20031003 Ver 1_COMPLETE FILE_20030812 (2)

WETLANDS 1401 GROUP
JUL 13 2004
WATER QUALITY SECTION
RESTORATION PLAN.
DANIELS FARM WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
Franklin County, North Carolina
October 2003
Prepared by., KCI Associates of North Carolina
4601 Six Forks Road, Suite 200
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609
KCI
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH CAROLINA, PA
RESTORATION PLAN
DANIELS FARM WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
Franklin County, North Carolina
October 2003
Prepared by., KCI Associates of North Carolina
4601 Six Forks Road, Suite 220
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609
Kci
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH CAROLINA, PA
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Daniels Farm Wetland Restoration Site is located within the Tar-Pamlico River Watershed (USGS
Hydrologic Unit 03020101 and North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) sub-basin 04-00-
70). The watershed is located in the Raleigh Belt of the Piedmont physiographic region. The local
watershed drains approximately 101 acres consisting of 56 acres of agriculture, 39 acres of forest and 6
acres of urban land uses.
The site is located approximately 1260 feet north of Egypt Church Road (SR 1604) along the western
property line of the Clyde Daniels Farm, south-southeast of Louisburg in Franklin County, North
Carolina. The 33.93 acres that comprise the site are situated on portions of Farm Tract T3792, Field 13
(25.4 acres) and Farm Tract T3791, Field 1 (20.6 acres). Current land use/land cover is agriculture, with
mixed deciduous and evergreen forest around the perimeter to the west and east, and agricultural farm
fields adjacent to the site to the north and south.
Historical site conditions were reviewed to understand the chronology of land use at the site and to assist
in the development of an appropriate restoration strategy. Aerial photographs of the site were obtained
from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service District Office in
Franklin County for the years 1938, 1955, 1973, 1982, and 2000. Based on the historical aerial
photographs reviewed, it appears that the Daniels Farm Wetland Restoration Site was forested until 1982,
when it was cleared and utilized for agriculture. There is no visible evidence of other mass disturbance
such as filling or mining on the site in any of the reviewed photographs.
A detailed soils investigation was conducted to determine the extent and distribution of the hydric soils on
the site and to classify the predominate soils identified to the soil series level. The Franklin County Soil
Survey classified the soils underlying the site as Altavista sandy loam. However, detailed soil mapping
by KCI soil scientists identified the following primary soil series on the property: Altavista (Fine-loamy,
mixed, semiactive, thermic Aquic Hapludults), Augusta (Fine-loamy, mixed, semiactive, thermic Aeric
Endoaquults), Roanoke (Fine, mixed, semiactive, thermic Typic Endoaquults), and Toisnot (Coarse-
loamy, siliceous, semiactive, thermic Typic Fragiaquults). The Roanoke and Toisnot soil series are listed
as hydric soils in Franklin County because of saturation for a significant period during the growing
season. Altavista and Augusta soils are not considered hydric but have inclusions of hydric soils within
the soil mapping unit. The Roanoke and Toisnot hydric soils comprise approximately 89 percent of the
site, while Altavista, Augusta and other non-hydric inclusions cover approximately 11 percent of the site.
Site hydrology was evaluated during field investigations and by applying a water budget analysis to the
site. The hydrologic source for the site is based on high groundwater, overland surface flow, and
groundwater seeps and springs; no natural streams are found in the proposed restoration area. An
apparent topographic divide near the southern end of the site directs water to the western and northern
sides of the site to existing drainage ditches that flow east. Water directed to the other side of the
topographic divide flows toward the eastern and northern sides of the site, where there are smaller
drainage features (grassed waterways) that direct water downslope to the north and offsite toward
constructed ponds to the east.
Much of the water on the site is attributed to a relatively high water table and numerous groundwater
seeps located in the central and eastern portions of the site. Several seeps or springs are found upslope of
the project area, indicating groundwater discharge is prominent in the local vicinity seasonally from
November to March. The site groundwater was evaluated by monitoring the water level with eight on-
site Solinst Levelogger gages, a barometric control gage, and a Levelogger gage.
Both surface water and groundwater are removed from the site via grassed waterways and ditches. A
significant portion of the surface water draining to the site is diverted around and away from the site via a
ditched channel and a farm drainage ditch, which run parallel to each other along the western edge of the
site, and eventually drain to the Tar River north of the site. Additionally, grassed waterways have been
constructed to channel water away from groundwater seeps, draining the central and eastern parts of the
site. The farm drainage ditch flows north then east into a lateral drainage ditch that bisects the site. The
lateral ditch flows from the western site boundary to the eastern boundary, and then continues offsite.
Existing site hydrology was modeled by developing an annual water budget that calculates water inputs
and outputs, and the change in storage on a monthly time step. The hydrographs for the average, dry, and
wet years show a similar pattern of seasonal water table levels. Water table recharge occurs during the
late fall and winter months until a rapid water table draw down occurs as PET rates increase in the spring.
During the summer, the water budget model shows the existing site is unsaturated within the upper 36
inches of soil. The proposed conditions water budget shows the annual hydrographs for the same three
climatic years, reflecting dry, average, and wet conditions. Without the estimated groundwater loss from
the ditch/drainage network, the water table recharges earlier in the fall, maintains a shallower soil depth
for a greater duration, and remains within 12 inches of the soil surface for a greater proportion of the
growing season.
The clearing, draining, and conversion of the site to agriculture has altered its natural wetland ecological
function and diminished its capacity for natural biological productivity, biogeochemical cycling, nutrient
cycling, and water quality enhancement. Under the current conditions, lateral drains, grassed waterways
and the ditching have effectively altered the hydrology of the site, decreasing the amount of water
available for soil saturation and extended periods of inundation. In its present state, the site is only
fulfilling a small proportion of its potential and historical wetland functional role within the landscape.
Restoration of the site will focus on the removal of hydrologic alterations and reforestation of the site
with species common to Low Elevation Seeps and Nonriverine Wet Hardwood Forests. The proposed
wetland mitigation activities will result in substantial enhancement of the existing water quality and
habitat functions onsite. Elimination of channelized flow from agricultural ditches that drain in two
different directions to the Tar River will drastically reduce nutrient, pesticide and sediment runoff from
the site and improve downstream water quality in the Tar River. The proposed ditch plugging and filling
will result in increased short-term surface and subsurface water storage, and a subsequent increase in the
duration and elevation of the seasonally high water table.
Specific actions proposed to achieve the goals and objectives of the project include:
• Filling the primary drainage ditch along the western site boundary
• Filling the farm drainage ditch along the western site boundary
• Plugging the lateral ditch with a ditch plug
• Filling the grassed waterways
• Removing ditch spoil from wooded areas to restore natural seepage patterns
• Placing water diversion features, where appropriate, to redistribute the surface hydrology
• Placing restrictive berms, where appropriate, to reduce runoff and enhance infiltration
• Recreating microtopography across the site to enhance surface water retention and storage,
and to provide amphibian breeding habitat where possible
• Disking the ground surface to reduce compaction from pastured cattle
• Re-vegetating the site with Low Elevation Seep and Nonriverine Wet Hardwood Forest
species
ii
DANIELS FARM MITIGATION PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Executive Summary ...........................................................................................................................i
1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................1
1.1 Goals and Objectives .................................................................................................1
1.2 Site Description ..........................................................................................................1
1.3 Watershed Characteristics ..........................................................................................1
1.4 Historical Site Conditions .....................................................................................:...............1
1.5 Constraints .............................................................................................................................5
1.5.1 Rare, Threatened, and Endangered (RTE) Species Documentation ..............5
1.5.2 Cultural Resources ...................................................................................................5
1.5.3 Environmental Hazards ............................................................................................6
2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS .................................................................................................... 6
2.1 Hydrology/Hydraulics ................................................................................................ 6
2.1.1 Surface Water ................................................................................................. 8
2.1.2 Groundwater .................................................................................................. 8
2.1.3 Water Budget ................................................................................................. 10
2.2 Soils ............................................................................................................................ 11
2.2.1 Historic Hydric Soils ...................................................................................... 15
2.3 Ecological Communities ............................................................................................ 16
2.4 Assessment of Site Conditions ................................................................................... 18
3.0 WETLAND RESTORATION ACTIVITIES ........................................................................19
3.1 Wetland Restoration ...................................................................................................21
3.1.1 Hydrologic Alterations ...................................................................................21
3.1.2 Vegetative Community Establishment ..........................................................22
4.0 WETLAND MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES.
4.1 Post Implementation Documentation...
4.2 Monitoring and Success Criteria..........
4.2.1 Hydrology ................................
4.2.2 Vegetation ................................
4.3 Management Plan/Remedial Activities
..................................................................23
..................................................................23
..................................................................23
..................................................................23
..................................................................23
..................................................................24
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
TABLES
Table 1 Summary Groundwater Levels ..................................................................................10
Table 2 Summary of Soil Series Mapping ..............................................................................15
Table 3 Restoration Type and Extent ......................................................................................19
FIGURES
Figure 1 Vicinity Map .............................................................................................................. 2
Figure 2 Site Location Map ...................................................................................................... 3
Figure 3 Site Watershed Map ................................................................................................... 4
Figure 4 Site Hydrology ........................................................................................................... 7
Figure 5 Groundwater Monitoring Gauges .............................................................................. 9
Figure 6 Soil Map ..................................................................................................................... 12
Figure 7 Limits of Hydric Soils ................................................................................................ 14
Figure 8 Existing Ecological Communities .............................................................................. 17
Figure 9 Restoration Type, Extents and Distribution ............................................................... 20
APPENDICES
Appendix A NRCS Letter Regarding Prior Converted Status
Appendix B Historical Aerial Photographs
Appendix C Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report
Appendix D Groundwater Hydrographs
Appendix E Hydric Soils Certification Letter and Soil Boring Descriptions
Appendix F Existing and Post-Restoration Water Budgets
Appendix G Permits
Appendix H Plans
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The following section presents background information pertaining to the Daniels Farm Site.
Assessments of both historical and existing site conditions were developed from data gathered during
field investigations, desktop review of relevant documents, and landowner interviews conducted between
November 2002 and February 2003.
1.1 Goals and Objectives
The goal of the project is to re-establish a nonriverine wetland that will restore ecosystem processes,
structure, and composition to mitigate for wetland functions and values that have been lost as a result of
anthropogenic disturbances in this region of the Tar-Pamlico River Basin.
Functions that will be restored as a result of the restoration include:
¦ Aquatic/Terrestrial Wildlife Habitat
¦ Water Quality
¦ Ground water Recharge
¦ Nutrient Cycling
¦ Low Elevation Seep and Nonriverine Wet Hardwood Communities
1.2 Site Description
The site is located approximately 1260 feet north of Egypt Church Road (SR 1604) along the western
property line of the Clyde Daniels Farm, approximately 3.5 miles south-southeast of Louisburg in
Franklin County, North Carolina (Figure 1). The site is located on the Louisburg, North Carolina USGS
7.5 minute topographic quadrangle, near the headwaters of two unnamed first-order tributaries to the Tar
River (Figure 2). The ground elevation at the Daniels Farm Site is approximately 185 to 200 feet above
mean sea level, as determined from the USGS topographic quadrangle. Topography at the site is
generally flat, and slopes gently in a northeasterly direction toward a tributary of the Tar River. The
33.93 acres that comprise the site are situated on portions of Farm Tract T3792, Field 13 (25.4 acres) and
Farm Tract T3791, Field 1 (20.6 acres).
1.3 Watershed Characteristics
The site is located in USGS Hydrologic Unit 03020101 and North Carolina Division of Water Quality
(NCDWQ) sub-basin 04-00-70 of the Tar-Pamlico River Basin. The site is generally flat and
depressional with slopes ranging from 0 to 2%. The watershed is located in the Raleigh Belt of the
Piedmont physiographic region. The site is underlain by foliated to massive granite, and is located west
of a prominent northeast-southwest trending anticline. Much of the site is located on a historic terrace
feature associated with the Tar River, which is located approximately 825 feet north of the northernmost
extent of the site.
The local watershed drains approximately 101 acres consisting of 56 acres of agriculture, 39 acres of
forest and 6 acres of urban land uses (Figure 3). Current land use/land cover is agriculture with mixed
deciduous and evergreen forest around the perimeter to the west and east.
1.4 Historical Site Conditions
Historical aerial photographs were reviewed in order to help determine the chronology of land use at the
site, and to assist in the development of an appropriate restoration strategy. Aerial photographs of the
site were obtained from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service
District Office in Franklin County for the following years: 1938, 1955, 1973, 1982, and 2000 (Appendix
B).
Fi ure 2. Site Location Ma
Site Boundary N
KC I 800 0 800 Feet
ASSOCIATES OF
SUM UROLLVA, NA
Source: 7.5' USGS Topographic Quadranxle - LoeaiburQ
Sang)-7 - ajS-- J nna o?lgdn.dodo,, SJSl1,S L : aolnos
ViT 'V!`170?'? H1?IQ\
AO salvIJOSS?
laa3 OOOI 0 0001
1
N Kipunog aIiS
Lys iui;)iA ? j a.in i3
\ ?} r I /? ,, ??' :•?` I ?? '? ?? Cam. i`
/,r,?' r-.?. ('•
u Q.,
r ? / t Res I!I I / ? f \ ?) r -? 1
?r?r q- `?rl Q?}I?? ©??r ? y i?.?\';\+fr ?? Vl??.y?y? r /? ?? i ?'?i?y rrl f?,\,I'?.. ?- I .. ?'?YJ'\>.v.I \ _ f????\ fr'
+?? { ? - -? /1 t \?1/, `J7{ I?,;?/ ? { , 'i,?1,f•?.j ill--4 _'. ?"`? -:>? ,I
f
4-7,
Jk?c
?11 i }'j ?7 { ?` S7 cif ?'?i?_1,'\_i , \ ?, /J ,?l" ? /?f I I `_. ,? ?? ? ?,? •\ u ???? ? ?i
}
?? it j ? ? ;,,?;? { ' -, '.?:? „?? ?., ` I i'i ??._?' -- r 'l
IV,
..15?• s tit -'
rrs?
? ... ? ?r,?.-py 1//?b~ f? 7-n/. ? i ?\'\ r?.? ????????-. ? -.?\#z'... ??•?` r ?)f ? If. { _ ??i ??i n..fe ?•l`\ .l I
'?,nq!-o7 - al2uv.ivono z!ydvA8odo,L S`JS/1,S'C _—os
80 SaIVIJOSSY
�w,u.,,:.u,.,.>..,=i.a,.i„,��;��� 1903 008 0 008
IDA
x lw
xnp—og arts
uN uoiluao7 allS •z ainlliA
UU!IOJBD WON A4-00 un)[MA

rg .:
IV/
%
v"N
Figure 3. Sub-watershed Boundary Ma
Site Boundary N
Drainage Area -,_-
800 0 $00 Feet
K C I
ASSOCIATES OF
,OK H UROUNA. PA
• Source.' 7. S' USGS Topographic Quadrangle- /,ousilrurg
• The 1938 aerial photograph shows the subject property covered with forest. The land to the
south of the site is cleared, and presumably in agricultural use. To the east of the site, the land
appears to be forested, interspersed with some open areas. While most of the land immediately
adjacent to the site was forested in 1938, much of the land in the general vicinity had been cleared
at this time, likely for agricultural production.
• The subject site remains forested in the 1955 aerial photograph. The section of the field south of
the site that had been cleared in the 1938 photograph, appeared to have been reforested by 1955.
There were very few other observable changes to the area immediately around the site from the
1938 photograph, though additional land further from the site appeared to have been cleared for
agricultural use.
• The subject site remains forested in the 1973 aerial photograph. The only observable alteration
to the site is a dirt road that runs to the property, which could have been used for logging
operations, though no significant land clearing is apparent. Land southeast of the site that had
been cleared in 1938 and showed signs of reforestation in the 1955 photograph, appears to have
returned to forested cover in the 1973 photograph. Across the landscape, there were isolated
areas, primarily along the Tar River, that were cleared for agriculture between 1955 and 1973.
• In the 1982 aerial photograph, the subject property had been cleared and appeared to be in
agricultural use. To a limited degree, additional land in the general vicinity of the site was
cleared and ditched for agriculture between 1973 and 1982.
• No apparent changes tool: place to the site between 1982 and 2000. The site remained cleared
and open, as visible in the 2000 aerial photograph. Adjacent land to the west and east of the site
was cleared between 1982 and 2000, either for agriculture or logging activities.
Based on the historical aerial photographs reviewed, it appears that the Daniels Farm Site was forested
until 1982, when it was cleared and utilized for agriculture. There is no visible evidence of mass
disturbance such as filling or mining on the subject site in any of the reviewed photographs.
1.5 Constraints
1.5.1 Rare, Threatened, and Endangered (RTE) Species Documentation
Available records were reviewed at the North Carolina Department of Parks and Recreation,
Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) to determine the presence of any rare, threatened, or
endangered (RTE) species or critical habitats on or near the site. Additionally, during the field
investigation, the existing site conditions were evaluated in order to determine if habitat suitable
for supporting Franklin County RTE species existed on the site. No occurrences of RTE species
or critical habitats were identified on the mitigation site. However, a pair of Bald Eagles was
observed on a nest located 1535 feet northeast of the site. The nest falls outside of the primary
zone designated as the critical habitat that encompasses an area extending 750 to 1500 feet
outward from the nest tree. The eagles appear to be using an area that has been farmed since
before 1938. Additionally, Bald Eagles have been nominated for de-listing by the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service.
1.5.2 Cultural Resources
Inspection of records from the Office of State Archeologists indicated that no archeological sites
have been recorded within the project area, or within a one-mile radius of the site. Given the
large breadth of the project and its relatively close proximity to the Tar River, a cursory field
inspection of the project area for archeological resources was considered to be prudent. Portions
of the project area that possessed the highest potential for archeological resources were identified
and inspected, either through surface collection or limited shovel testing. In addition to a limited
archeological reconnaissance, basic landform chronology and geomorphologic theory pertaining
to soil drainage and erosion were applied to interpret the potential for certain landforms within
the project area to possess intact archeological resources.
The majority of the project area consists of a series of older alluvial features, including terraces,
filled-in oxbows, and meander cutoffs. The distant location of these features in relation to the
current channel indicates that these landforms probably formed during the Pleistocene. Limited
testing verified this probable chronology with the exposure of very dense and old Bt horizons
along the elevated alluvial terraces. Based on this basic age assessment of the various alluvial
landforms within the project area, archeological material would be isolated to the upper A-
horizon stratum, or Ap in the case of the project area. Thus, the only potential for intact
resources would be truncated basal portions of features lying along elevated portions of the
alluvial floodplain landforms.
Field inspection of the current conditions indicated that the great majority of the project area,
approximately 85%, is saturated with standing water. Limited shovel testing along the only
elevated, and currently dry, portion of the alluvial terraces within the project area revealed
redoximorphic depletions. This finding indicates that even the elevated portions of the alluvial
landforms are saturated for some portion of the year. This high saturation level of the alluvial
landforms in the project would severely limit their utilization for occupation throughout the past.
Inspection and limited shovel testing of the upland colluvial deposits, approximately 15% of the
project area, indicated that these areas remain well-drained throughout the year. Although dry,
and therefore more attractive for permanent occupation throughout the past, the colluvial foot
slope of the surrounding uplands has no potential to retain buried archeological components given
the fact that it is an erosional surface and receives no accumulation of slope wash. The
utilization of these basic geomorphological theories and landform chronology indicates that the
project area possess no potential for intact buried archeological resources. Limited archeological
reconnaissance produced no intact archeological material, corroborating the basic
geomorphologic assessment of the project area.
The North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)
conducted a review of the proposed mitigation project to determine the presence of historic
preservation sites on the proposed mitigation site. The review found no known or documented
historic sites within a one-mile radius of the site.
1.5.3 Environmental Hazards
Deed records, aerial photographs, USGS maps, and county planning maps were reviewed to
assess the presence and potential impact of any utilities and easements on wetland restoration. A
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment is located in Appendix C. In summary, through the
scope of this investigation, no environmentally hazardous conditions were identified on the
Daniels Farm Site.
2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
2.1 Hydrology/Hydraulics
The hydrologic source for the site is based on high groundwater, overland surface flow, and groundwater
seeps and springs; no natural streams are found in the proposed restoration area. Figure 4 illustrates the
existing surface water flow patterns. Several seeps or springs are found upslope of the project area,
indicating groundwater discharge is prominent in the local vicinity seasonally, particularly during the wet
period from November to March. This seep/spring area collects water from upgradient areas to the
south, and from areas to the west. Water flow from the seep/spring area is then directed toward several
manmade drainage features that have been installed to prevent water from reaching the site and to
6
-- .,��.,
___.s` Y
f �.
r'
S'
'�.

efficiently remove water from the site. Two drainage ditches were observed on the site. The ditches run
parallel to one another along the field edge of the site's western border. The ditch closest to the field,
and the shallower of the two ditches, flows north approximately three-quarters the length of the site, then
turns east and flows offsite to a tributary of the Tar River. The deeper ditch flows along the western
boundary to the north, until it eventually drains off site and into the Tar River. Three grassed waterways
that vary from 1-2 feet deep and 5-25 feet wide traverse the central and eastern parts of the site, removing
ground and surface water from the site.
2.1.1 Surface Water
The site is located at the toe of a slope, and the topographic layout of the watershed is such that
water appears to be directed toward the site from upgradient areas. An apparent topographic
divide near the southern end of the site directs water to the western and northern areas and to
existing drainage ditches that flow east. Water directed to the other side of the topographic
divide flows toward the eastern and northern areas of the site, where a grassed waterway directs
water downslope to the north and offsite toward constructed ponds to the east. A significant
portion of the surface water draining onto the site is diverted around and away from the site via
two drainage ditches, which run north parallel to each other along the western edge of the site.
Grassed waterways were also constructed to channel water away from groundwater seeps,
draining the central and eastern parts of the site. One of the north flowing ditches along the
western edge of the site turns east, bisecting the site, and accepts discharge from a grassed
waterway before flowing offsite at the eastern boundary.
2.1.2 Groundwater
High ground water has historically been reported for the site and occurs seasonally at or near the
surface in the surrounding natural areas. This high water condition is attributed to a relatively
high water table and numerous groundwater seeps. The site groundwater is being evaluated by
monitoring the water level with eight on-site Solinst Levelogger gages and a barometric control
gage. Data will be compared to that received by a Levelogger gage installed at a reference
wetland (Figure 5). The Leveloggers were installed across the site on February 5 and 6, 2003
and programmed to measure water levels twice a day, at 12-hour intervals starting on February 6,
2003. The data was downloaded periodically and evaluated to determine the depth and duration
of the groundwater levels on the site. Data has been collected and evaluated through February 5,
2003.
Data from each monitoring gauge was plotted to determine the hydroperiod (duration of
saturation within 12 inches of the ground surface) for the site (Appendix D).
Hydrology Monitoring: On February 5, 2003 eight groundwater wells and one rain gauge were
installed on the project site to better determine site hydrology. Above average rainfall of 14.41
inches was recorded from February 5 to June 13, 2003, with 10.91 inches of this recorded since
the beginning of the growing season on March 20.
Well 1 is located north of the proposed restoration boundary near a sharp drop in slope away from
the site. This drop appears to help drain the area quickly after rain events, even though well 1 is
situated in Wahee soils which are classified as being somewhat poorly drained and slowly
permeable. This results in many days of inundation within a foot of the surface, but few for
periods of prolonged time (Table 1).
Well 2 is located within the site boundary north of the large lateral drainage ditch that flows west
to east across the site. The area slopes slightly from north to south, toward the drainage ditch.
Well 2 was placed in the Roanoke soil series, which is classified as being poorly drained and
slowly permeable or very slowly permeable. Lower landscape elevation contributes to
groundwater recharge from surrounding upland areas creating long periods of inundation
following precipitation events.
Well 3 is just south of the lateral drainage ditch near the seep that creates the western border of
the project site. The seep drains the western portion of the project site toward the lateral
drainage ditch. Similar to well 2, this point is located at a low elevation within Roanoke soils,
and likewise retains water at or near the surface for long periods following precipitation events.
Well 4 is located just south of the lateral drainage ditch just east of a south to north grassed
waterway/ drainage ditch in the southern portion of the project site. Although positioned at
relatively low elevation and within the poorly drained Roanoke soil series, the water table is
slightly lower here compared with the other low elevation wells, likely due to the close proximity
to the two drainage ditches.
Well 5 is located near the eastern border of the project site in an outcropping of the moderately
well-drained Altavista soil series. The water table is much lower here than at the other
monitoring points, and sharp spikes in water level are followed by quick declines after
precipitation events.
Well 6 is further south and just upgradient of well 3 near the seep that creates the western border
of the project site. Due to high elevation and close proximity to the seep, well 6 exhibits quick
drainage compared with monitoring points found within the Roanoke series.
Well 7 is located in the south east corner of the project site, just south of well 5. Like wells 2 and
3, well 7 is situated in Roanoke soil series. Like those monitoring points, water is retained after
precipitation events, but due to the high elevation and deeper water table, there is less
groundwater recharge, resulting in sharp declines in groundwater levels during dry periods.
Well 8 is located inside the south east corner of the project site boundary in an area distinguished
by a conglomeration of soils found on the project site, including Altavista, Augusta and Toisnot.
Toisnot is a poorly drained, slowly permeable soil that causes this area to pond during rain events
and keeps groundwater level consistently at or near the surface for extended periods following
precipitation events.

Well 1 ground
Total days water level was within 12
Max consecutive days inches of surface since 03
Surface Elevation (ft) /20/03
Soil Series
1 25 7.5 188.45 Wahee
2 50 15.5 187.31 Roanoke
3 50 18 188.07 Roanoke
4 35 10 186.73 Roanoke
5 10 6.5 191.47 Altavista
6 36 14.5 192.81 Roanoke
7 31 11 190.07 Roanoke
8 72 26 197.50 Toisnot
2.1.3 Water Budget
Existing site hydrology was modeled by developing an annual water budget that calculates water
inputs and outputs, and the change in storage on a monthly time step (Appendix F). Under
existing conditions, precipitation (P) is considered to be the only water input to the site. Historic
10
precipitation data from the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) Summary of the Day Data Set
was obtained from Earth Info, Inc. The data was obtained for the City of Louisburg, Franklin
County, NC, located approximately 3.5 miles north-northeast of the Daniels Farm site. Total
precipitation for the years of the period of record, from 1948-1997, was reviewed. Three years
were selected that represent precipitation conditions for an average year (1973), dry year (1963)
and wet year (1979).
Groundwater input to the site is likely, due to the landscape position of the site and observation of
several groundwater seep discharge zones on the site. However, groundwater input was not
calculated for the water budget since it is difficult to quantify and its exclusion provides for a
conservative estimate of water availability.
Water outputs from the site include potential evapotranspiration (PET) and groundwater
infiltration. PET was calculated by the Thornthwaite method using mean monthly temperatures
determined from 1971-2000 data from Louisburg, NC, and daytime hours. Groundwater
infiltration represents groundwater losses from the site due to downward seepage through the soil
profile. Soil permeability was assumed to be 2x10-6 ft/nin, which is typical of low permeability
soils associated with wetlands.
Net water inputs and outputs were calculated in inches, and normalized across the site on a
monthly time step. Net water inputs and outputs were then added or subtracted from a running
wetland water volume, expressed as a depth in inches, and normalized across the total area of the
site. A maximum wetland water volume of 2.52 inches was calculated, based on 36 inches of
soil with a specific yield of 0.12. All of the calculated water volume carne from water in the soil,
there was no surface water storage factored into the calculation.
The hydrographs for the average, dry, and wet years show a similar pattern of seasonal water
table levels. Water table recharge occurs during the late fall and winter months, until a rapid
water table drawdown occurs as PET rates increase in the summer. During the summer, the
water budget model shows the existing site is unsaturated within the upper 36 inches of soil.
2.2 Soils
A detailed soils investigation was conducted to determine the extent and distribution of the hydric soils on
the site and to classify the predominate soils identified to the soil series level (Figure 6, Appendix E).
The investigation consisted of delineating the hydric soil boundaries with pink flagging in accordance
with the 1987 US Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) Wetland Delineation Manual, NRCS Field
Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States and Soil Taxonomic Practices. Areas that have been
identified as possible hydric soil mapping units were surveyed at a higher intensity until the edge of the
mapping unit was identified. The boundary of the hydric and non-hydric soil mapping units were then
followed by continual sampling and observations as the boundary line was identified and delineated. In
those areas where the boundary was found to be a broad band gradient rather than a distinct break,
microtopography, landscape position, soil textural changes, redoximorphic features, depleted matrix, etc.
were additionally considered to identify the extent of the hydric soils.
To develop a detailed soils map, several soil borings were advanced on the site in the general hydric soil
areas identified by landscape position, vegetation and slope. Once the hydric soil borings were
identified, the soil scientist marked the point and established a visual line to the next auger boring where
again hydric soil conditions were predicted then confirmed by additional borings. The soil scientist
moved along the edges of the mapping unit and marked each point along the line. To confirm the hydric
soil mapping unit, nine soil borings were advanced to a depth of 50 inches. The soil profile descriptions
identified the individual horizons in the topsoil and upper subsoil as well as the depth, color, texture,
11
Figure 6. Soil Ma
= AaA - Altavista (E) Groundwater Monitoring Gauge I.D. Number
AuA - Augusta = Site Boundary
RoA - Roanoke " AE __
x.
KC1' RaA - Toisnet A
ASSOCIATES OF 200 0 200 Feet
NOKFH WOUNA. f'2 -
structure, boundary, and evidence of restrictive horizons and redoximorphic features. Eight of the soil
descriptions were located at each of the eight monitoring well locations. The ninth soil description was
located about 30 feet west of monitoring well #6.
Soils mapped on the property were found to be typical of low Piedmont, Coastal Plain uplands and
terraces that have formed in loamy and clayey marine and fluvial sediments. Specific soil series
identified on the property include: Altavista (Fine-loamy, mixed, semiactive, thermic Aquic Hapludults),
Augusta (Fine-loamy, mixed, semiactive, thermic Aeric Endoaquults), Roanoke (Fine, mixed, semiactive,
thermic Typic Endoaquults), and Toisnot (Coarse-loamy, siliceous, semiactive, thermic Typic
Fragiaquults). Additionally, State (Fine-loamy, mixed, semiactive, thermic Typic Hapludults) and
Wahee (Fine, mixed, semiactive, thermic Aeric Endoaquults) were identified in the transitional areas
between the poorly drained Roanoke and Toisnot soils and the somewhat poorly drained Augusta and
moderately well drained Altavista soils. The Roanoke and Toisnot soil series are listed as hydric soils in
Franklin County because of saturation for a significant period during the growing season. Altavista and
the Augusta soils are not considered hydric but have inclusions of hydric soils within the soil mapping
unit. Per the Franklin County Hydric Soils List, important notes state that hydric soils in this county
cannot be farmed under natural conditions without removing woody vegetation or hydrology
manipulation. Some map units and included soils listed, as hydric soils in this county may not meet the
definition of hydric soils and wetlands because the hydrology has been altered through drainage or other
manipulation.
The Franklin County Soil Survey has classified the soils underlying the site as Altavista sandy loam,
(59A). However, our findings (Appendix E) indicate that the Roanoke and Toisnot hydric soils comprise
approximately 89 percent of the site, while Altavista, Augusta and other non-hydric inclusions cover
approximately 11 percent of the site (Figure 7). All of these soil series are formed in alluvial sediments
and are commonly found on terraces adjacent to better-drained soils. The following sections describe
each soil series, in detail. The basic soil properties of each series are summarized in Table 2.
Altavista sandy loam (AaA, 59A, 544A) comprises the dominant non-hydric upland soil on the site. The
Altavista series consists of moderately well drained, moderately permeable soils that formed in fluvial
material on stream terraces. The soils have a low shrink-swell potential. The seasonally high water
table is at a depth of 1.5 to 2.5 feet during wet periods. This soil is mapped as rarely flooded by NRCS in
Franklin County. Slopes are 0 to 3 percent. Individual areas commonly are long and narrow and
generally range from 5 to 50 acres in size. Typically, the surface layer is dark brown fine sandy loam
eight inches thick. The subsoil extends to a depth of 33 inches. The upper part is yellowish brown
sandy clay loam with strong brown and very pale brown mottles. The next part is yellowish brown sandy
clay loam with light gray mottles. The lower part is yellowish brown sandy loam with gray mottles.
Included with this soil in mapping are a few small areas of well-drained State soils in slightly higher
landscape positions, and the slightly wetter somewhat poorly drained Wahee soils.
Augusta (AuA) is a minor soil component of the site. It is formed in loamy alluvial sediments of the
Piedmont and upper Coastal Plain stream terraces. The Augusta series consist of very deep, somewhat
poorly drained, moderately permeable soils with slow runoff and have a low shrink-swell potential. The
seasonally high water table is at a depth of 1.0 to 2.0 feet during wet periods. The soil appears to be
rarely flooded in Franklin County. Slopes are from 0 to 2 percent. Individual units occur as transitional
areas adjacent to the Altavista and Roanoke soils. Typically the surface layer is pale brown loam 0 to 9
inches thick. The solum extends to a depth of 40 to 80 inches. The subsoil ranges from pale brown to
light brownish gray and gray with a texture of clay loam, sandy clay loam or loam. Included with this
soil in mapping are areas of poorly drained Toisnot soils.
13

Mr-A Y a
a
,
r

-- .e:° r.I :r
! te--• -? - -'_-`_ T. - - --

- I{ ke .. ? t? ? `? f - - 'r io.ear°.?.,. ur.. ?s+•a _ ? ?-'-? ,un.,.e?:,cr.?o.ssam =.?±'.w? r<
,. ?? ?'t ?' '' ? %.t??sr,ras?nere?•st? a.?rrx "A?x• e. s'?a-°'- ??S
Syr y.
?y 44 ??Qf +i y nr .
d? h^y.Y L , v?. 'i " ?' t rwvr<. zeua - _ t -yr s . f _
t ?
111
' ? t 'r'? at ?. . ...bs.-r -e.?sr-.gym ?:. ,- ti. "? ?.- - .•'t:
rp??' ? ` I-_ ..31+ +ram?®r rYfau ?w `}?yY ?i, 1 ('?
7.-:
?` _. '
PA 1?T }??C 'A^f*I;y? i?2?j ?s A.'. .s iIt'_f y' FAr a
pf f t !. z ?y! r r t ?•?
Jrf . f?,'tr
a `k r R? FF l j,
a ?Y
Fi ure 7. Limits of H dric Soils
Depleted Soils N
Site Boundary A
KCI 200 0 200 Feet
ASSOCIATES OF
NOM C-MUNA; 6 Source: March 2000 Aerial Photographs, Franklin County G/S
Roanoke (RoA, 80, 80A, 88, and 88A) is the dominant soil on the site. It is formed in clayey alluvial
sediments on low Piedmont and coastal plain floodplains and terraces, and in clayey marine and alluvial
sediments on broad flats in the Coastal Plain. The Roanoke series consist of very deep, poorly drained,
slowly permeable or very slowly permeable soils that have a moderate shrink-swell potential. The
seasonally high water table is at a depth of one foot during wet periods. The soil is occasionally flooded
in low areas for brief periods. Slopes are 0 to 2 percent. Individual areas are irregular in shape and
generally range from 10 to 50 acres in size. Typically, the surface layer is five inches thick with a
Munsell color of light brownish gray, and ranges from fine sandy loam and loam to silt loam. The
subsoil is usually 48 inches thick. The upper part of the subsoil is light gray sandy clay loam that has
brownish yellow mottles. The lower part is gray silty clay or clay that has yellowish brown or brownish
yellow mottles.
The Toisnot Series (RaA, 827, 827A, 830, 830A, 837 and 847, and 847A) is mapped in a complex with
the Rains soil series in Franklin County; however, during the investigation, the Rains soils were not
identified on site. The Toisnot soils occur in shallow depressions, around the heads of drainageways, and
on the outer fringe of stream terraces next to the better-drained uplands in the upper Coastal Plain. The
soil formed in moderately coarse textured fluvial or marine sediments. The Toisnot soils consist of
poorly drained, slowly permeable soils that have a low shrink-swell potential. The seasonally high water
table is at a depth of one foot during wet periods. Slopes range from 0 to 2 percent. Typically, the
surface layer is six inches thick with a Munsell color of very dark gray and ranges from loam, sandy loam
to silt loam. The subsoil is usually 45 to 61 inches thick. A fragipan commonly occurs in the upper
boundary of the subsoil and commonly ranges from 20 to 40 inches but may range from 10 to 45 inches.
The upper part of the subsoil is light gray or dark gray sandy clay loam that has grayish brown and light
gray mottles. The lower part is gray and the texture is commonly sandy clay loam, but it may range to
fine sandy loam, sandy loam or sandy clay.
Table 2: Summary of Soil Series Mapping
Depth & Estimated
Map Soil Series Soil Subgroup Hydric Duration of Extent
Symbol Status High Water
Table z
AaA Altavista Aquic Non-Hydric 1.5' to 2.5' 7.62%
Hapludults (Nov. -April)
AuA Augusta Aeric Non-Hydric 1.0' to 2.0' 3.44%
Endoaquults (Dec. -May)
RoA Roanoke Typic Hydric 0' to 1.0' 70.12%
Endoaquults (Nov. -April)
RaA Rains-Toisnot, Typic Hydric 01-1. 0' 18.82%
I- I Complex Fragiaquults (Nov. -April)
' Hydric soil lists for Franklin County and North Carolina
2 Based on soil taxonomy for undrained condition
2.2.1 Historic Hydric Soils
The current and historic hydric status of the soil was evaluated to determine the extent to which wetland
restoration can be achieved on the site. This determination was complicated because the upper 6 to 12
inches of the site have been severely altered from prior land use including: agricultural practices, cattle
traffic, ditching and drainage of the primary water source, and reshaping the land surface to promote
15
drainage offsite. The cumulative impact of these land uses has significantly affected the hydrology of the
site. Resolution of these issues was achieved through conducting detailed field evaluations.
General guidance is provided by the ACOE for establishing the hydric status of the soils mapped for a
site. The guidance specifies that "depleted (reduced) soils must occur in the upper 12 inches" of the soil
profile to be considered hydric for the purposes of determining wetland restoration areas. The depleted
soils criteria were mapped in conjunction with the detailed hydric soil delineation. The soils exhibiting a
depleted matrix include the Roanoke and Toisnot series as well as the wetter inclusions in the somewhat
poorly drained Augusta and Wahee soils.
Detailed field investigations were also conducted with the detailed soil mapping of the site to identify
redoximorphic features in the upper 12 inches of the soil. Nine soil borings were described to a depth of
60 inches. The soil description process was complicated due to the disturbed nature of the agricultural
fields, where plowing has homogenized the horizons in the upper 6 to 12 inches of the soil. Repetitive
plowing and mixing of crop residues into the soil, along with the artificial drainage, has affected and
altered the hydric features (soil color and mottling) normally found in the upper soil horizons in an
undisturbed, natural site. Of the seven detailed soil descriptions within the hydric soil areas each
contained redoximorphic features in the upper 12 inches (Appendix E/ Figure 6).
2.3 Ecological Communities
A field survey was conducted in the fall/winter of 2002 to identify the dominant vegetative communities
on the site. This review documented that, though Nonriverine Wet Hardwood Forest historically
dominated the site, agricultural fields, planted in silage consisting of Brown Top Millet and Sudan grass,
are now the predominate cover. The site has also been used to graze cattle. Only small remnants of the
Low Elevation Seep community still remain within the area of proposed restoration. This community
currently occupies a thin strip adjacent to the western site boundary. A schematic of the existing
vegetative communities at the time of the investigation is included (Figure 8).
Low Elevation Seep
Low Elevation Seep communities are found at seepages and springs along bases of slopes or
edges of floodplains. These areas are generally saturated, even if no standing water is present.
The canopy includes Acer rubrum, Quercus phellos, and possibly other wetland trees. Herbs
found in this association include Saururus cernuus, Impatiens capensis, Osmunda cinnamomea,
Osmunda regalis var. spectabilis, Boehmeria cylindrica, Chelone glabra, Rudbeckia laciniata,
Ranunculus recurvatus, Juncus spp., and Saxiaga micranthidifolia. These communities can
serve as important breeding and foraging areas for amphibians. Low Elevation Seep
communities are relatively common in the Piedmont, lower Mountains, and upper Coastal Plain.
These communities tend to be small, and are often shaded by the canopy of the adjacent
communities. The vegetation and soils associated with well-developed Low Elevation Seeps
varies from the vegetation and soils found in the adjacent floodplain or upland communities.
Agriculture occupies the majority of the site, with pasture being the primary land use. Ditches
are found around the perimeter of the agricultural fields to enhance drainage of water from the
site and snake the land more suitable for fanning. Utilization of the site for agriculture has had
significant impacts on the site. Ditches and grassed waterways have been created or enhanced to
promote drainage through, around and off of the site to allow crop production on prior converted
wetland areas. Clearing of the site has removed virtually all of the natural vegetative
communities. All existing agricultural land, or 89% of the site, has been classified as prior
converted wetland. The remaining 11% of the land should also qualify for restoration due to
drainage and filling activities.
16
'f
`F
?,??,: - ,.. ,.:fie ;; -,?•
* ? r Y r'„ f `?1A9
7
? 7
5
.

i
n
Figure 8. Existing Communities
Q Site Boundary N
Agriculture A -y` l
u C T ?1 Low Elevation Seep V :.R nLM.I4varm in i'nY • n
11 1 200 0 200 Feet
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH CAROLINA, W Source: March 2000 Aerial Photographs, Franklin County G!S
%
Non Riverine Wet H
I:
...........
I•
i
/ : • off`
m
/
t `
upland
: /

2.4 Assessment of Site Conditions
The Daniels Wetland mitigation site has an extensive history of disturbance, undergoing dramatic land
cover alterations in 1982 for the purposes of agricultural production. The site consisted of Low Elevation
Seeps and Nonriverine Wet Hardwood Forest communities before these modifications. One small
remnant of a Low Elevation Seeps natural community remains; however, the understory vegetation has
been removed, and the hydrology and the landscape has been modified by subsequent ditching and
drainage efforts. The Nonriverine Wet Hardwood Forest communities historically dominate the lower
elevations of the site. These communities are found on poorly drained interstream flats with fine textured
mineral soils, not associated with rivers. These areas are seasonally saturated or flooded water tables,
poor drainage and perhaps by sheet flow from adjacent landscapes and pocosins. The soils are poorly
drained loamy or clayey mineral soils. The series in the Franklin County area consists of the Roanoke
(Typic Endoaquults) soils. The canopy is dominated by various hardwood trees typical of bottomlands
and includes Quercus michauxii, Quercus laurifolia, Quercus pagoda, Liriodendron tulipifera,
Liquidambar styraciflua, Ulmus Americana, Acer rubrum, and Nyssa biflora. The understory includes
species such as Carpinus caroliniana, Acer rubrum, flex opaca, and Asimina triloba. The shrub layer
includes Lindera benzoin, Persea palustris, Leucothoe axillaries, Clethra alnifolia, Vaccinium
corymbosum, Myrica cerifera, and Arundinaria gigantean. The herb layer may include Carex spp.,
Saururus cernus, Boehmeria cylindrica, and Woodwardia areolata.
Nonriverine Wet Forest Hardwood communities are among the most threatened of North Carolina's
natural communities, and in some ways are the least known. Also called oak flats, they were once
widespread in the outer Coastal Plain of northeastern North Carolina, but were long ago reduced to a
small fraction of their pre-settlement abundance. This community appears to exist on the extreme
western edge of its range. Although this unit does not exist along the margins of peatlands, it does meet
several wetland criteria, including landscape position, Roanoke soils, and some of the typical vegetation
communities.
The 33.93 acres that comprise the site are situated on portions of Farm Tract T3792, Field 13 (25.4 acres)
and Farm Tract T3791, Field 1 (20.6 acres). Field 13 holds Prior Converted status with NRCS. Field 1
has not been evaluated for Prior Converted Status but meets hydric soil criteria and shares the same
hydrologic drains as Field 13 (See NRCS letter - Appendix A). Agricultural farm fields are adjacent to
the site to the north and south.
The soils on the site have been disturbed, manipulated and ditched to promote drainage. The horizons in
the upper 6 to 12 inches of soil have been homogenized and mixed from plowing and grading activities on
the land. A network of ditches has effectively drained the site for agricultural use. Repetitive plowing
and mixing of crop residues into the soil, along with artificial drainage, has affected and altered the hydric
features (soil color and mottling) normally found in the upper soil horizons of an undisturbed site. The
extensive land alterations described have complicated the identification and determination of historic
hydric soil conditions. Despite drainage and regular plowing, field investigations indicate that much of
the relict hydric features of the soils on the site, i.e. redoximorphic features such as mottling, manganese
masses, and oxidized root channels within 6 to 12 inches of the surface, have been significantly reduced.
The site hydrology and hydraulics reflect those characteristically found in the lower Piedmont seeps and
nonriverine interstream flats in the upper Coastal Plain areas. The primary surface water input is from
seeps or springs that capture drainage from approximately 100 acres south and upgradient of the site. It
is believed that originally, discharge from the spring flowed by sheet flow (then perhaps a shallow
channel) from its source onto the southeastern corner of the site. The flow then likely continued
northeast and collected in a depressional area before flowing east off the site. After clearing the property,
the landowner realized that he needed to remove the surface water and groundwater from the site for crop
production or pasture. The shallow erosional drainageway that had formed along the western side of the
18
site was converted into a drainage ditch that extended from Egypt Church Road north along the site to a
depressional area where the ditch turned east and continued offsite to the Tar River. Later, since the
water was not being effectively drained offsite due to the amount of surface and groundwater input from
the west, the landowner dug another ditch along the western property line from Egypt Church Road
extending to the north end of the site. The ditch was cut through high ground to a stream that flowed into
the Tar River. These ditches along the eastern and western sides of the site are thought to have
effectively drained the majority of the site.
The secondary source of hydrology is from seeps along the southern end of the property and from high
ground water along the northern end of the property. Several grassed waterways were cut to intercept
seepage from the toeslopes along the southern boundary and direct the water eastward to the ditch dug
through the depressional collection area before flowing east and offsite. Additionally, in the field to the
north, shallow ditches were cut to allow gravity flow to the ditch flowing east through the depressional
area and offsite. Under the current conditions, the ditches and grassed waterways have effectively altered
the hydrology of the site, decreasing the amount of water available for soil saturation and extended
periods of flooding.
A water budget was developed for existing conditions, in order to calculate water inputs and outputs, and
the change in storage on a monthly time step. Under existing conditions, water input to the site comes
from precipitation, seasonally wet seepage zones, and surface runoff. Water outputs from the site include
potential evapotranspiration, surface water output, groundwater flow via the ditch network, and
groundwater infiltration. All of the calculated water volume for the site came from water in the soil;
there was no surface water storage factored into the calculation. The results of the existing water budget
show the expected pattern of rapidly declining water table levels in the spring and water table recharge
during the fall and winter. The model indicates that the upper 36 inches of soil will remain dry through
the summer and early fall.
In summary, the clearing, draining, and conversion of the site to agriculture has altered its natural wetland
ecological function and diminished its capacity for natural biological productivity, biogeochemical
cycling, nutrient cycling, and water quality enhancement. In its present state, the site is only fulfilling a
small proportion of its potential and historical wetland functional role within the landscape.
3.0 WETLAND RESTORATION ACTIVITIES
Restoration of the site will focus on the removal of hydrologic alterations and reforestation of the site
with species common to Low Elevation Seeps and Nonriverine Wet Hardwood Forests (Figure 9). This
effort will be initiated by removal of the perimeter ditches and grassed waterways. Hydrologic
reconnection will be made to allow water currently bypassing the site to the west to enter the site.
Reforestation of the site with Low Elevation Seep and Nonriverine Wet Hardwood Forest species
consistent with the surrounding natural wetlands will be initiated with 436 stems per acre, with a target
density of 320 steins per acre after five years. The proposed restoration types and extents are presented in
Table 3 and Figure 9.
Table 3: Restoration Tvne and Extent
Restoration Enhancement Creation
Community Type
Low Elevation Seep 8.62 acres 0 acres 0 acres
Nonriverine Wet Hardwood Forest 21.43 acres 0 acres 0 acres
Upland 0 acres 3.88 acres 0 acres
19
3.1 Wetland Restoration
The proposed wetland restoration area within the site currently consists of 21.43 acres of agricultural
fields and 8.62 acres of Low Elevation Seep forested land, which does not currently qualify as wetland
due to artificial drainage on the site. Based on existing relict hydric soils and forested vegetation on the
site, it is presumed that 30.05 acres were jurisdictional wetlands prior to conversion for agriculture. The
proposed restoration actions will be directed at restoring the character and function of the Low Elevation
Seep and the Nonriverine Wet Hardwood Forest wetland types that historically occupied these fields and
woodlands. It is anticipated that the proposed restoration actions will result in 30 acres of restored and
created wetland area on the site.
The proposed wetland mitigation activities will result in substantial enhancement of the existing water
quality and habitat functions onsite. Elimination of channelized flow from agricultural ditches that drain
in two different directions to the Tar River will drastically reduce nutrient, pesticide and sediment runoff
from the site and improve water quality downstream. The proposed ditch plugging and filling will result
in increased short-term surface and subsurface water storage, and a subsequent increase in the duration
and elevation of the seasonally high water table. The increased retention time of surface and subsurface
water will result in reduced peak flows to drainages that feed into the Tar River. Increased retention time
will also facilitate a variety of biogeochemical transformations such as denitrification and dissolved
organic carbon export. Reduced nitrogen export and increased carbon export will benefit downstream
aquatic habitat areas in the Tar River.
Converting the agricultural fields back to a natural vegetative species composition will improve the
feeding, shelter and breeding habitat for many indigenous and migrant faunal species. The seepage and
nonriverine nature of the restored wetlands will also augment wildlife corridors between existing habitats.
Specific actions proposed to achieve the goals and objectives of the project include:
• Filling the primary drainage ditch along the western site boundary
• Filling the farm drainage ditch along the western site boundary
• Plugging the lateral ditch with a ditch plug
• Filling the grassed waterways
• Removing ditch spoil from wooded areas to restore natural seepage patterns
• Placing water diversion features, where appropriate, to redistribute the surface hydrology
• Placing restrictive berms, where appropriate, to reduce runoff and enhance infiltration
• Recreating microtopography across the site to enhance surface water retention and storage,
and to provide amphibian breeding habitat where possible
• Disking the ground surface to reduce compaction from pastured cattle
• Re-vegetating the site with Low Elevation Seep and Nonriverine Wet Hardwood Forest
species
3.1.1 Hydrologic Alterations
In order to enhance the site functionality and increase habitat diversity, modifications that will
influence the hydroperiod of the site are being proposed. These actions are described in more
detail below:
Ditch Removal: Approximately two drainage ditches and three grassed waterways found
on the site currently enhance the removal of seepage waters and precipitation. This
drainage network will be filled or plugged as appropriate as part of restoration activities.
21
Fill Removal and Micro-topography Enhancement: Dredge spoils from ditching will
be removed and replaced on the site to expose buried hydric soils and establish micro-
topographic variations to enhance the retention of water from seepage and precipitation.
Redistribution of Surface Water: Water Diversion Features will be placed at planned
contour intervals to enhance the retention of water from seepage and precipitation and to
counteract the damage due to farm practices that promote soil disturbance, manipulation
and ditching. The water diversion features will simulate a mature forest condition by
diffusing surface water rather than concentrating sheet flow into erosive channels.
3.1.2 Vegetative Community Establishment Vegetation on the site will be restored in order
to be consistent with Low Elevation Seeps and Nonriverine Wet Hardwood Forest communities
(Figure 9). The following actions will be taken to re-vegetate the site:
Site Preparation: The soils on the site have undergone significant disturbance for at
least 21 years. Agricultural operations have compacted the soil, thus decreasing
infiltration. Upon the completion of the earth-moving activities, the site will be ripped
as necessary to create conditions conducive for the re-establishment of Low Elevation
Seep and Nonriverine Wet Hardwood Forest communities on the site.
Planting: The community-planting plan described below provides a guide for the
vegetative re-establishment of the targeted communities. If available, the following
species will be planted:
Low Elevation Seeps
Species: Scientific Name Common Name
Quercus phellos willow oak
Quercus michauxxii swamp chest nut oak
Quercus falcate var. pagodaefolia cherry bark oak
Quercus laurifolia laurel oak
Ulmus Americana american elm
Liriodendron tulipifera yellow poplar
Planting Density: 436 Stems per acre
Comments: All trees will be 12"-18" bare root material.
Nonriverine Wet Hardwood Forest
Species: Scientific Name Common Name
Liriodendron tulipifera yellow poplar
Quercus falcata var. pagodaefolia cherry bark oak
Ulmus americana American elm
Quercus laurifolia laurel oak
Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak
Nyssa sylvatica var. b flora swamp blackgum
Nyssa Mora water tupelo
Taxodium distichum bald cypress
Planting Density: 436 Stems per acre
Comments: All trees will be 12"-18" bare root material.
22
4.0 WETLAND MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES
4.1 Post Implementation Documentation
An "as built" report will be submitted to the WRP within 90 days of the completion of planting and gauge
installation and will include: elevations, photographs, gauge locations, and a description of initial species
composition by community and sampling plot locations. Included within the report will be a list of
species planted, planting densities, and a total number of stems in the mitigation area. This information
will form the base for further monitoring and evaluation.
4.2 Monitoring and Success Criteria
The monitoring program will be implemented to document system development and progress towards
achieving mitigation goals and objectives. The site will be determined to be successful once wetland
hydrology is established and vegetation success criteria are met. Monitoring data will be collected yearly
for a period of five years or until success criteria are achieved. Annual reports will be submitted to the
WRP, documenting the monitored components of the restoration plan i.e. hydrology and vegetation, and
will include all collected data, analysis and photographs.
4.2.1 Hydrology
Groundwater elevations will be monitored to demonstrate the attainment of jurisdictional
hydrology. The reference wetland monitored during the design phase will also be monitored
with the same procedures for comparative analysis.
Monitoring Procedure: Verification of wetland hydrology will be determined by
automatic recording well data, collected within the project area and approved reference
wetland. Automatic recording wells will be established within restoration areas at a
density of one automatic well per four acres (8 wells total). Daily data will be collected
from automatic wells over the 5-year monitoring period following implementation. This
data will be utilized to aid in determination of the local growing season based on soil
temperature and NRCS data.
Success Criteria: Wetland hydrology will be considered established if well data from the
site indicates that the water table is within 12 inches of the soil surface for 5% of the
growing season (MRCS published or locally calculated) during normal weather
conditions. A "normal" year was based on NRCS climatological data for Franklin
County, and using the 30th to 70"' percentile thresholds as the range of normal, as
documented in the USACOE Technical Report "Accessing and Using Meterological Data
to Evaluate Wetland Hydrology, April 2000." According to the USDA, NRCS Franklin
County Soil Survey, the growing season is considered to be the period with a 50%
probability that the daily minimum temperature is higher than 28°F. Using this criterion
and data from the adjacent counties of Nash and Granville, the growing season in
Franklin County is considered to extend from March 20 to November 11, yielding 235
days. Therefore, success will be achieved if the water table is within 12 inches of the
soil surface for 12 days during the growing season.
4.2.2 Vegetation
The success criteria for the planted species in the restoration areas will be based on survival and
growth. Beginning at the end of the first growing season, the project team will monitor site
vegetation for five years following the planting.
23
Monitoring Procedure: Permanent monitoring plots will be established in wetland
restoration areas at a density of one plot per four acres (eight plots total) and
systematically located to ensure even coverage. Data will be collected at each plot for:
total number of stems, species, percent survival, height, estimated percent cover of all
species, and evidence of insects, disease and browsing.
Success Criteria: Survival of planted species must be 260 stems/acre at the end of five
years of monitoring. Non-target species must not constitute more than 20 percent of the
woody vegetation based on permanent monitoring plots.
4.3 Management Plan/Remedial Activities
Restoration of wetlands involves interpretation of collected information to devise a strategy that will
ultimately lead to a functional ecosystem. In such, minor variations in expected responses can be
anticipated due to unknown site conditions, inputs from outside the restoration site, regional climatic
variations, acts of God, etc. Correspondingly, nurturing of the site through regular management activities
is considered necessary to assure that the goals and objectives of the project are met. These activities
will be conducted throughout the year and may include: invasive control, debris or trash removal, etc. If
the monitoring of the site thereafter identifies a failure to attain specific success criteria, a remedial action
plan will be developed which investigates the cause of the failure and proposes actions to rectify the
problem.
24
*41
b
z
d

APPENDIX A
NRCS Letter Regarding Prior Converted Status
United States Department of Agriculture
o N RCS
Natural Resourcii daftsNA06h Service
101-B S. Bidcett OlVd.
Louisburg, NC 27549
[phone] ext. 3
www.frankllnsolist) OtdicdHSeF'VAtlon,com
This statement is to verify that Franklin County Tract 3792, Field 13 on the Daniels
property is shown to be Prior Converted (PC) land according to Farm Service Agency
(FSA) official aerial photography. Tract 3791, Field 1 on the Daniels property is not
shown as PC on FSA aerial photography, however, based on information from soil
borings performed by Steve Stokes, an area on the lower portion of field 1 appears to
meet the criteria for hydric soils. A more complete soils analysis of the area would be
needed to determine the extent of hydric soils present on the property.
Jo ua Spelitnf
District Consd`VAtlOHI§t
The Natural Resources Conservation Service provides leadership in a partnership effort to help people
conserve, maintain, and improve our natural resources and environment.
An Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer
R?> a fik t'
n f
4
+y? r`tr7.
N AT
"jA, , ` 'k '/'aS.r ,?,¢ i •.r, ##? t .? r t?)ON
?_' .-
-v''`}6y'??=' d?''?' 1 ?Y?sr???1?4f???.•t ,.??r??+?; .? ?tSr?. ? y,. :eY'??Ce?`.rr.:y> ??r ?,:.

..Y ?ti
- i:? F 5 art. ,?
Ny `r -.?ar..?.?+?44.?-,y -
S r F•w',x?r
`a

?• it
N
F
S .
r -, ..
L ;?4 ??'.=. -.i
/..y.
r . % _. _ 'T ?i r??•,+gys/ 'fi'?g r -E? __
%
, s
y?
r
"
• ? ?
?. _
j
fir
.:
, , r
' '

14p • }W.x.Y
e
4?
i!k7 }
f 1
F '
a?
?4

r .
J, ini
;Ai
t°;•• .? ?'a Lila ? ?1 Jt Ar. A.. art r .'tip
17
77.
kl - v
PHASE I ESA
DANIELS FARM SITE
?- 1982 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH - - ',
KCI
ASSOCIATES OF Approximate Subject Property Area Highlighted N.C. Wetlands Restoration Program
NORTH CUMNA, PA -Nrnr:NR_
b
b
C?J
z
d
x
w
APPENDIX B
Historical Aerial Photographs
G,r t )'r •'FP r t i, '?''? ' w i?. ? t f.? • L 3` .r.: +,., r - '.y .
i ; 9kY f • :_ t ! + t r r .r ? ..l 1 5. ? I r y .
?•? t `f Z, r r+{?;?' .J,j 3-.tai at
!sy f r ti tit q> "?- ' ..ls,Ka'L #.r z' t t j! fax Y s>? `°%• ,cr; r f '. .
kn, c ? r < ? } Y .r I1 7 ? y ?x? i ? 7... d4- 7i•/? 4 t r ?p f Y -?. 1
.' jI? ' yr ; r r ry. c q. r l,j t'` rt:
1
n+/r{" r ?4 `' `ter
4 } /
17 lid:v n ??' '•/ }•?1'+'Gyl.'t i
r
':i't f;ix 1 kq 1r.{ •.` t,}'Sr_ ;+t .?,s +. .L !?S c. r .,,? rru>r r ° t.?. {l "i.
??? r Sri}#?? 1 ?'t l?i.: ?y s .e 1 t 1"T yti A? < .. P ^e ?,f
-. ? < •? rd ? --?' is ? ,? > ) ? au? ? r?rF``
? s ?c - { • '? a f?' - u"r ? __
if
Yat e4" I ?. +k. •iir z. t9 r yr+f?^ it L ".'''
y
yM j r•? ,r T y...
F y?r ?./t - r L r. - + 1 -0 F - J
• , ?Y:?;` rYrl, r n t t 'r ? s n {{ ? rr?? ,s ? ? I
15 i. :. F _ r t W rt ; ..! f r t a 1'-? ? r7(t •? L4 `irq•?f - Y ,!, ? t ?:"
i 4=?e..4q? St r, pit E'}c 'r to r< rw ,A t A2' ett ffi )vt. i J !y yr'
?; iSr 1 f Y. 4}r?$st t rtl c ' tr ' Y r-'r rR y tF " •? '
s iit1 a tt t , ;.re to ' ? •. '?1s?L ? ?,. a ? `•y 61" ?J --. ? t ?t,,r rya Via, v',t t?S 1, ?
?sr, / t. ff Y ;Kh 9?
); r ?e 'c 1 ,` ; ?? L ?+ r; ?• ' ? ?• i ' ' ?.yi 'K ? L r?l `r ?}? r.; < ri?
+S 4 f - •r^,i ?.y?„ ,r k r... J4 .. 4 Y! d,'+ T s t , Y
f t',I kv
cl.1i td r r L .. .yr P !p r r 1S Y' 1"-3+.'Y• t'" t / L .,.,.y_t ., 7 c .
7/ /ti.4 nij wS+trt LT `? rJ c },?`+? ?°? 1 ?' r g?°,'"'F.?.F? c rr r}; z?+.,. * J _
k' r-rrrSyre.. ?j vin g - (y ` ' Y xaJ{r k L :i b ?4kT
ki
? yf, ? e ft{?Lr '}" 3 •_ 4 r t,T :3 ? r ) r+ ?
rtrs,t , ?S^ J P.A, X1 ?}jr..{ z .? Sr•.r fl r<k? I] 'Tf ,t? ''r 4?{:"'. y * ' , tt ?
"'c ''...I'` *A? ? ? - . ..r..t ? ? ? ?Y fa't' ,irY r •.t- ? r '1-: .r t_ }cr f , iF Ta ?'?
T 4F t i+ r l t a ?5r? ?, Ya i a£ 1 °rc •Y C « , >r ck A:; . t.
3 4
?{tn / ? Q- ) ,:•?-?Y r,Tr:.ry ?; r , 4"r
•/ '/ ? t L t h'S ? J`S!' ? ?f-. e ,.,? ? _. ya ?y. ra ? i ,
X30 ft vk t r f r , 4 _t
t , • ! f'. ? , f,;ru ;t{r _J 3 f T ' N-i k: a •.NN,? r, -- ?, ? Y ? . t ? C , : 4 ji ?µ{?•ed°T -
2/ t :"?S+r F rtr r r'9X..e ,j,k f ?,?'? .'?-,'?•t.*f?1 X Z
; L rL
y 2t ?. ?zf 'r s t+_ r?tl a.? +?
1,4
..i, !tA r?rv r + ?.,,? ao
M1 _; ? it
? r t? - :11 l! i. t t r•.)? _ -ri X. -.Y,' ? rr 't ?H .Z? r`h: r ?..:
fy1' z
?, F4. ?{)aV, ?. q 2:1;1+ v'{)r ?' ) y fryS?l 1 , \.{ M •S
F SY. ?'. , f F L L t r - \ ?' ?.
L.2z
30//? L rF z t r1';,Sfir° ? r` r >4?* ? 1 ) ?. ft kt?< t ;?7 ;L .'d'{rte k*,a
71
X" J NOT TO SCALE
PHASE I ESA
DANIELS FARM SITE
K CI 1938 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH
ASSOCIATES OF Approximate Subject Property Area Highlighted N.C. Wetlands Restoration Program
--
NOM CAROLINA, PA - NCDF:N.
.r.-.� :a w•`,.1 fa. ��_. `6'�-_ iy �q �.. �','7ir+�����i.5 �'�`� Jr �'• -
• pit}�?t y,
.\ ' 'E.. � •� ;ei MY�k. pyy'�Y•{ W/"T}\ � � . • { '•w�,71�a
zti, i•� t����. �1 ��t�
s rr�'�,1 J' ryrD, ^I• j'.' t iA �y T I,]t
�7
' � - a>' ��•• 1.17'" yr t �'r w1'`r� w.el%.y 1 'w."''° t <. ;•�
+ ����' L . �:' qtr• � . ,: 7�.�` ,,µ x'.y x^
' i , � 'r's�� •:"� Yea . j . r;• d.. u
-Ft � •>• ` 'x 3r 'Giro 19 � "r'�d• 'M1• .. t;e r�
�� j►� _ k �iM r. rr i -ys � ..
' "_; �• � •Z`- ' � :. y �..: � 1 may'" p"' ,'`'r'
'•� - IC ,:�J 1� ♦ � }a mac.
SL
•^� ''r: i'•' t ;Ea- �I _ .. ,c S• may` Si A
�o
is ' ' -t` {�;. �;� � L: .: : � K•.i r i
Y; i 1j

Or,,, . i s l: - - - y ..1,,t .tet ✓ #--!'�_
k�' 6 "* � •tyt y - - - "'a k _' �,,, t-� „gce"5C� 'P _ ,� r .
v
T ,�q� r•' t� , _' w -
kI♦ �"'�r:''k' (., r � ; 7
r `g��, __ �� ••... ,� r,... `c _ .. _'r ^^' r a sr :�i � '.✓r .d e�.•+ ?"r a r -
ZP
S yvt,rw-. _..t•' ' � ai a. ' �' � f' j .�^` i �. �'�.t''J s r �^� .'11f �y . k !
do
sPic
AAA,;
-
-.:, /'. ✓H Y� ro6.3aj rT. .; r';,� zr^f * r. +�A♦4
1 rY S { `1.4 ! •�• .r irs . ft - r!f•.} h M.
�y
Jw
n� L -4.r'FZ 4
�=k 1; y/�: i+k >.. t=1: � ✓•' •.,a �"h q•: r,' .LY, {,w`�j't /� �"•',�tfr,R�" L c�.s. f r
•� !� f tt1'n�K_ ti a s �- '''€' a � w r'. L �. f ` r 'L �'"+rh "t.. r. Si'
�riJEl �- ��i:�4srS r `. `j._`w�� • v aGE� t a.. ,• 'r .� r j, r r ky i i
r! �Y.e :.. �t � yie$ "F r • (ras.r . ,. t w r" r + X40
lbi
It
al
1 ,.i.Y I.. i'rs �, • ` ii.. 1'ihd �.i�.•.rav ".''•.�+{P,'k,,is�C�. r t ? Gs. _ {: ec t'�"f•O �w��i��� i
ter. -� �j►k ;K,- r �^ �'+:,x� ra . �,lFk;.� yrn..s�, r��.,,r �,._`� Y
a i.. i •x{'43! rr '� • 'v -_� ,}. w ♦ ti n`-+ a. a :;i x Ytr w�', r_. ,ti. .>1,Y , , ! , i
4 It
- �✓ , 't r, '.e? �,�>r�t 3R ... ,�C 4; _. '� .,_rf.� A'� i �� j ; �r R_1rr y . / 1 •rt'
-e'6t14- IF'
�r< 7: � :�� �l�� t."♦' 7�.4 lr.x , � j , r:�; �
�,..'�,{r,+tsq r e. - t, 3Q+ �'yt"4{ .-s i•tji t.( ,.'!':, ti.
A4)
{ �j't��� ��1�'m. r ti^ ,:F �✓} �,� �� tLJ �v.j w. -f Y } r'�s. R Si` a �?9 �..' .�,,,:.
S r i: r r .:• try�c�� w"`1 ''. .� ti 5_ i 1 x `�` f
t
� * t � ,;,,. �� ''�`� ���•'t /`l +tal�,:.1 ��'� e +��gx��v�'fl �',�'lv� 'S=''�" ��ir '�e�.
t 1 ��� , ,M .Fk t.'r 4� r.M. t.•�r� o .fir ^c c!: r
r40
T TG SCALL
PHASE I ESA
_�- DANIELS FARM SITE
T 1973 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHA' �`. 41
K � 1 ` f
ASSOCIATES OF FApproximate Subject Pro er Area Hi hlighted N.C. WettandR Resroraaua ProgramNORTH CAROLINA, PA J P h g g CDENR

`..aIZK.
4,4
[. ', Az tt S„3 + 1 ? t1 <l$t y.' 4,1;'"Y _[,.,rr1, :.c tl ?''»
}?• 4Zr-Q r ",!Li FY?:,r~ `?? `:e`?? ij?i F?..wt,
'?jy - i ??'li ?-r 7c?..4 r 't; '? r, . r i,. _ ,Q.{Y; i - r•'?i ?,•
.'cr? air Y- -- a: x.. ? J- Ft.. ??? ?.i +r?,? x- ,pc> ^ . ? O' r K--E cy?-??r • !+:
?f 5a +: 'T Rj-^T :.? yr yriS ?f' f :R -t° s.?.• {{ - ?n ,?'>.
. 4 + 'yp' il- r.
I
re ?.,,Y +.1_,.r a?,~r >ye _ rF-c 1-? -r?r ?f dpi
get ?'??.!' ^'?•. r ? y ??t ? r:, ?• ?.?4 ,, S? '.
?.. Rte-
A l
to "`.^"raFr e. •s;- ? .o' "r`?L j '
N. NO
Ilk.
T. CL
1 r 7 Sn
. 1,
-•.r Al f ?'ry !6 av°•1? ,?V ,.`l ?•t8.. ,, {'
qw,
Xi
?j4 '1'1? J 1 ?y? y fy P f,
r?? ?r Rr'r'?'..-.,-?''?. K 1r".•rz- . a....- o l s, 1
+ :. S4 ?.-?.-?s : ? '. '?' ? SCr r ?; rr., ?-,` •?? "c. ; ti i t r?-• 't
r; 4% +? t a,,??t, 1..' e?. +K r t"" ,,t'^-yC•. r _: vj M j 1. 1 ?'j> "¢ :' `j?'e• '. :?
:-:?. ? ,L ii t" j ? ? I ?-1 ? .7' ? t ? ? > s.r+r._ t ? .rX?+Y T [ . ' ?": ?r a? ?/f? s'•c ,,,. 'r4' ark .?. .
. ? ? ?q?.wT"? 7 • ? .. ?i t<? a ? j yt ?? t'' _ r 1 {.S,y -7?,C . r
r !J 4@• / r ?? +1'1f a T. 4. ,?n ?.
lip L .-
1t
??..r ,4 `% .,? ``:. ?1{ . -i _ _ r 1 ;?Jf),1.r f- 'S`'•qt . it?*''r?..''+?.:i
111. ?l r , /?? sue! K '? flJ r
?t?t'f x 1 y r? It \. -?4,r 1.. nl.rd'." „y? P
17
?'! 9 .car •? r ? ? f "`? Vic.:. '`` °'
_ v rs
r.T' r?Kr?.?s;??? ?•T / ? .?•t, i = t?+'y'I,?'y yr??l.I;?• ??yy??,.?. (yyyf _
,t•A°' T' '?7 • i p 4??2'?S2?1C?1 T' T'VS? 4?b l R 't Y . .
?r.Jr •,f t???'x+?f. i'?+•' ;i r 1 ti? j -,-( t' r .`?r1'-,-?.;-_-.,?..?.r ?, ._ :.
NO SCALE
PHASE I ESA
DANIELS FARM SITE
T? 1982 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH ' -
ASSOCIATES OF [Approximate Subject Property Area Highlighted N.C. Wetlands estoration Program
NORTH CAROLINA, PA r, --- - Ncr)FNFt
r1; ?r `. +
r'
1, f k 'S
49
r.t >'. i?:n ?+ 1Y..1 ?Y't,. ;r. v.+? •,?. .; r •j a 1,
,j .ry} + 1?
¢. .r sRPr y
4 1174
-$??
?J• .- - - L?f
1 ',Y
nix.
SNI 4
k"OT
F _?J t z? r ; Pi '
..
i ? ?JPi t Ar'vT4t ? I,yh•..e. ? 7< r,?ri ' '.l f7 r, ..t?. ..r '
ilo
•rVK 1 - }}
? t ra ;•.r. ^..R' < 't_ ? - - - s ° _ 9? ?F ? „?-+ .? - .,y.. aZr ?????fi ,?_r,((''.,r ?? .
"g'7? '? ? ?f -S•?,' .mfr _ t
-*- v? *t
- `.- ? t Ap?py A,y .1 ? . r' 1 •2 V ".
ct ?' - rY/i?• +?Y 1 4-? -•??, ? F5? l .?...- '•?C" ;-
•
I.- iA
r { F ,NOT TO SC
' PHASE I ESA
DANIELS FARM SITE
K CI 2000 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH - - >, ASSOCIATES OF Approximate Subject Property Area Highlighted N.C. Wetlands Restoration Program
_ NcDENR
NORTH WOJNA, PA
b
b
z
d
n
APPENDIX C
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report
Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment
Daniels Farm Site
North of Egypt Church Road
Louisburg, North Carolina 27549
Prepared for: NC Wetlands Restoration Program
Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina
January 16, 2002
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary .................................................................................. 1
1.0 Objectives ................................................................................................. 1
2.0 Site Overview ........................................................................................... 3
3.0 Site Background/Operating History .......................................................... 3
4.0 Environmental Setting .............................................................................. 5
5.0 Site Inspection ........................................................................................... 5
6.0 Environmental Records/Database Review ................................................ 6
7.0 Summary and Recommendations ............................................................. 6
8.0 Persons Performing the Phase I ESA ........................................................ 7
9.0 Limitations ................................................................................................ 7
10.0 Restrictions ............................................................................................... 7
References ................................................................................................. 8
Figures
Figure 1 - Vicinity Map ......................................................................................... 2
Figure 2 - Site Sketch ............................................................................................4
Tables
Table 1 - Environmental Database Records Research .......................................... 6
Appendices
Appendix A - Historical Aerial Photographs
Appendix B - Site Photographs
Appendix C - Environmental Records Information and Database
Phase I ESA
Daniels Farm Site
Franklin Countv, North Carolina
Executive Summary
KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A. (KCI) has completed the Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment (ESA) on the Daniels Farm Site and is pleased to submit this summary of the findings.
The site is located north of Egypt Church Road in Franklin County, North Carolina. The site was
inspected by KCI on January 21, 2002.
The site is situated on land that gently slopes to the southwest toward a small tributary of Wolfpen
Branch. It is currently undeveloped land in agricultural use.
Based on the historical aerial photographs reviewed, it appears that the Daniels Farm Site was
forested from 1938 to 1982. In 1982, the site was cleared for agriculture. There is no visible
evidence of mass disturbance such as filling or mining on the subject site in any of the reviewed
photographs.
The soil survey of Franklin County, North Carolina classified the soils on the subject property as
Altavista sandy loam (AaA). Altavista is classified as having a 0 to 3 percent slope and is
moderately well drained.
The environmental database review did not identify the subject property or any surrounding sites
within a one-mile radius of the subject property within the designated ASTM search radii.
In summary, through the scope of this investigation, no environmentally hazardous conditions were
identified on the Daniels Farm Site. KCI findings indicate that areas of potential environmental
concern were not identified on the Daniels Site.
1.0 Objectives
KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A. (KCI) conducted a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
(ESA) on the Daniels property, located north of Egypt Church Road in Franklin County, North
Carolina (Figure 1. Site Vicinity Map.)
KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A. (KCI) has completed the Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment (ESA) for the Daniels Farm Site. By ASTM standards, the purpose of conducting an
environmental site assessment on a property is to identify recognized environmental conditions.
The term recognized environmental conditions means the presence or likely presence of any
hazardous substances or petroleum product on a property under conditions that indicate an existing
release, a past release, or a material threat of a release of any hazardous substances or petroleum
products onto structures on the property or into the ground, groundwater or surface water of the
property. This ESA consists of. 1) a review of available historical aerial photographs and property
tax/deed information; 2) a site inspection; and 3) a review of State and Federal environmental
database records.
f/ ���Mt.�:i� •s /iGo�h/,'��i, + \ �/1 /�. 1 1`�_�;�`-,
r
a '
��;�� ' 'YY�' ,,-.--: _ r r `�
JJ''• ,`• -�\fit ' l�
.�
y`::• '-'..i'• '' '•r•ri' I/ri •� _16 t ..l f. ii!f`.r'�/� p
f
•�•. ` .
'�I •jr s (-'� :y� •-• i _TT }' i�r • �� .i r' f - _ � }: z4� r-..-•
r��\•t 'tJ' ~� � �'�---1 'f''J J �t1�aJ/J i i ,� �l
� i
T •� , ; \ rp
4 � I
��
j� .. ! \ i ' •- r./1-,117 `�-•'--'. 1[r
_• ; ��, � `
�
/
/ --
����
,(t
kraz��
�•�
j`' L, . � ;};, (_�-�r. •.�,`.:l,,l�,, �r„�.._�� 1J i -'! J ���'f,'J `�. y
j �'I r` �%� !� �" � t,�.
i
f•�' Ni
�� ,.,._,�. /f�11..i F}lj.Y` •�L} !�r✓�-i��\��'�\�/�1,. .a � �t ��
`` f �
! ','�-.-t-•�.. � j
!
11 �� ��� f
-���' �
f �� j,
-\ [�V. rte, i
_ I+..,�� , / •J.�-
.4 l� ii r � i; �. , I` j .
� to d , l��lf
_
�j�•�.�.f� f
`
� •_.�
_ - , -- r �. ;� �..--___� ..' �1'�'._-�� =�
,I �E t' , .`�,--'•:1�. �t ,y � ��, '1 itt��; � � .1-., •l , i�lr .----'.:--.._
I' •r' •\r, `�1� /:" � �1�: �`'�///J �,� ' I f :'✓� f 'tiC%°, � r' � � ��` � ,, �,��. ��•'`�i �'
o , •}
�. \!) 1'9 �`I I �:C—
. k --^•�.
! i ., � t ', ,,r-._.-_._ -1:
1...,��1,��� ..fit 5 �a�-: ' i
�.�:,-..
`�
+: J
r `�
J IJ .�� .,� I � 1,-,�.Y�-/I tiij�. ✓'=-t
,t.. ,�`1� ��,.
-`
'�''��', / ' f `� � ', cam"' i('•, \� i ° �� `i a /' \ / 1 1'
j�.�. I' -A I .!, i {' } ) 1I'1
. } � � ; .\`
li , I
�\.i
rt' _. •� ;f .�y �
.1 .
r
- I r `tip � l ,�{{ t , ; f`S r �
r �'-�\-y.
I' l �.j ��'
1 ',I •.5 �,��••.l,L•'i•'�/
�---,`ti '`',�,, �,� i(_ -
71
•! j+ ':�` J �_ j rJ�Y:' - ,el'd �� ��/ f � ',:
•�
12
•� '
_ tf --..._J•,.a-f _ I
\.� j �l='11 ! I� _. �: ''' �� r .!} ' I :7 r.%fl !,' f / - �/r "Jf� `
\ � S i ,
\`
Figure 1: Vicnity Map
Daniels Site N
KCI
'msmurm �-
urt
A
900 0 900 Feet
\.C- Wa4,.,b ■a.,.•KV,.wl`nrypar

Phase I ESA
Daniels Farm Site
Franklin County, North Carolina
2.0 Site Overview
The Daniels Farm Site includes portions of Farm Tract T3792 (Field 13) and Farm Tract T3791
(Field 1), which encompass 32 acres. The site is currently in agricultural use, except for the
approximately seven wooded acres along the western edge of the property. KCI proposes to remove
any hydraulic alterations and reforest the site to restore wetland condition. Figure 2 provides an
aerial photograph taken in March of 2000 of the Daniels Farm Site.
3.0 Site Background/Operating History
To assess the historical use of the site, KCI reviewed available historical aerial photographs and
property tax records and deed information. Historical aerial photographs were examined to
ascertain changes in site features and land use. Appendix A provides copies of the historical aerial
photographs.
KCI obtained historical aerial photographs from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, NRCS District
Office in Wake County for the following years: 1938, 1955, 1973, 1982, and 2000.
• The 1938 aerial photograph shows the subject property covered with forest. The field to the
south is cleared and in agricultural use and the surrounding areas are forested. The subject
property does not change until 1973.
• The subject site remains forested in the 1973 aerial photograph. The only observable
alteration to the site is a dirt road that runs to the property, which could have been used for
logging operations, though no significant land clearing is apparent.
• The 1982 aerial photograph depicts the subject property as being cleared and in agricultural
use. There are no visible changes noted on the subject property between the 1982 and the
2000 aerial photographs.
Based on the historical aerial photographs reviewed, it appears that the Daniels Farm Site was
forested until 1982, when it was cleared and utilized for agriculture. There is no visible evidence of
mass disturbance such as filling or mining on the subject site in any of the reviewed photographs.
KCI personnel have not prepared nor reviewed the Property Tax and Deed information for the
subject property in order to further assess past land use. KCI attorneys will provide this information
prior to when WRP closes on the property.
3
____EgYPt Church Road
! .r
i

Phase I ESA
Daniels Farm Site
Franklin County, North Carolina
4.0 Environmental Setting
The ground elevation at the Daniels Farm Site is approximately 185 - 200 feet above mean sea level
(AMSL), as determined from the USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Quadrangle for Louisburg, North
Carolina. Topography on the site is nearly level to gently sloping, primarily in a northerly direction.
Due to the topography, surface water flows by sheet flow toward the center of the site, and then
flows east offsite. A ditch along the western property line captures all the surface and subsurface
flow from the adjacent property to the west and south and directs it to a tributary of Wolfpen Branch
to the northwest.
According to the Soil Survey of Franklin County, North Carolina, published by the United States
Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service (USDA SCS), the soils on the subject property
are classified as Altavista sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slope on low stream terraces. This moderately
well drained soil is long and narrow with planar to slightly concave slopes. The surface layer
consists of dark grayish brown sandy loam from 0 to 9 inches and the upper subsurface layer is light
yellowish brown sandy loam from 9 to 19 inches.
Permeability and water capacity is moderate. Agricultural development is most suited for the
Daniels Farm Site while urban development is poorly suited due to the management concerns of
flooding, wetness, and soil fertility.
KCI reviewed the USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Quadrangles for Louisburg, North Carolina, as
well as available area groundwater well data in an attempt to determine groundwater conditions
beneath the subject property. A definitive assessment of subsurface conditions beneath the subject
property is not feasible without conducting additional field investigations, including groundwater
borings, not covered by this scope of work.
5.0 Site Inspection
A site reconnaissance of the Daniels Farm Site was performed on January 21, 2002 by KCI staff to
assess the presence of visible evidence of hazardous or other environmentally sensitive conditions.
The site assessment involved the visual observation and physical inspection of the specific project
site and, when feasible, the surrounding areas. Photographs were taken during the inspection to
record key points. Appendix B contains site photographs.
The Daniels Farm Site is located north of Egypt Church Road. The adjacent land use to the north
and south is agriculture. The areas to the east and west are forested. A manmade ditch follows the
western border of the site boundary in a northeast direction from Egypt Church Road. There also is
a small ditch that follows the agricultural field on the west to a low point where the ditch turns east
across the site then off the subject property.
No environmental sensitive conditions or areas of potential environmental concern were identified
on the subject site at the time of the site inspection.
5
Phase I ESA
Daniels Farm Site
Franklin County, North Carolina
6.0 Environmental Records/Database Review
KCI reviewed available State and Federal Government environmental database records for the
purposes of further identifying recognized environmental conditions in connection with the subject
property and surrounding area. The specific databases and associated ASTM search radii
investigated are detailed in Table 1.
I`ABI,1 I. FNN IIZO\,AIU NI kL 1) A I,\B,VV I: IZI;('OIZI)S SEARC14
I)atahase %S"I :11 Search
Radius,,,(milc)
NPL National Priori List 1.00
Delisted NPL NPL Deletions 1.00
RCRIS-TSD Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System 0.5
State Haz. Waste State Hazardous Waste 1.00
CERCLIS Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Information System 0.5
CERC-NFRAP Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Information System 0.25
CORRACTS Corrective Action Report 1.00
State Landfill Solid Waste Facilities 0.5
LUST Incidents Management Database 0.5
UST Petroleum Underground Storage Tank Database 0.25
RAATS RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System TP
RCRIS Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System, small and large
_quantity generators 0.25
HMIRS Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System TP
PADS PCB Activity Database System TP
ERNS Emergency Response Notification System TP
FINDS Facility Index System/Facility Identification Initiative Program Summary Report TP
TRIS Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System TP
NPL Liens NPL Liens TP
NC HSDS Hazardous Substance Disposal Site 1.00
IMD Incident Management Database TP
TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act TP
MLTS Material Licensing Tracking System TP
ROD ROD 1.00
CONSENT Su erfund CERCLA Consent Decrees 1.00
Coal Gas Former Manufactured as (Coal Gas) Sites 1.00
MINES Mines Master Index File 0.25
TP= Target Property
The environmental database review did not identify the subject property or any surrounding sites
within a one-mile radius of the subject property within the designated ASTM search radii.
7.0 Summary and Recommendations
The Daniels Farm Site is situated on land that slopes to the northwest toward a small tributary of
Wolfpen Branch. The proposed access road will begin off Egypt Church Road and run north along
the fenced eastern edge of an agricultural field. The site is currently in agriculture.
The environmental database review did not identify the subject property or any surrounding sites
within a one-mile radius of the subject property with the designated ASTM search radii.
Phase I ESA
Daniels Farm Site
Franklin Countv. North Carolina
Through the scope of this investigation, KCI's findings indicate that areas of potential
environmental concern were not identified on the Daniels Farm site. KCI believes that no further
work is needed for the site.
8.0 Persons Performing the Phase I Environmental Assessment
Ms. Kimberly A. Burton performed the data collection and performed the site investigation. Ms.
Burton holds the position of Environmental Scientist I and has two years of experience conducting
site assessments. Ms. Burton and Mr. Steven Stokes, Senior Environmental Scientist, prepared this
Phase I ESA Report jointly.
9.0 Limitations
This study was limited to observations made during KCI's inspection and research of the subject
property. No borings or groundwater monitoring wells were installed, or sampled. No soil,
sediment, surface water, groundwater or building materials have been collected for laboratory
analysis. KCI makes no representations or certifications concerning subsurface conditions, soil, and
surface water or groundwater quality or building materials.
10.0 Restrictions
This environmental site assessment was performed to identify potential liabilities associated with
the current site conditions. KCI will not be held liable for the discovery or elimination of hazards
encountered that may potentially cause damage, accidents or injuries. The recommendations
rendered from work performed in no way eliminate hazards or the owner's obligation to Federal,
State, or Local laws. The property owner is solely responsible for notifying the proper authorities of
any conditions that violate current laws and regulations.
Data and information regarding current site conditions and operations have been provided to KCI in
part by the client and other sources. As is customary, we have assumed these data and information
to be complete and factually correct. The conclusions rendered from these data and information are
subject to professional opinion, and thus could result in differing interpretations. Additionally, the
conclusions rendered from this work are based on qualitative and quantitative information gathered
on or near the date of this report.
This work has been performed in accordance with current ASTM Standards and generally accepted
engineering practices. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Changes as to the content
or format of this report may be made only with KCI's expressed written approval.
7
Phase I ESA
Daniels Farm Site
Franklin County, North Carolina
REFERENCES
Historical Aerial Photographs. 1938, 1955, 1973, 1982, and 2000.
APPENDIX A
Historical Aerial Photographs
tfti -; ,k4a S tx a, % _ I 1 }••t. T y J
s 1, J ` ft3
1 ,- ' c r s •- ?` t Yv.a ? ?.r ! t, ?? 0. x ? '?,.s rY? s. ? -tf.?y.- i:.i?•^?. bi' ?Ji"r- : ? r?:_
+ .e-a
, A y. Jy` y I ,1 'Y ;x rI r t Y. x x ? g ? ha r v, .f ,
Y.`^i d:;? P?7•.4+ ?? +1 G A..i4-,•.f` r,` '?5" t I41?d tii 1" t ' tf. t•. -
e sp ?' y"ar ,: t a 1i , £ ?- 1 r,{ Js?>,t7 rrFyS.
?L 3?rI' f f i t f , .x i « 'fr >' r ? Y "' It
arr,1 o+
j.. Q j a Y S3 >«'sI'
yr? ??' ~n. ¢?f ?r r•1Q `.,?+ } ttr ? JI_ ? I i; -? t5{A ts? F t ? r Y ?r„•?? ?y ?;:? _'?? 1'?f I `
r e ,? 9 c re. i )?f .
W. N,
.1 .- y? fi ?K Fir r f r A{ - +, ? , ,f ?-
•/f z`1lt r c> r s v ??1 1S
L . -' F r F•t" Jt J t ) r ?, f'.,1. Y? :- > r' -d, ?. ,r
iYji -' ("; : Si ?Y r ` ,',? 1 p.). L?rf M1'•r ?y rt tf 43fY,? y
{: 3 to e F l . ? W s. A'? } s } • z. ? r : "r 4 ? u 4? rF 'N
7trrl ! th3 i/,'? ?}?T L t
t _?. r !?'•f ! x ?Q+=#?' aa.'?7? c,r '.1_( +t ?•A`ri1 I.,,, Y ,?. rt a? t
? - s,?'f? !o a it::?.! t 's- »,TS, ?, V A c fi/, ?.s.? 7!;•` _ s `r }} f '
''2 rY , ,•???? r.`a?r ?4• `?. F -,, !'?. rr, It A.;£
1 121
r.y+ ?'*'r tc 'F'ryr ?i? t( °` 1y ? `file ,s7t?C1} (! S• p-, p? $`'3Yw £J" { ;^! t .Et}3*uaa t ?4 di1 ?, t s
I;4?- ?? +.Fr ?Y•E`t`'t?.:.- ? )i µr1j? r a':._FF? p?? S t '>}i r.1J? x r '.y?.,?r y`1 ,,_"F > -s{ ?.T ':F? j?air ?."St?.a t ?a% -.
X y, 5 , r+s r' ? a €. w L? r '. ,F .c •/ ,F 1?$ `>? ?;b _ r ?t ? Y .•.
_ r tL' ("1i+ 4. .n. . ,ra na• ti ¢.a F 1
c Yq [ Yu P fi r 7 yf} jRPF `{r {{ 'frjrtni-'a it+'_
( >rs1 c •i• ' " _
„j i F, 1 n x : e '?`? s2 <_ d t r rht't,. >> 3 s`t• ?? ? C ?F . ? ?? b?
' ! ? Q i f ( r ,*•i, d a , s fI'.,yc4. rr ? .? ' f? , L ? M '.
l zt 1 J i ) 3 r r Y I r? i+ n 1
28 1A
r,.,•,3p v?y4 ?f F r . F fr ?: t , Iv# p >t s tfr qq LT t .
+ :, t f}?' ?'r?.C / ` ' '4 f+'r ? Z $ a r t. r ,As ' f+j yf... r?{y4 - .. t : Ff s t a V H
_ ( f Y A z .f F• ...'1 - h 4 L •t 1V T- ^L
. ?5•d w - r Y li ,F l.. t° 9. x'..' ? r (:? , } r i hs is 1 1 y ?'.. ?C _ j?r•` et"';i :"? ..'' x' ,.-? r d
: g ?? N / o - ,: ? !; r t a`• r '?j• ' 7? Y ?-" / , ?. F x 11 X, 4
` k., c F l` a s- 1/ rt't r ;t?, r: ° ? •? S+r?1 n ? ?` r ,,,' 1 ?? .,,,?n: rr X61 t
r ,V a*'r ?.' ? + ? tr r- ? ?) r ? .,> r tt< -r tY4.. 'R ? 1 "rj 9 - e `> J? q, ?. ,-{e t sl a1t'-'`' ,
t r' !r , J 7 ,.:t Y p:
4 C3 'a y. . ?"'!<, ,>r I! s 14 . y r ?.l t? * i i .: p 4 S- . tY M' ++..r Y ? ,re
s t .. s,-s ! t ._.' •' I b Y '?
l22i F Irk. `rrl:.ft?r?, +1° f.t r,,x{+t{zt !i?°rt }'?i?`? 4_.
30
?? f. Y 1 x r t i s t Yt t '- YS?;:`Y < t '`? t3< F{ -
t, i t
t'a?C'ffs,t2 1{ e ,?,.y ! r st x p .r ""
x.., yr -:'r-t- ? c`t J ;w ? .? 4s.. .Y r r t f Y ,r? 'rJT 2 . 1 Ya
? r •? l.•f''?A }. -K ?. k+ ..?L.v 4F n 1'?' }'? ?' _, )J s° ,C .t r
/. X ?`j ? ? F,r ? !tr• ?? fiAt.ll `.Z?+L ?t Y .? S b 1 iN1 R-vF1 + Y -
fpp c j.. rr ? (,? 4 3J
NOT TO SCALE
PHASE I ESA
DANIELS FARM SITE
?- 1938 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH
KCI
ASSOCIATES OF Fl,P,,,,imate Subject Property Areas Highlighted N.C. Wetlands Restoration Program
NORTH GUMNA, PA
,.. ,r.?1 5 P .7 +{?!? f „ 9 'l1 ?@'F 4 K
-0)4
{ •. a r?. ?"i ??>.??5,, +? \ 1w - ". ?7, s' eArf'3! e ?`",w r G'. ? ? ?A
y 4
Y? 4 ? ? ?, ] Yj vFy?•v ? ! ???? K. "`t J u .t 1 ? Y trL,?y !.R I? ! `?f< V-
?,, ! ?- ''fi'r ` r ;y r r,7 l,t y} ?`tr ? 4
L, t FYI r? ? ?f X`f $?. 'Y y'. ?! a/{r 1 ' fi aC t ^ - i
40
??' Ip??1t ????' •?, rr ? 7'?+ f` ,\1 ? .?,7,???/??Ci?C?.' ?I J?-?'?? •?;.?Y?.'y• 72
r.A_ .J? ?`??,;y,_}ri. '72e, / s}r?:A f? ?r,.i? `T?t:4 S?"??.??'y-,? 0
"t3
PHASE I ESA
DANIELS FARM SITE
KCI 1955 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH
-_-?---_
ASSOCIATES OF Approximate Subject Property Area Highlighted N.C. Wetlands Restoration Program
NOUH CARMUe PA b b _ _ Nf.DF.NR_ _ -
, -�k- +�. _ . 3 � iii::: ��• i ,/ ,r i ,.�,2e5t �... � � :
J G• - - ,4Y I - � gyp..
is ++(' �.. r 1 •� �-' w. r,:'r .a'� ;z� t x}a "' ,��* �rt i +` . P+} of a ,
t'� ai �r ti
L ♦ - ,y.;:... ...s.. *• ' Aj�
�.: , L + R \SF'`9" � 4 Y• "k i i�'. '�� { ' F, -!!a� v v 4* .�` .
,.� ♦ • �J, ,s �: Y Yrr �v-4. �•4 L.{r.X .T•-T.,..'•i, �".\�t��. ,3.A -�. F,�:
�9 f � ,..i �:: xr :f' 1 � .i,.t' .-;Y•'+.Y' ^ � fi' ; �4 •S :i' ♦ L hlr.�<1�'�� ir• �.6.i �;.
�e'`{'i�'�FA' • e, r '4 .�" �' ,
�,�_ �� 1� .y,•,;, �� �• ti _ ''� �. � '�' si � f'.
90
►yam � � ,rc : �' • t
r•\
v fes' � s .�,; '�Mt_� A. ;, i } h7 r. ♦ ..'� A� L ,6,i` � \
-!J,_�N(�„4 �' =:�i>' o•-_ lig' a .� �. c;w � `i" 6.,+
t F_
V, V.'
;�; y� i ,i� S. s R `_ •qr♦ .a J,Q �,,j7 � t7 S`:.'biF l� >r':.+ ..�..,, _ ai � _, *� 1�2y r+�_.y '.ed ��.
MA
-�`* , ; j.j ;��'� _ _ S._ .�rF 4y..s't,.�, a tiv ��) �+�Si -F`�'' r. o- :;-^ti •�; el t '?
a,.,t- r v.R r..�• .gyp,,'-�, r �.
:t .. .. znP� L�_.a. �• ��ti Yxxt r#. 3'N•.!'.�r � ��, � � �t�iy
A.., � � y. '�7 �xa-��:• "t' -r C atV;.- v`. 1`" �Z� �t 7. f�
► 1 J� k E r Y r w,/(�w t
n "+ {
"i'F
J riY
� tag'1.: C dt' � a' 4d�� h Ni` S _. .z � K tU. �. •+ � -k� , �
ri
.i i,- res, R '�. ... �ly +�j, 7f yt'�. �t y .~ a r r �R '4 ` �y.}i - :•iC
13��'y1. .'y. ,.�,n� ••Y "<k ��rN x r,,,t� "'V'. ♦ )�•y �.Y ♦ �- Sin
% r,I � '¢ yx:•T�a � . ' , ���y�'S'A4M��aiR�a�'. .. .fc tt'L
Ji
PHASE I ESA
DANIELS FARM SITE
1973 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH -
KC I N.C. Wetlands Restuntioa Program
ASSOCIATES. OF Approximate Subject Property Area Highlighted N�HR

'` ,� •yam •# � , ` ' � • •�
S x �
♦fir• 1♦/ �: J �'t•
.moi.
t , t•J����b� +�.. _fit art: f♦'�'y�y-+�.#� �.w'�' � .
�.!'f. Y' /� � •.•t� 1. b-. a:�<Y r
,v
Litt :♦
G.: f•
•. ,. ..a \i.� � � 4 'Y�-�' � ��ly � '� GZ � ly;�)f'. a! ��+�r
�f ♦ t �I �` 94�.st ,, t � ?fie•; ,# :` '�' 2TY+:
4
i ` .° �'' t - � �.'�'��. ,♦+Ih• WSJ � ��
air. Zi A
tr
, a
PHASE
ASSOCIATESDANIELS FARM SITE
1982 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH
KCI
• �� ��
•.•

{1 r
r ?-. ?, l nil 1St-l?f TY iy ? K ?t +?6?' r ,?..? I lj :•'C? .q'?"+.
9
A, rw
§?1?eA', l y p C T J ryp l ?Sf .''G 4: /Y+yor
? Sf ."•7 l
?y6?t?fwl',+,74 Y? ? a h
-' 4 Qfi
Y - ;?;? :yam. ? f ?, ` ,?? , ?+ •; L ?ti.
3 +szr {
?n E^
i? O'• gal v'! `?. ??Ilr
17.
tw Y'
r'? t f ?? { r ! r. Yr Y tt ;
• a y'r . _ 4` ?ti ??t, -tJ tai;';
• 'fi'r ?`?t ? r 1? >. ,,,,?t? ; ? :,v?r ? ,_..
/. Z A J it k `i 4
7

,1 a
Vic:
KCI
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH CAROUNA. PA
x ,4
r `
?_ r 1
? r t ..•-
r
t rt of v ?-. • orb. s .l - I % y NER4
+k H

r ,rNOT TO SC ALI
N.C. Wetlands Restoration Program
NCDb:NR-
r
PHASE I ESA
DANIELS FARM SITE
2000 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH
Approximate Subject Property Area Highlighted
Photo 1: View of the Daniels Farm Site looking to the north.
Photo 2: View of the Daniels Farm Site looking to the south.

Photo 3: View of a ditch which follows near the property boundary on the subject property in a north-
east direction from Egypt Church Road.
Photo 4: View of forested area to the west of the subject property.
APPENDIX C
Environmental Records Information and Database
Environmental
EEF:Data
Resources, Inc.
The EDR Radius Map
with GeoCheck®
Daniels
North of Egypt Church Road
Louisburg, NC 27549
Inquiry Number: 912282.2s
January 16, 2003
The Source
For Environmental
Risk Management
Data
3530 Post Road
Southport, Connecticut 06890
Nationwide Customer Service
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Internet: www.edrnet.com
FORM HOW
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION
PAGE
Executive Summary ------------------------------------------------------ ES1
Overview Map---------------------------------------------------------- 2
Detail Map------------------------------------------------------------- 3
Map Findings Summary --------------------------------------------------- 4
Map Findings----------------------------------------------------------. 6
Orphan Summary ------------------------------------------------------- 7
Government Records Searched/Data Currency Tracking- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - GR-1
GEOCHECK ADDENDUM
Physical Setting Source Addendum------------------------ -----------------. A-1
Physical Setting Source Summary ------------------------- ------------------ A-2
Physical Setting Source Map------------------------------ ----------------- A-7
Physical Setting Source Map Findings---------------------- -----------------. A-8
Physical Setting Source Records Searched------------------ ------------------ A-10
Thank you for your business.
Please contact EDR at 1-800-352-0050
with any questions or comments.
Disclaimer
Copyright and Trademark Notice
This report contains information obtained from a variety of public and other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED,
IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES INC. SPECIFICALLY
DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OFANYSUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITYOR FITNESS
FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL EDR BE LIABLE TO
ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE, ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY
LOSS OR DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES.
Entire contents copyright 2003 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole
or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission.
EDR and the edr logos are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are the
property of their respective owners.
TC912282.2s Page 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A search of available environmental records was conducted by Environmental Data Resources, Inc.
(EDR). The report meets the government records search requirements of ASTM Standard Practice for
Environmental Site Assessments, E 1527-00. Search distances are per ASTM standard or custom
distances requested by the user.
TARGET PROPERTY INFORMATION
ADDRESS
NORTH OF EGYPT CHURCH ROAD
LOUISBURG, NC 27549
COORDINATES
Latitude (North): 36.062300 - 36° 3'44.3"
Longitude (West): 78.281100 - 78° 16' 52.0"
Universal Tranverse Me rcator: Zone 17
UTM X (Meters): 744889.4
UTM Y (Meters): 3994079.8
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP ASSOCIATED WITH TARGET PROPERTY
Target Property: 2436078-A3 LOUISBURG, NC
Source: USGS 7.5 min quad index
TARGET PROPERTY SEARCH RESULTS
The target property was not listed in any of the databases searched by EDR.
DATABASES WITH NO MAPPED SITES
No mapped sites were found in EDR's search of available ( "reasonably ascertainable ") government
records either on the target property or within the ASTM E 1527-00 search radius around the target
property for the following databases:
FEDERAL ASTM STANDARD
NPL_________________________ National Priority List
Proposed NPL--------------- Proposed National Priority List Sites
CERCLIS-------------------- Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information
System
CERC-NFRAP--------------- CERCLIS No Further Remedial Action Planned
CORRACTS----------------- Corrective Action Report
RCRIS-TSD------------------ Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System
RCRIS-LQG------------------ Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System
RCRIS-SQG----------------- Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System
ERNS________________________ Emergency Response Notification System
STATE ASTM STANDARD
SHWS_____________ __________ Inactive Hazardous Sites Inventory
SWF/LF----------- ----------- List of Solid Waste Facilities
LUST______________ __________ Incidents Management Database
UST_______________ __________ Petroleum Underground Storage Tank Database
TC912282.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
OLI__________________________ Old Landfill Inventory
INDIAN UST_________________ Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
VCP_________________________ Responsible Party Voluntary Action Sites
FEDERAL ASTM SUPPLEMENTAL
CONSENT___________ ________ Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees
ROD_________________ ________ Records Of Decision
Delisted NPL_________ _______ National Priority List Deletions
FINDS________________ _______ Facility Index System/Facility Identification Initiative Program Summary Report
HMIRS_______________ ________ Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System
MLTS________________ ________ Material Licensing Tracking System
MINES_______________ ________ Mines Master Index File
NPL Liens___________ ________ Federal Superfund Liens
PADS_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ PCB Activity Database System
RAATS_______________ _______ RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System
TRIS_________________ ________ Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System
TSCA________________ ________ Toxic Substances Control Act
SSTS_________________ _______ Section 7 Tracking Systems
FTTS_________________ _______ FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA(Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, &
Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
STATE OR LOCAL ASTM SUPPLEMENTAL
NC HSDS____________________ Hazardous Substance Disposal Site
AST_________________________ AST Database
LUST TRUST________________ State Trust Fund Database
IMD__________________________ Incident Management Database
EDR PROPRIETARY HISTORICAL DATABASES
Coal Gas____________________ Former Manufactured Gas (Coal Gas) Sites
BROWNFIELDS DATABASES
Brownfields_________________ Brownfields Projects Inventory
VCP_________________________ Responsible Party Voluntary Action Sites
SURROUNDING SITES: SEARCH RESULTS
Surrounding sites were not identified.
Unmappable (orphan) sites are not considered in the foregoing analysis.
TC912282.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
OLI__________________________ Old Landfill Inventory
INDIAN UST_________________ Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
VCP_________________________ Responsible Party Voluntary Action Sites
FEDERAL ASTM SUPPLEMENTAL
CONSENT___________________ Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees
ROD_________________________ Records Of Decision
Delisted NPL________________ National Priority List Deletions
FINDS_______________________ Facility Index System/Facility Identification Initiative Program Summary Report
HMIRS_______________________ Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System
MILTS ------------------------ Material Licensing Tracking System
MINES_______________________ Mines Master Index File
NPL Liens ______ Federal Superfund Liens
PADS ------------------------ PCB Activity Database System
RAATS---------------------- RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System
TRIS_________________________ Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System
TSCA________________________ Toxic Substances Control Act
SSTS________________________ Section 7 Tracking Systems
FTTS________________________ FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System- FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, &
Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
STATE OR LOCAL ASTM SUPPLEMENTAL
INC HSDS____________________ Hazardous Substance Disposal Site
AST_________________________ AST Database
LUST TRUST_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ State Trust Fund Database
IMD__________________________ Incident Management Database
EDR PROPRIETARY HISTORICAL DATABASES
Coal Gas____________________ Former Manufactured Gas (Coal Gas) Sites
BROWNFIELDS DATABASES
Brownfields_________________ Brownfields Projects Inventory
VCP_________________________ Responsible Party Voluntary Action Sites
SURROUNDING SITES: SEARCH RESULTS
Surrounding sites were not identified.
Unmappable (orphan) sites are not considered in the foregoing analysis.
TC912282.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Due to poor or inadequate address information, the following sites were not mapped:
Site Name Database(s)
BENNIE GUPTON RESIDENCE IMD, LUST TRUST, LUST
EDWARDS, A.C. ESTATE (GAS) IMD, LUST
PERRY THARRINGTON GROCERY UST, IMD, LUST
CHARLIE WYNNE RESIDENCE LUST TRUST
ALLEN OIL COMPANY-BULK PLANT LUST TRUST
EDWARDS ESTATE(A.C.)(FORMER) LUST TRUST
A.B. ALSTON SERVICE STATION UST
HAYES GROCERY UST
DAVID SMITH GROCERY UST
CHARLIE E. WEST UST
AUBURN ALLEN GROCERY UST
GUPTON GROCERY UST
H.M. DICKENS (DECEASED 1987) UST
WILLIS MAY UST
401 RED BARN CONVENIENCE STOR UST
EDWARDS & FOSTER INC UST
BALL AIRCRAFT SERVICE UST
STALLINGS GROCERY UST
DORSEY'S BETTER VALUE SUPERET UST
WYNNE SERVICE STATION UST
HALE'S GROCERY UST
PETE SMITH'S GARAGE UST
PERRY'S SCHOOL REUNION UST
COMMUNITY GROCERY UST
PLEASANTS GARAGE UST
MIDWAY GROCERY #307 UST, IMD
LOUISBURG SITE #3 OLI
LOUISBURG DUMP OLI
TC912282.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3
* Target Property
A Sites at elevations higher than
or equal to the target property
• Sites at elevations lower than
the target property
L Coal Gasification Sites
National Priority List Sites
Landfill Sites
0 1/4 12 1 Mlles
IV Power transmission lines
// Oil & Gas pipelines
® 100-year flood zone
500-year flood zone
Wetlands
Hazardous Substance
Disposal Sites
TARGET PROPERTY: Daniels CUSTOMER: KCI Technologies, Inc.
ADDRESS: North of Egypt Church Road CONTACT: FGm Burton
CITY/STATE/ZIP: Louisburg NC 27549 INQUIRY #: 912282.2s
LAT/LONG: 36.0623 / 78.2811 DATE: January 16, 2003 6:02 pm
Copyright* 2003 EDR, Inc. 0 2003 GDT, Inc. Rel. 07/2002. All Rights Reserved.
DETAIL MAP - 912282.2s - KCI Technologies, Inc.

* Target Property
A Sites at elevations higher than
or equal to the target property
? Sites at elevations lower than
the target property
L Coal Gasification Sites
r Sensitive Receptors
0 National Priority List Sites
EJ Landfill Sites
0 1/16 1B 1/4 Mlles
f? Power transmission lines Hazardous Substance
Oil & Gas pipelines Disposal Sites
® 100-year flood zone
500-year flood zone
Wetlands
TARGET PROPERTY: Daniels CUSTOMER: KCI Technologies, Inc.
ADDRESS: North of Egypt Church Road CONTACT: Km Burton
CITY/STATE/ZIP: Louisburg NC 27549 INQUIRY #: 912282.2s
LAT/LONG: 36.0623 / 78.2811 DATE: January 16, 2003 6:02 pm
Copyright m 2003 EDR. Inc. 0 2003 GDT, Inc. Re 1. 07/2002. All Rights Reserved.
MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
Target Distance Total
Database Property (Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted
FEDERAL ASTM STANDARD
NPL 1.000
Proposed NPL 1.000
CERCLIS 0.500
CERC-N FRAP 0.250
CORRACTS 1.000
RCRIS-TSD 0.500
RCRIS Lg. Quan. Gen. 0.250
RCRIS Sm. Quan. Gen. 0.250
ERNS TIP
STATE ASTM STANDARD
State Haz. Waste 1.000
State Landfill 0.500
LUST 0.500
UST 0.250
OLI 0.500
INDIAN UST 0.250
VCP 0.500
FEDERAL ASTM SUPPLEMENTAL
CONSENT 1.000
ROD 1.000
Delisted NPL 1.000
FINDS TP
HMIRS TP
MILTS TP
MINES 0.250
NPL Liens TP
PADS TIP
RAATS TP
TRIS TP
TSCA TP
SSTS TP
FTTS TP
STATE OR LOCAL ASTM SUPPLEMENTAL
NC HSDS 1.000
AST TP
LUST TRUST 0.500
IMD TP
EDR PROPRIETARY HISTORICAL DATABASES
Coal Gas
0 0 0 0 NR 0
0 0 0 0 NR 0
0 0 0 NR NR 0
0 0 NR NR NR 0
0 0 0 0 NR 0
0 0 0 NR NR 0
0 0 NR NR NR 0
0 0 NR NR NR 0
NR NR NR NR NR 0
0 0 0 0 NR 0
0 0 0 NR NR 0
0 0 0 NR NR 0
0 0 NR NR NR 0
0 0 0 NR NR 0
0 0 NR NR NR 0
0 0 0 NR NR 0
0 0 0 0 NR 0
0 0 0 0 NR 0
0 0 0 0 NR 0
NR NR NR NR NR 0
NR NR NR NR NR 0
NR NR NR NR NR 0
0 0 NR NR NR 0
NR NR NR NR NR 0
NR NR NR NR NR 0
NR NR NR NR NR 0
NR NR NR NR NR 0
NR NR NR NR NR 0
NR NR NR NR NR 0
NR NR NR NR NR 0
0 0 0 0 NR 0
NR NR NR NR NR 0
0 0 0 NR NR 0
NR NR NR NR NR 0
1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
TC912282.2s Page 4
MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
Target Distance Total
Database Property (Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted
BROWNFIELDS DATABASES
Brownfields 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
VCP 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
NOTES:
AQUIFLOW - see EDR Physical Setting Source Addendum
TP = Target Property
NR = Not Requested at this Search Distance
Sites may be listed in more than one database
TC912282.2s Page 5
Map ID
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft.)
Elevation Site
MAP FINDINGS
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
Coal Gas Site Search: No site was found in a search of Real Property Scan's ENVIROHAZ database.
NO SITES FOUND
TC912282.2s Page 6
ORPAAN SUMMARY
City EDR ID
Site Name Site Address Zip Database(s)
GOLDSAND 0003144720 A.B. ALSTON SERVICE STATION ROUTE 6, BOX 321-A, LOUISBURG 27549 UST
LOUISBURG 0001439365 HAYES GROCERY RT 2 BOX 120 27549 UST
LOUISBURG 0003562627 DAVID SMITH GROCERY ROUTE 2 27549 UST
LOUISBURG S103131076 BENNIE GUPTON RESIDENCE RT 2, BOX 564 27549 IMD, LUST TRUST, LUST
LOUISBURG 0001436928 CHARLIE E. WEST ROUTE 2, BOX 174 27549 UST
LOUISBURG 0001436955 AUBURN ALLEN GROCERY ROUTE 2, BOX 133 27549 UST
LOUISBURG 0001436957 GUPTON GROCERY ROUTE 2, BOX 781 27549 UST
LOUISBURG 0001436959 H.M. DICKENS (DECEASED 1987) ROUTE 2, BOX 408 27549 UST
LOUISBURG 0001434524 WILLIS MAY ROUTE 3 27549 UST
LOUISBURG 0001436987 401 RED BARN CONVENIENCE STOR ROUTE 3 HWY 401 NORTH 27549 UST
LOUISBURG 0001437051 EDWARDS R FOSTER INC RT 3 BOX 366 27549 UST
LOUISBURG 0003144346 BALL AIRCRAFT SERVICE RT 3 BOX 683 27549 UST
LOUISBURG 0001436950 STALLINGS GROCERY ROUTE 3, BOX 325 27549 UST
LOUISBURG 0001436996 DORSEY'S BETTER VALUE SUPERET ROUTE 3, BOX 609 27549 UST
LOUISBURG 0003144718 WYNNE SERVICE STATION ROUTE 3, BOX 199 27549 UST
LOUISBURG S105119905 EDWARDS, A.C. ESTATE (GAS) 3420 HWY 39 SOUTH 27549 IMD, LUST
LOUISBURG S105218607 CHARLIE WYNNE RESIDENCE HIGHWAY 39 27549 LUST TRUST
LOUISBURG 5105219016 ALLEN OIL COMPANY-BULK PLANT HIGHWAY 39 27549 LUST TRUST
LOUISBURG S105219742 EDWARDS ESTATE(A.C.)(FORMER) 3420 HWY 39 SOUTH 27549 LUST TRUST
LOUISBURG 0001434128 HALE'S GROCERY RT 6 BOX 189 27549 UST
LOUISBURG 0001436907 PETE SMITH'S GARAGE RT 6 BOX 159 27549 UST
LOUISBURG 0001439067 PERRY'S SCHOOL REUNION RT 6 BOX 334-K 27549 UST
LOUISBURG 0001439495 COMMUNITY GROCERY RT 6 BOX 315 27549 UST
LOUISBURG 0001437103 PLEASANTS GARAGE ROUTE 6, BOX 439 27549 UST
LOUISBURG 0001438485 PERRY THARRINGTON GROCERY ROUTE 6, BOX 244 27549 UST, IMD, LUST
LOUISBURG S105485678 LOUISBURG SITE #3 BICKETT ST TO HILL ST, RT ON A 27549 OLI
LOUISBURG 0003092049 MIDWAY GROCERY #307 4589 NC HWY 39N 27549 UST, IMD
LOUISBURG S105485676 LOUISBURG DUMP E RIVER RD (SR 1600), 1 MI ON 27549 OLI
TC912282.2s Page 7
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
To maintain currency of the following federal and state databases, EDR contacts the appropriate governmental agency
on a monthly or quarterly basis, as required.
Elapsed ASTM days: Provides confirmation that this EDR report meets or exceeds the 90-day updating requirement
of the ASTM standard.
FEDERAL ASTM STANDARD RECORDS
NPL: National Priority List
Source: EPA
Telephone: N/A
National Priorities List (Superfund). The NPL is a subset of CERCLIS and identifies over 1,200 sites for priority
cleanup under the Superfund Program. NPL sites may encompass relatively large areas. As such, EDR provides polygon
coverage for over 1,000 NPL site boundaries produced by EPA's Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center
(EPIC) and regional EPA offices.
Date of Government Version: 10/24/02
Date Made Active at EDR: 12/09/02
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
NPL Site Boundaries
Sources:
EPA's Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC)
Telephone: [phone]
EPA Region 1
Telephone [phone]
EPA Region 3
Telephone [phone]
EPA Region 4
Telephone [phone]
Proposed NPL: Proposed National Priority List Sites
Source: EPA
Telephone: N/A
Date of Government Version: 10/24/02
Date Made Active at EDR: 12/09/02
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 11/04/02
Elapsed ASTM days: 35
Date of Last EDR Contact: 11/04/02
EPA Region 6
Telephone: [phone]
EPA Region 8
Telephone: [phone]
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 11/04/02
Elapsed ASTM days: 35
Date of Last EDR Contact: 11/04/02
CERCLIS: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
CERCLIS contains data on potentially hazardous waste sites that have been reported to the USEPA by states, municipalities,
private companies and private persons, pursuant to Section 103 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act (CERCLA). CERCLIS contains sites which are either proposed to or on the National Priorities
List (NPL) and sites which are in the screening and assessment phase for possible inclusion on the NPL.
Date of Government Version: 12/13/02
Date Made Active at EDR: 01115/03
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 12/26/02
Elapsed ASTM days: 20
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/26/02
CERCLIS-NFRAP: CERCLIS No Further Remedial Action Planned
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
As of February 1995, CERCLIS sites designated "No Further Remedial Action Planned" (NFRAP) have been removed
from CERCLIS. NFRAP sites may be sites where, following an initial investigation, no contamination was found,
contamination was removed quickly without the need for the site to be placed on the NPL, or the contamination
was not serious enough to require Federal Superfund action or NPL consideration. EPA has removed approximately
25,000 NFRAP sites to lift the unintended barriers to the redevelopment of these properties and has archived them
as historical records so EPA does not needlessly repeat the investigations in the future. This policy change is
part of the EPA's Brownfields Redevelopment Program to help cities, states, private investors and affected citizens
to promote economic redevelopment of unproductive urban sites.
TC912282.2s Page GRA
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 12/13/02
Date Made Active at EDR: 01/15/03
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 12/26/02
Elapsed ASTM days: 20
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/26/02
CORRACTS: Corrective Action Report
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
CORRACTS identifies hazardous waste handlers with RCRA corrective action activity.
Date of Government Version: 09/29/02
Date Made Active at EDR: 12/26/02
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 10/15/02
Elapsed ASTM days: 72
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/09/02
RCRIS: Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System
Source: EPA/NTIS
Telephone: [phone]
Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System. RCRIS includes selective information on sites which generate,
transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA).
Date of Government Version: 09/09/02 Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 09/24/02
Date Made Active at EDR: 10/28/02 Elapsed ASTM days: 34
Database Release Frequency: Varies Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/26/02
ERNS: Emergency Response Notification System
Source: EPA/NTIS
Telephone: [phone]
Emergency Response Notification System. ERNS records and stores information on reported releases of oil and hazardous
substances.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/01 Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 07/02/02
Date Made Active at EDR: 07/15/02 Elapsed ASTM days: 13
Database Release Frequency: Varies Date of Last EDR Contact: 10/28/02
FEDERAL ASTM SUPPLEMENTAL RECORDS
BRS: Biennial Reporting System
Source: EPA/NTIS
Telephone: [phone]
The Biennial Reporting System is a national system administered by the EPA that collects data on the generation
and management of hazardous waste. BRS captures detailed data from two groups: Large Quantity Generators (LQG)
and Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/99
Database Release Frequency: Biennially
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12117/02
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/17/03
CONSENT: Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees
Source: EPA Regional Offices
Telephone: Varies
Major legal settlements that establish responsibility and standards for cleanup at NPL (Superfund) sites. Released
periodically by United States District Courts after settlement by parties to litigation matters.
Date of Government Version: N/A
Database Release Frequency: Varies
Date of Last EDR Contact: N/A
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
ROD: Records Of Decision
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Record of Decision. ROD documents mandate a permanent remedy at an NPL (Superfund) site containing technical
and health information to aid in the cleanup.
TC912282.2s Page GR-2
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 12/21/01
Database Release Frequency: Annually
Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/07/03
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/07103
DELISTED NPL: National Priority List Deletions
Source: EPA
Telephone: N/A
The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) establishes the criteria that the
EPA uses to delete sites from the NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425.(e), sites may be deleted from the
NPL where no further response is appropriate.
Date of Government Version: 10/18/02
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 11/04/02
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/03/03
FINDS: Facility Index System/Facility Identification Initiative Program Summary Report
Source: EPA
Telephone: N/A
Facility Index System. FINDS contains both facility information and 'pointers' to other sources that contain more
detail. EDR includes the following FINDS databases in this report: PCS (Permit Compliance System), AIRS (Aerometric
Information Retrieval System), DOCKET (Enforcement Docket used to manage and track information on civil judicial
enforcement cases for all environmental statutes), FURS (Federal Underground Injection Control), C-DOCKET (Criminal
Docket System used to track criminal enforcement actions for all environmental statutes), FFIS (Federal Facilities
Information System), STATE (State Environmental Laws and Statutes), and PADS (PCB Activity Data System).
Date of Government Version: 10/10/02
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/06/03
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/07/03
HMIRS: Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System
Source: U.S. Department of Transportation
Telephone: [phone]
Hazardous Materials Incident Report System. HMIRS contains hazardous material spill incidents reported to DOT.
Date of Government Version: 07/31/02
Database Release Frequency: Annually
Date of Last EDR Contact: 10/21/02
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/20/03
MILTS: Material Licensing Tracking System
Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Telephone: [phone]
MLTS is maintained by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and contains a list of approximately 8,100 sites which
possess or use radioactive materials and which are subject to NRC licensing requirements. To maintain currency,
EDR contacts the Agency on a quarterly basis.
Date of Government Version: 10/21/02
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
MINES: Mines Master Index File
Source: Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration
Telephone: [phone]
Date of Government Version: 09/10/02
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/06/03
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/07103
Date of Last EDR Contact: 01/03/03
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/31/03
NPL LIENS: Federal Superfund Liens
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Federal Superfund Liens. Under the authority granted the USEPA by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation
and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, the USEPA has the authority to file liens against real property in order
to recover remedial action expenditures or when the property owner receives notification of potential liability.
USEPA compiles a listing of filed notices of Superfund Liens.
TC912282.2s Page GR-3
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 10/15/91
Database Release Frequency: No Update Planned
Date of Last EDR Contact: 11/25/02
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/24/03
PADS: PCB Activity Database System
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
PCB Activity Database. PADS Identifies generators, transporters, commercial storers and/or brokers and disposers
of PCB's who are required to notify the EPA of such activities.
Date of Government Version: 09/20/02
Database Release Frequency: Annually
Date of Last EDR Contact: 11113/02
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/10/03
RAATS: RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
RCRA Administration Action Tracking System. RAATS contains records based on enforcement actions issued under RCRA
pertaining to major violators and includes administrative and civil actions brought by the EPA. For administration
actions after September 30, 1995, data entry in the RAATS database was discontinued. EPA will retain a copy of
the database for historical records. It was necessary to terminate RAATS because a decrease in agency resources
made it impossible to continue to update the information contained in the database.
Date of Government Version: 04/17/95
Database Release Frequency: No Update Planned
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/10/02
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/10/03
TRIS: Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Toxic Release Inventory System. TRIS identifies facilities which release toxic chemicals to the air, water and
land in reportable quantities under SARA Title III Section 313.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/00
Database Release Frequency: Annually
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/26/02
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/24/03
TSCA: Toxic Substances Control Act
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Toxic Substances Control Act. TSCA identifies manufacturers and importers of chemical substances included on the
TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory list. It includes data on the production volume of these substances by plant
site.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/98
Database Release Frequency: Every 4 Years
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/10/02
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/10/03
FTTS INSP: FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Date of Government Version: 10/24/02
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/26/02
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/24/03
SSTS: Section 7 Tracking Systems
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Section 7 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, as amended (92 Stat. 829) requires all
registered pesticide-producing establishments to submit a report to the Environmental Protection Agency by March
1st each year. Each establishment must report the types and amounts of pesticides, active ingredients and devices
being produced, and those having been produced and sold or distributed in the past year.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/00
Database Release Frequency: Annually
Date of Last EDR Contact: 10/22/02
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/20/03
TC912282.2s Page GR-4
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
FTTS: FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
Source: EPA/Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances
Telephone: [phone]
FTTS tracks administrative cases and pesticide enforcement actions and compliance activities related to FIFRA,
TSCA and EPCRA (Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act). To maintain currency, EDR contacts the
Agency on a quarterly basis.
Date of Government Version: 10/24/02 Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/26/02
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/24/03
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ASTM STANDARD RECORDS
SHWS: Inactive Hazardous Sites Inventory
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
State Hazardous Waste Sites. State hazardous waste site records are the states' equivalent to CERCLIS. These sites
may or may not already be listed on the federal CERCLIS list. Priority sites planned for cleanup using state funds
(state equivalent of Superfund) are identified along with sites where cleanup will be paid for by potentially
responsible parties. Available information varies by state.
Date of Government Version: 10/16/02
Date Made Active at EDR: 11/25/02
Database Release Frequency: Annually
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 10/21/02
Elapsed ASTM days: 35
Date of Last EDR Contact: 10/16/02
SWF/LF: List of Solid Waste Facilities
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Solid Waste Facilities/Landfill Sites. SWF/LF type records typically contain an inventory of solid waste disposal
facilities or landfills in a particular state. Depending on the state, these may be active or inactive facilities
or open dumps that failed to meet RCRA Subtitle D Section 4004 criteria for solid waste landfills or disposal
sites.
Date of Government Version: 11/05/02
Date Made Active at EDR: 11/25/02
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 11/05/02
Elapsed ASTM days: 20
Date of Last EDR Contact: 11/13/02
LUST: Incidents Management Database
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Leaking Underground Storage Tank Incident Reports. LUST records contain an inventory of reported leaking underground
storage tank incidents. Not all states maintain these records, and the information stored varies by state.
Date of Government Version: 11/22/02
Date Made Active at EDR: 01/10/03
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 12/09/02
Elapsed ASTM days: 32
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/09/02
UST: Petroleum Underground Storage Tank Database
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Registered Underground Storage Tanks. UST's are regulated under Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) and must be registered with the state department responsible for administering the UST program. Available
information varies by state program.
Date of Government Version: 11/08/02
Date Made Active at EDR: 12/09/02
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 11/13/02
Elapsed ASTM days: 26
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/09/02
OLI: Old Landfill Inventory
Source: Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
TC912282.2s Page GR-5
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 09/30/02
Date Made Active at EDR: 11/25/02
Database Release Frequency: Varies
VCP: Responsible Party Voluntary Action Sites
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Date of Government Version: 09/16/02
Date Made Active at EDR: 11/15/02
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
INDIAN UST: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
Source: EPA Region 4
Telephone: [phone]
Date of Government Version: N/A
Date Made Active at EDR: N/A
Database Release Frequency: Varies
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ASTM SUPPLEMENTAL RECORDS
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 10/28/02
Elapsed ASTM days: 28
Date of Last EDR Contact: 10128/02
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 10/14/02
Elapsed ASTM days: 32
Date of Last EDR Contact: 09/16/02
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: N/A
Elapsed ASTM days: 0
Date of Last EDR Contact: N/A
HSDS: Hazardous Substance Disposal Site
Source: North Carolina Center for Geographic Information and Analysis
Telephone: [phone]
Locations of uncontrolled and unregulated hazardous waste sites. The file includes sites on the National Priority
List as well as those on the state priority list.
Date of Government Version: 06/21/95
Database Release Frequency: Biennially
Date of Last EDR Contact: 12/03/02
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/03/03
AST: AST Database
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Facilities with aboveground storage tanks that have a capacity greater than 21,000 gallons.
Date of Government Version: 07/01/02
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
Date of Last EDR Contact: 10/21/02
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/20/03
LUST TRUST: State Trust Fund Database
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
This database contains information about claims against the State Trust Funds for reimbursements for expenses
incurred while remediating Leaking USTs.
Date of Government Version: 11/08/02
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
IMD: Incident Management Database
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Groundwater and/or soil contamination incidents
Date of Government Version: 10/25/02
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 11/13/02
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/10/03
Date of Last EDR Contact: 10/28/02
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/27/03
TC912282.2s Page GR-6
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /'DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
EDR PROPRIETARY HISTORICAL DATABASES
Former Manufactured Gas (Coal Gas) Sites: The existence and location of Coal Gas sites is provided exclusively to
EDR by Real Property Scan, Inc. ©Copyright 1993 Real Property Scan, Inc. For a technical description of the types
of hazards which may be found at such sites, contact your EDR customer service representative.
Disclaimer Provided by Real Property Scan, Inc.
The information contained in this report has predominantly been obtained from publicly available sources produced by entities
other than Real Property Scan. While reasonable steps have been taken to insure the accuracy of this report, Real Property
Scan does not guarantee the accuracy of this report. Any liability on the part of Real Property Scan is strictly limited to a refund
of the amount paid. No claim is made for the actual existence of toxins at any site. This report does not constitute a legal
opinion.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA BROWNFIELDS DATABASES RECORDS
Brownfields: Brownfields Projects Inventory
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
A brownfield site is an abandoned, idled, or underused property where the threat of environmental contamination
has hindered its redevelopment. All of the sites in the inventory are working toward a brownfield agreement for
cleanup and liabitliy control.
Date of Government Version: 03/31/02
Database Release Frequency: Varies
Date of Last EDR Contact: 11/07/02
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/03/03
VCP: Responsible Party Voluntary Action Sites
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Date of Government Version: 09/16/02
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
Date of Last EDR Contact: 09/16/02
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/13/03
OTHER DATABASE(S)
Depending on the geographic area covered by this report, the data provided in these specialty databases may or may not be
complete. For example, the existence of wetlands information data in a specific report does not mean that all wetlands in the
area covered by the report are included. Moreover, the absence of any reported wetlands information does not necessarily
mean that wetlands do not exist in the area covered by the report.
Oil/Gas Pipelines/Electrical Transmission Lines: This data was obtained by EDR from the USGS in 1994. It is referred to by
USGS as GeoData Digital Line Graphs from 1:100,000-Scale Maps. It was extracted from the transportation category including
some oil, but primarily gas pipelines and electrical transmission lines.
Sensitive Receptors: There are individuals deemed sensitive receptors due to their fragile immune systems and special sensitivity
to environmental discharges. These sensitive receptors typically include the elderly, the sick, and children. While the location of all
sensitive receptors cannot be determined, EDR indicates those buildings and facilities - schools, daycares, hospitals, medical centers,
and nursing homes - where individuals who are sensitive receptors are likely to be located.
Flood Zone Data: This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR in 1999 from the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Data depicts 100-year and 500-year flood zones as defined by FEMA.
NWI: National Wetlands Inventory. This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR
in 2002 from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
TC912282.2s Page GR-7
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
STREET AND ADDRESS INFORMATION
© 2003 Geographic Data Technology, Inc., Rel. 07/2001. This product contains proprietary and confidential property of Geographic
Data Technology, Inc. Unauthorized use, including copying for other than testing and standard backup procedures, of this product is
expressly prohibited.
TC912282.2s Page GR-8
GEOCHECK®- PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE ADDENDUM
TARGET PROPERTY ADDRESS
DAN I ELS
NORTH OF EGYPT CHURCH ROAD
LOUISBURG, NC 27549
TARGET PROPERTY COORDINATES
Latitude (North):
Longitude (West):
Universal Tranverse Mercator:
UTM X (Meters):
UTM Y (Meters):
36.062302 - 36° 3'44.3"
78.281097 - 78' 16'52.0"
Zone 17
744889.4
3994079.8
EDR's GeoCheck Physical Setting Source Addendum has been developed to assist the environmental professional
with the collection of physical setting source information in accordance with ASTM 1527-00, Section 7.2.3.
Section 7.2.3 requires that a current USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Map (or equivalent, such as the USGS Digital
Elevation Model) be reviewed. It also requires that one or more additional physical setting sources be sought
when (1) conditions have been identified in which hazardous substances or petroleum products are likely
to migrate to or from the property, and (2) more information than is provided in the current USGS 7.5 Minute
Topographic Map (or equivalent) is generally obtained, pursuant to local good commercial or customary practice,
to assess the impact of migration of recognized environmental conditions in connection with the property. Such
additional physical setting sources generally include information about the topographic, hydrologic, hydrogeologic,
and geologic characteristics of a site, and wells in the area.
Assessment of the impact of contaminant migration generally has two principle investigative components:
1. Groundwater flow direction, and
2. Groundwater flow velocity.
Groundwater flow direction may be impacted by surface topography, hydrology, hydrogeology, characteristics
of the soil, and nearby wells. Groundwater flow velocity is generally impacted by the nature of the geologic strata.
EDR's GeoCheck Physical Setting Source Addendum is provided to assist the environmental professional in
forming an opinion about the impact of potential contaminant migration.
TC912282.2s Page A-1
GEOCHECW - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY
GROUNDWATER FLOW DIRECTION INFORMATION
Groundwater flow direction for a particular site is best determined by a qualified environmental professional
using site-specific well data. If such data is not reasonably ascertainable, it may be necessary to rely on other
sources of information, such as surface topographic information, hydrologic information, hydrogeologic data
collected on nearby properties, and regional groundwater flow information (from deep aquifers).
TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
Surface topography may be indicative of the direction of surficial groundwater flow. This information can be used to
assist the environmental professional in forming an opinion about the impact of nearby contaminated properties or,
should contamination exist on the target property, what downgradient sites might be impacted.
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP ASSOCIATED WITH THIS SITE
Target Property: 2436078-A3 LOUISBURG, NC
Source: USGS 7.5 min quad index
GENERAL TOPOGRAPHIC GRADIENT AT TARGET PROPERTY
Target Property: General NNE
Source: General Topographic Gradient has been determined from the USGS 1 Degree Digital Elevation Model and
should be evaluated on a relative (not an absolute) basis. Relative elevation information between sites of
close proximity should be field verified.
HYDROLOGIC INFORMATION
Surface water can act as a hydrologic barrier to groundwater flow. Such hydrologic information can be used to assist
the environmental professional in forming an opinion about the impact of nearby contaminated properties or, should
contamination exist on the target property, what downgradient sites might be impacted.
Refer to the Physical Setting Source Map following this summary for hydrologic information (major waterways
and bodies of water).
FEMA FLOOD ZONE
Target Property County
FRANKLIN, NC
Flood Plain Panel at Target Property:
Additional Panels in search area:
NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY
NWI Quad at Target Property
LOUISBURG
HYDROGEOLOGIC INFORMATION
FEMA Flood
Electronic Data
YES - refer to the Overview Map and Detail Map
3703770006A
3700980002C
3703770009A
NWI Electronic
Data Coverage
YES - refer to the Overview Map and Detail Map
Hydrogeologic information obtained by installation of wells on a specific site can often be an indicator
of groundwater flow direction in the immediate area. Such hydrogeologic information can be used to assist the
environmental professional in forming an opinion about the impact of nearby contaminated properties or, should
contamination exist on the target property, what downgradient sites might be impacted.
TC912282.2s Page A-2
GEOCHECK® - PHYSICAL; SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY
AQUIFLOWID
Search Radius: 2.000 Miles.
EDR has developed the AQUIFLOW Information System to provide data on the general direction of groundwater
flow at specific points. EDR has reviewed reports submitted by environmental professionals to regulatory
authorities at select sites and has extracted the date of the report, groundwater flow direction as determined
hydrogeologically, and the depth to water table.
LOCATION GENERAL DIRECTION
MAP ID FROM TP GROUNDWATER FLOW
Not Reported
GROUNDWATER FLOW VELOCITY INFORMATION
Groundwater flow velocity information for a particular site is best determined by a qualified environmental professional
using site specific geologic and soil strata data. If such data are not reasonably ascertainable, it may be necessary
to rely on other sources of information, including geologic age identification, rock stratigraphic unit and soil
characteristics data collected on nearby properties and regional soil information. In general, contaminant plumes
move more quickly through sandy-gravelly types of soils than silty-clayey types of soils.
GEOLOGIC INFORMATION IN GENERAL AREA OF TARGET PROPERTY
Geologic information can be used by the environmental professional in forming an opinion about the relative speed
at which contaminant migration may be occurring.
ROCK STRATIGRAPHIC UNIT
GEOLOGIC AGE IDENTIFICATION
Era: Paleozoic Category: Plutonic and Intrusive Rocks
System: Devonian
Series: Middle Paleozoic granitic rocks
Code: Pzg2 (decoded above as Era, System & Series)
Geologic Age and Rock Stratigraphic Unit Source: P.G. Schruben, R.E. Arndt and W.J. Bawiec, Geology
of the Conterminous U.S. at 1:2,500,000 Scale - a digital representation of the 1974 P.B. King and H.M. Beikman
Map, USGS Digital Data Series DDS - 11 (1994).
DOMINANT SOIL COMPOSITION IN GENERAL AREA OF TARGET PROPERTY
The U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Soil Conservation Service (SCS) leads the National Cooperative Soil
Survey (NCSS) and is responsible for collecting, storing, maintaining and distributing soil survey information
for privately owned lands in the United States. A soil map in a soil survey is a representation of soil patterns
in a landscape. Soil maps for STATSGO are compiled by generalizing more detailed (SSURGO) soil survey maps.
The following information is based on Soil Conservation Service STATSGO data.
Soil Component Name: PACOLET
Soil Surface Texture: fine sandy loam
Hydrologic Group: Class B - Moderate infiltration rates. Deep and moderately deep,
moderately well and well drained soils with moderately coarse
textures.
Soil Drainage Class: Well drained. Soils have intermediate water holding capacity. Depth to
water table is more than 6 feet.
TC912282.2s Page A-3
GEOCHECK® - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY
Hydric Status: Soil does not meet the requirements for a hydric soil.
Corrosion Potential - Uncoated Steel: HIGH
Depth to Bedrock Min: > 60 inches
Depth to Bedrock Max: > 60 inches
Soil Layer Information
Boundary Classification
Layer Upper Lower Soil Texture Class AASHTO Group Unified Soil Permeability Soil Reaction
Rate (in/hr) (pH)
1 0 inches 3 inches fine sandy loam Granular COURSE-GRAINED Max: 6.00 Max: 6.50
materials (35 SOILS, Sands, Min: 2.00 Min: 4.50
pct. or less Sands with
passing No. fines, Silty
200), Silty, or Sand.
Clayey Gravel
and Sand.
2 3 inches 29 inches sandy clay Silt-Clay FINE-GRAINED Max: 2.00 Max: 6.00
Materials (more SOILS, Silts Min: 0.60 Min: 4.50
than 35 pct. and Clays
passing No. (liquid limit
200), Clayey less than 50%),
Soils. Silt.
3 29 inches 52 inches clay loam Granular FINE-GRAINED Max: 2.00 Max: 6.00
materials (35 SOILS, Silts Min: 0.60 Min: 4.50
pct. or less and Clays
passing No. (liquid limit
200), Silty, or less than 50%),
Clayey Gravel Lean Clay
and Sand.
4 52 inches 70 inches sandy loam Silt-Clay COURSE-GRAINED Max: 2.00 Max: 6.00
Materials (more SOILS, Sands, Min: 0.60 Min: 4.50
than 35 pct. Sands with
passing No. fines, Silty
200), Silty Sand.
Soils.
OTHER SOIL TYPES IN AREA
Based on Soil Conservation Service STATSGO data, the following additional subordinant soil types may
appear within the general area of target property.
Soil Surface Textures: clay loam
gravelly - sandy loam
sandy loam
loam
Surficial Soil Types: clay loam
gravelly - sandy loam
sandy loam
loam
Shallow Soil Types: clay
sandy clay loam
TC912282.2s Page A-4
GEOCHECK® - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY
silt loam
clay loam
silty clay loam
Deeper Soil Types
fine sandy loam
weathered bedrock
ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORD SOURCES
According to ASTM E 1527-00, Section 7.2.2, "one or more additional state or local sources of environmental
records may be checked, in the discretion of the environmental professional, to enhance and supplement federal
and state sources... Factors to consider in determining which local or additional state records, if
any, should be checked include (1) whether they are reasonably ascertainable, (2) whether they are sufficiently
useful, accurate, and complete in light of the objective of the records review (see 7.1.1), and (3) whether they
are obtained, pursuant to local, good commercial or customary practice." One of the record sources listed in Section
7.2.2 is water well information. Water well information can be used to assist the environmental professional in
assessing sources that may impact groundwater flow direction, and in forming an opinion about the impact of
contaminant migration on nearby drinking water wells.
WELL SEARCH DISTANCE INFORMATION
DATABASE SEARCH DISTANCE (miles)
Federal USGS 1.000
Federal FRDS PWS Nearest PWS within 1 mile
State Database 1.000
FEDERAL USGS WELL INFORMATION
LOCATION
MAP ID WELL ID FROM TP
No Wells Found
FEDERAL FRDS PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM INFORMATION
LOCATION
MAP ID WELL ID FROM TP
No PWS System Found
Note: PWS System location is not always the same as well location.
STATE DATABASE WELL INFORMATION
LOCATION
MAP ID WELL ID FROM TP
No Wells Found
TC912282.2s Page A-5
GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY
OTHER STATE DATABASE INFORMATION
NORTH CAROLINA LOCATIONS OF NATURAL HERITAGE DATABASE
ID Class
0202136 Animal
NORTH CAROLINA NATURAL AREAS DATABASE:
ID Name
104 Middle Tar River Aquatic Habitat
164 Cedar Creek Aquatic Habitat
TC912282.2s Page A-6
PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP - 912282.2s
p0?
US N
y l\
f 3W 300 [
F
1 ?
J ?
?, ; so l
2%
NC
/%/ County Boundary
N Major Roads
N Contour Lines
® Water Wells
© Public Water Supply Wells
Groundwater Flow Direction
c i Indeterminate Groundwater Flow at Location
c v Groundwater Flow Varies at Location
Cluster of Multiple loons
0 112 1 2 Miles
OO Earthquake epicenter, Richter 5 or greater] Wildlife Areas
Natural Areas
Rare & Endangered Species
TARGET PROPERTY: Daniels CUSTOMER: KCI Technologies, Inc.
ADDRESS: North of Egypt Church Road CONTACT: Kim Burton
CITY/STATE/ZIP: Louisburg NC 27549 INQUIRY #: 912282.2s
LAT/LONG: 36.0623 / 78.2811 DATE: January 16, 2003 6:03 pm
Copyright 0 2003 EDR, Inc. Co 2003 GDT, Inc. Rel. 0712002. All Rights Reserved.
GEOCHECK®- PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance Database EDR ID Number
Site ID: 0202136
Latitude / Longitude: 36.0378 / -78.3039
Classification by Type: Animal
Degree of Accuracy associated with coordinate: Minutes
Occurrence Status: Extant
State Status: Special Concern
NC_NHEO 0202136
Site ID:
Site Name:
NHP Site Number:
Cartographic Specifications:
Acres per Polygon:
104
Middle Tar River Aquatic Habitat
S.USNCHP'1203
Natural Area
754.302
NC-NATURE 104
NC-NATURE 164
Site ID: 164
Site Name: Cedar Creek Aquatic Habitat
NHP Site Number: S.USNCHP'1052
Cartographic Specifications: Natural Area
Acres per Polygon: 39.359
TC912282.2s Page A-8
GEOCHECK®- PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE `MAP FINDINGS
RADON
AREA RADON INFORMATION
Federal EPA Radon Zone for FRANKLIN County: 2
Note: Zone 1 indoor average level > 4 pCi/L.
Zone 2 indoor average level >= 2 pCi/L and <= 4 pCi/L.
Zone 3 indoor average level < 2 pCi/L.
Federal Area Radon Information for Zip Code: 27549
Number of sites tested: 1
Area Average Activity % <4 pCi/L % 4-20 pCi/L
Living Area - 1 st Floor 0.000 pCi/L 100% 0%
Living Area - 2nd Floor Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported
Basement Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported
% >20 pCi/L
0%
Not Reported
Not Reported
TC912282.2s Page A-9
PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE RECORDS SEARCHED
HYDROLOGIC INFORMATION
Flood Zone Data: This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR in 1999 from the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Data depicts 100-year and 500-year flood zones as defined by FEMA.
NWI: National Wetlands Inventory. This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR
in 2002 from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
HYDROGEOLOGIC INFORMATION
AQUIFLOWR Information System
Source: EDR proprietary database of groundwater flow information
EDR has developed the AQUIFLOW Information System (AIS) to provide data on the general direction of groundwater
flow at specific points. EDR has reviewed reports submitted to regulatory authorities at select sites and has
extracted the date of the report, hydrogeologically determined groundwater flow direction and depth to water table
information.
GEOLOGIC INFORMATION
Geologic Age and Rock Stratigraphic Unit
Source: P.G. Schruben, R.E. Arndt and W.J. Bawiec, Geology of the Conterminous U.S. at 1:2,500,000 Scale - A digital
representation of the 1974 P.B. King and H.M. Beikman Map, USGS Digital Data Series DDS - 11 (1994).
STATSGO: State Soil Geographic Database
The U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Soil Conservation Service (SCS) leads the national Cooperative
Soil Survey (NCSS) and is responsible for collecting, storing, maintaining and distributing soil survey
information for privately owned lands in the United States. A soil map in a soil survey is a representation of
soil patterns in a landscape. Soil maps for STATSGO are compiled by generalizing more detailed (SSURGO) soil
survey maps.
ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORD SOURCES
FEDERAL WATER WELLS
PWS: Public Water Systems
Source: EPA/Office of Drinking Water
Telephone: [phone]
Public Water System data from the Federal Reporting Data System. A PWS is any water system which provides water to at
least 25 people for at least 60 days annually. PWSs provide water from wells, rivers and other sources.
PWS ENF: Public Water Systems Violation and Enforcement Data
Source: EPA/Office of Drinking Water
Telephone: [phone]
Violation and Enforcement data for Public Water Systems from the Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) after
August 1995. Prior to August 1995, the data came from the Federal Reporting Data System (FRDS).
USGS Water Wells: In November 1971 the United States Geological Survey (USGS) implemented a national water resource
information tracking system. This database contains descriptive information on sites where the USGS collects or has collected
data on surface water and/or groundwater. The groundwater data includes information on more than 900,000 wells, springs, and
other sources of groundwater.
TC912282.2s Page A-10
PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE RECORDS SEARCHED
STATE RECORDS
North Carolina Wildlife Resources/Game Lands
Source: Center for Geographic Information and Analysis
Telephone: [phone]
All publicly owned game lands managed by the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission and as listed in Hunting
and Fishing Maps for North Carolina Game Lands, 1989-90.
North Carolina Rare/Endangered Species and Natural Areas
Source: Natural Heritage Occurrence Sites Center for Geographic Information and Analysis
Telephone: [phone]
North Carolina Public Water Supply Wells
Source: Department of Environmental Health
Telephone: [phone]
RADON
Area Radon Information
Source: USGS
Telephone: [phone]
The National Radon Database has been developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA) and is a compilation of the EPA/State Residential Radon Survey and the National Residential Radon Survey.
The study covers the years 1986 - 1992. Where necessary data has been supplemented by information collected at
private sources such as universities and research institutions.
EPA Radon Zones
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Sections 307 & 309 of IRAA directed EPA to list and identify areas of U.S. with the potential for elevated indoor
radon levels.
OTHER
Epicenters: World earthquake epicenters, Richter 5 or greater
Source: Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
TC912282.2s Page A-11
b
b
z
d
t?
APPENDIX D
Groundwater Hydrographs
C
Gauge 1 - 05729
3
24
12

ca
w
2
1
_
_
0 2
R
a?
a?
W
co
3
-12 =
0
a
0
-24
Oo Oo 0O 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 Oo O? O? 0O 00 00 00 O`? O`?
\Ro \2'0 \?'o \?'O \?O \?O \?O \?O \?O \?o \?o \?O \Ro \?o \?o \Ro \?o \?O \?O
Date
---- ------- --- -----
® Rainfall ® Blank Blank - A Groundwater surface elevation -Ground surface 1 foot depth
-36
Page 1
C
Gauge 1 - 05729
3
24
12

m
cu
cc
2
1
0.57
0.2
0.1 0.10.09
0.01 0.02
0.17
0.27
0.0- 1 0.01
11%?
0.
0.12
0.03 0.03
'c
c
0
ca
a?
m
L
.F+
3
-12 =
0
/LR
V
-24
-36
O O 3 O O O O 3 3 3 O O 3 3 O O O O 3 O O O O O
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
Date
Rainfall Start of growing season l? Blank Groundwater surface elevation -Ground surface 1 foot depth
Page 1
Ch 2)
Gauge 1 - 05729
3
2
c
CU
1
0
0
3/31/2003 4/5/2003 4/10/2003 4/15/2003 4/20/2003 4/25/2003 4/30/2003 5/5/2003 5/10/2003 5/15/2003
Date
Rainfall -Groundwater surface elevation -Ground surface 1 foot depth
24
12
c
C
0 2
m
m
L
d
?F+
3
-12 =
m
0
L
0
-24
-36
Page 1
Ch; 2)
Gauge 1 - 05729
3
24
12
c
?a
C
CU
cc
2
c
0
a?
m
L
3
-12 c
1
0
L
cs'
-24
0
O`? 0O 00 Oo O? Oo O? Oo O? 00 00 00 00 Oo O? O`? O?
?O ?O ?O ?O ?O ?O ?O ?O ?O ?O ?O ?O 20 ?O ?O ?O vO
Date
Rainfall A, Groundwater surface elevation -Ground surface 1 foot depth
-36
Page 1
C
Gauge 2 - 05654
3
24
12
2
.M?
LL
2

_
0
ea
m
a?
L
cc

-12 c
1
0
L
C7
-24
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
X00 ??O X20 X00 ??O X00 X00 X00 X00 X00 4TO \TO \TO \TO X00 ?TO X00 X00 X00
Date
® Rainfall =Blank =Blank - * Groundwater Surface elevation -Ground surface 1 foot depth]
0
-36
Page 1

Gauge 2 - 05654
3

24
12
2
m
2
1.21
?_-j
1
0
0.57
0.2
0.1 0.10.09
0.01 0.02
0.27
0.17 n
0.01 ';' 0.01
0.52
0.12
0.03 0.03
c
C
0 2
c?
m
m
L
-12
0
L
0
-24
-36
Date
D Blank Start of growing season ® Rainfall A Groundwater surface elevation -Ground surface 1 foot depth
Page 1
Chi 2)
Gauge 2 - 05654
3
24
12
12
ca
CO
Cr
2
2
C
0 2
m
m
m
L
F+
3
-12 c
1
3
O
'L
rt
V
-24
0
-36
Page 1
Date
® Rainfall -f -Groundwater surface elevation -Ground surface 1 foot depth
Ch, ;2)
Gauge 2 - 05654
3
2
ca
w
1
0
24
12
2
_
0
ca
m
m
L
3
-12 'a
3
O
'LR
V
-24
-36
CO
0
0
N
(A CO
O
O
N
O CO
O
O
N CY)
O
O
N
N CO
O
O
N
M CO
O
O
N
d CO
O
O
N
In CO
O
O
N
(p CO
O
O
N
r,- CO
O
O
N
00 CO
0
0
N
CA CO
O
O
N
O CO
O
O
N
r CO
O
O
N
r m
0
O
N
N m
O
O
N
CO CO
O
O
N
?Y m
O
0
N
LO m
0
O
N
(D CO
0
O
N
C CO
0
O
N
CO C')
0
0
N
(A C')
O
O
N
O C`)
O
O
N
r CO
O
O
N
N CO
Q
0
N
M
r N N

Cf) N

CIS N

LX) N

LO N

U') N

CD N

CD N

u') N

LO C?

C1) C?

CD \
CD (0
CO
(D
CO
(D
(D
(D
(fl
CO r

CD r

O r

O r

(D
Date
® Rainfall - A Groundwater surface elevation -Ground surface 1 foot depth
Page 1
C
Gauge 3 - 05777
3
24
12

c?
w
c
cc
2
1
c
C
0
ca
G1
m
L
CD
ca
3
-12
0
/LR
V
-24
0
O? 00 0o O? 0o O? 00 00 O`? O? 00 0o Oo O? Oo 00 0o O? 00
\`LO \?'o \`tO \`?O \`?o \`1'O \`Lo \?o \`Lo \`?O \?O \?O \?O \`?O \?O \RO \`ZO \?O \?O
Date
® Rainfall Blank D Blank -?-Groundwater surface elevation -Ground surface 1 foot depth
-36
Page 1
C
Gauge 3 - 05777

m
cc
cc
3
2
1
AL 1. b
1.21
0.57 F
0.52 -
0.2 0.27
0.17
0.1 0.10.09 0.12
0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.03
24
12
c
0
m
m
L
a>
3
-12
3
O
L-

a
-24
-36
Date
® Rainfall Start of growing season D Blank 1 foot depth f Groundwater surface elevation Ground surface
Page 1
Ch; :2)
Gauge 3 - 05777
3
2
c
ca
Mm
cc
1
C
0
CO CO CO C7 CO CO CO CO CO CO C'') CO m C7 CO CO m CO CO m
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
r LO CO 0 CO LO CO O CO LO CO 0 CO LO CO 0 CY) LO CC)
CY) V N N N N C\ LO to In
CO It Nt It It LO U') Ln Ln
Date
® Rainfall - A Groundwater surface elevation Ground surface 1 foot depth
24
12
c
C
0
is
d
m
L
4+
-12 -a
c
0
L
a
-24
-36
Page 1
Ch 2)
Gauge 3 - 05777
3
2
C
c?
c
1
24
12
c
C
0
ca
a?
m
L
a?
co
-12 a
3
O
L
V
0
-24
-36
CO
O
O m
O
O CO
O
O CO
O
O CO
O
O CO
O
O Co
O
O CO
O
O Co
O
O CO
O
O CO
O
O m
O
O CO
O
O m
O
O CO
O
o CO
O
O m
O
O m
O
O CO
o
O CO
O
O C)
O
O CY)
O
O CO
O
O C')
O
O CO
O
O C')
O
O
N
O> N
O N
r N
N N
M N
- N
Ln N
CD N
r,- N
W N
O N
O N N
r N
N N
C 7 N N
LO N
CD N
C N
O N
O N
O N
r N
N N
C 7

LO N

LO N

Cn N

LO N

LO N

U') N

m N

Cn N

LO N

LO N

LO C?7

LO Q

LO O (0 (C)
\
CD
\
Cfl
\
CD
\
(D
Date
® Rainfall __ *--Groundwater surface elevation -Ground surface 1 foot depth
Page 1
C
Gauge 4 - 05748
3
24
12

c?
c
CU
m
2
1
c
C
0
c?
m
a?
L
m
ca
3
-12 c
0
a
0
-24
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 O`? 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
Date
Rainfall ® Blank O Blank -f -Groundwater surface elevation -Ground surface 1 foot depth
-36
Page 1
C
Gauge 4 - 05748
3
24
12

w
2
1
W
0
N
L
W
3
'a
c
-12 0
L
C?
-24
Date
L? Rainfall Start of growing season O Blank -?--Groundwater surface elevation-Ground surface 1 foot depth
Pagel
0
-36
Ch .2)
Gauge 4 - 05748
3
2
C
ca
M
1
0
co co ? co c+? co ro c+? co co co ? ? co co c+? co 0 0 co ? co co co co co co co co ? co co co co 0 ? 0 co co cn co co 0 c? co co co co co
0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
r N CO t7' to CO f- M O O r N M V M (D t- N O O r N C'7 It LO (O I? (n O O r N ('7 It In CO f- 00 O O r N M :T U) CO I- M
C 7 r T T T N N N N N N N N N N m ? ? ? ? -? -? r r r r r
Date
® Rainfall ->A Groundwater surface elevation -Ground surface 1 foot depth
24
12
c
C
0
a?
CU
L
m
-12 v
c
0
/LR
V
-24
-36
Page 1
Ch 2)
Gauge 4 - 05748
3
2
_
c
m
cc
1
0
24
12
_
0
c?
m
m
(D
ca
3
-12
0
L
a
-24
-36
C) C7 C7 CO CO CO CO CO C`) CO C7 CO m CO CO CO CO CO m CO CO CO CO CO 07 CO
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o O O O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O O o O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
O O N CY) LO CCU r- 00 O O r N m T LO CD C O O O r N CO
N N N N N N N N N N CO ?CY)
C\0 C(O C(O C\O C(0 C\0 (O C(0 (.0
LO LO LO LO LO Ln LO Ln LO LO Ln In LO 0 (0 (0 (D
Date
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIRainfall A Groundwater surface elevation -Ground surface 1 foot depth
Page 1
C
Guage 5 - 05746
3
24
12

c?
w
c
2
c
C
0
a?
a?
m
ca
3
-12
1
m
0
0
-24
0
00 Oo O? Oo Oo O`? O`? Oo O? Oo O? 00 00 Oo O? 00 Oo O? O?
\clo \?'o \?o \?o \?O \?o \?o \?O \?O \?o \?o \?O \?O \?O \RO \`?O \?o \Ro \RO
Date
® Rainfall Blank D Blank A- Groundwater surface elevation 1 foot depth Ground surface
-36
Page 1
C
Gauge 5 - 05746
3
24
12
c
CU
w
CU
cc
2
c
c
0
?n
a?
Q
L
3
-12 =
1
3
O
L
C7
-24
? 3 O 3 O 3 3 3 3 0 o O 3 ? 3 O 3 O O O O 3 3 O
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0o Oo 00 00
Date
®Rainfall Start of growing season - Blank 1 foot depth -?-Groundwater surface elevation -Ground surface i
0
-36
Page 1
Ch ;2)
Gauge 5 - 05746
3
2
c
ca
m
cc
1
0
C7 CO CO CO CO C7 CO CY) Ch CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO m m m
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
CO LO CO O C) m CO O C7 U-) CO O C) LO ODD O C) L
?h d N N N N 01)
ZZ :7 7 Ln LO m
C'7 It It It rf ?t V 't 1?3- LO U) LO LO
Date
Rainfall -A, Groundwater surface elevation Ground surface 1 foot depth
24
12
c
_
0 •.2
m
a?
L
m
3
-12 'a
c
0
,L
R
V
-24
-36
Page 1
Ch ,2)
Gauge 5 - 05746
3
2

1
0
24
12
'c
C
0
co
a?
m
L
m
3
-12 m
c
0
L
a
-24
-36
C7 CO (Y) C) CO C7 C7 C7 CO CO C) CO CO CO CO CO CO m CO CO CY) M CO CO C) CO
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
O O N C7 ? U-) CO fl- CO O O r r N CO It In (O C Cb CA O r N C'7
N N N N N N N N N N C?YJ C?7 CO C(O (a CD C(O C(C) CD (0 ? \ \ \ \
Cn LO U') LO In Cn LO LO Cn m Cn Cn In CO CO CO CD
Date
------------
® Rainfall a Groundwater surface elevation -Ground surface 1 foot depth
Page 1
C
Gauge 6 - 28014
c
CO
.M?
Lc
3
2
1
24
12
c
a
0 2
ca
m
m
L
-12 c
3
3
O
L
a
0.49 -24
0.21 a
0.01 0.04
p -36
O? 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
Date
L® Rainfall ® Blank Blank -f-Groundwater surface elevation -Ground surface 1 foot depth
Page 1
C
Gauge 6 - 28014
3
195
194
2
c
m
cc 1.21
cc
i
i b
0
0.57
0.2
0.1 0.10.09
0.01 0.02
1
0.52
0.27
C
C
193
m
m
m
m
3
192
3
0
L
V
191
190
Date
Rainfall Start of growing season D Blank -A Groundwater surface elevation -Ground surface 1 foot depth- i
Page 1
Ch, .2)
Gauge 6 - 28014
3
2

cc
w
C
1
0
C) CY) C'') CO Cr) CO CO CO C'7 CO C'') C7 M m CO CO CO CO CO m
O
O
N

(??
C) O
O
N
C\
?7 O
O
N
L\
V O
O
N
CO O
O
N
O

V O
O
N
C7 O
O
N
LO O
O
N
CC)

cl' O
O
N
O
N
? O
O
N
CO
N
Ni- O
O
N
U)
N
It O
O
N
CD
N
T O
O
N
O
CO \
It O
O
N
CY)
LO O
O
N
LO
LO O
O
N
CD
U) O
O
N
O

LO O
O
N
CO

LO O
O
N
LO

U) O
O
N
CC)

Ln
Date
- -- ------ ------ ----- - --------
Rainfall A Groundwater surface elevation -Ground surface 1 foot depth
24
12
c
C
0
W
d
L
d
rr
3
-12 'a
c
0
/L
R
V
-24
-36
Page 1
Ch 2)
Gauge 6 - 28014
3
2
L
ca
w
.M?
LL
1
24
12
_
0 :°
ca
a?
m
L
F+
-12
0
L
V
0
-24
-36
CO
O CO
O CO
O CO
O CO
O CO
O CO
O CO
O CO
O CO
O CO
O m
O CO
O CO
O m
O m
O m
O m
O CO
O m
O C Y)
O CO
O CO
O C7
O M
O m
O
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
N N
O N N
N N
M N
V N
M N
(O N
r- N
M N
O N
O N N N
N N
Q N
V N
Q N
(0 N
C N
CO N
O N
O N N
N N
O
N
In N
In N
In N
LO N
Ln N
m N
to N
LO N
to N
m R
m (?
LO O
(O \
CO \
CO \
(0
Date
® Rainfall f Groundwater surface elevation -Ground surface 1 foot depth
Page 1
C
Gauge 7 - 28008
3
24
12
2
ca
2
1
c
C
0
c?
d
m
L
4+
3
-12 0
0
L
V
-24
00 O? 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
\`10 \`1O \`Zo \`?'o \`Lo \`?o \?'o \?o \`ZO \`tO \?O \`LO \?O \?O \?O \?O \?O \`?O \?O
?L\?' DLO rL'? ?L\0 rL0 \'`O \'`'? \'`?l. \'`O \'`D\'`? \'`?o \'`1 \'`O \'`0 \ O \ ? \ ?' \ O
Date
0
-36
Rainfall Blank D Blank A Groundwater surface elevation -Ground surface 1 foot depth
Page 1
C
Gauge 7 - 28008
3
24
12

co
2
1
n
0.57
0
0.2
0.1 0.10.09
0.01 0.02
0.17
0.27
0.01 0.01
0.12
0.03 0.03
c
_
0 2
co
m
L
m
ca
-12
0
'LR
V
-24
-36
3 p p 3 3 3 p 3 p p p 3 p p p p 3 p 3 p p p p 3
2pp `Lpp `Lpp ?p0 `Lpp ?p0 ?p0 ?p0 ?p0 ?p0 ?p0 `Lpp ?p0 ?p0 ?Lpp ?p0 ?p0 ?p0 `Lpp `Lpp ?p0 ?p0 ?p0 ?p0
?,`??\ ?.\`?p\ ?L`??\ `?\?\ `?\? 3\?\ `?\?'\ `??\ 3\p\ p\'`p\ p\'`?\ p\'`p\ 3\'`?\ p\'`p\ p\'`'1\ p\'`p\ p\`?p\ p\`?? p\tip\ p\`??\ p\`t'p\ p\`??\ p\`?p\ 3\`??\
Date
® Rainfall ? Start of growing season D Blank --* Groundwater surface elevation -Ground surface 1 foot depth
Page 1
Ch ;2)
Gauge 7 - 28008
3
2
c
ca
1
C
0
CO
O
O
N CO
O
O
N

CO Co
O
O
N

LO CO
O
O
N

00 m
O
O
N

O CO
O
O
N

C7 CO
O
O
N

L() CO
O
O
N

00 CO
O
O
N

O CO
O
O
N

C'') CO
O
O
N

LO m
O
O
N

00 CO
O
O
N

O CO
C)
O
N

CY) m
O
O
N

L() CO
O
O
N

00 CO
O
O
N

O m
O
O
N
?
CY) m
O
O
N
?
LO m
O
O
N
?
CC)
('7

CY)
It r

It r

't r

It N

IT N

It N

V N

Nt (Y)

It
LO
LO
LO -

LO r

LIB
:7-
L()

LO
Date
® Rainfall A Groundwater-surface-elevation -Ground surface 1 foot depth
24
12
2
0 •.-2
co
m
d
L
3
-12 -a
c
0
0
L
a
-24
-36
Page 1
Ch .2)
Gauge 7 - 28008
3
24
12
2
_
ca
c
A4 .
1
0.48
0
0
0.
0.33
0.16 0.16 0.15
0.01 0.07 0.01 0.06
o _ m
0.63
0.1
12
_
0
ca
d
W
L
a?
ca
3
-12 0
0
L
-24
-36
C Y)
0 CO
o CO
O C'7
O C')
O C')
o C')
0 CO
0 CO
0 CO
0 CO
0 CO
0 CO
0 m
0 CO
0 CO
0 Cf)
0 m
0 CO
0 CO
0 C)
0 CO
0 CY)
0 C')
0 C`)
0 (+')
0
o O O O o o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o
N
(n N
O N
r N
N N
('7 N
'7 N
In N
CO N
f? N
C17 N
Cn N
O N
T N
T N
N N
C? N
? N
tf) N
CO N
C N
00 N
CA N
O N
r N
N N
C'7

In N
In N
LO N
LO N
Lo N
LO N
LO N
LO N
U) N
LO N
LO Cr)
LO -
L() (C) (C) (D (0 (0 (.C) CO (D M
(O \
(0
(.O \
(D
Date
Rainfall A Groundwater surface elevation -Ground surface 1 foot depth J
Page 1
C :: ;;: i
Gauge 8 - 05778
3
24
12

c?
w
c
2
c
C
0
m
m
L
m
ca
3
-12
1
m
0
a
-24
0
00 00 0O 00 00 00 00 00 00 OO 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
X00 ??O X20 ??O O O O O \T O ??O O X00 ??O O O O O 41O
Date
- Rainfall ® Blank D Blank -*-Groundwater surface elevation Ground surface 1 foot depth
-36
Page 1
C:;a;,.
Gauge 8 - 05778
c
C
Mm
cc
3
2
1
200
199
0
C
C
198
ca
m
m
L
N
197 v
c
3
0
L
V
196
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 O? 00 03 O? 00 00 O? 00 00 O? O? 00 00 00 00
Date
® Rainfall Start of growing season 0 Blank ??Groundwater surface elevation -Ground surface 1 foot dept
0
195
Page 1
Ch 2)
Gauge 8 - 05778
3
24
12
c
CU
W
m
cc
2
1
c
C
0
m
a?
L
-12
0
L
C7
-24
00 00 00 00 00 00 Oo O? O? O? 0O 00 Oo O? O? O? O? O? O? O?
?O ?O ?O ?O ?O ?O ,LO ?O ?O ?O ?O ?O ?O ?O ?O ?O ?O ?O ?O ,LO
Date
Rainfall A, Groundwater surface elevation -Ground surface 1 foot depth)
Page 1
C
0
-36
Ch ,2)
Gauge 8 - 05778
3
2
C
m
W
CU
cc
1
24
12
c
C
0
ca
m
m
L
F+
3
-12 -a
c
0
L
V
0
-24
-36
CO
O CO
O CO
O CO
O CO
O M
O CO
O CO
O M
O CO
O CO
O M
O M
O CO
O CO
O M
O M
O CO
O M
O CO
O CO
O CO
O CO
O CO
O CO
O CO
O
O
N
O O
N
O O
N
r O
N
N O
N
M O
N
? O
N
m O
N
(0 O
N
r-- O
N
m O
N
m O
N
O O
N
r O
N
r O
N
N O
N
M O
N
I- O
N
l() 0
N
(o O
N
C O
N
00 O
N
CA O
N
O O
N
r 0
N
N 0
N
M

LO N
LO N
Cn N
LO N
U') N
Cn N
LO N
U') N
LO N
Cn N
U-) m
Cf) CY)
LO C(D C(D CO CO (D (0 ? \
CD \
(0
(0 \
CD
Date
® Rainfall *Groundwater surface elevation -Ground surface 1 foot depth
Page 1
i
z
r??
APPENDIX E
Hydric Soil Certification Letter
Soil Boring Descriptions
KCI
ENGINEERS ? SURVEYORS ? SCIENTISTS ? CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS
LANDMARK CENTER I, SUITE 200 ? 4601 Six FORKS ROAD ? RALEIGH, NC 27609 ? 919-783-9214 ? (FAx) 919-783-9266
Hydric Soils Certification Letter
The Franklin County Soil Survey has classified the soils underlying the site as Altavista sandy loam. KCI Associates of North
Carolina, P.A. (KCI) has remapped and reclassified the soils as primarily Roanoke (Fine, mixed, semiactive, thermic Typic
Endoaquults) and Toisnot (Coarse-loamy, siliceous, semiactive, thermic Typic Fragiaquults) with inclusions of the better
drained Altavista (Fine-loamy, mixed, semiactive, thermic Aquic Hapludults) and Augusta (Fine-loamy, mixed, semiactive,
thermic Aeric Endoaquults) (Figure 6. Soil Map). The percent composition of each soil is listed as 70%, 19%, 8% and 3%
respectively. The Roanoke and Toisnot soils are listed as hydric soils due to saturation for a significant period during the
growing season and they are in accordance with the federal, state and county hydric soils list. The reclassification is based on
our findings obtained from a detailed soils investigation. This detailed soils investigation was conducted by augering
numerous soil borings across the site in areas identified by landscape position, vegetation and slope followed by the
preparation of a soil map that identifies each soil mapping unit to the series level. To verify each the soil mapping units five
additional soil borings were advanced on site and detailed soil descriptions were prepared of the vertical soil profile
(Appendix E). These borings correspond to Monitoring Well locations 2, 3, 4, 6, & 7 (Figure 5. GW Monitoring Gauges).
The Roanoke soils that were identified on the site are typical of the Roanoke soils throughout the county. They are formed in
clayey alluvial sediments on low Piedmont and Coastal Plain terraces and on planar to slightly concave depressions on slopes
adjacent to streams and rivers. The shape of these soil units is typically long and narrow due to their landform position. The
areas east of the site were mapped as Roanoke soils by NRCS. These offsite Roanoke soil areas were mapped on
correspondingly similar elevations to the site that was mapped by KCI. The Roanoke soils consist of very deep, poorly
drained, slowly permeable or very slowly permeable soils that have a moderate shrink-swell potential. The seasonally high
water table is at a depth of 1 foot during wet periods. The soil is occasionally flooded in low areas for brief periods. Slopes
are 0 to 2 percent. Individual areas are irregular in shape and generally range from 10 to 50 acres in size. Typically the surface
layer is 5 inches thick with a Munsell color of light brownish gray and ranges from fine sandy loam and loam to silt loam. The
subsoil is usually 48 inches thick. The upper part of the subsoil is light gray sandy clay loam that has brownish yellow
mottles. The lower part is gray silty clay or clay that has yellowish brown or brownish yellow mottles.
The Toisnot Series (RaA) is mapped in a complex with the Rains soil series in Franklin County however during KCI's
investigation the Rains soils were not identified on site. The Toisnot soils occur in shallow depressions, around the heads of
drainageways, and on the outer fringe of stream terraces next to the better drained uplands in the upper Coastal Plain. The soil
formed in moderately coarse textured fluvial or marine sediments. The Toisnot soils consist of poorly drained, slowly
permeable soils that have a low shrink-swell potential. The seasonally high water table is at a depth of 1 foot during wet
periods. Slopes range from 0 to 2 percent. Typically the surface layer is 6 inches thick with a Munsell color of very dark gray
and ranges from loam, sandy loam or silt loam. The subsoil is usually 45 to 61 inches thick. A fragipan commonly occurs in
the upper boundary of the subsoil and commonly ranges from 20 to 40 inches but may range from 10 to 45 inches. The upper
part of the subsoil is light gray or dark gray sandy clay loam that has grayish brown and light gray mottles. The lower part is
gray and the texture is commonly sandy clay loam, but it may range to fine sandy loam, sandy loam or sandy clay.
Steven F. Stokes, LSS
44,11f?
KCI ASSOCIATES OF NORTH CAROLINA, P.A.
Employee-Owned Since 1988
www.kci.com
KC I
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH CAROLNA, PA
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Client: NCWRP Date: February 5, 2003
Project: Daniels Farm Mitigation Site Project #: 1203012
County: Franklin State: NC
Location: Egypt Church Road, South of Louisburg, off Highway 39 SitelLot: MW #1
Soil Series: Wahee
Soil Classification: Fine, mixed, semiactive, thermic, Aeric Endoaquults
AWT: >40" SHWT: 12-18" Slope: 0-1% Aspect:
Elevation: Drainage: Somewhat Poorly Permeability: slow to very slow
Vegetation: Silage-Brown top millet and sudex
Borings terminated at 62 Inches
HORIZON DEPTH (IN) MATRIX MOTTLES TEXTURE STRUCTURE CONSISTENCE BOUNDARY NOTES
A 0-5 2.5Y 6/4 sl if r mfr as
E 5-7 10YR 5/4 10YR 6/6 sl 1 msbk mfr cs
Btl 7-10 10YR 6/6 10YR 6/3 scl 2msbk mfr w detect vfs, almost silt
Bt2 10-18 10YR 6/6 1OYR 7/1 c2f scl-el 2msbk mfr w
Bt3 18-40 10YR 6/6 10YR 7/1 c2f c 2msbk mfi w
Bt 4448 2.5Y7/2 IOYR5/6 c2d c 2msbk mfi w many p rominent clay skins
2.5Y6/6 c2f
BC 48-54 10YR5/6 IOYR4/6 c2d sl-scl Ifsbk mfr w
2.5Y7/2 c2d
C 54-62 10YR7/2 10YR5/6 c2d scl massive mfr

COMMENTS:
DESCRIBED BY: S.F.S. & K.A.N. DATE: 02/05/03
?4h?
KC I
ASSOCIATES OF
NORM CAROLINA, PA
Client:
Project:
County:
Location:
Soil Series:
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
NCWRP
Daniels Farm Mitigation Site
Franklin
Date: February 5, 2003
Project #: 1203012
State: NC
Site/Lot: MW #2
Egypt Church Road, South of Louisburg, off Highway 39
Roanoke
Soil Classification: Fine, mixed, semiactive, thermic, Typic Endoaquults
AWT: 5" SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 0-1% Aspect:
Elevation: Drainage: Poorly Permeability: slow to very slow
Vegetation: Silage-Brown top millet and sudex
Borings terminated at 62 Inches
HORIZON DEPTH (IN) MATRIX MOTTLES TEXTURE STRUCTURE CONSISTENCE BOUNDARY NOTES
A 0-5 lOYR 4/2 5YR4/6 cl loam lfr mfr as redox
Bt 1 5-9 lOYR 5/2 5YR4/6 cl scl lfsbk mfr cs common medium rounded -
concretions
5YR3/4c2 Mn masses
Bt g2 9-12 10YR 6/1 10YR 5/6 c2d scl Ifsbk mfr s man black Mn mass-3mm
Bt g3 12-33 10YR 6/1 10YR 5/8 m2d c lmsbk mfi s few 3mm concretions &
masses below 18"
C 1 33-50 10YR6/1 10YR5/8m2d c massive mfi s see note below
10YR2/lm2d
C g2 50-62 2.5Y6/2 7.5YR5/8 cl c massive see note below

COMMENTS:
33-50" lenses of black 10YR2/1 stained clay soil 1/4 to 1/2" wide repeating every 1/2 to 1" in horizon
50-62" lenses of black 10YR 2/1 stained clay soil 1/4" wide repeating every 1/2 to 1" in horizon
DESCRIBED BY: S.F.S. & K.A.N. DATE: 02/05/03
mmm===Er`?
mnwmw4h?
??
??
mnwnw==&?
of SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
ASSOCIATES T
NORM C001M PA
Client: NCWRP Date: February 5, 2003
Project: Daniels Farm Mitigation Site Project #: 1203012
County: Franklin State: NC
Location: Egypt Church Road, South of Louisburg, off Highway 39 Site/Lot: MW #3
Soil Series: Roanoke
Soil Classification: Fine, mixed, semiactive, thermic, Typic Endoaquults
AWT: 4" SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 0-1% Aspect:
Elevation: Drainage: Poorly Permeability: slow to very slow
Vegetation: Silage-Brown top millet and sudex
Borings terminated at 60 Inches
HORIZON DEPTH (IN) MATRIX MOTTLES TEXTURE STRUCTURE CONSISTENCE BOUNDARY NOTES
A 0-4 10YR 3/1 sl-1 if r mfr as
Bt 1 4-8 10YR 5/2 1OYR 5/6 fl f sl Ifsbk mfr cs
5YR4/6 cl
Bt g2 8-12 10YR4/2 IOYR5/6 flf fsl lfsbk mfr cs
5YR4/6 cl
Bt g3 12-18 10YR 511 5YR 5/8 fl scl Ifsbk mfr s
10YR 5/8 c2d
Bt g4 18-44 10YR 6/1 10YR 8/6 c2d c 2msbk mfi s few medium concretions -
between 40 to 44 "
Bt R5 44-52 2.5Y7/2 7.5YR5/6 f 1p lmsbk mfi s
BC 52-60 2.5Y6/2 2.5Y6/4flf scl lmsbk mfr w
7.5YR5/6 fl

COMMENTS:
DESCRIBED BY: S.F.S. & K.A.N. DATE: 02/05/03
MM.MM.MM14?
M-0MV46?
mmmmmr`?
??
wmmmnmmmmg?
KCI
ASSOICi P
P
NO CAROUNk
Client:
Project:
County:
Location:
Soil Series:
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
NCWRP Date: February 5, 2003
Daniels Farm Mitigation Site Project #: 1203012
Franklin State: NC
Egypt Church Road, South of Louisburg, off Highway 39
Roanoke
Soil Classification:
AWT: 5_'
Elevation:
Fine, mixed, semiactive, thermic, Typic Endoaquults
SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 0-1% Aspect:
Drainage: Poorly drained Permeability: slow to very slow
Vegetation: Silage-Brown top millet and sudex
Borings terminated at 60 Inches
HORIZON DEPTH (IN) MATRIX MOTTLES TEXTURE STRUCTURE CONSISTENCE BOUNDARY NOTES
Al 0-3 10YR4/2 l if r mfr cs redox
A2 3-6 10YR5/1 5YR4/4 fl 1 if r mfr cs
5YR4/6f1
Bt 1 6-14 10YR 5/2 10YR 5/6 fld scl 2fsbk mfr cs common medium black-
Mn masses
Bt g2 14-34 10YR 5/2 10YR 5/6 fld c 2msbk mfi s common medium black-
Mn masses
Bt g3 34-42 2.5Y 6/2 10YR 5/8 c2d scl lfsbk mfr s
2C g1 42-54 2.5Y 6/2 Is mass mfr s
2C g2 54-60 2.5Y 6/2 5YR 5/8 fl sl mass mfr
10YR 6/6 fld

COMMENTS:
placed well bottom 30" and transducer 28"
Site/Lot: MW #4
DESCRIBED BY: S.F.S. & K.A.N. DATE: 02/05/03
wmm-.W-r+?
=-.W=Mr4h?
EMEMW*?
KT
ASSOCIATES Of SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
NORTH CAROLINA, PA
Client: NCWRP Date: February 5, 2003
Project: Daniels Farm Mitigation Site Project #: 1203012
County: Franklin State: NC
Location: Egypt Church Road, South of Louisburg, off Highway 39 Site/Lot: MW #5
Soil Series: State
Soil Classification:
AWT: 44"
Elevation:
Vegetation: Silage-Brown top millet and sudex
Borings terminated at 60 Inches
HORIZON DEPTH (IN) MATRIX MOTTLES TEXTURE STRUCTURE CONSISTENCE BOUNDARY NOTES
A 0-6 10YR4/3 fSl-sl if r mfr as
E 6-13 10YR 5/4 sl if r mfr cw
Btl 13-20 10YR 5/6 scl lfsbk mfr w
Bt2 20-26 7.5YR 5/6 scl Ifsbk mfr w
Bt3 26-38 10YR 6/6 2.5YR4/8c2 scl-cl lfsbk mfr

Bt4 38-43 10YR 6/8 10YR 7/1 flf scl-cl lfsbk mfr w
2.5YR4/8 c2

Bt5 43-53 10YR 5/8 10YR 7/2 c2f scl lfsbk mfr w
2.5YR4/8 c2d
Bt6 53-58 10YR 5/8 10YR 7/2 c2d scl lfsbk mfr w

BC 58-60 2.5Y 7/2 10YR 5/8 c2f scl Ifsbk mfr
2.5YR4/8 c2

COMMENTS:
Placed well bottom 60" and transducer 58"
Fine, loamy, mixed, semiactive, thermic, Typic Hapludults
SHWT: 38-72" Slope: 0-2% Aspect:
Drainage: Well Permeability: Moderate
DESCRIBED BY: S.F.S. & K.A.N. DATE: 02/05/03
KCI
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH CAROLINA. PA
Client:
Project:
County:
Location:
Soil Series:
NCWRP
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Daniels Farm Mitigation Site
Franklin
Egypt Church Road, South of Louisburg, off Highway 39
Toisnot
Date: February 5, 2003
Project #: 1203012
State: NC
Site/Lot: MW #6
Soil Classification:
AWT: 6_'
Elevation:
Coarse-loamy, siliceous, semiactive, thermic Typic Fragiaquults
SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 0-2% Aspect:
Drainage: Poorly Permeability: Slow
Vegetation: Silage-Brown top millet and sudex
Borings terminated at 60 Inches
HORIZON DEPTH (IN) MATRIX MOTTLES TEXTURE STRUCTURE CONSISTENCE BOUNDARY NOTES
Al 0-3 10YR4/2 1 if r mfr cs
A2 3-5 10YR5/1 5YR4/6 fl sl if r mfr cs
10YR4/4flf
E 5-9 10YR 5/1 5YR4/6fl sl lfsbk mfr cw
Bt 1/E 9-15 IOYR 511 2.5YR 4/8 scl lfsbk mfr w
5YR3/4 cl
Exl 15-21 10YR 511 2.5Y 3/1 c2d sl massive cw w black Mn masses,
2.5Y 4/8 fld redox
Ex2 21-36 2.5Y6/l 2.5YR 4/8 fld is massive cw cs heavy clay films
Ex3 36-42 IOYR 511 sl massive cw cs coarse sand
Ex4 42-48 10YR5/2 sl massive cw es
Ex5 48-60 2.5Y6/2 sl massive cw

COMMENTS:
placed transducer @ 36"
DESCRIBED BY: S.F.S. & K.A.N. DATE: 02/05/03
1
KC I
ASSOCIATES OF
OMHH CAROUNk Client:
Project:
County:
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
NCWRP
Daniels Farm Mitigation Site
Franklin
Date: February 6, 2003
Project #: 1203012
State: NC
Location: Egypt Church Road, South of Louisburg, off Highway 39 Site/Lot: 30 ft West of MW #6
Soil Series: Toisnot
Soil Classification: Coarse-loamy, siliceous,semiactive,thermic Typic Fragiaquults
AWT: >62" SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 0-2% Aspect:
Elevation: Drainage: Poorly Permeability: Slow
Vegetation: Silage-Brown top millet and sudex
Borings terminated at 62 Inches
HORIZON DEPTH (IN) MATRIX MOTTLES TEXTURE STRUCTURE CONSISTENCE BOUNDARY NOTES
A 0-3 10YR 3/2 1 if r mfr as
E 3-6 2.5Y 5/2 sl if r mfr cw
Bt 1 6-9 2.5Y 6/2 2.5Y 6/4 fld scl lfsbk mfr cw
1OYR 6/6 flf
Bt g2 9-16 IOYR 6/1 10YR 5/8 c2d scl-sc 2fsbk mfr w
Bt g3 16-20 IOYR 6/1 1OYR 4/6 c2d sc 2msbk mfi w common distinct clay skins
Bt g4 20-25 10YR 6/1 10YR 4/6 c2d sl lfmsbk mfr w scl lenses
Exl 25-35 10YR 6/1 sl mass cw i brittle fra i an
Ex2 35-56 10YR5/1 sl mass cw cs brittle fra i an
Ex3 56-62 2.5Y 7/2 is-s mass dvh cs brittle fra i an

COMMENTS:
DESCRIBED BY: SFS & KAN DATE: 02/06/03
KCI
ASSOC
IATES of SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
NORTH CAROLINA, PA
Client: NCWRP Date: February 5, 2003
Project: Daniels Farm Mitigation Site Project #: 1203012
County: Franklin State: NC
Location: Egypt Church Road, South of Louisburg, off Highway 39 Site/Lot: MW #7
Soil Series: Roanoke
Soil Classification: Fine, mixed, semiactive, thermic Typic Endoaquults
AWT: 5" SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 04% Aspect:
Elevation: Drainage: Poorly Permeability: slow-very slow
Vegetation: Silage-Brown top millet and sudex
Borings terminated at 60 Inches
HORIZON DEPTH (IN) MATRIX MOTTLES TEXTURE STRUCTURE CONSISTENCE BOUNDARY NOTES
A 0-5 10YR 3/2 7.5YR4/8 fl fsl-1 if r mfr as
E 5-7 10YR 5/2 7.5YR5/6 fld sl Ifsbk mfr cs
5YR4/6 fl

Bt 1 7-13 IOYR 6/2 10YR 5/6 c2d scl lfsbk mfr cs

Bt g2 13-20 10YR 5/2 10YR 5/6 c2f c lmsbk mfi s

Bt 3 20-24 10YR 6/1 2.5YR 5/8 c2 c 2msbk mfi s
10YR 5/6 c2f
Bt g4 2440 10YR 6/1 10YR 5/6 c2f sc 2c pr mfi s
BC 4048 10YR6/1 2.5Y6/4 c2 sc 1fsbk mfi s
2C 48-60 2.5Y7/2 6/10Y c2 sl massive mfr
2.5Y6/4 c2

COMMENTS:
Transducer placed @ 36"
DESCRIBED BY: S.F.S. & K.A.N. DATE: 02/05/03
+?
M.M.--th?
KC I
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH CAROLINA, PA
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Client: NCWRP Date: February 5, 2003
Project: Daniels Farm Mitigation Site Project #: 1203012
County: Franklin State: NC
Location: Egypt Church Road, South of Louisburg, off Highway 39 SitelLot: MW #8
Soil Series: Augusta
Soil Classification: Fine-loamy, mixed, semiactive, thermic Aeric Endoaquults
AWT: surface SHWT: 12-18" Slope: 0-2% Aspect:
Elevation: Drainage: Somewhat Poorly Permeability: moderate
Vegetation: Silage-Brown top millet and sudex
Borings terminated at 60 Inches
HORIZON DEI'TH (IN) MATRIX MOTTLES TEXTURE STRUCTURE CONSISTENCE BOUNDARY NOTES
Al 04 IOYR 3/2 fsl if r mfr cs
A2 4-9 10YR4/1 7.5YR4/4 fld fsl
5YR4/4 cl
El 9-12 IOYR 5/2 10YR 5/6 flf sl if r mfr cs redox
IOYR 5/3 flf
E2 12-14 10YR5/3 10YR5/2 m2 sl if r mfr cs
Btl 14-22 10YR 5/4 10YR 5/2 c2d scl lfsbk mfr s
7.5YR5/6 c2d
Bt2 22-27 10YR 5/6 10 YR 511 c2f scl lmsbk mfr s
10 YR 5/4 c2f
Bt3 27-36 10YR 5/6 2.5YR 4/8 c2 scl lmsbk mfr s
10YR5/lc2d
Bt g1 36-42 10YR 511 10YR 5/6 c2f scl lmsbk mfr s
C 42-50 2.5Y6/1
10YR5/8
IOYRS/4
C 50-60 5Y6/1 10YR5/4 scl massive mfr

COMMENTS:
Sulfidic odor, surface ponding, soil saturated from 0 to 14 inches.
DESCRIBED BY: S.F.S. & K.A.N. DATE: 02/05/03
IN,
b
b
z
d
I-TI
APPENDIX F
Existing and Post-Restoration Water Budgets
Daniels Farm Mitigation Site Water Budget - Existing Conditions
Dry Year Water Inputs Water Outputs
Chan
e in
Excess
Wetland
1963 P Si * Gi PET So Go Infiltration g
Storage Water Volume
Jan-63 3.22 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.00 1.04 2.01 2.01 2.52
Feb-63 3.75 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.00 1.04 2.37 2.37 2.52
Mar-63 3.7 0.00 0.00 1.05 0.00 0.00 1.04 1.61 1.61 2.52
Apr-63 1.38 0.00 0.00 2.20 0.00 0.00 1.04 -1.86 0.00 0.66
May-63 3.24 0.00 0.00 3.62 0.00 0.00 1.04 -1.42 0.00 0.00
Jun-63 2.28 0.00 0.00 5.34 0.00 0.00 1.04 -4.10 0.00 0.00
Jul-63 2.56 0.00 0.00 6.10 0.00 0.00 1.04 -4.58 0.00 0.00
Aug-63 1.32 0.00 0.00 5.40 0.00 0.00 1.04 -5.12 0.00 0.00
Sep-63 4.35 0.00 0.00 3.89 0.00 0.00 1.04 -0.58 0.00 0.00
Oct-63 0.46 0.00 0.00 1.99 0.00 0.00 1.04 -2.57 0.00 0.00
Nov-63 7.85 0.00 0.00 0.92 0.00 0.00 1.04 5.89 3.37 2.52
Dec-63 3.85 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00 1.04 2.50 2.50 2.52
Annual Totals 37.96 0.00 0.00 31.32 0.00 0.00 12.48 -5.84 11.86
Avg. Year Water In uts Water Outputs C
i

1973
P
Si *
Gi
PET
So
Go
Infiltration hange
n
Storage Excess
Water Wetland
Volume
Jan-73 2.38 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.00 1.04 1.17 1.17 2.52
Feb-73 5.36 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.00 1.04 3.98 3.98 2.52
Mar-73 3.56 0.00 0.00 1.05 0.00 0.00 1.04 1.47 1.47 2.52
Apr-73 4.86 0.00 0.00 2.20 0.00 0.00 1.04 1.62 1.62 2.52
May-73 4.51 0.00 0.00 3.62 0.00 0.00 1.04 -0.15 0.00 2.37
Jun-73 8.57 0.00 0.00 5.34 0.00 0.00 1.04 2.19 2.04 2.52
Jul-73 3.06 0.00 0.00 6.10 0.00 0.00 1.04 -4.08 0.00 0.00
Aug-73 5.35 0.00 0.00 5.40 0.00 0.00 1.04 -1.09 0.00 0.00
Sep-73 2.47 0.00 0.00 3.89 0.00 0.00 1.04 -2.46 0.00 0.00
Oct-73 0.59 0.00 0.00 1.99 0.00 0.00 1.04 -2.44 0.00 0.00
Nov-73 0.74 0.00 0.00 0.92 0.00 0.00 1.04 -1.22 0.00 0.00
Dec-73 6.27 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00 1.04 4.92 2.40 2.52
Annual Totals 47.72 0.00 0.00 31.32 0.00 0.00 12.48 3.92 12.69
Wet Year Water In uts Water Outputs Ch
i

1979
P
Si *
Gi
PET
So
Go
Infiltration ange
n
Storage Excess
Water Wetland
Volume
Jan-79 6.35 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.00 1.04 5.14 4.37 2.52
Feb-79 4.31 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.00 1.04 2.93 2.93 2.52
Mar-79 3.47 0.00 0.00 1.05 0.00 0.00 1.04 1.38 1.38 2.52
Apr-79 5.33 0.00 0.00 2.20 0.00 0.00 1.04 2.09 2.09 2.52
May-79 5.42 0.00 0.00 3.62 0.00 0.00 1.04 0.76 0.76 2.52
Jun-79 6.19 0.00 0.00 5.34 0.00 0.00 1.04 -0.19 0.00 2.33
Jul-79 3.45 0.00 0.00 6.10 0.00 0.00 1.04 -3.69 0.00 0.00
Aug-79 3.68 0.00 0.00 5.40 0.00 0.00 1.04 -2.76 0.00 0.00
Sep-79 7.48 0.00 0.00 3.89 0.00 0.00 1.04 2.55 0.03 2.52
Oct-79 3.72 0.00 0.00 1.99 0.00 0.00 1.04 0.69 0.69 2.52
Nov-79 6.76 0.00 0.00 0.92 0.00 0.00 1.04 4.80 4.80 2.52
Dec-79 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00 1.04 -0.77 0.00 1.75
Annual Totals 56.74 0.00 0.00 31.32 0.00 0.00 12.48 12.94 17.061 1
* Note: Si is inches of runoff calculated for a 100.7-acre watershed contributing to a 35-acre site.
5.00
4.50
4.00
N
= 3.50
v
C
3.00
O
> 2.50"
L
c?
2.00
c
c?
1.50

1.00
0.50
0.00
Jan-63
Daniels Farm Mitigation Site
Existing Conditions Water Budget
Dry Year (1963) Hvdrograph
I
I
i
. . ,,., ,.,......... ................. .................................. ......
- ------ -
----------- ------- ------

- - - -I

- .

----

------- --

Gf?O G SEASO - March 20th to ovembegI 111h

Feb-63 Mar-63 Apr-63 May-63 Jun-63 Jul-63
Maximum
Capacity/
Soil Surface
= 2.52"
COE
Jurisdictional
Boundary
=
1.68" (12"
below ground
surface)
Aug-63 Sep-63 Oct-63 Nov-63 Dec-63
Date (month - year)
Daniels Farm Mitigation Site
Existing Conditions Water Budget
5.00
4.50
4.00
N
3.50
v
3.00
0
O
> 2.50
L
c?
2.00
c
c?
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
Average Year (1973) Hydrograph
I
I I
i
i
..... .............. ............................... ...............i.......
- -i - -- - -
i
............................ .......... ....................................... ....... ............. .............................. ...... ..................
i
i
i
2nthtoNhvPmhPr?11fh
GROWING SEASON_-
Maximum
Capacity/
Soil Surface
= 2.52"
COE
Jurisdictional
Boundary
=
1.68" (12"
below ground
surface)
Jan-73 Feb-73 Mar-73 Apr-73 May-73 Jun-73 Jul-73 Aug-73 Sep-73 Oct-73 Nov-73 Dec-73
Date (month - year)
Daniels Farm Mitigation Site
Existing Conditions Water Budget
5.00
Wet Year (7y/y) rid
4.50
4.00
N
t 3.50
v
C
3.00
O
> 2.50
m
c?
2.00
c
R
1.50
1.00
Maximum
Capacity/
Soil Surface
=2.52"
0.50
0.00 ! j , I i z&
Jan-79 Feb-79 Mar-79 Apr-79 May-79 Jun-79 Jul-79 Aug-79 Sep-79 Oct-79 Nov-79 Dec-79
Date (month - year)
COE
Jurisdictional
Boundary
=
1.68" (12"
below ground
surface)
Daniels Farm Mitigation Site Water Budget - Proposed Conditions
Dry Year Water Inputs Water Outputs Chan
e in Excess Wetland
1963 P Si * Gi PET So Go Infiltration g
Storage Water Volume
Jan-63 3.22 0.04 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.00 1.04 2.04 2.04 4.32
Feb-63 3.75 0.14 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.00 1.04 2.51 2.51 4.32
Mar-63 3.7 0.08 0.00 1.05 0.00 0.00 1.04 1.69 1.69 4.32
Apr-63 1.38 0.00 0.00 2.20 0.00 0.00 1.04 -1.86 0.00 2.46
May-63 3.24 0.47 0.00 3.62 0.00 0.00 1.04 -0.96 0.00 1.51
Jun-63 2.28 0.00 0.00 5.34 0.00 0.00 1.04 -4.10 0.00 0.00
Ju163 2.56 0.08 0.00 6.10 0.00 0.00 1.04 4.50 0.00 0.00
Aug-63 1.32 0.00 0.00 5.40 0.00 0.00 1.04 -5.12 0.00 0.00
Sep-63 4.35 1.39 0.00 3.89 0.00 0.00 1.04 0.81 0.00 0.81
Oct-63 0.46 0.00 0.00 1.99 0.00 0.00 1.04 -2.57 0.00 0.00
Nov 63 7.85 3.73 0.00 0.92 0.00 0.00 1.04 9.62 5.30 4.32
Dec 63 3.85 0.20 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00 1.04 2.71 2.71 4.32
Annual Totals 37.96 6.12 0.00 31.32 0.00 0.00 12.48 0.28 14.25
Av . Year Water In uts Water Outputs Ch
i E W
l
d
1973 P Si * Gi PET So Go Infiltration ange
n
Storage xcess
Water et
an
Volume
Jan-73 2.38 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.00 1.04 1.17 1.17 4.32
Feb-73 5.36 1.14 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.00 1.04 5.12 5.12 4.32
Mar-73 3.56 0.00 0.00 1.05 0.00 0.00 1.04 1.47 1.47 4.32
Apr-73 4.86 1.12 0.00 2.20 0.00 0.00 1.04 2.74 2.74 4.32
May-73 4.51 0.10 0.00 3.62 0.00 0.00 1.04 -0.05 0.00 4.27
Jun-73 8.57 5.10 0.00 5.34 0.00 0.00 1.04 7.29 7.25 4.32
Jul-73 3.06 0.09 0.00 6.10 0.00 0.00 1.04 -3.99 0.00 0.33
Aug-73 5.35 0.72 0.00 5.40 0.00 0.00 1.04 -0.37 0.00 0.00
Sep-73 2.47 0.09 0.00 3.89 0.00 0.00 1.04 -2.37 0.00 0.00
Oct-73 0.59 0.00 0.00 1.99 0.00 0.00 1.04 -2.44 0.00 0.00
Nov-73 0.74 0.00 0.00 0.92 0.00 0.00 1.04 -1.22 0.00 0.00
Dec-73 6.27 1.04 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00 1.04 5.96 1.64 4.32
Annual Totals 47.72 9.40 0.00 31.32 0.00 0.00 12.48 13.32 19.39
Wet Year Water In uts Water Outputs h
i

1979
P
Si *
Gi
PET
So
Go
Infiltration ange
n
C
Storage Excess
Water Wetland
Volume
Jan-79 6.35 1.73 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.00 1.04 6.87 6.11 4.32
Feb-79 4.31 0.53 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.00 1.04 3.46 3.46 4.32
Mar-79 3.47 0.13 0.00 1.05 0.00 0.00 1.04 1.52 1.52 4.32
Apr-79 5.33 1.19 0.00 2.20 0.00 0.00 1.04 3.29 3.29 4.32
May-79 5.42 0.26 0.00 3.62 0.00 0.00 1.04 1.02 1.02 4.32
Jun-79 6.19 3.61 0.00 5.34 0.00 0.00 1.04 3.42 3.42 4.32
Jul-79 3.45 0.08 0.00 6.10 0.00 0.00 1.04 -3.61 0.00 0.71
Aug-79 3.68 1.55 0.00 5.40 0.00 0.00 1.04 -1.21 0.00 0.00
Sep-79 7.48 1.96 0.00 3.89 0.00 0.00 1.04 4.51 0.19 4.32
Oct-79 3.72 0.16 0.00 1.99 0.00 0.00 1.04 0.85 0.85 4.32
Nov-79 6.76 2.03 0.00 0.92 0.00 0.00 1.04 6.84 6.84 4.32
Dec-79 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00 1.04 -0.77 0.00 3.55
Annual Totals 56.74 13.24 0.00 31.32 0.00 0.00 12.48 26.18 26.68
* Note: Si is inches of runoff calculated for a 100.7-acre watershed contributing to a 35-acre site.
5.00
4.50
4.00
N
t 3.50
v
3.00
O
> 2.50
a)
+r
c?
2.00
cc '
1.50

1.00
0.50
0.00
Jan-63
Daniels Farm Mitigation Site
Proposed Conditions Water Budget
Drv Year (1963) Hydro-graph

I .. ......... ....... ...

I ................. ................. ................................. ............. .....
. .
.. .
.
...........
i
i
?i
.... ................. . ..... ... ............................ ..
I I
. -
..
. ?
i
I?
I
I
i
GROWI G S ON - Ma ch 20th o N em er 1th
I
Feb-63 Mar-63 Apr-63 May-63 Jun-63 Jul-63
Maximum
Capacity = 4.32"
Soil Surface
= 2.52"
COE
Jurisdictional
Boundary
=
1.68" (12"
below ground
surface)
Aug-63 Sep-63 Oct-63 Nov-63 Dec-63
Date (month - year)
5.00
4.50
4.00
N
t 3.50
U
3.00
O
> 2.50
L -
(D
.M+
2.00
.a
c
1.50

1.00
0.50
0.00
Jan-73
Daniels Farm Mitigation Site
Proposed Conditions Water Budget
Average Year (1973) Hydrograph
I
-
.
1 1
. ........ ....
................
i
I ............. .... ..... .........?

I
................

................ .................

................

. ............. .................

........ ................ .................

............ !..... ........

...... ................................ .I

i
.......... ................ .............

................ ....

. . .........

........ .........
>11

...... ...

GROWI NG SEAS ON - Ma 20th to Novem er 11th
I
Feb-73 Mar-73 Apr-73 May-73 Jun-73 Jul-73
Maximum
Capacity = 4.32"
Soil Surface
= 2.52"
COE
Jurisdictional
Boundary
=
1.68" (12"
below ground
surface)
Aug-73 Sep-73 Oct-73 Nov-73 Dec-73
Date (month - year)
5.00
4.50
4.00
N
t 3.50
U
C
3.00
6
> 2.50
L
2.00
C
CU
1.50

1.00
0.50
0.00 -
Jan-79
Daniels Farm Mitigation Site
Proposed Conditions Water Budget
Wet Year (1979) Hydro-qraph

I
.............. ............... .. ........... ............... ............... ..... ...... ....... .................. ..... ..
I i

...........
... i
....... ........ ......
.
...............
.................
..... .....
--
.. ....
...
................. ................. .... ............................ ................. ................ ...... ....................... .......i ..... i...........

GROWI G SEA ON - Ma rch 0th November 11th

Feb-79 Mar-79 Apr-79 May-79 Jun-79 Jul-79
Maximum
Capacity = 4.32"
Soil Surface
= 2.52"
COE
Jurisdictional
Boundary
=
1.68" (12"
below ground
surface)
Aug-79 Sep-79 Oct-79 Nov-79 Dec-79
Date (month - year)
Y
.?
.?
O
k
.,
?.
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action 1D. 200321138 County Franklin
GENERAL PERMIT (REGIONAL AND NATIONWIDE) VERIFICATION
Property Owner KCI Associates of North Carolina
Address Attn: Mr. Joe Pfeiffer, Jr.
Landmark Center II, Suite 220
4601 Six Forks Road
Raleigh North Carolina 27609-5210
Telephone Number [phone]
Size and Location of project (waterway, road name/number, town, etc.) 33.93 on the north side
of SR 1604 (Egypt Church Road) approximately 0.8 mile east NC 39, southeast of Louisburg,
North Carolina. The property is located near Wolfpen Branch.
Description of Activity
Mechanized landclearing and filling activities impacting 0.24 acre of jurisdictional wetlands
located with the bottoms of existing ditches associated with the wetland restoration of the 33+
acre parcel.
X Section 404 (Clean Water Act, 33 USC 1344) only.
Section 10 (River and Harbor Act of 1899) only.
Section 404 and Section 10.
27 Nationwide Permit.
Any violation of the conditions of the Regional General or Nationwide Permit referenced above
may subject the permittee to a stop work order, a restoration order, and/or appropriate legal
action.
This Department of the Army Regional General/Nationwide Permit verification does not relieve
the permittee of the responsibility to obtain any other required Federal; State, or local
approvals/permits. The permittee may need to contact appropriate State and local agencies
before beginning work.
Regulatory Project Manager Signature
Date 8 August 2003 Expiration Date 8 August 2005
SURVEY PLATS, FIELD SKETCH, WETLAND DELINEATION FORM, ETC., MUST BE
ATTACHED TO THE FILE COPY OF THIS FORM, IF REQUIRED OR AVAILABLE: --- -
NATIONWIDE PERMIT 27
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
CORPS OF ENGINEERS
FINAL NOTICE OF ISSUANCE AND MODIFICATION OF NATIONWIDE PERMITS
FEDERAL REGISTER
AUTHORIZED MARCH 18, 2002
Stream and Wetland Restoration Activities. Activities in waters of the United States
associated with the restoration of former waters, the enhancement of degraded tidal and non-tidal
wetlands and riparian areas, the creation of tidal and non-tidal wetlands and riparian areas, and
the restoration and enhancement of non-tidal streams and non-tidal open water areas as follows:
1. The activity is conducted on:
a. Non-Federal public lands and private lands, in accordance with the terms and
conditions of a binding wetland enhancement, restoration, or creation agreement between the
landowner and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) or the Natural Resources Conservation
Service (MRCS), The National Marine Fisheries Service (NINIF), the National Ocean Service
(NOS) or voluntary wetland restoration, enhancement, and creation actions documented by the
NRCS pursuant to NRCS regulations; or
b. Reclaimed surface coal mined lands, in accordance with a Surface Mining Control and
Reclamation Act permit issued by the Office of Surface Mining or the applicable state agency
(the future reversion does not apply to streams or wetlands created, restored, or enhanced as
mitigation for the mining impacts, nor naturally due to hydrologic or topographic features, nor
for a mitigation bank); or
c. Any other public, private or tribal lands;
2. Notification: For activities on any public or private land that are not described by
paragraphs (1)(a) or (1)(b) above, the permittee must notify the District Engineer in accordance
with General Condition 13; and
3. Planting of only native plant species should occur on the site.
Activities authorized by this nationwide permit include, to the extent that a Corps permit is
required, but are not limited to: the removal of accumulated sediments; the installation, removal,
and maintenance of small water control structures; dikes, and bernis; the installation of current
deflectors; the enhancement, restoration, or creation of riffle and pool stream structure; the
placement of in-stream habitat structures; modifications of the stream bed and/or banks to restore
or create stream meanders; the backfilling of artificial channels and drainage ditches; the removal
of existing drainage structures; the construction of small nesting-islands; the -construction. of-open- -
water areas; the construction of oyster habitat over unvegetated bottom in tidal waters; activities
needed to reestablish vegetation, including plowing or discing for seed bed preparation and the
exotic or nuisance vegetation; and other related activities.
This NWP does not authorize the conversion of a stream to another aquatic use, such as the
creation of an impoundment for waterfowl habitat. This NWP does not authorize stream
channelization. This NWP does not authorize the conversion of natural wetlands to another
aquatic use, such as creation of waterfowl impoundments where a forested wetland previously
existed. However, this NWP authorizes the relocation of non-tidal waters, including non-tidal
wetlands, on the project site provided there are net gains in aquatic resource functions and values.
For example, this NWP may authorize the creation of an open water impoundment in a non-tidal
emergent wetland, provided the non-tidal emergent wetland is replaced by creating that wetland
'type on the project site. This NWP does not authorize the relocation of tidal-waters or-the
conversion of tidal waters, including tidal wetlands, to other aquatic uses, such as the conversion
of tidal wetlands into open water impoundments.
Reversion. For enhancement, restoration, and creation projects conducted- under paragraphs
(1)(a), this NWP does not authorize any future discharge of dredged or fill material associated
with the reversion of the area to its prior condition. In such cases a separate permit would be
required for any reversion. For restoration, enhancement, and creation projects conducted under
paragraphs (1)(a) and (1)(b), this NWP also authorizes any future discharge of dredged or fill
material associated with the reversion of the area to its documented prior condition and use (i.e.,
prior to the restoration, enhancement, or creation activities). The reversion must occur within
five years after expiration of a limited term wetland restoration or creation agreement or permit,
even if the discharge occurs after this NWP expires. This NWP also authorizes the reversion of
wetlands that were restored, enhanced, or created on prior-converted cropland that has not been
abandoned, in accordance with a binding agreement between the landowner and NRCS or FWS
(even though the restoration, enhancement, or creation activity did not require a Section 404
permit). The five-year reversion limit does not apply to agreements without time limits reached
under paragraph (1)(a). The prior condition will be documented in the original agreement or
permit, and the determination of return to prior conditions will be made by the Federal agency or
appropriate state agency executing the agreement or permit. Prior to any reversion activity, the
permittee or the appropriate Federal or State agency must notify the District Engineer and -
include the documentation of the prior condition. Once an area has reverted back to its prior
physical condition, it will be subject to whatever the Corps regulatory requirements will be at
that future date. (Sections 10 and 404)
Note: Compensatory mitigation is not required for activities authorized by this NWP,
provided the authorized work results in a net increase in aquatic resource functions and values n
the project area. This NWP can be -used to authorize compensatory mitigation projects, including -
mitigation banks, provided the permittee notifies the District Engineer in accordance with .
General Condition 13, and the project includes compensatory mitigation. for impacts.to waters.of
the United States caused by the authorized work. However, this NWP does not. authorize the... .
reversion of an area used for a compensatory mitigation project to its prior condition. NWP 27, _ _..._._._._.. __._
can be used to authorize impacts at a mitigation bank, but only in circumstances where it has
been approved under the Interagency Federal Mitigation Banks Guidelines.
3
a. In certain states and tribal lands an individual 401 Water Quality Certification must be
obtained or waived (See 33 CFR 330.4(c)).
b. For NWPs 12, 14, 17, 18, 32, 39, 40, 42, 43, and 44, Where the state or tribal 401
certification (either generically or individually) does not require or approve water quality`
management measures, the permittee must provide water quality management measures that will
ensure that the authorized work does not result in more than minimal degradation of water
quality (or the Corps determines that compliance with state or local standards, where applicable,
will ensure no more than minimal adverse effect on water quality). An important component of
water quality management includes stormwater management that minimizes degradation of the
-downstream aquatic system, including water quality (refer to General Condition 21 for
stormwater management requirements). Another important component of water quality
management is the establishment and maintenance of vegetated buffers next to open waters,
including streams (refer to General Condition 19 for vegetated buffer requirements for the
NWPs).
This condition is only applicable to projects that have the potential to affect water quality.
While appropriate measures must be taken, in most cases it is not necessary to conduct detailed
studies to identify such measures or to require monitoring.
10. Coastal Zone Management. In certain states, an individual state coastal zone
management consistency concurrence must be obtained or waived (see 33 CFR 330.4(d)).
11. Endangered Species.
a. No activity is authorized under any NWP which is likelyto jeopardize the continued
existence of a threatened or endangered species or a species proposed for such designation, as
identified under the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), or which will destroy or adversely
modify the critical habitat of such species. Non-federal permittees shall notify the District
Engineer if any listed species or designated critical habitat might be affected or is in the vicinity
of the project, or is located in the designated critical habitat and shall not begin work on the - "
activity until notified by the District Engineer that the requirements of the ESA have been
satisfied and that the activity is authorized. For activities that may affect Federally-listed
endangered or threatened species or designated critical habitat, the notification must include the
name(s) of the endangered or threatened species that may be affected by the proposed work or
that utilize the designated critical habitat that may be affected by the proposed work. As a result
of formal or informal consultation with the FWS-or NMFS,the District Engineer may add
species-specific regior al endangered species conditions to the NWPsw-
! ? ,.,
b. Authorization of an activity by a NWP does not authorize the "take," of a threatened or _
endangered species as defined under the. ESA. In the absence of separate authorization (e.g., an
ESA Section 10 Permit, a Biological Opinion with "incidental take" provisions, etc.) from the .
USFWS or the NMFS, both lethal and non-lethal "takes" of protected species are in violation of
the ESA. Information on the location of threatened and endangered species and their critical
5
I . Name, address and telephone numbers of the prospective permittee;
2. Location of the proposed project;
3. Brief description of the proposed project; the project's-purpose; direct and -
indirect adverse environmental effects the project would cause; any other NWP(s), Regional
General Permit(s), or Individual Permit(s) used or intended to be used to authorize any part
of the proposed project or any related activity. Sketches should be provided when necessary to
show that the activity complies with the terms of the NWP (Sketches usually clarify the project
and when provided result in a quicker decision.);
4. For NWPs 7, 12, 14, 18, 21, 34, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, and 43, the PCN
must also include a delineation of affected special aquatic sites, including wetlands, vegetated
shallows (e:g., submerged aquatic vegetation, seagrass beds), and riffle and pool complexes (see
paragraph 13(f));
5. For NWP 7 (Cutfall Structures and Maintenance), the PCN must include
information regarding the original design capacities and configurations of those areas of the
facility where maintenance dredging or excavation is proposed;
6. For NWP 14 (Linear Transportation Projects), the PCN must include a
compensatory mitigation proposal to offset permanent losses of waters of the US and a statement
describing how temporary losses of waters of the US will be minimized to the maximum extent
practicable;
7. For NWP 21 (Surface Coal Mining Activities), the PCN must include an Office
of Surface Mining (OSM) or state-approved mitigation plan, if applicable. To be authorized by
this NWP, the District Engineer must determine that the activity complies with the terms and
conditions of the NWP and that the adverse environmental effects are minimal both individually
and cumulatively and must notify the project sponsor of this determination in writing;
8. For NWP 27 (Stream and Wetland Restoration Activities), the PCN must include
documentation of the prior condition of the site that will be reverted by the permittee;
9. For NWP 29 (Single-Family Housing), the PCN must also include:
i. Any past use of this NWP by the Individual Permittee and/or the permittee's
spouse;
ii. A statement that the single-family housing activity is for a personal residence
of the permittee;
iii. A description of the entire parcel, including its size, and a delineation of
wetlands. For the purpose of this NWP, parcels of land measuring \1/4\-acre or less will not
7
District Engineer waives this criterion in writing, and the District Engineer has determined that
the project complies with all terms and conditions of this NWP, and that any adverse impacts of
the project on the aquatic environment are minimal, both individually and cumulatively;
15. For NWP 43 (Stormwater Management Facilities), the PCN must, include, for -
the construction of new stormwater management faeilities;a: maintenance plan- -in•accordance
with state and local requirements, if applicable) and a compensatory mitigation proposal to offset
losses of waters of the US. For discharges that cause the loss of greater than 300 linear feet of an
intermittent stream bed, to be authorized, the District Engineer must determine that the activity
complies with the other terms and conditions of the NWP, determine adverse environmental
effects are minimal both individually and cumulatively, and waive the limitation on stream
impacts in writing before the permittee may proceed;
16. For NWP 44 (Mining Activities), the PCN must include a description of all
waters of the US adversely affected by the project, a. description-of measures taken- to.minimize
adverse effects to waters of the US, a description of measures taken to comply with the criteria of
the NWP, and a reclamation plan (for all aggregate mining activities in isolated waters and
non-tidal wetlands adjacent to headwaters and any hard rock/mineral mining activities);
17. For activities that may adversely affect Federally-listed endangered or
threatened species, the PCN must include the name(s) of those endangered or threatened species
that may be affected by the proposed work or utilize the designated critical habitat that may be
affected by the proposed work; and
18. For activities that may affect historic properties listed.in, or. eligible for listing .
in, the National Register of Historic Places, the PCN must state which historic property may be.
affected by the proposed work or include a vicinity map indicating the location of the historic
property.
c. Form of Notification: The standard Individual Permit application form (Form ENG
4345) may be used as the notification but must clearly indicate that it is a PCN and must- include - - - -
all of the information required in (b) (1)-(18) of General Condition 13. A letter containing the
requisite information may also be used.
d. District Engir..e.?r's Decision: In reviewing the PCN for the proposed activity, the
District Engineer will determine whether the activity authorized by the NWP will result in more
than minimal individual or cumulative adverse environmental effects or may be contrary to the
public interest. The-prospective permittee may submit a proposed. ritigation plan with,the PCN
to expedite the process. The District Engineer will consider any proposed compensatory
mitigation the applicant has included in the proposal in determining whether the net adverse
environmental effects to the aquatic environment of the proposed work are minimal. If the
District Engineer determines that the activity complies with the terms and conditions of the NWP
and that the adverse effects on the aquatic environment are minimal, after considering mitigation,
the District Engineer will notify the permittee and include any conditions the District Engineer
9
site-specific comments. If so contacted by an agency, the District Engineer will wait an
additional 15 calendar days before making a decision on the notification. The District Engineer
will fully consider agency comments received within the specified time frame, but will provide
no response to the resource agency, except as provided below. The District Engineer will indicate
in the administrative record associated, with each _notif cation_that_the resource agencies'. concerns
were considered. As required by section 305(b)(4)(B) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act, the District Engineer will provide a response to NMFS.
within 30 days of receipt of any Essential Fish Habitat conservation recommendations.
Applicants are encouraged to provide the Corps multiple copies of notifications to expedite
agency notification.
f. Wetland Delineations: Wetland delineations. must. be prepared in accordance.with . the.. .
current method required by the Corps (For NWP 29 see paragraph (b)(9)(iii) for parcels less than
(\1/4\-acre in size). The permittee may ask the Corps to delineate the special aquatic site. There
may be some delay if the Corps does the delineation. Furthermore, the 45-day period will not
start until the wetland delineation has been completed and submitted to the Corps, where
appropriate.
14. Compliance Certification. Every permittee who has received NWP verification from the
Corps will submit a signed certification regarding the completed work and any required
mitigation. The certification will be forwarded by the Corps with the authorization letter and will
include:
a. A statement that the authorized work was done in accordance with the Corps
authorization, including any general or specific conditions;
b. A statement that any required mitigation was completed in accordance with the
permit conditions; and
c. The signature of the permittee certifying the completion of the work and mitigation.
15. Use of Multiple Nationwide Permits. The use of more than one NWP for a single and
complete project is prohibited, except when the acreage loss of waters of the US authorized by
the NWPs does not exceed the acreage limit of the NWP with the highest specified acreage limit
(e..4. if a road crossing 'over tidal waters is constructed under NWP 14, with associated bank .
stabilization authorized by NWP 13, the maximum acreage loss of waters of the US for the total
project cannot exceed \ 1/3\-acre) .
16. Water Supply Intakes. No activity, including structures and work in navigable waters of
the US or discharges of dredged or fill material, may occur in the proximity of a public water
supply intake except where the activity is for repair of the public water supply intake structures
or adjacent bank stabilization.
17. Shellfish Beds. No activity, including structures and work in navigable waters of the US
,. 11 _
(e.g., easements, deed restrictions) of vegetated buffers to open waters. In many cases, vegetated
buffers will be the only compensatory mitigation required. Vegetated buffers should consist of
native species. The width of the vegetated buffers required will address documented water
quality or aquatic habitat loss concerns. Normally, the vegetated buffer.will be 25 to 50 feet
wide on each side of the stream, but the. District. Engineers may require slightly- wider vegetated -
buffers to address documented water quality or habitat loss concerns. Where both Wetlands and . .
open waters exist on the project site, the Corps will determine the appropriate compensatory
mitigation (e.g., stream buffers or wetlands compensation) based on what is best for the aquatic
environment or, a watershed basis. In cases where vegetated buffers are determined to be the
most appropriate form of compensatory mitigation, the District Engineer may waive or reduce
the requirement to provide wetland compensatory mitigation for wetland impacts.
g. Compensatory mitigation proposals submitted with the " notification" may be either
conceptual or detailed. If conceptual plans are approved under the verification, then the Corps
will condition the verification to require detailed plans be submitted and approved by the Corps
prior to construction of the authorized activity in waters of the US.
h. Permittees may propose the use of mitigation banks, in-lieu fee arrangements or
separate activity-specific compensatory mitigation. In all cases that require compensatory
mitigation, the mitigation provisions will specify the party responsible for accomplishing and/or
complying with the mitigation plan.
20. Spawning Areas. Activities, including structures and work in navigable waters of the
US or discharges of dredged or fill material, in spawning areas during spawning seasons must be
avoided to the maximum extent practicable. Activities that result in the physical destruction (e.g.,
excavate, fill, or smother downstream by substantial turbidity) of an important spawning area are
not authorized.
21. Management of Water Flows. To the maximum extent practicable, the activity must be
designed to maintain preconstruction downstream flow conditions (e.g., location, capacity, and
flow rates). Furthermore, the activity must not permanently restrict or impede the passage of
normal or expected high flows (unless the primary purpose of the fill is to impound waters) and
the structure or discharge of dredged or fill material must withstand expected high flows. The
activity must, to the maximum extent practicable, provide for retaining excess flows from the
site, provide for maintaining surface flow rates from the site similar to preconstruction
conditions, and provide for not increasing water flows from the project site, relocating water, or
redirecting water flow beyond preconstruction. conditions. Stream channelizing will be reduced
to the minimal amount necessary, and the activity must,..to the maximum extent practicable, -
reduce
adverse effects such as flooding or erosion downstream and upstream of the project site, unless
the activity is part of a larger system designed to manage water flows. In most cases, it will not
be a requirement to conduct detailed studies and monitoring of water flow. ' - `
This condition is only applicable to projects that have the potential to affect waterflows.
13
into waters of the US within the mapped 100year floodplain, below headwaters (i.e. five cfs),
resulting in permanent above-grade fills, are not authorized by NWPs 39, 40, 42, 43, and 44.
b. Discharges in Floodway; Above Headwaters. Discharges of dredged or fill material
into waters of the US within the FEMA or locally mapped-floodway;'resulting'in permanent-
above-grade fills, are not authorized by NWPs 39; 40; 42;-and 44. -
c. The permittee must comply with any applicable FEMA-approved state or local
floodplain management requirements.
_ 27. Construction Period. For activities that have not been verified by the Corps and the
project was commenced or under contract to commence by the expiration date of the NWP (or
modification or revocation date), the work must be completed within 12-months after such date
(including any modification that affects the project).
For activities that have been verified and the project was commenced or under contract to
commence within the verification period, the work must be completed by the date determined by
the Corps.
For projects that have been verified by the Corps, an extension of a Corps approved
completion date maybe requested. This request must be submitted at least one month before the
previously approved completion date.
FURTHER INFORMATION --
1. District Engineers have authority to determine if an activity complies with the terms and
conditions of a NWP.
2. NWPs do not obviate the need to obtain other Federal, State, or local permits, approvals, or
authorizations required by law.
3. NWPs do not grant any property rights or exclusive privileges.
4. NWPs do n..)t authorize any injury to the property or rights of others.
5. NWPs do not authorize interference with any existing or proposed Federal project.
DEFINITIONS
Best Management Practices (BMPs): BMPs are policies, practices, procedures,,or structures
implemented to mitigate the adverse environmental effects on surface water quality resulting
from development. BMPs are categorized as structural or nonstructural. A BMP policy may
15 ...
fills that change an aquatic area to dry land, increase the bottom elevation of a waterbody, or
change the use of a waterbody. The acreage of loss of waters of the US is the threshold
measurement of the impact to existing waters for determining whether a project may qualify for a
NWP; it is not a net threshold that is calculated-after considering compensatory mitigation that .
maybe used to offset losses of aquatic functions and -values: -The loss-of-stream bed includes the
linear feet of stream bed that is filled or excavated. -.Waters of the.US temporarily filled, flooded, --
excavated, or drained, but restored to preconstruction contours and elevations after construction,
are not included in the measurement of loss of waters of the US. Impacts to ephemeral waters
are only not included in the acreage or linear foot measurements of loss of waters of the US or
loss of stream bed, for the purpose of determining compliance with the threshold limits of the
_. _ NWPs.
Non-tidal Wetland: An area that, during a year with normal patterns of precipitation has standing
or flowing water for sufficient duration to establish an ordinary high water mark. Aquatic
vegetation within the area of standing or flowing water is either non-emergent, sparse, or absent.
Vegetated shallows are considered to be open waters. The term "open water" includes rivers,
streams, lakes, and ponds. For the purposes of the NWPs, this term does not include ephemeral
waters.
Perennial Stream: A perennial stream has flowing water year-round during a typical year. The
water table is located above the stream bed for the most of the year. Groundwater is the primary
source of water for stream flow. Runoff from rainfall is a supplemental source of water for
stream flow.
Permanent Above-,grade Fill: A discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the US, w
including wetlands, that results in a substantial increase in ground elevation and permanently
converts part or all of the waterbody to dry land. Structural fills authorized byNWPs 3, 25, 36,
etc. are not included.
Preservation: The protection of ecologically important wetlands or other aquatic resources in
perpetuity through the implementation of appropriate legal and physical mechanisms.
Preservation may include protection of upland areas adjacent to wetlands as necessary to ensure
protection and/or enhancement of the overall aquatic ecosystem.
Restoration: Re-establishment of wetland and/or oth:,. aquatic resource characteristics and
function(s) at a site where they have ceased to exist, or exist in a substantially degraded state.
Riffle and Pool Complex: Riffle and pool complexes are special aquatic sites under the 404(b)(1)
Guidelines. Riffle and pool'complexes sometimes characterize steep gradient sections of
streams. Such stream sections are recognizable by their hydraulic characteristics. The rapid
movement of water over a course substrate in riffles results in a rough flow, a turbulent surface
and high dissolved oxygen levels in the water. Pools are deeper areas associated with riffles. A
slower stream velocity, a streaming flow, a smooth surface, and a finer substrate characterize
pools.
17
and maintenance of vegetated buffers I a method of compensatory mitigation that can be used in
conjunction with the restoration, creation, enhancement or preservation of aquatic habitats to
ensure that activities authorized by NWPs result in minimal adverse effects to the aquatic
environment. (See General Condition
Vegetated Shallows: Vegetated shallows are special aquatic sites under the 404(b)(1)
Guidelines. They are areas that are permanently inundated and under normal circumstances have
rooted aquatic vegetation, such as seagrasses in marine and estuarine systems and a variety of
vascular rooted plants in freshwater systems.
?Waterbody: A waterbody is any area that in a normal year has water flowing or standing above
ground to the extent that evidence of an ordinary high water mark is established. Wetlands
contiguous to the waterbody are considered part of the waterbody.
FINAL REGIONAL CONDITIONS FOR NATIONWIDE PERMITS IN THE
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
1. Waters Excluded from NWP or Subject to Additional Notification Requirements:
a. The Corps identified waters that will be excluded from use of this NWP. These waters are:
1. Discharges into Waters of the United States designated by either the North Carolina
Division of Marine Fisheries (NCDMF) or the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
(NCWRC) as anadromous fish spawning area are prohibited during the period between February
15 and June 30, without prior written approval from NCDMF or NCWRC and the Corps.
2. Discharges into Waters of the United States designated as sturgeon spawning areas are
prohibited during the period between February 1 and June 30, without prior written approval
from the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS).
b. The Corps identified waters that will be subject to additional notification requirements for
activities authorized by this NWP. These waters are:
1. Prior to the use of any NWP in any of the following north Carolina designated waters,
applicants must comply with Nationwide Permit General Condition 13. In addition, the
applicant must furnish a written statement of compliance with all of the conditions of the
applicable Nationwide Permit. The North Carolina designated waters that require additional
notification requirements are "Outstanding Resource Waters" (ORW) and "High Quality Waters"
(HQW) (as defined by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality), or "Inland Primary
Nursery Areas" (IPNA) (as defined by the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission), or
contiguous wetlands (as defined by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality), or "Primary
Nursery Areas" (PNA) (as defined by the North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries).
19
Buncombe Burke Caldwell Wilkes
Cherokee Clay Graham Swain
Haywood Henderson Jackson.. Surry
Macon Madison McDowell Stokes
Mitchell Polk Rutherford
Transylvania Watauga `
6. Applicants shall notify the NCDENR Shellfish Sanitation Section prior to dredging in
or removing sediment from an area closed to shell fishing where the effluent may be released to
an area open for shell fishing or swimming in order to avoid contamination of the disposal area
-and allow a temporary shellfish closure to be made. Any disposal of sand to the beach should
occur between November 1 and April 30 when recreational usage is low. Only clean sand should
be used and no dredged sand from closed shell fishing areas. If beach disposal was to occur at
times other than stated above or if sand from a closed shell fishing area is to be used, a swim
advisory shall be posted and a press release shall be made. NCDENR Shellfish Sanitation
Section must be notified before commencing this activity.
2. List of Final Corps Regional Modifications and Conditions for All Nationwide Permits
a. Individual or multiple NWPs may not be used for activities that result in the cumulative
loss or degradation of greater than 300 total linear feet of perennial streambed or intermittent
streambed that exhibits important aquatic function(s).
b. Prior to the use of any NWP (except 13, 27, and 39) for any activity that has more than a
total of 150 total linear feet of perennial streambed impacts or intermittent streambed impacts (if
the intermittent stream has important aquatic function), the applicant must comply with
Nationwide Permit General Condition 13. In addition, the applicant shall furnish a written
statement of compliance with all of the conditions listed of the applicable NWP. Compensatory
mitigation is typically required for any impact that requires such notification. [Note: The Corps
uses the Intermittent Channel Evaluation Form, located with Permit Information on the
Regulatory Program Web Site, to aid in the determination of the intermittent channel stream
status. Also, NWPs 13, 27 and 39 have specific reporting requirements.]
c. For all Nationwide Permits which allow the use of concrete as a building material,
meastres will be taken to prevent live or fresh concrete, including bags of uncured concrete,
from coming into contact with waters of the state until the concrete has hardened.
d. For all Nationwide Permits that allow for the use of riprap material for bank
stabilization, filter cloth must be placed underneath the riprap as an additional requirement of
its use in North Carolina waters.
e. For all NWPs that involve the construction of culverts, measures will be included in
the construction that will promote the safe passage of fish and other aquatic organisms.
All culverts in the 20 CAMA coastal counties must be buried to a depth of one foot below the
Roadway 21
Approach Fill
Bankfull
Culvert buried
below sireambed
to appropriate
Stream depth
receipt of the application. In such cases, the applicant will be required to submit a formal
application and pay of the appropriate fee, and DWQ will be required to process the application
through normal procedures;
3. Stream enhancement projects (as defined and limited below), that do not disturb wetlands and
that are not being conducted for compensatory mitigation or compensatory mitigation credit and
do not include any stream channel relocation, do not require written application to and approval
from the Division of Water Quality, and, therefore, do not require payment of an application fee
to the Division of Water Quality. Stream enhancement is the process of implementing stream
rehabilitation practices in order to improve water quality and/or ecological function. These
- practices must only be conducted on streams that are not experiencing severe aggradation or
erosion. Stream enhancement does not include the relocation of the stream channel.
Stream enhancement bank stabilization techniques include the use of woody vegetation as the
primary means of long-term stability, and "soft" techniques such as root wads that encourage the
establishment of dense woody vegetation. Stream enhancement techniques do not typically
include the use of stream bank or bed hardening techniques such as riprap or other rock, gabion,
block or concrete structures. However, enhancement activities may also include the placement of
in stream habitat or grade control structures such as cross vanes, j-hook vanes, and wing
deflectors that do not affect the overall dimension, pattern, or profile of a stable stream. The
applicant is required to notify the Division in writing with three copies of detailed enhancement
plans and specifications before the impact occurs if the stream enhancement project disturbs
greater than 500 feet of stream bank or if the project proposes the use of in stream structures. If
the Division determines that the project does not meet the above definition of stream
enhancement, then the Division shall notify the applicant in writing with an explanation within
30 days of receipt of the notification to require application and payment of the appropriate fee;
4. Stream stabilization projects that include the use of any structure or fill in the existing stream
bed or disturb greater that 500 feet of stream bank that are proposed under this General
Certification require written application to and approval from the Division of Water Quality.
Stream stabilization is defined as the in-place stabilization of an eroding stream bank using
measures that consist primarily of "hard" engineering, such as but not limited to concrete lining,
rip rap or other rock, and gabions. The use of "hard" engineering will not be considered as stream
restoration or enhancement;
5. Impacts to any stream length in the Neuse, Tar-Pamlico or Randleman River Basins (or any
other major river basins with Riparian Area Protection Rules [Buffer Rules] in effect at the time
of application) requires written concurrence for this Certification from DWQ in accordance with
15A NCAC 2B.0200. Activities listed as "exempt" from these rules do not need to apply for
written concurrence under this Certification. New development activities located in the protected
50-foot wide riparian areas (whether jurisdictional wetlands or not) within the Neuse and Tar-
Pamlico River Basins shall be limited to "uses" identified within and constructed in accordance
with 15A NCAC 2B .0200. All new development shall be located, designed, constructed, and
maintained to have minimal disturbance to protect water quality to the maximum extent
23
Consistent.
Citations:
2002 Nationwide Permits - Federal Register Notice 15 Jan 2002
2002 Nationwide Permits Corrections - Federal Register Notice 13 Feb 2002
2002 Regional Conditions - Authorized 17 May 2002
25
Permit Number: 200321138, Nationwide Permit Number 27
Name of Permittee: KCI Associates of North Carolina/Daniel Farm Restoration
Project Manager: Jean B. Manuele
.-Issuance: 8 August 2003
Upon completion of the activity authorized by this permit and any mitigation required by
the permit, sign this certification and return it to the following address:
US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
RALEIGH REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
6508 FALLS OF NEUSE ROAD, SUITE 120
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27615
Please note that your permitted activity is subject to a compliance inspection by an U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers representative. If you fail to comply with this permit you are
subject to permit suspension, modification, or revocation.
I hereby certify that the work authorized by the above referenced permit has been
completed in accordance with the terms and condition of the said permit, and required
mitigation was completed in accordance with the permit conditions.
Signature of Permittee

O? QG .... .. • . ..G.,,-y
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
`
UJ 7 Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality

August 18, 2003
Steven Stokes
KC I
4601 Six Forks Road
Raleigh, N.C. 27609
Dear Mr. Stokes:
Subject: Tar Pamlico River Basin
Riparian Buffer Rules
Daniels Farm Wetland Restoration
NBRRO 03-190
Franklin County

The information that was received by the Raleigh Regional Office on for project 03-190 has been
reviewed. The plat map and other information was provided to allow a determination to be made
as to whether or not the site would require compliance with the Tar Pamlico Buffer Rule.
The features represented on the Franklin County Soils and the Louisburg USGS Quad maps were
evaluated to determine their subjectivity to the Tar Pamlico Buffer Rule. It was determined that
there are no features depicted on either of the maps wihtin the project boundary. Therefore,
according the Rule, this property is not subject to the Tar Pamlico River Basin: Nutrient Sensitive
Waters Management Strategy; Protection and Maintenance of Existing Riparian Areas,
Administrative Code T15A:02B.0259 (NCAC 0259).
This letter addresses only the applicability of the Neuse Buffer Rules. For information relative to
the Wetlands 401/404 issues, please contact Mr. John Dorney at 919-733-1786. Thank you for
your attention to this matter and if this Office can be of any assistance or if you have additional
questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely,
Steve Mitchell
Environmental Scientist
cc: RRO/John Dorney
H:\nbrlet.for\nbr03\danielwi.190
Raleigh Regional Office 1628 Mail Service Center phone [phone]
Water Quality Section Raleigh, NC 27699-1628 facsimile [phone]
Customer Service
1-800-623-7748
*A
NCDENR
L?,It j.v '? ?..rJ - Sq ':• .>`?wis i * •'.',!?I ''+?'t ' ? _ ? - • '• •C'• t'.
t
Ib _ Yt . I u? ?J s? me _tii,? 4 t"' 41 T
Vr_?-I ?1 rl'3X?1' ?.1 'y'J i .fL71? I]71.?' x`: SI _-

Nlr
•"N^, ?..?"vJ=. ,,}? i?""?•?_ M y'? '.^?• } y _ ?yg; J ?,,r ` r ?` .i - .X
^--{`•`.'?.\rr3 l.•.? '.r '?: ???i.?i. -?11L.•• ?.?a?S?; ?l;f' r •? - -?.y - .w,•.i? J,
78 +e 1??y?,,.r ?/i , r ?• .r!?S _ t . ?.` •? n.l J \ I ; ,: O a ,.? ...??..j
`? F N "-. 't ^T? _' J J . , ,'• J • '1 ? ?y?? ` . F` ? :" `v . ; ?' `C , `_
.i • ?? ?s• +?••?"`:?_. r ?;
1
'??}` ? e ??vt t y Ci s? i t r'?F ??.???'?.'^.•t ? fr/- 7 ' r' ••.••' r ??? lei ^i ? i t t??i., ?"r '? r, - '
I•?% 'r?`""., ``ti•,rg% J,1??,+ ?1iuT7:?.,? -'? ':.:jt x !?._ r ? Y?-p` - j;; ??. ? ._ "i
S.i ;. E= ?y.4. ?•. -.
?f •J r \\ ??' f%- r... 4Y. ?. ? ?•' ? ?. _,? _ ??? ''` i NA ?
r? '?• w_?. ?•' . - \ t `•_ 1.ti -`?_.._,,,, I r,l - Ya , j .l7. _ °rJ::•:._ `?C•?'_r
.;? t •`? a JJ t`, . r ref
•'?.r!-'s'c •...`?. :!.._ ` vV ••?` 1. e\CJ.???`?•'??%:. ... t.- _?? i, _ --?a `? _ _.1`• •? _1,
?v jl >. _ -ms`s i ? L. ?•. ? {^ ! ) t? _ ._ 'f'%ri? ..-. ! 1 tl a ?'
77/
-t-r ? :.L '- ?f r'-`J j ,. ems) i . ?? -`-•.? ? \ - `, ' ?/ J • ?i ` ? I ?••.
I?{r i r ?( yt/_^?f •' .\ ? r ?;\ 't`om`-?:?• r.-. ?f ??J. 1 ?. ???•(^•`!?.???''`.
N NU
t
fiao J r ,rf f ?t `r`
r,' -? -`l '•,-/?J•! (. / ,?` I. ti?l,? j \J` rtlr???- 71 _ I .?r
7;1 I-
rif V-t =J. rh :.rnsY` _i' `:1•?.? ,'? -?L4 S1 r is, 1L I -;J•j n.- ?.
- J'
to •? _ - `?.i: ??s•s a-'?"'.--+-?__ "~ '` .'~r,?? ?: -
'?' ? ? ?'??' ?? (ter • ` ?? i . ny ,• c t t -`f t } i t l t ''l
- x-: .r. G ? y}, )?r?1 .•? - ?r ice'-'??'r?r .??.? - - _? _- ?\^ ?-•--? ? _ ,Itt .4
7 1y?1 ?r ?J11 7 ??
Franklin County. North Caroli.•ta `\ ?`, 1 i • %.l 1• ` A `? `?? :'? r t `T' \
•? / -- - ""e-4"a ..i??`,.??,` ,/,4t 1 t ski.. t' T_
Figure I. vicinity m
Site Bouri&rv
KCI
ASSGCI:.7 =S GP Soo 0 800 meet
Source: 7. S' USGS Topoerenrc ChodrrmQlr - Loeesrbur?
V. S. SCALE
STATIO.'! 1JVA;/. IOPY
v4urm iarouna ueparunent or r-nvironment and Natural Resources
I
_d I
> Alan W. Klimek, P.E.. Director
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
September 2, 2003
Franklin County
DWQ Project #: 03-1003
APPROVAL OF 401 Quality Certification, ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS and Tar-Pamlico River
KCI Associates of North Carolina
Attn: Joe Pfeiffer, Jr.
Landmark Center H
Suite 220
4601 Six Forks Road
Raleigh, NC 27609-5210

Dear Mr. Pfeiffer:
You have our approval in accordance with the attached conditions and those listed below, to place fill
material in 0.24 acres of ditches and grassed waterways for the purpose of restoring wetlands at the
Daniels Farm Wetland Restoration Site at Egypt Church Road near Louisburg, as you described in your
application dated August 12, 2003. After reviewing your application we have decided, this fill is
covered by General Water Quality Certification Number 3399. This certification allows you to use
Nationwide Permit Number 27 when the Corps of Engineers issues it. This approval is also valid for the
=-Pamlico River buffer rules (15A NCAC 2B .0259). In addition, you should get any other federal,
-te or local permits before you go ahead with your project including (but not limited to) Sediment and
Erosion Control, Coastal Stormwater, Non-Discharge and Water Supply Watershed regulations. This
approval will expire when the accompanying 404 or CAMA permit expires unless otherwise
specified in the General Certification.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your application except as
modified below. If you change your project, you must notify us and you may be required to send us a
new application. If the property is sold, the new owner must be given a copy of this Certification and
approval letter and is thereby responsible for complying with all conditions. If total wetland fills for this
project (now or in the future) exceed one acre, compensatory mitigation may be required as described in
15A NCAC 2H.0506 (h) (6) and (7). This approval shall expire when the corresponding Nationwide
Permit expires or as otherwise provided in the General Certification. For this approval to be valid, you
must follow the conditions listed in the attached certification and any additional conditions listed below.
Conditions of Certification:
1. The mitigation plan shall be modified as follows:
a. Erosion control matting shall be used on the lowermost section of the berms.
b. An as-built, as-graded plan shall be sent to DWQ within thirty (30) days of
completion of the grading.
N. C. Division of Water Quality, 401 Wetlands Certification Unit,
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 (Location)
[phone] (phone), 919-733-6893 (fax), (http://h2o.enr.state.ac.us/ncwettands
V.
G9
>
0
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
September 2, 2003
Franklin County
DWQ Project #: 03-1003
APPROVAL OF 401 Quality Certification, ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS and Tar-Pamlico River
KCI Associates of North Carolina
Attn: Joe Pfeiffer, Jr.
Landmark Center II
Suite 220
4601 Six Forks Road
Raleigh, NC 27609-5210
Dear Mr. Pfeiffer:
You have our approval in accordance with the attached conditions and those listed below, to place fill
material in 0.24 acres of ditches and grassed waterways for the purpose of restoring wetlands at the
Daniels Farm Wetland Restoration Site at Egypt Church Road near Louisburg, as you described in your
application dated August 12, 2003. After reviewing your application we have decided, this fill is
covered by General Water Quality Certification Number 3399. This certification allows you to use
kte ionwide Permit Number 27 when the Corps of Engineers issues it. This approval is also valid for the
-Pamlico River buffer rules (15A NCAC 2B .0259). In addition, you should get any other federal,
or local permits before you go ahead with your project including (but not limited to) Sediment and
Erosion Control, Coastal Stormwater, Non-Discharge and Water Supply Watershed regulations. This
approval will expire when the accompanying 404 or CAMA permit expires unless otherwise
specified in the General Certification.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your application except as
modified below. If you change your project, you must notify us and you may be required to send us a
new application. If the property is sold, the new owner must be given a copy of this Certification and
approval letter and is thereby responsible for complying with all conditions. If total wetland fills for this
project (now or in the future) exceed one acre, compensatory mitigation may be required as described in
15A NCAC 211.0506 (h) (6) and (7). This approval shall expire when the corresponding Nationwide
Permit expires or as otherwise provided in the General Certification. For this approval to be valid, you
must follow the conditions listed in the attached certification and any additional conditions listed below.
Conditions of Certification:
The mitigation plan shall be modified as follows:
a. Erosion control matting shall be used on the lowermost section of the berms.
b. An as-built, as-graded plan shall be sent to DWQ within thirty (30) days of
completion of the grading.
raw
NMENWR
G
r
N. C. Division of Water Quality, 401 Wetlands Certification Unit,
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh. NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh. NC 27604-2260 (Location)
[phone] (phone), 919-733-6893 (fax), (http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands
c. A site walk-through shall be added to the annual monitoring plan.
d. A revised well location map shall be provided with the final monitoring plan.
e. A copy of the final Feasibility Study and monitoring plan (currently dated August
2003) that reflects the above conditions shall be provided to DWQ once it is
completed.
Violations of any condition herein set forth may result in revocation of this Certification and may result
in criminal and/or civil penalties. This Certification shall become null and void unless the above
conditions are made conditions of the Federal 404 and/or coastal Area Management Act Permit.
If you. do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory hearing-,
You must. act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send as writterr I
petition, which conforms. to Chapter 1508 of they North Carolina General Statutes- to the Office of i
Administrative Hearings,. P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7447. This certification audits
conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water
Act. If you have any questions, please telephone John Dorney at 919-733-1786 or Steve Mitchell at our
Raleigh Regional Office at 919-571-4700.
Sincerely,
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Raleigh Field Office
Raleigh DWQ Regional Office
File Copy
Central Files
('! X dy-f ?-
. Klimek, P.E., Direc r
Steve Stokes, KCI
Certificate of Completion
DWQ Project No.:
County:
M)licant:
Project Name:
Date of Issuance of 401 Water Quality Certification:
Upon completion of all work approved within the 401 Water Quality Certification and Buffer Rules, and any
subsequent modifications, the applicant is required to return this certificate to the 40IlWetlands Unit, North
Carolina Division of Water Quality, 1621 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC, 27699-1621. This form may, be
returned to DWQ by the applicant, the applicant's authorized agent, or the project engineer. It is not
necessary to send certificates from all of these.
Applicant's Certification
hereby state that, to the best of my abilities, due care and
diligence was used in the observation of the construction such that the construction was observed to be built
within substantial compliance and intent of the 401 Water Quality Certification and Buffer Rules, the
approved plans and specifications, and other supporting materials.
Mature:
Date:
Agent's Certification
I, , hereby state that, to the best of my abilities, due care and
diligence was used in the observation of the construction such that the construction was observed to be built
within substantial compliance and intent of the 401 Water Quality Certification and Buffer Rules, the
approved plans and specifications, and other supporting materials.
Signature:
Date:
If this project was designed by a Certified Professional
I, , as a duly registered Professional (i.e.,
Engineer, Landscape Architect, Surveyor, etc.) in the State of North Carolina, having been authorized to -
observe (periodically, weekly, full time) the construction of the project, for the Permittee hereby state that,
to the best of my abilities, due care and diligence was used in the observation of the construction such that
the construction was observed to be built within substantial compliance and intent of the 401 Water Quality
Certification and Buffer Rules, the approved plans and specifications, and other supporting materials.
mature: Registration No.: Date:
WQC #3399
STREAM RESTORATION, ENHANCEMENT AND STABILIZATION AND WETLAND AND
RIPARIAN RESTORATION AND CREATION ACTIVITIES CERTIFICATION
GENERAL CERTIFICATION FOR STREAM RESTORATION ENHANCEMENT AND
STABILIZATION PROJECTS AND WETLAND AND RIPARIAN RESTORATION AND
CREATION ACTIVITIES INCLUDING THOSE ELIGIBLE FOR CORPS OF ENGINEERS
(CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF BULKHEADS)
This General Certification is issued in conformity with the requirements of Section 401, Public
Laws 92-500 and 95-217 of the United States and subject to the North Carolina. Division of Water
Quality Regulations in 15A NCAC 2H .0500 and 15A NCAC 2B .0200 for the discharge of fill
material to waters. as described in 33 CFR 330 Appendix A (B) (13) and (27)' of the Corps of
Engineers regulations (i.e. Nationwide Permit Numbers 13 and 27) and Regional Permit
197800080. The category of activities shall-include stream bank stabilization or stream
restoration activity as long as impacts to waters or significant wetlands are minimized: This
Certification replaces Water Quality Certification (WQC) Number 1663 issued on September 8,.
1983; WQC No. 1272 issued November 10, 1978; WQC No. 2665 issued on 21 January 1992;
WQC No. 2102 issued on February 11, 1997, WQC Nos. 3256, 3257 and 3258 issued on
November.22, 1999 and WQC No. 3353 issued on March 18, 2002. This WQC is rescinded
when the Corps of Engineers reauthorize Nationwide Permits 13 or 27 or Regional Permit
197800080 or when deemed appropriate by the Director of the Division of Water Quality (DWQ).
The State of North Carolina certifies that the specified category of activity will not violate
applicable portions of Sections 301, 302, 303, 306 and 307 of the Public Laws 92-500 and 95-217
if conducted in accordance with the conditions set forth.
Conditions of Certification:
1. Wetland and/or riparian area restoration and creation projects which are for
compensatory mitigation or compensatory mitigation credit (and not including
projects that only involve stream restoration or enhancement work described in
condition nos. 2 and 3 below) that are proposed under this General Certification
require written application to and approval from the Division of Water Quality. All
applications for written DWQ approval will be reviewed and a response will be
prepared within 30 days of stamped receipt of the application in the Division of
Water Quality's Central Office in Raleigh. This 30-day period does not include time
spent by the application or DWQ's response within US Postal Service or North
Carolina's Mail Service Center mail systems;
Wetland and riparian area restoration and creation projects (not including projects
that involve work in or impacts to streams) which are not for compensatory
mitigation or compensatory mitigation credit proposed under this General
Certification do not require written application to and approval from the Division of
Water Quality. In these cases, the applicant is required to notify the Division in
writing with three copies of project specifications before the impact occurs. If the
Division determines that the project would not result in an ecologically viable wetland
and riparian area, then the Division shall prepare a response to notify the applicant
in writing within 30 days of DWQ's receipt of the notification. In such cases, the
applicant will be required to submit a formal application and pay of the appropriate
fee, and DWQ will be required to process the application through normal
procedures;
WQC #3399
limited to concrete lining, rip rap or other rock, and gabions. The use of "hard"
engineering will not be considered as stream restoration or enhancement;
5. Impacts to any stream length in the Neuse, Tar-Pamlico or Randleman River Basins
(or any other major river basins with Riparian Area Protection Rules [Buffer Rules] in
effect at the time of application) requires written concurrence for this Certification
from DWQ in accordance with 15A NCAC 28.0200. Activities listed as "exempt"
from these rules do not need to apply for written concurrence under this
Certification. New development activities located in the protected 50-foot wide
riparian areas (whether jurisdictional wetlands or not) within the Neuse and Tar-
Pamlico River Basins shall be limited to "uses" identified within and constructed in
accordance with 15A NCAC 2B .0200. All new development shall be located,
designed, constructed, and maintained to have minimal disturbance to protectwater,
quality to the maximum extent practicable through the use of best management
practices; ;n to
s6. In order for the above conditions to be valid, any plans not requiring written
concurrence to use this Certification must be built according to the plans provided to
the Division- of WaterQuality: If4ritten concurrence is required, then the project
must be built and maintained according to the plans approved by the written
concurrence and Certification from the Division of Water Quality;
7. Appropriate sediment and erosion control practices which equal or exceed those
outlined in the most recent version of the "North Carolina Erosion and Sediment
Control Planning and Design Manual" or "North Carolina Surface Mining Manual"
whichever is more appropriate (available from the Division of Land Resources at the
DENR Regional and Central Offices) shall be designed, installed and maintained
properly to assure compliance with the appropriate turbidity water quality standard
(50 NTUs in streams and rivers not designated as trout waters by DWQ; 25 NTUs in
all saltwater classes and all lakes and reservoirs; 10 NTUs in DWQ-classified trout
waters);
8. All sediment and erosion control measures placed in wetlands or waters shall be
removed and the original grade restored after the Division of Land Resources or
delegated program has released the project;
9. Any rip-rap shall be of such a size and density so as not to be able to be carried off
by wave or current action and consist of clean rock or masonry material free of
debris or toxic pollutants. Rip-rap shall not be installed in the streambed except in
specific areas required for velocity control and approved by the Division of Land
Resources and Water Quality. However rock vanes, wing deflectors, and similar
structures for grade control and bank protection are acceptable;
10. Measures shall be taken to prevent live or fresh concrete from coming into contact
with freshwaters of the state until the concrete has hardened;
11. If an environmental document is required, this Certification is not valid until a Finding
of No Significant Impact or Record of Decision is issued by the State
Clearinghouse;
12. Additional site-specific conditions may be added to projects which require written
concurrence under this Certification in order to ensure compliance with all applicable
water quality and effluent standards;
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Raleigh Regional Office
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. (Bill) Ross, Secretary
Alva
- -
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF LAND RESOURCES
LETTER OF APPROVAL
September 10, 2003

Daniels & Daniels Farm, Inc.
733 Egypt Church Road
Louisburg, NC 27549
RE:
,Dear Sir/Madam:

Project Name: Daniels Farm Wetlands Rest:
County: Franklin
Submitted by: KCI Associates of NC, Inc.
Date Received: August 18, 2003
Date Processing Initiated: August 18, 2003
Watershed: Tar-Pamlico #1/03-03-01
New Submittal (X) Revised ( )
This office has reviewed the subject Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan. We find
the plan to be acceptable and hereby issue this letter of approval. If any modifications,
performance reservations, or recommendations are applicable, a list is enclosed and is
incorporated as a part of this letter of approval. The enclosed Certificate of Approval should be
posted at the job site. In addition, it should be noted that this plan approval shall expire three (3)
years following the date of approval, if no land-disturbing activity has been undertaken, in
accordance with Title 15A, North Carolina Administrative Code (NCAC) 413.0029.
If any modifications are not incorporated into the plan and implemented in the field, the
site will be in violation of the Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 (North Carolina
General Statute (NCGS), 113A-61.1).
15A NCAC 413.0018(a) requires that a copy of the approved plan be on file at the job site.
Also, this letter gives the notice required by NCGS 113A-61.1(a) concerning our right to perform
periodic inspections to ensure compliance with the approved plan.
North Carolina's sedimentation pollution control program is performance oriented,
requiring protection of the natural resources and adjoining properties. If at any time during this
project it is determined that the Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan is inadequate to meet
=he requirements of the Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 (NCGS 113A-51 through
=6), this office may require revisions in the plan and its implementation to ensure compliance
with the Act.
1628 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1628 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled110% post-consumer paper
Daniels & Daniels Farm, Inc.
September 10, 2003
Page 2
Acceptance and approval of this plan is conditioned upon your compliance with
applicable federal and state water quality laws, regulations and rules. This could include the
Division of Water Quality under stormwater or other specific water quality standards, and the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under Article 404 jurisdiction. Our approval does not supersede
any other required permit or approval.
Since this project disturbs one or more acres, one such approval relates to the
stormwater that will discharge from your project. This runoff is permitted pursuant to the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) administered in North Carolina by the
Division of Water Quality (DWQ). Attached is the General Stormwater NPDES Permit,
NCG010000, as revised October 1, 2001, covering your activity. You are responsible for
complying with the General Permit requirements and are subject to enforcement by DWQ for
any violations of the General Permit.
Due to the location of this project, it should be noted that a rule to protect and maintain
existing buffers along watercourses in the Tar-Pamlico River Basin became effective on January
1, 2-000: The Tar-Pamlico RiverRipadan Area Protection and Maintenance Rule (15A NCAC 2B
.0259) applies to all perennial and intermittent streams, lakes, ponds and estuaries in the Neuse
River Basin with existing vegetation on the adjacent land or "riparian area". In riparian areas
with existing vegetation in the first 30 feet directly adjacent to the stream, the rule prohibits land
disturbance or new development within the first 30 feet of land next to the water (the remaining
20 feet of the total buffer must be revegetated upon completion of any proposed land-disturbing
activity). In riparian areas with existing vegetation that is less than 30 feet wide, the rule
prohibits land disturbance or new development within the area that contains the existing
vegetation (but not the entire 50 foot riparian area). For more information about this riparian
area rule, please contact the Division of Water Quality's Wetland/401 Unit at 919-733-1786, or a
Division of Water Quality representative at this regional office.
Please note that this approval is based in part on the accuracy of the information
provided,concerning financial responsibility. You are requested to file an amended Financial
Responsibility Form if any changes become necessary. In addition, it would be helpful if you
would notify this office when the proposed land-disturbing activity covered by this plan is
initiated.
Your cooperation is appreciated and we look forward to working with you on this project.
If there are any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office.
Sincerely,

; -zz-
William H. Denton, IV, EIT
Asst. Regional Engineer
Land Quality Section
m1NHD:cIm
cc: KCI Associates of NC, Inc.
Mr. Ken Schuster, P.E., Division of Water Quality
v 1*1111111::::? _\
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Dir,
Division of Water Qt
NPDES STORMWATER DISCHARGE PERMIT
FOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES
Regulations adopted by the US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) and by the North Carolina Division of W,
Quality require that a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit be obtained for stormw
discharges from construction activities with land disturbance of 5 or more acres (1 or more acres after March 10, 201
This permit is in addition to your approved erosion and sedimentation control plan approval. The Division of Water Qu.
is delegated by the US EPA to administer the NPDES permit program in North Carolina. You have been given a cop
this General Permit and coverage under this general permit because your project is subject to these NPDES permit
requirements. You must comply with the applicable terms and conditions of this General Permit and you
subject to enforcement by the Division of Water Quality for any violations of the General Permit. It is
necessary to file a Notice of Intent to be covered by this General Permit nor to receive a Certificate of Coverage from
Division of Water Quality. If you do not wish to be covered by this general permit you may make application to
Division of Water Quality to be covered under an individual stormwater NPDES permit:
Description of Provisions
The General Permit is tied to an approved Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan issued by the North Carolina Divii
of Land Resources, or an approved Local Program. Adherence to the Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan is,
enforceable component of the General Permit. The General Permit not only requires adherence to the approved Eros
and-Sedimentation Control Plan, but also includes other limitations and controls. Some of the major items are outlim
below.
• Coverage - The permit covers projects that disturb 5 or more acres of land until March 10, 2003 when this thresh
will be dropped to cover projects disturbing one or more acre of land.
Inspections - The permittee must inspect all erosion and sedimentation control facilities and also must obse
runoff at stormwater discharges in accordance with the general permit (see Part 1 Section B for specific frequenci
etc.). Discharges to certain impaired waters require more frequent inspections.
• Records - Records of inspections must be maintained with a copy of the approved Erosion and Sedimental
Control Plan at the project site. An example of a potential inspection log is attached for your use.
• The General Permit has other provisions that address areas that could effect stormwater runoff from construct
activity that are not a part of an erosion and sedimentation control plan. These areas are addressed in Pa
Section A. of the General Permit and include matters such as demolition debris, chemical usage, and oil spills t
may contaminate stormwater runoff on a construction site.
Please note that there are other provisions in the permit and you should read and become familiar with all of the
conditions.
If You Have Questions About the General Permit
Questions concerning the General Permit requirements can be addressed to the Division of Water Quality Regio
Office. Office locations and phone numbers are as follows:
Asheville Regional Office......... 828/251-6208
Fayetteville Regional Office...... 910/486-1541
Mooresville Regional Office...... 704/663-1699
Raleigh Regional Office........... 919/571-4700
Washington Regional Office...... 252/946-6481
Wilmington Regional Office....... 910/395-3900
Winston-Salem Regional Office... 336/771-4600
Central Office ......................... 9191733-5083
For more information regarding the Programs of the Division of Water Quality, Stormwater and General Permits Unit, se
our home page at: http://hZo.enr.state.nc.us/su/stormwater.html
©?n
NCDENR
Customer Service Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 [phone]
1 800 623-7748
STORMWATER INSPECTIONS FC1l1l1ENERAL PERMIT NCG010000 - LAND DISTURBING ACTIV E
JROJECT:
MONITORING FOR THE WEEK BEGINNING:
RAINFALL:
Date Amount Initials
Of (inches)
Rain
By this signntulre, I certify (in accordance with Part II
Section R? 10 of the NCG010000 permit) that this report is
accurotg and Complete to the best of my knowledge:
(Signature of Permitee or Designee)
EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL FACILITIES INSPECTED: (At least once [twice, if on 3Q3(d) listed stream for construction related parai
per seven calendar days And within 24 hours of a rainfall of 0.5 inches er
Facility Date of Operating Describe corrective actions taken (may need tq attach additional information)
Identification Inspection Properly
OBSERVATIONS OF RUNOFF AT STORMWATER DISCHARGE OUTFALLS: (At least once [twice, if on 303(d) listed stream for construction related p
er seven calendar days And within 24 hours of a rainfall of 0.5 inches
Stornnvater Date Clarity Floating Suspended Oll sheen Other obvious Visible JEi dwribe actlops taken to Describe measures taken I
Discharge solids Solids lndica{ors of sediment prcrent future releases sediment outside of the di:
Oulfall storwater leavip
identificati g (may need to attach additional limits
pollution the site?' {ilforimtian) (may need to attach addii
on (list & describe) (YtN) information)
Clarity: Choose the number which best describes the clarity of the discharge where 1 is clear and 10 is very cloudy
Floating Solids: Choose the number which best describes the amount of floating solids in the discharge where 1 is no solids and 10 the surface is covered in floating sc
Suspended Solids: Choose the number which best describes the amount of suspended solids in the discharge where 1 is no solids and 10 is extremely muddy
Oil Sheen: Is there an oil sheen in the stormwater discharge? Y or N
* 303(d) listed streams for construction related parameters - The latest approved list may be obtained frPm jile Djyj#jon of Water Quality, or from the following websit
http:11h2o. enr. state. tic. us/se%onstruction303d
1 A t h Ur P1 UK1 ti UAKULINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
GENERAL PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE STORMWATER UNDER THE.
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provision of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1, other lawful
standards and regulations promulgated and adopted by North Carolina Environmental
Management Commission and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act as amended,
..AII owners, or operatp- -of stormwater, point .
'sourc. e? d'kharges' associated'.w.ith ;const uction
activities including clearing, grading and excavation activities resulting in. the disturbance.* of land
are hereby authorized. to discharge stormwater to the surface waters of North Carolina or to at
separate-: to sewersystem conveying stormwater tv the surface, waters.
The General Permit shall become effective on October 1, 2001.
The General Permit shall expire at midnight on September 30, 2006.
Signed this day October 1, 2001.
Grego
, Ph.Dg Acting Director
OTJ7rhpfpe
Divisibfi of ater Quality
By the Au ority of the Environmental Management Commission
Page 1 of 20 Pages
rani t
MONITORING, CONTROLS, AND LIMITATIONS FOR PERMITTED DISCHARGES
SECTION A: FINAL LIMITATIONS AND CONTROLS FOR STORMWATER
DISCHARGES
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the
Permittee is authorized to discharge stormwater associated with construction activity. Such
discharges shall be controlled, limited and monitored as specified below.
1. Prior to the commencement of construction, the permittee shall submit for approval a
Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (plan) to the Department of Environment, and
Natural Resources, Division of Land Resources, Land Quality Section, (or an approveck
local program) pursuant to the requirements of NC G.S. 113A-54.1 and in conformity
with rules adopted by the North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission.
Z The Permittee shall implement the plan, which has been approved by the approval
authority. The approved plan is considered a requirement or condition of this general
permit. Deviation from the approved plan, or approved amendment to the plan, shall
constitute a violation of the terms and conditions of this general permit except that
deviation from the approved plan will be allowed (1) to correct an emergency situation
where sediments are being discharged off the site or (2) when minor modifications have
been made . for the purpose of improving the performance of the erosion and
sedimentation control measures and notification of the minor modification has been made
to the Division of Land Resources (or approved local program). Such a deviation from
the approved plan shall be noted on the approved plan maintained at the job site. During
active construction, a copy of the approved plan shall be maintained on the site.
3. Equipment utilized during the construction activity on a site must be operated and
maintained in such a manner as to prevent the potential or actual pollution of the surface
or ground waters of the state. Fuels, lubricants, coolants, and hydraulic fluids, or any
other petroleum products, shall not be discharged onto the ground or into surface waters.
Spent fluids shall be disposed of in a manner so as not to enter the waters, surface or
ground, of the state and in accordance with applicable state and federal disposal
regulations. Any spilled fluids shall be cleaned up to the extent practicable and disposed
of in a manner so as not to allow their entry into the waters, surface or ground, of the
state.
4. Herbicide, pesticide, and fertilizer usage during the construction activity shall be
consistent with the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act and shall be in
accordance with label restrictions.
Page 3 of 20 Pages
Minimum monitoring and reporting requirements are as follows unless otherwise approved in
writing by the Director of the Division of Water Quality.
1. All erosion and sedimentation control facilities shall be inspected by or under the
direction of the permittee at least once every seven calendar days (at least twice every
seven days for those facilities discharging to waters of the State listed on the latest EPA
approved 303(d) list for construction related indicators of impairment such as turbidity or
sedimentation**) and within 24 hours after any storm event of greater that 0.5 inches of
rain per 24 hour period. A rain gauge shall be maintained on the site and a record of the
rainfall amounts and dates shall be kept by the permittee.
(** The latest approved list may be obtained from the Division of Water Quality, or from
the following website location: http://`h2o.enrstate.nc.uslsulconstruction3O3a)
ZOnce land disturbance has begun on the site, stormwater runoff discharges shalt Em
inspected by observation for stormwater discharge characteristics, as defined bel©wt at the
frequency in #1 above to evaluate the effectiveness of the pollution control facilities or
practices. If any visible sedimentation is leaving the disturbed limits of the site,
corrective action shall be taken immediately to control the discharge of sediments outside
the disturbed limits.
Stormwater Discharge
Characteristics Monitoring
T el Monitoring
Location2
Clarity SDO
Floating Solids SDO
Suspended Solids SDO
Oil Sheen SDO
Other obvious indicators
of stormwater pollution SDO
Footnotes:
1 Monitoring Type: The monitoring requires a qualitative observation of each
stormwater outfall. No analytical testing or sampling is required.
2 Sample Location: Stormwater Discharge Outfall (SDO)
3. The operator shall keep a record of inspections. Visible sedimentation found outside of
the disturbed limits shall be recorded and a brief explanation kept with the records as to
the measures taken to control future releases. Any measures taken to clean up the
sediment that has left the disturbed limits shall also be recorded. These records shall be
made available to DWQ or authorized agent upon request.
Page 5 of 20 Pages
PART I)'
STANDARD CONDITIONS
SECTION A: DEFINITIONS
1. Act or "the Act" or CWA
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, also known as the Clean Water Act, as
amended, 33 USC 1251, et. seq.
2 Best Management Practices BMPs),
Schedules of activities,.. prohibitions of practices, maintenance procedures, and other
management practices to prevent or redu=the: pollution: of watersG ofthe United! States.
BMWs also include treatment requirements, operation, procedures, and practices; to control
plant site runoff, spillage or leaks,. sludge or waste disposal, or drainage: from raw
material siorage.
3. DWO or Division
The Division of Water Quality, Department of Environment, and Natural Resources.
4. Director
The Director of the Division of Water Quality, the permit issuing authority.
5. EMC
The North Carolina Environmental Management Commission.
6. Permittee
The person who signed as the financially responsible party on the Erosion and
Sedimentation Control Plan.
7. Point Source Discharge
Any discernible, confined and discrete conveyance, including but specifically not limited
to, any pipe, ditch, channel, tunnel, conduit, well, discrete fissure, container, rolling
stock, or concentrated animal feeding operation from which pollutants are or may be
discharged to waters of the state.
8. Administrator
The Adminstrator of the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Page 7 of 20 Pages
Permit No. NCG010000
accordance with the terms, conditions, or requirements of a permit. [Ref: NC General
Statutes 143-215.6AJ.
(d) Any person may be assessed an administrative penalty by the Administrator for
violating section 301, 302, 306, 307, 308, 318 or 405 of this Act, or any permit condition
or limitation implementing any of such sections in a permit issued under section 402 of
this Act. Administrative penalties for Class I violations are not to exceed $11,000 per
violation, with the maximum amount of any Class I penalty assessed not to exceed
$27,500. Penalties for Class II violations are not to exceed $11,000 per day for each day
during which the violation continues, with the maximum amount of any Class II penalty
not to exceed $137,500.
7 Du to o Mitigate
The permittee shall take all reasonable-steps-to- minimize orprevent any discharge in
violation of this general permit which has a reasonable likelihood of adversely affecting
human health or the environment.
3. Civil and Criminal Liabilitv
Except as provided in Section C. of this permit regarding bypassing of stormwater control
facilities, nothing in this general permit shall be construed to relieve the permittee from
any responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties for noncompliance pursuant to NCGS 143-
215.3, 143-215.6A, 143-215.613, 143-215.6C or Section 309 of the Federal Act, 33 USC
1319. Furthermore, the permittee is responsible for consequential damages, such as fish
kills, even though the responsibility for effective compliance may be temporarily
suspended.
4. Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability
Nothing in this general permit shall be construed to preclude the institution of any legal
action or relieve the permittee from any responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties to which
the permittee is or may be subject to under NCGS 143-215.75 et seq. or Section 311 of the
Federal Act, 33 USC 1321. Furthermore, the permittee is responsible for consequential
damages, such as fish kills, even though the responsibility for effective compliance may
be temporarily suspended.
5. Property Rights
The issuance of this general permit does not convey any property rights in either real or
personal property, or any exclusive privileges, nor does it authorize any injury to private
property or any invasion of personal rights, nor any infringement of Federal, State or
local laws or regulations.
6. Severabilitv
Page 9 of 20 Pages
Permit No. NCGO10000
permit is issued to an owner/operator the applicability of this general permit is
automatically terminated on the effective date of the individual permit.
10. Signatory Requirements
a. All applications, reports, or information submitted to the Director shall be signed and
certified as follows:
(1) For a corporation: by a responsible corporate officer. For the purpose of this
Section, a responsible corporate officer means: (a) a president, secretary, treasurer
or vice president of the corporation in charge of a principal business function,, or
any: other person who performs similar policy or decision- making functions for
the corporation, or (b) the manager of one or more manufacturing production or
nz ain5' ` operating facilities Xn4ided the- manageris- autharize(f to'malte management
`=K • ?- -decisions which govern the operation of theregulatectfacility including.having the:
0 -1 rT explicit or implicit duty of making major-capital in recommendations;
and initiating and directing other comprehensive measuiei to assum long term
environmental compliance with environmental laws and regulations;, the manager
can ensure that the necessary systems established or actions taken to gather
complete and accurate information for permit application requirements; and where
authority to sign documents has been assigned or delegated to the manager in
accordance with corporate procedures.
(2) For a partnership or sole proprietorship: by a general partner or the proprietor,
respectively; or
(3) For a municipality, State, Federal, or other public agency: by either a principal
executive officer or ranking elected official.
b. All reports required by the general permit and other information requested by the Director
shall be signed by a person described above or by a duly authorized representative of that
person. A person is a duly authorized representative only if-
The authorization is made in writing by a person described above;
(2) The authorization specified either an individual or a position having responsibility
for the overall operation of the regulated facility or activity, such as the position
of plant manager, operator of a well or well field, superintendent, a position of
equivalent responsibility, or an individual or position having overall responsibility
for environmental matters for the company. (A duly authorized representative
may thus be either a named individual or any individual occupying a named
position.); and
(3) The written authorization is submitted to the Director.
C. Any person signing a document under paragraphs a. or b. of this section shall make the
following certification:
Page 11 of 20 Pages
Permit No. NCGO10000
SECTION C: OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF POLLUTION CONTROLS
1. Proper Operation and Maintenance
The permittee shall at all times properly operate and maintain all facilities and systems of
treatment and control (and related appurtenances) which are installed or used by the
permittee to achieve compliance with the conditions of this general permit.
2. Need to Halt or Reduce not a Defense
It shall not be a defense for a permittee in an enforcement action that it would have been
necessary to halt orreduce the permitted: activity in order to maintain compliance. with the
condition of this general permit.
1, Rypassinz of Stormwater Control Facilities.
a ``"`'- Definitions
(1) "Bypass" means the intentional diversion of stormwater from any portion of a
stormwater control facility including the collection system, which is not a
designed or established or operating mode for the facility.
(2) "Severe property damage" means substantial physical damage to property,
damage to the control facilities which causes them to become inoperable, or
substantial and permanent loss of natural resources which can reasonably be
expected to occur in the absence of a bypass. Severe property damage does not
mean economic loss caused by delays in production.
b. Bypass Not Exceeding Limitations.
The permittee may allow any bypass to occur which does not cause effluent limitations to
be exceeded, but only if it also is for essential maintenance to assure efficient operation.
These bypasses are not subject to the provisions of Paragraphs c. and d. of this section.
C. Notice
(1) Anticipated bypass. If the permittee knows in advance of the need for a bypass, it
shall submit prior notice, if possible at least ten days before the date of the bypass;
including an evaluation of the anticipated quality and effect of the bypass.
(2) Unanticipated bypass. The permittee shall submit notice within 24 hours of an
unanticipated bypass as required in Part II, E. 1(b)(1) of this general permit. (24-
hour notice).
d. Prohibition of Bypass
Page 13 of 20 Pages
Permit No. NCGOl000a
(3) The permittee submitted notice of the upset as required in Part H, E. 3. (b) (2) of
this general permit.
(4) The permittee complied with any remedial measures required under Part H, A. 2.
of this general permit.
d. Burden of Proof.
In- any" enforcement proceeding the permittee seeking to= establish the occurrence of an
upset has the burden of proo€.`
l iaa ;; TC <: F'a! 1.5t:. < SiF?,lfi 0-d id 2 ?C"I Ts J4-f#2 'ai'v 1q
ujdt ;oL? ?u?nisrn sa o? siist? burl ?o Div g3?€ ?!??.s .?a?zuoo$ni
Pty e i , k:;, iludv 3ILfIi 1 }Fl se . ilst Xi 'QCs u i :Fel. .,isan A 3 aIC+<d a1t:YUL4 <aFaii2 iFf L<:3 :Salt' s?
.i a x a .jjOL2fsi€3fu °.:•a''%8 { J?N7 abfif fEGIfi i 1431 Lt '70 ea??F e????<+ ^,r€a ? .0 t01r:'.10?
i3 13 .. ei3 V+3 L z v I`2..J. .i'G2.. ..?. 4..Ar* .,
C' ;zwi3. to F'follaivao- I: r a ?:ate n4:mi n:) iv)f .fi'v -t i 7-i m., !*^i r'!O;
Page 15 of 20 Pages
Permit No. NCG010000
The permittee shall allow the Director, or an authorized representative (including an
authorized contractor acting as a representative of the Director), or in the case of a facility
which discharges through a municipal separate storm sewer system, an authorized
representative of a municipal operator or the separate storm sewer system receiving the
discharge, upon the presentation of credentials and other documents as may be required
by law, to;
a. Enter upon the permittee's premises whem a regulated facility or activity is
located or conducted, or where records must be kept under the conditions of this
general permit;
Have access to and copy, at-,reasonable times, an records that:must be kept under
:tfcw zSEI?r3t, ?. {a y . ,
o ,thisF general hermit„ {
thm'COUdit40115-
3Tt x,s?11d6 i? 9 t ; {i ;:.;a F €
t 3' ?t
/?-
- Inspect at reasonAe• times any facilities, equipment (including monitoling,and Y;
control, equipment),. practices; or operations,regulated ,,an,..requited&umder tGit-
general permit; and
d Sample or monitor at reasonable times, for the purposes of assuring general
permit compliance or as otherwise authorized by the Clean Water Act, any
substances or parameters at any location.
Page 17 of 20 Pages
4. Other Information
Where the permittee becomes aware that it failed to submit any relevant facts in any
report to the Director, it shall promptly submit such facts or information.
5. Availability of Reports
Except for data determined to be confidential under NCGS 143-215.3(a)(2) or Section
308- of the- Federal Act, 33 USC 1318, all reports prepared in accordance with the terms
shall be available for public inspection at- the offices of the Division of Water Quality. As
required by the Act, discharge data shall not be considered confidential. Knowingly=
making any false- statement :orr-any sucir report may' result n'tits imposition of criminal
,?,,,,? penalties. as; provideend for.. iii: NCG& 143=215`.611 or in: Section 30? of the: V edevall Act:,
.fit o -J1'` u3"`i rN '+ ` :.
Cp Penalties for Falsification ofRegorts
The Clean Water-Act provides that any person who knowingly makes any false statement,
representation, or certification in any record or other document submitted or required: to
be maintained under this general permit, including monitoring reports or reports of
compliance or noncompliance shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not more
than $10,000 per violation, or by imprisonment for not more than two years per violation,
or by both.
Page 19 of 20 Pages
b
b
z
d
x
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
WETLANDS RESTORATION PROGRAM
FRANKLIN COUNTY
bran bnn o6n77faLm? 76f016LT p ?'
NQ T^Tw
9Obn
C. b 5
--
A ISSUED FOR PERMITS ONLY 064607
mwmw wrt uwao
LOCATION; DANIELS FARM
691 EGYPT CHURCH ROAD
LOUISBURG, NC 27549
O
O
O

h
U
O
U
ylcBm JIMAP
NOT TO SCALE
INDEX OF SHEETS
1 TITLE SHEET
2 GRADING PLAN
3 DETAILS
AWN In ffs 077w ds 11 PROJECT ENGfAi M- 11 PROFESSIONAL 9TIL&W SCIENTIST
KCI Associates
pp??nn l+???p Of North Carolina, P.A.
//??
? FORKS RO,RALFKH NC
l RAPI IC SCALES FJSUTE IONE20 AND RK CENTER EWL0015
-30 15 0 30 60
PLANS

TYPE OF WORK: WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
/
PROJECT
SITE !
i ?
:I
w S
u /
?rr4 W `///
I 1 ..4
JAMES W. BLAIO:, PE
PROJECT mwzwm
JOSEPH J. PFEIFFER PM
PROFESSIONAL NETTAAD SCZMV=
STEVEN F. STOKES, LSS
SOU sawnsr
w
N
z
SOIL SCIENTIST..
NO.
¦ ¦¦? FISTING PROPERTY LINE •- NDT •- WATER DIVERSION TERRACE AV07005 2 OF a
FFENM \, ! U T? ¦-? ?_ - - - - - EXISTINa a' CONTOUR LIxEB .... DITCH PLUS NGYN r Yi. RAND 5O
- - - - - METING CONTOUR LI ES EXISTIN1 DITCH TO BE FILLED
N/f GUMS a AWIELS MAYS ZW ----- EXISTING DRAINAGE DITCH PROPOSED CONTOUR LINES
t
W I\ r i U 1 I ?? OM BOON M PME ILV -X-X- FENCE LINE ROIL STABILIZED DITCH PLUS
rYYYI TREE LIRE ?••BB?i WATER DIVERSION BEN
SEE SHEET FOR DETAIL WATER DIVERSION EERY SURVEY WHTROL POINT
WATER B /
\ [ SEE SHEET 2 FOR DETAIL
I ?` ? I I I+YU / ?? 11 1// j w
\ ? SHEET 2IPoOR DEl PUR \ I I / I
1 1 1 1 / 1/ ?. I '?' `G I
sox ROOM-
I I / \ ?' I I B ? t
r I `\ ?lil i ? r i? / I \ t o I
W Z L I III I 1 I 1 ! !I ??, \\ ro' t Y i? I 1?? !
I `? / I III I 1 I I 1 \ 1 ! 1 J \ ,, vAy AREA I ,
\ +¦AF t I I{ y 1 I l \ l 1 /- ,' i n I • 1J 1/
I 1 1 ! I \ \ \ 1 1 1 I __ \\ \I ? f/ ?r? ??? -' ?/ ,BxRlDk96 ? 1 ? r\?/
B \1\ ???\ II i +ess??\\\ \\\ 11 \i 111 I\I //,'' `\ i ?? ///? / i? ?i'/// /??,''/ / ' / l? //1 //x
(x
TOM
\ B \\ IIII I \\ \ 1\ \ ?'` ?` I Il // l 1/ r/ N173 E-=12580 II I \ ` \. \ / , / 1 /'? r' I CLEW.-201.26
I IIII 1 / \ I y \ \ , `I ( 1 / 1 1 / , _?
ll. I i
//i /
B ?\ \ II I 1 1 ---?
?4/
1 ? 1 IIII ?\ ? / I I "??? j - "?. l /1 ,/ // •? I I I ,-- ? 1/ /r // , / tio
I ! I 111 I I 1 v ? , 1 , lj / ! 1 / ! ' l , / / / / iJv
\ DITCH PLua. l III / - \ 1 \ ` ' I f
\\\ SEE BHT.2 II 1j( \ \ \ --? ???- 1 (
¦Y , FOR DETAIL
/ 1 IIII I '`'??z?}ff?? /• , / / / / / 1 r ! ? r l 1 x
VIII ??/ y*
I 1 I I II I I / 'I f ,? , ?' ,' / ,' ,' / / J I I I I 1, l 1 1 1 ¦
I ?I r / / 1 ( I l I
/I
I 1 111 / / r r / / r 1 r / , , 1 1 1 I I IX
1 1' 41P? ` I / '??? / 1 1 1 y
\ III I , ,? /, I I \ \ , / 1 1 1 1 1 1, ?' x
l l ? / 1 \ \ 1 1 I , ?. r 1 1 I y
t I ,?
?' ? \ --- i III I // I/ / /r? lW 1 II \ ?? vv \v 1v II I I ! Ir I I 1 11 1 I ? I ( ?? m
\ ,'^ 11 \' I ' I 1 ?? `? \ \ y 1 I r / I i l l y l I I_ C)
B -' (I 1 '/ / I 1 \\ ` \ \\ \` \ 1 11 / I 1 1 1 1 1 1 w 10,
1. l III , /. I ? ? ? \ \ \ l 1 l ! ( I ! X m w-
,IIII .d,Alx?K
TBY11 I (IIII // 1 0000, \??\ `\ \\ `?? \ \\ \\ \\ \\ I\ \ I I I 1 1 1 I `
N -042929.00
re ?B 31 I i IIII 1L =m. WATER ?1 \ ? \ 1 , a? y ?? `? \ \ \ \ \ \ y 1 11 11 `y a -j
Y ELEV.•187.BA ; II II' PUB / !? SON \` ?1?
`\ 1\ \ II I 1 II y 1 1-R?nNiiw
??\ \^\ SEE BHL2 •`` \ \ \ \ 1 \ ` 1 11 1 ~Wz
FOR I \ // ? ? \\ 0.? R DETAI U
L \ \ ?? 11 1 ? ? I \I ??? \I `; ??\\ 1\ \I \\ \ `I 11 1 11? ? OuS
1?
Y I ?\ _? ?'? '- ?? \\ I' 1! j / ?? ? ,/ II I \\ 1\B 1 1 1 \\ \\\ 1\ 1\1\ 1
?- -- (? , ? ? , 1/ ? ? 1 1 11 11 yl A A A A\?
i Av vv 11 ( I ( I/ / % / Y l 1 1 \\ \\
N Y + Ws
\\\ ?, //i / _/ b? \ 1 I DITCH AMP. WATER I / I 1 I \ \ \ I
/ DITCH PLUG - , / _ /, _ / p ` \ \ I 1 I ! PUNG lox
TERRACE !\ j I I I I I \ I ?
1, I 1 I I \ w "< 'c
SEE Y '\ \ 1$7i _ /. \ \ \ F Detai
vl-
6' 1 I I I 1 /, J N
_n - 7 / \ / i•?" °: 1 , ?.- `• \ \ I I DITCH
IJ IPLUG \ \\ D I 11 11 Irllll ?/ rX
t I p ?. JI I y? =__ ?'1 t \/l / X Za v
__ ?--.,? x J W ?Y W a
f Spy rr.? - - __= - - _
707.00.108 FENCE
Z? Way
M/F LOCILLE R010910
_ \ _ _, _ _ _ ? A (III 1? ?? aZ
AEm BOOK 781B1, , PAW 222 p
D BO 120 ¦.
- - £
807.0.7.1070 \ ,' ,' v / F• t g
LLJ
SCALE IN FEET BE6D WOK 1W PAW ,fpO DITCH ` < ' \ ' I J o
(FULL SIZE SWEET) PLUG DITCH PLEA _ Yam
umcnnL rum Lcucnu. CONTRACT NO. SHEET NO
ldmm? ¦ ?? EXISTING PROPERTY LINE •- WOT ¦- WATER DIVERSION TERRACE AW09005 S OF S
FENCE X -- ?.,T ¦ ., r',? r ,.?. r.,., r, ?`- - - - - - EXISTING E' coNrouR LINES DITCH PLUS
MECT EMGN r W LAND Sq k
-. ... f 1 ` roe-00-o2G - - - - - EXISTING 1' CONTOUR LINESEXISTING DITCH TO BE FILLED
ter- X N/F OWraS ! OW7ELS FA9W XAC EXISTING DRAINAGE DITCH PROPOSED CONTOUR LINES
M \ I ) I f i AEIC BOW 70, FAGS 110 .X-X- PENCE LINE ? ROCK STABILIZED DITCH PLUG
I I , / 8 1 r} TREE LINE i-40--401• WATER DIVERSION 9ERM
INTER DIVERSION GEAr TEMPORARY ROCK SILT
/ 1 r 1 r • : DHEDX TYPE•A SEDIMENT AND EROSION LEGEND
M SEE SHEET 2 FDA DETAIL
- - _ V I 1 . r 1 1 1 INTER DIVERSION BERM UNPAVED ACCESS/MIL ROAD
I I I I ® TEMPORARY SILT FENCE (S1DR: S.01)
SEE BXFET 2 FOR DETAIL
ROCK STABILIZED DITCH PLUG I I I / ! 1 I mo' CONTROL POINT TEMP. ROCK slit CHECK TYPE-A (STOY:1806.01)
SEE SHEET 2 FOR DETAIL
\ E - i I ( f !`. / . \ • ' UNDISTURBED AREA . r LOD ¦ r LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
I 1 III I 1 1 f 1. 1. 1 r !, 1 I SMw :
I .. . l 1 I I I I ? 1 1 r . /,: A ?? ?F ?iYt ? "f ?.Eg0. ? !??LP9??.r r . •
M 1 1 A G I I I 1? 1 /': r lt , ?' 1 I?) a? A / 1 I
/ I III f I 1? ! I 1 saz C ?' ) ` ?! !? I A 1 TY 1 NHpO ROIL/
Iwo
v'v / I ( 1 1 ? ? h 7 A` ? - o w a -, p /- . t? V 1 ! EA
St* d?.v e7 - I / /y//YYY/
M A „ ? I III ? _ ' r;?: ? t --. I - ?z ,.,?"Y?4" :??? ?i .. I, r0_ . k. ,?? / ?i'? ?? ? . ??? I
? ? - 1 ! I \ ? v 1 ? rj 1 1 ".; I 9•ur.?'? t" .n ??,.?-Y r {j?;:? _.- 1 / / i .w k6Dw"? / /' a l?
M It (\ I I + w-8f y: 1 1 1 L.: 1 ors??,y-.;>vk .-kf a ',-? tiw::, t i1 /?? r,.. /X
1 =? 1 A\ I E -? 1 -? a at
W V •'.1 ?? ?
T91Y2
\ I I F. x / i., I/ N-841605.78
w I ? f G I
8 IIII [ ! v r v? . ?
E-22t25?.96
\ .. ,,t 7 >.. s: I. I I 1 Fii .r.., I; ru L..-.V:r ???1.,'F Yf s???r: ?.7 ' wia.?'. ?._ 14t ^?.',,, `?A? l ?I l• f 1 "?Na ' 8k ->.?;r f': 'b'u '.?'1i:1`.t`t .. ?; •? ! I ELEV.-201.26
1 1 I III i! \ \ LOD //
I 1; yv .. ?J' aP i ! !
-/ I II I I X11 /? \ 1_ 1 l F /J??l
M A 1 III I 1 1 v ?? ! / ?/ {' - I ?/ ?? / / /X
\\' y \ ? I I I \ ? L ;. 1 ! ? . _ \I A,-?? ?,
jr ! ?` Jl I, i' / ¦I+I¦r?¦?¦w?I // / ? / /
rLODw 4p
...r.r. i IIIII ?? / - .1z1> 1 - I,. / /
DITCH PLUS.
mM SIB 1 ? v V FO
SEE R DETAIL L IIII / 1 Sly" ? *a
V?
v FOR DETAIL v I I I ? a pp/ / / / 1
O? l/x
1dr
/ / / / / / / I (l
II / ? ><
ly\
0.
'. 11 IIII 1 •?
AREA TABLE •i 411 I ! ' , .
o
ACRES
/41(/ ENTIRE 1,477,829 33.98
I 1 III r 1 (. r / 1 W/ / I / , / / I / / / I 1 I I 1 I I\/
I PROPERTY
f 1 1 1 / \ I / / 1 1 1 I I \ o
I II 1 1 1 ' i $? v\ vv I f /' ?/ 11 11 I ?x
W OMITS u1sa2 13.35
f I I I UNDISTURBED N r / f M \ v I / /' I I I I I w
\,, /? (! 111 I I ?? ?_? I / IIl 1 r V v v 1v A 1 I I / / I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I c
vv-_?, \ ? I I / I ? 16, I I 1? vv v v v 1 1 I r I I I I I l I l i t d 0
M\ `I I III / I ?' / I 1 11 I I \"?. \ \ \\ 1 1 I / / t I 1 1 I I? I I ..?'i¢ o
STAUCTIQN SEQUENCE 1 1 1 1 1 1 f ?? ` ! I 11>? I v v ` y 1 1 ' I l r r 0` w
1'. MTEB DIVERSION SERIES Am R= STA9TLIn DITCH PLUG. 1 I I G - J / I \ `\ \ \ l / ( 1 - / I I 1
IX w w w2
d
f I I 1 y 1 11 1 \\ \ \ I I r d ??
2. WATER DIVERSION GERM AT ROCK SILT CHECK TYPE-A. ? I I I 1 II / 1 /? ?It?; / / 1 1 \ ' ? ¦ ¦? ¦ ?r . ?¦r ¦\_• . \ 1 \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ I 1 r , I I 1 I ? U(} ¢ o y?
( I ?, \ \ \ \ I I J? a z
3. WATER 0rVERSI01 TERRkXS GR
ACE TIE-INC AND FILL IN I I - ! f fi \ - \ I I ,?/ o a ? a
AGRICULTURAL AREAS,
:. I:" _.) 11111 ( // I /f I 1 1 A r?. -? v _ \V A 11 ! ?4 V A V A V I ! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I m?oH?
1 ! III ?- / I 8:? V ? v{\ 1 A v v V A I 1 1 M?
A WATER DIVERSIOI TERRACES GRADE TIE-INS IN WDODED AREAS. ' .
1 I I IIII OITCNT'• I l , ?;. J ? i T l / 1 I 1 °F ' \\ \ \ \ \ \ 1 ( 1 1 1 ?. 0ozz
e AND FILL Dirs. • ` I 1 f - - V A 1 I 'z
PLUGS INSTALL DITCH
PLUG a tI?? / 1\?a \ \ \ 1 1 11 l 1 N=w
• \ \ \ \ \ I \ \ 1 11 ? Wciz
J I ?\ '?\aaaa. ? I \ I?.??\ \^\ ? I l' 1 I { I I d ? ?\ ?\??
?" ??V A rr. \ 1 vI 1 1 I 'j I -I ?v\ ?\ :? V 1 \ V A V A 1 1 X Waw
5
\ • 1 1 \ \ \ 1 Nei 0??•
_ N?29,w \ 1 I 1 _ %
W I-? ?t?z446.3 Imo"
1 +nE Yaq_; ?_.a.a `?j v 1 I/ (/ r I f 1 ?I w 1 1 1 1 A
V M - \v <.._+ns-. •`raaa v 1 A\ I ? I { 1^;? / (:-'°,'.?j l ? l ,/ i I 1 1 1 A 1 A
\ \ SITE DM1 ??iy`( / S/ „ a1•-l??`r \ \ ( ?? 1 r I ( x,f=. -?? // ( /-. ^ ,: I I 1 1 1 \ 1 >
/ DITCH PLUG. DI ?r.w?J ? 1? ! I A A
t"r v;. z y,l? ?. ! 1 N+no ?VV iPLUG I I ? ! 1 I \ \I l?
_}Ir rir W¦Lr?r?iTr ft-LOD.r rI, 1 / ,wow ra_-'/ \? r?\ll I \\ \\ \ 1 1 1 W I I 11 11 \ ^ I' `X F uQi _I
r I ,t ? r -` I 1 D[TCH 1 I 'R? 1 (? T N D a o
N, °=_--- = - , ,* /- I I I _ `` PLNIG \ \ ? I l I /Irll I < ZZ'gY
10
'\.-- --'--- // ; \\ / _ _ _ ? 1 ? 111 J m? -
_ _ = - _ - _ / DI?O f too
Pz R5
0 u
N/FL ZLC7LLWILLf19QYER0 FENCE Y$? _ uAcr z
BOOK , PAGE 222 i¦? 7J'? - _\ _\\ _-_\/ \\/\ \ ?\ ?\ S _Il r111//?- O_?oC WLL?
B BD 120 QW - -3
Li \
_j Us
W
SCALE IN FEET N/F ZREAE N LWAS
(FULL SIZE SHEET) DEEP BOOM 1000. PAGE 420 DITCH
PLUG DITCH PLUG \ a •?. J "'
SHW 140. "
i-B EXISTING DITCH
A --- - Af
J
DITCH PLUG LIB
PLAN VIEW
DITCH PLUG c
EXISTING GRADE ELEVATION
--------- -------- --
VAR. I EXISTING VAR.
DITCH WIDTH
SECTION B•B
31
EXISTING GRADE ELEVATION
A:1 4:1 EXISTING DITCH 80TTOY
------ -------- ------- -----------
0
SECTION A-A
DITCH PLUG DETAIL
NOTES:
SEE PLAN SHEETS FOR LOCATIONS OF DITCH PLUGS.
SEE PROJECT SPECIAL PROVISONS FOR MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS.

W
J
m
i B"
3'-0"
V. C.
A ---- Af
L J
DITCH PLUG ?B
?B EXISTING DITCH
S' CLASS I
-3' / RIPAAP
1// EXISTING GRADE ELEVATION
4:1 ((" ! TL JI9'+ 4:1 EXISTING DITCH BOTTOM
0 0
GEOTEXTILE
SECTION A-A FABRIC
ROCK STABILIZED DITCH PLUG DETAIL
NOTES:
SEE PLAN SHEETS FOR LOCATIONS OF DITCH PLUGS.
SEE PROJECT SPECIAL PROVISONS FOR MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS.
- - EXISTING
ELEVATION
B'
WATER DIVERSION DETAIL
IXISTIMG GRA

CLASSWSTONE
-
B IN. MIN. DEPTH
(OVER FILTER FABRIC)
STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE ScE
SCALE: NTS
NOTES:
1. TURNING RADIUS SUFFICIENT TO ACCOMODATE LARGE TRUCKS SHALL BE PROVIDED.
2. ENTRANCE(S) SHOULD BE LOCATED TO PROVIDE FOR UTILIZATION BY ALL
CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES
3. MUST BE MAINTAINED IN A CONDITION WHICH VALL PREVENT TRACIONG OR DIRECT
FLOWOF MUD ONTO STREETS. PERIODIC TOPDRESSING WITH STONE WILL BE NECESSARY.
4. ANY MATERIAL TRACKED ONTO THE ROADWAY MUST BE CLEANED UP IMMEDIATELY.
S GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE SHALL BE LOCATED AT ALL POINTS OF INGRESS
AND EGRESS UNTIL SITE IS STABILIZED. FREQUEK17 CHECKS OF THE DEVICE AND
TIMELY MAINTENANCE MUST BE PROVIDED.
I.1' TD 31.1
WATER DIVERSION BERM DETAIL
6
C
Y
rc
LL
Wo N
d `, v
Z° o
??z o
m O? w
vOa lk Z20.
d doNm
?UQO?
m z a-
e"""A??? Ir J U
CpZ¢
?z?=W
U ?Z
W lJ C7
?JZ
O V)m
W
r
N
4
D
of 5
CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE
The Contractor is responsible forfollowing the sequence of
construction in accordance with the pans and the following
provisions, as directed by the Site Supervisor. In general, ale
construction involves establishing appropriate ground surface
elevations
to restore wetlands on the property. The Contractor Should
take note that the proposed grading as shown on the, plans may rest*
in saturated ground conditions depending on weather patterns
preceding and dung dmsfmctim. These ground owxftnS
may make vehicular access; andeaMworkdfficut. Coslncticn
snit proceed in the above mentioned manner unless otherwise directed
or approved by the Site Supervisor.
It tithe Intent ofthis contract that -
1. At project operations will amply with the provided Erosion and
Sedimentation Control Plain.
Thefolowlig pmvmon, along with the hWnKbms contained In
to pans, caratbdethe sequence of anstruclim
L Instal Site Preparation
1. InsW 3-C wooden stakes at vadous Intervals and high
visibility safety tape as dawned necessary by KCI, to Wets Pmjed
alte and identify project boundary, ansmctaVgrading tmib,
temporary staging auras, stabilized entrances, and acoass roads,
2. CoroWdsabNzedconstruction entrance andtemporary
singling -
3. Instal sift brace fa stabilized construction en6ances, and
temporary staging area as indicated in the plan.
4. Instal all sedimentrosion anti devices in eonrdence
with the plans and as directed by the Site Superdea.
II. Construct Sequence I-WaterDikersion Berm and Rock
Stabled Ditch Plug Construction
1. Conduct grading for water diversion berm construction as
needed in those areas in which surface Preparation anNargrade
beins will be accomplished.
Z Instelwater diversion berm sterling from opposlbends arid
work toward the rock stabilized ditch plug section. Stabilize is
water diversion berm with seed and mulch and install sit fencing
around to newly constructed area
3. Within, a24-hour period tewater diversion berm androck
stabilized ditch pug construction shed be co nplebd, Seeded,
muldhed and stabilized.
IN. CorobWSequrha2-WuWDNeslonBrmeWTerthpomry
Rock SR Check TypM
1. Construct grading lbrimster diversion berm construction as
needed in Vim area in which surface preparation andlor grade
beans will be accomplished
2. total water diversion berm stating from the north end and
work to the south. Stabilize the berm and install sit fencing around
the newly constructed area.
3. InsW the Rork Sift Chadic TypeA at the lowest point slag
the berm.
4. Within a 24- hour parlod the water diversion berm and Rock
Sin Check TypeA construction shall be completed, seeded, mulched
and stabilized
IV. Construct Sequence 3-Water Diversion Terraces, Grade
119-Ins and Fill Ditches in the Agricultural Areas
1. Conduct gredng as needed in those areas In which surface
preparation and/or grade deal will be accomplished.
2. Fa farm ditches as indicated within this area from the
Smiting a oI piles woods and from opal spread in &a ditch edpa.
3 Instal ditch plugs as Indicated In ditch bisecting site from
wen to seat and in farm ditch adjacent to the woods that Is oriented
from south to norttL
4. Construct water diver" terraces.
5. Grade site in accordance with proposed elevation. During
this sequence, grading operations shall rot disturb the ditch Wong
the west pop" ens Grade she in such a manner so as to
direct site runoff to the WaterDNenew Bens and associated Rack
S1aMTized Ditch Pug constructed a" the drainage to the east
V. Construct Sequence 4-Water Diversion Terraces and Graft
Tre4ns in the Wooded Area
1. Conduct grading as needed in those areas in which surface
preparation and/or grade tiers will be accomplished.
2. Construct water diverskin terraces
3. Grade site in acotirdanos, with proposed elevations.
VI. Construct Sequence 5- Install Ditch Plugs and FlII Ditch -
1. Instal firs ditch plug in hitch along western property line
rear the south end of the are to direct ditch flow into the
agricultural areas.
2. FRI ditch along western property Ikre starling atthe firs
ditch plug and working downgradierd with existing spoil along ditch.
Construct rrneinbg ditch plugs as you work filling the ditch
3. Fine tuna the grading of all water Diversion Terraces, Grade
TheJnsand Ditches within this area in accordance %M proposed
elevations.
NOTES
1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL EXERCISE EVERY REASONABLE PRECAUTION
THROUGHOUT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT TO PREVENT EROSION
AND SILTATION. EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE INSTALLED AND
MAINTAINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROJECT PLANS AND SPECIAL
PROVISIONS, NORM CAROLINA SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL GUIDE-
LINES AND AS DIRECTED BY THE SITE SUPERVISOR.
2. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL SHALL BE STOCKPILED WITHIN THE LIMITS OF
DISTURBANCE, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL STOCKPILE THE MATERIALS IN
NEARBY LOCATIONS WHERE SUFFICIENT AREA DOES EXIST. THE CONTRACTOR
IS RESPONSIBLE FOR INSTALLING APPROPRIATE STABILIZATION MEASURES
AROUND THE STOCKPILE AREA(S) TO PREVENT EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION.
ANY ADDITIONAL MEASURES NECESSARY TO CONTROL EROSION/SEDIMENTATION
IN THESE AREAS WILL BE INCORPORATED AS DIRECTED BY THE SITE SUPERVISOR
ANY EXCESS MATERIAL REMAMNG FOLLOWING THE 8ACKFILL OF THE EXISTING
CHANNEL SHALL BE DISPOSED OF AT AN APPROVED LOCATION.
3. EACH SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICE WILL BE REMOVED AFTER ALL
WORK HAS BEEN COMPLETED AND THE AREAS HAVE BEEN STABILIZED.
4. THE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES AND STAGING AREAS IDENTIFIED ON THE
PLANS PROVIDE THEONLY ACCESS POINTS INTO THE LIMITS OF
DISTURBANCE. NO ADDITIONAL ACCESS POINTS SHALL BE USED WITHOUT
APPROVAL OF THE SITE SUPERVISOR.
SEEDING:
1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL UTILIZE ATEMPORARY SEED MIX BROWN.
TOP MILLET (40LBS./AC)ANDANNUAL RYE(10LBS1AC)INSEEDING
ALL DISTURBED AREAS.
2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL UTILIZE THE SEED AND FERTILIZER MIX
SPECIFIED IN THE PLANTING PLAN AND THE PROJECT SPECIAL
PROVISIONS IN SEEDING ALL AREAS OF THE SITE
3. FERTILIZER AND LIMESTONE SHALL BE APPLIED AT THE RATE OF
50D LBS,/ACREAND 0.0 LBS.IACRE, RESPECTIVELY (BASED ON SOIL
TESTREPORT). FERTILIZER SHALL BE 10-10.10 ANALYSIS. UPON
WRITTEN APPROVAL OF THE SITE SUPERVISOR A DIFFERENT
ANALYSIS OF FERTILIZER MAY BE USED PROVIDED THE 1.1.1 RATIO
IS MAINTAINED AND THE RATE OF APPLICATION ADJUSTED TO
PROVIDE THE SAME AMOUNT OF PLANT FOOD AS A 10.10.10 ANALYSIS.
4. SEED IS TO BE SOWN BY MECHANICAL MEANS AND IS TO BE
EVENLY DISTRIBUTED AND SHOULD NOT BE BROADCAST WHEN
WIND VELOCITY EXCEEDS 5 MPH.
5. SEEDED AREAS ARE TO BE PROTECTED BY SPREADING STRAW
MULCH UNIFORMLY TO FORM A CONTINUOUS BLANKET OVER THE
SEEDED AREA
6
rc
Y
hr
o
W ii h
vo ~
g= 0
W_ W U
d) p= w
,y svWO•
d d?N?
?UQOz
N 'yaw
o M.<
?? El_i
Ak JVN
(-O hj Z ¢
F'"\i /.NZW
?/ WWU
?ry ?JZ
I!
W
Z W
U61 _
V P