20201990 Ver 1_ePCN Application_20210818

DWR
Dlrlslon of Water Resources
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
For Nationwide Permits and Regional General Permits
(along with corresponding Water Quality Certifications)
June 1, 2021 Ver4.1
Initial Review
Has this project met the requirements for acceptance in to the review process?*
r Yes
r No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
r Yes r No
Change only if needed.
BIMS # Assigned
20201990
Is a payment required for this project?*
r No payment required
r Fee received
r Fee needed - send electronic notification
Reviewing Office*
Central Office - [phone]
Information for Initial Review
la. Name of project:
White Hat Mitigation Project
la. Who is the Primary Contact?*
Matt Butler
1b. Primary Contact Email:*
[e-mail]
Date Submitted
8/18/2021
Nearest Body of Water
Deep Creek
Basin
Pasquotank
Water Classification
Class SC
Site Coordinates
Latitude: Longitude:
36.175378-76.329986
A. Processing Information
County (or Counties) where the project is located:
Perquimans
Is this a NCDMS Project
r Yes r No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
r Yes r No
Pre -Filing Meeting Information
Version#*
1
What amout is owed?*
r $240.00
IT $570.00
Select Project Reviewer*
Erin Davis:eads\ebdavis
1c. Primary Contact Phone:*
[phone]
Is this a courtesy copy notification?*
r Yes r No

ID#
20201990
Pre -fling Meeting or Request Date
7/9/2021
Attach documentation of Pre -Filing Meeting Request here:
pick the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach document
DWR Pre -Filing Meeting Request Form.pdf
File type nest be FCF
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
W Section 404 Permit (wetlands, streams and waters, Clean Water Act)
r Section 10 Permit (navigable waters, tidal waters, Rivers and Harbors Act)
Has this PCN previously been submitted?*
r Yes
IT No
1b. What type(s) of permit(s) do you wish to seek authorization?
W Nationwide Permit (NWP)
r Regional General Permit (RGP)
j— Standard (IP)
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
r Yes r No
Nationwide Permit (NWP) Number: 27 - Restoration
NWP Numbers (for multiple NWPS):
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
fJ 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular
r Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
r Individual 401 Water Quality Certification
le. Is this notification solely for the record because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWR 401 Certification:
For the record only for Corps Permit:
Version
1
51.35KB
r 401 Water Quality Certification - Egress
r Riparian Buffer Authorization
1f. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?*
r Yes IT No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
r Yes r No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
(' Yes r No
1h. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties?
r Yes r No
1i. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
r Yes IT No r Unknown
1j. Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?
r Yes r No
B. Applicant Information
1d. Who is applying for the permit?
r Owner 9 Applicant (other than owner)
le. Is there an Agent/Consultant for this project?*
r Yes r No
2. Owner Information
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
Ethel Sutton Chappell, William Wray Chappell, Tenants by Entirety
2b. Deed book and page no.:
123/321, 52/63, 81/119, 49/236, 44/218
r Yes r No
r Yes r No

2c.Contact Person:
2d.Address
Street Address
105 Sutton's Lane
Address Une 2
city
Hertford
Postal / Zip Code
27944
2e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
2g. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
3. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
3a. Name:
Matt Butler
3b. Business Name:
Environmental Banc and Exchange, LLC (EBX LLC), a RES entity
3c.Address
Street Address
3600 Glenwood Avenue
Address Line 2
Suite 100
City
Raleigh
Postal / Zip Opde
27612
3d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
3f. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
State / Province / legion
North Carolina
Country
USA
2f. Fax Number:
State / Province / Region
NC
Country
USA
3e. Fax Number:
C. Project Information and Prior Project History C")
1. Project Information
1b. Subdivision name:
(if appropriate)
1c. Nearest municipality/ town:
Hertford
F-
2. Project Identification
2a. Property Identification Number:
7889-62-5550, 7889-74-6923, 7889-82-4911,
2b. Property size:
7899-03-1867, 7889-84-1950, 7889-81-7137
76.32
2c. Project Address
Street Address
227 Suttons Lane
Address Line 2
city
State / Province / Region
Hertford
NC
Postal / Zip Code
Country
27944
USA
3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project:*
Deep Creek
3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water:*
Class SC

3c. What river basin(s) is your project located in?*
Pasquotank
3d. Please provide the 12-digit HUC in which the project is located.
030102050503
4. Project Description and History
4a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this application:*
The Project area is comprised of Deep Creek and is divided into three reaches that flow east and eventually drain into the Little River. The total drainage area for the Project is 1,859
acres (2.91 square miles). The Project drainage area originates just vest of Woodville Road about seven miles south of US Highway 17, with primary land uses of approximately 19
forest/brush, 1 % residential, 79 % cropland, and 0.2 % open water, while impervious/developed area covers about 0.2%. Most of the channels within the drainage area appear to have
been ditched and have mostly exposed riparian areas converted for agricultural use, with partial forestation. Much of the land immediately adjacent to the Project is used for agricultural
production, including row crops, which have contributed to the degradation of Project streams and wetlands. Additionally, logging of forested portions of the floodplain has further
degraded wetland function in some of the Project's wetlands.
DC1-A
Reach DC1-A is located in the eastern portion of the project and flows south east to an agricultural crossing. The reach has a juvenile pine forest and a hunting impoundment on its
right bank, while the left bank is bordered by a grassed farm road and an unmaintained cutover. The entire channel is a modified natural stream and has been relocated from its historic
location and dredged to enhance agricultural and hunting practices. This reach has been straightened and is oversized with nearly vertical banks and lacks any real aquatic habitat.
The agricultural crossing on the downstream end of the reach contains flash board risers that are periodically used to modify the water level through the reach to promote agricultural
and hunting practices. The drainage area for the reach is approximately 1,535 acres.
DC1-B
Reach DC1-B is located downstream of DC1-A and flows east toward a confluence with DC1-C. The reach has a juvenile pine forest on its right bank, while the left bank is adjacent to a
grassed farm road and active row crops. The entire channel is a modified natural stream that has been straightened and dredged to enhance agricultural production. This reach is
oversized with nearly vertical banks and lacks any real aquatic habitat. The drainage area for the reach is approximately 1,711 acres.
DC1-C
Reach DC1-C is the most downstream portion of the project located in the eastern limits of the project. The reach is surrounded on both sides by riparian forest. A grass farm road
parallels the existing channel for the length of the reach partially disconnecting hydrology from the left bank wetland. The entire channel is a modified natural stream that has been
straightened and dredged. The drainage area for the reach is approximately 1,859 acres. Deep Creek continues approximately 3.5 miles to the confluence with the Little River.
Wetland delineation confirmed the presence of seven jurisdictional wetland areas within the Project and are labeled as WD (Wetland D), WE (Wetland E), WF (Wetland F), WG
(Wetland G), WH (Wetland H), WJ (Wetland J), and WK (Wetland K). There are approximately 34.266 acres of wetlands within the proposed easement area, both forested and non -
forested.
Historic aerial imagery dating back to 1952 indicates that the western portion of the Project had been forested since at least 1952 before the right bank was partially cleared sometime
before 1975, leaving it sparsely wooded. Sometime between 2013 and 2017, Google Earth imagery shows that the right bank of the western portion had appeared to somewhat
regenerate, which has remained partially wooded with mainly pines up to current day. Between 2013 and 2016 the left bank was cleared for logging purposes and current conditions
show natural succession and a gradual regeneration of mostly pines. The middle of the Project was cleared for row crop production between 1952 and 1975, which has remained
cleared, except for a portion of the right bank appearing forested with pines since sometime between 2013 and 2017. The eastern portion of the Project has remained forested since at
least 1952. Adjacent to the Project, in all directions, most of the land has been maintained for agricultural purposes since at least 1952. Portions of the forested areas around the site
have also been maintained for hunting use. it is unknown exactly when the channelization of Deep Creek began; however, it is evident in the 1952 aerial imagery that the western and
middle segments of Deep Creek, within the Project boundary, were already heavily manipulated: the stream was obviously dredged and straightened, relocated from its historical
location. In 1952, ditching can be seen at the easement break and around 1975 ditching began in the middle of the western portion, where the forest had been partially cleared.
Currently, within the proposed easement boundary, the western portion of the Project is mostly a regenerated post -harvest pine monoculture along the left bank with dense active pine
stands along the right bank overlaid with a meandering swath of jurisdictional wetlands. Most of the right bank, east of the easement break is forested, moving downstream to the end of
the site. The left bank is cleared in the middle of the Project until the confluence with DC1-C, where the left banks becomes entirely wooded to the end of the easement boundary. Three
main ditches run through the Project; the western -most ditch runs parallel along the boundary line of the easement, the second meets the stream in the middle of DC1-A, and the last
comes to a confluence with the stream just east of the easement break. A fewsmaller ditches can be seen along DC1-A near the easement break and DC1-B flowing toward the channel
from the field to the north.
The Project is characterized primarily by row crop production with areas of disturbed riparian forest regeneration. Much of the left bank of DC1-B is rotated between soybean or corn
production, while most of the right bank, throughout the Project is sparsely to densely forested including stands of mixed slash pine (Pinus elliotii), persimmon (Diospyros virginiana),
winged elm (Ulmus alata), live oak (Quercus virginiana), willow oak (Quercus phellos), black oak (Quercus velutina), bald cypress (Taxodium distichum), pignut hickory (Carya glabra),
American hornbeam (Carpinus caroliniana), American beech (Fagus grandifolia), tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), swamp tupelo (Nyssa biflora), devil's walking stick (Aralia
spinosa), red maple (Acer rubrum), sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua), giant cane (Arundinaria gigantea), greenbrier (Smilax sp.), and muscadine (Vitis rotundifolia). Some exotics
were noted, including Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense) and Japanese stiltgrass (Microstegium vimineum).
4b. Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this project (including all prior phases) in the past?*
r Yes r No r Unknown
If yes, please give the DWR Certification number or the Corps Action ID (exp. SAW-0000-00000).
SAW-2018-02027
4f. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
34.266
4g. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
5400.55
4h. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:*
The purpose of the White Hat Mitigation Project is to generate compensatory mitigation credits for inclusion in the RES
Pasquotank Umbrella Mitigation Bank. This Bank will provide mitigation credits to offset unavoidable impacts to stream and wetland resources within the Pasquotank 05 River Basin (8-
digit USGS HUC 03010205). The conceptual design proposes to restore 5,258 linear feet (LF) and enhance 1,541 LF of stream as well as restore 3.490 acres, enhance 13.893 acres,
and preserve 3.487 acres of wetlands that will ultimately provide water quality benefits and ecosystem uplift for the Project's 1,859-acre drainage area.
4i. Describe the overall project in detail, including indirect impacts and the type of equipment to be used:*
The stream treatment plan and design approach were developed based on the existing conditions, project goals, and objectives. The Project will include Priority I Restoration and
Enhancement Level I. Stream restoration will incorporate the design of a single -thread, meandering channel with parameters based on data taken from hydrologic and hydraulic
modeling, onsite-gauge data, published empirical relationships, regional curves developed from epsting project streams, and NC and VA Regional Curves. Analytical design techniques
will be a crucial element of the project and will be used to determine the design discharge and to verify the overall design.
In oAA fii - cm in — ­I.Ai Avo onn­n OCC ••ioi oe„c 1 .;l • .i of miles. Inn ­ Aron - —A Innnnro kl. —IC— I nl l 7k. rem kl evL ;K!i A

n, - c„q,,,,w, a„. a„a,yu.,a, ..w,y„ app,-1- , .- acorn a, ­ca mu, an„„a, ,wau ,a,,,ayc a, ca, a,na - v . --
characteristics
characteristics deemed desirable for a reference condition, where consistent width to depth ratios, shallow floodplain inundation and backwater areas were observed. Inundation depth
can depend on several factors but based on observed water level as well as vegetation and floodplain debris we are confident that the floodplains often contain shallow standing water
As expected, many of the reaches were straight due to historic straightening however the channel dimensions were consistent between straight and meandering reaches. Channel
pattern was difficult to determine due to floodplain inundation and tree canopy making aerial imagery insufficient. RES utilized this data to not only guide the channel design but also
floodplain design. We have added swales that act as backwater features and sized the channel to promote regular shallowfloodplain inundation.
Reach DC1-A & B
An offline restoration approach is proposed for this reach to address channelization and loss of habitat. Priority Level I Restoration is proposed for Reach DC1-A, which will entail raising
the channel bed and restoring a stable single thread channel through the exsting floodplain. The exsting channels will be backfilled with material excavated from onsite to the elevation
of the floodplain in areas adjacent to the newchannel. Woody debris will be installed throughout the reach to improve aquatic habitat. Woody debris will be added in the channel in the
form of typical riffles (all riffles will be a mix of 75 % woody material / 25 % native substrate), brush bed sills, and brush toes. Channel banks will be live -staked, and a minimum 100-foot
buffer will be established and planted with native riparian vegetation, but buffers will exceed 100 feet in many areas. Invasive species will be treated.
Multiple drainage ditches run through the proposed easement and tie directly to the existing channel. The existing ditches that confluence with DC1-A flowthrough existing wetlands with
dimensions and slopes indicative of stormwater treatment swales and will therefore be tied directly into DC1-A. The ditches that confluence with DC1-B do not exhibit these treatment
characteristics and will therefore be directed into treatment swales before they outlet into DC1-B or existing jurisdictional wetlands.
Reach DC1-C
An Enhancement I approach is proposed for this reach to address lack of appropriate channel pattern, channel dimension, limited habitat, and limited connection to the left overbank
area. Enhancement activities will promote appropriate channel pattern, channel dimension, habitat, and encourage the formation of a natural stream and wetland complex in the low
gradient floodplain of Deep Creek. Enhancement activities will include:
Installation of 12 single wing deflectors to promote channel pattern, flow diversity, appropriate channel dimension and overbank flows.
- Removal of the existing road on the left bank. Removal will include the excavation of 50 percent of road material to provide connection from the channel to the lowareas of the left
bank wetland. The excavated material will then be deposited on the remaining areas of the existing road to form hummocks and promote floodplain flow and habitat diversity.
- Riparian planting along the top of the single wing defectors and the created hummocks
Wetland re-establishment with a credit ratio of 1:1 is proposed in areas 50 feet out from the proposed stream channel top of bank where jurisdictional wetlands do not exist and includes
areas of existing stream channel footprint, spoil, farm path, and drained areas. These re-establishment areas will connect the existing jurisdictional wetlands (WJ, WH, WK, WE, and
WD), resulting in a contiguous riparian wetland corridor. The system of interconnected re-established wetlands on the western side of the easement break, Will be collectively referred to
as "WR-1" (Wetland Re-establishment 1). Most of these proposed areas incorporate the footprint of the existing, excavated Deep Creek channel that will be back -filled and graded to
match the existing floodplain elevations in association with the stream restoration. Fbwever there are other small areas within WR-1 that contain hydric soils but lack sufficient wetland
hydrology and a lowered water table due to the altered landscape and drainage modifications, including the relocated and incised Deep Creek, presence of highly permeable soils, and
the location of drainage ditches intercepting groundwater discharges onto the floodplain. Moving east across the easement break, "WR-2" (Wetland Re-establishment 2) will be restored
50 feet out from the proposed channel. This system of wetlands borders jurisdictional wetlands WF and WG. As mentioned above, the hydrologic restoration of this area will be directly
related to the stream restoration and re -vegetation activities. Reconstructing Deep Creek (specifically reach DC1-A and DC1-B), with an appropriately sized channel back within the low
of the existing floodplain and filling the incised, abandoned channel, will raise the local groundwater elevation that will allowfrequent flooding. Also, the re-established wetland area will
be planted with bare root hardwood trees representative of a Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp community; however, due to the high organic matter of existing soil and existing natural
surface topography, ripping is not required. However, where construction equipment is utilized, limited surface roughening may be necessary due to the structure of high organic soil
that may be destroyed by equipment.
Wetland enhancement with a credit ratio of 3:1 is proposed within the exsting jurisdictional wetlands WJ, WH, WK, WG, WF, WE and WD in areas 50 feet and >150 feet out from the
proposed stream channel top of bank. These wetlands are naturally fed by groundwater; however, anthropogenic disturbance from agricultural production (clearing), ditching, and
planted pine monocultures have created unfavorable conditions for regeneration of woody wetland vegetation. Therefore, the primary approach to enhance these wetlands is to plant
native bare root trees, characteristic of a Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp in order to establish a wetland hardwood forest community. By reconstructing and enhancing Deep Creek,
with an appropriately sized channel back within the low of the existing floodplain, and plugging and filling the incised, abandoned channel, the local groundwater elevation WAIT rise and
more frequent flooding will occur, ultimately improving hydrology to the entire system.
Wetland preservation with a credit ratio of 10:1 is proposed for the remaining jurisdictional wetland areas within WG and WF that will not be directly enhanced by stream restoration
efforts. These areas lie outside of the non-standard buffer width areas (greater than 150 feet) and will remain forested and protected in perpetuity.
Sediment Control Measures:
A suite of sediment control measures will be utilized for the Project to reduce sediment and nutrient loading. The combination of the following sediment control measures: riparian buffer
planting, stream restoration and treatment Swale construction, will ultimately lead to the functional uplift of the site.
The riparian buffer will be restored or enhanced along all project reaches. Restored riparian buffers are established adjacent to and up -gradient from watercourses of water bodies to
improve water quality.
Several treatment swales are proposed along DC1-B to reduce sediment and nutrient loading from agricultural ditches along this reach. These swales are designed to provide treatment
by promoting sediment deposition and nutrient uptake. The treatment swales will also function as backwater habitat.
The restoration of the plant communities is an important aspect of the restoration Project. The selection of plant species is based on what was observed in the forest surrounding the
restoration Project and what is typically native to the area. Specifically, species identified in the downstream area of the Project, where it is mostly forested, along with species described
in the 2012 Guide to the Natural Communities of North Carolina, Fourth Approximation (Schafale, 2012) for coastal plain wetland -type communities were used to determine the most
appropriate species for the restoration project.
A Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp (Schafale, 2012) will be the target community along the Project reaches and wetlands; site characteristics showing habitat similarities to a Coastal
Plain Brownwater Bottomland Hardwood forest will also be used in determining appropriate species. This community type represents a diverse habitat where wet -tolerant hardwoods can
establish throughout while very wet species (e.g. cypress and gums) can thrive in the sloughs, depressions, and more swampy areas. Due to the varying site characteristics, including
soil types, wetland extent, existing vegetation, and inundation periods, there will be two planting zones where a mix of proposed tree species will be planted throughout the planting
areas, specific to the conditions present. The first planting zone (Zone 1) will account for the majority of the planting area in the wetlands and throughout the floodplain including a
selection of species similar to that of a Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp. A second planting zone (Zone 2) will include a selection of wet -tolerant species to be planted in areas along
DC1-B where treatment swales will be installed and more frequent flooding will occur, sometimes holding around 0.5 feet of standing water at a time.
Soil Restoration
Areas that have been disturbed, or tracked over with heavy equipment, and where the existing farm road was not removed the soil will be ripped and scarified during final soil
preparation and before planting. Any topsoil that is removed during construction will be stockpiled and placed over the Project during final soil preparation. This process should provide
favorable soil conditions for plant growth. Rapid establishment of vegetation will provide natural stabilization for the Project.
On Site Nuisance Species Management
Treatment for invasive species will be required, specifically along the downstream portion of DC1-A, which contains locally dense areas of Chinese privet. Vegetation throughout the
remainder of the site will be monitored throughout the life of the Project and any non-native species will be treated accordingly. Invasive species will require different and multiple
treatment methods, depending on plant phenology and the location of the species being treated; however, based on observed existing conditions, presently the only known exotic
invasive species that would require treatment is Chinese privet. All treatment will be conducted as to maximize its effectiveness and reduce chances of detriment to surrounding native
vegetation. Treatment methods will include mechanical (cutting with toppers, clippers, or chain saw) and chemical (foliar spray, cut stump, and hack and squirttechniques). Plants
mnfaininn m fh viahl. a Hn ,sill he remn ] from fhn Prni—t and nrnnarh, Hi.--1 All he hi,Wr annliro+n WH he a„—i—I by a roMfi—I nrn„nrl—firirin annlirafnr ,.Bfh a

North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (NCDA&CS) license and adhere to all legal and safety requirements according to herbicide labels, and NC and
Federal laws. Management records will be kept on the plant species treated, type of treatment employed, type of herbicide used, application technique, and herbicide concentration and
quantities used. These records will be included in all reporting documents.
Areas of cleared pines along DC1-A and to the south of DC1-B, will be monitored for future pine re -colonization throughout the site. Areas of dense regrowth will be treated either
mechanically (cutting with loppers, clippers, or chain saw), chemically (foliar spray, cut stump, and hack and squirt techniques), or a combination of both based on the localized need
The primary heavy equipment to be used to construct the project will include excavation, backhoes, and dump trucks.
5. Jurisdictional Determinations
5a. Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the property or proposed impact areas?*
r Yes r No O Unknown
Comments:
5b. If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made?*
r Preliminary r Approved r Not Verified r Unknown r N/A
Corps AID Number:
SAW 2018-02027
5c. If 5a is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Jeremy Schmid
Agency/Consultant Company: RES
Other:
5d. List the dates of the Corp jurisdiction determination or State determination if a determination was made by the Corps or DWR
A survey of existing wetlands was performed on April 24, 2019. A preliminary jurisdictional determination (PJD) request was sent to the USACE in July 2019 and a site visit was
conducted on August 15, 2019. Following the site visit and upon additional findings of aquatic resources, revised materials were submitted on August 29, 2019.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?*
r Yes r No
Are any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permits(s) used, or intended to be used, to authorize any part of the proposed project or related activity?
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Where are the impacts associated with your project? (check all that apply):
W Wetlands W Streams -tributaries r Buffers
r Open Waters r Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
2a1 Reason M
2b. Impact type * (')
2c. Type of W.* 2d. W. name *
2e. Forested *
2f. Type of
Jurisdicition*M
2g. Impact
area*
W1
Stream Restoration
T
fottomland Hardwood Forest WJ
Yes
Corps
0.040
(acres)
W2
Stream Restoration
P
Bottomland Hardwood Forest WD
Yes
Corps
0.510
(acres)
W3
Stream Restoration
T
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Yes
Erp.
3.240
�WD
(acres)
W4
Stream Restoration
P
Bottomland Hardwood Forest WH
Yes
__]
Fs
0.270
(acres)
W6
Stream Restoration
P
Bottomland Hardwood Forest WE
Yes
Corps
0.540
(acres)
W7
Ditch Plug
P
Bottomland Hardwood Forest WE
Yes
Corps
0.020
(acres)
W8
Stream Restoration
T
Bottomland Hardwood Forest WE
Yes
Corps
3.040
(acres)
W5 Stream Restoration T Bottomland Hardwood For WH Yes Corps 1.030
(acres)

W9
Stream Restoration
T
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
WK
Yes
__]
Fs
0.040
(acres)
W10
Stream Restoration
P
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
WF
Yes
Corps
0.610
(acres)
W11
Stream Restoration
T
ffo mland Hardwood Forest
WF
Yes
Corps
1.890
(acres)
W12
Stream Restoration
P
fforniand Hardwood Forest
WG
Yes
Corps
0.180
(acres)
W13
Stream Restoration
T
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
WG
Yes
Corps
0.570
(acres)
W14
Stream Enhancement
T
ffo miand Hardwood Forest
WG
Yes
Corps
0.560
(acres)
Stream Enhancement ��T
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
WF
F-s
Corps
0.450
f15
(acres)
2g. Total Temporary Wetland Impact
10.860
2g. Total Wetland Impact
12.990
2i. Comments:
2g. Total Permanent Wetland Impact
2.130
Stream restoration will involve the construction and alignment of reach DC1 A and B, including floodplain grading and the removal of an old farm path,
paralleling the stream. This will restore proper dimensions and profile to the stream which will provide a net gain in the ecological function to the
stream and wetland system. A ditch plug along Wetland WE will result in a permanent wetland impact. Additionally, a proposed treatment Swale will
occur on the western tip of Wetland WG, functioning to reduce sediment and nutrient loading from agricultural ditches along this reach; this will result
in a temporary wetland impact. Re -planting will involve the clearing of the current low -quality scrub -shrub vegetation and planting bare root trees
appropriate for the desirable forested natural community type.
3. Stream Impacts
3a. Reason for impact (?)
3b.lmpact type *
3c. Type of impact *
3d. S. name *
3e. Stream Type *
3f. Type of
3g. S. width *
3h. Impact
❑
(?)
Jurisdiction*
length*
S1
Stream Restoration
Permanent
Relocation
DC1
Perennial
Both
24
1,799
Average (feet)
(lir�rfeet)
S2
Stream Resoration
Permanent
Relocation
ff
Perennial
Both
24
2,019
Average (feet)
(linearfeet)
S3
Stream Enhancement
Tem orar
P Y
Bank Stabilization
DC1
Perennial
Both ]1:t1vsrage(f..t)
240
__A
(lirfeet)
31. Total jurisdictional ditch impact in square feet:
3i. Total permanent stream impacts:
3.818
3i. Total stream and ditch impacts:
243
3i. Total temporary stream impacts:
240
3j. Comments:
Al permanent stream impacts are due to the construction and re -alignment of stream reach DC1 (DC1-A and DC1-13); restoration back to the natural
valley and proper stream dimensions and profile Will provide a net gain in the ecological function to the stream and wetland system. Priority Level I
Restoration is proposed for Reach DC1-A, which will entail raising the channel bed and restoring a stable single thread channel through the existing
floodplain. The existing channels will be backfilled with material excavated from onsite to the elevation of the floodplain in areas adjacent to the new
channel. Woody debris will be installed throughout the reach to improve aquatic habitat. Temporary impacts will come from an Enhancement I
approach proposed along DC1-C to address lack of appropriate channel pattern, channel dimension, limited habitat, and limited connection to the left
overbank area. Enhancement activities will include installation of 12 single wing deflectors, removal of the existing farm path along the left bank, and
riparian planting along the top of the single wing deflectors. This will promote appropriate channel pattern, channel dimension, habitat, and encourage
the formation of a natural stream and wetland complex in the lowgradient floodplain of Deep Creek.
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation u
1. Avoidance and Minimization
la. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:
Impacts to jurisdictional streams and wetlands will be unavoidable due to the restoration activities proposed. Although these impacts are unavoidable,
the proposed stream treatment will result in an overall functional uplift of the stream and wetland system. Stream restoration of reaches DC1-A and
DC1-13 will have permanent stream impacts due to stream realignment. Reach DC1-C will have temporary stream impacts due to stream enhancement,
involving bank stabilization and planting. All wetlands will be impacted (both permanently and temporarily) due to stream restoration and one ditch plug
(on wetland WE). All impacts are as minimized as possible to keep as much natural area as can be. Construction will only occur where it is necessary
to provide long-term stabilization and promote flow throughout the Project area.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:

Impacts will be minimized using a staged construction approach. Where possible, the channel will be constructed prior to turning stream flow into a
segment. This approach minimizes the impact of each stage during the project construction. Efforts will be made to preserve individual high value
trees located within the stream restoration area.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
r Yes r No
2b. If this project DOES NOT require Compensatory Mitigation, explain why:
This is a stream and wetland mitigation project that will ultimately uplift the ecological quality of streams, buffers and wetlands on site, within the Pasquotank River Basin, and therefore
does not need compensatory mitigation.
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
r Yes r No
If no, explain why:
There are no buffer rules in place for the Pasquotank Watershed.
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250?*
r Yes r No
2b. Does this project meet the requirements for low density projects as defined in 15A NCAC 02H .1003(2)?
r Yes r No
Comments:
G. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of public (federal/state) land?*
r Yes r No
2. Violations (DWR Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), or DWR Surface Water or Wetland Standards or
Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?*
r Yes r No
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWR Requirement)
3a. Will this project result in additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?*
r Yes r No
3b. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
This project will not result in any additional development. Ultimately, there will be an increase in water quality within the project and downstream due to
the restoration and enhancement of the Project stream and wetlands, planting of a riparian buffer, and establishing a conservation easement to be
protected in perpetuity.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project?*
r Yes r Nor WA
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or habitat?*
r Yes r No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?*
r Yes r No
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Raleigh

5d. Is another Federal agency involved?*
r Yes r No r Unknown
5e. Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?
r Yes r No
5f. Will you cut any trees in order to conduct the work in waters of the U.S.?
r Yes r No
5g. Does this project involve bridge maintenance or removal?
r Yes r No
5h. Does this project involve the construction/installation of a wind turbine(s)?*
r Yes r No
5i. Does this project involve (1) blasting, and/or (2) other percussive activities that will be conducted by machines, such as jackhammers, mechanized pile drivers, etc.?
r Yes r No
5j. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?
USFWS- Information for Planning and Consultation and Natural Heritage Program Database.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*
r Yes r No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat?*
NOAA Essential Fish Habitat Mapper
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation status?*
r Yes r No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?*
NC SHPO
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?*
r Yes r No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
The design and permitting of the mitigation will include a FEMA No -Rise Certification and coordination with the Perquimans County Floodplain
Administrator.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?*
FEMA National Flood Hazard Layer FIRM Panel 3720788800K, eff. 12/21/2018
Miscellaneous
J
Please use the space below to attach all required documentation or any additional information you feel is helpful for application review. Documents should be combined into one
file when possible, with a Cover Letter, Table of Contents, and a Cover Sheet for each Section preferred.
dick the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach document
White Hat PCN Combined Attachments.pdf 15.14MB
ORM_Upload_Sheet_ Consolidated_NWPR_WhiteHat.pdf 57.8KB
File must he FLF or ME
Comments
Signature
*
W By checking the box and signing below, I certify that:
The project proponent hereby certifies that all information contained herein is true, accurate, and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief; and
• The project proponent hereby requests that the certifying authority review and take action on this CWA 401 certification request within the applicable reasonable period of time.
• I have given true, accurate, and complete information on this form;
• I agree that submission of this PCN form is a "transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a written signature; AND
• I intend to electronically sign and submit the PCN form.
Full Name:
Matt Butler
Signature

"ro
Date
8/18/2021

O O O O f.- O) V CO N f.- N
N O w CO V N f. Cl) O LO O O
"O M M M M M N N M N M M O
'� CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO C')')
C O .O
J �
O V f.- LO 'IT LO 'IT 'IT LO CO O N
a)O O r.- O LO� O� LO� LO O
O
M CO CO CO CO CO M CO CO CO CO CO
� co co M M M M M M M M�
J M
N
O_
T
H
NI V V V V V V V V V V V V
O O O O O O O O O O O O
O V V V V V V V V V V V V
m ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
�aaaaaaaaaaaa
wwwwwwwwwwww�—
fY of of of of of fY of of fY of O
Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q LL
CO — N — — LO M O LO LO M M
.-. N M( 2 LO CDf.- O 'ITO 'ITM
C O) N V CO 0 0' CO f.-
7 Cl) CO 'IT f.- LO M M M
O V M CD
V f� O O) LO 'ITV �
E-OLOLoI-N000ONOC)
Q O O"T LO O O
N
Q
T
N N N N N N N N N N N N O
Q Q Q Q Q J
N
U
O
U
5
(D
2
c
`m
3 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O LL LL LL W LL LL LL LL LL LL LL M
Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q
Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z
J J J J J J J J J J J J
000000000000
N of of of of of of fY of of fY of W
U U U U U U U U U U U U
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
fY fY fY fY fY fY fY fY fY fY fY fY
000000000000
z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z
a)
E
m
z
I
a�

¢ Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q
~I
E¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢
O
�
E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E
n
E aaa�a�aaa�a���
c
OOOOO00000w wwwwwww
a »zz>z>z»zz>z>zzz
d
n
ml m m m
o w w y H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
f (Eo 0
ezzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c
o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
`o
_ _ _
o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
a aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w
z noo�������������;�
E
z
�UUU�UU== W W W Y W W (7 C7 C7 W
❑ O O �i �i �i �i �i �i �i �i �i �i �i �i �i �i �i

Contact Name*
Matt Butler
Contact Email Address*
[e-mail]
Project Owner*
RES
Project Name*
White Hat
Project County*
Pasquotank
Owner Address:*
Street Address
3600 Glenwood Ave
Address Line 2
Suite 100
aty
Raleigh
Postal / Zip axle
27612
Is this a transportation project?*
r Yes r No
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
W 401 Water Quality Certification - F 401 Water Quality Certification -
Regular Express
F Individual Permit F Modification
F Shoreline Stabilization
Does this project have an existing project ID#?*
r Yes (- No
Please list all existing project ID's associated with this projects.*
20201990 Version 1
State / Province / Pegion
NC
Country
United States
Do you know the name of the staff member you would like to request a meeting with?
Erin Davis
Please give a brief project description below and include location information.*

The White Hat Stream and Wetland Mitigation Project (Project) is
located within Perquimans County, approximately nine miles east of
Hertford, NC. The Project lies within the Pasquotank River Basin,
North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) sub -basin 03-
01-52 and United States Geological Survey (USGS) 8-digit
Cataloguing Unit 03010205 and 14-digit hydrologic unit code (HUC)
03010205060020. The Project is the first to be established under the
RES Pasquotank Umbrella Mitigation Bank (Bank) being designed to
help meet compensatory mitigation requirements for stream and
wetland impacts in the HUC 03010205. The conceptual design
proposes to restore 5,258 linear feet (LF) and enhance 1,541 LF of
stream as well as restore 3.49 acres, enhance 13.89 acres, and
preserve 3.487 acres of wetlands that will ultimately provide water
quality benefits and ecosystem uplift for the Project's 1,859-acre
drainage area.
The Project is comprised of a 76.32-acre conservation easement
contained within six parcels and a 23.60-acre perpetual flowage
easement extending west toward Godfreys Lane. The Project
involves the restoration and enhancement of Deep Creek, a named
stream forming to the west of the easement boundary flowing east
through the Project to the Little River, eventually draining to the
Albemarle Sound. Within the conservation easement, the stream
channel is divided into three reaches, DC1-A, DC1-B, and DC1-C
and is surrounded by a system of interconnected jurisdictional
wetlands. To access the Project from Hertford, travel east
approximately 7.1 miles on New Hope Road. Turn left on Suttons
Lane and continue for another 0.5 miles to the eastern end of the
project. Godfreys Lane will allow access to the western portion of the
Project. The approximate coordinates of the conservation easement
are 36.175378,-76.329986.
By digitally signing below, I certify that I have read and understood that per the Federal Clean Water Act Section
401 Certification Rule the following statements:
This form completes the requirement of the Pre -Filing Meeting Request in the Clean Water Act Section 401 Certification
Rule.
1 understand by signing this form that I cannot submit my application until 30 calendar days after this pre -filing
meeting request.
1 also understand that DWR is not required to respond or grant the meeting request.
Your project's thirty -day clock started upon receipt of this application. You will receive notification regarding meeting location
and time if a meeting is necessary. You will receive notification when the thirty -day clock has expired, and you can submit an
application.
Signature *
Submittal Date 7/9/2021

fires
July 8, 2021
NC Division of Water Resources
217 West Jones Street
Raleigh, NC 27603
To Whom it May Concern,
3600 Glenwood Avenue, Suite 100
Raleigh, NC 27612
Corporate Headquarters
6575 West Loop South, Suite 300
Bellaire, TX 77401
Main: 713.520.5400
Resource Environmental Solutions (RES) is pleased to present this Pre -Construction Notification (PCN)
Form for the White Hat Mitigation Project located in Perquimans County, North Carolina (36.175378 and
-76.329986). This project will be part of the RES Pasquotank Umbrella Mitigation Bank and will provide
mitigation credits to offset unavoidable impacts to stream resources within the Pasquotank 05 River Basin
(8-digit USGS HUC 03010205). As part of this scope of work, RES is submitting this package to the North
Carolina Division of Water Resources (NC DWR), providing an assessment of temporary and permanent
impacts associated with the stream and wetland mitigation that will occur during the construction of this
project.
The White Hat Mitigation Project (the "Project") is comprised of a 76.32-acre conservation easement
contained within six parcels and a 23.60-acre perpetual flowage easement extending west, in Perquimans
County, NC. The Project will involve the restoration and enhancement of Deep Creek, which begins west
of the proposed easement boundaries and drains in an easterly direction across the site, eventually
draining to the Albemarle Sound. Through stream restoration and enhancement, the Project presents 6,799
linear feet (LF) of proposed stream and 20.870 acres of wetland re-establishment, enhancement, and
preservation. The site is primarily characterized by agricultural use, forest, and very low -intensity
residential areas. Land use at the site is characterized by row crop production and/or disturbed forest.
The proposed Project will provide improvements to water quality, hydrologic function, and habitat. The
projects will address stressors identified in the watershed through nutrient removal, sediment removal,
runoff filtration, and improved aquatic and terrestrial habitat.
We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please feel free to contact me at
[phone] if you have any additional question regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
Matt Butler I Project Manager
res. us

TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. PCN Figures
• Figure 1. Project Vicinity
• Figure 2. USGS Quadrangle
• Figure 3. Existing Conditions
• Figure 4. Mapped Soils
• Figure 5. NWI and FEMA
• Figure 6. Project Impacts
II. Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD)
Request
• Cover Letter
• PJD Form
• Aquatic Resources
• JD Request
• Landowner Authorizations
• Figures
• WET Forms
III. NC State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)
• Letter Sent
i. Cover Letter
ii. Figures
• Letter Received
IV. US Fish and Wildlife Service Self -Certification Package
• Self -Certification Letter
• Species Conclusion Table
• Official Species List
• NC Natural Heritage Program Letter

PCN Figures
• Figure 1.
Project Vicinity
• Figure 2.
USGS Quadrangle
• Figure 3.
Existing Conditions
• Figure 4.
Mapped Soils
• Figure 5.
NWI and FEMA
• Figure 6.
Project Impacts

S
11 S
1
p i Z
PRd 3
QBerea Church of Christ
�a
` yP
� NopP Atl
b
z 3
x°P
�pO°y\`eaa
QNx ad o,
H� D
Rd
C
f
0
0
Eure Seed Farms, Inc
N"ro /r
HOpe
Ry
1
N
PwNpp I I � I
F
1k
II White Hat Project
Wilson ©meter]
Proposed Easement
14- Digit HUC - 03010205060020
Pasquotank River Basin - 03010205
C5 Mile Aviation Zone
36.177,-76:333
N
Figure 1 - Project Vicinity Date: 1/29/2021
w�r Drawn by: EJU
White Hat res
0 1,000 2,000 Mitigation Project Checked by: MGB
1 inch = 2,000 feet
Feet Percluirnans County, North Carolina

I
:�s
Foreadmm
r.
Rab it
' Co er
I
`%/flit urst;
Laddirlo St
N �
w -
�Oco
�4
e~o 2 PO
O \
d C.
New Hope
r.
DUt
kernhom
1
�- Point
lag
ivy
�,,Q Newby
Legend Piney
Point _
Proposed Easement y Blount
oint
N Figure 2 - USGS Quadrangle Date: 6/29/2021
w E Nixonton (1982) Drawn by: EJU ores
5 White Hat Checked by: MDD
0 2,500 5,00
Mitigation Project
1 inch = 5,000 feet
Feet
Per uimans Count North Carolina

Post -Pine Harvest Regeneration
Legend '
Proposed Easement
Existing Wetland
® Existing Hunting Impoundment
Existing Perennial Stream
Existing Ditch
U----U Farm Path yy
Existing Wetland Gauge
N Figure 3 - Existing Conditions Date: 6/29/2021
w e Drawn by: EJU
White Hat Mitigation Project
s g res
Checked by: MDD
0 400 800
Perquimans County, North Carolina 1 inch = 800 feet
Feet

/^1
/ `�
�`�-� --
7 ' '
�,
_ �. . � ���11{wi1J..L7�
`++�I �
'/
��
v
�;
���.
�_
%� ___� ��_�'�,,--f-----
� % / i
� � � --
� ,� - -

a u r+ N c c E E
a N u
L = d
_ Z G r 0W¢ m
yy G m m W Z
4 t £ Y J O O O W
c Z
E.EEEE.E.EEEy
'00000
—o o o - - - - - ———————°vF'lo
3-vvvvH-,"', °mg
EEEOEEEEEE��
4x1.

Preliminary Jurisdictional
Determination (PJD) Request
• Cover Letter
• PJD Form
• Aquatic Resources
• JD Request
• Landowner Authorizations
• Figures
• WET Forms

fires
July 2, 2019
Kyle Barnes
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Washington Field Office
2407 West Fifth Street
Washington, NC 27889
Dear Mr. Barnes,
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Corporate Headquarters
5020 Montrose Blvd. Suite 650
Houston, TX 77006
Main: 713.520.5400
Resource Environmental Solutions (RES) is pleased to present this Request for a Preliminary Jurisdictional
Determination for the White Hat Mitigation Site located in Perquimans County, North Carolina
(36.175378°N and-76.329986°W). This project will be part of the RES Pasquotank Umbrella Mitigation
Bank and will provide mitigation credits to offset unavoidable impacts to stream resources within the
Pasquotank 05 River Basin (8-digit USGS HUC 03010205). As part of this scope of work, RES is
submitting this request to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) for a confirmation of the limits of
Waters of the U.S. on the subject site.
The White Hat Mitigation Site (the "Site") is contained in eight parcels totaling 108-acres of proposed
easement in Perquimans County, NC. The Site will involve the restoration and enhancement of Deep
Creek, which begins at the western part of the project area and drains in an easterly direction across the
Site, eventually draining to the Albemarle Sound. The site is primarily characterized by agricultural use,
forest, and very low -intensity residential areas. Land use at the site is characterized by row crop
production and/or disturbed forest.
The proposed site will provide improvements to water quality, hydrologic function, and habitat. The
projects will address stressors identified in the watershed through nutrient removal, sediment removal,
runoff filtration, and improved aquatic and terrestrial habitat.
res.us

0
We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please feel free to contact me at
[phone] if you have any additional question regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
Jeremy Schmid I Senior Ecologist
Attachments: Jurisdictional Determination Request Form, Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form,
Landowner Authorization Form, Vicinity Map, USGS Topographc Map, National Wetlands Inventory
Map, Soils Map, Potential Waters of the U.S. Delineation Map, and Wetland Data Sheets

Appendix 2 - PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD: 07/02/19
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD:Jeremy Schmid
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: CESAW-RG-W
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND/OR
AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: NC County/parish/borough: PerquimarlS City: Hertford
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format):
Lat.: 36.1753 Long.:-76.3299
Universal Transverse Mercator: NAD83
Name of nearest waterbody: Deep Creek
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
❑ Field Determination. Date(s):
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES IN REVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO REGULATORY
JURISDICTION.
Site
number
Latitude
(decimal
degrees)
Longitude
(decimal
degrees)
Estimated amount
of aquatic resource
in review area
(acreage and linear
feet, if applicable)
Type of aquatic
resource (i.e., wetland
vs. non -wetland
waters)
Geographic authority
to which the aquatic
resource "may be"
subject (i.e., Section
404 or Section 10/404)
see attached table

O O O O f.- O) V CO N f.- N
N O w CO V N f. Cl) O LO O O
"O M M M M M N N M N M M O
'� CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO C')')
C O .O
J �
O V f.- LO 'IT LO 'IT 'IT LO CO O N
a)O O r.- O LO� O� LO� LO O
O
M CO CO CO CO CO M CO CO CO CO CO
� co co M M M M M M M M�
J M
N
O_
T
H
NI V V V V V V V V V V V V
O O O O O O O O O O O O
O V V V V V V V V V V V V
m ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
�aaaaaaaaaaaa
wwwwwwwwwwww�—
fY of of of of of fY of of fY of O
Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q LL
CO — N — — LO M O LO LO M M
.-. N M( 2 LO CDf.- O 'ITO 'ITM
C O) N V CO 0 0' CO f.-
7 Cl) CO 'IT f.- LO M M M
O V M CD
V f� O O) LO 'ITV �
E-OLOLoI-N000ONOC)
Q O O"T LO O O
N
Q
T
N N N N N N N N N N N N O
Q Q Q Q Q J
N
U
O
U
5
(D
2
c
`m
3 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O LL LL LL W LL LL LL LL LL LL LL M
Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q
Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z
J J J J J J J J J J J J
000000000000
N of of of of of of fY of of fY of W
U U U U U U U U U U U U
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
fY fY fY fY fY fY fY fY fY fY fY fY
000000000000
z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z
a)
E
m
z
I
a�

1) The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional aquatic resources in
the review area, and the requestor of this PJD is hereby advised of his or her option
to request and obtain an approved JD (AJD) for that review area based on an
informed decision after having discussed the various types of JDs and their
characteristics and circumstances when they may be appropriate.
2) In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or a
Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring "pre -
construction notification" (PCN), or requests verification for a non -reporting NWP or
other general permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an AJD for the
activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware that: (1) the permit applicant has
elected to seek a permit authorization based on a PJD, which does not make an
official determination of jurisdictional aquatic resources; (2) the applicant has the
option to request an AJD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit
authorization, and that basing a permit authorization on an AJD could possibly result
in less compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) the
applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting the terms
and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4) the applicant can
accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply with all the terms and
conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation requirements the Corps has
determined to be necessary; (5) undertaking any activity in reliance upon the subject
permit authorization without requesting an AJD constitutes the applicant's acceptance
of the use of the PJD; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered
individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps permit
authorization based on a PJD constitutes agreement that all aquatic resources in the
review area affected in any way by that activity will be treated as jurisdictional, and
waives any challenge to such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance
or enforcement action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7)
whether the applicant elects to use either an AJD or a PJD, the JD will be processed
as soon as practicable. Further, an AJD, a proffered individual permit (and all terms
and conditions contained therein), or individual permit denial can be administratively
appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331. If, during an administrative appeal, it
becomes appropriate to make an official determination whether geographic
jurisdiction exists over aquatic resources in the review area, or to provide an official
delineation of jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review area, the Corps will
provide an AJD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable. This PJD finds
that there "may be"waters of the U.S. and/or that there "may be" navigable waters of
the U.S. on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in the review
area that could be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following
information:

SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply)
Checked items should be included in subject file. Appropriately reference sources
below where indicated for all checked items:
■❑ Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor:
Map:Vicinity, USGS, NWI, Soil, Existing conditions, WOUS
0 Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor.
❑ Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rationale:
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
■❑ U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: 24k Nixonton
❑ Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
■❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
G
100-year Floodplain Elevation is:
Photographs: ❑ Aerial (Name & Date):
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
(National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
❑ Previous determination (s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Other information (please specify):
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily
been verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for later jurisdictional
determinations.
Signature and date of
Regulatory staff member
completing PJD
Jeremy Schmid o�a�,ao;za,hNdzso;oo°
Signature and date of
person requesting PJD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)'
' Districts may establish timeframes for requestor to return signed PJD forms. If the requestor does not respond
within the established time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is
necessary prior to finalizing an action.

urisdictional Determination Reauest
US Army Corps
of Engineers.
Wilmington District
This form is intended for use by anyone requesting a jurisdictional determination (JD) from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District (Corps). Please include all supporting
information, as described within each category, with your request. You may submit your request
via mail, electronic mail, or facsimile. Requests should be sent to the appropriate project
manager of the county in which the property is located. A current list of project managers by
assigned counties can be found on-line at:
http://www.saw.usace.aimy.mil/Missions/Re ul�atoiyPermitProi4ram/Contact/CountyLocator.aspx,
by calling 910-251-4633, or by contacting any of the field offices listed below. Once your
request is received you will be contacted by a Corps project manager.
ASHEVILLE & CHARLOTTE REGULATORY
FIELD OFFICES
US Army Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
RALEIGH REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
INSTRUCTIONS:
WASHINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
2407 West Fifth Street
Washington, North Carolina 27889
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
WILMINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
General Number: 910-251-4633
Fax Number: [phone]
All requestors must complete Parts A, B, C, D, E, F and G.
NOTE TO CONSULTANTS AND AGENCIES: If you are requesting a JD on behalf of a
paying client or your agency, please note the specific submittal requirements in Part H.
NOTE ON PART D — PROPERTY OWNER AUTHORIZATION: Please be aware that
all JD requests must include the current property owner authorization for the Corps to
proceed with the determination, which may include inspection of the property when
necessary. This form must be signed by the current property owner(s) or the owner(s)
authorized agent to be considered a complete request.
NOTE ON PART D - NCDOT REQUESTS: Property owner authorization/notification for
JD requests associated with North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
projects will be conducted according to the current NCDOT/USACE protocols.
NOTE TO USDA PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS: A Corps approved or preliminary JD
may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security Act of
1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in
USDA programs, you should also request a certified wetland determination from the local
office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
Version: May 2017 Page 1

A.
B.
Jurisdictional Determination Request
PARCEL INFORMATION
Street Address: See attached
City, State:
Hertford. NC
County: Pequimans
Parcel Index Number(s) (PIN): See attached
REQUESTOR INFORMATION
Name: Jeremv Schmid
Mailing Address: 302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Telephone Number:
Raleigh, NC 27605
919-345-3034
Electronic Mail Address: [e-mail]
Select one:
❑ I am the current property owner.
❑ I am an Authorized Agent or Environmental Consultanti
❑ Interested Buyer or Under Contract to Purchase
❑ Other, please explain.
C. PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION2
Name: See attached
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number:
Electronic Mail Address:
' Must provide completed Agent Authorization Form/Letter.
z Documentation of ownership also needs to be provided with request (copy of Deed, County GIS/Parcel/Tax Record).
Version: May 2017 Page 2

Henry Butt William & Billie Divers
1223 WOODVILLE ROAD 325 NORTHEAST 59TH STREET
HERTFORD, NC 27944 OAK ISLAND, NC 28465
James Butt Robert & Hazel Eure
2217 IVAN STREET 400 WHITE HAT ROAD
APT 821 HERTFORD, NC 27944
DALLAS, TX 75201
Joseph Butt, Sr.
Calvin Godfrey
1491 NEW HOPE ROAD,
1833 NEW HOPE ROAD
HERTFORD, NC 27944
HERTFORD, NC 27944
Doris Carpenter Lizzie Godfrey
149 SHORE DRIVE 1833 NEW HOPE ROAD
COLONIAL BEACH, VA 22443 HERTFORD, NC 27944
Laurence Chappell Clarence Jennings
1777 NEW HOPE ROAD 123 E. GODFREYS LANE
HERTFORD, NC 27944 HERTFORD, NC 27944
Tina Chappell Laura Weaver
1777 NEW HOPE ROAD 2311 5TH AVENUE
HERTFORD, NC 27944 APT 8CC
NEW YORK, NY 10037
Dale & Cindy Craig Paul & Shannon Whitehead
189 GODFREY LANE 116 OLD US 17 ROAD
HERTFORD, NC 27944 HERTFORD, NC 27944
David Dewald
1679 NEW HOPE ROAD
HERTFORD, NC 27944

Landowner Authorization Form
Site: White Hat
Property Legal Description
Deed Book/Page: 287/562
County: Perguimans
Parcel ID Numbers: 7889-62-5550, 7889-74-6923, 7889-84-1950, 7889-82-4911, 7899-03-1867
Street Address: 105 Sutton's Lane, Hertford. NC
Property Owner: Ethel Sutton Channell: husband. William Wray Chappell. Tenants by Entirety
The undersigned, registered property owner of the above property, do hereby authorize
Resource Environmental Solutions, the NC Division of Water Resources, and the US Army Corps of Engineers,
their employees, agents or assigns to have reasonable access to the above referenced property for the evaluation of
the property as a potential stream, wetland, and or riparian buffer restoration project, including conducting stream
and or wetland determinations and delineations, as well as issuance and acceptance of any required permit(s) or
certification(s).
Property Owner Address: 105 Sutton's Lane, Hertford, NC 27944
UWe hereby certify the above information to be true and accurate to the best of my/our knowledge.
sll
(Property Owner Authorized Signature)
(Property Owner Printed Name)
Date
(Property Owner Authorized Signature) Date
(Property Owner Printed Name)
4846-3189-9210, v. 1

Landowner Authorization Form
Site: White Hat
Property Legal Description
Deed Book/Page: 467/388; 165/810
County: PeEguuimans
Parcel ID Numbers: 7889-34-6379
Street Address: Godfreys Lane Hertford, NC
Property Owner: Albert Delwin Eure BettyS. Eure Lois Marie Eure Karl Matthew Eure Burt AnthonyEure John
ZL�Albert Eure Tracy Michelle UmyhlettKrystal Dawn Eure Karla Denise Eure —K—ourt—ney Deane Eure
The undersigned, registered property owner of the above property, do hereby authorize
Resource Environmental Solutions, the NC Division of Water Resources, and the US Army Corps of Engineers,
their employees, agents or assigns to have reasonable access to the above referenced property for the evaluation of
the property as a potential stream, wetland, and or riparian buffer restoration project, including conducting stream
and or wetland determinations and delineations, as well as issuance and acceptance of any required permit(s) or
certification(s).
Property Owner Address: 102 Whitehat Road Hertford NC 27944
UWe hereby certify the above information to be true and accurate to the best of my/our knowledge.
� 9xt'
7
(Albert DJelwin Eure)
(Betty S. Eure)
(Lois Marie
(Karl Matthew
(Burt An'th6Ay Eure)
(Jo"bert Eure)
Date
q _ q , Z�)1�
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date

9
clla�l�'
(K la Denise Eure) Date
(Kourtney Deane ure) Date
L,Qo F_) FAA'
l w t'C �L �r M �?t l•� r-c, ,
4846-3189-9210, v. 1

Landowner Authorization Form
Site: White Hat
Property Legal Description
Deed Book/Page: 467/388; 165/810
County: Perquimans
Parcel ID Numbers: 7889-34-6379
Street Address: Godfreys Lane, Hertford,.NC
Property Owner: Albert Delwin Eure Be . S. Eure Lois Marie Eure Karl Matthew Eure Burt AnthonyEure John
Albert Eure Tracy Michelle Um hlett stal Dawn Eure Karla Denise Eure Kourtne y Deane Eure
The undersigned, registered property owner of the above property, do hereby authorize
Resource Environmental Solutions, the NC Division of Water Resources, and the US Army Corps of Engineers,
their employees, agents or assigns to have reasonable access to the above referenced property for the evaluation of
the property as a potential stream, wetland, and or riparian buffer restoration project, including conducting stream
and or wetland determinations and delineations, as well as issuance and acceptance of any required permit(s) or
certification(s).
Property Owner Address: 102 Whitehat Road Hertford NC 27944
UWe hereby certify the above information to be true and accurate to the best of my/our knowledge.
(Albert Delwin Eure)
(Betty S. Eure)
'4"- 02"'� &"-,)
(Lois Marie Eure)
I —
(Karl Matthew Eure)
(Burt Anthony Eure)
Date
Date
Date
Date
Date
(John Albert Eure) Date

Landowner Authorization Form
Site: White Hat
Property Legal Description
Deed Book/Page: 351/507
County: Perquimans
PIN Numbers: 7889-65-1628
Street Address: Godfreys Lane. Hertford, NC 27944
Property Owner: Bryan Alan Jennings, Wife of Bryan Alan Jennings, Rita Renee Jennings Rippy, Husband of Rita
Renee Jennings Rippy, Alan Clarence Jennings
The undersigned, registered property owner of the above property, do hereby authorize
Resource Environmental Solutions, the NC Division of Water Resources, and the US Army Corps of Engineers,
their employees, agents or assigns to have reasonable access to the above referenced property for the evaluation of
the property as a potential stream, wetland, and or riparian buffer restoration project, including conducting stream
and or wetland determinations and delineations, as well as issuance and acceptance of any required permit(s) or
certification(s).
Property Owner Address: 123 E. Godfreys Lane, Hertford, NC 27944
I/We hereby certify the above information to be true and accurate to the best of my/our knowledge.
e
(Property Owner Authorized Signature)
C L't (Lie 0e-r
(Property Owner Printed Name)
Date
-4-/5;-
-( -20(1?-
(Property Ownci�'Authoked Signature) Date
15�� ALAJ J1:!44IG`S
ropert Owner Printed Name)
srty Owner Authorized Signature)
1 n --t-
(Property Owner Printed Name)
Date

Landowner Authorization Form
Site: White Hat
Property Legal Description
Deed Book/Page: 351/507
County: Aerquimans
PIN Numbers: 7889-65-1628
Street Address: Godfreys Lane, Hertford, NC 27944
Property Owner: Bryan Alan Jennings, Wife of Bryan Alan Jennings, Rita Renee Jennings Rippy, Husband of Rita
Renee Jennings Rippy, Alan Clarence Jennings
The undersigned, registered property owner of the above property, do hereby authorize
Resource Environmental Solutions, the NC Division of Water Resources, and the US Army Corps of Engineers,
their employees, agents or assigns to have reasonable access to the above referenced property for the evaluation of
the property as a potential stream, wetland, and or riparian buffer restoration project, including conducting stream
and or wetland determinations and delineations, as well as issuanceand acceptance of any required permit(s) or
certification(s).
Property Owner Address: 123 E. Godfreys Lane, Hertford, NC 27944
I/We hereby certify the above information to be true and accurate to the best of my/our knowledge.
(Property Owner Authorized Signature)
(Property Owner Printed Name)
(Property Owner Authorized Signature)
Owner Printed Name)
(Property Owner Authorized Signature)
f
(Property Owner Printed Name)
Date
Date
Date
//r

Landowner Authorization Form
Site: White Hat
Property Legal Description
Deed Book/Page: 396/253
County: Perguimans
PIN Numbers: 7889-44-7770
Street Address: 123 E.Godfreys Lane, Hertford, NC
Property Owner: Michael R. Twiddy, and Wife of Michael R. Twiddy
The undersigned, registered property owner of the above property, do hereby authorize
Resource Environmental Solutions, the NC Division of Water Resources, and the US Army Corps of Engineers,
their employees, agents or assigns to have reasonable access to the above referenced property for the evaluation of
the property as a potential stream, wetland, and or riparian buffer restoration project, including conducting stream
and or wetland determinations and delineations, as well as issuance and acceptance of any required permit(s) or
certifcation(s).
Property Owner Address: 116 Bayshore Drive, Elizabeth City, NC 27909
I/We hereby certify the above information to be true and accurate to the best of my/our knowledge.
(Property Owner Authorized Signature)
%
(Property Owner Printed Name)
Date
(Property Owper Authorized Signature) Date
- hlb6- ss
(Property Owner Printed Name)

Landowner Authorization Form
Site: White Hat
Property Legal Description
Deed Book/Page: 314/1
County: Perquimans
Parcel ID Numbers: 7889-81-7137
Street Address: New Hope Road
Property Owner: Doris Iona Butt Carpenter
Authorized Invitee: Environmental Banc & Exchanee: LLC
The undersigned, being duly authorized by the record property owner of the above property, pursuant to the terms of
a Purchase and Sale Agreement dated 8/5/2019, a redacted copy of which will be provided upon request, do hereby
authorize:
Resource Environmental Solutions, the NC Division of Water Resources, and the US Army Corps of Engineers,
their employees, agents or assigns to have reasonable access to the above referenced property for the evaluation of
the property as a potential stream, wetland, and or riparian buffer restoration project, including conducting stream
and or ,vetland determinations and delineations, as well as issuance and acceptance of any required pennit(s) or
certification(s).
Property Owner Address: 302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110. Raleigh,NC 27605
I/We hereby certify the above information to be true and accurate to the best of my/our knowledge.
.Z
(Property Owner Authorized Signature)
P107 �76- 6.
(Property Owner Printed Name)
4846-3189-9210, v. I
Date

Jurisdictional Determination Request
F. JURISDICTIONAL DETERNIINATION (JD) TYPE (Select One)
0 I am requesting that the Corps provide a preliminM JD for the property identified herein.
A Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) provides an indication that there may
be "waters of the United States" or "navigable waters of the United States"on a property.
PJDs are sufficient as the basis for permit decisions. For the purposes of permitting, all
waters and wetlands on the property will be treated as if they are jurisdictional "waters of
the United States". PJDs cannot be appealed (33 C.F.R. 331.2); however, a PJD is
"preliminary" in the sense that an approved JD can be requested at any time. PJDs do
not expire.
❑ I am requesting that the Corps provide an approved JD for the property identified herein.
An Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD) is a determination that
jurisdictional "waters of the United States" or "navigable waters of the United
States" are either present or absent on a site. An approved JD identifies the limits of
waters on a site determined to be jurisdictional under the Clean Water Act and/or
Rivers and Harbors Act. Approved JDs are sufficient as the basis for permit
decisions. AJDs are appealable (33 C.F.R. 331.2). The results of the AJD will be
posted on the Corps website. A landowner, permit applicant, or other "affected
party" (33 C.F.R. 331.2) who receives an AJD may rely upon the AJD for five years
(subject to certain limited exceptions explained in Regulatory Guidance Letter 05-
02).
❑ I am unclear as to which JD I would like to request and require additional information
to inform my decision.
G. ALL REQUESTS
Map of Property or Project Area. This Map must clearly depict the boundaries of the
review area.
✓� Size of Property or Review Area 108 acres.
❑✓ The property boundary (or review area boundary) is clearly physically marked on the site.
Version: May 2017 Page 4

Jurisdictional Determination Request
H. REQUESTS FROM CONSULTANTS
Project Coordinates (Decimal Degrees): Latitude:
36.1753
Longitude:-76.3299
A legible delineation map depicting the aquatic resources and the property/review area.
Delineation maps must be no larger than 1 Ix 17 and should contain the following: (Corps
signature of submitted survey plats will occur after the submitted delineation map has been
reviewed and approved).6
■ North Arrow
■ Graphical Scale
■ Boundary of Review Area
■ Date
■ Location of data points for each Wetland Determination Data Form or tributary
assessment reach.
For Approved Jurisdictional Determinations:
■ Jurisdictional wetland features should be labeled as Wetland Waters of the US, 404
wetlands, etc. Please include the acreage of these features.
■ Jurisdictional non -wetland features (i.e. tidal/navigable waters, tributaries,
impoundments) should be labeled as Non -Wetland Waters of the US, stream, tributary,
open water, relatively permanent water, pond, etc. Please include the acreage or linear
length of each of these features as appropriate.
■ Isolated waters, waters that lack a significant nexus to navigable waters, or non -
jurisdictional upland features should be identified as Non -Jurisdictional. Please
include a justification in the label regarding why the feature is non jurisdictional (i.e.
"Isolated", "No Significant Nexus", or "Upland Feature"). Please include the acreage
or linear length of these features as appropriate.
For Preliminary Jurisdictional Determinations:
Wetland and non -wetland features should not be identified as Jurisdictional, 404,
Waters of the United States, or anything that implies jurisdiction. These features can be
identified as Potential Waters of the United States, Potential Non -wetland Waters of
the United States, wetland, stream, open water, etc. Please include the acreage and
linear length of these features as appropriate.
Completed Wetland Determination Data Forms for appropriate region
(at least one wetland and one upland form needs to be completed for each wetland type)
6 Please refer to the guidance document titled "Survey Standards for Jurisdictional Determinations" to ensure that the
supplied map meets the necessary mapping standards. hM2://www.saw.usace.4rmy.mil/Missions/Regulatoly-Permit-
Pro gram/Jurisdiction/
Version: May 2017 Page 5

Jurisdictional Determination Request
F4Completed appropriate Jurisdictional Determination form
• PJDs, please complete a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form' and include the
Aquatic Resource Table
• AJDS• please complete an Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form'.
Vicinity Map
Aerial Photograph
F4 USGS Topographic Map
0 Soil Survey Map
Other Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map, Proposed Site
Plan, previous delineation maps, LIDAR maps, FEMA floodplain maps)
Landscape Photos (if taken)
NCSAM and/or NCWAM Assessment Forms and Rating Sheets
❑ NC Division of Water Resources Stream Identification Forms
hJ Other Assessment Forms
' www.saw.usace.4rmy.mil/Portals/59/docs/regulatory/readocs/JD/RGL 08-02_App A Prelim _JD_Form fillable.pdf
8 Please see hM2://www.saw.usace.4M.mil/Missions/Regulatory-Permit-Program/Jurisdiction/
Principal Purpose: The information that you provide will be used in evaluating your request to determine
whether there are any aquatic resources within the project area subject to federaljurisdiction under the regulatory
authorities referenced above.
Routine Uses: This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal, state, and local
government agencies, and the public, and may be made available as part of a public notice as required by federal
law. Your name and property location where federal jurisdiction is to be determined will be included in the
approved jurisdictional determination (AJD), which will be made available to the public on the District's website
and on the Headquarters USAGE website.
Disclosure: Submission of requested information is voluntary; however, if information is not provided, the
request for an AJD cannot be evaluated nor can an AJD be issued.
Version: May 2017 Page 6

Y
a
a
_
F
4
1 ral I
M k
k
�
� t
IM1f{I
? i r{pCgh
New HUpe
Lependv:
White Hat Project
o Study Area
N
Project Vicinity
Date: 8/29/2019
Drawn by: MDE
res
s
White Hat Mitigation Project
Checked by: JLS
0
1,000 2,000
-
Perquimans County, North Carolina
finch =2,000 feet
Feet

L YA as i
17
Alit
Cem
-7
A
A
V17
7
.75
Ian
Le-gen
ew pe
Study Area
Date 8/29/2019
USGS Quadrangle
W E Nixonton (1982) Drawn by: MDE
White Hat Mitigation Project ���
Checked by: JLS
0 1,000 2,000
Aar Perquirnans County, North Carolina 1 inch = 2,000 feet
Feet

h
PFO4B,
PFO1/4Bd
PUBHx t
Ak
-
PFO1 Bd ' PFO4/1 Bd
Bd �
i
-_ -•- PFO1/4Bd
+ , .
W
Legend
Study Area
NWI Wetland (USFWS 10/15/2018)
N
= Date: 8/29/2019
National Wetland Inventory
w e Drawn by: MDE rs
e.
White Hat Mitigation Pro'1 ect
s Checked by: JLS
0 500 1,000
Perquimans County, North Carolina 1 inch= 1,000 feet
Feet

EURE,
ALBERT D.
7889-59-8885.
EURE�ALBERT.D.
BUTT, SE H, 7889-7 0 \
SR. -EST.
7889-27-9755
MOW
4L �
V
_�___ BUTl HENRY
HARVEY
. ► / �` 1 _ •' `" 7889-95-7505
GZLIZ
\LE R 8, 7899-
.A DEN 1
-6745 ____ -- \ nniooc
RE!ROBE-L H.,
,R Ht�� AZEL_*H.
/
7889 0-7435
`/`
WHITEHEAD, PAUL
CHAPPELL,
W. & SHANNON H
LAURENCE WRAY
7889-40-8742
7889-50-1538
i
CHAPPELL,'
W.& ETH
7889-50-
,PPE LL, WILLIAMA I
W.& ETHEL S
7889-60-8533 " -
UT,TT, JAMES C.
7899-02-5606

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: White Hat Mitigation Site City/County: Perquimans Sampling Date: 24-Apr-19
Applicant/Owner: Resource Environmental Solutions State: NC Sampling Point: DP-1
Investigator(s): J. Schmid Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Flat Local relief (concave, convex, none): flat Slope:
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR T Lat.: 36.18125 Long.:-76.34122
Soil Map Unit Name: Chaponoke silt loam NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes O No O (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑d significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No O
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
0.0 0/0 / 0.0
Datum: NAD83
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No O
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No O
Yes 0 No O
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No O
within a Wetland?
Remarks:
ditching surrounds the forested area on two sides, major canal is controlled using flashboard risers - would likely have stronger hydrology indicators if
not controlled
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Dry Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑d FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRRT, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No 0
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes O No 0
Depth (inches):
Yes O No O
Saturation Present?
Yes O No
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology
Present?
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
sn 'iow
Sampling Point: DP-1
Absolute Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
1 Quercus pagoda
)
-
% Cover
10 ❑d
Cover
20.0%
Status
FACW
Number of Dominant Species
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 6 (A)
2. Liquidambar styraciflua
30
❑d
60.0%
FAC
3. Quercus palustris
10
❑d
20.0%
FACW
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 7 (B)
4.
0
❑
0.00/0
5.
6
0
0
❑
❑
o.00/o
0.00/0
Percent of dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 85.7% (A/B)
7.
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
8.
0
❑
o.00/o
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
50% of Total Cover: 25 20% of Total Cover: 10 50 =Total Cover
Sapling or Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
1.
0
❑
0.0%
FAC species 0 x 3= 0
2.
0
❑
0.0%
FACU species 0 x 4= 0
3.
0
❑
0.0%
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
4.
0
❑
0.0%
Column Totals: 0 (A) 0 (B)
5,
o
❑
o.o°ro
6.
0
El
0.00/0
Prevalence Index = B/A = 0.000
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7. 0 ❑ 0.00/0
8.
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
50% of Total Cover: 0
20% of Total Cover: 0
0
= Total Cover
0 2 - Dominance Test is > 50%
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0 i
1. Ligustrum sinense
70
100.0%
FAC
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
2.
0
❑
0.0%
3.
0
❑
0.00/0
i Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4.
o
El
o.o°ro
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5. 0 ❑ o.00/o
6.
0
❑
0.00/0
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
50% of Total Cover: 35
20% of Total Cover: 14
70
= Total Cover
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
)
1 , Toxicodendron radicans
2.
20
0
❑d
❑
100.0%
0.o%
FAC
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
3.
0
❑
o.o%
4.
0
❑
0.0%
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
5.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
6.
7.
0
0
❑
❑
0.0%
0.0%
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
8.
0
❑
0.00/0
9.
0
❑
0.0%
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
10,
o
El
o.o%
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
11.
0
❑
0.00/0
3 ft (1 m) in height.
12.
0
❑
0.00/0
50% of Total Cover: 10
20% of Total Cover: 4
20
= Total Cover
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
)
1. Lonicera japonica 5 ❑d 25.0% FACU
2. Smilax laurifolia
15
❑d
75.0%
FACW
3.
0
❑
o.o%
4.
0
❑
0.00/0
5.
50% of Total Cover: 10
-
20% of Total Cover: 4
0
20
❑ 0.0%
= Total Cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes O No O
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - 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) 0/0Color (moisll_ 0/0Tvoe 1 Locz Texture Remarks
0-1 10YR 3/2 Loam
1-16 10YR 5/1 90 10YR 5/8 10 Clay
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (LRR O)
❑ Reduced Vertic (1`18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (LRR P, S, T)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
0 Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 153B)
❑ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T) ❑ Marl (1`10) (LRR U)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) ❑ Depleted Ochric (Fll) (MLRA 151)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR O, P, T)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A) ❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR O, S) ❑ Delta Ochric (1`17) (MLRA 151)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Reduced Vertic (1`18) (MLRA 150A, 150B) wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 149A) unless disturbed or problematic.
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
❑ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No ❑
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: White Hat Mitigation Site City/County: Perquimans Sampling Date: 24-Apr-19
Applicant/Owner: Resource Environmental Solutions State: NC Sampling Point: DP-2
Investigator(s): J. Schmid Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Flat Local relief (concave, convex, none): flat Slope: 0.0 % / 0.0 °
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR T Lat.: 36.1892 Long.:-76.3427 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Chaponoke silt loam NWI classification:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes O No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑d significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O 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 0 No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No
Yes 0 No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No
within a Wetland?
Remarks:
ditching surrounds the forested area on two sides, major canal is controlled using flashboard risers - would likely have stronger hydrology indicators if
not controlled
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Dry Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRRT, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No 0
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No 0
Depth (inches):
Yes ❑ No O
Saturation Present?
Yes ❑ No
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology
Present?
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
sn 'iow
Sampling Point: DP-2
Absolute Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
1 ]uniperus virginiana
)
% Cover
_ 20 ❑d
Cover
50.0%
Status
FACU
Number of Dominant Species
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A)
2. Quercus velutina
20
❑d
50.0%
UPL
3.
0
❑
0.00/0
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 4 (B)
4.
0
❑
0.00/0
5.
6
0
0
❑
❑
o.00/o
0.00/0
Percent of dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50.0% (A/B)
7.
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
8.
0
❑
o.00/o
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
50% of Total Cover: 20 20% of Total Cover: 8 40 =Total Cover
Sapling or Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
FACW species 10 x 2 = 20
1.
0
❑
0.0%
FAC species 15 x 3 = 45
2.
0
❑
0.0%
FACU species 20 x 4 = 80
3.
0
❑
0.0%
UPL species 20 x 5 = 100
4.
0
❑
0.00/0
Column Totals: 65 (A) 245 (B)
5,
o
❑
o.o°ro
6.
0
El
0.00/0
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.769
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7. 0 ❑ 0.00/0
8.
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
50% of Total Cover: 0
20% of Total Cover: 0
0
= Total Cover
❑ 2 - Dominance Test is > 50%
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
❑ 3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0 i
1. Ligustrum sinense
15
100.0%
FAC
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
2.
0
❑
0.0%
3.
0
❑
0.00/0
i Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4.
o
El
o.o°ro
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5. 0 ❑ o.00/o
6.
0
❑
0.00/0
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
50% of Total Cover: 7.5
20% of Total Cover: 3
15
= Total Cover
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
)
1 .
2.
0
0
❑
❑
0.00/0
0.o%
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
3.
0
❑
o.o%
4.
0
❑
0.0%
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
5.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
6.
7.
0
0
❑
❑
0.0%
0.0%
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
8.
0
❑
0.00/0
9.
0
❑
0.0%
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
10,
o
El
o.o%
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
11.
0
❑
0.00/0
3 ft (1 m) in height.
12.
0
❑
0.00/0
50% of Total Cover: 0
20% of Total Cover: 0
0
= Total Cover
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
)
1 Smilax laurifolia 10 ❑d 100.0% FACW
2.
0
❑
0.0%
3.
0
❑
o.o%
4.
0
❑
0.00/0
5.
50% of Total Cover: 5
20% of Total Cover: 2
- 0
10
❑ 0.0%
= Total Cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes O No O
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: DP-2
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) 0/0Color (moisll_ 0/0Tvoe 1 Locz Texture
0-12 10YR 4/1 Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Remarks
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (LRR O)
❑ Reduced Vertic (1`18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (LRR P, S, T)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 153B)
❑ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
❑ Marl (1`10) (LRR U)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All)
❑ Depleted Ochric (Fll) (MLRA 151)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR O, P, T)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR O, S)
❑ Delta Ochric (1`17) (MLRA 151)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Reduced Vertic (1`18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 149A)
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
❑ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: White Hat Mitigation Site City/County: Perquimans Sampling Date: 24-Apr-19
Applicant/Owner: Resource Environmental Solutions State: NC Sampling Point: DP-3
Investigator(s): J. Schmid Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Flat Local relief (concave, convex, none): flat Slope: 0.0 % / 0.0 °
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR T Lat.: 36.1795 Long.:-76.3381 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Chaponoke silt loam NWI classification:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes O No O (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology 0 significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No O
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 O
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No O
Yes O No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O No
within a Wetland?
Remarks:
ditching surrounds the forested area on two sides, major canal is controlled using flashboard risers - would likely have stronger hydrology indicators if
not controlled
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Dry Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRRT, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No 0
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes O No 0
Depth (inches):
Yes O No O
Saturation Present?
Yes O No
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology
Present?
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
area has water stained leaves from flooding due to flash board riser. Water table below 3 ft, dry brittle soil
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
sn 'iow
Sampling Point: DP-3
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
1. ]uglans nigra
2. Liquidambar styraciflua
3. Quercus velutina
4.
5.
6.
7.
8_
Absolute
Rel.Strat.
Cover
Cover
_ 10
❑
16.79/6
_ 30
❑d
50.0%
_ 20
❑d
33.39/6
_ 0
❑
0.0%
_ 0
❑
0.0%
0
❑
0.0%
_ 0
❑
0.0%
0
❑
0.0%
Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Status
Number of Dominant Species
UPL That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 6 (A)
FAC
UPL Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 8 (B)
Percent of dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 75.0% (A/B)
50% of Total Cover: 30
20% of Total Cover:
12
60
= Total Cover
Sapling or Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
1.
0
❑ o.o%
2.
0
❑ 0.0%
3.
0
❑ o.o%
4.
0
❑ o.o%
5.
0
❑ o.o%
6.
0
❑ o.o%
7.
0
❑ 0.00/0
8.
0
❑ 0.00/0
50% of Total Cover: 0
20% of Total Cover:
0
0
= Total Cover
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
1 . Ligustrum sinense
20
100.0%
FAC
2.
0
❑ 0.0%
3.
0
❑ o.o%
4.
0
❑ 0.00/0
5.
0
❑ 0.0%
6.
0
❑ 0.00/0
50% of Total Cover: 10
20% of Total Cover:
4
20
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
)
1 . Phytolacca americana
10
❑d 50.0%
FACU
2. Boehmeria cylindrica
10
❑d 50.0%
FACW
3.
0
❑ o.o%
4.
0
❑ o.o%
5.
0
❑ o.o%
6.
0
❑ o.o%
7.
0
❑ 0.0%
8.
0
❑ 0.0%
g.
0
❑ o.o%
10.
0
❑ 0.0%
11.
0
❑ 0.00/0
12.
0
❑ 0.00/0
50% of Total Cover: 10
20% of Total Cover:
4
20
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
)
1. Vitis rotundifolia
10
❑d 40.0%
FAC
2. Toxicodendron radicans
5
❑d 20.0%
FAC
3. Campsis radicans
10
❑d 40.0%
FAC
4.
0
❑ 0.00/0
5.
0
❑ 0.0%
50% of Total Cover: 12.5
20% of Total Cover:
5
25
= Total Cover
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species 0
x 1 =
0
FACW species 0
x 2 =
0
FAC species 0
x 3 =
0
FACU species 0
x 4 =
0
UPL species 0
x 5 =
0
Column Totals: 0
(A)
0 (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A = 0.000
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
❑ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
V 2 - Dominance Test is > 50%
❑ 3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0 i
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
3 ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes O No ❑
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: DP-3
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) 0/0_ Color (moist) 0/0Tvoe 1 Locz Texture
0-10 10YR 4/1 95 10YR 5/8 5 Clay Loam
10-16 10YR 5/1 90 10YR 5/8 10 Clay Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Remarks
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (LRR O)
❑ Reduced Vertic (1`18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (LRR P, S, T)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
0 Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 153B)
❑ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T) ❑ Marl (1`10) (LRR U)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) ❑ Depleted Ochric (Fll) (MLRA 151)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR O, P, T)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A) ❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR O, S) ❑ Delta Ochric (1`17) (MLRA 151)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Reduced Vertic (1`18) (MLRA 150A, 150B) wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 149A) unless disturbed or problematic.
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
❑ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No ❑
Remarks:
soil extremely dry, crumbles out of auger
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: White Hat Mitigation Site City/County: Perquimans Sampling Date: 24-Apr-19
Applicant/Owner: Resource Environmental Solutions State: NC Sampling Point: DP-4
Investigator(s): J. Schmid Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Flat Local relief (concave, convex, none): flat Slope: 0.0 % / 0.0 °
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR T Lat.: 36.1781 Long.:-76.3378 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Chaponoke silt loam NWI classification:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes O No O (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology 0 significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No O
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 O
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No O
Yes O No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O No
within a Wetland?
Remarks:
ditching surrounds the forested area on two sides, major canal is controlled using flashboard risers - would likely have stronger hydrology indicators if
not controlled
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Dry Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRRT, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No 0
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes O No 0
Depth (inches):
Yes O No O
Saturation Present?
Yes O No
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology
Present?
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
area has water stained leaves from flooding due to flash board riser. Water table below 3 ft, dry brittle soil
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
sn 'iow
Sampling Point: DP-4
Absolute
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 Ulmus americana
10
❑
14.3%
FAC
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
4 (A)
2. Pinus taeda
20
❑d
28.6%
FAC
3. Quercus velutina
10
❑
14.3%
UPL
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
4 (B)
4. Liquidambar styraciflua
20
❑d
28.6%
FAC
5. Carya glabra
10
❑
14.3%
FACU
Percent of dominant Species
6
0
❑
0.0%
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
100.0% (A/B)
7.
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$.
0
Elo.00/o
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of Tota I Cover: 35
20% of Tota I Cover: 14
70
=Total Cover
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling or Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
1.
0
❑
0.0%
FAC species 0 x 3= 0
2.
0
❑
0.0%
FACU species 0 x 4= 0
3.
0
❑
0.0%
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
4.
0
❑
0.0%
Column Totals: 0 (A) 0 (B)
5,
o
❑
o.o°ro
Prevalence Index = B/A = 0.000
6.
0
El
0.00/0
7.
0
❑
0.00/0
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8.
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
50% of Total Cover: 0
20% of Total Cover: 0
0
= Total Cover
0 2 - Dominance Test is > 50%
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
❑ 3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0 i
1. Ligustrum sinense
20
100.0% FAC
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
2.
0
❑
0.0%
3.
0
❑
0.00/0
i Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
o
El
o.o°ro
5.
0
❑
o.00/o
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6.
0
❑
0.00/0
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
50% of Total Cover: 10
20% of Total Cover: 4
20
= Total Cover
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
)
1 Toxicodendron radicans
10
❑d
100.0% FAC
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
2.
0
❑
0.o%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
3.
0
❑
o.o%
4.
0
❑
0.0%
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
5.
0
❑
0.0%
6.
0
❑
0.0%
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
7.
0
❑
0.0%
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
8.
0
❑
0.00/0
9.
0
❑
0.0%
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
El
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
10,
o
o.o%
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
11.
0
❑
0.00/0
3 ft (1 m) in height.
12.
0
❑
0.00/0
50% of Total Cover: 5
20% of Total Cover: 2
10
= Total Cover
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 0 ❑ 0.0%
2. 0 ❑ 0.0%
3. 0 ❑ o.o%
4. 0 ❑ o.o%
5. 0 ❑ 0.0% Hydrophytic
Vegetation
50% of Total Cover: 0 20% of Total Cover: 0 0 =Total Cover
Present? Yes O No ❑
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: DP-4
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) 0/0_ Color (moist) 0/0Tvoe 1 Locz Texture
0-11 10YR 4/1 95 10YR 5/8 5 Clay Loam
11-16 10YR 5/1 90 10YR 5/8 10 Clay Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Remarks
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (LRR O)
❑ Reduced Vertic (1`18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (LRR P, S, T)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
0 Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 153B)
❑ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T) ❑ Marl (1`10) (LRR U)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) ❑ Depleted Ochric (Fll) (MLRA 151)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR O, P, T)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A) ❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR O, S) ❑ Delta Ochric (1`17) (MLRA 151)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Reduced Vertic (1`18) (MLRA 150A, 150B) wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 149A) unless disturbed or problematic.
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
❑ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No ❑
Remarks:
soil extremely dry, crumbles out of auger
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: White Hat Mitigation Site City/County: Perquimans Sampling Date: 24-Apr-19
Applicant/Owner: Resource Environmental Solutions State: NC Sampling Point: DP-5
Investigator(s): J. Schmid Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope:
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR T Lat.: 36.1755 Long.:-76.3199
Soil Map Unit Name: Chaponoke silt loam NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes O No O (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No O
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
0.0 0/0 / 0.0
Datum: NAD83
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No O
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No O
Yes 0 No O
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No O
within a Wetland?
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Dry Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
0 Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
0 Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
0 FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRRT, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes * No O
Depth (inches): 3
Water Table Present? Yes O No 0
Depth (inches):
Yes O No O
Saturation Present?
Yes O No
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology
Present?
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
sn 'iow
Sampling Point: DP-5
Absolute Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
1 Taxodium distichum
)
-
% Cover
10 ❑
Cover
12.5%
Status
OBL
Number of Dominant Species
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
2. Nyssa biflora
50
❑d
62.5%
OBL
3. Acer rubrum
20
❑d
25.0%
FAC
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
4.
❑
o.o%
5.
6
0
0
❑
❑
o.00/o
0.0%
Percent of dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 80.0% (A/B)
7.
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
8.
0
❑
o.00/o
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
50% of Tota I Cover: 40 20% of Tota I Cover: 16 80 =Total Cover
Sapling or Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
1.
20
100.00/0
FAC species 0 x 3 = 0
2.
0
❑
0.0%
FACU species 0 x 4= 0
3.
0
❑
0.0%
0PL species 0 x 5= 0
4.
0
❑
0.0%
Column Totals: 0 (A) 0 (B)
5,
o
❑
o.o°ro
6.
0
El
0.00/0
Prevalence Index = B/A = 0.000
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7. 0 ❑ 0.00/0
8.
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
50% of Total Cover: 10
20% of Total Cover: 4
20
= Total Cover
0 2 - Dominance Test is > 50%
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0 i
1.
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
2.
0
❑
0.00/0
3.
0
❑
0.00/0
i Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4.
o
El
o.o°ro
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5. 0 ❑ o.00/o
6.
0
❑
0.00/0
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
50% of Total Cover: 0
20% of Total Cover: 0
0
= Total Cover
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
)
1 , Murdannia keisak
2. Saururus cernuus
30
20
❑d
❑d
50.0%
33.3%
OBL
OBL
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
3. Boehmeria cylindrica
10
❑
16.7%
FACW
4.
0
❑
0.00/0
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
5.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
6.
7.
1 0
0
❑
❑
0.0%
0.0%
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
8.
0
❑
0.00/0
9.
0
❑
0.0%
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
10,
o
El
o.o%
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
11.
0
❑
0.00/0
3 ft (1 m) in height.
12.
0
❑
0.00/0
50% of Total Cover: 30
20% of Total Cover: 12
60
= Total Cover
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
)
1. ❑ o.o%
2.
0
❑
o.o%
3.
0
❑
o.o%
4.
0
❑
0.0%
5.
50% of Total Cover: 0
-
20% of Total Cover: 0
0
0
❑ 0.0%
=Total Cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes O No O
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: DP-6
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) 0/0Color (moisll_ 0/0Tvoe 1 Locz Texture Remarks
0-3 10YR 2/1 Muck
3-16 10YR 2/1 Silt Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (LRR O)
❑ Reduced Vertic (1`18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (LRR P, S, T)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 153B)
❑ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T) ❑ Marl (1`10) (LRR U)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) ❑ Depleted Ochric (Fll) (MLRA 151)
W Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR O, P, T)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A) ❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR O, S) ❑ Delta Ochric (1`17) (MLRA 151)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Reduced Vertic (1`18) (MLRA 150A, 150B) wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 149A) unless disturbed or problematic.
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
❑ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No ❑
Remarks:
unable to pull soil clean soil profile due to inundation
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: White Hat Mitigation Site City/County: Perquimans Sampling Date: 24-Apr-19
Applicant/Owner: Resource Environmental Solutions State: NC Sampling Point: DP-6
Investigator(s): J. Schmid Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillside Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope: 0.0 % / 0.0 °
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR T Lat.: 36.1751 Long.:-76.3195 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Chaponoke silt loam NWI classification:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes O No O (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No O
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 O
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No
Yes O No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O No
within a Wetland?
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Dry Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRRT, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No 0
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes O No 0
Depth (inches):
Yes O No O
Saturation Present?
Yes O No
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology
Present?
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
sn 'iow
Sampling Point: DP-6
Absolute Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
1 Carya glabra
)
_
% Cover
20 ❑d
Cover
33.3%
Status
FACU
Number of Dominant Species
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
2. Liriodendron tulipifera
20
❑d
33.3%
FACU
3. Fagus grandifolia
20
❑d
33.3%
FACU
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 7 (B)
4.
❑
0.0%
5.
6
0
0
❑
❑
o.00/o
0.0%
Percent of dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 57.1% (A/B)
7.
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$.
0
❑
o.00/o
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
50% of Total Cover: 30 20% of Total Cover: 12 60 =Total Cover
Sapling or Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
1. Carpinuscaroliniana
20
100.0%
FAC
FAC species 0 x 3 = 0
2.
0
❑
0.0%
FACU species 0 x 4= 0
3.
0
❑
0.0%
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
4.
0
❑
0.0%
Column Totals: 0 (A) 0 (B)
5,
o
❑
o.o0ro
6.
0
El
0.00/0
Prevalence Index = B/A = 0.000
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7. 0 ❑ 0.00/0
8.
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
50% of Total Cover: 10
20% of Total Cover: 4
20
= Total Cover
0 2 - Dominance Test is > 50%
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
❑ 3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0 i
1.
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
2.
0
❑
0.00/0
3.
0
❑
0.00/0
i Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4.
o
El
o.00ro
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5. 0 ❑ o.00/o
6.
0
❑
0.00/0
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
50% of Total Cover: 0
20% of Total Cover: 0
0
= Total Cover
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
)
1 , Microstegium vimineum
2. Toxicodendron radicans
20
10
❑d
❑d
66.7%
33.3%
FAC
FAC
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
3.
0
❑
0.00/0
4.
0
❑
0.0%
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
5.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
6.
7.
1 0
0
❑
❑
0.0%
0.0%
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
8.
0
❑
0.00/0
9.
0
❑
0.0%
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
10,
o
El
o.o%
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
11.
0
❑
0.00/0
3 ft (1 m) in height.
12.
0
❑
0.00/0
50% of Total Cover: 15
20% of Total Cover: 6
30
= Total Cover
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
)
1. Vitis rotundifolia 10 ❑d 100.0% FAC
2.
0
❑
0.0%
3.
0
❑
o.o%
4.
0
❑
0.00/0
5.
50% of Total Cover: 5
20% of Total Cover: 2
- 0
10
❑ 0.0%
= Total Cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes O No O
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: DP-6
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) 0/0Color (moisll_ 0/0Tvoe 1 Locz Texture Remarks
0-3 10YR 4/4 Loam
3-12 10YR 7/3 Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (LRR O)
❑ Reduced Vertic (1`18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (LRR P, S, T)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 153B)
❑ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T) ❑ Marl (1`10) (LRR U)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) ❑ Depleted Ochric (Fll) (MLRA 151)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR O, P, T)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A) ❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR O, S) ❑ Delta Ochric (1`17) (MLRA 151)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Reduced Vertic (1`18) (MLRA 150A, 150B) wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 149A) unless disturbed or problematic.
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
❑ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: White Hat Mitigation Site City/County: Perquimans Sampling Date: 14-Aug-19
Applicant/Owner: Resource Environmental Solutions State: NC Sampling Point: DP-7
Investigator(s): J. Schmid Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope:
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR T Lat.: 36.1751 Long.:-76.3245
Soil Map Unit Name: Chaponoke silt loam NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes O No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No ❑
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
0.0 0/0 / 0.0
Datum: NAD83
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No ❑
Yes 0 No ❑
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No ❑
within a Wetland?
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)
❑d Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
❑d Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Dry Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
0 Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
0 Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
0 FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRRT, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No 0
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No 0
Depth (inches):
Yes O No ❑
Saturation Present?
Yes * No ❑
Depth (inches): 0
Wetland Hydrology
Present?
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
sn 'iow
Sampling Point: DP-7
Absolute Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
1 Nyssa biflora
)
_
% Cover
20 ❑d
Cover
33.3%
Status
OBL
Number of Dominant Species
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 7 (A)
2. Taxodium distichum
10
❑
16.7%
OBL
3. Acer rubrum
30
❑d
50.0%
FAC
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 7 (B)
4.
0
❑
0.00/0
5.
6
0
0
❑
❑
o.00/o
0.0%
Percent of dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
7.
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$.
0
❑
o.00/o
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
50% of Total Cover: 30 20% of Total Cover: 12 60 =Total Cover
Sapling or Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
1. Carpinuscaroliniana
10
100.0%
FAC
FAC species 0 x 3 = 0
2.
0
❑
0.0%
FACU species 0 x 4= 0
3.
0
❑
0.0%
0PL species 0 x 5= 0
4.
0
❑
0.0%
Column Totals: 0 (A) 0 (B)
5,
o
❑
o.o°ro
6.
0
El
0.00/0
Prevalence Index = B/A = 0.000
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7. 0 ❑ 0.00/0
8.
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
50% of Total Cover: 5
20% of Total Cover: 2
10
= Total Cover
0 2 - Dominance Test is > 50%
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0 i
1.
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
2.
0
❑
0.00/0
3.
0
❑
0.00/0
i Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4.
o
El
o.o°ro
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5. 0 ❑ o.00/o
6.
0
❑
0.00/0
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
50% of Total Cover: 0
20% of Total Cover: 0
0
= Total Cover
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
)
1 , Saururus cernuus
2. Boehmeria cylindrica
20
5
❑d
❑
40.0%
10.0%
OBL
FACW
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
3. Murdannia keisak
15
❑d
30.0%
OBL
4. Arundinaria gigantea
10
❑d
20.0%
FACW
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
5.
0
❑
0.00/0
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
6.
7.
1 0
0
❑
❑
0.0%
0.0%
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
8.
0
❑
0.00/0
9.
0
❑
0.0%
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
10,
o
El
o.o%
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
11.
0
❑
0.00/0
3 ft (1 m) in height.
12.
0
❑
0.00/0
50% of Total Cover: 25
20% of Total Cover: 10
50
= Total Cover
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
)
1 Smilax laurifolia 20 ❑d 100.0% FACW
2.
0
❑
0.0%
3.
0
❑
o.o%
4.
0
❑
0.00/0
5.
50% of Total Cover: 10
20% of Total Cover: 4
- 0
20
❑ 0.0%
= Total Cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes O No O
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: DP-7
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) 0/0Color (moisll_ 0/0Tvoe 1 Locz Texture Remarks
0-1 10YR 4/1 Silt Loam
1-16 10YR 4/1 90 10YR 5/8 10 Clay Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (LRR O)
❑ Reduced Vertic (1`18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (LRR P, S, T)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
0 Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 153B)
❑ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T) ❑ Marl (1`10) (LRR U)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) ❑ Depleted Ochric (Fll) (MLRA 151)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR O, P, T)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A) ❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR O, S) ❑ Delta Ochric (1`17) (MLRA 151)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Reduced Vertic (1`18) (MLRA 150A, 150B) wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 149A) unless disturbed or problematic.
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
❑ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No ❑
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: White Hat Mitigation Site City/County: Perquimans Sampling Date: 14-Aug-19
Applicant/Owner: Resource Environmental Solutions State: NC Sampling Point: DP-8
Investigator(s): J. Schmid Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Toeslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope: 0.0 % / 0.0 °
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR T Lat.: 36.1751 Long.:-76.3245 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Chaponoke silt loam NWI classification:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes O No O (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No O
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 O
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No
Yes O No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O No
within a Wetland?
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Dry Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑d FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRRT, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No 0
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes O No 0
Depth (inches):
Yes O No O
Saturation Present?
Yes O No
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology
Present?
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
sn 'iow
Sampling Point: DP-8
Absolute Rel.Strat.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: _
)
% Cover Cover
1. Fagus grandifolia
10
❑ 16.79/6
2. Acer rubrum
30
❑d 50.0%
3. Liriodendron tulipifera
20
❑d 33.39/6
4.
0
❑ o.o%
5.
0
❑ o.o%
6.
0
❑ 0.0%
7.
0
❑ 0.0%
8.
0
❑ 0.0%
50% of Total Cover: 30
20% of Total Cover: 12
60
= Total Cover
Sapling or Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
1. Asimina triloba
15
W 60.09/6
2. Carpinus caroliniana
10
0 40.09/6
3.
0
❑ o.o%
4.
0
❑ o.o%
5.
0
❑ o.o%
6.
0
❑ o.o%
7.
0
❑ o.o%
8.
0
❑ 0.0%
50% of Total Cover: 12.5
20% of Total Cover: 5
25
= Total Cover
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
1. Aralia spinosa
20
100.0%
2.
0
❑ 0.0%
3.
0
❑ o.o%
4.
0
❑ o.o%
5.
0
❑ 0.0%
6.
0
❑ 0.0%
50% of Total Cover: 10
20% of Total Cover: 4
20
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
)
Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
FACU
FAC
FACU
FAC
FAC
Number of Dominant Species
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
Percent of dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
8 (A)
9 (B)
88.9% (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species 0
x 1 =
0
FACW species 0
x 2 =
0
FAC species 0
x 3 =
0
FACU species 0
x 4 =
0
UPL species 0
x 5 =
0
Column Totals: 0
(A)
0 (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A = 0.000
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
❑ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
❑� 2 - Dominance Test is > 50%
0 3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0 i
FAC ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
1 . Microstegium vimineum
10
❑d 33.3% FAC
2. Arundinaria gigantea
20
❑d 66.7% FACW
3.
0
❑ o.o%
4.
0
❑ o.o%
5.
0
❑ o.o%
6.
0
❑ o.o%
7.
0
❑ 0.0%
8.
0
❑ 0.0%
9.
0
❑ o.o%
10.
0
❑ 0.0%
11.
0
❑ 0.0%
12.
0
❑ 0.0%
50% of Total Cover: 15 20% of Total Cover: 6
30
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Vitis rotundifolia
10
❑d 50.09/6 FAC
2. Smilax laurifolia
10
❑d 50.09/6 FACW
3.
0
❑ o.o%
4.
0
❑ 0.0%
5.
0
❑ 0.0%
50% of Total Cover: 10 20% of Total Cover: 4
20
= Total Cover
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
3 ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes O No ❑
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: DP-8
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) 0/0Color (moisll_ 0/0Tvoe 1 Locz Texture Remarks
0-5 10YR 3/3 Loam
5-16 10YR 4/4 Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (LRR O)
❑ Reduced Vertic (1`18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (LRR P, S, T)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 153B)
❑ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T) ❑ Marl (1`10) (LRR U)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) ❑ Depleted Ochric (Fll) (MLRA 151)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR O, P, T)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A) ❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR O, S) ❑ Delta Ochric (1`17) (MLRA 151)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Reduced Vertic (1`18) (MLRA 150A, 150B) wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 149A) unless disturbed or problematic.
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
❑ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: White Hat Mitigation Site City/County: Perquimans Sampling Date: 14-Aug-19
Applicant/Owner: Resource Environmental Solutions State: NC Sampling Point: DP-9
Investigator(s): J. Schmid Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Flat Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope:
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR T Lat.: 36.1778 Long.:-76.3357
Soil Map Unit Name: Chaponoke silt loam NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes O No O (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑d significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No O
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
0.0 0/0 / 0.0
Datum: NAD83
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No O
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No O
Yes 0 No O
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No O
within a Wetland?
Remarks:
ditching surrounds the forested area on two sides, major canal is controlled using flashboard risers - would likely have stronger hydrology indicators if
not controlled
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
0 Water Marks (Bl)
0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Dry Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑d FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRRT, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No 0
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes O No 0
Depth (inches):
Yes O No O
Saturation Present?
Yes O No
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology
Present?
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
sn 'iow
Sampling Point: DP-9
Absolute Rel.Strat.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover
Cover
1 . Ulmus americana _
10
❑
15.49/6
2. Pinus taeda
30
❑d
46.29/6
3. Quercus velutina
5
❑
7.7%
4. Liquidambar styraciflua
20
❑d
30.89/6
5.
0
❑
o.o%
6.
0
❑
o.o%
7.
0
❑
0.0%
8.
0
❑
0.0%
50% of Total Cover: 32.5 20% of Total Cover: 13
65
= Total Cover
Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Status
Number of Dominant Species
FAC That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 7 (A)
FAC
UPL Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 7 (B)
FAC
Percent of dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
Sapling or Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
1.
0
❑ o.o%
2.
0
❑ 0.0%
3.
0
❑ o.o%
4.
0
❑ o.o%
5.
0
❑ o.o%
6.
0
❑ o.o%
7.
0
❑ 0.00/0
8.
0
❑ 0.00/0
50% of Total Cover: 0
20% of Total Cover: 0
0
= Total Cover
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
1 . Ligustrum sinense
10
100.0%
FAC
2.
0
❑ 0.0%
3.
0
❑ o.o%
4.
0
❑ 0.00/0
5.
0
❑ 0.0%
6.
0
❑ 0.00/0
50% of Total Cover: 5
20% of Total Cover: 2
10
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
)
1 , Toxicodendron radicans
10
❑d 40.0%
FAC
2. ]uncus effusus
10
❑d 40.0%
OBL
3. Boehmeria cylindrica
5
❑d 20.0%
FACW
4.
0
❑ o.o%
5.
0
❑ o.o%
6.
0
❑ o.o%
7.
0
❑ 0.0%
8.
0
❑ 0.0%
g.
0
❑ o.o%
10.
0
❑ o.o%
11.
0
❑ o.o%
12.
0
❑ o.o%
50% of Total Cover: 12.5
20% of Total Cover: 5
25
= Total Cover
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species 0
x 1 =
0
FACW species 0
x 2 =
0
FAC species 0
x 3 =
0
FACU species 0
x 4 =
0
UPL species 0
x 5 =
0
Column Totals: 0
(A)
0 (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A = 0.000
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
❑ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
❑� 2 - Dominance Test is > 50%
0 3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0 i
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
3 ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Vitis rotundifolia
10
❑d 100.09/6 FAC
2.
0
❑ 0.0%
3.
0
❑ o.o%
4.
0
❑ 0.0%
5.
0
❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic
-
Vegetation
O ❑
50% of Total Cover: 5 20% of Total Cover: 2
10
= Total Cover
Present? Yes No
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: DP-9
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) 0/0_ Color (moist) 0/0Tvoe 1 Locz Texture
0-8 10YR 4/1 95 10YR 5/8 5 Clay Loam
8-16 10YR 4/1 90 10YR 5/8 10 Clay Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Remarks
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (LRR O)
❑ Reduced Vertic (1`18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (LRR P, S, T)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
0 Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 153B)
❑ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T) ❑ Marl (1`10) (LRR U)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) ❑ Depleted Ochric (Fll) (MLRA 151)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR O, P, T)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A) ❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR O, S) ❑ Delta Ochric (1`17) (MLRA 151)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Reduced Vertic (1`18) (MLRA 150A, 150B) wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 149A) unless disturbed or problematic.
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
❑ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No ❑
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

NC State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO)
• Letter Received

North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Roy Cooper
Secretary Susi H. Hamilton
May 31, 2019
Kyle Barnes
US Army Corps of Engineers
Washington Regulatory Field Office
2407 West Fifth Street
Washington, NC 27889
Office of Archives and History
Deputy Secretary Kevin Cherry
Re: Establish RES Pasquotank Umbrella Mitigation Bank, White Hat Mitigation Site, SAW 2018-02027,
Pasquotank County, ER 19-1564
Dear Mr. Barnes:
We have received a public notice concerning the above project.
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would be affected by
the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill -Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-807-6579 . In all future
communication concerning this project, please cite the above referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
V✓Ramona Bartos, Deputy
State Historic Preservation Officer
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6599

US Fish and Wildlife Service
Self -Certification Package
• Self -Certification Letter
• Species Conclusion Table
• Official Species List
• NC Natural Heritage Program Letter

NT OF P,yF'2e�
U) �
7 3
9
�A�H 3 dad
United States Department of the Interior
Project Name
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
P.O. Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
Date: O 1 /21 /2021
Self -Certification Letter
White Hat Mitigation Project
Dear Applicant:
U.S.
nfgZ&WR.1 U"
WKV{CE
err F
Thank you for using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) Raleigh Ecological
Services online project review process. By printing this letter in conjunction with your
project review package, you are certifying that you have completed the online project
review process for the project named above in accordance with all instructions
provided, using the best available information to reach your conclusions. This letter,
and the enclosed project review package, completes the review of your project in
accordance with the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544, 87 Stat.
884), as amended (ESA), and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C.
668-668c, 54 Stat. 250), as amended (Eagle Act). This letter also provides
information for your project review under the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (P.L. 91-190, 42 U.S.C. 4321-4347, 83 Stat. 852), as amended. A copy of this
letter and the project review package must be submitted to this office for this
certification to be valid. This letter and the project review package will be maintained
in our records.
The species conclusions table in the enclosed project review package summarizes
your ESA and Eagle Act conclusions. Based on your analysis, mark all the
determinations that apply:
❑,.no effect" determinations for proposed/listed species and/or
✓ proposed/designated critical habitat; and/or
❑ "may affect, not likely to adversely affect" determinations for proposed/listed
species and/or proposed/designated critical habitat; and/or
© "may affect, likely to adversely affect" determination for the Northern long-
eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) and relying on the findings of the January 5,
2016, Programmatic Biological Opinion for the Final 4(d) Rule on the
Northern long-eared bat;
❑✓ "no Eagle Act permit required" determinations for eagles.

Applicant Page 2
We certify that use of the online project review process in strict accordance with the
instructions provided as documented in the enclosed project review package results in
reaching the appropriate determinations. Therefore, we concur with the "no effect" or
,.not likely to adversely affect" determinations for proposed and listed species and
proposed and designated critical habitat; the "may affect" determination for Northern
long-eared bat; and/or the "no Eagle Act permit required" determinations for eagles.
Additional coordination with this office is not needed. Candidate species are not
legally protected pursuant to the ESA. However, the Service encourages consideration
of these species by avoiding adverse impacts to them. Please contact this office for
additional coordination if your project action area contains candidate species.
Should project plans change or if additional information on the distribution of
proposed or listed species, proposed or designated critical habitat, or bald eagles
becomes available, this determination may be reconsidered. This certification letter is
valid for 1 year. Information about the online project review process including
instructions, species information, and other information regarding project reviews
within North Carolina is available at our website http://www.fws.gov/raleigh/pp.html.
If you have any questions, you can write to us at Raleighgfws.gov or please contact
Leigh Mann of this office at 919-856-4520, ext. 10.
Sincerely,
/s/Pete Benjamin
Pete Benjamin
Field Supervisor
Raleigh Ecological Services
Enclosures - project review package

CV
O
N
CV
cB
cu
N
c3
Cl
u
cn
co
CN N
00 CD p
>
�I
a)Q N L6
le N
N
O �~ OU N
N
Q O F- U M
OOJ O O O co0-0
L
m
o
Oco N tnLu O CD
O O- ca Z N
(Dcn(DX«
0 Z U cn
a 0 Q L
Lu O O
U
O co cn >, co N
0
-�
iB
Q U)cn
U
orf
O ¢ - -�
O
LO LO NL
N N p LL 2
CON
Z
�0� co 0- cn UZDZ
O
m
N
0
U
<
cr
_N
LU
D
�
O
U
Q
(DU
U
Q
N
>,
W
N
LU
Z
Z
Z
Q
N
Q
�
Q
_
L
N
co
o
C
-�
co
O
:E
i
O (D
co
cn
M
N
>, a
U
U
_
O
U
O
Z
U)
cB
Z
O
Z
(D
m
Z
.�
o-0
U
i
Cya
N
O
0
N
O
C/)
cya
U
p C
—
N Z3 (B
- -C:
c6
Y a
-
w o
N
� (B
L
(B U
cn�U
z-
co �U
O
cn
N
U
O
cn
W
N
^O
N
O
N
�
Q
r'
N
L
O
cu
N
cn
D
N
L
U
N
O
L
Q
CU
cn
O
cu
Q
0)
O
C:
L
Q
E
0
�+
D
L
D
O
cn
-0
cu
_0
cu
O
N
cu
cu
4--
E
>
0
0
cu
C
tbcn
j
O
CU
Q
o
-
E
W
m
o
0) -0 —f
cu cu
� O
N cn
N N
O
N �
N
oo E
� O
U �
Q
c�
Cl
N
H
cB
65

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
In Reply Refer To:
Consultation Code: 04EN2000-2021-SLI-0533
Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-01143
Project Name: White Hat
January 21, 2021
Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project
location or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
The species list generated pursuant to the information you provided identifies threatened,
endangered, proposed and candidate species, as well as proposed and final designated critical
habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and/or may be affected by
your proposed project. The species list fulfills the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of
species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Please feel free to
contact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to
federally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed critical
habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the
Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be
completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be
completed by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and
implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested
through the ECOS-IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list.
Section 7 of the Act requires that all federal agencies (or their designated non-federal
representative), in consultation with the Service, insure that any action federally authorized,
funded, or carried out by such agencies is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any
federally -listed endangered or threatened species. A biological assessment or evaluation may be
prepared to fulfill that requirement and in determining whether additional consultation with the
Service is necessary. In addition to the federally -protected species list, information on the
species' life histories and habitats and information on completing a biological assessment or

01/21/2021 Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-01143 2
evaluation and can be found on our web page at http://www.fws.gov/raleigh. Please check the
web site often for updated information or changes
If your project contains suitable habitat for any of the federally -listed species known to be
present within the county where your project occurs, the proposed action has the potential to
adversely affect those species. As such, we recommend that surveys be conducted to determine
the species' presence or absence within the project area. The use of North Carolina Natural
Heritage program data should not be substituted for actual field surveys.
If you determine that the proposed action may affect (i.e., likely to adversely affect or not likely
to adversely affect) a federally -protected species, you should notify this office with your
determination, the results of your surveys, survey methodologies, and an analysis of the effects
of the action on listed species, including consideration of direct, indirect, and cumulative effects,
before conducting any activities that might affect the species. If you determine that the proposed
action will have no effect (i.e., no beneficial or adverse, direct or indirect effect) on federally
listed species, then you are not required to contact our office for concurrence (unless an
Environmental Impact Statement is prepared). However, you should maintain a complete record
of the assessment, including steps leading to your determination of effect, the qualified personnel
conducting the assessment, habitat conditions, site photographs, and any other related articles.
Please be aware that bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668 et seq.), and projects affecting these species may require
development of an eagle conservation plan (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/
eagle_guidance.html). Additionally, wind energy projects should follow the wind energy
guidelines (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/) for minimizing impacts to migratory birds and
bats.
Guidance for minimizing impacts to migratory birds for projects including communications
towers (e.g., cellular, digital television, radio, and emergency broadcast) can be found at: http://
www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdlssues/Hazards/towers/towers.htm; http://
www.towerkill.com; and http://www.fws.gov/migratoDLbirds/CurrentBirdlssues/Hazards/
towers/comtow.html.
Not all Threatened and Endangered Species that occur in North Carolina are subject to section 7
consultation with the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service. Atlantic and shortnose sturgeon, sea
turtles,when in the water, and certain marine mammals are under purview of the National Marine
Fisheries Service. If your project occurs in marine, estuarine, or coastal river systems you should
also contact the National Marine Fisheries Service, http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/
We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages
Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project
planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Tracking Number in
the header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project
that you submit to our office. If you have any questions or comments, please contact John Ellis
of this office atjohn—[e-mail].

01/21/2021 Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-01143
Attachment(s):
• Official Species List

01/21/2021 Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-01143
Official Species List
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the
requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether
any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed
action".
This species list is provided by:
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
[phone]

01/21/2021 Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-01143 2
Project Summary
Consultation Code: 04EN2000-2021-SLI-0533
Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-01143
Project Name: White Hat
Project Type: ** OTHER **
Project Description: Stream and Wetland Mitigation project
Project Location:
Approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:
www. google.com/maps/(a)36.175378300000006,-76.32661439911095,14z
New Hope
• a C
Counties: Perquimans County, North Carolina

01/21/2021 Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-01143 3
Endangered Species Act Species
There is a total of 2 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.
Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include
species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species
list because a project could affect downstream species.
IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA
Fisheriesi, as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the
Department of Commerce.
See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially
within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office
if you have questions.
1. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an
office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of
Commerce.
Mammals
NAME STATUS
Northern Long-eared Bat Myotis septentrionalis Threatened
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9045
�_qw@_P
NAME STATUS
Red Knot Calidris canutus rufa Threatened
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1864
Critical habitats
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S
JURISDICTION.

MEN Roy Cooper. Governor
•s ; NC DEPARTMENT OF Susi Hamilton, Secretary
■■ ■■ NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
013
0 Walter Clark, director, Land and Water Stewardship
NCNHDE-13395
November 25. 2020
Matthew DeAngelo
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC
302 Jefferson Street
Raleigh, NC 27607
RE: White Hat (RESTART)
Dear Matthew DeAngelo:
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide
information about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
Based on the project area mapped with your request, a query of the NCNHP database indicates that
there are no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, and/or
conservation/managed areas within the proposed project boundary. Please note that although there
may be no documentation of natural heritage elements within the project boundary, it does not
imply or confirm their absence; the area may not have been surveyed. The results of this query
should not be substituted for field surveys where suitable habitat exists. In the event that rare
species are found within the project area, please contact the NCNHP so that we may update our
records.
The attached `Potential Occurrences' table summarizes rare species and natural communities that
have been documented within a one -mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these
records suggests that these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area
if suitable habitat exists. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed areas within a one -mile
radius of the project area, if any, are also included in this report.
If a Federally -listed species is found within the project area or is indicated within a one -mile radius of
the project area, the NCNHP recommends contacting the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for
guidance. Contact information for USFWS offices in North Carolina is found here:
httr)s://www.fws.gov/offices/Directory/ListOffices.cfm?statecode=37.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation
planning, project review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria
for regulatory decisions. Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published
without prior written notification to the NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information
source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP data may not be redistributed without permission.
The NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional correspondence if a
Dedicated Nature Preserve, Registered Heritage Area, Clean Water Management Trust Fund
easement, or Federally -listed species are documented near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance,
please contact Rodney A. Butler at rod ney.butlerCo�ncdcr.aov or 919-707-8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
DEPAR7HEN7 OF NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
121 W. JONES STREET. RALEIGH. NC 27603 • 1691 MAIL SERVICE CENTER. RALEIGH. NC 27609
OFC 919.707.9120 • FAX [phone]

■
1
CO
/
\
CO
<So
e
\/\ƒ
co
/
-0 co
co E z
./ >z
co 0
4
%®
\
z
/
/
\
E
»
\
CO
/
2
z
CO CO 3
s 2
nE v
2 / 3
3
CO
3 / \ e %
CO CO.g % n
g / / 2 .
s ƒ
7
Al
/
\ E
/ co\ (
y E
E
}
O
e
.k
3 \
\ m
\ u
t
E
/
/
\
/
�y
/
�\
0 _
/\
\ CO
x a
CO
/
\
E
\
3
CO
\
/
a
CC)
CO
6
\
\
>
CO
4
\
�
\
\
cn
./
CO
E
§
/
CO
.k
3
\
\
\
E
/
/
\
ƒ
\
\
CO
\
z
§
/

v )
NW
r
W
LO
M
M
r
i
W
0
z
U
Z
M �;•
�l N19 -19
�.t
O Ghee
y Oe �JonAvilk Ra
9�� Z
2
W
M
O
M
N
a

Matthew Deanaelo
From: Raleigh, FW4 <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2021 1:23 PM
To: Matthew Deangelo
Subject: Automatic reply: [EXTERNAL] Online Project Review Certification Letter - White Hat Mitigation Project
(SAW-2018-02027)
Thank you for submitting your online project package. We will review your package within 30 days of
receipt. If you have submitted an online project review request letter, expect our response within 30
days. If you have submitted an online project review certification letter, you will typically not receive a
response from us since the certification letter is our official response. However, if we have additional
questions or we do not concur with your determinations, we will contact you during the review period.