20131305 Ver 1_Mitigation Plans_20131218

r�
o Astem
ao ement
PROGRAM
MEMORANDUM
To: Eric Kulz, NC DWR
From: Jeff Schaffer, NCEEP Eastern Regional Supervisor
Cc: Perry Sugg, EEP Project Manager U \J
Subject: Draft Final Mitigation Plan
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
EEP Project # 95716 W pnda wrqu QlM1m
rnyaer Bran
Cape Fear 03030002 — Guilford County
Date: December 17, 2013
Enclosed for your review are two hardcopies of the Draft Final Mitigation Plan for the Agony
Acres mitigation site in Guilford County. This document was posted on the EEP Portal on
December 16, 2013. Please forward to the appropriate DWR Field Representative for their
review.
Thank you.
RistoriKg... F ... PYottectr;K� Our lta.t� Y", EN
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699 -1652 / 919- 707 -8976 / http: / /portal.ncdenr.org /web /eep

DRAFT MITIGATION PLAN
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Guilford County, NC
DENR Contract No. 004949
EEP ID No. 95716
Cape Fear River Basin
HUC 03030002
C J'10 L
`,_ A
Prepared for:
r
eiii
�' 11 Irll It
'CIIIC
rvoocwM
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1652
December 12, 2013

DRAFT MITIGATION PLAN
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Guilford County, NC
DENR Contract No. 004949
EEP ID No. 95716
Cape Fear River Basin
HUC 03030002
Prepared for:
y SteI11
f *q4 }f,RAh+
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1652
Prepared by:
WILD LAND S
ENGINEERING
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
5605 Chapel Hill Road, Suite 122
Raleigh, NC 27609
Phone — 919 - 851 -9986
John Hutton
jhutton @wildlandseng.com
December 12, 2013
� iEC INI D
DEC ' 3 'N13
� i`M
NBC it -- -;SAM
�h1HAN�Eiv��,�

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Wildlands Engineering, Inc (Wildlands) is completing a full delivery project at the Agony Acres
Mitigation Site (Site) for the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) to restore,
enhance, and preserve a total of 9,081 linear feet (LF) of perennial and intermittent stream in
Guilford County, NC The Site is proposed to generate 6,471 Stream Mitigation Units (SMUs) and
3 0 Buffer Mitigation Units (BMUs) This site is located in the Reedy Fork Watershed within Cape
Fear River Basin Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03030002 (Cape Fear 02) The streams proposed
for restoration and enhancement are all tributaries to Reedy Fork and are referred to herein as
UT1, UT1A, UT16, and UT2 The site also includes 3 0 acres of riparian buffer restoration along
Reedy Fork and UT1
The Site is located within the Jordan Lake Water Supply Watershed which has been designated a
Nutrient Sensitive Water The Site's watershed is within Cape Fear local watershed HUC
03030002020070, which was not identified as a Cape Fear 02 Targeted Local Watershed (TLW)
in NCEEP's 2009 Cape Fear River Basin Restoration Priority (RBRP) plan, however, this local
watershed was later designated as a Targeted Resource Area (TRA) in the 2011 Request for
Proposals (RFP) in the Cape Fear 02 The Agony Acres Mitigation Site fully supports the
Cataloging Unit (CU) -wide functional objectives stated in the 2011 RFP to reduce and control
nutrient inputs, reduce and control sediment inputs, and protect and augment Significant
Natural Heritage Areas in the Cape Fear 02 River Basin The Project will contribute to meeting
the CU -wide Functional Improvement Objectives by establishing the following project goals
• Reduce sediment inputs by removing cattle from streams and restoring degraded and
eroding stream channels,
• Return a network of streams to a stable form that is capable of supporting biological
functions,
• Reduce fecal coliform, nitrogen, and phosphorous inputs through removing cattle from
streams and establishing and augmenting a forested riparian corridor,
• Protect existing high quality streams and forested buffers, and
• Improve and protect hydrologic inputs to the adjacent Reedy Fork Aquatic Habitat
Significant Natural Heritage Area
The proposed project will help meet the goals for the watershed outlined in the RBRP and
provide numerous ecological benefits within the Cape Fear River Basin While many of these
benefits are limited to the Agony Acres project area, others, such as pollutant removal, reduced
sediment loading, and improved aquatic and terrestrial habitat, have farther - reaching effects
This mitigation plan has been written in conformance with the requirements of the following
• Federal rule for compensatory mitigation project sites as described in the Federal
Register Title 33 Navigation and Navigable Waters Volume 3 Chapter 2 Section § 332 8
paragraphs (c)(2) through (c)(14)
• NCDENR Ecosystem Enhancement Program In -Lieu Fee Instrument signed and dated July
28, 2010
These documents govern EEP operations and procedures for the delivery of compensatory
mitigation
W
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Draft Mitigation Plan
Page i

- TABLE OF CONTENTS
10
Restoration Project Goals and Objectives
1
20
Project Site Location and Selection
2
21 Directions to Project Site
2
22 Site Selection and Project Components
2
30
Site Protection Instrument
3
40
Baseline Information — Project Site and Watershed Summary
3
41 Watershed Historical Land Use and Development Trends
4
42 Watershed Assessment
4
43 Physiography, Geology, and Soils
5
44 Valley Classification
6
45 Surface Water Classification and Water Quality
7
50
Baseline Information — Reach Summary
8
51 Existing Stream and Vegetation Condition
8
52 Stream Geomorphology
9
53 Channel Stability Assessment
15
54 Design Discharge Development
17
60
Baseline Information - Regulatory Considerations
20
61 401/404
20
62 Endangered and Threatened Species
20
63 Cultural Resources
22
64 FEMA Floodplain Compliance and Hydrologic Trespass
22
65 Essential Fisheries Habitat
22
66 Utilities and Site Access
22
70
Reference Sites
23
71 Reference Streams
23
80
Determination of Credits
25
90
Credit Release Schedule
27
91 Initial Allocation of Released Credits
28
92 Subsequent Credit Releases
28
100
Project Site Mitigation Plan
29
101 Designed Channel Classification
29
102 Target Buffer Communities
33
103 Stream Project and Design Justification
33
104 Sediment Transport Analysis
34
105 Project Implementation Summary
36
110
Maintenance Plan
37
120
Performance Standards
38
121 Streams
38
12 2 Vegetation
39
12 3 Visual Assessments
39
130
Monitoring Plan
39
131 Streams
41
13 2 Vegetation
42
13 3 Visual Assessments
43
140
Long -Term Management Plan
43
150
Adaptive Management Plan
43
160
Financial Assurances
44
170
References
45
Y
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Draft Mitigation Plan Page ii

TABLES
Table 1 Site Protection Instrument
3
Table 2 Project and Watershed Information
4
Table 3 Floodplain Soil Types and Descriptions
6
Table 4 Reach Summary Information
8
Table 5a Existing Stream Conditions
12
Table 5b Existing Stream Conditions
14
Table 6a Existing Conditions Channel Stability Assessment Results- UT1
16
Table 6b Existing Conditions Channel Stability Assessment Results- UT1A, UT16, UT2
17
Table 7 Design Discharge Analysis Summary
19
Table 8 Regulatory Considerations
20
Table 9 Listed Threatened and Endangered Species in Guilford County, NC
21
Table 10 Summary of Reference Reach Geomorphic Parameters
24
Table 11 Determination of Credits
26
Table 12 Credit Release Schedule — Stream Credits
28
Table 13a Design Morphologic Parameters
30
Table 13b Design Morphologic Parameters
31
Table 14 Existing Dimensional Shear Stress and Sediment Transport Analysis
35
Table 15 Proposed Dimensional Shear Stress and Sediment Transport Analysis
35
Table 16 Maintenance Plan
37
Table 17a Monitoring Requirements
40
Table 17b Monitoring Requirements (Enhancement II, Preservation Reaches and Buffer
Restoration Area)
41
FIGURES
Figure 1
Vicinity Map
Figure 2
Site Map
Figure 3
Watershed Map
Figure 4
USGS Topographic Map
Figure 5
Soils Map
Figure 6
Hydrologic Features Map
Figure 7
NC Piedmont Regional Curves with Project Data Overlay
Figure 8
FEMA Map
Figure 9
Reference Site Vicinity Map
Figure 10
Stream Design
Figure 11
Monitoring Vegetation Plot Location
APPENDICES
Appendix 1
Project Site Photographs
Appendix 2
Historic Aerial Photographs
Appendix 3
Project Site USACE Routine Wetland Determination and NCWAM Data Forms
Appendix 4
Project Site NCDWR Stream Classification Forms
Appendix 5
Resource Agency Correspondence
Appendix 6
Existing Morphologic Survey Data
Appendix 7
Floodplain Checklist and Recorded Easements
WAgony Acres Mitigation Site
Draft Mitigation Plan
Page ni
r

1.0 Restoration Project Goals and Objectives
The Agony Acres Mitigation Site (Site) is located in the Reedy Fork Watershed within the Jordan Lake
Water Supply Watershed which has been designated a Nutrient Sensitive Water The project streams
flow directly into Reedy Fork which flows into the Haw River and eventually into the Jordan Lake
Reservoir The Site's watershed is within Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03030002020070 which was not
identified as a Cape Fear 02 Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) in NCEEP's 2009 Cape Fear River Basin
Restoration Priority (RBRP) plan, however, this HUC was later designated as a Targeted Resource Area
(TRA) in the 2011 Request for Proposals (RFP) in the Cape Fear 02 The Agony Acres site connects to
Reedy Fork and three separate but connected Significant Natural Heritage areas Reedy Fork Aquatic
Habitat, Reedy Fork Slopes at NC 61, and Altamahaw Alluvial Forest are all listed on the NC Natural
Heritage GIS database immediately adjacent to the project There are also records for several state
threatened, special concern, and significantly rare mussel species in Reedy Fork (Appendix 5)
NCEEP completed a Local Watershed Plan (LWP) in 2008 on the HUC immediately downstream which
begins at the confluence of Reedy Fork and the Haw River and includes Travis and Tickle Creeks The
Site is located less than one mile outside of the LWP area and has a very similar land use pattern The
2008 Little Alamance, Travis, and Tickle Creeks LWP identified nutrient inputs from agriculture and
stream bank erosion in altered reaches as major stressors within this TLW The Site was identified as a
stream and buffer restoration and cattle exclusion opportunity to improve water quality and buffers
within the TRA Restoration goals for the downstream LWP area are defined in the 2008 Little
Alamance, Travis, and Tickle Creeks LWP The primary goals for the agricultural regions of the LWP area
are to promote nutrient and sediment reduction by restoring streams and riparian buffers and excluding
livestock The Cape Fear 02 2011 RFP established three CU -wide Functional Improvement Objectives as
t listed below
• To reduce and control sediment inputs,
• To reduce and control nutrient inputs, and
• To protect and augment Significant Natural Heritage Areas
The Agony Acres Mitigation Project will contribute to meeting the CU -wide Functional Improvement
Objectives described above by establishing the following project goals
• Reduce sediment inputs by removing cattle from streams and restoring degraded and eroding
stream channels,
• Return a network of streams to a stable form that is capable of supporting biological functions
important to sensitive species within and adjacent to the project site,
• Reduce fecal coliform, nitrogen, and phosphorous inputs through removing cattle from streams
and establishing and augmenting a forested riparian corridor,
• Protect existing high quality streams and forested buffers that provide habitat important to
sensitive species within and adjacent to the project site,
• Improve and protect hydrologic inputs to the adjacent Reedy Fork Aquatic Habitat Significant
Natural Heritage Area, and
• Improve and protect hydrologic inputs to Reedy Fork, which is listed as impaired on the 2012 NC
303(d) list for impaired aquatic life and for elevated fecal coliform levels
The project goals will be addressed through the following project objectives
• On -site nutrient inputs will be decreased by removing cattle from streams, re- establishing
floodplain connectivity, and filtering on -site runoff through buffer zones Off -site nutrient input
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 1

will be absorbed on -site by filtering flood flows through restored floodplain areas, where flood
flow will spread through native vegetation Vegetation is expected to uptake excess nutrients
• Stream bank erosion which contributes sediment load to the creeks will be greatly reduced, if
not eliminated, in the project area Eroding stream banks will be stabilized using bioengineering,
natural channel design techniques, and grading to reduce bank angles and bank height Storm
flow containing grit and fine sediment will be filtered through restored floodplain areas, where
flow will spread through native vegetation Spreading flood flows will also reduce velocity and
allow sediment to settle out Sediment transport capacity of restored reaches will be improved
so that capacity balances more closely to load Sediment load reduction will be monitored
through assessing bank stability with cross section and profile surveys and visual assessment
through photo documentation which serves as an accepted surrogate for direct turbidity
measurements
• Restored riffle /pool sequences will promote aeration of water and create deep water zones,
helping to lower water temperature Establishment and maintenance of riparian buffers will
create long -term shading of the channel flow to minimize thermal heating Lower water
temperatures will help maintain dissolved oxygen concentrations
• In- stream structures will be constructed to improve habitat diversity and trap detritus Wood
habitat structures will be included in the stream as part of the restoration design Such
structures may include log drops and rock structures that incorporate woody debris
• Adjacent buffer and riparian habitats will be restored with native vegetation as part of the
project Native vegetation will provide cover and food for terrestrial creatures Native plant
species will be planted and invasive species will be treated Eroding and unstable areas will also
be stabilized with vegetation as part of this project
• The restored land will be protected in perpetuity through a conservation easement
2.0 Project Site Location and Selection
21 Directions to Project Site
The Site is located in northeastern Guilford County, north of Gibsonville (Figure 1) From Gibsonville
take NC 61 north 5 5 miles Turn right on Sockwell Road Travel 14 miles The project site is located
north of Sockwell Road and is bound on the north by Reedy Fork
22 Site Selection and Project Components
The Site has been selected to provide stream mitigation units (SMUs) and buffer mitigation units
(BMUs) in the Cape Fear Basin The site was selected based on the current degraded condition of
the onsite streams as described in Section 5 0 and the potential for functional restoration as
described in Section 10 and 10 0 Credit determinations are presented in Section 8 0
The streams proposed for restoration, enhancement, and preservation include four unnamed
tributaries to Reedy Fork, henceforth referred to as UT1, UT1A, UT16, and UT2 (Figure 2) UT1 and
UT1A flow in a generally northward direction into Reedy Fork The two streams form a Y
configuration between Sockwell Road and Reedy Fork UT1B flows into UT1 from the west UT2
flows in a northward direction and enters Reedy Fork Creek immediately east of UT1
During the pre - restoration assessment, UT1 was divided into 5 reaches based on differences in
existing conditions UT1 Reach 1, UT1 Reach 2, UT1 Reach 3, UT1 Reach 4, and UT1 Reach 5 UT1A
was divided into 4 reaches based on differences in existing conditions UT1A Reach 1, UT1A Reach 2,
UT1A Reach 3, and UT1A Reach 4 UT113 and UT2 are presented as single reaches Photographs of
the project site are included in Appendix 1
W Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 2

i
3.0 Site Protection Instrument
The land required for construction, management, and stewardship of the mitigation project includes
portions of the parcels listed in Table 1 A copy of the land protection instrument is included in Appendix
7 Figure 2 depicts the recorded conservation easement areas
Table 1. Site Protection Instrument
EEP Mitigation Plan Tem
late
��
�
- -
peed Book
'��f
�[`
' � 1
SiteaProtec-tion
Landowner
PIN
County
and Page
El
Instrument
Number
David F Teague
8839749850
Guilford
Conservation
7558/904
0 11
8839858776
Easement
Ellen T Miller
8838947968
Guilford
Conservation
7558/927
1572
8838935500
Easement
George Y Teague
8838744721
Guilford
Conservation
7558/853
929
Easement
Holy Cow Farms, LLC
8838835816
Guilford
Conservation
7558/828
566
Easement
All site protection instruments require 60 -day advance notification to the U S Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) and the State prior to any action to void, amend, or modify the document No such action shall
take place unless approved by the State
4.0 Baseline Information — Project Site and Watershed Summary
Table 2 presents the project information and baseline watershed information The watershed areas
were delineated on the USGS 7 5- minute topographic quadrangles
W Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan Page 3

Table 2. Project and Watershed Information
Aaonv Acres Mitiaation Site
-Project �Gounty
Guilford County
Project Area (acres)
3078
aP oject Coo�dmates
-
36° 10' 40" N 79° 33' 02" W
'Physiog aphic,Region
-
Carolina Slate Belt of the Piedmont Physiographic Province
XJ.s
A _oregion'
Piedmont
RiverBasm
Cape Fear River
USGSmHU0(8 digit, k,'10- igit)
- -_
03030002, 03030002020070
_ _gym
_NCDWR Sub -basin
03 -06 -02
UT1
UT1A
Reaches
UTiB
UT2
(Reaches 1 -5)
(Reaches 1 -4)
Drainage Area (acres)
90-358
77-102
64
58
°Watershed Land Use
- Managed "Herbaceous Cover
59%
65%
98%
71%
'Mixed Upland Hardwoods
30%
32%
0%
29%
Cultivated
7%
2%
2%
0%
Southern Yellow Pine
3%
1%
0%
<1%
Low Intensity Development
1%
<1%
0%
0%
41 Watershed Historical Land Use and Development Trends
Much of the Agony Acres watershed and the project site were cleared for agricultural use at some
point prior to 1969 as is typical in the region, although no information exists to verify when the
clearing was completed Draining of wetlands and channelization or relocation of streams were
common practices during such land conversion activities Historic aerial photographs obtained from
Environmental Data Resources, Inc from 1969 and 1982 (Appendix 2) were compared to a series of
aerial photographs from 1993 to 2010 available in Google Earth The 1969 aerial photograph shows
that all fields currently in agricultural production and cattle pasture were cleared and converted
prior to that time There is remarkably little change in the location and extents of forested and
agricultural areas between 1969 and 2010
42 Watershed Assessment
The watershed area for the project streams (Figure 3) was delineated using a combination of USGS
7 5- minute topographic quadrangles, site specific topographic survey, and available GIS data The
site is characterized by gently rolling, well rounded hills with well - defined valleys as shown in Figure
4
On April 3, 2013, Wildlands conducted a watershed reconnaissance to verify current land uses
observed from the aerial photography and to identify potential stressors Windshield and on -foot
reconnaissance of the Agony Acres watershed confirmed that there has been little or no change in
the overall location and extents of forested and agricultural land use since at least as far back as
1969 The forested land use observed consists primarily of semi-mature hardwood canopies It does
appear that there were select and sporadic timbering activities over the years given that most of the
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 4

canopy trees appeared to be between 25 and 100 years old based on height and spread The
primary agricultural land use observed is livestock grazing operations, with a smaller percentage of
row crops and pasture
The channel assessment within the project area did not identify indicators of high sediment supply
on any reach which is supported by the watershed assessment Approximately 70% of the
contributing drainage area for each project reach is in agricultural production however the majority
of this area consists of pasture for cattle grazing This type of land use tends to produce significant
fine sediment from bank erosion however it produces much lower rates of overland fine sediment
than cultivated land The project site captures over 90% of the channel length for each of the
mapped streams meaning there is very little channel length upstream of the project that has the
potential to produce sediment supply for cattle impacts In addition, online farm ponds upstream of
the project reaches capture the majority of fine sediment delivered to that point
The watershed assessment supports the conclusion that the overall watershed hydrology and
sediment regime have remained essentially the same for the last half of a century and no recent
watershed stressors are affecting the geomorphic stability of the project reaches On -going
agricultural practices within the watershed may be contributing a portion of the fine sediment
deposition observed in sections of the streams on the Site However, project site local stressors
including lack of riparian buffers and livestock access are mostly responsible for the current
degraded conditions of the streams
43 Physiography, Geology, and Soils
The Site is located in the Carolina Slate Belt of the Piedmont Physiographic Province The Piedmont
Province is characterized by gently rolling, well- rounded hills with long low ridges, with elevations
ranging anywhere from 300 to 1500 feet above sea level The Carolina Slate Belt consists of heated
and deformed volcanic and sedimentary rocks Approximately 550 to 650 million years ago, this
region was the site of a series of oceanic volcanic islands The belt is known for its numerous
abandoned gold mines and prospects Specifically, the proposed restoration site is located in the
CZfv subregion within the Carolina Slate Belt The CZfv sub region is classified as felsic metavolcanic
rock These rock types are described as metamorphosed dacitic to rhyolitic flows and tuffs
interbedded with mafic and intermediate metavolcanic rock, meta- argillite and metamudstone
The floodplain areas of the proposed project are mapped by the Guilford County Soil Survey Soils in
the project area floodplain are primarily mapped as Cecil sandy loam, Congaree loam, Coronaca clay
loam, Enon fine sandy loam, Enon clay loam, Madison clay loam, Mecklenburg sandy clay loam, and
Wehadkee silt loam These soils are described below in Table 3 A soils map is provided in Figure 5
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 5

Table 3. Floodplain Soil Types and Descriptions
FFP Mitiantion Plan Temnlate
Soil Name
Location
Hydric
Classification
Description
Well drained soils typically found in upland and
Cecil sandy loam, 10
UT2 valley walls
Not Hydric
interfluves Cecil soils are well drained with
to 15% slopes
moderately high to high permeability This soil unit is
neither flooded nor ponded
Congaree soils are found in valleys and floodplains
Reedy Fork
They are moderately well drained with moderately
Congaree loam
floodplain
2133
high permeability This soil unit is frequently flooded
but typically not ponded
This soil unit is found in the uplands and hillslopes on
Upland terraces
ridges They are well - drained with a moderately high
Coronaca clay loam
between UT1
Not Hydric
to high permeability This soil unit is neither flooded
and Reedy Fork
norponded
Enon fine sandy
These well drained soils are found on uplands Shrink -
loam,
UT1 and UT1A
2133
swell potential is moderate The soil is neither flooded
6 to 10% slopes,
valley walls
nor ponded
10 to 15% slopes
clay loam,
UT1 and UT1A
These well drained soils are found on uplands and
2133
hillslopes on ridges They are moderately eroded with
10 t
10 to 15% slopes
valley walls
well drained The soil is neither flooded nor ponded
loam,
Reed Fork
Y
Madison soils are found on uplands and hillslopes on
15 to 2 % slopes
15 to 25 %slopes
valley walls
Not Hydric
ridges They are moderately eroded and well drained
This soil type is neither flooded nor ponded
Mecklenburg sandy
UT1 and UT2
These soils are well drained and generally found on
clay loam,
valley walls and
Not Hydric
hillslopes on ridges They typically have a moderately
6 to 10% slopes
upland terraces
low or moderately high permeability The soil is
neither flooded nor ponded
UT1 and
This soil unit is found in the valleys and depressions on
Wehadkee loam
downstream
2133,4
floodplains They are poorly drained with a
UT1A floodplains
moderately high to high permeability This soil unit is
frequently flooded but typically not ponded
Source Guilford County Soil Survey, USDA -NRCS, http / /efotg nres usda gov
44 Valley Classification
The stream valleys within the Site are characterized by relatively narrow floodplains with valley side
slopes ranging from 5% — 15% and valley slopes ranging from 13% — 3 9% It should be noted that
the surrounding fluvial and morphological landforms do not fit neatly into any of the Rosgen (1996)
valley type classification descriptions which are mostly based on landforms of the Western and
Central United States However, the Agony Acres valleys most closely resemble Valley Type IV, which
are steeper, moderately confined valleys with narrow valley bottoms containing the stream and an
associated floodplain While Valley Type IV is described in publication as bedrock controlled gorges
and canyons, personal communication with the author had indicated that bedrock controlled
confined valleys in the Mid - Atlantic and Southeast piedmont are accurately described as Valley Type
IV ( Rosgen, 2006 and 2007)
WAgony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 6

- , 45 Surface Water Classification and Water Quality
On January 28 and 29, 2013, Wildlands investigated and assessed on -site Jurisdictional Waters of the
United States using the USACE Routine On -Site Determination Method This method is defined in
the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual and subsequent Eastern Mountain and
Piedmont Regional Supplement Potential Jurisdictional wetland areas and typical upland areas were
classified using the USACE Routine Wetland Determination Data Form Jurisdictional wetland areas
were also assessed using the North Carolina Wetland Assessment Method (NCWAM) Stream
classifications were based on the NCDWR Stream Identification Form and the USACE Stream Quality
Assessment Worksheet All USACE and NCWAM wetland forms are included in Appendix 3 NCDWR
and USACE stream forms are located in Appendix 4
The results of the on -site field investigation indicate there are four Jurisdictional stream channels
within the project area, UT1, UT1A, UT16, and UT2, which are unnamed tributaries to Reedy Fork
Tributaries UT1, UT1A, and UT2 are classified as perennial channels UT113 is classified as an
intermittent stream channel The USACE and NCDWR conducted a site walk on December 11, 2012
The USACE issued a Jurisdictional verification (Action ID 2012 - 01909) on March 26, 2013, which is
included in Appendix 3
The four tributaries to Reedy Fork on the Site are located within the NCDWR subbasin 03 -06 -02 of
the Cape Fear River Basin The NCDWR assigns best usage classifications to State Waters that reflect
water quality conditions and potential resource usage None of the four tributaries are classified by
NCDWR and therefore are required to meet standards for Class C waters Class C waters are
protected for secondary recreation, fishing, and aquatic life Reedy Fork (NCDWR Index No 16 -11-
(9)) is classified as Water Supply V — Upstream (WS -V) and Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW) by
r, NCDWR Class WS -V waters are protected as water supplies and typically flow into other water
bodies that are directly used as sources for drinking, culinary or food processing purposes NSW
classification represents water bodies that require nutrient management plans to reduce water
quality impacts due to excessive nitrogen and phosphorus levels and algal populations
There are ten Jurisdictional wetland areas, designated as Wetlands A through K, located within the
proposed project area (Figure 6) The majority of on -site wetlands were classified as headwater
forest using the NCWAM classification key and the evaluator's best professional Judgment
Wetlands A — F and K fall under this classification These wetlands occur in the floodplains of the
perennial tributaries and adjacent riparian corridors These features exhibited low chroma soils,
water - stained leaves, drainage patterns, pockets of shallow inundation, and saturation in the upper
12 inches of the soil profile Dominant vegetation in these wetlands includes black willow (Salix
nigra), green ash (Froxinus pennsylvanica), red maple (Acer rubrum), sweetgum (Liquidombar
styraaflua), elderberry (Sambucus conodensis), soft stem rush (Juncus effusus), stilt grass
(Microstegium vimineum), and strawcolored flatsedge (Cyperus stngosus) These wetlands are
located within Enon and Wehadkee soils Enon soils are very deep, well - drained soil with low
permeability The Wehadkee is a deep, poorly - drained soil with moderate permeability Wetland
Determination Data Forms representative of Wetlands A — F and Wetland K (DP1 — DP5 and DPB,
respectively) are included in Appendix 3
Wetlands G, H, and J were classified as seeps using the NCWAM classification key These features
occur on side slopes that drain to UT1 between Sockwell Road and UT16 The wetlands exhibited
drainage patterns, low chroma soils, and saturation in the upper 12 inches of the soil profile
Common hydrophytic vegetation box elder (Acer negundo), river birch, spicebush (Lindera benzoin),
soft stem rush, and stilt grass These wetlands are located within Enon and Wehadkee soils (Figure
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 7

6) Wetland Determination Data Forms representative of Wetlands G, H, and J (DP7 and DP8) are
included in Appendix 3
5.0 Baseline Information — Reach Summary
Existing conditions assessments were conducted by Wlldlands in April 2013 The reach designations for
each tributary and the surveyed cross sections are shown in Figure 6 Existing geomorphic survey data is
included in Appendix 6 Table 4 presents the reach summary information
Table 4. Reach Summary Information
Aaonv Acres Mitiaation Site
51 Existing Stream and Vegetation Condition
The Site is an active cattle farm with a mix of forest and fields used for grazing and exhibits the same
land use patterns as shown in the 1969 aerial photo Much of the riparian buffers have been
maintained to narrow corridors to maximize agricultural and pasture land A large portion of the
Site is currently in use as active cattle pasture which have access to nearly all of the four tributaries
As a result, the stream banks show varying degradation across the site The rest of the Site is
currently farmed as row crops
The riparian vegetation along the upper third of UT1 is a sparse hardwood buffer consisting of tulip
popla (L►r►odendron tul►p►fera), red cedar (Jun►perus v►rg►n►ana), sweet gum (L►qu►dambar
styrac►flua), black willow (Sal►x n►gra), water oak (Quercus n►gra), American holly (Ilex opaca), willow
oak (Quercus phellos), Japanese honeysuckle (Lon►cera Japonica), and multiflora rose (Rosa
multiflora) The average riparian buffer width is approximately 100 feet on the left bank and 10 -20
feet on the right bank Much of the buffer has been removed along UT1 upstream of its confluence
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 8
F �
UTl Upper
UT1 Lower.
UT 1A
UTiB'
UT2 ,
Existing Length (LF)
4,331
1,420
2,015
243
1,028
Valley Type
VII
VIII(b)
VII
VII
VII
Valley Slope (feet/ foot)
0 016
0 013
0 027
0 022
0 024
Drainage Area (acres)
228
358
103
61
61
Drainage Area (square miles)
036
056
016
010
009
NCDWR stream ID score
425
465
41
2925
3225
Perennial or Intermittent
P
P
P
I
P
NCDWR Classification
WS -V
WS -V
WS -V
WS -V
WS -V
Rosgen Classification of Pre - Project Reach
E4
F4
G4, B /C3
G4
G4
Simon Evolutionary Stage
1,111
III, IV
1,11/111
II /III
II /III
FEMA classification
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
51 Existing Stream and Vegetation Condition
The Site is an active cattle farm with a mix of forest and fields used for grazing and exhibits the same
land use patterns as shown in the 1969 aerial photo Much of the riparian buffers have been
maintained to narrow corridors to maximize agricultural and pasture land A large portion of the
Site is currently in use as active cattle pasture which have access to nearly all of the four tributaries
As a result, the stream banks show varying degradation across the site The rest of the Site is
currently farmed as row crops
The riparian vegetation along the upper third of UT1 is a sparse hardwood buffer consisting of tulip
popla (L►r►odendron tul►p►fera), red cedar (Jun►perus v►rg►n►ana), sweet gum (L►qu►dambar
styrac►flua), black willow (Sal►x n►gra), water oak (Quercus n►gra), American holly (Ilex opaca), willow
oak (Quercus phellos), Japanese honeysuckle (Lon►cera Japonica), and multiflora rose (Rosa
multiflora) The average riparian buffer width is approximately 100 feet on the left bank and 10 -20
feet on the right bank Much of the buffer has been removed along UT1 upstream of its confluence
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 8
F �

with UT1B Pasture grasses are the dominate vegetation in this area Canopy and understory tree
species are present mainly along the top of bank Below UT1B, UT1 has a forested buffer with an
average width of approximately 100 feet on both banks with vegetation similar to the upper portion
of UT1 The remainder of UT1 has a buffer ranging from 0 to 75 feet wide The buffer and channel
have been heavily impacted by cattle grazing in the area
UT1A has very little riparian buffer in the upper portion near Sockwell Rd Pasture grasses are the
dominant vegetation Trees are sparsely scattered and mainly confined to the area near top of
bank The middle portion of UT1A has an intact forested buffer of overall 100 feet on both banks
Vegetation includes tulip poplar, red cedar, sweet gum, black willow, water oak, American holly,
willow oak, Japanese honeysuckle and multiflora rose The lower portion of UT1A has been
impacted by clearing and grazing The riparian buffer is approximately 10 feet wide and consists of
tulip poplar, sweet gum, black willow, Japanese honeysuckle, and multiflora rose
UT16 has a riparian buffer ranging from 0 to 5 feet wide Buffer vegetation consists of red cedar,
sweet gum, black willow, American holly, Japanese honeysuckle, and multiflora rose
UT2 has a partially intact buffer consisting of sweet gum, hickory (Carya spp ), willow oak, and water
oak The buffer along the left bank averages 15 feet wide, while the right bank buffer averages 50
feet wide
52 Stream Geomorphology
The streams run through relatively narrow, bedrock controlled valleys and exhibit low sinuosity and,
with the exception of portions of UT1 and UT1A, are all clearly degraded by livestock access The
streams generally lack well defined bed features such as riffle /pool sequences and most have low
width to depth ratios (<10) It does not appear that the streams have been relocated significantly
from the center of their valleys with the exception of UT2 which has clearly been relocated to the
eastern edge of its historic valley
In the reaches proposed for restoration, the stream banks are unstable and many of the banks have
been heavily impacted by cattle access, therefore bankfull indicators were limited and difficult to
identify An estimate of bankfull stage was made for each reach based on potential field indicators
including top of bank, bench features below top of bank, and in some cases where no other features
were apparent, secondary features such as scour lines Wildlands conducted morphologic surveys
including cross sections and longitudinal profiles and classified the streams based on the Rosgen
(1994) classification system to the degree possible using these best estimates of bankfull stage
Existing geomorphic conditions for each reach included in the project are summarized below in
Tables 5a and 5b The reaches and surveyed cross sections are mapped on Figure 6 Pattern
measurements were approximated for the restoration reaches, with the exception of UT16 which
was relatively straight and did not have a defined meandering pattern with typical riffle -pool
sequences
521 UT1
UT1 Reach 1 begins at Sockwell Road and flows northward through a wooded corridor surrounded
by active cattle pasture The reach drains 0 14 square miles Cattle have free access to the stream,
though the wooded corridor acts as a natural barrier to portions of the channel Cattle access has
resulted in sporadic degraded stream banks and poor bed form Channel incision is moderate
throughout the reach, with measured bank height ratios of 13 and 15 However, there is notable
stable pattern evident with a sinuosity of 125 and bank stability is good where cattle are not
accessing the stream This reach can be described as Stage 1 /III of the Simon Channel Evolutionary
W Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 9

Model (CEM) (Simon, 1989) Overall, the channel is in moderate condition with cattle access being
the main source of degradation
UT1 Reach 2 begins approximately 1100 feet downstream of the road with a drainage area of 0 25
square miles This reach continues generally northward through a sparsely wooded corridor with
young trees and frequent invasive species ranging from 10 to 100 feet on either side of the channel
Cattle access and active channel incision have caused more notable degradation to the stream
including areas of bank instability with active slumping The channel is significantly more incised
with a measured bank height ratio of 2 3 and low entrenchment ratio Bed material is notably
smaller through this section of channel than what was sampled upstream or downstream of this
reach with a d50 of 3 5mm — very fine gravel Similar to Reach 1, this reach can also be described by
Stage 1 /III of the CEM with a greater portion of the stream exhibiting characteristics of Stage III
UT1 Reach 3 begins approximately 300 feet downstream of the confluence with UT1B as the reach
takes a sharp turn to the east This reach drains 0 3 square miles and is located in a heavily wooded
area of the site This reach is stable and exhibits insignificant signs of bank erosion with average
buffer widths of 100 feet on either side It is characterized by bank height ratios around 10 and the
highest sinuosity for the site at 135 Bedrock outcrops are common through this reach This reach
can be described by Stage I of the CEM
Approximately 1500 feet downstream of the sharp turn to the east, the stream passes through an
existing ford crossing beginning UT1 Reach 4 This reach has a drainage area of 0 36 square miles
and has been impacted by cattle Buffer widths are narrow through this section and primarily
consist of sparse hardwood trees and brush The stream is moderately incised through much of the
reach At the downstream end of this reach, little to no buffer exists, cattle have caused significant
bank sloughing to occur, and the stream widens considerably as it loins with UT1A This reach can
be described as Stage 1 /III of the CEM
Downstream of the confluence with UT1A, UT1 Reach 5 begins flowing generally north and east until
it ties into Ready Fork, draining 0 56 square miles This reach has been severely impacted by cattle
access with actively eroding stream banks due to cattle trampling and /or channel sources Cross -
sectional area increases considerably downstream of the confluence and banks are nearly vertical
Buffer widths vary non - existent to approximately 75 feet with some hardwood trees but little
understory or bank vegetation UT1 Reach 5 is the most significantly impacted by cattle access and
is best described by Stage III moving towards Stage IV of the CEM
522 UT1A
UT1A Reach 1 begins at Sockwell Road where it drops several feet in vertical grade from the road
culvert UT1A Reach 1 flows generally north draining 0 12 square miles This reach is moderately
incised with a bank height ratio of 16 There is little to no buffer along this reach and cattle have
access to the stream throughout Similar to UT1 Reach 2, this reach can also be described by Stage
1 /III of the CEM with a greater portion of the stream exhibiting characteristics of Stage III
UT1A Reach 2 begins approximately 800 feet downstream of Sockwell Road This reach is
moderately stable and has access to its floodplain Cattle have impacted the stream causing areas
of erosion and bank sloughing Bed material distribution is poor due to cattle access which limits
macroinvertebrate habitat availability This reach can be described as Stage 1 /III of the CEM
UT1A Reach 3 begins approximately 1100 feet downstream of the road and continues north and
slightly west This reach is very stable and steep with an average slope of 4 9% This reach has good
r
floodplain access throughout with bank height ratios of 10 The stream bed is dominated by cobble
W Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 10

and bedrock formations The buffer width spans over 100 feet on either side of the stream This
reach can be described as Stage I of the CEM
UT1A Reach 4 flows generally north and slightly west, with a drainage area of 0 16 square miles
This reach is moderately incised with vertical, eroding banks and sluggish flow Buffer width is
narrow and primarily consists of sparse hardwood trees and brush UT1 Reach 4 exhibits more bank
instability and degradation from cattle access and can be described by Stage 1 /III of the CEM
523 UT1B
UT1B is a short, intermittent stream flowing through an existing wetland due east before it turns
north to loin with UT1 Reach 2 This small channel drains 0 10 square miles downstream of active
row crops Buffer width is narrow and sparse and stream banks are actively eroding UT1B is
continuously disturbed by cattle trampling and is incising to meet the grade of the UT1 Reach 2
UT1B is best described in Stage II /III of the CEM
524 UT2
UT2 starts at the Ruth Teague property line and runs generally north to tie into Ready Fork draining
approximately 0 09 square miles UT2 is incised and the banks are actively eroding due to cattle
access The stream appears to have been relocated from its historic location and pushed to the east
side of the valley Buffers are thin and vary in width along the length of the stream Little pattern
exists with only a few notable bends through the length of the reach and a sinuosity of 106 UT2 is
routinely accessed by cattle with areas of more significant erosion, along with its physical relocation
to the east side of the valley UT2 can best be described by Stage II /III of the CEM
W Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 11

Table 5a. Existing Stream Conditions
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
W Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 12
Notation
Units
UT1 -Reach 1
UTS- Reach 2
UT1- Reach 3
UT1- Reach 4
UT1- Reach 5
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
F Max
Min
Max
stream type
E4, G4
G4
E4, CO
G4
E4, G4
drainage area
DA
sq mi
014
025
030
036
056
bankfull
Q
cfs
21
14
25
45
129
discharge
bankfull
cross-
Abkf
SF
71
81
52
107
113
115
246
590
sectional area
average
velocity
Vbkf
fps
3 2
4 4
2 7
2 2
2 4
3 9
17
5 7
during
bankfull event
Cross- Section
width at
Wbkf
feet
5 5
6 3
6 5
9 1
10 4
10 3
13 9
16 0
bankfull
maximum
depth at
dmax
feet
15
18
14
18
14
19
5 2
bankfull
mean depth
dbkf
feet
13
0 8
10
12
11
15
4 3
at bankfull
bankfull width
w bkf /dbkf
43
49
82
73
101
93
33
104
to depth ratio
low bank
feet
20
25
33
18
32
38
52
height
bank height
BHR
13
15
2 3
10
2 2
10
2 0
ratio
floodprone
wfpa
feet
40
91
10
>36
15
20
>50
area width
entrenchment
ER
6 3
165
15
>3 9
14
12
>3 6
ratio
Slope
valley slope
Svalley
feet/ foot
0 014
0 016
0 010
0 034
0 013
0 003
0 016
channel slope
Schannel
feet/ foot
00077
0 013
0 0093
0 019
00039
0 028
0 011
00005
0 013
Profile
riffle slope
Sr,ffle
feet/ foot
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
riffle slope
Sriffle /Schannel
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ratio
pool slope
Spool
feet/ foot
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
pool slope
Spool /Schannel
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ratio
pool -to -pool
Lp_p
feet
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
spacing
pool spacing
LP P /wbkf
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ratio
pool cross-
sectional area
AP ° °l
SF
6 0
7 2
14 5
8 3
263
W Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 12

,1
WAgony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 13
Notation,
Units
� E
UTi'Reach'1
�
UT1- Reach',2
Rio v '9.
UT1- Reach3r°
wUT1 "Reach,'_4
y�,E
+UT1- fReach5
k
.aW w
M,17
Min
Max
Mm
Max
�'Mm
�Max�F
�enr�
" Mm
I •k•
�Maz�Mm
F�G'�.°
" ���
i
��
pool area
APOOI�Abkf
10
14
13
07
10
ratio
maximum
d P ° °�
feet
11
24
25
16
25
pool depth
pool depth
dPOOl�dbkf
10
30
23
15
15
ratio
pool width at
W P °°
feet
65
62
94
71
180
bankfull
pool width
WPool/Wbkf
12
10
10
07
11
ratio
Pattern
sinuosity
K
125
114
135
106
124
belt width
Wbit
feet
18
101
12
20
21
93
23
27
48
157
meander
WbIU / Wbkf
23
128
15
25
27
118
29
34
61
199
width ratio
meander
L
"'
feet
68
152
27
45
121
171
43
84
176
260
length
meander
L w bkf
86
192
34
57
153
216
54
106
223
329
length ratio
radius of
R`
feet
13
101
6
18
14
60
13
31
13
86
curvature
radius of
curvature
RJ Wbkf
16
12 8
0 8
2 3
18
7 6
16
3 9
16
10 9
ratio
Particle Size Distribution from Reach -wide Pebble Count
dso Description
d16
mm
059
033
063
007
0 18
d35
mm
295
188
3 15
229
320
dso
mm
5 15
347
938
800
146
d84
mm
100
450
161
662
128
d95
mm
180
117
431
995
234
dloo
mm
1024
256
>2048
128
>2048
WAgony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 13

Table 5b. Existing Stream Conditions
Agony Acres Mitiqation Site
°'
Notation
Units r
UT1A -
-UT1A' '„
=�
UT1A -
UT1A -" -
= UT1B
Reach 1
ReacFi;2 "',
Reach 3
"ReadW
�-
_y
Mm
Max
Mln
Max `
Mln
Max
MIA _ �
fVlaz
�Miny
Maz
'Min
iL
N1ax�
stream type
E4
E4
B3
E4
E4
E4
drainage area
DA
sq ml
012
014
015
016
010
009
bankfull
Q
cfs
21
35
37
50
25
23
discharge
bankfull cross
Abp
SF
63
87
74
93
54
52
70
sectional area
average velocity
during bankfull
Vbkf
fps
33
4
49
52
46
3
51
event
Cross - Section
width at bankfull
Wbkf
feet
58
89
111
93
49
62
96
maximum depth
dmaa
feet
14
13
10
15
19
10
20
at bankfull
mean depth at
dbkf
feet
11
10
07
10
11
06
11
bankfull
bankfull width to
Wbkf /dbkf
53
91
166
90
44
55
155
depth ratio
low bank height
feet
24
13
10
22
31
10
40
bank height ratio
BHR
17
10
10
15
16
10
21
floodprone area
width
Wfpa
feet
15
34
25
>80
36
>20
entrenchment
ER
26
38
23
>8 6
75
>2 4
ratio
Slope
feet/
valley slope
Svalley
0 016
0 021
0 050
0 018
0 022
0 024
foot
feet/
channel slope
S channel
00095
0 021
0 049
0 015
0 020
0 013
0 022
foot
Profile
feet/
riffle slope
S raffle
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
foot
riffle slope ratio
Sriffle /Schannel
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
feet/
pool slope
Spool
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
foot
pool slope ratio
Sp° °I /Schannel
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
pool -to -pool
Lpp
feet
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
spacing
pool spacing
LP P /wbkf
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ratio
pool cross-
sectional area
A P ° °I
SF
62
112
98
249
115
60
pool area ratio
Apool /Abkf
10
13
13
27
2 1
10
W Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 14

i
53 Channel Stability Assessment
Wildlands used a modified version of the Rapid Assessment of Channel Stability as described in
Hydrologic Engineering Circular (HEC) -20 (Lagasse, 2001) The method is semi - quantitative and
incorporates thirteen stability indicators that are evaluated in the field and individually rated on a
scale of Excellent, Good, Fair, or Poor Lower scores are indicative of increased stability Ratings are
as follows
• Excellent (1 -3 points)
• Good (4 -6 points)
• Fair (7 -9 points)
• Poor (10 -12 points)
Once all parameters are scored, the overall stability of the stream is then classified with similar
scoring adjectives (Excellent, Good, Fair, or Poor) The adjectives assigned to the streams are as
follows
W Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 15
Notation
� U nits
UT1A -
Reach 1
UT1A -
Reach 2
UT1A -
Reach 3
UT1A -
Reach 4
UT1B
UT2
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Maz
Mm
Max
Min
"Max,
maximum pool
depth
d p ° °�
feet
18
16
16
36
25
14
pool depth ratio
dpool /dbkf
16
16
23
36
23
18
pool width at
bankfull
w p ° °l
feet
68
94
85
128
59
76
pool width ratio
wpo °l /wbkt
1
12
1 1
08
14
12
10
Pattern
sinuosity
K
112
108
104
103
106
106
belt width
Wblt
feet
30
35
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
32
54
meander width
ratio
Wblt/Wbkf
3 8
44
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
41
68
meander length
Lm
feet
89
104
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
102
103
meander length
ratio
L w bkf
11
3
132
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
12 9
13
radius of
curvature
R`
feet
12
57
N/A
N/A i
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
12
43
_T radius of
curvature ratio
RJ Wbkf
15
7 2
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1 5
5 4
Particle Size Distribution from Reach -wide Pebble Count
d50 Description
d16
mm
0 15
028
200
045
N/A
020
d35
mm
2 18
164
12 9
271
N/A
068
d5o
mm
431
5 15
506
506
N/A
2 11
d84
mm
16
105
168
677
N/A
207
d95
mm
139
172
2048
122
N/A
983
d1o0
mm
256
362
>2048
362
N/A
256
53 Channel Stability Assessment
Wildlands used a modified version of the Rapid Assessment of Channel Stability as described in
Hydrologic Engineering Circular (HEC) -20 (Lagasse, 2001) The method is semi - quantitative and
incorporates thirteen stability indicators that are evaluated in the field and individually rated on a
scale of Excellent, Good, Fair, or Poor Lower scores are indicative of increased stability Ratings are
as follows
• Excellent (1 -3 points)
• Good (4 -6 points)
• Fair (7 -9 points)
• Poor (10 -12 points)
Once all parameters are scored, the overall stability of the stream is then classified with similar
scoring adjectives (Excellent, Good, Fair, or Poor) The adjectives assigned to the streams are as
follows
W Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 15

• Excellent (< 41)
• Good (41 to less than 70)
• Fair (70 to less than 98)
• Poor (98 or higher)
The assessment results for the streams on the Agony Acres site indicate that many of the streams
rated in the second to the lowest category — fair UT1 Reach 1, UT1 Reach 3, and UT1A Reach 2
rated in the lower half of the second highest category - good These reaches are relatively stable
with areas of degradation caused by cattle access to the site UT1 Reach 3 and UT1A Reach 3 rated
in the highest category - excellent These areas have considerable bedrock control and have seen
little impact from adjacent agricultural and livestock practices For every reach assessed, the
vertical fraction was greater than the lateral fraction This indicates that vertical instability is a
greater problem for these streams than lateral instability Total scores, stability ratings, and vertical
and horizontal fractions are provided in Tables 6a and 6b
Table 6a. Existing Conditions Channel Stability Assessment Results- UTl
Aaonv Acres Mitigation Site
W Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 16
UT1- Reach 1
UT1- Reach 2
UTl - Reach 3
UT1- Reach 4
UT1- Reach 5
1 Watershed
characteristics
5
7
3
5
8
2 Flow habit
5
5
5
5
5
3 Channel pattern
3
9
2
3
8
4 Entrenchment
2
9
2
4
8
5 Bed material
5
10
3
5
5
6 Bar development
5
8
3
6
8
7 Obstructions
4
4
4
4
4
8 Bank soil texture
and coherence
2
2
2
2
2
9 Average bank
slope angle
5
10
3
6
10
10 Bank protection
5
10
5
7
8
11 Bank cutting
3
8
2
4
6
12 Mass wasting or
bank failure
2
7
1
3
7
Score
46
89
35
54
79
Rating
Good
Fair
Excellent
Good
Fair
Lateral Fraction
028
062
022
037
055
Vertical Fraction
033
075
022
042
058
W Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 16

Table bb. Existing Conditions Channel Stability Assessment Results- UT1 A, UT1 B, UT2
t Agony Acres Mitigation Site
'Parameter
UT1A -
Reach 1
UT1A -
Reach 2
UT1A -
Reach 3
UT1A -
Reach 4
UT16
UT2
1 Watershed
characteristics
6
5
4
6
7
6
2 Flow habit
5
5
5
5
5
5
3 Channel pattern
8
5
1
8
9
7
4 Entrenchment
9
2
2
9
9
7
5 Bed material
10
9
4
7
10
10
6 Bar development
8
6
3
8
8
8
7 Obstructions
7
3
3
3
4
4
8 Bank soil texture
and coherence
2
2
2
2
2
2
9 Average bank
slope angle
10
2
2
10
10
10
10 Bank protection
8
3
1
9
10
10
it Bank cutting
6
3
1
6
8
5
12 Mass wasting or
bank failure
6
4
1
5
7
5
Score
85
49
29
78
89
79
Rating
Fair
Good
Excellent
Fair
Fair
Fair
Lateral Fraction
053
023
012
053
062
053
Vertical Fraction
075
047
025
067
075
069
54 Design Discharge Development
Multiple methods were used to develop bankfull discharge estimates of the project reaches The
resulting values were compared and concurrence between the estimates and best professional
judgment were used to determine the specific design discharge for each project reach
The methods to estimate discharge included
1 The published North Carolina rural Piedmont curve drainage area - discharge relationships,
2 The provisional Updated North Carolina rural Piedmont/ Mountain curve (Walker) Curve
drainage area- discharge relationships,
3 Drainage area — discharge relationships from reference reaches,
4 Regional flood frequency analysis developed for this project,
5 USGS flood frequency equations for rural watersheds in the North Carolina Ridge and Valley -
Piedmont region, and
6 Discharge analysis of existing channels at top of bank to estimate an upper limit discharge
541 NC Rural Piedmont Regional Curve Predictions
The published NC rural Piedmont curve was used to estimate discharge based on drainage area
using regional relationships Figure 7 illustrates the NC Piedmont curve
W Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 17

542 Provisional Updated NC Piedmont/Mountain Regional Curve Predictions
Design discharges using the draft updated curve for rural Piedmont and mountain stream channels a '
were estimated based on drainage area using regional relationships (Walker, unpublished)
543 Drainage Area - Discharge Relationships from Reference Reaches
Five reference reaches were identified for this Site including one onsite reference reach Each
reference reach has stable cross - sections surveyed primarily to assist with the drainage area -
discharge relationship as well as dimension, pattern, and profile reference data The onsite
reference reach is UT1 Reach 3, a stable section of stream with wide vegetated buffer and good
stream pattern (drainage area of 0 3 square miles) The four additional reference reaches include
Spencer Creek 1 (drainage area of 0 96 square miles) and Spencer Creek 2 (drainage area of 0 37
square miles), UT to Polecat Creek (drainage area of 0 41 square miles) and UT to Cane Creek
(drainage area of 0 29 square miles) These data points were used to estimate a reference drainage
area - discharge relationship to predict discharge values for each tributary on the Site
544 Regional Flood Frequency Analysis
Four USGS stream gage sites were identified within reasonable proximity of the project site for use
in development of a project specific regional flood frequency analysis Data from these gages were
used to develop a regional flood frequency curve as described by Dalrymple (1960) The gages used
were
• 2065100 — Snake Creek near Brookneal, VA (drainage area 165 square miles),
• 2075350 — Powells Creek near Turbeville, VA (drainage area 0 29 square miles),
• 2086000 — Dial Creek near Bahama, NC (drainage area 4 73 square miles),
• 208650112 — Flat River Tributary near Willardville, NC (drainage area 114 square miles)
Flood frequency curves were developed for the 12 year and 15 year recurrence interval discharges
These relationships can be used to estimate discharge of those recurrence intervals for ungauged
streams in the same hydrologic region and were solved for discharge with the drainage area for each
project reach as the input
The four gages did pass the homogeneity test However, each of these gages, with the exception of
the Powells Creek, represents a larger drainage area than the project reaches The resulting flood
frequency analysis predicted the 1 5 -year event for these same gages used to build the analysis by
+/- 7 %, which suggests that there is a reasonable correlation of accuracy for this analysis The
results of this regional flood frequency analysis were found to be consistent with some of the flood
frequency predictions from alternate estimation methods
545 USGS Flood Frequency Equations for Rural Watersheds in the NC Ridge and Valley -
Piedmont
USGS flood frequency equations for rural watersheds in the North Carolina Ridge and Valley -
Piedmont Region 1 (USGS, 2009) were used to estimate peak discharges for each reach for floods
with a recurrence interval of 2, 5, 10, and 25 years These recurrence interval events were used to
extrapolate discharge estimates for the 12- and 1 5 -year events
W Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 18

546 Discharge Analysis of Existing Channel Top of Bank
Manning's equation was used to calculate the discharge in each of the project reaches for the
channel - filling flow at existing top of bank As has been discussed, the onsite channels show
evidence of lateral and vertical instability These channels are oversized in their current condition
Part of the discharge selection criteria was that the discharge for channels flowing full at current top
of bank should function as an upper limit boundary for the design condition In other words, the
restored channels should not be designed to carry more flow than the existing channel since the
existing condition shows signs of being oversized Resulting top of bank discharge values were
calculated well above any other prediction methods and were not a particularly helpful indicator in
the final design discharge estimates
547 Design Discharge Selection
Wildlands ranked each of these discharge estimations based the level of confidence in the data and
similarity of the datasets to the projects streams Design values were selected by weighting each of
the estimation approaches based on this ranking methodology Table 7 summarizes the results of
each of the discharge analyses described in this section and the final selected design discharge for
each of the project reaches
Table 7. Design Discharge Analysis Summary
Aaonv Acres Mitiaation Site
6is`charge Estimation' Method
UT1-
UT1'
�- UT1A -
-_ --
UT1A -
UT13
UT2
-
Reach 2
Reach 5
-Reach 1
Reach 4
Drainage Area (square miles)
025
056
012
016
010
009
USGS Rural Regression
30
53
18
21
15
14
Extrapolation 1 2 -year event (cfs)
USGS Rural Regression
45
77
27
33
23
23
Extrapolation 1 5 -year event (cfs)
Regional Flood Frequency Analysis
25
39
16
19
14
14
1 2 -year event (cfs)
Regional Flood Frequency Analysis
44
70
29
34
25
25
15 -year event (cfs)
NC Piedmont Regional Curve (cfs)
33
59
20
24
16
16
Reference Reach Analysis (cfs)
23
49
11
15
9
9
Draft Walker NC Regional Curve
19
35
11
13
9
9
Design Discharge (cfs)
25
46
14
17
11
11
dkb
W Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 19

6.0 Baseline Information - Regulatory Considerations
Table 8 presents the project information and baseline wetland information
Table 8. Regulatory Considerations
Aaonv Acres Mitigation Site
=
Applicable?
Resolved?
Supporting Documentation
Categorical Exclusion
Yes
Yes
Appendix 5
Waters of the US — Section 404
Yes
TBD
NW27 Permit to be submitted
Waters of the US — Section 401
Yes
TBD
401 Certification to be submitted
Endangered Species Act
Yes
Yes
Appendix 5
Historic Preservation Act
Yes
Yes
Appendix 5
Coastal Zone Management
Act /Coastal Area Management Act
No
N/A
N/A
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
Yes
Yes
Appendix 7
Essential Fisheries Habitat
No
N/A
N/A
61 401/404
As discussed in Section 4 5, the results of the onsite field investigation indicate that tributaries UT1,
UT1A, UT16, and UT2 are jurisdictional within the Site Additionally there are ten jurisdictional
wetland areas (Wetland A - K) located within the Site (Figure 6) totaling 0 86 acres Each of the
described tributaries and wetland features will be protected under the conservation easement to be
placed on the properties The Jurisdictional Determination, including all necessary and required
forms, was submitted to the USACE Wilmington District on March 18, 2013 A signed Notification of
Jurisdictional Determination (Action ID 2012 - 01909) was issued by the USACE on March 26, 2013
and is enclosed in Appendix 3
Impacts to existing wetland areas were avoided to the extent possible during design phase Stream
restoration at the upstream end of UT113 will involve excavation of a new channel through a portion
of Wetland K The area proposed for impact is approximately 0 01 acres This represents impacts to
less than 2% of the site's wetlands
62 Endangered and Threatened Species
621 Site Evaluation Methodology
The Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, amended (16 U S C 1531 et seq ), defines protection
for species with the Federal Classification of Threatened (T) or Endangered (E) An "Endangered
Species" is defined as "any species which is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant
portion of its range" and a "Threatened Species" is defined as "any species which is likely to
become an Endangered Species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant
portion of its range" (16 U S C 1532)
The US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and NC Natural Heritage Program (NHP) databases
were searched for federally listed threatened and endangered plant and animal species for
Guilford County, NC Two federally listed species, the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and
the small whorled pogonia (Isotria medeoloides) are currently listed in Guilford County (Table
9)
W Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 20

a Table 9. Listed Threatened and Endangered Species in Guilford County, NC
Aaonv Acres Mitioation Site
Species
Federal Status
'Habitat
Biological Conclusion
Vascular Plant
Small whorled
pogonia
Montane oak - hickory or
May affect, but not likely
(Isotna
T
acidic cove forests
to adversely affect
medeoloides)
Vertebrate
Bald eagle
Near large water bodies
May affect, but not likely
(Holiaeetus
BGPA
lakes, marshes, seacoasts,
I
to adversely affect
leucocepholus)
and rivers
622 Threatened and Endangered Species Descnptions
Small Whorled Pogonia
The small whorled pogonia is a small perennial herb, approximately 9 to 25 cm in height with a
whorl of green elliptical leaves This species is typically found in montane oak - hickory or acidic
cove forests The understory structure of these habitats can range from dense rhododendron
thickets to open /sparse shrub strata Current threats to this species include loss of habitat and
overutilization for scientific and private collections
Bald Eagle
The bald eagle is a very large raptor species, typically 28 to 38 inches in length Adult individuals
are brown in color with a very distinctive white head and tail Bald eagles typically live near
large bodies of open water with suitable fish habitat including lakes, marshes, seacoasts, and
rivers This species generally requires tail, mature tree species for nesting and roosting Bald
eagles were de- listed from the Endangered Species List in June 2007, however, this species
remains under the protection of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act (BGPA) This species is known to occur in every U S state except Hawaii
623 Biological Conclusion
Based on a pedestrian survey of the site that was performed on March 14, 2012, no individual
species or critical habitat was found to exist on the site In addition no suitable small whorled
pogonia habitat was observed Moderate potential for bald eagle nesting was present
Review and comment from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) was requested
on December 17, 2012 in respect to the Agony Acres Mitigation Site and its potential impacts on
threatened or endangered species USFWS responded on January 11, 2013, that, "the proposed
action is not likely to adversely affect any federally - listed endangered or threatened species,
their formally designated critical habitat, or species currently proposed for listing " USFWS
believes that, "the requirements under section 7(a)(2) of the Act have been satisfied "
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 21

63 Cultural Resources
631 Site Evaluation Methodology
The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, amended (16 U S C 470), defines the
policy of historic preservation to protect, restore, and reuse districts, sites, structures, and
objects significant in American history, architecture, and culture Section 106 of the NHPA
mandates that federal agencies take into account the effect of an undertaking on any property,
which is included in, or eligible for inclusion in, the National Register of Historic Places A letter
was sent to the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) on December 17, 2012,
requesting review and comment on any cultural resources potentially affected by the Agony
Acres Mitigation Project
632 SHPO/THPO Concurrence
A request for review and comment from the SHPO with respect to any archeological and
architectural resources related to the Agony Acres Mitigation Site was made on December 17,
2012 SHPO responded on January 15, 2013 and determined that the project as proposed will
not have an effect on any historic resources
64 FEMA Floodplain Compliance and Hydrologic Trespass
Portions of UT1, UT1A, and UT2 lie within FEMA Zone AE and the floodway and flood fringe of Reedy
Fork (Figure 8) Reedy Fork's base flood elevations have been defined and a detailed study has been
performed with floodway areas mapped on Guilford County FIRM Panels 8838 and 8848 No
mapped cross - sections from Reedy Fork exist within the project work area A flood study will not be
required for this project Wildlands is coordinating with Guilford County to satisfy any local
permitting The EEP Floodplain Requirements Checklist is included in Appendix 7
The project will be designed so that any increase in flooding will be contained on the project site and
will not extend upstream to adjacent parcels, so hydrologic trespass will not be a concern The
proposed restoration has been designed to transition back to the existing boundary conditions in a
gradual manner
65 Essential Fisheries Habitat
651 Habitat Description
The USFWS does not list any Critical Habitat areas for Guilford County Agency correspondence
received for the project contains no mention of essential fisheries or requests for additional
information related to essential fisheries
652 Biological Conclusion
Given that there are no listed Critical Habitat areas, the project will have no effect on essential
fisheries habitat
66 Utilities and Site Access
The Site is accessible from several gravel farm roads and pasture access gates off of Sockwell Road
as shown in Figure 2 Most of the reach lengths are accessible via existing farm road or field without
having to traverse through forested areas Easement option agreements have been established
with the landowners that allows for temporary construction access and permanent monitoring
ON
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 22

access There are seven proposed easement breaks that range from 20 to 50 feet in width and will
include culvert or ford crossings These crossing areas are not included in the mitigation credit
calculation for the site This site can provide the required minimum riparian buffer for Piedmont
streams The easement area will be marked per NCEEP Guidelines for Full Delivery Requirement for
Completion of Survey for Conservation Easements (12/15/2011) Fencing will be required for this
site to exclude cattle access and any other potential sources for damage to the site The crossings
will be fenced both upstream and downstream to permanently prevent livestock access and provide
better protection of the riparian area There are no other known constraints or utilities on the
proposed project site There are no airports within 5 miles of the site
7.0 Reference Sites
71 Reference Streams
Five reference reaches were identified near the Site and used to support the design of the proposed
restoration and enhancement measures (Figure 9) Reference reaches can be used as a basis for
design or, more appropriately, as one source of information on which to base a stream restoration
design Most, if not all, reference reaches identified in the North Carolina Piedmont are in heavily
wooded areas and the mature vegetation contributes greatly to their stability These reference
streams were chosen because of similarities to the project streams including drainage area, valley
slope and morphology, and bed material The reference reaches are within the Carolina Slate Belt
region of the Piedmont with the exception of UT to Cane Creek
711 Reference Streams Channel Morphology and Classification
j' Reach 3 of UT1 on the Site is a high quality preservation component of the project and was selected
as a reference reach due to its similarity in slope and drainage area to the restoration reaches on the
project A detailed survey was conducted in March of 2013 UT1— Reach 3 has a drainage area of
0 3 square miles and classified as an E4 stream type
Spencer Creek is located in western Montgomery County near the crossroads of Ophir, NC (Buck
Engineering, 2004) This consists of two reaches (Spencer Creek Reach 1 and Reach 2) that classified
as E4 stream types situated within a mature forest Wildlands visited Spencer Creek Reach 1 in
March, 2012 and visually confirmed that the land use is unchanged and that the stream is laterally
and vertically stable Wildlands conducted a detailed survey of Spencer Creek Reach 2 in March
2012
The UT to Cane Creek reference is located in Northeastern Rutherford County The dataset was used
as a reference stream for the Cane Creek Restoration prepared by Restoration Systems and Axiom
Environmental in 2007 The drainage area is 0 29 square miles and the land use within the drainage
area is a semi- mature forest The UT to Cane Creek reference site has a drainage area of 0 29 square
miles and classified as a C4 /E4 stream type
The UT to Polecat Creek reference reach is located in northern Randolph County approximately 25
miles southwest of the Agony Acres site The site was identified by Wolf Creek Engineering and
used as a reference reach for the Holly Grove Restoration Site (Wolf Creek Engineering, 2007)
Wildlands conducted a site visit and reference reach survey in March of 2013 to confirm the
geomorphic parameters listed in the Holly Grove Restoration Plan The UT to Polecat Creek
reference reach has a drainage area of 0 41 square miles and classified as an E4 stream type
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 23

712 Reference Streams Vegetation Community Types Descriptions y
Restored riparian vegetation communities will be similar to that found along preservation reaches <<'
UT1 Reach 1 and UT1A Reach 3 at the Site These reaches are surrounded by mature hardwood
forests composed of typical Piedmont bottomland riparian forest tree species Dominant canopy
species in this area include tulip poplar, red cedar, sycamore, sweet gum, water oak, and willow oak
Common understory vegetation includes red cedar, black willow, and American holly
The mature trees within the riparian buffers provide significant bank reinforcement to keep the
streams from eroding horizontally and maintain channel width to depth ratios The forested
floodplain areas of this portion of the site are classified as a Piedmont bottomland forest (Schafale &
Weakley, 1990)
Table 10. Summary of Reference Reach Geomorphic Parameters
Annnv ArrPC Mitinntinn Sitp
W Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 24
On "site Reference
��
Reach -
UT to Polecat
Spencer Creek`i
Spencer Creek�2
�, UT_To Cane
-'UT1= Reach 3
Creek
Creek
Parameter
Notation
Units
'­m i'n
max
min I
max
min I
max,
min
max
min'
max
stream type
E4
E4
E4
E4
C4 /E4
drainage area
DA
sq mi
030
041
096
037
029
bankfull discharge
Qbkf
cfs
25
20
97
35
40
bankfull cross-
Abkf
SF
107
113
54
124
178
197
66
87
89
122
sectional area
average velocity
during bankfull
Vbkf
fps
22
24
22
35
49
54
5
56
38
event
Cross- Section
width at bankfull
Wbkf
feet
91
104
53
109
107
112
63
93
115
123
maximum depth at
dmax
feet
18
14
17
21
26
1
12
12
16
bankfull
mean depth at
dbkf
feet
10
12
10
1 1
16
18
08
10
08
10
bankfull
bankfull width to
w d
bkf/ bkf
73
101
52
96
58
71
79
93
123
144
depth ratio
depth ratio
dmax/dbkf
18
14
17
13
14
12
13
17
bank height ratio
BHR
10
10
11
10
10
10
--
--
floodprone area
wfpa
feet
>36
25
65
60
>114
14
125
31
width
entrenchment ratio
ER
>3 9
32
83
55
>10 2
17
43
>2 5
Slope
valley slope
Svalley
ft/ft
0 010
0 034
0 017
00109
0 022
0 031
00262
channel slope
Schannel
ft/ft
00039
0 028
0 012
00047
0 019
0 022
0 015
Profile
riffle slope
Sriffle
ft/ft
N/A
N/A
0 004
0 047
0 013
00184
0 0343
0 0188
0 0704
riffle slope rati±0srole/Schannei
N/A
N/A
03
4
28
1
16
13
'
W Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 24

u ¢I siwon dfi3�oi
pii »sd 'I
� ... r
x d4 Onsrtit
e Reference
a
Reach -
UT to Polecat
Spencer Creek 1
=Spencer Creek 2
UT,Tb Cane
Creeks
Creek
UT1- Reach 3
-
Parameter
Notation,
Units
mm
max
min
max -
`min
max
min
max,r_
9'min*
mLaxjyy
—
R —"'mi$
iaii %illwfin I OW i
°mod �.s 36'itfh
pool slope
Spool
ft/ft
N/A
N/A
0 017
00007
00009
00007
0 014
00005
00108
pool slope ratio
Spool /Schannel
N/A
N/A
14
015
019
0
06
0
072
pool -to -pool
Lp_p
feet
N/A
N/A
34
52
71
9
46
27
73
spacing
pool spacing ratio
Lp_p /Wbkf
N/A
N/A
03
32
63
1 66
14
49
23
1 61
pool cross -
sectional area at
Apool
SF
145
93
245
65
98
119
bankfull
pool area ratio
Apool /Abkf
13
08
1 17
12
1 14
1
11
1
13
maximum pool
dpool
feet
25
18
33
12
18
26
depth at bankfull
pool depth ratio
dpool /dbkf
23
16
18
18
1 20
15
18
17
pool width at
wpool
feet
94
8
175
6
12
85
bankfull
pool width ratio
I wpool/Wbkf
10
07
1 15
16
10
1 13
07
Pattern
sinuosity
K
135
14
23
10
13
14
r ti belt width
Wblt
feet
21
93
28
50
38
41
10
50
102
eander width
Wblt/Wbkf
23
89
30
53
34
36
16
54
83
89
ratio
linear wavelength
(formerly meander
Lm
feet
121
171
56
85
46
48
55
142
45
81
length)
linear wavelength
ratio (formerly
Lm /Wbkf
133
164
60
90
41
44
87
153
39
66
meander length
ratio)
meander length
feet
--
--
--
--
--
--
53
178
--
--
meander length
--
--
--
--
--
--
84
191
--
ratio
radius of curvature
Ro
feet
14
60
19
50
11
15
12
85
23
38
radius of curvature
R w bkf
15
58
20
53
13
14
19
91
2
31
ratio
Notes
N/A Data not available
8.0 Determination of Credits
Mitigation credits presented in Table 11 are projections based upon site design Upon completion of site
construction the project components and credits data will be revised to be consistent with the as -built
condition
ON Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 25

Table 11. Determination of Credits
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Agony Acres Mitigation Site, Guildford County, DENR Contract 004949 u
- -
- -
Non =rpaean
II&r`o" g'e ni � -
- Phosp horus ospYhorusNui�tnryN °eni�ti, N
- =
= Stream R
Riparian Wetland B
Wetland N
Buffer -
-r� O
Off eta
Type R
R R
RE R
R R
RE R
R R
RE -
- -
-
Totals 5
5,184 1
1,287 N
N/A N
N/A N
N/A N
N/A 3
30 N
N/A N
N/A
Project Components „
Approach R
Restoration or P
Proposed
Project Project Component E
Stationing/ Location (
Existing R
(P1, P2, R
Restoration C
Restoration M
Mitigation
Credit
or Reach ID F
Footage (LF) T
etc) E
Equivalent (
Footage (LF) R
Ratio
(SMU)
UT1 -Reach 1 1
Enhancement 1
(DOT ROW) (
100 +00 to 100+14 1
14 E
Ell E
(No Credit)
14 -
- -- -
- --
UTi -Reach 1 1
100 +14 to 103 +62, 1
1,079 E
Ell E
Enhancement 1
1,079 2
25 4
432
103 +93 to 111+24
UT1 -Reach 1 1
Enhancement 3
(Easement Break) (
103 +62 to 103 +93 3
31 E
Ell E
(No Credit)
31 -
- -- -
- --
UT1 -Reach 2 1
111 +24 to 122 +38 1
1,039 P
P1 R
Restoration 1
1,114 1
1 1
1,114
UT1 -Reach 2 1
122 +38 to 123 +31 9
93 E
El E
Enhancement 9
93 2
2 6
62
UT1 -Reach 3 1
123 +31 to 128 +50, 1
1,350 P
Preservation 1
1,350 5
5 2
270
129 +06 to 137 +37
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 26

9.0 Credit Release Schedule
All credit releases will be based on the total credit generated as reported by the as -built survey of the
mitigation site Under no circumstances shall any mitigation project be debited until the necessary DA
authorization has been received for Its construction or the District Engineer (DE) has otherwise provided
written approval for the project in the case where no DA authorization is required for construction of
the mitigation project The DE, in consultation with the Interagency Review Team (IRT), will determine if
performance standards have been satisfied sufficiently to meet the requirements of the release
schedules below In cases where some performance standards have not been met, credits may still be
released depending on the specifics of the case Monitoring may be required to restart or be extended,
depending on the extent to which the site fails to meet the specified performance standard The release
of project credits will be subject to the criteria described as follows
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 27
Project Components
-_ -
Approach
Restoration or
-
- �
Proposed
Component
Stationing/ Location
-
Existing
(Pl, P2,
Restoration
Restoration
MitigationF-
�
q jCre'dit,' J
,Project
orReach,�ID" s_
��
Footage (LF)
-
Equivalent,
Footage (LF)�
Ratio "� e��
�(SMU)
x.400 8
u� 1� -4 a"
,
,etc)
�
MA -Reach 4
216 +28 to 222 +78
461
P1
Restoration
650
1
650
UT1B
300 +00 to 302 +19
243
P1
Restoration
219
1
219
400 +00 to 404 +16,
UT2
975
P1
Restoration
972
1
972
404 +67 to 410 +23
UT2
404 +16 to 404 +67
53
P1/2
Restoration
51
- --
- --
(Easement Break)
(No Credit)
a
A ,
Component
Summation � ,,, r
ar eR imn ��-
`
�Ripa�ian Wetlenii
p , �o���q
n _
R4storation'Level
Stream (LF)
_acres
Non'RipariaF n
Buffer (acres)
- _'
Upland (acres)
Wetland (a(res)
-
Rrvenne
Non 4v
Restoration
5,184
N/A
N/A
N/A
30
N/A
Enhancement
2,079
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Enhancement)
353
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Enhancement II
1,726
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Alternative
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Mitigation
Creation
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Preservation
1,807
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
High Quality
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Preservation
9.0 Credit Release Schedule
All credit releases will be based on the total credit generated as reported by the as -built survey of the
mitigation site Under no circumstances shall any mitigation project be debited until the necessary DA
authorization has been received for Its construction or the District Engineer (DE) has otherwise provided
written approval for the project in the case where no DA authorization is required for construction of
the mitigation project The DE, in consultation with the Interagency Review Team (IRT), will determine if
performance standards have been satisfied sufficiently to meet the requirements of the release
schedules below In cases where some performance standards have not been met, credits may still be
released depending on the specifics of the case Monitoring may be required to restart or be extended,
depending on the extent to which the site fails to meet the specified performance standard The release
of project credits will be subject to the criteria described as follows
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 27

Table 12. Credit Release Schedule — Stream Credits
Acres Miticiation Site
0
Initial Allocation — see requirements below
30%
30%
First year mornto�mg report demonstrates perrformance °
°10% p J
„ P40%
standards are being met
2
Second year monitoring report demonstrates performance
10%
50%
standards are being met
(60 % *)
3
y`� "t
Third year monitoring report demonstrates performance
10%
60%
-
standards are being met
4
Fourth year monitoring report demonstrates performance
5%
65%
standards are being met
(75 % *)
5
Fifth'year monitoring report demonstrates °performance
10%
75%
standards are being met
_
(85 % *)
6
Sixth" monitoring report demonstrates performance standards are
5-
80%
1,1F ,r
being met _ F
(90 %)
7°
Seventh year mornfohng report demonstrates performance standards are
`10%
909l.
being met and the project has received closeout approval
(100 %)
91 Initial Allocation of Released Credits
The initial allocation of released credits, as specified in the mitigation plan can be released by the NCEEP
without prior written approval of the DE upon satisfactory completion of the following activities
a Approval of the final Mitigation Plan
b Recordation of the preservation mechanism, as well as a title opinion acceptable to the USACE
covering the property
c Completion of project construction (the initial physical and biological improvements to the
mitigation site) pursuant to the mitigation plan, Per the NCEEP Instrument, construction means
that a mitigation site has been constructed in its entirety, to include planting, and an as -built
report has been produced As -built reports must be sealed by an engineer prior to project
closeout, if appropriate but not prior to the initial allocation of released credits
d Receipt of necessary DA permit authorization or written DA approval for projects where DA
permit issuance is not required
92 Subsequent Credit Releases
All subsequent credit releases must be approved by the DE, in consultation with the IRT, based on a
determination that required performance standards have been achieved For stream projects a reserve
of 10% of a site's total stream credits shall be released after two bank -full events have occurred, in
separate years, provided the channel is stable and all other performance standards are met In the
event that less than two bank -full events occur during the monitoring period, release of these reserve
credits shall be at the discretion of the IRT As projects approach milestones associated with credit
release, the NCEEP will submit a request for credit release to the DE along with documentation
substantiating achievement of criteria required for release to occur This documentation will be
included with the annual monitoring report
W Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 28

r 10.0 Project Site Mitigation Plan
101 Designed Channel Classification
The design streams will be restored to the appropriate type based on the surrounding landscape,
climate, and natural vegetation communities but also with strong consideration to existing
watershed conditions and trajectory The Site consists of stream restoration, enhancement, and
preservation (Figure 10) The specific proposed stream types are described below
The stream restoration portion of this project includes six (6) reaches
• UT1 -Reach 2 UT1 from approximately 1100 feet downstream of Sockwell Road to a sharp
bend due east, approximately 1100 feet in length,
• UT1 -Reach 5 UT1 beginning at the confluence with UT1A to its terminus with Reedy Fork,
approximately 1500 feet in length,
• UT1A -Reach 1 UT1A beginning at Sockwell Road for a length of approximately 800 feet,
• UT1A -Reach 4 UT1A beginning approximately 700 feet upstream of the confluence with
UT1 to its terminus with UT1,
• UT16 UT1B beginning at the conservation easement to its terminus with UT1,
approximately 200 feet,
• UT2 UT2 beginning at an existing fence line to its terminus with Reedy Fork, approximately
1000 feet,
The project also includes stream enhancement on four (4) reaches classified as either enhancement
I (El) or enhancement II (Ell)
• UT1 -Reach 1, Ell UT1 beginning at Sockwell Road for a length of approximately 1100 feet,
• UT1 -Reach 2, El UT1 beginning near a sharp bend due east for a length of approximately
100 feet,
• UT1 -Reach 4, EI /EII UT1 beginning at an existing ford crossing to the confluence with UT1A,
approximately 700 feet in length,
• UT1A -Reach 2, Ell UT1A beginning approximately 800 feet downstream of Sockwell Road to
a sharp change in channel slope and bedrock material, approximately 300 feet in length,
• Additionally, there are two (2) preservation reaches
• UT1 -Reach 3 UT1 beginning approximately 100 feet after a sharp bend due east to an
existing ford crossing, approximately 1400 feet in length,
• UT1A -Reach 3 UT1A beginning at a sharp change in channel slope and bedrock material for
a length of approximately 500 feet
For UT1 -Reach 3 and UT1A -Reach 3, the streams have not been impacted by cattle and overall
stream health is relatively good For these reaches, preservation is proposed, mainly consisting of
fencing out cattle
The restoration reaches were designed to be similar to C -type streams according to the Rosgen
classification system (Rosgen, 1996) Type C streams are slightly entrenched, meandering streams
with access to the floodplain (entrenchment ratios >2 2) and channel slopes of 2% or less They
occur within a wide range of valley types and are appropriate for the project landscape
The morphologic design parameters as shown in Tables 13a and 13b for the restoration reaches fall
within the ranges specified for C streams (Rosgen, 1996) However, the specific values for the design
t parameters were selected based on designer experience and judgment and were verified with
morphologic data form reference reach data sets
W Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan Page 29

Table 13a. Design Morphologic Parameters
Aaonv Acres Mitiaation Site
ON
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 30
Notation
Units
UT1 Reach 2
UT1- Reach 5
UT1A Reach 1
JMin 4 '
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max'
stream type
C4
C4
C4
drainage area
DA
sq ml
025
056
012
design discharge
Q
cfs
250
460
140
bankfull cross - sectional
area
Abp
SF
74
120
48
average velocity during
bankfull event
ubkf
fps
25-5
25-5
2 5 5
Cross - Section
width at bankfull
Wbkf
feet
102
128
80
maximum depth at
bankfull
dmax
feet
10
12
12
15
07
09
mean depth at bankfull
dbkf
feet
08
09
06
bankfull width to depth
ratio
w bkf /dbkf
13 1
136
134
depth ratio
feet
12
15
12
15
12
15
bank height ratio
BHR
10
10
10
10
10
10
floodprone area width
W {Pa
feet
22
51
28
64
18
40
entrenchment ratio
ER
22
50
22
50
22
50
Slope
valley slope
S valley
feet/
foot
00160
00128
00160
channel slope
S `rani
feet/
foot
0007
0 0150
0 0054
FO 172
00103
00175
Profile
riffle slope
S raffle
feet/
f OOt
00148
00453
00118
00363
00148
00453
riffle slope ratio
Sr,fe/Sch"i
12
34
12
34
12
34
pool slope
SP
feet/
foot
00000
00053
00000
00043
00000
00053
pool slope ratio
SP/Sch "I
000
040
000
040
000
040
pool -to -pool spacing
LP P
feet
13
67
17
84
10
53
pool spacing ratio
LP P /Wbkf
13
66
13
66
13
66
pool cross - sectional area
SF
87
158
132
241
52
95
pool area ratio
11
20
11
20
1 1
20
maximum pool depth
feet
09
32
1 1
31
07
24
pool depth ratio
12
41
12
41
12
41
ON
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 30

I
Table 13b. Design Morphologic Parameters
Agony Acres Miti ation Site
t,v
Notation
Units
UT1= Reach 2
UT1 -Reach 5
UT1A - Reach 1
Min
Max
Min
Max
_Min
Max
pool width at bankfull
feet
102
163
128
205
80
128
pool width ratio
Min
FK6
10
16
10
16
10
16
Pattern
sinuosity
K
drainage area
120
130
120
130
120
130
belt width
WbIt
feet
16
74
20
93
13
58
meander width ratio
Wbif/Wbkf
16
73
16
73
16
73
linear wavelength
(formerly meander
length)
Lm
feet
46
133
58
166
36
104
linear wavelength ratio
(formerly meander
length ratio)
Lm/Wbkf
45
130
45
130
45
130
meander length
feet
31
151
38
192
24
120
meander length ratio
73
66
30
150
30
150
30
150
radius of curvature
R,
feet
18
31
23
38
14
24
radius of curvature ratio
Rc/ Wbkf
08
18
30
18
30
18
30
Table 13b. Design Morphologic Parameters
Agony Acres Miti ation Site
t,v
UT1A' :`h 4
���. w ,'UT1B - d�
� UT2 p
,
'Notation
-Units
,
,
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
FK6
stream type
C4
C4
C4
drainage area
DA
sq mi
016
010
009
design discharge
Q
cfs
170
110
110
bankfull cross - sectional
Ahkf
SF
50
52
34
area
average velocity during
ubkf
fps
25-5
1 5 4
25-5
bankfull event
Cross - Section
width at bankfull
Wbkf
feet
82
73
66
maximum depth at
dmaX
feet
08
10
07
09
06
08
bankfull
mean depth at bankfull
dbkf
feet
06
06
05
bankfull width to depth
w bkf /dbkf
136
126
128
ratio
depth ratio
feet
12
F1 5
12
15
12
1 5
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 31

Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 32
Notation
Units
UT1A - Reach 4
UT16
UT2
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
bank height ratio
BHR
10
10
10
10
10
10
floodprone area width
Wfpa
feet
18
41
16
37
15
33
entrenchment ratio
ER
22
50
22
50
22
50
Slope
valley slope
S valley
feet/
foot
00183
00240
00194
channel slope
Schnl
feet/
foot
0014
0 0153
0 0100
00200
00121
00231
Profile
riffle slope
S raffle
feet/
foot
00212
00652
00222
00680
00179
00549
riffle slope ratio
Sriffle /Schnl
12
34
12
34
12
34
pool slope
Sp
feet/
foot
00000
00077
00000
00080
00000
00065
pool slope ratio
Sp/S�h„ l
000
040
000
040
000
040
pool -to -pool spacing
Lp_p
feet
11
54
9
48
9
44
pool spacing ratio
Lp_p /Wbkf
13
66
13
66
13
66
pool cross - sectional area
SF
54
99
47
85
37
68
pool area ratio
1 1
20
11
20
1 1
20
maximum pool depth
feet
07
25
07
24
06
2 1
pool depth ratio
12
41
12
41
12
41
pool width at bankfull
feet
82
131
73
117
66
106
pool width ratio
10
16
10
16
10
16
Pattern
sinuosity
K
120
130
120
130
120
130
belt width
Wblt
feet
13
60
12
53
11
48
meander width ratio
Wbit Wbkf
16
73
16
73
16
73
linear wavelength
(formerly meander
length)
Lm
feet
37
107
33
95
30
86
linear wavelength ratio
(formerly meander
length ratio)
Lm /Wbkf
45
130
45
130
45
130
meander length
feet
25
123
22
110
20
99
meander length ratio
30
15 0
30
150
30
150
radius of curvature
R,
feet
15
25
13
22
12
20
radius of curvature ratio
Rj Wbkf
18
30
18
30
18
30
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 32

102 Target Buffer Communities
} The target communities for the restored riparian buffer zones will be based on the following
• Reference conditions from forested areas on and around the Site,
• Existing mature trees throughout the project area,
• Vegetation listed for these community types in Classification of the Natural Communities of
North Carolina (Shafale and Weakley,1990),
• Native trees with proven success in early successional restoration sites, and
• Consultation with native tree suppliers
The primary reference sites are the semi-mature Piedmont bottomland forests along sections of UT1
and UT1A that are slated for preservation and Enhancement 2 (see section 7 12 for documented
species)
103 Stream Project and Design Justification
Based on assessments of the watershed and existing channels, the project design has been
developed to address stream degradation caused by incision, bank instability caused by erosion and
livestock access, associated fine sediment deposition, lack of vegetation in riparian zones, and lack
of riparian and aquatic habitat The existing conditions assessment of the tributary reaches on the
Site indicated that livestock operations have resulted in degraded stream conditions as evidenced
through bank erosion, bank and bed trampling, incision, and over widening The result is degraded
aquatic and benthic habitat and net sediment export from streambanks to downstream receiving
waters Riparian buffers exist along portions of UT1 and UT1A, however, buffer areas along other
reaches have been maintained in pasture or lack an understory and herbaceous layer
t�
a\ _ Four different approaches to stream rehabilitation /preservation are planned for the site, depending
on the degree of intervention necessary to remediate the problems The restoration reaches (UT1-
Reach 2, UT1 -Reach 5, UT1A -Reach 1, UT1A -Reach 4, UT16, and UT2) are all currently located in
active cattle pastures The stream beds generally lack riffle /pool morphology and the banks and
beds have been trampled and de- stabilized by livestock encroachment Bank height ratios indicate
moderate to severe incision All of these reaches appear to be in Stage III and Stage IV of the Simon
channel evolution model Due to the slow rate of these geomorphic processes and continual
livestock access, there is little evidence of the depositional recovery process associated with Stage V
Without intervention, these systems will stay in a degraded state and not be able to adjust or
recover
If livestock access was removed and buffers were not managed, eventually UT1, UT1A, UT1B, and
UT2 would recover to stable C or E streams However, the tributaries would stabilize at a lower
position relative to the valley floor and be cut off from the original floodplain During this decades -
long recovery process, the streams would continue to export sediment and nutrients and have
impaired habitat conditions However, with continued livestock access, management of buffers, and
no bank /bed stabilization treatments, the streams will not stabilize and will continue to export tons
of sediment, nutrients, and pollutants to downstream receiving waters
Other reaches on the project site have been less disturbed by cattle and have not incised as much as
the reaches described above For these reaches (UT1 -Reach 1, UT1 -Reach 4, and UT1A -Reach 2),
enhancement II is planned and the only mechanical alterations proposed for the channels will be
repairs of isolated bank erosion as necessary The main activities to improve and protect these
r reaches will be planting riparian buffers and fencing out cattle Enhancement I is proposed for short
W Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 33

portions of UT1 -Reach 2 and UT1 -Reach 4 using grade control structures to safely transition
between priority I restoration (Rosgen, 1997) and enhancement II
For UT1 -Reach 3 and UT1A -Reach 3, the streams have not been impacted by cattle and overall
stream health is relatively good For these reaches, preservation is proposed, mainly consisting of
fencing out cattle
The design objectives were developed to deal with the issues described in the paragraphs above
The key factors driving the need for this intervention are
• Without intervention, it is likely that downstream sedimentation will continue to occur
• The intervention will provide functional improvement to the ecosystem by restoring
riffle /pool sequences to promote aeration of water, lower water temperature, help
maintain dissolved oxygen concentrations, and restore the aquatic, benthic, and riparian
habitat
• The restoration and buffer enhancement efforts will reduce on -site nutrient inputs by
removing cattle from streams and filtering on -site runoff through buffer zones Off -site
nutrient input will be absorbed on -site by filtering flood flows through restored floodplain
areas, where flood flow will spread through native vegetation
The project will restore, enhance, and preserve nearly two miles of riparian buffers and will create a
conservation corridor by connecting these lands to forested upstream and downstream properties
The project area will be protected in perpetuity with a conservation easement
104 Sediment Transport Analysis
A sediment competence analysis was performed for the restoration reaches on the site UT1
Reaches 2 and 5 and UT1A Reaches 1 and 4 and the Enhancement 1 section of UT1 Reach 4 Table
14 summarizes the dimensional shear stresses and movable particle size calculations under existing
conditions for the restoration reaches The critical shear stress required to move the observed
largest subpavement particle and the movable particle size given the existing shear stress are both
reported in the table
Bed material in UT1 Reach 2 was well below the size classes in reaches upstream and downstream
likely due to recent incision and highly mobile beds, therefore sediment data from Reach 1 was used
for sediment transport analysis in Reach 2 Using this approach, existing shear stress is below the
shear stress required to move the d84 of the subpavement indicating an aggradational situation
This is likely due to a decreased slope in this reach below the knickpoints that represent the break
between Reach 1 and 2
UT1 Reach 4 has an existing shear stress that is approximately equal to the shear stress required to
move the largest measured subpavement particle indicating that the system is currently in
equalibrium with its sediment supply
UT1 Reach 5 has an existing shear stress that greatly exceeds the shear stress required to move the
largest measured particle in the subpavement material indicating that this system is degradational
This analysis is supported by observed conditions of active incision
Based on the watershed assessment summarized earlier in this report, the stream channels are
expected to have adequate capacity to pass the limited sediment load being received from
upstream drainage
oft
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 34

f�
Table 14. Existing Dimensional Shear Stress and Sediment Transport Analysis
Aaonv Acres Mitigation Site
Table 15 summarizes the dimensional shear stresses and movable particle size calculations for the
restoration reaches under proposed conditions UT1 Reach5 and UT1A Reach 4 have design shear
stresses that do not move the largest measured subpavement particles but do move particle sizes
between the d84 and d95 UT1 Reaches 2 and 4 have design shear stresses that do not move the d84
based on the regression line of the Shields Curve However, when looking at the range of data
points used to develop the curve, the upper end of material mobilized at the calculated shear
stresses indicates that the d84 would be mobilized at a bankfull flow This is an indicator of sediment
competence with a low potential for aggradation at the design discharge values for these reaches
given that the majority of subpavement material is mobilized at bankfull flows Aggradation is not
considered to be a risk due to the low sediment supply associated with these reaches as determined
through the watershed analysis described previously
UT1A Reach 1 has a design shear stress that mobilizes the largest measured subpavement particle
size However, when looking at the range of data points used to develop the curve, the lower end of
material mobilized at the calculated shear stresses is comparable to the largest measured
subpavement particle This analysis indicated that the design channel has adequate competence to
mobilize all subpavement material in the system and has a moderate potential for degradation In
order to safeguard against potential incision, constructed riffles will be built with material larger
than that predicted to be mobilized at bankfull flows
Table 15. Proposed Dimensional Shear Stress and Sediment Transport Analysis
Aaonv Acres Mitigation Site
Parameter
-,- W UT1 , ,
UTlA
'
-
Reach 2
Reach 4
Reach' 5
" u,� ,
Rea�rt ch 1,
� �`
Reach`4
d84 of subpavement sediment sample (mm)
412
312
381
129
321
d95 of subpavement sediment sample (mm)
569
369
559
279
498
Largest subpavement particle sampled
(mm)
573
460
728
279
607
Existing shear stress (Ibs /ftZ)
043
069
126
05
176
Moveable particle (mm) per Shield's Curve
325
532
991
382
141
Shear (Ibs /ftZ) stress to move dioo
074
060
094
037
082
Table 15 summarizes the dimensional shear stresses and movable particle size calculations for the
restoration reaches under proposed conditions UT1 Reach5 and UT1A Reach 4 have design shear
stresses that do not move the largest measured subpavement particles but do move particle sizes
between the d84 and d95 UT1 Reaches 2 and 4 have design shear stresses that do not move the d84
based on the regression line of the Shields Curve However, when looking at the range of data
points used to develop the curve, the upper end of material mobilized at the calculated shear
stresses indicates that the d84 would be mobilized at a bankfull flow This is an indicator of sediment
competence with a low potential for aggradation at the design discharge values for these reaches
given that the majority of subpavement material is mobilized at bankfull flows Aggradation is not
considered to be a risk due to the low sediment supply associated with these reaches as determined
through the watershed analysis described previously
UT1A Reach 1 has a design shear stress that mobilizes the largest measured subpavement particle
size However, when looking at the range of data points used to develop the curve, the lower end of
material mobilized at the calculated shear stresses is comparable to the largest measured
subpavement particle This analysis indicated that the design channel has adequate competence to
mobilize all subpavement material in the system and has a moderate potential for degradation In
order to safeguard against potential incision, constructed riffles will be built with material larger
than that predicted to be mobilized at bankfull flows
Table 15. Proposed Dimensional Shear Stress and Sediment Transport Analysis
Aaonv Acres Mitigation Site
Parameter
UTiY, ��r� .
UT1A
Reach 2
Reach 4
Reach 5
Reach 1
Reach 4
d84 of subpavement sediment sample (mm)
412
312
381
129
321
d95 of subpavement sediment sample (mm)
569
369
559
279
498
Largest subpavement particle sampled
(mm)
573
460
728
279
607
Proposed shear stress (Ibs /ftZ)
049
031
063
048
054
Moveable particle (mm) per Shield's Curve
373
229
482
363
410
Shear (Ibs /ftZ) stress to move dioo
074
j 060
j 094
037
082
Wor Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 35

105 Project Implementation Summary
The stream restoration will be constructed as described in this section A full set of preliminary
(60 %) design plans are included with this mitigation plan for review
1051 Site Grading, Structure Installation, and Other Project Related Construction
The stream restoration elements of the project will be constructed primarily as Priority 1 restoration
with a section of Priority 2 restoration at the downstream ends of UT1 and UT2 The stream bed will
be raised so that the bankfull elevation will coincide with the existing floodplain, the cross sections
will be constructed to convey the design discharge, and the pattern will be reconstructed so that the
channel meanders through the floodplain Enhancement I components of the project will involve
constructing riffle structures and stabilizing banks as necessary but will not involve altering the
existing channel pattern Enhancement II components will include fencing cattle out of the riparian
corridors with only localized bank treatments and stabilization as necesaary
The stream reconstruction will result in appropriately sized channels that will meander across the
floodplain The cross - sectional dimensions of the design channels will be constructed to flood the
adjacent floodplain and the existing wetlands frequently The reconstructed channel banks will be
built with stable side slopes, and matted and planted with native vegetation for long -term stability
The sinuous planform of the channel will be built to mimic a natural Piedmont stream
The bedform of the reconstructed gravel and cobble stream beds will vary between pools and riffles
Generally the pools will occur in the outside of the meander bends and the riffles in the straight
sections of channel between meanders Riffle /pool sequences will be built in the new channels as
they are common for streams in Piedmont streams with bed material similar to the project reaches
These features provide energy dissipation and aquatic habitat As a result of the project, the
floodplain will be more frequently inundated
Instream structures will include constructed riffles, angled log sills, log vanes, and cascade step -pool
structures The constructed riffles and cascade step -pools will include native gravel /cobble material
harvested from the existing channel and from surrounding rocky hillslopes The diverse range of
constructed riffle types will provide grade control, heterogeneous habitat, and a varied flow regime
Wood will be incorporated into these structures using a mixture of logs and brush material Log
vanes will provide additional grade control and will deflect flows away from banks while creating
habitat diversity Angled log sills will be used to allow for small grade drops across pools and provide
extra grade control protection At select outer meander bends, the channel banks will be
constructed of brush toe or brush mattress treatments to reduce erosion potential and encourage
pool formation Transplanted sod mats, rootwads, and roller log structures will also be used to
protect channel banks and turn water downstream
Four (4) culvert crossings will be installed outside of the easement boundaries at the request of the
various landowners These include three (3) crossings on UT1 and one (1) crossing on UT1A
Additionally, three (3) ford crossings will be installed, one each on UT1, UT1A, and UT2 Fencing will
be installed along the conservation easement boundary in locations where the adjacent land use will
remain active cattle pasture Crossings located in cattle pasture will have cattle gates so that cattle
will be herded through to move from one pasture to another rather than having unrestricted access
to crossing areas at all times
1052 Natural Plant Community Restoration
As a final stage of construction, riparian buffers will be planted and restored with native trees and
herbaceous plants The natural community within and adjacent to the project easement can be
ON Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 36

classified as Piedmont bottomland forest (Schafale and Weakley, 1990) The woody and herbaceous
species selected are based on this community type, observations of the occurrence of species in the
downstream forest previously described, and best professional judgment on species establishment
and anticipated site conditions in the early years following project implementation Permanent
herbaceous seed will be placed on stream banks, floodplain areas, and all disturbed areas within the
project easement The stream banks will be planted with live stakes and the channel toe will be
planted with plugs ofjuncus effusus The riparian buffers and existing wetland areas will be planted
with bare root seedlings Proposed permanent herbaceous species are shown in the plan set
Individual tree and shrub species will be planted throughout the project easement including stream
banks, benches, tops of banks, and floodplains zones These species will be planted as bare root and
live stakes and will provide additional stabilization to the outsides of constructed meander bends
and side slopes Species planted as bare roots will be spaced at an initial density of 520 plants per
acre based on 12 feet by 7 feet spacing (targeted densities after monitoring year 3 are 320 woody
stems per acre) Live stakes will be planted on channel banks at 2 -foot to 3 -foot spacing on the
outside of meander bends and 6 -foot to 8 -foot spacing on tangent sections Point bars will not be
planted with live stakes Proposed tree and shrub species are representative of existing on -site
vegetation communities and are typical of Piedmont bottomland forests Species are detailed in the
plan set
11.0 Maintenance Plan
The site shall be monitored on a regular basis and a physical inspection of the site shall be conducted a
minimum of once per year throughout the post - construction monitoring period until performance
standards are met These site inspections may identify site components and features that require
routine maintenance Routine maintenance should be expected most often in the first two years
following site construction and may include the following
Table 16. Maintenance Plan
Annnv Arras Mitinntinn Site
Component /Feature
Maintenance through project close -out
"
Routine channel maintenance and repair activities may include chinking of in- stream structures
to prevent piping, securing loose coir matting, and supplemental installations of live stakes and
Stream
other target vegetation along the channel Areas where storm water and floodplain flows
intercept the channel may also require maintenance to prevent bank failures and head - cutting
Beaver dams that inundate the streams shall be removed and the beaver shall be trapped
Vegetation shall be maintained to ensure the health and vigor of the targeted community
Routine vegetation maintenance and repair activities may include supplemental planting,
Vegetation
pruning, mulching, and fertilizing Exotic invasive plant species shall be controlled by mechanical
and /or chemical methods Any vegetation control requiring herbicide application will be
performed in accordance with NC Department of Agriculture (NCDA) rules and regulations
Site boundaries shall be identified in the field to ensure clear distinction between the mitigation
site and adjacent properties Boundaries may be identified by fence, marker, bollard, post, tree -
Site boundary
blazing, or other means as allowed by site conditions and /or conservation easement Boundary
markers disturbed, damaged, or destroyed will be repaired and /or replaced on an as- needed
basis
Ford and Culvert
Ford crossings within the site may be maintained only as allowed by Conservation Easement or
Crossings
existing easement, deed restrictions, rights of way, or corridor agreements
Ok
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 37

12.0 Performance Standards
The stream and buffer performance criteria for the project site will follow approved performance
criteria presented in the EEP Mitigation Plan Template (version 2 1, 09/01/2011), the EEP Monitoring
Requirements and Performance Standards for Stream and /or Wetland Mitigation (11/7/2011), and the
Stream Mitigation Guidelines issued in April 2003 by the USACE and NCDWR Annual monitoring and
semi- annual site visits will be conducted to assess the condition of the finished project The stream
restoration and enhancement sections and the buffer restoration sections of the project will be assigned
specific performance criteria components for stream morphology (stream only), hydrology (stream
only), and vegetation (stream and buffer) Performance criteria will be evaluated throughout the seven
year post - construction monitoring If all performance criteria have been successfully met and two
bankfull events have occurred during separate years, Wildlands may propose to terminate stream
and /or vegetation monitoring An outline of the performance criteria components follows
121 Streams
1211 Dimension
Riffle cross - sections on the restoration and enhancement I reaches should be stable and should
show little change in bankfull area, maximum depth ratio, and width -to -depth ratio Per EEP
guidance, bank height ratios shall not exceed 12 and entrenchment ratios shall be at least 2 2 for
restored channels to be considered stable Reach riffle means should fall within the parameters
defined for channels of the appropriate Rosgen stream type If any changes do occur, these changes
will be evaluated to assess whether the stream channel is showing signs of instability Indicators of
instability include a trend in vertical incision or eroding channel banks over the monitoring period
Changes in the channel that indicate a movement toward stability or enhanced habitat include a
decrease in the width -to -depth ratio in meandering channels or an increase in pool depth Remedial
action would not be taken if channel changes indicate a movement toward stability
1212 Pattern and Profile
Visual assessments and photo documentation should indicate that streams are remaining stable and
do not indicate a trend toward vertical or lateral instability
1213 Substrate
Substrate materials in the restoration and enhancement I reaches should indicate a progression
towards or the maintenance of coarser materials in the riffle features and smaller particles in the
pool features
1214 Photo Documentation
Photographs should illustrate the site's vegetation and morphological stability on an annual basis
Cross - section photos should demonstrate no excessive erosion or degradation of the banks
Longitudinal photos should indicate the absence of persistent bars within the channel or vertical
incision Grade control structures should remain stable Deposition of sediment on the bank side of
vane arms is preferable Maintenance of scour pools on the channel side of vane arms is expected
1215 Bankfull Events
Two bankfull flow events must be documented on the restoration and enhancement reaches within
the seven -year monitoring period The two bankfull events must occur in separate years Stream
a Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 38

monitoring will continue until success criteria in the form of two bankfull events in separate years
have been documented
122 Vegetation
The final vegetative success criteria for the stream restoration and enhancement areas and the
buffer restoration area will be the survival of 210 planted stems per acre in the riparian corridor at
the end of the required monitoring period (year seven) For the stream areas only, the interim
measure of vegetative success will be the survival of at least 320 planted stems per acre at the end
of the third monitoring year and at least 260 stems per acre at the end of the fifth year of
monitoring Planted vegetation must average 10 feet in height in each plot at the end of the
seventh year of monitoring If this performance standard is met by year five and stem density is
trending towards success (i e , no less than 260 five year old stems /acre), monitoring of vegetation
on the site may be terminated with written approval by the USACE in consultation with the NC
Interagency Review Team The extent of invasive species coverage will also be monitored and
controlled as necessary throughout the required monitoring period
123 Visual Assessments
Visual assessments should support the specific performance standards for each metric as described
above
13.0 Monitoring Plan
Annual monitoring data will be reported using the EEP Monitoring Report template (version 14,
11/7/11) The monitoring report shall provide a project data chronology that will facilitate an
understanding of project status and trends, population of EEP databases for analysis, research purposes,
and assist in decision making regarding close -out The monitoring period will extend seven years
beyond completion of construction or until performance criteria have been met Project monitoring
requirements in the sections below and are listed in more detail in Tables 17a and 17b All survey will
be tied to grid
W Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 39

Table 17a. Monitoring Requirements
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Notes
1 Cross - sections will be permanently marked with rebar to establish permanent location Surveys will include points measured at all breaks
in slope, including top of bank, bankfull, edge of water, and thalweg
2 Pattern and profile will be visually assessed during bi- annual site visits
3 One crest gage will be installed per stream channel Devices will be inspected quarterly or semi-annually, evidence of bankfull will be
documented with a photo
4 Vegetation monitoring will follow CVS protocols
5 Locations of exotic and nuisance vegetation will be mapped
6 Locations offence damage, vegetation damage, boundary encroachments, etc will be mapped
7 Photograph markers will be established so that the same locations and view directions on the site are monitored
*The total number of vegetation plots listed above will be distributed throughout the site within the proposed planting area Please refer to
Figure 11 for further details on approximate vegetation plot location
WAgony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 40
Monitonng�
quantity /= Length
�� -_ x - ,. -_ /j=am _
Reach
Paramefe�
�-
wr '
Feature
',a
Ulf =
UT1
�UT1 �',
- v
'U_T1A
UT1A'
rr r n
��UT16
Frequency,,
ti;Notes
'R2
;R5
R4��
`UT2
R4
Rl
Riffle Cross
3
1
3
3
2
1
4
Sections
Years 1, 2,
Dimension
Pool Cross
3, 5 and 7
1
3
1
3
2
2
1
3
Section
Pattern
Pattern
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Annual
Profile
Longitudinal
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Annual
2
profile
Reach wide
(RW), Riffle
1 RW
1 RW
1 RW
1 RW
1 RW
1 RW
1 RW
Substrate
Annual
(RF) 100
3 RF
1 RF
3 RF
3 RF
2 RF
1 RF
3 RF
pebble count
Hydrology
Crest Gage
Y
Y
Y
Y
Annual
3
Years 1, 2,
Vegetation
CVS Level 2
16*
3,5and7
4
Visual
Stream and
Semi -
Assessment
Buffer Areas
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Annual
Exotic and
nuisance
Semi -
Annual
5
vegetation
-�---��
Project
Semi-
6
Boundary
Annual
Reference
photographs
41
Annual
7
Photos
Notes
1 Cross - sections will be permanently marked with rebar to establish permanent location Surveys will include points measured at all breaks
in slope, including top of bank, bankfull, edge of water, and thalweg
2 Pattern and profile will be visually assessed during bi- annual site visits
3 One crest gage will be installed per stream channel Devices will be inspected quarterly or semi-annually, evidence of bankfull will be
documented with a photo
4 Vegetation monitoring will follow CVS protocols
5 Locations of exotic and nuisance vegetation will be mapped
6 Locations offence damage, vegetation damage, boundary encroachments, etc will be mapped
7 Photograph markers will be established so that the same locations and view directions on the site are monitored
*The total number of vegetation plots listed above will be distributed throughout the site within the proposed planting area Please refer to
Figure 11 for further details on approximate vegetation plot location
WAgony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 40

f Table 17b. Monitoring Requirements (Enhancement II, Preservation Reaches and Buffer
Restoration Area)
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
u^" a °aal' B i4i ,fir
o�
t ,�,
quantity/ Length
"'W -�
Parameter �
fiMonitoring
,
�Frequency
�
UT1UT1
�,
UT1
UT1A
UT1A
�'IteedForkr
Feature _
�mF
m
�'rR3
�,R4'
r
R2,,_,, "
��_,
^R3��u��
s
Buffer �,�,�
i( )'
�No`_tes
�� ;
:�,;� a
,,�,��t
�u,t�'�':�ra�`
u�
Riffle Cross
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Sections
Years 1, 2,
Dimension
Pool Cross
3, 5 and 7
1
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Section
Pattern
Pattern
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Annual
Longitudinal
2
Profile
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Annual
Profile
Reach wide
(RW), Riffle
Substrate
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Annual
(RF) 100
pebble count
Hydrology
Crest Gage
Y
Y
n/a
Annual
3
Years 1, 2,
Vegetation
CVS Level 2
16
4
3,5 and 7
Visual
Stream and
Semi -
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Assessment
Buffer Areas
Annual
Exotic and
Semi -
nuisance
NNE
Annual
5
vegetation
Project
Semi-
6
Boundary
Annual
Reference
Photographs
41
Annual
7
Photos
Notes
1 Cross - sections will be permanently marked with rebar to establish permanent location Surveys will include points measured at all breaks
in slope, including top of bank, bankfull, edge of water, and thalweg
2 Pattern and profile will be visually assessed during bi- annual site visits
3 One crest gage will be installed per stream channel Devices will be inspected quarterly or semi- annually, evidence of bankfull will be
documented with a photo
4 Vegetation monitoring will follow CVS protocols
5 Locations of exotic and nuisance vegetation will be mapped
6 Locations offence damage, vegetation damage, boundary encroachments, etc will be mapped
7 Photograph markers will be established so that the same locations and view directions on the site are monitored
*The total number of vegetation plots listed above will be distributed throughout the site within the proposed planting area Please refer to
Figure 11 for further details on approximate vegetation plot location
131 Streams
1311 Dimension
In order to monitor the channel dimension, one (1) permanent cross - section will be installed per 20
bankfull widths along stream restoration /enhancement level I reaches, with riffle and pool sections
in proportion to EEP guidance Each cross - section will be permanently marked with pins to establish
its location Cross - section surveys will include points measured at all breaks in slope, including top
of bank, bankfull, edge of water, and thalweg to monitor any trends in bank erosion If moderate
/ bank erosion is observed a stream reach during the monitoring period, an array of bank pins will be
installed in representative areas where erosion is occurring for reaches with a bankfull width of
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 41

greater than three feet Bank pins will be installed in at least three locations (one in upper third of
the pool, one at the mid -point of the pool, and one in the lower third of the pool) Bank pins will be
monitored by measuring exposed rebar and maintaining pins flush to bank to capture bank erosion
progression Annual cross - section and bank pin survey (if applicable) will be conducted in
monitoring years one (1), two (2), three (3), five (5), and seven (7)
1312 Pattern and Profile
Longitudinal profile surveys will not be conducted during the seven year monitoring period unless
other indicators during the annual monitoring indicate a trend toward vertical and lateral instability
If a longitudinal profile is deemed necessary, monitoring will follow standards as described in the
EEP Monitoring Requirements and Performance Standards for Stream and /or Wetland Mitigation
(11/7/2011) and the 2003 USACE and NCDWR Stream Mitigation Guidance for the necessary
reaches
1313 Substrate
A reach -wide pebble count will be performed in each restoration reach each year for classification
purposes A pebble count will be performed at each surveyed riffle to characterize the pavement
1314 Photo Documentation
Photographs will be taken once a year to visually document stability for seven years following
construction Permanent markers will be established and located with GPS equipment so that the
same locations and view directions on the site are photographed each year Photos will be used to
monitor restoration and enhancement stream reaches as well as vegetation plots and wetland
areas
Longitudinal reference photos will be established at the tail of riffles approximately every 200 LF
along the channel by taking a photo looking upstream and downstream Cross - sectional photos will
be taken of each permanent cross - section looking upstream and downstream Reference photos
will also be taken for each of the vegetation plots and within wetland areas Representative digital
photos of each permanent photo point, cross - section and vegetation plot will be taken on the same
day of the stream and vegetation assessments are conducted The photographer will make every
effort to consistently maintain the same area in each photo over time
1315 Bankfull Events
Bankfull events will be documented using a crest gage, photographs, and visual assessments such as
debris lines The crest gages will be installed within a riffle cross - section of the restored channels in
surveyed riffle cross - sections The gages will be checked at each site visit to determine if a bankfull
event has occurred Photographs will be used to document the occurrence of debris lines and
sediment deposition
132 Vegetation
Vegetation monitoring plots will be installed and evaluated within the restoration and enhancement
areas to measure the survival of the planted trees The number of monitoring quadrants required is
based on the EEP monitoring guidance documents (version 14, 11/7/11) The size of individual
quadrants will be 100 square meters for woody tree species and shrubs Vegetation assessments
will be conducted following the Carolina Vegetation Survey (CVS) Level 2 Protocol for Recording
Vegetation (2006)
W Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 42

The initial baseline survey will be conducted within 21 days from completion of site planting and
used for subsequent monitoring year comparisons The first annual vegetation monitoring activities
will commence at the end of the first growing season, during the month of September The
restoration and enhancement sites will then be evaluated each subsequent year between June 1
and September 31 Species composition, density, and survival rates will be evaluated on an annual
basis by plot and for the entire site Individual plot data will be provided and will include height,
density, vigor, damage (if any), and survival Planted woody stems will be marked annually as
needed and given a coordinate, based off of a known origin, so they can be found in succeeding
monitoring years Mortality will be determined from the difference between the previous year's
living planted stems and the current year's living planted stems
133 Visual Assessments
Visual assessments will be performed along all stream and buffer restoration areas on a semi- annual
basis during the seven year monitoring period Problem areas will be noted such as channel
instability (i a lateral and /or vertical instability, in- stream structure failure /instability and /or piping,
headcuts), vegetated health (i a low stem density, vegetation mortality, invasive species or
encroachment), beaver activity, or livestock access Areas of concern will be mapped and
photographed accompanied by a written description in the annual report Problem areas with be
re- evaluated during each subsequent visual assessment Should remedial actions be required,
recommendations will be provided in the annual monitoring report
14.0 Long -Term Management Plan
Upon approval for close -out by the Interagency Review Team (IRT) the Site will be transferred to the
NCDENR Division of Natural Resource Planning and Conservation and Stewardship Program This party
shall be responsible for periodic inspection of the site to ensure that restrictions required in the
conservation easement or the deed restriction document(s) are upheld Endowment funds required to
uphold easement and deed restrictions shall be negotiated prior to site transfer to the responsible
party
The NCDENR Division of Natural Resource Planning and Conservation's Stewardship Program currently
houses EEP stewardship endowments within the non - reverting, interest - bearing Conservation Lands
Stewardship Endowment Account The use of funds from the Endowment Account is governed by North
Carolina General Statue GS 113A- 232(d)(3) Interest gained by the endowment fund may be used only
for the purpose of stewardship, monitoring, stewardship administration, and land transaction costs, if
applicable The NCDENR Stewardship Program intends to manage the account as a non - wasting
endowment Only interest generated from the endowment funds will be used to steward the
compensatory mitigation sites Interest funds not used for those purposes will be re- invested in the
Endowment Account to offset losses due to inflation
15.0 Adaptive Management Plan
Upon completion of site construction EEP will implement the post - construction monitoring protocols
previously defined in this document Project maintenance will be performed as described previously in
this document If, during the course of annual monitoring it is determined the site's ability to achieve
site performance standards are Jeopardized, EEP will notify the USACE of the need to develop a Plan of
Corrective Action The Plan of Corrective Action may be prepared using in -house technical staff or may
require engineering and consulting services Once the Corrective Action Plan is prepared and finalized
�- EEP will
1 Notify the USACE as required by the Nationwide 27 permit general conditions
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 43

2 Revise performance standards, maintenance requirements, and monitoring requirements as
necessary and /or required by the USACE
3 Obtain other permits as necessary
4 Implement the Corrective Action Plan
5 Provide the USACE a Record Drawing of Corrective Actions This document shall depict the
extent and nature of the work performed
16.0 Financial Assurances
Pursuant to Section IV H and Appendix III of the Ecosystem Enhancement Program's In -Lieu Fee
Instrument dated July 28, 2010, the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
has provided the US Army Corps of Engineers Wilmington District with a formal commitment to fund
projects to satisfy mitigation requirements assumed by EEP This commitment provides financial
assurance for all mitigation projects implemented by the program
ON Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan
Page 44
r"

17.0 References
Dalrymple, T 1960 Flood- Frequency Analyses Manual of Hydrology Part 3 Flood -Flow Techniques
USGS Water Supply Paper #1543 -a USGPO, 1960
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), 2011 Web Soil Survey
http / /websoilsurvey nres usda gov /app /HomePage htm
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NHP), 2009 Natural Heritage Element Occurrence Database,
Chatham County, NC http //149 168 1 196 /nhp /county html
Lagasse, P F , Schall, J D , Johnson, F , Richardson, E V , Richardson, J R , and Chang, F , 2001 Stream
Stability at Highway Structures, Second Edition U S Department of Transportation, Report No
FHWA -IP -90 -014, HEC- 20 -ED -2 Washington, DC Federal Highway Administration, 132 p
Rosgen, D L 1994 A classification of natural rivers Catena 22 169 -199
Rosgen, D L 1996 Applied River Morphology Pagosa Springs, CO Wildland Hydrology Books
Rosgen, D L 1997 A Geomorphological Approach to Restoration of Incised Rivers Proceedings of the
Conference on Management of Landscapes Disturbed by Channel Incision Center For
Computational Hydrosaence and Bioengineering, Oxford Campus, University of Mississippi, Pages
12 -22
Rosgen, D L 2006 & 2007 Personal Communication
Schafale, M P and A S Weakley 1990 Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina, 3rd
approx North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh, North Carolina
I Simon, A 1989 A model of channel response in disturbed alluvial channels Earth Surface Processes and
Landforms 14(1) 11 -26
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Final Mitigation Plan Page 45

�
A �.� r % J- 03010104021010 _ _! Hydrologic Unit Code (14)
r -i► OI3 Q f110036L,; , EEP Targeted Local Watersheds
(� t �.� r,,✓ j NCDWQ Subbasin 03 -06 -02
03030002010010
i EEP Conservation Easements
♦.� ` ROCKINOtiAM
j 10 © Airports
- ✓�'�„w`�, ti �' ,�` ' j� . J Natural Heritage Element Occurence
Significant Natural Heritage Area
--
- 303d Listed Streams
03030062010040 j^►�
----------------------
03030002010050
/1 ✓,,�� Reedy Fork Slopes at NC 61
-�1� �;`ji►� 03030002030020
J ,
L'9 ��''�� Altamahaw Alluvial For
030 002026070
L —•I �•! Reed Fork Aquatic Habitat Forest
OV30002020090
r •
000203004
„!'"•r' Project Area
} 03030002020060 +
' 03030002030010
0303000202007^ ^11- >
r +. GUILFORP.i d " .•
r,I t'1 tI 4 � V ! Reedy Fork Slopes at NC 61 �« j ; ALA AU
t'r•�. i - '�. t L. t �I t t l;�t r 030300(13095.Q.r� .s
03030'020 5�`1 . , Q
.j, _ .
.
� r. •� I V j I L 0� ,:,�:.
Rur�,....� h
1. s:
s .. • = t I. • I t — tingto � - �
t t. .yam..` J •� •i t sam
r 0303(i9�2Q 036 0bod 01
cr
� urlt�tt f3 060
�w.a/� S {u y�ii u, /;,i1 ). v Eutr ,• i t
�I'+►�. 030300020010 ,n*�e 0"'
r�*� b0002p40040 r rJ +%�� i Q3030002tl40100
12, ' 1- 030002040070`
WILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
0 1 2 Miles
I I I
Figure 1 Vicinity Map
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Mitigation Plan
EEP Project No. 95716
Guilford County, NC

Figure 2 Site Ma,
W I L D L A N D S Agony Acres Mitigation Sit,
ENGINEERING
Mitigation Plan
0 250 500 Feet EEP Project No.95716
I I I
Guilford County, NC

Figure 3 Watershed Map
�i W I L D L A N D S Agony Acres Mitigation Site
ENGINEERING
0 500 1,000 Feet Mitigation Plan
I i EEP Project No.95716
Guilford County, NC

Project Location � •. �,�'�-� '`�,.��, i `' � ''^
`*-'r � -� � *•ter: l�ll -f f ���- -y�'`t
5
0
. 4 1
Ci 171-
273
II � � 1 �• `1� 111
4p'j(�� ►�', dFFit3 g/e ip --- : � � � {`\ yl-- � 1,\ i
WILDLANDS
E N G I N E E R I N G
0 500 1,000 Feet
I I I
Figure 4 USGS Topographic Mi
Agony Acres Mitigation Si'
Mitigation Plan
EEP Project No.95716
Guilford County, NC

Project Location
L— —J Proposed Conservation Easement
Reach Break
Perennial Stream
• • • • • • • • Intermittent Stream
Streams
_ CcD -Cecil sandy loam
CoA- Congaree loam
_ CrC- Coronaca clay loam
_ EnC -Enon fine sandy loam, 6 to 10%
_ EnD -Enon fine sandy loam, 10 to 15%
_ EoD2 -Enon clay loam
_ McE2- Madison clay loam
_ MhC2- Mecklenburg sandy clay loam
_ W- -Open Water
_ WhA- Wehadkee loam
M
WILDLANDS
E N G I N E E R I N G
1
i
0 250 500 Feet
I i 1
Figure 5 SoilsMap
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Mitigation Plan
EEP Project No.95716
Guilford County, NC
t.'
l
x
Figure 5 SoilsMap
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Mitigation Plan
EEP Project No.95716
Guilford County, NC

Figure 6 Hydrologic Features Ma
W I L D L A N D S Agony Acres Mitigation Sit,
E N G I N E E R I N G Mitigation Plan
0 250 500 Feet
I I I EEP Project No.95716
Guilford County, NC

North Carolina Piedmont Regional Curve: Discharge
10000
1000-
T
100
R .......... ..
10
1
0.01
I M!
min
. ......... .......
0.1 1 10 100
Drainage Area (square miles)
• Rural Data — — — Rural Upper 95% Limit
— — — Rural Lower 95% Limit ♦ Reference Reaches
,7 Qmax - Existing Site Streams ■ Surveyed Gage Sites
& RFF 12grcPraedictions X Reference Reach Curve
t Design 5 h rges x Onsite Reference XS - Discharge
Alan Walker NC Rural Mountain & Piedmont Curve: Discharge
10000 1 - 4 ,....1 1 1 1 - f -1, 11-1 . i , - - . - i I 1 1 4 1 i - -
I I [JI
0.01 01 1 10 100
Drainage Area (square miles)
•
Aura Data
— —
— Rural Upper 95% Limit
— — — Rural Lower 95% Limit
•
Reference Reaches
e
Qmax - Existing Site Streams
a
Surveyed Gage Sites
A
RFF 1.2-yr Predictions
T
Reference Reach Curve
•
Design Discharges
•
Alan Walker Curve
Ref Reaches
■
Surveyed Existing XS (ALL) - Discharge
rvPower
Power R, r .1 Data)
(Reference Reach Curve)
Figure 7 NC Piedmont Regional Curves
with Project Data Overlay
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Mitigation Plan
EEP Project No.95716
Guilford County, NC

ZONE X- -- � _
Ix—
ZONE-. X
ZONEAE
II �IC
GONE AF —ZONE X
(imlio,d C. otwt, � � _ -_ ����./ �..• —ZONE X
t:nin Corr,, atcd Aien,
701 I I
ZONE X
_
FIRM Panel 8838 and 8848, dated June18, 2007
Figure 8 FEMA Flood Map
w6mw.�'Wl L D LANDS Agony Acres Mitigation Site
ENGINEERING
Mitigation Plan
0 500 1,000 Feet EEP Project No.95716
Guilford County, NC

Reference Reach
, Eden
KN) fig?,;. '.IOKI—.1 Maygdan Rkll KIIl(111:1P,1
Reidsville
S i
� t
Rural ,
_!
fie
- f.} UT1 Reach 3 &
ti Y Project Area
I k-'1: `�`� l 1 I t = ltainahav4
%OKIll
Yadkinville Kerne�wille Gu I L F OR I PAorganta►a n Hare '
Winston -Salem
' Greensboro Gibsonville. Elon River Mebai
Clemmons ` t
I
Hrgh Jamestown '
Point t
r
Thomasville $� UT Polecat iberty
► `Lexington Randleman --
r� � L t�A111)01, H Siler
Spencer �.. -r
Asheboro city.
UT to Cane Creek = 229 a " CI ATH Ahl
:eta N O R T H .286 ry
ille CAROLINA
Landis ina Grove 3 28? ►.? �� San,'ti..
wfPolis
Ietih., ri" Spencer Creek 1 & 2
le Tom st
25 T m
Tray
Harri5kur�i ti t :' HLY '
hl c 01: t"
Locust
:te r ti I Pinehurst ` SOLk.hefn
Pines ,.
_� Aberdeen Fort Br
ilit�
Pinzbluff h�Resew
Indian
Figure 9 Reference Reach Vicinity Map
1w W I L D L A N D S Agony Acres Mitigation Site
E N G I N E E R I N G Mitigation Plan
EEP Project No. 95716
0 10 20 Miles
Guilford County, NC

Figure 10 Concept Desig,
W I L D L A N D S Agony Acres Mitigation Sit
E N G I N E E R I N G
0 250 500 Feet Mitigation Plan
I I I I EEP Project No.95716
Guilford County, NC

Figure 11 Monitoring Plan
W I L D L A N D S Agony Acres Mitigation Site
C N G I N C C R I N G
0 250 500 Feet Mitigation Plan
I I I I I t EEP Project No.95716
Guilford County, NC

Appendix 1: Project Site Photographs

Photo 1. Reedy Fork - Buffer Restoration
Photo 2. UT1 Reach 1 - Enhancement 11

Photo 3. UT1 Reach 2 - Restoration
Photo 4. UT1 Reach 3 - Preservation

Photo 5. UT1— Reach 4 Enhancement II
Photo 6. UT1 Reach 5 - Restoration

Photo 7. UT1A Reach 1 - Restoration
Photo 8. UT1A Reach 2 - Enhancement 11

Photo 9. UT1A Reach 3 - Preservation
Photo 10. UT1A Reach 4 — Restoration

Photo 11. UT1B - Restoration
Photo 12. UT2 — Restoration

Appendix 2: Historic Aerial Photographs

b i
IL
4—
�y
'�
••e

t f.
rep♦.•� t f.
r
r
LN
Ali
4.
Al
"RW WW-
f
fi
w .
4
4t .. >�L' "c� �► �'. #a!ii
AL
it
,♦ .f t �x j � ✓ ' FR art ���„ � "� k
S 4? a `'i � =i `"- an,".:_'�' �{:!♦ :� f (i t.
kxt� S- J ' -v�y f R . ,1'••sJs- ±
I-
r 4: a b >e
INQUIRY M 3478919.4 - {
YEAR: 1982'
,
500' -
o��.+'.•.t°c^^: °�s�. :: +�^•W�m��. =fir-,"_ .. :,. 1. �. . - .. ..

.009
C66 :8VBA
N Z, V6W9LtC :# AmmON1
5
,Nk
4- *rwx
41
, --a
J.j
v
;14

�R s� /�
-i
� �
. .,

VI
04 -4
L
4,
INQUIRY M 3478919.4
YEAR: 2005
I = 500'
P7
J&
xA lot
IL 4k - q
at
W1.
y.
Qkt,
At�74
411k
low -
I.V

.. � FFF ....
t�....... ........
s �
m
3,
.
l
INQUIRY #: 3478919.4
YEAR: 2006
= 500'

Appendix 3: Project Site USACE Routine Wetland Determination, NCWAM Data
Forms, and Approved Jurisdictional Determination

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Sae Agony Acres Stream Mitigation Site Cary /County Guilford Sampling Date 1/28/13
Applicant/Owner Wildlands Engineering State NC Sampling Point wetland A - DPI - -�
Investigator(s) Matt Jenkins, PWS and Ian Eckardt Section, Township, Range —�
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc ) floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none) concave Slope (ova) 0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) MLRA 136 Let N 36 177325 Long W 79 543360 Datum
Sod Map Unit Name Enon fine sandy loam (EnD) NWI classification
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 40' No (If no, explain in Remarks )
Are Vegetation '� Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No ✓
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks )
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, Important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydnc Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Sampling point located In a sparsely vegetated concave depression adjacent to UT1A. Cattle have
access to the sampling location and have disturbed /trampled much of the surface area at the
sampling point.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators-
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one Is required. check
all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (66)
_ Surface Water (Al) _
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
_ High Water Table (A2)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Drainage Patterns (1310)
V Saturation (A3)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
_ Water Marks (B1) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (62) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (63) _
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (64) _
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (131)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
Geomorphic Position (132)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (133)
Water - Stained Leaves (69)
_ Microtopographic Relief (134)
_ Aquatic Fauna (1313)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches)
Water Table Present? Yes No
Depth (inches)
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth (inches) `12"
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitonng well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point WeilandA - DPI
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size 30 ) % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species
' 1 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (A)
Total Number of Dominant
3 Species Across All Strata (B)
4
5 Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (A/B)
6
7
8
=Total Cover
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size 15' )
1 Ilex opaca 5 No FAC
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size 5- )
1 Microstegium vimineum 1 No FAC
2
�3
f 5
Prevalence Index worksheet-
Total % Cover of
Multiply by.
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x4=
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators*
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53 0'
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydnc soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
6 Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in (7 6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
7 height
8
Sapling/Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
9 than 3 in DBH and greater than 3 28 ft (1 m) tall
10
11 Herb — All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 ft tall
12
= Total Cover Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3 28 ft in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size 30' ) height
1
2
3
4
5 Hydrophytic
Vegetation
6 Present? Yes No
= Total Cover
Remarks (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
Feature is located in an sparsely vegetated concave depression that has been heavily disturbed
(trampled) by cattle. Very little vegetation is present within the sampling area
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

SOIL
Wetland A - DP1
Sampling Point
Profile Description (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators)
Depth Matrix
(inches) Color (moist) %
Redox Features f
Color (moist) % Twe oc Texture Remarks a
0-4 5Y 3/1 99
10YR 4/3 1 C PL sandy silt loam
1
4 -12 5Y 4/1 85
5YR 4/6 15 C PL silty day loam
'Type C= Concentration, D =De letion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains 2Location
PL =Pore Unin M =Matnx
Hydric Soil Indicators
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils
Histosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_
Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_
Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_
V Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Sods (F19)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136,147)
_
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_
Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
MLRA 136)
_ Umbnc Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3lndicators of hydrophyttc vegetation and
_
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Sods (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
_
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
unless disturbed or problematic
Restrictive Layer (if observed)
Type
Depth (inches)
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site Agony Acres Stream Mitigation Site City /County Guilford Sampling Date 1/28/13
pplicanttOwner Wildiands Engineering State NC Sampling Point `""and Bac -OP2
­ ivestigator(s) Matt Jenkins, PWS and Ian Eckardt Section, Township, Range
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc) floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none) concave Slope (%) 0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) MLRA 136 Lat N 36 179497 Long W 79 545200 Datum
Soil Map Unit Name Wehadkee loam (WhA) NWI classification
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks )
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No ✓
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks )
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, Important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area
Hydnc Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Sampling point located In a concave depression adjacent to UT1 The area was cleared in the past
and no mature tree strata Is present
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required. check
all that apoly)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Surface Water (Al) _
True Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88)
High Water Table (A2) _
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Drainage Patterns (610)
Saturation (A3)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
_ Water Marks (61) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (132) _
Recent Iron Reduction In Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (B3) _
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (64) _
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (85)
Geomorphic Position (132)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Water - Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
_ Aquatic Fauna (1313)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches) 2"
Water Table Present? Yes No "
Depth (inches)
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth (inches) 12"
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes � No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Wetland 0 8 C - DP2
Sampling Point
Absolute
Dominant indicator
Dominance Test worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size 30' )
e Cover
Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 3 (A)
1
2
Total Number of Dominant
3
Species Across All Strata 3 (B)
4
Percent of Dominant Species
5
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 100% (A/B)
6
Prevalence Index worksheet-
7
Total % Cover of Multiply by.
8
OBL species x 1 =
15'
=Total Cover
FACW species x2=
Saplmo /Shrub Stratum (Plot size
Fraxmus pennsylvanica
)
10
yes FACW
FAC species x 3 =
1
2 Linodendron tulipifera
2
no FAC
FACU species x4=
3 Sambucus canadensis
5
no FACW
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals (A) (B)
4
5
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators*
7
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophyhc Vegetation
8
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
g
3 - Prevalence Index is 53 0'
10
_
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
17
= Total Cover
_
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size 5' )
Problematic Hydrophyhc Vegetation' (Explain)
1 Juncus effusus
40
yes FACW
—
2 Rubus sp
10
no FAC
'Indicators of hydnc sod and wetland hydrology must
3 Cyperus stngosus
20
yes FACW
be present, unless disturbed or problematic ti
–
q
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata
5
Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in (7 6 cm) or
6
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
7
height
8
Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in DBH and greater than 3 28 ft (1 m) tall
9
10
Herb – All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
11
of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 ft tall
12
Woody vine – All woody vines greater than 3 28 ft in
70
=Total Cover
height
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size 30'
)
1
2
3
4
Hydrophytic
5
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
6
= Total Cover
Remarks (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet )
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Interim Version

Wetland B 8 C - DP2
SOIL Sampling Point
Profile Description (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators )
Depth Matrix Redox Features
�(inchesl Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type Loci Texture Remarks
10 -12 5Y 5/2 70 2 5YR 3/4 30 C PL loamy clay
'Type C= Concentration, D =De letion RM= Reduced Matrix MS= Masked Sand Grains 2Location PL =Pore Lining, M = Matrix
Hydrlc Soil Indicators
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Type
Depth (inches)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbnc Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Sods (F19) (MLRA 148)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Sc
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Sods (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic
Hydric Soli Present? Yes V No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site Agony Acres Stream Mitigation Site City/County Guilford Sampling Date 1/28/13
Applicant/Owner Wildlands Engineering State NC Sampling Point Welland D - DPI. -
Investigator(s) Matt Jenkins, PWS and Ian Eckardt Section, Township, Range _
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc ) floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none) concave Slope (%) 0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) MLRA 136 Lat N 36 180729 Long W 79 544436 Datum
Soil Map Unit Name Wehadkee loam ((WhA) NWI classification
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks )
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ✓ No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, Important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
H dnc Soil Presents Yes � No Is the Sampled Area
y within a Wetland? Yes ✓ No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks
Sampling point located in a sparsely vegetated concave depression adjacent to UT1.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required, check
all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
_ Surface Water (Al) _
True Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) _
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (B10)
Saturation (A3) _
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
_ Water Marks (61) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (132) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133) _
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (64) _
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
Geomotphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Water- Stained Leaves (B9)
_ Microtopographic Relief (134)
_ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches)
Water Table Present? Yes No
Depth (inches)
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth (inches) 12„
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point wetland D - DP3
Absolute Dominant Indicator
30
Dominance Test worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size ) ° Cover Species? Status
�1
Number of Dominant Species
Betula nigra 10 no FACW
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 1 (A)
`
`(2 Carpinus caroliniana 10 no FAC
3 Acer rubrum 20 yes FAC
Total Number of Dominant
1
Species Across All Strata (B)
4
5
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 100% (A/B)
6
7
Prevalence Index worksheet-
8
Total % Cover of Multiply by
40 =Total Cover
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size 15 )
FACW species x2=
1
FAC species x 3 =
2
FACU species x4=
3
UPL species x 5 =
4
Column Totals (A) (B)
5
6
Prevalence Index = B/A =
7
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators-
8
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
9
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
10
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53 0'
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
5, =Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size )
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1 Microstegwm vimineum 5 no FAC
— Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
,3
'Indicators of hydnc soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
4
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata: ,
5
6
Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in Q 6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height
8
9
Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in DBH and greater than 3 28 ft (1 m) tall
10
11
Herb – All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 ft tall
12
5 = Total Cover
Woody vine – All woody vines greater than 3 28 ft in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size 30' )
height
1
2
3
4
5
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
6
Present? Yes No
= Total Cover
Remarks (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet )
This sampling location is located in a sparsely vegetated depression adjacent to UT1 A small
amount of microstegium is present but the majority of the ground Is devoid of herbaceous cover. A
few trees are present on the edges of the sampling area
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Interim Version

SOIL
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Sol
Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Wetland D - DP3
Sampling Point
Profile Description (Describe to the depth needed to
document the Indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators ) 7
Depth
(inches)
Matrix
Color (moist)
%
Redox Features
Color (moist) % Type
oc
Texture Remarks
0 -3
10YR 3/2
95
7 5YR 416
5 C
PL
silt loam
3 -8
10YR 4/2
80
5YR 4/6
20 C
PL
silty day loam
8 -12
7 5YR 3/2
50
7 5YR 5/8
50 C
PL
silty day loam
Hydric Soil Indicators
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matnx (S4)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Type
Depth (inches)
3duced Matrix MS=Masked Sand Grains 2Location PL =Pore Lining, M =Matnx
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Sol
Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (172)
_ Piedmont Floodpiain Sods (F19)
_
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbnc Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3Indicators of hydrophybc vegetation and I_
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic ,
11
Hydric Soil Present? Yes V No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site Agony Acres Stream Mitigation Site City /County Guilford Sampling Date 1/28/13
— ,pplicant/Owner Wildlands Engineering State NC Sampling Point wetland E - DP4
I If vestigator(s) Matt Jenkins, PWS and Ian Eckardt Section, Township, Range
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc) floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none) concave Slope ( %) 0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) MLRA 136 Let N 36 179381 Long W 79 546346 Datum
Soil Map Unit Name Enon fine sandy loam (EnD) NWI classification
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ✓ No (If no, explain in Remarks)
Are Vegetation '/ Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are 'Normal Circumstances" present? Yes_
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks)
No ✓
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydnc Sod Presents Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks
Sampling point located In the floodplain of UT1 used for cattle grazing The area was cleared In the
past and lacks a mature tree canopy
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required. check
all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (66)
Surface Water (Al) _
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
_ High Water Table (A2) _
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
' Saturation (A3) _
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
_ Water Marks (B1) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (132) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (B3) _
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (64) _
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (B5)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
_ Shallow Aquitard (133)
Water - Stained Leaves (B9)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
_ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations,
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches) 2"
Water Table Present? Yes No "
Depth (inches)
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth (inches) at surface
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — interim Version

Wetland E - DP4
VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size 30' ) % Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
_
1
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 4 (A) %
1
2
Total Number of Dominant
3
Species Across All Strata 4 (B)
4
Percent of Dominant Species
5
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 100% (A/B)
6
Prevalence Index worksheet
7
Total % Cover of Multiply by
8
OBL species x 1 =
=Total Cover
Sapiino /Shrub Stratum (Plot size 15' )
FACW species x 2 =
1 Sambucus canadensis 15 yes FACW
FAC species x 3 =
2 Salix nigra 15 yes OBL
FACU species x 4 =
3
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals (A) (B)
4
5
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
7
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53 0'
10
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
30 = Total Cover
_
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size 5' )
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1 Juncus eff isus 50 yes FACW
—
2 Microstegium vimineum 30 yes FAC
'Indicators of hydnc soil and wetland hydrology must �
3
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
4
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata.
5
Tree –Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in (7 6 cm) or
6
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
7
height
8
Sapling /Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less
g
than 3 in DBH and greater than 3 28 It (1 m) tall
10
Herb –All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
11
of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 ft tali
12
Woody vine –All woody vines greater than 3 28 ft in
80 =Total Cover
height
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size 30' )
1
2
3
4
Hydrophytic
5
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
6
= Total Cover
Remarks (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet )
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Interim Version

SOIL Sampling Point wetland E - DP4
Profile Description (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Tvoe Loci Texture Remarks
"0 10YR 5/2 70 5YR 4/6 30 C PL day
'Type C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains 2Location PL =Pore Lining, M = Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators Indicators for Problematic Hydric SOIIs3
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Type
Depth (inches)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Sods (F19) (MLRA 148)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Sods (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Other (Explain In Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site Agony Acres Stream Mitigation Site City/County Guilford Sampling Date 1/28/13
Applicant/Owner Wildlands Engineering State NC Sampling Point wetiandF -DP1
Investigator(s) Matt Jenkins, PWS and Ian Eckardt Section, Township, Range
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc ) floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none) concave Slope ( %) 0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) MLRA 136 Lat N 36 176849 Long W 79 550241 Datum
Sod Map Unit Name Wehadkee loam (WhA) NWI classification
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes `� No (If no, explain in Remarks)
Are Vegetation V , Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ✓ No
Are Vegetation , Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks )
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area
Hydnc Sod Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks
Sampling point located In the floodplain of UT1 used for cattle grazing The feature Is located within
an active cattle field and experiences significant disturbances to vegetation
iavnizni nr.v
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is reouired
check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (66)
Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
_
High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (610) ;6
_
Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
_ Water Marks (61)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_
Drift Deposits (133)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_
_ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (65)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
_ Shallow Aquitard (133)
_
Water - Stained Leaves (69)
_ Microtopographic Relief (134)
_ Aquatic Fauna (1313)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations
Surface Water Present'? Yes No
Depth (inches)
Water Table Present? Yes No
Depth (inches)
✓
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth (inches) ` 12"
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks
r
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point wetland F - DP5
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size 30' ) % Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
Betula rngra 5 no FACW
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 3 (A)
;> Acer rubrum 15 yes FAC
-`
Total Number of Dominant
3
Species Across All Strata 3 (B)
4
Percent of Dominant Species
5
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 100% (A/B)
6
Prevalence Index worksheet
7
Total % Cover of MUIbl)IV by.
8
20 = Total Cover
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size 15' )
FACW species x 2 =
1
FAC species x 3 =
2
FACU species x 4 =
3
UPI-species x5=
4
Column Totals (A) (B)
5
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
7
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9
3 - Prevalence Index is 53 0'
10
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
=
5- Total Cover
_
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size )
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation (Explain)
1 Cyperus stngosus 20 yes FACW
—
2 Microstegwm wmmeum 20 yes FAC
/
�I Festuce sp 10 no FAC
'Indicators of hydnc sod and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata
5
6
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in (7 6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
7
height
8
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
g
than 3 in DBH and greater than 3 28 ft (1 m) tall
10
Herb - All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
11
of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 ft tall
12
50 = Total Cover
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3 28 ft in
W V St PI 30'
d
height
0o v me ratum ( of size )
1 Lonicera japonica 5 no FAC
2
3
4
5 Hydrophytic
Vegetation
6 Present? Yes No-
5 = Total Cover
Remarks (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version

SOIL
Sampling Point wetland F - DP5
Profile Description (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators)
Depth Matnx Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc Texture Remarks
0 -9 10YR 4/2 60 5YR 4/8 40 C PL silt clay loam
9 -12 5Y 5/2 90 5YR 4/6 10 C PL clay loam
'Tvoe C= Concentration. D= DeDlebon, RM= Reduced Matrix. MS= Masked Sand Grains 2Location PL =Pore Lining, M =Matnx
Hydric Soil Indicators
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils'
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron- Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbnc Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present, i
_ Stnpped Matnx (S6)
unless disturbed or problematic
Restrictive Layer (if observed)
Type
Depth (inches)
Hydric
Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version
1

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site Agony Acres Stream Mitigation Site City /County Guilford
1pplicant/Owner Wddlands Engineering State NC
,rvestigator(s) Matt Jenkins, PWS and Ian Eckardt Section, Township, Range
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc ) hlllslope Local relief (concave, convex, none) concave
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) MLRA 136 Let N 36 175901 Long W 79 550260
W h ilk I IA/kA
Sampling Date 1/28/13
— Sampling Point Welland G - DP6
- Slope (%) 0
Datum
Soil Map Unit Name e a ee oam ( ) NWI classification
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ✓ No (If no, explain in Remarks )
Are Vegetation V Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No ✓
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks )
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydnc Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes V No
Remarks
Sampling point Is representative of a jurisdictional wetland area located within a hillside draw
adjacent to UT1 The hillside is located within an active grazing pasture and experiences significant
seasonal disturbances to vegetation
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required, check all that apply)
_ Surface Sod Cracks (66)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Drainage Patterns (610)
Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (1316)
Water Marks (131)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (64)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (131)
Iron Deposits (135)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
_ Shallow Aquitard (133)
Water - Stained Leaves (69)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
_ Aquatic Fauna (1313)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations
Surface Water Present? Yes No
1� Depth (inches)
Water Table Present? Yes No
Depth (inches) ` 12"
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth (inches) 0 -12"
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

Wetland G - DP6
VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point
Remarks (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet-
Tree Stratum (Plot size 30' )
% Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 Liquidambar styraciflua
10
no FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 4 (A)
2 Acer rubrum
20
yes FAC
Total Number of Dominant
3
Species Across All Strata 4 (B)
4
Percent of Dominant Species
5
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 100% (A/B)
6
Prevalence Index worksheet
7
Total % Cover of Multiply by
8
35
=Total Cover
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size 15'
)
FACW species x2=
1
FAC species x 3 =
2
FACU species x 4 =
3
UPL species x 5 =
4
Column Totals (A) (B)
5
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators,
7
1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8
2 - Dominance Testis >50%
9
_ 3 - Prevalence Index 1s:53 0'
10
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
= Total Cover
_
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size 5' )
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation (Explain)
1 Cyperus stngosus
30
yes FACW
_
2 Microstegwm wmmeum
20
yes FAC
'Indicators
10
no FAC
of hydnc sod and wetland hydrology must
3 Festuca sp
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
4 Juncus effusus
20
yes FACW
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata
5
Tree —Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in (7 6 cm) or
6
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
7
height
8
Sapling /Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
g
than 3 in DBH and greater than 3 28 ft (1 m) tall
10
Herb —All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
11
of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 ft tail
12
80
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3 28 ft in
= Total Cover
height
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size 30'
)
1
2
3
4
Hydrophytic
5
Vegetation
6
Present? Yes No
= Total Cover
Remarks (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

SOIL
Sampling Point wetland G - DP6
Profile Description (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
inches Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Tvpe Loc' Texture Remarks
b -6 10YR 3/1 95 5YR 4/6 5 C PL sandy day loam
6 -12 10YR 4/1 90 7 5YR 4/4 10 C PL sandy clay
RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand
Hydric Soil Indicators
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils'
_ Hlstosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Hlstic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Praine Redox (A16)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (172)
_ Piedmont Fioodplain Soils (1719)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
! Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Thick Darts Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron- Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147,148)
MLRA 136)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Umbnc Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_
Sandy Redox (S5)
_
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
unless disturbed or problematic
Type
Depth (inches)
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site Agony Acres Stream Mitigation Site City /County Guilford Sampling Date 1/28/13
Wildlands Engineering NC Wetland HBJ -or --
ApphcanUOwner g g State Sampling Point ,
Investigators) Matt Jenkins, PWS and Ian Eckardt Section, Township, Range
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc ) hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none) concave Slope ( %) 6
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) MLRA 136 Lat N 36 174959 Long W 79 551122 Datum
Soil Map Unit Name Enon fine sandy loam (EnD) NWI classification
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ✓ No (If no, explain in Remarks )
Are Vegetation Sod or Hydrology significantly disturbed9 Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes_
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks )
✓ No
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, Important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydnc Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes ✓ No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks
Sampling point is representative of a jurisdictional wetland area located within a hillside seep
adjacent to UT1 Wetland H and J appear to be seeps located on the hillslope adjacent to UT1
Both are located within a forested section of an active grazing field
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is reautred,
check all that aaoiv)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Drainage Patterns (1310)
Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
_ Water Marks (131)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (134)
_ Other (Explain to Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (132)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water - Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
_ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches)
Water Table Present? Yes No
Depth (inches)
✓
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth (inches) 0 -12"
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point Wetland HB J -DP7
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size 30' )
% Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 3 (A)
2
Total Number of Dominant
3
Species Across All Strata 3 (B)
4
Percent of Dominant Species
5
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 100% (A/B)
6
Prevalence Index worksheet
7
8
Total % Cover of Multiply by,
= Total Cover
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size 15'
)
FACW species x 2 =
1 Lindera benzion
20
yes FACW
FAC species x 3 =
2 Acer negundo
20
yes FACW
FACU species x 4 =
3 Betula nigra
10
no FACW
UPL species x 5 =
4
Column Totals (A) (B)
5
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
7
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8
_
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9
3 - Prevalence Index is 53 0'
10
_
50
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
5'
= Total Cover
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size )
1 Microstegium vimineum
30
yes FAC
— Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
2
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
4
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata
5
6
Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in (7 6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
7
height
8
Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less
9
than 3 in DBH and greater than 3 28 ft (1 m) tail
10
Herb – All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
11
of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 ft tail
12
30
= Total Cover
Woody vine – All woody vines greater than 3 28 ft in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size 30'
)
height
1 Lonicera japonica
10
no FAC
2
3
'4
Hydrophytic
5
Vegetation
6
Present? Yes No
10
= Total Cover
Remarks (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet )
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Interim Version

SOIL
Wetland H & J - DP7
Sampling Point
Profile Description (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators)
Depth Matrix
(inches) Color (moist) %
Redox Features
Color (moist) % Tvoe Loc
Texture Remarks
0 -12 2 5Y 3/1 100
clay loam no mottles within upper 12"
'Type C= Concentration, D =De letion RM= Reduced Matrix MS= Masked Sand Grains 2Location
PL =Pore Lining, M =Matnx
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils'
Hydric Soil Indicators
Histosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_
Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_
Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Sods (F19)
_
Stratified Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (177)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbnc Surface (F13) (li 136, 122)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1719) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
_
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
unless disturbed or problematic
Restrictive Layer (if observed)
Type
Depth (inches)
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site Agony Acres Stream Mitigation Site City /County Guilford Sampling Date 1/29/13
'lpplicant/Owner Wiidlands Engineenng State NC Sampling Point wetland K - DP8
ivestigator(s) Matt Jenkins, PWS and Ian Eckardt Section, Township, Range
Landform (hilislope, terrace, etc ) hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none) concave Slope ( %) 0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) MLRA 136 Lat N 36 177940 Long W 79 551253 Datum
Soil Map Unit Name Wekadkee loam (WhA) NWI classification
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ✓ No (If no, explain in Remarks )
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes_
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks )
No ✓
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Presents Yes ✓ No Is the Sampled Area
Hydnc Soil Present? Yes ✓ No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
Remarks
Sampling point is representative of a jurisdictional wetland area located in the floodplain adjacent to
UT1 B The area is located in a fallow floodplain whose vegetation has been significantly disturbed
in the past
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one Is reauired.
check all that almly)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Drainage Patterns (610)
✓ Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
_ Water Marks (131)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (83)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (64)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (131)
_ Iron Deposits (65)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87)
_ Shallow Agwtard (D3)
_ Water- Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (134)
_ Aquatic Fauna (1313)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations
Surface Water Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches)
Water Table Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches)
Saturation Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches) ` 12"
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aenal photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Wetland K - DP8
Sampling Point
Remarks (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet )
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Interim Version
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size 30' )
% Cover
Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 Salix nigra
5
no OBL
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 3 (A)
2
Total Number of Dominant
3
Species Across All Strata 3 (B)
4
Percent of Dominant Species
5
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 100% (A/B)
6
Prevalence Index worksheet
7
Total % Cover of, Multiply by
8
OBL species x 1 =
=Total Cover
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size 15'
)
FACW species x 2 =
1 Salix nigra
15
yes OBL
FAC species x 3 =
2
FACU species x4=
3
UPL species x 5 =
4
Column Totals (A) (B)
5
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
7
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9
3 - Prevalence Index is 53 0'
10
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
5.
50
= Total Cover
_ data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size )
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1 Solidago sp
50
yes FAC
—
2 Rubus sp
20
yes FAC
Rosa multiflora
10
no FACU
'Indicators of hydric sod and wetland hydrology must
3
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
4
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata
5
Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in (7 6 cm) or
6
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
7
height
8
Sapling /Shrub –Woody plants, excluding vines, less
g
than 3 in DBH and greater than 3 28 ft (1 m) tall
10
Herb – All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
11
of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 ft tall
12
30
=Total Cover
Woody vine – All woody vines greater than 3 28 ft in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size 30
)
height
1 Lonicera japonica
10
no FAC
2
3
4
Hydrophytic
5
Vegetation
6
Present? Yes No
10
= Total Cover
Remarks (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet )
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Interim Version

SOIL
Weiland K - DP8
Sampling Point
Profile Description (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
_finches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type, oc, Texture Remarks
j0 -2 10YR 3/3 95 7 5YR 7/6 5 C PL silt loam
2 -12 10YR 5/2 80 2 5YR 4/4 20 C PL clay loam
I
'Tvoe C= Concentration. D= DeDiebon. RM= Reduced Matrix. MS= Masked Sand Grains 2Location PL =Pore Lininq, M = Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils'
_ Histosol (A1)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplam Sods (F19)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (177)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
+ _ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbnc Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophybc vegetation and
1_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Sods (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
,rJ Stripped Matrix (S6)
unless disturbed or problematic
Type
Depth (inches)
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site Agony Acres Stream Mitigation Site City /County Guilford Sampling Date 1/28/13
Applicant/Owner Wildlands Engineering State NC Sampling Point DP9 - Uplan-?,-
Investigator(s) Matt Jenkins, PWS and Ian Eckardt Section, Township, Range
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc) floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none) none Slope (%) 0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) MLRA 136 Lat N 36 179161 Long W 79 54435 Datum
Soil Map Unit Name Wehadkee loam NWI classification
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ✓ No (If no, explain in Remarks)
Are Vegetation ✓ Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No ✓
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks )
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, Important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydnc Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks
Sampling point is representative of a non jurisdictional upland area located in the floodplain of
project site
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required, check
all that aoaly)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (86)
_ Surface Water (A1) _
True Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) _
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (610)
_ Saturation (A3) _
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (816)
_ Water Marks (B1) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (132) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Dnft Deposits (B3) _
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (134) _
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (B5)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (133)
_ Water- Stained Leaves (89)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
_ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches)
Water Table Present? Yes No
Depth (inches)
✓
Saturation Present? Yes No Or
Depth (inches)
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aenal photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point DP9 - Upland
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet*
Tree Stratum (Plot size 30' ) % Cover Species? Status
Number of Dorrunant Species
\I
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 1 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
3
Species Across All Strata 1 (B)
4
Percent of Dominant Species
5
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 100% (A(B)
6
Prevalence Index worksheet
7
8
Total % Cover of Multiply by,
= Total Cover
OBL species x 1 =
Saplino /Shrub Stratum (Plot size 15' )
FACW species x 2 =
1
FAC species x 3 =
2
FACU species x4=
3
UPL species x 5 =
4
Column Totals (A) (B)
5
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
7
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8
_
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9
3 - Prevalence Index Is s3 0'
10
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
=
5' Total Cover
_
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size )
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1 Festuca sp 100 yes FAC
—
2
f'4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
100
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size 30' )
1
2
3
4
= Total Cover
'Indicators of hydnc soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata
Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in (7 6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height
Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in DBH and greater than 3 28 ft (1 m) tall
Herb – All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 ft tall
Woody vine – All woody vines greater than 3 28 ft in
height
5 Hydrophytic
Vegetation
6 Present? Yes No
= Total Cover
Remarks (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet )
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Interim Version

SOIL
Sampling Point DP9 - Upland
Profile Description (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators)
Depth Matnx Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc Texture Remarks
0 -12 7 5YR 4/6 100 ,loam
Hydric Soil Indicators
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matnx (S6)
Type
Depth (inches)
Masked Sand Grains 2Location PL =Pore Lining, M =Matnx
Indicators for Problematic Hydric So
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Depleted Matnx (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbnc Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Sods (F19) (MLRA 148)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Coast Praine Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Sods (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Other (Explain In Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No `'
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version
1

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site Agony Acres Stream Mitigation Site City /County Guilford Sampling Date 1/28/13
F '` )plicant/Owner Wildlands Engineenng State NC Sampling Point D1310-Upland
{ 2 /estigator(s) Matt Jenkins, PWS and Ian Eckardt Section, Township, Range
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc ) floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none) none Slope ( %) 0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) MLRA 136 Lat N 36 176314 Long W 79 550172 Datum
Sod Map Unit Name Wehadkee loam NWI classification
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ✓ No (If no, explain in Remarks )
Are Vegetation Sod or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No ✓
Are Vegetation Sod 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.
t
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydnc Sod Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No ✓
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks
Sampling point is representative of a non jurisdictional upland area within the floodplain of UT1 that
is actively managed and used for cattle grazing
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators*
Secondary Indicator; (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required, check all that aooly)
_ Surface Sod Cracks (66)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave`Surface (138)
High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
_ Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (1316)
_ Water Marks (B1)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (134)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (B5)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Water- Stained Leaves (B9)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (135)
Field Observations
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches)
Water Table Present? Yes No
`' Depth (inches)
✓
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth (inches)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks
L
r
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point DP10 - Upland
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size 30' ) % Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 1 (A)
1
2
n--
-
Total Number of Dominant
3
Species Across All Strata 1 (B)
4
Percent of Dominant Species
5
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 100% (AfB)
6
Prevalence Index worksheet
7
8
Total % Cover of Multiply by,
= Total Cover
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size 15' )
FACW species x 2 =
1
FAC species x 3 =
2
FACU species x 4 =
3
UPL species x 5 =
4
Column Totals (A) (B)
5
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
7
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8
_
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9
3 - Prevalence Index is 53 0'
10
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
= Total Cover
5'
_
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size )
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation (Explain)
1 Festuca sp 100 yes FAC
—
2 °
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
'Indicators of hydnc soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata
Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in (7 6 cm) or
more In diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height
Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 In DBH and greater than 3 28 ft (1 m) tall
Herb – All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 it tall
100 = Total Cover Woody vine – All woody vines greater than 3 28 it in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size 30'
1
2
3
4
5
16
= Total Cover
Remarks (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet )
height
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Interim Version

I
F
SOIL
Sampling Point DP10 - Upland
Profile Description (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % LMe Loe� Texture Remarks
'0 -12 7 5YR 4/4 100 loam
'Type C= Concentration, D= Deplebon, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains 2Locabon PL =Pore Lining, M =M_atnx
Hydric Soil Indicators
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3
_ Histosoi (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147,146)
(li 147, 148)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (1712) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophybc vegetation and
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Sods (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Stripped Matrix (36)
unless disturbed or problematic
Restrictive Layer (N observed)
Type
Depth (inches)
Hydric
Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD)
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:Raleigh Regional Office
C PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Agony Acres Stream Mitigation Site - UTI to Reedy Fork and
Wetlands B, C, D, E, F, G, H, & J
State NC County/parish/borough Guilford City Elon
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format) Lat 36 180031 ° jIN, Long 79 544768° W
Universal Transverse Mercator
Name of nearest waterbody Reedy Fork
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) Into which the aquatic resource flows Haw River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) Cape Fear River 03030002
Check if map /diagram of review area and/or potential Jurisdictional areas is /are available upon request
® Check if other sites (e g , offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form
D REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
N Office (Desk) Determination Date
® Field Determination Date(s)
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are no "navigable waters of the US" within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) Jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area [Required]
® Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide
® Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce
Explain
B CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION
There MMre .,waters of the U S" within Clean Water Act (CWA) Jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U S in review area (check all that apply). i
® TNWs, including territorial seas
Q Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent waters (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Qi Non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
;® Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
® Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
® Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
® Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U S in the review area:
Non - wetland waters 5,850 linear feet 10- 15width (ft) and /or acres
Wetlands 0 49 acres
c Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on 987D_ehneation Manual
Elevation of established OHWM (if known)
2 Non - regulated waters /wetlands (check if applicable) .3
® Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional
Explain
' Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below
2 For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year -round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(c g, typically 3 months)
3 Supporting documentation is presented in Section 111 F

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
- A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section III.A 1 and Section III.D.1 only, if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below
1 TNW
Identify TNW
Summarize rationale supporting determination
2 Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent"
B CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non - navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i e tributaries that typically flow year -round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year -round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody° is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III B.1 for
the tributary, Section III B 2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsfte. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III C below.
1. Characteristics of non -TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size Prck List
Drainage area Pick Liss °t
Average annual rainfall inches
Average annual snowfall inches
(n) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW
❑ Tributary flows through Prck List tributaries before entering TNW
Project waters are l ck=List river miles from TNW
Project waters are i nck_Lrst river miles from RPW
Project waters are iWaXist aerial (straight) miles from TNW
Project waters are uick,I t aerial (straight) miles from RPW
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries Explain
Identify flow route to TNW5
Tributary stream order, if known
Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West
s Flow route can be described by identifying, e g, tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply)
Tributary is ❑ Natural
❑ Artificial (man -made) Explain
❑ Manipulated (man- altered) Explain
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate)
Average width feet
Average depth feet
Average side slopes ick) ist.
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply)
❑ Silts ❑ Sands ❑ Concrete
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel ❑ Muck
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation Type / %cover
❑ Other Explain
Tributary condition /stability [e g, highly eroding, sloughing banks] Explain
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes Explain
Tributary geometry Pick List
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope) %
(c) Flow
Tributary provides for Pick List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year Pick List
Describe flow regime
Other information on duration and volume
Surface flow is ick List. Characteristics
Subsurface flow ick List Explain findings
❑ Dye (or other) test performed
Tributary has (check all that apply)
❑ Bed and banks
❑ OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply)
❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank
❑
the presence of litter and debris
❑ changes in the character of soil
❑
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
❑ shelving
❑
the presence of wrack line
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
❑
sediment sorting
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑
scour
❑ sediment deposition
❑
multiple observed or predicted flow events
❑ water staining
❑
abrupt change in plant community
❑ other (list)
❑ Discontinuous OHWM 7 Explain
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determ
® High Tide Line indicated by Em
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
❑ physical markings /characteristics
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list)
me lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply)
Mean High Water Mark indicated by
❑ survey to available datum,
❑ physical markings,
❑ vegetation lines /changes in vegetation types
(m) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e g , water color is clear, discolored, oily film, water quality, general watershed characteristics, etc )
Explain
Identify specific pollutants, if known
6A natural or man -made discontinuity in the OHWIvt does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e g, where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices) Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody s flow
regime (e g , flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break
'Ibid

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply)*
❑ Riparian corridor Characteristics (type, average width)
❑ Wetland fringe Characteristics
d ❑ Habitat for
❑ Federally Listed species Explain findings
❑ Fish/spawn areas Explain findings
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species Explain findings
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity Explain findings
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non -TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics
Properties
Wetland size 0 49acres
Wetland type Explain Using the NCWAM key the wetlands were determined to be headwater forest wetlands
Wetland quality Explain impacted by cattle grazing
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries Explain N/A
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non -TNW
Flow is Internh en, fl Explain
Surface flow is- L iscrete_
Characteristics flow is over floodplam areas from groundwater seeps and overland flow
Subsurface flow des Explain findings groundwater in soil borings
❑ Dye (or other) test performed
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non -TNW
® Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection Explain
❑ Ecological connection Explain
❑ Separated by berm/barrier Explain
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 2 river miles from TNW
Project waters are 2-5 aerial straight) miles from TNW
Flow is from Wetland to navigable waters.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the 5 year, floodplam
(n) Chemical Characteristics
Characterize wetland system (e g, water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface, water quality, general watershed
characteristics, etc ) Explain located in active cattle field, most wetlands are regularly impacted and maintained A few
located in forested areas are accessed by cattle
Identify specific pollutants, if known
(w) Biological Characteristics Wetland supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian buffer Characteristics (type, average width) Wetlands consist of floodplam vegetation including FAC, FACW,
and OBL wetland ratings Wetlands D, H, and J are forested while
❑ Vegetation type /percent cover Explain
❑ Habitat for
❑ Federally Listed species Explain findings
❑ Fish/spawn areas Explain findings
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species Explain findings
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity Explain findings
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis 8
Approximately ( 0 49 ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis
r

For each wetland, specify the following
Directly abuts9 (YIN)
Size (in acres)
Wetland B - Y
Oil
WetlandD - Y
001
Wetland F - Y
003
Wetland H - Y
002
Directly abuts9 (YIN) Size (in acres)
Wetland C - Y 014
Wetland E - Y 004
Wetland G - Y 012
Wetland J - Y 0 14
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed features provide water treatment and
flood storage
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and /or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW) Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW9
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note. the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non -RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III D
2 Significant nexus findings for non -RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non -RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III D
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section III D
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY)-
TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area
TNWs linear feet width (ft), Or, acres
[� Wetlands adjacent to TNWs acres
RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
® Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year -round are jurisdictional Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial This channel exhibited average bankfull widths of 10 to 15 feet, well- defined riffle -pool sequences, and
substrate consisting of sand to cobble This majority of the project reach is located within active cattle pastures Many areas
where cattle have access , the channel banks exhibit a lack of suitable stabilizing vegetation which has led to portions of
incision and bank degradation Small portions of the reach are in forested areas where cattle have been restricted and are in
relatviely better condition Biological sampling within the channel resulted in a weak to moderate presence of fish and a

moderate presence of amphibians UT1 to Reedy Fork scored 57(upper reach) and 55(lower reach) out of a possible 100
points on the USACE Stream Assessment Form and scored 43 5 and 49 out of 61 5 possible points on the NCDWQ Stream
f Classification Form, indicating perennial status (SCP1 and SCP2)
'® Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e g, typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III B Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply)
Z Tributary waters 5,850 linear feetl0- 15width (ft)
Other non - wetland waters acres
Identify type(s) of waters
3 Non -RPWs8 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
® Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III C
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply)
d Tributary waters linear feet width (ft)
A Other non - wetland waters acres
Identify type(s) of waters
4 Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year -round Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III D 2, above Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW Wetlands B, C, D, E, F, G, H, and J are directly connected to UT1 to Reedy Fork via
direct surface water connections
®_ Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally " Provide data indicating that tributary is
i seasonal in Section III B and rationale in Section III D 2, above Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area 0.49acres
5 Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
W Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are junsidictional Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III C
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area acres
6 Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
® Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III C
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area acres
7 Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional
X Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the US," or
® Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1 -6), or
❑ Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below)
E ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA- STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
y _ SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) 10
8See Footnote # 3
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III D 6 of the Instructional Guidebook

no which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes
no from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce
® which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce
® Interstate isolated waters Explain
® Other factors Explain '
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination,
Provide estimates for Jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply)
® Tributary waters linear feet width (ft)
_® Other non - wetland waters acres
Identify type(s) of waters
® Wetlands acres
F NON - JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
® If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements
® Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule (MBR)
® Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for Junsdiction Explain
® Other (explain, if not covered above)
Provide acreage estimates for non - jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of Jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i e , presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
Judgment (check all that apply)
X Non - wetland waters (i e, rivers, streams) linear feet width (ft)
n Lakes /ponds acres
X Other non - wetland waters acres List type of aquatic resource
❑■ Wetlands acres
Provide acreage estimates for non - jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for Jurisdiction (check all that apply)
® Non - wetland waters (i e, rivers, streams) linear feet, width (ft)
® Lakes /ponds acres
® Other non - wetland waters acres List type�of aquatic resource
X Wetlands acres
SECTION IV. DATA SOURCES
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below)
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant
❑
Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation report
® 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 Ossipee, NC
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey Citation Guilford County Soils
® National wetlands inventory map(s) Cite name
® State/Local wetland inventory map(s)
® FEMA/FIRM maps
® 100 -year Floodplam Elevation is (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
E Photographs ® Aerial (Name & Date)
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described In the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos

or ® Other (Name & Date) see attached report
[] Previous determination(s) File no and date of response letter
Applicable /supporting case law
Applicable /supporting scientific literature
J ® Other information (please specify)
B ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U S Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD).
B DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER Raleigh Regional Office
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION Agony Acres Stream Mitigation Site - UT1A to Reedy Fork and
Wetland A
State NC County/parish/borough Guilford City Elon
Center coordinates of site (iaUlong in degree decimal format) Lat 36 180031° IN ,., Long 79 544768'& &
Universal Transverse Mercator
Name of nearest waterbody Reedy Fork
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) Into which the aquatic resource flows Haw River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) Cape Fear River 03030002
® Check if map /diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is /are available upon request
(] Check if other sites (e g, offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form
D REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Q Office (Desk) Determination Date
WE Field Determination Date(s)
SECTION II. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are no "navigable waters of the US" within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area [Required]
N Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide
® Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce
Explain
B CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There =Are "waters of the U S " within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a Indicate presence of waters of U S in review area (check all that apply) i
TNWs, including territorial seas
® Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent waters (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
® Non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
® Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
® Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
® Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
® Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U S in the review area:
Non - wetland waters 2,061 linear feet 8- 12width (ft) and/or acres
Wetlands 0 06 acres
c Limits (boundaries) of Jurisdiction based on f19$_7Dein 'ea _t1703_ a u_aI
Elevation of established OHWM (if known)
2. Non - regulated waters /wetlands (check if applicable) .3
® Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional
Explain
Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below
2 For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TN W and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e g , typically 3 months)
3 Supporting documentation is presented in Section IiI F

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section III.A.1 and Section III D.1 only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section IIIM 1., otherwise, see Section III B below
1 TNW
Identify TNW
Summarize rationale supporting determination
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent"
B CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under RApanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non - navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year -round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months) A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also ,jurisdictional If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year -round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
J If the waterbody° is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B 2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section HI.0 below.
1. Characteristics of non -TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size Pick ist
Drainage area Pick List
Average annual rainfall inches
Average annual snowfall inches
(u) Physical Characteristics-
(a) Relationship with TNW
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW
❑ Tributary flows through R ick Li t tributaries before entering TNW
Protect waters are Wick river miles from TNW
Project waters are river miles from RPW
Project waters are aerial (straight) miles from TNW
Project waters are aerial (straight) miles from RPW
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries Explain
Identify flow route to TNW5
Tributary stream order, if known
° Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West
s Flow route can be described by identifying, e g, tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply)
Tributary is ❑ Natural
❑ Artificial (man -made) Explain
❑ Manipulated (man- altered) Explain
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate)
Average width feet
Average depth feet
Average side slopes Pick List
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply)
❑ Silts ❑ Sands
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation Type /% cover
❑ Other Explain
❑ Concrete
❑ Muck
Tributary condition /stability [e g, highly eroding, sloughing banks] Explain
Presence of run/riffle /pool complexes Explain
Tributary geometry i ick ist
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope) %
(c) Flow
Tributary provides for Pick List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year PPick List
Describe flow regime
Other information on duration and volume
Surface flow is P�tcst. Characteristics
Subsurface flow ick ist Explain findings
❑ Dye (or other) test performed
Tributary has (check all that apply)
❑ Bed and banks
❑ OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply)
❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank
❑
❑ changes in the character of soil
❑
❑ shelving
❑
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
❑
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑
❑ sediment deposition
❑
❑ water staining
❑
❑ other (list)
❑ Discontinuous OHWM 7 Explain
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determ
® High Tide Line indicated by ink
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
❑ physical markings /characteristics
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list)
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
me lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply)
Mean High Water Mark indicated by
❑ survey to available datum,
❑ physical markings,
❑ vegetation lines /changes in vegetation types
(w) Chemical Characteristics.
Characterize tributary (e g , water color is clear, discolored, oily film, water quality, general watershed characteristics, etc )
Explain
identify specific pollutants, if known
6A natural or man -made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e g, where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices) Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e g , flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break
'Ibid

(iv) Biological Characteristics Channel supports (check all that apply)
❑ Riparian corridor Characteristics (type, average width)
❑ Wetland fringe Characteristics
❑ Habitat for
❑ Federally Listed species Explain findings
❑ Fish/spawn areas Explain findings
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species Explain findings
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity Explain findings
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non -TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics
Properties
Wetland size 0 06acres
Wetland type Explain Using the NCWAM key the wetland was determined to be a headwater forest wetland
Wetland quality Explain impacted by cattle grazing
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries Explain N/A
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non -TNW
Flow is ! nte_r_mittent flow Explain
Surface flow is i iscrete
Characteristics flow is over floodplam areas from groundwater seeps and overland flow
Subsurface flow Yes Explain findings groundwater in soil borings
❑ Dye (or other) test performed
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non -TNW
® Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection Explain
❑ Ecological connection Explain
❑ Separated by berm/barrier Explain
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 5 river miles from TNW
Project waters are erial straight miles from TNW
Flow is from Wetland ton ieable waters.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the 5� 10 year, floodplam
(u) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e g, water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface, water quality, general watershed
characteristics, etc ) Explain Wetland A is located in a forested area used for cattle grazing The surface area is heavily
trampled by cattle Cow manure was observed within the delineated area
Identify specific pollutants, if known
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian buffer Characteristics (type, average width) Wetland A has a mature canopy but little to no understory or
herbaceous vegetation The canopy extents out greater than 50 feet beyond the eastern edge of Wetland A
❑ Vegetation type /percent cover Explain
❑ Habitat for
❑ Federally Listed species Explain findings
❑ Fish/spawn areas Explain findings
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species Explain findings
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity Explain findings
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis I
Approximately ( 0 06 ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis

For each wetland, specify the following
Directly abuts9 (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Wetland A - Y 006
Summanze overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed features provide water treatment and
flood storage
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and /or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e g between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplam is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example.
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW9
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW9
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs9
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW9
Note- the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below-
1 Significant nexus findings for non -RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III D
2. Significant nexus findings for non -RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non -RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III D
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section III D
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area
® TNWs linear feet width (ft), Or, acres
® Wetlands adjacent to TNWs acres
RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
_® Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial This channel exhibited average bankfull widths of 8 to 12 feet, well - defined riffle -pool sequences, and
substrate consisting of gravel, cobble, and bedrock Most of the project reach is used for livestock grazing Many areas where
livestock have access, the channel banks exhibit a lack of suitable stabilizing vegetation which has led to portions of incision
and bank degradation The middle portion of this reach is very steep and dominated by cobble and bedrock In this area the
channel is relatively stable Biological sampling within the channel resulted in a weak presence offish and amphibians and

moderate presence of macro invertebrates UT1A to Reedy Fork scored 58 out of a possible 100 points on the USACE Stream
Assessment Form and scored 38 out of 61 5 possible points on the NCDWQ Stream Classification Form, indicating perennial
status (SCP3)
Tnbutaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e g, typically three months each year) are
= jurisdictional Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III B Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply)
Tributary waters 2,061 linear feet 8 -12 width (ft)
❑ Other non - wetland waters acres
Identify type(s) of waters
3 Non -RPWs8 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III C
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply)
IN Tnbutary waters linear feet width (ft)
D Other non - wetland waters acres
Identify type(s) of waters
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tnbutaries typically flow year -round Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III D 2, above Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW Wetland A is directly connected to UTIA to Reedy Fork via direct surface water
connections
W Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally " Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III B and rationale in Section III D 2, above Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area 0 06acres
5 Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
® Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III C
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area acres
6. Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III C
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area acres
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters 9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional
® Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the US," or
® Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1 -6), or
® Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below)
E ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA- STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):10
'See Footnote # 3
' To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III D 6 of the Instructional Guidebook

N which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes
no from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce
® which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce
N Interstate isolated waters Explain
® Other factors Explain
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination
Provide estimates for. jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply)
® Tributary waters linear feet width (ft)
❑■_ Other non - wetland waters acres
Identify type(s) of waters
® Wetlands acres
F. NON - JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
® If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the crrtena in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR)
® Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction Explain
® Other (explain, if not covered above)
Provide acreage estimates for non - jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of Jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i e , presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
Judgment (check all that apply)
® Non - wetland waters (i e, rivers, streams) linear feet width (ft)
❑E Lakes /ponds acres
Q Other non - wetland waters acres List type of aquatic resource
® Wetlands acres
Provide acreage estimates for non- jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply)
® Non - wetland waters (i e, rivers, streams) linear feet, width (ft)
© Lakes /ponds acres
® Other non - wetland waters acres List type of aquatic resource
® Wetlands acres
SECTION IV. DATA SOURCES
A SUPPORTING DATA Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below)
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant
❑ Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation report
® 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 Ossipee, NC
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey Citation Guilford County Soils
® National wetlands inventory map(s) Cite name
® State /Local wetland inventory map(s)
® FEMA/FIRM maps
® 100 -year Floodplam Elevation is (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
0 Photographs ® Aerial (Name & Date)
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA Jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos

or ® Other (Name & Date) see attached report
Previous determination(s) File no and date of response letter
,® Applicable /supporting case law
Applicable /supporting scientific literature
_ ® Other information (please specify)
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD.

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD)
B DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:Raleigh Regional Office
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Agony Acres Stream Mitigation Site - UT1B to Reedy Fork and
Wetland K
State NC County/parish/borough Guilford City Elon
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format) Lat 36 1800310 N, Long 79 544768'S
Universal Transverse Mercator
Name of nearest waterbody Reedy Fork
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows Haw River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) Cape Fear River 03030002
M Check if map /diagram of review area and/or potential Jurisdictional areas is /are available upon request
® Check if other sites (e g , offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)
® Office (Desk) Determination Date
Iffi Field Determination Date(s)
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are no 'navigable waters of the US" within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) Jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area [Required]
® Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide
® Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce
Explain
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION
There A�°,i yre' 'waters of the U S " within Clean Water Act (CWA) Jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a Indicate presence of waters of U S. in review area (check all that apply)- i
F01 TNWs, including territorial seas
® Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
® Relatively permanent waters'` (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
® Non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
® Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
® Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Q Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
® Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U S in the review area.
Non - wetland waters 4071mear feet 3- 5width (ft) and /or acres
Wetlands 0 31 acres
c Limits (boundaries) of Jurisdiction based on L987 D°elmeafionn 1Glanual
Elevation of established OHWM (if known)
2. Non - regulated waters /wetlands (check if applicable) 3
® Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional
Explain 11
Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section IiI below J
Z For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e g, typically 3 months)
3 Supporting documentation is presented in Section III F

SECTION III• CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
- The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section III.A l and Section IH.D 1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section IIIM I , otherwise, see Section III B below
1. TNW
Identify TNW
Summarize rationale supporting determination
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent'
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY)
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non - navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year -round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g , typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year -round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section IH.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody° is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
`f waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B 2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.0 below
1. Characteristics of non -TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(I) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size 64 r r s
Drainage area 64 acres
Average annual rainfall 39 40 inches
Average annual snowfall 8 1 inches
(n) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW
® Tributary flows through ,2 tributaries before entering TNW
Project waters are 2 -5 river miles from TNW
Project waters are or less river miles from RPW
Project waters are 215 aerial (straight) miles from TNW
Project waters are (or less) aerial (straight) miles from RPW
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries Explain No
Identify flow route to TNW5 UT1B to Reedy Fork flows into UT1 UT1 flows into Reedy Fork with flows into the Haw
River (TNW)
' Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the arid
West
' Flow route can be described by identifying, e g, tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW

eroding
2013
Tributary stream order, if known
(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply)
Tributary is ❑ Natural
❑ Artificial (man -made) Explain
® Manipulated (man- altered) Explain Historically manipulated for agricultural management
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate)
Average width 3 -5 feet
Average depth 2 -3 feet
Average side slopes Vertical (sl.a or less)
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply)
® Silts ® Sands ❑ Concrete
❑ Cobbles ® Gravel ❑ Muck
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation Type /% cover
❑ Other Explain
Tributary condition/stability [e g, highly eroding, sloughing banks] Explain Approximately 80% of UTi B is actively
Presence of run /riffle /pool complexes Explain Bedform features are present however not well developed throughout
Tributary geometryRem ely straight
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope) 1 %
(c) Flow
Tributary provides for Seasonal flow
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year 2,r, -:
Describe flow regime Channel exhibited moderate flow during site visits conducted during March 2013 and January
Other information on duration and volume
Surface flow is _C +onfined Characteristics Channel has a well defined bed and bank within which flow is confined
Subsurface flow + nknown Explain findings
❑ Dye (or other) test performed
Tributary has (check all that apply)
® Bed and banks
® OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply)
® clear, natural line impressed on the bank
❑
❑ changes in the character of soil
❑ shelving
❑
® vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
❑
® leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑ sediment deposition
❑ water staining
❑
❑ other (list)
❑ Discontinuous OHWM 7 Explain
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determ
® High Tide Line indicated by
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
❑ physical markings /characteristics
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list)
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
me lateral extent of CWA Jurisdiction (check all that apply)
Mean High Water Mark indicated by
❑ survey to available datum,
❑ physical markings,
❑ vegetation lines /changes in vegetation types
(m) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e g , water color is clear, discolored, oily film, water quality, general watershed characteristics, etc )
Explain UT1B exhibited relatively clear water with some iron oxidizing bacteria present
Identify specific pollutants, if known
r
6A natural or man -made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever junsdiction (e g, where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices) Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e g , flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break
'Ibid

(iv) Biological Characteristics Channel supports (check all that apply)
® Riparian corridor Characteristics (type, average width) 0 -5 feet wide buffer for much of reach Vegetation consisted of
red cedar, sweetgum, black willow, American holly, Japanese honeysuckle, and multiflora rose
❑ Wetland fringe Characteristics
❑ Habitat for
❑ Federally Listed species Explain findings
❑ Fish/spawn areas Explain findings
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species Explain findings
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity Explain findings
2 Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non -TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics
Properties
Wetland size 0 31acres
Wetland type Explain Using the NCWAM key the wetland was determined to be a headwater forest wetland
Wetland quality Explain impacted by clearing and cattle grazing
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries Explain N/A
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non -TNW
Flow is Intermittent�flow Explain
Surface flow is-
Characteristics flow is over floodplam areas from groundwater seeps and overland flow
Subsurface flow 0 Explain findings groundwater in soil borings
❑ Dye (or other) test performed
(c) Wetland Adiacency Determination with Non -TNW
® Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection Explain
❑ Ecological connection Explain
❑ Separated by berm/barrier Explain
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are M5 river miles from TNW
Protect waters are 2- aerial (straight) miles from TNW
Flow is from Wetlan. to nav Qable waters.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the 5 - l0-year floodplam
(n) Chemical Characteristics
Characterize wetland system (e g, water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface, water quality, general watershed
characteristics, etc ) Explain Wetland K is located in a managed area used for cattle grazing
Identify specific pollutants, if known
(w) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply)-
® Riparian buffer Characteristics (type, average width) Wetland K is dominated by herbaceous vegetation (mainly goldern
rod and blackberry) A thin npairan buffer exists in spots but is less than 5 feet wide
❑ Vegetation type /percent cover Explain
❑ Habitat for
❑ Federally Listed species Explain findings
❑ Fish/spawn areas Explain findings
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species Explain findings
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity Explain findings
3 Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis 11
Approximately ( 0 31 ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis

For each wetland, specify the following
Directly abuts9 (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts9 (YIN) Size (in acres)
Wetland K - Y 031
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed features provide water treatment and
flood storage
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and /or biological integrity of a TNW
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW) Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplam is not solely determinative of significant nexus
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW9
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and hfecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW9
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW9
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below-
1. Significant nexus findings for non -RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III D
2 Significant nexus findings for non -RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non -RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III D
3 Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section III D
D DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY)
1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area
® TNWs linear feet width (ft), Or, acres
® Wetlands adjacent to TNWs acres
2 RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
® Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year -round are jurisdictional Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial This channel exhibited average bankfull widths of 3 -5 feet, moderately defined riffle -pool sequences,
and substrate consisting of silt, sand, and gravel The project reach is been used for livestock grazing A maority of the
channel banks exhibit a lack of suitable stabilizing vegetation which has led to widespread incision and bank degradation
Biological sampling within the channel resulted in a weak presence of macro invertebrates Fish and amphibians were not

observed UT1A to Reedy Fork scored 37 out of a possible 100 points on the USACE Stream Assessment Form and scored
29 25 out of 61 5 possible points on the NCDWQ Stream Classification Form, indicating intermittent status (SCP4)
0 Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e g, typically three months each year) are
( .jurisdictional Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III B Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally
Provide estimates for. jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply)
Tributary waters 407 linear feet 3- 5width (ft)
�] Other non - wetland waters acres
Identify type(s) of waters
3 Non -RPWss that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is. jurisdictional Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III C
Provide estimates for. jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply)
® Tributary waters linear feet width (ft)
W Other non - wetland waters acres
Identify type(s) of waters
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
® Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year -round Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III D 2, above Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW Wetland K is directly connected to UT1B to Reedy Fork via direct surface water
connections.
® Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally " Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III B and rationale in Section III D 2, above Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW
Provide acreage estimates for, jurisdictional wetlands in the review area 0 31acres
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
® Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are.junsidictional Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III C
Provide acreage estimates for. jurisdictional wetlands in the review area acres
6. Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
® Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III C
Provide estimates for_ jurisdictional wetlands in the review area acres
7 Impoundments of jurisdictional waters .9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a,jurisdictional tributary remains. jurisdictional
® Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the US," or
® Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1 -6), or
® Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below)
E ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA- STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)."
8See Footnote # 3
To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III D 6 of the Instructional Guidebook

ME which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes
® from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce
❑■ which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce
Interstate isolated waters Explain
® Other factors Explain
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination.
Provide estimates for Jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply)
® Tributary waters linear feet width (ft)
® Other non - wetland waters acres
Identify type(s) of waters
® Wetlands acres
F. NON - JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
® If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropnate Regional Supplements
® Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR)
j] Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus' standard, where such a finding is required for Junsdiction Explain
® Other (explain, if not covered above)
Provide acreage estimates for non - jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i e , presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
Judgment (check all that apply)
® Non - wetland waters (t a rivers, streams) linear feet width (ft)
® Lakes /ponds acres
FBI Other non - wetland waters acres List type of aquatic resource
® Wetlands acres
Provide acreage estimates for non - jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for Jurisdiction (check all that apply)
D Non - wetland waters (i e , rivers, streams) linear feet, width (ft)
® Lakes /ponds acres
® Other non - wetland waters acres List type of aquatic resource
® Wetlands acres
SECTION W. DATA SOURCES.
A SUPPORTING DATA Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below)
1Z Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant
❑ Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation report
® 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 Ossipee, NC
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey Citation Guilford County Soils
® National wetlands inventory map(s) Cite name
X State/Local wetland inventory map(s)
® FEMA/FIRM maps
® 100 -year Floodplam Elevation is (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs ® Aerial (Name & Date)
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos

or ® Other (Name & Date) see attached report
® Previous determination(s) File no and date of response letter
® Applicable /supporting case law
® Applicable /supporting scientific literature
Other information (please specify)
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:
i

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook
SECTION I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD)-
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER Raleigh Regional Office
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION Agony Acres Stream Mitigation Site - UT2 to Reedy Fork
State NC County/parish/borough Guilford City Elon
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format) Lat 36 180031 ° N, Long 79 544768°
Universal Transverse Mercator
Name of nearest waterbody Reedy Fork
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows Haw River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) Cape Fear River 03030002
® Check if map /diagram of review area and/or potential Jurisdictional areas is /are available upon request
® Check if other sites (e g, offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form
D REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)
® Office (Desk) Determination Date
® Field Determination Date(s)
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are no "navigable waters of the US" within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) Jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area [Required)
® Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide
® Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce
Explain
B CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are "waters of the US" within Clean Water Act (CWA) Jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area [Required]
Q.
Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S in review area (check all that apply) i
® TNWs, including territorial seas
® Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
® Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
® Non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
® Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
® Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
® Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
® Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
® Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S in the review area
Non - wetland waters 1,0441mear feet 8- 12width (ft) and/or acres
Wetlands acres
c Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on
Elevation of established OHWM (if known)
2 Non - regulated waters /wetlands (check if applicable) 3
® Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional
Explain
i Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section 111 below
Z For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e g , typically 3 months)
3 Supporting documentation is presented in Section 111 F

SECTION III CWA ANALYSIS
A TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs if the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section III A 1 and Section IIIM 1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below
1 TNW
Identify TNW
Summarize rationale supporting determination
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent"
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for Jurisdiction established under Rapanoshave been met.
The agencies will assert Jurisdiction over non - navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year -round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also Jurisdictional If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year -round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III D.2 If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section IH.D 4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
i If the waterbody° is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B 1 for
the tributary, Section III B 2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.0 below.
1 Characteristics of non -TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size 'Ric ist
Drainage area Pick fist
Average annual rainfall inches
Average annual snowfall inches
(u) Physical Characteristics.
(a) Relationship with TNW
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW
❑ Tributary flows through tributaries before entering TNW
Project waters are Pick List river miles from TNW
Project waters are Pick List river miles from RPW
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from RPW
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries Explain
Identify flow route to TNW5
Tributary stream order, if known
° Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West
s Flow route can be described by identifying, e g, tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply)
Tributary is ❑ Natural
❑ Artificial (man -made) Explain
❑ Manipulated (man- altered) Explain
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate)
Average width feet
Average depth feet
Average side slopes Pick List
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply)
❑ Silts ❑ Sands
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation Type /% cover
❑ Other Explain
❑ Concrete
❑ Muck
Tributary condition/stability [e g, highly eroding, sloughing banks] Explain
Presence of run/riffle /pool complexes Explain
Tributary geometry ick List
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope) %
(c) Flow
Tributary provides for Pick ist
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year !Pick List
Describe flow regime
Other information on duration and volume
Surface flow is . Characteristics
Subsurface flow ick List Explain findings
❑ Dye (or other) test performed
Tributary has (check all that apply)
❑ Bed and banks
❑ OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply)
❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank
❑
❑ changes in the character of soil
❑
❑ shelving
❑
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
❑
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑
❑ sediment deposition
❑
❑ water staining
❑
❑ other (list)
❑ Discontinuous OHWM 7 Explain
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determ
® High Tide Line indicated by
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
❑ physical markings /characteristics
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list)
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
me lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply)
Mean High Water Mark indicated by
❑ survey to available datum,
❑ physical markings,
❑ vegetation lines /changes in vegetation types
(iii) Chemical Characteristics*
Characterize tributary (e g , water color is clear, discolored, oily film, water quality, general watershed characteristics, etc )
Explain
Identify specific pollutants, if known
6A natural or man -made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e g , where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices) Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e g, Flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break
'Ibid

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian corridor Characteristics (type, average width)
❑ Wetland fringe Characteristics
r ❑ Habitat for
❑ Federally Listed species Explain findings
❑ Fish/spawn areas Explain findings
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species Explain findings
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity Explain findings
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non -TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics
Properties
Wetland size acres
Wetland type Explain
Wetland quality Explain
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries Explain N/A
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non -TNW
Flow is Pick 'Lit Explain
Surface flow is -1c s
Characteristics
Subsurface flow t tick List Explain findings g
❑ Dye (or other) test performed
(c) Wetland Adiacency Determination with Non -TNW
❑ Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection Explain
❑ Ecological connection Explain
1 ❑ Separated by berm/barrier Explain
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are i ick Est river miles from TNW
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW
Flow is from 'P_ ckW?ist.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the Pick List floodplam
(u) Chemical Characteristics
Characterize wetland system (e g, water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface, water quality, general watershed
characteristics, etc ) Explain
Identify specific pollutants, if known
(m) Biological Characteristics Wetland supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian buffer Characteristics (type, average width)
❑ Vegetation type /percent cover Explain
❑ Habitat for
❑ Federally Listed species Explain findings
❑ Fish/spawn areas Explain findings
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species Explain findings
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity Explain findings
3 Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis N
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis

For each wetland, specify the following
Directly abuts9 (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts9 (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed
C SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and /or biological integrity of a TNW
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplam is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW9
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW9
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs9
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW9
Note the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non -RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III D
2. Significant nexus findings for non -RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non -RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III D
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section III D
D DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY)-
I TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area
® TNWs linear feet width (ft), Or, acres
® Wetlands adjacent to TNWs acres
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
® Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year -round are jurisdictional Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial This channel exhibited average bankfull widths of 8 to 12 feet, moderately defined riffle -pool
sequences, and substrate consisting of gravel and cobble The project reach is used for livestock grazing Many areas where
livestock have access , the channel banks exhibit a lack of suitable stabilizing vegetation which has led to portions of incision
and bank degradation Biological sampling within the channel resulted in a weak presence of fish, amphibians, and
macromvertebrates UTiA to Reedy Fork scored 48 out of a possible 100 points on the USACE Stream Assessment Form and
scored 36 25 out of 61 5 possible points on the NCDWQ Stream Classification Form, indicating perennial status (SCP3)

Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e g, typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III B Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply)
Tributary waters 1,044 linear feet 8 -12 width (ft)
Other non - wetland waters acres
Identify type(s) of waters
Non -RPWs8 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
FJ Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III C
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply)
Tributary waters linear feet width (ft)
�] Other non - wetland waters acres
Identify type(s) of waters
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
RH Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands
t Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year -round Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III D 2, above Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally " Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III B and rationale in Section III D 2, above Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area acres
l
5 Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
} Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III C
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area acres
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III C
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area acres
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters'
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional
M Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the US," or
{] Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1 -6), or
Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below)
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA- STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):10
19 which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes
'See Footnote # 3
1 9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III D 6 of the Instructional Guidebook
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos

IN from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce
19 which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce
IN Interstate isolated waters Explain
Q Other factors Explain
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Provide estimates for Jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply)
M Tributary waters linear feet width (ft)
® Other non - wetland waters acres
Identify type(s) of waters
EE Wetlands acres
F. NON - JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
'Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR)
Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for Jurisdiction Explain
® Other (explain, if not covered above)
Provide acreage estimates for non - jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of Jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i e , presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
Judgment (check all that apply)
® Non - wetland waters (i e, rivers, streams) linear feet width (ft)
Lakes /ponds acres
Other non - wetland waters acres List type of aquatic resource
® Wetlands acres
Provide acreage estimates for non - jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for Jurisdiction (check all that apply)
® Non - wetland waters (i e, rivers, streams) linear feet, width (ft)
® Lakes /ponds acres
All Other non - wetland waters acres List type of aquatic resource
® Wetlands acres
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below)
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant
❑ Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation report
® Data sheets prepared by the Corps
ME 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 Ossipee, NC
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey Citation Guilford County Soils
OR National wetlands inventory map(s) Cite name
® State/Local wetland inventory map(s)
® FEMA/FIRM maps
100 -year Floodplam Elevation is (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs ® Aerial (Name & Date)
or ® Other (Name & Date) see attached report
® Previous determination(s) File no and date of response letter
® Applicable /supporting case law
® Applicable /supporting scientific literature
Other information (please specify)

B ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 4 1
Kanng �aicuiaior version a -1
Wetland Site Name Agony Acres - Wetland A Date 1/28/2013
Wetland Type HQdw ater Forest Assessor Name /Organization Ian Eckardt
Level III Ecoregionj Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body Reedy Fork
River Basin I Cape Fear USGS 8 -Digit Catalogue Unit 03030002
Yes re—No Preciortation within 48 hrs?
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and /or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately within 10 years) Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited
to the following
• Hydrological modifications (examples ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc )
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples mowing, clear - cutting, exotics, etc)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? [;Yes r*",No
Regulatory Considerations (select all that apply to the assessment area)
F Anadromous fish
I-- Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
C NCDWQ riparian buffer rule in effect
F Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
F Publicly owned property
C N C Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
F' Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
r_1 Designated NCNHP reference community
P-1 Abuts a 303(d)- listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)- listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
r Blackwater
o Brownwater
F Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) r.Lunar ';Wind [';Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? [.,Yes frNo
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver?
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions?
Yes frNo
r,.No
Ground Surface CondrtronNegetatron Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual) If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect
GS VS
�A A Not severely altered
�.;B F."JB Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate), exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
2 Surface and Sub - Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub) Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology Refer to the current NRCS lateral effect of ditching guidance for
North Carolina hydnc soils (see USACE Wilmington District website) for the zone of influence of ditches in hydnc soils A ditch
s 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and ditch
sub -surface water Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable
Surf Sub
r. A [.;A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered
r: B r, B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation)
rC r, C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines)
3 Water Storage /Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (answer for non -marsh wetlands only)
Check a box in each column for each group below Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT)
AA WT
3a rA r. A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 foot deep
[, B r° B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
rC [.°C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
r4 rJ D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b jA Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
r B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
.1C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

Sod Texture /Structure — assessment area condition metric
Check a box from each of the three sod property groups below Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature Make soil observations within the 12 inches Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Sods guidance for
regional indicators
4a rA Sandy sod
B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
D Loamy or clayey gleyed sod
E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b FjA Soil ribbon < 1 inch
r",B Soil nbbon z 1 inch
4c rA No peat or muck presence
r, B A peat or muck presence
5 Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub - surface pollutants or discharges (Sub)
Examples of sub - surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc
Surf Sub
r, A [.A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
�.,B r, B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
E ;C r"�C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6 Land Use — opportunity metric
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column) Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment Consider sources
draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the
assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M) Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion
WS
5M
2M
and the wetland complex at the assessment areas (WC) See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries
F A
[7—'A
F,' A
z 10% impervious surfaces
Fn B
r B
r B
< 10% impervious surfaces
r C
r C
n C
Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
El D
Eif D
(rl D
z 20% coverage of pasture
F E
E, E
r, E
z 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
r F
r, F
r F
s 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
• G
rj G
r G
z 20% coverage of clear -cut land
• H
r H
n H
Little or no opportunity to improve water quality Lack of opportunity may result from hydrologic alterations
that prevent drainage or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area
v 7 Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer — assessment area/wetland complex condition metric
I 7a Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
.;Yes r",No If Yes, continue to 7b If No, skip to Metric 8
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body Make buffer judgment based on the average width of the wetland
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed
7b How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is weltand? Descriptor E should be selected if ditches effectively bypass the buffer
r A z 50 feet
[°0
M ' B From 30 to < 50 feet
C From 15 to < 30 feet
D From 5 to < 15 feet
7 E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c Tributary width If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width
re.!5 15 -feet wide ['; > 15 -feet wide Other open water (no tributary present)
7d Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
[: Yes r, No
7e Is tributary or other open water sheltered or exposed?
rr Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic
Exposed — adjacent open water with width z 2500 feet or regular boat traffic
Wetland Width at the Assessment Area — wetland type /wetland complex metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Check
a box in each column Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT)
and the wetland complex at the assessment areas (WC) See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries
WT
WC
[;A
z 100 feet
.,A
r, B
B
From 80 to < 100 feet
r. C
r C
From 50 to < 80 feet
r, D
r. D
From 40 to < 50 feet
E;E
From 30 to <40feet
g F
�; F
From 15 to < 30 feet
g;G
[.;G
From 5 to < 15 feet
r. H
r H
< 5 feet

9 Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric
Answer for assessment area dominant landform
r",A Evidence of short- duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
�.; B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
C Evidence of long- duration inundation or very long- duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10 Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition)
A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels
�B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland
.,C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland
11 Wetland Size — wetland type /wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual) Seethe User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas If assessment area is clear -cut, select "K" for the FW column
WT WC FW (if applicable)
A A A ? 500 acres
B B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C C From 50 to < 100 acres
D D D From 25 to < 50 acres
E E E From 10 to < 25 acres
F F F From 5 to < 10 acres
G G G From 1 to < 5 acres
H H H From 0 5 to < 1 acre
I I I From 0 1 to < 0 5 acre
. J . J . J From 0 01 to < 0 1 acre
K K K < 0 01 acre or assessment area is clear -cut
12 Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosms only)
A Pocosin is the full extent (z 90 %) of its natural landscape size
B Pocosin is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size
13 Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column) Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment This
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and /or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
metric naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate) Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility
line corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wide
Well Loosely
A A z 500 acres
. B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C From 50 to < 100 acres
D D From 10 to < 50 acres
E E < 10 acres
F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b Evaluate for marshes only
r'Yes ['No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters /stream or tidal wetlands
14 Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges Artificial edges include
non - forested areas z 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and clear -cuts
Consider the eight main points of the compass
A No artificial edge within 150 feet in all directions
. B No artificial edge within 150 feet in four (4) to seven (7) directions
C An artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in more than four (4) directions or assessment area is clear -cut
15 Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
EA Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area
[:B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata
[:C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition Expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species) Exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum
16 Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species ( <10% cover of exotics)
B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics
C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species ( >50% cover of exotics)

i
17 Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a Is vegetation present?
E Yes U No If Yes, continue to 17b If No, skip to Metric 18
17b Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands
A Z 25% coverage of vegetation
B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c Check a box in each column for each stratum Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands Consider structure
in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately
AA
WT
a
B
PA
•
B
Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
v
C
C
Canopy sparse or absent
oA
B
A
B
Dense mid - story/sapling layer
Moderate density mid- story/sapling layer
C
• C
Mid- story/sapling layer sparse or absent
A A Dense shrub layer
2 B B Moderate density shrub layer
U) •.0 ..0 Shrub laver sparse or absent
Dense herb layer
= B B Moderate density herb layer
PA C • C Herb layer sparse or absent
18 Snags —wetland type condition metric
• A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12- inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability)
B Not A
19 Diameter Class Distribution —wetland type condition metric
CA Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH), many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present
�B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 -inch DBH
C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees
20 Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric
Include both natural debris and man - placed natural debris
R A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability)
B Not A
21 Vegetation /Open Water Dispersion — wetland type /open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water
[-'A r'B E:C UD
ti " tg t a
22 Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive
ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man -made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision
. A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area
B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area
C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area
D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area
Notes

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Vernon 4 1
Rating Calculator Version 41
Wetland Site Name Agony Acres - Wetland A Date 1/28/2013
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name /Organization Ian Eckardt
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y /N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y /N)
YES
Wetland is intensively managed (Y /N)
NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y /N)
YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y /N)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y /N)
YES
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y /N)
NO
Sub - function Rating Summary
Function Sub - function Metrics Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition HIGH
Sub - Surface Storage and Retention Condition HIGH
Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
YES
Particulate Change Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Soluble Change Condition
MEDIUM
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
YES
Physical Change
Condition
HIGH
Hydrology
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Water Quality
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
YES
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Habitat
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
MEDIUM
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Vegetation Composition
Condition
HIGH
Function Rating Summary
Function
Metrics /Notes
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
YES
Habitat
Conditon
MEDIUM
Overall Wetland Rating HIGH
i

NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 4 1
Kaung Laicuiazor version n 1
Wetland Site Name Agony Acres - Wetland B Date 1/28/2013
WetiandTypel Headwater Forest !) Assessor Name /Organization Ian Eckardt
Level III Ecoregionj Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body Reedy Fork
River Basml Cape Fear j± USGS 8 -Digit Catalogue Unit 03030002
No Preciodation within 48 hrs?
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and /or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately within 10 years) Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited
to the following
Hydrological modifications (examples ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc)
Surface and sub - surface discharges into the wetland (examples discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc )
Signs of vegetation stress (examples vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc)
Habitat/plant community alteration (examples mowing, clear - cutting, exotics, etc)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? Yes E;No
Regulatory Considerations (select all that apply to the assessment area)
C Anadromous fish
C Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
[- NCDWQ riparian buffer rule in effect
f7 Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
F` Publicly owned property
C N C Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
r Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
F Designated NCNHP reference community
r Abuts a 303(d)- listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)- listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
Blackwater
Brownwater
[ Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) [ Lunar ; Wind g ^, Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? [;Yes FNo
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver?
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions?
Yes
Yes [r No
Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual) If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect
GS VS
rA r. A Not severely altered
r B [. BB Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub - Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub) Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology Refer to the current NRCS lateral effect of ditching guidance for
North Carolina hydric soils (see USACE Wilmington District website) for the zone of influence of ditches in hydric sods A ditch
s 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and ditch
sub - surface water Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable
Surf Sub
r, A rA Water storage capacity and duration are not altered
r B �: B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation)
rC r Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines)
Water Storage /Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (answer for non -marsh wetlands only)
Check a box in each column for each group below Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT)
AA WT
3a rA r. A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 foot deep
r B [, B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
g;C r. C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
.; D �.; D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b r. A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
rB Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
[.;C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

4 Soil Texture /Structure - assessment area condition metric
Check a box from each of the three sod property groups below Dig sod profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature Make soil observations within the 12 inches Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydnc Sods guidance for
regional indicators
4a rA Sandy sod
rB Loamy or clayey sods exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
r, D Loamy or clayey gleyed sod
[j E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b Fj A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
rB Sod ribbon z 1 inch
4c rA No peat or muck presence
r° B A peat or muck presence
5 Discharge into Wetland - opportunity metric
Check a box in each column Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub - surface pollutants or discharges (Sub)
Examples of sub - surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc
Surf Sub
r: A E: A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
r r Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
C [";C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6 Land Use - opportunity metric
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column) Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment Consider sources
draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the
assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M) Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion
WS
5M
2M
f-i A
r A
1-7. A
Z 10% impervious surfaces
r! B
(? B
177, B
< 10% impervious surfaces
r C
r C
F C
Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
F-1. D
C D
f- D
s 20% coverage of pasture
r E
r E
r E
z 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
C F
[ F
C1 F
a 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
F, G
r G
ff, G
a 20% coverage of clear -cut land
F H
r H
ri H
Little or no opportunity to improve water quality Lack of opportunity may result from hydrologic alterations
that prevent drainage or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area
Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer - assessment area/wetland complex condition metric
7a Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
.;Yes r",No If Yes, continue to 7b If No, skip to Metric 8
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body Make buffer judgment based on the average width of the wetland
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed
7b How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is weltand? Descriptor E should be selected if ditches effectively bypass the buffer
r, A z 50 feet
r B From 30 to < 50 feet
C From 15 to < 30 feet
r, D From 5 to < 15 feet
r. E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c Tributary width If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels /braids for a total width
re,:5 15 -feet wide E° > 15 -feet wide r Other open water (no tributary present)
7d Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tnbutary/open water?
r, Yes o No
7e Is tributary or other open water sheltered or exposed?
Sheltered - adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic
Exposed - adjacent open water with width z 2500 feet or regular boat traffic
Wetland Width at the Assessment Area - wetland type /wetland complex metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Check a box in each column Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT)
and the wetland complex at the assessment areas (WC) See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries
WT
WC
r.".A
a 100 feet
.,A
r B
r, B
From 80 to < 100 feet
(;C
[`;C
From 50 to < 80 feet
,D
D
From 40 to < 50 feet
E
�'; E
From 30 to < 40 feet
F
F
From 15 to < 30 feet
[.;G
(.;G
From 5 to < 15 feet
r. H
r, H
< 5 feet
I"

9 Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric
Answer for assessment area dominant landform
r ,A Evidence of short- duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
�;C Evidence of long- duration inundation or very long- duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10 Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition)
or Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels
B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland
�C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland
Wetland Size — wetland type /wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual) Seethe User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas If assessment area is clear -cut, select "K" for the FW column
WT
WC
FW (if applicable)
A
-A
A
z 500 acres
B
B
B
From 100 to < 500 acres
C
C
C
From 50 to < 100 acres
D
D
D
From 25 to < 50 acres
E
E
E
From 10 to < 25 acres
F
F
F
From 5 to < 10 acres
G
G
G
From 1 to < 5 acres
H
H
H
From 0 5 to < 1 acre
I
I
I
From 0 1 to < 0 5 acre
J
J
J
From 0 01 to < 0 1 acre
. K
• K
• K
< 0 01 acre or assessment area is clear -cut
12 Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosms only)
A Pocosin is the full extent (a 90 %) of its natural landscape size
B Pocosin is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size
13 Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column) Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment This
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and /or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
metric naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate) Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility
line corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wide
Well Loosely
A
A
a 500 acres
B
B
From 100 to < 500 acres
C
C
From 50 to < 100 acres
D
D
From 10 to < 50 acres
E
E
< 10 acres
• F
• F
Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b Evaluate for marshes only
CYes ['No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters /stream or tidal wetlands
14 Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges Artificial edges include
non - forested areas z 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and clear -cuts
Consider the eight main points of the compass
A No artificial edge within 150 feet in all directions
B No artificial edge within 150 feet in four (4) to seven (7) directions
. C An artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in more than four (4) directions or assessment area is clear -cut
15 Vegetative Composition —assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
CA Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area
E:B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata
•:C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition Expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species) Exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum
16 Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species ( <10% cover of exotics)
B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics
C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species ( >50% cover of exotics)

17 Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a Is vegetation present?
: Yes C; No If Yes, continue to 17b If No, skip to Metric 18
17b Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands
A
z 25% coverage
of vegetation
B
< 25%
coverage of vegetation
17c Check a box in each column for each stratum Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands Consider structure
in airspace
above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately
AA
WT
a
m
B
PA
A
B
Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
C
C
. C
Canopy sparse or absent
,9
B
PA
A
B
Dense mid- story/sapling layer
Moderate density mid- story/sapling layer
g
C
• C
Mid- story/sapling layer sparse or absent
o
r
B
PA
B
Dense shrub layer
Moderate density shrub layer
(Z)
C
. C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
=
B
PA
•
B
Dense herb layer
Moderate density herb layer
C
C
Herb layer sparse or absent
18 Snags — wetland type condition metric
RA Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12- inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability)
. B Not A
19 Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric
[:A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH), many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present
B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 -inch DBH
. C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees
20 Large Woody Debris —wetland type condition metric
Include both natural debris and man - placed natural debris
A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability)
HB Not A
21 Vegetation /Open Water Dispersion — wetland type /open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water
r,A ['B ERC D
� r•
22 Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive
ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man -made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision
. A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area
B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area
C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area
,D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area
Notes

11 1
NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 4 1
Rating Calculator Version 4 1
Wetland Site Name Agony Acres - Wetland B Date 1/28/2013
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name /Organization Ian Eckardt
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y /N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y /N)
YES
Wetland is intensively managed (Y /N)
YES
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y /N)
YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y /N)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y /N)
NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y /N)
NO
Sub - function Rating Summary
Function Sub - function Metrics Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition LOW
Sub - Surface Storage and Retention Condition HIGH
Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
YES
Particulate Change Condition
LOW
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Soluble Change Condition
MEDIUM
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
YES
Physical Change Condition
LOW
Condition /Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
YES
Pollution Change Condition NA
Condition /Opportunity NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N) NA
Habitat Physical Structure Condition LOW
Landscape Patch Structure Condition LOW
Vegetation Composition Condition LOW
Function Rating Summary
Function
Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Condition
LOW
Condition /Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
YES
Habitat
Conditon
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 41
mating caicuiator version 4 1
Wetland Site Name Agony Acres - Wetland C Date 1/28/2013
Wetland Type Head -ater Forest + Assessor Name /Organization Ian Eckardt
Level III Ecoregionj Piedmont + Nearest Named Water Body Reedy Fork
River Basin Cape Fear + USGS 8 -Digit Catalogue Unit 03030002
No Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and /or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately within 10 years) Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited
to the following
• Hydrological modifications (examples ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc )
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc )
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples mowing, clear - cuffing, exotics, etc)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? r: Yes r. No
Regulatory Considerations (select all that apply to the assessment area)
F Anadromous fish
r-, Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
C' NCDWQ riparian buffer rule in effect
f Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
r Publicly owned property
[ N C Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
F Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
C, Designated NCNHP reference community
r✓ Abuts a 303(d)- listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)- listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
ri Blackwater
o Brownwater
r Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) r . Lunar rWind f, Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? Yes No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver?
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions?
Yes
rYes ro No
Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual) If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect
GS VS
A ,A Not severely altered
�B F,'B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
2 Surface and Sub - Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub) Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology Refer to the current NRCS lateral effect of ditching guidance for
North Carolina hydric soils (see USACE Wilmington District website) for the zone of influence of ditches in hydnc soils A ditch
s 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and ditch
sub -surface water Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable
Surf Sub
r°A [.;A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered
[: B B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation)
C C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples draining, flooding, sod compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines)
3 Water Storage /Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (answer for non -marsh wetlands only)
Check a box in each column for each group below Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT)
AA WT
3a rA r. A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 foot deep
B �; B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
C r,C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
r: D [: D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b rA Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
r Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
[.;C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

I
Sod Texture /Structure — assessment area condition metric
Check a box from each of the three sod property groups below Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature Make soil observations within the 12 inches Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydnc Sods guidance for
regional indicators
4a r,A Sandy soil
B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
D Loamy or clayey gleyed sod
[� E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b E ;A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
rB Sod ribbon z 1 inch
4c or No peat or muck presence
[, B A peat or muck presence
5 Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub - surface pollutants or discharges (Sub)
Examples of sub - surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc
Surf Sub
o",,A rA Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
r, B r B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
�C r,C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6 Land Use — opportunity metric
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column) Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment Consider sources
draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the
assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M) Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion
WS
5M
2M
r,A
G A
r A
r, A
z 10% impervious surfaces
F. B
r B
r B
< 10% impervious surfaces
r C
M= C
r} C
Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
R, D
r D
r D
z 20% coverage of pasture
R E
i? E
R, E
z 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
I i F
r F
r F
Z 20% coverage of maintained grass /herb
F G
i✓ G
1✓i G
z 20% coverage of clear -cut land
1— H
172 H
1-1 H
Little or no opportunity to improve water quality Lack of opportunity may result from hydrologic alterations
that prevent drainage or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area
Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer — assessment area/wetland complex condition metric
7a Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
Yes r'.No If Yes, continue to 7b If No, skip to Metric 8
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body Make buffer judgment based on the average width of the wetland
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed
7b How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is wettand? Descriptor E should be selected if ditches effectively bypass the buffer
A z 50 feet
B From 30 to < 50 feet
C From 15 to < 30 feet
D From 5 to < 15 feet
E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c Tributary width If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels /braids for a total width
r: s 15 -feet wide r. > 15 -feet wide r. Other open water (no tributary present)
7d Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water2
r Yes r No
7e Is tributary or other open water sheltered or exposed
�".,' Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic
r Exposed — adjacent open water with width z 2500 feet or regular boat traffic
Wetland Width at the Assessment Area — wetland type /wetland complex metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Check a box in each column Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT)
and the wetland complex at the assessment areas (WC) See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries
WT
WC
r,A
r".A
z 100 feet
r^,' B
r B
From 80 to < 100 feet
�,C
rC
From 50 to < 80 feet
D
[ D
From 40 to < 50 feet
rj E
r"j E
From 30 to < 40 feet
g;F
;F
From 15 to < 30 feet
G
G
From 5 to < 15 feet
H
H
< 5 feet

9 Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric
Answer for assessment area dominant landform
F, A Evidence of short- duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
rB Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
C Evidence of long- duration inundation or very long- duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10 Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition)
�.;A Sediment deposition Is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels
B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland
�C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland
11 Wetland Size —wetland type /wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual) Seethe User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas If assessment area is clear -cut, select "K" for the FW column
WT
WC
FW (if applicable)
A
A
A Z 500 acres
B
B
B From 100 to < 500 acres
C
C
C From 50 to < 100 acres
D
D
D From 25 to < 50 acres
E
E
E From 10 to < 25 acres
F
F
F From 5 to < 10 acres
G
G
G From 1 to < 5 acres
H
H
H From 0 5 to < 1 acre
I
I
I From 0 1 to < 0 5 acre
. J
. J
J From 0 01 to < 0 1 acre
K
K
• K < 0 01 acre or assessment area is clear -cut
12 Wetland Intactness —wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
A Pocosin is the full extent (z 90 %) of its natural landscape size
B Pocosin is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size
13 Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column) Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment This
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and /or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
metric naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate) Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility
line corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wide
Well
Loosely
A
A
z 500 acres
B
B
From 100 to < 500 acres
C
C
From 50 to < 100 acres
D
D
From 10 to < 50 acres
E
E
< 10 acres
. F
. F
Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b Evaluate for marshes only
['Yes ['No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters /stream or tidal wetlands
14 Edge Effect —wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges Artificial edges include
non - forested areas z 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and Gear -cuts
Consider the eight main points of the compass
A No artificial edge within 150 feet in all directions
B No artificial edge within 150 feet in four (4) to seven (7) directions
. -C An artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in more than four (4) directions or assessment area is clear -cut
15 Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
[:A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area
B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata
E:C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition Expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species) Exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum
16 Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species ( <10% cover of exotics)
B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics
C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species ( >50% cover of exotics)

17 Vegetative Structure — assessment area /wetland type condition metric
17a Is vegetation present?
.: Yes [: No If Yes, continue to 17b If No, skip to Metric 18
17b Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands
18 Snags —wetland type condition metric
A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 -inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability)
. B Not A
19 Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric
['A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH), many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present
B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 -inch DBH
• C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees
20 Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric
Include both natural debris and man - placed natural debris
H A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability)
B Not A
21 Vegetation /Open Water Dispersion — wetland type /open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water
r
22 Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive
ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man -made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision
. A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area
B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area
C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area
D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area
A
z 25% coverage of vegetation
B
< 25%
coverage of vegetation
17c Check
a box in each column for each stratum Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands Consider structure
in airspace
above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately
AA
WT
a
C
ca
A
B
PC
B
PA
Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
C
Canopy sparse or absent
o
A
B
B
PA
Dense mid- story/sapling layer
Moderate density mid- story/sapling layer
• C
C
Mid- story/sapling layer sparse or absent
a
t
A
• B
B
PA
Dense shrub layer
Moderate density shrub layer
U)
C
C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
.2
_
B
PA
• A
Dense herb layer
Moderate density herb layer
B
C
C
Herb layer sparse or absent
18 Snags —wetland type condition metric
A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 -inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability)
. B Not A
19 Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric
['A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH), many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present
B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 -inch DBH
• C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees
20 Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric
Include both natural debris and man - placed natural debris
H A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability)
B Not A
21 Vegetation /Open Water Dispersion — wetland type /open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water
r
22 Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive
ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man -made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision
. A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area
B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area
C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area
D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 41
Rating Calculator Version 4 1
Wetland Site Name Agony Acres - Wetland C Date
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name /Organization
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y /N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y /N)
Wetland is intensively managed (Y /N)
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y /N)
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y /N)
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y /N)
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y /N)
Sub - function Rating Summary
1/28/2013
Ian Eckardt
MW
YES
YES
YES
NO
NO
NO
Function Sub - function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Sub - Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Physical Change
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
YES
Particulate Change
Condition
HIGH
Vegetation Composition Condition LOW
Function Rating Summary
Function
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Hydrology
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
YES
Physical Change
Condition
LOW
Condition /Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
YES
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
LOW
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Vegetation Composition Condition LOW
Function Rating Summary
Function
Metrics /Notes
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
YES
Habitat
Conditon
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating HIGH
_/

�J
NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 41
Kating Gaicuiaxor Version 4 l
Wetland Site Name Agony Acres - Wetland D Date 1/28/2013
Wetland Type Head -ater Forest Assessor Name /Organization Ian Eckardt
Level III Ecoregionj Piedmont 1�+ Nearest Named Water Body Reedy Fork
River Basinj Cape Fear USGS 8 -Digit Catalogue Unit 03030002
Yes F:;NO Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and /or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately within 10 years) Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited
to the following
• Hydrological modifications (examples ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc)
• Surface and sub - surface discharges into the wetland (examples discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc )
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples mowing, clear - cutting, exotics, etc)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? E°,Yes �.°,No
Regulatory Considerations (select all that apply to the assessment area)
U Anadromous fish
F_ Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
F NCDWQ riparian buffer rule in effect
(- Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
F Publicly owned property
N C Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
F Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
r Designated NCNHP reference community
r Abuts a 303(d)- listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)- listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
Blackwater
Brownwater
r Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ;Lunar ;Wind ;Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? ["Yes r No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver?
Does the assessment area experience overbank
normal rainfall conditions?
;Yes F,* No
Yes fo'No
Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual) If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect
GS VS
•�A •,A Not severely altered
B r B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
2 Surface and Sub - Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub) Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology Refer to the current NRCS lateral effect of ditching guidance for
North Carolina hydnc soils (see USACE Wilmington Distnct website) for the zone of influence of ditches in hydric soils A ditch
s 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and ditch
sub -surface water Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable
Surf Sub
r: A or,A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered
B (°.' B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation)
C r, C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples draining, flooding, sod compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines)
3 Water Storage /Surface Relief — assessment area /wetland type condition metric (answer for non -marsh wetlands only)
Check a box in each column for each group below Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT)
AA WT
3a rA �°,A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 foot deep
B � B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
rC r, C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
E: D r D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b �A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
[; B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
rC Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

Soil Texture /Structure - assessment area condition metric
Check a box from each of the three sod property groups below Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature Make sod observations within the 12 inches Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for
regional indicators
4a r�A Sandy sod
oB Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
B Sod ribbon z 1 inch
4c or No peat or muck presence
r B A peat or muck presence
5 Discharge into Wetland - opportunity metric
Check a box in each column Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub -surface pollutants or discharges (Sub)
Examples of sub -surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc
Surf Sub
rA oA Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
r B r, B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
�C r, C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
Land Use - opportunity metric
Check all that apply (at least one box In each column) Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment Consider sources
draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the
assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M) Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion
WS
5M
2M
A
F' A
F A
F, A
z 10% impervious surfaces
rn B
r B
r, B
< 10% impervious surfaces
F C
Cl C
C, C
Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
R, D
r D
fYI D
s 20% coverage of pasture
r E
r E
r E
s 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
F F
r F
Cr F
z 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
Fe-, G
r G
r, G
z 20% coverage of clear -cut land
F H
F H
rc H
Little or no opportunity to improve water quality Lack of opportunity may result from hydrologic alterations
that prevent drainage or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area
Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer - assessment area/wetland complex condition metric
7a Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
Yes r;No If Yes, continue to 7b If No, skip to Metric 8
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body Make buffer judgment based on the average width of the wetland
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed
7b How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is weltand? Descriptor E should be selected if ditches effectively bypass the buffer
r A z 50 feet
B From 30 to < 50 feet
r: C From 15 to < 30 feet
[! D From 5 to < 15 feet
E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c Tributary width If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width
s 15 -feet wide r> 15 -feet wide r Other open water (no tributary present)
7d Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tnbutary/open water?
�: Yes r, No
7e Is tributary or other open water sheltered or exposed
Sheltered - adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic
Exposed - adjacent open water with width Z 2500 feet or regular boat traffic
Wetland Width at the Assessment Area - wetland type /wetland complex metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Check a box in each column Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT)
and the wetland complex at the assessment areas (WC) See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries
WT
WC
A
(;A
z 100 feet
[; B
(; B
From 80 to < 100 feet
rj C
[ r C
From 50 to < 80 feet
D
g i D
From 40 to < 50 feet
r E
r, E
From 30 to < 40 feet
F
� , FF
From 15 to < 30 feet
�G
E,G
From 5 to < 15 feet
r'; H
r H
< 5 feet
'a ti

7
9 Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric
Answer for assessment area dominant landform
r",A Evidence of short- duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
o B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
r. C Evidence of long - duration inundation or very long- duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10 Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition)
or Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels
B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland
�C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland
Wetland Size — wetland type /wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual) Seethe User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas If assessment area is clear -cut, select "K" for the FW column
WT
WC
FW (if applicable)
A
A
A
z 500 acres
=413
B
B
From 100 to < 500 acres
C
C
C
From 50 to < 100 acres
D
D
D
From 25 to < 50 acres
E
E
E
From 10 to < 25 acres
- F
F
F
From 5 to < 10 acres
G
G
G
From 1 to < 5 acres
- H
H
H
From 0 5 to < 1 acre
- I
I
I
From 0 1 to < 0 5 acre
J
J
J
From 0 01 to < 0 1 acre
• K
• K
• K
< 0 01 acre or assessment area is clear -cut
12 Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
A Pocosin is the full extent (z 90 %) of its natural landscape size
B Pocosin is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size
13 Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column) Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment This
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and /or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
metric naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate) Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility
line corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wide
Well
Loosely
A
A
z 500 acres
B
B
From 100 to < 500 acres
C
C
From 50 to < 100 acres
• D
• D
From 10 to < 50 acres
E
E
< 10 acres
F
F
Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b Evaluate for marshes only
CYes CNo Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters /stream or tidal wetlands
14 Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges Artificial edges include
non - forested areas z 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and clear -cuts
Consider the eight main points of the compass
A No artificial edge within 150 feet in all directions
• B No artificial edge within 150 feet in four (4) to seven (7) directions
C An artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in more than four (4) directions or assessment area is clear -cut
15 Vegetative Composition —assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
JEA Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area
[:B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata
CC Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition Expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species) Exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum
16 Vegetative Diversity —assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species ( <10% cover of exotics)
B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics
C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species ( >50% cover of exotics)

17 Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a Is vegetation present?
E; Yes C" No If Yes, continue to 17b If No, skip to Metric 18
17b Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands
A z 25% coverage of vegetation
B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c Check a box in each column for each stratum Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands Consider structure
in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately
AA WT
n PA • A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
mB B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
U C C Canopy sparse or absent
o A PA Dense mid- story/sapling layer
B B Moderate density mid- story/sapling layer
• C C Mid- story/sapling layer sparse or absent
a A A Dense shrub layer
t B B Moderate density shrub layer
U • _C •.0 Shrub laver sparse or absent
.2 PA Dense herb layer
= B B Moderate density herb layer
C • C Herb layer sparse or absent
18 Snags — wetland type condition metric
• A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12- inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability)
B Not A
19 Diameter Class Distribution —wetland type condition metric
MA Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH), many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present
B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 -inch DBH
�C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees
20 Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric
Include both natural debris and man - placed natural debris
H A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability)
B Not A
21 Vegetation /Open Water Dispersion — wetland type /open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water
r, A ['B cc [:D
n
r+ �
� i �, •t f i f
22 Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive
ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man -made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision
• A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area
B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area
C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area
D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area

1 NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 4 1
Rating Calculator Version 4 1
Wetland Site Name Agony Acres - Wetland D Date
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name /Organization
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y /N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y /N)
Wetland is intensively managed (Y /N)
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y /N)
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y /N)
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y /N)
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y /N)
Sub - function Rating Summary
1/28/2013
Ian Eckardt
'MW
YES
NO
YES
NO
NO
NO
Function Sub - function Metrics Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition HIGH
Sub - Surface Storage and Retention Condition HIGH
Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition HIGH
Condition /Opportunity HIGH
Function Rating Summary
Function
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
YES
Particulate Change
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Condition /Opportunity
NA
i
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Habitat
Conditon
MEDIUM
Soluble Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
YES
Physical Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
YES
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
MEDIUM
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Vegetation Composition
Condition
HIGH
Function Rating Summary
Function
Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
YES
Habitat
Conditon
MEDIUM
Overall Wetland Rating HIGH

NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 41
mating L aicuwator version ,+ i
Wetland Site Name Agony Acres - Wetland E Date 1/28/2013
WetiandTypel Headwater Forest ! Assessor Name /Organization Ian Eckardt
Level III Ecoregionj Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body Reedy Fork
River Basin Cape Fear USGS 8 -Digit Catalogue Unit 03030002
L .Yes rNo Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude /Longitude (deci- degrees)
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and /or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately within 10 years) Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited
to the following
• Hydrological modifications (examples ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc)
• Surface and sub - surface discharges into the wetland (examples discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc )
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples mowing, clear - cutting, exotics, etc)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? (: Yes r, No
Regulatory Considerations (select all that apply to the assessment area)
r Anadromous fish
r Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
[ NCDWQ riparian buffer rule in effect
r Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
r Publicly owned property
N C Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
r Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
f=° Designated NCNHP reference community
r, Abuts a 303(d)- listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)- listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
["� Blackwater
o Brownwater
F Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) r", Lunar r Wmd ;Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? [',Yes to',No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver?
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions?
Yes r.; No
rNo
1 Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual) If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect
GS VS
(
.°�'A jA Not severely altered
r B � B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub - Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub) Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology Refer to the current NRCS lateral effect of ditching guidance for
North Carolina hydnc soils (see USACE Wilmington Distnct website) for the zone of influence of ditches in hydnc soils A ditch
s 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and ditch
sub -surface water Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable
Surf Sub
[: A A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered
B B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation)
C [;C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples draining, flooding, sod compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines)
3 Water Storage /Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (answer for non -marsh wetlands only)
Check a box in each column for each group below Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT)
AA WT
3a r. A [';A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 foot deep
r. B (; B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
r, C rC Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
or D r D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b jA Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
[•,B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
rC Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

tr
Sod Texture /Structure — assessment area condition metric
Check a box from each of the three sod property groups below Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature Make soil observations within the 12 inches Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for
regional indicators
4a A Sandy soil
B Loamy or clayey sods exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
C Loamy or clayey sods not exhibiting redoximorphic features
�D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
rE Histosol or hishc epipedon
4b rA Sod ribbon < 1 inch
B Sod ribbons 1 inch
4c A No peat or muck presence
B A peat or muck presence
Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub -surface pollutants or discharges (Sub)
Examples of sub - surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc
Surf Sub
�.°A [.;A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
r. B r B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
r r";C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6 Land Use — opportunity metric
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column) Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment Consider sources
draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the
assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M) Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion
WS
5M
2M
rA
F- A
rI A
f f A
z 10% impervious surfaces
ff B
rt- B
r B
< 10% impervious surfaces
ri C
f-1 C
17' C
Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
En D
ff D
r, D
z 20% coverage of pasture
r E
rr E
r E
z 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
F F
r F
O F
a 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
F—f G
r G
ro G
z 20% coverage of clear -cut land
n H
F H
Ft H
Little or no opportunity to improve water quality Lack of opportunity may result from hydrologic alterations
that prevent drainage or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area
Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer — assessment area/wetland complex condition metric
7a Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
[. Yes r,No If Yes, continue to 7b If No, skip to Metric 8
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body Make buffer judgment based on the average width of the wetland
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed
7b How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is weltand? Descriptor E should be selected if ditches effectively bypass the buffer
A z 50 feet
B From 30 to < 50 feet
�; C From 15 to < 30 feet
o: D From 5 to < 15 feet
E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c Tnbutary width If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels /braids for a total width
r: s 15 -feet wide E'; > 15 -feet wide r Other open water (no tributary present)
7d Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
r Yes r: No
7e Is tributary or other open water sheltered or exposed?
r Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic
r, Exposed — adjacent open water with width Z 2500 feet or regular boat traffic
Wetland Width at the Assessment Area — wetland type /wetland complex metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Check a box in each column Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT)
and the wetland complex at the assessment areas (WC) See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries
WT
WC
rA
r"
s 100 feet
r B
r", B
From 80 to < 100 feet
�C
r, C
From 50 to < 80 feet
r
r",D
From 40 to < 50 feet
rjE
jE
From 30 to < 40 feet
rj F
, F
From 15 to < 30 feet
F,"G
[.,G
From 5 to < 15 feet
r H
r H
< 5 feet

9 Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric
Answer for assessment area dominant landform
F,A Evidence of short- duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
.,C Evidence of long- duration inundation or very long - duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10 Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric _
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition)
FA Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels
B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland
rj C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland
11 Wetland Size — wetland type /wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual)
Seethe
User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas If assessment area is clear -cut, select 'W for the FW column
WT
WC
FW (if applicable)
A
A
A z 500 acres
B
B
B From 100 to < 500 acres
C
C
C From 50 to < 100 acres
D
D
D From 25 to < 50 acres
E
E
E From 10 to < 25 acres
F
F
F From 5 to < 10 acres
G
G
-G From 1 to < 5 acres
H
H
H From 0 5 to < 1 acre
> I
I
I From 0 1 to < 0 5 acre
J
J
J From 0 01 to < 0 1 acre
. K
. K
. K < 0 01 acre or assessment area is clear -cut
12 Wetland Intactness —wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
A Pocosin is the full extent (z 90 %) of its natural landscape size
B Pocosin is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size
13 Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column) Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment This
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and /or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
metric naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate) Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility
line corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wide
Well Loosely
A A Z 500 acres
B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C From 50 to < 100 acres
D D From 10 to < 50 acres
E E < 10 acres
. F . F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b Evaluate for marshes only
CYes C No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters /stream or tidal wetlands
14 Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges Artificial edges include
non - forested areas z 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and clear -cuts
Consider the eight main points of the compass
A No artificial edge within 150 feet in all directions
B No artificial edge within 150 feet in four (4) to seven (7) directions
. C An artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in more than four (4) directions or assessment area is clear -cut
15 Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
CA Vegetation is dose to reference condition in species present and their proportions Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area
E:B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata
CC Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition Expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species) Exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum
16 Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species ( <10% cover of exotics)
B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics
C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species ( >50% cover of exotics)

r'
17 Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a Is vegetation present?
E: Yes [: No If Yes, continue to 17b If No, skip to Metric 18
17b Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands
A z 25% coverage of vegetation
B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c Check a box in each column for each stratum Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands Consider structure
in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately
AA
WT
CL
A
Canopy closed, or nearly dosed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
C
B
PA
B
Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
C
• C
Canopy sparse or absent
oA
I?
B
A
B
Dense mid- story/sapling layer
Moderate density mid- story/sapling layer
• C
• C
Mid- story/sapling layer sparse or absent
2
A
• B
A
• B
Dense shrub layer
Moderate density shrub layer
(n
C
C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
.e PA • Dense herb layer
B B Moderate density herb layer
C C Herb layer sparse or absent
18 Snags —wetland type condition metric
H A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12- inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability)
B Not A
19 Diameter Class Distribution —wetland type condition metric
['A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH), many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present
B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 -inch DBH
. C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees
20 Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris
H A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability)
B Not A
21 Vegetation /Open Water Dispersion — wetland type /open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water
r'A ['B ['C D
F i,=
22 Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity Include Intensive
ditching, fill, sedimentation, channellzatlon, diversion, man -made berms, beaver dams, and stream Incision
• A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered In the assessment area
B Overbank flow Is severely altered In the assessment area
C Overland flow is severely altered In the assessment area
D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area
Notes

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 4 1
Rating Calculator Version 4 1
Wetland Site Name Agony Acres - Wetland E Date
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name /Organization
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y /N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y /N)
Wetland is intensively managed (Y /N)
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y /N)
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y /N) y,
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y /N)
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y /N)
Sub - function Rating Summary
1/28/2013
Ian Eckardt
►[W
YES
YES
YES
NO
NO
NO
Function Sub - function Metrics Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition MEDIUM
Sub - Surface Storage and Retention Condition MEDIUM
Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition HIGH
Condition /Opportunity NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N) NA
Habitat Physical Structure Condition LOW
Landscape Patch Structure Condition LOW
Vegetation Composition Condition MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Hydrology
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
YES
Particulate Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
YES
Physical Change
Condition
LOW
Condition /Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
YES
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition /Opportunity NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N) NA
Habitat Physical Structure Condition LOW
Landscape Patch Structure Condition LOW
Vegetation Composition Condition MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function
Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
YES
Habitat
Conditon
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating MEDIUM

�r
NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 41
maung t.aicuiator versson q i
Wetland Site Name Agony Acres - Wetland F Date 1/28/2013
Wetland Type Headwater Forest I Assessor Name /Organization Ian Eckardt
Level III Ecoregion Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body Reedy Fork
River Basmi Cape Fear USGS 8 -Digit Catalogue Unit 03030002
r,Yes r'No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude /Longitude (deci -degrees)
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and /or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately within 10 years) Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited
to the following
• Hydrological modifications (examples ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc )
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples mowing, clear - cutting, exotics, etc)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? °Yes or, No
Regulatory Considerations (select all that apply to the assessment area)
C Anadromous fish
r- Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
F NCDWQ riparian buffer rule in effect
C Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
f- Publicly owned property
[� N C Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
r Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
r Designated NCNHP reference community
r Abuts a 303(d)- listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)- listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
(. Blackwater
o Brownwater
r Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) Lunar r Wind r, Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? ['Yes or, No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver?
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions?
[;Yes FNo
r°:

4 Sod Texture /Structure — assessment area condition metric
Check a box from each of the three sod property groups below Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature Make soil observations within the 12 inches Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for
regional indicators
4a �,A Sandy soil
L: B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
,C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
.jD Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
rjE Histosol or histic epipedon
4b rjA
Soil ribbon < 1 inch
r-,B
Soil ribbon z 1 inch
4c rA
No peat or muck presence
r, B
A peat or muck presence
5 Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub -surface pollutants or discharges (Sub)
Examples of sub -surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc
Surf Sub
re"A oA Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
B ( B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
[;C rC Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6 Land Use — opportunity metric
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column) Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment Consider sources
draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the
assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M) Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion
WS
5M
2M
A
r A
F,, A
rf A
z 10% impervious surfaces
rf B
re— B
F , B
< 10% impervious surfaces
F C
F, C
r- C
Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
r D
r D
F!! D
z 20% coverage of pasture
r? E
t✓, E
r E
z 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
C F
r✓ F
r-� F
z 20% coverage of maintained grass /herb
F G
F; G
ri G
z 20% coverage of clear -cut land
F
i H
Ft H
Little or no opportunity to improve water quality Lack of opportunity may result from hydrologic alterations
that prevent drainage or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area
Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer— assessment area/wetland complex condition metric
7a Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
Yes ,No If Yes, continue to 7b If No, skip to Metric 8
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body Make buffer judgment based on the average width of the wetland
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed
7b How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is weltand? Descriptor E should be selected if ditches effectively bypass the buffer
r, A a 50 feet
r B From 30 to < 50 feet
C From 15 to < 30 feet
g D From 5 to < 15 feet
E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c Tributary width If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width
r: 5 15 -feet wide r. > 15 -feet wide r, Other open water (no tributary present)
7d Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tnbutary/open water?
r. Yes rojNo
7e Is tributary or other open water sheltered or exposed?
Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic
Exposed — adjacent open water with width z 2500 feet or regular boat traffic
Wetland Width at the Assessment Area — wetland type /wetland complex metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Check a box in each column Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT)
and the wetland complex at the assessment areas (WC) See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries
WT
WC
A
r. A
z 100 feet
�; B
B
From 80 to < 100 feet
C
From 50 to < 80 feet
,,C
r, D
D
From 40 to < 50 feet
r; E
; E
From 30 to < 40 feet
r F
r F
From 15 to < 30 feet
�G
G
From 5 to < 15 feet
H
H
< 5 feet

9 Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric
Answer for assessment area dominant landform
r, A Evidence of short- duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
F B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
C Evidence of long- duration inundation or very long- duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10 Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition)
(•,* A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels
r B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland
rC Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland
11 Wetland Size — wetland type /wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual) Seethe User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas If assessment area is clear -cut, select "K" for the FW column
WT WC FW (if applicable)
A A A z 500 acres
B B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C 24C From 50 to < 100 acres
D D D From 25 to < 50 acres
E E , E From 10 to < 25 acres
F F F From 5 to < 10 acres
G G - G From 1 to < 5 acres
H H H From 0 5 to < 1 acre
I I I From 0 1 to < 0 5 acre
J J J From 0 01 to < 0 1 acre
• K . K . K < 0 01 acre or assessment area is clear -cut
12 Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
A Pocosin is the full extent (z 90 %) of its natural landscape size
B Pocosin is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size
13 Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column) Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment This
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and /or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
metric naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate) Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility
line corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wide
Well Loosely
A A a 500 acres
B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C From 50 to < 100 acres
D • D From 10 to < 50 acres
j
• E E < 10 acres
F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b Evaluate for marshes only
Yes [:No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters /stream or tidal wetlands
14 Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges Artificial edges include
non - forested areas z 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and dear -cuts
Consider the eight main points of the compass
A No artificial edge within 150 feet in all directions
B No artificial edge within 150 feet in four (4) to seven (7) directions
. C An artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in more than four (4) directions or assessment area is clear -cut
15 Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
['A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area
•E B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata
UC Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition Expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non-
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species) Exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum
16 Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
( A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species ( <10% cover of exotics)
B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics
C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species ( >50% cover of exotics)

17 Vegetative Structure — assessment area /wetland type condition metric
17a Is vegetation present?
Yes [: No If Yes, continue to 17b If No, skip to Metric 18
17b Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands
A
z 25%
coverage of vegetation
B
< 25%
coverage of vegetation
17c Check a box in each column for each stratum Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands Consider structure ;
in airspace
above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately
AA
WT
C1
B
PA
B
PA
Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
C
C
Canopy sparse or absent
oA
PC B
B
PA
Dense mid- story/sapling layer
Moderate density mid- story/sapling layer
2
C
Mid- story/sapling layer sparse or absent
a
r
A
B
A
B
Dense shrub layer
Moderate density shrub layer
. -C
• C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
a
0)
B
PA
. B
Dense herb layer
Moderate density herb layer
C
C
Herb layer sparse or absent
18 Snags — wetland type condition metric
• A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12- inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability)
B Not A
19 Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric
C'A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH), many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present
E:B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 -inch DBH
[:C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees
20 Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris
R A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability)
B Not A
21 Vegetation /Open Water Dispersion —wetland type /open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water
A B ['C ['D
22 Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive
ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man -made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision
• A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area
B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area
C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area
D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
l Accompanies User Manual Version 4 1
� M
Rating Calculator Version 4 1
Wetland Site Name Agony Acres - Wetland F Date
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name /Organization
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y /N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y /N)
Wetland is intensively managed (Y /N)
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y /N)
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y /N)
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y /N)
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y /N)
1/28/2013
Ian Eckardt
T
YES
NO
YES
NO
NO
NO
Sub - function Rating Summary
Metrics /Notes
Rating
Function
Sub - function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
HIGH
Sub - Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Pathogen Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
YES
Particulate Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
- '
Soluble Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
YES
Physical Change
Condition
LOW
Condition /Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
YES
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Habitat
Physical Structure
Condition
MEDIUM
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Vegetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function
Metrics /Notes
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
YES
Habitat
Conditon
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating MEDIUM
r
f �l,

NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 4 1
mating %,aicuiaior ver5ion,4 i
Wetland Site Name Agony Acres - Wetland G Date 1/28/2013
Wetland Typel Seep Assessor Name /Organization Ian Eckardt
Level III Ecoregionj Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body Reedy Fork
River Basml Cape Fear USGS 8 -Digit Catalogue Umt 03030002
r°;YeS rNo Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude /Longitude (deci- degrees)
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and /or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately within 10 years) Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited
to the following
• Hydrological modifications (examples ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc )
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples mowing, clear - cutting, exotics, etc)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? Yes r, No
Regulatory Considerations (select all that apply to the assessment area)
C Anadromous fish
F_ Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
17 NCDWQ npanan buffer rule in effect
[ Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
r Publicly owned property
C N C Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
C Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
r Designated NCNHP reference community
r Abuts a 303(d)- listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)- listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
Blackwater
Brownwater
f- Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) rLunar rWind Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? Yes �..,No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver?
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions?
.,Yes No
g: No
Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual) If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect
GS VS
F.",A r, A Not severely altered
B , B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Subsurface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub) Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology Refer to the current NRCS lateral effect of ditching guidance for
North Carolina hydric sods (see USACE Wilmington District website) for the zone of influence of ditches in hydric soils A ditch
s 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and ditch
sub - surface water Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable
Surf Sub
[: A A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered
B B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation)
r r, C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines)
Water Storage /Surface Relief — assessment area /wetland type condition metric (answer for non -marsh wetlands only)
Check a box in each column for each group below Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT)
AA WT
3a r, A ,A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 foot deep
r B g', B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
�C r, C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
�.; D �.; D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b r, A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
r Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
[.0 Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

Y
4 �
Sod Texture /Structure — assessment area condition metric
Check a box from each of the three sod property groups below Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature Make soil observations within the 12 inches Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for
regional indicators
4a rA Sandy soil
oB Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
D Loamy or clayey gleyed sod
[;E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b r"jA Soil ribbon < 1 inch
or Sod ribbon Z 1 inch
4c re". A No peat or muck presence
r. B A peat or muck presence
5 Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub - surface pollutants or discharges (Sub)
Examples of sub -surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc
Surf Sub
(: A �: A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
r,B E �B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
[ ; C ['C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6 Land Use — opportunity metric
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column) Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment Consider sources
draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the
assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M) Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion
WS
5M
2M
r,A
❑ A
Ff A
r A
a 10% impervious surfaces
r, B
r B
r, B
< 10% impervious surfaces
r� C
FA C
r C
Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
En D
r D
f? D
a 20% coverage of pasture
F E
r2 E
r E
z 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
F F
f F
r F
z 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
F G
r G
r1 G
Z 20% coverage of clear -cut land
F H
f H
C H
Little or no opportunity to improve water quality Lack of opportunity may result from hydrologic alterations
that prevent drainage or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area
Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer — assessment area/wetland complex condition metric
7a Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
FYes rNo If Yes, continue to 7b If No, skip to Metric 8
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body Make buffer judgment based on the average width of the wetland
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed
7b How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is weltand? Descriptor E should be selected if ditches effectively bypass the buffer
r, A z 50 feet
r B From 30 to < 50 feet
r C From 15 to < 30 feet
D From 5 to < 15 feet
. E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
J
7c Tnbutary width If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width
r s 15 -feet wide r. > 15 -feet wide r. Other open water (no tributary present)
7d Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
r, Yes E: No
7e Is tributary or other open water sheltered or exposed?
o Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic
r, Exposed — adjacent open water with width z 2500 feet or regular boat traffic
Wetland Width at the Assessment Area — wetland type /wetland complex metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Check a box in each column Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT)
and the wetland complex at the assessment areas (WC) See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries
WT
WC
r,A
rA
a 100 feet
r. B
A B
From 80 to < 100 feet
r,C
rC
From 50 to < 80 feet
D
D
From 40 to < 50 feet
rj E
rj E
From 30 to < 40 feet
E ; F
r, F
From 15 to < 30 feet
r G
o G
From 5 to < 15 feet
E'; H
�; H
< 5 feet

9 Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric
Answer for assessment area dominant landform
�A Evidence of short- duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
�;C Evidence of long- duration inundation or very long- duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10 Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition)
[."A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels
r B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland
.,C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland
Wetland Size — wetland type /wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual) Seethe User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas If assessment area is clear -cut, select "K" for the FW column
WT
WC
FW (if applicable)
A
A
A
z 500 acres
B
B
B
From 100 to < 500 acres
C
C
C
From 50 to < 100 acres
D
D
D
From 25 to < 50 acres
E
E
E
From 10 to < 25 acres
F
F
F
From 5 to < 10 acres
G
G
G
From 1 to < 5 acres
H
H
H
From 0 5 to < 1 acre
I
I
I
From 0 1 to < 0 5 acre
. J
. J
. J
From 0 01 to < 0 1 acre
K
K
K
< 0 01 acre or assessment area is clear -cut
12 Wetland Intactness —wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
A Pocosin is the full extent (Z 90 %) of its natural landscape size
B Pocosin is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size
13 Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column) Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment This
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and /or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
metric naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate) Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility
line corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wide
Well Loosely
A
A
z 500 acres
B
B
From 100 to < 500 acres
C
C
From 50 to < 100 acres
D
• D
From 10 to < 50 acres
E
E
< 10 acres
. F
F
Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b Evaluate for marshes only
Yes 0 No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters /stream or tidal wetlands
14 Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges Artificial edges include
non - forested areas z 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and clear -cuts
Consider the eight main points of the compass
A No artificial edge within 150 feet in all directions
B No artificial edge within 150 feet in four (4) to seven (7) directions
. C An artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in more than four (4) directions or assessment area is clear -cut
15 Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
[:A Vegetation is dose to reference condition in species present and their proportions Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area
B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata
[:C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition Expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species) Exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum
16 Vegetative Diversity— assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species ( <10% cover of exotics)
B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics
C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species ( >50% cover of exotics)

17 Vegetative Structure— assessment area /wetland type condition metric
17a Is vegetation present
Yes [: No If Yes, continue to 17b If No, skip to Metric 18
17b Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands
A z 25% coverage of vegetation
B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c Check a box in each column for each stratum Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands Consider structure
in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately
AA WT
C1 Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
m PA
B • B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
V C C Canopy sparse or absent
o
B
PA
B
Dense mid- story/sapling layer
Moderate density mid- story/sapling layer
C
• C
Mid- story/sapling layer sparse or absent
r
A
B
A
B
Dense shrub layer
Moderate density shrub layer
W
. C
. C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
=
B
PA
•
B
Dense herb layer
Moderate density herb layer
C
C
Herb layer sparse or absent
18 Snags —wetland type condition metric
• A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12- inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability)
B Not A
19 Diameter Class Distribution —wetland type condition metric
[:A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH), many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present
B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 -inch DBH
C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees
20 Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris
R A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability)
B Not A
21 Vegetation /Open Water Dispersion — wetland type /open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water
r'A r' B [:C CD
C y
7 a !
22 Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive
ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man -made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision
. A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area
B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area
C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area
D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area
Notes

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 41
Rating Calculator Version 41
Wetland Site Name Agony Acres - Wetland G Date 1/28/2013
Wetland Type Seep Assessor Name /Organization Ian Eckardt
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y /N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y /N) YES
Wetland is intensively managed (Y /N) YES
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y /N) YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y /N) NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y /N) NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y /N) NO
Sub - function Rating Summary
Function Sub - function Metrics Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition NA
Sub - Surface Storage and Retention Condition NA
Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition NA
Vegetation Composition Condition MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Hydrology
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Particulate Change
Condition
NA
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
NA
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Physical Change
Condition
NA
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
MEDIUM
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Vegetation Composition Condition MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function
Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Condition
MEDIUM
.Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Habitat
Conditon
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating MEDIUM

i
� 1
i
i
NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 41
naung t aiculator version 4
Wetland Site Name Agony Acres - Wetland H Date 1/28/2013
Wetland Type Seep Assessor Name /Organization Ian Eckardt
Level III Ecoregionj Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body Reedy Fork
River Basinj Cape Fear USGS 8 -Digit Catalogue Unit 03030002
r,Yes rNo Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude /Longitude (dea - decrees)
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and /or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately within 10 years) Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited
to the following
• Hydrological modifications (examples ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc )
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples mowing, clear - cutting, exotics, etc)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? r".Yes rNo
Regulatory Considerations (select all that apply to the assessment area)
fr Anadromous fish
F- Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
r NCDWQ riparian buffer rule in effect
C Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
F Publicly owned property
r N C Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
F' Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
F- Designated NCNHP reference community
[✓ Abuts a 303(d)- listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)- listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
rj Blackwater
r Brownwater
r Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ;Lunar Wind ';Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? Yes �.;No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver?
Does the assessment area
during normal rainfall conditions?
rYes ro No
Yes rt. No
Ground Surface ConditionNegetation Condition - assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual) If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect
GS VS
A ,A Not severely altered
r ,B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, sod compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub - Surface Storage Capacity and Duration - assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub - surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub) Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology Refer to the current NRCS lateral effect of ditching guidance for
North Carolina hydric soils (see USACE Wilmington District website) for the zone of influence of ditches in hydric soils A ditch
s 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and ditch
sub -surface water Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable
Surf
Sub
oA
�: A
Water storage capacity and duration are not altered
B
B
Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation)
C
[;C
Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines)
Water Storage /Surface Relief - assessment area/wetland type condition metric (answer for non -marsh wetlands only)
Check a box in each column for each group below Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT)
AA WT
3a r, A rA Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 foot deep
r, B r B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
C C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
or,D oD Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b ;A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
rC Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

Sod Texture /Structure — assessment area condition metric
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature Make soil observations within the 12 inches Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydnc Soils guidance for
regional indicators
4a rA Sandy sod
B Loamy or clayey sods exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
i D Loamy or clayey gleyed sod
;E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b r,"A Sod ribbon < 1 inch
FjB Sod ribbon z 1 inch
4c rA No peat or muck presence
,,B A peat or muck presence
Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub - surface pollutants or discharges (Sub)
Examples of sub - surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc
Surf Sub
[: A [C, AA Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
;' B r`; B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
.jC E°C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
Land Use — opportunity metric
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column) Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment Consider sources
draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the
assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M) Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion
WS 5M 2M
F1 A M A Cl A z 10% impervious surfaces
fF B r B F� B < 10% impervious surfaces
C, C Ci C 1— Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
ra D r D r D a 20% coverage of pasture
r E r E r E z 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
i= F [ F CI F s 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
F_ F G rt G s 20% coverage of clear -cut land
F H rt H r H Little or no opportunity to improve water quality Lack of opportunity may result from hydrologic alterations
that prevent drainage or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area
7 Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer — assessment area/wetland complex condition metric
7a Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
;Yes rJNo If Yes, continue to 7b If No, skip to Metric 8
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body Make buffer judgment based on the average width of the wetland
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed
7b How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is weltand? Descriptor E should be selected if ditches effectively bypass the buffer
A z 50 feet
B From 30 to < 50 feet
r C From 15 to < 30 feet
D From 5 to < 15 feet
E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c Tnbutary width If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width
r.,!5 15 -feet wide [ ; > 15 -feet wide r Other open water (no tributary present)
7d Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water)
g°, Yes r No
7e Is tributary or other open water sheltered or exposed?
E. Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic
r Exposed — adjacent open water with width z 2500 feet or regular boat traffic
Wetland Width at the Assessment Area — wetland type /wetland complex metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Check a box in each column Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT)
and the wetland complex at the assessment areas (WC) See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries
WT
WC
rA
rA
z 100 feet
r B
r, B
From 80 to < 100 feet
(,C
r-C
From 50 to < 80 feet
r, D
r" D
From 40 to < 50 feet
E
; E
From 30 to < 40 feet
r F
, F
From 15 to < 30 feet
[.;G
G
From 5 to < 15 feet
H
H
<5feet

i
9 Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric
Answer for assessment area dominant landform
[;A Evidence of short- duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
F B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
C Evidence of long- duration inundation or very long- duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10 Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition)
AA Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels
,B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland
rC Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland
11 Wetland Size — wetland type /wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual) Seethe User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas If assessment area is clear -cut, select °K" for the FW column
WT WC FW (if applicable)
A A A z 500 acres
B B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C . C C From 50 to < 100 acres
D D D From 25 to < 50 acres
E E E From 10 to < 25 acres
F F F From 5 to < 10 acres
G G G From 1 to < 5 acres
H H H From 0 5 to < 1 acre
I I I From 0 1 to < 0 5 acre
-J J J From 0 01 to < 0 1 acre
. K . K . K < 0 01 acre or assessment area is clear -cut
12 Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
A Pocosin is the full extent (Z 90 %) of its natural landscape size
B Pocosin is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size
13 Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column) Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment This
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and /or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
metric naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate) Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility
line corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wide
Well Loosely
A A z 500 acres
B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C From 50 to < 100 acres
D • D From 10 to < 50 acres
`�
• E E < 10 acres
F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b Evaluate for marshes only
( Yes [:No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters /stream or tidal wetlands
14 Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges Artificial edges include
non - forested areas z 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and clear -cuts
Consider the eight main points of the compass
A No artificial edge within 150 feet in all directions
• B No artificial edge within 150 feet in four (4) to seven (7) directions
C An artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in more than four (4) directions or assessment area is clear -cut
15 Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pone Flat)
:A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions Lower strata composed of appropnate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area
B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata
[:C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition Expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species) Exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum
16 Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species ( <10% cover of exotics)
B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics
C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species ( >50% cover of exotics)
i

17 Vegetative Structure— assessment area /wetland type condition metric
17a Is vegetation present?
: Yes : No If Yes, continue to 17b If No, skip to Metric 18
17b Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands
A Z 25% coverage of vegetation
�i B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c Check a box in each column for each stratum Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands Consider structure
in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately
AA
WT
n
B
PC A
PA
B
Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
v
C
Canopy sparse or absent
o A
B
PC
B
PA
Dense mid- story/sapling layer
Moderate density mid- story/sapling layer
g
C
Mid - story/sapling layer sparse or absent
n A
A
Dense shrub layer
2 • B
• B
Moderate density shrub layer
C C
C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
.2 PA Dense herb layer
B . B Moderate density herb layer
C C Herb layer sparse or absent
18 Snags — wetland type condition metric
. - RA Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 -inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability)
B Not
19 Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric
[:A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH), many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present
• B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 -inch DBH
C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees
20 Large Woody Debris —wetland type condition metric
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris
A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability)
RB Not A
21 Vegetation /Open Water Dispersion — wetland type /open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water
1
22 Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive
ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man -made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision
. A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area
B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area
C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area
D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area
Notes

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 4 1
Rating Calculator Version 41
Wetland Site Name Agony Acres - Wetland H Date
Wetland Type Seep Assessor Name /Organization
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y /N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y /N)
Wetland is intensively managed (Y /N)
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y /N)
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y /N)
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y /N)
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y /N)
Sub - function Rating Summary
1/28/2013
Ian Eckardt
YES
NO
YES
NO
NO
NO
Function Sub - function Metrics Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition NA
Sub - Surface Storage and Retention Condition NA
Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition NA
Condition /Opportunity NA
Condition /Opportunity NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N) NA
Habitat Physical Structure Condition HIGH
Landscape Patch Structure Condition LOW
Vegetation Composition Condition HIGH
Function Rating Summary
Function
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Particulate Change
Condition
NA
Water Quality
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
NA
Habitat
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Physical Change
Condition
NA
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition /Opportunity NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N) NA
Habitat Physical Structure Condition HIGH
Landscape Patch Structure Condition LOW
Vegetation Composition Condition HIGH
Function Rating Summary
Function
Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Habitat
Conditon
MEDIUM
Overall Wetland Rating HIGH

NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 41
rtanng L;aicwator version n 1
Wetland Site Name Agony Acres - Wetland J Date 1/28/2013
Wetland Type Seep Assessor Name /Organization Ian Eckardt
Level III Ecoregioni Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body Reedy Fork
River Basin Cape Fear USGS 8 -Digit Catalogue Unit 03030002
No PreciDrtation within 48 hrs?
etude
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and /or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately within 10 years) Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited
to the following
• Hydrological modifications (examples ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc)
• Surface and sub - surface discharges into the wetland (examples discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc )
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples mowing, clear - cutting, exotics, etc)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? r .Yes ri No
Regulatory Considerations (select all that apply to the assessment area)
I_ Anadromous fish
F_ Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
f- NCDWQ riparian buffer rule in effect
[- Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
r Publicly owned property
r N C Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
(- Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
r Designated NCNHP reference community
fF Abuts a 303(d)- listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)- listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
Blackwater
Brownwater
F, Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) .,Lunar
;Wind �; Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? r,Yes No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver?
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions?
Yes ,No
o No
1 Ground Surface ConditionNegetation Condition - assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual) If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect
GS VS
re'A F,'A Not severely altered
B rJ B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
2 Surface and Sub - Surface Storage Capacity and Duration - assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub - surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub) Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology Refer to the current NRCS lateral effect of ditching guidance for
North Carolina hydnc sods (see USACE Wilmington District website) for the zone of influence of ditches in hydnc sods A ditch
<- 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and ditch
sub - surface water Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable
Surf Sub
rA re A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered
(`°',-� B , B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation)
C C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples draining, flooding, sod compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines)
3 Water Storage /Surface Relief- assessment area /wetland type condition metric (answer for non -marsh wetlands only)
Check a box in each column for each group below Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT)
AA WT
3a rA rq°jA Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 foot deep
r B �° B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
C j C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
or
D or
D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b � ;A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
ri,C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

f
j
f
Sod Texture /Structure — assessment area condition metric
Check a box from each of the three sod property groups below Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature Make sod observations within the 12 inches Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for
regional indicators
4a r, A Sandy sod
r B Loamy or clayey sods exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
�C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
�D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
[; E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b ,A
Soil ribbon < 1 inch
F,* B
Sod ribbon z 1 inch
4c rA
No peat or muck presence
r B
A peat or muck presence
5 Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub - surface pollutants or discharges (Sub)
Examples of sub -surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc
Surf Sub
(: A ro",A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
�; B r, B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
[;C (;C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6 Land Use — opportunity metric
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column) Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment Consider sources
draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the
assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M) Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion
WS
5M
2M
B
r A
Ft A
r A
z 10% impervious surfaces
r B
rs B
r, B
< 10% impervious surfaces
ri C
17 C
r C
Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
(F, D
r D
r, D
z 20% coverage of pasture
E, E
r E
IF E
z 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
r F
f" F
f- F
a 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
F, G
F G
F G
z 20% coverage of clear -cut land
F H
F H
F H
Little or no opportunity to improve water quality Lack of opportunity may result from hydrologic alterations
that prevent drainage or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area
Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer — assessment area/wetland complex condition metric
7a Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
.;Yes r,No If Yes, continue to 7b If No, skip to Metric 8
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body Make buffer judgment based on the average width of the wetland
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed
7b How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is weltand? Descriptor E should be selected if ditches effectively bypass the buffer
A Z 50 feet
B From 30 to < 50 feet
C From 15 to < 30 feet
r D From 5 to < 15 feet
r., E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
J
7c Tributary width If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width
r: s 15 -feet wide r, > 15 -feet wide Other open water (no tributary present)
7d Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water'?
r Yes ro". No
7e Is tributary or other open water sheltered or exposed?
Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic
r Exposed — adjacent open water with width Z 2500 feet or regular boat traffic
Wetland Width at the Assessment Area — wetland type /wetland complex metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Check a box in each column Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT)
and the wetland complex at the assessment areas (WC) See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries
WT WC
�A
,A
Z 100 feet
B
r, B
From 80 to < 100 feet
.JC
r
From 50 to < 80 feet
['; D
; D
From 40 to < 50 feet
E
[ ,E
From 30 to < 40 feet
F
r, F
From 15 to < 30 feet
E ;G
FJ"G
From 5 to < 15 feet
r H
r.-, H
< 5 feet

9 Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric
Answer for assessment area dominant landform
�A Evidence of short- duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
�.; B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
rC Evidence of long - duration inundation or very long - duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10 Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition)
rA Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels
B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland
�C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland
11 Wetland Size —wetland type /wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual) Seethe User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas If assessment area is clear -cut, select °K° for the FW column
WT
WC
FW (if applicable)
A
A
A
z 500 acres
B
B
B
From 100 to < 500 acres
C
C
C
From 50 to < 100 acres
D
D
D
From 25 to < 50 acres
E
E
E
From 10 to < 25 acres
F
F
F
From 5 to < 10 acres
G
G
G
From 1 to < 5 acres
H
H
H
From 0 5 to < 1 acre
I
I
I
From 0 1 to < 0 5 acre
J
J
J
From 0 01 to < 0 1 acre
. K
. K
. K
< 0 01 acre or assessment area is clear -cut
12 Wetland Intactness —wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
A Pocosin is the full extent (z 90 %) of its natural landscape size
B Pocosin is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size
13 Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column) Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment This
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and /or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
metric naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate) Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility
line corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wide
Well Loosely
A
A
z 500 acres
B
B
From 100 to < 500 acres
C
C
From 50 to < 100 acres
D
• D
From 10 to < 50 acres
• E
E
< 10 acres
F
F
Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b Evaluate for marshes only
CYes oNo Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters /stream or tidal wetlands
14 Edge Effect —wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges Artificial edges include
non - forested areas Z 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and clear -cuts
Consider the eight main points of the compass
A No artificial edge within 150 feet in all directions
• B No artificial edge within 150 feet in four (4) to seven (7) directions
C An artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in more than four (4) directions or assessment area is clear -cut
15 Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
E:A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area
[:B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata
MC Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition Expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species) Exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum
16 Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species ( <10% cover of exotics)
B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics
C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species ( >50% cover of exotics)

I
17 Vegetative Structure — assessment area /wetland type condition metric
17a Is vegetation present?
•E" Yes E; No If Yes, continue to 17b If No, skip to Metric 18
17b Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands
A z 25% coverage of vegetation
B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c Check a box in each column for each stratum Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands Consider structure
in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately
a
2
AA
WT
Dense shrub layer
Moderate density shrub layer
a
mB
NA
•
B
Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
A
_ . B
C
C
Canopy sparse or absent
L,
B
PA
PA
B
Dense mid- story/sapling layer
Moderate density mid- story/sapling layer
g
C
C
Mid- story/sapling layer sparse or absent
a
2
A
• B
B
NA
Dense shrub layer
Moderate density shrub layer
U)
C
C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
A
_ . B
B
NA
Dense herb layer
Moderate density herb layer
C
C
Herb layer sparse or absent
18 Snags — wetland type condition metric
R A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12- inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability)
B Not A
19 Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric
[:A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH), many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present
B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 -inch DBH
C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees
20 Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris
A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability)
. B Not A
21 Vegetation /Open Water Dispersion — wetland type /open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water
r,°A ['B r:C D
1
22 Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive
ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man -made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision
. A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area
B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area
C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area
D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area
Notes

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 41
Rating Calculator Version 4 1 —
Wetland Site Name Agony Acres - Wetland J Date 1/28/2013
Wetland Type Seep Assessor Name /Organization Ian Eckardt
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y /N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y /N) YES
Wetland is intensively managed (Y /N) NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y /N) YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y /N) NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y /N) NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y /N) NO
Sub - function Rating Summary
Function Sub - function Metrics Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition NA
Sub - Surface Storage and Retention Condition NA
Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition NA
Condition /Opportunity NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N) NA
Particulate Change Condition NA
Vegetation Composition Condition HIGH
Function Rating Summary
Function
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Hydrology
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
NA _
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Physical Change
Condition
NA
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
HIGH
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Vegetation Composition Condition HIGH
Function Rating Summary
Function
Metrics /Notes
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Habitat
Conditon
MEDIUM
Overall Wetland Rating HIGH

1
NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 41
Kacnng i.aicuiator version 4 -1
Wetland Site Name Agony Acres - Wetland K Date 1/28/2013
WetlandTypel Headwater Forest Assessor Name /Organization Ian Eckardt
Level III Ecoregionj Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body Reedy Fork
River Basm Cape Fear (tom USGS 8 -Digit Catalogue Unit 03030002
Yes ro.No Preciortation within 48 hrs?
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately within 10 years) Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited
to the following
• Hydrological modifications (examples ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc)
• Surface and sub - surface discharges into the wetland (examples discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc )
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc )
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples mowing, clear - cutting, exotics, etc)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? f'
.,Yes or, f' .,No
Regulatory Considerations (select all that apply to the assessment area)
r Anadromous fish
(_ Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
r NCDWQ riparian buffer rule in effect
f� Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
F ublicly owned property
N C Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
F Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
F Designated NCNHP reference community
G Abuts a 303(d)- listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)- listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
Blackwater
r Brownwater
f- Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) r. Lunar r Wind � Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? r Yes fr
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver?
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions?
[;Yes F,' No
INo
Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual) If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect
GS VS
;A r'
A Not severely altered
�; B F," B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Subsurface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub - surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub) Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology Refer to the current NRCS lateral effect of ditching guidance for
North Carolina hydnc soils (see USACE Wilmington District website) for the zone of influence of ditches in hydnc soils A ditch
s 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and ditch
sub - surface water Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable
Surf Sub
[: A [: A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered
B r B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation)
r C r C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines)
Water Storage /Surface Relief — assessment area /wetland type condition metric (answer for non -marsh wetlands only)
Check a box in each column for each group below Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT)
AA WT
3a rA 1A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 foot deep
B B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
[;C �C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
�.; D •, D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b rA Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
�B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
[.;C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

4 Sod Texture /Structure - assessment area condition metric
Check a box from each of the three sod property groups below Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature Make soil observations within the 12 inches Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydnc Soils guidance for
regional indicators
4a rA Sandy soil
rB Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
r Loamy or clayey sods not exhibiting redoximorphic features
r, D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
�; E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b r"jA Soil ribbon < 1 inch
B Sod ribbon z 1 inch
4c A No peat or muck presence
B A peat or muck presence
5 Discharge into Wetland - opportunity metric
Check a box in each column Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub -surface pollutants or discharges (Sub)
Examples of sub -surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc
Surf Sub
A g: A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
B B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
�C rJ C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
Land Use - opportunity metric
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column) Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment Consider sources
draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the
assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M) Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion
WS
5M
2M
rA
F, A
FA
f A
z 10% impervious surfaces
F3 B
r, B
F? B
< 10% impervious surfaces
F C
r__1 C
rf C
Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
R, D
r D
r D
Z 20% coverage of pasture
i✓ E
r±_ E
r, E
z 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
r F
Cl F
rr F
z 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
F" G
F-r G
Ft G
z 20% coverage of clear -cut land
F H
F, H
r-7 H
Little or no opportunity to improve water quality Lack of opportunity may result from hydrologic alterations
that prevent drainage or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area
Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer - assessment area/wetland complex condition metric
7a Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
F Yes r;No If Yes, continue to 7b If No, skip to Metric 8
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body Make buffer judgment based on the average width of the wetland
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed
7b How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is weltand? Descriptor E should be selected if ditches effectively bypass the buffer
r A z 50 feet
B From 30 to < 50 feet
ro.j C From 15 to < 30 feet
D From 5 to < 15 feet
E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c Tributary width If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width
r: <- 15 -feet wide r, > 15 -feet wide r, Other open water (no tributary present)
7d Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
r' Yes r No
7e Is tributary or other open water sheltered or exposed?
o Sheltered - adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic
r, Exposed - adjacent open water with width z 2500 feet or regular boat traffic
Wetland Width at the Assessment Area - wetland type /wetland complex metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Check a box in each column Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT)
and the wetland complex at the assessment areas (WC) See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries
WT
WC
rA
rA
Z 100 feet
[;B
JB
From 80 to < 100 feet
C
C
From 50 to < 80 feet
D
,D
From 40 to < 50 feet
r; E
; E
From 30 to < 40 feet
E; F
FF
From 15 to < 30 feet
G
jG
From 5 to < 15 feet
r H
r, H
< 5 feet

i
9 Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric
Answer for assessment area dominant landform
r—,A Evidence of short- duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
[ C Evidence of long- duration inundation or very long- duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10 Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric
i \
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition)
•�A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels
B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland
r Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland
11 Wetland Size — wetland type /wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual) Seethe User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas If assessment area is clear -cut, select "K" for the FW column
WT WC FW (if applicable)
A A A z 500 acres
B B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C C From 50 to < 100 acres
D D D From 25 to < 50 acres
E E E From 10 to < 25 acres
F F F From 5 to < 10 acres
G G G From 1 to < 5 acres
H H H From 0 5 to < 1 acre
I I I From 0 1 to < 0 5 acre
. J . J • J From 0 01 to < 0 1 acre
K K K < 0 01 acre or assessment area is clear -cut
12 Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosms only)
A Pocosin is the full extent (z 90 %) of its natural landscape size
B Pocosin is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size
13 Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked In each column) Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment This
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and /or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
metric naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate) Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility
line corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wide
Well Loosely
A A z 500 acres
B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C From 50 to < 100 acres
D • D From 10 to < 50 acres
E E < 10 acres
. F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b Evaluate for marshes only
Yes CNo Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters /stream or tidal wetlands
14 Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges Artificial edges include
non - forested areas z 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and clear -cuts
Consider the eight main points of the compass
A No artificial edge within 150 feet in all directions
B No artificial edge within 150 feet in four (4) to seven (7) directions
. -C An artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in more than four (4) directions or assessment area is clear -cut
15 Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
MA Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area
[:B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata
Ce:C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition Expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species) Exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum
16 Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species ( <10% cover of exotics)
B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics
C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species ( >50% cover of exotics)
i

17 Vegetative Structure — assessment area /wetland type condition metric
17a Is vegetation present?
Yes C No If Yes, continue to 17b If No, skip to Metric 18
17b Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands
A z 25% coverage of vegetation
B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c Check a box in each column for each stratum Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands Consider structure
in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately
AA
WT
Dense shrub layer
Moderate density shrub layer
oA
cc B
A
B
Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
. C
. C
Canopy sparse or absent
oA
B
A
B
Dense mid- story/sapling layer
Moderate density mid- story/sapling layer
g.
C
. C
Mid- story/sapling layer sparse or absent
a A
r B
A
B
Dense shrub layer
Moderate density shrub layer
. C
. C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
�
=
B
PA
.
B
Dense herb layer
Moderate density herb layer
C
C
Herb layer sparse or absent
18 Snags — wetland type condition metric
RA Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12- inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability)
. -B NotA
19 Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric
['A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH), many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present
[;B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 -inch DBH
EC Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees
20 Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric
Include both natural debris and man - placed natural debris
A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability)
. B Not A
21 Vegetation /Open Water Dispersion — wetland type /open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season Pattemed
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water
22 Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only]
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive
ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man -made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision
. A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area
B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area
C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area
,D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area
Notes

i
r
NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 4 1
Rating Calculator Version 4 1
Wetland Site Name Agony Acres - Wetland K Date
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name /Organization
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y /N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y /N)
Wetland is intensively managed (Y /N)
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y /N)
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y /N)
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y /N)
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y /N)
Sub - function Rating Summary
1/28/2013
Ian Eckardt
Ri
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
Function Sub - function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Sub - Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Habitat Physical Structure
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
YES
Particulate Change
Condition
LOW
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Soluble Change Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
YES
Physical Change Condition
HIGH
Function Rating Summary
Function
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Hydrology
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
YES
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
LOW
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Vegetation Composition
Condition
LOW
Function Rating Summary
Function
Metrics /Notes
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
LOW
Water Quality
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
YES
Habitat
Conditon
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action I D 2012 -01909 County Guilford U S G S Quad NC- OSSIPEE
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Property Owner /Agent Authorized Agent: Wildlands Engineenng, Inc.
Address 1430 S. Mint Street, #104
Charlotte, NC 28203
Telephone No 704 - 332 -7754
Property description
Size (acres) 9,3621f and 0 86 ac
Nearest Town Gibonsville
Nearest Waterway Reedy Fork
Coordinates 36 1798065 N, -79 545861 W
River Bann Haw River, Cape Fear River Basin
Hydrologic Unit Code 3030002
Location Description Property is located off Sockwell Road north of Gibsonville, northwest Guilford County, NC
Property contains several abutting wetlands and UTs to Reedy Fork Current land conditions include pasture and rowcrop
agriculture and forested areas as well, primarily along riparian corridors
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
Based on preliminary information, there may be Waters of the U S on the above described property We strongly suggest
you have this property inspected to determine the extent of Department of the Army (DA) Jurisdiction To be considered
final, a jurisdictional determination must be verified by the Corps This preliminary determination is not an appealable
action under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 33 1) ) If you wish, you
may request an approved JD (which may be appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction Also, you
may provide new information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD
B. Approved Determination
There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described property subject to the permit requirements of
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act Unless there is a change in the law or
our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification
X There are Waters of the U S on the above described property subject to the permit requirements of Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification
We strongly suggest you have the Waters of the U S on your property delineated Due to the size of your property
and/or our present workload, the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner For a
more timely delineation, you may wish to obtain a consultant To be considered final, any delineation must be verified by
the Corps
X The Waters of the U S on your property have been delineated and the delineation has been verified by the Corps We
strongly suggest you have this delineation surveyed Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed and verified by the
Corps Once verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA Jurisdiction on your
property which, provided there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied upon for a period not to
exceed five years
The Waters of the U S have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the Corps
Regulatory Official identified below on _ Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determmation may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification
There are no waters of the U S , to include wetlands, present on the above described property which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344) Unless there is a change in the law or our

published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification
Action Id 2012 -01909
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US and/or wetlands without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311) If you have any questions regarding this
determmation and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Tyler Crumbley at 919 - 846 -2564
C. Basis For Determination
The site contains wetlands as determined by the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and the Interim
Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual Eastern Mountain and Piedmont Region These
wetlands are abutting stream channels located on the property that exhibit indicators of ordinary high water marks The stream
channels on the property are unnamed tributaries to Reedy Fork which flows into the Haw River which is a Traditionally
Navigable Water in the Cape Fear River Basin Fiver which is currently and has historically been a navigable water of the U S
D. Remarks:
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delmeation/determmation has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act Jurisdiction for the
particular site identified in this request The delmeation/determmation 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 request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources
Conservation Service, prior to starting work
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved ,jurisdictional determinations as indicated in
B. above)
Attached to this verification is an approved Jurisdictional determination If you are not in agreement with that approved
Jurisdictional determination, you can make an administrative appeal under 33 CFR 331 Enclosed you will find a request for
appeal (RFA) form If you request to appeal this determination you must submit a completed RFA form to the following
address
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn Jason Steele, Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Room 10M15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303 -8801
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for
appeal under 33 CFR part 331 5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP
Should you decide to submrt an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by 24 May, 2013
* *It is not necessary to submrt an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this
correspondence **
_ Digitally signed by
,.✓� ,,/ CRUMBLEY TYLERAUTRY 100750
9975
r
Corps Regulatory Official Tyle Crumbley Date 2013 03 26 112201.0400
Issue Date 26 March, 2013 Expiration Date 26 March, 2018
Electronic Copy Furnished CESAW- RG- R/Willtams
2

Q © OO OO A 1 OO ' OCR'
Q' MITA AMALL
Applicant. Wildlands Engineering, Inc File Number: 2012 -01909 Date 26 March, 2W
Attached is. See Section below
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT Standard Permit or Letter of permission) A
PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission) B
PERMIT DENIAL C
X
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION D
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION E
SiE TIOO' I -The following ident�i�f es your righ�t�s and options regard�mg an a � � � � �i� � � strat�ive appeal of the above
decision. AddAi-t�ional t o ation may be found at
htt /) usace. , ill /CE W/Page_ s /reg imp aterials as x or Co s regulations at 33 CFR Part 331
A- INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
• ACCEPT If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights
to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit
• OBJECT If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request that
the permit be modified accordingly You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district engineer
Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will forfeit your right
to appeal the permit in the future Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your objections and may (a)
modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your objections, or (c) not modify
the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written After evaluating your objections, the
district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in Section B below
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
• ACCEPT If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights
to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit
• APPEAL If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you
may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section 11 of this
form and sending the form to the division engineer This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the
date of this notice
C: PERMIT DENIAL. You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process
by completing Section 11 of this form and sending the form to the division engineer This form must be received by the division
engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice
D• APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or
provide new information.
• ACCEPT You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the
date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD
• APPEAL If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers Administrative
Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer This form must be received
by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice

E- PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION• You do not need to respond to the Corps
regarding the preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an
approved JD (which may be appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction Also you may
provide new information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD.
S +ECTIOO N ItI - REQ EAST FOR AP IiI
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an
initial proffered permit in clear concise statements You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons
or objections are addressed in the administrative record
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the
record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to
clarify the administrative record Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record However,
you may provide additional information to clarify the location of mformation that is already in the administrative record
POO INT O+ F COO'NTACT FOR QUE�STIOO NSOR hNF OORMATION:
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the appeal
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
process you may contact
also contact
Tyler Crumbley, Protect Manager
Mr Jason Steele, Administrative Appeal Review Officer
USACE, Regulatory Division
CESAD -PDO
11405 Falls of Neuse Road
U S Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
Wake Forest, NC 27587
60 Forsyth Street, Room 1OM15
919 - 846 - 2564828- 271 -7980
Atlanta, Georgia 30303 -8801
Phone [phone]
RIGHT OF ENTRY Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government
consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process You will be provided a 15 day
notice of any site mvestigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in all site investigations
Date-
Telephone number.
Signature of appellant or agent
For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Attn: Tyler Crumbley, 69 Darlington Avenue, Wilmington,
North Carolina 28403
For Permit denials, Proffered Permits and approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this form to:
Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Jason Steele,
Administrative Appeal Officer, CESAD -PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 1OM15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303 -8801
Phone: [phone]
4

Appendix 4: Project Site NCDWQ Stream Classification Forms
c \;

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date _ , 13
Protect/Site A
Latitude jj ' t ,-763
Evaluator: n L f 1 3 j6
County. ; ( 4-10 rd
Longitude. 7-9 *.3_3'0.-Z,
Total Points: ,�
Stream is at least intermittent 14 Jo -5
Stream Determination (cir le a
Ephemeral Intermittent erennia ,
Other SC P I . Li-11
e Quad Name
if Z 19 or perennial if z 30'
2 Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
g jjppa, F�
A Geomorphology (Subtotal = )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1' Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2 Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3 In- channel structure ex riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple-pool se uence
0
1
2
CD
4 Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5 Active /relict floodplam
0
1
2
3
6 Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7 Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
0
3
8 Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9 Grade control
0
05
1
1 5
10 Natural valley
0
05
1
C1 5
11 Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated, see discussions in manual `---
B Hydrology (Subtotal = q6 S )
12 Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13 Iron oxidizing bacteria
19 Rooted upland plants in streambed
1
2
3
14 Leaf litter
1 5 )
1
05
0
15 Sediment on plants or debris
0
05
1
15
16 Organic debris lines or piles
0
05
1
15
17 Sod -based evidence of high water tables
No = 0
Yes = 3
C Biology (Subtotal = __q__)
18 Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19 Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20 Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21 Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22 Fish
0
05
1
15
23 Crayfish
0
1
15
24 Amphibians
0
0 5
1
1 5
25 Algae
no
i o5
1
15
26 Wetland plants in streambed
Al ,4
FACW = 0 75, OBL = 1 5
Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods See p 35 of manual
Notes
Sketch
T

NC DWQ Stream Identification form Version 4.11
Date -2e- ' _3
Project/Site A- o -� a,5-
Latitude
Evaluator, (_ � �s
County �j C �,`�
Longitude 7-9"-32 "39.
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent L) Q
Stream Determination (cir le one)
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennaa
Other C_ L r 1
e Quad Name
if >_ 19 or erennial if ? 30' ! i(
2 Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
g 6 -.mower ea
A Geomorphology (Subtotal =-f" )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2 Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2)
3
3 In- channel structure ex riffle -pool, step -pool,
n le- ool sequence
0
1
23
15
4 Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
15
5 Active /relict floodplam
0
1
2
3
6 Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7 Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
CD
8 Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9 Grade control
0
05
1
N) -
10 Natural valley
0
05
1
1 5
11 Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Ye' s = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated, see discussions in manual
B Hydrology (Subtotal= /d,
)
12 Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13 Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2 '
3
14 Leaf litter
1 5
1
05
0
15 Sediment on plants or debris
0
05
1
15
16 Organic debris lines or piles
0
05
1 n:rL
15
17 Sod -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
C Biology (Subtotal = % 0 )
18 Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19 Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20 Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21 Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22 Fish
0
0 5
1
1 5
23 Crayfish
0
C-050
1
15
24 Amphibians
0
05
(2-3
1 5
25 Algae
Co J
05
1
15
26 Wetland plants in streambed
N) -
FACW = 0 75, OBL = 1 5
Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods See p 35 of manual
Notes
Sketch

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date 1 — � e - 1
Prolect/Site �. ��� �.� ��
Latitude Ei �/Q `�� 3� 6
Evaluator: "j
County U ; ��
Longitude- a 3 2
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
Stream Determination (ci one
Other SCA 2.
if? 19 or perennial rf >_ 30' CY
Ephemeral Intermittent erenrnal
e g Quad Name:
A Geomorphology (Subtotal = /q )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2 Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
05
3
3 In- channel structure ex riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple-pool se uence
0
1
2
1 5
4 Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5 Active /relict floodplam
0
Yes = 3
2
3
6 Depositional bars or benches
0
1
1
3
7 Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
1 1
3
8 Headcuts
N A-
1
2
3
9 Grade control
0
05
1
15
10 Natural valley
0
05
1
1 5
11 Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated, see discussions in manual
B Hydrology (Subtotal A. 5 )
12 Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
0
13 Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14 Leaf litter
1 5
1
05
0
15 Sediment on plants or debris
0
05
2
1 5
16 Organic debris lines or piles
0
05
1
15
17 Sod -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
C Biology (Subtotal = 9.5 )
18 Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19 Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20 Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
M
3
21 Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22 Fish
0
5
1
15
23 Crayfish
0
1
15
24 Amphibians
0
5
1
15
25 Algae
CO—)
05
1 1
15
26 Wetland plants in streambed
N A-
FACW = 0 75, OBL = 1 5 Other = 0
"perennial streams may also be identified using other methods Seep 35 of manual
Notes
Sketch
a'f I

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date 1_1q? — )
ProjectlSite k}- j �
Latitude 36 o l o ",q j s
Evaluator: J
County: C u f l -P.
Longitude. --n o 33 03r
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent R q. a �
Stream Dete ion (circle one)
Ephemeral Perennial
Other S'c%O q ° cxr( is
Quad Name
if 2: 19 or perennial if? 30*
ntermitten
e g
A Geomorphology (Subtotal = %E )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
CD
2 Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
05
3
3 In- channel structure ex riffle -pool, step -pool,
n le- ool sequence
0
1
Q2
3
4 Particle size of stream substrate
0
2
2
3
5 Active /relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6 Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7 Recent alluvial deposits
0
rij
W
3
8 Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9 Grade control
0
05
1'
1 5
10 Natural valley
0
05
C11
1 5
11 Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated, see discussions in manual
B Hydrology (Subtotal = 55' )
12 Presence of Baseflow
0
1
t�2
3
13 Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
CID
2
3
14 Leaf litter
15
(D
05
0
15 Sediment on plants or debris
0
0
1
15
16 Organic debris lines or piles
0 'trj�(kv
2
1
1 15
17 Soil -based evidence of high water tables
No = 0
Yes = 3
C Biology (Subtotal = Sa, 5
6 "';-11i
18 Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19 Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20 Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21 Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22 Fish
0
05
1
1 5
23 Crayfish
0
05
1
15
24 Amphibians
05
1
15
25 Algae
1
15
26 Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0 751 OBL = 1 5
Other = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods See p 35 of manual
Notes
Sketch
1

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date l � %1
Project/Site �- ��gS
Latitude 3 6 ° /r} X570.5
Evaluator:
County IS v; � vr�
Longitude- °3a - '�2 G?`
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermfttent
Stream Determination (circle ne
Ephemeral Intermittent
Other 5C.p s-
Quad /Name
if >_ 19 or perennial if Z 30`
erennia
e g
b -/q'
A Geomorphology (Subtotal
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2 Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3 In- channel structure ex riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple-pool se uence
0
1
LCD
3
4 Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
1
3
5 Active /relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6 Depositional bars or benches
0
0 5
2
3
7 Recent alluvial deposits
0
0
2
3
8 Headcuts
0
1
2
9 Grade control
0
05
1
10 Natural valley
0
05
1
1
11 Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated, see discussions in manual
B Hydrology (Subtotal = �? )
12 Presence of Baseflow
0
1
1
3
13 Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
CD
2
3
14 Leaf litter
15
1
0 5
0
15 Sediment on plants or debris
0
30 5
1
15
16 Organic debris lines or piles
0
05
1
15
17 Sod -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
C Biology (Subtotal = Ra a1
18 Fibrous roots in streambed
3
1
0
19 Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20 Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
(J9
2
3
21 Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22 Fish
0
0 5
1
1 5
23 Crayfish
0
05
1
1 5
24 Amphibians
0
0 5
1
15
25 Algae
0
0
1
15
26 Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0 75,
BL = 1 5 Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods See p 35 of manual
Notes
Sketch

OFFICE USE ONLY: USACE AID# DWQ #
SCP 1— Upper UT1 to Reedy Fork (Perennial)
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
1. Applicant's Name: Wildlands Engineering, Inc 2. Evaluator's Name: Ian Eckardt
3. Date of Evaluation: 1/28/2013 4. Time of Evaluation: 10:30 AM
5. Name of Stream:—UT I to Reedy Fork (Upper) 6. River Basin: Cape Fear 03030002
7. Approximate Drainage Area: 361 Acres 8. Stream Order: First
9. Length of Reach Evaluated: 300 If 10. County: Guilford
11. Location of reach under evaluation (include nearby roads and landmarks): From Gibsonville, NC, travel north on NC -16 for
approximately 5 miles and turn right onto Sockwell Road. Travel approximately 1.5 miles, site will be north of Sockwell Road.
12. Site Coordinates (if known): N 36.175515 °, W 79.550596°
13. Proposed Channel Work (if any): restoration /enhancement/preservation
14. Recent Weather Conditions: Small rainfall event within past 24 hours.
15. Site conditions at time of visit: oartly sunnv. 40°
16. Identify any special waterway classifications known: _Section 10 _Tidal Waters _Essential Fisheries Habitat
_Trout Waters _Outstanding Resource Waters _ Nutrient Sensitive Waters _Water Supply Watershed (I -IV)
17. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES Q If yes, estimate the water surface area:_
8. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? (�9 NO 19. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
20. Estimated Watershed Land Use: _% Residential _% Commercial % Industrial _% Agricultural
20 % Forested _% Cleared / Logged _% Other ( )
21. Bankfull Width: 10 -15' 22. Bank Height (from bed to top of bank): 34'
23. Channel slope down center of stream: _Flat (0 to 2 %) X Gentle (2 to 4 %) _Moderate (4 to 10 %) _Steep (> 10 %)
24. Channel Sinuosity: Straight X Occasional Bends _Frequent Meander _Very Sinuous _Braided Channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each
characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the
worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or
weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character
of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more
continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score
of 100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 57 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature Date 1/28/13
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers in order to make a preliminary assessment of
tream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
articular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change — version 05/03. To Comment, please call 919- 876 -8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams
NM- OWEN
1n11_"CvzFftOr1w0
.1'
b I 'ersis lenlp'ool
tWO
fik
=FW�- 5
4
(WPrese
W., 0
p-
_
Aen c -W- past an altera�
El� f i
3
, A �,
t
,-
ex-te ps. v e t raiton era t jbn ma 36%, I
( L
,z
Nolir 7 pariango
Offiffig.608-A-C
0- 4'
2
ffdQNd)46iAs)
N scI prge )S�
-nutXient�0 r -,C i�ca l "i-
JEd ffi
ne--m
4 '
x,
2
to di9piar eRh�-
IN
-AEM
ND
i roundwaK
ter d sc a,
W7
1W(fid-dilb Eggs, 7sMeeps,
4-
1140--4
4
Wetlads,26i6f
—ge vet �a­x',Oih 0
ps,,� '
__
Presence of adjacent i oqgir,
_f tnf
W(no,'__Iffid-�plal
14
3
JAC
_0��es
WWI: I W
Entrenchment : Il` Tj 1 ro 4 p- W�
nn-7, -,r -
2
19,C
iveN�
eepjyntreh_c
entTen6lreaCOM"%u4M6oint§!-
it' g r�gWf rs e 7n "w cweftnffBwwVt G-1 s ffid's--1
WN
�x
in'
4,11
ax-pv6 t�),
u
Igga I ql� Z7�=efllrselfs$ -6
R
V Mft i
:0 5'
3
-ienv: -"Jchbi M" i
liza Th
06$n Wad I -ff d 6 f
'r"R
�
i�C,
SIV6 to'an;
da t i -,= ax points)'
­74"
7"
-10
RA
0
2
n NO siiOn 6,Uittleor
e sixe,
o,,kedA�Mnts),,_-,-
11,
Sir V- @T e!l- -ge-al- -- �?t, �
' T d ktyv-cfcl(aRkql d6stpi
'e & veT,1
2
C
s
ir-1, rcroFiga"nmn�er�ircis—ioiror—.0ideni-n-
-Inc ­Q -M Ift",
O_j,5,�- '6-A
-4
2
61, -
4*eepEl�jl &�U67,k
1,�_J
i§ able'� e&fff-;6� swKinakpoiW) �,4
A 3',-1
iv f5. vomvv aw 7
e-Oc-e' 'F; 'Mainik- filffirYs"_1*11-e �,_ 11�
01 major 11 1� NEM
0"D�
Rr'-
1
_O' �
3
11�_
on �,= 41 f
erosion, Wpoints)
(se _QF,Eeros�10� -6no-ffirm9sio
L ",
�:_ _V A 4�41, _�,_
t.
Root de th.and densrtyon banks
0 71,
m`O,�5
3
FS
- oints)
i1c,111 i—vesto-ffilp--
%0 1r, Icvt-
pdCOc ion
'57�- ltNl
O�,i Wo.Fe
iO
3
substantial m n X,
AW
i �e`s —en —ce! B' f: in �)y rjopocomplexes __
P6 _�p riffle
't 'M6 Unifflees-
�'3
0;5
0-
4
max In
p no R es
06plloer�- 4 WON H po
_,6
it at-comp eiUi
'-0 '6'
_-O
0
3
66 d" Af V i6d, abitgs, dmax Oomis)
as
C_J�H-firy, 4 �v'� over. i We A-9 I Wd
18-
ntinuous canopyAffiai�O 6m
'(66 sl�i ifi -V on-=, 0 its) t
0�_
i5
10-,5
3
d 7,
eaa';,
aiW7 n
0 ­,4
2
16ose-strUcOre-= iriax)
(deeply•,effibeddedj-QQ_
'Presence of s invertebrates
V
Tq
25-
eyidence,= 0 common4tumerowtypes -,max,points)
3
,�kno
_,,PiZVC94041f1A1 i�fij7bians-
p
-
0-4
4
7�
2
,�z--�(i'-f'o.'-�e--v-tdeii7ce�l,---.O,,,common,,numer-ous'tyoes 1
mts)_
A of fish= i x
'resence
A',
•
-evidence common tSrfies mak bmts)_.
A
�,,O __4
0- 4
0
tno 7-,6j ,numerous
9vid "Wid Wildlife user
��O
enc e
(fi 6_ v i d eri cie:O,,d Kiffid an iCe V i d a)� p-0 i ift§
D=6
5
0 -5
2
r_t-a11 Points Possible
T®TAL SC®+ also enter on flrst
page
58
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams

OFFICE USE ONLY: USACE AID# DWQ #
SCP 2 — Lower UT1 to Reedy Fork (Perennial)
1
i' � STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET AO
1. Applicant's Name: Wildlands Engineering, _ Inc 2. Evaluator's Name: Ian Eckardt
3. Date of Evaluation: 1/28/2013 4. Time of Evaluation: 10:30 AM
5. Name of Stream: UT1 to Reed Fork ork (lower) 6. River Basin: Cape Fear 03030002
7. Approximate Drainage Area: 361 Acres 8. Stream Order: First
9. Length of Reach Evaluated: 3001f 10. County: Guilford
11. Location of reach under evaluation (include nearby roads and landmarks): From Gibsonville, NC, travel north on NC -16 for
approximately 5 miles and turn right onto Sockwell Road. Travel approximately 1.5 miles, site will be north of Sockwell Road.
12. Site Coordinates (if known): N 36.180691'. W 79.544393°
13. Proposed Channel Work (if any): restoration /enhancement/preservation
14. Recent Weather Conditions: Small rainfall event within past 24 hours.
15. Site conditions at time of visit: partly sunnv. 400
16. Identify any special waterway classifications known: _Section 10 _Tidal Waters _Essential Fisheries Habitat
_Trout Waters _Outstanding Resource Waters _ Nutrient Sensitive Waters _Water Supply Watershed (I -IV)
17. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES (D If yes, estimate the water surface area:_
8. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? (5 NO 19. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
20. Estimated Watershed Land Use: _% Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial _% Agricultural
20 % Forested _% Cleared / Logged _% Other
21. Bankfull Width: 10 -15' 22. Bank Height (from bed to top of bank): 4 -5'
23. Channel slope down center of stream: _Flat (0 to 2 %) X Gentle (2 to 4 %) _Moderate (4 to 10 %) _Steep ( >10 %)
24. Channel Sinuosity: Straight X Occasional Bends _Frequent Meander _Very Sinuous _Braided Channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each
characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the
worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or
weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character
of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more
continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score
of 100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 55 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature Date 1/28/13
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers in order to make a preliminary assessment of
stream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change — version 05/03. To Comment, please call 919- 876 -8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams
W44M
"Won'& stenf-poo
Presence I, i�, persistent,,7-,obl-sl;;F�4F�wKi�an�r�i��i "t
ersi
p V, -P
p 11 "
";n
0
wo
4
dry
5,
2, Nk 01 0 tro M!
"F-St-:0&
M, Evidence ofipandh=uf?%�
i!�M alteration Vw Mz2ff-
-
Wil
extensivela lterktLffyff jQ rdfiff�zu
4-
� F!
qw7pne.-W
2
fievj lewn Me WfnW-V i e n t -'o �rchemical d�ji s�lccr a �r� e s
Iffle
2
ieffgM -s
e ilcharjMliargegi- x-,pointg).,r
5 "1
wl=Wrid' s n
Groundwater w I ("
"W�"eep wetlands' ftfai p6ifits),-
=Wj 11, §@p-�!,,c
arg SpMngs,'�g
o!Uiscli' eeN,,
0
4
-s�
41�-,� VOT
`4
-to"O
0
3
0 604144=11,max pomfsp:�
plaiii access
0 5
0- 4
2
d dX
quen p6ifiisj,-�,
i--Hq-ffij effjfe-1aQ
-0�-6
0
'
x-
-Z�
'y
S -
4
2,Te
-0 -5
4,,
43
3
e, der -�7 ffiak '�6iiifs)
Al,
1AMU'l 1--- ISediment-input 'N
-, - r
0'
0 4
4,,,
2
_ & , - '.
20(eXtensive-16*68NI A �'h
Im
n%'O,-,, ftlebrWsed ent ­miw"f6i�is
--jyj-,
'%;,�JUC'fi i7airn7ef%e-drW6 e.-
j y
2
- -
% T
polfif§)-,
VEVi'den-c
1 'tXibanks' -
0
OLt4
ee An&96d. 107sthble)56 max.poift s
-,c
A
q'� 'H'ek�fi A 6
c -0 Wig"
I Ir Q -V
C,.V.2 gg�
0,
2
re e si6W1;D0',fflqeKqsion�N aiji'ETR 11�fg)'
W4
VA
14 -
'd
2
j
06visibl -0 dn --mdX'Oom
seffi66tsUfWU
n-
I @F el y- t—tre--o-r- , � --ve t-oc a�-functio-
2
'j;�-ci
tWh ' '
Lim p6ctAO3Whgiden c
-pFesenVi—OfrAih:P1k
pooUr�pple =pool completes'
-3
-
0
0
4
no ritut;b/i ippmb,vi pvu1ba,�0,,,,wutPdeve1bpe
W
a ,i!Cqqj exit y
ZA,
1 7
W
Wl-
3
hiW, �tdqTdRtjiiCh6d halhtat§�� ffiak,'Pomts)
re'T v a= Wanoppv taM b
n -
ts)"
,JfidAaAmj -v�e A,�"N,-Tontiffuto Q
5
-0 -5,
­ ,
- O=5
3
1 ;Substrate embedde ness -
�'-0-4,
2
vl
-0 It&
Q-s
embedded -A K)
'P
feseii�Vtr stream raiii
M
a
(n6 iN6a-enc'e =`O,'boffinf&h %1" i na' x--,-� p�- 6 1 i it �s
-5
u %m
3
ai�s
� 7C-- w
1 1
�21
-"6)
�n`o',6vidence cd monknumerous m-ax- -W-m
�4
0
2
`Presence of fsti_ A %z, IT
'0
--V ax-� �-­ - -
�no evidefici .1. doriiInon',�numerous, -M bmO
0' 4
---
4,
'I
0-4
1
'E 16 use
-
�wl
bifirdant�d-vidence „,,,
0
2
e omaxpomt§�),
otal Points S i le
00
00
1U0
00) TAL SC®RE also enter ®n
S
55
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams

OFFICE USE ONLY: USACE AID# DWQ #
SCP 3 - UT1A to Reedy Fork (Perennial)
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
1. Applicant's Name: Wildlands Engineering, Inc 2. Evaluator's Name: Ian Eckardt
3. Date of Evaluation: 1/28/2013 4. Time of Evaluation: 10:30 AM
5. Name of Stream:—UT I A to Reedy Fork 6. River Basin: Cape Fear 03030002
7. Approximate Drainage Area: 94 Acres 8. Stream Order: First
9. Length of Reach Evaluated: 3001f 10. County: Guilford
11. Location of reach under evaluation (include nearby roads and landmarks): From Gibsonville. NC, travel north on NC -16 for
approximately 5 miles and turn right onto Sockwell Road. Travel approximately 1.5 miles: site will be north of Sockwell Road.
12. Site Coordinates (if known): N 36.176901 °, W 79.543562°
13. Proposed Channel Work (if any): restoration /enhancement/preservation
14. Recent Weather Conditions: Small rainfall event within past 24 hours.
15. Site conditions at time of visit: Dartly sunnv. 40°
16. Identify any special waterway classifications known: _Section 10 _Tidal Waters _Essential Fisheries Habitat
_Trout Waters _Outstanding Resource Waters _ Nutrient Sensitive Waters _Water Supply Watershed (I -IV)
17. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES O If yes, estimate the water surface area:_
8. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? (�3 NO 19. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
20. Estimated Watershed Land Use: _% Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial _% Agricultural
30 % Forested % Cleared / Logged _% Other
21. Bankfull Width: 8 -12' 22. Bank Height (from bed to top of bank): 3 -5'
23. Channel slope down center of stream: _Flat (0 to 2 %) X Gentle (2 to 4 %) _Moderate (4 to 10 %) _Steep (> 10 %)
24. Channel Sinuosity: Straight X Occasional Bends _Frequent Meander _Very Sinuous _Braided Channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each
characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the
worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or
weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character
of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more
continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score
of 100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 58 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature a.�� Date 1/28/13
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers in order to make a preliminary assessment of
stream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change — version 05/03. To Comment, please call 919- 876 -8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
C +OR G
ON O ANT RANGE
#
C : CTE� ` �S C ►S
Coastal
ie
SCO
mont ountain
-
��'
- y" '" 6'jZZ� "�"i4�,'�k�w�?, `.'E�r�
ast human,alteration. -��_�a �
�4 Ti!�v ` f:'ll"
x
`
iw"�t}'1 `,J�f��'_
�'�
0
_
0
3
_�
= o�nts
G _>
� ;
tensive alteration 0 no�alterat�on _max° �_'
�
`' , ,
Riparian zone �`"
N v ♦
=w�
?s•
.�
buffer,�maxs` °ouits
_
-_v�
W. nti uous, wide �,
• •
ry��
4
Evidence ofnutrient�orchemical `aischarges �r
�0�= 5�'i�'
4° 4�
2
- �a 4� �, v
' extens -0 dtsctiar esmax omts°
��r��F�
X04 ,
""
_ _ vedrsch�'ar�es no
��
v' M - °sr
B� � - � r Y
r Groundwater iiscr °,
� w ,_ ° °
.i a .a s'° s>!2 w.c
��a
- :0�`�3.� $
�cy.,e '7v
t "S: , —. �1,'
C"+°&
Y ����
Kip 4 yiF,,
4
nozd�schar e -, 0,s rm s see s; wetlands; etc . r maxa omts
; , "-
��t_
r&°ig4Ai' 'fir "3 'R�S�3F8�3`alro,tri• ex-, w �a_,.,
-Presence,of adjacentrfloodplam �
_pf
� ° � �,.��
`0
q -� ,n. a�, ,`c-s, -`r
� ''fi�
.��a�, i >e_��+ r
�, �� >�°�
`
�
flood lain eztensrve flood lam
°" ro
0_'`2�
' ;.
3
�-
no = rriax oints _
� .w
n =, r�
��Entrenchme�nt
-`'/ flood lain_ access
" - °= °'
shed
0, 5 4
0 =R4, �
i0 2
"
2
dee 1 „:entire - 0 fre uei►t floodih _gtimax' omts t =_.x
e �.`.
°`z
�t
- ° '
p,_
0
"
2
nowards ad acet m ,-3 - w-m-
�z
- -�-
�'�
3� �� �a --� � •_ ��Channel�s�nuosity�� �'� -�
a
_
=
-._�_
w ��
extensive;etiannehzation,- 0; atural�meander maX omts
r }a§i`8
�a:3L�wi X"4`2 � t �. ..
• ;�A. `'¢LS'> - t �C -4' i
Seaiment�m ut,
- r P ys f
y �-m- ' -4
-r..x ..mow
_yr
- n u:0 " t�
5 fr -il:.. i i..r mgri!i"
P,r
<,
vrJ
R 4 -
,�, 0
3
_
extensweV osition�,�0;fhttWor4r►o,sediment ,max,, omts �
, �r5
•bz4 _
�° = t�•
3
� �r,� °tip
-
-:�
Size &Q,vrZ,rsify of c`han el'beil ubstrate=
`onus"
' -
fine,�liomo enous 0, lar e, diverse _siz es.max�
�
t � .:s:Y'O'9E £`aY 3`� 3.Y: ✓P.zz, �Wlp?f, i F es.,
-� -Eviilence ofschannel- inc�sOU - 1 -Wijng w
,°+ha Tk.Y -i ara_ •�'fJ' e�
'r qLJ" .. r �f
'� '2" - '__`.
-
(nc sed }'a
O5
2
dee „0 stablebeii.& banks �n
Rte, -� _ i ax' omts
���_
,��A
ti
of m failures'
°S2
'ya5
3
o severe eosion u!eros ables bamins
x"-,�
�rRoot depth =anddensity -on�banks`�
' =a�;
-�`;,°
2
��4��
_•4� .���� ' s
noivi`s�ble- roots- ��O;�dense roots�throu outinaxr omts
�Impac`t,by3agriculture�or livestockuproduction�
5 =
�4� �r�zW.� , x�.
4
? `�0 - 5
1
r s0
y��� substantial��m act0�no evidence�maz�om'ts
��`
r0
''��w��s
„'��
Presence of i-iftle- pooUr�pple -pool corriplexes
� ;g a=
�no ��well�develo :na,z
OSR6 °,•
3
nfles7h les or�_ oolg� 6, ed = pom6 .,
p_ a�- Habifat complexlty� _- �7 °.._�:'
__.. °
<`�
-
little oi�no liabitaf 0, fr uent vanedzhab�tats` in s)
:,_
�� '_
S!'
R�
. �maz'
.- _
�ry
�
e-
k
s Canopy coverage,Tover;streamtied'
n o °shadm ve "etatton -cano = ` `
0,_ 5 =°
3
ontmuous max oints
,,_
_
.
T -',SJ3 t ateds
e
v
u
�- dee 1 embedded 0 ;loose�strucfiire = mdk
- -
= - °Presence' bf stream inve teb_rates`
0
a ip v
0
ri -
-types =,max rio evidence ;0 „cor mon;numecou iomts
-,4 ; e
- ,5 8 ;
=�5_=-
3
Presence of am`plubians°,., t
e��� --
ra
p�,4.
� r�
”' ° 4
,:' -
2
,;21_
�”
cek es`= max
� ��04
,0�'4
no -evide 0,,common numerous oints
no`evidence = 0, common,�nutnerous es - mak- omts
=4=
-A4- -
0 =4
0
11277—
Evidence"ofwildhfe -use
'
=, °5
. -.�� �_,
noev�dence = ,�O;�abundant elide "nce> �rriaX` oirits .- - -ta
��M ';
-,5
"" '
a_
0' ='` �E
B -
3 ru °-
2
otal oints ossible
00
100 -
00
TOT SC +ORE (also enter on first
page)
58 -
* These
charactenstics
are not assessed in coastal streams

OFFICE USE ONLY: USACE AID# DWQ #
SCP4 -UT1B to Reedy Fork (Intermittent)
0 AO
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
1. Applicant's Name: Wildlands Engineering, Inc 2. Evaluator's Name: Ian Eckardt
3. Date of Evaluation: 1/28/2013 4. Time of Evaluation: 2:00 PM
5. Name of Stream: UT1B to Reedy Fork 6. River Basin: Cape Fear 03030002
7. Approximate Drainage Area: 64 Acres 8. Stream Order: First
9. Length of Reach Evaluated: 200 if 10. County: Guilford
11. Location of reach under evaluation (include nearby roads and landmarks): From Gibsonville, NC, travel north on NC -16 for
approximately 5 miles and turn right onto Sockwell Road. Travel approximately 1.5 miles: site will be north of Sockwell Road.
12. Site Coordinates (if known): N 36.178017 °, W 79.550763°
13. Proposed Channel Work (if any): restoration
14. Recent Weather Conditions: Small rainfall event within past 24 hours.
15. Site conditions at time of visit: partly sunny. 40°
16. Identify any special waterway classifications known: _Section 10 _Tidal Waters _Essential Fisheries Habitat
_Trout Waters _Outstanding Resource Waters
17. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluati
8. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YE NO
20. Estimated Watershed Land Use: _% Residential
5 % Forested
21. Bankfull Width: 3 -5'
Nutrient Sensitive Waters _Water Supply Watershed (1 -IV)
)n point? YES O If yes, estimate the water surface area:_
19. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
_% Commercial _% Industrial _% Agricultural
% Cleared / Logged _% Other ( )
22. Bank Height (from bed to top of bank)
23. Channel slope down center of stream: _Flat (0 to 2 %) X Gentle (2 to 4 %) _Moderate (4 to 10 %) _Steep (>I 0%)
24. Channel Sinuosity: Straight X Occasional Bends _Frequent Meander _Very Sinuous _Braided Channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each
characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the
worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or
weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character
of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more
continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score
of 100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 37 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature o.� �`^ Date 1/29/13
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers in order to make a preliminary assessment of
stream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
-,articular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change — version 05103. To Comment, please call 919- 876 -8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
_
M�����MCKB—astal
Ki!e,
Wmam
Olo;flow, 64
OEM
07
ffl��Rj@plia
*pWg
f;r
OTO 2c o
1-3
F,02ffikef-70--=V�e
IdEW-
wr
po
7ce NVenuf a in
MR
4
,
t!n
6'
7M
);int:t;
fr
r
%liglarda
:U�n t
ens h-ijihelizifti
in-
O
ep
reseWeUl
REG
HAMM C6
1611
x,
ans
P"rg-6`ewWcW--6'rf rig
These
characteristics
are not assessed in coastal streams

OFFICE USE ONLY: USACE AID# DWQ #
SCP5 -UT2 to Reedy Fork (Perennial)
13 STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET -
1. Applicant's Name: Wildlands Engineering, , Inc 2. Evaluator's Name: Ian Eckardt
3. Date of Evaluation: 1/28/2013 4. Time of Evaluation: 12:00 PM
5. Name of Stream: UT2 to Reedy Fork 6. River Basin: Cape Fear 03030002
7. Approximate Drainage Area: 63 Acres 8. Stream Order: First
9. Length of Reach Evaluated: 2001f 10. County: Guilford
11. Location of reach under evaluation (include nearby roads and landmarks): From Gibsonville, NC, travel north on NC -16 for
approximately 5 miles and turn right onto Sockwell Road. Travel approximately 1.5 miles; site will be north of Sockwell Road.
12. Site Coordinates (if known): N 6.178955 °. W 79.541314°
13. Proposed Channel Work (if any): restoration
14. Recent Weather Conditions: Small rainfall event within past 24 hours.
15. Site conditions at time of visit: partly sunnv, 40°
16. Identify any special waterway classifications known: _Section 10 _Tidal Waters _Essential Fisheries Habitat
_Trout Waters _Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters _Water Supply Watershed (I -IV)
17. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES e If yes, estimate the water surface area:_
8. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YE NO 19. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
20. Estimated Watershed Land Use: _% Residential % Commercial _% Industrial _% Agricultural
30 % Forested _% Cleared / Logged _% Other ( )
21. Bankfull Width: 8 -12' 22. Bank Height (from bed to top of bank): 4 -5'
23. Channel slope down center of stream: _Flat (0 to 2 %) X Gentle (2 to 4 %) _Moderate (4 to 10 %) _Steep (> 10 %)
24. Channel Sinuosity: Straight _Occasional Bends X Frequent Meander _Very Sinuous _Braided Channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each
characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the
worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or
weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character
of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more
continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score
of 100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 48 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature `� o.� � Date 1/28/13
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers in order to make a preliminary assessment of
Cream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
articular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change — version 05/03. To Comment, please call 919- 876 -8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
ECOREGION'POINT
RANGE
#
CHARACTERISTICS
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
1
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5
0 — 4
0-5
4
no flow or saturation = 0; strop flow = max points)
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0-5
0-5
3
extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
2
no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points)
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0 — 4
0-4
3
extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max oints
5
Groundwater discharge
0-3
0-4
0-4
4
no discharge = 0; springs, see s, wetlands, etc. = max points)
U
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0 - 4
0-2
4
no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
x
Entrenchment / floodplain access
s�
7
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding =max points)
0 -5
0 -4
0 -2
1
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0-4
0-2
0
no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9
Channel sinuosity
0-5
0-4
0-3
1
extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points)
10
Sediment input
0-5
0-4
0-4
3
extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment = max points)
1 1
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
NA*
0 — 4
0 — 5
2
2
fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points)
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
0 - 4
0-5
1
y+
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points)
13
Presence of major bank failures
0-5
0 - 5
0-5
2
severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
14
Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0 - 4
0-5
2
H
no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points)
I S
Impact by agriculture or livestock production
0-5
0 — 4
0-5
2
substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points
16
Presence of riffle- pool/ripple -pool complexes
0-3
0-5
0-6
2
no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed = max oints
1
Habitat complexity
0-6
0 - 6
0-6
2
little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
18
Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0 5
0-5
4
no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy =max oints
—
19
Substrate embeddedness
NA*
0-4
0-4
2
deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max
20
Presence of stream invertebrates
0-4
0-5
0-5
1
no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
21
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0-4
0-4
1
O
no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max p oints
22
Presence offish
0-4
0-4
0-4
1
no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0-5
0-5
1
no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)
Total Points Possible
100
100
100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page)
48
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

Appendix 5: Resource Agency Correspondence
� 1

Categorical Exclusion Form for Ecosystem Enhancement
Program Projects
Version 1.4
Note: Only Appendix A should to be submitted (along with any supporting documentation) as the
environmental document.
Part
1: General Project Information
Project Name:
Agony Acres Mitigation Project
Count Name:
Guilford County
EEP Number:
#95716, RFP 16- 004357
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Project Sponsor:
Project Contact Name:
Andrea Eckardt
Project Contact Address:
1430 S. Mint Street, Suite 104, Charlotte, NC 28203
Project Contact E -mail:
aeckardt @wildlandseng.com
EEP Project Mana er:
Perry Sugg
Project Description
The Agony Acres Mitigation Site is
a stream mitigation project located in Guilford County, NC
north of the Town of Gibsonville.
The project is located on four unnamed tributaries to Reedy
Fork. The project will provide stream
mitigation units to NCEEP in the Cape Fear River Basin
(03030002). The mitigation project
involves a combination of
stream restoration, enhancement and
For Official Use Only
Reviewed By:
Date
P of ct Manager
Conditional Approved By:
Date
For Division Administrator
FHWA
❑ Check this box if there are
outstanding issues
Final Approval By:
Date
For Division Administrator
FHWA

W*v
WILDL.ANDS
F NGIrJI F. RINC>
December 3.7, 2012
Renee Gledhill - Earley
State Historic Preservation Office
463.7 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -463.7
Subject: EEP Stream mitigation project in Guilford County, NC
Agony Acres Mitigation Project
Dear Ms. Gledhill - Earley,
The Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) requests review and comment on any possible
issues that might emerge with respect to archaeological or cultural resources associated with a
potential stream and buffer restoration project on the attached site (USGS site map with
approximate areas of potential ground disturbance / stream restoration area is enclosed).
The Agony Acres site has been identified for the purpose of providing in -kind mitigation for
unavoidable stream channel impacts. Several sections of channel have been identified as
significantly degraded. The site has historically been disturbed due to agricultural purposes,
specifically for an active cattle operation. No architectural structures or archaeological artifacts
have been observed or noted during preliminary surveys of the site for restoration purposes.
We ask that you review this site based on the attached information to determine the presence
of any historic properties.
We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please feel free to contact
us with any questions that you may have concerning the extent of site disturbance associated
with this project.
Sincerely,
Andrea S. Eckardt
Senior Environmental Planner
[e-mail]
1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104 Charlotte, NC 28203 , (P) 704 - 332 -7754 = (F) 704 - 332 -3306

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Pat McCrory, Governor
Susan W. Kluttz, Secretary
Kevin Cherry, Deputy Secretary
January 15, 2013
Andrea Eckardt
Wildlands Engineering
1430 South Mint Street
Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28203
Re: Agony Acres Stream Mitigation, Guilford County, ER 12 -2383
Dear Ms. Edkardt:
Thank you for your letter of December 17, 2012, concerning the above project.
Office of Archives and History
Division of Historical Resources
David Brook, Director
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,
please 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,
Ramona M. Bartos
Location: 109 Fast Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699 -4617 Telephone /Fax: (919) 807 - 6570/807 -6599

WILIDLANI)S
December i7, 2012
Dale Suiter
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Raleigh Field Office
P.O. Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636
Subject: Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Guilford County, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Suiter,
The Agony Acres Mitigation Site has been identified for the purpose of providing in -kind
mitigation for unavoidable stream channel and riparian buffer impacts. Several sections of
stream channels throughout the site have been identified as significantly degraded as a result
of past agricultural activities, specifically active cattle operations.
We have already obtained an updated species list for Guilford County from your web site
( http: / /nc- es.fws.gov /es /countryfr.html). The threatened or endangered species for the county
are: the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and the small whorled pogonia (Isotria
medeoloides). We are requesting that you please provide any known information for each
species in the county. The USFWS will be contacted if suitable habitat for any listed species is
found or if we determine that the project may affect one or more federally listed species or
designated critical habitat.
Please provide comments on any possible issues that might emerge with respect to
endangered species, migratory birds or other trust resources from the construction of a stream
and buffer restoration project on the subject property. A USGS map showing the approximate
property lines and area of potential ground disturbance /stream restoration area is enclosed.
The figure was prepared from the Ossipee, NC 7..5- Minute Topographic Quadrangle.
If we have not heard from you in 3o days we will assume that you do not have any comments
regarding associated laws and that you do not have any information relevant to this project at
the current time.
We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please feel free to contact
us with any questions that you may have concerning the extent of site disturbance associated
with this project.
Sincerely,
Andrea S. Eckardt
Senior Environmental Planner
Attachment:
USGS Topographic Map

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh North Carolina 27636 -3726
January 11, 2013
Andrea Eckardt
Wildlands Engineering
1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28203
Re: Agon, Aces >.4itmatron Site- Curlford County, NC
Dear Ms Eckardt-
This letter is to inform you that a list of all federally - protected endangered and threatened species
with known occurrences in North Carolina is now available on the U.S Fish and Wildlife
Service's (Service) web page at http-//www.fws gov /raleigh Therefore, if you have projects that
occur within the Raleigh Field Office's area of responsibility (see attached county list), you no
longer- need to contact the Raleigh Field Office for a� list of federally- protected species.
Our web page contains a complete and frequently'upddted list of all endangered and threatened
species protected by the provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973; as amended (16
U.S.0 1531 et seq.)(Act), and a list of federal species of concern' that are known to occur in
each county in North Carolina.
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 can ied 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 deterinining whether additional corsult.4tion 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
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.
i The teun "fedc. qi species of concern" refers to those species which the Service believes might be in need of
concenti ated comei vation actions Federal species of concern ieceive no legal' protection and their designation does
not necessarily imply that the species will eventually be proposed for listing as a federally endangered or threatened
species However, we recommend that all - practicable measures be taken to avoid or minimize adverse impacts to
federal species of concern

If your pioject 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 Caiolma 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.
With regard to the above - referenced protect, we offer the following remarks Our comments are
subnnitted pursuant to, and in accordance with, provisions of the Endangered Species Act.
Based on the information provided and other unformation available, it appears that the proposed
action is not likely to adversely affect any fedeially - listed endangered or threatened species, their
formally designated critical habitat, or species currently proposed for listing under the Act at
these sites We believe that the requirements of section 7(a)(2) of the Act have been satisfied for
youi project Please remember that obligations undei section 7 consultation must be
reconsidered if (1) new information reveals impacts of this identified action that may affect
listed species or critical habitat in a manner not previously considered; (2) this action is
subsequently modified in a mariner that was not considered in this review; or, (3) a new species
is listed or critical habitat determined that may be affected by the identified action
However, the Service is concerned about the potential impacts the proposed action might have
on aquatic species Aquatic resources are highly susceptible to sedimentation. Therefore, we
recommend that all practicable measures be taken to avoid adverse impacts to aquatic species,
including - implementing directional boring methods and stringent sediment and erosion control
measures An erosion and sedimentation contiol plan should be submitted to and approved by
the North Caiolina Division of Land Resources, Land Quality Section prior to construction.
Erosion and sedimentation controls should be installed and maintained between the construction
site and any neaiby down - gradient surface waters In addition, we recommend maintaining
natural, vegetated buffers on all streams and creeks adjacent to the project site
The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission has developed a Guidance Memorandum (a
copy can be found on our website at (http / /www fws gov /raleigh) to addiess and mitigate
secondary and cumulative impacts to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife resources and water quality
We recommend that you consider this document in the development of your projects and in
completing an initiation package for consultation (if necessary).
2

We hope you find our web page useful and informative and that following the process described
above will reduce the time required, and eliminate the need, for general correspondence for
species' lists If you have any questions or comments, please contact John Ellis of this office at
(919) 856 -4520 ext. 26.
Sincerely,
fk Pete Benjamin
Field Supervisor
3

Wit*
WILDLANDS
erir�irae er�ir�rs
December 17, 2012
Shannon Deaton
North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission
Division of Inland Fisheries
1721 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699
Subject: Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Guilford County, North Carolina
Dear Ms. Deaton,
The purpose of this letter is to request review and comment on any possible issues that
might emerge with respect to fish and wildlife issues associated with a potential stream
and buffer restoration project on the attached site. A USGS map showing the
approximate property lines and areas of potential ground disturbance (stream
restoration section) is enclosed. The figure was prepared from the Ossipee, NC 7.5-
Minute Topographic Quadrangles.
The Agony Acres Site has been identified for the purpose of providing in -kind
mitigation for unavoidable stream channel impacts. Several sections of channel
throughout the site have been identified as significantly degraded as a result of past
agricultural activities, specifically active cattle operations.
We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please feel free to
contact us with any questions that you may have concerning the extent of site
disturbance associated with this project.
Sincerely,
Andrea S. Eckardt
Senior Environmental Planner
Attachment:
USGS Topographic Map
1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104, Charlotte, NC 28203 - (P) 704 - 332 -7754 = (F) 704 - 332 -3306

® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Gordon Myers, Executive Director
1 l January 2013
Andrea S Eckardt, Senior Environmental Planner
Wildlands Engineering
1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28203
Subject Agony Acres Mitigation Site, Guilford County, North Carolina
Dear Ms Eckardt
Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission have reviewed the subject
information Our comments are provided in accordance with provisions;of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended, 16 U S C 661 -667e) and North Carolina General Statutes (G S 113 -131 et seq )
The proposed project would provide in -kind mitigation for unavoidable stream impacts Several
sections of channel throughout the site have been identified as significantly degraded from past agricultural
activities including cattle operations The project site includes Reedy Fork Creek and its unnamed tributaries in
the Cape Fear River basin There are records for the state threatened triangle floater (Alasmidonta undulata),
the state special concern notched rainbow (Vcllosa constricia), and the state significantly rare Eastern creekshell
(Vcllosa dehcmbcs) in Reedy Fork Creek
Although the project site includes Reedy Fork Creek, according to the information provided it appears
the potential land disturbance area will be only on the unnamed tributaries to Reedy Fork Creek If any
restoration activities will be performed on Reedy Fork Creek, then we recommend a mussel survey be
conducted prior to any rnstream work on Reedy Fork Creek No mussel survey is needed for restoration
activities or istream work performed on the unnamed tributaries to Reedy Fork Creek.
Mussel surveys should be conducted 100 meters upstream of the proposed rnstream work area, within
the istream work area, and 300 meters downstream of the- istream work area. Surveys should be conducted by
biologists with both state and federal endangered species permits Qualitative mussel sampling should be
conducted by visual (snorkel, SCUBA, or view scope) and tactile surveys These surveys should be timed to
provide catch - per -unit effort (CPUE) Specimens should be documented for identification confirmation with
color digital photographs in JPEG format Mussels located within the impact area should be relocated upstream
into suitable habitat in Reedy Fork Creek The iesoutce agencies should be provided a complete compilation of
the results of the suivey If a federally endangered species is encountered, sampling activities should cease and
findings should be immediately reported to the U S Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) at (919) 856 -4520 and
Ryan Heise of the NCWRC at (919) 707 -0368
Mailing Address: Division of Liland Fisheries - 1721 Mail Service Center - Raleigh, NC 27699 =1721
Telephone: [phone] - Fax: [phone]

Page 2
11 January 2013
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Stream restoration projects often improve water quality and aquatic habitat We recommend
establtshing native, foiested buffers in riparian areas to improve terrestrial habitat and provide a travel corridor
for wildlife species, and fencing livestock out of riparian buffer areas We do not anticipate the project to result
in significant adverse impacts to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife resources provided
• Mussel surveys are conducted prior to any mstreain work on Reedy Fork Creek
• Any mussels found within the impact area in Reedy Foik Creek aie relocated upstream into suitable
habitat in Reedy Fork Creek
• Natural channel design methods are used
• Measures are taken to minimize erosion and sedimentation from consti uction/restoration activities
Thank you for the opportunity to review this proposed project If we can provide further assistance,
please contact our office at (336) 449 -7625 or shaii bryant@ncwildlife org
Sincerely,
Shari L Bryant
Piedmont Region Cooidinator
Habitat Conservation Program
cc Ryan Heise, NCWRC

Appendix 6: Existing Morphological Survey Data

Hydrologic Features MF
Agony Acres Mitigation Sit,.
WILDLANDS Feet
FNCINFFRIrlG 0 300 600 1,200
I I I I I I I I I Guilford County, NC

640
6395
639
6385
—638
0375
637
'4336 5
w 636
6355
635
634 5
riffle
'
-
ag "stl9,.rm
x- section area (ft sq )
mgE
A a ` f'
,. nrF65c "'T�b�R�4
v.a Hs,e
^S
Paxi sse zy�.�2 j'^"h` r >Sa 'x'rvmza`$*n'w
i't Y °"d`k a.
�y�.n
Y e 3 k yMK
m.. '2..+�w �' 4�<`$}�Aq
9 d � ''�.n{`
14
hyd radl (ft)
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
a 4
v '° �
.t _.CZ -T✓,. `e
w� w
y#
_ �t
"E
`"a�cT �` ,_�,..- ..-- '�--
{___...'— � --...� >'z'3-
wc a
_%
�a= u`�' =• �'�'�t �s��3�_ }6` --�F ���� -.kk� v o s
- --- -- ------
s - � ` ,...
-.. ------ ------ j
v �-.- �.�._,.- ._ -i —$.r _.�— ._.__.,— � —
- -z
d- 'g _°°._Y_
�&�- a`r�r_._i',
� J#}
w^h."- w.f^t+
A �i-�-`�+'�''v $�� �n� •�`K•s `
Yc w a.s "F
.`%1� •�
s Y - .G
0 5
Elevation (ft)
Bankfull Dimensions
175
x- section area (ft sq )
11 1
width (ft)
1 6
mean depth (ft)
21
max depth (ft)
126
wetted parlmeter (ft)
14
hyd radl (ft)
70
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
82 velocity (ft/s)
1434 discharge rate (cfs)
1 23 Froude number
10 15 20 25
Width (ft)
Flood Dimensions
- -- W flood prone area (ft)
- -- entrenchment ratio
21 low bank height (ft)
10 low bank height ratio
Flow Resistance
u uou manning-s rougnness
026 D'Arcy- Welsbach frlc
- -- resistance factor u /u*
- -- relative roughness
30 35 40
Materials
- -- D50 (mm)
- -- D84 (mm)
209 threshold grain size (mm)
Forces & Power
492 channel slope ( %)
425 shear stress (lb /sq ft )
148 shear velocity (ft/s)
40 unit strm power (lb /ft/s)

6555
655
6545
ZI 654
Eb53 5
653 -
°b52 5
652
651 5
651
riffle
--•,
a
Flood Dimensions
Materials
�
� �
.lxr rs� � e.+ . a' _
.�, � w �- -�•- -•- - -.—. - _..
_ ..- > p � � »,� �° 6� °s- -...._ ..
_ -'_� ° » - _ ..
= .3.. -.._ ,.. ry-- ,l..`.a. rt+. � 5 _
v ... .. � ; .-. `- _ _
1 a.� -- .• Y ry 9 - _
° i A �,- .. �. _
a
T ** F3 � n { ° _ �
1 t
t ' _ '
I � �, R � _y � u � a.14 - - i.. G F i f 10. . i Y pr
. "- �, -�ybi •"E `..cam 3� °� ._� --r- -.. - .�.- .i�" -.-+
D84 (mm)
1 0
mean depth (ft)
1 3
low bank height (ft)
57
threshold grain size (mm)
1 3
max depth (ft)
1 0
low bank height ratio
98
wetted parameter (ft)
09
hyd radi (ft)
91
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
Flow Resistance
Forces & Power
40
velocity (ft/s)
0 050
Manning's roughness
0 10
20 30 40
Width (ft)
Bankfull Dimensions
Flood Dimensions
Materials
87
x- section area (ft sq)
340
W flood prone area (ft)
- --
D50 (mm)
89
width (ft)
38
entrenchment ratio
- --
D84 (mm)
1 0
mean depth (ft)
1 3
low bank height (ft)
57
threshold grain size (mm)
1 3
max depth (ft)
1 0
low bank height ratio
98
wetted parameter (ft)
09
hyd radi (ft)
91
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
Flow Resistance
Forces & Power
40
velocity (ft/s)
0 050
Manning's roughness
21
channel slope ( %)
346
discharge rate (cfs)
030
D'Arcy- Weisbach fnc
1 16
shear stress (lb /sq ft )
075
Froude number
- --
resistance factor u /u"
077
shear velocity (ft/s)
- --
relative roughness
51
unit strm power (lb /ft/s)
[4111]
1

614
613
612
611
O
610
w 609
608
607
i
riffle
0 5
Bankfull Dimensions
10 15 20 25 30
Width (ft)
Flood Dimensions
282
x- section area (ft sq )
160
width (ft)
1 8
mean depth (ft)
20
_
179
- —�
u x as . s . - .M�o .K » �Y ..... * �� n �.. s° � �"--��- ��c' •
8e'- x � "-.-''� 2`
` "e � e 1 ^3°a e . ,5JS'°. XR`
'
i ' te- NWili_i Pf
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
G
A i -S m
4
^
�
yz�
8
?fig '. „q�
'£
„rtmss
WOPPI,
o-
. , ' r �'
��
`r""v
s e g t w ro ° .
�= '��`
° d,a'.d. .,.. °;?,"
f �✓^�eE a
~ —mss`;
4S
.�-� �° x l
�...w - :`�.- --
.*.'tea- • - 3 E
i.;.�..s;.-s`� '`
x
_� 'r
T� #i
-ie" <k�
F +ixde
..
m Xk x
✓` .Yi
+Fe e
X!hrt'.
0 5
Bankfull Dimensions
10 15 20 25 30
Width (ft)
Flood Dimensions
282
x- section area (ft sq )
160
width (ft)
1 8
mean depth (ft)
20
max depth (ft)
179
wetted parameter (ft)
1 6
hyd radl (ft)
91
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
57 velocity (ft/s)
1603 discharge rate (cfs)
080 Froude number
201 W flood prone area (ft)
1 2 entrenchment ratio
40 low bank height (ft)
20 low bank height ratio
Flow Resistance
U u41J manning-s rougnness
016 D'Arcy- Weisbach fric
- -- resistance factor u /u"
- -- relative roughness
35 40 45 50
Materials
- -- D50 (mm)
- -- D84 (mm)
62 threshold grain size (mm)
Forces & Power
1 28 channel slope ( %)
1 25 shear stress (lb /sq ft )
080 shear velocity (ft/s)
8 unit strm power (lb /ft/s)

611.5
611
610.5
610
'609.5
c: 609
0
X08.5
W
608
607.5
607
606.5
606
0 5 10
Bankfull Dimensions
24.6
x- section area (ft.sq.)
16.0
width (ft)
1.5
mean depth (ft)
1.9
max depth (ft)
18.3
wetted parimeter (ft)
1.3
hyd radi (ft)
10.4
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
5.1 velocity (ft/s)
126.7 discharge rate (cfs)
0.78 Froude number
riffle
15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Width (ft)
Flood Dimensions Materials
22.9 W flood prone area (ft)
1.4 entrenchment ratio
3.8 low bank height (ft)
2.0 low bank height ratio
Flow Resistance
u.u4u manning-s rougnness
0.17 D'Arcy- Weisbach fric.
- -- resistance factor u /u*
- -- relative roughness
- -- D50 (mm)
- -- D84 (mm)
53 threshold grain size (mm):
Forces & Power
1.28 channel slope ( %)
1.08 shear stress (lb /sq.ft.)
0.75 shear velocity (ft/s)
6.3 unit strm power (lb /ft/s)
50

608
606
604
Z 602
g 600
598
596
594
592
riffle
�3'`�
X,
wegzp
10
�. x "�a�
4_
"�' i•-
.c-
50 60
^ ^ • �� •" ....:'"`'Y3-
ikTj -
"^� _ _ _ .-. ,R
Width (ft)
�J,
5
a
­4 ^rz?xa
Flood Dimensions
Materials
13
"' N
PM1; ta ".,.A': RF-a
:zd �e#, ^ae .r.-
....T��1�''' n 9' "x!" nark
"W -.= S�' ��,, `.,"6 °21s�6', ''ate -fir''
a
*� Q °"f' �r�k .. $�..
wr�_,LL...',�
-- �'��- _- ...-,r
�c f
•---
t � z "".'.`_ =F- = t-+ � .. � .,
-ter-
666
.� �-pv xr'�e -T - R^ '��- �l-= u'''"-- 7�^'_`°..'. -.-r! s n 1 R'
- r z a FAR°
t b - '`�+•s -�- °_�.4
- --
entrenchment ratio
- --
D84 (mm)
43
mean depth (ft)
52
low bank height (ft)
¢tea' <°� s �
of ' C � -
_iS^,"'i `h'..k. r-• ___ _ �_� _,.'-
`30 -•¢� � r 's��'ae
''`� x? 1i ae. W __. _ =vi+ �rnr- +...ate. *'b f°�4 �"'4"
_ �z e � r
v a}, ._a_t
1 0
low bank height ratio
203
wetted parameter (ft)
{t �
, r^fa
0
10
20
30
40
50 60
Width (ft)
Bankfull Dimensions
Flood Dimensions
Materials
590
x- section area (ft sq)
---
W flood prone area (ft)
- --
D50 (mm)
139
width (ft)
- --
entrenchment ratio
- --
D84 (mm)
43
mean depth (ft)
52
low bank height (ft)
4
threshold grain size (mm)
52
max depth (ft)
1 0
low bank height ratio
203
wetted parameter (ft)
29
hyd radi (ft)
33
width -depth ratio
Bankfull Flow
Flow Resistance
Forces &
Power
1 7
velocity (ft/s)
0 040
Manning's roughness
005
channel slope ( %)
1000
discharge rate (cfs)
013
D'Arcy- Weisbach frnc
009
shear stress (lb /sq ft )
018
Froude number
- --
resistance factor u /u"
022
shear velocity (fUs)
- --
relative roughness
022
unit strm power (lb /ft/s)

6195
619
6185
618
O
ZZ
,6175
m
w 617
6165
616 -
riffle
0 5
Bankfull Dimensions
52
x- section area (ft sq )
83
width (ft)
06
mean depth (ft)
10
max depth (ft)
87
wetted parameter (ft)
06
hyd radi (ft)
133
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
9
H
w
r 7.
y
r
0 5
Bankfull Dimensions
52
x- section area (ft sq )
83
width (ft)
06
mean depth (ft)
10
max depth (ft)
87
wetted parameter (ft)
06
hyd radi (ft)
133
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
30 velocity (ft/s)
157 discharge rate (cfs)
068 Froude number
10
Width (ft)
Flood Dimensions
15
Materials
20
- -- W flood prone area (ft) - -- D50 (mm)
- -- entrenchment ratio - -- D84 (mm)
1 0 low bank height (ft) 24 threshold grain size (mm)
1 0 low bank height ratio
Flow Resistance
u u4u manning-s rougnness
022 D'Arcy- Weisbach frnc
- -- resistance factor u /u*
- -- relative roughness
Forces & Power
1 29 channel slope ( %)
048 shear stress (lb /sq ft )
050 shear velocity (ft/s)
1 51 unit strm power (lb /ft/s)
25

615
6145
614
6135
S613
96125
m 612
'%11 5
611
6105
610
riffle
m "v 3t
i '
I.1 S a`T .a ..e . .- %v 'sU +U�r�°+,A.,. .t�"'-
9
� 4 -4 8 • -- -a- C � ' "Fy4 s ` ��AqrY a "° � � " b ; u u -4`' z � 6a ` e S "k' y 'w°�rtrig . �_y C _D�, . ,���
�e 2Y p" .,tr i f- 2 - .5., a�ne Y ` H.0 ` h �t
IC
�.K'�'=a3�� ",l "�pp G�t'`A�'� Ue "v4 . t'%9"'c a •
ll - fn: ` �9�' ..wi'M1$w� ''b a�a@ �°e'L+'a[rS4` c� P-4
,
�h �.. i � ,a� C�I�"��� i %(' w� _ f
a 4
mean depth (ft)
k"4v 'i
-e,x ir
s 3
a'
max depth (ft)
102
wetted parameter (ft)
06
= 'a+*- '.,.— ..- ..�....- r #-a-. °',$"; -a4
4 _- '.. -�`F
r.... 1.,.=-
Bankfull
£�° - -'°- -ems- >#
r'- -- .i.......- -- ----
-q'
--.9
+
r
� -.
% r3
,j{j.�
�a o
ffs - .xf....�.....y,
`_�Nv
_�_..�.. �... =•- lr � Mafia
3 > r,4
a � v''mu:6�
# $Y � ��
M _ s Y - ..- ..._..R� ..ea�'i.�y
^��� �e'�... -_ 9
� e
v �2 �` r
_ _ . ✓ As i SSs t � 9es�
�x L- �.--- rmR--." V
� � ^ 3i. � Y
�'�Uu"!,i
� "� l'i µ `d,4@r `
s
0 10
Bankfull Dimensions
20 30 40 50 60
Width (ft)
Flood Dimensions
59
x- section area (ft sq )
96
width (ft)
06
mean depth (ft)
1 2
max depth (ft)
102
wetted parameter (ft)
06
hyd radi (ft)
155
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
30 velocity (ft/s)
175 discharge rate (cfs)
068 Froude number
- -- W flood prone area (ft)
- -- entrenchment ratio
1 7 low bank height (ft)
14 low bank height ratio
Flow Resistance
U cc urarcy- vvuisuacn mu
- -- resistance factor u /u"
- -- relative roughness
70 80 90 100
Materials
- -- D50 (mm)
- -- D84 (mm)
23 threshold grain size (mm)
Forces & Power
1 29
channel slope ( %)
047
shear stress (lb /sq ft )
049
shear velocity (ft/s)
1 47
unit strm power (lb /ft/s)

612
611
610
F 609
g 608
m
607
U.1
606
605
604
riffle
,— - _— °+�•— _ .. -- n R« _.-• -- -,- —.» Mx - a ,— b k'y r a -- --- - - --- - - __ -- -� �- -- - - -- -- - - ---- - - - - -_ - - ... - - --
-- - -
T,-- - - - - -- -- - j
0 10
Elevation (ft)
Bankfull Dimensions
70
x- section area (ft sq )
62
width (ft)
1 1
mean depth (ft)
20
max depth (ft)
78
wetted parimeter (ft)
09
hyd radi (ft)
55
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
51 velocity (ft/s)
358 discharge rate (cfs)
095 Froude number
20 30 40
Width (ft)
Flood Dimensions
459 W flood prone area (ft)
74 entrenchment ratio
40 low bank height (ft)
21 low bank height ratio
Flow Resistance
U u4u Manning-s rougnness
019 D'Arcy- Weisbach fric
- -- resistance factor u /u`
- -- relative roughness
50
60 70 80
Materials
- -- D50 (mm)
- -- D84 (mm)
60 threshold grain size (mm)
Forces & Power
219 channel slope ( %)
122 shear stress (lb /sq ft )
079 shear velocity (ft/s)
79 unit strm power (lb /ft/s)

640
6395
639
—6385
0 638
R637 5
M a) 637
6365
636
635 5
riffle
0 5
Bankfull Dimensions
107
x- section area (ft sq )
104
width (ft)
1 0
mean depth (ft)
y e'
max depth (ft)
11 9
wetted parameter (ft)
09
i4=
101
width -depth ratio
•:-- �a--- + „>Y'c�'S. u v � $ i
�` 3� �� ;—.°
.. ��.... .�. - x ' _
_' a -e
+�..6- "£'A"r�-- .F'Y"a"5' -,- F
-w_ J1e.n ? - ,..- ,..+���—
� iR' D' wA .f.= c � } .. <
_... _ 4.w- cn�„� °�-y� �
� • �� �� °i--
,... e e'..'-.u+w ->..o w �y F a
� ._ -s -. .r. aX'�. ro
�K-. n-... - .. w -.
-�-_ -. '+*�:'ey- .+.?
t.�..,.. u. S ^.+M- C��_n ':[+Y� •r c x �..._en yi
a � � � •%«
f' ��"� �',
k '� � "` �,,, s ._• � �
__'.. W — ��
V � � � �'�°'''s v�.� _ � a
� �
;.�, -3.� � � s� �F�y� .I�d � _ .c � ° � = a
� _._._
� EX "5 k.
."y
W��d�fi �L ��_3�
�zF*.�� =F i��y>C cp.. �
�� '91111
,- -•�ryAe ._ x4 i����
r`�f'�F-a @�d
�' � � "Y n ��n �ke � '�' " �5n 'a q
0 5
Bankfull Dimensions
107
x- section area (ft sq )
104
width (ft)
1 0
mean depth (ft)
18
max depth (ft)
11 9
wetted parameter (ft)
09
hyd radi (ft)
101
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
22 velocity (ft/s)
231 discharge rate (cfs)
040 Froude number
10 15 20 25
Width (ft)
Flood Dimensions
- -- W flood prone area (ft)
- -- entrenchment ratio
1 8 low bank height (ft)
1 0 low bank height ratio
Flow Resistance
u u4u manning-s rougnness
019 D'Arcy- Weisbach fric
- -- resistance factor u /u"
- -- relative roughness
30 35 40
Materials
- -- D50 (mm)
- -- D84 (mm)
11 threshold grain size (mm)
Forces & Power
039
channel slope ( %)
022
shear stress (lb /sq ft )
034
shear velocity (ft/s)
054
unit strm power (lb /ft/s)

641 5
641
6405
Z 640
25395
CO
m 639
W
6385
638
637 5
riffle
0 5
Bankfull Dimensions
11 3
x- section area (ft sq )
91
width (ft)
12
mean depth (ft)
1 8
max depth (ft)
106
wetted parameter (ft)
1 1
hyd radi (ft)
73
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
24 velocity (ft/s)
274 discharge rate (cfs)
041 Froude number
10 15 20 25
Width (ft)
Flood Dimensions
- -- W flood prone area (ft)
- -- entrenchment ratio
1 8 low bank height (ft)
1 0 low bank height ratio
Flow Resistance
018 D'Arcy- Weisbach fnc
- -- resistance factor u /u`
- -- relative roughness
30 35 40
Materials
- -- D50 (mm)
- -- D84 (mm)
13 threshold grain size (mm)
Forces & Power
039
channel slope ( %)
026
shear stress (lb /sq ft )
037
shear velocity (ft/s)
073
unit strm power (lb /ft/s)

664
663
662
661
c 660
0
659
w 658
657
656
655
pool
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Width (ft)
Bankfuil Dimensions
Flood Dimensions
Materials
62
x- section area (ft sq)
- --
F.
' x �
ry K
= rya-- F•^"�,°,"
��.,As!
68
width (ft)
s"�''� >`'a���� =� ��, '`
:€ �. � �, �
,,
D84 (mm)
... - i �
Ty -�a -a
.
33
,R
threshold grain size (mm)
{ f �
i`
G•-�+
�
° �yd5 ° e° o
"3 <_ t f _.�_-
..e .4 "'i T _�._."
L , � §�'k'a' I a.��'� !'im�h =—
�` V
�� ° �
"'6�sa� -- �!
M1
�--
�� M��`14g�
j
~h ».y
�
� ��
����`�"'k� �`'^�
w
� �
�°�'
rod''- i'•k�T'�rtSdV °ice q�S$
-wyn' '� 'o�� �
-r`�•�
� .�f
fig' � t ,�c � � �."�1�
su ''�`t, .sxN��h,
t p,
�P ��. �'L rya' a `� �. rv��"� �� � Y �,� � , <��;�,�
,i,,
� 4,�ik"�° iJ �"� �'.,h.,d
�+ *,ta `�s b ��� a�,.r�
75
width -depth ratio
Bankfuil
Flow
Flow Resistance
Forces & Power
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Width (ft)
Bankfuil Dimensions
Flood Dimensions
Materials
62
x- section area (ft sq)
- --
W flood prone area (ft)
- --
D50 (mm)
68
width (ft)
- --
entrenchment ratio
- --
D84 (mm)
09
mean depth (ft)
33
low bank height (ft)
21
threshold grain size (mm)
1 8
max depth (ft)
1 8
low bank height ratio
87
wetted parameter (ft)
07
hyd radi (ft)
75
width -depth ratio
Bankfuil
Flow
Flow Resistance
Forces & Power
29
velocity (ft/s)
0 040
Manning's roughness
095
channel slope ( %)
180
discharge rate (cfs)
021
D'Arcy- Weisbach frnc
042
shear stress (lb /sq ft )
060
Froude number
- --
resistance factor u /u`
047
shear velocity (ft/s)
- --
relative roughness
1 57
unit strm power (lb /ft/s)

663
662
661
660
0
659
w 658
657
656 -
riffle
0 10
Bankfull Dimensions
20 30 40 50 60
Width (ft)
Flood Dimensions
63
,t��
58
width (ft)
1 1
mean depth (ft)
14
max depth (ft)
74
wetted parameter (ft)
'4
y
53
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
{{y {{y {{7
0 10
Bankfull Dimensions
20 30 40 50 60
Width (ft)
Flood Dimensions
63
x- section area (ft sq )
58
width (ft)
1 1
mean depth (ft)
14
max depth (ft)
74
wetted parameter (ft)
09
hyd radi (ft)
53
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
33 velocity (ft/s)
208 discharge rate (cfs)
062 Froude number
152 W flood prone area (ft)
26 entrenchment ratio
24 low bank height (ft)
1 7 low bank height ratio
Flow Resistance
0 040 Manning's roughness
020 D'Arcy- Weisbach fnc
- -- resistance factor u /u`
- -- relative roughness
70 80 90 100
Materials
- -- D50 (mm)
- -- D84 (mm)
25 threshold grain size (mm)
Forces & Power
095 channel slope ( %)
051 shear stress (lb /sq ft )
051 shear velocity (ft/s)
21 unit strm power (lb /ft/s)

650
649
648
647
c 646 -
m 645
w 644
643
642
641
pool
$ -,-
x- section area (ft sq )
59
width (ft)
AT 4_�
�hT a°T@
mean depth (ft)
25
max depth (ft)
;
°.����'_@,%a
12
° � �- E'flsa..��,+.a
x _e a __
_ -__
may,
Bankfull
' `i� —
_---:,.D---'r--'.'s--z
_n
—`s-_
Xi.-a
_
q _
«a __— ` _ •-•- �- �•- - -.- 3_ m - .., - --ham -..ter.
tj
".t'a, -��'
n ;•�
�' "'ate �� '.e�����.� °a` Vr.�'' -.. =���'
� = �
-
i b a� a��a
w,�}° ��:, n
0 10
Bankfull Dimensions
11 5
x- section area (ft sq )
59
width (ft)
1 9
mean depth (ft)
25
max depth (ft)
94
wetted parameter (ft)
12
hyd radi (ft)
31
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
60 velocity (ft/s)
693 discharge rate (cfs)
096 Froude number
20 30 40 50
Width (ft)
Flood Dimensions
- -- W flood prone area (ft)
- -- entrenchment ratio
39 low bank height (ft)
1 5 low bank height ratio
Flow Resistance
017 D'Arcy- Weisbach fric
- -- resistance factor u /u*
- -- relative roughness
60 70 80
Materials
- -- D50 (mm)
- -- D84 (mm)
75 threshold grain size (mm)
Forces & Power
1 98
channel slope ( %)
1 52
shear stress (lb /sq ft )
089
shear velocity (ft/s)
144
unit strm power (lb /ft/s)

6485
648
6475
647
g646 5
cc 646
X45 5
W
645
6445
644
6435
643
riffle
0 10
Bankfull Dimensions
54
-,?u
49
width (ft)
mean depth (ft)
1 9
0 Al ^s'
65
wetted parameter (ft)
08
hyd radi (ft)
44
Bankfull
Flow
47
r 1
�-- -� Z-
�I�t
�- - -- -- - -- -�
#A .,.�.yf9
;.c s -- - -� -- -- ----- - -- - -�- - =-- � - -4 a ' �
'}� �, =,-r-
F?- �-0�--
y-w�' o -`
.�.ta++. h -r
� ,�xx
�a��'R § x dN`'`7'�'r__
�Q '_`._'r.�, *t i"o "_""_"� mi2-1^ .. � �-�•T i q •-.' -•
�. —...`
�" � if � ° � 11 ° r
� Y- �" °y tf'i� �-
\�.�: -- t .x - e T � ��. 'Fe,� ��i,. �✓AS
� r .e:�
A _ e'���e
_.. q °
0 10
Bankfull Dimensions
54
x- section area (ft sq )
49
width (ft)
1 1
mean depth (ft)
1 9
max depth (ft)
65
wetted parameter (ft)
08
hyd radi (ft)
44
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
46 velocity (ft/s)
252 discharge rate (cfs)
090 Froude number
20 30 40 50
Width (ft)
Flood Dimensions
364 W flood prone area (ft)
75 entrenchment ratio
31 low bank height (ft)
1 6 low bank height ratio
Flow Resistance
U u4u Manning's rougnness
020 D'Arcy- Weisbach fric
- -- resistance factor u /u*
- -- relative roughness
60 70 80
Materials
- -- D50 (mm)
- -- D84 (mm)
51 threshold grain size (mm)
Forces & Power
1 98 channel slope ( %)
1 03 shear stress (lb /sq ft )
073 shear velocity (ft/s)
64 unit strm power (lb /ft/s)

6525
652
651 5
_ 651
950 5
0 650
�49 5
M 649
6485
648
647 5
i
0
10 20
`''a. a d"a ";'s '�s
_ Ir
, 4 +
3--- ,-s..c =;Fro y
,_.-..-
a.. __•- ,-- •-- v--- .- +.- ,-- ,.- ..+.c. �r�-T3
r "'S J,,
Width (ft)
Elevation (ft)
Bankfull
-
-`�
Flood Dimensions
Materials
�
�- -.f.,.
- --� --�
�`
. �
d 9 9 *s� ^' _ _ 0 2 ✓'it" ' S d' r
nt'��
D50 (mm)
�
width (ft)
- --
entrenchment ratio
- --
D84 (mm)
1 2
mean depth (ft)
31
low bank height (ft)
48
threshold grain size (mm)
24
max depth (ft)
1 3
low bank height ratio
87
wetted parimeter (ft)
ea4�." .. z °
m x �' "�'� '� '� ° °_ �'����"�`'� - _ �z,ee rm °a si
� w° ✓e °�
1 �n :r�,� a vµ °� 3+ ;WN �rY<w
3 ..
�ro
_
width -depth ratio
4
^rH` yr
0
10 20
30
40 50
60
70 80
Width (ft)
Elevation (ft)
Bankfull
Dimensions
Flood Dimensions
Materials
72
x- section area (ft sq)
- --
W flood prone area (ft)
- --
D50 (mm)
62
width (ft)
- --
entrenchment ratio
- --
D84 (mm)
1 2
mean depth (ft)
31
low bank height (ft)
48
threshold grain size (mm)
24
max depth (ft)
1 3
low bank height ratio
87
wetted parimeter (ft)
08
hyd radi (ft)
53
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
Flow Resistance
Forces &
Power
45
velocity (ft/s)
0 040
Manning's roughness
1 9
channel slope ( %)
323
discharge rate (cfs)
020
D'Arcy- Weisbach fric
097
shear stress (lb /sq ft )
088
Froude number
- --
resistance factor u /u*
071
shear velocity (ft/s)
- --
relative roughness
62
unit strm power (lb /ft/s)

651
650
649
648
647
2 646
m 645
w 644
643
642
641
riffle
0 10
Bankfull Dimensions
20 30 40
52
g
a
width (ft)
08
mean depth (ft)
14
max depth (ft)
78
wetted parameter (ft)
07
hyd radi (ft)
82
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
°lift�''ntia
T
I, 'A .� fix.
_ ., ,.•^ 4
>'� 4T, -
_
r
"'"' =" - - -- —
---
-tl ---
o�,"^�"^�¢
�Q �
� ��
.
—�--�
r �� �;
z
�- _ r- • � si''
"c` �
- s � r—
_
�
P w e�
> .
j
�
I� r
e � ~ � � s'F ,.i _ d_ �''�
0 10
Bankfull Dimensions
20 30 40
52
x- section area (ft sq )
65
width (ft)
08
mean depth (ft)
14
max depth (ft)
78
wetted parameter (ft)
07
hyd radi (ft)
82
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
27 velocity (ft/s)
141 discharge rate (cfs)
059 Froude number
Flood Dimensions
50 60
Width (ft)
96 W flood prone area (ft)
1 5 entrenchment ratio
33 low bank height (ft)
23 low bank height ratio
Flow Resistance
U u4u manning-s rougnness
021 D'Arcy- Weisbach fric
- -- resistance factor u /u*
- -- relative roughness
70 80 90 100
Materials
- -- D50 (mm)
- -- D84 (mm)
19 threshold grain size (mm)
Forces & Power
093
channel slope ( %)
038
shear stress (lb /sq ft )
044
shear velocity (ft/s)
1 25
unit strm power (lb /ft/s)
r _ f
t

661
660
659
658
0
657
_m
w 656
655
654
riffle
ro
x- section area (ft sq )
63
width (ft)
1 3
mean depth (ft)
18
max depth (ft)
-
wetted parameter (ft)
1 0
hyd radi (ft)
49
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
aC��.e
.T-
1",°
>�,�9 as ��
F � ,. 0.3,
d't x �..d d �5
x~ �'
�
A _i.'
��Y � w�cd
V� 1"_
�� ^t@a
E;•N � L�.� ..�
re �,i" ✓e � -
,�' °,E���� r y � �
k�' -0�v '°+ =2Fzx,�i�.
Y`
�f
� ,
s -- --
� B a��3��y�, s�
P
V
- ..F rd's
re
g °fir � n s
43
� ���°.e °�'c�y' � " .�
l i.
- - - - - -- -g-
- -- - - - - -- - -'
-- - - - -- --
�
NO.-
- -- - - - --
�-
o>P.., ��` B' ��
- - - - - -
�W ^ =.»°'t 7
-- -
_ -
-
`k� iirn^ rC.4 §4 'bK.. to i€
�-
bra+. R+~u p ��z�`,v
L s �
�f&,e
•yn ' � 2' i s
a° 4.-�G eT -3
rt_
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Bankfull Dimensions
81
x- section area (ft sq )
63
width (ft)
1 3
mean depth (ft)
18
max depth (ft)
80
wetted parameter (ft)
1 0
hyd radi (ft)
49
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
44 velocity (ft/s)
356 discharge rate (cfs)
076 Froude number
Width (ft)
Flood Dimensions
397 W flood prone area (ft)
63 entrenchment ratio
27 low bank height (ft)
1 5 low bank height ratio
Flow Resistance
0 040 Manning's roughness
018 D'Arcy- Weisbach frac
- -- resistance factor u /u*
- -- relative roughness
70 80 90
Materials
- -- D50 (mm)
- -- D84 (mm)
42 threshold grain size (mm)
Forces & Power
1 33 channel slope ( %)
085 shear stress (lb /sq ft )
066 shear velocity (ft/s)
47 unit strm power (lb /ft/s)
r
,

622
621 -
620 -
619 -
0 618 -
617 -
w 616 -
615
614
613
riffle
r 3 s #> d A d
.•.ary °w,wr �. w..,�',- t:'#;<,r�*w 2s ry.. r _n^i,
e R3 ZXT
p ...._s`e
a�%'+.#�X,�'7e', b A., i-vr4a
t,'�!L x.,!?` ` ^ ^'`"`*'S_y'r''q�i'�'
Bankfull
Dimensions
x�
�.P{:,,.m§�§'^
�.�.>a
—.
� — i � "_
width (ft)
1 0
i F'rir l r�4sa,rrdin
"._...�
%
we 4 r E5 r�n a
S, S
1 5
max depth (ft)
yJy
01 '�''rt'v '
�-,er ,.� 4' ,`
',` a,' M e �,
hyd radi (ft)
90
xdx .in , M m ie
_ y by s
"n -'F-'
o.
-------_'�3
u
#fir"
,A�
4° �_ <.��`'�� � " - -ire ^'�-
0
20
- --
Elevation (ft)
Bankfull
Dimensions
96
x- section area (ft sq )
93
width (ft)
1 0
mean depth (ft)
1 5
max depth (ft)
100
wetted parimeter (ft)
1 0
hyd radi (ft)
90
width -depth ratio
Bankfull Flow
52 velocity (ft/s)
501 discharge rate (cfs)
094 Froude number
40 60
Width (ft)
Flood Dimensions
- -- W flood prone area (ft)
- -- entrenchment ratio
22 low bank height (ft)
15 low bank height ratio
Flow Resistance
U u4U Manning's roughness
019 D'Arcy- Weisbach fric
- -- resistance factor u /u"
- -- relative roughness
80 100 120 140
Materials
- --
D50 (mm)
- --
D84 (mm)
62
threshold grain size (mm)
Forces &
Power
21
channel slope ( %)
1 26
shear stress (lb /sq ft )
081
shear velocity (ft/s)
71
unit strm power (lb /ft/s)

625
624
623
622
i 621
c 620
0
619
618
U.1 617
616
615
614
...
0
20
40
60
80
100 120
Width (ft)
��:_:
-" �-sx : "s,.`"S"""""�""- ,--� -- ° - -'-_
� `'� � . _- •---- �-�-"
--r-� i . "__"
°-�"
249
,�...,,.,�„.- .,._.�,. �-- ..,y -.r.. �.���.,r�— t- .�— �- W-- >.. ---PU
u � °�;`�"'-r�- �- .- �.^"^"'
W flood prone area (ft)
- --
D50 (mm)
"'�-
width (ft)
o s�
entrenchment ratio
- --
D84 (mm)
20
mean depth (ft)
36
low bank height (ft)
106
threshold grain size (mm)
36
max depth (ft)
1 0
low bank height ratio
151
wetted parameter (ft)
1 6
hyd radi (ft)
— —T
0
20
40
60
80
100 120
Width (ft)
Bankfull Dimensions
Flood Dimensions
Materials
249
x- section area (ft sq)
- --
W flood prone area (ft)
- --
D50 (mm)
128
width (ft)
- --
entrenchment ratio
- --
D84 (mm)
20
mean depth (ft)
36
low bank height (ft)
106
threshold grain size (mm)
36
max depth (ft)
1 0
low bank height ratio
151
wetted parameter (ft)
1 6
hyd radi (ft)
65
width -depth ratio
Bankfull Flow
Flow Resistance
Forces & Power
75
velocity (ft/s)
0 040
Manning's roughness
21
channel slope ( %)
1878
discharge rate (cfs)
016
D'Arcy- Weisbach frac
216
shear stress (lb /sq ft )
1 03
Froude number
- --
resistance factor u /u"
1 06
shear velocity (ft/s)
- --
relative roughness
193
unit strm power (lb /ft/s)

643
642
641
640
-
c
g 638
> 637
w 636
635 -
634
633
'" ° 5 "xa�a�
(�`s _ ° vm`" � ° �'
sr
sosm
-
""
width (ft)
raS aa.
mean depth (ft)
{ �
VIE-,
�int,��--�
max depth (ft)
ww��
wetted parameter (ft)
1 0
hyd radi (ft)
75
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
1�
w3pt ,h °
- --
D84 (mm)
1 6
wLm UY aF r '$T Vag6
]
Ji
threshold grain size (mm)
1 0
A IAaV ` ,ar,u�"
�jw,.F
Forces & Power
Manning's roughness
492
channel slope ( %)
029
D'Arcy- Weisbach fnc
� _ � s� -
�'ry
h' @" i
'#'- c x.a<...��^ i S e i,X' ��r, . �.a aYW.., k
udxn vN 'n i- w% , z°Cp'b �a ''�x ,'� Vim; �� qx{� s•3 9o-y�.+e'"'.s '��i,.x
A_s�+ >tn. ,c �� �`: -.•8
�," >� � ^OF i'y <s b4KU �f'
A
-
�v ra,o d �9 «a
�i��h��e$GM'"M
F�� �v S�x
� R3X lY ��v
relative roughness
23
,
0 10
Bankfull Dimensions
98
x- section area (ft sq )
85
width (ft)
1 1
mean depth (ft)
1 6
max depth (ft)
97
wetted parameter (ft)
1 0
hyd radi (ft)
75
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
66 velocity (ft/s)
647 discharge rate (cfs)
1 17 Froude number
20
30 40
50
60 70
Width (ft)
Flood Dimensions
Materials
242
W flood prone area (ft)
- --
D50 (mm)
28
entrenchment ratio
- --
D84 (mm)
1 6
low bank height (ft)
152
threshold grain size (mm)
1 0
low bank height ratio
Flow Resistance
Forces & Power
0 050
Manning's roughness
492
channel slope ( %)
029
D'Arcy- Weisbach fnc
308
shear stress (lb /sq ft )
- --
resistance factor u /u*
1 26
shear velocity (ft/s)
- --
relative roughness
23
unit strm power (lb /ft/s)

652
651
650
649
c 648
0
m 647
w 646
645
644
643
riffle
0 10
Bankfull Dimensions
74
x- section area (ft sq )
11 1
width (ft)
07
rr°
1 0
max depth (ft)
11 6
wetted parameter (ft)
06
hyd radi (ft)
166
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
-_�L
- - ---
_
7
Si
i(
0 10
Bankfull Dimensions
74
x- section area (ft sq )
11 1
width (ft)
07
mean depth (ft)
1 0
max depth (ft)
11 6
wetted parameter (ft)
06
hyd radi (ft)
166
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
49 velocity (ft/s)
365 discharge rate (cfs)
1 08 Froude number
20 30 40 50
Width (ft)
Flood Dimensions
252 W flood prone area (ft)
23 entrerichment ratio
10 low bank height (ft)
1 0 low bank height ratio
Flow Resistance
u uou manning-s rougnness
034 D'Arcy- Weisbach fnc
- -- resistance factor u /u"
- -- relative roughness
60 70
Materials
80 90
- -- D50 (mm)
-- D84 (mm)
97 threshold grain size (mm)
Forces & Power
492
channel slope ( %)
1 97
shear stress (lb /sq ft )
101
shear velocity (ft/s)
101
unit strm power (lb /ft/s)

656
655
654
653
ZO 652
CO
651
LJ
650
649
648
EM
o
'0 q _�`""�' x",, s_� "° _.r'�'�'c�. ,. a�_. P .,. -.- ��z � —��..» � �°�,,s ;. _.. � �s:a ' �iV • ---�-% - '�.,.�'� -.�`�y F .. >a�
° a
,;. 3"ta, ", "-k-u
§ +"",t' �°,M ° "I» p`iQao j °ct� g # �w '; tl
y° ty-
'---- -- � - 4 =---- - -_T,77-7-7---- = _ '� - I T_ y `" - -�--m a -T - -�i_` R e .-s - -_- v - • -Y -O 4 --- -9�s ',� .h - `(,, -Y-.;-z-.; „ ,a ��6�1 i �`2--' d ar , 1+ %c -t i �'1i �F = �',.�{y'� _ a day'$ Y
°
�
,ry
B”? '
�A0° a<
F -3
0 20 40 60
Width (ft)
Bankfull Dimensions
112
x- section area (ft sq )
94
width (ft)
1 2
mean depth (ft)
1 6
max depth (ft)
106
wetted parameter (ft)
1 1
hyd radi (ft)
80
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
56 velocity (ft/s)
625 discharge rate (cfs)
096 Froude number
Flood Dimensions
41 2 W flood prone area (ft)
44 entrenchment ratio
22 low bank height (ft)
14 low bank height ratio
Flow Resistance
0 040 Manning's roughness
018 D'Arcy- Weisbach frac
- -- resistance factor u /u"
- -- relative roughness
80 100
Materials
- -- D50 (mm)
- -- D84 (mm)
68 threshold grain size (mm)
Forces & Power
21 channel slope ( %)
1 38 shear stress (lb /sq ft )
084 shear velocity (ft/s)
87 unit strm power (lb /ft/s)

663
662
661
660
0
659
w 658
657
656 -
...
v
-. Pil
VI
° e �f o
�
-�_ _ -- _—
-�2�—
G s
-- a—
�_..._��
.., -�.. _ _ _ kr.— .r - -_.. - .- T�- a++.--- ...-'� - "- -•._•- `-- _- _• -- - ^.�� —� _--`_ _- �
max depth (ft)
72
wetted parameter (ft)
1 9
hyd radi (ft)
W ,
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
076
shear velocity (ft/s)
85
unit strm power (lb /ft/s)
0
10
Bankfull Dimensions
134
x- section area (ft sq )
52
width (ft)
26
mean depth (ft)
29
max depth (ft)
72
wetted parameter (ft)
1 9
hyd radi (ft)
20
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
55 velocity (ft/s)
739 discharge rate (cfs)
071 Froude number
20 30
Width (ft)
Flood Dimensions
-- W flood prone area (ft)
- -- entrenchment ratio
29 low bank height (ft)
1 0 low bank height ratio
Flow Resistance
U U4U manning's roughness
015 D'Arcy- Weisbach fric
- -- resistance factor u /u*
-- relative roughness
40 50
60 70
Materials
--
D50 (mm)
--
D84 (mm)
55
threshold grain size (mm)
Forces &
Power
095
channel slope ( %)
1 11
shear stress (lb /sq ft )
076
shear velocity (ft/s)
85
unit strm power (lb /ft/s)

666
664
662
660
658
w 656
654
652
...
0 20 40 60 80 100
Width (ft)
Bankfull Dimensions
60
x- section area (ft sq )
65
width (ft)
09
mean depth (ft)
1 1
�.�,<s
82
'fi
07
b "y ea
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
a k
' �� C k �^ � � � �.1,"
,�^�- -•- .r£ %_.. } s �'+'�`�`'�° v
n o e�y`$� s R�
NSif" „'�",`$ ck
a h 6
- .- "'.- "'""'
1"',
° • a � r .. (" ; ^i+ > Y � n` B�° a i
rAy
`-2„' -0� w'._ ISM ^`�1! iS: A�°�+'4''7^ . 3 AF��1' W "- a�: &._�"� '
n4 �> n$ �u � b w a �'sv u ?i /
ovb �' rt,
�i. Ck
N° .��#�'krs':
� i� --. • piV "DA rt'� ,A +� 8s
."'. _v-
---------
mow °a `_' ------
-- -- J— - ' ea _ _- x _ -_ --
$
a'->?
$�`
0 20 40 60 80 100
Width (ft)
Bankfull Dimensions
60
x- section area (ft sq )
65
width (ft)
09
mean depth (ft)
1 1
max depth (ft)
82
wetted parameter (ft)
07
hyd radi (ft)
69
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
27 velocity (ft/s)
160 discharge rate (cfs)
055 Froude number
Flood Dimensions
241 W flood prone area (ft)
37 entrenchment ratio
25 low bank height (ft)
23 low bank height ratio
Flow Resistance
021 D'Arcy- Weisbach fric
- -- resistance factor u /u"
- -- relative roughness
120 140
Materials
160 180
- -- D50 (mm)
- -- D84 (mm)
17 threshold grain size (mm)
Forces & Power
077
channel slope ( %)
035
shear stress (lb /sq ft )
043
shear velocity (ft/s)
1 19
unit strm power (lb /ft/s)

641.5
641
640.5
640
X639.5
0
.-�6 639
°638.5
638
637.5
637
0 10
Elevation (ft)
Bankfull Dimensions
14.5
x- section area (ft.sq.)
9.4
width (ft)
1.5
mean depth (ft)
2.5
max depth (ft)
11.8
wetted parimeter (ft)
1.2
hyd radi (ft)
6.1
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
2.7 velocity (ft/s)
38.7 discharge rate (cfs)
0.42 Froude number
20 30 40
Width (ft)
Flood Dimensions
- -- W flood prone area (ft)
- -- entrenchment ratio
3.1 low bank height (ft)
1.3 low bank height ratio
Flow Resistance
u.u4u Manning-s rougnness
0.17 D'Arcy- Weisbach fric.
- -- resistance factor u /u*
- -- relative roughness
50 60
Materials
- -- D50 (mm)
- -- D84 (mm)
15 threshold grain size (mm):
Forces & Power
0.39 channel slope ( %)
0.30 shear stress (lb /sq.ft.)
0.39 shear velocity (ft/s)
1 unit strm power (lb /ft/s)
70

624
623
622
_ 621
620
0 619
m 618
W 617
616
615
614
riffle
0 10
Bankfull Dimensions
20 30 40 50 60
Width (ft)
11 5
XW
103
width (ft)
1 1
mean depth (ft)
14
max depth (ft)
°wl�affi
wetted parameter (ft)
A °;
U Y
93
=
Bankfull
Flow
J
0 10
Bankfull Dimensions
20 30 40 50 60
Width (ft)
11 5
x- section area (ft sq )
103
width (ft)
1 1
mean depth (ft)
14
max depth (ft)
114
wetted parameter (ft)
1 0
hyd radi (ft)
93
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
39 velocity (ft/s)
448 discharge rate (cfs)
069 Froude number
Flood Dimensions
149 W flood prone area (ft)
14 entrenchment ratio
32 low bank height (ft)
22 low bank height ratio
Flow Resistance
u u4u manning-s rougnness
019 D'Arcy- Weisbach fnc
- -- resistance factor u /u*
- -- relative roughness
70 80 90
Materials
- -- D50 (mm)
- -- D84 (mm)
34 threshold grain size (mm)
Forces & Power
1 1 channel slope ( %)
069 shear stress (lb /sq ft )
060 shear velocity (ft/s)
3 unit strm power (lb /ft/s)

626
624
622
C 620
0
618
w 616
614
612
pool
0 10
Bankfull Dimensions
20 30 40 50
Width (ft)
83
x- section area (ft sq )
7 1
4S ! '
` �,.
�_ � o'_'!
1 6
max depth (ft)
V
�
�.F°- - t }
10
I„
£rfG"'
- •,-•— '_
__ - — '_' t$�n.-
_ "— - _ '�_` j _ - _ _ -• i- _ _
_ - _ - Y--... _
..-
—e
- �1- &Z � s _' F—Y
-
---- - - - - -- - -- I -------------- - - -r
-- ---- - - - - -- - ------------ - - - - --
-------------- 7 -7------------777--------
0 10
Bankfull Dimensions
20 30 40 50
Width (ft)
83
x- section area (ft sq )
7 1
width (ft)
12
mean depth (ft)
1 6
max depth (ft)
83
wetted parimeter (ft)
10
hyd radi (ft)
60
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
Flood Dimensions
142 W flood prone area (ft)
20 entrenchment ratio
40 low bank height (ft)
25 low bank height ratio
Flow Resistance
39 velocity (ft/s) 0 040 Manning's roughness
324 discharge rate (cfs) 019 D'Arcy- Weisbach fric
069 Froude number - -- resistance factor u /u*
- -- relative roughness
60 70
Materials
80 90
- -- D5O (mm)
- -- D84 (mm)
34 threshold grain size (mm)
Forces & Power
1 1 channel slope ( %)
068 shear stress (lb /sq ft )
059 shear velocity (ft/s)
31 unit strm power (lb /ft/s)

615
614
613
612
611
c
g 610
m
'm 609
U' 608
607
606
605
0 10 20
Bankfull Dimensions
263
x- section area (ft sq )
180
width (ft)
1 5
mean depth (ft)
25
max depth (ft)
197
wetted parameter (ft)
1 3
hyd radi (ft)
124
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
52 velocity (ft/s)
1356 discharge rate (cfs)
079 Froude number
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Width (ft)
Flood Dimensions Materials
205 W flood prone area (ft) - -- D50 (mm)
1 1 entrenchment ratio - -- D84 (mm)
47 low bank height (ft) 53 threshold grain size (mm)
1 9 low bank height ratio
Flow Resistance
0 040 Manning's roughness
017 D'Arcy- Weisbach fric
- -- resistance factor u /u*
- -- relative roughness
Forces & Power
1 3 channel slope ( %)
1 09 shear stress (lb /sq ft )
075 shear velocity (ft/s)
61 unit strm power (lb /ft/s)

616
614
612
610
0
608
w 606
604
602
0 20
Bankfull Dimensions
60
x- section area (ft sq )
76
width (ft)
08
mean depth (ft)
14
max depth (ft)
93
wetted parameter (ft)
06
hyd radi (ft)
97
width -depth ratio
Bankfull
Flow
41 velocity (ft/s)
247 discharge rate (cfs)
091 Froude number
pool
! i -- -- - - - - -- - -- ----- --- -I--- ---- - - ---------------
F
40 60 80
Width (ft)
Flood Dimensions
160 W flood prone area (ft)
21 entrenchment ratio
33 low bank height (ft)
23 low bank height ratio
Flow Resistance
021 D'Arcy- Weisbach fric
- -- resistance factor u /u`
- -- relative roughness
100 120
140 160
Materials
- --
D50 (mm)
- --
D84 (mm)
44
threshold grain size (mm)
l
Forces &
Power
22
channel slope ( %)
089
shear stress (lb /sq ft )
068
shear velocity (ft/s)
44
unit strm power (lb /ft/s)

UT1- Reach 1
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
100
Silt/Clay
90
■
"
Sand
ble
I
r
B
d
80
;
'%0
I
e
Al
60
�
/
1
or
E 50
V
'
c
W 40
I
a
30
;
Ae
30
10
i
I
�l
0.01 i�. l 1 10 1 i N:1 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
--0 Reach Summary - .a -- R'rffie Summary Pool Summary

UT1- Reach 2
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
loo
Si
t/Clay
Sand
90
J
T11—
'
obble
I
r
B
d
o
so
v --
'
-o
AL
6(1
E 50
–
-
U
/
40
v
a
30
i
lU
0
C�.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 1000)
Particle Class Size (mm)
--*— Reach Summary Riffle Summary --r • Pool Summary

UT1- Reach 3
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
100
San
90
Si
t/C
y
obbl
I
r
Bc
d
oc
80
• -,�
••
~i
70
a
60
0
Or
B 50
U
..
-
/
-of'
Ir
_
W -40
V
L
a
30
20
lip
AK
i�
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 low 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
—�— Reach Summary - -- Riffle Summary Pool Summary

UT1- Reach 4
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
100
Silt/Clay
Sand
90
�-
♦
obble
I
r
BEdroci
S0
..0
i
e
> 60
M
50
U
/ '
40
v
a
30
J-o
20
10
i
0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 IWO 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
--� —Reach Summary Riffle Summary —♦ Pool Summary

UT1- Reach 5
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
100
Si
It/Clay
Sa
90
'
°
Be
do
E c
I
er
80
A
60
>
m
�
50
E
U
•
40
v
30
■
?0
-
-
- it - ---
0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
a Reach Summary Riffle Summary —► Pool Summary

UT1A - Reach 1
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
100
Si
t/C
y
a
_
90
;mvr 1
_
obble
I
r
Bc
d
so
-0
e
J!t
6 0
m
E 50
U
40
U
CL
3n
00,
Ae
0
0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
— 0 Reach Summary Riffle Summary —♦ • Pool Summary

UTU- Reach 2
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
100
SiIt/Clay
Sand
90
o ble
Bedroc
I
r
80
%0
60
m
�
50
�
U
C 40
U
L
a
30
20
0
0.01 0.1 1 to 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
—9 Reach Summary - --W -- Riffle Summary ---A • Pool Summary

UT1A - Reach 3
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
loo
Si
t/Clay
Sand
90
Fel
'bble
r
B
d
I
r
80
"U
0
o
;
v GU
T
E 50
U
c
U 40
U
41
lU
ilt
�-w ------
0.01 U.1 1 10 IWO 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
—0 Reach Summary – - Riffle Summary Pool Summary

UT1A - Reach 4
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
100
Si
It/Clay
Sand
90
7bble
Be
droc
Etlide
r
80
"0
60
S0
E
U
40
U
a�
CL
30
—
0
--
A100'
�.- - --- --
lii
0
0.01 0.1 1 to 1 j 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
—0 — Reach Summary -Riffle Summary Pool Summary

UT2
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
100
Si
t/C
py
Eand
90
71e
♦ SIC
I
r
B
d
su
-0
0
E 50
U
-40
a
30
OOM
r
?0
10
v
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 IWO 1110011
Particle Class Size (mm)
-- Reach Summary Riffle Summary —A • Pool Summary

UT1 -R1- Riffle 100 Count
Pavement- Subpavement Particle Distribution
100
-
Sand
Silt/Clay
•!
-
90
Gravel
Cobble
Boulder
Bedrock
S0
i
60
a,
50
9
-
U
M
40
v
1.
6r
Ow
so
?0
10
0.01 0.1 1 10 10O IOM 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
- - -m - -- Pavement Summary —r • Subpavement Summary

UT1 -R4 - XS27 Riffle 100 Count
Pavement- Subpavement Particle Distribution
loo
TTT
Silt /Clay
Sand
90
Gravel
Cobble
Boulder
Bedrock
30
i
16 1
v
60
U
5i)
-
/
r
v
40
FJ+
a
�
2,,
er
10
"
o
0,01
U.1 1 10 1(K) 1000 IWY.)
Particle Class Size (nim)
Pavement Summary —,► Subpavement Summary

UT1 -R5 - XS3 Riffle 100 Count
Pavement- Subpavement Particle Distribution
100
s
Sand.
Silt /Clay
Gravel
Cobble
Boulder
Bedrock
80
%0
r
0
e
60
SO
V
�
ao, 40
U
F.
a
30
?0
1 fl
0
-
- ■ - - --
-�
- -
-
-
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (nun)
-- -a -- - Pavement Summary --r • Subpavement Summary

UT1A -R1 - Riffle 100 Count
Pavement- Subpavement Particle Distribution
100
Silt/Clay
90
Sand
Gravel
Cobble
Boulder
Bedrock
80
-0
If
f
0
'
v 60
.�
r
50
V
�
C
v 40
U
F.
v
a
'
'
30
t
lip
ji
0
(1.01 0.1 1 10 1fK> 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
-- E-- - Pavement Summary —r • Subpavement Summary

UT1A -R4 - XS19 Riffle 100 Count
Pavement- Subpavement Particle Distribution
100
Sand
90
Silt /Clay
Gravel
Cobble
Boulder
Bedrock
80
e
•
a 60
f; 50
Of
U
40
OF
30
?0
10
0 -
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
-- t -- Pavement Summary —* • Subpavement Summary

FROEHLING & ROBERTSON
ISIEVE ANALYSIS
Project: Agony Acres
Client: Wildlands Engineering
Sample 01
UT1A -R1 Riffle
Weight
Retained
Percent
Retained
Percent
Passing
10" - 256 mm
0
0.0
100.0
5" - 128mm
0
0.0
100.0
2.5" - 64mm
0
0.0
100.0
1.5" - 38.1 mm
0
0.0
100.0
5/8" - 15 mm
257.64
11.3
88.7
3/8" - 9 mm
556.69
24.4
75.6
#5 -4 mm
970.77
42.5
57.5
#10 - 2 mm
1256.33
55.0
45.0
Sample 02
UT1A -R4 XS19 Riffle
Weight
Retained
Percent
Retained
Percent
Passing
10" - 256 mm
0
0.0
100.0
5" - 128mm
0
0.0
100.0
2.5" - 64mm
0
0.0
100.0
1.5" - 38.1 mm
219.80
9.1
90.9
5/8" - 15 mm
864.27
35.7
64.3
3/8" - 9 mm
1111.71
45.9
54.1
#5 - 4 mm
1393.31
57.5
42.5
#10 - 2 mm
1695.85
70.0
30.0
Project No: 66R -0019
Date: 4/17/2013
Sample 01
UT1A -R1 Riffle
Pan #
9
Wet soil + tare (G)
2701.39
Dry soil + tare
2427.72
Wt. of Water
273.67
Tare wt.
142.44
Dry wt. of Soil
2285.28
Moisture %
12.0
Largest Particle (1) mm
27.85
Largest Particle (2) mm
25.89
Largest Particle (1) Wt. Grams
28.84
Largest Particle (2) Wt. Grams
22.00
Sample 02
UT1A -R4 XS19 Riffle
Pan #
22 -G
Wet soil + tare (G)
2935.59
Dry soil + tare
2669.52
Wt. of Water
266.07
Tare wt.
247.31
Dry wt. of Soil
2422.21
Moisture %
11.0
Largest Particle (1) mm
60.65
Largest Particle (2) mm
63.08
Largest Particle (1) Wt. Grams
148.08
Largest Particle (2) Wt. Grams
71.75
Performed By: Dave Jenks Date: 4/22/2013

FROEHLING & ROBERTSON
SIEVE ANALYSIS
Project: Agony Acres
Client: Wildlands Engineering
Sample 03
UT1 -R1 Riffle
Weight
Retained
Percent
Retained
Percent
Passing
10" - 256 mm
0
0.0
100.0
5" - 128mm
0
0.0
100.0
2.5" - 64mm
0
0.0
100.0
1.5" - 38.1 mm
348.76
18.2
81.8
5/8" - 15 mm
748.96
39.1
60.9
3/8" - 9 mm
875.75
45.7
54.3
#5 - 4 mm
1085.15
56.6
43.4
#10 - 2 mm
1385.47
72.3
27.7
Sample 04
UT1 -R4 XS27 Riffle
Weight
Retained
Percent
Retained
Percent
Passing
10" - 256 mm
0
0.0
100.0
5" - 128mm
0
0.0
100.0
2.5" - 64mm
0
0.0
100.0
1.5" - 38.1 mm
74.90
2.8
97.2
5/8" - 15 mm
1238.34
46.7
53.3
3/8" - 9 mm
1660.34
62.6
37.4
#5 ­4 mm
1940.95
73.2
26.8
#10 - 2 mm
2185.20
82.4
17.6
Project No: 66R -0019
Date: 4/17/2013
Sample 03
UT1 -R1 Riffle
Pan #
24 -0
Wet soil + tare (G)
2360.74
Dry soil + tare
2117.40
Wt. of Water
243.34
Tare wt.
199.93
Dry wt. of Soil
1917.47
Moisture %
12.7
Largest Particle (1) mm
57 .25
Largest Particle (2) mm
54.15
Largest Particle (1) Wt. Grams
106.56
Largest Particle (2) Wt. Grams
102.00
Sample 04
UT1 -R4 XS27 Riffle
Pan #
RB -5
Wet soil + tare (G)
3178.10
Dry soil + tare
2980.92
Wt. of Water
197.18
Tare wt.
328.90
Dry wt. of Soil
2652.02
Moisture %
7.4
Largest Particle (1) mm
45.99
Largest Particle (2) mm
40.38
Largest Particle (1) Wt. Grams
74.95
Largest Particle (2) Wt. Grams
129.27
Performed By: Dave Jenks Date: 4/22/2013

FROEHLING & ROBERTSON
SIEVE ANALYSIS
Project: Agony Acres
Client: Wildlands Engineering
Sample 05=
UT1 -R5 XS3 Riffle
Weight
Retained
Percent
Retained
Percent
Passing
10" - 256 mm
0
0.0
100.0
5" - 128mm
0
0.0
100.0
2.5" - 64mm
0
0.0
100.0
1.5" - 38.1 mm
497.80
16.0
84.0
5/8" - 15 mm
1256.69
40.5
59.5
3/8" - 9 mm
1732.06
55.8
44.2
#5 - 4 mm
2109.86
j 68.0
j 32.0
#10 - 2 mm
2424.64
1 78.2
1 21.8
Project No: 66R -0019
Date: 4/17/2013
Sample 05
UT1 -R5 XS3 Riffle
Weight
Retained
Percent
Retained
Percent
Passing
10" - 256 mm
Dry soil + tare
3373.80
Wt. of Water
5" - 128mm
Tare wt.
271.78
Dry wt. of Soil
2.5" - 64mm
Moisture %
9.5
1.5" -38.1 mm
5/8" - 15 mm
3/8" - 9 mm
#5 -4 mm
#10 -2 mm
Project No: 66R -0019
Date: 4/17/2013
Sample 05
UT1 -R5 XS3 Riffle
Pan #
Y -8
Wet soil + tare (G)
3668.70
Dry soil + tare
3373.80
Wt. of Water
294.90
Tare wt.
271.78
Dry wt. of Soil
3102.02
Moisture %
9.5
Largest Particle (1) mm
72.84
Largest Particle (2) mm
60.66
Largest Particle (1) Wt. Grams
270.97
Largest Particle (2) Wt. Grams
121.72
Pan #
Wet soil + tare (G)
Dry soil + tare
Wt. of Water
Tare wt.
Dry wt. of Soil
Moisture %
Largest Particle (1) mm
Largest Particle (2) mm
Largest Particle (1) Wt. Grams
Largest Particle (2) Wt. Grams
Performed By: Dave Jenks Date: 4/22/2013

m
a
a
a
a
m
0
q
N
Z
a
SINGE
FROEHLING & R13BERTS01IN119 INC.
Project No: 66R -0019
Client: Wildlands Engineering
Project: Agony Acres
City /State: N.A.
GRAIN SIZE
DISTRIBUTION
U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS I HYDROMETER
6 4 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 1/23/8 3 4 6 810 1416 20 30 40 50 60 100 140 200
100
95
90
85
80
75
s 70
ao
65
60
L
Q/
LL 55
Y
v
50
v
45
vu
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
Grain Size (mm)
COBBLES
GRAVEL
SAND
SILT OR CLAY
coarse
fine
coarse
medium
fine
Sample No. Depth
Location
Cc
Cu
•
01 at 0.0
UT1A -R1 Riffle
X
02 at 0.0
UT1A- R4 -XS19 Riffle
A
03 at 0.0
UT1 -R1 Riffle
*
04 at 0.0
UT1 -114 XS27 Riffle
O
05 at 0.0
UT1 -RS
XS3 Riffle
Sample No. Depth
D100
D60
D30
D10
%Gravel
%Sand
%Silt
%Cie..
•
01 at 0.0
38.1
4.469
38.6
*
02 at 0.0
64
12.086
2.001
55.1
A
03 at 0.0
64
13.949
2.21
S4.3
1*1
04 at 0.0
64
17.293
5.107
70.9
J(F)J
0S at 0.0
64
15.295
3.493
65.4

Appendix 7: Floodplain Checklist and Recorded Easements

Ovs te
i s l � I' ,� 1, 0 �
EEP Floodplain Requirements Checklist
This form was developed by the National Flood Insuiance program, NC Floodplain
Mapping program and Ecosystem Enhancement Program to be filled for all EEP projects
The form is intended to summarize the floodplain requirements during the design phase
of the projects. The form should be submitted to the Local Floodplain Administrator
with three copies submitted to NFIP (attn State NFIP Engineer), NC Floodplain Mapping
Unit (attn State NFIP Coordinator) and NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program.
Project Location
Name of project.
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Name if stream or feature
Unnamed tributaries to Reedy Fork
County:
Guilford County, NC
Name of river basin
Cape Fear River Basin
Is project urban or rural?
Rural
Name of Jurisdictional
municipal ity /county.
Guilford County
DFIRM panel number for
entire site
FIRM Panels 8838 and 8848
Community No: 370111
Map Numbeis: 3710883800) and 3710884800K
Effective Map Date- June 18, 2007
Consultant name
Wildlands Engineering, Inc
Nicole Macaluso, PE, CFM
Phone number:
(919) 851 -9986
Address:
5605 Chapel Hill Road, Suite 122
Raleigh, NC 27607
Appendix 7 floodplain Checklist Page I of 3

Design Information
Piovide a general description of project (one paragraph). Include project limits on a
reference orthophotograph at a scale of 1" = 500"
Wildlands Engineering as designing a stream restoration project to provide stream
mitigation units (SMUs),for the NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program No work is
proposed on Reedy Fork, the FEMA- mapped stream, however, grading is proposed
along three unnamed tributaries located within the mapped Reedy Forkfloodplaan No
studies or modeling exist for any of the project streams
Reach
Length
Priority
UTI -Reach 4
669
One and Two (Enhancement)
UTI -Reach 5
1,420
One (Restoration)
UTIA -Reach 4
461
One (Restoration)
UT2
1,028
One (Restoration)
Floodplai>n Information
Is project located in a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA)?
•; Yes; No
*Grading will take lace in the Reedy Fork SFHA
If project is located in a SFHA, check how it was determined:
r Redelineation
F Detailed Study
l= Limited Detail Study
* Approximate Study
r Don't know
List flood zone designation Zone AE and Zone X
Check if applies.
W AE Zone
4 ; Floodway
,(7 Non - Encroachment
None
f^ A Zone
,cV Local Setbacks Required
No Local Setbacks Required
If local setbacks aie iequired, list how many feet.
Appendix 7_Floodplain Checklist Page 2 of 3

Does proposed channel boundary encroach outside floodway /non-
encroachment /setbacks?
Yes ; No
Land Acquisition (Check)
• State owned (fee simple)
• Conservation easment (Design Bid Build)
Fv Conservation Easement (Full Delivery Project)
Note: if the project property is state - owned, then all requirements should be addressed to
the Department of Administration, State Construction Office (attn: Herbert Neily,
(919) 807 -4101)
Is community /county participating in the NFIP program?
Yes :: No
Note: if community is not participating, then all requirements should be addressed to
NFIP attn: State NFIP Engineer, (919 ) 715 -8000)
Name of Local Floodplain Administrator: Frank Park, PE
Phone Number: (336) 641 -3753
Floodplain Requirements
This section to be filled by designer /applicant following verification with the LFPA
No Action
F No Rise
F Letter of Map Revision
r Conditional Letter of Map Revision
F Other Requirements
List other requirements:
Comments:
Name: N Cc)\R_ MO•CoJ uGg Cc *\ Signatui�
Title: VJa. -fk Date: 1 U /ZLf / 13
tr\ni (lei
Appendix 7_Floodplain Checklist Page 3 of 3

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
GUILFORD COUNTY
SPO File Number 41- AAABN; EEP # 95716
Prepared by: Office of the Attorney General
Property Control Section
Return to. NC Department of Administration
State Property Office
1321 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1321
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
PROVIDED PURSUANT TO
FULL DELIVERY
NIITIGATION CONTRACT
stamps: $566.00
P/U Ct'ERFIELD
THIS CONSERVATION EASEMENT DEED, made this 12th day of
December , 20 13 by Ellen Teague Miller (unmarried) ( "Grantor "), whose mailing
address is 7165 Sockwell Road, Elon, NC 27244 , to the State of North Carolina, ( "Grantee "),
whose mailing address is State of North Carolina, Department of Administration, State Property
Office, 1321 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699 -1321. The designations of Grantor and
Grantee as used herein shall include said parties, their heirs, successors, and assigns, and shall
include singular, plural, masculine, feminine, or neuter as required by context.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143 -214.8 et sea , the State
of North Carolina has established the Ecosystem Enhancement Program (formerly known as the
Wetlands Restoration Program) within the Department of Environment and Natural Resources
for the purposes of acquiring, maintaining, restoring, enhancing, creating and preserving wetland
and riparian resources that contribute to the protection and improvement of water quality, flood
prevention, fisheries, aquatic habitat, wildlife habitat, and recreational opportunities; and
WHEREAS, this Conservation Easement from Grantor to Grantee has been negotiated,
arranged and provided for as a condition of a full delivery contract between Wildlands
Engineering, Inc, 1430 S Mint Street Charlotte, NC 28203 and the North Carolina Department
of Environment and Natural Resources, to provide stream, wetland and/or buffer mitigation
pursuant to the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Purchase and
Services Contract Number 4949
PREPARED BY C,OLTRmF & oVFRFIELD, PU-C
lillllilllll ill11111�11111111111111i1�
2013080515
GUILFORD CO, NC FEE $26 00
STATE OF NC REAL ESTATE EXTX
$566.00
PRESENTEDSRECORDIW
12 -12 -2013 04 42 42 PM
JEFF L THIGPEN
REGISTER OF DEEDS
BY TAMMYC SMITH
DEPUTY GB
B K: R 7558
PG: 927 -940
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
GUILFORD COUNTY
SPO File Number 41- AAABN; EEP # 95716
Prepared by: Office of the Attorney General
Property Control Section
Return to. NC Department of Administration
State Property Office
1321 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1321
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
PROVIDED PURSUANT TO
FULL DELIVERY
NIITIGATION CONTRACT
stamps: $566.00
P/U Ct'ERFIELD
THIS CONSERVATION EASEMENT DEED, made this 12th day of
December , 20 13 by Ellen Teague Miller (unmarried) ( "Grantor "), whose mailing
address is 7165 Sockwell Road, Elon, NC 27244 , to the State of North Carolina, ( "Grantee "),
whose mailing address is State of North Carolina, Department of Administration, State Property
Office, 1321 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699 -1321. The designations of Grantor and
Grantee as used herein shall include said parties, their heirs, successors, and assigns, and shall
include singular, plural, masculine, feminine, or neuter as required by context.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143 -214.8 et sea , the State
of North Carolina has established the Ecosystem Enhancement Program (formerly known as the
Wetlands Restoration Program) within the Department of Environment and Natural Resources
for the purposes of acquiring, maintaining, restoring, enhancing, creating and preserving wetland
and riparian resources that contribute to the protection and improvement of water quality, flood
prevention, fisheries, aquatic habitat, wildlife habitat, and recreational opportunities; and
WHEREAS, this Conservation Easement from Grantor to Grantee has been negotiated,
arranged and provided for as a condition of a full delivery contract between Wildlands
Engineering, Inc, 1430 S Mint Street Charlotte, NC 28203 and the North Carolina Department
of Environment and Natural Resources, to provide stream, wetland and/or buffer mitigation
pursuant to the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Purchase and
Services Contract Number 4949
PREPARED BY C,OLTRmF & oVFRFIELD, PU-C

WHEREAS, The State of North Carolina is qualified to be the Grantee of a Conservation
Easement pursuant to N.C. Gen Stat. § 121 -35; and
WHEREAS, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the North Carolina
Department of Transportation and the United States Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington
District entered into a Memorandum of Agreement, (MOA) duly executed by all parties in
Greensboro, NC on July 22, 2003, which recognizes that the Ecosystem Enhancement Program
is to provide for compensatory mitigation by effective protection of the land, water and natural
resources of the State by restoring, enhancing and preserving ecosystem functions, and
WHEREAS, the acceptance of this instrument for and on behalf of the State of North
Carolina was granted to the Department of Administration by resolution as approved by the
Governor and Council of State adopted at a meeting held in the City of Raleigh, North Carolina,
on the 8'h day of February 2000; and
WHEREAS, the Ecosystem Enhancement Program in the Department of Environment
and Natural Resources, which has been delegated the authority authorized by the Governor and
Council of State to the Department of Administration, has approved acceptance of this
instrument; and
WHEREAS, Grantor owns in fee simple certain real property situated, lying, and being
in Washington Township, Guilford County, North Carolina (the "Property "), and being more
particularly described as those certain parcels of land containing approximately 14.59 acres and
being conveyed to the Grantor by deed as recorded in Deed Book 7306 at Page 450 and 51.91
acres and being conveyed to the Grantor by deed as recorded in Deed Book 7115 at Page 1943
of the Guilford County Registry, North Carolina; and further identified as PIN numbers 8838 -93-
5500 and 8838 -94 -7969, and
WHEREAS, Grantor is willing to grant a Conservation Easement over the herein
described areas of the Property, thereby restricting and limiting the use of the included areas of
the Property to the terms and conditions and purposes hereinafter set forth, and Grantee is willing
to accept such Conservation Easement. This Conservation Easement shall be for the protection
and benefit of Reedy Fork
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, terms, conditions, and
restrictions hereinafter set forth, Grantor unconditionally and irrevocably hereby grants and
conveys unto Grantee, its successors and assigns, forever and in perpetuity, a Conservation
Easement along with a general Right of Access.
The Easement Area consists of the following:
Easement Areas F through M containing a total of 15.72 acres as shown on the plats of survey
entitled "Final Plat, Conservation Easement for the State of North Carolina Ecosystem
Enhancement Program, Project Name- Agony Acres Mitigation Project, SPO File No.
2

41- AAABN, EEP Site No. 95716 dated 3/24/13- 10/08/2013 by Phillip B. Kee, PLS Number NC-
4347 and recorded in the Guilford County, North Carolina Register of Deeds at Plat Book 185
Page 118.
See attached "Exhibit A ", Legal Description of area of the Property hereinafter referred to as the
"Easement Area"
The purposes of this Conservation Easement are to maintain, restore, enhance, construct,
create and preserve wetland and/or riparian resources in the Easement Area that contribute to the
protection and improvement of water quality, flood prevention, fisheries, aquatic habitat, wildlife
habitat, and recreational opportunities; to maintain permanently the Easement Area in its natural
condition, consistent with these purposes; and to prevent any use of the Easement Area that will
significantly impair or interfere with these purposes. To achieve these purposes, the following
conditions and restrictions are set forth:
I. DURATION OF EASEMENT
Pursuant to law, including the above referenced statutes, this Conservation Easement and
Right of Access shall be perpetual and it shall run with, and be a continuing restriction upon the
use of, the Property, and it shall be enforceable by the Grantee against the Grantor and against
Grantor's heirs, successors and assigns, personal representatives, agents, lessees, and licensees
H. GRANTOR RESERVED USES AND RESTRICTED ACTIVITES
The Easement Area shall be restricted from any development or usage that would impair
or interfere with the purposes of this Conservation Easement. Unless expressly reserved as a
compatible use herein, any activity in, or use of, the Easement Area by the Grantor is prohibited
as inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation Easement. Any rights not expressly
reserved hereunder by the Grantor have been acquired by the Grantee Any rights not expressly
reserved hereunder by the Grantor, including the rights to all mitigation credits, including, but
not limited to, stream, wetland, and riparian buffer mitigation units, derived from each site within
the area of the Conservation Easement, are conveyed to and belong to the Grantee. Without
limiting the generality of the foregoing, the followmg specific uses are prohibited, restricted, or
reserved as indicated-
A. Recreational Uses. Grantor expressly reserves the right to undeveloped recreational
uses, including hiking, bird watching, hunting and fishing, and access to the Easement Area for
the purposes thereof.
B. Motorized Vehicle Use. Motorized vehicle use in the Easement Area is prohibited.
C. Educational Uses. The Grantor reserves the right to engage in and permit others to
engage in educational uses in the Easement Area not inconsistent with this Conservation
Easement, and the right of access to the Easement Area for such purposes including organized
3

educational activities such as site visits and observations Educational uses of the property shall
not alter vegetation, hydrology or topography of the site.
D. Vegetative Cutting. Except as related to the removal of non - native plants, diseased or
damaged trees, or vegetation that destabilizes or renders unsafe the Easement Area to persons or
natural habitat, all cutting, removal, mowing, harming, or destruction of any trees and vegetation
in the Easement Area is prohibited.
E. Industrial, Residential and Commercial Uses. All industrial, residential and
commercial uses are prohibited in the Easement Area.
F. Agricultural Use. All agricultural uses are prohibited within the Easement Area
including any use for cropland, waste lagoons, or pastureland.
G. New Construction. There shall be no building, facility, mobile home, antenna, utility
pole, tower, or other structure constructed or placed in the Easement Area.
H. Roads and Trails. There shall be no construction of roads, trails, walkways, or paving
in the Easement Area
I. Signs. No signs shall be permitted in the Easement Area except interpretive signs
describing restoration activities and the conservation values of the Easement Area, signs
identifying the owner of the Property and the holder of the Conservation Easement, signs giving
directions, or signs prescribing rules and regulations for the use of the Easement Area may be
allowed.
J. Dumping or Storing. Dumping or storage of soil, trash, ashes, garbage, waste,
abandoned vehicles, appliances, machinery, or any other material in the Easement Area is
prohibited.
K. Grading, Mineral Use, Excavation, Dredging. There shall be no grading, filling,
excavation, dredging, mining, dnllmg; removal of topsoil, sand, gravel, rock, peat, minerals, or
other materials.
L. Water Quality and Drainage Patterns. There shall be no diking, draining, dredging,
channeling, filling, leveling, pumping, impounding or diverting, causing, allowing or permitting
the diversion of surface or underground water in the Easement Area. No altering or tampering
with water control structures or devices, or disruption or alteration of the restored, enhanced, or
created drainage patterns is allowed. All removal of wetlands, polluting or discharging into
waters, springs, seeps, or wetlands, or use of pesticide or biocides in the Easement Area is
prohibited. In the event of an emergency interruption or shortage of all other water sources,
water from within the Easement Area may temporarily be used for good cause shown as needed
for the survival of livestock and agricultural production on the Property.
M. Subdivision and Conveyance. Grantor voluntarily agrees that no subdivision,
partitioning, or dividing of the underlying Property owned by the Grantor in fee simple ( "fee ")
4

that is subject to this Easement is allowed. Unless agreed to by the Grantee in writing, any future
conveyance of the underlying fee and the rights conveyed herein shall be as a single block of
property Any future transfer of the fee simple shall be subject to this Conservation Easement.
Any transfer of the fee is subject to the Grantee's right of unlimited and repeated ingress and
egress over and across the Property to the Easement Area for the purposes set forth herein.
N. Development Rights. All development rights are permanently removed from the
Easement Area and are non - transferrable.
O. Disturbance of Natural Features. Any change, disturbance, alteration or impairment of
the natural features of the Easement Area or any intentional introduction of non - native plants,
trees and/or animal species by Grantor is prolubited.
The Grantor may request permission to vary from the above restrictions for good cause
shown, provided that any such request is not inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation
Easement, and the Grantor obtains advance written approval from the N.0 Ecosystem
Enhancement Program, whose mailing address is 1652 Mail Services Center, Raleigh, NC
27699 -1652
III. GRANTEE RESERVED USES
A. Right of Access, Construction, and Inspection. The Grantee, its employees and agents,
successors and assigns, receive a perpetual Right of Access to the Easement Area over the
Property at reasonable times to undertake any activities to restore, construct, manage, maintain,
enhance, and monitor the stream, wetland and any other riparian resources in the Easement Area,
in accordance with restoration activities or a long -term management plan. Unless otherwise
specifically set forth in this Conservation Easement, the rights granted herein do not include or
establish for the public any access rights.
B. Restoration Activities. These activities include planting of trees, shrubs and herbaceous
vegetation, installation of monitoring wells, utilization of heavy equipment to grade, fill, and
prepare the soil, modification of the hydrology of the site, and installation of natural and
manmade materials as needed to direct in- stream, above ground, and subterraneous water flow.
C. Signs. The Grantee, its employees and agents, successors or assigns, shall be permitted
to place signs and witness posts on the Property to include any or all of the following: describe
the project, prohibited activities within the Conservation Easement, or identify the project
boundaries and the holder of the Conservation Easement.
D. Fences. The Grantee, its employees and agents, successors or assigns, shall be permitted
to place fencing on the Property to restrict livestock access. Although the Grantee is not
responsible for fence maintenance, the Grantee reserves the right to repair the fence, at its sole
discretion.

IV. ENFORCEMENT AND REMEDIES
A. Enforcement. To accomplish the purposes of this Conservation Easement, Grantee is
allowed to prevent any activity within the Easement Area that is inconsistent with the purposes
of this Easement and to require the restoration of such areas or features in the Easement Area
that may have been damaged by such unauthorized activity or use Upon any breach of the terms
of this Conservation Easement by Grantor, the Grantee shall, except as provided below, notify
the Grantor -in writing of such breach and the Grantor shall have ninety (90) days after receipt of
such notice to correct the damage caused by such breach If the breach and damage remains
uncured after ninety (90) days, the Grantee may enforce this Conservation Easement by bringing
appropriate legal proceedings including an action to recover damages, as well as injunctive and
other relief The Grantee shall also have the power and authority, consistent with its statutory
authority (a) to prevent any impairment of the Easement Area by acts which may be unlawful
or in violation of this Conservation Easement, (b) to otherwise preserve or protect its interest in
the Property; or (c) to seek damages from any appropriate person or entity. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, the Grantee reserves the immediate right, without notice, to obtain a temporary
restraining order, injunctive or other appropriate relief, if the breach is or would irreversibly or
otherwise materially impair the benefits to be derived from this Conservation Easement, and the
Grantor and Grantee acknowledge that the damage would be irreparable and remedies at law
inadequate The rights and remedies of the Grantee provided hereunder shall be in addition to,
and not in lieu of, all other rights and remedies available to Grantee in connection with this
Conservation Easement.
B. Inspection. The Grantee, its employees and agents, successors and assigns, have the
right, with reasonable notice, to enter the Easement Area over the Property at reasonable times
for the purpose of inspection to determine whether the Grantor is complying with the terms,
conditions and restrictions of this Conservation Easement.
C. Acts Beyond Grantor's Control. Nothing contained in this Conservation Easement
shall be construed to entitle Grantee to bring any action against Grantor for any injury or change
in the Easement Area caused by third parties, resulting from causes beyond the Grantor's control,
including, without limitation, fire, flood, storm, and earth movement, or from any prudent action
taken in good faith by the Grantor under emergency conditions to prevent, abate, or mitigate
significant mjury to life, or damage to the Property resulting from such causes
D. Costs of Enforcement. Beyond regular and typical monitoring expenses, any costs
incurred by Grantee in enforcing the terms of this Conservation Easement against Grantor,
including, without limitation, any costs of restoration necessitated by Grantor's acts or omissions
in violation of the terms of this Conservation Easement, shall be borne by Grantor.
E. No Waiver. Enforcement of this Easement shall be at the discretion of the Grantee and
any forbearance, delay or omission by Grantee to exercise its rights hereunder in the event of any
breach of any term set forth herein shall not be construed to be a waiver by Grantee.
Ni

r +
V. MISCELLANEOUS
A. This instrument sets forth the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the
Conservation Easement and supersedes all prior discussions, negotiations, understandings or
agreements relating to the Conservation Easement If any provision is found to be invalid, the
remainder of the provisions of the Conservation Easement, and the application of such provision
to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is found to be invalid, shall not be
affected thereby.
B. Grantor is responsible for any real estate taxes, assessments, fees, or charges levied upon
the Property. Grantee shall not be responsible for any costs or liability of any kind related to the
ownership, operation, insurance, upkeep, or maintenance of the Property, except as expressly
provided herein Upkeep of any constructed bridges, fences, or other amenities on the Property
are the sole responsibility of the Grantor. Nothing herein shall relieve the Grantor of the
obligation to comply with federal, state or local laws, regulations and permits that may apply to
the exercise of the Reserved Rights
C. Any notices shall be sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested to the
parties at their addresses shown herein or to other addresses as either party establishes in writing
upon notification to the other.
D. Grantor shall notify Grantee in writing of the name and address and any party to whom
the Property or any part thereof is to be transferred at or prior to the time said transfer is made.
Grantor further agrees that any subsequent lease, deed, or other legal instrument by which any
interest in the Property is conveyed subject to the Conservation Easement herein created.
E. The Grantor and Grantee agree that the terms of this Conservation Easement shall survive
any merger of the fee and easement interests in the Property or any portion thereof
F. This Conservation Easement and Right of Access may be amended, but only in writing
signed by all parties hereto, or their successors or assigns, if such amendment does not affect the
qualification of this Conservation Easement or the status of the Grantee under any applicable
laws, and is consistent with the purposes of the Conservation Easement The owner of the
Property shall notify the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in writing sixty (60) days prior to the
initiation of any transfer of all or any part of the Property Such notification shall be addressed
to: Justin McCorkle, General Counsel, US Army Corps of Engineers, 69 Darlington Avenue,
Wilmington, NC 28403
G. The parties recognize and agree that the benefits of this Conservation Easement are in
gross and assignable provided, however, that the Grantee hereby covenants and agrees, that in
the event it transfers or assigns this Conservation Easement, the organization receiving the
interest will be a qualified holder under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 121 -34 et seq. and § 170(h) of the
Internal Revenue Code, and the Grantee further covenants and agrees that the terms of the
transfer or assignment will be such that the transferee or assignee will be required to continue in
perpetuity the conservation purposes described in this document.
7

VI. QUIET ENJOYMENT
Grantor reserves all remaining rights accruing from ownership of the Property, including
the right to engage in or permit or invite others to engage in only those uses of the Easement
Area that are expressly reserved herein, not prohibited or restricted herein, and are not
inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation Easement. Without limiting the generality of
the foregoing, the Grantor expressly reserves to the Grantor, and the Grantor's invitees and
licensees, the right of access to the Easement Area, and the right of quiet enjoyment of the
Easement Area
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said rights and easements perpetually unto the State of
North Carolina for the aforesaid purposes.
AND Grantor covenants that Grantor is seized of said premises in fee and has the right to
convey the permanent Conservation Easement herein granted; that the same is free from
encumbrances and that Grantor will warrant and defend title to the same against the claims of all
persons whomsoever.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Grantor has hereunto set his hand and seal, the day
and year first above written.
s '^ �
� r 1 r _ (SEAL)
Ellen Teague Miller
NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTYOF Guilford
1, Paulette L. Watkins , a Notary Public in and for the County and State
aforesaid, do hereby certify that Ellen Teague Miller, Grantor, personally appeared
before me this day and acknowledged the execution of the foregoing instrument.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and Notary Seal this the 12th
d of December 2013.
Notary Public � T tAOTARY p �?
Paulette L. Watkins
• PUBLIC .00:
My commission expires- 7/1/18
= ,cG���'••....••',�;��
'.CRa�oVN.'
8

I
"Exhibit A"
A Conservation Easementfor
The State of North Carolina,
Ecosystem Enhancement Program,
Agony Acres- Stream Mitigation Project
The Property of Ellen T. Miller
SPO FILE NUMBER. 41 AAABN EEP PROJECT ID: (95716)
The following conservation easement areas are located off of Sockwell Road (SR #2735) within
the Washington Township, Guilford County, North Carolina and being on a portion of that
property conveyed to Ellen T. Miller by Franklin J. Teague and Ruth Sockwell Teague as
recorded in Deed Book 7345 Page 1794(Tract #1) and on a portion of that property described in
an instrument of combination as recorded in Deed Book 7306 Page 450 in the Guilford County
Register of Deeds and being more particularly described as follows:
Conservation Easement Area T"2.25 Acres:
BEGINNING AT AN EXISTING 3/4" IRON PIPE (CORNER 34), said iron pipe being a
common comer of Deed Book 7345 Page 1794(Tract #1), Deed Book 7538 Page 1429 and Deed
Book 7345 Page 1799, and located N 15 °42'42" W a horizontal ground distance of 1793.72 feet
from a 1" iron pipe set with a Kee cap in concrete, said iron pipe being located in a pasture
approximately 165 feet north of the centerline of Sockwell road and having North Carolina State
Plane Coordinates of Northing: 883153 24 feet and Fasting: 1839742.68 feet;
Thence with a common line of Deed Book 7345 Page 1794(Tract #1) and Deed book 7345 Page
1799 and the conservation easement area N 14 °21'56" W a distance of 137.78 feet to a 5/8" rebar
set with an EEP cap (comer 42), said rebar being located S 14 °21'56" E a distance of 1558 96
feet from a 1" iron pipe set with a Kee cap;
Thence leaving the aforesaid common line and continuing with the conservation easement area
the following (5) courses and distances:
(1) N 14°31'42" E a distance of 323.25 feet to a calculated point (corner 43);
(2) S 42 °28'20" E a distance of 201.46 feet to a calculated point (corner 44),
(3) S 09 °11'13" W a distance of 147 74 feet to a calculated point (comer 45),
(4) S 18 °20'20" W a distance of 203.50 feet to a calculated point (comer 46);
(5) S 12 °43'11" E a distance of 404.78 feet to a 5/8" rebar set with an EEP cap (corner 47),
said rebar being in the common line of Deed Book 7345 Page 1794 (Tract #1) and Deed
Book 7306 Page 450 of the Guilford County Registry,
Thence with the aforesaid common line and continuing with the conservation easement N
63 039'26" W a distance of 104.08 feet to an existing planted stone (comer 36), said stone being a
common corner of Deed Book 7345 Page 1794(Tract #1), Deed Book 7306 Page 450 and Deed
Book 7538 Page 1429 of the Guilford County Registry;
D

Thence with the common line of Deed Book 7345 Page 1794 (Tract 41) and Deed Book 7538
Page 1429 of the Guilford County Registry and continuing with the conservation easement N
13 °09'45" W the following (2) distances:
(1) 271.35 feet to an existing planted stone (corner 35),
(2) 129.05 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
Conservation Easement Area "G" 1.48 Acres:
BEGINNING AT A 5/8" REBAR SET WITH AN EEP CAP (CORNER 48), said rebar being in
a common fine of Deed Book 7345 Page 1794(Tract #1) and Deed Book 7345 Page 1799 and
located N 13 °45'04" W a horizontal ground distance of 3536.82 feet from a 1" iron pipe set in
concrete with a Kee cap, said iron pipe being located in a pasture approximately 165 feet north of
the centerline of Sockwell road and having North Carolina State Plane Coordinates of Northing.
883153.24 feet and Eastmg. 1839742.68 feet,
Thence with the aforesaid common line and the conservation easement area N 45'24'11" E a
distance of 55.85 feet to a calculated point, said point being where the mouth of a branch meets
Reedy Fork,
Thence leaving the aforementioned common line with the top of the bank of the Reedy Fork and
continuing with the conservation easement area the following (6) courses and distances
(1) S 34 °36`55" E a distance of 58.74 feet to a calculated point,
(2) S 63 °24'37" E a distance of 124.38 feet to a calculated point;
(3) S 57 °41' 10" E a distance of 261.00 feet to a calculated point ;
(4) S 48 °58'53" E a distance of 161.19 feet to a calculated point;
(5) S 48 °15'05" E a distance of 221.82 feet to a calculated point;
(6) S 37 °10'25" E a distance of 315 72 feet to a calculated point;
Thence leaving the top of the bank of the Reedy Fork and continuing with the conservation
easement area the following (5) courses and distances:
(1) S 52 °49`35" W a distance of 55.00 feet to a calculated point (corner 49),
(2) N 37 °10`25" W a distance of 310.39 feet to a calculated point (corner 50);
(3) N 48 °33'30" W a distance of 372 78 feet to a calculated point (corner 51);
(4) N 59 °40'44" W a distance of 389.37 feet to a calculated point (corner 52),
(5) N 34 136'55" W a distance of 63 18 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING
Conservation Easement Area "'H"5.1 5 Acres:
BEGINNING AT A 5/8" REBAR SET WITH AN EEP CAP (CORNER 53), said rebar being
located N 00 °13'17" E a horizontal ground distance of 2676.91 feet from a 1" iron pipe set with a
Kee cap in concrete, said iron pipe being located in a pasture approximately 165 feet north of the
centerline of Sockwell road and having North Carolina State Plane Coordinates of Northing:
883153.24 feet and Easting: 1839742.68 feet;
Thence with the conservation easement area N 52 °49'35" E a distance of 55.00 feet to a
calculated point, said point being at the top of the bank of the Reedy Fork;
Thence with the top of the bank of the Reedy Fork and continuing with the conservation
easement area the following (8) courses and distances:
(1) S 38 °08'45" E a distance of 141.34 feet to a calculated point;
(2) S 39 047'40" E a distance of 106 28 feet to a calculated point;
10

(3) S 49-12-5611 E a distance of 127.90 feet to a calculated point ;
(4) S 54130'10" E a distance of 36 52 feet to a calculated point ;
(5) S 68 °09'21" E a distance of 68 04 feet to a calculated point;
(6) S 64 °44'27" E a distance of 46.07 feet to a calculated point ,
(7) S 81 °37'17" E a distance of 51.72 feet to a calculated point ;
(8) S 83 °58'48" E a distance of 57 01 feet to a calculated point (comer 54);
Thence leaving the top of the bank of the Reedy Fork and continuing with the conservation
easement area the following (11) courses and distances:
(1) S 05 °59'13" W a distance of 468.01 feet to a calculated point (corner 55);
(2) S 78 °12'27" W a distance of 138.69 feet to a calculated point (comer 56);
(3) N 00 °07'00" W a distance of 243.65 feet to a calculated point (corner 57);
(4) N 11'25'08" E a distance of 222.85 feet to a calculated point (corner 58);
(5) N 67 °04'00" W a distance of 182 04 feet to a calculated point (comer 59);
(6) S 31-24'40" W a distance of 210 41 feet to a calculated point (corner 60);
(7) S 79 °08'07" W a distance of 466.59 feet to a calculated point (comer 61),
(8) N 42 °28'20" W a distance of 14139 feet to a calculated point (corner 62);
(9) N 67°51'42" E a distance of 455.48 feet to a calculated point (corner 63);
(10) N 29 °02'01" E a distance of 191.86 feet to a calculated point (corner 64),
(11) N 37 °10'25" W a distance of 134.83 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
Conservation Easement Area "I" 1.28 Acres:
BEGINNING AT A 5/8" REBAR SET WITH AN EEP CAP (CORNER 65), said rebar being in
a common line of Deed Book 7345 Page 1794(Tract #1) and Deed Book 6566 Page 2931 and
located N 18 °42'14" E a horizontal ground distance of 1592 38 feet from a 1" iron pipe set in
concrete with a Kee cap, said iron pipe being located in a pasture approximately 165 feet north of
the centerline of Sockwell road and having North Carolina State Plane Coordinates of Northing:
883153 24 feet and Easting 1839742 68 feet;
Thence with the conservation easement area the following (4) courses and distances:
(1) N 26 °15'20" W a distance of 335.25 feet to a calculated point (comer 66);
(2) N 78 °14'59" E a distance of 144.39 feet to a calculated point (corner 67);
(3) S 38 118'42" E a distance of 203.65 feet to a calculated point (corner 68);
(4) S 03 145'20" E a distance of 183 38 feet to a 5/8" rebar set with an EEP cap (corner 69),
said rebar being in a common line of Deed Book 7345 Page 1794(Tract #1) and Deed
Book 6566 Page 2931 of the Guilford County Registry;
Thence with the aforesaid common line and continuing with the conservation easement area
N 84 028'17" W a distance of 131.94 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING
11

Conservation Easement Area 7" 1.14 Acres:
BEGINNING AT A 5/8" REBAR SET WITH AN EEP CAP (CORNER 70), said rebar being in
a common line of Deed Book 7345 Page 1794(Tract #1) and Deed Book 7306 Page 450 and
located N 10 °45'30" W a horizontal ground distance of 1167 60 feet from a 1" iron pipe set in
concrete with a Kee cap, said iron pipe being located in a pasture approximately 165 feet north of
the centerline of Sockwell road and having North Carolina State Plane Coordinates of Northing:
883153.24 feet and Easting. 1839742.68 feet,
Thence with the conservation easement area the following (3) courses and distances:
(1) S 39 °09'50" E a distance of 148.78 feet to a calculated point (corner 71);
(2) S 01'06'26" E a distance of 333.54 feet to a calculated point (corner 72),
(3) S 03 °54'12" W a distance of 362.12 feet to a calculated point (corner 73), said point
being in the common line of Deed Book 7345 Page 1794(Tract #1) and Deed Book 7306
Page 450 of the Guilford County Registry;
Thence with the aforesaid common line and continuing with the conservation easement area the
following (2) courses and distances.
(1) N 76 °00'01" W a distance of 28.13 feet to an existing 3/4" iron pipe (comer 74), said iron
pipe being a common comer of Deed Book 7345 Page 1794(Tract #1) and Deed Book
7306 Page 450 of the Guilford County Registry;
(2) N 03 °27'07" W a distance of 804.76 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
_Conservation Easement Area "K" 0.25 Acres:
BEGINNING AT A 5/8" REBAR SET WITH AN EEP CAP (CORNER 37), said rebar being in
a common line of Deed Book 7306 Page 450 and Deed Book 7538 Page 1429 and located N
19 °10'16" W a horizontal ground distance of 1253.45 feet from a 1" iron pipe set in concrete
with a Kee cap, said iron pipe being located in a pasture approximately 165 feet north of the
centerline of SockweIl road and having North Carolina State Plane Coordinates of Northing-
883153.24 feet and Easting. 1839742.68 feet;
Thence with the aforesaid common line and with the conservation easement area N 06 122'08" E
a distance of 153.84 feet to an existing planted stone (corner 36), said stone being a common
corner of Deed Book 7306 Page 450, Deed Book 7538 Page 1429 and Deed Book 7345 Page
1791(Tract #1) of the Guilford County Registry;
Thence leaving the aforementioned common line and with the common line of Deed Book 7306
Page 450 and Deed Book 7345 Page 1794(Tract #1) of the Guilford County Registry and
continuing with the conservation easement area S 63 °39'26" E a distance of 104.08 feet to a 5/8
rebar set with an EEP cap (corner 47);
Thence leaving the aforesaid common line and continuing with the conservation easement area
the following (2) courses and distances.
(3) S 12 °30'53" E a distance of 48.84 feet to a calculated point (corner 75);
(4) S 63 058'50" W a distance of 134 56 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
12

Conservation Easement Area "L" 3.38 Acres:
BEGINNING AT A 5/8" REBAR SET WITH AN EEP CAP (CORNER 70), said rebar being in
a common line of Deed Book 7306 Page 450 and Deed Book 7345 Page 1794(Tract #1) and
located N 10 °45'30" W a horizontal ground distance of 1167.60 feet from a 1" iron pipe set in
concrete with a Kee cap, said iron pipe being located in a pasture approximately 165 feet north of
the centerline of Sockwell road and having North Carolina State Plane Coordinates of Northing:
883153 24 feet and Easting• 1839742.68 feet;
Thence with the aforesaid common line and the conservation easement area the following (2)
courses and distances:
(7) S 03 °27'07" E a distance of 804.76 feet to an existing 3/4" iron pipe (corner 74), said iron
pipe being a common corner of Deed Book 7306 Page 450 and Deed Book 7345 Page
1794(Tract #1) of the Guilford County Registry;
(8) S 76 °00'01" E a distance of 28.13 feet to a 5/8" rebar with an EEP cap (corner 73),
Thence leaving the aforementioned common line and continuing with the conservation easement
area the following (8) courses and distances:
(6) S 03 °03'09" E a distance of 280.94 feet to a calculated point (corner 76),
(7) N 82 °31'55" W a distance of 154.96 feet to a calculated point (corner 77);
(8) N 01 °43'03" W a distance of 164 22 feet to a calculated point (corner 78),
(9) N 07°51'08" W a distance of 219.19 feet to a calculated point (corner 79);
(10) N 02 °21'36" E a distance of 490.54 feet to a calculated point (comer 80);
\ (11) N 27 °20'47" W a distance of 233.02 feet to a calculated point (corner 81);
(12) N 63 °58'50" E a distance of 142 20 feet to a calculated point (corner 82);
(13) S 38 °58'34" E a distance of 90.38 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
Conservation Easement Area "M" a 79 Acres.
BEGINNING AT A 5/8" REBAR SET WITH AN EEP CAP (CORNER 83), said rebar being in
the margin of a 60 foot wide right of way along Sockwell road and located S 34 °30'59" W a
horizontal ground distance of 175.20 feet from a 1" iron pipe set with a Kee cap in concrete, said
iron pipe being located in a pasture approximately 165 feet north of the centerline of Sockwell
road and having North Carolina State Plane Coordinates of Northing: 883153.24 feet and
Eastmg 1839742.68 feet;
Thence with the margin of a 60 foot wide right of way along SockwelI road and the conservation
easement area the following (2) courses and distances-
(9) S 84 °07'04" W a distance of 40.71 feet to an existing 1/2" iron pipe disturbed (corner 84),
(10) S 78 °19'23" W a distance of 150.83 feet to a 5/8" rebar set with an EEP cap
(comer 85);
Thence leaving the aforementioned right of way and continuing with the conservation easement
area the following (3) courses and distances.
(12) N O1 °28'44" E a distance of 225 55 feet to a calculated point (corner 86);
(13) S 82 °31'55" E a distance of 165.40 feet to a calculated point (comer 87),
(14) S 06 °11'59" E a distance of 170.27 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
13

Being all of that area of land containing a total of 15.72 Acres, being the same more or less,
according to a plat of survey entitled "A Conservation Easement Survey for: The State of North
Carolina, Ecosystem Enhancement Program, Agony Acres Mitigation Project'; on the property
of Ellen T. Miller; Job# 130101 -CE. This description was prepared from an actual survey and
shown on the aforementioned plat by Kee Mapping and Surveying, PA (License # C -3039)
between the dates of 03/27/13 -- 10 /08 /2013and under the supervision of Phillip B. Kee, NC PLS
(License # L -4647)
Conservation easement corners were not set and conservation easement lines were not flagged at time
of recordation Corners to beset after construction with 5/8" by 30" rebar and capped with a 3 %"
aluminum cap with state seal, unless otherwise noted.
14

\ iIlll�11111111iliiIII�IIIINIIillli�
2013080502
GUILFORD CO, NC FEE $26 00
STATE OF NC REAL ESTATE EXTX
$335.00
PRESENTED 6 RECORDED
12 -12- 2013 04 37 13 PM
JEFF L THIGPEN
REGISTER OF DEEDS
BY TAMMY C SMITH
DEPUTY -G8
BK: R 7558
PG: 853 -863
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
EASEM ENTGUILFORD COUNTY
SPO File Number 41- AAABW; EEP 95716
Prepared by: Office of the Attorney General
Property Control Section
Return to- NC Department of Administration
State Property Office
1321 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1321
CONSERVATION
PROVIDED PURSUANT TO
FULL DELIVERY
NIITIGATION CONTRACT
stamps: $335.00
P/U OVERFIELD
THIS CONSERVATION EASEMENT DEED, made this 12th day of
December , 20 1 3b George Y Teague and Cherry W. Teague, ( "Grantor "), whose
mailing address is 7092 Sockwell Road, Elon, NC 27244, to the State of North Carolina,
( "Grantee "), whose mailing address is State of North Carolina, Department of Administration,
State Property Office, 1321 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699 -1321. The designations of
Grantor and Grantee as used herein shall include said parties, they heirs, successors, and assigns,
and shall include singular, plural, masculine, feminine, or neuter as required by context
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of N C Gen. Stat. § 143 -214.8 et sea., the State
of North Carolina has established the Ecosystem Enhancement Program (formerly known as the
Wetlands Restoration Program) within the Department of Environment and Natural Resources
for the purposes of acquiring, maintaining, restoring, enhancing, creating and preserving wetland
and riparian resources that contribute to the protection and improvement of water quality, flood
prevention, fisheries, aquatic habitat, wildlife habitat, and recreational opportunities; and
WHEREAS, this Conservation Easement from Grantor to Grantee has been negotiated,
arranged and provided for as a condition of a full delivery contract between Wildlands
Engineering, Inc, 1430 S Mint Street Charlotte, NC 28203 and the North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, to provide stream, wetland and/or buffer mitigation
/ PREPARED RY C,OLTRANE & OVER11FL11. PLLC

pursuant to the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Purchase and
Services Contract Number 4949 .
WHEREAS, The State of North Carolina is qualified to be the Grantee of a Conservation
Easement pursuant to N.0 Gen. Stat. § 121 -35, and
WHEREAS, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the North Carolina
Department of Transportation and the United States Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington
District entered into a Memorandum of Agreement, (MOA) duly executed by all parties in
Greensboro, NC on July 22, 2003, which recognizes that the Ecosystem Enhancement Program
is to provide for compensatory mitigation by effective protection of the land, water and natural
resources of the State by restoring, enhancing and preserving ecosystem functions; and
WHEREAS, the acceptance of this instrument for and on behalf of the State of North
Carolina was granted to the Department of Administration by resolution as approved by the
Governor and Council of State adopted at a meeting held in the City of Raleigh, North Carolina,
on the 8b day of February 2000; and
WHEREAS, the Ecosystem Enhancement Program in the Department of Environment
and Natural Resources, which has been delegated the authority authorized by the Governor and
Council of State to the Department of Administration, has approved acceptance of this
instrument, and
WHEREAS, Grantor owns in fee simple certain real property situated, lying, and being
in Washington Township, Guilford County, North Carolina (the "Property "), and being more
particularly described as that certain parcel of land containing approximately 77.46 acres and
being conveyed to the Grantor by deed as recorded in Deed Book 7345 at Page 1803 of the
Guilford County Registry, North Carolina, and further identified as PIN # 8838 -74 -4721 and
WHEREAS, Grantor is willing to grant a Conservation Easement over the herein
described areas of the Property, thereby restricting and limiting the use of the included areas of
the Property to the terms and conditions and purposes hereinafter set forth, and Grantee is willing
to accept such Conservation Easement This Conservation Easement shall be for the protection
and benefit of Reedy Fork
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, terms, conditions, and
restrictions hereinafter set forth, Grantor unconditionally and irrevocably hereby grants and
conveys unto Grantee, its successors and assigns, forever and in perpetuity, a Conservation
Easement along with a general Right of Access.
The Easement Area consists of the following
Easement Areas A and B containing a total of 9.29 acres as shown on the plats of survey
entitled "Final Plat, Conservation Easement for the State of North Carolina Ecosystem
Enhancement Program, Project Name: Agony Acres Mitigation Project, SPO File No. 41-
AAABW, EEP Site No 95716" dated 3/24/13 - 10/08/2013 by Phillip B Kee, PLS Number NC-
2

4347 and recorded in the Guilford County, North Carolina Register of Deeds at Plat Book 185
Page 118.
See attached "Exhibit A ", Legal Description of area of the Property hereinafter referred to as the
"Easement Area"
The purposes of this Conservation Easement are to maintain, restore, enhance, construct,
create and preserve wetland and/or riparian resources in the Easement Area that contribute to the
protection and improvement of water quality, flood prevention, fisheries, aquatic habitat, wildlife
habitat, and recreational opportunities; to maintain permanently the Easement Area in its natural
condition, consistent with these purposes, and to prevent any use of the Easement Area that will
significantly impair or interfere with these purposes. To achieve these purposes, the following
conditions and restrictions are set forth:
I. DURATION OF EASEMENT
Pursuant to law, including the above referenced statutes, this Conservation Easement and
Right of Access shall be perpetual and it shall run with, and be a continuing restriction upon the
use of, the Property, and it shall be enforceable by the Grantee against the Grantor and against
Grantor's heirs, successors and assigns, personal representatives, agents, lessees, and licensees.
11. GRANTOR RESERVED USES AND RESTRICTED ACTIVITES
The Easement Area shall be restricted from any development or usage that would impair
or interfere with the purposes of this Conservation Easement. Unless expressly reserved as a
compatible use herein, any activity in, or use of, the Easement Area by the Grantor is prohibited
as inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation Easement. Any rights not expressly
reserved hereunder by the Grantor have been acquired by the Grantee. Any rights not expressly
reserved hereunder by the Grantor, including the rights to all mitigation credits, including, but
not limited to, stream, wetland, and riparian buffer mitigation units, derived from each site within
the area of the Conservation Easement, are conveyed to and belong to the Grantee. Without
limiting the generality of the foregoing, the following specific uses are prohibited, restricted, or
reserved as indicated-
A. Recreational Uses. Grantor expressly reserves the right to undeveloped recreational
uses, including hiking, bird watching, hunting and fishing, and access to the Easement Area for
the purposes thereof.
B. Motorized Vehicle Use. Motorized vehicle use in the Easement Area is prohibited.
C. Educational Uses. The Grantor reserves the right to engage in and permit others to
engage in educational uses in the Easement Area not inconsistent with this Conservation
Easement, and the right of access to the Easement Area for such purposes including organized
educational activities such as site visits and observations. Educational uses of the property shall
not alter vegetation, hydrology or topography of the site.
3

D. Vegetative Cutting. Except as related to the removal of non - native plants, diseased or
damaged trees, or vegetation that destabilizes or renders unsafe the Easement Area to persons or
natural habitat, all cutting, removal, mowing, harming, or destruction of any trees and vegetation
in the Easement Area is prohibited.
E. Industrial, Residential and Commercial Uses. All industrial, residential and
commercial uses are prohibited in the Easement Area
F. Agricultural Use. All agricultural uses are prohibited within the Easement Area
including any use for cropland, waste lagoons, or pastureland.
G. New Construction. There shall be no building, facility, mobile home, antenna, utility
pole, tower, or other structure constructed or placed in the Easement Area.
H. Roads and Trails. There shall be no construction of roads, trails, walkways, or paving
in the Easement Area
I. Signs. No signs shall be permitted in the. Easement Area except interpretive signs
describing restoration activities and the conservation values of the Easement Area, signs
identifying the owner of the Property and the holder of the Conservation Easement, signs giving
directions, or signs prescribing rules and regulations for the use of the Easement Area may be
allowed.
J. Dumping or Storing. Dumping or storage of soil, trash, ashes, garbage, waste,
abandoned vehicles, appliances, machinery, or any other material in the Easement Area is
prohibited.
K. Grading, Mineral Use, Excavation, Dredging. There shall be no grading, filling,
excavation, dredging, mining, drilling, removal of topsoil, sand, gravel, rock, peat, minerals, or
other materials.
L. Water Quality and Drainage Patterns. There shall be no diking, draining, dredging,
channeling, filling, leveling, pumping, impounding or diverting, causing, allowing or permitting
the diversion of surface or underground water in the Easement Area. No altering or tampering
with water control structures or devices, or disruption or alteration of the restored, enhanced, or
created drainage patterns is allowed. All removal of wetlands, polluting or discharging into
waters, springs, seeps, or wetlands, or use of pesticide or biocides in the Easement Area is
prohibited. In the event of an emergency interruption or shortage of all other water sources,
water from within the Easement Area may temporarily be used for good cause shown as needed
for the survival of livestock and agricultural production on the Property.
M. Subdivision and Conveyance. Grantor voluntarily agrees that no subdivision,
partitioning, or dividing of the underlying Property owned by the Grantor in fee simple ( "fee ")
that is subject to this Easement is allowed. Unless agreed to by the Grantee in writing, any future
conveyance of the underlying fee and the rights conveyed herein shall be as a single block of
4

property. Any future transfer of the fee simple shall be subject to this Conservation Easement.
Any transfer of 'the fee is subject to the Grantee's right of unlimited and repeated ingress and
egress over and across the Property to the Easement Area for the purposes set forth herein.
N. Development Rights. All development rights are permanently removed from the
Easement Area and are non - transferrable.
0. Disturbance of Natural Features. Any change, disturbance, alteration or impairment of
the natural features of the Easement Area or any intentional introduction of non - native plants,
trees and/or animal species by Grantor is prohibited.
The Grantor may request permission to vary from the above restrictions for good cause
shown, provided that any such request is not inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation
Easement, and the Grantor obtains advance written approval from the N.C. Ecosystem
Enhancement Program, whose mailing address is 1652 Mail Services Center, Raleigh, NC
27699 -1652.
III. GRANTEE RESERVED USES
A. Right of Access, Construction, and Inspection. The Grantee, its employees and agents,
successors and assigns, receive a perpetual Right of Access to the Easement Area over the
Property at reasonable times to undertake any activities to restore, construct, manage, maintain,
'!^ enhance, and monitor the stream, wetland and any other riparian resources in the Easement Area,
-' in accordance with restoration activities or a long -term management plan. Unless otherwise
specifically set forth in this Conservation Easement, the rights granted herein do not include or
establish for the public any access rights.
B. Restoration Activities. These activities include planting of trees, shrubs and herbaceous
vegetation, installation of monitoring wells, utilization of heavy equipment to grade, fill, and
prepare the soil, modification of the hydrology of the site, and installation of natural and
manmade materials as needed to direct in- stream, above ground, and subterraneous water flow
C. Signs. The Grantee, its employees and agents, successors or assigns, shall be permitted
to place signs and witness posts on the Property to include any or all of the following- describe
the project, prohibited activities within the Conservation Easement, or identify the project
boundaries and the holder of the Conservation Easement.
D. Fences. The Grantee, its employees and agents, successors or assigns, shall be permitted
to place fencing on the Property to restrict livestock access Although the Grantee is not
responsible for fence maintenance, the Grantee reserves the right to repair the fence, at its sole
discretion.
5

IV. ENFORCEMENT AND REMEDIES
A. Enforcement. To accomplish the purposes of this Conservation Easement, Grantee is
allowed to prevent any activity within the Easement Area that is inconsistent with the purposes
of this Easement and to require the restoration of such areas or features in the Easement Area
that may have been damaged by such unauthorized activity or use. Upon any breach of the terms
of this Conservation Easement by Grantor, the Grantee shall, except as provided below, notify
the Grantor -in writing of such breach and the Grantor shall have ninety (90) days after receipt of
such notice to correct the damage caused by such breach. If the breach and damage remains
uncured after ninety (90) days, the Grantee may enforce this Conservation Easement by bringing
appropriate legal proceedings including an action to recover damages, as well as injunctive and
other relief The Grantee shall also have the power and authority, consistent with its statutory
authority. (a) to prevent any impairment of the Easement Area by acts which may be unlawful
or in violation of this Conservation Easement; (b) to otherwise preserve or protect its interest in
the Property, or (c) to seek damages from any appropriate person or entity. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, the Grantee reserves the immediate right, without notice, to obtain a temporary
restraining order, injunctive or other appropriate relief, if the breach is or would irreversibly or
otherwise materially impair the benefits to be derived from this Conservation Easement, and the
Grantor and Grantee acknowledge that the damage would be irreparable and remedies at law
inadequate. The rights and remedies of the Grantee provided hereunder shall be in addition to,
and not in lieu of, all other rights and remedies available to Grantee in connection with this
Conservation Easement.
B. Inspection. The Grantee, its employees and agents, successors and assigns, have the
right, with reasonable notice, to enter the Easement Area over the Property at reasonable tunes
for the purpose of inspection to determine whether the Grantor is complying with the terms,
conditions and restrictions of this Conservation Easement.
C. Acts Beyond Grantor's Control. Nothing contained in this Conservation Easement
shall be construed to entitle Grantee to bring any action against Grantor for any injury or change
in the Easement Area caused by third parties, resulting from causes beyond the Grantor's control,
including, without limitation, fire, flood, storm, and earth movement, or from any prudent action
taken in good faith by the Grantor under emergency conditions to prevent, abate, or mitigate
significant injury to life; or damage to the Property resulting from such causes.
D. Costs of Enforcement. Beyond regular and typical monitoring expenses, any costs
incurred by Grantee in enforcing the terms of this Conservation Easement against Grantor,
including, without limitation, any costs of restoration necessitated by Grantor's acts or omissions
in violation of the terms of this Conservation Easement, shall be borne by Grantor.
E. No Waiver. Enforcement of this Easement shall be at the discretion of the Grantee and
any forbearance, delay or omission by Grantee to exercise its rights hereunder in the event of any
breach of any term set forth herein shall not be construed to be a waiver by Grantee
0

r
V. MISCELLANEOUS
A. This instrument sets forth the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the
Conservation Easement and supersedes all prior discussions, negotiations, understandings or
agreements relating to the Conservation Easement If any provision is found to be invalid, the
remainder of the provisions of the Conservation Easement, and the application of such provision
to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is found to be invalid, shall not be
affected thereby.
B. Grantor is responsible for any real estate taxes, assessments, fees, or charges levied upon
the Property. Grantee shall not be responsible for any costs or liability of any kind related to the
ownership, operation, insurance, upkeep, or maintenance of the Property, except as expressly
provided herein Upkeep of any constructed bridges, fences, or other amenities on the Property
are the sole responsibility of the Grantor. Nothing herein shall relieve the Grantor of the
obligation to comply with federal, state or local laws, regulations and permits that may apply to
the exercise of the Reserved Rights.
C. Any notices shall be sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested to the
parties at their addresses shown herein or to other addresses as either party establishes in writing
upon notification to the other.
D. Grantor shall notify Grantee in writing of the name and address and any party to whom
the Property or any part thereof is to be transferred at or prior to the time said transfer is made
Grantor further agrees that any subsequent lease, deed, or other legal instrument by which any
interest in the Property is conveyed subject to the Conservation Easement herein created.
E. The Grantor and Grantee agree that the terms of this Conservation Easement shall survive
any merger of the fee and easement interests in the Property or any portion thereof
F. This Conservation Easement and Right of Access may be amended, but only in writing
signed by all parries hereto, or their successors or assigns, if such amendment does not affect the
qualification of this Conservation Easement or the status of the Grantee under any applicable
laws, and is consistent with the purposes of the Conservation Easement The owner of the
Property shall notify the U S. Army Corps of Engineers in writing sixty (60) days prior to the
initiation of any transfer of all or any part of the Property. Such notification shall be addressed
to: Justin McCorkle, General Counsel, US Army Corps of Engineers, 69 Darlington Avenue,
Wilmington, NC 28403
G. The parties recognize and agree that the benefits of this Conservation Easement are in
gross and assignable provided, however, that the Grantee hereby covenants and agrees, that in
the event it transfers or assigns this Conservation Easement, the organization receiving the
interest will be a qualified holder under N C. Gen. Stat § 121 -34 et seq. and § 170(h) of the
Internal Revenue Code, and the Grantee further covenants and agrees that the terms of the
transfer or assignment will be such that the transferee or assignee will be required to continue in
perpetuity the conservation purposes described in this document.
7

i
VI. QUIET ENJOYMENT
Grantor reserves all remaining rights accruing from ownership of the Property, including
the right to engage in or permit or invite others to engage in only those uses of the Easement
Area that are expressly reserved herein, not prohibited or restricted herein, and are not
inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation Easement. Without limiting the generality of
the foregoing, the Grantor expressly reserves to the Grantor, and the Grantor's invitees and
licensees, the right of access to the Easement Area, and the right of quiet enjoyment of the
Easement Area
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said rights and easements perpetually unto the State of
North Carolina for the aforesaid purposes.
AND Grantor covenants that Grantor is seized of said premises in fee and has the right to
convey the permanent Conservation Easement herein granted, that the same is free from
encumbrances and that Grantor will warrant and defend title to the same against the claims of all
persons whomsoever.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Grantor has hereunto set his hand and seal, the day
and year first above written.
(SEAL)
��
George Y. Teague
2 (SEAL)
Cherry W. Teague
0

NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTYOF Guilford
I, Paulette L. Watkins , a Notary Public in and for the County and State
aforesaid, do hereby certify that George Y. Teague , Grantor, personally appeared
before me this day and acknowledged the execution of the foregoing instrument.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and Notary Seal this the 12
dav of December 2013.
iw
Notary Public �'����E �•�W9�
Paulette L. Watkins ,
My commission expires: 7/1/18
r7 11 Ile
NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTYOF Guilford
' PUBLIC v .
40 .
ORO COVE
'rrrjrsrsisi s \ \\
I, Paulette L. Watkins , a Notary Public in and for the County and State
aforesaid, do hereby certify that Cherry W. Teague , Grantor, personally appeared
before me this day and acknowledged the execution of the foregoing instrument.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and Notary Seal this the 12
of December 1201 3.
Notary Public
Paulette L. Watkins J ; ••'F ;
4R,•' NOTARY
My commission expires- 7 /1 /18 0 ..�' PUBLIC ?� ,;
p #000VN
`''<r„rrowo
6

"Exhibit A"
A Conservation Easement for
The State of North Carolina,
Ecosystem Enhancement Program,
Agony Acres- Mitigation Project
The Property of George Y. Teague
SPO FILE NUMBER: 41 AAABW EEP PROJECT ID: (95716)
The following conservation easement areas are located off of Sockwell Road (SR #2735) within
the Washington Township, Guilford County, North Carolina and being on a portion of that
property conveyed to George Y. Teague by Franklin J. Teague and Ruth Sockwell Teague as
recorded in Deed Book 7345 Page 1803 (Tract #3) in the Guilford County Register of Deeds and
being more particularly described as follows-
Conservation Easement Area "A" 1.15 Acres;
BEGINNING AT A 5/8" REBAR SET WITH AN EEP CAP (CORNER 1), said rebar being in
the margin of a 60 foot wide right of way along Sockwell road and located S 81 ° 12'15 " W a
horizontal ground distance of 2545.37 feet from a 1" iron pipe set in concrete with a Kee cap,
said iron pipe being located in a pasture approximately 165 feet north of the centerline of
Sockwell road and having North Carolina State Plane Coordinates of Northing: 883153.24 feet
and Easting: 1839742.68 feet;
Thence with the conservation easement area the following (4) courses and distances:
(1) N 12 °55'32" E a distance of 370.95 feet to a calculated point (comer 2),
(2) S 67 °04'50" E a distance of 150 72 feet to a calculated point (comer 3);
(3) S 11 °14'50" W a distance of 283.48 feet to a calculated point (comer 4), said point being
in the margin of the aforementioned right of way;
Thence with the aforementioned right of way S 81 °3V1 7" W a distance of 168.34 feet to the
TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
Conservation Easement Area "B" 8.14 Acres:
BEGINNING AT A 5/8" REBAR SET WITH AN EEP CAP (CORNER 5), said rebar being
located N 89 °3114" W a horizontal ground distance of 2469.83 feet from a I" iron pipe set in
concrete with a Kee cap, said iron pipe being located in a pasture approximately 165 feet north of
the centerline of Sockwell road and having North Carolina State Plane Coordinates of Northing
883153.24 feet and Easting. 1839742 68 feet,
Thence with the conservation easement area the following (5) courses and distances:
(1) N 52 °08'03" E a distance of 148.22 feet to a calculated point (comer 6);
(2) N 09 °34'47" E a distance of 262.85 feet to a calculated point (corner 7);
(3) N 04 °00'02" W a distance of 693.62 feet to a calculated point (corner 8);
10

(4) N 23 °51'42" E a distance of 482 35 feet to a calculated point (corner 9) -
(5) N 80'10'07" E a distance of 415.53 feet to a 5/8" rebar set with an EEP cap(corner 10),
said rebar being in the common line of Deed Book 7345 Page 1803(Tract #3) and Deed
Book 7345 Page 1799 of the Guilford County Registry and being located S 05 °21'57" W
a distance 939.22 feet from a 1" iron pipe set with a Kee cap;
Thence with the aforesaid common line and continuing with the conservation easement area
S 05 021'57" W a distance of 54 87 feet to an existing 3/4" iron pipe (corner 11), said iron pipe
being a common comer of Deed Book 7345 Page 1803(Tract #3), Deed Book 7345 Page 1799
and Deed Book 7538 Page 1429 of the Guilford County Registry;
Thence leaving the aforementioned common line and with a common line of Deed Book 7345
Page 1803(Tract #3) and Deed Book 7538 Page 1429 of the Guilford County Registry and
continuing with the conservation easement area S 05 °21'57" W The following (2) distances.
(1) 166 74 feet to an existing planted stone (corner 12),
(2) 25.43 feet to a 5/8" rebar set with an EEP cap (comer 13), said rebar being located
N 05 °21'57" E a distance of 149.40 feet from an existing 5/8 rebar;
Thence leaving the aforementioned common line and continuing with the conservation easement
area the following (7) courses and distances:
(1) S 81 °19'55" W a distance of 309 88 feet to a calculated point (comer 14);
(2) S 16 °27'04" W a distance of 355 64 feet to a calculated point (corner 15);
(3) S 09 °42'15" E a distance of 361.39 feet to a calculated point (corner 16);
(4) S 01'30'23" W a distance of 319.36 feet to a calculated point (comer 17);
(5) S 17 °19'30" W a distance of 242.53 feet to a calculated point( comer 18);
(6) S 48 °27'25" W a distance of 128 97 feet to a calculated point( corner 19);
(7) N 67 °04'50" W a distance of 185.14 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
Being all of that area of land containing a total of 9 29 Acres, being the same more or less,
according to a plat of survey entitled "A Conservation Easement Survey for: The State of North
Carolina, NC Department of Administration, Ecosystem Enhancement Program, Agony Acres
Mitigation Project'; on the property of George Y. Teague; Job# 130101 -CE. This description
was prepared from an actual survey and shown on the aforementioned plat by Kee Mapping and
Surveying, PA (License # C -3039) between the dates of 03/27/13 — 10/08/2013 and under the
supervision of Phillip B Kee, NC PLS (License # L- 4647).
Conservation easement corners were not set and conservation easement lines were not flagged at time
of recordation. Corners to be set after construction with 5/8" by 30" rebar and capped with a 3 W
aluminum cap with state seal, unless otherwise noted
11

YIIII�EY�IY�IINII�IIY
2013080499
GUILFORD CO, NC FEE $2600
STATE OF NC REAL ESTATE EXTX
$204.00
PRESENTED d RECORDED
12 -12 -2013 04 32 58 PM
JEFF L THIGPEN
REGISTER OF DEEM
Sy TAMMY SMITH
DEPUTY -G8
BK: R 7558
PG: 828 -838
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
GUILFORD COUNTY
SPO File Number 41 -AAABM EEP # 95716
Prepared by Office of the Attorney General
Property Control Section
Return to: NC Department of Administration
State Property Office
1321 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1321
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
PROVIDED PURSUANT TO
FULL DELIVERY
MITIGATION CONTRACT
stamps: $204.00
P/u 0VE,lEIELD
THIS CONSERVATION EASEMENT DEED, made this - 1 2th day of
December ' 20 1'3by Holy Cow Farm, LLC (formerly Diamond Shadow Farm, LLC),
( "Grantor "), whose mailing address is7157 Sockwell Road, Elon, NC 27244 , to the State of
North Carolina, ( "Grantee "), whose mailing address is State of North Carolina, Department of
Administration, State Property Office, 1321 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699 -1321. The
designations of Grantor and Grantee as used herein shall include said parties, their heirs,
successors, and assigns, and shall include singular, plural, masculine, feminine, or neuter as
required by context
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of N.C. Gen Stat § 143 -214 8 et sea., the State
of North Carolina has established the Ecosystem Enhancement Program (formerly known as the
Wetlands Restoration Program) within the Department of Environment and Natural Resources
for the purposes of acquiring, maintaining, restoring, enhancing, creating and preserving wetland
and riparian resources that contribute to the protection and improvement of water quality, flood
prevention, fisheries, aquatic habitat, wildlife habitat, and recreational opportunities, and
WHEREAS, this Conservation Easement from Grantor to Grantee has been negotiated,
arranged and provided for as a condition of a full delivery contract between Wildlands
Engineering, Inc, 1430 S Mint Street Charlotte, NC 28203 and the North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, to provide stream, wetland and /or buffer mitigation
PREPARED BY COLTRANE & OVERFIELD. PLLC

pursuant to the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Purchase and
Services Contract Number 4949
WHEREAS, The State of North Carolina is qualified to be the Grantee of a Conservation
Easement pursuant to N.0 Gen Stat. § 121 -35; and
WHEREAS, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the North Carolina
Department of Transportation and the United States Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington
District entered into a Memorandum of Agreement, (MOA) duly executed by all parties in
Greensboro, NC on July 22, 2003, which recognizes that the Ecosystem Enhancement Program
is to provide for compensatory mitigation by effective protection of the land, water and natural
resources of the State by restoring, enhancing and preserving ecosystem functions; and
WHEREAS, the acceptance of this instrument for and on behalf of the State of North
Carolina was granted to the Department of Administration by resolution as approved by the
Governor and Council of State adopted at a meeting held in the City of Raleigh, North Carolina,
on the 81' day of February 2000; and
WHEREAS, the Ecosystem Enhancement Program in the Department of Environment
and Natural Resources, which has been delegated the authority authorized by the Governor and
Council of State to the Department of Administration, has approved acceptance of this
instrument; and
WHEREAS, Grantor owns in fee simple certain real property situated, lying, and being
in Washington Township, Guilford County, North Carolina (the "Property "), and being more
particularly described as that certain parcel of land containing approximately 47 +/- acres and
being conveyed to the Grantor by deed as recorded in Deed Book 6963 at Page 483, Deed Book
7538 at Page 1429, Deed Book 7548 at Page 681, and Deed Book 7551 at Page 1043 of the
Guilford County Registry, North Carolina; and further identified as PIN# 8838 -83 -5816, and
WHEREAS, Grantor is willing to grant a Conservation Easement over the herein
described areas of the Property, thereby restricting and limiting the use of the included areas of
the Property to the terms and conditions and purposes hereinafter set forth, and Grantee is willing
to accept such Conservation Easement. This Conservation Easement shall be for the protection
and benefit of Reedy Fork
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, terms, conditions, and
restrictions hereinafter set forth, Grantor unconditionally and irrevocably hereby grants and
conveys unto Grantee, its successors and assigns, forever and in perpetuity, a Conservation
Easement along with a general Right of Access
The Easement Area consists of the following:
Easement Areas C & D containing a total of 5.66 acres as shown on the plats of survey entitled
"Final Plat, Conservation Easement for the State of North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program, Project Name: Agony Acres Mitigation Project, SPO File No. 41- AAABM, EEP Site
Pi-

No. 95716" dated 3/24/13- 10/08/13 by Phillro B. Kee, PLS Number NC -4347 and recorded in
the Guilford County, North Carolina Register of Deeds at Plat Book 185 Page 118.
See attached "Exhibit A ", Legal Description of area of the Property hereinafter referred to as the
"Easement Area"
The purposes of this Conservation Easement are to maintain, restore, enhance, construct,
create and preserve wetland and/or riparian resources in the Easement Area that contribute to the
protection and improvement of water quality, flood prevention, fisheries, aquatic habitat, wildlife
habitat, and recreational opportunities; to maintain permanently the Easement Area in its natural
condition, consistent with these purposes; and to prevent any use of the Easement Area that will
significantly impair or interfere with these purposes To achieve these purposes, the following
conditions and restrictions are set forth:
I. DURATION OF EASEMENT
Pursuant to law, including the above referenced statutes, this Conservation Easement and
Right of Access shall be perpetual and it shall run with, and be a continuing restriction upon the
use of, the Property, and it shall be enforceable by the Grantee against the Grantor and against
Grantor's heirs, successors and assigns, personal representatives, agents, lessees, and licensees.
H. GRANTOR RESERVED USES AND RESTRICTED ACTIVITES
The Easement Area shall be restricted from any development or usage that would impair
or interfere with the purposes of this Conservation Easement. Unless expressly reserved as a
compatible use herein, any activity in, or use of, the Easement Area by the Grantor is prohibited
as inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation Easement. Any rights not expressly
reserved hereunder by the Grantor have been acquired by the Grantee. Any rights not expressly
reserved hereunder by the Grantor, including the rights to all mitigation credits, mcluding, but
not limited to, stream, wetland, and riparian buffer mitigation units, denved from each site within
the area of the Conservation Easement, are conveyed to and belong to the Grantee. Without
limiting the generality of the foregoing, the following specific uses are prohibited, restricted, or
reserved as indicated:
A. Recreational Uses. Grantor expressly reserves the right to undeveloped recreational
uses, including hiking, bird watching, hunting and fishing, and access to the Easement Area for
the purposes thereof.
B. Motorized Vehicle Use. Motorized vehicle use in the Easement Area is prohibited.
C. Educational Uses. The Grantor reserves the right to engage in and permit others to
engage in educational uses in the Easement Area not inconsistent with this Conservation
Easement, and the right of access to the Easement Area for such purposes including organized
educational activities such as site visits and observations Educational uses of the property shall
not alter vegetation, hydrology or topography of the site.
3

D. Vegetative Cutting. Except as related to the removal of non - native plants, diseased or
damaged trees, or vegetation that destabilizes or renders unsafe the Easement Area to persons or
natural habitat, all cutting, removal, mowing, harming, or destruction of any trees and vegetation
in the Easement Area is prohibited.
E. Industrial, Residential and Commercial Uses. All industrial, residential and
commercial uses are prohibited in the Easement Area.
F. Agricultural Use. All agricultural uses are prohibited within the Easement Area
including any use for cropland, waste lagoons, or pastureland.
G. New Construction. There shall be no building, facility, mobile home, antenna, utility
pole, tower, or other structure constructed or placed in the Easement Area.
H. Roads and Trails. There shall be no construction of roads, trails, walkways, or paving
in the Easement Area
I. Signs. No signs shall be permitted m the Easement Area except interpretive signs
describing restoration activities and the conservation values of the Easement Area, signs
identifying the owner of the Property and the holder of the Conservation Easement, signs giving
directions, or signs prescribing rules and regulations for the use of the Easement Area may be
allowed.
J. Dumping or Storing. Dumping or storage of soil, trash, ashes, garbage, waste,
abandoned vehicles, appliances, machinery, or any other material in the Easement Area is
prohibited
K. Grading, Mineral Use, Excavation, Dredging. There shall be no grading, filling,
excavation, dredging, mining, drilling; removal of topsoil, sand, gravel, rock, peat, minerals, or
other materials
L. Water Quality and Drainage Patterns. There shall be no diking, draining, dredging,
channeling, filling, leveling, pumping, impounding or diverting, causing, allowing or permitting
the diversion of surface or underground water in the Easement Area. No altering or tampering
with water control structures or devices, or disruption or alteration of the restored, enhanced, or
created drainage patterns is allowed All removal of wetlands, polluting or discharging into
waters, springs, seeps, or wetlands, or use of pesticide or biocides in the Easement Area is
prohibited In the event of an emergency interruption or shortage of all other water sources,
water from within the Easement Area may temporarily be used for good cause shown as needed
for the survival of livestock and agricultural production on the Property
M. Subdivision and Conveyance. Grantor voluntarily agrees that no subdivision,
partitioning, or dividing of the underlying Property owned by the Grantor in fee simple ( "fee ")
that is subject to this Easement is allowed. Unless agreed to by the Grantee in writing, any future
conveyance of the underlying fee and the rights conveyed herein shall be as a single block of
4

property. Any future transfer of the fee simple shall be subject to this Conservation Easement. '
Any transfer of the fee is subject to the Grantee's right of unlimited and repeated ingress and
egress over and across the Property to the Easement Area for the purposes set forth herein.
N. Development Rights. All development rights are permanently removed from the
Easement Area and are non - transferrable
U. Disturbance of Natural Features. Any change, disturbance, alteration or impairment of
the natural features of the Easement Area or any intentional introduction of non - native plants,
trees and /or animal species by Grantor is prohibited
The Grantor may request permission to vary from the above restrictions for good cause
shown, provided that any such request is not inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation
Easement, and the Grantor obtains advance written approval from the N.C. Ecosystem
Enhancement Program, whose mailing address is 1652 Mail Services Center, Raleigh, NC
27699 -1652.
III. GRANTEE RESERVED USES
A. Right of Access, Construction, and Inspection. The Grantee, its employees and agents,
successors and assigns, receive a perpetual Right of Access to the Easement Area over the
Property at reasonable times to undertake any activities to restore, construct, manage, maintain,
enhance, and monitor the stream, wetland and any other riparian resources in the Easement Area,
in accordance with restoration activities or a long -term management plan. Unless otherwise
specifically set forth in this Conservation Easement, the nghts granted herem do not include or
establish for the public any access rights
B. Restoration Activities. These activities include planting of trees, shrubs and herbaceous
vegetation, installation of monitoring wells, utilization of heavy equipment to grade, fill, and
prepare the soil, modification of the hydrology of the site, and installation of natural and
manmade materials as needed to direct in- stream, above ground, and subterraneous water flow.
C. Signs. The Grantee, its employees and agents, successors or assigns, shall be permitted
to place signs and witness posts on the Property to include any or all of the following. describe
the project, prohibited activities within the Conservation Easement, or identify the project
boundaries and the holder of the Conservation Easement.
D. Fences. The Grantee, its employees and agents, successors or assigns, shall be permitted
to place fencing on the Property to restrict livestock access Although the Grantee is not
responsible for fence maintenance, the Grantee reserves the right to repair the fence, at its sole
discretion

IV. ENFORCEMENT AND REMEDIES
A. Enforcement. To accomplish the purposes of this Conservation Easement, Grantee is
allowed to prevent any activity within the Easement Area that is inconsistent with the purposes
of this Easement and to require the restoration of such areas or features in the Easement Area
that may have been damaged by such unauthorized activity or use. Upon any breach of the terms
of this Conservation Easement by Grantor, the Grantee shall, except as provided below, notify
the Grantor -in writing of such breach and the Grantor shall have ninety (90) days after receipt of
such notice to correct the damage caused by such breach If the breach and damage remains
uncured after ninety (90) days, the Grantee may enforce this Conservation Easement by bringing
appropriate legal proceedings including an action to recover damages, as well as injunctive and
other relief The Grantee shall also have the power and authority, consistent with its statutory
authority. (a) to prevent any impairment of the Easement Area by acts which may be unlawful
or in violation of this Conservation Easement; (b) to otherwise preserve or protect its interest in
the Property; or (c) to seek damages from any appropriate person or entity. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, the Grantee reserves the immediate right, without notice, to obtain a temporary
restraining order, injunctive or other appropriate relief, if the breach is or would irreversibly or
otherwise materially impair the benefits to be derived from this Conservation Easement, and the
Grantor and Grantee acknowledge that the damage would be irreparable and remedies at law
inadequate. The rights and remedies of the Grantee provided hereunder shall be in addition to,
and not in lieu of, all other rights and remedies available to Grantee in connection with this
Conservation Easement.
B. Inspection. The Grantee, its employees and agents, successors and assigns, have the
right, with reasonable notice, to enter the Easement Area over the Property at reasonable times
for the purpose of inspection to determine whether the Grantor is complying with the terms,
conditions and restrictions of this Conservation Easement
C. Acts Beyond Grantor's Control. Nothing contained in this Conservation Easement
shall be construed to entitle Grantee to bring any action against Grantor for any mjury or change
in the Easement Area caused by third parties, resulting from causes beyond the Grantor's control,
including, without limitation, fire, flood, storm, and earth movement, or from any prudent action
taken in good faith by the Grantor under emergency conditions to prevent, abate, or mitigate
significant injury to life, or damage to the Property resulting from such causes
D. Costs of Enforcement. Beyond regular and typical monitoring expenses, any costs
incurred by Grantee in enforcing the terms of this Conservation Easement against Grantor,
including, without limitation, any costs of restoration necessitated by Grantor's acts or omissions
in violation of the terms of this Conservation Easement, shall be borne by Grantor
E. No Waiver. Enforcement of this Easement shall be at the discretion of the Grantee and
any forbearance, delay or omission by Grantee to exercise its rights hereunder in the event of any
breach of any term set forth herein shall not be construed to be a waiver by Grantee.
C1

V. MISCELLANEOUS
A. This instrument sets forth the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the
Conservation Easement and supersedes all prior discussions, negotiations, understandings or
agreements relating to the Conservation Easement If any provision is found to be invalid, the
remainder of the provisions of the Conservation Easement, and the application of such provision
to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is found to be invalid, shall not be
affected thereby.
B. Grantor is responsible for any real estate taxes, assessments, fees, or charges levied upon
the Property. Grantee shall not be responsible for any costs or liability of any kind related to the
ownership, operation, insurance, upkeep, or maintenance of the Property, except as expressly
provided herein Upkeep of any constructed bridges, fences, or other amenities on the Property
are the sole responsibility of the Grantor. Nothing herein shall relieve the Grantor of the
obligation to comply with federal, state or local laws, regulations and permits that may apply to
the exercise of the Reserved Rights
C. Any notices shall be sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested to the
parties at their addresses shown herein or to other addresses as either party establishes in writing
upon notification to the other.
D. Grantor shall notify Grantee in writing of the name and address and any party to whom
the Property or any part thereof is to be transferred at or prior to the time said transfer is made
Grantor further agrees that any subsequent lease, deed, or other legal instrument by which any
interest in the Property is conveyed subject to the Conservation Easement herein created.
E. The Grantor and Grantee agree that the terms of this Conservation Easement shall survive
any merger of the fee and easement interests in the Property or any portion thereof.
F. This Conservation Easement and Right of Access may be amended, but only in writing
signed by all parties hereto, or their successors or assigns, if such amendment does not affect the
qualification of this Conservation Easement or the status of the Grantee under any applicable
laws, and is consistent with the purposes of the Conservation Easement The owner of the
Property shall notify the U S Army Corps of Engineers in writing sixty (60) days prior to the
initiation of any transfer of all or any part of the Property Such notification shall be addressed
to. Justin McCorkle, General Counsel, US Army Corps of Engineers, 69 Darlington Avenue,
Wilmington, NC 28403
G. The parties recognize and agree that the benefits of this Conservation Easement are in
gross and assignable provided, however, that the Grantee hereby covenants and agrees, that in
the event it transfers or assigns this Conservation Easement, the organization receiving the
interest will be a qualified holder under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 121 -34 et seq. and § 170(h) of the
Internal Revenue Code, and the Grantee further covenants and agrees that the terms of the
transfer or assignment will be such that the transferee or assignee will be required to continue in
perpetuity the conservation purposes described in this document
7

r'
1
VI. QUIET ENJOYMENT
Grantor reserves all remaining rights accruing from ownership of the Property, including
the right to engage in or permit or invite others to engage in only those uses of the Easement
Area that are expressly reserved herein, not prohibited or restricted herein, and are not
inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation Easement Without limiting the generality of
the foregoing, the Grantor expressly reserves to the Grantor, and the Grantor's invitees and
licensees, the right of access to the Easement Area, and the right of quiet enjoyment of the
Easement Area
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said rights and easements perpetually unto the State of
North Carolina for the aforesaid purposes.
AND Grantor covenants that Grantor is seized of said premises in fee and has the right to
convey the permanent Conservation Easement herein granted; that the same is free from
encumbrances and that Grantor will warrant and defend title to the same against the claims of all
persons whomsoever.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Grantor has hereunto set his hand and seal, the day
and year first above written
Holy Cow Farm LLC
4:i� / (SEAL)
David F. Teague, Manager
Susan S Teague, Manager
(SEAL)

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF Guilford
I, Paulette L. Watkins ' a Notary Public in and for the
aforesaid County and State, do,hereby certify that David F. Teague , Manager of
Holy Cow Farm LLC a limited liability company, personally
came before me this day and acknowledged the due execution of the foregoing instrument on
behalf of the company.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereto under set my hand and Notarial Seal this the
12th day of December , 20 1.3
Notary Public
My Commission Expires: 7/1/18 Paulette L. Watkins
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTYOF Guilford
PuBlic
I, Paulette L. Watkins , a Notary Public in and for the
aforesaid County and State, do hereby certify that Susan S . Teague , Manager of
Holy Cow Farm , LLC a Iimited liability company, personally
came before me this day and acknowledged the due execution of the foregoing instrument on
behalf of the company
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereto under set my hand and Notarial Seal this the
12th day of December 20 1.3
r 4, VV
Notary Public
My Commission Expires: 7 /1 /18 Paulette L. Watkins
L ; HOTARy� Z
,N
p
9 - vBUC .:*4
:; tAo
co
�oUN�,��,,

f
"Exhibit A"
A Conservation Easement for
The State of North Carolina,
Ecosystem Enhancement Program,
Agony Acres - Mitigation Project
The Property of Holy Cow Farm, LLC
(formerly Diamond Shadow Farm, LLC)
SPO FILE NUMBER. 41 AAABM EEP PROJECT ID: (95716)
The following conservation easement areas are located off of Sockwell Road (SR #2735) within
the Washington Township, Guilford County, North Carolina and being on a portion of that
property conveyed to Holy Cow Farm, LLC by Diamond Shadow Farms, LLC as recorded in
Deed Book 7538 Page 1429 in the Guilford County Register of Deeds and being more
particularly described as follows-
Conservation EasementArea "C"4.57Acres
BEGINNING AT A 5/8" REBAR SET WITH AN EEP CAP (CORNER 20), said rebar being in
a common line of Deed Book 7538 Page 1429 and Deed Book 7345 Page 1799 and located N
48 °09'27" W a horizontal ground distance of 2291.28 feet from a 1" iron pipe set in concrete
with a Kee cap, said iron pipe being located in a pasture approximately 165 feet north of the
centerline of Sockwell road and having North Carolina State Plane Coordinates of Northing:
883153.24 feet and Easting: 1839742.68 feet;
Thence with the aforesaid common line and the conservation easement area N 80 °46'51" E the
following (2) distances-
(1) 101.89 feet to an existing 3/4" pinched top iron pipe (comer 21);
(2) 126.52 feet to a 5/8" rebar set with an EEP cap (comer 22);
Thence leaving the aforementioned common line and continuing with the conservation easement
area the following (12) courses and distances-
(1) S 73 °13'09" E a distance of 291 14 feet to a calculated point (corner 23),
(2) N 70 °55'10" E a distance of 166 31 feet to a calculated point (corner 24);
(3) S 85 123'23" E a distance of 211.18 feet to a calculated point (corner 25);
(4) N 50'09'12" E a distance of 23170 feet to a calculated point (corner 26);
(5) S 25 °14'28" E a distance of 157.53 feet to a calculated point (comer 27);
(6) S 52 133'00" W a distance of 228.44 feet to a calculated point (corner 28);
(7) N 89 °57'56" W a distance of 293.85 feet to a calculated point (corner 29);
(8) S 27 045'36" W a distance of 140.63 feet to a calculated point (comer 30);
(9) N 85 °06'04" W a distance of 144.94 feet to a calculated point (corner 31);
(10) N 65 02730" W a distance of 203.01 feet to a calculated point (comer 32),
(11) N 81112'5 1 " W a distance of 262.49 feet to a calculated point (corner 33);
(12) N 05 °21'57" E a distance of 131.05 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
10

Conservation EasementArea "D" 1.09 Acres:
BEGINNING AT AN EXISTING 3/4" IRON PIPE (CORNER 34), said iron pipe being a
common comer of Deed Book 7538 Page 1429, Deed Book 7345 Page 1799 and Deed Book
7345 Page 1794 (Tract #1), and located N 15 142'42" W a horizontal ground distance of 1793.72
feet from a 1" iron pipe set in concrete with a Kee cap, said iron pipe being located in a pasture
approximately 165 feet north of the centerline of Sockwell road and having North Carolina State
Plane Coordinates of Northing: 883153.24 feet and Easting: 1839742.68 feet,
Thence with a common line of Deed Book 7538 Page 1429 and Deed Book 7345 Page 1794 and
with the conservation easement area S 13 °09'45" E the following (2) distances:
(1) 129.05 feet to an existing planted stone (comer 35),
(2) 271.35 feet to an existing planted stone (corner 36), said stone being a common comer of
Deed Book 7538 Page 1429, Deed Book 7345 Page 1794 (Tract #1) and Deed Book 7306
Page 450 of the Guilford County Registry;
Thence leaving the aforementioned common line and with a common line of Deed Book 7538
Page 1429 and Deed Book 7306 Page 450 of the Guilford County Registry and continuing with
the conservation easement area S 06 °22'08" W and distance of 153.84 feet to a 5/8" rebar set
with an EEP cap (comer 37), said rebar being located N 06 °22'08" E a distance of 1431.63 feet
from an existing 1/2" iron pipe;
Thence leaving the aforesaid common line and continuing with the conservation easement area
the following (3) courses and distances:
(1) N 28 °59'44" W a distance of 174.90 feet to a calculated point (comer 38);
(2) N 02'09'17" W a distance of 115.42 feet to a calculated point (corner 39),
(3) N 25 °14'28" W a distance of 279.36 feet to a 5/8" rebar set with an EEP cap (corner 40),
said rebar being in a common line of Deed Book 7538 Page 1429 and Deed Book 7345
Page 1799 of the Guilford County Registry;
Thence with the aforesaid common line and continuing with the conservation easement N
80 °46'51" E the following (2) distances
(1) 63.48 feet to a 5/8" rebar set with an EEP cap (corner 41),
(2) 72.41 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
Being all of that area of land containing a total of 5.66 Acres, being the same more or less,
according to a plat of survey entitled "A Conservation Easement Survey for The State of North
Carolina, Ecosystem Enhancement Program, Agony Acres Mitigation Project ", on the property
of Holy Cow Farm, LLC; Job# 130101 -CE. This description was prepared from an actual survey
and shown on the aforementioned plat by Kee Mapping and Surveying, PA (License # C -3039)
between the dates of 03/27/13 — 10/08/2013 and under the supervision of Phillip B. Kee, NC PLS
(License # L- 4647).
Conservation easement corners were not set and conservation easement lines were not flagged at time
of recordation. Corners to be set after construction with 5/8" by 30" rebar and capped with a 3 %"
aluminum cap with state seal, unless otherwise noted.
I