20201533 Ver 1_Rocky River PJD Request 20201104_reduced_20201120

BURNSN ME-DONNELL
November 4, 2020
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801-5006
Re: Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Request for Piedmont Natural Gas Rocky River
HDD Project. Cabarrus and Stanly Counties, North Carolina.
To Whom it May Concern:
Burns & McDonnell was contracted by Piedmont Natural Gas (PNG), a subsidiary of Duke
Energy to provide wetland delineation services for the proposed Rocky River HDD Project
(Project) in Cabarrus County, North Carolina (Figure A-1, Appendix A). The following sections
provide information on the proposed Project and summarize the completed wetland delineation.
INTRODUCTION
Piedmont Natural Gas proposes to install approximately 1,500-feet of new 30-inch pipeline via
Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) method under the Rocky River and connect to an existing
natural gas pipeline. The Project is near the Cabarrus and Stanly County line approximately 20
miles east of Charlotte, NC near the Rocky River.
The Project has the potential to impact wetlands or other water bodies that may be under the
jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) as designated by Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act. Burns & McDonnell conducted a wetland delineation for the Project to
evaluate the presence of wetlands and other water bodies, including streams, drainages, and
ponds. The delineation was conducted based on the proposed Project boundary provided by PNG
(Survey Area). The Survey Area included in the wetland delineation is approximately 69 acres.
METHODS
The following discussions summarize the methods used for the review of existing data and the
wetland delineation.
Existing Data Review
Burns & McDonnell reviewed available background information for the proposed Project prior
to conducting a site visit. This available background information included:
• U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic maps (Midland, North Carolina
quadrangles),
• USGS National Hydrography Dataset (NHD),
• U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps,
• National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP) aerial photography (2020),
• Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) 2020 National Flood Hazard Layer
(NFHL), and
9400 Ward Parkway \ Kansas City, MO 64114
0 816-333-9400 \ F 816-333-3690 \ burnsmcd.com

BURNS NME-DONNELL
Alicia DePalma
Piedmont Natural Gas
July 9, 2020
Page 2
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS)
2019 Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) digital data for Obion County, Tennessee.
Wetland presence based only on NWI maps cannot be assumed to be an accurate assessment of
potentially occurring jurisdictional wetlands. Wetland identification criteria differ between the
USFWS and the USACE. As a result, wetlands shown on an NWI map may not be under the
jurisdiction of the USACE, and all USACE jurisdictional wetlands are not always included on
NWI maps. Therefore, a field visit was conducted to identify any wetlands or other water bodies
that may be present.
Wetland Delineation Field Survey
A wetland delineation was completed April 8, 2020 and June 18, 2020, in accordance with the
1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (1987 Manual) and the 2010 Regional
Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Eastern Mountains and
Piedmont Region — Version 2.0 (Regional Supplement). Sample plots were established at
multiple locations, and Wetland Determination Data Forms from the Regional Supplement were
completed to characterize the Survey Area (Appendix B). Vegetation, soil conditions, and
hydrologic indicators were recorded at each of these sample plots. Locations of sample plots and
other identified features were surveyed using a sub -meter accurate global positioning system
(GPS) unit. A photograph taken at each sample plot is included with each data form (Appendix
B). Natural color photographs depicting water bodies, streams, and representative field
conditions were taken and are included in Appendix C (Photographs 1-19).
RESULTS
The following sections describe the results of the existing data review and the completed wetland
delineation.
Existing Data Review
The existing USGS topographic maps were reviewed to familiarize Burns & McDonnell wetland
personnel with the topography and potential locations of wetlands and other water bodies (Figure
A-2). The USGS topographic maps indicate the Survey Area crosses open fields with gentle
slopes.
The FEMA floodplain indicates the Survey Area is in a 100-year floodplain in multiple places
(Figure A-2).
The NWI data identified no wetlands and NHD data identified two streams located within the
Survey Area, the Rocky River and an unnamed stream (Figure A-2).
The 2018 NAIP aerial photography indicates that the Survey Area is centered by the Rocky
River and a forested riparian area with largely open agricultural fields at the east and western
ends.

BURNS **ME-DONNELL
Alicia DePalma
Piedmont Natural Gas
July 9, 2020
Page 3
The USDA NRCS SSURGO digital data indicate that portions of 7 soil map units are in the
Survey Area (Figure A-3). Of the 7 soil map units, one map unit is included on local and national
hydric soil lists (Figure A-3; Soils Series Legend).
Wetland Delineation Field Survey
From March 2 through 4 and on April 20, 2020, a wetland scientist with Burns & McDonnell
conducted an onsite wetland delineation of the Survey Area. The second person of the team, a
GPS specialist with Burns & McDonnell, recorded the location and extent of features identified
within the Survey Area. The land cover and delineated wetlands from the field survey efforts are
discussed in detail below.
Vegetation. The Survey Area was largely composed of upland fields, active agricultural fields,
forested areas on either side of Rocky River and existing utility easement. Upland portions of the
Survey Area were primarily harvested corn fields. In upland forested areas dominant vegetation
included loblolly pine (Pious taeda), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), black cherry tree
(Prunus serotina), red maple (Acer rubrum), northern red oak (Quercus rubra), willow oak
(Quercus phellos), Japanese privet (Ligustrum japonicum), Christmas fern (Polystichum
acrostichoides), and Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica).
Soils. Typical upland soils were highly disturbed in agricultural areas and 10YR 3/4, dark
yellowish brown in the Rocky River riparian areas, and 5 YR 5/8, yellowish red, in forested
upland areas near the eastern portion of the Survey Area. Soils typically had a texture of silt
loam. Redoximorphic features were typically present in wetland soils.
Hydrology. The primary source of hydrology for wetlands was overland flow, groundwater, and
precipitation. Indicators of hydrology within the wetlands included surface water, high water
table, saturation, water -stained leaves, oxidized rhizospheres on living root channels, drainage
patterns, a concave geomorphic position, and a positive FAC-neutral test.
Delineated Areas
During the wetland delineation efforts, four wetlands and thirteen streams were identified within
the Survey Area. The wetlands and streams are generally described below, and their locations are
shown on Figure A-4 in Appendix A. Table 1 provides the types and size of each wetland, and
Table 2 provides the type and length of each stream delineated. Sample plots were taken in
wetlands and adjacent uplands. Data forms and photographs for these sample plots are included
in Appendix B and Appendix C, respectively.
Wetlands
Four wetlands, comprised of two wetland types [palustrine emergent wetlands (PEM) and
palustrine forested (PFO)] totaling 0.856 acres, were delineated (Photographs in Appendices A
and C).
Two PEM wetlands, encompassing 0.035 acres, were delineated. Dominant vegetation in the
PEM wetlands included lamp rush (Juncus effusus) shallow sedge (Carex lurida), and American

BURNS **ME-DONNELL
Alicia DePalma
Piedmont Natural Gas
July 9, 2020
Page 4
water plantain (Alisma subcordatum). Wetland hydrology was indicated in PEM wetlands by
surface water, oxidized rhizospheres on living roots, drainage patterns, a concave geomorphic
position, and a positive FAC neutral test. Hydric soil was indicated by the presence of a depleted
matrix.
Two PFO wetlands, totaling approximately 0.826 acres, were delineated. Vegetation in the PFO
wetlands was dominated by red maple, sweetgum, water oak (Quercus nigra), winged -elm
(Ulmus alata), Chinese privet, lamp rush, shallow sedge, lizard's tail (Saururus cernuus) poison
ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), greenbriar (Smilax rotundifolia) and Virginia creeper
(Parthenocissus quinquefolia) (rough barnyard grass, fall panic grass, lamp rush (Juncus
effusus), and muscadine (Vitis rotundifolia). Wetland hydrology was indicated in the PFO
wetlands by surface water, a high water table, saturation, water -stained leaves, oxidized
rhizospheres on living roots, a concave geomorphic position, and a positive FAC-neutral test.
Hydric soil was indicated by the presence of a depleted matrix.
Table 1: Type and Size of Wetland Delineated
Area of Wetland
Wetland Number
Wetland
(acre) in Survey
Figure A-4
b
Jurisdictional
Type
page Number
Area
WET PEM-01
PEM
0.0175
3
Yes
AR WET PEM-01
PEM
0.0178
2
Yes
WET PFO-01
PFO
0.3833
4,6
Yes
WET PFO-02
PFO
0.4372
3
Yes
0.8558
(a) Symbols for wetland type: PEM = palustrine emergent, PFO = palustrine forested,
(b) An official Jurisdictional Determination can only be made by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
*All potentially non jurisdictional wetlands are shaded gray
Streams
Thirteen stream channels, consisting of three stream types (perennial, intermittent, and
ephemeral) totaling 2,524 delineated linear feet within the Survey Area, were identified
(Photographs, Appendix Q. The different stream types are summarized below.
Seven ephemeral stream channels totaling of 1,286 feet within the Survey Area, were delineated.
Ephemeral streams were characterized by a defined bed and bank, but they had limited or no
flow during the site visit, indicating that these streams largely convey water only during and after
precipitation events. Ephemeral streams ranged from approximately 0.5 to 3 feet in width at the
ordinary high water mark (OHWM) with bank heights ranging from 0.25 to 1 feet. At the time of
the delineation, water was observed at a depth of 1 inch to 2 inches. The substrates of the
ephemeral streams were comprised of grass, silt and limited gravel. These streams were in
upland fields and agricultural fields. Riparian areas of ephemeral streams were typically

BURNS **ME-DONNELL
Alicia DePalma
Piedmont Natural Gas
July 9, 2020
Page 5
improved or in areas of active agricultural. Riparian vegetation included species such as Festuca
sp., common chickweed, and agricultural corn stubble.
Three intermittent stream channels, totaling of 579 linear feet within the Survey Area, were
delineated. Intermittent streams were characterized by the presence of a limited volume of flow
at the time of the site visit. This is a likely indicator that the stream is partially fed by
groundwater, but it may not flow during dry periods. Intermittent streams were 1 to 3 feet in
width at the OHWM with bank heights ranging from 0.75 to 2 feet. At the time of the
delineation, water was observed at a depth of 2 inches to 1 foot. The substrates of intermittent
streams were comprised of silt with limited gravel. These streams flowed through an agricultural
field, utility easement, and a wooded riparian area. Common riparian vegetation included corn
stubble within the agricultural field and Virginia creeper, Japanese honeysuckle, and Japanese
privet.
Three perennial streams totaling 684 feet within the Survey Area. Perennial streams were
characterized by the presence of a substantial volume of flow at the time of the site visit as well
as secondary characteristics such as observance of fish and rooted aquatic fauna, indicating that
water flows year-round. Perennial streams were approximately 5 to 120 feet in width at the
OHWM with bank heights ranging from 2 to 22 feet. At the time of the delineation, the depth of
water observed was 0.5 to 10 feet. The substrates of the perennial streams were likely comprised
of silt, gravel, and cobble although due to turbidity, this could not be confirmed at all streams.
Perennial streams flowed through forested areas and wooded riparian areas. Common riparian
vegetation included sweetgum, red oak, red maple, and Japanese privet.

BURNSMEDONNELL
Alicia DePalma
Piedmont Natural Gas
July 9, 2020
Page 6
Table 2: Type and Length of Streams Delineated
Stream Number
Stream Type
Length of Stream
(feet) in Survey
Area*
Figure A-4 Page
Number
Jurisdictionala
S-1
Ephemeral
646.46
4,6
No
S-2 (Rocky River)
Perennial
364.31
4
Yes
S-3
Intermittent
317.31
3
Yes
S-4
Perennial
361.45
3
Yes
S-5
Intermittent
139.79
3
Yes
ARI_S-I
Ephemeral
35.92
4
No
ARl S-2
Ephemeral
49.82
4
No
AR2_S-1
Ephemeral
90.27
2
Yes
AR3_S-1
Perennial
78.96
1
Yes
AR3_S-2
Ephemeral
78.89
1
No
AR3_S-3
Perennial
70.95
1
Yes
AR3_S-4
Ephemeral
241.57
1
No
AR3 S-5
Ephemeral
48.36
1
No
Total
(a) An official Jurisdictional Determination can only be made by the U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers.
SUMMARY
Burns & McDonnell conducted a wetland delineation of the Survey Area to identify wetlands
and other water bodies. Four wetlands and thirteen stream channels were identified. To avoid the
need for a Section 404 permit from the USACE, the proposed Project should be designed to
avoid all impacts to potentially jurisdictional waters.
Factors considered to determine a significant nexus to waters of the U.S. included proximity to,
or evidence of, a clear hydrologic connection with other waters of the U.S., location within a
mapped floodplain, and presence of a defined bed and bank. A total of 4 wetlands and 13 streams
appear to have a hydrological connection, or other significant nexus to other probable waters of
the U.S (Tables I and 2). The features indicated as "Yes" in Tables I and 2 are presumed to be
under the jurisdiction of the USACE; however, an official Jurisdictional Determination can only
be made by the USACE.
If all impacts are temporary in nature the Project will likely be self -certified under the NWP 12,
provided that all regional and general conditions are met. Regardless of which NWP(s) is
applicable to the Project, the regional and general conditions of the NWP(s) would apply and
would need to be followed during Project construction.

BURNS **ME-DONNELL
Alicia DePalma
Piedmont Natural Gas
July 9, 2020
Page 7
If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me by telephone a
770 510-4526 or by e-mail [e-mail].
Sincerely,
Jesse A. Brown
Environmental Scientist
Attachments:
Appendix A - FIGURES
Appendix B - ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORMS, EASTERN
MOUNTAINS AND PIEDMONT REGION
Appendix C - SITE PHOTOGRAPHS

APPENDIX A - FIGURES

Path: Z:\Clients\TND\DukeEnrgyCar\123240_RockyRiverHDD\Studies\Geospatial\DataFiles\ArcDocs\ENS_DesktopReview\DR_RockyRiver_Fig1.mxd kdboatright 7/17/2020
Fm
.. "� t .. r - - I.. �` �;,� r I •I � 1. � �_. �.r�j�.�y}y�/y (•�� - ._ � 'I ��'` �'Z' ,� \t •'J�
`: - � ' - - ., • �. . ,ram r � �' ` �
iY
.17
7.
NA
.]:�. � w r III r. I•
'-��� U'A� ' • J•.•.F. '':A6 � ... � ... � �_ _ _-cif - �'�.:: 'iL�.
Al
�.� ����}�• � ...- � _ �- ,-�F fir::, �-lz-
/"-� �� �'` - y, ��=-._ � � ��� I .• � �� � � �; , ----'�
. 1�"� _ �� , , '� _� � .� -�. Cam• � Q /
S }
J
Survey Area
County Boundary NORTH Figure 1
Tr Access Road (AR) % BURNS Topographic Map
McPONNi!ZR I
3,300 1,650 0 31300 - Rocky River HDD
Cabarrus & Stanly Co., NC
Scale in Feet
Source: Esri, and Burns & McDonnell Enqineerinq Companv, Inc. Issued: 7/

Path: Z:\Clients\TND\DukeEnrgyCar\123240 RockyRiverHDD\Studies\Geospatial\DataFlles\ArcDocs\ENS DesktopReview\DR Rocky River_Fig3.mxd kdboatright 7/17/2020
Service Laver Credits: Source: Esri. Maxar. GeoEve. Earthstar Geoaraohics. CNES/Airbus DS. USDA. USGS. AeroGRID. IGN. and the GIS User Communitv
Map Unit Symbol & Name GoF - Goldston very channery silt loam, 15 to 45 % slopes MsA- Misenheimer channery silt loam, 0 to 4 % slopes
BaB - Badin channery silt loam, 2 to 8 % slopes KkB - Kirksey silt loam, 0 to 6 % slopes OaA- Oakboro silt loam, 0 to 2 % slopes, frequently flooded*
BaD - Badin channery silt loam, 8 to 15 % slopes KkB - Kirksey silt loam, 1 to 6 % slopes TbB - Tarrus channery silt loam, 2 to 8 % slopes
ChA - Chewacla sandy loam, 0 to 2 % slopes, frequently flooded* LdB2 - Lloyd clay loam, 2 to 8 % slopes, moderately eroded TcB2 - Tarrus channery silty clay loam, 2 to 8 % slopes, moderately eroded
GoC - Goldston very channery silt loam, 4 to 15 % slopes MhB - Misenheimer channery silt loam, 0 to 4 % slopes W - Water
Asterisk (*) indicates hydric soil.
MsA i
• �1 . E
•
BaB ..1
Survey Area
L___j County Boundary
T� Access Road (AR)
Q SSURGO Soils Map Unit
Source: Esri, USGS-SSURGO Soils Database, ar
pany, inc.
• } i
KkB
, r
Owf• • •'
NORTH Figure 3
`N BURNS Soils Map
800 400 0 800 \ M�DONNELL. Rocky River HDD
Cabarrus & Stanly Co., NC
Scale in Feet

Path: Z:\Clients\TND\DukeEnrgyCar\123240 RockyRiverHDD\Studies\Geospatial\DataFlles\ArcDocs\ENS DesktopReview\DR Rocky River_Fig3_MLV.mxd kdboatright 7/17/2020
Service Laver Credits: Source: Esri. Maxar. GeoEve. Earthstar Geoaraohics. CNES/Airbus IDS. USDA. USGS. AeroGRID. IGN. and the GIS User Communitv
Map Unit Symbol & Name EnB - Enon sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes MeD - Mecklenburg loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes
CcB2 - Cecil sandy clay loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes, moderately eroded EnD - Enon sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes SfB - Sedgefield sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes'
ChA- Chewacla sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded' IdB - Iredell loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes* VaB - Vance sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes
CuB2 - Cullen clay loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes, moderately eroded MeB - Mecklenburg loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes W - Water
Asterisk (*) indicates hydric soil.
� t
-1
tit- +�41
t' f
t ti
-46
f � '
• 3•
7� MF
Q Survey Area
L___j County Boundary NORTH Figure 3
Q SSURGO Soils Map Unit NBURNS Soils Map
400 200 0 400 My
5DONNELL- Rock River HDD
Cabarrus & Stanly Co., NC
Scale in Feet
Source: Esri, USGS-SSURGO Soils Database, and Burns & McDonnell Engineering Company, Inc. Issued: 7/17/2020

Path: Z:\Clients\TND\DukeEnrgyCar\123240 RockyRiverHDD\Studies\Geospatial\DataFiles\ArcDocs\ENS DesktopReview\DR Rocky River_Fig4.mxd kdboatright 7/8/2020
Service La er Credits: Source: Esri Maxar GeoE a Earthstar Geo ra hics CNES/Airbus IDS USDA USGS AeroGRID IGN and the GIS User Communit
r r alow
4.
Y i
AR-3
a .s
4 J11 _
:a.
AN 2
00
Survey Area Wetland Stream (S) 01
4) Figure 4
PEM Perennial 2
0 Culvert � NORrH Wetland Delineation Map
T� Access Road (AR) —"'—" Ephemeral ��%BURNS ` Rocky River HDD
200 100 0 200 M-DONIVr-1,L
Cabarrus & Stanly Co., NC
Page 1 of 8
Scale in Feet
rce: Esri, FEMA, USFWS-National Wetland Inventory (NHD), and Burns & McDonnell Engineering Company, Inc. Issued: 7

Path: Z:\Clients\TND\DukeEnrgyCar\123240 RockyRiverHDD\Studies\Geospatial\DataFlles\ArcDocs\ENS DesktopReview\DR Rocky River_Fig4.mxd kdboatright 7/8/2020
Service Laver Credits: Source: Esri. Maxar. GeoEve. Earthstar Geoaraohics. CNES/Airbus DS. USDA. USGS. AeroGRID. IGN. and the GIS User Communitv
t
Vp
tjr
JAW
ltw
•� I it 79 x • r /
IF
� R
y.r•� kr ,. +. `�
s r
Survey Area Wetland Stream (S) 01
PEM—•••—•• Ephemeral �24� Figure 4
0 Culvert NORrH Wetland Delineation Map
T� Access Road (AR) '� ` BURNS Rocky River HDD
200 100 0 200 \ M_DONNELL`
Cabarrus & Stanly Co., NC
Page 2 of 8
Scale in Feet
Source: Esri, FEMA, USFWS-National Wetland Inventory (NHD), and Burns & McDonnell Engineering Company, Inc. Issued: 7/8/2020

Path: Z:\Clients\TND\DukeEnrgyCar\123240 RockyRiverHDD\Studies\Geospatial\DataFiles\ArcDocs\ENS DesktopReview\DR Rocky River_Fig4.mxd kdboatright 7/8/2020
Service Laver Credits: Source: Esri Maxar GeoE a Earthstar Geo ra hics CNES/Airbus IDS, USDA USGS AeroGRID IGN and the GIS User Community
3 0 119 ;11-
rti
Survey Area Wetland Stream (S)
0 Culvert - PFO Perennial
T� Access Road (AR) —"'—" Ephemeral
Sample Plot (SP)
Source: Esri, FEMA, USFWS-National Wetland Inventory (NHD), and Burns & McDonnell Engineering
.f
S 01
\F
01
<24 Figure 4
NORTH Wetland Delineation Map
**BURNS Rocky River HDD
200 100 0 200 NM DQNNELL-
Cabarrus & Stanly Co., NC
Page 4 of 8
Scale in Feet
mpany, Inc. Issued: 7/8/2020

Path: Z:\Clients\TND\Du
Service La er Credits: S
12 3240RockyRiverHDD\Studies\Geospatial\DataFiles\ArcDocs\ENS DesktopReview\DR Rocky River_Fig4.mxd kdboatright 7/8/2020
Aaxar, GeoE a Earthstar Geo ra hics CNES/Airbus DS USDA USGS AeroGRID IGN and the GIS User Communit
'T
t.
Survey Area Wetland Stream (S)
0 Culvert - PFO — — Ephemeral
T� Access Road (AR)
Sample Plot (SP)
Y
01
NORTH �2J
BURNS
200 100 0 200 NM5DQNNELL
Scale in Feet
AR
Figure 4
Wetland Delineation Map
Rocky River HDD
Cabarrus & Stanly Co., NC
Page 6 of 8
rce:

APPENDIX S - ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORMS,
ATLANTIC AND GULF COAST PLAIN REGION

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Rocky River HDD Project City/County: Cabbarus/Stanly Sampling Date: 04/08/2020
Applicant/Owner: Duke Energy - Piedmont Natural Gas State: NC Sampling Point: WET_PEM-01
Investigator(s): Jesse A. Brown Section, Township, Range: N/A
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): Lat: 35.229339 Long:-80.482064 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Goldston Very Channery Silt Loam; 15 to 45 percent slopes NWI classification: None
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation X , Soil X, or Hydrology X significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
LDS' rquality PEM wetland in actively maintained ROW.
Wetland likely created by stream blowout from ROW maintenance/mowing.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary
Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required;
check all that aooly)
❑
❑
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
❑
Surface Water (Al) ❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
x
High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
X❑
Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑
Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
❑
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑
Water Marks (131)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
❑
Sediment Deposits (132)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑
Drift Deposits (133)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
El
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Iron Deposits
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑x
Stuntedor Stressed Plants (D1)
Geomorphic Position
❑
(B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
❑
(D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
❑
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
FRG -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes x No
Depth (inches): 2
Water Table Present? Yes x No
Depth (inches): 0
Saturation Present? Yes x No
Depth (inches): 0
wetland Hydrology Present? Yes x No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WET _PEM_01
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1. N/A
That Are OBL, FACW, or FRG: 1
(A)
2.
Total Number of Dominant
3.
Species Across All Strata: 1
(B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FRG: 100
(A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
= Total Cover
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
OBL species x 1 =
SaNinq/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
FACW species x 2 =
1 N/A
FRG species x 3 =
2
FACU species x 4 =
3
UPL species x 5 =
4
Column Totals: (A)
(B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
7.
8.
9.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
1. Saururus cernuus 20 y OBL
2. Juncus effusus 10 N OBL
3. Persecaria sp. (hydropiperoides?) 5 N OBL
4. Rumex crispus 2 N FAC
5.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
37 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 18.5 20% of total cover: 7.4
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1. N/A
2.
3.
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is :53.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Hydrophytic
5. Vegetation
= Total Cover Present? Yes X No
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
It appears vegetation is periodicaly sprayed with herbicide and mowed. Highly disturbed.
Most of the vegetation in the PEM is dead.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
Redox Features
(inches)
Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Type' Loc
Texture Remarks
0-6
2.5 Y 4/2 95
5 YR 3/4 5 C M
Clay Loam
6-16
2.5 Y 4/2 50
5 YR 3/4 50 C M
Clay Loam
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11:
® Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
0 Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
n Indicators for Problematic Hydric So
Dark Surface (S7) 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) ❑ (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Depleted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147)
Redox Dark Surface (F6) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Rocky River HDD Project City/County: Cabbarus/Stanly Sampling Date: 04/08/2020
Applicant/Owner: Duke Energy - Piedmont Natural Gas State: NC Sampling Point: WET-PEM-0I-UPL
Investigator(s): Jesse A. Brown Section, Township, Range: N/A
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): Lat: Long: Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Goldston Very Channery Silt Loam; 4 to 15 percent slopes NWI classification: None
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation X , Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No X
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
Vegetation disturbed from ROW maintenance
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary
Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that aooly)
❑
❑
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
❑
Surface Water (Al) ❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑
High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑
Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑
Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
❑
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑
Water Marks (131)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
❑
Sediment Deposits (132)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑
Drift Deposits (133)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Iron Deposits
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Geomorphic Position
❑
(B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
❑
(D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
❑
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
FRG -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes
No X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes
No X Depth (inches):
wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point:
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover
Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FRG: 0 (A)
2.
Total Number of Dominant
3.
Species Across All Strata: (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FRG: (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
= Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
20% of
total cover:
OBL species x 1 =
SaNinq/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
FACW species x 2 =
1
FRG species x 3 =
2
FACU species x 4 =
3
UPL species x 5 =
4
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
_ 2 -Dominance Testis >50%
9.
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is :53.0'
= Total Cover
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
20% of
total cover:
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1. Trifolium renens
30
Y FACU
2. Trifolium pratense
30
Y FACU
3. Rumex Cris us
P
15
N FAC
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
10 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 37.5 20% of total cover: 15
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
5.
50% of total cover:
numbers here or on a separate
= Total Cover
20% of total cover:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No X
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

:ter
I. _ ... .. .. .
EM 01
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc Texture Remarks
0-16 10 YR 3/6 100
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11:
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced
MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
In icators for Problematic Hydric So
Dark Surface (S7) 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) (MLRA 147, 148)
Redox ( 8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
❑
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F1
Depleted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147}
9)
❑
Redox Dark Surface (F6) Very Shallow Dark Surface (T
Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Other (Explain in Remarks)
F12)
❑F
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Rocky River HDD Project City/County: Cabbarus/Stanly Sampling Date: 04/08/2020
Applicant/Owner: Duke Energy - Piedmont Natural Gas State: NC Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Jesse A. Brown Section, Township, Range: N/A
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): Lat: Long: Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary
Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required;
check all that aooly)
❑
❑
Surface Soil cracks (136)
Sparsely Vegetated concave Surface (138)
❑
Surface Water (Al) ❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑
High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑
Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑
Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (c3)
❑
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑
Water Marks (131)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (c4)
❑
Dry -Season Water Table (c2)
❑
Sediment Deposits (132)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (c6)
❑
crayfish Burrows (c8)
❑
Drift Deposits (133)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (c7)
❑
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (c9)
❑
Algal Mat or crust (134)
Iron Deposits
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Geomorphic Position
❑
(B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
❑
(D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
❑
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
FRG -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point:
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FRG: (A)
2.
Total Number of Dominant
3.
Species Across All Strata: (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FRG: (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
= Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
OBL species x 1 =
SaNinq/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
FACW species x 2 =
1
FRG species x 3 =
2
FACU species x 4 =
3
UPL species x 5 =
4
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
_ 2 -Dominance Testis >50%
9.
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is :53.0'
= Total Cover
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1.
2.
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
6
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
7.
height.
8.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
9.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
10.
m) tall.
11.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
= Total Cover
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
height.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Hydrophytic
5.
Vegetation
= Total Cover
Present? Yes No
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc Texture Remarks
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11:
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced
MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
In icators for Problematic Hydric So
Dark Surface (S7) 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) (MLRA 147, 148)
Redox ( 8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
❑
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F1
Depleted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147}
9)
❑
Redox Dark Surface (F6) Very Shallow Dark Surface (T
Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Other (Explain in Remarks)
F12)
❑F
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Rocky River HDD Project City/County: Cabbarus/Stanly Sampling Date: 04/08/2020
Applicant/Owner: Duke Energy - Piedmont Natural Gas State: NC Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Jesse A. Brown Section, Township, Range: N/A
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): Lat: Long: Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary
Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required;
check all that aooly)
❑
❑
Surface Soil cracks (136)
Sparsely Vegetated concave Surface (138)
❑
Surface Water (Al) ❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑
High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑
Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑
Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (c3)
❑
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑
Water Marks (131)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (c4)
❑
Dry -Season Water Table (c2)
❑
Sediment Deposits (132)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (c6)
❑
crayfish Burrows (c8)
❑
Drift Deposits (133)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (c7)
❑
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (c9)
❑
Algal Mat or crust (134)
Iron Deposits
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Geomorphic Position
❑
(B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
❑
(D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
❑
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
FRG -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point:
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FRG: (A)
2.
Total Number of Dominant
3.
Species Across All Strata: (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FRG: (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
= Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
OBL species x 1 =
SaNinq/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
FACW species x 2 =
1
FRG species x 3 =
2
FACU species x 4 =
3
UPL species x 5 =
4
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
_ 2 -Dominance Testis >50%
9.
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is :53.0'
= Total Cover
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1.
2.
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
6
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
7.
height.
8.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
9.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
10.
m) tall.
11.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
= Total Cover
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
height.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Hydrophytic
5.
Vegetation
= Total Cover
Present? Yes No
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc Texture Remarks
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11:
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced
MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
In icators for Problematic Hydric So
Dark Surface (S7) 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) (MLRA 147, 148)
Redox ( 8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
❑
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F1
Depleted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147}
9)
❑
Redox Dark Surface (F6) Very Shallow Dark Surface (T
Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Other (Explain in Remarks)
F12)
❑F
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Rocky River HDD Project City/County: Cabbarus/Stanly Sampling Date: 04/08/2020
Applicant/Owner: Duke Energy - Piedmont Natural Gas State: NC Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Jesse A. Brown Section, Township, Range: N/A
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): Lat: Long: Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary
Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required;
check all that aooly)
❑
❑
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
®
Surface Water (Al) ❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
®High
Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
El
DrainagePatterns (B10)
❑
Saturation (A3)
❑X Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
❑
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑
Water Marks (131)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
❑
Sediment Deposits (132)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑
Drift Deposits (133)
❑X Thin Muck Surface (C7)
El
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Iron Deposits
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
X❑
Stuntedor Stressed Plants (D1)
Geomorphic Position
❑
❑
(B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
❑
(D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
❑
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
X
FRG -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 2
Water Table Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 2
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth (inches): Q
wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point:
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30
)
% Cover
Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1. Acer rubrum
70
Y FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FRG: 3 (A)
2. Ulmus americana
10
N FACW
Total Number of Dominant
3.Liquidambar styraciflua
5
N FAC
Species Across All Strata: 3 (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FRG: 100 (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
85
= Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
42.5 20% of
total cover: 17
OBL species x 1 =
SaNinq/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species x 2 =
1. Acer rubrum
25
N FAC
FRG species x 3 =
2. Ulmus americana
20
N FACW
FACU species x 4 =
3. Juni erus virginiana
10
N FACU
UPL species x 5 =
4
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
X 2 -Dominance Testis >50%
9.
3 - Prevalence Index is :53.0'
55%
= Total Cover
_
4 -Morphological Adaptations (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
27.5 20% of
total cover: 11
-
5
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1. Carex lurida
45
Y OBL
-
2, Juncus effusus
40
Y FACW
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
6
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
7.
height.
8.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
9.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
10.
m) tall.
11.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
95%
= Total Cover
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
50% of total cover:
45% 20% of
total cover: 19%
30
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
)
height.
1. Lonicera japonica 5 N
2. Smilax rotundifolia
2
N
3.
4.
Hydrophytic
5.
Vegetation
7
= Total Cover
Present? Yes X No
50% of total cover:
3.5 20% of
total cover: 1.4
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc Texture Remarks
0-18 2.5 YR 60 7.5 YR 4/6 40 C M Silt Loam
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11:
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced
MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
In icators for Problematic Hydric So
Dark Surface (S7) 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) (MLRA 147, 148)
Redox ( 8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
❑
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F1
Depleted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147}
9)
❑
Redox Dark Surface (F6) Very Shallow Dark Surface (T
Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Other (Explain in Remarks)
F12)
❑F
Hydric Soil Present? Yes
Forested wetland at base of farm fields and utility
right-of-way.
1
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Rocky River HDD Project City/County: Cabbarus/Stanly Sampling Date: 04/08/2020
Applicant/Owner: Duke Energy - Piedmont Natural Gas State: NC Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Jesse A. Brown Section, Township, Range: N/A
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): Lat: Long: Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary
Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required;
check all that aooly)
❑
❑
Surface Soil cracks (136)
Sparsely Vegetated concave Surface (138)
❑
Surface Water (Al) ❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑
High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑
Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑
Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (c3)
❑
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑
Water Marks (131)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (c4)
❑
Dry -Season Water Table (c2)
❑
Sediment Deposits (132)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (c6)
❑
crayfish Burrows (c8)
❑
Drift Deposits (133)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (c7)
❑
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (c9)
❑
Algal Mat or crust (134)
Iron Deposits
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Geomorphic Position
❑
(B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
❑
(D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
❑
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
FRG -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point:
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FRG: (A)
2.
Total Number of Dominant
3.
Species Across All Strata: (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FRG: (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
= Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
OBL species x 1 =
SaNinq/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
FACW species x 2 =
1
FRG species x 3 =
2
FACU species x 4 =
3
UPL species x 5 =
4
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
_ 2 -Dominance Testis >50%
9.
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is :53.0'
= Total Cover
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1.
2.
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
6
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
7.
height.
8.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
9.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
10.
m) tall.
11.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
= Total Cover
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
height.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Hydrophytic
5.
Vegetation
= Total Cover
Present? Yes No
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc Texture Remarks
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11:
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced
MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
In icators for Problematic Hydric So
Dark Surface (S7) 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) (MLRA 147, 148)
Redox ( 8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
❑
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F1
Depleted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147}
9)
❑
Redox Dark Surface (F6) Very Shallow Dark Surface (T
Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Other (Explain in Remarks)
F12)
❑F
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Rocky River HDD Project City/County: Cabbarus/Stanly Sampling Date: 04/08/2020
Applicant/Owner: Duke Energy - Piedmont Natural Gas State: NC Sampling Point: WET PFO-2
Investigator(s): Jesse A. Brown Section, Township, Range: N/A
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): Lat: 35.22845 Long:-80.47994 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification: N/A
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic vegetation Present? Yes X No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary
Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required;
check all that aooly)
❑
❑
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Sparsely vegetated Concave Surface (138)
®
Surface Water (Al) ❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑
High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑X
Drainage Patterns (B10)
0
Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
❑
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑
Water Marks (131)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
❑
Sediment Deposits (132)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑
Drift Deposits (133)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑
Saturation visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Iron Deposits
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Geomorphic Position
❑
(B5)
Inundation visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
❑
(D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
0
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
❑
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
FRG -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches): 2
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches): 0
Saturation Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches): 0
wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WET_PFO-2_UPL
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1. Acer rubrum
50
Y
FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FRG:
2
(A)
2. Quercus nigra
25
N
FAC
Total Number of Dominant
3.
Species Across All Strata:
2
(B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
100
5.
That Are OBL, FRCW, or FRG:
(AtB)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
75
= Total Cover
50% of total cover:
37.5 20% of
total cover:
15
OBL species
x 1 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FRCW species
x 2 =
1. Acer rubrum
25
N
FAC
FRG species
x 3 =
2. Ligustrum sinsense
25
N
FAC
FACU species
x 4 =
3
UPL species
x 5 =
4
Column Totals:
(A)
(B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A
=
7.
8.
9.
50
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 25
20% of total cover:
5
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
1.
Saururus cernuus
45
Y
OBL
2.
Toxicodendron radicans
20
N
FAC
3
Ligustrum sinsense
15
N
FAC
4.
Carex lurida
15
N
OBL
5.
Parthenocissus quinquefolia
10
N
FACU
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
U5 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 52.5 20% of total cover: 21
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1. Smilax rotundifolia 5 N UPL
2. Vitis rotundifolia 5 N FAC
3.
4.
5.
10 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 5 20% of total cover: 2
numbers here or on a separate
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is :53.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
Herb - RII herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine - RII woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: WET_PFO-2_UPL
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc Texture Remarks
0-16 2.5 YR 60 7.5 YR 4/6 40 RM M Clay Loam
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11:
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced
MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
In icators for Problematic Hydric So
Dark Surface (S7) 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) (MLRA 147, 148)
Redox ( 8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
❑
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F1
Depleted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147}
9)
❑
Redox Dark Surface (F6) Very Shallow Dark Surface (T
Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Other (Explain in Remarks)
F12)
❑F
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Rocky River HDD Project City/County: Cabbarus/Stanly Sampling Date: 04/08/2020
Applicant/Owner: Duke Energy - Piedmont Natural Gas State: NC Sampling Point: WET_PFO-2_UPL
Investigator(s): Jesse A. Brown Section, Township, Range: N/A
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): Lat: 35.229016 Long:-80.480540 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Goldston Very Channery Silt Loam; 15 to 45 percent slopes NWI classification: N/A
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No X
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary
Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that aooly)
❑
❑
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
❑
Surface Water (Al) ❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑
High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑
Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑
Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
❑
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑
Water Marks (131)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
❑
Sediment Deposits (132)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑
Drift Deposits (133)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Iron Deposits
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Geomorphic Position
❑
(B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
❑
(D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
❑
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
FRG -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes
No X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes
No X Depth (inches):
wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WET_PFO-2_UPL
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: % Cover
Species? Status
1. Prunus seritona 40
Y FACU
2. Acer rubrum 30
N FAC
3.—Ouercus ruhra 10
KI FACIl
4.
6.
7.
80 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 40 20% of total cover: 16
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 )
1. Acer rubrum 30 N FAC
2. Liquidambar styraciflua 5 N FAC
4.
5.
7
8.
9.
50% of total cover: 17.5
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
1. Polystichum acrostichoides
2. Lenicera�anenica
4.
5.
7
8.
9.
10.
U
35 = Total Cover
20% of total cover: 7
5
5
N FACU
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FRG:
(A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
(B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FRG:
(AtB)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FRG species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A)
(B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is :53.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
N FACU
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
10 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 5 20% of total cover: 2
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 'I )
1.
2.
3.
5.
50% of total cover:
numbers here or on a separate
= Total Cover
20% of total cover:
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Hydrophytic
Vegetation N
Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc Texture Remarks
0-16 5YR 5/8 100
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11:
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced
MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
In icators for Problematic Hydric So
Dark Surface (S7) 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) (MLRA 147, 148)
Redox ( 8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
❑
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F1
Depleted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147}
9)
❑
Redox Dark Surface (F6) Very Shallow Dark Surface (T
Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Other (Explain in Remarks)
F12)
❑F
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

APPENDIX C - SITE PHOTOGRAPHS

Photograph 1: View of Wetland Sample Point; PEM _WET_ 01; PEM; northeast.
Photograph 2: View of Upland Sample Point; PEM_01_UPL; Upland; northeast.
Photographs
Piedmont Natural Gas `�♦BURNS April 8, 2020
Rocky River HDD 1\MEDONNELL June 18, 2020
Cabarrus County, North Carolina

O '004 cD .ry OJ7 t�nx al ��
y "' ,,. off► �.
N' C�1 }�J�
�11��'O'
co
_ 0 o� , o-1 ` o
00
O O ;j
!4L `{{yy �i
R �.
ors _ . `�` � '+� r •!j ~r a` a � +ty�
rtr t o M. r r 43
,..
f "k
o cn p,
IT
a

w

4 x,
R
�,7
t �,r
at_
'k�,�� y F' '�el•�'
_ •' _
� +•ice• y�
,n_., : •!

lu m -
o
Gp
s
00
2g# 4S3 V co N
Q O
W Ol
W LTI Vj
CJ
a � N
N m
CD W
N
We
t. k
A
i
Y
F F}
y �
4, ,
{ 1
I

711
Ww.
Ul
c
rl) m
co` ':o
10
P��I, r + s. a _ - 'rid -; •_ _ ( � � _
r�,
y •` , ,�` 1, -"

0 w.
O F' NeifF N 01
r N .3 '.
O = c: 3 O_ o' go
a f 7 O S
is 7 > +
fD aj w
D. CO
_ [n
D 1+ N fD
(;D O, "
`0 Q
N IV
V 0� W n
N Ul C -0
O O O 1
in
CO rO 00
O O
1
V V O
J 0
1
�O
Ln
Ln
CD
IV m
fD bo p h
r �� �%
j,
/ yIF F n
� r
t�
r
' I;
� _ r
i
4
f J.

Photograph 15: View of Ephemeral Drainage AR1_S-1.
Piedmont Natural Gas I `�♦BURNS
Rocky River HDD 1\MEDONNELL
Photographs
April 8, 2020
June 18, 2020
Cabarrus County, North Carolina

r� =
m
n
o D-o o
O
N
Ol N OJ
rr —_ CD
O
C
Q
7
fD
to
7
al
Ul .. W N�
co
i
0000
A I+ N cp
tC IU
- 3—A&MWIAM
T
Ln
N
10
00
T
I+

Photograph 19: View of Ephemeral Drainage AR3_S-4
-28: Upslope view of JD-2; Drainage (north).
Piedmont Natural Gas I `�BURNS
Rocky River HDD 1\MEDONNELL
Photographs
April 8, 2020
June 18, 2020
Cabarrus County, North Carolina

PARCEL MAP

AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM

SAMPLE AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Rocky River HDD Project
LOT NO. PLAN NO. PARCEL ID:
STREET ADDRESS: Multiple parcels near Garmon Mill Rd and Pine Bluff Rd.
Cabarrus and Stanly Counties
Please print:
Property Owner: Piedmont Natural Gas (holder of easement)
Property Owner: Tom Morris (Project Manager at Piedmont Natural Gas)
The undersigned, registered property owners of the above noted property, do hereby authorize
Jesse A. Brown
(Contractor / Agent)
of Burns & McDonnell
(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 33068, Charlotte, NC 28233
Telephone: [phone]
We hereby certify the above information submitted in this application is true and accurate to the
best of our knowledge.
Tom Morris Digitallysigned byTom
i Morris, PE
P E Date: 2020.1 1.03
_ 14:43:50-05'00'
Authorized Signature
Authorized Signature
Date: Date: 11 /03/2020

PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERNIINATION FORM

PNG Rocky River HDD Project — Feature Table
Site Number
Latitude
Longitude
Cowardin
Estimated
Class of
Class/Stream
amount of
aquatic
Classification
aquatic
resource
resource in
review area
WET PEM-01
35.229449
-80.482191
Palustrine
0.0175 - acres
Wetland
Emergent
AR WET PEM-01
35.228080
-80.476000
Palustrine
0.0178 - acres
Wetland
Emergent
WET_PFO-01
35.23143
-80.486762
Palustrine
0.3833 - acres
Wetland
Forested
WET_PFO-02
35.228346
-80.479689
Palustrine
0.4372 - acres
Wetland
Forested
S-2 (Rocky River)
35.229705
-80.483723
Perennial
364.31 - If
Stream
S-3
35.229234
-80.482544
Intermittent
317.31 - If
Stream
S-4
35.228941
-80.481961
Perennial
361.45 - If
Stream
AR3 S-1
1 35.229791
1 -80.475822
1 Perennial
78.96 - If
Stream
AR3 S-3
1 35.229933
1 -80.472766
1 Perennial
70.09 - If
Stream