20131301 Ver 1_401 Application_20131213

MCADAMS
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
To: NC DENR - Division of Water Resources
Date: December 16, 2013
ATTN: Ms. Cherri Smith
1650 Mail Service Drive..!
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699 �" REGULAR MAIL
Re: Purdue Pharma
Nationwide Permit 39 /GC 3890
I am sending you the following item(s):
Job No.: PPH -13010
COPIES
DATE
NO.
DESCRIPTION
5
Signed Agent Authorization
5
Fi .1 USGS Quad - Northeast Durham
5
Fi .2 Wake County Soil Survey
5
Fi .3 Existing Conditions
5
Fi .3 Existing Conditions w. Aerial
5
Fi .4 Overall Impact Ma
5
Pre - Construction Notification
5
Data Forms
5
Previous Wetland Delineation Maps
5
DWQ Neuse Buffer Determination Letter
1
Di ital CD of Plans
1
Check - Application Fee
These are transmitted as checke
Mw
❑ As requested - For your use
s, ) ;
❑ For approval ' ('j�
® For review and comment a Da FAA
Copy to: Signed:
vin Yates
enior Environmental Consultant
Raleigh- Durham Charlotte
2905 Meridian Parkway 11301 Carmel Commons Blvd., Suite 111
Durham, North Carolina 27713 Charlotte, North Carolina
(919) 361 -5000 (704) 527 -0800
Designing Tomorrow's Infrastructure & Communities
McAdamsCo.com

�J McADAMS
December 13, 2013
Ms. Cherri Smith
401 & Buffer Permitting Unit Supervisor
NC DENR - Division of Water Resources
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699 -1650
Re: Nationwide Permit 39 /GC 3890
Purdue Pharma
Raleigh, North Carolina
PPH -13010 c3N1a }Ty
W b + Ater 9ranch
Dear Ms. Smith:
On behalf of, we are applying for a US Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE)
Nationwide Permit 39 and NC Division of Water Resources (DWR) proposed
impacts to waters of the US and Neuse Buffers associated with the project
known as the Purdue Pharmaceutical Manufacturing Facility. The
proposedPurdue Pharmaceuticals - Treyburn site is proposed at the northern
terminus of International Drive in Treyburn Corporate Park in northern
Durham, NC. The western portion of the subject property drains to the Little
River and the eastern portion and its unnamed tributaries drain to the Eno River,
both of these Rivers feed to Falls Lake, located within the Neuse River Basin
(Hydrologic Unit Code 03020201).
• Signed Agent Authorization
• Fig. l - USGS Quad — Northeast Durham
• Fig.2- Wake County Soil Survey (Sheets: 14)
• Fig.3- Existing Conditions
• Fig.3- Existing Conditions w. Aerial
• Fig.4- Overall Impact Map (Insets 1)
The John R. McAdams • Pre - Construction Notification
Company, Inc. • Data Forms
• Previous Wetland Delineation Maps (AID # AID 200021060)
2905 Meri dian Parkway y
Raleigh Durham, • DWQ Neuse Buffer Determination Letter (NBRRO # 13 -346)
Durham, North Carolina 27713
(919) 361 -5000
Charlotte, NC
11301 Carmel Commons Blvd,
Suite 111
Charlotte North Carolina 28226
(704) 527 -0800
MCAdamSCo.COm Designing Tomorrow's Infrastructure & Communities

Ms. Cherri Smith
Purdue Pharma
December 13, 2013
Page 2 of 7
PROJECT LOCATION/HABITAT: The proposed Purdue Pharmaceuticals
- Treyburn site is proposed at the northern terminus of International Drive in
Treyburn Corporate Park in northern Durham, NC The site is within the City
of Durham corporate limits and urban growth area, and is subject to its
zoning The approximate 51 -acre parcel is to be subdivided off a larger 220 -
acreparent parcel, abutting a Norfolk and Western iailroad right -of -way, as
well as Little River and its bottomlands, on its western boundary, and The
Southern Research Institute to the south. There is a proposed off -site sanitary
sewer connection to the east of the property boundary, therefore the project
area has bee extended to capture proposed impacts associated with the sewer
line crossing.
The site is vacant and entirely forested with a mixture of some mature
hardwoods (mostly Oak species and Tulip Poplar) and loblolly pine A
Norfolk & Western railroad right -of -way runs generally north/south at the
site's western boundary. Within the western flank of the site is a dirt road, as
well as a Duke powerline easement with pylons. 100 -year floodplain and
floodway zones associated with the Little River bottomlands extend into the
site's western edge The western portion of the subject property drains to the
Little River and the eastern portion and its unnamed tributaries drain to the Eno
River, both of these Rivers feed to Falls Lake, located within the Neuse River
Basin (Hydrologic Unit Code 03020201)
JURISDICTIONAL FEATURES & PREVIOUS DETERMINATIONS:
The jurisdictional wetlands were originally verified by Mr Todd Tugwell of
the US Army Corps of Engineers on August 3, 2005, per signed JD maps
(AID 200021060) Mr Eric Alsmeyer of the USACE, re- verified the original
delineation most recently on June 20, 2013. There are a total of 3 49 acres of
riparian wetlands within the project Since it is a contiguous wetlands complex
over one acre in size, there is a 25 -ft riparian buffer from the perimeter of the
wetland boundary per the Durham Unified Development Ordinance. A Neuse
River Riparian Stream Buffer Determination was conducted by Sara Knies of
the NC Division of Water Resources (DWR) on November 21, 2013 (NBRRO
PPH -13010

Ms. Cherry Smith
Purdue Pharma
December 13, 2013
Page 3 of 7
# 13 -346) (enclosed) Stream "A" depicted on the Durham County Soils
Survey, which runs north to south, along the eastern project boundary is present
per the enclosed NCDWR Buffer Determination Letter, and was determined
to be an intermittent stream feature Intermittent Stream Feature "A" is
broken into two sections, with 230 linear feet in section Al and 442 linear feet
in section A2 Since this is mapped feature, Stream "A" is subject to the
Neuse River Riparian Buffer Rules Stream Feature `B" is not present in the
field There are several non - jurisdictional ephemeral drains on the western
side of the property See Figures 1 -3
PROPOSED IMPACTS: The proposed Purdue Pharmaceuticals project is a
188,250 square feet, two -story pharmaceutical manufacturing facility with
laboratories, along with parking, infrastructure, utilities, and stormwater
management improvements The site is within the City of Durham corporate
limits and urban growth area, and is subject to its zoning The approximate
51 -acre parcel is to be subdivided off a larger 220 -acre parent parcel currently
owned by Treyburn Corporate Park and eventually owned by Purdue Pharma,
LP
The entire site was designed to minimize impacts to aquatic and terrestrial
resources, while utilizing the remainder of the parcel. The manufacturing
facility, road access, and most of the infrastructure will be completely
constructed in uplands, however the facility will be required to tie into an off-
site sanitary sewer to the east of the property boundary with proposed stream,
wetland, and riparian buffer impacts (See Figure 4, Inset 1).
INSET 1 Although efforts have been made to avoid impacts, the proposed 8"
sanitary sewer will need to cross Stream "A" in this location due to topographic
constraints, to tie into the main 12" trunk line to the east Impacts have been
located at choke point (narrow band) to minimize impacts to wetlands, resulting
in 0 02 acre of forested wetland impacts. Although there will be no associated
fill, since the sewer maintenance corridor will be maintained the impacts to
forested wetlands are considered permanent. There is 40 linear feet of
temporary impact to stream "A" associated with the installation of the sewer
PPH -13010

Ms Cheni Smith
Purdue Pharma
December 13, 2013
Page 4 of 7
line The sewer is proposed to be installed utilizing the trench and backfill
method While directionally boring methods were looked at, they proved to be
too costly, with a risk of hitting bedrock at depth. Once trenched and backfilled,
the stream bed is to be returned to the original grade
There is 2,431 square feet of Zone 1 and 1,784 square feet of Zone 2 impacts to
the Neuse Buffei, which crosses the stream at a near 90 degree angle with a
maintenance corridor of 30 linear feet. These are considered allowable uses
TOTAL PROPOSED WETLAND IMPACTS:
Impact Location
Impact Type
Proposed
(acres)
Inset 1 (perm)
Trench & Backfill
Sewer Install
002
TOTAL
404/401 wetlands: 0.02 acre
PPH -13010

Ms Cherri Smith
Purdue Pharma
December 13, 2013
Page 5 of 7
TOTAL PROPOSED STREAM IMPACTS:
TOTAL RIPARIANBUFFER IMPACTS:
Impact Location
Impact Type
Proposed
Impact Location
Impact Type
(linear feet)
Inset 1 (temp)
Trench & Backf ll
40
Sewer Install
TOTAL
401f of temporary impact
TOTAL RIPARIANBUFFER IMPACTS:
Impact Location
Impact Type
Impacts (square feet)
Zone I / Zone 2
Inset 1 (perm )
allowable Sewer Easement 2,431 1,784
Total Zone 1 Impacts: 2,431 sf
TOTALS
Total Zone 2 Impacts: 1,784 sf
PPH -13010

Ms Cherri Smith
Purdue Pharma
December 13, 2013
Page 6 of 7
AVOIDANCE and MINIMIZATION: Impacts to juiisdictional streams
and stream buffers have been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent
practicable, however due to required infrastructure improvements there are
proposed impacts There are only 40 linear feet of temporary stream impact and
0 02 acre of wetland impact associated with this portion of the project, while
avoiding 652 linear of remaining stream channel and 3 47 acres of wetlands
within the project area. Location of the proposed sewer connections were
directed to existing manholes, absence of significant trees and wetlands within
the proposed impact area. To minimize impacts, the sanitary sewer at impact
area "A" has been aligned at a near perpendicular angle as it crosses the
unnamed tributary, reducing stream and stream buffer impacts In this location
Mitigation for impacts is proposed in the form of avoidance and minimization
MITIGATION: There is 0.02 acre of permanent wetland impact. Although
there will be no associated fill, since the sewer maintenance corridor will be
maintained the impacts to forested wetlands are considered permanent Per an
email dated 09/27/2013 Mr Eric Alsmeye> (USACE) stated that mitigation will
likely not be required Mitigation for impacts is proposed in the form of
avoidance and minimization
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT: The proposed development is located
within the Neuse River basin with stormwater runoff from the proposed
development draining into an unnamed tributary of the Eno River in the Falls
Lake Watershed The site is located inside the Watei Supply Watershed within
the F /J -B water supply watershed overlay district. Stormwater management on
this site shall meet the stormwater management performance standards for
development set forth in the Durham County regulations The western facility
is discharging into an adjacent floodplam and the eastern facility is
discharging into a wetland complex, both with the little to no slope In
combination with the stormwater facility, discharge points, and associated
rip -rap dissipaters they will meet diffuse flow requirements for the proposed
project
PPH -13010

Ms. Cherri Smith
Purdue Pharma
December 13, 2013
Page 7 of 7
Peak Runoff Control Requirements: The proposed project will result in a
significant increase in peak flow rates. To mitigate this impact, the proposed
facilities have been sized such that post - development peak now rates are no
greater than pre - development levels in the 1 -, 2 -, and 10 -year storm events.
The peak runoff control calculations include both the proposed condition and
future condition of development.
Pollutant and Nutrient Control Requirements: The stormwater facilities onsite
are designed such that they achieve 90% TSS. Nutrient loading calculations
for this site are based only on the proposed condition. The stormwater
management facilities provide the necessary loading rate reduction needed for
the site to reach the target loading rate of 0.33 lb /ac /yr of phosphorus;
however, they do not provide the necessary loading rate reduction needed for
the site to reach the target loading rate of 2.2 lb /ac /yr of nitrogen. The post
development with BMPs nitrogen loading rate is 2.32 lb /ac /yr. The project
requires an offset payment to offset the 182.74 lb of nitrogen (0.12 lb /ac /yr
50.76 ac * 30 yr) generated by this development.
A copy of the final stormwater management plan and approval letter from
City of Durham/Durham County will be provided to NCDWR upon approval.
Consideration of this project is greatly appreciated. If you should have any
questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact
me at (919) 287 -0895.
Sincerely,
Mcadams Company
Kevin Yates
Senior Enviro ental Consultant
Project Manager
Enclosures
13PH -13010

Since 1979
THE JOHN R. McADAMS COMPANY, INC.
AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
All Blanks To Ile Filled In By The CurrentPronerty Owner
Name: Treybum Corporate Park LLC
Address: 2020 W. Main Street #300 Durham, NC 27705
Phone: [phone]
Project Name/Description: Purdue Pharmaceuticals — Tre burn Corporate Park - Durham, NC
Project Number: PPH -13010 Project Manager: I Bill Derks/ Kevin Yates
Date: June 19.2013
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Attn: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
Re: Wetlands Related Consulting and Permitting
To Whom It May Concern:
1, the current owner, hereby designate and authorize The John R. McAdams Company, Inc. to act
in my behalf as my agent for the on -site concurrence meeting with the Corps of Engineers on
June 20, 2013.
This notification supersedes any previous correspondence concerning the agent for this project.
NOTICE: This authorization, for liability and professional.yyourtesy reasons, is valid only
for government officials to enter the property when, q Ecompanied by The John 11.
McAdams Company, Inc. staff. You should call The ohdR. McAdams Company, Inc. to
arrange a site meeting prior to visiting the site.
tAr' :m-
Print (o Property_ Own e�y
Cc: Ms. Cherri Smith
NCDENR -DWQ
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604
C I V I L E N G I N E E R I N G • L A N D P L A N N I N G • S U R V E Y I N G
PO Box 14005 • Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 • (919) 361 -5000 • fax [phone]
mvw Johnrmcadams.com

0
00 z
_M o o
= w �
IL o
4
a
i
MCADAMS

•
B
i
?.
/ FEAT E 13 Co mfC
/ \. -� s , I
FEATURE A
m rc
C f z
Cf1 lti \`\ t . t j
\ � ` —M! B
` fD
! f�
GRAPHIC SCALE
r r ! All 400 0 200 400 8000
1
' !
1 inch _
400 ft.
4 !
DURHAM COUNTY SOIL SURVEY SHEET # 14
�z1F
W
pj
I
W�7W�7 f
O ( M
M mDm O \
a o
a
z
G
®MCADAMS

WA7F919
O 'C
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Page 1 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
Pre - Construction Notification PCN
Form
A. Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1 a.
Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit El Section 10 Permit
1 b.
Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: or General Permit (GP) number: NWP: 39 / GP: 3890
1c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes ® No
1 d.
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
® 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ® Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e.
Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification:
❑ Yes ® No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes ® No
1f.
Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in -lieu
fee program.
❑ Yes ® No
1 g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
❑ Yes ® No
1 h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes ® No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
Purdue Pharma Manufacturing L.P.
2b.
County:
Durham
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Durham
2d.
Subdivision name:
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no:
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Treyburn Corporate Park, LLC
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
DB: 170 Page: 314
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
Terry Sanford
3d.
Street address:
2020 W. Main Street, Suite 300
3e.
City, state, zip:
Durham, NC 27705
3f.
Telephone no.:
3g.
Fax no.:
3h.
Email address:
TSanford @jtsassociates.com
Page 1 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4
Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a
Applicant is
❑ Agent ® Other, specify Responsible for Development and eventual
owner of parcel
4b
Name
Frank Demarmis
4c
Business name
(if applicable)
Purdue Pharma LP
4d
Street address
4701 Purdue Drive
4e
City, state, zip
Wilson, NC 27893
4f
Telephone no
Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc ) to
proposed project
4g
Fax no
Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water
4h
Email address
River basin
5
Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a
Name
Kevin Yates
5b
Business name
(if applicable)
McAdams Company
5c
Street address
P O Box 14005
5d
City, state, zip
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
5e
Telephone no
919 - 361 -5000
5f
Fax no
919- 361 -2269
5g
Email address
yates@mcadamsco com
B.
Project Information and Prior Project History
1
Property Identification
1a
Property identification no (tax PIN or parcel ID)
0845 -04 -64 -0807
1 b
Site coordinates (in decimal degrees)
Latitude 36 101637 N Longitude - 78 847708 W
(DD DDDDDD) ( -DD DDDDDD)
1 c
Property size
50 76 acres
2
Surface Waters
2a
Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc ) to
proposed project
Eno River
2b
Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water
WS- IV,CA, NSW Stream Index Number 27 -2 -(20 5)
2c
River basin
Neuse / HUC 03020201
Page 2 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version

3 Project Description
3a Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
The proposedPurdue Pharmaceuticals - Treyburn site is proposed at the northern terminus of International Drive in
Treyburn Corporate Park in northern Durham, NC The site is within the City of Durham corporate limits and urban
growth area, and is subject to its zoning The approximate 51 -acre parcel is to be subdivided off a larger 220 -
acreparent parcel, abutting a Norfolk and Western railroad right -of -way, as well as Little River and its bottomlands, on
its western boundary, and The Southern Research Institute to the south There is a proposed off -site sanitary sewer
connection to the east of the property boundary, therefore the project area has bee extended to capture proposed
impacts associated with the sewer line crossing
The site is vacant and entirely forested with a mixture of some mature hardwoods (mostly Oak species and Tulip
Poplar) and loblolly pine A Norfolk & Western railroad right -of -way runs generally north /south at the site's western
boundary Within the western flank of the site is a dirt road, as well as a Duke powerline easement with pylons 100 -
year floodplain and floodway zones associated with the Little River bottomlands extend into the site's western edge
The western portion of the subject property drains to the Little River and the eastern portion and its unnamed tributaries
drain to the Eno River, both of these Rivers feed to Falls Lake, located within the Neuse River Basin (Hydrologic Unit
Code 03020201)
The jurisdictional wetlands were originally verified by Mr Todd Tugwell of the US Army Corps of Engineers on August
3, 2005, per signed JD maps (AID 200021060) Mr Eric Alsmeyer of the USACE, re- verified the original delineation
most recently on June 20, 2013 There are a total of 3 49 acres of riparian wetlands within the project Since it is a
contiguous wetlands complex over one acre in size, there is a 25 -ft riparian buffer from the perimeter of the wetland
boundary per the Durham Unified Development Ordinance A Neuse River Riparian Stream Buffer Determination was
conducted by Sara Knies of the NC Division of Water Resources (DWR) on November 21, 2013 (NBRRO # 13 -346)
(enclosed) Stream "A" depicted on the Durham County Soils Survey, which runs north to south, along the eastern project
boundary is present per the enclosed NCDWR Buffer Determination Letter, and was determined to be an intermittent
stream feature Intermittent Stream Feature "A" is broken into two sections, with 230 linear feet in section Al and 442
linear feet in section A2 Since this is mapped feature, Stream "A" is subject to the Neuse River Riparian Buffer Rules
Stream Feature "B" is not present in the field There are several non - jurisdictional ephemeral drains on the western
side of the property See Figures 1 -3
Land use within the vicinity of the project is multi - family and residential, and with forested areas in the vicinity of the
project area There is also City of Raleigh sanitary sewer easements within and adjacent to the property and a
greenway running along the northern boundary of the property
Page 3 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version

3b List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property
Project Area 3 49 acres riparian / Property 0 65 acres riparian
3c List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property
672 1 f of Intermittent Stream
3d Explain the purpose of the proposed project
The purpose of the proposed project is to create a pharmaceutical manufacturing facility in Durham County, NC
3e Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used
The proposed Purdue Pharmaceuticals project is a 188,250 square feet, two -story pharmaceutical manufacturing
facility with laboratories, along with parking, infrastructure, utilities, and stormwater management improvements The
site is within the City of Durham corporate limits and urban growth area, and is subject to its zoning The approximate
51 -acre parcel is to be subdivided off a larger 220 -acre parent parcel currently owned by Treyburn Corporate Park and
eventually owned by Purdue Pharma, LP
PROPOSED IMPACTS: The entire site was designed to minimize impacts to aquatic and terrestrial resources, while
utilizing the remainder of the parcel The manufacturing facility, road access, and most of the infrastructure will be
completely constructed in uplands, however the facility will be required to tie into an off -site sanitary sewer to the east of
the property boundary with proposed stream, wetland, and riparian buffer impacts (See Figure 4, Inset 1)
INSET 1 Although efforts have been made to avoid impacts, the proposed 8" sanitary sewer will need to cross Stream
"A" in this location due to topographic constraints, to tie into the main 12" trunk line to the east Impacts have been located
at choke point (narrow band) to minimize impacts to wetlands, resulting in 0 02 acre of forested wetland impacts
Although there will be no associated fill, since the sewer maintenance corridor will be maintained the impacts to forested
wetlands are considered permanent There is 40 linear feet of temporary impact to stream "A" associated with the
installation of the sewer line The sewer is proposed to be installed utilizing the trench and backfill method While
directionally boring methods were looked at, they proved to be too costly, with a risk of hitting bedrock at depth Once
trenched and backfilled, the stream bed is to be returned to the original grade
There is 2,431 square feet of Zone 1 and 1,784 square feet of Zone 2 impacts to the Neuse Buffer, which crosses the
stream at a near 90 degree angle with a maintenance corridor of 30 linear feet These are considered allowable uses
Typical construction equipment will be used such as a long -arm track -hoe, front end loader, and bush hog for the initial
clearing
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
® Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments
4b If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
❑ Preliminary ® Final (UNKNOWN)
of determination was made?
4c If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Agency /Consultant Company EcoScience / McAdams
Name (if known) Kevin Yates / Sandy Smith
Other
4d If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation
. The jurisdictional wetlands were originally verified by Mr Todd Tugwell of the US Army Corps of Engineers on August
3, 2005, per signed JD maps (AID 200021060) Mr Eric Alsmeyer of the USACE, re- verified the original delineation
most recently on June 20, 2013
. A Neuse River Riparian Stream Buffer Determination was conducted by Sara Knies of the NC Division of Water
Resources (DWR) on November 21, 2013 (NBRRO # 13 -346)
Page 4 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version

5. Project History
5a Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
❑ Yes ® No ❑ Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions
Permits have been previously acquired for the Treyburn Corporate Park, however this project has been deemed a single
and complete project with independent utility
6 Future Project Plans
6a Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes ® No
6b If yes, explain
Page 5 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version

C Proposed Impacts Inventory
1 Impacts Summary
la Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply)
® Wetlands ® Streams - tributaries ® Buffers
❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2 Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted
2a
2b
2c
2d
2e
2f
Wetland impact
Type of jurisdiction
number —
Type of impact
Type of wetland
Forested
(Corps - 404, 10
Area of impact
Permanent (P) or
(if known)
DWQ — non -404, other)
(acres)
Temporary T
Inset 1 (perm)
Trench & Backfill
Sewer Install
Riparian
® Yes
El No
® Corps
® DWQ
0 02 ac
2g. Total wetland impacts
0 02 ac
2h Comments (See Figure 4, Insets 1)
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted
3a
3b
3c
3d
3e
3f
3g
Stream impact
Type of impact
Stream name
Perennial
Type of jurisdiction
Average
Impact
number -
(PER) or
(Corps - 404, 10
stream
length
Permanent (P) or
intermittent
DWQ — non -404,
width
(linear
Temporary (T)
(INT)?
other)
(feet)
feet)
Inset 1 (temp)
Trench & Backfdl
Sewer Install
Stream "A"
Imp Int
® Corps
® DWQ
3 ft
40
S3 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
3h Total stream and tributary impacts
135
31 Comments (See Figure 4, Insets 1)
4 Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of the
U S then individually list all open water impacts below
4a
415
4c
4d
4e
Open water
Name of waterbody
impact number
(if applicable)
Type of impact
Waterbody type
Area of impact (acres)
— Permanent (P)
or Temporary
T
01 ❑P ❑T
02 ❑P ❑T
03 ❑P ❑T
04 ❑P ❑T
4L Total open water impacts
N/A
4g Comments
5 Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below
Page 6 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version

5a
5b
5c
5d
5e
Wetland Impacts (acres)
Stream Impacts (feet)
Upland
Pond ID
Proposed use or purpose of
(acres)
number
pond
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
P1
P2
5f. Total
N/A
5g Comments
5h Is a dam high hazard permit required
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no
51 Expected pond surface area (acres)
5j Size of pond watershed (acres)
5k Method of construction
6 Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form
6a
® Neuse ❑ Tar - Pamlico ❑ Other
Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman
6b
6c
6d
6e
6f
6g
Buffer impact
number —
Reason for
Buffer
Zone 1 impact
Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P)
impact
Stream name
mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
or Temporary
required?
T
Inset 1 (perm)
Sewer
Stream "A"
No
2,431
1,784
allowable
Easement
6h Total buffer impacts
2,431 sf
1,784 sf
61 Comments (See Figure 4, Insets 1)The proposed riparian buffer impacts are considered allowable under the Neuse Table
of Uses
D Impact Justification and Mitigation
1 Avoidance and Minimization
la Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project
Impacts to jurisdictional streams and stream buffers have been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent practicable,
however due to required infrastructure improvements there are proposed impacts There are only 40 linear feet of temporary
stream impact and 0 02 acre of wetland impact associated with this portion of the project, while avoiding 652 linear of
remaining stream channel and 3 47 acres of wetlands within the project area Location of the proposed sewer connections
were directed to existing manholes, absence of significant trees and wetlands within the proposed impact area To minimize
impacts, the sanitary sewer at impact area "A" has been aligned at a near perpendicular angle as it crosses the unnamed tributary,
reducing stream and stream buffer impacts in this location Mitigation for impacts is proposed in the form of avoidance and
minimization
1 b Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques
The site is large manufacturing facility but all proper sedimentation and erosion control measures will be implemented, as
well there is network of stormwater management facilities strategically placed throughout the site to minimize runoff
Proper sedimentation and erosion control methods will be utilized during all phases of construction and installation as
described in the Erosion Control Plan sheet reviewed and approved by the NC Division of Land Quality and Durham
Page 7 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version

County All work will take place during dry conditions and can be facilitated from high, non - Jurisdictional, stable ground
adjacent to the Neuse Buffer The contractor shall install silt fence, inlet protection, sediment traps, diversion ditches,
tree protection, clearing only as necessary to install these devices All erosion and sediment control measures will be
checked for stability and operation following every runoff producing rainfall, but in no case less than once every week
Any needed repairs will be made immediately to maintain all measures designed An erosion control inspections report
is required and will be kept by the owner's representative
Temporary seeding and permanent seeding plans are included to restore most of the buffer areas which will not be
permanently impacted by the sanitary sewer
2 Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U S or Waters of the State
❑ Yes ® No
There is 0 02 acre of permanent wetland impact
Although there will be no associated fill, since the sewer
2a Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for impacts
maintenance corridor will be maintained the impacts to
to Waters of the U S or Waters of the State?
forested wetlands are considered permanent Per an
email dated 09/27/2013 Mr Eric Alsmeyer (USACE)
stated that mitigation will likely not be required Mitigation
for impacts is proposed in the form of avoidance and
minimization
2b If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply)
❑ DWQ ❑ Corps
❑ Mitigation bank
2c If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this project?
❑ Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3 Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a Name of Mitigation Bank
3b Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type Buffer
3c Comments
4 Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached
❑ Yes
4b Stream mitigation requested
linear feet
4c If using stream mitigation, stream temperature
❑ warm ❑ cool ❑cold
4d Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only)
square feet
4e Riparian wetland mitigation requested
acres
4f Non - riparian wetland mitigation requested
acres
4g Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested
acres
4h Comments
5 Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan
Page 8 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation?
❑ Yes ® No
6b If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation Calculate the
amount of mitigation required
Zone
6c
Reason for impact
6d
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
6e
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1 5
6f Total buffer mitigation required
6g If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e g , payment to private mitigation bank, permittee
responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund)
6h Comments Per the Neuse River Riparian Buffer Rules Table of Uses the proposed acitivities are deemed an allowable use
Page 9 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1 Diffuse Flow Plan
1a Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
® Yes ❑ No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
lb If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why
Comments
There will be (2) stormwater management facilities to service the proposed project
These facilities will function as "dual- purposed facilities" by providing reduction in
TN -export and by providing detention such that the pre - development peak flow
rates are no greater than post - development peak flow rates in the 1 -, 2 -, and 10-
® Yes ❑ No
year storm events The western facility is discharging into an adjacent floodplain
and the eastern facility is discharging into a wetland complex, both with the little to
no slope In combination with the stormwater facility, discharge points, and
associated rip -rap dissipaters they will meet diffuse flow requirements for the
proposed project
Page 10 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version

2. Stormwater Management Plan
Existing 0%
2a What is -the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
New Proposed Impervious 19%
2b Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
® Yes ❑ No
2c If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why
2d If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan
The proposed development is located within the Neuse River basin with stormwater runoff from the proposed
development draining into an unnamed tributary of the Eno River in the Falls Lake Watershed The site is located inside
the Water Supply Watershed within the F /J -B water supply watershed overlay district Stormwater management on this
site shall meet the stormwater management performance standards for development set forth in the Durham County
regulations
Peak Runoff Control Requirements
The proposed project will result in a significant increase in peak flow rates To mitigate this impact, the proposed
facilities have been sized such that post - development peak flow rates are no greater than pre - development levels in the
1 -, 2 -, and 10 -year storm events The peak runoff control calculations include both the proposed condition and future
condition of development
Pollutant and Nutrient Control Requirements
The stormwater facilities onsite are designed such that they achieve 90% TSS Nutrient loading calculations for this site
are based only on the proposed condition The stormwater management facilities provide the necessary loading rate
reduction needed for the site to reach the target loading rate of 0 33 Ib /ac /yr of phosphorus, however, they do not
provide the necessary loading rate reduction needed for the site to reach the target loading rate of 2 2 Ib /ac /yr of
nitrogen The post development with BMPs nitrogen loading rate is 2 32 Ib /ac /yr The project requires an offset
payment to offset the 182 74 lb of nitrogen (0 12 Ib /ac /yr * 50 76 ac * 30 yr) generated by this development
A copy of the final stormwater management plan and approval letter from City of Durham /Durham County will be
provided to NCDWR upon approval
® Certified Local Government
2e Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ DWQ Stormwater Program
❑ DWQ 401 Unit
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
Raleigh
❑ Phase II
3b Which of the following locally - implemented stormwater management programs
® NSW
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply)
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other
3c Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ® No
attached? A courtesy copy of the SW Management Plan will be provided upon
approval by the City of Durham /Durham County
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
4a Which of the following state - implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ Coastal counties
❑ HQW
(check all that apply)
❑ ORW
Page 11 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version

Page 12 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version
® Session Law 2006 -246
❑ Other
4b
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ® No
attached?
5
DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a
Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
® Yes ❑ No
5b
Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
® Yes ❑ No
F.
Supplementary Information
1
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1a
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal /state /local) funds or the
❑ Yes ® No
use of public (federal /state) land?
1 b
If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑ Yes ❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1c
If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
❑ Yes ❑ No
letter )
Comments
2
Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a
Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H 0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H 1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑ Yes ® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 26 0200)?
2b
Is this an after - the -fact permit application?
❑ Yes ® No
2c
If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s)
3
Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
❑ Yes ® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b
If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description
The proposed project is a single and complete project with appropriate land use control and stormwater measures in
place for specific areas which require them
4
Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non - discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility
Waste water will be directed into an existing City of Durham maintained sewer line
Page 12 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version

5 Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
® Yes ❑ No
habitat?
5b Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑ Yes ® No
impacts'?
El Raleigh
5c If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted
❑ Asheville
5d What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
The USFWS web page http / /www fws gov /nc- es /es /countyfr html and the Natural Heritage virtual workroom
http / /nhpweb enr state nc us /nhis /public /gmap75_main phtml was accessed on November 6, 2013 to determine if the
project would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical habitat Based on this research, the bald eagle
(Haliaeetus leucocephalus - BGPA), Michaux's sumac (Rhus michauxii - E), Smooth Cone Flower, and red - cockaded
woodpecker (Picoides borealis - E) are federally listed species to occur within Durham County Based on field
inspections, it is believed no adverse impacts will occur to threatened and endagered species and their known habitiat
due to the contruction of the proposed project
6 Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitats
❑ Yes ® No
6b What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
An interactive map located at http //ocean flondamanne orgefh_coral /ims /viewer htm was utilized on November 6, 2013 to
determine if the project will impact Essential Fish Habitat
7 Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes ® No
status (e g , National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
A review of the list of properties and districts in North Carolina entered in the National Register of Historic Places
(http / /www hpo ncdcr gov /nrlist htm) was conducted on November 6, 2013 for Durham County, and it did not reveal any
listing within the project area It is believed the proposed project will not occur in or near an area that has been
designated as having historic or cultural preservation status by the state, federal, or tribal governments
8 Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a Will this project occur in a FEMA - designated 100 -year floodplain?
❑ Yes ® No
8b If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements This project will be designed to meet FEMA requirements and
reviewed by the local delegated Floodplain Manager within the City of Raleigh
8c What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? North Carolina Flood Insurance Rate Map Panel 1748
does not show 100 -year flood areas or floodways located on the subject property
Kevin Yates
Date
Page 13 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version

Applicant/Agent's Printed Name Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
is provided
Page 14 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version

MUM
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Wafer Resources
Water'Duality Programs
Pat McCroy Thomas A. Reeder John E°.,%varla, III
Governor Director Secretary
Nove m tier °2'1',,2013
Treyburn Cotporate Park, LLC -
Mr Terry Sanford,
2020 West Main Street, Suite 300 ,
Durham, NC 27705
Subject: Surface Water Determinahon,Letter
NBRRO# 13.346
Durliam County,
"Determination Type
Buffer,Call' °
°Isolated or'EIP,Call
® Neuse'(X5A NC'AC 213, 0233)
Star t(9
❑ Tar - Pamlico ,(15A NCAQ 2B' 0259)
Ephemeral /intermittent/Perennial Determination °
USGS
El Isolated °Wetland Determination
❑ Jordan (1 "5A.NCAC 2B,,0267)
'Subject
ProjectName International Dnve,.Durham
Location/Directions- - Subject pcdperty as a,piivate undeveloped tract located at suliject,address;
proposed site of The Purdue Pharmaceuticals'
Subject Stfeam . UT'to Little River
Determination bate; November 21, <2013
Staff: Sara Knies-
Feature
E/UP*
Not
Subject -
Star t(9
Stop@
Soil
USGS
'Subject
_
(Survey
To o'
A(1)
I
X
DW,Q'Flag Al
DWQ,FIag
X'
X
Start
A 1 Stop,
A(!)
I
X
DWQ:FIag A2 -
DWQ Flag-
X
- X
`Start
A2, Stop,
B
E
X
X
*EIIIP = EphemeraUlntermittent7Perennidl
Explanation The feature(s),Irsted above has or have been located -on theiSoil Survey of Wake County, North
Carolina or the most.recent +copy of the USGS Topographic map =a 1 24,000;scale, Each featuPe,tharis�checked'
"Not Subject ""has been determined norto be a stream dr is not present.on'the'property Features thaVare checked
"Subject" have'k en,located on the property and possess charactenstics that qualify it to be a,sti•ea h. There may be
other streams located °on'your ff6perty'that,d6 not shdi�up on the maps referenced -,abdve -but, still may be
Dote Carolma,
- Nturdly
North Carolina Division ofWater Resources 1628 Mad'Serv_ice Center 'Raleigh, NC 27699=- 1628,Phonei(919),791 -4200
Internet - v✓ww ncwaterpualtty orq Location 3800 Barrett Dnve Raleigh, NC 27669 Fax ,(919) 788 -7,159
An-Equal Opporturnty /Af rmabve'Acbon'Employer- 50% R@cycled1,10% Pbst Consumer Paper,

Internati6nal Drive
- Ddrham County =
November 21; 2013
Page,2,of 2:
considered junsdictional according to the US Army, Cofps of Engineers and/or to `the'Division of Water Resources
(DWR)'
ThIsVon- site,determination shall expire five (5) years from the date-of this letter. Landowner"s_,or affected parties that,
digpute i deteFlinination, madelby the DWR or Delegated, Local Authority, may fequesta determination by the
Director: An, appeal f 4d&t must be made within sixty'(60) days,of date of-tli& letter or frbm the date the affected
par.'ty(including downstream and /or adjacent owners) is'notified of this letter. A request for a4etermination by,the
Nrectorlshall be referred io ttieFDirect6r -;m Wfitmgc /o'KaremHiggms,'DWR WeBSCaPe Unit, 1650 MalltService
Center, Raleigh, NC 2,7,699. -
MA'determinati6fi is final and binding unless, as)detaded.above, y4tf ask °for a,hearing or appeal within,,sixty (60)
days.
The,owner /fuiure owners should notify�fhe,Division of Water�Resources (►ucluding any other Local, State,,and
Fed'eral,Agencies) of thig deci "sion coycerftingany futa-re c6r. espogdenc6s regarding =the 'subject property (stated
above): This prdlect may, "require a Section 404'/401 Permitlf6ethe pf,6p6sed,activityl Any inquiriesrshou_fd be
directed fd'the`Div Mon'of Water Resources (Central Office) at,(919) -80,7 - 6300,_ and'the,US Army Corp of Engineers
(Raleigh Regulatory" Field Office) at6(919) -554 -4884.
If you.tiave questions regWdmg.Ithig determination, please feel free to contact Sara Khios at,(9,19) 791=4200,
Res P' tf? Y,
D4nny1Smitli Supervisor
Water "Quality ,Section
_Ralegh_Re&nal_ Office _
cc RRO %SWP File Copy
u

DURHAM COUNTY SOIL SURVEY SHEET 414
ett
y jjk
o oil
'l
�i
� g

�1tcADAMS

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site X"' L C City /County Oi._ fe G Sampling Date lU /Z// r
Apphcant/Owner ,. State Sampling Point .. o�2�
Investigator(s) Section, Township, Range
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc) Local relief (concave, convex, none) Slope ( °k)
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) Lat Long Datum
Sod Map Unit Name NWI classification
Are climatic / hyd7l�oo/ggic conditio on the site typic ffooy tthis time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks)
Are Vegetation, /l/ Sod or Hydrology f – significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes � No
Are Vegetation y . 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.
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
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required, check all that apply) AN^Q
_ Surface Sod Cracks (136)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
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 (131)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry - Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Sods (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (CB)
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 (131)
Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (132)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aqwtard (D3)
_ Water - Stained Leaves (139)
Microtopographic Relief (D4
_ Aquatic Fauna (613)
—_ 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)
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 – Version 2 0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size ) % Cover S ectes? Status
2 W,k[i
3 w t/ C o
4 �y p -g-A.
5 0� -+K �-
6
2� =Total Cover
50% of total cover_ 20% of total cover_
Sapling Stratum (Plot size
T
2
4
5
6
= Total Cover v
.Svlak 50% of total cover S&46 20% of total cover o
hrub Stratum (Plot size )
1
2
3
4
5
6
= Total Cover
Sampling Point 0 P,
Dominance Test worksheet
20% of total cover
Number of Dominant Species
Hererbatu Plot siz )
41-1 Sj
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC
(A)
Total Number of Dominant
C
r
Species Across All Strata
(B)
Percent of Dominant Species
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC
a (A/B)
Total % Cover of Multiply by
OBL species x 1 = 0
FACW species A x 2 =
FAC species x3=
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 = �0
Column Totals (A) (B)
Prevalence Index =B/A= 1 7 2
Hydrophyttc vegetation indicators
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophyttc Vegetation
iT- Dominance Testis >50%
7�3 - Prevalence Index is < -3 0'
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'indicators of hydrtc soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata
50% of total cover
20% of total cover
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Hererbatu Plot siz )
41-1 Sj
-/
�-i K
approximately 20 It (6 m) or more in height and 3 in
(7 6 larger in diameter at breast height (DBH)
1
cm) or
2 , k,,Y � k'WAl 4-ii.1
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
3 Cu �
L
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
4 ¢ w`c
-�
than 3 in (7 6 cm) DBH
5
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height
6
7
Herb - All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, including
8
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
9
ft (1 m) in height
10
Woody vine -All woody vines, regardless of height
11
—�=
Total Cover
50% of total cover �6 20% of total cover 7
Woody Vi Stratum (Plots] )
2
3
4 _
5 —
= Total Cover I
50% of total cover _ 20% of total cover
Remarks (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
Hydrophyttc v
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Vernon 2 0

cntf
Profile Description (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color moist % Color (moist) % Type _
6 l� -
` Ti _
Sampling Point
absence of indicators)
exture , Remarks
C
'T a C= Concentration, D =De letion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains ZLocation PL =Pore Lining, M =Matrix
Hydnc Sod Indicators
Indicators for Problematic Hydnc Sods'
Histosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_
Hisuc Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prame Redox (A16)
_
Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Fioodplam Soils (F19)
Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_
2 cm ;Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (177)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Thick Dark Surface (Al 2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron- Manganese Masses (F72) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
MLRA 136)
_ Umbnc Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
'Indicators of hydrophync vegetation and
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Sods (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic
Restrictive Layer (if observed)
Type
Depth (inches)
Hydnc Sod Presenter Yes No
Remarks
S Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2 0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
ProjecUSrte City /County Lt� Sampling Date !�
Applicant/Owner ( rey State C Sampling Point _
Investigators) -:" Section, Township, Range
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc) Local relief (concave, convex, none) Slope ( %)
Subregion (LRR or MLRAj Lat Long Datum
Sod Map Unit Name j_ 0 6. /6 -e ��T �4t— NWI classification
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions gn the site typical for this time of year? Yes ✓ No (If no, explain in Remarks )
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology _1 significantly disturbed? Are 'Normal Circumstances' present? Yes ',-�No
Are Vegetation , Sod E or Hydrology /y 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
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Pnmary Indicators (minimum of one is required check all that apply)
_ Surface Sod Cracks (B6)
Surface Water (Al)
True Aquatic Plants (614)
! Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
H Water Table (A2)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (B10)
_ Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (616)
Water Marks (61)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Sods (C6)
_ Crash Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (63)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (131)
_ Iron Deposits (B5)
_ Geomorphic Position (132)
Ir
I datton Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_Water- Stained Leaves (139)
Aquatic Fauna
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
4144
_ (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) 3
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 – Version 2 0

SOIL
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) % TypeL Loc4
Texture Remarks
�
W d zF
'Type C= Concentration, D =De letion RM= Reduced Matrix MS= Masked Sand Grains
ZLocation PL =Pore Lining, M =Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydnc Sods'
Hydnc Sod Indicators
Histosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_
Hisoc Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prame Redox (A16)
_
Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)my
Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floadplarn Soils (F19)
_
Stratified Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A71)
_
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
MLRA 136)
_ Umbnc Surface (F73) (MLRA 136, 122)
'indicators of hydrophyhc vegetation and
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplam Sods (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
_
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic
Restrictive Layer (if observed)
Type
No
Depth (inches)
Hydnc Sod Presenter Yes
Remarks
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2 0
S Army Corps of Engineers

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size //3 ) %° Cover Sec s? Status
1 ¢ G 114 It.1 l
2 U (vL-�%
_ = Total Cover
501/6 of total cover �LL 20% of total cover
Saolmg Stratum (Plot size /C )
1 -2 C 2-o /7
4
Sampling Point 10
Dominance Test worksheet
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 1� (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC / bD (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet
Total % Cover of
Multi I b
OBL species
x 1 =
T
FACW species
x 2 =_
FAC species :—
x 3 = Z
FACU species 0
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals
(A) (B)
_
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
3
Prevalence Index = B/A
= -
= Total Cover
50% of total cover � 20% of total cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size ) (/ /
2
3
Hydrophytic
-76—)= Total Cover Vegetation
50 /° of total cover l
° �11 20% of total cover Present? Yes No
Remarks (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2 0
'%7)— = Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
50% of total cover
20% of total cover
011', - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
;��Domjnance Test is >50%
S -SF� (Plot size )
v
20 l
3 - Prevalence Index is 53 0'
1 ��
2�� y,
—L
_
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
_
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
3
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
4
5
'Indicators of hydnc sod and wetland hydrology must
6
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
2, � = Total Cover
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata
5 °o of total cover
�� 20% of total cover
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Wo;b-SUaWm (Plot size )
approximately 20 ft (5 m) or more in height and 3 in
1
(7 6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH)
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in (7 6 cm) DBH
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height
Herb - All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
ft (1 m) in height
10
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height
11
= Total Cover
50% of total cover � 20% of total cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size ) (/ /
2
3
Hydrophytic
-76—)= Total Cover Vegetation
50 /° of total cover l
° �11 20% of total cover Present? Yes No
Remarks (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2 0

CERTIFICATE FOR THE U S ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
THIS CERTIFIES THAT THE COPY OF THIS PLAT ACCURATELY DEPICTS THE BOUNDARY OF THE
JURISDICTION OF SECTION 404 OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT AS DETERMINED BY THE
UNDERSIGNED ON THIS DATE UNLESS THERE IS A CHANGE IN THE LAW OR OUR PUBLISHED
REGULATIONS, THIS DETERMINATION OF SECTION404 JURISDICTION MAY BE RELIED UPON FOR
A PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED FIVE YEARS FROM THIS DATE. THIS DETERMINATION WAS MADE
UTILIZING THE 1987 CORPS OF ENGINEERS WETLANDS DETERMINATION MANUAL-
REGULATORY OFFICIAL
TITLE
DATE
USAGE ACTION ID
11/
1 fj1�i ;
lr'r -Z —C�
'
t;
.v
fll rte; \`�
l t !it
��_q5 RA CI
'ERTY\,
NOTES
j JURISDICTIONAL AREAS OUTSIDE OF TRACTS 1, 2 AND
3 AS SHOWN ON THIS KEY MAP ARE KNOWN TO EXIST
BUT HAVE BEEN OMITTED FOR CLARITY
SEE SHEETS 1/18
THROUGH 5/18 FOR
DETAILED MAPS IN THIS
i
AREA CORPORATE PARK
BOUNDARY, TYP
w �" rl / V R''.; •_ Y - #' � r� � \� l 'f \� "--• r-r `� ' �
.M� �i
," L
_x
SEE SHEETS 3/22 � i a'
THROUGH 22/22 FOR o \�- 43 `t j / r e1' `ti i 'iv, 3 r +
DETAILED MAPS IN -
THIS AREA ?}';��il'" ^� ;/ a 3 \`s,ll r /f`,V 1r' JUL 0 1 2u�
dp� sf✓ tL-i
C R9Li.C$BSGUL.ATORY —ELD OF?ICE
SEE SHEETS 1/20 THROUGH 16/20
AND SHEET 1/1 FOR DETAILED MAPS
Jam{ 7 �,�` ;.►rte f ', tS . i ti7 y y \� IN THIS AREA
800 400 0 800'
,;, ' y} � _- .,� �� ,7J1 . - :�,,,+°� •,,liJ t. > �. ,- � � 1 ^= 800' -0°
_ n = THE SCALE BAR DATE JUNE 2005
` k� 2005 TREYBURN CORPARATE PARK SHOWN BELOW
~ �_ V ® ° H & s Job 3424
HAZEN AND SOVER ��a��=
t -t MEASURES ONE NUMBER
Environmental Engineers & Scientists`; WETLAND DELINEATION INCH LONG ON
"' ,: q� EXTENSION THE ORIGINAL CT DRAWING
DESIGNED LMS CHECKED LMS NUMBER NUMBER
v Y: .2 T'`'x DRAWING
DRAWN PWS PROJ ENGR DLC
1 REGULATORY APPROVAL 6/05 DLC1
NO ISSUED FOR DATE BY APPROVED ° - - -- SHEET 1 OF 1
Wiz' ,wr
3424- road\Shatl4)t \3424- rood \Sheetl5lt\ 3124 - road \Sheett0,lt\342h md\�lln \s Ze-rWdV4MdU&1t\342e- r0ad \5hwMx \K[YFti \irepumywmVreyrrurn ��. oc,..
3
I

NON- L0=77 NAL
nT
O
A
'r
v
REISSUED 610212005
REVISED 610212005
REVISED 12110199
SHEET 14 OF 20
REDUCED COPY NOT TO SCALE
NOW -JUR1 MITONAL
NON -AM MCTKWAL
NON- JUWSYCTIOYAL
SITE X
8 51 AC
NCN- JURl=TGNAL
NON- JURMCMWAL
NON- JURADICIMAL
CERTIFICATE FOR THE U S ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
THIS CER7IFIES THAT THIS COPY OF THIS PLAT ACCURATELY DMC73 THE
BOUNDARY OF THE JJRWIC71ON OF SEC77ON 404 OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT
AS DE7ERMINED BY THE UNDERSIGNED ON THIS DATE UNLESS THERE IS A
CHANGE SIN THE LAW OR OUR PUBLISHED REGULATIONS THIS DETERMINAT ION
OF SEC77ON 404 JURISDIC770N MAY BE RELIED UPON FOR A PERIOD NOT TO
EXCEED F@P YEARS FROM THIS DATE THIS DETERMIALA710M WAS MADE
U77UDNO THE 1987 CORPS OF ENGINEERS 6E7LANDS DELWEA71ON MANUAL
wy8l%u m LU9W7Y COL
N014- AMSDfCI70NAL
REGULATORY OFFICIAL
7777E
DATE -4 70X3
USACE ACTION m
WETLAND SITE "X" SURVEY FOR
TREYBURN CORPORATE
PARK
MANGUM TWP , DURHAM CO, NORTH CAROLINA
FIELD WORK PERFORMED DECEMBER 1, 1998
PROPERTY AS DESCRIBED IN D B 2325 , PG 188
STANDING IN THE NAME OF
TREYBURN LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
VICINITY MAP
Z�
SITE
9
�o
�p
1407E A'
THE LOC4770N OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES
AS SHOWN ARE BASED ON VISIBLE EVIDENCE
AND DRAWSNGS PROVIDED TO THE SURVEYOR
LOCATION OF UNDERGROUND U7RI77ES AND
SIRUC7UR£5 MAY VARY FROM LOC4 77ONS
SHOWN HEREON, AND ADDI77ONAL BURIED
UDUTIES MAY EXIST CONTACT THE
APPROPRIATE UnLITY COMPANIES FOR
BVFDRU41M REGARDING BURIED UnU77ES.
N07E 8'
IXCEPT AS SPECI7CALLY STATED OR SHOWN,
THIS SURVEY DOES NOT REPORT ANY OF
THE FULLOWN& EASEMENIX OTHER THAN
7HOSE VISIBLE DURING FIELD MWMA77ON,
BUILDING SETBACKS. RESIMC77YE COVENANTS
ZONING OR LAND USE REGULATONS AND ANY
FACTS WHICH A 7171E SEARCH MAY DISCLOSE
N07E 'C'
ALL DISTANCES ARE HORIZONTAL GROUND
AND AREA BY COORDINATE COMPUTA170AL
NOTE `D'
IMS SURVEY WAS DONE W17HOUT A 717LE
SEARCH AND LS BASED ON REFERENCED
0IFORMA7101K THERE MAY ETOST OTHER
DOCUMENTS OF RECORD WHICH COULD
AFFECT THIS PROPERTY
NOTE E'
SUBSURFACE AND ENVIRONMENTAL CQM71ONS
WERE NOT EXAMINED OR CONSIDERED DURING
IT0.S SURVEY ALL BUILDINGS SURFACE AND
SUBSURFACE BfPROVEMDN7S ON AND ADJAC ENT
TO THE 97E ARE NOT NECESSARILY SHOWN HEREON
NO STATE WENT IS MADE CONCERNING
7HE EXISIENCE OF UNDERGROUND CONTAINERS
WHICH MAY AFFECT THE USE OF THIS TRACT
NOTE `F"
7HIS PLAT IS NOT INTENDED FOR RECORDA77ON
SCALE 1° = 50'
50' 0 50' 100'
REFERENCES
DB 23151188
PS 117 149
13M=51106
DB 988/902
REVISED 718199
OWNERS ADDRESS PROJECT f
TREYBURN LLC 98 -290
1214 ROCKY POINT LANE TAX NAP f
DURHAM, NC 27712
SUMMIT
Consulting Engineers
1000 Corporate Dr , Suite 101
Hillsborough, NC 27278 -8551
Voice (919) 732 -3883
Fax, (919) 732 -6676
www summd -engineer com
LEGEND
PIN IF
O
MAIMMA77CAL POINT
DRAWN BY'
e EXLS77NG /RON/ROCK
❑
CONC. MONUMENT SET
JDC1)(VlD
■
EX/S77NG CONC. MON
CHECKED BY'
A
IRON PIN SET
�Q.,
UTILITY POLE
DRAMiNG:
98 -290
SUMMIT
Consulting Engineers
1000 Corporate Dr , Suite 101
Hillsborough, NC 27278 -8551
Voice (919) 732 -3883
Fax, (919) 732 -6676
www summd -engineer com

CER71FICATE FOR THE US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
y THIS CERTIFIES THAT THIS COPY OF THIS PLAT ACCURATELY DEPICTS THE
BOUNDARY OF THE JJR/SDIC77ON OF SECTION 404 OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT
AS DETERMINED BY THE UNDERSIGNED ON THIS DATE UNLESS THERE IS A
CHANGE IN THE LAW OR OUR PUBLISHED REGULATIONS, THIS DETERMINATION
OF SECTION 404 .NRISDICTION MAY BE RELIED UPON FOR A PERIOD NOT TO
EXCEED RAE YEARS FROM THIS DATE IRIS DETERMINATION WAS MADE
UTILIZING THE 1987 CORPS OF ENt7 DS DELINEITION MANUAL.
REGULATORY OFFICIAL
.TIE
DATE
USACE ACTION 10
\
GyF \
yOf \
A
NON- rAA6SOCTKWAL
AIRISOICTIOML
SITE X
8 51 ACRES
CURVE TABLE
CURVE
LENGTH
RADIUS
DELTA ANGLE
CHD 8RNG
CHORD
TANGENT
C
56.41
3948 78
04
40.53
56.41
28,21
C2
53.21
3946 78
61.51
N51 4Vo2w
1 5121
1 28 61
LINE TABLE 57E
X
LWE
LENGTH
BFARWG
X54
5&78
7T0'E
X55
J&JO
4"W
X56
40.53
X57
6477
N
XSB
61.51
DRAWING`
X59
i4-
NOBWW-E
X60
J&5
NI
X61
69.88
X62
2578
XBJ
74-20
X64
Sa46
'W
X55
48.44
N5255'4
X66
6122
N
X87
44.89
X68
36.19
'W
X69
4126
X70
46.89
N36' 51E
X71
616.32
31' 'E
X72
"K.3
N45 4218T
X73
5881
X74
8865
X75
44.28
O6-E
X76
JR33
Or
X77
4294
41 M
X78
5599
X79
5672
M
X80
6904
9
X81
8QB7
X210
34 61
X211
39M
28 3'W
X2121
3221
3509
56.14
6197
E54.41
ATFO
2'W
6FE-5
1
4&74
54
76.49
43'E
720.5
NisiffyT
X222
6791
X22.3
56.85
X224
5961
X225
80.73
6
X226
5&62
N3734Y2�
;=7
3196
N3525Y0
X228
J874
NtZ7 7"28
X367
10.82
N2152'87'E
X368
207
N2878^52 E
i —X368
\ MERCK ilk DO, WG
\ \CU PDh 0645 -02 -58 -7312
DEW BOWIPAGE ~1682
PLOT BOOK/PAGE 16
\ NOTE
\ SEE PLAT UTLED 'PROPERTY OF TRMIRN CORPORATE PARK, LLC;
\ DATED 6/72/04 BY GLAD T HOWARD PLS. AND RECORDED W
\ PLAT B" 162 PAGE 10 OF DIE MR& M COUNTY REG57ER OF DEEDS
CARq
\
\
\ = GLC
\
NOJ- JURfAXCDONAt \ \
WETLAND SITE 'Y' SURVEY FOR \ \
"°" IR""` X TREYBURN CORPORATE PARK \
+� \\
MANGUM TWP., DURHAM CO, NORTH CAROLINA REISSUED 6/02/2005 REVISED 6/02/2005
N \ \\
FIELD WORK PERFORMED DECEMBER i, 1998 REVISED 12/10/99 \ \ \\
x PROPERTY AS DESCRIBED IN D.B 2325 , PG. 188 \\
x� STANDING IN THE NAME OF SHEET 16 OF 20 \\
dUNSWUOVAL _ TREYBURN LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY REDUCED COPY NOT TO SCALE
VICINITY MAP
Z�
SIn:
Z
9�0
N07E A'
THE LOCATION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES
AS %(OWN ARE BASED LW VISIBLE EVIDENCE
AND DRAWINGS PROVIDED TO THE SURVEYOR
LOCATION OF UNDERGROUND U77UTAES AND
STRUCTURES MAY VARY FROM LOCATIONS
SHOWN HEREON. AND ADD1770MAL BURIED
UTTUTIES MAY EXIST CONTACT THE
APPROPRIATE UTILITY COMPANIES FOR
INFORMATION REGARDING BURIED UTILITIES
NOTE "0'
EXCEPT AS SPECIFICALLY STATED OR SHOWN,
THIS SURVEY DOES NOT REPORT ANY OF
THE FOUAWINa EASEMENT$ OTHER THAN
THOSE VISIBLE DURING FIELD EhAM1N47IOJ
BUILDING SETBACKS RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS
ZONING OR LAND USE REGULATIONS AND ANY
FACTS WHICH A 717LE SEARCH MAY D1SO.OSE
NOTE 'C'
ALL DISTANCES ARE' HORIZONTAL GROUND
AND AREA BY COORDINATE COMPUTATION
NOTE ID"
THIS SURVEY WAS DONE WITHOUT A TITLE
SEARCH AND IS BASED ON REf00VC£D
INFORMATION THERE MAY E)0ST 07HER
DOCUMENTS OF RECORD WHICH COULD
AFFECT THIS PROPERTY
N07E i'
SUBSURFACE AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
WERE NOT EXAMINED OR CONSIDERED DURING
THIS SURVEY ALL BUILDINGS, SURFACE AND
SUBSURFACE IMPROVEMENTS ON AND ADMCENT
TO THE SITE ARE NOT NECESSARILY SHOWN HEREON
NO STATEMENT IS MADE CONCERNING
THE EXISTENCE OF UNDERGROUND CONTAINERS
W1ICH MAY AFFECT THE USE OF THIS TRACT
NOTE 'F"
THIS PLAT IS NOT IN TENDED FOR RECOiDA77ON
SCALE 1' = 50'
50' 0 50' 100'
REFERENCES
D8 23251188
PB 117/149
PB 1251106
00 968/902
REVISED 718199
OWNERS ADDRESS PROJECT I
TREYSURN LLC 96 -290
1214 ROCXY POINT LANE TAX MAP /
DURHAM, NC 27712
LEGEND I PIN 0
0 MATHEMATICAL POINT
0
EXSTING IRON/ROCK
DRAWN BY
O
CONC MONUMENT SET
JDC/kWO
■
EXISTING CONC MON
CHECKED BY
A
IRON PIN SET
•a,
UTILITY POLE
DRAWING`
98 -290
SUMMIT.
Consulting Engineers
1000 Corporate Dr , Suite 101
Hillsborough, NC 27278 -8551
Voice (919) 732,3883
Fax [phone]
www summR- engineer com