20171582 Ver 1_Jurdistictional Determination_20171212

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This farm should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. R�,PORT COMPLETION DAT�, FOR APPROV�D JURiSD1CTIONAL DET�RM1NATiON (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBCR:
NCDOT, Division 12, SR 1819 (Alexis High Shoals Road), Bridg� # 127 ] 7BP.12.R.89
C. PROJ�CT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State: North Carolina County/parish/borough: Gaston City: High Shoals
Center coordinates of site (laUlong in degree decimal format): -81.171794 35.402128
Latitude & Longitude in Decimal Degrees:
Universal Transverse Mercator: 17S
Name of nearest waterbody: Hoyle Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: South Fork Catawba River
Nan�e of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): Catawba
� Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
❑ Checl< if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recarded
on a different JD form.
D. RCVIEW PERFORM�,D �OR SITE EVALUATION CH�,CK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Detennination. Date:
� Field Detennination. Date(s): 09-14-17
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERM[NATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Appear to be no "navigable wnters of'tlae U.S." within Rivers and Harbois Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR
part 329) in the review area. [Requir•ecI]
❑ 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 far use to transport interstate ar fareign
commerce. Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OI' 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. Tndicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): �
❑ TNWs, including territorial seas
❑ Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
� Relatively permanent waters'- (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Wetlands directly abutting RPWs tl�at flow directly or ii�directly 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 ar indirectly into TNWs
❑ Impoundrnents of jurisdictional waters
❑ Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, induding isolated wetlands
b. Identify (esdmate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: 200 linear feet: 25-30 width (ft).
Wetlands: 0 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: Established by OHWM.
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:
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
' Boxes chedced below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section Ili below.
'- For purposes of this form, an RPW is detined as a tributary that is not a TN W and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least
"seasonally" (e.g., typically 3 months).
j Supporting documentation is presented in Section iil.F.

The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW,
complete Section III.A.l 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.I.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Sumrnarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetlandadjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent":
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNV1') 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 Rapa��os 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 signi�cant 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 I11.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.0 below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: Pick List
Drainage area: Pick List
Average annual rainfall:
Average annual snowfall:
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
❑ Tributary flows tlu�ough ... tributaries befare entering TNW.
Project waters are Pick Listriver miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from RPW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles fi•om TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:.
Identify flow route to TNWS:
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, whicl� flows through the review area, to flow ii�to h�ibutary b, whicl� then flows into
TNW.

aPP�Y)�
(b) General Tributary CharacterisYics (check all t1�aY ap�ly�
Tributary is: ❑ Natural
❑ Artificial (man-made). Explain:.
❑ Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:
Tributary properties witl� respect to top of bank (esti�nate):
Average width:
Average depth:
Average side slopes: Pick List
Priinary hibutary substrate composition (check all fllat apply):
❑ Silts ❑ Sands ❑ Concrete
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel ❑ Muck
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type/% cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [Mostly Stable]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain:
Tributary gzometry: Pick List
Tributary b adient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Pick List
Estin�ate averagz number of flow events in review area/ ear: Pick List
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Piek 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 thaC apply):
❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank ❑ the presence of litter and debris
❑ cl�anges in the cl�aracter of soil ❑ destrliction of ten•estrial vegetation
❑ shelving ❑ the presence of wrack line
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, ar absent ❑ sediment sorting
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away ❑ scour
❑ sediment deposition ❑ multiple observed or predicted flow events
❑ water staining ❑ abrupt change in plant community
❑ otl�er (list):
❑ Discontinuous OHWM.� Explain:
If factors otl�er than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that
❑ High Tide Line indicated by: ❑
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
❑ physical markings/characteristics
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other Qist):
Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ survey to available datum;
❑ physica) markings;
❑ vegetation lines/changes in vegetaYion types.
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water colar is clear, discolared, oily film; water quality; general watershed
characteristics, etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (t e, avera e width):
❑ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
❑ Habitat for:
�A natireal or m�n-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 breal< in the OHWM that is
unrelated to the waterbody's flow regime (e.g., flow over a rocl< outerop or throuoh a culvert), the agencies will lool< far indicators of flow above
�nd below the break.
'lbid.

❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fisl�/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic/wildlife diveisity. Explain findings:
Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Cl�aracteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size:
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationsliip with Non-TNW:
Flow is: Pick Lisk Explain:
Sirrface 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. Ex lain:
❑ Ecological connection. E�cplain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximit�(Relationshi�) to TNW
Project wetlands are Pick 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 Pick List floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general
watershed cl�aracteristics; etc.). Ex lain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. WeNand supports (check all that a � I):
❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, avera e width :
❑ Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fisl�/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally-sensitive species. Ex lain findin s:
❑ Aquatic/wildlife diveisity. Explain findings:
Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
Al] wetland(s) beinv considered in the cumulative analysis: Pick List
Approximately ( considered in the cumulative analysis.
Far eacli wetland, specify the following:
Suminarize overall biological, cl�einical and pl�ysical fimctions being perfonned:
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 nesus esists 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 speci�c 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 ar flood
waters to TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants ar flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support fiinctions
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 co�mbination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to tr•ansfer mitrients and
organic carbon that support downstream foodwebs'?
• Does the tributary, in combination witl� its adjacent weYlands (if any), l�ave other relationsl�ips to tl�e pl�ysical,
diemical, 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. Signi�cant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findin s of resence ar absence of significant nexus below, based on the h-ibutary itself, tlien go to
Section III.D:
2. Significant nexus findings fm• 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
combinarion witl� all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to Secrion llI.D:
3. Signi�cant 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 a11 of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK
ALL THAT APPLY):
l. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
❑ TNWs:
❑ Wetlands adjacent to TNWs:
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: Multiple observed flow events, presence of fish
❑ Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year)
are jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that
tributary flows seasonally:
Provide estimates for jurisdictiona] waters in the review area (check all that apply):
� Tributary waters: 200 linear feet 25-30 width (ft).
❑ Other non-wetland waters:
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:
❑ Other non-wetland waters:
Identify type(s) of waters:
"See Footnote # 3.

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 tribtirtary is zrennial 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:
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 far jurisdictional wetlands in the review area:
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:
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jw•isdictional tributary rernains jurisdictional.
❑ Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
❑ Demonsh•ate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), ar
❑ Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. 1SOLATED �INT�RSTATE OR INTRA-STATE� WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DCGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WNICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE,
INCLUDING ANY SUCH WATERS (CNECK ALL TNAT APPLl�:10
❑ which are or could be used by interstate ar foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
❑ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
❑ whid� are or could be used far industria] purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
❑ Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
❑ Other factois. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Provide estimates for j�irisdictional waters in tl�e review area (check all that apply):
❑ Tributary waters:
❑ Other non-wetland waters:
ldenti t e s) of waters:
❑ Wetlands:
F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ lf 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 Regiona) Supplements.
❑ Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or fareign) commerce.
❑ Priar to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based
solelv on the "Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
❑ Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jiu-isdiction. Explain:
❑ Other. (explain, if not covered above):
' To complete the analysis refer to the I<ey in Section �Il.D.6 of the Instnictional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asscrting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on Chis category, Corps Districts will elevate the acHon to Corps and F,PA
HQ for review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Menaorandum Regnrding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following
Rapanos.

Provide acreage zstimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the solz potential basis of jurisdiction is the
MBR factors (i.e., presence of mib atory 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, strearns):
❑ Lakes/ponds:
❑ Other non-wetland waters: resource:
❑ Wetlands:
Provide acreage estimates for non jw�isdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard,
where such a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that a 1):
❑ Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams):
❑ Lakes/ponds:
❑ Other non-wetland waters: c resource:
❑ Wetlands:
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 ar plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicanUconsultant:
❑ Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
❑ Office concurs with data sheets/delineation repart.
❑ Office does not concirr with data sheets/delineation re ort.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geologica) Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC inaps.
❑ U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad namex<Quad».
� USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
� FEMA/FIRM inaps:.
❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: ical Datum of 1929)
❑ Photographs: ❑ Aerial (Name & Date):
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of res onse letter:
❑ Applicable/supporting case ]aw:
❑ Applicable(supporting scientific literature:
❑ Other infonnation lease s ecify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: