20100039 Ver 1_401 Application_20100110

w
THE
I?NOOTEN
COMPANY
E N G I N E E R I N G
PLANNING
ARCHITECTURE
120 North Boylan Avenue
Raleigh NC 27603-1423
919.828.0531
fax [phone]

January 14, 2010
Ms. Cyndi Karoly-Supervisor
N.C. Division of Water Quality
401 /Wetlands Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1650
Re: Sanitary Sewer System
Town of Red Oak, North Carolina
TWC No. 3034-H
9 k/ K --A5 f!awlg
°
U
JAN 1 4 2010
DENR • WATER OUALjTY
(RANDS AND STORWATER BRANCH
Ms. Karoly:
On behalf of The Town of Red Oak, we are sending you the following documents for
your review and approval for the above-referenced project:
• Five (5) copies of the PCN Form;
• Five (5) copies of the Authorizing Agreement;
• Five (5) copies of Endangered Species Results for Nash County;
• Five (5) copies of the USGS Topographic Map with the project area indicated;
• Five (5) copies of NRCS Custom Soil Report for Nash County;
• Two (2) copies of 24"06" plans;
• Three (3) copies of 11"x17" plans;
• One (1) check for $240.00 (#1006) made payable to "NC Division of Water
Quality"
I trust the above information is sufficient for your review; however, if you should
have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact
us.
Best Regards,
THE WOOTEN COMPANY
VVL /__-
William A. Larsen, E.I.
Enclosures: As noted above
Cc: Alfred L. Wester, Town of Red Oak Mayor
20100039

jOyW?yA
(ILJ_W\.7? y
O Nii? -c
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
1 a. Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit ? Section 10 Permit -t -
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 12 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
1 g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below. ? Yes ® No
1 h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)? ? Yes ? No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project: Town of Red Oak Sanitary Sewer System
2b. County: Nash
2c. Nearest municipality / town: Town of Red Oak
2d. Subdivision name: N/A
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no: N/A D
.?
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed: Town of Red Oak 2c,t
3b. Deed Book and Page No. DB: 1544 DP: 11 aENR-WATER
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable): N/A TORMIMM 5 iRk"
3d. Street address: P.O. Box A
3e. City, state, zip: Red Oak, North Carolina 27868-0016
3f. Telephone no.: [phone]
3g. Fax no.: [phone]
3h. Email address: [e-mail]
Page 1 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is: ? Agent ? Other, specify: N/A
4b. Name: Same As Owner
4c. Business name
(if applicable): N/A
4d. Street address: N/A
4e. City, state, zip: N/A
4f. Telephone no.: N/A
4g. Fax no.: N/A
4h. Email address: N/A
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name: Christopher A. Thomson, P. E.
5b. Business name
(if applicable): The Wooten Company
5c. Street address: 120 N. Boylan Avenue
5d. City, state, zip: Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
5e. Telephone no.: [phone]
5f. Fax no.: [phone]
5g. Email address: [e-mail]
Page 2 of 11
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): 382314247586
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): Latitude: 36.038817 Longitude: - 77.90825
(DD.DDDDDD) (-DD.DDDDDD)
1 c. Property size: 0.96 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to Unamed Tributary to Pigbasket Creek
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water: C;NSW
2c. River basin: Tar-Pamlico
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:
Presently the site is surrounded by rural residental and rural commercial land uses, with large managed properties mixed
with areas of dense forest. The large majority of this project will be installed on either NCDOT Right-of-Way or on
permanent easements.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
Zero (0) Acres
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
215 LF of perennial, Unnamed Tributaries to Pigbasket Creek border the property on its western edge.
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The project aims to provide a sanitary wastewater collection and transport system for the Town of Red Oak, Red Oak
Elementary School, and Red Oak Middle School.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The project will involve the installation of 8-inch gravity sewer lines, 4 and 6 inch force mains, 1 pump station, and the
removal of two septic systems to be replaced with wetwells and pumps. A trackhoe will be used to dig the trenches for
laying the sewer lines. Directional drilling will also be utilized with segments of force main.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
®Yes ? No ? Unknown
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments: Please see attached letter.
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
? Preliminary ? Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas? Agency/Consultant Company:
Name (if known): Martin Richmond Other: NCDENR Division of Water Quality
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
Wednesday January 6, 2010
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for ?Yes ®No ? Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
N/A
Page 3 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? ? Yes ® No
6b. If yes, explain.
N/A
Page 4 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. 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. 2b. 2c. 2d. 2e. 2f.
Wetland impact Type of jurisdiction
number - Type of impact Type of wetland Forested (Corps - 404, 10 Area of impact
Permanent (P) or (if known) DWQ - non-404, other) (acres)
Temporary T
W1 ? P ? T N/A N/A ? Yes
? No ? Corps
? DWQ N/A
W2 ? P ? T N/A N/A ? Yes ? Corps N/A
? No ? DWQ
W3 ? P ? T N/A N/A ? Yes ? Corps N/A
? No ? DWQ
W4 ? P ? T N/A N/A ? Yes ? Corps N/A
? No ? DWQ
W5 ? P ? T N/A N/A ? Yes ? Corps N/A
? No ? DWQ
W6 ? P ? T N/A N/A ? Yes ? Corps N/A
? No ? DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts N/A
2h. Comments: No wetland impacts are anticipated. We will be directionally drilling under any stream-related wetlands. The
installation of the force main will be five (5) feet from edge of pavement; therefore will be out of the wetlands that are near
roadways.
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. 3b. 3c. 3d. 3e. 3f. 3g.
Stream impact Type of impact Stream name Perennial Type of jurisdiction Average Impact
number - or
(PER)
(Corps - 404, 10
stream
length
Permanent (P) or intermittent DWQ - non-404, width (linear
Temporary (T) (INT)? other) (feet) feet)

S1 ? P ®T Open Cut Gravity Unnamed
Tributary to ® PER ? Corps
11
20
Sewer Line. Pigbasket Creek. ? INT ® DWQ
S2 ? P ? T N/A N/A ? PER ? Corps N/A N/A
? INT ? DWQ
S3 ? P ? T N/A N/A ? PER ? Corps N/A N/A
? INT ? DWQ
S4 ? P ? T N/A N/A ? PER ? Corps N/A N/A
? INT ? DWQ
S5 ? P ? T N/A N/A ? PER ? Corps N/A N/A
? INT ? DWQ
S6 ? P ? T N/A N/A ? PER ? Corps N/A N/A
? INT ? DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts 20
3i. Comments: The unnamed tributary will only be temporarily disturbed during the construction process. It will be returned to
its previous condition after construction activities.
Page 5 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
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)
01 ? P ? T N/A N/A N/A N/A
02 ? P ? T N/A N/A N/A N/A
03 ? P ? T N/A N/A N/A N/A
04 ? P ? T N/A N/A N/A N/A
4f. Total open water impacts N/A
4g. Comments: No open water impacts are anticipated.
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If and or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a.

Pond ID 5b.

Proposed use or purpose of 5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres) 5d.
Stream Impacts (feet) 5e.
Upland
(acres)
number pond
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
P1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
P2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
5f. Total N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
5g. Comments: N/A
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
? Yes ? No If yes, permit ID no: N/A
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres): N/A
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres): N/A
5k. Method of construction: N/A
Page 6 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
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 an impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
? Neuse ®Tar-Pamlico ? Other: N/A
Project is in which protected basin? ? Catawba ? Randleman
6b. 6c. 6d. 6e. 6f. 6g.
Buffer impact
number - Reason Buffer Zone 1 impact Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P) for impact Stream name mitigation (square feet) (square feet)
or Temporary required?
T
Gravity
B1 ®P ? T Sewer Unnamed Tributary to ? Yes 1200 800
Line Pigbasket Creek ® No
Installation
B2 ? PEI T N/A N/A ?? Nos N/A N/A
B3 ? P ? T N/A N/A ?? Nos N/A N/A
6h. Total buffer impacts 1200 800
6i. Comments: Buffers will be restored to their original quality and appearance after construction is complete.
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1 a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
The sewer line will only cross the Unnamed Tributary at a single location and will be kept at the shallowest depth possible.
The crossing will take place in a single location that will intersect at an approximate angle of 80 degrees.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Minimizing trench widths, minimizing sediment runoff by using sedimentation and erosion control measures, directional drilling
force main under all perennial streams and immediate seeding and mulching.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for ? Yes ® No
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply): ? DWQ ? Corps
? Mitigation bank
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this project? ? Payment to in-lieu fee program
? Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank: N/A
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter) Type N/A Quantity N/A
Page 7 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
3c. Comments: N/A
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: N/A linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature: ? warm ? cool ?cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only): N/A square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested: N/A acres
4f. Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested: N/A acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested: N/A acres
4h. Comments: N/A
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.
N/A
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 N/A N/A 3 (2 for Catawba) N/A
Zone 2 N/A N/A 1.5 N/A
6f. Total buffer mitigation required: N/A
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: The installation of a gravity sewer line across this unnamed tributary will result in a perpendicular crossing that
disturbs less than 150 linear feet of buffer and has a maintenance corridor equal to or less than 10 feet in width. By NC
Administration Code 15A NCAC 026.0259 (6) this action is considered "Allowable" with written authorization.
Page 8 of 11
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 ® Yes ? No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
Comments: This project only creates 3,540 square feet of impervious surface from ? Yes ® No
gravel drives, manhole lids, valve vaults, and pump stations so it does not need a
diffuse flow plan.
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project? 1.11 %
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan? ? Yes ® No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why: This project only creates 3,540 square
feet of impervious surfaces.
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
N/A
? Certified Local Government
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan? ? DWQ Stormwater Program
? DWQ 401 Unit
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
? Phase II
3b. Which of the following locally-implemented stormwater management programs ? NSW
? USMP
apply (check all that apply): ? Water Supply Watershed
? Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been ? Yes ? No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
? Coastal counties

4a.
Which of the following state-implemented stormwater management programs apply ? HQW
? ORW
(check all that apply): ? 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
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met? ? Yes ? No
Page 9 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the ® Yes ? No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State ? Yes ® No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
? Yes ? No
letter.)
Comments:
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards, ? Yes ® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
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 ? Yes ® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
The project aims to provide a sanitary wastewater collection and transport system for the Town of Red Oak, Red Oak
Elementary School, and Red Oak Middle School.
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.
All of the wastewater collected in this system will be pumped via force main lines to the Tar River Regional Wastewater
Treatment Facility.
Page 10 of 11
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 ® Yes ? No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act ? Yes ® No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted. El Raleigh
? Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
www.saw.usace.army.miI/wetlands/esa
Website supplied in PCN instruction documents. NCNHP quad search and county search results are attached. The Red
Oak Quad in Nash County was used to decide if there are any impacts. Project will be within NCDOT Right of Way and
permanent utility easemtents.
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?
http://ocean.floridamarine.org/efh-coral/ims/viewer.htm
Website supplied in PCN instruction documents.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
®Yes ? No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
National Register of Historic Place (Red Oak Community House)
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? NC Flood Maps

Christopher A. Thomson, P.E.
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name Applicant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
is rovided.
Page 11 of 11
PCN Form -Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
SAMPLE AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
LOT NO. N/A PLAN NO, N/A PARCEL ID: N/A
STREET ADDRESS: NC 43 (Red Oak Blvd), SR 1524 (Red Oak Battleboro Rd), SR 1003
(Red Oak Rd), SR 1604 (Hunter Hill Rd), SR 1603 (N. Old Carriage Rd)
Please print:
Property Owner: Town of Red Oak
Property Owner: N/A
The undersigned, registered property owners of the above noted property, do hereby authorize
Christopher A. Thomson, P.E. of The Wooten Company
(Contractor / Agent) (Name of consulting firm)
to act on my behalf and take all actions necessary for the processing, issuance and acceptance of
this permit or certification and any and all standard and special conditions attached.
Property Owner's Address (if different than property above):
P.O. Box A, Town of Red Oak, North Carolina, 27868-0016
Telephone: [phone]
We hereby certify the above information submitted in this application is true and accurate to the
best of our knowledge.
N/A
Authorized Signature / Authorized Signature
Date: 1-12:-
Date: N/A
NC NHP County Element Search
http: // 149.16 8.1.196/nhp/find.php
NC NHP County Element Search Results
New Search
Returned Elements: 38 using: NASH ALL
[Animal Assemblage 1] [Invertebrate Animal 17] [Natural Community 5] [Vascular Plant 7] [Vertebrate Animal 81
State Federal State Global County - Map
Major Group Scientific Name Common Name Status Status Rank Rank Status Habitat
Animal
Assemblage
Colonial Wading Bird Colony
None
None
None
S3 Nash -
Current
Link
Invertebrate
A/asmidonta heterodon
Dwarf Wedgemussel
E
E
S1
G1 G2 Nash
t
C
Link
Animal urren
Invertebrate
Animal
Alasmidonta undulata
Triangle Floater
T
None
S2 Nash -
Current
Link
Invertebrate
Animal
Baetisca becki
A Mayfly
SR
None
S1
G2G3 Nash
Current
Link
Invertebrate
Elliptio /anceo/ata
Yellow Lance
E
FSC
S1
G2G3 Nash -
C
t
Link
Animal urren
Invertebrate
Animal
Elliptio roanokensis
Roanoke Slabshell
T
None
S1 Nash -
Current
Link
Invertebrate
Animal
Elliptio steinstansana
Tar River Spinymussel
E
E
S1
G1 Nash -
Current
Link
Invertebrate
Fusconaia masoni
Atlantic Pigtoe
E
FSC
S1 Nash -
C
t
Link
Animal urren
Invertebrate
Lampsilis cariosa
Yellow Lampmussel
E
FSC
S1 Nash -
C
t
Link
Animal urren
Invertebrate
Lampsilis radiata
Eastern Lampmussel
T
None
S1S2 Nash -
C
t
Link
Animal urren
Invertebrate
Animal Lampsilis sp. 2 Chameleon Lampmussel SR None S1 G1 Nash
Obscure Link
Invertebrate
Animal
Lasmigona subviridis
Green Floater
E
FSC
S1 Nash -
Current
Link
Invertebrate
Animal Ligumia nasuta Eastern Pondmussel T None S1 G4 Nash
Historical Link
Invertebrate
Animal
Macdunnoa brunnea
A Mayfly
SR
None
S2 Nash -
Current
Link
Invertebrate
Animal Neurocordulia virginiensis Cinnamon Shadowdragon SR None S2S3 G4 Nash -
Obscure Link
Invertebrate Orconectes carolinensis North Carolina Spiny SC None S3 G3 Nash - Link
Animal Crayfish Current
Invertebrate
Strophitus undulatus
Creeper
T
None
S2 Nash-
Link
Animal Current
Invertebrate Villosa constricta Notched Rainbow SC None S3 G3 Nash Link
Animal Current -
Natural Coastal plain small stream Nash-

Community
swamp (brownwater subtype) None None None S2S3 G5T3T4
Current Link
-
Natural Mesic mixed hardwood forest Nash-

Community
(piedmont subtype) None None None S4 G5T5
Current Link
Natural Piedmont/coastal plain heath Nash-
Community bluff None None None S3 ? Current Link
Natural Piedmont/mountain Nash

Community
bottomland forest None None None S3? G5
Current Link
Natural Piedmont/mountain levee Nash -

Community
forest None None None S3? G55
Current Link
Vascular Carex bushii Bush's Sedge SR-P None S1 G4 Nash- Link
Plant Historical
Vascular
Didiplis diandra
Water Purslane
SR-P
None
S1 Nash-
Link
Plant Current
1 of2 1/11/2010 8:58 AM
NC NHP Quad Search http://149.168.1.196/nhp/quad.php
NC NHP Quad Search Results
New Search
Returned Elements: 16 using: RED OAK
[Invertebrate Animal 11] [Vertebrate Animal 5]
Maior Group Scientific Name Common Name State Status Status Federal State Rank Rank Global Quad -Status Map -
Habitat
Invertebrate Alasmidonta undulata Triangle Floater T None S2 G4 Red Oak-Current Link
Animal
Invertebrate Baetisca becki A Mayfly SR None S1 G2G3 Red Oak-Current Link
Animal
Invertebrate Elliptio lanceo/ata Yellow Lance E FSC S1 G2G3 Red Oak-Current Link
Animal -
Invertebrate Elliptio roanokensis Roanoke Slabshell T None S1 G3 Red Oak-Current Link
Animal -
Invertebrate
Animal imal Elliptio steinstansana Tar River Spinymussel E E S1 G1 Red Oak-Current Link
-
Invertebrate Fusconaia masoni Atlantic Pigtoe E FSC S1 G2 Red Oak-Current Link
Animal -
Invertebrate Lampsilis cariosa
Animal Yellow Lampmussel E FSC S1 G3G4 Red Oak-Current Link
-
Invertebrate
Lampsilis radiata
Animal Eastern Lampmussel T None S1S2 G5 Red Oak-Current Link
-
Invertebrate
Macdunnoa brunnea
Animal A Mayfly SR None S2 G3G4 Red Oak-Current Link
-
Invertebrate Strophitus undulatus
Animal Creeper T None S2 G5 Red Oak-Current Link
-
Invertebrate Villosa constricta Notched Rainbow SC None S3 G3 Red Oak-Current Link
Animal -
Vertebrate
Animal Ambloplites cavifrons Roanoke Bass SR FSC S2 G3 Red Oak-Obscure Link
-
Vertebrate Corynorhinus rafinesquii Rafinesque's Big-eared
Animal macrotis Bat - Coastal Plain SC FSC S3 G3G4TNR Red Oak-Obscure Link
Subspecies
Vertebrate
Animal Hemidactylium scutatum Four-toed Salamander SC None S3 G5 Red Oak-Current Link
-
Vertebrate

Animal Necturus lewisi Neuse River Waterdog SC None S3
G3 Red Oak-Current
Link
-
Vertebrate Noturus furiosus Carolina Madtom T FSC S2 G2 Red Oak-Current Link
Animal -
NC NHP database updated on: Sunday, August 2nd, 2009.
Search performed on Monday, 11 January 2010 @ 09:02:18 EST
Explanation of Codes
1 of 1 1/11/2010 9:02 AM
• , 7
USDA United States A product of the National Custom Soil Resource
AfM- Department of Cooperative Soil Survey,
Agriculture a joint effort of the United Report for
O
v N RCS States Department of
Agriculture and other
N
h C
t

Federal agencies, State as
oun
y,
Natural agencies including the
Resources Agricultural Experiment N
th C
li

Conservation
Stations, and local or
aro
na
Service participants
December 7, 2009
Preface
Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They
highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about
the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many
different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners,
community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also,
conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal,
and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance
the environment.
Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose
special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties
that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information
is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on
various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying
with existing laws and regulations.
Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area
planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases.
Examples include soil quality assessments (http://soils.usda.gov/sqi/) and certain
conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact
your local USDA Service Center (http://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?
agency=nres) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://soils.usda.gov/contact/
state offices/).
Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are
seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a
foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic
tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or
underground installations.
The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department
of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural
Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation
Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil
Survey.
Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available
through the NRCS Soil Data Mart Web site or the NRCS Web Soil Survey. The Soil
Data Mart is the data storage site for the official soil survey information.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs
and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where
applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual
orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an
individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited
bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means
2
for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should
contact USDA's TARGET Center at [phone] (voice and TDD). To file a
complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400
Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call [phone]
(voice) or [phone] (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and
employer.
3
Contents
Preface ....................................................................................................................2
How Soil Surveys Are Made ............................................................................... ...5
Soil Map ............................................................................................................... ...7
Soil Map ............................................................................................................. ...8
Legend ............................................................................................................... ...9
Map Unit Legend ............................................................................................... .10
Map Unit Descriptions ....................................................................................... .10
Nash County, North Carolina ......................................................................... .12
AaA-Altavista sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes, rarely flooded ............. .12
BoB-Bonneau loamy sand, 0 to 4 percent slopes .................................... .13
GeB-Georgeville loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes .......................................... .14
GeC-Georgeville loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes ........................................ .14
Me-Meggett loam, frequently flooded ...................................................... .15
NoB-Norfolk loamy sand, 2 to 6 percent slopes ........................................ 17
NrB-Norfolk, Georgeville, and Faceville soils, 2 to 8 percent slopes........ 18
NuB-Norfolk-Urban land complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes .......................... 20
Ra-Rains fine sandy loam ......................................................................... 21
Wh-Wehadkee loam, frequently flooded ................................................... 22
References ............................................................................................................ 24
4
How Soil Survevs Are Made
Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas
in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and
their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations
affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of
the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and
the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is
the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the
surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the
surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other
living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity.
Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas
(MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share
common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources,
soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically
consist of parts of one or more MLRA.
The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is
related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area.
Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of
landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous
areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the
landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus,
during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable
degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the
landscape.
Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their
characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil
scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only
a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by
an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify
predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries.
Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They
noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock
fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to
identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their
properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units).
Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil
characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for
comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic
classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of
soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil
scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the
5
Custom Soil Resource Report
individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that
they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and
research.
The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the
objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have
similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique
combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable
proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of
the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes
the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and
landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of
resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is
needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.
Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map.
The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of
mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and
experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil-
landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific
locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of
measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These
measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to
bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of
sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from
one point to another across the landscape.
Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of
characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct
measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit
component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other
properties.
While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally
are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret
the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics
and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different
uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils
in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are
modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet
local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information,
production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop
yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from
field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil.
Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such
variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long
periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil
scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have
a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a
high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date.
After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the
survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and
identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields,
roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.
6
Soil Ma
The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil
map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols
displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to
produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit.
7
Custom Soil Resource Report
Soil Map
36° 2'36"
35` 59' 3"
36° 2'40"
35° 59' 8"
<o
Map Scale: 1.31,300 if printed on As ize (8.5" x 11") sheet. N
io
N Meters
0 300 600 1,200 1,800
Feet
0 1,000 2,000 4,000 6,000
O
Q-
a)
ry
N
U
7
O
N
N
ry
O
UC
C
O
N
7
U
0 O
o 0
co o
w m
O

N
0)

> m
m o
N

N y
a> `° C-) 0

co

O co

O 3 C: 0
N C

0
N u N
w
O 0
.-
C cm
N
d
O_ N

O
7
C vi
C
O
O
N
a)
O Un7 E
Z
o c6 ` U 03 N a O
_ L z;,?

C) O C

Of

o?

O LO w
?-

O
F..
Q eo N
3 N
a 0
C: <
O Z U NO L
? 0?
O
C
C N
. m o
U N Z N
N L L
3`
?r?/
I.L tn
Q Q L
U y y
a) U) O
O
Z U Q C to
O O Q -O
O C
O O 7 N 0
3 Y T D _O m 'O N>
U-
a) N
0 C 0
0
N
'u o
E o o
O O
n E ?` c6
N E
z C 4 O _
0.'L g O C
U o N NL O >'
a .
E ? m F- o'a y? .6 2 E
Q

O

c0

07 J

cO N
m >
Z

y
a)
L N C
c
C O
M L
, .a z
E C m
O N
O N

M ,,
!n .L.-
C N >,2
a> T (
N Z cU
N Q E 0 01 N C
7
O 'O m

Z
O C
C, = U) 0
a
Q O
c0
6-0-2 a
L
N
o
a)
Z Q 0 _
a m
"D
L 7

CO
N
N N 0 r-
U U) .- 0 (n
Q N
>
7 >,
??
L a
oamm
CL H co o
d E Ana
c° U ? in in w
o H
°
o
c
)

0
.
0
U)

N
N
o

U
m
m
U

a N
T
m
r

P N

O O
O N
N C
m 2 y a
N N
0
m in c E m o
> O t (3 U) O U O U) O 2 5 R U)
7 2
J

i0
O
LL 3

N m
Z E3 "
-? °
N
W ) a « C

,
V +
W
J
a
Q 0 C

0

m p
CL
U)
.
N D. a

N ^N'
N
. d

Q E

m
w .p-

a
U7
"O
_°
c
p C
m
o
m?
o
a a
a
D o a
co
T 3
3 m
p 0 m
m 0
o d ?_
(3 c
p °
o o w
CL Cl.
> m o
o m
o
n N a
o
Q
m V. O
3 O
a N d
> _
U) w
> a 4- L
m O C
U
Y n
>. O
L O (n Q U)
U
>
N

Q 0 C _p

' `p m 0
_p m m C y
> m
co N
N
C_ N -
U G a N
C > C
co a) -_
p
'O O
«

m
0 CO
CO
00 U U cD
(D J
d
0_
U) cn cn (z o a
U) 0 (n cn

c a

m
`p U

Q t)
Custom Soil Resource Report
Map Unit Legend
Nash County, North Carolina (NC127)
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres In A01 Percent of A01
AaA Altavista sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes, rarely
flooded 0.8 0.6%
BoB Bonneau loamy sand, 0 to 4 percent slopes 32.2 23.5%
GeB Georgeville loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes 6.5 4.8%
GeC Georgeville loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes 2.6 1.9%
Me Meggett loam, frequently flooded 10.6 7.7%
NoB Norfolk loamy sand, 2 to 6 percent slopes 24.1 17.6%
NrB Norfolk, Georgeville, and Faceville soils, 2 to 8
percent slopes 26.9 19.7%
NuB Norfolk-Urban land complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes 18.5 13.5%
Ra Rains fine sandy loam 14.4 10.5%
Wh Wehadkee loam, frequently flooded 0.3 0.2%
Totals for Area of Interest 136.8 100.0%
Map Unit Descriptions
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils
or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the
maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.
A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more
major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named
according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic
class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape,
however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability
of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend
beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic
class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic
classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas
for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes
other than those of the major soils.
Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the
map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called
noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a
particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties
and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different
management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally
are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used.
Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified
by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the
contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with
10
Custom Soil Resource Report
some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been
observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially
where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations
to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape.
The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness
or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic
classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that
have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments
on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If
intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to
define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.
An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each
description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties
and qualities.
Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for
differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons
that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.
Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity,
degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such
differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the
detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly
indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0
to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.
Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.
These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.
A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate
pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The
pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all
areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.
An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or
miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or
anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical
or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and
relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-
Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that
could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar
interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of
the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be
made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up
of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material
and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.
11
Custom Soil Resource Report
Nash County, North Carolina
AaA-Altavista sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes, rarely flooded
Map Unit Setting
Elevation: 80 to 1,400 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 37 to 60 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 70 degrees F
Frost-free period: 200 to 265 days
Map Unit Composition
Altavista and similar soils: 90 percent
Minor components: 9 percent
Description of Altavista
Setting
Landform: Stream terraces
Down-slope shape: Concave
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Old loamy alluvium derived from igneous and metamorphic rock
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 3 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Moderately well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 18 to 30 inches
Frequency of flooding: Rare
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity: High (about 9.6 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability (nonirrigated): 2w
Typical profile
0 to 8 inches: Fine sandy loam
8 to 15 inches: Fine sandy loam
15 to 42 inches: Sandy clay loam
42 to 80 inches: Sandy loam
Minor Components
Roanoke, undrained
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Depressions on stream terraces, backswamps on stream terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Flat
Down-slope shape: Concave
Across-slope shape: Linear
Tomotley, undrained
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Depressions on stream terraces, flats on stream terraces
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
12
Custom Soil Resource Report
Bibb, undrained
Percent of map unit. 1 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Down-slope shape: Concave
Across-slope shape: Linear
Wehadkee, undrained
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Landform: Depressions on flood plains
Down-slope shape: Concave
Across-slope shape: Linear
BoB-Bonneau loamy sand, 0 to 4 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
Elevation: 80 to 330 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 38 to 55 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 70 degrees F
Frost-free period: 210 to 265 days
Map Unit Composition
Bonneau and similar soils: 87 percent
Description of Bonneau
Setting
Landform: Flats on marine terraces, ridges on marine terraces
Landform position (two-dimensional): Shoulder, summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Crest
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Convex
Parent material. Loamy marine deposits
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 6 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 36 to 60 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity: Moderate (about 6.6 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability (nonirrigated): 2s
Typical profile
0 to 9 inches: Loamy sand
9 to 24 inches: Loamy sand
13
Custom Soil Resource Report
24 to 35 inches: Sandy clay loam
35 to 80 inches: Sandy clay loam
GeB-Georgeville loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
Elevation: 200 to 1,400 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 37 to 60 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 66 degrees F
Frost-free period: 200 to 240 days
Map Unit Composition
Georgeville and similar soils: 90 percent
Description of Georgeville
Setting
Landform: Interfluves
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Residuum weathered from metavolcanics and/or argillite
Properties and qualities
Slope: 2 to 6 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity: Moderate (about 8.5 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability (nonirrigated): 2e
Typical profile
0 to 8 inches: Loam
8 to 15 inches: Clay loam
15 to 45 inches: Clay
45 to 80 inches: Loam
GeC-Georgeville loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
Elevation: 200 to 1,400 feet
14
Custom Soil Resource Report
Mean annual precipitation: 37 to 60 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 66 degrees F
Frost-free period: 200 to 240 days
Map Unit Composition
Georgeville and similar soils: 90 percent
Description of Georgeville
Setting
Landform: Hillslopes on ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Convex
Parent material. Residuum weathered from metavolcanics and/or argillite
Properties and qualities
Slope: 6 to 10 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity: Moderate (about 8.5 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability (nonirrigated): 3e
Typical profile
0 to 8 inches: Loam
8 to 15 inches: Clay loam
15 to 45 inches: Clay
45 to 80 inches: Loam
Me-Meggett loam, frequently flooded
Map Unit Setting
Elevation: 80 to 330 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 38 to 55 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 70 degrees F
Frost-free period: 210 to 265 days
Map Unit Composition
Meggett, undrained, and similar soils: 80 percent
Meggett, drained, and similar soils: 10 percent
Description of Meggett, Undrained
Setting
Landform: Stream terraces
15
Custom Soil Resource Report
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Concave
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material. Loamy fluviomarine deposits over marly sandy and clayey alluvium
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Poorly drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately
high (0.00 to 0.20 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 0 to 12 inches
Frequency of flooding: Frequent
Frequency of ponding: Rare
Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 10 percent
Available water capacity: High (about 9.0 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability (nonirrigated): 6w
Typical profile
0 to 8 inches: Loam
8 to 14 inches: Fine sandy loam
14 to 48 inches: Clay
48 to 80 inches: Clay
Description of Meggett, Drained
Setting
Landform: Stream terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Concave
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Loamy fluviomarine deposits over marly sandy and clayey alluvium
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature. More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Poorly drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately
high (0.00 to 0.20 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 0 to 12 inches
Frequency of flooding: Frequent
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 10 percent
Available water capacity: High (about 9.0 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability (nonirrigated): 3w
Typical profile
0 to 8 inches: Loam
8 to 14 inches: Fine sandy loam
14 to 48 inches: Clay
48 to 80 inches: Clay
16
Custom Soil Resource Report
NoB-Norfolk loamy sand, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
Elevation: 80 to 330 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 38 to 55 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 70 degrees F
Frost-free period: 210 to 265 days
Map Unit Composition
Norfolk and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 5 percent
Description of Norfolk
Setting
Landform: Broad interstream divides on marine terraces, flats on marine terraces
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder
Landform position (three-dimensional): Crest
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Loamy marine deposits
Properties and qualities
Slope: 2 to 6 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 40 to 72 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity: Moderate (about 7.6 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability (nonirrigated): 2e
Typical profile
0 to 9 inches: Loamy sand
9 to 14 inches: Loamy sand
14 to 70 inches: Sandy clay loam
70 to 100 inches: Sandy clay loam
Minor Components
Bibb, undrained
Percent of map unit.- 3 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Down-slope shape: Concave
Across-slope shape: Linear
17
Custom Soil Resource Report
Johnston, undrained
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Down-slope shape: Concave
Across-slope shape: Linear
NrB-Norfolk, Georgeville, and Faceville soils, 2 to 8 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
Elevation: 80 to 330 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 38 to 55 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 70 degrees F
Frost-free period. 210 to 265 days
Map Unit Composition
Norfolk and similar soils: 45 percent
Georgeville and similar soils: 25 percent
Faceville and similar soils: 15 percent
Description of Norfolk
Setting
Landform: Broad interstream divides on marine terraces, ridges on marine terraces
Landform position (two-dimensional): Shoulder, summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Crest
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Loamy marine deposits
Properties and qualities
Slope: 2 to 8 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 40 to 72 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity: Moderate (about 7.6 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability (nonirrigated): 2e
Typical profile
0 to 9 inches: Loamy sand
9 to 14 inches: Loamy sand
14 to 70 inches: Sandy clay loam
70 to 100 inches: Sandy clay loam
18
Custom Soil Resource Report
Description of Georgeville
Setting
Landform: Ridges
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Residuum weathered from metavolcanics and/or residuum
weathered from argillite
Properties and qualities
Slope: 2 to 8 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity: Moderate (about 8.5 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability (nonirrigated): 2e
Typical profile
0 to 8 inches: Loam
8 to 15 inches: Clay loam
15 to 45 inches: Clay
45 to 80 inches: Loam
Description of Faceville
Setting
Landform: Broad interstream divides on marine terraces, ridges on marine terraces
Landform position (two-dimensional): Shoulder, summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Crest
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Clayey marine deposits
Properties and qualities
Slope: 2 to 8 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity: Moderate (about 8.1 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability (nonirrigated): 2e
Typical profile
0 to 8 inches: Fine sandy loam
8 to 13 inches: Fine sandy loam
13 to 80 inches: Clay loam
19
Custom Soil Resource Report
NuB-Norfolk-Urban land complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
Elevation: 80 to 330 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 38 to 55 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 70 degrees F
Frost-free period. 210 to 265 days
Map Unit Composition
Norfolk and similar soils: 50 percent
Urban land. 35 percent
Description of Norfolk
Setting
Landform: Broad interstream divides on marine terraces, ridges on marine terraces
Landform position (two-dimensional): Shoulder, summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Crest
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Loamy marine deposits
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 6 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 40 to 72 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity: Moderate (about 7.6 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability (nonirrigated): 2e
Typical profile
0 to 9 inches: Loamy sand
9 to 14 inches: Loamy sand
14 to 70 inches: Sandy clay loam
70 to 100 inches: Sandy clay loam
Description of Urban Land
Interpretive groups
Land capability (nonirrigated): 8s
20
Custom Soil Resource Report
Ra-Rains fine sandy loam
Map Unit Setting
Elevation: 80 to 330 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 38 to 55 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 70 degrees F
Frost-free period: 210 to 265 days
Map Unit Composition
Rains, drained, and similar soils: 80 percent
Rains, undrained, and similar soils: 10 percent
Description of Rains, Drained
Setting
Landform: Flats on marine terraces, carolina bays on marine terraces, broad
interstream divides on marine terraces
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Loamy marine deposits
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Poorly drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.20 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 0 to 12 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity: High (about 9.4 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability (nonirrigated): 3w
Typical profile
0 to 7 inches: Fine sandy loam
7 to 12 inches: Fine sandy loam
12 to 20 inches: Sandy loam
20 to 62 inches: Sandy clay loam
62 to 65 inches: Sandy clay loam
Description of Rains, Undrained
Setting
Landform: Flats on marine terraces, carolina bays on marine terraces, broad
interstream divides on marine terraces
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit
Down-slope shape: Linear
21
Custom Soil Resource Report
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Loamy marine deposits
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Poorly drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.20 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 0 to 12 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity: High (about 9.4 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability (nonirrigated): 4w
Typical profile
0 to 7 inches: Fine sandy loam
7 to 12 inches: Fine sandy loam
12 to 20 inches: Sandy loam
20 to 62 inches. Sandy clay loam
62 to 85 inches: Sandy clay loam
Wh-Wehadkee loam, frequently flooded
Map Unit Setting
Elevation: 200 to 1,400 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 37 to 60 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 66 degrees F
Frost-free period. 200 to 240 days
Map Unit Composition
Wehadkee, undrained, and similar soils: 85 percent
Wehadkee, drained, and similar soils: 10 percent
Description of Wehadkee, Undrained
Setting
Landform: Depressions on flood plains
Down-slope shape: Concave
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Loamy alluvium derived from igneous and metamorphic rock
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Poorly drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 0 to 12 inches
22
Custom Soil Resource Report
Frequency of flooding: Frequent
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity: High (about 9.9 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability (nonirrigated): 6w
Typical profile
0 to 8 inches: Loam
8 to 43 inches: Sandy clay loam
43 to 80 inches: Sandy loam
Description of Wehadkee, Drained
Setting
Landform: Depressions on flood plains
Down-slope shape: Concave
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Loamy alluvium derived from igneous and metamorphic rock
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Poorly drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 0 to 12 inches
Frequency of flooding: Frequent
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity. High (about 9.9 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability (nonirrigated): 4w
Typical profile
0 to 8 inches: Loam
8 to 43 inches: Sandy clay loam
43 to 80 inches: Sandy loam
23
References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004.
Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and
testing. 24th edition.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of
soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of
wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
FWS/OBS-79/31.
Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States.
Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States.
Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils
in the United States.
National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries.
Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S.
Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://soils.usda.gov/
Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making
and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service,
U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http://soils.usda.gov/
Soil Survey Staff. 2006. Keys to soil taxonomy. 10th edition. U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http://soils.usda.gov/
Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands
Section.
United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of
Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical
Report Y-87-1.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National forestry manual. http://soils.usda.gov/
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National range and pasture handbook. http://www.giti.nres.usda.gov/
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National soil survey handbook, title 4304I. http://soils.usda.gov/
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the
Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296.
http://soils.usda.gov/
24
Custom Soil Resource Report
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land
capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210.
25