20160978 Ver 1_401 Application_20171017

fires
September 28, 2017
Resource Environmental Solutions is pleased to submit a Nationwide Permit 27 Pre -Construction
10055 Red Run Blvd.
Ms. Karen Higgins
Suite 130
NC DWR, 401 &Buffer Permitting Branch
Owings Mills, MD21117
Carolina, approximately two miles southeast of Smithfield. The project streams proposed for
512 North Salisbury St.
5020 Montrose Blvd.
Raleigh, NC 27604
412 N. 4th St.
project will involve the restoration and protection of streams in the Neuse River watershed. Project
Suite 300
has been designed in concurrence with the Polecat Riparian Buffer and Nutrient Offset Mitigation
Baton Rouge, LA
Higgins,
Dear Ms. Hi gg ,
70802
Resource Environmental Solutions is pleased to submit a Nationwide Permit 27 Pre -Construction
100 Calhoun St.
Notification PCN Mitigation ("Project"). .1 ���• Project for the Polecat Stream Miti atiProject "Pect" The Pject is located
g
Suite 320
Charleston, SC
within a watershed dominated by agricultural and residential land use in Johnston County, North
29401
Carolina, approximately two miles southeast of Smithfield. The project streams proposed for
restoration have been significantly impacted b channelization and agricultural practices. The
� 5' p Y � p
5020 Montrose Blvd.
suite 650
project will involve the restoration and protection of streams in the Neuse River watershed. Project
Houston, TX
has been designed in concurrence with the Polecat Riparian Buffer and Nutrient Offset Mitigation
77006
Bank.
1200 Camellia Blvd.
Suite 220
The objective for this mitigation site is to restore and design natural waterways through
Lafayette, LA
stream/wetland complexes with appropriate cross-sectional dimension and slope that will provide
70508
function and meet the appropriate success criteria for the existing streams. Accomplishing this
1371/2 East Main St.
objective entails the restoration of natural stream characteristics, such as stable cross sections,
Suite 210
planform, and in -stream habitat. The floodplain areas will be hydrologically reconnected to the
Oak Hill, WV
channels where feasible to provide natural exchange and storage during flooding events.
25901
33 Terminal Way
The attached PCN package includes PCN Form, supporting figures, the Jurisdictional Suite 431
Determination package submitted to the USACE, and design plans. Total stream impacts resulting Pittsburgh, PA
15219
from the proposed project are 5,235. Buffer impacts resulting from project are 84,547 square feet
of buffer impact in Zone 1 and 27,419 square feet of buffer impact in Zone 2. 302 Jefferson St.
Suite 110
For our reference a co of the approved Final Mitigation Plan has been provided on the included Raleigh, NC
Y � PY PP g p 27605
CD with this PCN submittal. This PCN application has already been submitted to the US Army
Corps of Engineers. Thank you for your prompt attention to this important project. Please contact 1521 W. Main
me at 919-209-1062 or bbreslow(&res.us if you have an questions or require an additional 2 Floor
Y Y q q Y Richmond, VA
information. 23220
Sincerely yours,
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC
Brad Breslow
Project Manager

a`'pF wArE�Q�
C, vlllt:� Y
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:
❑X Section 404 Permit ❑ Section 10 Permit
1 b.
Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 27 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑X Yes ❑ No
1 d.
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
❑X 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e.
Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification:
❑ Yes NX No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes NX 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.
N Yes ❑X No
1 g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
N Yes NX No
1 h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ YesX❑ No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
Polecat Mitigation Site
2b.
County:
Johnston
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Smithfield
2d.
Subdivision name:
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
See attached Landowner Information
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
3d.
Street address:
3e.
City, state, zip:
3f.
Telephone no.:
3g.
Fax no.:
3h.
Email address:
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4.
Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a.
Applicant is:
❑X Agent ❑ Other, specify:
4b.
Name:
Brad Breslow
4c.
Business name
(if applicable):
Resource Environmental Solutions
4d.
Street address:
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
4e.
City, state, zip:
Raleigh, NC 27605
4f.
Telephone no.:
919-209-1062
4g.
Fax no.:
4h.
Email address:
[e-mail]
5.
Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a.
Name:
5b.
Business name
(if applicable):
5c.
Street address:
5d.
City, state, zip:
5e.
Telephone no.:
5f.
Fax no.:
5g.
Email address:
Page 2 of 10

B.
Project Information and Prior Project History
1.
Property Identification
1a.
Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
See attached landowner info
1 b.
Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.475181
Longitude: -78.311495
1 c.
Property size:
53.1 acres
2.
Surface Waters
2a.
Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
Polecat Branch
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
C; NSW
2c.
River basin:
Neuse- 03020201
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:
See Supplemental Information
3b.
List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 13.41
3c.
List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
3d.
See
Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
Supplemental Information
3e.
See
Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Supplemental Information
4.
Jurisdictional Determinations
4a.
Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (includingall prior phases in the past?
❑X Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
Comments:
4b.
If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
❑x Preliminary ❑ Final
4c.
If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Jeremy Schmid
Agency/Consultant Company: RES
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
Site visit conducted with the USACE on June 22, 2017.
5.
Project History
5a.
Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
❑ Yes ❑X No ❑ Unknown
5b.
If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6.
Future Project Plans
6a.
Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes ❑X No
6b.
If yes, explain.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑ Wetlands ❑X Streams — tributaries ❑X 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 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W2 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W3 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W4 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W5 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W6 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
2h. Comments:
There are wetlands on-site however they will not be impacted during the stream restoration.
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
Relocation
KZ2,KZ4
PER
Corps
11
1,702
S2 P
Relocation
KZ3
PER
Corps
3
126
S3 P
Relocation
KZ5
PER
Corps
4.6
123
S4 P
Relocation
M11,KZ6
PER
Corps
11
2,306
S5 P
Relocation
Crossing on M11
PER
Corps
8.9
100
S6 P
Relocation
M11
PER
Corps
8.9
878
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
5,235
3i. Comments:
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then indivi ually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
impact number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable)
4c.
Type of impact
4d.
Waterbody
type
4e.
Area of impact (acres)
01
Choose one
Choose
O2 -
Choose one
Choose
03 -
Choose one
Choose
04 -
Choose one
Choose
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, the complete the chart below.
5a.
Pond ID number
5b.
Proposed use or
purpose of pond
5c.
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:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a. Project is in which protected basin?
❑X Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman ❑ Other:
6b.
Buffer Impact
number —
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Stream name
6e.
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f.
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet)
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet)
B1 P
Stream Restoration
KZ2,KZ3,KZ4,KZ5
No
37,972
7,821
B2 P
Stream Restoration
KZ6,M11
No
42,770
15,311
B3 P
Stream Restoration
M11
No
3,805
4,287
B4 -
Yes/No
B5 -
Yes/No
B6 -
Yes/No
6h. Total Buffer Impacts:
84,547
27,419
6i. Comments:
Page 5 of 10

D.
Impact Justification and Mitigation
1.
Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
See Supplemental Information
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
See Supplemental Information
2.
Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a.
Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
❑ Yes ❑X No
2b.
If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ❑ Corps
2c.
If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
❑ Mitigation bank
El Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3.
Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a.
Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b.
Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Quantity:
Quantity:
Quantity:
3c. Comments:
4.
Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a.
Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
❑ Yes
4b.
Stream mitigation requested:
linear feet
4c.
If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
Choose one
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4f.
Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g.
Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h.
Comments:
5.
Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a.
If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
❑ Yes ❑X 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
1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 7 of 10

E.
Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1.
Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a.
Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
❑ Yes X❑ No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b.
If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
No
increase in impervious surface.
❑ Yes ❑ No
2.
Stormwater Management Plan
2a.
What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
1
2b.
Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ Yes ❑X No
2c.
If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
No
increase in impervious surface.
2d.
If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative
description of the plan:
2e.
Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
3.
Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a.
In which localgovernment's jurisdiction is thisproject?
❑ 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 ❑ 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?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5b.
Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

F.
Supplementary Information
1.
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a.
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
❑ Yes ❑X No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b.
If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑ Yes ❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c.
If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
❑ Yes ❑ No
letter.)
Comments:
2.
Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a.
Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
E] Yes ❑X No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b.
Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
❑ Yes ❑X 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 ❑X 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.
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
❑X Yes ❑ No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑X 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?
USFWS IPAC and Natural Heritage Program Database
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ❑X No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
NOAA Essential Fish Habitat Mapper
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?
NC SHPO GIS Database
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA -designated 100 -year floodplain?
❑X Yes ❑ No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
RES will conduct a FEMA flood study to either obtain a No -Rise Certification or CLOMR/ LOMR from the Johnston County floodplain administrator.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
FEMA NFHL
Brad Breslow
09-27-2017
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Date
Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant is provided.
Page 10 of 10

PCN Supplemental Information
Polecat Stream Mitigation Project
Nationwide Permit 27
Pre -Construction Notification
Name and address of the Applicant:
Resource Environmental Solutions
c/o Brad Breslow
302 Jefferson Street. Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605

PCN Supplemental Information -Polecat Stream Mitigation Project
A. Applicant Information
3. Owner Information
B. Proiect Information and Prior Proiect History
la. Property Identification no. (tax Pin or parcel ID): See table owner information above.
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the proiect at the
time of this application:
The Site is located in Johnston County approximately two miles southeast of Smithfield, North Carolina. The
Site is located in the Neuse River Basin within Cataloging Unit 03020201, 14 -digit USGS Hydrologic Unit
Code (HUC) 03020201140010 (USGS, 2012 The Polecat Creek watershed (HUC 03020201140010) was
identified as a Targeted Local Watershed (TLW), a watershed that exhibits both the need and opportunity for
wetland, stream, and riparian buffer restoration. The Polecat Creek watershed includes 42 square miles of
watershed area. Twenty percent of the watershed is used for agricultural purposes and three percent is currently
developed.
The site consists of agricultural fields, cattle pastures and wooded areas. The easement totals 53.1 acres.
Current conditions demonstrate significant habitat degradation as a result of impacts from agriculture, historic
land uses, and water diversion. Having been channelized in the past, some of the streams do not access their
floodplains as frequently as they naturally would have prior to agricultural operations. In most cases, the
riparian buffer is in poor condition where much of the riparian buffer is devoid of trees or shrubs and row crops
are present up to the edge of the existing channel. Habitat along the majority of the restoration reaches is poor in
that there is little woody debris or overhanging vegetation for fish cover or protection for other aquatic species.
The project area is comprised of a contiguous easement area along Polecat Branch and multiple unnamed
tributaries. The easement is separated by a crossing at Yelverton Grove Road (NC SR 2508), two utility
crossings, and four agricultural crossings. The project is divided into eastern and western portions by Yelverton
Grove Road. The eastern portion of the project includes Reach KZO, Reach KZ1, Reach KZ2, Reach KZ3,
Reach KZ4, and Reach KZS. The western portion of the project includes Reach KZ6, Reach MI1, Reach PCI,
Reach PC2, and Reach PC3.
Wetland delineations identified three riparian wetlands in the project area.
Pin or Tax
Deed Book &
Parcel
Protected
Landowner
County
Parcel ID
Page Number
Acreage
Acreage
James Nelson
260300 -10 -
Mitchell and
3295;
Brenda C.
260200-39-
39.97;
Mitchell
2410
Johnston
1533-481
51.79
18.6
260200-78-
EBX Neuse I,
0311;
LLC
260200-58-
4685-181;
9.67;
9860
Johnston
4706-0822
46.99
26.88
Marvin Hill and
260200 -57 -
Mark Earl Hill
6726
Johnston
4232-919
37.2
7.58
B. Proiect Information and Prior Proiect History
la. Property Identification no. (tax Pin or parcel ID): See table owner information above.
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the proiect at the
time of this application:
The Site is located in Johnston County approximately two miles southeast of Smithfield, North Carolina. The
Site is located in the Neuse River Basin within Cataloging Unit 03020201, 14 -digit USGS Hydrologic Unit
Code (HUC) 03020201140010 (USGS, 2012 The Polecat Creek watershed (HUC 03020201140010) was
identified as a Targeted Local Watershed (TLW), a watershed that exhibits both the need and opportunity for
wetland, stream, and riparian buffer restoration. The Polecat Creek watershed includes 42 square miles of
watershed area. Twenty percent of the watershed is used for agricultural purposes and three percent is currently
developed.
The site consists of agricultural fields, cattle pastures and wooded areas. The easement totals 53.1 acres.
Current conditions demonstrate significant habitat degradation as a result of impacts from agriculture, historic
land uses, and water diversion. Having been channelized in the past, some of the streams do not access their
floodplains as frequently as they naturally would have prior to agricultural operations. In most cases, the
riparian buffer is in poor condition where much of the riparian buffer is devoid of trees or shrubs and row crops
are present up to the edge of the existing channel. Habitat along the majority of the restoration reaches is poor in
that there is little woody debris or overhanging vegetation for fish cover or protection for other aquatic species.
The project area is comprised of a contiguous easement area along Polecat Branch and multiple unnamed
tributaries. The easement is separated by a crossing at Yelverton Grove Road (NC SR 2508), two utility
crossings, and four agricultural crossings. The project is divided into eastern and western portions by Yelverton
Grove Road. The eastern portion of the project includes Reach KZO, Reach KZ1, Reach KZ2, Reach KZ3,
Reach KZ4, and Reach KZS. The western portion of the project includes Reach KZ6, Reach MI1, Reach PCI,
Reach PC2, and Reach PC3.
Wetland delineations identified three riparian wetlands in the project area.

PCN Supplemental Information -Polecat Stream Mitigation Project
The Polecat project consists of stream restoration and enhancement on tributaries that drain directly to Polecat
Creek. The project presents 8,178 linear feet of Stream Restoration and Enhancement.
3d. Explain the Purpose of the proposed proiect:
The objective for this restoration project is to restore and design natural waterways through stream/wetland
complexes with appropriate cross-sectional dimension and slope that will provide function and meet the
appropriate success criteria for the existing streams. Accomplishing this objective entails the restoration of
natural stream characteristics, such as stable cross sections, planform, and in -stream habitat. The floodplain
areas will be hydrologically reconnected to the channel to provide natural exchange and storage during flooding
events. The design will be based on reference conditions, USACE guidance (USAGE, 2005), and criteria that
are developed during this project to achieve success. Additional project objectives, such as restoring the riparian
buffer with native vegetation, ensuring hydraulic stability, and eradicating invasive species.
3e. Describe the overall proiect in detail, including the type of equipment to be used.
The design approach for the Polecat Site is to combine the analog method of natural channel design with
analytical methods to evaluate stream flows and hydraulic performance of the channel and floodplain. The
analog method involves the use of a "template" stream adjacent to, nearby, or previously in the same location as
the design reach. The template parameters of the analog reach are replicated to create the features of the design
reach. The analog approach is useful when watershed and boundary conditions are similar between the design
and analog reaches. Hydraulic geometry was developed using analytical methods in an effort to identify the
design discharge.
The Polecat Site will include Priority Level 1 and 2 restoration and Enhancement Levels I, II, and III. Priority 1
and 2 restoration reaches will incorporate the design of a single -thread meandering channel, with parameters
based on data taken from the reference site, published empirical relationships, NC Coastal Plain Regional
Curves, and hydrologic and hydraulic analyses. Enhancement measures follow current regulatory guidance and
published research.
Reaches KZ1, KZ2, KZ4, KZ6 and MI1
A combination of Priority 1 and 2 Restoration, Enhancement Level I and Buffer Enhancement is proposed
along the primary project channel to address existing impairments, particularly channelization, buffer
encroachment and impacts from continued cattle access. The watershed that drains to the upper end of the
project is approximately 524 acres, and land use is primarily agricultural and forested. Buffer Enhancement is
proposed for Reach KZ1 as the channel is stable throughout, regularly accesses its floodplain and provides a
variety of aquatic habitats. A minimum of a 100 -foot buffer will be established along the majority of Reach
KZ1 and will be planted with native riparian vegetation. A 74 -foot easement break is proposed in the middle of
the reach to accommodate a proposed gas line.
Priority 1 Restoration is proposed for Reach KZ2 to address bank failures and historic straightening. The design
approach will include meandering the proposed channel within the natural valley, and backfilling the existing
stream. A minimum 100 -foot buffer will be established and planted with native riparian vegetation. Woody
debris, brush toes, and log structures will be installed along the reach to improve in -stream habitat and stability.
Priority 1 Restoration is proposed for Reach KZ4 to address historic straightening and the resulting degradation.
The design approach will include meandering the proposed channel within the natural valley, and backfilling
the existing stream. A minimum 100 -foot buffer will be established and planted with native riparian vegetation.
Because much of the buffer is devoid of significant woody vegetation, woody debris and log structures will be
installed along the bed to improve in -stream habitat and stability. A 30 -foot easement break is proposed 104
linear feet upstream of the existing 84" CMP roadway crossing to accommodate an existing overhead
powerline.

PCN Supplemental Information -Polecat Stream Mitigation Project
A 55 -foot easement break is proposed at Yelverton Grove Rd. located at the reach break between KZ4 and KZ6.
The existing 84" CMP will be retained and no work is proposed within the NCDOT Right of Way.
Priority 2 Restoration is proposed for Reach KZ6 to address historic straightening and the resulting degradation
and entrenchment. The design approach will include excavating a floodplain within the natural valley,
meandering the proposed channel within proposed floodplain limits, and backfilling the existing stream.
Existing drainage ditches will be graded through the proposed floodplain and attached to the proposed channel.
A minimum 50 -foot buffer will be established and planted with native riparian vegetation. Woody debris and
log grade control structures will be installed along the bed to improve in -stream habitat and stability.
Priority 1 Restoration is proposed for Reach MI1 to address historic straightening and livestock impacts. The
design approach will include meandering the proposed channel within the natural valley, backfilling the existing
stream, and restoring hydrology to a relic channel. A minimum 100 -foot buffer will be established and planted
with native riparian vegetation. Because much of the buffer is devoid of significant woody vegetation, woody
debris and log grade control structures will be installed along the bed to improve in -stream habitat and stability.
A 100 -foot easement break is proposed to accommodate a proposed 36" and 24" HDPE farm crossing. The
drainage area at the downstream end of the reach is 825 acres.
Reach KZO
Enhancement Level II is proposed for Reach KZO. A minimum of a 100 -foot buffer will be established along
the majority of Reach KZO and all areas not currently wooded will be planted with native riparian vegetation. A
30 -foot easement break is proposed in the middle of the reach to accommodate an existing 24" / 18" HDPE
farm crossing.
Reach KZ3
Priority 1 Restoration is proposed for Reach KZ3, to address bank failures and historic straightening. The
design approach will include meandering the proposed channel within the natural valley, and backfilling the
existing stream. A minimum 100 -foot buffer will be established and planted with native riparian vegetation.
Log sills and brush toes will be installed along the bed to improve in -stream habitat and stability.
Reach KZ5
Priority 2 Restoration is proposed for Reach K75, to address bank failures and historic straightening. The
design approach will include excavating a floodplain bench, meandering the proposed channel within the
proposed floodplain limits, and backfilling the existing stream. A minimum 100 -foot buffer will be established
and planted with native riparian vegetation. Brush bed sills and woody debris will be installed along the channel
to improve in -stream habitat and stability.
Reach PC1
Buffer Enhancement is proposed for Reach PCI as the channel is stable throughout, regularly accesses its
floodplain and provides a variety of aquatic habitats. A minimum of a 100 -foot buffer will be established along
the majority of Reach PCI and will be planted with native riparian vegetation.
Reach PC2
Enhancement Level II is proposed for Reach PC2. The design approach will include stabilizing localized areas
of instability. A minimum 100 -foot buffer will be established and planted with native riparian vegetation. Brush
toes and log sills will be installed along the reach to address erosional areas and to improve in -stream habitat.

PCN Supplemental Information -Polecat Stream Mitigation Project
Reach PC3
Buffer Enhancement is proposed for Reach PC3 as the channel is stable throughout, regularly accesses its
floodplain and provides a variety of aquatic habitats. A minimum of a 100 -foot buffer will be established along
the majority of Reach PC3 and will be planted with native riparian vegetation.
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
la. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designink proiect.
Due to the nature of this project, complete avoidance is not possible. Both stream and wetland impacts were
considered when designing the Polecat project. This project should uplift the ecological quality of streams and
wetlands on site. The existing channel length is 7,707 LF with five stream crossings. The proposed project will
result in 8,178 LF of stream with six stream crossings.
Reach
Mitigation
Type
Existing Length
(LF)
Proposed Length
(LF)
KZO
Enhancement II
252
252
KZO
Enhancement II
89
89
KZl
Enhancement III
485
485
KZl
Enhancement III
378
378
KZ2
P 1 Restoration
575
621
KZ3
P2 Restoration
126
183
KZ4
P I/ P2 Restoration
1,028
1,145
KZ4
Enhancement I
99
99
KZ5
P2 Restoration
123
152
KZ6
P2 Restoration
1,260
1,258
MIl
P1 Restoration
1,046
1,227
MIl
P 1 Restoration
878
952
PC1
Enhancement III
605
605
PC2
Enhancement II
373
373
PC3
Enhancement III
359
359
TOTAL
7,707
8,178

PCN Supplemental Information -Polecat Stream Mitigation Project
lb. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction
techniques:
Impacts are minimized using a staged construction approach. Where possible the channel will be constructed
prior to turning stream flow into a segment. This approach allows minimization of the impact of each stage
during the project construction. Additionally all work in wetlands and streams will be conducted during dry
conditions and/or with mats to protect soil structure. Efforts will be made to preserve individual high value
trees located within the stream restoration area.

nWrs_N Cowardin_Code
Wetland A (WA)
NORTH CAROLINA
PFO
Wetland B (WB)
NORTH CAROLINA
PEM
Wetland C (WC)
NORTH CAROLINA
PFO
KZ0
NORTH CAROLINA
R4
KZ1
NORTH CAROLINA
R2
KZ2/KZ4
NORTH CAROLINA
R2
KZ3
NORTH CAROLINA
R2
KZ5
NORTH CAROLINA
R4
KZ6/MI1
NORTH CAROLINA
R2
Ditch
NORTH CAROLINA
126 FOOT DELINEATE
HGM_Code Me
ngitude Local_Waterwayj
Area
4.21 ACRE DELINEATE
35.475357
-78.304912 Polecat Branch
Area
2.46 ACRE DELINEATE
35.47672
-78.322024 Polecat Branch
Area
6.74 ACRE DELINEATE
35.479812
-78.320497 Polecat Branch
Linear
341 FOOT DELINEATE
35.4762
-78.3087 Polecat Branch
Linear
863 FOOT DELINEATE
35.4759
-78.3125 Polecat Branch
Linear
1702 FOOT DELINEATE
35.4748
-78.3038 Polecat Branch
Linear
126 FOOT DELINEATE
35.4793
-78.3204 Polecat Branch
Linear
123 FOOT DELINEATE
35.4793
-78.3204 Polecat Branch
Linear
3184 FOOT DELINEATE
35.4793
-78.3204 Polecat Branch
Linear
799 FOOT RPW
35.4793
-78.3204 Polecat Branch

e'o9deh
Rh
a
i
S Highway -0 13,s
C-
a
Y
a
L
a
0
a
G
A
Crocker Rrj
�a
ale
S ads
6
9dPh
'Qa
� 6
0
3 �O�
Durham a ',�
ry
"-pleigh
IN otth
(�afolina
Legend
Sanford 0
olclsb Polecat Easement
Polecat Mitigation Site L� Service Area- HUC 03020201
Latitude: 35° 28' 34.326" N
Longitude:78° 18'46.250" W �,oiP��t N; TLW - 03020201140010
P N
Figure 1 - Vicinity Map
W -A-
V15 Polecat Mitigation Site
0 1,320 2,640 res
Johnston County, North Carolina
i
Feet

GoA Ra
Gr Ly^
GoA
G� °A`� V GoA NoB
U
GoA UCC
GeB GeB GoA NoA
NoB GoA
NoA
GoA GeB LY Ra
Ud
GoA
LY Ra UCC Bb
Ra
GoA NoA
•Ud /\ NoB GoA
GoA
GoA
CoB
GoA
G
NoA
Ly /
GoA
Tin
a
Ra
Ly
NoA \
NoA
Ra Ly NoA CoB
(-"\
GoA GoA
Ly
NoA
GoA
Ra GoA
GeB e
Ly NoA NoA Ly
G0
GoA
.ource EEsri, DigitalGlobe, GeoE7ye-Earths`arAGeograpi ics,
unty Soils, Survey USD ZUSTG'S; AeroGRID, I,G'N, and�the GIS User Community
Rmf
NoA
Ly
GoA
,�I=
Symbol
Name
Symbol Name
Bb
Bibb sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flaaded
NoA Norfolk loamy sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes
GoB
Cowarts loamy sand, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Ra Rains sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
GoA
Goldsboro sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Tn Toisnot loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Ly
Lynchburg sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Ud Udorthents, loamy
Legend
Proposed Easement
0 Nonhydric 0%
0 Hydric inclusions 1-89%
0 Hydric 90-100%
N
wE Figure 3 -Soils Map
0 500 ,.000 Polecat Mitigation Site
Feet Johnston County, North Carolina
pr e .1r.

r
r
rt, i
y -w
PC 2
t WC
r
,t
l
W B
KZ 6 KZ 5
KZ 2KZ I
WA
KZ 3
s '
Le-gend % •
Proposed Easment- 53.1 Ac .'
Existing Streams 1 {
A
Existing Ditch •
_ r t � ♦ R
{ Existing Wetlands
Future ACP
-�
33 Powerline Easement Esri, HERE, DeLorme, Mapmylndia, ®OpenStreetMap con�t,rr+b.wtPH I I -ors, ource.
Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earths4ar Geographies., CNES/Airbus D , U' DA,
�p
now—USGS, Aero^RID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
w� N
Figure 4 - Existing Conditions
-A-
S Polecat Mitigation Site res
0 400 800
ma Johnston County, North Carolina
a€ Feet
oa

i
Legend
Restoration
Enhancement I
Enhancement 11
Enhancement III ,� µ
Proposed Easement- 53.1 Acres
w�EFigure 5 - Conceptual Map
0 300 soo Polecat Mitigation Site
res
Feet Johnston County, North Carolina
N11tigation Type
Enhancement 1II
Enhancement 11I
�� -`
485
378
NOtigation Ratio
1 :5.0
1 :5.0
Base SMB
97
76
Adj.Otc[SMUs
97
76
Pl Restoration
621
1:1.0
621
699
PI/ P2 Restoration
1,145
1:1.0
1,145
1,258
Enhancement1
99
1:1.5
66
66
P2 Restoration
1,258
1:1.0
1,258
1,306
Pl Restoration
1,227
1:1.0
1,227
1,227
pIedRe,,heach
Pl Restoration
952
1:1.0
952
1,014
P2 Restoration
183
1:1.0
183
183
P2 Restoration
152
1:1.0
152
152
Enhancement RI
605
1 : 5.0
121
131
Enhancement 11
373
1 :2.5
149
149
Enhancement 11I
359
1 :5.0
72
72
Enhancement I1
Enhancement Il
252
89
1:2.5
1 :2.5
101
36
36
8.178
6156
6.567
w�EFigure 5 - Conceptual Map
0 300 soo Polecat Mitigation Site
res
Feet Johnston County, North Carolina

Legend
Existing TOB
3
Proposed Restoration
Crossings
Zone 1 Buffer Impacts
Zone 2 Buffer Impacts
a
a Existing Wetlands
Proposed Easement- 53.1 Acres
s w�E
3 0 175 350
IFeet
iFS5
NEI
Figure 6 - Jurisdictional Water Impacts Map - Inset 2
Polecat Mitigation Site
Johnston County, North Carolina
01
fires
_
.
1,
\
S4
Figure 6 - Jurisdictional Water Impacts Map - Inset 2
Polecat Mitigation Site
Johnston County, North Carolina
01
fires

Division
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
69 DARLINGTON AVENUE
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403-1343
September 18, 2017
Re: NCIRT Review and USACE Approval of the Request for Modification to the Neu -Con
Umbrella Mitigation Banking Instrument (LIMBI) to add the Polecat Mitigation Site
Mr. Daniel Ingram
Resource Environmental Solutions
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, North Carolina 27605
Dear Mr. Ingram:
This letter is to inform you that the Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers (Corps) has
reviewed and approved the Polecat Final Mitigation Plan dated July 2017. Therefore, your request
to modify the Neu -con UMBI to include the Polecat Mitigation Site is hereby approved.
The bank sponsor accepts all risk, liability, and responsibility for the success of all
mitigation activities associated with the approved mitigation bank site. In accordance with the
final mitigation plan, the bank sponsor must prepare and submit annual monitoring reports to
document whether the stream restoration areas (8,178 linear feet) on the project site meet the
necessary interim and final performance standards. When credits are debited from the mitigation
site, the bank sponsor must provide the Corps with an updated ledger form identifying the
purchaser of the credits, the project name, the permit number, and the number and type of credits
to be debited. When all stream credits (6,567 SMUs) have been consumed, no more credits may
be sold !from this mitigation site.
From the Corps' perspective, the next phase in the establishment of the Neu -Con UMBI,
Polecat Mitigation Site, includes the submittal of the Nationwide Permit 27 application,
recording the conservation easement to protect the mitigation site, marking the boundary of the
site with permanent signs, and executing the necessary financial assurances. Once the
conservation easement has been recorded and we receive the required executed financial
assurance documents, the Corps will be in a position to approve an initial credit release for 15%
of the total steam mitigation credits. We look forward to working with you to ensure the Polecat'.
Mitigation Site complies with the requirements of the approved UMBI and site-specific
mitigation plan.

-2 -
In all future correspondence concerning this matter, please refer to our file number, SAW -
2016 -01986. If you have any questions regarding this letter, the mitigation plan review process, or
the requirements of the Mitigation Rule, please call Ms. Samantha Dailey at [phone]
extension 22, or by email at Samantha.J.Daileygusace.army.mil.
Sincerely,
delw�t/ 4
HenryWicker
Deputy Chief, Regulatory Division
Electronic Copies Furnished:
NCIRT Distribution List

ATTACHMENT A
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL
DETERMINATION (JD): December 21, 2016
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PRELIMINARY JD:
Jeremy Schmid, PWS- Resource Environmental Solutions, 302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110, Raleigh, NC 27605
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
(USE THE ATTACHED TABLE TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE WATERBODIES AT DIFFERENT
SITES)
State: NC County/parish/borough: JohnSton
City: Smithfield
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format):
Lat. 35,476082 0N, Long. -78,311377
Universal Transverse Mercator: NAD 1983
Name of nearest waterbody: Polecat Branch
0W
Identify (estimate) amount of waters in the review area:
Non -wetland waters:
84 8365 linear feet: width (ft) and/or acres.
Cowardln Class: R4 and R5
Stream Flow: Intermittent and Perennial
Wetlands' 13A1 acres.
Cowardtn Class: PEM and PFD
Name of any water bodies on the site that have been identified as Section 10
waters:
Tidal:
Non -Tidal:

E
REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT
APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
❑ Field Determination. Date(s)-
SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for preliminary JD
(check all that apply - checked items should be included in case file and,
where checked and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
❑ Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the
applicant/consultant:
❑ Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the
appI' nt/consultant.
u Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geologicaf Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps
❑ U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:
❑ USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey.
Citation:
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is:
(National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
❑ Photographs: ❑ Aerial (Name & Date): or
❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Other information (please specify): PFD forms
E

1. The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional waters of the
United States on the subject site, and the permit applicant or other affected party
who requested this preliminary JD is hereby advised of his or her option to
request and obtain an approved jurisdictional determination (JD) for that site.
Nevertheless, the permit applicant or other person who requested this
preliminary JD has declined to exercise the option to obtain an approved JD in
this instance and at this time.
2. In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or
a Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring
"pre -construction notification" (PCN), or requests verification for a non -reporting
NWP or other general permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an
approved JD for the activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware of the
following: (1) the permit applicant has elected to seek a permit authorization
based on a preliminary JD, which does not make an official determination of
jurisdictional waters; (2) that the applicant has the option to request an approved
JD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit authorization, and
that basing a permit authorization on an approved JD could possibly result in less
compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) that
the applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting
the terms and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4)
that the applicant can accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply
with all the terms and conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation
requirements the Corps has determined to be necessary; (5) that undertaking
any activity in reliance upon the subject permit authorization without requesting
an approved JD constitutes the applicant's acceptance of the use of the
preliminary JD, but that either form of JD will be processed as soon as is
practicable; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered
individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps
permit authorization based on a preliminary JD constitutes agreement that all
wetlands and other water bodies on the site affected in any way by that activity
are jurisdictional waters of the United States, and precludes any challenge to
such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance or enforcement
action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7) whether
the applicant elects to use either an approved JD or a preliminary JD, that JD
will be processed as soon as is practicable. Further, an approved JD, a proffered
individual permit (and all terms and conditions contained therein), or individual
permit denial can be administratively appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331,
and that in any administrative appeal, jurisdictional issues can be raised (see 33
C.F.R. 331.5(a)(2)). If, during that administrative appeal, it becomes necessary
to make an official determination whether CWA jurisdiction exists over a site, or
to provide an official delineation of jurisdictional waters on the site, the Corps will
provide an approved JD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable.
3

This preliminary JD finds that there "maybe" waters of the United States on the
subject project site, and identifies all aquatic features on the site that could be
affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information:
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not
necessari!y been verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for
later jurisdictional determinations.
�iT�
Signature and date of
Regulatory Project Manager
(REQUIRED)
Signature and date of
person requesting preliminary JD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)

nWrs_N Cowardin_Code
Wetland A (WA)
NORTH CAROLINA
PFO
Wetland B (WB)
NORTH CAROLINA
PEM
Wetland C (WC)
NORTH CAROLINA
PFO
KZ0
NORTH CAROLINA
R4
KZ1
NORTH CAROLINA
R2
KZ2/KZ4
NORTH CAROLINA
R2
KZ3
NORTH CAROLINA
R2
KZ5
NORTH CAROLINA
R4
KZ6/MI1
NORTH CAROLINA
R2
Ditch
NORTH CAROLINA
126 FOOT DELINEATE
HGM_Code Me
ngitude Local_Waterwayj
Area
4.21 ACRE DELINEATE
35.475357
-78.304912 Polecat Branch
Area
2.46 ACRE DELINEATE
35.47672
-78.322024 Polecat Branch
Area
6.74 ACRE DELINEATE
35.479812
-78.320497 Polecat Branch
Linear
341 FOOT DELINEATE
35.4762
-78.3087 Polecat Branch
Linear
863 FOOT DELINEATE
35.4759
-78.3125 Polecat Branch
Linear
1702 FOOT DELINEATE
35.4748
-78.3038 Polecat Branch
Linear
126 FOOT DELINEATE
35.4793
-78.3204 Polecat Branch
Linear
123 FOOT DELINEATE
35.4793
-78.3204 Polecat Branch
Linear
3184 FOOT DELINEATE
35.4793
-78.3204 Polecat Branch
Linear
799 FOOT RPW
35.4793
-78.3204 Polecat Branch

Jurisdictional Determination Request
13
USArmy Corps
If Englneers-
Wilmington District
This form is intended for use by anyone requesting a jurisdictional determination (JD) from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District (Corps). Please include all supporting
information, as described within each category, with your request. You may submit your request
to the appropriate Corps Field Office (or project manager, if known) via mail, electronic mail, or
facsimile. A current list of county assignments by Field Office and project manager can be
found on-line at: littp://www.sa,,v.tisace.armv.mil/Missions/Re ug latoEyPermitllroLram aspx , by
telephoning: 910-251-4633, or by contacting any of the field offices listed below:
ASHEVILLE REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville. North Carolina 28801-5006
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
RALEIGH REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest. North Carolina 27587
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
WASHINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
2407 West Fifth Street
Washington. North Carolina 27889
General Number. [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
WILMINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington. North Carolina 28403
General Number: 910-251-4633
Fax Number: [phone]
Version: December 2013 Page 1

Jurisdictional Determination Request
INSTRUCTIONS:
All requestors must complete Parts A, B, C, D, E and F
NOTE TO CONSULTANTS AND AGENCIES: If you are requesting a JD on behalf of a
paying client or your agency, please note the specific submittal requirements in Part G.
NOTE ON PART D — PROPERTY OWNER AUTHORIZATION: Please be aware that all JD
requests must include the current property owner authorization for the Corps to proceed with the
determination, which may include inspection of the property when necessary. This form must be
signed by the current property owner to be considered a complete request.
NOTE ON PART D - NCDOT REQUESTS: Property owner authorization/notification for JD
requests associated with North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) projects will be
conducted according to the current NCDOT/USACE protocols.
NOTE TO USDA PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS: A Corps approved or preliminary JD may not
be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or
your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in USDA programs, you
should also request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural
Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
Version: December 2013 Page 2

Jurisdictional Determination Request
A. PARCEL INFORMATION
Street Address:
City, State:
County:
Directions:
See attached Site Ownership Information
Parcel Index Number(s) (PIN)
B. REQUESTOR INFORMATION
Name:
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number:
Electronic Mail Address I:
See attached Site Ownership Information
Jeremy Schmid, PWS
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
919-345-3034
[e-mail]
Select one:
❑ I am the current property owner.
✓❑ 1 am an Authorized Agent or Environmental Consultant
❑ Interested Buyer or Under Contract to Purchase
❑ Other, please explain.
C. PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION
Name:
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number:
Electronic Mail Address':
See attached Site Ownership information
❑ Proof of Ownership Attached (e.g. a copy of Deed, County GIS/Parcel/Tax Record data)
' If available
2 Must attach completed Agent Authorization Form
3 If available
Version: December 2013 Page 3

Jurisdictional Determination Request
D. PROPERTY OWNER CERTIFICATION
1, the undersigned, a duly authorized owner of record of the property/properties identified herein,
do authorize representatives of the Wilmington District. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)
to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on-site investigations
and issuing a determination associated with Waters of the U.S. subject to Federal jurisdiction
under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of
1599.
See attached Site Ownership Information
Property Owner (please print) Date
Property Owner Signature
E. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION TYPE
Select One:
F7I am requesting that the Corps provide a preliminary JD for the property identified herein.
This request does include a delineation.
I am requesting that the Corps provide a pLe-liminary JD for the property identified herein.
This request does NOT include a delineation.
1 am requesting that the Corps investigate the property/project area for the presence or
absence of WoUS' and provide an approved JD for the property identified herein. This
request does NOT include a request for a verified delineation.
I am requesting that the Corps delineate the boundaries of all WoUS on a property/project
area and provide an approved JD (this may or may not include a survey plat).
I am requesting that the Corps evaluate and approve a delineation of WoUS (conducted
by others) on a property/project area and provide an approved JD (may or may not
include a survey plat).
4 For NCDOT requests following the current NCDOT/USACE protocols, skip to Part E
5 Waters of the United States
Version: December 2013 page 4

F.
7
Z✓
Jurisdictional Determination Request
ALL REQUESTS
Map of Property or Project Area (attached). This Map must clearly depict the boundaries
of the area of evaluation.
Size of Property or Project Area Easement= 44 59
acres
Lr .L 1 verify that the property (or project) boundaries have recently been surveyed and marked
by a licensed land surveyor OR are otherwise clearly marked or distinguishable.
G. JD REQUESTS FROM CONSULTANTS OR AGENCIES
(1) Preliminary JD Requests:
® Completed and signed Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form
Project Coordinates: 35.478082 Latitude -78311377 Longitude
Maps (no larger than 1 1x17) with Project Boundary Overlay:
0 Large and small scale maps that depict, at minimum: streets, intersections, towns
✓1 Aerial Photography of the project area
17 USGS Topographic Map
❑✓ Soil Survey Map
Other Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map, Proposed Site
Plan, previous delineation maps, LIDAR maps, FEMA floodplain maps)
e See Appendix A of this Form. From Regulatory Guidance Letter No. 08-02, dated June 26, 2008
Version: December 2013 Page 5

Jurisdictional Determination Request
Delineation Information (when applicable):
Wetlands:
❑✓ Wetland Data Sheets
Tributaries:
❑ USACE Assessment Forms
0 Upland Data Sheets 0✓ Other Assessment Forms
(when appropriate)
❑ Landscape Photos, if taken
121 Field Sketch overlain on legible Map that includes:
■ All aquatic resources (for sites with multiple resources, label and identify)
■ Locations of wetland data points and/or tributary assessment reaches
■ Locations of photo stations
■ Approximate acreage/linear footage of aquatic resources
(2) Approved JDs including Verification of Delineation:
❑ Project Coordinates:
Latitude
Longitude
Maps (no larger than I IxI7) with Project Boundary Overlay:
❑ Large and small scale maps that depict, at minimum: streets, intersections, towns
❑ Aerial Photography of the project area
❑ USGS Topographic Map
❑ Soil Survey Map
❑ Other Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map, Proposed Site Plan,
previous delineation maps)
1987 Manual Regional Supplements and Data forms can be found at:
htt www.usace.army.millMissions/CivilWarks/RegulatoryProsramandPermits/rep, suoo aspx
Wetland and Stream Assessment Methodologies can be found at:
htt orta;.ncdenr.or c document library/get file?uuid=76f3c58b-dab8-4960-ba43-45b7faf06f4c& rou Id=38364 and,
httwww.saw.usace.arm .mil Portals 59 docs re ulator ublicnotices 2013 NCSAM Draft User Manual 130318. df
8 Delineation information must include, at minimum, one wetland data sheet for each wetland/community type.
Version: December 2013 Page 6

Jurisdictional Determination Request
Delineation Information (when applicable):
Wetlands:
❑ Wetland Data Sheets'
Tributaries:
❑ USACE Assessment Forms
❑ Upland Data Sheets ❑ Other Assessment Forms
(when appropriate)
❑ Landscape Photos, if taken
❑ Field Sketch overlain on legible Map that includes:
• All aquatic resources (for sites with multiple resources, label and identify)
• Locations of wetland data points and/or tributary assessment reaches
• Locations of photo stations
• Approximate acreage/linear footage of aquatic resources
Supporting Jurisdictional Information (for Approved JDs only)
❑ Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form(s) (also known as "Rapanos
Form(s)")
❑ Map(s) depicting the potential (or lack of potential) hydrologic connection(s),
adjacency, etc, to navigable waters.
9 Delineation information must include, at minimum, one wetland data sheet for each wetland/community type.
Version: December 2013 page 7

jurisdictional Determination Request
I. REQUESTS FOR CORPS APPROVAL OF SURVEY PLAT
Prior to final production of a Plat, the Wilmington District recommends that the Land
Surveyor electronically submit a draft of a Survey Plat to the Corps project manager for
review.
Due to storage limitations of our administrative records, the Corps requires that all hard-
copy submittals include at least one original Plat (to scale) that is no larger than 11"x17"
(the use of match lines for larger tracts acceptable). Additional copies of a plat, including
those larger than I I "x 17, may also be submitted for Corps signature as needed. The
Corps also accepts electronic submittals of plats, such as those transmitted as a Portable
Document Format (PDF) file. Upon verification, the Corps can electronically sign these
plats and return them via e-mail to the requestor.
(1) PLATS SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL
7 Must be sealed and signed by a licensed professional land surveyor
❑ Must be to scale (all maps must include both a graphic scale and a verbal scale)
❑ Must be legible
F] Must include a North Arrow, Scale(s), Title, Property Information
Must include a legible WoUS Delineation Table of distances and bearings/metes
and bounds/GPS coordinates of all surveyed delineation points
0 Must clearly depict surveyed property or project boundaries
Must clearly identify the known surveyed point(s) used as reference (e.g. property
corner, USGS monument)
RWhen wetlands are depicted:
• Must include acreage (or square footage) of wetland polygons
• Must identify each wetland polygon using an alphanumeric system
Version: December 2013 Page 8

jurisdictional Determination Request
11 When tributaries are depicted:
• Must include either a surveyed, approximate centerline of tributary with
approximate width of tributary OR surveyed Ordinary High Water Marks
(OHWM) of tributary
• Must identify each tributary using an alphanumeric system
• Must include linear footage of tributaries and calculated area (using approximate
widths or surveyed OHWM)
• Must include name of tributary (based on the most recent USGS topographic
map) or, when no USGS name exists, identify as "unnamed tributary"
all depicted WoUS (wetland polygons and tributary lines) must intersect or tie -to
surveyed project/property boundaries
Must include the location of wetland data points and/or tributary assessment
reaches
❑ Must include, label accordingly, and depict acreage of all waters not currently
subject to the requirements of the CWA (e.g. "isolated wetlands", "non -
jurisdictional waters"). NOTE: An approved JD must be conducted in order to
make an official Corps determination that a particular waterbody or wetland is not
jurisdictional.
Must include and survey all existing conveyances (pipes, culverts, etc.) that
transport WoUS
Version: December 2013 Page 9

Jurisdictional Determination Request
(2) CERTIFICATION LANGUAGE
When the entire actual Jurisdictional Boundary is depicted:
include the following Corps Certification language:
`This certifies that this copy of this plat accurately depicts the boundary of the jurisdiction
of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as determined by the undersigned on this date.
Unless there is a change in the low or our published regulations, the determination of
Section 404 jurisdiction may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five (5) years from
this date. The undersigned completed this determination utilizing the appropriate Regional
Supplement to the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual."
Regulatory Official:
Title:
Date:
USACE Action ID No.:
PWhen uplands may be pEesent within a depicted Jurisdictional Boundary:
include the following Corps Certification language:
"This certifies that this copy of this plat identifies all areas of waters of the United States
regulated pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as determined by the
undersigned on this date. Unless there is change in the law or our published regulations,
this determination of Section 404 jurisdiction may be relied upon for a period not to exceed
five years from this date. The undersigned completed this determination utilizing the
appropriate Regional Supplement to the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands
Delineation Manual."
Regulatory Official:
Title:
Date:
USA CE Action ID No.:
Version: December 2013 Page 10

Jurisdictional Determination Request
(3) GPS SURVEYS
For Surveys prepared using a Global Positioning System (GPS), the Survey must include
all of the above, as well as:
be at sub -meter accuracy at each survey point.
include an accuracy verification:
One or more known points (property comer, monument) shall be located with the
GPS and cross-referenced with the existing traditional property survey (metes and
bounds).
include a brief description of the GPS equipment utilized.
Version: December 2013 Page 11

Polecat Site Ownership Information
Pin or Tax Parcel
Deed Book &
Parcel
Protected
Landowner
County
ID
Page Number
Acreage
Acreage
Lawrence Coor
and Cl da Coor
260300-20-1780
Johnston
1982-727
32.06
5.35
James Nelson
Mitchell and
Brenda C.
260300-10-3295;
39.97;
Mitchell
260200-39-2410
Johnston
1533-481;
51.79
15.32
Rebecca
4217681;
5.37;
Kuszmaul, Craig
4217644;
24.26;
Kuszmaul et al.
4217676
Johnston
19.68
13.83
Marvin Hill and
Mark Earl Hill
260200-57-6726
Johnston
4232-919
37.2
3.71
Mohammed
Farhad Purmul
260200-78-0311
Johnston
8.32
3.68

n
n
v
7
g
�+
o'
c
e
m
a
}
Smithiald µg33Q j
y
v.= -. eAfaekrr
hY e
QFogdu:, :<<,
LEGEND
0
APPROXIMATE PROJECT LIMITS
Street Map Source:
VICINITY MAP World Street Map
A tel ANGLER ESRI ArcGIS Online
1%FAww–mW ENVIRONMENTAL
a Ores Co -pang N
POLECAT MITIGATION SITE
CORPORATE 15367 TELEPHONE ROAD, WARRENTON, VIRGINIA 2M7
P: 703.393.48" I F: 703.393.3930
www.AnglerEnvironm`ntal.com J O H N STO N COUNTY, NC
I inch = 800 feet
Document Path: CAUsers\j—h-J\Dropb- (RE5)\@RE5 G15\Pr sects\NC\Polecat (bank 5ite)\MXDUD_Pigurc5\Polecat_Vicinity.mxcl - Date 5avecl: 1212 1120 1 G

J
r
s �
! • ■ •
■ •
f �
■
A7 � ■ .
■
O �
-.
CE
C2�0)
• v Z5�9
i sm I f 1
!
■• LEGEN D
APPROXIMATE PROJECT LIMITS
Street Map Source:
PROJECT LOCATION MAP USA Topo Maps
A�" ANGLER ESRI ArcGIS Online
qWAmw`ftW ENVIRONMENTAL
a Pres company POLECAT MITIGATION SITE N
CORPORATE 15367 TELEPHONE ROAD, W'ARRENTON, VIRGINIA 30187
P: 703.393.4844 I F: 703.3931934
www.AnglerEn,ironmental.com J O H N STO N COUNTY, NIC
1 inch = 900 feet
Document Path: C:\UserSschm d\Dropbox (RE5)\@RE5 GI5Prot-is\NC\P6—t (bank site)\MXDVD_figures\PolecAF_ q-t_Lo t, --d - Date Saved: 12/21 /201 6

Document Path: CAUsers\j—h-a\Dropb- (RE5)\@RE5 G15\Pr sects\NC\Polecat (bank site)\MXD\JD_fqurc5\Pol—t_NWI.m a - Date 5a -a: 1212 1120 1 6

Document Path: CAUsers\j—h-a\Dropb- (RE5)\@RE5 G15\Pr sects\NC\Polecat (bank siteAMXDUD_figures\Pol—t_Aenal_lma jcry.m a - Date 5a -a: 1212 1120 1 6

y�� f
GOA
G�A A
GOB GOB
Ly
GOA`
GOA ud
■ yu
ud
r r r r GOA
Lys GOA � w.+�-- �
Nob W A f Ly 4
-,�
Ucc
No
,�. ,� . -
GOA GOA
dr
of
OR, AV
vf, Ly
,GOA r
��t
I
Ly
-13
NoA
41
YGoA r +
yp-� 1%0Co
�
w
yoA
V.
GSA � f
� L
> GOF D
GOA
gGoAdor
I rt
LEGEND
DAPPROXIMATE PROJECT LIMITS
HYDRIC SOIL
® SOIL WITH HYDRIC INCLUSIONS
n NON -HYDRIC SOIL
ri&Digi� t,
spr W Ly
r
~ GoA%
r t iiiiii
source:
SOILS MAP U.S. Department of Agriculture
A tel ANGLER Natural Resources
,4MI ENVIRONMENTAL
Conservation Service
a ]res Company POLECAT MITIGATION SITE Soil Survey Geographic N
CORPORAT@ 536'/T@LEPHON@ROAD, WAN,VIRGINIA30187 (SSURGO)
P: '/03.393.OSJOF:'/03.393.2934 .3930
www.AnglerEnvironmental.com J O H N STO N COUNTY, NC
I inch = 800 feet
Document Path: CAUsers\jschmJ\Dropbm (RE5)\@RE5 G15\Pr sects\NC\Polecat (bank 5ite)\MXDUD_Figures\Polecat_5oi15.mxcl - Date 5avecl: 12/21/201 G
1 Go
vol.
'Y.0
LO
r
x Ly
L
'NoA.
r
� �
10k
//
r
�
or
�GoA
ri&Digi� t,
spr W Ly
r
~ GoA%
r t iiiiii
source:
SOILS MAP U.S. Department of Agriculture
A tel ANGLER Natural Resources
,4MI ENVIRONMENTAL
Conservation Service
a ]res Company POLECAT MITIGATION SITE Soil Survey Geographic N
CORPORAT@ 536'/T@LEPHON@ROAD, WAN,VIRGINIA30187 (SSURGO)
P: '/03.393.OSJOF:'/03.393.2934 .3930
www.AnglerEnvironmental.com J O H N STO N COUNTY, NC
I inch = 800 feet
Document Path: CAUsers\jschmJ\Dropbm (RE5)\@RE5 G15\Pr sects\NC\Polecat (bank 5ite)\MXDUD_Figures\Polecat_5oi15.mxcl - Date 5avecl: 12/21/201 G

Water R esources
FNVIRONMFNTAL QUALITY
September 30, 2016
Brad Breslow c/o Resource Environmental Solutions
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
PAT MCCRORY
Governor
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
Secretag
S. JAY ZIMMERMAN
Din,clor
Subject: Buffer Determination Letter
NBBRO #16-261
Orange County
Determination Type. Buffer Determination
Buffer
Intermittent/Perennial
® Neuse (15A NCAC 2B.0233)
Start@
❑ Tar -Pamlico 05A NCAC 213 .0259)
❑ Intermittent/Perennial Determination (where local buffer
USGS
0
ordinances apply)
❑ Jordan (15A NCAC 2B .0267)
X
(governmental and/or interjurisdictional
throughout
projects)
Project Name: Polecat Mitigation Property
This letter replaces the previous letter sent August 22, 2016
Address/Location: 2595 Yelverton Grove Road, Smithfield, NC
Stream(s): UTs to Polecat Creek
Determination Date: August 31, 2016 Staff: Ray Milosh
Stream
EIllP*
Not Subject
Subject
Start@
Stop@
Soil
SurveyTo
USGS
0
Stream A
1
X
throughout
Stream B
I
X
throughout
X
X
Stream C
I
X
throughout
Stream D
I
X
flag at 35.47307,
78.30787
X
Stream E
E
X
throughout
Stream F
P
X
flag about
X
X
*L111P = LphemeratllntermittentlYerennia!
Explanation: The stream(s) listed above has been located on the most recent published NRCS Soil Survey of
Chatham County, North Carolina and/or the most recent copy of the USGS Topographic map at a 1:24,000 scale.
Each stream that is checked "Not Subject" has been determined to not be at least intermittent or is not present.
Streams that are checked "Subject" have been located on the property and possess characteristics that qualify it to be
Division of Water Resources, Raleigh Regional Office, Water Quality Operations Section http://portal.nedenr.org/web/wqlaps
1628 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1628 Phone: [phone]
Location: 3800 Barrett Drive, Raleigh, NC 27609 Fax: [phone]

PoleCat Mitigation Site 16-261 September 30, 2016
Ray Milosh NC DEQ DWR Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Stream A = Not subject
Stream B = Subject throughout
Stream C = Not subject
Stream D = Subject from flag at 35.47307 78.30787
Stream E = Not subject
alrs�xr
m F (Polecat Creek) = 5ubiect mrouenout
- Stream E tC,
Stream F (Polecat Branch)ice
a
t Stream C N%4 �•
Le end y '
I � i
Proposed Easement
�;✓' stream a �
r Parcels .r'"USGS The - a i n a _ a nal BoundaneS Datase 3D ElevadamPr ram, Geo ra rc Names
~ iniarmation System, National Hydrography Dataset, Natrona! Land Cover Oalabase, naponal SWc>vres"
Dataset. and National Transportation Dataset; U.S. Census Bureau--nGER!Line r
FIGURE 3 Dae: arzasasa
Stream Uetennina4ons18uffe[ Viability Map
Dmm by 6a res
U 3U OM Polecat Mitigation Site
J=iiim�
F -t Johnston County, NC

PoleCat Mitigation Site 16-261 September 30, 2016
Ray Milosh NC DEQ DWR Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Stream A = Not subject
Stream B = Subject throughout
Stream C = Not subject
Stream D = Subject from flag at 35.47307 78.30787
Stream E = Not subject
Stream F (Polecat Creek) = Subject throughout

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: Polecat Mitigation Site City/County: Johnston Sampling Date: 15 -Dec -16
Applicant/Owner: Resource Environmental Solutions State: NC Sampling Point: DP -1
Investigator(s): J. Schmid, R. Medric Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope: 0.0 % / 0.0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat.: 35.474412 Long.: -78.304172 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Lynchburg sandy loam NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes O No O (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No O
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Yes (0% No O
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required;
0 C)
Is the Sampled Area
�
Hydric Soil Present?
Y
Yes No
Yes `�� NO O
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes 0 No O
within a Wetland?
Remarks:
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Wetland A
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required;
check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Dry Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)d❑
FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No O
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes O No OO
Depth (inches):
Yes O No O
Saturation Present?Wetland
Yes * No O
Depth (inches): 6
Hydrology Present?
(includes capillary frinqe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
C ., An.7
Sampling Point: DP -1
8 (A)
8 (B)
100.0% (A/B)
7.
Absolute
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
8,
Cover
Status
❑
0.0%
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of Total Cover: 20
20% of Total Cover: 8
Number of Dominant Species
1 . Pinus taeda
40
V100.0%
Sapling or Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30
FAC
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
2.
o
❑
o.o°ro
= Total Cover
20❑
50.0%
Ll
FAC species 85 x 3 = 255
2. Acer rubrum
Total Number of Dominant
3
0
50.0%
0.0%
FACU species 0 x 4 = 0
Species Across All Strata:
4.
0
❑
0.0%
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
5.
0
❑
0.0%
0.0%
Percent of dominant Species
column Totals: 125 (A) 325 (B)
5.
5.
❑
o
Ll
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC
6.
0
0.0%
8 (A)
8 (B)
100.0% (A/B)
7.
0
0
❑
0.0%
2.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
8,
0
❑
0.0%
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of Total Cover: 20
20% of Total Cover: 8
40
=Total Cover
0
OBL species 10 x 1 = 10
Sapling or Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30
)
-
Vegetation
FACW species 30 x 2 = 60
1. Liquidambar styraciflua
= Total Cover
20❑
50.0%
FAC
FAC species 85 x 3 = 255
2. Acer rubrum
20❑
50.0%
FAC
FACU species 0 x 4 = 0
3.
0
❑
0.0%
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
4.
0
❑
0.0%
column Totals: 125 (A) 325 (B)
5.
5.
o
Ll
o.o
-0.0%
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.600
0
Ll
0.0
7.
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8 •
0
❑
0.0%
❑ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
50% of Total Cover: 20
20% of Total Cover: 8
40
= Total Cover
0 2 - Dominance Test is > 50%
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30
)❑
3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0 1
1. Magnolia virginiana
20❑
100.0%
FACW
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
2.
0
E.
0.0%
3.
0
❑
0.0%
i Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
o
❑
o.o°r°
5.
0
❑
0.0%
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6.
0
❑
0.0%
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
50% of Total Cover: 10
20% of Total Cover: 4
20
= Total Cover
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30
)
1 Arundinaria gigantea
10d❑
40.0%
FACW
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
2.Osmunda regalis
5d❑
20.0%
OBL
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
3. Athyrium filix-femina
5
20.0%
FAC
4, ]uncus effusus
5d❑
20.0%
OBL
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
5.
0
❑
0.0%
6.
0
❑
0.0%
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
7•
0
❑
0.0%
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
8 •
0
❑
0.0%
g
0
❑
0.0%
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
•
❑
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
1 Q.
0
0.0%
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
11.
0
❑
0.o%
3 ft (1 m) in height.
12.
o
❑
o.o%
50% of Total Cover: 12.5
20% of Total Cover: 5
25
= Total Cover
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1.
0
❑ o.o%
2.
0
❑ o.o%
3.
o
❑ o.o%
4.
0
❑ 0.0%
5.
0
❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic
-
Vegetation
50% of Total Cover: 0 20% of Total Cover: 0
0
= Total Cover
Present? Yes ` • No ' -'
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: DP -1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features _
(inches) Color (moist) _%o _ Color (moist) % Tyne 1 Loc? Texture Remarks
0-6 IOYR 4/1 95 7.5YR 5/8 5 C M Loam
6-12+ 10YR 5/1 90 10YR 5/6 10 C M Clay Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 21-ocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (LRR O)
❑ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
❑ Stratified Layers (AS)
d❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 153B)
❑ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T) ❑ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) ❑ Depleted Ochric (Fl l) (MLRA 15 1)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR O, P, T)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A) ❑ Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR 0, S) ❑ Delta Ochric (1`17) (MLRA 1511
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Reduced Vertic (1`18) (MLRA 150A, 150B) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 149A) unless disturbed or problematic.
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
❑ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No 0
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: Polecat Mitigation Site City/County: Johnston Sampling Date: 15 -Dec -16
Applicant/Owner: Resource Environmental Solutions State: NC Sampling Point: DP -2
Investigator(s): J. Schmid, R. Medric Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope: 0.0 % / 0.0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat.: 35.474952 Long.: -78.306850 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Bibb sandy loam NWI classification: Upland
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes O No O (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No O
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes (0% No O
* C)
Is the Sampled Area
�
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Y
Yes `- No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O No C
within a Wetland?
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required;
check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Dry Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)d❑
FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No O
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes O No OO
Depth (inches):
Yes O No O
Saturation Present?Wetland
Yes O No
Depth (inches):
Hydrology Present?
(includes capillary frinqe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
C ., An.7
Sampling Point: DP -2
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0
Absolute Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30
1 , Quercus nigra
)
% Cover
40❑
Cover
50.0%
Status
FAC
Number of Dominant Species
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 7 (A)
2. Pinus taeda
20d❑
25.0%
FAC
3. Quercus laurifolia
20d❑
25.0%
FACW
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 7 (B)
4.
0
❑
0.0%
5.
6.
o
o
❑
❑
0.0%
o.o°r°
Percent of dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
7.
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
8,
0
❑
0.0%
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of Total Cover: 40
20% of Total Cover: 16
80
=Total Cover
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling or Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30
)
FACW species 35 x 2 = 70
1.
0
❑
0.0%
FAC species 140 x 3 = 420
2.
0
❑
0.0%
FACU species 0 x 4= 0
3.
0
❑
0.0%
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
4.
0
❑
0.0%
column Totals: 175 (A) 490 (B)
5.
5.
o
Ll
o.o
0.0%
o
Ll
0.0
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.800
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7. 0 ❑ 0.0%
8,
0
❑
0.0%
❑ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
50% of Total Cover: 0
20% of Total Cover: 0
0
= Total Cover
0 2 - Dominance Test is > SO%
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30
)❑
3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0 1
1. Ligustrum sinense
20d❑
44.4%
FAC
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
2. Magnolia virginiana
15d❑
33.3%
FACW
3. Ilex opaca
10❑
22.2%
FAC
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4.
o
❑
0.0%
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5. o ❑ 0.0%
6.
0
❑
0.0%
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
50% of Total Cover: 22.5
20% of Total Cover: 9
45
= Total Cover
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30
)
1 , Microstegium vimineum
2.
50d❑
0
❑
100.0%
0.0%
FAC
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
3.
o
❑
0.0%
4.
0
❑
0.0%
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
5.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
6.
7,
0
0
❑
❑
0.0%
0.0%
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
8,
0
❑
0.0%
g,
0
❑
0.0%
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
1 Q.
0
Ll
0.0%
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
11.
0
❑
0.o%
3 ft (1 m) in height.
12.
o
❑
o.o%
50% of Total Cover: 25
20% of Total Cover: 10
50
= Total Cover
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1. 0 ❑ o.o%
2.
0
❑
o.o%
3.
o
❑
o.o%
4.
0
❑
0.0%
5.
50% of Total Cover: 0
20% of Total Cover: 0
0
-
0
❑ 0.0%
= Total Cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes ` • No ' -'
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: DP -2
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features _
(inches) Color (moist) _ % _ Color (moist) % Tvoe 1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-12+ 30YR 4/1 90 7.5YR 4/6 10 C M Clay Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 21-ocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (LRR O)
❑ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
❑ Stratified Layers (AS)
d❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 153B)
❑ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T) ❑ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) ❑ Depleted Ochric (Fl l) (MLRA 15 1)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A) ❑ Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR 0, S) ❑ Delta Ochric (1`17) (MLRA 1511
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Reduced Vertic (1`18) (MLRA 150A, 150B) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 149A) unless disturbed or problematic.
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
❑ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No 0
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: Polecat Mitigation Site City/County: Johnston Sampling Date: 15 -Dec -16
Applicant/Owner: Resource Environmental Solutions State: NC Sampling Point: DP -3
Investigator(s): J. Schmid, R. Medric Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope: 0.0 % / 0.0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat.: 35.476131 Long.: -78.312930 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Bibb sandy loam NWI classification: Upland
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes O No O (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No O
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes (0% No O
O
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Y
Yes ` No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O No C
within a Wetland?
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required;
check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Dry Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)d❑
FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No O
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes O No OO
Depth (inches):
Yes O No O
Saturation Present?Wetland
Yes O No
Depth (inches):
Hydrology Present?
(includes capillary frinqe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
C ., An.7
Sampling Point: DP -3
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0
Absolute Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30
1 . Acer rubrum
)
% Cover
30❑
Cover
42.9%
Status
FAC
Number of Dominant Species
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
2. Liquidambar styraciflua
30d❑
42.9%
FAC
3. Quercus nigra
10
❑
14.3%
FAC
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 4_ (B)
4.
0
❑
0.0%
5.
6.
o
o
❑
❑
0.0%
o.o°r°
Percent of dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
7.
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
8,
0
❑
0.0%
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of Total Cover: 35
20% of Total Cover: 14
70
=Total Cover
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling or Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30
)
FACW species 10 x 2 = 20
1.
0
❑
0.0%
FAC species 110 x 3 = 330
2.
0
❑
0.0%
FACU species 0 x 4= 0
3.
0
❑
0.0%
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
4.
0
❑
0.0%
column Totals: 120 (A) 350 (B)
5.
5.
o
Ll
o.o
0.0%
o
Ll
0.0
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.917
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7. 0 ❑ 0.0%
8,
0
❑
0.0%
❑ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
50% of Total Cover: 0
20% of Total Cover: 0
0
= Total Cover
0 2 - Dominance Test is > 50%
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30
)❑
3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0 1
1. Magnolia virginiana
10
❑
100.0%
FACW
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
2.
0
E.
0.0%
3.
0
❑
0.0%
i Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4.
o
❑
o.o°r°
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5. o ❑ 0.0%
6.
0
❑
0.0%
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
50% of Total Cover: 5
20% of Total Cover: 2
10
= Total Cover
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30
)
1 , Microstegium vimineum
2.
40d❑
0
❑
100.0%
0.0%
FAC
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
3.
o
❑
0.0%
4.
0
❑
0.0%
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
5.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
6.
7,
0
0
❑
❑
0.0%
0.0%
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
8,
0
❑
0.0%
g,
0
❑
0.0%
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
1 Q.
0
Ll
0.0%
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
11.
0
❑
0.o%
3 ft (1 m) in height.
12.
o
❑
o.o%
50% of Total Cover: 20
20% of Total Cover: 8
40
= Total Cover
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1. 0 ❑ o.o%
2.
0
❑
o.o%
3.
o
❑
o.o%
4.
0
❑
0.0%
5.
50% of Total Cover: 0
20% of Total Cover: 0
0
-
0
❑ 0.0%
= Total Cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes ` • No ' -'
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: DP -3
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features _
(inches) Color (moist) _% _ Color (moist) % Tvne 1 Locz_ _Texture Remarks
0-4 IOYR 4/3 100 Loam
4-12+ 10YR 4/1 100 Clay Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 21-ocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (LRR O)
❑ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
❑ Stratified Layers (AS)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 153B)
❑ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T) ❑ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) ❑ Depleted Ochric (Fl l) (MLRA 15 1)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR O, P, T)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A) ❑ Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR 0, S) ❑ Delta Ochric (1`17) (MLRA 1511
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Reduced Vertic (1`18) (MLRA 150A, 150B) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 149A) unless disturbed or problematic.
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
❑ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: Polecat Mitigation Site City/County: Johnston Sampling Date: 15 -Dec -16
Applicant/Owner: Resource Environmental Solutions State: NC Sampling Point: DP -4
Investigator(s): J. Schmid, R. Medric Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Toeslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope: 2.0 % / 1.1
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat.: 35.476659 Long.: -78.322071 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Bibb sandy loam NWI classification: PEM
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes O No O (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No O
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Yes (0% No O
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required;
0 C)
Is the Sampled Area
�
Hydric Soil Present?
Y
Yes No
Yes `�� NO O
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes 0 No O
within a Wetland?
Remarks:
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Wetland B
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required;
check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)❑
Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Dry Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)d❑
FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No O
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes O No OO
Depth (inches):
Yes O No O
Saturation Present?Wetland
Yes * No O
Depth (inches): 0
Hydrology Present?
(includes capillary frinqe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
C ., An.7
Sampling Point: DP -4
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0
Absolute Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30
1 ,
)
% Cover
0 ❑
Cover
0.0%
Status
Number of Dominant Species
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A)
2.
o
❑
o.o%
3.
0
❑
0.0%
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 1 (B)
4,
0
❑
0.0%
5.
6.
0
o
❑
❑
0.0%
o.o%
Percent of dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
7.
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
8,
0
❑
0.0%
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of Total Cover: 0
20% of Total Cover: 0
0
=Total Cover
OBL species 80 x 1 = 80
Sapling or Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30
)
FACW species 10 x 2 = 20
1.
0
❑
0.0%
FAC species 0 x 3= 0
2.
0
❑
0.o%
FACU species 0 x 4= 0
3.
0
❑
0.o%
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
4.
0
❑
o.o%
column Totals: 90 (A) 100 (B)
5,
5.
o
Ll
o.o
0.0%
0
Ll
0.0
Prevalence Index = B/A = 1.111
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7. 0 ❑ 0.0%
8,
0
❑
0.0%
0 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
50% of Total Cover: 0
20% of Total Cover: 0
0
= Total Cover
0 2 - Dominance Test is > SO%
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30
)❑
3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0 1
1.
0
❑
0.o%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
2,
0
❑
0.0%
3.
0
❑
0.0%
i Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4, _
o
❑
0.0%
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5. o ❑ 0.0%
6,
0
❑
0.0%
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
50% of Total Cover: 0
20% of Total Cover: 0
0
= Total Cover
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30
)
1 , ]uncus effusus
2. Carex lurida
70d❑
10
❑
77.8%
11.1%
OBL
OBL
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
3. Andropogon glomeratus
10
❑
11.1%
FACW
4.
0
❑
0.0%
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
5.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
6.
7,
0
0
❑
❑
0.0%
0.0%
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
8,
0
❑
0.0%
g,
0
❑
0.0%
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
1 Q.
0
❑
0.0%
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
11.
0
❑
o.o%
3 ft (1 m) in height.
12.
o
❑
o.o%
50% of Total Cover: 45
20% of Total Cover: 18
90
= Total Cover
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1. 0 ❑ o.o%
2.
0
❑
o.o%
3.
o
❑
o.o%
4.
0
❑
0.0%
5,
50% of Total Cover: 0
20% of Total Cover: 0
0
-
0
❑ 0.0%
= Total Cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes ` • No ' -'
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: DP -4
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features _
(inches) Color (moist) _ % _ Color (moist) % Tvoe 1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-12+ 30YR 4/1 85 7.5YR 5/8 15 C M Clay Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 21-ocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (LRR O)
❑ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
❑ Stratified Layers (AS)
d❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 153B)
❑ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T) ❑ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) ❑ Depleted Ochric (Fl l) (MLRA 15 1)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A) ❑ Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR 0, S) ❑ Delta Ochric (1`17) (MLRA 1511
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Reduced Vertic (1`18) (MLRA 150A, 150B) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 149A) unless disturbed or problematic.
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
❑ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No 0
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: Polecat Mitigation Site City/County: Johnston Sampling Date: 15 -Dec -16
Applicant/Owner: Resource Environmental Solutions State: NC Sampling Point: DP -5
Investigator(s): J. Schmid, R. Medric Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope: 1.0 % / 0.6
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat.: 35.480003 Long.: -78.318265 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Bibb sandy loam NWI classification: Upland
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes O No O (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No O
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes (0% No O
O
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Y
Yes ` No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O No C
within a Wetland?
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required;
check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Dry Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)d❑
FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No O
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes O No OO
Depth (inches):
Yes O No O
Saturation Present?Wetland
Yes O No
Depth (inches):
Hydrology Present?
(includes capillary frinqe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
C ., An.7
Sampling Point: DP -5
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0
Absolute Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30
. Uriodendron tulipifera
)
% Cover
40 ❑
Cover
50.0%
Status
FACU
Number of Dominant Species
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
2. Quercus michauxii
20d❑
25.0%
FACW
3. Pinus taeda
10
❑
12.5%
FAC
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 6 (B)
4. Liquidambar styraciflua
10
❑
12.5%
FAC
5.
6.
o
o
❑
❑
0.0%
o.o°r°
Percent of dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 66.7% (A/B)
7.
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
8,
0
❑
0.0%
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of Total Cover: 40
20% of Total Cover: 16
80
=Total Cover
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling or Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30
)
FACW species 40 x 2 = 80
1.
0
❑
0.0%
FAC species 50 x 3 = 150
2.
0
❑
0.0%
FACU species 50 x 4 = 200
3.
0
❑
0.0%
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
4.
0
❑
0.0%
column Totals: 140 (A) 430 (B)
5.
5.
o
Ll
o.o
0.0%
o
Ll
0.0
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.071
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7. 0 ❑ 0.0%
8,
0
❑
0.0%
❑ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
50% of Total Cover: 0
20% of Total Cover: 0
0
= Total Cover
0 2 - Dominance Test is > 50%
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30
)
❑ 3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0 1
1. Magnolia virginiana
10
❑
100.0%
FACW
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
2.
0
E.
0.0%
3.
0
❑
0.0%
i Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4.
o
❑
o.o°r°
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5. o ❑ 0.0%
6.
0
❑
0.0%
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
50% of Total Cover: 5
20% of Total Cover: 2
10
= Total Cover
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30
)
1 , Microstegium vimineum
2. Arundinaria gigantea
30d❑
10d❑
75.0%
25.0%
FAC
FACW
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
3,
o
❑
0.0%
4.
0
❑
0.0%
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
5.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
6.
7,
0
0
❑
❑
0.0%
0.0%
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
8,
0
❑
0.0%
g,
0
❑
0.0%
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
1 Q.
0
Ll
0.0%
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
11.
0
❑
0.o%
3 ft (1 m) in height.
12.
o
❑
o.o%
50% of Total Cover: 20
20% of Total Cover: 8
40
= Total Cover
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1. Lonicera japonica 10 d❑ 100.0% FACU
2.
0
❑
0.0%
3.
o
❑
o.o%
4.
0
❑
o.o%
5.
50% of Total Cover: 5
20% of Total Cover: 2
0
-
10
❑ 0.0%
= Total Cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes ` • No -'
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: DP -5
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
❑ Histosol (Al)
Redox Features _
(inches)
Color (moist)
_10 _
Color (moist) % Tvne 1 Loci_ Texture
_
0-3
IOYR 3/2
100
Loam
3-5
10YR 4/3
100
Loam
5-12+
2.5Y 5/6
100
Clay Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 21-ocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Remarks
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (LRR O)
❑ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
❑ Stratified Layers (AS)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 153B)
❑ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T) ❑ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) ❑ Depleted Ochric (Fl l) (MLRA 15 1)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A) ❑ Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR 0, S) ❑ Delta Ochric (1`17) (MLRA 151)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Reduced Vertic (1`18) (MLRA 150A, 150B) 3Indicators of hydrology
mushydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 149A) unless disturbed or problematic.
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
❑ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: Polecat Mitigation Site City/County: Johnston Sampling Date: 15 -Dec -16
Applicant/Owner: Resource Environmental Solutions State: NC Sampling Point: DP -6
Investigator(s): J. Schmid, R. Medric Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope: 0.0 % / 0.0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat.: 35.480003 Long.: -78.319062 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Bibb sandy loam NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes O No O (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No O
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Yes (0% No O
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required;
0 C)
Is the Sampled Area
�
Hydric Soil Present?
Y
Yes No
Yes `�� NO O
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes 0 No O
within a Wetland?
Remarks:
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Wetland C
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required;
check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Dry Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)d❑
FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No O
Depth (inches): 2
Water Table Present? Yes O No OO
Depth (inches):
Yes O No O
Saturation Present?Wetland
Yes O No
Depth (inches):
Hydrology Present?
(includes capillary frinqe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
C ., An.7
Sampling Point: DP -6
7.
15
Absolute
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
8,
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
❑
Cover
Status
50% of Total Cover: 40
20% of Total Cover: 16
80
=Total Cover
OBL species 20 x 1 = 20
Sapling or Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30
)
❑ 0.0%
Number of Dominant Species
FACW species 35 x 2 = 70
.
Liquidambar styraciflua
20❑
❑
25.0%
FAC
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
8 (A)
2.
Nyssa biflora
20d❑
FACU species 0 x 4= 0
25.0%
OBL
0
❑
3.
Acer rubrum
15d❑
18.8%
FAC
Total Number of Dominant
column Totals: 150 (A) 375 (B)
5.
5.
o
Ll
o.o
0.0%
Species Across All Strata:
8 (B)
4.
Pinus taeda
15d❑
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.500
18.8%
FAC
o
Ll
5.
Quercus nigra
10
❑
12.5%
FAC
Percent of dominant Species
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8,
0
❑
0.0%
❑ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
100.0% (A/B)
6.
0
o
0 2 - Dominance Test is > 50%
o.o°ro
)❑
7.
15
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
8,
❑ 0.0%
0
❑
0.0%
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of Total Cover: 40
20% of Total Cover: 16
80
=Total Cover
OBL species 20 x 1 = 20
Sapling or Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30
)
❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic
FACW species 35 x 2 = 70
1 .
0
❑
0.0%
FAC species 95 x 3 = 285
2.
0
❑
0.0%
FACU species 0 x 4= 0
3.
0
❑
0.0%
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
4.
0
❑
0.0%
column Totals: 150 (A) 375 (B)
5.
5.
o
Ll
o.o
0.0%
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.500
o
Ll
0.0
7.
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8,
0
❑
0.0%
❑ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
50% of Total Cover: 0
20% of Total Cover: 0
0
= Total Cover
0 2 - Dominance Test is > 50%
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30
)❑
3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0 1
1. Magnolia virginiana
15❑
100.0% FACW
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
2.
0
E.
0.0%
3.
0
❑
0.0%
i Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
o
❑
o.o°ro
5.
0
❑
0.0%
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6.
0
❑
0.0%
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
50% of Total Cover: 7.5
20% of Total Cover: 3
15
= Total Cover
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30
)
1 Arundinaria gigantea
20d❑
50.0% FACW
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
2. Microstegium vimineum
20d❑
50.0% FAC
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
3.
0
❑
0.0%
4.
0
❑
0.0%
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
5.
0
❑
0.0%
6.
0
❑
0.0%
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
7,
0
❑
0.0%
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
8,
0
❑
0.0%
g,
0
❑
0.0%
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
❑
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
1 Q.
0
0.0%
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
11.
0
❑
0.o%
3 ft (1 m) in height.
12.
o
❑
o.o%
50% of Total Cover: 20
20% of Total Cover: 8
40
= Total Cover
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1 Smilax rotundifolia
15
0 100.0% FAC
2.
0
❑ 0.0%
3.
o
❑ o.o%
4.
0
❑ o.o%
5.
0
❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic
-
Vegetation
50% of Total Cover: 7.5 20% of Total Cover: 3
15
= Total Cover
Present? Yes ` • No -'
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: DP -6
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features _
(inches) Color (moist) _%o _ Color (moist) % Tyne 1 Loc? Texture Remarks
0-8 IOYR 4/1 90 7.5YR 5/8 10 C M Loam
8-12+ 10YR 5/1 85 7.5YR 5/8 15 C M Clay Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 21-ocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (LRR O)
❑ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
❑ Stratified Layers (AS)
d❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 153B)
❑ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T) ❑ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) ❑ Depleted Ochric (Fl l) (MLRA 15 1)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR O, P, T)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A) ❑ Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR 0, S) ❑ Delta Ochric (1`17) (MLRA 1511
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Reduced Vertic (1`18) (MLRA 150A, 150B) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 149A) unless disturbed or problematic.
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
❑ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No 0
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

Document Path: C:\U5ers\j5chmid\Drorbox (RE5)\@RE5 GI5\Project5\NC\Polecat (bank 5ite)\MXD\JD_Figure5\POlecat_WOU5 I I x 1 7.mxd - Date Saved: 1212 1120 16