20210195 Ver 1_Final NRTR_Friendly Ave September_2018_20210423

NATURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT
West Friendly Avenue Widening and Intersection Improvements
Guilford County,North Carolina
STIP U-5841
WBS Element No. 50232.1.1
�oF �oRT`i6,
O
9
. r �2
o i zi
Pr
\e, oQ/
�NrOF TRAte
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Environmental Coordination and Permitting
Division 7
September 2018

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
2.0 METHODOLOGY 1
3.0 PROTECTED SPECIES 1
3.1 Endangered Species Act Protected Species 1
3.2 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act 2
4.0 WATER RESOURCES 2
5.0 REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS 3
5.1 Clean Water Act Waters of the U.S. 3
5.2 Construction Moratoria 3
5.3 N.C. River Basin Buffer Rules 3
5.4 Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 Navigable Waters 4
6.0 REFERENCES 5
Appendix A Figures
Figure 1. Vicinity Map
Figure 2. Topographic Map
Figure 3. Jurisdictional Features Map
Appendix B Qualifications of Contributors
Appendix C Jurisdictional Determination Materials
TABLE OF TABLES
Table 1. ESA federally protected species listed for Guilford County 1
Table 2. Streams in the study area 2
Table 3. Characteristics of jurisdictional streams in the study area 3

Natural Resources Technical Report STIP U-5841, Guilford County,N.C.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to make
improvements to West Friendly Avenue between Pembroke Road and North Elam
Avenue for 0.2 mile (STIP U-5841) in Guilford County (Appendix A, Figures 1 and 2).
NCDOT anticipates widening the roadway for improving pedestrian safety and relieving
congestion. This state-funded project will include improvements at the West Friendly
Avenue intersections with North Lindell Road and Green Valley Road. The following
modified Natural Resources Technical Report (NRTR) has been prepared to assist in the
preparation of a planning document for the purposes of the State Environmental Policy
Act(SEPA).
2.0 METHODOLOGY
All work was conducted in general accordance with the NCDOT's Environmental
Analysis Unit's latest NRTR Guidance and Template (November 2017). Field work was
conducted on July 3rd, 2018. The principal personnel contributing to the field work and
document are provided in Appendix B. Two potential jurisdictional streams were
identified and delineated in the approximate 6.4-acre study area;jurisdictional boundaries
have not yet been verified by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The
jurisdictional determination materials for these streams are provided in Appendix C.
3.0 PROTECTED SPECIES
3.1 Endangered Species Act Protected Species
As of July 6th, 2018 the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists one
federally protected species, under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) for Guilford
County(Table 1). For the species, the Biological Conclusion is rendered based on survey
results in the study area.
Table 1. ESA federally protected species listed for Guilford County
Scientific Name Common Name Federal Habitat Biological
Status Present Conclusion
Isotria medeoloides Small whorled pogonia T Yes No Effect
T-Threatened
Small whorled pogonia
USFWS Recommended Survey Window: Mid-May through early July
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Potential habitat exists within limited areas of the forests of the study area. Plant
by plant surveys were conducted by STV biologists Brandon Phillips, CHMM,
and Joshua Kotheimer, WPIT, throughout areas of suitable habitat on July 3rd
2018. No individuals of small whorled pogonia were observed and the July survey
was conducted during the flowering season. There are records of small whorled
1 September 2018

Natural Resources Technical Report STIP U-5841, Guilford County,N.C.
pogonia being located in Guilford County, but no records of small whorled
pogonia being located in the study area USGS topographic quadrangle. The
NCNHP website was reviewed (July 6th, 2018) to determine the locations of the
nearest populations of small whorled pogonia. The NCNHP determined that no
populations of small whorled pogonia were present within one mile of the study
area, so no effect to small whorled pogonia is anticipated.
3.2 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
The bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) is protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act, and enforced by the USFWS. Habitat for the bald eagle primarily
consists of mature forests in proximity to large bodies of open water for foraging. Large
dominant trees are utilized for nesting sites, typically within 1.0 mile of open water.
A desktop-GIS assessment of the study area, as well as the area within a 1.0-mile radius
of the project limits, was performed on July 6th, 2018 using NC OneMap color aerials.
No water bodies large enough or sufficiently open to be considered potential feeding
sources were identified. Since there was no foraging habitat within the review area, a
survey of the study area and the area within 660 feet of the project limits was not
conducted. Additionally, a review of the NHP database on July 6, 2018 revealed no
known occurrences of this species within 1.0 mile of the study area. Due to the lack of
habitat, known occurrences, and minimal impact anticipated for this project, it has been
determined that this project will not affect this species.
4.0 WATER RESOURCES
Water resources in the study area are part of the Cape Fear basin [U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS) Hydrologic Unit 03030002]. Two streams were identified in the study area
(Table 2). The approximate location of these streams is shown in Figure 3.
Table 2. Streams in the study area
Stream NCDWR Best Usage Bank Bankfull Depth
Name Map ID Index Classification Height width (ft) (in)
Number (ft)
North North 16-11-14-1 WS-V;NSW 5 20 12
Buffalo Buffalo
Creek Creek
U.T. to SB 16-11-14-1 WS-V;NSW 4 10 4
North
Buffalo
Creek
No streams within the study area have been designated as an Outstanding Resource
2 September 2018

Natural Resources Technical Report STIP U-5841, Guilford County,N.C.
Water (ORW). There are no designated High Quality Waters (HQW) or water supply
watersheds (WS-I or WS-II) within or within 1.0 mile downstream of the study area. The
North Carolina 2016 Final 303(d) list of impaired waters identifies no waters within the
study area as an impaired water.
No other surface waters were identified in the study area.
5.0 REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS
5.1 Clean Water Act Waters of the U.S.
Two potential jurisdictional streams were identified in the study area (Table 3). The
approximate location of these streams is shown in Figure 3. North Carolina Stream
Assessment Method (NCSAM) forms and NCDWR stream identification forms are
included in Appendix C — Jurisdictional Determination Materials. All jurisdictional
streams in study area have been designated as warm water streams for the purposes of
stream mitigation.
Table 3. Characteristics of jurisdictional streams in the study area
Map ID Length Classification Compensatory River Basin
(ft.) Mitigation Required Buffer
North Buffalo 310 Perennial Y Y
Creek
SB* 26 Intermittent Undetermined Y
Total 336
*NCSAM forms are available in Appendix C -Jurisdictional Determination Materials
No potential jurisdictional wetlands were identified within the study area.
5.2 Construction Moratoria
No streams have been identified in the study area as trout or primary nursery waters.
Therefore, no mandatory trout moratoriums are required.
In addition, the project has not been identified as anadromous fish habitat. No in-water
construction moratorium are required.
5.3 N.C. River Basin Buffer Rules
The streams in the study area are within the Haw River subbasin of the Cape Fear River
basin (USGS Hydrologic Unit 03030002). The Haw River is within the Jordan Lake
watershed and therefore Jordan Lake water supply riparian buffer rules administered by
3 September 2018

Natural Resources Technical Report STIP U-5841, Guilford County,N.C.
the NCDWR apply to the two streams within the study area. Roadway impacts to the
stream buffers are likely unavoidable due to the location of the existing roadway and the
location of the unnamed tributary to North Buffalo Creek (SB) and North Buffalo Creek.
Roadway and utility easement uses within the stream buffers are existing and ongoing
and are therefore exempt from the Jordan Lake water supply riparian buffer rules.
Proposed roadway improvements would require that the project meet the diffuse flow
stormwater requirement of the Jordan Lake water supply riparian buffer rules.
5.4 Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 Navigable Waters
No streams have been designated by the USACE as a Navigable Water under Section 10
of the Rivers and Harbors Act.
4 September 2018

Natural Resources Technical Report STIP U-5841, Guilford County,N.C.
6.0 REFERENCES
Cowardin, Lewis M., Virginia Carter, Francis C. Golet, and Edward T. LaRoe. 1979.
Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. US
Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service Office of Biological
Sciences, Washington, DC.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.
Technical Report Y-87-1, U. S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station.
Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Griffith, G.E., Omernik, J.M., Comstock, J.A., Schafale, M.P., McNab, W.H., Lenat,
D.R., MacPherson, T.F., Glover, J.B., and Shelburne, V.B., 2002, Ecoregions of
North Carolina and South Carolina, (color poster with map, descriptive text,
summary tables, and photographs): Reston, Virginia, U.S. Geological Survey
(map scale 1:1,5000,000).
N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Resources.
Water Quality Assessment and Impaired Waters List {2016 Draft 303(d) list}.
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Planning/TMDL/303 d/2016/2016_N
C_Category_5_303d_list.pdf. Accessed July 2018.
N.C. Natural Heritage Program. 2018. Federally Listed Threatened and Endangered
Species, Greensboro,NC U.S.G.S. Quadrangle.
https://www.ncnhp.org/data/species-community-search. Accessed July 2018.
N.C. Natural Heritage Program. 2017. Federally Listed Threatened and Endangered
Species, Guilford County. https://www.ncnhp.org/data/species-community-
search. Accessed July 2018.
NC OneMap. NC Geographic Information Coordinating Council. 2018.
https://services.nconemap.gov/secure/rest/services/Imagery/Orthoimagery_Latest/
ImageServer. Accessed August 24, 2018.
Newcomb, L. 1977. Newcomb's Wildflower Guide. Boston: Little, Brown and
Company. 490 pp.
Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2014. Soil Series Data, Guilford County,North
Carolina.
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of
North Carolina: Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program,
Division of Parks and Recreation,NCDEHNR. Raleigh,North Carolina. 325 pp.
5 September 2018

Natural Resources Technical Report STIP U-5841, Guilford County,N.C.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2012. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual: Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Version
2.0, ed. J. F. Berkowitz, J. S. Wakeley, R. W. Lichvar, C. V. Noble. ERDC/EL
TR-12-9. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development
Center.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2017. National Wetlands Inventory—V2
https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/Mapper.html. Accessed July 2018.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service, IPaC—Information,Planning, and Conservation
System, 2018. Environmental Conservation Online System.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/UIEKIJULMVGORCRDQPQER7B QDU/resour
ces. Accessed July 2018.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 4: Southeast Region,North Carolina
Ecological Services. 2017. Endangered Species, Threatened Species, Federal
Species of Concern, and Candidate Species, Guilford County,North Carolina.
Updated 06-27-2018. https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/guilford.html
Accessed July 2018.
United States Geological Survey. 2016. Greensboro,North Carolina, Topographic
Quadrangle (7.5 minute series).
United States Geological Survey. 2017. USGS The National Map Topo Base Map.
http://basemap.nationalmap.gov/arcgis/services.
6 September 2018

Natural Resources Technical Report STIP U-5841, Guilford County,N.C.
Appendix A
Figures
7 September 2018

-,rrev lr
a 6 •
ry0o N
�o
tveg _West Cone 9,
e0. �e�Cone Boulevard reyrro
(?i .
°card
%
WestCoc' 0
y o°bb
D •Road 9 „,,00ze
` o ._
CosN
r• i0.
c.
. r.
fe .,...3.
t.
;+-3'11''Dicl Irving Park Elementary
v �.. m
mf
c '3 •WY Rodd
b ,
Q
s
- - i West Wendover Avenue
„ D tic -
8 R6 \ 9 r
F.
tr
d J
1 e Wesr Frrena� Gi�so % o e
r7,1
Hobbs Road Ayeo� 9
�'4,� �'�to Green Nilf
Nt77n1ilaA �'�'o Cemetery
Lakes Park a,4Y
North Lindell Rd > aY
d ', . ..
n
e W
.0
C
,µet Street west Market Street °i, Z
West Market Street West Friendly Avenue 1,¢5' Pic:-° - .0%,•A Xtlend!)
P,eo# Greensboro College Gre
ec sMeic— n , Y en,�d'e University 1
- ��' of North- x
a
Carolina if 1
Greensboro
,n Gatden Street J
,
- '5; c'
�_ a SQ"c,9GarnM Street Spring GardenStteet Damiltle District
_ ea =West Gate City 86ulevarE'
t SoG Danville D'' _ '
c''SPring GatdePSttee t _ — .
c -A _ )t�- r i
_ it y
7
StfQet Y
Patte n o
e _
efsgn Street n — _ �j a a
PaK P o -P.
D tti.t. voa
nve�'e sweet iA
° Qa��¢c D Westorida Street 0 0.25 os c �� t
C q° Vest Floridaest Flonda Street- Miles
° d Street
r /41) a hs
NOHTN Guilford County,NC NCDOT Division 7
° Legend STIPU-5841
West Friendly Ave.
\b �El El Study Area (-6.4 acres) Widening and
r vensboro Intersection Improvements
S 4 ,. Guilford County,NC
or TROOPS
3
�Lr .
Friday,August 24,2018
FIGURE 1
STV Engineers,Inc.Project No.
4019518 Sources:Guilford County GIS Vicinity Map
Drawn By: Checked By: Approved By: Department,NC One Map&
NCDOT
AMC BJP MAI

� N
.--+
J }'
Ay
_.%.
ik.- \,,,,
%, ,
.k
k
A Jib.:
pr.iiiipi ..
AIL. prui,...r 41111r
ailopjri:
- ILI Ritii,
47kustiiii. r40:44,,1Ib% 421 (H
\ Q4a4 J.
Atihbei?0
rtikliFIR - 411?
Ipittr
N4
lit 6.. (— , ke . / iip iii
,,F•AN - tr 8&16 ,r
iv, r if 4T,k ,-(fiwi, 41
• . li' %Jr. 4.4:4
41‘..ii
'iltr II 111111 ) ,
i 11,11 eft.IS ..
r
CI 0 Pr" ifie
4c 1161441
0 Mil zi ' /1 , ,,,,
k...„f., iiMiiill Ilt Z _...1•1116 -ii-F
',zero
..
414011.,1 ii.ri
.„,,, .z...)istp etzl pp ‘44,44 rh
IA0 250 500 1,000 ,...
Feet j I111rtigg fr 4())9°fegaill
' 11n lc
li
�F SyOHTH Og9O NCDOT Division 7
4�
r STIP U-5841
Legend West Friendly Ave.
% o Widening and
Study Area (-6.4 acres) * Intersection Improvements
,v Guilford County,NC
A
x1w'
STY, 100 Friday,August 24,2018
Greensboro Quad FIGURE 2
STV Engineers,Inc.Project No.
4019518 Ref.USGS 7 5 Minute Topographic
By: Checked
PBy ApprovedBy [Greensboro,NCI 2016 Map

. 4
r.
/ --(0, ,,, . 7 _ ,...,..,
, ',/ 7 // ., :::lq.:-'. '". -
' /,'' .A-' ...":41,i1,'•.).-: ' a
Eil
• rj° 4 s , \ ,�►,; , H
`
• . wv , 6>� e. , , ..„...,,,,,,, „, 'A s
r/ e:„7„,
,:. : -,.%Nr; s-..
,„,„, ...., , ,,,„ ,„, „ ,/,,.., , ,, ,......v., ,„,,.......,,s,,
. ." dj
CF - �t
�( r 'A ... p-. • / i �,#�i ..-;:
/ `\+ "� t J+ • w�,
':/ 17//,,/ .:,. '''‘''' -il'.'' '''%"..' .' ''. :::,$���
SB('--26 If) Q .r' �f �,
2�� ,9 v 'w?�^N.Buffalo Creek(-310 If) „�
F GFWgRc,41 3 �, \„ .�Tz, �� 4 cy�-•lkva •`'� yv.
� � 4 r.. �, ,, ? �.
t
4
, .
.. ..., .,
it..- -- ',. i .,
,-4 f. , - „,... ,
M v
.,-,,, - , a vex ��V .il4tAk,
i i /.,
,x
_ 0 100 200 400
Feet
IIrTlc 'lowiR
Notes:
S1ORTN 4 1. The boundaries of potential jurisdictional
OF 0440.s. waters of the U.S.were approximated by STV NCDOT Division 7
? Legend Engineers,Inc.during a field review conducted STIP U-5841
qon July 3rd, 2018. Potential jurisdictional
boundaries have been marked in the field with West Friendly Ave.
s I blue and white striped tape and mapped using Wideningand
0 Study Area (-6.4 Acres) a Trimble Geo7X hand-held GPS unit capable
y v of subfoot accuracy.This map is intended for Intersection Improvements
b
5vo Stream planning purposes only. Guilford County,NC
Or TPPN 2. Boundaries of the potential waters of the
U.S.have not been verified by the U.S.Army
Corps of Engineers and are subject to charge Friday,August 24,2018
following verification.
IMIiii 100
eaitd 3.No wetlands were identified within the study FIGURE 3
area.
STV Engineers,Inc.Project No. Jurisdictional
4019518 Sources:Guilford County GIS Features
Drawn By: Checked By: Approved By: NCDOT Department,NC One Map& Map
AMC BJP MAI

Natural Resources Technical Report STIP U-5841, Guilford County,N.C.
Appendix B
Qualifications of Contributors
Group Manager: Michael Iagnocco, P.W.S.
Education: B.S. Biological Sciences, State University of New York, Oneonta,NY
Experience: Proj. Manager/Sr. Environmental Scientist, STV, 2003-Present
Project Manager/Principal, Law Environmental 1996-2003
Sr. Environmental Scientist, Woolpert, LLP 1990-1996
Project Manager, Carpenter Environmental Associates 1981-1990
Environmental Scientist, Lawler, Matusky& Skelly, Inc. 1980-1981
Responsibilities: Wetland and stream delineations and assessment, impact assessment,
Section 404 permitting, document preparation, task coordination.
Principal
Investigator: Brandon J. Phillips, CHMM
Education: B.S. Biology, 1989
Experience: Senior Environmental Specialist, STV, 2005-Present
Project Manager, Schoor DePalma, 2000-2005
Consultant, Spectrum Environmental, 1998-2000
Principal, Ecological Science and Env. Management, 1996-1998
Project Manager, SAIC, 1993-1996
Senior Environmental Analyst, Carpenter Environmental, 1990-1993
Biologist, Ridge Environmental, 1989-1990
Responsibilities: Wetland and stream delineations, mitigation, natural resources
inventory, protected species surveys, stream assessment, document
preparation.
Investigator: Joshua L. Kotheimer, W.P.I.T.
Education: B.S. Environmental Technology, 2011, B.A. Chemistry, 2011,
G.I.S. Graduate Certificate, 2013
Experience: Environmental Scientist, STV, 2013-present
Research Assistant,North Carolina State University, 2012-2013
Responsibilities: Wetland and stream delineations, GIS and GPS data handling,
preparation of documents and figures.
11 September 2018

Natural Resources Technical Report STIP U-5841, Guilford County,N.C.
Appendix C
Jurisdictional Determination Materials
12 September 2018

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: Project/Site: Latitude:
Evaluator: County: Longitude:
Total Points: Stream Determination (circle one) Other
Stream is at least intermittent Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial e.g. Quad Name:
if>_ 19 or perennial if>_30*
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = ) Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1 a.Continuity of channel bed and bank 0 1 2 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0 1 2 3
3. In-channel structure: ex. riffle-pool, step-pool, 0 1 2 3
ripple-pool sequence
4. Particle size of stream substrate 0 1 2 3
5.Active/relict floodplain 0 1 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 0 1 2 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits 0 1 2 3
8. Headcuts 0 1 2 _ 3
9. Grade control 0 0.5 1 1.5
10. Natural valley 0 0.5 1 1.5
11. Second or greater order channel No=0 Yes=3
a artificial ditches are not rated;see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = )
12. Presence of Baseflow 0 1 2 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 0 1 2 3
14. Leaf litter 1.5 1 0.5 0
15. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0.5 1 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles 0 0.5 1 1.5
17. Soil-based evidence of high water table? No=0 Yes=3
C. Biology (Subtotal = )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 3 2 1 0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 3 2 1 0
20. Macrobenthos(note diversity and abundance) 0 1 2 3
21.Aquatic Mollusks 0 1 2 3
22. Fish 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Crayfish 0 0.5 1 1.5
24.Amphibians 0 0.5 1 1.5
25.Algae 0 0.5 1 1.5 _
26.Wetland plants in streambed FACW=0.75; OBL= 1.5 Other=0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods.See p.35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
USACE AID#: NCDWR#:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map,and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch"section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA(do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
U-5841 -SB(UT to North Buffalo
1. Project name(if any): Creek) 2. Date of evaluation: 7/3/18
3.Applicant/owner name: NCDOT Division 7 4.Assessor name/organization: B. Phillips
5. County: Guilford 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin: Cape Fear on USGS 7.5-minute quad: North Buffalo Creek
8. Site coordinates(decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 36.081670 N; -79.830066 W
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number(show on attached map): SB 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated(feet): 26
11. Channel depth from bed(in riffle, if present)to top of bank(feet): 4 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank(feet): 10 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ❑No
14. Feature type: ❑Perennial flow ®Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains(M) ® Piedmont(P) ❑ Inner Coastal Plain (I) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ®A ❑B
valley shape(skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream,flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream,steeper valley slope)
17.Watershed size: (skip ❑Size 1 (<0.1 mi2) ®Size 2(0.1 to<0.5 mi2) ❑Size 3(0.5 to<5 mi2) ['Size 4(>_5 mi2)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18.Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ®Water Supply Watershed (❑I ❑II ❑III ❑IV EV)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ®NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ®Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish 0303(d)List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat(list species)
19.Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in"Notes/Sketch"section or attached? ❑Yes No
1. Channel Water-assessment reach metric(skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow,water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction-assessment reach metric
®A At least 10% of assessment reach in-stream habitat or riffle-pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach(examples: undersized or perched culverts,causeways that constrict the channel,tidal gates,debris jams,
beaver dams).
❑B Not A
3. Feature Pattern-assessment reach metric
• A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples:straightening, modification above or below culvert).
❑B Not A
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile-assessment reach metric
®A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile(examples: channel down-cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
❑B Not A
5. Signs of Active Instability-assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down-cutting(head-cut),active widening,and artificial hardening(such as concrete,gabion, rip-rap).
®A < 10%of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25%of channel unstable
❑C >25%of channel unstable

6. Streamside Area Interaction-streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank(LB)and the Right Bank(RB).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
❑B ❑B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down-cutting, aggradation, dredging)that adversely affect
reference interaction(examples: limited streamside area access,disruption of flood flows through streamside area,leaky
or intermittent bulkheads,causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching[including mosquito ditching])
®C ®C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction,bulkheads,retaining walls,fill,stream incision,disruption
of flood flows through streamside area]or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access[examples:impoundments,intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors-assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
❑A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone(milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
❑B Excessive sedimentation(burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
®C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
❑D Odor(not including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes/Sketch"
section.
❑F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
❑G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone(removal, burning, regular mowing,destruction, etc)
01 Other: (explain in"Notes/Sketch"section)
❑J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather-watershed metric(skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought;for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a drought.
❑A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
®C No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream-assessment reach metric
❑Yes ®No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes,skip to Metric 13(Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In-stream Habitat Types-assessment reach metric
10a. ['Yes ®No Degraded in-stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in-stream hardening [for example, rip-rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only,then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur(occurs if>5%coverage of assessment reach)(skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
❑A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses , °, OF 5%oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) m ❑G Submerged aquatic vegetation
❑B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent - ❑H Low-tide refugia(pools)
vegetation Y ❑I Sand bottom
❑C Multiple snags and logs(including lap trees) . m ❑J 5%vertical bank along the marsh
❑D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots ° ❑K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
• Little or no habitat
*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate-assessment reach metric(skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11a. ❑Yes No Is assessment reach in a natural sand-bed stream?(skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
®A Riffle-run section(evaluate 11c)
❑B Pool-glide section(evaluate 11d)
❑C Natural bedform absent(skip to Metric 12,Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffle sections,check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach-whether or not submerged. Check
at least one box in each row(skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present(NP)=absent, Rare
(R)= present but < 10%, Common (C)_ > 10-40%,Abundant(A) = >40-70%, Predominant(P)= > 70%. Cumulative percentages
should not exceed 100%for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Bedrock/saprolite
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Boulder(256-4096 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Cobble(64-256 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Gravel (2-64 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Sand (.062-2 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Silt/clay(<0.062 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Detritus
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Artificial (rip-rap,concrete,etc.)
11d. ❑Yes ❑No Are pools filled with sediment?(skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)

12. Aquatic Life—assessment reach metric(skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. ®Yes ❑No Was an in-stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No,select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. ❑No Water ❑Other:
12b. ®Yes ❑No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to"individuals"for Size 1 and 2 streams and"taxa"for Size 3 and 4 streams.
❑ ['Adult frogs
❑ ['Aquatic reptiles
❑ ['Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
❑ ['Beetles
❑ ❑Caddisfly larvae(T)
❑ ['Asian clam (Corbicula)
❑ ['Crustacean(isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
❑ ['Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans
❑ ['Mayfly larvae(E)
❑ ❑Megaloptera(alderfly,fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ®Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ ®Mosquito fish(Gambusia)or mud minnows(Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams(not Corbicula)
❑ ®Other fish
❑ ❑Salamanders/tadpoles
❑ ®Snails
❑ ❑Stonefly larvae(P)
❑ ❑Tipulid larvae
❑ ®Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition—streamside area metric(skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank(LB)and the Right Bank(RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland runoff.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑B ❑B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
®C ®C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area(examples: ditches,fill,soil compaction,
livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees,drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage—streamside area metric(skip for Size 1 streams,Tidal Marsh Streams,and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank(LB)and the Right Bank(RB)of the streamside area.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water>6 inches deep
❑B ❑B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®C ®C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water<3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence—streamside area metric(skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank(LB)and the Right Bank(RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
❑Y ❑Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
®N ®N
16. Baseflow Contributors—assessment reach metric(skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
❑A Streams and/or springs(jurisdictional discharges)
❑B Ponds(include wet detention basins;do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
DC Obstruction passing flow during low-flow periods within the assessment area(beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom-release dam,weir)
❑D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating(iron in water indicates seepage)
❑E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
®F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors—assessment area metric(skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
❑A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach(includes areas excavated for pump installation)
❑B Obstruction not passing flow during low-flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex:watertight dam,sediment deposit)
®C Urban stream(>_24%impervious surface for watershed)
®D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
❑E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
❑F None of the above
18. Shading—assessment reach metric(skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider"leaf-on"condition.
❑A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category(may include gaps associated with natural processes)
®B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
DC Stream shading is gone or largely absent

19. Buffer Width—streamside area metric(skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider"vegetated buffer"and"wooded buffer"separately for left bank(LB)and right bank(RB)starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
®A ®A ❑A ❑A >_ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B From 50 to< 100 feet wide
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C From 30 to<50 feet wide
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D From 10 to<30 feet wide
❑E ❑E ®E EE < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure—streamside area metric(skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank(LB)and right bank(RB)for Metric 19("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Mature forest
❑B ❑B Non-mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
®C ®C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees< 10 feet wide
❑D ❑D Maintained shrubs
❑E ❑E Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors—streamside area metric(skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank(LB)and right bank(RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream(Abuts),does not abut but is
within 30 feet of stream(<30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank,check here and skip to Metric 22:
Abuts <30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A Row crops
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B Maintained turf
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C Pasture(no livestock)/commercial horticulture
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D Pasture(active livestock use)
22. Stem Density—streamside area metric(skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank(LB)and right bank(RB)for Metric 19("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Medium to high stem density
❑B ❑B Low stem density
®C ®C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer—streamside area metric(skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation> 10 feet wide.
LB RB
®A The total length of buffer breaks is<25 percent.
❑B ❑B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C ❑C The total length of buffer breaks is>50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition—streamside area metric(skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first)as it contributes to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
❑B ❑B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear-cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
®C ®C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non-characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity—assessment reach metric(skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. Oyes No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
If No,select one of the following reasons. ❑No Water ['Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement(units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A <46 ❑B 46 to<67 ❑C 67 to<79 ❑D 79to<230 ❑E >_230
Notes/Sketch:

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name U-5841 SB (UT to North Date of Assessment 7/3/18
Buffalo Creek)
Stream Category Pa2 Assessor Name/Organization B. Phillips
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations(Y/N) YES
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N) NO
NC SAM feature type(perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Intermittent
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology LOW LOW
(2)Baseflow HIGH LOW
(2) Flood Flow LOW LOW
(3)Streamside Area Attenuation LOW LOW
(4) Floodplain Access LOW LOW
(4)Wooded Riparian Buffer LOW LOW
(4)Microtopography LOW LOW
(3)Stream Stability MEDIUM MEDIUM
(4)Channel Stability HIGH HIGH
(4)Sediment Transport MEDIUM MEDIUM
(4)Stream Geomorphology LOW LOW
(2)Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA NA
(2)Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA NA
(2)Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA NA
(3)Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA NA
(3)Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA NA
(1)Water Quality LOW LOW
(2)Baseflow HIGH LOW
(2)Streamside Area Vegetation MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3)Thermoregulation MEDIUM MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors YES YES
(2)Aquatic Life Tolerance LOW NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA NA
(1) Habitat LOW LOW
(2) In-stream Habitat LOW LOW
(3)Baseflow HIGH LOW
(3)Substrate MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3)Stream Stability MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3) In-stream Habitat LOW LOW
(2)Stream-side Habitat LOW LOW
(3)Stream-side Habitat LOW LOW
(3)Thermoregulation LOW LOW
(2)Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat NA NA
(3)Flow Restriction NA NA
(3)Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA NA
(4)Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA NA
(4)Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA NA
(3)Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat NA NA
(2) Intertidal Zone NA NA
Overall LOW LOW

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET—Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: U-5841 West Friendly Avenue Improvements City/County: Greensboro/Guilford Sampling Date: 07-03-18
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT Division 7 State: NC Sampling Point: DP#1
Investigator(s): Brandon Phillips Section,Township, Range:
Landform(hillside,terrace,etc.): Terrace Local relief(concave,convex, none): convex Slope(%): —1
Subregion(LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 36.081394 Long:-79 829017 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Enon-Urban land complex NWI classification PF01
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no,explain in Remarks)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed,explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS—Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No X Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
DP#1 is representative of the forested uplands of the study area and is located east of North Buffalo Creek and south of West Friendly Avenue
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators(minimum of one is required;check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks(B6)
Surface Water(A1) True Aquatic Plants(B14) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(B8)
_High Water Table(A2) _Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(C1) _Drainage Patterns(B10)
_Saturation(A3) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots(C3) _Moss Trim Lines(B16)
Water Marks(B1) Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) _Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
Sediment Deposits(B2) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) _Crayfish Burrows(C8)
Drift Deposits(B3) _Thin Muck Surface(C7) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust(B4) _Other(Explain in Remarks) _Stunted or Stressed Plants(D1)
_Iron Deposits(B5) _Geomorphic Position(D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(B7) Shallow Aquitard(D3)
Water-Stained Leaves(B9) Microtopographic Relief(D4)
Aquatic Fauna(B13) FAC-Neutral Test(D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth(inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No X Depth(inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No X Depth(inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos,previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Wetland hydrology indicators are not present.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: DP#1
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) %Cover Species? Status Dominance Test worksheet:
1. Liquidambar styraciflua — 10 Yes FAC Number of Dominant Species
2. Fraxinus pennsylvanica 10 Yes FACW That Are OBL. FACW.or FAC: 2 (A)
3. Total Number of Dominant
4 Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
5. — Percent of Dominant Species
6. That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 40.0% (A/B)
7. Prevalence Index worksheet:
20 =Total Cover Total%Cover of: Multiply by:
50%of total cover: 10 20%of total cover: 4 OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) FACW species 10 x 2= 20
1. Ailanthus altissima 25 Yes FACU FAC species 10 x 3= 30
2. FACU species 95 x 4= 380
3. UPL species 0 x 5= 0
4. Column Totals: 115 (A) 430 (B)
5. Prevalence Index =B/A= 3 74
6. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7 _1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8 _2-Dominance Test is>50%
9. 3-Prevalence Index is s3.0'
25 =Total Cover 4-Morphological Adaptations'(Provide supporting
50%of total cover: 13 20%of total cover: 5 data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) _Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1. Lonicera japonica 50 Yes FACU 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2 Asclepias syriaca 10 No FACU present, unless disturbed or problematic.
3 Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
4 Tree—Woody plants,excluding vines,3 in.(7 6 cm)or
5 more in diameter at breast height(DBH), regardless of
6. height.
7 Sapling/Shrub—Woody plants,excluding vines, less
8. than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9 (1 m)tall.
10. Herb—All herbaceous(non-woody)plants, regardless
11. of size,and woody plants less than 3 28 ft tall.
60 =Total Cover Woody Vine—All woody vines greater than 3 28 ft in
50%of total cover: 30 20%of total cover: 12 height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
1. Vitis aestivalis 10 Yes FACU
2.
3.
4
5 Hydrophytic
10 =Total Cover Vegetation
50%of total cover: 5 20%of total cover: 2 Present? Yes No X
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Hydrophytic vegetation is not present.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Version 2 0

SOIL Sampling Point: DP#1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Typel Loc` Texture Remarks
0-20 10YR 4/3 100 Loamy/Clayey
Type. C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_Histosol(Al) _Polyvalue Below Surface(S8)(MLRA 147,148) _2 cm Muck(A10)(MLRA 147)
_Histic Epipedon(A2) Thin Dark Surface(S9)(MLRA 147, 148) _Coast Prairie Redox(A16)
_Black Histic(A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1)(MLRA 136) (MLRA 147,148)
_Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) _Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)
_Stratified Layers(A5) _Depleted Matrix(F3) (MLRA 136,147)
_2 cm Muck(A10)(LRR N) _Redox Dark Surface(F6) _Red Parent Material(F21)
_Depleted Below Dark Surface(A11) Depleted Dark Surface(F7) (outside MLRA 127,147, 148)
_Thick Dark Surface(Al2) Redox Depressions(F8) _Very Shallow Dark Surface(F22)
_Sandy Mucky Mineral(S1) Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR N, _Other(Explain in Remarks)
_Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) MLRA 136)
_Sandy Redox(S5) Umbric Surface(F13)(MLRA 122, 136) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_Stripped Matrix(S6) Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)(MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Dark Surface(S7) Red Parent Material(F21)(MLRA 127,147,148) unless disturbed or problematic
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type:
Depth(inches) Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
This data sheet is revised from Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Regional Supplement Version 2 0 to include the NRCS Field Indicators of Hydric
Soils,Version 8.0,2016. Hydric soil indicators were not present.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Version 2 0