20221387 Ver 1_08232022_Harnett - PJD_20221005

(4ltivers
& ASSOCIATES. INC.
ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
August 23, 2022
Harnett County Project Manager
USACOE — Wilmington District
69 Darlington Ave
Wilmington, NC 28403
REFERENCE: Jurisdiction Determination Requestion & Preconstruction Notification
White Oak Creek Crossing — 85 Single Family Lots — 134 Townhome Units
On behalf of our client White Oak Creek Crossing, LLC, we are submitting this Jurisdictional
Determination (JD) request and Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) for the proposed White
Oak Creek Crossing Planned Use Development, west of NC-55 (North Raleigh St) within the
Town of Angier in northern Harnett County. The development will include the initial immediate
construction of approximately 78 single family residential lots, 148 townhomes on the eastern
12-acre and western 28-acre portions of the site, and the associated attendant features
including proposed Town of Angier roads, sidewalks, walking trails, utilities, stormwater basins,
and other features as depicted on the plans.
At a later date, an additional 144 multi -family units and three commercial outparcels will be
designed and built on the remaining areas of the site. All impacts to jurisdictional waters from
roads, utilities and attendant features necessary to support this future development are shown
in the current plans. The future development area will not require any additional impacts to
waters beyond those identified in this JD Request and PCN application.
The remainder of this letter contains supporting text for various JD and PCN sections with "see
attached text" noted in the attached PCN form.
107 E. Second Street. Greenville. NC 27858 - PO Box 929, Greenville, NC 27835 • Phorse 252-752-4135 • Fax: [phone]
HCBELS Lic_ No. F•0334 rvwnr.riversandassociates.cam NCBOLA Lic. No. C-312

(41t1vers
& ASSOCIATES. INC.
ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
PJD Appendix 2 -- ORM TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES IN JD REVIEW AREA
Feature acres or feet Regulatory JD Map
Number Latitude Longitude in review area Water Feature Type Authority Figure
P-1 35.4249 -78.7488 1.65 ac open water pond Sec 404 4C
P-2 35.5246 -78.7455 0.21 ac open water pond Sec 404 4C
S-1 35.5236 -78.7541 1520 ft stream, perennial Sec 404 4B
S-2 35.5230 -78.7500 1990 ft stream, perennial Sec 404 4B
S-3 35.5238 -78.7495 806 ft stream, perennial Sec 404 4C
W-GB 35.5257 -78.7540 0.01 ac wetland, forested Sec 404 4B
W-GC 35.5244 -78.7544 0.01 ac wetland, forested Sec 404 4B
W-GZ 35.5236 -78.7543 0.09 ac wetland, forested Sec 404 4B
W-GD 35.5228 -78.7541 0.19 ac wetland, forested Sec 404 4B
W-GG 35.5230 -78.7523 0.28 ac wetland, forested Sec 404 4B
W-GJ 35.5269 -78.7509 0.04 ac wetland, forested Sec 404 4B
W-GS 35.5427 -78.7503 0.41 ac wetland, forested Sec 404 4C
W-GH 35.5242 -78.7491 0.27 ac wetland, forested Sec 404 4C
W-GK 35.5253 -78.7455 0.22 ac wetland, forested Sec 404 4C
W-GL 35.5252 -78.7484 0.01 ac wetland, herbaceous Sec 404 4C
W-GM 35.5256 -78.7487 0.02 ac wetland, herbaceous Sec 404 4C
W-GX 35.5258 -78.7482 0.03 ac wetland, forested Sec 404 4C
Total wetland area = 1.58 acres
Total open water area = 1.86 acres
Total stream length = 4316 feet
107 E. Second Street, Greenville. NC 27858 - PO Box 929, Greenville, NC 27835 • Phorse 252-752-4135 • Fax: [phone]
HCBELS Lic_ No. F•0334 rvwnr.riversandassociates.cam NCBOLA Lic. No. C-312

(41t1vers
& ASSOCIATES. INC.
ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
PCN Section C. PROPOSED IMPACTS INVENTORY TABLES:
WETLANDS, STREAMS, and OPEN WATERS
WETLAND impact reason temp weildnd wetland forested ;urisdic impact
impact g or perm label type acres
W-1 fill, residential lots Perm GK headwater yes ACE, DWR 0.132
W-1 fill, residential lots Temp GK headwater yes ACE, DWR 0.012
W-2 fill, road grading Perm GX headwater yes ACE, DWR 0.039
W-3 fill, road crossing Perm GM headwater no ACE, DWR 0.022
W-5 fill, commercial lots Perm GS headwater yes ACE, DWR 0.109
W-6 fill, road + resid lots Perm Gl headwater yes ACE, DWR 0.044
W-8 fill, road crossing Perm GZ floodp pool yes ACE, DWR 0.059
W-8 fill, road crossing rt.rnp GZ floodp pool yes ACE, DWR 0.013
W-10 fill, residential lots Perm GL headwater no ACE, DWR 0.006
Total Temporary Wetland Impact
Total Permanent Wetland Impact
Total Temp + Perm Wetland Impact
0.025
0.411
0.d36
STREAM impact reason temp stream stream jurisdic average impact impact
impact # or perm Zabel type width, ft length, ft so. feet
5.7 fill, road crossing Perm 51 perennial ACE. DWR 8 82
S•7b road grading, upst Temp S1 perennial ACE, DWR 8 15
S-7a road grading. dnst Temp S1 perennial ACE, DWR 8 25
5.9 trail, utility xing Perm 53 perennial ACE, DWR 4 35
fill, road crossing Perm 53 perennial ACE, DWR 4
80
656
120
200
140
320
Total Temporary Stream Impact
Total Permanent Stream Impact
Total Temp + Perm Stream Impact
40 320
197 1116
237 1436
POND Impact reason temp pond open water activity jurlsdk impact
impact # or perm label type type acres
P-4 fill, road crossing P P1 pond fill ACE. DWR 0.02E
P-11 utility line xing P P2 pond fill ACE. (MR
Total Temporary Open Water Impact
Total Permanent Open Water Impact
Total Temp + Perm Open water Impact
0.031
0.031
107 E. Second Street. Greenville. NC 27858 - PO Box 929, Greenville, NC 27835 • Phone( 252-752-4135 • Faar: 252-752-3974
HCBELS Lic_ Ho. F•0334 rrwnr.rive rsendassociates.com NCBOLA LiC. Ho. C-312

(41t1vers
& ASSOCIATES. INC.
ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
PCN Section D. IMPACTJUSTIFICATION AND MITIGATION Impact Avoidance / Minimization
1. The cross section of the site entrance roadways are designed as narrow as allowed by
the governing local jurisdictional to aid in avoidance and impact minimization of
potential wetlands GZ, GX, and GM. The alignments of Oriole Drive and Purple Martin
Drive are set such that each road shall be constructed as close to the existing adjacent
property boundary as possible to aid in impact avoidance and minimization of potential
onsite wetlands and open waters.
• Oriole Drive within the western portion of the development, off of Rawls Church
Road (SR1415) is situated along the southern property boundary to help avoid
potential wetland GZ. The vertical alignment of Oriole Drive and the proposed
retaining walls at stationing 13+00 to 15+50 minimize the impacts to potential
wetland GZ and the Neill's Creek (stream S1) roadway crossing.
• Initial conceptual designs utilized a small wet pond north of Oriole Drive at
approximate station 15+00 to avoid storm conveyance pipes perpendicular to the
Neill's Creek crossing. Once potential wetland GZ was identified, roadway drainage
was proposed to be re-routed to the dry pond at Station 17+00 to avoid complete
infill of potential wetland GZ.
• Purple Martin Drive within the eastern portion of the development with access to
North Raleigh Street (NC 55), is aligned with the adjacent Logans Court as per Town
of Angier and the North Carolina Department of Transportation requirements.
Purple Martin Drive then enters the site along the northern project boundary to
avoid impacting potential wetland GK, and to minimize impacts to potential
wetlands GM and GX. Where Purple Martin Drive must cross the potential open
waters pond directly downstream of wetland GM, an H-Post driven retaining wall
along the southern right-of-way is proposed to minimize permanent impacts and
avoid temporary impacts that traditional retaining wall construction would require.
2. Initial site concept called for all pad graded lots, however lots 164 to 170 are proposed
as crawl space lots, with minimal front yard slope, minimum rear yard widths and
maximum rear yard slopes to avoid impact of potential wetland GG and potential
stream S-2W.
3. Bobwhite Court is positioned directly east of the potential open waters pond
downstream of potential wetland GK. An H-Post driven retaining wall along the western
right-of-way is proposed to minimize permanent impacts and avoid additional
temporary impacts that traditional retaining wall construction would require.
107 E. Second Street. Greenville. NC 27858 - PO Box 929, Greenville, NC 27835 • Phorse 252-752-4135 • Fax: [phone]
HCBELS Lic_ No. F•0334 rvwnr.riversandassociates.cam NCBOLA Lic. No. C-312

(4ltivers
& ASSOCIATES. INC
ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
4. A sole three -unit townhome is proposed along the western right-of-way Bobwhite Court
(Lots 49-51) with a side lot line retaining wall to minimize impacts to potential wetland
GK. While this impact is being accounted for within the aggregate % acres of allowable
disturbance, in our opinion, this feature should not be considered jurisdictional. The
potential open water pond that potential wetland GK drains into was created during
agricultural development in the 1990s and is not natural. Below is the 1916 Soils map
overlaid with current aerial which seems to support this.
[WAY Se K•12 I IMeraaeVe I Sanborn Maps I Learn i+are I About l3+is ProjectNC Mips > rnteonc Orrrlay Map: t Hem t Ca�xy Sot Survey. 1114
Harnett County Soil Survey, 1916
Using the etterfare below, users can compare a historic map from the North Carolina Maps project nth a current map or
sateT.te imasa_
NAP coti R4LS
(!� Turn Historic Hap
c °ff
Fade HIROnC Nap
View organ& may
Help with this pane
Open in Googie Earth
Ongnal map: "Sal Map, North Caroisna, Harnett County Sheet ." 1916. North Carolina State Arrhsves call number
MC.o48.19161, C. 2
Our understanding from property owners, and field observation is that the water level
of the pond does not fluctuate with rainfall events, even though the potential
intermittent stream immediately downstream is 5-10' below the pond normal water
level. A non -changing water level should clearly indicate that the pond is upland of the
potential open waters downstream and satisfies the following definition of non -
jurisdictional waters.
107 E. Second Street. Greenville. NC 27858 - PO Box 929, Greenville, NC 27835 • Phone [phone] • Fax: [phone]
HCBELS Lic_ No. F•0334 rvwnr.riversandassociates.carn NCBOLA Lic. No. C-312

(4ltivers
& ASSOCIATES. INC.
ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
§ 328.3 Definitions.
(b) Non jurisdictional waters. The following are not "waters of the United States":
(8) Artificial lakes and ponds, including water storage reservoirs and farm, irrigation, stock watering,
and log cleaning ponds, constructed or excavated in upland or in non -jurisdictional waters, so long as
those artificial lakes and ponds are not impoundments of jurisdictional waters that meet the conditions
of paragraph (c)(6) of this section;
(14) Upland. The term upland means any land area that under normal circumstances does not satisfy all
three wetland factors (i.e., hydrology, hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils) identified in paragraph
(c)(16) of this section, and does not lie below the ordinary high water mark or the high tide line of a
jurisdictional water.
PCN Section D.4. Compensatory Mitigation -- Payment to In Lieu Fee Program
The Daniels Creek Mitigation Bank (SAW-2017-00998, Wildlands Engineering) is the only approved
private mitigation bank in Cape Fear-04. Ashley Yarsinke of Wildlands informed us by email on July 25,
2022 that they will not have mitigation credits available until next year.
PCN Section F.5. Endangered Species and Critical Habitats
The US-FWS IPaC Search Tool identifies four federal -listed endangered or threatened species of concern:
The Red -cockaded woodpecker, Cape Fear shiner, Atlantic pigtoe mussel, and Rough -leaf loosestrife.
No critical habitat for any of these species is identified in the IPaC tool. Potential impacts to each of
these species due to project development are explained below:
107 E. Second Street. Greenville. NC 27858 - PO Box 929, Greenville, NC 27835 • Phone_ 252-752-4135 • Fax: [phone]
HCBELS Lic_ No. F•0334 rvwnr.riversandassociates.cam NCBOLA Lic. No. C-312

USACOE AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: WHITE OAK CREEK CROSSING SUBDIVSION
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PARCEL ID: 040674 0254 & 040674 002203
STREET ADDRESS: 1251 N RALEIGH 5T ANGIER. NC 27501-0000
1192 RAWLS CHURCH RD ANGIER, NC 27501
Please print:
Property Owner: STEPHENSON DWIGHT & STEPHENSON ELOISE
Property Owner: WHITE OAK CREEK CROSSING LLC (WOCC)
The undersigned, registered property owners of the above noted property, do hereby authorize
Brian K Edwards & David Ballentine , of Rivers and Associates, Inc
(Contractor / Agent) (Name of consulting firm)
to act on my behalf and take all actions necessary for the processing, issuance and acceptance of
this permit or certification and any and all standard and special conditions attached.
Property Owner's Address (if different than property above):
1187 N RALEIGH ST ANGIER, NC 27501-9129
Telephone: [phone]
We hereby certify the above information submitted in this application is true and accurate to the
best of our knowledge.
,4- 07 - - j OFF p r
�Cv,� '. 50'14645aJ
Authorized `$TiTi ture
Dwight Stephenson, POA Vann Stephenson
Date:
i
7/27Z o -z
r
Authorized Signature
Vann Stephenson, WOCC
Date: 7/Z,-r 7 o

Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions
SAW —
BEGIN DATE [Received Date]:
1. Project Name: White Oak Creek Crossing Subdivision, Angier, NC
2. Work Type:
Private n Institutional n
3. Project Description / Purpose:
Government n Commercial n
Mixed -use subdivision on 77 acres, west of NC-55 and east of Rawls Church Rd.
4. Property Owner / Applicant:
owner: Dwight Stephenson + White Oak Creek Crossing LLC
5. Agent / Consultant: Brian K. Edwards, PE, Rivers and Associates, Inc
6. Related Action ID Number(s):
7. Project Location - Coordinates, Street Address, and/or Location Description:
1251 North Raleigh St, Angier, NC 27501. Lat/Lon = 35.5255 -78.7430 (access road from NC-55)
8. Project Location - Tax Parcel ID: 0674-46-8078, 0674-25-9617
9. Project Location — County: Harnett
10. Project Location — Nearest Municipality or Town : Angier
11. Project Information — Nearest Waterbody: Neills Creek tributary
12. Watershed / 8-Digit Hydrologic Unit Code:
Authorization:
Regulatory Action Type:
Cape Fear 03030004-0501 (Neills Creek)
Section 10 n Section 404 n Section 10 & 404 n
Standard Permit
✓ Nationwide Permit # 29
n Regional General Permit #
n Jurisdictional Determination Request
Pre -Application Request
Unauthorized Activity
n Compliance
n No Permit Required
Revised 20210428

Jurisdictional Determination Request
US Army Carp
ol Engineers
Worunarg+ Warier
This form is intended for use by anyone requesting a jurisdictional determination (JD) from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District (Corps). Please include all supporting
information, as described within each category, with your rcqucst. You may submit your rcqucst
via mail, electronic mail, or facsimile. Requests should be sent to the appropriate project
manager of the county in which the property is located. A current list of project managers by
assigned counties can be found on-line at:
http: //www.saw.usace. artny.tnil/Missions/Re gulatorvPerinitProaam/Contacti CountvL ocator.aspx,
by calling 910-251-4633, or by contacting any of the field offices listed below. Once your
rcqucst is received you will bc contacted by a Corps project manager.
ASHEVILLE &CI1AR1 OTTE REGULATORY
FIELD OFFICES
US Army Corps of Fnginccrs
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: (828) 2814120
R4LEIGI1 REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
LS Army Corps of Engineers
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
Gcncral Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
INSTRUCTIONS:
WASHINGTON REGULATORY F1E1.1) OFFICE
US Army Corps or Engineers
2407 West Fifth Street
Washington, North Carolina 27889
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
WILMINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US army Corps of Engineers
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
Gcncral Number: 910-751-4633
Fax Number: [phone]
All requestors must complete Parts A, B, C, D, E, F and G.
NOTE TO CONSULTANTS AND AGENCIES: If you are requesting a JD on behalf -of a
paying client or your agency, please note the specific submittal requirements in Part H.
NOTE ON PART D — PROPERTY OWNER AUTHORIZATION: Please bc aware that
all JD requests must include the current property owner authorization for the Corps to
proceed with the determination, which may include inspection of the property when
necessary. This form must bc signed by thc current property owner(s) or thc owner(s)
authorized agent to be considered a complete request.
NOTE ON PART D - NCDOT REQUESTS: Property owner authorization/notification for
JD requests associated with North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
projects will be conducted according to the current NCDOTiUSACE protocols.
NOTE TO USDA PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS: A Corps approved or preliminary JD
may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security Act of
1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in
USDA programs, you should also request a certified wetland determination from the local
office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
Version: May 2017 Pagc 1

Jurisdictional Determination Request
A. PARCEL INFORMATION
Street Address: 1251 N. Raleigh St + 1192 Rawls Church Rd
City, State: Angier, NC 27501
County: Harnett
Parcel Index Number(s) (PIN): 0674-46-8078, 0674-25-9617, ri
B. REQUESTOR INFORMATION
Name: Brian K. Edwards, PE, Rivers & Assoc.
Mailing Address: 353 E Six Forks Rd Ste 230
Telephone Number:
Electronic Mail Address:
Select one:
Raleigh NC 27609
919-594-1626 ext.6274
[e-mail]
I am the current property owner.
I am an Authorized Agent or Environmental Consu1tantl
Interested Buyer or Under Contract to Purchase
Other, please explain.
C. PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION2
Name: Dwight Stephenson + White Oak Cred
Mailing Address: 1251 N. Raleigh St
Telephone Number:
Electronic Mail Address:
Angier, NC 27501
919-632-8884 (Vann Stephenson)
[e-mail]
Must provide completed Agent Authorization Form Letter.
Documentation of ownership also needs bc provided with request (copy of Deed. County GIS/Parccl/Tax Record).
Version: May 2017 Pagc 2

Jurisdictional Determination Request
D. PROPERTY ACCESS CERTIFICATION3,4
By signing below, I authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of'
Engineers (Corps) to enter upon the property heroin described for the purpose of conducting on -
site investigations, if necessary, and issuing a jurisdictional determination pursuant to Section
404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and IIarbors Act of 1899. I, the
undersigned, am either a duly authorized owner of record of the property identified herein, or
acting as the duly authorized agent of the owner of record of the property.
Brian K Edwards
Print Name
Capacity: ❑ Owner ❑✓ Authorized Agent`
01 August 2022
Date
(agent authorization letter attached)
Signature
E. REASON FOR JD REQUEST: (Check as many as applicable)
❑ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be
designed to avoid all aquatic resources.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be
designed to avoid all jurisdictional aquatic resources under Corps authority.
❑✓ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which may
require authorization from the Corps, and the JD would be used to avoid and minimize
impacts to jurisdictional aquatic resources and as an initial step in a future permitting
process.
❑✓ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which may
require authorization from the Corps; this request is accompanied by my permit application
and the JD is to be used in the permitting process.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities in a navigable water of the
U.S. which is included on the district Section 10 list and/or is subject to the cbb and flow of
the tide.
nA Corps JD is required in order obtain my local/state authorization.
❑ I intend to contest jurisdiction over a particular aquatic resource and request the Corps
confirm that jurisdiction does/does not exist over the aquatic resource on the parcel.
❑ I believe that the site may be comprised entirely or dry land.
❑ Other:
For NCDOT requests following the currant NCDOT/USACE protocols, skip to Part E.
If there are multiple parcels owned by different parties, please provide the following for each additional parcel on a
continuation sheet.
Must provide agent authorization form/letter signed by owner(s).
Version: May 2017 Pagc 3

Jurisdictional Determination Request
F. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD) TYPE (Select One)
❑
1 am requesting that the Corps provide a preliminary JD for the property identi lied herein.
A Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) provides an indication that there may
be "waters of the LTnited States" or "navigable waters of the United States"on a property_
PJDs arc sufficient as the basis for permit decisions. For the purposes of permitting, all
waters and wetlands on the property will be treated as if they are jurisdictional "waters of
the United States". P.TDs cannot be appealed (33 C.F.R. 331.2); however, aPJD is
"preliminary" in the sense that an approved J D can be requested at any time. PJDs do
not expire,
I am requesting that the Corps provide an approved JD for the property identified herein.
An Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD) is a determination that
jurisdictional "waters of the United States" or "navigable waters of the United
States" arc either present or absent on a site. An approved JD identifies the limits of
waters on a site determined to be jurisdictional under the Clean Water Act and/or
Rivers and Harbors Act. Approved JDs are sufficient as the basis for permit
decisions. AJDs are appealable (33 C.F.R. 331.2). The results of the AJD will be
posted on the Corps website. A landowner, permit applicant, or other "affected
party" (33 C.F.R. 331.2) who receives an A.TD may rely upon the A.TD for five years
(subject to certain limited exceptions explained in Regulatory Guidance Letter 05-
02).
I am unclear as to which JD T would like to request and require additional information
to inform my decision,
ALL REQUESTS
Map of Property or Project Area. This Map must clearly depict the boundaries of the
review area.
Size of Property or Review Arca 77 acres.
The property boundary (or review area boundary) is clearly physically marked on the site.
Version: May 2017 Pagc 4

Jurisdictional Determination Request
H. REQUESTS FROM CONSULTANTS
Project Coordinates (Decimal Degrees): Latitude: 35.5255
Longitude: -78.7430
❑ A legible delineation map depicting the aquatic resources and the property/review area.
Delineation maps must be no larger than 11 x 17 and should contain the following: (Corps
signature of submitted survey plats will occur after the submitted delineation map has been
reviewed and approved).
• North Arrow
• Graphical Scale
• Boundary o f Review Area
• Date
• Location ofdata points for each Wetland Determination Data Form or tributary
assessment reach.
For Approved Jurisdictional Determinations:
• Jurisdictional wetland features should be labeled as Wetland Waters of the US,, 404
wetlands, etc. Please include the acreage of these features.
• Jurisdictional non -wetland features (i.e. tidal/navigable waters, tributaries,
impoundments) should be labeled as Non -Wetland Waters of the US, stream, tributary,
open water, relatively permanent water, pond, etc. Please include the acreage or linear
length of each of -these features as appropriate.
• Isolated waters, waters that lack a significant nexus to navigable waters, or non -
jurisdictional upland features should be identified as Non -Jurisdictional. Please
include a justification in the label regarding why the feature is non jurisdictional (i.c.
"Isolated", "No Significant Nexus", or "Upland Feature"). Please include the acreage
or linear length of these Features as appropriate.
For Preliminary Jurisdictional Determinations:
• Wetland and non -wetland features should not be identified as Jurisdictional, 404,
Waters of the United States, or anything that implies jurisdiction. These features can be
identified as Potential Waters of the United States, Potential Non -wetland Waters of
the United States, wetland, stream, open water, ctc, Please include the acreage and
linear length of these features as appropriate.
n
Completed Wetland Determination Data Forms for appropriate region
(at least one wetland and one upland form needs to be completed for each wetland type)
Please refer to the guidance document titled "Survey Standards for Jurisdictional Determinations" to ensure that the
supplied man meets the necessary mapping standards. http://www.saw_usace_armyrni IrMissions/Regulatory-Perinit-
Program/Jurisdiction/
Version: May 2o17 Pagc 5

Jurisdictional Determination Request
Completed appropriate Jurisdictional Determination form
• PJDs, please complete a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form' and include the
Aquatic Resource Table
• 4JDs, please complete art Approved Jurisdictional Determination Fore
Vicinity Map
Aerial Photograph
USGS Topographic Map
Soil Survey Map
Other Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map., Proposed Site
Plan,, previous delineation maps, LIDAR maps, FEMA floodplain maps)
Landscape Photos (i f taken)
nNCSAM andior NCWAM Assessment Forms and Rating Sheets
nNC Division of Water Resources Stream Identification Forms
Other Assessment Forms
' www.saw.usacc.army.mil/Porlals/59/dots/rcgulalory/rcgdocs/JD/RGL_08-02_App_A_Prclim_JD_Form_fillablc.pdf
8 Please see http://wvw.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions'Regulatory-Permit-Program/Jurisdiction/
Principal Purpose: The information that you provide will be used n evaluating your request to determine
whether lhcrc arc any aquatic resources within the project area subject to federal jurisdiction under the regulatory
authorities referenced above.
Routine -Jses: This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other fcdcral, state, and local
government agencies; and the public, and may be made available as part o fa public notice as required by federal
law. Your name and property location where federal jurisdiction is to be determined will be included in the
approvedjurisdictional determination (AJD), winch will be made available to the public on the District's websi ce
andonthe Headquarters USAGEwebsite.
Disclosure: Submission of requested information is voluntary; however, ifintbrmation is not provided, the
request for an AJD cannot he evaluated nor can an AJD be issued.
Version: May 2017 Pagc 6

Appendix 2 - PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD:
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: Brian Edwards, Rivers & Assoc, 353 E Six Forks Rd Ste 230 Raleigh NC 27609
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND/OR
AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: NC County/parish/borough: Harnett City: Angier
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format):
Lat.: 35.5251 Long.: -78.7475
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: NeiIIS Creek tributary
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
❑ Field Determination. Date(s):
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES IN REVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO REGULATORY
JURISDICTION.
Site
number
Latitude
(decimal
degrees)
Longitude
(decimal
degrees)
Estimated amount
of aquatic resource
in review area
(acreage and linear
feet, if applicable)
Type of aquatic
resource (i.e., wetland
vs. non -wetland
waters)
Geographic authority
to which the aquatic
resource "may be"
subject (i.e., Section
404 or Section 10/404)
see
attached
table

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

SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply)
Checked items should be included in subject file. Appropriately reference sources
below where indicated for all checked items:
• Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor:
Map: White Oak Creek Crossing - Overall Wetland & Stream Impacts Map
O Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor.
n Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
n Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rationale:
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas: HUC # 03030004-0501
❑ USGS NHD data.
O USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
• U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: Angier NC, 1:24:000
O Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Harnett County, 1994
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/local wetland inventory map(s):
■❑ FEMA/FIRM maps: FEMA FRIS Map # 3720067400K -- 10/3/2006
❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: .(National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
❑ Photographs: n Aerial (Name & Date):
or n Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Other information (please specify):
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily
been verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for later jurisdictional
determinations.
Signature and date of
Regulatory staff member
completing PJD
Signature and date of
person requesting PJD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)'
1 Districts may establish timeframes for requestor to return signed PJD forms. If the requestor does not respond
within the established time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is
necessary prior to finalizing an action.

Anita ,,„‘ 7-1r1"41).,
R
I
0
White Oak Creek Crossing - Stephenson site, 1251 North Raleigh St, Angier NC, Harnett County -- USGS Topographic Quadrangle map.

k�k
1
fir
J �
I
r
JL r -
I 1% 1 i 57i I
� + t
•
White Oak Creek Crossing - Tax parcel map, from NC Natural Heritage Program Data Explorer with streams added by Mogensen Mitigation, Inc.

0
cu
c
c
▪ c
0
Lr)
•
0
,o 2
aJ
03 c
a)
c to
n 0
O c
cu s_
484-
cu
5 0
cu
_CD
C (NJ
O (NI
0
U
T73 -a
Ls-) CU
• LL
0
rs.71
CU 0
-0 CU
• 0_
v▪ ) 0_
CCI
O C
0_ 0
CU
aJ
0
cu
1,1
C
ai
s_
c
5 •
0
u _▪ c
in LE
0_
CU -0
tf) ai
a 0
a_
o 2
ca_
E
CD c
aJ
> 9
o
▪ •,7
aJ 0
bD
Z

Figure 4B. Potential jurisdictional wetlands (green), streams (blue), and open waters (blue) - Western half. JD
review area boundary (project site) in yellow. Feature lengths and acreage in DOT right-of-way not quantified.

U
CU
2
L
Q
0
A)
CU
L
0
U
'L
CU
n
(13
CU
cri
CU
• A- )
CU
O
c
(D 0
AJ w
� L
cri
E
co LI—
a1 0
L
cri _▪ C
AJ
AJ
hA - 0
L .�
LE
C
co 5
cu
cu
C U
o f6
U �
f6
• _• c•
CU
C
AJ
Q �--'
CL
Q%
(-3 U
LJ 0
CO 4)
LL �

i:ure A 1. YTe an. an. U. an. Data Form sam• e •oint ocations

FEMA Flood Risk Information System (FRIS) Map # 3720067400K - 10/3/2006 -- White Oak Creek Crossing project area in red.
u;
a,
L
to

1141.
to mem AA
Case Filar fie' HUC
X001-41
11,
40.
wviva4p4119, -
f
1
Cliltbei
41
C.412* four
C �w
r
des C rtellr
►�iw ,1if;.t4I# jf
1
MR, U
Figure 6. USGS Watershed Map -- Cape Fear River HUC # 03030004-0501.-- White Oak Creek Crossing project area in red.

List of wetlands in the JD Review Area and their applicable USACE wetland data forms.
acres or lin ft
Wetland in review wetland upland
Name Latitude Longitude area Wetland Type impact data form data forms
W-GB 35.5257 -78.7540 0.01 ac FP pool, forested no GZ-wet GD-upl
W-GC 35.5244 -78.7544 0.01 ac FP pool, forested no GZ-wet GD-upl
W-GZ 35.5236 -78.7543 0.09 ac FP pool, forested yes GZ-wet GD-upl
W-GD 35.5228 -78.7541 0.19 ac FP pool, forested no GZ-wet GD-upl
W-GG 35.5230 -78.7523 0.28 ac FP pool, forested no GZ-wet GD-upl
W-GJ 35.5269 -78.7509 0.04 ac head seep, forested yes GJ-wet GS-upl
W-GS 35.5427 -78.7503 0.41 ac head seep, forested yes GS-wet GS-upl
W-GH 35.5242 -78.7491 0.27 ac FP pool, forested no GZ-wet GD-upl
W-GK 35.5253 -78.7455 0.22 ac head seep, forested yes GK-wet agric
W-GL 35.5252 -78.7484 0.01 ac ditch, herb -scrub no GM -wet agric
W-GM 35.5256 -78.7487 0.02 ac ditch, herb -scrub yes GM -wet agric
W-GX 35.5258 -78.7482 0.03 ac head seep, forested yes GK-wet agric
Red = No data form, but vegetation and soils are similar to the wetland or upland indicated.
Uplands adjacent to GK, GL, GM, and GX are tilled cropland -- no data form filled out.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont 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)
Project/Site: 1251 North Raleigh St, Angier
City/County: Angier / Harnett Co
Applicant/Owner: Stephenson, Dwight-1- Vann; White Oak Creek Crossing LLC
Investigator(s): Gerald Pattern, MMI
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): head seep
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.52690
Soil Map Unit Name: Cecil
Section. Township, Range:
Sampling Date: 6/28/2021
State: NC Sampling Point: GJ-w
Local relief (concave, convex, none): flat -concave Slope (%): 0-2
Long: -78.75093 Datum: NAD-83
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
NWI classification:
Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes X No
Yes X No
Yes X No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Yes X No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Surface (B8)
(C2)
Imagery (C9)
(D1)
(D4)
_
Surface Water (A1) Aquatic Plants (B14) Sparsely Vegetated Concave
_ _True _
X High Water Table (A2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Drainage Patterns (B10)
_ _
X Saturation (A3) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (B1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Dry -Season Water Table
_ _ _
Sediment Deposits (B2) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ _ _
Drift Deposits (B3) Muck Surface (C7) Visible on Aerial
_ _Thin _Saturation
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Other (Explain in Remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants
_ _
Iron Deposits (B5) Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ _
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ _
Water -Stained Leaves (B9) Microtopographic Relief
_ _
Aquatic Fauna (B13) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes
X
No
Water Table Present? Yes X No Depth (inches): 8
Saturation Present? Yes X No Depth (inches): 5
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Precip past 3 days = 0.3 inch, past 10 days = 2.3 inch, past 30 days = 5.3 inch.
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point:
GJ-w
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft ) % Cover Species? Status
1. Quercus phellos 15 Yes FAC
2. Quercus pagoda 10 No FACW
3. Acer rubrum 15 Yes FAC
4. Liquidambar styaciflua 20 Yes FAC
5. Nyssa sylvatica 10 No FAC
6.
7.
70 =Total Cover
50% of total cover: 35 20% of total cover: 14
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft )
1. Acer rubrum 15 Yes FAC
2. Ligustrum sinense 15 Yes FACU
3. Marys rubra 10 Yes FACU
4. Quercus phellos 10 Yes FAC
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
50 =Total Cover
50% of total cover: 25 20% of total cover: 10
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft )
1. Smilax rotundifolia 15 Yes FAC
2. Ligustrum sinense 10 Yes FACU
3. Boehmeria cyfindrica 5 No FACW
4. Athyrium filix-femina 5 No UPL
5. Parthenocissus quinquefolia 15 Yes FACU
6. Gelsemium sempervirens 10 Yes FAC
7. Carex lupuliformis 5 No FACW
8.
9.
10.
11.
65 =Total Cover
50% of total cover: 33 20% of total cover: 13
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft )
1. Smilax rotundifolia 10 Yes FAC
2. Vitis rotundifolia 5 No FAC
3. Parthenocissus quinquefolia 5 No FACU
4. Toxicodendron radicans 5 No FAC
5. Celastrus orbicufatus 10 Yes FACU
35 =Total Cover
50% of total cover: 18 20% of total cover: 7
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 8 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 13 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 61.5% (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
(B)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is 3.01
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants; excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub- Woody plants; excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
(1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont- Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point:
GJ-w
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
(inches)
Matrix
Color (moist)
0-3 10YR 2/1
3-8 10YR 5/1
8-16 10YR 5/2
100
80
Redox Features
Color (moist)
10YR 3/1
Type Loc2
Texture Remarks
Loamy/Clayey
20 D M Loamy/Clayey
70 10YR 4/4 30 C PL/M
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
Loamy/Clayey Distinct redox concentrations
2Location: PL=Pore Lining; M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol (A1)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
X Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
Piedmont Floodplain Sails (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
X Piedmont Floodplain Sails (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present?
Yes X No
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont 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)
Project/Site: 1251 North Raleigh St, Angier
City/County: Angier / Harnett Co
Sampling Date: 6/28/2021
Applicant/Owner: Stephenson, Dwight-1- Vann; White Oak Creek Crossing LLC State: NC Sampling Point: GK-w
Investigator(s): Gerald Pattern, MMI
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): head seep
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.52535
Soil Map Unit Name: Rains
Section. Township, Range:
Local relief (concave, convex, none): flat Slope (%): 0-2
Long: -78.74555 Datum: NAD-83
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
NWI classification:
Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes X No
Yes X No
Yes X No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Yes X No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Surface Soil Cracks
(B6)
Concave Surface (B8)
(C2)
Aerial Imagery (C9)
Plants (D1)
(D2)
(D4)
_
Surface Water (A1) Aquatic Plants (B14) Sparsely Vegetated
_ _True _
X High Water Table (A2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Drainage Patterns (B10)
_ _
X Saturation (A3) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (B1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Dry -Season Water Table
_ _ _
Sediment Deposits (B2) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ _ _
Drift Deposits (B3) Muck Surface (C7) Visible on
_ _Thin _Saturation
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Other (Explain in Remarks) Stunted or Stressed
_ _
Iron Deposits (B5) Geomorphic Position
_ _
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ _
Water -Stained Leaves (B9) Microtopographic Relief
_ _
Aquatic Fauna (B13) X FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes
X
No
Water Table Present? Yes X No Depth (inches): 9
Saturation Present? Yes X No Depth (inches): 4
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Precip past 3 days = 0.3 inch, past 10 days = 2.3 inch, past 30 days = 5.3 inch.
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point:
GK-w
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Quercus nigra
30 ft
Magnolia virginiana
Mores rubra
Liquidambar styaciflua
Liriodendron tufipifera
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1. Acer rubrum
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
50% of total cover:
(Plot size: 30 ft
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Cover Species? Status
20 Yes FAC
10 No FACW
10 No FACU
20 Yes FAC
10 No FACU
70 =Total Cover
35 20% of total cover: 14
Magnolia virginiana
Morella cenfera
Juglans nigra
Sambucus nigra
10 Yes FAC
10 Yes FACW
10 Yes FAC
10 Yes FACU
10 Yes FAC
50 =Total Cover
50% of total cover: 25 20% of total cover: 10
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft )
1. Woodwardia areofata
2. Lycopus virginicus
3. Juncus effusus
4. Persicaria pensyfvanica
5. Persicaria sagittata
6. Murdannia keisak
7. Carex lupuliformis
8.
9.
10.
11.
10 Yes FACW
5 No OBL
10 Yes FACW
10 Yes FACW
10 Yes OBL
15 Yes OBL
10 Yes FACW
70 =Total Cover
50% of total cover: 35 20% of total cover: 14
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft
1. Smilax rotundifolia
2. Vitis riparia
3. Parthenocissus quinquefolia
4. Toxicodendron radicans
5. Vitis rotundifolia
5
5
5
5
5
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
25 =Total Cover
FAC
FACW
FACU
FAC
FAC
50% of total cover: 13 20% of total cover: 5
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 16 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 18 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 88.9% (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species 30 x 1 = 30
FACW species 65 x 2 = 130
FAC species 85 x 3 = 255
FACU species 35 x 4 = 140
UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
Column Totals: 215 (A) 555 (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.58
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
X 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.01
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants; excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub- Woody plants; excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
(1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)

SOIL
Sampling Point: GK-w
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
(inches)
Matrix
Color (moist)
0-2 10YR 2/1
100
2-14 2.5Y 2.5/1 100
Redox Features
Color (moist)
Type Loc2
100 MS M
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
Texture Remarks
Sandy
Sandy 100% org mask
2Location: PL=Pore Lining; M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol (A1)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
X Dark Surface (S7)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
Piedmont Floodplain Sails (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Piedmont Floodplain Sails (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present?
Yes X No
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont 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)
Project/Site: 1251 North Raleigh St, Angier + Rawls Ch Rd
City/County: Angier / Harnett Co
Applicant/Owner: Stephenson, Dwight-1- Vann; White Oak Creek Crossing LLC
Investigator(s): Gerald Pattern, MMI
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): floodplain pool
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.52367
Soil Map Unit Name: Wehadkee
Section. Township, Range:
Sampling Date: 12/07/2021
State: NC Sampling Point: GZ-w
Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0-2
Long: -78.75430 Datum: NAD-83
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
NWI classification:
Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes X No
Yes X No
Yes X No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Yes X No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Surface (B8)
(C2)
Imagery (C9)
(D1)
(D4)
_
Surface Water (A1) Aquatic Plants (B14) Sparsely Vegetated Concave
_ _True _
X High Water Table (A2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Drainage Patterns (B10)
_ _
X Saturation (A3) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (B1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Dry -Season Water Table
_ _ _
Sediment Deposits (B2) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ _ _
Drift Deposits (B3) Muck Surface (C7) Visible on Aerial
_ _Thin _Saturation
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Other (Explain in Remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants
_ _
Iron Deposits (B5) Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ _
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ _
Water -Stained Leaves (B9) Microtopographic Relief
_ _
Aquatic Fauna (B13) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes
X
No
Water Table Present? Yes X No Depth (inches): 10
Saturation Present? Yes X No Depth (inches): 6
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Relatively dry. Precip past 7 days = 0.0 inch, past 14 days = 0.5 inch.
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point:
GZ-w
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Liriodendron tulipifera
30 ft
Quercus phellos
Acer rubrum
Liquidambar styraciflua
Pinus taeda
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1. Acer rubrum
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
50% of total cover:
(Plot size: 30 ft
Absolute
Cover
15
10
15
15
20
Dominant Indicator
Species? Status
Yes FACU
No FAC
Yes FAC
Yes FAC
Yes FAC
75 =Total Cover
38 20% of total cover: 15
Ligustrum sinense
Ilex opaca
Quercus alba
Clethra alnifolia
Viburnum nudum
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
1. Carex Iupulina
10
30
10
5
5
Yes FAC
Yes FACU
Yes FACU
No FACU
No FAC
10 Yes OBL
70 =Total Cover
50% of total cover: 35 20% of total cover: 14
15ft )
2. Ligustrum sinense
3. Boehmeria cylindrica
4. Athyrium filix-femina
5. Viburnum nudum
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
10 Yes OBL
25 Yes FACU
5 No FACW
10 Yes UPL
10 Yes OBL
60 =Total Cover
50% of total cover: 30 20% of total cover: 12
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft
1. Smilax rotundifolia
2. Vitis rotundifolia
3. Bignonia capreolata
4. Toxicodendron radicans
5. Lonicera japonica
5 Yes FAC
5 Yes FAC
5 Yes FAC
5 Yes FAC
5 Yes FACU
25 =Total Cover
50% of total cover: 13 20% of total cover: 5
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 11 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 17 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 64.7% (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
FACU species
UPL species
Column Totals:
Prevalence Index
x 1 =
x 2 =
x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
(A)
= B/A =
(B)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is 3.01
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants; excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub- Woody plants; excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
(1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont- Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: GZ-w
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
(inches)
Matrix
Color (moist)
0-4 10YR 3/2
4-8 10YR 4/2
8-15 10YR 3/2
100
Redox Features
Color (moist)
Type Loc2
95 10YR 4/4 5 D PL/M
95 10YR 4/6 5 C PL/M
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
Texture Remarks
Loamy/Clayey
Loamy/Clayey
Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
2Location: PL=Pore Lining; M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol (A1)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
X Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
Piedmont Floodplain Sails (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
X Piedmont Floodplain Sails (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present?
Yes X No
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont 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)
Project/Site: 1251 North Raleigh St, Angier
City/County: Angier / Harnett Co
Applicant/Owner: Stephenson, Dwight-1- Vann; White Oak Creek Crossing LLC
Investigator(s): Gerald Pattern, MMI
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): headwater seep
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.52565
Soil Map Unit Name: Wagram
Section. Township, Range:
Sampling Date: 6/28/2021
State: NC Sampling Point: GM-w
Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 1-2
Long: -78.74862 Datum: NAD-83
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
NWI classification:
Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes X No
Yes X No
Yes X No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Yes X No
Remarks:
Ditch flowing into pond, draining cropland, mowed.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Surface Soil Cracks
(B6)
Concave Surface (B8)
(C2)
Aerial Imagery (C9)
Plants (D1)
(D2)
(D4)
_
Surface Water (A1) Aquatic Plants (B14) Sparsely Vegetated
_ _True _
X High Water Table (A2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Drainage Patterns (B10)
_ _
X Saturation (A3) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (B1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Dry -Season Water Table
_ _ _
Sediment Deposits (B2) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ _ _
Drift Deposits (B3) Muck Surface (C7) Visible on
_ _Thin _Saturation
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Other (Explain in Remarks) Stunted or Stressed
_ _
Iron Deposits (B5) Geomorphic Position
_ _
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ _
Water -Stained Leaves (B9) Microtopographic Relief
_ _
Aquatic Fauna (B13) X FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes
X
No
Water Table Present? Yes X No Depth (inches): 3
Saturation Present? Yes X No Depth (inches): 0
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Precip past 3 days = 0.3 inch, past 10 days = 2.3 inch, past 30 days = 5.3 inch.
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point:
G M-w
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1. Salix nigra
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
50% of total cover:
(Plot size: 30 ft
Absolute
Cover
10
Dominant Indicator
Species? Status
=Total Cover
20% of total cover:
Yes
10 =Total Cover
OBL
50% of total cover: 5 20% of total cover: 2
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft
1. Festuca rubra
2. Persicaria hydropiperoides
3. Carex crinita
4. Rhynchospora scirpoides
5. Juncus effusus
6. Diodia virginiana
7. Murdannia keisak
8.
9.
10.
11.
15 Yes FACU
15 Yes OBL
10 No OBL
10 No OBL
15 Yes FACW
10 No FACW
10 No OBL
85 =Total Cover
50% of total cover: 43 20% of total cover: 17
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
50% of total cover:
=Total Cover
20% of total cover:
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 4 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 75.0% (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
FACU species
UPL species
Column Totals:
Prevalence Index
x 1 =
x 2 =
x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
(A)
= B/A =
(B)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is 53.01
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants; excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants; excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
(1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont- Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: GM-w
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
(inches)
Matrix
Color (moist)
0-5 10YR 2/1
5-11 10YR 3/1
11-16 10YR 3/2
100
Redox Features
Color (moist)
Type Loc2
90 10YR 4/4 10 C PL/M
75 10YR 4/4 25 C PL/M
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
Texture Remarks
Sandy
Loamy/Clayey
Loamy/Clayey Distinct redox concentrations
2Location: PL=Pore Lining; M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol (A1)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
X Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
X Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
Piedmont Floodplain Sails (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
X Piedmont Floodplain Sails (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present?
Yes X No
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont 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)
Project/Site: 1251 North Raleigh St, Angier
City/County: Angier / Harnett Co
Applicant/Owner: Stephenson, Dwight-1- Vann; White Oak Creek Crossing LLC
Investigator(s): Gerald Pattern, MMI
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): headwater seep
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.52429
Soil Map Unit Name: Cecil
Section. Township, Range:
Sampling Date: 2/22/2022
State: NC Sampling Point: GS-w
Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 1-2
Long: -78.75061 Datum: NAD-83
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
NWI classification:
Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes X No
Yes X No
Yes X No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Yes X No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Surface (B8)
(C2)
Imagery (C9)
(D1)
(D4)
_
Surface Water (A1) Aquatic Plants (B14) Sparsely Vegetated Concave
_ _True _
X High Water Table (A2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Drainage Patterns (B10)
_ _
X Saturation (A3) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (B1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Dry -Season Water Table
_ _ _
Sediment Deposits (B2) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ _ _
Drift Deposits (B3) Muck Surface (C7) Visible on Aerial
_ _Thin _Saturation
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Other (Explain in Remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants
_ _
Iron Deposits (B5) Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ _
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ _
Water -Stained Leaves (B9) Microtopographic Relief
_ _
Aquatic Fauna (B13) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes
X
No
Water Table Present? Yes X No Depth (inches): 11
Saturation Present? Yes X No Depth (inches): 6
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Somewhat dry. Precip past 7 days = 0.2 inch, past 14 days = 1.0 inch.
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point:
GS-w
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft
1. litmus amencana
2. Quercus fafcata
3. Acer rubrum
4. Liquidambar styaciflua
5. Pinus taeda
6. Quercus alba
7.
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1. Acer rubrum
50% of total cover:
(Plot size: 30 ft
Absolute
Cover
10
5
10
10
15
10
Dominant Indicator
Species? Status
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
60 =Total Cover
FACW
FACU
FAC
FAC
FAC
FACU
30 20% of total cover: 12
2. Ligustrum sinense
3. Quercus nigra
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10
20
10
Yes
Yes
Yes
40 =Total Cover
FAC
FACU
FAC
50% of total cover: 20 20% of total cover: 8
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft )
1. Arundinaria tecta 20 Yes FACW
2. Ligustrum sinense
3. Lonicera japonica
4. Ilex opaca
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
20 Yes FACU
10 No FACU
5 No FACU
55 =Total Cover
50% of total cover: 28 20% of total cover: 11
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft
1. Smilax rotundifolia
2. Vitis rotundifolia
3. Lonicera japonica
4. Toxicodendron radicans
5.
5 Yes FAC
5 Yes FAC
5 Yes FACU
5 Yes FAC
20 =Total Cover
50% of total cover: 10 20% of total cover: 4
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 10 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 14 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 71.4% (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
FACU species
UPL species
Column Totals:
Prevalence Index
x 1 =
x 2 =
x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
(A)
= B/A =
(B)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is 3.01
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants; excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub- Woody plants; excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
(1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont- Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: GS-w
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
(inches)
Matrix
Color (moist)
0-5 10YR 2/1
5-9 10YR 5/1
9-16 10YR 5/2
100
Redox Features
Color (moist)
Type Loc2
85 10YR 3/1 15 D PL/M
70 10YR 4/4 30 C PL/M
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
Texture Remarks
Loamy/Clayey
Loamy/Clayey
Loamy/Clayey Distinct redox concentrations
2Location: PL=Pore Lining; M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol (A1)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
X Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
Piedmont Floodplain Sails (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
X Piedmont Floodplain Sails (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present?
Yes X No
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont 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)
Project/Site: 1251 North Raleigh St, Angier
City/County: Angier / Harnett Co
Sampling Date: 2/22/2022
Applicant/Owner: Stephenson, Dwight-1- Vann; White Oak Creek Crossing LLC State: NC Sampling Point: GS-up
Investigator(s): Gerald Pattern, MMI
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): swale
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.52474
Soil Map Unit Name: Cecil
Section. Township, Range:
Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0-2
Long: -78.75048 Datum: NAD-83
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
NWI classification:
Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Yes No X
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Surface (B8)
(C2)
Imagery (C9)
(D1)
(D4)
_
Surface Water (A1) Aquatic Plants (B14) Sparsely Vegetated Concave
_ _True _
High Water Table (A2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Drainage Patterns (B10)
_ _ _
(A3) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Moss Trim Lines (B16)
_Saturation
Water Marks (B1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Dry -Season Water Table
_ _ _
Sediment Deposits (B2) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ _ _
Drift Deposits (B3) Muck Surface (C7) Visible on Aerial
_ _Thin _Saturation
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Other (Explain in Remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants
_ _
Iron Deposits (B5) Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ _
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ _
Water -Stained Leaves (B9) Microtopographic Relief
_ _
Aquatic Fauna (B13) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes
No
X
Water Table Present? Yes No X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No X Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Somewhat dry. Precip past 7 days = 0.2 inch, past 14 days = 1.0 inch.
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point:
GS-up
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
1. Liriodendron tufipifera
30 ft
2. Quercus afba
3. Acer rubrum
4. Liquidambar styaciflua
5. Pinus taeda
6.
7.
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1. Acer rubrum
50% of total cover:
(Plot size: 30 ft
Absolute
Cover
15
10
10
15
20
Dominant Indicator
Species? Status
Yes FACU
No FACU
No FAC
Yes FAC
Yes FAC
70 =Total Cover
35 20% of total cover: 14
2. Ligustrum sinense
3. Quercus nigra
4. Pinus taeda
5. Ilex opaca
6.
7.
8.
9.
15 Yes FAC
10 Yes FACU
10 Yes FAC
15 Yes FAC
10 Yes FACU
60 =Total Cover
50% of total cover: 30 20% of total cover: 12
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft
1. Arundinaria tecta
2. Ligustrum sinense
3. Lonicera japonica
4. Ilex opaca
5. Toxicodendron radicans
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
10 No FACW
20 Yes FACU
15 Yes FACU
10 No FACU
10 No FAC
65 =Total Cover
50% of total cover: 33 20% of total cover: 13
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft
1. Smilax rotundifolia
2. Vitis rotundifolia
3. Lonicera japonica
4. Toxicodendron radicans
5.
5 Yes FAC
5 Yes FAC
5 Yes FACU
5 Yes FAC
20 =Total Cover
50% of total cover: 10 20% of total cover: 4
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 8 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 14 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 57.1% (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
FACU species
UPL species
Column Totals:
Prevalence Index
x 1 =
x 2 =
x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
(A)
= B/A =
(B)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is 3.01
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants; excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub- Woody plants; excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
(1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont- Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: GS-up
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
(inches)
Matrix
Color (moist)
0-4 10YR 3/2
4-12 10YR 4/2
100
100
12-16 10YR 4/3 100
Redox Features
Color (moist)
Type Loc2
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
Texture Remarks
Loamy/Clayey
Loamy/Clayey
Loamy/Clayey
2Location: PL=Pore Lining; M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol (A1)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
Piedmont Floodplain Sails (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Piedmont Floodplain Sails (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present?
Yes No X
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont 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)
Project/Site: 1251 North Raleigh St, Angier
City/County: Angier / Harnett Co
Sampling Date: 6/28/2021
Applicant/Owner: Stephenson, Dwight-1- Vann; White Oak Creek Crossing LLC State: NC Sampling Point: GD-up
Investigator(s): Gerald Pattern, MMI
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): floodplain
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.52324
Soil Map Unit Name: Wehadkee
Section. Township, Range:
Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0-2
Long: -78.75417 Datum: NAD-83
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
NWI classification:
Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Yes No X
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Surface (B8)
(C2)
Imagery (C9)
(D1)
(D4)
_
Surface Water (A1) Aquatic Plants (B14) Sparsely Vegetated Concave
_ _True _
High Water Table (A2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Drainage Patterns (B10)
_ _ _
(A3) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Moss Trim Lines (B16)
_Saturation
Water Marks (B1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Dry -Season Water Table
_ _ _
Sediment Deposits (B2) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ _ _
Drift Deposits (B3) Muck Surface (C7) Visible on Aerial
_ _Thin _Saturation
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Other (Explain in Remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants
_ _
Iron Deposits (B5) Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ _
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ _
Water -Stained Leaves (B9) Microtopographic Relief
_ _
Aquatic Fauna (B13) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes
No
X
Water Table Present? Yes No X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No X Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Precip past 3 days = 0.3 inch, past 10 days = 2.3 inch, past 30 days = 5.3 inch.
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point:
GD-up
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft
1. Liriodendron tulipifera
2. Quercus michauxii
3. Acer rubrum
4. Liquidambar styraciflua
5. Pinus taeda
6. litmus amencana
7.
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1. Acer rubrum
50% of total cover:
(Plot size: 30 ft
Absolute
Cover
10
10
15
15
10
10
Dominant Indicator
Species? Status
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
70 =Total Cover
FACU
FACW
FAC
FAC
FAC
FACW
35 20% of total cover: 14
2. Ligustrum sinense
3. Quercus nigra
4. Pinus taeda
5. Ilex opaca
6.
7.
8.
9.
15
10
10
15
10
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
60 =Total Cover
FAC
FACU
FAC
FAC
FACU
50% of total cover: 30 20% of total cover: 12
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft
1. Arundinaria tecta
2. Ligustrum sinense
3. Lonicera japonica
4. Ilex opaca
5. Toxicodendron radicans
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
10 No FACW
20 Yes FACU
15 Yes FACU
10 No FACU
10 No FAC
65 =Total Cover
50% of total cover: 33 20% of total cover: 13
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft
1. Smilax rotundifolia
2. Vitis rotundifolia
3. Lonicera japonica
4. Toxicodendron radicans
5.
5 Yes FAC
5 Yes FAC
5 Yes FACU
5 Yes FAC
20 =Total Cover
50% of total cover: 10 20% of total cover: 4
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 11 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 17 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 64.7% (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
FACU species
UPL species
Column Totals:
Prevalence Index
x 1 =
x 2 =
x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
(A)
= B/A =
(B)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is 3.01
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants; excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub- Woody plants; excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
(1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont- Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: GD-up
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
(inches)
Matrix
Color (moist)
0-5 10YR 3/2
5-12 10YR 4/2
12-16 10YR 4/2
100
100
90
Redox Features
Color (moist)
10YR 4/4
Type Loc2
Texture Remarks
Loamy/Clayey
Loamy/Clayey
10 C M Loamy/Clayey
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
Distinct redox concentrations
2Location: PL=Pore Lining; M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol (A1)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
Piedmont Floodplain Sails (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Piedmont Floodplain Sails (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present?
Yes No X
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Version 2.0

From: Gerald Pottern
Sent: Friday, June 24, 2022 12:38 PM
To: 401PreFile <[e-mail]>
Subject: 401/Buffer Pre -filing Meeting Request - Angier, Harnett Co
Please fill out the following information:
Project Name: White Oak Creek Crossing multi -use development
County: Harnett County
Applicant Name: Gerald Pottern, Mogensen Mitigation Inc (consultant)
Applicant Email: [e-mail]
** Please note that multiple projects may be submitted within the same email by supplying all
the above information for each project.
*** In the event your email is not allowing auto -responses, please save a copy of your sent
email for your records and if necessary use that copy in application/form submittal.
Gerald Pottern
Mogensen Mitigation Inc. - Raleigh
MMI Environmental Consultants
104 East Chestnut Avenue
Wake Forest, NC 27587
Office / Home: 919-556-8845
Mobile / Text: 919-649-6506
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
la. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
X Section 404 Permit • Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 29 or General Permit (GP) number:
lc. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes X No
ld. Type(s) of approval sought from
the DWQ (check
— Regular
— Express
all that apply):
Jurisdictional General Permit
Buffer Authorization
X 401 Water Quality Certification
• Non-404
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification
❑ Riparian
le. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification:
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes x No
❑ Yes x No
lf. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee
mitigation of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance
or in -lieu fee program.
program proposed for
letter from mitigation bank
X Yes ❑ No
lg. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer lh
below.
❑ Yes X No
1 h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes x No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project:
White Oak Creek Crossing Subdivision
2b. County:
Harnett
2c. Nearest municipality / town:
Angier
2d. Subdivision name:
White Oak Creek Crossing
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
STEPHENSON DWIGHT + WHITE OAK CREEK CROSSING LLC
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
2179 : 0585 (Stephenson) + 4131 : 0669 (WOCC)
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
Vann Stephenson
3d. Street address:
1251 N RALEIGH ST
3e. City, state, zip:
ANGIER, NC 27501
3f. Telephone no.:
919-632-8884
3g. Fax no.:
3h. Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
X Agent ❑ Other, specify:
4b. Name:
Brian K. Edwards, PE
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
Rivers and Associates, Inc
4d. Street address:
353 E Six Forks Rd Ste 230
4e. City, state, zip:
Raleigh NC 27609
4f. Telephone no.:
919.594.1626 x6274
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
[e-mail]
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
same as above
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
5c. Street address:
5d. City, state, zip:
5e. Telephone no.:
5f. Fax no.:
5g. Email address:
Page 2 of 10

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
la. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
0674-46-8078 + 0674-25-9617
lb. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): Latitude: 35.525500 Longitude: -78.742900
lc. Property size:
77 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
Neills Creek
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
WS-IV
2c. River basin:
Cape Fear HUC 03030004-0501
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The 77-acre project site is roughly 2/3 agricultural land and 1/3 forest, with a single-family home. a mobile home, and farm buildings on the eastem
portion. Adjacent lands are single family residential, agricultural, and forest. NC -DOT owns a 300-ft wide right-of-way (10 acres) through the middle
of the site for the proposed NC-55 bypass around Angier. The site drains southward and westward into unnamed tributaries of Neills Creek. r
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 1.25
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 3928
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
Single-family and multi -family residential development, and future commercial
development with access from Raleigh Road, Rawls Church Rd, and the
+
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment
Mass grading of site and construction of infrastructure including roadways, utilities,
to be used:
and padded lots for residential and commercial development. Typic
+
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
❑ Yes X No ❑ Unknown
Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
• Preliminary• Final
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Gerald Pottern
Agency/Consultant Company: Mogensen Mitigation Inc.
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
Gerald Pottern delineated and mapped streams, wetlands, and open water areas on the site between June 2021 to Feb 2022. The delineation has
not yet been verified by USACE.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Yes X No Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
X Yes ❑ No
6b. If yes, explain.
Phase 1 development east of the central pond and west of the future NC-55 bypass are shown on the site plan. Design of Phase 2 development in
the central part of the site is pending. but all roads and utility impacts to waters are shown, and no additional impacts to waters will occur in Phase 211
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below
for your project (check
❑ Buffers
all that apply):
Waters ❑ Pond Construction
X Wetlands X Streams — tributaries
X
Open
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
Wetland impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
2b.
Type of impact
2c.
Type of wetland
2d.
Forested
2e.
Type of jurisdiction
Corps (404,10) or
DWQ (401, other)
2f.
Area of
impact
(acres)
Wi
SEE ATTACHED TABLES
W2
W3
W4
W5
W6
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
2h. Comments:
SEE ATTACHED TABLES
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
Stream impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
3b.
Type of impact
3c.
Stream name
3d.
Perennial (PER) or
intermittent (INT)?
3e.
Type of
jurisdiction
3f.
Average
stream
width
(feet)
3g.
Impact
length
(linear
feet)
S1
SEE ATTACHED
S2
S3
S4
S5
S6
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
3i. Comments:
SEE ATTACHED TABLES
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
impact number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable)
4c.
Type of impact
4d.
Waterbody
type
4e.
Area of impact (acres)
01
SEE ATTACHED TABLES
02
03
04
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
SEE ATTACHED TABLES
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a.
Pond ID number
5b.
Proposed use or
purpose of pond
5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
5d.
Stream Impacts (feet)
5e.
Upland
(acres)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
P1
P2
5f. Total:
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a. Project is in which protected basin?
■
Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman
X
Other: Cape Fear
6b.
Buffer Impact
number —
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Stream name
6e.
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f.
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet)
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet)
31 -
Yes/No
32 -
Yes/No
B3 -
Yes/No
B4 -
Yes/No
B5 -
Yes/No
B6 -
Yes/No
6h. Total Buffer Impacts:
6i. Comments:
Page 5 of 10

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
la. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
See text in attached support letter.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
See text in attached support letter.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
No
X Yes ❑
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
x DWQ x Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
fee program
Mitigation
• Mitigation bank
p Payment to in -lieu
❑ Permittee Responsible
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank: No private bank credits available in CFR-04; see text in attached support letter.
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Quantity:
Quantity:
Quantity:
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
❑ Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
197.0000000 linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
warm
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0.41000000 acres
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation?
Yes X No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
Zone
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 7 of 10

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
• Yes © No
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
■ Yes ■ No
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
64.8 %
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
X Yes • No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
High Density development areas will meet TSS removal and peak flow attenuation by means of wet ponds. Low Density development areas will
meet peak flow attenuation by means of dry detention ponds. Stormwater Control measures are designed based on NC DEQ SCM minimal design
criteria, as required by Town of Angier.
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
Town of Angier
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
Town of Angier
3b. Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
apply (check all that apply):
X Phase II
NSW
❑ USMP
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached?
❑Yes X No
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
4a. Which of the following state -implemented stormwater management programs apply
(check all that apply):
• Coastal counties
• HQW
❑ORW
• Session Law 2006-246
• Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached?
• Yes • No
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
x Yes • No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
© Yes • No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
use of public (federal/state) land?
❑ Yes ©No
1 b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
❑Yes ❑ No
lc. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.)
Comments:
❑ Yes • No
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
❑Yes X No
2b. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
❑Yes X No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
• Yes X No
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
Angier and surrounding areas in northern Harriett County are growing due to proximity to the Research Triangle
provide much -needed housing in this area and small businesses within walking distance. Additional development
area, but this project is not in itself expected to be a cause of additional development.
analysis in accordance with the
region. This proposed project will
will likely occur in the surrounding
+
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non -discharge or discharge)
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
Sanitary wastewater from the proposed homes and businesses will be conveyed via the existing Neills Creek
WWTP which discharges into the Cape Fear River near Lillington. The Town of Angier has approved a sanitary
their Planned Use Development approval.
of wastewater generated from
sewer to the North Harnett County
allotment of ,x* MGD for the project in
+
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
l Yes ❑ No
0 Yes ❑ No
Raleigh
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
The US-I=WS !Pee Tool identifies four federal -listed endangered or threatened species of concern: The Red -cockaded woodpecker, Cape Fear
shiner, Atlantic pigtoe mussel, and Rough -leaf loosestrife. A Biological Assessment for these species is included in the attached letter.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes x❑ No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
NOAA-NMFS Essential Fish Habitat Mapping Tool indicates no EFH in the project vicinity
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
❑ Yes ❑x No
111
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
NCSHPO GIS Web service (HPOWeb 2.0) indicates one historic home within 1/2 mile of the project. Structure HT1046, mapped 600 ft south of the
project site, was demolished in 2019-2020. No archaeological survey was performed on the site to our knowledge.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?
❑ Yes x❑ No
8b. if yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
FEMA Flood Risk Informaton System (FRIS) Map No. 2720067400K (Harnett Co Panel # 0674) shows no mapped flood hazard area on the project
site. The upstream limit of Zone AE flood risk mapping begins about 0.4 mile downstream of the project.
111
80. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
NC Flood Risk Information System
Brian K Edwards
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agents signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant is provided_)
08-23-2022
Date
Page 10 of 10

• ETI W HEI LL
. E H LLI •
• :•;
....
-... -,
4 '... " ...
, % ...
'.......
- ...-, ... '',.......
. -- -----• - - ' ----- ) ''''' ' .-', ' , ` .
. .....,. ell--,.2.:3b..-„,...-,.....
---,_---___-,.., --„.--
AE-LAND .PAPAL.,an—s?
161.3.
•• /.
•-• '
.
10
. /. •r''
:.' ... / '
' i .... / + . ..
-`...-41-il, ..4.• 4101.re. ..." . . , , . ,. '
, 1
,,,..„„04,0- •„- - AO* • -..- , ...' -..,:s ....' , L 0 ir .Alte'di," 8.4S1/ / 5 -% ' - .. \ ‘ % • '' .
./d.o..leed, 4,-Xe," . -.0'. ... .,.! •,.. ,......% ‘.... ‘..:\',
./...r,;f.&':4/ 4141. ‘-....,... .....,..„:,.., .".... "--.. ' -..,' -... ---:-
... .......... -.... 7,.....-k.. ._ ....:',' ••• ' '
„...4; / • "" ..* fe
' ..-..or • / f'"*".' 4.. --:„‘ - •••,' .....-..-
2%'
\-•,------- viard•e• .4„..0. .....v- .:•4:45 ...-':-%-14... 4
- .,...--.-,_-_-__-. _. 4,947,-Matkei- • 4,,„5,./470z...q:
•--f-;---:;,-----_,..-!'"01,44W Alitir***4 ,
-.7 -•:.• ---: - 4?-7,4.-S-i•gyar.14-1',-.,•:.-WZ.f...i.AZ01404724.75- • ..
\--I--
--,-:-._
• •c
SUNFILCHT LL
OA 2.721 PC, d
- = •-
W.1
w.2
W.3
P•4
W-5
W.6
S .7
w-1 o
P•11
S•12
WE1Jl, • 1.0FAC,
1.7.15
no .2
,Isfr: •
• 257 SF
VV-1
W. ellart9/S. treani Impaet Table
.....,,rn".., ..
SF 00: V
Pry.mm,11 1,M 2F 0 13 .•v:
Weldrind ,rnp•HGIR•1
limliNgS'y C 5F 4.0C•AC.
rrnan.n1 I :.P EF C.
,
weo.nr,.rnpp;in
c SF
OM
Pm!! Irniinif.1
,cmprar, e EF 0.00 a.0
mxri..n1 I .31 C..,12 A.,..
5151.1nmlimp•=1.
711M11:9:a14. SF OM AC
Q,A.,..
wronmiri Iniporei is
'rcenolary e EF
r.W.rn.,11 I $2: jr.
1
Stminm !nun.. fir
71:1111:.-ay -.Te SF ao
orrrrmrc: "M.: a 0112 AL..
leintlniiil Imporl ft
,,Y, . IN 5F OD'
, rj El. COMAS:
4ermani imp... • +,
• .., a SF am .C.
Ai) sp
r Er 0.1:DAC
4.0, P.C.
1 %, 0.0akC
,ifrruliall :651 sr 0.co Rc
's..............g,..,,R
-regniacly a SF 0.1BAC
Prmolimil :,22 g C•1•13 01d
11.0.1{ki Rail '
-rstai .ennaleni 2.P.3.E0 Er .147 kG
1.511,1rr.n.41.1%1 21 7ECI SF
49E - !MACY
1.7.3.1 SF
W.1 16 WC.
_
/ .11 L..r
flLHT LL
P-11 2D6
p
ri
ar
SCALE 1 - 1 al II
Figure 1A. White Oak Creek Crossing - Jurisdictional Waters Impacts - Overview Map, Eastern Half.

I I
wILLIRikI3 PEGG, E.
�r 7wILLFJRb
•
7F
P 3 I
I ;
-----J-—
IL- E -I'
JJ E—
L .? h ahi•�s
yd,TTHE545
h.?. 3E^i PG 2'-
rdIGH#EL l 1THE317
46 3L17E R . 1E6
:p,ruv h 8.4513r VATTHEW
LI.9. 2d^3 P;;. 05'
I of so, iffy
SCALE 1 rich — 1 Oa Ir
H E
'E- E •IWF'''
irE
I I
LJILJi J
FIL HT LL
ti
NE-1.-VC.;WIC d
i
i
J
IIrrIM1! I L �IL�IilYi'� I ry
I''4r V �J
FIL HT LL
Figure 1B. White Oak Creek Crossing -Jurisdictional Waters Impacts - Overview Map, Western Half.

-- LOD\ - lr.
\ 5 89:4i6r—E 894.34fi
ilk■ter �. Lam
i
ff srr ;
• S 8§1]773.r E
— ` • —.7.5
WETLAND GK: Forest+Scrub
PERMANENT IMPACT W-1
5734 SQ.FT = 0.132 AC
FS
WETLAND GK: Forest+Scrub
- TEMPORARY IMPACT W-1
510 SQ.FT = 0.012 AC
100' 0 50' 100'
MENEM
11111111
■•
•
€ .5f
OPEN WATER: Pond P2
PERMANENT IMPACT 0-11
208 SQ.FT = 0.005 AC
ryW
EXIST
POND
r
Figure 2A. White Oak Creek Crossing - Jurisdictional Waters Impacts - Eastern Area Impact Details.
7

/
•
T
ti. ; ,
4 rETL LND GM,
PERMANENT kMPACTW-3 — '-
g•53 SCI.FT 0,027AC may ,_
POND P1; GPr#n W Wr
PERMANENT IMPACT"
112s Si, i Y 0,026 AG
a
11 Y*
_-
--,...:::_,_:
.i t :2 . 2 / : .- : ::.:97:_,;r14..-_-7-4. :;2.`;'
+ -r; ac- a --�-*
,
9
'I
3
WETLAND GX: FartPstwa-d
PERMANENT IMPACT W-2
1713 .SO.FT ■ g.O39 AC
WETLAND GL: Harb-Scrub
PERMANENT IMPACT W-10
257 Sal, FT ■ 0.046 AC
cO TE ra,r, �A
wti.744.
I
+'J ! L ? A
-/-F-f i ti riA I
/.:
-+ 1 IETLAND G5; F4rCSt0d
PERMANENT IMPACT 1+W-E "� * k
1475a SQ,FT * 0,149 AC 1r - - I
I � i -
1'\ \\
\ \\ r ` "-� f / r r; i } �S \ 1
itii - \\ ..\.
� - -- -- 1 i 1
ti , .�\'' \\ ___ '" +r / II
\\-- \\ \ -. -- x f t'
{
\\\ -ram_ :" }ii + %
\ \ \ \ \ � STREAM S3: PerormIal �;- +. • l •{ ; Z .. 1 �+
\ \ w PERMANENT IMPACT S-9
\ 1 \ \ \ 4x35FT-140$G,FT }, / 1 i I1 )+ 1i + \
$'REAM $3; Perem-d.al ..I { J r i I ! \\
40 PERMANENT IMPACT S-12 • / I/ / 1I 1 4 x bO FT = 320 5U. Fr . ' I { yI 1
:F4 i ( (I) 4 l i \
+
xi
--+_
'sI -.- -
- -
\ • \
-\r1C f. ��N. �. fi...- - - - - - -
Wotiand.GH
Ho'Impizct
Figure 2B. White Oak Creek Crossing -Jurisdictional Waters Impacts - Central Area Impact Details.

0 50 10Y
•=1 MI•i•
i•
1R S c5.� .
1 11
1l: 111111}1I ! r4
)1.,�F'l1111,�M
I I 1 11111111,11 !I)i‘
11 J Ir1 r 113 1 11 r 1�111
=a ulith111 1111rlrr
'4q� I iIIJI}15134 /
11I�F#"//
111 1i1l11 111! III/ ;Ili
' 11111 1 1 f! I! 11 III 1
//i/11/1 i l Olio
1111 r 1 11 111� l 11 I I!1rI//��6/g4
1 l 1. ti I
1111�
WETLAND GJ: Forested
PERMANENT IMPACT W.
1920 SQ.FT = 4.044 AC
•
ti
Figure 2C. White Oak Creek Crossing -Jurisdictional Waters Impacts - Northwest Area Impact Details.
/r
WETLAND GZ: Forested
PERMANENT IMPACT W-8
2572 SQ.FT = 0.059 AC
.V .5.9'4.9'72' W
WETLAND GZ: Forested
TEMPORARY IMPACT W-8
555 SQ.FT = 0.013 AC
STREAM Si: 8' wide
TEMP IMPACT S-7b
15 x 8 = 120 SF
STREAM Si: 8' wide
PERM IMPACT 5-7
85 x 8 = 680 SF
STREAM Si: 8' wide
TEMP IMPACT S-7a
25x8=200SF
//
N 757Y14" W
HfDF
r 11
fir-~ - �} _
▪ _ :i •— 29s
J -
3°5 1r(
— �1
STREAM S2
No Impact
Ls 67,414- w
1 SR 2i"
100'
WETLAND GG
No impact
J
N 89'17'"
292.74'
0 50' 100'
—� ii-iiiiii
Figure 2D. White Oak Creek Crossing -Jurisdictional Waters Impacts - Southwest Area Impact Details.