20090739 Ver 1_401 Application_20090609

ECS CAROLINAS, LLP
Geotechnical - Construction Materials - Environmental
W LLp
June 26, 2009
09-0739
Ms. Cyndi Karoly
North Carolina Division of Water Quality,
401 Wetlands Unit
2321 Crabtree Blvd. Suite 250
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Subject: Pre-Construction Notification Application Q15 r"' 'r?'l i(F
Request for Nationwide Permit 14
Dakota Street Culvert Upgrade JUN
Kannapolis, Cabarrus County, North Carolina
ECS Project 09-16927A DENR - WATER QUALITY
WETLANDS AND S', rorma'.TR PIM-NCH
Dear Ms. Karoly:
Please find five copies of the Pre-Construction Notification Application for the above referenced
site. The site is located in Kannapolis (Figure 1) and consists of a failed culvert and a washed
out section of Dakota Street. The existing 40 foot, 96 inch diameter metal culvert will be
upgraded to an 85 foot, 12 foot by 8 foot double barrel concrete box culvert. The culvert will be
installed into Threemile Branch. Headwalls and endwalls are being used to minimize the
impacts to the stream. Stream floodplain benches (recommended by NCDENR) will be created
at each end of the culvert to localize the water to one side of the channel and prevent scouring,
erosion and culvert failure. Riprap will be used to stabilize the creek banks for culvert
protection. The crossing will impact 135 linear feet of stream channel. The existing 96 inch
diameter culvert is 40 feet long so the additional impact associated with the new culvert is 95
feet. The % impervious surface will be consistent with the impervious surface before the culvert
failed. On behalf of the City of Kannapolis, I am requesting that a 401 Water Quality
Certification be issued to authorize the impact to 95 linear feet of stream channel. There are
no other stream or wetland impacts associated with this project. Because the impact is less
than 150 linear feet, no mitigation is proposed.
Please feel free to contact me at [phone] if you have any questions concerning this
request or if additional information is required. Thank you in advance for your timely
consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
ECS Carolinas, LLP
Michael T. Brame
Senior Environmental Scientist
Attachment: Pre-Construction Notification Application
401 Water Quality Certification Fee -$240.00
4811 Koger Boulevard - Greensboro, NC 27407 - [phone] - Fax [phone]
ECS Carolinas, LLP
AGENT AUTHORIZATION
Scope of Work: Wetland Services
Location: Dakota Street Culvert Upgrade
Kannapolis, North Carolina
This form authorizes ECS to act as our agent in stream/wetland matters including U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers and North Carolina Division of Water Quality field verification and permit application.
Property Address: Dakota Street
Kannapolis, NC
Owner Information:
Name: City of Kannapolis c/o Wilmer Melton Public Works Director
Address: Public Works Department
P. O. Box 1199
Kannapolis, NC 28082
Telephone Number: 704-920-4200
Fax Number: 704-920-4244
E-mail Address: [e-mail]
6 a e
aF wAr?9
E
a - ? -r
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version November 2008
Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information -A DE
1. Processing
1 a. Type(s) of approval sought from the

Corps:
® Section 404 Permit ? Section 10 Permit
1b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 14 or General Permit (GP) number:
1 c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps? ? Yes ? No
1 d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
® 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular ? Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
? 401 Water Quality Certification - Express ? Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required? For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification:
? Yes ® No For the record only for Corps Permit:

? Yes ® No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in-lieu
fee program. ? Yes ® No
1g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1h
below. ? Yes ® No
1h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)? ? Yes ® No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project: Dakota Street Culvert Repair
2b. County: Cabarrus ;"Q *? •-:.? i 7A
2c. Nearest municipality / town: Kannapolis t-~ L! V IS M
2d. Subdivision name: Linear Transportation Project JU
;
N A
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no:
DENR • WATER QUALM
3. Owner Information E
3a. Name on Recorded Deed: City of Kannapolis
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable): City of Kannapolis Public Works Department c/o Wilmer Melton
3d. Street address: P.O. Box 1199
3e. City, state, zip: Kannapolis, North Carolina 28082
3f. Telephone no.: 704-920-4200
3g. Fax no.: 704-920-4244
3h. Email address: [e-mail]
Page 1 of 13
PCN Form - November 2008 Version
Section A. Applicant Information, continued
4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is: ? Agent ? Other, specify:
4b. Name:
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address:
4e. City, state, zip:
4f. Telephone no.:
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name: Michael Brame
5b. Business name
(if applicable): ECS Carolinas, LLP
5c. Street address: 4811 Koger Blvd.
5d. City, state, zip: Greensboro, North Carolina 27407
5e. Telephone no.: 336-856-7150
5f. Fax no.: 336-856-7160
5g. Email address: [e-mail]
Page 2 of 13
PCN Form - November 2008 Version
B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1 a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID): Dakota Street - City of Kannapolis
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): 35.466433'N - 80.615181'W
1c. Property size: Linear roadway, approximately 0.75 acres
2. Surface Waters

2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to Threemile Branch
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water: Class C
2c. River basin: Yadkin River

3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The site is located on Dakota Street at the point where it crosses Threemile Branch. The existing culvert was undersized
and has failed resulting in a washed out roadway. Dakota Street is currently closed due to the washed out roadway. The
section of Dakota Street that is closed is located between Ridge Avenue and Cannon Boulevard. Single family
residences are located along Dakota Street east and west of the proposed road crossing repair.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
No Wetlands, See Routine Wetland Determination Data Form (included as an attachment.
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
The property includes an existing roadway corridor. A total of 135 linear feet of perennial stream channel (Threemile
Branch) are located within the road crossing area.

3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The purpose of this project is to replace a failed culvert with a larger culvert and install riprap at each end of the culvert for
bank and bed stabilization.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The existing 40 foot, 96" metal culvert will be upgraded to an 85 foot, 12'X 8' double barrel concrete box culvert. Head
walls and end walls will be constructed to minimize impacts. Riprap will be used to stabilize the banks of the stream.
stream floodplain benches (recommended by the NCDENR) will be created at each end of the culvert to localize
Also
,
the water to one side of the stream and prevent scouring, erosion and culvert failure. The stream floodplain benches will
be created by burying the riprap beneath the bed of the stream. Water will be pumped around the construction site while
dumptrucks and other grading equipment will be used for
a crane
kh
A t
l
d
,
oe,
rac
.
e
the culvert and riprap are being instal
this project.

4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
? Yes ? No ® Unknown
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type ? Preliminary ? Final
of determination was made?
Agency/Consultant Company: ECS Carolinas, LLP
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas? Other: Performed a wetland delineation in the proposed
Name (if known): road corridor. The delineation has not been verified.
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for ? Yes ®No ? Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?

5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
Page 3 of 13
PCN Form - November 2008 Version
B. Project Information and Prior Project History
6. Future Project Plans
6a Is this a phased project? ? Yes ® No
6b. If yes, explain.
Page 4 of 13
PCN Form - November 2008 Version
C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
? Wetlands ® Streams - tributaries ? Buffers
? Open Waters ? Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
f
2a.
Wetland impact 2b.
Type of 2c.
Type of wetland 2d.
Forested 2e.
Type of 2
.
Area of impact (acres)
number - impact (if known) jurisdiction
Permanent (P) or (Corps - 404,
Temporary (T) DWQ - non-
404, other
W1 ? P ? T ? Yes ? No ? Corps
? DWQ
W2 ? P ? T ? Yes ? No ? Corps
? DWQ

W3 ?P?T
?Yes ?No ? Corps
?DWQ
W4 ? P ? T ? Yes ? No ? Corps
? DWQ
Q
W5 ? P ? T ? Yes ? No ? Corps
? DWQ
W6 ? P ? T
Yes [I No
? Corps
?
? DWQ
Total wetland impacts
Comments: There are no wetland impacts associated with this project.
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
Stream impact 3b.
Type of 3c.
Stream name 3d.
Perennial (PER) or 3e.
Average stream width (feet) 3f.
Impact
length
number - impact intermittent (INT).
(linear feet)
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
S1 ®P ? T Culvert/ Threemile Branch ® PER ? INT 135
RipRap
S2 ? P ? T ? PER ? INT
S3 ? P ? T ? PER ? INT
S4 ? P ? T ? PER ? INT
S5 ? P ? T ? PER ? INT
S6 ? P ? T ? PER ? INT
Total stream and tributary impacts 135
Comments: The existing 96" culvert is 40 foot long so the additional impact associated with the new culvert is 95 feet.
Page 5 of 13
PCN Form - November 2008 Version
C. Proposed Impacts Inventory, continued
1mpacts (for DWQ)
4. Buff
f
4a. Will t impact a protected ?Yes ®No
ripa?
El Neuse ? Tar-Pamlico
4b. If yes, which basin? ? Catawba ? Randleman
? Other:
4c. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of
this form.
Buffer impact Buffer
number - Reason mitigation Zone 1 impact (square Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P) for impact Stream name required? feet) (square feet)
or Temporary
T
B1 ?P?T ?Yes ?No
B2 ?P?T ?Yes ?No
B3 ?P?T ?Yes ?No
B4 ?P?T ?Yes ?No
B5 ?P?T ?Yes ?No
B6 ?P?T ?Yes ?No
Total buffer impacts
Comments: There are no buffer impacts.
5. Open Water Impacts

If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water
of the U.S. then individual) list all open water impacts below.

Open water Name of
impact number
- Permanent waterbody
Type of impact
Waterbody type
Area of impact (acres)
(P) or (if
applicable)
Temporary T
01 ?P?T
02 ?P?T
03 ?P?T
04 ?P?T
Total open water impacts
Comments: There are no open water impacts.
Page 6 of 13
PCN Form - November 2008 Version
C. Proposed Impacts Inventory, continued
6. Pond or Lake Construction
If and or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
6a.
Open
water 6b.

Proposed use or 6c.
Wetland (acres) 6d.
Stream (feet) 6e.
Upland
(acres)
impact
number purpose of pond
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
P1
P2
P3
P4
Total
Comments:
6f. Is a dam high hazard permit required? ? Yes ? No If yes, permit ID no:
6g. Expected pond surface area (acres):
6h. Size of pond watershed (acres):
6i. Method of construction:
Page 7 of 13
PCN Form - November 2008 Version
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Headwalls and end walls are being used to minimize impacts. The slopes above the walls will be 2:1. The culvert will be
situated in the exact location of the failed culvert to avoid additional impacts to the stream and vegetated areas adjacent
to the stream.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Headwalls and end walls are being used to minimize impacts. The slopes above the walls will be 2:1. The culvert will be
situated in the exact location of the failed culvert to avoid additional impacts to the stream and vegetated areas adjacent
to the stream. Water will be pumped around the construction site while the culvert and riprap are being installed.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State? ? Yes ® No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply): ? DWQ ? Corps

2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project? ? Mitigation bank
? Payment to in-lieu fee program

? Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter) Type Quantity
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In-lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in-lieu fee program is attached. ? Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested: linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature: warm, cool, cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only): square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4f. Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested: acres
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 8 of 13
PCN Form - November 2008 Version
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation, continued
6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) - required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires ? Yes ® No
buffer mitigation?
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
Zone Reason for impact Total impact
(square feet) Multiplier Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1 3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2 1.5
Total buffer mitigation required:
6c. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in-lieu fee fund).
6d. Comments: The road crossing is being located in an existing roadway. There are no additional buffer impacts associated
with the project.
Page 9 of 13
PCN Form - November 2008 Version
E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan

1 a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified ? Yes ® No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? ? Yes ? No
2. Determination if the Project Requires a Stormwater Management Plan
2a. Does the project require a Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit? ® Yes ? No
2b. Is the project subject to General Certification 3704 or 3705? ® Yes ? No
3. Determination of Stormwater Review Jurisdiction
3a. Is this project subject to any of the following state-implemented stormwater ? Coastal counties
? HQW
management programs (check all that apply)? ? ORW
If so, attach one copy of the approval letter from the DWQ and one copy of the ? Session Law 2006-246
approved stormwater management plan. ? Other:
3b. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project? Kannapolis
3c. Is this local government certified to implement a state stormwater program? ? Yes ? No
If so, attach one copy of the approval letter from the local government and one copy
of the approved stormwater management plan (or one copy of the approved
Stormwater management plan stamped as approved).
4. Information Required for DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
The percent imperveous will not
4a. What is the overall percent imperviousness according to the most current site plan? change as a result of the
proposed activity.
4b. Does this project contain any areas that meet the criteria for "high density" per ? Yes ® No
General Certifications 3704 and 3705?
4c. If the site is over 24% impervious and/or contains high density areas, then provide a brief narrative description of the
stormwater management plan.
4d. Has a completed BMP Supplement Form with all required items been submitted ? Yes ® No
for each stormwater BMP?
Page 10 of 13
PCN Form - November 2008 Version
F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the ® Yes ? No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State ? Yes ® No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
? Yes
? No
letter.)
Comments: To the best of our knowledge, a NEPA or SEPA is not required.
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards, ? Yes ® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after-the-fact permit application? ? Yes ® No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in ? Yes ® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
Not Applicable
Page 11 of 13
PCN Form - November 2008 Version
F. Supplementary Information, continued
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or ? Yes ® No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act ? Yes ® No
impacts?
? Raleigh
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
? Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
We reviewed the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program list for federally listed threatened and endangered species that
have been identified on the Concord, North Carolina Quadrangle (the quadrangle that contains the site). There are no
federally listed threatened or endangered species that are listed as inhabiting this quadrangle
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat? ? Yes ® No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
The site is located in an area that has been designated as having Class C waters. There are no federally listed
threatened or endangered species that have been documented as inhabiting Threemile Branch. In it's current state, there is a
non functioning culvert located in the stream. Asphalt pavement and soil are caving into the stream. The installation of a new
culvert will benefit the fish species which inhabit the stream.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation ? Yes ® No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
There are no structures that will be impacted by the proposed project. There are structures that will benefit from the road
being opened back up.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain? ® Yes ? No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements: The City is working with FEMA and the NC Floodplain Mapping
program to obtain permission for the construction of the proposed culvert replacement. The City will have to file a LOMR
application once the project is completed.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? Flood Insurance Rate Map, Panel 3710561200J
IL a e,
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant Date
Page 12 of 13
PCN Form - November 2008 Version
Ct'n{en i"
1,;1 irk 6t(.
r ?;+ • RadJO lowv, tiyyb? / ?/
S
r^ p•r ? ? ? qr' ,
f' F6, Heilmans N fill
>
yS
LAik(
• 1« Tr-..mid ?(? t;,
ird
•
Z ?t
41
SITE
Z r ?` 1 i1f 71,E ?J1
1 iga1 akF 1 Fe >,r ,c i,; t R
,
rip
600,,
. SIirrot r h Pwr? t??e i` 1 ?- ? c.1-;.??/,? -s ?? • ? •
r ,
Hi i• 4'l? ? ,.r r (1 1. ? ? l
(Wks
• ; p 1 •Crossiiw t f
• ?2? N'rm.crr • ? ' •
SOURCE: FIGURE I
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP s SITE LOCATION MAP
CONCORD, NC QUADRANGLE CULVERT REPAIR
DATED 1969, REVISED 1987 DAKOTA STREET
KANNAPOLIS, NORTH CAROLINA
SCALE: 1"=2,000 CAROLINAS ECS PROJECT NO, 09-16927A
PnD LrtrcE. Mill
f ,F
Enf, Pot) ? r L \. C02, I J 14in
i CeB r--
?, "";D7 \Kannapolis
PoD P.F
, r CeH 1 I ?? d
SITE En3
i F n B
cn ?? CcD2? ??F? ,r ?,i R,
E.13 eAD
EnB ?U
/'
„fi
('.NEt EnB C~V ?`"
PoF \
z ? POD ? j
EnB p 6n <? ?
P
Ro al " ?) \ oD \1 ( aF ^ -1 Por
i 1
\
Oaks
V
\ Cc6< \y h \ +\ U \71 1 ` F ?N1 I ?? ??
r? \ ( Enf,l i?r
Enp V 1 ?O PoF, Y? ?C'j / ?? Cuit? Ch
- 10
1 ',F
E ,Et _ ccC2 -??:= EuB7a1
PoF
C
` CeB
/' ?(F nD?\ 1 i I \ Q?F / F• O ? V PoD r
\ I V? ?? ?? -? ?V7 ?G
Pof
Ory1 I ?' a0' fcR2 i rnB 10 Q AaB
_V ch MCD
Oka
p?/NaE J/? '/.
EnD MeE
5 1 r CeB
E',,e Y' ?? { rxe?I f ?L,7 , f n8
Ln8 ?R' Q Er U ` C,h)
FnD ?"/?} ?? V Mki-
1,?EoH 1A111
VPcU
Vy ?
PuD
11 W J ;v , , r cr
FOS • IS
?nD
f
c)[3 -nE3 P
U
C \ ?? 2pef \ i MPB - ? -,J f 1 V
\ o
n
.t FIGURE 2
SOURCE:
s SOIL MAP
USDA SOIL SURVEY OF CULVERT REPAIR
CABARRUSCOUNTY DAKOTA STREET
SHEET NO. 2 KANNAPOLIS, NORTH CAROLINA
ISSUED SEPTEMBER 1988
NOT TO SCALE CAROLINAS ECS PROJECT NO. 09-16927A
THE STREAM/WETLAND LOCATIONS SHOWN ON THIS MAP ARE APPROXIMATE. THEY HAVE BEEN DELINEATED
BY ECS. THEY HAVE NOT BEEN VERIFIED BY THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS. THEY HAVE NOT BEEN
SURVEYED.
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Culvert Repair - Dakota Street Project No: Date: 12/31/2008
Applicant/Owner: Alley Williams Carmen & King County: Cabarrus
Investigators: ECS Carolinas, LLP 09-16927A State: North Carolina
Plot ID: DP-1
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation:)? ?Yes ® No Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? ?Yes ® No Field Location: View Figure 3
(If needed, explain on the reverse side)
VLF kx lAlWIN
Dominant Plant Species (Latin/Common) Stratum Indicator Plant Species (Latin/Common) Stratum Indicator
Acer rubrum
Red maple Tree/Sap FAC
Liquidambar styraciflua
Sweet gum Tree/Sap FAC+
Smilax rotundifolia
Common greenbrier Vine FAC
Ligustrum sinense
Chinese privet Tree/Sap FAC

L
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-): 1000 FAC Neutral: 100%
Numeric Index:
Remarks:
The dominant vegetation is hydrophytic.
II I LIIVLVIrI
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
? Stream
Lake or Tide Gauge Wetland Hydrology Indicators
P
i
,
? Aerial Photographs r
mary Indicators
? Inundated
? Other ? Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
? Water Marks
® No Recorded Data ? Drift Lines
? Sediment Deposits
Field Observations ? Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators
Depth of Surface Water: 0" ? Oxidized Root Channels in U
er 12 I
h
pp
nc
es
? Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: >12" ? Local Soil Survey Data
? FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: >12" ? Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Wetland hydrology indicators are not present.
(Wetform) Pagel of 2
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetland s Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Culvert Repair - Dakota Street Project No: Date: 12/31/2008
Applicant/Owner: Alley Williams Carmen & King County: Cabarrus
Investigators: ECS Carolinas, LLP 09-16927A State: North Carolina
Plot ID: DP-1
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Chewacla sandy loam
Map Symbol: Ch Mapped Hydric Inclusion? ®Yes ? No
Drainage Class: Somewhat poorly Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type: ?Yes ® No
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Fluvaquentic dystrochrepts
Profile Description
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Color Mottle
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Texture, Concretions, Structure, etc.

0-12 10YR 4/3 0% Loam

Hydric Soil Indicators:
? 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
? Reducing Conditions ? Listed on National Hydric Soils List
? Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors ? Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Hydric soil indicators are not present.
WILlLA1NU DEIEluVillNA IO
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampling Point within the Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? ?Yes ® No
Hydric Soils Present? nYes ? No
Remarks:
Wetland hydrology and hydric soil indicators are not present. The sampling point is not located within a wetland.
(Wetform)
Page 2 of 2
?s
0
?m

? rc
QQU?U?Y
mLm
1
i
I /
/ p
y a
v ?I NLL?
ly v
t.- N
30
?>
?w
W

Q
I
14.00
i
Z
w
m
z
0
J
C<
N

Q
W
I
"I
o ? ? e f
? ???gigigie3ggwe111 ? a
Z
i
t
a I
I ??O
I
I
I a r ./ I I
/ ? I , g 4 I
/ I
s I tl
I tl
I ? I
I I
a
15.00 '{
II
L`
C\2
to
co co
O
4
w
a
Hw
wa
a
?q
?z
x?
M?
W
^a^
F-?1
y U ;
A I ? 3
Ym
b - n
s
}I S
i III ?, I I ??`
II I I °? ? ? e ?: W=
? III I I bid ' ??.???
,, I_II I I
I
11
III I ,
I I, 1 v t-q?r ir E-
I
=1
I II '? I g = -___ - w ?
• •
o
-I it m - p, U?
r
---?r W Z E-+
1.4
P
H®?
• ,I °I wE--ao
I m g I
•II I ?I ? x
J FPY
I III ?? ?
1 ?
I 1 O? J
I J
imp
'j V) r
w
W
I I I i III w
42 z
i Ili I ?NH? v W
I ?F ?g o U
N
II 3 .N mo .,
/ ICI; /'AI?i\
CO Lo
AII
?- ,III II , 7{ N -
} I j ?91 ?`rlu , NOR £ II 1 I j
j,w
111 I
I''??° EEC
11 / I At
1 (/ ?I ?/??-???III,I„I`1?
4
I I? '? L I IQ?f I \ ? p 6 ?
Oil
o
- - --- - -
?. --__--- mss- - -?=? _ -

1.4

?Y z
I/? i ado
?
? /

W ?? \ 1 p CO
HH
??
`\ V 1 I rl ?
P
YN
1 ?\
\\
"
' \ O
2_?
?
\
\
\I E- U

Q
OAD

i I's Y

\ \ \ 4 ? ,,
? I I I,I- ? i
\ ? 1
\
t ? I L lr J ? '_ ? -?
?I I,u . w

z
I g ? d w
$ ? Z
J1
J
F ??
\ N ? ?O
Z ?a

I
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD): December 31, 2008
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Asheville, Dakota Street Culvert Upgrade, ECS Job No. 09-16927A
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State: NC County/parish/borough: Cabarrus City: Kannapolis
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.466433° N, Long. -80.615181 ° W.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Threemile Branch
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Threemile Branch
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03040105
® 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
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: 135 linear feet: -6 width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1987 Delineation Manual
Elevation of established OHWM (if known): Unknown.
2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable) :3
[l Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:
1 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).
s Supporting documentation is presented in Section I11.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:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent":
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section 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 waterbodya 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 IILC below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: 616 acres
Drainage area: 616 -acres
Average annual rainfall: 45.9 inches
Average annual snowfall: 5.5 inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
? Tributary flows directly into TNW.
® Tributary flows through 2 tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are 15-20 river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1(or less) river miles from RPW.
Project waters are 10-15 aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1(or less) aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNW`: Threemile Branch flows into Cold Water Creek which flows into the Rocky River.
Tributary stream order, if known: First.
° Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.
(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: ? Natural
? Artificial (man-made). Explain:
® Manipulated (man-altered). Explain: Some areas have been straightened/influenced by previous
existing crossing.
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: 6 feet
Average depth: 5-8 feet
Average side slopes: Vertical (lsl or less).
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
® Silts ® Sands ? Concrete
® Cobbles ® Gravel ® Muck
® Bedrock ® Vegetation. Type/% cover: 20
? Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain: highly eroding in areas. Existing road is
caving in/eroding.
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain: Areas of the stream contain riffle-pool complexes.
Tributary geometry: Relatively straight
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): 1.4 %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Seasonal flow
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: 20 (or greater)
Describe flow regime: Continual.
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Discrete and confined. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Unknown. Explain findings:
? Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
® Bed and banks
® OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
® clear, natural line impressed on the bank
® changes in the character of soil ?
® shelving
® vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
® leaf litter disturbed or washed away
® sediment deposition
® water staining
? other (list):
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
El 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: Water color is clear. There are some sediment deposits.
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.
(N) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width): Bottomland hardwoods in areas (approximately 100 feet).
? Wetland fringe. Characteristics: Small wetland pockets adjacent to streams, mainly in headwater area.
® Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
® Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings: Minnows, crayfish, salamanders and macroinvertebrates were observed.
Terrestrial animals that drink from the stream and eat aquatic species also use the stream.
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(j) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: 0 acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain: No.
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: Perennial flow. Explain:
Surface flow is: Confined
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Unknown. 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 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
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: mature hardwoods; 30% Cover.
? Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings: Aquatic wildlife was observed with moderate diversity..
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: Pick List
Approximately ( 0 ) 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: Functions to filter runoff and slow flood
waters. Biodiversity is moderate. Wetland is located in an old pasture.
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 IILD:
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: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
? Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: Minows are present.
? 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 I1I.13. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
® Tributary waters: 135 linear feet 8 width (ft).
? Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non-RPWs8 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 111.13 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: 1.35 acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
? Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters .9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
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):70
? which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
? Other factors. Explain:
SSee Footnote 4 3.
9 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.
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
? Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
? Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
? 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 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:
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
? 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):
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: