AppendixIII_WetlandsEval_Updated Environmental Report-07.29.2022

Appendix III – Wetlands Evaluations

Appendix III.A – December 10, 2019 Approved Jurisdictional
Determination
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. SAW-2006-00574 County: Pender U.S.G.S. Quad: NC- Topsail
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Requestor: Jamestown Pender L.P.
Troy Harris
Address: Ponce de Leon Avenue NE, 7th Floor
Atlanta, GA 30308
Telephone Number: 704-347-4747
E-mail:[e-mail]
Size (acres) 207.4 Nearest Town Hampstead
Nearest Waterway Godfrey Creek River Basin Cape Fear
USGS HUC 03030007 Coordinates Latitude: 34.403255
Longitude: -77.691409
Location description: The project area is located east of Hoover Road and Castle Bay Subdivision, south of Wolf Pond Road,
north of North Saint Johns Church Road, and west of Lodge Road in Hampstead, Pender County, NC. Form 1 of 2 documents
the relevant reach of the site via Godfrey Creek.
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
There appear to be waters, including wetlands on the above described project area/property, that may be subject to Section 404
of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). The
waters, including wetlands have been delineated, and the delineation has been verified by the Corps to be sufficiently accurate
and reliable. The approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated DATE. Therefore
this preliminary jurisdiction determination may be used in the permit evaluation process, including determining compensatory
mitigation. For purposes of computation of impacts, compensatory mitigation requirements, and other resource protection
measures, a permit decision made on the basis of a preliminary JD will treat all waters and wetlands that would be affected in any
way by the permitted activity on the site as if they are jurisdictional waters of the U.S. This preliminary determination is not an
appealable action under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331). However, you may
request an approved JD, which is an appealable action, by contacting the Corps district for further instruction.
There appear to be waters, including wetlands on the above described project area/property, that may be subject to Section 404
of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403).
However, since the waters, including wetlands have not been properly delineated, this preliminary jurisdiction determination
may not be used in the permit evaluation process. Without a verified wetland delineation, this preliminary determination is
merely an effective presumption of CWA/RHA jurisdiction over all of the waters, including wetlands at the project area, which
is not sufficiently accurate and reliable to support an enforceable permit decision. We recommend that you have the waters,
including wetlands on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland
delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can be verified by the Corps.
B. Approved Determination
There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described project area/property subject to the permit
requirements of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for
a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
There are waters, including wetlandson the above described project area/property subject to the permit requirements of Section
404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
We recommend you have the waters, including wetlands on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be
able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that
can be verified by the Corps.
SAW-2006-00574
The waters, including wetlands on your project area/property have been delineated and the delineation has been verified by
the Corps. The approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated DATE. We strongly
suggest you have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed and verified by the Corps. Once
verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA jurisdiction on your property which, provided
there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years.

The waters, including wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the
Corps Regulatory Official identified below on 12/10/2019. Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.

There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described project area/property which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.

The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA).
You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in in Wilmington, NC, at [phone] to determine their
requirements.

Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US, including wetlands, without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). Placement of dredged or fill material, construction or
placement of structures, or work within navigable waters of the United States without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Sections 9 and/or 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC § 401 and/or 403). If you have any questions
regarding this determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Emily Greer at 910.251.4567 or
[e-mail].

C. Basis For Determination: Basis For Determination: See the approved jurisdictional determination
form dated 12/10/2019.
D. Remarks: None.

E. Attention USDA Program Participants

This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps’ Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the particular site
identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security
Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in USDA programs, you should request
a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.

F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in B.
above)

This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. If you object to this
determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. Enclosed you will find a
Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this determination you
must submit a completed RFA form to the following address:

US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn: Phillip Shannin, Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Room 10M15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801

In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for appeal
under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP. Should you
decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by 02/08/2020.
**It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this correspondence.**

Corps Regulatory Official: ______________________________________________________

Date of JD: 12/10/2019 Expiration Date of JD: 12/08/2024
GREER.EMILY.C.1385325300 Digitally signed by GREER.EMILY.C.1385325300
Date: 2019.12.11 15:04:08 -05'00'
SAW-2006-00574
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we
continue to do so, please complete the Customer Satisfaction Survey located at
http://corpsmapu.usace.army.mil/cm_apex/f?p=136:4:0

Copy furnished:

Agent: LMG
Wes Fryar
E-mail: [e-mail]

NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: Jamestown Pender L.P., Troy Harris File Number: SAW-2006-00574 Date: 12/10/2019
Attached is: See Section below
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission) A
PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission) B
PERMIT DENIAL C
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION D
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION E
SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision.
Additional information may be found at or http://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/RegulatoryProgramandPermits.aspx
or the Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
x ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
x OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request
that the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district
engineer. Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will
forfeit your right to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your
objections and may: (a) modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your
objections, or (c) not modify the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After
evaluating your objections, the district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in
Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
x ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
x APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein,
you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of
this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days
of the date of this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by
completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division
engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or provide new
information.
x ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the
date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
x APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers
Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the district engineer. This form
must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps regarding the
preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be appealed),
by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new information for further consideration by the
Corps to reevaluate the JD.

SECTION II - REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an initial
proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons or
objections are addressed in the administrative record.)

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the
record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to
clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record.
However, you may provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative
record.
POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION:
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the
appeal process you may contact:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division
Attn: Emily Greer
Wilmington Regulatory Office
U.S Army Corps of Engineers
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403

If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
also contact:
Mr. Phillip Shannin, Administrative Appeal Review Officer
CESAD-PDO
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
60 Forsyth Street, Room 10M15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government
consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15 day
notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in all site investigations.

________________________________________
Signature of appellant or agent.
Date: Telephone number:

For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to:

District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Attn: Emily Greer, 69 Darlington Avenue, Wilmington, North Carolina
28403

For Permit denials, Proffered Permits and Approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this form to:

Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Phillip Shannin, Administrative
Appeal Officer, CESAD-PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 10M15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]

RRRREsri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors05001,000250FeetScale applies to 11X17" print.3805 Wrightsville AvenueWilmington, NC 28403(910) 452-0001Figure 7Preliminary WetlandMapJamestown Pender ProjectPender County, NCMap Date: June 2019LMG18.132³L:\PERMITS\2018 PERMIT FILES\01-18-132 --- Jamestown Pender Project, Russell Weil\MapsBoundaries are approximate and not meant to be absolute.Map Source: 2016 NC One MapThis is not a survey. All boundaries and distances are consideredapproximate. This represents a preliminary sketch prepared from field notes.The site has not been field verified by the USACE at this time. Thisdelineation was performed by Wes Fryar on 05-20-2019.SiteLegendBoundaryWetlands - 18.38 acUplands - 189.03 ac (91%)Open Waters - 0.59 ac RPWs - 16,867 lfDP1-UPDP2-UPDP3-UPDP4-WET
Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors07001,400350FeetScale applies to 11X17" print.3805 Wrightsville AvenueWilmington, NC 28403(910) 452-0001Figure 8Rapanos ReferenceMapJamestown Pender ProjectPender County, NCMap Date: June 2019LMG18.132³L:\PERMITS\2018 PERMIT FILES\01-18-132 --- Jamestown Pender Project, Russell Weil\MapsBoundaries are approximate and not meant to be absolute.Map Source: 2016 NC One MapThis is not a survey. All boundaries and distances are consideredapproximate. This represents a preliminary sketch prepared from field notes.The site has not been field verified by the USACE at this time. Thisdelineation was performed by Wes Fryar on 05-20-2019.SiteLegendBoundaryGodfrey Creek ReachTrumpeter Swamp ReachWetlands - 18.38 acRPWs - 16,867 lfOpen Waters - 0.59 ac TrumpeterSwampGodfreyCreekWetland A~2.134 acWetland B~3.965 acWetland F~2.435 acWetland G~3.358 acWetland D~6.484 acOpen Waters 1~0.460 acOpen Waters 2~0.134 ac
6$:GREER.EMILY.C.1385325300Digitally signed by GREER.EMILY.C.1385325300 Date: 2019.12.11 15:04:41 -05'00'
6$:GREER.EMILY.C.1385325300Digitally signed by GREER.EMILY.C.1385325300 Date: 2019.12.11 15:04:59 -05'00'
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.

SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD): 12/10/2019

B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Wilmington District, McFarland/Mitigation Bank/Preliminary JD, SAW-2006-
00574 Form 1 of 2

C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The project area is located east of Hoover Road and Castle Bay
Subdivision, south of Wolf Pond Road, north of North Saint Johns Church Road, and west of Lodge Road in Hampstead, Pender County,
NC. Form 1 of 2 documents the relevant reach of the site via Godfrey Creek.
State: NC County/parish/borough: Pender City: Hampstead
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 34.403255 , Long. -77.691409
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Godfrey Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Harrisons Creek
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03030007
Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc…) are associated with this action and are recorded on a different
JD form:

D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date: 12/10/2019
Field Determination. Date(s): 5/20/2019, 8/02/2019

SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.

There are no “navigable waters of the U.S.” within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the review
area. [Required]
Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:

B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.

There are “waters of the U.S.” within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]

1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply):1
TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent waters 2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands

b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: 12,500 (RPW 1) + 2,600 (RPW 2) + 430 (RPW 3) + 500 (RPW 4) + 840 (RPW 5) + 17,900 linear feet, 8
wide, and 0.46 (Open Water 1) + 0.13 (Open Water 2) = 0.59 acres.
Wetlands: 2.13 (Wetland A) + 4.0 (Wetland B) + 2.44 (Wetland F) + 3.4 (Wetland G) = 12 acres.

c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1987 Delineation Manual
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):

2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):3
Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS

1 Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
2 For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least “seasonally”
(e.g., typically 3 months).
3 Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section III.A.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetlandadjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is “adjacent”:
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are “relatively permanent
waters” (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody 4 is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: 130 square miles
Drainage area: 0.61 square miles
Average annual rainfall: 57 inches
Average annual snowfall: 1 inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
Tributary flows directly into TNW.
Tributary flows through 3 tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are 5-10river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1 (or less)river miles from RPW.
Project waters are 5-10 aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1 (or less) aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNW5: Site to Godfrey Creek to Harrisons Creek
Tributary stream order, if known:
(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: Natural
Artificial (man-made). Explain: Manmade drainage ditches
4Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the arid West.
5Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.
Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: 8 feet
Average depth: 6 feet
Average side slopes: Vertical (1:1 or less).
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
Silts Sands Concrete
Cobbles Gravel Muck
Bedrock Vegetation. Type/% cover:
Other. Explain:
Tributarycondition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain: Stable
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain: None
Tributary geometry: Relatively straight
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): 1 %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for:Perennial
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: 11-20
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Discrete and confined.Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Unknown. Explain findings:
Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
Bed and banks
OHWM 6(check all indicators that apply):
clear, natural line impressed on the bank the presence of litter and debris
changes in the character of soil destruction of terrestrial vegetation
shelving the presence of wrack line
vegetation matted down, bent, or absent sediment sorting
leaf litter disturbed or washed away scour
sediment deposition multiple observed or predicted flow events
water staining abrupt change in plant community
other (list):
Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
High Tide Line indicated by: Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
oil or scum line along shore objects survey to available datum;
fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) physical markings;
physical markings/characteristics vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
tidal gauges
other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain: Water is clear
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
Habitat for:
Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
6A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody’s flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
7Ibid.

Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings: Habitat for amphibians and reptiles, and mammals

2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW

(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: 12 acres
Wetland type. Explain: Pocosin Bay
Wetland quality. Explain: Good
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:

(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: No Flow . Explain: Due to barriers, connection appears to occur during high rain events and via groundwater.

Surface flow is: Not present
Characteristics:

Subsurface flow: Unknown. Explain findings:
Dye (or other) test performed:

(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non-TNW:
Directly abutting
Not directly abutting
Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain: Groundwater connection.
Ecological connection. Explain:
Separated by berm/barrier. Explain: Wetlands separated from tributaries by spoil berm.

(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 5-10river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 2-5 aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Wetland to navigable waters.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the 100 - 500-year floodplain.

(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain: Surface water was not present during site visit.
Identify specific pollutants, if known:

(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain: ~80% cover of typical pocosin wetland vegetation in a disturbed Carolina Bay.
Habitat for:
Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings: Habitat for reptiles, amphibians, avians, and mammels.

3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: 4
Approximately 12 acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:

Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Wetland A No 2.13 Wetland F No 2.44
Wetland B No 4.0 Wetland G No 3.4

Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed: The onsite wetlands and the similarly
situated offsite wetlands adjacent to the relevant reach provide wildlife habitat, support downstream foodwebs, and reduce
the amount of pollutants reaching the TNW.

C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION

A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
x Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
x Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
x Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream food webs?
x Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III.D:
2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section III.D:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
TNWs: linear feet, wide, Or acres.
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: Previous determinations have documented perennial flow of onsite tributaries.
Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow “seasonally” (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: 17k linear 8 feet wide.
Other non-wetland waters: 0.59 acres.
Identify type(s) of waters: Two open water impoundments.
3. Non-RPWs
8 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a TNW
is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet, wide.
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
8See Footnote # 3.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow “seasonally.” Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.
9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
Demonstrate that impoundment was created from “waters of the U.S.,” or Open water ponds were excavated within
jurisdictional wetland areas, thus, are jurisdictional by rule.
Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):10
which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet, wide.
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands: acres.
F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in “SWANCC,” the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
“Migratory Bird Rule” (MBR).
Waters do not meet the “Significant Nexus” standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
Other: (explain, if not covered above):
9To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams):linear feet, wide.
Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.

Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the “Significant Nexus” standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams):linear feet, wide.
Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.

SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.

A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant: Figure 8. Rapanos Reference Map, June 2019
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
Corps navigable waters’ study:
U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
USGS NHD data.
USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: 1:24k, Topsail, NC
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: NRCS Web Soil Survey
National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: USFWS Online Wetland Mapper
State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
FEMA/FIRM maps: FEMA.gov
100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
Photographs: Aerial (Name & Date): Current SAW Regulatory GIS Viewer
Or Other (Name & Date): Multiple years, Google Earth
Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter: SAW-2006-00574, January 8, 2012
Applicable/supporting case law:
Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
Other information (please specify):

B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team, [e-mail], Esri,HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, EarthstarGeographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User CommunitySAW-2006-00574 Similarly SituatedWetlandsμ00.551.10.275miMap created by Emily Greer on 12/10/2019 at3:59:01 PMCoordinate System: WGS 1984 Web MercatorAuxiliary SphereMap Center: -77.7263 34.3949SiteGodfrey CreekHarrison Creek(TNW)FLOW
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.

SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD): 12/10/2019

B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Wilmington District, McFarland/Mitigation Bank/Preliminary JD, SAW-2006-
00574 Form 2 of 2

C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The project area is located east of Hoover Road and Castle Bay
Subdivision, south of Wolf Pond Road, north of North Saint Johns Church Road, and west of Lodge Road in Hampstead, Pender County,
NC. Form 1 of 2 documents the relevant reach of the site via Godfrey Creek.
State: NC County/parish/borough: Pender City: Hampstead
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 34.403255 , Long. -77.691409
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Trumpeter Swamp
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Harrisons Creek
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03030007
Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc…) are associated with this action and are recorded on a different
JD form:

D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date: 12/10/2019
Field Determination. Date(s): 5/20/2019, 8/02/2019

SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.

There are no “navigable waters of the U.S.” within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the review
area. [Required]
Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:

B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.

There are “waters of the U.S.” within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]

1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply):1
TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent waters 2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands

b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: linear feet, wide, and/or acres.
Wetlands: 6.5 acres (Wetland D).

c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1987 Delineation Manual
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):

2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):3
Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS

A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs

1 Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
2 For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least “seasonally”
(e.g., typically 3 months).
3 Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.

The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section III.A.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.

1. TNW
Identify TNW:

Summarize rationale supporting determination:

2. Wetlandadjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is “adjacent”:

B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):

This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.

The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are “relatively permanent
waters” (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.

A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.

If the waterbody 4 is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.C below.

1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW

(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size:Pick List
Drainage area:Pick List
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches

(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
Tributary flows directly into TNW.
Tributary flows through Pick Listtributaries before entering TNW.

Project waters are Pick Listriver miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick Listriver miles from RPW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:

Identify flow route to TNW5:
Tributary stream order, if known:

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: Natural
Artificial (man-made). Explain:
Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:

Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet

4Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the arid West.
5Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: Pick List.

Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
Silts Sands Concrete
Cobbles Gravel Muck
Bedrock Vegetation. Type/% cover:
Other. Explain:

Tributarycondition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry: Pick List
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %

(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for:Pick List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: Pick List
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:

Surface flow is: Pick List.Characteristics:

Subsurface flow: Pick List. Explain findings:
Dye (or other) test performed:

Tributary has (check all that apply):
Bed and banks
OHWM 6(check all indicators that apply):
clear, natural line impressed on the bank the presence of litter and debris
changes in the character of soil destruction of terrestrial vegetation
shelving the presence of wrack line
vegetation matted down, bent, or absent sediment sorting
leaf litter disturbed or washed away scour
sediment deposition multiple observed or predicted flow events
water staining abrupt change in plant community
other (list):
Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:

If factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
High Tide Line indicated by: Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
oil or scum line along shore objects survey to available datum;
fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) physical markings;
physical markings/characteristics vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
tidal gauges
other (list):

(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
Habitat for:
Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:

2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW

(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:

6A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody’s flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
7Ibid.

Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:

(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is:Pick List. Explain:

Surface flow is: Pick List
Characteristics:

Subsurface flow: Pick List. Explain findings:
Dye (or other) test performed:

(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non-TNW:
Directly abutting
Not directly abutting
Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
Ecological connection. Explain:
Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:

(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are Pick Listriver miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Pick List.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the Pick List floodplain.

(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:

(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:
Habitat for:
Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:

3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: Pick List
Approximately acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:

Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)

Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:

C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION

A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.

Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
x Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
x Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
x Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream food webs?
x Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?

Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:

1. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III.D:

2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:

3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section III.D:

D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):

1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
TNWs: linear feet, wide, Or acres.
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.

2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial:
Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow “seasonally” (e.g., typically three months each year)are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet wide.
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:

3. Non-RPWs 8 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a TNW
is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet, wide.
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:

4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly abutting an RPW:
The onsite wetlands are a part of a large, contiguous wetland system that is not separated by berm or barrier from the
tributary, Trumpeter Swamp.

Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow “seasonally.” Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:

Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: 6.5 acres.

5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.

8See Footnote # 3.

Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.

Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.

6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.

Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.

7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
Demonstrate that impoundment was created from “waters of the U.S.,” or
Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).

E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):10
which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
Other factors. Explain:

Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet, wide.
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands: acres.

F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in “SWANCC,” the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
“Migratory Bird Rule” (MBR).
Waters do not meet the “Significant Nexus” standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
Other: (explain, if not covered above):

Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams):linear feet, wide.
Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.

Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the “Significant Nexus” standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams):linear feet, wide.
Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.

SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.

9To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant: Figure 8. Rapanos Reference Map, June 2019
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
Corps navigable waters’ study:
U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
USGS NHD data.
USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: 1:24k, Topsail, NC
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: NRCS Web Soil Survey
National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: USFWS Online Wetland Mapper
State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
FEMA/FIRM maps: FEMA.gov
100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
Photographs: Aerial (Name & Date): Current SAW Regulatory GIS Viewer
Or Other (Name & Date): Multiple years, Google Earth
Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter: SAW-2006-00574, January 8, 2012
Applicable/supporting case law:
Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
Other information (please specify):

B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team, [e-mail], Esri,HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, EarthstarGeographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User CommunitySAW-2006-00574 Similarly SituatedWetlandsμ0120.5miMap created by Emily Greer on 12/10/2019 at3:56:58 PMCoordinate System: WGS 1984 Web MercatorAuxiliary SphereMap Center: -77.7397 34.4160)RUPRITrumpeter SwampCattail CreekMerricks CreekHarrisons Creek(TNW)Northeast CapeFear RiverFLOWSite

Appendix III.B – June 24-26, 2022 Davey Resource Group
Wetland Delineation

Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Lat:Long:
Soil Map Unit Name:
x
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes x No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
X No
No X X
No X
Yes x
Yes x
Yes x No X
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R
OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
(Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
NWI classification:
Water Marks (B1)
Sampling Date:Hampstead/Oebder
NCS&ME/NC DOT
Hampstead Mines-Jamestown Pender-Area E City/County:
Slope (%):
Upland
upland
convex
Section, Township, Range:Paul Farley
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
0-1Local relief (concave, convex, none):Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):
Yes
Remarks:
Kureb
34.398629
No hydrology indicators observed to 20"
6/27/22
-77.684218
No
Normal precipitation conditions per USACE APT
HYDROLOGY
NAD 83
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?Yes
(If no, explain in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed?
naturally problematic?
interstream divide
Yes
LRR T, MLRA 153A Datum:
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
Yes
Remarks:
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Field Observations:
Water Table Present?No
No
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
No
(includes capillary fringe)
20
20
Surface Water Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Sphagnum Moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Saturation Present?
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)Iron Deposits (B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Saturation (A3)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Are “Normal Circumstances” present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Yes
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Yes
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
No
ENG FORM 6116-2-SG, JUL 2018 Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
(Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.(A/B)
7.
8.
x 1 =
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:x 2 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 3 =
1.x 4 =
2.x 5 =
3.Column Totals:(B)
4.
5.
6.
7.X
8.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:X
)
)
Ilex glabra
Tree Stratum
Pinus palustris
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Total % Cover of:
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Dominant
Species?
(A)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
20
25
Multiply by:
UPL species
)
=Total Cover
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
FAC
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
Yes FACU
Yes
4
FACW
upland
3
4
FACU species
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(B)
Indicator
Status
20
VEGETATION (Four Strata)– Use scientific names of plants.
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
75.0%
(A)
20
Asistida stricta
Vaccinium crassifolium
Absolute
% Cover
)30' r
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
5
Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Yes
FAC
Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
=Total Cover
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Yes
10
30' r
13
25
20
820
=Total Cover
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below.)
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?Yes No
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Woody Vine – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
=Total Cover
40
30'r
ENG FORM 6116-2-SG, JUL 2018 Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain – Version 2.0
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
Depth (inches):X
(LRR S, T, U)
(MLRA 138, 152A in FL, 154)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
(outside MLRA 138, 152A in FL, 154)
(MLRA 153B, 153D)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Anomalous Bright Floodplain Soils (F20)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(outside MLRA 150A)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)Black Histic (A3)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Remarks:
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
SOIL Sampling Point:
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Reduced Vertic (F18)
NoYes
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
upland
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
(inches)Color (moist)
0-20 10010YR 7/2
Loc2 Texture Remarks
Sandy
%
Histosol (A1)
Barrier Islands Low Chroma Matrix (TS7)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
%
Matrix
Color (moist)Type1
Redox FeaturesDepth
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
all grains are uncoated
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
(outside MLRA 150A, 150B)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, T)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Anomalous Bright Floodplain Soils (F20)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Hydric Soil Present?
(MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
Marl (F10) (LRR U)
Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
(MLRA 153B)
Red Parent Material (F21)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
Barrier Islands 1 cm Muck (S12)
(MLRA 153B, 153D)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8)
ENG FORM 6116-2-SG, JUL 2018 Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain – Version 2.0
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Lat:Long:
Soil Map Unit Name:
x
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes x No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
X No
X No X
X No
X
x
X
Yes x
Yes x
Yes x X No
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R
OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
(Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
NWI classification:
Water Marks (B1)
Sampling Date:Hampstead/Pender
NCS&ME, NC DOT
Hampstead Mines-Jamestown Pender-Area E City/County:
Slope (%):
PF0ssBd
wetland
concave
Section, Township, Range:Paul Farley
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
0-1Local relief (concave, convex, none):Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):
Yes
Remarks:
Murville
34.398629
6/27/22
-77.686901
No
Precipitation in normal range per USACE antecedent precipitation tool
HYDROLOGY
NAD 83
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?Yes
(If no, explain in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed?
naturally problematic?
Carolina Bay
Yes
LRR U, MLRA 156A Datum:
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
Yes
Remarks:
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Field Observations:
Water Table Present?No
No
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
No
(includes capillary fringe)
4
4
Surface Water Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Sphagnum Moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Saturation Present?
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)Iron Deposits (B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Saturation (A3)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Are “Normal Circumstances” present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Yes
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Yes
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
No
ENG FORM 6116-2-SG, JUL 2018 Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
(Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.(A/B)
7.
8.
x 1 =
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:x 2 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 3 =
1.x 4 =
2.x 5 =
3.Column Totals:(B)
4.
5.
6.
7.X
8.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:X
30' r )
25
25 YesSmilax laurifolia FACW
)
Ilex glabra
Cyrilla racemiflora
Tree Stratum
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Total % Cover of:
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Dominant
Species?
(A)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
20
Multiply by:
UPL species
)
=Total Cover
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
FACW
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
40
15
FACW
Godonia lasianthus
No
Yes
FACW
wetland
5
5
FACU species
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(B)
Indicator
Status
VEGETATION (Four Strata)– Use scientific names of plants.
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
100.0%
(A)
15
Lyonia lucida
Ilex glabra
Absolute
% Cover
Yes
)30'r
40
No
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
23
Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Yes
FACW
Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
=Total Cover
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Yes
FACW
30'r
58
115
15
FACW
6
5
15
13
=Total Cover
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below.)
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?Yes No
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Woody Vine – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
=Total Cover
30
Lyonia lucida
ENG FORM 6116-2-SG, JUL 2018 Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain – Version 2.0
X
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
Depth (inches):X
(LRR S, T, U)
(MLRA 138, 152A in FL, 154)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
(outside MLRA 138, 152A in FL, 154)
(MLRA 153B, 153D)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Anomalous Bright Floodplain Soils (F20)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(outside MLRA 150A)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)Black Histic (A3)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Remarks:
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
SOIL Sampling Point:
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Reduced Vertic (F18)
NoYes
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
wetland
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
(inches)Color (moist)
10YR 2/1 10012-20
0-12 10010YR 2/1
Loc2 Texture Remarks
Mucky Sand
Sandy
%
Histosol (A1)
Barrier Islands Low Chroma Matrix (TS7)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
%
Matrix
Color (moist)Type1
Redox FeaturesDepth
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
(outside MLRA 150A, 150B)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, T)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Anomalous Bright Floodplain Soils (F20)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Hydric Soil Present?
(MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
Marl (F10) (LRR U)
Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
(MLRA 153B)
Red Parent Material (F21)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
Barrier Islands 1 cm Muck (S12)
(MLRA 153B, 153D)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8)
ENG FORM 6116-2-SG, JUL 2018 Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain – Version 2.0
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Lat:Long:
Soil Map Unit Name:
x
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes x No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
No X
No X X
No X
Yes x
Yes x
Yes x No X
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Saturation (A3)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Are “Normal Circumstances” present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Yes
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Yes
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
No
Surface Water Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Sphagnum Moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Saturation Present?
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)Iron Deposits (B5)
Datum:
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
Yes
Remarks:
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Field Observations:
Water Table Present?No
No
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
No
(includes capillary fringe)
20
20
Kureb
34.401080
No owt or saturation observed within upper 20" of soil surface
6/26/22
-77.679593
No
Rainfall falls within normal condition per USACE antecedent rainfall tool
HYDROLOGY
NAD 83
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?Yes
(If no, explain in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed?
naturally problematic?
interstream divide savanna
Yes
LRR T, MLRA 153A
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R
OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
(Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
NWI classification:
Water Marks (B1)
Sampling Date:Hampstead/Pender
NCS&ME/NC DOT
Hampstead Mines- Jamestown Pender-Area F City/County:
Slope (%):
upland
upland
convex
Section, Township, Range:Paul Farley
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
0-1Local relief (concave, convex, none):Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):
Yes
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-2-SG, JUL 2018 Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
(Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.(A/B)
7.
8.
x 1 =
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:x 2 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 3 =
1.x 4 =
2.x 5 =
3.Column Totals:(B)
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:X
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Woody Vine – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
0
=Total Cover
40
30' r
820
=Total Cover
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below.)
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Typical upland savanna vegetation
Yes No
13
30'r
5
10
20
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
2
Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Yes
FAC
Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
=Total Cover
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Yes
Absolute
% Cover
)30'r
20
Vaccinium crassifolium
Aristida stricta
upland
2
4
FACU species
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(B)
Indicator
Status
25
VEGETATION (Four Strata)– Use scientific names of plants.
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
50.0%
(A)
Yes FACU
0
Yes
5
FACU
260
0
75
0
0
(A)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
25
10
Multiply by:
0
3.47
UPL species
)
=Total Cover
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
FAC
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Total % Cover of:
Prevalence Index worksheet:
40
35
120
Dominant
Species?
140
)
Quercus virginiana
Tree Stratum
Pinus palustris
)
ENG FORM 6116-2-SG, JUL 2018 Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain – Version 2.0
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
Depth (inches):X
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
Barrier Islands 1 cm Muck (S12)
(MLRA 153B, 153D)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8)
sand is friable/loose/uncoated
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
(outside MLRA 150A, 150B)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, T)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Anomalous Bright Floodplain Soils (F20)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Hydric Soil Present?
(MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
Marl (F10) (LRR U)
Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
(MLRA 153B)
Red Parent Material (F21)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Histosol (A1)
Barrier Islands Low Chroma Matrix (TS7)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
%
Matrix
Color (moist)Type1
Redox FeaturesDepth
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Loc2 Texture Remarks
Sandy
%(inches)Color (moist)
0-20 10010YR 7/2
SOIL Sampling Point:
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Reduced Vertic (F18)
NoYes
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
upland
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
(LRR S, T, U)
(MLRA 138, 152A in FL, 154)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
(outside MLRA 138, 152A in FL, 154)
(MLRA 153B, 153D)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Anomalous Bright Floodplain Soils (F20)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(outside MLRA 150A)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)Black Histic (A3)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Remarks:
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
ENG FORM 6116-2-SG, JUL 2018 Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain – Version 2.0
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Lat:Long:
Soil Map Unit Name:
x
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes x No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
X No
X No X
X No
Rg
X
x x
X
x x
Yes x
Yes x
Yes x X No
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R
OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
(Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
NWI classification:
Water Marks (B1)
Sampling Date:Hampstead/Pender
NCS&ME/NC DOT
Hampstead Mines-Jamesown Pender-Area F City/County:
Slope (%):
wetland
concave
Section, Township, Range:Paul Farley
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
0-1Local relief (concave, convex, none):Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):
Yes
Remarks:
34.401126
6/26/22
-77.679441
No
Normal preciptation conditions per USACE antecedent precipitation tool The latitude/longitude location was measured with a hand held gps which is
not survey accurate. When I overlaid this point on the NWI map it showed the location as in uplands. The NWI map is a large scale mapping tool. I
showed the NWI type as the data appear to closely match that type ecosystem (in my professional judgement).
HYDROLOGY
NAD 83
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?Yes
(If no, explain in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed?
naturally problematic?
Carolina Bay (depression)
Yes
LRR T, MLRA 153A Datum:
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
Yes
Remarks:
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Field Observations:
Water Table Present?No
No
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
No
(includes capillary fringe)
4
4
Surface Water Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Sphagnum Moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Saturation Present?
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)Iron Deposits (B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Saturation (A3)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Are “Normal Circumstances” present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Yes
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Yes
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
No
ENG FORM 6116-2-SG, JUL 2018 Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
(Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.(A/B)
7.
8.
x 1 =
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:x 2 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 3 =
1.x 4 =
2.x 5 =
3.Column Totals:(B)
4.
5.
6.
7.X
8.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:X
30' r )
25
25 YesSmilax laurifolia FACW
)
40
Acer rubrum
Cyrilla racemiflora
Tree Stratum
Pinus serotina
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Total % Cover of:
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Dominant
Species?
(A)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
10
20
Multiply by:
UPL species
)
=Total Cover
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
OBL
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
10
50
FACW
Ilex glabra
Yes FACW
No
No
2
FACW
wetland
6
6
FACU species
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(B)
Indicator
Status
10
VEGETATION (Four Strata)– Use scientific names of plants.
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
100.0%
(A)
8
Osmunda cinamonea
Woodwardia areolata
Absolute
% Cover
No
)30' r
5
Yes
Lyonia lucida Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
25
FACW
Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Yes
FACW
Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
=Total Cover
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Yes
5
FAC
30' r
63
125
8
FACW
4
5
8
13
=Total Cover
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below.)
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?Yes No
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Woody Vine – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
=Total Cover
Yes
16
30' r
Persea palustris
ENG FORM 6116-2-SG, JUL 2018 Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain – Version 2.0
X
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
Depth (inches):X
(LRR S, T, U)
(MLRA 138, 152A in FL, 154)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
(outside MLRA 138, 152A in FL, 154)
(MLRA 153B, 153D)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Anomalous Bright Floodplain Soils (F20)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(outside MLRA 150A)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)Black Histic (A3)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Remarks:
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
SOIL Sampling Point:
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Reduced Vertic (F18)
NoYes
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
wetland
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
(inches)Color (moist)
0-20 10010YR 2/1
Loc2 Texture Remarks
Mucky Sand
%
Histosol (A1)
Barrier Islands Low Chroma Matrix (TS7)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
%
Matrix
Color (moist)Type1
Redox FeaturesDepth
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
(outside MLRA 150A, 150B)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, T)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Anomalous Bright Floodplain Soils (F20)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Hydric Soil Present?
(MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
Marl (F10) (LRR U)
Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
(MLRA 153B)
Red Parent Material (F21)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
Barrier Islands 1 cm Muck (S12)
(MLRA 153B, 153D)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8)
ENG FORM 6116-2-SG, JUL 2018 Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain – Version 2.0
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Lat:Long:
Soil Map Unit Name:
x
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes x No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
No X
No X X
No X
Yes x
Yes x
Yes x No X
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Saturation (A3)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Are “Normal Circumstances” present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Yes
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Yes
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
No
Surface Water Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Sphagnum Moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Saturation Present?
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)Iron Deposits (B5)
Datum:
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
Yes
Remarks:
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Field Observations:
Water Table Present?No
No
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
No
(includes capillary fringe)
20
20
Kureb
34.401123
No hydrology indicators observed to 20"
6/17/22
-77.677825
No
Vegetation in normal range per USACE antecdent precipitation tool (attached)
HYDROLOGY
NAD 83
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?Yes
(If no, explain in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed?
naturally problematic?
interstream divide
Yes
LRR T, MLRA 153A
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R
OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
(Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
NWI classification:
Water Marks (B1)
Sampling Date:Hampstead/Pender
NCS&ME/NC Department of Transportation
Jamestown Pender-Area G City/County:
Slope (%):
upland
upland
convex
Section, Township, Range:Paul Farley
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
0-1Local relief (concave, convex, none):Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):
Yes
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-2-SG, JUL 2018 Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
(Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.(A/B)
7.
8.
x 1 =
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:x 2 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 3 =
1.x 4 =
2.x 5 =
3.Column Totals:(B)
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:X
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Woody Vine – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
0
=Total Cover
25
30'
Pinus palustris
513
=Total Cover
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below.)
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Savanna like vegetation. Dominance of non-hydrophytic vegetation is not typical for this area
Yes No
8
FACU
30'r
5
10
15
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
2
Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Yes
FAC
Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
=Total Cover
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Yes
Absolute
% Cover
Yes
)30'r
5
10
Vaccinium crassifolium
Aristida stricta
upland
2
5
FACU species
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(B)
Indicator
Status
15
VEGETATION (Four Strata)– Use scientific names of plants.
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
40.0%
(A)
5
FACU
Yes FACU
0
Yes
3
175
0
50
0
0
(A)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
15
Multiply by:
0
3.50
UPL species
)
=Total Cover
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
FAC
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Total % Cover of:
Prevalence Index worksheet:
25
25
75
Dominant
Species?
100
)
Quercus virginiana
Tree Stratum
Pinus palustris
)
ENG FORM 6116-2-SG, JUL 2018 Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain – Version 2.0
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
Depth (inches):X
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
Barrier Islands 1 cm Muck (S12)
(MLRA 153B, 153D)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8)
firiable/uncoated
firiable/uncoated
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
(outside MLRA 150A, 150B)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, T)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Anomalous Bright Floodplain Soils (F20)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Hydric Soil Present?
(MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
Marl (F10) (LRR U)
Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
(MLRA 153B)
Red Parent Material (F21)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Histosol (A1)
Barrier Islands Low Chroma Matrix (TS7)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
%
Matrix
Color (moist)Type1
Redox FeaturesDepth
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Loc2 Texture Remarks
Sandy
sandy
%(inches)Color (moist)
10YR 7/2 1003-20
0-3 10010YR 3/2
SOIL Sampling Point:
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Reduced Vertic (F18)
NoYes
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
upland
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
(LRR S, T, U)
(MLRA 138, 152A in FL, 154)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
(outside MLRA 138, 152A in FL, 154)
(MLRA 153B, 153D)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Anomalous Bright Floodplain Soils (F20)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(outside MLRA 150A)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)Black Histic (A3)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Remarks:
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
ENG FORM 6116-2-SG, JUL 2018 Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain – Version 2.0
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Lat:Long:
Soil Map Unit Name:
x
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes x No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
X No
X No X
X No
X
x
X
x
Yes x
Yes x
Yes x X No
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Saturation (A3)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Are “Normal Circumstances” present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Yes
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Yes
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
No
Surface Water Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Sphagnum Moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Saturation Present?
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)Iron Deposits (B5)
Datum:
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
Yes
Remarks:
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Field Observations:
Water Table Present?No
No
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
No
(includes capillary fringe)
6
6
Murville
34.401165
Normal rainfall conditions as determined by USACE antecedent preciptiation tool (graph attached)
6/17/22
-77.678923
No
Rainfall is in normal range per USACE antecedent preciptation tool) graph attached. The location was marked with a hand held gps unit and must
not be considered absolute. The marked location appears to fall outside the Wetland polygon on the NWI map which is a large scale drawing and
also should be considered approximate. Therefore I concluded that the data point falls within the wetland polygon on the nwi as it appears to
resemble that category (in my professional opinion).
HYDROLOGY
NAD 83
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?Yes
(If no, explain in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed?
naturally problematic?
Depression (Carolina Bay)
Yes
LRR T, MLRA 153A
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R
OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
(Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
NWI classification:
Water Marks (B1)
Sampling Date:Hampstead/Pender
NCS&ME/NC DOT
Jamestown Pender Tract - Area G City/County:
Slope (%):
PSS43Bd
wetland
concave
Section, Township, Range:Paul Farley
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
0-1Local relief (concave, convex, none):Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):
Yes
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-2-SG, JUL 2018 Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
(Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.(A/B)
7.
8.
x 1 =
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:x 2 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 3 =
1.x 4 =
2.x 5 =
3.Column Totals:(B)
4.
5.
6.
7.X
8.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:X
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Woody Vine – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
=Total Cover
30
30' r
Gordonia lasianthus
6
5
15
13
=Total Cover
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below.)
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Typical Caolina Bay/tall pocosin vegetation
Yes No
5
FACW
30' r
58
115
10
FACW
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
23
Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Yes
FACW
Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
=Total Cover
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Yes
Absolute
% Cover
No
)30' r
20
No
20
Lyonia lucida
Ilex glabra
wetland
5
5
FACU species
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(B)
Indicator
Status
10
VEGETATION (Four Strata)– Use scientific names of plants.
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
100.0%
(A)
60
20
FACW
Lyonia lucida
Yes FACW
No
Yes
2
FACW
(A)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
10
15
Multiply by:
UPL species
)
=Total Cover
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
FACW
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Total % Cover of:
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Dominant
Species?
Smilax laurifolia FACW
)
Ilex glabra
Cyrilla racemiflora
Tree Stratum
Pinus serotina
30')
25
25 Yes
ENG FORM 6116-2-SG, JUL 2018 Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain – Version 2.0
X
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
Depth (inches):X
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
Barrier Islands 1 cm Muck (S12)
(MLRA 153B, 153D)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8)
no uncoated grains
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
(outside MLRA 150A, 150B)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, T)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Anomalous Bright Floodplain Soils (F20)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Hydric Soil Present?
(MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
Marl (F10) (LRR U)
Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
(MLRA 153B)
Red Parent Material (F21)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Histosol (A1)
Barrier Islands Low Chroma Matrix (TS7)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
%
Matrix
Color (moist)Type1
Redox FeaturesDepth
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Loc2 Texture Remarks
Mucky Sand
Sandy
%(inches)Color (moist)
10YR 2/1 10010-20
0-10 10010YR 2/1
SOIL Sampling Point:
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Reduced Vertic (F18)
NoYes
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
wetland
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
(LRR S, T, U)
(MLRA 138, 152A in FL, 154)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
(outside MLRA 138, 152A in FL, 154)
(MLRA 153B, 153D)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Anomalous Bright Floodplain Soils (F20)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(outside MLRA 150A)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)Black Histic (A3)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Remarks:
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
ENG FORM 6116-2-SG, JUL 2018 Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain – Version 2.0
#*#*
#*#*
f 9f 8f 7f 6
f 5
f 4f 3f 2f 1
f 99
f 98
f 97f 96f 95
f 94
f 93
f 92
f 91
f 90
f 89
f 86f 85f 84 f 83
f 82f 81 f 80 f 79
f 78f 77
f 76f 75
f 74
f 73
f 72
f 70f 69
f 64f 63f 62f 61
f 60
f 59f 58
f 57
f 55f 54
f 53
f 52
f 51
f 49f 48f 47 f 46
f 45
f 44
f 43
f 42 f 41
f 40f 39
f 38f 37f 36f 35
f 34
f 33
f 32 f 31 f 30 f 29
f 28
f 27
f 26 f 25f 24
f 23 f 22
f 21
f 20
f 19
f 17 f 15 f 14 f 13 f 12
f 11
f 10
f 181f 180f 179f 178
f 176f 175f 174f 173
f 172
f 171f 170f 169f 168
f 167
f 166
f 165f 164f 163f 162f 161f 160
f 159
f 158
f 157f 156
f 155f 154f 153
f 151
f 149
f 148f 147 f 145
f 143f 142f 141f 140f 139f 138
f 137f 136f 135f 134f 133f 132
f 131f 130
f 129f 128 f 127f 126 f 125f 124
f 123 f 122f 121f 120f 119f 118
f 117f 116
f 115 f 113
f 112f 111
f 110f 109f 108
f 107
f 106
f 105f 104
f 101f 100
f 87 stop
f 66 stop
f 88 reatart
f 182 stop on fence
0 300 600150Feet
Scale app lies to 11X17" print.
3805 Wrightsville AvenueWilmington, NC 28403(910) 452-0001
L:\wetlands\2022\DRG22.326\maps\area e and f field notes sketchBoundaries are approximate and not meant to be absolute.Map Source: 2020 NC Onemap ¯
Section 404/401 DelineationSections E; and Ffield note sketch
Hampstead MinesJamestown PenderPender County, NC
Map Date: 7/28/22DRGNCW22.326
Legend
Project Areas
Flagged wetland boundaries
#*Data Points
1
97
85
8479
73
72
68
57
39
32
21
121
110
0 180 36090Feet
Scale app lies to 11X17" print.
3805 Wrightsville AvenueWilmington, NC 28403(910) 452-0001
L:\wetlands\2022\DGNCW22.326\maps\Area G\area g_preliminary sketch.mxdBoundaries are approximate and not meant to be absolute.Map Source: 2020 NC Onemap aerial photography ¯
Section 401/404 DelineationPreliminary Sketch
Hampstead Mines - Area GPender County, NC
Map Date: 6/29/22DRGNCW22.326
NOTE: This is n ot a survey. All boundaries and distances are consideredapproximate. This represents a preliminary sketch prepared from field notes.A survey of delineated areas and review and approval by the U.S. ArmyCorps of Engineers is recommende d prior to specific site planning.
Upland/wetland boundaries are marked with pink and black ribbonsnumbered a pproxima tely as sho wn
Legend
Area G Project Area ~ 22.7 acres
Identifed uplands ~22.2 acres (98%)
Identified wetlands ~ 0.5 acres (2%)
Flagged upland/wetland boundary
Nov
2021
Dec
2021
Jan
2022
Feb
2022
Mar
2022
Apr
2022
May
2022
Jun
2022
Jul
2022
Aug
2022
Sep
2022
Oct
2022
0
2
4
6
8
10
Rainfall (Inches)2022-06-17
2022-05-18
2022-04-18
Antecedent Precipitation vs Normal Range based on NOAA's Daily Global Historical Climatology Network
Daily Total
30-Day Rolling Total
30-Year Normal Range
30 Days Ending 30th %ile (in)70th %ile (in)Observed (in)Wetness Condition Condition Value Month Weight Product
2022-06-17 3.027165 6.436614 5.196851 Normal 2 3 6
2022-05-18 2.504331 4.351181 0.787402 Dry 1 2 2
2022-04-18 2.347244 3.71811 4.913386 Wet 3 1 3
Result Normal Conditions - 11
Coordinates 34.401165, -77.678023
Observation Date 2022-06-17
Elevation (ft)60.76
Drought Index (PDSI)Severe drought
WebWIMP H2O Balance Wet Season
Weather Station Name Coordinates Elevation (ft)Distance (mi)Elevation Weighted Days (Normal)Days (Antecedent)
WILMINGTON INTL AP 34.2675, -77.8997 33.136 15.661 27.624 7.48 11353 90
Dec
2021
Jan
2022
Feb
2022
Mar
2022
Apr
2022
May
2022
Jun
2022
Jul
2022
Aug
2022
Sep
2022
Oct
2022
Nov
2022
0
2
4
6
8
10
Rainfall (Inches)2022-06-26
2022-05-27
2022-04-27
Antecedent Precipitation vs Normal Range based on NOAA's Daily Global Historical Climatology Network
Daily Total
30-Day Rolling Total
30-Year Normal Range
30 Days Ending 30th %ile (in)70th %ile (in)Observed (in)Wetness Condition Condition Value Month Weight Product
2022-06-26 3.593307 6.503937 4.799213 Normal 2 3 6
2022-05-27 2.484646 4.493701 1.11811 Dry 1 2 2
2022-04-27 1.833465 3.96378 3.42126 Normal 2 1 2
Result Normal Conditions - 10
Coordinates 34.401080, -77.679594
Observation Date 2022-06-26
Elevation (ft)61.62
Drought Index (PDSI)Severe drought
WebWIMP H2O Balance Wet Season
Weather Station Name Coordinates Elevation (ft)Distance (mi)Elevation Weighted Days (Normal)Days (Antecedent)
WILMINGTON INTL AP 34.2675, -77.8997 33.136 15.585 28.484 7.457 11353 90
Hampstead Mines, Jamestown-Pender 22.326
Paul notes
Areas F and E

June 26, 2022

Came in and worked Sunday afternoon
Started in Area F along the end of the Carolina Bay
Tied F1-F66
Got overheated and had to go in.
Pretty basic savanna/bay line

June 27, 2022

It took all day but I got it flagged f67-f182

Again, goes from pretty hard Bay to pretty hard savanna, line is pretty basic smilax laurifolia seems to
be the best indicator of where the wetlands are as far as the soils are concerned

Wetland Data sheet 34.401126, -77.679441

Mapped as Murville soils
Concave in edge of Carolina bay 0-1
PSS43Bd on NWI

SOILS

0-8 10YR 2/1 mucky sand
8-20 10YR 2/1 sand

No observed uncoated grains

HYDROLOGY

OWT/SATURATION AT 4”
Has geomorphic position

VEGETATION

Trees
Pond pine 10

SHRUBS/saps
TITI 20
Red maple 5
Red bay 10
Gallberry 50
Fetterbush 40

Herbs
Cinamon fern 8
Netted chain 8

Vines
Smilax laurifolia 30

Upland Data_area F 34.401080, -77.679593

Kureb soils
Upland on NWI
Convex 1-2

HYDROLOGY

None observed to 20”

SOILS

0-20 10YR 7/2 sand 100% uncoated

VEGETATION

Trees
Long leaf 25

Shrubs
Scrub oaks 10

Herbs
Wire grass 20
Vaccinium crassifoium 20

JUNE 27/22

Came back and finished up F66-f182. Finished pretty late.
This completes both Areas E and F

Did a final data sheet for Area E

AREA F – upland data 34.398787, -77.684188
Mapped as Kureb, upland on NWI
Convex on savanna/interstream divide maybe 1-2

Same old same old. This whole place is all the same

VEGETATION

Long needle 20

Gallberry 25

Crassifolium & wiregrass 20 each

HYDROLOGY

None observed to 20”

SOILS

0-20 10YR 7/2 sand

Rainfall conditions are normal per Anecedent precip tool

Area e wetland data 34.398677, -77.686901

Murville Soils, concave in bay
Normal precipitation
PF0SSBd
0-1

VEGETATION

Shrubs/saps

TITI 20
GAllberry 40
Fetterbush 40
Gordonia lasianthus 15

Herbs

Fetterbush 10
Gallberry 10

Smilax laurifolia 20

Murville soils 0-20, mucky to about 12

Hampstead Mines 22.326
Paul Notes
June 17, 2022

JUNE 16, 2022 (Thursday)
Got here on Friday afternoon. Started out on Area G. Flagged along fairly sharp break between
pine/wiregrass savanna and typical Carolina Bay/tall pocosin vegetation. Line was pretty sharp going
from gray sandy soil to sharp mucky/doughy soil. The break was pretty much conisistently on where the
smilax laurifolia came in. Flagged 1-14

Upland Data 34.410123, -77.677825

Mapped as Kureb soil
Convex on edge of bay rim
Upland on NWI

Soils

0-3 10YR 3/2 sand 100% basically all uncoated
3-20 10YR 7/2 sand 100% uncoated

Hydrology

None observed to 20”

Vegetation

Trees

Pine 15

Shrubs
Pine 5
Quercus virginiana 3

Herbs
Aristida stricta 10
Vaccinium crassifolium 15

Overall remarks: normal precipitation conditions per USACE antecedent precipitation tool
Fairly typical savanna for this area of Pender County

Wetland data sheet 34.401165, -77.678023

Mapped as murville soils
PSS43bd on NWI
Concave in Carolina bay near eastern bay rim
0-1

Vegetation

Trees
Pond pine 20

Shrubs
Titi 15
Gordonia bay 20
Ilex glabra 60
Fetterbush 20

Herbs

Fetterbush 20
Ilex glabra 10

Vines
Smilax laurifolia 25

SOILS

0-10 10YR 2/1 mucky sand
10-20 10YR 2/1 sand

HYDROLOGY

SATURATED OWT ABOUT 6”

HAS GEOMORPHIC POSITION
MUCKY MODIFIER

Stopped at 14 due to weather and getting late.

JUNE 24, 2022

Hot and muggy as all get out

Flagged 15-104

Its all the same stuff bay surrounded by nice savanna

JUNE 26, 2022

Finished flags 105-121 before going over to other mine areas