20200598 Ver 1_00_PCN_PJD_Complete__20200505

Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions
ACTION ID #: SAW- Begin Date (Date Received):
Prepare file folder Assign Action ID Number in ORM
1. Project Name [PCN Form A2a]:
2. Work Type: Private Institutional Government Commercial
3. Project Description / Purpose [PCN Form B3d and B3e]:
4. Property Owner / Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A4]:
5. Agent / Consultant [PNC Form A5 – or ORM Consultant ID Number]:
6. Related Action ID Number(s) [PCN Form B5b]:
7. Project Location – Coordinates, Street Address, and/or Location Description [PCN Form B1b]:
8. Project Location – Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form B1a]:
9. Project Location – County [PCN Form A2b]:
10. Project Location – Nearest Municipality or Town [PCN Form A2c]:
11. Project Information – Nearest Waterbody [PCN Form B2a]:
12. Watershed / 8-Digit Hydrologic Unit Code [PCN Form B2c]:
Authorization: Section 10 Section 404 Section 10 and 404
Regulatory Action Type:
Pre-Application Request
Unauthorized Activity
Compliance
Standard Permit
Nationwide Permit #39
Regional General Permit #
Jurisdictional Determination Request No Permit Required
Revised 20150602
#18 & 39
2019-01993
Medline Mebane - South Site
✔
Medline Industries, Inc. proposes to construct a commercial use development, with associated access roads, parking lots and
stormwater facilities on the subject property (Figure 1).
Medline Industries, Inc.
Chris Tinklenberg, PWS (Kimley-Horn)
The subject property is located at West Ten Rd, between Squires Road and Country Haven in Orange
County, NC. Project Coordinates (Decimal Degrees): 36.069258 N, -79.208247 W
9834743184; 9834846079
Orange
Mebane
UT of Sevenmile Creek
Upper Neuse (HUC 03020201)
✔
✔
✔
kimley-horn.com 200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202 704-333-5131
May 4, 2020
Ms. Sam Dailey
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
US Army Corps of Engineers
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
Ms. Karen Higgins
NC DWR, 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604
Re: Pre-Construction Notification (NWP #18 & #39) &
Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Request (SAW-2019-01993)
Medline Mebane – South Site
Mebane, Orange County, NC
Dear Ms. Dailey and Ms. Higgins:
On behalf of our client, Medline Industries, Inc., Kimley-Horn (KH) is submitting the enclosed joint
Section 404/401 Pre-construction Notification for the above-referenced project for your review pursuant
to a Nationwide Permit #18 and #39 and General 401 Water Quality Certification number 4139, as well
as a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) Request package. This application is to request
authorization for the construction of a proposed multi-building, commercial distribution facilities site,
driveway access, associated parking, and stormwater facilities. Three (3) potential non-wetland waters
of the US (S1-S3) were identified. Four (4) potential wetland waters of the US (W1-W4) were identified.
The center of the project area is located at 36.069258° N, -79.208247° W. The following information is
included as part of this application submittal:
Project Summary Sheet
Agent Authorization
Pre-Construction Notification Form
Jurisidictional Determination Request Form
Permit Figures
Figure 1 – Vicinity
Figure 2 – USGS 7.5’ Topo (Efland Quadrangle)
Figure 3 – NRCS Soils (2018 Orange Co. Aerial)
Figure 4 – PJD Field Sketch (2018 Orange Co. Aerial)
Figure 5 - PJD Field Sketch (Lidar)
Figure 6 – Proposed Conditions (2018 Orange Co. Aerial)
Permit Plans – Medline Mebane – South Site
NCDWQ Stream Identification Forms & Wetland Data Forms
Project Site Photographs
NC Wetland Assessment Method Forms
Agency Correspondence
EBX-Neuse I, LLC Stream and Wetland Banks Statement of Availability
Page 2
kimley-horn.com 200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202 704-333-5131
PROJECT BACKGROUND
The proposed Medline Mebane- South Site is located south of West Ten Road, in the City of Mebane,
Orange County, NC. The approximately 45.6-acre property is predominately undeveloped land and
young forested areas, with portions of the site formerly utilized for agricultural purposes. The site is
situated 0.2-miles south of I-85/I-40, with Squires Road to the west and Country Haven to the east,
West Ten Road to the north, and undeveloped forested land to the south.
Construction of the proposed development will consist of three (3) commercial distribution facilities
(approximately 345,000 square-feet (sqft), 60,000 sqft, and 45,000 sqft), three (3) driveway access
points, parking lots, and two (2) stormwater detention ponds.
AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE
Cultural Resources
Kimley-Horn consulted the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) HPOWEB GIS
service on March 4, 2020. No documented architectural, historic, or archaeological sites of significance
within or near the project boundary were identified.
Protected Species
A review of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database on January 13, 2020, did
not indicate known occurrences of threatened or endangered species within the project boundary.
Additionally, pedestrian surveys conducted by Kimley-Horn on October 1, 2019, did not identify any
occurrences of protected species within the property boundary. A concurrence request letter was
submitted to the USFWS on March 5, 2020. A response is pending as of the date of this PCN submittal
but will be provided once it is received (See attached NCNHP Letter and USFWS Concurrence
Request).
PROPOSED IMPACTS TO JURISDICTIONAL WATERS
Authorization is requested under NWP 39 to construct grading fill slopes necessary to meet the purpose
and need of the development resulting in 0.18-ac of permanent impacts to Wetland 3.
Authorization is requested under NWP 18 to construct grading fill slopes necessary to meet the purpose
and need of a proposed stormwater detention pond resulting in 0.02-ac of permanent impacts to
Wetland 1 and 0.03-ac of permanent impacts to Wetland 4.
In total, the proposed development project seeks permanent impacts to 0.23-ac of potential
wetland-WoUS.
AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION
Avoidance and minimization efforts were implemented during development planning and design to the
greatest extent practicable in order to reduce the overall impacts on the aquatic environment while
staying within nationwide permit thresholds. The final plan demonstrates maximum avoidance and
minimization efforts by reducing the proposed wetland impacts to 0.23-ac. The rationale to support
avoidance and minimization efforts include the following:
·Wetland 1, 3, and 4 – Impacts 1, 2, and 3: These impacts are necessary to facilitate the
appropriate grading to meet the needs/requirements of the proposed development. The
design maximizes the available space to construct the facilities while minimizing impacts to
aquatic features.
Page 3
kimley-horn.com 200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202 704-333-5131
·Avoidance of the remaining 0.04-ac of wetlands on-site
·Avoidance of approximately 1,492 linear feet of streams on-site, including the construction of
a retaining wall above the origin of S3.
COMPENSATORY MITIGATION
Compensatory mitigation will be met by the purchase of credits from The Neu-Con Wetland & Stream
Umbrella Mitigation Bank. 0.23-ac of wetland impacts will be mitigated through the purchase of wetland
mitigation credits. Based on an NCWAM assessment of Wetland W1, Wetland W3, and Wetland W4,
mitigation is proposed at a 2:1 ratio. A copy of the signed Statement of Availability (SOA) is included
for your reference.
In total, 0.46 riparian wetland credits will be purchased from The Neu-Con Wetland & Stream
Umbrella Mitigation Bank to provide the appropriate compensatory mitigation for this project.
Please feel free to contact me at [phone] if you have any questions or if additional information
is necessary.
Sincerely,
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
Chris Tinklenberg, PWS
Environmental Scientist
Attachments
Project Summary Sheet
kimley-horn.com 200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202 704-333-5131
Project Name: Medline Mebane – South Site
Applicant Name and Address: Medline Industries, Inc.
One Medline Place
Mundelein, Illinois 60060
Telephone Number: 847-643-4984
Type of Request: Nationwide PCN (NWP #18 & #39) Individual Permit Application
Jurisdictional Determination Other:
Included Attachments: Project Plans USGS Map NRCS Soil Survey
Agent Authorization Delineation Sketch Delineation Survey
Data Forms (Up & Wet) NCDWR Stream Forms USACE Stream Forms
NCDMS Confirmation Aerial Photo Site Photos
Agency Correspondence Other: Other:
Check if applicable: CAMA County Trout County Isolated Waters
Section 7, ESA Section 106, NHPA EFH
Mitigation Proposed ( NC EEP On-Site Off-Site Other)
County: Orange Nearest City/Town: Mebane
Waterway: UT to Sevenmile Creek River Basin: Upper Neuse
H.U.C.: 03020201 USGS Quad Name: Efland
Property Size (acres): 45.6 acres Approx. Size of Jurisdiction on Site (acres): 0.42 ac
Site Coordinates (in decimal degrees): 36.069258 °N -79.208247 °W
Project Location: The project site is located south of West Ten Road between Squires Road and Country Haven in the
City of Mebane, Orange County, NC.
Site Description: The approximately 45.6-acre property is predominately undeveloped land, with portions of the site
formerly utilized for agricultural purposes. The site is situated 0.2-miles south of I-85/I-40, with Squires Road to the west
and Country Haven to the east, West Ten Road to the north, and undeveloped forested land to the south.
Impact Summary (if applicable): The proposed project requires grading and fill for three proposed buildings, the
associated parking lot, and a stormwater detention pond. The proposed project will result in a total 0.23-acres of permanent
impacts to wetland WoUS.
NWP
#
Open Water
(acres)
Wetland
(acres)
Stream Channel
Intermittent and/or Unimportant
Aquatic Function
Perennial and/or Important
Aquatic Function
Temp. Perm. Temp. Perm. Temp. Perm. Temp. Perm.
lf ac lf ac lf ac lf Ac
18 0.05
39 0.18
Total 0.23
Total Permanent (Loss) Impact to Wetland Waters of the U.S. 0.23 ac
Kimley-Horn Contact: Chris Tinklenberg, PWS Direct Number: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

AGENT AUTHORIZATION
AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
Name: Medline Industries, Inc.
Address: One Medline Place Mundelein, IL 60060
Phone: [phone]
Project Name/Description: Medline Mebane - South Site
Date: September 9, 2019
The Department of the Army
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
Attention: Samantha Dailey
Re: Wetland Related Consulting and Permitting
hereby designates and authorizes Kimley-Horn and
Associates, Inc. to act in their behalf as their agent solely for the purpose of processing
Jurisdictional Determinations, Section 404 permits/Section 401 Water Quality Certifications
applications, and to furnish upon request supplemental information in support of applications, etc.
from this day forward until successful completion of the permitting process or revocation by
.
Authorized this the day of , .
Authorized Representative Authorized Representative
(Print Name) (Signature)
Cc: Karen Higgins
NC Division of Water Resources
401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1650

PRE-CONSTRUCTION
NOTIFICATION FORM

Page 1 of 12
PCN Form – Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no. _____________
DWQ project no. _______________
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps: Section 404 Permit Section 10 Permit
1b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 18 and 39 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps? Yes No
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
401 Water Quality Certification – Regular Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
401 Water Quality Certification – Express Riparian Buffer Authorization
1e. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?

For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification:
Yes No
For the record only for Corps Permit:

Yes No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in-lieu
fee program.
Yes No

1g. Is the project located in any of NC’s twenty coastal counties? If yes, answer
1h below.
Yes No

1h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)? Yes No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project: Medline Mebane – South Site
2b. County: Orange
2c. Nearest municipality / town: Mebane
2d. Subdivision name: N/A
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no: N/A
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed: MRE MNC, LLC
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
3d. Street address: Three Lakes Drive
3e. City, state, zip: North Field, IL 60093
3f. Telephone no.:
3g. Fax no.:
3h. Email address:

Page 2 of 12
PCN Form – Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is: Agent Other, specify: Land Purchaser
4b. Name: Dmitry Dukhan
4c. Business name
(if applicable): Medline Industries, Inc.
4d. Street address: One Medline Place
4e. City, state, zip: Mundelein, Illinois 60060
4f. Telephone no.: 847-643-4984
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address: [e-mail]
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name: Chris Tinklenberg, PWS
5b. Business name
(if applicable): Kimley-Horn and Associates
5c. Street address: 200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200
5d. City, state, zip: Charlotte, NC 28202
5e. Telephone no.: 704-409-1802
5f. Fax no.:
5g. Email address: [e-mail]

Page 3 of 12
PCN Form – Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID): 9834743184; 9834846079
1b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): Latitude: 36.069258 Longitude: -79.208247
(DD.DDDDDD) (-DD.DDDDDD)
1c. Property size: 45.6 acres (Project Boundary)
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to proposed
project: UT to Sevenmile Creek
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water: Sevenmile Creek- WS-II HQW/NSW
2c. River basin: Upper Neuse; HUC 03020201
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The proposed Medline Mebane - South Site is located south of West Ten Road between Squires Road and Country
Haven in Mebane, Orange County, NC. The approximately 45.6-acre property is predominately undeveloped land and
young forested areas, with portions of the site formerly utilized for agricultural purposes. The site is situated 0.2-miles
south of I-85/I-40 with Squires Road to the west and Country Haven to the east, West Ten Road to the north, and
undeveloped forested land to the south.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
0.27 ac
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
The total length of all on-site streams is approximately 1,492 linear feet.
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The purpose of the project is to construct three commercial distribution facilities, totaling 450,000 square-feet of new
commercial space, associated parking lots, access roads, and stormwater detention ponds.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Development of the approximately 45.6-acre lot will consist of three (3) commercial distribution facilities (approximately
345,000 square-feet (sqft), 60,000 sqft, and 45,000 sqft in size), three (3) driveway access points, parking lots, and two
(2) stormwater detention ponds. Grading associated with the construction of the three facilities, driveway access points,
parking lots, and the stormwater detention ponds will result in a total of 0.23-ac permanent impacts to potential wetland-
WoUS (Wetland W1, Wetland W3, and Wetland W4). Permanent wetland impacts include 0.02-ac to Wetland W1, 0.18-
ac to Wetland W3, and 0.03-ac to Wetland W4. General construction equipment includes, but are not limited to,
bulldozers, back hoes, front-end loaders, etc. will be used for construction purposes.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the Corps
or State been requested or obtained for this property / project
(including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments: PJD request included in this package.
Yes No Unknown
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type of
determination was made? Preliminary Final
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known):
Agency/Consultant Company: Kimley-Horn &
Assoc., Inc.
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.

Page 4 of 12
PCN Form – Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases) in the past? Yes No Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to “help file” instructions.

6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? Yes No
6b. If yes, explain.

Page 5 of 12
PCN Form – Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
Wetlands Streams - tributaries Buffers
Open Waters Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
Wetland impact
number –
Permanent (P)
or Temporary
(T)
2b.

Type of impact
2c.

Type of wetland
(if known)
2d.

Forested

2e.
Type of jurisdiction
(Corps - 404, 10
DWQ – non-404, other)
2f.

Area of impact
(acres)
W1 – Site 1
P T Grading Fill (NWP 18) Riparian Yes
No
Corps
DWQ 0.02
W3 – Site 2
P T Grading Fill (NWP 39) Riparian Yes
No
Corps
DWQ 0.18
W4 – Site 3
P T Grading Fill (NWP 18) Riparian Yes
No
Corps
DWQ 0.03
2g. Total wetland impacts 0.23
2h. Comments:
The proposed project requires grading of the Site which will result in a total of 0.23-acres of permanent impacts to potential
wetland-WoUS (Wetland W1, Wetland W3, and Wetland W4). Wetland impacts will result from fill associated with grading and
the installation of stormwater detention ponds. Permanent wetland-WoUS impacts include 0.02-ac to Wetland 1 (NWP 18),
0.18-ac to Wetland 3 (NWP 39), and 0.03-ac to Wetland 4 (NWP 18). In total, the proposed development project seeks
permanent impacts to 0.23-ac of potential wetland-WoUS.
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
Stream impact
number -
Permanent (P)
or Temporary
(T)
3b.
Type of impact
3c.
Stream name
3d.
Perennial
(PER) or
intermittent
(INT)?
3e.
Type of jurisdiction
(Corps - 404, 10
DWQ – non-404,
other)
3f.
Average
stream
width
(feet)
3g.
Impact
length
(linear
feet)
P T PER
INT
Corps
DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
3i. Comments:
4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
impact number
– Permanent
(P) or
Temporary (T)
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable)
4c.

Type of impact
4d.

Waterbody type
4e.

Area of impact (acres)
O1 P T
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:

Page 6 of 12
PCN Form – Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a.

Pond ID
number
5b.

Proposed use or purpose of
pond

5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
5d.
Stream Impacts (feet)
5e.
Upland
(acres)
Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded
P1
P2
5f. Total
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
Yes No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
Project is in which protected basin?
Neuse Tar-Pamlico Other:
Catawba Randleman
6b.
Buffer impact
number –
Permanent (P)
or Temporary
(T)
6c.

Reason
for impact
6d.

Stream name
6e.

Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f.

Zone 1 impact
(square feet)
6g.

Zone 2 impact
(square feet)
B1 P T Yes
No
6h. Total buffer impacts
6i. Comments: The proposed project will not impact protected riparian buffers.
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Avoidance and minimization efforts were implemented during development planning and design to the greatest extent
practicable in order to reduce the overall impacts on the aquatic environment while staying within nationwide permit thresholds.
The final plan demonstrates maximum avoidance and minimization efforts by reducing the proposed wetland impacts to 0.23-
ac. The rationale to support avoidance and minimization efforts include the following:
· Wetland 1, 3, and 4 – Impacts 1, 2, and 3: These impacts are necessary to facilitate the appropriate grading to meet
the needs/requirements of the proposed development. The design maximizes the available space to construct the
facilities while minimizing impacts to aquatic features.
· Avoidance of the remaining 0.04-ac of wetlands on-site
· Avoidance of approximately 1,492 linear feet of streams on-site, including the construction of a retaining wall above the
origin of S3.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Impacts to wetlands within the site will be avoided and minimized to the extent practical throughout the construction process.
Impacts to streams and their associated riparian buffers are completely avoided. Stormwater and erosion control measures
will be utilized to avoid sedimentation impacts to downstream waters and control runoff from the construction site.

Page 7 of 12
PCN Form – Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
Yes No

2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply): DWQ Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this project?
Mitigation bank
Payment to in-lieu fee program
Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank: Neu-Con Wetland & Stream Umbrella Mitigation Bank (Meadow Spring Site)
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter) Type Riparian
wetland mitigation Quantity 0.46
3c. Comments: Compensatory mitigation will be met by the purchase of credits from The Neu-Con Wetland & Stream
Umbrella Mitigation Bank. 0.23-ac of wetland impacts will be mitigated through the purchase of wetland mitigation credits.
Based on an NCWAM assessment of Wetland W1, Wetland W3, and Wetland W4, mitigation is proposed at a 2:1 ratio. A
copy of the signed Statement of Availability (SOA) is included for your reference.
In total, 0.46 riparian wetland credits will be purchased from The Neu-Con Wetland & Stream Umbrella Mitigation
Bank to provide the appropriate compensatory mitigation for this project.
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In-lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in-lieu fee program is attached. Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested: linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature: warm cool cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only): square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4f. Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested: acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.

Page 8 of 12
PCN Form – Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) – required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation?
Yes No

6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
Zone
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Total impact
(square feet)

Multiplier
6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1 3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2 1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in-lieu fee fund).

6h. Comments:

Page 9 of 12
PCN Form – Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules? Yes No
1b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
Comments:
The proposed project falls within Neuse river basin. As such the proposed onsite stormwater
will be designed in accordance with the requirements of Orange County specifically Section
6.14 Stormwater Management of the Unified Development Ordinance and as required to
meet the state mandated Falls Lake and Jordan Lake Stormwater Rules for New
Development (15A NCAC 2B. 0277, 15A NCAC 2B. 0265, Session Law 2009-484). Specifically
· Nutrient load contribution must meet the standards listed in Section 6.14.7
as required by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NC DWQ),
· Nitrogen and phosphorus loads contributed by proposed new development
shall not exceed the following unit-area mass loading rates, Falls Lake
Watershed, Nitrogen, 2.2 pounds per acre per year, Phosphorus, 0.33 pounds
per acre per year
· Peak attenuation of the 1-year 24-hour storm;
· Meet or provide mitigation for the nutrient load contribution leaving the site;
· The nutrient export from each new development shall be calculated in pounds
per acre per year (using the approved accounting tool) in accordance with the
methodologies approved by the NC DWQ.

Yes No

Page 10 of 12
PCN Form – Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project? 50%
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan? Yes No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why: N/A
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
The proposed sediment basins will be converted to permanent stormwater control measures.
The stormwater components associated with the proposed development have been designed in accordance with the City of
Mebane’s Phase II Stormwater Post-Construction Ordinance. Per section 303 of the Stormwater Ordinance, the following
Mebane Requirements apply to the proposed development;
The measures shall be designed to control and treat the stormwater run-off generated by the 1” (one inch) of rain;
Runoff volume drawdown time shall be a minimum of 48 hours, but not more than 120 hours;
Stormwater shall not leave the project site at a rate greater than the predevelopment discharge rate for the ten-
year, 24-hour storm;
All structural stormwater treatment systems used to meet the requirements of the program shall be designed to
have a minimum of 85% average annual removal for Total Suspended Solids (TSS);
General engineering design criteria for all projects shall be in accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .1008(c), as
explained in the Design Manual;
All stormwater control measures that incorporate a permanent or temporary water pool with depth greater than
two feet shall be fenced. The fence shall meet the design standards maintained by the Stormwater Administrator.
A copy of the approval will be provided when it is received.
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
Certified Local Government
DWQ Stormwater Program
DWQ 401 Unit
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government’s jurisdiction is this project? City of Mebane
3b. Which of the following locally-implemented stormwater management programs
apply (check all that apply):
Phase II
NSW
USMP
Water Supply Watershed
Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached?
Yes No – Pending
Approval
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
4a. Which of the following state-implemented stormwater management programs apply
(check all that apply):
Coastal counties
HQW
ORW
Session Law 2006-246
Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached? Yes No
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements? Yes No

Page 11 of 12
PCN Form – Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met? Yes No
F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
use of public (federal/state) land? Yes No
1b. If you answered “yes” to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Yes No
1c. If you answered “yes” to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.)
Comments:
Yes No
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
Yes No
2b. Is this an after-the-fact permit application? Yes No
2c. If you answered “yes” to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes No
3b. If you answered “yes” to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered “no,” provide a short narrative description.
The project is designed to construct three commercial distribution facilities, associated parking, and stormwater detention
ponds. No additional or cumulative impacts are anticipated due to the construction of the proposed project.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility: Waste water will be directed to a City of Mebane public
works sewer main adjacent to the project.

Page 12 of 12
PCN Form – Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
habitat? Yes No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
impacts? Yes No
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Raleigh
Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat? A review of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database on January 13, 2020, did not
indicate known occurrences of threatened or endangered species within the project boundary. Additionally, pedestrian
surveys conducted by Kimley-Horn on October 1, 2019, did not identify any occurrences of protected species within the
property boundary. A concurrence request letter was submitted to the USFWS on March 23, 2020. A response is
pending as of the date of this PCN submittal but will be provided once it is received (See attached NCNHP Letter and
USFWS Concurrence Request).
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat? Yes No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
NCNHP element occurrence database did not indicate the presence of EFH within the project boundary.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
Yes No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
Kimley-Horn consulted the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) HPOWEB GIS service on March 4,
2020. No documented architectural, historic, or archaeological sites of significance within or near the project boundary
were identified.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain? Yes No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? FIRM Panel 3710983400J

Chris Tinklenberg, PWS

Applicant/Agent's Printed Name

_______________________________
Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
is provided.)

3/31/2020
Date

JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
REQUEST
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Version: May 2017
Page 1

This form is intended for use by anyone requesting a jurisdictional determination (JD) from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District (Corps). Please include all supporting
information, as described within each category, with your request. You may submit your request
via mail, electronic mail, or facsimile. Requests should be sent to the appropriate project
manager of the county in which the property is located. A current list of project managers by
assigned counties can be found on-line at:
http://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/RegulatoryPermitProgram/Contact/CountyLocator.aspx,
by calling 910-251-4633, or by contacting any of the field offices listed below. Once your
request is received you will be contacted by a Corps project manager.
ASHEVILLE& CHARLOTTE REGULATORY
FIELDOFFICES
US ArmyCorps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina28801-5006
GeneralNumber: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
RALEIGHREGULATORYFIELDOFFICE
US ArmyCorps of Engineers
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina27587
GeneralNumber: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
WASHINGTONREGULATORYFIELDOFFICE
US ArmyCorps of Engineers
2407 West Fifth Street
Washington, North Carolina27889
GeneralNumber: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
WILMINGTONREGULATORYFIELDOFFICE
US ArmyCorps of Engineers
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
GeneralNumber:910-251-4633
Fax Number: [phone]
INSTRUCTIONS:
All requestors must complete Parts A, B, C, D, E, F and G.
NOTE TO CONSULTANTS AND AGENCIES: If you are requesting a JD on behalf of a
paying client or your agency, please note the specific submittal requirements in Part H.
NOTE ON PART D – PROPERTY OWNER AUTHORIZATION: Please be aware that
all JD requests must include the current property owner authorization for the Corps to
proceed with the determination, which may include inspection of the property when
necessary. This form must be signed by the current property owner(s) or the owner(s)
authorized agent to be considered a complete request.
NOTE ON PART D - NCDOT REQUESTS: Property owner authorization/notification for
JD requests associated with North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
projects will be conducted according to the current NCDOT/USACE protocols.
NOTE TO USDA PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS: A Corps approved or preliminary JD
may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security Act of
1985.If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in
USDA programs, you should also request a certified wetland determination from the local
office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Version: May 2017
Page 2
A. PARCEL INFORMATION
Street Address: _______________________________________________
City, State: _______________________________________________
County:
Parcel Index Number(s) (PIN):
B. REQUESTORINFORMATION
Name:
Mailing Address:
_________________________________________
Telephone Number: _________________________________________
Electronic Mail Address: ________________________________________
Select one:
I am the current property owner.
I am an Authorized Agent or Environmental Consultant1
Interested Buyer or Under Contract to Purchase
Other, please explain. ________________________________________
__________________________________________________________
C. PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION2
Name:
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number:
Electronic Mail Address:
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1 Must provide completed Agent Authorization Form/Letter.
2 Documentation of ownership also needs to be provided with request (copy of Deed, County GIS/Parcel/Tax Record).
West Ten Road
Mebane, NC
Orange
9834743184; 9834846079
Chris Tinklenberg
200 South Tryon St
Suite 200
704-333-5131
[e-mail]
See Attached.
✔
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Version: May 2017
Page 3

D. PROPERTY ACCESS CERTIFICATION3,4
By signing below, I authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on-
site investigations, if necessary, and issuing a jurisdictional determination pursuant to Section
404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. I, the
undersigned, am either a duly authorized owner of record of the property identified herein, or
acting as the duly authorized agent of the owner of record of the property.
Print Name
Capacity: Owner Authorized Agent5
Date
Signature
E. REASON FOR JD REQUEST:(Check as many as applicable)
I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be
designed to avoid all aquatic resources.
I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be
designed to avoid all jurisdictional aquatic resources underCorpsauthority.
Iintendto construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcelwhich may
require authorization from the Corps, andthe JDwould beusedto avoid and minimize
impacts tojurisdictional aquatic resources and as aninitialstep in a future permitting
process.
I intendto construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcelwhich may
require authorization from the Corps; this request is accompanied by my permit application
and the JD is to be used in the permitting process.
Iintendto construct/develop a project or perform activities in a navigable water of the
U.S. which is included on the district Section 10 list and/or is subject to the ebb and flow of
the tide.
A Corps JD is required in order obtain my local/state authorization.
I intend to contest jurisdiction over a particular aquatic resource and request the Corps
confirm that jurisdiction does/does not exist over the aquatic resource on the parcel.
I believe that the site may be comprised entirely of dry land.
Other:___________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
3 For NCDOT requests following the current NCDOT/USACE protocols, skip to Part E.
4 If there are multiple parcels owned by different parties, please provide the following for each additional parcel on a
continuation sheet.
5 Must provide agent authorization form/letter signed by owner(s).
Chris Tinklenberg, PWS
3/10/2020
✔
✔
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Version: May 2017
Page 4

F. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD) TYPE (Select One)
I am requesting that the Corps provide a preliminary JD for the property identified herein.
A Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) provides an indication that there may
be “waters of the United States” or “navigable waters of the United States”on a property.
PJDs are sufficient as the basis for permit decisions. For the purposes of permitting, all
waters and wetlands on the property will be treated as if they are jurisdictional “waters of
the United States”. PJDs cannot be appealed (33 C.F.R. 331.2); however, a PJD is
“preliminary” in the sense that an approved JD can be requested at any time. PJDs do
not expire.
I am requesting that the Corps provide an approved JD for the property identified herein.
An Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD) is a determination that
jurisdictional “waters of the United States” or “navigable waters of the United
States” are either present or absent on a site. An approved JD identifies the limits of
waters on a site determined to be jurisdictional under the Clean Water Act and/or
Rivers and Harbors Act. Approved JDs are sufficient as the basis for permit
decisions. AJDs are appealable (33 C.F.R. 331.2). The results of the AJD will be
posted on the Corps website. A landowner, permit applicant, or other “affected
party” (33 C.F.R. 331.2) who receives an AJD may rely upon the AJD for five years
(subject to certain limited exceptions explained in Regulatory Guidance Letter 05-
02).
I am unclear as to which JD I would like to request and require additional information
to inform my decision.
G. ALL REQUESTS
Map of Property or Project Area. This Map must clearly depict the boundaries of the
review area.
Size of Property or Review Area acres.
The property boundary (or review area boundary) is clearly physically marked on the site.
45.6
✔
✔
✔
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Version: May 2017
Page 5

H. REQUESTS FROM CONSULTANTS
Project Coordinates (Decimal Degrees): Latitude: ______________________
Longitude: ______________________
A legible delineation map depicting the aquatic resources and the property/review area.
Delineation maps must be no larger than 11x17 and should contain the following: (Corps
signature of submitted survey plats will occur after the submitted delineation map has been
reviewed and approved).6
ƒNorth Arrow
ƒGraphical Scale
ƒBoundary of Review Area
ƒDate
ƒLocation of data points for each Wetland Determination Data Form or tributary
assessment reach.
For Approved Jurisdictional Determinations:
ƒJurisdictional wetland features should be labeled as Wetland Waters of the US, 404
wetlands, etc. Please include the acreage of these features.
ƒJurisdictional non-wetland features (i.e. tidal/navigable waters, tributaries,
impoundments) should be labeled as Non-Wetland Waters of the US, stream, tributary,
open water, relatively permanent water, pond, etc. Please include the acreage or linear
length of each of these features as appropriate.
ƒIsolated waters, waters that lack a significant nexus to navigable waters, or non-
jurisdictional upland features should be identified as Non-Jurisdictional. Please
include a justification in the label regarding why the feature is non-jurisdictional (i.e.
“Isolated”, “No Significant Nexus”, or “Upland Feature”). Please include the acreage
or linear length of these features as appropriate.
For Preliminary Jurisdictional Determinations:
ƒWetland and non-wetland features should not be identified as Jurisdictional, 404,
Waters of the United States, or anything that implies jurisdiction. These features can be
identified as Potential Waters of the United States, Potential Non-wetland Waters of
the United States, wetland, stream, open water, etc. Please include the acreage and
linear length of these features as appropriate.
Completed Wetland Determination Data Forms for appropriate region
(at least one wetland and one upland form needs to be completed for each wetland type)
____________________________________________________________________________
6 Please refer to the guidance document titled “Survey Standards for Jurisdictional Determinations” to ensure that the
supplied map meets the necessary mapping standards.http://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory-Permit-
Program/Jurisdiction/
36.069258 N
-79.208247 W
✔
✔
✔
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Version: May 2017
Page 6

Completed appropriate Jurisdictional Determination form
x PJDs,please complete a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form7 and include the
Aquatic Resource Table
x AJDs, please complete an Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form8
Vicinity Map
Aerial Photograph
USGS Topographic Map
Soil Survey Map
Other Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map, Proposed Site
Plan, previous delineation maps, LIDAR maps, FEMA floodplain maps)
Landscape Photos (if taken)
NCSAM and/or NCWAM Assessment Forms and Rating Sheets
NC Division of Water Resources Stream Identification Forms
Other Assessment Forms
_____________________________________________________________________________
7 www.saw.usace.army.mil/Portals/59/docs/regulatory/regdocs/JD/RGL_08-02_App_A_Prelim_JD_Form_fillable.pdf
8 Please see http://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory-Permit-Program/Jurisdiction/
Principal Purpose:The information thatyouprovide will beusedinevaluating your requestto determine
whether thereareany aquatic resources within the project areasubjecttofederaljurisdictionunder the regulatoryauthorities referencedabove.
RoutineUses:Thisinformation maybeshared with the Departmentof Justice andotherfederal, state,and local
government agencies, and the public,andmaybe made available aspartof a public notice as required byfederallaw. Your nameandproperty location wherefederal jurisdiction is to bedetermined will beincluded in the
approved jurisdictional determination (AJD),which will bemade available tothe public on the District's website
andontheHeadquartersUSAGEwebsite.
Disclosure:Submission ofrequested information is voluntary; however, ifinformation is notprovided, the
requestforanAJDcannot beevaluatednorcananAJD be issued.
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
Appendix 2 - PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A.REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD:
B.NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD:
C.DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
D.PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND/OR
AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: County/parish/borough:City:
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format):
Lat.:Long.:
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody:
E.REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s):
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES IN REVIEW AREA WHICH “MAY BE”SUBJECT TO REGULATORY
JURISDICTION.
Site
number
Latitude
(decimal
degrees)
Longitude
(decimal
degrees)
Estimated amount
of aquatic resource
in review area
(acreage and linear
feet, if applicable)
Type of aquatic
resource (i.e., wetland
vs. non-wetland
waters)
Geographic authority
to which the aquatic
resource “may be”
subject (i.e., Section
404 or Section 10/404)
See attached table
Chris Tinklenberg, 200 South Tryon St. Suite 200 Charlotte, NC 28202
NC Orange Mebane
36.069258 N -79.208247 W
17N
UT to Sevenmile Creek
1) The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional aquatic resources in
the review area, and the requestor of this PJD is hereby advised of his or her option
to request and obtain an approved JD (AJD) for that review area based on an
informed decision after having discussed the various types of JDs and their
characteristics and circumstances when they may be appropriate.
2) In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or a
Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring “pre-
construction notification” (PCN), or requests verification for a non-reporting NWP or
other general permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an AJD for the
activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware that: (1) the permit applicant has
elected to seek a permit authorization based on a PJD, which does not make an
official determination of jurisdictional aquatic resources; (2) the applicant has the
option to request an AJD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit
authorization, and that basing a permit authorization on an AJD could possibly result
in less compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) the
applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting the terms
and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4) the applicant can
accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply with all the terms and
conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation requirements the Corps has
determined to be necessary; (5) undertaking any activity in reliance upon the subject
permit authorization without requesting an AJD constitutes the applicant’s acceptance
of the use of the PJD; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered
individual permit)or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps permit
authorization based on a PJD constitutes agreement that all aquatic resources in the
review area affected in any way by that activity will be treated as jurisdictional, and
waives any challenge to such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance
or enforcement action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7)
whether the applicant elects to use either an AJD or a PJD, the JD will be processed
as soon as practicable. Further, an AJD, a proffered individual permit (and all terms
and conditions contained therein), or individual permit denial can be administratively
appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331. If, during an administrative appeal, it
becomes appropriate to make an official determination whether geographic
jurisdiction exists over aquatic resources in the review area, or to provide an official
delineation of jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review area, the Corps will
provide an AJD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable. This PJD finds
that there “may be” waters of the U.S. and/or that there “may be”navigable waters of
the U.S. on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in the review
area that could be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following
information:
SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply)
Checked items should be included in subject file. Appropriately reference sources
below where indicated for all checked items:
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor:
Map: ________________BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB.
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor.
Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rationale: _______BBBBBBBBBBBB.
Data sheets prepared by the Corps: ________BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB.
Corps navigable waters’ study: ____________BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB.
U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas: ________BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB.
USGS NHD data.
USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: _________BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB.
Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: __________BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB.
National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: ________BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB.
State/local wetland inventory map(s): ____________BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB.
FEMA/FIRM maps: ________________BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB.
100-year Floodplain Elevation is: ____BBBBBBBBBBBB.(National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
Photographs: Aerial (Name & Date): ______BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB.
or Other (Name & Date): ______BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB.
Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter: __________BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB.
Other information (please specify): ______________BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB.
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily
been verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for later jurisdictional
determinations.
Signature and date of Signature and date of
Regulatory staff member person requesting PJD
completing PJD (REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)1
1 Districts may establish timeframes for requestor to return signed PJD forms. If the requestor does not respond
within the established time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is
necessary prior to finalizing an action.
1:12,000; Efland
Orange County SSURGO Soils
NWI digital data
North Carolina 2017, 2/5/2017
Site photographs, 10/1/2019 and 10/17/2019
Site Number
Latitude
(decimal
degrees)
Longitude
(decimal
degrees)
Estimated amount of
aquatic resource in
review area
Type of aquatic
resource
Geographic authority to
which the aquatic resource
"may be" subject
S1- UT of Sevenmile
Creek 36.068329 -79.212744 1,338 lf
Non-wetland
waters Section 404
S2- UT of Sevenmile
Creek 36.068432 -79.206313 56 lf
Non-wetland
waters Section 404
S3- UT of Sevenmile
Creek 36.068733 -79.205991 98 lf
Non-wetland
waters Section 404
W1 36.068206 -79.211809 0.02 ac Wetland waters Section 404
W2 36.068372 -79.206522 0.04 ac Wetland waters Section 404
W3 36.068886 -79.208748 0.18 ac Wetland waters Section 404
W4 36.068299 -79.20906 0.03 ac Wetland waters Section 404

FIGURES
Figure 1
Vicinity Map
Medline Mebane - South Site
Mebane, Orange County, NC
Orange
County
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Project Study Area
Orange County
±
0 1,000 2,000Feet
Figure 2: USGS Topographic map (Efland)
Medline Mebane - South Site
Mebane, Orange County, NC
Legend
Project Study Area
±
W Ten Rd
Squires RdHwB
GeCLg
EnB
GeB
HwB
GeC
HrC
Ch
GeB GeB
0 300 600Feet
Figure 3: SSURGO Soils and NWI
Medline Mebane - South Site
Mebane, Orange County, NC
Legend
Project Study Area
NWI
SSURGO Soils
Hydric Rating
Not Hydric (0%)
Hydric (1 to 32%)
±
S1 S1S2
W1 W4
W3
W2
S3
W Ten Rd
Squires Rd0 300 600Feet
Figure 4: Preliminary JD Field Sketch
Medline Mebane - South Site
Mebane, Orange County, NC
Legend
Project Study Area
Streams (Potential Non-Wetland WoUS)
Wetland (Potential Wetland WoUS)
±
Figure 4a
Figure 4b
Figure 4c
_!_!_!#0!.
S1
W1Squires Rd1
2 3
0 100 200Feet
Figure 4a: Preliminary JD Field Sketch
Medline Mebane - South Site
Mebane, Orange County, NC
Legend
Project Study Area
Streams (Potential Non-Wetland WoUS)
Wetland (Potential Wetland WoUS)
_!Photo Locations
Data Points
#0 Upland Form
!.Wetland Form
±
_!_!!.
#0
W4
W3
W2
10
11
0 100 200Feet
Figure 4b: Preliminary JD Field Sketch
Medline Mebane - South Site
Mebane, Orange County, NC
Legend
Project Study Area
Streams (Potential Non-Wetland WoUS)
Wetland (Potential Wetland WoUS)
_!Photo Locations
Data Points
#0 Upland Form
!.Wetland Form
±
_!_!_!_!_!_!#0
!.
S1
S2
W2 9
S3
4567
8
12
0 100 200Feet
Figure 4c: Preliminary JD Field Sketch
Medline Mebane - South Site
Mebane, Orange County, NC
Legend
Project Study Area
Streams (Potential Non-Wetland WoUS)
Wetland (Potential Wetland WoUS)
_!Photo Locations
Data Points
#0 Upland Form
!.Wetland Form
±
S1 S1S2
W1 W4
W3
W2
S3
W Ten Rd
Squires Rd0 300 600Feet
Figure 5: Preliminary JD Field Sketch - LiDAR
Medline Mebane - South Site
Mebane, Orange County, NC
Legend
Project Study Area
Streams (Potential Non-Wetland WoUS)
Wetland (Potential Wetland WoUS)
ValueHigh : 705
Low : 635
±
S1 S1S2
W1 W4
W3
W2
S3
Site 1 (W1):
Grading Fill
0.02-acres Permanent Impacts
(NWP 18)
Site 3 (W4):
Grading Fill
0.03-acres Permanent Impacts
(NWP 18)
Site 2 (W3):
Grading Fill
0.18-acres Permanent Impacts
(NWP 39)Squires RdW Ten Rd
0 300 600Feet
Figure 6: Proposed Conditions
Medline Mebane - South Site
Mebane, Orange County, NC
Legend
Project Study Area
Proposed Grading
Proposed Buildings
Proposed Parking Curb
Streams (Potential Non-Wetland WoUS)
Wetland (Potential Wetland WoUS)
Riparian Buffer (50ft)
±

PERMIT DRAWINGS
400.0'150.0'150.0'
1150.0'300.0'300.0'68' ROW FOR DUKE ENERGY
TRANSMISSION LINE
345 K 45 K 60 K
EXISTING WETLAND
EXISTING WETLANDEXISTING WETLAND
EXISTING WETLAND
NC LICENSE #F-0102
200 SOUTH TRYON STREET, SUITE 200
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA 28202
PHONE [phone]
C 2019MEDLINE MEBANE EXHIBIT
DATE: 03-23-20 SHEET 1 of 1
NORTH

NCDWQ STREAM IDENTIFICATION
FORMS & WETLAND DATA FORMS
Date:Project/Site:Latitude:
Evaluator:County:Longitude:
Total Points:23.5
Stream is at least intermittent
if ≥ 19 or perennial if ≥ 30
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = Absent Weak Strong Score
0 1 3 2
0 1 3 1
0 1 3 1
0 1 3 1
0 1 3 2
0 1 3 1
0 1 3 1
0 1 3 0
0 0.5 1.5 0.5
0 0.5 1.5 1
0
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology Subtotal = 9
0 1 3 2
0 1 3 2
1.5 1 0 0.5
0 0.5 1.5 1
0 0.5 1.5 0.5
3
C. Biology Subtotal = 4
3 2 0 1
3 2 0 3
0 1 3 0
0 1 3 0
0 0.5 1.5 0
0 0.5 1.5 0
0 0.5 1.5 0
0 0.5 1.5 0
0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Intermittent reach of S1 originating off-site
Low flow, iron oxidizing bacteria, and lots of leaf litter/detritus in channel
26. Wetland plants in streambed FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5; Other = 0
23. Crayfish 1
24. Amphibians 1
25. Algae 1
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)2
21. Aquatic Mollusks 2
22. Fish 1
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 1
14. Leaf litter 0.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris 1
16. Organic debris lines or piles 1
17. Soil-based evidence of high water table?No = 0 Yes = 3
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 1
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 2
8. Headcuts 2
9. Grade control 1
10. Natural valley 1
11. Second or greater order channel No = 0 Yes = 3
12. Presence of Baseflow 2
5. Active/relic floodplain 2
6. Depositional bars or benches 2
7. Recent alluvial deposits 2
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 2
3. In-channel structure: ex. riffle-pool, step-pool, ripple-2
4. Particle size of stream substrate 2
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank 2
North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form, Version 4.11
10/1/2019 S1 (Int) Mebane Industrial
Southern Site 36.068657
William Sullivan & Kenzie
Richards Orange -79.213139
Stream Determination (circle one)
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
Other
e.g. Quad Name:Efland
10.5 Moderate
Date:Project/Site:Latitude:
Evaluator:County:Longitude:
Total Points:32.5
Stream is at least intermittent
if ≥ 19 or perennial if ≥ 30
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = Absent Weak Strong Score
0 1 3 3
0 1 3 2
0 1 3 2
0 1 3 2
0 1 3 1
0 1 3 2
0 1 3 1
0 1 3 0
0 0.5 1.5 1
0 0.5 1.5 1
3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology Subtotal = 7.5
0 1 3 2
0 1 3 0
1.5 1 0 0.5
0 0.5 1.5 1
0 0.5 1.5 1
3
C. Biology Subtotal = 7.5
3 2 0 3
3 2 0 3
0 1 3 0
0 1 3 0
0 0.5 1.5 0.5
0 0.5 1.5 0
0 0.5 1.5 1
0 0.5 1.5 0
0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Low-flow, incised perennial reach
Numerous mosquito fish and frogs in channel
26. Wetland plants in streambed FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5; Other = 0
23. Crayfish 1
24. Amphibians 1
25. Algae 1
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)2
21. Aquatic Mollusks 2
22. Fish 1
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 1
14. Leaf litter 0.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris 1
16. Organic debris lines or piles 1
17. Soil-based evidence of high water table?No = 0 Yes = 3
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 1
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 2
8. Headcuts 2
9. Grade control 1
10. Natural valley 1
11. Second or greater order channel No = 0 Yes = 3
12. Presence of Baseflow 2
5. Active/relic floodplain 2
6. Depositional bars or benches 2
7. Recent alluvial deposits 2
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 2
3. In-channel structure: ex. riffle-pool, step-pool, ripple-2
4. Particle size of stream substrate 2
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank 2
North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form, Version 4.11
10/1/2019 S1 Mebane Industrial
Southern Site 36.068553
William Sullivan & Kenzie
Richards Orange -79.204718
Stream Determination (circle one)
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
Other
e.g. Quad Name:Efland
18 Moderate
Date:Project/Site:Latitude:
Evaluator:County:Longitude:
Total Points:19
Stream is at least intermittent
if ≥ 19 or perennial if ≥ 30
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = Absent Weak Strong Score
0 1 3 2
0 1 3 0
0 1 3 1
0 1 3 1
0 1 3 0
0 1 3 1
0 1 3 1
0 1 3 1
0 0.5 1.5 0.5
0 0.5 1.5 0.5
0
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology Subtotal = 7
0 1 3 2
0 1 3 0
1.5 1 0 0.5
0 0.5 1.5 0.5
0 0.5 1.5 1
3
C. Biology Subtotal = 4
3 2 0 1
3 2 0 3
0 1 3 0
0 1 3 0
0 0.5 1.5 0
0 0.5 1.5 0
0 0.5 1.5 0
0 0.5 1.5 0
0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Weak intermittent channel flowing out of Wetland W2
Discharges into S1 shortly after origin
Continuous flow
26. Wetland plants in streambed FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5; Other = 0
23. Crayfish 1
24. Amphibians 1
25. Algae 1
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)2
21. Aquatic Mollusks 2
22. Fish 1
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 1
14. Leaf litter 0.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris 1
16. Organic debris lines or piles 1
17. Soil-based evidence of high water table?No = 0 Yes = 3
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 1
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 2
8. Headcuts 2
9. Grade control 1
10. Natural valley 1
11. Second or greater order channel No = 0 Yes = 3
12. Presence of Baseflow 2
5. Active/relic floodplain 2
6. Depositional bars or benches 2
7. Recent alluvial deposits 2
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 2
3. In-channel structure: ex. riffle-pool, step-pool, ripple-2
4. Particle size of stream substrate 2
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank 2
North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form, Version 4.11
10/1/2019 S2 Mebane Industrial
Southern Site 36.068436
William Sullivan & Kenzie
Richards Orange -79.206337
Stream Determination (circle one)
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
Other
e.g. Quad Name:Efland
8 Moderate
Date:Project/Site:Latitude:
Evaluator:County:Longitude:
Total Points:21.5
Stream is at least intermittent
if ≥ 19 or perennial if ≥ 30
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = Absent Weak Strong Score
0 1 3 2
0 1 3 1
0 1 3 1
0 1 3 2
0 1 3 0
0 1 3 1
0 1 3 1
0 1 3 1
0 0.5 1.5 0
0 0.5 1.5 2
0
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology Subtotal = 6.5
0 1 3 1
0 1 3 0
1.5 1 0 0.5
0 0.5 1.5 2
0 0.5 1.5 0
3
C. Biology Subtotal = 4
3 2 0 1
3 2 0 3
0 1 3 0
0 1 3 0
0 0.5 1.5 0
0 0.5 1.5 0
0 0.5 1.5 0
0 0.5 1.5 0
0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Weak intermittent channel flowing into S1
26. Wetland plants in streambed FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5; Other = 0
23. Crayfish 1
24. Amphibians 1
25. Algae 1
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)2
21. Aquatic Mollusks 2
22. Fish 1
17. Soil-based evidence of high water table?No = 0 Yes = 3
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 1
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 1
14. Leaf litter 0.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris 1
16. Organic debris lines or piles 1
11. Second or greater order channel No = 0 Yes = 3
12. Presence of Baseflow 2
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 2
8. Headcuts 2
9. Grade control 1
10. Natural valley 1
5. Active/relic floodplain 2
6. Depositional bars or benches 2
7. Recent alluvial deposits 2
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 2
3. In-channel structure: ex. riffle-pool, step-pool, ripple-2
4. Particle size of stream substrate 2
Stream Determination (circle one)
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
Other
e.g. Quad Name:Efland
11 Moderate
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank 2
North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form, Version 4.11
10/17/2019 S3 Mebane Industrial
Southern Site 36.068683
William Sullivan & Emma
Radford Orange -79.205988
Project/Site:Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Lat:Long:
Soil Map Unit Name:
X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
X No
No X X
No X
Yes X
Yes X
Yes X X
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R
OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
(Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
NoYes
No
No
Water Table Present?
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (B1)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Upland data point was taken approximately 30 feet from the Wet point and 1 foot highter in elevation on the edge of the agricultural field
HYDROLOGY
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Iron Deposits (B5)
City/County:Mebane Industrial Southern Site Orange County
W1 UP
10/1/2019
NC
No
Section, Township, Range:William Sullivan & Mackenzie Richards
1-2Convex
Datum:-79.21171636.068222LRR P, MLRA 136
NWI classification:
Slope (%):Local relief (concave, convex, none):
Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed?
naturally problematic?
Are “Normal Circumstances” present?
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
Remarks:

Is the Sampled AreaYes
Yes
Yes
Hydric Soil Present?
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Nowithin a Wetland?Yes
No primary or secondary indicators observed
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Remarks:
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
No
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Surface Water Present?
Field Observations:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
(Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.(A/B)
7.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:x 1 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 2 =
1.x 3 =
2.x 4 =
3.x 5 =
4.Column Totals:(B)
5.
6.
7.
8.X
9.
4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:Yes X
=Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Dense herbaceous layer
)5
=Total Cover
FAC
FAC
Yes
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
VEGETATION (Four Strata)– Use scientific names of plants.
0
285
0
0
Multiply by:
20
2.90Prevalence Index = B/A =
10
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
95
0
(A)
(B)
(A)
20
13
50
15
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Woody Vine – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
=Total Cover
Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
30 )
100
Yes
No
30
5
Andropogon gerardii
10Symphyotrichum lateriflorum FACW
Microstegium vimineum 60
5
Acer rubrum
Tree Stratum
)
=Total Cover
30 )
Indicator
Status
Dominant
Species?
Yes FAC
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
(1 m) tall.
Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Absolute
% Cover
100.0%
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
No
W1 UP
3
3
FACU species
UPL species
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
0
305
0
105
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
Depth (inches):X
Sampling Point:
Yes
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
Soils split matrix with 10YR 5/4 and 7.5YR 4/6 Soils
very friable - difficult to dig past 10 inches.
Hydric Soil Present?
Type:
Histosol (A1)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Loc2
Loamy/Clayey50
Color (moist)
Matrix
10YR 5/40-10
W1 UPSOIL
Type1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Redox FeaturesDepth
(inches) Color (moist)Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
%
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Redox (S5)
%
Split matrix
Texture
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)MLRA 136)
Dark Surface (S7)unless disturbed or problematic.Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
No
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
(MLRA 147, 148)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
Project/Site:Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Lat:Long:
Soil Map Unit Name:
X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
X No
X No X
X No
X
X
X
X
Yes X
Yes X
Yes X X
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R
OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
(Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
NoYes
No
No
Water Table Present?
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (B1)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Wetland W1 is a small depression at the edge of agriculture fields, at the bottom of a larger drainage patterns. Likely drains to Stream S1 off-site
HYDROLOGY
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Iron Deposits (B5)
City/County:Mebane Industrial Southern Site Orange County
W1-1 Wet
10/1/2019
NC
No
Section, Township, Range:William Sullivan & Mackenzie Richards
ConcaveDepression
Datum:-79.21180836.068205LRR P, MLRA 136
NWI classification:
Slope (%):Local relief (concave, convex, none):
Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed?
naturally problematic?
Are “Normal Circumstances” present?
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
Remarks:

Is the Sampled AreaYes
Yes
Yes
Hydric Soil Present?
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Nowithin a Wetland?Yes
Soils are slightly moist, but not saturated
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Remarks:
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
No
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Surface Water Present?
Field Observations:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
(Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.(A/B)
7.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:x 1 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 2 =
1.x 3 =
2.x 4 =
3.x 5 =
4.Column Totals:(B)
5.
6.
7.
8.X
9.X
4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:Yes X
=Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Wetland is completely covered in dense herbaceous layer
)5
=Total Cover
FACW
FACW
Yes
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
VEGETATION (Four Strata)– Use scientific names of plants.
0
0
0
0
Multiply by:
200
2.00Prevalence Index = B/A =
100
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
0
0
(A)
(B)
(A)
2050
15
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Woody Vine – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
=Total Cover
Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
30 )
100
No
Yes
10Carex caroliniana
70Polygonum pensylvanicum FACW
Juncus effusus 20
Tree Stratum
)
=Total Cover
30 )
Indicator
Status
Dominant
Species?
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
(1 m) tall.
Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Absolute
% Cover
100.0%
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
No
W1-1 Wet
2
2
FACU species
UPL species
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
0
200
0
100
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
X
Depth (inches):X
Sampling Point:
Yes
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil Present?
Type:
Histosol (A1)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Loc2
M
85
Loamy/Clayey
Loamy/Clayey
Loamy/Clayey
90 C
Color (moist)
Matrix
C10YR 4/2
2.5Y 4/3 10YR 4/6
10YR 4/63-10
0-3
W1-1 WetSOIL
10-16 2.5Y 5/2
Type1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
70
Redox FeaturesDepth
(inches) Color (moist)Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
2.5Y 6/8
%
Clay loam
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Redox (S5)
%
M15
Loam
Texture
Clay loam
10 M
C30
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)MLRA 136)
Dark Surface (S7)unless disturbed or problematic.Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
No
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
(MLRA 147, 148)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
Project/Site:Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Lat:Long:
Soil Map Unit Name:
X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
X No
No X X
No X
Yes X
Yes X
Yes X X
No primary or secondary hydrology indicators observed.
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Remarks:
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
No
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Surface Water Present?
Field Observations:
Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed?
naturally problematic?
Are “Normal Circumstances” present?
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
Remarks:

Is the Sampled AreaYes
Yes
Yes
Hydric Soil Present?
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Nowithin a Wetland?Yes
City/County:Mebane Industrial Southern Site Orange County
W2 UP
10/1/2019
NC
No
Section, Township, Range:William Sullivan & Mackenzie Richards
1-2NoneTerrace
Datum:-79.20664636.068280LRR P, MLRA 136
NWI classification:
Slope (%):Local relief (concave, convex, none):
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (B1)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Upland point taken approximately 20 feet from and 1 foot higher in elevation than Wetland W2.
HYDROLOGY
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Iron Deposits (B5)
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R
OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
(Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
NoYes
No
No
Water Table Present?
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
(Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.(A/B)
7.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:x 1 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 2 =
1.x 3 =
2.x 4 =
3.x 5 =
4.Column Totals:(B)
5.
6.
7.
8.X
9.
4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:Yes X
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
No
W2 UP
8
11
FACU species
UPL species
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
0
530
0
185
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
FAC
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
5
Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
(1 m) tall.
Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Absolute
% Cover
72.7%
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
30
Juglans nigra
Liquidambar styraciflua
Tree Stratum
)
=Total Cover
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Ulmus americana
Liquidambar styraciflua
30 )
50
Indicator
Status
10
20
Yes
Dominant
Species?
Yes
10
5
Juniperus virginiana
No10
Quercus phellos 5
5
Acer rubrum
Phragmites australis
Microstegium vimineum 80
15
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Woody Vine – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
FACU
=Total Cover
Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
30 )
Toxicodendron radicans
90
18
615
45
Prevalence Index worksheet:
FAC
Total % Cover of:
130
15
(A)
(B)
(A)
Yes
Yes
390
0
60
Multiply by:
80
2.86Prevalence Index = B/A =
FAC
40
FACU
Yes
Yes FACU
FAC
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
VEGETATION (Four Strata)– Use scientific names of plants.
25 10
20
0
Yes
Yes
FACW
FACW
5
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
)5
=Total Cover
FAC
FACW
Yes
38
=Total Cover15
Parthenocissus quinquefolia
10 Yes
Yes
FAC
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
Depth (inches):X
Dark Surface (S7)unless disturbed or problematic.Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
No
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
(MLRA 147, 148)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)MLRA 136)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Redox (S5)
%Texture
W2 UPSOIL
Type1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Redox FeaturesDepth
(inches) Color (moist)Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
%
Matrix
10YR 5/30-12
Loc2
Loamy/Clayey100
Color (moist)
Sampling Point:
Yes
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil Present?
Type:
Histosol (A1)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
Project/Site:Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Lat:Long:
Soil Map Unit Name:
X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
X No
X No X
X No
X
X X
X
X
Yes X
Yes X
Yes X X
Wetland W2 has ponded surface water throughout.
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Remarks:
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
No
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Surface Water Present?
Field Observations:
Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed?
naturally problematic?
Are “Normal Circumstances” present?
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
Remarks:

Is the Sampled AreaYes
Yes
Yes
Hydric Soil Present?
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Nowithin a Wetland?Yes
City/County:Mebane Industrial Southern Site Orange County
W2 WET
10/1/2019
NC
No
Section, Township, Range:William Sullivan & Mackenzie Richards
2-3ConcaveHeadwater depression
Datum:-79.20655836.068330LRR P, MLRA 136
NWI classification:
Slope (%):Local relief (concave, convex, none):
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (B1)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Wetyland W2 is a linear headwater wetland originating at a knick point below a large boulder. W2 flows down slope until it confines into Stream S2.
HYDROLOGY
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Iron Deposits (B5)
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R
OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
(Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
NoYes
No
No
Water Table Present?
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
(Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.(A/B)
7.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:x 1 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 2 =
1.x 3 =
2.x 4 =
3.x 5 =
4.Column Totals:(B)
5.
6.
7.
8.X
9.X
4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:Yes X
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
No
W2 WET
8
8
FACU species
UPL species
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
0
170
0
80
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
FAC
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
(1 m) tall.
Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Absolute
% Cover
100.0%
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
15
Ulmus americana
Liquidambar styraciflua
Tree Stratum
)
=Total Cover
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
30 )
10
Indicator
Status
10
Dominant
Species?
Yes
5
5
Polygonum pensylvanicum
Yes
No
No
5
5
Acer rubrum
Impatiens capensis
5Onoclea sensibilis FACW
Peltandra virginica 10
15
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Woody Vine – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
FACW
=Total Cover
Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
30 )
Toxicodendron radicans
45
FACWYes
9
38
23
Boehmeria cylindrica
15
10
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
20
0
(A)
(B)
(A)
Yes
60
10
0
Multiply by:
100
2.13Prevalence Index = B/A =
50
FACW
Yes FAC
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
VEGETATION (Four Strata)– Use scientific names of plants.
5 2 10
Yes FACW
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
)5
=Total Cover
OBL
FACW
Yes
25
=Total Cover10
10 Yes FAC
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
X
X
X
Depth (inches):X
Dark Surface (S7)unless disturbed or problematic.Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
No
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
(MLRA 147, 148)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)MLRA 136)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Redox (S5)
%
Clay
Texture
30 M
W2 WETSOIL
Type1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Redox FeaturesDepth
(inches) Color (moist)Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
%
Matrix
10YR 3/1 7.5YR 4/60-16
Loc2
Loamy/Clayey70C
Color (moist)
Sampling Point:
Yes
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil Present?
Type:
Histosol (A1)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
Project/Site:Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Lat:Long:
Soil Map Unit Name:
X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
X No
No X X
No X
Yes X
Yes X
Yes X X
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R
OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
(Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
NoYes
No
No
Water Table Present?
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (B1)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Upland data point taken approximately 15 feet from wetland data point on an old pond berm.
HYDROLOGY
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Iron Deposits (B5)
City/County:Mebane Industrial Southern Site Orange County
W3 & W4 UP
10/1/2019
NC
No
Section, Township, Range:William Sullivan & Mackenzie Richards
1-2Convex
Datum:-79.20881036.068725LRR P, MLRA 136
NWI classification:
Slope (%):Local relief (concave, convex, none):
Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed?
naturally problematic?
Are “Normal Circumstances” present?
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
Remarks:

Is the Sampled AreaYes
Yes
Yes
Hydric Soil Present?
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Nowithin a Wetland?Yes
No primary or secondary hydrological indicators observed.
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Remarks:
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
No
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Surface Water Present?
Field Observations:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
(Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.(A/B)
7.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:x 1 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 2 =
1.x 3 =
2.x 4 =
3.x 5 =
4.Column Totals:(B)
5.
6.
7.
8.X
9.
4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:Yes X18
=Total Cover35
Toxicodendron radicans
30 Yes
No
FACU
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
)4
=Total Cover
7
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
VEGETATION (Four Strata)– Use scientific names of plants.
10 4 0
Yes
Yes
FAC
FAC
120
0
160
Multiply by:
0
3.50Prevalence Index = B/A =
0
Yes FACU
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
40
40
(A)
(B)
(A)
513
14
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Woody Vine – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
FAC
=Total Cover
Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
30 )
Lonicera japonica
15
Prunus serotina
25
Liquidambar styraciflua
Tree Stratum
)
=Total Cover
Liquidambar styraciflua
Pinus taeda
30 )
20
Indicator
Status
10
10
Dominant
Species?
Yes
10
FAC
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
5
Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
(1 m) tall.
Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Absolute
% Cover
60.0%
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
No
W3 & W4 UP
3
5
FACU species
UPL species
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
0
280
0
80
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
Depth (inches):X
Sampling Point:
Yes
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
Soils too compacted to dig below 6 inches
Hydric Soil Present?
Type:
Histosol (A1)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Loc2
Loamy/Clayey100
Color (moist)
Matrix
10YR 6/60-6
W3 & W4 UPSOIL
Type1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Redox FeaturesDepth
(inches) Color (moist)Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
%
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Redox (S5)
%
Fill
Texture
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)MLRA 136)
Dark Surface (S7)unless disturbed or problematic.Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
No
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
(MLRA 147, 148)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
Project/Site:Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Lat:Long:
Soil Map Unit Name:
X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
X No
X No X
X No
X
X
X
X
X
Yes X
Yes X
Yes X X
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R
OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
(Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
NoYes
No
No
Water Table Present?
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (B1)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Wetland is an old pond bed in an agricultural field.
HYDROLOGY
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Iron Deposits (B5)
City/County:Mebane Industrial Southern Site Orange County
W3 & W4 WET
10/1/2019
NC
No
Section, Township, Range:William Sullivan & Mackenzie Richards
0-1Concave
Datum:-79.20880436.068868LRR P, MLRA 136
NWI classification:
Slope (%):Local relief (concave, convex, none):
Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed?
naturally problematic?
Are “Normal Circumstances” present?
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
Remarks:

Is the Sampled AreaYes
Yes
Yes
Hydric Soil Present?
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Nowithin a Wetland?Yes
Lots of oxidized rhizospheres in soil.
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Remarks:
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
No
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Surface Water Present?
Field Observations:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
X
2 (W4)
Sampling Point:
(Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.(A/B)
7.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:x 1 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 2 =
1.x 3 =
2.x 4 =
3.x 5 =
4.Column Totals:(B)
5.
6.
7.
8.X
9.X
4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:Yes X
=Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
)5
=Total Cover
OBL
FACW
Yes
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
VEGETATION (Four Strata)– Use scientific names of plants.
20
150
20
0
Multiply by:
70
2.29Prevalence Index = B/A =
35
Yes FAC
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
50
0
(A)
(B)
(A)
FACWNo
11
1025
28
10
15
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Woody Vine – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
=Total Cover
Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
30 )
55
Polygonum pensylvanicum
Yes
No
20
30
Acer rubrum
Chasmanthium latifolium
5Boehmeria cylindrica FACW
Juncus effusus 20
50
Liquidambar styraciflua
Tree Stratum
)
=Total Cover
30 )
Indicator
Status
Dominant
Species?
Yes
20
FAC
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
(1 m) tall.
Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Absolute
% Cover
100.0%
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
No
W3 & W4 WET
4
4
FACU species
UPL species
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
0
240
0
105
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
X
X
Depth (inches):X
Sampling Point:
Yes
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil Present?
Type:
Histosol (A1)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Loc2
60
Loamy/Clayey
Loamy/Clayey
Color (moist)
Matrix
C2.5Y 4/2
10YR 3/1
7.5YR 5/82-12
0-2
W3 & W4 WETSOIL
Type1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Redox FeaturesDepth
(inches) Color (moist)Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
%
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Redox (S5)
%
M40
Loam
Texture
Clay
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)MLRA 136)
Dark Surface (S7)unless disturbed or problematic.Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
No
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
(MLRA 147, 148)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

PROJECT SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
Photo Page 1

Photo 1 – Stream 1 (S1) – Intermittent stream, facing downstream towards the east.

Photo 2 – Wetland 1 (W1) – Representative wetland community, facing southeast.

Title Photo Pages
Project
Medline Industries, Inc.
Mebane Industrial - Southern Site
Orange County, NC
Prepared By

Date Project Number
4/30/20 095977020
Photo Page 2

Photo 3 – W1 Wetland Data Point – Representative Soil Profile

Photo 4 – Stream 1 (S1) – Perennial Stream, facing upstream towards the west

Title Photo Pages
Project
Medline Industries, Inc.
Mebane Industrial - Southern Site
Orange County, NC
Prepared By

Date Project Number
4/30/20 095977020
Photo Page 3

Photo 5 – Stream 1 (S1) – Perennial stream, facing downstream towards the east.

Photo 6 – Stream 2 (S2) – Intermittent stream, facing downstream towards the west.

Title Photo Pages
Project
Medline Industries, Inc.
Mebane Industrial - Southern Site
Orange County, NC
Prepared By

Date Project Number
4/30/20 095977020
Photo Page 4

Photo 7 – Wetland 2 (W2) – Drainage pattern, facing southwest.

Photo 8 – W2 Wetland Data Point representative community, facing west.

Title Photo Pages
Project
Medline Industries, Inc.
Mebane Industrial - Southern Site
Orange County, NC
Prepared By

Date Project Number
4/30/20 095977020
Photo Page 5

Photo 9 – W2 Wetland Data Point representative soil profile.

Photo 10 – Wetland 3 (W3) – Representative community, facing northwest.

Title Photo Pages
Project
Medline Industries, Inc.
Mebane Industrial - Southern Site
Orange County, NC
Prepared By

Date Project Number
4/30/20 095977020
Photo Page 6

Photo 11 – Wetland 4 (W4) – Representative wetland community, facing north.

Photo 12 – Stream 3 (S3) – Intermittent stream headcut, facing downstream towards the south.

Title Photo Pages
Project
Medline Industries, Inc.
Mebane Industrial - Southern Site
Orange County, NC
Prepared By

Date Project Number
4/30/20 095977020

NC WETLAND ASSESSMENT
METHOD FORMS
USACE AID#:NCDWR #:
Yes No
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited
to the following.
•
•
•
•
Is the assessment area intensively managed?Yes No
Regulatory Considerations - Were regulatory considerations evaluated?Yes No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
Anadromous fish
Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
Publicly owned property
N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
Designated NCNHP reference community
Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
Blackwater
Brownwater
Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes)Lunar Lunar Wind Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island?Yes No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver?Yes No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions?Yes No
1.Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition – assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect.
GS
A A Not severely altered
B B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire-plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
2.Surface and Sub-Surface Storage Capacity and Duration – assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub-surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch ≤ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only,
while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and sub-surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf
A A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
B B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
C C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
3.Water Storage/Surface Relief – assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column for each group below. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT).
AA WT
3a. A A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 foot deep
B B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
C C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
D D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot
4.Soil Texture/Structure – assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees)
Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear-cutting, exotics, etc.)
Surface and sub-surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
Sub
VS
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
36.068206, -79.211809
NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 5
Sevenmile Creek
Chris Tinklenberg, PWS (Kimley-Horn)
Wetland W1
10/01/2019Date of Evaluation
Wetland Site Name
SAW-2019-01933
Assessor Name/Organization
Nearest Named Water Body
Project Name
Wetland Type Headwater Forest
Level III Ecoregion
03020201
RaleighNCDWR RegionCounty
Neuse
Orange
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit
Piedmont
River Basin
Applicant/Owner Name Medline Industries, LLC
Medline Mebane - South Site
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature. Make soil observations within the 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for
regional indicators.
4a. A Sandy soil
B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
B Soil ribbon ≥ 1 inch
4c. A No peat or muck presence
B A peat or muck presence
5.Discharge into Wetland – opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub-surface pollutants or discharges (Sub).
Examples of sub-surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
A A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
B B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
C C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6.Land Use – opportunity metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands)
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources
draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the
assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M). Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion.
WS 5M 2M
A A A ≥ 10% impervious surfaces
B B B Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
C C C ≥ 20% coverage of pasture
D D D ≥ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
E E E ≥ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
F F F ≥ 20% coverage of clear-cut land
G G G Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in
the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent dainage and/or overbank flow from affectio the
assessment area.
7.Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer – assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands)
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
Yes No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is weltand? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make
buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.)
A ≥ 50 feet
B From 30 to < 50 feet
C From 15 to < 30 feet
D From 5 to < 15 feet
E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
≤ 15-feet wide > 15-feet wide Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
Yes No
7e. Is tributary or other open water sheltered or exposed?
Sheltered – adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
Exposed – adjacent open water with width ≥ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
8.Wetland Width at the Assessment Area – wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes
and Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp
Check a box in each column. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and the wetland complex at the
assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
A A ≥ 100 feet
B B From 80 to < 100 feet
C C From 50 to < 80 feet
D D From 40 to < 50 feet
E E From 30 to < 40 feet
F F From 15 to < 30 feet
G G From 5 to < 15 feet
H H < 5 feet
9.Inundation Duration – assessment area condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands)
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
A Evidence of short-duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
C Evidence of long-duration inundation or very long-duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
Forest only)
10.Indicators of Deposition – assessment area condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands and all marshes)
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11.Wetland Size – wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select “K” for the FW column.
WT FW (if applicable)
A A A ≥ 500 acres
B B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C C From 50 to < 100 acres
D D D From 25 to < 50 acres
E E E From 10 to < 25 acres
F F F From 5 to < 10 acres
G G G From 1 to < 5 acres
H H H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
I I I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
J J J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
K K K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12.Wetland Intactness – wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
A Pocosin is the full extent (≥ 90%) of its natural landscape size.
B Pocosin is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13.Connectivity to Other Natural Areas – landscape condition metric
13a.Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
metric naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four-lane roads, regularly maintained utility
line corridors the width of a four-lane road or wider, urban landscapes, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wide.
A A ≥ 500 acres
B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C From 50 to < 100 acres
D D From 10 to < 50 acres
E E < 10 acres
F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b.Evaluate for marshes only.
Yes No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands.
14.Edge Effect – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non-forested areas ≥ 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and clear-cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directiions? If the assessment area is clear-cut,
select option "C."
A 0
B 1 to 4
C 5 to 8
15. Vegetative Composition – assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non-
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum.
16.Vegetative Diversity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non-tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (<10% cover of exotics).
B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (>50% cover of exotics).
17.Vegetative Structure – assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a.Is vegetation present?
Yes No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b.Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non-marsh wetlands.
A ≥ 25% coverage of vegetation
B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c.Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non-marsh wetlands. Consider structure
in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
A A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
B B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
C C Canopy sparse or absent
Well
WC
Loosely
AA WT
CanopyMid-Story
A A Dense mid-story/sapling layer
B B Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
C C Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
A A Dense shrub layer
B B Moderate density shrub layer
C C Shrub layer sparse or absent
A A Dense herb layer
B B Moderate density herb layer
C C Herb layer sparse or absent
18.Snags – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12-inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
B Not A
19.Diameter Class Distribution – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12-inch DBH.
C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20.Large Woody Debris – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man-placed natural debris.
A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
B Not A
21.Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion – wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non-Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
A B C D
22.Hydrologic Connectivity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization,
diversion, man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes Mid-StoryShrubHerb
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N)
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
Sub-function Rating Summary
Function Sub-function Metrics
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition
Sub-Surface Storage and Retention Condition
Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Particulate Change Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Soluble Change Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Physical Change Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Pollution Change Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Habitat Physical Structure Condition
Landscape Patch Structure Condition
Vegetation Composition Condition
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics/Notes
Hydrology Condition
Water Quality Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Habitat Condition
Overall Wetland Rating
Rating
LOW
HIGH
NO
NO
YES
NO
NO
YES
NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Wetland Type
Wetland Site Name Wetland W1
Chris Tinklenberg, PWS (Kimley-Horn)Headwater Forest
Date
Assessor Name/Organization
10/01/2019
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
LOW
LOW
HIGH
YES
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
Rating
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
NA
LOW
LOW
YES
NA
YES
NA
NA
MEDIUM
HIGH
YES
HIGH
YES
LOW
NA
HIGH
USACE AID#:NCDWR #:
Yes No
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited
to the following.
•
•
•
•
Is the assessment area intensively managed?Yes No
Regulatory Considerations - Were regulatory considerations evaluated?Yes No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
Anadromous fish
Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
Publicly owned property
N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
Designated NCNHP reference community
Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
Blackwater
Brownwater
Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes)Lunar Lunar Wind Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island?Yes No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver?Yes No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions?Yes No
1.Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition – assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect.
GS
A A Not severely altered
B B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire-plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
2.Surface and Sub-Surface Storage Capacity and Duration – assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub-surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch ≤ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only,
while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and sub-surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf
A A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
B B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
C C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
3.Water Storage/Surface Relief – assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column for each group below. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT).
AA WT
3a. A A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 foot deep
B B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
C C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
D D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot
4.Soil Texture/Structure – assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Piedmont
River Basin
Applicant/Owner Name Medline Industries, LLC
Medline Mebane - South Site
03020201
RaleighNCDWR RegionCounty
Neuse
Orange
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit
NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 5
Sevenmile Creek
Chris Tinklenberg, PWS (Kimley-Horn)
Wetland W3
10/01/2019Date of Evaluation
Wetland Site Name
SAW-2019-01933
Assessor Name/Organization
Nearest Named Water Body
Project Name
Wetland Type Headwater Forest
Level III Ecoregion
Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees)
Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear-cutting, exotics, etc.)
Surface and sub-surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
Sub
VS
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
36.068873, -79.208833
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature. Make soil observations within the 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for
regional indicators.
4a. A Sandy soil
B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
B Soil ribbon ≥ 1 inch
4c. A No peat or muck presence
B A peat or muck presence
5.Discharge into Wetland – opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub-surface pollutants or discharges (Sub).
Examples of sub-surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
A A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
B B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
C C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6.Land Use – opportunity metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands)
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources
draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the
assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M). Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion.
WS 5M 2M
A A A ≥ 10% impervious surfaces
B B B Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
C C C ≥ 20% coverage of pasture
D D D ≥ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
E E E ≥ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
F F F ≥ 20% coverage of clear-cut land
G G G Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in
the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent dainage and/or overbank flow from affectio the
assessment area.
7.Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer – assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands)
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
Yes No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is weltand? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make
buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.)
A ≥ 50 feet
B From 30 to < 50 feet
C From 15 to < 30 feet
D From 5 to < 15 feet
E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
≤ 15-feet wide > 15-feet wide Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
Yes No
7e. Is tributary or other open water sheltered or exposed?
Sheltered – adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
Exposed – adjacent open water with width ≥ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
8.Wetland Width at the Assessment Area – wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes
and Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp
Check a box in each column. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and the wetland complex at the
assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
A A ≥ 100 feet
B B From 80 to < 100 feet
C C From 50 to < 80 feet
D D From 40 to < 50 feet
E E From 30 to < 40 feet
F F From 15 to < 30 feet
G G From 5 to < 15 feet
H H < 5 feet
9.Inundation Duration – assessment area condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands)
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
A Evidence of short-duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
C Evidence of long-duration inundation or very long-duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
Forest only)
10.Indicators of Deposition – assessment area condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands and all marshes)
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11.Wetland Size – wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select “K” for the FW column.
WT FW (if applicable)
A A A ≥ 500 acres
B B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C C From 50 to < 100 acres
D D D From 25 to < 50 acres
E E E From 10 to < 25 acres
F F F From 5 to < 10 acres
G G G From 1 to < 5 acres
H H H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
I I I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
J J J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
K K K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12.Wetland Intactness – wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
A Pocosin is the full extent (≥ 90%) of its natural landscape size.
B Pocosin is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13.Connectivity to Other Natural Areas – landscape condition metric
13a.Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
metric naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four-lane roads, regularly maintained utility
line corridors the width of a four-lane road or wider, urban landscapes, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wide.
A A ≥ 500 acres
B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C From 50 to < 100 acres
D D From 10 to < 50 acres
E E < 10 acres
F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b.Evaluate for marshes only.
Yes No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands.
14.Edge Effect – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non-forested areas ≥ 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and clear-cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directiions? If the assessment area is clear-cut,
select option "C."
A 0
B 1 to 4
C 5 to 8
15. Vegetative Composition – assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non-
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum.
16.Vegetative Diversity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non-tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (<10% cover of exotics).
B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (>50% cover of exotics).
17.Vegetative Structure – assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a.Is vegetation present?
Yes No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b.Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non-marsh wetlands.
A ≥ 25% coverage of vegetation
B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c.Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non-marsh wetlands. Consider structure
in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
A A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
B B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
C C Canopy sparse or absent
AA WT
CanopyMid-StoryWell
WC
Loosely
A A Dense mid-story/sapling layer
B B Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
C C Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
A A Dense shrub layer
B B Moderate density shrub layer
C C Shrub layer sparse or absent
A A Dense herb layer
B B Moderate density herb layer
C C Herb layer sparse or absent
18.Snags – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12-inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
B Not A
19.Diameter Class Distribution – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12-inch DBH.
C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20.Large Woody Debris – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man-placed natural debris.
A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
B Not A
21.Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion – wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non-Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
A B C D
22.Hydrologic Connectivity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization,
diversion, man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes Mid-StoryShrubHerb
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N)
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
Sub-function Rating Summary
Function Sub-function Metrics
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition
Sub-Surface Storage and Retention Condition
Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Particulate Change Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Soluble Change Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Physical Change Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Pollution Change Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Habitat Physical Structure Condition
Landscape Patch Structure Condition
Vegetation Composition Condition
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics/Notes
Hydrology Condition
Water Quality Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Habitat Condition
Overall Wetland Rating
NA
LOW
LOW
NO
NA
YES
NA
NA
MEDIUM
HIGH
YES
HIGH
YES
MEDIUM
NA
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
Rating
HIGH
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
HIGH
YES
LOW
NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Wetland Type
Wetland Site Name Wetland W3
Chris Tinklenberg, PWS (Kimley-Horn)Headwater Forest
Date
Assessor Name/Organization
10/01/2019
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Rating
HIGH
HIGH
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES

AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE

kimley-horn.com 200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202 704-333-5131

March 23, 2020

Raleigh Field Office
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
P.O. Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636

Re: Medline Mebane – South Site
Mebane, Orange County, North Carolina
Project Review Certification Letter

Dear USFWS Raleigh Field Office,

On behalf of our client, Medline Industries, Inc., Kimley-Horn (KH) is submitting this letter requesting
concurrence regarding the results of the pedestrian survey performed for the above-referenced
project in accordance with the methodologies recommended by USFWS. The pedestrian survey was
conducted by KH staff William Sullivan and Mackenzie Richards on October 1, 2019.

Background Information

The project area is located along West Ten Rd, between Squires Road and Country Haven in the City
of Mebane, Orange County, NC. A maintained powerline easement originates in the eastern portion
of the site. The area evaluated for the approximately 45.6-acre project site consists of undeveloped
forested land, undeveloped open areas, maintained power powerline easement, and gravel and dirt
access roads. The property is situated 0.2-miles south of I-85/I-40 in a generally rural setting, bound
by low density, single-family residential uses,undeveloped forested areas, and undeveloped
maintained areas.

Medline Industries intends to construct/develop a project on the subject property which may require
future authorization from the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE); therefore, Medline Industries
contracted with KH to perform the pedestrian survey within areas of potentially suitable habitat on
the subject property to identify and document occurrences of federally listed threatened and/or
endangered species.

Methodology and Findings

As of January 13, 2020, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists three (3) federally
protected species for Orange County (Table 1). A brief description of each species’ habitat
requirements follows, along with the Biological Conclusion rendered based on survey results in the
study area.

Page 2
kimley-horn.com 200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202 704-333-5131

Table 1: Federally protected listed species for Orange County
Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status Habitat Present Biological
Conclusion
Alasmidonta
geterodon
Dwarf
Wedgemussel E No No effect
Rhus michauxii Michaux’s Sumac E Yes No effect
Echinacea
laevigata
Smooth
Coneflower E Yes No effect

Dwarf Wedgemussel
USFWS optimal survey window: March-November

Habitat Description: The Dwarf Wedgemussel prefers streams with slow to moderate current and
sand, gravel, or firm silt bottoms. Water must be well oxygenated. This species prefers stable banks
with extensive root systems. Pollution from agricultural land activities is one of the primary threats to
the Dwarf Wedgemussel.

Biological conclusion: No effect
Potentially suitable habitat for the Dwarf Wedgemussel is not found on-site. The streams found on
the subject property do not support extensive root systems. A review of the NCNHP records, updated
January 13, 2020, indicates no known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area

Michaux’s sumac
USFWS optimal survey window: May-October

Habitat Description: Michaux’s sumac, endemic to the inner Coastal Plain and lower Piedmont, grows
in sandy or rocky, open, upland woods on acidic or circumneutral, well -drained sands or sandy loam
soils with low cation exchange capacities. The species is also found on sandy or submesic loamy swales
and depressions in the fall line Sandhills region as well as in openings along the rim of Carolina bays;
maintained railroad, roadside, power line, and utility rights-of-way; areas where forest canopies have
been opened up by blowdowns and/or storm damage; small wildlife food plots; abandoned building
sites; under sparse to moderately dense pine or pine/hardwood canopies; and in and along edges of
other artificially maintained clearings undergoing natural succession. In the central Piedmont, it
occurs on clayey soils derived from mafic rocks. The plant is shade intolerant and, therefore, grows
best where disturbance (e.g., mowing, clearing, grazing, periodic fire) maintains its open habitat.

Biological Conclusion: No effect
Suitable habitat for Michaux’s sumac is present on the subject property along the maintained
roadsides, open areas, and the utility right-of-way. Although potentially suitable habitat does persist
on the subject property, many of the areas of potentially suitable habitat are maintained by occasional
mowing and offer only marginally suitable habitat. A review of the NCNHP records, updated January
Page 3
kimley-horn.com 200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202 704-333-5131

13, 2020, indicates no known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area. Pedestrian surveys were
conducted by Kimley-Horn biologists throughout areas of potentially suitable habitat on October 1,
2019, and no individuals of Michaux’s sumac were observed. Due to a lack of recorded occurrences
and a lack of observed individuals on the subject property, the proposed project will have no effect
on this species.

Smooth coneflower
USFWS optimal survey window: late May-October

Habitat Description: Smooth coneflower, a perennial herb, is typically found in meadows, open
woodlands, the ecotonal regions between meadows and woodlands, cedar barrens, dry limestone
bluffs, clear cuts, and roadside and utility rights-of-way. In North Carolina, the species normally grows
in magnesium- and calcium-rich soils associated with gabbro and diabase parent material, and
typically occurs in Iredell, Misenheimer, and Picture soil series. It grows best where there is abundant
sunlight, little competition in the herbaceous layer, and periodic disturbances (e.g., regular fire
regime, well-timed mowing, careful clearing) that prevents encroachment of shade-producing woody
shrubs and trees on site where woody succession is held in check, it is characterized by a number of
species with prairie affinities.

Biological Conclusion: No effect
Potentially suitable habitat for Smooth coneflower is present on the subject property along the
roadsides, open areas, and the utility right-of-way that receives abundant sunshine and has minimal
competition in the herbaceous layer. A review of the NCNHP records, updated January 13, 2020,
indicates no known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the subject property. Pedestrian surveys were
conducted by Kimley-Horn biologists throughout areas of potentially suitable habitat on October 1,
2019. No individuals of smooth coneflower were observed. Due to a lack of recorded occurrences
and the absence of observed individuals on the subject property, the proposed project will have no
effect on this species.

Northern Long-eared Bat
USFWS optimal survey window: June 1 – August 15

Habitat Description: In North Carolina, the Northern long-eared bat (NLEB) occurs in the mountains,
with scattered records in the Piedmont and coastal plain. In western North Carolina, NLEB spend
winter hibernating in caves and mines. Since this species is not known to be a long-distance migrant,
and caves and subterranean mines are extremely rare in eastern North Carolina, it is uncertain
whether or where NLEB hibernate in eastern North Carolina. During the summer, NLEB roost singly or
in colonies underneath bark, in cavities, or in crevices of both live and dead trees (typically ≥3 inches
dbh). Males and non-reproductive females may also roost in cooler places, like caves and mines. This
bat has also been found, rarely, roosting in structures like barns and sheds, under eaves of buildings,
behind window shutters, in bridges, and in bat houses. Foraging occurs on forested hillsides and
Page 4
kimley-horn.com 200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202 704-333-5131

ridges, and occasionally over forest clearings, over water, and along tree-lined corridors. Mature
forests may be an important habitat type for foraging.
Biological Conclusion: May affect, not likely to adversely affect
Potentially suitable roosting habitat for the Northern long-eared bat (NLEB) is present within the
cleared areas in the subject property , however, there are no known hibernacula or roosting sites in
Orange County. In addition, Orange County is not identified by the USFWS Asheville Field Office as a
county where incidental take may be a special consideration for NLEB. A review of the North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) records updated Januaryuy 13, 2020 indicates no known roosting
sites or hibernacula within 1.0 mile of the study area. There will be no blasting, pile driving, or other
percussive activities and the project site is located outside of a known hibernacula or area of mature
roosting trees. Given these circumstances, USACE’s Alternative Local Procedure (ALP) 1 would be
used. Based upon the presence of potentially suitable habitat but the lack of known occurrences,
hibernacula, or roosting sites, the biological conclusion of "may affect, not likely to adversely affect"
has been rendered for NLEB for this project.

Bald Eagle and Golden Eagle Protection Act
USFWS optimal survey window: November through March

Habitat Description:
Habitat for the bald eagle primarily consists of mature forest in proximity to large bodies of open
water for foraging. Large dominant trees are utilized for nesting sites, typically within 1.0 mile of open
water. A desktop-GIS assessment of the project study area, as well as the area within a 1.13-mile
radius (1.0 mile plus 660 feet) of the project limits, was performed on March 23, 2020 using 2019
color aerials. Bodies of water large enough or sufficiently open to be considered a potential feeding
source were not identified. A review of the NCNHP database, updated on January 13, 2020, revealed
no known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area. Due to the lack of known occurrences, and
the lack of observed individuals or nests, it has been determined that the proposed project will not
affect this species.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect

Statement of Qualifications:

Investigator: William Sullivan
Education: B.S. Natural Resources – Ecosystem Assessment, 2016, Minor in Forest
Management 2016
Experience: Environmental Analyst, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2016-Present
Responsibilties: Wetland and stream delineations, GPS/GIS, document preparation

Investigator: Mackenzie Richards
Education: B.S. Natural Resources – Ecosystem Assessment, 2015; M.S. Renewable
Natural Resource – Fisheries and Aquaculture, 2017
Page 5
kimley-horn.com 200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202 704-333-5131

Experience: Environmental Analyst, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2018-Present
Responsibilties: Wetland and stream delineations, GPS/GIS, document preparation

Please provide concurrence regarding the survey results and biological conclusions as well as any
other possible issues that might emerge with respect to protected species as a result of the proposed
project. Thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please email
([e-mail]) a copy of your reply to my attention and/or send an original
copy by mail. Please feel free to contact me at [phone] if you have any questions or if
additional information is necessary.

Sincerely,

KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.

Chris Tinklenberg, PWS
Environmental Scientist

Attachments
IPaC resource list
This report is an automatically generated list of species and other resources such as critical habitat
(collectively referred to as trust resources) under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS)
jurisdiction that are known or expected to be on or near the project area referenced below. The list
may also include trust resources that occur outside of the project area, but that could potentially be
directly or indirectly affected by activities in the project area. However, determining the likelihood and
extent of effects a project may have on trust resources typically requires gathering additional site-
specific (e.g., vegetation/species surveys) and project-specific (e.g., magnitude and timing of proposed
activities) information.
Below is a summary of the project information you provided and contact information for the USFWS
office(s) with jurisdiction in the defined project area. Please read the introduction to each section that
follows (Endangered Species, Migratory Birds, USFWS Facilities, and NWI Wetlands) for additional
information applicable to the trust resources addressed in that section.
Location
Orange County, North Carolina
Local office
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
[phone]
[phone]
MAILING ADDRESS
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
PHYSICAL ADDRESS
551 Pylon Drive, Suite F
U.S. Fish & Wildlife ServiceIPaCInformation for Planning and Consultation
Page 1 of 8IPaC: Explore Location
3/4/2020https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/Z4ZJEEY2XNH3DKWZSSLV6KET7Y/resources
Raleigh, NC 27606-1487
Page 2 of 8IPaC: Explore Location
3/4/2020https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/Z4ZJEEY2XNH3DKWZSSLV6KET7Y/resources
Endangered species
This resource list is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an analysis of project
level impacts.
The primary information used to generate this list is the known or expected range of each species.
Additional areas of influence (AOI) for species are also considered. An AOI includes areas outside of the
species range if the species could be indirectly affected by activities in that area (e.g., placing a dam
upstream of a fish population, even if that fish does not occur at the dam site, may indirectly impact
the species by reducing or eliminating water flow downstream). Because species can move, and site
conditions can change, the species on this list are not guaranteed to be found on or near the project
area. To fully determine any potential effects to species, additional site-specific and project-specific
information is often required.
Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act requires Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary
information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of
such proposed action" for any project that is conducted, permitted, funded, or licensed by any Federal
agency. A letter from the local office and a species list which fulfills this requirement can only be
obtained by requesting an official species list from either the Regulatory Review section in IPaC (see
directions below) or from the local field office directly.
For project evaluations that require USFWS concurrence/review, please return to the IPaC website and
request an official species list by doing the following:
1. Draw the project location and click CONTINUE.
2. Click DEFINE PROJECT.
3. Log in (if directed to do so).
4. Provide a name and description for your project.
5. Click REQUEST SPECIES LIST.
Listed species
and their critical habitats are managed by the Ecological Services Program of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) and the fisheries division of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA Fisheries ).
Species and critical habitats under the sole responsibility of NOAA Fisheries are not shown on this list.
Please contact NOAA Fisheries for species under their jurisdiction.
1. Species listed under the Endangered Species Act are threatened or endangered; IPaC also shows
species that are candidates, or proposed, for listing. See the listing status page for more
information.
2.NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an office of the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce.
The following species are potentially affected by activities in this location:
1
2
Page 3 of 8IPaC: Explore Location
3/4/2020https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/Z4ZJEEY2XNH3DKWZSSLV6KET7Y/resources
Amphibians
Fishes
Clams
Flowering Plants
Critical habitats
Potential effects to critical habitat(s) in this location must be analyzed along with the endangered
species themselves.
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS AT THIS LOCATION.
NAME STATUS
Neuse River Waterdog Necturus lewisi
There is proposed critical habitat for this species. Your location is
outside the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6772
Proposed Threatened
NAME STATUS
Carolina Madtom Noturus furiosus
There is proposed critical habitat for this species. Your location is
outside the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/528
Proposed Endangered
NAME STATUS
Atlantic Pigtoe Fusconaia masoni
There is proposed critical habitat for this species. Your location is
outside the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5164
Proposed Threatened
Dwarf Wedgemussel Alasmidonta heterodon
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/784
Endangered
NAME STATUS
Michaux's Sumac Rhus michauxii
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5217
Endangered
Smooth Coneflower Echinacea laevigata
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3473
Endangered
Page 4 of 8IPaC: Explore Location
3/4/2020https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/Z4ZJEEY2XNH3DKWZSSLV6KET7Y/resources
Migratory birds
THERE ARE NO MIGRATORY BIRDS OF CONSERVATION CONCERN EXPECTED TO OCCUR AT THIS LOCATION.
Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds.
Nationwide Conservation Measures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize impacts to all birds at any
location year round. Implementation of these measures is particularly important when birds are most likely to occur in
the project area. When birds may be breeding in the area, identifying the locations of any active nests and avoiding
their destruction is a very helpful impact minimization measure. To see when birds are most likely to occur and be
breeding in your project area, view the Probability of Presence Summary. Additional measures and/or permits may be
advisable depending on the type of activity you are conducting and the type of infrastructure or bird species present
on your project site.
What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location?
The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC)and other species that
may warrant special attention in your project location.
The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network
(AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets and is queried
and filtered to return a list of those birds reported as occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project intersects,
and that have been identified as warranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that area, an eagle
(Eagle Act requirements may apply), or a species that has a particular vulnerability to offshore activities or
development.
Again, the Migratory Bird Resource list includes only a subset of birds that may occur in your project area. It is not
representative of all birds that may occur in your project area. To get a list of all birds potentially present in your
project area, please visit the AKN Phenology Tool.
Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act .
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to migratory
birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider implementing
appropriate conservation measures, as described below.
1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
Additional information can be found using the following links:
• Birds of Conservation Concern http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/managed-species/
birds-of-conservation-concern.php
• Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds
http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/project-assessment-tools-and-guidance/
conservation-measures.php
• Nationwide conservation measures for birds
http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/pdf/management/nationwidestandardconservationmeasures.pdf
1 2
Page 5 of 8IPaC: Explore Location
3/4/2020https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/Z4ZJEEY2XNH3DKWZSSLV6KET7Y/resources
What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs for the migratory birds potentially occurring in
my specified location?
The probability of presence graphs associated with your migratory bird list are based on data provided by the Avian
Knowledge Network (AKN). This data is derived from a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science
datasets .
Probability of presence data is continuously being updated as new and better information becomes available. To learn
more about how the probability of presence graphs are produced and how to interpret them, go the Probability of
Presence Summary and then click on the "Tell me about these graphs" link.
How do I know if a bird is breeding, wintering, migrating or present year-round in my project area?
To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding, wintering, migrating or year-
round), you may refer to the following resources: The Cornell Lab of Ornithology All About Birds Bird Guide, or (if you
are unsuccessful in locating the bird of interest there), the Cornell Lab of Ornithology Neotropical Birds guide. If a bird
on your migratory bird species list has a breeding season associated with it, if that bird does occur in your project area,
there may be nests present at some point within the timeframe specified. If "Breeds elsewhere" is indicated, then the
bird likely does not breed in your project area.
What are the levels of concern for migratory birds?
Migratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern:
1. "BCC Rangewide" birds are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) that are of concern throughout their range
anywhere within the USA (including Hawaii, the Pacific Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands);
2. "BCC - BCR" birds are BCCs that are of concern only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the
continental USA; and
3. "Non-BCC - Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on your list either because of
the Eagle Act requirements (for eagles) or (for non-eagles) potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain
types of development or activities (e.g. offshore energy development or longline fishing).
Although it is important to try to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, efforts should be made, in particular, to avoid
and minimize impacts to the birds on this list, especially eagles and BCC species of rangewide concern. For more
information on conservation measures you can implement to help avoid and minimize migratory bird impacts and
requirements for eagles, please see the FAQs for these topics.
Details about birds that are potentially affected by offshore projects
For additional details about the relative occurrence and abundance of both individual bird species and groups of bird
species within your project area off the Atlantic Coast, please visit the Northeast Ocean Data Portal. The Portal also
offers data and information about other taxa besides birds that may be helpful to you in your project review.
Alternately, you may download the bird model results files underlying the portal maps through the NOAA NCCOS
Integrative Statistical Modeling and Predictive Mapping of Marine Bird Distributions and Abundance on the Atlantic
Outer Continental Shelf project webpage.
Bird tracking data can also provide additional details about occurrence and habitat use throughout the year, including
migration. Models relying on survey data may not include this information. For additional information on marine bird
tracking data, see the Diving Bird Study and the nanotag studies or contact Caleb Spiegel or Pam Loring.
What if I have eagles on my list?
If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to obtain a permit to avoid violating the Eagle
Act should such impacts occur.
Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report
Page 6 of 8IPaC: Explore Location
3/4/2020https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/Z4ZJEEY2XNH3DKWZSSLV6KET7Y/resources
The migratory bird list generated is not a list of all birds in your project area, only a subset of birds of priority concern.
To learn more about how your list is generated, and see options for identifying what other birds may be in your project
area, please see the FAQ “What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified
location”. Please be aware this report provides the “probability of presence” of birds within the 10 km grid cell(s) that
overlap your project; not your exact project footprint. On the graphs provided, please also look carefully at the survey
effort (indicated by the black vertical bar) and for the existence of the “no data” indicator (a red horizontal bar). A high
survey effort is the key component. If the survey effort is high, then the probability of presence score can be viewed as
more dependable. In contrast, a low survey effort bar or no data bar means a lack of data and, therefore, a lack of
certainty about presence of the species. This list is not perfect; it is simply a starting point for identifying what birds of
concern have the potential to be in your project area, when they might be there, and if they might be breeding (which
means nests might be present). The list helps you know what to look for to confirm presence, and helps guide you in
knowing when to implement conservation measures to avoid or minimize potential impacts from your project
activities, should presence be confirmed. To learn more about conservation measures, visit the FAQ “Tell me about
conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds” at the bottom of your
migratory bird trust resources page.
Facilities
Wildlife refuges and fish hatcheries
REFUGE AND FISH HATCHERY INFORMATION IS NOT AVAILABLE AT THIS TIME
Wetlands in the National Wetlands Inventory
Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes.
For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
District.
WETLAND INFORMATION IS NOT AVAILABLE AT THIS TIME
This can happen when the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) map service is unavailable, or for very
large projects that intersect many wetland areas. Try again, or visit the NWI map to view wetlands at
this location.
Data limitations
The Service's objective of mapping wetlands and deepwater habitats is to produce reconnaissance level information
on the location, type and size of these resources. The maps are prepared from the analysis of high altitude imagery.
Wetlands are identified based on vegetation, visible hydrology and geography. A margin of error is inherent in the use
of imagery; thus, detailed on-the-ground inspection of any particular site may result in revision of the wetland
boundaries or classification established through image analysis.
The accuracy of image interpretation depends on the quality of the imagery, the experience of the image analysts, the
amount and quality of the collateral data and the amount of ground truth verification work conducted. Metadata
should be consulted to determine the date of the source imagery used and any mapping problems.
Page 7 of 8IPaC: Explore Location
3/4/2020https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/Z4ZJEEY2XNH3DKWZSSLV6KET7Y/resources
Wetlands or other mapped features may have changed since the date of the imagery or field work. There may be
occasional differences in polygon boundaries or classifications between the information depicted on the map and the
actual conditions on site.
Data exclusions
Certain wetland habitats are excluded from the National mapping program because of the limitations of aerial imagery
as the primary data source used to detect wetlands. These habitats include seagrasses or submerged aquatic
vegetation that are found in the intertidal and subtidal zones of estuaries and nearshore coastal waters. Some
deepwater reef communities (coral or tuberficid worm reefs) have also been excluded from the inventory. These
habitats, because of their depth, go undetected by aerial imagery.
Data precautions
Federal, state, and local regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over wetlands may define and describe wetlands in a
different manner than that used in this inventory. There is no attempt, in either the design or products of this
inventory, to define the limits of proprietary jurisdiction of any Federal, state, or local government or to establish the
geographical scope of the regulatory programs of government agencies. Persons intending to engage in activities
involving modifications within or adjacent to wetland areas should seek the advice of appropriate federal, state, or
local agencies concerning specified agency regulatory programs and proprietary jurisdictions that may affect such
activities.
Page 8 of 8IPaC: Explore Location
3/4/2020https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/Z4ZJEEY2XNH3DKWZSSLV6KET7Y/resources
Photo Page 1

Photo 1 –Maintained powerline easement.

Photo 2 - Maintained powerline easement.
Title Photo Pages
Prepared For
Project Medline Mebane – South Site
Mebane, Orange County, North Carolina
Prepared By

Date Project Number
3/23/20 095977020
Photo Page 2

Photo 3 –Maintained area along West Ten Road and Squires Road.

Photo 4 –- Gravel road and road side area near residential areas.
Title Photo Pages
Prepared For
Project Medline Mebane – South Site
Mebane, Orange County, North Carolina
Prepared By

Date Project Number
3/23/20 095977020

Photo Page 3

Photo 5 –Maintained area along West Ten Road

Title Photo Pages
Prepared For
Project Medline Mebane – South Site
Mebane, Orange County, North Carolina
Prepared By

Date Project Number
3/23/20 095977020

Figure 1
Vicinity Map
Mebane Industrial - Southern Site
Mebane, Orange County, NC
Orange
County
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Project Study Area
Orange County
±
Medline Mebane
Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed
0 1,000 2,000Feet
Figure 2: USGS Topographic map (Efland)
Mebane Industrial - Southern Site
Mebane, Orange County, NC
Legend
Project Study Area
±
Medline Mebane
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID,
IGN, and the GIS User Community
0 300 600Feet
Figure 3: Threatened and Endangered Species Survey
Mebane Industrial - Southern Site
Mebane, Orange County, NC
Legend
Project Study Area
Potentially Suitable Habitat
±
Medline Mebane
NCNHDE-11579
March 4, 2020
Taylor Kiker
Kimley-Horn
200 South Tryon Street
Charlotte, NC 28202
RE: Mebane Medline South
Dear Taylor Kiker:
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide
information about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
Based on the project area mapped with your request, a query of the NCNHP database indicates that
there are no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, and/or
conservation/managed areas within the proposed project boundary. Please note that although there
may be no documentation of natural heritage elements within the project boundary, it does not
imply or confirm their absence; the area may not have been surveyed. The results of this query
should not be substituted for field surveys where suitable habitat exists. In the event that rare
species are found within the project area, please contact the NCNHP so that we may update our
records.
The attached ‘Potential Occurrences’ table summarizes rare species and natural communities that
have been documented within a one-mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these
records suggests that these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area
if suitable habitat exists. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed areas within a one-mile
radius of the project area, if any, are also included in this report.
If a Federally-listed species is found within the project area or is indicated within a one-mile radius of
the project area, the NCNHP recommends contacting the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for
guidance. Contact information for USFWS offices in North Carolina is found here:
https://www.fws.gov/offices/Directory/ListOffices.cfm?statecode=37.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation
planning, project review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria
for regulatory decisions. Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published
without prior written notification to the NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information
source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP data may not be redistributed without permission.
The NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional correspondence if a
Dedicated Nature Preserve, Registered Heritage Area, Clean Water Management Trust Fund
easement, or Federally-listed species are documented near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance,
please contact Rodney A. Butler at [e-mail] or 919-707-8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Mebane Medline South
March 4, 2020
NCNHDE-11579
Element Occurrences Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Taxonomic
Group
EO ID Scientific Name Common Name Last
Observation
Date
Element
Occurrence
Rank
Accuracy Federal
Status
State
Status
Global
Rank
State
Rank
Butterfly 34564 Erynnis martialis Mottled Duskywing 1952-07-01 H 5-Very
Low
--- Significantly
Rare
G3 S2
Dragonfly or
Damselfly
33764 Somatochlora
georgiana
Coppery Emerald 2004-Pre H? 5-Very
Low
--- Significantly
Rare
G3G4 S2?
No Natural Areas are Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Managed Areas Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Managed Area Name Owner Owner Type
Orange County Open Space - Eurosports Soccer
Center
Orange County Local Government
Definitions and an explanation of status designations and codes can be found at https://ncnhde.natureserve.org/content/help. Data query generated on March 4, 2020; source: NCNHP, Q1 Jan 2020.
Please resubmit your information request if more than one year elapses before project initiation as new information is continually added to the NCNHP database.
Page 2 of 3
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
Page 3 of 3

AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE EBX-NEUSE I, LLC STREAM
AND WETLAND BANKS
STATEMENT OF AVAILABILITY

EBX-Neuse I, LLC Stream and Wetland Banks
Statement of Availability March 9, 2020

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Sam Dailey
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Center, Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587

Re Project: Medline Distribution – South Site

This document confirms that Medline Industries, Inc. (Applicant) for the Medline Distribution – South
Site (Project) has expressed an interest to utilize 0.40 Riparian Wetland Mitigation Credits from the
EBX-Neuse sponsored Neu-Con Wetland & Stream Umbrella Mitigation Bank, specifically 0.40 from the
Meadow Spring Site in the Neuse HUC 03020201. As the official Bank Sponsor, EBX-Neuse I, LLC,
attests to the fact that mitigation is available for reservation at this time.
These mitigation credits are not considered secured, and consequently are eligible to be used for alternate
purposes by the Bank Sponsor, until payment in full is received from the Applicant resulting in the
issuance of a Mitigation Credit Transfer Certificate by the bank acknowledging that the Applicant has
fully secured credits from the bank and the Banker has accepted full responsibility for the mitigation
obligation requiring the credits/units.
The Banker will issue the Mitigation Credit Transfer Certificate within three (3) days of receipt of the
purchase price. Banker shall provide to Applicant a copy of the Mitigation Credit Transfer Certificate and
a documented copy of the debit of credits from the Bank Official Credit Ledger(s), indicating the permit
number and the resource type secured by the applicant. A copy of the Mitigation Credit Transfer
Certificate, with an updated Official Credit Ledger will also be sent to regulatory agencies showing the
proper documentation.
If any questions need to be answered, please contact me at 919-209-1075.
Best Regards,
Caitlan B. Parker
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605