20070861 Ver 1_Individual_20070517

❑ ®❑ Kimley-Hom
and Associates, Inc.
May 17, 2007
Mr. James Shern
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road
Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27615
Ms. Cyndi Karoly
NC Division of Water Quality
2321 Crabtree Blvd.
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602
Re: Selma Quarry, Martin Marietta Materials, Inc.
Individual Permit Application Submittal
Johnston County, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Shern and Ms. Karoly:
PAYMENT
RECEIVED
■
P.0 Box 33068
Raleigh, North Carolina
27636-3068
0 7. 0 8 6 1
On behalf of our client Martin Marietta Materials, Inc., Kimley-Horn and
Associates, Inc. is submitting the enclosed Individual Department of the Army
Permit Application for authorization pursuant to Section 404 and 401 of the
Clean Water Act to construct the above reference project. The following
information is included as part of the application submittal:
• Project Summary Sheet
• Individual Permit Application - Engineer Form 4345
• Individual Permit Support Document
If there is any additional information you need or any way we can assist in
expediting the processing of this application, please do not hesitate to contact me
at [phone].
Very truly yours,
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
V vt
Zl
Todd J. Tu ell
Environmental Scientist
Enclosures
Cc: Mr. Steve Whitt, Martin Marietta Materials, Inc.
■
TEL [phone]
FAX [phone]
44�- @4�
90
'V21 q�
�gj�gQry
R'Ncy

Kimley-Hom
_j and Associates, Inc.
Project Summary Sheet
Project Name: Selma Ouarry
Applicant Name and Address: Martin Marietta Materials, Inc.
Attn: Mr. Steven S. Whitt
Post Office Box 30013
Raleigh, NC 27622-0013
Telephone Number: (919 781-4550
Type of Request: ❑ Nationwide PCN (NWP # ) ® Individual Permit Application
❑ Jurisdictional Determination ❑ Other:
Included Attachments: ® Project Plans ® USGS Map ® NRCS Soil Survey
® Agent Authorization ® Delineation Sketch ❑ Delineation Survey
® Data Forms (Up & Wet) ❑ NCDWQ Stream Forms ❑ USACE Stream Forms
® NCEEP Confirmation ® Aerial Photo ® Site Photos
® Agency Correspondence ❑ Other: ❑ Other:
Check if applicable: ❑ CAMA County ❑ Trout County ❑ Isolated Waters
❑ Section 7, ESA ❑ Section 106, NHPA ❑ EFH
® Mitigation Proposed (® NC EEP ❑ On -Site ❑ Off -Site ❑ Other)
County: Johnston Nearest City/Town: Selma
Waterway: Unnamed Tributary to the Neuse River
H.U.C.:03020201
Property Size (acres): 503
Site Coordinates (in decimal degrees): 35.5686 ON
River Basin: Neuse
USGS Quad Name: Selma
Approx. Size of Jurisdiction on Site (acres): 58.57
78.3197 °W
Project Location: The project site is located on both sides of Bear Farm Road (SR 1914), approximately 0.5 mile north of
U.S. Highway 70, adjacent to the Neuse River, approximately 2 miles southeast of Wilson's Mills, North Carolina.
Site Description: The project site is located within a bend of the Neuse River and contains several unnamed tributaries that
drain directly to the river. The land is comprised of agricultural fields separated by several mixed -hardwood forested areas,
which areeg, nerally located along the streams and in low areas.
Impact Summary (if applicable): Impacts associated with project total 2.7 acres of wetland and 130 linear feet of stream,
resulting from activities associated with the construction of a new quarry, including the placement of fill for the construction
of the earthen berms, transportation facilities, and excavation of overburden to reach aggregate product within the mine pit.
Wetland and Stream Impacts & Mitigation
Impact
Feature
Shown
on
Type of
Type of Impact
Permanent
Mitigation
Required
Number
Figure:
System
Impacts*
Ratio
Mitigation
1
Wetland
5, 6
Forested,
Fill (Berm, Processing
acres
2:1
0.92 acres
3
Non -Riparian
Area, Haul Road)0.46
2
Wetland
5,6
Forested,
Excavation (Stripping
1.04 acres
2:1
2.08 acres
8, 9, 10
Non -Riparian
Over -burden, Mine Pit)
3
Wetland
Forested,
Excavation (Stripping
5
5,7
Non -Riparian
Over -burden, Mine Pit
0.81 acres
2:1
1.62 acres
4
Wetland
5' 7
Forested,
Fill (Berm, Processing
acres
2:1
0.78 acre
4,5
Non -Riparian
Area, Haul Road)0.39
5
Stream 1
5,8
Intermittent/
Culvert/Fill
130 feet
NA
NA
Low Quality
(Rail Crossing)
Wetland Impact Totals:
2.7 acres
5.4 acres
Stream Impact Totals:
130 feet
NA
*Impacts rounded up to nearest hundredth of an acre.
Kimley-Horn Contact: Todd Tugwell 1���?777 �i Direct Number: 919-677-2104
0 Box 33068 e { i� • TEL [phone]
0 �
Raleigh, North Carolina V FAX [phone]
27636.3068 MAY^
Z � 2007
Dd
AENR
k-TIANbgq - AIER4UlALITV

APPLICATION FOR DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PEI*IT • 0 8 6
OMB APPROVAL NO. 0710-0003
(33 CFR 325)
Expires December 31, 2004
The Public burden for this collection of infonnation is estimated to average 10 hours per response, although the majority of applications should require
5 hours or less. This includes the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and
completing and reviewing the collection of infonnation. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of
information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Service Directorate of Information
Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302; and to the Office of Management and Budget,
Paperwork Reduction Project (0710-0003), Washington, DC 20503. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no
person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control
number. Please DO NOT RETURN your form to either of those addresses. Completed applications must be submitted to the District Engineer having
jurisdiction over the location of the proposed activity.
PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT
Authorities: Rivers and Harbors Act, Section 10, 33 USC 403; Clean Water Act, Section 404, 33 USC 1344; Marine Protection, Research and
Sanctuaries Act, 33 USC 1413, Section 103. Principal Purpose: Information provided on this form will be used in evaluating the application for a
permit. Routine Uses: This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal, state, and local government agencies.
Submission of requested information is voluntary, however, if information is not provided the pen -nit application cannot be evaluated nor can a pen -nit
be issued.
One set of original drawings or good reproducible copies which show the location and character of the proposed activity trust be attached to this
application (see sample drawings and instructions) and be submitted to the District Engineer having jurisdiction over the location of the proposed
activity. An application that is not completed in full will be returned.
(ITEMS 1 THR U 4 TO BE FILLED BY THE CORPS)
1. APPLICATION NO.
2. FIELD OFFICE CODE
3. DATE RECEIVED
4. DATE APPLICATION COMPLETED
(ITEMS BELOW TO BE FILLED BYAPPLICANT)
5. APPLICANT'S NAME
8. AUTHORIZED AGENT'S NAME AND TITLE (an agent is not required)
Martin Marietta Materials
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
Attn: Steven S. Whitt
Attn: Todd Tugwell, Environmental Scientist
6. APPLICANT'S ADDRESS
9. AGENT'S ADDRESS
Post Office Box 30013
Post Office Box 33068
Raleigh, NC 27622-0013
Raleigh, NC 27636-3068
7. APPLICANT'S PHONE NOS. W/AREA CODE
10. AGENT'S PHONE NOS. W/AREA CODE
a. Residence NA
a. Residence NA
b. Business [phone]
b. Business [phone]
11. STATEMENT OF AUTHORIZATION
I hereby authorize Kimle -Horn and Associates Inc. to act in my behalf as my agent in the processing of this application and to
fumis upon request, supplemental infonnation in support of this p nmit ap ication.
za
441-
APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE DATE
NAME, LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT OR ACTIVITY
12. PROJECT NAME OR TITLE (see instructions) PAYM E N T
Selma Quarry REC EIVED
13. NAME OF WATERBODY, IF KNOWN (ifapplicable)
14. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS (ifapplicable)
Unnamed Tributaries to the Neuse River
655 — 2155 Bear Fann Road, Smithfield, NC 27577
15. LOCATION OF PROJECT
Johnston North Carolina
COUNTY STATE
16. OTHER LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS, IF KNOWN (see instructions)
Coordinates (in decimal degrees) for the center of the site are 35.5686° N, 78.3197° W.
17. DIRECTIONS TO THE SITE
The project site is located on both sides of Bear Fann Road (SR 1914), approximately 0.5 mile north of U.S. Highway 70, adjacent to the Neuse River,
approximately 2 miles southeast of Wilson's Mills, in Johnston County, North Carolina.
ENG FORM 4345, Jul 97 EDITION OF FEB 94 IS OBSELETE (Proponent: CECW-OR)

18. Nature of Activity (Description ofproject, include all features)
The project is a 503 -acre aggregate quant' site, which would include the construction of all required infrastructure, including the processing facilities,
transportation network, screening bean and the mine pit. Construction of the project will result in the unavoidable loss of 2.7 acres of wetland and 130
linear feet (260 square feet) of jurisdictional stream. A detailed description of the project purpose is provided in Section 1.3 of the attached pen -nit
application support document.
19. Project Purpose (Describe the reason or purpose of the project, see instructions)
The basic project purpose for the proposed activity is develop a new mine in order to supply aggregate to the regional market. MMM is developing
this new quant' in order to keep up with growing regional demand for high-quality granite. Although the product may be shipped by rail up and down
the eastern seaboard, the primary market served by the quarry includes the entire eastern portion of North Carolina. A more complete description of
the project purpose is provided in Section 2.0 of the attached pen -nit application support document.
I USE BLOCKS 20-22 IF DREDGED AND/OR FILL MATERIAL IS TO BE DISCHARGED
20. Reason(s) for Discharge
The discharge of fill, including earthen material and riprap, and excavation within jurisdictional areas is required for the construction the necessary
infrastructure associated with the development of a new mine. Because of the type of facility proposed and the extensive disturbance required, the
wetland impacts are unavoidable. The project requires the construction of a railroad spur necessitating impacting a low quality stream. Alternatives
were identified; however, all of the alternatives were determined to be impracticable and unable to meet the project purpose and need. The proposed
site plan represents the least damaging practicable alternative. Additionally, mitigation will be provided to offset the proposed impact to wetlands.
Additional information, including an alternatives analysis, and measures taken to avoid and minimize impacts, have been included in Section 5.0 of the
attached permit application support document.
21. Type(s) of Material Being Discharged and the Amount of Each Type in Cubic Yards
Construction of the site will require the discharge of fill (primarily including earthen fill with small amounts of riprap, gravel, etc.) for the construction
of screening berm, railroad spur, and access roads on the project site. The total acreage of wetland impacted by fill is approximately 0.85 acres, with a
maximum bene height of 40 feet. Accordingly, the maximum estimated volume of discharge is approximately 55,000 cubic yards of fill material
within wetlands.
22. Surface Area in Acres of Wetlands or Other Waters Filled (see instructions)
The project as proposed will result in the pennanent placement of fill into 0.85 acres of non -riparian wetland, and the excavation of 1.85 acres of non -
riparian wetland, for a total impact of 2.7 acres and approximately 130 (260 sq. ft.) feet of jurisdictional stream . The detailed description of the
proposed impacts is included in Section 1.3 of the attached permit application support document.
23. Is Any Portion of the Work Already Complete? Yes No X IF YES, DESCRIBE THE COMPLETED WORK
24. Addresses of Adjoining Property Owners, Lessees, Etc., Whose Property Adjoins the Waterbody (if more than can be entered here,
please attach a supplemental list).
Addresses of adjoining property owners are included in Appendix F of the attached permit application support document.
25. List of Other Certifications or Approvals/Denials Received from other Federal, State, or Local Agencies for Work Described in This Application
AGENCY TYPE APPROVAL* IDENTIFICATION NUMBER DATE APPLIED DATE APPROVED DATE DENIED
NCDENR - DWQ
NPDES Permit
To Be Determined
Concurrent with 404
NA
NA
NCDENR - DWQ
Water Quality Permit (401 Cert.)
To Be Determined
Application Pending
NA
NA
NCDENR - DAQ
Air Quality Permit
To Be Determined
Application Pending
NA
NA
NCDENR-DLR
Mine Permit
To Be Determined
Application Pending
NA
NA
Town of Selma
Floodplain Development Permit
To Be Determined
Application Pending
NA
NA
*Would include but is not restricted to zoning, building and flood plain permits
26. Application is hereby made for a permit or permits to authorize the work described in this application. I certify that the information in this
application is complete and accurate. I her certify that I possess the authority to undertake the work described herein or atn acting as the
y thorized a f the applica
S' a
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE SIGNATU O AGENT DA E
The application must be signed by the person who desires to undertake the proposed activity (applicant) or it may be signed by a duly
authorized agent if the statement in block 11 has been filled out and signed.
18 U.S.C. Section 1001 provides that: Whoever, in'any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States
knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up any trick, scheme, or disguises a material fact or makes any false, fictitious or
fraudulent statements or representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious or
fraudulent statements or entry, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned hot more than five years or both.

INDI VID UAL PERMIT APPLICA TION AND
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION
Selma Quarry, Martin Marietta Materials
Johnston County, North Carolina
Prepared for:
Martin Marietta Materials
Post Office Box 30013
Raleigh, NC 27622-0013
Martin Marietta Materiat/4A
wMW y%
Prepared by:
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
Post Office Box 33068
Raleigh, NC 27636-3068
COF1
Kmley-Hom
and Associates, Inc.
May 2007
©Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2007

Executive Summary
This document is intended to provide supplementary information in support of the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers' (USACE) preparation of the Public Notice, Environmental Assessment, Finding of No
Significant Impact, Statement of Findings, and Review and Compliance Determination according to
the 404(b)(1) guidelines for the proposed Selma Quarry, in Selma, North Carolina.
Applicant: Martin Marietta Materials
Attn: Steven S. Whitt
Post Office Box 30013
Raleigh, NC 27622-0013
Date of Application: May 17, 2007
Location: The project site is located on both sides of Bear Farm Road (SR 1914), approximately 0.5
mile north of U.S. Highway 70, adjacent to the Neuse River, approximately 2 miles southeast of
Wilson's Mills, in Johnston County, North Carolina. Coordinates (in decimal degrees) for the center
of the site are 35.5686'N, 78.31970W. The project site contains several unnamed tributaries and
adjacent wetlands that flow into the Neuse River, which is located adjacent to the property. The
Neuse River is a tributary to the Atlantic Ocean.
Existing Site Conditions: The entire project site is approximately 503 acres in size. The project site
is comprised of agricultural fields separated by several mixed -hardwood forested areas, which are
generally located along the streams and in low areas. The Neuse River runs along the eastern
boundary of the tract, and land located to the north and west is primarily comprised of moderate to
low density residential subdivisions intermixed with agricultural fields and unmanaged woodlands.
The property contains three tributaries totaling 2,884 linear feet of jurisdictional stream channel, as
well as ten wetland areas totaling 58.57 acres in size. A non jurisdictional abandoned borrow pit
created during the construction of nearby highways covers approximately 14 acres in the southern
portion of the property.
Applicant's Stated Purpose: The basic project purpose for the proposed activity is to develop a
new mine in order to supply aggregate to the regional market. Martin Marietta Materials (MMM) is
developing this new quarry in order to keep up with growing regional demand for high-quality
granite. Although the product may be shipped by rail up and down the eastern seaboard, the primary
market served by the quarry includes the entire eastern portion of North Carolina. An off-site
alternative was identified; however, the off-site alternative did not meet the required site -selection
criteria (see the alternatives discussion below). The applicant has also evaluated on-site alternatives
that could avoid or reduce impacts to waters of the U.S., but these alternatives were determined to be
impracticable and unable to meet the project purpose and need.
Project Description: The project is a 503 -acre aggregate quarry site, which would include the
construction of all required infrastructure, including the processing facilities, transportation network,
screening berm and the mine pit. The lifespan of the project as shown is expected to be
approximately 50 years. Construction of the project will result in the unavoidable loss of 2.7 acres
of wetland. Wetland Impacts 1 and 2, which are depicted on Figure 6, will occur to the wetland
system which drains from the center of the pit area to the southwest. Impacts 3 and 4, which are

depicted on Figure 7, will occur within the wetland system that drains to the east from the pit area.
Impact 1 (0.46 acres) and Impact 4 (0.39 acres) will result from the placement of fill for the
perimeter berm and for construction of the access road to be located at the toe of slope along the
outside of the face of the berm. Impact 2 (1.04 acres) and Impact 3 (0.81 acres) will be due to the
excavation of the mine pit. Impact 5 (130 linear feet of stream channel), which is depicted on
Figure 8, will result from the construction of a rail spur across an intermittent stream. No Neuse
River Buffer impacts will result from the construction of mine pit and required processing facilities.
Each proposed jurisdictional impact is detailed in the following table:
Stream and Wetland Impacts & Mithyation
Impact
Feature
Shown
on
Type of
Type of Impact
Permanent
Mitigation
Required
Number
System
Impacts*
Ratio
Mitigation
Figure:
I
Wetland
5,6
Forested,
Fill (Berm, Processing
0.46 acres
2:1
0.92 acres
3
Non -Riparian
Area, Haul Road
2
Wetland
5,6
Forested,
Excavation (Stripping
1.04 acres
2:1
2.08 acres
8, 9, 10
Non -Riparian
Over -burden, Mine Pit
3
Wetland
5,7
Forested,
Excavation (Stripping
0.81 acres
2:1
1.62 acres
5
Non -Riparian
Over -burden, Mine Pit
4
Wetland
5' 7
Forested,
Fill (Berm, Processing
acres
2:1
0.78 acre
4,5
Non -Riparian
Area, Haul Road)0.39
5
Stream
5,8
Intermittent/
Culvert/Fill
130 feet
NA
NA
1
Low Quality
(Rail Crossing)
Wetland Impact Totals:
2.7 acres
5.4 acres
Stream Impact Totals:
130 feet
NA
*Impacts rounded up to nearest hundredth of an acre.
The applicant proposes to mitigate for impacts to 2.7 acres of wetlands associated with the project by
providing payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) sufficient
for the restoration of 5.4 acres (a 2:1 ratio) within the Neuse River Basin (HUC 03020201). An
acceptance form from NCEEP is included in Appendix H.
Stream 1 is a very low quality stream which has been negatively impacted by the contribution
watershed over a substantial period of time. Photographs of this stream are included in Appendix E.
Because the proposed rail spur crossing will impact less than 150 feet of stream and because of the
low quality of the stream, no stream mitigation is proposed.
Other Required Authorizations: Other required authorizations to be obtained prior to construction
of the proposed work include an individual 401 Water Quality Certification from the North Carolina
Division of Water Quality (DWQ), a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
Permit issued by DWQ, a Mining Permit from the North Carolina Division of Land Resources
(DLR), an Air Quality Permit from the North Carolina Division of Air Quality (DAQ), and a
Floodplain Development Permit from the Town of Selma.
Essential Fish Habitat (EFH): Based upon the location of the project and the minimal impacts
predicted, we believe the proposed project will not adversely impact EFH or associated fisheries
managed by the South Atlantic or Mid Atlantic Fishery Management Councils or the National
Marine Fisheries Service.
Cultural Resources: Based upon a review of the latest published version of the National Register of
Historic Places at the State Historic Preservation Office, no registered properties, or properties listed
ii

as being eligible for inclusion therein, are located within the project area or will be affected by the
proposed work.
Endangered Species: Based upon consultation with the latest North Carolina Natural Heritage
Program Database and pedestrian field surveys, no threatened or endangered species are known to be
located in the immediate area of the proposed project. Therefore, we anticipate a finding of "no
effect" on federally listed endangered or threatened species or their formally designated critical
habitat, pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973.
iii

Contents
1.0
Location, Existing Site Conditions, Project Description.......................................................... 1
1.1 Location........................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Existing Site Conditions.................................................................................................. 1
1.2.1 Land Use.............................................................................................................. 1
1.2.2 Topography.......................................................................................................... 1
1.2.3 Streams and Wetlands.......................................................................................... 2
1.2.4 Soils......................................................................................................................3
1.2.5 Vegetation............................................................................................................4
1.2.6 Protected Species and Habitat.............................................................................. 4
1.2.7 Historical and/or Archaeological Sites................................................................ 4
1.2.8 Regulated Floodplain........................................................................................... 4
1.3 Project Description........................................................................................................... 5
2.0
Project Purpose......................................................................................................................... 6
3.0
Scope of Analysis:.................................................................................................................... 7
4.0
Other Federal, State, and Local Authorizations Obtained or Required and Pending ............... 7
4.1 State Water Quality (401) Certification........................................................................... 7
4.2 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit ............................................... 7
4.3 Coastal Zone Management (CZM) Consistency Determination ..................................... 7
4.4 Mining Permit.................................................................................................................. 7
4.5 Air Quality Permit............................................................................................................ 7
4.6 Floodplain Development Permit...................................................................................... 8
5.0
Project Alternatives................................................................................................................... 8
5.1 No -Project Alternative..................................................................................................... 8
5.2 Off-site Alternative.......................................................................................................... 8
5.3 On -Site Alternatives......................................................................................................... 9
5.4 Minimization....................................................................................................................9
IV

Figures
Figure 1: Vicinity Map
Figure 2: USGS Topographic Map (Selma Quadrangle)
Figure 3: Soil Survey (Johnston County)
Figure 4: Delineation of Waters of the U.S.
Figure 5: Overall Site Plan
Figure 6: Impact 1 and 2 Detail
Figure 7: Impact 3 and 4 Detail
Figure 8: Impact 5 Detail
Figure 9: Typical Berm Cross Section
Appendices
Appendix A:
Project Alternatives
Appendix B:
Agency Coordination
Appendix C:
USACE Wetland Data Forms
Appendix D:
Floodplain (FIRM) Map
Appendix E:
Site Photographs
Appendix F:
Adjacent Property Owners
Appendix G:
Agent Authorization Form
Appendix H:
NCEEP ILF Acceptance Letter
V

1.0 Location, Existing Site Conditions, Project Description
1.1 Location
The project site is located east of U.S. Highway 70, approximately 4 miles northwest of the
U.S. Interstate 95/U.S. Highway 70 interchange in Selma, Johnston County, North Carolina
and approximately 2 miles southeast of Wilson's Mills, North Carolina. Coordinates (in
decimal degrees) for the center of the site are 35.56860 N, 78.3197° W. The project site
contains several unnamed tributaries and adjacent wetlands that flow into the Neuse River,
which is located adjacent to the property. The Neuse River is a tributary to the Atlantic
Ocean. Figure 1 (Vicinity Map) and Figure 2 (USGS Topographic Map) show the project
location.
1.2 Existing Site Conditions
The entire project site is approximately 503 acres in size. The project site is comprised of
agricultural fields separated by several mixed -hardwood forested areas, which are generally
located along the streams and in low areas. The Neuse River runs along the eastern boundary
of the tract, and land located to the north and west is primarily comprised of moderate to low
density residential subdivisions intermixed with agricultural fields and unmanaged
woodlands. The US Highway 70 corridor is located approximately 0.5 mile to the west of
the site. The property contains three tributaries totaling 2,884 linear feet of jurisdictional
stream channel, as well as ten wetland areas totaling 58.57 acres in size. There is also a large
wetland, measuring 50 acres or more, located between the Neuse River and the southern
boundary of the site. This wetland is not within the boundary of the project site, but is
contiguous with wetlands on the site. A non jurisdictional abandoned borrow pit created
during the construction of nearby highways covers approximately 14 acres in the southern
portion of the property. All three streams on the site drain to the Neuse River. Figure 4
shows an aerial photograph of the project site and on-site photographs are included in
Appendix E.
1.2.1 Land Use
Land located adjacent to the project site primarily consists of moderate to low density
residential subdivisions, agricultural fields, and unmanaged woodlands to the north
and west. The Neuse River forms a portion of the eastern property boundary. The
southeast property boundary parallels the Neuse River; however the property does not
extend completely to the river along this portion. The project site is also generally
bordered by railroad tracks to the west and Bear Farm Road to the northwest.
Residential development has been moving into this area from the Smithfield -Selma
area. The US Highway 70 corridor provides easy access to the area, and industrial
and institutional land uses are common along the highway corridor. An example of
this is the correctional facility located approximately 0.5 mile to the southwest of the
project site.
1.2.2 Topography
The project is located in the coastal plain physiographic region and has a consistently
rolling terrain with moderately steep slopes. The topography of the project area

varies from a high elevation of approximately 174 feet above mean sea level (MSL)
at the northwestern corner of the site property where Uzzle's Pond Road intersects
with Bear Farm Road to a low of approximately 112 feet MSL at the easternmost
point of the site property boundary, adjacent to the Neuse River.
The proposed site is located in the Neuse River drainage basin (DWQ sub -basin
03-04-02). Because the site generally occupies a ridge within the bend of the river,
there are no drainage features that enter the project boundaries, and all stormwater
flows off the site to one of three streams that flow directly to the Neuse River.
Several ditches located in agricultural fields on the western side of the site accelerate
drainage of water from the site.
1.2.3 Streams and Wetlands
Figure 4 shows the delineated jurisdictional areas evaluated by Kimley-Horn and
Associates, Inc. (KHA) staff and reviewed by US Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) representative Jamie Shern on August 30, 2006 within the project site. The
project site contains 58.57 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, 0.27 acres of jurisdictional
open water, and 2,884 linear feet of jurisdictional stream. USACE wetland and
upland data forms are included in Appendix C.
Stream 1 is an intermittent channel that originates onsite. The total length of Stream 1
within the project site is approximately 484 linear feet. The drainage begins at the
base of a large pile of manure. A large amount of trash and debris has been pushed
into the stream channel just downstream from its origin. The stream shows signs of
excessive nutrient inputs, including excessive growths of algae and iron -oxidizing
bacteria. Pictures of this system are included in Appendix E. The stream received a
NCDWQ classification rating of 22, which indicates the stream is intermittent.
Stream 1 does not appear on either the Soil Survey of Johnston County, NC (Figure
3) or on the most recent USGS Topographic Map (Selma, NC; 1964, revised 1988)
(Figure 2). The stream channel flows into a wooded area at the edge of the site and
dissipates within the floodplain.
Stream 2 is an intermittent "unimportant" channel that originates onsite, just north of
an existing dirt road that cuts across the center of the property and flows from
southwest to northeast, towards the Neuse River. There is a small, non -riparian
forested wetland (Wetland 7; 0.09 acre) located adjacent to the stream. This stream
appears on the Soil Survey of Johnston County, NC, however it is not shown on the
most recent USGS Topographic Map (Selma, NC; 1964, revised 1988). Stream 2 was
determined to be subject to the Neuse River Buffer Rules during an onsite buffer
determination meeting with Michael Horan of the NC Division of Water Quality
(September 21, 2006). Approximately 900 linear feet of jurisdictional, buffered
Stream 2 is located onsite.
Stream 3 outlets from an abandoned farm pond and continues flowing
south/southwest through the project site until it exits the property and eventually
discharges into the Neuse River. Wetland 2 (0.8 -acre; upstream of pond) and
Wetland 3 (5.8 acres; downstream of pond) are non -riparian forested wetland seeps
2

that provide additional hydrologic input into the southern reach of the stream. The
total length of Stream 3 within the subject property is approximately 1,499 linear feet
(941f upstream of the pond and 1,405 if downstream of the pond). This stream
appears on both the Soil Survey of Johnston County, NC and the USGS Topographic
Map (Selma, NC; 1964, revised 1988). The subject channel begins upstream of the
pond.
Ten wetland areas were identified and flagged on the project site. Several of these
areas are adjacent to one -another and form continuous wetlands systems. Wetland 1
is approximately 17.8 acres in size, and is located along the southwestern boundary of
the project site. This is a forested system that receives a portion of its hydrologic
inputs from the adjacent agricultural fields on the site. Drainage ditches located
within the fields expedite run off from the fields into this system. Water from this
system flows under the rail road tracks located to the south of the wetland and into an
off-site stream which carries the flow to the Neuse River.
Wetlands 2, 3, 8, 9, and 10 (totaling 7.66 acres) form two fingers that extend into the
site. These areas receive hydrologic inputs from groundwater seeps and from
drainage from the eastern portion of the site. The system is forested, although many
of the trees are young. Wetland 8 appears to be located in a former pond bed, as
evidenced by the breached dam just upstream from the dirt road crossing at its low
point.
Wetland 5 is a similar forested system, which drains toward the eastern side of the
site to Wetland 4, a 32 -acre wetland system located along the eastern and southern
side of the project boundaries. Wetland 4 is contiguous with a large wetland area,
50+ acres, located outside the project boundaries. This system is low-lying and is
supported by hydrology from the Neuse River. The system is generally forested with
several areas of deeper open water.
Wetland areas 6 and 7 are small seeps located along the northern boundary of the
project area. Together, these areas total 0.11 acre and drain to the Neuse River via
Stream 2.
Most of the wetland areas within the project area are forested systems that have had
some previous impact due to past agricultural activities, including mechanized
clearing, ditching, or use as a pond. The wetlands to be impacted are the smaller
fingers that extend into the mine pit area. Functions provided by these wetlands
include retention of stormwater, filtration of sediment, nutrient sequestration, and
providing habitat for a variety of animal and plant species. Due to past activities,
these areas are not pristine or particularly unique or high-quality. Accordingly,
mitigation proposed for the impacts is at a 2:1 ratio.
1.2.4 Soils
Most of the soils within the higher elevations of the project site are classified by the
USDA Soil Conservation Service (SCS) Soil Survey for Johnston County as Bonneau
sand, Gilead sandy loam, Norfolk loamy sand, and Uchee loamy coarse sand (Figure
3). These moderately well to well -drained soils are commonly located on upland
ridges and side slopes as well as broad inter -stream divides. This includes the
3

agricultural fields as well as a portion of the forested areas onsite. The drainage ways
along Streams 2 and 3 are mapped as Nason silt loam, a well -drained soil commonly
located on south -facing side slopes of stream valleys in the uplands on the Piedmont.
The soil located within the drainage way of Stream 1 as well as Wetland 3 and part of
Wetland 4 is classified as Wehadkee loam, frequently flooded. This very deep,
poorly drained soil is formed in recent alluvial sediments on floodplains. Wehadkee
loam is classified as a hydric soil. Other hydric soils mapped under the project site are
Grantham silt loam, Rains sandy loam, Roanoke loam, and Toisnot loam. These are
all very deep, poorly drained soils. Chewacla loam, Goldsboro sandy loam, and
Lynchburg sandy loam are project site soils listed as having hydric inclusions. These
are all very deep, moderately well to somewhat poorly drained soils.
1.2.5 Vegetation
Wetlands 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10 are non -riparian forested systems dominated by
red maple (Acer rubrum), sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua), river birch (Betula
nigra), and sweetbay (Magnolia virginiana). Wetland 6 is a small, non -riparian
emergent wetland dominated by (Boehmeria cylindrica) and (Woodwardia virginica).
The vegetation in the wetland portions of the project area ranges from facultative to
obligate, suggesting that the soils on the site are regularly saturated throughout the
year, but that they may dry out in the summer months or during periods of drought.
Upland areas on the site contain a mixture of tree species common to the region,
including a variety of oaks (Quercus spp.) and hickories (Carya spp.), as well as red
maple (Acer rubrum), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), yellow poplar
(Liriodendron tulipifera) and loblolly pine (Pinus taeda).
1.2.6 Protected Species and Habitat
Based upon a review of the most recent North Carolina Natural Heritage Program
(NHP) Element Occurrence Database (on March 16, 2007), and pedestrian field
surveys, no species listed on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) list of
federally threatened or endangered species (updated: January 29, 2007) listed for
Johnston County are known to be located onsite or in the immediate vicinity of the
proposed project. Accordingly, we anticipate a finding of "no effect' on federally
listed endangered or threatened species or their formally designated critical habitat,
pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973.
1.2.7 Historical and/or Archaeological Sites
Based upon review of records at the State Historic Preservation Office (conducted on
March 9, 2007), no registered properties or properties listed as being eligible for
inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places are located within the project
area or will be affected by the proposed work.
1.2.8 Regulated Floodplain
Portions of streams 1, 2, and 3 are all unnamed tributaries to the Neuse River, and are
within regulated floodplain within the project site. Appendix D includes a map of
the FEMA -designated floodplain through the project site.
4

1.3 Project Description
The project is a 503 -acre aggregate quarry site, which will include the construction of all
required infrastructure, including the processing facilities, transportation network, screening
berm and the mine pit. The lifespan of the project as shown is expected to last approximately
50 years.
Site preparation will begin with the mechanized clearing of vegetation and installation of
erosion control devices around the construction area. All sediment and erosion control
structures will be installed within a 50 -foot wide strip of land situated around the perimeter
of the site, just to the outside of the future berm location. A 50 -foot wooded buffer will be
left undisturbed just outside of the erosion control area. With the exception of areas where
wetland impacts are proposed, all remaining wetlands on the site will be located outside of
the 50 -foot buffer. The wooded buffer will not only act as a visual and acoustic screen, but
will also help reduce the risk of unintended wetland impacts.
Following installation of the erosion control measures, the transportation and processing
facilities will be constructed. Bear Farm Road, which is currently a loop road that bisects the
site, will be gated at the northern entrance to the site, and the southern entrance of Bear Farm
Road will be the main entrance to the site. The site office and scales are to be located at this
point. A railway spur will also be constructed off of the existing rail road that forms the
southern boundary of the site. The rail spur will access the site and run along the edge of the
plant and stockpile area. Accessibility to the rail cars will be critical since rail transportation
of the product will be the main form of product distribution.
The processing facilities will generally be constructed in the western portion of the site.
Initially, a portable processing plant will be constructed to process sort the aggregate so that
the plant can begin production as quickly as possible. A permanent plant is planned to be
constructed in the same area, which will provide the long-term processing needs for the
quarry.
The initial pit area, which measures approximately 10 acres, will be located just to the east of
existing Bear Farm Road. The power line that is currently located in this area will be
relocated to the west of the pit as part of this process. Only a relatively small amount of
aggregate will be available in the initial pit area. As the pit expands, excavation will shift to
the east. In order to safely access deeper rock, the pit must expand laterally as it gets deeper.
The blasting and excavation of rock is accomplished in a corkscrew pattern, with each turn
going deeper into the ground. The bulk of the material to be mined is located in the eastern
half of the site, generally within the bend of the Neuse River, as depicted on Figure 5.
There is approximately 25 feet of overburden in the initial pit, which will be excavated and
used to construct the screening berms around the perimeter of the site. While the berms play
an important role as a visual and acoustic barrier to the mine operations, they are also critical
to providing flood protection for 100 year storm events and for storage of the large amount of
overburden removed to the pit area. As the pit expands, the additional overburden will be
used to create and expand on berms around the site. The berms will be constructed to a
height of approximately 40 feet, a top width of 40 feet, and 2:1 side slopes. The width of the
bottom of the berms will be approximately 200 feet. Additionally, there will be a setback of
approximately 33 feet from the toe of slope on the inside of the berm to the edge of the pit to
ensure stability of the berm and to address safety concerns.

In an attempt to minimize impacts, project components that have more flexibility with regard
to their location, including the processing plant and stockpile areas, have been located to
avoid any impact to wetlands. Due to the nature of the mine pit, however, the pit will result
in the unavoidable loss of 2.7 acres of wetland. Wetland Impacts 1 and 2, which are depicted
on Figure 6, will occur to the wetland system which drains from the center of the pit area to
the southwest. Impacts 3 and 4, which are depicted on Figure 7, will occur within the
wetland system that drains to the east from the pit area. Impact 1 (0.46 acre) and Impact 4
(0.39 acre) will result from the placement of fill for the perimeter berm and for construction
of the access road to be located at the toe of slope along the outside the face of the berm.
Impact 2 (1.04 acres) and Impact 3 (0.81 acre) will be due to the excavation of the mine pit.
The only stream impact, shown on Figure 8 as Impact 5 (130 linear feet) will be required for
the construction of the rail spur, however, there is no stream buffer impact as this stream does
not appear on the latest version of the soil survey or USGS topo maps.
Stormwater and groundwater that collect within the pit will be pumped to a pit clarification
pond located just outside the northern edge of the pit. Where possible, this water will be
used for dust control and aggregate processing. Any excess water will be released outside
the buffer of a small tributary that drains north to the Neuse River. A NPDES permit will be
obtained to authorize this proposed release, though it is anticipated that what little water
collects in the pit bottom will be used in normal mine operations.
The applicant proposes to mitigate for impacts to 2.7 acres of wetlands associated with the
project by providing payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
(NCEEP) sufficient for the restoration of 5.4 acres (a 2:1 ratio) within the Neuse River Basin
(HUC 03020201). An acceptance form from NCEEP is included in Appendix H. No stream
mitigation has been proposed due to the minimal length of the impact (less than 150 feet) and
because of the low quality of the system.
2.0 Project Purpose
The basic project purpose for the proposed activity is to develop a new mine in order to supply
aggregate to the regional market. Currently, MMM supplies granite aggregate from several quarries
across the Piedmont of North Carolina, including several quarries in Alamance, Wake, and Johnston
Counties. MMM is developing this new quarry in order to keep up with growing regional demand
for high-quality granite. Although the product may be shipped by rail up and down the eastern
seaboard, the primary market served by the quarry includes the entire eastern portion of North
Carolina. Due to the long-term nature of mining projects, it is requested that the permit be issued for
a period of 20 years.
An off-site alternative was identified; however, the off-site alternative did not meet the require site -
selection criteria (see the alternatives discussion below). The applicant has also evaluated on-site
alternatives that could avoid or reduce impacts to waters of the U.S., but these alternatives were
determined to be impracticable and unable to meet the project purpose and need.
Discharges into waters of the U.S. associated with the proposed undertaking include activities
intended to access the mineral product. This includes the construction of the berms and associated
access road, and excavation of overburden necessary to expose the mined rock face. None of these
activities requires siting in a special aquatic site. Accordingly, the proposed project is not
considered water dependent, and less damaging practicable alternatives, which involve no fill in
on

streams or wetlands, are therefore presumed to be available. It is also presumed that those
alternatives have less adverse impact to the aquatic ecosystem. A review of the alternate plans,
including those that reduce or avoid impacts to waters of the U.S., is included in Section 5 of this
document. These alternatives are not practicable and would not meet the project purpose and need.
3.0 Scope of Analysis:
The proposed work will primarily benefit Martin Marietta Materials (MMM) and will be wholly
funded by MMM. Other than the requirement to obtain a Section 404 permit, no other federal
involvement in the proposed work is anticipated. There are no practicable alternatives to the
proposed plans that would further avoid or minimize impacts to waters of the U.S., and the project
would not meet the applicant's purpose and need but for the proposed impacts. Additionally, the
proposed mine pit is bisected by two wetland systems subject to Section 404 permit requirements,
and impacts to these systems are essential for the development of the project as a whole.
Accordingly, the proposed scope of analysis extends to the limits of the project (i.e., the entire 503 -
acre project area).
4.0 Other Federal, State, and Local Authorizations Obtained or
Required and Pending
4.1 State Water Quality (401) Certification
The North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) 401 certification application is
submitted concurrent to this 404 permit application. DWQ will also review the proposed
plans for compliance with state stormwater requirements. This approval is pending.
4.2 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit
The DWQ is also required to issue a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) Permit to allow the discharge of water pumped from the mine sump. This
discharge point is shown on the Mine Plan, Figure 5. This approval is pending.
4.3 Coastal Zone Management (CZM) Consistency Determination
A North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (DCM) consistency determination/permit
is not required.
4.4 Mining Permit
The NCDENR Division of Land Resources (DLR) is required to issue a Mining Permit,
which includes approval of a Sediment and Erosion Control Plan. This permit must be
approval by the DLR prior to the occurrence of any site disturbance. This approval is
pending.
4.5 Air Quality Permit
The NCDENR Division of Air Quality (DAQ) is required to issue an Air Quality Permit
prior to initiation of mine operations. This approval is pending.
7

4.6 Floodplain Development Permit
A Floodplain Development Permit is required from the Town of Selma for the placement of
fill within the 100 -year regulated floodplain. This approval is pending.
5.0 Project Alternatives
5.1 No -Project Alternative
MMM has considered several alternatives to meet the regional demand for aggregate. The
no -project alternative would require that existing mines increase their production of
aggregate to keep up with demand. In the case of the East Alamance Quarry, MMM is
already in the process of permitting a mine expansion to extend the lifespan of the quarry.
Consideration was also given to trying to expand the production of the other quarries,
however it was determined that the cost of retrofitting the quarry to produce more product
could not be justified by the minimal gains in productivity. Additionally, increasing the
productivity of existing mines would not meet the end goal of increasing long-term supply of
aggregate, as speeding up production would only cause the existing mines to be depleted that
much sooner. The existing quarries are also located further to the west of the primary market
for the Selma site, and the cost of transporting the product would greatly increase with these
options.
5.2 Off-site Alternative
MMM has also looked for off-site alternatives to the proposed Selma Quarry. A second site
was identified in Wayne County (Goldsboro Quarry) that could potentially produce
aggregate to meet the regional demand. Significant resources were expended towards the
development of the Goldsboro Quarry, however it was determined that the Selma site is a
much better match for siting criteria for a new quarry than the Goldsboro site. To begin with,
the Goldsboro site does not have as high a quality aggregate as the Selma site. The rock is
softer and some of the samples failed to meet the soundness criteria required for certain
industry uses. The Goldsboro site also has limited rock reserves, with 45 acres as opposed to
the 172 acres of reserve at Selma. The Goldsboro site also has overburden of approximately
58 feet, twice the depth of overburden at the Selma site, which significantly increases the
cost of accessing the rock while reducing the maximum depth of the quarry as a result of
overburden setback slopes. The Goldsboro site would also require greater infrastructure costs
due to extending the required railroad access to the site. The Goldsboro site would have
additional logistical constrains, including limited water supply, multiple property owners,
existing animal waste lagoons that could have negative impacts on surrounding groundwater,
and improper zoning. Further, the site is relatively close (less than 1000 ft.) to a public water
supply well system and significant concern for those wells has been expressed by the
Department of Environment and Natural Resources. Concerning the Goldsboro Quarry, the
NC Division of Water Resources has communicated to the Division of Land Resources, Land
Quality Section, ""DWR recommends that dewatering not be allowed if this quarry is issued
a permit by DLR". Operation of a hard rock quarry is not financially feasible for this project.
Lastly, based on initial assessments, the environmental impact from developing a quarry at
the Goldsboro site would likely be equal to or greater than the proposed impact for the Selma
Site. The Goldsboro site has a large wetland and stream system that crosses it, with a smaller

overall acreage that would limit the on-site avoidance and minimization potential. An
overview map of the Goldsboro site is presented in Appendix A.
5.3 On -Site Alternatives
On-site alternatives were also considered to avoid impacts to wetlands. In order to develop
the site without impacts, the mine pit would be limited to the size of the largest expanse of
upland area on the site. Additionally, because of the requirement to construct a berm around
the pit, the edge of the pit would need to be located approximately 233 feet from the edge of
any wetland or stream. This alternative would significantly limit the volume of material
produced by the mine as well as the economic return of the project. The current mine plan
was developed as a way to minimize the impact to wetlands, while still allowing for a large
enough mine pit to enable production to continue throughout the life of the project.
Furthermore, it is important to note that this application proposes all of the required impacts
for the anticipated lifespan of the mine. An alternative approach would be to minimize the
area for the mine pit, with the intent of requesting additional permits when the pit needs to
expand into jurisdictional areas. Presenting all of the anticipated impacts upfront allows a
better understanding of the cumulative impact of the project. Additionally, this approach
allows more flexibility in the operations of the quarry, since it is not possible to determine
exactly when the pit may expand into the proposed impact areas. For this reason, it is
requested that the mine permit be issued for a period of 20 years.
5.4 Minimization
MMM has taken several steps to minimize on-site impacts to streams and wetlands.
Development of the mine plan utilized the flexibility associated with locating the processing
facilities and stockpile area to avoid all impacts to streams and wetlands. Additionally,
sediment and erosion control measures that were initially proposed for low portions of the
site were moved upslope to avoid impacts to streams and Neuse buffers. Existing wetlands
located within the bend of the Neuse River were also avoided as much as possible. The site
has a total of more than 58 acres of wetlands, mostly located near the proposed pit area.
With the exception of the proposed impacts, these wetlands were avoided and buffered with a
minimum 50 -foot undisturbed area to ensure they were protected from accidental impact.
7

ea : SH
5
1 (f l
-Sa w
j 50
1 42 ,.� it _ 01 ,M
0 50 100 01, 0 10 20
Miles '
f P N PS Milo
v Little.Divine F
��
2090 Riverstone '`..
S,owther•Iand-Rd QeQa��e
-
2039
� Sullivan.F�d'` Q •..� �
L-lttle. - i
a
4�
A���
70 ti' , ,R, i Revell-Rd' ..
a
a . " 2016 Startime-Rd
`m �/' .. ✓' ap 2019
sosl�l9 ones"
d
i i. Flu Ra x 1 11 s
qj
2020 u�.. �eap-Warm-Rd'' %�
} Project Area
2568 ,/� s K 1. 51 a
w of •y..••�
---r,age,d ' - 39 nt.
2575 1 _
u:. 1917 ... a
70 96
01r
i 6
70
` P
Q / O
� qnd
Hartley
• �� ro U ✓ � m f~ OJt�
F. ie
tt@ QA
t- r 2393
�Smith fi d
Title Vicinity Map
Project MMM - Selma Site
Prepared For: Johnston County, North Carolina
' Date Project Number Figure
5/17/07 011185026 1
T:\pn\011185026 MMM SO—\Pe w D---tsTP nit Figur.Tigiue 1_Se — VianityMap.d- Prepared by Laura Lang cc" I=— ,

T;�pn`A11185026 MMM Selma\Pennit DocumemTemut Figu es\Fig= 2_Seima USGS Topo Map.dm Prepared by Laura Lang Gmn -s- K
�� (•
A ,
i
J � �
• .4
14i I L
� Y
�• a - •, _ �•-�,
1 \ 4�, la c? •;�
•�,
'010 AA
o
I f'x avr • w ��
•• 0 P, 1
• 1 \ v
'—P v . Sand and Gravel I
.. � ' •
1. �
j
41
` \ ~ �j • Ing •� • .�
T
• /! W
••
Legend
0 1,000 2,000 4,000
Project Boundary
• •
/ Feet
t'r'1141►•OA i
Title
USGS Topographic Map (USGS Quad: Selma, NC: 1964, revised 1988)
tlr••n.rr.�rr.rW
Project
MMM — Selma Site
Johnston County, North Carolina
nn
v�
Date
Project Number
Figure
5/17/07
011185026
2
T;�pn`A11185026 MMM Selma\Pennit DocumemTemut Figu es\Fig= 2_Seima USGS Topo Map.dm Prepared by Laura Lang Gmn -s- K

TApn\011185026 MMM SCEMTetmit Docome \P—t Figms\Fig= 3_Selma_NRCS Soil Map.dm prepared by Laura Lang Cw �� t

Sr, h • Jk "% � t F Y�
t �
t .. r': •' g3 '' t�
Project Boundary
Strep
acres
c�
Wetland 1
17.8 ac
0
Wetland 2
0.8 ac
1
Strearn 3 '
Wetland 3
58 ac
F.
jY
.. iaa-•► R4_.1..
Legend
U Project Boundary �+ ' N
z w
--r^- Jurisdictional Stream Channel
e4 Jurisdictional Wetlands ►- S
K Jurisdictional Open Waters 0 600 1,200 2,400
50' Neuse River Buffer
Feet
c
Title Delineation of Waters of the U.S.
Project MMM - Selma Site
Prepared For: Johnston County,North Carolina
nn
V V Date Project Number Figure
5/17/07 011185026 4
i:�pn`011185026 MMM SelmaTermil Docume NTern it FiguresTigure 4_ Selma_ Delineation Map.doc Prepared by Laura Lang cc" .KY+n �

Fi ure 8
�sEn,
F1 ure 7
C/'
, s
igur
,Lr
Tft 8Re Overvbw PC" 5 of 8
l?raject SO - Ousm UBACE AD •
APPk� Dais d RWc Noice�
Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. Cou�ty� Johnston
P.O.B. 30013 Watarwar UT to the Neuse River
Raleigh, NV 27622-0013 Flvw Bair Neuse

FUTURE PIT AREA �f
Impact # I J(
-� Wetland Fill t
0.46Ac.
fact#2
Wei nd Excavation
1.04A
50)
Ooel-
. � e
M � • • k FVjvR� ,.,K..--
l
•
3W 0 1w aw !00'
7ft hpacia 1 and 2 Po" 6 of 8
PraJscf 8ohia COJBM UBACE AD i
APPlw* Dale d Pubk Willow
Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. County. Johnston
P.O.B. 30013 Waterway, UT to the Neuse River
Raleigh, NV 27622-0013 liver Bair Neuse

1
NESE RI►ER
Impact # 4
Wetland Fill
0.39Ac.
1 '
Impact#3 / ���� •�•� ,��
Wetland avation , ` • ` • ` ' , `
0.81A .
Oe4
,w
TAW Mmeb 3 and 4 PW* 7 of 8
ProJaN Balma Cum" UBUX AD •
Martin Marietta Materials, Inc.
P.O.B. 30013
Raleigh, NV 27622-0013
Dais d PWO Notlor
Camp Johnston
Wabrwap UT to the Neuse River
Rhw Bair Neuse

T:lpn\A11185026 MMM SelmTerrait DecumentsTeraut FigureiTigure 9_Seim _Crom Section.dee Prepared by Lau. I.aug
.9
oa
.g t w
c S �
3 E $
I
t
t
:� II
SII
•,I
� II
Pit Littut
I.n
9 � I
_ y
Lt
s s,
N i
C —
o
4 _
w CA
V'^1
�
O V1
O _ Ow..
�G
y
a
N rl 8
�e
ACJJ
W
7 ..
O
b i
U v
W
:l
P�mlit RlnuxlaT
Title
Typical Cross-Section of the Screening Berm
Project
MMM — Selma Site
Prepared For:
Johnston County, North Carolina
MI Ut.,WU
Date
Project Number
Figure
5/7/07
011185026
9
T:lpn\A11185026 MMM SelmTerrait DecumentsTeraut FigureiTigure 9_Seim _Crom Section.dee Prepared by Lau. I.aug

Appendix A: Project Alternatives

WhA �' WhA
Lv
• ��� Why,
Kn
KaA
KaA LV
•
Jr
i'Z'r Paroject Alternative Site " '••. 1d Yaa.
Ati
JQ
tPo
'IVatti. Lu Jo % Ja i
Np
P � '�' �,•�.� $
ftioA d►`-- a' KsA
r' �y 1Y
L) Ni82
0C
urs "`^fir >1ioA ia�' "� KaA
wit
�n
4D NciA
ti 1
loiUA Kn
--� Ly
�N o6 NoA
0 500 1,000 2,000
' Feet I riQ t Ly N
F r Gfl�- Nr►3? Grr`��
Title Project Alternative Soil Survey Map (Wayne County Soil Survey, 1974)
Project MMM — Goldsboro Quarry
Prepared For: Wayne County, North Carolina
v� Date Project Number Appendix
5/17/07 011185026 A
T:\pnW 11185026 MMM SOmaT—it DonanwrsT—it Fig—Upprndiz A_Selma_Roj Alternative Soils prepared by Laura Lang
Map.dm

T:\Pa\011185026 MMM SelmaT—it Doc --e \P—t Fig—\App-diz A_Selma_Proj Alternative USGS Prepared by Laura Lang cc �n
Map.doc K+.••+.t rt
Sm y
01
N :
01�) -ti,� t 13
C s9or
4
Pr jeci Alternative Sitelop
,/s •,,.•'�.���•
41)
,, r
t
t �
0 1,000 2,000 4,000 " F `—
:aaj"e.
Feet
Title
Project Alternative USGS Topographic Map (Goldsboro, NC 1974, photorevised 1981; Princeton, NC, 1974)
Project
MMM — Goldsboro Quarry
Prepared For:
Wayne County,North Carolina
v�
Date
Project Number
Appendix
5/17/07
011185026
A
T:\Pa\011185026 MMM SelmaT—it Doc --e \P—t Fig—\App-diz A_Selma_Proj Alternative USGS Prepared by Laura Lang cc �n
Map.doc K+.••+.t rt

Appendix B: Agency Coordination

Kimley-Ilom & Assoc., Inc.
Attn: Laura Lang
PO Box 33068
Raleigh, NC 27636-3068
Attn: Ms. Laura Lang
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
September 26, 2006
BASIN:
Neuse River X Tar -Pamlico
(15A NCAC 2B .0233) (15A NCAC 2B .0259)
Complaint
Incident #
Project Name:
NOV
Martin Marietta Selma Site
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
REUNED
SEP 2 9 1006
KIMLEY-HORN
ENVIR,
NBR# 06-233
Johnston County
Buffer Determination X
Call
Location/Directions: located east of the intersection of SR1200 SR 1913 and west of SR 1003.
Subject Stream: UT to the Neuse River
Date of Determination: 9/21/2006
Feature(s)
Not Subject Start @
Subject
Stop@ Stream Soil USGS
Form Pts. Survey Topo
1
X
X
2
X
X
3
X
X X
4
X
I X
5
X
X
6
X
X
Comments:
Explanation: The feature(s) listed above has or have been located on the Soil Survey of Johnston County, North
Carolina or the most recent copy of the USGS Topographic map at a 1:24,000 scale. Each feature that is checked
"Not Subject" has been determined not to be a stream or is not present on the property. Features that are checked
"Subject" have been located on the property and possess characteristics that qualify it to be a stream. There maybe
other streams other streams located on your property that do not show up on the maps referenced above but, still
maybe considered jurisdictional according to the US Army Corps of Engineers and/or to the Division of Water
Quality.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality Raleigh Regional Office Surface Water Protection Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: h2o.encstate.nc.us 1628 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1628 FAX [phone] I-877-623-6748
An Equal OppodunitylAtfinnative Action Employer- 50% Recyde&10% Post Consumer Paper
l ` Caro ' a
ooMoro y

Martin Marietta Site Selma
Johnston County
9/26/2006
Page 2 of 2
This on-site determination shall expire five (5) years from the date of this letter. Landowners or affected
parties that dispute a determination made by the DWQ or Delegated Local Authority that a surface water
exists and that it is subject to the buffer rule may request a determination by the Director. A request for a
determination by the Director shall be referred to the Director in writing c/o Cyndi Karoly, DWQ
Wetlands/401 Unit, 2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, NC 27604-2260. Individuals that dispute a determination
by the DWQ or Delegated Local Authority that "exempts" a surface water from the buffer rule may ask for
an ad judicatory hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. Applicants are
hereby notified that the 60 -day statutory appeal time does not start until the affected party (including
downstream and adjacent landowners) is notified of this decision. DWQ recommends that the applicant
conduct this notification in order to be certain that third party appeals are made in a timely manner. To ask
for a hearing, send a written petition, which conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General
Statutes to the Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, N.C. 27699-6714. This
determination is final and binding unless you ask for a hearing within 60 days.
The (owner/future owners) should notify the Division of Water Quality (including any other Local, State,
and Federal Agencies) of this decision concerning any future correspondences regarding• the subject property
(stated above). This project may require a Section 404/401 Permit for the proposed activity. Any inquiries
should be directed to the Division of Water Quality (Central Office) at (919)-733-1786, and the US Army
Corp of Engineers (Raleigh Regulatory Fleld Office) at (919)-876-8441.
Respectfully,
Michael Horan
Environmental Spec. 1
CC: Shandra Coats-. Johnston County Government, P.O. Box 1049, Smithfield, NC 27577
Jamie Shern-US Army Corps of Engineers, Raleigh Regulatory Office
Wetlands/ Stormwater Branch, 2321 Crabtree Blvd, Suite 250, Raleigh, NC 27604
RRO/SWP Files
Central Files
hCarolina
North Carolina Division of Water Quality Raleigh Regional Office Surface Water Protection Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet h2o.enrstate.naus 1628 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1628 FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recyde&10% Post Consumer Paper

�• „ 1 � �. � / 5 - il(T_ '� 1 � � / , ��� T-� ,,,.� tt :Cem� ,r r� .c
� I •;,��\ M1 t � t r;i f '�� t�� 1 �� Vit j i4Y4 lR — •I
ACZ
A F of �JY"-• rl' '^ {\+ fI/ 1L_ +5r ' _7 �i • 4...
if v - t ,• r � . �
150- J�1•� f ., % Jr
i_!' exti"'rL J�'• 5.� ,+^ l _ fi.+ 1 pa,�•" /.. 1 P" J
44
• s
A.
•• L J (r, y
r
•,. °G s� ;.�. a ,G'•� \ I t - ,� -r f..' ( 1003 r `I\ �
. a C fi :. 1P^ :—_..... --- I+C.!3• Wil{ 6 •+ t \ 5 � /. � L � r
t .p }. r . • + f . 7
A.
L:.;• �.�-?'. `'IeJ• I .� J 1 � i f j --��n 1 44' A •t / j ,� Al
er' e/ • • i � j , �r
~l '�` +� 1'\• [ ,� � ; �� � Lai. � 5 r`.�K'•d "'_ . r \ �' y 1'
i t' 4 i� {; \ `'a�• '�s
It
1` ` / I 1'` ? I 1. '•� `� �`'`* L ~• i \,, 4 rr C•'r f' " rr ;"a',},�y ti ` f V 4
• .+ +� e r a,�• 7 %+ � 5 1904 k•�;' ..;�1 � � f `e 4 � r � � �^'z i %` ; .i ... �� ,; _ � +,__
.✓{
�. �, �%` "`r-":rc �S•. }�. R t...\+�y'Rj� r f + •�+,."5„ ' >.i v _:;>t •!7 .�"''7
'r`h .�, p • .L=s,71./ .� r..-' ,'.;/ .+
M
( gyp:
"`; f •i , "" .Y,. .•0 }.. titt•'' r,/rQ/AI't >CirgYei �� '\ �!}`ti 'r �.*ia.v 1434
pi ts
X03 •, it .� /�� :c �" Sand end Ctevel
N.
V, It t ' i ' "• J6S
V fir
o t \ \ �f ` p AQ �y� , •R
r , + / r � ,� r+ 1 �.. ro' _4`c� � ,asOn• J66 .
a. �?t"-'� •.r ! - 1, t -� �1 .,/t0 }'!\ i
(Selma, NC: 1964, revised 1988)
I Projec ber
011185026
Prcpared by Tykr McEwen

Ir
r:
�I E•7F VJ 1T jV
A7 �j t '
�
�+�+t.i,-�'iS � : ili��'Y.ryi�{�'J:Y:t. xT `x�,• .:.
5K''
�y
`-'
, �+{{'':,%e.i,,"r>�'
r; '.r• •'' _.'„%>Yrn11 s �'{4, �. •,
^
rf`_'
`�} .1.4'. tEf,.";_). .'f': s:t
�r •_
`(
.S may. t,i":iSL�S`"•�:.a•ii.'4c''-T`'•1'`i;�' r .+'.• .a
4'4, re
`a°
n•�{,v
� f�;1'..r7 ������•°++, � �yy :YYi . !' 7 ,{'-t.•' ..� } SI''i= `
r`Fpp" i1/ 'd)al^ Sni '` »'Y';;:}:i) .j$• :.; .:.;:.�'•..,
tAi :;%;-' r�yVy jpr•� _ :. r. iL';; '
�
� • � r � 5,l Iii - tF' � � a' .s . .;.. ,� � _ ,� i• •� �
„
, f
SIMON
^.
L„ 4x,g•:::>. _,'�.
��•�t �4 :.r:
'�;•''ip."sii' '�i K1'!)
t�J
vtt•;.:;:.;
;t- '�, :'!+'• �., +�• _i„;�ats; a�, :,a ytxf: - .itzi-'�',-
_•_
:t f�c... ''��� •, j. ?.. _ t�'jw '•..`SST, ..3,;,i ti`��i .�•', t �t1� :4t•. .IL•.:" :7�:...+
,E J1 •. y1{<r t. 'f•e'h 'r:i •w:' >=`\.- ti• o L••• ..: ` .
:,, '�:+`• •rs.:.::;W='
rC
�;`;+:-: :`. �L�. •.r= • p.. , , i'•,e
Q p _ - ilk-:::•
-g :- X. .i,`It ;Y'; };: "ia�'f.: ':i �' �.>.=H Jti: • �•4 •, ti;Y%::
^
.:�Ci:?
,- sir , i : 7 'r • ..t +i c. r.'�•' . .
•.t
• s
,. .}: �}•t ;- r + Y' u.}1. iy:
a 6`
'rrt
•rr ��f• ••i ni `°•'! 'W4•
.S�`• 'l.� :;::.a, Nj a•. J.
.• `..:: {
tri •'.' ( � •: � � .!'1 �� �5�' '�.�
co
Ar -
>�`i'r. '_' ._••: .. , •i- }� y , h' d.'='`'l r;:.t ti'C. 4'r l: 'rx� .. :•.i•��i:i.� 'y�.Yi: �•;�• '+}�'��, 'i t5
rs.
�+�.. !•'}. l..K _: S, :k .:.�- _'i,,�+': y}:��r ` •)a .};+,�s� +r:t•'y �:`: •�.
't::i :i t'•
=f. ''t•
:?) .: s:i:c�~ .:4'"r � �Lr': •. TC)• in:�aii:...0
.a�S:lYer:. ::: ''•r y°i•"''f.t•ifff.. -•itT� 4'•�. •.�.
r, :�
�:' >. :: `—'••.. a,�'r.•.:
is ,, �:.: z. ii hi"i:+.<.Ss• :
\.+�. _ .... .}%i': •:?i'r�.•. :_ `•k;.f:.:?'j tiny• •: .:.,w:it ,�yy
,
•'' '• r. � = a' :i..,.-, .G,•: • •'::.; 6.ti�1+,,ire F
:
ILA
*41
EV
ED
as
n t` QS
•� ? ; -�`'
� X' r yam,+.
.tF`= -i
IA

Appendix C: USACE Wetland Data Forms

DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual
Project/Site: Selma Site Date: 6/7/2006
Applicant/Owner: Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. County: Johnston
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (Tyler
Investigator: McEwen, Laura Lang) State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on this site? Yes Community ID: Forested
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation?) No Transect ID: w4-22
Is the area a potential Problem Area? No Plot ID: Wetland 1
Vegetation
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Quercus nigra
T
FAC
9•
2. Acer rubrum
T/S
FAC
10.
3. Magnolia virginiana
T/S
FACW
11
4. Clethra alnifolia
S
FACW
12.
5. Rubus argutus
S/H
FAC
13.
6. Pteridium aquilinum
H
FACU
14.
15.
8.
16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FACU): 83%
Hydrology:
RECORDED DATA:
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS
Depth to Surface Water: NIA (in)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 10 (in)
Depth to Saturated Soil: _ 6 (in)
WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS:
PRIMARY INDICATORS
Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12 inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
SECONDARY INDICATORS:
x Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
x Water Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Fac -Neutral Test
Other

SOILS
,a.__
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phrase): Grantham silt loam Drainage Class: Poorly drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Typic Paleaquults
PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? (Y/N) No
Depth
inches
Matrix Color
Horizon Munsell Moist
Mottle Colors
Munsell Moist
Mottle
Abundance/Contrast
Texture, Concretions,
Structure, etc.
0-4
A 10 YR 2/1
Sandy loam
4-18
Bg 2.5 Y 6/1
2.5 Y 4/1
10%
Sandy loam
2.5 Y 5/6
5%
HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
x Reducing Conditions
x Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Concretions
High Organic Streaking in
Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Hydric Soil Present? (Y/N) Yes
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION (Y/N)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
Hydric Soils Present? Yes
Is this sampling point a Wetland? Yes
Remarks:
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in remarks)

DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual
Project/Site: Selma Site Date: 6/7/2006
Applicant/Owner: Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. County: Johnston
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (Tyler
Investigator: McEwen, Laura Lang) State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on this site? Yes Community ID: Forested
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation?) No Transect ID: w4-22
Is the area a potential Problem Area? No Plot ID: Upland 1
Vegetation
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Liquidambar sryraciflua
T
FAC+
9•
2. Quercus nigra
T
FAC
10.
3. Acer rubrum
T
FAC
11.
4. Vaccinium corymbosum
S
FACW
12•
5. Vitis rotundifolia
V
FAC
13.
6.
14.
7.
15.
8.
16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding
FACU): 100%
Rcmarkc-
Hydrology:
RECORDED DATA:
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS
Depth to Surface Water: N/A (in)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: N/A (in)
Depth to Saturated Soil: N/A (in)
WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS:
PRIMARY INDICATORS:
Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12 inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
CONDARY INDICATORS:
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
Water Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Fac -Neutral Test
Other

SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phrase): Norfolk loamy sand Drainage Class: Well drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Typic Kandiudults
PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? (Y/N) No
Depth
inches
Matrix Color
Horizon Munsell Moist
Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
Munsell Moist Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-12
A 10 YR 3/2
Loam
12-18
B 2.5 Y 5/4
10 YR 5/6 10% Fine sandy loam
HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Concretions
High Organic Streaking in
Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Hydric Soil Present? (Y/N) No
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION (Y/N)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes
Wetland Hydrology Present? No
Hydric Soils Present? No
Is this sampling point a Wetland? No
Remarks:
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in remarks)

DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual
Project/Site: Selma Site Date: 6/7/2006
Applicant/Owner: Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. County: Johnston
Investigator: KHA (LAL, TJM) State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on this site? Yes Community ID: Forested
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation?) No Transect ID: W2-26
Is the area a potential Problem Area? No Plot ID: Wetland 2
Vegetation
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Acer rubrum
T
FAC
9.
2. Magnolia virginiana
T/S
FACW+
10.
3. Betula nigra
T
FACW
11.
4. Toxicodendron radicans
V
FAC
12.
5. Woodwardia areolata
H
OBL
13.
6. Boehmeria cylindrica
H
FACW+
14.
7. Osmunda cinnamomea
H
FACW+
15.
8
16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding
FACU): 100%
D-A'e -
Hydrology:
RECORDED DATA:
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS:
Depth to Surface Water: N/A (in)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 6 (in)
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in)
WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS:
PRIMARY INDICATORS:
Inundated
X Saturated in Upper 12 inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
SECONDARY INDICATORS:
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
Water Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Fac -Neutral Test
Other

SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phrase): Nason silt loam Drainage Class: well drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Typic Hapludults
PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? (Y/N)
No
Depth
inches Horizon
Matrix Color
Munsell Moist
Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
Munsell Moist Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-6
10YR 3/1
Loam
6-18
10YR 4/2
2.5Y 5/6 20% Loam
HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
X Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Concretions
High Organic Streaking in
Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Hydric Soil Present? (Y/N) Yes
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION (Y/N)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
Hydric Soils Present? Yes
Is this sampling point a Wetland? Yes
Remarks:
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in remarks)

DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual
Project/Site: Selma Site Date: 6/7/2006
Applicant/Owner: Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. County: Johnston
Investigator: KHA (LAL, TJM) State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on this site? Yes Community ID: Forested
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation?) No Transect ID: W2-26
Is the area a potential Problem Area? No Plot ID: Upland 2
Vegetation
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Liquidambar styracii lua
T
FAC+
9•
2. Prunus serotina
T
FACU
10.
3. Pinus taeda
T/S
FAC
11.
4. Acer rubrum
T/S
FAC
12.
5. Lonicera japonica
V
FAC-
13.
6. Toxicodedron radicans
V
FAC
14.
7.
15.
8.
16.
Percent of Dominant Species
that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FACU): 67%
r --
Hydrology:
RECORDED DATA:
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS
Depth to Surface Water: N/A (in)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: N/A (in)
Depth to Saturated Soil: >18 _ (in)
WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS:
PRIMARY INDICATORS
Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12 inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
SECONDARY INDICATORS:
Oxidized Root Channels in Uppei
Water Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Fac -Neutral Test
Other
12 inches

SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phrase): Nason silt loam Drainage Class: well drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Typic Hapludults
PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? (Y/N) No
Depth
inches Horizon
Matrix Color
Munsell Moist
Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
Munsell Moist Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-6
10YR 5/4
Loam
6-18
7.5YR 5/6
clay loam
HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Concretions
High Organic Streaking in
Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Hydric Soil Present? (Y/N) No
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Hydric Soils Present?
Is this sampling point a Wetland?
Remarks:
(Y/N)
Yes
No
No
No
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in remarks)

DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual
Project/Site: Selma Site Date: 6/7/2006
Applicant/Owner: Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. County: Johnston
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (Tyler
Investigator: McEwen, Laura Lang) State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on this site? Yes Community ID: Forested
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation?) No Transect ID: W5-13
Is the area a potential Problem Area? No Plot ID: Wetland 3
Vegetation
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Liquidambarstyraci,Jlua
T
FAC+
9. Smilax rotundifolia V FAC
2. Betula nigra
T
FACW
10. Lonicerajaponica V FAC -
3. Acer rubrum
T/S
FAC
11
4. Alnus serrulata
T/S
FACW
12•
5. Arisaema uriphyllum
H
FACW-
13.
6. Saururus cernuus
H
OBL
14.
7. Parthenocissus quinquefolia
H
FAC
15.
8. Woodwardia areolata
H
OBL
16.
Percent of Dominant Species
that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FACU): 100%
D-- roc
Hydrology:
RECORDED DATA:
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS.
Depth to Surface Water: N/A (in)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 3 (in)
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in)
WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS:
PRIMARY INDICATORS:
Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12 inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
SECONDARY INDICATORS:
Oxidized Root Channels in Uppe
x Water Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Fac -Neutral Test
Other
r 12 inches

SOILS
.......:..
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phrase): Bonneau sand Drainage Class: Well drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Arenic Paleudults
PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? (Y/N)
No
Depth
inches Horizon
Matrix Color
Munsell Moist
Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
Munsell Moist Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-6 A
10 YR 2/1
Mucky loam
6-12
10 YR 2/1
Sandy loam
12-18 Bg
10 YR 4/1
10 YR 2/1 5% Loamy sand
HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
I Reducing Conditions
x Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Concretions
High Organic Streaking in
Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Hydric Soil Present? (Y/N) Yes
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION (Y/N)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
Hydric Soils Present? Yes
Is this sampling point a Wetland? Yes
Remarks:
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in remarks)

DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual
Project/Site: Selma Site Date: 6/7/2006
ApplicantlOwner: Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. County: Johnston
Investigator: KHA (LAL, TJM) State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on this site? Yes Community ID: Forested
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation?) No Transect ID: 015-13
Is the area a potential Problem Area? No Plot ID: Upland 3
Vegetation
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Quercus alba
T
FAC+
9•
2. Quercus phellos
T
FACU
10.
3. Pinus taeda
T
FAC
11.
4. Juniperous virginiana
S
FACU
12.
5. Smilax rotundifolia
V
FAC
13•
6. Lonicera japonica
V
FAC-
14.
7.
15.
8.
16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FACU): 50%
Pamarkc-
Hydrology:
RECORDED DATA:
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS
Depth to Surface Water: N/A (in)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: N/A (in)
Depth to Saturated Soil: >18 (in)
WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS:
PRIMARY INDICATORS:
Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12 inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
SECONDARY INDICATORS:
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
Water Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Fac -Neutral Test
Other

SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phrase): Bonneau sand Drainage Class: well drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Arenic Paleudults
PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? (Y/N)
No
Depth
inches Horizon
Matrix Color
Munsell Moist
Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
Munsell Moist Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-10
10YR 5/3
Sand
10-18
10YR 6/3
loamy sand
HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Concretions
High Organic Streaking in
Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Hydric Soil Present? (Y/N) No
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION (Y/N)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes
Wetland Hydrology Present? No
Hydric Soils Present? No
Is this sampling point a Wetland? No
Remarks:
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in remarks)

DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual
Project/Site: Selma Site Date: 6/12/2006
Applicant/Owner: Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. County:
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (Tyler
Investigator: McEwen, Laura Lang) State:
Do Normal Circumstances exist on this site? Yes Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation?) No Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area?
Vegetation
No Plot ID:
Johnston
NC
Forested
w7-03
Wetland 4
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Liquidamhar styraciva
T
FAC+
9. Athyrium filix femina H FAC
2. Betula nigra
T/S
FACW
10.
3. Acer ruhrum
T/S
FAC
11.
4. Ligustrum sinense
S
FAC
12.
5. Smilax rotundifolia
V
FAC
13.
6. Lonicerajaponica
V
FAC-
14.
7. Toxicodendron radicans
V
FAC
15.
8. Vitis rotundifolia
V
FAC
16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FACU): 100%
o.,.., l
Hydrology:
RECORDED DATA:
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS:
Depth to Surface Water: N/A (in)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: >24 (in)
Depth to Saturated Soil: 14 (in)
WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS:
PRIMARY INDICATORS:
Inunaatea
Saturated in Upper 12 inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
SECONDARY INDICATORS:
x Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
x Water Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Fac -Neutral Test
Other

SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phrase): Wehadkee Drainage Class: Poorly drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Typic Fluvaquents
PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? (Y/N) No
Depth
inches
Matrix Color
Horizon Munsell Moist
Mottle Colors
Munsell Moist
Mottle
Abundance/Contrast
Texture, Concretions,
Structure, etc.
0-8
A 2.5 Y 5/2
10 YR 3/6
15%
Sandy loam
8-16
B 2.5 Y 6/2
10 YR 4/6
25%
Sandy loam
16-24
2.5 Y 6/1
10 YR 5/8
25%
Loamy sand
HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
x Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Concretions
High Organic Streaking in
Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Hydric Soil Present? (Y/N) Yes
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION (Y/N)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Hydric Soils Present?
Is this sampling point a Wetland?
Remarks:
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in remarks)

DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual
Project/Site: Selma Site Date: 6/7/2006
Applicant/Owner: Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. County: Johnston
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (Tyler
Investigator: McEwen, Laura Lang) State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on this site? Yes Community ID: Forested
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation?) No Transect ID: w7-03
Is the area a potential Problem Area? No Plot ID: Upland 4
Vegetation
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
1. Liriodendron tulipifera
T
FAC
9. Parthenocissus quinquefolia
y
FAC
2. Acer rubrum
T
FAC
10. Campsis radicans
y
FAC
3. Platanus occidentalis
T
FACW-
11.Athyriumfilix femina
H
FAC
4. Prunus serolina
T
FACU
12•
5. Ligustrum sinense
S
FAC
13•
6. Vitis rotundifolia
y
FAC
14.
7. Lonicera japonica
y
FAC-
15.
8. Smilax rotundifolia
y
FAC
16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FACU): 91%
Rnmarkc-
Hydrology:
RECORDED DATA:
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS:
Depth to Surface Water:
N/A (in)
Depth to Free Water in Pit:
N/A (in)
Depth to Saturated Soil:
N/A (in)
WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS:
PRIMARY INDICATORS:
Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12 inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
:CONDARY INDICATORS:
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
Water Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Fac -Neutral Test
Other

SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phrase): Gilead sandy loam Drainage Class: Moderately well -drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Aquic Hapludults
PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? (Y/N) No
Depth
inches Horizon
Matrix Color
Munsell Moist
Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
Munsell Moist Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-8 A
2.5 Y 4/3
Sandy loam
8-24 B
10 YR 4/4
Sandy loam
HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Concretions
High Organic Streaking in
Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Hydric Soil Present? (Y/N) No
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Hydric Soils Present?
Is this sampling point a Wetland?
Remarks:
(Y/N)
Yes
No
No
No
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in remarks)

DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual
Project/Site: Selma Site Date: 6/7/2006
Applicant/Owner: Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. County: Johnston
Investigator: KHA (LAL, TJM) State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on this site? Yes Community ID: Forested
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation?) No Transect ID: W8-20
Is the area a potential Problem Area? No Plot ID: Wetland 5
Vegetation
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Acer rubrum
T
FAC
9•
2. Magnolia virginiana
T/S
FACW+
10.
3. Salix nigra
T
OBL
11
4. Betula nigra
T
FACW
12•
5. Toxicodendron radicans
V
FAC
13.
6. Woodwardia areolata
H
OBL
14.
7. Boehmeria cylindrica
H
FACW+
15.
8. Osmunda cinnamomea
H
FACW+
16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding
FACU): 100%
Damnrka
Hydrology:
RECORDED DATA:
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS
Depth to Surface Water: N/A (in)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 10 (in)
Depth to Saturated Soil: 6 (in)
WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS:
PRIMARY INDICATORS:
Inundated
X Saturated in Upper 12 inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
SECONDARY INDICATORS:
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
Water Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Fac -Neutral Test
Other

SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phrase): Gilead sandy loam Drainage Class: moderately well drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Aquic Hapludults
PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? (Y/N) No
Depth
inches Horizon
Matrix Color
Munsell Moist
Mottle Colors
Munsell Moist
Mottle
Abundance/Contrast
Texture, Concretions,
Structure, etc.
0-8
10YR 3/1
Loam
8-12
10YR 5/1
10YR 5/6
15%
Clay loam
12-18
10YR 4/1
10YR 5/6
25%
Loamy Clay
HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
X Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Concretions
High Organic Streaking in
Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Hydric Soil Present? (Y/N) Yes
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION (Y/N)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Hydric Soils Present?
Is this sampling point a Wetland?
Remarks:
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in remarks)

DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual
Project/Site: Selma Site Date: 6/7/2006
Applicant/Owner: Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. County: Johnston
Investigator: KHA (LAL, TJM) State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on this site? Yes Community ID: Forested
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation?) No Transect ID: W8-20
Is the area a potential Problem Area? No Plot ID: Upland 5
Vegetation
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Quercus nigra
T
FAC+
9•
2. Pinus taeda
T
FAC
10.
3. Prunus serotina
T
FACU
11.
4. Juniperous virginiana
S
FACU
12.
5. Smilax rotundifolia
V
FAC
13•
6. Lonicera japonica
V
FAC-
14.
7. Toxicodendron radicans
V
FAC
15.
i3
16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding
FACU): 57%
Damnrlra-
Hydrology:
RECORDED DATA:
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS
Depth to Surface Water: N/A (in)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: N/A (in)
Depth to Saturated Soil: >18 (in)
WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS:
PRIMARY INDICATORS:
Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12 inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
SECONDARY INDICATORS:
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
Water Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Fac -Neutral Test
Other

SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phrase): Gilead sandy loam Drainage Class: moderately well drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Aquic Hapludults
PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? (Y/N) No
Depth
inches Horizon
Matrix Color
Munsell Moist
Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
Munsell Moist Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-4
10YR 6/3
sandy loam
4-18
10YR 5/6
fine sandy clay loam
HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Concretions
High Organic Streaking in
Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Hydric Soil Present? (Y/N) No
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION (Y/N)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes
Wetland Hydrology Present? No
Hydric Soils Present? No
Is this sampling point a Wetland? No
Remarks:
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in remarks)

DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual
Project/Site: Selma Site Date: 6/7/2006
Applicant/Owner: Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. County: Johnston
Investigator: KHA (LAL, TJM) State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on this site? Yes Community ID: Emergent
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation?) No Transect ID: W10-02
Is the area a potential Problem Area? No Plot ID: Wetland 6
Vegetation
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Boehmeria cylindrica H FACW+ 9•
2. Woodivardia virginica H OBL 10.
3. 11.
4. 12
5. 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FACU): 100%
Ramnrka-
Hydrology:
RECORDED DATA:
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS:
Depth to Surface Water: N/A (in)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 12 (in)
Depth to Saturated Soil: 8 (in)
WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS:
PRIMARY INDICATORS:
Inundated
X Saturated in Upper 12 inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
SECONDARY INDICATORS:
Oxidized Root Channels in Uppei
Water Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Fac -Neutral Test
Other
12 inches

SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phrase): Roanoke loam Drainage Class: poorly drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Typic Endoaquults
PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? (Y/N) No
Depth
inches
Matrix Color
Horizon Munsell Moist
Mottle Colors
Munsell Moist
Mottle
Abundance/Contrast
Texture, Concretions,
Structure, etc.
0-8
10YR 3/1
Loam
8-12
10YR 5/1
10YR 5/6
15%
Clay loam
12-18
10YR 4/1
10YR 5/6
25%
Loamy Clay
HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
X Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Concretions
High Organic Streaking in
Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Hydric Soil Present? (Y/N) Yes
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION (Y/N)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
Hydric Soils Present? Yes
Is this sampling point a Wetland? Yes
Remarks:
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in remarks)

DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual
Project/Site: Selma Site Date: 6/7/2006
Applicant/Owner: Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. County: Johnston
Investigator: KHA (LAL, TJM) State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on this site? Yes Community ID: Forested
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation?) No Transect ID: W10-02
Is the area a potential Problem Area? No Plot ID: Upland 6
Vegetation
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Quercus phellos
T
FACW-
9.
2. Acer rubrum
T
FAC
10.
3. Pinus taeda
T
FAC
11.
4. Smilax rotundifolia
V
FAC
12.
5. Lonicera japonica
V
FAC-
13.
6. Toxicodendron radicans
V
FAC
14.
7.
15.
8.
16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FACU): 82%
Remarks:
Hydrology:
RECORDED DATA:
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS
Depth to Surface Water: N/A
(in)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: N/A
(in)
Depth to Saturated Soil: >18
(in)
WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS:
PRIMARY INDICATORS:
Saturated in Upper 12 inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
SECONDARY INDICA TORS:
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
Water Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Fac -Neutral Test
Other

SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phrase): Roanoke loam Drainage Class: poorly drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Typic Endoaquults
PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? (Y/N) No
Depth
inches
Matrix Color
Horizon Munsell Moist
Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
Munsell Moist Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-10
10YR 6/3
sandy loam
10-18
10YR 5/6
sandy clay loam
HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Concretions
High Organic Streaking in
Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Hydric Soil Present? (Y/N) No
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION (Y/N)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes
Wetland Hydrology Present? No
Hydric Soils Present? No
Is this sampling point a Wetland? No
Remarks:
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in remarks)

DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual
Project]Site: Selma Site Date: 6/7/2006
Applicant/Owner: Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. County: Johnston
Investigator: KHA (LAL, TJM) State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on this site? Yes Community ID: Forested
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation?) No Transect ID: W9-03
Is the area a potential Problem Area? No Plot ID: Wetland 7
Vegetation
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Salix nigra
T -
OBL
9.
2. Quercus nigra
T
FAC
10.
3. Acer rubrum
T
FAC
11.
4. Juncus effusus
H
FACW
12.
5. Woodmardia areolata
H
OBL
13.
6. Impatiens capensis
H
FACW
14.
7.
15.
8.
16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding
FACU): 100%
Remarks -
Hydrology:
RECORDED DATA:
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS
Depth to Surface Water: N/A (in)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 8 (in)
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in)
WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS:
PRIMARY INDICATORS:
Inundated
X Saturated in Upper 12 inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
SECONDARY INDICATORS:
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
Water Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Fac -Neutral Test
Other

SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phrase): Wehadkee Drainage Class: poorly drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Typic Fluvaquents
PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? (Y/N) No
Depth
inches
Matrix Color
Horizon Munsell Moist
Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
Munsell Moist Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-6
A 10 YR 3/1
Loam
6-18
B 2.5Y 4/1
10 YR 5/6 10% Fine sandy loam
HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
X Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Concretions
High Organic Streaking in
Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Hydric Soil Present? (Y/N) Yes
emarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION (Y/N)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
Hydric Soils Present? Yes
Is this sampling point a Wetland? Yes
Remarks:
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in remarks)

DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual
Project/Site: Selma Site Date: 6/7/2006
Applicant/Owner: Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. County: Johnston
Investigator: KHA (LAL, TJM) State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on this site? Yes Community ID: Forested
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation?) No Transect ID: W9-03
Is the area a potential Problem Area? No Plot ID: Upland 7
Vegetation
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Quercus phellos
T
FACW-
9.
2. Acer rubrum
T
FAC
10.
3. Pinus taeda
T
FAC
11.
4. Smilax rotundifolia
V
FAC
12.
5. Lonicera japonica
V
FAC-
13.
6. Toxicodendron radicans
V
FAC
14.
7.
15.
8.
16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding
FACU): 82%
Rpmarks-
Hydrology:
RECORDED DATA:
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS
Depth to Surface Water: N/A (in)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: N/A (in)
Depth to Saturated Soil: >18 (in)
WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS:
PRIMARY INDICATORS:
Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12 inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
SECONDARY INDICATORS:
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
Water Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Fac -Neutral Test
Other

SOILS
Map Unit Name 11
(Series and Phrase): Wehadkee Drainage Class: poorly drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Typic Fluvaquents
PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? (Y/N) No
Depth
inches Horizon
Matrix Color
Munsell Moist
Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
Munsell Moist Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-8
10YR 6/3
sandy loam
8-18
10YR 5/8
sandy clay loam
HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Concretions
High Organic Streaking in
Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Hydric Soil Present? (Y/N) No
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION (Y/N)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes
Wetland Hydrology Present? No
Hydric Soils Present? No
Is this sampling point a Wetland? No
Remarks:
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in remarks)

Appendix D: Floodplain (FIRM) Map

f, q
Project Boundary
K Jursidictional Open Waters
Jurisdictional Wetlands
Jurisdictional Stream Channel
FLOODZONE
AE
- AEFW
4
4
1 6001,200 2,404
Feet
Title I FEMA Floodplain Map (FIRM #3720260600J and #3720260500J; December 2, 2005)
Project MMM—Goldsboro Quarry
Prepares For. Wayne County, North Carolina
Mnrun MN.eI/n Mal•rf•Ia / \/
v� Date Project Number Appendix
5/17/07 011185026 D
T:\pnN11185026 MMM Sek=\Nra it Docume \Pemut FigmniAppendix D_ Selma_ Floodplain Map.dm Prepared by Laura Lang CC" =
i=
4
4
1 6001,200 2,404
Feet
Title I FEMA Floodplain Map (FIRM #3720260600J and #3720260500J; December 2, 2005)
Project MMM—Goldsboro Quarry
Prepares For. Wayne County, North Carolina
Mnrun MN.eI/n Mal•rf•Ia / \/
v� Date Project Number Appendix
5/17/07 011185026 D
T:\pnN11185026 MMM Sek=\Nra it Docume \Pemut FigmniAppendix D_ Selma_ Floodplain Map.dm Prepared by Laura Lang CC" =

Appendix E: Site Photographs

Photograph 1. View of site facing southwest. The manure pile is the origin of Stream 1.
Photograph 2. Origin of Stream 1, looking east. Note trash and debris in stream.
Title:
Site Photographs
Photo Page:
I1
Project:
Selma Quarry
Photo Date:
April 20, 2007
Applicant:
County: Johnston
Martin Marietta Materials
Waterway: UT to the Neuse River
Post Office Box 30013
River Basin: Neuse
Raleigh, NC 27622-0013
«n.R

czn ;`m .

Appendix F: Adjacent Property Owners

ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS
Gertrude Creech
c/o Carolina House
141 Clay Ridge Way
Holly Springs, NC 27540-8527
Russel Johns
5291 Buffalo Road
Selma, NC 27576
Robert V. Lucas
6095 Buffalo Road
Selma, NC 27576
Richard M. Hinnant Revoc Trust
Carolyn F. D. Hinnant Revoc Trust
4673 Hinnant Edgerton Road
Selma, NC 27576
Thomas Franklin Rose
140 Old Plantation Circle
Winston-Salem, NC 27104
Kenneth and Daffie Talton
2750 NC -96 North
Selma, NC 27576

Appendix G: Agent Authorization Form

08/16i06, 13:54 MARTIN MARIETTA 4 96772050
Martin Marietta Materials
P. O. Box 30013
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622.0013
Telephone [phone]
AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
Name:_ Martin Marietta Materials, hc.
Address:
Phone: _ (219)-- 781-4550
Project Name/Description: Selma Quarry Site (Johnston Countvl
Date: _ August 16, 2006
The Department of the Army
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
Attention: Z -A
Field Office: Raleigh, NC
Re: Wetland Related Consulting and Permitting
To 'Whom It May Concern:
I hereby designate and authorize Kimley--Horn and ,Associates, Inc. to act in my/our
behalf as my/our agent solely for the purpose of processing of Section 404 permits and
Section 401 Water Quality Certifications applications and to furnish upon request
supplemental information in support of applications, etc. from this day forward until
successful completion of the permitting process or revocation.
Authorized this the 16 day of ARgU 2006
Steven S. Whitt
Name
CC: Ms. Cyndi Karoly,
N.C. Wetlands Unit
2321 Crabtree Blvd
Raleigh, N. C. 27604
Compa
N0.705 902

Appendix H: NCEEP ILF Acceptance Letter

Steven Whitt
Martin Marietta Materials
PO Box 30013
Raleigh, NC 27622-0013
LF1.-
U%stem
ian 1emej.-it
PROGRAM
April 25, 2007
Project: Selma Quarry County: Johnston
7' 0 8 6 1
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is willing to
accept payment for impacts associated with the above referenced project. Please note that this decision does not assure that
the payment will be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation for project impacts. It is the responsibility of the
applicant to contact these agencies to determine if payment to the NCEEP will be approved.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. if we have not received a copy of
the issued 404 Permit(401 Certification/CAMA permit within this time frame, this acceptance will expire. It is the
applicant's responsibility to send copies of the permits to NCEEP. Once NCEEP receives a copy of the permit(s) an invoice
will be issued based on the required mitigation in that permit and payment must be made prior to conducting the authorized
work. The amount of the In Lieu Fee to be paid to NCEEP by an applicant is calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and
policies listed at www.nceep.net.
Based on the information supplied by you the impacts that may require compensatory mitigation are summarized in the
following table.
Neuse
03020201
Stream (feet)
Wetlands (acres)
Buffer I
(Sq. Ft.)
Buffer II
(Sq. Ft.)
Cold Cool
Warm
Ri arian Non-Ri arian
Coastal Marsh
Impacts
0 0
0
0 3.0
0
0
0
Credits
0 0
0
0 6.0
0
0
0
Upon receipt of payment, EEP will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. If the regulatory agencies
require mitigation credits greater than indicated above, and the applicant wants NCEEP to be responsible for the additional
mitigation, the applicant will need to submit a mitigation request to NCEEP for approval prior to permit issuance. The
mitigation will be performed in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding between the N. C. Department of
Environment and Natural Resources and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers dated November 4, 1998.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Kelly Williams at [phone].
D. dilmore, PE
Director
cc: Cyndi Karoly, Wetlands/401 Unit
Jamie Shern, USACE-Raleigh
Eric Kulz, DWQ-Raleigh
Todd Tugwell, agent
File
R &storu-t9... ... Prot" our Stat&
RMIER t
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 / 919-715-0476 / www.nceep.net