20061144 Ver 2_401 Application_20080208

r
~~ ARCADIS
ARCADIS
Infrastructure, environment, facilities 801 Corporate Center Drive
Suite 300
Raleigh
Ms. Cyndi Karoly ~~~~~~~ D North Carolina 27607
Tel [phone]
N.C. Division of Water Quality Fax [phone]
401 Wetlands Unit FED 1 2 2008 www.arcadis-us.com
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 ~NR_N1ATE ~~ICFI
vS ~,~ s~
WATER RESOURCES
Subject:
Application for Permit Modification for the City of Raleigh Dempsey E. Benton Water
Treatment Plant project -Rerouting of a previously permitted transmission main
Action ID Numbers 200320193, 200620626-200620628, and Nationwide Permit Date:
Numbers 12 (Utility Line Activities) and 39 (Residential, Commercial, and Institutional 12 February 2008
Developments)
Contact:
Linda Diebolt
Dear Ms Karoly:
Phone:
In association with construction of the Dempsey E. Benton Water Treatment Plant 919.854.1282
(WTP), upgrades to the Lake Benson and Lake Wheeler dams, and construction of

transmission mains, Nationwide Permit (NWP) Numbers 12 and 39 were issued by Email:
Iinda.dieboltCc?arcadis-us.com
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE). To better meet the existing and
forecasted needs of the communities that will be served by the Dempsey E. Benton Our ref:
WTP, a transmission main route that was included in the aforementioned NWP 12 NC703027.1000
has been modified.
The new transmission main route includes four blow off locations that will
permanently impact 44 linear feet (0.004 acre) of stream. The new transmission
main route, including the four aforementioned blow offs, will impact 324 linear feet
(0.053 acre) of stream and 0.048 acre of wetlands. The new transmission main route
traverses 6 streams (Wildcat Creek will be crossed twice) and 2 wetlands. The
previously permitted transmission main route crossed 9 streams and 2 wetlands.
The new transmission main route, compared to the previously permitted transmission
main route, decreases the temporary stream impacts by 36 feet (0.014 acre) and
decreases temporary wetland impacts by 0.94 acre.
Permanent impacts to 0.26 acre of wetlands, which were previously permitted and for
which mitigation was secured through the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program, are still proposed to occur. The permanent wetland impacts are associated
with construction of the Dempsey E. Benton WTP facility and are not related to the
Imagine the result

ARCADIS Mr. Jamie Shern
12 February 2008
transmission main. Permanent impacts to two streams, which total 43 linear feet of
impact, were previously permitted and are still proposed to occur. Additional
permitted impacts that are expected to occur are impacts associated with a second
transmission main that is not being relocated.
In response to the changes in impacts associated with relocation of the transmission
main route, we have provided the attached documentation.
^ Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Application Form -The attached
PCN Application Form was generated to provide information on the impacts
associated with only the new transmission main route and the four
associated new blow offs. Previously permitted impacts that will no longer
occur due to the relocation of the transmission main route and previously
permitted impacts that will occur regardless of the relocation of the
transmission main route are not included in the PCN Application Form. The
attached PCN Application Form includes:
o Table 1, which provides the site coordinates for the impact locations
o Figure 1, Site Location Map
o Figure 2, Soils Map
o Figures 3 through 5, which depict the location of the new
transmission main, the impact locations, and the impact amounts
o Construction details for anti-seep collars and blow off discharge
stabilization areas
o Routine Jurisdictional Determination Form - An upland and
wetland Jurisdictional Determination Form is provided for Wetland 4.
o Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form -Approved
Jurisdictional Determination Forms are provided for Streams 20
through 24.
^ Additionallnformation
o Sheet 1 through Sheet 10 - These figures show the previously
permitted transmission main route, the permitted impact totals, and
whether the permitted impacts will still occur. The attached figures
also show the impacts associated with the new transmission main
route and associated blow offs.
Page:
G1WWtri•700012.1WP~Natural ResoureeslPennit Motlificauon Jan 200t31DWt]Cover Letter Permit Motl.doc 2/`~

ARCADIS Mr. Jamie Shern
12 February 2008
o Table 1 and 2 -Tables 1 and 2 provide summaries and
comparisons relative to the previously permitted jurisdictional
impacts and impacts associated with the new transmission main
route. Table 1 provides information and comparison of stream
impacts, and Table 2 provides information and comparison of
wetland impacts.
^ Items not included in this package: Items that were provided with the
previous permit application submittal, such as the Finding of No Significant
Impact (FONSI), Routine Jurisdictional Determination Forms for areas
included in the previous PCN Application Form package, and construction
drawings associated with the Dempsey E. Benton WTP and upgrades to the
Lake Benson and Lake Wheeler dams, are not included in this package. If
additional copies of this information are needed, please let us know, and we
will provide you with the additional copies you need.
If you have any questions or require additional information, please feel free to call or
e-mail me.
Sincerely,
ARCf4DIS
~,
Linda Diebolt
Senior Scientist
Copies:
Dale Crisp (City of Raleigh)
Whit Wheeler (ARCADIS)
file
Page:
G,\WWbi\700012.1 WUNatural Resources\Pennit Moditicauon Jan_20081DW0 Cover Letter_Permit Mod.doc 3/3

Office Use Only: Form Version March OS
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No.
(If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
I. Processing
II. Applicant Information FEB ~ ~ 208
1. Owner/Applicant Information e~R-wp'rtr~~auaurr
Name: City of Raleigh; c/o Dale Crisp -Director of Pub is t~~~~iesTOlzaiwArc-~er~cH
Mailing Address: City of Raleigh
P.O. Box 590
Raleigh, NC 27602
Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® 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: 12
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 Mana ement Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check her D ~ ~ ~ lJ Vii' n
~It
~,.
,~
Telephone Number: 919-857-4540 Fax Number: 919-857-4545
E-mail Address: [e-mail]
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: Linda Diebolt
Company Affiliation: ARCADIS
Mailing Address: 801 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 300
Raleigh. NC 27607-5073
Telephone Number: 919-854-1282 Fax Number: 919-854-5448
E-mail Address: [e-mail]
Updated 1 UU2005
Page 5 of 16

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: City of Raleigh, Dempsey E. Benton Water Treatment Plant, Rerouting of
a Previously Permitted Finished Water Transmission Main
2. T.LP. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only):
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): The new transmission main will be located in
existing and proposed easements.
4. Location
County: Wake Nearest Town: Garner
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number):
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.): The new transmission
main route extends north along Benson Road (Highway 50) from the proposed Dempsey
Benton Water Treatment Plant (WTP) to New Rand Road. The transmission main runs north
along New Rand Road, then turns west and runs along. Rand Mill Road. The transmission
main crosses through a City of Raleigh baseball field and then runs through a power line
easement and wooded, undeveloped land to Haywood Street. The transmission main
continues north along Montague Street, then turns west along West Main Street. The
transmission main follows West Main Street to Benson Road, where it starts paralleling a
railroad easement. The transmission main parallels the railroad easement north to Rush
Street. The transmission main runs west along Rush Street, crosses Hammond Road, then
turns north and parallels Newbold Street to South Wilmington Street. The transmission main
runs north along South Wilmington Street to the E.B. Bain WTP.
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): See Table 1 (attached)
6. Property size (acres): ~ 38 acres (7.9-miles long, 40-foot wide easement)
Updated 1 l/1/2005
Page 6 of 16

7. Name of nearest receiving body of water: Lake Benson/Swift Creek
8. River Basin: Neuse River Basin
(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/.)
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application:
Much of the land crossed by the transmission main route consists of roadway easements and
wooded, undeveloped land adjacent to a railroad easement Bottomland hardwood forest is
the dominant riparian vegetation community at most of the stream crossings
10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
A new, approximately 7.9 mile long 48-inch finished water transmission main will be
constructed from the Dempsey E. Benton WTP site to the E B Bain WTP site Transmission
main construction will primarily utilize bulldozers for land clearing and backhoes for trench
excavation and back-filling. The transmission main will be located primarily within existing
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) rights-of-way along Benson Road
(Highway 50), New Rand Road, Rand Mill Road Haywood Street Montague Street West
Main Street, Rush Street and South Wilmington Street Four blow offs will be constructed
along the transmission main and will discharge into the adjacent streams
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: The City of Raleigh proposes to reactivate
Lakes Benson and Wheeler reservoirs as a water supply source primarily to provide the City
and surrounding Wake County communities with a reliable and independent water supply
source. This project will help initiate solutions to the post-2010 water supply needs and the
current drought situation in the project area and for surrounding local communities
purchasing water from the City. Reroutin of the pipeline will better meet the existin and
forecasted needs of the communities that will be served by the Dempsey E Benton WTP
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 lD 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
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 for the WTP site has been issued b.
USACE (Action ID. No. 20030193• February 18 2003) A North Carolina Division of Water
Quality (NCDWQ) stream determination for the applicability of Neuse River Riparian Buffer
Rules was conducted at the WTP on April 14 2003 and issued August 28 2003 (No NBRRO -
03-199). As noted in the NCDWQ letter the applicability of the buffer rules to Swift Creek and
Updated I I/1/2005
Page 7 of l6

Mahlers Creek, the southern and eastern property boundaries, were not in question, and riparian
areas along these creeks are assumed to be subject to the buffer rules.
Impacts to jurisdictional resources along the force main for the Highway 50 wastewater pump
station have been permitted under a separate NWP #12 (Action ID No. 200421195 and
20042 1 1 96; August 16, 2004). A 401 Water Quality Certification for the force main was issued
by NCDWO (Proiect No. 04-0921: July 30. 20041.
As part of the permitting for the Dempsey E. Benton WTP and its associated pump stations,
water transmission mains, intake and discharge sites, and other structures, a NWP #12 and #39
were issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) on April 5, 2006 (Action ID
Numbers 200320193 and 200620626-200620628). Approval of 401 Water Quality Certification
and Authorization Certificate per the Neuse River Buffer Protection Rules (15A NCAC 2B
.0233) with Additional Conditions was issued on November 26, 2006 (NCDWQ Project # 06-
1144). However, after the aforementioned Section 401 and 404 approvals were issued, a portion
of the previouslypermitted transmission main was rerouted. Impacts to jurisdictional areas from
the rerouted transmission main described herein are less than the impacts included in the April 5,
2006 USAGE NWP #12 and #39 and the November 26, 2006 Water Quality Certification.
The information contained within this PCN Application Form reflects only impacts to
jurisdictional areas that were not included in the previous permit application. Figures showing
the previously permitted transmission main route, the permitted impact totals, and whether the
impacts will change with the relocation of the transmission main route are attached to this PCN
Application Form (see "Additional Information"). The attached figures also show the impacts
associated with the new transmission main route. Wetland and stream summary tables that
compare the previously permitted jurisdictional impacts to the impacts associated with the new
transmission main route are also provided in the attached "Addition Information" section. Table
1 and Table 2, as provided in the attached "Additional Information," show that the new
transmission main route will decrease temporary stream impacts by 361inear feet and 0.014 acre,
and decrease temporary wetland impacts by 0.94 acre below the previouslypermitted impacts.
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 future permit requests are anticipated for this Proiect.
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)
Updated l l/1/2005
Page 8 of 16

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:
Installation of the transmission main will temporarily impact 0.48 acre of jurisdictional
wetland. Temporary wetland impacts, totaling 0.46 acre, will occur within a shrub scrub
riverine wetland, Wetland 3. Temporarypacts to Wetland 3 were included in the previous
permit; however, relocation of the transmission main reduced the temporarypacts to this
wetland by 0.42 acre (0.88 acre of impacts were previously permitted for Wetland 3).
Wetland 4 is located adjacent to a stream channel (S23) within an existing sewer easement.
Temporary impacts to Wetland 4 consist of 0.02 acre. During construction activities,
discharge of excavated material into the adjacent wetlands will be for the minimum period of
time necessary for installation of the pipe. These temporary discharges will be fully
contained and appropriate erosion control measures will be used. Anti-seep collars will be
placed at 150 foot intervals along the transmission line within Wetland 3. A construction
detail for the anti-seep collars is attached. Upon completion of the transmission main
installation within the wetland areas, the wetland area will be returned to original grade,
seeded, and strawed. Fescue grass seed will not be used within the wetland areas.
The transmission main will cross 6 jurisdictional stream channels and temporarily impact 324
linear feet of stream. The construction easement is 40 feet in width, for a total temporary
stream impact of 0.053 acre. The stream crossings will be performed using coffer dams and
all crossings will be at an ankle between 75 degrees and 105 degrees of the surface water
intersection. All applicable construction moratoria relative to fish will be adhered to during
construction of the transmission main. Upon completion of the transmission main
installation, the stream bed and banks will be restored to their on ig nal grade and the banks
will be stabilized. Stream stabilization will be provided by the installation of matting along
andportions of the stream bank that were disturbed during construction activities. No
permanent fill material, such as rip rap, will be placed below Ordinary High Water Mark
(OHWM) relative to the stream crossings of the transmission main.
Four blow offs will be installed along the transmission main. These blow offs will discharge
onto stabilization pads that will diffuse the flow prior to discharge into the stream. A
minimal amount of rip rap will be placed within the stream below OHWM in association
with the blow offs for stream bank stabilization. The blow offs will permanently impact 44
linear feet and 0.004 acre of stream. A construction detail for the blow offs is attached.
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.
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 9 of 16

Wetland Impact Type of Wetland Located within Distance to Area of
Site Number Type of Impact (e.g., forested, marsh, 100-year Nearest Impact
(indicate on map) herbaceous, bog, etc.) Floodplain Stream (acres)
(yes/no) (linear feet)
Wetland 3 Temporary excavation Shrub scrub, riverine Yes 135 0.46
Wetland 4 Temporary excavation Herbaceous, riverine Yes 0 0.02
Total Wetland Impact (acres) 0.48
3. List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: 3.04 acres
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
perennial o Average Impact Area of
Number Stream Name Type of Impact j
Intermittent`. Stream Width Length Impact
(indicate on map) Before Impact (linear feet) (acres)
S 14 UT to Big Branch Temporary Intermittent 6 feet 40 0.006
excavation
S 17 Walnut Creek Temporary perennial 15 feet 40 0.014
excavation
S20 UT to Swift Creek Temporary Intermittent 6 feet 40 0.006
excavation
S21 UT to Wildcat Temporary Intermittent 6 feet 40 0.006
Branch excavation
S22 Wildcat Branch Temporary perennial 10 feet 40 0.009
excavation
S2'i UT to Wildcat Temporary perennial 3 feet 40 0.003
Branch excavation
S24 Wildcat Branch Temporary perennial 10 feet 40 0.009
excavation
Blow Off 1 UT to Swift Creek Permanent rip-rap Intermittent 6 feet 11 0.001
Blow Off 2 UT to Big Branch Permanent rip-rap Intermittent 6 feet 1 1 0.001
Blow Off 3 UT to Walnut Creek Permanent rip-rap Perennial 3 feet 1 1 0.001
Blow Off 4 Walnut Creek Permanent rip-rap Perennial 15 feet 11 0.001
Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage) 324 0.057
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 10 of 16

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, dred~in:?. flooding. drainage. bulkheads. etc.
Open Water Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)
Name of Waterbody
(if applicable)
Type of Impact Type of Waterbody
(lake, pond, estuary, sound, bay,
ocean, etc.) Area of
Impact
(acres)

Total Open Water Impact (acres)
6. List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U.S. resulting from the proiect:
Stream Impact (acres): 0.057
Wetland Impact (acres): 0.48
Open Water Impact (acres): 0
Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres) 0.537
Total Stream Impact (linear feet): 324
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.):
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.):
Current land use in the vicinity of the pond:
Size of watershed draining to pond: Expected pond surface area:
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 1 1 of 16

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. Impacts to jurisdictional
resources can only be completely avoided by implementation of a no-build scenario. The no-
build scenario is not an acceptable option. Impacts to jurisdictional areas have been avoided or
minimized to the extent feasible. The new transmission main route decreases the previously
permitted impacts. The new transmission main route is located within numerous existing
easements and right-of-ways, and adjacent to a railroad easement. A majority of the new
transmission main route is located along topographic rides. All stream crossings will be
perpendicular to the stream flow to minimize impacts. All impacts along the transmission main
route, except minimal permanent impacts associated with the blow offs, will be temporar. ,, s
the grade will be restored to preconstruction elevations once the transmission main is installed.
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
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, available at
htro://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/strm~ide.html.
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)
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 12 of 16

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.
Mitigation is not proposed for wetland or stream impacts described herein. Mitigation credits
for permanent wetland impacts associated with construction of the Dempsey E. Benton WTP,
as described in the previous PCN Application Form, have been secured through the
Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP).
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://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.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):
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet):
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres):
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 a NEPA/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 ^
A copy of the FONSI was provided with the previous PCN Application for this project
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
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 13 of 16

Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
1. 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 )? 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
(square feet) Multiplier Required
Mitigation
1 23,958 3 (2 for Catawba)
2 16,117 1.5
Total 40,075
Zone I 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 ( .
3. 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. Buffer mitigation is not proposed for this
nroiect. Per 15A NCAC 02B .0233, neroendicular crossings that disturb greater than 40
linear feet of riparian buffer with a maintenance corridor greater than 10 feet in width is
allowable.
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 transmission main and blow offs encompass
annroximately 38.32 acres of land. Impervious surfaces will occur within 0.02 acre of the nroiect
area in association with the blow off stabilization pads, which equates to less than 0.01 percent of
the proiect area. Best Management Practices will be used during construction activities. An
Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan is bein damped for the project and will be finalized
and approved prior to project construction.
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.
Updated l l/1/2005
Page 14 of 16

No wastewater other than discussed in the previous PCN Application Form for the subiect
project, will be generated by the new transmission main
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
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:
Dempsey E. Benton WTP Project will not significantl affect growth rate final land use atterns
or development densities in the Swift Creek watershed as these have been determined by
separate planning and political processes. Yet it is also correct to state that the additional
increment of water supply that would be contributed b~project is a necessary factor in
achieving and sustaining a normal rate of growth. However the strong local programs in Ip ace
by these communities will offset any potential overall cumulative impacts that may result from
the proposed project such as growth management planning land mana ement lannin ,open
space plans and initiatives erosion and sedimentation control riparian buffers water
conservation, stormwater and pollution prevention and planning toward low impact
development. A comprehensive discussion of the cumulative impacts of the proposed project is
provided in the Environmental Assessment. A Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) has
been received for this project and was attached to the previously submitted PCN Ap lication
Form.
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).
A Final Biological Assessment (BA) was submitted to the USACE in July 2005 that described in
detail the findings and approach to evaluating the instream flow study results the impacts of the
proposed project, and mitigation for impacts to the dwarf wedgemussel The Final BA initiated
formal Section 7 Consultation under the Endan erg ed Species Act A Final Biological Opinion
was signed by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service in February 2006 The conclusions of the
Final Biological Opinion were provided in the previously submitted PCN Application Form for
the Dempsey E. Benton WTP project.
Updated I I/l/2005
Page I S of 16

~~~
Applicant/Agent's igna ure Date
(Agent's signature is valid o if authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)

~" ~ ,f
6~
AR~ADIS G & ~d.
Gf ~orih Caro!ir.i: ~;
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 16 of 16

Table 1
Site Coordinates
Permit Modification for New Transmission Main Route
Dempsey E. Benton Water Treatment Plant
Raleigh, NC
Crossing Latitude Longitude
S14 35.7214 -78.6274
S17 35.7569 -78.6403
S20 35.7013 -78.6063
S21 35.7303 -78.6308
S22 35.7429 -78.6399
S23 35.7434 -78.6411
S24 35.7318 -78.6348
Blow Off 1 35.7013 -78.6063
Blow Off 2 35.7214 -78.6274
Blow Off 3 35.7421 -78.6401
Blow Off 4 35.7569 -78.6403
Wetland 3 35.7406 -78.6399
Wetland 4 35.7433 -78.6411

~ ~~
~

o
~ Q-
'
~~.
~ :,
~
~ o
~ ~
N ~.
7
n
~
O
N
~
C
~ v
C1i O
3

~
~
v
~
~
~ :, ~ I
Cn
~
_ ~
~
C
~ _ ~
v
~ ~ ~
fD
cn
e e .
0
CD
n ~
'
`G `G O
o m r
~~ ~
m
~.
.
~~
~
-D

~.
N
"t

z
1' MIN. TRENCH WIDTH 1' MIN.
PLAN
CL
WE
NOTES:
1. DO NOT EXCEED 150 FEET BETWEEN COLLARS.
ANTI-SEEP COLLAR
SECTION
PROPOSED WATER MAIN
(DIAMETER VARIES)
WELDED COLLAR
CLASS B CONCRETE
EC02 No scALE

~ i
A
22'
PLAN
Q~
Q
N
O
I-
N
W
C.7 _
Q
2
U
0
A ~'
0
Z
w
GRAVEL BEDDING OVER FILTER FABRIC
SECTION A-A
NOTES:
1. THIS DETAIL IS FOR A PIPE OUTLET TO FLAT AREA WITH NO WELL-DEFINED CHANNEL.
2. A FILTER BLANKET OR FILTER FABRIC SHOULD BE INSTALLED UNDER THE GRAVEL BEDDING AND ABOVE THE
SOIL FOUNDATION.
BLOW OFF DISCHARGE STABILIZATION DETAIL
NO SCALE

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Stream 20 and Blow Off l (UT to Swift Creek) are located along
a UT to Swift Creek south of Haywood Street and west of Rand Mill Road in Garner, NC. Sites are located within a powerline easement.
State: North Carolina County/parish borough: Wake City: Garner
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.7013° , Long. -78.6063° .
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: UT to Swift Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) Into which the aquatic resource flows: Swift Creek
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03020201
Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
[~ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s):
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There no "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 flow of the tide.
Q 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 Are "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act(CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): t
TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
~j Relatively permanent waters2 (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 of jurisdictional waters
Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: 51 linear feet: 12 width (ft) and/or 0.007 acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: ~~ TwpI)~1WM.
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
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 [I[ below.
= For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a T[VW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
' Supporting documentation is presented in Section [II.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 III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent":
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanas have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody° is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.C below.
Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: ~iekList
Drainage area: ISckLi.
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
^ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
^ Tributary flows through Pick'L~# tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are ll~;~,fst river miles from RPW.
Project waters are lEst aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are ~~ aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNWS: Stream flows into a tributary, which flows to Lake Benson.
Tributary stream order, if known:
° Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the acid
West.
s Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: ^ Natural
^ Artificial (man-made). Explain:
^ Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: ~iek List.
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: Stable.
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain: Moderate.
Tributary geometry: ~#ek'~;ist
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): 0-5
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: dick List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: Pick List
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: lick List. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: P'ick.List. Explain findings:
^ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
^ Bed and banks
^ OHWMfi (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 flow events
abrupt change in plant community
^ Discontinuous OHWM.~ Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determ
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):
one 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:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
fiA natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows 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., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
^ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
^ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
^ Habitat for:
^ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
^ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
^ Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
^ Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: 'hick List. Explain:
Surface flow is: Pick List
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: dick List. Explain findings:
^ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adiacencv Determination with Non-TNW:
^ Directly abutting
^ Not directly abutting
^ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
^ Ecological connection. Explain:
^ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 'Clc jCist aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: )Pick List..
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the Pick List floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
^ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
^ Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:
^ Habitat for:
^ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
^ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
^ Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
^ Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: ~~ 1:is~1
Approximately ( )acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
I. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III.D:
2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section [II.D:
3. Significant nexus Endings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain Indings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section III.D:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
~j TNWs: 40 linear feet 6 width (ft), Or, 0.006 acres.
~] Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
~{ Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial:
Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally: Field assessment performed in August 2007 did not find flow to be present within the stream channel.

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
[7 Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
^ Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify 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 significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
[} Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
^ Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
^ Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
[~ Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
^ Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates forjurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters v
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 (l-6), or
^ Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):10
which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
"See Footnote # 3.
To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

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:
Wetlands: acres.
F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the ]987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
^ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
^ Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
~] 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 finding 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:
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:1:24,000, Garner, Lake Wheeler, Raleigh West, Raleigh East.
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:Wake County.
National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
FEMA/FIRM maps:
100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
Photographs: ®Aerial (Name & Date):Wake County 2007.
or ^ Other (Name & Date):
Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
Applicable/supporting case law:
Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Stream 21 (UT to Wildcat Branch) is located south of Tryon
Road and west of the railroad easement within the fenced portion of the NC Highway Patrol Driver Training Center.
State: North Carolina County/parish/borough: Wake City: Garner
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.7303° , Long. -78.6308° .
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: UT to Wildcat Branch
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) Into which the aquatic resource flows: Walnut Creek
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03020201
Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
^ Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
^ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s):
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are no "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 flow 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 ;Are "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act(CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): t
TNWs, including territorial seas
~] Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
~C Relatively permanent watersz (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 of jurisdictional waters
[] Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: 40 linear feet: 6 width (ft) and/or 0.006 acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: ~stal~lished b~ 01t`wM.
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
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 [II below.
`For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous Bow 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 III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent":
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRHiUTARY (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 Rapanor have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody° is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: ~iclt Last
Drainage area: Pick'List
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
^ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
^ Tributary flows through ~'c1[ Isisk tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are ~ic~ List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are ~.~:a,st river miles from RPW.
Project waters are ~'ic~k~:lst aerial (straight) Holes from TNW.
Project waters are ~'iek Y,ist aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNWS: Stream flows into a tributary, which flows to Lake Benson.
Tributary stream order, if known:
~ Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the arid
West.
`Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review azea, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that aaolv):
Tributary is: ^ Natural
^ Artificial (man-made). Explain:
^ Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: I~ck Li&t.
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: Stable.
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain: Moderate.
Tributary geometry: Pack Est
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): 0-5 %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: ~'ielG List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year. Pick List
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Pick List. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Pick Ldst. Explain findings:
^ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
^ Bed and banks
^ OHWM~ (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 terresMal vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
^ Discontinuous OHWM.~ Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determ
(Q 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:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows 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., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
^ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
^ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
^ Habitat for:
^ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
^ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
^ Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
^ Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: Pick List. Explain:
Surface flow is: Pick List
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Pick List. Explain findings:
^ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non-TNW:
^ Directly abutting
^ Not directly abutting
^ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
^ Ecological connection. Explain:
^ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are Pick. List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Plck List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Pick List.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the Pick Lirst floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
^ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
^ Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:
^ Habitat for:
^ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
^ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
^ Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
^ Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: `List
Approximately ( )acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the Functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to can•y pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III.D:
2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section II[.D:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
^ TNWs: 401inear feet6width (ft), Or, 0.006 acres.
~] Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial:
^ Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally: Field assessment performed in August 2007 did not find flow to be present within the stream channel.

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:
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 significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
(~ Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
^ Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
^ Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates 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 significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.y
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).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):10
^ which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
~] from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
^ which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
^ Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
"See Footnote # 3.
'' To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section IICD.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

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:
Wetlands: acres.
F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
[f 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 solel on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area, where [he 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 finding is required for jurisdiction (check al] 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 incase file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
^ Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
^ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
[] Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
~] 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:1:24,000, Garner, Lake Wheeler, Raleigh West, Raleigh East.
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:Wake County.
National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
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):Wake County 2007.
or ^ Other (Name & Date):
^ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
Applicable/supporting case law:
Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
^ Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Stream 22 and Blow Off 3 (Wildcat Branch) are located north of
Rush Street and east of Hammond Road. Stream 24 is Icoated north of E. Tryon Road.
State: North Carolina County/parish borough: Wake City: Garner
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.7429°111, Long. -78.6399° .
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Wildcat Branch
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) Into which the aquatic resource flows: Walnut Creek
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03020201
Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
^ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
^ Field Determination. Date(s):
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are nfl "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 flow 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 Are "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water AcG(CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): t
TNWs, including territorial seas
^ Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent watersZ (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 of jurisdictional waters
Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: 40 linear feet: 10 width (ft) and/or 0.009 acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: Established 6y bH'WM.
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):3
Potentiallyjurisdictional 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 III below.
` For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous Flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
Supporting documentation is presented in Section [ILF.

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 III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent":
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody° is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: Pick List
Drainage area: Piek List
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
^ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
^ Tributary flows through Fick List tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are `PiclcLi~t river miles from RPW.
Project waters are 1?jck i.ist aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are P~ictc List aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNWS: Stream flows into a tributary, which flows to Lake Benson.
Tributary stream order, if known:
° 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 flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that applv):
Tributary is: ^ Natural
^ Artificial (man-made). Explain:
^ Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: Pir,~c 1C.ist.
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: Stable.
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain: Moderate.
Tributary geometry: 1'ic$ Llst
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): 0-5 %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: 1'Ick List
Estimate average number of tlow events in review area/year: Pick List
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Pick List. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: ]rick List. Explain findings:
^ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check al] that apply):
^ Bed and banks
^ OHWM~ (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 flow events
abrupt change in plant community
^ Discontinuous OHWM.~ Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determ
^ 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:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
~A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows 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., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'[bid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
^ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
^ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
^ Habitat for:
^ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
^ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
^ Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
^ Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: )Plck List. Explain:
Surface flow is: Pick List
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Fick List. Explain findings:
^ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adiacency Determination with Non-TNW:
^ Directly abutting
^ Not directly abutting
^ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
^ Ecological connection. Explain:
^ Separated by berm barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are Peek List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Pick List.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the 1'iiek )C,ist floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil tilm on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
^ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
^ Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:
^ Habitat for:
^ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
^ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
^ Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
^ Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: ~'icli`List
Approximately ( )acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, For example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III.D:
2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
3. Significant nexus Endings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section III.D:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
I. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
TNWs: 40linear feetlOwidth (ft), Or, 0.009acres.
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial:
Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally: Field assessment performed in August 2007 did not find flow to be present within the stream channel.

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: 40 linear feet 10 width (ft).
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non-RPWsB that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
^ Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section [II.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section [ILC.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section [II.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.y
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).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)a°
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:
"See Footnote # 3.
To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section Il[.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

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:
Wetlands: acres.
F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
^ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
(~ Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
^ 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 finding 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:
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
^ Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
^ Office does no[ 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:1:24,000, Garner, Lake Wheeler, Raleigh West, Raleigh East.
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:Wake County.
^ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
^ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
^ FEMA/FIRM maps:
100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
Photographs: ®Aerial (Name & Date):Wake County 2007.
or ^ Other (Name & Date):
^ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
^ Applicable/supporting case law:
^ Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
[] Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Stream 23 and Wetland 4 (UT to Walnut Creek) are located
north of Rush Street and west of Hammond Road. The stream and wetland are located within an existing easement.
State: North Carolina County/parish/borough: Wake City: Garner
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.7434° ~V, Long. -78.6411 ° .
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Wildcat Branch
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) Into which the aquatic resource flows: Walnut Creek
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03020201
Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
[,] Field Determination. Date(s):
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are nq "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 flow 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 Are "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act jCWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): t
TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent watersZ (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 of jurisdictional waters
[] Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: 40 linear fee[: 3 width (ft) and/or 0.003 acres.
Wetlands: 0.02 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: established by UiWM.
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
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 III below.
z For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
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 III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent":
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanor have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody° is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: spick List
Drainage area: Pick List
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
^ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
^ Tributary flows through Piek T~ist tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are ick ~3st river miles from TNW.
Project waters are i'u~k;Lest river miles from RPW.
Project waters are aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick ~.ist aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNWS: Stream flows into a tributary, which flows to Lake Benson.
Tributary stream order, if known:
° Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regazding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the acid
West.
s Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review azea, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

(b) General Tributarv Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: ^ Natural
^ Artificial (man-made). Explain:
^ Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: Eck X:ist.
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: Stable.
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain: Moderate.
Tributary geometry: 1€'ick:i[.ist
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): 0-5 %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Pick-List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: Pick List
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Pick List. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Pick List. Explain findings:
^ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
^ Bed and banks
^ OHWM~ (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 flow events
abrupt change in plant community
^ Discontinuous OHWM.~ Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determ
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:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
~A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows 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., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
^ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
^ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
^ Habitat for:
^ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
^ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
^ Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
^ Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: Pick-List. Explain:
Surface flow is: Pick List
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Pick List. Explain findings:
^ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non-TNW:
^ Directly abutting
^ Not directly abutting
^ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
^ Ecological connection. Explain:
^ Separated by berm barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are Fick-List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are ~''ick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: i?iek List.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the P-ck List floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
^ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
^ Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:
^ Habitat for:
^ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
^ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
^ Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
^ Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: Ack )f.,ist
Approximately ( )acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/M Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/M Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III.D:
2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section III.D:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
I. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
TNWs: 401inear feet.width (ft), Or, 0.003acres.
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: 0.02acres.
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Q Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial:
Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally: Field assessment performed in August 2007 did not find flow to be present within the stream channel.

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:
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 significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
^ Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW: The RPW in the project area does not contain a defined bed and bank.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section I[I.B and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: 0.02 acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.y
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).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):10
which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
^ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
^ Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
RSee Footnote # 3.
`' To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section II[.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
"~ 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.

Provide estimates forjurisdictional 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:
Wetlands: acres.
F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
^ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
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).
C] Lakes/ponds: acres.
^ Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
(^ Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
[] Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
~] Lakes/ponds: acres.
Q 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:
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicandconsultant.
^ 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:l :24,000, Garner, Lake Wheeler, Raleigh West, Raleigh East.
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:Wake County.
National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
(~ 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):Wake County 2007.
or ^ Other (Name & Date):
Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
Applicable/supporting case law:
Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

naTa FnRM - R~><1T><NE WETLAND DETERMINATION
Prolec Srte: Date: ~ _5
Applicant/Owner: ~ •~~ County:
Investigator(s): State:
Do Normal Circumstanc exist on the site? Yes- Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? ~es-~ o_ Transect ID: ~ {
Is this area a otential Problem Area? Yes C.~Te~ -~ Plot ID:
Dominant Plant S ecies Stratum _Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1.
`~ v.~ ~- -i ~ ILA' 9.
~
2. U ~1- - 10.
3. ~ ~ 11.
4. -' ~YhL 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
~. 15.
g, 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-).
Remarks:
(1 ~~ C c.s-~1~'~ Cam` - --~-
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks) Prim Indicators:
Stream, Lake, or tide Gauge Inundated
Aerial Photographs _ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
/ Other _ Water Marks
~ No Recorded Data Available Drift Lines
7 Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: _Drainage Patterns in Wetlands

~ Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
/
(in.)
Depth of Surface Water: Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
~/ Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: .- (in.) Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: `- (in.) _
_Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Map Unit Name (Series & Phase): Drainage Class:
Taxonomy (Subgroup) Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon Munsell ist (Munsell Moistl Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.

Histosol Concretions
_
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
educing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: U ~ ~ < .._„~~
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? No
Wetland Hydrology Present? No
Hydric Soils Present? ~ No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?Ce~ No
Remarks:
~~ ~
z
O
H
d
H
W
GS

G7
O
a
O
Q,'

O
F
U
U
a

Do Normal Circumstances exis[ on tnC sum' ~',~~ No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? ~o
Is this area a potential Problem Area? Yes r
County: C~~~.---
State:
Community
Transect ID: Ll ~
Plot ID: -
lior~ui~,~ ~ ,r.....,.. -- _ _ 9.
• C3 10.
2 r 4'' - ~~ 11.
3. ~ - 12.
Z 4• ~ ~ ~_ ~ ~ 13.
O 5~ '~- 14.
E+ 6• 15.
H y• 16.
G7
W percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-).
~ Remarks:
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream, La1ce, or tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
Recorded Data Available
U`
O
a
Ctr
A
O
Field Observatrons:
Depth of Surface Water ..~- (in )
Depth to Free Water in Pit: ~ (in•)
Depth to Saturated Soil: ~ (m )
Remarks: ~ tx- ~J~Qd`~~~
Primary Indicators:
_Inundated
_ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
_Drift Lines
_ Sediment Deposits
_ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
_ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Map Unit Name (Series & Phase)'
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
Depth Matnx Color Mottle Colors
inches Horizon Mansell Moi t (Mansell Moistl
~-
Drainage Class:
Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Mottle Texture, Concretions,
Abundance/Contrast Structure etc.
Histosol
- ugh Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
C Histic Epipedon
- Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
U _Agrric Moisture Regime Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
U Remarks: ~ ~-~ ~-~-~
.,
A
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes
Wetland Hydrology Present? Z'eS

t Within a Wetland? Yes N
i
P
? Yes `Io~ Is t o
n
his Sampling
Hydric Soils Present
ks:
a
r
em
R
(
y
'
~
~•-~ o ~

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

v IGON ST H,( PAR RW PEACE ST S~EVENSRp
o ~ Kp ~\~ DR
' O"~ ~qUC C,q OVHN SeORO W NORTH ST POLK ST ~ ~P
_ ~
~' F S = NEW BERN PJ
w MARCOM ST WESTERN PO KIDD RD
KAPLAN Oq 6VRTOR O e<`O s13 O<FRp F-
Qa ~P ~ Sheet 8
y9 J
y~~~ ~~ Q~PP Q m pMS o ~
~~Q ~ P J~~~ ~ G T EAD DR ~' ~ uai
a 9
~ -~~ _,"~~ u~ O~2 09 0 0
0
_ ~~ E.B. Bain WTP B U
~ ~"`/ ~Q 2N/qG ~ S 1 ~ 6`~RLV DR Z
~ PKW y ~ ~~
~o Sheet 7 s" a ss ss Sheet 10
Q `q0 Ee Blow Off 4
~ SIERRq O
LINEBERRyp9 R s7
TRy S23 ROCKOUARgyRO
oNRp __ _ Wetland 4 S16 SEABROOKRD SLIPPERY~< ~ CROH'RjF~ p0
r-~ ~~ Sheet 6 s, 5 ~p9 ~ 9
`~~ -~ ~ ~~ S22 ~ Blow Off 3 goo
'F,y
G
Wetland 3 9N~
°A•~F ,N~o~ ~ s21 s21 S6 Sheet 9 ~9
SRD ~ Sheet 5 S14 Q~QS`~Py
l Blow off 2
gTFSMILLPOND RD~ PURSER OR
'~ 1
O~ ~ ~ ~,~ ~ ?'a
~yQO p FARM RD MAXWEL`' SPRINt,, pR = ! ,III ~ l
pEa ~ GROVEMONT RD
2
4 ~
s2o ~~
Sheet 4
~FOFND RD POPLAR DR s5 E GARNER RD
`i; SIMPKINS RD
~;-- WOODLAND RD QO
~~~?,~~ la~` Qo -~ > Blow Off 1
~ ~ ~~
~~ ~ ~. ~F9~ US 70 H
.t _
~~ ~ o S4 WyE
s,s ~~~ D ~ 9Sheet 3
~~ ~' p ,o s3 y
_ c
~ z Wetland 2 HILLANDALE LNmO
~ ~ ~~gRORRIDGE ~
i PRA °~ v~
~~ o~ a
QO 9RKWAY DR ~~4,
Q' 9
~~~~ ~ ,= ~~ , ~ _ ~_ ny ~~ New Transmission
~w u ~ ;; Ll J},-~_ Main Route
~ i ~ ~ ~~ t BUFFPLOERp
~ ~ ~
v u u~i ~ Sh~Evet 2 s1 Previously Permitted
~CP~PSO9~ ~~O~grE pq~ WATER TREABMENOT PLANT - Transmission Main Route
Sheet SFq STONE`'? currently under construction ~ r Wetland 1
Index s,9
G~~FFORD RD
Legend SCALE
New Transmission Main Route 0 0.5 1 2
Miles Sheet 1
1 inch equals 1 mile

#""~ ;,~~' ,%~ r ~~ yR ~~~.~ ~' ~, '~,,;,; ;' Impacts will not occur ~s~o: ~r"'
~YrM~~t „?, .„~'~` ~ ,,~ .. ~ ''~~n. , Previously Permitted Impacts: .'"" :~, y~"t'Y`,I, ~~`'~`•
~~``, ,. ~'~- ~ a-~* ~ :. ~, ~ :~ ~ Stream Impacts: 0.009 acre ,~ ..•=* t~•r`*°`
_ :'~~~~~a ` ~ °,.' ~ .`, w ' Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre ~~ ~ ~~`'
~ :~ ,
,~ ~ ,~ ~ '• r` 'y
spRT F ~ "~~, ; ~^~' :~ ~~ Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre -
a.. Ca f ~r.• N' IIR
~rw. _ ~,~ { ~, .~ t,~g "ter p ~. ~ ilr ., ` d'k ~(~ ~,, Ye~~ F . f ~ "p\. ~~ fCY~~ ~ .
G ~ Ilkk 7~
w ~ r »_
AL°D~EL T .. a _ R ' '
s '+r, gym, 4 ~ ~ r ~~r e€-fi ~~'' +r fi°
_ _y ~ p
~ F~ '•.,y ~~~~ `"s ~ ~a"'~ ~ 'y'~~ORA pv~ ~"T 7~' ~ ~ ~ r~ t * y ~ .r~ ~ f J lr ~' '~
~+er'-~` '"~ ~~s~~ ~'~, "" VAN ~ u.J +i~~ ^ ~ .s~ ~(~ r ~,tf :.~ ~`!..
~• ~`~' ~ w '~~~• ~.~°~s~, p'~~/~ +'~ ya!` 'F SpvE ~S'~ '~yc a$r~ maims.-,5'~~„TOjDAVFt'~'"k` ~ ~CRES~TVJOODDRF~``~•d'
r _
~Y`~3 `.~ .~,GK ~:~ ~` ~~ " ~ m .Jrcn ,F F 810 `* ~'`~ A ~~r~'~'~1~ ~ `'.,~ ~§~~~ ,~~,~~+,-
.,, ~ ,„ ~ ', ~ ~ _+, ` viously Permitted Transmission Main Route
~ ~~~4 ~~., ~ ~~ Pre r ~ ~ _~ '~, ,•
~ *~ ~ , ~~ ~ ~~ ,,. ~~ '~~ A ~ :~'•~ ' ,+rr z.~~''~\P SS pat,cQ} ~~Fi~•..~.. .J~ ~ ~ ~5.\ .~ a :t~`
~~ 4 dV ~ QO~i ~ : .';~v t .} °.~ ~+4N ~" * ~ e. ~ ~1!~ LAWNOP~`~1.y4,~~ r _
ti ~'7R ~ ~5~. °4'?'`,y/!"S~ ~. _{~ v7 Y._ fP ~ ~ Yr K~ 74 _ ~ ~~~~" ;'r" '~kh 4 .
•
1 ;~ i . ~y ry ~~~td.~,~fi~f..r ~ }~ x fA ~~,y-, ~ ;;~~'y.~ Aa 4.%~'~F`r t+!!r ,~ ~'~ ~ i;f.~=~,
+!'^. s:
~ v~. , ~'.t~' ~,~! !
.. _>
:~' ~ ..,.,y, ®Ma'' w' S~J,.~: . L- R' .Q ~y}~k$"~ r '~ st ~y~ A~,y1'.}~ 2) {( ~ti~ ~ t~~~,~` ~.~ ~ ,; ~~~_ ~~~ ~S ~~~
Legend SCALE
Previously Permitted Transmission Main Route
R New Transmission Main Route 0 400 800 1,600 Sheet 4
Feet
Neuse River Buffer
---~- -Surface Waters 1 inch equals 800 feet

~~
~~ .~~ ,v:
Blow Off 2
New Impacts
Stream Impacts: 0.001 acre
Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre ~.
Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre
~:--..
x,
~„ ~ ~, ~-'
~~ ,
S14
Impacts are 0.002 acre more than the previously ; /
permitted impacts and are located approximately ~~ ~''
120 feet downstream of the previously permitted ~. ~
impact location. rw`
. , New Impacts
Stream Impacts: 0.006 acre ;~,
Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre
.y Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre
M `~ `(
e-r~
h
'~' a ~ a'~,a"~\S~~ vP~\SSDR ',~
~ ,.
E s w' ~ ~ G r
.~ ~ "
~, ~
Legend SCALE
• : -s New Transmission Main Route 0 400 800 1,600
Blow Off Location Feet Sheet 5
Neuse River Buffer 1 inch equals 800 feet
Surface Waters
r ~--
.
~~ ~
~~x,
S 14 ~ - -~
n'~ Impacts will not occur ~ ~ .~
Previously Permitted Impacts: lt;r, r
Stream Impacts: 0.004 acre -
Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre ± „~ ,
My
Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre ,
. ~

,,
~~
y
"~, "' A~yj
~,~
,
Dq<
` ~
" e~~O
~
~
~.~' ~
~
~, a
~
~ t

,,~ a HENRY DR I , '» ~„ ~
- l ~~ ~ ~ _ ~r~ J~ ~j~'1
i~ a
.
l
Y$q~
-
i
'A~ ~~
~ ~
;
~ ~ ~~ rx:
~~ q
G
~ y R~
~" , ~y
~• ~, , ~N .
„~ ~

6'- R
f
1
S23
New Impacts
Stream Impacts: 0.003 acre
Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre
Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre
''~.` °~.~ NEWCO
' EBY DR „. ~
--
5~
+~ ~ L 1A

N
~q
.
+3 .~ °^{
P9.T
".

~~~ ~ ~~s ~ ~ ~"'Y Y c .
M'
•
' x~p'° A
~~~
I
~ S16 ~
,
,~, ~ii. E`TER CT 1 ,

Impacts will not occur
~, ,
$
; +~ ,~

Previously Permitted Impacts: ~
.~4y 1 Gia
~ ?~,.~~€~~; . ~.
}
Stream Impacts: 0.009 acre ~~ ~ ~~
'` t',.t ,~
'~~
`
Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre " ~'~
,~; ~.
Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre ,,~"*~,~ ~ E~ a
,
~ ~ ~
~

. ,. .
.
7
~ ~

~ ~
"' ~~ ~ ~. '.
"
`
` S 15

Impacts will not occur
, ~:
~ G~°•~"
~, ,
~~
~'~'~~~'~ k ,~
~
,
~'~
°
~.,
Y k f ~" ~
%' ~ `'~
~ Previously Permitted Impacts:
Stream Impacts: 0.004 acre y4 `* ,
~
~ v} . ~
~;s'~~ `~.~~.~" y
Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre
Buffer Zone 2 Im acts: 0.037 acre Mz W.~~ x~ '~__`"
. ~ ~' ~' ~ ~ ~ ~''
"" Wetland 4 ,~,~, -~ • ~~
New Impacts ~. ='~#
• Rn~; Wetland Impacts: 0.04 acre ~ ~` ; ~

.~,
'~
S22
New Impacts
Stream Impacts: 0.009 acre
Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre `
` Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre
*-~
,
<a , -
~
x ~ ~ VV
etland 3 -u.
- ~, <~
~" ~' Impacts will not occur
Previously Permitted Impacts: ~ ~ ~,~ '~, ,~ ~~k
;% ~, ~ $,
~,- - Wetland Impacts: 0.88 acre ~ ~~
'~~ e `
~ ~'~~ ~ ~M; ,~
~`~ `
ppp'
~ ~ ~ ~~.
tt - ~
~ `
,~.
~ _ CHAPANOK "' r
me,. _ ~ sue,
M
`_ Previously Permitted Transmission Main Route
~ ~. a
~ j ,
'
•- ' ~

r
"~~

i ;:
,~~ SNERWEE DR ~ ~;, ~
f

7 rC ~1 @ ' fkJ
X'
OC . Ca= i
. ~t~. ;~4i'. "+~
Legend
Previously Permitted Transmission Main Route
New Transmission Main Route
Blow Off Location
Neuse River Buffer
Surface Waters
~ Wetlands
-' Blow Off 3 `". ~ ~ ~ '
.~~ ., New Impacts H~i~TOPO _~~~, ~..,,~`~"'
Stream Impacts: 0.001 acre ~'~ .~~; „ ~,1, ,~
Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre ,~~ - ~ ~"
Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre "CROSS
Wetland 3 1 z~`'.~'~ ~"~~ ~t~~~
Wetland mpacts: 0.46 acre y £ ~ ~P ~`GN \N ~ ?~'_~~~__
~ ~ P ~,~ Y~
¢ ~~ xE +~~ a~ ~a'Y~,'gf°`~ ra "S 3~~' '~ ~~, A 44 i~~¢
4 s, ~ ~,,~ ~f~
yx~y~~~, , ~ .~,.~ f r µ ~" '
:'
~v"+ .. .,„,....b ~ E ...
~.
°~, °}~' ;`°~~ New Transmission Main Route `' ~,
.~ , t
;~4'~~'... :3 y.m311"a°rJfi~"" ~' ~ ~ rte:
p 3aT
~~•.
,,~ ~
~° ~ '~
~ w+.

.".
R~ : ~'
~i
'~ a
SCALE
0 400 800 1,600 Sheet 6
Feet
1 inch equals 800 feet

y
-
,�� Rocky Branch ' _
• �,� � � O A �` _ , "' ��Bfy .. � �s - - BR
ZAGG S
P� Y i Y3�v v 1Ac J ANC O
u~i 0
Z tt+ 4115
r
}
..oa AAA" � ,�',i�� � y BR
r
T mat
HOKE ST
„ PROSPECT AVE " S17
. ' Impacts are equal to the previously permitted impacts,
but are located approximately 195 feet downstream
f �' suMnnlTAVE CoQ of the previously permittied impact location
New Impacts
Stream Impacts: 0.014 acre
v~, MAYWOODAVE Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre
W Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre_'
Ui--- t
UA F G1 BE AVE I .,
cc c. N Blow Off 4
ImNew pacts
Stream
LU :� ,
_ _,, M r 4` A ° Stream Impacts: 0.001 acre
a ; . Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre
Fn .
N pENMARCO9 Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre
E.B. Bain Water Treatment Plant - ,
HUBEST� —
�^ XNm s ,.
' t
m
t � •. ,' oar, o x
S17 r . , .�p�0`,jl�
O
j Impacts will not occur ;1 ¢ ''' �oP ...... °
Previously Permitted Impacts: 'NAMM° '
Stream Impacts: 0.014 acre m x
Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre - 140Fk/ ro
W Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre r299 a ir
.a 2
' o
Previously Permitted Transmission Main Route 4 ~~ New Transmission Main Route
. F
GR'4N/TFT ,� �
p '+! PECAN RD NF`
Legend SCALE
Previously Permitted Transmission Main Route
New Transmission Main Route 0 400 800 1,600 Sheet 7
Blow Off Location Feet
Neuse River Buffer 1 inch equals 800 feet
Surface Waters

~ m, ~~ ', ~ i r ~ ~ _ nl` 3 _ ~
~ ~ y w S ,,.: ~ ~ ~ P,9
~". a .,~~ ~~
~
dot' ~.pq d,. ~
~
; s vt w: j ~
py o ,
e' .. TO e y9'a ", (
,. 9~9 `
+ ~
' 'r ~
~ l ,~' f~
!7.
~ ° yr
~*'~ ~~ ` A
`
~+ ss,
w
ty,3t ~ ~ G
~. ~ _ O
'i! ,
. ~
SS'
~ r ,ti i'
~ a +
~ ^ ~ ~'J
~
r
#
p z
t
~
d k { m
~
, ~. ~>
° ~ ~n7r ~'~ ~. F° r ~ _
1'
F. . i f
T ,( y
t 3 ~ ~ ~ Aa f'~p y
' ' " ~ r 4 r~ T~~ .
a d y ~
s ~y~. p ~, ,\ n~ i f y - ~
ffi W' ~+ ~ F1 ~ ~ F
E r + r
~k f S ~'_
c w ~ ~~ ,~ , ~ ~ S6
~~~~'.~~~Rq~sro~AO. ~` ~~ 7y~~~gi ~ ~~ ',;.~;~ Impacts are as previously permitted
,~,~_ ~° ,.~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ r ; ~ `Previously Permitted Impacts:
~ ~ -~ _ ~~'~~`' ~ 'Stream Impacts: 0.014 acre
oo~° ~" a~~ n~' ~'~,~, `~{ ~ Buffer Zone 1 Impacts: 0.055 acre
~o'; ~~ ~ ~; ,~~ J t ~ ~ k~ ,~.; Buffer Zone 2 Impacts: 0.037 acre
~~ M * d , ~ ~, f '
ry. Y aw 4 }
s Y L f~~ ,C.
,., ~ ~ r ,rr ,~ ';:
~ ~ T r# y w A n.
$ r-
~~~ Z ~~ ~ Previously Permitted Transmission MaineRoute ~
r ~ f ;a~` sl a?.
~Yy.~ M ~~ ` u 4 r'r P ~ ~' 3~

k w yt Np
~ ~~4 F~a d
f... ~+
~ r ~~
1 9~~ y
V i'~ F~ ~
'
y

~h,. y'~h
W$V
~ k. F a 1 4 i
,~
{
k` J~
f i' ~ ~

. ~~ a6 k ~ 7 t ~~ .` $~ a ~.r
5
.
~.^~ ~~ s ±t"..
~',~^
..:a~
~} ~•
G i~~~~

i~
4 `r
~,.
L ~~ ~~
.w ~ r
~ `1
f~ a, ~r 1~r(., p4isi~`A
S ~~ b ~Wy y~,4,fj #f ,.
Ma ~ _ ~+ r
~ r°:f a }.Efy~e i4.~ ,~.
r a
r ~ ~ ~ ~~ a ~ ~ f.
r
"'
"',.t
~ ',
~~,
Y~ ~
~~
• F °, • ...
3`~p ~y y~o U.~
"" SCALE
Previously Permitted Transmission Main Route
Neuse River Buffer 0 400 800
Surface Waters
~ Feet
1'600 I Sheet 8
1 inch equals 800 feet

e
Legend SCALE
Previously Permitted Transmission Main Route
Neuse River Buffer 0 400 800 1,600
Feet Sheet 9
- - ~ Surface Waters
1 inch equals 800 feet

f

N
S
IrK .
I ..
`'a..~
.:
'!~I
Fii

~OP ^~ ~ U
G~
.
~ ~ w
,p i
~
~ ~ 5
Previously Permitted Transmission Ma in Route .._

~.~_~, r iS. 'l.r ., ~ i
a
'.

c
TABLE 1
Summary of Stream Impacts
Dempsey E. Benton WTP
City of Raleigh
US Army Corps of Engineers Action ID Numbers 200320193, 200620626.200620628
NC Division of Water t]uality Project # 06.1144

Stream Impact

P
i
l

Average
Permitted Impact Length

Associated with the Total Impact

Length Associated Change to Permitted

Impact Length from
Permitted
Area of Impact
Total Area of Impact Change to Permitted

Area of Impact from

Summary of Impact Changes

Number
Stream Name
Type of Impact erenn
a
or
Intermittent?
Stream Width Impact

Length
New Transmission
with the Entire
New Transmission Area of

Im
t Associated with the New

T
i
i
M
i
R Associated with the

E
i
P
New Transmission Main
Associated with New

(shown on map)
Before Impact

(linear feet)
Main Route
Project
Main Route pac ransm
ss
on
a
n
oute nt
re
roject
Route
Proposed Pipeline Route

(linear feet)
(linearteet)
(linear feet) (acres) (acres) (acres)
(acres)

S1
UT to Swift Creek Temporary
Intermittent
15 feet
40
0
0
-00
0.014
0
0
-0
014
Impacts will not occur. The new pipeline route is within the NCDOT right-of-way along
excavation . Benson Road (NC 50). Within the project area, Benson Road is located on a ridge.

S2
UT to Swift Creek Temporary
Intermittent
3 feet
40
0
0
-00
0.003
0
0
-0
003 Impacts will not occur. The new pipeline route is within the NCDOT right-of-way along
excavation . Benson Road (NC 50). Within the project area, Benson Road is located on a ridge.
S3 UT to Swift Creek Temporary perennial 10 feet 40 0 0 -40 0.009 0 0 -0
009 Impacts will not occur. The new pipeline route is within the NCDOT right-of-way along
excavation , Benson Road (NC 50). Within the project area, Benson Road is located on a ridge.

S4
UT to Swift Creek Temporary
Intermittent
5 feet
40
0
0
-40
0.005
0
0
-0
006 Impacts will not occur. The new pipeline route is within the NCDOT right-of-way along
excavation . New Rand Road. Within the project area, New Rand Road is located on a ridge.
S5 UT to Swift Creek Temporary perennial 10 feet 40 0 0 -40 0.009 0 0 -0
009 Impacts will not occur. The new pipeline route parallels a railroad easement that is
excavation . located on a rid e.
Temporary
S6 UT to Big Branch
excavation Perennial 15 feet 40 0 4D 0 0.014 0 0.014 0 Impacts are as permitted
S7 UT to Walnut Creek Temporary perennial 15 feet 40 0 40 0 0.014 0 0
014 0 ~ Impacts are as permitted
excavation .
S8 UT to Walnut Creek Temporary
excavation Intermittent 5 feet 4D 0 40 0 0.005 0 0.005 0 Impacts are as permitted
S9 UT to Walnut Creek Temporary
excavation Perennial 4 feet 40 0 40 0 0.004 0 0.004 0 Impacts are as permitted
S10 Walnut Creek Temporary
excavation perennial 15 feet 4D 0 40 0 0.014 0 0.014 0 Impacts are as permitted
513 UT to Walnut Creek Temporary
excavation perennial 15 feet 40 0 40 0 0.014 0 0.014 0 Impacts are as permitted
Impacts associated with the new pipeline alignment well be O.D02 acre mare than the
S14 UT fo Big Branch Temporary Intermittent 4 feet (new location 40 40 40 0 004
0 0
006 006
0 0
002 Permitted impacts 010.004 acre. New proposed pipeline route is located approximately
excavation has a width of 6 feet) . . . . 120 feet downstream of the permitted crossing location, and the stream width at the new
i eline crossin location is 6 feet.
S15 UT to Walnut Creek Temporary
excavation Intermittent 4 feet 40 0 0 -00 0.004 0 0 -0.004 Impacts will not occur
S16 UT to Walnut Creek Temporary
excavation perennial 10 feet 40 0 0 -00 0.009 0 0 -0.009 Impacts will not occur
Temporary Impacts associated with the new pipeline alignment will be equal to permitted impacts.
S17 Walnut Creek
excavation Perennial 15 feet 40 40 40 0 0.014 0.014 0.014 0
New proposed pipeline route is located approximately 195 feet downstream of the
ermined location,
S18 Swift Creek Permanent Weir Perennial 12 feet 3 0 3 0 0.001 0 0.001 0 Im acts are as ermined
Permanent bridge
S19 Swift Creek and minimum flow
assemb Perennial 200 feet 40 0 40 0 0.184 0 0.184 D Impacts are as permitted
S20 UT tc Swin Creek Temporary Intermittent 6 feet 0 40 40 40 0 0
006 OD6
O 006 '
0 The relocated pipeline will cross a stream that was no' crossed with the previous pipeline
excavation . . .
' all nment.
S21 UT to Wildcat Branch Temporary Intermittent 6 feet 0 40 40 40 D 0
006 0
006 0
006 The reocated pipeline will cross a stream that was not crossed with the previous pipeline
excavation . . . ali nment.
S22 Wildcat Branch Temporary Perennial 10 feet 0 40 4D 40 D 0
009 0
009 009
0 The relocated pipeline vrill cross a stream that was not crossed with the previous pipeline
excavation . . . ali nment.

S23
UT to Walnut Creek Temporary
Perennial
3 feet
0
40
40
40
D
0
003
0
003
0
003 The relocated pipeline will cross a stream that was not crossed with the previous pipeline

excavation . . . alt nment. This stream is crossed twice Stream 22 and Stream 24 .
S24 Wildcat Branch Temporary Perennial 10 feet D 4D 40 40 0 0
009 0
009 0
009 The relocated pipeline will cross a stream that was not crossed with the previous pipeline
excavation . . . alt nment. This stream is crossed twice Stream 22 and Stream 24 .
Blow Off 1 UT to Swift Creek ermanent - Ri Ra Intermittent 6 feet D 11 11 11 0 0.001 0.001 0.001 The new blow off location will im act 55 s uare feet of stream.
Blow Off 2 UT to Bi Branch ermanent - Ri Ra Intermittent 6 feet 0 11 11 11 0 0.001 0.001 0.001 The new blow off location will im act 55 s uare feet of stream.
Blow Off 3 UT to Walnut Creek ermanent - Ri Ra Perennial 3 feet 0 11 11 11 0 0.001 0.001 0.001 The new blow off location will im act 55 s uare feet of stream.
Blow Off 4 Walnut Creek ermanent - Ri Ra Perennial 15 feet 0 11 11 11 0 0.001 0.001 O.D01 The new blow oft bcation will im act 55 s uare feet of stream.
Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage) 643 324 607 3u 0.321 0.057 0,307 , ,-,. , Relocation of the pipeline decreases the stream impacts by 76 linear
feet and 0.023 acre.
Impacts to these streams will not occur with the new transmission main route
" ; Impacts to these streams will occur as described in the previous PCN Application Form that was submitted for this project
Impacts to these streams will occur from the new transmission main route

TABLE 2
Summary of Wetland Impacts from New Proposed Pipeline Route
Dempsey E. Benton WTP
City of Raleigh
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Action ID Numbers 200320193, 200620626-200620628
N.C. Division of Water Quality Project # 06-1144

Wetland Impact Located
Distance to
Permitted Total Area of Impact
Total Area of Impact Change to Permitted

Site Number Type of Wetland within
Nearest
Area of Based on the New
Associated with the Area of Impact from Summary of Impact Changes

(indicate on Type of Impact (e.g., forested, marsh, 100-year
Stream
Impact Transmission Main
Entire Project New Transmission Associated with New

map) herbaceous, bog, etc.) Floodplain
(linear feet)
(acres) Route
(acres) Main Route Transmission Main Route
(yes/no) (acres) (acres)
Wetland 1 Permanent
radin /fillip Forested, non-riverine No 650 0.26 0 0.26 0 Impacts are as permitted
Temporary Impacts will not occur. The new pipeline route is within the NCDOT
Wetland 2
excavation Shrub scrub, riverine Yes 200 0.54 0 0 -0.54 right-of-way along Benson Road (NC 50). Within the project area,
Benson Road is located on a rid e.
Temporary Impacts will not occur. The new pipeline route is located
Wetland 3
excavation Shrub scrub, riverine Yes 200 0.88 0.46 0.46 -0.42 upgradient from the previous pipeline route. The new pipeline
route arallels a railroad easement that is located on a rid e.

Wetland 4 Temporary
Herbaceous, riverine
Yes
0
0
0.02
0.02
0
02 The relocated pipeline will cross a wetland that was not crossed

excavation . with the revious i eline ali nment.
Total Wetland Im act acres
P ( )
1.68
0.48
0.74
'.D.~a Relocation of the pipeline reduces the number of wetlands
crossed and decreases the wetland impacts by 0.94 acres.
Impacts to these previously permitted wetlands will not occur with the new transmission main route
,,~,~„_;;~,~? Impacts to these wetlands will occur as described in the previous PCN Application Form that was submitted for this project
Impacts to these wetlands will occur from the new transmission main route