20141310 Ver 2_PCN Form Submission_20200131

DWR
mrlslon of Water Resources
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
September 29, 2018 Ver 3
Initial Review
Has this project met the requirements for acceptance in to the review process?*
r Yes
r No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
C Yes r No
Change only if needed.
BIMS # Assigned * Version#*
20141310 2
Is a payment required for this project?*
r No payment required What amout is owed?*
r Fee received r $240.00
r Fee needed - send electronic notification IT $570.00
Reviewing Office *
Winston-Salem Regional Office - (336) 776- Select Project Reviewer*
9800 Sue Homewood:eads\slhomewood
Information for Initial Review
1a. Name of project:
McConnell Center - Lot 9
1a. Who is the Primary Contact?*
S&EC, PA - Bob Zarzecki
1b. Primary Contact Email:*
[e-mail]
Date Submitted
1/31/2020
Nearest Body of Water
Little Alamance Creek (Stream Index No. 16-19-3-(0.5))
Basin
Cape Fear
Water Classification
WS4V; NSW
Site Coordinates
Latitude: Longitude:
36.056257-079.705067
A. Processing Information
County (or Counties) where the project is located:
Guilford
Is this project a public transportation project?*
r Yes r No
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
W Section 404 Permit (wetlands, streams and waters, Clean Water Act)
r Section 10 Permit (navigable waters, tidal waters, Rivers and Harbors Act)
1b. What type(s) of permit(s) do you wish to seek authorization?
W Nationwide Permit (NWP)
r Regional General Permit (RGP)
r Standard (IP)
1c. Primary Contact Phone:*
[phone]

1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
r Yes r- No
Nationwide Permit (NWP) Number:
NWP Numbers (for multiple NWPS):
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
W 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular
r Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
r Individual Permit
39 - Commercial/Institutional Developments
le. Is this notification solely for the record because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWR401 Certification:
For the record only for Corps Permit:
r 401 Water Quality Certification - Express
r Riparian Buffer Authorization
1f. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?*
r Yes r No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
r Yes r No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
r Yes r No
Acceptance Letter Attachment
McConnell Center Lot 9 - SOA (RS)(reserved).pdf
McConnell Center Lot 9 - SOA (Wildlands).pdf
1h. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties?
r' Yes r No
1j. Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?
r- Yes r No
B. Applicant Information
1d. Who is applying for the permit?
W Owner r Applicant (other than owner)
le. Is there an Agent/Consultant for this project?*
r Yes r No
2. Owner Information
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
Goria Youngs Mill, LLC
2b. Deed book and page no.:
Book 7427 & Page 2495
2c. Responsible party:
Pierre A. Goria
2d.Address
Street Address
PO Box 39
Address Une 2
City
McLeansville
Postal / Zip Code
27301
2e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
2g. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
4. Agent/Consultant (if applicable)
4a. Name:
State / FrWnce / Region
NC
Country
USA
2f. Fax Number:
143.61 KB
161.08KB
r Yes r No
r- Yes r No

Bob Zarzecki
4b. Business Name:
Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
4c.Address
Street Address
8412 Falls of Neuse Road
Address tine 2
Suite 104
city
Raleigh
Postal / Zip Code
27615
4d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
4f. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
Agent Authorization Letter*
McConnell Center Lot 9 - Goria-S&EC Agent Authorization. pdf
State / Province / legion
NC
Country
USA
4e. Fax Number:
[phone]
732.461<B
C. Project Information and Prior Project History u'
1. Project Information
1b. Subdivision name:
(d appropriate)
McConnell Center Industrial Park
1c. Nearest municipality/ town:
Greensboro, NC
2. Project Identification
2a. Property Identification Number:
7894101021
2c. Project Address
Street Address
1299 Youngs Mill Road
Address tine 2
` Note: Alternate entrance to Lot 9 is thru Lot 1 off McConnell Center Drive.
City
Greensboro
Postal / Zip Code
27406
3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project:
Little Alamance Creek (Stream Index No. 16-19-3-(0.5))
3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water:*
WS-IV; NSW
3c. What river basin(s) is your project located in?*
Cape Fear
3d. Please provide the 12-digit HUC in which the project is located.
030300020302
4. Project Description and History
2b. Property size:
27.95
State / Province / legion
NC
Country
USA
4a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this application:*
The site consists of Lot 9 of the existing McConnell Center industrial park and is currently zoned for the proposed use. The site is currently mostly cleared and graded and has an active
N.C. DEMLR Erosion & Sedimentation Control Plan Approval. A pond on the property was permitted by DEMLR for use as an NPDES sediment basin and waste area for grading work
initially occurring on Lot 1. The majority of the remaining lots within the industrial park along McConnell Center Drive are already developed and have active warehouse distribution
centers for companies such as Coca-Cola Bottling Co., O'Reilly Auto Parts, Wayfair and others. Interstate 40 abuts the northern property line. Candice Ridge residential subdivision is
located to the south.
4b. Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this project (including all prior phases) in the past?*
r Yes r No r Unknown

4c. If yes, please give the DWR Certification number or the Corps Action ID (exp. SAW-0000-00000).
Please refer to the attached "McConnell Center Lot 9 Project History". This project history includes permits for Lot 1 as well, which we understand will be cumulative to the impacts
requests in this application. Those permits include USACE NWP39 verification SAW-2013-02235 and NC DWR 14-1310 for impacts to resulting in 140 LF of stream and 0.018 acres of
wetlands.
Project History Upload
McConnell Center Lot 9 - Project History (reduced).pdf
3.18MB
4d. Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the USGS topographic map indicating the location of the project site. (for DWR)
McConnell Center Lot 9 - USGS.pdf 772.6KB
4e. Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the published County NRCS Soil Survey map depicting the project site. (for DWR)
McConnell Center Lot 9 - Soil Survey.pdf 631.56KB
4f. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
3,640
4g. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
2.76
4h. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:*
Commercial - The purpose of the project is to complete construction of the emsting McConnell Center industrial park.
41. Describe the overall project in detail, including indirect impacts and the type of equipment to be used:*
The overall project, being the development on Lot 9, includes the construction of an industrial warehouse building and associated parking, stormwater management and infrastructure.
Heavy equipment will be used such as excavators, bull dozers and dump trucks typically used for such construction.
4j. Please upload project drawings for the proposed project.
McConnell Center Lot 9 - IMPACT MAPS & Wetland Restoration Plan (rev. 12-6-19).pdf 2.74MB
5. Jurisdictional Determinations
5a. Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the property or proposed impact areas?*
r Yes r No G Unknown
Comments:
The jurisdictional WOTUS depicted on the attached permit drawings are a combination of site
survey located wetlands and streams and GIS overlaid areas provided from the USACE (in areas
inaccessbile due to fill).
5b. If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made?*
r' Preliminary r Approved r' Not Verified r Unknown r N/A
Corps AID Number:
SAW-2018-02038 describes the jurisdictional WOTUS that east or are believed to have eAsted on
the site.
5c. If 5a is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Dave Bailey
Agency/Consultant Company: USACE
Other: initial delineation performed by ECS Southeast, LLC
5d1. Jurisdictional determination upload
McConnell Center Lot 9 - ECS_PJD Request_06.14.2018 (reduced).pdf 7.51 MB
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?*
r Yes O No
7b. If yes, explain.
This site being Lot 9 as lot with the eAsting McConnell Center industrial park.
Are any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permits(s) used, or intended to be used, to authorize any part of the proposed project or related activity?
No. The proposed impacts to WOTUS requested in this application are the last remaining anticipated for the industrial park.
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
la. Where are the impacts associated with your project? (check all that apply):
W Wetlands W Streams -tributaries r Buffers
r Open Waters r Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts

Lot 9 -Perm.
Total Wetland
Impact
2a1 Reason (?)
Industrial Lot Fill
2b. Impact type * M
P
2c. Type of W.
Headwater Forest
2d. W. name *
Wetland Impact
2e. Forested *
Yes
2C Type of
Jurisdicition*(?)
Both
2g. Impact
area*
0.400
(acres)
Lot 9 -
Temporary
Wetland Impact
Temporary Construction
Access
T
Headwater Forest
Temporary Wetland
Impacts
Yes
Both
0.040
(acres)
2g. Total Temporary Wetland Impact
0.040
2g. Total Wetland Impact
0.440
2h. Comments:
3. Stream Impacts
2g. Total Permanent Wetland Impact
0.400
FT0_]a. Reason for impact (?) 3blmpact type * 3c. Type of impact* 3d. S. name 3e. Stream Type * 3f. Typeofh 3h. Impact
(?) Jurisdiction* length*
Industrial Lot Fill Permanent Fill JWestern Tributary ���Both E�1�1
S1 ry
31. Total jurisdictional ditch impact in square feet:
31. Total permanent stream impacts:
547
31. Total stream and ditch impacts:
547
3j. Comments:
31. Total temporary stream impacts:
The stream was identified by the USACE during a site visit on April 26, 2004 as a jurisdictional tributary, but believed to be a lowquality intermittent or
possibly ephemeral stream. The applicant requests a waiver from the 300 LF threshold as allowed within NWP39. We understand that the USACE has
adequate Feld notes and information pertaining to this stream to complete their review of this request.
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:
The owner was aware of the jurisdictional stream that was diverted around the pond many years ago, but was unaware as to the jurisdictional nature
of the pond itself or the existance of the smalller western tributary stream. The owner obtained permits for a stream crossing on Lot 1 and during the
development of that crossing obtained multiple Erosion & Sedimentation Control Plan approvals from NC DEMLR to include the use of the pond as an
NPDES sediment basin and waste area, which was modified and approved to include additional waste area to the west of the pond in the area of the
previously existing western tributary stream. The owner was made aware of the jurisdictional nature of the pond and western tributary when they
received the October 25, 2018 USACE Notice of Unauthorized Discharge of Fill into WOTUS. Since that time the owner has worked with the USACE,
DWR and their representatives to resolve the unauthorized discharge. Part of this resolution resulted in the attached permit drawings which minimize
impacts to the wetlands within the jurisdictional pond area to 0.4 acres. Unfortunately the lot cannot be practically developed and avoid the pre-
existing western tributary. The owner has proposed a Wetland Restoration Plan as described in the attached permit drawings to remove non -
authorized fill from approximately 1.58 acres of pre-existing wetlands, return the area to original grades (+/- elevation of 708) and plant with a wetland
seed mix. The project also was designed to stay within the footprint of existing stream crossings. Retaining walls are also included in the design to not
only stay within the footprint of the existing stream crossings, but also minimize wetland impacts.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:
The owner has obtained an Erosion & Sedimentation Control Plan in the past and will obtain any necessary revisions to this plan resulting from the
hopeful approval of the attached permit drawings. The proposed project includes post construction stormwater management to help protect
downstream waters.
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?
r Yes
r No
2c. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
W DWR
W Corps
2d. If yes, which mitigation option(s) will be used for this project?
W Mitigation bank r Payment to in -lieu fee r Permittee Responsible
program Mitigation

3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
Restoration Systems - Motes Creek, Orphan Creek & Rocky Top Mitigation Banks (totalling 0.6
acres) & Wildlands Holdings Cane Creek U.M.B. Bethel Branch Site
3b. Credits Purchased/Requested (attach receipt and letter)
Type: Quantity:
Riparian wetland 0.8
Attach Receipt and/or letter
McConnell Center Lot 9 - SOA (RS)(reserved).pdf
McConnell Center Lot 9 - SOA (Wildlands).pdf
3c. Comments
143.61 KB
161.08KB
6. Buffer mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) - required by DWR
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires buffer mitigation? If yes, you must fill out this entire form - please contact DWR for more
information.
r- Yes r No
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
r Yes r No
What type of SCM are you providing?
r Level Spreader
r Vegetated Conveyance (lower SHWT)
r Wetland Swale (higher SHWT)
W Other SCM that removes minimum 30 % nitrogen
r Proposed project will not create concentrated stormwater flow through the buffer
Diffuse Flow Documentation
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250?*
r Yes r No
2b. Does this project meet the requirements for low density projects as defined in 15ANCAC 02H .1003(2)?
r Yes r No
2c. Does this project have a stormwater management plan (SMP) reviewed and approved under a state stormwater program or state -approved local government stormwater
program?
r Yes r No
2d. Which of the following stormwater management program(s) apply:
W Local Government F State
Local Government Stormwater Programs
W Phase II W NSW r USMP W Water Supply
Please identify which local government stormwater program you are using.
Greensboro
Comments:
The stormwater management BMP has yet to be fully designed, but has been approbmately sized and located on the plans and will be in compliance with all applicable delegated
stormwater management requirements.
G. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of public (federal/state) land?"
r Yes r No
u
v

2. Violations (DWR Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), or DWR Surface Water or Wetland Standards or
Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)? *
r Yes r No
2b Provide an explanation of the violation(s):
Please refer to the attached "Project History". The site was not issued an actual NOV from DWR, but was from the USACE. If approved, this ATF
application should bring the site into full compliance with both USACE and DWR regulations.
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWR Requirement)
3a. Will this project result in additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?*
r Yes r No
3b. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
While the site is an industrial lot and anticipated warehouse, it's already rezoned and located within an existing and active industrial park adjacent to
and with abuttting access to a major interstate highway (1-85). No additional development is anticipated to result from the completion of construction on
this lot which could impact nearby downstream water quality.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project?*
r Yes r No r WA
4b. Describe, in detail, the treatment methods and dispositions (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from the proposed project. If the wastewater will be treated
at a treatment plant, list the capacity available at that plant.
Wastewater from the site will be discharged to the existing Greensboro sanitary sewer system already accessible to the property. The City and DEQ
will ensure that adequate capacity exists.
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or habitat?*
r Yes r No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?*
r Yes r No
5d. Is another Federal agency involved?*
r Yes r No r Unknown
5e. Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?
r Yes r No
5f. Will you cut any trees in order to conduct the work in waters of the U.S.?
r Yes r No
5g. Does this project involve bridge maintenance or removal?
r Yes r No
5h. Does this project involve the construction/installation of a wind turbine(s)?*
r Yes r No
51. Does this project involve (1) blasting, and/or (2) other percussive activities that will be conducted by machines, such as jackhammers, mechanized pile drivers, etc.?
r Yes r No
5j. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?
USFWS IPAC & N.C. Natural Heritage Program Databases - A search of NHP confirmed no known elemental occurrences for Federally protected
endangered or threatened species within a one (1) mile buffer around the site.
Consultation Documentation Upload
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*
r Yes r No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat?*
NOAA- EFH Mapper; The project is located within the Piedmont of NC, far from any EFH areas.
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 status?*
r Yes r No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?*
NC SHPO HPO-WEB

7c. Historic or Prehistoric Information Upload
McConnell Center Lot 9 - SHPO.pdf
280.2KB
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-yearfloodplain?*
F Yes f• No
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?*
NC Flood Mapping & FEMA DFIRM (see attached)
Miscellaneous
Comments
U
Miscellaneous attachments not previously requested.
McConnell Center Lot 9 - FEMA.pdf 368.04KB
Signature U
*
W By checking the box and signing below, I certify that:
I have given true, accurate, and complete information on this form;
I agree that submission of this PCN form is a "transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act');
I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act');
. I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a written signature; AND
I intend to electronically sign and submit the PCN form.
Full Name:
Bob Zarzecki
Signature
Sign
Date
1 /31 /2020

Restoration Systems, LLC
1101 Haynes St. Suite 211
Raleigh, North Carolina
Ph: [phone]
Fx: [phone]

Statement of Mitigation Credit Availability
Cape Fear 03030002 January 24, 2020
Army Corps of Engineers

Re: Availability of Compensatory Stream Credits
Project: McConnell Center, Lot 9 This document confirms that 0.60 Wetland Credits (Credits) from the following banks are currently available and all or a portion may be used, once transferred, for compensatory mitigation relative to the McConnell Center, Lot 9 project, and as proposed by Goria Youngs Mill, LLC (Applicant).
Bank Name Credits
Available Motes Creek 0.40 Orphan Creek 0.025 Rocky Top 0.175
TOTAL 0.60 The Applicant may ultimately purchase the Credits, if they are available, following Permit issuance. Should the Applicant purchase the Credits at that time, we will complete and execute the Mitigation Credit Transfer Certificate (Certificate) within five (5) days of receipt of the full purchase price. We will additionally provide copies of the completed and executed Certificate to the Applicant, the Division of Water Resources (DWR) and, if needed, other regulatory agencies. In addition, we will provide DWR with an updated copy of the Bank’s Ledger, reflecting the transaction. Transaction information in the updated Bank Ledger will include relevant Permit and Applicant information as well as the number and resource type of the debited Credits. Should your office have any questions, please contact me at 919.334.9123. Sincerely, Tiffani Bylow Restoration Systems, LLC

Restoration Systems, LLC
1101 Haynes St. Suite 211
Raleigh, North Carolina
Ph: [phone]
Fx: [phone]

Statement of Mitigation Credit Availability
Cape Fear 03030002 January 24, 2020
Army Corps of Engineers

Re: Availability of Compensatory Stream Credits
Project: McConnell Center, Lot 9 This document confirms that 0.60 Wetland Credits (Credits) from the following banks are currently available and all or a portion may be used, once transferred, for compensatory mitigation relative to the McConnell Center, Lot 9 project, and as proposed by Goria Youngs Mill, LLC (Applicant).
Bank Name Credits
Available Motes Creek 0.40 Orphan Creek 0.025 Rocky Top 0.175
TOTAL 0.60 The Applicant may ultimately purchase the Credits, if they are available, following Permit issuance. Should the Applicant purchase the Credits at that time, we will complete and execute the Mitigation Credit Transfer Certificate (Certificate) within five (5) days of receipt of the full purchase price. We will additionally provide copies of the completed and executed Certificate to the Applicant, the Division of Water Resources (DWR) and, if needed, other regulatory agencies. In addition, we will provide DWR with an updated copy of the Bank’s Ledger, reflecting the transaction. Transaction information in the updated Bank Ledger will include relevant Permit and Applicant information as well as the number and resource type of the debited Credits. Should your office have any questions, please contact me at 919.334.9123. Sincerely, Tiffani Bylow Restoration Systems, LLC

Wildlands Holdings IV, LLC · Wildlands Engineering, Inc · 1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104, Charlotte, NC 28203

Statement of Availability

January 24, 2020

RE: Availability of Riparian Wetland Credits for the “Goria Youngs Mill, LLC” project
Bank Name: Cane Creek Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bank Site: Bethel Branch Site
Bank Sponsor: Wildlands Holdings, IV, LLC
USACE Action ID: SAW-2016-02365
Riparian Wetlands Credits Needed: 0.2 acres
Riparian Wetlands Credits Available: 0.94 acres
Cape Fear 03030002 River Basin

Dear Mr. Pete Goria,

Wildlands Holdings IV, LLC has the above-mentioned riparian wetland credits from the Cane
Creek Umbrella Mitigation Bank: Bethel Branch Site to satisfy the mitigation requirements
related to the above-mentioned project. The project is located within the service area (HUC
03030002) of the Bank.

Credits may be reserved for a period of 12 months upon the receipt of a non-refundable
deposit of 10% of the purchase price. Should credits not be reserved, they will be sold on a first
come, first serve basis. Credit prices will be guaranteed for a period of 6 months from the date
of this letter and are then subject to change.

An invoice for this transaction will be sent upon your request and we will reserve the credits
and price for a period of 30 days from invoice. This letter is a Statement of Availability as of the
date provided – it is not a reservation of credits nor a guarantee of price. Credits will be sold on
a first come, first serve basis.

Final transfer of credits will occur upon completion of the Mitigation Responsibility Transfer
Form within the 404 permit.

We appreciate the opportunity to assist you with your mitigation requirements. Please contact
me at 205-807-0800 or [e-mail] if you have any questions or need any
additional information.

Wildlands Holdings IV, LLC · Wildlands Engineering, Inc · 1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104, Charlotte, NC 28203

Sincerely,

Ian M. Hazelhoff
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Land Acquisition
[e-mail]
O: [phone] ext. 120
M: [phone]

Cc: Ms. Katie Merritt, NC Division of Water Resources (bi-annually)
Mr. Bob Zarzecki, Soil and Environmental Consultants, PA

Wildlands Holdings IV, LLC · Wildlands Engineering, Inc · 1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104, Charlotte, NC 28203

Statement of Availability

January 24, 2020

RE: Availability of Riparian Wetland Credits for the “Goria Youngs Mill, LLC” project
Bank Name: Cane Creek Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bank Site: Bethel Branch Site
Bank Sponsor: Wildlands Holdings, IV, LLC
USACE Action ID: SAW-2016-02365
Riparian Wetlands Credits Needed: 0.2 acres
Riparian Wetlands Credits Available: 0.94 acres
Cape Fear 03030002 River Basin

Dear Mr. Pete Goria,

Wildlands Holdings IV, LLC has the above-mentioned riparian wetland credits from the Cane
Creek Umbrella Mitigation Bank: Bethel Branch Site to satisfy the mitigation requirements
related to the above-mentioned project. The project is located within the service area (HUC
03030002) of the Bank.

Credits may be reserved for a period of 12 months upon the receipt of a non-refundable
deposit of 10% of the purchase price. Should credits not be reserved, they will be sold on a first
come, first serve basis. Credit prices will be guaranteed for a period of 6 months from the date
of this letter and are then subject to change.

An invoice for this transaction will be sent upon your request and we will reserve the credits
and price for a period of 30 days from invoice. This letter is a Statement of Availability as of the
date provided – it is not a reservation of credits nor a guarantee of price. Credits will be sold on
a first come, first serve basis.

Final transfer of credits will occur upon completion of the Mitigation Responsibility Transfer
Form within the 404 permit.

We appreciate the opportunity to assist you with your mitigation requirements. Please contact
me at 205-807-0800 or [e-mail] if you have any questions or need any
additional information.

Wildlands Holdings IV, LLC · Wildlands Engineering, Inc · 1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104, Charlotte, NC 28203

Sincerely,

Ian M. Hazelhoff
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Land Acquisition
[e-mail]
O: [phone] ext. 120
M: [phone]

Cc: Ms. Katie Merritt, NC Division of Water Resources (bi-annually)
Mr. Bob Zarzecki, Soil and Environmental Consultants, PA

   McConnell Center - Lot 9 USGS Topographic Map

McConnell Center - Lot 9
USDA Guilford County Soil Survey (Sheets 28 & 29)
Proposed Building288,000 sf86 Trailer Parking Spaces360'800'74± Parking Spaces50± DOCK SPACESFIRE ACCESS
82± Parking Space
s 41 Trailer Parking Spaces(ALTERNATE - APPROXIMATELY340 AUTOMOBILE PARKING SPACES)AEDCB165432123456ABCDEDate:Sheet:DECEMBER, 201919-061Drawn:Check:Job Number:PRELIM
INARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONArchitecture Engineering Interior DesignMcCONNELL CENTER DRIVE
GREENSBORO, NORTH CAROLINA
PROPOSED LOT 9
McCONNELL CENTER Triad Design Group, P.C.4807-C Koger BoulevardGreensboro, NC 27407Telephone [phone]Facsimile 336-218-8010www.triad-designgroup.comNC Architecture Reg. 50709NC Engineering Lic. C-1108SHEET TITLE:NODATEDESCRIPTIONThis drawing & the details herein, as an instrument ofservice, is the property of Triad Design Group, PC, andmay be used only for this specific project and shall notbe loaned, copied, or reproduced in any form withoutexpressed written consent from Triad Design Group,PC. Copyright © 2019. Triad Design Group, PC, Allrights reserved.Triad Design Group, PC, shall not be responsible forconstruction means, methods, techniques, orprocedures utilized by the contractor, nor for the safetyof public or contractor's employees; or for the failure ofthe contractor to carry out the work in accordance withthe contract documents.

.REVISIONS:DATEDESCRIPTIONSUBMITTALS:LAHEXH 1CADOVERALLSITE PLAN
AEDCB165432123456ABCDEDate:Sheet:DECEMBER, 201919-061Drawn:Check:Job Number:PRELIM
INARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONArchitecture Engineering Interior DesignMcCONNELL CENTER DRIVE
GREENSBORO, NORTH CAROLINA
PROPOSED LOT 9
McCONNELL CENTER Triad Design Group, P.C.4807-C Koger BoulevardGreensboro, NC 27407Telephone [phone]Facsimile 336-218-8010www.triad-designgroup.comNC Architecture Reg. 50709NC Engineering Lic. C-1108SHEET TITLE:NODATEDESCRIPTIONThis drawing & the details herein, as an instrument ofservice, is the property of Triad Design Group, PC, andmay be used only for this specific project and shall notbe loaned, copied, or reproduced in any form withoutexpressed written consent from Triad Design Group,PC. Copyright © 2019. Triad Design Group, PC, Allrights reserved.Triad Design Group, PC, shall not be responsible forconstruction means, methods, techniques, orprocedures utilized by the contractor, nor for the safetyof public or contractor's employees; or for the failure ofthe contractor to carry out the work in accordance withthe contract documents.

.REVISIONS:DATEDESCRIPTIONSUBMITTALS:LAHEXH BUF 2CADSTREAM BUFFERIMPACTS 2
Proposed Building288,000 sf800'50± DOCK SPACES82± Parking Spac
e
s 41 Trailer Parking SpacesAEDCB165432123456ABCDEDate:Sheet:DECEMBER, 201919-061Drawn:Check:Job Number:PRELIM
INARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONArchitecture Engineering Interior DesignMcCONNELL CENTER DRIVE
GREENSBORO, NORTH CAROLINA
PROPOSED LOT 9
McCONNELL CENTER Triad Design Group, P.C.4807-C Koger BoulevardGreensboro, NC 27407Telephone [phone]Facsimile 336-218-8010www.triad-designgroup.comNC Architecture Reg. 50709NC Engineering Lic. C-1108SHEET TITLE:NODATEDESCRIPTIONThis drawing & the details herein, as an instrument ofservice, is the property of Triad Design Group, PC, andmay be used only for this specific project and shall notbe loaned, copied, or reproduced in any form withoutexpressed written consent from Triad Design Group,PC. Copyright © 2019. Triad Design Group, PC, Allrights reserved.Triad Design Group, PC, shall not be responsible forconstruction means, methods, techniques, orprocedures utilized by the contractor, nor for the safetyof public or contractor's employees; or for the failure ofthe contractor to carry out the work in accordance withthe contract documents.

.REVISIONS:DATEDESCRIPTIONSUBMITTALS:LAHEXH STR 1CADSTREAMIMPACT 1
AEDCB165432123456ABCDEDate:Sheet:DECEMBER, 201919-061Drawn:Check:Job Number:PRELIM
INARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONArchitecture Engineering Interior DesignMcCONNELL CENTER DRIVE
GREENSBORO, NORTH CAROLINA
PROPOSED LOT 9
McCONNELL CENTER Triad Design Group, P.C.4807-C Koger BoulevardGreensboro, NC 27407Telephone [phone]Facsimile 336-218-8010www.triad-designgroup.comNC Architecture Reg. 50709NC Engineering Lic. C-1108SHEET TITLE:NODATEDESCRIPTIONThis drawing & the details herein, as an instrument ofservice, is the property of Triad Design Group, PC, andmay be used only for this specific project and shall notbe loaned, copied, or reproduced in any form withoutexpressed written consent from Triad Design Group,PC. Copyright © 2019. Triad Design Group, PC, Allrights reserved.Triad Design Group, PC, shall not be responsible forconstruction means, methods, techniques, orprocedures utilized by the contractor, nor for the safetyof public or contractor's employees; or for the failure ofthe contractor to carry out the work in accordance withthe contract documents.

.REVISIONS:DATEDESCRIPTIONSUBMITTALS:LAHEXH STR 2CADSTREAMIMPACT 2(EXISTING)
AEDCB165432123456ABCDEDate:Sheet:DECEMBER, 201919-061Drawn:Check:Job Number:PRELIM
INARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONArchitecture Engineering Interior DesignMcCONNELL CENTER DRIVE
GREENSBORO, NORTH CAROLINA
PROPOSED LOT 9
McCONNELL CENTER Triad Design Group, P.C.4807-C Koger BoulevardGreensboro, NC 27407Telephone [phone]Facsimile 336-218-8010www.triad-designgroup.comNC Architecture Reg. 50709NC Engineering Lic. C-1108SHEET TITLE:NODATEDESCRIPTIONThis drawing & the details herein, as an instrument ofservice, is the property of Triad Design Group, PC, andmay be used only for this specific project and shall notbe loaned, copied, or reproduced in any form withoutexpressed written consent from Triad Design Group,PC. Copyright © 2019. Triad Design Group, PC, Allrights reserved.Triad Design Group, PC, shall not be responsible forconstruction means, methods, techniques, orprocedures utilized by the contractor, nor for the safetyof public or contractor's employees; or for the failure ofthe contractor to carry out the work in accordance withthe contract documents.

.REVISIONS:DATEDESCRIPTIONSUBMITTALS:LAHEXH STR 3CADSTREAMIMPACT 3(EXISTING)
AEDCB165432123456ABCDEDate:Sheet:DECEMBER, 201919-061Drawn:Check:Job Number:PRELIM
INARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONArchitecture Engineering Interior DesignMcCONNELL CENTER DRIVE
GREENSBORO, NORTH CAROLINA
PROPOSED LOT 9
McCONNELL CENTER Triad Design Group, P.C.4807-C Koger BoulevardGreensboro, NC 27407Telephone [phone]Facsimile 336-218-8010www.triad-designgroup.comNC Architecture Reg. 50709NC Engineering Lic. C-1108SHEET TITLE:NODATEDESCRIPTIONThis drawing & the details herein, as an instrument ofservice, is the property of Triad Design Group, PC, andmay be used only for this specific project and shall notbe loaned, copied, or reproduced in any form withoutexpressed written consent from Triad Design Group,PC. Copyright © 2019. Triad Design Group, PC, Allrights reserved.Triad Design Group, PC, shall not be responsible forconstruction means, methods, techniques, orprocedures utilized by the contractor, nor for the safetyof public or contractor's employees; or for the failure ofthe contractor to carry out the work in accordance withthe contract documents.

.REVISIONS:DATEDESCRIPTIONSUBMITTALS:LAHEXH WL 1CADTEMPORARYWETLAND IMPACT
82± Parking SpacesA EDCB165432123456ABCDEDate:Sheet:DECEMBER, 201919-061Drawn:Check:Job Number:PRELIM
INARYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONArchitecture Engineering Interior DesignMcCONNELL CENTER DRIVE
GREENSBORO, NORTH CAROLINA
PROPOSED LOT 9
McCONNELL CENTER Triad Design Group, P.C.4807-C Koger BoulevardGreensboro, NC 27407Telephone [phone]Facsimile 336-218-8010www.triad-designgroup.comNC Architecture Reg. 50709NC Engineering Lic. C-1108SHEET TITLE:NODATEDESCRIPTIONThis drawing & the details herein, as an instrument ofservice, is the property of Triad Design Group, PC, andmay be used only for this specific project and shall notbe loaned, copied, or reproduced in any form withoutexpressed written consent from Triad Design Group,PC. Copyright © 2019. Triad Design Group, PC, Allrights reserved.Triad Design Group, PC, shall not be responsible forconstruction means, methods, techniques, orprocedures utilized by the contractor, nor for the safetyof public or contractor's employees; or for the failure ofthe contractor to carry out the work in accordance withthe contract documents.

.REVISIONS:DATEDESCRIPTIONSUBMITTALS:LAHEXH WL 2CADNON-PERMITTEDFILL REMOVAL
NCHPO HPOWEB
Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan,
Local districts & boundaries
Local individual resources & centerpoints
Local Landmark
Local Landmark, Gone
Local HD Center Point
Surveyed Only individual resources & centerpoints
Surveyed Only
Surveyed in NRHD
1/30/2020, 6:58:23 PM 0 0.25 0.50.13 mi
0 0.4 0.80.2 km
1:18,056
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office
State of North Carolina DOT, Esri, HERE, Garmin, INCREMENT P, NGA, USGS |
Ja n 30 , 20 20¯
No rth Carol ina F loo dpl ai n Mapp ing Prog ram
McConnell Lot 9 – Project History
Page 1 of 2
McConnell Center Lot 9
Project History

April 26, 2004 – USACE site visit with ECS Limited for a prospective buyer (not the owner), in
which the USACE confirmed two jurisdictional streams, the drained pond and several wetland
areas (not delineated at that time) on Lot 9. The owner was first made aware of this USACE site
visit and findings in the October 25, 2018 USACE notice (see below).

November 25, 2013 – DWR On-Site Determination for Applicability of Jordan Lake Riparian
Buffer Rules & Mitigation Rules. Documenting a site visit on Lot 1 (only) between ECS
Carolinas, LLP, DWR and USACE.

December 12, 2014 – PCN Application for McConnell Center – Lot 1.

October 29, 2014 – DEMLR Erosion & Sedimentation Control Plan Approval for Lot 1.

January 22, 2015 – DWR Request for Additional Information.

January 30, 2015 – ECS Limited email providing Additional Information.

March 11, 2015 – ECS Limited email providing Additional Information.

March 25, 2015 – ECS Limited letter providing Response & Additional Information.

April 10, 2015 – USACE NWP39 Verification (SAW-2013-02235) for Lot 1.

April 21, 2015 – DWR 401 Approval (DWR#14-1310) for Lot 1.

May 8, 2015 – DEMLR Erosion & Sedimentation Control Plan Approval for Lot 1. Including
the “Waste Area Plan” within the pond on Lot 9.

February 23, 2016 – Email from USACE to DWR regarding a USACE compliance site visit for
the McConnell Center road crossing to Lot 1. However, acknowledge the existing crossing to Lot
9 and clearing activities on Lot 9 to include work within the pond area. Stating … “However,
there is an existing pond basin on this tract that was drained several years ago and has grown
up in cattails and wetland trees (green ash?/red maple?). I couldn’t see much into the tract, but
it appears that they may have converted some of this old pond basin into a sediment basin, as
there were several rows of silt fence lined across this area. We may want to look at a little more
McConnell Lot 9 – Project History
Page 2 of 2
closely soon.” This email was not provided to the owner and was only obtained from a search of
DWR online file number 20141310 by the owner’s representatives after receipt of the October
25, 2018 USACE notice.

June 29, 2016 – DEMLR Erosion & Sedimentation Control Plan Approval for Lot 1.

January 18, 2018 – DEMLR Erosion & Sedimentation Control Plan Approval for Lot 1.
Including plan modification showing a permanent BMP for future retention pond within the pond
area and expanded waste area west of the pond area.

June 14, 2018 – ECS Southeast, LLP submittal of Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination
(PJD) request to the USACE for McConnell Center Lots 1, 7, 8 & 9. Identified pond area as a
“BMP”.

August 23, 2018 – USACE & DWR site visit with ECS Southeast, LLP to verify.

October 25, 2018 – USACE Notice of Unauthorized Discharge of Fill into WOTUS.

February 25, 2019 – Brooks Pierce Response to USACE.

May 30, 2019 – Site meeting with USACE, DWR, owner and their representatives. The USACE
and DWR agreed to wait to review an after-the-fact permit application and wetland restoration
plan to resolve the unauthorized discharge of fill described in the October 25, 2018 USACE
Notice.

May 30, 2019 to January 30, 2020 – Site surveys, design and engineering efforts were
conducted by the owner’s representatives in an effort to prepare the necessary permit drawings
suitable to request the after-the-fact application and wetland restoration agreed upon during the
May 30, 2019 site visit. The USACE and DWR were kept abreast of the progress towards this
effort.

* Note: Not all of the documents referenced above are provided in the PCN application but can
be provided upon request.

A
I
SAW- 2013 -02235 Special Conditions:
1) Please note that future phases of the McConnell Center commercial/industrial Park and related
activities may be considered part of a single and complete project. Impacts of these future phases
may be considered cumulative, with respect to compensatory mitigation and Nationwide Permit
thresholds, with impacts permitted during earlier phases authorized and documented under
Action Ili: SAW- 2013 -02235 and related Action IDs. Current cumulative impacts to waters of the
US for this single and complete project include permanent impacts to 0.018 acre of wetlands and
140 linear feet (0.02 acre) of stream channel (loss of waters). This amounts to a total loss of waters
of the US of 0.038 acre.
Corps Regulatory Official - - Date 4/10/2015
David E Bailey
Expiration Date of Verification: 03/18/2017
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Pat McCrory Donald R. van der Vaart
Governor Secretary
April 21, 2015
AIROG McConnell LLC
Attn: Buddy Seymour
5603 New Garden Village Dr.
Greensboro NC 27410
DWR # 14 -1310
Guilford County
Subject: APPROVAL OF 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION WITH ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
McConnell Center— Lot 1
Dear Mr. Seymour:
You have our approval for the impacts listed below for the purpose described in your
application dated December 12, 2014, received by the Division of Water Resources (Division)
December 19, 2014, with subsequent information on January 30, 2015, March 11, 2015 and
March 26, 2015. These impacts are covered by the attached Water Quality General
Certification Number 3890 and the conditions listed below. This certification is associated with
the use of Nationwide Permit Number 39 once it is issued to you by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers. Please note that you should get any other federal, state or local permits before
proceeding with your project, including those required by (but not limited to) Sediment and
Erosion Control, Non - Discharge, and Water Supply Watershed regulations.
This approval requires you to follow the conditions listed in the enclosed certification(s) or
general permit and the following additional conditions:
1. The following impacts are hereby approved provided that all of the other specific and
general conditions of the Certification are met. No other impacts are approved,
including incidental impacts. [15A NCAC 02B .0506(b)(c)]
Impact Area Temporary /Permanent Impact Amount
404/401 Wetlands Permanent 0.018 acres
Streams Permanent 140 linear feet
Winston -Salem Regional Office
Location: 450 W. Hanes Mill Rd. Suite 300. Winston- Salem, North Carolina 27105
Phone: 336 =776 -98001 FAX: 336 - 776 -9797; Customer Sefvice: 1-877-623-6748
Internet: http: r 1portal.ncdenr.orglwebiuvq!ssis
An Equal Opportunity ; Affirmative Action Employer
AIROG McConnell LLC
DWR# 14 -1310
401 APPROVAL
Page 2 of 3
2. This approval is for the purpose and design described in your application. The plans and
specifications for this project are incorporated by reference as part of the Certification.
if you change your project, you must notify the Division and you may be required to
submit a new application package with the appropriate fee. If the property is sold, the
new owner must be given a copy of this approval letter and General
Certifications) /Permit /Authorization and is responsible for complying with all
conditions. [15A NCAC 02B .0507(d)( 2)]
3. The proposed project must comply with the City of Greensboro's local water supply
ordinance approved by the N.C. Environmental Management Commission (EMC) as
required under the Jordan Lake Water Supply Watershed: Protection and Maintenance
of Riparian Areas (Jordan Buffer Rule) 15A NCAC 02B .0267.
4. You are required to provide one copy of the approved SMP, including plan details on
full -sized plan sheets, with proof of the City of Greensboro's approval. The approved
SMP shall be submitted to the DWR 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit (1617 Mail Service
Center, Raleigh, NC 27699 -1617) before any impacts authorized in this certification
occur. After it is approved and submitted to the Division, the SMP may not be modified
without prior written authorization from the City of Greensboro If the SMP is modified
in the future, then you shall provide one modified SMP with proof of approval to the
DWR 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit prior to the commencement of the modifications.
15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)( 5)]
This approval and its conditions are final and binding unless contested. [G.S. 143- 215.51
This Certification can be contested as provided in Articles 3 and 4 of General Statute 150B by
filing a written petition for an administrative hearing to the Office of Administrative Hearings
hereby known as OAH) within sixty (60) calendar days.
A petition form may be obtained from the OAH at http: / /www.ncoah.com/ or by calling the
OAH Clerk's Office at (919) 431 -3000 for information. A petition is considered filed when the
original and one (1) copy along with any applicable OAH filing fee is received in the OAH during
normal office hours (Monday through Friday between 8:00am and 5:00pm, excluding official
state holidays).
The petition may be faxed to the OAH at (919) 431 -3100, provided the original and one copy of
the petition along with any applicable OAH filing fee is received by the OAH within five (5)
business days following the faxed transmission.
Mailing address for the OAH:
If sending via US Postal Service:
Office of Administrative Hearings
6714 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -6714
AIROG McConnell LLC
DWR# 14 -1310
401 APPROVAL
Page 3 of 3
If sending via delivery service (UPS, FedEx, etc):
Office of Administrative Hearings
1711 New Hope Church Road
Raleigh, NC 27609 -6285
One (1) copy of the petition must also be served to DENR:
John Evans, General Counsel
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
1601 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1601
This letter completes the review of the Division under section 401 of the Clean Water Act.
Please contact Sue Homewood at 336- 776 -9693 or sue.homewood(@- ncdenr.gov if you have any
questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
W. Corey Basinger
Regional Supervisor
Water Quality Regional Operations
Division of Water Resources
Enclosures: GC 3890
cc: Eric McClanahan, ECS Carolinas (via email)
David Bailey, USACE Raleigh Regulatory Field Office (via email)
Virginia Spillman, City of Greensboro
DWR WSRO 401 files
DWR 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
47« f/lcCsn^l Canter Diiv
QSmw TowMhip. Euilhnt Ciianty
GrBflnsioro/NarfA Caro?*
Homewood, Sue
From: Bailey, David E SAW <[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2016 12:27 PM
To: Homewood, Sue
Subject: RE: McConnell Center road crossing compliance visit; SAW -2013-02235
Attachments: 20160219_124352_resizedjpg; 20160219_124402_resizedjpg; 20160219_124524
resizedjpg; 20160219_124547_resizedjpg; 20160219_124733_resizedjpg; 20160219_
124908_resizedjpg; 20160219_124952_resizedjpg; 20160219_125014_resizedjpg;
20160219_125020_resizedjpg; 20160219_130936_resizedjpg
Original Message -----
From: Bailey, David E SAW[mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, February 22, 2016 8:23 AM
To: Homewood, Sue <[e-mail]>
Subject: McConnell Center road crossing compliance visit; SAW -2013-02235
Hi Sue. Hope you had a good weekend. Just an update to let you know that I did visit the above project on the way back
to the office on Friday. The pipe is installed including the upstream headwall. The downstream headwall is present, but
not installed yet. The pipe itself looks to be the appropriate length and appears to be buried —V. The rip rap pad may be
up to 10' too long (based on pacing, didn't have a tape with me) and is not keyed in flush with the stream bed. My permit
doesn't specifically address the above but the plans do show the rip rap extending no higher than the top of the stream
bed elevation. Basically, the top layer of rip rap appears to be sitting on top of the stream bed.
The water upstream of the crossing was fairly clear whereas the water coming out of the pipe was turbid. However, upon
further investigation the turbid water was entering the stream from the east side of the crossing via a rip rap lined ditch
approximately 5-10' upstream of the pipe inlet. This water was coming from a stormwater pipe that seemed to be
discharge from a stormwater pond related to the construction ongoing on the parcel east of our subject crossing. The
water in the stormwater pond was extremely turbid, though I couldn't immediately identify any turbid water entering the
stormwater pond.
I have pictures of all of this and will forward them soon.
Also, I noticed that there is a crossing over our subject stream at the far upstream end of our parcel just south of 1-40.
The surface of the crossing is muddy and very recently used; I originally thought that this might be a violation. However,
upon further inspection this crossing had mature vegetation on the side slopes and large roots visible in the fill, so it must
have been there for several years. I appears that the equipment used to clear our site, as well as the property to the
west, used this existing crossing. Also, the pipe under this crossing is very old and mangled at the inlet, resulting in severe
active erosion around the inlet. Nothing for the Corps to do here, just a heads up.
Lastly, I walked the boundary of the parcel and found either silt fence or vegetated diversion berms in place along the
entire perimeter. Buffers of at least 30' are present throughout. There appears to be no ongoing work on the parcel to
the west, other than the clearing which finished up weeks ago. However, there is an existing pond basin on this tract that
was drained several years ago and has grown up in cattails and wetland trees (green ash?/red maple?). I couldn't see
much into the tract, but it appears that they may have converted some of this old pond basin into a sediment basin, as
there were several rows of silt fence lined across this area. We may want to look at a little more closely soon.
Let me know if you have any questions. I'd like to discuss with you before pursuing the rip rap pad issue. Thanks.
Dave Bailey
David E. Bailey, PWS
Regulatory Project Manager
US Army Corps of Engineers
CE -SAW -RG -R
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
Phone: [phone], Ext. 30.
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we
continue to do so, please complete the Customer Satisfaction Survey located at
Blockedhttp://corpsmapu.usace.army.miI/cm_apex/f?p=136:4:0.

Writer’s Direct Dial: 336-271-3134 Writer’s Direct Fax: [phone] Email: [e-mail]
Brooks, Pierce, McLendon, Humphrey & Leonard, L.L.P.
Attorneys and Counsellors at Law

February 25, 2018

VIA EMAIL [ [e-mail]; [e-mail] ]

Colonel Robert J. Clark, District Commander
c/o Mrs. Jean B. Gibby, Acting Chief, Raleigh Division, and
Mr. David E. Bailey, Regulatory Project Manager, Raleigh Division
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - Wilmington District
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587

RE: SAW – 2018-02038

Dear Mrs. Gibby and Mr. Bailey:

I am writing again on behalf of the owner of the property that is the subject of the above-
referenced matter, and with reference to the letter dated October 25, 2018 from Colonel Clark to
Mr. Pete Goria and Ms. Carolyn E. Goria, and my response letters to the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (“Corps”) dated November 14, December 14, 2018 and January 14, 2019. Thank you
for your patience and cooperation in allowing us additional time to obtain and review existing
records and information to better understand the circumstances.

This letter is intended to: (1) provide additional information and documents relevant to the
assertions of the October 25 letter; (2) address the regulatory context; and (3) request a meeting to
discuss the factual and regulatory circumstances so that we may develop a proposed resolution that
will be acceptable to both the owners and the Corps.

1. Additional Information and Records

a. Property Ownership

Mr. and Mrs. Goria acquired the property in 1990 and transferred title to the current owner,
Goria Youngs Mill, LLC in 2012. See Guilford County Registry of Deeds at Bk R 7427 Pg 2495,
Bk 3813 Pg 1109, and Bk 3813 Pg 1111.

b. Impoundment and Berm/Spillway Structures

It appears that the impoundment (a/k/a “Blanchard Dam”) was constructed in the 1960s,
around the same time Highway 85 was developed. See Exhibit 1 (U.S.G.S. Topo Map 1952,
Ms. Jean Gibby and Mr. David Bailey
February 25, 2019
Page 2

updated 1968 and 1970). It also appears that the impoundment area encompassed uplands that had
been used for agricultural uses - fields of row crops. See, e.g., Exhibit 2 (Aerial Photo, 1959). We
are continuing our efforts to obtain additional documents and information regarding the
impoundment area.

The October 25 letter refers to the relocation of a stream to an excavated channel east of
the pond, labeled “Approx. Relocated Stream” on the “Approximate Pond-Grading Conditions”
map. This bypass channel was not constructed by the current owners and was in place at least as
early as 1982. See, e.g., Exhibit 3 (1982 “Blanchard Dam” Dam Safety Inspection report with
sketch showing the bypass channel, labeled and referred to as a diversion berm / emergency
spillway). Based on our research, it appears that this bypass channel was constructed at the same
time as the impoundment, most likely to divert flood flows and/or sediment around the
impoundment area, which we understand was historically a common practice in the piedmont of
NC. To our knowledge the stream has been diverted to the bypass channel since its original
construction (sometime prior to 1982, most likely in the 1960’s). The owners neither constructed
this bypass channel nor diverted the stream to it.

c. Stream Features

i. Northwest Stream Feature

In the October 25 letter, the northwest stream feature is depicted as running into the former
impoundment area. However, the stream does not flow into the impoundment area, but rather
flows around the impoundment area to the east through the bypass channel. We understand that it
has flowed in that manner at least since 1990, when Mr. Goria acquired the property, and
apparently since the impoundment and bypass channel were constructed in the late 1960s.

ii. West Stream Feature

The October 25 letter depicts “approximate pre-grading conditions,” including an “Approx.
west stream” feature flowing into the impoundment area. It appears that the assertion regarding
the approximate location and extent of the stream feature is based on an April 26, 2004 site visit
by Corps staff. Staff notes indicate the feature is “unimportant,” which indicates no mitigation
would be required for impacts to this feature.

Precipitation records indicate there was about a half-inch of rain on the day of the site visit,
which would have caused surface run-off. See Piedmont Triad Airport Station records
[https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/nc/greensboro/KGSO/date/2004-4-26];
Burlington-Alamance Regional Station records
[https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/nc/burlington/KBUY/date/2004-4-26 ].

We are continuing our review and analyses (including seeking additional documentation)
regarding this topographical feature. From our review and analyses of available documents and
information to date, it appears that while grading activities on the property impacted the area in
Ms. Jean Gibby and Mr. David Bailey
February 25, 2019
Page 3

question, it is unclear whether a jurisdictional stream feature was, in fact, present prior to the
grading activities. We look forward to discussing this issue with you to better understand the
Corps’s assertion of jurisdiction with respect to this feature.

d. Grading Activities

As noted in the October 25 letter, grading activities were carried out on the property
pursuant to Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plans approved by NC DEQ DEMLR.

2. Regulatory Context

Given the complex factual circumstances, the regulatory context seems unclear, including
regarding jurisdiction and potential means of resolution through restoration and/or after-the-fact
permitting. It is also unclear to us whether the Corps is asserting that the present owners are
responsible for addressing circumstances that existed prior to their ownership of the property.

3. Meeting Request

Due to the complex factual circumstances and unclear regulatory context, we believe it
would be productive to meet with you with a goal of understanding each other’s views so that we
may determine an efficient means of resolving this matter. I ask that you please contact me to
schedule a meeting at your convenience. Thank you for attention and consideration.

Sincerely,
Alexander Elkan
C: Mr. Pete Goria
George W. House, Esq.
Mr. Bob Zarzecki, S&EC, PA
Jurisdictional Determination RequestD. PROPERTY ACCESS CERTIFICATION3 4By signing below, I authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers (Corps) to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on-site investigations, if necessary, and issumg ajurisdictional determination pursuant to Section404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. I, theundersigned, am either a duly authorized owner of record of the property identified herein, oracting as the duly authorized agent of the owner of record of the property.See Attached Agent AuthorizationPrint NameCapacity: I_| Owner b^J Authorized Agent56/14/2018DateSignatureE. REASON FOR JD REQUEST: (Check as many as applicable)]] I mtend to constmct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would bedesigned to avoid all aquatic resources.J I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would bedesigned to avoid alljurisdictional aquatic resources under Corps authority.I •/1 I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which mayrequire authorization from the Corps, and the ID would be used to avoid and minimizeimpacts tojurisdictional aquatic resources and as an initial step in a future permitting)rocess.I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which mayrequire authorization from the Corps; this request is accompanied by my permit applicationand the ID is to be used m the permitting process.I intend to constmct/develop a project or perform activities in a navigable water of theU.S. which is included on the district Section 10 list and/or is subject to the ebb and flow ofthe tide.A Corps JD is requu-ed in order obtam my local/state authorization.I mtend to contest jurisdiction over a particular aquatic resource and request the Corpsconfirm that jurisdiction does/does not exist over the aquatic resource on the parcel.I believe that the site may be comprised entirely of dry land.Other:3 For NCDOT requests following the current NCDOT/USACE protocols, skip to Part E.4 If there are multiple parcels owned by different parties, please provide the following for each additional parcel on acontinuation sheet.5 Must provide agent authorization fonn/letter signed by owner(s).Version: May 2017 Page 3
Jurisdictional Determination RequestF. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD) TYPE (Select One)I am requesting that the Corps provide a preliminary JD for the property identified herein.A Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) provides an indication that there maybe "waters of the United States" or "navigable waters of the United States"on a property.PJDs are sufficient as the basis for permit decisions. For the purposes of permitting, allwaters and wetlands on the property will be treated as if they are jurisdictional "waters ofthe United States". PJDs cannot be appealed (33 C.F.R. 331.2); however, a PJD is"preliminary" m the sense that an approved JD can be requested at any time. PIDs donot expire.I am requesting that the Corps provide an approved ID for the property identified herein.An Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD) is a determination thatjurisdictional "waters of the United States" or "navigable waters of the UnitedStates" are either present or absent on a site. An approved ID identifies the lunits ofwaters on a site determined to be jurisdictional under the Clean Water Act and/orRivers and Harbors Act. Approved IDs are sufficient as the basis for permitdecisions. AJDs are appealable (33 C.F.R. 331.2). The results of the AJD will beposted on the Corps website. A landowner, permit applicant, or other "affectedparty" (33 C.F.R. 331.2) who receives an AID may rely upon the AID for five years(subject to certam limited exceptions explained in Regulatory Guidance Letter 05-02).I am unclear as to which JD I would like to request and require additional informationto inform my decision.G. ALL REQUESTSMap of Property or Project Area. This Map must clearly depict the boundaries of thereview area.Size of Property or Review Area o^-^-1 acres.The property boundary (or review area boundary) is clearly physically marked on the site.Version: May 2017 Page 4
Jurisdictional Determination RequestH. REQUESTS FROM CONSULTANTS^ Project Coordinates (Decimal Degrees): Latitude: 36.056112Longitude: -79.705420^ A legible delineation map depicting the aquatic resources and the property/review area.Delineation maps must be no larger than 11x17 and should contain the following: (Corpssignature of submitted survey plats will occur after the submitted delmeation map has beenreviewed and approved).• North Arrow• Graphical Scale• Boundary of Review Area• Date• Location of data points for each Wetland Determination Data Form or tributaryassessment reach.For Approved Jurisdictional Determinations:• Jurisdictional wetland features should be labeled as Wetland Waters of the US, 404wetlands, etc. Please include the acreage of these features.• Jurisdictional non-wetland features (i.e. tidal/navigable waters, tributaries,impoundments) should be labeled as Non-Wetland Waters of the US, stream, tributary,open water, relatively permanent water, pond, etc. Please include the acreage or linearlength of each of these features as appropriate.• Isolated waters, waters that lack a significant nexus to navigable waters, or non-jurisdictional upland features should be identified as Non-Jurisdictional. Pleaseinclude a justification in the label regarding why the feature is non-jurisdictional (i.e."Isolated", "No Significant Nexus", or "Upland Feature"). Please include the acreageor Imear length of these features as appropriate.For Preliminary Jurisdictional Determmations:• Wetland and non-wetland features should not be identified as Jurisdictional, 404,Waters of the United States, or anything that implies jurisdiction. These features can beidentified as Potential Waters of the United States, Potential Non-wetland Waters ofthe United States, wetland, stream, open water, etc. Please include the acreage andlinear length of these features as appropriate.Completed Wetland Determination Data Forms for appropriate region(at least one wetland and one upland form needs to be completed for each wetland type)6 Please refer to the guidance document titled "Survey Standards for Jurisdictional Determinations" to ensure that thesupplied map meets the necessary mapping standards. littp://\v\\'\v.saw.usace.armv.mil/Missions/Reaulatoi-y-Permit-Program/Jurisdiction/Version: May 2017 Page 5
1ZJurisdictional Determination RequestCompleted appropriate Jurisdictional Determination form• PJDs, please complete a Preluninary Jurisdictional Determination Form7 and include theAquatic Resource Table• AJDs^please complete an Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form8Vicinity MapAerial PhotographUSGS Topographic MapSoil Survey MapOther Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map, Proposed SitePlan, previous delineation maps, UDAR maps, FEMA floodplain maps)Landscape Photos (if taken)NCSAM and/or NCWAM Assessment Forms and Rating SheetsNC Division of Water Resources Stream Identification FormsOther Assessment Forms7 \wvw.saw.Lisace.armv.mil/Portals/59/docs/re2ulatorv/regdocs/JD/RGL 08-02 App A Prelim JD Form fiHabje.pdf8 Please see http://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/RegLilatoi'v'-Permit-Program/Jurisdiction/Principal Purpose: The information that you provide will be used in evaluating your request to determinewhether there are any aquatic resources within the project area subject to federaljurisdiction under the regulatoryauthorities referenced above.Routine Uses: This mformation may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal, state, and localgovernment agencies, and the public, and may be made available as part of a public notice as required by federallaw. Your name and property location where federal jurisdiction is to be determined will be included in theapprovedjurisdictional determination (AJD), which will be made available to the public on the District's websiteand on the Headquarters USAGEwebsite.Disclosure: Submission of requested information is voluntary; however, if information is not provided, therequest for an AJD cannot be evaluated nor can an AID be issued.Version: May 2017 - Page 6
i='--2^ .^^^^^•Z-^tiECS SOUTHEAST, LLP"Setting the Standard for Service"GeotechniGal • Constcuctlan Materials • Environmental • FacilitiesAgent AuthorizationI'tC. R.!t(f'.U''Tt,^ £nc|innL>f1ntf FEnn F t&?aHr. P.aiiialei.nl iSBal.iiireU r-irm ]';"!UOSC; flagialfKd EnrUuaurlnf] FNIH li'MProperty/Site:Address of Site:4.71 acres and 27,94 acres1301 Youngs Mill Road and 1299 YOUIIRS Mm RoadGreensboro, North CarolmaParcel Identification Number (PIN): 7894000056 and 7894101021Owner Information;Name; Goria Yoyags Mill LLC and. Gtadys M. Sears Revocable Ti-usj;Address; P.O. Box-39McLeaosville, North Cnrolina 27301Telephone Number: 336-339-4880Fax Number: _ N/A ^E-mail Address: petegorial@gmail,comProperty Owner Certification:I, the undersigned, a duly authorized owner of record of the property/properties Identified herein,do authorize representatives oftheWilmington District, U,S. Army Corps of.-Engmeers (USACE)and/ or the North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) to enter upon the propertyherein described for the purpose of conducting on-site investigations and issuing adetermination associated with Waters of the U,S. subject to FederaI/Statej'urisciiction underSection 404 and 401 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of1899.1 also authorize ECS to act In my behglf in the processing of this request and to furnishsupplemental information in support of this request, including stream/wetland matters incoordination with the USAGE and the NCDWR field verification and permit application:Property Owner Signature:Date;See attachedMay 16, 2018ECS Capital Services, PLLC • ECS Florida, LLC • ECS Mid-Allaniio, LLC - ECS Midwest, LLC - ECS Saillheasl, LLP • ECS Texas, LLPwww,eos|iniited.com
[Signature page to Agent Authorization for ECS Southeast, LLCfor 1299 and 1301 Youngs Mill Road]iria youngs Mill^LLC ^_ ^:C(IAO^-I/^me; J2@i?e^vaJL GoriaBy:.Name;Titl^" ManagerNaiA&TPierre A. Gbriyaka Pet& GoiiaTitle: ManagerOladys M. Sears Revocable Trustdated June 2,1992, as amended andrestated Februmy 26, 2008:Mary S. Truslow, as Co-Trustee of fl-ieGladys M. Sears Re.voc.able Trustdated June 2, 1992., as amended andrestated Febmary 26, 2008Marcia S. Regan, as Co-Trustee of theGladys M. Sears Revocable Trustdated .Time 1,1992, as amended andrestated February 26,2008
yfci/its/^Biy ib:i/' 33h-3 ('9-ai.y / UK WILLIAM iRUSLaw PAGE 04/04[Signature page l.o Agsiit Autlwrization for BCS Southeast, LLCfor 1299 and 130-1 YoungsMIU R(Md]Goria Youngs Mill, LLCBy:_Name: Carolyn E. OoriaTitle; ManagerBy;_Name: Pier,rc A. Goria aka Pete OoriaTitle; Mati^gfi):Gladys M. Sears Rcvocable Trustdated June 2, .1992, as amended andrestated February 2&, 2008;-^v^^~^Mswy S. Trtislow, as Co-ImsteeoffhcGladys M. Scars ReVocat>lc TrUStdated June 2,1992, as amended andrestated February 2$, 2008Marofo S. Regan, as Co-Trustee of theGladys M. S&ar8 Revooable Trustdated June 2,1992, ag amended andrestated February 2$, 2008
[Signature page to Agent AuUiorization for ECS Southeast, LLCfor 1299 and 1301 Youngs Mill Road]Goria Youngs Mill, LLCBy:_Name: Carolyn E. Goria.Title; Manager•&'By:_Name; Pien'e A, Goria aka Pete GoriaTitle: ManagerGladys M, Sears Revocable Trustdated June 2, 1992, as amended andrestated February 26, 2008;Mary S, Truslow. as Co-Tmstee of theGladys M. Sears Revocable Tnist[ated J Line 2, 1992, as ameiyie^i'idre^e^ February 26,^00?^t'^_^~-^^.^-u'cia S, Regan, as Co-Trustee of t)Gladys M. Sears Revocable Trustdated June 2,1992, as amended andrestated February 26, 2008
ECS SOUTHEAST, LLP"Seiting the Standard for Sewice"S^ESS^.,. Geotechnical • Consli-uctjon Materials • Environmental • FaciiiliesHi-; Ru'.lis;!Sl?il Enuinotin'in.i F'um F- 10711l-li" Ru]]rt!-iwl 6.;ol™i'j|6 r-|im U-'i'la^C R^l^GfE'd Enyti'^^iino Hmt 'i3^9Agent AuthorizationProperty/Site; Lot 1 PB 179/53-54; Lot 7, PB 179/53-54; and Lot 8, PB 179/53-54Address of Site: 4743 Me-Cormen Center Drive; 4745 McConnell Center Drive; and4754 Near MeConnelI Center DriveGreensboro, North CarolinaParcel Identification Number (PIN): 7894202233, 7893391690 and 7893589957Owner fnformatlon;Name: Airog McConneU. LLC and Sears McConnell Properties LLCAddress; P.O. Box. 39McLeansville, North Carolina 27313Telephone Number: 336-339-4880Fax Number: N/AE-mail Address; [e-mail] Owner Certification:t, the undersigned, a duly authorized owner of record of the property/properties identified herein,do authorize representatives of the Wtlmington District, U.S, Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE)and/ or the North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) to enter upon the propertyherein described for the purpose of conducting on-site investigations and issuing adetermination associated with Waters of the U.S, subject to Federal/State jurisdiction underSection 404 and 401 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of1899.1 also authorize ECS to act in my behalf In the processincf of this request and to furnishsupplemental information in support of this request, inclLlding stream/wetland matters incoordination with the USAGE and the NCDWR field veriffcatian and permit application:Property Owner Signature; See attachedMay 16, 2018Date;ECS Capital Seivices. PLLC • ECS Florida, LLC • ECS Mid.Ailantlc, LLC • ECS Midwssl, LLC • ECS Soulhaasl, LLP • ECS Texas, LLPwww.ecslimited.corn
[Signature page to Agent Authorization for ECS Soutlieast, LLCfor Lots 1, 7 and 8 of Plat Book 179, Pages 53 and 54, GuilfordCounty Register of Deeds]Property Owners;SearsMpnncll Propgqics, LjF\CMe^-Mame*'/ MaYcia S. ReganTitle: ManagerName: John R. SearsTitle; ManagerBy;_Name: Mary S, TruslowTitle: ManagerAirog McConneU, LLCBy:_Name: Carolyn E, GoriaTitle: ManagerByLName: Pierre A, Goria aka Pete GoriaTitle; Manager
[Signature page to Agent Authorization for ECS Southeast, LLCfor Lots 1,7 and 8 of Plat Book 179, Pages 53 and 54, OvllfordGouinty Register of Deeds]Property Owners:Sears McComiell Properties, LLCBy:_Name; Marcia S. ReganTitle:. MqnaRec, . -By; j^i^-^ /\y^'s^^<,N4m^; JohnK-SlTUte)' ManagerBy:_Name: Mary S. TruslowTitle: ManagerAirog McCoimsUi LLCBy:.Name: Carolyn E. GoriaTitb: ManagerBY:, „Name: .Pierre A. Goria a3ea Pete GoriaTitle: Manager
uo/io/^oiy its: 11 .ajb-j fj-aiy / LIIT WlL-L.-LHr/l IKU^LUW I^Htafc. U^/U^[Signature page to A.gcnt Aathurizal.ion for ,ECS Soutbeasjl., LLCfor Lots 1,7 and 8 of Plat Book 179, Pages 53 and 54, GuilfordCounty Register of Deeds]'Property Owners:SKU-S McConnd! Properties, 1,LCBy:_Narrtc; Marcia S. RcganTitle; ManagerBy:_Name: John R. SearsTide; ManagerBy^^^sZW|^3Name; Mary S. T'raslowTit]?; ManagerAirog McConnelI, LLCBy:_Name; Carolyn R GoriaTide: ManagerBy;_, _Name; Ptcrre A. Goria aka Pete CTorioTitle; Manager
[Signature page to Agent Autliorizatlon for ECS Southeast, LLCfor Lots 1,7 and 8 of Plat Book 179, Pages 53 and 54, GuilfordCounty Register of Deeds]Property Owners;Sears McCo.nnslI Properties, LLCBy:_Name: MarciaS.ReganTitle: ManagerBy:_Name; John R. SearsTitie: ManagerBy:_Hame: Mary S. TruslowTitle: ManagerAirog McConasU.? LLGBv^AA^-Gx^-^ G^LCjs^Name:J^el¥a^. Gor!Managerz^,,V^ftE'. PierreA.GoriaalcaPeteGoriaTitle; Manager
McL-inwill.-^Approximate Project Study AreaSfcl.ilu0 0.5 1Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan,METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), Mapmylndia, NGCC, ©OpenS treetMap contributors, and the GIS User CommunityLINCOLN HARMSMCCONNELLSITELOTS 1, 7,8 &9GUILFORD COUNTYNORTH CAROLINASITE LOCATION MAPGuilford County, NCmnBj;KJViprovcd By:WBFChecked By;WBFDate:5/23/2018ECS Project No.49:6952FIGURE 1
^. :^M '%;¥PI.M'"L. ^' - -7 <Ti <^\e.^^..N^^iLegendProject Study Area.-i^'' !^c. ?•}•<'}c^^^/y^/.'Wir^<^^^/"z, :1..^^^K"-.^'L:.-^>'•)) . r-lY-''\-'—,'\ ^h-.-v- '^\'-' ^^. <-y ^ )1;. ''-/^L:V --:-:.^---.^ , ;f/-..^,^A-~':-^<£^' •"^ "Y ' ^",^' n'p^^"?. ''r-^/; .v\-r-- "' ' . • M''T^^-i^\-.ii..^'"I I ^ ^LL S . - "- '- .~"\! . ^\...--'—-?-^—\'»;^1-..'^T'-_L^iwr^'-^^:.;^/^.• .~T\- •\ f- -'.-•S- ;;'i,Copt>Tgtit;p20]13Nati^5/23/2018FIGURE 2
GUILFORD COUNTYNORTH CAROUNACcB - Cecil sandy loam2-6% slopesCcC - Cecil sandy loam6-10% slopesChA - Chewacla loam0-2% slopes~ErS_- Eribn fine saady loam2-6% slopesEnC - Eabn. fine sandy loam6-10% slopesEnD - Boon fine sandy loam10-15% slopesMhB2 - Mecklenburg sandyday loam, 2-6% slopesW"-Water>TOWB By; | Checked By:WBFDate:5/23/201849:6952FIGURE 3
LegendProject Study AreaFlood Hazard ZonesZone TypeD 1% Annual Chance Flood HazardRegulatory FloodwaySpecial FloodwayArea of Undetermined Flood Hazard0.2% Annual Chance Flood HazardFuture Conditions 1% Annual Chance Flood HazardArea with Reduced Risk Due to LeveeMCCONNELLSFTELOTS 1,7,8 & 9GUILFORD COUNTYNORTH CAROLINAPANEL37107S9400J&37107S9300JGullford County, NCDrawn By:Date:5/23/2018FIGURE 4
LegendProject Study AreaCowardin CodeI I PEMIChPF01APUBHhR5UBHDate:5/23/2018FIGURE 5
LegendProject Study AreaStreamWetlandData PointCulvertBMPStream A-80 linear feet79.706973, 36.057008MCCONNELSITELOTS 1,7.8 & 9Wetland C-0.06 acres-79.706343, 36.056879Wetland A-0.12 acres-79.707425, 36.056973GUILFORD COUNTONORTH CAROLINAWetland E-0.01 acres79.701838,36.057612Stream B~1,064 linear feet-79.704921,36.057097Stream C~714 linear feet-79.70156, 36.056321APPROXIMATE WATERSOF THE B.S. ANDWETLANDS LOCATIONMAPNote:1. Jurisdictionid waters oftheUS.were delineated by ECS durirthe field reviews conducted on May 23,2018. FtaBmsmnmirkdlOaggug tape and posifiirecorded using a Trime GeuXH 2005tomi.htMGPS.ma.2.The features depicted have nut 'verified by the USAGE orNCDEQ-DWThis map is intended for plammigpurposes.Stream E-1080 linear feet-79.699146,36.054163Wetland D-0.37 acres-79.704099, 3G.055543Stream D~702 linear feet-79.700620, 36.054266ECS Project No.49:6952
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM. U.S. Army Corps of EngineersThis fomi should be completed by followmg the instructions provided m Section IV of the ID Form Instructional Guidebook.SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATIONA. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:WiImington, McConnell Site Lots 1, 7, 8, 9 (49:6952-A)C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND ENFOSMATION:State:North Carolina County/parish/borough: Guilford City: GreensboroCenter coordmates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 36.086519° N, Long. 79.295366° W.Universal Transverse Mercator:Name of nearest waterbody: UT to Little Alamance CreekName of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) Into which the aquatic resource flows: Little Alamance CreekName of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): Jordan LakeE] Check ifmap/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/ai-e available upon request.[_] Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on adifferent JD form.D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):D Office (Desk) Determination. Date:[3 Field Determination. Date(s):SECTION H: SUMMARY OF FINDINGSA. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.There Are no "navigable -waters of the U.S." wifhiu Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in thereview area. [Required][_| Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.[_] Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.Explain:B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.There Are "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required}1. Waters of the U.S.a. Indicate presence of waters ofU.S. in review area (check all that apply):n TNWs, including territorial seasD Wetlands adjacent to TNWs13 Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indu-ectly into TNWsNon-RPWs that flow du-ectly or indu-ectly mto TNWs13 Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWsD Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow du-ectly or mdirectly into TNWsD Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWsD Impoundments ofjurisdictional watersQ Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, includmg isolated wetlandsb. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:Non-wetland waters: 3,640 linear feet: 6 width (ft) and/or acres.Wetlands: 2.76 acres.c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1987 Delineation ManualElevation of established OHWM (if known):2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):Q Potentiall}' jm-isdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be notjurisdictional.Explain:Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.2 For purposes of this form, an KPW 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).3 Supporting documentation is presented in Section ffl.F.
SECTION m: CWA ANALYSISA. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWsThe agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, completeSection KI.A.l and Section BGE.D.l. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections ffl.A.1 and 2and Section III.D.L; otherwise, see Section ffl.B below.1. TNWIdentify TNW:Summarize rationale supporting determination:2. Wetland adj acent to TNWSummarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjaceuf:B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (EF ANY):This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helpsdetermine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries ofTNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanentwaters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3months). 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 ULD.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,skip to Section m.D.4.A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts andEPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between arelatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, eventhough 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 thewaterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation mustconsider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, foranalytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request isthe tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section ffl.B.l forthe tributary, Section UI.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section HI.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsiteand offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section HI.C below.1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW(i) General Area Conditions:Watershed size: Pick ListDrainage area: Pick ListAverage annual rainfall: inchesAverage annual snowfall: inches(ii) Physical Characteristics:(a) Relationship with TNW:D Tributary flows du-ectly into TNW.D Tributary flows through Pick List tributaries before entering TNW.Project waters are Pick List river miles from TNW.Project waters are Pick List river miles from RPW.Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.Project waters are Pick List aerial (sb-aight) miles from RPW.Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:Identify flow route to TNW5:Tributary stream order, if known:Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the aridWest.5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.
(b) General Tributary Characteristics fcheck all that apply'):Tributary is: D NaturalC] Artificial (man-made). Explain:D Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):Average width: 2-10 feetAverage depth: 0.5-4 feetAverage side slopes: 3:1.Primary tributaiy substrate composition (check all that apply):EX] Silts 13 Sands D ConcreteS Cobbles 13 Gravel D MuckBedrock S Vegetation. Type/% cover: 60%Q Other. Explain:Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:Presence ofrun/riffle/pool complexes. Explain:Tributary geometry: MeanderingTributary gradient (approximate average slope): 1-2 %(c) Flow:Tributary provides for: Seasonal flowEstimate average number of flow events in review area/year: 6-10Describe flow regime: Moderate to heavy baseflow.Other information on duration and volume:Surface flow is: Discrete and confined. Characteristics:Subsurface flow: Unlaiown. Explain findmgs:D Dye (or other) test performed:Tributaiy has (check all that apply):^ Bed and banks[X] OHWM" (check all indicators that apply):S clear, natural line unpressed on the bank Q the presence of litter and debris '^ changes in the character of soil Q destruction of ten'esta-ial vegetation^ shelving S the presence ofwrack lineE<] vegetation matted down, bent, or absent ^ sediment sorting^ leaf litter disturbed or washed away ^ scorn-13 sedunent deposition ^ multiple observed or predicted flow events|^ water stauung ^ abrupt change in plant communityD other (list):D Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:If factors other than the OHWM were used to determme lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):D High Tide Line indicated by: [Xl Mean High Water Mark indicated by:[_i oil or scum line along shore objects [X] survey to available datum;|_I fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ^ physical markmgs;[_] physical markings/characteristics ^ vegetation liiies/changes m vegetation types.D tidal gaugesD other (list):(iii) Chemical Characteristics:Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).Explain: Mostly Clear.Identify specific pollutants, if known:6A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or wherethe OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flowregime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), fhe agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.7Ibid.
(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):E<] Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width): 2-50 feet.13 Wetland fringe. Characteristics: Hydrophytic vegetation and soils.Habitat for:D Federally Listed species. Explain fmdings:D Fish/spawn areas. Explam findings:[_] Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain fmdings:^ Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings: Pools and deep creek/swamp.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: 2.76 acresWetland type. Explain: Headwater forest, bottomland hai-dwood forest, non-tidal fi-eshwater marsh.Wetland quality. Explain-.Natural.Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain: No.(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:Flow is: Perennial flow. Explain:Surface flow is: ConfinedCharacteristics:Subsurface flow: Unknown. Explain findings:D Dye (or other) test performed:(c) Wetland Adi acencv Determination with Non-TNW:E| Directly abuttingD Not du'ectly abuttmgD Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:D Ecological connection. Explain:D Separated by berm/ban-ier. Explain:(d) Proximity fRelationshiol to TNWProject wetlands are 5-10 river miles from TOW.Project waters .are 1-2 aerial (straight) mfles from TNW.Flow is from: Wetland to navigable waters,.Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the 10 - 20-year floodplain.(ii) Chemical Characteristics:Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil fika on surface; water quality; general watershedcharacteristics; etc.). Explain:Identify specific pollutants, if known:(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):D Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):D Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:D Habitat for:[_| Federally Listed species. Explain findings:[_] Fish/spawn areas. Explain fmdiags:Q Other envh-onmentally-sensitive species. Explam fmdings:D Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain fmdings:3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)All wetland(s) bemg considered m the cumulative analysis: 2Approximately ( 6.90 ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.
For each wedand, specify the following:Directly abuts? FVTN)Wetland A 00Wetland B (Y)Wetland C (Y)Size Cin acres'1-0.12-2.20-0.06Du-ectlv abuts? WN)Wetland D CY)Wetland E(Y)Size Cm acres')-0.37-0.01Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed: Tributaries in combination withadjacent wetlands have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to TNWs. Additionally, the tributaries on-site providehabitat and life cycle support functions for aqautic species. Also, the wetlands have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organiccarbon to support downstream foodwebs.C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATIONA significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performedby any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrityof a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributaiy, in combination with all of its adjacentwetlands, 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 flowof water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNVV, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacentwetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between atributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within oroutside of a floodplain is not solely detenninative of significant nexus.Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance anddiscussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:• Does the tributary, in combmation with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters toTNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?• Does the tributary, m combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and Ufecycle support functions for fish andother species, such as feeding, nesting, spawnmg, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?• Does the tributary, m combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to fransfer nutrients and organic carbon thatsupport downstream foodwebs?• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, orbiological integrity of the TNW?Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documentedbelow:1. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explainfmdings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself then go to Section ffl.D:2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly intoTNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the bibutary in combination with all of itsadjacent wetlands, then go to Section ffl.D:3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings ofpresence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go toSection DID:D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDENGS. THE SITBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ASE (CHECK ALLTHAT APPLY):1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:QTNWs: Imearfeet width (ft). Or, acres.n Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.2. RPWs that How directly or indirectly into TNWs.13 Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating thattributary is perennial: Highwater marks, strong Baseflow, strong banks.
Tributaries ofTNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically ttu'ee months each year) arejurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section UI.B. Provide rationale indicatmg diat tributary flowsseasonally: Water stained leaves, water marks with consistant base flow, observed seasonal flow.Provide estimates forjurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):[3 Tributary waters: SA through SE- 3,6401inear feet average 6' widthlinear feet width (ft).D Other non-wetland waters: acres.Identify type(s) of waters:3. Non-RPWs8 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.D Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly mto a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with aTNW isjurisdictional. Data supporting tliis conclusion is provided at Section ffl.C.Provide estimates forjurisdictional waters wifhia the review area (check all that apply):D Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).n Other non-wetland waters: acres.Identify type(s) of waters:4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.|^ Wetlands directly abut KPW aud thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.13 Wetlands directly abutting an. RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round.' Provide data and rationaleindicating that tributary is perennial in Section IH.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicatmg that wetland isdirectly abutting an RPW: Wetlands drain or are abutting RPWs. Visible drainage patterns.13 Wetlands directly abuttmg an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary isseasonal in Section ffl.B and rationale in Section HI.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is du-ectlyabutting an RPW:Provide acreage estimates forjurisdictional wetlands in the review area: 6.90 acres.5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.D Wetlands that do not du-ectly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacentand with smilarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supportmg this 'conclusion is provided at Section M.C.Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.Q Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have wheu considered in combmation with the tributary to which they are adjacent andwith similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW arejurisdictional. Data supporting thisconclusion is provided at Section ffl.C.Provide estimates forjurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.As a general rule, the impoundment ofajurisdlctional tributary remains jurisdictional.Q Demonstrate that unpoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," orD Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), orQ Demoasb-ate 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, INCLUMNG ANYSUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL f OAT APPLY):108See Footnote #3.To complete the analysis refer to. the key in Section HI.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 forreview consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.
D which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.n from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.n which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.D Interstate isolated waters. Explain:D Other factors. Explain:Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:Provide estimates forjurisdictional waters ill the review area (check all that apply):D Tributary waters: Unear feet width (ft).D Other non-wetland waters: acres.Identify type(s) of waters:L] Wetlands: acres.F. NON-JUMSDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):[_\ If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria m the 1987 Coips of EngineersWetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.II Review area included isolated waters with no substantial uexus 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).Q Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:D 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 MBRfactors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for m'igated agriculture), using best professionaljudgment (check all that apply):Q Non-wedand waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).D Lakes/ponds: acres.D Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:D Wetlands: acres.Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where sucha fmdmg is requu-ed forjiuisdiction (check all that apply):n Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).D Lakes/ponds: acres.Other non-wetiand waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:n Wetlands: acres.SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for ID (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checkedaud requested, appropriately reference sources below):M Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:[3 Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.n Office concm-s with data sheets/deliiieation report.Q Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.D Data sheets prepared by the Corps:D Corps navigable waters' study:n U.S. Geological Survey Hydi'ologic Atlas:LIUSGSNHDdata.D USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.^ U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:McCleansville 1:24000.[3 USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Siu-vey. Citation:Figure 4.13 National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: Figure 5.n State/Local wetland inventory map(s):EX] FEMA/FIRMmaps:S 100-year Floodplain Elevation is:629.5ftCNational Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)Ig Photographs: [X] Aerial (Name & Date):Figure 6.or ^ Other (Name & Date):Site Photographs.13 Previous determiaation(s). File no. and date of response lettei-McCoimell Site Lots 1, 7, 8 & 9 (49:6952-A).Applicable/supportmg case law:Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
D Other information (please specify):B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: Multiple sediment traps/BMP are near the center of the PSA. Sediment traps/BMPswere creahied during the grading of the lots and not removed due to grading activities are on gomg. The sediment traps/BMP was containedan oridmaiy high water mark at the time of the site reconnaissance. A Grading plans and stormwater plans are attached to this JD packet.The plans mdicate that the sediment traps/BMPs were dug in uplands and are non-jurisdictional.
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont RegionProject/Site: McConnell Site Lots 1 ,7,8,9Applicant/Owner: Lincoln HarrisCity/County:Greensboro/Guilford Sampling Date: 5/23/18State: NC Sampling Point: DP-1 (WA)Investigator(s): Ken Vilagos-ECS SoutheastLandform (hillside, terrace, etc.):Section, Township, Range:Local relief (concave, convex, none): concaveSubregion (LRR or MLRA); LRRP,MLRA136 Lat: 36.056973Soil Map Unit Name: Enon Fine sandy loamLong: -79.707425Slope (%): <1%Datum: NAD83NWI classification: nonYesNoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Are Vegetation X , Soil X , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Are Vegetation(If no, explain in Remarks.)Yes No, Soil, or Hydrologynaturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)SUMMARY OF FINDINGS -Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Hydric Soil Present?Wetland Hydrology Present?Remarks:Soil looks to be fill material in someAttachsiteYesYesYesmapxxxshowing sampling point locations,NoNoNoareas. Shrubs appear to planted asIs the Sampled Areawithin a Wetland?transects,Yes Xbank stabilization/erosion control.important features, etc.NoHYDROLOGYWetland Hydrology Indicators:Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that aDDlv)Surface Water (A1)X High Water Table (A2)X Saturation (A3)Water Marks (B1)Sediment Deposits (B2)Drift Deposits (B3)Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Iron Deposits (B5)Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Aquatic Fauna (B13)True Aquatic Plants (B14)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reouired)Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)Drainage Patterns (B 10)Moss Trim Lines (B16)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)Crayfish Burrows (C8)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)Geomorphic Position (D2)Shallow Aquitard (D3)Microtopographic Relief (D4)X FAC-Neutral Test (D5)Field Observations:Surface Water Present?Water Table Present?Saturation Present?(includes capillary fringe)YesYesYesxxNo XNoNoDepth (inches):Depth (inches):Depth (inches):0103Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X NoDescribe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:Remarks:US Army Corps of EngineersEastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific namesTree Stratum (Plot size: 30 sq ft )1.2.3.4.5.6.7.Liquidambar styracifluaQuercus phellosPlatanus occ/dentalisJuniperus virginiana50% of total cover:Saplina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15sqft1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.Liquidambar styracifluaCarpinus carolinianaSaAx nigra50% of total cover:Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 sq ft )1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10.11.Carex alopecoideaJuncus effususCampsis radicansToxicodendron radicans50% of total cover:Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 sq ft1.2.3.4.5.Vitis rotundifolia50% of total cover:Absolute% Cover301010555of plants.DominantSpecies?YesNoN6No=Total Cover28 20% of total cover:.)30101050YesYesYes=Total Cover25 20% of total cover:8520105120YesNoNoNo=Total Cover60 20% of total cover:.)55Yes3 20% of total cover:=Total Cover/o of total cover:Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)IndicatorStatusFACFACFACWFACU11FACFACOBL10FACWFACWFACFAC24FAC1Sampling Point: DP-1 (WA)Dominance Test worksheet:Number of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 6 (A)Total Number of DominantSpecies Across All Strata: 6 (B)Percent of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)Prevalence Index worksheet:Total % Cover of: Multiply by:OBL species 10 x1= 10FACW species 115 x2= 230FAC species 1.00 x3= 300FACU species 5 x4= 20UPL species 0 x5= 0Column Totals: 230 (A) 560 (B)Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.43Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic VegetationX 2 - Dominance Test is >50%X 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.04 - Morphological Adaptations (Provide supportingdata in Remarks or on a separate sheet)Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation (Explain)Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must bepresent, unless disturbed or problematic.Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) ormore in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless ofheight.Sapling/Shrub -Woody plants, excluding vines, lessthan 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft(1 m) tail.Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardlessof size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft inheight.HydrophyticVegetationPresent? Yes X NoUS Army Corps of EngineersEastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
SOILSampling Point: DP-1 (WA)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) % Type Loc TextureRemarks0-107.5YR 5/2907.5YR 4/410MLoamy/ClayeyDistinct redox concentrations10-207.5YR 5/1957.5YR 5/4PLLoamy/ClayeyDistinct redox concentrations20-287.5YR 4/2957.5YR 5/3MLoamy/ClayeyFaint redox concentrations1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.Hydric Soil Indicators:Histosol (A1)Histic Epipedon (A2)Black Histic (A3)Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Stratified Layers (A5)2cmMuck(A10)(LRRN)Depleted Below Dark Surface (AH)Thick Dark Surface (A12)Sandy Mucky Mineral (31)Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Sandy Redox (S5)Stripped Matrix (S6)Dark Surface (S7)Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147,148)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)X Depleted Matrix (F3)Redox Dark Surface (F6)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)? Redox Depressions (F8)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,MLRA136)Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147,148)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils'2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)Coast Prairie Redox (A16)(MLRA 147,148)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)(MLRA136,147)Red Parent Material (F21)(outside MLRA 127,147,148)Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)Other (Explain in Remarks)indicators ofhydrophytic vegetation andwetland hydrology must be present,unless disturbed or problematic.Restrictive Layer (if observed):Type:Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes X NoRemarks:This data sheet is revised from Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Regional Supplement Version 2.0 to include the NRCS Field Indicators of HydricSoils, Version 8.0, 2016.US Army Corps of EngineersEastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont RegionProject/Site: McConnell Site Lots 1 ,7,8,9Applicant/Owner: Lincoln HarrisCity/County: Greensboro/GuilfordState:NCSampling Date: 5/23/18Sampling Point: DP-2Investigator(s): Ken Vilagos-ECS SoutheastLandform (hillside, terrace, etc.):Section, Township, Range:Local relief (concave, convex, none): ConvexSubregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P,MLRA136Soil Map Unit Name: Enon fine sandy loamLat: 36.056817Long: -79.707246Slope (%): <1%Datum: NAD83NWI classification:Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes NoAre Vegetation., Soil, or Hydrologynaturally 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?Hydric Soil Present?Wetland Hydrology Present?Remarks:YesYesYesNoNoNoxxxIs the Sampled Areawithin a Wetland?YesNo XHYDROLOGYWetland Hydrology Indicators:Primary Indicators (minimum of one is reauired; check all that aDDlv)Surface Water (A1)High Water Table (A2)Saturation (A3)Water Marks (B1)Sediment Deposits (B2)Drift Deposits (B3)Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Iron Deposits (B5)Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Aquatic Fauna (B13)True Aquatic Plants (B14)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (CG)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)Drainage Patterns (B10)Moss Trim Lines (B16)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)Crayfish Burrows (C8)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)Geomorphic Position (D2)Shallow Aquitard(D3)Microtopographic Relief (D4)FAC-NeutralTest<D5)Field Observations:Surface Water Present?Water Table Present?Saturation Present?(includes capillary fringe)YesYesYesNo' NoNoxxxDepth (inches):Depth (inches):Depth (inches):02424Wetland Hydrology Present?YesNo XDescribe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:Remarks:US Army Corps of EngineersEastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0
VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific namesTree Stratum (Plot size: 30 sq ft )1.2.3.4.5.6.7.Liriodendron tulipiferaLiquidambar styracifluaJuniperus virginiana50% of total cover:Saplina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15sqft1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.Liriodendron tulipiferaJuniperus virginianaCarpinus caroliniana//ex opaca50% of total cover:Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 sq ft )1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10.11.Artemisia abrotanumCarex alopecoideaCampsis radicansPolystichum acrostichoidesvj50% of total cover:Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 sq ft1.2.3.4.5.Vitis rotundifolia50% of total cover:30.)1540.)3Absolute% Cover3020106020%1010553020%6010558020%5520%Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)of plants.DominantSpecies?YesYesNo=Total Cover1 of total cover:YesYesNoNo=Total Coverof total cover:YesNoNoNo=Total Coverof total cover:Yes=Total Coverof total cover:IndicatorStatusFACUFACFACU12FACUFACUFACFACU6UPLFACWFACFACW16FAC1Sampling Point: DP-2Dominance Test worksheet:Number of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A)Total Number of DominantSpecies Across All Strata: 6 (B)Percent of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 33.3% (A/B)Prevalence Index worksheet:Total % Cover of: Multiply by:OBL species 0 x 1 = 0FACW species 15 x2= 30FAC species 35 x3= 105FACU species 65 x4= 260UPL species 60 x5= 300Column Totals: 175 (A) 695 (B)Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.97Hydrophytlc Vegetation Indicators:1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation2 - Dominance Test is >50%3 - Prevalence Index is £3.04 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supportingdata in Remarks or on a separate sheet)Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation (Explain)Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must bepresent, unless disturbed or problematic.Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) ormore in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless ofheight.Sapling/Shrub-Woody plants, excluding vines, lessthan 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft(1 m) tail.Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardlessof size, and woody plants [ess than 3.28 ft tail.Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft inheight.HydrophyticVegetationPresent? Yes No XUS Army Corps of EngineersEastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
SOILSampling Point: DP-2Profile 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)''/_ Type1 Loo2TextureRemarks0-2810YR5/4100Loamy/ClayeyType: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.'Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.Hydric Soil Indicators:Histosol (A1)Histic Epipedon (A2)Black Histic (A3)Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Stratified Layers (A5)2cmMuck(A10)(LRRN)Depleted Below Dark Surface (A1 1)Thick Dark Surface (A12)Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Sandy Redox (S5)Stripped Matrix (S6)Dark Surface (S7)Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147,148)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Depleted Matrix (F3)Redox Dark Surface (F6)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)Redox Depressions (F8)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,MLRA 136)Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127,147,148)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils'2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)Coast Prairie Redox (A16)(MLRA 147,148)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)(MLRA136.147)Red Parent Material (F21)(outside MLRA 127,147,148)Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)Other (Explain in Remarks)'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation andwetland hydrology must be present,unless disturbed or problematic.Restrictive Layer (if observed):Type:Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?YesNo XRemarks:This data sheet is revised from Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Regional Supplement Version 2.0 to include the NRCS Field Indicators of HydricSoils, Version 8.0, 2016.US Army Corps of EngineersEastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET- Eastern Mountains and Piedmont RegionProject/Site: McConnell Site Lots 1 ,7,8,9Applicant/Owner: Lincoln HarrisCity/County: Greensboro, Guilford Sampling Date: 5/23/2018State: NC Sampling Point: DP-4Investigator(s): Ken Vilagos-ECS SoutheastLandform (hillside, terrace, etc.): hillsideSection, Township, Range:Local relief (concave, convex, none): convexSlope (%): 2%Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRRP,MLRA136 Lat: 36.056749Soil Map Unit Name: Enon sandy clay loamLong: -79.705982Datum: NAD83NWI classification: noneAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology, SoilYes XNoAre Vegetation, or Hydrology(If no, explain in Remarks.)significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes Nonaturally 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?Hydric Soil Present?Wetland Hydrology Present?Remarks:YesYesYesNoNoNoxxxIs the Sampled Areawithin a Wetland?YesNo XHYDROLOGYWetland Hydrology Indicators:Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that aDDlv)Surface Water (A1)High Water Table (A2)Saturation (A3)Water Marks (B1)Sediment Deposits (B2)Drift Deposits (B3)Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Iron Deposits (B5)Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Aquatic Fauna (B13)True Aquatic Plants (B14)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)Presence.of Reduced Iron (C4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)Drainage Patterns (B10)Moss Trim Lines (B16)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)Crayfish Burrows (C8)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)Geomorphic Position (D2)Shallow Aquitard (D3)Microtopographic Relief (D4)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)Field Observations:Surface Water Present?Water Table Present?Saturation Present?(includes capillary fringe)YesYesYesNoNoNoxxxDepth (inches):Depth (inches):Depth (inches):02828Wetland Hydrology Present?YesNo XDescribe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:Remarks:US Army Corps of EngineersEastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
k/EGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientificTree Stratum (Plot size: 30 sq ft )1.2.3.4.5.6.7.Liriodendron tulipiferaPinus taedaJuniperus virginianaQuercus falcataUlmus americaha50% of total cover: 43Saplina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 sq ft )1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.Carpinus carolinianaLigustrum sinenseLiriodendron tulipiferaJuniperus virginiana50% of total cover: 30Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 sq ft )1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10.11.Rubus aboriginumLigustrum sinense//ex opacaPolystichum acrostichoidesSmilax rotundifolia50% of total cover: 20Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 sq ft )1.2.3.4.5.V7ffs rotundifolia50% of total cover: 3namesAbsoluteabsolute% Cover3520151058520%25201056020%151055540of plants.DominantSpecies?YesYesNoNoNo=Total Coverof total cover:YesYesNoNo=Total Cover1 of total cover:YesYesNoNoNo=Total Cover20% of total cover:5520%Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)Yes=Total Cover3 of total cover:IndicatorStatusFACUFACFACUFACUFACW17FACFACUFACUFACU12UPLFACUFACUFACUFAC8FAC1Sampling Point: DP-4Dominance Test worksheet:Number of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAG: 3 (A)Total Number of DominantSpecies Across All Strata: 7 (B)Percent of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 42.9% (A/B)Prevalence Index worksheet:Total % Cover of: Multiply by:OBL species 0 x 1 = 0FACW species 5 x2= 10FAC species 55 x3= 165FACU species 115 x4= 460UPL species 15 x5= 75Column Totals: 190 (A) 710 (B)Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.74Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation2 - Dominance Test is >50%3 - Prevalence Index is S3.014 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supportingdata in Remarks or on a separate sheet)Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation (Explain)Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must bepresent, unless disturbed or problematic.Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:Tree-Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) ormore in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless ofheight.Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, lessthan 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft(1 m) tail.Herb -All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardlessof size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tail.Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft inheight.HydrophyticVegetationPresent? Yes No XUS Army Corps of EngineersEastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0
SOILSampling Point: DP-4Profile 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) % Type LOG TextureRemarks0-287.5YR 5/4100Loamy/Clayey'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.Hydric Soil Indicators:Histosol (A1)Histic Epipedon (A2)Black Histic (A3)Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Stratified Layers (A5)2cmMuck(A10)(LRRN)Depleted Below Dark Surface (AH)Thick Dark Surface (A12)Sandy Mucky Mineral (81)Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Sandy Redox (S5)Stripped Matrix (S6)Dark Surface (S7)Poly value Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147,148)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Depleted Matrix (F3)Redox Dark Surface (F6)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)Redox Depressions (F8)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,MLRA 136)Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127,147,148)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils :2cmMuck(A10)(MLRA147)Coast Prairie Redox (A16)(MLRA147,148)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)(MLRA 136,147)Red Parent Material (F21)(outside MLRA 127,147,148)Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)Other (Explain in Remarks)Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation andwetland hydrology must be present,unless disturbed or problematic.Restrictive Layer (If observed):Type:Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?YesNo XRemarks:This data sheet is revised from Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Regional Supplement Version 2.0 to include the NRCS Field Indicators of HydricSoils, Version 8.0, 2016.US Army Corps of EngineersEastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont RegionProject/Site: McConnell Site Lots 1 ,7,8,9ApplicanVOwner: Lincoln HarrisCity/County: Greensboro/GuilfordState:NCSampling Date: 5/23/18Sampling Point: DP-5 (WC)Investigators): Ken Vilagos-ECS SoutheastLandform (hillside, terrace, etc.):Section, Township, Range:Local relief (concave, convex, none): concaveSlope (%): <1%Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P,MLRA136Soil Map Unit Name: Enon fine sandy loamLat: 36.056879Long: -79.706343Datum: NAD83NWI classification: PUBHhAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)Are Vegetation .Soil ,orHydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes NoAre Vegetation, Soil, or Hydrologynaturally 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?Hydric Soil Present?Wetland Hydrology Present?Remarks:YesYesYesxxxNoNoNoIs the Sampled Areawithin a Wetland?Yes X NoHYDROLOGYWetland Hydrology Indicators:Primary Indicators fminimum of one is required: check all that apply)X Surface Water (A1)X High Water Table (A2)X Saturation (A3)Water Marks (B1)Sediment Deposits (B2)Drift Deposits (B3)Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Iron Deposits (B5)Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Water-Stained Leaves (89)Aquatic Fauna (B13)True Aquatic Plants (B14)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)Drainage Patterns (B10)Moss Trim Lines (B16)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)Crayfish Burrows (C8)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)Geomorphic Position (D2)Shallow Aquitard(D3)Microtopographic Relief (D4)X FAC-Neutral Test (D5)Field Observations:Surface Water Present?Water Table Present?Saturation Present?(includes capillary fringe)YesYesYesxxxNoNoNoDepth (inches):Depth (inches):Depth (inches):18010Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X NoDescribe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:Remarks:US Army Corps of EngineersEastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0
VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific namesTree Stratum (Plot size: 30 sq ft )1.2.3.4.5.6.7.Liquidambar styracifluaQuercus phellosPlatanus occidentalisP/ntfs taeda50% of total cover:Saplina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15sqft1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.Liquidambar styracifluaSa/;x nigraCarpinus camliniana50% of total cover:Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 sq ft )1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10.11.Campsis radicansJuncus effususTypha angustifoliaToxicodendron radicans50% of total cover:Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 sq ft1.2.3.4.5.50% of total cover:Absolute% Cover402015108543 20%_)2010104020 20%7020151011558 20%.)20%Remarks; (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)of plants.DominantSpecies?YesYesNoNo=Total Cover1 of total cover:YesYesYes=Tota[ Coverof total cover:YesNoNoNo=Total Coverof total cover:=Total Coverof total cover:IndicatorStatusFACFACFACWFAC17FACOBLFAC8FACFACWOBLFAC23Sampling Point: DP-5 (WC)Dominance Test worksheet:Number of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 6 (A)Total Number of DominantSpecies Across All Strata: 6 (B)Percent of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)Prevalence Index worksheet:Total % Cover of: Multiply by:OBL species 25 x 1 = 25FACW species 35 x2= 70FAC species 180 x3= 540FACU species 0 x4= 0UPL species 0 x5= 0Column Totals: 240 (A) 635 (B)Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.65Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic VegetationX 2 - Dominance Test is >50%X 3 - Prevalence Index is ^3.014 - Morphological Adaptations (Provide supportingdata in Remarks or on a separate sheet)Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must bepresent, unless disturbed or problematic.Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) ormore in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless ofheight.Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, lessthan 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft(1 m) tail.Herb -All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardlessof size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft inheight.HydrophyticVegetationPresent?. Yes X NoUS Army Corps of EngineersEastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
SOILSampling Point: DP-5 (WC)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) % Type Loc TextureRemarks0-2810YR5/19010YR4/410MLoamy/ClayeyDistinct redox concentrationsType: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.Hydric Soil Indicators:Histosol (A1)Histic Epipedon (A2)Black Histic (A3)Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Stratified Layers (A5)2cmMuck(A10)(LRRN)Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Thick Dark Surface (A12)Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Sandy Redox (S5)Stripped Matrix (S6)Dark Surface (S7)Polyvalue Below Surface (88) (MLRA 147,148)Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147,148)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)Loamy GIeyed Matrix (F2)X Depleted Matrix (F3)Redox Dark Surface (F6)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)? Redox Depressions (F8)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,MLRA 136)Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147,148)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils"2cmMuck(A10)(MLRA147)Coast Prairie Redox (A16)(MLRA 147,148)Piedmont Roodplain Soils (F19)(MLRA136,147)Red Parent Material (F21)(outside MLRA 127, 147,148)Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)Other (Explain in Remarks)Indicators ofhydrophytic vegetation andwetland hydrology must be present,unless disturbed or problematic.Restrictive Layer (if observed):Type:Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes XNoRemarks:This data sheet is revised from Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Regional Supplement Version 2.0 to include the NRCS Field Indicators of HydricSoils, Version 8.0, 20.16.US Army Corps of EngineersEastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont RegionProj'ect/Site: McConnell Site Lots 1 ,7,8,9Applicant/Owner: Lincoln HarrisCity/County: Greensboro, Guilford Sampling Date: 5/23/2018State: NC Sampling Point: DP-6Investigator(s): Ken Vilagos-ECS SoutheastLandform (hillside, terrace, etc.): hillsideSection, Township, Range:Local relief (concave, convex, none): convexSlope (%): 2%Subregion(LRRorMLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 36.055387Soil Map Unit Name: Enon sandy clay loamLong: -79.704427Datum: NAD83NWI classification: noneYes XNoAre climatic/ hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Are Vegetation _ .Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Are Vegetation(If no, explain in Remarks.)Yes No, Soil, or Hydrologynaturally 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?Hydric Soil Present?Wetland Hydrology Present?Remarks:YesYesYesNoNoNoxxxIs the Sampled Areawithin a Wetland?YesNo XHYDROLOGYWetland Hydrology Indicators:Primary Indicators (minimum of one is reauired; check all that aoolv)Surface Water (A1)High Water Table (A2)Saturation (A3)Water Marks (B1)Sediment Deposits (B2)Drift Deposits (B3)Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Iron Deposits (B5)Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Aquatic Fauna (B13)True Aquatic Plants (B14)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)Drainage Patterns (B10)Moss Trim Lines (816)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)Crayfish Burrows (C8)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)Geomorphic Position (D2)Shallow Aquitard(D3)Microtopographic Relief (D4)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)Field Observations:Surface Water Present?Water Table Present?Saturation Present?(includes capillary fringe)YesYesYesNoNoNoxxxDepth (inches):Depth (inches):Depth (inches):02828Wetland Hydrology Present?YesNo XDescribe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:Remarks:US Army Corps of EngineersEastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
/EGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 sq ft )1.2.3.4.5.6.7.Liriodendron tulipiferaCarya glabraJuniperus virginianaQuercus falcataUlmus americana50% of total cover:Saplina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15sqft1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.Carpinus carolinianaLigustrum sinenseLiriodendron tulipiferaJuniperus virginiana50% of total cover:Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 sq ft . )1.2.3.4.5..6.7.8.9.10.11.Rubus aboriginumLigustrum sinense.//ex opacaEupatorium capillifolium50% of total cover;Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 sq ft1.2.3.4.5.Vitis rotundifolia50% of total cover:Absolute Dominant% Cover Species?40202010595.)251510555281510553518.)553YesYesYesNoNo=Total Cover48 20% of total cover:20% of total cover:YesYesNoNo=Total Cover20% of total cover:YesYesNoNo=Total Cover20% of total cover:Yes=Total Cover20% of total cover:Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)IndicatorStatusFACUFACUFACUFACUFACW19FACFACUFACUFACU11UPLFACUFACUFACU7FAC1Sampling Point: DP-6Dominance Test worksheet:Number of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A)Total Number of DominantSpecies Across All Strata: 8 (B)Percent of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 25.0% (A/B)Prevalence Index worksheet:Total % Cover of: Multiply by:OBL species .0 x 1 = 0FACW species 5 x2= 10FAC species 30 x3= 90FACU species 140 x4= 560UPL species 15 x5= 75Column Totals: 190 (A) 735 (B)Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.87Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation2 - Dominance Test is >50%3 - Prevalence Index is ;S3.014 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supportingdata in Remarks or on a separate sheet)Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must bepresent, unless disturbed or problematic.Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) ormore in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless ofheight.SaplIng/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, lessthan 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft(1 m) tail.Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardlessof size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tail.Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft inheight.HydrophytlcVegetationPresent? Yes No XUS Army Corps of EngineersEastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
SOILSampling Point: DP-6Profile 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) % Type LOG TextureRemarks0-287.5YR 5/4100Loamy/ClayeyType: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.Hydric Soil Indicators:Histosol (A1)Histic Epipedon (A2)Black Histic (A3)Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Stratified Layers (A5)2cmMuck(A10)(LRRN)Depleted Below Dark Surface (AH)Thick Dark Surface (A12)Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Sandy Redox(S5)Stripped Matrix (S6)Dark Surface (S7)Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147,148)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Depleted Matrix (F3)Redox Dark Surface (F6)Depleted Dark Surface (F7).Redox Depressions (F8)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,MLRA 136)Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127,147, 148)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils :2cmMuck(A10)(MLRA147)Coast Prairie Redox (A16)(MLRA 147,148)Piedmont FIoodplain Soils (F19)(MLRA136,147)Red Parent Material (F21)(outside MLRA 127,147,148)Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)Other (Explain in Remarks)indicators of hydrophytic vegetation andwetland hydrology must be present,unless disturbed or problematic.Restrictive Layer (if observed):Type:Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?YesNo XRemarks:This data sheet is revised from Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Regional Supplement Version 2.0 to include the NRCS Field Indicators of HydricSoils, Version 8.0, 2016.US Army Corps of EngineersEastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont RegionProject/Site: McConnell Site Lots 1 ,7,8,9Applicarrt/Owner: Lincoln HarrisCity/County: Greensboro/GuilfordState:NCSampling Date: 5/23/18Sampling Point: DP-7 WDInvestigators): Ken Vilagos-ECS SoutheastLandform (hillside, terrace, etc.): fSection, Township, Range:Local relief (concave, convex, none): none<1%Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136Soil Map Unit Name: Enon fine sandy loamLat: 36.055543Long: -79.704099Slope (%):Datum: NAD83NWI classification:Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes NoAre Vegetation, Soil, or Hydrologynaturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - AttachHydrophytic Vegetation Present?Hydric Soil Present?Wetland Hydrology Present?Remarks:siteYesYesYesmapxxxshowing sampling point locations,NoNoNoIs the Sampled Areawithin a Wetland?transects,Yes Ximportant features, etc.NoHYDROLOGYWetland Hydrology Indicators:Primary Indicators (minimum of one is reauired: check all that aoolv)X Surface Water (A1)X High Water Table (A2)X Saturation (A3)Water Marks (B1)Sediment Deposits (B2)Drift Deposits (B3)Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Iron Deposits (B5)Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Aquatic Fauna (B13)True Aquatic Plants (B14)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)Drainage Patterns (B 10)Moss Trim Lines (B16)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)Crayfish Burrows (C8)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)Geomorphic Position (D2)Shallow Aquitard (D3)Microtopographic Relief (D4)X FAC-Neutral Test (D5)Field Observations:Surface Water Present?Water Table Present?Saturation Present?(includes capillary fringe)YesYesYesxxxNoNoNoDepth (inches):Depth (inches):Depth (inches):4010Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X NoDescribe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:Remarks:US Army Corps of EngineersEastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
VEGETATION (Four Strata) - UseTree Stratum (Plot size: 30 sq ft1.2.3.4.5.6.7.Liquidambar styracifluaQuercus phellosPlatanus occidentalisSa//x nigra50% of totalSaplina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.Liquidambar styracifluaCarpinus carolinianaSa/;x nigra50% of totalHerb Stratum (Plot size: 5 sq ft1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10.11.Juncus effususCarex alopecoideaTypha angustifoliaToxicodendron radicans50% of totalJse scientific names.)cover:^15 sq ftcover:.)cover:Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 sq ft1.2.3.4.5.Vitis rotundifolia50% of totalcover:40.)2353.)3Absolute% Cover40201558020%2015104520%70151010105of plants.DominantSpecies?YesYesNoNo=Total Cover1 of total cover:YesYesYes=Total Cover1 of total coverYesNoNoNo=Total Cover20% of total cover:5520%Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)Yes=Total Coverof total cover:IndicatorStatusFACFACFACWOBL16FACFACOBL9FACWFACWOBLFAC21FAC1Sampling Point: DP-7 WDDominance Test worksheet:Number of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 7 (A)Total Number of DominantSpecies Across All Strata: 7 (B)Percent of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)Prevalence Index worksheet:Total % Cover of: Multiply by:OBL species 25 x 1 = 25FACW species 100 x2= 200FAC species 110 x3= 330FACU species 0 x4= . 0UPL species 0 x5= 0Column Totals: 235 (A) 555 (B)Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.36Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic VegetationX 2 - Dominance Test is >50%X 3 - Prevalence Index is ss3.014 - Morphological Adaptations (Provide supportingdata in Remarks or on a separate sheet)Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation (Explain)Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must bepresent, unless disturbed or problematic.Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) ormore in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless ofheight.Sapling/Shrub -Woody plants, excluding vines, lessthan 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft(1 m) tail.Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardlessof size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft inheight.HydrophyticVegetationPresent? Yes X NoUS Army Corps of EngineersEastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
SOILSampling Point: DP-7 WDProfile 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)%0-2810YR5/18510YR4/415TextureRemarksMLoamy/CIayeyDistinct redox concentrationsType: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.Hydric Soil Indicators:Histosol (A1)Histic Epipedon (A2)Black Histic (A3)Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Stratified Layers (A5)2cmMuck(A10)(LRRN)Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Thick Dark Surface (A12)Sandy Mucky Mineral (81)Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Sandy Redox (S5)Stripped Matrix (S6)Dark Surface (S7)Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147,148)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)X Depleted Matrix (F3)Redox Dark Surface (F6)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)? Redox Depressions (F8)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,MLRA 136)Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127,147,148)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils";2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)Coast Prairie Redox (A16)(MLRA147,148)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)(MLRA136,U7)Red Parent Material (F21)(outside MLRA 127,147,148)Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)Other (Explain in Remarks)Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation andwetland hydrology must be present,unless disturbed or problematic.Restrictive Layer (if observed):Type:Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes XNoRemarks:This data sheet is revised from Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Regional Supplement Version 2.0 to include the NRCS Field Indicators of HydricSoils, Version 8.0,2016.US Army Corps of EngineersEastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont RegionPrqject/Site: McConnell Site Lots 1 ,7,8,9ApplicanVOwner: Lincoln HarrisCity/County: Greensboro,'Guilford Sampling Date: 5/23/2018State: NC Sampling Point: DP-8Investigator(s): Ken Vilagos-ECS SoutheastLandform (hillside, terrace, etc.): hillsideSection, Township, Range:Local relief (concave, convex, none): convexSlope (%): 3%Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRRP,MLRA136 Lat: 36.057412Soil Map Unit Name: Enon sandy clay loamLong:-79.201679Datum: NAD83NWI classification: noneAre climatic/ hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology, SoilYes XNoAre Vegetation, or Hydrology(If no, explain in Remarks.)significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes Nonaturally 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?Hydric Soil Present?Wetland Hydrology Present?Remarks:YesYesYesNoNoNoxxxIs the Sampled Areawithin a Wetland?YesNo XHYDROLOGYWetland Hydrology Indicators:Primary Indicators Cminimum of one is reauired: check all that aoplv)Surface Water (A1)High Water Table (A2)Saturation (A3)Water Marks (B1)Sediment Deposits (B2)Drift Deposits (B3)Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Iron Deposits (B5)Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Aquatic Fauna (B13)True Aquatic Plants (B14)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Secondary Indicators frninimum of two required)Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)Drainage Patterns (810)Moss Trim Lines (B16)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)Crayfish Burrows (C8)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)Geomorphic Position (D2)Shallow Aquitard (D3)Microtopographic Relief (D4)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)Field Observations:Surface Water Present?Water Table Present?Saturation Present?(includes capillary fringe)YesYesYesNoNoNoxxxDepth (inches):Depth (inches):Depth (inches):02828Wetland Hydrology Present?YesNo XDescribe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:Remarks:US Army Corps, of EngineersEastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
i/EGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 sq ft )1..2.3.4.5.6.7.Liriodendron tulipiferaCarya glabraPinus taedaQuercus falcata50% of total cover:Saplina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15sqft1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9. .Carpinus carolinianaLigustrum sinenseLiriodendron tulipiferaJuniperus virginiana50% of total cover:Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 sq ft )1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10.11.Eupatorium capillifoliumLigustrum sinensePolystichum acmstichoides50% of total cover:Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 sq ft1.2.3.4.5.50% of total cover;Absolute Dominant% Cover Species?3020201.08040 20%.)25151055528601057538.)YesYesYesNo=Total Cover20% of total cover:YesYesNoNo=Total Cover20% of total cover:YesNoNo=Total Cover20% of total cover:=Total Cover20% of total cover:Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)IndicatorStatusFACUFACUFACFACU16FACFACUFACUFACU11FACUFACUFACU15Sampling Point: DP-8Dominance Test worksheet:Number of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A)Total Number of DominantSpecies Across All Strata: 6 (B)Percent of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 33.3% (A/B)Prevalence Index worksheet:Total % Cover of: Multiply by:OBL species 0 x 1 = 0FACW species 0 x2= 0FAC species 45 x3= 135FACU species 165 x4= 660UPL species 0 x5= 0Column Totals: 210 (A) 795 (B)Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.79Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation2 - Dominance Test is >50%3 - Prevalence Index is £3.04 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supportingdata in Remarks or on a separate sheet)Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must bepresent, unless disturbed or problematic.Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. f7.6 cm) ormore in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless ofheight.Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, lessthan 3 in. DBH and greater than or equai to 3.28 ft(1 m) tall.Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardlessof size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tail.Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft inheight.HydrophyticVegetationPresent? Yes No XUS Army Corps of EngineersEastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
SOILSampling Point: DP-8Profile 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)%LoczTextureRemarks0-2810YR4/6100Loamy/ClayeyType: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.Hydric Soil Indicators:Histosol (A1)Histic Epipedon (A2)Black Histic (A3)Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Stratified Layers (A5)2cmMuck(A10)(LRRN)Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Thick Dark Surface (A12)Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Sandy Gleyect Matrix (S4)Sandy Redox (S5)Stripped Matrix (S6)Dark Surface (S7)Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Depleted Matrix (F3)Redox Dark Surface (F6)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)Redox Depressions (F8)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,MLRA136)Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127,147,148)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils :2cmMuck(A10)(MLRA147)Coast Prairie Redox (A16)(MLRA 147,148)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)(MLRA 136, 147)Red Parent Material (F21)(outside MLRA 127,147,148)Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)Other (Explain in Remarks)Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation andwetland hydrology must be present,unless disturbed or problematic.Restrictive Layer (if observed):Type:Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?YesNo XRemarks:This data sheet is revised from Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Regional Supplement Version 2.0 to include the NRCS Field Indicators of HydricSoils, Version 8.0, 2016.US Army Corps of EngineersEastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont RegionProj'ect/Site: McConnell Site Lots 1,7,8,9Applicant/Owner: Lincoln HarrisCity/County: Greensboro/Guilford Sampling Date: 5/23/18^State: NC Sampling Point: DP-9WEInvestigator(s): Ken Vilagos-ECS SoutheastLandform (hillside, terrace, etc.):Section, Township, Range:Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave<1%Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRRP.MLRA136 Lat: 36.057612Soil Map Unit Name: Enon fine sandy loamLong:-79.701838Slope (%):Datum: NAD83NWI classification:Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No_ (If no, explain in Remarks.)Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes_NoAre Vegetation.Soil, or Hydrologynaturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - AttachHydrophytic Vegetation Present?Hydric Soil Present?Wetland Hydrology Present?Remarks:siteYesYesYesmapxxxshowingNoNoNolampling point locations,Is the Sampled Areawithin a Wetland?transects,Yes Ximportant features, etc.NoHYDROLOGYWetland Hydrology Indicators:Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)X Surface Water (A1)X High Water Table (A2)X Saturation (A3)Water Marks (B1)Sediment Deposits (B2)Drift Deposits (B3)Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Iron Deposits (B5)Inundation Visible on Aerial Imageiy (B7)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Aquatic Fauna (B13)True Aquatic Plants (B14)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6).Thin Muck Surface (C7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)Drainage Patterns (B10)Moss Trim Lines (B16)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)Crayfish Burrows (C8)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)Geomorphic Position (D2)Shallow Aquitard(D3)Microtopographic Relief (D4)X FAC-Neutral Test (D5)Field Observations:Surface Water Present?Water Table Present?Saturation Present?(includes capillary fringe)YesYesYesxxxNo .NoNoDepth (inches):Depth (inches):Depth (inches):4010Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X NoDescribe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:Remarks:US Army Corps of EngineersEastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0
VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientificTree Stratum (Plot size: 30 sq ft )1.2.3.4.5.6.7.Liquidambar styracifluaQuercus phellosPlatanus occidentalis50% of total cover:Saplina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15sqft1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.Liquidambar styracifluaCarpinus carolinianaSa/;x nigra50% of total cover:Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 sq ft )1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10.11.Juncus effususQuercus phellosToxicodendron radicansOnocfea sensibilis50% of total cover:Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 sq ft1.2.3.4.5.Vitis rotundifolia50% of total cover:40_)2028)3; namesAbsolute% Cover4025158020%2015540of plants.DominantSpecies?YesYesNo=Tota[ Cover1 of total cover:YesYesNo=Total Cover20% of total cover:201515555YesYesYesNo=Total Cover20% of total cover:5520%Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)Yes=Total Coverof total cover:IndicatorStatusFACFACFACW16FACFACOBL8FACWFACFACFACW11FAC1Sampling Point: DP-9 WEDominance Test worksheet:Number of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 8 (A)Total Number of DominantSpecies Across All Strata: 8 (B)Percent of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)Prevalence Index worksheet:Total % Cover of: Multiply by:OBL species 5 x 1 = 5FACW species 40 x2= 80FAC species 135 x3= 405FACU species 0 x4= 0UPL species 0 x5= 0Column Totals: 180 (A) 490 (B)Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.72Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic VegetationX 2 - Dominance Test is >50%X 3 - Prevalence Index is ^3.04 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supportingdata in Remarks or on a separate sheet)Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must bepresent, unless disturbed or problematic.Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) ormore in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless ofheight.Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, lessthan 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft(1 m) tail.Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardlessof size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft inheight.HydrophyticVegetationPresent? Yes X NoUS Army Corps of EngineersEastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
SOILSampling Point: DP-9 WEProfile 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)% Type1 Loc2TextureRemarks0-2810YR5/18510YR4/415MLoamy/ClayeyDistinct redox concentrations1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.Hydric Soil Indicators:Histosol (A1)Histic Epipedon (A2)Black Histic (A3)Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Stratified Layers (A5)2cmMuck(A10)(LRRN)Depleted Below Dark Surface (A1 1)Thick Dark Surface (A12)Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Sandy Redox (S5)Stripped Matrix (S6)Dark Surface (S7)Poly value Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)Thin Dark Surface (89) (MLRA 147,148)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)X Depleted Matrix (F3)Redox Dark Surface (F6)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)X Redox Depressions (F8)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,MLRA 136)Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147,148)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)Coast Prairie Redox (A16)(MLRA 147,148)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)(MLRA136,147)Red Parent Material (F21)(outside MLRA 127,147,148)Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)Other (Explain in Remarks)Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation andwetland hydrology must be present,unless disturbed or problematic.Restrictive Layer (if observed):Type:Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes XNoRemarks:This data sheet is revised from Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Regional Supplement Version 2.0 to include the NRCS Field Indicators of HydricSoils, Version 8.0, 2016.US Army Corps of EngineersEastern Mountains and Piedmont -Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont RegionProject/Site: McConnell Site Lots 1 ,7,8,9Applicant/Owner: Lincoln HarrisCity/County: Greensboro, Guilford Sampling Date: 5/23/2018State: NC Sampling Point: DP-10Investigator(s): Ken Vilagos-ECS SoutheastLandform (hillside, terrace, etc.):Section, Township, Range:Local relief (concave, convex, none): convexSlope (%): 1%Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRRP,MLRA136 Lat: 36.053198Soil Map Unit Name: Cecil sandy loamLong: -79.690258Datum: NAD83NWI classification: noneYes XNoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Are Vegetation(If no, explain in Remarks.)Yes No, Soil, or Hydrologynaturally 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?Hydric Soil Present?Wetland Hydrology Present?Remarks:YesYesYesNoNoNoxxxIs the Sampled Areawithin a Wetland?YesNo XHYDROLOGYWetland Hydrology Indicators:Primary Indicators (minimum of one is reauired; check all that aDDlv)Surface Water (A1)High Water Table (A2)Saturation (A3)Water Marks (B1)Sediment Deposits (B2)Drift Deposits (B3)Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Iron Deposits (B5)Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Aquatic Fauna (B13)True Aquatic Plants (B14)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)Drainage Patterns (B 10)Moss Trim Lines (B16)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)Crayfish Burrows (C8)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)Geomorphic Position (D2)Shallow Aquitard (D3)Microtopographic Relief (D4)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)Field Observations:Surface Water Present?Water Table Present?Saturation Present?(includes capillary fringe)YesYesYesNoNoNoxxxDepth (inches):Depth (inches):Depth (inches):02828Wetland Hydrology Present?YesNo XDescribe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:Remarks:US Army Corps of EngineersEastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
k/EGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 sq ft )1.2.3.4.5.6.7.Liriodendron tulipiferaCarya glabraPinus taedaQuercus falcataP/nus taeda50% of total cover:Saplinq/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 sq ft1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.Carpinus carolinianaLigustrum sinenseLimdendron tulipiferaJuniperus VirginiansLiquidambar styraciflua50% of total cover:Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 sq ft )1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10.11.Rubus aboriginumLigustrum sinensePolystichum acrostichoides//ex opaca50% of total cover:Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 sq ft1.2.3.4.5.50% of total cover:Absolute Dominant% Cover Species?30252010109548 20%.)251515556533351510107035.)YesYesYesNoNo=Totai Cover20% of total cover:YesYesYesNoNo=Total Cover20% of total cover:YesYesNoNo=Total Cover20% of total cover:=Total Cover20% of total cover:Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)IndicatorStatusFACUFACUFACFACUFAC19FACFACUFACUFACUFAC13UPLFACUFACUFACU14Sampling Point: DP-10Dominance Test worksheet:Number of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A)Total Number of DominantSpecies Across All Strata: 8 (B)Percent of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 25.0% (A/B)Prevalence Index worksheet:Total % Cover of: Multiply by:OBL species 0 x 1 = 0FACW species 0 x2= 0FAC species 60 x3= 180FACU species 135 x4= 540UPL species 35 x5= 175Column Totals:. 230 (A) 895 (B)Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.89Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation2 - Dominance Test is >50%3 - Prevalence Index is s3.04 - Morphological Adaptations (Provide supportingdata in Remarks or on a separate sheet)Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation (Explain)Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must bepresent, unless disturbed or problematic.Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:Tree -Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) ormore in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless ofheight.Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, lessthan 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft(1 m) tail.Herb-All herbaceous (non-woody) plants,, regardlessof size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tail.Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft inheight.HydrophyticVegetationPresent? Yes No XUS Army Corps of EngineersEastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0
SOILSampling Point: DP-10Profile 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)%^ Type' LociTextureRemarks0-2810YR5/4100Loamy/ClayeyType: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.Hydric Soil Indicators:Histosol(A1)Histic Epipedon (A2)Black Histic (A3)Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Stratified Layers (A5)2cmMuck(A10)(LRRN)Depleted Below Dark Surface (AH)Thick Dark Surface (A12)Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Sandy Redox (S5)Stripped Matrix (S6)Dark Surface (S7)Polyvalue Below Surface (88) (MLRA 147,148)Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147,148)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Depleted Matrix (F3)Redox Dark Surface (F6)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)Redox Depressions (F8)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,MLRA 136)Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127,147,148)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils'2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)Coast Prairie Redox (A16)(MLRA 147,148)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)(MLRA 136,147)Red Parent Material (F21)(outside MLRA 127,147,148)Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)Other (Explain in Remarks)indicators of hydrophytic vegetation andwetland hydrology must be present,unless disturbed or problematic.Restrictive Layer (if observed):Type:Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?YesNo XRemarks:This data sheet is revised from Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Regional Supplement Version 2.0 to include the NRCS Field Indicators of HydricSoils, Version 8.0, 2016.US Army Corps of EngineersEastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11^ADateL54^Project/Site:^^ ^_Latitude; ^ 0^700?,Evaluator: ^\y^^county: C.o\\^Longitude:-7?,70^?7^Total Points:Stream is at least intermittentif > 19 or perennial if > 30*z^Stream Determnialien (circle one)Ephemeral ti)termitterl^ PerennialOthere.g. Quad Name'.A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = \T— }1a- Continuity of channel bed and bank2. Stnuosity of channel along thalweg3. In-channel structure: ex. riffle-pool, step-pool,ripple-pool sequence4; Particle size of stream substrate5. Actiye/relictfloodplain6. Depositional bars or benches7. Recent alluvial deposits8. Headcuts9. Grade control10. Natural valley11. Second or greater order channelAbsent0000000©00Weak11 .0^0110.50.5^=0}Moderater2,2222~sr2~wYesStrong333333331.51.5•3artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manualB. Hydrology (Subtotal= '7 . 5 )12. Presence of Baseflow13. Iron oxidizing bacteria14. Leaf litter^0.515. Sediment on plants or debris0.51.516. Organic debn's lines or piles0.51.517. Soil-based evidence of high water table?No =0C. Biology (Subtotal = ^> )18. Fibrous roots in streambedj9. Rooted upland plants in streambed20. Macrabenthos (note diversity and abundance)~w21. Aquatic Mollusks22. Fish0.51.523. CrayfishM-0.51.524. Amphibians0.51.525. Algae~^~0.511.526. Wetland plants in streambedFACW=0.75; OBL=1.5 Other =0'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.Notes:Sketch:
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11J^Dafe: &/^.J//^Projecf/S,te:^^j^<=-Latitude: 3^o5-7o9^_Evaluator:/<-. v-pu^^County:^- .",J3CI/ /T»^iLongitude:-/^70<^ 9^,Total Points:Stream is at least intermittentif > 19 or perennial if>. 30*S3>.5Stream Determination (cirple-efEphemeral (ntennittent/Perenni^Othere.g. Quad Name:A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = I (^ }1a' Continuity of channel bed and bank2. Sinuosity.of channel along thalweg3. In-channel structure: ex. riffle-pool, step-pool,ripple-ppol sequence4. Particle size of stream substrate5. Active/refictfloodplain6. Depositional bars or benches7. Recent alluvial deposits8. Headcuts9. Grade control10. Natural valley11. Second or greater order channelAbsent0000000000Weak11 .1-<a>"J£L1~^~10.50.5^=0)Moderate2222js2?_.2~w1Yes =3Strongv~3333331.5~w'artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions In manualB. Hydrology (Subtotal = ^ )12. Presence of BaseflowJ^-13. Iron oxidizing bacteriad)14. Leaf litter~€s70.515. Sediment on plants or debris1.516. Organic debris lines or piles0.51.517. Soil-based evidence of high water table?No =0_C. Biology (Subtotal =J^_^18. Fibrous roots in streambed19. Roofed upland plants in streambed^20. Macrobenlhos (note diversity and abundance)~7Q21. Aquatic Mollusks3Z22. Fish1.523. Crayfish1.524. Amphibians1.525. Algae-^L0.511.526. Wetland plants in streambedFACW=0.75; OBL=1.5 Other =0"perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.Notes: ^,^'iC U^-^S ///-s^ (^^/^/Y c^-^.Sketch:
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11Date: ^V^Evaluator: |/ \ ^>j\ V)H|<^ACI-\Total Points: 0Stream is at least intermittent _, f_ y & fS or perennial if & 30* ~ ^> I t_Project/Site:^^ ^comiy:6^^\Stream Determination (circle one)Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial<>€-Latitude:^(L^te2Jl-onaitude:-79:7oi5^Othere.g. Quad Name:_A. Geomorphotogy (Subtotal = \^\ >S )\a~ Continuity of channel bed and bank2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg3. In-channel structure: ex. riffle-pool, step-pool,ripple-poot sequence4. Particle size of stream substrate5. Active/relictfloodplain6. Depositfonal bars or benches7. Recent all u via! deposits8. Headcuts9. Grade .control10. Natural valley11. Second or greater order channelAbsent0000000000^Weak11 .<£>01cb_0_£&0.50.5^LModerate222~w222JS-1YesStrong^33333331.53artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manualB. Hydrology (Subtotal = q )12. Presence of Baseflow13. Iron oxidizihg bacteria14. Leaf litter1.50.515. Sediment on plants ardebns0.51.516. Organic debris lines or piles0.5ZI1.517. Soil-based evidence of high water table?No =0Yes^_C. Biology (Subtotal=.J_18. Fibrous roots in streambedv19. Rooted upland plants in sfreambed20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)^_21. Aquatic Mollusks22. Fish£L0.51.523. Crayfish^_1.524. Amphibians1.525. AIgae£L0.511.526. Wetland plants in sfreambedFACW=0.75; OBL=1.5 Other =0'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.Notes: fij,W<r/ Ar-^f^--, .A/y/^^ C^M}<,^/ r^&/\^<TSketch:
NC DWQ Stream Identification FormDate: 5,^,.,^Evaluator: \ / . \ ,.'-<"-t^ \^i\L^A.g'NTotal Points: ^Stream is at least intermittent --? - -) <J& 19 pr perennial if & 30" C3 ' •Version 4.11Project/Site:^^| ^county: G^,\^AStream Determination (circle one)Ephemeral Intermittent P/efenmsbLatitude: 3(,.OS^6GLongitude:-7 9. ~?' Oo(^QOthere.g. Quad Name:A.. Geomorphology (Subtotal = I fl . SAbsentWeakModerateStrong' Continuity of channel bed and bank012. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg^_3. In-channel structure: ex. riffle-pool, step-pool,ripple-pool sequence(D4. Particle size of stream substrate^L5. Active/relictfloodplainQ6. Depositional bars or benches7. Recent alluvial deposits_0s_8. Headcuts9. Grade control0.51.510. Natural valley0.511. Second or greater order channelNo =0artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manualB. Hydrology (Subtotal = _CLI5_12. Presence of Baseflow13. Iron oxidizing bacteria14. Leaf litter15. Sediment on plants or debris16. Organic debris lines or piles17. Soil-based evidence of high water table?0000110.50.5No =020.5~SL<p3301.51.5^s^C. Biology (Subtotal = ^ . ^ )18. Fibrous roots in streambed19. Roofed upland plants in streambed~^~20. Macrobenthos (note diversify and abundance)^D21. Aquatic Mollusks22. Fish1.523. Crayflsh7^~1.524. Amphibians1.525. Algae0.511,526. Wetland plants in streambedFACW=0.75; OBL=1.5 Other =0'perennial strsams may also be idenfi{ied using other methods. Ses p. 35 of manual.I strsams may also be idenfi(ied using other methods. Ses p. 35 of manual. _^^-r.r^y (3>oMk^/y A^/P //J^/v^ ^7)^ bf^ileS-Notes:Sketch:
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4JL1^Date:^/^/^Evaluator: ^\)\\^,^Total Points: QStream is at least intemiittentif z 19 or perennial if: a 30* _' /' ^_ProjecySite:^^^ ^_County: ^-\^Stream Determjoatieajcjrcle one)Ephemeral/lfftermittiyft PerennialLatitude: ^ 0^ )^Longitude:-79.6W(?Othere.g. Quad Name:A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =' i'2> )AbsentWeakModerateStropg1a- Continuity of channel bed and bank0•t2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg3. In-channe! structure: ex. riffle-pool, step-pool,ripple-pool sequencey4. Particle size of stream substrateq>5. Active/relict floodplain .~^~6. Depositional bars or benches7. Recent alluvial deposits8. Headcuts9. Grade control0.51.510. Natural vattey0.51.511. Second or greater order channelW^7Yes =3artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manualB. Hydrology (Subtota! = °\ )12. Presence of Baseflow13. Iron oxidiztng bacteria^14. Leaf litter1.5~^7-0.515. Sediment on plants or debris0.5~w1.516. Organic debns lines or piles0.5^1.517. Soil-based evidence of high water table?No =0sC. Biology (Subfotal = ^ )18. Fibrous roots in streambed19. Rooted upland plants in streambeddS?^20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)21. Aquatic Mollusks^22. Fish0.5_~SSL1.523. Crayfish1.524. Amphibians1.525.AIgae0.511.526. Wetland plants in streambedFACW=0.75; OBL=1.5 Other =0*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.),^ ,^/e ^ r^M,-^^Notes;Sketch: