20140106 Ver 1_401 Application_20140214

r
® 2c- 1 ^ , J 6
STV /Ralph Whitehead Associates
1000 West Morehead Street, Suite 200
Charlotte, North Carolina 28208
(704)372 -1885 fax:[phone]
Letter of Transmittal
Sheet No.: 1 of 1
To: NC DWR Date: 01/31/2014 Our Job No.: 2515066
401 & Buffer Permitting Unit File Code: Your Job No.:
512 N. Salisbury Street Attention: Karen Higgins
Raleigh, NC 27604 Reference: Project ZDC in Zebulon, NC
We Are Sending: ®Attached ❑Under Separate Cover via ®Overnite ❑2nd Day ❑Regular mail the following items:
[]Shop Drawings ❑ Prints ❑Sepias ❑Mylars ❑Samples []Change Order
❑Copy of Letter El Reports El Specifications ❑Cost Estimates ❑Electronic Media
®Other: Request for Nationwide Permit #39
Item Rev. No. Quantity
2
Action Codes:
5
1
Description Action Code
Project ZDC in Zebulon, NC. Request for G
Nationwide Permit #39
Application fee of $240 D
A. Action Indicated on Item Transmitted C. For Your Use E. For Information Only G. For Approval
B. See Remarks Below D. As Requested F. For Review & Comment
Remarks Ms. Higgins,
Attached, please find five copies of the Project ZDC in Zebulon, NC, Request for Nationwide Permit #39
application package for your approval, and a check for $240 for the associated application fee. Please contact
Brandon Phillips at 704 - 372 -1885 ext. 2536 or brandon.phillips(&stvinc.com if you have any questions regarding
this permit application.
Thanks, �-•_
CGpOM¢
Copies: James Lastinger - USACE IFELS - 4 20 14
Paul Marcoux,SVP - BB &T WA
Mark Van Sickle, RLA, LEED AP - Little
Signed. Brandon Phillips ran
an employee -owned company providing quality service since 1912

Corps Submittal Cover Sheet
Please provide the following information:
1. Project Name Project ZDC
2. Name of Property Owner /Applicant: Branch Bank and Trust Company_
3. Name of Consultant/Agent: STV /Ralph Whitehead Associates
*Agent Authorization needs to be attached.
4. Related/Previous Action ID number(s): 201101006
5. Site Address: N. Arendell Avenue and Green Pace Road
6. Subdivision Name:
7. City: Z_ebulon
8. County:
9. Lat: 35.838285° N Long: -78.327161'W
10. Quadrangle Name: Zebulon, NC (1990)
11. Waterway: Unnamed tributaries to the Little River.
12. Watershed: Neuse
13. Requested Action: W= D
D
X Nationwide Permit # 39
General Permit # F E 9- 4 201.4
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Pre-Application Request ►MFR - WATER OUALITY
Pre -A
Pp q Well a 9tormwatcr Branch
The following information will be completed by Corps office:
AID:
Prepare File Folder Assign Number in ORM Begin Date
Authorization: Section 10 Section 404
Project Description/Nature of Activity /Project Purpose:
Site/Waters Name:
Keywords:

* 100
January 31, 2014
Via FEDERAL EXPRESS
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
Attention: Mr. James Lastinger
Subject: Pre - Construction Notification Pursuant to
Nationwide Permit No. 39
Proposed Project ZDC
Wake County, North Carolina
USACE Action ID 201101006
DWQ EXP# 11 -0354
Dear Mr. Lastinger:
On behalf of the Branch Bank and Trust Company (BB &T), and in cooperation with Little
Diversified Architectural Consulting (LITTLE), STV /Ralph Whitehead Associates (STV /RWA), is
submitting a Pre - Construction Notification (PCN) application form in accordance with General
Condition No. 31 and pursuant to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Section 404
Nationwide Permit (NWP) Number 39 — Commercial and Institutional Developments (Federal
Register Vol. 77, No. 34; updated February 21, 2012) for the permitting requirements of the
proposed Project ZDC in Zebulon, NC. The BB &T of Falls Church, VA has retained STV /RWA
to act as its agent in matters related to wetlands permitting services for this project; reference
Attachment A for an Agent Certification of Authorization. The PCN form is included as
Attachment B. Figures and Drawings referenced in the ensuing discussion are included in
Attachment C. Photographs of the permit area are included in Attachment D. A Jurisdictional
Determination regarding the approximate location and extent of jurisdictional waters of the U.S.
within the approximate 50 -acre project study area (PSA) was granted on June 1, 2011 (USACE
Action ID # 201101006) and is found in Attachment E. Agency correspondence is found in
Attachment F. N.C. Wetland Assessment Method Forms are found in Attachment G.
Project Description
The subject project study area (PSA) for the proposed Project ZDC is located to the west of and
adjacent to NC 96 (N. Arendell Avenue), and south and east of SR 2368 (Green Pace Road) in
Wake County, North Carolina (Attachment C — Figure 1). The PSA encompasses approximately
50 acres and consists of former agricultural fields and mixed pine /hardwood forest. Adjacent to
the site are commercial properties to the east along NC 96 (N. Arendell Avenue), undeveloped
woodland to the south and west, and commercial and residential development to the north.

Branch Bank and Trust Company January 31, 2014
Project ZDC - Request for NWP #39
BB &T is proposing the construction of a data center campus along SR 2368 (Green Pace Road)
and NC 96 (N Arendell Avenue) in Wake County west of the town of Zebulon, NC The
proposed data center campus will be constructed in phases, with the requirement to first
construct a data hall and office in the first phase of construction, and the addition of a second
data hall in the second phase of construction.
As part of the proposed Project ZDC, BB &T proposes to divert the drainage that is piped onto
the PSA from the east under NC 96 (N Arendell Avenue), around the proposed development
footprint The drainage diversion of off -site waters will ensure the continued hydrology to the
downstream waters of the U S Access drives to the proposed data center will be from both SR
2368 (Green Pace Road) and NC 96 (N Arendell Avenue) The main access will be from SR
2368 (Green Pace Road), where the proposed parking for the facility is located
Unavoidable impacts to waters of the U S have necessitated the use of a Nationwide Permit
#39 for the development of the data center campus These unavoidable impacts include the
filling of a former agricultural drainage ditch that has developed the characteristics of a wetland,
the filling of a portion of a former agricultural pond that is now drained and has also developed
wetland characteristics, the filling of an emergent wetland, and the piping of an on -site
intermittent stream. These impacts to waters of the U S are discussed in the Impacts to Waters
of the U S section of this cover letter
The erosion control measures for the site construction that include silt fencing, silt ditching,
slope drains, and a sediment basin with baffles and outlet skimmer shall be put in place prior to
construction The wetland and stream impacts would be done under the requested Nationwide
Permit #39
Background
As noted on aerial photography (2005) of Wake County, and verified by field review, the project
study area (PSA) is undeveloped and has been used as a former agricultural operation in a
suburban setting. Unimproved roadways for the former agricultural operation are located
throughout the PSA Mixed pine and hardwood forest areas are located on the periphery of the
PSA to the south and west Jurisdictional waters of the U S within the PSA include five
jurisdictional streams, two ponds and nine jurisdictional wetlands
The PSA topography is nearly level within the eastern and central portions of the site, and
gently sloping within the surrounding mixed pine and hardwood forests to the south and west
The stream flows are in a generally southwest direction Representative photographs of the
PSA are found in Attachment D
Prior to fieldwork, the following references were reviewed to identify possible waters of the U S ,
including wetland areas
• U S Geological Service (USGS) 7 5- minute quadrangle maps {Zebulon, NC (1990)1
• U S Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Map (Zebulon,
NC)
• U S Department of Agriculture (USDA) Soil Conservation Service (SCS) (now known as
Natural Resources Conservation Service {NRCS)) Soil Survey of Wake County, NC (1970)
• NRCS Soil Series Data, 2009
Page 2

Branch Bank and Trust Company January 31, 2014
Project ZDC - Request for NWP #39
• Wake County, NC GIS Data, 2005 Orthophotography
The USGS map (Attachment C - Figure 2) depicts the three former on -site ponds (now
designated Pond C, Pond/Wetland D, and Wetland E) and the stream connecting and providing
drainage for the ponds, as 'blue line' features The USDA Sod Survey depicts four intermittent
streams in other locations of the site The USFWS NWI map does not identify any streams or
wetlands within the PSA, but does depict two ponds
The proposed Project ZDC in Zebulon is located entirely within the northern outer Piedmont
Physiographic Province of North Carolina, which is characterized by broad, gently rolling
interstream areas and by steeper slopes along drainageways Based on topographic mapping,
elevations in the PSA range from approximately 330 feet above National Geodetic Vertical
Datum (NGVD) to 290 feet NGVD The highest elevations in the PSA are located near the
intersection of NC 96 (N Arendell Avenue) and SR 2368 (Green Pace Road). The lowest
elevations in the PSA are located in the southwest corner.
According to the NRCS Soil Series Data (Attachment C - Figure 3), the PSA contains six
interspersed sod types Appling sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes (ApB), Appling sandy loam, 2
to 6 percent slopes, moderately eroded (ApB2), Appling sandy loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes,
moderately eroded (ApC2), Colfax sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes (Cn), Durham loamy sand,
2 to 6 percent slopes (DuB), and Mantachie sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, rarely flooded
(Me) Colfax sandy loam is the only soil considered to be hydnc due to inclusions of the
Weehadkee, undramed and the Worsham, undrained soil types.
The proposed PSA is located in the Neuse River drainage basin. The PSA is located within the
Upper Neuse Watershed The mayor stream in the project region (Little River) generally flows in
a southerly direction. The Hydrologic Unit Code 8 (HUC 8) for the Upper Neuse Watershed is
03020201 The applicability of the on -site streams to the Neuse Riparian Area Protection Rules
was determined by Lia Myott Gdleski of the North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources ( NCDENR) on April 20, 2011 NCDENR issued the determination in a letter
dated April 21, 2011 (DWQ EXP# 11- 0354), please see Attachment F - Agency
Correspondence for a copy of this determination letter
Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S.
Jurisdictional waters of the U S located within the project study area (PSA) are limited to five
stream channels (Streams B, F, G, H and 1), two ponds (Pond C and Pond D) and nine wetlands
(Wetlands A, B, D, E, F, G, H, I, and J), reference Attachment C - Figure 4 for the locations of
these jurisdictional features and associated stream buffers The jurisdictional boundaries of the
streams, ponds, and wetlands were delineated by Brandon J Phillips, C H M M of STV /RWA
and were surveyed by ESP Associates, P A. The jurisdictional boundaries of the streams and
wetlands were field verified by the USACE Raleigh Regulatory Field Office ( USACE Action ID
201101006); please see Attachment F - Agency Correspondence for a copy of the Notification
of Jurisdictional Determination letter
Off -site drainage from properties located to the east is directed onto the PSA through pipes
located under NC 96 (N Arendell Ave ) Outfalls under NC 96 provide the hydrology to linear
Wetland A and linear Wetland B Linear Wetland A is an unmaintained drainage ditch that has
Page 3

Branch Bank and Trust Company January 31, 2014
Project ZDC - Request for NWP #39
developed wetland characteristics Linear Wetland A drains to Wetland E (a former agricultural
pond) through two pipe culverts that have been placed under two of the unimproved farm roads
that traverse the PSA. The pipe culverts conveying the drainage flow within linear Wetland A are
undersized, and are perched above the bottom of the ditch, creating a basin wetland within the
linear drainage ditch Linear Wetland B drains to Pond C (a former agricultural pond), which in
turn drains to Pond/Wetland D (a former agricultural pond) through seasonal RPW Stream B.
Pond/Wetland D drains to Wetland E through seasonal RPW Stream B Pond C and Wetlands
D and E have historically had their earthen berms removed to restore the direct connection to
downstream waters Wetland E drains through the gap in the former earthen dam towards the
southwest through seasonal RPW Stream F
Additional drainage from SR 2368 (Green Pace Road) and the north enters Wetland G in the
northwest portion of the PSA Wetland G provides the headwaters to seasonal RPW Stream G
(a Neuse River Basin buffered stream), which drains south past Wetland J and through Wetland
F to seasonal RPW Stream F, to create perennial RPW Stream F (also buffered streams)
Seasonal RPW Stream H enters the PSA in the southeast portion of the site and flows west,
through Wetland H to its confluence with seasonal RPW I, to create perennial RPW Stream I (all
are buffered streams) Perennial RPW Stream I flows to the west, past Wetland I, and drains
off -site
The wetlands to be impacted were evaluated using the NC WAM, Version 4 1 (October 2010)
The forms prepared for the impacted wetlands (Wetland A, Wetland E, and Wetland G) indicate
that all three wetlands to be impacted have an overall wetland rating of "low," please see
Attachment G - N C Wetland Assessment Method Forms for copies of the wetland rating
sheets for the three wetlands that will be impacted by the proposed development.
Purpose and Need
The purpose of the proposed Project ZDC is to provide new data halls and office space for
BB &T (Attachment C - Drawings WD -1 through WD -4) The new data halls and office are
required to support the expanded business needs driven by the continued growth of BB &T This
important BB &T facility will provide vital fobs for the local work force and is essential to provide
needed services to the Triangle market and bank branches in eastern North Carolina. Initial
construction for Phase I will include the access drives, the parking areas, stormwater
management facilities, and the data hall and office Occupancy of the facility is anticipated
within 18 months Phase II of the proposed Project ZDC will be the construction of an additional
data hall and is anticipated to be completed within five years
Impacts to Waters of the U.S.
The project involves the construction of the access drives, the parking areas, stormwater
management facilities, and the data halls and office. Attachment C - Drawing WD -1 depicts the
proposed development footprint overlay on the jurisdictional waters of the U.S and regulated
stream buffers Attachment C - Drawing WD -2 depicts an enlarged development footprint
overlay on the jurisdictional waters of the U S Proposed impacts to waters of the U S are
depicted on Attachment C - Drawing WD -3 A total of 18,436 square feet (0 423 acre) of
wetland impact and 56 linear feet (0 005 acre) of stream impact is anticipated from the proposed
development
Page 4

Branch Bank and Trust Company January 31, 2014
Project ZDC — Request for NWP #39
Project plans for the development propose diverting the off -site drainage currently going to
linear Wetland A to Pond C, and then filling linear Wetland A because it is located within the
proposed development footprint Permanent impacts to linear Wetland A will be a total of
approximately 6,139 square feet (0 141 acre) and are listed on the PCN form (Attachment B) as
Wetland Impact W1, see Attachment D — Photographs 1 and 2 for a view of the Wetland Impact
W1 areas
The northernmost portion of Wetland E, where the drainage pipe from linear Wetland A enters
the Wetland E basin, will also be filled for the proposed development Permanent impacts to
Wetland E at this location will be approximately 8,396 square feet (0 193 acre) and this impact
is listed on the PCN form as Wetland Impact W2, see Attachment D — Photograph 3 for a view
of Wetland Impact W2
A portion of Wetland G will be filled for the proposed development parking lot Permanent
impacts to Wetland G will be approximately 2,707 square feet (0 062 acre) and is listed on the
PCN form as Wetland Impact W3, see Attachment D — Photograph 4 for a view of Wetland
Impact W3
A second, smaller area of Wetland E will also be impacted by the proposed high flow by -pass
outlet on the sediment and stormwater detention and water quality basin (wet pond) Permanent
impacts to Wetland E resulting from the proposed nprap pad outlet of the high flow by -pass
outlet for the wet pond will be approximately 1,194 square feet (0 027 acre) and is listed on the
PCN form as Wetland Impact W4, see Attachment D — Photograph 5 for a view of Wetland
Impact W4
Wetland A currently drains to Wetland E through a pipe culvert The drainage to Wetland A will
be diverted to Pond C, which drains to Pond/Wetland D, which in turn drains to Wetland E
through an existing pipe and seasonal RPW Stream B The proposed 100' pipe culvert to be
placed in seasonal RPW Stream B will replace the existing 44' pipe and will cause
approximately 56 linear feet (0 005 acre) of permanent impacts to seasonal RPW Stream B, and
is listed on the PCN form as Stream Impact S1, see Attachment D — Photograph 6 for a view of
Stream Impact S1 All work in seasonal RPW Stream B shall be subject to pump around
operations when the pipe culvert removal and installation work is to be performed in the live
channel Work in or adjacent to the stream shall be conducted so that the flowing stream does
not come into contact with the disturbed area Necessary measures shall be taken to prevent
direct contact between uncured or curing concrete and the waters of seasonal RPW Stream B
Disturbed areas will be restored to their pre - construction state upon work completion The
proposed pipe culvert shall be buried at least one foot below the bed of the stream as
appropriate to maintain aquatic passage (Attachment C — Drawings WD -4 and WD -5)
Avoidance and Minimization
Site selection for this critical facility (data center) was undertaken in 2009 -2010 The size of the
parcel as well as its proximity to redundant infrastructure needs (water, electric, fiber optic) and
the distance to Raleigh and Wilson, North Carolina were determining factors in locating and
selecting the site The facility will ultimately be 249,000 square feet in size with 65 maximum
day to day employees, along with space to accommodate 67 disaster recovery employees and
associated parking The existing infrastructure dictated the need for a finished first floor
elevation of 342 50 feet NGVD in order to provide gravity sanitary sewer service for the facility
Page 5

Branch Bank and Trust Company January 31, 2014
Project ZDC - Request for NWP #39
The design team and owner worked through several iterations of building configurations to
maximize long term viability of the facility as the primary data center for BB &T Facility
protection is paramount for this facility and a 100' perimeter setback was utilized in order to help
maximize the standoff distance from pending threats Also, due to the adjacency of the
interstate to the south of the property, the required access from both SR 2368 (Green Pace
Road) and NC 96 (N Arendell Avenue), and the location of the wetlands, the northern end of
the site was selected for the location of the building This facility location has helped to minimize
the impact to the more significant, higher quality wetlands that are located in the central and
western portions of the project study area (PSA)
Due to the nature of the project, avoiding impacts to linear Wetland A, Wetland E, Wetland G
and seasonal RPW Stream B while achieving project goals is not practicable There is no
practicable alternative that would achieve the project purpose of developing the northeastern
uplands of the PSA (Attachment D - Photograph 7) for the proposed data halls and office that
would avoid, or result in less impacts to waters of the U S. Best management practices (BMPs)
will be used for stormwater management, and appropriate erosion and sedimentation controls
will be installed and maintained during construction activities to allow for the least adverse effect
on the wetlands and stream channels, and associated water quality The placement of the pipe
culvert within the channel of seasonal RPW Stream B would be done in the dry using a
cofferdam for the pump- around operation, with sedimentation and erosion control devices clear
of any jurisdictional waters
Sedimentation and erosion control plans have been prepared for the proposed development
(See Attachment C - Figures and Drawings) Sedimentation and erosion control devices were
designed in accordance with appropriate City and State erosion and sediment control
ordinances and will thereby equal or exceed the requirements specified in the latest version of
the North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Manual The Erosion and Sedimentation
Control Plan that has been prepared for the project was submitted to Wake County
Environmental Services for approval The Erosion Control Plan Stage I is depicted on Drawing
C -401, and includes the installation of the silt fencing around the limits of construction, as well
as the construction of the sediment basin with baffles that will receive the runoff from the
construction area An enlarged view of the proposed construction sediment basin is depicted in
Drawing C -402 The Erosion Control Plan Stage II is depicted on Drawing C -403, and includes
the installation of a rock filter berm and level spreader at the proposed sediment basin, after the
site has been stabilized and sediment has been removed from the sediment basin The Wake
County Environmental Services approval of the sedimentation and erosion control plan for the
construction of the proposed Project ZDC is pending
Activities on the project site involving impacts to waters of the U S will be required to follow the
General Conditions of the USACE Nationwide Permits (Federal Register Vol 77, No 34,
updated February 21, 2012), applicable USACE Wilmington District Regional Conditions (March
29, 2012), and applicable NCDWQ consistency conditions (March 19, 2012)
Compensatory Mitigation
As described above, efforts have been made to avoid and minimize impacts to waters of the
U S to the maximum extent practicable The proposed wetland and stream impacts and the
required permit application was discussed with the USACE during a phone conversation to
determine if compensatory mitigation would be required for this project Mr. David Shaeffer of
Page 6

Branch Bank and Trust Company January 31, 2014
Project ZDC - Request for NWP #39
the USACE informed STV /RWA that since wetland impacts are greater than 0 1 acre, there
would likely be a requirement for compensatory wetland mitigation Since stream impacts are
less than 150 linear feet, there would likely be no requirement for compensatory stream
mitigation Therefore, wetland compensatory mitigation requirements for this project are
anticipated Further discussions with you indicated that the compensatory mitigation would be
done using a 2 1 ratio, unless the North Carolina Wetlands Assessment Method (NC WAM)
indicated that the overall wetland rating was "low " In that situation, the compensatory wetland
mitigation would be done using a 1.1 ratio. The wetlands to be impacted were evaluated using
the NC WAM, Version 4 1 (October 2010), and the forms prepared for the impacted wetlands
(Wetland A, Wetland E, and Wetland G) indicate that all three wetlands to be impacted have an
overall wetland rating of "loud' (Attachment G - NC Wetland Assessment Method Forms)
Therefore, we anticipate providing compensatory mitigation at a 1 1 ratio which would equate to
the purchase of 0 43 acre of wetland mitigation credit The Pancho Stream and Wetland
Mitigation Bank was contacted regarding the availability of wetland mitigation credits Credits
are available and therefore the Pancho Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank will be providing
the necessary wetland credits for Project ZDC A credit reservation request letter will be sent to
the Pancho Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank as soon as the wetland mitigation
requirements have been determined by the USACE
Stormwater Management Plan
A Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) for the project is required due to the impervious
surfaces that are proposed, and has been prepared by LITTLE Stormwater will be collected
from impervious surfaces and directed by curb and gutter into storm drainage inlets Subsurface
pipes will convey stormwater to a water quality basin that will be initially used during
construction as a sediment basin and converted to a permanent water quality basin when
construction is completed (See Attachment C - Drawing WD -4) The permanent Best
Management Practices (BMPs) to be used include a wet pond (water quality basin), level
spreader, and filter strip A splitter box will be installed upstream of the level spreader and filter
strip to allow high flows to bypass the filter strip The wet pond has been designed to remove
85% total suspended solids The BMPs provide water quality per the North Carolina BMP
Manual and utilizes a littoral shelf and level spreader to help maximize water quality and
minimize off site impacts due to stormwater discharge quality and quantity. The overall pre -
development drainage pattern has been essentially maintained The SWMP has been submitted
to the Wake County Environmental Services - Stormwater Management Program The SWMP
will be reviewed by the Wake County Environmental Services - Stormwater Management
Program and approval is pending
Cultural Resources
A review of historic and archaeological sites in the vicinity of the proposed Project ZDC was
conducted The National Register was consulted and indicated that there are two sites listed on
the National Register in the Zebulon area The George and Neva Barbee House, a
bungalow /craftsman residential dwelling is located approximately 1 mile away from the project
study area (PSA) The Bennett Bunn Plantation is located more than two miles away from the
PSA. Considering that limited impacts to waters of the U S are proposed for this project, the
likelihood of unidentified cultural resources being present or impacted in the proposed permit
area is considered remote
Page 7

Branch Bank and Trust Company January 31, 2014
Project ZDC - Request for NWP #39
The North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources State Historic Preservation Office
(SHPO) was contacted by STV /RWA requesting information on potential historic resources
within the PSA As of this date, we have received no response from SHPO, regarding historic
resources that may be affected by the proposed project (Attachment F - Agency
Correspondence).
Protected Species
STV /RWA conducted a protected species habitat assessment and review of the project study
area (PSA) in March and April, 2011 Prior to the field reviews, STV /RWA reviewed the U S
Fish and Wildlife Service ( USFWS) and North Carolina Natural Heritage Program ( NCNHP)
databases, which provided existing data concerning the potential occurrence of federally and
state protected (threatened or endangered) species in Wake County These databases indicate
that there are three federal and state endangered species that may occur in Wake County The
NCNHP map viewer was also consulted (January, 2014) and indicated that no protected
species are located within two miles of the PSA The NCNHP response to a request for
concurrence indicates that no federally listed species are located within one mile of the PSA, but
the state listed rare species, regal darter (Coryphaeschna ingens) was recorded as being
located within a mile of the PSA (Attachment F - Agency Correspondence) The USFWS
Information, Planning, and Conservation (IPAC) Online System was consulted and indicated
that five federal endangered species should be considered for the PSA The five federally
protected species and their respective physical descriptions and habitat requirements are
described below
Dwarf wedgemussel (Alasmidonta heterodon) - Federal /State Endangered
The dwarf wedgemussel is a federally and state listed endangered species The mussel rarely
exceeds 45 millimeters (mm) in length Young shells are typically greenish -brown in color with
greenish rays, while older shells usually appear black or brown The shell is relatively thin, but
tends to thicken with age toward the anterior end The preferred habitat of this species includes
clay banks along root systems of trees, mixed substrates of cobble, gravel, and sand, and
occasionally soft silt substrates. Stream banks are stable, having extensive root systems and
mature riparian buffers Water quality within the rivers and streams where the dwarf
wedgemussel is found is good to excellent. Dwarf wedgemussel once occurred in rivers and
streams from New Brunswick, Canada to North Carolina North Carolina supports the greatest
number of known occurrences within the Neuse River Basin (Orange Co, Wake Co, Johnston
Co , Wilson Co , Nash Co ), and the Tar River Basin
Potential habitat does not exist within any of the streams present within the PSA No clay banks
along root systems of trees, or mixed substrates of cobble, gravel, and sand are located within
the streams within the PSA There are records of dwarf wedgemussel currently being located in
Wake County and the Zebulon, NC USGS quadrangle The NCNHP database was reviewed to
determine the locations of the nearest populations of dwarf wedgemussel The NCNHP
determined that no populations of dwarf wedgemussel are present within two miles of the PSA
Based on the field review, the lack of habitat present and the available databases, it is
determined that this project will have `no effect' on the dwarf wedgemussel
Biological Conclusion No Effect
Page 8

Branch Bank and Trust Company January 31, 2014
Project ZDC — Request for NWP #39
Tar River spinymussel (Elliptio stemstansana) — Federal /State Endangered
The Tar River spinymussel is a federally and state listed endangered species This spinymussel
is 2 5 inches in length Juvenile spiny mussels contain 12 spines and have an outer shell
surface that is orange -brown with greenish rays Adult mussels tend to lose their spines as they
mature and have a darker outer surface with inconspicuous rays The inner shell of both the
juvenile and adult spinymussel is yellow or pinkish at one end and blueish -white at the other
end This species is typically observed in unconsolidated beds of gravel and coarse sand in
relatively fast flowing water The water quality of the stream is good to excellent Stream banks
are usually stable, having extensive root systems The Tar River spinymussel is known to occur
in Edgecombe County within the Swift Creek subbasin and the Tar River
Potential habitat does not exist within any of the streams present within the PSA No
unconsolidated beds of gravel and coarse sand in relatively fast flowing water are located within
the streams within the PSA There are no records of Tar River spinymussel currently being
located in Wake County and the Zebulon, NC USGS quadrangle. The NCNHP database was
reviewed to determine the locations of the nearest populations of Tar River spinymussel The
NCNHP determined that no populations of Tar River spinymussel are present within two miles
of the PSA Based on the field review, the lack of habitat present and the available databases, it
is determined that this project will have 'no effect' on the Tar River spinymussel
Biological Conclusion No Effect
Cape Fear shiner (Notropis mekistocho/as) — Federal /State Endangered
The Cape Fear shiner is a federally and state listed endangered species. The Cape Fear shiner
a small, moderately stocky minnow, rarely exceeding 2 5 inches in length The Cape Fear
shiner body is flushed with a pale silvery yellow, with somewhat pointed yellowish fins, and a
black band that runs along the sides of its body During the spawning season, the yellowish
golden body color is intensified in the males, and the females take on a silvery cast This
species is distinguished from similar species by the black upper and lower lips The Cape Fear
shiner inhabits slow pools, riffles, and runs with gravel, cobble, and boulder substrates, often
around beds of aquatic vegetation The Cape Fear shiner is typically associated with schools of
other related species, but it is never the dominant species
Potential habitat does not exist within any of the streams present within the PSA No slow pools,
riffles, and runs with gravel, cobble, and boulder substrates are located within the streams within
the PSA There are no records of Cape Fear shiner currently being located in Wake County and
the Zebulon, NC USGS quadrangle The NCNHP database was reviewed to determine the
locations of the nearest populations of Cape Fear shiner The NCNHP determined that no
populations of Cape Fear shiner are present within two miles of the PSA Based on the field
review, the lack of habitat present and the available databases, it is determined that this project
will have 'no effect' on the Cape Fear shiner
Bioloaical Conclusion No Effect
Red - cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) — Federal /State Endangered
The red - cockaded woodpecker (RCW) is a federally and state listed endangered species Adult
red - cockaded woodpeckers (RCWs) are approximately 18 to 20 centimeters (cm) long with a
wingspan of 35 to 38 cm Adults have a black cap, throat, and stripe on the side of the neck and
white cheeks and underparts The back is barred with black and white horizontal stripes Adult
males have a small red spot on each side of the black cap The bird is native to southern pine
Page 9

Branch Bank and Trust Company January 31, 2014
Project ZDC — Request for NWP #39
forests and typically nests within open pine stands with trees 80 years or older Roosting
cavities are excavated within live pines, which are often infected with a fungus which causes
what is known as red -heart disease Foraging may occur in pine and /or mixed pine /hardwood
stands 30 years or older with trees 10" or larger in diameter at breast height (dbh)
No individuals of RCW were observed within the PSA during the March and April field reviews.
While the southern and western portions of the PSA outside of the impact areas exhibit some
habitat requirements preferred by this species, there are no currently known populations within
the proximity of the PSA Based on the field review, and the available databases, it is
determined that this project will have 'no effect' on the RCW
Biological Conclusion No Effect
Michaux's sumac (Rhus michauxnl — Federal /State Endangered
Michaux's sumac is a rhizomatous, densely hairy shrub, with erect stems from one to three feet
in height The compound leaves contain evenly serrated, oblong to lanceolate, acuminate
leaflets Most plants are unisexual, however, more recent observations have revealed plants
with both male and female flowers on one plant The flowers are small, borne in a terminal,
erect, dense cluster, and colored greenish yellow to white Flowering usually occurs from June
to July, while the fruit, a red drupe, is produced through the months of August to October
Michaux's sumac grows in sandy or rocky open woods in association with basic soils
Apparently, this plant survives best in areas where some form of disturbance has provided an
open area This plant is restricted to eleven counties in North Carolina, and is listed as current in
Wake County Michaux's sumac is not listed as present within the Zebulon, NC USGS
quadrangle
No individuals of Michaux's sumac were observed within the PSA during the March and April
field reviews, although it was outside the flowering season While the PSA exhibits some habitat
requirements preferred by this species, there are no currently known populations within the
proximity of the PSA Based on the field review, and the available databases, it is determined
that this project will have 'no effect' on Michaux's sumac
Biological Conclusion No Effect
The list of protected species was reviewed, and evaluations were performed regarding the
likelihood of the presence of each species in the PSA The PSA largely consists of formerly
farmed areas and mature mixed pine /hardwood forest The USFWS and the NCNHP databases
were reviewed by STV /RWA regarding potential protected species within the PSA According to
the USFWS and the NCNHP websites, no record of rare species, significant natural
communities, or significant natural heritage areas within one mile of the PSA have been
documented The Natural Heritage Program Map Viewer indicates that several Wake County
Open Space conservation /managed areas are located within 2 miles of the PSA A request for
concurrence letter has been sent to the USFWS and the NCNHP A response from the USFWS
is pending The NCNHP response indicates that no federally listed species are located within
one mile of the PSA, but the state listed rare species, regal darter (Coryphaeschna ingens) was
recorded as being located within a mile of the PSA (Attachment F — Agency Correspondence)
Due to the habitat requirements for the aforementioned protected plant and animal species, the
habitat available within the PSA, the findings of the field survey, as well as the findings of the
NCNHP, it is determined that the proposed project will have no effect on any of the protected
species listed for Wake County
Page 10

Branch Bank and Trust Company
Project ZDC — Request for NWP #39
January 31, 2014
Closing
Please feel free to contact either of the undersigned at (704) 372 -1885 should you have any
questions or concerns regarding this request for Nationwide Permit #39.
Sincerely,
STV /RALPH WHITEHEAD ASSOCIATES
Brandon J. Phillips, C.H.M.M.
Senior Environmental Specialist
Attachment A:
Attachment B:
Attachment C:
Attachment D:
Attachment E:
Attachment F:
Attachment G:
Michael A. lag�c�o` PWS
Project Manag / for Scientist
Agent Certification of Authorization
Pre - Construction Notification Form
Figures and Drawings
Photographs
Notification of Jurisdictional Determination
Agency Correspondence
N.C. Wetlands Assessment Method Forms
cc: Karen Higgins, NCDWR
Mark Van Sickle, Little Diversified Architectural Consulting
Page 11

Branch Bank and Trust Company
Project ZDC - Request for NWP #39
Attachment A
Agent Certification of Authorization
January 31, 2014

AGENT CERTIFICATION OF AUTHORIZATION
I,
�- k 1', -, �,,— Z )�er( the owner of the site in question, hereby
certify that I have authorized Michael A Iagnocco, P.W.S. of STV/Ralph Whitehead
Associates, to act on my behalf and take all actions necessary in the processing, issuance,
and acceptance of this jurisdictional determination and any required permit applications
and all standards and special conditions attached
We hereby verify that the above information submitted in this request/application is true
and accurate to the best of our knowledge.
Applicant's signature
Date
- .•
Date
Completion of this form will allow the agent to sign all future application correspondence.

Branch Bank and Trust Company
Project ZDC — Request for NWP #39
Attachment B
Pre - Construction Notification Form
January 31, 2014

. � I
OBOE
I � o <
20140 ;06
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre - Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A.
Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1 a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
Q Section 404 Permit ❑ Section 10 Permit
1 b.
Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 39 or General Permit (GP) number:
1 c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes 0 No
1 d.
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification:
❑ Yes ❑X No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes X❑ No
1f.
Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for
mitigation of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank
or in -lieu fee program.
❑X Yes ❑ No
1 g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
❑ Yes Q No
1 h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes Q No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
Project ZDC
2b.
County:
Wake
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Zebulon
2d.
Subdivision name:
N/A
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
N/A
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Branch Bank and Trust Company
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
Paul Marcoux, SVP - Branch Bank and Trust Company
3d.
Street address:
6400 Arlington Blvd., Suite 11200
3e.
City, state, zip:
Falls Church, VA 22042
3f.
Telephone no.:
(703) 241 -3564
3g.
Fax no.:
3h.
Email address:
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4.
Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a
Applicant is
X❑ Agent ❑ Other, specify
4b
Name
4c
Business name
(if applicable)
4d
Street address
4e
City, state, zip
0
Telephone no
4g
Fax no
4h
Email address
5.
Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a
Name
Michael A lagnocco, P W S
5b
Business name
(if applicable)
STV /Ralph Whitehead Associates
5c
Street address
900 West Trade Street, Suite 715
5d
City, state, zip
Charlotte, NC 28202 -1144
5e
Telephone no
(704) 372 -1885
5f.
Fax no
(704) 371 -3393
5g
Email address
michael iagnocco @stvinc corn
Page 2 of 10

B.
Project Information and Prior Project History
1
Property Identification
la
Property Identification no (tax PIN or parcel ID)
0050085 0047846 0030080 0019914 0377542 0030074
lb
Site coordinates (in decimal degrees)
I Latitude 35 838285 Longitude -78 327161
1c
Property size
50 acres
2.
Surface Waters
2a
Name of nearest body of water to proposed project
Little River
2b
Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water
WS -II, HQW, NSW, CA
2c
River basin
Upper Neuse
3.
Project Description
3a Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application
The protect study area encompasses approximately 50 acres and consists primarily of former agricultural fields, agricultural ponds, and mixed pine/
hardwood forest Adjacent to the site are commercial properties to the east along NC 96 (N Arendell Avenue), undeveloped woodland to the south
and west, and commercial and residential development to the north Refer to Project Description in cover letter for details on the existing conditions
3b
List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property 5 1
3c
List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property 2,368
3d Explain the purpose of the proposed project
BB&T is proposing the construction of a data center campus along NC 96 in Wake County, NC Refer to Purpose and Need in cover letter for details
3e Describe the overall project In detail, including the type of equipment to be used
Construction of data halls and office Heavy equipment to be used Refer to Protect Description in cover letter for details on the proposed development
4.
Jurisdictional Determinations
4a
Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
❑x Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
Comments Action ID 201101006 and DWR EXP#11 -0354
4b
If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
❑ Preliminary Q Final
4c
If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known) Brandon J Phillips, CHMM
Agency /Consultant Company STV /Ralph Whitehead Assoc
Other
4d If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation
USACE Action ID 201101006 -June 1, 2011, NCDWQ DWQ EXP# 11 -0354 -April 21, 2011 Jurisdictional Determination and DWQ Express Review
Attached (Attachment E)
5.
Project History
5a
Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
El Yes © No ❑ Unknown
5b
If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions
6.
Future Project Plans
6a
Is this a phased project?
0 Yes ❑ No
6b If yes, explain
The proposed data center campus will be constructed in phases, with the requirement to first construct a data hall and office in the first phase of
construction, and a second data hall in the second phase of construction within five years The requested NWP #39 covers both phases of construction
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 14 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply)
❑X Wetlands Streams — tributaries ❑ Buffers ❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted
2a
Wetland impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
2b
Type of impact
2c
Type of wetland
2d
Forested
2e
Type of jurisdiction
Corps (404,10) or
DWQ (401, other)
2f
Area of
impact
(acres)
W1 P
Fill
Small -Basin Wetland
No
Corps
0 141
W2 P
Fill
Small -Basin Wetland
No
Corps
0 193
W3 P
Fill
Non -Tidal Freshwater Marsh
No
Corps
0 062
W4 P
Fill
Small -Basin Wetland
No
Corps
0 027
W5
Choose one
Choose one
Yes /No
-
W6 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes /No
-
2g Total Wetland Impacts:
0 423
2h Comments
Wetland Impacts are depicted on Attachment C - Drawing WD -3
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted
3a
Stream impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
3b
Type of impact
3c
Stream name
3d
Perennial (PER) or
intermittent (INT)?
3e
Type of
jurisdiction
3f
Average
stream
width
(feet)
3g
Impact
length
(linear
feet)
S1 P
Culvert
seasonal RPW B
INT
Corps
4
56
S2
Choose one
-
-
S3 -
Choose one
-
-
S4 -
Choose one
-
-
S5 -
Choose one
-
-
S6 -
Choose one
3h Total stream and tributary impacts
56
31 Comments
Stream Impacts are depicted on Attachment C - Drawing WD -3
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form — Version 14 January 2009

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U S then indiv ually list all open water impacts below
4a
Open water
impact number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
4b
Name of waterbody
(if applicable)
4c
Type of impact
4d
Waterbody
type
4e
Area of impact (acres)
O1
Choose one
Choose
O2 -
Choose one
Choose
03 -
Choose one
Choose
04
Choose one
Choose
4f Total open water impacts
0
4g Comments NO open water impacts are proposed
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, the complete the chart below
5a
Pond ID number
5b
Proposed use or
purpose of pond
5c
Wetland Impacts (acres)
5d
Stream Impacts (feet)
5e
Upland
(acres)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
P1
Choose one
P2
Choose one
5f Total:
5g Comments No pond or lake construction impacts are proposed
5h Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no
51 Expected pond surface area (acres)
51 Size of pond watershed (acres)
5k Method of construction
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form
6a. Project is in which protected basin?
X❑ Neuse ❑ Tar - Pamlico '❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman ❑ Other
6b
Buffer Impact
number —
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
6c
Reason for im
` pact
6d
Stream name
6e
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet )
6g
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet
B1 -
Yes /No
B2 -
Yes /No
B3 -
Yes /No
B4 -
Yes /No
B5 -
Yes /No
B6 -
Yes /No
6h Total Buffer Impacts
0
0
61 Comments No buffer impacts are proposed
Page 5 of 10

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project
The proposed development footprint was placed in the northeastern uplands of the site in order to avoid impacts to the streams and wetlands in the
central and western portions of the site Due to the nature of the project, avoiding impacts to linear Wetland A, Wetland E, Wetland G and seasonal
RPW Stream B while achieving protect goals is not practicable There is no practicable alternative that would achieve the project purpose of
developing the northeastern uplands of the PSA Refer to Avoidance and Minimization in cover letter for details on the avoidance measures taken
1 b Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques
Best management practices (BMPs) and erosion and sedimentation controls will be installed and maintained during construction activities to allow for
the least adverse effect on the wetlands and stream channels The pipe culvert installation in seasonal RPW Stream B would be done in the dry using
a cofferdam for the pump -around operation, with sedimentation and erosion control devices clear of any jurisdictional waters Refer to Avoidance and
Minimization in cover letter for details on the avoidance measures taken through construction techniques
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?
❑X Yes ❑ No
2b If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply)
Q DWQ ❑X Corps
2c If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
Mitigation bank
❑ Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a Name of Mitigation Bank Pancho Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank
3b Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type Choose one
Type Choose one
Type Choose one
Quantity
Quantity
Quantity
e mitigation required for the proposed iAtland impacts has not yet been determined y the USAGE A 1 1 ratio is an cipa e
3c Comments
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached
❑ Yes
4b Stream mitigation requested
linear feet
4c If using stream mitigation, stream temperature
Choose one
4d Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only)
square feet
4e Riparian wetland mitigation requested
acres
4f Non - npanan wetland mitigation requested
acres
4g Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested
acres
4h Comments
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form — Version 14 January 2009

6 Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
Yes nX No
buffer mitigation?
6b If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation Calculate the
amount of mitigation required
6c
6d
6e
Zone
Reason for impact
Total impact
Multiplier
Required mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
15
6f Total buffer mitigation required:
o
6g If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e g , payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund)
No buffer impacts are proposed
6h Comments
Page 7 of 10

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
❑X Yes ❑ No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why
Yes A diffuse flow plan consisting of the use of a level spreader at the outlet of the stormwater water
® Yes ❑ No
quality basin is proposed An approval letter from Wake County Environmental Services - Stormwater
Management Program for the Stormwater Management Plan is pending
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
21 25 %
2b Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
❑x Yes ❑ No
2c If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why
2d If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan
Stormwater will be collected from impervious surfaces and directed by curb and gutter into storm drainage inlets Subsurface pipes will convey
stormwater to a water quality basin (wet pond) that will be initially used during construction as a sediment basin and converted to a permanent water
quality basin when construction is completed (See Attachment C — Drawing WD-4) The permanent Best Management Practices to be used include a
wet pond, level spreader, and filter strip A splitter box will be installed upstream of the level spreader and filter strip to allow high flows to bypass the
filter strip The wet pond has been designed to remove 85% total suspended solids and meets the requirements of NCDENR The SWMP has been
submitted to the Wake County Environmental Services - Stormwater Management Program for review and approval
2e Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
Wake County Environmental Services
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
Wake County
X❑ Phase II
❑ NSW
3b Which of the following locally- implemented stormwater management programs
[] USMP
apply (check all that apply)
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other
3c Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑Yes ❑X No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑Coastal counties
❑HQW
4a Which of the following state - implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ORW
(check all that apply)
❑Session Law 2006 -246
[:]Other
4b Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
X❑ Yes ❑ No
5b Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑X Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1 4 January 2009

F.
Supplementary Information
1.
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
la
Does the project Involve an expenditure of public (federal /state /local) funds or the
❑ Yes
❑X No
use of public (federal /state) land?
lb
If you answered 'yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑ Yes
❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1c
If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (if so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
❑ Yes
❑ No
letter)
Comments
2.
Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a
Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H 0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H 1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑Yes
❑X No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B 0200)?
2b
Is this an after - the -fact permit application?
El Yes
Q No
2c
If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s)
3.
Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
❑Yes
Q No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b
If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description
4.
Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non - discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility
Wastewater generated from the site will be collected by sanitary sewer and will be piped to the Little Creek WWTP (NPDES #NC 0079316) The Little
Creek WWTP has a maximum capacity of 1 85 million gallons a day
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1 4 January 2009

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
❑ Yes ❑X No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
0 Yes ❑ No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Raleigh
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
The USFWS IPAC and NC Natural Heritage Program web sites were consulted. A request for concurrence has also been sent to the USFWS and NC
Natural Heritage Program (See Attachment F - Agency Correspondence).
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ❑ No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
NOAA EFH Webpage
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes ❑X No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
The National Register website was reviewed to determine the locations of the nearest listed historic sites. A request for concurrence has also been
sent to the State Historic Preservation Office (See Attachment F - Agency Correspondence).
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA- designated 100 -year floodplain?
❑ Yes X❑ No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
FEMA FIRM maps on -line
Michael A. lagnocco, P.W.S.
01 -29 -2014
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Date
AppIican1/&eJtA Signature
(Agent's signature is alid o y if an authorization
letter from the pel a t is provided.)
Page 10 of 10

Branch Bank and Trust Company
Project ZDC - Request for NWP #39
Attachment C
Figures and Drawings
January 31, 2014

Glory Rd
Legend
= Project Study Area
SR 2368
^ o
'c c
L
� p
r
W Gann Ave
v;
�4 I p;
C�
Qe
�D
O
:Y
F
n'
t'J
s
n
F'tppt^ R7 �`
b
4
0
v
�
o
G
�
0
e
s
r•�o
u
v
Yt
G
U�
-t
9-
6
Af
9�
n
Zj
`1
Zebulon
s`
�t•
�N 3Vc 100
1i6
:p
t
Of
•r.
A�
Oakm.im Rci
Old 13" 'In An
:..
N
KSTIV
Clien L•
BB&T
In Cooperation With
E,. ,I. T,.T,, E.,.E
Project:
ProjectZ.DC
in "Z.ebulon
Wake County, NC
'title:
SITE LOCATION MAP
Ref. ESR1, De Lorme, NAVTEQ,
USGS, lawrmap, WC, NRCAN,
M ET 1, TomTom, 2013
a
-
V8 ?6
1 yt�,tta�.
Wake County, NC
Drawn By: Checked By:
JLK BJP
Approved By: Date:
ia�tPlp 3ohnsan Rd MAI 01/30/2014
STV /RWA Project No.
2515066
0 0.25 0.5 1
Miles FIGURE 1

• � !•� � f `� J'47.f � \! _, + `• ��y � � \1 ^` . -vim • •
� ✓.-- ^ � �- V - -fie -_. ESTV�
Cm `\ yL� \. ,� *.. • • •'' / , .r .`+
x
1333 r Client:
. r 2371 ?
BB&T
V j /'+, f/' . •AMY ti�J" '+ e 4 In Cooperation With
4
• :: a m•. '� - 3 ` ; ._ Q . ^.�..... —.� - i { / `.h,. 1• `� I os „ ,,, s,,. E
�(' �` � A=MY i i�� �` � tI •' I l , \.J Project:
,• � ,� � _�° r v � � ." f•� + _ . `_ ago\ tr���'` `�,,.
• �' +� Approximate Project Study Area • �Q ? ,,' ;''°�' .• j
f— J t x. Project ZDC
v
• J, � � � . ,^ � 3, _ n � In Zebulon
Ile ,Hill Rd ' "• '+ w ! �.' ; /-, - — Wake County, NC
` • '� � ill • j•. (' r
64
.� G�' :�, S i _ C •; '.a to USGS TOPOGRAPHIC
r Q Gmt O MAP
f - , i '• ,. a 11 Ref. USGS 7.5 Minute Topography
j % " "ol••�•- t f 264 Map(Zebulon,1981)
�\
264 SR Z36$ ' • , .t = Tl+ 96 • . ' �..'
� _► _ '' !
r f \ • : �.� f +. , `r. �� Zebulon Quad
lb, • .. : ":.r - } i • Vefk1� `.\ •:: �+�, .• .Drawn By: Checked By:
!'ti. ..�j is ••r�'��� '�'.� `" `%� JLK [Lip .
I*At �'' , - s _ • f' t • - • L• �, , •!�.• •'f • .y�•.`oj Approved By: Date:
MAI 01/30/2014
?1` \ .;i `' • STV /RWA Project No.
Legend \\ 2515066
h I+`► 0 1,000 2,000 4,000
® Project Study Area FIGURE 2
,
Feet

lam— Approximate Project Study Area ' L—psirogi nr IlaLL L
Project:
Project ZDC
in Zebulon
Wake County, NC
�f pB2 -
/�✓/ C ��, "� � _- Title:
NRCS SOIL SERIES
\ MAP
_ Ret. NRCS Soil Series Data
Wake County, NC (2012)
Mapped Soil Units
t Within the PSA
MP in e Y
—aB
sandy loam
Y
A B
ApC2 ` t'`; �e — p 2 to 8 percent slopes
Ap82 Appling sandy loam,
2 to 6 percent slopes,
moderately eroded
A p C Appling sandy loam,
` �� - -- - 6 to 10 percent slopes
ll•J ,MeA- �jD Appling sandy loam,
Cie ApC2 6 to 10 percent slopes,
64 264 Byf moderately eroded
CnA to 3 sandy loam,
0
_ 1 ' O l0 3 percent slopes
64 264 DUB Durham loamy sand,
2 to 6 percent slopes
Legend
Project Study Area
USGS National Hydrography Dataset
MAI 01/30/2014
i STV/RWA Project No.
f
2515066
0 500 1,000 2,000
FIGURE 3
Feet
1
MeA
Mantachie sandy loam,
0 to 2 percent slopes,
i x
rarely flooded
•
W
Water
�/+`
WkC
Wake- Sew - Wedowee
complex, 2 to 10 percent
es
slo rocky
P oc Y
Drawn By:
Checked By:
JLK
BJP
y
-
-- (0
Approved By:
Dale:
MAI 01/30/2014
i STV/RWA Project No.
f
2515066
0 500 1,000 2,000
FIGURE 3
Feet

I
ii
*04VMEWr7 Legend
Project Study Area (49.47 Acres)
o Wetland Determination Data Point
Jurisdictional Stream
R Jurisdictional Wetland
Jurisdictional Pond
Neuse River Basin Riparian Buffer
Qr& ! "
[Wetland A (0. 13 Ac.)
p;. ,EE%, Wetland B (0.07 AC.)
-T
DP 11
:4x DP 10
DP 9
1-
Wetland J (0.21 Ac.)
Wetland F (0.36 Ac.)
Perennial RPW F (172 If)
JM ►r` . _
Wetland G (0.67 Ac.)
Nr.. .1
J Fromoe,
J•
S D P 7 DP8
Wetland I (0.03 Ac.)
Perennial RPW 1 (312 If)
Seasonal RPW 1 (192 10
6 264 _ .
0 100 200 400
Feet
Note:
1. Jurisdictional waters of the U.S. were delineated by STV /Ralph Whitehead
Associates on March 30 to April 1, 2011. Jurisdictional boundaries were
marked in the field with blue and white striped tape and orange pin flags
and approximated using a Trimble GEOXH hand held GPS unit capable of
subfoot accuracy.
2. Jurisdictional boundaries of waters of the U.S. have been verified by the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in May 2011. Action I.D. 201101006.
3. Stream Buffers have been established by the NCDWQ.
DWQ EXP# 11 -0354
Reference: Wake County, NC GIS Data, 2005 Orthophotography
Seasonal RPW B (172 If)
i
l
'.l
D_J
Seasonal RPW F (108 If)
DP 2
Wetland E (2.03 Ac.)
Wetland H (0.30Ac.)
Seasonal RPW H (805 If)
tit ,
DP 1
�j
Pond C (0.22 Ac.) y` j
j
Pond D (0.75 Ac.) +
P3
DP 4
Wetland D (0.33Ac.)
tt5
i
t,uent.
XSTV
In
BB&T ADD eration L I T T L E
Wlth o�.ms�em.�cw�rrcruwi. coxm.osc
Project:
ZDC in Zebulon
Title:
Approximate Waters of the U.S.
Wake County, NC
and Wetlands Boundary Map
Delineated By:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By.
Date:
BJP
J L K
BJP
MAI
Revised 4 /5/2011
Revissed :02/03/2014
STV Project No.
File Path:
No.
OF
2515066
Figure 4
NAProjectst251506612515066 0001\80 Reports 8 StudiesGIS
1Figures%Delineation FiguresUan 2014JLK\
1
1
Fig4Wate(s_REV_2 03_14.mxd

END OF
JURISDICTIONAL
STREAM
50' BUFFER FROM
TOP OF BANK
J
I 0i `1
I
..,jj; ;111
f
�r r
_ ►tip.
� 9t
J
I
J�
l ,Y
�r
I!
,9
JURISDICTIONAL
WETLANDS
�1
\�PW1111 Mr,
GRAPHIC SCALE
300 0 150 300 600
\` 1 " = 300'
Pnnopal In Charge WALKER
PROJECT NANIE
PROJECT ZDC
PROJECT NUIISER
132 6814 03
Project Manager ENGLE
Drawn By VAN SICKLE
ZEBULON, NORTH CAROLINA
14/01/10
Thu d,aw„8 and the deaga Jhoma my the
-RIPTION
REFERENCE
jnaperyolls #kDtternfredArc/ntecArm!
WETLAND DISTURBANCE
" The '°&°" ""8
� Jroaeag vrtbaat tbea wntk°
- P- &b--d and� - f -9--t
OVERALL SITE PLAN
W—/1
azll be Mr jed to kpl acbox
,_ .
W D -1
0 W14

PHASE I
DATA HALL".
AND
OFFICE_' —,
Ord
,�
'"
� 1 ■riljl
Project Manager ENGLE
VAN SICKLE
ZEBULON, NORTH CAROLINA
Drawn By
I I
Tbu dmmrng and the design sbo" am the
�I
STORMWA
`POND
DATA HALL
,,.k, ,e afth s dmamg aubarrt lbenwrrlfen
PHASE I
DATA HALL".
AND
OFFICE_' —,
Ord
,�
'"
� 1 ■riljl
Project Manager ENGLE
VAN SICKLE
ZEBULON, NORTH CAROLINA
Drawn By
I I
Tbu dmmrng and the design sbo" am the
�I
PHASE 11
` °"Ang The>ePmd� ""g°'
DATA HALL
,,.k, ,e afth s dmamg aubarrt lbenwrrlfen
cmuent uPrabrbrted aid any
ENLARGED SITE PLAN
az!! be myect to kgad attrorr
© LMe ]DIO
II�gII
sip-+f
r••jl
� � i
m
�,CIIC SCALE
0 150 300
" = 300'
Pnnwpal in Charge WALKER -
PROJECT NAME
PROJECT ZDC
Project Manager ENGLE
VAN SICKLE
ZEBULON, NORTH CAROLINA
Drawn By
Tbu dmmrng and the design sbo" am the
P1*,.y ,f Lttk D. —fled Arrbrtubrn d
` °"Ang The>ePmd� ""g°'
WETLAND DISTURBANCE
,,.k, ,e afth s dmamg aubarrt lbenwrrlfen
cmuent uPrabrbrted aid any
ENLARGED SITE PLAN
az!! be myect to kgad attrorr
© LMe ]DIO
.�� S
132 6814 03
14/01/10
WD -2

TOTAL WETLAND
IMPACTS
EQUALS
18,436
SF (0.423 AC)
56 LF OF STREAM IMPACT
LEGEND:
ZEBULON, NORTH CAROLINA
WATERS
OF THE
US
IMPACTS
TO WATERS
OF THE
US
W3— WETLAND G
IMPACT OF
0.062 ACRE ,
END OF
SEASONAL RPW G
WETLAND 'J
WETLAND E S1— STREAM B
IMPACT 56 LF
Seoul
W4— WETLAND E IMPACT
OF 0.027 ACRE
T
�8
•-
■■1... --`�� WETLAND A,
w ,
0.141 ACRE
See MEN
IMPACT OF 0.193
ACRE
1" = 200'
PROJECT
L ITT LE' Pnncipal m Charge WALKER
PROJECT ZDC
132 6814 03
Project Manager. ENGLE
DIVERSIFIED *,IRCHITECTURAL CONSULTING
ZEBULON, NORTH CAROLINA
Dram By VAN SICKLE
14/01/10
Thu & mrng and the deagn rhomm am the
PrpP ofL,,A&Dn,4,dArrhrtatma!
DESCRIPTION
REFERENCE
' Co—L-g The npmd- -m,mpy "
WETLAND DISTURBANCE
T: 704.525.6350 F: 704.551.8700 other— of thu & marg wAW Char amtten
'
roacent uproh,',md and aryrrrfnngement
ENLARGED SITE GRADING PLAN
QA�W aA*om
WITH WETLAND IMPACTS
WD -3
©Lm� m14

PROJECT NAME
LITT LETM
SIED ITEAL CONSULTING
DESCRIPTION
5315 4lesOrk Drive ChGrlotie, PIC 23217
T: 704.K5. 50 F: ;04.561.8 ?00
,,,,.,.IiltleonlinE.com
PROJECT NUIBER
ISSUE DATE
REFERENCE
BULLETIN DRAIMNG

330
325
320
315
330
325
320
315
-25 +00 0 +00 25 +00 50 +00 75 +00 100 +00 125 +00
NOTE: HORIZONTAL SCALE 1" = 30'
PIPE /HW TO BE INSTALLED 12" BELOW VERTICAL SCALE 1 " = 3'
BOTTOM OF EXISTING STREAM BED
i
44 OF�XI-ST-ING-
P�E`TO BE REMOVED
II I c-� g
_1
I I �
�r
I
1
HV-
,NV, = 314.00
--tlW -53
mV-t- 31-7,00
it
1
I�
-100 LF OF 42" HDPE
r ® 3.0% SL-OPE�
I 1
Pnnapal in Charge WALKER
PROJECT ZDC
proles Manager ENGLE
Drawn By VAN SICKLE ZEBULON, NORTH CAROLINA
Thu dm wg and the &iWv show; am the
pmpedy ofLttk D-- fled -4-4 ---1 D P O
Co,,,,og Themp'odudrau eopy+ngar WETLAND DISTURBANCE
ether arc ojtbu dmeaug aarhoxr thur a�rutm
mnrau rr p- hrh#ed aad arty snfnagemeat CULVERT PROFILE
wAU he subjed to legal adkon
© UN W14 S1-STREAM IMPACT
1 1\
01�.�
132 6814 03
14/01/10
WD-5
ul
0.03 SLOPE
330
325
320
315
-25 +00 0 +00 25 +00 50 +00 75 +00 100 +00 125 +00
NOTE: HORIZONTAL SCALE 1" = 30'
PIPE /HW TO BE INSTALLED 12" BELOW VERTICAL SCALE 1 " = 3'
BOTTOM OF EXISTING STREAM BED
i
44 OF�XI-ST-ING-
P�E`TO BE REMOVED
II I c-� g
_1
I I �
�r
I
1
HV-
,NV, = 314.00
--tlW -53
mV-t- 31-7,00
it
1
I�
-100 LF OF 42" HDPE
r ® 3.0% SL-OPE�
I 1
Pnnapal in Charge WALKER
PROJECT ZDC
proles Manager ENGLE
Drawn By VAN SICKLE ZEBULON, NORTH CAROLINA
Thu dm wg and the &iWv show; am the
pmpedy ofLttk D-- fled -4-4 ---1 D P O
Co,,,,og Themp'odudrau eopy+ngar WETLAND DISTURBANCE
ether arc ojtbu dmeaug aarhoxr thur a�rutm
mnrau rr p- hrh#ed aad arty snfnagemeat CULVERT PROFILE
wAU he subjed to legal adkon
© UN W14 S1-STREAM IMPACT
1 1\
01�.�
132 6814 03
14/01/10
WD-5

MATCtHUt ,SEE B OW y� '-W \ r' n�^ l ,oxrw unaw,cxinetc r '
„e•i
_- _-it ,''_ � 21
';w
Akl
/ / /// // '� _ /^I/ `�I�II �a ``� \ \\ ` � - /� �uw�wx. sa amanc aaz ,vom ��,� I � i i \ /�' ♦/� �; r
'// � - - i, � I �I,II \ \\\ `�, �/' Ac °mn ,(� � I / \' eoa. :„wc. wm./ ,. # •- -fit ♦ II
EROSION CONTROL PLAN CONTINUATION (SOUTH) SCALE 1 • 50
EROSION CONTROL LEC04D ,y, / / \ ' < \ \ / / r/ / I rz, i l ♦rl , \g�V � ! sj° °'"t,
, w°a ar w.s,xucoo, � , /jj'/ r ` � � I / I \ \ \ � , _ / / � / � {r/ .+•. i o."°"i � ♦ , ` � yt I // d r
f / /l: + / 1 1 ' \I \ \ �' / / \ l :: /B`i Ij —�_Jl 3 • 3+
m, race srs .° src-aos � / u.aar. / ii �f y I \ 1 ` \ \ � / � / / Y \ t ' I \ • � I iye r >.n.m
zram xeon.:rc -w. EH3 Zl,�
a swvc owv. s: ocrn src -ow oon.°cc .m,. w,«• ,) ,o. / // / / '� \ 1 \ \ ^ " 1 /M / / / I♦`, +.•j ':y
s sm«a. ws« :g onr .rc -aa. r°° a aria u, o \\ ly i `l 1 r I // i / / .J �1 I • I V `: ,yrc
/ /f� n:
tt
annoxma °muemsca ons •rc -°° n°501aa rwwm ,m'm c a �l / p '
.a ,ax...rxw sa mw .rt -ao. '� •'.Y / /�/ I /�' kf � I 1/ \ \ i � 1 / � / / / � �-p°" / ' t I 1 "" °"°.° �' i` \ u � — _ ++� /
4 1 ° / s♦ /� ° II r'
SEE SHEET C -603 FOR EROSION CONTROL / 1
NOTES AND CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE / /� \ y. i I I/� r ` • 1 / \� / Z _ / %' /' / �. �' 4 r� o'
L,/`�t�i,9 + %rs / l �\ ,� 's; ' '/ \\ I m III I \ /I «�.w,,. ♦ li I
// / // l : N l�ir / / +; � � � Q ♦�� � \ � i / RAC
ij
/ l � / �,)rll I ' I 1 a �' �ar/'✓l 1 I � 1 \ `� � �� \GC ' _ I 1 _ � � ♦r
xe-
cnunowu' 'r 117 / _ — •L — -/ ' \ (^ 1 I
p:l / m�., °, �/ :
/ , I , � 1 � 132881403
EROSION CONTROL
PLAN STAGE I
GRAPHIC SCALE
C-401
1 = 50 _ = -Trl� - r ,_.. YMATC� Nft

EFO81ON CONTROL LEGEND
: smear asa aa.o+.a .ac. o. • K,
> mr rwcc s,; ar.> Jrc-aaJ
mr o- n za oc a :rc aw Ea
EEI. sac ww sg ocr.n arc -aw
n smwr esre s¢ on.n •rc -aw
r sm,o,r e..w auras sa ttva VK -ra.
n svom,r a m• amain. st X --
a wnn cwmw c,w,crunc sa m.> .rc -ea.
,a ava.r .raw sc ar.� . /c -ao.
„ wxalRUCaW fl,rR.WCF, SQ afim J /C-6M
SEE SHEET C -603 FOR EROSION CONTROL
NOTES AND CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE
jr�9i
Lo °
cN
40 I l �
r/-
1
_ /dam
q/
r , -
/� q
I \ / I 325
fill
rl;/q� �y I / I I / /ir
Af
B
/ y• I �I I �2� �/ //i r _,__L r, / o
op
,iii � = �� /• \ \ - / / - - / /,' / � \ � I�\ \ �, � n i\ I o o+ .+..�,
ar �/ _ / ,*,\ \ \ \ ` ems« wain , � � � \\ \ \ � � \A\ � \ ` ♦ ya.�o -� � �- mwrrome.e.
dr�CAUTIOwuI
a �' °• �' \ _ _ ' \ / \ \ \ \ \ \ N I \ \ 132681403
\S\ EROSION CONTROL
PLAN STAGE I
GRAPHIC SCALE , \\ - /' � 1 '\ �� /� " 1 1 l I ��1 I \ BASIN ENLARGEMENT
' 1 . r ' �, \ � / /' _� � 315` � \1 1 \\ s1��`• ,,ter
1 - 20

EROSION CONTROL LEGEND
, — rc co,s,s .—
x mf r[NLL s[[ miv aK -aw ©o
mi wm sF occ aK-w. .Fm
a 9.roE onwx s¢ o[ia fK-w.f
e Smu,Fwt 6.9x. 5¢ o[IK . /c -ew
i s:m6wi e.se, aorta, s[E o[iM ,K -aa F.
6 s[m[xi evv. 9twfFA sa o[iu .K -sw
s am ruxma smuc>usc ss[ o[r.6 . /c -ew
,U "m eenan s¢ OEfeLL .K -w.
„ aaf 1— [wawa..1 ai,a •K -ea
,f w,tt rxot[rnw - sa ocisL eK -ea i_i
SEE SHEET C -603 FOR EROSION CONTROL
NOTES AND CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE
/ 7Ef l i' / /tom I 1
CA I�
REE
GRAPHIC SCALE
C1
1 = 50
/ L �
/
»5
/

Branch Bank and Trust Company
Project ZDC — Request for NWP #39
Attachment D
Photographs
January 31, 2014

Branch Bank and Trust Company
Project ZDC - Request for NWP #39
January 31, 2014
Photograph 1. A view of the starting point of Wetland A (Impact W 1), located west of
and adjacent to N. Arendell Avenue where the clean water bypass will be installed.
Photograph 2. A view of the pipe culvert outlet under the farm road that crosses over
Wetland A (Impact W 1), located in the central portion of the site.

Branch Bank and Trust Company
Project ZDC - Request for NWP #39
January 31, 2014
Photograph 3. A view of the northern portion of Wetland E (Impact W2), where Wetland
A drains into Wetland E through a pipe culvert.
Photograph 4. A view of the northern portion of Wetland G (Impact W3), located in the
northwest portion of the site.

Branch Bank and Trust Company
Project ZDC - Request for NWP #39
January 31, 2014
Photograph 5. A view of the scrub /shrub vegetation of Wetland E (Impact W4).
A�q
h*
el
e..P
P�
1
Photograph 6. A view of the connection (Seasonal RPW B) located between Wetland D
and Wetland E (Impact S 1).

Branch Bank and Trust Company January 31, 2014
Project ZDC - Request for NWP #39
Photograph 7. A view of the upland fields located in the central portion of the site.

Branch Bank and Trust Company
Project ZDC - Request for NWP #39
Attachment E
Notification of Jurisdictional Determination
January 31, 2014

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS COPY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. 201101006 County: Wake U.S.G.S. Quad: Zebulon
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Property Owner /Agent: Branch Bank and trust Company
Address: attn: M. Leland Bobo, 11
6400 Arlington Blvd., suite 11200
Falls Church, VA 22042
Telephone No.: 703 - 241 -3564
Property description:
JUN 7 2011 j
I STVT3alph'.1NMehead Assoc"'., �I
Size (acres) 49 Nearest Town Zebulon
Nearest Waterway Little River River Basin Neuse
USGS HUC 03020201 Coordinates N 35.8382 W - 78.3271
Location description The proiect site is located at the corner of N. Arendell Ave. and Green Pace Rd. in Zebulon
Wake County, North Carolina. Aquatic features on site drain to the Little River in the Neuse River basin.
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
Based on preliminary information, there may be wetlands on the above described property. We strongly suggest you have
this property inspected to determine the extent of Department of the Army (DA) jurisdiction. To be considered final, a
jurisdictional determination must be verified by the Corps. This preliminary determination is not an appealable action
under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process ( Reference 33 CFR Part 331).
B. Approved Determination
There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described property subject to the permit requirements of
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Unless there is a change in the law or
our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
X There are waters of the U.S. including wetlands on the above described property subject to the permit requirements of
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
_ We strongly suggest you have the wetlands on your property delineated. Due to the size of your property and /or our
present workload, the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner. For a more timely
delineation, you may wish to obtain a consultant. To ue considered finai, any delineation must be verified by the Corps.
X The waters of the U.S. including wetland on your property have been delineated and the delineation has been verified
by the Corps. We strongly suggest you have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed
and verified by the Corps. Once verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA
jurisdiction on your property which, provided there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied
upon for a period not to exceed five years.
The wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the Corps
Regulatory Official identified below on Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described property which are subject to the
pen-nit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
_ The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act
(CAMA). You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Washington, NC, at [phone] to determine
their requirements.
Page 1 of 2

Action ID
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US and /or wetlands without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 131 1) If you have any questions regarding this
determination and/or the Corps regulatory progiam, please contact James Lastmaer at 919- 554 -4884 ext 32
C. Basis For Determination
Established OHWM and the U S. Army Corns of En2meers 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual
D. Remarks
Site visit conducted on May 23 2011 to verify jurisdictional waters on site.
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation /determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act Jurisdiction for the
particular site identified in this request The delineation /determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation
provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985 If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation
in USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources
Conservation Service, prior to starting work
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved Jurisdictional determinations as indicated in
B. above)
This correspondence constitutes an approved Jurisdictional determination for the above described site If you object to this
determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR part 331 Enclosed you will find a
Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form if you request to appeal this
determination you must submit a completed RFA form to the following address
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division
Attn Jean Gibby, Field Office Chief,
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Dr, suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
in order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for
appeal under 33 CFR part 331 5, and that it has been received by the District Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP
Should you decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by August 1, 2011
* *It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the District Office if you do not object to the determination in this
correspondence **
Corps Regulatory Officia
Date June 1, 2011
Expiiation Date June 1, 2016
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 our website at Imp // iegulatory usacesurvey com/ to
complete the survey online
Copy furnished
STV /Ralph Whitehead Associates
Attn Michael Iagnocco
1000 W Morehead St, suite 200
Charlotte, NC 28208
Page 2 of 2

y,,.., ..S��r t.7` ' '.' Ar�rn *Q41,Vi7
�'j+ r•�^ �� " r,,, &*� rrl�- K"r`�."3 'aY Y t� :.y ✓'rte, ;r'L^y'^'^`t;{, � j^ '"cy�,1 c
5i5 h iiy a �s✓ t _� ! ^T c >✓ ,` sfa a� 5. 1=• :° ��g "y~.r.,
}„y',.'•.�� ,.c'u� �-Y -r��'+:.s- C.+'S. A ^u1 '�'�.;>s•�,^�^.d�� E ��"
�tf" =�• f "
;,. � �-��; N F APPEAL'"OP,TIONS�AND PROCESS AAND:'�' „�- "`�
� ^ADMINISTRATIVE
y, 1� 'S �4�T3�.7.. +s,��,,�. .. .i:. ds. M;^`a4., w✓��tt ° }..� ^ '�,£'' �^ 1a� ��'N',+r�J�,y�ifri'��.tf P "'O`�.1�, v. ->�, aS����';'..'
_
_ n. w. ,.+s�,,'e4 ..i,•'r,�'v.f e Mme,. nor i.... �,� ,� r s s.'�+ w:.. ..5. 1'S.T, i� �' o �i 4o-'a�+ -'� .. ,r`
Applicant Branch Bank and Trust Company
File Number SAW - 2011 -
Date June 1, 2011
01006
Attached is
See Section below
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission)
A
PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission)
B
PERMIT DENIAL
C
X
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
D
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
E
SECTION I� Tlie following - identifies yotYriglits and options regarding an administrati- ve�appeal of the above
.y
4decis on: ;Additional "informationlmay,be found�'at'' -.', =l _' =;r r e� -.� �1�j ;�''_,
,• i `u °`•-.
? c -• r v r
C`,.CrP b r..t , ., *'tH•.
http / %www usace y.miUCE�CW/Eages /reg_ materials aspx or..Co s regulations at '-33, -,CFR Part 331. '
A. INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT You may accept or object to the permit
• ACCEPT If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization if you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights
to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved Jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit
• OBJECT if you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request that
the permit be modified accordingly You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district engineer
Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will forfeit your right
to appeal the permit in the future Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your objections and may (a)
modify the permit to adds ess all of your concei ns, (b) modify the pei mit to address some of your objections, or (c) not modify
the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written After evaluating your objections, the
district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in Section B below
B PROFFERED PERMIT You may accept or appeal the permit
• ACCEPT If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the pei mit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights
to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit
• APPEAL If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you
may appeal the declined permit under the Coi ps of Engineers Administiative Appeal Process by completing Section 11 of this
form and sending the form to the division engineer This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the
date of this notice
C PERMIT DENIAL You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process
by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer This form must be received by the division
engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice
D APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION You may accept or appeal the approved JD or
provide new information
• ACCEPT You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the
date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD
• APPEAL If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers Administrative
Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer This form must be received
by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice

E PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION You do not need to respond to the Corps
regarding the preliminary JD The Preliminary JD is not appealable If you wish, you may request an
approved JD (which may be appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction Also you may
provide new information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD
_SECTION II, = REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an
initial pi offered permit in clear concise statements You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons
or objections are addressed in the administrative record )
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the
record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to
clarify the administrative record Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record However,
you may provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative record
PMT, ,OF; CONTACT ;FOR- QUESTIONS'OR INFORMATION

If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the appeal If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
process you may contact also contact
James Lastmger Jason Steele
Regulatory Specialist Administrative Appeals Review Officer
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office 60 Forsyth Street, SW (Room 9M10)
3331 Heritage Trade Dr , suite 105 Atlanta, GA 30303 -8801
Wake Forest, NC 27587 1 404 -562 -5137
RIGHT OF ENTRY Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government
consultants, to conduct investigations of the piolect site during the course of the appeal process You will be provided a 15 day
notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in all site investigations
Date Telephone number
Signature of appellant or agent
For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits and approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this
form to:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Attn: Jean Gibby, Field Office Chief, Raleigh
Regulatory Field Office, 3331 Heritage Trade Dr., suite 105, Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
For Permit denials and Proffered Permits send this form to:
Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Mike Bell,
Administrative Appeal Officer, CESAD- ET -CO -R, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 9M15, Atlanta,
Georgia 30303 -8801

A ��
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H Sullins Dee Freeman
Governor Director Secretary
April 21, 2011
Branch Bank and Trust Company
Attn Mr M Leland Bobo I1, Asst VP
6400 Arlington Blvd, Ste 1200
Falls Church, VA 22042
DWQ EXP# 11 -0354
Wake County
Subject Property: Project DCX in Zebulon, NC (PINs: 1796910996, 1796911846, 1796912790,
1796914437, 1796915308, 1796917039, 1796809670, 1795993938, 1795993938, & 1795899685)
On -Site Determination for Applicability to the Neuse Riparian Area Protection Rules (15A NCAC 2B
0233) - EXPRESS REVIEW PROGRAM
Dear Mr Bobo
On April 20, 2011, at the request of Mr Michael lagnocco, of STV /Ralph Whitehead Associates, Lia
Myott Gilleski conducted an on -site determination to review six stream features located on the subject
property for applicability to the Neuse Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B 0233) The features are labeled as
"A" through "I" on the attached maps initialed by Lia M Gilleski on April 21, 2011 The Division of
Water Quality (DWQ) has determined that the following
• Feature "A" is not subject to the Neuse Buffer Rule on the property as it is an ephemeral /ditch
complex
• Feature "B" is not subject to the Neuse Buffer Rule on the property since it is an ephemeral
ditch
• Feature "C" is not subject to the Neuse Buffer Rule on the property since the pond is not
connected to a subject stream
• Feature "D" is not subject to the Neuse Buffer Rule on the property since the pond is not
connected to a subject stream The feature at the pond outlet is man made through high ground
• Feature "E" is not subject to the Neuse Buffer Rule since the pond has been drained and is now a
wetland
• Feature "F" is subject to the Neuse Buffer Rule on the property since it is an intermittent stream
beginning in the old pond bed The feature transitions to a perennial stream at the confluence of
Feature F and Feature G
• Feature "G" is subject to the Neuse Buffer Rule on the property at the flag, "G I "— Intermittent
stream begins
• Feature "H" is subject to the Neuse Buffer Rule on the property It was uncontested and not
visited during the April 20, 2011 field visit
• Feature "I" is subject to the Neuse Buffer Rule on the property It was uncontested and not
visited during the April 20, 2011 field visit
This on -site determination shall expire five (5) years from the date of this lettet Landowners or affected
parties that dispute a determination made by the DWQ that a surface water exists and that it is subject to
401 Oversight/Express Review Permitting Unit
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699 -1650
Location Archdale Bldg , 512 N Salisbury St, Raleigh, NC 27604
Phone 919 - 807 -6301 4 FAX [phone]
Internet http //portal n, denr orglweblwgkwp1ws144 11
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affmnauve Action Employer
NorthCarolina
N turalib"'

Branch Bank and Trust Company
Page 2 of 2
April 21, 2011
the buffer rule may request a determination by the Director. A request for a determination by the Director
shall be referred to the Director in writing c/o [an McMillan, DWQ 401 Oversight /Express Review
Permitting Unit, 1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699 -1650. You must act within 60 days of the
date that you receive this letter. Applicants are hereby notified that the 60 -day statutory appeal time does
not start until the affected party (including downstream and adjacent landowners) is notified of this
decision. This determination is final and binding unless you ask for a hearing within 60 days.
This letter only addresses the applicability to the buffer rules and does not approve any activity within the
buffers. Nor does this letter approve any activity within Waters of the United States or Waters of the
State. If you have any questions, please contact Lia Myott Gilleski at 919.807.64
Sincer y, /
Coleen H. Sullins
CHS/�m/lmg
Attachments: Wake County Soil Survey Map
USGS Topographic Map
cc: Lauren Witherspoon, DWQ Raleigh Regional Office
File Copy
Mike Iagnocco, STV /Ralph Whitehead Associates, 1000 West Morehead St, Ste 200, Charlotte, NC
28208

T
f
y,.
e
' o
� Y t
F —_.sue
/!ate -�° t 3 � ". a. �`. tr "` _^'c - S v '� •��' � ' i _ -_sx_� -
t.
/..f.a • Y � A h�S 2tk. � i�..�
sy�
e-_ ,. ..,�� ; 51 iJ� _ _ _ -;° -�` ,��y� +ter• �- -
"gyp " ^ ; �� " s-,s. - � �- a`e'!�a � •, , _ e(`..�� rc t �
N�
_ rw
KOS`
OKA
r

MyTopo MapServer
35' 50'49" N
J,78o 20' 21" W
M�topo
35* 50'49" N
78- 19'6" W,
Page I of I
All t It
35- 49- 47- 14 35' 49' 47" Nr
78' 20' 21" W 78* 19'6" W
© 1999 - 2011 MyTopo
C,
sobJe �4
North GaTCAM, C-l"
ManagerildPt GOn,
10
J! I i n �OVOlatt,f
Ike C--f A-4 IV e- pu4n
Oj RX I"6J, RX
t4 tU#�,t"-fes4c,4)
19
'�-o 6' e c-+ Cv�cau�cs�l�t)
u
littp://iiiapservei-.mytopo.com/,,ipi/api_iiicludes/ii,,ivigatoi-.print.cl'iii?heiglit=5OO&width=49... 4/21/2011
%
Page I of I
All t It
35- 49- 47- 14 35' 49' 47" Nr
78' 20' 21" W 78* 19'6" W
© 1999 - 2011 MyTopo
C,
sobJe �4
North GaTCAM, C-l"
ManagerildPt GOn,
10
J! I i n �OVOlatt,f
Ike C--f A-4 IV e- pu4n
Oj RX I"6J, RX
t4 tU#�,t"-fes4c,4)
19
'�-o 6' e c-+ Cv�cau�cs�l�t)
u
littp://iiiapservei-.mytopo.com/,,ipi/api_iiicludes/ii,,ivigatoi-.print.cl'iii?heiglit=5OO&width=49... 4/21/2011

Branch Bank and Trust Company
Project ZDC — Request for NWP #39
Attachment F
Agency Correspondence
January 31, 2014

KSTV; ioo
January 10, 2014
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Raleigh Field Office
551 F Pylon Drive
Raleigh, NC 27606
Attention: Emily Jernigan
Subject: Request for Evaluation
Branch Bank and Trust Company
Proposed Project ZDC
Wake County, NC
Dear Ms. Jernigan:
On behalf of Branch Bank and Trust Company (BB &T), STV /Ralph Whitehead Associates
(STV /RWA), is conducting environmental screening and Section 404 wetlands permitting
services for the proposed Project ZDC in Wake County, North Carolina. As an integral part of
this effort, we are soliciting input from agencies and individuals concerning the potential impacts
this project may have on the cultural, physical or biological conditions in the area.
BB &T is proposing the construction of a data center campus along NC 96 (N. Arendell Avenue)
in eastern Wake County, north of the town of Zebulon, NC (Figure 1). The site has been used
formerly for agriculture. The proposed data center campus will be constructed in phases, with
the requirement to first construct a data hall and office in the first phase of construction, and a
second data hall in the second phase of construction.
According to on -site field reviews, the proposed project study area (PSA) is comprised primarily
of cleared field areas that have resulted from the former agricultural operations, former
agriculture ponds that have developed wetland characteristics and mixed hardwood forest in the
southern and western areas of the site. The PSA topography is nearly level within the eastern and
central portions of the site, and gently sloping within the surrounding forests to the south and
west. The USGS map depicts the former ponds located in the central portion of the PSA (Figure
2).
According to the USDA SCS (Figure 3), the PSA contains six interspersed soil types: Appling sandy
loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes (ApB); Appling sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes, moderately eroded
(ApB2); Appling sandy loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes, moderately eroded (ApC2); Colfax sandy loam,
2 to 6 percent slopes (Cn); Durham loamy sand, 2 to 6 percent slopes (DuB); and Mantachie sandy

Jernigan
January 10, 2014
Page 2
loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, rarely flooded (Me). Colfax sandy loam is the only soil considered to be
hydric due to inclusions of the Weehadkee, undramed and the Worsham, undramed soil types
The results of the on -site field review conducted by STV /RWA indicate that there are a total of
five relatively permanent waters (RPW) 10 jurisdictional wetlands located within the PSA. All
totaled, these jurisdictional waters of the U.S encompass 5.34 acres of the approximately 49 acre
site. Jurisdictional areas including wetlands on the subject property were delineated using the
U S Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Routine On -Site Determination Method as defined in
the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual' Jurisdictional boundaries have been
field - venfied by representatives of the USACE and a Jurisdictional Determination for the site
was issued on 6/1/11 (USACE Action ID 201101006) Design efforts currently underway are
attempting to avoid and minimize impacts to waters of the U S. to the maximum extent
practicable A stormwater management plan to be reviewed and approved by Wake County will
also be an essential element of the project.
STV /RWA scientists are conducting an environmental screening as well as wetland permitting
pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act We are currently in the process of evaluating
the potential impacts associated with the construction of this project In order that we may fully
evaluate the impacts of the proposed project, it is requested that you respond in writing
concerning any beneficial or advcrse impacts of the proposed project relating to the interests of
your agency, most notably as related to the presence of rare, threatened, or endangered species
For the study effort to stay on schedule and for your input to be included, please respond by
February 10, 2014.
Please direct your comments to:
Mr Brandon Phillips
STV /Ralph Whitehead Associates
900 West Trade Street, Suite 715
Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 -1144
brandon phillips@stvmc corn
If you have any questions or need additional information concerning this project, please contact
Brandon Phillips at (704) 816 -2536. We look forward to hearing from you
Sincerely,
STV /RALPH WHITEHEAD ASSOCIATES
A_U�
Brandon J Phillips HMM
Senior Scientist
Attachments
I Environmental Laboratory, 1987, "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, " Technical Report Y -87 -1, US Army Engineer
Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi

ST 100
v4j
January 10, 2014
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program
1601 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1601
Attention: Harry E. LeGrand, Jr., Zoologist
Subject: Request for Evaluation
Branch Bank and Trust Company
Proposed Project ZDC
Wake County, NC
Dear Mr. LeGrand:
On behalf of Branch Bank and Trust Company (BB &T), STV /Ralph Whitehead Associates
(STV/RWA), is conducting environmental screening and Section 404 wetlands permitting
services for the proposed Project ZDC in Wake County, North Carolina. As an integral part of
this effort, we are soliciting input from agencies and individuals concerning the potential impacts
this project may have on the cultural, physical or biological conditions in the area.
BB &T is proposing the construction of a data center campus along NC 96 (N. Arendell Avenue)
in eastern Wake County, north of the town of Zebulon, NC (Figure 1). The site has been used
formerly for agriculture. The proposed data center campus will be constructed in phases, with
the requirement to first construct a data hall and office in the first phase of construction, and a
second data hall in the second phase of construction.
According to on -site field reviews, the proposed project study area (PSA) is comprised primarily
of cleared field areas that have resulted from the former agricultural operations, former
agriculture ponds that have developed wetland characteristics and mixed hardwood forest in the
southern and western areas of the site. The PSA topography is nearly level within the eastern and
central portions of the site, and gently sloping within the surrounding forests to the south and
west. The USGS map depicts the former ponds located in the central portion of the PSA (Figure
2).
According to the USDA SCS (Figure 3), the PSA contains six interspersed soil types: Appling sandy
loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes (ApB); Appling sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes, moderately eroded
(ApB2); Appling sandy loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes, moderately eroded (ApC2); Colfax sandy loam,
2 to 6 percent slopes (Cn); Durham loamy sand, 2 to 6 percent slopes (DuB); and Mantachie sandy

NCNHP - LeGrand
January 10, 2014
Page 2
loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, rarely flooded (Me) Colfax sandy loam is the only soil considered to be
hydric due to inclusions of the Weehadkee, undramed and the Worsham, undramed soil types
The results of the on -site field review conducted by STV /RWA indicate that there are a total of
five relatively permanent waters (RPW) 10 jurisdictional wetlands located within the PSA All
totaled, these jurisdictional waters of the U.S. encompass 5 34 acres of the approximately 49 acre
site Jurisdictional areas including wetlands on the subject property were delineated using the
U S Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Routine On -Site Determination Method as defined in
the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual' Jurisdictional boundaries have been
field - verified by representatives of the USACE and a Jurisdictional Determination for the site
was issued on 6/1/11 (USACE Action ID 201101006) Design efforts currently underway are
attempting to avoid and minimize impacts to waters of the U.S to the maximum extent
practicable A stormwater management plan to be reviewed and approved by Wake County will
also be an essential element of the project
STV /RWA scientists are conducting an environmental screening as well as wetland permitting
pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. We are currently in the process of evaluating
the potential impacts associated with the construction of this project. In order that we may fully
evaluate the impacts of the proposed project, it is requested that you respond in writing
concerning any beneficial or adverse impacts of the proposed project relating to the interests of
your agency, most notably as related to the presence of rare, threatened, or endangered species
For the study effort to stay on schedule and for your input to be included, please respond by
February 10, 2014
Please direct your comments to.
Mr. Brandon Phillips
STV /Ralph Whitehead Associates
900 West Trade Street, Suite 715
Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 -1144
brandon phillips@stvmc com
If you have any questions or need additional information concerning this project, please contact
Brandon Phillips at (704) 816 -2536. We look forward to hearing from you
Sincerely,
STV RALPH WHITEHEAD ASSOCIATES
Brandon J Plull s, CHMM
Senior Scientist
Attachments
Environmental Laboratory, 1987, "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, " Technical Report Y -87 -1, US Army Engineer
Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi

V�� 100 6- _"')
January 10, 2014
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office
4617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699 -4617
Attention: Renee Gledhill- Earley
Subject: Request for Evaluation
Branch Bank and Trust Company
Proposed Project ZDC
Wake County, NC
Dear Ms. Gledhill- Earley:
On behalf of Branch Bank and Trust Company (BB &T), STV /Ralph Whitehead Associates
(STV /RWA), is conducting environmental screening and Section 404 wetlands permitting
services for the proposed Project ZDC in Wake County, North Carolina. As an integral part of
this effort, we are soliciting input from agencies and individuals concerning the potential impacts
this project may have on the cultural, physical or biological conditions in the area.
BB &T is proposing the construction of a data center campus along NC 96 (N. Arendell Avenue)
in eastern Wake County, north of the town of Zebulon, NC (Figure 1). The site has been used
formerly for agriculture. The proposed data center campus will be constructed in phases, with
the requirement to first construct a data hall and office in the first phase of construction, and a
second data hall in the second phase of construction.
According to on -site field reviews, the proposed project study area (PSA) is comprised primarily
of cleared field areas that have resulted from the former agricultural operations, former
agriculture ponds that have developed wetland characteristics and mixed hardwood forest in the
southern and western areas of the site. The PSA topography is nearly level within the eastern and
central portions of the site, and gently sloping within the surrounding forests to the south and
west. The USGS map depicts the former ponds located in the central portion of the PSA (Figure
2).
According to the USDA SCS (Figure 3), the PSA contains six interspersed soil types: Appling sandy
loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes (ApB); Appling sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes, moderately eroded
(ApB2); Appling sandy loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes, moderately eroded (ApC2); Colfax sandy loam,
2 to 6 percent slopes (Cn); Durham loamy sand, 2 to 6 percent slopes (DuB); and Mantachie sandy

Gledhill- Earley
January 10, 2014
Page 2
loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, rarely flooded (Me) Colfax sandy loam is the only soil considered to be
hydnc due to inclusions of the Weehadkee, undramed and the Worsham, undramed soil types
The results of the on -site field review conducted by STV /RWA indicate that there are a total of
five relatively permanent waters (RPW) 10 jurisdictional wetlands located within the PSA. All
totaled, these jurisdictional waters of the U S. encompass 5.34 acres of the approximately 49 acre
site. Jurisdictional areas including wetlands on the subject property were delineated using the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Routine On -Site Determination Method as defined in
the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual' Jurisdictional boundaries have been
field - verified by representatives of the USACE and a Jurisdictional Determination for the site
was issued on 6/1/11 (USACE Action ID 201101006) Design efforts currently underway are
attempting to avoid and minimize impacts to waters of the U.S to the maximum extent
practicable. A stormwater management plan to be reviewed and approved by Wake County will
also be an essential element of the project.
STV /RWA scientists are conducting an environmental screening as well as wetland permitting
pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act We are currently in the process of evaluating
the potential impacts associated with the construction of this project. In order that we may fully
evaluate the impacts of the proposed project, it is requested that you respond in writing
concerning any bcncficial or adverse impacts of the proposed project relating to the interests of
your agency, most notably as related to the presence of historic or archaeological resources For
the study effort to stay on schedule and for your input to be included, please respond by February
10, 2014
Please direct your comments to
Mr Brandon Phillips
STV /Ralph Whitehead Associates
900 West Trade Street, Suite 715
Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 -1144
brandon phillips@stvinc com
If you have any questions or need additional information concerning this project, please contact
Brandon Phillips at (704) 816 -2536 We look forward to hearing from you
Sincerely,
STV/ LPH WHITEHEAD ASSOCIATES
Brandon J Philli , CHMM
Senior Scientist
Attachments
Environmental Laboratory, 1987, "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, " Technical Report Y -87 -1, US Army Engineer
Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi

Wake
Approximate Project Study Area
Reference: Wake County GIS Data, 2010
Approximate 49 -Acre Site
in Zebulon, NC
Wake County, NC
2
X
STV/ Ralph Whitehead Associates
Scale: 1:12,000
Site Location
Map
FIGURE 1

E Vh%Pe7l�r�
enN' t L
Mill
�.. /� / � , ,. ` �� � •` .ill �. ., Il' iJ
Sey_H Rd•" Cem. t� r _` • d, ji `-.K I . .
J _ :. ' - i ' =" � • � �' •�� if - � ° ((1✓ya " 3 i' ,3^y :
Approximate Project Study Area
96
`64
• , . �r s}j� -. 'C:atr ;' Pry: q ,.L �' _ t
•ter— .rti� "f"4� / ! , �y.� ,-! +'
-. 't+K- y,g�....,� � � ! �`� � 14 -• � --- _ ;�i�FF��clnil�,y�.y� '�'i�'� `t��t. � + '� ` / ;"�'' .
4- F
{ ! 1 _ f � * ! ' -^' �+,'%.•� Sri • /il��-1/ �s �y�. - � � yl
zeb
l� �,• ,l - 4 c i� a�sc�4x 1 F'atkti; ` a* "':� slr ;\ Y7
rg
,.1y
- ishf
1 Pfaa± a� /f 1�:� f + �•ha -s- r �. }t \' � t?r �� � - ,••r ! ti ;pis � y�� �! � �'� /
-, i,•�,•, ,' - ., ,
,+ ��; J I � .. ' ^c n qty ` • � �y � � 1t • 'r ' >�� �� .� �/ �_ + .,� -:
J/ Wj /y1� �► * .•fir ,Y j����'\ \' ,'- �r, r', L � }!�+;.
1 ..., --\•^� /jl U J 1, j 1.2Jr. <`
'� .rte S� j R}•(
Ic
i .
IL
Reference: USGS Topographic Quadrangle Maps, Zebulon, NC Quad, 1990 ' . �'� ' j Scale: 1:24,000
Approximate 49 -Acre Site USGS Site location
in Zebulon, NC X Map
STV/ Ralph Whitehead Associates
Wake County, NC FIGURE 2

u - ur am ioamy sand, to 6 percent s opes
Me - Mantachie sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, rarely flooded
W - Water
Reference: NRCS GIS Soil Data, 2009
Approximate 49 -Acre Site Soils Location
in Zebulon, NC X Map
STV/ Ralph Whitehead Associates
Wake County, NC FIGURE 3
'• Bow, iti "
Y
'�....'�_� r ' '•� ` Owl
1, ,
�,•, !
4.
7A,1
AM
Approximate Project Stud
Mapped Soil Units in the Proiect Study Area
ApB - Appling sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
ApB2 - Appling sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes, moderately eroded
ApC2 - Appling sandy loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes, moderately eroded
Cn - Colfax sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
u - ur am ioamy sand, to 6 percent s opes
Me - Mantachie sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, rarely flooded
W - Water
Reference: NRCS GIS Soil Data, 2009
Approximate 49 -Acre Site Soils Location
in Zebulon, NC X Map
STV/ Ralph Whitehead Associates
Wake County, NC FIGURE 3

Pat McCrory
Governor
AT FAIV
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Office of Land and Water Stewardship
John E Skvarla, 111
Secretary
Mr Brandon Phillips
STV /Ralph Whitehead Associates
900 West Trade Street, Suite 715
Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 -1144
Brandon phillips@stvinc com
Bryan Gossage
Director
January 29, 2014
RE Branch Bank and Trust Company — Proposed Project ZDC, Wake County, North Carolina
Dear Mr Phillips
Thank you for contacting the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) about the proposed
project referenced above The Natural Heritage Program does not have any records of rare species,
important natural communities, significant natural heritage areas (SNHAs) or conservation /managed
areas within the proposed project area
Within one mile of the proposed project area, the NCNHP database shows a record for the following
rare species
* For status definitlOn5, please see the Help document at htto / /www ncnhp orR /web /nhp /database search
This record for Regal Darner is considered to have very low accuracy, the locational information for this
occurrence states only that it has been known to occur in lakes and ponds in Wake County
Please note that although we may not be aware of natural heritage elements within the project area, it
does not necessarily mean that they are not present It may simply mean that the area has not been
surveyed The use of Natural Heritage Program data should not be substituted for actual field surveys
where they are needed, particularly if the project area contains suitable habitat for rare species or
important natural communities
The NCNHP database also shows records for five areas managed by Wake County and included in their
open space dataset that are within one mile of the proposed project site, but none are adjacent
You may wish to visit the new NCNHP website (www ncnhp ore) that offers access to data and other
information on rare species, natural communities, significant natural areas, and lands managed for
conservation The online map viewer currently available shows boundaries of SNHAs and
conservation /managed areas, such as Wake County open space properties, and can be searched for
records within one mile to five miles of the project location We are also happy to help you use and
1601 Mail Service Center Raleigh North Carolina 27699 -1601
Phone [phone]\ Internet wwwncdenrgov
An Equal opportunity } Alfirmalife Action Employer -50°, Recycled t 101,6 Post Consume, Paper
ELEMENT
OCCURRENCE
NC
USA
SCIENTIFIC NAME
COMMON NAME
STATUS*
STATUS*
STATUS*
Coryphaeschna mgens
Regal Darner
Current
SR
- - --
* For status definitlOn5, please see the Help document at htto / /www ncnhp orR /web /nhp /database search
This record for Regal Darner is considered to have very low accuracy, the locational information for this
occurrence states only that it has been known to occur in lakes and ponds in Wake County
Please note that although we may not be aware of natural heritage elements within the project area, it
does not necessarily mean that they are not present It may simply mean that the area has not been
surveyed The use of Natural Heritage Program data should not be substituted for actual field surveys
where they are needed, particularly if the project area contains suitable habitat for rare species or
important natural communities
The NCNHP database also shows records for five areas managed by Wake County and included in their
open space dataset that are within one mile of the proposed project site, but none are adjacent
You may wish to visit the new NCNHP website (www ncnhp ore) that offers access to data and other
information on rare species, natural communities, significant natural areas, and lands managed for
conservation The online map viewer currently available shows boundaries of SNHAs and
conservation /managed areas, such as Wake County open space properties, and can be searched for
records within one mile to five miles of the project location We are also happy to help you use and
1601 Mail Service Center Raleigh North Carolina 27699 -1601
Phone [phone]\ Internet wwwncdenrgov
An Equal opportunity } Alfirmalife Action Employer -50°, Recycled t 101,6 Post Consume, Paper

Branch Bank and Trust Company — Proposed Project ZDC, Wake County North Carolina
lanuary 29, 2014
�aqe 2
Interpret the GIS data provided on our website for your project review
Please feel free to contact me at 919 - 707 -8629 or Allison Weakley@ncdenr Qov If you have questions or
need further Information.
Sincerely,
Allison Schwarz Weakley, Conservation Planner
NC Natural Heritage Program

Branch Bank and Trust Company
Project ZDC - Request for NWP #39
Attachment G
N.C. Wetlands Assessment Method Forms
January 31, 2014

NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 41
MaLllla Ma1%.U1aLV1 YCISIVII Y 1
Wetland Site Name Project ZDC Wetland A Date 04/01/11
Wetland Typel Basin Wetland Assessor Name /Organization Brandon Phillips -STV
Level III Ecoregionj Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body Little River
River Basin I Neuse XJ USGS 8 -Digit Catalogue Unit 03020201
r, Yes r", No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude /Longitude (deci- degrees) 35 839856, -78 327465
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately within 10 years) Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited
to the following
• Hydrological modifications (examples ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc )
• Surface and sub - surface discharges into the wetland (examples discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc )
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc )
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples mowing, clear - cutting, exotics, etc )
Is the assessment area Intensively managed? rt, Yes r", No
Regulatory Considerations (select all that apply to the assessment area)
r Anadromous fish
r Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
NCDWQ riparian buffer rule in effect
C Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
C Publicly owned property
N C Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
r Designated NCNHP reference community
[� Abuts a 303(dylisted stream or a tributary to a 303(d)- listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
r Blackwater
Brownwater
Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) [; Lunar r Wind ['; Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? r, Yes �; No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? r, Yes [+ No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? Yes ro", No
Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual) If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect
GS VS
�; A A Not severely altered
rey B B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, sod compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub - Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub - surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub) Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology Refer to the current NRCS lateral effect of ditching guidance for
North Carolina hydnc sods (see USACE Wilmington District website) for the zone of influence of ditches in hydnc sods A ditch
51 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and ditch
sub - surface water Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable
Surf Sub
r A , A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered
r B r B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation)
(; C C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples draining, flooding, sod compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines)
Water Storage /Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (answer for non -marsh wetlands only)
Check a box in each column for each group below Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT)
AA WT
3a ; A (', A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 foot deep
B �; B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
C r; C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
[' D �; D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b �, A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
�, B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet

4 Soil Texture /Structure — assessment area condition metric
Check a box from each of the three sod property groups below Dig sod profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature Make sod observations within the 12 inches Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Sods guidance for
regional indicators
4a r� A Sandy sod
r; B Loamy or clayey sods exhibiting redoxfmorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
C Loamy or clayey sods not exhibiting redoximorphic features
r D Loamy or clayey gleyed sod
E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b A Sod ribbon < 1 inch
B Sod ribbon z1 inch
4c r , A No peat or muck presence
r", B A peat or muck presence
Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub - surface pollutants or discharges (Sub)
Examples of sub - surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc
Surf Sub
r A r A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
B [ B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
C C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
Land Use — opportunity metric
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment Consider sources
draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the
assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M) Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion
WS 5M 2M
r A G A [ A a10% impervious surfaces
r B r B r B < 10% impervious surfaces
C r C [ C Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
D C D r D ?20% coverage of pasture
r E G E r E z20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
ri F r F r F >20% coverage of maintained grass /herb
G IJ G r G >-20% coverage of clear -cut land
H H r H Little or no opportunity to improve water quality Lack of opportunity may result from hydrologic alterations
that prevent drainage or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area
Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer — assessment area/wetland complex condition metric
7a Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
Yes r; No If Yes, continue to 7b If No, skip to Metric 8
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body Make buffer judgment based on the average width of the wetland
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed
7b How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is weltand? Descriptor E should be selected if ditches effectively bypass the buffer
A >_50 feet
�'; B From 30 to < 50 feet
r C From 15 to < 30 feet
D From 5 to < 15 feet
E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c Tributary width If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels /braids for a total width
�; 515 -feet wide [; > 15 -feet wide r, Other open water (no tributary present)
7d Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
�; Yes r. No
7e Is tributary or other open water sheltered or exposed?
Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic
r Exposed — adjacent open water with width X500 feet or regular boat traffic
Wetland Width at the Assessment Area — wetland type /wetland complex metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Check a box in each column Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT)
and the wetland complex at the assessment areas (WC) See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries
WT
WC
A
; A
>_100 feet
B
['; B
From 80 to < 100 feet
C
C
From 50 to < 80 feet
D
D
From 40 to < 50 feet
E
E
From 30 to < 40 feet
F
F
From 15 to < 30 feet
�;G
[';G
From 5 to < 15 feet
rH
r
<5feet

9
Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric
Answer for assessment area dominant landform
r A
Evidence of short- duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
B
Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
�± C
Evidence of long- duration inundation or very long- duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10
Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition)
A
Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels
B
Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland
[ ; C
Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland
11
Wetland
Size — wetland type /wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area the
size
of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual) Seethe User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas If assessment area is clear -cut, select "K" for the FW column
WT
WC FW (if applicable)
A
A A >_500 acres
B
B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C
C C From 50 to < 100 acres
D
D D From 25 to < 50 acres
E
E E From 10 to < 25 acres
F
F F From 5 to < 10 acres
G
G G From 1 to < 5 acres
C:H
CH r:H From 0 5 to < 1 acre
E�I
r:I [:I From 01 to <05acre
J
r: J r: J From 0 01 to < 0 1 acre
K
: K r: K < 0 01 acre or assessment area is clear -cut
12
Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
A
Pocosm is the full extent ( >_90 %) of its natural landscape size
B
Pocosm is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size
13
Connectivity
to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a
Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column) Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment This
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and /or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
metric naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate) Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility
line comdors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wide
Well Loosely
A r: A ?500 acres
B E B From 100 to < 500 acres
E C r: C From 50 to < 100 acres
D D From 10 to < 50 acres
E E <10acres
F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b
Evaluate for marshes only
C Yes r: No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters /stream or tidal wetlands
14 Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges Artificial edges include
non - forested areas ?40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line comdors and clear -cuts
Consider the eight main points of the compass
A No artificial edge within 150 feet in all directions
B No artificial edge within 150 feet in four (4) to seven (7) directions
E, C An artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in more than four (4) directions or assessment area is clear -cut
15 Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area
E B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing it also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata
C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition Expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species) Exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum
16 Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species ( <10% cover of exotics)
B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics
C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species ( >50% cover of exotics)

17 Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a Is vegetation present?
E Yes [: No If Yes, continue to 17b If No, skip to Metric 18
17b Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands
A
z25%
coverage of vegetation
B
< 25% coverage of vegetation
17c Check a box in each column for each stratum Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands Consider structure
in airspace
above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately
AA
WT
oA
A
Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
m
B
�' B
Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
U
E: C
E: C
Canopy sparse or absent
0''
0
A
A
Dense mid- story/sapling layer
B
B
Moderate density mid- story/sapling layer
E' C
E C
Mid- story/sapling layer sparse or absent
[: A
A
Dense shrub layer
2
L
[: B
�' B
Moderate density shrub layer
""
EC
EC
Shrub layer sparse or absent
A
E A
Dense herb layer
B
B
Moderate density herb layer
C
E; C
Herb layer sparse or absent
18 Snags — wetland type condition metric
A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 -inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability)
B Not A
19 Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric
A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH), many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present
B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 -inch DBH
Co C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees
20 Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric
Include both natural debris and man - placed natural debris
A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability)
E Not
21 Vegetation /Open Water Dispersion — wetland type /open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water
22 Hydrologic Connectivity— assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive
ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man -made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision
A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area
B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area
C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area
D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area
Notes
Linear Wetland A is a former drainage ditch that is conveyed through two pipe culverts that have been placed under two existing, unimproved farm
roads Linear Wetland A drains to Wetland E, which drains to a Neuse River Basin buffered stream

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 4 1
Rating Calculator Version 4 1
Wetland Site Name Project ZDC Wetland A Date 04 /01/11
Wetland Type Basin Wetland Assessor Name /Organization Brandon Phillips -STV
Notes on Field Assessment Form (YIN) YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (YIN) YES
Wetland is intensively managed (YIN) YES
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (YIN) NO
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (YIN) NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (YIN) NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (YIN) NO
Sub - function Rating Summary
Function Sub - function Metncs Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition NA
Sub - Surface Storage and Retention Condition NA
Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition NA
Condition /Opportunity NA
Vegetation Composition Condition MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics /Notes Rating
Hydrology Condition LOW
Water Quality Condition LOW
Condition /Opportunity LOW
Opportunity Presence? (YIN) YES
Habitat Conditon LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW
Opportunity Presence? (YIN)
NA
Particulate Change
Condition
NA
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (YIN)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
NA
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (YIN)
NA
Physical Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (YIN)
NA
Pollution Change
Condition
LOW
Condition /Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (YIN)
YES
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
LOW
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Vegetation Composition Condition MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics /Notes Rating
Hydrology Condition LOW
Water Quality Condition LOW
Condition /Opportunity LOW
Opportunity Presence? (YIN) YES
Habitat Conditon LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 4 1
Kanng %,aicuiaior version 4 i
Wetland Site Name Project ZDC Wetland E Date 04/01/11
Wetland Typel Basin Wetland ,+s Assessor Name /Organization Brandon Phillips -STV
Level III Ecoregionj Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body Little River
RiverBasinj Neuse Iii USGS 8 -Digit Catalogue Unit 03020201
i* Yes C° No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude /Longitude (deci- degrees) 35 838023, -78 327953
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and /or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately within 10 years) Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited
to the following
• Hydrological modifications (examples ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc )
• Surface and sub - surface discharges into the wetland (examples discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc )
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc )
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples mowing, clear - cutting, exotics, etc )
Is the assessment area intensively managed? [; Yes [ , No
Regulatory Considerations (select all that apply to the assessment area)
j- Anadromous fish
Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
r NCDWQ riparian buffer rule in effect
r Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
Publicly owned property
(- N C Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
j- Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
[- Designated NCNHP reference community
D Abuts a 303(d)- listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)- listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
r Blackwater
[; Brownwater
Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) r Lunar r, Wind r Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? (; Yes r!', No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? �; Yes [±j No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? ' Yes r:,, No
Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual) If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect
GS VS
r?, A r.; A Not severely altered
r B r B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, sod compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub - Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub - surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub) Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology Refer to the current NRCS lateral effect of ditching guidance for
North Carolina hydnc sods (see USACE Wilmington District website) for the zone of influence of ditches in hydnc sods A ditch
51 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and ditch
sub - surface water Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable
Surf Sub
r� A (, A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered
r B B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation)
C (; C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples draining, flooding, sod compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines)
Water Storage /Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (answer for non -marsh wetlands only)
Check a box in each column for each group below Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT)
AA WT
3a [ ; A ; A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 foot deep
B B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
�, C (; C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
ro; D (; D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b r-; A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
�, B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet

r*; C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

Soil Texture /Structure — assessment area condition metric
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below Dig sod profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature Make soil observations within the 12 inches Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydnc Soils guidance for
regional indicators
4a r" A Sandy sod
[; B Loamy or clayey sods exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
[, C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoxwmorphic features
r D Loamy or clayey gleyed sod
r E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b (; A Sod ribbon < 1 inch
B Sod ribbon 2-1 inch
4c A No peat or muck presence
B A peat or muck presence
Discharge Into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub - surface pollutants or discharges (Sub)
Examples of sub - surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc
Surf Sub
�', A A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
B ['; B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
C E'; C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
Land Use — opportunity metric
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column) Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment Consider sources
draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the
assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M) Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion
WS 5M 2M
ji A r A r A 2-10% impervious surfaces
F71 B r' B r B < 10% impervious surfaces
r C r C r C Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
D r D r D 2-20% coverage of pasture
r E r E r—, E a20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
F r F [ F 2-20% coverage of maintained grass /herb
r G r G r G >20% coverage of clear -cut land
F7 H r H r H Little or no opportunity to improve water quality Lack of opportunity may result from hydrologic alterations
that prevent drainage or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area
Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer — assessment area/wetland complex condition metric
7a Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
r.; Yes r No If Yes, continue to 7b If No, skip to Metric 8
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body Make buffer judgment based on the average width of the wetland
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed
7b How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is weltand? Descriptor E should be selected if ditches effectively bypass the buffer
�; A 2-50 feet
�, B From 30 to < 50 feet
�.; C From 15 to < 30 feet
D From 5 to < 15 feet
E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c Tributary width If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels /braids for a total width
515 -feet mode [; > 15 -feet mode [; Other open water (no tributary present)
7d Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tnbutary/open water?
re, Yes rL No
7e Is tributary or other open water sheltered or exposed?
Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic
Exposed — adjacent open water with width 2-2500 feet or regular boat traffic
Wetland Width at the Assessment Area — wetland type/wetland complex metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Check a box in each column Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT)
and the wetland complex at the assessment areas (WC) See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries
WT
WC
r, A
, A
2-100 feet
�'; B
�, B
From 80 to < 100 feet
�', C
C
From 50 to < 80 feet
�', D
D
From 40 to < 50 feet
�; E
", E
From 30 to < 40 feet
r F
r F
From 15 to < 30 feet
G
[; G
From 5 to < 15 feet
H
r, H
< 5 feet

9 Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric
Answer for assessment area dominant landform
A Evidence of short- duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
C Evidence of long - duration inundation or very long- duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10 Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition)
A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels
B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland
�, C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland
11 Wetland Size — wetland type /wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual) Seethe User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas If assessment area is clear -cut, select "K" for the FW column
WT WC FW (if applicable)
A A A 2500 acres
B B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C C C CC From 50 to < 100 acres
CD CD ED From 25 to < 50 acres
C E C E C E From 10 to < 25 acres
CF CF CF From 5 to < 10 acres
C G E G C G From 1 to < 5 acres
EH n CH From 05to <1 acre
I CII From 01 to <05acre
C J C J C J From 0 01 to < 0 1 acre
C K C K C K < 0 01 acre or assessment area is clear -cut
12 Wetland Intactness — wetiand type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
C A Pocosin is the full extent ( >_90 %) of its natural landscape size
C B Pocosin is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size
13 Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column) Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment This
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
metric naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate) Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility
line comdors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wide
Well Loosely
C A C A 2500 acres
C B E B From 100 to < 500 acres
EC C C From 50 to < 100 acres
D D From 10 to < 50 acres
E E <10acres
F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b Evaluate for marshes only
C Yes C No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters /stream or tidal wetlands
14 Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges Artificial edges include
non - forested areas >_40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and clear -cuts
Consider the eight main points of the compass
A No artificial edge within 150 feet in all directions
B No artificial edge within 150 feet in four (4) to seven (7) directions
E C An artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in more than four (4) directions or assessment area is clear -cut
15 Vegetative Composition —assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area
B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcuttmg or
clearing It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata
C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition Expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non-
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species) Exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum
16 Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species ( <10% cover of exotics)
B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics
C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species ( >50% cover of exotics)

PEW
17. Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a Is vegetation present?
E Yes C No If Yes, continue to 17b If No, skip to Metric 18
17b Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands
C A
>25% coverage of vegetation
C B
< 25% coverage of vegetation
17c Check a box in each column for each stratum Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands Consider structure
in airspace
above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately
AA
WT
C
A
A
Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
B
B
Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
U
C
C C
Canopy sparse or absent
o
C A
C A
Dense mid- story/sapling layer
�
F: B
E B
Moderate density mid- story/sapling layer
C C
C C
Mid- story/sapling layer sparse or absent
A
A
Dense shrub layer
L
B
B
Moderate density shrub layer
W
C, C
CC
Shrub layer sparse or absent
M A
EA
Dense herb layer
iu
B
B
Moderate density herb layer
_
C
C
Herb layer sparse or absent
18 Snags — wetland type condition metric
A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 -inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability)
' B Not A
19 Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric
A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH), many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present
B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 -inch DBH
C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees
20 Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric
Include both natural debris and man - placed natural debris
C A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability)
E, B Not A
21 Vegetation /Open Water Dispersion — wetland type /open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water
�A B C D
�v t Fir
1 1
4 p �Y1� y3
p
22 Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive
ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man -made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision
A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area
B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area
C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area
D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area
Notes
Wetland E is a former agricultural pond that has been drained by the removal of the earthen dam, Hydrology is received from the pipe culvert that
drains linear Wetland A, and the pipe culvert that drains Wetland D

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 4.1
Rating Calculator Version 4.1
Wetland Site Name Project ZDC Wetland E Date 04/01/11
Wetland Type Basin Wetland Assessor Name /Organization Brandon Phillips -STV
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y /N) YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y /N) YES
Wetland is intensively managed (Y /N) NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y /N) YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y /N) NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y /N) NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y /N) NO
Sub - function Rating Summary
Function Sub - function Metrics Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition NA
Sub - Surface Storage and Retention Condition NA
Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition NA
Opportunity Presence? (YIN) YES
Habitat Physical Structure Condition LOW
Landscape Patch Structure Condition MEDIUM
Vegetation Composition Condition MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics /Notes Rating
Hydrology Condition LOW
Water Quality Condition LOW
Habitat
Condition /Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
Conditon
Overall Wetland Rating LOW
LOW
YES
LOW
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Particulate Change
Condition
NA
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
NA
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Physical Change
Condition
NA
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Pollution Change
Condition
LOW
Condition /Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (YIN) YES
Habitat Physical Structure Condition LOW
Landscape Patch Structure Condition MEDIUM
Vegetation Composition Condition MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics /Notes Rating
Hydrology Condition LOW
Water Quality Condition LOW
Habitat
Condition /Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
Conditon
Overall Wetland Rating LOW
LOW
YES
LOW

NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 41
Katmg carcuiator version 41
Wetland Site Name Project ZDC Wetland G Date 04/01/11
Wetland Type Non -Tidal Freshw ater Marsh Assessor Name /Organization Brandon Phillips -STV
Level III Ecoregionj Piedmont I+ Nearest Named Water Body Little River
River Basinj Neuse 121 USGS 8 -Digit Catalogue Unit 03020201
M. Yes C': No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude /Longitude (deci- degrees) 35 839199, -78 328821
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately within 10 years) Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited
to the following
• Hydrological modifications (examples ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc)
• Surface and sub - surface discharges into the wetland (examples discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc )
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc )
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples mowing, clear - cutting, exotics, etc )
Is the assessment area Intensively managed? r:", Yes r No
Regulatory Considerations (select all that apply to the assessment area)
j Anadromous fish
i Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
NCDWQ npanan buffer rule in effect
Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
r Publicly owned property
N C Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
G Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
Designated NCNHP reference community
Abuts a 303(d )-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)- listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, If any? (check all that apply)
r Blackwater
�« Brownwater
i Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) (-; Lunar Wind (; Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? r, Yes �; No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? r, Yes r!, No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? Yes r:", No
Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual) If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect
GS VS
�', A A Not severely altered
(: B [:; B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, sod compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub - Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub - surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub) Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology Refer to the current NRCS lateral effect of ditching guidance for
North Carolina hydnc sods (see USACE Wilmington District website) for the zone of influence of ditches in hydnc sods A ditch
51 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and ditch
sub - surface water Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable
Surf Sub
A A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered
B [; B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation)
C C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples draining, flooding, sod compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines)
Water Storage /Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (answer for non -marsh wetlands only)
Check a box in each column for each group below Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT)
AA WT
3a r A (, A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 foot deep
[; B �; B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
[; C �; C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
D r D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b �-; A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
�; B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet

r, C Evidence that mawmum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

4 Sod Texture /Structure — assessment area condition metric
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature Make sod observations within the 12 inches Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydnc Sods guidance for
regional indicators
4a r," A Sandy sod
r% B Loamy or clayey sods exhibiting redoxwmorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
r C Loamy or clayey sods not exhibiting redoxwmorphic features
D Loamy or clayey gleyed sod
E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b �!? A Sod ribbon < 1 inch
B Sod ribbon >_1 inch
4c �; A No peat or muck presence
B A peat or muck presence
Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub - surface pollutants or discharges (Sub)
Examples of sub - surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc
Surf Sub
r A A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
B B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
C C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
Land Use — opportunity metric
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column) Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment Consider sources
draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the
assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M) Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion
WS 5M 2M
r A r A [ A ?10% impervious surfaces
[' B r B F-1 B < 10% impervious surfaces
C r C [ C Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
D r D [ D >-20% coverage of pasture
E E r E Z20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
r F [ F G F ?20% coverage of maintained grass /herb
G r G ❑ G Z20% coverage of clear -cut land
r H [ H [ H Little or no opportunity to improve water quality Lack of opportunity may result from hydrologic alterations
that prevent drainage or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area
Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer — assessment area/wetland complex condition metric
7a Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
Yes , No If Yes, continue to 7b If No, skip to Metric 8
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body Make buffer judgment based on the average width of the wetland
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed
7b How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is weltand? Descriptor E should be selected if ditches effectively bypass the buffer
A z50 feet
B From 30 to < 50 feet
�.; C From 15 to < 30 feet
[', D From 5 to < 15 feet
� , E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c Tributary width If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels /braids for a total width
s15 -feet wide r, > 15 -feet wide �; Other open water (no tributary present)
7d Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
r' Yes r'; No
7e Is tributary or other open water sheltered or exposed?
(: Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic
Exposed — adjacent open water with width ?2500 feet or regular boat traffic
Wetland Width at the Assessment Area — wetland type/wetland complex metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Check a box in each column Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT)
and the wetland complex at the assessment areas (WC) See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries
WT
WC
r-, A
r-, A
>_100 feet
r, B
�, B
From 80 to < 100 feet
C
�; C
From 50 to < 80 feet
D
(, D
From 40 to < 50 feet
r, E
�, E
From 30 to < 40 feet
F
F
From 15 to < 30 feet
G
[;G
From 5 to < 15 feet
�'; H
['; H
< 5 feet

9 Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric
Answer for assessment area dominant landform
A
Evidence of short- duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
B
Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
C
Evidence of long- duration inundation or very long - duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10 Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition)
A
Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels
B
Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland
C
Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland
11 Wetland
Size — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area the
size
of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual) See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas If assessment area is clear -cut, select "K" for the FW column
WT
WC FW (if applicable)
A
A A 2500 acres
B
B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C
C C From 50 to < 100 acres
D
D D From 25 to < 50 acres
E
E E From 10 to < 25 acres
�F
F F From 5 to < 10 acres
CG
E, G r, G From 1 to < 5 acres
H
H H From 05to <lacre
I
I I From 0 1 to < 0 5 acre
J
J J From 0 01 to < 0 1 acre
K
K K < 0 01 acre or assessment area is clear -cut
12 Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosms only)
A
Pocosin is the full extent ( >_90 %) of its natural landscape size
C B
Pocosm is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size
13 Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a
Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column) Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment This
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and /or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
metric naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate) Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility
line comdors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wide
Well Loosely
A A ;2500 acres
B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C From 50 to < 100 acres
D D From 10 to < 50 acres
�E E <10acres
F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b
Evaluate for marshes only
Yes r: No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters /stream or tidal wetlands
14 Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges Artificial edges include
non - forested areas ?40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and clear -cuts
Consider the eight main points of the compass
A No artificial edge within 150 feet in all directions
B No artificial edge within 150 feet in four (4) to seven (7) directions
C An artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in more than four (4) directions or assessment area is clear -cut
15 Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area
B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcuttmg or
clearing It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata
C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition Expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non-
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species) Exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum
16 Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
C A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species ( <10% cover of exotics)
E B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics
C C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species ( >50% cover of exotics)

L-J
17 Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a Is vegetation present?
C Yes C No If Yes, continue to 17b If No, skip to Metric 18
17b Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands
E A
?25%
coverage of vegetation
C B
< 25% coverage of vegetation
17c Check a box in each column for each stratum Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands Consider structure
in airspace
above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately
AA
WT
CL
A
A
Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
C
a
B
B
Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
v
C
C
Canopy sparse or absent
o
A
A
Dense mid- story/sapling layer
B
B
Moderate density mid- story/sapling layer
i
C
C
Mid- story/sapling layer sparse or absent
A
A
Dense shrub layer
r
B
B
Moderate density shrub layer
0
C
C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
.0
A
A
Dense herb layer
i5
B
' B
Moderate density herb layer
_
C
C
Herb layer sparse or absent
18 Snags — wetland type condition metric
A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12- inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability)
B Not A
19 Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric
A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH), many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present
B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 -inch DBH
C C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric
Include both natural debris and man - placed natural debris
n A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability)
E B Not A
21 Vegetation /Open Water Dispersion — wetland type /open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water
�A B r'C ED
22 Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive
ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man -made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision
A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area
B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area
C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area
D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area
Notes
Wetland G is an emergent wetland maintained as a field by infrequent mowing operations Wetland G drainage enters a drainage ditch which has
created seasonal RPW Stream G Seasonal RPW Stream G is a Neuse River Basin buffered stream

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 41
Rating Calculator Version 4.1
Wetland Site Name Project ZDC Wetland G Date 04 /01/11
Wetland Type Non -Tidal Freshwater Marsh Assessor Name /Organization Brandon Phillips -STV
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y /N) YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y /N) YES
Wetland is intensively managed (Y /N) YES
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y /N) YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y /N) NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y /N) NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y /N) NO
Sub - function Rating Summa
Function Sub - function Metncs Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition NA
Sub - Surface Storage and Retention Condition NA
Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N) NA
Habitat Physical Structure Condition LOW
Landscape Patch Structure Condition HIGH
Vegetation Composition Condition MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function Metncs /Notes Rating
Hydrology Condition LOW
Water Quality Condition
Condition /Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
Habitat Conditon LOW
Overall Wetland Rating
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Particulate Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
NA
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Physical Change
Condition
NA
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N) NA
Habitat Physical Structure Condition LOW
Landscape Patch Structure Condition HIGH
Vegetation Composition Condition MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function Metncs /Notes Rating
Hydrology Condition LOW
Water Quality Condition
Condition /Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
Habitat Conditon LOW
Overall Wetland Rating