20230198 Ver 1_ePCN Application_20230203

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:
10/31/2022
BIMS # Assigned* Version#*
20230198 1
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:
South Carter Industrial
la. Who is the Primary Contact?*
Timmons Group, attn: Hunter Wines
What amout is owed?*
$240.00
$570.00
Select Project Reviewer*
Zachary Thomas:eads\ztthomas
1 b. Primary Contact Email:* lc. Primary Contact Phone:*
[e-mail] [phone]
Date Submitted
2/3/2023
Nearest Body of Water
Upper Little River
Basin
Cape Fear
Water Classification
B
Site Coordinates
Latitude: Longitude:
35.408745 -79.124175
A. Processing Information
County (or Counties) where the project is located:
Lee
Is this a NCDMS Project
Yes No
Is this project a public transportation project? *
Yes No

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
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:
1f. 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
ld. 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:
Luck Stone Corporation
2b. Deed book and page no.:
1628-285
2c. Contact Person:
2d. Address
Street Address
P.O. Box 29682
Address Line 2
City
Richmond
Postal /Zip Code
23242
401 Water Quality Certification - Express
Riparian Buffer Authorization
State / Province / Region
Virginia
Country
USA
Yes No
Yes No

2e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
2f. Fax Number:
2g. Email Address: *
[e-mail]
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
Hazel Carter Bullard
2b. Deed book and page no.:
1396-977,1396-981
2c. Contact Person:
2d. Address
Street Address
5360 NC 87 Highway
Address Line 2
City
Sanford
Postal / Zip Code
27332
2e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
2g. Email Address: *
[e-mail]
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
Curtis Dale Kelly
2b. Deed book and page no.:
1396-979,1396-981
2c. Contact Person:
2d. Address
Street Address
15223 NC 27 West
Address Line 2
City
Sanford
Postal / Zip Code
27332
State / Province / Region
North Carolina
Country
USA
2f. Fax Number:
State / Province / Region
North Carolina
Country
USA
2e. Telephone Number: 2f. Fax Number:
[phone]
2g. Email Address: *
[e-mail]
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
Star 87 LLC
2b. Deed book and page no.:
1571-897
2c. Contact Person:
Ray Covington
2d. Address
Street Address
709 Croswell Street
Address Line 2
City State / Province / Region
Whitsett North Carolina
Postal / Zip Code Country
27377 USA
2e. Telephone Number: 2f. Fax Number:
[phone]
2g. Email Address: *
ray@fig.l Ic
3. Applicant Information (if different from owner)

3a. Name:
Mark Lyczkowski
3b. Business Name:
3c. Address
Street Address
114 Hawkins Ave
Address Line 2
City State / Province / Region
Sanford North Carolina
Postal / Zip Code Country
27330 USA
3d. Telephone Number: 3e. Fax Number:
[phone]
3f. Email Address: *
[e-mail]
4. Agent/Consultant (if applicable)
4a. Name:
Timmons Group, attn: Hunter Wines
4b. Business Name:
Timmons Group
4c. Address
Street Address
1001 Boulders Parkway, Suite 300
Address Line 2
City State / Province / Region
Richmond Virginia
Postal / Zip Code Country
23225 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:
Sanford, Lee County
2. Project Identification
2a. Property Identification Number:
966013868500,966012603400,
966023741700,966044425800,
966034187300,966035948600,
966053062200
2b. Property size:
141.9
2c. Project Address
Street Address
NC 87
Address Line 2
City State / Province / Region
Sanford North Carolina
Postal / Zip Code Country
27332 USA
3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project: *
Upper Little River

3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water: *
B
3c. What river basin(s) is your project located in?*
Cape Fear
3d. Please provide the 12-digit HUC in which the project is located.
030300040201
4. Project Description and History
4a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this application:*
The majority of the site consists of agricultural and maintained land with mixed hardwood and pine forests. The site is bound by agricultural land and private residential areas to the north
and south, Highway 87 to the east, and undeveloped forest 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
4f. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
3.11
4g. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
6,117
4h. Explain the purpose of the proposed project: *
The purpose of the proposed project is to construct a multi-user access road from Hwy 87. This access road will service the South Carter Industrial Park. This road is needed as the
proposed industrial park would not be feasible without access. The access road is the first step in marketing and selling space to users within the industrial park.
4i. Describe the overall project in detail, including indirect impacts and the type of equipment to be used: *
The project will include the construction of a multi-user private access road. The two lane access road will be able to support and accommodate mixed use vehicular traffic. Culverts will be
installed at stream crossings and will be countersunk to ensure hydrologic connectivity with downstream waterbodies and allow for aquatic life movement. Traditional earth work and
grading equipment will be used including excavators, bulldozers, and surface paving equipment.
5. Jurisdictional Determinations
5a. Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the property or proposed impact areas?*
• Yes
No Unknown
Comments:
Please find attached the Wetland Delineation package including the relevant maps and data stations
for the project. We are requesting confirmation of the wetland boundary concurrent with the permit
request.
5b. If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made?*
Preliminary Approved Not Verified Unknown N/A
Corps AID Number:
5c. If 5a is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known):
Agency/Consultant Company:
Other:
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?*
Multiple Timmons Group
Yes No
Are any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permits(s) used, or intended to be used, to authorize any part of the proposed project or related activity?
No
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory
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*
W1
Road/Driveway Crossing
P
Headwater Forest
Impact 1
Yes
Both
0.290
(acres)
2g. Total Temporary Wetland Impact
0.000
2g. Total Wetland Impact
0.290
2i. Comments:
2g. Total Permanent Wetland Impact
0.290
Impact number 1 (site 1) consists of 12,566-sq.ft. (0.29-acre) of permanent wetland impact necessary for road construction and culvert installation
associated for the road construction. The road is necessary to provide access throughout the Site.
3. Stream Impacts
3a. Reason for impact (?)
3b.lmpact type*
3c. Type of impact*
3d. S. name*
3e. Stream Type*
(?)
3f. Type of
Jurisdiction*
3g. S. width
3h. Impact
length*
Si
Access Road
Permanent
Culvert
Impact 2
Intermittent
Both
3
Average (feet)
141
(linear feet)
S2
Access Road
Permanent
Culvert
Impact 3
Intermittent
Both
4
Average (feet)
5
(linear feet)
S3
Access Road
Permanent
Culvert
Impact 4
Perennial
Both
3
Average (feet)
167
(linear feet)
S4
Access Road
Permanent
Culvert
Impact 5
Intermittent
Both
7
Average (feet)
122
(linear feet)
S5
Access Road
Permanent
Culvert
Impact 6
Perennial
Both
9
Average (feet)
152
(linear feet)
3i. Total jurisdictional ditch impact in square feet:
0
3i. Total permanent stream impacts:
587
3i. Total stream and ditch impacts:
587
3i. Total temporary stream impacts:
0
3j. Comments:
Impact numbers 2,3,4,5, and 6 consists of 587-If 3,080-sq.ft. and 0.07-acre) of permanent stream impacts associated with the proposed road crossing.
This crossing is necessary to provide access to the parcel located south of South Jim Minor Road. The road crossing will include the installation of a
culvert countersunk underneath the road crossing to maintain the hydrologic connection between the up gradient and down gradient portion of the
stream.
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
la. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:
Impacts have been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent practicable given the projects purpose and need. Access from HWY 87 will be
required o construct the industrial park. The location of the access road is confined to the parcels the Applicant has control over. Jurisdictional features
span the entirety of the access corridor making impacts unavoidable. In effort to minimize impacts, the Applicant has proposed crossings in the least
sinuous portions of the channels. Additionally, they propose to cross at perpendicular locations to minimize channel and wetland disturbance. The
Applicant proposes to utilize countersunk culverts at each crossing to allow for hydrologic connectivity and aquatic life movement.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:
Proper sedimentation and erosion control methods will be utilized during all phases of construction and installation as described in accordance with the
requirements of the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources: Erosion Control Planning and Design Manual (May 2013) and
local codes. All work will take place during dry conditions and can be facilitated from high, non -jurisdictional, stable ground. The contractor shall install
silt fence, inlet protection, sediment traps, division ditches, temporary coffer dams, tree protection, and clearing only as necessary to install devices. All
erosion and sediment control measures will be checked for stability and operation following every runoff producing rainfall, but in no case less than once
every week. Any needed repairs will be made immediately to maintain all measures designed. An erosion control inspections report is required and will
be kept by the owner's representative.
Temporary seeding and permanent seeding plans are included to restore impacted areas. The project will meet all relative requirements of Best
Management Practices and Engineered Stormwater Control Structures as outlined through State and Local Stormwater Rules. Measures will be taken to
prevent oil, tar, trash, debris, and other pollutants from entering adjacent jurisdictional features. Any excess excavated materials not utilized as back fill
will be placed and contained within upland areas and permanently stabilized to prevent erosion into adjacent jurisdictional features. Therefore,
stockpiling of excavated material within jurisdictional waters of the U.S. will be strictly prohibited as part of the construction of this project. All project
construction activities initiated within jurisdictional waters of the U.S. will be carried to completion in an expeditious manner to minimize the period of
disturbance within jurisdictional waters.
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:
(linear feet)
1,174
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWR only):
(square feet)
4c. If using stream mitigation, what is the stream temperature:
warm
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
(acres)
0.58
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested: 4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
(acres) (acres)
4h. Comments
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
If no, explain why:
Project is not within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules.
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)?
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
3. Stormwater Requirements
3a. Select whether a completed stormwater management plan (SMP) is included for review and approval or if calculations are provided to document the project will not cause degradation of
downstream surface waters.*
Stormwater Management Plan Antidegradation Calculations
Comments:
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.
This project will not impact nearby water quality as appropriate erosion and sediment controls and stormwater management best practices will be
utilized.
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?
USFWS IPaC, North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) Database
See attached consultation documentation.
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? *
N/A
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?*
NCHPO HPOWEB Application
See attached documentation.
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?*
FEMA FIRM Map

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
20230202 South Carter Industrial_ePCN Cover Page Package.pdf 38.81 MB
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:
Hunter Wines
Signature
Date
2/3/2023

5410 Trinity Road P 919.866.4951
T I M M O N S GROUP Suite F 919.859.5663
Raleigh,
NC 27607 www.timmons.com
February 2, 2023
James Lastinger
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers — Wilmington District
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
Colleen Cohn
401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
NCDEQ — Division of Water Resources
3800 Barrett Drive
Raleigh, NC 27609
Re: Electronic Pre -Construction Notification Attachments
South Carter Industrial
Sanford, Lee County, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Lastinger and Ms. Cohn,
On behalf of Mark Lyczkowski, we are providing additional attachments and information to aid in
the review of the electronic Pre -Construction Notification for South Carter Industrial, an
approximately 141.9-acre site located within Lee County, NC (the Site).
The purpose of the project is to construct a multi-user access road to service future developments
within the South Carter Industrial Park. Impacts were avoided and minimized to the maximum
extent practicable. The access corridor is bisected by several jurisdictional features, and impacts
could not be avoided entirely. Proposed impacts include 0.29 acres of Palustrine Forested (PFO)
wetlands and 587 linear feet (0.07 acres) of stream channel. The Applicant has proposed to
compensate for these unavoidable impacts through the purchase of mitigation credits in order to
achieve no net loss of aquatic resources. Standard mitigation ratios of 2:1 were applied requiring
0.58 wetland and 1,174 stream credits.
Additionally, we are requesting a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) for the wetland
delineation completed for the project. Delineation supporting materials are included as Appendix
B.
Please review the below attachments and contact Hunter Wines at [phone] or
hunter.winesa-timmons.com if additional information is required.
Sincerely,
Timmons Group
Hunter Wines, PWS
Senior Environmental Scientist
ENGINEERING I DESIGN I TECHNOLOGY

Enclosures
ATTACHMENTS
Appendix A Figure 1 —Vicinity Map
Figure 2
— Hydrologic Unit Code Map
Figure 3
— Environmental Inventory Map
Figure 4
— Parcel Map
Figure 5
— NRCS Soil Survey Map
Figure 6
— Wetlands and Waters of the U.S.
Figure 7
— Wetlands and Waters of the U.S.
Appendix B Field Data Stations
NC DWR Stream Identification Forms
Delineation Photo Log
Appendix C
Agent Authorization Form
DWR Pre -Filing Request
Appendix D
Mitigation Acceptance Letter
Appendix E
IPaC Official Species Report
NCNHP Database Report
Appendix F
SHPO Map
Delineation Map
Impacts Map

Appendix A

Path: Y:\804\41353.012 - South Carter Industrial Park\GIS\41353.012-JD-VIC.n-xd
0
Site Limits
�O
00056 low
■
- _ - ♦� UPPer Lif[(e
?5�
Site limits are approximate.
Topographic imagery from USGS.
1,000 2,000 3,000
4,000
Feet
SOUTH CARTER INDUSTRIAL PARK T I M M O N S GROUP •' �,�
LEE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA �®
FIGURE 1: VICINITY MAP YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS. •
TIMMONS GROUP JOB NUMBER:41353.012 U.S.G.S. QUADRANGLE(S):SANFORD and BROADWAY
PROJECT STUDY LIMITS: 141.9 ACRES DATE(S):2019
LATITUDE: 35.408745 WATERSHED(S):UPPER CAPE FEAR (CAPE FEAR RIVER BASIN)
LONGITUDE:-79.124175 HYDROLOGIC UNIT CODE(S):03030004
These plans and associated documents are the exclusive property of TIMMONS GROUP and may not be reproduced in whole or in part and shall not be used for any purpose whatsoever, inclusive, but not
limited to constructionbiddingand/or construction staking without the exnress written consent of TIMMONS GROUP.

iou �nq'anisnpui'ianaosteym asotlintl Rue ion pasn aq iou Ileys pue petl ui io aloym ui paanpwtla�aq iou ,lew pue dNONO SNOWWIl lo,lpatlwtl ausnpxaiayiiaie sivawnaopupaieixsse pueusueltl asap yl
a:::j
=
dVW MOO IlNn 0190-IOUaAH :Z 3unsid
aw w VNI-1021tl0 H1210N �AlNnoo 33-1 -o
NOLLdIi10530 NOI51A3i1 31tl0 o¢ o¢ �= rn NUVd IviuisnONI U31UVO Hings
le1uawuo�pw3 I A■olouga l I WE"R>se„al I lequaplsay �uawtlolana0 a��s ,� d f 10 J S N O WW I 1
s��x�dtl o o, awo� ■ineN■noax�a■n■iNwxo■uunaa , • -
l.ss
,Q O
M
O
O o M
O �
-
N y E
O "li.p%f C iil' in nN
M
O x y ax
on
w w U n
Z - 2 F
� _ J
N
O
O
_ N O
- V O
Y M
�Ewt m
w va
71
0 E O
O
M
s -
01
!S
M
O O O
N
O
y G�
L
�J c
M
- O
O
M y �
O � O
M N
O O
A
` CI1
U)
4 �
U 2
Q
b
E � _ 4dIn0Uc i,o
o
f.01 G 'n ➢ � � O`
ern Y Q �
V \ `� O ■ ■
1 ■
pxw'onH-OI`Zl M' 1100\Wed leuisnpul iapeo glnog-Zl0'ESElb\b08\:A:filed

pxw'yyl3-OI`Zl0'£S£WSI`J\Wed Ieulanpul iape0 4jn.S - ZLO'£S£ Lb\b08\:A:47ed

Path: Y:\804\41353.012 - South Carter Industrial Park\GIS\41353.012-JD-PARCEL.mxd
y
966034187300
KELLY,
CURTIS DALE
})
Sy ,
966013868500 40
LUCK STONE
CORPORATION f`
4
966035948600 a,
KELLY, CURTIS
DALE (TRUSTEE) ,!
Y
Ak
966044425800
s BULLARD,
HAZEL CARTER dalfi"AC.,
966053062200
966023741700 = STAR 87 LLC
BULLARD,
HAZEL CARTER
966012603400?
LUCK STONE
CORPORATION
Legend
Project Study Limits - 141.9 Acres
Lee County Parcels
0 800 1,600 2,400
SOUTH CARTER INDUSTRIAL PARK
LEE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
FIGURE 4: PARCEL MAP
TIMMONS GROUP JOB NUMBER: 41353.012
PROJECT STUDY LIMITS: 141.9 ACRES
LATITUDE: 35.408745
LONGITUDE:-79.124175
ese p ans an associate ocument: are [ e exc usive property o an may no[ a repro uce
I
imited to construction, bidding, and/or onstmction staking without the express written consent of TIM MONS GROUP.
,1�
Site limits are approximate.
s,zoo Feet Imagery and Parcels from NC OneMap.
TIMMONS GROUP ,•'•e•�
YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS. • •
U.S.G.S. QUADRANGLE(S): SANFORD and BROADWAY
DATE(S): 2019
WATERSHED(S): UPPER CAPE FEAR (CAPE FEAR RIVER BASIN)
HYDROLOGIC UNIT CODE(S): 03030004

Path: Y:\804\41353.012 - South Carter Industrial Park\GIS\41353.012-JD-NRCS.mxd
N
s4
1
N V Td� � F
I DoB
TOO D o a DOE
Toe 0 I r
TaB TaD
T A3 'I
- - - -ta�
Site Limits
it 4
TaB
C f D fiat fiaE
TOID
TaB
CFI
CIE Xa
TOB
k� T*D
I
d
fD PUF -
fID
DejEl FWD rla r',-
PaF
A
Ciro
Site limits are approximate. tj '
Soils data from NRCS Web Soil Survey (Lee County, 1989) Pat
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4.000
Feet
SOUTH CARTER INDUSTRIAL PARK T I M M O N S GROUP •' •,
LEE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
FIGURE 5: NRCS SOIL SURVEY MAP YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS. •
TIMMONS GROUP JOB NUMBER: 41353.012 U.S.G.S. QUADRANGLE(S): SANFORD and BROADWAY
PROJECT STUDY LIMITS: 141.9 ACRES DATE(S): 2019
LATITUDE: 35.408745 WATERSHED(S): UPPER CAPE FEAR (CAPE FEAR RIVER BASIN)
LONGITUDE:-79.124175 o e HYDROLOGIC UNIT CODE(S): 03030004
ese plans an associate documents are [ e exc usive property o an may not a reproduced in w or in part an shall not a use or any purpose whatsoever, inclusive, but not
limited to construction, bidding, and/or construction staking without the express written consent &TIMMONS GROUP.

df0210 SNOWWIllo luasuoa ual01m ssa1tlxa ayl lnoypm 6u!Nels umpnosuoa 1olpue'6uippiq'uoilunosuoa of palm!
lou mnq'anisnpui'1anaosleym asotllntllue iol pasn aq lou Heys pue owl ui13aloym ui paunpodelaq louAmu puedROUO SNOWWLLIolpadold anisnpxa NI ale sluounoop paleixsse puesuel asayl
dtlW NOLLtl3NI130 S2I31VM ONtl SONV113M :9 32If10Id
VNI1DMY9 N1MON'Lump WI
)12IVd 1VI I1SflONI 21312IV3 H1flOS
11
aaaaaaaaaEMMMI
iIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIE
1111111111111111111111
®mmmmmmne
I1I�1EfIf@11111I11111119
11111 I1111'IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII110
iIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIO��� IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIEIIIIII
i11111111111111111111:
I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
'•' •' df1O1I9 SNOWWII
0
0<
m?-) 3g
wo
E o m
rn LL x
- _ fto- 1 U
-a mm V 0 _a m
C a t 3 _aawm
3:J °©A-0•*11IDI
oI

dfOUO SNOWWIllo InaSno uaIVflm
ndxa ay inoypm OU!NRIs uOIangsuo Jo/pue'6uippiq'uo6ovIsuoo of pawn!!
s.
dIW NOLLV3NI13O S2I31VM ONV SONV113M :9 32If10Id
VN9DbWJ 141110N'Amino° WI
)12IVd 1VI I1SflONI 21312IV3 H1flOS
3g
ffiaV
_ T o
f7 — _ v U o
0 Y E v
a)6: a` ro 3 - a U a w a a
—I��

df0210 SNOWWI110 luesuoo ual0im ssaJdxa ayl lnoyom 6u!Nels umpngsuoo iolpue'6uippiq'uoilungsuoo of menu
lou mnq'anisnpui'lanaosleym asodeld lue 1 1 pasn aq lou Heys pue pod ui io aloym ui paonpoltlal aq lou Amu pue d00d0 SNOWWII to Apatloid anisnpxa NI aie sluawnoop paleioosse pue sueld asayl
dtlW NOLLtl3NI13O S2I31VM ONtl SONV113M :9 32If10Id
VN9DbWJ NiMON'A1mIW MI
)12IVd 1VI I1SflONI 21312IV3 H1flOS
iI9oIII19IIIIIIIIIIIo9
ol00000000000000000000e
IIIIIGIIIIIIIIIIIIIH
solool0000000000000co
II@oIlI11IIIIIIIIIIII!
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIO���
111111111111111111 f 11I l
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIO
I IIIIIIIII91911119IEII

df0219 SNOWWI110 loosuoo ual0,m ssa,tlxa ayl lnoyom 6u!Nels uoIlongsuo3,olpue'6uippiq'uoilongsuo3 of palm!
lou mnq'anisnpui',anaosleym asocind lue, l pasn aq lou Heys pue pod uiJoaloym ui paonpoRla,aq louAmu puedROdS SNOWWIIIoIpado,tl anisnpxa ayl a,e sluawnoop paleiaosse puesnel asayl
dtlW NOLLtl3NI130 S2I31VM ONtl SONV113M :9 32If10Id
VNI1DMY9 N1MON'Lump WI
)12IVd 1VI I1SflONI 21312IV3 H1flOS
11
014,
11111111111111111111111
immmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
®mmmmmmne
IIIII1GIIIIIIIIIIIIII9
a leIeeIeeIIIIIIIIIIIIle
a1lleIelI IIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII:���
e111111111111111111 a 11 e
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII:
m eeeeeeeeemmmmmmm9Imea
111111II1II1111III1III
alt e
gD
gw
'•' •' df1O1I9 SNOWWII
•
� V
C 'o
N a`
J

df0210 SNOWWI110 loosuoo ual01m ssa1tlxa ayl lnoypm 6u!Nels uoIlongsuoo 1olpue'6uippiq'uoilongsuoo of paliwil
lou mnq'anisnpuianaosleym asocintllue Jol pasn aq lou Heys pue pod uiJoaloym ui paonpoRlalaq louAmu puedROUO SNOWWIIIolpadold anisnpxa aylaIe sluawnoop paleixsse puesuel asayl
dIW NOLLV3NI130 S2131VM ONV SONV113M :9 321f101d
VNI1DMY9 N1MON'Lump WI
)12IVd 1VI I1SflONI 21312IV3 H1flOS
iIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
®mmmmmmne
111111111111111111111
111110011111111111111111
I1@@I@111111111111111I!
111111111111111111111111
11111111111111111111111111
iImmmmmmlll0
1IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
10010110111011011

_sao� a
4_ amm3
akoakkoww� )IOU
,�_m_e,_a --- \\
\: w»` -:-
\
\ \
!
_ -
��.
/
/
z z :

_sao� a
4_ amm3
akoakkoww� )IOU
,�_m_e,_a --- \\
\: w»` -:-
�
�
m
; I I Ik
c-
��.
WE26
65

VNIIOLJVO HILION
anoa�aSNOWWIl lIOU
vRLLsnaNiaalavoHlnos NH
2It
✓/sue/^^�j
� - � e � � _
-
_
65 65 w O
o
-
65E WE
-
o v
e
a a f7 > a U m _ w m m m w
N �••� ° mIl ® ® I I � 1

Appendix B

Feature G
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 PSA-33B5-1
Date: 01 /19/2022
Project/site: Sanford Quarry
Latitude: 35.409332
Evaluator: M. Gilbert, S. Law
County: Lee
Longitude: _79.1 17676
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent 26.5
Stream Determination circle one)
Other Sanford and Broadway,
2016
if>_ 19 or perennial if>_ 30'
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
e.g. Quad Name: MLRA 136
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 14 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
1 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
1 2
1
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
1 3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0 1
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0 1
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
I LLE-0-11
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated: see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 7
* NRCS, USGS, & Field -Verified
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
�2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5-1
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1
1 1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table? **
No = 0
Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = 5.5 Heavy redox concentrations and depleted soils
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
1 2
1
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
1 0
1
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5 1
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1
1 1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
I
FACW = 0.75; OBL =
1.5 1 Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: Some algae found on rocks throughout reach. According to the Antecedent Precipitation Tool, conditions on -site were within "Wetter than
Normal."
Sketch:

Feature F (Upper)
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 PSA-33D5-1
Date: 01 /19/2022
Project/site: Sanford Quarry
Latitude: 35.409488
Evaluator: M. Gilbert, S. Law
County: Lee
Longitude: _79.1 19535
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent 4.5
Stream Determination (circle one)
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
Other Sanford and Broadway,
2016
e.g. Quad Name:
if>_ 19 or perennial if>_ 30-
MLRA 136
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 5.5 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
1 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0 1
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
L-L-1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
I LLE-0-11
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated: see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 5
* NRCS, USGS, & Field -Verified
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1�
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table? **
No = 0
Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = 4 ) Heavy redox concentrations and depleted soils
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1 1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
I
FACW = 0.75; OBL =
1.5 1 Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: No algae or organisms noted within subject area. According to the Antecedent Precipitation Tool, conditions on -site were within "Wetter
than Normal."
Sketch:

Feature A
NC DWO Stream identification Form Version 4.11 PSA-54G1-1
Date: 07/20/2022
Project/Site: South Carter Industrial
Latitude: 35.412403
Evaluator:A. Johnson, M. Gilbert
county:Lee
Longitude:_79.123662
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent 2 9. 5
Stream Determination circle one)
Other Broadway Quad, 2019
LRR P, MLRA 136
if >_ 19 or perennial if >_ 30'
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 15.5 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
I LLE-0-11
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroloov (Subtotal = 8.5 ) NRCS, USGS, & Field -Verified
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1�
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table? **
No = 0
Yes = 3
C. Bioloav (Subtotal = 5.5 ) ww 1 HY l-: 40 XAilth -v)Y -v)/K
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
1 0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
I
FACW = 0.75; OBL =
1.5 1 Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: Well defined channel with a few pools. Standing water is present near the confluence, but most of the channel is dry. According to the
Antecedent Precipitation Tool, conditions on -site were drier than normal and under a moderate drought.
Sketch:

4
4M
'�
3,
N11-1
R
M4'
4,"
3A,
WMIM
-4, A
ZIA.
z

Appendix C

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Sanford Quarry City/County: Lee County Sampling Date: 01/19/2022
Applicant/Owner: Mark Lyczkowskl State: NC Sampling Point: FDS-33C5-1
Investigator(s): M. Gilbert, S. Law Section, Township, Range: N/A
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Swale Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA136 Lat: 35.409657 Long:-79.117464
Soil Map Unit Name: NaD - Nanford silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes NWI classification: U
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes _0 No Q (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation = Soil = or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? N Are "Normal Circumstances" present?
_ Slope (%): 2%
Datum: NAD83
land
Yes 0 No ❑✓
Are Vegetation L__J Soil 0, or Hydrology ,0 naturally problematic? Y (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes �0 No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes I v l Nowithin a Wetland? Yes 0 No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes.I r L No
Point taken within a seep located inside a Swale located upslope of a stream feature. According to the Antecedent
Precipitation Tool, conditions on -site were within "Wetter than Normal."
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
❑✓ Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
✓❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑✓ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑✓ Saturation (A3)
✓❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
,❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (131)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (132)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (133)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (134)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
❑ Iron Deposits (135)
✓❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (139)
❑ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
_❑Aquatic Fauna (1313)
❑✓ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes 0
No ❑ Depth (inches): 0.5
Water Table Present? Yes 0
No ❑ Depth (inches): 6
II
Saturation Present? Yes Q
No ❑ Depth (inches): 0
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: FDS-33C5-1
Tree Stratum (Plot size. 30ft. )
1. Acer rubrum
2. Nyssa sylvatica
3. Liquidambar styraciflua
4. Carpinus caroliniana
5. Ilex opaca
6.
Absolute
% Cover
25
20
12
10
5
72
Dominant Indicator
Species? Status
YES FAC
YES FAC
NO FAC
NO FAC
NO FACU
= Total Cover
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 9 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 9 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species 100%
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
36
14.4
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
20% of
total cover:
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling Stratum (Plots 30ft. )
FACW species 55 x 2 = 110
1. Acer rubrum
20
YES
FAC
133 399
2. Liquidambar styraciflua
18
YES
FAC
FAC species x 3 =
3. Ilex opaca
10
NO
FACU
FACU species 21 x 4 = 84
4. Juniperus virginiana
3
NO
FACU
UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
Column Totals: 204 (A) 573 (B)
5.
6.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.84
51
= Total Cover
Vegetation Indicators:
50% of total cover:
25.5 20% of total cover:
10.2
IHydrophytic
LJ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft. )
✓ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
1. Vacinnium corymbosum
10
YES
FACW
✓ 3 - Prevalence Index is <-3.0'
2
❑ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
3.
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
4.
V
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
6.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
10
= Total Cover
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
50% of total cover: 5
20% of total cover: 2
5ft•
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
1. Leersia virginica
25
YES FACW
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
2. Juncus effusus
20
YES FACW
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
3. Carex blanda
20
YES FAC
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
d Liaustrum sinense
3
NO FACU
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
5.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
6
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
7.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
$
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
9.
ft (1 m) in height.
10.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
11.
68 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 34
20% of total cover: 13.6
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft. )
1. Smilax rotundifolia
8 YES FAC
2.
3.
4.
5.
$
Hydrophytic
= Total Cover
Vegetation
Present? Yes T71 No�
50% of total cover: 4
20% of total cover: 1.6
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont -Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: FDS-33C5-1
to the death needed to document the indicator or confirm
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc Texture Remarks
0-18 10YR 4/2 88 5YR 3/4 12 C PL LC Prominant redox concentrations
'Type: C=Concentration, D=De letion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
0 Histosol (Al)
❑ Dark Surface (S7)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
0 Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
❑✓ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No ❑
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Sanford Quarry City/County: Lee County Sampling Date: 01/19/2022
Applicant/Owner: Mark Lyczkowskl State: NC Sampling Point: FDS-33C5-2
Investigator(s): M. Gilbert, S. Law Section, Township, Range: N/A
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Sldeslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA136 Lat: 35.409587 Long:-79.117346
Soil Map Unit Name: NaD - Nanford silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes NWI classification: U
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes _0 No Q (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation = Soil .=, or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? N Are "Normal Circumstances" present?
_ Slope (%): 3-5%
Datum: NAD83
land
Yes 0 No ❑✓
Are Vegetation L__J Soil 0, or Hydrology ,0 naturally problematic? Y (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 0 No ✓� Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes Nowithin a Wetland? Yes 0 No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes.= No
Point taken on sideslope just upslope of palustrine forested wetland seep. According to the Antecedent Precipitation
Tool, conditions on -site were within "Wetter than Normal."
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
❑ Surface Water (Al) ❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
❑ High Water Table (A2) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
,❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (131) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (132) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (133) ❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (134) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
❑ Iron Deposits (135)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (139)
❑ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
_❑Aquatic Fauna (1313)
❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No = Depth (inches): N/A
Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No = Depth (inches): >18
6
n
Saturation Present? Yes Q No ❑ Depth (inches):
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: FDS-33C5-2
Tree Stratum (Plot size. 30ft. )
1. Acer rubrum
2. Ilex opaca
3. Liquidambar styraciflua
4. Quercus alba
5. Quercus falcata
6.Oxydendrum arboreum
Absolute
% Cover
30
25
10
10
8
8
91
Dominant Indicator
Species? Status
YES FAC
YES FACU
NO FAC
NO FACU
NO FACU
NO UPL
= Total Cover
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 7 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 42 9% (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
45.5
18.2
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
20% of
total cover:
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling Stratum (Plots 30ft. )
FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
1. Liquidambar styraciflua
35
YES
FAC
80 240
2. Ilex opaca
25
YES
FACU
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species 83 x 4 = 332
3.
UPL species 8 x 5 = 40
4.
Column Totals: 171 (A) 612 (g)
5.
6.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.58
60
= Total Cover
Vegetation Indicators:
50% of total cover:
30 20% of
total cover:
12
IHydrophytic
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15ft. )
❑ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
1. Callicarpa americana
10
YES
FACU
Q 3 - Prevalence Index is <-3.0'
2. Ilex opaca
5
YES
FACU
❑ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
3.
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
4.
V 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
6. be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
15 = Total Cover Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
50% of total cover: 7.5 20% of total cover: 3
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5ft• ) approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
1. N/A (7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
2. Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
3. approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
5.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
6
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
7.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
$
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
9.
ft (1 m) in height.
10.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
11.
0 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 0
20% of total cover: 0.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15ft. )
1. Gelsemium sempervirens
5 YES FAC
2.
3.
4.
5.
5
Hydrophytic
= Total Cover
Vegetation
Present? Yes = No�
50% of total cover: 2•5
20% of total cover: 1
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: FDS-33C5-2
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type Loc Texture Remarks
0-3 10YR 4/3 100 CL
3-18 10YR 5/6 85 10YR 4/3 15 C M SCL Distinct redox concentrations
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
0 Histosol (Al)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Dark Surface (S7)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
0 Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No ❑
Remarks:
Point taken within sideslope, not within a depressional feature.
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
❑ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control #: 0710-0024, Exp:1113012024
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
See ERDC/EL TR-12-9; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: South Carter Industrial City/County: Sanford/Lee Sampling Date: 7/20/22
Applicant/Owner: Mark Lyczkowski State: NC Sampling Point: FDS-54A1-1
Investigator(s): A. Johnson & M. Gilbert Section, Township, Range: N/A
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Draw Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 3-5%
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.408660 Long:-79.118355 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: NaD: Nanford silt loam, 8-15% slopes NWI classification: Upland
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No X
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
The sampling point was taken within a draw. According to the USACE Antecedent Precipitation Tool, conditions onsite were drier than normal and
under a moderate drought.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
—Surface Water (Al) —True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) —Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (Cl)
X Drainage Patterns (1310)
_Saturation (A3) _Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
—Moss Trim Lines (1316)
—Water Marks (131) —Presence
of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
_Sediment Deposits (132) _Recent
Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (134) _Other
(Explain in Remarks)
_Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_Iron Deposits (135)
X Geomorphic Position (D2)
—Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water-Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: FDS-54A1-1
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft )
1. Liquidambar styraciflua
2. Nyssa sylvatica
3. Acer rubrum
4.
5.
6.
7.
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
% Cover
Species?
Status
15
Yes
FAC
10
Yes
FAC
8
Yes
FAC
33 =Total Cover
50% of total cover:
17
20% of total cover:
Saplinq/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft
)
1.
Ilex opaca
25
Yes
2.
Nyssa sylvatica
10
Yes
3.
Ligustrum sinense
8
No
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
43
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
22
20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft )
1.
Microstegium vimineum
60
Yes
2.
Arisaema triphyllum
8
No
3.
Carex blanda
5
No
4.
Juncus effusus
3
No
5.
Nyssa sylvatica
3
No
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
79
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
40
20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft
)
1.
N/A
2.
3.
4.
5.
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
7
FACU
FAC
FACU
9
FAC
FACW
FAC
FACW
FAC
In
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 6 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 83.3% (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is !2.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
(1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
ENG FORM 6116-4, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont -Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: FDS-54A1-1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Types Loc2
Texture Remarks
0-6 10YR 6/3 95
7.5YR 5/8 5 C M
Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
6-12 10YR 5/2 98
7.5YR 4/6 2 C M
Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
12-15 2.5Y 6/2 60
10YR 5/6 40 C M
Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) _ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
—Black Histic (A3)
—Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
—Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
—Stratified Layers (A5)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_Redox Depressions (F8)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
_Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
_Other (Explain in Remarks)
Gleyed Matrix (S4)
MLRA 136)
—Sandy
—Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Dark Surface (S7)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type: Compaction
Depth (inches): 15
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Auger refusal at 15 inches due to soil compaction
ENG FORM 6116-4, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control #: 0710-0024, Exp:1113012024
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
See ERDC/EL TR-12-9; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: South Carter Industrial City/County: Sanford/Lee Sampling Date: 7/20/22
Applicant/Owner: Mark Lyczkowski State: NC Sampling Point: FDS-54A1-2
Investigator(s): A. Johnson & M. Gilbert Section, Township, Range: N/A
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Draw Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 1-3%
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.408578 Long:-79.118405 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: NaD: Nanford silt loam, 8-15% slopes NWI classification: Upland
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No X
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
The sampling point was taken within the upland area in the center of a draw. According to the USACE Antecedent Precipitation Tool, conditions onsite
were drier than normal and under a moderate drought.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
—Surface Water (Al) —True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) —Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (1310)
_Saturation (A3) _Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
—Moss Trim Lines (1316)
—Water Marks (131) —Presence
of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
_Sediment Deposits (132) _Recent
Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (134) _Other
(Explain in Remarks)
_Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_Iron Deposits (135)
X Geomorphic Position (D2)
—Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water-Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: FDS-54A1-2
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft )
1. Pinus taeda
2. Liquidambar styraciflua
3. Acer rubrum
4. Oxydendrum arboreum
5.
6.
7.
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
% Cover
Species?
Status
15
Yes
FAC
10
Yes
FAC
8
No
FAC
8
No
UPL
41 =Total Cover
50% of total cover:
21
20% of total cover:
Saplinq/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft
)
1.
Liquidambar styraciflua
18
Yes
2.
Ilex opaca
15
Yes
3.
Oxydendrum arboreum
8
No
4.
Cornus florida
5
No
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
46
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
23
20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft )
1.
Microstegium vimineum
30
Yes
2.
Chasmanthium laxum
20
Yes
3.
Gelsemium sempervirens
8
No
4.
Arisaema triphyllum
8
No
5.
Dichanthelium commutatum
5
No
6.
Vitis rotundifolia
5
No
7.
Lonicera japonica
5
No
8.
Smilax rotundifolia
3
No
9.
10.
11.
84
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
42
20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft
)
1.
Vitis rotundifolia
10
Yes
2.
Toxicodendron radicans
8
Yes
3.
4.
5.
18
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
9
20% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
9
FAC
FACU
UPL
FACU
IN
FAC
FAC
FAC
FACW
FACU
FAC
FACU
FAC
17
FAC
FAC
4
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 7 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 8 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 87.5% (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is !2.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
(1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
ENG FORM 6116-4, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont -Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: FDS-54A1-
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
Redox Features
(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist)
%
Types
Loc2
Texture
Remarks
0-5
10YR 5/8
100
Loamy/Clayey
5-14
10YR 5/4
80
10YR 5/3
15
C
M
Loamy/Clayey
Faint redox concentrations
5YR 4/6
15
C
M
Prominent redox concentrations
14-18
10YR 7/3
60
10YR 6/6
30
C
M
Loamy/Clayey
Distinct redox concentrations
7.5YR 5/8
10
C
M
Prominent redox concentrations
18-24
2.5Y 7/2
60
2.5Y 7/4
40
C
M
Loamy/Clayey
Distinct redox concentrations
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
`Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
—Black Histic (A3)
—Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
—Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
—Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_Redox Depressions (F8)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
_Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
_Other (Explain in Remarks)
Gleyed Matrix (S4)
MLRA 136)
—Sandy
—Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Dark Surface (S7)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
Remarks
ENG FORM 6116-4, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control #: 0710-0024, Exp:1113012024
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
See ERDC/EL TR-12-9; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: South Carter Industrial City/County: Sanford/Lee Sampling Date: 7/20/22
Applicant/Owner: Mark Lyczkowski State: NC Sampling Point: FDS-54H1-1
Investigator(s): A. Johnson & M. Gilbert Section, Township, Range: N/A
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 1-3%
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.409695 Long:-79.123788 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: TaD: Tarrus silt loam, 8-15% slopes NWI classification: Upland
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No X
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
The sampling point was taken within the edge of a floodplain wetland near the toe of slope. According to the USACE Antecedent Precipitation Tool,
conditions onsite were drier than normal and under a moderate drought.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
—Surface Water (Al) —True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) —Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (Cl)
X Drainage Patterns (1310)
_Saturation (A3) _Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
—Moss Trim Lines (1316)
—Water Marks (131) —Presence
of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
X Sediment Deposits (132) —Recent
Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
X Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (134) _Other
(Explain in Remarks)
_Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_Iron Deposits (135)
X Geomorphic Position (D2)
—Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
X Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
X FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 17
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Buttressing of roots noted on the mature trees within the wetland; No water table was found within 24 inches of the soil surface at the time of sampling
ENG FORM 6116-4, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: FDS-541-11-1
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft )
1. Liquidambar styraciflua
2. Acer rubrum
3. Salix nigra
4. Diospyros virginiana
5.
6.
7.
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
% Cover
Species?
Status
15
Yes
FAC
10
Yes
FAC
10
Yes
OBL
8
No
FAC
43 =Total Cover
50% of total cover:
22
20% of total cover:
Saplinq/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft
)
1.
Alnus serrulata
15
Yes
2.
Carpinus caroliniana
8
Yes
3.
Diospyros virginiana
5
No
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
28
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
14
20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft )
1.
Impatiens capensis
15
Yes
2.
Microstegium vimineum
10
Yes
3.
Carex blanda
5
No
4.
Boehmeria cylindrica
5
No
5.
Ligustrum sinense
5
No
6.
Toxicodendron radicans
3
No
7.
Diospyros virginiana
2
No
8.
9.
10.
11.
45
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
23
20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft
)
1.
Toxicodendron radicans
15
Yes
2.
Smilax rotundifolia
10
Yes
3.
4.
5.
25
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
13
20% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
9
OBL
FAC
FAC
0
FACW
FAC
FAC
FACW
FACU
FAC
FAC
9
FAC
FAC
5
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 9 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 9 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is !2.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
(1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
ENG FORM 6116-4, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont -Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: FDS-54H1-1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
Redox Features
(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist)
%
Types
Loc2
Texture
Remarks
0-6
2.5Y 7/3
90
5YR 5/8
10
C
PL/M
Loamy/Clayey
Prominent redox concentrations
6-11
2.5Y 6/1
85
5YR 4/6
15
C
M
Loamy/Clayey
Prominent redox concentrations
11-17
2.5Y 6/2
95
7.5YR 5/6
5
C
M
Loamy/Clayey
Prominent redox concentrations
17-24
2.5Y 7/2
80
7.5YR 6/8
15
C
M
Loamy/Clayey
Prominent redox concentrations
5YR 5/8
5
C
M
Prominent redox concentrations
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators.
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
—Black Histic (A3)
—Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
—Stratified Layers (A5)
_2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11:
_Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
—Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
_Stripped Matrix(S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
—Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions(F8)
_Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
—Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
ENG FORM 6116-4, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control #: 0710-0024, Exp:1113012024
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
See ERDC/EL TR-12-9; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: South Carter Industrial City/County: Sanford/Lee Sampling Date: 7/20/22
Applicant/Owner: Mark Lyczkowski State: NC Sampling Point: FDS-54H1-2
Investigator(s): A. Johnson & M. Gilbert Section, Township, Range: N/A
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Sideslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 3-5%
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.409653 Long:-79.123861 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: TaD: Tarrus silt loam, 8-15% slopes NWI classification: Upland
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No X
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
The sampling point was taken just upslope of a palustrine forested wetland in a floodplain. According to the USACE Antecedent Precipitation Tool,
conditions onsite were drier than normal and under a moderate drought.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
—Surface Water (Al) —True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) —Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (1310)
_Saturation (A3) _Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
—Moss Trim Lines (1316)
—Water Marks (131) —Presence
of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
_Sediment Deposits (132) _Recent
Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (134) _Other
(Explain in Remarks)
_Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_Iron Deposits (135)
X Geomorphic Position (D2)
—Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water-Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Auger refusal at 8 inches of the soil surface due to rock layer
ENG FORM 6116-4, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: FDS-541-11-2
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft )
1. Liriodendron tulipifera
2. Liquidambar styraciflua
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
% Cover
Species?
Status
20
Yes
FACU
10
Yes
FAC
30 =Total Cover
50% of total cover:
15
20% of total cover:
Saplinq/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft
)
1.
Liquidambar styraciflua
15
Yes
2.
Carpinus caroliniana
10
Yes
3.
Liriodendron tulipifera
8
No
4.
Carya glabra
5
No
5.
Ilex opaca
3
No
6.
7.
8.
9.
41
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
21
20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft )
1.
Lonicera japonica
15
Yes
2.
Ligustrum sinense
8
Yes
3.
Asplenium platyneuron
5
No
4.
Carex blanda
3
No
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
31
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
16
20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft
)
1.
Vitis rotundifolia
18
Yes
2.
3.
4.
5.
18
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
9
20% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
0
FAC
FAC
FACU
FACU
FACU
9
FACU
FACU
FACU
FAC
7
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 7 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 57.1 % (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is !2.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
(1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
FAC
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
4 Present? Yes X No
ENG FORM 6116-4, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont -Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: FDS-54H1-2
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Types Loc2
Texture Remarks
0-2 10YR 3/3 100
Loamy/Clayey
2-8 10YR 6/6 95
5YR 6/8 5 C M
Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) _ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
—Black Histic (A3)
—Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
—Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
—Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_Redox Depressions (F8)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
_Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
_Other (Explain in Remarks)
Gleyed Matrix (S4)
MLRA 136)
—Sandy
—Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Dark Surface (S7)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type: Rock
Depth (inches): 8
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
Auger refusal at 8 inches due to restrictive rock layer
ENG FORM 6116-4, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control #: 0710-0024, Exp:1113012024
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
See ERDC/EL TR-12-9; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: South Carter Industrial City/County: Sanford/Lee Sampling Date: 7/20/22
Applicant/Owner: Mark Lyczkowski State: NC Sampling Point: FDS-54z1-1
Investigator(s): A. Johnson & M. Gilbert Section, Township, Range: N/A
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Depression Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 3-5%
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.408342 Long:-79.116784 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: TaB: Tarrus silt loam, 2-8% slopes NWI classification: Upland
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No X
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
The sampling point was taken within a depressional feature that appears to have been an old pond. The feature has since been dredged. According to
the USACE Antecedent Precipitation Tool, conditions onsite were drier than normal and under a moderade drought.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
—Surface Water (Al) —True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) —Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (1310)
_Saturation (A3) _Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
—Moss Trim Lines (1316)
—Water Marks (131) —Presence
of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
_Sediment Deposits (132) _Recent
Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (134) _Other
(Explain in Remarks)
_Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_Iron Deposits (135)
X Geomorphic Position (D2)
—Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water-Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: FDS-54Z1-1
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft )
% Cover
Species?
Status
1. Liquidambar styraciflua
25
Yes
FAC
2. Liriodendron tulipifera
20
Yes
FACU
3. Pinus taeda
15
Yes
FAC
4.
5.
6.
7.
60
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
30
20% of total cover:
12
Saplinq/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft
)
1. Liquidambar styraciflua
15
Yes
FAC
2. Oxydendrum arboreum
8
Yes
UPL
3. Acer rubrum
8
Yes
FAC
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
31
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
16
20% of total cover:
7
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft )
1. N/A
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft
)
1. N/A
2.
3.
4.
5.
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 6 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 66.7% (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is !2.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
(1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
ENG FORM 6116-4, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont -Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: FDS-54Z1-1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
Redox Features
(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist) % Types Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-4
5YR 4/6
60
10YR 7/3 40 D M Loamy/Clayey
4-7
10YR 6/6
90
5YR 5/8 10 C M Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
7-22
10YR 5/6
100
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators.
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
—Black Histic (A3)
—Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
—Stratified Layers (A5)
_2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11:
_Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
—Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
_Stripped Matrix(S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
—Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
—Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
—Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions(F8)
_Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
—Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
ENG FORM 6116-4, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

TIMMONS GROUP
YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS,
AGENT AUTHORIZATION and
PROPERTY OWNER CERTIFICATION FORM
All Blanks to be Filled in by Current Landowner
The Department of the Army
US Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
PO Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
To Whom It May Concern:
NCDEQ — Division of Water Resources
401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1650
1, the undersigned, current property owner designate, authorize representatives of Timmons
Group to act on my behalf as my agent in the processing of permit applications, to furnish upon
request suppl Dental inform tion in support of applications, etc., from this day forward.
This the day of _ 20_r.
(number) (Month) (Year)
I, the undersigned, a duly authorized owner of record of the property/properties identified herein,
do authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)
and NCDEQ Division of Water Resources (DWR) 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 401 and 404 of the Clean Water
Act, and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899.
This notification supersedes any previous correspondence concerning the agent for this project.
Project Name: South Carter Industrial
Parcel ID: 9660-12-6034-00; 9660-13-8685-00
Site Address: 0 S NC 87
Sanford, NC 27332
Property Owner's Name (Print): Luck Stone Corporation
Property Owner's Signatur �
Property Owner's Maili
Address: P.O. Box 29682
Richmond, VA 23242
Property Owner's Fax
Telephone: c" -1 C, -1.4 SS - s"G No.
Property Owner's
Email Address: 1- EJ r -�c
AN
M
to
Lf
O)
Ln
a;
rn
x
d
W
L,
a
a
00
0�
rn
E
O
U
0
E
E
3

•`see!
� S
TIMMONS GROUP
YOUR YiSiON ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS.
AGENT AUTHORIZATION and
PROPERTY OWNER CERTIFICATION FORM
All Blanks to be Filled in by Current Landowner
The Department of the Army
US Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
PO Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
To Whom it May Concern:
NCDEQ - Division of Water Resources
401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1650
I, the undersigned, current property owner designate, authorize representatives of Timmons
Group to act on my behalf as my agent in the processing of permit applications, to furnish upon
request supplemental information in support of applications, etc., from this day forward.
This the -2, ;! day of _ 3 hit 4 20Z3.
(number) (Month) (Year)
I, the undersigned a duly authorized owner of record of the propertylproperties identified herein,
do authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)
and NCDEQ Division of Water Resources (DWR) 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 401 and 404 of the Clean Water
Act. andlor Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899.
This notification supersedes any previous correspondence concerning the agent for this project
Project Name: South Carter Industrial
Parcel ID: 9660-534)M-00
Site Address: 0 NC 87 Hwy
Sanford, NC 27332
Property Owner's Name (Print): Star 87 L C
Property Owner's Signature: ZOLI
Property Owner's Mailing
Address: 709 Cra ell St
Property Owner's
Telephone:
Property Owner's
Email Address:
Whitsett, NC 27377
Fax
No-
70q c t s we/1 6Y�- kl C_ z 7S 7
C
0
qT
M
d
M
ko
Id
Ln
O;
Ln
90
v�
.r
Qt
x
a
E
0
V
IA
C
O
rZ
E
�.r
y�
i

TIMMONS GROUP
YOUR VISION ACHIEVEa THROUGH OURS.
AGENT AUTHORIZATION and
PROPERTY OWNER CERTIFICATION FORM
All Blanks to be Filled in by Current Landowner
The Department of the Army
US Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
PO Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
To Whom It May Concern -
I
NCDEQ — Division of Water Resources i
401 & Buffer Permitting Unit i
1650 Mail Service Center I
Raleigh. NC 27699-1650 f
I. the undersigned. current property owner designate, authorize representatives of Timmons
Group to act on my behalf as my agent in the processing of permit applications, to furnish upon
request supplemental information in support of applications, etc., from this day forward.
This the day of �A n,m ckru , 2023 .
(number) (Month) (Year)
I, the undersigned, a duly authorized owner of record of the property/properties identified herein,
do authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)
and NCDEQ Division of Water Resources (DWR) 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 401 and 404 of the Clean Water
Act. ariftr Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899.
This notification supersedes any previous correspondence concerning the agent for this protect.
Project Name
South Carter Industrial
Parcel ID: 9660-35-9486-00: 9660-34-1873-00
Site Address: 5120 & 5124 S NC 87 Hwv & 0 S NC 87 Hwv
Sanford, NC 27332
Property Owner's Name (Print): Curtis Dale
Property Owner's Signature: L
Property Owner's Mailing " U
Address: 15223 NC 27 W
Sanford, NC 27332
Property Owner's C L �1 Fax
Telephone: �f 07 'l7� No.
Property Owner's
Email Address:
E
O
u
c
a
E
E
3
3
3

i
TIMMONS GROUP
AGENT AUTHORIZATION and
PROPERTY OWNER CERTIFICATION FORM
All Blanks to be Filled in by Current Landowner
The Department of the Army NCDEQ — Division of Water Resources
US Army Corps of Engineers 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
Wilmington District 1650 Mail Service Center
PO Box 1890 Raleigh, NC 27699-1650
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
To Whom It May Concern.
i, the undersigned, current property owner designate, authorize representatives of Timmons
Group to act on my behalf as my agent in the processing of permit applications, to furnish upon
request supplemental information in support of applications, etc., from this day forward.
This the ' } day of • 20 -3
Month] ,
(number) ( (Year)
1, the undersigned, a duly authorized owner of record of the property/properties identified herein,
do authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)
and NCDEQ Division of Water Resources (DWR) to enter upon the property herein described
for the purpose of canductito Federal g on -site investigations
ur sdicgtaon unde�Section 401determination
an 4a4 jaf the Clean Watch
Waters of the U.S. subject 1
Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899.
This notification supersedes any previous correspondence concerning the agent far this project.
Pro�set Nsime: South Carter Industrial — —
Parcel id: 9mow04 -425"; 966-23-7417-00
a
a
n
u
z
rn �
d �
f
cc 0
a Ln
.� ao
N �
y x
a
� k
N
a Ln
2
r
h �
f W
Ln
i
Site Address: 0 8 NC 87 Hwy -- -- - - — 1
Sanford, NC 27332
property owner's Nae [Print]: Hazel Carter Bullard
m
_Property Owner's Signature'.)( ' f
Property Owner's Mailing i
53P0 NC 87 Hwy
Address:
Sanford, NC 27332
Property Owner's r r
Telephone: ( � i i �� � r No.
property Owner's
Email~ Address: +- — -

From: 401PreFile
To: Hunter Wines
Subject: Automatic reply: [External] Pre -filing Request - South Carter Industrial
Date: Monday, October 31, 2022 11:20:36 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
This email confirms receipt of your pre -filing meeting request. Please retain this email for your
records and submit this documentation as part of your 401 application (PCN Application) as
required by federal law. DWR will not be able to accept your application without this federally
required documentation. 401 applications received without documentation that a pre -filing
meeting request was submitted at least 30 days prior will be returned as incomplete.
Responses to this email are not monitored.
Background
On April 6, 2022, the United States Supreme Court issued an order staying a lower court's
vacatur of the Trump Administration's 2020 "Clean Water Act Section 401 Certification Rule"
("Federal Rule"). As a result of the United States Supreme Court order, the Trump
Administration's Federal Rule has sprung back into effect.
The Trump Administration's Federal Rule imposes additional procedural requirements on
applicants for 401 Certifications and on DWR's processing of those applications. One
requirement is that 401 applicants must request a pre -filing meeting request at least 30 days
prior to submitting their 401 application. [40 C.F.R. §121.4] In turn, the Federal Rule requires
that applicants include documentation of their pre -filing meeting request in their 401
Certification application. [40 C.F.R §121.1, 40 C.F.R. §121.5]. Please refer to the Federal
Rule for more information.
Per 40 CFR §121 and §121.5, a 401 Certification application that does not include the required
pre -filing meeting request documentation does not constitute a "certification request." As a
result of the reinstatement of the Trump Administration's Federal Rule, all 401 applications
received after April 6, 2022 that do not have documentation that a pre -filing meeting request
was submitted at least 30 days prior to submittal of a 401 Certification application will be
returned as incomplete.
If you need to contact 401/Buffer Permitting Staff, please use the following link(s) to access of
staff contact list(s).
For Non -Transportation Central Staff:
https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/water-quality permitting/401-buffer-

permitting/401-buffer- per mitting-contacts
For Non -Transportation Regional
Staff: https:,//edocs.deg.nc.g_ov/WaterResources/DocView.aspx?dbid=0&id=2162034&cr=1
For all Transportation Projects Including NCDOT Projects:
httl2s://deq.nc.g_ov/about/divisions/water-resources/water-resources-permits/transportation-
permitting/staff-contacts

Appendix D

ROY COOPER
Governor
ELIZABETH S. BISER
Secretary
MARC RECKTENWALD
Director
Mark Williams
Luck Stone Corporation
PO Box 29682
Richmond, VA 23242
Project: South Carter Industrial
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
November 3, 2022
Expiration of Acceptance: 5/3/2023
County: Lee
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
Cape Fear
03030004
Warm Stream
1,174
Cape Fear
03030004
Riparian Wetland
0.58
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,
/ t�d_ A.�
FOR James. B Stanfill
Deputy Director
cc: Hunter Wines, 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

Appendix E

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
In Reply Refer To:
Project Code: 2023-0011793
Project Name: South Carter Industrial Park
November 02, 2022
Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project
location or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
The enclosed species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as
well as proposed and final designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your
proposed project and/or may be affected by your proposed project. The species list fulfills the
requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the
Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). If your project area
contains suitable habitat for any of the federally -listed species on this species list, the proposed
action has the potential to adversely affect those species. If suitable habitat is present, surveys
should be conducted to determine the species' presence or absence within the project area. The
use of this species list and/or North Carolina Natural Heritage program data should not be
substituted for actual field surveys.
New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of
species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Please feel free to
contact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to
federally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed critical
habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the
Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be
completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be
completed by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and
implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested
through the ECOS-IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list.
The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species and the
ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) of the
Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 et seq.), Federal agencies are required to
utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of threatened and endangered

11/02/2022
species and to determine whether projects may affect threatened and endangered species and/or
designated critical habitat.
A Biological Assessment is required for construction projects (or other undertakings having
similar physical impacts) that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the
human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)
(c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a biological
evaluation similar to a Biological Assessment be prepared to determine whether the project may
affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat. Recommended
contents of a Biological Assessment are described at 50 CFR 402.12.
If a Federal agency determines, based on the Biological Assessment or biological evaluation, that
listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be affected by the proposed project, the
agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to 50 CFR 402. In addition, the Service
recommends that candidate species, proposed species and proposed critical habitat be addressed
within the consultation. More information on the regulations and procedures for section 7
consultation, including the role of permit or license applicants, can be found in the "Endangered
Species Consultation Handbook" at:
http://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/pdf/TOC-GLOS.PDF
Migratory Birds: In addition to responsibilities to protect threatened and endangered species
under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), there are additional responsibilities under the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) to
protect native birds from project -related impacts. Any activity, intentional or unintentional,
resulting in take of migratory birds, including eagles, is prohibited unless otherwise permitted by
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)). For more
information regarding these Acts see https://www.fws.gov/birds/policies-and-regulations.php.
The MBTA has no provision for allowing take of migratory birds that may be unintentionally
killed or injured by otherwise lawful activities. It is the responsibility of the project proponent to
comply with these Acts by identifying potential impacts to migratory birds and eagles within
applicable NEPA documents (when there is a federal nexus) or a Bird/Eagle Conservation Plan
(when there is no federal nexus). Proponents should implement conservation measures to avoid
or minimize the production of project -related stressors or minimize the exposure of birds and
their resources to the project -related stressors. For more information on avian stressors and
recommended conservation measures see https://www.fws.gov/birds/bird-enthusiasts/threats-to-
birds.php.
In addition to MBTA and BGEPA, Executive Order 13186: Responsibilities of Federal Agencies
to Protect Migratory Birds, obligates all Federal agencies that engage in or authorize activities
that might affect migratory birds, to minimize those effects and encourage conservation measures
that will improve bird populations. Executive Order 13186 provides for the protection of both
migratory birds and migratory bird habitat. For information regarding the implementation of
Executive Order 13186, please visit https://www.fws.gov/birds/policies-and-regulations/
executive-orders/e0-13186. php.

11/02/2022
3
We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages
Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project
planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Code in the header of
this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project that you submit
to our office.
Attachment(s):
• Official Species List
• Migratory Birds

11/02/2022
Official Species List
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the
requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether
any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed
action".
This species list is provided by:
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
[phone]

11/02/2022
Project Summary
Project Code: 2023-0011793
Project Name: South Carter Industrial Park
Project Type: Commercial Development
Project Description: industrial
Project Location:
Approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:
www. google.com/maps/(a)35.41025855,-79.12215612787094,14z
LSI,n Tr,7
Counties: Lee County, North Carolina

11/02/2022 3
Endangered Species Act Species
There is a total of 3 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.
Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include
species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species
list because a project could affect downstream species.
IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA
Fisheriesi, as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the
Department of Commerce.
See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially
within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office
if you have questions.
1. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an
office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of
Commerce.
Fishes
NAME
STATUS
Cape Fear Shiner Notropis mekistocholas Endangered
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6063
Insects
NAME
STATUS
Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus
Candidate
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743
Flowering Plants
NAME
STATUS
Harperella Ptilimnium nodosum
Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3739
Critical habitats
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S
JURISDICTION.

11/02/2022
Migratory Birds
Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act! and the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Actz.
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to
migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider
implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described below.
1. The Migratory Birds Treat. Act of 1918.
2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
3. 50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)
The birds listed below are birds of particular concern either because they occur on the
USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) list or warrant special attention in your
project location. To learn more about the levels of concern for birds on your list and how this
list is generated, see the FAQ below. This is not a list of every bird you may find in this location,
nor a guarantee that every bird on this list will be found in your project area. To see exact
locations of where birders and the general public have sighted birds in and around your project
area, visit the E-bird data mapping tool (Tip: enter your location, desired date range and a species
on your list). For projects that occur off the Atlantic Coast, additional maps and models detailing
the relative occurrence and abundance of bird species on your list are available. Links to
additional information about Atlantic Coast birds, and other important information about your
migratory bird list, including how to properly interpret and use your migratory bird report, can be
found below.
For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures
to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, click on the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE
SUMMARY at the top of your list to see when these birds are most likely to be present and
breeding in your project area.
BREEDING
NAME SEASON
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Breeds Sep 1 to
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention Jul 31
because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types
of development or activities.
Brown -headed Nuthatch Sitta pusilla Breeds Mar 1
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions to Jul 15
(BCRs) in the continental USA
Chimney Swift Chaetura pelagica Breeds Mar 15
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA to Aug 25
and Alaska.

11/02/2022
BREEDING
NAME
SEASON
Prairie Warbler Dendroica discolor
Breeds May 1
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
to Jul 31
and Alaska.
Prothonotary Warbler Protonotaria citrea
Breeds Apr 1 to
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
Jul 31
and Alaska.
Red-headed Woodpecker Melanerpes erythrocephalus Breeds May 10
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA to Sep 10
and Alaska.
Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina Breeds May 10
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA to Aug 31
and Alaska.
Probability Of Presence Summary
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be
present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project
activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read and understand the
FAQ "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting
to interpret this report.
Probability of Presence (■)
Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your
project overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4-week
months.) A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey effort (see
below) can be used to establish a level of confidence in the presence score. One can have higher
confidence in the presence score if the corresponding survey effort is also high.
How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:
The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in
the week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for
that week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee
was found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is
0.25.
2. To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of
presence is calculated. This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum
probability of presence across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of presence
in week 20 for the Spotted Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability of presence at week 12
(0.25) is the maximum of any week of the year. The relative probability of presence on
week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it is 0.05/0.25 = 0.2.

11/02/2022 3
3. The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical
conversion so that all possible values fall between 0 and 10, inclusive. This is the
probability of presence score.
Breeding Season( )
Yellow bars denote a very liberal estimate of the time -frame inside which the bird breeds across
its entire range. If there are no yellow bars shown for a bird, it does not breed in your project
area.
Survey Effort (1)
Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of surveys
performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. The number of
surveys is expressed as a range, for example, 33 to 64 surveys.
No Data (—)
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.
Survey Timeframe
Surveys from only the last 10 years are used in order to ensure delivery of currently relevant
information. The exception to this is areas off the Atlantic coast, where bird returns are based on
all years of available data, since data in these areas is currently much more sparse.
probability of presence breeding season I survey effort — no data
SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Bald Non -BCC Jill Jill 111, ++++boo MEOW d��J � JI
Vulnerable
Brown -headed Nuthatch IIII Ills Ill+ Mill iiii l7il 11111111111111111111
BCC -BCR
Chimney Swift I „"'' "' Jill"
BCC Rangewide
++++ + ++ ++++ ++ + + + +++ +++ ++++
(CON) i■■ ____
Prairie Warbler 1 ' ___; Jill Jill ,
BCC Rangewide ++++ ++++ ++++ + + +++ +++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++
(CON)
Prothonotary -+—+++++ III Jill Jill ---+ -+-- —+­+—+++++—+
Warbler
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Red-headed 11111+11
Woodpecker
BCC Rangewide ����
(CON)

11/02/2022
4
Wood Thrush --- ---+ ---
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Additional information can be found using the following links:
• Birds of Conservation Concern https://www.fws.gov/program/migratory-birds/species
• Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds https://www.fws.gov/library
collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take-migratory-birds
• Nationwide conservation measures for birds https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/
documents/nationwide-standard-conservation-measures.Ddf
Migratory Birds FAQ
Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts
to migratory birds.
Nationwide Conservation Measures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize
impacts to all birds at any location year round. Implementation of these measures is particularly
important when birds are most likely to occur in the project area. When birds may be breeding in
the area, identifying the locations of any active nests and avoiding their destruction is a very
helpful impact minimization measure. To see when birds are most likely to occur and be breeding
in your project area, view the Probability of Presence Summary. Additional measures or permits
may be advisable depending on the type of activity you are conducting and the type of
infrastructure or bird species present on your project site.
What does IPaC use to generate the list of migratory birds that potentially occur in my
specified location?
The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern
(BCQ and other species that may warrant special attention in your project location.
The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the Avian
Knowledge Network (AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, bandim
and citizen science datasets and is queried and filtered to return a list of those birds reported as
occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project intersects, and that have been identified as
warranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that area, an eagle (Eagle Act
requirements may apply), or a species that has a particular vulnerability to offshore activities or
development.
Again, the Migratory Bird Resource list includes only a subset of birds that may occur in your
project area. It is not representative of all birds that may occur in your project area. To get a list
of all birds potentially present in your project area, please visit the Rapid Avian Information
Locator (RAIL) Tool.
What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs for the migratory birds
potentially occurring in my specified location?

11/02/2022 5
The probability of presence graphs associated with your migratory bird list are based on data
provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). This data is derived from a growing
collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets.
Probability of presence data is continuously being updated as new and better information
becomes available. To learn more about how the probability of presence graphs are produced and
how to interpret them, go the Probability of Presence Summary and then click on the "Tell me
about these graphs" link.
How do I know if a bird is breeding, wintering or migrating in my area?
To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding,
wintering, migrating or year-round), you may query your location using the RAIL Tool and look
at the range maps provided for birds in your area at the bottom of the profiles provided for each
bird in your results. If a bird on your migratory bird species list has a breeding season associated
with it, if that bird does occur in your project area, there may be nests present at some point
within the timeframe specified. If "Breeds elsewhere" is indicated, then the bird likely does not
breed in your project area.
What are the levels of concern for migratory birds?
Migratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern:
1. "BCC Rangewide" birds are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) that are of concern
throughout their range anywhere within the USA (including Hawaii, the Pacific Islands,
Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands);
2. "BCC - BCR" birds are BCCs that are of concern only in particular Bird Conservation
Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA; and
3. "Non -BCC - Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on
your list either because of the Eagle Act requirements (for eagles) or (for non -eagles)
potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities
(e.g. offshore energy development or longline fishing).
Although it is important to try to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, efforts should be made,
in particular, to avoid and minimize impacts to the birds on this list, especially eagles and BCC
species of rangewide concern. For more information on conservation measures you can
implement to help avoid and minimize migratory bird impacts and requirements for eagles,
please see the FAQs for these topics.
Details about birds that are potentially affected by offshore projects
For additional details about the relative occurrence and abundance of both individual bird species
and groups of bird species within your project area off the Atlantic Coast, please visit the
Northeast Ocean Data Portal. The Portal also offers data and information about other taxa besides
birds that may be helpful to you in your project review. Alternately, you may download the bird
model results files underlying the portal maps through the NOAA NCCOS Integrative Statistical
Modeling and Predictive Mapping of Marine Bird Distributions and Abundance on the Atlantic
Outer Continental Shelf project webpage.

11/02/2022 6
Bird tracking data can also provide additional details about occurrence and habitat use
throughout the year, including migration. Models relying on survey data may not include this
information. For additional information on marine bird tracking data, see the Diving Bird Study
and the nanotag studies or contact Caleb Spiegel or Pam Lorin.
What if I have eagles on my list?
If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to obtain a permit to avoid
violating the Eagle Act should such impacts occur.
Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report
The migratory bird list generated is not a list of all birds in your project area, only a subset of
birds of priority concern. To learn more about how your list is generated, and see options for
identifying what other birds may be in your project area, please see the FAQ "What does IPaC
use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location". Please be
aware this report provides the "probability of presence" of birds within the 10 km grid cell(s) that
overlap your project; not your exact project footprint. On the graphs provided, please also look
carefully at the survey effort (indicated by the black vertical bar) and for the existence of the "no
data" indicator (a red horizontal bar). A high survey effort is the key component. If the survey
effort is high, then the probability of presence score can be viewed as more dependable. In
contrast, a low survey effort bar or no data bar means a lack of data and, therefore, a lack of
certainty about presence of the species. This list is not perfect; it is simply a starting point for
identifying what birds of concern have the potential to be in your project area, when they might
be there, and if they might be breeding (which means nests might be present). The list helps you
know what to look for to confirm presence, and helps guide you in knowing when to implement
conservation measures to avoid or minimize potential impacts from your project activities,
should presence be confirmed. To learn more about conservation measures, visit the FAQ "Tell
me about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory
birds" at the bottom of your migratory bird trust resources page.

11/02/2022
IPaC User Contact Information
Agency:
Timmons Group
Name:
Timmons Group
Address:
1001 Boulders Pkwy
City:
Richmond
State:
VA
Zip:
23225
Email
[e-mail]
Phone:
8042006500
Lead Agency Contact Information
Lead Agency: Army Corps of Engineers

Roy Cooper, Governor
■ ■■■
r ■■ ■ INC DEPARTMENT OF
■■,■i NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
■ ■■
November 3, 2022
Morgan Gilbert
Timmons Group
5410 Trinity Road
Raleigh, NC 27606
RE: South Carter Industrial Park
Dear Morgan Gilbert:
❑. Reid Wilson, Secretary
Misty Buchanan
Deputy Director, Natural Heritage Program
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide
information about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
Based on the project area mapped with your request, a query of the NCNHP database indicates that
there are no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, and/or
conservation/managed areas within the proposed project boundary. Please note that although there
may be no documentation of natural heritage elements within the project boundary, it does not
imply or confirm their absence; the area may not have been surveyed. The results of this query
should not be substituted for field surveys where suitable habitat exists. In the event that rare
species are found within the project area, please contact the NCNHP so that we may update our
records.
The attached `Potential Occurrences' table summarizes rare species and natural communities that
have been documented within a one -mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these
records suggests that these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area
if suitable habitat exists. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed areas within a one -mile
radius of the project area, if any, are also included in this report.
If a Federally -listed species is found within the project area or is indicated within a one -mile radius of
the project area, the NCNHP recommends contacting the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for
guidance. Contact information for USFWS offices in North Carolina is found here:
httr)s://www.fws.gov/offices/Directory/ListOffices.cfm?statecode=37.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation
planning, project review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria
for regulatory decisions. Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published
without prior written notification to the NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information
source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP data may not be redistributed without permission.
The NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional correspondence if a
Dedicated Nature Preserve, Registered Heritage Area, Land and Water Fund easement, or Federally -
listed species are documented near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance,
please contact Rodney A. Butler at rod ney.butler�ncdcr.gov or 919-707-8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
DEPAR7HEN7 OF NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
121 W. JONES STREET. RALEIGH. NC 27603 • 1691 MAIL SERVICE CENTER. RALEIGH. NC 27609
OFC 919.707.9120 • FAX [phone]

/
\
CO
/ /
3
s
>
\ \
/
a
\
o e
? ®
e
9
3
3
CO
ƒ
\
/
u
3 /
CO
e
e
» CO
F-
CO\
g/
F
/
®
\
0
\}
/
co
E/
3:
\
\/
/\
2
/
\
\\
\
6
\
O
»®
/
2
>
%
e
4.2
® +
( /
/
\
\ ®
}
J
e
2
§
?
u
e
&
./
e
\
>s
°
&\
/
u
\\
»±
\\a
\\
3-
§C
2
©
--
J
2
4 \ e
eece
/
\
\3\/
�«
\+2
/
-
% \
e
m \
®
$
\ \ \ »
±
e 2
o v
/
\
` \
\
e
0F
o o
~
CO 0z
\
\
\
± 3 ®\
\/
U0
%
-(
/
co \ ®
c
4a
\
.0
D
\
3
2
/
2
J/
CO
Z
n
e
CO
\ee
%
\?
CO
�%
c
/
: z
\
/
/
/
g
/ {
\
CO
_
\
\e\
z�
\
\
®
/
)-0
�
\
cn
\
u
E
\\
\
CO
0
\
CO
/
E
CO�
\
E
2
\\
/
/
2 /
z
:
m
\
\
\ LL
\
\ \
CO§
0
C
-0
\
w
\
°
/
co
} e
?
/
z�
2 }
\
\
/
e
co
s m/
E
\ E
co
LE
0
\
\
0)\
3
(
°
1000
z
cn
/
/
e
e
u
±
%
\ \
±
®
o
~
/
9
±
% E
4
=\
\
CO
Cl
\
>
\
�/
��E
4
/
\\
\
\\\/
z
0
\z�
CO0~
®
E
E 2 E
2
e(
\
/
\ \
\
/ / /
/
/ \
/
\ /
§
/

n
n
Cir \
D \ N
m \
S \ ,fPMaDeal o
b\
W W
Y O
a cc�
�c v o
3 �z u
c
0
� o c�
Y u O
f;.
O
0
J �
v
Gn5tzrs eek
0
N
U!
d
d
urC6
scAndrew Rd
d
y
St Andrews
W
z
Hot 3
a
Z�
2 C
Z O0
m
� V
a v
@ O �
N d 0
O
O O m
N Z V
cM d U1
2 = o
s Z m a
o ❑ ❑ ❑
z
M
O
M

Appendix F

m
w
0^
n
2
O^
n
2
U
Z
r. O
r# y
� � e
a
4
o N741
M
O
7
T �
V
Lilt 2io
try
¢p ��oreY Rid9�
1
{ IR 'Ile
4�
6
R
J
113
Q
T
.off
#fir
4
E W
U� 00 w
O O S
W
0
L
C
0 LO U
00 N �
O O o n
Z
w�
oQ
M ° z
_ N Z
Z
o
� O
O O oo
OF
m o
U)
O
U
U)
O
Q
L
U
06
U
N
U
L
O
U)
N
Q
O
N
o
(o Q
ca
7 T
E
70 p
70
T T
O N
J
N 0
N
co
70
T