20090998 Ver 1_401 Application_20090909

TRANSMITTAL FORM
To:
Cyndi Karoly
NC Division of Water Quality
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, St 250
Raleigh, NC 27604
We are sending you: ® Attached
The following items:
8208 Brian Ct.; Garner, NC 27529
P:919-606-1065 - F:919-341-4474
09-0 99 8
Date: 9/15/09
Project: Deep River Outfall Segment PA I
Reference No.:
? Email ? Under Separate Cover'
COPIES DATE ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION
5 9/14/09 1 Response to NOV & PCN
1 9/14/09 2 Application fee of $240.00

These items are transmitted as checked below:
® For approval
? For your use
? As requested
? For review and comment
? Approved as submitted
? Approved as noted
? Please return
? Other:
Comments:
One copy was delivered directly to Sue Homewood as this is a combined PCN and response to NOV
Signed: ?J'An-,
Name: Philip May
Title: Senior Environmental Scientist
Copied to:
Terry Houk, City of High Point
Robert Davis, Davis-Martin-Powell & Associates EP,"NNGwr= Sue Ho
mewood, DWQ Winston Salem Regional Office S r P 1 7 2009
Andy Williams, USACE Raleigh Regulatory Office DENR - WATER QUALITY
WETLANDS AND STORMWATER BRANCH
CAROLINA
8208 Brian Ct.; Garner, NC 27529
ECOSYSTEMS, Inc. P:919-606-1065-F:919-341-4474
September 14, 2009
Ms. Sue Homewood
Winston Salem Regional Office
NC Division of Water Quality
585 Waughtown Street
Winston-Salem, NC 27107
RE: Notice of Violation with Recommendation for Enforcement NOV-20090SP-0013
401 Water Quality Certification Inspection - GC3625
Deep River Sewer Outfall Segment 3
Guilford County NC
Dear Ms. Homewood:
As proposed in our July 14, 2009 response to the above referenced Notice of Violation (NOV) and
subsequent phone conversations, the purpose of this submittal is to provide detailed information on
the City of High Point's (City) plan to address the subject violations and gain compliance with
Section 404 and 401 of the Clean Water Act.
Project Background
The Deep River Outfall Segment 3 was originally issued a 404 permit (Action ID 200620048) and
401 Certification (DWQ ID 05-1935) on November 10 and November 9, 2005 respectively. The
project construction was completed in 2008. During a field review on June 4, 2009, several sites
were determined to be out of compliance with the issued permit/certification and needed to be
addressed:
• Three jurisdictional stream channels not identified in the application permitting materials that
were subsequently impacted by construction (Sites 5, 6, 7 in Figure 2).
• Four stream crossings (three streams above and Site 2 in Figure 2) that were not restored to
natural pre-project conditions after construction.
• A wetland area (Site A in Figure 2) that was not restored to pre-project conditions.
The purpose of this submittal is twofold: to respond to these issues with a plan to rectify or restore
the sites described above, and to present a revised after-the-fact Pre-Construction Notification
(PCN) to document the actual impacts that occurred on the construction project. A comparison of
the original permit impacts and current impacts, along with a corrective action plan for the impacted
areas, is included in this letter. Attached to this letter are a PCN, figures, and engineering detail of
the proposed permanent crossings.
Ms. Sue Homewood Page 2 of 4
September 14, 2009
Impacts
Table 1 provides information regarding the sites containing jurisdictional features (streams,
wetlands, and riparian buffers) and compares the original (2005) application with the current
calculations. The three streams identified in your NOV were field inspected by Carolina
Ecosystems on July 30, 2009. Each feature was found to be intermittent in nature, most starting just
upstream of the sewer corridor, and lacking in significant aquatic habitat. Stream forms
documenting each site are attached. The sites have been added to the previous permit site numbers
as Sites 5 through 7 (Figure 2).
The discrepancy between previous proposed impacts (Sites 1 through 4) and current impact levels
can be attributed to the stabilization of stream banks along the project, which have been included in
the current application as temporary impacts. This stabilization was done at the direct request of the
NC Division of Land Resources and as it involved only bank stabilization with no channel bed
impacts, a modification of the original PCN was not deemed necessary. The width of the corridor,
and therefore the amount of stabilization, was minimized to the greatest extent practical. The sewer
line is 54" in diameter and, due to the local topography, the required depth to maintain gravity flow
was often over 40 feet. This required a larger construction area (over 100 feet) than typically
needed for smaller sewer outfall projects. The clearing associated with this construction was
minimized to the amount required to safely dig the trench and install erosion control measures.
However, even at the stream crossings, the depth of cut was often in excess of 20 feet, therefore
requiring a larger corridor (over 60 feet). This increased the amount of temporary impact associated
with clearing and bank stabilization.
Permanent impacts will be minimized to the greatest extent practical for the work proposed in this
submittal. While no permanent impacts were originally proposed, in order to maintain access to all
portions of the corridor, several permanent stream crossings are proposed. These are required due
to the relatively steep topography of the site, and the need to stabilize sections of the stream
channels to prevent erosion from infrequent maintenance vehicle access. Maintenance corridors
within wetlands, streams, and riparian buffers will be limited to a 10 foot width. Permanent
crossings will be installed using riprap overlaying geotextile fabric to a depth up to 1 foot below the
bed of the stream (see attached detail). The riprap will be embedded such that it will not impede
flow in the channels. Banks will be stabilized in the crossings using 57 stone and geotextile.
Stream bank cut sections will reinforced and vegetated to prevent erosion.
Corrective Action Plan
A corrective action plan has been developed in response to your June 15, 2009 NOV. The NOV
identified several areas on the site that needed to be addressed:
• Four tributaries containing riprap in excess of proposed impacts at Sites 2, 5, 6, and 7
(Figure 2).
• A wetland area (Site A) containing permanent riprap fill (Figure 2).
Ms. Sue Homewood Page 3 of 4
September 14, 2009
Stream Channel Rehabilitation and Stabilization
At each stream channel impact location (Sites 2, 5, 6, and 7) riprap fill currently in the channel
will be removed by backhoe or by hand depending on the site condition, stream channel width,
and access. Removed materials will be hauled away and disposed of in upland locations with
the exception of the material used to stabilize the permanent crossings detailed above.
The channel will be tied in up and downstream of the project corridor to match existing
dimensions, and any areas requiring adjustment within the corridor will be restored to match
these dimensions and the pre-project stream pattern. Silt fencing will be installed at the toe of
slopes adjacent to the stream channel and the banks will be seeded based on the schedule below.
No matting is proposed as these locations are small headwater streams with intermittent flow
and low potential for bank erosion. Erosion control measures will be placed in accordance with
the NC Sedimentation and Erosion Control Manual.
Wetland Rehabilitation
At Site A, riprap fill currently in the wetland area will be removed by backhoe or by hand
depending on the site condition. Removed materials will be hauled away and disposed of in
upland locations with the exception of the material used to stabilize the permanent crossings
described above. The disturbed area will be graded to match adjacent wetland elevations and
seeded based on the schedule below.
Seeding Specifications
Seeding of the stream banks and wetland areas will be performed using both temporary and
permanent seed mixtures as follows:
Fall Seeding (through October 31):
Wetlands: Ernst wetland meadow seed mix (ERNMX-122) 1/3 lb/1000 sq. ft.
Stream Banks: Ernst riparian buffer seed mix (ERNMX-178) 1/3 lb/1000 sq. ft.
Winter rye: 60 lbs/acre
Winter/Spring Seeding (after October 31):
Winter: Winter rye: 1201bs/acre
Spring: See above for wetland and stream banks (mow area prior to seeding).
Topsoil will be added and/or scarified prior to initial seeding. Straw will be placed over the seeded
areas and erosion control measures will be implemented in accordance with the NC Sedimentation
and Erosion Control Manual. Equivalent seed mixes to the ones specified above will be accepted
after review by a qualified professional.
Work will be initiated within 30 days of approval by the USACE and NCDWQ of the permit
application and NOV response.

Ms. Sue Homewood
September 14, 2009
Page 4 of 4
Conclusions
The preceding information, along with the enclosed Pre-Construction Notification and associated
materials, is submitted for your review of this project. Five copies are also being sent to the NC
DWQ Wetlands/401 Unit for their review, along with the required $240.00 application fee. One
copy is being provided to the US Army Corps of Engineers Raleigh Regulatory Office for their
review and re-issuance of a NWP for the project. We appreciate your time in reviewing the
documentation of this project. Please contact us at your earliest convenience if you have any
questions or require any additional information.
Sincerely,
Carolina Ecosystems, Inc.
Philip
Senior Environmental Scientist
Cc: Ian McMillan, NCDWQ 401 Unit (5 copies)
Andy Williams, USACE Raleigh Regulatory Office
Robert Davis, Davis Martin Powell & Associates, Inc.
Terry Houk, City of High Point
®g-0 90 8
o`?oF w A rF9
O c
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 W W&
1. Processing
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit ? Section 10 Permit
1b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 12 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
1 h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)? ? Yes ® No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project: Deep River Outfall Segment 3
2b. County: Guilford
2c. Nearest municipality /town: Jamestown & High Point
2d. Subdivision name: Not applicable
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no: Not applicable
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed: City of High Point
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable): Terry Houk
3d. Street address: 211 South Hamilton Street
3e. City, state, zip: High Point, NC 27260
3f. Telephone no.: [phone]
3g. Fax no.: [phone]
3h. Email address: [e-mail]
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:
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: Phil May
5b. Business name
(if applicable): Carolina Ecosystems, Inc.
5c. Street address: 8208 Brian Court
5d. City, state, zip: Garner, NC 27529
5e. Telephone no.: [phone]
5f. Fax no.: [phone]
1 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): Multiple - see attached list
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): Latitude: Longitude: -
(DD.DDDDDD) (-DD.DDDDDD)
1c. Property size: Varies acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to Deep River
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water: WS-IV
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 site is an existing sewer easement as authorized by the approved permits in 2006 (see below for ID no's).
Surrounding land use is primarily forested with some residential and commercial/industrial areas mostly concentrated at
either end of the sewer line.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
2.31 in initial corridor study area
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
820 in initial corridor
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The purpose of the current project is to remove riprap from temporary impact areas, and restore the stream and wetland
areas to pre-project conditions as appropriate. In four locations, a permanent low-water crossing will be constructed as
described below.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The sewer outfall project was constructed in 2008. The work proposed in this application is limited to removal of rip rap
from channels and wetlands, followed by re-establishment of the stream channels and wetlands to pre-project conditions
as described in the attached cover letter. Backhoes may be used during the removal of riprap and placement of low
water crossing materials. Other heavier equipment is not anticipated.
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?
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: Goldstein & Associates
Name (if known): Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
11/10/2005
Page 3 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
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.
404 (USACE ID 200620048) and 401 (DWQ ID 05-1935) approvals were issued in November 2005 for this segment of
the outfall. A post-project inspection by USACE and NCDWQ staff revealed discrepancies between the original permit
and the actual impacts. This application addresses those impacts.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? ? Yes ® No
6b. If yes, explain.
Page 4 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 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.
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 - non-404, other) (acres)
Temporary T
W1 ®P ? T Re-grading Site A Headwater ? Yes
® No ® Corps
? DWQ 0.05
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 0.05
2h. Comments: See attached table for comparison with previous impacts
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 - (PER) or (Corps - 404, 10 stream length
Permanent (P) or intermittent DWQ - non-404, width (linear
Temporary (T) (INT)? other) (feet) feet)
S1 ®P ? T Low water UT-Deep River ? PER ® Corps 6 10
crossing Site 2 ® INT ? DWQ
S2 ®P ? T Low water UT Deep River ? PER ® Corps 4 10
crossing Site 5 ® INT ? DWQ
S3 ®P ? T Low water UT Deep River ? PER ® Corps 3 10
crossing Site 6 ® INT ? DWQ
S4 ® P ? T Low water UT Deep River ? PER ® Corps 4 10
crossing Site 7 ® INT ? DWQ
S5 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S6 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts 40
3i. Comments: See attached table for comparison with previous impacts
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.
Open water
impact number -
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T 4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable) 4c.

Type of impact 4d.

Waterbody type 4e.

Area of impact (acres)
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.

Pond ID 5b.

Proposed use or purpose 5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres) 5d.
Stream Impacts (feet) 5e.
Upland
(acres)
number of pond
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
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:
Page 6 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWO)
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.
? Neuse ?Tar-Pamlico ? Other:
Project is in which protected basin? ? Catawba ® Randleman
6b. 6c. 6d. 6e. 6f. 6g.
Buffer impact
number- Reason Buffer Zone 1 impact Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P) or for Stream name mitigation (square feet) (square feet)
Temporary T impact required?
-
B1 ®P ? T Sewer
i UT-Deep River Site 2 ? Yes
N 743 488
cross
ng ®
o
B2 ® PEI T Sewer
i UT-Deep River Site 5 ? Yes
® N 635 391
cross
ng o
B3 ® P ? T Sewer
i UT-Deep River Site 6 ? Yes 598 394
cross
ng ® No
B4 ® PEI T Sewer
i UT-Deep River Site 7 El Yes 586 388
cross
ng ® No
6h. Total buffer impacts 2562 1661
6i. Comments: See attached table for comparison to previous impacts
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
la. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Impact minimization was described in the 2005 permit application. Stream crossings were designed to be near-perpendicular
and the alignment was shifted to minimize wetland impacts to the greatest practical extent. Due to the large size of the pipe
(54") and the depths required to maintain gravity flow (up to 40' and often 20' at stream crossings) a large construction corridor
was required. Permanent maintenance corridors within jurisdictional areas and the proposed low-water crossings will be
limited to 10' width.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Construction will be accomplished using backhoe and hand labor to minimize impacts to the areas. Riprap will be removed,
the stream channels tied in up and downstream, and silt fence will be installed at the edge of the channel. Exposed areas will
be seeded to prevent erosion and the low-water crossings will be installed to minimize long term impacts on the channels. A
check dam and/or pump around will be used if required due to flow in the stream channel.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for ? Yes ® No
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply): ? DWO ? Corps
? Mitigation bank
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
El Payment to in lieu fee program
project?
? Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter) Type Quantity
Page 7 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
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.
6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) - required by DWI
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation? ? Yes Z 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 DWO)
1. Diff use 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?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
? Yes ®No
Comments: No impervious surface or stormwater system proposed
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project? 0%
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan? ? Yes ® No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why: No impervious surface or stormwater
collection system is proposed.
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?
? 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. DWO Stormwater Program Review
? Coastal counties
? HOW
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 (DWI 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: SEPA process completed in 2000 - FONSI attached
2. Violations (DWO 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): This application is
in response to the NOV issued on 6/15/09 from NCDWQ. Please see cover letter for full details of response and proposal to
address the issues.
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.
EA and FONSI issued. Project is a replacement of existing outfall trunk line and is already approved and constructed.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWO 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.
Sewage transported by this line is treated in the City of High Point's Eastside Wastewater Treatment Facility.
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?

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?
Field review of site and prior PCN approval and NCWRC concurrence.
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?
NOAA Interactive Mapper - Essential Fish Habitat
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?
Area already disturbed, prior PCN approval assumes SHPO concurrence on project.
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: No fills or change in flood plain capacity
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? Previous 2005 PCN
Terry Houk 4, 9/14/09
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name Applic Agent' Signatu Date
(Agent's signature is valid on an authorization letter from the applicant
is provided.)
Page 11 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
c
0
m
U
O
O a C) Q
Q
(h U')
C O 0
N 'Z- 04
E m
L
CY)
N 0 c
O
c cn
O v a
L 2 E
> c U
w 0 o
J QU m
m 0 0 a
D a E
'Fu
N CY)
M N N
0 N O O r- N
T T M
N
T

0 co
M 0)
N IT M M
a
T
O N
co Lo .0 (o (0
U N ti (D V) co N

O 0 0 OO 0 O
I- N N N N O
N
O O O
C O O O O O
o o 0 O
N c
o c
o 0 0 0
O co
Z
U

L ^
/
?.L T
O c 0 0 O
7
0 N 0
04
04 0
04
04
00
m N
C
a)
C
m
E
O
a
O O
T
o
O O
T O
T o
T O
0
N

U)
Y
C
rn
O CO
m O C
O ? O O O N

s 12

a) ?
L C
L C
Ufa

o

0)

o

a
LO
?

O~O

COO
P-
M
am
a)

m
C E
a)
d O O O O O
Z?
? U L
E 0- 0
m
m o E

F-
N
N N N N
o
co
C
a)
C
m
E
U) O 0
O O O O
a o 0 0
Ll
cu
a
a)

O 0 0
U 0 0 0
C
0
C

0 E

° CD C 0
M N O O O
d o 0 0
Z

a
N a
E Lo L,)

p a) T O N
ci O O O

?
1
1
l
d
L
LI
Ll V

U
c
"
'
.
c
0
O
U
7
c
O
U
O
c
7
.a
c
O
ca
N
.Q
Y c
L
O C
.••.-. to
c M O
a) j U
L
U
a) M
O Z O
mZa cu
a a) L
L O
cu a
a)
U C U
0 cu - a)
M CA N
a) C Q ()
- Y O
O C Q m
O? ?E
c c a)
m 0 N'2
N UO 3
m m U O
L
(A Q a) -a
C a)
m co 3 O
-0 a
0) o n
- ao c
co T O
axi 9 ° 0
7 N 'y m
O U)
U U U
0 m
0 c: t5 Q
m o m E
CL 0. -
.E N E
mma)-0
o rn m c
CL Y
E E Q)
c t
0 m 0 ?
I-maU
TABLE 2
Deep River Outfall Segment 3
Pre-Construction Notification (2009)
Site Coordinates
NC State Plane (NAD 83)
Site Eastin Northing Latitude Longitude
1 1724507.77 812112.90 35.977810 79.931105
2A 1722705.69 814842.07 35.985260 79.937282
3 1720174.44 814998.32 35.985624 79.945843
4 1719705.69 817258.73 35.991821 79.947500
5 1720976.52 814810.82 35.985130 79.943126
6 1723934.86 813894.15 35.982688 79.933098
7 1723768.19 813529.57 35.981682 79.933649
B 1719653.61 816321.23 35.989244 79.947646
TABLE 3
Deep River Outfall Segment 3
Pre-Construction Notification (2009)
Tax Parcel Information
15-94-7039-0-0951-00-038
15-94-7039-0-0951-00-046
15-94-7039-0-0951-00-001
15-94-7039-0-0951-00-018
15-94-7039-0-0951-00-017
15-94-7039-0-0951-00-054
15-94-7039-0-0951-00-053
15-94-7039-0-0951-00-009
15-94-7039-K-1004-00-200
18-00-0083-0-0003-00-003 A
18-00-0083-0-0001-00-003 A
18-00-0083-0-0001-00-004 A
15-94-7039-0-1003-00-006
15-94-7039-0-1003-00-003
15-94-7039-0-1003-00-001

0
0
° d o
r
P
amestow
? ?sopc
> ? O
?a
m
` p o. 0
High Point Pro'ect Corridor.
?R
.ala
O 0 w e
4
a
4
•
CAROLINA 0.3 0 0.3 Miles N Figure: 1 Date: 9/4/09
Ecos'yS7EMS, INC.
A Vicinity Map
8208 Brian Court
Garner, NC 27529 Data Sources: Deep River Outfall Segment 3
O: [phone] - USGS 1:24,000 Topographic Quad Pre-Construction Notification
F: [phone]
www.carolinaeco.com High Point East City of High Point, NC

Site 4

f

¦ i
Slte B

t ¦
a
M
M
s
¦

Sites 2 & A tq r ?
Site 3 •
¦ ¦ Site 5 ¦ ' Site 6 ? w
I ? ¦
? it ¦t
¦ `' tr t

f. Site 7` ¦

M? 1
# ?

L
µ Site 1 . ,
s • a
rr
O • t
J
CAROLINA 500 0 500 Feet N Figure: 2 D

ate:
F

9/4/09
ECOSYSTEMS. INC.
8208 Brian Court

A
Deep River OutFall
Gamer, NC 27529 Data Sources: Segment 3
o: [phone]

F:[phone] - USGS 1:24,000 Topographic
Quad
Pre-Construction Notification
www.carolinaeco.com High Point East City of High Point NC
/
1. Riprap will be removed from wetland and 6 /
area graded to match adjacent topography. /
2. Riprap will be removed from channel and ream Channel, /
banks. /
3. Channel will be restored to match up/down
stream dimensions and pre-project pattern. /
4. Disturbed areas will be seeded per schedu /
in PCN. /
i
.? A roximate e nt /
f riprap /
................. ................. Y?:J? ¦?M •.• .
.. ... •...v
......... ............. .....•.• r' ?? • .
..?? •_........ ....... ......... •i.?w.••••
/
/
/ 54" Ou II
Mai enance Cor 'tlo / 10 ft wide
/ permane
crossin
? Wetland Boundary
t
/
/ Zone 2 Buffer
N /
A10 10 Feet Zone 1 Buffer
CAROLINA Data Sources: Figure: 3 Date: 9/4/09
ECOSYSTEMS. INC. - DMP Deep River Outfall Design
8208 Brian Court Site 2A Impact Area
Gamer, NC 27529 - DMP surveyed topography Deep River Outfall Segment 3
O: [phone]
F: (919) 3414474 Pre-Construction Notification
www.carolinaeco.com City of High Point NC
1. Riprap will be removed from channel and
banks.
2. Channel will be restored to match up/down
stream dimensions and pre-project pattern.
3. Disturbed areas will be seeded per schedul Zone 2 Buffer
in PCN.
tream Channel`
\pproximat
ex
tent
Zone Buffer
prap `

4" Outfall 1

10 wide

per nent

Maintenance. Corridor Gros ng
t

®

CAROLINA Data Sources: Figure: 4 Date: 9/4/09
EcosYBTEMs. INC.
8208 Brian Court _DMP Deep River Outfall Design Site 5 Impact Area
Gamer, NC 27529 - DMP surveyed topography Deep River Outfall Segment 3
O: [phone]
6
06-10
F: (919
341-
5 Pre-Construction Notification
www.carolinaeco.com ('il?i of I link D^in+ Ki?
1. Riprap will be removed from channel and
banks.
2. Channel will be restored to match up/down
stream dimensions and pre-project pattern. /':'•
3. Disturbed areas will be seeded per schedul
in PCN.
Stream Approximate ex t
Channe of riprap
Aft-
e 1 Buffe .?
0
permanent
crossing
Zone 2 Buffe
54" Outfall
Maintenance Corridor
N
A10 0 10 Feet
CAROLINA Data Sources: Figure: 5 Date: 9/4/09
ECOSYSTEMS. INC. _ DMP Deep River Outfall Design Site 6 Impact Area
8208 Brian Court
Gamer, NC 27529 - DMP surveyed topography Deep River Outfall Segment 3
0:[phone]
F: [phone] Pre-Construction Notification
www.carolinaeco.com (-i}%i of (--link Dnir%f KIr`

1. Riprap will be removed from channel and
banks.
2. Channel will be restored to match up/down
stream dimensions and pre-project pattern.
3. Disturbed areas will be seeded per schedu
in PCN.

Stream
Channe
e 1 Buffet
e2
N
A/460?40 Feet
Approximate extent

10 ft wi
pe vent
crossing . ': Maintenance Corridor
• ....
ffe ;;;s• ......... ....... ...........
i
CAROLINA Data Sources: Figure: 6 1 Date: 9/4/09
ECOSYSTEMS. INC. _DMP Deep River Outfall Design Site 7 Impact Area
8208 Brian Court DMP Gamer, NC 27529 _ surveyed topography Deep River Outfall Segment 3
O: [phone]
F: [phone] Pre-Construction Notification
www.carolinaeco.com CItV Of Hlph Point. NC

0
07 x A
0xmvi
- o
N
59o0x
>oFi o
mmD>
o??v
O
Dm
AO
A Z
F
D Z
A
N 2
N
D
ZOIMZ K
N a0N A
z
rDZO_q Z
?0m? 2
z>z0 m
m=om
r-
r
Ar?
'o
DAD
Z7 N?
zm
-
0
0ON
D a) 0
r-
< m
Q Z X
1
C
M 0 z
>o
zZ?
I
?r?
C
AN 0
0
-T O n
??z
_ G7
0
D 'O ;o
K -0 D
DMZ
D
f0*I N
-I _0 O
0 N O
M r 2
M (-) x
M m
mo
z;D
\ N
562 O M
My
r.zy?
Zr ZO
0
s?
mD?O
0x?'n
_O
NmR1 d?
m0=1
?O F-o
mR>>
co \
0-,?
A ?
?L
U7 cn O r i
:.
;z
X m
D
N V
m0
x
zm
D p
r=
..V

xD O
,Rx A
CD m
A
Z
x

N'VNN
com
m

N
59 c
o
v
o Z C K
m
m mom
WODZ
?
_ g°n
c z
m A -'

?>
>
0
m r 0
>=j
v
N
z ;
z
0 X p 0
m
M
J 01 U7 A W N O
NC7 DO m00 xm0D 7C ODO (NX Z
00 Z0 x --I C.-4 m A? mm N
0- oz RXm z -icy v mnm ?M
M S2 R X2 Dm z Z N ? N X 0 0 A
-ni -0-1 Nam DAmo N0> 0M o
A mA M?> 0000 y00? O2 Z
a 'vz z N
0 'o O LnA rN7 DZO.Z?1 O> MD M
M mm fgE! rz-4 D 0 A=m Z0 n
M zo m?o *>>x a ,MNy rxi O
--j (" m?;u -n D ro?mN > D z
-{ <
N ZA 0XIM *0MA NmD D
M m --AII-0D NnAMi - ?C-1 ?
O Zc 2 N 'a=0-4 x Mr0 Z
21 m A N o N m x EEC
C) C N C m m N O
D Mm 20M >OD a --M _-q
o Z; ??m No Cm , xZm 2
0m Dmn -?Z
N Z 0 M-I DNmm 0 K MOO
-4
-I M
D N? ZA mZ -N,1
z m? 0?0 Z??Z o m m
O D? r [00 OADm NC >
nmz Nm00m Nm?j =1 o m
W r- 2 >z z
m 11 M ?zD c rM D N
N A pNrl 170 T?ln Z? D
M cn?A mN?O 7C0 0
p? D NZ
X D fm zr m 2 `S0 co
M -u Nr mNp 0
D G7 O C
M
O M Z Z0 ra 00 A2 Z
N Ir*-0 C-D aC D
00 ED L p0D -qC? ?m
M D v z D Z pm A
M Do ?fZrl (OzIO? D
C x c-i
A M 0 l ;
N
CITY OF HIGH POINT: NC DAVIS-MARTIN-POWELL & ASSOCIATES, INC 'Ra
I- £ SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS ° s e ^' ?? e? s ou, ?>„ aa.u ENGINEERING
He zzes£hl
O 3 DEEP RIVER OUTFACE -SEGMENT 3 .o LAND PLANNING m,J
fH[',FC i.(]367 ?n6-4821
PERMANENT LOW WATER CROSSING EXHIBIT F.vs54nNa U„?>'-::i
„< _P w SURVEYING'`
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
. Environmental Assessment for the
City of High Point Deep River Outfall Improvements Project
City of High Point, Guilford County
February 18, 2000
An environmental assessment (EA) has been prepared, pursuant to the requirements of the North
Carolina Environmental Policy Act, for the proposed construction of 68,000 feet of new 24 to 66-
inch diameter sanitary sewerlines in Guilford- County. The. sewer lines will be along the Deep
River and its tributaries, including High Point Lake and Qak Hollow Lake, from Johnson Street
in the northwestern section of the City of High Point to Kivett Drive Extension east of the City.
The project will replace severely deteriorated and undersized segments of the existing Deep
River Outfall, increase collection system capacity, provide service to unsewered areas, and. allow
future retirement of an existing pump station. In most areas, the sewer line will be in new right-
of-way but in others the existing Deep River Outfall will be paralleled. The -new sewer line will
service the following areas: the Deep River basin upstream of Richland Creek and south of
Interstate 40 which includes northern High Point; Jamestown; southwestern Greensboro; and
southeastern Kemersville. The entire service area is 69.2 square miles, of which 483 miles is
existing and 20.9 square miles is proposed.
Wastewater will be conveyed'to the Eastside Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP). This plant
is currently in the permitting review process for an expansion from 16 million gallons per day
(MGD) to 26 MGD. An EA for this expansion was completed under the guidance of the
Division of Water Quality's Construction Grants and Loans Section. The State Clearinghouse
review of the EA was completed on, July 7, 1999.
The alternatives for the proposed project included the "no action" alternative; repairing/replacing
the outfall at the existing location, and replacing the outfall on a new location (preferred
alternative).
The "No Action" alternative was dismissed because existing infiltration and exfiltration
problems would not be addressed and High Point would need to limit new connections to the
existing Deep River Outfall. Additionally, growth in the area would still be expected to occur
without the project but with less desirable wastewater treatment, such as septic tanks.
The alternative '.6f repairing the outfall was dismissed because it was not considered cost-
effective not: would-'it solve capacity limitation or wastewater pumping problems. The
alternative -of. replacing. the outfall with a new large pipeline adjacent to the existing outfall was
also dismissed. Although this option would have addressed capacity concerns it would not have
addressed wastewater pumping problems and obtaining new construction easements for the
pipeline was considered impractical in many areas due to existing development.

The preferred alternative is.replacement of the Deep River Outfall, mostly in new right-of-way.
It is the alternative that best solves problems of maintenance, capacity limitations, and excessive
pumping. The principal engineering constraints in selecting the preferred route included
providing sewer service where most needed; providing a suitable horizontal gradient to ensure
flow, and providing adequate depth'to avoid aerial segments or obstructions to stream flow.
The preferred route for the pipeline was chosen to minimize work in environmentally sensitive
areas and the corridor will be limited to 25 feet right-of ways. However, the preferred route will
require the clearing of approximately 37.74 acres of upland forest, 15.84 acres of floodplain
forest, 13.64. acres of old field/scrub habitats, and 25.62 acres of developed land, and crossing
fifty streams or impoundments.
The final alignment for only a portion of the eastern segment of the project has been determined
at this tune. Design plans for the remainder of the outfall from Jamestown WWTP west to
Johnson Street (56,000 feet) will be developed when funding becomes available. The North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission will be provided the opportunity to review the final
sewer alignment before construction.
Most of the stream crossings are not anticipated to produce permanent to changes.
However, four stream crossings along the segment .of the pipeline which has a final design, will
require filling the existing channel and constructing a new channel on top of the filled area.
To minimize impacts to water quality and aquatic resources, no instream activities will take place
during April and May. Post construction mitigation activities will include restoring the site to
previous grade and contours, and. revegetating to control erosion.
To minimize impacts from construction in wetlands, all construction activities will conform to
any conditions imposed by permits required by the` United States Army Corps of Engineers and
401 Water Quality Certifications required from the North Carolina Division of Water Quality. If
it is determine that 401 Certification conditions will not be met, the City will apply for a 401
Certification. ' Mitigation for stream. and wetland. impacts will be determined during the
Certification process..:
Based on the findings -of the EA and on the impact avoidance/mitigation measures contained
therein, it is concluded that the proposed project will not result in significant impacts to the
environment. This EA and Finding of,No Significant Impact (FONSI) are prerequisites for the
issuance of the 401 Water Quality Certification and Sewer Extension Permit by the Division of
Water Quality. Pending approval by the State Clearinghouse, the environmental review for this
project will be .concluded. An environmental impact statement will not be prepared for this
project.
Division of Water Quality
February 18, 2000
North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form Version 3.1
Date: Protect: ?-??? Latitude:
r
ti
Evaluator. Site: Longitude:
Total Points: Other
Stream is at least intermittent County: e.g. Quad Name:
if>_ 19 or perennial if z 30 C ^
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal )
1e. Continuous bed and bank
2. Sinuosity
-
- Absent_ Weak
0
0 1 Moderate Strong
3
_..' 3
-
3. In-channel structure: riffle-pool sequence
0 - -- -
1 2` 3
4 Soil texture or stream substrate sorting 0 1 3
5. Active/relic floodplain 1 2. 3
6. Depositional bars or benches ( 1 2 3
7. Braided channel
8., Recent alluvial deposits
8
0 1 2 3
2 3
9
Natural levees 2 3
10. Headcuts
- - -
0
2
3
11 Grade controls
12 Natural valley or drainageway
13. Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence. ---
0
0 - -
0.5
l 0.5
No =x I --
1 1.5
"' i 1.5
Yes = 3
man-made a tcnes are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 4.5 )

14. Groundwater flow/discharge
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or
Water in channel - dry or growing season ---
0

0 --err- --,

2 3
i 16 Leaflitter
17 Sediment on plants or debris
i 1.
0 1
,b. 0.5 0
1 1.5
-
18. Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines) 1
-- -
19. Hydnc soils (redoximorphic features) present? ? 0 t
- -• ; -
zNo = 1 1.5

Yes = 1.5
C. Bioloav (Subtotal = =5 .
20 . Fibrous roots in channel 2 0
21°. Rooted plants in channel
---
22. Crayfish
23. Bivalves
__ 3
-

05
1 j 1
-

1 2 0

_ 1.5

3

_
24. Fish
25. Amphibians
? 0
0 0 5
0.5 1
1 1.5
1.5
--
26. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance -
, 0.5 1 1.5
27. Filamentous algae; periphyton 0 1 2 3
28. Iron oxidizing bacteria/fungus. 0 y 0.5 1 j 1.5

29 °. Wetland plants in streambed -
1 -? ?- _
FAC ="; FACW = 0.75;
OSL = 1.5 SAV
= 2.0; Other = 0
hems zu anc zi rocus on the presence of upland plants, Item 297f6cuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants.
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes.) Sketch:

r
USACE STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

Presence of flow / persistRit pools. la stream ; .
no flow or saturation= 0;'f&oo flow - max oints 0 - S 0 - 4
. Evidence of past hama , l' ergdon
i
r
0 -6
0 5
0 ?
nax l *)>
(extensive atteratioa = 0; atto
atio&
a

3
Rip"n zpn
no buffer r Conti uoiis, wide buffWp'= mart hats

Q -6

0 -

OR
Evidence o f au tri@ut of chcmteal dlseh°°a rPs `
`
0 '
0"
<
lextensive di4a
es = 0; no discttar es maz pints .
;== Gro"dwMek d `n
no dischar Os in 'feu w la CM. mac pints
Pr _pcG fa ice to plate

si
&
j6
e
,?rm
t
' 0 r 0-4 -4 2,
E1
v ain,,
no f
dp
- ,
xt6lit
ran
s
ax J
r

r n chfeiit f pod an
"41 -A 4
e rent' et#l?0k In max in

-

- 4

n
a?.

da a ad' earl wetlandsmain
too

r

?-

G - ?
6 - `?
U Vii- r
?
, e ver e annel zaban = 0t; natural d*And 60 rn0 pmutCs i
? - ?
? ?ci,171??eQt ltl CYK, `• rv -
7? - -. y ,
y. ?'
exter?i de ition? t?• little orrid sed?nen?? mad' mt?, ; • ?-
K r Size * di?ersityef cbririnet ' s t69trote' ; r-
`
' fl 0 ,j
t' Mine ma s ?I rsetdzesinaac
.intsj Y
1 Evidenccha?neltnfilsioaxWltlenftlg p?
S 2
0=?;
UrS'
dee ii?c = (# stal#bed+ rax P(pn t
t
13 t z ?4_ : ?Presepf o rna a; s l ; '
» p' S 7 ''

(severe esiun.* fY; ra? er l nlcsR? max oints
l 0 - C
` S

14 Root tb end ion ks

(na:visiF?le rtiot3= i1, ase'rc3s ufutrax ` ` iris '

O - 3

0 t
15 .
` ?pacby,ariculture, tivestacl, tlntr pluictinn
n
'
` `t3 - x Q 4 U
'
at
ta
asft"-,O•'aftvl noOni
int9? _ 7
1 d p of
pndU19SC- t cdr?rpiC?rev
a
l i_O ' 3C
- x

0 - 6
t?
Fa eS(r1
4WelG -2 niwx igts
?C&P
'
17 n .. Sabi
compleNr
k:
tt 43FJO hE& tam 0 uet14 vaO'trubrta{w mati?` wtsti

0

)
8 - Cs pove t?stteatnbd t
shadlm, ,, oon& rt uibm ax rots ?? S ?.., (1 '

.
to
'S. (1i Fecnbecl SV .7t.lUlt Cr

(t'- Y

5 v

S'1
Pr„esace stxe jn.' rteliratts$ s agcy)'` - ---
no widen e ` 0 n , rr n c '
?l r Presencetlfamphik`

no o-vidence = OLIcomtt# , ggtriero = max rots ?9 J
ft
-4

0
1 !

:
0 _4
Prese fkslf "'
typCS 1
no ayidertse ©n, row
ntaic ` is 4.
4%

i 0t `
?3 dance i? wtllift use t ,?
?; . ,
no evidence; atidat evideaice.=-max "oittts r f.
(-
0 5
O Ofgk *4 y r r. o-,` i +r.. t :y -1w7Ct "l Q,- ,
AV SC a g.(-)
fi 7 hese characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form Version 3.1
l
Date: 3 i
Project:
Latitude:

Evaluator: Site: Longitude:

Total Points: `
!
Other
Stream is at least intermittent j? County:
a-g. Quad Name:
if z 19 or perennial if ? 30
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 17. - t Absent WeakIModerate Strong
1'. Continuous bed and bank 0 1 2 3
2. Sinuosity 0 1 <2 -? 3
3. In-channel structure: riffle pool sequence 0 1 2 3
C _ ?- -- _
4 Soil texture or stream substrate sorting a 0 1_ 4 3
5 Activelrelic floodplain 1 2 3
i 6. Depositional bars or benches 2 3
7. Braided channel r f 2 3
& Recent alluvial deposits 2 3
.
Natural levees - 2 -- - 3
10 Headcuts 0 -- 2 3
_ - - --- _-
11. Grade controls 0 i 0.5 1 1.5'
.-
12 Natural valley or drainageway _ 0 _ 5 _ 1 1.5
?13. Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented t No Yes - 3
evidence.
Man-made ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal= 3 }
i 14. Groundwater flow/discharge 2 3
--
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain or 1 2 3
Water in channel - dry or grown season
16. Leaflitter 1.5 0.5 0
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0 5?a 1 1.5
18. Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines) _ 0 1 1.5?
19. Hydric soils (redoxlmorphic features) present? No 0 `Yes 1.5
- -- -- -
C. Biology (Subtotal = - 0 )
20b. Fibrous roots in channel 3 2 1 0 ---?
21E. Rooted plants in channel 3 2 0
22. Crayfish
I 0 - 0.5 1 1.5
23 Bivalves 1 I 2 3
24 Fish _
1.5
25 Amphibians 0 0 5 1 1 5
- - --
26. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 05 1 1.5
27 Filamentous algae; periphyton ¢ 1 2 3
28 Iron oxidizin9bacteria/fun9us.
0.5 1 1.5
29 Wetland plants in streambed FA FACW = &75; OBL 1.5 SAV - 2.0; Other = 0
Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, Ite es on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants.
Sketch:
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes.)
fem.. *-
?i
USAGE STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
+_T---- Y
?
-
Y
T
';? l ?~-
f.
? V
.
. Vill'
.•Rf
M
i• ? -? y
{
'
,
^
`
?
.. "`i .+r»?' `S
't
` -; ,
.,}
?
y
Ui?171?
? "?(??nlil?? ?'?.r??.ll.wi:k...:.
f
. .
lk « _
Presence of flow/ persistent pools in stream 0 0-4 ' -5
?--
(no flow or saturation= 0; strong flow= max Dints) ,__ L
Evidence of past human alteration _ 6 0 - 5 5
extensive altetafioa,= 0 ;-no alteration = max points) i
` ti ?? p;wne 0--6 0-4- 0-5 14

No buffer 0; Oanri wide buffer = max Dints)
?. -

4 Evidentca of nutrient or cheilaI discharges L
5
0
0-4,1
,14 extensive d}sss~h es _; no dirt cs = max rots)
Groundwater (?isd?rg?? ._=

-
,t
°
' '
0-3
0-4
0-4 `

'

no discharge = 0; spnngs, sups, cvet
, nts
4etc
= max _
Presence of adjacent floodplaia
=
no flood lain
0; extensive flood lain = max ints}-

f =? Entrenchment 1 floodplain access
0-5
0-4 _

,? ...:
.0

'
(deeply entrenched - 0' frequent flooding = max points)
Presence of adjacent wetlands
` 0- 0-4 2
w - = no wetlands 0, large Ojaacent
wetlands = max points)
" Channel slitoosity,
O S
0 -4
^ 3
fc?ctensive channelization = O• natural meander- max oittis)
Sedimimt input
'' _
10-5
0_a
©-4 --
siiitt?ltttlc ornc, swiirAtnt = max points)

1
dfve chaminet lied substrate
NA
0
4 _
0

7? Dos 0;- dli -st -rte otnts - -

r 12 Evidence ofcUnnei in
0-5
0-4
04
(deeply incised 0; stable bed SE
1

I Presence of major bankfxlfares= 41,"-
.

s
f
,
J --_(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max oin#s) -

t4 a attiepttt:d densi orx banks
`'
? 3
0 4
ttisitt
't#lrnu aut = max points

` Inrpxct b} xgu#tnirt,''Iit?estpe? Qr umber production
. 15 :.
(substanti =O no max points), 0-5 0-4 0 5 ?

16 Presence"o#`ir?ftleoo}completes
I 0-3
0-5
0-6-
(no. rit(les/ri let or ls`-O; xveF?eyeki cL? x ints) S
17 n
? 0-6- . 0 - 6 " 0-6
little or
o habitat = 0; frequent, varied fiabitats,r m

`'. 18 Canopy coverage over streambed
0 5
0-
nn shading vegetation = 0• continuous cano = max ; -t- '

t
19
Substrate embeddedness ----
~0 -4
-4 ----
dee 1 embedded = 0- loose structurte7ir tax ;r-, C
? ?0 Presence of stream invertebrawrs .,, F ?
(no evidence 0; common, numerous types = maxainu)
Pre
e
m
hib
f
a
s O - 0-5 .
1
C. senc
o
a
p
i
u
?r
(no evidence = 0; common numerous types - max jtits` , 0 4 0 - 4

Q .22 Presence offish- .

no evidence 0
common
o
s ye
}
nume
-
f
61
4
0-4.
0-4
?
Iffl, I ;
,
s
max k
u
rT
r
S
- Evidence of wildlife use

'
0-6
U 5=
4-- 5
(no evidence= 0; abundant evidence= max points)
-? ? /
T17
100
100 F,
LiJ'^
< - I
-
Tf I' '?? on first page)

* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
L`
Date: zip Project: Latitude:
Evaluator: t Site: 'r Longitude:
Total Points: Other
Stream is at least intermittent f County: ;
if ? 19 or perennial if 2:30 f £ e. g. Quad Name:
Norm k;aronna ulvislon or vvater Wuau ly - Ju Caul IuGnu n%?a?IVII I Ul111 Y171JIV11 N. I

C. Biology (Subtotal = )
20 Fibrous roots in channel ? 3 2 1 i 0
21b Rooted plants in channel - 2 1 0
22. Crayfish { 0.5 i 1 1.5
23 Bivalves
h
24
F T
1 0
1 _ 1
0
5 2
1 3
1
5
.
is
25. Amphibians 1 .
0.5 1 .
1.5
26. Maerobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 0.5 1 1.5

i 27. Filamentous algae periphyton .........
0
1 -2 3
28. Iron oxidizing bacteria/fungus. 0 5 1 1 5
29 b Wetland plants in streambed 1 FAC = 0 5; FACW = 0.75; OBL - 1.5 SAV = 2.0; Other
Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants -, -
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes.) Sketch:
3
- .3
3
3
3
3
3
_ 3
3
_ __-
1.5
14. Groundwater flow/discharge b? 1 2 3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or
0
1
2
3
_ Water in channel - dry or growing season - .
16. Leaflitter 1.5 0.5 O
_
17. Sediment on plants or debris -
0 0. 1 1.5
`18. Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines) 0 0.5 1.5
19. Hydric soils (redoximorphic features) present? No = 0 es - 1.5 W
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal Absent Weak Moderate
13. Continuous bed and bank -? 0 1 2
2. Sinuosity 0
- _2
_
3 In-channel structure: riffle-pool sequence 0 1
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sorting 0 1 2
5. Active/relic floodplain I 1 _.._. 2
6. Depositional bars or benches
T B
d
l
d 0 ,1
1 ! Z
2
rai
channe
e
i
7
i :
' 2
. ecent alluvial depos
ts _ ...... .......--.._
1
' _ _.__ __ _ ___ r 1
Natural levees
9 1 2
10. Headcuts ?=
- 1- - -G ---- 2..
11. Grade controls _.. ---
-
0 0,5
fi
12. Natural valley ordrainageway 1 0_ 0.5
1
13. Second or greater order channel on existin ! r;
USGS or NRCS map or other documented No = 0/
r Yes = 2
evidence.
_
.
Man-made ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrolo?Y (Subtotal = _?

USACE STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

.?
C r-
_
,- _ ... W
? eseitC4 of.flow l persist t is ip sCrea?
5 ,
0
4 ?
n uo oHr tit sate ration JFO;AtrohjJI o imax" intsll -
,,. 5
? ~
w ' Eviden'qe 6f past human a1WEratian
CexienAv alteration
0
n
aif
?3
"i, a,

r
6
0
-5
'
S -
=
:
er
o
on
• .
k . 4 .r pa>t+iaq zone - ,
f
b
70-4-
u
er0
ax
r''
F x ~ Far c f'n Wen r c i ise -
- +? d hArges

?

u

4

0
- - 4eXtet?c'ivb t
ch ElS:;J4d ng,41sehar - t1Fgx 4ttg'?' 1,
V I?C ul Fw-a dischirgu
?iS a 5 l = rtts? 0 4

' ? ati ?,cent+o±it a
o r :tteze mid =tea teats
Y `,
(? +t
?

?4* An 0 -214
' G 4

K n w a'
fl W7t I

et s n
idi in
- 2
u {
t: .
k
ti (ex?tcns"tvs charinclizaon M tsi
n O •"

` -

0
l Q:

a >

T .. rein
5
..
ext it Oqa?; d of le ink ma.,,c airI

5?
t b w

¢

-

1 ` ty'-I eft ca el s i it to
t t1 ? hcil is -:9; ar St i6tXes ==ax rots a
„.1 ?
0 4 .
0 5
` ?
l3
y ° quenc f mjijor Qr
evereer4s s; na emio
R 'c tK
d d k ,
0-5
t r14
k an
eus* Oq nkk
tna bkt
d
=
-;
c
`

"At .?
ense xodr[e? nu
m 4nts
mpa tui,.llvocortiater
irgdteti

5 ti
?

„

4
___--
.si p
-
st
n .
1/.?
J y
V
?
st
nltt
clfetit& nz. pnfsl f
- f rilt7 i cC ri o;, ?Mdc btt? o _jnts} ?`3. 0 S 0-G
? 6 l
1OF Rd llapttei tYCiTta = I$ I ills i
? r : -6
do shsdin?> etaLtc? ?,§l; coati - ? ?•? 0 ? 0
e X19,. c ' 0
r"c
`
e
nvus
e it
l
4
0
es m
?r#s
T
.? t t
c
A
dt
' 8??0 olrna>tp?ti a ', t ; xaz ? -
°f o A min ias p4 0 4. , 0«
aY ' '
"
?
X 6°
- `
f}
F
hQ - 'QDt?itlt A
nI
?
51. . -S;='.'
r
{
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.