20170113 Ver 1_401 Application_20170117

Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Mr. Jason Randolph
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue
Asheville, NC 28801-5006
Mr. Alan Johnson
NCDEQ
Division of Water Resources
610 East Center Street, Suite 301
Mooresville, NC 28115
Ms. Karen Higgins
NCDEQ
Division of Water Resources
Wetlands & Storm Water Branch
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604
Mr. Byron Hamstead
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa St.
Asheville, NC 28801
January 20, 2017
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
/0170113
tr
L
���`
.)NN 2 4 2017
Subject: SAW -2016 -01541 --Request for Pre -Construction Notification for NWP 29 and
Final Approved Jurisdictional Determination for the Moore Farm Site, Indian Trail, Union
County, NC
Ms. Higgins, and Messrs. Randolph, Johnson, and Hamstead,
Enclosed is a request for Nationwide Permit #29 and Final Approved Jurisdictional
Determination associated with the proposed Moore Farm site in Indian Trail, Union County, NC.
Site visits were conducted to review and confirm WEPG's delineation on November 10th and
December 1 st by Alan Johnson of NCDEQ and Mr. Jason Randolph of the USACE, respectively.
The three open water ponds on the site were determined to be non jurisdictional since they were
agricultural ponds excavated in high ground. As detailed in the attached Delineation Map, the
site consists of one perennial and two intermittent stream channels and one abutting wetland.
Please refer to accompanying Jurisdictional Determination section for additional information on
site surface waters.
Charlotte Office: www.wetiands-epg.com Asheville Office:
10612-D Providence Rd. 1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg. I
PMB 550 Suite 10, PMB 283
Charlotte, NC 28277 Asheville, NC 28805
[phone] [phone]
len.rindner((ilwetlands-epg.com 1 [e-mail]

Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
Due to the locations of the onsite jurisdictional surface water features, complete avoidance of
impacts was not practicable. Impacts to site surface waters associated with the proposed
development were limited through site selection location and design location/orientation of the
proposed lots, access routes, and existing/proposed utilities. Proposed permanent impacts
associated with the project total approximately 0.041 acres of onsite wetlands (Wetlands K/KK)
and approximately 140 linear feet of seasonal streams (R -PW H). Specifically, the proposed
impacts to jurisdictional waters are associated with fill and grading for construction of
stormwater facilities and roadway access.
Temporary impacts total 55 linear feet and are associated with excavation for a proposed sewer
line crossing and temporary fill for stabilization of the streambanks following the removal of a
culvert. Temporary impacts proposed for the sewer line crossing are approximately 20 linear
feet. Temporary impacts anticipated from the removal of the existing culvert are approximately
35 linear feet. Matting and temporary stabilization will be installed to limit erosion and
reestablish vegetation along the banks. A Conceptual Restoration Plan is attached and provides
details for the stabilization of stream banks at the culvert removal location. Due to the minimal
impacts associated with the proposed project, no compensatory mitigation is being proposed for
the anticipated permanent impacts.
Also enclosed is a copy of our Threatened/Endangered Species Evaluation for the site in which
no listed species were identified within the project area therefore we believe that there will be no
effect on listed species or their critical habitat as designated under Section 7 of the Endangered
Species Act.
We believe that the site plan has been designed to avoid and minimize impacts to aquatic
resources on the site while still providing needed access to develop the site as proposed. Please
contact me if you have any questions, [phone] or email at amanda.ionesgwetlands-
epg_com.
Sincerely,
OIUVI--
Amanda Jones
Regulatory Specialist
Heath Caldwell
Environmental Scientist
Charlotte Office: www.wetlands-epg.com Asheville Office:
10612-D Providence Rd. 1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg. I
PMB 550 Suite 10, PMB 283
Charlotte, NC 28277 Asheville, NC 28805
[phone] [phone]
[e-mail] 2 [e-mail]

Permit Application

W A T
V� G
> _
o � <
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no. 2016-01541
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A.
Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1 a.
Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
❑X Section 404 Permit ❑ Section 10 Permit
1 b.
Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 29 or General Permit (GP) number:
1 c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes ❑X No
1 d.
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
❑X 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e.
Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification:
❑ Yes ❑X No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ YesX❑ 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 ❑X No
1 g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
N Yes NX 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:
Moore Farms Site
2b.
County:
Union
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Indian Trail
2d. Subdivision name:
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Multiple parcels (see attached map) - recently purchased by applicant
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
3d.
Street address:
3e. City, state, zip:
3f.
Telephone no.:
3g.
Fax no.:
3h.
Email address:
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
❑ Agent ❑X Other, specify: New owner
4b. Name:
Mel Graham
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
Graham Enterprises of the Carolinas LLC
4d. Street address:
2701 Coltsgate Road, Suite 300
4e. City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28211
4f. Telephone no.:
704-552-5338
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
[e-mail]
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
Amanda Jones
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC - Wetlands & Environmental Planning Group
5c. Street address:
1070 Tunnel Road, Building 1, Suite 10, PMB 283
5d. City, state, zip:
Asheville, NC 28803
5e. Telephone no.:
828-708-7059
5f. Fax no.:
5g. Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 2 of 10

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
Multiple parcels- please see attached Parcel Map
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.036 Longitude: -80.6798
1 c. Property size:
96.16 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
Davis Mine Creek
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
Class C
2c. River basin:
03050103 Catawba
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:
A majority of the site is composed of vacant, fallow fields and horticultural fields with forested areas on the periphery of site. General land use in the
vicinity consists of residential and agricultural development.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 0.095
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 1,899
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
Fill and grading for roadway access and construction of stormwater facilities for proposed residential development.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Excavation and grading of the site will use standard equipment - excavator, trackhoe, dump trucks, etc.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (includingall prior phases)in the past?
❑X Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
Comments: SAW -2016-01541
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
❑ Preliminary ❑X Final
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): N. Nelson/H.Caldwell
Agency/Consultant Company: WEPG
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
Site visit was conducted by Jason Randolph on 11/15/2016 to confirm WEPG's delineation in which findings/determinations are included
for final approved determination.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
❑ Yes ❑X No ❑ Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes ❑X No
6b. If yes, explain.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form —Version 1.4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑X Wetlands Q 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.
Wetland impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
2b.
Type of impact
2c.
Type of wetland
2d.
Forested
2e.
Type of jurisdiction
Corps (404,10) or
DWQ (401, other)
2f.
Area of
impact
(acres)
W1 P
Fill
Headwater Wetland
Yes
Corps
0.041
W2 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W3 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W4 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W5 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W6 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
0.041
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.
Stream impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
3b.
Type of impact
3c.
Stream name
3d.
Perennial (PER) or
intermittent (INT)?
3e.
Type of
jurisdiction
3f.
Average
stream
width
(feet)
3g.
Impact
length
(linear
feet)
S1 P
Culvert
RPW H
INT
Corps
5
140
S2 T
Excavation
RPW H
INT
Corps
5
20
S3 T
Stabilization
RPW H
INT
Corps
5
35
S4 -
Choose one
-
-
S5 -
Choose one
-
-
S6 -
Choose one
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
195
3i. Comments:
Culvert will total 140 If of total stream impacts for roadway crossing. 55 If of temporary impacts includes 35 If for stream bank stabilization at proposed
culvert removal and 20 If for proposed sanitary sewer line crossing.
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

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 indivi ually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
impact number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable)
4c.
Type of impact
4d.
Waterbody
type
4e.
Area of impact (acres)
01 -
Choose one
Choose
O2 -
Choose one
Choose
03 -
Choose one
Choose
04 -
Choose one
Choose
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, the complete the chart below.
5a.
Pond ID number
5b.
Proposed use or
purpose of pond
5c. 5d. 5e.
Wetland Impacts (acres) Stream Impacts (feet) Upland
(acres)
Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded
Filled Excavated
P1
Choose one
P2
Choose one
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 any impacts require mitigation. then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a. Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman ❑ Other:
6b.
Buffer Impact
number —
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Stream name
6e.
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f.
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet)
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet
B1 -
Yes/No
B2 -
Yes/No
B3 -
Yes/No
B4 -
Yes/No
B5 -
Yes/No
B6 -
Yes/No
6h. Total Buffer Impacts:
6i. Comments:
Page 5 of 10

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
The site plan was designed to avoid onsite surface water features to the maximum extent practicable while still incorporating necessary site
development and viable access. Impacts to site surface waters associated with the proposed development were limited through site location, plan
design and location/orientation of lots, and access routes. Of the 1,899 linear feet of onsite streams and the 0.95 acres of onsite wetlands, only 140
linear feet of stream and 0.041 acres of wetlands will be impacted as part of this project.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Construction techniques will implement approved erosion control methods to avoid/minimize impacts to onsite/adjacent offsite receiving conveyances.
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 Q No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ❑ Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
❑ Mitigation bank
El 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: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Quantity:
Quantity:
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:
Choose one
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 6 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

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 QX 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 7 of 10

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
❑ Yes ❑X 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
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
28.3%
2b. Does this pro'ect require a Stormwater Management Plan?
0 Yes ❑ No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
Stormwater on the site will be handledttreated by BMPs as shown on the attached plans. The stormwater plan has not been submitted/approved by
Union County but has been designed to meet their criteria.
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
Union County
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which localgovernment's jurisdiction is thisproject?
Union County
❑X Phase II
❑ NSW
3b. Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
E] USMP❑
apply (check all that apply):
Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑Yes ❑X 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
❑ Yes ❑X No
attached?
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 8 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

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 ❑X 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
El 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,
E] Yes Eg 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 Eg 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.
No additional phases are proposed.
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.
Wastewater generated on the site will be transported to the nearest treatment facility via sewer lines.
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

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 ❑X No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑ Yes ❑X No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
-
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
A threatened/endangered species assessment was conducted in which no species were identified. Habitat does exist for the Northern Long Eared Bat
but the project is exempt as noted in the cover letter. Report is included
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ❑X No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
No essential fish habitat in this region.
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 ❑X 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?
SHPO's website: http://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA -designated 100 -year floodplain?
❑X Yes ❑ No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
No grading or fill will occur within the designated floodplain as part of this project.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
hftp://gis-web.co.union.nc.us/gomaps/#
Digitally signed by Heath Caldwell
Heath Caldwell ou, rn=Heath Caldwell,o=WEPG,
ou, email=heath.caldwell(c�wetlands
Heath Caldwell
e c=US
01-19-2017
ate: 201
Date: 2017.07.17 08:55:18 -05'00'
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Applicant/Agent's Signature
Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant isprovided.)
Page 10 of 10

Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Anent Authorization Letter
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
The purpose of this form is to authorize our firm to act on your behalf in matters related to aquatic
resource (i.e. stream/wetlands) identification/mapping and regulatory permitting. The
undersigned, who are either registered property owners or legally authorized to conduct due
diligence activities on the property as identified below, do hereby authorize associates of
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC, Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group (WEPG) to act on my
behalf and take all actions necessary for the processing, issuance, and acceptance of applicable
permit(s) and/or certification(s).
Project/Site Name: Moore Farm Site
Property Address: 3401 Waxhaw Indian Trial Road, Indian Trail, NC 28079
Parcel Identification Number (PIN): Multiple parcels - See attached parcel map.
Select one: 1 am an interested buyer/seller
Name: Mel Graham
Company: Graham Enterprises of the Carolinas, LLC
Mailing Address: 2701 Coltsgate Road, Suite 300, Charlotte, NC 28211
Telephone Number: 704-552-5338
Electronic Mail Address: [e-mail]
r�oqfflyym�
Property Owner / Interested Buyer* / Other'
Date
* The Interested Buyer/Other acknowledges that an agreement and/or formal contract to purchase and/or conduct
due diligence activities exists between the current property owner and the signatory of this authorization in cases
where the property is not owned by the signatory.
Charlotte Office: www.wetiands-epg.com Asheville Office:
10612-D Providence Rd. 1070 Tunnel Rd.. Bldg. I
PMB SSO Suite 10, PMB 283
Charlotte. NC 28277 Asheville. NC 28805
[phone] [phone]
[e-mail] 2 [e-mail]

N
c
N
NEI
Maps/Plans

heet 2 of 17
MOORE FARM
Union Co., NC
AERIAL MAP — WATERS OF THE U.S.
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
SUBJECT TO USA CEINCDEQ VERIFICATION
Drawn By: Reviewed By:
HAC LSR
DATE: /
7/6/16

d
1 g.
00,
-'
CREEK
IL
4
w
` i• �� `�
DAVIS MINE CREEKIn I
National GecgraoicScoe,, t-c-:;tc'
USGS QUAD
Matthews, NC
M�-RL„UL
96.16
jSheet 3 of6/
17 n �,� �� I MOORE FARM
Union Co., NC
USGS MAP — WATERS OF THE U.S.
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
SUBJECT TO USACE/NCDEQ VERIFICATION
LOCATION
Lat: 35.U3b `-'N
Long: -80.6798 °W
H UC: 03050103
LOWER CATAWBA
Drawn By: Reviewed By:
HAC LSR
DATE:
7/7/16

WyB.' Bd!
BdC2
' Bd C 2--- /
1� •
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner. PLLC.
len.rindner@wetlands-epg,com
[phone]
www.wetiands-epg.com
GsB
BaB
.w
BdC2
dC

Properties recently purchased and is now owned by:
Mel Graham
Graham Enterprises of the Carolinas, LLC
.i
-
PID# M7120012
7
PID# M7120014
PID# M7120013
PID# N7120014
PID# 07138003A
PID# N7120013
� PIQ# M7120014 -��
PID# N7120014
LTATJ 1
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
[e-mail]
[phone]
www.wetlands-epg.com
(formerly) Elizabeth Moore
319 North 27"' Street
Wilmington, NC 28405
(formerly) Pitt Moore
3401 Waxhaw Indian Trail
Indian Trail, NC 28079
1

Flow Path: Jurisdictional features on the site
flow into Price Mill Creek, to East Fork -- l,ol F "
Twelvemile Creek, to Twelvemile Creek, then
to the Catawba River (TNW). Xt G6
,
c
`-, � i t j SVD � , /J �� � j,�, r �r� • i � -'� � ;
rP•. �
7Nou„ 0
44.
'U
4- _171_1
1
b i
,
y ,
:
• , �i
V�
;rte . ; . -. ► - � -� -
f
-
Legend
y t�
C, x ,.J rr .. a 1 L.- i �.� Flow Path
Project Boundar,
Sheet 7 of MOORE FARM Drawn By: Reviewed By:
17 r Pr. Union Co., NC HAC LSR
Navigation Pathway Map
*Approximate boundary
DATE:
7/7/16

WATERS OF THE
US RPW H
821 LF/0.11 ACRES
EXIST. 30' PERMANENT
SANITARY SEWER
EASEMENT
ENGINGERLNG
2013 Van Buren Ave., Suite A
Indian Trail, NC 28079
(704) 8824222
www.eagleonline.net
o EXISTING
p HOUSE EXISTING
CULVERT
J
'1
z
e i
0
z I
x
3 u
x
W
SSMH
RIM 601.22
WATERS OF THE US RPW C
157 LF/0.03 ACRES
S M H'
=�— -�
RIM 59 .93
S H
RIM 597. 3
SSMH
T RIM 597.07
WATERS OF THE US RPW
921 LF/0.32 ACREB
WATERS OF THE US
ABUTTING WETLAND K/KK
0.95 ACRES
EXISTING CONDITIONS
MAP
SCALE' 1.,-500'
JOB NAME: MOORE FARMS
APPLICANT: GRAHAM ENTERPRISE LOCATION:
JOB NUMBER: 5750 WAXHAW INDIAN TRAIL RD
UNION CO. N.C.
EXIST. 30' PERMANENT
SANITARY SEWER
EASEMENT
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 500' 1000'
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 5oo ft.
Sheet 8 of 17

PROP. TEMP. PROP. STREAM IMPACT AREA -1
STREAM IMPACT -3 140± LF DISTURBANCE PROP. WET
35± LF DISTURBANCE 2-72" CMP WITH HEADWALLS POND
"REFERENCE CONCEPTUAL E
STREAM STABILIZATION PLAN PROP. 20' S.S. ESMT.
c BY WEPG" PROP. WET AN��—
IMPACT AREA -1 rw000 LN. -----
J - - -
I
(0.041 AC/1,805 SF)
$ `` �N
PROP. Z V
MOORE FARM ►.,,
SUBDIVISION 3
±96.16 ACRES P P
W
STREAM 20± LF DISTURBANC POND
PROP.
• •P•./��
EXIST. 20'
PERMANENT
SANITARY SEWER
A EASEMENT E
ENGIN ERLNG
2013 Van Buren Ave., Suite A
Indian Trail, NC 28079
[phone]
www.eagleonline.net
PROP. WET
ii POND
II
1�
PROP. 20'
I
S.S. ESMT.
I '
/
PROP. WET
POND
OVERALL SITE PLAN
SCALE: 1�=500'
JOBNAME: MOOREFARMS
APPLICANT: GRAHAM ENTERPRISE LOCATION:
JOB NUMBER: 5750 WAXHAW INDIAN TRAIL RD
UNION CO. N.C.
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 500' 1000'
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 500 ft. Sheet 9 of 17

W
ct f
PROP:- SEGMENTAL r
1 0 �Z, BLOCK WALL f
o _ _
IONS ��ssos. o ♦y `STREAM IMPACT ARE 1
log 0± T 6�BANC�
s 1� DIS
co
w-
SS 67y 613 / l h 6?0
A, —
r /
61` •" 616 ," �� - _---
1 \ --
N 618 620
2 ,,, .'• 620 ♦r
/ 9+00
of M,O RE FARM —
N
—15708 s2p PAR',
/ szo % ROP. SEGMENTAL
620 LOCK WALL ,
624
tiV iI I',, 618 619' 618
616 '
105 v 615 0 \ \
+` 1' 61377
a�cV rn t%s \ co
EG L F STREAM CROSSING #1 PROP. 40'Wx38'Lx12°D GRAPHIC SCALE
E N 1 N ERI Cbi DUAL CULVERT - IMPACT AREA RIP RAP APRON. 040' 80'
ELEVATION ABOVE
SCALE : "-40'ORDINARY HIGH
JOB NAME: MOOREFARMS ( IN FEET )
2013 Van Buren Ave., Suite A APPLICANT: GRAHAM ENTERPRISE LOCATION: WATER MARK
Indian Trail, NC 28079 5750 WAXHAW INDIAN TRAIL RD (NO IMPACT) 1 inch = 40 ft.
JOB NUMBER:
[phone] UNION CO. N.C. Sheet 10 of 17
www.eagleonline.net

E A G L E
ENG1] IEERING
2013 Van Buren Ave., Suite A
Indian Trail, NC 28079
[phone]
www.eagleonline.net
STREAM CROSSING #2
8" S.S. TEMP. IMPACT AREA
SCALE: 1"=40'
JOB NAME: MOORE FARMS
APPLICANT: GRAHAM ENTERPRISE LOCATION:
JOB NUMBER: 5750 WAXHAW INDIAN
UNION CO. N.C.
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 40' 80'
( IN FEET )
I inch = 40 ft.

620
620
PROP
ADEATCENTERLINE
615
A
615
-125:E
iI Q21=
0
i
610
610
i
A
125±L 7211CM 0.,,;0%
605
/ SLOPE
(BURIED 1.(?')
0
605
602
,Z)�
•—
Lq o�
e— O
�
O
(Np
o
N
�
602
0+00 1+00 2+00 3+00
EA "a
NGIN GER LN STREAM CROSSING #1 VERTICAL
DUAL CULVERT - CROSS-SECTION GRAPHIC SCALE SCALE
SCALE: 1'=40' ( IN FEET )
JOB NAME: MOORE FARMS 401 8I 1 inch = 4' ft.
2013 Van Buren Ave., Suite A APPLICANT: GRAHAM ENTERPRISE LOCATION:
Indian Trail, NC 28079 JOB NUMBER: 5750 WAXHAIN INDIAN TRAIL RD ( IN FEET )
[phone] UNION CO. N.C. 1 inch = ao ft. Sheet 12 of 17
www.eagleonline.net

620
PROPOSED
SEGMENTAL
BLOCK WALL
615
610
605
602
PROPOSED
�/�RAI�F /d•1)
-0+25 0+00
ENANGEA
2013 Van Buren Ave., Suite A
Indian Trail, NC 28079
[phone]
www.eagleonline.net
1+00
STREAM CROSSING #1
DUAL CULVERT - PROFILE
SCALE: 1'=40'
JOBNAME: MOOREFARMS
APPLICANT: GRAHAM ENTERPRISE LOCATION:
JOB NUMBER: 5750 WAXHAW INDIAN
UNION CO. N.C.
620
)@±0.50%
3MENTAL
615
610
2+00 2+25
605
602
O
VERTICAL
GRAPHIC SCALE SCALE
( IN FEET )
0 40' 80' 1 inch = 4' ft.
0
( IN FEET) Sheet 13 of 17
1 inch = 40 ft.
ME
-,__
•
• __E
�--
himmm
M�
imm�mI�I
Iv/mmm
m
IImmmm�I
mmCID
��
•SLOPE
• -4, ,
„
co
-0+25 0+00
ENANGEA
2013 Van Buren Ave., Suite A
Indian Trail, NC 28079
[phone]
www.eagleonline.net
1+00
STREAM CROSSING #1
DUAL CULVERT - PROFILE
SCALE: 1'=40'
JOBNAME: MOOREFARMS
APPLICANT: GRAHAM ENTERPRISE LOCATION:
JOB NUMBER: 5750 WAXHAW INDIAN
UNION CO. N.C.
620
)@±0.50%
3MENTAL
615
610
2+00 2+25
605
602
O
VERTICAL
GRAPHIC SCALE SCALE
( IN FEET )
0 40' 80' 1 inch = 4' ft.
0
( IN FEET) Sheet 13 of 17
1 inch = 40 ft.

61(
60(
-.
off-
Ir
co
J
EXIS
ELD
I
I ,
107.47' of 8' PVC ® 0.50%
158.x' of
PROPOSED OPE
CUT INS MLLATI
N
595-
0+00
NEE
2013 Van Buren Ave., Suite A
Indian Trail, NC 28079
[phone]
w --ea m-111wrist
1+00
STREAM CROSSING #2
8' S.S. PROFILE & CROSS-SECTION
SCALE. 1W0'
JOB NAME NIOO/tEFARM$
APPLICANT. QRAKW ENTERPRISE LOCATION.
JOB NUMBER SM WAXHAWINOIAN7A
!INION CO. N.C.
60(
59:
n-&77
0+71.64
IO
T. CL
CATION
TREAM
T
W. 8"
DIP
=@
)SSING
i5
VERTICAL
GRAPHIC SCALE SCALE
( IN FEET )
0 �� 1 inch = 4' ft.
0
( IN FEET) Sheet 14 of 17
1 inch = 40 ft.
EXIS
ELD
OFS
PR(
S.S.
PIP
CRI
5.1
0+71.64
IO
T. CL
CATION
TREAM
T
W. 8"
DIP
=@
)SSING
i5
VERTICAL
GRAPHIC SCALE SCALE
( IN FEET )
0 �� 1 inch = 4' ft.
0
( IN FEET) Sheet 14 of 17
1 inch = 40 ft.

t , %V, Y Wim.%;i
N
CD
I w M
mjr�
605
:x
SCALE:
VX
00
627
ED
621
\
(n S
ENGINEERING
2013 Van Buren Ave., Suite A
Indian Trail, NC 28079
[phone]
I / = v \ 617
7r62
/ 110
� _ I J 614
N �
620 s�� PROP. WETLAND
IMPACT AREA 1
0.041 ACRES ( 1,805 S.F)
620
6'>
6'
6b
6;,j
610 �^
ItY
1 1 1"V /
'O
674 ,,AA
6;?
—4Q' SS ESMT
v
--26—SS E�T -
608
.603- 607
601
WETLANDS IMPACT
�=60'
JOB NAME:
APPLICANT:
MOOREFARMS
GRAHAM ENTERPRISE LOCATION:
JOB NUMBER: 5750 WAXHAW INDIAN TRAIL RD
UNION CO. N.C.
No
I
WET BASIN -4
612
� � I
N \
(n
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 60' 120'
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 60' ft.
Sheet 15 of 17

d'r
634
�,
°'
_, N v
I w711
5 �
N�1 N
IO 011%
it
W �
N o
15"
11
T�
rn INV. 607.
I/
`14LC
_
N
�
7
i
N
O e
p
8
i
15" DI
1
INV. 606.81
9
co
ENGINEERING
2013 Van Buren Ave., Suite A
Indian Trail, NC 28079
[phone]
www.eagleonline.net
CP N
co
O �
N
�- ROP. P STREAM IMPACT —3
±35 LF DISTURBANCE
(AREA WILL BE RESTORED TO
rPRE—CONSTRUCTION CONTOURS)
"REFERENCE CONCEPTUAL STREAM
..__STABI,LIZATION PLAU BY WgPG"
O N
I
/
O ` �
co \ 618
61) o
STREAM CROSSING #3
15" CULVERT TEMP. IMPACT AREA
SCALE: I'=60'
JOBNAME: MOOREFARMS
APPLICANT: GRAHAM ENTERPRISE LOCATION:
JOB NUMBER: 5750 WAXHAW INDIAN TRAIL RD
UNION CO. N.C.
l
i
i
ob
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 60' 120'
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 60' ft.
LEGEND
IMPACT AREA
62S
622
Sheet 16 of 17

CENTER LINE H-
I
I
I
2:1 SLOPE
LIVE STAKES/
CONTAINER
_ 2
12" COIR 1 r
V
FIBER LOG _
TOE OF SLOPE
OVERALL PROJECT GOALS
SEED & STRAW
NATIVE SEED MIX AND
REPLANT TREES IN
DISTURBED AREAS
DISTURBED AREA TO BE
SEEDED (NATIVE MIX),
MATTED & PLANTED 13' ON
CENTER - FROM TOP OF
SLOPE TO TOE OF SLOPE)
(1) STABILIZE ERODING AREAS W/COIR FIBER BLANKET
(2) INSTALL COIR FIBER LOGS AT TOE OF SLOPE
(3) RE-ESTABLISH NATIVE VEGETATION W/SEED & LIVE
STAKE/CONTAINERIZED MATERIAL (Nov '16-M arch '17)
Materials List:
1. Coir Fiber Logs: Diam. 12", Length 10'
2. Wooden Stakes: Length 3'
3. Erosion Fabric: Coir Fiber Matting — NO PLASTIC
4. Sod Pins: 1,000+
Sheet 17 of 17
SEED, MAT &
* PLANT FROM TOP \, %
OF BANK TO TOE /
OF SLOPE 2
r T�
605,
D ,i i �' I
% SEED &STRAW
00
V �` / / NATIVE SEED MIX AND !
COIR FIBER LOGS /� REPLANTTREES IN I
DISTURBED AREAS
Live Stakes/Containerized Material (3' on center):
Cornus amomum (Silky Dogwood), Salix caroliniana (Carolina Willow), Salix sericea (Silky
Willow), Sambucus canadensis (Elderberry), Symphoricarpos orbiculatus (Coralberry)
(Native Stabilization Seed Mix (20-251bs. per acre):
Elymus virginicus (Virginia wild rye), Tripsacum dactyloides (Eastern gammagrass), Panicum
virgatum (Switchgrass),.Agrostis scabra (Rough bentgrass), Carex vulpinoidea (Fox sedge),
Tridens flavus (Purple top), Schizachvr•ium scoparium (Little bluestem), Coreopsis lanceolata
(Lance leaf tickseed), Sorghastrum nutans (Indian grass), Elymus hystr•ix (Bottlebrush grass)
I Festuca ovina var. duriuscala (Hard Fescue), Rudbeckia hirta (Blackeyed Susan)
MOORE FARM
Union Co., NC
ENHANCEMENT MAP — WATERS OF THE U.S.
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
SUBJECT TO USACEiNCDEQ I ERIFICATION
Drawn By: Reviewed By:
NRN LSR
DATE: /
1/18/17

O
.4-J
c�
.E
v
4
v
w
.jurisdictional
Determination Information

Jurisdictional Determination Request
0
US Army Corps
of Englnasrs
Wilmington District
This form is intended for use by anyone requesting a jurisdictional determination (JD) from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District (Corps). Please include all supporting
information, as described within each category, with your request. You may submit your request
to the appropriate Corps Field Office (or project manager, if known) via mail, electronic mail, or
facsimile. A current list of county assignments by Field Office and project manager can be
found on-line at: http://www.saw.usace.army.miI/Missions/Re ug latoEXPermitPro rg_am_aspx , by
telephoning: 910-251-4633, or by contacting any of the field offices listed below:
ASHEVILLE REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
RALEIGH REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
WASHINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
2407 West Fifth Street
Washington, North Carolina 27889
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
WILMINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
General Number: 910-251-4633
Fax Number: [phone]

Jurisdictional Determination Request
INSTRUCTIONS:
All requestors must complete Parts A, B, C, D, E and F.
NOTE TO CONSULTANTS AND AGENCIES: If you are requesting a JD on behalf of a
paying client or your agency, please note the specific submittal requirements in Part G.
NOTE ON PART D — PROPERTY OWNER AUTHORIZATION: Please be aware that all JD
requests must include the current property owner authorization for the Corps to proceed with the
determination, which may include inspection of the property when necessary. This form must be
signed by the current property owner to be considered a complete request.
NOTE ON PART D - NCDOT REQUESTS: Property owner authorization/notification for JD
requests associated with North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) projects will be
conducted according to the current NCDOT/USACE protocols.
NOTE TO USDA PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS: Corps approved and preliminary JDs identify
the limits of CWA (and RHA, if applicable) jurisdiction for the particular site identified in your
request. The JD may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security
Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in
USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of
the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.

Jurisdictional Determination Request
A. PARCEL INFORMATION
Property Information Moore Farm Site
Address: Waxhaw Indian Trial Road, Indian Trail, NC 28079
County: Union
From the 1485 and US -74 intersection southeast of Charlotte, take exit 51B to US -74 south and travel 2.7 miles to N. Indian Trail Road.
Directions: Turn right onto N. Indian Trail Road and travel 1.5 miles to Waxhaw Indian Trail Road. Travel two miles and the site will be on your left.
Parcel Index Number (PIN): M7120012, M7120013, M7120014, N7120012, N7120014, N7120013, and
07138993A
B. REQUESTOR INFORMATION
Name: Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC,
Wetlands & Environmental Planning Group (WEPG)
Mailing Address: 10612-D Providence Road, PMB 550, Charlotte NC 28277
Telephone Number: 704-904-2277
Electronic Mail Address: len.rindner a,wetlands-e .com
Select one:
I am the current property owner.
I am an Authorized Agent or Environmental Consultant
Interested Buyer or Under Contract to Purchase
❑ Other, please explain.
7 Name: Graham Enterprises of the Carolinas LLC
Mailing Address: 2701 Coltsgate Road Suite 300, Charlotte, NC 28211
Telephone Number: 704-552-5338
Electronic Mail Address 3: [e-mail]
Select one:
❑✓ I am the current property owner.
❑ I am an Authorized Agent or Environmental Consultant4
H
Interested Buyer or Under Contract to Purchase
Other, please explain.
1 If available
2 Must attach completed Agent Authorization Form
3 If available
4 Must attach completed Agent Authorization Form
3

Jurisdictional Determination Request
E. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION TYPE
Select One:
I am requesting that the Corps provide a preliminary JD for the property identified herein.
❑ I am requesting that the Corps investigate the property/project area for the presence or
absence of WoUS6 and provide an approved JD for the property identified herein. This
request does NOT include a request for a verified delineation. (proceed to F and G
below).
❑ I am requesting that the Corps delineate the boundaries of all WoUS on a property/project
area and provide an approved JD (this may or may not include a survey plat).
I am requesting that the Corps evaluate and approve a delineation of WoUS (conducted
by others) on a property/project area and provide an approved JD (may or may not
include a survey plat).
F. ALL REQUESTS
Map of Property or Project Area (attached). This Map must clearly depict the boundaries
of the area of evaluation.
✓❑ Size of Property or Project: 96.16
I verify that the property (or project) boundaries have recently been surveyed and marked
by a licensed land surveyor OR are otherwise clearly marked or distinguishable.
G. JD REQUESTS FROM CONSULTANTS OR AGENCIES
(1) Preliminary JD Requests:
❑ Completed and signed Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination F
❑ Project Coordinates: Latitude Longitude
Maps (no larger than I 1 x 17) with Project Boundary Overlay:
❑ Large and small scale maps that depict, at minimum: streets, intersections, towns
e Waters of the United States
' See Appendix A of this Form. From Regulatory Guidance Letter No. 08-02, dated June 26, 2008

Jurisdictional Determination Request
Aerial Photography of the project area
USGS Topographic Map
Soil Survey Map
Other Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map, Proposed Site
Plan, previous delineation maps, LIDAR maps, FEMA floodplain maps)
Delineation Information (when applicable):
Wetlands:
Wetland Data Sheets
Upland Data Sheets
n
i1
Landscape Photos, if taken
Tributaries:
USACE Assessment Forms
Other Assessment Forms
(when appropriate)
Field Sketch overlain on legible Map that includes:
All aquatic resources (for sites with multiple resources, label and identify)
Locations of wetland data points and/or tributary assessment reaches
Locations of photo stations
Approximate acreage/linear footage of aquatic resources
(2) Approved JDs including Verification of a Delineation:
❑✓ Project Coordinates: 35.036 N, -80.6798 W
Maps (no larger than 11x17) with Project Boundary Overlay:
Large and small scale maps that depict, at minimum: streets, intersections, towns
Aerial Photography of the project area
USGS Topographic Map
Soil Survey Map
Other Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map, Proposed Site
Plan, previous delineation maps)
Delineation Information (when applicable):
tlands:
Wetland Data Sheets
Upland Data Sheets
Tributaries:
USACE Assessment Forms
Other Assessment Forms
(when appropriate)
8 Delineation information must include, at minimum, one wetland data sheet for each wetland/community type.
9 Delineation information must include, at minimum, one wetland data sheet for each wetland/community type.
N

Jurisdictional Determination Request
Landscape Photos, if taken
Field Sketch overlain on legible Map that includes:
All aquatic resources (for sites with multiple resources, label and identify)
Locations of wetland data points and/or tributary assessment reaches
Locations of photo stations
Approximate acreage/linear footage of aquatic resources
Supporting Jurisdictional Information (for Approved JDs only)
Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form(s) (also known as "Rapanos
Form(s)")
Map(s) depicting the potential (or lack of potential) hydrologic connection(s),
adjacency, etc. to navigable waters.
I. REQUESTS FOR CORPS APPROVAL OF SURVEY PLAT
Prior to final production of a Plat, the Wilmington District recommends that the Land
Surveyor electronically submit a draft of a Survey Plat to the Corps project manager for
review.
Due to storage limitations of our administrative records, the Corps requires that all hard-
copy submittals include at least one original Plat (to scale) that is no larger than 11"x17"
(the use of match lines for larger tracts acceptable). Additional copies of a plat, including
those larger than 11"x17", may also be submitted for Corps signature as needed. The
Corps also accepts electronic submittals of plats, such as those transmitted as a Portable
Document Format (PDF) file. Upon verification, the Corps can electronically sign these
plats and return them via e-mail to the requestor.
Plats submitted for approval must:
F] be sealed and signed by a licensed professional land surveyor
❑ be to scale (all maps must include both a graphic scale and a verbal scale)
❑ be legible
❑ include a North Arrow, Scale(s), Title, Property Information
❑ include a legible WoUS Delineation Table of distances and bearings/metes and
bounds/GPS coordinates of all surveyed delineation points
clearly depict surveyed property or project boundaries
7

Jurisdictional Determination Request
clearly identify the known surveyed point(s) used as reference (e.g. property
corner, USGS monument)
when wetlands are depicted:
*include acreage (or square footage) of wetland polygons
*identify each wetland polygon using an alphanumeric system
❑ when tributaries are depicted:
*include either a surveyed, approximate centerline of tributary with
approximate width of tributary OR surveyed Ordinary High Water Marks
(OHWM) of tributary
*include linear footage of tributaries and calculated area (using
approximate widths or surveyed OHWM)
*include name of tributary (based on the most recent USGS topographic
map) or, when no USGS name exists, identify as "unnamed tributary"
❑ all depicted WoUS (wetland polygons and tributary lines) must intersect or tie -to
surveyed project/property boundaries
❑ include the location of wetland data points and/or tributary assessment reaches
❑ include, label accordingly, and depict acreage of all waters not currently subject to
the requirements of the CWA (e.g. "isolated wetlands", "non jurisdictional
waters"). NOTE: An approved JD must be conducted in order to make an official
Corps determination that a particular waterbody or wetland is not jurisdictional.
❑ include and survey all existing conveyances (pipes, culverts, etc.) that transport
Wous
CERTIFICATION LANGUAGE
❑ When the entire actual Jurisdictional Boundar i�picted:

Jurisdictional Determination Request
include the following Corps Certification language:
"This certifies that this copy of this plat accurately depicts the boundary of the jurisdiction
of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as determined by the undersigned on this date.
Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, the determination of
Section 404 jurisdiction may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five (5) years from
this date. The undersigned completed this determination utilizing the appropriate Regional
Supplement to the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual."
Regulatory Official:
Title:
Date:
USACE Action ID No.:
When uplands maypresent within a depicted Jurisdictional Boundary
include the following Corps Certification language:
"This certifies that this copy of this plat identifies all areas of waters of the United States
regulated pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as determined by the
undersigned on this date. Unless there is change in the law or our published regulations,
this determination of Section 404 jurisdiction may be relied upon for a period not to exceed
five years from this date. The undersigned completed this determination utilizing the
appropriate Regional Supplement to the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands
Delineation Manual."
Regulatory Official:
Title:
Date:
USACE Action ID No.:
GPS SURVEYS
0

Jurisdictional Determination Request
For Surveys prepared using a Global Positioning System (GPS), the Survey must include
all of the above, as well as:
❑ be at sub -meter accuracy at each survey point.
include an accuracy verification:
One or more known points (property corner, monument) shall be located with the
GPS and cross-referenced with the existing traditional property survey (metes and
bounds).
❑ include a brief description of the GPS equipment utilized.
10

FIGURE NO.
MOORE FARM
Union Co., NC
DELINEATION MAP — WATERS OF THE U.S.
Drawn By: Reviewed By:
HAC LSR
DATE:
10/18/16
Rev: 11/16/16

Jurisdictional Wetland KIKK SOUTH CAROLINA
PFO
DEPRESS Area
0.95 ACRE
RPWWN
35.0364
-80.6811 Davis Mine Creek
Jurisdictional Perennial RPW Tributary B SOUTH CAROLINA
R3
Linear
921 FOOT
RPW
35.0389
-80.674 Price Mill Creek
Jurisdictional Seasonal RPW Tributary C SOUTH CAROLINA
R4
Linear
157 FOOT
RPW
35.03875
-80.6741 Price Mill Creek
Jurisdictional Seasonal RPW Tributary H SOUTH CAROLINA
R3
Linear
821 FOOT
RPW
35.0383
-80.6821 Davis Mine Creek

1-7

El

Photo 3: Seasonal RPW C
Moore Farm
EP Union County, NC- Photos taken on 7/6/2016
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner. PLLC.

i� _ ... ,
�. � S !y4
a \ * i
., �,
�, �
....,, 4�e � �� � �, � � � 4 � ��~' nth `'�P•
v �, .�
r ,err � s� ` -..,.,w# � '• fes.
�,.. i i � "°rrr .`: , �
,. A.
=,,
._. ..o
�^ � t � ._
�.
. — :.'-
..
•�- ,� .. ,
w
a _.:
°�� �
z �
* 1 � ./7
�..
., ; . ..
'� '''`} max'`' ' t
a �:�a - �,�- ,„�
M.
� � _ ' f
�,m � �' �� ..,3.`
. i
W
_ �
�.
.: ,
,�� - � i
�.: �t � � �
���
.,
,,� ,�
a
.{{
.. �,: �
` � / � is ",.
ip' - � y.
��,�� ;
..
f
-, .
�.
s
Px �:�
� �
,�.
<,,
,�
A. �.
1 �,�

Photo 5: Open Water/Agricultural Pond
Moore Farm
Union County, NC - Photos taken on 7/6/2016
Wedands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner. PLIC.

Photo 6: Open Water/Agricultural Pond
Moore Farm
Union County, NC - Photos taken on 7/6/2016
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner. PLLC.

Photo 7: Open Water/Agricultural Pond
Moore Farm
Union County, NC - Photos taken on 7/6/2016
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard 5 RLndner. PLLC.

k
1
-rte
5
� �..,.� 'tie •� �� '�'� L� +k""�a,,�, ^�"4'+-_. ''� a ,ef� 5 , � �,{� f ,'
17
VWM,�y/ y
• "i
It
C+ .... .' -.tip. ... ..`--..�aa. moi' .",a. .,._ '. �' �' _.. , .`°.ra • •,. �. r ..�`, ,.

NF1` Cr: .. y♦ ?
a «g
i
k h
9 `f
4

STREAM REACH EVALUATION FORM
I Date: 17/11/16 1 Evaluator: I HAC I Easting: 1-80.6846
Proiect: I Moore Farms: Waters of the US RPW B (DP1) I Northinq: 1 35.0342
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent if > 19 or perennial if > 30'
(riqht-click the purple number and left -click Update Field to summarize points)
A.
Geornorphology Geomorphology
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
1a.
Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
3
2.
Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
2
3.
In -channel structure: riffle- / step- pool sequence
0
1
2
3
3
4.
Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
3
5.
Active/relic floodplain
0
1
2
3
1
6.
Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
2
7.
Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
2
8.
Headcuts
0
1
2
3
0
9.
Grade controls
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
10.
Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5
11.
Second or greater order channel
No = 0
1 Yes
= 3
0
Geomorphology
Subtotal 6mI�
a Man-made ditches are not rated: see discussion in NCDWQ Manual
B. Hydroloqy
12.
Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
1
13.
Iron Oxidizing Bacteria
0
1
2
3
0
14.
Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
1.5
15.
Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
16.
Organic debris lines or piles Wrack lines
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
17.
Soil -based Evidence of high water table?
0
No = 0
Yes = 3
3
0
24.
Amphibians
0
Hydrology
Subtotal 6E,�
1.5
C. Biology
18.
Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
19.
Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
20.
Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
0
1
2
3
1
21.
Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
2
22.
Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
23.
Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
24.
Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
25.
Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
26.
Wetland plants in streambed
FACW= 0.75, OBL= 1.5, Other= 0
0
Biology
Subtotal
perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See paqe 35 of NCDWQ manual.
Notes:
Several live mussels found within approximate 200' reach of stream.
Adapted from NCDWQ: Methodology for Identification of Intermittent and Perennial Streams and their
(version 4.11)
Origins.

STREAM REACH EVALUATION FORM
Date: 1 7/12/16 1 Evaluator: I HAC I Easting: -80.6819
Proiect: I Moore Farms: Waters of the US RPW H IDP 2) 1 Northinq: 35.0377
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent if > 19 or perennial if > 30"
(riqht-click the purple number and left -click Update Field to summarize points)
A.
Geomorphology
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
1a.
Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2
2.
Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
2
3.
In -channel structure: riffle- / step- pool sequence
0
1
2
3
1
4.
Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
1
5.
Active/relic floodplain
0
1
2
3
1
6.
Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
2
7.
Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
1
8.
Headcuts
0
1
2
3
0
9.
Grade controls
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
10.
Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5
11.
Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes
= 3
0
Geomorphology
Subtotal
a Man-made ditches are not rated: see discussion in NCDWQ Manual
B. Hydrology
12.
Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
1
13.
Iron Oxidizing Bacteria
0
1
2
3
0
14.
Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
16.
Organic debris lines or piles Wrack lines
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
17.
Soil -based Evidence of high water table?
Crayfish
No = 0
Yes
= 3
3
0.5
24.
Amphibians
0
Hydrology
Subtotal
1.5
C. Biology
18.
Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
2
19.
Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
20.
Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
0
1
2
3
1
21.
Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
0
22.
Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
23.
Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
24.
Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
25.
Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
26.
Wetland plants in streambed
FACW= 0.75, OBL= 1.5, Other= 0
0
Bioloav
Subtotal
. perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See page 35 of NCDWQ manual.
Notes:
Intermittent channel located upslope from Wetland K/KK.
Adapted from NCDWQ: Methodology for Identification of Intermittent and Perennial Streams and their
(version 4.11)
Origins.

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Moore Farm City/County: Indian Trail/Union Co
Applicant/Owner: Graham Enterprises of the Carolinas LLC State: NC
Investigator(s): NRN, HAC Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): Lat: 35.0373 Long: -80.6816
Soil Map Unit Name: ScA: Secrest-Cid complex NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes x No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil , or Hydrology - significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes=] No=
Are Vegetation - Soil - or Hydrology - naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
Sampling Date: 7/12/16
- Sampling Point: Wetland DP 3
- Slope (%): 0 - 2
Datum:
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes= No = Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes= No = within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes= No =
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that aaoly)
[�Surface Soil Cracks (136)
=Surface Water (A1)
IZI True Aquatic Plants (B14)
=1sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
=High Water Table (A2)
=Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
ETPrainage Patterns (B10)
=Saturation (A3)
=Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) =Moss Trim Lines (616)
=Water Marks (131)
=Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
=Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
=Sediment Deposits (62)
=Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
=Crayfish Burrows (C8)
=Drift Deposits (63)
=Thin Muck Surface (C7)
=Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
=Algal Mat or Crust (134)
=Other (Explain in Remarks)
=Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
=Iron Deposits (135)
Q✓ Geomorphic Position (D2)
=Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
=Shallow Aquitard (D3)
=Water -Stained Leaves (69)
=Microtopographic Relief (D4)
=Aquatic Fauna (1313)
=FAC -Neutral Test (135)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes=
No= Depth (inches): 2"
Water Table Present? Yes=
Saturation Present? Yes=
No= Depth (inches): 3"
No= Depth (inches): SUrfaCe
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes= No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30' ) % Cover Species? Status
j. -Salix nigra 80 Y OBL
2 Platanus occidentalis 5 N FACW
3.
4.
7.
85 = Total Cover
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: 30'
j. -Salix nigra 15 Y
2. _
5.
6.
7.
� a =Total Cover
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30'
1.
2.
3.
6.
7.
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30'
1 Microstegium vimineum 70
2 Carex sp. 10
3 Solidago sp. 5
q Rubus sp. 5
5.
6.
7.
8.
10.
11.
12.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1 Lon icera japonica
3.
on
OBL
Sampling Point: Wetland DP 3
Dominance Test worksheet:
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
Number of Dominant Species
Tree — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
N
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
4
(A)
Total Number of Dominant
Sapling — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Species Across All Strata:
4
(B)
Percent of Dominant Species
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
100%
(A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x4=
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A)
(B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
01 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
=2 - Dominance Test is >50%
Q3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
04 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
= Total Cover
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
Y FAC
Tree — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
N
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
N
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
N
Sapling — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
= Total Cover
5 Y FAC
5. _
5
Remarks:
or on a separate
= Total Cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? YesF✓ No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: Wetland DP 3
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Tvne Loc Texture Remarks
0-20 10YR 6/2 85 7.5YR 4/6 15 C PL Clay loam
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. `Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
❑Histosol (Al)
=Dark Surface (S7)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
❑2 cm Muck (A10) (MCRA 147)
QHistic Epipedon (A2)
=Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
=Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
=Black Histic (A3)
=hin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
=Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
=Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
=Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
=Stratified Layers (A5)
=2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
=Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 136, 147)
=Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
=Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
=Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
=Other (Explain in Remarks)
=Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
=Redox Depressions (F8)
=Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
❑Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
=Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
MLRA 136)
❑Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
=Sandy Redox (S5)
=Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
=Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓❑ No =
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Moore Farm City/County: Indian Trail/Union Co
ADDlicanUOwner: Graham Enterprises of the Carolinas LLC
State: NC
Investigator(s): NRN, HAC Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): Lat: 35.0373 Long: -80.6819
Sampling Date: 7/12/16
- Sampling Point: Upland DP 4
- Slope (%): 0 - 2
Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: ScA: Secrest-Cid complex NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes x No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology - significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes F7 No =
Are Vegetation ' Soil ' or Hydrology ' naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes= No = Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes= No Q✓ within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes= No Q
Remarks:
Upland data point taken approximately 40' West of Wetland DP 3.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is reauired: check all that apply)
=1surface Soil Cracks (B6)
=Surface Water (Al) =True Aquatic Plants (614)
=]Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
=High Water Table (A2) =Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
E::]Drainage Patterns (610)
=Saturation (A3) =Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) =Moss Trim Lines (1316)
=Water Marks (61) =Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
=Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
=Sediment Deposits (132) =Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
=Crayfish Burrows (C8)
=Drift Deposits (133) =Thin Muck Surface (C7)
=Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
=Algal Mat or Crust (B4) =Other (Explain in Remarks)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
=Iron Deposits (135)
=Geomorphic Position (D2)
=Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
=Shallow Aquitard (D3)
=Water -Stained Leaves (139)
=Microtopographic Relief (D4)
=Aquatic Fauna (B13)
=FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes= No= Depth (inches): -
Water Table Present? Yes= No= Depth (inches): -
Saturation Present? Yes= No= Depth (inches): -
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes= No E✓
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: Upland DP 4
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont -Version 2.0
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
% Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
j. -Salix nigra
55 Y OBL
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
2 Ulmus americana
20 Y FACW
Li uidambar s raciflua
3• 4 �
10 N FAC
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 6 (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 66.6% (p/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
85 = Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: 30'
)
OBL species x 1 =
1.
FACW species x 2 =
2,
FAC species x 3 =
3,
FACU species x4=
4,
UPL species x 5 =
5.
Column Totals: (A) (B)
6.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
7.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
30'
= Total Cover
01 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
1. Juniperus virginiana
5 Y FACU
✓02 - Dominance Test is >50%
2.
03 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
3.
Q4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
4.
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
5.
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
6.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
7.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
30'
=
5 Total Cover
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
1 Allium canadense
50 Y FACU
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
2. Microstegium vimineum
15 Y FAC
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
3.
4
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
5•
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
6.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
7
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
8.
9
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
10.
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
11.
12.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
65 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1 Lonicera japonica
20 Y FAC
2.-
3.
4'
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
5.
Present? Yes= No=
20 = Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont -Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: Upland DP 4
(Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc Texture Remarks
0-20 5YR 4/6 100 silt loam
RM=Reduced Matrix. MS=Masked Sand Grains.
Soil Indicators:
UHistosol (Al)
❑Histic Epipedon (A2)
=Black Histic (A3)
=Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
=Stratified Layers (A5)
=2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
=Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
=Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
=Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
=Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
=Sandy Redox (S5)
=Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Sc
=Dark Surface (S7)
❑2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
=Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
=Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
=Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
=Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
=Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
=Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 136, 147)
=Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
=Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
=Other (Explain in Remarks)
=Redox Depressions (F8)
❑Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
❑Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
=Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
=Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓❑ No =
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
Applicant: Graham Enterprises
Site: Moore Farms
Form for: Waters of the U.S. Abutting Wetland K/KK, Waters of the U.S. Perennial RPW Tributary B, Waters of the U.S. Seasonal
RPW Tributary C, and Waters of the U.S. Seasonal RPW Tributary H.
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State:NC County/parish/borough: Union City: Indian Trail
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.036° N, Long. -80.67980 W.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Price Mill Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Catawba River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03050103
Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s):
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There "navigable waters of the US." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required)
Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There "waters ofthe 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
Relatively permanent waterS2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non -wetland waters: 1899 linear feet: 4 width (ft) and/or 0.17 acres.
Wetlands: 0.95 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: Ebb by O VM
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):'
Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
Z For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
' Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.

Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain: Three open water ponds were determined be non -jurisdictional during 11/15/16 site visit. Ponds were
excavated in high ground for agricultural purpsoses. .

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section III.A.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section 111.13 below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent':
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non -navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody° is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.I for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.0 below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: 3285 square miles
Drainage area: 2061 acres
Average annual rainfall: 44 inches
Average annual snowfall: 0 inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
® Tributary flows through 4 tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are 25-30 river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1 (or less) river miles from RPW.
Project waters are 15-20 aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1 (or less) aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNWS: Jurisdictional features on the site flow into Price Mill Creek, to East Fork Twelvemile
Creek, to Twelvemile Creek, then to the Catawba River (TNW).
° Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
s Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

Tributary stream order, if known: 1.
(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: 10 feet
Average depth: +/-5 feet
Average side slopes: ZJ.
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: Ret-tixely;ssi�t
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: +�Sll14*
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: � (et r _O
Describe flow regime: Flow of RPW A, B and M are perennial. Flow of RPW C, H and O are intermittent. See
attached stream evaluation forms.
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Disco' cmdv
9il tid. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: thskmv n. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
® Bed and banks
® OHWM' (check all indicators that apply):
❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank
® changes in the character of soil
❑
® shelving
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
® leaf litter disturbed or washed away
® sediment deposition
IK
❑ water staining
❑
❑ other (list):
❑ Discontinuous OHWM.' Explain:
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
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Q High Tide Line indicated by: Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects ❑ survey to available datum;
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ❑ physical markings;
❑ physical markings/characteristics ❑ vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain: water color is clear - no signs of pollutants.
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
'A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
7Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
® Wetland fringe. Characteristics: Forested wetland abuts Seasonal RPW Tributary H.
® Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally -sensitive species. Explain findings:
® Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings: Typical aquatic and wildlife diversity.
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 PkkLW 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: Pick 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)
Jurisdictional Wetland K/KK 0.95
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed: Onsite wetland and jurisdictional
RPW's provide habitat for herpetofauna and macro invertebrates. The wetland has the capacity to provide nutrients and organic
carbon to downstream foodwebs. Wetlands provide flood storage during rain events and ground water recharge during dry periods.
The wetland also traps and filters pollutants before reaching offsite Perennial RPWs and the Catawba River (TNW).
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 IIID:
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 IIID:
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 IIID: .
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
0 TNWs: linear feet width (fl), Or, acres.
Q Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
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: Perennial RPW Tributary B exhibits geomorphology, hydrology, and biological indicators consistent
with perennial flowing streams in the piedmont ecoregion.

Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are.
DO 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: Seasonal RPW Tributaries C, and H exhibit geomorphology, hydrology, and biological indicators consistent with
intermittent flowing streams in the piedmont ecoregion.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: 1899 linear feet 10 width (ft).
Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
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:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW: .
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW: Wetland K/KK directly abuts onsite Seasonal RPW Tributary H with no break in jurisdiction.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: 0.95 acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
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):10
'See Footnote # 3.
v To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III. D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
0 Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands: acres.
F. NON -JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
171 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
Idgment (check all that apply):
Non -wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
Lakes/ponds: acres.
Q Other non -wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.
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):
E3 Non -wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other non -wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
M Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
CM 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.
0 Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
Corps navigable waters' study:
U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: See map.
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): Site photographs 10/22/2015.
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:

Ln
W
�V
d!
V)
N
v
M
C
c�
W
�,
d1
v
Cu
s
Threatened & Endangered Species
Report

Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species
Evaluation
For: Moore Farm
Union County, North Carolina
By: Lisa R. Gaffney
September 21, 2016
Chrlo W ORIM: www.wedww"N aom AdwAm 011 m
10612PO Nuvldl . Rd. IGMTWwmd Rd.. Oft I
PMB 550 &" I% PMB 383
Chnrbeee, NC 38277 AdWA@6 NC 2WW
ice+? +0+-7777 Omrmm
Ia rInAw G wllrndaowcom w=dyocam

Moore Farm —Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
GENERAL LANDSCAPE DESCRIPTION:
The Moore Farm site is +/- 96 acres located just east of Waxhaw Indian Trail
Road, and just north of Hunter Pointe Drive in Union County, North Carolina. It
can be found on the Matthews, NC USGS Topographic Quadrangle Map; latitude
is 35.0360 N, longitude is 80.6798 W. The site is a tree farm and is a mosaic of
cultivated tree groves, disturbed forest cover, dirt/gravel roads, open water
ponds, fencerows, and residential property. The topography is flat to gently
sloped with the elevation ranging from 590 to 640 ft. (Figure 1).
Figure 1:
OOF
I
/;; e
C
Wedands and Environmental PlanninS Group Leonard S. Rlndner, PLLC.
USGS QUAD
LOCATION
Matthews, NC
Lat: 35.036 ON
APPROXIMATE
Long: -80.6798 QW
ACREAGE
HLIC:03050103
96.16
LOWER CATAWBA
Wedands and Environmental PlanninS Group Leonard S. Rlndner, PLLC.

Moore Farm Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
METHODOLOGY:
The US Fish and Wildlife Service website
http://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/union.htmi was referenced to
determine the occurrence of Threatened, Endangered and Protected species for
Union County North Carolina, the results of which are listed below (Table 1).
Maps and aerial photographs were assembled and the site was investigated
September 13 and 16, 2016.
Table 1: Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species listed for
Union County
County: Union, NC
*Source: US Fish & Wildlife Service
**Data search on September 13, 2016
Group Name Status Lead Office
Clams Carolina heelsplitter Endangered
Asheville
(Lasmigona
Ecological
decorata)
Services Field
Office
Flowering Schweinitz's Endangered
Asheville
Plants sunflower
Ecological
(Helianthus
Services Field
schweinitzir)
Office
Flowering Michaux's sumac Endangered Raleigh
Plants (Rhus michauxu) Ecological
Services Field
Office
Birds Bald Eagle Protected under the Great Lakes-
(Haliaeetus Bald and Golden Big Rivers
leucocephalus) Eagle Protection Act Region (Region
3)
Wedandi and Environmental PlanninS Group Leonard S. Rindnor, PLLC.

Moore Farm —Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
Two plant species with federal protection are listed as potentially occurring in
Union County:
• Schweinitz's Sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzh), listed as Federally
Endangered, is typically found in open habitats which historically have
been maintained by wildfires and grazing bison and elk herds. Now most
occurrences are limited to roadsides, woodland and field edges, and utility
rights-of-way (ROW).
• Michaux's Sumac (Rhus michauxii), listed as Federally Endangered,
requires habitat of sandy forests and woodland edges. This species
requires periodic fire as a part of its ecology.
Two animal species with federal protection are listed as potentially occurring in
Union County:
Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), protected by the Bald and
Golden Eagle Protection Act, typically inhabits forested areas near large
bodies of open water such as lakes, marshes, seacoasts and rivers,
where there are suitable fish populations and tall trees for nesting and
roosting.
• Carolina heelsplitter (Lasmigona decorata), listed as Federally
Endangered, is restricted to cool, clean, well -oxygenated water. Stable,
silt- free stream beds are required for this species. Typically stable areas
occur where the stream banks are well -vegetated with trees and shrubs.
1:7 *114&1
The site is primarily a tree farm and is a mosaic of cultivated tree groves,
overgrown thickets, mowed access corridors, disturbed forest cover, dirt/gravel
roads, open water ponds, fencerows, and residential property. On the mostly flat
uplands there are multiple groves of cultivated trees, primarily Loblolly Pines
(Pinus taeda) in varying stages of maturity. The more mature stands have an
average DBH (diameter at breast height) of 18 inches, and the less mature
stands have an average DBH of 6 inches. There is also a stand of cultivated
Shumard and Willow Oaks (Quercus shumardii and Q. phellos) with an average
DBH of 10 inches. The more natural wooded areas are primarily associated with
drainages, wetlands and slopes. The homesites and outbuildings in the western
portion of the site near Waxhaw Indian Trail Road have semi open lawns and
landscaping, as well as several sheds and trailers with overgrown weedy patches
and scrub/shrub cover along with areas covered in mixed turf grass and typical
lawn weeds.
Wetland: and Environmental PlanminE Group Leonard S. Rlndner, PLLC.

Moore Farm —Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
The expansive tree stands have transitional edges dominated by Dog Fennel
(Eupatorium capilifollium), Goldenrod (Solidago spp.), Broomsedge (Andropogon
virginicum), and Blackberry (Rubus spp.).
The dirt and gravel roads and maintained corridors throughout the site are
covered with partially mowed turfgrass and scrub/shrub thickets dominated by
Fescue (Festuca sp.), Blackberry, Pokeweed (Phytolacca americana),
Goldenrod, Broomsedge, Brazilian Verbena (Verbena brasiliense), Tickseed
(Bidens sp.), Evening Primrose (Oenothera sp.), Black Cherry (Prunus serotina),
Persimmon (Diosporous virginiana), Winged Elm (Ulmus alata), and Red Cedar
(Juniperus virginiana).
The disturbed mixed woods on the slopes and drainages are composed Loblolly
Pine (Pinus taeda), of Short -leaf Pine (P. echinata), Virginia Pine (P. virginiana),
American Ash (Fraxinus americana), White Oak (Quercus alba), Northern Red
Oak (Quercus rubra), Southern Red Oak (Quercus falcata), Black Oak (Quercus
velutina), Willow Oak (Quercus phellos), Mockernut Hickory (Carya tomentosa),
Pignut Hickory (Carya glabra), Carolina Shagbark Hickory (Carya carolinae-
septentrionalis), Black Walnut (Juglans nigra), Green Ash (F. pensylvanica),
Sweet Gum (Liquidambar styraciflua), and Yellow Poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera
var. tulipifera). Subcanopy trees present are Sourwood (Oxydendrum
arboreum), Red Maple (Acer rubrum var. rubrum), Red Cedar (Juniperus
virginiana), Flowering Dogwood (Cornus florida), Black Gum (Nyssa sylvatica),
Black Cherry (Prunus serotina), Redbud (Cercis canadensis), and Red Mulberry
(Morus rubra). The shrub layer includes Blueberry (Vaccnium sp.), Spicebush
(Lindera benzoin), Autumn Olive (Elaeagnus umbellata), Paw Paw (Asimina
triloba) and Chinese Privet (Ligustrum sinense). Vines present are Japanese
Honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), Trumpet Creeper (Campsis radicans), Virginia
Creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia), Muscadine (Vitis rotundifolia), and
Poison Ivy (Toxicodendron radicans). The herb layer includes Christmas Fern
(Polystichum acrostichoides), Crane -fly Orchid (Tipularia discolor), Spotted
Wintergreen (Chimaphila maculata), River Oats (Chasmanthium latifolium), and
Japanese Stiltgrass (Microstegium vimineum).
The open water ponds have some transitional wetland edge habitat dominated
by typical wetland vegetation including Sedges (Carex spp., Cyperus spp.,
Scirpus spp.), Rushes (Juncus spp.), and Cattails (Typha latifolia).
The mowed roadside along Waxhaw Indian Trail Road is dominated by Fescue
turf grass and common weedy and transitional species including Johnson grass
(Sorghum halepense), Sericea Lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata), Ragwort
(Packera sp.) Indian Hemp (Apocynum cannabinum), Goldenrod (Solidago sp.),
Beggars Ticks (Desmodium sp.), and Dogfennel (Eupatorium capillifolium).
There is also a Pecan grove (Carya illinoensis) adjacent to the road.
Wedands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

Moore Farm —Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
Threatened & Endangered/Protected Species Results
• All potential habitats for Schweinitz's Sunflower and Michaux's Sumac
along the roadsides, access corridors, woods and field edges were closely
examined and neither of these species were present.
• Streams on site do not have the habitat characteristics required to support
populations of the Carolina Heelsplitter. No mussels were observed
during the survey nor would any be expected on-site.
• There is no bald eagle habitat on site, and no eagles or eagle's nests were
observed.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
I recommend further consultation with the project planners and engineers
regarding coordination with USFWS and other federal and state agencies as
needed.
Respectfully submitted,
Lisa R. Gaffney
Biologist
September 21, 2016
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindnor, PLLC.

Moore Farm —Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
Curriculum Vitae for:
Lisa R. Gaffney
Biologist / Botanist
B.S. Biology, University of North Carolina at Charlotte
Ms. Gaffney is a classically trained botanist and biologist, and has conducted field work
and investigative studies covering thousands of cumulative acres in both North and
South Carolina since 1996, including:
• Cabarrus County NC Natural Heritage Inventory 1997-1998. Organized,
directed, and worked in field survey of natural areas in Cabarrus County for the
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, collecting field data and writing reports.
• Lincoln County NC Natural Heritage Inventory 2000-2001. Organized, directed,
and worked in field survey of natural areas in Lincoln County for the North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program, collecting field data and writing reports.
• Threatened and Endangered Species Surveys and Natural Communities
Evaluation for over 30,000 acres in North and South Carolina, 1996 - present.
• Located and identified at least six previously unreported populations of Federally
Endangered Schweinitz's Sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii).
• Located and identified four previously unreported populations of
Threatened Dwarf Heartleaf (Hexastylis naniflora).
• Located a previously unknown population of Federally Endangered Schweinitz's
Sunflower at Redlair Farm in Gaston County, NC. This discovery led (in part) to
the purchase of the site by the State of North Carolina Plant Conservation
Program, now called Redlair Preserve. This population has become a Recovery
Site for the species.
• Participated in numerous Piedmont Prairie restoration projects in Mecklenburg,
Union, Cabarrus and Gaston Counties, North Carolina.
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rlndner, PLLC.