20200598 Ver 2_ePCN Application_20230123

DWR
Division of Water Resources
Initial Review
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
For Nationwide Permits and Regional General Permits
(along with corresponding Water Quality Certifications)
April 13, 2022 Ver 4.3
Has this project met the requirements for acceptance in to the review process?*
Yes
No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
Yes No
Change only if needed.
Pre -Filing Meeting Date Request was submitted on:
11/29/2022
BIMS # Assigned* Version#*
20200598 2
Is a payment required for this project?*
No payment required
Fee received
Fee needed - send electronic notification
Reviewing Office*
Raleigh Regional Office - [phone]
Information for Initial Review
la. Name of project:
Exeter Mebane South Outparcels
la. Who is the Primary Contact?*
Joe Thompson
What amout is owed?*
$240.00
$570.00
Select Project Reviewer*
Zachary Thomas:eads\ztthomas
lb. Primary Contact Email:* lc. Primary Contact Phone:*
[e-mail] [phone]
Date Submitted
1/23/2023
Nearest Body of Water
UT of Sevenmile Creek
Basin
Neuse
Water Classification
WS-II; HQW, NSW
Site Coordinates
Latitude:
36.069258
A. Processing Information
County (or Counties) where the project is located:
Orange
Is this a NCDMS Project
Yes No
Is this project a public transportation project? *
Yes No
Longitude:
-79.208247

la. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
Section 404 Permit (wetlands, streams and waters, Clean Water Act)
Section 10 Permit (navigable waters, tidal waters, Rivers and Harbors Act)
Has this PCN previously been submitted?*
Yes
No
Please provide the date of the previous submission.*
5/22/2020
1 b. What type(s) of permit(s) do you wish to seek authorization?
Nationwide Permit (NWP)
Regional General Permit (RGP)
Standard (IP)
lc. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
Yes No
Nationwide Permit (NWP) Number: 39 - Commercial/Institutional Developments
NWP Numbers (for multiple NWPS):
ld. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
401 Water Quality Certification - Regular
Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
Individual 401 Water Quality Certification
le. Is this notification solely for the record because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWR 401 Certification:
For the record only for Corps Permit:
If. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?*
Yes No
lg. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
Yes No
lg. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
Yes No
1 h. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties?
Yes No
1j. Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?
Yes No
B. Applicant Information
Id. Who is applying for the permit?
Owner Applicant (other than owner)
le. Is there an Agent/Consultant for this project?*
Yes No
2. Owner Information
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
Exeter Mebane Lane, LLC
2b. Deed book and page no.:
2c. Contact Person:
J Peter Lloyd
401 Water Quality Certification - Express
Riparian Buffer Authorization
Yes No
Yes No

2d. Address
Street Address
101 W Elm St
Address Line 2
Ste 600
City
Conshohocken
Postal / Zip Code
19428
State / Province / Region
PA
Country
USA
2e. Telephone Number: 2f. Fax Number:
[phone]
2g. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
3. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
3a. Name:
Joe Thompson
3b. Business Name:
Exeter Property Group
3c. Address
Street Address
715 Harvard St
Address Line 2
City State / Province / Region
Orlando FL
Postal / Zip Code Country
32804 USA
3d. Telephone Number: 3e. Fax Number:
[phone]
3f. Email Address: *
Joseph thompson@egtexeter. com
4. Agent/Consultant (if applicable)
4a. Name:
Chris Tinklenberg
4b. Business Name:
Kimley-Horn and Associates
4c. Address
Street Address
200 South Tryon St
Address Line 2
Suite 200
City State / Province / Region
Charlotte NC
Postal / Zip Code Country
28202 USA
4d. Telephone Number: 4e. Fax Number:
[phone]
4f. Email Address: *
[e-mail]
C. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Project Information
1b. Subdivision name:
(if appropriate)
lc. Nearest municipality / town:
Mebane
2. Project Identification

2a. Property Identification Number:
9834843113
2b. Property size:
45.7
2c. Project Address
Street Address
Address Line 2
City
Postal /Zip Code
3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project:*
UT of Sevenmile Creek
3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water:*
WS-II; HQW, NSW
3c. What river basin(s) is your project located in?*
Neuse
3d. Please provide the 12-digit HUC in which the project is located.
030202010302
4. Project Description and History
State / Province / Region
Country
4a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this application:*
The site is located south of West Ten Road, between Squires Road and Country Haven in Orange County, NC. The site is
comprised of recent growth forestland, open areas with dilapidated structures, and undeveloped forestland. The site is
bound by W Ten Road and an industrial warehouse to the north, undeveloped forestland and single-family residences to
the east, undeveloped forestland to the south, and Squires Road and single-family residences to the west.
4b. Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this project (including all prior phases) in the past? *
Yes No Unknown
If yes, please give the DWR Certification number or the Corps Action ID (exp. SAW-0000-00000).
SAW-2019-01993, DWR #20-0598
4f. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
0.27
4g. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
1,536
4h. Explain the purpose of the proposed project: *
The purpose of this project is to construct an industrial warehouse to support the growing demands in the region.
4i. Describe the overall project in detail, including indirect impacts and the type of equipment to be used: *
The project proposes the development of two (2) warehouse buildings, totaling ±432,000 SF, on -site roadway, truck/trailer
parking, employee parking, and stormwater facilities.
General construction equipment including bulldozers, excavators, front-end loaders, etc. will be used for construction
purposes.
5. Jurisdictional Determinations
5a. Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the property or proposed impact areas?*
Yes No
Comments:
5b. If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made?*
Preliminary Approved Not Verified Unknown N/A
Corps AID Number:
SAW-2019-01993
5c. If 5a is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known):
Agency/Consultant Company:
Other:
Chris Tinklenberg
Kimley-Horn and Associates
Unknown
5d. List the dates of the Corp jurisdiction determination or State determination if a determination was made by the Corps or DWR
October 4, 2019
6. Future Project Plans

6a. Is this a phased project?*
Yes No
Are any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permits(s) used, or intended to be used, to authorize any part of the proposed project or related activity?
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
la. Where are the impacts associated with your project? (check all that apply):
Wetlands Streams -tributaries
Open Waters Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
Buffers
2a. Site #* (?)
2a1 Reason (?)
2b. Impact type"(')
2c. Type of W.*
2d. W. name
2e. Forested*
2f. Type of Jurisdicition*
(?)
2g. Impact
area*
Impact 1 - W3
Grading/Fill
P
Headwater Forest
W3
No
Both
0.180
(acres)
Impact 2 - W4
Grading/Fill
P
Headwater Forest
W4
No
Both
0.030
(acres)
2g. Total Temporary Wetland Impact
0.000
2g. Total Wetland Impact
0.210
2i. Comments:
2g. Total Permanent Wetland Impact
0.210
The proposed development seeks authorization under NWP 39 for wetland impacts associated with the grading activities necessary to construct the two
(2) proposed warehouse buildings. Impacts to the wetlands are proposed at two impact sites:
• Impact Site 1 — 0.18-acre to Wetland 3 results from grading necessary to construct the proposed industrial development.
• Impact Site 2 - 0.03-acre to Wetland 4 results from grading necessary to construct the proposed industrial development.
Overall, impacts associated with the proposed development will result in 0.21-acre of permanent impacts to wetland waters of the US.
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation
u
1. Avoidance and Minimization
la. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:
Avoidance and minimization efforts were implemented during development planning and design to the greatest extent practicable to reduce the overall
impacts on the aquatic environment while staying within nationwide permit thresholds. The final plan demonstrates maximum avoidance and
minimization efforts by reducing the proposed stream impacts. The rationale to support avoidance and minimization efforts include the following:
• Avoidance of the remaining 0.06-acre of wetlands on -site
• Avoidance of the 1,536 LF of streams on -site
• Avoidance of the Neuse River Basin Riparian Buffers on -site
lb. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:
Stormwater and erosion control measures will be utilized to avoid sedimentation impacts to downstream waters and control runoff from the construction
site.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
Yes No
2c. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
DWR Corps
2d. If yes, which mitigation option(s) will be used for this project?
Mitigation bank Payment to in -lieu fee program Permittee Responsible Mitigation
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
Yes No
4b. Stream mitigation requested: 4c. If using stream mitigation, what is the stream temperature:
(linear feet)
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWR only): 4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
(square feet) (acres)

4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
(acres)
0.21
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
(acres)
4h. Comments
Compensatory mitigation will be met by the purchase of credits through the NC Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS) in -lieu fee program. 0.21-acre
of wetland impacts will be mitigated through the purchase of wetland mitigation credits. Based on an NCWAM assessment of Medium for Wetland 3 and
Wetland 4, mitigation is proposed at a 2:1 ratio for impacts to these features, or 0.42 mitigation credits. In total, 0.42 wetland mitigation credits will be
purchased to offset impacts associated with this project. Quality assessment results and State of Availability are included.
6. Buffer mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) - required by DWR
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires buffer mitigation? If yes, you must fill out this entire form - please contact DWR for more information.
Yes No
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
la. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
Yes No
What type of SCM are you providing?
Level Spreader
Vegetated Conveyance (lower SHWT)
Wetland Swale (higher SHWT)
Other SCM that removes minimum 30% nitrogen
Proposed project will not create concentrated stormwater flow through the buffer
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250? *
Yes No
2b. Does this project meet the requirements for low density projects as defined in 15A NCAC 02H .1003(2)7
Yes No
2c. Does this project have a stormwater management plan (SMP) reviewed and approved under a state stormwater program or state -approved local government stormwater program?
Yes No
N/A - project disturbs < 1 acre
2d. Which of the following stormwater management program(s) apply:
Local Government State
Local Government Stormwater Programs
Phase II NSW USMP Water Supply
Please identify which local government stormwater program you are using.
City of Mebane
Comments:
The proposed project falls within Neuse River basin. As such the proposed onsite stormwater will be designed in accordance with the requirements of Orange County specifically Section
6.14 Stormwater Management of the Unified Development
Ordinance and as required to meet the state mandated Falls Lake and Jordan Lake Stormwater Rules for New Development (15A NCAC 2B. 0277, 15A NCAC 2B. 0265, Session Law
2009-484). Specifically:
• Nutrient load contribution must meet the standards listed in Section 6.14.7 as required by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NC DWQ);
• Nitrogen and phosphorus loads contributed by proposed new development shall not exceed the following unit -area mass loading rates, Falls Lake Watershed, Nitrogen, 2.2 pounds per
acre per year, Phosphorus, 0.33 pounds per acre per year;
• Peak attenuation of the 1-year 24-hour storm;
• Meet or provide mitigation for the nutrient load contribution leaving the site;
• The nutrient export from each new development shall be calculated in pounds per acre per year (using the approved accounting tool) in accordance with the methodologies approved by
the NC DWQ.
The proposed sediment basins will be converted to permanent stormwater control measures. The stormwater components
associated with the proposed development have been designed in accordance with the City of Mebane's Phase II Stormwater
Post -Construction Ordinance. Per section 303 of the Stormwater Ordinance, the following Mebane Requirements apply to the
proposed development:
• The measures shall be designed to control and treat the stormwater run-off generated by the 1" (one inch) of rain;
• Runoff volume drawdown time shall be a minimum of 48 hours, but not more than 120 hours;
• Stormwater shall not leave the project site at a rate greater than the predevelopment discharge rate for the ten-year,
24-hour storm;
• All structural stormwater treatment systems used to meet the requirements of the program shall be designed to have
a minimum of 85% average annual removal for Total Suspended Solids (TSS);
• General engineering design criteria for all projects shall be in accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .1008(c), as explained in
the Design Manual;
• All stormwater control measures that incorporate a permanent or temporary water pool with depth greater than two feet
shall be fenced. The fence shall meet the design standards maintained by the Stormwater Administrator.
A copy of the approval will be provided when it is received.

G. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation
la. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of public (federal/state) land? *
Yes No
2. Violations (DWR Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), or DWR Surface Water or Wetland Standards or
Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?*
Yes No
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWR Requirement)
3a. Will this project result in additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?*
Yes No
3b. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
No additional or cumulative impacts are anticipated due to the construction of the proposed project.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project?*
Yes No N/A
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or habitat?*
Yes No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?*
Yes No
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Raleigh
5d. Is another Federal agency involved?*
Yes
5e. Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?
Yes No
No Unknown
5f. Will you cut any trees in order to conduct the work in waters of the U.S.?
Yes No
5g. Does this project involve bridge maintenance or removal?
Yes No
5h. Does this project involve the construction/installation of a wind turbine(s)?*
Yes No
5i. Does this project involve (1) blasting, and/or (2) other percussive activities that will be conducted by machines, such as jackhammers, mechanized pile drivers, etc.?
Yes No
5j. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?
A review of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database on December 6th, 2022, did not indicate known occurrences of threatened
or endangered species occurring within the site boundary. Potentially suitable habitat for threatened and endangered species on -site was not identified.
A concurrence request letter was submitted to the USFWS on December 7th, 2022. The project did not identify suitable habitat for listed species and a
biological conclusion of "no effect" was recommended to USFWS. USFWS responded on December 20th, 2022, and recommended a "no effect"
determination for Neuse River waterdog, Carolina madtom, and dwarf wedgemussel. USFWS could not concur with a "no effect" determination for
Atlantic pigtoe. Kimley-Horn provided the USFWS with further information to support a "no effect" determination. The USFWS responded on January 5th,
2023, and recommended a "may affect, not likely to adversely affect" for Atlantic pigtoe. The USFWS correspondence is attached.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*
Yes No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat? *
NCNHP element occurrence database did not indicate the presence of EFH within the project boundary
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)

7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation status?*
Yes No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?*
Kimley-Horn consulted the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) HPOWEB GIS service on December 7th, 2022. No documented
architectural, historic, or archaeological sites of significance within the project boundary were identified. The HPOWEB map is attached.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?*
Yes No
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?*
FIRM Panel 3710451400K & 3710450400L
Miscellaneous
Please use the space below to attach all required documentation or any additional information you feel is helpful for application review. Documents should be combined into one file when
possible, with a Cover Letter, Table of Contents, and a Cover Sheet for each Section preferred.
Click the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach document
_20230118_Exeter Mebane South Outparcels(SAW-2019-01993)_NWP39 Modification.pdf 76.94MB
File must be PDF or KMZ
Comments
Signature
- By checking the box and signing below, I certify that:
• The project proponent hereby certifies that all information contained herein is true, accurate, and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief'; and
• The project proponent hereby requests that the certifying authority review and take action on this CWA 401 certification request within the applicable reasonable period of time.
• I have given true, accurate, and complete information on this form;
I agree that submission of this PCN form is a "transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a written signature; AND
I intend to electronically sign and submit the PCN form.
Full Name:
Chris Tinklenberg
Signature
Date
1/23/2023

Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions
ACTION ID #: SAW- 2019-01993 Begin Date (Date Received):
Prepare file folder ❑ Assign Action ID Number in ORM ❑
1. Project Name [PCN Form A2a]: Exeter Mebane South Outparcels
2. Work Type: VPrivate ❑Institutional ❑ Government ❑ Commercial
3. Project Description / Purpose [PCN Form 133d and 133e]:
Exeter Property Group is seeking a modification to the authorization under NWP 39 for wetland impacts associated with grading
activities necessary to construct two (2) proposed warehouse buildings.
4. Property Owner / Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A41: Exeter Property Group (POC: Joe Thompson)
715 Harvard St, Orlando, Florida 32804; [e-mail]; 407-748-6888
5. Agent / Consultant [PNC Form A5 — or ORM Consultant ID Number]:
Chris Tinklenberg, PWS (Kimley-Horn)
6. Related Action ID Number(s) [PCN Form 135b]:
7. Project Location — Coordinates, Street Address, and/or Location Description [PCN Form Blb]:
The subject property is located south of West Ten Rd, between Squires Road and Country Haven in Orange
County, NC. Project Coordinates (decimal degrees): 36.069258,-79.208247
8. Project Location —Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form Bla]: 9834843113
9. Project Location —County [PCN Form A2b]: Orange
10. Project Location —Nearest Municipality or Town [PCN Form A2c]: Mebane
11. Project Information — Nearest Waterbody [PCN Form 132a]: UT of Sevenmile Creek
12. Watershed / 8-Digit Hydrologic Unit Code [PCN Form 132c]: Upper Neuse (HUC 03020201)
Authorization: Section 10 ❑ Section 404 ❑✓
Regulatory Action Type:
❑ Standard Permit
❑✓ Nationwide Permit #39
Regional General Permit #
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Section 10 and 404 ❑
::]Pre -Application Request
::]Unauthorized Activity
❑ Compliance
❑No Permit Required
Revised 20150602

Kimley»>Horn
January 18, 2023
April Norton
Wilmington District, Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
US Army Corps of Engineers
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
Mr. Paul Wojoski
NC DWR, 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604
Re: Pre -Construction Notification Modification (NWP #39 and IWQC)
Exeter Mebane South Outparcels (SAW-2019-01993)
Mebane, Orange County, NC
Dear Ms. Norton and Mr. Wojoski:
On behalf of our client, Exeter Property Group, Kimley-Horn (KH) is submitting the enclosed modification to
the Section 404/401 Pre -construction Notification (PCN) for the above -referenced project for your review
pursuant to Nationwide Permit #39 and Individual 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC). The proposed
project seeks to construct two (2) warehouse buildings, totaling ±432,000 square feet (SF), including access
roads, utilities, and stormwater management facilities. Authorization is requested under NWP 39 for impacts
associated with grading activities necessary to construct a portion of the industrial site. The following
information is included as part of this application submittal:
• Project Summary Sheet
• Pre -Construction Notification Form
• Agent Authorization
• Permit Figures
■ Figure 1 —Vicinity
■ Figure 2 — USGS 7.5' Topo (Efland Quadrangle)
■ Figure 3 — Orange Co. SSURGO Soils and NWI Map (ESRI Aerial Basemap)
■ Figure 4 — Existing Conditions (ESRI Aerial Basemap)
• Permit Drawings
• Agency Correspondence
• Compensatory Mitigation
PROJECT BACKGROUND
Exeter Mebane South Outparcels is a proposed 45.7-acre industrial development located in Mebane, Orange
County, NC. The center of the project is located at 36.069258°,-79.208247°. The project proposes the
development of two (2) warehouse buildings, totaling ±432,000 SF, on -site roadway, truck/trailer parking,
employee parking, and stormwater facilities. The purpose of this project is to construct an industrial
warehouse to support the growing demands in the region.
Modification is requested for this permit (SAW-2019-01993) due to a change in the applicant, expired
verification, and a change in permit plans.

Kimley»>Horn
AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE
Cultural Resources
Page 2
Kimley-Horn consulted the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) HPOWEB GIS service
on December 71h, 2022. No documented architectural, historic, or archaeological sites of significance within
the project boundary were identified. The HPOWEB map is attached.
Protected Species
A review of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database on December 61h, 2022, did not
indicate known occurrences of threatened or endangered species occurring within the site boundary.
Potentially suitable habitat for threatened and endangered species on -site was not identified. A concurrence
request letter was submitted to the USFWS on December 71h, 2022. The project did not identify suitable
habitat for listed species and a biological conclusion of "no effect' was recommended to USFWS. USFWS
responded on December 201h, 2022, and recommended a "no effect' determination for Neuse River
waterdog, Carolina madtom, and dwarf wedgemussel. USFWS could not concur with a "no effect'
determination for Atlantic pigtoe. Kimley-Horn provided the USFWS with further information to support a "no
effect' determination. The USFWS responded on January 51h, 2023, and recommended a "may affect, not
likely to adversely affect' for Atlantic pigtoe. The USFWS correspondence is attached.
PROPOSED IMPACTS TO JURISDICTIONAL WATERS
The proposed development seeks authorization under NWP 39 for wetland impacts associated with the
grading activities necessary to construct the two (2) proposed warehouse buildings. Impacts to the wetlands
are proposed at two impact sites:
• Impact Site 1 — 0.18-acre to Wetland 3 results from grading necessary to construct the proposed
industrial development.
• Impact Site 2 - 0.03-acre to Wetland 4 results from grading necessary to construct the proposed
industrial development.
Overall, impacts associated with the proposed development will result in 0.21-acre of permanent
impacts to wetland waters of the US.
AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION
Avoidance and minimization efforts were implemented during development planning and design to the
greatest extent practicable to reduce the overall impacts on the aquatic environment while staying within
nationwide permit thresholds. The final plan demonstrates maximum avoidance and minimization efforts by
reducing the proposed impacts. The rationale to support avoidance and minimization efforts includes the
following:
• Avoidance of the remaining 0.06-acre of wetlands on -site
• Avoidance of the 1,536 LF of streams on -site
• Avoidance of the Neuse River Basin Riparian Buffers on -site
COMPENSATORY MITIGATION
Compensatory mitigation will be met by the purchase of credits through the NC Division of Mitigation Services
(NCDMS) in -lieu fee program. 0.21-acre of wetland impacts will be mitigated through the purchase of wetland
mitigation credits. Based on an NCWAM assessment of Medium for Wetland 3 and Wetland 4, mitigation is
proposed at a 2:1 ratio for impacts to these features, or 0.42 mitigation credits. In total, 0.42 wetland
mitigation credits will be purchased to offset impacts associated with this project. Quality assessment results
and State of Availability are included.

Kimley»>Horn
Page 3
Please feel free to contact me at [phone] if you have any questions or if additional information is
necessary.
Sincerely,
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
Chris Tinklenberg, PWS
Environmental Scientist

Kimley>>>Horn
Project Summary Sheet
Project Name: Exeter Mebane South Outparcels
Applicant Name and Address: Joe Thompson
Exeter Property Group
715 Harvard St
Orlando, FL 32804
Telephone Number: 407-748-6888
Type of Request: ® Nationwide PCN (NWP # L9
❑ Jurisdictional Determination
❑ Individual Permit Application
❑ Other:
Included Attachments: ® Project Plans ® USGS Map ® NRCS Soil Survey
® Agent Authorization ❑ Delineation Sketch ® Delineation Survey
❑ Data Forms (Up & Wet) ❑ NCDWR Stream Forms ❑ USACE Stream Forms
® NCDMS Confirmation ® Aerial Photo ❑ Site Photos
® Agency Correspondence ❑ Other: ❑ Other:
Check if applicable: ❑ CAMA County ❑ Trout County ❑ Isolated Waters
❑ Section 7, ESA ❑ Section 106, NHPA ❑ EFH
❑ Mitigation Proposed (❑ NC EEP ❑ On -Site ❑ Off -Site ❑ Other)
County: Orange Nearest City/Town: Mebane
Waterway: UT of Sevenmile Creek River Basin: Upper Neuse
H.U.C.: 03020201 USGS Quad Name: Efland
Property Size (acres): 45.7 Approx. Size of Jurisdiction on Site (acres): 0.27 ac / 1,536 LF
Site Coordinates (in decimal degrees): 36.069258 °N-79.208247 °W
Project Location: The subject property is located south of West Ten Road, between Squires Road and Country Haven in
Orange County, NC.
Site Description: The subject property is comprised of recent growth forestland, open areas with dilapidated structures,
and undeveloped forestland. The site is bound by W Ten Road and an industrial warehouse to the north, undeveloped
forestland and single-family residences to the east, undeveloped forestland to the south, and Squires Road and single-family
residences to the west.
Impact Summary (if applicable): Authorization is requested under NWP 39 to impact 0.18-acre to Wetland 3 and 0.03-
acre to Wetland 4 resulting from grading necessary to construct the proposed industrial development.
Stream Channel
Open Water
Wetland
Intermittent and/or Unimportant
Perennial and/or Important
NWP
(acres)
(acres)
#
Aquatic Function
Aquatic Function
Tem .
Perm.
Tem .
Perm.
Temp.
Perm.
Temp.
Perm.
if
ac
if
ac
if
ac
if
Ac
39
-
-
-
0.21
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Total
0.21
Total Permanent (Loss) Impact to Non -Wetland Waters of the
U.S. If/acres
_
Total Permanent (Loss) Impact to Wetland Waters of the U.S.
0.21
acres
Kimley-Horn Contact: Chris Tinklenber, PWS Direct Number: [phone]
Email: chris.tinklenberg(a� imley-hom.com

M
o/�Q� INArF�9��
l I.�wu
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A.
Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1 a.
Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit El Section 10 Permit
1 b.
Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 39 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes
❑ No
1d.
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
® 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e.
Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification:
❑ Yes ® No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes ® No
1f.
Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in -lieu
fee program.
® Yes
❑ No
1g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties? If yes, answer
1 h below.
❑ Yes
® No
1 h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes
® No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
Exeter Mebane South Outparcels
2b.
County:
Orange
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Mebane
2d.
Subdivision name:
N/A
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no:
N/A
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Exeter Mebane Lane, LLC
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
J Peter Lloyd
3d.
Street address:
101 W Elm St, Ste 600
3e.
City, state, zip:
Conshohocken, PA 19428
3f.
Telephone no.:
3g.
Fax no.:
3h.
Email address:
Page 1 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4.
Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a.
Applicant is:
❑ Agent ® Other, specify: Developer
4b.
Name:
Joe Thompson
4c.
Business name
(if applicable):
Exeter Property Group
4d.
Street address:
715 Harvard St
4e.
City, state, zip:
Orlando, FL, 32804
4f.
Telephone no.:
407-748-6888
4g.
Fax no.:
4h.
Email address:
[e-mail]
5.
Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a.
Name:
Chris Tinklenberg, PWS
5b.
Business name
(if applicable):
Kimley-Horn and Associates
5c.
Street address:
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200
5d.
City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28202
5e. Telephone no.:
704-409-1802
5f.
Fax no.:
5g.
Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 2 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
9834843113
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 36.069258 Longitude:-79.208247
(DD.DDDDDD) (-DD.DDDDDD)
1c. Property size:
45.7 acres (Project Boundary)
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to proposed
UT of Sevenmile Creek
project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
WS-II; HQW, NSW
2c. River basin:
Neuse (HUC 03020201)
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 site is located south of West Ten Road, between Squires Road and Country Haven in Orange County, NC. The site is
comprised of recent growth forestland, open areas with dilapidated structures, and undeveloped forestland. The site is
bound by W Ten Road and an industrial warehouse to the north, undeveloped forestland and single-family residences to
the east, undeveloped forestland to the south, and Squires Road and single-family residences to the west.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
0.27 ac
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
1,536 LF
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The purpose of this project is to construct an industrial warehouse to support the growing demands in the region.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The project proposes the development of two (2) warehouse buildings, totaling ±432,000 SF, on -site roadway, truck/trailer
parking, employee parking, and stormwater facilities.
General construction equipment including bulldozers, excavators, front-end loaders, etc. will be used for construction
purposes.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the Corps
or State been requested or obtained for this property / project
®Yes El No El Unknown
(including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type of
®Preliminary El Final
determination was made? SAW-2019-01993
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Agency/Consultant Company: Kimley-Horn and
Associates
Name (if known): Chris Tinklenberg
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
October 4, 2019
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for this
® Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
NWP 39 and NWP 18 were approved on May 22, 2020 (SAW-2019-01993). A modification is request for this permit due
to a change in applicant, expired verification, and change in permit plans.
Page 3 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? ❑ Yes ® No
6b. If yes, explain.
C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
® Wetlands ❑ Streams - tributaries ❑ Buffers
❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
2b.
2c.
2d.
2e.
2f.
Wetland impact
Type of jurisdiction
number —
Type of impact
Type of wetland
Forested
(Corps - 404, 10
Area of impact
Permanent (P)
(if known)
DWQ — non-404, other)
(acres)
or Temporary
T
Impact 1 — W3
H P LLJJ
Grading/Fill
PSS
I
No
® Corps
DWQ
0.18
Impact 2 — W4
®P❑T
Grading/Fill
PSS
No
® Corps
®DWQ
0.03
2g. Total wetland impacts
2h. Comments:
The proposed development seeks authorization under NWP 39 for wetland impacts associated with the grading activities
necessary to construct the two (2) proposed warehouse buildings. Impacts to the wetlands are proposed at two impact sites:
• Impact Site 1 — 0.18-acre to Wetland 3 results from grading necessary to construct the proposed industrial
development.
• Impact Site 2 - 0.03-acre to Wetland 4 results from grading necessary to construct the proposed industrial
development.
Overall, impacts associated with the proposed development will result in 0.21-acre of permanent impacts to wetland waters of
the US.
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
3b.
3c.
3d.
3e.
3f.
3g.
Stream impact
Type of impact
Stream name
Perennial
Type of jurisdiction
Average
Impact
number -
(PER) or
(Corps - 404, 10
stream
length
Permanent (P)
intermittent
DWQ — non-404,
width
(linear
or Temporary
(INT)?
other)
(feet)
feet)
(T)
❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
I ❑ DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
3i. Comments:
Page 4 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

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.
4b.
4c.
4d.
4e.
Open water
Name of waterbody
impact number
(if applicable)
Type of impact
Waterbody type
Area of impact (acres)
- Permanent
(P) or
Temporary T
4L Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, then com Iete the chart below.
5a.
5b.
5c.
5d.
5e.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
Stream Impacts (feet)
Upland
Pond ID
Proposed use or purpose of
(acres)
number
pond
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
K 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.
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico ❑ Other:
Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman
6b.
6c.
6d.
6e.
6f.
6g.
Buffer impact
number-
Reason
Buffer
Zone 1 impact
Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P)
for impact
Stream name
mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
or Temporary
required?
T
❑P❑T
El Yes
❑ No
6h. Total buffer impacts
6i. Comments: The proposed project will not impact protected riparian buffers.
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Avoidance and minimization efforts were implemented during development planning and design to the greatest extent
practicable to reduce the overall impacts on the aquatic environment while staying within nationwide permit thresholds. The
final plan demonstrates maximum avoidance and minimization efforts by reducing the proposed stream impacts. The rationale
to support avoidance and minimization efforts include the following:
• Avoidance of the remaining 0.06-acre of wetlands on -site
Page 5 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

• Avoidance of the 1,536 LF of streams on -site
• Avoidance of the Neuse River Basin Riparian Buffers on -site
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Stormwater and erosion control measures will be utilized to avoid sedimentation impacts to downstream waters and control
runoff from the construction site.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
® Yes ❑ No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
® DWQ ® Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this project?
❑ Mitigation bank
® Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type:
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:
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
❑ warm ❑ cool ❑cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0.21 acres
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments:
Compensatory mitigation will be met by the purchase of credits through the NC Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS) in -lieu
fee program. 0.21-acre of wetland impacts will be mitigated through the purchase of wetland mitigation credits. Based on an
NCWAM assessment of Medium for Wetland 3 and Wetland 4, mitigation is proposed at a 2:1 ratio for impacts to these features,
or 0.42 mitigation credits. In total, 0.42 wetland mitigation credits will be purchased to offset impacts associated with this project.
Quality assessment results and State of Availability are included.
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 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
❑ Yes ® No
buffer mitigation?
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.
6c.
6d.
6e.
Zone
Reason for impact
Total impact
Multiplier
Required mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
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 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
® Yes ❑ No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
The proposed project falls within Neuse River basin. As such the proposed onsite
stormwater will be designed in accordance with the requirements of Orange County
specifically Section 6.14 Stormwater Management of the Unified Development
Ordinance and as required to meet the state mandated Falls Lake and Jordan Lake
Stormwater Rules for New Development (15A NCAC 2B. 0277, 15A NCAC 2B. 0265,
Session Law 2009-484). Specifically:
• Nutrient load contribution must meet the standards listed in Section 6.14.7 as
required by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NC DWQ);
❑ Yes ® No
• Nitrogen and phosphorus loads contributed by proposed new development shall
not exceed the following unit -area mass loading rates, Falls Lake Watershed,
Nitrogen, 2.2 pounds per acre per year, Phosphorus, 0.33 pounds per acre per
year;
• Peak attenuation of the 1-year 24-hour storm;
• Meet or provide mitigation for the nutrient load contribution leaving the site;
• The nutrient export from each new development shall be calculated in pounds
per acre per year (using the approved accounting tool) in accordance with the
methodologies approved by the NC DWQ.
Page 8 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

2.
Stormwater Management Plan
2a.
What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
69.7%
2b.
Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
® Yes ❑ No
2c.
If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why: N/A
2d.
If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative
description of the plan:
The
proposed sediment basins will be converted to permanent stormwater control measures.
The stormwater components
associated with the proposed development have been designed in accordance with the City
of Mebane's Phase II Stormwater
Post
-Construction Ordinance. Per section 303 of the Stormwater Ordinance, the following Mebane Requirements apply to the
proposed development:
• The measures shall be designed to control and treat the stormwater run-off generated by the 1" (one inch) of rain;
• Runoff volume drawdown time shall be a minimum of 48 hours, but not more than 120 hours;
• Stormwater shall not leave the project site at a rate greater than the predevelopment discharge rate for the ten-year,
24-hour storm;
• All structural stormwater treatment systems used to meet the requirements of the program shall be designed to have
a minimum of 85% average annual removal for Total Suspended Solids (TSS);
• General engineering design criteria for all projects shall be in accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .1008(c), as explained in
the Design Manual;
• All stormwater control measures that incorporate a permanent or temporary water
pool with depth greater than two feet
shall be fenced. The fence shall meet the design standards maintained by the Stormwater Administrator.
A copy of the approval will be provided when it is received.
® Certified Local Government
2e.
Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ DWQ Stormwater Program
❑ DWQ 401 Unit
3.
Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a.
In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
City of Mebane
® Phase II
❑ NSW
3b.
Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ® No — Pending
attached?
Approval
4.
DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑ Coastal counties
❑ HQW
4a.
Which of the following state -implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ ORW
(check all that apply):
❑ 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?
® Yes ❑ No
5b.
Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
® Yes ❑ No
Page 9 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

F.
Supplementary Information
1.
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1a.
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
❑ Yes
® No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b.
If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑ Yes
❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c.
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.)
❑ Yes
❑ No
Comments:
2.
Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a.
Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑ Yes
® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b.
Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
❑ Yes
® No
2c.
If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3.
Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a.
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
❑ Yes
® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b.
If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
No additional or cumulative impacts are anticipated due to the construction of the proposed project.
4.
Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a.
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility:
Wastewater generated on site will be directed to a City of Mebane public works sewer main adjacent to
the project.
Page 10 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5.
Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a.
Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
® Yes ❑ No
habitat?
5b.
Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
® Yes ❑ No
impacts?
® Raleigh
5c.
If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
❑ Asheville
5d.
What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
A review of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database on December 6th, 2022, did not indicate
known occurrences of threatened or endangered species occurring within the site boundary. Potentially suitable habitat for
threatened and endangered species on -site was not identified. A concurrence request letter was submitted to the USFWS
on December 7th, 2022. The project did not identify suitable habitat for listed species and a biological conclusion of "no
effect" was recommended to USFWS. USFWS responded on December 20th, 2022, and recommended a "no effect"
determination for Neuse River waterdog, Carolina madtom, and dwarf wedgemussel. USFWS could not concur with a "no
effect" determination for Atlantic pigtoe. Kimley-Horn provided the USFWS with further information to support a "no effect"
determination. The USFWS responded on January 5th, 2023, and recommended a "may affect, not likely to adversely
affect" for Atlantic pigtoe. The USFWS correspondence is attached.
6.
Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ® No
6b.
What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
NCNHP element occurrence database did not indicate the presence of EFH within the project boundary.
7.
Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a.
Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes ® No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b.
What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
Kimley-Horn consulted the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) HPOWEB GIS service on December
7th, 2022. No documented architectural, historic, or archaeological sites of significance within the project boundary were
identified. The HPOWEB map is attached.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?
❑ Yes ® No
8b.
If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? FIRM Panel 3710451400K & 3710450400L
Chris Tinklenbera, PWS
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Applicant/Agent's Signature
1/18/2023
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
Date
is provided.)
Page 11 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

AGENT AUTHORIZATION

AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
Name: Exeter Property Group (Joe Thompson)
Address: 715 Harvard St, Orlando, Florida 32804
Phone: [phone]
Email: ioseph.thompson(a�egtexeter.cotn
Project Name/Description: Exeter Mebane South Outparcels Modification
Date:12/16/2022
The Department of the Army
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
Attention: April Norton
Re: Wetland Related Consulting and Permitting
Joe Thompson hereby designates and authorizes Kimley-Horn and Associates,
Inc. to act in my/our behalf as my/our agent solel for the purpose of processing Jurisdictional
Determinations, Section 404 permits/Section 401 Water Quality Certifications applications and
to furnish upon request supplemental information in support of applications, etc. from this day
forward until successful completion of the permitting process or revocation by the owner.
In addition, 1, the undersigned, under contract to purchase the property/properties identified
herein, do authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(Corps) to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on -site
investigations and issuing a determination associated with Waters of the U.S. subject to Federal
jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and
Harbors Act of 1899.
Authorized this the 16th day of December , 2022
Joe Thompson
Authorized Representative tho zed Representative
(Print Name) ature)

FIGURES

S carl ett 5t .� oo� v.
o a _
N
19ton �s=Highway aOJd_ - S- f° _ -+o ff Nathan N o Gregg St m m
spare Dr _ filler Ct
Frazier \j_
p Rd = o
° r1 __..O$_ _
E Washington St Y o
9K` <
G t _ Fuller Rd
Mlles CouSrop - RedrhSn'Xifig _______ _ ____
__ = US
'- Rtl For
Industrial Sanders
C1
PS
Ln
Rabbit Run Ln ® Wat-
a
fC q Z
y Tcn Rd °
D
o S eo Rd
m' o o Yt
Cheeks x
Cros Broads W Ten Rd a
W Ten Rd
rc
in
�D
Ln
�r
Johann
yr
o°
gushy Cook Rd
Wordy Gals Dr T,mbetwood >r!
a
m Co
oKF
Y
O
A
a
Feet
Kathy Dr 0 2,000 4,000
Orange
County
Figure 1
Legend Vicinity Map
Kimley>>> Horn Project Boundary ExetMebanbe,n0 angeh County, NC
January 2023

•
c-4 M cn U c4
a) a! fC a)z N
a)L 22 N
LL p 3Q�+
CD c
O �
N
cu
7 0)
V O C
t U
C 0
CD
+ i ,
CD
O O 00 C
L
O
N
co 0
yw
96 CD
e
1
I�• :
L -
�� � •• �� � '- `- �. -tip � • �6
• • ,-
ra
�, ,
-
o00
• �•
V
J '7'
• O
��

r y
AII-
�p
1
�r •,'+ �.: �a�-,'tea- "^_- -
.. -
N
O O
ILL O
0
0
0
Ln
O
si
JJ
V U
*A' Rc.
n !,
a 'o
M Q N (�
tC a) Z
coy
N
i U
7
N
_ Co
LL 7
Z O
Co
a
VDU
0)
co
NU) E2
O a)0
co a
0 co
C9 a) co
N a�
N
X
W

AwdL ;
- LL
J
�O
-fr co
R �
ao •- �
o '
c '
Q to (�
coa)y
N
cC N z
L U
N
cD
LL 0
CD
_�
�_ 0. Q c
�'
ID
LL 0 :5 =
Co
+—� p cj
2
co
0)
V7
O c
U) E2
a) 0
�
CD
O
co
N -C
M
LU
cc�
G
�
X
w
X
1
N
! i
` ~ c�
ee
or—
i
WI
`Y
(6
S
`
O
C
ra

PERMIT DRAWINGS

.. .........
2J313Y3 103
CD
133HSN3AOO
UJOH(<<Ai)lwl)l S-130�NdinO Hinos
ANVOEIIN 2:313X3
LULU
Z P
E 7 T 7 Uj
LU
CO
a -
�a
LL 0
U)
z
< ry
_3 0
0
0—
M
z
LLJ o
LLI
z
sw NT
cj) - a -Nap
O co o
C)
<
LLI
LLI
Ld LU 3:
LU
LL,
M
ui
F—
�� \ \ Z
LU
LU
LU
z,
uu
w
CD
ID FM
CD
wl
LU
z S2
>
LU 0
(D C)
o L) t 3
z
0 1
FF,
7- "s,

- -_ ry 3rvya3
b313X3 103
aH L db'W am a3ayd3ae o
U.IUH(K/�a�lU�� ;--°oz%a<< ONISVHd 4Hd dOS3 S�302NdinO HinOS =�
°Re° 3NVOEIW 2:313X3
,R. a d erma
M
tea -
-
_-
a
¢
k a�
.a�;e gg5 j R �= S a�
98F s"
of - -
p ae, sae
a ,,�; sum s saF� a
�e sz, �.=gam e
e€
e9.
oo m �oF;s mo=�
_ -
'_
N.
a€.yea fan" � -
M
e -
fl
-
--
��
z.
,o
nU
3w
Q°
W
5
W
U
N
U

2J313Y3 103
dVW am AaIdwd 1 -.
IN. ONISVHd ZHd dOS3 S130�NdinO Hinos
UJOHO(Aalw! --%Q�z,-..' ANVOEIIN �:Oi3XA
V7 U
to
! 1 1
1 J
list,
NOW
o
ea
tO
1 oil
1 R
J7
f-
ask!
Hula 1
SID,
1
gum
WR
IN

-
-
.............
aN
b313X3 103
3N�;a3w
�N�63�y��_eedaN �w� �:.�A�•
�LL
uaOH(�(/�al���
; \ ;_ /,;
° oz a
db'W
ONISVHd £Hd dOS3
amaaayeaae
S�302NdinO H1f10S
o
°°te°
3NVOEIW 2:313X3
a
U
_
S
a
z
z a
g- B.
-U
F
K
Q
Z
U
E
-
t
Q¢
00
Wa eZ
=Eo�o=9
Z-;
5
>an­
LLO 5.
W
1
w
wd
w
a a72.a2
I
III
U
R g
E
I'
S
E o
_
8 w
w
5
DLLs=
a
y _
zw
m
IJ
All
1
�.

�ry 3rvya3
03
, �oj313Y 1 � CDU.IOHr(K/LaIUllN 4Hd dOS3 S�302JVdino HinOS =L)
°tea°° 3Nb'83W 2:313X3
� e
t
Z
C P C
O #
� �
G
E W a
Q
F
2
©e 0 0 s 0 0 0 00 0 0S T s 0 0
F ...
F
nU
�-
'\�.,�'
%,A+rY�ip
r`C "
<^ ✓�iiG nul III �� „ _ --_ = - r� v ��/iU��r �i i" r' �J}
✓�, ii°z �` I i I y� �Ilhl�q" � ' ii �^w 'i i ) �i�iii �i� �� li) v r I I I � �, I `'_ lul�r�l' � ���� ��,_ -. �\ I ��r
r rr% I i rvr yb r%r IM1II i � iii y v III r II ar r.'n it "_ � )
Oo
",a,3_,\evv'�al� )li 11i �'ii P iY i')i i/E.'�.
� � V`'PI I �r�, i i nioUi I I (i li ' r I` �. I II,:•'vItn+lly r � .`� -"Fi )f III
�'�
_� rzr�, /zrrr,,✓i_,��,v���l1vvv 11'I�v �� �lliil� �i i i .w 'i �i'iauil����il'V��r ii�lll ���;�� ems' "�'"wwiw�vl���`,z�,���"./ I '���'ri�
� il� ���` �,•
e hiMlgi I � v v `'��.v \n� -rr I INil
fill
'A
l7�N9oe�
I�
I
y j �zziH%o 1� I� etZ� �j� ry I o /�IIIr•� "
� I
w
H
Z
w
U
Z
O
H
O]
C7
w
V\\
�11\\\
ug
�� t�� �, , I _ �" � / �I s � :: �.`: iCr 5' I' it � ', i✓y;i'G`,--: '
���,�-�_ - ->%1 i /�r r � r�=/ J �� � ' v��Vy9\�, v'I `�I)Iv° � `, 1'�+' jl ��ii ✓' '
m
I rr rl /r
e'riJ
-
I
-
4
-
¢
I

ZHd d0S3
aN 3N;a3w
2J 313X3 103
cn
am a3ayd3ad ; o
S-1302NdinO H1f10S
3Nb'83W 2:313X3
- ou
a
e
�
�
W
N
I I
O
C
i
w
W
loc
C
6
~I
I
W
o f
E
N
W
Q
W
d
F
2
©e 0 0 s 0 0 0 00 0 0S T s 0 0
F
...
6
f
J
17
07 ��� �! /� �! IIIIII �,-• � ___ —
/ 'I li
`:`�lulr
��yl (� ICI l l r III
e ! Irn Illr�" '� Illu
%r�l�llilllll;�i I I � I I
V) tpI I I i I
llli'i1 .'i'�'IA "�liiii II II II '
,III IIIIII ,
I i� � J�Ililljll i i il!!—�4h
0
it'll
ply jil III;
"ll�l k llliliil�llib �.
r /
l �?�' �f�/� a✓�'� et ,pp,'
z
Z
O
H
m
rr
0
e
bsd
W
W.
r
�'�`! � —!o �l nl ll�h lull �,. rr" � ��• •���
M
rr
t
II J a
I Ill lrylll III III �'it1.. ���'����\ti�
a_
I l l l r l l 4� ����,•�, _
I �
!
r a
u
!
Iv
Y� � )II I I i �r! Irrr%f'llr- rf
r� ' ���` � — i A - � i lll�ii v�l�i(r i��� r' "✓� i�'/�rri�r i r
I }
-
�
i
"f,Jilf_

bAIAXA IDA
�JOJ 113dVdMJ
3NVO31M �I=X3
..... .. ...... . ...
d
Ujo
S-1308Vdino Hinos
H(((AalwIN CHd dOS3
. . . . . . . . . .
II
loc
s
1
0
a L
z
z
N, 4�zNiz N.
s
1) C 0 0 0 (A) 00 0 0 (a) 0s 0® 0 0
Mi
F-
0
U)
0
0
x

O
�
�aw
Qx
LL
Z
<
a
a
a
o
b313X3103 co
�w 63ad��_eedaN a,wnl zz�.. '�� am aaaydaad o
o�s� rva; b'-SIIb'130 dOS3 ; N
.IOH(K/La�LUI� s�3�wdlno Hlnos
go U=�
�__-! oo a 3NVOEIW 2:313X3
_ = w _ L L L
0.
o�
�y a 3 y U�
- - - w -
�'
a o
3 a�-5 O —
__ a 3
y� Z 3� S F F Ij� li� QQ
F
2
arvrv�rvm � orrvwrvrof a O _ aa�
21
h4 a O
zo ai k- axe ai
02
UT
Y
7W s U
O ¢ C
W j O >2v L
Zp $y4gg U� � Cv
G
W o
U= e G=
� 3<
W
� E�2
a ¢
VY
dE a m -
% W C
q_
U x o P14
SE
I '
o ���� o
Z eS - mRi4g� =3 Y - B
p a'� a ap z WN
:Li .ao da ss=s LLa Y
e
°
yg E 1m E ao
L o o
z z
N�
# - A
O �a

�w 63�d��_eedaN �w�zz�..
5 �LaM,
go uaoHO(Aalwi�
.
' =m��
_-!
9-SlIV13a d3S3
b313Y= 103
am aaaydaad
S�302�bd1f10 H1f10S
3Nb'83W 2E313X3
CD
�o
; N
=U
ors n
�IooEe
la
x
TM.
�
"A
A
9
A
E^zypuz 3tFys e
A
T -_ th
lu
C
-
�€
ry
aiSGe
ry
N
s
%isi"s€§ II��IIIIIIII
IIIZ
B R
e�
e
w�
s5
w�
-�-Hdd
41
411
a
F
-
j
u �5e
o
_ tS UP
-�
72
i
A 6
ex
s
€02H
6E
8g
9
7�
d��g
N$ EryEsE�yyENE�yyE
Eg�gdg9gCggdg
Ng9
y=
_ _
_ ��w p�
L
L
x
-
x
e- oS�,os
C
CC
U
JJ
20
U
_
- aD
1
3
s
Q
Oil
3 c
X
x
k
s O
LU
J
=
U
aao J
FF
$ F
w
LL z
z
se
.a e �
_
Q
_
X .
X _
o
w
X
L
Q
X
~
xq
-
Q
F
Q
w
w
sa
11
=per
3 Y
J
EN
111111111
111
1
A.
h z
o W Z
J _ W
Q
"
feu
Q' J
Q
N
€8"-E"
CL
o <cR
J h
�6-mi-
LLI
0 m
m
3 3
~
a
w
LLz
F2�

go Ujo N
�(�(�����
.�
�-SlIt/13a dOS3
1103
S�302NdinO Hinos
3Nb83W 2�313X3
CD
; N
��ooEe
a
L
V
_
_
Amy ',
NsM
�
a�
��III
uuuuu
R
uuu
It
75 h _ e..
Ma
eo
s
d?
y
-
C
C
C
91
a
C
C
QII
LO
L
L
L
/
—
75
EME ffixn
=aa e

�w 53�y��ssdaN 3,w�zz�
LL �
uaOH(<(/�alwl
..........
.Q e�
"• �;`
a
-SlIt/13a d3S3
b313X3103
am a3ayd3ad
S�302�bd1f10H1f10S
3Nb'83W 2:313X3
= N
=�
�00£B£b��
ESQ
8 gg
i
y8
ssa
yaF
_
�
a
E Q c
0L_
J
-
LU
888
�LU
m
RJR
oZ
az
Z
_aa
���a
aao
9
a0
o�oa
R�U
qp�- F
- a W
o �
8
xII�II
II
;x a ma
x
"
E
I11
I—III=III—I I�—I
�II�II�II�II_
�ll�ll� l=1 o
=IWIII
o
p
E
4
aG m�
5°
�go
no a¢m
- - -
mg
••� --
w
[ - 0="4 sad
0
Jue
-_-UE
pyo"
Y�
'�';
VVV
£apoo� N4pUN4 amo�
s El
®
F
s� s
=o'
x
sad,
wcm J
' w
m
g
u
w y
wdo=awo�: wands. a.a
arcs.,. z=z.,aoa. =,.one i ai-z
N
mom„/ i�sso
VsE x
Q�Q
€ I
__
s d
ar
T 4a
w
o
Y
Z
4
E 4�
II'lll
_ _
0 5m a��N.o�'- 3a= ` E_
II III
III®
_
—
—
0 -
-_ 's3a 90 Gum„&aoE m
W
vE
0
'ak%49
0

aN 3Nye3w
7Fr
asstiaN a.w�. t �s. b313XA 1DA m N_ ?JOd 03iJHdMJd
3-S31t113Q d0S3 S�30?�bd1f10 H1f10S
Ujo
3NVO31M bJ=X3
a=
0
lls, m
14
PgIai�� 3g�j�mg�'��g�P`s;F,
o :€!e� €stgt�tyt;Sp3 �$3gg((
i PFt a6_ [g:aa= Ps§6e°Pa'Ygag?'!t r'¢Caarg d s
g s: Eg d
5 fs 8ifr5�gg'tg99$a�laPHgH`mutEi#s £
- . . olimi
EY:Ep
e$L
s
9r
t r €
€ i x
Y g €
2 I g
❑ e- 9 e Pil
a
-
g w g F ! t
� syFa€
rigig"5ueia'P aFtt _
80 ®s ffrrss� fill[.t�16a joe @` azgss lP!
"Ij a't�g Fss ffi +• at Fgv ¢� e£1ICY
�g€g3i ��;js�
a4a PeFs,i�as�g fsaga4 �t'7Fi€ gP�eg3P
[g�Yt a 6€¢�a �$"`a�kal�
a ti�
Cam'
• .e %�8 � � .m6 �C
sa
e4$Ya4' "�!°��P'!S� � Rill. a�+tYt €ltYF€
s`
p � sta -a r s �a y-
Y3
a age
�� �l5ii.��fa,la��
�C
O
a
x
x$
f
i

N 3N"3W
-- J313X3 103
IIVI13AO - NVId 311S M
uaOH<(</\al��� 's�• { ZZ�aI/II' S-l3obivcii O HinOS =v
�" 31Y0 3Nb83W 2�313X3
. 100f9£bl0
z
a
a
s= a
s
50;
,
-
C 3
3
ez�
nV
a
lb tiDNINOZ //
09B8 6 'Nd Ctl1 / _
1#
� 1
3
I
1
I
\
i
HHN�HHI. HHHHH.1 l �IUNHf 4
f �✓ � 1 II Iql II F� II 1
I
I Iil I �� II I 1
I I II I
I I
l I m
I _III it
III---___--
li I
E I y' II oyP .
I it 1

y �a� oN 3Nva3
`/" 2J313X3 103 m N
UJOH<<<Aalwi) :; °oz,y,3
d 11V130 - NVId 311S S�302�bdlfl0 H1flOS
`�^ I°°Ee�°�� 3Nb'83W 2:313X3
III� nU
�I I
0
s
a _
3 3 _
fuE� 133H53353NI1 H�1tlYY
I
J
() "+)(7
, (h)(h) e)(H)(h)
%)

2J313Y3 1
C)3
9 -IIVIACI NV-ld 311S
S130�NdinO HinOS
UJOH<<<Aalw.N ANVOEIIN 2:313X3
I T
L 2
13,E

L
UIOH(«AalwiN
"-
. . "
11b213AO
NVId 3E)VNIVNO
ONV ONlaVNE)
N 3Ntl93W
J313X3 103
S AINV9 IAf 3XA
3Nb'83W 2�313X3
; v
=v
oiYg�r3��
oH3
I00E9£bI°
e-, 1g p
F
z
3
5
u
G
0
w
h.
e
z
S
a.
O LLO
u C Y
m �
y - O
� A K
U , a
m e h
N
m 2
C y
m
U
,91s�`�\
s'd3aynH5.�vmde -I#� l v i /I l �l). r iii li l r ri �'I�� '
<`
hill �
IF
I
� I
$gw4
f a a a i au�r `_ I J>jol _ I I I �( I I _' r - _� �•
r \
"�, \�2`Va ,p\Fail ill lllr lld a' 'I 114
e5
-i%;'%i%�� allr0�plll�l € I m g < >
Y I lii li ���Y\��
LCo
Ills IIIIII l - _ � r� II I � lam �( Sl rlaV` _ 'illllill low
4ryl ul III III :� l: L ij e } I' ,rlr ro y c
la'ikli v
^ '
;0
I II € I< z
r
ri1v lbVi�p r r
_ �� ` o /ir,
la<I 'rrl
la
I
I'iFdv�l'IL
Cr
I C �
s
I II� i`I�lii ifrlli�:r J"',__:
��'r'_�
`-
�°'1
ii _ � I / ,��'i i l i � r i � �II� � Ip�{ I � i �,'� ;''/ �s"• n I�' s �,_�,_ti �,� ria Ala I ar I _
a
�� ✓'r r a l s-I--=T � i ���_��f, r � >_ ��_���� fii_.a%�ar:� � �A rll saar(r � I

V-11V130
2J313X3 1D3L
;
Ida,.,.
NVId 3Jb'NIb21aS�302�b'dlfl0
H1flOSUJOH<<<Aalwi�
:;-{'aNVONIOVNO
3Nb83W2�313X3
17 7 /
WON
k
®�
J
IWO
�
3
�
-
-
_
-
-
K F E
-
'a
a
o
0
9 m w3
cuv� 11-33sANn �ivw
v`
L r _ ,l
a
cl
I ,
` IL III`,`,)vvil
�LL
i
(D U)
v, v1 /1 ,r,o v I I �, I � ,',vI I�{v
Ir
.J � /�, '• \ 11 11 1 — L ' \ � .I
— e
,a
r
�IfVr Ilv ` os� � � v 1 I I v v l l I � v I v v ,I �� r,'I' i�"' ✓ it 1 t
x �I 1vI �1 V / _I
1,
� x
I L r ,
' ° I
/
1 v= f.—/_ / , Ir�i�� >I _. ,1 � 1—1 r it �i sv ✓�� vie
\
i
I y

y �a�>3 ory arvva3
9--lIb'13a 2i313Y3 103
"NVId BOVNIVNO ; v
11JUH (K/LalUJl� :;-!,. � aNb' JNI4�d2iJ S�302NdinO HinOS = c�
�00£Bb°„° 3Nb'83W 2:313X3
w
W'U I
L
w �
-
9- o
-
-
_
-
-
K F E
-
'a
_
e o
a
9 E m 3
� .
>� / II�Gnll i F
� —_ � i
�� i �' °iiIIPlPillll li A �, i � vA--
II II II II vliul ili i�qd I� it �I I I ;�� � � A � � �> � `�. y � �
I I iu lllil � ��
p \�
I IL1 � I I
I
I
I it i till llllilltl � ql� � �, � I v �
I 1 u e I v i
LMDO
D COD
E
v
LL
\
I '� i J ✓ � I L� �:��� I v �s _� i vvv I � i iv � � o i � j 7
\

.............
b313Y3 103
IN.
OA�IdA�d CD �oj
V6SAIHONd WNOIS
UJOHO(Aalw.)l S-130�NdinO Hinos
ANVOEIIN 2:313X3
mi
0,
0
2
z
Lu
Itrw
LU
o
m a- m
z
0
IL
-i
0
ix
z
0
L)
F-
LU
F- w
El L z
0
a.

b313X3103 U3
�w 63�d1�_eedaN �w���..�� am aaaydaad o
9-S331302id W2101S � a
.IOH(K/La�LUI� s�3�wdlno Hlnos
U=�
�__-! oo a 3NVOEIW 2:313X3
5 -
a _ '
�¢W
s
=¢a m
J
K
F
2 ,
U
W
J —
� U
Z
, Q
gig
d. a
,
J
l �
W
/ F
g
Z
Y
, a _
I
U)
a i ¢
w
' N x
1 I �
- J
I — 7
Z m
--------------
N
2
J a -
0 7
m
I
I
� I
I !�
J
K
W
� F
,
I g,�
I � N
W 2
Ili 2
Al
7
� m

go Q}O� /ka|
N |
'
= §
' �
S31 I Ord wNo1
e313Y2103
S 30dW inO H1nOS)�
gNVO gn �:g1 Xg
§�
.
®
~ � :
� w
IL
}
d]
2} `
}
LD )

y �a��
aN aNvaaw
b313X3 103
m c
UJOH(K/�a�UJI�
==
d-was
s1302Ndlno H1nos
°°te °
3Nb'83w 2:313X3
E
E
E
vvvv
Q
- -
C
C
d
o
3 II II IIHII
� yew
s
33
aj
w
�
0
5
flz J
�k
a -
- -
3 g k
N
/U
� f
i
Z
a
— _
III Ir l
W
s o �I�I IIII
LU
I
I -
I I
H
�=
W
s.
s
I
Ir I
LLI
\ II I
wx
CC
6R 6�I O
_
Ig
l
I
III 2 N
I
(IIII
1
III IUIII I I IJ
II II II III ICI
w 0
/ 1
/I r
_III I I I IIII I I I II I=
� '�I IuiII IIII IIII II II IIiuII UI a�
r •
II III LL
I1 IUIII II IIIITII IIII III
-� � iII IUIII II Ii°uI IUIII I I1 iIIII I

b 313Y3 103
UJOH
s�3owdino Hinos
(K/�alUJI�
°°tebl�
3Nb'83W 2:313X3
z�
HN
QY
Y i6 w
S Q
0
OR, 7H
K
U
p
Z
-
e
c
c
O
d
O
.}lu
s
d
k
Z
I E
w ?
w p
w
e �
F
Erl
Z
m
Cu
a�EorF-� gWa",_
\
I I III I I- I II I I II III I
�� I
I III
I I 41�11 i I I li Illil I I �'�
,��
I/ =
IJIJ I II II I
-
1 II =_�
ILI71 111 =,
W
a
I
YI,w
Lu
),f
Y
Z
III N
III
tla '
II III I
I I IJI I I III I I p
�..
/
`
,w
-
\ \
II
I I I I�1 i
i
�
�e �
IJ
'�I �II III I I II,II II 111111111171 dm
II IIIIII
III II ��
•: V � --
� � � � iI � i
`
l
III I�TII IIII �IiII IIIIu� i
Idl 1111 i1 11111=
��� I I
ME _.. d
lilu
illlll 11 I —I illll I I i illlil—1 ��
III II
/ it
211

UJOH
M
b313X3 103
am a3ayd3ad
s130�Ndlno Hinos
a
, �
(<<Ai)lwi)l
ootie a ov
3Nb83W 2:313X3
pU
U
p Z
�
c
c
3 S.
E
gI
z
�mm.wm.mo� 33 0
Qm
C� a -
i
-1 0L-.
a o
8k= y - Z
-
w
¢ O
NI
-
I-
' k V i
W
w Pn
e
r
LU
E
a t -I
f
k3 g Z
_
IJ \\ 31
,w
N
tl I I I I I I I III I I p
II I I I I I I I I III I I � Z
\\ \11\
2. I�I II II 11 II IIII II II 11111
ICI —I II IIII Imm—I III I—�z
2
\
111�111I IT�11111 III CI`I II IIIIIIT=
I� �
; ..md -.-moo .,,

y a oN arvva3
," zl�' � •".' am aaaHdaad � n
_" S�Ib'13a-W0S S-1302NdinO HinOS
UJ0H 0<Aa1wi)1 :;' ' M ootie e a„3Nb'83W 2 MMA = e�
O0 6- E
E fi li�E
Two mum
HIPH
Y
o
L-A
z
Y
i Z
HOT",
LLI
r
d z z N J N
Wis Jul
L-J
O w
_ z
- Y
r _ z
w u 3 W it
X

„„,,,V3110121„,,„3111-15.15N0„1„1105„2
,N1,31VIDS,V...01+1,11NIN Z2OZ
WOH (OADIWDI
H 313)(3 103
HOJ GANYd1Id
s13oevdino Hinos
ANVE01A1 HaLaXA

1
Nd
' i -
1 •
0
II�
e"'° = IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
• IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
"�� � IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIII NIII�111111
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
— IIIIIIIIl1�11111111111
Illllli�i�®�iililllllll
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�111111
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�111111 -
UNION
Illlllllllliiiiiillllll
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Illlllll����ll��l�lill
i � � IIIIIIIIIIII�11111�111
E
I111111111111111111111
�sIIIIIII����1�11111�111
j—� — — IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII®
I®®®!I
� 11
� nm
■ ,III'
lil
Ilil

AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE

F

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh ES Field Office
Post Office Sox 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
December 20, 2022
Taylor Kiker, PWS
Kimley-Horn
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200
Charlotte, NC 28202
Subject: Exeter Mebane South Parcels (USFWS Project Code 2023-0021907)
Dear Ms. Kiker:
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed your December 7, 2022, email and
attachments regarding proposed future construction at the Exeter Mebane South Outparcels, south of
West Ten Rd, Orange County, North Carolina. Kimly-Horn requested concurrence with species
determinations for four listed species, based upon potential industrial development of the site and
potential need for a Clean Water Act Section 404 permit. Kimly-Horn conducted a pedestrian survey of
the site in April 2019. Photos and site descriptions were provided, but no construction plans.
Kimly-Horn made a "no effect" determination for the Neuse River waterdog, Carolina madtom, Atlantic
pigtoe, and dwarf wedgemussel, stating that suitable habitat for the four species was not observed in the
on -site stream reaches during the 2019 pedestrian surveys.
The Service believes that a no effect determination is appropriate for Neuse River waterdog, Carolina
madtom, and dwarf wedgemussel, because these three species are not typically found higher up in the
watershed, and are usually found in medium to large waterbodies. Although we do not have stream size
data, it is not likely that suitable habitat is found for these three species within 400 meters downstream
of the project, simply due to the drainage area and stream size. Under normal circumstances, a
downstream distance of 400 meters is generally considered to be the extent of detectable sedimentation
effects, and so we need to also consider the habitat in reaches downstream of a project in order to make
a determination.
Specifically, there are historic records of Carolina madtom downstream in the same 10-digit Hydrologic
Unit (HUC) as the project site, but no current records. This historic record is at the other end of the 10-
digit HUC, in the Eno River. Likewise, there are historic records of dwarf wedgemussel in the Eno
River, quite far upstream of the confluence with Sevenmile Creek. Neuse River waterdog and Atlantic
pigtoe have current records in the 10-digit HUC, in the Eno River upstream and downstream of the
confluence of Sevenmile Creek.
The Service cannot currently concur with the no effect determination for Atlantic pigtoe. The Atlantic
Pigtoe has been documented in streams as small as < 1 meter wide. Further, because listed aquatic
species are hanging on in marginal or degraded habitats, presence of silt and detritus alone (and for
dwarf wedgemussel — lack of extensive root systems) are not a good indicator of suitable habitat.
Further, we note that although there are no current records within a mile of the project, to our
knowledge, Sevenmile Creek and the unnamed tributaries in this arear have not been surveyed.

Finally, it is difficult to make a determination for listed species without project -specific information on
the impacts proposed and conservation measures to avoid and minimize impacts. Without more
information, the Service recommends that any construction proposal avoid all stream reaches (including
the 50-foot buffer) on the site, and that stringent erosion control measures be incorporated into the plan
to protect onsite and downstream reaches from sedimentation.
If a permit is sought from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Service recommends that a more
thorough suitable habitat survey be conducted for Atlantic pigtoe, within all reaches on the project site,
and to a point 400 meters downstream of the easternmost proposed stream impact site. This will provide
the information needed for the Corps and the Service to make an appropriate species determination for
Atlantic pigtoe. Information on proposed construction methods and avoidance and minimization
measures will be helpful.
Thank you for the opportunity to consult on this project. If you have questions or concerns, please
contact Kathy Matthews at Kathryn_ [e-mail].
Sincerely,
4V.-�Jay.Lj
Pete Benjamin D�
Field Supervisor
2

Kiker, Taylor
From: Matthews, Kathryn H <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, January 5, 2023 3:43 PM
To: Kiker, Taylor
Cc: Mann, Leigh
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Exeter Mebane South Outparcels - Review Request Letter (Project Code
2023-0021907)
Categories: External
IYou don't often get email from [e-mail]. Learn why this is important
That's great info. Given that we don't know whether there is suitable habitat in the stream and there will be
development pretty close, we would recommend a determination of "may affect, not likely to adversely
affect," but if you receive a federal permit or federal funds, the federal agency will make their own
determination.
Based on the information shown in the plans and the other information you provided, it appears that the
proposed action is not likely to adversely affect any federally -listed endangered or threatened species, their
formally designated critical habitat, or species currently proposed for listing under the ESA.
Thanks for the additional information, and please let me know if you have other questions or need further
follow-up. Happy New Year.
Please note that I am teleworking Wednesday through Friday, every week. Email is the best way to reach
me. Thanks,
Kathy Matthews
NC Renewable Energy Coordinator &
Fish and Wildlife Biologist
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
551-F Pylon Drive
Raleigh, NC 27606
919-856-4520, x. 27
From: Kiker, Taylor <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, January 5, 2023 3:19 PM
To: Matthews, Kathryn H <[e-mail]>
Cc: Mann, Leigh <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] Exeter Mebane South Outparcels - Review Request Letter
Kathy,
Thank you for the reply. I am attaching our proposed site plan for your reference. The project will not impact any of the
streams and their buffers. Given this, is it possible to concur with the no effect for Atlantic pigtoe?
Please let me know.

Thank you,
Taylor (she/her/hers)
Taylor Kiker, PWS
Kimley-Horn 1200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202
Direct: 980 296 0810 1 Mobile: [phone]
Celebrating 15 years as one of FORTUNE's 100 Best Companies to Work For
From: Matthews, Kathryn H <[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2022 7:33 AM
To: Kiker, Taylor <[e-mail]>
Cc: Mann, Leigh <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Exeter Mebane South Outparcels - Review Request Letter
IYou don't often get email from kathryn matt [e-mail]. Learn why this is important
Hi Taylor,
Please find attached a letter for this project. Let me know if you have questions or concerns.
Happy Holidays,
Kathy Matthews
Please note that I am teleworking Wednesday through Friday, every week. Email is the best way to reach
me. Thanks,
Kathy Matthews
NC Renewable Energy Coordinator &
Fish and Wildlife Biologist
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
551-F Pylon Drive
Raleigh, NC 27606
919-856-4520, x. 27
From: Kiker, Taylor <[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 7, 2022 6:02 PM
To: Raleigh, FW4 <[e-mail]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Exeter Mebane South Outparcels - Review Request Letter
This email has been received from outside of DOI - Use caution before clicking on links, opening attachments, or
responding.

Please find the attached Online Project Review Certification Letter for the above referenced project. Please contact me if
questions arise.
Thank you
Taylor (she/her/hers)
Taylor Kiker, PWS
Kimley-Horn 1200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202
Direct: 980 296 0810 1 Mobile: [phone]
Celebrating 15 years as one of FORTUNE's 100 Best Companies to Work For

COMPENSATORY
MITIGATION

NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 5
USACE AID#: SAW-2019-01933 NCDWR #:
Project Name Exeter Mebane South Outparcels Date of Evaluation 10/01/2019
Applicant/Owner Name Exeter Property Group Wetland Site Name Wetland W3
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization Chris Tinklenberg, PWS
Level III Ecoregion Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body Sevenmile Creek
River Basin Neuse USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit 03020201
County Orange NCDWR Region Raleigh
r Yes f+ No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees) 36.068873,-79.208833
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited
to the following.
Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? ('• Yes (. No
Regulatory Considerations -Were regulatory considerations evaluated? . Yes rNo If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
F Anadromous fish
F Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
Rl NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
F Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
F Publicly owned property
F N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
F Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HOW, ORW, or Trout
F Designated NCNHP reference community
F Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
r Blackwater
(+` Brownwater
F Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) r Lunar r Wind ('• Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? ('• Yes (+` No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? r Yes (: No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? r Yes (: No
1. Ground Surface ConditionNegetation Condition - assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect.
GS VS
(•` A A Not severely altered
{` B {+` B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
2. Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration - assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <- 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only,
while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
(` A A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
(*` B B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
C" C C` C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
3. Water Storage/Surface Relief - assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column for each group below. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT).
AA WT
3a. t A A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 foot deep
C B B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
(` C C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
{+ D + D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. (` A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
C B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
(` C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot
4. Soil Texture/Structure - assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature. Make soil observations within the 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for
regional indicators.
4a. (' A Sandy soil
(•` B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
(` C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features

D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. A
Soil ribbon < 1 inch
B
Soil ribbon > 1 inch
4c. {+ A
No peat or muck presence
C B
A peat or muck presence
5. Discharge into Wetland - opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub -surface pollutants or discharges (Sub).
Examples of sub -surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
C*` A {+ A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
C B C B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
r C r C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6. Land Use - opportunity metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources
draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the
assessment area (51M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (21M). Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion.
WS 5M 2M
F A r A r A > 10% impervious surfaces
F B r B r B Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
F-1 C r C 7 C > 20% coverage of pasture
F D r D r D > 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
r E r E r E > 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
F F r F r F > 20% coverage of clear-cut land
F G r G r G Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in
the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent dainage and/or overbank flow from affectio the
assessment area.
Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer - assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
C Yes (: No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is weltand? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make
buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.)
C` A > 50 feet
{ B From 30 to < 50 feet
{ C From 15 to < 30 feet
D From 5 to < 15 feet
E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
C <- 15-feet wide C > 15-feet wide C Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
C Yes (" No
7e. Is tributary or other open water sheltered or exposed?
C Sheltered - adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
C Exposed - adjacent open water with width > 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area - wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes
and Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp
Forest only)
Check a box in each column. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and the wetland complex at the
assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
C A C. A > 100 feet
C B C B From 80 to < 100 feet
C*` C C C From 50 to < 80 feet
C D C D From 40 to < 50 feet
( E { E From 30 to < 40 feet
( F F From 15 to < 30 feet
C G C G From 5 to < 15 feet
C H C H < 5 feet
9. Inundation Duration - assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
( A Evidence of short -duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
C*` B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
C C Evidence of long -duration inundation or very long -duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10. Indicators of Deposition -assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands and all marshes)
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
C A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
C*` B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
C C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11. Wetland Size - wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select "K" for the FW column.
WT WC FW (if applicable)
CA CA CA >500acres
C B C B C B From 100 to < 500 acres

r C r C r C From 50 to < 100 acres
(- D C'' D r D From 25 to < 50 acres
{ E C- E (: E From 10 to < 25 acres
{ F C'' F C` F From 5 to < 10 acres
{ G {' G G From 1 to < 5 acres
r H r H r H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
6' 1 C I C I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
C J C J C J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
r K �— K r K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12. Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
A Pocosin is the full extent (> 90%) of its natural landscape size.
B Pocosin is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
metric naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility
line corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wide.
Well Loosely
( A r A > 500 acres
B r B From 100 to < 500 acres
C (- C From 50 to < 100 acres
+ D t+' D From 10 to < 50 acres
E r E < 10 acres
F (- F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
r Yes r No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands.
14. Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non -forested areas > 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and clear -cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directiions? If the assessment area is clear-cut,
select option "C."
C` A 0
. B 1 to 4
C 5to8
15. Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
+ B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
r C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
r A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (<10% cover of exotics).
(: B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
r C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (>50% cover of exotics).
17. Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
(+ Yes r No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
r A > 25% coverage of vegetation
C B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider structure
in airspace
above the
assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA
WT
Q
( A
r A
Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
m-C`
B
r B
Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
U
d+ C
: C
Canopy sparse or absent
o
.C` A
A
Dense mid-story/sapling layer
�
d: B
B
Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
�r C
C
Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
n C` A A Dense shrub layer
t6 B
+ B
Moderate density shrub layer
{ C
C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
{+ A
+ A
Dense herb layer
{ B
B
Moderate density herb layer
x {" C
(` C
Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
r A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12-inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
(: B Not A
19. Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
r A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
(` B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12-inch DBH.
C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.

20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris.
r A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
{: B Not A
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion — wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
{`A (`B 'C {'D
� ^. ter- \� �--.,..ter --•� �•--�� �r-.. �-�,.�r�..�
22. Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization,
diversion, man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
{: A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
r B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
{ C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
( D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual
Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Wetland W3
Date
10/01/2019
Wetland Type Headwater Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Chris Tinklenberg, PWS
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
YES
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open
water (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Rating Summary
Function Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
HIGH
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Particulate Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Physical Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
LOW
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
HIGH
Vegetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology Condition
HIGH
Water Quality Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Habitat Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating MEDIUM

NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 5
USACE AID#: SAW-2019-01933 NCDWR #:
Project Name Exeter Mebane South Outparcels Date of Evaluation 10/01/2019
Applicant/Owner Name Exeter Property Group Wetland Site Name Wetland W4
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization Chris Tinklenberg, PWS
Level III Ecoregion Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body Sevenmile Creek
River Basin Neuse USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit 03020201
County Orange NCDWR Region Raleigh
r Yes f+ No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees) 36.068426,-79.209086
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited
to the following.
Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? ('• Yes (. No
Regulatory Considerations -Were regulatory considerations evaluated? . Yes rNo If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
F Anadromous fish
F Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
Rl NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
F Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
F Publicly owned property
F N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
F Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HOW, ORW, or Trout
F Designated NCNHP reference community
F Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
r Blackwater
(+` Brownwater
F Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) r Lunar r Wind ('• Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? ('• Yes (+` No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? r Yes (: No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? r Yes (: No
1. Ground Surface ConditionNegetation Condition - assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect.
GS VS
(•` A A Not severely altered
{` B {+` B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
2. Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration - assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <- 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only,
while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
(` A A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
(*` B B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
C" C C` C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
3. Water Storage/Surface Relief - assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column for each group below. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT).
AA WT
3a. t A A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 foot deep
C B B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
(` C C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
{+ D + D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. (` A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
C B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
(` C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot
4. Soil Texture/Structure - assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature. Make soil observations within the 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for
regional indicators.
4a. (' A Sandy soil
(•` B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
(` C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features

D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. A
Soil ribbon < 1 inch
B
Soil ribbon > 1 inch
4c. {+ A
No peat or muck presence
C B
A peat or muck presence
5. Discharge into Wetland - opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub -surface pollutants or discharges (Sub).
Examples of sub -surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
C*` A {+ A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
C B C B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
r C r C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6. Land Use - opportunity metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources
draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the
assessment area (51M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (21M). Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion.
WS 5M 2M
F A r A r A > 10% impervious surfaces
F B r B r B Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
F-1 C r C 7 C > 20% coverage of pasture
F D r D r D > 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
r E r E r E > 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
F F r F r F > 20% coverage of clear-cut land
F G r G r G Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in
the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent dainage and/or overbank flow from affectio the
assessment area.
Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer - assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
C Yes (: No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is weltand? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make
buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.)
C` A > 50 feet
{ B From 30 to < 50 feet
{ C From 15 to < 30 feet
D From 5 to < 15 feet
E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
C <- 15-feet wide C > 15-feet wide C Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
C Yes (" No
7e. Is tributary or other open water sheltered or exposed?
C Sheltered - adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
C Exposed - adjacent open water with width > 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area - wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes
and Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp
Forest only)
Check a box in each column. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and the wetland complex at the
assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
C A C. A > 100 feet
C B C B From 80 to < 100 feet
C*` C C C From 50 to < 80 feet
C D C D From 40 to < 50 feet
( E { E From 30 to < 40 feet
( F F From 15 to < 30 feet
C G C G From 5 to < 15 feet
C H C H < 5 feet
9. Inundation Duration - assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
( A Evidence of short -duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
C*` B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
C C Evidence of long -duration inundation or very long -duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10. Indicators of Deposition -assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands and all marshes)
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
C A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
C*` B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
C C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11. Wetland Size - wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select "K" for the FW column.
WT WC FW (if applicable)
CA CA CA >500acres
C B C B C B From 100 to < 500 acres

r C r C r C From 50 to < 100 acres
(- D C'' D r D From 25 to < 50 acres
{ E C- E (: E From 10 to < 25 acres
{ F C'' F C` F From 5 to < 10 acres
{ G {' G G From 1 to < 5 acres
r H r H r H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
C I C I C I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
6' J C J C J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
r K �— K r K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12. Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
r A Pocosin is the full extent (> 90%) of its natural landscape size.
B Pocosin is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
metric naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility
line corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wide.
Well Loosely
( A r A > 500 acres
B r B From 100 to < 500 acres
C (- C From 50 to < 100 acres
+ D t+' D From 10 to < 50 acres
E r E < 10 acres
F (- F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
r Yes r No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands.
14. Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non -forested areas > 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and clear -cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directiions? If the assessment area is clear-cut,
select option "C."
C` A 0
. B 1 to 4
C 5to8
15. Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
+ B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
r C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
r A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (<10% cover of exotics).
(: B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
r C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (>50% cover of exotics).
17. Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
(+ Yes r No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
r A > 25% coverage of vegetation
C B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider structure
in airspace
above the
assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA
WT
Q
( A
r A
Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
m-C`
B
r B
Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
U
d+ C
: C
Canopy sparse or absent
o
.C` A
A
Dense mid-story/sapling layer
�
d: B
B
Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
�r C
C
Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
n C` A A Dense shrub layer
t6 B
+ B
Moderate density shrub layer
{ C
C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
{+ A
+ A
Dense herb layer
{ B
B
Moderate density herb layer
x {" C
(` C
Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
r A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12-inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
(: B Not A
19. Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
r A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
(` B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12-inch DBH.
C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.

20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris.
r A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
{: B Not A
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion — wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
{`A (`B 'C {'D
� ^. ter- \� �--.,..ter --•� �•--�� �r-.. �-�,.�r�..�
22. Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization,
diversion, man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
{: A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
r B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
{ C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
( D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual
Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Wetland W3
Date
10/01/2019
Wetland Type Headwater Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Chris Tinklenberg, PWS
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
YES
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open
water (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Rating Summary
Function Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
HIGH
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Particulate Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Physical Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
LOW
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
HIGH
Vegetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology Condition
HIGH
Water Quality Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Habitat Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating MEDIUM

ROY COOPER
Governor
ELIZABETH S. BISER
Secretary
MARC RECKTENWALD
Director
Joe Thompson
Exeter Property Group
715 Harvard Street
Orlando, FL 32804
Project: Exeter Mebane South Outparcels
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
January 9, 2023
Expiration of Acceptance: 7/9/2023
County: Orange
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) is willing to
accept payment for compensatory mitigation for impacts associated with the above referenced project as
indicated in the table below. Please note that this decision does not assure that participation in the DMS in -
lieu fee mitigation program will be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation for project impacts.
It is the responsibility of the applicant to contact permitting agencies to determine if payment to the DMS will
be approved. You must also comply with all other state, federal or local government permits, regulations or
authorizations associated with the proposed activity including G.S. § 143-214.11.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not
received a copy of the issued 404 Permit/401 Certification within this time frame, this acceptance will
expire. It is the applicant's responsibility to send copies of the permits to DMS. Once DMS receives a copy
of the permit(s) an invoice will be issued based on the required mitigation in that permit and payment must
be made prior to conducting the authorized work. The amount of the in -lieu fee to be paid by an applicant is
calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and policies listed on the DMS website.
Based on the information supplied by you in your request to use the DMS, the impacts for which you are
requesting compensatory mitigation credit are summarized in the following table. The amount of mitigation
required and assigned to DMS for this impact is determined by permitting agencies and may exceed the
impact amounts shown below.
River Basin
Impact Location
8-di it HUC
Impact Type
Impact Quantity
Neuse
03020201
Riparian Wetland
0.21
Upon receipt of payment, DMS will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. The
mitigation will be performed in accordance with the In -Lieu Fee Program instrument dated July 28, 2010.
Thank you for your interest in the DMS in -lieu fee mitigation program. If you have any questions or need
additional information, please contact [e-mail].
Sincerely,
AdWd �
FOR James. B Stanfill
Asset Management Supervisor
cc: Chris Tinklenberg, agent
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Mitigation Services
217 West Jones Street 1 1652 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652
h(h�TH :.AROI iRA IV
o �nmmmenni w�a 919,707,8976