20120285 Ver 1_Stream Call Letter_20070514

NORTH CAROLINA
,01
Turnpike Authority
Gaston East -West Connector
Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties
STIP No U -3321
Merger Process Concurrence Point 2a — Proposed Approach
Handout 1— February 5, 2008
The next step in the merger process for the Gaston East West Connector project is
Concurrence Point 2a (CP2a) — Bridging and Alignment Review At CP2a the project
team will identify bridge locations and lengths and determine which natural resources
warrant additional avoidance measures The team will review the preliminary designs
to identify any changes that may be needed before finalization of the preliminary
engineering and completion of the environmental document Additionally the need for
expensive structural items such as wildlife crossings large retaining walls special
pedestrian accommodations etc will be considered at this time
(http / /www ncdot or /g doh /preconstruct /pe/MERGER01 /)
Due to the large size of the project NCTA would like to propose a methodology to focus
on the major stream crossings to be discussed at the CP2a meeting The purpose of this
letter is to describe the proposed approach and to request your comment and input
before finalizing the approach and proceeding with preparations for the CP2a meeting
The studies that provide the data needed for the CP2a meeting have been completed
Namely these include the Final Preliminary Hydraulic Technical Memorandum the
preliminary engineering designs and the Final Natural Resources Technical Report
(with impact calculations) (The draft NRTR was reviewed by NCTA and NCDOT and
their comments have been incorporated into the version of the NRTR to be used for
CP2a but this version has not yet been formally approved as final)
Based on the hydraulic analysis there are a total of 129 crossings having a
recommended structure equal to or larger than a 72 inch pipe (major crossings) (see
attached overview map from the Final Preliminary Hydraulic Technical Memorandum
For this large number of major crossings present on the Gaston East West Connector a
screening approach is proposed to identify those most important for the Merger Team to
discuss

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Determination Manual)
Project / Site Gaston E W Connector
Date 5/14/07
County Gaston
Applicant / Owner NC Turnpike Autority
Investigator Chris Sheats, Tim Savidge The Catena Group
State NC
1 Linodendron tulipifera
Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes X No
Community ID Up
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical situation)? Yes No X
Transect ID W3A8
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No X
Plot ID W3A8 flag3
(explain on reverse if needed)
10 Polystichum acrostichoides
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum Indicator
1 Linodendron tulipifera
Can
FACW
9 Oxydendron arboreum
III
subc NI
2 Ouercus rubra
can
FACU
10 Polystichum acrostichoides
herb FAC
3 Eleaegnus umbellata
shrub
NI
Oxidized Roots Channels in Upper 12
4 Morus rubra
subc
FAC
12
Depth to Saturated Soil >12 (in)
5 Ulmus rubra
Can
FAC
13
6 LicLuidamber styraciflua
Can
FAC +
14
7 Quercus nigra
Can
FAC
15
8 Vitis rotundifolia
vine
FAC
16
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL FACW or FAC excluding FAC)
>50%
Remarks
HYDROLOGY
_ Recorded Data (Describe In Remarks)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Stream Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Primary Indicators
Other
Inundated
_Saturated in Upper 12
X No Recorded Data Available
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Field Observations
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water (in)
Secondary Indicators
Oxidized Roots Channels in Upper 12
Depth to Free Water in Pit (in)
Water Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil >12 (in)
FAC Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks
SOILS

Map Unit Name
Drainage Class
(Series and Phase)
Confirm Mapped Type? Yes_ No x
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
Profile Description
Depth Matrix Colors
Moist)
Mottle Colors Mottle Texture Concretions
(Munsell Moist) Abundance /Contrast Structure etc
inches Horvzon (Munsell
0 g 10 YR 4/4
None
None loam
8 12+ 10 YR 5/6
None
None loam
Hydric Soil Indicators
_ Histosol
_ Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
_ Histic Epipedon
_
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_ Sulfidic Odor
Listed On Local Hydric Soils List
Aquic Moisture Regime
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
—Other (Explain in Remarks)
x
Remarks
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Yes X
No Is the Sampling Point
Within a Wetland? Yes_ No X
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes
No X
Hydric Soils Present?
Yes
No X
Remarks

P7:
'N
IIN
1, f
, I I
WL
,--m
REZ""W-ROIN
`WS- w
cz
tk`
I
Kil
A
, I I
WL
,--m
REZ""W-ROIN
`WS- w
cz
tk`
I
Kil

4 7 - Y
'r2y n �+, .t iA«^'
it
fi
.. _ 5 Y c5 i J �4
tt, � �'! t -i S '� L.,t �.t, °�� � r s� i;'r`c r � ,. °a e `"' - • �, t '.o�' -c`'�
' a .. ; f �� ♦ its _sy �,y, � ,�„ d •,� ? �} ✓<2i��G+ 't"` �Z �• � ,F� ` a'`��"`' i�'
n •v • L ,
fix
�� �iy n1Y`1 i .�' ` ��„t ;L ~r `".5 ry ';'r ���- '`•- "�t%Y'y1�� � ", 7� )_ K -0,�1 '�.. .�,•,F• r� . l:t +,«tip r;, �r... ts. r ,z >„ `tK- �.hj..,��- t I'4 `Y>� 3y «4,.J•;'�,F -�, :t .'rJ' t
c.^r -5{_+, y s„)) i� ,C' '� -' ✓ti` w' key i' y
,¢
^ � tt v5' .a,' .t..€1 "� �' � t' C^r t t�. ✓'K '1 2- ,.zc• � s T �� F.� ��r'�I� y j� ''�
`-t'"' x t44 �*+ h"T'�.�' x '� •LL 1 i .t ,YS s�y.Tli. �' 2>< u' t +t `
r•'s '>- fl Jt -.., ti -r .' f'.. °1,�"' r` ~�,-� r fs t � ��� �.�ztt?h,J" � !.'fi o a� � r.� t. t
VI
S,c;,
yy
3 o _
�f4.>k`'•,.,�'ir� w,� � �.d 5 '•�i�.�, i �� ` -'it. -+r^, Zk' u
y t' , . , ♦ Ll
ir
ynt Y w 1 S f t� * �C:.X, v,�4 -r� Yi+'�� � P i �a tv�•l _ ,,,, i S
,� , '"�°1 \,. .,x{ }`�"` .. fc �„� R , fj h •�7s'• -•e7t i i Ift;'f
it "i
ZC
`-� � �r�ky,< ' -� � ' ,Y..��"n. -'�� s }t a.. ,3YR S ,��td° f !�Y`�S � •ti..: t �,..
\r_ 11" r r tpY �� ? a.n ✓- t;- 5*-51,
lit-
'
a�
j r «i
kk E .� '". tz t _ `. }.r},•a ay r, r ', si{t,�,y Sp t'ri cL a.} a`'
i,y 1 µ , ks 7� 1��� 3 ♦ :r
i.; t-i._
3".9
ve
fi
ice:, r
-+ «3 {�.
w M , r 4 —, <
'( ry :..s Y � �''+ "t��r,,+iir�. %iy`r'.� cA >� ;��� «, ♦ - �.. t M, xS / j. �1
S
y E4�i s
`� .� .�- ♦� Y r � .Y�,�. r � � - et'�.

- d r4 � lJ �' 1 ! -�:, �w;�r 't �'3EA .}+ r - r �.. � � - � -�,v�' •� s4.q.
L t. * `s '.v ` i` ti r�'"� .,{• - .r s �"r ° i °.� >e, '.. ar F? �t S
t 5 � 4 7.t Si x ti. Y } i.. � �ll .M b "% r�R �r iK ,• IIA p��� �JJ` ¢6�`" ar b`Ti: �
° " 4 ��' f A r� {. fi 4 � �. < it t;' d• - F i el' �� yA} },p�• •�r'Z { j� i -` .�� �
Jr,
�€ p
Q.
s' y,:.: h �; �r� q e y�r.+q,:.>'�!�' �' .. � r �,� r��'r�d1'r a - •- x _ � I
.. �rK.. h• <'i..tb �t+ ri7;�'4� tt t4:....k',,�.z,L�t`- � 4 .n � �' i
r ► i .�{�# + +fit V
4 •rs }�'S�` 'E. �j�•r Ft^`'r t_' ar5.+ y .� `� is �` �
v� as '.-rv*N'w*+•v ' eo ,t t tT 1 �Fpa� 'r n `r �.. cy..` -10
�•; . *� `".s . 3 ,' \ '€,� r`,` 1� `i- L'i fi.i �. �1. i� S 4 ���r ' �• �' k C^^g.- '•�'�T ;"�y * t` `
Nt
` °� . c* � � c"� '" � E �t E�"'r, `� � � ,Y, w � c�•. " f'T'• b ;'"Ly r. z �� YJ�.
-, u S S.r� � 9 '�P �t�r � ,� j - �� 1 �'� y.' � "5. r. ♦ .•5. p {� s
4 f� t4rc rt c Lam, I hg A r y * a`F ✓ a..
., r � ; I ' `, � ,- • � � �' # � * � L7jL° .z a� i, � . k .fir'# ,,.f � � _,' yEt ,�
d f t,• �"'� t: .s �. -4 '�. t �,,, ct:. !s- '� � (x^51 "y �. \ _.
z t � r �4 {.� -.1 ck�, "a •t ;:ti h� t ., �,1CYj r s t `'
f1� F 1^ 4 .+ � 'Y'S"`Y J k <2 �Y f1 '� � R � � � � y�41� i S"��? � • ` .:
..it `w' A4,. 1 i�`Z s% -` . ° t 1s 4 •� ar1.s 7t}..`r. SS r I+. I Z 5 �, 4 .f' i d
tK -
-Ct.,f It, t III
44
CL
7 '.f t ��9 �r'<' ' - fy .t ���J i °t .y>� daX x� .`n • � C r. '' i'�' ��' A> 1
• _ �� a � � y.� i +4` S� r f ,. t �' � ��� � � ?{I'" .a5" n� � �4'i , �G, t 'T� �, ,.-• �JC" •� t �
'„y; r ttit '. � r ,�+ ^r � a {(+��j � J' t .. �,,,r.�F �y..�.c•: i.
.�"� -i-•r 'y �L '" �, a .X" a :CV ; � < � ^ �13•;,. '� ' � �i ..rr � r`t � F �
3 ' �+ '�•� -'�i . ' 'Sec"�•� - -- r �pf'k� y .r t � -ci- •t rar �a�� s-- I'�' - t .
ir � 4 �. -' �° • J x s<� � Syl � y � ° ry1 .a..'t t ,i ` � �. � ,>z � t ! r v 5 _
''�� r ��.-� �, (,` a��C arc � r -SCF� °s., i •1 9.' `
r�'� #' �[�J,YG.. � 1�R'r.. 'S,..i •r.• +* ,� „ -ter :r- f:S {.•. ,� �, o k
f•f �•� '� � r; ~�f a'1!� ��+ ,� ': ' [ �3 '-� ,yy' � cy"s.' f r'•� ' S �+ '.,51 l -:r.Y b
{{ I 4•

Y ► / Z�.
F .
a C k
)f '.'+�'. ..\ ,''{ . ti c�����4�. "`� .i'/1 \ r 1 i � cx. YS^s.� y_�•f„y .'vC,f r�,�:
00 -i „sx ��w �+ Tl.+'�a„ -� ✓.,� �.. tir
� < � .f o rr err � y t/r�' � � �, .; ` •L 4�t. � } ' `� r '�1 f"
tk,. "r,,S� q�*'t" / c
� �lh�"' °..
t� ', ir. ° ' f .,x, f7 r',�t "'- }•i:. Q'v� �,cc,.
� L �1..k '•4a�" `w ,r �� {r'�,: {. � a• - ^^':- "4'�s �'v � +`* x (, }: "� � ``-2yy Y_+.�.. G
L �+� .; �Jy�,,� `r f �+�i•1� ' 4�'x l^ �i�,�a,y �i., w4� ; ' ..yr�^�t7kx�
.: - � '-1 u� � r' - �..•.�'�.. Vii' -��y � � '4 r r.���°'�4 «�. �•'r�'t`"•
�' �fsp- 4 ��FF``Y��'C. 4.., ^l���'- y s,. ci �� � �.+'r�t .'� s� ✓ ��` `
� �s . � jJ fhsF�� :' a ► t°^ � ,� c� �� .r w+ti"�F -�r• �`:. �.��� r'���"�"� •�z,� t
�':. 1 \r'3.,'i ° ��d ��`' ; �. j .+ i f �r`:+ t '_" °,4+ �.'t�+��`-rh'i.•'� �Qy��: �, �y�
�i
-.nS.( •�a. E` 'c� ` .. rrr ' f,.. .y ti r t.r t#r•s ,
�,/� t/ r ss�,f ftr F• s ', 3s C � ,i w *x i .c /..i t. '. ti 't � + r'T �t't.
'` Y t!fa� , Y � +-Y_..R �y r"' f rc "w � � c Y- s �. •F t. S r}' �`!t'_
t�..w� � � � ��:7 i •;Aa �"+F` :3"`�� �"'t [ }r '� r• S "�T- x �h k1' `
v�. L c s� T � � �� /wS j � � ^f w � ♦ Y ("" { '�. � 4. � hy�
Al
?#+;y t•� > t k Y• t s r #s ek,,c ti ►_ rye �y} } {¢ 2
' s r 1 vt ► v�f'r
CL
-. r � • � .i .,_� tr,;i ( 'ij, r rr: �r yR:Y j � ,r-h•r ` �?...rk: i r�
.� 1.` 4 2. � •C.' '�#, Y c C � j- �y..�.�otl r�C �•Z .�- }` "'�. �."Fiaa.' �.: fl:} ��
w '
^{ � _ ' � r '{ �, Kr Si fit. .^ ,w- •.
-`w .� a FM r -~f \•. � "� � 'its ��� c���y�.:�t' T 1�i .�'�k�� �� : +
�' 1�Si y i `i � r' < � fir c .3 ! Si'•'� 'T� .�� �t
t� ,`�'f., �. ya . ,� Try K � F ``�` , '�'.. �,.y ` �i ' � rr•Ki ,, � tit i ="f�"r'��I��'�'� '�•t r�. �
_ t.., F:� tt k. �t1 i.': /av rt, a:�''t/ "•SC��" •:.+Y _/. C. �
,1 , �; � st F rrr'•L Yy}`' +.1' '�: ;;• � t rrG, `' �'r .fi r�+' . X �;�Y?;
� .. r I ✓ . V /'�t qI �'-. =y YC- _ ,eft st' ✓ l�
- • `r S. ', c � .'c { t t �f �,r L, r +... y "t�trl ���i,� w
,. S } �� -i�7 { a... }. r* "`f+4 �2 _„X•� 1�;y'�1,,.�.�a yk^�C�'Ci} �Tt �S' :t
r G tx >
.'t �'. 1 _y, t ' t .; fir✓'..' y.i
• .. vi '' ,.. ;. i• - -. _ • •k . �+'.,�m�' •r' ..- r. t < . • t .. . s z ! ism .. �_ -r �t`, c e'Y.•`: c'r�. ' r17

S' �� ~�tt 'g� ��� J'2 �r ,.� r 4 r °'Cy> +t .} ' r � � { 'tom 3 g' i t4 't} T ��.�` ; :� G S��~ ��,/•M
tr .5 �.�i��� ,p '"' � -- ^�\ � "t ri _i `al �• .'4 , i. fih F tt ti {'3 ...lf �''�� }r••�4a 'k J
"�} iJ* f t :• t �t i,.` 3 ( Y1-`� "">� �` t _'a+,` �y?'•s1 � r *��
�. r i r�- .l..Y„y,... a ti T -'' ,•r ' c { �(", `" t, c' rr` t"''!r} ,y.6..
+}� Ir �. r�.� ; 5 .� Y�,r • .+- r ter, � yf" +�' y�� "G°.� ^�Sr. Sr,'s - it ;,.?��'�"' �
' � 3 S1M �•- r .+=' "tsra` '' r _ -- � 1 � F `�"` c r ,r�+{� "^- � � r y y .r��m '
� �'fs `� a �� •` " y" ". � .'Kw �,.rt�r h E'. �`�, .tF� t. �- r`SY�Y'r -. ..,, t 1 <F CIX�-
_ � ' � ^'.f`� �� ° < < - +r .> 4-r / _ a r'Y "'`M .x < r• }2,`yJ T..c�%, '�t '..i )4 �%
'/� ► o - �' A' .-7 r r� s � r .� �� ' .9"*r�u t� �. x�'�L � r *,�� '��k �`"rt fix.
I ' r�'', r: -:F E,` ► '"• - ., .y r„?77r,ar
•.'„ors #' 'i' y+.1 +j • ,�,��+€ ' .Vy'
:e
'.1i•' � : ,� � r.`tv ` J _ 3 f {. � .r, r. t jy..�k � �, s t 3 �4 a `"�
�rr'.r �_r � �X �R f Y J ^� t< c.< �`����.'- a:..�a r; k �sM `�'��•� rq.,a.:• i
� w / ► „G;, i _�,. - / A �Yc � �� S \ P•,, fix.
f. l \ ar. � .,• s l% �'•t�� 'y ✓�fc try..,- '. a ty:
.r y��t„- :r�r!'�'. g �. '"hs °•4.`�'r � � I�,�'',�'i"3.1'`�'�.` � � ,.� n � +xn t'.
:. .,* �. r r xs• t ti � �' �1 � �;7.,C �k •„`x�.'r°"ts'l .i « s.:' r4"c f,4 .E
� r+x �" r � �� -,� :..s t' � x t *�x� t., � r ��.r..,`, t' � �r ' e.eh �'h• .
� '• .i � ,� a:, 1 }i -,� X� 't' � .sae r � .. ,r
J� � 4 �^ia, t a.. L . � Y• ,� .
�'r �, { '''o ri ►" t r `�.,t�,�r. - �..r�"�1* >,,
� r. Y +r -a�.r \ x"� t.. '` :-.t � ��"i at r .,�i�'• t'i- t �� r,� "'1"rr' t.._
..— rsi r r <�' �r v�f r„r� �i r„ ' `f. { 1 � �� i'' ' t��".. •,.� x-r'•� 5..� -. r 3
.ice � -,t�` .� �v.I�x� .{. 1,• 1 V ii �. i 1"rM..� � l,✓ y2
• _„c' s ^y J «E.r+y;Ja aY S" 1 .Y . }}{{,``,,,,.... �r, eh Yt:..� , .,�
y..�'^ a r � �` L�1+,r",� �' � "• F��' j'y " l - �-r`1.t. �'r� ,FCf. wr� °tiyr,* '.6 r k� i�3`:,.,- y�
� - 3 H � � ` r �,r- d"�F :�� r w t -�K' r•u . -+u z°r iF ,t," Ca 1
� ^ "r.+.iy-<+ �� 3 .k7y!"'�'•� tJ �-,p i`~ -:�,
kk
� � � _ii" 1, 2`r - ='' � i' c `r -s.'i r -+.�"r .% ,�,,.. a 'Y 4�, '+ c4'it r • *..t '\r
4��� ?'e i-y �_ ."`� r1- ► '�2 "'� "t t��� �_ .R �+` ta�� 5. � fy c�rc � ~. �,
�� �; ten. Z r°w. r .J a� �-'c' t 1�. "'-yam + -s� � E, �. � + .:r3 �c*kt,:• �` ?!/Fry
a >
!( �\ -•� y E'�, rr ay _y,E 3 .r "; � a� � . C < t� f t � ,?' r_ z � t!.
a {y.t r''x ,t". { .'� r ...fit .7+ _ ° ' -�s � •c ��-[T.��- +'w 5..( l 7' y �. ,4�:'r' -.
_ , . -a'c y .t� ^5f r� � - c; . r �: ' �ryx �•� �'� ='.r� �". `��,', r u t �" � -�`'� � 'iiY
i. �,y r'M H'_.`-- 4= s._� f.:', "t�; sue. '�"" i�,iT � ''�•�}. ,,�//yy��t�\ `t *.art'{ .
. �. ii .!j -♦ . � 4h i i..

5 � yL �r `^� • j *�• � '!�s�r s °'� � �' _ "" earl ,` � 11��.� ��y
' _ ..e _N c-¢ ��J� � y 7a n' s � ,�",...� ,•t� �.C- - f! Sf,, a. n i�." ; c,^k
�'� `�F ,`ter ,. z �� � s - � �,.- -% , : r� •��.�,: -� '£, ..K' y'`,,,�� �� �yt,�,
•x �� '' ,: �� fit° 5i �'4'� fr - � �y .�'�:/� +I `�;�.+,�°•�� �r.�'_'.� ".. --fi.4 ��l ✓1
.r t zs •-
'� r '� �'' � . tL w, -<.,� r � r"f"t,"�`a- r �t>�,,,,,., �. !'y '� ✓i s v��F'��Ki �/`"` 'r " f �
s
� - s"- 2 F rcr G.<�JFi - .rc,s'#!R F K 'r'i' �bu G- „F,Y'•�?- 3',,,, �- � ,, r+ , t �` .}
f�- t ; � -;4• E ` t i.. -+ � rx „tCt.4'''�% rT �a< �. ' `�^ 7�� �"+z -�
Y•, � Er � � r� �a a � a _ �r� i� i ��� ,44 ✓� f �t� -• �.5� -� �4't•+�. '�., _
1 + -s1 y • .. G ,��' � F� i s x +: '[' 7, ” �IC� .+, is mss. a
t t j � -y} ! � t IY, � `. � .� i '�`ti y.� � C'rri; f � �, �4...� "' ",! (+� �i•1 - .✓' _ ,°T" <r�. �
ED,
L•; ,�• z ,- �";y�v,� ,�a '� i,''SJ _ w _ t�` �_
./"�•� ��,rif 'c i .c7 t � x� w�., 7fJ � '�s � �"�y e`• �.r� � �i
Ale—
J,
ZP
,
���..yyIt •Fuy. -l•I.• \ .V��"� ♦ '�F��. <3_ �ti s, f� C \
c: • t v t ` \ \ \ \ \ \�
Tj yam/ �`�� '•-
_�c..��. �+ { �s' Y::i L'�: ., � � �l'� -�3•. - h r \ �fj�r ✓ski
,LuS y Tii • \\
1y 7y` s
{/� j� • r�t' -"�� 1. "'� -�L� `�+�': ►j�.
Y+ y -�•v -r -: Y y�r �_ °- � vl �y '� - ,a 4 - : \ : tom• �' _
r 1
T
Y
� - �Y•^S f ff� .S i � E� r. h A , M( ��a._ ... wt 1".-=- ""L.C.__ ".'?3.. ..Y_.� T-
I VP
mmmmm
IMO
CL
Y x

RM
3 7

3 .
&f
ti �M
4
L .,t
X41.
./ITS'

In
V�14.1

r.
5 ,mac
Zi
LAI
'Al

3;'• � x, � zZ7
p ' k
'� r '• 1° ce � ra
t �• 2 -:+ frS<
r!! Y+ �- "'�gti t • , r �Sl�l 1r is
10,
'�Y r
!'aFrr • `'V ir-} s`S .� � y. ssi ":; ; �,,'er3 �
LL, �r �, }Y'��. � r � 4 f fir' ♦ '� }' F y s � 4 s .w yr
G
t
a4'r
P-PA }4xha ' "sE• `'s` -..� 1•' y'+'; -tea
ZNr
ai
a� r a•��� y Y� ."w Y 7 ZJ'
�. x �`5 � �� � .i.Jti;•��' � 1 ' :3 ;� ,`� rf .} e � �. rte/
tee. _s-,h. - t��$''• - 't'''" _ .. / s�. �,+� a'
_ tt,� �.5� • {y /"y 7 } %.y ��� ? r•y! fir-
t dk � 7v
1K ,+
..'t r ` ,• 1^r�t y���a s-•t I-tat � � � ,% � `" " r,F7 +t s� f�" y�.
j
tr * -t--h }�

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLANDS DETERMINATION
(1987 ACOE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site Gaston East West Connector Community ID wetland
Applicant/Owner NCTA Transect ID
Investigator W Mullin /J Freeman Plot ID C2 005
A Do normal circumstances exist on this site?
B Is this site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)
C Is the area a potential Problem Area?
(If needed explain on reverse)
VEGETATION
Date
17 Oct 06
County
Gaston
State
NC
0 Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
MINANT PLANT SPECIES
STRATUM
Acer rubrum red maple
tree
L►nodendron tul►p►fera tulip poplar
tree
Smilax rotund►fol►a common greenbrier
vine
Viburnum dentatum downy arrowwood
shrub
Chasmanth►um laxum slender woodoats
forb
Microsteg►um v►m►neum Japanese grass
forb
Arund►nana tecta switch cane
forb
Tox►codendron radicans poison ivv
vine
,cent of Dominant Species that are OBL FACW or FAC (excluding FAC
HYnRC)I nr.y
❑ No
0 No
El No
FAC
FAC
FAC
FAC
FACW
FAC+
FACW
FAC
89% II
_Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks Section)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
_Stream Lake or Tide Guage
Primary Indicators
_Aerial Photographs
_Inundated
x Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_Other
Recorded Data Available
Marks
—No
—Water
Drift Lines
Field Observations
_
Sediment Deposits
Depth of Surface Water (in)
_
x Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth to Free Water in pit (in)
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Depth to Saturated Soil 12 (in)
_Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12
—Water Stained Leaves
_ Local Soil Survey Data
FAC Neutral Test
_
_Other (explain in Remarks Section)
Remarks
SOILS

(Series and Phase)
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
Profile Description
Depth
(inches) Horizon
08 A
g+ B
sandy loam
Matrix Colors
(Munsell Moist)
A n \/n A /n
7 5Y4/3
Hydrlc Soils Indicators
_ Hlstosol
_ Hlstic Epipedon
_ Sulfidic Odor
x Aquic Moisture Regime
—Reducing Conditions
x Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
Remarks
Drainage Class WD
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type ❑ Yes ❑ No
Mottle
Abundance /Contrast
distinct/common
distinct/common
Texture Concentrations
Structure etc
clay loam
loamv sand
_ Concretions
High Organic Content
_Organic Streaking In Sandy Soils
_ Listed on Local Hydrlc Soils List
—Listed on National Hydrlc Soils List
x Other (Explain In Remarks Section)
Oxidized root channels Inclusions of Madison series (lots of mica In soil) Common Inclusion for this series
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? 0 Yes ❑ No
Wetland Hydrology Present? El Yes ❑ No Is this Sampling Point within a 2 Yes ❑ No
Wetland?
Hydric Soils Present? 0 Yes ❑ No
(Remarks

I
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLANDS DETERMINATION
(1987 ACOE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site Gaston East West Connector Community ID upland Date _
Applicant/Owner NCTA Transect ID County
Investigator W Mullin /J Freeman Plot ID C3 004 State
A Do normal circumstances exist on this site?
B Is this site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)
C Is the area a potential Problem Area?
(If needed explain on reverse)
Cat 1 A 1 IUN
19 Oct 06
Gaston
NC
2 Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes 0 No
IMINANT PLANT SPECIES
STRATUM
Quercus alba white oak
tree
Morus rubra red mulberry
mid
Acer rubrum red maple
tree
L►gu►dambarstyrac►flua sweetgum
tree
Lon►cera japonica Japanese honeysuckle
vine
L►gustrum s►nense Chinese privet
shrub
Quercus rubra northern red oak
tree
Po/vst►chum acrosticho►des chnstmas fern
herb
rcent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC
HYDROLOGY
INDICATOR
FACU
FAC
FAC
FAC+
FAC
FAC
FAC U
FAC
62%
_Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks Section)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
_ Stream Lake or Tide Guage
Primary Indicators
Photographs
Inundated
_Aerial
_ Other
_
—Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
—No Recorded Data Available
Marks
—Water
Drift Lines
Field Observations
_
_Sediment Deposits
Depth of Surface Water (in)
_ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth to Free Water in pit (in)
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Depth to Saturated Soil (in)
_Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12
Stained Leaves
—Water
—Local Soil Survey Data
FAC Neutral Test
_
Other (explain in Remarks Section)
Remarks
NO WETLAND HYDROLOGY
SOILS

Map Unit Name Pacolet sandy loam Drainage Class WD
(Series and Phase) Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup) Confirm Mapped Type ❑ Yes ❑ No
file Description
Depth
'inches) Horizon
03 A
3+ B
Matrix Colors
(Munsell Moist)
1 nYR4 /,4
-1 UTK4 /3
iric Soils Indicators
_ Histosol
_ Histic Epipedon
_Sulfidic Odor
_Aquic Moisture Regime
—Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
JAS 9 We\ k',' I9711 A i_1WilL` /A>i[9L'
Mottle
Abundance /Contrast
Texture Concentrations
Structure etc
SANDYLOAM
SANDYLOAM
_ Concretions
—High Organic Content
_Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
—Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
—Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks Section)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? P1 Yes ❑ No
Wetland Hydrology Present? ❑ Yes 0 No Is this Sampling Point within a ❑ Yes E�] No
Wetland
Hydric Soils Present? ❑ Yes E No
Remarks
1 11

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLANDS DETERMINATION
(1987 ACOE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site Gaston East West Connector Community ID upland Date
Applicant/Owner NCTA Transect ID County
Investigator W Mullin /J Freeman Plot ID C4 003 State
A Do normal circumstances exist on this site?
B Is this site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)
C Is the area a potential Problem Area?
(If needed explain on reverse)
0 Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
L►nodendron tul►p►fera tulip poplar tree
L►qu►dambarstyrac►flua sweetgum mid
Acer rubrum red maple tree
Prunus serot►na black cherry tree
Acer negundo eastern box elder mid
Tox►codendron radicans poison ivy vine
Pinus taeda loblolly pine tree
Lon►cera japonica Japanese honeysuckle vine
rcent of Dominant Species that are OBL FACW or FAC (excluding FAC
HYnRni nr;Y
20 Oct 06
Gaston
NC
❑ No
0 No
Q No
ACATOR
FAC
FAC+
FAC
FACU
FACW
FAC
FAC
FAC
75% II
_Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks Section)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
—Stream Lake or Tide Guage
Primary Indicators
_Aerial Photographs
Inundated
_ Other
_
—Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
No Recorded Data Available
—Water Marks
Drift Lines
Field Observations
_
_ Sediment Deposits
Depth of Surface Water (in)
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth to Free Water in pit (in)
_
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Depth to Saturated Soil (in)
_Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12
—Water Stained Leaves
—Local Soil Survey Data
_ FAC Neutral Test
—Other (explain in Remarks Section)
Remarks
no wetland hydrology
JUILJ

k
Map Unit Name Chewacla loam
Drainage Class SPD
(Series and Phase)
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
Confirm Mapped Type
❑ Yes ❑ No
Profile Description
Depth
Matrix Colors
Mottle Texture Concentrations
(inches) Horizon
(Munsell Moist)
Abundance /Contrast
Structure etc
03 A
10YR3/3
CLAY LOAM
3 9 B
10YR4/3
CLAY LOAM
9+
10YR4/4
CLAY LOAM
iric Soils Indicators
_ Histosol
_ Histic Epipedon
_Sulfidic Odor
_Aquic Moisture Regime
—Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
SOIL NOT PRESENT
WETLAND DETERMINATION
_ Concretions
High Organic Content
_Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
—Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
—Listed on National Hydric Soils List
_Other (Explain in Remarks Section)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? E] Yes ❑ No
Wetland Hydrology Present? ❑ Yes 0 No Is this Sampling Point within a ❑ Yes 0 No
Wetland?
Hydric Soils Present? ❑ Yes El No
I
0

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLANDS DETERMINATION
(1987 ACOE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site Gaston East West Connector Community ID wetland
Applicant/Owner NCTA Transect ID
Investigator W Mullin /J Freeman Plot ID C6 004
A Do normal circumstances exist on this site?
B Is this site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)
C Is the area a potential Problem Area?
(If needed explain on reverse)
MINANT PLANT SPECIES
Eutrochium fistulosum doe pye weed
Liquidambarstyraciflua sweetgum
Lonlcerajaponica Japanese honeysuckle
Acer rubrum red maple
Arundmana tecta switch cane
Date
2 Nov 06
County
Gaston
State
NC
El Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes 7 No
STRATUM
forb
INDICATi
FAC+
tree
FAC+
vine
FAC
tree
FAC
forb
FACW
Drift Lines
Field Observations
_
_ Sediment Deposits
Depth of Surface Water -8 (in)
Patterns in Wetlands
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL FACW or FAC (excluding FAC ) 80%
Remarks
HYDROLOGY
_Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks Section)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
_ Stream Lake or Tide Guage
Primary Indicators
_Aerial Photographs
X Inundated
_Other
X Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
No Recorded Data Available
—Water Marks
Drift Lines
Field Observations
_
_ Sediment Deposits
Depth of Surface Water -8 (in)
Patterns in Wetlands
Depth to Free Water in pit (in)
—Drainage
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Depth to Saturated Soil (in >
_Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12
—Water Stained Leaves
—Local Soil Survey Data
_ FAC Neutral Test
Other (explain in Remarks Section)
Remarks
JVILJ

Map Unit Name CHEWACLA LOAM
Drainage Class SPD
(Series and Phase)
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
Closely matches?
Yes ❑ No
Profile Description
Depth
Matrix Colors
Mottle Texture Concentrations
(inches) Horizon
(Munsell Moist)
Abundance /Contrast
Structure etc
0 3 A
10YR4/2
distinct/few
clay loam
3+ B
GLEY 6N
clay
Hydric Soils Indicators
_ Histosol
_ Histic Epipedon
_ Sulfidic Odor
x Aquic Moisture Regime
—Reducing Conditions
x Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
Remarks
Wt 1 LANU Ut I tKMINA I IVN
_ Concretions
—High Organic Content
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
—Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks Section)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? 0 Yes ❑ No
Wetland Hydrology Present? 0 Yes ❑ No Is this Sampling Point within a 0 Yes ❑ No
Wetland?
Hvdric Soils Present? 0 Yes ❑ No

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLANDS DETERMINATION
(1987 ACOE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site Gaston East West Connector Community ID upland
Applicant/Owner NCTA Transect ID
Investigator W Mullin /J Freeman Plot ID C7 001
A Do normal circumstances exist on this site?
B Is this site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)
C Is the area a potential Problem Area?
(If needed explain on reverse)
VFCZFTATInN
Fagus grand►fol►a American beech
Acer rubrum red maple
Smilax rotund►fol►a common greenbner
L►qu►dambar styrac►flua sweetgum
Lon►cera/apon►ca Japanese honeysuckle
Date
6 Nov 06
County
Gaston
State
NC
ED Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes 0 No
STRATUM
tree
INDICAT
FACU
tree
FAC
vine
FAC
tree
FAC+
vine
FAC
—No
Drift Lines
Field Observations
_
_ Sediment Deposits
(Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL FACW or FAC (excluding FAC ) 60%
Remarks
uvn0n1 nt--v
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks Section)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
_
Lake or Tide Guage
Primary Indicators
_Stream
Photographs
_Inundated
_Aenal
_Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_Other
Recorded Data Available
—Water Marks
—No
Drift Lines
Field Observations
_
_ Sediment Deposits
Depth of Surface Water (in)
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth to Free Water in pit (in)
_
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Depth to Saturated Sod (in)
_Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12
Stained Leaves
—Water
—Local Soil Survey Data
FAC Neutral Test
_
Other (explain in Remarks Section)
Remarks
no hydrology at this point
SOILS

Map Unit Name Pacolet sandy loam Drainage Class WD
(Series and Phase) Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup) Closely matches? P-1 Yes ❑ No
Profile Description
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Texture Concentrations
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) Abundance /Contrast Structure etc
0 16 A 10YR4/6 CLAY LOAM
Iric Soils Indicators
_ Histosol
_ Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
_Aquic Moisture Regime
—Reducing Conditions
_Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
0 WETLAND SOILS
_ Concretions
—High Organic Content
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
—Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
—Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks Section)
Wt I LANU Ut I tKMINA I IVN
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? E Yes ❑ No
Wetland Hydrology Present? ❑ Yes 0 No Is this Sampling Point within a ❑ Yes No
Wetland?
Hvdric Sods Present? ❑ Yes 0 No
marks

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLANDS DETERMINATION
(1987 ACOE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site Gaston East West Connector Community ID upland
Applicant/Owner NCTA Transect ID
Investigator W Mullin /J Freeman Plot ID C8 001
A Do normal circumstances exist on this site?
B Is this site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)
C Is the area a potential Problem Area?
(If needed explain on reverse)
VEG
r__^RI
Date _
County
State _
0 Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
6 Nov 06
Gaston
NC
❑ No
No
No
Fagus gran►fol►a American beech tree FACU
Acer rubrum red maple tree FAC
Oxydendrum arboreum sourwood tree NI
Po/ystichum acrosticho►des christmas fern herb FAC
Euonymous amencana strawberry bush forb FAC
Lon►cerajapon►ca Japanese honeysuckle vine FAC
cent of Dominant Species that are OBL FACW or FAC (excluding FAC ) 33%
HYDROLOGY
Data (Describe in Remarks Section)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
_Recorded
Lake or Tide Guage
Primary Indicators
_Stream
Photographs
_ Inundated
_Aenal
_Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_Other
Recorded Data Available
—Water Marks
—No
Lines
Field Observations
—Drift
_Sediment Deposits
Depth of Surface Water (in)
Patterns in Wetlands
Depth to Free Water in pit (in)
—Drainage
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Depth to Saturated Soil (in)
_Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12
Stained Leaves
—Water
—Local Soil Survey Data
Neutral Test
—FAC
Other (explain in Remarks Section)
Remarks
no hydrology at this point
SOILS

Map Unit Name Pacolet sandy loam Drainage Class WD
(Series and Phase) Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup) Closely matches? 0 Yes ❑ No
Profile Description
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Texture Concentrations
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) Abundance /Contrast Structure etc
016 A 10YR4/6 clay loam
iric Soils Indicators
_ Histosol
_ Histic Epipedon
_Sulfidic Odor
_Aquic Moisture Regime
—Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
wetland soils
_ Concretions
—High Organic Content
—Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
—Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
—Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks Section)
WETLANU UL I LKMINA I IVN
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? ❑ Yes El No
Wetland Hydrology Present? ❑ Yes D No Is this Sampling Point within a ❑ Yes D No
Wetland?
Hydric Soils Present? ❑ Yes No

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLANDS DETERMINATION
(1987 ACOE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site Gaston East West Connector Community ID upland Date
Applicant/Owner NCTA Transect ID County
Investigator W Mullin /J Freeman Plot ID C9 001 State
A Do normal circumstances exist on this site?
B Is this site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)
C Is the area a potential Problem Area?
(If needed explain on reverse)
V1=rFTAT11(1N
El Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
6 Nov 06
Gaston
NC
❑ No
No
No
DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES STRATUM INDICATOR
1 Fagus gran►folia American beech tree FACU
2 Acer rubrum red maple tree FAC
3 L►nodendron tul►p►fera tulip poplar tree FAC
a Po/ystichum acrosticho►des chnstmas fern herb FAC
5 Carp►nus carohn►ana musclewood mid FAC
6 Oxydendrum arboreum sourwood tree NI
7 As►m►n►a tnloba paw paw shrub FAC
s
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC ) 71%
Remarks
uvnoni nr•v
Data (Describe in Remarks Section)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
_Recorded
Lake or Tide Guage
Primary Indicators
_Stream
Photographs
_Inundated
_Aerial
_Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_Other
No Recorded Data Available
—Water Marks
_
Lines
Field Observations
—Drift
_ Sediment Deposits
Depth of Surface Water (in)
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth to Free Water in pit (in )
_
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Depth to Saturated Sod (in )
_Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12
Stained Leaves
—Water
—Local Soil Survey Data
Neutral Test
—FAC
Other (explain in Remarks Section)
Remarks
no wetland hydrology
SOILS

Map Unit Name Pacolet sandy loam Drainage Class WD
(Series and Phase) Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup) Closely matches? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Profile Description
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Texture Concentrations
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) Abundance /Contrast Structure etc
0 16 A 10YR4/6 CLAY LOAM
Hydric Soils Indicators
_ Histosol
_ Histic Epipedon
_Sulfidic Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
—Reducing Conditions
_ Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
Remarks
WETLAND DEl
_ Concretions
—High Organic Content
—Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
—Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
—Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks Section)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? 0 Yes ❑ No
Wetland Hydrology Present? ❑ Yes El No Is this Sampling Point within a ❑ Yes 0 No
Wetland?
Hydric Sods Present? ❑ Yes El No

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLANDS DETERMINATION
(1987 ACOE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site Gaston East West Connector Community ID upland Date _
Applicant/owner NCTA Transect ID County
Investigator W Mullin /J Freeman Plot ID C10 004 State
A Do normal circumstances exist on this sites Q Yes ❑ No
B Is this site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation) ❑ Yes No
C Is the area a potential Problem Area? ❑ Yes No
(If needed explain on reverse)
7 Nov 06
Gaston
NC
All
DOMINANT PLANT SPECIE5
J 1 r%m " " ""
1 P►nus taeda loblolly pine
tree
2 L►qu►dambar styrac►flua sweetgum
tree
3 Frax►nus amencana white ash
tree
a Elaeagnus pungens thorny olive
shrub
s L►nodendron tul►p►fera tulip poplar
tree
s Jun►perus virg►n►ana eastern red cedar
mid
7 Polyst►chum acrost►cho►des chnstmas fern
herb
s Lon►cera japon►ca Japanese honeysuckle
vine
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC
Remarks
GY
FAC
FAC+
FACU
NI
FAC
FACU
FAC
FAC
50% II
HYDROLO
Data (Describe in Remarks Section)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
_Recorded
Lake or Tide Guage
Primary Indicators
_Stream
Photographs
_Inundated
_Aerial
_Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_Other
No Recorded Data Available
—Water Marks
Lines
Field Observations
—Drift
_Sediment Deposits
Depth of Surface Water (in)
_ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth to Free Water in pit (m)
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Depth to Saturated Soil (in)
_Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12
Stained Leaves
—Water
—Local Soil Survey Data
FAC Neutral Test
_
Other (explain in Remarks Section)
Remarks
no hydrology at this point
SOILS

Map Unit Name Gaston sandy clay loam
Drainage Class WD
(Series and Phase)
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
Closely matches?
0 Yes ❑ No
Profile Description
Depth
Matrix Colors
Mottle
Texture Concentrations
(inches) Horizon
(Munsell Moist)
Abundance /Contrast
Structure etc
05 A
7 5YR4/6
SANDY CLAY LOAM
5+ B
7 5YR5/8
SANDY CLAY LOAM
Hydric Soils Indicators
_ Histosol
Histic Epipedon
_ Sulfldic Odor
Aqulc Moisture Regime
—Reducing Conditions
_ Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
Remarks
o wetland soils
_ Concretions
—High Organic Content
—Organic Streaking In Sandy Soils
—Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
—Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks Section)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? 0 Yes ❑ No
Wetland Hydrology Present? ❑ Yes 0 No Is this Sampling Point within a ❑ Yes No
y gy Wetland?
Hvdnc Sods Present? ❑ Yes E] No
marks

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLANDS DETERMINATION
(1987 ACOE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site Gaston East West Connector Community ID upland
Applicant/Owner NCTA Transect ID
Investigator W Mullin /J Freeman Plot ID C11 001
A Do normal circumstances exist on this site?
B Is this site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)
C Is the area a potential Problem Area?
(If needed explain on reverse)
Date
7 Nov 06
County
Gaston
State
NC
Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES a i MA 1 u1v1
1114UIVM 1'
1 Polyst►chum acrost►cho►des christmas fern
herb
FAC
2 Lon►cerajapon►ca Japanese honeysuckle
vine
FAC
s L►gustrum s►nense Chinese privet
shrub
FAC
a Carp►nus carohn►ana musclewood
mid
FAC
5 L►riodendron tul►p►fera tulip poplar
tree
FAC
s Quercus alba white oak
tree
FACU
7 P►nus virg►n►ana Virginia pine
tree
NI
a Carya alba mockernut hickory
tree
NI
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC
)
50%
Remarks
nlvrwwv
Data (Describe in Remarks Section)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
_Recorded
Stream Lake or Tide Guage
Primary Indicators
_
Photographs
_Inundated
_Aerial
_Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_Other
No Recorded Data Available
—Water Marks
Lines
Field Observations
—Drift
— Sediment Deposits
Depth of Surface Water (in)
—Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth to Free Water in pit (in )
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Depth to Saturated Soil (in)
—Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12
Stained Leaves
—Water
—Local Soil Survey Data
FAC Neutral Test
_
Other (explain in Remarks Section)
Remarks
no hydrology at this point
SOILS

Map Unit Name Pacolet sandy loam
Drainage Class WD
(Series and Phase)
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
Closely matches?
Yes ❑ No
Profile Description
Depth
Matrix Colors
Mottle
Texture Concentrations
(inches) Horizon
(Munsell Moist)
Abundance /Contrast
Structure etc
05 A
7 5YR4/2
SANDY LOAM
5+ B
5YR5/6
SANDY CLAY LOAM
Hydric Soils Indicators
_ Histosol
_ Hlstic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
_Aquic Moisture Regime
—Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
_ Concretions
—High Organic Content
—Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
—Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
—Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks Section)
WETLAND Ut I CKMINA I IVN
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? [�] Yes ❑ No
Wetland Hydrology Present9 ❑ Yes El No Is this Sampling Point within a ❑ Yes No
y gy Wetland?
Hvdric Soils Present? ❑ Yes 0 No
(Remarks

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLANDS DETERMINATION
(1987 ACOE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site Gaston East West Connector Community ID upland
Applicant/Owner NCTA Transect ID
Investigator W Mullin /J Freeman Plot ID C12 001
A Do normal circumstances exist on this site?
B Is this site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)
C Is the area a potential Problem Area?
(If needed explain on reverse)
A 1 IUN
ANT PLANT
Acer rubrum red maple
L►gustrum s►nense Chinese privet
Eupatonum cap►ll►fol►um dog fennel
Jun►perus virg►n►ana eastern red cedar
Rubus argutus blackberry
Quercus cocc►nea scarlet oak
L►qu►dambarstyrac►flua sweetgum
Date
7 Nov 06
County
Gaston
State
NC
21 Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
E No
❑ Yes
0 No
STRATUM
tree
INDICATOR
FAC
shrub
FAC
forb
FACU
mid
FACU
forb
FACU+
tree
NI
tree
FAC+
Depth of Surface Water (in)
_ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
(Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC )
Remarks
43% II
nvrwwv
Data (Describe in Remarks Section)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
_Recorded
Lake or Tide Guage
Primary Indicators
_Stream
Photographs
_Inundated
_Aerial
_Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_Other
No Recorded Data Available
—Water Marks
Lines
Field Observations
—Drift
— Sediment Deposits
Depth of Surface Water (in)
_ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth to Free Water in pit (in )
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Depth to Saturated Soil (in )
_Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12
Stained Leaves
—Water
—Local Soil Survey Data
FAC Neutral Test
_
Other (explain in Remarks Section)
Remarks
no hydrology at this point
SOILS

Map Unit Name Pacolet sandy loam
(Series and Phase)
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
Drainage Class WD
Field Observations
Closely matches? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Profile Description
Depth Matrix Colors
Mottle Texture Concentrations
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist)
Abundance /Contrast Structure etc
05 A 7 5YR4/2
sandy loam
5+ B 5YR5/6
sandy clay loam
Hydric Sods Indicators
Hlstosol
_ Concretions
_
Histic Epipedon
—High Organic Content
Odor
_Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_Sulfidic
Moisture Regime
_Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
_Aquic
Conditions
_ Listed on National Hydric Soils List
—Reducing
_Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
_Other (Explain in Remarks Section)
Remarks
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? ❑ Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? ❑ Yes No Is this Sampling Point within a ❑ Yes No
y gy Wetland?
Hydric Soils Present? ❑ Yes No
Remarks

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLANDS DETERMINATION
(1987 ACOE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site Gaston East West Connector Community ID wetland
Applicant/Owner NCTA Transect ID
Investigator W Mullin /J Freeman Plot ID C13 001
A Do normal circumstances exist on this site?
B Is this site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)
C Is the area a potential Problem Area?
(If needed explain on reverse)
VEGETA
L►nodendron tul►p►fera tulip poplar
Carp►nus carol►n►ana musclewood
Acer rubrum red maple
Ulmus rubra slippery elm
Lon►cerajapon►ca Japanese honeysuckle
L►gustrum s►nense Chinese privet
Viola spp violets
Date
5 Uec Ub
County
Gaston
State
NC
Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
STRATUM
tree
INDICAI
FAC
mid
FAC
tree
FAC
tree
FAC
vine
FAC
shrub
FAC
herb
FAC
Depth of Surface Water 2 (in)
_ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC )
86% II
n T Ur%VLOGY
Data (Describe in Remarks Section)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
_Recorded
Lake or Tide Guage
Primary Indicators
_Stream
Photographs
X Inundated
_Aerial
_Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_Other
No Recorded Data Available
—Water Marks
X Drift Lines
Field Observations
— Sediment Deposits
Depth of Surface Water 2 (in)
_ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth to Free Water in pit 0 (in)
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Depth to Saturated Soil 0 (in)
_Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12
Stained Leaves
—Water
—Local Soil Survey Data
FAC Neutral Test
_
Other (explain in Remarks Section)
Remarks
SOILS

Map Unit Name Vance sandy loam
Drainage Class
(Series and Phase)
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
Closely matches?
0 Yes ❑ No
Profile Description
Depth
Matrix Colors
Mottle
Texture Concentrations
(inches) Horizon
(Munsell Moist)
Abundance /Contrast
Structure etc
03 A
10YR3 /2
clay loam
3+ B
10YR5/2
distinct/common
clay loam
Hydric Soils Indicators
_ Hlstosol
_ Histic Eplpedon
_Sulfldic Odor
x Aquic Moisture Regime
—Reducing Conditions
x Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
Remarks
_ Concretions
—High Organic Content
_Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
—Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
—Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks Section)
WETLAND DETERMINATIVN
Hydrophytic Vegetation Presents Q Yes ❑ No
Is this Sampling Point within a ,, ❑ Yes El No
Wetland Hydrology Presents Yes ❑ No Wetland?
Hvdric Soils Present? El Yes ❑ No
IlRemarks

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLANDS DETERMINATION
(1987 ACOE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site Gaston East West Connector Community ID upland Date _
Applicant/owner NCTA Transect ID County
Investigator W Mullin /J Freeman Plot ID C14 002 State
A Do normal circumstances exist on this site?
B Is this site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)
C Is the area a potential Problem Area?
(If needed explain on reverse)
VEGETA
Quercus alba (white oak
L►r►odendron tul►p►fera (tulip poplar)
Quercus rubra (northern red oak)
Jun►perus v►rg►n►ana (eastern red cedar)
L►qu►dambar styrac►flua (sweetgum)
Eupatoru►m capol►fol►um (dog fennel)
P►nus virg►n►ana (Virginia pine)
5 Dec Ub
Gaston
NC
0 Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes El No
❑ Yes E No
STRATUM
tree
INDICATi
FACU
tree
FAC
tree
FACU
mid
FACU
tree
NI
mid
FAC+
herb
FACU
Depth of Surface Water (m)
_ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
I lPercent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC )
Remarks
ROLOGY
29% II
HYD
Data (Describe in Remarks Section)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
_Recorded
Stream Lake or Tide Guage
Primary Indicators
_
Photographs
_Inundated
_Aenal
_Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_Other
No Recorded Data Available
—Water Marks
Lines
Field Observations
—Drift
_Sediment Deposits
Depth of Surface Water (m)
_ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth to Free Water in pit (in)
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Depth to Saturated Sod (in)
_Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12
Stained Leaves
—Water
—Local Soil Survey Data
FAC Neutral Test
_
Other (explain in Remarks Section)
Remarks
no hydrology at this point
SOILS

Map Unit Name Gaston sandy clay loam
(Series and Phase)
Taxonomy (Subgroup)
Drainage Class
Field Observations
Closely matches?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Profile Description
Depth
Matrix Colors
Mottle
Texture Concentrations
(inches) Horizon
(Munsell Moist)
Abundance /Contrast
Structure etc
04 A
10YR3/3
LOAM
4+ B
10YR5/6
SANDY CLAY LOAM
Hydric Soils Indicators
_ Histosol
_ Histic Epipedon
_ Sulfidic Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
—Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
IINO WETLAND SOILS
_ Concretions
—High Organic Content
—Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
—Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
—Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks Section)
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? ❑ Yes No
Is this Sampling Point within a
Wetland Hydrology Present? ❑Yes No Wetland? F] Yes ❑ No
Hydric Soils Present? ❑ Yes Q No

Fourth Version
WETLANDS RATING WORKSHEET
Project name Gaston Co E W Connector Nearest road US Highway 321
County Gaston Wetland area 031 acres Wetland width 90 _feet
Name of evaluator J Freeman/W Mullin Date 10 16 06
Wetland location
on pond or lake
on perennial stream
X on intermittent stream
_ within mterstream divide
other
Soil series Pacolet sandy loam
predominantly organic — humus
muck or peat
x predominantly mineral — non sandy
_ predominantly sandy
Adjacent land use
(within '/z mile upstream upslope or radius)
_ forested /natural vegetation 40 %
_ agriculture, urban/suburban 50 %
impervious surface 10 %
Dominant vegetation
(1) Acer rubrum
(2) Smilax rotundifolia
(3) Viburnum dentatum
Flooding and wetness
Hydraulic factors _ semipermanently to permanently flooded
or indundated
_ steep topography _ seasonally flooded or inundated
_ ditched or channelized x intermittently flooded or temporary
x total riparian wetland width > 100 ft surface water
no evidence of flooding or surface water
Wetland type (select one)*
Bottomland hardwood forest
_ Pine savanna
x Headwater forest
_ Freshwater marsh
Swamp forest
_ Estuarine fringe forest
_
Wet flat
_ Ephemeral wetland
_
Pocosm
_ Carolina bay
_ Bog forest
_ Bog/fen
_ Seep
Other
*The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels
weight
R Water storage 1 x400= _4_
A Bank/shoreline stabilization 3 x400= 12 Wetland
Score
T Pollutant removals 5 x 5 00 = _25_
64
1 Wildlife habitat 3 x200= _6
N Aquatic life value 4 x400= _16
C, Recreation/Education 1 x 1 00 =
* *Add 1 point if in sensitive watershed and > 10% nonpomt disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius

WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET Fourth Version
Project Name Gaston East West Connector
County Gaston
Name of Evaluator
Nearest Road US Highway 321
Wetland area 0 1 acres Wetland width 55 feet
William Mullin & Jennifer Freeman Date 10/17/2006
Wetland location
_ on pond or lake
_ on perennial stream
x on intermittent stream
_within mterstream divide
other
Soil series Pacolet sandy loam
_ predominantly organic humus, muck or
peat
x predominantly mineral non sandy
predominantly sandy
Hydraulic factors
_ steep topography
_ ditched or channelized
x total wetland width > 100 feet
Wetland Type (select one)*
Bottomland hardwood forest
x Headwater forest
Swamp forest
Wet flat
Pocosin
Bog forest
Adjacent land use
(within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius)
forested /natural vegetation 40 %
agriculture, urban/suburban 50 %
impervious surface 10 %
Dominant vegetation
(1) red maple
(2) tulip poplar
(3) common greenbrier
Flooding and wetness
semipermanently to permanently flooded or
inundated
seasonallLflooded or inundated
x intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
no evidence of flooding or surface water
Pine savanna
Freshwater marsh
Bog /fen
Ephemeral wetland
Carolina bay
Other
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels
Water 1 x 4 00 = 4 Wetland
R
storage
A
Bank/Shoreline stabilization
2
x 4 00 =
8
rating
T
Pollutant removal **
5
x 5 00 =
25
I
Wildlife habitat
3
x 2 00 =
6
N
G
** Add 1 point
Aquatic life value
Recreation /education
if in sensitive watershed and > 10% non point source
3
1
disturbance within
x 4 00 =
x 100 =
1/2 mile upstream
12
1
upslope or
radius
0 1

WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET Fourth Version
Project Name _Gaston East West Connector
County Gaston
Name of Evaluator
Wetland area
William Mullin & Jennifer Freeman
Wetland location
x on pond or lake
_ on perennial stream
_ on intermittent stream
_ within mterstream divide
other
Nearest Road NC 274 (Union Rd)
0 19 acres Wetland width 90 feet
Date 12/7/2006
Adjacent land use
(within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius)
forested /natural vegetation 60 %
agriculture urban /suburban 40 %
impervious surface %
Soil series Helena sandy loam Dominant vegetation
_ predominantly organic humus muck or (1) Liriodendron tuhpifera
peat (2) Alnus serrulata
x predominantly mineral non sandy (3) Quercus nigra
predominantly sandy
Hydraulic factors
_ steep topography
_ditched or channelized
x total wetland width > 100 feet
Wetland Type (select one)*
Bottomland hardwood forest
Headwater forest
x Swamp forest
Wet flat
Pocosm
Bog forest
Flooding and wetness
x semipermanently to permanently flooded or
inundated
seasonally flooded or inundated
intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
no evidence of flooding or surface water
Pine savanna
Freshwater marsh
Bog/fen
Ephemeral wetland
Carolina bay
Other
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels
R Water storage 2 x 4 00 = 8 Wetland
A
Bank/Shoreline stabilization
2
x 4 00 =
8
rating
T
I
Pollutant removal **
Wildlife habitat
2
3
x 5 00 =
2 00 =
10
6�]
N
G
** Add 1 point
Aquatic life value
Recreation /education
if in sensitive watershed and > 10% non point source
2
1
disturbance within
x
x 4 00 =
x 1 00 =
1/2 mile upstream
8
1
upslope or
radius
A Bank/Shoreline stabilization 1 x 4 UU = 4 rating
-
T Pollutant removal ** 2 x 5 00 = 10
I Wildlife habitat 2 x 2 00 = 43i
N Aquatic life value 2 x 4 00 = 8
G Recreation/education 1 x 1 00= I 1
** Add 1 point if in sensitive watershed and > 10% non point source disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius

WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET Fourth Version
Project Name _Gaston East West Connector
County Gaston
Name of Evaluator
Wetland area
William Mullin & Jennifer Freeman
Wetland location
_ on pond or lake
x on perennial stream
_ on intermittent stream
_within mterstream divide
other
Soil series Wedowee sandy loam
_ predominantly organic humus muck or
peat
x predominantly mineral non sandy
predominantly sandy
Hydraulic factors
x steep topography
_ ditched or channelized
x total wetland width > 100 feet
Wetland Type (select one)*
x Bottomland hardwood forest
Headwater forest
Swamp forest
Wet flat
Pocosm
Bog forest
Nearest Road SR 2425 (Patrick Rd)
03 acres Wetland width 70 feet
Date 12/14/2006
Adjacent land use
(within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius)
forested /natural vegetation 70 %
agriculture urban /suburban 30 %
impervious surface %
Dominant vegetation
(1) Betula nigra
(2) Liquidambar styraciva
(3) Arundmaria tecta
Flooding and wetness
x semipermanently to permanently flooded or
inundated
seasonally flooded or inundated
intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
no evidence of flooding or surface water
Pine savanna
Freshwater marsh
Bog/fen
Ephemeral wetland
Carolina bay
Other
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels
R
Water storage
2
x 4 00 =
8 Wetland
A
Bank/Shoreline stabilization
2
x 4 00 =
8 rating
T
Pollutant removal **
2
x 5 00 =
10
I
Wildlife habitat
3
x 2 00 =
6 a�
N
Aquatic life value
2
x 4 00 =
8
G
Recreation /education
1
x 1 00 =
1
** Add 1
point if in sensitive watershed and > 10% non point source disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius

WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET Fourth Version
Project Name _Gaston East West Connector
County Gaston
Name of Evaluator
Wetland area
William Mullin & Jennifer Freeman
Wetland location
_ on pond or lake
x on perennial stream
_ on intermittent stream
_ within mterstream divide
other
Soil series Chewacla loam
_ predominantly organic humus muck or
peat
x predominantly mineral non sandy
predominantly sandy
Hydraulic factors
_ steep topography
x ditched or channelized
total wetland width > 100 feet
Wetland Type (select one)*
x Bottomland hardwood forest
Headwater forest
Swamp forest
Wet flat
Pocosm
Bog forest
Nearest Road Patrick Rd (SR 2425)
003 acres Wetland width 13 feet
Date 12/14/2006
Adjacent land use
(within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius)
forested /natural vegetation 70 %
agriculture urban /suburban 30 %
impervious surface %
Dominant vegetation
(1) Betula nigra
(2) Liquidambar styraciva
(3) Arundinaria tecta
Flooding and wetness
semipermanently to permanently flooded or
inundated
seasonally flooded or inundated
x intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
no evidence of flooding or surface water
Pine savanna
Freshwater marsh
Bog/fen
Ephemeral wetland
Carolina bay
Other
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels
R Water storage 1 x 4 00 = 4 Wetland
A Bank/Shoreline stabilization 1 x 4 00 = 4 rating
T Pollutant removal ** 1 x 5 00 = 5
I Wildlife habitat 2 x 2 00 = 42
N Aquatic life value 1 x 4 00 = 4
G Recreation /education 1 x 1 00 = 1
** Add 1 point if in sensitive watershed and > 10% non point source disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius

WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET Fourth Version
Project Name Gaston East West Connector
County Gaston
Name of Evaluator
Nearest Road US Highway 321
Wetland area 01 acres Wetland width 55 feet
William Mullin & Jennifer Freeman Date 10/17/2006
Wetland location
_ on pond or lake
_ on perennial stream
x on intermittent stream
_within interstream divide
other
Adjacent land use
(within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius)
forested /natural vegetation 40 %
agriculture urban /suburban 50 %
impervious surface 10 %
I
Soil series Pacolet sandy loam Dominant vegetation
_predominantly organic humus muck or (1) red maple
peat (2) tulip poplar
x predominantly mineral non sandy (3) common greenbrier
predominantly sandy
Hydraulic factors
_ steep topography
—ditched or channelized
x total wetland width > 100 feet
Wetland Type (select one)*
Bottomland hardwood forest
x Headwater forest
Swamp forest
Wet flat
Pocosm
Bog forest
Flooding and wetness
seMipermanently to permanently flooded or
inundated
seasonally flooded or inundated
x intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
no evidence of flooding or surface water
Pine savanna
T_ Freshwater marsh
Bog/fen
Ephemeral wetland
Carolina bay
Other
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or Stream channels
R Water storage 1 x 4 00 = 4 Wetland
A Bank/Shoreline stabilization 2 x 4 00 = 8 rating
T Pollutant removal ** 5 x 5 00 = 25 t
I Wildlife habitat 3 x 2 00 = 6 5�
N Aquatic life value 3 x 4 00 = 12
G Recreation/education 1 x 1 00 = 1
** Add 1 point if in sensitive watershed and > 10% non point source disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius

WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET Fourth Version
Project Name Gaston East West Connector Nearest Road US Highway 321
County Gaston Wetland area 0 003 acres Wetland width —8 feet
Name of Evaluator William Mullin & Jennifer Freeman Date 10/19/2006
Wetland location
on pond or lake
x on perennial stream
on intermittent stream
within interstream divide
other
Adjacent land use
(within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius)
forested /natural vegetation 60 %
agriculture urban /suburban 30 %
impervious surface 10 %
Soil series Pacolet sandy loam Dominant vegetation
_predominantly organic humus muck or (1) Microstegium vimineum
peat (2) Ligustrum sinense
_predominantly mineral non sandy (3) Boehmeria cylmdrica
x predominantly sandy
Hydraulic factors
x steep topography
_ ditched or channelized
total wetland width > 100 feet
Wetland Type (select one)*
Bottomland hardwood forest
Headwater forest
Swamp forest
Wet flat
Pocosin
Bog forest
Flooding and wetness
semipermanently to permanently flooded or
inundated
seasonally flooded or inundated
intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
x no evidence of flooding or surface water
Pine savanna
Freshwater marsh
Bog/fen
Ephemeral wetland
Carolina bay
x Other seep
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels
R
Water storage
0
x 4 00 =
0
Wetland
A
Bank/Shoreline stabilization
0
x 4 00 =
0
rating
T
Pollutant removal **
0
x 5 00 =
0
I
Wildlife habitat
0
x 2 00 =
0
O�
N
Aquatic life value
0
x 4 00 =
0
G
Recreation /education
0
x 1 00 =
L 0
TOO SMALL
** Add 1 point if in sensitive watershed and > 10% non point source disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius

WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET Fourth Version
Project Name Gaston East West Connector
County Gaston
Name of Evaluator
Wetland area
William Mullin & Jennifer Freeman
Wetland location
on pond or lake
X on perennial stream
on intermittent stream
within interstream divide
other
Soil series
_ predominantly organic humus muck or
peat
X predominantly mineral non sandy
predominantly sandy
Hydraulic factors
_ steep topography
_ditched or channelized
X total wetland width > 100 feet
Wetland Type (select one)*
Bottomland hardwood forest
Headwater forest
Swamp forest
X Wet flat
Pocosm
Bog forest
Nearest Road SR 2420
0 46 acres Wetland width 120
Date 10/20/2006
Adjacent land use
(within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius)
• forested /natural vegetation 90 %
• agriculture urban /suburban 10 %
impervious surface %
Dominant vegetation
(1) Liriodendron tulipifera
(2) Acer rubrum
(3) Ligustrum sinense
Flooding and wetness
semipermanently to permanently flooded or
inundated
seasonally flooded or inundated
X intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
no evidence of flooding or surface water
Pine savanna
Freshwater marsh
Bog/fen
Ephemeral wetland
Carolina bay
Other
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels
feet
R
Water storage
1
x 4 00 =
4
Wetland
A
Bank/Shoreline stabilization
3
x 4 00 =
12
rating
T
Pollutant removal **
6
x 5 00 =
25
N
j
Wildlife habitat
2
x 2 00 =
4
N -5 4
as
N
Aquatic life value
2
x 4 00 =
8
G
Recreation /education
1
x 10 0 =
L 1
** Add 1 point if in sensitive
watershed and > 10% non point source disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius

WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET Fourth Version
Project Name Gaston East West Connector
County Gaston
Name of Evaluator
Wetland area
William Mullin & Jennifer Freeman
Wetland location
_ on pond or lake
x on perennial stream
_ on intermittent stream
_ within interstream divide
other
Soil series Chewacla loam
_ predominantly organic humus muck or
peat
x predominantly mineral non sandy
predominantly sandy
Hydraulic factors
_ steep topography
_ditched or channelized
x total wetland width > 100 feet
Wetland Type (select one)*
x Bottomland hardwood forest
Headwater forest
Swamp forest
Wet flat
Pocosin
Bog forest
Nearest Road SR 2420
0 64 acres Wetland width —135 feet
Date 10/31/2006
Adjacent land use
(within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius)
• forested /natural vegetation 85 %
• agriculture urban /suburban 10 %
• impervious surface 5 %
Dominant vegetation
(1) Acer rubrum
(2) Liriodendron tulipifera
(3) Microstegium vimineum
Flooding and wetness
semipermanently to permanently flooded or
inundated
x seasonally flooded or inundated
intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
no evidence of flooding or surface water
Pine savanna
Freshwater marsh
Bog/fen
Ephemeral wetland
Carolina bay
Other
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels
R
Water storage
4
x 4 00 =
16
Wetland
A
T
I
N
Bank/Shoreline stabilization
Pollutant removal **
Wildlife habitat
Aquatic life value
4
x 4 00 =
x 5 00 =
x 2 00 =
x 4 00 =
16
25�
4
8
rating
5
2
2
G
Recreation /education
1
x 1 00=
1
** Add 1 point if in sensitive watershed and > 10% non point source disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius

WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET Fourth Version
ProiectName Gaston East West Connector
County Gaston
Name of Evaluator
Wetland area
William Mullin & Jennifer Freeman
Wetland location
_ on pond or lake
_ on perennial stream
—on intermittent stream
_ within mterstream divide
x other adjacent to stream
Nearest Road SR 2420
0 39 acres Wetland width —83 feet
Date 11/2/2006
Adjacent land use
(within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius)
forested /natural vegetation 50 %
agriculture urban /suburban 50 %
impervious surface %
Soil series Chewacla loam Dominant vegetation
_ predominantly organic humus muck or (1) Acer rubrum
peat (2) Lonicerajaponica
x predominantly mineral non sandy (3) Smilax glauca
predominantly sandy
Hydraulic factors
_ steep topography
_ditched or channelized
x total wetland width > 100 feet
Wetland Type (select one)*
Bottomland hardwood forest
Headwater forest
Swamp forest
Wet flat
Pocosin
Bog forest
Flooding and wetness
x semipermanently to permanently flooded or
inundated
seasonally flooded or inundated
intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
no evidence of flooding or surface water
-Pine savanna
—Freshwater marsh
_ Bog/fen
-Ephemeral wetland
_ Carolina bay
x Other seep
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels
R
Water storage
1 x 4 00 =
4
Wetland
A
Bank/Shoreline stabilization
2 x 4 00 =
8
rating
T
Pollutant removal **
1 x 5 00 =
5�
I
Wildlife habitat
3 x 2 00 =
6
28k
N
Aquatic life value
1 x 4 00 =
4
G
Recreation /education
1 x 100 =
1
** Add 1 point if in sensitive watershed and > 10% non point source disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius

WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET Fourth Version
Project Name Gaston East West Connector
County Gaston
Name of Evaluator
Wetland area
William Mullin & Jennifer Freeman
Wetland location
_ on pond or lake
X on perennial stream
_ on intermittent stream
_within interstream divide
other
Nearest Road SR 2416
003 acres Wetland width —38 feet
Date 11/6/2006
Adjacent land use
(within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius)
forested /natural vegetation 25 %
agriculture urban /suburban 65 %
impervious surface 10 %
Soil series Pacolet sandy loam Dominant vegetation
_predominantly organic humus muck or (1) Liriodendron tulipifera
peat (2) Acer rubrum
X predominantly mineral non sandy (3) Lonicerajaponica
predominantly sandy
Hydraulic factors
X steep topography
_ ditched or channelized
total wetland width > 100 feet
Wetland Type (select one)*
Bottomland hardwood forest
Headwater forest
Swamp forest
X Wet flat
Pocosm
Bog forest
Flooding and wetness
semipermanently to permanently flooded or
inundated
X seasonally flooded or inundated
intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
no evidence of flooding or surface water
Pine savanna
Freshwater marsh
Bog/fen
Ephemeral wetland
Carolina bay
Other
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels
R
Water storage
1
x 4 00 =
4
Wetland
A
Bank/Shoreline stabilization
2
x 4 00 =
8
rating
T
Pollutant removal **
1
x 5 00 =
5
I
Wildlife habitat
3
x 2 00 =
6
32
N
Aquatic life value
2
x 4 00 =
8
G
Recreation /education
1
x 1 00 =
1
** Add 1 point if in sensitive watershed and > 10% non point source disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius

WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET Fourth Version
Project Name Gaston East West Connector
County Gaston
Name of Evaluator
Wetland area
William Mullin & Jennifer Freeman
Wetland location
_ on pond or lake
X on perennial stream
_ on intermittent stream
_ within mterstream divide
other
Soil series Pacolet sandy loam
_ predominantly organic humus muck or
peat
X predominantly mineral non sandy
predominantly sandy
Hydraulic factors
X steep topography
_ ditched or channelized
total wetland width > 100 feet
Wetland Type (select one)*
Bottomland hardwood forest
Headwater forest
Swamp forest
x Wet flat
Pocosm
Bog forest
Nearest Road SR 2416
003 acres Wetland width —40 feet
Date 11/6/2006
Adjacent land use
(within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius)
forested /natural vegetation 35 %
agriculture urban /suburban 55 %
impervious surface 10 %
Dominant vegetation
(1) Acer rubrum
(2) Lindera benzoin
(3) Lonicerajaponica
Flooding and wetness
semipermanently to permanently flooded or
inundated
X seasonally flooded or inundated
intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
no evidence of flooding or surface water
Pine savanna
Freshwater marsh
Bog/fen
Ephemeral wetland
Carolina bay
Other
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels
R Water storage 1 x 4 00 = 4 Wetland
A Bank/Shoreline stabilization 2 x 4 00 = 8 rating
T Pollutant removal ** 1 x 5 00 = 5 �
I Wildlife habitat 2 x 2 00 = 4 �6
N Aquatic life value 2 x 4 00 = 4
G Recreation /education 1 x 100 = 1
** Add 1 point if in sensitive watershed and > 10% non point source disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius

WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET Fourth Version
Protect Name Gaston East West Connector
County Gaston
Name of Evaluator
Nearest Road SR 2416
Wetland area 02 acres
William Mullin & Jennifer Freeman
Wetland location
_ on pond or lake
X on perennial stream
_ on intermittent stream
_ within interstream divide
other
Wetland width —100 feet
Date 11/6/2006
Adjacent land use
(within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius)
forested /natural vegetation 40 %
agriculture urban /suburban 50 %
impervious surface 10 %
Soil series Pacolet sandy loam Dominant vegetation
_ predominantly organic humus muck or (1) Polygonum sagittatum
peat (2) Sohdago gigantea
X predominantly mineral non sandy (3) Smilax rotund folia
predominantly sandy
Hydraulic factors
_ steep topography
_ditched or channelized
X total wetland width > 100 feet
Wetland Type (select one)*
Bottomland hardwood forest
X Headwater forest
Swamp forest
Wet flat
Pocosm
Bog forest
Flooding and wetness
semipermanently to permanently flooded or
inundated
seasonally flooded or inundated
X intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
no evidence of flooding or surface water
Pine savanna
Freshwater marsh
Bog/fen
Ephemeral wetland
Carolina bay
Other
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels
R Water storage 2 x 4 00 = 8 Wetland
A Bank/Shoreline stabilization 3 x 4 00 = 12 rating
T Pollutant removal ** 3 x 5 00 = 15ri
I Wildlife habitat 2 x 2 00 = 4
N Aquatic life value 2 x 4 00 = 8
G Recreation /education 1 x 1 00= 1
** Add 1 point if in sensitive watershed and > 10% non point source disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius

I
WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET Fourth Version
Project Name _Gaston East West Connector
County Gaston
Name of Evaluator
Wetland area
William Mullin & Jennifer Freeman
Wetland location
_ on pond or lake
X on perennial stream
_ on intermittent stream
_ within mterstream divide
other
Soil series Gaston sandy clay loam
_ predominantly organic humus muck or
peat
X predominantly mineral non sandy
predominantly sandy
Hydraulic factors
_ steep topography
_ ditched or channelized
X total wetland width > 100 feet
Wetland Type (select one)*
Bottomland hardwood forest
X Headwater forest
Swamp forest
Wet flat
Pocosin
Bog forest
Nearest Road Robinson Rd (SR 2416)
004 acres Wetland width 50 feet
Date 11/7/2006
Adjacent land use
(within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius)
forested /natural vegetation 30 %
agriculture urban /suburban 65 %
impervious surface 5 %
Dominant vegetation
(1) Acer rubrum
(2) Microstegium vimmeum
(3) Sambucus canadensis
Flooding and wetness
X semipermanently to permanently flooded or
inundated
seasonally flooded or inundated
intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
no evidence of flooding or surface water
Pine savanna
Freshwater marsh
Bog/fen
Ephemeral wetland
Carolina bay
Other
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels
R
Water storage
2
x 4 00 =
8
Wetland
A
Bank/Shoreline stabilization
5
x 4 00 =
20
rating
T
Pollutant removal **
2
x 5 00 =
10
"
I
Wildlife habitat
4
x 2 00 =
8
5'�5
N
Aquatic life value
2
x 4 00 =
8
G
Recreation /education
1
x 1 00=
1
** Add 1
point if in sensitive watershed and > 10% non point source
disturbance within
1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius

WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET Fourth Version
Project Name _Gaston East West Connector
County Gaston
Name of Evaluator
Wetland area
William Mullin & Jennifer Freeman
Wetland location
_ on pond or lake
X on perennial stream
on intermittent stream
_within mterstream divide
other
Soil series Pacolet sandy loam
_predominantly organic humus muck or
peat
X predominantly mineral non sandy
predominantly sandy
Hydraulic factors
_ steep topography
_ditched or channelized
X total wetland width > 100 feet
Wetland Type (select one)*
Nearest Road Robinson Rd (SR 2416)
0 14 acres Wetland width —150 feet
Date 11/7/2006
Adjacent land use
(within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius)
forested /natural vegetation 35
agriculture urban /suburban 60 %
impervious surface 5 %
Dominant vegetation
(1) Linodendron tulipifera
(2) Ligustrum smense
(3) Microstegium vimineum
Flooding and wetness
X semipermanently to permanently flooded or
inundated
seasonally flooded or inundated
intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
no evidence of flooding or surface water
X Bottomland hardwood forest
Pine savanna
Headwater forest
Freshwater marsh
Swamp forest
Bog/fen
Wet flat
Ephemeral wetland
Pocosm
Carolina bay
Bog forest
Other
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels
R Water storage 3 x 4 00 = 12 Wetland
A Bank/Shoreline stabilization 4 x 4 00 = 16 rating
T Pollutant removal ** 5 x 5 00 = 25
I Wildlife habitat 3 x 2 00 = 6�
N Aquatic life value 2 x 4 00 = 8
G Recreation /education I x 100 = 1
** Add 1 point if in sensitive watershed and > 10°/ non point source disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius

WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET Fourth Version
Project Name _Gaston East West Connector
County Gaston
Name of Evaluator
Wetland area
William Mullin & Jennifer Freeman
Wetland location
_ on pond or lake
X on perennial stream
on intermittent stream
_ within mterstream divide
other
Nearest Road Sparrow Dairy Rd (SR 2423)
0 07 acres Wetland width —60 feet
Date 11/7/2006
Adjacent land use
(within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius)
• forested /natural vegetation 10 %
• agriculture urban /suburban 90 %
impervious surface %
Soil series Pacolet sandy loam Dominant vegetation
_ predominantly organic humus muck or (1) Acer rubrum
peat (2) Ligustrum smense
X predominantly mineral non sandy (3) Juncus spp
predominantly sandy
Hydraulic factors
_ steep topography
_ditched or channel►zed
X total wetland width > 100 feet
Wetland Type (select one)*
Bottomland hardwood forest
X Headwater forest
Swamp forest
Wet flat
Pocosm
Bog forest
Flooding and wetness
semipermanently to permanently flooded or
inundated
seasonally flooded or inundated
intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
no evidence of flooding or surface water
Pine savanna
Freshwater marsh
Bog/fen
Ephemeral wetland
Carolina bay
Other
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels
R
Water storage
1 x 4 00 =
4
Wetland
A
Bank/Shoreline stabilization
2 x 4 00 =
8
rating
T
I
Pollutant removal **
Wildlife habitat
1 x 5 00 =
1 x 2 00 =
5
2�
N
Aquatic life value
1 x 4 00 =
4
G
Recreation /education
1 x 1 00=
1
** Add 1
point if in sensitive watershed and > 10% non point source disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius

WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET Fourth Version
Project Name _Gaston East West Connector
County Gaston
Name of Evaluator
Wetland area
William Mullin & Jennifer Freeman
Wetland location
_ on pond or lake
x on perennial stream
on intermittent stream
_within mterstream divide
other
Nearest Road Bud Wilson Rd (SR 2423)
0 02 acres Wetland width 58 feet
Date 12/5/2006
Adjacent land use
(within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius)
• forested /natural vegetation 40 %
• agriculture urban /suburban 60 %
impervious surface %
Soil series Vance sandy loam Dominant vegetation
_predominantly organic humus muck or (1) Lonicerajaponica
peat (2) Acer rubrum
x predominantly mineral non sandy (3) Linodendron tulipifera
predominantly sandy
Hydraulic factors
_ steep topography
_ditched or channelized
x total wetland width > 100 feet
Wetland Type (select one)*
Flooding and wetness
x semipermanently to permanently flooded or
inundated
seasonally flooded or inundated
intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
no evidence of flooding or surface water
Bottomland hardwood forest
Pine savanna
x Headwater forest
Freshwater marsh
Swamp forest
Bog /fen
Wet flat
Ephemeral wetland
Pocosin
Carolina bay
Bog forest
Other
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels
R
Water storage
1
x 4 00 =
4
Wetland
A
Bank/Shoreline stabilization
1
x 4 00 =
4
rating
T
Pollutant removal **
1
x 5 00 =
5
I
Wildlife habitat
3
x 2 00 =
6
q.�
N
Aquatic life value
1
x 4 00 =
4
!!%
G
Recreation/education
1
x 1 00=
1
** Add 1
point if in sensitive watershed and > 10% non point source disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius

WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET Fourth Version
Project Name Gaston East West Connector
County Gaston Wetland area
Name of Evaluator William Mullin & Jennifer Freeman
Wetland location
_ on pond or lake
x on perennial stream
_ on intermittent stream
_within mterstream divide
other
Soil series Gaston sandy clay loam
_ predominantly organic humus muck or
peat
x predominantly mineral non sandy
predominantly sandy
Hydraulic factors
_ steep topography
_ ditched or channelized
x total wetland width > 100 feet
Wetland Type (select one)*
Bottomland hardwood forest
Headwater forest
Swamp forest
Wet flat
Pocosin
Bog forest
Nearest Road Bud Wilson Rd (SR 2423)
0 18 acres Wetland width 120 feet
Date 12/5/2006
Adjacent land use
(within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius)
forested /natural vegetation 35 %
agriculture urban /suburban 65 %
impervious surface %
Dominant vegetation
(1) Woodwardia areolata
(2) Osmunda cmnamomea
(3) Alnus serrulata
Flooding and wetness
x semipermanently to permanently flooded or
inundated
seasonally flooded or inundated
intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
no evidence of flooding or surface water
—Pine savanna
—Freshwater marsh
_ Bog/fen
—Ephemeral wetland
—Carolina bay
x Other seep
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels
R
Water storage
1
x 4 00 =
4
Wetland
A
Bank/Shoreline stabilization
1
x 4 00 =
4
rating
T
Pollutant removal **
1
x 5 00 =
5
I
Wildlife habitat
3
x 2 00 =
6q
N
Aquatic life value
1
x 4 00 =
4
G
Recreation /education
1
x 1 00=
1
** Add 1
point if in sensitive watershed and > 10% non point source disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius

WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET Fourth Version
Project Name Gaston East West Connector Nearest Road Bud Wilson Rd (SR 2423)
County Gaston Wetland area 012 acres Wetland width 137 feet
Name of Evaluator William Mullin & Jennifer Freeman Date 12/5/2006
Wetland location
_ on pond or lake
x on perennial stream
_ on intermittent stream
_within interstream divide
other
Soil series Gaston sandy clay loam
_ predominantly organic humus muck or
peat
x predominantly mineral non sandy
predominantly sandy
Hydraulic factors
_ steep topography
_ditched or channelized
x total wetland width > 100 feet
Wetland Type (select one)*
Bottomland hardwood forest
Headwater forest
Swamp forest
Wet flat
Pocosm
Bog forest
Adjacent land use
(within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius)
forested /natural vegetation 35 %
agriculture urban /suburban 65 %
impervious surface %
Dominant vegetation
(1) Ligustrum sinense
(2) Woodwardia areolata
(3) Osmunda cmnamomea
Flooding and wetness
x semipermanently to permanently flooded or
inundated
seasonally flooded or inundated
intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
no evidence of flooding or surface water
_ Pine savanna
_ Freshwater marsh
_ Bog/fen
_ Ephemeral wetland
_Carolina bay
x Other seep
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels
R
Water storage
1 x 4 00 =
4
Wetland
A
Bank/Shoreline stabilization
1 x 4 00 =
4
rating
T
I
Pollutant removal **
Wildlife habitat
1 x 5 00 =
3 x 2 00 =
5
64
N
Aquatic life value
1 x 4 00 =
4
a mo
G
Recreation/education
1 x 1 00=
1
** Add 1 point if in sensitive watershed and > 10% non point source disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius

WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET Fourth Version
Project Name _Gaston East West Connector
County Gaston
Name of Evaluator
Wetland area
William Mullin & Jennifer Freeman
Wetland location
_ on pond or lake
x on perennial stream
_ on intermittent stream
_within mterstream divide
other
Soil series Helena sandy loam
_ predominantly organic humus muck or
peat
x predominantly mineral non sandy
predominantly sandy
Hydraulic factors
_ steep topography
_ditched or channelized
x total wetland width > 100 feet
Wetland Type (select one)*
Nearest Road Bud Wilson Rd (SR 2423)
002 acres Wetland width 30 feet
Date 12/6/2006
Adjacent land use
(within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius)
forested /natural vegetation 20 %
agriculture urban /suburban 80 %
impervious surface %
Dominant vegetation
(1) Liquidambarstyraciva
(2) Smilax rotund foha
(3) Acer rubrum
Flooding and wetness
x semipermanently to permanently flooded or
inundated
seasonally flooded or inundated
intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
no evidence of flooding or surface water
Bottomland hardwood forest
Pine savanna
x Headwater forest
Freshwater marsh
Swamp forest
Bog /fen
Wet flat
Ephemeral wetland
Pocosin
Carolina bay
Bog forest
Other
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels
R
Water storage
2
x 4 00 =
8
Wetland
A
Bank/Shoreline stabilization
1
x 4 00 =
4
rating
T
Pollutant removal **
2
x 5 00 =
10
I
Wildlife habitat
3
x 2 00 =
6
A
N
Aquatic life value
2
x 4 00 =
8
G
Recreation/education
1
x 1 00=
E 1
** Add 1
point if in sensitive watershed and > 10% non point source disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius

WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET Fourth Version
Project Name _Gaston East West Connector
County Gaston
Name of Evaluator
Wetland area
William Mullin & Jennifer Freeman
Wetland location
_ on pond or lake
_ on perennial stream
_ on intermittent stream
x within mterstream divide
other
Soil series Helena sandy loam
_ predominantly organic humus muck or
peat
x predominantly mineral non sandy
predominantly sandy
Hydraulic factors
steep topography
ditched or channelized
x total wetland width > 100 feet
Wetland Type (select one)*
Bottomland hardwood forest
x Headwater forest
Swamp forest
Wet flat
Pocosm
Bog forest
Nearest Road Bud Wilson Rd (SR 2423)
042 acres Wetland width 200 feet
Date 12/6/2006
Adjacent land use
(within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius)
forested /natural vegetation 50 %
agriculture urban /suburban 50 %
impervious surface %
Dominant vegetation
(1) Acer rubrum
(2) Liquidambar styraciva
(3) Smilax rotundifolia
Flooding and wetness
semipermanently to permanently flooded or
inundated
x seasonally flooded or inundated
intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
no evidence of flooding or surface water
Pine savanna
Freshwater marsh
Bog/fen
Ephemeral wetland
Carolina bay
Other
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels
R Water storage 2 x 4 00 = 8 Wetland
A
Bank/Shoreline stabilization
2
x 4 00 =
8
rating
T
Pollutant removal **
2
x 5 00 =
10
I
Wildlife habitat
2
x 2 00 =
4
N
G
** Add 1 point
Aquatic life value
Recreation /education
if in sensitive watershed and > 10% non point source
2
1
disturbance within
x 4 00 =
x 1 00=
1/2 mile upstream
8
L 1
upslope or
radius

WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET Fourth Version
Project Name _Gaston East West Connector
County Gaston
Name of Evaluator
Wetland area
William Mullin & Jennifer Freeman
Wetland location
x on pond or lake
_ on perennial stream
_ on intermittent stream
_within mterstream divide
other
Soil series Helena sandy loam
_ predominantly organic humus muck or
peat
x predominantly mineral non sandy
predominantly sandy
Hydraulic factors
_ steep topography
_ ditched or channelized
x total wetland width > 100 feet
Wetland Type (select one)*
Bottomland hardwood forest
Headwater forest
x Swamp forest
Wet flat
Pocos►n
Bog forest
Nearest Road NC 274 (Union Rd)
0 16 acres Wetland width 110 feet
Date 12/7/2006
Adjacent land use
(within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius)
forested /natural vegetation 60 %
agriculture urban /suburban 40 %
impervious surface %
Dominant vegetation
(1) Liquidambar styraciflua
(2) Smilax rotund►folia
(3) Arundmaria tecta
Flooding and wetness
x semipermanently to permanently flooded or
inundated
seasonally flooded or inundated
intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
no evidence of flooding or surface water
Pine savanna
Freshwater marsh
Bog/fen
Ephemeral wetland
Carolina bay
Other
* The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels
R
Water storage
2
x 4 00 =
8
Wetland
A
Bank/Shoreline stabilization
1
x 4 00 =
4
rating
T
Pollutant removal **
2
x 5 00 =
10
I
Wildlife habitat
3
x 2 00 =
63
N
Aquatic life value
1
x 4 00 =
4
G
Recreation /education
1
x 1 00=
1
1** Add 1
point if insensitive watershed and > 10% non point source disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream upslope or radius

3
s
t
Fit' � � �• `� <u' `"f 4_t } �`q�� iL�,�;�r�~''?�.; ! .. '� ,'s ^'
Ilk
At
no
s �
r�
e•
f
i

0
w w
D � �
yw
D
•
pow
m _ `A
CD
N
0c)
0O CD
O C V
C)
0
a 7
F
N !^
U
\V m)
q cn D
n
0
N J
� 4 lti
o I I
Ln m d -�8 n
Z o MZ
v z 42
CD
CL
r
CD
m x
co � Z.
c
m

G�
v
O
3
m
CD
v
vo
ov
�n
0
o
0C
�crn
Z n
@
FD'
cQ
3
w
& � o
Z C
o �.
D
0 T
co
C

0 ,4.
W
Z
G N
< U)
w
0
O
p
�� r3
ll .
0
ED .--r
CD
O (D w G i
o a (D m
so 0 W v
m 0 r-4-
oO
w
N w 0O-
cn _ Z
W
w
W a
4
En
J
ET
2 <D ffl u° 1
3 °1 7a
RL
m_
0
C -
T o
�N Z
C

pgg
u J
rF
0
1
m
v
N �
O
CD \V
O �, r�f•
� C ^
0 O
O
C
v �
CD
0
rh
0
r7
V )
CD
(Q
3
CD
W
c m o
c
Z m D
o
D d
a
oN_ co
T
C
(D

W .
GiCi� C
l
±M .. ��` -.tea .n.w•_ �Y.y ._ ``�
�'..: I a`
Zal
cn
m WU, W
* a5� G1
A / ,''A cn
CD
; N` m ti . N
gg 7' SS y j'
s C �nF $s N N • + w r
v CO ♦ ! CA cam' S > D -U
O ci O ii N 7 '�',•��j aR
O
CD
e0 p
cn
CD
0 w • y�.
� p
• A
W Cl)
D cn Vii. w
w
Cn
cn
cn
sg cn� A 'y D
Cl)
CA
D w —
N CA
w 3 u o 0 0 N W N A N C Cl)
o �m o 5 o a v N N N 5° ° 3 � C n w
3 3
o a ci .
o " D
o
(� r
N` N
CD
N N

caoa
"icy '� • .ia
�FiORTON ''
n
v �
l w w
p
CD
w
+
— ^w
m • c'»
W IV faW _ w
° n O
0 07 .. ' •
CD
s LA
4 S
Q
CD
cc
CD
cni
CD
w_` � M - �_� •± r. .—mss a � t i
a
i m v$ S 3
R Yf
_m a
ID
o
I

UJ
O
m
v
N
O
O
A
Nn
CD
0
0 0 0
0
< T
n
rrF
O
L/
CD
3
CD
�t
W
r
r
� cn o
d
a
� o
rrrrrrrrrrrrrr� _T
C
(D
.'O
cn Y
w�
I:
d.7

G)
a)
U)
r-f
O
n
m
v
r*
m
>>
r-�
0a
A
CCD O
C7
O C
3 Q
C CD
O n
O
O n r-+.
�o O
N � i
CD
N
U)
'\ ^V
(
3
CD
W
O
m
Z D
0
y o
V' D
C

Your complimentary
use period has ended Site # (indicate on attached map)
Thank vnu for €rclht7
pbFcomplete, 'Y ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
- - °" -
2. Evaluator's name: Jennifer
M. Freeman
4. Time of evaluation: 1530
5. Name of stream:
UT to Crowder's Creek
6. River basin:
Catawba
7. Approximate drainage area:
8. Stream order:
1
9. Length of reach evaluated:
10. County:
Gaston
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees.
12. Subdivision name (if any):
Latitude:
Longitude:
Method location determined (circle): GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo /GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
East of Bud Wilson Rd, north corridor on east side of D20 mainstem
14. Proposed channel work (if any):
n/a
15. Recent weather conditions: cool,
sunny
16. Site conditions at time of visit:
sunny & 64 degrees
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known:
Section 10
Tidal Waters
Essential Fisheries Habitat
Trout Waters
Outstanding Resource Waters
Nutrient Sensitive Waters
Water Supply
Watershed
(I -IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation
point?
yes If yes,
estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map?
no
20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey?
no
21. Estimated watershed land use: 10%
residential
10% industrial
80% forested
22. Bankfull width: 2
ft
23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank):
En—
24. Channel slope down center of stream:
Flat (0 to 2 %)
x
Gentle (2 to 4 %)
Moderate (4 to 10 %)
0 %)
25. Channel sinuosity:
Straight
s
Occasional bends
Frequent meander
Very sinuous
Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristics within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. if a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream amy be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 1 49 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature I (Jennifer M. Freeman) Date 12 -11 -06
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream quality. The
total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a particular mitigation ratio
or requirement.

a
Your compflme /21fary
use perlo,4 has ende,4.
Thank you for usl'r4
PDF Cofnp,�ete,
Site # (indicate on attached map)
'Y ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
* These charactersitics are not assessed in coastal streams.
_C01117CION POD NTT
r
RANCE
SCORE,
CS
Coastal Pieclinont J
Mountain
Presence of flow / persistent pools in streams
(no flow or saturation = 0: strong flow = max points)
0-5
0-4
0-5
Evidence of past human alteration
2
(extensive alteration = 0, no alteration = max points)
0-6
0-5
0-5
Riparian Zone
(no buffer = 0: contiguous, wide buffier = max points)
0-6
0-4
0-5
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
4
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)
0-5
0-4
0-4
Groundwater discharge
5
(no discharge = 0: springs, seeps, wetlands. etc. ---- max points)
0-3
0-4
0- 4
Presence of adjacent floodplain
6
(no floodplain - -0; extensive floodplain ---- rnax points)
0-4
0-4
0 —
Entrenchment / floodplain access
7
(deeply entrenched = 0, frequent flooding = max P—OiT—ts) L ........ . .
..... . 0- 5
0-4
0-2
Presence of adjacent wetlands
(no wetlands 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
0-6
0-4
0-2
1
Channel sinuosity
9
nsive channel ization = 0; natural meander max points)
(extensive
- 5
0-4
0-1
2
Sediment input
10
(extensive deposition = 0; little or no sediment =max points)
0-5
0-4
0-4
2
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
(fine homogenous - 0, large, diverse sizes -== max points)
411�
0 - 4
0 5
Evidence of channel incision or widening
12
(deeply incised = 0. stable bed & banks = max points)
0-5
0-4
0-5
Presence of major bank failures
13
(severe erosion = 0, no erosion, stable banks -- max points)
0-5
0 - 5
0-5.
4
Root depth and density on banks
14
(no visible roots = 0- dense roots throughout - max points)
0-1
0-4
0-5
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
15
(substantial impact = 0; no evidence— max points)
0-5
0-4
0-5
3
Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes
16
(no riffles/ripples or pools = 0: well developed _ max points)
0-3
0-5
0-6
2
Habitat complexity
17
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
0-6
0-6
0-6
2
Canopy coverage over streambed
18
(no shading veeetation — 0; continuous canopy -- max points)
0-5
0-5
0-5
4
Substrate embeddedness
19
rna
(deeply embedded �­. 0; loose structure x points)
0-4
0 -4
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
0-4
0-5
0-5
0
Presence of amphibians
(no evidence = 0, common, numerous types = max points)
0-4
0-4
0-4
0
Presence of fish
22
(110 evidence -0; common, numerous types max points)
1 0-4
0-4
0-4
Evidence or,,vildlife use
(no evidence :i! n t:,,id
............. ..........
1'otal Points Possible k
() - 7
100
CJ J,' (also enter on first page)
Milk' l- SO
49
* These charactersitics are not assessed in coastal streams.

Your comptimex� �
uSe peri has en - Site # (indicate on attached map)
771an,k fort fbi` I 4
PDFCo Y ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
a �i Two -
=t:Vd1,
2. Evalua tor's name: Jennifer
M. Freeman
4. Time of evaluation: 0945
5. Name of stream:
UT to Crowder's Creek
6. River basin:
Catawba
7. Approximate drainage area:
8. Stream order:
I
9. Length of reach evaluated:
10. County:
Gaston
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees.
12. Subdivision name (if any):
Latitude:
Longitude:
Method location determined (circle): GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo /GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
East of Bud Wilson Rd, north corridor, east of D20 mainstem
14. Proposed channel work (if any):
n/a
15. Recent weather conditions: cool
& sunny
16. Site conditions at time of visit:
sunny & 51 degrees
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known:
Section 10
Tidal Waters
Essential Fisheries Habitat
Trout Waters
Outstanding Resource Waters
Nutrient Sensitive Waters
Water Supply
Watershed
(I -IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation
point?
no If yes,
estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map?
no
20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey?
no
21. Estimated watershed land use: 90%
forested
10% agricultural
22. Bankfull width: 2
ft
23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank):
1 ft
24. Channel slope down center of stream:
Flat (0 to 2 %)
x
Gentle (2 to 4 1
Moderate (4 to 10 %)
Steep ( >I0 %)
25. Channel sinuosity:
Straight
x
Occasional bends
Frequent meander
Very sinuous
Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristics within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream amy be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 140 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature I (Jennifer M. Freeman) Date 12 -12 -06
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream quality. The
total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a particular mitigation ratio
or requirement.

Ydur u0177pff7717631
use period has ended
Thank you for U'51)7;
Site 4 (indicate on attached map)
,tea - complete, 'Y ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
* These charactersitics are not assessed in coastal streams.
Presenceof flow I persistent pools in streams
1 (no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
0 - 5
0 - 4
0 - 5 0
Evidence of past human alteration
� ;2
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
0 - 6
0 - 5
0 - 5
4
Riparian Zone
3
(no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer — max points)
0 - 6
0 - 4
0- 5
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
4
(extensive discharges ,= 0; no discharges � max points)
0-5
0 - 4
0 - 4
3
Groundwater discharge
,5
(no dischar,_le = 0; springs. seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points)
0 - 3
0 - 4
0 - 4
0
Presence of adjacent floodplain
6
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
0 - 4
0 -4
0 - 2
0
Entrenchment / floodplain access
.7
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding =max points)
0 _ 5
_ 0 - 4
0 - 2
0
Presence of adjacent wetlands
=8
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
0 - 6
0 - 4
0 - 2 " '
1
Channel sinuosity
9
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points)
0- 5
0 - 4
0 - 3
2
Sediment input
PI 0
(extensive deposition = 0; little or no sediment = max points)
0 - 5
0 - 4
0 - 4
3
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
1 I
(fine homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points)
NAB
0 - 4
0 - 5
1
Evidence of channel incision of widening
„ 1 2
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed &banks _ max points)
0 - 5
0 - 4
0 - 5
2
F
Presence of major bank failures
1
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks - max points)
0 - 5
0 - 5
0_5
4
Root depth and density on banks
1 4
(no visible roots ._ 0: dense roots throughout = max points)
0- 3
0 - 4
0 - 5
1
j�
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
1 5
(substantial impact = 0; no evidence � max points)
0 - 5
0 - 4
0_5
1
Presence of riffle- pool /ripple -pool complexes
16
(no riffles /ripples or pools = 0; well developed — max points)
0 - 3
0 - 5
0 - 6
2
Habitat complexity
17
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
0 - 6
0 - 6
0 - 6
2
Canopy coverage over streambed
18
(no shading vegetation = 0: continuous canopy — max points)
0 - 5
0 - 5
0 - 5
5
..
.... _
Substrate embeddedness
1 9
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max points)
NA*
0 - 4
0 - 4
2
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
_0
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
0 - 4
0 - 5
0- 5
0
b
Presence of amphibians
w2
1
(no evidence - 0; common, numerous types = max points)
0 - 4
0 - 4
0 - 4
0
Presence of fish
22
(no evidence = 0: common, numerous types = max points)
0 - 4
0 - 4
0 - 4
0
Evidence of wildlife use
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = ma pints)
(� -
ti -
3
otal l "trots Possible
i ,lti 1 Q
a Ot)
TOTAL SCORE (also eilt"'r (:"a first Page)
40
* These charactersitics are not assessed in coastal streams.

Your complimentary
use 'period has ended , ? Site # (indicate on attached map)
Thank you for u.hi7
pl7FCorn7plte,; ='Y ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
t mow- , „_.
a t _ 1�_p °�y�� °- °�
2. Evaluator's name: Jennifer
M. Freeman
4. Time of evaluation: 0845
5. Name of stream:
UT to Crowder's Creek
6. River basin:
Catawba
7. Approximate drainage area:
8. Stream order:
2
9. Length of reach evaluated:
10. County:
Gaston
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees.
12. Subdivision name (if any):
Latitude:
Longitude:
Method location determined (circle): GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo /GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
Just west of SR 2425 & east of D20 mainstem
14. Proposed channel work (if any):
n/a
15. Recent weather conditions: cool,
sunny
16. Site conditions at time of visit:
48 degrees & overcast
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known:
i
Section 10
Tidal Waters
Essential Fisheries Habitat
Trout Waters
Outstanding Resource Waters
Nutrient Sensitive Waters
Water Supply
Watershed
(I -IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation
point?
no If yes,
estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map?
no
20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey?
no
21. Estimated watershed land use: 90%
forested
10% agricultural
22. Bankfull width: —
3 ft
23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank):
3 ft
24. Channel slope down center of stream:
Flat (0 to
pxFrequent x
Gentle (2 to 4 %)
Moderate (4 to 10 %)
Steep (,10 %)
25. Channel sinuosity:
Straight
Occasional bends
meander
Very sinuous
Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristics within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream amy be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): r 56 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature I (Jennifer M. Freeman) I Date 12 -13 -06
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream quality. The
total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a particular mitigation ratio
or requirement.

Your 40177plimental),
use period has ended
Thank you for USI'/79
PDF Complekl-
Site 4 (indicate on attached map)
'Y ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
W
;W 4 C S
[ON POINT RAII
------------ -
SCORE
constal Piedniont Mountain
Presence of flow persistent pools in streams
(no flow or saturation - 0: strong flow = max points)
0-5
0-4
0-
Evidence of past human alteration
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration — max points)
0-6
0-5
0-5
4
Riparian Zone
(no bUfTer = 0, contiguous, wide buffer max points)
0-6
0-4
0-5
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
4
(extensive discharges — 0, no discharges - max points)
0-5
0-4
0-4
3
Groundwater discharge
5
(no discharge - - 0, springs, see s, wetlands, etc. = max points)
0-3
0-4
0-4
Presence of adjacent floodplain
6
(no floodplain = 0: extensive floodplain = max points)
0-4
0-4
0-2
0
Entrenchment / floodplain access
7
(deeply entrenched = 0: free cent flooding = max points)
0-5
0-4
0-2
0
Presence of adjacent wetlands
8
(no wetlands = 0, large adjacent wetlands = max points)
0-6
0-4
0-2
0
Channel sinuosity
9
(extensive channelization = 0. natural meander= max points)
0- 5
0-4
0-1
3
Sediment input
10
(extensive deposition,— -- 0; little or no sediment = max points)
0-5
0-4
0-4
3
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
(fine homogenous 0, large, diverse sizes =max points)
0 - 4
0 5
3
Evidence of channel incision or widening
>1
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points)
0-5
0-4
0-5
2
Presence of ma jor bank failures
13
ere erosion 0, no erosion, stable banks= max points)
(severe
0-5
0-5
0-5
Root depth and density on banks
14
- dense roots throughout = max points)
(110 visible roots = 0,
0-3
0-4
0-5
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
15
(substantial impact- 0; no evidence = max points)
0-5
0-4
0-5
2
77
Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes
16
(no riffles/ripples or pools 0, well developed max points)
0
0-5
0-6
3
Habitat complexity
17
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
0 - 6 1
0-6
0-6
3
Canopy coverage over streambed
7
� 18
Z
(no shading vegetation = 0: continuous canopy =max points)
0- 5
0-5
0-5
5
Substrate embeddedness
19
- loose structure = max points)
(deeply embedded = 0, . .....
'A
0-4
0-4
—
3
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
20
(no evidence numerous common, nuerous types max points)
0 - 4
0-5
0-5
Presence of amphibians
'
(no evidence = 0: common, numerous types max points)
0-4
0-4
0-4
1
Presence of fish
(no evidence - 0; common, numerous types = max points)
0-4
0-4
0-4
0
Evidence of wildlife use
. .................
Total Points Possill
0-6
10
0-5
0- 5
0
4
also enter o first rst page)
Loa-
56
* These charactersitics are not assessed in coastal streams.

t
Your complimen ry `.
use period has endue Site # (indicate on attached map)
Thank you ft?r using
PDFCLI ple ,,,'Y ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
2. Evaluator's name: Jennifer
M. Freeman
4. Time of evaluation: 1430
5. Name of stream:
UT to Crowder's Creek
6. River basin:
Catawba
7. Approximate drainage area:
8. Stream order:
1
9. Length of reach evaluated:
10. County:
Gaston
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees.
12. Subdivision name (if any):
Latitude:
I Longitude:
Method location determined (circle): GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo /GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
just west of SR 2425
14. Proposed channel work (if any):
n/a
15. Recent weather conditions: sunny
& cool
16. Site conditions at time of visit:
sunny & 60 degrees
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known:
Section 10
Tidal Waters
Essential Fisheries Habitat
Trout Waters
Outstanding Resource Waters
Nutrient Sensitive Waters
Water Supply
Watershed
(I -IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation
point?
no If yes,
estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map?
no
20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey?
no
21. Estimated watershed land use: 10%
residential
50% forested
40% cleared /logged
22. Bankf ill width: 2
— 3.5 ft
23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank):
1 — 2 ft
24. Channel slope down center of stream:
Flat (0 to 2 %)
x
Gentle (2 to 4 0
Moderate (4 to 10 %)
Steep ( >10 %)
25. Channel sinuosity:
Straight
Occasional bends
x
Frequent meander
Very sinuous
Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristics within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream amy be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 1 60 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature (Jennifer M. Freeman) Date 12 -13 -06
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream quality. The
total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a particular mitigation ratio
or requirement.

i'OUr c0177ppin' rM&Y
use period has ended,
Thank you for using
PDP Complete,
Site # (indicate on attached map)
'Y ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
* These charactersitics are not assessed in coastal streams.
t OR [ CtON POINT _2 NC E
2 El
�.. `��\
Coastal )'�i£�1tXat3nt lklountain
_
Presence of flow / persistent pools in streams
� 1 (no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
0 - 5 0 - 4 0 - 5
4
Evidence of past human alteration
2
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
0 - 6
0 - 5
0 - 5
3
Riparian Zone
3
(no b u f f e r = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = - max points)
0 - 6
0 - 4
0 - 5
2
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
4
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)
0-5
0 - 4
0 - 4
3
Groundwater discharge
5
(no discharge - 0: springs, seeps, wetlands. etc. = max points)
0 - 3
0 - 4
0 - 4
3
Presence of adjacent floodplain
r
6
(no floodplain = 0-, extensive floodplain = max points)
0 - 4
0 - 4
0 - 2
2
Entrenchment / floodplain access
* -
7
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding= max points)
0 - 5
0 - 4
0 - 2
3
Presence of adjacent wetlands
8
(no wetlands - = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
0 - 6
0 - 4
0 - 2
0
Channel sinuosity
9
(extensive channelization = 0: natural meander = max points)
0 - 5
0 - 4
0 - 3
3
Sediment input
1 0
(extensive deposition = 0; little or no sediment = max points)
0 - 5
0-4
0 - 4
2
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
,
1 1
(fine homo,enous _ 0. large, diverse sizes = max )
NA*
0 - 4
0 - 5
3
Evidence of channel incision or widening
(dee ly incised = 0; stable bed& banks = max points)
0 - 5
0 - 4
0 - 5
3
_
Presence of major bank failures
.- 1 3
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
0- 5
0-5
0 - 5
4
Root depth and density on banks
1 4
(no visible roots = 0 ; dense roots throughout _ max points)
0- 3
0 - 4
0 - 5
3
v
i Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
' I 1 5
1 (substantial impact =0; no evidence max points)
0- 5
1 0 - 4
0 - 5
2
Presence of riffle -pool /ripple -pool complexes
1 6
(no riffles/ ripples or pools = 0: well developed -= max points)
0 - 3
0 - 5
0 - 6
4
Habitat complexity
1 7
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
0 - 6
0 - 6
0 - 6
4
n '
Canopy coverage over streambed
18
(no shading vegetation _ 0: continuous canopy = max points)
0 - 5
0 - 5
0 - 5
4
Substrate embeddedness
1 9
(deeply embedded_ 0; loose structure - -- max points)
: , NA
� 0 - 4
0 - 4
3
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
20
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
0 - 4
0- 5
0 - 5
2
' -
Presence of amphibians
1 21
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
0 - 4
0 - 4
0 - 4
0
Presence of fish
22
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
0 - 4
0 - 4
0 - 4
0
j Evidence of wildlife use
_._
Total Points Possible ._
j
)0
•:- Aj(r SCi)RI" (also eater on first page)
...
* These charactersitics are not assessed in coastal streams.

iI ' :_1
Your compf%ne ary.. ;
use period has endxi '. Site # (indicate on attached map)
Thank you for using
pDFComple!`e.. Y ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
d e�i 3gx" t .,
2. Evaluator's name: Jennifer
M. Freeman
4. Time of evaluation: 1420
5. Name of stream:
UT to Crowder's Creek
6. River basin:
Catawba
7. Approximate drainage area:
8. Stream order:
1
9. Length of reach evaluated:
10. County:
Gaston
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees.
12. Subdivision name (if any):
Latitude:
Longitude:
Method location determined (circle): GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo /GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
Just west of SR 2425
14. Proposed channel work (if any):
n/a
15. Recent weather conditions: sunny,
cool
16. Site conditions at time of visit:
sunny & — 60 degrees
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known:
Section 10
Tidal Waters
Essential Fisheries Habitat
Trout Waters
Outstanding Resource Waters
Nutrient Sensitive Waters
Water Supply
Watershed
(I -IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation
point?
no If yes,
estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map?
no
20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey?
no
21. Estimated watershed land use: 10%
residential
70% forested
20% cleared /logged
22. Bankfull width:
23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank):
24. Channel slope down center of stream:
x
Flat (0 to 2 %)
Gentle (2 to 41
Moderate l0 %
Steep ( >10 %)
25. Channel sinuosity:
Straight
x
Occasional bends
Frequent meander
Very sinuous
j�Bra�,dedjhannel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristics within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream amy be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): F47 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature I (Jennifer M. Freeman) I Date 12 -13 -06
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream quality. The
total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a particular mitigation ratio
or requirement.

Your COMP11177017tary
crse Period has er;ded
TA3nA- you for usrnc7
PDF COP77pletO.
Site # (indicate on attached map)
'Y ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
* These eharactersitics are not assessed in coastal streams.
Coa,tal Piedmont Mountain
Presence of flow / persistent pools in streams
a ° 1 (no flow or ;,saturation - 0; strong flow - max points)
0- 5
0 - 4
0 - 5
1
Evidence of past human alteration
2
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration max points)
0 - 6
0 - 5
0 - 5
4
a
Riparian Zone
3
(no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer -max points}
0-
0 - 4
0- 5
3
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
4
(extensive discharges - 0; no discharges max points)
0-5
0 - 4
0 - 4
3
Groundwater discharge
5
(no discharge - 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points)
0 - 3
0 - 4
0 - 4
Presence of adjacent floodplain
6
(no floodplain - = 0; extensive floodplain = mat points)
0 - 4
0 - 4
0--)
2
Entrenchments floodplain access
� 7
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding max points)
0 - 5
- -
- 0 - 4
0 - 2
4
esen ce of adjacent wetlands
8
( rye adjacent wetlands max points)
no wetlandP
0 - 6
0 - 4
0 - 2
0
Channel sinuosity
�� 9
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points)
�
Sediment input
10
(extensive deposition = 0; little or no sediment = max points)
O - >
0 - 4
0 - 4
3
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
(fine homogenous - 0: larue, diverse sizes - max points)
NA*
0 - 4
0 - 5
0
Evidence of channel incision or widening
1 2
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks - max points)
0 - 5
0 - 4
0 - 5
4
r
Presence of major bank failues
1 3
(severe erosion _ 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)'
0 - 5
0 - 5
0 - 5
5
y
Root depth and density on banks
1 4
(no visible roots = 0, dense roots throughout = max points)'
0 - 3
0 - 4
0 - 5
2
'
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
1 5
(substantial impact = 0; no evidence = max points)
0 - 5
0 - 4
0 - 5
2
Presence of riffle - pool /ripple -pool complexes
1 6
(noriffles /ripples or pools " - 0; well developed _ _ max points)
0 - 3
0 - 5
0 - 6
1
Habitat complexity
� +
1%
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats - max points)
0 - 6
0 - 6
0 - 6
0
s
Canopy coverage over streambed
1 8
(no shading vegetation - 0, continuous canopy = max points)
0-5
0 - 5
0 - 5
4
Substrate embeddedness
19 _
(dee )ly embedded = 0; loose structure = max points)
N *;
0 - 4
0 - 4
2
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
0 - 4
0 - 5
0 - 5
0
i
Presence of amphibians
21
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
0 - 4
0 - 4
0 - 4
0
Presence of fish
( n o c e = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
0 - 4
0 - 4
0 - 4
0
f. _
Evidence of wildlife use
(no evi& ncc ,n idence =max points)
°i'otal Points Possible
TOTAL SCORE (also alter on first' pare)
* These eharactersitics are not assessed in coastal streams.

4 !i
Your compllme17tary ,
use period has ended Site # (indicate on attached map)
Thank you for using
pDFCornpl t Y ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
"
2. Evaluator's name: Jennifer
M. Freeman
4. Time of evaluation: 1600
5. Name of stream:
UT to Crowder's Creek
6. River basin:
Catawba
7. Approximate drainage area:
8. Stream order:
1
9. Length of reach evaluated:
10. County:
Gaston
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees.
12. Subdivision name (if any):
Latitude:
I
I Longitude:
Method location determined (circle): GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo /G[S Other GS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
Southern corridor, east of main D20 channel, East of Bud Wilson Rd
14. Proposed channel work (if any):
n/a
15. Recent weather conditions: cool,
sunny
16. Site conditions at time of visit:
sunny & — 50 degrees
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known:
Section 10
Tidal Waters
Essential Fisheries Habitat
Trout Waters
Outstanding Resource Waters
Nutrient Sensitive Waters
Water Supply
Watershed
(I -IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation
point?
no If
yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map?
no
20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey?
no
21. Estimated watershed land use: 10%
industrial
90% forested
22. Bankfull width: 2
— 3 ft
23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank):
1.5 — 3 ft
24. Channel slope down center of stream:
Flat (0 to 2 %)
Gentle (2 to 4 %)
x
Moderate (4 to l0 %)
Steep ( >10 %)
25. Channel sinuosity:
Straight
Occasional bends
x
Frequent meander
Very sinuous
Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristics within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream amy be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): F67 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature I (Jennifer M. Freeman) Date 12 -14 -06
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream quality. The
total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a particular mitigation ratio
or requirement.

Your Comp%ifnentary
use Period has ended.
Thank you for usrfrg
F'DF C0177,utete.
Site # (indicate on attached map)
'Y ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
"�� g
i CC)RI G [ON P(il>�rT
i2, 1t
Coastal
Piechnont
Mountain
�az ..
Presence of flow /persistent pools to streams
1 `
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
0 - 5
0 - 4
0 - 5
3
Evidence of past human alteration
2
(extensive alteration -- 0- no alteration = max points)
0 - 6
0- 5
U - 5
4
\
Riparian Zone
(no buffer -_, 0; contiguous, wide b u f f e r = max points)_
0 - 6
0 - 4
0 - 5
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
4
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges -max points)
0-5
0 - 4
U - 4
3
Groundwater discharge
5
(no discharge _ 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. _ max points)
0 - 3
0 - 4
0 -4
4
Presence of adjacent floodplain
6
1 (no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
0 - 4
0 - 4
0 - 2
2
Entrenchment / floodplain access
7
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)
0 - 5
0 - 4
0:2 _
3
Presence of adjacent wetlands
8
(no wetlands = 0, large adjacent wetlands = max points)
0 - 6
U - 4
0 - 2
0
`":.' •
Channel sinuosity
9
(extensive channelizatioil= 0: natural meander = max Dints)
0-5
0 - 4
O - 3
3
Sediment input
10
(extensive deposition = 0; little o r no sediment = max points)
0.-...5
0 - 4
0 - 4
2
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
'
1 1
(fine homogenous = 0; lame, diverse sizes =max Dints)
w *
_-
0-4
0 - 5
3
Evidence of channel incision or widening
12
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points)
0 - 5
0 - 4 0 - 5
3
Presence of major bank failures
1
13
(severe erosion -- 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
0 - 5
_0_ 5
0 - 5
4
;4
Root depth and density on banks
14
(no visible roots - 0, dense roots throughout= max points)
0 - 3
0 - 4
0 - 5
2
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
1 5
(substantial impact = 0; no evidence = max points)
0- 5
0 - 4
0 - 5
4
j
Presence of riffle- pool /ripple -pool complexes
16 '
(no riffles /ripples or pools = 0; well developed = max points)
0' = 3
0 - 5
0 - 6
4
Habitat complexity
F
1 7
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
0 - 6
0 - 6
0 - 6
4
Canopy coverage over streambed
1 8
(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy ._ max points)
0 - 5
0- 5
0 - 5
5
Substrate embeddedness
19
_ (deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max oints)
NA* _
0 - 4
0 - 4
3
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
_0
(no evidence = = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
U - 4
—0-5
0 - 5
3
Presence of amphibians
p
? 1
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
0 - 4
0 - 4
0 - 4
0
-�
Presence of fish
" �
22
(no evidence = 0, common, numerous types = max points)
0 - 4
0 - 4
0 - 4
0
-
Evidence of wildlife use
- -, �n idence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)
} _ , _
_ ; 0 _ 5 1
'Ft ➢t 11 Points Possible � , .
�
1ii 1(U
C iL (also cntet €iu first C) <ty
e)
* These charactersitics are not assessed in coastal streams.

Yow complitne q
Rk use period has end
d ':,
Site # (indicate on attached map)
COmIp}e Thank you for using ;
V p GL PDFCorflp r Y ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
ill 2. Evaluator's name: Jennifer M. Freeman
4. Time of evaluation: 1625
5. Name of stream:
UT to Crowder's Creek
6. River basin:
Catawba
7. Approximate drainage area:
8. Stream order:
2
9. Length of reach evaluated:
10. County:
Gaston
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees.
12. Subdivision name (if any):
Latitude:
Longitude:
Method location determined (circle): GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo /GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
east of Bud Wilson Rd
14. Proposed channel work (if any):
n/a
15. Recent weather conditions: sunny
& cool
16. Site conditions at time of visit:
sunny & — 52 degrees
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known:
Section 10
Tidal Waters
Essential Fisheries Habitat
Trout Waters
Outstanding Resource Waters
Nutrient Sensitive Waters
Water Supply
Watershed
(I -IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation
point?
no If yes,
estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map?
yes
20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey?
yes
21. Estimated watershed land use: 10%
industrial
30% agricultural
50% forested
22. Bankfull width: —
12 ft
23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank):
4 — 6 ft
24. Channel slope down center of stream:
x
Flat (0 to 2 %)
Gentle (2 to 41 )
Moderate (4 to 10 %)
Steep ( >t 0 %)
25. Channel sinuosity:
Straight
Occasional bends
x
Frequent meander
Very sinuous
Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristics within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream amy be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 772 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature I (Jennifer M. Freeman) Date 12 -14 -06
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream quality. The
total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a particular mitigation ratio
or requirement.

Your comp Brenta t)"
111�Rap% use period has enaed,
Site # (indicate on attached map)
k you for usin7
C itp'-fl Thank
'Y
FDF Compilete, ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
AON POINT
FCO,RF� G SCORE
UP CS
Coasta l Piedmont �ountain I
. . ..
Presence of flow l persistent pools in streams
(no flow or saturation = 0. strong flow = max points)
0-5
0-4
0-5
4
Evidence of past human alteration
2
(extensive alteration 0; no alteration max points)
0-6
0-5
0-5
3
Riparian Zone
3
(no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer max points)
0-6
0-4
0-5
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
4
(extensive discharges -- 0; no discharges = max points)
0-5
0-4
0-4
Groundwater discharge
5
(no discharge = 0, springs, seens, wetlands. etc -4,)
0-3
0-4
0-4
4
Presence of adjacent floodplain
6
(no floodplain = 0: extensive floodplain - max points)
0-4
0-4
0-2
Entrenchment floodplain access
7
(deeply entrenched- fireqUent flooqLin,�_ax points)
0;
0 5
0 -4
.. . . . ......
0-2
1
Presence of adjacent wetlands
large adjacent wetlands - rnax p
(no wetlands 0; 1, 0
0-6
0-4
0-2
Channel sinuosity
9
(extensive channelization = 0: natural meander = max points)
0-5
0-4
0-1
4
Sediment input
10
(extensive deposition = 0; little or no -sediment = max points)
0 -
0-4
0-4
3
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
(fine homogenous= 0. large, diverse sizes ---. max points)
A'�
0-4
0-5
4
Evidence of channel incision or widening
12
(deeply incised - 0; stable bed & banks =, max points)
0-5
0-4
0-5
2
Presence of major bank failures
13
(severe erosion - O; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
0- 5
0-5
0-5
2
Root depth and density on banks
i 4
(no visible roots -- O; dense roots throughout = max points)
0-3
0-4
0-5
2
Impact by agriculture. livestock, or timber production
15
(substantial impact = 0, no evidence = max points)
0-5
0-4
0-5
Presence of riftle-pool/ripple-pool complexes
16
(no riffles/ripples or pools - 0, well developed = max points)
0-3
0-5
o-6
4
Habitat complexity
17
(little or no habitat = 0; Frequent, varied habitats = max points)
0-6
0-6
0-6
5
Canopy coverage over streambed
18
(no shading vegetation -- 0, continuous canopy - max points)
0-5
0-5
0-5
5
Substrate embeddedness
"N
19
i (deeply embedded = 0; loose structure
..........
�,N A"
0-4
0-4
3
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
20
(no evidence = 0, common, numerous types max points)
0-4
0-5
0-5
4
Presence of amphibians
21
(no evidence = 0; common, mArnerous types max points)
0-4
0-4
0-4
2
Presence of fish
(no evidence = 0: common, numerous types = max points)
0-4
0-4
0-4
3
Evidence of wildlife use
(no evidence 0, abwidant evidence = max points)
0-6 0 -
. ......... . .....
. . ..........
'rcitai Points Possible
I oci
TOTAL, SCORE (also enter oil III-st pa,�e)

5
USACE AID# DWQ # Site (indicate an attached map)
M STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET -AQF
Provide the rouawing inronnation for the stream' reach under suis",sment:
1. ApplicanCs namr,:—, 2. Evaluator's namc-
3. Date of cvaluatiow-­ 4. Time of evaluation--, -
Name of stream,
7. Approximate drainage arca-.
9. tAmgth of rc*6 evaluated:.
n
H. Site coor4inates (if known): prefer ter dmirritl devrms,
Latitudc(cx 114,972112):
(4 River basin
8. Stream
10. Cmmcy,
12. Sibdivision a*= (if Any):---
LmgiUxk(ca -77.55M10,
Method location detennined(circk): OPS TopoShM 0?ft(Ax640P1aoWGtS OthcrGIS Cher
13. Location of reach under evaluation (nom nearby too& and landmarks and attach ;nap identifying sucar,10) lozatlan):—
14. Proposed channcl work (if any):
15, Recent Weather conditioris.,
IC Site conditions at time of visit'
17, ldejjtify tiny "cial waterway cimsifications known: —section 10 --Tidal Waters —EsWn63j Fisheries Habitat
Trout Waters, —Chitsimnding Resource Watem Nutrient semiffitWaters --Watcr Supply watershed (1 -1V)
18. Is there a pond or lake lowcd upstrciimi of the evaluation point? YES NO W yes, estimate the Witter surface are,•:—
19. I)oes ch.i;ujgI apMr on USGS quad mbp? YES, NQ 20. Does chumcl appew on USDA $oil Survey'! YH
21. Estimated waters, hcd land use: Residential %conmercial % industrial % Agricultural
% Forested —% Cleared I Logged Other
22. Bankfull width:-- 23. Bank height (from tsed to top of honk:),­ --­-
24. Channel slope down center of arciow, _Flat (0 to 2%) Mod title to 10% --Steep l(ro
(27 to 4%) e (4 (>
25. Channel sinuosity: beard Fmquent meander Aery sinuous Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksbeel (located on page 2)-. Be& by dete=ining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, cu. Every characteristic must be scored using the swnc ccoregion. Assign points
to each charactcrissic within the range sbo%m for the eeon:giom Page 3 provides a brief desr-tiption of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stitam reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section, Where them are obvious changes, in the characw of a stream under review (t g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a fbrest), the stream may be divided into smallitr reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evahuite each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach. must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing I a stream of1he
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): I I — Comments-
Evaluator's Signature—,,­;-- Date ss a S n
This channel evaluation foriat Is linteridtd to be used only as a guide to as" landovmers and environmental P Ofe 10 21 1
gathering the data required fame
the United States Army Corps of Ea&em to make a prrJimfnBry assessment of strealn
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form Is =bject to USACF, approval and does not ir"PlY 2
particular mitigation ratio or requiremeuL Form subject to change - vmian 06/03. To Conm=L please call 919-876-W I x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT '4 WORKSHEET
* T'hesn ctLimr_ rr lire are^ n i Re4 e a r1 in nr3artt 1 c+• x c
2
#
GHARAC ei�C
EC OREGION POINT
RANGE
SCORES
Coastal
Piedmont
Moatncsin
Presence of flow f pervistrutpools to streim
no flow or saturation = 0; sman _ ito - =X, rots
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
it - 5
0-5
extensive alteration - 0 no alteaatio a =max p2a pts
W.
3_
Riparian rant
0-6
0-4
0-5
racy buffer - il' Contiguous, wide buffer - rrix anus
Evidence of nutrient car cbem cal discharges
0-5
q - 4
0-4
wensivc discharges - 0, no di - -=X Points)
Groundwater disebarge
_.
nil da e: " ti' n R etc, W arta�c
v
6
I*res"ce of adj*er at floodplarin
-
� --
no fin Ii d aaln - • extensive fl lapin - scent points)
� �'t
0-4
0-2
7
_
Entrenchment ! fbaocipiaaia access
.. <.......
0.
(deeply crartnebod'" 1' fr 2 fitx 3xi arias}
0-5
0 - 4
0-2
Presence or adjacent wttlausls
no wetlands - 0: la a acl laccnt Avil ands - max .tits
0-6
� ° �
Ch"Del sinuosity
eactcnstve cltsrttaeii tion - 0° natural - m" points)
�- �
0-4
C � 3
i
a0
Sediment input
0-°5
0-r4
0 -4
....._._
CAte nsive dePosi tion- 0. or no sediment - max ants
SIw & diversity of channel bed substrate
a a
m
{�'inc . Via: enaaas ° 0 °. C div a siz � 15
NA*
0-4
E-v°idencc of channel Incision or widening
m_. {aioT.L incised„ pit, stable brit l , s �- max int,�
_
13
Provence or major hank failures
0 -5
0 -5
°.
0 -5
..........
r�r�siaxri fa° no esi�a plc buatks � rax points)
I
Root depth sand density on banks
� - 3
0-4
- 5
no visible roosts - 0, dense r to throughout - mm points)
15
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
substantial -i-. no evidence - t x rrals
5
0-4
° 5
16
Presence of rtlllt-footlriFPle-pool complexes
nai riffleaMpples ctr pools - 0; well- dcv5LI tam assts
0-3
0 - 5
0-6
17
HAWtaat complexity
- b
0-6
A - 6
4
little or no habitat = 9; varied haabitats max mints)
l
Canopy coverage over a rea mbed
0-5
t3 - 5
0-5
no shading vegetation - q; a�a w canasta = mu iw
19
Substrate eatInd4edness
NA*
0-4
to --4
d l- embedded d -: kwc structure = ;rsaac
20
Presence of saresm iaaverteb rates s (sere pale 4)
0-4
Q - 5
0-5
>4
(no evidence = D, moat, niamieraus t - n= ints)
0
21
Presences of amphibians
no evidence = % cam am, numuui,-s - max inns
22
Presence HofGIs
0-4
0 -4
0-4
�..,
lace evidence - 2 _ max points)
g
Evidence of �e use
0-6 �
0-5
{I - 5
no evideac= 0• abundant evidcc - max %tats
Total Points Passible
IDO
100
100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page)
* T'hesn ctLimr_ rr lire are^ n i Re4 e a r1 in nr3artt 1 c+• x c
2

USACE AfDg-- Dw.,Q"-- Site #_ (indicate on attached map)
M STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under asseament:
1. Applicant's name. 2. Evaluator's ruirne:
g.
3. Date of mmiuntion: 4. Time of evraluittion:
S. Name of stream: 6. Rivcr basin-.—
7.. Approximate drainage arc:__,_ .­­_._ S. Stream order-
9. Length of reach evaluated:— IC County:
11. Site coordinaits (if known): Vrcfcrindcci=ldcp= IL Subdivision nannic (if any);
LAlitudeica . Loniiptudc(" --,17,33mify,
Mcthod location determined (circle): GPS T" Shtxi Onho 4Aesisl) PboWGIS Otha GIS Otha_--
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and I&ndmarks and attach trup identifying surAm(s) Ideation):
M Proposed channel work (if any),
15. Recent weather conditions:
16. Site conditions at time of visit
1 *41. Identify any spreill w=M,-AV known: —scriton 10 ­­.."Tidal Watem —1—IFs'sentint 1`.sl:crlcs HaNtill
— - 1'rout \Vatcm —Outstanding Rc=rcc Wairrs ___NutricntSrnr6fivcWAtCT1 _W3tC1 Supply WR1cM,-hCd_(I-IV)
NO I r yes. rstimte thewater surfacc ams: I'A
18. Is there z pond tat lake located upwram of the evaluation point? es +
19. Does clunml app".r on USGS quad map? �,,YF
NO 20. Doci channel app= on IJSDA Scil Survey? (y INO
21. 11"Sti.maird wa tershrd land use Rc, Agricultural
iijential —% commc; Cie) % Industrial
Cleared 41 Logged _% Other L_­­­__)
22. Bankfull width: 4 r—�- 13, 83.,%k height (from bed to top of bank);
24. Channel slope down center of stream: _Flat 40 to r1o) \.,L_CjtW1c (Z to 4%) _Moderate J4 to 10%) —Strtp ( >! Vlo)
25. Channel sinuosity. _Straight _Occasloral bends Fmqucni meander Very sinuous —Braided cluinncl
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located an page 2), Begin by determining the most appropriate ectircgion based can
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, zw. Every charactefistic must be wored using the samic ecoreginn. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the workshect- Scores should reflect an overall Lucss.rneat of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated duc to site or weadur conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where th ere are obvious changes in the character of a see am under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a tomt), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display mart continuity, " a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score mignczd to a strewn reach must range berween 0 and 104, with a score, of 100 representing a shearer of_Vie
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): Comments-
7
Evaluator's Signature � Date— 4
This channel evaluation f6rin Is Intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and enyiroinmentat Professionals in
gathering the data requ�ei:l by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form b tubject to USACE approval and do" not Imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subj*a to change — version OW03, To Comment, please calf !919 -876 -9441 x 26.

e hcse characteristics are not m=cd in c=-W smarm.
y
ECOREGION POINT
RANGE
CHARACTERISTICS
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
I
Pretence of love / pmislent pools in stream
0-4
0-4
0-5
new flow or satmion - 0; strong flaw - r x ,n.ts)
2
s
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0 - $
0- S
cxtcnsivc alicratia n - 9 na alteration rasax points)
Riparian zone
� {
0-4
{� �
'no butler - 0,. omfi uous wide buffer - n ux
�
Evidence ofuntrient or chemical d%harges
exICnsivc de _:. 0: no dischATM - max points)
Groundwater discharge
0-3
0-4
0-4
no discharge - 0-, Wetland. ctc, - tax points)
fr
Presence of adjacent floodpfain
0 —d
0-4
0 -2
teci fir med lain � i ?` cxtcnsrve fto�txi iaen *� r m,ts
p
_
�.,
Entrenchment I floodptaain access
0^
0
0-2
drt ly cntrierachcd - 0" fr cnt fhwdi - max [Alts
Presence of adjacent wetlands
(no wetlands - 0; lasrye add accni w' r l ds - x enss)
�
0 �
t) 2
_ _.j
!l
C y 'Channel sinuosity
�"xtCn"1it channeliration - ; natural n=ndcr • t=-% in
0-5
0-4
0-3
Sediment Input
(extensive cfc ositton- O or no stdir z'st - rnax ants
Size &. diversity of channel beef substrate
i 1
fant, fxum tewus; 0, luge, djvvu sins ttiax points)
NA*
0 - 4
0- . 5
l2
E`idtnce of chtsonel Incision or widening
U
0_5
0 -4
0--5
_._.._.. riceTsi iaec>sctf {i stabit )xd 6r b��x - max into)
l
Presence of major bank failures
0 5
ll 5
0-5
�'4crzerc errrsir�n tl° tan erBSiCs stable finks �* rnsX lefts
' °w �
Rost deptb and density on honks
0 -3
0--4'
0_5
no visible ryas - 0; dense r tutu ut -mart teats
_a
to
t �
impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
subsuiutial ' t �U' �� e+ridanrict � agar iris.
0' - 5
0-4
0-5
--
lb
Preunct of riffle-pool/ripple-pool compltxt*
0-3
0-5
0-6
no riffiesfripplLs or pools. - 0• wcT:gs , - max points)
17
Habitst complexity
0-6
0-6
0-6
1 r,
little car no habitat— 0• Irequentvafied b2bita€s - mast rots
18
Canopy coverage ostr sttreanibed
0 -5
0 -5
0 -5
M.a
t�tli3 $1S�d1ti 4i etaticrn a ©; Continait�tx�s Cana - Ctt'�X ia:�'
19
Substrate embeddedncxs
N O
0-4
0-4
r2
(deeply, rmbedded - 0; loose strtecttaa" = tatsx)
Y
20
Presence of stre m invenebratts (set page 4)
0-4
Q S
0-5
r
o evidence - 0; oon at ucou m n ag points
C.:
I
Preece of amphibians
0' � �
0-4
0-4
G
no evidence = % cxtamna numerous - rrraax points)
22
Preseaice of fish
0-4
D _
0-4
no evidence - 0. conyn= aaUtag a points)
a
23
i vidence of wffd ffc use
0-6
0 - 5
0-5
fno evidetrec = 0: abundant evidz^rsax - tzst i
Total Points Possible
100
lOti
100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on fiat gage)
{
e hcse characteristics are not m=cd in c=-W smarm.
y

US ACE A] D# DWQ #
Site # � ridicate on attached map)
M STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET -AQF
Provide the followbig information for the stream reach under assessment;
1. Applicant's name : L-L—A — 2. Evaluator's name.
3. Date of evaluation: 4. Time of evaluation: (7
5. 6. River basin:
. Name of stream:
7. Approximate drainage area:
9. Length of reach evaluated:— I
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimst degrees-
Latitudc (cx. 3,4172312):
S. Stream order',,
10. County:
12. Subdivision name (if any):
Longilade (ex. - 77,556611);
Method location determined (circle): GPS TopoShect. Ortho (Aerial) PhotaIGIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying strcarrt(s) location):
-��) v �24
14. Proposed channel work (if any):
15. Recent weather conditions- -V
16. Site conditions at time of visit:
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: _Section 10 .-Tidal Waters Essential Fisherics. Habitat
Trout Waters Outstanding Resource Waters —Nunient Sensitive Waters —Water Supply Watershed _(I-IV)
18, Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES 146' If yes, estimate the water surface arm
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES
21. Estimated watershed land use 10 % Residential
Z�D/* Forested
22- Bank-full width: 1", 2— j�± —
20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES
—1/6 Commercial Industrial 0/6 Agricultural
—% Cleared / Logged Other (
23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank-)- 4�j- . .....
24. Channel slope down center of stream: F1 at, (0 to 2%) ----Qent le (2 to 4%) Mode to (4 to 101/1*) __Steep ( >1(1 %)
'��N.LFrequeni meander
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight —Occasional bends Very sinuous Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located an page 2), Begin by determining the most appropriate coorcgion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same =region. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksbect. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in tile
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e,g,, the swcarn flnws from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach, The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of.the
highest quality. le.
Total Scare (from reverse): r7i` , Comments:
Evaluator's Signature i:f 0, Date
This channel evaluation fdrm,is hiCended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and enirironmental professibRAlls in
gathering the data required 60 the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. Tice total score resulting from the completion of this form Is subject to VSACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06103. To Comment, please call 919-876-,9441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
2
CHARACTERISTICS
ECOREGION POINT RANGE
---------
Coastal
Piedmont
untain
SCORE
Presence of flow I persistent Pools In stream
(no flow or saturation = 0: stroprig flow = max Dints
0-5
0-4
0-5
2
Evidence of past human alteration
-
(extensive alteration - 0. no alteration max Dints
0-6
0-5
0-5
Riparian zone
no buffer tiguous. vide buffer inIs
0-6
0--4
0-5
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
--.
f extensive dischMes - 0• no, discharges -max points)
0-5
0-4
0-4
5
Groundwater discharge
d i6c 0 - ("
no discharge - 0: oint-'s
0-3
0-4
0-4
Pre
Presence of adjacent floodpisin
0 f122 -11 am
n flood lain - extensive Ila lain = max rots)
0-4
0-4
0-2
7
;nd
Entrenchment
Entrenchment I floodplain access
renc
deenly qnrr,-nrhPA Ains = max por S)
vent V
0-5
0-4
0-2
8
P,4
Presence of adjacent weliands
n
no wetlands adjacent wetlands max
-6
0-4
0-2
9
channel sinuosity
—
—
—
---�5!tensivr CUVUI�Iization -a 0' natural meander0-5
0-4
0-3
Sediment Input
—
-
extensive do sition= 0 little ar net 5ediznerit
0-5
0-4
a- 4
it
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
—
—
---
.1 (fine, homo cnOus - 0; lar e diverse sizes =— rots
NAO
0-4
0-5
12
Evidence Of channel Incision or widening
—
(deeply incised - 0; stable bed & bzflks = inax Dints )
0-5
0-4
-
0-5
13
Presence of major bank Mures
s c r n -
os" ero
n
severe erosion - 0. no erosioLi, stable banki - ra x points)
0
_4
0-1
0-5
14
Root
0 d h
a C and
depth n d
Root depth and density on banks
density
-
no 1,ille o O's C"so
no vjS;h1f-- rnAf� - n .4 OU
d
Besse roois throu
0-3
0-4
0- 4
0
0-5
15
1
Impact
Impact by agriculture, livestock
"J, agriculture, Cull 4re ve�toek`
,or timber production
—
an c
substantial iMpact !2-L no evidence, - ff= ants
DOI
0-5
0-4
0-5
i
7
16
am M
Presence of rime-pool./ripple-pool complexes
n nM
oriLNes/ripplesOrPOOIS-O;'%Tll-dcvelo d-n= oints
0-3
0-5
0-6
17
Mbl t
lbbitat complexity
U compl�
—
eorno t en van,
ale or no habitat 0- en' varied habitats = max mints
0-6
0-6
0-6
18
Canopy coverage over stream bed
—
(Ao shading :getation - ii' con *nuous cano V = Max points )
0- 5
-
05
0 -5
19
Substrate embeddedness
—
--
Bee. I embedded - n- inn. structure = rnax
NA*
0-4
0-4
2�
Presence Of stream Invertebrates (see page 4)
—
no evidence = Oi comwn, nurntrOUS bm tm�
0-4
0-5
0-5
21
Presence of amphibians
0
0-9
no evidence ft 0!
rn.�,. !IT —es = max 2onts)
0-4
0-4
0-4
0 22
Presence Offish
(no evidenre, = n. comunon numerates t es=max oints
0-4
0-4
0-4
23
Evidence a r wffdHfc use
(Tto evidence Ab"mrf."f evidence = max iz=
0-6
0-5
0-5
T40tal Points POSSIble
100
100
100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page)
rase C112racteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
2