20180133 Ver 1_More Information Received_20180710

Strickland, Bev
From: Phil May <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, July 09, 2018 9:05 PM
To: Homewood, Sue
Cc: Dailey, Samantha J CIV USARMY CESAW (US); Coggins, Tony C
Subject: RE: [External] Triangle Tyre/R-5868 Supplemental Information
Attachments: Proposed Access Road Environmental Impacts July9.xlsx; Proposed Access Road
Environmental Impacts July9.pdf, R-5868_buffersjuly92018.pdf
rt
Sue,
Please see below in red and the attached files for responses to your questions. I am copying Sam as well since this
provides some more detail to the impacts. Let me know if you find anything else you need or if you need this
information in a different format.
Also as discussed the link below provides access to the responses to public comments that was provided in May to Sam.
https://d rive.google.com/open?id=lZfOKTgiJ bl W-9BRXS3sEm iY1-U Ud icFJ
Thanks
Phil
Phil May
CAROLINA ECOSYSTEMS INC.
[phone]
From: Homewood, Sue [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2018 12:12 PM
To: Phil May <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [External] Triangle Tyre/R-5868 Supplemental Information
Phil,
I'm drafting the permit and have a few items I need resolved/clarified please.
• The additional information indicates pond fill, however the Impact table does not include any open water
impacts. Can you provide that for me please. Please see attached table of R-5868 updated impacts. Let me
know if you need a different format — I included an excel and pdf format for your use.
• The plan sheets provided indicate there will be temporary stream and wetland impacts but the table provided
does not break out the temporary versus permanent impacts I'm not sure if you've listed the total or just the
permanent. I need them broken down please. Please see attached table of R-5868 updated impacts with
breakdown.
• For buffer impacts at Site 4, the plan sheet lists the crossing as allowable but it falls under the category of
"allowable with mitigation" because the stream impacts are greater than 150 ft. Please see revised plan sheets
attached.

• I can't find an acceptance letter from the private mitigation bank in any of the various submittals. Can you
resend it please. NCDOT will provide an updated acceptance letter ASAP.
Thanks,
Sue Homewood
Division of Water Resources, Winston Salem Regional Office
Department of Environmental Quality
336 776 9693 office
336 813 1863 mobile
Sue. [e-mail]
450 W. Hanes Mill Rd, Suite 300
Winston Salem NC 27105
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
From: Phil May[mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2018 3:38 PM
To: Dailey, Samantha J CIV USARMY CESAW (US) <[e-mail]>; Higgins, Karen
<[e-mail]>; Homewood, Sue <[e-mail]>
Cc: john [e-mail]; Coggins, Tony C <[e-mail]>; Eric Evans <[e-mail]>
Subject: [External] Triangle Tyre/R-5868 Supplemental Information
Hello all,
Attached are several items providing updated details on the above referenced project. Attachments include:
- Supplemental Information Letter
- R-5868 Wetland Impacts —Revised
- R-5868 Buffer Impacts— Revised
- R-5868 Conceptual Drainage Plan
- Triangle Tyre Overall Stormwater Summary
- Triangle Tyre County Stormwater Approval
In addition, the following links hopefully provide access to a full set of Sediment and Erosion Control Plans and Phase 1
Grading Plans for the Triangle Tyre site. Please let us know if you need a hard copy or another electronic transmittal
method to access these plans.
- S&EC Plan: https://www.dropbox.com/s/257s6byrc32irov/TT SECPlan.pdf?dl=0
- Phase 1 Grading Plan: https://www.dropbox.com/s/3shwOhn5i8cm84f/TT Grading.pdf?dl=0
I have copied John Ellis on this information as well since his questions should be addressed by this information. Please
let us know if you need anything further for your review.

Thanks and have a great weekend,
Phil
Phil May
Senior Scientist
CAROLINA ECOSYSTEMS INC.
3040 NC Hwy 42 West P.O. Box 41 Cell [phone]
Clayton NC 27520 Lewisville, NC 27023 Office [phone] xt 102
www.carolinacco.com

Jul -18 R-5868 Impact Update
Permanent Stream
Temp. Stream
Total Mit. Buffer
Total Allowable
Permanent Wetland
Temp Wetland
Surface Water
Temp. Surface Water
Site
Impact (LF)
Impact (LF)
Impacts (SF)
Zone 1 (SF)
Zone 2 (SF)
Buffer Impact (SF)
Zone I (SF)
Zone 2 (SF)
Impact (SF)
Impacts (SF)
(Pond) Ac.
(Pond) Ac.
Site I
----
----
----
----
----
7034
3839
3195
----
----
----
----
Site 2
----
----
----
----
----
-----
-----
-----
----
----
----
----
Site 3
255
25
26448
17796
8652
-----
-----
-----
-----
----
----
----
Site 4
200
25
20762
12829
7933
----
----
----
1576
700
----
----
Site 5
----
----
----
----
----
3700
1923
1777
----
----
0.084
0.078
Totals
455
50
47210
30625
16585
10734
5762
4972
1576
700
0.084
0.078

Jul -18 R-5868 Impact Update
Site
Permanent Stream
Impact (LF)
Temp. Stream
Impact (LF)
Total Mit. Buffer
Impacts (SF)
Zone 1 (SF)
Zone 2 (SF)
Total Allowable
Buffer Impact (SF)
Zone 1 (SF)
Zone 2 (SF)
Permanent Wetland
Impact (SF)
Temp Wetland
Impacts (SF)
Surface Water
(Pond) Ac.
Temp. Surface Water
(Pond) Ac.
Site 1
----
----
----
----
----
7034
3839
3195
----
----
----
----
Site 2
----
----
----
----
----
-----
-----
-----
----
----
----
----
Site 3
255
25
26448
17796
8652
-----
-----
-----
-----
----
----
----
Site 4
200
25
20762
12829
7933
----
----
----
1576
700
----
----
Site 5
----
----
----
----
----
3700
1923
1777
----
----
0.084
0.078
Totals
455
50
47210
30625
16585
10734
5762
4972
1576
700
0.084
0.078

1223 Jones Franklin Rd.
PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
ETHERILL Raleigh, N.C. 27606
ENGINEERING License No. F-0377
R-5868 1 4
RAN SHEET NO.
BUS: 919 8518077
Fax: [phone]
ROADWAY DESIGN
HYDRAULICS
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING/DESIGN BRIDGE/STRUCTURE DESIGN
NAD 8
ENGINEER
ENGINEER
2001 CIVIL/SITE DESIGN - GIS/GPS - CONSTRUMON OBSERVATION
\
INC®MPLE
E PLANS
1
DO NOT USE FOR
/ W ACQUISITION
-i
C C /i\nn� ;
X X� DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
CID
,(VMGVO(Y 03AVCI ,bZ Ar
%l l
w
CJVH_ C0
C //�/ FM S'/ C +
Y 01 fV
C C C C C C C C C C C
0y C In
I
V i
--------
�
'Oa OH(G59N/M SZZ/ a5 •MMOdOM 03AVd.6Z q'/ (S2
cby U
_ va =
N
W
ti 11s Z
I "
n
SITE 1
n I
I �
I00i a 100
n I
n
GRAPHIC SCALE
n I
I n �
I �n
c�c�c�c�c�c ALLOWABLE IMPACTS ZONE 1
MATCHLINE SEE SHT. 5 A-
.15+00.00STA
ALLOWABLE IMPACTS ZONE 2
��I

F F
BZ
n
r
�y BZ 2
V1
m
m
TB� /
r Q> Q>1' .�� fO
/ \0�
1223 Jones Franklin Rd.
PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
ETHERILL Raleigh, N.C. 27606
ENGINEERING License No. F-0377
R-5868 6
RAN SHEET NO.
BUS: 919 8518077
Fax: [phone]
ROADWAY DESIGN
HYDRAULICS
TRANSPORTAMN PLANNING/DESIGN-BRIDGE/STRUCTURE DESIGN
ENGINEER
ENGINEER
CIVIL/SITE DESIGN - GIS/GPS - CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION
INCOMPLETE
PLANS
DO NOT U16 FOR
RBW ACOUI3ITION
\ \
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
i�eek
G<
1 y
N Y
9Z 2
F az sti >
eti
a
z
0ti 81 2
ITE 3
C
E F
/ \ F
F
\aaiO�p�•� ��!ie
100, 01 100,
GRAPHIC SCALE
MITIGABLE IMPACTS ZONE 1
MITIGABLE IMPACTS ZONE 2

I 223 Jones Franklin Rd. PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
ETHERILL Raleigh, N.C. 27606 R-5868 9
ENGINEERING License No. F-0377
m I
Bus: 919 8518077 RAN SHEET NO.
Fax: [phone]
ROADWAY DESIGN HYDRAULICS
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING/DESIGN- BRIDGE/STRUMM DESIGN ENGINEER ENGINEER
MIUSITE DESIGN -GIS/GPs - CONSrRUCnON OBSERVATION nLMPL TE
PLAN
DO NOT USE FOR R/W ACQUISITION
t
V
C
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
\ m UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
SITE 4
1\�91� 91 ••• \ � 7
m —
rFI C c
Ln
1711 F iTl F F F F F F F —� C
� F F � � F F F N
_I Xv,
r
00
� � F
N F F F F F F C F F F \ \_ c C
F C C LC � C C
D
Ln
,o \
O
91 ze
p
O
(?g 2k
eti1 41N \\
100' 0' 100, \�
GRAPHIC SCALE
MITIGABLE IMPACTS ZONE 1
Z
flO
A� MITIGABLE IMPACTS ZONE 2
Aye

NpD
SATE 5
N
H
N
ai
I I II
Il\I\\ I
\ I I
\) I
1 POND I m I
nut Creek N F F ry
— F
F
F _
F �
C
— N
C
C
— C
� C C
C
10
(END
l
BZ I
= 3AVd.5'8/
POND
1223 Jones Franklin Rd.
PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
ETHERILL Raleigh, N.C. 27606
ENGINEERING License No. F-0377
R-5868 /2
PWSHEET NO.
— —
BUS: 919 851 8077
Fax: [phone]
ROADWAY DESIGN
HYDRAULICS
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING/DESIGN- BUDGE/STRUCNRE DESIGN
ENGINEER
ENGINEER
CIVIUSITE DESIGN -GIS/GPS- CONSrRUMON OBSERVATION
FINCOMPLE
TE PLANS
DO NOT USE FOR
R/W ACOUISITION
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
100, 0' 100,
GRAPHIC SCALE
c�c�c>c>c�c ALLOWABLE IMPACTS ZONE 1
\\\\\\\ ALLOWABLE IMPACTS ZONE 2

'I SK-
5 Tj.
y awtuM°
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
ROY COOPER
GovERNOR
May 21, 2018
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
ATTN: Ms. Samantha Dailey
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
JAMES H. TROGDON, III
SECRETARY
SUBJECT: Application for Section 404 Individual Permit, Section 401 Individual
Water Quality Certification, and Isolated Waters General Permit 100000
Project Diamond and R-5868 (Kingsboro CSX Select Site Access Road)
Edgecombe County, NC
Dear Ms. Dailey:
Please reference your letter dated April 4, 2018, concerning Edgecombe County and NC
Department of Transportation's application for Department of the Army (DA)
authorization to permanently discharge fill material into 2,134 linear feet of stream
channel, 9.12 acres of riparian wetlands, 5.23 acres of open water and temporarily
discharge fill material into 635 linear feet of stream channel associated with the proposed
construction of a tire manufacturing facility, rail access and supporting roadway
construction for site access to the proposed Kingsboro CSX Select Site (pad b).
Specifically your letter requested additional information concerning off-site alternatives
analysis supporting a determination that the Kingsboro CSX Select Site (pad b) is the
practicable alternative for the proposed tire manufacturing facility. You also provided
copies of the written comments for our review and response received during the
Wilmington District (Corps) public notice for the proposed project dated February 23,
2018.
In response to your referenced letter, please see attached spreadsheet table that list each
commenter, the date of their comment, a summary of their comment, and a response to
the comment. Also attached are supporting documents in reference to the response to
specific comments.
Mailing Address: Telephone: [phone] Location:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Customer Service: 1-877-368-4968 509 WARD BLVD
DIVISION FOUR WILSON, NC 27895
POST OFFICE BOX 3165 Website: www.ncdot.gov
WILSON, NC 27895

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
ROY COOPER
GovERNOR
JAMES H. TROGDON, III
SECRETARY
Thank you for your quick response and prompt assistance to our application for DA
permit authorization concerning the Kingsboro CSX Select Site project. Please contact
me at 252-640-427 if you have any questions or need additional information.
Sincerely,
DocuSigned by:
%ovus
3�
DI Ve s.
Environmental Officer
NCDOT Div.4
Cc:
Eric Evans Edgecombe County Manager
Karen Higgins, NCDWR 401 Unit
Bob May, P.E., Wetherill Engineering, Inc.
Bobby Joyner, P.E., Appian Consulting Engineers
Phil May, Carolina Ecosystems, Inc.
Attachments
- Comment Response Spreadsheet
- NCWAM/NCSAM Forms
- Alternatives Analysis Figures
- Aquatic Surveys Report
Mailing Address:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION FOUR
POST OFFICE BOX 3165
WILSON, NC 27895
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Customer Service: 1-877-368-4968
Website: www.ncdot.gov
Location:
509 WARD BLVD
WILSON, NC 27895

R-5868/Triangle Tyre
Public Notice Comments
Date Commenter Comment Summarv/Tooic
Response
3/16/2018
?????
Have NCWAM/NCSAM forms been completed?
NCSAM & NCWAM forms were provided on 5/3/18 as part of the supplemental information for the 401 review.
Partial DMS and private mitigation bank compensatory mitigation was documented in the initial application. Due to time
constraints, a DMS acceptance was included in the application. Since that time NCDOT has discussed partial compensation
with available mitigation banks for portions of the mitigation. All available bank credits will be used prior to using DMS.
3/23/2018
English
Mitigation plan available?
Mitigation ratios are being evaluated and sufficient mitigation will be provided to compensate forfunctional losses.
3/23/20181
English
Additional resources to review
A full application was provided to Mr. English.
The facility layout was addressed in the initial application. The factory layout in the east -west orientation is a requirement of
3/25/2018
Horton
Buildings not arranged to avoid impacts
Triangle Tyre to allow efficient flow of materials and traffic in accordance with their operation parameters.
Adequate utilities for the provision of sewer service to the facility are being provided by the County. Runoff is addressed
through multiple Best Management Practices (BMPs) at the locations shown in the site plan. A more detailed stormwater
management plan is being developed by Triangle Tyre, and will be reviewed by qualified County staff or contractor, and
forwarded to the NC Division of Water Resources upon completion of the review. No impacts will occur in jurisdictional areas
3/25/2018
Horton
Water quality will be affected by runoff, sewage, etc
until a Final Stormwater Plan approval has been issued by the County and provided to NCDWR.
3/25/2018
Horton
How much water is needed and where from?
Sufficient watersupply is being provided to the site through an extension of the County's existing system.
Solid waste generated at the facility will be transported to an existing permitted solid waste facility that can accept the waste
3/25/2018
Horton
Solid waste
and has capacity. The specific facility to be used will be determined by Triangle Tyre as part of their operations
A series of public meetings were held to notify local residents of the project as follows: December 4, 2017 - Held for citezens
input before approving financing of $17 million for land purchase for Economic Development. December 19, 2017 -Public
Hearing for citizens input before entering into an agreement (inducement) to purchase and convey land to promote economic
development. January 2, 2018 - Second Public Hearing discussing financing because total amount to borrow increased from
3/25/2018
Horton
Public has not been notified
$17 million to $22 million. February 8, 2018 - a meeting was held for Midlakes MHP residents to discuss the project.
Available private mitigation bank credits will be purchased for compensatory mitigation of project impacts. NCDOT has been
3/22/2018
Mogensen
Available credits should be used first
in communication with Mr. Mogensen and will coordinate this effort.
3/19/2018
NCWRC
Will surveys be performed downstream
Detailed aquatic surveys have been performed. A report by Three Oaks Engineering is attached
3/26/2018
NCWRC
Aquatic surveys
Detailed aquatic surveys have been performed. A report by Three Oaks Engineering is attached
Edgecombe County and Triangle Tyre recognize the value of forested buffers to water quality, threatened and endangered
species, and wildlife migration. Development plans are in progress, and the needs of future owners are not yet known.
Recent surveys for aquatic species and the conclusions of those experts found no effect to these animals by the project as
3/26/2018
NCWRC
Forested buffers
proposed. Preservation of the widest possible buffers will be a consideration of all future plans.
The provision of the road facility (R-5868) is a requirement of the Triangle Tyre company in order to provide the adequate flow
of materials and products into and out of the facility. The roadway also reduces conflicts with trucks making turns in both
3/26/2018
NCWRC
Use of existing road system
directions at the Kingsboro Rd -Alt. US 64 intersection.
At this time there are no other active projects on the other parcels within the Kingsboro CSX Select Site. Due to the dire
3/26/2018
NCWRC
Other impacts "not disclosed"
economic circumstances of the County, they are actively pursuing other companies but none have committed at this time.
NCWAM forms were provided as part of the supplmental information on 5/3/18. Although there are higher quality
unavoidable impacts at Site 8, a mitigation ratio of 2:1 is proposed to fully compensate for loss of wetland functions, as a
standard mitigation ratio. Other impacts will be compensated via standard ratios that take into account each site's stream
3/26/20181
NCWRC
NCWAM forms & increased mitigation
and/or wetland function.

The conceptual stormwater BMP locations have been vetted through the County to ensure that they will provide adequate
room for stormwater treatment in compliance with State rules. A final site plan is being developed, and a detailed stormwater
plan will accompany that and be reviewed by qualified County staff or contractors. This plan will be forwarded upon approval
to NCDWR prior to encroachment in any impact areas. To date, a cursory review has been completed by the county's
engineering consultant and has not triggered any "red flags" or egregious non-compliance issues with the County's
3/26/2018
NCWRC
Stormwater details
Ordinances or requirements.
The following improvements are proposed to the existing state roads to improve safety and mobility with the expected
increase in traffic generated by the Triangle Tyre Co: (1) Widen Kingsboro Rd. to provide a left turn lane onto the proposed
access road; (2) Widen US 64 Alt at the intersection of Kingsboro Rd. to provide a left turn lane onto Kingsboro Rd.; (3) Widen
US 64 Alt at the intersection of Harts Chapel Rd to provide a left turn lane onto Harts Chapel Rd. The widening will be localized
3/13/2018
Seibert
Will Alt 64 & Harts Chapel Rd be widened?
to the turn lane improvements, and improvements to Harts Chapel Rd. will be localized to the intersection with US 64 Alt.
After a GIS screening of adequate sized parcels (300 acres) with road and rail accessibility, there were only five other parcels
within the County that meet these criteria. These parcels have similar or greater amounts of mapped wetlands or streams
(comparison based on available mapping for all six parcels) or significant flood plain areas. This suggests that there is potential
for similar magnitude impacts on alternative sites, but these sites were not practicable as they were not immediately available
3/26/2018
Sound Rivers
Alternative sites "presume" similar impacts - must clearly demonstrate
or were not configured to allow for the site plan and grading requirements.
While the initial application detailed three separate site selection processes (CSX Select Site, Triangle Tyre search, and County
site search), an additional GIS screening of County parcels has been performed. As seen in the attached maps, when a
minimum parcel size (300 acres) and accessibility to road and rail are applied to the 2017 County parcels only 6 adequate sites
result (including the project site). This shows that there are few sites within the County that meet the specified criteria, and
does not account for the fact that the other sites would not have been available in the time frame to meet the Triangle Tyre
requirements (if available at all), are constrained by floodplains, or are not configured to allow adequate layout of the
3/26/2018
Sound Rivers
Further detailed analysis of alternative sites required
proposed facility
Minor edits were provided to the initial application to update total wetland impacts at two sites, due to continued efforts to
3/26/2018
Sound Rivers
Amount of impacts inconsistent
minimize impacts on the site.
A corridor approach to permitting roadways is a standard method used by NCDOT when final designs are not immediately
available but plans need to progress and ensure that the alignments are permittable. Final roadway design is ongoing and
3/26/2018
Sound Rivers
Preliminary corridor impacts not sufficient - final proposal required
will reduce impacts compared to what is currently proposed. This corridor approach has been used on many NCDOT projects.
Compensatory mitigation is being provided at standard ratios for all site impacts based on the quality of resource being
3/26/2018
Sound Rivers
Mitigation not provided for all impacts
impacted.
Mitigation is not typically provided for impacts to ponds or other open waters. There will be limited fill placed in these areas,
and at the road crossing near Alt US 64, the ponds will be drained and allowed to revert to free-flowing stream and wetland
systems. This will improve the quality of the aquatice resources on site, and compensate for any loss of open waters at this
3/26/2018
Sound Rivers
No mitigation for pond impacts
location.
Mitigation will be provided by private bank (including Mogensen Mitigation Services) and DMS. DMS will provide mitigation in
3/26/2018
Sound Rivers
DMS may mitigate outside watershed
accordance with their MOA with the Corps.
The location and type of mitigation being provided will be addressed by DMS and private banks and typically will be a similar
3/26/2018
Sound Rivers
Mitigation should replace location and type
type to the proposed impacts.
With the unavoidable wetland impact at Site 8, a 2:1 mitigation ratio is proposed, and will sufficiently offset the loss of
wetland function at this impact site. Other resource impacts will be compensated through adequate ratios as determined by
3/26/2018
Sound Rivers
Corps should consider much higher ratios
the NCSAM/NCWAM ratings previously submitted.
3/26/2018
Sound Rivers
Additional sensitive species
Detailed aquatic surveys have been performed. A report by Three Oaks Engineering is attached
The provision of the road facility (R-5868) is a requirement of the Triangle Tyre company in order to provide the adequate flow
of materials and products into and out of the facility. The roadway also reduces conflicts with trucks making turns in both
3/15/2018
USFWS
Roadway
directions at the Kingsboro Rd - Alt. US 64 intersection.
3/15/2018
USFWS
JAquatic surveys
I Detailed aquatic surveys have been performed. A report by Three Oaks Engineering is attached

ies user manual version z.i
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5 -minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same
property, identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User
Manual for detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if any supplementary
measurements were performed. See the NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT / SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Project Diamond - Kingsboro Site 1 2. Date of evaluation: March 22, 2018
3. Applicant/owner name: Edgecombe County 4. Assessor name/organization: G. Price, R. Crowther
5. County: Edgecombe County 6. Nearest named water body
7. River Basin: Tar -Pamlico on USGS 7.5 -minute quad: Walnut Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.9310, -77.6758
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): Impact Site 1 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 150
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 3 r Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 6 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? [,Yes [+; No
14. Feature type: F; Perennial flow [; Intermittent flow [;Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM RATING INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: [;Mountains (M) [;Piedmont (P) [+; Inner Coastal Plain (1) [;Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic \ /
valley shape (skip for F,a ��� [;b
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip [,Size 1 (< 0.1 mi`) F Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi`) [;Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi`) [;Size 4 (>_ 5 mi)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? FYes [-,No If Yes, check all that appy to the assessment area.
F Section 10 water F Classified Trout Waters F Water Supply Watershed ( [;I [;II [;III [;IV [;V)
F Essential Fish Habitat r Primary Nursery Area r High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
F Publicly owned property r NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect r Nutrient Sensitive Waters
F_ Anadromous fish r 303(d) List r CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
F Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
F Designated Critical Habitat (list species):
t. Channel Water- assessment reach metric (skip for Size t streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
A Water throughout assessment reach.
B No flow, water in pools only.
C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is adversely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impounded on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates).
[+;B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
[+;A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
[;B Not A.
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
[;A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming,
over widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of
these disturbances).
[+;B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability- assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
A < 10% of channel unstable
B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
C > 25% of channel unstable
6. Streamside Area Interaction - streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
[;A [;A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
[+;B B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area,
leaky or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
[;C [;C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision,
disruption of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples:
impoundments, intensive mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a
man-made feature on an interstream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors - assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)

r C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
F_ D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
r E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in the "Notes/Sketch"
section.
F F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
F G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
F H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
F I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
F, J Little to ho stressors
Recent Weather -watershed metric
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a
drought.
{" A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
{" B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
{: C No drought conditions
9 Large or Dangerous Stream - assessment reach metric
[,Yes f-- No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types - assessment reach metric
10a. (-Yes { -,No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
F, A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses m N r F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) H m r G Submerged aquatic vegetation
F B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o `- �, r H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation t o r I Sand bottom
F C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) L E2 r J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
F D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots 02 r K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
F E Little or no habitat
****************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH
11. Bedform and Substrate- assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11 a. r Yes (-,No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
P A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
F B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
r C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffles sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach - whether or not submerged.
Check at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain Streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) _
absent, Rare (R) = present but <- 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative
percentages should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
Bedrock/saprolite
Boulder (256 - 4096 mm)
Cobble (64 - 256 mm)
Gravel (2-64 mm)
Sand (.062-2 mm)
Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
Detritus
Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11 d. [,Yes [-,No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12. Aquatic Life - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. {; Yes (-,No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. [;No Water [;Other:
12b. (: Yes {-,No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check
all that apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for size 3 and 4 streams.
F_ r Adult frogs
F r Aquatic reptiles
r r Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
r r Beetles (including water pennies)
F_ r Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [T])
F i- Asian clam (Corbicula )
F-71 r Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
F r Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
F r Dipterans (true flies)
F r Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
F r Megaloptera (alderfly, fishily, dobsonfly larvae)
F r Midges/mosquito larvae
F r Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
r r Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula )
F r Other fish
F r Salamanders/tadpoles
r r Snails
F r Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
F F_ Tipulid larvae

F F Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and
upland runoff.
RB
LB
RB
A
;A
Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
+, B
B
Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
C
; C
Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples include: ditches, fill,
D D From 10 to < 30 -feet wide
E
soil, compaction, livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage - streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
[;A A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water>-- 6 inches deep
B B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
C C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the
normal wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
Y ;Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
N N
16. Baseflow Contributors - assessment reach metric (skip for size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
F' A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
F0 B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
F C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods within assessment area (beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
F D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
F E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
F F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors -assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
F A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
F B Obstruction not passing flow during low flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
F C Urban stream (>> 24% impervious surface for watershed)
F D Evidence that the stream -side area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
F E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
F F None of the above
18. Shading -assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
[;A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
[;B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
[+;C Stream shading is gone or largely absent
19. Buffer Width - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top
of bank out to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB
RB
LB RB
A
A A >- 100 -feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
B
�*", B;
B B From 50 to < 100 -feet wide
C;
C;
C C From 30 to < 50 -feet wide
D;
D;
D D From 10 to < 30 -feet wide
E
E
�+, EE ; E < 10 -feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB
RB
A
A
A
Mature forest
B
B
Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
;C;C
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer- streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
�D
D
Maintained shrubs
E
E
Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but
is within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22: (-
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB
RB
LB RB LB RB
A
A A A Row crops
B;
B
B B B; B Maintained turf
C
;C
C C C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
[;D
D
D [;D D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem
Density - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB
RB
[;A
A
Medium to high stem density
[;B
B
Low stem density
C
C
No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer- streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)

Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 -feet wide.
LB RB
�A A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
[;B [;B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
[;C [;C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition - First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes
to assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
A A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native
species, with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
B; B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity- assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ' ;Yes F, No Was a conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. [,No Water Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
[;A <46 r;B 46 to<67 E;C 67 to<79 [;D 79 to<230 n >- 230

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Project Diamond - Kingsboro Site 1
Stream Category lag
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
INC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Date of Evaluation March 22, 2018
Assessor Name/Organization G. Price, R. Crowther
NO
YES
NO
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
LOW
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
LOW
(4) Floodplain Access
MEDIUM
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
LOW
(4) Microtopography
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
(4) Channel Stability
HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport
LOW
(4) Stream Geomorphology
MEDIUM
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(1) Water Quality
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation
LOW
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
HIGH
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat
MEDIUM
(3) Baseflow
HIGH
(3) Substrate
HIGH
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
(3) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
LOW
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
NA
Overall
LOW

ies user manual version z.i
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5 -minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same
property, identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User
Manual for detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if any supplementary
measurements were performed. See the NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT / SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Project Diamond - Kingsboro Site 3 2. Date of evaluation: March 22, 2018
3. Applicant/owner name: Edgecombe County 4. Assessor name/organization: G. Price, R. Crowther
5. County: Edgecombe County 6. Nearest named water body
7. River Basin: Tar -Pamlico on USGS 7.5 -minute quad: Walnut Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.9286, -77.6703
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): Impact Site 3 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 200
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 4 r Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 12 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? [,Yes [+; No
14. Feature type: F; Perennial flow [; Intermittent flow [;Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM RATING INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: [;Mountains (M) [;Piedmont (P) [+; Inner Coastal Plain (1) [;Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic \ /
valley shape (skip for F,a ��� [;b
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip [,Size 1 (< 0.1 mi`) [,Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi`) Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi`) [;Size 4 (>_ 5 mi)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? FYes [-,No If Yes, check all that appy to the assessment area.
F Section 10 water F Classified Trout Waters F Water Supply Watershed ( [;I [;II [;III [;IV [;V)
F Essential Fish Habitat r Primary Nursery Area r High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
F Publicly owned property r NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect r Nutrient Sensitive Waters
F_ Anadromous fish r 303(d) List r CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
F Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
F Designated Critical Habitat (list species):
1. Channel Water- assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
A Water throughout assessment reach.
B No flow, water in pools only.
C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
;A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is adversely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impounded on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates).
B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
[;B Not A.
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
[+;A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming,
over widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of
these disturbances).
[;B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability- assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
A < 10% of channel unstable
B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
C > 25% of channel unstable
6. Streamside Area Interaction - streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
[+;A A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
[;B [;B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area,
leaky or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
[;C [;C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision,
disruption of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples:
impoundments, intensive mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a
man-made feature on an interstream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors - assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)

r C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
F_ D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
r E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in the "Notes/Sketch"
section.
F F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
F G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
F H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
F I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
F, J Little to ho stressors
Recent Weather -watershed metric
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a
drought.
(" A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
(" B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
{: C No drought conditions
9 Large or Dangerous Stream - assessment reach metric
Yes f-- No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types - assessment reach metric
10a. (-Yes { -,No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
F A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses m N r F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) H m r G Submerged aquatic vegetation
F B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o `- r H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation t o r I Sand bottom
r C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) L E2 r J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
F D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots 02 r K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
F E Little or no habitat
****************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH
11. Bedform and Substrate- assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11 a. r Yes (-,No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
F A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
F, B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
r C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11c. In riffles sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach - whether or not submerged.
Check at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain Streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) _
absent, Rare (R) = present but <- 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative
percentages should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
Bedrock/saprolite
Boulder (256 - 4096 mm)
Cobble (64 - 256 mm)
Gravel (2 - 64 mm)
Sand (.062-2 mm)
Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
Detritus
Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11 d. 'Yes F, No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12. Aquatic Life - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. (*-Yes (-,No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. [,No Water ,Other:
12b. (i Yes { -,No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check
all that apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for size 3 and 4 streams.
F_ r Adult frogs
F r Aquatic reptiles
r r Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
F r Beetles (including water pennies)
[ r Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [T])
F r Asian clam (Corbicula )
F r Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
F r Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
F r Dipterans (true flies)
F r Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
F r Megaloptera (alderfly, fishily, dobsonfly larvae)
F r Midges/mosquito larvae
F r Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
r r Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula )
F r Other fish
F r Salamanders/tadpoles
r r Snails
F r Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
F r Tipulid larvae

F F Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and
upland runoff.
RB
LB
RB
A
A
A
Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
B
; B
Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
C
; C
Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples include: ditches, fill,
D D From 10 to < 30 -feet wide
E
soil, compaction, livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage - streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
[+;A A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water>-- 6 inches deep
B B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
[;C C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the
normal wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
Y Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
N N
16. Baseflow Contributors - assessment reach metric (skip for size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
F A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
F B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
F C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods within assessment area (beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
F D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
F E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
F F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors -assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
F A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
F B Obstruction not passing flow during low flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
F C Urban stream (>> 24% impervious surface for watershed)
F D Evidence that the stream -side area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
F E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
F F None of the above
18. Shading -assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
[;A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
[;B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
[+;C Stream shading is gone or largely absent
19. Buffer Width - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top
of bank out to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB
RB
LB RB
A
A
A A >- 100 -feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
B;
B;
B B From 50 to < 100 -feet wide
C;
C;
C C From 30 to < 50 -feet wide
D
; D;
D D From 10 to < 30 -feet wide
E
E;
E E < 10 -feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB
RB
A
A
A
Mature forest
B;
B
Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
C
C
Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
�D
D
Maintained shrubs
E
E
Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but
is within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22: r
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB
RB
LB RB LB RB
A
A
[;A A [;A A Row crops
[;B
B
[;B B [;B B Maintained turf
[�C
C
C C C C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
[;D
D
[;D D [;D D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem
Density- streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB
RB
[;A
A
Medium to high stem density
[+;B
[+;B
Low stem density
[;C
C
No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer- streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)

Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 -feet wide.
LB RB
�A A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
[;B [;B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
[;C [;C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition - First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes
to assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
A A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native
species, with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
+, B+, B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
;C;C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity- assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ' ;Yes F, No Was a conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. [,No Water Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
[;A <46 r;B 46 to<67 E;C 67 to<79 [;D 79 to<230 n >- 230

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Project Diamond - Kingsboro Site 3
Stream Category la3
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
INC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Date of Evaluation March 22, 2018
Assessor Name/Organization G. Price, R. Crowther
NO
YES
NO
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
HIGH
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
HIGH
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
HIGH
(4) Floodplain Access
HIGH
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
MEDIUM
(4) Microtopography
HIGH
(3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
(4) Channel Stability
HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport
HIGH
(4) Stream Geomorphology
LOW
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(1) Water Quality
LOW
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
MEDIUM
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
LOW
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
MEDIUM
(2) In -stream Habitat
MEDIUM
(3) Baseflow
HIGH
(3) Substrate
HIGH
(3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat
MEDIUM
(3) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
LOW
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
NA
Overall
MEDIUM

NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 5
USACE AID#: NCDWR #:
Project Name Project Diamond Date of Evaluation March 22, 2018
Applicant/Owner Name Edgecombe County/NCDOT Wetland Site Name Impact Site 4
Wetland Type Bottomland Hardwood Forest Assessor Name/Organization G Price, R Crowther
Level III Ecoregion Southeastern Plains Nearest Named Water Body Walnut Creek
River Basin Tar -Pamlico USGS 8 -Digit Catalogue Unit 03020101
County Edgecombe NCDWR Region Raleigh
E ;Yes [;No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees) 35.9293, -77.6565
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited
to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? �; Yes E+; No
Regulatory Considerations Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ;Yes ;No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
F Anadromous fish
F Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
F-1- NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
F Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
r Publicly owned property
F N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
F Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
F Designated NCNHP reference community
F Abuts a 303(d) -listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d) -listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any.) (check all that apply)
Blackwater
Brownwater
F Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ;Lunar .,Wind
Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? Yes ; No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? Yes No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? Yes No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect.
GS VS
;A E+;A Not severely altered
B B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
2. Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only,
while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
;A+;A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
B; B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
;C;C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
3. Water Storage/Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column for each group below. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT).
AA WT
3a. A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water> 1 foot deep
B; B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
C ; C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
D; D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b.;A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet

B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
;C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

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

9. Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
A Evidence of short -duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
E ;C Evidence of long -duration inundation or very long -duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10. Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands and all marshes)
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
E ;A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11. Wetland Size — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select "K" for the FW column.
WT WC FW (if applicable)
CA CA CA >_ 500 acres
C B r, B L] B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C E C E C From 50 to < 100 acres
C D L] D E D From 25 to < 50 acres
C E L] E L] E From 10 to < 25 acres
C F L] F L] F From 5 to < 10 acres
C G L] G L]G From 1 to < 5 acres
C H L] H L] H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
E I E I E I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
cJ L]J L]J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
C K L: K L] K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12. Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
CA Pocosin is the full extent (>: 90%) of its natural landscape size.
C B Pocosin is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
metric naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility
line corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wide.
Well Loosely
EA EA >_ 500 acres
E B C: B From 100 to < 500 acres
E C C: C From 50 to < 100 acres
E D C: D From 10 to < 50 acres
E E < 10 acres
F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
[]Yes C No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands.
14. Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non -forested areas z 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and clear -cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directiions? If the assessment area is clear-cut,
select option "C."
E;A 0
L] B 1 to 4
L]C 5to8
15. Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
E;A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
E:C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
L]A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (<10% cover of exotics).
B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
E:C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (>50% cover of exotics).

17. Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
Z Yes L: No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
L]A
>_ 25%
coverage of vegetation
L] B
< 25%
coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider structure
in airspace
above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA
WT
CL
�A
�A
Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
o
�
� B
E B
Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
v
L]C
L:C
Canopy sparse or absent
o
L]A
L:A
Dense mid-story/sapling layer
E;B
EB
Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
L]C
L:C
Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
A
A
Dense shrub layer
B
B
Moderate density shrub layer
(0
E;C
E;C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
9
L]A
L:A
Dense herb layer
B
E B
Moderate density herb layer
L]C
L:C
Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
L]A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 -inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
EB Not
19. Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
L]A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 -inch DBH.
L]C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris.
L]A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
EB Not
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion — wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
L]A EB EC ED
\Q';F'
22. Hydrologic Connectivity— assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization,
diversion, man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
L]A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
L]C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
L] D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Impact Site 4 Date
Wetland Type Bottomland Hardwood Forest Assessor Name/Organization
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N)
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
Sub -function Rating Summary
March 22, 2018
G Price, R Crowther
RX,
YES
NO
YES
NO
NO
NO
Function Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Habitat
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Soluble Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Physical Change Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Pollution Change Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N) NA
Habitat Physical Structure Condition MEDIUM
Landscape Patch Structure Condition HIGH
Vegetation Composition Condition HIGH
Function Rating Summary
Function
Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
LOW
Water Quality
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Habitat
Condition
HIGH
Overall Wetland Rating MEDIUM

ies user manual version z.i
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5 -minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same
property, identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User
Manual for detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if any supplementary
measurements were performed. See the NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT / SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Project Diamond - Kingsboro Site 4 2. Date of evaluation: March 22, 2018
3. Applicant/owner name: Edgecombe County 4. Assessor name/organization: G. Price, R. Crowther
5. County: Edgecombe County 6. Nearest named water body
7. River Basin: Tar -Pamlico on USGS 7.5 -minute quad: Walnut Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.9296, -77.6565
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): Impact Site 4 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 275
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 4 r Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 8 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? [,Yes [+; No
14. Feature type: F; Perennial flow [; Intermittent flow [;Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM RATING INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: [;Mountains (M) [;Piedmont (P) [+; Inner Coastal Plain (1) [;Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic \ /
valley shape (skip for r -,a ��� [+;b
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip Size 1 (< 0.1 mi`) [,Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi`) Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi`) [;Size 4 (>_ 5 mi)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? FYes [-,No If Yes, check all that appy to the assessment area.
F Section 10 water F Classified Trout Waters F Water Supply Watershed ( [;I [;II [;III [;IV [;V)
F Essential Fish Habitat r Primary Nursery Area r High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
F Publicly owned property r NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect r Nutrient Sensitive Waters
F_ Anadromous fish r 303(d) List r CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
F Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
F Designated Critical Habitat (list species):
1. Channel Water- assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
A Water throughout assessment reach.
B No flow, water in pools only.
C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is adversely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impounded on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates).
[+;B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
[;A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
[+;B Not A.
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
[+;A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming,
over widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of
these disturbances).
[;B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability- assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
A < 10% of channel unstable
+, B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
C > 25% of channel unstable
6. Streamside Area Interaction - streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
[;A [;A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
[;B [;B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area,
leaky or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
[+;C C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision,
disruption of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples:
impoundments, intensive mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a
man-made feature on an interstream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors - assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)

r C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
F_ D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
r E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in the "Notes/Sketch"
section.
F F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
F G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
F H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
F I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
F, J Little to ho stressors
Recent Weather -watershed metric
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a
drought.
{" A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
{" B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
{: C No drought conditions
9 Large or Dangerous Stream - assessment reach metric
[,Yes f-- No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types - assessment reach metric
10a. (-Yes { -,No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
F A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses m N r F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) H m r G Submerged aquatic vegetation
F, B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o `- �, r H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation t o r I Sand bottom
r C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) L E2 r J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
P D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots 02 r K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
F E Little or no habitat
****************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH
11. Bedform and Substrate- assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11 a. r Yes (-,No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
P A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
F B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
r C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffles sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach - whether or not submerged.
Check at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain Streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) _
absent, Rare (R) = present but <- 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative
percentages should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
Bedrock/saprolite
Boulder (256 - 4096 mm)
Cobble (64 - 256 mm)
Gravel (2-64 mm)
Sand (.062-2 mm)
Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
Detritus
Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11 d. [,Yes [-,No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12. Aquatic Life - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. {; Yes (-,No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. [;No Water [;Other:
12b. (: Yes {-,No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check
all that apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for size 3 and 4 streams.
F_ r Adult frogs
F r Aquatic reptiles
r r Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
F r Beetles (including water pennies)
[ r Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [T])
F i- Asian clam (Corbicula )
F r Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
F r Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
F r Dipterans (true flies)
F r Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
F r Megaloptera (alderfly, fishily, dobsonfly larvae)
[r r Midges/mosquito larvae
r r Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
r r Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula )
F r Other fish
F r Salamanders/tadpoles
r r Snails
F r Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
F F_ Tipulid larvae

F F Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and
upland runoff.
RB
LB
RB
A
A
;A
Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
B
; B
Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
C
; C
Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples include: ditches, fill,
D D From 10 to < 30 -feet wide
E
soil, compaction, livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage - streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
[;A A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water>-- 6 inches deep
B B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
[;C C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the
normal wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
Y Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
N N
16. Baseflow Contributors - assessment reach metric (skip for size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
Fv A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
F B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
F C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods within assessment area (beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
F D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
P E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
F F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors -assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
F A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
F B Obstruction not passing flow during low flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
F C Urban stream (>> 24% impervious surface for watershed)
F D Evidence that the stream -side area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
F E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
F F None of the above
18. Shading -assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
[+;A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
[;B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
[;C Stream shading is gone or largely absent
19. Buffer Width - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top
of bank out to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB
RB
LB RB
A
A
A A >- 100 -feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
B;
B;
B B From 50 to < 100 -feet wide
C;
C;
C C From 30 to < 50 -feet wide
D
; D;
D D From 10 to < 30 -feet wide
E
E;
E E < 10 -feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB
RB
[+;A
;A;A
[;B
Mature forest
B
B
Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
C
C
Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
�D
D
Maintained shrubs
E
E
Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but
is within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22: r
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB
RB
LB RB LB RB
A
A
[;A A [;A A Row crops
[;B
B
[;B B [;B B Maintained turf
[�C
C
C C C C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
[;D
D
[;D D [;D D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem
Density- streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB
RB
[+;A
[+;A
Medium to high stem density
[;B
B
Low stem density
[;C
C
No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer- streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)

Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 -feet wide.
LB RB
�A A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
[;B [;B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
[;C [;C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition - First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes
to assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
A A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native
species, with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
B; B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
;C;C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity- assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ' ;Yes F, No Was a conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. [,No Water Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
[;A <46 r;B 46 to<67 E;C 67 to<79 [;D 79 to<230 n >- 230

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Project Diamond - Kingsboro Site 4
Stream Category Ib3
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
INC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Date of Evaluation March 22, 2018
Assessor Name/Organization G. Price, R. Crowther
NO
YES
NO
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
LOW
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
LOW
(4) Floodplain Access
LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
HIGH
(4) Microtopography
NA
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(4) Channel Stability
MEDIUM
(4) Sediment Transport
LOW
(4) Stream Geomorphology
MEDIUM
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(1) Water Quality
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
HIGH
(2) In -stream Habitat
HIGH
(3) Baseflow
HIGH
(3) Substrate
HIGH
(3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
(3) In -stream Habitat
HIGH
(2) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat
MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
NA
Overall
MEDIUM

NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 5
USACE AID#: NCDWR #:
Project Name Project Diamond Date of Evaluation March 22, 2018
Applicant/Owner Name Edgecombe County/NCDOT Wetland Site Name Impact Site 6
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization G Price, R Crowther
Level III Ecoregion Southeastern Plains Nearest Named Water Body Walnut Creek
River Basin Tar -Pamlico USGS 8 -Digit Catalogue Unit 03020101
County Edgecombe NCDWR Region Raleigh
E ;Yes [;No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees) 35.9267, -77.6390
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited
to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? �; Yes E+; No
Regulatory Considerations Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ;Yes ;No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
F Anadromous fish
F Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
F-1- NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
F Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
r Publicly owned property
F N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
F Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
F Designated NCNHP reference community
F Abuts a 303(d) -listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d) -listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any.) (check all that apply)
Blackwater
Brownwater
F Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ;Lunar .,Wind
Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? Yes ; No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? Yes No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? Yes No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect.
GS VS
;A E+;A Not severely altered
B B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
2. Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only,
while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
;A+;A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
B; B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
;C;C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
3. Water Storage/Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column for each group below. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT).
AA WT
3a. A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water> 1 foot deep
B; B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
;C;C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
D D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b.;A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet

B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
;C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

4. Soil Texture/Structure — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature. Make soil observations within the 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for
regional indicators.
4a.;A Sandy soil
B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
;C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b.;A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
;B Soil ribbon >_ 1 inch
4c. ;A No peat or muck presence
B A peat or muck presence
Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub -surface pollutants or discharges (Sub).
Examples of sub -surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
A A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
B B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
;C;C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
Land Use — opportunity metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources
draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the
assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M). Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion.
WS 5M 2M
F A F A F A >_ 10% impervious surfaces
F B r B F B Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
F C F C F C >_ 20% coverage of pasture
F' D Fl D F1 D >_ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
F E F E r E >_ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
F F F F F F >_ 20% coverage of clear-cut land
F G r G r G Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in
the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent dainage and/or overbank flow from affectio the
assessment area.
Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer — assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
;Yes F,No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is weltand? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make
buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.)
A >_ 50 feet
B From 30 to < 50 feet
C From 15 to < 30 feet
D From 5 to < 15 feet
E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
<_ 15 -feet wide K—, > 15 -feet wide K—, Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
Yes K—, No
7e. Is tributary or other open water sheltered or exposed?
Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
Exposed — adjacent open water with width >_ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes
and Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp
Forest only)
Check a box in each column. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and the wetland complex at the
assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
A A >_ 100 feet
B B From 80 to < 100 feet
C; C From 50 to < 80 feet
D D From 40 to < 50 feet
E E From 30 to < 40 feet
F F From 15 to < 30 feet
G; G From 5 to < 15 feet
H H < 5 feet

9. Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
E ;A Evidence of short -duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
C Evidence of long -duration inundation or very long -duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10. Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands and all marshes)
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
E ;A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11. Wetland Size — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select "K" for the FW column.
WT WC FW (if applicable)
CA CA CA >_ 500 acres
C B r, B C B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C E C E C From 50 to < 100 acres
C D L] D E D From 25 to < 50 acres
C E L] E C E From 10 to < 25 acres
E F E F E F From 5 to < 10 acres
C G L] G CG From 1 to < 5 acres
C H L] H C H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
C I L] I C I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
CJ CJ CJ From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
C K C K E K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12. Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
CA Pocosin is the full extent (>: 90%) of its natural landscape size.
C B Pocosin is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
metric naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility
line corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wide.
Well Loosely
CA CA >_ 500 acres
E B C B From 100 to < 500 acres
EC C C From 50 to < 100 acres
E D C D From 10 to < 50 acres
C E C E < 10 acres
C F E F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
[]Yes C No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands.
14. Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non -forested areas z 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and clear -cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directiions? If the assessment area is clear-cut,
select option "C."
CA 0
Z B 1 to 4
CC 5to8
15. Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
CA Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
CC Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
CA Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (<10% cover of exotics).
C B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
CC Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (>50% cover of exotics).

17. Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
Z Yes L: No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
L]A
>_ 25%
coverage of vegetation
L] B
< 25%
coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider structure
in airspace
above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA
WT
CL
�A
EA
Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
o
�
E;B
E;B
Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
v
L]C
L:C
Canopy sparse or absent
o
L]A
L:A
Dense mid-story/sapling layer
B
EB
Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
L]C
L:C
Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
EA
EA
Dense shrub layer
B
E; B
Moderate density shrub layer
(0
EC
EC
Shrub layer sparse or absent
9
L]A
L:A
Dense herb layer
L] B
L: B
Moderate density herb layer
E;C
EC
Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
L]A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 -inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
EB Not
19. Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
L]A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 -inch DBH.
L]C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris.
EA Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
L]B Not
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion — wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
L]A EB EC ED
\Q';F'
22. Hydrologic Connectivity— assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization,
diversion, man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
E;A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
L] B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
L]C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
L] D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Impact Site 6 Date
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N)
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
Sub -function Rating Summary
March 22, 2018
G Price, R Crowther
RX,
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Function Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Habitat
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Soluble Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Physical Change Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Pollution Change Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N) NA
Habitat Physical Structure Condition MEDIUM
Landscape Patch Structure Condition MEDIUM
Vegetation Composition Condition MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function
Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Habitat
Condition
MEDIUM
Overall Wetland Rating MEDIUM

NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 5
USACE AID#: NCDWR #:
Project Name Kingsboro Site Date of Evaluation January 25, 2018
Applicant/Owner Name Edgecombe County/NCDOT Wetland Site Name Area 107 Wetland
Wetland Type Basin Wetland Assessor Name/Organization G Price/Carolina Ecosystems
Level III Ecoregion Southeastern Plains Nearest Named Water Body Walnut Creek
River Basin Tar -Pamlico USGS 8 -Digit Catalogue Unit 03020101
County Edgecombe NCDWR Region Raleigh
;Yes E ;No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees) 35.9230, -77.6380
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited
to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? �; Yes E+; No
Regulatory Considerations Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ;Yes ;No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
F Anadromous fish
F Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
F NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
F Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
r Publicly owned property
F N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
F Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
F Designated NCNHP reference community
F Abuts a 303(d) -listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d) -listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any.) (check all that apply)
Blackwater
Brownwater
F Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ;Lunar .,Wind
Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? Yes ; No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? Yes No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? Yes No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect.
GS VS
;A E+;A Not severely altered
B B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
2. Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only,
while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
;A+;A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
B; B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
;C;C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
3. Water Storage/Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column for each group below. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT).
AA WT
3a. A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water> 1 foot deep
B; B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
;C;C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
D D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b.;A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet

B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
;C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

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

9. Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
A Evidence of short -duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
C Evidence of long -duration inundation or very long -duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10. Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands and all marshes)
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11. Wetland Size — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select "K" for the FW column.
WT WC FW (if applicable)
CA CA CA >_ 500 acres
C B r, B C B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C E C E C From 50 to < 100 acres
C D L] D E D From 25 to < 50 acres
C E L] E C E From 10 to < 25 acres
C F L] F C F From 5 to < 10 acres
C G L] G CG From 1 to < 5 acres
E H E H C H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
C I L] I C I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
CJ CJ CJ From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
C K C K E K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12. Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
CA Pocosin is the full extent (>: 90%) of its natural landscape size.
C B Pocosin is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
metric naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility
line corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wide.
Well Loosely
CA CA >_ 500 acres
C B C B From 100 to < 500 acres
CC C C From 50 to < 100 acres
D D From 10 to < 50 acres
E E < 10 acres
C F E F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
Yes C No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands.
14. Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non -forested areas z 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and clear -cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directiions? If the assessment area is clear-cut,
select option "C."
CA 0
B 1 to 4
EC 5to8
15. Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
CA Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
CC Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
CA Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (<10% cover of exotics).
Z B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
CC Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (>50% cover of exotics).

17. Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
Z Yes L: No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
L]A
>_ 25%
coverage of vegetation
L] B
< 25%
coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider structure
in airspace
above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA
WT
CL
�A
EA
Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
o
�
E B
E B
Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
v
E;C
E:C
Canopy sparse or absent
o
L]A
L:A
Dense mid-story/sapling layer
L]B
L:B
Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
E;C
E:C
Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
A
A
Dense shrub layer
B
B
Moderate density shrub layer
(0
E;C
E;C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
9
E;A
E:A
Dense herb layer
L] B
L: B
Moderate density herb layer
L]C
L:C
Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
L]A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 -inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
EB Not
19. Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
L]A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
L] B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 -inch DBH.
EC Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris.
L]A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
EB Not
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion — wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
L]A EB EC ED
\Q';F'
22. Hydrologic Connectivity— assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization,
diversion, man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
L]A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
L] B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
L]C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
L] D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes

Wetland Site Name
Wetland Type
NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Area 107 Wetland
Basin Wetland
Date January 25, 2018
Assessor Name/Organization Price/Carolina Ecosyster
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N)
Condition
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Rating Summary
Function Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
NA
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
NA
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Habitat
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Particulate Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Physical Change Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Pollution Change Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N) NO
Habitat Physical Structure Condition HIGH
Landscape Patch Structure Condition LOW
Vegetation Composition Condition MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function
Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Habitat
Condition
MEDIUM
Overall Wetland Rating HIGH

NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 5
USACE AID#: NCDWR #:
Project Name Kingsboro Site Date of Evaluation January 25, 2018
Applicant/Owner Name Edgecombe County/NCDOT Wetland Site Name Area 103 Wetland
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization G Price, R Crowther/Carolina Ecosyster
Level III Ecoregion Southeastern Plains Nearest Named Water Body Penders Mill Run
River Basin Tar -Pamlico USGS 8 -Digit Catalogue Unit 03020101
County Edgecombe NCDWR Region Raleigh
;Yes E ;No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees) 35.9182, -77.6413
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited
to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? �; Yes E+; No
Regulatory Considerations Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ;Yes ;No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
F Anadromous fish
F Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
F-1- NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
F Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
r Publicly owned property
F N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
F Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
F Designated NCNHP reference community
F Abuts a 303(d) -listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d) -listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any.) (check all that apply)
Blackwater
Brownwater
F Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ;Lunar .,Wind
Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? Yes ; No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? Yes No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? Yes No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect.
GS VS
;A E+;A Not severely altered
B B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
2. Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only,
while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
;A+;A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
B; B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
;C;C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
3. Water Storage/Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column for each group below. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT).
AA WT
3a. A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water> 1 foot deep
B B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
;C;C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
D; D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b.;A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet

B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
;C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

4. Soil Texture/Structure — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature. Make soil observations within the 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for
regional indicators.
4a.;A Sandy soil
B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
;C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b.;A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
;B Soil ribbon >_ 1 inch
4c. ;A No peat or muck presence
B A peat or muck presence
Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub -surface pollutants or discharges (Sub).
Examples of sub -surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
A A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
B B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
;C;C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
Land Use — opportunity metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources
draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the
assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M). Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion.
WS 5M 2M
F A F A F A >_ 10% impervious surfaces
F B r B F B Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
F C F C F C >_ 20% coverage of pasture
F' D Fl D F1 D >_ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
F E F E r E >_ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
F F F F F F >_ 20% coverage of clear-cut land
F G r G r G Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in
the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent dainage and/or overbank flow from affectio the
assessment area.
Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer — assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
;Yes F,No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is weltand? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make
buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.)
A >_ 50 feet
B From 30 to < 50 feet
C From 15 to < 30 feet
D From 5 to < 15 feet
E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
<_ 15 -feet wide K—, > 15 -feet wide K—, Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
Yes K—, No
7e. Is tributary or other open water sheltered or exposed?
Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
Exposed — adjacent open water with width >_ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes
and Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp
Forest only)
Check a box in each column. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and the wetland complex at the
assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
A A >_ 100 feet
B B From 80 to < 100 feet
C; C From 50 to < 80 feet
D D From 40 to < 50 feet
E E From 30 to < 40 feet
F F From 15 to < 30 feet
G; G From 5 to < 15 feet
H H < 5 feet

9. Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
A Evidence of short -duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
E ;C Evidence of long -duration inundation or very long -duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10. Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands and all marshes)
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
E ;A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11. Wetland Size — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select "K" for the FW column.
WT WC FW (if applicable)
CA CA CA >_ 500 acres
C B r, B C B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C E C E C From 50 to < 100 acres
C D L] D E D From 25 to < 50 acres
C E E E E E From 10 to < 25 acres
E F L] F C F From 5 to < 10 acres
C G L] G CG From 1 to < 5 acres
C H L] H C H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
C I L] I C I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
CJ CJ CJ From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
C K C K E K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12. Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
CA Pocosin is the full extent (>: 90%) of its natural landscape size.
C B Pocosin is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
metric naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility
line corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wide.
Well Loosely
CA CA >_ 500 acres
E B E B From 100 to < 500 acres
EC C C From 50 to < 100 acres
E D C D From 10 to < 50 acres
E E < 10 acres
F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
[]Yes C No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands.
14. Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non -forested areas z 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and clear -cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directiions? If the assessment area is clear-cut,
select option "C."
CA 0
B 1 to 4
EC 5to8
15. Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
CA Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
CC Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
CA Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (<10% cover of exotics).
C B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
CC Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (>50% cover of exotics).

17. Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
Z Yes L: No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
L]A
>_ 25%
coverage of vegetation
L] B
< 25%
coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider structure
in airspace
above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA
WT
CL
�A
�A
Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
o
�
� B
E B
Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
v
L]C
L:C
Canopy sparse or absent
o
L]A
L:A
Dense mid-story/sapling layer
E;B
EB
Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
L]C
L:C
Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
A
EA
Dense shrub layer
B
E; B
Moderate density shrub layer
(0
EC
EC
Shrub layer sparse or absent
9
L]A
L:A
Dense herb layer
B
E B
Moderate density herb layer
L]C
L:C
Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 -inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
B Not
19. Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
L]A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 -inch DBH.
L]C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris.
EA Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
L]B Not
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion — wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
L]A EB EC ED
\Q';F'
22. Hydrologic Connectivity— assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization,
diversion, man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
E;A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
L] B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
L]C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
L] D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes

Wetland Site Name
Wetland Type
NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Area 103 Wetland
Date January 25, 2018
Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization R Crowther/Carolina Eco
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
YES
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Rating Summary
Function Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
HIGH
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Habitat
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Physical Change Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Pollution Change Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N) NA
Habitat Physical Structure Condition HIGH
Landscape Patch Structure Condition HIGH
Vegetation Composition Condition MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function
Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Habitat
Condition
HIGH
Overall Wetland Rating HIGH

NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 5
USACE AID#: NCDWR #:
Project Name Kingsboro Site Date of Evaluation January 25, 2018
Applicant/Owner Name Edgecombe County/NCDOT Wetland Site Name Area 103 Wetland
Wetland Type Riverine Swamp Forest Assessor Name/Organization G Price, R Crowther/Carolina Ecosyster
Level III Ecoregion Southeastern Plains Nearest Named Water Body Penders Mill Run
River Basin Tar -Pamlico USGS 8 -Digit Catalogue Unit 03020101
County Edgecombe NCDWR Region Raleigh
;Yes E ;No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees) 35.9178, -77.6395
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited
to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? �; Yes E+; No
Regulatory Considerations Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ;Yes ;No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
F Anadromous fish
F Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
F-1- NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
F Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
r Publicly owned property
F N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
F Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
F Designated NCNHP reference community
F Abuts a 303(d) -listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d) -listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any.) (check all that apply)
Blackwater
Brownwater
F Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ;Lunar .,Wind
Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? Yes ; No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? Yes No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? Yes No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect.
GS VS
;A E+;A Not severely altered
B B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
2. Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only,
while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
;A+;A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
B; B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
;C;C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
3. Water Storage/Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column for each group below. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT).
AA WT
3a. A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water> 1 foot deep
B B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
;C;C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
D; D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b.;A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet

B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
;C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

4. Soil Texture/Structure — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature. Make soil observations within the 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for
regional indicators.
4a.;A Sandy soil
B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
;C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b.;A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
;B Soil ribbon >_ 1 inch
4c. ;A No peat or muck presence
B A peat or muck presence
Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub -surface pollutants or discharges (Sub).
Examples of sub -surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
A A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
B B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
;C;C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
Land Use — opportunity metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources
draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the
assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M). Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion.
WS 5M 2M
F A F A F A >_ 10% impervious surfaces
F B r B F B Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
F C F C F C >_ 20% coverage of pasture
F' D Fl D F1 D >_ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
F E F E r E >_ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
F F F F F F >_ 20% coverage of clear-cut land
F G r G r G Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in
the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent dainage and/or overbank flow from affectio the
assessment area.
Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer — assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
F; Yes K;No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is weltand? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make
buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.)
A >_ 50 feet
B From 30 to < 50 feet
C From 15 to < 30 feet
D From 5 to < 15 feet
E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
<_ 15 -feet wide K—, > 15 -feet wide K—, Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
Yes K—, No
7e. Is tributary or other open water sheltered or exposed?
Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
Exposed — adjacent open water with width >_ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes
and Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp
Forest only)
Check a box in each column. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and the wetland complex at the
assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
A A >_ 100 feet
B B From 80 to < 100 feet
C; C From 50 to < 80 feet
D D From 40 to < 50 feet
E E From 30 to < 40 feet
F F From 15 to < 30 feet
G; G From 5 to < 15 feet
H H < 5 feet

9. Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
A Evidence of short -duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
E ;C Evidence of long -duration inundation or very long -duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10. Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands and all marshes)
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
E ;A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11. Wetland Size — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select "K" for the FW column.
WT WC FW (if applicable)
CA CA CA >_ 500 acres
C B r, B L] B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C E C E C From 50 to < 100 acres
C D L] D E D From 25 to < 50 acres
C E E E E E From 10 to < 25 acres
C F L] F L] F From 5 to < 10 acres
E G L] G L]G From 1 to < 5 acres
C H L] H L] H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
C I L] I L] I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
cJ L]J L]J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
C K L: K L] K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12. Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
CA Pocosin is the full extent (>: 90%) of its natural landscape size.
C B Pocosin is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
metric naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility
line corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wide.
Well Loosely
EA E: A >_ 500 acres
E B E B From 100 to < 500 acres
EC C: C From 50 to < 100 acres
E D C: D From 10 to < 50 acres
E E < 10 acres
F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
[]Yes C No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands.
14. Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non -forested areas z 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and clear -cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directiions? If the assessment area is clear-cut,
select option "C."
CA 0
Z B 1 to 4
L]C 5to8
15. Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
E;A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
E:C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
L]A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (<10% cover of exotics).
B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
E:C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (>50% cover of exotics).

17. Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
Z Yes L: No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
L]A
>_ 25%
coverage of vegetation
L] B
< 25%
coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider structure
in airspace
above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA
WT
CL
�A
EA
Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
o
�
E;B
E;B
Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
v
L]C
L:C
Canopy sparse or absent
o
L]A
L:A
Dense mid-story/sapling layer
L]B
L:B
Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
E;C
EC
Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
EA
EA
Dense shrub layer
E B
E B
Moderate density shrub layer
(0
E;C
E;C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
9
L]A
L:A
Dense herb layer
B
E B
Moderate density herb layer
L]C
L:C
Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 -inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
B Not
19. Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
EA Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 -inch DBH.
L]C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris.
EA Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
L]B Not
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion — wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
L]A EB EC ED
\Q';F'
22. Hydrologic Connectivity— assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization,
diversion, man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
E;A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
L] B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
L]C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
L] D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes

Wetland Site Name
Wetland Type
NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Area 103 Wetland
Riverine SwamD Forest
Date January 25, 2018
Assessor Name/Organization R Crowther/Carolina Eco
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
YES
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Rating Summary
Function Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
HIGH
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Habitat
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Soluble Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Physical Change Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Pollution Change Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N) NA
Habitat Physical Structure Condition HIGH
Landscape Patch Structure Condition HIGH
Vegetation Composition Condition HIGH
Function Rating Summary
Function
Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Habitat
Condition
HIGH
Overall Wetland Rating HIGH

ies user manual version z.i
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5 -minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same
property, identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User
Manual for detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if any supplementary
measurements were performed. See the NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT / SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Project Diamond - Kingsboro Site 2. Date of evaluation: February 15, 2018
3. Applicant/owner name: Edgecombe County 4. Assessor name/organization: G. Price, R. Crowther
5. County: Edgecombe County 6. Nearest named water body
7. River Basin: Tar -Pamlico on USGS 7.5 -minute quad: Penders Mill Run
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.9186, -77.6437
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): Buffer Site 8 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 360
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 2 r Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 3 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? [,Yes [+; No
14. Feature type: [, Perennial flow F; Intermittent flow [;Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM RATING INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: [;Mountains (M) [;Piedmont (P) [+; Inner Coastal Plain (1) [;Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic \ /
valley shape (skip for F,a ��� [;b
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip [,Size 1 (< 0.1 mi`) F Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi`) [;Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi`) [;Size 4 (>_ 5 mi)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? FYes [-,No If Yes, check all that appy to the assessment area.
F Section 10 water F Classified Trout Waters F Water Supply Watershed ( [;I [;II [;III [;IV [;V)
F Essential Fish Habitat r Primary Nursery Area r High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
F Publicly owned property r NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect r Nutrient Sensitive Waters
F_ Anadromous fish r 303(d) List r CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
F Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
F Designated Critical Habitat (list species):
1. Channel Water- assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
A Water throughout assessment reach.
B No flow, water in pools only.
C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
;A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is adversely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impounded on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates).
B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
[;B Not A.
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
[+;A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming,
over widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of
these disturbances).
[;B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability- assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
A < 10% of channel unstable
+, B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
C > 25% of channel unstable
6. Streamside Area Interaction - streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
[;A [;A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
[+;B B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area,
leaky or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
[;C [;C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision,
disruption of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples:
impoundments, intensive mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a
man-made feature on an interstream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors - assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)

r C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
F_ D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
r E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in the "Notes/Sketch"
section.
F F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
F G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
F H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
F I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
F, J Little to ho stressors
8. Recent Weather- watershed metric
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a
drought.
(" A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
(" B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
{: C No drought conditions
9 Large or Dangerous Stream - assessment reach metric
Yes f-- No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types - assessment reach metric
10a. (-Yes { -,No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
F A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses N r F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) H m r G Submerged aquatic vegetation
F B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o `' r H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation t o r I Sand bottom
F C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) L E2 r J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
F D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots 02 r K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
F E Little or no habitat
***...**'**`*******************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****'***********************
11. Bedform and Substrate- assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11 a. f- Yes (-,No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. Bedfo rm evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
F_ A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
F B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
r C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11c. In riffles sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach - whether or not submerged.
Check at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain Streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) _
absent, Rare (R) = present but <- 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative
percentages should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
Bedrock/saprolite
Boulder (256 - 4096 mm)
Cobble (64 - 256 mm)
Gravel (2 - 64 mm)
Sand (.062-2 mm)
Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
Detritus
Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11 d. r-, Yes [ , No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12. Aquatic Life - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. (i Yes (,No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. [,No Water ,Other:
12b. (*-Yes { -,No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check
all that apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for size 3 and 4 streams.
F_ r Adult frogs
F r Aquatic reptiles
r r Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
F r Beetles (including water pennies)
F_ r Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [T])
F r Asian clam (Corbicula )
F-71 r Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
F r Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
F, r Dipterans (true flies)
F r Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
F r Megaloptera (alderfly, fishily, dobsonfly larvae)
F r Midges/mosquito larvae
F r Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
r r Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula )
F r Other fish
F r Salamanders/tadpoles
r r Snails
F r Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
F r Tipulid larvae

F F Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and
upland runoff.
RB
LB
RB
A
A
A
Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
B
; B
Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
C
; C
Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples include: ditches, fill,
D D From 10 to < 30 -feet wide
E
soil, compaction, livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage - streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
[;A A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water>-- 6 inches deep
[+; B B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
[;C C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the
normal wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
Y Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
N N
16. Baseflow Contributors - assessment reach metric (skip for size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
F A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
F B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
F C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods within assessment area (beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
F D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
F E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
F F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors -assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
F A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
F B Obstruction not passing flow during low flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
F C Urban stream (>> 24% impervious surface for watershed)
F D Evidence that the stream -side area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
F E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
F F None of the above
18. Shading -assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
[+;A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
[;B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
[;C Stream shading is gone or largely absent
19. Buffer Width - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top
of bank out to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB
RB
LB RB
A
A
A A >- 100 -feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
B;
B;
B B From 50 to < 100 -feet wide
C;
C;
C C From 30 to < 50 -feet wide
D
; D;
D D From 10 to < 30 -feet wide
E
E;
E E < 10 -feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB
RB
[+;A
;A;A
[;B
Mature forest
B
B
Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
C
C
Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
�D
D
Maintained shrubs
E
E
Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but
is within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22: r
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB
RB
LB RB LB RB
A
A
[;A A [;A A Row crops
[;B
B
[;B B [;B B Maintained turf
[�C
C
C C C C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
[;D
D
[;D D [;D D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem
Density- streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB
RB
[+;A
[+;A
Medium to high stem density
[;B
B
Low stem density
[;C
C
No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer- streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)

Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 -feet wide.
LB RB
�A A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
[;B [;B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
[;C [;C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes
to assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
A A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native
species, with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
+, B+, B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
;C [ ;C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity— assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ,Yes [,No Was a conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. [,No Water Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
r-, A <46 r-, B 46 to < 67 r-, C 67 to < 79 r-, D 79 to < 230 r; E >! 230

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Project Diamond - Kingsboro Site Date of Evaluation February 15, 2018
Stream Category lag Assessor Name/Organization G. Price, R. Crowther
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) YES
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N) NO
INC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Intermittent
USACE/
NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Floodplain Access
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Microtopography
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
LOW
(4) Channel Stability
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Sediment Transport
LOW
LOW
(4) Stream Geomorphology
LOW
LOW
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(1) Water Quality
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
LOW
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
HIGH
(3) Substrate
LOW
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW
LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
NA
NA
Overall
MEDIUM
MEDIUM

NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 5
USACE AID#: NCDWR #:
Project Name Project Diamond Date of Evaluation March 22, 2018
Applicant/Owner Name Edgecombe County/NCDOT Wetland Site Name Impact Site 9
Wetland Type Bottomland Hardwood Forest Assessor Name/Organization G Price, R Crowther
Level III Ecoregion Southeastern Plains Nearest Named Water Body Walnut Creek
River Basin Tar -Pamlico USGS 8 -Digit Catalogue Unit 03020101
County Edgecombe NCDWR Region Raleigh
E ;Yes [;No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees) 35.9206, -77.6511
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited
to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? �; Yes E+; No
Regulatory Considerations Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ;Yes ;No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
F Anadromous fish
F Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
F-1- NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
F Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
r Publicly owned property
F N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
F Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
F Designated NCNHP reference community
F Abuts a 303(d) -listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d) -listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any.) (check all that apply)
Blackwater
Brownwater
F Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ;Lunar .,Wind
Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? Yes ; No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? Yes No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? Yes No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect.
GS VS
;A E+;A Not severely altered
B B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
2. Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only,
while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
;A+;A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
B; B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
;C;C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
3. Water Storage/Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column for each group below. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT).
AA WT
3a. A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water> 1 foot deep
B B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
;C;C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
D; D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b.;A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet

B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
;C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

4. Soil Texture/Structure — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature. Make soil observations within the 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for
regional indicators.
4a.;A Sandy soil
B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
;C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b.;A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
;B Soil ribbon >_ 1 inch
4c. ;A No peat or muck presence
B A peat or muck presence
Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub -surface pollutants or discharges (Sub).
Examples of sub -surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
A A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
B B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
;C;C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
Land Use — opportunity metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources
draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the
assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M). Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion.
WS 5M 2M
F A F A F A >_ 10% impervious surfaces
F B r B F B Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
F C F C F C >_ 20% coverage of pasture
F' D Fl D F1 D >_ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
F E F E r E >_ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
F F F F F F >_ 20% coverage of clear-cut land
F G r G r G Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in
the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent dainage and/or overbank flow from affectio the
assessment area.
Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer — assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
;Yes F,No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is weltand? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make
buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.)
A >_ 50 feet
B From 30 to < 50 feet
C From 15 to < 30 feet
D From 5 to < 15 feet
E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
<_ 15 -feet wide K—, > 15 -feet wide K—, Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
Yes K—, No
7e. Is tributary or other open water sheltered or exposed?
Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
Exposed — adjacent open water with width >_ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes
and Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp
Forest only)
Check a box in each column. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and the wetland complex at the
assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
A A >_ 100 feet
B B From 80 to < 100 feet
C; C From 50 to < 80 feet
D D From 40 to < 50 feet
E E From 30 to < 40 feet
F F From 15 to < 30 feet
G; G From 5 to < 15 feet
H H < 5 feet

9. Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
E ;A Evidence of short -duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
C Evidence of long -duration inundation or very long -duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10. Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands and all marshes)
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
E ;A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11. Wetland Size — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select "K" for the FW column.
WT WC FW (if applicable)
CA CA CA >_ 500 acres
C B r, B C B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C E C E C From 50 to < 100 acres
C D L] D E D From 25 to < 50 acres
C E L] E C E From 10 to < 25 acres
C F L] F C F From 5 to < 10 acres
C G L] G CG From 1 to < 5 acres
C H L] H C H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
E I E I E I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
CJ CJ CJ From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
C K C K E K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12. Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
CA Pocosin is the full extent (>: 90%) of its natural landscape size.
C B Pocosin is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
metric naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility
line corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wide.
Well Loosely
EA CA >_ 500 acres
E B C B From 100 to < 500 acres
E C C C From 50 to < 100 acres
E D C D From 10 to < 50 acres
C E C E < 10 acres
C F E F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
[]Yes C No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands.
14. Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non -forested areas z 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and clear -cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directiions? If the assessment area is clear-cut,
select option "C."
CA 0
Z B 1 to 4
CC 5to8
15. Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
CA Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
CC Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
CA Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (<10% cover of exotics).
C B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
CC Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (>50% cover of exotics).

17. Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
Z Yes L: No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
L]A
>_ 25%
coverage of vegetation
L] B
< 25%
coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider structure
in airspace
above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA
WT
CL
�A
EA
Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
o
�
E;B
E;B
Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
v
L]C
L:C
Canopy sparse or absent
o
L]A
L:A
Dense mid-story/sapling layer
B
EB
Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
L]C
L:C
Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
EA
EA
Dense shrub layer
B
E; B
Moderate density shrub layer
(0
EC
EC
Shrub layer sparse or absent
9
E;A
EA
Dense herb layer
L] B
L: B
Moderate density herb layer
L]C
L:C
Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
L]A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 -inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
EB Not
19. Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
L]A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 -inch DBH.
L]C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris.
L]A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
EB Not
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion — wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
L]A EB EC ED
\Q';F'
22. Hydrologic Connectivity— assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization,
diversion, man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
E;A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
L] B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
L]C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
L] D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Impact Site 9 Date
Wetland Type Bottomland Hardwood Forest Assessor Name/Organization
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N)
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
Sub -function Rating Summary
March 22, 2018
G Price, R Crowther
RX,
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Function Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
HIGH
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Habitat
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Soluble Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Physical Change Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Pollution Change Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N) NA
Habitat Physical Structure Condition MEDIUM
Landscape Patch Structure Condition LOW
Vegetation Composition Condition MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function
Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Habitat
Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating HIGH

ies user manual version z.i
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5 -minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same
property, identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User
Manual for detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if any supplementary
measurements were performed. See the NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT / SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Project Diamond - Kingsboro Site 2. Date of evaluation: February 15, 2018
3. Applicant/owner name: Edgecombe County 4. Assessor name/organization: G. Price, R. Crowther
5. County: Edgecombe County 6. Nearest named water body
7. River Basin: Tar -Pamlico on USGS 7.5 -minute quad: Walnut Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.9245, -77.6498
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): Buffer Site 10 DNS 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 330
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 4 r Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 7 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? [,Yes [+; No
14. Feature type: F; Perennial flow [; Intermittent flow [;Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM RATING INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: [;Mountains (M) [;Piedmont (P) [+; Inner Coastal Plain (1) [;Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic \ /
valley shape (skip for r -,a ��� [+;b
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip Size 1 (< 0.1 mi`) F Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi`) [; Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi`) [; Size 4 (>_ 5 mi)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? FYes [-,No If Yes, check all that appy to the assessment area.
F Section 10 water F Classified Trout Waters F Water Supply Watershed ( [;I [;II [;III [;IV [;V)
F Essential Fish Habitat r Primary Nursery Area r High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
F Publicly owned property r NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect r Nutrient Sensitive Waters
F_ Anadromous fish r 303(d) List r CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
F Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
F Designated Critical Habitat (list species):
1. Channel Water- assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
A Water throughout assessment reach.
B No flow, water in pools only.
C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is adversely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impounded on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates).
[+;B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
[;A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
[+;B Not A.
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
[+;A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming,
over widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of
these disturbances).
[;B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability- assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
A < 10% of channel unstable
B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
C > 25% of channel unstable
6. Streamside Area Interaction - streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
[;A [;A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
[;B [;B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area,
leaky or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
[+;C C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision,
disruption of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples:
impoundments, intensive mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a
man-made feature on an interstream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors - assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)

r C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
F_ D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
r E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in the "Notes/Sketch"
section.
F F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
F G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
F H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
F I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
F, J Little to ho stressors
Recent Weather -watershed metric
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a
drought.
{" A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
{" B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
{: C No drought conditions
9 Large or Dangerous Stream - assessment reach metric
[,Yes f-- No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types - assessment reach metric
10a. (-Yes { -,No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
F A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses m N r F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) H m r G Submerged aquatic vegetation
F, B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o `- �, r H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation t o r I Sand bottom
F C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) L E2 r J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
F D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots 02 r K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
F E Little or no habitat
****************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH
11. Bedform and Substrate- assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11 a. r Yes (-,No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
P A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
F B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
r C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffles sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach - whether or not submerged.
Check at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain Streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) _
absent, Rare (R) = present but <- 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative
percentages should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
Bedrock/saprolite
Boulder (256 - 4096 mm)
Cobble (64 - 256 mm)
Gravel (2-64 mm)
Sand (.062-2 mm)
Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
Detritus
Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11 d. [,Yes [+� No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12. Aquatic Life - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. {; Yes (-,No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. [;No Water [;Other:
12b. (: Yes {-,No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check
all that apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for size 3 and 4 streams.
F_ r Adult frogs
F r Aquatic reptiles
r r Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
F r Beetles (including water pennies)
[ r Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [T])
F i- Asian clam (Corbicula )
F r Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
F r Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
F r Dipterans (true flies)
F r Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
F r Megaloptera (alderfly, fishily, dobsonfly larvae)
F r Midges/mosquito larvae
F r Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
r r Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula )
F r Other fish
F r Salamanders/tadpoles
r r Snails
F r Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
F F_ Tipulid larvae

F F Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and
upland runoff.
RB
LB
RB
A
A
A
Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
B
; B
Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
C
; C
Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples include: ditches, fill,
D D From 10 to < 30 -feet wide
E
soil, compaction, livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage - streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
[;A A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water>-- 6 inches deep
B B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
C C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the
normal wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
Y ;Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
N N
16. Baseflow Contributors - assessment reach metric (skip for size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
Fv A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
F B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
F C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods within assessment area (beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
F D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
F E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
F F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors -assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
F A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
F B Obstruction not passing flow during low flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
F C Urban stream (>> 24% impervious surface for watershed)
F D Evidence that the stream -side area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
F E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
F F None of the above
18. Shading -assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
[+;A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
[;B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
[;C Stream shading is gone or largely absent
19. Buffer Width - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top
of bank out to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB
RB
LB RB
A
A
A A >- 100 -feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
B;
B;
B B From 50 to < 100 -feet wide
C;
C;
C C From 30 to < 50 -feet wide
D
; D;
D D From 10 to < 30 -feet wide
E
E;
E E < 10 -feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB
RB
[+;A
;A;A
[;B
Mature forest
B
B
Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
C
C
Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
�D
D
Maintained shrubs
E
E
Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but
is within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22: r
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB
RB
LB RB LB RB
A
A
[;A A [;A A Row crops
[;B
B
[;B B [;B B Maintained turf
[�C
C
C C C C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
[;D
D
[;D D [;D D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem
Density- streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB
RB
[+;A
[+;A
Medium to high stem density
[;B
B
Low stem density
[;C
C
No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer- streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)

Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 -feet wide.
LB RB
�A A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
[;B [;B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
[;C [;C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes
to assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
A A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native
species, with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
+, B+, B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
;C [ ;C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity— assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ,Yes [,No Was a conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. [,No Water Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
r-, A <46 r-, B 46 to < 67 r-, C 67 to < 79 r-, D 79 to < 230 r; E >! 230

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Project Diamond - Kingsboro Site
Stream Category Ib2
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
INC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Date of Evaluation February 15, 2018
Assessor Name/Organization G. Price, R. Crowther
NO
YES
NO
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
LOW
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
LOW
(4) Floodplain Access
LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
HIGH
(4) Microtopography
NA
(3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
(4) Channel Stability
LOW
(4) Sediment Transport
HIGH
(4) Stream Geomorphology
MEDIUM
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(1) Water Quality
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(3) Baseflow
HIGH
(3) Substrate
HIGH
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat
MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
NA
Overall
LOW

ies user manual version z.i
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5 -minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same
property, identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User
Manual for detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if any supplementary
measurements were performed. See the NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT / SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Project Diamond - Kingsboro Site 2. Date of evaluation: February 15, 2018
3. Applicant/owner name: Edgecombe County 4. Assessor name/organization: G. Price, R. Crowther
5. County: Edgecombe County 6. Nearest named water body
7. River Basin: Tar -Pamlico on USGS 7.5 -minute quad: Walnut Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.9239, -77.6492
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): Buffer Site 10 UPS 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 140
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 1 r Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 2 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? [,Yes [+; No
14. Feature type: F; Perennial flow [; Intermittent flow [;Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM RATING INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: [;Mountains (M) [;Piedmont (P) [+; Inner Coastal Plain (1) [;Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic \ /
valley shape (skip for F,a ��� [;b
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip [.Size 1 (< 0.1 mi`) [,Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi`) [;Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi`) [;Size 4 (>_ 5 mi)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? FYes [-,No If Yes, check all that appy to the assessment area.
F Section 10 water F Classified Trout Waters F Water Supply Watershed ( [;I [;II [;III [;IV [;V)
F Essential Fish Habitat r Primary Nursery Area r High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
F Publicly owned property r NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect r Nutrient Sensitive Waters
F_ Anadromous fish r 303(d) List r CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
F Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
F Designated Critical Habitat (list species):
1. Channel Water- assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
A Water throughout assessment reach.
B No flow, water in pools only.
C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is adversely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impounded on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates).
[+;B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
[+;A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
[;B Not A.
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
[+;A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming,
over widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of
these disturbances).
[;B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability- assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
A < 10% of channel unstable
B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
C > 25% of channel unstable
6. Streamside Area Interaction - streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
[;A [;A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
[+;B B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area,
leaky or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
[;C [;C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision,
disruption of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples:
impoundments, intensive mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a
man-made feature on an interstream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors - assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)

r C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
F_ D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
r E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in the "Notes/Sketch"
section.
F F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
F G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
F H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
F I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
F, J Little to ho stressors
Recent Weather -watershed metric
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a
drought.
(" A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
(" B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
{: C No drought conditions
9 Large or Dangerous Stream - assessment reach metric
Yes f-- No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types - assessment reach metric
10a. (-Yes { -,No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
F A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses m N r F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) H m r G Submerged aquatic vegetation
F B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o `- �, r H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation t o r I Sand bottom
F C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) L E2 r J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
P D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots 02 r K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
F E Little or no habitat
****************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH
11. Bedform and Substrate- assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11 a. r Yes (-,No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
P A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
F, B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
r C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffles sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach - whether or not submerged.
Check at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain Streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) _
absent, Rare (R) = present but <- 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative
percentages should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
Bedrock/saprolite
Boulder (256 - 4096 mm)
Cobble (64 - 256 mm)
Gravel (2-64 mm)
Sand (.062-2 mm)
Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
Detritus
Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11 d. Yes [+; No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12. Aquatic Life - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. (*-Yes (-,No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. [,No Water ,Other:
12b. (i Yes {-,No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check
all that apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for size 3 and 4 streams.
F_ r Adult frogs
F r Aquatic reptiles
r r Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
F r Beetles (including water pennies)
F_ r Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [T])
F i- Asian clam (Corbicula )
F-71 r Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
F r Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
F r Dipterans (true flies)
F r Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
F r Megaloptera (alderfly, fishily, dobsonfly larvae)
F r Midges/mosquito larvae
F r Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
r r Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula )
F r Other fish
F r Salamanders/tadpoles
r r Snails
F r Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
F F_ Tipulid larvae

F F Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and
upland runoff.
RB
LB
RB
A
A
;A
Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
B
; B
Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
C
C
Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples include: ditches, fill,
D D From 10 to < 30 -feet wide
E
soil, compaction, livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage - streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
[;A A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water>-- 6 inches deep
B B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
C C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the
normal wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
Y ;Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
N N
16. Baseflow Contributors - assessment reach metric (skip for size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
F A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
F B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
F C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods within assessment area (beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
F D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
F E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
F F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors -assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
F A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
F B Obstruction not passing flow during low flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
F C Urban stream (>> 24% impervious surface for watershed)
F D Evidence that the stream -side area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
F E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
F F None of the above
18. Shading -assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
[;A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
[;B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
[+;C Stream shading is gone or largely absent
19. Buffer Width - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top
of bank out to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB
RB
LB RB
A
A
A A >- 100 -feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
B;
B;
B B From 50 to < 100 -feet wide
C;
C;
C C From 30 to < 50 -feet wide
D
; D;
D D From 10 to < 30 -feet wide
E
E;
E E ; E < 10 -feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB
RB
A
A
A
Mature forest
B
B
Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
;C;C
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer- streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
�D
D
Maintained shrubs
E
E
Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but
is within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22: (-
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB
RB
LB RB LB RB
A
A A A Row crops
B;
B
B B B; B Maintained turf
C
C
C C C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
[;D
D
D [;D D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem
Density - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB
RB
[;A
A
Medium to high stem density
[;B
B
Low stem density
C
C
No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer- streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)

Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 -feet wide.
LB RB
�A A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
[;B [;B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
[;C [;C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes
to assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
A A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native
species, with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
B; B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
+;C [;C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity— assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ,Yes [,No Was a conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. [,No Water Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
r-, A <46 r-, B 46 to < 67 r-, C 67 to < 79 r-, D 79 to < 230 r; E >! 230

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Project Diamond - Kingsboro Site
Stream Category lai
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
INC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Date of Evaluation February 15, 2018
Assessor Name/Organization G. Price, R. Crowther
NO
YES
NO
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
LOW
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
LOW
(4) Floodplain Access
MEDIUM
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
LOW
(4) Microtopography
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(4) Channel Stability
LOW
(4) Sediment Transport
HIGH
(4) Stream Geomorphology
LOW
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(1) Water Quality
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
LOW
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
MEDIUM
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(3) Baseflow
HIGH
(3) Substrate
HIGH
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
(3) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
LOW
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
NA
Overall
LOW

4± +
N
Miles
0 0.085 0.17
CAROLINA
Q Parcel Area
ECOSYSTEMS
modified from: http://data.nconemap.gov/downloads/
vector/parcels/Edgecombe_parcels_2017_11_20.zip
May 2018
® CAMA Wetlands
modified from: https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Coastal%20
NC 2017 Statewide
Management/documents/PDF/wetlands/Documents
Aerial Photography
%20and%20Data/edge_wets.zip
r
NC Ce to for Geographic Information & Anaylsis
_ Floodplain USGS Streams
modified from: https://sdd.nc.gov/sdd/ modified from: https://prd-tnm.s3.amazonaws.com/
DataDownload.aspx# StagedProducts/Hydrography/NHD/State/High
i Rail Line 400 foot Buffer
i_ . _ — Resolution/Shape/NHD_H North_Carolina Shape.zip
modified from: http://dotw-xfer01.dot.state.nc.us/ Parcel 47O92323O5
gisdot/DOTRailroad/NC - Rail -Track SHP.zip
- (Study Area)

r ..
a �:
by �
E3
N
Miles
0 0.085 0.17
CAROLINA
Q Parcel Area
_ Floodplain
USGS Streams
ECOSYSTEMS
modified from: ht //data.nconema . ov/downloads/
�� p g
modified from: https://sdd.nc.gov/sdd/
modified from: https://prd-tnms3.amazonaws.com/
vector/parcels/Ed ecombeparcels_2017 –11 –20.zip
DataDownload.aspx#
StagedProducts/Hydrography/NHD/State/High
May 2018
® CAMA Wetlands
i_._— i Rail Line 400 foot Buffer
Resolution/Shape/NHD_H North_Carolina Shape.zip
modified from: https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Coastal%20
modified from: http://dotw-xfer01.dot.state.nc.us/
NC 2017 Statewide
Management/documents/PDF/wetlands/Documents
gisdot/DOTRailroad/NC_Rail_Track_SHP.zip
Parcel 4746282795
Aerial Photography
%20and%20Data/edge_wets.zip

- I - , ■ a: 5
h -
Miles
0 0.055 0.11
NC Center
for Geogr phic Information & Anaylsis:;
CAROLINA
Q Parcel Area
Floodplain
USGS Streams
ECOSYSTEMS
modified from: ht //data.nconema tp:p.gov/downloads/
�� p g
modified from: https://sdd.nc.gov/sdd/
modified from: https://prd-tnms3.amazonaws.com/
vector/parcels/Ed ecombeparcels_2017 –11 –20.zip
DataDownload.aspx#
StagedProducts/Hydrography/NHD/State/High
May 2018
® CAMA Wetlands
i_._— i Rail Line 400 foot Buffer
Resolution/Shape/NHD_H North_Carolina Shape.zip
modified from: https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Coastal%20
modified from: http://dotw-xfer01.dot.state.nc.us/
NC 2017 Statewide
Management/documents/PDF/wetlands/Documents
gisdot/DOTRailroad/NC_Rail_Track_SHP.zip
Parcel 4708782970
Aerial Photography
%20and%20Data/edge_wets.zip

Aquatic Species Survey Report
Kingsboro CSX Select Site Access Road
Edgecombe County, North Carolina
WBS Element # 47802. 1.1
Walnut Creek (Reach 1) during the survey efforts
Prepared For:
04 uoerH �
A
l
o AO
6 F `
NC Department of Transportation
Raleigh, North Carolina
Contact Person:
Chad Coggins
Environmental Officer Division 4
North Carolina Department of Transportation
tccogginskncdot.gov
509 Ward Boulevard
PO Box 3165
Wilson, NC 27895-3165
April 18, 2018

Prepared by:
324 Blackwell Street, Suite 1200
Durham, NC 27701
Contact Person:
Tom Dickinson
[e-mail]
919-732-1300

Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction.......................................................................................................................... 1
2.0 Waters Impacted..................................................................................................................
2
2.1 303(d) Classification........................................................................................................
2
2.2 NPDES discharges...........................................................................................................
2
3.0 Target Federally Protected Species Descriptions................................................................
2
3.1 Alasmidonta heterodon (Dwarf Wedgemussel)...............................................................
2
3.1.1. Species Characteristics..............................................................................................
2
3.1.2. Distribution and Habitat Requirements....................................................................
3
3.1.3. Threats to Species.....................................................................................................
4
3.2 Parvaspina steinstansana (Tar River Spinymussel)........................................................
5
3.2.1. Species Characteristics..............................................................................................
5
3.2.2. Distribution and Habitat Requirements....................................................................
5
3.2.3. Threats to Species.....................................................................................................
6
3.3 Elliptio lanceolata (Yellow Lance)..................................................................................
6
3.3.1. Species Characteristics..............................................................................................
6
3.3.2. Distribution and Habitat Requirements....................................................................
7
3.3.3. Threats to Species.....................................................................................................
7
4.0 Other Target Species Descriptions.......................................................................................
7
4.1 Lasmigona subviridis (Green Floater).............................................................................
7
4.1.1. Species Characteristics..............................................................................................
7
4.1.2. Distribution and Habitat Requirements....................................................................
7
4.1.3. Threats to Species.....................................................................................................
8
4.1.4. Species Listing..........................................................................................................
8
4.2 Fusconaia masoni (Atlantic Pigtoe).................................................................................
8
4.2.1. Species Characteristics..............................................................................................
8
4.2.2. Distribution and Habitat Requirements....................................................................
9
4.2.3. Threats to Species.....................................................................................................
9
4.2.4. Species Listing..........................................................................................................
9
4.3 Necturus lewisi (Neuse River Waterdog).........................................................................
9
4.3.1. Species Characteristics..............................................................................................
9
4.3.2. Distribution and Habitat Requirements..................................................................
10
4.3.3. Threats to Species...................................................................................................
10
4.3.4. Species Listing........................................................................................................
11
4.4 Noturus furiosus (Carolina Madtom).............................................................................
11
4.4.1. Species Characteristics............................................................................................
11
4.4.2. Distribution and Habitat Requirements..................................................................
11
4.4.3. Threats to Species...................................................................................................
12
4.4.4. Species Listing........................................................................................................
12
5.0 Survey Efforts....................................................................................................................
12
5.1 Methodology..................................................................................................................
12
5.1.1. Mussel Surveys.......................................................................................................
12
5.1.2. Neuse River Waterdog Surveys..............................................................................
13
6.0 Results................................................................................................................................13
6.1 Walnut Creek (Survey Reach 1)....................................................................................
13
6.1.1. Stream Conditions at Time of Survey.....................................................................
13

6.1.2. Mussel Surveys Results..........................................................................................
14
6.2 Walnut Creek (Survey Reach 2).....................................................................................
14
6.2.1. Stream Conditions at Time of Survey.....................................................................
14
6.2.2. Mussel Surveys Results..........................................................................................
14
6.3 Walnut Creek (Survey Reach 3).....................................................................................
14
6.3.1. Stream Conditions at Time of Survey.....................................................................
14
6.3.2. Mussel Surveys Results..........................................................................................
15
6.4 UT to Walnut Creek (Survey Reach 4)..........................................................................
15
6.4.1. Stream Conditions at Time of Survey.....................................................................
15
6.4.2. Mussel Surveys Results..........................................................................................
15
6.5 UT to Penders Mill Run (Survey Reach 5)....................................................................
15
6.5.1. Stream Conditions at Time of Survey.....................................................................
15
6.5.2. Mussel Surveys Results..........................................................................................
16
6.6 Neuse River Waterdog Survey Results.........................................................................
16
7.0 Discussion/Conclusions.....................................................................................................
17
8.0 Literature Cited..................................................................................................................
18
Appendix A. Figures:
Figure 1: Project Vicinity & Survey Reach
Figures 2-1 through 2-7: NCNHP Element Occurrences
Figure 3: 303(d) Listed Streams and NPDES Discharges

1.0 INTRODUCTION
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) and Edgecombe County are jointly
proposing to construct an access road and site pad as part of the Kingsboro CSX Select Site for
the Triangle Tyre Company (Appendix A, Figure 1). The Federally Endangered Dwarf
Wedgemussel (Alasmidonta heterodon, DWM) is listed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) for Edgecombe County, though there are no records in the county. The federally
Endangered Tar River Spinymussel (Parvaspina steinstansana, TSM [formerly Elliptio
steinstansana (Perkins et al. 2017)]) and the Federally Threatened Yellow Lance (Elliptio
lanceolata) are listed by USFWS for Edgecombe County and have current records. The Green
Floater (Lasmigona subviridis), Atlantic Pigtoe (Fusconaia masoni), Neuse River Waterdog
(Necturus lewisi), and Carolina Madtom (Noturus furiosus) are also being considered for listing
by the USFWS and are known to occur in Edgecombe County.
Tables 1 lists the nearest element occurrence (EO) in approximate river miles (RM) for targeted
species for the project area. Data is according to the NC Natural Heritage Program database
(NCNHP 2018) most recently updated in January 2018.
Table 1—Element Occurrences
*: C — NCNHP Current; H NCNHP Historic
As part of the federal permitting process that requires an evaluation of potential project -related
impacts to federally protected species, Three Oaks Engineering (Three Oaks) was contracted by
NCDOT to conduct surveys targeting the DWM, TSM, Yellow Lance, Green Floater, Atlantic
Pigtoe, Neuse River Waterdog, and Carolina Madtom.
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report April 2018
Job# 18-006 Page 1
Distance from
EO
Study Area
First
Last
EO
Species Name
EO ID
Waterbod
Limits RM
Observed
Observed
Status*
Figure
Dwarf
Stony
Wed em ssel
20981
Creek
36.8
May 1991
July 1992
C
2-1
Tar River
October
21438
Tar River
12.2
May 1977
C
2-2
Sin ussel
2001
22004
Tar River
10.4
July 1987
May 1988
H
Yellow Lance
November
November
2-3
34945
Swift Creek
24.2
C
2004
2004
September
September
25398
Tar River
13.0
H
1982
1982
Green Floater
August
October
2-4
31149
Tar River
30.0
C
2009
2013
September
Atlantic Pigtoe
19338
Tar River
9.5
July 2004
C
2-5
1982
Neuse River
Tar River
0.4
January
January
C
2-6
Waterdog3793
1980
2015
16882
Tar River
0.4
May 1985
May 1985
H
Carolina Madtom
September
2-7
14421
Swift Creek
9.1
August 2007
C
1959
*: C — NCNHP Current; H NCNHP Historic
As part of the federal permitting process that requires an evaluation of potential project -related
impacts to federally protected species, Three Oaks Engineering (Three Oaks) was contracted by
NCDOT to conduct surveys targeting the DWM, TSM, Yellow Lance, Green Floater, Atlantic
Pigtoe, Neuse River Waterdog, and Carolina Madtom.
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report April 2018
Job# 18-006 Page 1

2.0 WATERS IMPACTED
The subject property drains to two watersheds, Walnut Creek and an unnamed tributary (UT) to
Penders Mill Run. Walnut Creek is in the Upper Tar subbasin of the Tar River basin (HUC#
03020101). Walnut Creek flows approximately 0.5 river mile (RM) from the study area to its
confluence with the Tar River. The UT to Penders Mill Run is also in the Upper Tar River
subbasin of the Tar River basin (U.S. Geological Survey [USGS] Hydrologic Unit 03020101).
It joins Penders Mill Run approximately 1.0 RM from the study area boundary which flows 3.2
RM to its confluence with the Tar River.
2.1 303(d) Classification
Walnut Creek, UT to Walnut Creek and UT to Penders Mill Run are not on the North Carolina
Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ, formerly NC Department of Environment and
Natural Resources, NCDENR) - Division of Water Resources 2014 Final 303(d) list of impaired
streams. The 2016 Draft 303(d) list of impaired streams does not propose changes to the 2014
list in the vicinity of this project. The closest 303(d) listed stream is Stony Creek, which flows
into the Tar River approximately 17.4 RM upstream of the project area, Stony Creek is listed as
impaired due to exceeding criteria for both Benthos (Fair) and Dissolved Oxygen (Figure 3).
2.2 NPDES discharges
The closest NPDES discharge is on the Tar River within 9.5 miles upstream of the confluence of
Walnut Creek with the Tar River: Tar River Regional Waste Water Treatment Plant (NPDES
Permit # NC0030317) (Figure 3, USEPA 2018).
3.0 TARGET FEDERALLY PROTECTED SPECIES DESCRIPTIONS
3.1 Alasmidonta heterodon (Dwarf Wedgemussel)
3.1.1. Species Characteristics
The DWM was originally described as Unio heterodon (Lea 1829). Simpson (1914)
subsequently placed it in the genus Alasmidonta. Ortmann (1919) placed it in a monotypic
subgenus Prolasmidonta, based on the unique soft-tissue anatomy and conchology. Fuller
(1977) believed the characteristics of Prolasmidonta warranted elevation to full generic rank and
renamed the species Prolasmidonta heterodon. Clarke (1981) retained the genus name
Alasmidonta and considered Prolasmidonta to be a subjective synonym of the subgenus
Pressodonta (Simpson 1900).
The specific epithet heterodon refers to the chief distinguishing characteristic of this species,
which is the only North American freshwater mussel that consistently has two lateral teeth on the
right valve and only one on the left (Fuller 1977). All other laterally dentate freshwater mussels
in North America normally have two lateral teeth on the left valve and one on the right. The
DWM is generally small, with a shell length ranging between 25 millimeters (mm) (1.0 inch) and
38 mm (1.5 inches). The largest specimen reported by Clarke (1981) was 56.5 mm (2.2 inches)
long, taken from the Ashuelot River in New Hampshire. The periostracum is generally olive
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report April 2018
Job# 18-006 Page 2

green to dark brown; nacre bluish to silvery white, turning to cream or salmon colored towards
the umbonal cavities. Sexual dimorphism occurs in DWM, with the females having a swollen
region on the posterior slope, and the males are generally flattened. Clarke (1981) provides a
detailed description of the species.
Nearly all freshwater mussel species have similar reproductive strategies; a larval stage
(glochidium) becomes a temporary obligatory parasite on a fish. Many mussel species have
specific fish hosts, which must be present to complete their life cycle. Based upon laboratory
infestation experiments, Michaelson and Neves (1995) determined that potential fish hosts for
the DWM in North Carolina include the Tessellated Darter (Etheostoma olmstedi) and the
Johnny Darter (E. nigrum). McMahon and Bogan (2001) and Pennak (1989) should be consulted
for a general overview of freshwater mussel reproductive biology.
3.1.2. Distribution and Habitat Requirements
The historic range of the DWM is confined to Atlantic slope drainages from the Peticodiac River
in New Brunswick, Canada, south to the Neuse River, North Carolina. Occurrence records exist
from at least 70 locations, encompassing 15 major drainages, in 11 states and one Canadian
Province (USFWS 1993). When the recovery plan for this species was written, the DWM was
believed to have been extirpated from all but 36 localities, 14 of them in North Carolina
(USFWS 1993). The most recent assessment (2013 5 -Year Review) indicates that the DWM is
currently found in 16 major drainages, comprising approximately 75 "sites" (one site may have
multiple occurrences). At least 45 of these sites are based on less than five individuals or solely
on relict shells. It appears that the populations in North Carolina, Virginia, and Maryland are
declining as evidenced by low densities, lack of reproduction, or inability to relocate any
individuals in follow-up surveys. Populations in New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and
Connecticut appear to be stable, while the status of populations in the Delaware River watershed
affected by the multiple flood events between 2004 and 2006 are still being studied (USFWS
2013).
Strayer et al. (1996) conducted range -wide assessments of remaining DWM populations and
assigned a population status to each of the populations. The status rating is based on range size,
number of individuals and evidence of reproduction. Seven of the 20 populations assessed were
considered "poor," and two others are considered "poor to fair" and "fair to poor," respectively.
In North Carolina, populations are found in portions of the Neuse and Tar River basins; however,
they are believed to have been extirpated from the main -stem of the Neuse River.
The DWM inhabits creeks and rivers of varying sizes (down to approximately two meters wide),
with slow to moderate flow. A variety of preferred substrates have been described that range
from coarse sand, to firm muddy sand, to gravel (USFWS 1993). In North Carolina, DWM often
occurs within submerged root mats along stable streambanks. The wide range of substrate types
used by this species suggests that the stability of the substrate is likely as important as the
composition.
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report April 2018
Job# 18-006 Page 3

3.1.3. Threats to Species
The cumulative effects of several factors, including sedimentation, point and non -point
discharge, stream modifications (impoundments, channelization, etc.) have contributed to the
decline of this species throughout its range. Except for the Neversink River population in New
York, which has an estimated population of over 80,000 DWM individuals, all the other
populations are generally small in numbers and restricted to short reaches of isolated streams.
The low numbers of individuals and the restricted range of most of the surviving populations
make them extremely vulnerable to extirpation from a single catastrophic event or activity
(Strayer et al. 1996). Catastrophic events may consist of natural events such as flooding or
drought, as well as human influenced events such as toxic spills associated with highways,
railroads, or industrial -municipal complexes.
Siltation resulting from substandard land -use practices associated with activities such as
agriculture, forestry, and land development has been recognized as a major contributing factor to
degradation of mussel populations. Siltation has been documented to be extremely detrimental
to mussel populations by degrading substrate and water quality, increasing potential exposure to
other pollutants, and direct smothering of mussels (Ellis 1936, Marking and Bills 1979).
Sediment accumulations of less than one inch have been shown to cause high mortality in most
mussel species (Ellis 1936). In Massachusetts, a bridge construction project decimated a
population of the DWM because of accelerated sedimentation and erosion (Smith 1981).
Sewage treatment effluent has been documented to significantly affect the diversity and
abundance of mussel fauna (Goudreau et al. 1988). Goudreau et al. (1988) found that recovery
of mussel populations may not occur for up to two miles below points of chlorinated sewage
effluent.
The impact of impoundments on freshwater mussels has been well documented (USFWS 1992a,
Neves 1993). Construction of dams transforms lotic habitats into lentic habitats, which results in
changes in aquatic community composition. The changes associated with inundation adversely
affect both adult and juvenile mussels, as well as fish community structure, which could
eliminate possible fish hosts for upstream transport of glochidia. Muscle Shoals on the
Tennessee River in northern Alabama, once the richest site for naiads (mussels) in the world, is
now at the bottom of Wilson Reservoir and covered with 19 feet of muck (USFWS 1992b).
Large portions of all the river basins within the DWM's range have been impounded; this is
believed to be a major factor contributing to the decline of the species (Master 1986).
The introduction of exotic species such as the Asian Clam (Corbicula fluminea) and Zebra
Mussel (Dreissena polymorpha) has also been shown to pose significant threats to native
freshwater mussels. The Asian Clam is now established in most of the major river systems in the
United States (Fuller and Powell 1973), including those streams still supporting surviving
populations of the DWM. Concern has been raised over competitive interactions for space, food
and oxygen with this species and native mussels, possibly at the juvenile stages (Neves and
Widlak 1987, Alderman 1995). The Zebra Mussel, native to the drainage basins of the Black,
Caspian, and Aral Seas, is an exotic freshwater mussel that was introduced into the Great Lakes
in the 1980s and has rapidly expanded its range into the surrounding river basins, including those
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report April 2018
Job# 18-006 Page 4

of the South Atlantic slope (O'Neill and MacNeill 1991). This species competes for food
resources and space with native mussels and is expected to contribute to the extinction of at least
20 freshwater mussel species if it becomes established throughout most of the eastern United
States (USFWS 1992b). The Zebra Mussel is not currently known to be present in any river
supporting DWM population, nor the Tar -Pamlico River basin.
3.2 Parvaspina steinstansana (Tar River Spinymussel)
3.2.1. Species Characteristics
The TSM grows to a maximum length of 60 mm. Short spines are arranged in a radial row
anterior to the posterior ridge on one valve and symmetrical to the other valve. The shell is
generally smooth in texture with as many as 12 spines that project perpendicularly from the
surface and curve slightly ventrally. However, adult specimens tend to lose their spines as they
mature (USFWS 1992c). The smooth, orange -brown to dark brown periostracum may be rayed
in younger individuals. The shell is significantly thicker toward the anterior end and the nacre is
usually pink in this area. The posterior end of the shell is thinner with an iridescent bluish white
color. Two or more linear ridges, originating within the beak cavity and extending to the ventral
margin, can be found on the interior surface of the shell. The distance between these ridges
widens toward the ventral margin. Johnson and Clarke (1983) provide additional descriptive
material.
Little is known about the reproductive biology of the TSM (USFWS 1992c); however, nearly all
freshwater mussel species have similar reproductive strategies, which involve a larval stage
(glochidium) that becomes a temporary obligatory parasite on a fish. Many mussel species have
specific fish hosts, which must be present to complete their life cycle. The TSM is probably a
tachytictic (short-term) reproducer with gravid females present at some time from April through
August (Widlak 1987). The glochidia have not been described. Eads and Levine (2008), and
Eads et al. (2008) identified the following fish species as suitable hosts: Bluehead Chub
(Nocomis leptocephalus), Pinewoods Shiner (Lythrurus matutinus), Satinfin Shiner (Cyprinella
analostana), and White Shiner (Luxilus albeolus). McMahon and Bogan (2001) and Pennak
(1989) should be consulted for a general overview of freshwater mussel reproductive biology.
3.2.2. Distribution and Habitat Requirements
Previously, this mussel was believed to be endemic to the Tar -Pamlico River basin and probably
ranged throughout most of the basin before the area was settled during the 1700s (NC Scientific
Council on Mollusks 2011). Historically, the TSM was collected in the Tar River from near
Louisburg in Franklin County to Falkland in Pitt County (approximately 78 RM). By the mid-
1960s, its known range had been reduced to the main channel of the Tar River from Spring Hope
in Nash County to Falkland in Pitt County (Shelley 1972, Clarke 1983). By the early 1980s, its
range in the Tar River was restricted to only 12 miles of the river in Edgecombe County (Clarke
1983). It was last observed (two individuals) in the river in 2001 within an extensive sandbar
habitat in Edgecombe County (unpublished data, NCWRC Aquatics Database). It is currently
found in three streams, Shocco, Sandy/Swift, and Fishing/Little Fishing creeks in the Tar -
Pamlico River basin (unpublished data, NCWRC Aquatics Database). In 1998, the species was
found in Johnston County in the Little River, a tributary to the Neuse River. Only a few
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report April 2018
Job# 18-006 Page 5

individuals have been found in the Little River in subsequent years (unpublished data, NCWRC
Aquatics Database).
The preferred habitat of the TSM in the Tar -Pamlico River basin was described as relatively fast
flowing, well -oxygenated, circumneutral pH water in sites prone to significant swings in water
velocity, with a substrate comprised of relatively silt -free loose gravel and/or coarse sand
(Adams et al. 1990). Various species associates, which are good indicators for the presence of
the TSM, include (in decreasing order of association) Atlantic Pigtoe, Yellow Lance, Yellow
Lampmussel (Lampsilis cariosa), Notched Rainbow (Villosa constricta), Triangle Floater
(Alasmidonta undulata), and Creeper (Strophitus undulatus) (Adams et al. 1990). Johnson
(1970) stated that the Atlantic Pigtoe appeared to be closely associated with the James River
Spinymussel (Parvaspina collina) in the James River basin. This same close association is true
for the TSM and Atlantic Pigtoe. In habitats which have not been significantly degraded in the
Tar -Pamlico River basin, the presence of Atlantic Pigtoe is the best indicator of the potential
presence of TSM (NC Scientific Council on Mollusks 2011).
3.2.3. Threats to Species
Threats to the TSM are similar to those described for the DWM and have contributed to the
decline of this species throughout its range. All the remaining TSM populations are generally
small in numbers and restricted to short reaches of isolated streams. The low numbers of
individuals and the restricted range of most of the surviving populations make them extremely
vulnerable to extirpation from a single catastrophic event.
3.3 Elliptio lanceolate (Yellow Lance)
3.3.1. Species Characteristics
The Yellow Lance was described from the Tar River at Tarboro, North Carolina in 1828, by I.
Lea (Lea 1828). Johnson (1970) synonymized this species with 25 other named species of lance -
shaped elliptio mussels into Elliptio lanceolata species complex. Genotypic and phenotypic
analysis demonstrated that some of these formally described species are valid, including Elliptio
lanceolata (Bogan et al. 2009). This species differs from other lanceolate Elliptios by having a
"waxy" bright yellow periostracum that lacks rays. Some older specimens are brown towards
the posterior end of the shell. The periostracum can also have brown growth rests. Yellow
Lance have a distinct pallial line and adductor muscle scars. The posterior ridge is distinctly
rounded and curves dorsally towards the posterior end. The nacre ranges from an iridescent blue
on the posterior end, sometimes becoming white or salmon colored on the anterior end. The
lateral teeth are long, with two on the left and one on the right. Each valve also has two
psuedocardinal teeth; on the left valve one tooth is before the other with the posterior tooth
tending to be vestigial, and on the right valve the two teeth are parallel and the more anterior one
is vestigial (Adams et al. 1990).
The Yellow Lance is a tachytictic (short-term) breeder, brooding young in early spring and
releasing glochidia in early summer. White Shiner and Pinewoods Shiner are potential fish hosts
for Yellow Lance (Eads and Levine 2009).
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report April 2018
Job# 18-006 Page 6

3.3.2. Distribution and Habitat Requirements
This species taxonomy has changed several times and therefore so has its range. The Yellow
Lance is currently thought to be distributed in the Atlantic Slope river basins from the Neuse
River Basin in North Carolina north to the Rappahannock River Basin in Virginia, except for the
Roanoke River Basin, the Patuxent River Basin in Maryland and possibly the Potomac River
Basin in Virginia and Maryland (USFWS 2017). It is in considerable decline throughout its
range; however, extant populations still occur in all the historic river basins, except possibly the
Potomac (USFWS 2017). This species has been found in multiple physiographic provinces,
from the foothills of the Appalachian Mountains, through the Piedmont and into the Coastal
Plain, in small streams to large rivers, in substrates primarily consisting of clean sand, and
occasionally gravel, with a high dissolved oxygen content (USFWS 2017, Adams et al. 1990).
No remaining populations appear below point source pollution or other nutrient -rich areas
(Alderman 2003). Associate mussel species include Atlantic Pigtoe, Tar River Spinymussel,
Yellow Lampmussel, Notched Rainbow, Triangle Floater, Paper Pondshell (Utterbackia
imbecillis), Eastern Lampmussel (Lampsilis radiata), Creeper, and other Elliptio species (Adams
et al. 1990).
3.3.3. Threats to Species
Threats to the Yellow Lance and many other species are similar to those described above for the
DWM. Factors that influence long term viability of this species are discussed in detail in the
USFWS Yellow Lance Species Status Review (2017).
4.0 OTHER TARGET SPECIES DESCRIPTIONS
4.1 Lasmigona subviridis (Green Floater)
4.1.1. Species Characteristics
The Green Floater was described by Conrad (183 5) from the Schuykill River in Lancaster
County, Pennsylvania. This small mussel species has a thin, slightly inflated, subovate shell that
is narrower in front and higher behind. The dorsal margin forms a blunt angle with the posterior
margin. The shell is dull yellow or tan to brownish green, usually with concentrations of dark
green rays.
4.1.2. Distribution and Habitat Requirements
The Green Floater occurs along the Atlantic slope from the Savannah River in Georgia north to
the Hudson River in New York, as well as in the "interior" basins (New, Kanawah, and Watagua
Rivers) of the Tennessee River basin. It has experienced major declines throughout its entire
range. Based on preliminary genetics research, the southern populations of the Green Floater
(Tar -Pamlico, Neuse, and Yadkin/Pee Dee River Basins) appear to be genetically distinct from
populations from the Roanoke River to the north and west (Morgan Railey and Arthur Bogan,
North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences, 2007 Personal Communication). Further research
is needed to determine if these differences warrant classification of the southern populations as a
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report April 2018
Job# 18-006 Page 7

distinct species. It occurs in small size streams to large rivers, in quiet waters such as pools, or
eddies, with gravel and sand substrates.
4.1.3. Threats to Species
Threats to the Green Floater are similar to those described for the DWM and have contributed to
the decline of this species throughout its range. All the remaining Green Floater populations are
generally small in numbers and restricted to short reaches of isolated streams. The low numbers
of individuals and the restricted range of most of the surviving populations make them extremely
vulnerable to extirpation from a single catastrophic event.
4.1.4. Species Listing
This species was petitioned for federal listing under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (ESA) within the 2010 Petition to List 404 Aquatic, Riparian and Wetland Species
from the Southeastern United States by the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD 2010).
4.2 Fusconaia masoni (Atlantic Pigtoe)
4.2.1. Species Characteristics
The Atlantic Pigtoe was described by Conrad (1834) from the Savannah River in Augusta,
Georgia. Although larger specimens exist, the Atlantic Pigtoe seldom exceeds 50 mm (2 inches)
in length. This species is tall relative to its length, except in headwater stream reaches where
specimens may be elongated. The hinge ligament is relatively short and prominent. The
periostracum is normally brownish, has a parchment texture, and young individuals may have
greenish rays across the entire shell surface. The posterior ridge is biangulate. The interdentum
in the left valve is broad and flat. The anterior half of the valve is thickened compared with the
posterior half, and, when fresh, nacre in the anterior half of the shell tends to be salmon colored,
while nacre in the posterior half tends to be more iridescent. The shell has full dentation. In
addition to simple papillae, branched and arborescent papillae are often seen on the incurrent
aperture. In females, salmon colored demibranchs are often seen during the spawning season.
When fully gravid, females use all four demibranchs to brood glochidia (VDGIF 2014).
The Atlantic Pigtoe is a tachytictic (short-term) breeder, brooding young in early spring and
releasing glochidia in early summer. The Bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus) and Shield Darter
(Percina peltata) have been identified as potential fish hosts for this species (O'Dee and Waters
2000). Additional research has found Rosefin Shiner (Lythrurus ardens), Creek Chub (Semotilus
atromaculatus), and Longnose Dace (Rhynichthys cataractae) are also suitable hosts (Wolf
2012). Eads and Levine (2011) found White Shiner, Satinfin Shiner, Bluehead Chub, Rosyside
Dace (Clinostomus funduloides), Pinewoods Shiner, Creek Chub, Swallowtail Shiner (Notropis
procne), and Mountain Redbelly Dace (Chrosomus oreas) to also be suitable hosts for Atlantic
Pigtoe.
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report April 2018
Job# 18-006 Page 8

4.2.2. Distribution and Habitat Requirements
Johnson (1970) reported the range of the Atlantic Pigtoe extended from the Ogeechee River
Basin in Georgia north to the James River Basin in Virginia; however, recent curation of the H.
D. Athearn collection uncovered valid specimens from the Altamaha River in Georgia (Sarah
McRae, USFWS, personal communication). It is presumed extirpated from the Catawba River
Basin in North and South Carolina south to the Altamaha River Basin. The general pattern of its
current distribution indicates that the species is currently limited to headwater areas of drainages
and most populations are represented by few individuals. In North Carolina, aside from the
Waccamaw River, it was once found in every Atlantic Slope river basin. Except for the Tar
River, it is no longer found in the mainstem of the rivers within its historic range (Savidge et al.
2011). It is listed as Endangered in Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina, and as
Threatened in Virginia. It has a NatureServe rank of G2 (imperiled).
The Atlantic Pigtoe has been found in multiple physiographic provinces, from the foothills of the
Appalachian Mountains, through the Piedmont and into the Coastal Plain, in streams less than
one meter wide to large rivers. The preferred habitat is a substrate composed of gravel and
coarse sand, usually at the base of riffles; however, it can be found in a variety of other substrates
and lotic habitat conditions.
4.2.3. Threats to Species
Threats to the Atlantic Pigtoe are similar to those described for the DWM and have contributed
to the decline of this species throughout its range. Atlantic Pigtoe appears to be particularly
sensitive to pollutants and requires clean, oxygen -rich water for all stages of life. All the
remaining Atlantic Pigtoe populations are generally small in numbers and restricted to short
reaches of isolated streams. The low numbers of individuals and the restricted range of most of
the surviving populations make them extremely vulnerable to extirpation from a single
catastrophic event.
4.2.4. Species Listing
This species was petitioned for federal listing under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (ESA) within the 2010 Petition to List 404 Aquatic, Riparian and Wetland Species
from the Southeastern United States by the CBD (CBD 2010) and is listed as Endangered in
North Carolina by NCWRC.
4.3 Necturus lewisi (Neuse River Waterdog)
4.3.1. Species Characteristics
The Neuse River Waterdog is a fully aquatic salamander and was first described by C.S. Brimley
in 1924 as a subspecies of the Common Mudpuppy (N. maculosus); it was elevated to species
status in 1937 by Percy Viosca, Jr.
The Neuse River Waterdog ranges in size from 6-9 inches (15.24 — 22.86 cm) in length; record
length is 11 inches (27.94 cm). It has a somewhat stocky, cylindrical body with smooth skin, a
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report April 2018
Job# 18-006 Page 9

rather flattened, elongate head with a squared -off nose, and small limbs. The tail is vertically
flattened with fins on both the top and bottom. Distinct from most salamanders, the Neuse River
Waterdog, and other Necturus species, have four toes on each foot. The Neuse River Waterdog
is a rusty brown color on the dorsal side and dull brown or slate colored on the ventral side.
Both dorsal and ventral sides are strongly spotted but the ventral side tends to have fewer and
smaller markings; spots are dark bluish to black. They also have a dark line running through the
eye. Adults are neotenous and retain three bushy, dark red external gills usually seen in larval
amphibians. Both male and female are similar in appearance and can be distinguished only
through differences in the shape and structure of the cloaca (Beane and Newman 1996; Conant
and Collins 1998; EDGE of Existence 2016).
Individuals become sexually mature at approximately 5-6 years of age. Breeding normally
occurs in the spring. The male deposits a gelatinous spermatophore that is picked up by the
female and used to fertilize between 30-50 eggs. The fertilized eggs are attached to the
underside of flat rocks or other submerged objects and guarded by the female until they hatch in
June or July (Conant and Collins 1998; EDGE of Existence 2016).
4.3.2. Distribution and Habitat Requirements
The Neuse River Waterdog is found only in the Neuse and Tar River basins of North Carolina
(AmphibiaWeb 2006; Beane and Newman 1996; Frost 2016).
Neuse River Waterdogs inhabit rivers and larger streams, where they prefer leaf beds in quiet
waters. They need high levels of dissolved oxygen and good water quality. The Neuse River
Waterdog is generally found in backwaters off the main current, in areas with sandy or muddy
substrate. Adults construct retreats on the downstream side of rocks or in the stream bank where
they remain during the day. They are active during the night, leaving these retreats to feed.
Neuse River Waterdogs are carnivorous, feeding on invertebrates, small vertebrates, and carrion.
Neuse River Waterdogs are most active during winter months even when temperatures are below
freezing. During summer months, they will burrow into deep leaf beds and are rarely found. It
has been suggested that this inactivity in summer may be an adaptation to avoid fish predators,
which are more active at these times. In addition, Neuse River Waterdogs produce a defensive,
toxic skin secretion that is assumed to be distasteful to predators (AmphibiaWeb 2006; Beane
and Newman 1996; Conant and Collins 1998; EDGE of Existence 2016; NatureServe Explorer
2016).
4.3.3. Threats to Species
Any factors that reduce water quality are threats to the Neuse River Waterdog. These can
include changes that result in siltation and pollution reducing habitat quality (e.g. channelization,
agricultural runoff, and industrial and urban development). Impoundments are also a threat to
the dispersal of the species as it is unable to cross upland habitat; Neuse River Waterdogs do not
climb and are unlikely to use fish passages (NatureServe Explorer 2016).
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report April 2018
Job# 18-006 Page 10

4.3.4. Species Listing
This species was petitioned for federal listing under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (ESA) within the 2010 Petition to List 404 Aquatic, Riparian and Wetland Species
from the Southeastern United States by the CBD (CBD 20 10) and is listed as a species of Special
Concern (SC) in North Carolina by NCWRC.
4.4 Noturus furiosus (Carolina Madtom)
4.4.1. Species Characteristics
The Carolina Madtom (a small catfish) was described at Milburnie, near Raleigh, NC in the
Neuse River by Jordan and Meek (Jordan 1889). The Carolina Madtom reaches a maximum size
of 132 mm (5.2 inches). Compared to other madtoms within its range, it has a relatively short
stout body and a distinctive color pattern of three to four dark saddles along its back that connect
a long black stripe on the side running from the snout to the tail. The adipose fin is mostly dark,
making it appear that the fish has a fourth saddle. The Madtom is tan on the rest of its body and
yellow to tan between the saddles. The adipose fin and caudal fin are fused together, a
distinguishing characteristic from other members of the catfish family (Ictaluridae). There are no
speckles on the Madtom's belly, and the tail has two brown bands that follow the curve of the
tail. The Carolina Madtom, like other catfishes, has serrae on its pectoral fins and is thought to
have the most potent venom of any of the catfish species (NCWRC 2010).
4.4.2. Distribution and Habitat Requirements
The Carolina Madtom is endemic to the Piedmont/Inner Coastal Plain portion of the Tar/Pamlico
and Neuse River basins. It occurs in creeks and small rivers in habitats generally consisting of
very shallow riffles with little current over coarse sand and gravel substrate (Lee et al. 1980).
Burr et al (1989) found most records came from medium to large streams, i.e. mainstem Neuse
and Tar Rivers and their major tributaries. The population in the Trent River system (part of the
Neuse River basin) is isolated from the rest of the Neuse River basin by salinity levels, so it is
therefore considered a separate population, though it has not been detected in Trent River in the
last five years (Sarah McRae, USFWS, personal communication). In the lower portions of these
rivers, Carolina Madtom is usually found over debris piles in sandy areas. During nesting
season, which is from May to July, Madtoms prefer areas with plenty of cover to build their nests
with shells, rocks, sticks, bottles, and cans, being suitable cover types. Males guard the nests, in
which females may lay between 80 and 300 eggs.
Carolina Madtom is found in water that ranges from clear to tannin -rich, which is usually free-
flowing. It is generally rare throughout its range and is apparently in decline. The Tar River
population has historically been more robust than the Neuse River population (Burr et al. 1989),
which has shown declines in recent years (Midway 2008). The Little River of the Neuse River
Basin has the largest population of Madtom in the Neuse River Basin, with records from 2016
indicating the Madtom is present (Sarah McRae, USFWS, personal communication). A few
specimens have been collected from Swift Creek of the Neuse River Basin. Fishing Creek and
Swift Creek of the Tar River Basin are also productive systems in regard to Carolina Madtom
populations, with around 14 specimens collected in the mid-1980s from Swift Creek (water
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report April 2018
Job# 18-006 Page 11

levels in Fishing Creek prevented sampling during that study). In 2016, a total of 17 individuals
were recorded in Swift Creek, and a total of four individuals were recorded in Fishing Creek
(Sarah McRae, USFWS, personal communication). The Carolina Madtom has been observed in
at least 36 localities (Burr et al. 1989).
Carolina Madtom has a lifespan of about four years, with sexual maturity being reached around
two years in females and three years in males. Sampling for Carolina Madtom is most effective
at dawn and dusk when they are most active and feeding (Mayden and Burr 1981). Their diet
consists mostly of benthic macroinvertebrates, which they collect by scavenging for food on the
bottom of the stream.
4.4.3. Threats to Species
Identified threats to the species include water pollution and construction of impoundments (Burr
et al. 1989). Carolina Madtom is susceptible to threats due to its limited range and low
population densities (Angermeier 1995, Burr and Stoekel 1999). As a bottom -dwelling fish,
Carolina Madtom is susceptible to habitat loss when stream bottoms are impacted by
urbanization, impoundments, deforestation, etc.
4.4.4. Species Listing
Because of its limited distribution, Carolina Madtom is listed as Special Concern and is Proposed
Threatened in North Carolina. It was petitioned for federal listing under the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended (ESA) within the 2010 Petition to List 404 Aquatic, Riparian and
Wetland Species from the Southeastern United States by the CBD (CBD 2010).
5.0 SURVEY EFFORTS
Neuse River Waterdog surveys were led by Tim Savidge (Permit # 18-ES0034) and Tom
Dickinson (Permit # 18-ES00343), Lizzy Stokes -Cawley, and Nancy Scott from March 26 — 30,
2018. Freshwater Mussel and Carolina Madtom surveys were conducted on April 3, 2018, by
Tom Dickinson and Nancy Scott, and on April 4, 2018 by Tim Savidge and Lizzy Stokes -
Cawley.
5.1 Methodology
5.1.1. Mussel Surveys
Mussel surveys and/or habitat evaluations were performed within all the streams occurring in the
property boundary. In addition, the 0.5 mile reach of Walnut Creek from the property boundary
to the confluence with the Tar River was also surveyed (Figure 1). Areas of appropriate habitat
were searched, concentrating on the habitats preferred by the target species. The survey team
spread out across the creek into survey lanes. Visual surveys were conducted using glass -bottom
view scopes. Tactile methods were employed, particularly in streambanks under submerged
rootmats. All freshwater bivalves were recorded and returned to the substrate. Timed survey
efforts provided Catch Per Unit Effort (CPUE) data for each species. Relative abundance for
freshwater snails and freshwater clam species were estimated using the following criteria:
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report April 2018
Job# 18-006 Page 12

➢ (VA) Very abundant > 30 per square meter
➢ (A) Abundant 16-30 per square meter
➢ (C) Common 6-15 per square meter
➢ (U) Uncommon 3-5 per square meter
➢ (R) Rare 1-2 per square meter
➢ (P-) Ancillary adjective "Patchy" indicates an uneven distribution of the species within the
sampled site.
During the mussel survey effort, the presence of preferred habitats for the Carolina Madtom
were assessed and if conditions were appropriate, targeted visual surveys were conducted by
overturning rocks and debris in these areas, as well as searching artificial cover (i.e. bottles, cans,
etc.).
5.1.2. Neuse River Waterdog Surveys
Methods were developed by Three Oaks in consultation with the USFWS and NC Wildlife
Resources Commission (NCWRC) and were designed to replicate winter trapping efforts
conducted as part of the recent species status assessment undertaken by these agencies and
collaborators. Walnut Creek is the only waterbody on the property that was considered to
contain potential habitat for this species. A total of ten baited traps were set for four soak nights
at the project site; three traps were set upstream and seven were set downstream of the US 64
Alternative West. Trap sites were selected based on habitat conditions and accessibility.
Undercut banks, with some accumulation of leaf pack, as well as back eddy areas within runs
were the primary microhabitats selected; however, all of the microhabitats (pool, riffle, run, etc.)
occurring at a site were sampled with at least one trap. Traps were baited with a combination of
chicken livers and hot dogs and allowed to soak overnight. The traps were checked daily, all
species found within the traps were recorded, and the traps were rebaited. If the targeted Neuse
River Waterdog was found at a site, trapping efforts were discontinued.
6.0 RESULTS
Results by waterbody evaluated are as follows.
6.1 Walnut Creek (Survey Reach 1)
6.1.1. Stream Conditions at Time of Survey
This reach included Walnut Creek from its confluence with the Tar River upstream to the large
UT (Survey Reach 4) draining the middle portion of the site (Figure 1). Habitat consisted of a
shallow sequence of riffle, run, and pool. The channel ranged from 10 to 20 feet wide with
banks 5 to 7 feet high that exhibited moderate to severe signs of erosion and undercutting.
Substrate consisted primarily of fine shifting sand and banks consisted of clay and root mats.
Occasional mudstone outcropping, and gravel were noted. The surveyed reach was bordered by
a moderate to wide -forested buffer. Water was low and clear with low to moderate velocity.
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report April 2018
Job# 18-006 Page 13

6.1.2. Mussel Surveys Results
A total of 3.5 person hours of survey time were spent in the reach, during which no freshwater
mussels were located. The Asian Clam was the only mollusk found, which was uncommon.
6.2 Walnut Creek (Survey Reach 2)
6.2.1. Stream Conditions at Time of Survey
This reach included Walnut Creek upstream from the large UT draining the middle portion of the
site and ended near a beaver impounded section noted in Reach 3 (Figure 1). Habitat consisted
of a shallow sequence of riffle, run, and pool. The channel ranged from 6 to 12 feet wide with
banks 3 to 6 feet high that ranged from stable to exhibiting some erosion and undercutting.
Substrate consisted primarily of fine sand and banks consisted of clay and root mats. The
surveyed reach was bordered by a narrow mature forested buffer and surrounded by a recently
harvested cutover. Water was low and clear with low to moderate velocity throughout.
6.2.2. Mussel Surveys Results
A total of 5.17 person hours of survey time were spent in the reach, with the Eastern Elliptio
(Elliptio complanata), being found consistently in relatively low abundance (Table 2). Other
mollusk species located included the Asian Clam and the aquatic snail Pointed Campeloma
(Campeloma decisum).
Table 2. CPUE for Freshwater Mussels in Walnut Creek
Scientific Name
Common Name
# live
Abundance/
CPUE
Freshwater Mussels
CPUE
Elliptio com lanata astern Elliptio 106
20.5/hr
Freshwater Snails and Clams
Relative
Abundance
Campeloma decisum
Pointed Campeloma —
U
Corbicula uminea[Asian
Clam
U
6.3 Walnut Creek (Survey Reach 3)
6.3.1. Stream Conditions at Time of Survey
This surveyed/habitat evaluated portion of Walnut Creek extended from the end of Reach 2
upstream to the Kingsboro Road crossing. Approximately half of this reach is impounded by a
large beaver dam complex. This portion was not surveyed due to lack of habitat. The free-
flowing portions (above and below the impoundment) consisted of a series of runs and pools
with accumulations of woody debris scattered throughout. The channel ranged from 6 to 8 feet
wide with banks 3 to 5 feet high that exhibited moderate to severe signs of erosion and
undercutting. Substrate consisted of shifting sand with clay banks, a silt cover was present
throughout the reach. Pockets of gravel substrate were present in the upper extent of the survey
reach, near the Kinsboro Road crossing. The surveyed reach was bordered by a moderate to
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report April 2018
Job# 18-006 Page 14

wide, disturbed -forested buffer. The water was relatively clear with moderate velocity
throughout.
6.3.2. Mussel Surveys Results
A total of 2.0 -person hours of survey time were spent in the reach, with one freshwater mussel
the Eastern Elliptio being found (Table 3). No mussels were found above the beaver
impoundment. Other mollusk species located included the Asian Clam and one aquatic snail the
Pointed Campeloma.
Table 3. CPUE for Freshwater Mussels in Tar River
Scientific Name
Common Name
# live
Abundance/
CPUE
Freshwater Mussels
CPUE
lli do com lanata
astern Elli do
20
10.0/hr
Freshwater Snails and Clams
Relative
Abundance
Campeloma decisum
Pointed Campeloma
—
U
Corbicula uminea
Sian Clam
U
6.4 UT to Walnut Creek (Survey Reach 4)
6.4.1. Stream Conditions at Time of Survey
This surveyed portion of the large UT to Walnut Creek extended from the confluence with
Walnut Creek to a point where the stream was considered too small to support freshwater
mussels (Figure 1). Two tributaries to this stream were also evaluated and determined to be too
small to support mussels. The surveyed portion consisted primarily of runs with accumulations
of woody debris scattered throughout. The channel ranged from 4 to 7 feet wide with banks 5 to
7 feet high that exhibited severe signs of erosion and undercutting. Substrate consisted of
shifting sand, clay and silt, banks consisted of clay. The surveyed reach was bordered by a
moderate to wide -forested buffer. The channel was scoured down to marine shell deposits
throughout much of the reach. The water was relatively clear with low to moderate velocity
throughout.
6.4.2. Mussel Surveys Results
A total of 1.8 -person hours of survey time were spent in the reach, with no freshwater mussels
being found. One mollusk species, the Pointed Campeloma was present.
6.5 UT to Penders Mill Run (Survey Reach 5)
6.5.1. Stream Conditions at Time of Survey
This evaluated portion of UT to Penders Mill Run extended from the lower crossing of Harts
Chapel Road just above the railroad crossing upstream to the upper crossing of Harts Chapel
Road, just north of the intersection with Sunpointe Lane (Figure 1). The majority of the stream
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report April 2018
Job# 18-006 Page 15

occurred within a bottomland swamp forest, with no defined channel and was not surveyed due
to lack of habitat. The upper portion of the stream near the upper crossing of Harts Chapel Road
consisted of a defined channel, two to three feet wide, with banks up to three feet high. Substrate
consisted primarily of silt and clay. This portion of the stream is bordered by a moderate -
forested buffer on the right descending bank and an agricultural field on the left bank. There was
no discernable flow and the substrate was covered in mats of filamentous algae throughout.
6.5.2. Mussel Surveys Results
Habitat in the survey reach was not appropriate for target freshwater mussel species and no
mussels were found.
6.6 Neuse River Waterdog Survey Results
Surveys for the Neuse River Waterdog were conducted March 26-30, 2018. Ten baited traps
were placed in Walnut Creek, seven traps were placed North of US 64 Alt West and three traps
were placed South of US 64 Alt West. Trap sites were selected to target all microhabitats
present in the reach but focused specifically on areas with undercut banks and leaf pack
accumulation, as well as eddy areas within runs. The Neuse River Waterdog was not found at
the project site during survey efforts. Table 4 portrays species captured during the trapping
effort.
Table 4. NRWD Survey: Species Found in Walnut Creek
Trap
Day 1
Day 2
Day 3
Day 4
1
Pirate Perch 4
2
Mudminnow
Pirate Perch
3
(Umbra pygmaea) (1)
(Aphredoderus
sayanus) 1
Bluegill Sunfish
Green Sunfish
Redbreast Sunfish
4
(Lepomis macrochirus)
(Lepomis yanellus)
(Lepomis auratus)
(1)
(1 )
Cambarus s 1
(2)
5
Satinfin Shiner
American Eel
6
(Cyprinella analostana)
(Anguilla rostrate)
1
1
Pirate Perch
Tadpole Madtom
7
(Aphredoderus sayanus)
(Noturus gyrinus)
1
2
Bluegill Sunfish
8
(Lepomis macrochirus)
1
Margined Madtom
Pirate Perch
Pirate Perch
9
(Noturus insignis) (1)
(Aphredoderus
(Aphredoderus
sayanus) 1
sa anus 2
Pirate Perch
Margined Madtom
10
(Aphredoderus
(Noturus insignis)
sayanus) (2)
(1)
Creek Chubsucker
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report April 2018
Job# 18-006 Page 16

Table 4. NRWD Survey: Species Found in Walnut Creek
Trap
Day 1
Day 2
Day 3
Day 4
(Erimyzon oblongus)
1
7.0 DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS
The results indicate that the study area supports a freshwater mussel fauna of one common
species, the Eastern Elliptio. No other mussel species were found. Neither the DWM, TSM,
Yellow Lance, Green Floater, nor Atlantic Pigtoe were found during the surveys. While the
target species were not located, appropriate habitat is present; thus, the presence of additional
species cannot be altogether ruled out. Several rare species are known from the Tar River and
nearby tributaries (Section 1.0). Based on these survey results, adverse effects to the five target
mussel species, the Carolina Madtom and the Neuse River Waterdog are unlikely to result from
project construction but cannot be entirely discounted. Strict adherence to erosion control
standards should minimize the potential for any adverse impacts to occur.
Biological conclusions on potential impacts from the project to the target species are provided
below.
The USFWS is the regulating authority for Section 7 Biological Conclusions and as such, it is
recommended that they be consulted regarding their concurrence with the finding of this
document.
Biological Conclusion Dwarf Wedgemussel: May Affect/Not Likely to Adversely Affect
Biological Conclusion Tar River Spinymussel: May Affect/Not Likely to Adversely Affect
Biological Conclusion Yellow Lance: May Affect/Not Likely to Adversely Affect
While the following species are not currently federally protected and biological conclusions are
not necessary at the time of the writing of this report, if these species were to receive federal
protection, appropriate biological conclusions are as follows:
Biological Conclusion Atlantic Pigtoe: May Affect/Not Likely to Adversely Affect
Biological Conclusion Green Floater: May Affect/Not Likely to Adversely Affect
Biological Conclusion Neuse River Waterdog: May Affect/Not Likely to Adversely Affect
Biological Conclusion Carolina Madtom: May Affect/Not Likely to Adversely Affect
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report April 2018
Job# 18-006 Page 17

8.0 LITERATURE CITED
Adams, W. F., J. M. Alderman, R. G. Biggins, A. G. Gerberich, E. P. Keferl, H. J. Porter, and A.
S.Van Devender. 1990. A report on the conservation status of North Carolina's
freshwater and terrestrial molluscan fauna. N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission,
Raleigh. 246 pp, Appendix A, 37 pp.
Alderman, J. M. 1995. Monitoring the Swift Creek Freshwater mussel community. Unpublished
report presented at the UMRCC symposium on the Conservation and Management of
Freshwater Mussels II Initiative for the Future. Rock Island, IL, UMRCC.
Alderman, J.M. 2003. Status and Distribution of Fusconaia mason and Elliptio lanceolata in
Virginia. USFWS Grant Agreement: 1148-401 81-99-G-113. 118pp.
AmphibiaWeb: Information on amphibian biology and conservation [web application]. 2006.
Berkeley, California: AmphibiaWeb. Accessed: March 22, 2016.
http://amphibiaweb.org/index.html.
Angermeier, P. L. 1995. Ecological attributes of extinction -prone species: loss of freshwater fishes
of Virginia. Conservation Biology 9:143-158.
Beane, J. and Newman, J. T. 1996. North Carolina Wildlife Profiles — Neuse River Waterdog.
Division of Conservation Education, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission.
Bogan, A.E., J.Levine, and M.Raley. 2009. Determination of the systematic position and
relationships of the lanceolate Elliptio complex (Mollusca: Bivalvia: Unionidae) from six
river basins in Virginia. NC Museum of Natural Sciences, Raleigh, NC. 37pp.
Brimley, C. S. 1924. The waterdogs (Necturus) of North Carolina. Journal of the Elisha Mitchell
Scientific Society 40: 166-168.
Burr, B. M., B.R. Kuhajda, W.W. Dimmick and J.M. Grady. 1989. Distribution, biology, and
conservation status of the Carolina madtom (Noturus furiosus, an endemic North Carolina
catfish. Brimleyana 15:57-86.
Burr, B. M., and J. N. Stoeckel. 1999. The natural history of madtoms (genus Noturus), North
America's diminutive catfishes. Pages 51-101 in E. R. Irwin, W. A. Hubert, C. F.
Rabeni, H. L. J. Schramm, and T. Coon, editors. Catfish 2000: Proceedings of the
International Ictalurid Symposium. Symposium 24. American Fisheries Society,
Bethesda, Maryland.
Center for Biological Diversity (CBD). 2010. Petition to List 404 Aquatic, Riparian and Wetland
Species from the Southeastern United States as Threatened or Endangered Under the
Endangered Species Act. April 20, 2010, 1,145 pp. Available online at:
http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/esa/Candiate%20 Spp/SE—Petition.pdf.
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report April 2018
Job# 18-006 Page 18

Clarke, A. H. 1981. The Tribe Alasmidontini (Unionidae: Anodontinae), Part I: Pegias,
Alasmidonta, and Arcidens. Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology, No. 326. 101 pp.
Clarke, A. H. 1983. Status survey of the Tar River spiny mussel. Final Report to U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service with supplement. 63 pp.
Conant, R. and Collins, J.T. 1998. A Field Guide to the Reptiles and Amphibians of Eastern and
Central North America. Third Edition, Expanded. Houghton Mifflin Company. Boston,
Massachusetts.
Conrad, T.A. 1834. New freshwater shells of the United States, with coloured illustrations; and a
monograph of the genus Anculotus of Say; also a synopsis of the American naiades. J.
Dobson, 108 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 1-76, 8 pls.
Conrad, T.A. 1835. Monography of the Family Unionidae, or naiades of Lamarck, (fresh water
bivalve shells) of North America, illustrated by figures drawn on stone from nature. J.
Dobson, 108 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 1:1-12, plates 1-5.
Eads, C.B. and J.F. Levine. 2008. Carolina Heelsplitter (Lasmigona decorata) and Tar River
Spinymussel (Elliptio steinstansana) Conservation Research: July 2007 -June 2008. Final
report submitted to the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission. Raleigh, NC.
18 pp.
Eads, C.B. and J.F. Levine. 2009. Propagation and culture of three species of freshwater
mussel: Alasmidonta varicose, Medionidus conradicus, and Elliptio lanceolata from July
2008 -June 2009. NC State University, Raleigh, NC. 16pp.
Eads, C.B. and J.F. Levine. 2011. Refinement of Growout Techniques for Four Freshwater
Mussel Species. Final Report submitted to NC Wildlife Resources Commission, Raleigh,
NC. 15pp.
Eads, C.B., R. Nichols, C.J. Woods, and J.F. Levine. 2008. Captive spawning and host
determination of the federally endangered Tar River spinymussel (Elliptio steinstansana).
Ellipsaria, 10(2):7-8.
EDGE of Existence website. "165. Neuse River Waterdog (Necturus lewisi)". Accessed: March
22, 2016. http://www.edgeofexistence.org/amphibians/species—info.php?id=1361.
Ellis, M. M. 1936. Erosion Silt as a Factor in Aquatic Environments. Ecology 17: 29-42.
Frost, Darrel R. 2016. Amphibian Species of the World: an Online Reference. Version 6.0
(March 22, 2016). Electronic Database accessible at
http://research.amnh.org/herpetology/amphibiaJindex.html. American Museum of Natural
History, New York, USA.
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report April 2018
Job# 18-006 Page 19

Fuller, S. L. H. 1977. Freshwater and terrestrial mollusks. In: John E. Cooper, Sarah S.
Robinson, John B. Fundeburg (eds.) Endangered and Threatened Plants and Animals of
North Carolina. North Carolina State Museum of Natural History, Raleigh.
Fuller, S. L. H. and C. E. Powell. 1973. Range extensions of Corbicula manilensis (Philippi) in
the Atlantic drainage of the United States. Nautilus 87(2): 59.
Goudreau, S. E., R. J. Neves, and R. J. Sheehan. 1988. Effects of Sewage Treatment Effluents
on Mollusks and Fish of the Clinch River in Tazewell County, Virginia. USFWS: 128 pp.
Johnson, R.I. 1970. The systematics and zoogeography of the Unionidae (Mollusca: Bivalvia) of
the southern Atlantic slope region. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology.
140: 263-449.
Johnson, R.I. and A.H. Clarke. 1983. A new spiny mussel, Elliptio (Canthyria) steinstansana
(Bivalvia: Unionidae), from the Tar River, North Carolina. Occasional Papers on
Mollusks, Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University, 4(61): 289-298.
Jordan, D.S. 1889. Descriptions of fourteen species of freshwater fishes collected by the U.S.
Fish Commission in the summer of 1888. Proceedings of the United States National
Museum 11:351-362.Lea, I. 1828. Description of six new species of the genus Unio,
embracing the anatomy of the oviduct of one of them, together with some anatomical
observations on the genus. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society
3(N.S.):259-273 + plates iii -vi.
Lea, I. 1828. Description of six new species of the genus Unio, embracing the anatomy of the
oviduct of one of them, together with some anatomical observations on the genus.
Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 3(N.S.):259-273 + plates iii -vi.
Lea, I. 1829. Description of a new genus of the family of naiades, including eight species, four of
which are new; also the description of eleven new species of the genus Unio from the
rivers of the United States: with observations on some of the characters of the naiades.
Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 3[New Series]:403-457, pls. 7-14.
Lee, D.S., C.R. Gilbert, C.H. Hocutt, R.E. Jenkins, D.E. McAllister, and J.R. Stauffer. 1980.
Atlas of North American freshwater fishes. North Carolina State Museum of Natural
History, Raleigh.
Marking, L.L., and T.D. Bills. 1979. Acute effects of silt and sand sedimentation on freshwater
mussels. Pp. 204-211 in J.L. Rasmussen, ed. Proc. of the UMRCC symposium on the
Upper Mississippi River bivalve mollusks. UMRCC. Rock Island IL. 270 pp.
Master, L. 1986. Alasmidonta heterodon: results of a global status survey and proposal to list as
an endangered species. A report submitted to Region 5 of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. 10 pp. and appendices.
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report April 2018
Job# 18-006 Page 20

Mayden, R.L. and B.M. Burr. 1981. Life history of the slender madtom, Noturus exilis, in
southern Illinois (Pisces: Ictaluridae), Occas. Pap. Mus. Nat. Hist. Univ. Kans. 93:1-64
McRae, Sarah. 2017. Fish and Wildlife Biologist, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Raleigh, NC.
Personal communication regarding target species.
Midway, S.R. 2008. Habitat Ecology of the Carolina Madtom, Noturus furiosus, an Imperiled
Endemic Stream Fish. M.S. Thesis. North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC. 74 pp.
McMahon, R. F. and A. E. Bogan. 2001. Mollusca: Bivalvia. Pp. 331-429. IN: J.H. Thorpe and
A.P. Covich. Ecology and classification of North American freshwater invertebrates.
2ndedition. Academic Press.
Michaelson, D.L. and R.J. Neves. 1995. Life history and habitat of the endangered dwarf
wedgemussel Alasmidonta heterodon (Bivalvia: Unionidae). Journal of the North
American Benthological Society 14(2):324-340.
NatureServe. 2016. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application].
Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://explorer.natureserve.org.
(Accessed: May 23, 2016). Species Accessed: Necturus lewisi, Noturus furiosus
Neves, R. J. and J. C. Widlak. 1987. Habitat Ecology of Juvenile Freshwater Mussels (Bivalvia:
Unionidae) in a Headwater Stream in Virginia. American Malacological Bulletin 1(5): 1-
7.
Neves, R.J. 1993. A state of the Unionids address. Pp. 1-10 in K.S. Cummings, A.C. Buchanan,
and L.M. Kooch, eds. Proc. of the UMRCC symposium on the Conservation and
Management of Freshwater Mussels. UMRCC. Rock Island IL. 189 pp.
North Carolina Department of Natural Resources (NCDENR) - Division of Water Resources.
2014.2014 North Carolina 303(d) List. https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-
resources/planning/clas sification-standards/3 03 d/3 03 d -file s
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program. 2018. Biotics Database. Division of Land and Water
Stewardship. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources, Raleigh, North Carolina.
January 2018 version.
North Carolina Scientific Council on Mollusks. 2011. Reevaluation of Status Listings for
Jeopardized Freshwater and Terrestrial Mollusks in North Carolina. Report of the
Scientific Council on Freshwater and Terrestrial Mollusks, 38 p.
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC). Unpublished Aquatics Database.
North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission (NCWRC). 2010. NCpedia profile for Carolina
Madtom (Noturus furiosus) [web application]. By Brian Watson, updated by Chris Wood.
June 14, 2010. http://ncpedia.org/wildlife/carolina-madtom Accessed November 4, 2016.
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report April 2018
Job# 18-006 Page 21

O'Dee, S.H., and G.T. Waters. 2000. New or confirmed host identification for ten freshwater
mussels. Pp. 77-82 in R.A. Tankersley, D.I. Warmolts, G.T. Waters, B.J. Armitage, P.D.
Johnson, and R.S. Butler (eds.). Freshwater Mollusk Symposia Proceedings Part I.
Proceedings of the Conservation, Captive Care and Propagation of Freshwater Mussels
Symposium. Ohio Biological Survey Special Publication, Columbus.
O'Neill, C. R., Jr., and D. B. MacNeill. 1991. The zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha): an
unwelcome North American invader. Sea Grant, Coastal Resources Fact Sheet. New
York Sea Grant Extension. 12 pp.
Ortmann, A.E. 1919. A monograph of the naiades of Pennsylvania. Part III: Systematic account
of the genera and species. Memoirs of the Carnegie Museum 8(1): xvi-384, 21 pls.
Pennak, R. W. 1989. Fresh -water Invertebrates of the United States, Protozoa to Mollusca. New
York, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Perkins, M.A., N.A. Johnson, and M.M. Gangloff. 2017. Molecular systematics of the
critically -endangered North American spinymussels (Unionidae: Elliptio and
Pleurobema) and description of Parvaspina gen. nov. Conservation Genetics (2017).
doi: 10. 1007/s 10592 -017-0924-z
Railey, Morgan and Arthur Bogan, North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences, 2007 Personal
Communication
Savidge, T. W., J. M. Alderman, A. E. Bogan, W. G. Cope, T. E. Dickinson, C. B. Eads,S. J.
Fraley, J. Fridell, M. M. Gangloff, R. J. Heise, J. F. Levine, S. E. McRae, R.B. Nichols,
A. J. Rodgers, A. Van Devender, J. L. Williams and L. L. Zimmerman. 2011. 2010
Reevaluation of Status Listings for Jeopardized Freshwater and Terrestrial Mollusks in
North Carolina. Unpublished report of the Scientific Council on Freshwater and
Teresstrial Mollusks. 177pp.
Shelley, R.M. 1972. In defense of naiades. Wildlife in North Carolina. March: 1-7.
Simpson, C.T. 1900. Synopsis of the naiades, or pearly fresh -water mussels. Proceedings of the
United States National Museum 22(1205):501-1044.
Simpson, C.T. 1914. A descriptive catalogue of the naiades, or pearly fresh -water mussels. Parts
I—III. Bryant Walker, Detroit, Michigan, xii + 1540 pp.
Smith, D. 1981. Selected freshwater invertebrates proposed for special concern status in
Massachusetts (Mollusca, Annelida, Arthropoda). MA Dept. of Env. Qual. Engineering,
Div. of Water Pollution Control. 26 pp.
Strayer, D. L., S. J. Sprague and S. Claypool, 1996. A range -wide assessment of populations of
Alasmidonta heterodon, an endangered freshwater mussel (Bivalvia: Unionidae). J.N.
Am. Benthol. Soc., 15(3):308-317.
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report April 2018
Job# 18-006 Page 22

United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water. NPDES facilities by permit
type. NPDESPERMIT_WMERC. Accessed March 2, 2018.
https://watersgeo. epa. gov/arcgis/rest/services/OWPROGRAM/NPDESPERMIT_WMER
C/MapServer
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1992a. Special report on the status of
freshwater mussels.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1992b. Endangered and Threatened species
of the southeast United States (The Red Book). FWS, Ecological Services, Div. of
Endangered Species, Southeast Region. Govt Printing Office, Wash, DC: 1,070.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1992c. Tar Spinymussel (Elliptio (Canthyria)
steinstansana) Recovery Plan. Atlanta, Georgia. 34 pp.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1993. Dwarf Wedgemussel (Alasmidonta
heterodon) Recovery Plan. Hadley, Massachusetts. 527 pp.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2013. Dwarf Wedgemussel Alasmidonta
heterodon 5 -Year Review: Summary and Evaluation, Susi vonOettingen, FWS, Concord,
NH.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2017. Yellow Lance Species Status Review
Viosca, P., Jr. 1937. A tentative revision of the genus Necturus, with descriptions of three new
species from the southern Gulf drainage area. Copeia 1937:120-138.
Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (VDGIF). 2014. Atlantic Pigtoe
Conservation Plan. Bureau of Wildlife Resources. VDGIF, Richmond, VA. 31 pp.
Widlak, J.C. 1987. Recovery Plan for the Tar River spiny mussel (Elliptio (Canthyria)
steinstansana) Johnson and Clarke. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Wolf, E.D. 2012. Propagation, Culture, and Recovery of Species at Risk Atlantic Pigtoe.
Virginia Tech Conservation Management Institute, Project No. 11-108. 55pp.
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report April 2018
Job# 18-006 Page 23

APPENDIX A
Figures
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report April 2018
Job# 18-006 Page 24

�' f3ER�l
11 �
}oexv Ma ,,Mt
J Scums: ESrj,dH�E:RE. f
Del-cf'r, , UBGS, rraei
INCREMENT P, Id
p # vapen.MEfTa� 4'9e>�•,. r
i ;Htrg K; ). Esri ea, E> -i
i
71
'e
r -
i
f
r�
r
r� �`' L
— US 6 4 ALT 1"FEST I-
i
F15H1 LN
r
7
DEE, V. S
Study ,4rea - . `.0
Survey Reach 1 a—
. -
i
Survey Reach 2
Survey Reach 3 Y J
Survey Reach 4
Survey Reach 5
Strearns ...
Streams
EER ? gsyrod rQ. •mak.A it 2415
G Aquatic Species Survey,: o�01 0.2 Miles Figure
° f3 Kngsboro CSX Select Site Access Road
t Project Vicinity Mapf° 18-00e
Edgecomhe County. North Card ina r�ed LSC TED
TED
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report April 2018
Job# 18-006 Page 25

EO In 15923wEQ^�
,. lie
a #�
.yy
tip,- 3 P•��IW1
YSV41'e�,I' h
17
' � �� � • Pat �` kr� � w - .
I _
��. �,.sapbl7y r o t .e 4� �.. c �• a
�� ''eek •#3 ca S ,�' � �ln� C`' Y�,
7�► ���y�., � �Grape eh � L� W � �� e
l•R� p � "30. V
Study Area
Streams
NCNHP Element Occurrence '"
JA
Dwarf Wed emussel
GINEER/ Prepared For:
Aquatic Species Survey
Kingsboro CSX Select Site Access Road
NCNHP Element Occurrence
y Dwari Wed emussel
Edgecomhe County, Norih Carolina
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report
Job# 18-006
Figu re
2-1
April 2018
Page 26
Date: Apd12018
Scale. 0 1 2 Miles
I t I
Job Nc
18-006
Drawn Ry.Checketl
B;:
LSC
TED
Figu re
2-1
April 2018
Page 26

,a, :ti C �► `Sr'6o� , ,� va �r �
EO ID 21424 ~= 5V•n ~ k ;, � l"`i+`.�-�b,��•
}' ?D
Ca
Lax
G r EO ID 21438
Q r
0
m 8uG •am .
J • t1e � �E- � q
sr � •o .
I�
5 = 1 5
Study Area y EO ID 21438
Streams
NCNHP Element Qccurrence ,AIV r
? ISTpW ER: p
Tar River Spinymussel
Prepared For.
�c Gy N H 4 Aquatic Species Survey
CS affe Fn Kingsboro CSX Select Site Access Road
LU
�� NCNHP Element Occurrence
:
Tar River Spinyl
�b3311�9 'f �e < @ Edgecol County, North Carolina
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report
Job# 18-006
Date: Apri12018
Scale: D D-5 1 Miles
W
Job No
18-006
Drawn By. Checked By:
LSC TED
Figu re
2-2
April 2018
Page 27

��,INEER/ Prepared For:
,� Aquatic Species Survey
OKingsboro CSX Select Site Access Road
NCNHP Element Occurrence: Yellow Lance
Edgeccmbe County, North Carolina
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report
Job# 18-006
Date: April 2018
Scale : 0 0.5 1 Miles
I r I
Job No:
18-006
Drawn BY:
hec
Cked B,.
LSC TED
Figure
2-3
April 2018
Page 28

�p\\ E[R/* Prepared For.
N
V - ;; Aquatic Species Survey
y
LU
T Kingsbro CSX Select Site Access Road
�
� NCNHP Element Occurrence: Green Floater
/b�3��� ' F t c Edgecambe County, North Carolina
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report
Job# 18-006
Figilre
2-4
April 2018
Page 29
Dale April 2018
Scale0 0.5 1 Miles
w
Job No..
18-006
Drawn 6y.
Checkecl B'
LSC
I TED
Figilre
2-4
April 2018
Page 29

�V�I�LiR�N Prepared For.
cS I A SM e.� "d Aquatic Species Survey
Kingsboro CSX Select Site Access Road
LLM
%L NCNHP Element Occurrence: Atlantic Pigtoe
N7b33��� *r �F t a Edgecomhe County, North Caraiina
Figu re
2-5
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report April 2018
Job# 18-006 Page 30
Date. April 2018
Scale : 0 0.5 1 Miles
W
Job No.:
18-00&
Drawn 6y:
Checked 6y:
LSC
TED
Figu re
2-5
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report April 2018
Job# 18-006 Page 30

Prepared For.
' Pu Aquatic Species Survey
Kingsboro CSX Select Site Access Road
�u m
NCNHPElemeoegDce=
9 ° Neuse Riverr Waterdaterd
or t ° Edgecombe County, North Carolina
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report
Job# 18-006
Date. April 2018
Scale. 0 0.5 1 Miles
W
Job No
18-006
Drawn By: Checked By:
LSC I TED
Figu re
2-G
April 2018
Page 31

Prepared For: N
Aquatic Species Survey
y
W
Kin gsboro CSX Select Site Access Road
v NCNHPElement Occurrence:
1 ,�Carolina Madtom
b
*b33l1�`� F e Edgecomhe County, North Carolina
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report
Job# 18-006
Figu re
27
April 2018
Page 32
Date: April 2018
Scale . 0 0.5 1 Mile -
I i I
.lob No.. 18-006
Drawn 6yd
Ll
Checke'
LSC
TE❑
Figu re
27
April 2018
Page 32

My I
Clash i.
y- remediation
Site f
; .... Phillips
r Middle SchCCI
-Tar Riser
r Battle bora
Regional _
F'v tib`' formeVr Carolina plant VM -11- r S
Fre ht facilit, f.
r - u00 2UriC5
�& Fibers site
0
r` ;.r SLlnset`
ell Lie
- TransNortatiaio n
f R'
Rr'
Study Area
— Streams
NPIJES Waste Water Facilities
C NPIDESDischarge
—303(d� Listed Streams
y Aquatic Species Survey
Kingsbora CSX Select Site Access Road
+ 303(d} Listed Streams end MI'D ES Dbchages
Edgecorre6eCaunty, Math Carding
R-5868 Kingsboro CSX Select Site Survey Report
Job# 18-006
41
7 r
Pin etops vUWTP
Figrlre
3
April 2018
Page 33
lk,S�- Apni1201.8
e: 0 0.5 1 Miles
I i I
1S -00e.
barn $fir:
�^. io'�ced 3y.
LSC
TED
Figrlre
3
April 2018
Page 33