20090783 Ver 1_401 Application_20090709

0 9 0 7 8 3
WITHERS _ RAVENEL
ENGINEERS I PLANNERS I SURVEY 111 MacKenan Drive
CARY, NORTH CAROLINA, 27511,
TEL: [phone] `.,c .> r?•
FAX: [phone]
TO: Ian McMillan.
NC-DWQ
2321 Crabtree Boulevard
Raleigh, NC
WE ARE SENDING YOU
? Shop Drawings
? Copy of Letter
DATE July 15, 2009 JOB NO. 2090053
ATTENTION Ian McMillan
> PHONE #
r J.. RE: Southbridge Greenway Connector
? Attached via the following items:
? Prints ? Plans ? Samples
? Change order ? Diskette ?
? Specifications
COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION
5 Request for 401 Authorization
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below:
F] For approval ? Approved as submitted ? Resubmit copies for approval
® For your use E] Approved as noted El Submit copies for distribution
? As requested E] Returned for corrections ? Return corrected prints
? For review and comment ? Other:
? FOR BIDS DUE El PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US
REMARKS: Ian,
Let me know if you need any additional information.
Thanks,
Todd
RECEIVED BY:
DATE RECEIVED:
COPY TO: File SIGNED: Todd Preuni

/fendosures are not as notes; please notify us at once.
WITHERS (X3 RAVENEL
ENGINEERS I PLANNERS
July 15, 2009
USACE - Raleigh Office
Ms. Crystal Amschler
3331 Heritage Trade Dr., Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
Re: South Bridge Trail Connector
Request for 404/401 authorization
W& R Project Number- 2090053
Dear Ms. Amschler and Mr. McMillan,
C?9 0783
FPfZg7
Q R S C
NC-Division of Water QualityAttn:
Attn: Mr. Ian McMillan
2321 Crabtree Boulevard
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
On behalf of the Town of Cary, we are requesting 404 authorization and 401
Certification for impacts to wetlands associated with the installation of a greenway
connector trail. The proposed wetland impacts consist of o.o6 acres. Bridges were
used at the stream crossing to minimize impacts.
The project area is located southwest of the intersection of Cary Glen Road and
Lantern Ridge Drive, at Latitude 35.8109748°N, and Longitude 78.9087752°W, in
Wake County, North Carolina. The corridor is located in the Cape River Basin and
surface waters on-site flow into Panther Creek. The Water Quality Classification for
Panther Creek is "WS-IV;NSW", the Stream Index Number is: 16-41-1-17-3, and the
Cataloging Unit for the site is 03030004.
Project History
Wetlands were delineated by Withers & Ravenel on February 23', 2oo9. Data forms
and JD forms are included in support of our delineation. .
Avoidance and Minimization
Prior to the greenway development, the applicant requested that a detailed wetland
delineation be conducted so that impacts to wetlands and `waters' could be
minimized. In the original plans, the greenway was shifted to the south (towards the
creek), however; the Town of Cary requested that the trail be re-aligned outside of
the 50400t stream buffer. Given these constraints, and the existing homes to the
north of the greenway, wetland impacts could not be avoided. To reduce impacts,
the applicant will utilize a bridge at the proposed stream crossing.
Mitigation
Because the impacts are less than o.1 acres, we do not believe that mitigation
should be required. If mitigation is required, the applicant proposes payment to the
NCEEP, or an acceptable mitigation bank.
ill MacKenan Drive i Cary, NC 27511 1 tel: [phone] fax: [phone]oo8 i www.withersravenet.com
7040 Wrightsville Avenue i Suite 1o1 i Wilmington, NC 28403 1 tel: [phone] fax: [phone]
Brunswick Surveying 1 1027 Sabbath Home Rd, SW i Supply, NC 28462 1 tel: 9io.842.9392 1 fax: g1o.842.8019
Please feel free to call if you have any questions or require additional information.
Sincerely,
WITHERS & RAVENEL, INC.
Todd Preuninger
Senior Biologist
Attachments:
1) PCN Form
2) Site Plans
3) Agent Authorization
4) USGS Quadrangle Map
5) Wake County Soil Survey Map
6) Data Forms
09 0 7 8 3
W ATrh
y
C3
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Pre-Construction Notification PCN Form
A. Applicant Information

1.
Processing M aim
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:
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps? ® Yes ? No
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
® 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular ? Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
? 401 Water Quality Certification - Express ? Riparian Buffer Authorization
1e. 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
1 g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below. ? Yes ® No
1h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)? ? Yes ® No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project: Southbridge Trail Connector
2b. County: Wake
2c. Nearest municipality / town: Cary
2d. Subdivision name: Southbridge
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no: NA
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed: Cary Park Property Owners Association
3b. Deed Book and Page No. 09430, pg 0083
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable): Tom Liebrecht
3d. Street address: 1000 Park Forty Plaze, Suite 300
3e. City, state, zip: Durham, NC 27713
3f. Telephone no.:
3g. Fax no..
3h. Email address:
Page I of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is: ? Agent ® Other, specify: Proposed Easement Holder
4b. Name: Doug McRainey
4c. Business name
(if applicable): Town of Cary
4d. Street address: 316 North Academy Street
4e. City, state, zip: Cary, NC 27513
4f. Telephone no.: 469-4061
4g. Fax no.: 469-4344
4h. Email address: [e-mail]
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name: Todd Preuninger
5b. Business name
(if applicable): Withers & Ravenel
5c. Street address: 111 MacKenan Drive
5d. City, state, zip: Cary, NC 27511
5e. Telephone no.: 469-3340
5f. Fax no.: 467-6008
5g. Email address: [e-mail]
Page 2 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID): 0725609464
Latitude: 35.8109748 N Longitude: -
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): 78.9087752°W
(DD.DDDDDD) (-DD.DDDDDD)
1 c. Property size: NA - Linear Project acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to Panther Creek
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water: WS-IV;NSW
2c. River basin: Cape Fear
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 greenway corridor is wooded, residential housing surrounds the project corridor.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
<0.25 acres
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
about 2000 feet of perennial stream run parallel to the greenway
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The purpose of the proposed work is to connect existing greenways to the noorth and south of this project
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Typical clearing equipment will be used to grade the corridor and lay asphalt
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property I ? Yes ? No ® Unknown
project (including all prior phases) in the past.
Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
? Preliminary ? Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas? Agency/Consultant Company: Withers & Ravenel
Name (if known): Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for ? Yes ? No ® Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
Permits may have been obtained for the adjacent subdivision, but we are not aware if the Town applied for permits for the
greenway projects nearby.
Page 3 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? ? Yes ® No
6b. If yes, explain.
Additional impacts may be required for future greenway connectors, but we are not aware of any additional impacts
needed at this point.
Page 4 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
® Wetlands ? Streams - tributaries ? Buffers
? Open Waters ? Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a. 2b. 2c. 2d. 2e. 2f.
Wetland impact Type of jurisdiction
number - Type of impact Type of wetland Forested (Corps - 404, 10 Area of impact
Permanent (P) or (if known) DWQ - non404, other) (acres)
Temporary T
W1 ®P ? T fill/culvert headwater ® Yes
? No ® Corps
? DWQ 0.06
W2 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W3 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W4 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W5 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W6 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts 0.06
2h. Comments:
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a. 3b. 3c. 3d. 3e. 3f. 3g.
Stream impact Type of impact Stream name Perennial Type of jurisdiction Average Impact
number - or
(PER)
(Corps - 404, 10
stream
length
Permanent (P) or intermittent DWQ - non-404, width (linear
Temporary (T) (INT)? other) (feet) feet)
S1 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S2 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S3 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S4 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S5 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S6 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts 0
3i. Comments:
Page 5 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a. 4b. 4c. 4d. 4e.
Open water Name of waterbody
impact number - (if applicable) Type of impact Waterbody type Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
01 ?P?T
02 ?P?T
03 ?P?T
04 ?P?T
4f. Total open water impacts 0
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If and or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a. 5b. 5c. 5d. 5e.
Pond ID I Proposed use or purpose
number of pond
Wetland Impacts (acres)
Stream Impacts (feet) Upland
Flooded I Filled I Excavated I Flooded I Filled I Excavated I Flooded
P1
P2
5f. Total
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
? Yes ? No if yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If an impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
Project is in which protected basin?
6b. 6c. 6d.
Buffer impact
number - Reason
Permanent (P) or for
Temgorarv (T) imoact
B1 ?P?T
B2 ?P?T
B3 ?P?T
6i. Comments:
? Neuse ? Tar-Pamlico ? Other:
? Catawba ? Randleman
6e. 6f. 6g.
Buffer
Stream name mitigation
required?
? Yes
? No
? Yes
? No
? Yes
? No
6h. Total buffer impacts
Zone 1 impact Zone 2 impact
(square feet) (square feet)
Page 6 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 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.
Prior to the greenway development, the applicant requested that a detailed wetland delineation be conducted so that impacts
to wetlands and 'waters' could be minimized. In the original plans, the greenway was shifted to the south (towards the creek),
to minimize wetland impacts, however; the Town of Cary requested that the trail be re-aligned outside of the 50-foot stream
buffer. Given these constraints, and the existing homes to the north of the greenway, wetland impacts could not be avoided.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
To reduce impacts, the applicant will utilize a bridge at the proposed stream crossing.
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

pro
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
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In-lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in-lieu fee program is attached. ? Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested: linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature: ? warm ? cool ?cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only): square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4f. Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested: acres
4h. Comments:
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 7 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) - required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation? ? Yes ® No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.

Zone 6c.
Reason for impact 6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier 6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1 3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2 1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in-lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 8 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified ? Yes ® No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
? Yes ? No
Comments:
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project? NA %
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan? ? Yes ® No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why: NA - Greenway Trail
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
? Certified Local Government
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan? ? DWQ Stormwater Program
? DWQ 401 Unit
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project? NA - Greenway trail
? Phase II
3b. Which of the following locally-implemented stormwater management programs ? NSW
? USMP
apply (check all that apply): ? Water Supply Watershed
? Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been ? Yes ® No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
? Coastal counties
? HQW
4a. Which of the following state-implemented stormwater management programs apply ? ORW
(check all that apply):
? Session Law 2006-246
? Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached? ? Yes ? No
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements? ? Yes ? No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met? ® Yes ? No
Page 9 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
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:
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.
The proposed project consists of a greenway trail within an existing subdivision, therefore, we do not believe that it will
result in additional development or impact water quality.
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.
NA - Greenway
Page 10 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or ? Yes ® No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act ? Yes ® No
impacts?
El 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?
The NHP database does not list any endangered species for the Green Level Quad Map.
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 not located in a coastal area.
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?
No historic structures were identified when the corridor was reviewed for wetland/stream impacts.
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:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? FEMA Maps
- 1(1,101
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name Applicant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
is provided.)
Page 11 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
f
WITHERS''" RAVEN EL
ENGINEERS I PLANNERS I SURVEYORS
Site Access/Agent Authorization Form
Project Name: Southbridge Trail Connector
Proposed Easement Holder: rc)W J OF AMY
Address: 31 & /Voo-rI4 A cpDEmy sr,,
CA R y I N C. Z -7S13
Phone: C-7/1) -4&Y .--bolo r
Fax: ci `i) 4b9 --43-44-
Email: DO0'(,,rnc PA I NOYC?'77 MvNOFCAR-Y,O2L
I hereby grant Withers and Ravenel, INC permission to conduct environmental
studies on the property described above. In addition, I authorize Withers and
Ravenel to act on my behalf as my agent when conducting site meetings and/or
correspondence (i.e. permit applications etc.) with the USACE and the NC - Division
of Water Quality, if necessary.
Easement Holder: ?owAJ OF ::?,4(Ly Date: '7/13/0y
(Print Name)
(Si at re)
r.
?? ' • ! '
_2 J
?,
;f
?-•--` ?' 3 7? ?1 i
C"y350 /
I. ?
FIGURE 1: USGS Prepared By Date. Job Number
WITHERS Q`? RAV E N E L
@NC;IVFfPS P,ANNFR? SGNVEVpuS TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLE LT 02-18-09 02090053
Southbridge Greenway Connector
111 MacKenan Drive Cary, North Carolina 27511 Wake County, North Carolina
tel:[phone] fax. [phone] Feet
www wrfhersravenel. com Greenlevel Quadrangle 0 500 1,000 2,000

TAM
•
? _
S CRfE R 1

` ALBION PL /t

3;?.

d

'0 ?--
?
y I
,
?

? F

? ? I \ a
i NORTHLgNDS:DR
CARPENTER-FI E:STAT N RD !I
a Y I._
AN WAYS /
• T-) R1
?sit.
TSTONE/??? ?? ?...
QUART2lCRYsrAll??r I '
' pu5?
Mp f ?/ , l O
yob
W t
? ' --:„y •_ Wry!
J
O- - N?VVt?t?' W 1. l
A
KAT ?ti• ??O !.? l DENNISON LN
o ?_ 3 to
t T?
.
:.p _ OF N c
C
0-
IX SHgWRD ? ,.•F
l
- M
k_j
Y a GNKO. pONU.OR.
?`-
01,
•
W
l
a
,
r-
FIGURE 1: USGS Prepared By Date: Job Number
WITHERS ANNE RAV E OR E L TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLE LT 02090053
ENGINEERS ? PLANNERS , SURVEYORS 02-18-09
Southbridge Greenway Connector
111 MacKenan Drive Cary, North Carolina 27511 Wake County, North Carolina
tel:[phone] fax: [phone] Feet
www.wlthersravenel.com Greenlevel Quadrangle 0 500 1,000 2,000
?O

111 \\
III II'? rl
;III li
Ij II I
u ll'?_
9
W 8
J
V O
U O O
d 5
Q C
U O

I
m

N"

l 1

\
L&J
N 3

a. w
w
w
ck:
a0
zQ
za
V)
N
00
it
U ,Z
Z
W
N m
1

J

1

a

a

f N
!n
v
en U.
o
N
N
N
J
Z
co O
F- F-
?- U

U Q Q
V) 3 3
Q W Z Z

uj LLJ
?

a
N ?
0 0

a
L tFj
r H
H

m a m
f
lm? ^ W J (n V
GUWF-<
z "'
0:5 r! n
u?ZO?
J uJZ W-H 0
?aUJ
F- F-
WZg
0 W O
?2 F-
ca Z
_j F-
m ::) od
Q 00
U) m
Q W
Q J
H Q
(n u
z
0
ui u<
a
z w
G0 > Q = z
U
W
^ ¢ a n w
W0 000.a
aJ¢af 3
I
? ? III III
,VIII '?'?
I) li i
? ?? III
1bnO3 31VGNONN3X
+?111? 111
X111 'iil
PEo
W a
Z "y
¦
o-
WW
r
N
N
W
i?
s
0)
i N 2
¦ 3
WWI
W ?
i ?
V
i J
W ?S

F_
m
X
W
U
CL

Z
J
w
0
W
Z
0
Q
ce
W
0
?c
m
O
V)
3
6
g
TWO 1Md - Ry [SUM ISM 20 /W 'ADP& ? L -5m0'8030L0 - H44x3 tlWwI\80'L0'LO\WCh Jo I
\O17\AO1wwrj 4DV44rK-SS00l0\OS00-60\804H
? i
EXISTING I• IMPACT Al
345 SF WETLAND
WETLANDS \
PROPOSED 1
SCOUR HOLE PROPOSED 15"
RCP CROSS PIPE
1
PROPOSED 10'
GREENWAY TRAIL 1 I Cp
TOWN OF CARY PROPERTY
2 STREAM BUFFER LINE
(ZONE 2) /
I
TOWN OF CARY
/ STREAM BUFFER
(ZONE 3)
GRAPHIC SCALE ??
20 0 10 20 40 O?
1 inch - 20 ft,
SOUTH BRIDGE TRAIL CONNECTOR IMPACT MAP A WITHERS &- RAVEm
ENGINEERS I PLANNERS 1 SURVEYORS
CARY WAKE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA+.,
PROPOSED 24"
RCP CROSS PIPE
PROPOSED
SCOUR HOLE
EXISTING
`WETLANDS
N
I
PROPOSED 10'
GREENWAY TRAIL
TOWN OF CARY --?
STREAM BUFFER
(ZONE 2) i
NG
?NDS
TOWN OF CARY
STREAM BUFFER
/ (ZONE 3)
GRAPHIC SCALE
30 0 15 30 60
1 inch = 30 k.
i
\ EXISTING \\ \
Y
5" RCP \y \
i PROPOSED
iii i •ii'' 18" RCP
i IMPACT 81
' i 2220 SF-WETLAND \ \\ \\

SOUTHBRIDGE TRAIL CONNECTOR
1? , IMPACT MAP B WITHERS RAVENEL
RNRIRRRRR 1 ?IANNRRR I RNRYRYORR
CARY WAKE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA ,........,,.
DATA FORM 1
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Determination Manual)
Project / Site: W&R Project # - 02090053.0 Date: 2-23-2009
Applicant / Owner: Town of Cary - Attn: Joe Godfrey County: Wake
State: NC
Investigator: Withers & Ravenel (Todd Preuninger)
Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes No II
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical situation)? Yes II No Community ID Headwater
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes II No E Forest Wetland
(explain on reverse if needed) Transect ID: --
PlotID:
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Acer rubrum Tree FAC 9.
2. A thyrium filix-femina Herb FAC 10.
3. Liriodendron tulapifera Tree FAC 11.
4. Salix niara Tree OBL 12.
5. Juncus fffusus Herb FACW 13.
6.-Smilax rotundifolia Vine FAC 14.
7. Dichanthelium clandestinum Panicum FACW 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC excluding FAC-). 100
Remarks:
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present
HYDROLOGY
II Recorded Data (Describe In Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators
? Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
[1 Aerial Photographs Primary Indicators:
II Other II Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12"
No Recorded Data Available II Water Marks
Drift Lines
Field Observations: II Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: NA (in.)
Secondary Indicators:
Depth to Free Water in Pit: >12 (in.) L1 Oxidized Roots Channels in Upper 12"
Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Saturated Soil: 3 (in.) Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
II Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Hydrology Indicators Present
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Wo Worsham Sandy Loam Drainage Class: Poorly Drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Typic Ochraguult Confirm Mapped Type? Yes[] No[]
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-2 B 10YR 5/1 l OYR 4/6 clay loam
2-8 B 10YR 5/3 course sand
8-10 C IOYR 4/1 1OYR 5/6 clay
Hydric Soil Indicators:
F Histosol L1 Concretions
II Histic Epipedon II High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
II Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
II Aquic Moisture Regime Listed On Local Hydric Soils List
II Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
M Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors II Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Hydric Soils Present
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No II
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes M No II
Is the Sampling Point
Within a Wetland? YesM NoII
Remarks:
DATA FORM 2
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Determination Manual)
Project / Site: W&R Project # - 02090053.0 Date: 2-23-2009
Applicant / Owner: Town of Cary - Attn: Joe Godfrey County: Wake
State: NC
Investigator: Withers & Ravenel (Todd Preuninger)
Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Z Non
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical situation)? Yes II No Community ID: Upland
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes II No
T
--
tID:
(explain on reverse if needed) PlotID:
otID:
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Betula nizra Tree NO 9. _
2. Toxicodendron radicans Vine FAC 10. _
3. Cornus jlorida Tree FACU 11.
4. Liriodendron tulii era Tree FAC 12.
5. Ilex zlabra Tree NO 13.
6. Polystichum acrostichoides Herb FAC 14. _
7. Ulmus americana Tree FACW 15. _
8. Carya tomentosa Tree FACU 16. _
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC excluding FAC-). 50
Remarks:
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present
HYDROLOGY
[1 Recorded Data (Describe In Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators
? Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
II Aerial Photographs Primary Indicators:
Other n Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12"
No Recorded Data Available II Water Marks
II Drift Lines
Field Observations: II Sediment Deposits
II Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: NA (in.)
Secondary Indicators:
Depth to Free Water in Pit: >12 (in.) II Oxidized Roots Channels in Upper 12"
II Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Saturated Soil: >12 (in.) II Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
II Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Hydrology Indicators Absent
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): CrE Creedmoor sandy loam Drainage Class: Moderately Drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Aquic hapludult Confirm Mapped Type? Yes[1 NoF l
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottl e Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-2 B l OYR 4/4 sandy loam
2-12 B 10YR 5/4 sandy loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
II Histosol II Concretions
II Histic Epipedon II High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
n Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
II Aquic Moisture Regime E Listed On Local Hydric Soils List
R Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors ? Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Hydric Soils Absent
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No II
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes II No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes n No
Is the Sampling Point
Within a Wetland? YesII NoJQ
Remarks:
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 E BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State: NC County/parish/borough: Wake City: Cary
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.8109748° N, Long. 78.9087752° W.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Panther Creek/Jordan Lake
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) Into which the aquatic resource flows: Jordan Lake/Haw River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03030004
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 Il: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Appear to be no "navigahle 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 maybe 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):
TNWs, including territorial seas
? Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
8 Relatively permanent waters (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Impoundments 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. -30 linear feet: 2-10 width (ft) and/or NA acres.
Wetlands: < I acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1987 Delineation; Manual
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:
1 Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
2 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).
1 Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.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 HI.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 HLB below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW: NA.
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent": NA.
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 HLB.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 II1.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: acres
Drainage area: acres
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: 10 inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
? Tributary flows directly into TNW.
? Tributary flows through Pick List tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from RPW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain: NA.
Identify flow route to TNW':
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.
5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.
(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: ? Natural
? Artificial (man-made). Explain:
? Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: Pick List.
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
? Silts ? Sands ? Concrete
? Cobbles ? Gravel ? Muck
? Bedrock ? Vegetation. Type/% cover:
? Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry: Pick List
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(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
? 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
? Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
If factors other than the OH WM 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:
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 OH" 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 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:
? 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: Pict: 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 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):
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: flowing during summer drought, and DWQ stream forms.
Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally' (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
ED Tributary waters: -20 linear feet 2-10 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 tie to the channel .
[3 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: < lacres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Q 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.
El 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 II1.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.
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):'0
which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
0 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.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section I11.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):
Q If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
? Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SIFANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule' (MBR).
Q 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.
L] 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):
N 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.
El U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: Quad.
® 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: This form is for impacts since they are to abutting wetlands.