20220345 Ver 1_ePCN Application_20220303

1 i
Division of Wader Resources
Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Form
For Nationwide Permits and Regional General Permits
(along with corresponding Water Quality Certifications)
December 6,2021 Ver 4.2
Initial Review
Has this project met the requirements for acceptance in to the review process?*
• Yes
No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
Yes • No
Change only if needed.
BIMS#Assigned* Version#*
20220345 1
Is a payment required for this project?*
No payment required What amout is owed?*
Fee received 0$240.00
• Fee needed-send electronic notification 0$570.00
Reviewing Office* Select Project Reviewer*
Raleigh Regional Office-[phone] Colleen Cohn:eads\cmcohn
Information for Initial Review
1a.Name of project:
DENC Person County Pipeline
1a.Who is the Primary Contact?*
Joey Lawler,PWS
1 b.Primary Contact Email:* 1c.Primary Contact Phone:*
[e-mail] [phone]
Date Submitted
3/3/2022
Nearest Body of Water
UTs to Cub Creek and Rock Fork
Basin
Tar-Pamlico;Neuse
Water Classification
Cub Creek=WS-IV;NSW/Rock Fork=WS-III;ORW,NSW
Site Coordinates
Latitude: Longitude:
36.298370° -78.843168°
A. Processing Information 0
County(or Counties)where the project is located:
Person
Is this a NCDMS Project
0 Yes ® No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
O Yes 0No
1a.Type(s)of approval sought from the Corps:
OO Section 404 Permit(wetlands,streams and waters,Clean Water Act)
0 Section 10 Permit(navigable waters,tidal waters,Rivers and Harbors Act)

Has this PCN previously been submitted?*
Yes
• No
lb.What type(s)of permit(s)do you wish to seek authorization?
OO Nationwide Permit(NWP)
O Regional General Permit(RGP)
0 Standard(IP)
1c.Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
O Yes • No
Nationwide Permit(NWP)Number: 12-Utility Lines
NWP Numbers(for multiple NWPS):
Id.Type(s)of approval sought from the DWR:
pO 401 Water Quality Certification-Regular 0 401 Water Quality Certification-Express
O Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit O Riparian Buffer Authorization
O Individual 401 Water Quality Certification
1e.Is this notification solely for the record because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWR 401 Certification: 0 Yes O No
For the record only for Corps Permit: 0 Yes O No
If.Is this an after-the-fact permit application?*
O Yes O No
1g.Is payment into a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
0 Yes O No
1g.Is payment into a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
O Yes O No
1h.Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties?
O Yes O No
1j.Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?
O Yes ® No
B. Applicant Information
1d.Who is applying for the permit?
0 Owner❑O Applicant(other than owner)
1e.Is there an Agent/Consultant for this project?*
* Yes f No
2.Owner Information
2a.Name(s)on recorded deed:
Dominion Energy North Carolina(easement only)
2b.Deed book and page no.:
N/A
2c.Contact Person:
Robert Ley,PE
2d.Address
Street Address
220 Operations Way
Address Line 2
MC C221
City State/Province/Region
Cayce SC
Postal/Zip Code Country
29033 USA
2e.Telephone Number: 2f.Fax Number:
[phone]
2g.Email Address:*
[e-mail]

3.Applicant Information(if different from owner)
3a.Name:
Robert Ley,PE
3b.Business Name:
Dominion Energy North Carolina
3c.Address
Street Address
220 Operations Way
Address Line 2
MC C221
City State/Province/Region
Cayce SC
Postal/Zip Code Country
29033 USA
3d.Telephone Number: 3e.Fax Number:
[phone]
3f.Email Address:*
robe [e-mail]
4.Agent/Consultant(if applicable)
4a.Name:
Joey Lawler,PWS
4b.Business Name:
S&ME,Inc.
4c.Address
Street Address
2016 Ayrsley Town Boulevard,Suite 2A
Address Line 2
City State/Province/Region
Charlotte NC
Postal/Zip Code Country
28273 USA
4d.Telephone Number: 4e.Fax Number:
[phone]
4f.Email Address:*
[e-mail]
C. Project Information and Prior Project History C")
1.Project Information
lb.Subdivision name:
(if appropriate)
1c.Nearest municipality/town:
Rougemont
2.Project Identification
2a.Property Identification Number: 2b.Property size:
See attached list
2c.Project Address
Street Address
Origin:Upper Piedmont Landfill/Terminus:DENC transmission pipeline near Lady Shadow Trail
Address Line 2
Peed Road to Lady Shadow Trail
City State/Province/Region
Rougement NC
Postal/Zip Code Country
27572 USA
3.Surface Waters

3a.Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project:*
UTs to Cub Creek and Rock Fork
3b.Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water:*
Cub Creek=WS-IV;NSW/Rock Fork=WS-III;ORW,NSW
3c.What river basin(s)is your project located in?*
Tar-Pamlico
Neuse
3d.Please provide the 12-digit HUC in which the project is located.
030201010101 and 030202010103
4. Project Description and History
4a.Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this application:*
The new line will originate at a proposed station site located within the southern portion of the landfill and will extend generally southwest for approximately 4.4 miles before tying into
DENC's existing T-12/T-12B pipeline easement.
4b.Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this project(including all prior phases)in the past?*
O Yes O No 0 Unknown
4f.List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
0.146
4g.List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
282
4h.Explain the purpose of the proposed project:*
The purpose of the new pipeline is to transport methane gas recovered from the Upper Piedmont Environmental Landfill facility,which is operated by a private third-party company,to a
point of connection to an existing DENC transmission pipeline.The route consists primarily of a mixture of pine and hardwood forests in various stages of development,land disturbed for
silvicultural purposes,or other areas that have been developed in connection with residences,roadways,and other utility easements.
4i.Describe the overall project in detail,including indirect impacts and the type of equipment to be used:*
Construction of the new pipeline will first involve demarcation of clearing limits,jurisdictional boundaries,and other associated workspaces,etc.In high ground areas,additional temporary
workspace(TWS)adjacent to the proposed easement will generally be required to safely install the new pipe.At stream and wetland crossings,the TWS has been eliminated or reduced,
and the pipe will be installed within the proposed 50-foot permanent easement.
The 50-foot width of the proposed easement is required to adequately support:1)aerial and ground leakage surveys;2)aerial patrolling for possible encroachment activity near the
pipeline;3)accurate identification of possible repairs and maintenance;4)promotion of damage prevention in that the easement can be more easily identified by the public,and;5)
minimization of potential canopy encroachment,which creates visibility concerns.
Once the limits of disturbance have been demarcated,clearing of forested areas will commence.Temporary equipment crossings will be installed across streams and along one side of the
easement to facilitate logging equipment passage,timber removal,and prevent excessive rutting and ground disturbance in the wetlands.Where necessary,low areas and environmental
resources will be protected by use of temporary measures such as staked waddles,compost filter socks,or other less-invasive siltation barriers that can temporarily be installed during this
phase of the project.Installation of silt fence,silt fence outlets,and other measures requiring ground disturbance will occur following removal of timber and will proceed in conjunction with
grading operations.
Grubbing and below-ground vegetation removal will be minimized within wetlands or along streambanks,where it will be limited to the trench line and portions of travel lane,if necessary,
for safety reasons.Select portions of the easement may require rough grading to facilitate safe passage of equipment and to prepare a suitably-level work surface.Within wetland areas
where extensive rutting or soil disturbance may occur,timber or composite mats are planned for use to provide work and travel space for equipment.
Following preparation of the work area and installation of necessary erosion and sediment control(E&SC)measures,the trench will be excavated along the"non-working"side of the
easement.Subsurface disturbance will only be conducted within the trench line at wetlands and stream crossings.Stump removal or light grading may occur on the working side of the
easement if required for safety reasons.The work will be performed from the timber mats placed along the working side of the easement.In certain areas,including wetlands and fields
supporting crops,efforts will be made to segregate topsoil from the subsoil.If necessary,trench breakers(temporary barriers generally constructed of sand bags or similarly suitable
material)will be installed within the trench to slow the flow of subsurface water.
In general,lengths of the new pipe will be trucked to the site from temporary storage yards,strung along the easement,and placed on skids(wooden pedestals).Specialized machines will
be used to bend individual segments of pipe to fit the contours of the trench where necessary.The pipe segments will be welded together,x-rayed,the structural integrity and surface
coating inspected,and then lowered into the trench.Portions of the trench may require dewatering or"padding"to prevent large rocks or other debris from coming in contact with the pipe.
Permanent trench breakers will then be installed where necessary and the trench backfilled.In areas where segregation of the subsoil and topsoil is required,the topsoil will be replaced
last.Affected areas will then be"cleaned up"by rough-grading and conducting temporary seeding,if necessary,followed by final grading,permanent seeding,and mulching to restore the
easement as closely as possible to pre-disturbance contours and conditions.
5.Jurisdictional Determinations
5a.Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the property or proposed impact areas?*
• Yes No Unknown
Comments:
5b.If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination,what type of determination was made?*
0 Preliminary 0 Approved ® Not Verified 0 Unknown 0 N/A
Corps AID Number:
N/A
5c.If 5a is yes,who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name(if known): J.Lawler,PWS and Rebeckah Sims,PWS
Agency/Consultant Company: S&ME

Other:
6.Future Project Plans
6a.Is this a phased project?*
Yes • No
Are any other NWP(s),regional general permit(s),or individual permits(s)used,or intended to be used,to authorize any part of the proposed project or related activity?
No
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory C"U
1. Impacts Summary
1a.Where are the impacts associated with your project?(check all that apply):
Wetlands CI Streams-tributaries OO Buffers
Open Waters 0 Pond Construction
2.Wetland Impacts
2a.Site#*(?) 2a1 Reason(?) 2b.Impact type*(?) 2c.Type of W.* 2d.W.name* 2e.Forested* 2f.Type of Jurisdicition*2g.Impact
(?) area*
1 Utility easement P Headwater Forest WP Yes Both 0.051
(acres)
2 Utility easement P Headwater Forest WI Yes Both 0.001
J (acres)
3 Utility easement P Headwater Forest WK Yes Both 0.010
(acres)
4 Utility easement P Headwater Forest WM Yes Both 0.004
(acres)
5 Utility easement P Headwater Forest WCC Yes Corps 0.030
(acres)
6 Utility easement P Headwater Forest WG Yes Both 0.030
(acres)
7 Utility easement P Headwater Forest WN Yes Both 0.020
(acres)
2g.Total Temporary Wetland Impact 2g.Total Permanent Wetland Impact
0.000 0.146
2g.Total Wetland Impact
0.146
2i.Comments:
All impacts are for permanent conversion of forested wetlands to herbaceous wetlands and temporary disturbance associated with utility line
construction.There will be no loss of waters of the US.
3.Stream Impacts
3a.Reason for impact(?) 3b.Impact type* 3c.Type of impact* 3d.S.name* 3e.Stream Type* 3f.Type of 3g.S.width* 3h.Impact
(?) Jurisdiction* length*
S1 Utility line construction Temporary Excavation SA Perennial Both 5 54
Average(feet) (linear feet)
S2 Utility line construction Temporary Excavation SE Perennial Both 5 66
Average(feet) (linear feet)
S3 Utility line construction Temporary Excavation SG Intermittent Both 4 52
Average(feet) (linear feet)
S4 Utility line construction Temporary Excavation SM Perennial Both 4 58
Average(feet) (linear feet)
S5 Utility line construction Temporary Excavation SN Perennial Both 4 52
Average(feet) (linear feet)
3i.Total jurisdictional ditch impact in square feet:
0
3i.Total permanent stream impacts: 3i.Total temporary stream impacts:
0 282

3i.Total stream and ditch impacts:
282
3j.Comments:
All impacts are temporary and affected streambanks will be restored.
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWR)
6a.Project is in which protect basin(s)?
Check all that apply.
OO Neuse OO Tar-Pamlico
O Catawba O Randleman
O Goose Creek 0 Jordan Lake
O Other
6b.Impact Type 6c.Per or Temp 6d.Stream name 6e.Buffer mitigation required? 6f.Zone 1 impact 6g.Zone 2 impact
Utility easement P SA Yes 3,120 2,540
Utility line construction P SC Yes 2,908 2,318
Utility line construction P SF Yes 0 3,226
Utility line construction P SG Yes 3,126 2,084
Utility line construction P SK Yes 0 430
Utility line construction P SM Yes 3,228 1,643
Utility line construction P SN Yes 3,029 2,014
6h. Total buffer impacts:
Zone 1 Zone 2
Total Temporary impacts: 0.00 0.00
Zone 1 Zone 2
Total Permanent impacts: 15,411.00 14,255.00
Zone 1 Zone 2
Total combined buffer impacts: 15,411.00 14,255.00
6i.Comments:
Buffers will be restored to original grade and contour and vegetated with grass following construction.
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation 0
1.Avoidance and Minimization
1a.Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:
To minimize impacts to waters of the US,DENC has proposed to limit the work space at stream and wetland crossings to 50 feet,and locate additional
workspace areas outside of the jurisdictional areas and stream buffers.The project was also routed to avoid multiple streams and wetlands.
1 b.Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:
The project has been designed to incorporate appropriate erosion and sediment control practices outlined in the most recent version of the"North
Carolina Erosion and Sedimentation Control Planning and Design Manual"and approved by the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources(NCDENR)prior to construction.
As proposed,the project will comply with applicable conditions of the USACE NWP No.12 and NCDWR WQC GC No.4244.Following the construction,
the temporarily-affected streambanks and wetlands will be restored in accordance with the accompanying construction documents.Temporarily-
disturbed streambanks and wetland areas will be restored to their original contours and conditions to the degree practicable upon project completion.
Unless otherwise authorized by the appropriate permits,no fills or spoils of any kind will be permanently placed within wetlands or along streambanks.
Further,disturbed streambanks will be permanently stabilized using coir matting(with no plastic or nylon)and native vegetative cover.
2.Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S.or Waters of the State
2a.Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for impacts to Waters of the U.S.or Waters of the State?
• Yes No
2c.If yes,mitigation is required by(check all that apply):
• DWR Corps
2d.If yes,which mitigation option(s)will be used for this project?
• Mitigation bank Payment to in-lieu fee program Permittee Responsible Mitigation

3.Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a.Name of Mitigation Bank:
EBX
3b.Credits Purchased/Requested(attach receipt and letter)
Type: Quantity:
Riparian wetland 0.66
Riparian buffer 18465
3c.Comments
See attached credit availability letters
4.Complete if Making a Payment to In-lieu Fee Program
4a.Approval letter from in-lieu fee program is attached.
Yes No
4b.Stream mitigation requested:
(linear feet) 4c.If using stream mitigation,what is the stream temperature:
0
4d.Buffer mitigation requested(DWR only): 4e.Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
(square feet) (acres)
25155 0.08
4f.Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested: 4g.Coastal(tidal)wetland mitigation requested:
(acres) (acres)
4h.Comments
See attached credit availability letter
6. Buffer mitigation(State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules)-required by DWR
6a.Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires buffer mitigation?If yes,you must fill out this entire form-please contact DWR for more information.
! Yes O No
6b.If yes,then identify the square feet of impact.
6c.Reason for impact 6d.Total impact(square Multiplier 6e.Required mitigation
feet) (square feet)
Zone 1 Utility Line 15,421 3 46,263
Zone 2 14,255 0
6f.Total buffer mitigation required
46263
6g.If buffer mitigation is required,is payment to a mitigation bank or NC Division of Mitigation Services proposed?
• Yes No
6j.Comments:
Mitigation is required for Zone 1 impacts only(SF impacts x 3).Mitigation is not required for Zone 2 impacts because the area will be restored and
remain in a grassed state.
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR) (A)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
I a.Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
• Yes No
What type of SCM are you providing?
O Level Spreader
O Vegetated Conveyance(lower SHWT)
O Wetland Swale(higher SHWT)
O Other SCM that removes minimum 30%nitrogen
O Proposed project will not create concentrated stormwater flow through the buffer
2.Stormwater Management Plan

2a.Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250?*
O Yes 0No
2b.Does this project meet the requirements for low density projects as defined in 15A NCAC 02H.1003(2)?
0 Yes 0No
Comments:
Project is a utility line that will not create concentrated flow or impervious surface.
G. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation
1a.Does the project involve an expenditure of public(federal/state/local)funds or the use of public(federal/state)land?*
O Yes O No
2.Violations(DWR Requirement)
2a.Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules(15A NCAC 2H.0500),Isolated Wetland Rules(15A NCAC 2H.1300),or DWR Surface Water or Wetland Standards or
Riparian Buffer Rules(15A NCAC 2B.0200)?*
Yes O No
3.Cumulative Impacts(DWR Requirement)
3a.Will this project result in additional development,which could impact nearby downstream water quality?*
O Yes • No
3b.If you answered"no,"provide a short narrative description.
Project is a utility line designed to transport reclaimed gas from a landfill to an existing pipeline.
4.Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a.Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project?*
Yes • No N/A
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat(Corps Requirement)
5a.Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or habitat?*
O Yes • No
5b.Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?*
O Yes O No
5c.If yes,indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Raleigh
5d.Is another Federal agency involved?*
O Yes O No 0 Unknown
5e.Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?
O Yes 0No
5f.Will you cut any trees in order to conduct the work in waters of the U.S.?
O Yes 0No
5g.Does this project involve bridge maintenance or removal?
O Yes 0No
5h.Does this project involve the construction/installation of a wind turbine(s)?*
O Yes 0No
5i.Does this project involve(1)blasting,and/or(2)other percussive activities that will be conducted by machines,such as jackhammers,mechanized pile drivers,etc.?
O Yes 0No
5j.What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?
USFWS IPaC and NCNHP database
6. Essential Fish Habitat(Corps Requirement)
6a.Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*
Yes • No
6b.What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat?*
NOAA Essential Fish Habitat Mapper

7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources(Corps Requirement)
7a.Will this project occur in or near an area that the state,federal or tribal governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation status?*
Yes • No
7b.What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?*
See SHPO Letter
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a.Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?*
Yes • No
8c.What source(s)did you use to make the floodplain determination?*
NC Flood Mapper
Miscellaneous
Please use the space below to attach all required documentation or any additional information you feel is helpful for application review.Documents should be combined into one file when
possible,with a Cover Letter,Table of Contents,and a Cover Sheet for each Section preferred.
Click the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach document
COVER LETTER AND SUPPOPRTING INFO-DENC PERSON COUNTY.pdf 11.98MB
File must be PDF or KMZ
Comments
Project will not result in any loss of waters.
Signature
*
By checking the box and signing below,I certify that:
• The project proponent hereby certifies that all information contained herein is true,accurate,and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief';and
• The project proponent hereby requests that the certifying authority review and take action on this CWA 401 certification request within the applicable reasonable period of time.
• I have given true,accurate,and complete information on this form;
• I agree that submission of this PCN form is a"transaction"subject to Chapter 66,Article 40 of the NC General Statutes(the"Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66,Article 40 of the NC General Statutes(the"Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a written signature;AND
• I intend to electronically sign and submit the PCN form.
Full Name:
Joey Lawler
Signature
Date
3/3/2022

isEmp
II
March 3, 2022
United States Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Office
3331 Hermitage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
Attention: April Norton
Person County Project Manager
[e-mail]
Reference: Pre-Construction Notification
Dominion Energy North Carolina Person County Pipeline Project
Person County, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 216697
Dear Ms. Norton,
On behalf of Dominion Energy North Carolina (DENC), S&ME, Inc. (S&ME) is submitting this pre-
construction notification (PCN) to inform you of work they plan to conduct in order to install a proposed
natural gas pipeline in Person County, North Carolina.
The project as proposed will require authorization from the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the
North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). The applicable authorizations are Nationwide
Permit (NWP) No. 12 (Utility Line Activities) and Water Quality Certification (WQC) General Certification
(GC) No.4244, respectively.
In support of this PCN, the following accompanying information has been submitted through the NCDWR
electronic PCN website (https://edocs.deq.nc.gov/Forms/Pre-Construction Notification Form):
Appendix I - Authorization to Act as Agent
Appendix II - Figures
Appendix III - Site Photographs
Appendix IV- Delineation Information
Appendix V- Stream/Wetland/Riparian Buffer Impact Exhibits
Appendix VI - Typical Construction Details
Appendix VII - North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) Database and U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) Reports
Appendix VIII - Three Oaks Aquatic Species Survey Report
Appendix IX - SHPO Letter(September 23, 2021)
Appendix X - General Restoration Plan
S&ME, Inc. 19751 Southern Pine Boulevard I Charlotte, NC 28273 I p 704.523.4726 I f 704.525.3953 I www.smeinc.com

Pre-Construction Notification
DENC Person County Pipeline Project
I I Person County, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 216697
General Project Information
DENC is planning to install approximately four miles of new, natural gas pipeline within a new 50-foot
easement in Person County, North Carolina. The purpose of the new pipeline is to transport methane gas
recovered from the Upper Piedmont Environmental Landfill facility, which is operated by a private third-
party company, to a point of connection to an existing DENC transmission pipeline.The new line will
originate at a proposed station site located within the southern portion of the landfill and will extend
generally southwest for approximately 4.4 miles before tying into DENC's existing T-12/T-12B pipeline
easement.
Figures prepared for this PCN are included in Appendix II.The approximate location of the proposed
route is depicted on the Site Vicinity Exhibit (Figure 1), appropriate portions of the Moriah, North Carolina
U.S. Geological Survey(USGS) Topographic Exhibit (Figure 2), the Person County Soils Exhibit (Figure 3)
and Aerial Orthoimagery Exhibits (Figures 4-11).
The route consists primarily of a mixture of pine and hardwood forests in various stages of development,
land disturbed for silvicultural purposes, or other areas that have been developed in connection with
residences, roadways, and other utility easements. Photographs of the general site conditions are included
in Appendix III.
A majority of the project is located within the Tar-Pamlico River Basin, although a shorter segment is also
located in the Neuse River Basin. Based on review of FEMA floodplain mapping available at
https://fris.nc.gov website, the pipeline will not encroach upon areas classified as FEMA-designated
floodplain.
Review of the appropriate NC USGS Topographic Map (Figure 2) indicated that the proposed route
crosses three streams, which are depicted by either solid or dashed blue lines. Streams in the northern
portion of the route ultimately drain to Cub Creek (NCDWR Index No. 28-3, WS-IV; NSW) while most of
those in the south drain to Rock Fork Branch (NCDWR Index No. 27-3-4-1, WS-III; ORW; NSW).
In addition to the three streams depicted by the USGS maps, multiple drainage features are also shown on
the published soil survey. The predominant soil types mapped within the project area are depicted on
Figure 3 and include Lignum silt loam (Aquic Hapludults), Herndon loam (Typic Kanhapludults),
Georgeville silt loam (Typic Kanhapludults), Cid silt loam (Aquic Hapludults) and Goldston very channery
silt loam (Typic Dystrudepts). Chewacla loam (Fluvaquentic Dystrudepts) is mapped along some of the
drainageways. With the exception of Chewacla loam, none of the predominant soils mapped at the site
are classified as hydric.
Jurisdictional Areas
Jurisdictional features located within the project corridor were delineated by S&ME on September 29 and
October 1, 2021. Additional delineation efforts were conducted on October 18-19, 2021 to account for
segments of the proposed pipeline that were re-routed to avoid/minimize potential impacts.
The delineation was conducted utilizing currently accepted methods for wetland determination, as set
forth in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual and the Eastern Mountain and
2

Pre-Construction Notification
dime DENC Person County Pipeline Project
Person County, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 216697
Piedmont Regional Supplement.When necessary, stream assessments were conducted in accordance with
NCDWR and USACE guidelines.
S&ME also determined which on-site streams were subject to riparian buffer rules. In both the Tar-
Pamlico and Neuse River watersheds, streams depicted on either the most recent printed version of the
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) soil survey map or the most recent version of a USGS
1:24000 (7.5 minute) topographic quad map are subject to riparian buffer rules, except in cases where the
NCDWR can verify that the depicted stream is not present in field. On December 16, 2021, S&ME met on-
site with NCDWR personnel to review streams within the project corridor that were potentially subject to
the buffer rules. Following the site visit, NCDWR provided a January 20, 2022 Buffer Determination Letter
confirming their concurrence with S&ME's findings. A copy of the Buffer Determination letter is included
in Appendix IV, along with wetland determination data forms representative of the general wetland types
observed within route, NCDWR Stream classification forms and information other information relative to a
request for Delineation Concurrence (DC).
Description of the Work and Proposed Impacts
Construction of the new pipeline will first involve demarcation of clearing limits,jurisdictional boundaries,
and other associated workspaces, etc. In high ground areas, additional temporary workspace (TWS)
adjacent to the proposed easement will generally be required to safely install the new pipe. At stream and
wetland crossings, the TWS has been eliminated or reduced, and the pipe will be installed within the
proposed 50-foot permanent easement.
The 50-foot width of the proposed easement is required to adequately support: 1) aerial and ground
leakage surveys; 2) aerial patrolling for possible encroachment activity near the pipeline; 3) accurate
identification of possible repairs and maintenance;4) promotion of damage prevention in that the
easement can be more easily identified by the public, and; 5) minimization of potential canopy
encroachment, which creates visibility concerns.
Once the limits of disturbance have been demarcated, clearing of forested areas will commence.
Temporary equipment crossings will be installed across streams and along one side of the easement to
facilitate logging equipment passage, timber removal, and prevent excessive rutting and ground
disturbance in the wetlands.Where necessary, low areas and environmental resources will be protected by
use of temporary measures such as staked waddles, compost filter socks, or other less-invasive siltation
barriers that can temporarily be installed during this phase of the project. Installation of silt fence, silt
fence outlets, and other measures requiring ground disturbance will occur following removal of timber
and will proceed in conjunction with grading operations.
Grubbing and below-ground vegetation removal will be minimized within wetlands or along streambanks,
where it will be limited to the trench line and portions of travel lane, if necessary, for safety reasons. Select
portions of the easement may require rough grading to facilitate safe passage of equipment and to
prepare a suitably-level work surface. Within wetland areas where extensive rutting or soil disturbance
may occur, timber or composite mats are planned for use to provide work and travel space for equipment.
Following preparation of the work area and installation of necessary erosion and sediment control (E&SC)
measures, the trench will be excavated along the "non-working" side of the easement. Subsurface
disturbance will only be conducted within the trench line at wetlands and stream crossings. Stump
3

Pre-Construction Notification
DENC Person County Pipeline Project
Person County, North Carolina
411111 S&ME Project No. 216697
removal or light grading may occur on the working side of the easement if required for safety reasons.
The work will be performed from the timber mats placed along the working side of the easement. In
certain areas, including wetlands and fields supporting crops, efforts will be made to segregate topsoil
from the subsoil. If necessary, trench breakers (temporary barriers generally constructed of sand bags or
similarly suitable material) will be installed within the trench to slow the flow of subsurface water.
In general, lengths of the new pipe will be trucked to the site from temporary storage yards, strung along
the easement, and placed on skids (wooden pedestals). Specialized machines will be used to bend
individual segments of pipe to fit the contours of the trench where necessary.The pipe segments will be
welded together, x-rayed, the structural integrity and surface coating inspected, and then lowered into the
trench. Portions of the trench may require dewatering or"padding" to prevent large rocks or other debris
from coming in contact with the pipe. Permanent trench breakers will then be installed where necessary
and the trench backfilled. In areas where segregation of the subsoil and topsoil is required, the topsoil will
be replaced last.Affected areas will then be "cleaned up" by rough-grading and conducting temporary
seeding, if necessary, followed by final grading, permanent seeding, and mulching to restore the
easement as closely as possible to pre-disturbance contours and conditions.
All work within wetlands and streams will be conducted in accordance with the applicable permits. Best
Management Practices (BMPs) will be employed at all stream and wetland crossings to help prevent
siltation or inadvertent discharges to a waters of the U.S. Jurisdictional Impact exhibits (Figures 12-16)
included in in Appendix V. Typical construction details associated with stream and wetland crossings are
included Appendix VI.
Proposed Project Impacts
Project-wide wetland and stream impacts are summarized in Tables 1 and 2, respectively. Note that all
stream impacts are temporary. Wetland impacts will result from conversion of forested wetlands to
herbaceous wetlands, but will not involve a loss of waters of the US.
Table 1: Summary of Delineated Stream Impacts
Stream ID Flow Regime Feature Description Buffered? Impacts Impacts
(LF) (Acres)
SA Perennial UT to Cub Yes 54 0.006
SE Perennial UT to Cub Creek Yes 66 0.007
SG Intermittent UT to Rock Fork Branch Yes 52 0.005
SM Perennial UT To Cub Creek Yes 58 0.006
SN Perennial UT to Rock Fork Branch Yes 52 0.005
TOTAL 282 0.029
4

Pre-Construction Notification
DENC Person County Pipeline Project
I I Person County, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 216697
Table 2: Summar of Delineated Wetland Impacts
Wetland ID NCWAM Wetland Type Impacts
(Acres)
WCC Forested headwater wetland 0.030
WP Forested headwater wetland. 0.051
WG Forested headwater wetland 0.030
WI Forested basin wetland 0.001
WK Forested headwater wetland 0.010
WM Forested headwater wetland 0.004
WN Forested headwater wetland 0.020
TOTAL 0.146
Additional Protected Areas
The project area is located in the Neuse and Tar River basins and is subject to riparian buffer rules. These
rules apply to perennial and intermittent streams, ponds and lakes located in the watershed, if these
features are shown on either the most recent printed version of the NRCS soil survey map or the most
recent version of the USGS 1:24,000 (7.5 minute) topographic quad map. Buffer impacts are summarized
in Table 3 below, and Impact Exhibits are also included in Appendix V.
Table 3: Summary of Stream Buffer Impacts
Stream ID Watershed Zone 1 Impacts(sf) Zone 2 Impacts(sf)
SA Tar-Pamlico 3,120 2,540
SC Tar-Pamlico 2,908 2,318
SF Tar-Pamlico 0 3,226
SG Neuse 3,126 2,084
SK Tar-Pamlico 0 430
SM Tar-Pamlico 3,238 1,643
SN Neuse 3,029 2,014
TOTAL 15,421 14,255
Note that Streams SF and SK are channels subject to riparian buffers, but are located outside of the
construction corridor.Therefore, aside from the buffer impacts identified above, these streams will not be
otherwise impacted by the project, or require Section 404/401 permitting.
Federally Protected Species
To assist you with determining compliance with applicable sections of the Endangered Species Act (ESA)
of 1973 (16 USC 1531-1543), S&ME submitted a request for information to the NCNHP.The NCNHP
responded with a July 22. 2021 and September 28, 2021 reports that listed natural areas and protected
5

Pre-Construction Notification
DENC Person County Pipeline Project
Person County, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 216697
species with documented occurrences within one mile of the project area. The report identified no
occurrences of federally protected species within one mile of the site.
S&ME also consulted the USFWS IPaC system for a list of species that are known or expected to be near
the assessment area. The IPaC report identified the following species as having potential for direct or
indirect affected by activities in the assessment area.
S&ME also subcontracted Three Oaks Engineering to conducted habitat evaluations and surveys for this
target aquatic species in September 2021.
Table 4: Federall Protected S.ecies for Person Count
Federal
Scientific Name Common Name Category Status Habitat Present?
Danaus plexippus Monarch Bufferfly Insect C No
Necturus lewisi Neuse River Waterdog Amphibian T Marginally suitable
Noturus furiosus Carolina Madtom Fish E Marginally suitable
Fusconaia masoni Atlantic Pigtoe Clam T Marginally suitable
Alasmidonta heterodon Dwarf Wedegmeuusel Clam E Marginally suitable
Elliptio lanceolata Yellow Lance Clam T Marginally suitable
C = Candidate;E=Endangered; E(P) = Proposed Endangered;T(P) = Proposed;T=Threatened
Descriptions of the relevant species taken from USFWS sources are provided below.
Monarch Butterfly
Status: Candidate
Biological Determination: No Effect
The monarch butterfly(Danaus plexippus) is reddish/orange in color with black vein like markings. It has a
black border around its wings with white spots. In the spring and summer, the monarch butterfly's primary
habitat is open field and meadows containing milkweed. In the winter it can be found on the coast of
southern California as well as high altitudes of central Mexico.
The project as proposed should not have a significant effect on monarch butterfly because the project site
does not contain suitable habitat for this species.
Neuse River Waterdog
Status: Proposed Threatened
Biological Determination: May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect
The Neuse River waterdog (Necturus lewisi) is a freshwater salamander endemic to the Neuse and Tar
River basins of North Carolina. It grows up to 11 inches in length and has a reddish/brown body with an
irregular pattern of large blue or black spots. Specific habitat characteristics include low to moderate
gradient streams with low current velocity. It is a fully aquatic salamander, which means it does not leave
the water. It lacks lungs, getting oxygen from the water via external gills and needs clean, flowing water
with high dissolved oxygen concentrations.The species dwells in streams wider than 15 meters but has
6

Pre-Construction Notification
DENC Person County Pipeline Project
I I
Person County, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 216697
been found in smaller creeks.The species thrives in cold water and is much more active in colder seasons
and when water is near-freezing. Stream SA exhibited marginally-suitable habitat for the listed aquatic
species, and therefore, a survey by a firm experienced and licensed to conduct such aquatic survey work
was recommended.
On November 2, 2021, Three Oaks Engineering (sub-consultant to S&ME) personnel conducted habitat
evaluations and surveys for this target aquatic species. Surveys for this species was conducted from a
point approximately 400 meters downstream of the project crossing upstream to a point approximately
100 meters upstream of the proposed project crossing. Marginally suitable habitat for the species is
present in the pool habitats surveyed in the unnamed tributary to Cub Creek; however, no individuals of
this species was detected during the surveys.Therefore, impacts to this aquatic species are unlikely to
occur within the project area.
Carolina Madtom
Status: Endangered
Biological Determination: May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect
The Carolina madtom (Noturus furiosus) is a freshwater fish endemic to the Neuse and Tar River basins of
North Carolina. It is a small catfish, reaching a maximum length of approximately five inches. The species
occurs in riffles, runs, and pools in medium to large streams and rivers. Ideally, it inhabits fresh waters with
continuous, year-round flow and moderate gradient in both the Piedmont and Coastal Plain
physiographic regions. Optimal substrate for the Carolina madtom is predominantly silt-free, stable,
gravel and cobble bottom habitat, and it must have cover for nest sites, including under rocks, bark, relic
mussel shells, and even cans and bottles. Stream SA may exhibit potentially-suitable habitat for the listed
aquatic species, and therefore, a survey by a firm experienced and licensed to conduct such aquatic survey
work was recommended.
On November 2, 2021, Three Oaks Engineering personnel conducted habitat evaluations and surveys for
this target aquatic species. Surveys for this species was conducted from a point approximately 400 meters
downstream of the project crossing upstream to a point approximately 100 meters upstream of the
proposed project crossing. While appropriate habitat for this species is present, no individuals of this
species were detected during the surveys.Therefore, impacts to this aquatic species iare unlikely to occur
within the project area.
Atlantic Pigtoe
Status: Threatened
Biological Determination: May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect
The Atlantic pigtoe (Fusconaia masoni) is a freshwater mussel found in Virginia, North Carolina, South
Carolina, and Georgia. The shell of the Atlantic pigtoe is a chunky, rhombus shape, like that of a pig's
hoof/toe.There is a distinct posterior ridge.The outer surface of the shell is yellow to dark brown and
parchment-like, while the inner layer is iridescent blue to salmon, white, or orange. The preferred habitat
of the Atlantic pigtoe is coarse sand and gravel, and rarely in silt and detritus. Historically, the best
populations existed in small creeks to larger rivers with excellent water quality, where flows were sufficient
to maintain clean, silt-free substrates. Stream SA may exhibit potentially-suitable habitat for the listed
aquatic species, and therefore, a survey by a firm experienced and licensed to conduct such aquatic survey
work was recommended.
7

Pre-Construction Notification
DENC Person County Pipeline Project
Person County, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 216697
On November 2, 2021, Three Oaks Engineering personnel conducted habitat evaluations and surveys for
this target aquatic species. Surveys for this species was conducted from a point approximately 400 meters
downstream of the project crossing upstream to a point approximately 100 meters upstream of the
proposed project crossing. Appropriate habitat was present specifically in deeper pools; however, no
mussels of this species were found during the surveys. Therefore, impacts to this aquatic species are
unlikely to occur within the project area.
Dwarf Wedgemussel
Status: Endangered
Biological Determination: May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect
The dwarf wedgemussel (Alasmidonta heterodon) is a small bivalve that is typically greenish brown in
color. The dwarf wedgemussel appears to be a generalist in terms of its preference for stream size,
substrate and flow conditions. It inhabits small streams less than five meters wide to large rivers more
than 100 meters wide. It is also found in a variety of substrate types including clay, sand, gravel and
pebble, and sometimes in silt depositional areas near banks; and it usually inhabits hydrologically stable
areas, including very shallow water along streambanks and under root mats. Dwarf wedgemussels are
often patchily distributed in rivers. Stream SA may exhibit potentially-suitable habitat for the listed aquatic
species, and therefore, a survey by a firm experienced and licensed to conduct such aquatic survey work
was recommended.
On November 2, 2021, Three Oaks Engineering personnel conducted habitat evaluations and surveys for
this target aquatic species. Surveys for this species was conducted from a point approximately 400 meters
downstream of the project crossing upstream to a point approximately 100 meters upstream of the
proposed project crossing. Appropriate habitat was present specifically in deeper pools; however, no
mussels of this species were found during the surveys. Therefore, impacts to this aquatic species are
unlikely to occur within the project area.
Yellow Lance
Status: Threatened
Biological Determination: May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect
The yellow lance (Elliptio lanceolata) is a freshwater mussel found in specific basins of Maryland, Virginia,
and North Carolina. It is a bright yellow mussel with a shell more than twice as long as it is tall, reaching
just over three inches in length. The yellow lance is a sand-loving species often found buried deep in
clean, coarse to medium sand, although it can sometimes be found in gravel substrates. Yellow lances are
often moved with shifting sand and eventually settle in sand at the downstream end of stable sand and
gravel bars. This species depends on clean, moderate flowing water with high dissolved oxygen. This
species is found in medium-sized rivers to smaller streams. Stream SA may exhibit potentially-suitable
habitat for the listed aquatic species, and therefore, a survey by a firm experienced and licensed to
conduct such aquatic survey work was recommended.
On November 2, 2021, Three Oaks Engineering personnel conducted habitat evaluations and surveys for
this target aquatic species. Surveys for this species was conducted from a point approximately 400 meters
downstream of the project crossing upstream to a point approximately 100 meters upstream of the
proposed project crossing. Appropriate habitat was present specifically in deeper pools; however, no
8

Pre-Construction Notification
DENC Person County Pipeline Project
Person County, North Carolina
mom S&ME Project No. 216697
mussels of this species were found during the surveys. Therefore, impacts to this aquatic species are
unlikely to occur within the project area.
Copies of the NCNHP and USFWS IPaC reports are included in Appendix VII, and the Three Oaks report is
included in Appendix VIII.
Historic Sites
S&ME provided an August 21, 2021 scoping letter to the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office
(NCSHPO). The scoping letter included a description of the proposed project and exhibits that depicted
the proposed route and requested that they review and provide comment on the project. NCSHPO
responded with a September 23, 2021 letter stating that they had conducted a review of the project and
were aware of no historic resources which would be affected by the project. Therefore, NCSHPO had no
comment on the project as proposed.A copy of the NCSHPO response letter is provided in Appendix IX.
Avoidance and Minimization
To minimize impacts to waters of the US, DENC has proposed to limit the work space at stream and
wetland crossings to 50 feet, and locate additional workspace areas outside of the jurisdictional areas and
stream buffers.Additionally, construction equipment operating near the streams and wetlands will be
limited to that necessary for pipe installation and restoration activities.
The project has been designed to incorporate appropriate erosion and sediment control practices
outlined in the most recent version of the "North Carolina Erosion and Sedimentation Control Planning
and Design Manual" and approved by the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (NCDENR) prior to construction.
As proposed, the project will comply with applicable conditions of the USACE NWP No. 12 and NCDWR
WQC GC No.4244. Following the construction, the temporarily-affected streambanks and wetlands will be
restored in accordance with the accompanying construction documents. Temporarily-disturbed
streambanks and wetland areas will be restored to their original contours and conditions to the degree
practicable upon project completion. Unless otherwise authorized by the appropriate permits, no fills or
spoils of any kind will be permanently placed within wetlands or along streambanks. Further, disturbed
streambanks will be permanently stabilized using coir matting (with no plastic or nylon) and native
vegetative cover. Additional details are provided in the General Restoration Plan (Appendix X).
Mitigation
Because the project will not result in permanent stream impacts, compensatory stream mitigation should
not be required.Although the project will not result in a loss of waters, the project will result in conversion
of 0.141 acre of forested wetlands to herbaceous wetlands.The project will also impact 15,421 sf of sf
Zone 1 riparian buffer and 14,255 sf of Zone 2. Based on the appropriate Table of Uses in the respective
Riparian Buffer Rules, mitigation is required only for Zone 1 impacts associated with perpendicular
crossings of permanent maintenance corridors for below-ground utilities that are greater than 30 linear
feet wide. Further, any wetland areas located within the buffers are subtracted from the square-footage
requiring mitigation. The appropriate amount of mitigation credit is determined by multiplying the
9

Pre-Construction Notification
Ammo DENC Person County Pipeline Project
I Person County, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 216697
amount of Zone 1 impacts (sf) by three. DENC plans to purchase the necessary wetland and riparian buffer
mitigation credit in the appropriate watersheds from a private bank and the NC Division of Mitigation
Services. Once the appropriate credit availability letters have been received, copies will be forwarded to
the USACE and NCDWR for your approval.
Closing
Thank you for your review of this PCN. Please feel free to contact us at 704-523-4726 with questions or if
you need additional information.
Sincerely,
S&ME •
Ayb:/,X;,pyt.
Walter Cole, LSS Joey Lawler, PWS
Natural Resources Professional Senior Consultant
Senior Review by Jason Reeves, PE, Principal Engineer
cc. Robert Ley, PE, DENC
Robert Lepsic, PWS, DENC
Attachments:
Appendix I - Authorization to Act as Agent
Appendix II - Figures
Appendix III - Site Photographs
Appendix IV - Delineation Information
Appendix V- Stream/Wetland/Riparian Buffer Impact Exhibits
Appendix VI - Typical Construction Details
Appendix VII - North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) Database and USFWS IPaC Reports
Appendix VIII - Three Oaks Aquatic Species Survey Report
Appendix IX - SHPO Letter(September 23, 2021)
Appendix X - General Restoration Plan
10

List of Supporting Information
DENC Person County Pipeline Project
• Appendix I - Authorization to Act as Agent
• Appendix II -Figures
• Appendix III - Site Photographs
• Appendix IV - Delineation Information
• Appendix V - Stream/Wetland/Riparian Buffer Impact Exhibits
• Appendix VI - Typical Construction Details
• Appendix VII — NCNHP Database and USFWS IPaC Reports
• Appendix VIII - Three Oaks Aquatic Species Survey Report
• Appendix IX - SHPO Letter (September 23, 2021)
• Appendix X - General Restoration Plan

Appendix I
Authorization to Act as Agent

II -
AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
Date: 01.25.2022
Project Information
S&ME Project Name: Dominion Energy North Carolina Person County Pipeline
Type of Project: Natural Gas Pipeline Project
Location: Person County, NC
Property Owner/Rep Information
Owner Name: Dominion Energy South Carolina
Mailing Address: 220 Operation Way, MC C221
City, State, Zip Code: Cayce, SC 29033
Telephone No. 803.201.2539
Contact: Robert Ley, PE
Agent Information
Business Name: S&ME, Inc.
Street Address: 9751 Southern Pine Blvd
City, State, Zip: Charlotte, NC 28273
Telephone No. 704.523.4726
Contact: Joey Lawler, PWS/ Rebeckah Sims, PWS
Authorization: I, Robert Ley , hereby authorize S&ME, Inc. to
submit information to and coordinate with the US Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) and other relevant Federal/State/Local agencies pursuant to obtaining
necessary environmental permits for the project(s) referenced above. If
applicable, this also authorizes the USACE to access the proposed project area
for the purposes of conducting site assessment/confirming the accuracy of
delineated boundaries, provided that prior notification is given.
Signature:
�obe�t J7 Lec, ?E
S&ME, INC./2016 Ayrsley Town Boulevard Suite 2A /p 704.523.4726 f 704.525.3953/www.smeinc.com

Appendix II
Figures

N
M
To
N '
� J
H
V
Q •
N
H
N
a 0
T
O
V
•
0 4,000 8,000
(FEET)
PROPOSED ALIGNMENT
REFERENCE: PROPOSED PIPELINE LOD
- GIS BASE LAYERS WERE OBTAINED FROM ESRI. THIS MAP IS FOR INFORMATIONAL
3 PURPOSES ONLY. ALL FEATURE LOCATIONS DISPLAYED ARE APPROXIMATED.THEY ARE ---' ACCESS ROADS & EXTRA WORKSPACE LOD
o NOT BASED ON CIVIL SURVEY INFORMATION,UNLESS STATED OTHERWISE.
SCALE: FIGURE NO.
- y�, SITE VICINITY EXHIBIT 1 " = 4,000 '
- L DATE:
III DOMINION ENERGY NORTH CAROLINA 12/13/2021
PERSON COUNTY PIPELINE PROJECT PROJECT NUMBER
PERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA 216997

NEs'RR � (L
gin; N
6
4')
i ,c)_)'!'",' -. ''6:..--7. . - 0 _,-Itn i•------1
' 1FI Q 4 1 600
d % /4 ‘-.,:, , ..•• A ..„....:.
w mic.........-___, Atio:.1.:., cw, i ler .4 -,..
ca
. D „ . 43,k. 1 s____ylio c,s1
.., 't-, o os-0*6.__, 44 ff," A
-'5,._ i
f, --_ , ,,\ , , ,.... ( 1
0 -1 41, „\11011
'' y it> -4
r wo w � .
s � a
m
,I. '. --' , 0 (I rt 1, Q ,; . , __-. •
) 41\---1 I 4101 '
i rank et
o cg,t4i
r it,,,,, d;01 / r
9 Q
i . 4,„
J.
1,- ----,8 4
,. .. .. , iifoI .,.
09 ,
b.
E ,,,,t,, ,:,, .-., u) _ ul'," „Ai,'
mil 1 i, Q , :S.
?_,-,,, 46 ---, r4ro lip 111111101Pre— itill.vowe.:s000"0" . libiir ii: .
r--11] VW i'vel U 2/4 ,:())71 _ k 4,
i,7,, -,_,i- <t..,1 21"\. -----------------:\„,, 1, 9 4''`-‘,./X)
— r,-5 4044p "'lb, GIIC
. Ait I
s li Ter 4, 4!_,-,L:iP.-'- ' ,_
, y,,,____,,, / CI:.. )-)- 'V'' Al " 1 4
„'1' -i1/4,-----„ „!(---c, T... 6- NA '' 0 ,I, . it*
E. , (1 , iNr),)•04/.. g) j__, .0,, ,, • pa ,
'' } .). e _„,1:61;:iiii%aisiri -, _Ak- .. .,,m
,,._ & . >--,=--/-2::, C ) n, 1 i
. , 4 Iv. 441/).1
. bcP Aiil j,=---- 22. .\
F3' , j ) /.,55° 41 -,1-611H ° j'I.> 0 0 .0.-I 4 1004 A ut:"'0
_'''-----i '''' _,i i ' ' if I‘
s ..---.-,--------__ ...___jr_.---___\7:, ,,.,,,,, AI A tifiedi
1,4\ft 7-6/X 41
NIir^N N
o � r
,,.t,E_,
1
-- r
0 2,000 4,000 1(
(FEET) / H9 . ' - h1rW_,,.
'
T
O)
N
REFERENCE: — PROPOSED ALIGNMENT
GIS BASE LAYERS WERE OBTAINED FROM ESRI. THIS MAP IS FOR INFORMATIONAL l' PROPOSED PIPELINE LOD
a PURPOSES ONLY. ALL FEATURE LOCATIONS DISPLAYED ARE APPROXIMATED.THEY ARE
3 NOT BASED ON CIVIL SURVEY INFORMATION,UNLESS STATED OTHERWISE. ACCESS RDS & EXTRA WORKSPACE LOD
0
SCALE: FIGURE NO.
4. USGS TOPOGRAPHIC EXHIBIT 1 " = 2,000 '
DATE:
III .. DOMINION ENERGY NORTH CAROLINA 12/13/2021 2
PERSON COUNTY PIPELINE PROJECT PROJECT NUMBER
PERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA 216997 I

0 1,500 3,000
• Go.•, _ N
(FEET) ' i
REFERENCE: ' �f
GIS BASE LAYERS WERE OBTAINED FROM ERSI AND COUNTY SOURCES. THIS MAP IS FOR ti f ul L
INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. ALL FEATURE LOCATIONS DISPLAYED ARE
f APPROXIMATED.THEY ARE NOT BASED ON CIVIL SURVEY INFORMATION,UNLESS STATED
OTHERWISE.WETLANDS AREAS WERE PREVIOUSLY DISTURBED AND LOCATION •
r j -4rl,
APPROXIMATED. }l
x ,. UT: I_gs 1
-- H.riii.-- ,,
r,i_. .,f1�y r HrE� f FirE3 Cy -
,p
----
I Ca iHrB 4
HrC na 1 Lgf3 � �!.�
,,, --' • ,.-. ,,GA:c.
. -
N � y r^ �� LgB u• � 1. 0
�� Y c,44
7/'. G. H�`� \ Ci r
_,.
o E Hrli f
HrB lr.
N.- raoF G yfc'. �n f•HrG J Tali
3 HrB J Lga litir Gor _ -
72 Hr8 iiiip Lg8 •' 157 - l.E:B GeB
•
r'
_
•
HrC
. ----- ,-....r., !--!-:-r• ___-----V--n.,, /17:5;)'.'-
?irC
rt
•
f Iv iirCa Q r ,
N � iN,IN. da
t
{L LLiB .� LgB )z �• ll ina} �y e k�r8 4 y 4 y /C-7(.",c)f�
. • • 4 HrC c ,, I,} .
o � kGp, hirC r`-
�, G
1 • HrB �' l�rC
o 411 G He
HrR
Hr., rirB .- -� J
-4I + ffr$ B
° n • Cyr HrC rL-
Hra i 11‘ \
49
LAB ' \ , • 90
\ HAI HrC ')+ 0011114 '-, ;3015)
•
N ` }{r8
o FirE3 HOB
Y
r4N4
• Hr �' 71-.---- - - �, - •x�'• _ PROPOSED ALIGNMENT
PROPOSED PIPELINE LOD
---• ACCESS ROADS & EXTRA WORKSPACE LOD
ra
- IF3 ; NRCS DIGITIZED STREAMS
0
SCALE: FIGURE NO.
NRCS SOILS EXHIBIT 1 " = 1,500 '
DATE:
III .. DOMINION ENERGY NORTH CAROLINA 12/13/2021 3
PERSON COUNTY PIPELINE PROJECT PROJECT NUMBER
PERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA 216997

Drawing Path:T:\Energy\Projects\2021\216997 ELI Person County Pipeline Project Rougemont NC\CAD\GIS\MAP SETS\Report\4-AERIAL.mxd plotted by kwallace 03-02-2022
_, r.: 1. p
ti, -•..',,- f . y._�. •M•. ••'.'•f••:.� s •7 +1�._ ry.'ti' `..' 5•• 1r J'' � - .,•�4 t �i 4 ..•.-
. r' 'L •'-'''' .tea .L 4• • r i4 < ` :.'- • ''• y • ■ -• 1` s
k .` -•:-. is - _ � ,. • - ;. •, F . i. .`,h_'4• l
•
_ ■..•• _. r• r-'- , . . ] ! slp 1 r ' *
.•r_ S. / t� r• - -.-•i�'•. • :' • . _' '�• ''' yini i • ,` "'Ai, . . A i %. -.x , - i �'- . ,) t, ,.0, , ir'a. _ .I •S !-b:4 - - 1 •S':'. C l31:N.1-•- .s. A L.y :' -‘--',-1
•
•
. r r , t _.
y • L:! .F 'yW c • i. T• , - - a • ? ' /•t 1F _ Fr • . c,,+ • . .•' "�, i}+. •
4.
~h' - -Y�- •iti•i' "' ti :�..�;' --.;it. •�•�-•,-j o .l _ .• -
• r} t - f -'
, .
; z '
4.
."� 4: -• i ! - '• 7 .. ,.r ;1,. • d^" f ;fir .. . .iS '' r i? ' ' - .-. i1"' -`a•iT! •'ye _t.
•
$. ..- y a 1 ,'. ':. .. .;• ..E'.`4 } - • •=.�• Y- `1- .r.�,I,•µµ of __
..-1. • �; 'ate'`'- -^'t--4 i-
i••, T s , Je.tr •.ta 1 ,-- ia•~_. - f' L _ �y .—i -. -t .••r ._
•
•
•
s ti x:�� a•. s.' i' �:`;': r is . . i'` ems '-x ir 3'4
,'G: a ,i ,f � ••; �5 ` ^f ie x a +i�n
^' ?X; r i .4,,.;._ -fit :. ,.' iry, i=' _ } `fir _ 'x'. *i.'wq, -• . '".O .r.A.
7 ..?,, _ t..risy. _ .4'- "'+j; t .: •,- - :• ..y,Y; _ _ - -11 to ?3., _ -
-,x. .� .i - ,. ,.'w'r ' --A.- Ti 1.a.
- s ,.Y y. �1'
o.. �,r• F .' ram.• <<r, •,+ •mow: _ . ••.• . . w -y 4 S_
..sN:.• 4` �1- -+.., •'.A -` w`, !:•�_:.!,. ,;,` der _ . ."-r.. ,,:- ., •''ti - 1u, � T-,r'`
..}}i -i .e- . .� -_ " C• '... eti.rrt �-' •� .+.ie'"".'L- .a;. - ■i, 7 / t,9 -4 _
•
i•.r•r..J -,i'Ra - i - —a. :2- .+. • .• ` �-i - • - -_f'' - N'•rry _ :1 r _ y>—
.--1..:!4..-;.A;:.? '',.q._ ...j'erli.,-,, ••••4:i .-', . '• fr . - . ..• _,A0,...1,7-•• --ic.:1-. _*•.,.(•;.- .3-•*-. :. , . ,..:-i_ .r.„. ,•-•,..‘-‘'_,Z;ii,.
tr.
-314"
' a- iT :��'• �• r ;St •1,. f••.s YL �1 i• . iviL S.. eft . `..+'. - • 'rr `Y:
3 '+ • 1- - - ,'' '. r� PROPOSED ALIGNMENT
. [• •i _ r• 7 II:. '•�`.:, a. `•- PROPOSED PIPELINE LOD
F i,, -•M1 �^, 1,
0 300 600 ., : • .-ra. -.`'�Y, ;-<, z ---ACCESS RDS & EXTRA WORKSPACE LOD
(FEET) •��{ • - `-,:� : DELINEATED POTENTIAL STREAMS
REFERENCE:2017 RTHOIMAGERY FOR PERSON COUNTY ._ f7'•�•5 t. . >Egtit DELINEATED POTENTIAL STREAMS OUTSIDE LOD
GIS BASE LAYERS WERE OBTAINED FROM PERSON COUNTY. THIS MAP IS FOR r • ,+ . _.ei.
INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. ALL FEATURE LOCATIONS DISPLAYED ARE -��yi�,�, *:. ;{.- . .'' f DELINEATED POTENTIAL WETLANDS
APPROXIMATED.THEY ARE NOT BASED ON CIVIL SURVEY INFORMATION,UNLESS STATED ikt r'-•" - '"' `h ' - '
_"'+ ' •"- ROADS
OTHERWISE. " a►.r-S r f — ...
SCALE: FIGURE NO.
AERIAL ORTHOIMAGERY EXHIBIT 1 " = 300 '
DATE: 5
fi ir - DOMINION ENERGY NORTH CAROLINA 3-2-22
PERSON COUNTY PIPELINE PROJECT PROJECT NUMBER
PERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA 216997

Drawing Path:T:\Energy\Projects\2021\216997 ELI Person County Pipeline Project Rougemont NC\CAD\GIS\MAP SETS\Report\4-AERIAL.mxd plotted by kwallace 03-02-2022
•
•
. • • _i• tA ..2- ''•''','.-s..•...Air?...t. , ' 4..._%, i.,.„ .
. . . . ..,_ . ...,. „.„. .,.............,„. ......5,.,, _ . _ . ,..z ,,,-.
.. _
.. ..,..
,,; , . ..,.. •...,.."....„,,, -i-,f7,--e„...):„.•. 'T -` t - .••-.7,,, -.4;t, ,,..., ....., - _
•
y r i, {• - S try S _ 4
ti
. . .a`:.:a •4 •-Y• • —•*It• ... '-'....igr--7.-:-AIL. .,''' ,. C •-1 '-'... .
Ilk• ..mink -., .1, ,c ., k'. • - -440,-- .4,._ .. . , . . ..v.,....it....1.7... -4-ti•...-;-,!.V..,. No...y_.,
40
- / - f .._, . , a �yi:' Y■` Few \ •�•ai• :r "
ti w _ '.'
yip. ;�,- }ll_ kA _or . • _ } ,. .�. --„.- . ?!e!t•._ r {,S- L•:.
if
f �'t!'•,* .- . • - y , •• • r-' - • refs -s.1',.".....,` • •• ,.
' +- 1 - =y .. - • ' - _ rs _ irk$!. ;:- - - :f. :i,-`. •/ .._t. ri-_\ - ..
t3 1./.--
•
•
- -I
- •.1•. _'/ 'r I5i c'r r - { • =ty`""-. -- •, -ir.P ii-.r7�4,;— \\ * 2-"F
•
•
•
- 7 ,.-w y • • 'mar.
.411%
•
•
Qt r I .+ •��` - [ -.
• : V., - _
.v .- r ' \ ma
s- Fir*/A • •' \'iyt,K - -,ik_ _
, y r.�s 3 _
• i a
L
7 ,F" i+ . - Ti �;.itt • c% :��.i' .'� '- _ .. _ ; _ . •-:74.�+ 1 � ' -1. - - - yr3
•
\ ..• ; ; ;��rtie �- f
•
. • ." • - ,fi.� . .
._ � {` .Y- • - . s • -��,- � ,,p Y \\n yam { .L f`Sr r•
r.
•
. „air7-t.-1;
ar
•
11, - ,s,,,;+ - e ji t-h. •. r, . r Y 41''/' 0, lt-:' -_` - PROPOSED ALIGNMENT
3' . ` M1't - .•'. • -- PROPOSED PIPELINE LOD
0 300 600 r, rr'' •' "� -.• .•- );'"' ---ACCESS RDS & EXTRA WORKSPACE LOD
(FEET) ., , _ "= ;=! e.
i� --.- }-, yeti -. _¢k -+. DELINEATED POTENTIAL STREAMS
REFERENCE:2017 ORTHOIMAGERY FOR PERSON COUNTY • rF•;. A..:" DELINEATED POTENTIAL STREAMS OUTSIDE LOD
GIS BASE LAYERS WERE OBTAINED FROM PERSON COUNTY. THIS MAP IS FOR L ' ,' +r !*-✓ ;. ".f. +- i.r
INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. ALL FEATURE LOCATIONS DISPLAYED ARE ; •sM1 r- ,:• '' • DELINEATED POTENTIAL WETLANDS
APPROXIMATED.THEY ARE NOT BASED ON CIVIL SURVEY INFORMATION,UNLESS STATED 'i w: Ff •11 R ?
OTHERWISE. .. r• .4 �'. � �+ •.`' ROADS
SCALE: FIGURE NO.
— AERIAL ORTHOIMAGERY EXHIBIT 1 " = 300 '
DATE: 6
fi ir - DOMINION ENERGY NORTH CAROLINA 3-2-22
PERSON COUNTY PIPELINE PROJECT PROJECT NUMBER
PERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA 216997

Drawing Path:T:\Energy\Projects\2021\216997 ELI Person County Pipeline Project Rougemont NC\CAD\GIS\MAP SETS\Report\4-AERIAL.mxd plotted by kwallace 03-02-2022
... - •.,- jp.11'W/.;.•;.--=.''':q44,....e.• .....':, d _.:ir.....,,,....., ..
• : •••.-•- •.,.• •• 0 / V.i).1.,' 1•.: '•• kiC•.' .;;'''`•..- %, ;-44t•••,:t-..';..-:'..•-'--11 .•,...t,•','''1-.r.4(e..4•••
r.y` •,'_-„s....L'
# ';Q.//> • . ii.r ,:?. ::' . , -i. $^ :. ••fir '1 ., . wit! Yr 44
•-7.••.',''.':••1-•....••-.:.'.4-,.--.,.•''.•.1-.-1:••*;:1 er4;.•;.••1•k..•-•••-.1••'1•1.••;l4'k.,''.•i'•',:':.,''".'.•;,,
- i`LL'. •r}' - •rF r.
i7 If t‘\6/L.. _ •' , 4 y f f L`'k rF y 1•;"�`./.;
•
.w4 ; .4 : jam• ta_ C '.? , •• ;T `S' 7►" `st.{,'r.: . t0'a.. rt' i ,. i- ,f 4'l
1,Y4..., •A;; •1 y.3. . ' ,'i ,i i , .. • ) S �r —.fi.' ' .•. '+ sP MZ' 1 i .:ti ' •• • • • •• • ••
•• •• •tk
%it,
• ••
•
•INi
lit • • • ;;�'
`J i117..
- _ i- :� -5. •fi �i - 'k
i.
•
_•i, i. ,b: ; FF _1 y��. J/ 'I •'.Jy'�{• ��•tl0 .L l'. I •f • - • •'� f 1'J` �4'/ jF
;ti; • , it ��' 'r - rI;5'L r. 3 J:, �, Q ax ! �S�
t,.. t • •i .. +�,•` ' L'- ; �; 1"►R ,_i`l isS.•Tv? .�.;,•r' riC j
r T' iv: "v +l �w•r •.# , or.r„ ,, ,,F!' * d• p v 4 y•' f a, � .G it •r +:.
f -, ,k. : ti' . -sip,..,,, ,,,-,,f f y 7.-- 4.r r4 7' ,i" _la• r':r1.t'.1 �. 's?' Yy Lit 'AL. '.
i, ' ?�.V'1 .k. ��r�*.- 'Liaisf �. • rf` ' . • •' r . -. PROPOSED ALIGNMENT
..:,' PROPOSED PIPELINE LOD
..•''".4'1.
=
0 300 600r • , •z rf --ACCESS RDS & EXTRA WORKSPACE LOD
`fir';; �^ . 1 +.
(FEET) _ ; '• •'' DELINEATED POTENTIAL STREAMS
REFERENCE:2017 ORTHOIMAGERY FOR PERSON COUNTY • ; st �1'-'! .
GIS BASE LAYERS WERE OBTAINED FROM PERSON COUNTY. THIS MAP IS FOR -- 42 , !r' DELINEATED POTENTIAL STREAMS OUTSIDE LOD
INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. ALL FEATURE LOCATIONS DISPLAYED ARE z! Ir.,•-•. .r? .` A t.}' DELINEATED POTENTIAL WETLANDS
APPROXIMATED.THEY ARE NOT BASED ON CIVIL SURVEY INFORMATION,UNLESS STATED ,.1. F T.'., `. ROADS
OTHERWISE. #.-
SCALE: FIGURE NO.
AERIAL ORTHOIMAGERY EXHIBIT 1 " = 300 '
DATE: I J
fi - DOMINION ENERGY NORTH CAROLINA 3-2-22 /
- PERSON COUNTY PIPELINE PROJECT PROJECT NUMBER
PERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA 216997

Drawing Path:T:\Energy\Projects\2021\216997 ELI Person County Pipeline Project Rougemont NC\CAD\GIS\MAP SETS\Report\4-AERIAL.mxd plotted by kwallace 03-02-2022
ri',7' r.,,,,� ;E ', {' i,'', i•.-•, - -'it--S::_'r .r .r' - 7p;;�!`,! •iil�''(6? .! �.e. •-- 4-• 44'7: 44,. •-' ?v:�.v ..,t• _L-r `1•.L','_r_�.,' - rs4._. ,., y�3J`ft1 i 3r --1.-•,40 , 1 y_ i `!V` '§"1 %y. 'a: ki.l • 't S. `=" 4 '/ :ir', .ti . c 1 tr. . ;C•.9. ' -,F '•'1 1 `.. 43 :,v,t, y t It :a'h ' - I. ' .-;1 i rr -� g e, 4 r sy r.,p , 4.:• .j,; # Y •s ,r �,C '7
'-,Y �} 17 '.. -� -.3Y'i � 1 rl! • �y; -'f1" 14.r.r mil.�`"'.5- i,,. rV ! ti�j1f . .0 'it'. _ -' N R� E.
r+�F ,-+ `r.+ rT'�'iifyt.' '' 1s , # } .S eti3 _ 1 I�; , �. i}`, .e 1 y
-j' 4] , - - .' ..i2 ,_* !- I..p �,1 • 4• .� '� S N I' ,7 .. r Ilk; ., 4,` " ' ..fit . !F
fr
g.
.4
47
�:f•fr _. I .�.S'+ •-.� ,• 7 - • .;ii.4 W` "ilfi i i'is it - i •. A ._;5i r. -. ?"4": .. ,..' 1.,1.. ,•• - 1 i, , .,*,-o. 1.1., '•-•
�r 'r # r_�'' '•�'' � - _ r,y-i i •� t'1�Y{' .V` rY ,..v.4a. y`► _'� i �, . ,.y v• � .,�1F�e•�'��''�' , yli-'� �I � e y.�) , ..
:-•x. rwf .' T -i %4-,. y1±f; 6 :. i�trti,' 'K'':. t• 4r,. 3 ` '''' i f• r'- ;,,- - 4.... fr,.;if' ! -, " i ,,
iki
_.•:,-,.'• , r .:,... ' i',.."!•-• V.4. .$ .-•,,i* i,:'(••• -- .:-: 91,t '•'Atli!: -.:•-,--..;I - -,:. ' ' - • -.'l'4..' ' ‘ 4.r14.--,........ . ...-. , .
- =• - 4,- •� f- '��•.♦ •�"r;`'•" •sX.. �`� .•'.� 1 :Jot, ._ rL 'ti % -.A NY• y` ;ti: `- ` !- ,'frY.i f I /' i't,.t
mow, .v •L■ 1 * -y rF. -1yr• a� .-.r f .� .?.• _ .Y, ft.'.r - ,- '7 j
.rt� '`.' ■: ...• ,r; v+ N: - I; - + i ,C? r,r' :�r,�.__-11 _ _i+s3::- r 'jI.'h • .tSISs\ ,4.4., y;s_IA,,' ,
ii•+ •F"}' � ,� � "� 'fP. r:i• `t t1�,¢ 1 I • ,1 �• f. � r�' S /•,' K'•i,; r44,��!
' _ . .pr.. ,-
1. . •,i ) �, Erb 'l-$- .v.: • �`F',k_'1 r .' ' y /'i rrrrrr..
+•., _ 'y' •._ ,,,.• _ .,e µ.r• '.•r T` i�;. I'i'-e' ,ryRa" J i ,�: ..- Y4 f` I� ' ( P•- ',,':,I'�•�, ,� _ L •'r • if;i.��. + .s •1_ _ - 4I' •, - 1 �h} t is yi, .cI. • ,t- "! • Tr_•:r .. IC. ,, .- , `� H[..I. !•' :i f /, �.I f A
5}.: •iIt .A',' Y' !�,'� ..�� ^i• I#x'*'' '. w�:� �: tirY-Ftiii 'l•Vr' i '•r�'y. •,. '�F. ' IaL: %� , ,7'r' :
fi•-�.�- �� ..i � � 3' .�I Y �w� 'Fi' • � q }y 41 � .. } �. y. .,6 � i •
r'�
.,-,..
1� "II .0 1 1 .1- !I ,F..•°...'.'' _to 7 mil- 1 , iy Q' _
L' � .��1 1 ,}.• ..�1 k .i pJ~ VFT.. ^�' -� �''' �ry7�•� li ..�.: {µ,. 1
..7,;,
La,. :t
•
, . i �_ ill ' • L •4i.. 7: , Cj r• 7 •�1 r,''4 1r ii•r ; t,•, I•t :iY.• ^, 4 T/'f. ': f4 1 .
. n-'N,- •• • `...T C4' -,, ,t4• :,1 ,,_1 . �•i"' ` ;, ,., `ti [ I• �G• _r7 .• -.. `` •J', *..
+,� r},»r.w►. i s `!- w + .•h '� ,'.-,:, ry+n:. ,� •"S "n w . �Inl" N ram; a -.
Ala i'1 '',�F r b f.^±`.. ,�^ ,,; :d °.'� r'
„u !r.-• r. �+ adli yr .:'.•i: '� ra �• :'� -, Y t� C d •a mow :
1.
•
•,� LLI y t L _ e,yr y� -,�" c -''".d.F*-, -".t-', ,� ".''{`•��`'•-•_ .- -
ilt
,M ,. ram . �'.'.:L • -(w �"r. - • '` R ry r
Il ,f. if . _ fr i
4. .I. • r :Ciif '
p -''' '�" f '' PROPOSED ALIGNMENT
�y{ I.i -• � ' ' ''�:�•„" PROPOSED PIPELINE LOD
0 300 600 - . , ' ---ACCESS RDS & EXTRA WORKSPACE LOD
(FEET) ..�r�;.f � .;• �� "•`""
t th K'r_ �' °• r''s.�, DELINEATED POTENTIAL STREAMS
REFERENCE:2017 ORTHOIMAGERY FOR PERSON COUNTY r' r.- f 'r y-.. DELINEATED POTENTIAL STREAMS OUTSIDE LOD
GIS BASE LAYERS WERE OBTAINED FROM PERSON COUNTY. THIS MAP IS FOR f .�iY�� �` � ���'�ti
INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. ALL FEATURE LOCATIONS DISPLAYED ARE A: '.i+�_ ,' -- ' f,• ...;'•: , DELINEATED POTENTIAL WETLANDS
APPROXIMATED.THEY ARE NOT BASED ON CIVIL SURVEY INFORMATION,UNLESS STATEDAtI ,u _ #,1,-.
OTHERWISE. V; t'; .,}.• I. , ' - a 3 ROADS
SCALE: FIGURE NO.
AERIAL ORTHOIMAGERY EXHIBIT 1 " = 300 '
DATE: 8
ii - DOMINION ENERGY NORTH CAROLINA 3-2-22
PERSON COUNTY PIPELINE PROJECT PROJECT NUMBER
PERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA 216997

Drawing Path:T:\Energy\Projects\2021\216997 ELI Person County Pipeline Project Rougemont NC\CAD\GIS\MAP SETS\Report\4-AERIAL.mxd plotted by kwallace 03-02-2022
• �ti`•iti.� �' •-1' -u .4i'"',',y t'..•,•'!' w' R'' ,•x , r` Sr Jj ,:! +1;'.� 1 *,.t._i '_r. Pr •s
•J y �. .S .Vi Mom:''• • b - '. •.i. • r�. •' X\'/ �. - ..
•
•
•
• 1 t _ .'r•,. { :J • . : 4. _fir.' - +4., • 1 .-wr. - ',-I. •'•''.'..'' -
:.ti max. 1 i,:-' -.' ;'A.1 -=..:•. •...� •�:: -ram �, c, ra;k-:f�.•d •
r�`• iiltil
} • ,� .JTti��•' �y.. } 4! :F' s"}WC•. RS F-' .-•d M•y{+.r �„0. '" y• ^i �411
. . '•r vx ,'� e ' •
:rs�e r - }-..�.`. y • per..• ;:l - �,'2.1'-i• •
f- 'r.y r. . I�.e4.1'-:e s• ,0••'. :r'lir . ',q••I'-•'4.:.': ry e
• •
1;1•�. - �j '!. • �'f •i ` � 'Jr•:�F - 1. ••
•
• • •OfIiii; . •
•
•
•
L
• � .�i��• ,.,:{er � iJ �y.,� .i-.'. • ___
- ,� • •Y.'1.J ,.]� r' Y.'w. ry.i.•..i
�•'#''' i7:47
s.d • . ,i. .mo_.." - rS'.: icy. �.•y•3 may..;....-'..• rk .{.,t... nr �-j: • �' .+fr A -d' i
�`� V iit. - y; • 'ral•l•�`.' e1. n .r,�`w !•.. •T �}:_- ,'i` wV' ,. • 11
trf w
�;' 11° • e
y - 4r)
t s- ;10 . „1Y i . , , �.1•- ...-*�,.' ,f • :s - tt, i'.,..i-r._ . ^,;:Rs �''ef'G F _ R:t ;.4 o, .
• Y'�' a '''V i �� ..r � y �r 4•'-1•Y+,�:: ..l:Y4i 4 i'L .✓. _ ,�r`'ry. � 4 '._; ti 7�K
' "Y r i•{; S' T ` ''1• 't : hY.-• •kl. ' .�.. Fyt• 4.,. • •• 1- • ...LLL - ,• v 1- r" • !!f"'ff''.. w � _
..?R :.�• r? A.,,, iv .-Y. Cl - r A' -M"'1. y^ rv' -Y'., •is, :.�T •..�r '"� .-r. r .� l7 ti-
Lr- ,., r. I 1.t gr 'S YY_ 1 u '1 ri.v Np/��, .'� T w Y. _ a--.1 I .N' ; Y` �:
_. ,• •
' , I 'I 1-* . • •
C- �lL-- / - r+fig •Sr41,T.;.. • F}' • -.-. 4ly+., Y�'f. • 7- �• .... F. _ ' ALL e
'�. . I c`_ f,!' � 'i A '. iV..y' 'Yw.. .11 .' - ;4 IF ► ..� Wl
�•,�. "y.:�.1r. .-.� �7' i' .G'! _ SF,:Vr•A. �r� �� y .�7•j • •�r +r,�.� •'r7 • J. ..X'�7 �. `Y.e — �N T..
I
t •Sa ..xS r-,..L... , ,�. �.. �. y. got • th'.t'a: _ — t
S� . . 's +' :. ti. e•••. 1,...,a.•1--, T' is . -� • rvwnwl'� a c: *' Hari -y.+l.
"r'.:� ^,r. j. ,, '.-ayr�� '3_ ;'1 1 $•..,• 4; y iVw •n, .r+ •I y. ' `i,,.1-_ a.. i' '
-• - "`.F• . _• r., ..:a, •'; 6-, 'J, .\ - R-. F;i:• „ _1,' .i .i 1,es:i i .f'-s• V -1•t.• r!. •E '�'.:` s .,' •'Z▪ •
'
•
� �i�i ._s•5; •i yr .l 1'. •
- • IA' - b .�. •.(1�t t!4 •,4,t� �fy�•y 1• k,M1�' it 151:. •
{ •L. N..I 1- v.
' �wlk- •1 �'r. �,�J�.x .r' ,vre*. •
L I� r�."ji' •t�r�,'F�5 •��i.�r �F S 'I'. }.J� 'J r \ M1 • el▪-I lY
•
• 1 _� �,, n.. ryi,�r• . .1k'' .�.= V , .. ,+ 1 ; _ 71-+ I ' 1/4" r '.... ..
� y
Yn` .�•,'•r..:�, xn.111` ti '.:-s, ■• •,e' .mil" . _ €- ►�0.,'11 ' ,�' �°' 1; ''• .
" ,1ir:;a-{:ti '.7�(�`4.71,•_''.' 'y''•.ru;' , \.1 •'`' %, ` �!for •i, i. 1 �`1k ;'1 7}�I'�'1+}
.p ,1 , c • . ,fi .;F...- r .' S . Ili
! 4� - •! titi '{►IMF .rr ,+S I ... '1't
,r".:. -41'�i •eyir " , '1. "• �1 X {.: • + " rt.� a r tlt f•.{..{� •r�.•'
•.f.• x "•' A►• .�'7- i.-,:1, ran'....... ,s =it t ". . _
•
•
'a..-04- , .` iiiim,fr • PROPOSED ALIGNMENT
• ` . ' PROPOSED PIPELINE LOD
0 300 600 •': ———ACCESS RDS & EXTRA WORKSPACE LOD
(FEET) __ DELINEATED POTENTIAL STREAMS
REFERENCE:2017 ORTHOIMAGERY FOR PERSON COUNTY 4.k �` S e j� ..,
'1 DELINEATED POTENTIAL STREAMS OUTSIDE LOD
GIS BASE LAYERS WERE OBTAINED FROM PERSON COUNTY. THIS MAP IS FOR � . . •
INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. ALL FEATURE LOCATIONS DISPLAYED ARE '.
DELINEATED POTENTIAL WETLANDS
APPROXIMATED.THEY ARE NOT BASED ON CIVIL SURVEY INFORMATION,UNLESS STATED I. , _ .1, ,p.� •. r
OTHERWISE. . ;' — ROADS
SCALE: FIGURE NO.
AERIAL ORTHOIMAGERY EXHIBIT 1 " = 300 '
DATE: (�
11 - DOMINION ENERGY NORTH CAROLINA 3-2-22 7
PERSON COUNTY PIPELINE PROJECT PROJECT NUMBER
PERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA 216997

Drawing Path:T:\Energy\Projects\2021\216997 ELI Person County Pipeline Project Rougemont NC\CAD\GIS\MAP SETS\Report\4-AERIAL.mxd plotted by kwallace 03-02-2022
i'.. , - .'x' : / �"." .`,.: ..i• : ''f ",-•!.'-` Ir.," •.... .. r,f'. _.. ''. • ,:, -• {„ 'iR '..y41,,ih i.:• ..t ;• ..
! .er •
hi
_. _ ,r ; .- ,J'"'r _` •_`. _ -• &. +'ice •`^,7,�� _ . Z. sl.' � - �^7'1. •'' �^.•.Jr- ��81
all
_ a- � "�sr •I S
. . '� y. �! ft.
_ - :.F•�� .. ,.tip: i''.•ti • �+.•f.E ':i .. % ��
•
- r + t t"T • r'/- .T eYr• ,_s__ 'y*•'•-•. - ----.-. .j =-1 ``r{^i �� ;� -•-. .� .A_- :�. , t qY _ i • fe 'i
' . ue : c. r . -
=• >
" ' .� "- 1.-;4,.
r•• •• '* 4' . • -- Y.4- . : 's J'. .!r :X,• f •', i _ at -.4 .:. srryv = K Y . : ir f _ � • : ;' > _ - k i:, , r .s:.. �
•
•
•
, T ' �" � F • r .- ice-' a :,, t ter `% . .�'� , % . .• ` `�'`; I.7 � ° `+ + `� : � L_ Ar } I
_it \o �' r ;s ,qh44t ;
• I•r+ • �r n,�_� -• _+_,x�i"-- im 4--...
• '716 . -.
-' -� .„ _ 4�.-7:-• - a- _ • - - f _ i • ,.,, ..
•
L.
� r -'
• ,/...• . ,. - :. _*- -7-41--r--....:__. i'-___,.-.7 3- ---- tE_.1• .,,,,,.---T.. ---.!-'.. ''-....-.7.-••. - ' t,.-e_:' • , 4 4‘4,- .....17---•.-
It
. , _._;.,.,..,-_,,:.;-._:L=_.:,___. ___,,..,_... _.____ ;,,,,_,_.7-:,.......,,,,,...„.„4:740:7„-..,_,. ._,, ...,..„___,....)..-4-„,_,..ii.. _. __:,..-.0.,;,,,.-.....-..i...,..,..,...,.,.'r .,..,-,:Erni.. ....„., r
E r '-'.. 's'-4- . ..': ..11.ex,4 ii- .4' .."': ....4 y AP - • .- r:'• ----:;•'''--6..:4.27:-..--•--re--14.. -. wr.-r::- --'..: -'- '.- '2:-..#461i4.-7..i..:.•-;- ...--4';1.-.. 6!---" !-7:.-:,. ..':—:-..-",:: _ -::--,r1—• - t,'•4.1_..iri:' -.1, --_-.• --.-•,••-' ...
C•. .ti t ._= +r .A \ - wCY` - - ..r�,F ---.=- !� r,■ Tr l n.• • 'y�f'. 4 • 1
,+■r i. s., . , _ 4.:•. ; fir 4-,' , 44 3_ ...11.
. I'
.,
I
s. 7� r Y .*, . .1 f i�� yl" 4 •.
-4•` — `.—'
,q�r� --- - _• Y' }' - -- a- a�Joneskd k x :,f: �c.�F��_s L s.
�l yire
I , - '_ Y:a �x r.11: ':_�- 'F' PROPOSED ALIGNMENT
.. , .* ' -1 .. . . .. y i, scar* - '
• • :3. j" ' PROPOSED PIPELINE LOD
0 300 600 ..1 ' r.-•• ..4. i.y-+ 1 ..
t ����`- :'. �-t�'; '� -�' ACCESS RDS & EXTRA WORKSPACE LOD
(FEET) ; •-..•
-,
-__ . " � "• �_••- ;- DELINEATED POTENTIAL STREAMS
REFERENCE:2017 ORTHOIMAGERY FOR PERSON COUNTY `" • � +`^
l �.. DELINEATED POTENTIAL STREAMS OUTSIDE LOD
GIS BASE LAYERS WERE OBTAINED FROM PERSON COUNTY. THIS MAP IS FOR ;-• j- •1
INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. ALL FEATURE LOCATIONS DISPLAYED ARE '-''$ h' r DELINEATED POTENTIAL WETLANDS
APPROXIMATED.THEY ARE NOT BASED ON CIVIL SURVEY INFORMATION,UNLESS STATED a3; -__ ',
OTHERWISE. . - / •'Y ROADS
SCALE: FIGURE NO.
AERIAL ORTHOIMAGERY EXHIBIT 1 " = 300 '
DATE: 10
,fi - DOMINION ENERGY NORTH CAROLINA 3-2-22
PERSON COUNTY PIPELINE PROJECT PROJECT NUMBER
PERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA 216997

Drawing Path:T:\Energy\Projects\2021\216997 ELI Person County Pipeline Project Rougemont NC\CAD\GIS\MAP SETS\Report\4-AERIAL.mxd plotted by kwallace 03-02-2022 \
a.
r. _ �f� _ r-INK _ -ram--. .� ► ♦" }.•�', {
`r- ' w.
JJ ," y :•
;
0 ~.i ` •i- \ \ _ r - " --:rz. _ •" '-. _ f .
- '1 - Jam.- i. '--- _ _ _r' '.era. '.Trcr
' " 1,»- 1.r.Y • _ it R A -- � �. - yl...• - Y- � �•.,
I.
•
'+ye +. girt % \ _ - - - - ' -, r IS-
like.?.. 'T y.1 } _},� w r '- �' 'R� -., '\ •• s _ r _"y 3.
941' s 1-Yi':6 YypC _ 7;{. Via►;. C\.. \ \ r. • � .
•
,24 -
: SN: a- • _ .ram `:. ~ "•ti • No t..' .+;1c"-4"-' ., IC . - y
It iY. _ _ - - ` -- \ \ rj�
rf.ii
4 +` + � - - i: - • - '. -,.f w 1 Y 1 Y.kI . ,a i f S bfi . .4 �' - ..�.f_ •. ` 1 4.r . " -• 1 .r. _R. r :.. • — jY-4.-
,ritrT.11}�},A,, •s: ..1r►r� r�, .r.,„: '�Z`'' : 'r �. +tea �* '` o;i. 4 ix. • -r•14 R., _ -�--
ti'� e .�5c•' s -yr. {• -• n,-. ri'- ••., - :• .- ..
4,161
,� m.
'A.S. .. , -,` `a`r ;71 :C "4.44 '-'..• ` . ._ �` PROPOSED ALIGNMENT
PROPOSED PIPELINE LOD
0 300 600 � ---ACCESS RDS & EXTRA WORKSPACE LOD
(FEET) F"- 1 1
DELINEATED POTENTIAL STREAMS
REFERENCE:2017 ORTHOIMAGERY FOR PERSON COUNTY DELINEATED POTENTIAL STREAMS OUTSIDE LOD
GIS BASE LAYERS WERE OBTAINED FROM PERSON COUNTY. THIS MAP IS FOR
INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. ALL FEATURE LOCATIONS DISPLAYED ARE DELINEATED POTENTIAL WETLANDS
APPROXIMATED.THEY ARE NOT BASED ON CIVIL SURVEY INFORMATION,UNLESS STATED
OTHERWISE. .? . •'r ROADS
SCALE: FIGURE NO.
AERIAL ORTHOIMAGERY EXHIBIT 1 " = 300 '
DATE: 1 1
fi ir - DOMINION ENERGY NORTH CAROLINA 3-2-22
PERSON COUNTY PIPELINE PROJECT PROJECT NUMBER
PERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA 216997 1

Appendix III
Site Photographs

iiir SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
iiiik
Eir Dominion Energy North Carolina Person County Pipeline Project
Person County, NC
impr S&ME Project No. 216997
Iiiik
PHOTOGRAPH 1 ' : : ^ ' 4
VIEWING DIRECTION: North ' _ V
7 ., .
DESCRIPTION/COMMENT: View of �4 ' I 411,15,. .i' •s1, ,ro•ect corridor..-°.�: ,�. •' `'" `� #
}!"� i4 m. .- -.-..' .', ice..
,._%-,..-.. .,,,,,:,t,...,. ..,..,..--,, ,..•.
,t.,..,
ff.
's r-
.• i ,
PHOTOGRAPH 2 • - k I` ,;. ,
r . rY C ��
f .
. , , 14 • . n,- ,t, A
VIEWING DIRECTION: East �_ ,'-',�r ,lt ..
' s ‘ •• '.'-. 1 , f' '.. r t '7`"►�!),AL :``
DESCRIPTION/COMMENT: View of ,, ,• ° 4` I• 4 : w ' �
project corridor. V.
-r.,.r," , r +. r 3 k ':,,� ' '-
r rN� "hk47.4 k ��
:a ,'.. N j Y .cam:
- 4
�j. sy,
1

iiir SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
mik
EF
DENC Person County Pipeline Project
Person County, NC
lopr S&ME Project No. 216997
PHOTOGRAPH 3 ' ',�y'P
VIEWING DIRECTION: Southeast . I. T.
DESCRIPTION/COMMENT: View of illilitigoIlik , .. 1
project corridor within the powerline
easement.
-
it A,.. 1 - y.. - }
•
PHOTOGRAPH 4 `'..F A'rv``per'+'.• ', t �s ' •.;` h t,'6 `"`-
VIEWING DIRECTION: Northeast � � • '' , .e x� i. * . .- `
\i ,- ' ue .T. , r 7,„, ...
y� Oe yr-w �'F 1+Ffr-y '�. ti�.k.1- • 1^"7- 75 r-+�
�.� "-.;•p a m lam' _L t
DESCRIPTION/COMMENT: View of , '' *. 'fi +_ :40 % { , ' -
Stream SA facing upstream. ;/ r r•'; ,r{, ►
4100 , , ,•
,_ r .r.! .104%40141k 4 :... -42.-__- :41,.... ..e.",
` Fes-SP+4151 4. : D- 4
v tb. ae.r P; +{ �} �df:R SS
2

SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
DENC Person County Pipeline Project
Person County, NC
S&ME Project No. 216997
PHOTOGRAPH 5 .
VIEWING DIRECTION: North 4 7E °`� "' '` A_
DESCRIPTION/COMMENT: View of
Stream SB (outside of construction ,` ' '`�`
IP
corridor)facing upstream.
•
,..-r.. : .y.
. . i 4 Y. :- is I,
Iiiii&i,
PHOTOGRAPH 6 + • • 1, r ►• / -
1 ' -'".4..-.1• '.' :airloy;e1°.2,e^it 6 1 i$.
VIEWING DIRECTION: North , 4 r `i ; ‘ '"'�'• _� -y ,{`� }. r '"'+
el...,--tii:--,1.;., ryi--._ :777_ ... : .71-?:
DESCRIPTION/COMMENT: View of - ,�
Stream SC facing downstream. • f +�e '
ice, s r ' -;2
ftefr- •... ,,
ir. '/ of. �; a -..- ' �"
3

iiiii SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
EF
DENC Person County Pipeline Project
Person County, NC
lopr S&ME Project No. 216997
PHOTOGRAPH 7 a ti 4 �1' .,1_; i ';
xs ' /1.;'I i f ''. ,
VIEWING DIRECTION: North c�- „: ',;.,,m �'i .; .tr
DESCRIPTION/COMMENT: View of ,2p, -•` .1S„,' ''' r
Wetland WG. -;1,... • "- • '�%. : -' _
• ' - ---:----•-•, " ---- •• -,o, -N.. -.•._
t.
.: „0.4 ._ _ , :,.. ., .,. ...4 c...„_,...i.. .. ., __ .5"--,.:11t_' --
40
PHOTOGRAPH 8 `' `' llr '
f � ;fl•:V _;,k ,� �:�. rah �';
VIEWING DIRECTION: West Lp i,. . .,>r,rh- ",
q� . 3 1� �ry",
iFf' i
DESCRIPTION/COMMENT: View ofit
11
"� '''
Stream SF (outside of construction �"
corridor) looking downstream Ns - \,, r - t e'.ar; • - 'r .«. dy
towards the culverts at the road ;',>: • a " .
= �, q)� .,,�
r
crossing. : ' r y" r: h 4' ? J'rtth : '1.: Mr
a
4

iiii SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
EF DENC Person County Pipeline Project
Person County, NC
inw S&ME Project No. 216997
PHOTOGRAPH 9 <
VIEWING DIRECTION: East N '�' ` Y, F V '
DESCRIPTION/COMMENT: View of
Wetland WH (open water and ` • ,'.., "'' ' 4 '.cll, +�'�. -` �a IV 1
wetland fringe). d. a • ,+}.v ;[ ;, Y : , 4.
4
PHOTOGRAPH 10 1 '
VIEWING DIRECTION: East I• , T' • •., •.• ��
.; 1 • _ *'
1911C•111- -.
DESCRIPTION/COMMENT: View of . - 4. ; -
Stream SG looking upstream. h • ;
• 1 - 'y1 r} +' b. i..Y
Y..
y J S
)/ 11
rit f
• ►
5

itil SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
mik
EF DENC Person County Pipeline Project
Person County, NC
inw S&ME Project No. 216997
Illiii
PHOTOGRAPH 11
K
VIEWING DIRECTION: East
, I • - :.
DESCRIPTION/COMMENT: View of -, '-, - -4
Wetland WL. _ ':-+ .
"'f r {
i 1 .►
PHOTOGRAPH 12 -4 'tip, ' '1, : ar,. -:? .,,
� ,
{
VIEWING DIRECTION: East t• ',kV' s
DESCRIPTION/COMMENT: View of - - ''--' z
Wetland WM.
.., -
49�5'v } y 'yam. Y �..
._ 2 klikc,
}yAfi l r may, ; k�` a ., ti� "_.
r
6

SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
DENC Person County Pipeline Project
Person County, NC
S&ME Project No. 216997
I r �u
PHOTOGRAPH 13 y,x -' E ri }. ' _
-� „ "C s '�i is
VIEWING DIRECTION: East r ` �s ..r =
DESCRIPTION/COMMENT: View of ..'. � F
F,r S� --.7
F
Stream SM facing downstream. ...; '- ,l,c <,t /��// �i r _ - -., ;,
• x 'mod r r`IF ►'0 t - ` +"Iiiirrt - J
". ,. :- j
. •
— ' 4i...-. illik.
•
- I si" `..
▪ - ;m 2fi. {' ��r AAA.k t`�
,' 3i
PHOTOGRAPH 14 ` I ,:.'� �>> y� + 0� „ I
4
F
VIEWING DIRECTION: Northwest I' . e "- ; • -. ,,,, ... �x ri .
DESCRIPTION/COMMENT: View of '_`'Y s '";_4 _
Stream SN facing upstream. x , -,' •
.._ ,� ,,, , -fir
I ^ -' -
' - ,,..��hh .. 8n -r
.44
I `K .. /s
+ �r
, K`^ � r
7

SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
DENC Person County Pipeline Project
Person County, NC
S&ME Project No. 216997
PHOTOGRAPH 15 - ,' :. u�
,, . 41111Lt.ilwisiohlia.1 ...„. , , ,,., 1 0 77 . . , —
'en.. •
VIEWING DIRECTION: Wests it„ r w "
-s .. 1.7r4'
DESCRIPTION/COMMENT: View of -
Wetland WP. , - r.
� r�•
''-;r - '. , . '*''-7-- . ' -."--' Orte.
p .
PHOTOGRAPH 16 •�. • _ f r ' `' '
Sri_ . _. , '
"�. ::i.
VIEWING DIRECTION: South i Y i 1 1
DESCRIPTION/COMMENT: View of "r
old dumping area adjacent to site. r = ..a, ,, ' ,
0
i14
4,
• r a. �• fr .1.
ar- - J''.--.1:7'eC._ .r.lir
f
8

Appendix IV
Delineation Information

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

Jurisdictional Determination Request
A. PARCEL INFORMATION
Street Address: See attached Exhibits
City, State: Rougemont, NC
County: Person
Parcel Index Number(s) (PIN): See attached List
B. REQUESTOR INFORMATION
Name: Joey Lawler, P.W.S.
Mailing Address: 2016 Ayrsley Town Blvd., Suite 2A
Telephone Number: 704.604.6474
Electronic Mail Address: [e-mail]
Select one:
IIII am the current property owner.
✓❑ I am an Authorized Agent or Environmental Consultant'
riInterested Buyer or Under Contract to Purchase
IIIOther,please explain.
C. PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION2
Name: Dominion Energy NC (Easement Only)
Mailing Address: 220 Operation Way, MC C221
Cayce, SC 29033
Telephone Number: 803.201 .2539
Electronic Mail Address: [e-mail]
1 Must provide completed Agent Authorization Form/Letter.
2 Documentation of ownership also needs to be provided with request(copy of Deed,County GIS/Parcel/Tax Record).
Version:May 2017 Page 2

Jurisdictional Determination Request
D. PROPERTY ACCESS CERTIFICATION3,4
By signing below, I authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps)to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on-
site investigations,if necessary, and issuing a jurisdictional determination pursuant to Section
404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. I, the
undersigned, am either a duly authorized owner of record of the property identified herein, or
acting as the duly authorized agent of the owner of record of the property.
See attached Agent Form
Print Name
Capacity: fl Owner F7 Authorized Agents
03.03.22
Date
Signature
E. REASON FOR JD REQUEST: (Check as many as applicable)
n I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be
designed to avoid all aquatic resources.
n I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be
designed to avoid all jurisdictional aquatic resources under Corps authority.
n I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which may
require authorization from the Corps, and the JD would be used to avoid and minimize
impacts to jurisdictional aquatic resources and as an initial step in a future permitting
process.
n I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which may
require authorization from the Corps; this request is accompanied by my permit application
and the JD is to be used in the permitting process.
n I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities in a navigable water of the
U.S. which is included on the district Section 10 list and/or is subject to the ebb and flow of
the tide.
n A Corps JD is required in order obtain my local/state authorization.
nI intend to contest jurisdiction over a particular aquatic resource and request the Corps
confirm that jurisdiction does/does not exist over the aquatic resource on the parcel.
I believe that the site may be comprised entirely of dry land.
n Other:
3 For NCDOT requests following the current NCDOT/USACE protocols,skip to Part E.
4 If there are multiple parcels owned by different parties,please provide the following for each additional parcel on a
continuation sheet.
5 Must provide agent authorization faun/letter signed by owner(s).
Version:May 2017 Page 3

Jurisdictional Determination Request
F. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION(JD)TYPE (Select One)
v I am requesting that the Corps provide a preliminary JD for the property identified herein.
A Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD)provides an indication that there may
be"waters of the United States" or"navigable waters of the United States"on a property.
PJDs are sufficient as the basis for permit decisions. For the purposes of permitting, all
waters and wetlands on the property will be treated as if they are jurisdictional "waters of
the United States". PJDs cannot be appealed(33 C.F.R. 331.2); however, a PJD is
"preliminary" in the sense that an approved JD can be requested at any time. PJDs do
not expire.
II am requesting that the Corps provide an approved JD for the property identified herein.
An Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD)is a determination that
jurisdictional "waters of the United States" or"navigable waters of the United
States" are either present or absent on a site. An approved JD identifies the limits of
waters on a site determined to be jurisdictional under the Clean Water Act and/or
Rivers and Harbors Act. Approved JDs are sufficient as the basis for permit
decisions. AJDs are appealable (33 C.F.R. 331.2). The results of the AJD will be
posted on the Corps website. A landowner,permit applicant, or other"affected
party" (33 C.F.R. 331.2)who receives an AJD may rely upon the AJD for five years
(subject to certain limited exceptions explained in Regulatory Guidance Letter 05-
02).
riI am unclear as to which JD I would like to request and require additional information
to inform my decision.
G. ALL REQUESTS
nMap of Property or Project Area. This Map must clearly depict the boundaries of the
review area.
✓ Size of Property or Review Area — 26 acres.
The property boundary (or review area boundary) is clearly physically marked on the site.
Version:May 2017 Page 4

Jurisdictional Determination Request
H. REQUESTS FROM CONSULTANTS
`/ Project Coordinates (Decimal Degrees): Latitude: 36.298305
Longitude: -78.837023
nA legible delineation map depicting the aquatic resources and the property/review area.
Delineation maps must be no larger than l 1x17 and should contain the following: (Corps
signature of submitted survey plats will occur after the submitted delineation map has been
reviewed and approved).6
• North Arrow
• Graphical Scale
• Boundary of Review Area
• Date
• Location of data points for each Wetland Determination Data Form or tributary
assessment reach.
For Approved Jurisdictional Determinations:
• Jurisdictional wetland features should be labeled as Wetland Waters of the US, 404
wetlands, etc. Please include the acreage of these features.
• Jurisdictional non-wetland features (i.e. tidal/navigable waters, tributaries,
impoundments) should be labeled as Non-Wetland Waters of the US, stream, tributary,
open water, relatively permanent water,pond, etc. Please include the acreage or linear
length of each of these features as appropriate.
• Isolated waters,waters that lack a significant nexus to navigable waters, or non-
jurisdictional upland features should be identified as Non-Jurisdictional. Please
include a justification in the label regarding why the feature is non jurisdictional (i.e.
"Isolated", "No Significant Nexus", or"Upland Feature"). Please include the acreage
or linear length of these features as appropriate.
For Preliminary Jurisdictional Determinations:
• Wetland and non-wetland features should not be identified as Jurisdictional, 404,
Waters of the United States, or anything that implies jurisdiction. These features can be
identified as Potential Waters of the United States, Potential Non-wetland Waters of
the United States,wetland, stream, open water, etc. Please include the acreage and
linear length of these features as appropriate.
nCompleted Wetland Determination Data Forms for appropriate region
(at least one wetland and one upland form needs to be completed for each wetland type)
6 Please refer to the guidance document titled"Survey Standards for Jurisdictional Determinations"to ensure that the
supplied map meets the necessary mapping standards.http://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory-Permit-
Pro gram/Jurisdiction/
Version:May 2017 Page 5

Jurisdictional Determination Request
`/ Completed appropriate Jurisdictional Determination form
• PJDs,please complete a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form'and include the
Aquatic Resource Table
• AJDs,please complete an Approved Jurisdictional Determination Forma
V Vicinity Map
n Aerial Photograph
USGS Topographic Map
I/ Soil Survey Map
Other Maps, as appropriate (e.g.National Wetland Inventory Map, Proposed Site
Plan,previous delineation maps, LIDAR maps, FEMA floodplain maps)
6/ Landscape Photos (if taken)
NCSAM and/or NCWAM Assessment Forms and Rating Sheets
NC Division of Water Resources Stream Identification Forms
Other Assessment Forms
' www.saw.usace.army.mil/Portals/59/docs/regulatory/regdocs/JD/RGL_08-02_App_A_Prelim_JD_Form_fillable.pdf
s Please see http://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory-Permit-Pro gram/Jurisdiction/
Principal Purpose:The information that you provide will be used in evaluating your request to determine
whether there are any aquatic resources within the project area subject to federal jurisdiction under the regulatory
authorities referenced above.
Routine Uses:This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal,state,and local
government agencies,and the public,and may be made available as part of a public notice as required by federal
law.Your name and property location where federal jurisdiction is to be determined will be included in the
approved jurisdictional determination(AJD),which will be made available to the public on the District's website
and on the Headquarters USAGE website.
Disclosure:Submission of requested information is voluntary;however,if information is not provided,the
request for an AJD cannot be evaluated nor can an AJD be issued.
Version:May 2017 Page 6

Appendix 2 - PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD: 03.03.2022
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: ,Joey Lawler,PWS 2016Aysrley Town Blvd,Suite 2A Charlotte,NC 28273
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND/OR
AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: NC County/parish/borough: Person City: Rougemont
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format):
Lat.: 36.298305 Long.: -78.837023
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Rock Fork Branch
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
❑ Field Determination. Date(s): September 29. October 1, 18-19,2201
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES IN REVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO REGULATORY
JURISDICTION.
Site Latitude Longitude Estimated amount Type of aquatic Geographic authority
number (decimal (decimal of aquatic resource resource (i.e.,wetland to which the aquatic
degrees) degrees) in review area vs. non-wetland resource "may be"
(acreage and linear waters) subject(i.e., Section
feet, if applicable) 404 or Section 10/404)
See Attached Table

LIST OF AQUATIC RESOURCES IN REVIEW AREA
Tributaries
Estimated amount Geographic Authorty
Site Number Latitude Longitude of aquatic Type of Aquatic to which Watershed
resource in review area Resource the Aquatic Resource
(If) "May Be"Subiect
SA 36.3071 -78.8257 54 Non Wetland Section 404/401 Tar-Pamlico
Water(Stream)
Non-Wetland
SC 36.2984 -78.8398 66 Section 404/401 Tar-Pamlico
Water(Stream)
Non-Wetland
SG 36.2953 -78.8577 52 Water(Stream) Section 404/401 Neuse
Non-Wetland
SM 36.2879 -78.8576 58 Section 404/401 Tar-Pamlico
Water(Stream)
Non-Wetland
SN 36.284 -78.8577 52 Water(Stream) Section 404/401 Neuse
Wetlands
WCC 36.3095 -78.8251 0.030 Wetland Section 404/401
Tar-Pamlico
WP 36.2985 -78.84 0.051 Wetland Section 404/401
Neuse
WG 36.2992 -78.8466 0.030 Wetland Section 404/401
Tar-Pamlico
WI 36.2986 -78.857 0.001 Wetland Section 404/401
Neuse
WK 36.2947 -78.8572 0.010 Wetland Section 404/401
Neuse
WM 36.2911 -78.8565 0.004 Wetland Section 404/401
Neuse
WN 36.2878 -78.8573 0.020 Wetland Section 404/401
Tar-Pamlico

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

SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply)
Checked items should be included in subject file. Appropriately reference sources
below where indicated for all checked items:
• Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor:
Map:Site is depicted on the attached exhibits prepared by S&ME
■❑ Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor.
❑ Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rationale:
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
• U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: 1 :24,000 Moriah, NC
O Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Person County, 1995
• National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: USFWS NWI
❑ State/local wetland inventory map(s):
• FEMA/FIRM maps: 3720094300K (06.04.2007)
❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: .(National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
• Photographs: • Aerial (Name & Date): NC OneMap 2017
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
■❑ Other information (please specify): Person County LiDAR (NC Spatial Download)
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily
been verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for later jurisdictional
determinations.
l
Signature and date of Signature and date of
Regulatory staff member person requesting PJD
completing PJD (REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)'
Districts may establish timeframes for requestor to return signed PJD forms. If the requestor does not respond
within the established time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is
necessary prior to finalizing an action.

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: DENC Person County Pipeline City/County: Rougemont/Person Sampling Date: 01-Oct-21
Applicant/Owner: Dominion Energy North Carolina State: NC Sampling Point: WN
Investigator(s): J.Lawler.PWS Section,Township,Range: S T R
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Bench Local relief(concave,convex,none): hummocky Slope: 2.0% / 1.1 °
Subregion(LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 36.287840° Long.: -78.857266° Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Georgeville Loam NWI classification:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 0 No 0 (If no,explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ ,Soil ❑ ,or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes 0 No 0
Are Vegetation ❑ ,Soil ❑ ,or Hydrology ❑ naturally problematic? (If needed,explain any answers in Remarks.)
Summary of Findings -Attach site map showing sampling point locations,transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 0 No 0
Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No 0 Is the Sampled Area
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No O
within a Wetland? Yes CD No 0
Remarks:
Seepy area near stream
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators(minimum of one required;check all that apply) _ ❑ Surface Soil Cracks(B6)
❑ Surface Water(Al) ❑ True Aquatic Plants(B14) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(B8)
❑ High Water Table(A2) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) ❑ Drainage Patterns(B10)
❑ Saturation(A3) ❑d Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots(C3) ❑ Moss Trim Lines(B16)
❑ Water Marks(Bl) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) ❑ Dry Season Water Table(C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits(B2) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) ❑d Crayfish Burrows(C8)
❑ Drift deposits(B3) ❑ Thin Muck Surface(C7) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust(B4) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks) ❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants(Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits(B5) ❑ Geomorphic Position(D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(B7) ❑ Shallow Aquitard(D3)
❑ Water-Stained Leaves(B9) ❑ Microtopographic Relief(D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna(B13) FAC-neutral Test(D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth(inches):
Water Table Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth(inches): 4
Saturation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0
(includes capillary fringe) Yes 0 No O Depth(inches): 1
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well,aerial photos,previous inspections),if available:
Antecedent Precipitation Tool
Remarks:
Precipitation in prior three months has been normal.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant Sampling Point: WN
Species?
Absolute Rel.Strat. Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ) %Cover Cover Status
Number of Dominant Species
1• Liriodendron tulipifera 40 ❑ 36.4% FACU That are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 4 (A)
2. Platanus occidentalis 30 0 27.3% FACW
15 ❑ 13.6% FAC Total Number of Dominant
3 Liquidambar styraciflua Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
4 Carpinus caroliniana 15 ❑ 13.6% FAC
5 Acer rubrum 10 ❑ 9.1% FAC Percent of dominant Species
6.
o ❑ o.o% That Are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 80.0% (A/B)
7 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index worksheet:
g 0 ❑ 0.0% Total%Cover of: Multiply by:
110 =Total Cover OBL species 10 x 1 = 10
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 )
FACW species 35 x 2 = 70
1 Cabomba caroliniana 10 ❑ 45.5% OBL
2. Liquidambar styraciflua 10 0 45.5% FAC FAC species 127 x 3 = 381
3. Ligustrum sinense 2 ❑ 9.1% FACU FACU species 47 x 4 = 188
4. 0 ❑ 0.0% UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
5 0 ❑ 0.0% Column Totals: 219 (A) 649 Co)
6 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.963
7. 0 ❑ 0.0% Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
$ 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
9. 0 ❑ 0.0%
❑ Dominance Test is>500/o
0 ❑ 0.0%
1 0 Prevalence Index is<_3.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 22 =Total Cover
❑ Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
1. 0 ❑ 0.0% data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3 0 ❑ 0.0% 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4 0 ❑ 0.0% be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
5. o ❑ o.o°%o _ Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6. o ❑ o.o°%o - Four Vegetation Strata:
❑ . Tree stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding vines,3 in.
7 0 00%
(7.6 cm)or more in diameter at breast height(DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ) 0 =Total Cover regardless of height.
Sapling/shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding
1• Microstegium vimineum 60 d❑ 70.6% FAC vines,less than 3 in.DBH and greater than 3.28 ft(1 m)tall.
2. Deparia acrostichoides 15 ❑ 17.6% FAC Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
3. Polystichum acrostichoides
5 ❑ 5.9% FACU regardless of size,and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4. Juncus effusus 5 ❑ 5.9% FACW Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
in height.
5. 0 ❑ o.o%
6 0 ❑ o.o°io ! Five Vegetation Strata:
7. 0 ❑ 0.0% -
Tree-Woody plants,excluding woody vines,approximately 20
8 0 ❑ 0.0% - ft(6 m)or more in height and 3 in.(7.6 cm)or larger in
❑ 0.0% diameter at breast height(DBH).
0
9. Sapling stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
10 0 ❑ 0.0% _ vines,approximately 20 ft(6 m)or more in height and less
11. o ❑ 0.0% - than 3 in.(7.6 cm)DBH.
12 o ❑ 0.0% - Shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
vines,approximately 3 to 20 ft(1 to 6 m)in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ) 85 =Total Cover
Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
1. Toxicodendron radicans 2 ❑ 100.0% FAC including herbaceous vines,regardless of size,and woody
species,except woody vines,less than approximately 3 ft(1
2. 0 ❑ 0.0% _ m)in height.
3. 0 ❑ 0.0% - Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines,regardless of
0 ❑ 0.0% height.
4. -
5. 0 ❑ o.o% Hydrophytic
6.__ 0 ❑ 0.0% - Vegetation
2 =Total Cover
Present? Yes 0 No 0
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Hydrophytic vegetation is dominant
*Indicator suffix= National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

Soil Sampling Point: WN
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) _ % Type 1 Loc2 _ Texture Remarks
0-4 10YR 3/1 98 10YR 5/6 02 C PL Loam
4-12 10YR 5/1 95 10YR 5/6 05 C M Loam
'Type:C=Concentration.D=Depletion.RM=Reduced Matrix,CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains ,Location: PL=Pore Lining.M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol(Al) ❑ Dark Surface(S7) ❑ 2 cm Muck(A10)(MLRA 147)
❑ Histic Epipedon(A2) ❑ Polyvalue Below Surface(S8)(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Black Histic(A3) ❑Thin Dark Surface(S9)(MLRA 147,148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox(A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)
❑ Stratified Layers(A5) 0 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(F7) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks)
❑ Thick Dark Surface(Al2) ❑ Redox Depressions(F8)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral(S1)(LRR N, ❑ Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR N,
MLRA 147,148) MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) ❑ Umbric Surface(F13)(MLRA 136,122)
❑ Sandy Redox(S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)(MLRA 148) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
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): Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No 0
Remarks:
Soil is hydric
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: DENC Person County Pipeline City/County: Rougemont/Person Sampling Date: 01-Oct-21
Applicant/Owner: Dominion Energy North Carolina State: NC Sampling Point: WN -UP
Investigator(s): J.Lawler.PWS Section,Township,Range: S T R
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Toeslope Local relief(concave,convex,none): rolling Slope: 3.0% / 1.7 °
Subregion(LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 36.287798° Long.: -78.857343° Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Georgeville Loam NWI classification:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 0 No 0 (If no,explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ ,Soil ❑ ,or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes 0 No 0
Are Vegetation ❑ ,Soil ❑ ,or Hydrology ❑ naturally problematic? (If needed,explain any answers in Remarks.)
Summary of Findings -Attach site map showing sampling point locations,transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 0 No 0
Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No 0 Is the Sampled Area
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0
within a Wetland? Yes 0 No 0
Remarks:
Taken on slope near wetland
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators(minimum of one required;check all that apply) _ ❑ Surface Soil Cracks(B6)
❑ Surface Water(Al) ❑ True Aquatic Plants(B14) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(B8)
❑ High Water Table(A2) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) ❑ Drainage Patterns(B10)
❑ Saturation(A3) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots(C3) ❑ Moss Trim Lines(B16)
❑ Water Marks(Bl) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) ❑ Dry Season Water Table(C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits(B2) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) ❑ Crayfish Burrows(C8)
❑ Drift deposits(B3) ❑ Thin Muck Surface(C7) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust(B4) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks) ❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants(DI)
❑ Iron Deposits(B5) ❑ Geomorphic Position(D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(B7) ❑ Shallow Aquitard(D3)
❑ Water-Stained Leaves(B9) ❑ Microtopographic Relief(D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna(B13) ❑ FAC-neutral Test(D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth(inches):
Water Table Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth(inches):
Saturation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0
(includes capillary fringe) Yes 0 No 0 Depth(inches):
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well,aerial photos,previous inspections),if available:
Antecedent Precipitation Tool
Remarks:
Precipitation in prior three months has been normal.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant Sampling Point: WN -UP
Species?
Absolute Rel.Strat. Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ) %Cover Cover Status
Number of Dominant Species
1• Liriodendron tulipifera 40 ❑ 42.1% FACU That are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 3 (A)
2. Liguidambar styraciflua 25 0 26.3% FAC
10 ❑ 10.5% FACU Total Number of Dominant
3 Quercus alba Species Across All Strata: 6 (B)
4 Acer rubrum _ 10 ❑ 10.5% FAC
5 Carpinus caroliniana 10 ❑ 10.5% FAC Percent of dominant Species
6.
o ❑ o.o% That Are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 50.0% (A/B)
7 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index worksheet:
g 0 ❑ o.0°io Total%Cover of: Multiply by:
95 =Total Cover OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 )
FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
1 Liguidambar styraciflua 5 0 41.7% FAC
2. Quercus alba 5 0 41.7% FACU FAC species 59 x 3 = 177
3. Diospyrosvirginiana 2 ❑ 16.7% FAC FACU species 65 x 4 = 260
4. 0 ❑ 0.0% UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
5 0 ❑ 0.0% Column Totals: 124 (A) 437 (B)
6 0 ❑ 0.0% - Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.524
7. 0 ❑ 0.0% Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
$ 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
9. 0 ❑ 0.0%
❑ Dominance Test is>500/0
10. 0 ❑ 0.0%
❑ Prevalence Index is<_3.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 12 =Total Cover
❑ Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
0 ❑ 0.0% data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3 0 ❑ 0.0% 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4 0 ❑ 0.0% be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
5. o ❑ 0.0% _ Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6. o ❑ 0.0% - Four Vegetation Strata:
0 ❑ 0.0% Tree stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding vines,3 in.
7 (7.6 cm)or more in diameter at breast height(DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ) 0 =Total Cover regardless of height.
Sapling/shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding
1• Polystichum acrostichoides 10 d❑ 66.7% FACU vines,less than 3 in.DBH and greater than 3.28 ft(1 m)tall.
2. Deparia acrostichoides 5 ❑ 33.3% FAC Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
3 0 ❑ 0.0% regardless of size,and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
. -
0 ❑ 0.0% Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
4' in height.
5. 0 ❑ 0.0%
6 0 ❑ o.o°io - Five Vegetation Strata:
7. 0 ❑ 0.0%
Tree-Woody plants,excluding woody vines,approximately 20
8 0 ❑ 0.0% ft(6 m)or more in height and 3 in.(7.6 cm)or larger in
❑ 0.0% diameter at breast height(DBH).
0
9. Sapling stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
1 0. 0 ❑ 0.0% _ vines,approximately 20 ft(6 m)or more in height and less
11. o ❑ 0.0% - than 3 in.(7.6 cm)DBH.
12 0 ❑ 0.0% - Shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
vines,approximately 3 to 20 ft(1 to 6 m)in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ) 15 =Total Cover
Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
1. Vitis rotundifolia 2 ❑ 100.0% FAC including herbaceous vines,regardless of size,and woody
species,except woody vines,less than approximately 3 ft(1
2. 0 ❑ 0.0% _ m)in height.
3. 0 ❑ 0.0% - Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines,regardless of
0 ❑ 0.0% height.
4. -
5. 0 ❑ o.o% Hydrophytic
6._ 0 ❑ 0.0% - Vegetation
2 =Total Cover
Present? Yes 0 No 0
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Hydrophytic vegetation is dominant
*Indicator suffix= National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

Soil Sampling Point: WN -UP
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) % Type 1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-6 10YR 5/4 100 Loam
6-12 10YR 5/6 100
'Type:C=Concentration.D=Depletion.RM=Reduced Matrix,CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains ,Location: PL=Pore Lining.M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol(Al) ❑ Dark Surface(57) ❑ 2 cm Muck(A10)(MLRA 147)
❑ Histic Epipedon(A2) ❑ Polyvalue Below Surface(58)(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Black Histic(A3) ❑Thin Dark Surface(59)(MLRA 147,148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox(A16)
(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) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface(All) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface(F7) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks)
❑ Thick Dark Surface(Al2) ❑ Redox Depressions(F8)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral(51)(LRR N, ❑ Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR N,
MLRA 147,148) MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix(54) ❑ Umbric Surface(F13)(MLRA 136,122)
❑ Sandy Redox(55) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)(MLRA 148) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Stripped Matrix(56) ❑ Red Parent Material(F21)(MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type:
Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No 0
Remarks:
Soil is not hydric
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: DENC Person County Pipeline City/County: Rougemont/Person Sampling Date: 01-Oct-21
Applicant/Owner: Dominion Energy North Carolina State: NC Sampling Point: WP
Investigator(s): J.Lawler.PWS Section,Township,Range: S T R
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Swale Local relief(concave,convex,none): hummocky Slope: 1.0% / 0.6 °
Subregion(LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 36.283031° Long.: -78.859960° Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Lignum Loam NWI classification: NA
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 0 No 0 (If no,explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ ,Soil ❑ ,or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes 0 No 0
Are Vegetation ❑ ,Soil ❑ ,or Hydrology ❑ naturally problematic? (If needed,explain any answers in Remarks.)
Summary of Findings -Attach site map showing sampling point locations,transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 0 No 0
Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No 0 Is the Sampled Area
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0
within a Wetland? Yes CD No 0
Remarks:
Wooded area near existing gravel road
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators(minimum of one required;check all that apply) _ ❑ Surface Soil Cracks(B6)
❑ Surface Water(Al) ❑ True Aquatic Plants(B14) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(B8)
❑ High Water Table(A2) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) ❑d Drainage Patterns(B10)
❑ Saturation(A3) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots(C3) ❑ Moss Trim Lines(B16)
❑ Water Marks(Bl) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) ❑ Dry Season Water Table(C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits(B2) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) ❑ Crayfish Burrows(C8)
❑ Drift deposits(B3) ❑ Thin Muck Surface(C7) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust(B4) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks) ❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants(Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits(B5) ❑ Geomorphic Position(D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(B7) ❑ Shallow Aquitard(D3)
❑ Water-Stained Leaves(B9) ❑ Microtopographic Relief(D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna(B13) FAC-neutral Test(D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth(inches):
Water Table Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth(inches):
Saturation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0
(includes capillary fringe) Yes 0 No 0 Depth(inches):
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well,aerial photos,previous inspections),if available:
Antecedent Precipitation Tool
Remarks:
Precipitation in prior three months has been normal.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant Sampling Point: yyp
Species?
Absolute Rel.Strat. Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ) %Cover Cover Status
Number of Dominant Species
1• Acer rubrum 65 ❑ 65.0% FAC That are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 10 (A)
2. Liquidambar styraciflua 20 0 20.0% FAC
Total Number of Dominant
3 Nyssa svlvatica 15 ❑ 15.0% FAC Species Across All Strata: 10 (B)
4 0 ❑ 0.0%
5 0 ❑ 0.0% Percent of dominant Species
6. 0 ❑ 0.0%
That Are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
7 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index worksheet:
g 0 ❑ o.0°io Total%Cover of: Multiply by:
100 =Total Cover OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 )
FACW species 20 x 2 = 40
1 Liquidambar styraciflua 10 0 33.3% FAC
2. Diospvrosvirginiana 10 0 33.3% FAC FAC species 147 x 3 = 441
3. Quercus phellos 10 d❑ 33.3% FAC FACU species 0 x 4 = 0
4. 0 ❑ 0.0% OPL species 0 x 5 = 0
5 0 ❑ 0.0% column Totals: 167 (A) 481 (B)
6 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.880
7. 0 ❑ 0.0% Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
$ 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
9. 0 ❑ 0.0%
❑ Dominance Test is>50%
0 ❑ 0.0%
1 0 Prevalence Index is<_3.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30 =Total Cover
❑ Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
0 ❑ 0.0% data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3 0 ❑ 0.0% 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4 0 ❑ 0.0% be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
5. o ❑ 0.0% _ Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6. o ❑ 0.0% - Four Vegetation Strata:
0 ❑ 0.0% Tree stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding vines,3 in.
7 (7.6 cm)or more in diameter at breast height(DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ) 0 =Total Cover regardless of height.
Sapling/shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding
1• Microstegium vimineum 10 d❑ 33.3% FAC vines,less than 3 in.DBH and greater than 3.28 ft(1 m)tall.
2. Juncus effusus 10 ❑ 33.3% FACW Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
3. Arundinaria gigantea
10 0 33.3% FACW regardless of size,and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
0 ❑ 0.0% Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
4' in height.
5. 0 ❑ 0.0%
6 0 ❑ o.o°io - Five Vegetation Strata:
7. o ❑ 0.0%
Tree-Woody plants,excluding woody vines,approximately 20
8 0 ❑ 0.0% ft(6 m)or more in height and 3 in.(7.6 cm)or larger in
❑ 0.0% diameter at breast height(DBH).
0
9. Sapling stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
10 0 ❑ 0.0% _ vines,approximately 20 ft(6 m)or more in height and less
11. o ❑ 0.0% - than 3 in.(7.6 cm)DBH.
12 0 ❑ 0.0% - Shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
vines,approximately 3 to 20 ft(1 to 6 m)in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ) 30 =Total Cover
Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
1. Toxicodendron radicans 5 0 71.4% FAC including herbaceous vines,regardless of size,and woody
species,except woody vines,less than approximately 3 ft(1
2. Smilax rotundifolia 2 0 28.6% FAC m)in height.
3. 0 ❑ 0.0% - Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines,regardless of
0 ❑ 0.0% height.
4. -
5. 0 ❑ 0.0% Hydrophytic
6._ 0 ❑ 0.0% - Vegetation
7 =Total Cover
Present? Yes 0 No 0
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Hydrophytic vegetation is dominant
*Indicator suffix= National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

Soil Sampling Point: yyp
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) % Type 1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-3 10YR 3/2 100 Loam
3-12 10YR 5/2 90 10YR 5/6 10 C PL Loam
'Type:C=Concentration.D=Depletion.RM=Reduced Matrix,CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains ,Location: PL=Pore Lining.M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol(Al) ❑ Dark Surface(57) ❑ 2 cm Muck(A10)(MLRA 147)
❑ Histic Epipedon(A2) ❑ Polyvalue Below Surface(58)(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Black Histic(A3) ❑Thin Dark Surface(59)(MLRA 147,148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox(A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)
❑ Stratified Layers(A5) 0 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(F7) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks)
❑ Thick Dark Surface(Al2) ❑ Redox Depressions(F8)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral(51)(LRR N, ❑ Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR N,
MLRA 147,148) MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix(54) ❑ Umbric Surface(F13)(MLRA 136,122)
❑ Sandy Redox(55) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)(MLRA 148) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Stripped Matrix(56) ❑ Red Parent Material(F21)(MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type:
Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No 0
Remarks:
Soil is hydric
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: DENC Person County Pipeline City/County: Rougemont/Person Sampling Date: 01-Oct-21
Applicant/Owner: Dominion Energy North Carolina State: NC Sampling Point: WP-UP
Investigator(s): J.Lawler.PWS Section,Township,Range: S T R
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Flat Local relief(concave,convex,none): flat Slope: 0.0% / 0.0 °
Subregion(LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 36.283108° Long.: -78.859950° Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Lignum Loam NWI classification:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 0 No 0 (If no,explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ ,Soil ❑ ,or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes 0 No 0
Are Vegetation ❑ ,Soil ❑ ,or Hydrology ❑ naturally problematic? (If needed,explain any answers in Remarks.)
Summary of Findings -Attach site map showing sampling point locations,transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 0 No 0
Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No 0 Is the Sampled Area
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0
within a Wetland? Yes 0 No 0
Remarks:
Taken in wooded area next to small wetland area
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators(minimum of one required;check all that apply) _ ❑ Surface Soil Cracks(B6)
❑ Surface Water(Al) ❑ True Aquatic Plants(B14) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(B8)
❑ High Water Table(A2) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) ❑ Drainage Patterns(B10)
❑ Saturation(A3) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots(C3) ❑ Moss Trim Lines(B16)
❑ Water Marks(Bl) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) ❑ Dry Season Water Table(C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits(B2) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) ❑ Crayfish Burrows(C8)
❑ Drift deposits(B3) ❑ Thin Muck Surface(C7) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust(B4) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks) ❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants(Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits(B5) ❑ Geomorphic Position(D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(B7) ❑ Shallow Aquitard(D3)
❑ Water-Stained Leaves(B9) ❑ Microtopographic Relief(D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna(B13) ❑ FAC-neutral Test(D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth(inches):
Water Table Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth(inches):
Saturation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0
(includes capillary fringe) Yes 0 No 0 Depth(inches):
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well,aerial photos,previous inspections),if available:
Antecedent Precipitation Tool
Remarks:
Precipitation in prior three months has been normal.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant Sampling Point: WP -UP
Species?
Absolute Rel.Strat. Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ) %Cover Cover Status
Number of Dominant Species
1• Ulmus americana 65 ❑ 65.0% FACW That are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 5 (A)
2. Liquidambar styraciflua 20 0 20.0% FAC
15 ❑ 15.0% FACU Total Number of Dominant
3 Juniperus virainiana Species Across All Strata: 8 (B)
4 o ❑ 0.0%
5 0 ❑ 0.0% Percent of dominant Species
6.
o ❑ 0.0% That Are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 62.5% (A/B)
7 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index worksheet:
g 0 ❑ o.0°io Total%Cover of: Multiply by:
100 =Total Cover OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 )
FACW species 80 x 2 = 160
1 Juniperus virginiana 10 0 40.0% FACU
2. Ulmus americana 10 0 40.0% FACW FAC species 55 x 3 = 165
3. Quercus laurifolia 5 0 20.0% FACW FACU species 34 x 4 = 136
4 0 ❑ 0.0% UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
5 0 ❑ 0.0% Column Totals: 169 (A) 461 (B)
6 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.728
7. 0 ❑ 0.0% Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
$ 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
9. 0 ❑ 0.0%
0 Dominance Test is>500/o
0 ❑ 0.0%
1 0 Prevalence Index is<_3.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 25 =Total Cover
❑ Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
0 ❑ 0.0% data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3 0 ❑ 0.0% 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4 0 ❑ 0.0% be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
5. o ❑ 0.0% _ Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6. o ❑ 0.0% - Four Vegetation Strata:
❑ . Tree stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding vines,3 in.
7 0 00%
(7.6 cm)or more in diameter at breast height(DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ) 0 =Total Cover regardless of height.
Sapling/shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding
1• Microsteuium vimineum 35 0 94.6% FAC vines,less than 3 in.DBH and greater than 3.28 ft(1 m)tall.
2. Rubus alleaheniensis 2 ❑ 5.4% FACU Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
3 0 ❑ 0.0% regardless of size,and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
. -
0 ❑ 0.0% Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
4' in height.
5. 0 ❑ 0.0%
6 0 ❑ o.o°io - Five Vegetation Strata:
7. 0 ❑ 0.0%
Tree-Woody plants,excluding woody vines,approximately 20
8 0 ❑ 0.0% ft(6 m)or more in height and 3 in.(7.6 cm)or larger in
❑ 0.0% diameter at breast height(DBH).
0
9. Sapling stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
10 0 ❑ 0.0% _ vines,approximately 20 ft(6 m)or more in height and less
11. o ❑ 0.0% - than 3 in.(7.6 cm)DBH.
12 0 ❑ 0.0% Shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
vines,approximately 3 to 20 ft(1 to 6 m)in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ) 37 =Total Cover
Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
1. Parthenocissus quinquefolia 5 0 71.4% FACU including herbaceous vines,regardless of size,and woody
species,except woody vines,less than approximately 3 ft(1
2. Lonicera iaponica 2 0 28.6% FACU m)in height.
3. 0 ❑ 0.0% Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines,regardless of
4.
0 ❑ 0.0% height.
5. 0 ❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic
6.__ 0 ❑ 0.0% - Vegetation
7 =Total Cover
Present? Yes No 0
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Hydrophytic vegetation is dominant
*Indicator suffix= National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

Soil Sampling Point: yyp-Up
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) % Type 1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-2 10YR 6/3 100 Loam
2-12 10YR 7/1 100 Loam
'Type:C=Concentration.D=Depletion.RM=Reduced Matrix,CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains ,Location: PL=Pore Lining.M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol(Al) ❑ Dark Surface(57) ❑ 2 cm Muck(A10)(MLRA 147)
❑ Histic Epipedon(A2) ❑ Polyvalue Below Surface(58)(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Black Histic(A3) ❑Thin Dark Surface(59)(MLRA 147,148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox(A16)
(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) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface(All) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface(F7) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks)
❑ Thick Dark Surface(Al2) ❑ Redox Depressions(F8)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral(51)(LRR N, ❑ Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR N,
MLRA 147,148) MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix(54) ❑ Umbric Surface(F13)(MLRA 136,122)
❑ Sandy Redox(55) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)(MLRA 148) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Stripped Matrix(56) ❑ Red Parent Material(F21)(MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type:
Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No 0
Remarks:
Soil is not hydric
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

Antecedent Precipitation vs Normal Range based on NOAA's Daily Global Historical Climatology Network
Daily Total
I1 _ 30-Day Rolling Total
30-Year Normal Range
7 -
11ilk
6 - I i2021-08-02
t
L\f-
,,..v,N5
-
U
C �-'
4 _ 2021-09-01 2621�0-0
(,..,
11111
f I
C _,_,
.co 3 - -
C R 1 j A Al r ' _
2 -
r _
1 - -
\ \rfliL rn
-
- - 1 - 1 - -
11 n z ., 1 n e� krill_ f n i _ in I Il s r1 f L 1111�71111 �, n ., n rti n n _
0 , 1 1 I
Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb
2021 2021 2021 2021 2021 2021 2021 2021 2021 2021 2022 2022
Coordinates 36.283036, -78.86051 30 Days Ending 30th %ile (in) 70th %ile (in) Observed (in) Wetness Condition Condition Value Month Weight Product
Observation Date 2021-10-01 2021-10-01 2.283858 5.770473 3.480315 Normal 2 3 6
Elevation (ft) 616.89 2021-09-01 2.610236 4.332677 3.527559 Normal 2 2 4
Drought Index (PDSI) Mild wetness 2021-08-02 3.002756 4.911024 5.38189 Wet 3 1 3
WebWIMP H2O Balance Wet Season Result Normal Conditions - 13
Weather Station Name Coordinates Elevation (ft) Distance (mi) Elevation A Weighted A Days (Normal) Days (Antecedent)
ROXBORO 7 ESE 36.3464, -78.8858 709.974 4.599 93.084 2.498 10465 90
TIMBERLAKE 8.1 NE 36.3553, -78.8314 645.013 5.249 28.123 2.51 2 0
Figure and tables made by the ROUGEMONT 36.2119, -78.8569 540.026 4.919 76.864 2.592 729 0
j
Antecedent Precipitation Tool ROXBORO 4.6 SE 36.3583, -78.9173 620.079 6.086 3.189 2.758 8 0 Nft Version 1.4 HILLSBOROUGH 8.8 NE 36.1521, -78.9813 528.871 11.277 88.019 6.067 1 0
HILLSBOROUGH 8.7 NE 36.1468, -78.9782 521.982 11.474 94.908 6.252 14 0
DURHAM 10.7 NNE 36.1292, -78.8611 416.011 10.629 200.879 6.918 1 0
`+twritten byJson Deters BUTNER FLTR PLT 36.1414, -78.7736 354.987 10.92 261.903 7.774 103 0
U.S.Army Corps of Engineers
OXFORD AG 36.3039, -78.6108 500.0 13.981 116.89 7.925 30 0

PROPERTY OWNER LIST
Tract No. Parcel No OWNER DB/PG Owner Name
Start of Pipeline
Plat Book/Page 10/31J UPPER PIEDMONT
1 0953 00 05 7044.000 Deed Book/Page 258/763 ENVIRONMENTAL I
Plat Book/Page 15/962 DORSEY RONALD S
2 0953 00 22 2572.000 Deed Book/Page 757/280 DORSEY MELVILLE H
3 0953-00-01-9554.000 Deed Book/Page 166/627 CASH ROSCOE ESTATE
SR 1727 - Peed Road
4 0953-00-10-9067.000 Deed Book/Page 1054/542 YORK LAND LLC/Johnathon C.
York "Jon"
5 0952-00-08-1354.000 Plat Book/Page 17/219 ELLIS JERRY M
Deed Book/Page 180/586
6 0952-00-06-4686.000 Deed Book/Page 675/143 LEE JOSEPH I III TRUSTEE
6.5 0942 00 76 3618.000 Plat Book/ Page 22/37 GATORPACK LAND & TIMBER
Deed Book/Page 1069/69 LLC
BAUCOM NOEL LANG/ NEW
7 0942-00-78-2604.000 Deed Book/Page 1092/240 OWNER ERICA HEATHER
YOUNG and spouse
Christopher Lee Moncsko
MCNEILL BARBARA
8 0942-00-58-2741.000 Deed Book/Page 319/476 R/DECEASED Sandra Ruth
McKeever
Page 1

Tract No. Parcel No OWNER DB/PG Owner Name
9 0942-00-38-6368.000 Deed Book/Page 53/605 IRBY DEBORAH
BOWLING/Widower
SR - Mt. Harmony Church Road
10 0942-00-26-6936.000 Deed Book/Page 692/411 BLALOCK CHRISTOPHER D
10.5 0942-00-16-3961.000 BOWLING RICHARD L
Deed Book/Page 303/361 BOWLING DONNA M
12.5 94200157549 Deed Book/Page 316/507 Ann Cole Garrard
13 0942-00-25-4826.000 Plat Book/Page 6/77-3 BOWLING TIMOTHY DALE
Deed Book/Page 213/565
Howard Vaughan Road
Plat Book 5/629 Deed THOMSON JOSEPH R
14 0942 00 24 4518.000 Book 1052/44 THOMSON JAIME E
15 0942-00-23-7983.000 Deed Book/Page 1038/597 BOWLING MICHAEL TODD
Page 2

Tract No. Parcel No OWNER DB/PG Owner Name
15.5 0942-00-03-4910.000 Deed Book/Page 99/216 TURLEY AUDRY ESTATE
Plat Book/Page 15/839 MELTON MICHAEL D
18 0942-00-12-6394.000
Deed Book/Page 875/331 MELTON PATRICIA A
THE DIANE JOAN FRANCES
Plat Book/Page 15/839 LIVING TRUST
19 0942-00-02-5129.000
Deed Book/Page 985/305 FRANCES DIANE JOAN
TRUSTEE
End of Pipeline at T-12/T-12B
Forest L. Oakley & Sondra H.
Laydown Yard 0952-00-49-5345 Deed Book/Page 1050/748 Oakley
Page 3

Dominion
Energy®
August 4, 2021
Landowner Name
Landowner Address
Re: Dominion Energy Pipeline Survey Activity
Notice County: PERSON
County PIN:
Dear Landowner,
In order to serve our customers in North Carolina, Dominion Energy ("DENC") will be constructing a new
gas pipeline in Person County. DENC is committed to providing safe, reliable natural gas service, and
projects like these are part of our routine natural gas operations throughout its service territory.
To begin this project, a land survey and engineering study is needed to determine routing of the new
pipeline facility and to collect information pertinent to the development of the plans that will be used to
construct the new pipeline facility. A surveyor's "right-of-entry" is provided for under North Carolina
General Statute 40A-11. This letter is to notify you of our intent to enter the property for the preliminary
survey, but this does not necessarily mean your property will be impacted. Our contracted surveyors and
engineers include: Diversified Energy Services, Inc., S&ME and Energy Land & Infrastructure, PLLC.
The survey process is typically routine and minimally disruptive to the property. It may be necessary in
some cases, however, to take core soil samples during the engineering phase. Should that be the case,
Dominion, or its contractor(s), will coordinate with individual property owners prior to the sampling
process. Dominion is committed to restoring any such area to its original state after the survey and
assessment process has been completed.
If we determine that your property will be impacted, a representative of Dominion will contact you to
arrange just compensation for the land rights needed to proceed with this project. As a part of this
process, an exhibit of your property will be prepared, showing where the proposed easement for the
pipeline project is situated in relation to your property. This will NOT involve the purchase or relocation of
homes.
Our land agents will attempt to contact you after sending this notification to answer any questions you
may have about the survey process and to learn about features of your property we should be aware of
prior to entry. With your permission, we would like to begin surveying sooner than 30 days, however, if
you do not grant permission we will certainly wait the 30 days as required by the NC General Statute
referenced above.
If you have any questions, you may contact one of our contracted right of way agents from
Diversified Energy Services, Inc. at(919) 776-2232.
Dominion is committed to being as open and transparent as possible throughout this process and to
minimizing any inconvenience to you. We look forward to working with you and thank you in advance for
your consideration.
Sincerely yours,
ter
Engineer II
Dominion Energy

DocuSign Envelope ID: D9B130C3-E1C4-4BF4-BCA8-200AD6935298
4:_-tc STATE 0''",
", '3 OI1
ROYCOOPER -5 1 ,_- Ar
Governor V O`
ELIZABETH S.BISER ` L,za
Secretary '*fAf ou v�vlot0*_-
S.DANIEL SMITH NORTH CAROLINA
Director Environmental Quality
January 20,2022
Dominion Energy North Carolina
220 Operation Way
MC C221
Cayce, SC 29033
Subject: Buffer Determination Letter
DENC Person County Pipeline
Person County
NBRRO#21-413
Dear Dominion Energy North Carolina:
On December 16,2021,Alys Hannum of the Division of Water Resources(DWR)Raleigh Regional
Office conducted an on-site review of the features located on the DENC Person County Pipeline property
at the request of S&ME Inc.,to determine the applicability of the Tar-Pamlico River Basin Buffer Rule,
Title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code 02B .0734.
The table and maps below summarize the features evaluated for subjectivity to the Neuse River Riparian
Buffer Rule.Features that are identified as"Subject"have been located on either the most recent
published NRCS Soil Survey of Person County or the most recent copy of the USGS Topographic map,
have been located on the ground, and possess characteristics that qualify them to be at least intermittent
streams.Features that are identified as"Not Subject"are not located on either of the required maps,are
not present on the property,or have been determined not to be at least intermittent.
There may be other streams or features on the property that may be considered jurisdictional
according to the US Army Corps of Engineers and therefore subject to the Clean Water Act. This
project may require a Section 404/401 Permit for proposed activity within buffers or within waters
of the state.Any inquiries should be directed to the US Army Corp of Engineers(Raleigh
Regulatory Field Office) at(919)-554-4884.
D_E Q j North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
Raleigh Regional Office 3800 Barrett Drive I Raleigh,North Carolina 27609
NORTH CAROLINA
Deparbnent at EmnraamemeI(Wimi 919.791.4200

DocuSign Envelope ID: D9B130C3-E1C4-4BF4-BCA8-200AD6935298 DENC Person County Pipeline
Person County
January 20,2021
Page 2 of 3
Determination Type:
Buffer Intermittent/Perennial
❑Neuse (15A NCAC 2B .0714)
® Tar-Pamlico (15A NCAC 2B .0734) ❑ Intermittent/Perennial Determination(where
local buffer ordinances apply)
❑ Jordan(15A NCAC 2B .0267)
(governmental and/or interjurisdictional
projects)
Project Name: DENC Person County Pipeline
Address/Location: Multiple
Stream(s): Cub Creek and Rock Fork Branch
Determination Date: December 16,2021 Staff: Ales Hannum
Feature E/I/P* Not Subject Start @ Stop @ Soil USGS
Subject Survey Topo
A NP X Not Present X
B E X Outside Right-of-way X
C E X Outside Right-of-way X
D E X Outside Right-of-way X
All other features were considered subject by the consulting agency and were not evaluated.
*E=Ephemeral,I=Intermittent,P=Perennial,NP=Not Present,N/A=Not Applicable,N/E=Not Evaluated
This on-site determination shall expire five(5)years from the date of this letter.Landowners or
affected parties that dispute a determination made by the DWR may request a determination by
the Director.An appeal request must be made within sixty(60) days of date of this letter.A request
for a determination by the Director shall be referred to the Director in writing.If sending via US
Postal Service: do Paul Wojoski;DWR—401 &Buffer Permitting Unit;1617 Mail Service Center;
Raleigh,NC 27699-1617.If sending via delivery service(UPS,FedEx, etc.):Paul Wojoski;DWR—401
&Buffer Permitting Unit;512 N. Salisbury Street;Raleigh,NC 27604.
This determination is final and binding unless,as detailed above,an appeal is requested within sixty(60)
days of the date of this letter.
D E Q North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
Raleigh Regional Office 3800 Barrett Drive I Raleigh,North Carolina 27609
NORTH CAROIJNA
Department of Environmental Emery 919.791.4200

DocuSign Envelope ID: D9B130C3-E1C4-4BF4-BCA8-200AD6935298 DENC Person County Pipeline
Person County
January 20,2021
Page 3 of 3
If you have questions regarding this determination,please contact Alys Hannum, of my staff, at
[e-mail],or by telephone at(919) 791-4255.
Sincerely,
,—DocuSigned by:
S 1U .,
'1/4—BCDA9D825D4A46D...
Scott Vinson,Regional Supervisor
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Raleigh Regional Office
cc: RRO DWR File Copy/Laserfiche
Robert Schwartz,Dominion Energy([e-mail])
Joey Lawler, S&ME Inc. ([e-mail])
Rebeckah Sims, S&ME Inc. ([e-mail])
Kylie Wallace([e-mail])
D E Q North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
Raleigh Regional Office 3800 Barrett Drive I Raleigh,North Carolina 27609
NORM CAROUNA
Departmental Environmental quality 919.791.4200

DocuSign Envelope ID: D9B130C3-E1C4-4BF4-BCA8-200AD6935298
DENC Person County Pipeline
Person County, NC-DWR Project #21-413
All other features were considered subject by the consulting agency and were not evaluated.
i(FEET) !a 1 IV
REFERENCE: ! A: Not Subject
GIS BASE LAYERS WERE OBTAINED FROM ERSI AND COUNTY SOURCES. THIS MAP IS FOR
INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. ALL FEATURE LOCATIONS DISPLAYED ARE
APPROXIMATED.THEY ARE NOT BASED ON CIVIL SURVEY INFORMATION,UNLESS STATED
OTHERWISE.WETLANDS AREAS WERE PREVIOUSLY DISTURBED AND LOCATION
APPROXIMATED.
t,-._ -
H rB
11 �w fi ,_g3 -
r -- ,, 12)
rl3 t _t, a - • _ HrB �/
-: 0 roil
. ,
. . .
....,
, 4,
49
1 ' �lrB r r;.. .,rj i
4 /0"/ LgB04
.,. i HrC ' P L ey. o f
--1Ik`�' QoF - Cyo
C: Not Subject a IA re
• S GoF
14116 .44\i,.,,
LgB S0 .
lirlip ..- .4,
le % .
r::. r ��
r rC
ca
clitf 1 t-8g.:.` - .
Ii,B �� Hrk3 ., B: Not Subject
L.gB
H r8 C5°C
•or G sC ,,, Y
ilkr -c. H
.illillo.. _
, Gelit.‘l• /-46'N Ci HrB ,
c
' aGee H__ 4irB
o
'n 1El
L.gB 1__[rt3
Hr6
k1rB -�
] ,.,f
Geegl
t OrB HC F 4 ,- «Jir — �
LB 3of quk„ \ a
. HrC e NY hai 1
_ Lg3 rlrC �..-1'--"1-
.
D: Not Subject )
----� PROPOSED PIPELINE
NRCS Soil Survey Sheets ,s STAATEa, Base map provided by
�
Person Co., NC 1995 � eM-C i 4-
g S&ME Inc
Le end: g � ;: 7`o ::Locations are approximate
,a ii� a, and are provided for V
-project boundary �' �,,,;,;x' reference only::

DocuSign Envelope ID: D9B130C3-E1C4-4BF4-BCA8-200AD6935298
DENC Person County Pipeline
Person County, NC-DWR Project #21-413
All other features were considered subject by the consulting agency and were not evaluated.
° T3 ) r;
c7),.. �� / ) is A� f' -c ��
�'II , ' . \ - AiN7ots hown ]}
(____.. .\_\cc.1):\_,.. z._,..:
Iiii
..,.. „p‹,:lii
` l:, , r - All," lir ' ., • — 41:5_, /li
F
r■ii---- ira, b 25 ,...--,---1.- i 1
_____, „
, I a.s?/. i
rf
_, . ' .
( 1 ,-RF
� � } p •f � gf
i Y '
.r/--- / ,) 5r441 0 -
tii
01 rt% ? , IIVAdoci\--,..
J7 ,
s - fr.
C: Not Shown _
_.,ii_jr f l
._..)
.31■414//
yy C J 4
V w � , -:JJG� r fc
1 § Ihii ,:. . % -r) / (J )t' :�\\ B:• Not Shown 1 .
- ' \' ce c."- -±-,--7-'—j----1,...")
\\___P- i
i 'OelOPIF ' /
[(� .y 44y. fPRE4090�7 , �^ `'.` �� J /
) f", ..',. .1 t.I,'�f• - COUS1N.Ral _ V \e) .
Wit ,,�� .qPIII 9pIrt___. _ . 1,
„ , iik it, L7111111- -..____-.) '
S \‘4191,7'. - 1(
141S‘ •," TP\ \-.Z-)!a 5 \ r
�� .„ ,U c--c— ,I ----,(\f-y--- „law f
M, -- -„ lb (.747‘7 ,
,51) . ---kt , G _ trio) ' 10 A
(&r- ).
__ :_ .,�, D: Not Shown o
_, -'1.• :� .lfll� ti A 'i ter _ J`-'�1 f f
USGS Topographical Map
-0STAri'",. Base map provided by
M..� ,
Person County 2019 � S&ME Inc
y�
Le end' f ` f` ::Locations are approximate
g 0I and are provided for V
ik
-Project boundary ^,�4� ,: reference only::

DocuSign Envelope ID: D9B130C3-E1C4-4BF4-BCA8-200AD6935298
DENC Person County Pipeline
Person County, NC-DWR Project #21-413
All other features were considered subject by the consulting agency and were not evaluated.
Z
j
1' _ '. r - , ..... .4.•-
---.
—417
*1/47%-R.i..:. , _. -. if
iir
r'4' • A - - _ 1I ,
ig
A: Not Present " >~ } 1
•
PROPOSED PIPELINE
__ , . .iiiih.• • • —
—STREAMS
n ?:]L r:A.
,.FEET:
I-- STREAM CENTERLINE
®WETLANDS
REFERENCE.2017 ORTHOIMAGERY FOR PERSON COUNTY
CF.S EASE LAYERS WERE TW NE❑FROM PERSON COUNTY.THIS MAP 15 FOR 1=3 OPEN WATER
INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY ALL FEATURE LOCATIONS DISPLAYED ME
APPROXIMATED THEY ARE NOT BASED ON CIVIL SURVEY INFORMATION.UNLESS STATED ROADS
Aerial Photography j
j�.0STA7Eq„i,, Base map provided by
M..� 1. S&ME Inc
Figures �t �.
Le end' f ::Locations are approximate
g 8 and are provided for,47
-Project boundary ^,i4�z,,* reference only::

DocuSign Envelope ID: D9B130C3-E1C4-4BF4-BCA8-200AD6935298
DENC Person County Pipeline
Person County, NC-DWR Project #21-413
All other features were considered subject by the consulting agency and were not evaluated.
B: Not Subject
•
s.c �-•- ��— PROPOSED PIPELINE
STREAMS
u sop
I(FEET)
-- STREAM CENTERLINE
®WETLANDS
REFERENCE:2017ORTHOIMAGTRY FOR PERSON COUNTY -
GIS BASE LAYERS WERE OBTAINED fROM PERSON COUNTY-THIS M P IS FOR =OPEN WATER
INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY.ALL FEATURE LOCATIONS DISPLAYED ARE ROADS
APPROXIMATED THEY ARE NOT BASED ON CIVIL SURVEY INFORMATION.UNLESS STATED - x
Aerial Photography j
j�.McSTA7Ecri,� Base map provided by
Figure 7 i‘t
S&MEInc
Le end' f ::Locations are approximate
g �I and are provided for 47
-Project boundary reference only::

DocuSign Envelope ID: D9B130C3-E1C4-4BF4-BCA8-200AD6935298
DENC Person County Pipeline
Person County, NC-DWR Project #21-413
All other features were considered subject by the consulting agency and were not evaluated.
N
1
,•C: Not Subject
1
-11:401
, i, :s 0. .-.:fro .. sfr,ei '.,.•••••...k.:;.,....,....,..._7_,•<,..•:::,..41::::,..:iii,........ ._....,,,p...:.:::;..1.,i,:..-:.....‘..::::i;,......,_:::,.,,,. ,;......3. ..
—PROPOSED PIPELINE
-STREAMS
D SLL' NJU
•� -- STREAM CENTERLINE
(FEET) 4 •^ ..•
• ®WETLANDS
REFERENCE 201 T ORTHOMLIAC ERY FOR PERSON COUNTY
G15 BASE LAYERS WERE GUNNED FROM PERSON COUNTY.THIS MAP IS FOR OPEN WATER
.N FORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY.ALL FEATURE LOCATIONS DSPLAYED ARE ,� ROADS
•V SRO%I MATER THEY ARE NOT BASED ON CML SURVEY INFORMATION,UNLESS STATED
Aerial Photography ,--:,-.STATE':‘, Base map provided by
d' K,Wao
s
Figure 8 ; tip S&ME Inc
i Q a)>L
::Locations are approximate
Legend: �i o,
"' C/f A`I
and are provided for V
-Project boundary ° ,�+>•.�,,,,,- y ' reference only:: JN_

DocuSign Envelope ID: D9B130C3-E1C4-4BF4-BCA8-200AD6935298
DENC Person County Pipeline
Person County, NC-DWR Project #21-413
All other features were considered subject by the consulting agency and were not evaluated.
D: Not Subject • - .• f � �
'' p• 1.-,.. -' •♦., .t .,- r_ row •
. -P -
.._.- • .%
rQa' nw .IL_ ye`,M r t .71S
_-----.....----- d . j C'd' ! Y
5 !
. 15 •
. !! - L
— s
—n __
1 ! a
i t !! MI LL - II`ri`I
r Y 1
1
r 1
> .a+'
� 1
, s
I ir
u: IPtt� : 7` -,.:.,:se.- 1..
.1.15.
� 1 •
41 y •
1
''�1-,1► qr,4 `'' r*'tip • 'd. f..- 1 • ..
.t
., AO Sillii.ilkilll'
PROPOSE❑PIPELINE
D 3Da MO —STREAMS
,(FEET) * T.0. - �-- STREAM CENTERLINE
- - , ®WETLANDS
REFERENCE,2017 ORTN011/AGERY FOR PERSON COUNTY -
GS BASE LAYERS WERE OBTAINED FROM PERSON COUNTY THIS MAP IS FOR - OPEN WATER
'--ORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY ALL FEATURE LOCATIONS CFS PLAYED ARE ROADS
•HO)1MATED THEY ARE NOT EASED ON CNN_SURVEY INFORMATION,UNLESS STATED f-�.
•
Aerial Photography t% STA7e��, Base map provided by
M..� �, S&ME Inc
Figure 11 � y
Legend: ' 5. ::Locations are approximate
g Of and are provided for V
-Project boundary ^�141zr* reference only::

Appendix V
Stream/Wetland/Riparian Buffer Impact Exhibits

MM �
LnJ �
1 1 1 --
1 1 1 -
I. 1 I -
1 I I I 1I II II 11 11i
1 1 11 1 1 1rillr"1"-"P.Ilk
1 1 1 11 1 1 1I I I 1 1 1
1 1
N ff z w z
X
N STREAM o W i
O
N L• • if
�Oo�TEMPORARYOMPACTS a Q
"�v:P. [ CM BUFFER IMPACT MAPS { — :- - —
~ .'9 o° BUFFER IMPACTS*
z a z
ce 1—
r � w �
Lu
.r WETLAND c A o
- - FORESTED WETLAND C•ONVERSION
z ,
E
•
/I 1
I I I
l .4..r-!1, ♦•I 1 1
♦ I 1 I \
1 1 1 1
I 1 I
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 I 1 I I 1 I SCALE:
} 1 1 ` 1 1 1 I 1 1 PROPOSED ALIGNMENT 1 " = 50 '
N 1 1 1 1 I 1 ► 11 ACCESS ROADS AND EXTRA WORKSPACE DATE:
\I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 PROPOSED LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE 2-23-22
r '' ��I 1 I I 1 I 1 1 1 DELINEATED POTENTIAL STREAMS PROJECT NUMBER
' `- 1 I I 11 ; 1 I. 216997
DELINEATED POTENTIAL WETLANDS
FIGURE NO.
REFERENCE: TEMPORARY STREAM IMPACTS
• GIS BASE LAYERS WERE OBTAINED FROM ESRI. THIS MAP IS FOR INFORMATIONAL 0 50 100 TEMPORARY WETLAND I M PACTS 12
PURPOSES ONLY. ALL FEATURE LOCATIONS DISPLAYED ARE APPROXIMATED.THEY ARE
o NOT BASED ON CIVIL SURVEY INFORMATION,UNLESS STATED OTHERWISE. (FEET) ROADS

rio.a ..' ''' if ' s ' ...""r , .
•
'! • �L ; M-\ _, L. - I }•i/ :I.Y1 . _.
+ 1•
• . I - L T - r - lit .■• ` r r j
..
- - _
•
• .1' • 1. • 44.Nroslm RI .. 11
A I $30117111 ' 4 . .,. , . ,. -
4- 1 1; ,- _
e A , . .- ti a 1. 'it '•A C p ••,'
A .0 , AT ti I- ' '
T ' i
_ r
- t r 9 1, .:-.% ; ''' 14 g
' �� ti
t l ■o - •
. _ *1. if ‘Wa. . iflii,i. '...1 IL:• 4. • -4 41;1'4 .' 14/6. 1a. ::- : -
it . . • e - - tri,--i;"..efi -- ft ,". . -. ii. • -,.. . • rip .1‘.' IlLity t..t li ' 4 ., p
' ...I 1: 4 I I I 0:iikai 4 i ' .
/ will- f -iti.V.I. ,....."• .
A 140- IlLi 1. . • ,- '. - ,tie,_ % . -:;4•L...r : ..
A . 11* Iv,...,.....t , - iro• 47 . a: .1" or". . c 11.1C.... 1......46... IL , • %,
r . if. :-...--r" . :: A.; ' A i 1-'4 Ilk' •
. .01. • 4 i ., ... -• ':;_4,, •. ... N.jtiziolit •M
.'..„.-r..1. ,L•,.1Zik,..„.-L.
■i., ii,k ]1 r'-it - .g• v l,ititit.l.4 e o _ ,,
WETLAND WG■ 1
',. .dr'•i...l''•y s'i.l.l it,^i•.. 1..',.; t
r, . .
>. A. , r , FORESTED WETLAND C•ONVERSION `
�
, _ , • ■ -.
4.
ti s`` %fir ti L �i e. �� °c a ' a w Z V Z
N F _ J •
• x J w
r, - I,i .'.--• '- '�-'y•e _ °° EOQPTEMPORARYIMPACTS '- •'. 1 w O —
li
"" -' - ' { I BUFFER IMPACT MAPS 1111 wG Q
N Y •- •. f f �1��i _ U
r - • • o° BUFFER omPACTS* '. U _
.--.7.' - ,...., v• Illi •447 -' : '' 1-C: -
�� mil # #4. r _ a z
- }
, 4. --Ala.,ilL - .
CC I—
", :. . It • -11.- Iii.4 L.L., — z
•
.r _ �' r f 1 -�-1 �^ " • �._ 'a_,- r 4 Vt.•NI&. - - Ilv--N.- 1 • •I ! a I i `�,, its ' 1 P 0 O Z
IP '+l► U NON
fir, ;� ' d ■j t • t Sc �� ,� ' �s R. iill ■ --- Al w
f. F..-A Y- µ—s——— �.- ram• -■ , — �. O a
1004,
•
v • �.'4�• ■ 1 '1, • c }-' ate. p **It i• 1- �J } ■• ■ r • ��. R' I�
„Iiiht - . -414° VIOLA -.• _4 .-44,,, . ... % . it_ - ' .. 401/1444.:orst..'i. * ...' 11%, 1 -- .•— 1 l'i-IOC a'
E i'''' ' ..402/.1ii .: : /.. ....-. , iik•...:tlt4st ,:. i Ir. v .... s , i. • .11Sli.
1 ..w.
. t :
ii,...La _
, pir.
1• .• it -•- • #ry 1.4,. tv . ,
� -'f. •4�ifikligjilitiii;;'''' ,
- .... I' • . 1 ' A:41ki• .1... . t °-17" 21111r4 .:rt-- ‘711:-' - 111:5N,A .
IL III-
o
o der Law
tiff i'je�' 1* * r I.li
'IN T . ,
, Arks I - •
d.a ,. 7Flip f' ' : SCALE:
�+ x . 51
PROPOSED ALIGNMENT 1 50 '
r v
N y ; ti }` �_�y� � � ACCESS ROADS AND EXTRA WORKSPACE DATE:
'- ' ii, 0 -g - . - �? - *-.11L 14 PROPOSED LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE 2 23 22
a. I t `y ,' ‘� PROJECT NUMBER
r 4 i Si DELINEATED POTENTIAL STREAMS
' •
DELINEATED POTENTIAL WETLANDS 216997
FIGURE NO.
REFERENCE: TEMPORARY STREAM IMPACTS
L. GIS BASE LAYERS WERE OBTAINED FROM ESRI. THIS MAP IS FOR INFORMATIONAL 0 50 100 TEMPORARY WETLAND I M PACTS 13
PURPOSES ONLY. ALL FEATURE LOCATIONS DISPLAYED ARE APPROXIMATED.THEY ARE -
6 NOT BASED ON CIVIL SURVEY INFORMATION,UNLESS STATED OTHERWISE. (FEET) . ROADS

I •
frA -Af'
A 4, Ake
.
11 44 X .44. . .. 4
.4*. . ;Alt, -.. 1 i '
STREAM
• ��OoF TEMPORARY[IMPACTS
_ BUFFER IMPACTS FIGURES
o° BUFFER[IMPACTS*
ro
t ` I sir _ -
• _ x z w z
,, . A-.7,N -
N
N I- E— a Q
o L I _ w V
i-A, . ., .
Y - U = z =
, . . ,s i __ J H-
WETLAND MIA[I -. O
0.00004 P c CIF . >
a z
FORESTED WETLAND CONVERSIONin
w z z
a Z w O
I _ O z u u
Q r E zpo
i
o
Q - WETLAND
zE ,,-9. 11 Itill 11 CO]At IF
414
0., * ; _ „', FORESTED WETLAND CONVERSION
i h'-*ZlitillH411
�W�
Q
T i
SCALE:
N r ;ii; { PROPOSED ALIGNMENT 1 " = 50 '
N
' ---• ACCESS ROADS AND EXTRA WORKSPACE DATE:
PROPOSED LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE 2-23-22
4 DELINEATED POTENTIAL STREAMS PROJECT NUMBER
�' DELINEATED POTENTIAL WETLANDS 216997
' } i a FIGURE NO.
a REFERENCE: f' ' ■ ■ TEMPORARY STREAM IMPACTS
GIS BASE LAYERS WERE OBTAINED FROM ESRI. THIS MAP IS FOR INFORMATIONAL i
PURPOSES ONLY. ALL FEATURE LOCATIONS DISPLAYED ARE APPROXIMATED.THEY ARE 0 50 100 #_! TEMPORARY WETLAND IMPACTS 14
'TaNOT BASED ON CIVIL SURVEY INFORMATION,UNLESS STATED OTHERWISE. � (FEET) ti,-
� � •� ROADS

--,.-4)•, ., ,
i -,,L , ,ii,,t . i, i, - . .. t__ }
... . . _
, :, ...,. . , ..
_ . .., kr _.... ' r .111, ell
r ,, -..
- • . . .. . •_t a, ,.. Ht-.. . i _ r.
rf
I . t .1
*.li til.I
Ir." 7,..... .1.- •
'1 !t.. . , .. kir;
,i. 0.• . t, * I •
I ---— YX- - * , )•- 'LP
..r .1.1 r -, ,- . , . , ,- . , , ;
. _ .
an(,3'� if i'. ]�
\ Na yard Vau9h . I �'
1 ' ,
; t� $ CA
t-
" �,r, i. STREAM- X z w z
WETLAND + 36�Oo�TEMPORARY OMPACTS W , O O
" VE BUFFER OMPACTS FIGURES H u cc Q
.�. 0.00484 L'L OO G' U = LL, u
—t _ i s. 0° BUFFER IMPACTS* +: z =
• \ \ _ - _ _I' _ FORESTED WETLAND C•ONER�SION �',, SM J
y
/ a z
Q � � .110
t \\ ���� \ WETLAND�G/Gl a 1_
- _
oo ncQoF wzz
V ` �` • FORESTED WETLAND C•ONVER%ION ZO w 0 O
z
t �`` EI Ooz
- - U z N o
< A O a
"a rip ..„ -. pp -.. i I 101.' I, 1 , 11 r, � _ o
, • .. e 0: 4. aiyil...9 ... .. ., el( .
1 y
T
' ' < < �.1
. OL . :- OP- if4a. , .-. 1 *V - • - • • ,. .
0 + rr r +
.i' n �i. r 1._.:. .r �n, Talk �► SCALE:
• 0.11; • • R °41 • ,� PROPOSED ALIGNMENT 1 " = 50 '
` * Ifie DATE:
o t � _ Y ACCESS ROADS AND EXTRA WORKSPACE
�, n•_ � t �_ PROPOSED LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE 2-23-22
e.- y r ;. PROJECT NUMBER
4 - '1'4 4-1- ..- - .� t, DELINEATED POTENTIAL STREAMS
ti .0r� w 't# 'ra - 216997
DELINEATED POTENTIAL WETLANDS FIGURE NO.
REFERENCE: TEMPORARY STREAM IMPACTS
GIS BASE LAYERS WERE OBTAINED FROM ESRI. THIS MAP IS FOR INFORMATIONAL 0 50 100 TEMPORARY WETLAN D I M PACTS 15
PURPOSES ONLY. ALL FEATURE LOCATIONS DISPLAYED ARE APPROXIMATED.THEY ARE
6` NOT BASED ON CIVIL SURVEY INFORMATION,UNLESS STATED OTHERWISE. (FEET) ROADS

• a - EP
III -.
T 'r ■
�. -�
14.,. 4.. , .r , r"---._
/C``
X`
e
t6. „ _ . f lists,„
_ .. ,
ff <
z i_ <
N .4- . -,ti';r • • X w z
o I' Ni .i Y0' - - W O
N 'r - • . _ _ ; WETLAND�WiP c!) v cc Q
"i"IIIII*IllihlliLilkir-
QM At CIF /•
/ U = w V
STREAM� 1 J FORESTED WETLAND CONVERSION \ /// o
72 lie, )-y•
*PO
.— 'PORARY MPACTS -' i '�' /�/
a + /'L .� BUFFER IMPACT MAPS ,� �f - r• ••r,„- .11r. r ;• ■ai sail._ / Ii
I
I
li.
v
z y / _
4g.' -- i "Pik /r .riti‘.
.- - --$1.
//Pr i
..., •
...,.. .1-", 4 f.."..5. . .
�. i` - 'I—. -.PO • ti - -
= 1 / .....
• V . mit I r f . i., { SCALE:
} . r :F , ' '► ' '� �'' -' *•,$ " , PROPOSED ALIGNMENT 1 " = 50 '
r . ►� •r- - ' -, -
` . ,,, ► . -_' }��• 'r ,. - ;� - ACCESS ROADS AND EXTRA WORKSPACE DATE:
a - �t kl, '.,, i, �L + , . 2 23 22
" - i ;' _ • ' 4 '. STREAM CENTERLINES
�. PROJECT NUMBER
r►�i ' - x - w PROPOSED LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
•'4,- lid a c 1�'3'{L•� r ►� •• .- - 216997
�� DELINEATED POTENTIAL STREAMS
REFERENCE: _ _ 7 DELINEATED POTENTIAL WETLANDS FIGURE NO.
• GIS BASE LAYERS WERE OBTAINED FROM ESRI. THIS MAP IS FOR INFORMATIONAL 0 50 100 ��- TEMPORARY STREAM IMPACTS
PURPOSES ONLY. ALL FEATURE LOCATIONS DISPLAYED ARE APPROXIMATED.THEY ARE '4 - - 16
0 NOT BASED ON CIVIL SURVEY INFORMATION,UNLESS STATED OTHERWISE. �� (FEET) TEMPORARY WETLAND IMPACTS
r.

�/ \\\\\ k IIII ° 1 \ IgI .
LEGEND: STREAM BUFFERS / LEGEND: STREAM BUFFERS \ iii
I LEGEND: STREAM BUFFERS
3,120 SF ZONE 1: PERM. IMPACT / 0 SF ZONE 1: PERM. IMPACT ' j
3,126 SF ZONE 1: PERM. IMPACT
f f \\ �$ 1 IIrI �12,540 SF ZONE 2: PERM. IMPACT /
3,226 SF ZONE 2: PERM. IMPACT \ IXI' I j 1 2,084 SF ZONE 2: PERM. IMPACT
STREAM (SA) ANGLE: 94° STREAM (SF)ANGLE: N/A I I 1
\ ' I j STREAM (SG)ANGLE: 110°
°� , ' , '\\ ♦ I ENERGY LAND&INFRASTRUCTURE PLLC
` , � I 1 I I 136 QUADE DRIVE CARY,NC 27513
f_� II II . , I J I f \ I NC LICENSE NO.P-1289
\\� I I I + 3
3 ' '
'
♦ , I ' I I I W 1,
2Z
, \ I II � o. y
u ri•
�\ \ 154+0 4 I 1- ;w
STREAM (SA) /KA4
, I IN o .
PERENNIAL1Q,OPEN CUT FOR GAS LINE, / fir. • I tri z W DTEMPORARY STREAM CROSSING/MAT II STREAM (SG) / cL 3 w
PLACEMENT • - \is I INTERMITTENT `� 3 N♦ JQ� + OPEN CUT FOR GAS LINE, � t LL-LOD ltOD!t // O o ��m/
5 II /J .� STREAM (SF) I ° IIITEMPORARY STREAM CROSSING/MAT / / —� w m i•
n
, I PLACEMENT ` o N o
x0_ +, PERENNIAL I ♦ I J I ./ ` J a'�,
, (>&t 0
\ \'\
..,..\1
\ \ , —col ----— --- W Lt
0 I/ i -°. ,
4,i144
3.° X .. ttoi 66,^71;c1.,.t.,1:e_t_,... .-r,-._.___._.._....
o p♦♦♦♦♦ fr___A__LO i***
♦♦4*4
m 03
-LODE ♦♦ O°� - _ _ A-----1I H ,_-
,♦♦ ♦♦
lvio*
itt i-p
- 4N.
*i,
` w -ro) 0U0c‘>-
- N N
. \\ ` / CZ / LOD---LOD 0- LOD LOD -LOB-- z
o
� � U U
\ 0LT)
11 w IL \ \ z LT)
z
\\ i I . I L L L w 0 0
_. �a0, .._ _0_ - _.,,•u� — - - - - - - - /, ., .600 � � A 00
t I'( 00
w wit '8 \ \
IEt
II/II \ Ii �
SA: SUBJECT SF: SUBJECT SG: SUBJECT O
STREAM SA CROSSING WITH BUFFER. STREAM SF CROSSING WITH BUFFER. STREAM SG CROSSING WITH BUFFER.
ALLOWABLE WITH MITIGATION. ALLOWABLE WITH MITIGATION. ALLOWABLE WITH MITIGATION.
■E Wm
E w
1 2 c
1 1 iaW
LEGEND: STREAM BUFFERS LEGEND: STREAM BUFFERS LEGEND: STREAM BUFFERS
i
0 SF ZONE 1: PERM. IMPACT 3,238 SF ZONE 1: PERM. IMPACT
2,908 SF ZONE 1: PERM. IMPACT °
430 SF ZONE 2: PERM. IMPACT 1,643 SF -m ZONE 2: PERM. IMPACT 2,318 SF F 1 ZONE 2: PERM. IMPACT !
g a
STREAM (SK)ANGLE: N/A STREAM (SM)ANGLE: 105° I STREAM (SC) ANGLE: 98°
7o0
1 50'STREAM (SM)
PERENNIAL
f / OPEN CUT FOR GAS LINE, 7-.41
- °
TEMPORARY STREAM CROSSING/MAT1I , IPLACEMENT
STREAM (SK) / / ,.♦
INTERMITTENT ♦♦
/ / I I STREAM (SC) *•♦♦♦♦
PERENNIAL '�♦�
,. _ OPEN CUT FOR GAS LINE,
. , • .♦I
__ - —O° -----GO'
� ♦�� TEMPORARY STREAM CROSSING/MAT ♦♦
Ld - ♦♦♦0 // > PLACEMENT ,♦♦♦
D .. 4 I ..
• . •
♦ '—. ♦PON
♦ \
. l - OD� LO ' 0u I 0
\ �j1 � , -4♦ 4\
. INO •, :0 -LOD
---__4,/
—V _\12:---7°' ...„
. /--be + / //ei / c.)
"t7 .. ** 2 r: u)
U LOID , / 4
i _Le.,____ck__ Loe____i _,
cp
�4O ♦♦♦
, ' / / r2 LL H
O < i : (Nit '05,.........„ 1,466.1‘ H D LLJ
>),) + �►
Q
cal /�Sx >
• 1
°o / \\
�-c' 0_ i ° I ICI \\‘,11 0
O ) 1 \\ N
I I 11 I o
coW O(NI v I * / ° 0
a 12,
II;
I O GO 1 N m CO
w �N CP 1 %// o w
Y � 6 I II 110+ 0 o
U
m / / \ .� I11'(/ / U-
w SK: SUBJECT SM: SUBJECT SC: SUBJECT
I 0 a o U
1_ T STREAM SF CROSSING WITH BUFFER. STREAM SM CROSSING WITH BUFFER. STREAM SC CROSSING WITH BUFFER.
al I'-2 ALLOWABLE WITH MITIGATION. ALLOWABLE WITH MITIGATION. ALLOWABLE WITH MITIGATION.
L
0 F_O
QC] Z ,
Ea--�-6
a .� 54
C 0--
IJTo
U J 0

LEGEND: STREAM BUFFERS
3,029 SF ZONE 1: PERM. IMPACT
2,014 SF ZONE 2: PERM. IMPACT
STREAM (SN)ANGLE: 79°
ENERGY LAND&INFRASTRUCTURE PLLC
136 QUADE DRIVE CARY,NC 27513
NC LICENSE NO.P-1289
1
1
W z -
CC w
J 2Z
Isoc'?
Vmw5
N J Z t
Cc J W
N '
•
h u W w
— — — x x 7— —�—mac=mac x — — I •�• — 3
p\A • • ?wVLL
K
C)
4 • • 0 ill 0
Z O N O
- • • • Q j 01 W
-L66�-L6D LOB li-L96---L6D LOB— L`Y7� ` ,: / .• •• •
ct LL in
V O \ LL
0 hx �
W O W
�x0 + �� ,,♦♦♦♦ • w
Z Z
\ u-' Z
Nsb
ti Q m
ti 03
�� •oN.# .�
2%...'(;b, 1- N N
�
`D,♦. O 0 co
w
�� ZCC
O z z
cr
4ii s,
n+' k N CL O 0
STREAM (SN) U co co
PERENNIAL w o 0
OPEN CUT FOR GAS LINE, 0 0 0 0
LL u
0 0
$+0 w w
22 >
rOL
t\
co co
o
I co co
I ct
SN: SUBJECT O
STREAM SN CROSSING WITH BUFFER.
ALLOWABLE WITH MITIGATION. _
■m at
OW
N
J_
Q
L,J
m'
L,J
Li
Li
D
m
Q
L1J
m
I—
C
O
N
5 N
Li r: rn
La J
O L -
fYLi- Q
H
Wm Qw
O
d
Q
U
1
M
C O-
O• Ln
CJ •si-
O N
cn U I CO (�
IJN N ii
I FN CO 0
LCOno� O0 — m m
a �N in
U 0 W 0
Y D > di
� U
N m �I- O Q w
IQ�
0 0_I—
U
N LiJ
1 1_ T
Oa u) C
N
L
O F_O
a) , c
E 2(3-c
O 5 O.° 54
C 0"
a) To
O_
J u m mT

WETLAND AND RIPARIAN BUFFER MITIGATION REQUIREMENT
DENC PERSON COUNTY PIPELINE PROJECT
REQUIRED WETLAND MITIGATION (1:1 RATIO FOR CONVERSION)
NEUSE 03020201
Wetland ID Impacts (ac)
WP 0.051
WI 0.001
WK 0.01
WM 0.004
TOTALS 0.066
TAR-PAMLICO 03020101
Wetland ID Impacts (ac)
WCC 0.03
WG 0.03
WN 0.02
TOTAL 0.080
REQUIRED RIPARIAN BUFFER MITIGATION ([ZONE 1-WETLANDS] x 3)
TAR-PAMLICO 03020101
Stream ID
Zone 1 Impacts Wetlands in Mitigatable Mitigatable
(sf) Zone 1 (sf) Amt (sf) amount x 3 (sf)
SA 3,120 - 3,120 9,360
SC 2,908 - 2,908 8,724
SF - - - -
SK - - - -
SM 3,238 871 2,367 7,101
TOTAL 9,266 TOTAL 25,185
NEUSE 03020201
Zone 1 Impacts Wetlands in Mitigatable Mitigatable
Stream ID
(sf) Zone 1 (sf) Amt (sf) amount x 3 (sf)
SG 3,126 - 3,126 9,378
SN 3,029 - 3,029 9,087
TOTAL 6,155 TOTAL 18,465

Appendix VI
Typical Construction Details

NOTES PROPOSED TOE-OF-BANK
1 . THE CONTRACTOR WILL RESTORE THE TEMPORARY WORKSPACE
CONTOURS OF THE BED AND BANKS OF Y \ \I \
ALL WATERWAYS IMMEDIATELY AFTER 1 \ \ \
PIPE INSTALLATION AND BACKFILL, \
EXCEPT OVER THE TRAVEL LANE. WIDTH OF DISTURBANCE0 \\1 \
TRAVEL LANES AND BRIDGES MAY STAY 1
IN PLACE UNTIL HYDROSTATIC TESTING TO CHANNEL TO BE PROPOSED GAS
AND CLEANUP ARE COMPLETE. ALL MINIMIZED f PIPELINE
MATERIALS USED TO SUPPORT PROPOSED II. II I I Ir
CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES WILL BE PERMANENT EASEMENT /REMOVED FROM WATERBODIES AND (WIDTH VARIES) i
WETLANDS, INCLUDING, BUT NOT
/LIMITED TO, FLUMES, MATS, PLASTIC NETFREE OR RECP
SHEETING, AND SANDBAGS. ENGINEER APPROVED
2. THE STREAM BANK CONTOUR SHALL BE EQUIVALENT
RE-ESTABLISHED. ALL DEBRIS SHALL BE
REMOVED FROM THE STREAMBED AND /
BANKS. STREAM BANKS SHALL BE 1 I , /
STABILIZED AND TEMPORARY SEDIMENT
BARRIERS SHALL BE INSTALLED WITHIN I
24 HOURS OF COMPLETING THE
CROSSING IF PRACTICABLE.
3. IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING
RECONSTRUCTION OF THE STREAM
BANKS, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL
INSTALL SEED AND EROSION CONTROL
FABRICS ON WATERBODY BANKS.
4. INSTALL AND ANCHOR CURLEX NETFREE
OR ENGINEER APPROVED EQUIVALENT PLAN VIEW STABILIZED CHANNEL
ACCORDING TO MANUFACTURER'S
INSTRUCTIONS.
STABILIZE FILL
---1-1 2„
INSTALL NETFREE OR RECP
ENGINEER APPROVED EQUIVALENT /
/ M7,,
NORMAL WATER LINE
QQ'
er
WATER LEVEL
GRASS SEED IS SPREAD BENEATH Alimem
EROSION CONTROL FABRIC. SEED 1 1 1 I I 1 SEE PLAN VIEW
MIX CAN BE FOUND WITH EROSION - 1 1 I TEMPORARY MATTING
CONTROL DETAILS
4'
TYPICAL CROSS SECTION STABILIZED CHANNELPROPOSED GAS LINE
STREAMBANK STABILIZATION

SILT FENCE W/
WIRE BACKING PIPELINE
ALONG PUMP
STREAM SAND
TRENCH
. BAGS
SAND = B
F - - OS S SFS/ BAGS
�F �� . F F
r
° .
WWI , .
b -
STREAM �►� 4. � �� i,P►
FLOW r
•
r SF S � — - SEF a
SF
SF
B I
4 ° ..
SILT FENCE W/ 50'
25' SETBACK WIRE BACKING
a
ALONG STREAM
PU - SF
<4 7 ir I
c / cn
SPOIL PILE - FILTER
/ BAG
SILT
- FENCE
CORDUROY MATS, TIMBER MATS
OR TEMPORARY BRIDGING 7 OR TIMBER
MAT
BRIDGE FLUME SHOULD BE SIZED TO
HANDLE FLOW AND SUFFICIENT
/ IN LENGTH TO ACCOMMODATE
\ � // WIDENING TRENCH TO PREVENT
FAILURE.
i BOTTOM
CREEK
PIPELINE
SECTION B-B
CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE NOTES:
1 . INSTALL SILT FENCE
2. INSTALL PUMP UPSTREAM OF CROSSING LOCATION. PUMP SHOULD HAVE TWICE THE PUMPING CAPACITY OF
ANTICIPATED FLOW. ALL INTAKE HOSES WILL BE SCREENED.
3. INSTALL UPSTREAM SANDBAG COFFERDAM. INSTALL DOWNSTREAM COFFERDAM. ENSURE A 2 FT. MINIMUM
TOP CREST WIDTH ON THE COFFERDAMS
4. INSTALL TIMBER MAT CONSTRUCTION CROSSING.
5. CONSTRUCT PIPELINE.
6. STABILIZE PIPELINE TRENCH USING CURLEX II OR ENGINEER APPROVED EQUIVALENT AND MULCH/SEED
MIXTURE.
7. ONCE TRENCH AREA IS STABILIZED AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION CROSSING IS REMOVED, DISMANTLE
DOWNSTREAM COFFERDAM. THEN REMOVE UPSTREAM COFFERDAM. KEEP PUMP RUNNING DURING REMOVAL
TO MAINTAIN STREAM FLOW.
6�
STREAM CROSSING ( PUMP DIVERSION )

EASEMENT
At At A A At
SEE DETAIL SILT FENCE SEE DETAIL SILT FENCE
W WETLAND
At At At At At At
GENERAL NOTES:
At At A At At A A
t At At At At At At
1 . NO WASTES, SPOILS, SOLIDS OR FILLS WILL BE
PLACED WITHIN WETLANDS, WATERS OR RIPARIAN
CONSTRUCTION ROAD CONSTRUCTION ROAD AREAS.
2. WETLAND CROSSINGS SHALL BE RESTORED TO
t4 At At t4 At At
ORIGINAL CONTOURS ONCE CONSTRUCTION IS
At At A At At A A
COMPLETED.
WETLAND INSTALL SILT FENCE PRIOR
TO AND FOLLOWING 3. TO RESTORE THE CORRIDOR IN WETLAND AREAS
CONSTRUCTION THE CONTRACTOR WILL USE A NATIVE SEED MIX,
WHICH WILL BE DISTRIBUTED WITH PLACEHOLDER
SPECIES TO PROVIDE SOIL STABILIZATION UNTIL THE
EASEMENT PERMANENT SEEDING GERMINATES AND BECOMES
ESTABLISHED. THIS SEED MIX WILL BE COMPRISED
TYPICAL PRE AND POST-CONSTRUCTION PLANVIEW OF SPECIES THAT ARE NATIVE TO THE COUNTY (WITH
THE EXCEPTION OF THE PLACEHOLDER SPECIES.
EASEMENT 4. REFER TO PLANS FOR PLACEMENT OF SILT FENCE
ALONG DISTURBED LIMITS.
At At At At
SEE DETAIL - Y A A
SILT FENCE SEE 5. ADDITIONAL MEASURES MAY BE NECESSARY IN
4 .4 A
DETAIL ORDER TO PROTECT AFFECTED CREEKS AND
c�j SILT WETLANDS.
WETLAND m FENCE
SPOIL PILE 6. EXCAVATION FOR WETLAND CROSSING AND
SPOIL INSTALLATION OF PIPE SHALL BE CONDUCTED IN THE
t4 At At PILE
SAME DAY TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PRACTICAL
BENTONITE BENTONITE BACKFILLING AND RESTORATION OF WETLANDS
PLUG dS �S
PLUG SHOULD OCCUR AS SOON AS PRACTICAL UPON
COMPLETION OF PIPE INSTALLATION.
t4 At At t4 At At
7. TREES WILL BE CUT AND STUMPS LEFT IN PLACE.
TEMPORARY 8. TOPSOIL REMOVED FROM WETLANDS SHOULD BE
EQUIPMENT CROSSING KEPT SEPARATELY FROM OTHER TOPSOIL
STOCKPILES AND REPLACED IN THE SAME AREA. USE
SEED 129 SOUTHERN WETLAND MEADOW MIX FROM
dS dS THE ROUND STONE NATIVE SEED COMPANY OR
-n APPROVED EQUAL FOR FINAL STABILIZATION .
SEE DETAIL SILT FENCE
CORDUROY MATS, TIMBER
WETLAND MATS OR TEMPORARY
A BRIDGING
/ r y a r
11
At At
EASEMENT
TYPICAL WETLAND CROSSING DETAIL

Appendix VII
NCNHP Database and USFWS IPaC Reports

Roy Cooper,Governor
M 1 NC DEPARTMENT OF D.Reid Wilson,Secretary
■iiii NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
ONION Walter Clark
Director,Division of Land and Water Stewardship
NCNHDE-15862
September 28, 2021
Kylie Wallace
S&ME
9751 Southern Pine Blvd
Charlotte, NC 29273
RE: Person County Pipeline; 216997
Dear Kylie Wallace:
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide
information about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
Based on the project area mapped with your request, a query of the NCNHP database indicates that
there are no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, and/or
conservation/managed areas within the proposed project boundary. Please note that although there
may be no documentation of natural heritage elements within the project boundary, it does not
imply or confirm their absence; the area may not have been surveyed. The results of this query
should not be substituted for field surveys where suitable habitat exists. In the event that rare
species are found within the project area, please contact the NCNHP so that we may update our
records.
The attached `Potential Occurrences' table summarizes rare species and natural communities that
have been documented within a one-mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these
records suggests that these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area
if suitable habitat exists. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed areas within a one-mile
radius of the project area, if any, are also included in this report.
If a Federally-listed species is found within the project area or is indicated within a one-mile radius of
the project area, the NCNHP recommends contacting the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for
guidance. Contact information for USFWS offices in North Carolina is found here:
https://www.fws.gov/offices/Directory/ListOffices.cfm?statecode=37.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation
planning, project review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria
for regulatory decisions. Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published
without prior written notification to the NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information
source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP data may not be redistributed without permission.
The NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional correspondence if a
Dedicated Nature Preserve, Registered Heritage Area, Land and Water Fund easement, or Federally-
listed species are documented near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance,
please contact Rodney A. Butler at [e-mail] or 919-707-8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
0 121 W.JONES STREF1.RALEIGH.NC 27603 • 1 S1 MAIL SERVICE CENTER RALEIGR NG 27G9r+
. .QFC 19.7Q .912O • FAX 91S.747.9121

Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Person County Pipeline
Project No. 216997
September 28, 2021
NCNHDE-15862
Element Occurrences Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Taxonomic EO ID cientific Name Common Name Element Accuracy Federal State Global State
Group Observation Occurrence Status Status Rank Rank
Date Rank
Natural 25566 Piedmont Monadnock --- 2016 C 2-High --- --- G3G4 S3
Community Forest (Typic Subtype)
Natural Areas Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Site Name entational Rating Collective Rating I
Deep Creek Mountain and Slopes R5? (General?) C5 (General)
No Managed Areas are Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Definitions and an explanation of status designations and codes can be found at https://ncnhde.natureserve.ora/help. Data query generated on September 28, 2021; source: NCNHP, Q2 July 2021. Please
resubmit your information request if more than one year elapses before project initiation as new information is continually added to the NCNHP database.
Page 2 of 3

NCNHDE-15862: Person County Pipeline
,
,
s.
oi
'...'.-.., ;
f,
Na
-7'.. '2.. ": 4141 rj :
f"i o
/ C.N....„ :
C -
3
o4Y
•
Il _
W+E
S --
Septerriber 28,2021 1:43,616
❑ Project Boundary 0 0-375 O 75 1 i5 mi
0 Buffered Project Boundary 0 o 5 1 2 km
NHP Natural Area 1!NHNR 56urces:Esri,HERE.Gerrrin,Interrrap•increment P Corp.GEBCO•USGS.
1 FAO,NPS-NRCAN.GeoBase•IGN•Kadaster Na...Ordnance Survey.Esrl Japan-
MEII•Esri China(Hong Kong}•(o)OpenStreelMap contributors.and the GIS
User Corrmunity
Page 3 of 3

I.
{+}li 1:11 alilIJJiif F.
.4: United States Department of the Interior '
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
ff3 Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh,NC 27636-3726
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
In Reply Refer To: September 28, 2021
Consultation Code: 04EN2000-2021-SLI-2317
Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-04778
Project Name: Person County Pipeline
Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project
location or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
The species list generated pursuant to the information you provided identifies threatened,
endangered, proposed and candidate species, as well as proposed and final designated critical
habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and/or may be affected by
your proposed project. The species list fulfills the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of
species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Please feel free to
contact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to
federally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed critical
habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the
Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be
completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be
completed by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and
implementation for updates to species lists and information.An updated list may be requested
through the ECOS-IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list.
Section 7 of the Act requires that all federal agencies (or their designated non-federal
representative), in consultation with the Service, insure that any action federally authorized,
funded, or carried out by such agencies is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any
federally-listed endangered or threatened species. A biological assessment or evaluation may be
prepared to fulfill that requirement and in determining whether additional consultation with the
Service is necessary. In addition to the federally-protected species list, information on the
species' life histories and habitats and information on completing a biological assessment or

09/28/2021 Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-04778 2
evaluation and can be found on our web page at http://www.fws.gov/raleigh. Please check the
web site often for updated information or changes
If your project contains suitable habitat for any of the federally-listed species known to be
present within the county where your project occurs, the proposed action has the potential to
adversely affect those species. As such, we recommend that surveys be conducted to determine
the species' presence or absence within the project area. The use of North Carolina Natural
Heritage program data should not be substituted for actual field surveys.
If you determine that the proposed action may affect(i.e., likely to adversely affect or not likely
to adversely affect) a federally-protected species, you should notify this office with your
determination, the results of your surveys, survey methodologies, and an analysis of the effects
of the action on listed species, including consideration of direct, indirect, and cumulative effects,
before conducting any activities that might affect the species. If you determine that the proposed
action will have no effect(i.e., no beneficial or adverse, direct or indirect effect) on federally
listed species, then you are not required to contact our office for concurrence (unless an
Environmental Impact Statement is prepared). However, you should maintain a complete record
of the assessment, including steps leading to your determination of effect, the qualified personnel
conducting the assessment, habitat conditions, site photographs, and any other related articles.
Please be aware that bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668 et seq.), and projects affecting these species may require
development of an eagle conservation plan(http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/
eagle_guidance.html). Additionally, wind energy projects should follow the wind energy
guidelines (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/) for minimizing impacts to migratory birds and
bats.
Guidance for minimizing impacts to migratory birds for projects including communications
towers (e.g., cellular, digital television, radio, and emergency broadcast) can be found at: http://
www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdlssues/Hazards/towers/towers.htm; http://
www.towerkill.com; and http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdlssues/Hazards/
towers/comtow.html.
Not all Threatened and Endangered Species that occur in North Carolina are subject to section 7
consultation with the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service. Atlantic and shortnose sturgeon, sea
turtles,when in the water, and certain marine mammals are under purview of the National Marine
Fisheries Service. If your project occurs in marine, estuarine, or coastal river systems you should
also contact the National Marine Fisheries Service, http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/
We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages
Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project
planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Tracking Number in
the header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project
that you submit to our office. If you have any questions or comments, please contact John Ellis
of this office at [e-mail].

09/28/2021 Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-04778 3
Attachment(s):
• Official Species List

09/28/2021 Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-04778 1
Official Species List
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the
requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether
any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed
action".
This species list is provided by:
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
[phone]

09/28/2021 Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-04778 2
Project Summary
Consultation Code: 04EN2000-2021-SLI-2317
Event Code: Some(04EN2000-2021-E-04778)
Project Name: Person County Pipeline
Project Type: TRANSMISSION LINE
Project Description: 9-26-2021 Alignment
Project Location:
Approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https://
www.google.com/maps/@36.29936475,-78.84948908941638,14z
`•NI -
4 _
Counties: Person County, North Carolina

09/28/2021 Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-04778 3
Endangered Species Act Species
There is a total of 6 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.
Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include
species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species
list because a project could affect downstream species.
IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA
Fisheriesl, as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the
Department of Commerce.
See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially
within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office
if you have questions.
1. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an
office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of
Commerce.
Amphibians
NAME STATUS
Neuse River Waterdog Necturus lewisi Threatened
There is final critical habitat for this species.The location of the critical habitat is not available.
Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6772
Fishes
NAME STATUS
Carolina Madtom Noturus furiosus Endangered
There is final critical habitat for this species.The location of the critical habitat is not available.
Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/528

09/28/2021 Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-04778 4
Clams
NAME STATUS
Atlantic Pigtoe Fusconaia masoni Proposed
There is proposed critical habitat for this species.The location of the critical habitat is not Threatened
available.
Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5164
Dwarf Wedgemussel Alasmidonta heterodon Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/784
Yellow Lance Elliptio lanceolata Threatened
There is final critical habitat for this species.The location of the critical habitat is not available.
Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4511
Insects
NAME STATUS
Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus Candidate
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743
Critical habitats
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S
JURISDICTION.

Appendix VII
Three Oaks Aquatic Species Survey Report

Aquatic Species Survey Report
DENC Gas Pipeline Project
Person County, North Carolina
� o-
II 4
�.a�.'7F.�.: :tv �[:.6411 �:ti.o. �'r�
', ilz-,, . .3,\_sm,,,, '',41, ..,! .,, it ..... ,..-,„;,,g
lort
ii
� �' ` 4 l p
P ,rioi,', 3i„.1-5L t',.-,41t-..„4„.___-3.- : • % 4,.. , , ASTIV. r
1/4
•
M1 ` .:� ., .... Nos
s 1 , ay
,
� T.•.0.i .1. . . ��- „ell_ 7
. ' 1 , . t4; sy 1. I V� .
•
i ,r
UT Cub Creek during surveys
Prepared For:
iiII
i III
IN .
S&ME, Inc.
2016 Ayrsley Town Boulevard,
Suite 2A
Charlotte,NC 28273
December 14, 2021

Prepared by:
��#sr
kg('
324 Blackwell Street, Suite 1200
Durham,NC 27701
Contact Person:
Tom Dickinson
[e-mail]
919-732-1300

Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction 1
2.0 Target Species Descriptions 2
2.1 Dwarf Wedgemussel (Alasmidonta heterodon) 2
2.1.1. Species Characteristics 2
2.1.2. Distribution and Habitat Requirements 2
2.1.3. Threats to Species 3
2.2 Atlantic Pigtoe (Fusconaia masoni) 4
2.2.1. Species Characteristics 4
2.2.2. Distribution and Habitat Requirements 5
2.2.3. Threats to Species 5
2.2.4. Designated Critical Habitat 6
2.3 Yellow Lance (Elliptio lanceolata) 7
2.3.1. Species Characteristics 7
2.3.2. Distribution and Habitat Requirements 8
2.3.3. Threats to Species 8
2.3.4. Designated Critical Habitat 8
2.4 Neuse River Waterdog (Necturus lewisi) 9
2.4.1. Distribution and Habitat Requirements 9
2.4.2. Threats to Species 10
2.4.3. Designated Critical Habitat 10
2.5 Carolina Madtom (Noturus furiosus) 11
2.5.1. Distribution and Habitat Requirements 11
2.5.2. Threats to Species 12
2.5.3. Designated Critical Habitat 12
3.0 Survey Efforts 13
3.1 Stream Conditions UT Cub Creek 13
3.2 Methodology 13
3.2.1. Mussels 13
3.2.2. Carolina Madtom 14
3.2.3. Neuse River Waterdog 14
4.0 Results 14
4.1 Mussels 15
4.2 Carolina Madtom 15
4.3 Neuse River Waterdog 15
5.0 Conclusions 15
6.0 Literature Cited 16
Appendix A: Figures
Figure 1: Project Vicinity & Survey Reach
Figure 2-1 to 2-5: NCNHP Element Occurrences and Designated Critical Habitats
Appendix B: Select Photographs

1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Project will involve a crossing of an unnamed tributary (UT)to Cub Creek of the Tar River
Basin in Person County,North Carolina(Figure 1). The Federally Endangered Dwarf
Wedgemussel (Alasmidonta heterodon, DWM) and Carolina Madtom (Noturus furiosus, CMT),
and the Federally Threatened Atlantic Pigtoe (Fusconaia masoni, AP),Yellow Lance (Elliptio
lanceolata, YL), and Neuse River Waterdog (Necuturus lewisi, NRWD), are protected species
known from the upper Tar River Basin. Additionally,the US Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) Information, Planning, and Consultation (IPaC) system indicates these species could
potentially be affected by activities in this location (USFWS IPaC 2021a). As such, Three Oaks
Engineering, Inc. (Three Oaks)was contracted to perform surveys in the UT Cub Creek project
area for mussel species, Carolina Madtom, and Neuse River Waterdog.
Tables 1 lists the nearest element occurrence (EO) in approximate river miles (RM) for target
species relative to the proposed project crossing of UT Cub Creek. Data is according to the NC
Natural Heritage Program database (NCNHP 2021)most recently updated in October 2021.
Table 1—Element Occurrences
Distance
from
EO EO crossing First Last EO
Species Name ID Waterbody (RM) Observed Observed Status* Figure
Cub
Creek/Shelton
Creek/Fox
Dwarf September September
Wedgemussel 21012 Creek/North 3.4 1986 2019 2-1
Fork Tar
River/Tar
River
Atlantic Pigtoe 14934 Cub Creek/Tar 3 6 November September C 2-2
River 1974 2020
Yellow Lance 21931 Tar River/ 18.75 May 1977 September C 2-3
Tabbs Creek 2020
Neuse River January December
Waterdog 11010 Tar River 5.5 1980 2019 C 2-4
Carolina 459 Tar River 28.45 June 1963 August C 2-5
Madtom 2017
*:C—NCNHP Current
DENC Person Co Pipeline Aquatic Surveys December 2021
Three Oaks Job#21-336 Page 1

2.0 TARGET SPECIES DESCRIPTIONS
2.1 Dwarf Wedgemussel (Alasmidonta heterodon)
2.1.1. Species Characteristics
The DWM was originally described as Unio heterodon (Lea 1829). Simpson (1914)
subsequently placed it in the genus Alasmidonta. Oilivann (1919)placed it in a monotypic
subgenus Prolasmidonta, based on the unique soft-tissue anatomy and conchology. Fuller
(1977) believed the characteristics of Prolasmidonta warranted elevation to full generic rank and
renamed the species Prolasmidonta heterodon. Clarke (1981)retained the genus name
Alasmidonta and considered Prolasmidonta to be a subjective synonym of the subgenus
Pressodonta (Simpson 1900).
The specific epithet heterodon refers to the chief distinguishing characteristic of this species,
which is the only North American freshwater mussel that consistently has two lateral teeth on the
right valve and only one on the left(Fuller 1977). All other laterally dentate freshwater mussels
in North America normally have two lateral teeth on the left valve and one on the right. The
DWM is generally small,with a shell length ranging between 25 millimeters (mm) (1.0 inch) and
38 mm (1.5 inches). The largest specimen reported by Clarke (1981)was 56.5 mm (2.2 inches)
long, taken from the Ashuelot River in New Hampshire. The periostracum is generally olive
green to dark brown; nacre bluish to silvery white,turning to cream or salmon colored towards
the umbonal cavities. Sexual dimorphism occurs in DWM,with the females having a swollen
region on the posterior slope, and the males are generally flattened. Clarke (1981)provides a
detailed description of the species.
Nearly all freshwater mussel species have similar reproductive strategies; a larval stage
(glochidium)becomes a temporary obligatory parasite on a fish. Many mussel species have
specific fish hosts,which must be present to complete their life cycle. Based upon laboratory
infestation experiments, Michaelson and Neves (1995) determined that potential fish hosts for
the DWM in North Carolina include the Tessellated Darter(Etheostoma olmstedi) and the
Johnny Darter(E. nigrum). McMahon and Bogan (2001) and Pennak(1989) should be consulted
for a general overview of freshwater mussel reproductive biology.
2.1.2. Distribution and Habitat Requirements
The historic range of the DWM is confined to Atlantic slope drainages from the Peticodiac River
in New Brunswick, Canada, south to the Neuse River,North Carolina. Occurrence records exist
from at least 70 locations, encompassing 15 major drainages, in 11 states and one Canadian
Province (USFWS 1993). When the recovery plan for this species was written,the DWM was
believed to have been extirpated from all but 36 localities, 14 of them in North Carolina
(USFWS 1993). The most recent assessment(2013 5-Year Review) indicates that the DWM is
currently found in 16 major drainages, comprising approximately 75 "sites" (one site may have
multiple occurrences). At least 45 of these sites are based on less than five individuals or solely
on relict shells. It appears that the populations in North Carolina, Virginia, and Maryland are
declining as evidenced by low densities, lack of reproduction, or inability to relocate any
individuals in follow-up surveys. Populations in New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and
DENC Person Co Pipeline Aquatic Surveys December 2021
Three Oaks Job#21-336 Page 2

Connecticut appear to be stable,while the status of populations in the Delaware River watershed
affected by the multiple flood events between 2004 and 2006 are still being studied(USFWS
2019b).
Strayer et al. (1996) conducted range-wide assessments of remaining DWM populations and
assigned a population status to each of the populations. The status rating is based on range size,
number of individuals and evidence of reproduction. Seven of the 20 populations assessed were
considered "poor," and two others are considered "poor to fair" and"fair to poor," respectively.
In North Carolina, populations are found in portions of the Neuse and Tar River basins; however,
they are believed to have been extirpated from the main-stem of the Neuse River.
The DWM inhabits creeks and rivers of varying sizes (down to approximately two meters wide),
with slow to moderate flow. A variety of preferred substrates have been described that range
from coarse sand, to firm muddy sand, to gravel (USFWS 1993). In North Carolina, DWM often
occurs within submerged root mats along stable streambanks. The wide range of substrate types
used by this species suggests that the stability of the substrate is likely as important as the
composition.
2.1.3. Threats to Species
The cumulative effects of several factors, including sedimentation,point and non-point
discharge, stream modifications (impoundments, channelization, etc.)have contributed to the
decline of this species throughout its range. Except for the Neversink River population in New
York, which has an estimated population of over 80,000 DWM individuals, all the other
populations are generally small in numbers and restricted to short reaches of isolated streams.
The low numbers of individuals and the restricted range of most of the surviving populations
make them extremely vulnerable to extirpation from a single catastrophic event or activity
(Strayer et al. 1996). Catastrophic events may consist of natural events such as flooding or
drought, as well as human influenced events such as toxic spills associated with highways,
railroads, or industrial-municipal complexes.
Siltation resulting from substandard land-use practices associated with activities such as
agriculture, forestry, and land development has been recognized as a major contributing factor to
degradation of mussel populations. Siltation has been documented to be extremely detrimental
to mussel populations by degrading substrate and water quality, increasing potential exposure to
other pollutants, and direct smothering of mussels (Ellis 1936,Marking and Bills 1979).
Sediment accumulations of less than one inch have been shown to cause high mortality in most
mussel species (Ellis 1936). In Massachusetts, a bridge construction project decimated a
population of the DWM because of accelerated sedimentation and erosion (Smith 1981).
Sewage treatment effluent has been documented to significantly affect the diversity and
abundance of mussel fauna (Goudreau et al. 1988). Goudreau et al. (1988) found that recovery
of mussel populations may not occur for up to two miles below points of chlorinated sewage
effluent.
DENC Person Co Pipeline Aquatic Surveys December 2021
Three Oaks Job#21-336 Page 3

The impact of impoundments on freshwater mussels has been well documented (USFWS 1992a,
Neves 1993). Construction of dams transforms lotic habitats into lentic habitats,which results in
changes in aquatic community composition. The changes associated with inundation adversely
affect both adult and juvenile mussels, as well as fish community structure,which could
eliminate possible fish hosts for upstream transport of glochidia. Muscle Shoals on the
Tennessee River in northern Alabama, once the richest site for naiads (mussels) in the world, is
now at the bottom of Wilson Reservoir and covered with 19 feet of muck(USFWS 1992b).
Large portions of all the river basins within the DWM's range have been impounded; this is
believed to be a major factor contributing to the decline of the species (Master 1986).
The introduction of exotic species such as the Asian Clam (Corbiculafluminea) and Zebra
Mussel (Dreissena polymorpha)has also been shown to pose significant threats to native
freshwater mussels. The Asian Clam is now established in most of the major river systems in the
United States (Fuller and Powell 1973), including those streams still supporting surviving
populations of the DWM. Concern has been raised over competitive interactions for space, food
and oxygen with this species and native mussels, possibly at the juvenile stages (Neves and
Widlak 1987,Alderman 1995). The Zebra Mussel,native to the drainage basins of the Black,
Caspian, and Aral Seas, is an exotic freshwater mussel that was introduced into the Great Lakes
in the 1980s and has rapidly expanded its range into the surrounding river basins, including those
of the South Atlantic slope (O'Neill and MacNeill 1991). This species competes for food
resources and space with native mussels and is expected to contribute to the extinction of at least
20 freshwater mussel species if it becomes established throughout most of the eastern United
States (USFWS 1992b). The Zebra Mussel is not currently known to be present in any river
supporting DWM population.
2.2 Atlantic Pigtoe (Fusconaia masons)
2.2.1.Species Characteristics
The Atlantic Pigtoe was described by Conrad(1834) from the Savannah River in Augusta,
Georgia. Although larger specimens exist, the Atlantic Pigtoe seldom exceeds 50 mm (2 inches)
in length. This species is tall relative to its length, except in headwater stream reaches where
specimens may be elongated. The hinge ligament is relatively short and prominent. The
periostracum is normally brownish, has a parchment texture, and young individuals may have
greenish rays across the entire shell surface. The posterior ridge is biangulate. The interdentum
in the left valve is broad and flat. The anterior half of the valve is thickened compared with the
posterior half, and, when fresh, nacre in the anterior half of the shell tends to be salmon colored,
while nacre in the posterior half tends to be more iridescent. The shell has full dentation. In
addition to simple papillae, branched and arborescent papillae are often seen on the incurrent
aperture. In females, salmon colored demibranchs are often seen during the spawning season.
When fully gravid, females use all four demibranchs to brood glochidia(VDGIF 2014).
The Atlantic Pigtoe is a tachytictic (short-term)breeder,brooding young in early spring and
releasing glochidia in early summer. The Bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus) and Shield Darter
(Percina peltata) have been identified as potential fish hosts for this species (O'Dee and Waters
2000). Additional research has found Rosefin Shiner(Lythrurus ardens), Creek Chub (Semotilus
atromaculatus), and Longnose Dace (Rhynichthys cataractae) are also suitable hosts (Wolf
DENC Person Co Pipeline Aquatic Surveys December 2021
Three Oaks Job#21-336 Page 4

2012). Eads and Levine (2011) found White Shiner(Luxilus albeolus), Satinfin Shiner
(Cyprinella analostana), Bluehead Chub (Nocomis leptocephalus), Rosyside Dace (Clinostomus
funduloides), Pinewoods Shiner(Lythrurus matutinus), Swallowtail Shiner(Notropis procne),
and Mountain Redbelly Dace (Chrosomus oreas)to also be suitable hosts for Atlantic Pigtoe.
2.2.2.Distribution and Habitat Requirements
Johnson (1970)reported the range of the Atlantic Pigtoe extended from the Ogeechee River
Basin in Georgia north to the James River Basin in Virginia; however,recent curation of the H.
D. Athearn collection uncovered valid specimens from the Altamaha River in Georgia(USFWS
2021c). In addition,USFWS (2021c) citing Alderman and Alderman (2014)reported two shells
from the 1880's that also documented the historical occurrence in the Altamaha River Basin. It
is presumed extirpated from the Catawba River Basin in North and South Carolina south to the
Altamaha River Basin (USFWS 2021c). The general pattern of its current distribution indicates
that the species is currently limited to headwater areas of drainages and most populations are
represented by few individuals. In North Carolina, aside from the Waccamaw River, it was once
found in every Atlantic Slope River basin. Except for the Tar River, it is no longer found in the
mainstem of the rivers within its historic range (Savidge et al. 2011). It is listed as Endangered
in Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina, and as Threatened in Virginia. It has a
NatureServe rank of G2 (imperiled).
The Atlantic Pigtoe has been found in multiple physiographic provinces, from the foothills of the
Appalachian Mountains, through the Piedmont and into the Coastal Plain, in streams less than
one meter wide to large rivers. The preferred habitat is a substrate composed of gravel and
coarse sand,usually at the base of riffles; however, it can be found in a variety of other substrates
and lotic habitat conditions.
2.2.3. Threats to Species
Threats to the Atlantic Pigtoe and many other species are similar to those described above for the
DWM. A majority of the remaining Atlantic Pigtoe populations are generally small in numbers
and restricted to short reaches of isolated streams. Strayer et al. (1996)postulated that the low
numbers of individuals and the restricted range of most of the surviving populations of the Dwarf
Wedgemussel (Alasmidonta heterodon), another imperiled freshwater mussel species,make
them extremely vulnerable to extirpation from a single catastrophic event or activity. This
vulnerability to extirpation also applies to the Atlantic Pigtoe, given that majority of the
remaining populations are generally small in numbers and restricted to short reaches of isolated
streams. In the Piedmont region,there has been an approximately 48% loss of former stream
representation compared to historical representation (USFWS 2021c). Catastrophic events may
consist of natural events such as flooding or drought, as well as human influenced events such as
toxic spills associated with highways,railroads, or industrial-municipal complexes.
DENC Person Co Pipeline Aquatic Surveys December 2021
Three Oaks Job#21-336 Page 5

2.2.4.Designated Critical Habitat
The Atlantic Pigtoe is listed as a Federally Threatened Species under the Endangered Species
Act(ESA)with Section 4(d) Rule and Critical Habitat Designation. In accordance with Section
4 of the ESA, Critical Habitat for listed species consists of:
(1) The specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is
listed, in which are found those physical or biological features (constituent elements)that
are:
a. essential to the conservation of the species, and
b. which may require special management considerations or protection
(2) Specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is listed
in accordance with the provisions of Section 4 of the Act, upon a determination by the
Secretary that such areas are"essential for the conservation of the species."
On November 16, 2021,USFWS listed the Atlantic Pigtoe as a Threatened species under the
ESA. Critical habitat was revised with the listing (86 FR 64000) and consists of the following
(USFWS 2021c):
• Unit 1 (JR1) - 29 river mi (46.7 river km) of Craig Creek in Craig and Botetourt
Counties, Virginia
• Unit 2 (JR2) - 1 mile (1.6-km) of Mill Creek in Bath County,Virginia
• Unit 3 (CR1) - 4 miles (6.6 km) of Sappony Creek in the Chowan River Basin in
Dinwiddie County,Virginia
• Unit 4 (CR2) - 64 river miles (103 river km) of the Nottoway River and a portion of
Sturgeon Creek in Nottoway, Lunenburg, Brunswick, Dinwiddie, and Greenville
Counties,Virginia
• Unit 5 (CR3) - 5 miles (8 km) of the Meherrin River in Brunswick County,Virginia
• Unit 6 (RR1) - 14 miles (22.5 km) of the Dan River in Pittsylvania County,Virginia and
Rockingham County,North Carolina
• Unit 7 (RR2) - 12 miles (19.3 km) of Aarons Creek in Granville County,North Carolina
and along the Mecklenburg County-Halifax County line in Virginia and North Carolina
• Unit 8 (RR3) —3 miles (4.8 km) of Little Grassy Creek in the Roanoke River Basin in
Granville County,North Carolina
• Unit 9 (TR1) - 91 miles (146.5 km) of the mainstem of the upper and middle Tar River as
well as several tributaries (Bear Swamp Creek, Crooked Creek, Cub Creek, and Shelton
Creek), in Granville,Vance, Franklin, and Nash Counties,North Carolina.
• Unit 10 (TR2) - 50 miles (80.5km) of Sandy/Swift Creek in Granville, Vance, Franklin,
and Nash Counties,North Carolina
• Unit 11 (TR3) - 85 miles (136.8 km) in Fishing Creek, Little Fishing Creek, Shocco
Creek, and Maple Branch located in Warren, Halifax, Franklin, and Nash Counties,North
Carolina
DENC Person Co Pipeline Aquatic Surveys December 2021
Three Oaks Job#21-336 Page 6

• Unit 12 (TR4) - 30 miles (48.3 km) of the Lower Tar River, lower Swift Creek and lower
Fishing Creek in Edgecombe County,North Carolina
• Unit 13 (NR1) - 60 river miles (95 river km) in four subunits including Flat River, Little
River, Eno River, and the Upper Eno River in Person, Durham, and Orange Counties,
North Carolina
• Unit 14 (NR2) - 61 river miles (98.2 river km) in five subunits including Swift Creek,
Middle Creek,Upper Little River,Middle Little River, and Contentnea Creek in Wake,
Johnston, and Wilson Counties,North Carolina
• Unit 15 (CFI) - 4 miles (6.4 km) of habitat in the New Hope Creek in Orange County,
North Carolina
• Unit 16 (CF2) - 10 river miles (16.1 river km) of Deep River in Randolph County, North
Carolina,including the mainstem as well as Richland Creek and Brush Creek
• Unit 17 (YR1) - 40 miles (64.4 kin) of Little River in Randolph and Montgomery
Counties,North Carolina
*JR, CR, RR, TR,NR, CF and YR denote James River, Chowan River, Roanoke River, Tar
River,Neuse River, Cape Fear River and Yadkin River Basins,respectively.
Critical Habitat Unit 9 is closest occurring 3.6 RM downstream (Figure 2-2).
2.3 Yellow Lance (Elliptio lanceolata)
2.3.1. Species Characteristics
The Yellow Lance was described from the Tar River at Tarboro,North Carolina in 1828, by I.
Lea(Lea 1828). Johnson (1970) synonymized this species with 25 other named species of lance-
shaped elliptio mussels into Elliptio lanceolata species complex. Genotypic and phenotypic
analysis suggests that some of these formally described species are valid, including Elliptio
lanceolata(Bogan et al. 2009). This species differs from other lanceolate Elliptios by having a
"waxy" bright yellow periostracum that lacks rays. Some older specimens are brown towards
the posterior end of the shell. The periostracum can also have brown growth rests. Yellow
Lance have a distinct pallial line and adductor muscle scars. The posterior ridge is distinctly
rounded and curves dorsally towards the posterior end. The nacre ranges from an iridescent blue
on the posterior end, sometimes becoming white or salmon colored on the anterior end. The
lateral teeth are long,with two on the left and one on the right. Each valve also has two
psuedocardinal teeth; on the left valve one tooth is before the other with the posterior tooth
tending to be vestigial, and on the right valve the two teeth are parallel and the more anterior one
is vestigial (Adams et al. 1990).
The Yellow Lance is a tachytictic (short-term)breeder,brooding young in early spring and
releasing glochidia in early summer. White Shiner(Luxilus albeolus) and Pinewoods Shiner
(Lythrurus matutinus) are potential fish hosts for Yellow Lance (Eads and Levine 2011).
DENC Person Co Pipeline Aquatic Surveys December 2021
Three Oaks Job#21-336 Page 7

2.3.2. Distribution and Habitat Requirements
This species taxonomy has changed several times and therefore so has its range. The Yellow
Lance is currently thought to be distributed in the Atlantic Slope river basins from the Neuse
River Basin in North Carolina north to the Rappahannock River Basin in Virginia, except for the
Roanoke River Basin, the Patuxent River Basin in Maryland and possibly the Potomac River
Basin in Virginia and Maryland(USFWS 2017). It is in considerable decline throughout its
range; however, extant populations still occur in all the historic river basins, except possibly the
Potomac (USFWS 2017). This species has been found in multiple physiographic provinces,
from the foothills of the Appalachian Mountains, through the Piedmont and into the Coastal
Plain, in small streams to large rivers, in substrates primarily consisting of clean sand, and
occasionally gravel,with a high dissolved oxygen content(USFWS 2017,Adams et al. 1990).
No remaining populations appear below point source pollution or other nutrient-rich areas
(Alderman 2003). Associate mussel species include Atlantic Pigtoe (Fusconaia masoni), Tar
River Spinymussel (Parvaspina steinstansana),Yellow Lampmussel (Lampsilis cariosa),
Notched Rainbow(Villosa constricta), Triangle Floater(Alasmidonta undulata), Paper Pondshell
(Utterbackia imbecillis), Eastern Lampmussel (Lampsilis radiata), Creeper(Strophitus
undulatus), and other Elliptio species (Adams et al. 1990).
2.3.3. Threats to Species
Threats to the Yellow Lance and many other species are similar to those described above for the
DWM. Factors that influence long term viability of this species are discussed in detail in the
USFWS Yellow Lance Species Status Review(2017).
2.3.4. Designated Critical Habitat
The Yellow Lance is listed as a Federally Threatened Species under the Endangered Species Act
(ESA)with Critical Habitat Designation. In accordance with Section 4 of the ESA, Critical
Habitat for listed species consists of:
(1) The specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is
listed, in which are found those physical or biological features (constituent elements)that
are:
a. essential to the conservation of the species, and
b. which may require special management considerations or protection
(2) Specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is listed
in accordance with the provisions of Section 4 of the Act,upon a determination by the
Secretary that such areas are"essential for the conservation of the species."
On April 8, 2021,Yellow Lance Critical Habitat was designated with the listing (86 FR 18189-
18215) and consists of the following (USFWS 2021d):
• Unit 1 (PR1) - 10 river mi (16 river km) of the Patuxent River
• Unit 2 (RR1) - 44 mi (71-km)in the Rappahannock Subbasin
DENC Person Co Pipeline Aquatic Surveys December 2021
Three Oaks Job#21-336 Page 8

• Unit 3 (RR2) - 9 mi (14-km) in the Rapidan Subbasin
• Unit 4 (YR1) - 8 mi (13-km) in the South Ana River
• Unit 5 (JR1) - 14 mi (23-km) in Johns Creek
• Unit 6 (CR1) - 41 mi (66-km) in the Nottoway Subbasin
• Unit 7 (TR1) - 91 mi (146-km) in the Tar River
• Unit 8 (TR2) - 31 mi (50-km) in the Sandy/Swift Creek Subbasin
• Unit 9 (TR3) - 37 mi (60-km) in the Fishing Creek Subbasin
• Unit 10 (NR1) - 24 mi (39-km) in Swift Creek
• Unit 11 (NR2) - 10 mi (16-km) in the Little River
*PR, RR,YR, JR, CR, TR and NR denote Patuxent River, Rappahannock River,York River,
James River, Chowan River, Tar River, and Neuse River Basins, respectively.
Critical Habitat Unit 7 is closest occurring 11.16 RM downstream (Figure 2-3).
2.4 Neuse River Waterdog (Necturus lewisi)
The Neuse River Waterdog is a fully aquatic salamander and was first described by C.S. Brimley
in 1924 as a subspecies of the Common Mudpuppy (N. maculosus); it was elevated to species
status in 1937 by Percy Viosca, Jr.
The Neuse River Waterdog ranges in size from 6-9 inches (15.24—22.86 cm) in length; record
length is 11 inches (27.94 cm). It has a somewhat stocky, cylindrical body with smooth skin, a
rather flattened, elongate head with a squared-off nose, and small limbs. The tail is vertically
flattened with fins on both the top and bottom. Distinct from most salamanders,the Neuse River
Waterdog, and other Necturus species,have four toes on each foot. The Neuse River Waterdog
is a rusty brown color on the dorsal side and dull brown or slate colored on the ventral side.
Both dorsal and ventral sides are strongly spotted but the ventral side tends to have fewer and
smaller markings; spots are dark bluish to black. They also have a dark line running through the
eye. Adults are neotenous and retain three bushy, dark red external gills usually seen in larval
amphibians. Both male and female are similar in appearance and can be distinguished only
through differences in the shape and structure of the cloaca(Beane and Newman 1996; Conant
and Collins 1998; EDGE of Existence 2016).
Individuals become sexually mature at approximately 5-6 years of age. Breeding normally
occurs in the spring. The male deposits a gelatinous spermatophore that is picked up by the
female and used to fertilize between 30-50 eggs. The fertilized eggs are attached to the
underside of flat rocks or other submerged objects and guarded by the female until they hatch in
June or July (Conant and Collins 1998; EDGE of Existence 2016).
2.4.1.Distribution and Habitat Requirements
The Neuse River Waterdog is found only in the Neuse and Tar River basins of North Carolina
(AmphibiaWeb 2006; Beane and Newman 1996; Frost 2016).
DENC Person Co Pipeline Aquatic Surveys December 2021
Three Oaks Job#21-336 Page 9

Neuse River Waterdogs inhabit rivers and larger streams,where they prefer leaf beds in quiet
waters. They need high levels of dissolved oxygen and good water quality. The Neuse River
Waterdog is generally found in backwaters off the main current, in areas with sandy or muddy
substrate. Adults construct retreats on the downstream side of rocks or in the stream bank where
they remain during the day. They are active during the night, leaving these retreats to feed.
Neuse River Waterdogs are carnivorous, feeding on invertebrates, small vertebrates, and carrion.
Neuse River Waterdogs are most active during winter months even when temperatures are below
freezing. During summer months,they will burrow into deep leaf beds and are rarely found. It
has been suggested that this inactivity in summer may be an adaptation to avoid fish predators,
which are more active at these times. In addition,Neuse River Waterdogs produce a defensive,
toxic skin secretion that is assumed to be distasteful to predators (AmphibiaWeb 2006; Beane
and Newman 1996; Conant and Collins 1998; EDGE of Existence 2016;NatureServe Explorer
2016).
2.4.2. Threats to Species
Any factors that reduce water quality are threats to the Neuse River Waterdog. These can
include changes that result in siltation and pollution reducing habitat quality (e.g.,
channelization, agricultural runoff, and industrial and urban development). Impoundments are
also a threat to the dispersal of the species as it is unable to cross upland habitat; Neuse River
Waterdogs do not climb and are unlikely to use fish passages (NatureServe Explorer 2016).
2.4.3.Designated Critical Habitat
The Neuse River Waterdog has received listing under the ESA as a Threatened Species with
Section 4(d) Rule and Critical Habitat Designation. Critical habitat designation provided(CFR
Vol. 84 No. 99)consists of the following (USFWS 2021b):
• Unit 1 - 8.6 river mi (13.8 river km) of the Upper Tar River in Granville County
• Unit 2 - 10.5 river mi (16.9 river km) of Upper Fishing Creek in Warren County
• Unit 3 - 63 river mi (101 river km) of lower Little Fishing Creek in Halifax,Nash, and
Edgecombe Counties.
• Unit 4 - 68-river-mi (110-river-km) segment of Sandy Creek and Red Bud Creek in
Franklin,Nash, and Edgecombe Counties
• Unit 5 - 100-river-mi (161-river-km) segment of the Middle Tar River in Franklin, Nash,
and Edgecombe Counties
• Unit 6 - 60 river mi (96.6 river km) in the Lower Tar River Subbasin including portions
of Town Creek, Otter Creek, and Tyson Creek in Edgecombe and Pitt Counties
• Unit 7 - 41.5 river mi (66.8 river km) of the Eno River in Orange and Durham Counties
• Unit 8 - 17.4-river-mi (28-river-km) segment of the Flat River in Person and Durham
Counties
• Unit 9 - 7.6-river-mi (12.2-river-km) stretch of Middle Creek in Wake and Johnston
Counties
• Unit 10 - 23.35-river-mi (37.6-river-km) stretch of Swift Creek in Johnston County
DENC Person Co Pipeline Aquatic Surveys December 2021
Three Oaks Job#21-336 Page 10

• Unit 11 - 89.6-river-mi (144.2-river-km) segment of the Little River including Buffalo
Creek in Franklin, Wake, Johnston, and Wayne Counties
• Unit 12 - 18.7-river-mi (30-river-km) segment of Mill Creek in Johnston and Wayne
Counties
• Unit 13 —40-river-mi of(64.4-river-km) of Middle Neuse River in Wayne and Lenoir
Counties
• Unit 14— 117-river-mi (188.3-river-km) of Contentnea Creek,Neuse River,Nahunta
Swamp, and Pinetree Creek in Wayne, Greene, Wilson, Lenoir, Pitt, and Craven Counties
• Unit 15 — 10-river-mi (16-river-km) of Swift Creek in Craven County
• Unit 16— 62-river-mi (100-river-km) of Trent River including Beaver Creek in Jones
County
The Study Area is 15.15 RM upstream of proposed Critical Habitat Unit 1 in the Tar River
(Figure 2-4).
2.5 Carolina Madtom (Noturus furiosus)
The Carolina Madtom (a small catfish)was described at Milburnie, near Raleigh,NC in the
Neuse River by Jordan (Jordan 1889). The Carolina Madtom reaches a maximum size of 132
mm (5.2 inches). Compared to other madtoms within its range, it has a relatively short stout
body and a distinctive color pattern of three to four dark saddles along its back that connect a
long black stripe on the side running from the snout to the tail. The adipose fin is mostly dark,
making it appear that the fish has a fourth saddle. The Carolina Madtom is tan on the rest of its
body and yellow to tan between the saddles. The adipose fin and caudal fin are fused together, a
distinguishing characteristic from other members of the catfish family (Ictaluridae). There are no
speckles on the belly, and the tail has two brown bands that follow the curve of the tail. The
Carolina Madtom, like other catfishes,has serrae on its pectoral fins and is thought to have the
most potent venom of any of the catfish species (NCWRC 2010).
2.5.1.Distribution and Habitat Requirements
The Carolina Madtom is endemic to the Piedmont/Inner Coastal Plain portion of the Tar/Pamlico
and Neuse River basins. It occurs in creeks and small rivers in habitats generally consisting of
very shallow riffles with little current over coarse sand and gravel substrate (Lee et al. 1980).
Burr et al. (1989) found most records came from medium to large streams, e.g.,mainstem Neuse
and Tar Rivers and their major tributaries. The population in the Trent River system (part of the
Neuse River basin) is isolated from the rest of the Neuse River basin by salinity levels,therefore
it is considered a separate population, though it has not been detected in Trent River in the last
five years (Sarah McRae,USFWS, personal communication). In the lower portions of these
rivers, Carolina Madtom is usually found over debris piles in sandy areas. During nesting
season,which is from May to July, they prefer areas with plenty of cover to build their nests with
shells,rocks, sticks, bottles, and cans, being suitable cover types. Males guard the nests in which
females may lay between 80 and 300 eggs.
DENC Person Co Pipeline Aquatic Surveys December 2021
Three Oaks Job#21-336 Page 11

Carolina Madtom is found in usually free flowing water that ranges from clear to tannin rich. It
is generally rare throughout its range and is apparently in decline. The Tar River population has
historically been more robust than the Neuse River population (Burr et al. 1989), which has
shown declines in recent years (Midway 2008). The Little River of the Neuse River Basin has
the largest population of Carolina Madtom in the Neuse River Basin, with records from 2016
indicating it is present(Sarah McRae,USFWS,personal communication). A few specimens
have been collected from Swift Creek of the Neuse River Basin. Fishing Creek and Swift Creek
of the Tar River Basin are also productive systems in regard to Carolina Madtom populations,
with around 14 specimens collected in the mid-1980s from Swift Creek(water levels in Fishing
Creek prevented sampling during that study). In 2016, a total of 17 individuals were recorded in
Swift Creek and a total of four individuals were recorded in Fishing Creek(Sarah McRae,
USFWS,personal communication). The Carolina Madtom has been observed in at least 36
localities (Burr et al 1989).
Carolina Madtom has a lifespan of about four years with sexual maturity being reached around
two years in females and three years in males. Sampling for Carolina Madtom is most effective
at dawn and dusk when they are most active and feeding (Mayden and Burr 1981). Their diet
consists mostly of benthic macroinvertebrates,which they collect by scavenging for food on the
bottom of the stream.
2.5.2. Threats to Species
Identified threats to the species include water pollution and construction of impoundments (Burr
et al. 1989). Carolina Madtom is susceptible to threats due to its limited range and low
population densities (Angermeier 1995, Burr and Stoekel 1999). As a bottom-dwelling fish,
Carolina Madtom is susceptible to habitat loss when stream bottoms are impacted by
urbanization, impoundments, deforestation, etc.
2.5.3.Designated Critical Habitat
The Carolina Madtom has received listing under the ESA as an Endangered Species with Critical
Habitat Designation. Critical habitat designation provided at that time (CFR Vol. 84 No. 99)
consists of the following (USFWS 2021b):
• Unit 1 —26 river miles (42 river km) of Tar River in Franklin, Granville, and Vance
Counties
• Unit 2 — 66 river miles (106 km) of Sandy/Swift Creek in Edgecombe, Franklin, Halifax,
Nash, and Warren Counties
• Unit 3 — 86 river miles (138 km) of the Fishing Creek Subbasin in Edgecombe, Franklin,
Halifax,Nash, and Warren Counties
• Unit 4—20 river miles (32 km) of the Upper Neuse River Subbasin (Eno River) in
Durham and Orange Counties
• Unit 5 —28 river miles (45 km) of the Little River in Johnston County
• Unit 6 — 15 river miles (24 km) of Contentnea Creek in Wilson County
DENC Person Co Pipeline Aquatic Surveys December 2021
Three Oaks Job#21-336 Page 12

• Unit 7 — 15 river miles (24 kin) of the Trent River in Jones County
The Study Area is located 27.5 RM miles upstream of Critical Habitat Unit 1 in The Tar River
(Figure 2-5).
3.0 SURVEY EFFORTS
Habitat evaluations and surveys for target species were conducted on November 2, 2021,by
Three Oaks personnel Tom Dickinson (Permit 21-ES00343), Trevor Hall, and Lizzy Stokes-
Cawley.
3.1 Stream Conditions UT Cub Creek
The channel in the surveyed portion of UT Cub Creek ranged from 3 to 7 meters wide,with
clay/rocky banks up to 1 meter high that ranged from stable to eroded and undercut. The
surveyed reach encompassed a series of mostly shallow riffle/run/pool habitat sequences with
mixed cobble, gravel, sand, silt, and clay substrates. Due to persistent dry conditions at the time
of the survey, portions of the riffle/run habitats were intermittently dry. Water depth in pools
ranged up to two feet deep. Some scour was noted although bedrock present armored much of
the channel from significant downcutting. Surrounding land use consists of recently clear-cut
forest with a moderate-width,mature hardwood forest buffer present along the creek.
3.2 Methodology
Surveys for mussels, Carolina Madtom, and Neuse River Waterdog were conducted from a point
approximately 400 meters downstream of the project crossing upstream to a point approximately
100 meters upstream of the proposed project crossing (Figure 1)
3.2.1.Mussels
Areas of appropriate habitat were searched, concentrating on the stable habitats preferred by the
target species. The survey team spread out across the creek into survey lanes. Visual surveys
were conducted using glass bottom view buckets (bathyscopes). Tactile methods were
employed, particularly in streambanks and under submerged rootmats. All freshwater bivalves
were recorded and returned to the substrate. Timed survey efforts provided Catch Per Unit
Effort(CPUE) data for each species. Relative abundance for freshwater snails and freshwater
clam species were estimated using the following criteria:
DENC Person Co Pipeline Aquatic Surveys December 2021
Three Oaks Job#21-336 Page 13

➢ (VA)Very abundant> 30 per square meter
➢ (A) Abundant 16-30 per square meter
➢ (C) Common 6-15 per square meter
➢ (U) Uncommon 3-5 per square meter
➢ (R) Rare 1-2 per square meter
➢ (P-) Ancillary adjective "Patchy" indicates an uneven distribution of the species within the
sampled site.
3.2.2. Carolina Madtom
During the mussel survey effort for the project,the presence of preferred habitats for the
Carolina Madtom were assessed and targeted visual surveys were conducted by overturning
rocks and debris in these areas. To supplement these efforts, electrofishing surveys were
conducted to establish a representative fish community for the site. The fish surveys were
conducted within the reach using one Smith Root LR-24 backpack electrofishing unit and dip
nets. All habitat types in the survey reach (riffle, run, pool, slack-water, etc.)were sampled.
Stunned fish were placed into buckets and were identified, counted, assigned a relative
abundance, and released live onsite.
Relative abundance reported was estimated using the following criteria:
➢ (VA)Very abundant: > 30 collected at survey reach
➢ (A) Abundant: 16-30 collected at survey reach
➢ (C) Common: 6-15 collected at survey reach
➢ (U) Uncommon: 3-5 collected at survey reach
➢ (R) Rare: 1-2 collected at survey reach
It should be noted that relative abundances of particular species can be affected by survey
methodologies and site conditions. Thus, some species, particularly those that are found in
deeper pools and runs and those that can seek cover quickly, may be under-represented, or not
detected within the survey reach.
3.2.3.Neuse River Waterdog
Neuse River Waterdog habitat was evaluated as part of the mussel and Carolina Madtom surveys
for this project. When present in robust populations, the Neuse River Waterdog can readily be
observed by turning over cover objects,which was conducted throughout the survey reach during
mussel surveys. The species can also be captured while electroshocking. Additional dip net
sweeps through leaf packs and underneath submerged rootmats were conducted to supplement
these efforts.
4.0 RESULTS
Target species were found during the survey efforts. The specific survey and results are
presented below.
DENC Person Co Pipeline Aquatic Surveys December 2021
Three Oaks Job#21-336 Page 14

4.1 Mussels
While appropriate habitat was present,particularly in deeper pools, no mussel or other aquatic
mollusk evidence was found in 3.75 person hours of survey time.
4.2 Carolina Madtom
A total of 10 fish species were captured collectively during the efforts in 1,526 seconds of
intermittent shocking time (Table 2). The Carolina Madtom was not observed, and fish were
found in relative low abundance.
Table 2.Fish Survey Results: UT Cub Creek
Scientific Name Common Name Relative Abundance
Ameiurus nebulosus Brown Bullhead R
Aphredoderus sayanus Pirate Perch C
Erimyzon oblongus Creek Chubsucker A
Esox americanus Redfin Pickerel C
Lepomis auritus Redbreast Sunfish U
Lepomis cyanellus Green Sunfish C
Lepomis gulosus Warmouth U
Lepomis macrochirus Bluegill U
Notemigonus crysoleucas Golden Shiner C
Semotilus atromaculatus Creek Chub R
4.3 Neuse River Waterdog
Marginally suitable habitat for the species is present in the pool habitats surveyed in UT Cub
Creek however, it was not detected during these efforts.
5.0 CONCLUSIONS
The surveyed portion of UT Cub Creek contains physical habitat attributes that could support the
targeted aquatic species; however, none were found during these efforts. The small size of the
stream is likely limiting colonization in the area and known records occur well downstream
(Section 1.0). Based on these survey results, impacts to protected aquatic species are very
unlikely to occur in the project area. Strict adherence to erosion control standards should
minimize the potential for any adverse impacts to occur.
DENC Person Co Pipeline Aquatic Surveys December 2021
Three Oaks Job#21-336 Page 15

6.0 LITERATURE CITED
Alderman, J. M. 1995. Monitoring the Swift Creek Freshwater mussel community. Unpublished
report presented at the UMRCC symposium on the Conservation and Management of
Freshwater Mussels II Initiative for the Future. Rock Island, IL,UMRCC.
AmphibiaWeb: Information on amphibian biology and conservation [web application]. 2006.
Berkeley, California: AmphibiaWeb. Accessed: March 22, 2016.
http://amphibiaweb.org/index.html.
Angermeier, P. L. 1995. Ecological attributes of extinction-prone species: loss of freshwater
fishes of Virginia. Conservation Biology 9:143-158.
Beane, J. and Newman, J. T. 1996.North Carolina Wildlife Profiles —Neuse River Waterdog.
Division of Conservation Education,North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission.
Brimley, C. S. 1924. The waterdogs (Necturus) of North Carolina. Journal of the Elisha Mitchell
Scientific Society 40: 166-168.
Burr,B.M.,B.R. Kuhajda, W.W. Dimmick and J.M. Grady. 1989. Distribution,biology, and
conservation status of the Carolina madtom (Noturus furiosus, an endemic North Carolina
catfish. Brimleyana 15:57-86.
Burr, B. M., and J. N. Stoeckel. 1999. The natural history of madtoms (genus Noturus),North
America's diminutive catfishes. Pages 51-101 in E. R. Irwin, W. A. Hubert, C. F.
Rabeni, H. L. J. Schramm, and T. Coon, editors. Catfish 2000: Proceedings of the
International Ictalurid Symposium. Symposium 24. American Fisheries Society,
Bethesda,Maryland.
Clarke,A. H. 1981. The Tribe Alasmidontini (Unionidae: Anodontinae), Part I: Pegias,Alasmidonta,
and Arcidens. Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology,No. 326. 101 pp.
Conant, R. and Collins, J.T. 1998. A Field Guide to the Reptiles and Amphibians of Eastern and
Central North America. Third Edition, Expanded. Houghton Mifflin Company. Boston,
Massachusetts.
Conrad, T.A. 1834.New freshwater shells of the United States,with coloured illustrations; and a
monograph of the genus Anculotus of Say; also a synopsis of the American naiades. J.
Dobson, 108 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 1-76, 8 pls.
Eads, C.B. and J.F. Levine. 2011. Refinement of Growout Techniques for Four Freshwater
Mussel Species. Final Report submitted to NC Wildlife Resources Commission, Raleigh,
NC. 15pp.
EDGE of Existence website. "165.Neuse River Waterdog (Necturus lewisi)". Accessed: March
22, 2016. http://www.edgeofexistence.org/amphibians/species info.php?id=1361.
DENC Person Co Pipeline Aquatic Surveys December 2021
Three Oaks Job#21-336 Page 16

Ellis,M. M. 1936. Erosion Silt as a Factor in Aquatic Environments. Ecology 17: 29-42.
Frost, Darrel R. 2016. Amphibian Species of the World: an Online Reference. Version 6.0
(March 22, 2016). Electronic Database accessible at
http://research.amnh.org/herpetology/amphibia/index.html. American Museum of Natural
History,New York,USA.
Fuller, S. L. H. 1977. Freshwater and terrestrial mollusks. In: John E. Cooper, Sarah S.Robinson,
John B. Fundeburg (eds.)Endangered and Threatened Plants and Animals of North
Carolina. North Carolina State Museum of Natural History, Raleigh.
Fuller, S. L. H. and C. E. Powell. 1973. Range extensions of Corbicula manilensis (Philippi) in
the Atlantic drainage of the United States.Nautilus 87(2): 59.
Goudreau, S. E., R. J.Neves, and R. J. Sheehan. 1988. Effects of Sewage Treatment Effluents on
Mollusks and Fish of the Clinch River in Tazewell County,Virginia. USFWS: 128 pp.
Johnson, R.I. 1970. The systematics and zoogeography of the Unionidae (Mollusca: Bivalvia) of
the southern Atlantic slope region. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology.
140: 263-449.
Jordan, D.S. 1889. Descriptions of fourteen species of freshwater fishes collected by the U.S.
Fish Commission in the summer of 1888. Proceedings of the United States National
Museum 11:351-362.Lea, I. 1828. Description of six new species of the genus Unio,
embracing the anatomy of the oviduct of one of them, together with some anatomical
observations on the genus. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society
3(N.S.):259-273 +plates iii-vi.
Lea, I. 1829. Description of a new genus of the family of naiades, including eight species, four of
which are new; also the description of eleven new species of the genus Unio from the
rivers of the United States: with observations on some of the characters of the naiades.
Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 3[New Series]:403-457, pls. 7-14.
Lee, D.S., C.R. Gilbert, C.H. Hocutt, R.E. Jenkins, D.E. McAllister, and J.R. Stauffer. 1980.
Atlas of North American freshwater fishes. North Carolina State Museum of Natural
History, Raleigh.
Marking, L.L., and T.D. Bills. 1979. Acute effects of silt and sand sedimentation on freshwater
mussels. Pp. 204-211 in J.L. Rasmussen, ed. Proc. of the UMRCC symposium on the
Upper Mississippi River bivalve mollusks. UMRCC. Rock Island IL. 270 pp.
Master, L. 1986. Alasmidonta heterodon: results of a global status survey and proposal to list as
an endangered species. A report submitted to Region 5 of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. 10 pp. and appendices.
DENC Person Co Pipeline Aquatic Surveys December 2021
Three Oaks Job#21-336 Page 17

Mayden, R.L. and B.M. Burr. 1981. Life history of the slender madtom,Noturus exilis, in
southern Illinois (Pisces: Ictaluridae), Occas. Pap. Mus. Nat. Hist. Univ. Kans. 93:1-64
McMahon, R. F. and A. E. Bogan. 2001. Mollusca: Bivalvia. Pp. 331-429. IN: J.H. Thorpe and
A.P. Covich. Ecology and classification of North American freshwater invertebrates.
nd
2 edition. Academic Press.McRae, Sarah. 2017. Fish and Wildlife Biologist,U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service. Raleigh,NC. Personal communication regarding target species.
Michaelson, D.L. and R.J.Neves. 1995. Life history and habitat of the endangered dwarf
wedgemussel Alasmidonta heterodon (Bivalvia: Unionidae).Journal of the North
American Benthological Society 14(2):324-340.
Midway, S.R. 2008. Habitat Ecology of the Carolina Madtom,Noturus furiosus, an Imperiled
Endemic Stream Fish. M.S. Thesis.North Carolina State University, Raleigh,NC. 74 pp.
NatureServe. 2016.NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application].
Version 7.1. NatureServe,Arlington,Virginia. Available http://explorer.natureserve.org.
(Accessed: May 23, 2016). Species Accessed:Necturus lewisi
Neves, R. J. and J. C. Widlak. 1987. Habitat Ecology of Juvenile Freshwater Mussels (Bivalvia:
Unionidae)in a Headwater Stream in Virginia. American Malacological Bulletin 1(5): 1-
7.
Neves, R.J. 1993. A state of the Unionids address. Pp. 1-10 in K.S. Cummings, A.C. Buchanan,
and L.M. Kooch, eds. Proc. of the UMRCC symposium on the Conservation and
Management of Freshwater Mussels. UMRCC. Rock Island IL.189 pp.
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP). 2021. Biotics Database. Division of Land
and Water Stewardship. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources. October 2021
version.
North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission (NCWRC). 2010. NCpedia profile for Carolina
Madtom (Noturus furiosus) [web application]. By Brian Watson,updated by Chris Wood.
June 14, 2010. http://ncpedia.org/wildlife/carolina-madtom Accessed November 4, 2016.
O'Dee, S.H., and G.T. Waters. 2000. New or confirmed host identification for ten freshwater
mussels. Pp. 77-82 in R.A. Tankersley, D.I. Warmolts, G.T. Waters, B.J. Armitage, P.D.
Johnson, and R.S. Butler(eds.). Freshwater Mollusk Symposia Proceedings Part I.
Proceedings of the Conservation, Captive Care and Propagation of Freshwater Mussels
Symposium. Ohio Biological Survey Special Publication, Columbus.
O'Neill, C. R., Jr., and D. B. MacNeill. 1991. The zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha): an
unwelcome North American invader. Sea Grant, Coastal Resources Fact Sheet. New
York Sea Grant Extension. 12 pp.
DENC Person Co Pipeline Aquatic Surveys December 2021
Three Oaks Job#21-336 Page 18

Ortmann,A.E. 1919. A monograph of the naiades of Pennsylvania. Part III: Systematic account
of the genera and species. Memoirs of the Carnegie Museum 8(1): xvi-384, 21 pls.
Pennak, R. W. 1989. Fresh-water Invertebrates of the United States, Protozoa to Mollusca. New
York, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Savidge, T. W., J. M. Alderman,A. E. Bogan, W. G. Cope, T. E. Dickinson, C. B. Eads,S. J.
Fraley, J. Fridell, M. M. Gangloff, R. J. Heise, J. F. Levine, S. E. McRae, R.B.Nichols,
A. J. Rodgers,A. Van Devender, J. L. Williams and L. L. Zimmerman. 2011. 2010
Reevaluation of Status Listings for Jeopardized Freshwater and Terrestrial Mollusks in
North Carolina. Unpublished report of the Scientific Council on Freshwater and
Teresstrial Mollusks. 177pp.
Simpson, C.T. 1900. Synopsis of the naiades, or pearly fresh-water mussels. Proceedings of the
United States National Museum 22(1205):501-1044.
Simpson, C.T. 1914. A descriptive catalogue of the naiades, or pearly fresh-water mussels. Parts
I—III. Bryant Walker, Detroit, Michigan,xii + 1540 pp.
Smith, D. 1981. Selected freshwater invertebrates proposed for special concern status in
Massachusetts (Mollusca,Annelida, Arthropoda). MA Dept. of Env. Qual. Engineering,
Div. of Water Pollution Control. 26 pp.
Strayer, D. L., S. J. Sprague and S. Claypool, 1996. A range-wide assessment of populations of
Alasmidonta heterodon, an endangered freshwater mussel (Bivalvia: Unionidae). J.N.
Am. Benthol. Soc., 15(3):308-317.
USFWS 1992a. Special report on the status of freshwater mussels.
USFWS 1992b. Endangered and Threatened species of the southeast United States (The Red
Book). FWS, Ecological Services, Div. of Endangered Species, Southeast Region. Govt
Printing Office, Wash, DC: 1,070.
USFWS 1993. Dwarf Wedgemussel (Alasmidonta heterodon) Recovery Plan. Hadley,
Massachusetts. 527 pp.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2017. Yellow Lance Species Status Review
United State Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2018. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Threatened Species Status With Section 4(d) Rule and Critical Habitat
Designation for Atlantic Pigtoe. 50 CFR 17:83 FR 51570, 51570-51609. Docket No.
FWS-R4-ES-2018-0046.
DENC Person Co Pipeline Aquatic Surveys December 2021
Three Oaks Job#21-336 Page 19

United State Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2019. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Threatened Species Status With Section 4(d) Rule for Neuse River Waterdog
and Endangered Species Status for Carolina Madtom and Proposed Designations of
Critical Habitat. 50 CFR 17:84 FR 23644, 23644-23691. Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2018-
0092.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2019b. Dwarf Wedgemussel Alasmidonta
heterodon 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation, Susi vonOettingen, FWS, Concord,
NH.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2021a. Information for Planning and
Consultation (IPaC). https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/
6B OAUHN NW RHLPPMEHDTVAGJQKA/resources
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 202 lb. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Threatened Species Status with Section 4(d) Rule for Neuse River Waterdog,
Endangered Species Status for Carolina Madtom, and Designations of Critical Habitat. 50
CFR 17:86 FR 30688, 30688-30751. Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2018-0092.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). April 2021c. Species Status Assessment
Report for the Atlantic Pigtoe (Fusconaia masoni)Version 1.4
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2021d. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Designations of Critical Habitat for Yellow Lance. 50 CFR 17:86 FR 18189,
18189-18215. Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2018-0094.
Viosca, P., Jr. 1937. A tentative revision of the genus Necturus,with descriptions of three new
species from the southern Gulf drainage area. Copeia 1937:120-138.
Virginia Depailuient of Game and Inland Fisheries (VDGIF). 2014. Atlantic Pigtoe
Conservation Plan. Bureau of Wildlife Resources. VDGIF, Richmond, VA. 31 pp.
Wolf, E.D. 2012. Propagation, Culture, and Recovery of Species at Risk Atlantic Pigtoe.
Virginia Tech Conservation Management Institute, Project No. 11-108. 55pp.
DENC Person Co Pipeline Aquatic Surveys December 2021
Three Oaks Job#21-336 Page 20

APPENDIX A
Figures
DENC Person Co Pipeline Aquatic Surveys December 2021
Three Oaks Job#21-336 Page 21

}
HiZ
z , �:.
Z �� �e
a ,6
•
PERSON COUNTY
--- ©O enStreetMap(and)
conthicllWors•CC-BY-SA
lit
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
nProposed Crossing
Survey Reach
Stream
Road .arlhpao C3r13i `-`.ogr.a aOGf.r atie antlP
i$%\ttEER/y1 Prepared For Aquatic Species Surveys Date December 2021 Figure
_
DENC Gas Pipeline Project Scale D 100 200 Feet
ril
1/441
I
I I , Over U Cub Creek sae No. 1
Er—
Project Vicinity& SurveyReach 21-336
`941/833160 Person County, North Carolina Drawn By TDH Checked TED

. A II
r
1
1
...-f PCCdS O�C S[ g
- 158 4
1:i 'Rp y i U v S -_ "I
lJ
el Z
) ..
1-
iI— z
Da1tRI,Fr1
Mi UM1'w
z I -� f5
0Iz
cii -
I, a ►
+ 0 o _ J
C
C .
.
\I
I
Cuh[,e Q
1 -
' f
r
1 } 1e
�I - o
• 1
t
0 n Proposed Crossing , 1
D
NCNHP Element Occurrence
Dwarf Wedgemussel r
I—_ _ County Boundary
Streams
/ f f ©OpenStree Map(and)contributors,CC-BY-SA
Prepared For.- DateDecember 2021
� �NFER/yy, Aquatic Species Surveys Figure
DENC Gas Pipeline Project Scare 0 1,050 2,i00 Feet
4, tt, lill Over UT Cub Creek
r — NCNHP Element Occurrence: Job No. 21-336 2. 1
�, Dwarf Wedgemussel
ryfal30* Drawn Bv: Checked By
Person County, North Carolina TDH TED

N -
P�a
4' T 1 R�'ij
II- 7
1
} I
1
I
• , I t A
NJ reerss stare ox�°id
ISk I•
8
7:
1 EO ID 14934
I
N •
} Unit#10
r1F-
zl1
/ d I o
W f.4.?'�
° `
ZI Z J
,' ,
70
rr alp i
l 0 • EO ID 14934
I
A-
At NI
t
\ t
1
•
I 4
1•
• �I o
•
J A
0 .
v . I .
1 ,0
A Proposed Crossing - r
r
NCNHP Element Occurrence
r....„,...
Atlantic Pigtoe
Critical Habitat:Atlantic Pigtoe )
County Boundary i
---'-"Ni,...
— Stream
t4 r j ©OpenStreetMap{an J co tributors; C-BYSA
Prepared For.- °ateDecember 2021
� �NE�R/yc Aquatic Species Surveys Figure
+ DENC Gas Pipeline Project scare o 1.250 2,500 Feet
Ca, Over UT Cub Creek I I
— NCNHP Element Occurrence and Jab No.. 21 336
f 2.2
'�yfd�331i�`��� I Critical Habitat:Atlantic Pigtoe Drawn By Checked By
Person County, North Carolina TDH TED

N I
A I
i NC 96
11
III //.0 ''Fr
, f f r IS'
I
.
}
Z I D y''r. :Vnrrli 4`i'r41n'R4 i,r
7 O
O + U
W ZI
J ,,rft sir.
Q J US 158
fYiZW ¢CO 5
a ix f. i.
r
A
= =? zfard
jc7, „,,,, c,,,,,
i T:G .
"r
/
/ '4r.,
19 :
202
/ lioy//m.
CreS-¢ / _ 'r
1 1.- =
i❑i.�r�A ' s
,4a
PERSON COUNTY /
-- i° /
DURHAM COUNTY /
_ _ ./ Lb t
� - - EOID21931 ' -
fr r
A Proposed Crossing ""c,
NCNHP Element Occurrence "'
16, Yellow Lance `'"
ii,
5 `•
Critical Habitat: Yellow Lance F a
r
- ! County Boundary i
+ I85 ,i',15
— Tar River Streams %
t ©OpenStreetMap(and)contributors,CC-BY-SA
Prepared For °ateDecember 2021
� �rFER/yc Aquatic Species Surveys Figure
it DENC Gas Pipeline Project scare o 3.850 7,700 Feet
t, a Pi Over UT Cub Creek
— NCNHP Element Occurrence: Jab No. 21-336
f2.3
ilik Yellow Lance
-4/43316*- I
Drawn By Checked By
Person County, North Carolina TDH TED

N
k �urrA f'o�'F
1
US158 =__ - _
} II— - C'
zID .
D
0 0I
Iw "..,,.
J
0 I J .,.'
W1Q
allfr - , v
EO ID 11010
I;`k
1.- - - _,,
,. �- 4
/
PERSON COUNTY
/ /
/
DURHAM COUNTY f
/
---" Unit# 1
.... /// .........zw.....,\H‘ss
} I1
A Proposed Crossing 1 „,, oE.E
NCNHP Element Occurrence Stem
Neuse River Waterdog %
ilCritical Habitat: Neuse River Waterdog
i
I__ i County Boundary 1
III
Tar River Streams
i
I 1 ©OpenStreetMap(and)contributors,CC-BY-SA
Prepared For DateDecember 2021
� �kEER/yc Aquatic Species Surveys Figure
l DENC Gas Pipeline Project scare o 2,750 5,500 Feet
t Over UT Cub Creek
41
— NCNHP Element Occurrence and Jab No. 21-336
f2.4
'�yfdt331i�`��� I Critical Habitat: Neuse River Waterdog Drawn By: Checked By
Person County, North Carolina TDH TED

NC 96 t
N
Aki,---\ ›,_i_i>__
zI 0 •la,r.,I1-•-,,-
p �r s
p I U �_
uss I
U 1 in—IOIJ (>
L\i"—'"\\
rt Z
WIQ
a
I + ZI >-
I nl9kris
7 0 D
�k vrnyle liir6- rrRisrr .. U I p .-. .,
w I(U
_ J
'^U„:C:r. III U
us r sa X -
z `Z
Q f .
I' l/ Qicc 17. .mv.
` ,err, _.1rd _i. 4I I '..R.
A tip` Li` — l /J)
C.'''. �..7 1
it\ ll�”,-
F"•kl'!, f Ki
-- —`_—_�J �ir�i'.r�li CYO` /
r 1
I !m
Canu Butner `vr Unit .k.
trolvVrig -.F # 1
Itrsm
s, Unit
V # 1
/ K
. ,., ,� f EO ID 459 arNibf
f INS usrs US/1
4011 ( 1 )- i . ,t) 4Ij I 8 _,.,,, •
2
r
of I
iT ., .r
U IJ
er , ^- Cavdmonr NC se /, i� r
A Proposed Crossing
NCNHP Element Occurrence k f `r
Carolina Madtom ,/S c,,,;'
z..
Critical Habitat: Carolina Madtom __c� I �—
N� 1
1 1 County Boundary yk l Co III "` 6
Tar River Streams FooGNryNTY I 't
�C,,,,,SI -� ©OpenStreetMap(and)contributors!�CCBY-SA
Prepared For °ateDecember 2021
� 1rFER/yc Aquatic Species Surveys Figure
it DENC Gas Pipeline Project scale 0 4,900 9,800 Feet
tau, Over UT Cub Creek I I I
it
— NCNHP Element Occurrence and JobNo. 21-336
f2.5
'�yfd�331i�`��� I Critical Habitat: Carolina Madtom Drawn By: Checked By
Person County, North Carolina TDH TED

APPENDIX B
Select Photographs
DENC Person Co Pipeline Aquatic Surveys December 2021
Three Oaks Job#21-336 Page 21

N, . 1 ' , ' ' .0 : • ... - •• lit:. • . -4 •) • . 4.. ;; .,.. . .
. •- ',11!-* N.. :e...:41 riti r.1„Or .• . . , •,
4, .% ., . /../::::,_::,;7..ir''' ' 4 ' .. .
•
" ' ,Vil I- 1/ ' } r ''i, � Y -4s .~s � a r
' , .1 r� - Y- mac+` _ _R - ! — if'• w
•
tr T._ ✓ 1 •.. 4
•l F � �+
•
~-
440P ' .• "IttC.e--.' . .. -
-9 -
•
Larger pool habitat near the project crossing
DENC Person Co Pipeline Aquatic Surveys December 2021
Three Oaks Job#21-336 Page 22

' � •
,,,- „.- .1 ...... . • ..•..;.:, •. •. '• -.r'i-., r•rrli-v,iy. ..,...s 6.... -._ ,. ' '.• .- .)-.• .- , -
• ., _ P. ]Xti. ems- 7•-.
r' , fi - +R r• .ti+r.
i • - --o F. - JP ..-r1 `fit - ' t,ti - .t: '. `:f ar. '
r. irk• ... t: ;`" i-.
•
•
.a+Y1,�4frV l - 7k ,,
•
•
"a. I. E_' . A _ y i�.S33 _'-
'�. . `ram =y A '~ },.. ', •4., ' -
. . ` ', C.,,.. -1..1 .1.. •• ,... •ir-- .:. r,,,,13...,..,. • c„-%-4.::• . -iket r ; -
.. ,
I. .l.. •,...- - , ..,•••! ..4.16:1,, '"....• .7,. •-., .. -'l'iii..1,, +,:qr .N..... -.J....-. -
Dry channel in the upper portion of the survey reach
DENC Person Co Pipeline Aquatic Surveys December 2021
Three Oaks Job#21-336 Page 23

Appendix IX
SHPO Letter (September 23, 2021)

STATF'�*
Mn�m.U�j
£$ i.: g1
North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M.Bartos,Administrator
Governor Roy Cooper Office of Archives and History
Secretary D.Reid Wilson Deputy Secretary,Darin J.Waters,Ph.D.
September 23, 2021
Kimberly Nagle [e-mail]
S&ME
134 Suber Road
Columbia, SC 29210
Re: Person County Pipeline project, Person County, ER 21-2074
Dear Ms. Nagle:
Thank you for your letter of August 12, 2021,regarding the above-referenced undertaking. We have
reviewed the submission and offer the following comments.
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would be affected
by the project. Therefore,we have no comment on the project as proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36
CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-814-6579
or [e-mail]. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the
above referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
Ramona Bartos, Deputy
State Historic Preservation Officer
Location:109 East Jones Street,Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address:4617 Mail Service Center,Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax:[phone]-6898

Appendix X
General Restoration Plan

General Restoration Plan
DENC Person County Pipeline Project
Rougemont, Person County, North Carolina
The proposed project has been designed to avoid and minimize jurisdictional impacts where practicable. As
part of mitigation for unavoidable impacts, the following plan shall be implemented to restore temporarily-
affected wetlands and streams.This plan entails restoration of temporarily-disturbed streambanks and
wetland areas to their original contours and conditions to the degree practicable upon project completion.
Unless otherwise authorized by the appropriate permits, no fills or spoils of any kind will be permanently
placed within wetlands or along streambanks. Further, disturbed streambanks will be permanently stabilized
using coir matting (with no plastic or nylon) and native vegetative cover.
Proposed restoration activities will include the removal of placed fill material and restoration of original pre-
disturbance contours. Excavated material shall be returned to the trench to the extent possible, and
remaining excess material relocated and retained on an upland site. Excavated topsoil or streambed substrate
will be stockpiled separately, kept viable, and then replaced uniformly over the area of excavation from which
it was removed. The native seed mix identified in Table 1 below will be utilized at temporarily-disturbed
streambanks and wetland areas.
Table 1: Native North Carolina Piedmont Ri.arian Seed Mix
Scientific Name Common Name Percentage of Mix
Sorghastrum nutans Indiangrass 29.9
Elymus virginicus Virginia Wildrye 20.0
Panicum virgatum Switchgrass 20
Panicum anceps Beaked Panicgrass 10.0
Chasmanthium latifolium River Oats 5.0
Panicum rigidulum Redtop Panicgrass 5.0
Chamaecrista fasciculata Partridge Pea 3.0
Carex vulpinoidea Fox Sedge 2.0
Coreopsis lanceolata Lanceleaf Coreopsis 2.0
Juncus effusus Soft Rush 0.5
Vernonia noveboracensis New York Ironweed 0.4
Helenium autumnale Common Sneezeweed 0.2
TOTAL 100
Native seed mix is to be applied to the disturbed wetland areas and along streambanks.The recommended
application rate is 20 pounds per acre.To provide quicker cover, the mix specified in Table 1 should also be
augmented with the appropriate cover/companion species, as identified in Table 2.
1

Table 2: Cover/Com•anion S•ecies
Scientific Common Season to
Name Name Plant Mix Comments
Secale cereale Grain Rye September 1 to 30 lbs./acre Grows 3-4' tall, but not a strong a
Aril 30 comsetitor.
Extremely tolerant of wet soils;
Echinochloa Japanese May 1 to August has cold-climate tolerance; helps
10 lbs./acre
esculenta Millet 31 reduce weed growth; increases
biomass .roduction.
Substitutions to the native seed mix identified in this restoration plan may be made with prior approval.Any
substitutions shall continue to consist of appropriate native species.
Additional information related to restoration activities is included on the Typical Wetland and Stream
Crossing Details. Note that in the event of a conflict, the specifications of the approved E&SC plan shall
govern.
The native seed mix (ERNMX-307) can be obtained from:
Ernst Seeds
8884 Mercer Pike
Meadville, Pennsylvania 16335
1-800-873-3321
814-336-2404
[e-mail]
2