20181064 Ver 1_JDInfo_20180802

This Exhibit is for planning purposes only and information shown hereon does not e
meet NC 47-30 Requirements and therefore is not for design, con's ruoli on or 1 inch = 650 feet FIELD VERIFICATION MAP FIELD VISIT 1 FIELD VISIT 2
cording or transfer of title. The Exhibit was compiled from available informaion OVERVIEW
obtained from the sources listed below. Streams and Wetlands: All features
located in the field wee recorded using a mapping grade Trimble GeoXT or GRAPHIC SCALE STREAM AND WETLAND DETERMINATIONS
GeoXH GPS receiverwith supposed su b -meter accuracy. CREW: M. MICKLEY, S. BEAVANS CREW: A
Sources: 0 325 650 1,300
Frank""County °ala: Frank linCounty GIS Feet NOVOZYMES FARM PROPERTIES DATE: 8/17/15 DATE:
Aerial Photography: ESRI Imagery Prime World

Legend
Unverified Features
f Streams
EPHEMERAL
INTERMITTENT
PERENNIAL
Wetlands
Jor-
•
L"%.
► r 7/
Farm 1
i
r
. t
_40
J
.W—
7i
ob
r"i
rFarm 2}�
e
This Exhibit is for planning purposes only and information shown hereon does not
meet NC 47-30 Requirements and therefore is not for design, construction, or
1 inch = 650 feet
e
FIELD VERIFICATION MAP
cording or transfer of title. The Exhibit was compiled from available information
FIELD VISIT 1
FIELD VISIT 2
OVERVIEW
obtained from the sources listed below. Streams and Wetlands: All features
located in the field wee recorded using a mapping grade Trimble GeoXT or
GeoXH GPS receiverwith supposed su b -meter accuracy.
GRAPHIC SCALE
STREAM AND WETLAND DETERMINATIONS
CREW: M. MICKLEY, S. BEAVANS
CREW:
0 325 650 1,300
B
DATE: 8/17/15
DATE:
Sources:
Frank""County °ala: Frank linCounty GIS
Feet
NOVOZYMES FARM PROPERTIES
Aerial Photography: ESRI Imagery Prime World

■ ur-lg r
I'l
. �'� �� .f 'ter'. •� ��•••�� : �' � -" R ' .� � 4 r
I di
p +
- t #
+
+ �'+ +
+ + sy
t
N

oL
Legend
�tland Points
'
'ace Water Points t
)d Features;
EPHEMERAL Y*
NTERMITTENT - r
'ERENNIAL �. .
�tlands
bar)! .
r'
i
tb
r' f
Or
Or 4w741,
`
�f.
I
�f.

UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE
38'07'30'
36°05'Dp'
38°02'30•
FRANKLIN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
FRANKLINTON QUADRANGLE
SHEET NUMBER 4 OF 17
36°07'30'
bC
rnw w
tl` �k-t"-
70- 30'x0• 78 27'30• m
78"25'GV as
mie evN wrva7wn aarpNtlb ne U.S.Oaprtn°nto(
a SCALE
8„an.eo6roeo�al wtla6s.rwm. oz.DOD
of lntab. f3edo ppapha CraPaetl by ne U.9.
0ept 01d Survey. hdn 19868g1Y
wcro.
, s
inaa9roonY. HvdoaravhrelMtalentl lnlametlon wen £ - wire
aoubatl hen na NaVrY esaacsa Coneavatlan SaMw. ., , v iem moo mev
�
Nan Nnakan xebna/i90,'1(NA083 0AS808pharoitl
100Darrltlr laic UMuarW dd"m �, if ti SaMt7. nmrao�wcenal rE6i
00anYmY WIe MtlImltl ffi.tlaon daU, if zboxn,ap
i0nreUab
_ _
�� �p4fYOnlO Wpl4l dila s�ewldtlleb Fc.atiiEne
NOEMIObAnxn07.5wMe ay.E.bi
38°02'30•
I4a
36 - OD'
38°D'00”
78°22'30`
FRANKLINTON, NORTH CAROLINA
76 MINUTE SENIES
SHEETNUM9 90F 17

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: Aug 17, 2015
Project/Site: Novozymes/SA (upstream)
Latitude: 36.09704
Evaluator:Sam Beavans, Mulkey, Inc.
County: Franklin
Longitude: -78.401813
Total Points:
,a.
Other: FRANKLINTON
F307.75
Stream is at least intermittent if
.Stream Determination:
e.g. Quad Name:
>19 or perennial if >30
Perennial
2.
A.
Geomorphology (Subtotal =14 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
,a.
Continuous bed and bank
0
1
2
3
3
2.
Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
2
3.
In -Channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool, ripple-
ool se uence
0
1
2
3
2
4.
Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
1
5.
Active/relic floodplain
0
1
2
3
1
6.
Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
1
7.
Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
1
8.
Headcuts
0
1
2
3
1
9.
Grade controls
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
10.
Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
11.
Second or greater order channel
No
- 0
Yes = 3
0
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual.
B.
Hydrology (Subtotal =8 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
12.
Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
3
13.
Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
0
14.
Leaflitter
1.5
1
0.5
0
1.5
15.
Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
16.
Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
17.
Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No
= 0
Yes =
1.5
1.5
C.
Biology Subtotal =a75)
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
18.
Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
19.
Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
20.
Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
0
1
2
3
0
21.
Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
0
22.
Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
23.
Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
24.
Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
25.
Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
26.
Wetland plants in streambed
FACW=0.75; OBL=1.5 Other=0
0.75
'perennial stream may also be identified using other methods. See p.35 of manual.
Notes:
Jewelweed
Bank Height (feet)
3-4
Bankfull Width (feet)
2-4
Water Depth inches
2-24
Channel SubstrateSilt/sand
Velocity:
Moderate
Clarity:
tear
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: Aug 17, 2015
Project/Site: Novozymes/SA
downstream D
Latitude: 36.098827
Evaluator:Sam Beavans, Mulkey, Inc.
County: Franklin
Longitude: -78.400337
Total Points:
,a.
Other: FRANKLINTON
39
Stream is at least intermittent if
Stream Determination:
e.g. Quad Name:
>19 or perennial if >30
Perennial
2.
A.
Geomorphology (Subtotal =23 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
,a.
Continuous bed and bank
0
1
2
3
3
2.
Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3
3.
In -Channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool, ripple-
ool se uence
0
1
2
3
2
4.
Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
1
5.
Active/relic floodplain
0
1
2
3
3
6.
Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
3
7.
Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
2
8.
Headcuts
0
1
2
3
1
9.
Grade controls
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
10.
Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
11.
Second or greater order channel
No
- 0
Yes = 3
3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual.
B.
Hydrology (Subtotal =9.5)
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
12.
Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
3
13.
Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
2
14.
Leaflitter
1.5
1
0.5
0
0.5
15.
Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5
16.
Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
17.
Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No
= 0
Yes =
1.5
1.5
C.
Biolo Subtotal =6.5)
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
18.
Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
2
19.
Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
20.
Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
0
1
2
3
0
21.
Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
0
22.
Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
23.
Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
24.
Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
25.
Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
26.
Wetland plants in streambed
FACW=0.75; OBL=1.5 Other=0
'perennial stream may also be identified using other methods. See p.35 of manual.
Notes:
Below second pond area, stream flattens out; not as eroded
Sketch:
Bank Height (feet) .5-1
Bankfull Width (feet) 3-4
Water Depth inches 2-12
Channel SubstrateSilt/sand
I*

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: Aug 17, 2015
Project/Site: Novozymes/SC
Latitude: 36.096371
Evaluator:Sam Beavans, Mulkey, Inc.
County: Franklin
Longitude: -78.401534
Total Points:
,a.
Other: FRANKLINTON
F307.25
Stream is at least intermittent if
.Stream Determination:
e.g. Quad Name:
>19 or perennial if >30
Perennial
2.
A.
Geomorphology (Subtotal =15 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
,a.
Continuous bed and bank
0
1
2
3
3
2.
Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
2
3.
In -Channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool, ripple-
ool se uence
0
1
2
3
2
4.
Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
1
5.
Active/relic floodplain
0
1
2
3
2
6.
Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
1
7.
Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
2
8.
Headcuts
0
1
2
3
0
9.
Grade controls
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
10.
Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
11.
Second or greater order channel
No
- 0
Yes = 3
0
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual.
B.
Hydrology (Subtotal =7 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
12.
Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
2
13.
Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
0
14.
Leaflitter
1.5
1
0.5
0
1.5
15.
Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
16.
Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
17.
Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No
= 0
Yes =
1.5
1.5
C.
Biology Subtotal =a25)
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
18.
Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
19.
Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
20.
Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
0
1
2
3
0
21.
Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
0
22.
Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
23.
Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
24.
Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
25.
Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
26.
Wetland plants in streambed
FACW=0.75; OBL=1.5 Other=0
0.75
'perennial stream may also be identified using other methods. See p.35 of manual.
Notes:
Impatiens capensis
Bank Height (feet)
2-3
Bankfull Width (feet)
2-3
Water Depth inches
2-12
Channel SubstrateSilt/sand
Velocity:
low
Clarity:
tear
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: Aug 17, 2015
Project/Site: Novozymes/SD
Latitude: 36.09946
Evaluator:Sam Beavans, Mulkey, Inc.
County: Franklin
Longitude: -78.399915
Total Points:
,a.
Other: FRANKLINTON
16
Stream is at least intermittent if
Stream Determination:
e.g. Quad Name:
>19 or perennial if >30
Ephemeral
2.
A.
Geomorphology (Subtotal =10 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
,a.
Continuous bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2
2.
Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
2
3.
In -Channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool, ripple-
ool se uence
0
1
2
3
1
4.
Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
1
5.
Active/relic floodplain
0
1
2
3
2
6.
Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
0
7.
Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
1
8.
Headcuts
0
1
2
3
0
9.
Grade controls
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
10.
Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
11.
Second or greater order channel
No
- 0
Yes = 3
0
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual.
B.
Hydrology (Subtotal
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
12.
Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
0
13.
Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
0
14.
Leaflitter
1.5
1
0.5
0
0
15.
Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
16.
Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
17.
Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No
= 0
Yes =
1.5
0
C.
Biolo Subtotal =5 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
18.
Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
2
19.
Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
20.
Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
0
1
2
3
0
21.
Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
0
22.
Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
23.
Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
24.
Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
25.
Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
26.
Wetland plants in streambed
FACW=0.75; OBL=1.5 Other=0
'perennial stream may also be identified using other methods. See p.35 of manual.
Notes: Bank Height (feet) .5
Bankfull Width (feet) 1-2
Water Depth inches 0
Channel Substrate Bar
I*
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: Aug 18, 2015
Project/Site: Novozymes/SE(upstream)
Latitude: 36.106121
Evaluator:Sam Beavans, Mulkey, Inc.
County: Franklin
Longitude: -78.4081
Total Points:
,a.
FRANKLINTON
Other:
23.5
Stream is at least intermittent if
.Stream Determination:
e.g. Quad Name:
>19 or perennial if >30
Intermittent
2.
A.
Geomorphology (Subtotal =16 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
,a.
Continuous bed and bank
0
1
2
3
3
2.
Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3
3.
In -Channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool, ripple-
ool se uence
0
1
2
3
2
4.
Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
3
5.
Active/relic floodplain
0
1
2
3
0
6.
Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
1
7.
Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
1
8.
Headcuts
0
1
2
3
1
9.
Grade controls
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
10.
Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
11.
Second or greater order channel
No
- 0
Yes = 3
0
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual.
B.
Hydrology (Subtotal =2.5)
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
12.
Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
0
13.
Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
0
14.
Leaflitter
1.5
1
0.5
0
1
15.
Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
16.
Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
17.
Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No
= 0
Yes =
1.5
0
C.
Biolo Subtotal =5 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
18.
Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
2
19.
Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
20.
Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
0
1
2
3
0
21.
Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
0
22.
Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
23.
Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
24.
Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
25.
Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
26.
Wetland plants in streambed
FACW=0.75; OBL=1.5 Other=0
'perennial stream may also be identified using other methods. See p.35 of manual.
Notes: Bank Height (feet) 3-4
Bankfull Width (feet) 3-5
Water Depth inches 0
Channel Substrate Sand/gravel/bedrock
I*
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: Aug 18, 2015
Project/Site: Novozymes/SE
downstream D
Latitude: 36.10716
Evaluator:Sam Beavans, Mulkey, Inc.
County: Franklin
Longitude: -78.408272
Total Points:
,a.
Other: FRANKLINTON
34.5
Stream is at least intermittent if
.Stream Determination:
e.g. Quad Name:
>19 or perennial if >30
Perennial
2.
A.
Geomorphology (Subtotal =20_5)
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
,a.
Continuous bed and bank
0
1
2
3
3
2.
Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3
3.
In -Channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool, ripple-
ool se uence
0
1
2
3
2
4.
Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
3
5.
Active/relic floodplain
0
1
2
3
1
6.
Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
2
7.
Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
2
8.
Headcuts
0
1
2
3
2
9.
Grade controls
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
10.
Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5
11.
Second or greater order channel
No
- 0
Yes = 3
0
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual.
B.
Hydrology (Subtotal =7.5)
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
12.
Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
3
13.
Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
0
14.
Leaflitter
1.5
1
0.5
0
1
15.
Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
16.
Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
17.
Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No
= 0
Yes =
1.5
1.5
C.
Biolo Subtotal =6.5)
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
18.
Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
2
19.
Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
20.
Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
0
1
2
3
1
21.
Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
0
22.
Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
23.
Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
24.
Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
25.
Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
26.
Wetland plants in streambed
FACW=0.75; OBL=1.5 Other=0
'perennial stream may also be identified using other methods. See p.35 of manual.
Notes:
Bank Height (feet)
3-5
Bankfull Width (feet)
2-5
Water Depth inches
2-12
Channel Substrate
Sand/gravel/cobble/bedrock
Velocity:
Moderate
Clarity:
tear
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: Aug 18, 2015
Project/Site: Novozymes/SF
Latitude: 36.106442
Evaluator:Sam Beavans, Mulkey, Inc.
County: Franklin
Longitude: -78.408431
Total Points:FRANKLINTON
,a.
Other:
20.5
Stream is at least intermittent if
.Stream Determination:
e.g. Quad Name:
>19 or perennial if >30
Intermittent
2.
A.
Geomorphology (Subtotal =14 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
,a.
Continuous bed and bank
0
1
2
3
3
2.
Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3
3.
In -Channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool, ripple-
ool se uence
0
1
2
3
1
4.
Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
2
5.
Active/relic floodplain
0
1
2
3
0
6.
Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
1
7.
Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
0
8.
Headcuts
0
1
2
3
2
9.
Grade controls
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
10.
Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
11.
Second or greater order channel
No
- 0
Yes = 3
0
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual.
B.
Hydrology (Subtotal =1.5)
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
12.
Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
0
13.
Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
0
14.
Leaflitter
1.5
1
0.5
0
0.5
15.
Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
16.
Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
17.
Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No
= 0
Yes =
1.5
0
C.
Biolo Subtotal =5 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
18.
Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
2
19.
Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
20.
Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
0
1
2
3
0
21.
Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
0
22.
Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
23.
Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
24.
Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
25.
Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
26.
Wetland plants in streambed
FACW=0.75; OBL=1.5 Other=0
'perennial stream may also be identified using other methods. See p.35 of manual.
Notes: Bank Height (feet)
Bankfull Width (feet)
Water Depth inches
Channel Substrate
I*
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: Aug 18, 2015
Project/Site: Novozymes/SG
Latitude: 36.10809
Evaluator:Sam Beavans, Mulkey, Inc.
County: Franklin
Longitude: -78.407076
Total Points:
,a.
Other: FRANKLINTON
30
Stream is at least intermittent if
Stream Determination:
e.g. Quad Name:
>19 or perennial if >30
Perennial
2.
A.
Geomorphology (Subtotal =16 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
,a.
Continuous bed and bank
0
1
2
3
3
2.
Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3
3.
In -Channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool, ripple-
ool se uence
0
1
2
3
1
4.
Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
2
5.
Active/relic floodplain
0
1
2
3
1
6.
Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
1
7.
Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
1
8.
Headcuts
0
1
2
3
2
9.
Grade controls
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
10.
Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
11.
Second or greater order channel
No
- 0
Yes = 3
0
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual.
B.
Hydrology (Subtotal =7.5)
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
12.
Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
3
13.
Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
0
14.
Leaflitter
1.5
1
0.5
0
1
15.
Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
16.
Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
17.
Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No
= 0
Yes =
1.5
1.5
C.
Biolo Subtotal =6.5)
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
18.
Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
2
19.
Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
20.
Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
0
1
2
3
0
21.
Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
0
22.
Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
23.
Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
24.
Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
25.
Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
26.
Wetland plants in streambed
FACW=0.75; OBL=1.5 Other=0
'perennial stream may also be identified using other methods. See p.35 of manual.
Notes:
Bank Height (feet)
2-4
Bankfull Width (feet)
2-5
Water Depth inches
2-6
Channel Substrate
and/gravel/cobble
Velocity:
low
Clarity:
tear
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: Aug 18, 2015
Project/Site: Novozymes/SH
Latitude: 36.10783
Evaluator:Sam Beavans, Mulkey, Inc.
County: Franklin
Longitude: -78.406573
Total Points:FRANKLINTON
,a.
Other:
F23
Stream is at least intermittent if
.Stream Determination:
e.g. Quad Name:
>19 or perennial if >30
Intermittent
2.
A.
Geomorphology (Subtotal =10_5)
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
,a.
Continuous bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2
2.
Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
1
3.
In -Channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool, ripple-
ool se uence
0
1
2
3
1
4.
Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
2
5.
Active/relic floodplain
0
1
2
3
1
6.
Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
1
7.
Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
1
8.
Headcuts
0
1
2
3
0
9.
Grade controls
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
10.
Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
11.
Second or greater order channel
No
- 0
Yes = 3
0
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual.
B.
Hydrology (Subtotal =5 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
12.
Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
1
13.
Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
0
14.
Leaflitter
1.5
1
0.5
0
1
15.
Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
16.
Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
17.
Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No
= 0
Yes =
1.5
1.5
C.
Bi0lo Subtotal =7.5)
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
18.
Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
19.
Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
20.
Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
0
1
2
3
0
21.
Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
0
22.
Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
23.
Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
24.
Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
25.
Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
26.
Wetland plants in streambed
FACW=0.75; OBL=1.5 Other=0
'perennial stream may also be identified using other methods. See p.35 of manual.
Notes:
Bank Height (feet)
.5-2
Bankfull Width (feet)
2-4
Water Depth inches
2-6
Channel Substrate
3ilt/sand/gravel
Velocity:
low
Clarity:
tear
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: Aug 18, 2015
Project/Site: Novozymes/SI(downstream)
Latitude: 36.108515
Evaluator:Sam Beavans, Mulkey, Inc.
County: Franklin
Longitude: -78.407483
Total Points:
,a.
Other: FRANKLINTON
30
Stream is at least intermittent if
Stream Determination:
e.g. Quad Name:
>19 or perennial if >30
Perennial
2.
A.
Geomorphology (Subtotal =16 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
,a.
Continuous bed and bank
0
1
2
3
3
2.
Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
1
3.
In -Channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool, ripple-
ool se uence
0
1
2
3
2
4.
Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
2
5.
Active/relic floodplain
0
1
2
3
1
6.
Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
2
7.
Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
1
8.
Headcuts
0
1
2
3
2
9.
Grade controls
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
10.
Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
11.
Second or greater order channel
No
- 0
Yes = 3
0
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual.
B.
Hydrology (Subtotal =6.5)
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
12.
Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
2
13.
Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
0
14.
Leaflitter
1.5
1
0.5
0
1
15.
Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
16.
Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
17.
Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No
= 0
Yes =
1.5
1.5
C.
Bi0lo Subtotal =7.5)
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
18.
Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
19.
Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
20.
Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
0
1
2
3
0
21.
Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
0
22.
Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
23.
Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
24.
Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
25.
Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
26.
Wetland plants in streambed
FACW=0.75; OBL=1.5 Other=0
'perennial stream may also be identified using other methods. See p.35 of manual.
Notes:
Bank Height (feet) 3-5
Bankfull Width (feet) 3-5
Water Depth inches 2-12
Channel Substrate 3ilt/sand/gravel
Velocity: low
Claritv: ,Ipnr
Sketch:

USACE AID# DWQ# Site # (indicate on attached map)
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: SWE Group 2. Evaluator's name:
3. Date of evaluation: Aug 17, 2015 4. Time of evaluation:
5. Name of stream: UT Buffalo Creek (SAup) 6. River basin:
7. Approximate drainage area:F00 200 ac 8. Stream order:
9. Length of reach evaluated: 2,564 ft 10. County:
Sam Beavans, Mulkey, Inc.
1:30
ar-Pamlico
2nd
Franklin
11. Site coordinates (if known): refer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any)
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 36.09704 Longitude (ex. -77.556611):
-78.401813
Method location determined: 17 GPS 17 Topo Sheet F- Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS F- Other GIS Other:
13. Location of reach under evaluation (Note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
INE side of intersection between Hwy 56 and Perrys Chapel Rd. Novozymes Farm 92
14. Proposed channel work (if any): I
15. Recent weather conditions: JNo rain in last 48 hours.
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Sunny and 90 degrees.
Section 10 F- Tidal Waters F- Essential Fisheries Habitat
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known:
Trout Waters Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters rX- Water Supply Watershed Iv
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES F- NO If yes, estimate the water surface area: 4 ac
19. Does channel appear on USGS uad map? [5Z YES F NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Surve ? V YES F NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: % Residential % Commercial I 10 % Industrial 50 % Agricultural
40 % Forested F % Cleared / Logged %Other
22. Bankfull width: 3-4 ft 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 2-4 ft
24. Channel slope down center of stream: r- Flat (0 to 2%) 9 Gentle (2 to 4%) r- Moderate (4 to 10%) r- Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight F Occasional bends V Frequent meander r- Very sinuous r- Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 58 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature: Sam Beavans Date: I Aug 17, 2015
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change -version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
*These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
ECOR� DINT RANGE
#Ir
CHARACTERISTICS
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
1
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5
0-4
0-5
4
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0-5
0-5
4
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
4
(no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points)
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0-4
0-4
3
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)
a
5
Groundwater discharge
0-3
0-4
0-4
4
d
(no discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points)
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0-4
0-2
2
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
pEntrenchment
/ floodplain access
0-5
0-4
0-2
1
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0-4
0-2
3
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9
Channel sinuosity
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander =max points)
0-5
0-4
0-3
10
Sediment input
0-5
0-4
0-4
1
(extensive deposition = 0; little or no sediment =max points)
�
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
N/A*
0-4
0-5
1
(fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points)
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
0-4
0-5
3
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points)
FPresence
13
of major bank failures
0-5
0-5
0-5
a
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
d
14
Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0-4
0-5
2
(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points)
15
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0-5
0-4
0-5
4
(substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points)
16
Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes
0-3
0-5
0-6
3
(no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed = max points)
1
Habitat complexity
0-6
0-6
0-6
4
Fes.
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0-5
0-5
4
x18
(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = max points)
19
Substrate embeddedness
N/A*
0-4
0-4
3
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max)
20
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0-4
0-5
0-5
0
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
21
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0-4
0-4
2
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types =max points)
pPresence
22
of fish
0-4
0-4
0-4
p
Pa
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0-5
0-5
3
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)
Total Points Possible
100
100
100
TOTAL SCORE (Also enter on first page)
58
*These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

USACE AID# DWQ# Site # (indicate on attached map)
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: SWE Group 2. Evaluator's name:
3. Date of evaluation: Aug 17, 2015 4. Time of evaluation:
5. Name of stream: UT Buffalo Creek (SAdown) 6. River basin:
7. Approximate drainage area:F00 200 ac 8. Stream order:
9. Length of reach evaluated: 2,564 ft 10. County:
Sam Beavans, Mulkey, Inc.
1:20
ar-Pamlico
2nd
Franklin
11. Site coordinates (if known): refer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any)
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 36.097481 Longitude (ex. -77.556611):
-78.401361
Method location determined: 17 GPS 17 Topo Sheet F- Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS F- Other GIS Other:
13. Location of reach under evaluation (Note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
INE side of intersection between Hwy 56 and Perrys Chapel Rd. Novozymes Farm 92
14. Proposed channel work (if any): I
15. Recent weather conditions: JNo rain in last 48 hours.
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Sunny and 90 degrees.
Section 10 F- Tidal Waters F- Essential Fisheries Habitat
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known:
Trout Waters Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters rX- Water Supply Watershed Iv
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES F- NO If yes, estimate the water surface area: 4 ac
19. Does channel appear on USGS uad map? [5Z YES F NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Surve ? V YES F NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: % Residential % Commercial I 10 % Industrial 50 % Agricultural
40 % Forested F % Cleared / Logged %Other
22. Bankfull width: 3-4 ft 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): .5-1 ft
24. Channel slope down center of stream: F Flat (0 to 2%) 9 Gentle (2 to 4%) r- Moderate (4 to 10%) r- Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight F Occasional bends V Frequent meander r- Very sinuous r- Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 69 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature: Sam Beavans Date: I Aug 17, 2015
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change -version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
*These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
ECOR� DINT RANGE
#Ir
CHARACTERISTICS
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
1
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5
0-4
0-5
4
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0-5
0-5
4
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
4
(no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points)
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0-4
0-4
3
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)
a
5
Groundwater discharge
0-3
0-4
0-4
4
d
(no discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points)
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0-4
0-2
4
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
pEntrenchment
/ floodplain access
0-5
0-4
0-2
4
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0-4
0-2
3
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9
Channel sinuosity
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander =max points)
0-5
0-4
0-3
10
Sediment input
0-5
0-4
0-4
1
(extensive deposition = 0; little or no sediment =max points)
�
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
N/A*
0-4
0-5
2
(fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points)
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
0-4
0-5
3
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points)
FPresence
13
of major bank failures
0-5
0-5
0-5
4
a
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
d
14
Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0-4
0-5
2
(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points)
15
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0-5
0-4
0-5
4
(substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points)
16
Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes
0-3
0-5
0-6
3
(no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed = max points)
1
Habitat complexity
0-6
0-6
0-6
4
Fes.
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0-5
0-5
4
x18
(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = max points)
19
Substrate embeddedness
N/A*
0-4
0-4
3
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max)
20
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0-4
0-5
0-5
0
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
21
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0-4
0-4
2
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types =max points)
pPresence
22
of fish
0-4
0-4
0-4
p
Pa
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0-5
0-5
3
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)
Total Points Possible
100
100
100
TOTAL SCORE (Also enter on first page)
69
*These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

USACE AID# DWQ# Site # (indicate on attached map)
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: SWE Group 2. Evaluator's name: Sam Beavans, Mulkey, Inc.
3. Date of evaluation: Aug 17, 2015 4. Time of evaluation: 1:40
5. Name of stream: UT Buffalo Creek (SC) 6. River basin: ar-Pamlico
7. Approximate drainage area: F-54
54 ac 8. Stream order: 1st
9. Length of reach evaluated: 496 ft 10. County: I Fraklin
11. Site coordinates (if known): refer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any):
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 36.096218 Longitude (ex. -77.556611): -78.401421
Method location determined: 17 GPS 17 Topo Sheet F Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS r- Other GIS Other:
13. Location of reach under evaluation (Note nearby roads and landmarks and attach
INE of intersection between Hwy 56 and Perrys Chapel Rd
14. Proposed channel work (if any): I
15. Recent weather conditions: JNo rain in last 48 hours.
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Sunny and 90 degrees
Section 10 F- Tidal Waters F- Essential Fisheries Habitat
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known:
Trout Waters Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters rX- Water Supply Watershed Iv
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES F- NO If yes, estimate the water surface area: 1.4 ac
19. Does channel appear on USGS uad map? [5Z YES F NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Surve ? V YES F NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: % Residential % Commercial I 10 % Industrial 50 % Agricultural
40 % Forested F % Cleared / Logged %Other
22. Bankfull width: 2-3 ft 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 2-3 ft
24. Channel slope down center of stream: r- Flat (0 to 2%) r- Gentle (2 to 4%) rX- Moderate (4 to 10%) r- Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight F Occasional bends r- Frequent meander r- Very sinuous r- Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 61 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature: Sam Beavans Date: I Aug 17, 2015
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change -version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
*These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
ECOR� DINT RANGE
#Ir
CHARACTERISTICS
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
1
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5
0-4
0-5
3
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0-5
0-5
4
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
4
(no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points)
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0-4
0-4
4
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)
a
5
Groundwater discharge
0-3
0-4
0-4
2
d
(no discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points)
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0-4
0-2
4
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
pEntrenchment
/ floodplain access
0-5
0-4
0-2
4
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0-4
0-2
2
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9
Channel sinuosity
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander =max points)
0-5
0-4
0-3
�
10
Sediment input
0-5
0-4
0-4
3
(extensive deposition = 0; little or no sediment =max points)
�
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
N/A*
0-4
0-5
2
(fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points)
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
0-4
0-5
3
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points)
FPresence
13
of major bank failures
0-5
0-5
0-5
3
a
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
d
14
Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0-4
0-5
2
(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points)
15
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0-5
0-4
0-5
4
(substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points)
16
Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes
0-3
0-5
0-6
3
(no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed = max points)
1
Habitat complexity
0-6
0-6
0-6
2
Fes.
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0-5
0-5
4
x18
(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = max points)
19
Substrate embeddedness
N/A*
0-4
0-4
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max)
20
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0-4
0-5
0-5
0
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
21
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0-4
0-4
1
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types =max points)
pPresence
22
of fish
0-4
0-4
0-4
p
Pa
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0-5
0-5
2
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)
Total Points Possible
100
100
100
TOTAL SCORE (Also enter on first page)
61
*These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

USACE AID# DWQ# Site # (indicate on attached map)
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: SWE Group 2. Evaluator's name: Sam Beavans, Mulkey, Inc.
3. Date of evaluation: Aug 17, 2015 4. Time of evaluation: 1:40
5. Name of stream: UT Buffalo Creek (SD) 6. River basin: ar-Pamlico
7. Approximate drainage area: F-20
20 ac 8. Stream order: 1st
9. Length of reach evaluated: 129 ft 10. County: Franklin
11. Site coordinates (if known): refer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any):
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 36.09946 Longitude (ex. -77.556611): -78.399915
Method location determined: 17 GPS 17 Topo Sheet r- Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS r- Other GIS Other:
13. Location of reach under evaluation (Note nearby roads and landmarks and attach
JRuns into SA near the edge of the property line
14. Proposed channel work (if any): I
15. Recent weather conditions: JNo rain in last 48 hours.
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Sunny and 90 degrees
Section 10 F- Tidal Waters F- Essential Fisheries Habitat
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known:
Trout Waters Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters rX- Water Supply Watershed Iv
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? F- YES 9 NOIf yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGSuad map? r- YES V NO 20. Does channel ap ear on USDA Soil Surve ? V YES F NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: f % Residential I % Commercial % Industrial % Agricultural
--F1 00 -% Forested F--% Cleared /Logged F --% Other
22. Bankfull width: 1-2 ft 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 5 ft
24. Channel slope down center of stream: F Flat (0 to 2%) r- Gentle (2 to 4%) rX- Moderate (4 to 10%) r- Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight F Occasional bends r- Frequent meander r- Very sinuous r- Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 42 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature: Sam Beavans Date: I Aug 17, 2015
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change -version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
*These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
ECOR� DINT RANGE
#Ir
CHARACTERISTICS
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
1
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5
0-4
0-5
0
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0-5
0-5
4
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
4
(no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points)
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0-4
0-4
4
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)
5
Groundwater discharge
0-3
0-4
0-4
1
a
d
(no discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points)
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0-4
0-2
3
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
pEntrenchment
/ floodplain access
0-5
0-4
0-2
3
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0-4
0-2
1
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9
Channel sinuosity
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander =max points)
0-5
0-4
0-3
10
Sediment input
0-5
0-4
0-4
1
(extensive deposition = 0; little or no sediment =max points)
�
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
N/A*
0-4
0-5
1
(fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points)
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
0-4
0-5
4
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points)
FPresence
13
of major bank failures
0-5
0-5
0-5
3
a
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
d
14
Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0-4
0-5
(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points)
1
15
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0-5
0-4
0-5
3
(substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points)
16
Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes
0-3
0-5
0-6
(no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed = max points)
1
Habitat complexity
0-6
0-6
0-6
Fes.
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
1
Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0-5
0-5
3
x18
(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = max points)
19
Substrate embeddedness
N/A*
0-4
0-4
1
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max)
20
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0-4
0-5
0-5
0
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
21
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0-4
0-4
0
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types =max points)
pPresence
22
of fish
0-4
0-4
0-4
0
Pa
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0-5
0-5
7
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)
Total Points Possible
100
100
100
TOTAL SCORE (Also enter on first page)
42
*These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

USACE AID# DWQ# Site # (indicate on attached map)
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: SWE Group 2. Evaluator's name:
3. Date of evaluation: Aug 18, 2015 4. Time of evaluation:
5. Name of stream: UT Buffalo Creek (SEup) 6. River basin:
7. Approximate drainage area: F-70 ac 8. Stream order:
9. Length of reach evaluated: 148 ft 10. County:
Sam Beavans, Mulkey, Inc.
:15
ar-Pamlico
1st
Franklin
11. Site coordinates (if known): refer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any)
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 36.106121 Longitude (ex. -77.556611):
-78.4081
Method location determined: 17 GPS 17 Topo Sheet F- Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS F- Other GIS Other:
13. Location of reach under evaluation (Note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
JUpstream portion of SE before headcut, drains ag field on Novozymes Farm 91
14. Proposed channel work (if any): I
15. Recent weather conditions: JNo rain in last 48 hours.
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Sunny and 90 degrees
Section 10 F- Tidal Waters F- Essential Fisheries Habitat
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known:
Trout Waters Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters rX- Water Supply Watershed Iv
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? F- YES 9 NOIf yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS uad map? r- YES V NO 20. Does channel ap ear on USDA Soil Surve ? V YES F NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: % Residential % Commercial % Industrial 95 % Agricultural
I %Forested %Cleared /Logged F % Other
22. Bankfull width: 3-5 ft 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 3-4 ft
24. Channel slope down center of stream: F Flat (0 to 2%) r- Gentle (2 to 4%) rX- Moderate (4 to 10%) r- Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight F Occasional bends r- Frequent meander r- Very sinuous r- Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 40 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature: Sam Beavans Date: I Aug 18, 2015
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change -version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
*These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
ECOR� DINT RANGE
#Ir
CHARACTERISTICS
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
1
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5
0-4
0-5
1
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0-5
0-5
4
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
4
(no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points)
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0-4
0-4
4
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)
5
Groundwater discharge
0-3
0-4
0-4
1
a
d
(no discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points)
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0-4
0-2
1
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
pEntrenchment
/ floodplain access
0-5
0-4
0-2
1
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0-4
0-2
0
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9
Channel sinuosity
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander =max points)
0-5
0-4
0-3
10
Sediment input
0-5
0-4
0-4
1
(extensive deposition = 0; little or no sediment =max points)
�
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
N/A*
0-4
0-5
3
(fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points)
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
0-4
0-5
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points)
FPresence
13
of major bank failures
0-5
0-5
0-5
a
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
d
14
Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0-4
0-5
2
(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points)
15
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0-5
0-4
0-5
1
(substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points)
16
Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes
0-3
0-5
0-6
2
(no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed = max points)
1
Habitat complexity
0-6
0-6
0-6
2
Fes.
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0-5
0-5
3
x18
(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = max points)
19
Substrate embeddedness
N/A*
0-4
0-4
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max)
20
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0-4
0-5
0-5
0
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
21
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0-4
0-4
0
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types =max points)
pPresence
Pa
22
of fish
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
0-4
0-4
0-4
0
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0-5
0-5
2
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)
Total Points Possible
100
100
100
TOTAL SCORE (Also enter on first page)
40
*These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

USACE AID# DWQ# Site # (indicate on attached map)
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: SWE Group 2. Evaluator's name: Sam Beavans, Mulkey, Inc.
3. Date of evaluation: Aug 18, 2015 4. Time of evaluation: :00
5. Name of stream: UT Buffalo Creek (SEdown) 6. River basin: ar-Pamlico
7. Approximate drainage area: --70 ac 8. Stream order: 1st
9. Length of reach evaluated: 1,116 ft 10. County: I Franklin
11. Site coordinates (if known): refer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any):
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 36.10716 Longitude (ex. -77.556611): -78.408272
Method location determined: 17 GPS 17 Topo Sheet r- Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS r- Other GIS Other:
13. Location of reach under evaluation (Note nearby roads and landmarks and attach
lNorth of Perrys Chapel Rd located on Novozymes Farm #1
14. Proposed channel work (if any): F
15. Recent weather conditions: No rain in last 48 hours.
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Overcast and 80 degrees.
Section 10 F- Tidal Waters Essential Fisheries Habitat
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known:
Trout Waters Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters rX- Water Supply Watershed Iv
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? F- YES 9 NOIf yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS uad map? r- YES V NO 20. Does channel ap ear on USDA Soil Surve ? V YES F NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: % Residential % Commercial % Industrial 95 % Agricultural
I %Forested %Cleared /Logged F % Other
22. Bankfull width: 2-5 ft 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 3-5 ft
24. Channel slope down center of stream: F Flat (0 to 2%) 9 Gentle (2 to 4%) r- Moderate (4 to 10%) r- Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight F Occasional bends V Frequent meander r- Very sinuous r- Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 60 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature: Sam Beavans Date: I Aug 18, 2015
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change -version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
*These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
ECOR� DINT RANGE
#Ir
CHARACTERISTICS
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
1
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5
0-4
0-5
4
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0-5
0-5
5
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
4
(no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points)
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0-4
0-4
4
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)
5
Groundwater discharge
0-3
0-4
0-4
1
a
d
(no discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points)
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0-4
0-2
1
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
pEntrenchment
/ floodplain access
0-5
0-4
0-2
1
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0-4
0-2
1
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9
Channel sinuosity
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander =max points)
0-5
0-4
0-3
10
Sediment input
0-5
0-4
0-4
2
(extensive deposition = 0; little or no sediment =max points)
�
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
N/A*
0-4
0-5
4
(fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points)
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
0-4
0-5
3
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points)
FPresence
13
of major bank failures
0-5
0-5
0-5
3
a
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
d
14
Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0-4
0-5
2
(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points)
15
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0-5
0-4
0-5
4
(substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points)
16
Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes
0-3
0-5
0-6
4
(no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed = max points)
1
Habitat complexity
0-6
0-6
0-6
3
Fes.
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0-5
0-5
3
x18
(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = max points)
19
Substrate embeddedness
N/A*
0-4
0-4
3
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max)
20
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0-4
0-5
0-5
1
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
21
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0-4
0-4
1
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types =max points)
pPresence
22
of fish
0-4
0-4
0-4
p
Pa
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0-5
0-5
2
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)
Total Points Possible
100
100
100
TOTAL SCORE (Also enter on first page)
60
*These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

USACE AID# DWQ# Site # (indicate on attached map)
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: SWE Group 2. Evaluator's name: Sam Beavans, Mulkey, Inc.
3. Date of evaluation: Aug 18, 2015 4. Time of evaluation: :20
5. Name of stream: UT Buffalo Creek (SF) 6. River basin: ar-Pamlico
7. Approximate drainage area: F-20
20 ac 8. Stream order: 1st
9. Length of reach evaluated: 145 ft 10. County: Franklin
11. Site coordinates (if known): refer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any):
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 36.106442 Longitude (ex. -77.556611): -78.408431
Method location determined: 17 GPS 17 Topo Sheet F Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS r- Other GIS Other:
13. Location of reach under evaluation (Note nearby roads and landmarks and attach
(Short intermittent stream near the top of SE that then flows into SE and eventually Buffalo Creek
14. Proposed channel work (if any): I
15. Recent weather conditions: JNo rain in last 48 hours.
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Sunny and 90 degrees
Section 10 F- Tidal Waters F- Essential Fisheries Habitat
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known:
Trout Waters Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters rX- Water Supply Watershed Iv
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? F- YES 9 NOIf yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS uad map? YES V NO 20. Does channel ap ear on USDA Soil Surve " F YES FX- NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: % Residential % Commercial % Industrial 95 % Agricultural
I %Forested %Cleared /Logged F % Other
22. Bankfull width: 4-5 ft 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 3-5 ft
24. Channel slope down center of stream: F Flat (0 to 2%) r- Gentle (2 to 4%) rX- Moderate (4 to 10%) r- Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight F Occasional bends r- Frequent meander r- Very sinuous r- Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 40 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature: Sam Beavans Date: I Aug 18, 2015
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change -version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
*These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
ECOR� DINT RANGE
#Ir
CHARACTERISTICS
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
1
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5
0-4
0-5
1
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0-5
0-5
4
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
4
(no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points)
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0-4
0-4
4
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)
5
Groundwater discharge
0-3
0-4
0-4
1
a
d
(no discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points)
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0-4
0-2
1
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
pEntrenchment
/ floodplain access
0-5
0-4
0-2
1
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0-4
0-2
0
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9
Channel sinuosity
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander =max points)
0-5
0-4
0-3
10
Sediment input
0-5
0-4
0-4
1
(extensive deposition = 0; little or no sediment =max points)
�
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
N/A*
0-4
0-5
3
(fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points)
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
0-4
0-5
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points)
FPresence
13
of major bank failures
0-5
0-5
0-5
a
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
d
14
Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0-4
0-5
2
(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points)
15
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0-5
0-4
0-5
1
(substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points)
16
Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes
0-3
0-5
0-6
2
(no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed = max points)
1
Habitat complexity
0-6
0-6
0-6
2
Fes.
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0-5
0-5
3
x18
(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = max points)
19
Substrate embeddedness
N/A*
0-4
0-4
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max)
20
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0-4
0-5
0-5
0
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
21
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0-4
0-4
0
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types =max points)
pPresence
Pa
22
of fish
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
0-4
0-4
0-4
0
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0-5
0-5
2
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)
Total Points Possible
100
100
100
TOTAL SCORE (Also enter on first page)
40
*These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

USACE AID# DWQ# Site # (indicate on attached map)
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: SWE Group 2. Evaluator's name:
3. Date of evaluation: Aug 18, 2015 4. Time of evaluation:
5. Name of stream: UT Buffalo Creek (SG) 6. River basin:
7. Approximate drainage area: -20 ac 8. Stream order:
9. Length of reach evaluated: 500 ft 10. County:
Sam Beavans, Mulkey, Inc.
:45
ar-Pamlico
1st
Franklin
11. Site coordinates (if known): refer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any)
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 36.10809 Longitude (ex. -77.556611):
-78.407076
Method location determined: 17 GPS 17 Topo Sheet F- Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS r- Other GIS Other:
13. Location of reach under evaluation (Note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
lNorth of Perrys Chapel Rd located on Novozymes Farm #1
14. Proposed channel work (if any): F
15. Recent weather conditions: No rain in last 48 hours.
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Overcast and 80 degrees.
Section 10 F- Tidal Waters Essential Fisheries Habitat
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known:
Trout Waters Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters rX- Water Supply Watershed Iv
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? F- YES 9 NOIf yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS uad map? YES V NO 20. Does channel ap ear on USDA Soil Surve " F YES FX- NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: f % Residential I % Commercial % Industrial 90 % Agricultural
10 %Forested F--% Cleared /Logged F--% Other
22. Bankfull width: 2-5 ft 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 2-4 ft
24. Channel slope down center of stream: F Flat (0 to 2%) 9 Gentle (2 to 4%) r- Moderate (4 to 10%) r- Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight F Occasional bends V Frequent meander r- Very sinuous r- Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 60 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature: Sam Beavans Date: I Aug 18, 2015
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change -version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
*These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
ECOR� DINT RANGE
#Ir
CHARACTERISTICS
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
1
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5
0-4
0-5
4
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0-5
0-5
5
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
4
(no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points)
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0-4
0-4
4
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)
a
5
Groundwater discharge
0-3
0-4
0-4
2
d
(no discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points)
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0-4
0-2
1
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
pEntrenchment
/ floodplain access
0-5
0-4
0-2
2
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0-4
0-2
1
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9
Channel sinuosity
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander =max points)
0-5
0-4
0-3
�
10
Sediment input
0-5
0-4
0-4
2
(extensive deposition = 0; little or no sediment =max points)
�
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
N/A*
0-4
0-5
3
(fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points)
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
0-4
0-5
3
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points)
FPresence
13
of major bank failures
0-5
0-5
0-5
3
a
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
d
14
Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0-4
0-5
2
(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points)
15
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0-5
0-4
0-5
4
(substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points)
16
Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes
0-3
0-5
0-6
4
(no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed = max points)
1
Habitat complexity
0-6
0-6
0-6
3
Fes.
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0-5
0-5
3
x18
(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = max points)
19
Substrate embeddedness
N/A*
0-4
0-4
3
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max)
20
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0-4
0-5
0-5
1
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
21
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0-4
0-4
1
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types =max points)
pPresence
Pa
22
of fish
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
0-4
0-4
0-4
p
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0-5
0-5
2
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)
Total Points Possible
100
100
100
TOTAL SCORE (Also enter on first page)
60
*These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

USACE AID# DWQ# Site # (indicate on attached map)
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: SWE Group 2. Evaluator's name:
3. Date of evaluation: Aug 18, 2015 4. Time of evaluation:
5. Name of stream: UT Buffalo Creek (SH) 6. River basin:
7. Approximate drainage area: --10 ac 8. Stream order:
9. Length of reach evaluated: 123 ft 10. County:
Sam Beavans, Mulkey, Inc.
10:15:00 AM
ar-Pamlico
1st
Franklin
11. Site coordinates (if known): refer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any)
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 36.10783 Longitude (ex. -77.556611):
-78.406573
Method location determined: 17 GPS 17 Topo Sheet F- Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS F- Other GIS Other:
13. Location of reach under evaluation (Note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
lNorth of Perrys Chapel Rd located on Novozymes Farm #1
14. Proposed channel work (if any): F
15. Recent weather conditions: No rain in last 48 hours.
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Overcast and 80 degrees.
Section 10 F- Tidal Waters Essential Fisheries Habitat
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known:
Trout Waters Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters rX- Water Supply Watershed Iv
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? F- YES 9 NOIf yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS uad map? YES V NO 20. Does channel ap ear on USDA Soil Surve " F YES FX- NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: f % Residential I % Commercial % Industrial % Agricultural
--F1 00 -% Forested F--% Cleared /Logged F--% Other
22. Bankfull width: 2-4 ft 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 5-2 ft
24. Channel slope down center of stream: F Flat (0 to 2%) 9 Gentle (2 to 4%) r- Moderate (4 to 10%) r- Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight F Occasional bends r- Frequent meander r- Very sinuous r- Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 47 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature: Sam Beavans Date: I Aug 18, 2015
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change -version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
*These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
ECOR� DINT RANGE
#Ir
CHARACTERISTICS
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
1
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5
0-4
0-5
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0-5
0-5
5
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
4
(no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points)
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0-4
0-4
4
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)
a
5
Groundwater discharge
0-3
0-4
0-4
2
d
(no discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points)
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0-4
0-2
1
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
pEntrenchment
/ floodplain access
0-5
0-4
0-2
2
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0-4
0-2
0
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9
Channel sinuosity
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander =max points)
0-5
0-4
0-3
10
Sediment input
0-5
0-4
0-4
2
(extensive deposition = 0; little or no sediment =max points)
�
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
N/A*
0-4
0-5
2
(fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points)
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
0-4
0-5
3
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points)
FPresence
13
of major bank failures
0-5
0-5
0-5
3
a
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
d
14
Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0-4
0-5
2
(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points)
15
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0-5
0-4
0-5
4
(substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points)
16
Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes
0-3
0-5
0-6
2
(no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed = max points)
1
Habitat complexity
0-6
0-6
0-6
Fes.
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
1
Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0-5
0-5
3
x18
(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = max points)
19
Substrate embeddedness
N/A*
0-4
0-4
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max)
20
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0-4
0-5
0-5
0
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
21
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0-4
0-4
0
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types =max points)
pPresence
22
of fish
0-4
0-4
0-4
0
Pa
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0-5
0-5
2
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)
Total Points Possible
100
100
100
TOTAL SCORE (Also enter on first page)
47
*These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

USACE AID# DWQ# Site # (indicate on attached map)
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: SWE Group 2. Evaluator's name:
3. Date of evaluation: Aug 18, 2015 4. Time of evaluation:
5. Name of stream: UT Buffalo Creek (SI) 6. River basin:
7. Approximate drainage area: --10 ac 8. Stream order:
9. Length of reach evaluated: 96 ft 10. County:
Sam Beavans, Mulkey, Inc.
11:00:00 AM
ar-Pamlico
1st
Franklin
11. Site coordinates (if known):refer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any)
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 36.108515 Longitude (ex. -77.556611):
-78.407483
Method location determined: 17 GPS 17 Topo Sheet F- Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS F- Other GIS Other:
13. Location of reach under evaluation (Note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
lNorth of Perrys Chapel Rd located on Novozymes Farm #1
14. Proposed channel work (if any): F
15. Recent weather conditions: No rain in last 48 hours.
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Overcast and 80 degrees.
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: Section 10 Tidal Waters Essential Fisheries Habitat
Trout Waters Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters rX- Water Supply Watershed Iv
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? F- YES 9 NOIf yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS uad map? YES V NO 20. Does channel ap ear on USDA Soil Surve " F YES FX- NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: % Residential % Commercial % Industrial 95 % Agricultural
I %Forested %Cleared /Logged F % Other
22. Bankfull width: 3-5 ft 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 3-5 ft
24. Channel slope down center of stream: F Flat (0 to 2%) 9 Gentle (2 to 4%) r- Moderate (4 to 10%) r- Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight F Occasional bends r- Frequent meander r- Very sinuous r- Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 54 Comments:
Perennial portion starts at a headcut, upstream of headcut was called ephemeral.
Evaluator's Signature: Sam Beavans Date: I Aug 18, 2015
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change -version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
*These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
ECOR� DINT RANGE
#Ir
CHARACTERISTICS
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
1
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5
0-4
0-5
3
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0-5
0-5
5
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
4
(no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points)
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0-4
0-4
4
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)
a
5
Groundwater discharge
0-3
0-4
0-4
2
d
(no discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points)
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0-4
0-2
3
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
pEntrenchment
/ floodplain access
0-5
0-4
0-2
2
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0-4
0-2
0
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9
Channel sinuosity
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander =max points)
0-5
0-4
0-3
�
10
Sediment input
0-5
0-4
0-4
2
(extensive deposition = 0; little or no sediment =max points)
�
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
N/A*
0-4
0-5
3
(fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points)
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
0-4
0-5
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points)
FPresence
13
of major bank failures
0-5
0-5
0-5
2
a
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
d
14
Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0-4
0-5
2
(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points)
15
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0-5
0-4
0-5
4
(substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points)
16
Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes
0-3
0-5
0-6
2
(no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed = max points)
1
Habitat complexity
0-6
0-6
0-6
2
Fes.
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0-5
0-5
3
x18
(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = max points)
19
Substrate embeddedness
N/A*
0-4
0-4
3
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max)
20
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0-4
0-5
0-5
0
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
21
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0-4
0-4
1
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types =max points)
pPresence
22
of fish
0-4
0-4
0-4
0
Pa
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0-5
0-5
2
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)
Total Points Possible
100
100
100
TOTAL SCORE (Also enter on first page)
54
*These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Novozymes City/County: Franklin Sampling Date: 8/17/2015
Applicant/Owner: SWE Group State: NC Sampling Point: WB 07
Investigator(s): Mark Mickley, Mulkey, Inc. Section, Township, Range: Franklinton, NC
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): depression Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat: 36.9703 Long: -78.401915 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: HeB Helena sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes NWI classification: PEM
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
NCWAM Basin Wetland
HGM Code DEPRESS
Waters Type RPWWD Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Surface Water (A1)
X True Aquatic Plants (B14)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
X High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (1310)
X Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (131)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
X Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (B3)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
X FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes
X No Depth (inches): 12
Saturation Present? Yes
X No Depth (inches): 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Old pond areas, dams were blown out more than 10 years ago.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont –Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft )
1 Acer rubrum FAC
2.
3.
[:1
Sampling Point:WB 07
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
% Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
10 X FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A)
x 2 =
Total Number of Dominant
1.Impatiens capensis
Species Across All Strata: 3 (B)
50 X
Percent of Dominant Species
2.Typha Iatifolia
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100% (A/B)
10 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 5 20% of total cover: 2
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft )
1.
2.
WIN
5.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 0 20% of total cover: 0
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft )
1.Cephalanthus occidentalis OBL 2 X OBL
4.
2 = Total Cover
6.
7.
70 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 35 20% of total cover: 14
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft )
1.
3.
4.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 0 20% of total cover: 0
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
50% of total cover:
1 20% of total cover:
0.4
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
5 ft )
x 2 =
FAC species
1.Impatiens capensis
FACW
50 X
FACW
2.Typha Iatifolia
OBL
10
OBL
3 Solidago spp.
5
4.Baccharis halimifolia
FACW
5
FACW
6.
7.
70 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 35 20% of total cover: 14
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft )
1.
3.
4.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 0 20% of total cover: 0
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is <-3.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH)
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: WB 07
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Redox Features
(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist) % Type' Loc Texture Remarks
0-3
10 YR 3/3
100
SaClLoam
3-10
2.5 YR 5/2
80
10 YR 4/6 20 C M SaClLoam
10-12
10 YR 3/1
100
SaClLoam
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol (Al)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11:
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric So
Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF 12)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Novozymes City/County: Franklin Sampling Date: 8/17/2015
Applicant/Owner: SWE Group State: Sampling Point: WB 07
Investigator(s): Mark Mickley, Mulkey, Inc. Section, Township, Range: Franklinton, NC
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat: 36.97128 Long: -78.402024 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Wedowee sandy loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes NWI classification: Upland
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
NCWAM
HGM Code
Waters Type UPLANDS Uplands
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Surface Water (A1)
_ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (1310)
Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (131)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (B3)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
_ FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring
well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont –Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point:WB 07
50% of total cover: 0 20% of total cover—0
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft ) approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
1.Phytolacca americana FACU 10 X FACU (7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
2. Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
3• approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
5.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
30 ft )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 Liriodendron tulipifera
FACU
45
X
FACU
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A)
2.Liquidambar styraciflua
FAC
25
X
FAC
Acer rubrum
FAC
20
X
FAC
Total Number of Dominant
3.
Species Across All Strata: 7 (B)
4 Pinus taeda
FAC
5
FAC
5 Quercus phellos
FACW
5
FACW
Percent of Dominant Species 71
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
100 = Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by
50% of total cover:
50 20% of
total cover:
20
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling Stratum (Plot size:
15 ft )
1 Liquidambar styraciflua
FAC
5
X
FAC
FACW species x 2 =
2.Juniperus virginiana
FAC
5
X
FAC
species x 3 =
3 Diospyros virginiana
FAC
2
FAC
FACFAC
species x 4 =
UPL s
PL species x 5 =
4.
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5.
6.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
12
= Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
50% of total cover:
6 20% of
total cover:
2.4
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
15 ft )
x 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
1
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is <-3.0'
2
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
3.
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
4.
5.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
6.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
= Total Cover
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
50% of total cover: 0 20% of total cover—0
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft ) approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
1.Phytolacca americana FACU 10 X FACU (7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
2. Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
3• approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
5.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
6
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
7.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
$
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
9
ft (1 m) in height.
10.
11.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
10 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 5 20% of total cover: 2
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft )
1.Smilax rotundifolia FAC 30 X FAC
2.Lonicera japonica FAC 5 FAC
3 Vitis rotundifolia FAC 2 FAC
4.
Hydrophytic
37 = Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover: 18.5 20% of total cover: 7,4 Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: WB 07
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc Texture Remarks
0_8 10 YR 4/4 100 SaLoam
8_12 10 YR 7/2 100 SaLoam
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol (Al)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric So
Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF 12)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Novozymes City/County: Franklin Sampling Date: 8/17/2015
Applicant/Owner: SWE Group State: NC Sampling Point: WD32
Investigator(s): Mark Mickley, Mulkey, Inc. Section, Township, Range: Franklinton, NC
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): depression Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat: 36.98963 Long: -78.400122 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: HeB Helena sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
NCWAM Bottomland Hardwood Forest
HGM Code RIVERINE
Waters Type RPWWD Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Surface Water (A1)
_ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
X High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
X Drainage Patterns (1310)
X Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (131)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
X Drift Deposits (B3)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
X FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
X
Water Table Present? Yes No
Depth (inches): 6
Saturation Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring
well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point:WD32
5. Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
6 approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
7. Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
$ herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
9 ft (1 m) in height.
10.
11. Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
120 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 60 20% of total cover: 24
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft )
1.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
= Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover: 0 20% of total cover: 0 Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
50% of total cover:
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
30 ft )
% Cover
Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 Acer rubrum
FAC
50
X FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
2.Liriodendron tulipifera
FACU
20
X FACU
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Liquidambar styraciflua
FAC
15
FAC
Total Number of Dominant
3
FAC
30
FAC
Species Across All Strata: 6 (B)
4 Ulmus americana
FACW
10
FACW
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
5.Nyssa sylvatica
FAC
5
FAC
Percent of Dominant Species 67%
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
100 = Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by
50% of total cover:
50 20% of
total cover: 20
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling Stratum (Plot size:
15 ft )
1 Liquidambar styraciflua
FAC
10
X FAC
FACW species x 2 =
2.Ulmus americana
FACW
10
X FACU
FAC species x 3 =
3 Ulmus alata
FACU
5
FACW
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
4.
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5.
6.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
25
= Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
50% of total cover:
12.5 20% of
total cover: 5
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
15 ft )
x 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
1 Arundinaria gigantea
FACW
10
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is <-3.0'
2
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
3.
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
4.
5.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
6.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
10
= Total Cover
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
5. Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
6 approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
7. Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
$ herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
9 ft (1 m) in height.
10.
11. Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
120 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 60 20% of total cover: 24
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft )
1.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
= Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover: 0 20% of total cover: 0 Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
50% of total cover:
5 20% of total cover:
5 ft
_2
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
)
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
1.Boehmeria cylindrica
FACW
60 X
FACW
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
2.Impatiens capensis
FACW
30 X
FACW
Sapling -Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
3.Microstegium vimineum
FAC
30
FAC
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
5. Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
6 approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
7. Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
$ herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
9 ft (1 m) in height.
10.
11. Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
120 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 60 20% of total cover: 24
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft )
1.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
= Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover: 0 20% of total cover: 0 Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: WD32
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Redox Features
(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist) % Type' Loc Texture Remarks
0-3
10 YR 4/3
100
SaClLoam
3-6
10 YR 4/1
90
10 YR 4/3 10 C M SaClLoam
6-12
10 YR 4/1
100
SaClLoam
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol (Al)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11:
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric So
Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF 12)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Novozymes City/County: Franklin Sampling Date: 8/17/2015
Applicant/Owner: SWE Group State: Sampling Point: WD 32
Investigator(s): Mark Mickley, Mulkey, Inc. Section, Township, Range: Franklinton, NC
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%): 2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat: 36.9894 Long: -78.399946 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: HeB Helena sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes NWI classification: Upland
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
NCWAM
HGM Code
Waters Type UPLANDS Uplands
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Surface Water (A1)
_ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (1310)
Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (131)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (B3)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
_ FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring
well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont –Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point:WD 32
50% of total cover: 25_ 20% of total cover:_1
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft ) approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
1.Polystichum acrostichoides FAC 5 X FAC (7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
2. Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
3• approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
5.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
30 ft )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 Liriodendron tulipifera
FACU
40
X
FACU
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 7 (A)
2 Acer rubrum
FAC
40
X
FAC
Liquidambar styraciflua
FAC
30
X
FAC
Total Number of Dominant
3
Species Across All Strata: $ (B)
4 Pinus taeda
FAC
5
FAC
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 88% (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
115 = Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by
50% of total cover:
58 20% of
total cover:
23
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling Stratum (Plot size:
15 ft )
1 Acer rubrum
FAC
10
X
FAC
FACW species x 2 =
2.Ilex opaca
FAC
2
FAC
species x 3 =
3 Juniperus virginiana
FAC
2
FAC
FACFAC
species x 4 =
UPL s
PL species x 5 =
4.
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5.
6.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
14
= Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
50% of total cover:
7 20% of
total cover:
2.8
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
15 ft )
x 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
1 Viburnum dentatum
FAC
5
X
FAC
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is <-3.0'
2
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
3.
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
4.
5.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
6.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
5
= Total Cover
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
50% of total cover: 25_ 20% of total cover:_1
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft ) approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
1.Polystichum acrostichoides FAC 5 X FAC (7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
2. Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
3• approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
5.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
6
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
7.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
$
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
9
ft (1 m) in height.
10.
11.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
5 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 2.5 20% of total cover: 1
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft )
1.Vitis rotundifolia FAC 5 X FAC
2.Lonicera japonica FAC 2 X FAC
3.
4.
Hydrophytic
7 = Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover: 3.5 20% of total cover: 1.4 Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: WD 32
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc Texture Remarks
0-12 10 YR 6/3 100 SaLoam
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol (Al)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric So
Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF 12)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Novozymes City/County: Franklin Sampling Date: 8/18/2015
Applicant/Owner: SWE Group State: NC Sampling Point: WE 07
Investigator(s): Mark Mickley, Mulkey, Inc. Section, Township, Range: Franklinton, NC
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): drainage way Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat: 36.108082 Long: -78.408141 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: ChA - Chewacla and Wehadkee soils, 0 to 3 percent slopes NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
NCWAM Bottomland Hardwood Forest
HGM Code RIVERINE
Waters Type RPWWD Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Surface Water (A1)
_ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
X Drainage Patterns (1310)
X Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (131)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (B3)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
_ FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 6
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring
well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
[y
70 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 35 20% of total cover: 14
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft )
1 Acer rubrum FAC 10 X FAC
2.Liquidambar styraciflua FAC 2 FAC
WIN
5.
12 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 6 20% of total cover: 2.4
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft )
1.Lindera benzoin FACW 30 X FACW
4.
5.
30 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 1 S 20% of total cover: 6
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft )
1.Microstegium vimineum FAC 90 X FAC
2.Andropogon glomeratus FACW 2 FACW
3.
6.
7.
92 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 46 20% of total cover: 18.4
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft )
1.
3.
4.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 0 20% of total cover: 0
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Sampling Point:WE 07
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 80% (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft )
% Cover
Species? Status
1 Liriodendron tulipifera FACU
50
X FACU
2 Acer rubrum FAC
15
X FAC
3 Liquidambar styraciflua FAC
5
FAC
[y
70 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 35 20% of total cover: 14
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft )
1 Acer rubrum FAC 10 X FAC
2.Liquidambar styraciflua FAC 2 FAC
WIN
5.
12 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 6 20% of total cover: 2.4
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft )
1.Lindera benzoin FACW 30 X FACW
4.
5.
30 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 1 S 20% of total cover: 6
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft )
1.Microstegium vimineum FAC 90 X FAC
2.Andropogon glomeratus FACW 2 FACW
3.
6.
7.
92 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 46 20% of total cover: 18.4
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft )
1.
3.
4.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 0 20% of total cover: 0
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Sampling Point:WE 07
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 80% (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is <-3.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH)
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: WE 07
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Redox Features
(MLRA 147, 148)
(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist) % Type' Loc
Texture Remarks
0-2
10 YR 2/2
100
SaClLoam
2-6
10 YR 6/6
100
SaClLoam
6-10
10 YR 4/1
80
7.5 YR 3/4 20 C M
SaClLoam
10-12
10 YR 4/1
90
7.5 YR 3/4 10 C M
SaClLoam
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol (Al)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11:
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric So
Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF 12)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Novozymes City/County: Franklin Sampling Date: 8/18/2015
Applicant/Owner: SWE Group State: NC Sampling Point: WE 07
Investigator(s): Mark Mickley, Mulkey, Inc. Section, Township, Range: Franklinton, NC
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%): 3
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat: 36.108048 Long: -78.408012 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: ChA - Chewacla and Wehadkee soils, 0 to 3 percent slopes NWI classification: Upland
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS —Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
NCWAM
HGM Code
Waters Type UPLANDS Uplands
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Surface Water (A1)
_ True Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (131)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (62)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (133)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (B5)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring
well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point:WE 07
50% of total cover: 2 S 20% of total cover:_1
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft ) approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
1.Microstegium vimineum FAC 35 X FAC (7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
2.Polystichum acrostichoides FAC 5 FAC
Sapling -Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
3• approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
5.
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
30 ft )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 Pinus taeda
FAC
30
X
FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 8 (A)
2 Acer rubrum
FAC
30
X
FAC
Liquidambar styraciflua
FAC
20
FAC
Total Number of Dominant
g
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
11.
Species Across All Strata: 8 (B)
4 Liriodendron tulipifera
FACU
20
FACU
20 20% of total cover: 8
5.Cornus florida
FACU
5
FACU
Percent of Dominant Species 100%
FAC
30 X FAC
2.Toxicodendron radicans
FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
6.
3.
4.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
109; = Total Cover
5.
Hydrophytic
Total % Cover of: Multiply by
50% of total cover:
53 20% of
total cover:
21
20 20% of total cover: 8
Present? Yes X No
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling Stratum (Plot size:
15 ft )
1 Acer rubrum
FAC
10
X
FAC
FACW species x 2 =
2.Liquidambar styraciflua
FAC
10
X
FAC
FAC species x 3 =
3 Quercus rubra
FACU
2
FACU
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
4.
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5.
6.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
22
= Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
50% of total cover:
11 20% of
total cover:
4.4
— 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
15 ft )
x 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
1.Lindera benzoin
FACW
5
X
FACW
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is <-3.0'
2
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
3.
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
4.
5.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
6.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
5
= Total Cover
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
50% of total cover: 2 S 20% of total cover:_1
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft ) approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
1.Microstegium vimineum FAC 35 X FAC (7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
2.Polystichum acrostichoides FAC 5 FAC
Sapling -Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
3• approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
5.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
6
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
7.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
$
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
9
ft (1 m) in height.
10.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
11.
40 = Total Cover
50% of total cover:
20 20% of total cover: 8
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
30 ft )
1.Vitis rotundifolia
FAC
30 X FAC
2.Toxicodendron radicans
FAC
10 X FAC
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
40 = Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
20 20% of total cover: 8
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: WE 07
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc Texture Remarks
0-12 7.5 YR 5/8 100 SaLoam
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol (Al)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric So
Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF 12)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0