20210536 Ver 1_Combined Attachments_PCN_TobaccoRoad_20230418

3600 Glenwood Avenue,Suite 100
res
Raleigh, NC 27612
Corporate Headquarters
6575 West Loop South,Suite 300
Bellaire,TX 77401
Main:713.520.5400
April 6,2023
NC Division of Water Resources
217 West Jones Street
Raleigh, NC 27603
To Whom it May Concern,
Resource Environmental Solutions (RES) is pleased to present this Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Form for the
Tobacco Road Mitigation Project located in Alamance County, North Carolina (35.973063, -79.282234).This project will
be part of the RES Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Mitigation Bank and will provide mitigation credits to offset unavoidable
impacts to stream resources within the Cape Fear 02 River Basin (8-digit USGS HUC 03030002).As part of this scope of
work, RES is submitting this package to the North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NC DWR) and the US Army
Corps of Engineers(USACE), providing an assessment of temporary and permanent impacts associated with the stream,
wetland,and buffer mitigation that will occur during the construction of this project.
The Tobacco Road Mitigation Project (the "Project") is comprised of a 42.29-acre conservation easement contained
within two parcels, split into three sections, in Alamance County, NC. The Project will involve the restoration,
enhancement, and preservation of 11 unnamed tributaries of Motes Creek, the rehabilitation, enhancement, and
creation of 23 wetlands,and the restoration,enhancement,and preservation of riparian buffers throughout the Project
area. Through stream restoration, enhancement, and preservation, the Project presents 12,435 linear feet (LF) of
proposed stream, generating 8,574.833 base Warm Stream Mitigation Units (SMUs) and 8,311.010 total SMUs (after
non-standard buffer width credit adjustments).Through wetland rehabilitation,enhancement,and creation,the Project
presents 4.979 acres of proposed wetland treatment, generating 2.096 Wetland Mitigation Units (WMUs).This site will
be co-located with a DWR Riparian Buffer and Nutrient Offset Bank of the same name(Tobacco Road),which presents
the opportunity to perform 988,522.708 ft2 (22.69 acres) of riparian buffer and nutrient offset mitigation for the Haw
River Watershed; a tributary to B. Everett Jordan Lake in accordance with 15A NCAC 02B.0703, 15A NCAC 02B .0295,
and 15A NCAC 02B .0267.
The proposed Project will provide improvements to water quality, hydrologic function, habitat, and floodplain
connectivity.The Project will address stressors identified in the watershed through nutrient removal,sediment removal,
runoff filtration, and improved aquatic and terrestrial habitat.
We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please feel free to contact me at [phone]
or [e-mail] if you have any additional question regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
alZ�7 !e
Ben Carroll I Designer/Project Manager
res.us

TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. PCN Figures
• Figure 1. Project Vicinity
• Figure 2. USGS Quadrangle
• Figure 3. Existing Conditions
• Figure 4. Mapped Soils
• Figure 5. NWI and FEMA
• Figure 6. Project Impacts
II. DWR Pre-Filing Meeting Request Form
III. Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) Request
• JD Request
• Landowner Authorizations
• PJD Form
• Aquatic Resources
• Figures
• WET Forms
• USACE Concurrence Email
IV. OMBIL Regulatory Module (ORM)
V. Regulatory Scoping Letter Responses
• NC Wildlife Resources Commission
• NC Natural Heritage Program
• State Historic Preservation Office
• United States Fish and Wildlife Service
• Stream Determination Letter

PCN Figures
• Figure 1. Project Vicinity
• Figure 2. USGS Quadrangle
• Figure 3. Existing Conditions
• Figure 4. Mapped Soils
• Figure 5. NWI and FEMA
• Figure 6. Project Impacts

a�CjeeX Buckner Companies O '
ry ' South AtlanticQ
s/�- 507 detailing Galvanizing z 4z Maw Grove churn Ro,
Wheeley Auto Mall —
Outdoors At Last
Q�, m
CItgo�
coo \ � Marys Grove Ch+rrch Rtl
Kinder House 0
S z,4z
F �
Citgo Graham Grocery 8 c
� L
sy
a
Ha ve L�
C4apry 214I Nickz HJ
'Pv
paintingQ Andersen Sterilizers The Pavil
Qr at Nicks R
ksA 54 \
Archangel Battle Park \Caroline or
,roe
QD .
a
Qc� Duchy Airpark
y
a
oo y
f
cJ �
h � A O
Salem Community O 4
Church € $
zt42
its
Contigo Education 0 �30 S,
v � a
Watkins Heavy Hauling
Q
U-Haul 0`y ` s4 z,4s e
ghborhood Dealer 0 Thom Rd
3
Rae McKenzie arr Aft Mobile Home Park ' \
�amh,swood o
z az 6 Farm School
Martinsville
e Or R 8ramhk5at'. - o
Jae9 r n
Danville Sa o'er, c O
Tobacco Road
nc,roW Mitigation Project
- School Rd '
z
NQ
reensboro 0
Carolina United Grading Morrow Ancestral r Burlington ha
ON 12 Q Graveyard© igh0 Oln
King CobraZApiaryQ W O
Chapel Hill
Legend
Asheboro
z, _
Proposed Easement
FIJD Study Area
Q.
ocape Fear River Basin -03030002 (Haw River Subwatershed of ad'`
the Jordan Lake Watershed) Uwharrie
E:114 Digit HUC -03030002050040 tional f oresl
�e P nehu35.973063,-79.282234
" Figure 1- Project Vicinity Date: 3/27/2023
W E y. res
s Drawn b EJU
Tobacco Road
a ,.000 2 00o Mitigation Project Checked by:BRC
� Feet
Alamanee County, North Carolina t inch=2,000feet Restoring a Resilient Earth for a Modern World

0.- a
� ... •. / -. ` - l / 1 _ _ _ 11\ _� I� 1 . .
\. 2 t•
1 `.� Qy81 ,l o p , 64 I rst n s�
%Or
0-2
S 5
O d i
Leaend
� J0
Proposed Easement
JD Study Area ( '�, /►+;Ser �— \ _� f r�
l .! `_ f_ Copyright:©2013 National Geogra phi c Society,i cubed
Figure 2 - USGS Date: 3/27/2023
Saxapahaw(1977)
Drawn by:EJU
Tobacco Road Mitigation Project ores
0 1,000 2,000 Checked by:BRC
Alamance County, North Carolina 1 inch=2,000 feet Restoring a Resilient Earth for a Modern World
Feet

_ Row Crop \��
' r
Cattle Pasture Row Crop
17.
i
Leaend
Proposed
J D Study
�^ Buffer Zone1 1
1
1 �ARP Cattle Pasture
C� Existing Wetland
+ Existing Pond�J
Row Crop Row Crop Perennial
Intermittent
Ditch
� dSeep
Underground Gasline
FIL
Existing
Culvert
r Existing Ford
' Duchy Airport
Figure • Conditions Date:
EM
Sir�rf�•t�f`'LJTobacco Road Mitigation Project Ores
0 350Checked by:BRC
Alamance County, North Carolina 1 inch= 00 feet Restoring a Resilient Earth for a Modern World

ME
X.. ................
sr
....... .....
'z
.................
................
X:
X:
X"
'-Z
............
Proposed Easement
IX:...%
x JD Study Area
—X!!
ter
Figure 4- NRCS Soil Survey-Alarnance County(1960) Date: 3/20/2023
JL
Drawn by:EJU
Tobacco Road Mitigation Project
res
0 350 700 Checked by:JRM
Alamance County, North Carolina 1 inch=700 feet Restoring a Resilient Earth for a Modem World
Feet

96
PANEL
3710981100K
eff. 11/17/�2017 PUBHh
Z• e AE�
PANEL
37109 1000 �
. 9/6 +
PUBHh PUBHh
i
LIMIT O
_ PUBH�t;
PANEL
3710981000J
PFo�A eff.MN006 LIMIT OFF
-_ STUDY Q Proposed Easement
- Q JD Study Area
g
Z• AE � NWI Wetlands(USFWS January 2022)
PUBHh � FEMA Zone AE
e
Figure 5 - NWI and FEMA Date: 3/23/2023
Drawn by:EJU
Tobacco Road Mitigation Project pres
0 350 700 Checked by:BRC
Alamance County, North Carolina 1 inch=700 feet Restoring a Resilient Earth for a Modern World
Feet

pres
54 t Restoring a resilient earth for a modern world
OIL r.
t �, � N
W E
t \� 0 400 800
' Figure 6a
Project Overviews
e
Tobacco Road
• � � 46 %�W Mitigation Project
Alamance County North Carolina
�� '• Date: 3/27/2023 Drawn by:MOE
54 rr
1:7,200 Checked by:BRC
��• � , Q Proposed Easement
Q Grid Index
Existing Wetland
s91R M + AIM Existing Top of Bank
-Proposed Top of Bank
a #
I -
a
t. 54
MOIL_
nowt �• w
* +/ -` +.

{ res
l Restoring o resilient earth for o modern world
54
i
� N
�I
W E
I
•
5
�N
• 0 125 250
t a
w1 Figure 6b
WB Wetland Impacts
Page 1
Tobacco Road
4.
—�WA Mitigation Project
M,wi W 10 Alamance County North Carolina
g �
54 r
t 'Wq Date: 312712023 Drawn by:MDE
i �
j
, * 1:3,000 Checked by:BRC
i
OProposed Easement
Y ��Existing Wetland
Y W7
s Existing Top of Bank
—Proposed Top of Bank
' 1 Limits of Disturbance
WG
W12 W71 Impact Type
w uw —
y ®Permanent Wetland
®Temporary Wetland
WS
W13 W6 Impact ID Aquatic ID WOUS Type Impact Type Area Purpose
W14 WK W3 WD Wetland Temporary 0.014 1 Limits of Disturbance
WF W1 WB Wetland Temporary 0.068 Limits of Disturbance
W4 WE Wetland Temporary 0.004 Limits of Disturbance
4� 54 W5 WF Wetland Permanent 0.002 Stream Plugs
W4 W6 WF Wetland Temporary 0.092 Limits of Disturbance
ws
W7 WIG Wetland Temporary 0.083 Limits of Disturbance
w1s W8 WH Wetland Temporary 0.008 Limits of Disturbance
WL w3 W-a WH W9 WI Wetland Permanent 0.001 Stream Restoration
8
WM W10 WI Wetland Temporary 0.036 Limits of Disturbance
w16 W W11 WJ Wetland Permanent 0.002 Stream Restoration
WN W12 WJ Wetland Temporary 0.034 Limits of Disturbance
- .; W13 WK Wetland Permanent 0.009 Stream Restoration & Stream Plugs
r W14 WK Wetland Temporary 0.065 Limits of Disturbance
� Y
W15 WL Wetland Temporary 0.023 Limits of Disturbance

WK
WS WF
W6
7
W,3 res
W14
r
Restoring o resilient earth for a modem world
N
Wis WB W4
'- W 3 W+WH W E
' WL
WM
W16 WD s
0 125 250
,- - -
,NW ` Wz Figure 6b
` ,,;,_ Wetland Impacts
I Page 2
1
we
-' Tobacco Road
W17 Mitigation Project
WS -
Alamance County North Carolina
wa Wo Date: 3/27/2023 Drawn by:MOE
wr� 1:3,000 Checked by:BRC
W4
O Proposed Easement
Ir
� O Existing Wetland
(� O Existing Top of Bank
Proposed Top of Bank
r r Limits of Disturbance
1. Impact Type
®Permanent Wetland
®Temporary Wetland
i
i
i
1
Impact ID Aquatic ID WOUS Type Impact Type Area Purpose
W3 WD Wetland Temporary 0.014 Limits of Disturbance
W2 WC Wetland Temporary 0.041 Limits of Disturbance
W8 WH Wetland Temporary 0.008 Limits of Disturbance
E
W15 WL Wetland Temporary 0.023 Limits of Disturbance
W16 WM Wetland Temporary 0.002 Limits of Disturbance
W17 WO Wetland Temporary 0.045 Limits of Disturbance

pres
Restoring o resilient earth for a modern world
N
ww W E
•r 5
0 125 250
Figure 6b
* Wetland Impacts
wR Page 3
Tobacco Road
W 17 wa
Mitigation Project
F
Alamance County North Carolina
Date: 3/27/2023 Drawn by:MOE
1:3,000 Checked by:BRC
t•
t O Proposed Easement
OExisting Wetland
' , O Existing Top of Bank
• •' _Proposed Top of Bank
• r _ Limits of Disturbance
• Impact Type
• ®Permanent Wetland
•
• ®Temporary Wetland
W19
W18
W20 wu
i"
Impact ID Aquatic ID I WOUS Type Impact Type Area Purpose
W17 WO Wetland Temporary 0.045 Limits of Disturbance
E
W18 WU Wetland Permanent 0.002 Stream Restoration
W19 WU Wetland Temporary 0.022 Limits of Disturbance
W20 WV Wetland Temporary 0.002 Limits of Disturbance

i
4
pres
-f l Restoring o resilient earth for o modern world
54 � N
W E
II
I r
• • t
f S
0 125 250
i
615
9
616 Figure 6c
Buffer Impacts
B17 B14 ���P Page 1
? 613 Tobacco Road
4
' I Mitigation Project
� rt
Alamance County North Carolina
r Q
Drawn by:MDE
r ' ' B,
a B19 1:3,000 Checked by:BRC
S r Q 618 Proposed Easement
,�
Existing Top of Bank
t _Proposed Top of Bank
i
P _ _r Limits of Disturbance
' 1 Buffer Zone
Zone 1(0-30 ft)
r_ ,Zone 2(31-50 ft)
B2 ���.i
, r_ Impact Type
Permanent Buffer Zone 1(0-30 ft)
_Permanent Buffer Zone 2(31-50 ft)
Temporary Buffer Zone 2(31-50 ft
o •
B3
54 Impact ID Aquatic ID Buffer Zone Impact Type Area (sqft) Purpose
ti
B20 Bl TR1-A Zone 1 (0-30 ft) Permanent 1,736 Limits of Disturbance
� B2 TRl-B Zone 1 (0-30 ft) Permanent 48,861 Stream Restoration&Limits of Disturbance
W B3 TR1-B Zone 2(0-30 ft) Permanent 7,705 Limits of Disturbance
�. B7 B7 TR1-C Zone 1(0-30 ft) Permanent 50,041 Stream Restoration&Limits of Disturbance
c
B13 MN1-A Zone 2(0-30 ft) Temporary 7,763 Limits of Disturbance
B14 MN1-B Zone 1 (0-30 ft) Permanent 35,883 Stream Restoration&Limits of Disturbance
B15 MN1-13 Zone 2(0-30 ft) Permanent 4,255 Stream Restoration&Limits of Disturbance
g B6 1\ �ZD �� �� B16 MN2-A Zone 1 (0-30 ft) Permanent 9,022 Stream Restoration&Limits of Disturbance
cf B17 MN2-A Zone 2(0-30 ft) Permanent 1,785 Limits of Disturbance
B21
B18 MN2-B Zone 2(0-30 ft) Permanent 302 Stream Restoration
32 B19 MN2-13 Zone 1 (0-30 ft) Permanent 795 Stream Restoration
`v . B20 MN3 Zone 2(0-30 ft) Permanent 561 Limits of Disturbance

62 res
Restoring o resilient earth for o modem world
B2p '�Q'1
N
Zw
_ B7
J� W E
tR1,G S
0 125 250
t
Figure 6c
Bs , Buffer Impacts
B4 ��r� - Page 2
9 �
Tobacco Road
Mitigation Project
_ .. Alamance County North Carolina
B23
Date: 3/27/2023 Drawn by:MOE
B25
3 B9 ?2J 1:3,000 Checked by:BRC
? B29 B8 624
3 Q Proposed Easement
Z
Existing Top of Bank
E126 B28 _Proposed Top of Bank
B27
r Limits of Disturbance
Buffer Zone
'LI B22 Zone 1(0-30 ft)
�66
_ r Zone 2(31-50 ft)
'. B10 - \ Impact Type
Impact ID Aquatic ID Buffer Zone Impact Type Area(sgft) Purpose -Permanent Buffer Zone 1(0-30 ft)
' 1311 B2 TR1-B Zone 1 (0-30 ft) Permanent 48,861 Stream Restoration&Limits of Disturbance Temporary Buffer Zone (0-30ft)
' f 6'q M,yy B3 TR1-B Zone 2(0-30 ft) Permanent 7,705 Limits of Disturbance -Permanent Buffer Zone 2(31-50 ft)
'64 TR1-C Zone 1(0-30 ft) Temporary 409 Wetland Depression Temporary Buffer Zone 2(31-50 ft
B5 TR1-C Zone 2(0-30 ft) Temporary 184 Wetland Depression
B6 TR1-C Zone 2(0-30 ft) Permanent 5,629 Limits of Disturbance
B7 TR1-C Zone 1 (0-30 ft) Permanent 50,041 Stream Restoration &Limits of Disturbance
B8 TR1-D Zone 2(0-30 ft) Permanent 5,116 Limits of Disturbance
B9 TR1-D Zone 1 (0-30 ft) Permanent 49,198 Stream Restoration &Limits of Disturbance
- B20 MN3 Zone 2(0-30 ft) Permanent 561 Limits of Disturbance
�. B21 MN4-B Zone 1 (0-30 ft) Permanent 1,643 Limits of Disturbance
B22 MN5-A Zone 2(0-30 ft) Permanent 143 Limits of Disturbance
B23 MN5-A Zone 1 (0-30 ft) Permanent 8,740 Stream Restoration &Limits of Disturbance
B24 MN5-B Zone 2(0-30 ft) Permanent 650 Limits of Disturbance
g B25 MN5-B Zone 1 (0-30 ft) Permanent 1,938 Stream Restoration&Limits of Disturbance
B26 MN6-B Zone 2(0-30 ft) Permanent 1,181 Stream Restoration
B27 MN6-B Zone 2(0-30 ft) Permanent 5,638 Limits of Disturbance
8 B28 MN6-B Zone 1 (0-30 ft) Permanent 1,255 Stream Restoration
B29 MN7 Zone 1 (0-30 ft) Permanent 7,481 Stream Restoration&Limits of Disturbance

pres
Restoring o resilient earth for a modern world
N
W E
s
0 125 250
Figure 6c
Buffer Impacts
Bg Page 3
? B29 Tobacco Road
Mitigation Project
B27 jR0'o Alamance County North Carolina
f 2� Date: 3/27/2023 Drawn by:MOE
tise
1:3,000 Checked by:BRC
611 ° B28 Q Proposed Easement
B26
Existing Top of Bank
i
Proposed Top of Bank
MN8 P Limits of Disturbance
Buffer Zone
Zone 1(0-30 ft)
B10 r t Zone 2(31-50 ft)
Impact Type
-Permanent Buffer Zone 1(0-30 ft)
Permanent Buffer Zone 2(31-50 ft)
' B30
B12 ,' B31
10 1
• Impact ID Aquatic ID Buffer Zone Impact Type Area(sqft) Purpose
• a1 1 1 _ __ , ' B8 TR1 D Zone 2(0 30 ft) Permanent 5,116 Limits of Disturbance
M ON
T _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 69 TR1-D Zone 1 (0-30 ft) Permanent 49,198 Stream Restoration &Limits of Disturbance
�. B10 TR1-E Zone 2(0-30 ft) Permanent 64,625 Stream Restoration&Limits of Disturbance
B11 TR1-E Zone 1 (0-30 ft) Permanent 89,509 Stream Restoration&Limits of Disturbance
612 TR1-F Zone 1 (0-30 ft) Permanent 36,--- Limits of Disturbance
B26 MN6-B Zone 2(0-30 ft) Permanent 1,181 Stream Restoration
g r B27 MN6-B Zone 2(0-30 ft) Permanent 5,638 Limits of Disturbance ^
B28 MN6-B Zone 1(0-30 ft) Permanent 1,255 Stream Restoration
B29 MN7 Zone 1 (0-30 ft) Permanent 7,481 Stream Restoration&Limits of Disturbance
B30 MN8 Zone 1(0-30 ft) Permanent 1,432 Stream Restoration&Limits of Disturbance
- B31 MN8 Zone 2(0-30 ft) Permanent 180 Stream Restoration

i
pres
Restoring a resilient earth for a modem world
r 54
N
I � W E
I �
I
I
4
i \ s
0 125 250
9 Figure 6d
, ° Stream Impacts
S11 �� `� �R�.P Page 1
Tobacco Road
t ,
r Mitigation Project
S12 ,
Alamance County North Carolina
t
Date: 3/27/2023 Drawn by:MOE
r r ,
Seep 1:3,000 Checked by:BRC
r
t r
Proposed Easement
Existing Top of Bank
-Proposed Top of Bank
d r -
52 _ _ - Limits of Disturbance
t
Impact Type
®Permanent Stream
Temporary Stream
' Crossing
/ H
. l
R'
S1
/ � 0
/ r
i 54
R �
3
SS Impact ID Impact Type Length Aquatic ID Purpose WOUS Type
S4
S1 Permanent 1127 TR1-13 Stream Restoration Stream
G
S2 Permanent 50 TR1-B Crossing(17+50) Stream
53 Permanent 302 I TR1-B Stream Restoration Stream
S13 \� 55 Permanent 50 TR1-C Crossing(31+50) Stream
56 `- S10 Permanent 731 MN1 B Stream Restoration Stream
S11 Permanent 30 MN2-A Crossing(06+00) Stream
`y z S12 Permanent 532 MN2-B Stream Restoration Stream

pres
Restoring o resilient earth for o modern world
N
,
2
.� .
r 'SS W E
�
s
1 �72 0 125 250
Y
s13 r
f S6
Figure 6d
r Stream Impacts
Page 2
9
Tobacco Road
Mitigation Project
S4
- Alamance County North Carolina
Date: 3/27/2023 Drawn by:MOE
1:3,000 Checked by:BRC
4 4�
1 O r Q Proposed Easement
�R Existing Top of Bank
I
S7 S14 D -Proposed Top of Bank
IF Limits of Disturbance
Impact Type
Permanent Stream
®Temporary Stream
S8
r Crossing
r
S9
' 4,1Ns
:i
i
Impact ID Impact Type Length Aquatic ID Purpose WOUS Type
S1 Permanent 1127 TRl-B Stream Restoration Stream
S4 Temporary 376 TR1-C Layered Riffles Stream
g S5 Permanent 50 TR1-C Crossing(31+50) Stream
S6 Permanent 40 TR1-C Crossing(35+50) Stream
57 Temporary 150 TR1-D Enhancement I Stream
1'8 513 Permanent 40 MN4-A Crossing(02+50) Stream
514 Permanent 231 MN6-B Stream Restoration Stream

ores
Restoring a resilient earth for a modern world
N
L W E
S
0 125 250
Figure 6d
Stream Impacts
Page 3
Z
J Tobacco Road
Mitigation Project
G�
V 57 s4 (R Alamance County North Carolina
dj Date: 3/27/2023 Drawn by:MDE
ti6e` 514
1:3,000 Checked by:BRC
9
'`♦
OProposed Easement
Existing Top of Bank
�tisq -Proposed Top of Bank
MN8 r 1 Limits of Disturbance
t Impact Type
®Permanent Stream
0 ®Temporary Stream
i
Crossing
s1s
59
i
g
Impact ID Impact Type Length Aquatic ID Purpose WOUS Type
S4 Temporary 376 TRl-C Layered Riffles Stream
S7 Temporary 150 TRl-D Enhancement I Stream
S8 Permanent 40 TRl-D Crossing(60+50) Stream
� 59 Permanent 1948 TRl-E Stream Restoration Stream
_ S14 Permanent 231 MN6-B Stream Restoration Stream
� S15 Permanent 86 MN8 Stream Restoration Stream

DWR Pre-Filing Meeting
Request Form

l Pre-Filing -
DWR MeetingRequest • `•aa:►•
NORTH CAROLINA
Enrlronmenfol Quality
ID#* 20210536 Version* 1
Regional Office* Winston-Salem Regional Office-[phone]
Reviewer List* Sue Homewood
Pre-Filing Meeting Request submitted 3/9/2021
........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Contact Name* Matt Butler
Contact Email Address* [e-mail]
Project Name* Tobacco Road
Project Owner* Environmental Banc&Exchange, LLC
Project County* Alamance
Owner Address: Street Address
3600 Glenwood Ave.
Address Line 2
Suite 100
City State/Province/Pegion
Raleigh NC
Postal/Zip Code Country
27612 us
Is this a transportation project?* r Yes r No
Type(s)of approval sought from the DWR:
W 401 Water Quality Certification- F 401 Water Quality Certification-
Regular Express
r- Individual Permit F Modification
r- Shoreline Stabilization
Does this project have an existing project ID#?*
r Yes r No
Do you know the name of the staff member you would like to request a meeting with?
Erin Davis
Please give a brief project description below and include location information.

The Project is located in Alamance County,approximately 13 miles
southwest of Burlington, NC near the intersection of Thom Road and
Highway 54 in the Cape Fear River Basin within Cataloging Unit
03030002, 03030002050040, and NC Division of Water Resources
(DWR)Sub-Basin 03-06-04.The Project consists of two parcels
totaling 46.42 acres of conservation easement.The Project has a
total drainage area of 458 acres and is mainly a mix of forested and
agricultural land including rowcrop and active pasture; aerial imagery
indicates that the Project area has historically served these land
uses. Stressors currently affecting the Project include row crop,
livestock production and a lack of riparian buffers.
The Project will involve the stream restoration, enhancement, and
preservation of several unnamed tributaries including,TR1 (TR1-A,
TR1-B,TR1-C,TR1-D,TR1-E,TR1-F),TR2, MN1 (MN1-A, MN1-B,
MN1-C), MN2(MN2-A, MN2-B), MN3, MN4 (MN4-A, MN4-B), MN5
(MN5-A, MN5-B), MN6(MN6-A, MN6-B), MN7(MN7-A, MN7-B), and
MN8. Reaches are broken up by treatment type.TR1 flows east to
west towards Mineral Springs Road. MN1, MN2, MN3,and MN7 flow
south before coming to confluences with TR1. MN4, MN5, and MN6
flow north before coming to confluences with TR1.TR2 flows to the
west, paralleling TR1-C before draining to it,just before the
confluence of TR1-D and MN5-B. In addition to the stream reaches,
there are multiple degraded wetland areas within the project area that
have been impacted by livestock access and/or ditching.The
conceptual design presents 12,899 linear feet of stream mitigation
generating 7,074.796 Stream Mitigation Units(SMU)and 0.58 acres
of wetland mitigation generating 0.139 Wetland Mitigation Units
(WMU). In addition to stream and wetland mitigation,the Project also
presents the opportunity to provide up to 44 acres of Riparian Buffer
Mitigation generating 16.05 acres of Riparian Buffer Credits.The
Project will provide critical ecological uplift to aquatic and riparian
corridors that would otherwise be even further degraded by
agricultural uses and continued livestock access.
Please give a couple of dates you are available for a meeting.
4/8/2021
Please attach the documentation you would like to have the meeting about.
Tobacco Road Draft Instrument
6.18MB
Mod_20210308.pdf
pdF only
By digitally signing below, I certify that I have read and understood that per the Federal Clean Water Act Section
401 Certification Rule the following statements:
• This form completes the requirement of the Pre-Filing Meeting Request in the Clean Water Act Section 401 Certification
Rule.
• I understand by signing this form that I cannot submit my application until 30 calendar days after this pre-filing
meeting request.
• I also understand that DWR is not required to respond or grant the meeting request.
Your project's thirty-day clock started upon receipt of this application. You will receive notification regarding meeting location
and time if a meeting is necessary. You will receive notification when the thirty-day clock has expired,and you can submit an
application.

Signature
e-w,vr ff
Submittal Date 3/9/2021

Preliminary Jurisdictional
Determination (PJD
Request
• JD Request
• Landowner Authorizations
• PJD Form
• Aquatic Resources
• Figures
• WET Forms
• USACE Concurrence Email

Jurisdictional Determination Request
FE11
US Army Corps
of Engineers
Wilmington District
This form is intended for use by anyone requesting a jurisdictional determination(JD) from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District(Corps). Please include all supporting
information, as described within each category, with your request. You may submit your request
via mail, electronic mail, or facsimile. Requests should be sent to the appropriate project
manager of the county in which the property is located. A current list of project managers by
assigned counties can be found on-line at:
http://www.saw.usace.LM.mil/Missions/Re ug latoiyPermitProgram/Contact/CountyLocator.aspx,
by calling 910-251-4633, or by contacting any of the field offices listed below. Once your
request is received you will be contacted by a Corps project manager.
ASHEVILLE&CHARLOTTE REGULATORY WASHINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
FIELD OFFICES US Army Corps of Engineers
US Army Corps of Engineers 2407 West Fifth Street
151 Patton Avenue,Room 208 Washington,North Carolina 27889
Asheville,North Carolina 28801-5006 General Number:[phone]
General Number:[phone] Fax Number:[phone]
Fax Number:[phone]
WILMINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
RALEIGH REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE US Army Corps of Engineers
US Army Corps of Engineers 69 Darlington Avenue
3331 Heritage Trade Drive,Suite 105 Wilmington,North Carolina 28403
Wake Forest,North Carolina 27587 General Number:910-251-4633
General Number:[phone] Fax Number:[phone]
Fax Number:[phone]
INSTRUCTIONS:
All requestors must complete Parts A, B, C, D, E, F and G.
NOTE TO CONSULTANTS AND AGENCIES: If you are requesting a JD on behalf of a
paying client or your agency, please note the specific submittal requirements in Part H.
NOTE ON PART D—PROPERTY OWNER AUTHORIZATION: Please be aware that
all JD requests must include the current property owner authorization for the Corps to
proceed with the determination, which may include inspection of the property when
necessary. This form must be signed by the current property owner(s) or the owner(s)
authorized agent to be considered a complete request.
NOTE ON PART D -NCDOT REQUESTS: Property owner authorization/notification for
JD requests associated with North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
projects will be conducted according to the current NCDOT/USACE protocols.
NOTE TO USDA PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS: A Corps approved or preliminary JD
may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security Act of
1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in
USDA programs, you should also request a certified wetland determination from the local
office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service,prior to starting work.
Version:May 2017 Page 1

Jurisdictional Determination Request
A. PARCEL INFORMATION
Street Address: 5249 Thom Rd.
City, State: Mebane, NC
County: Alamance
Parcel Index Number(s) (PIN): 9810596562, 9810273348
B. REQUESTOR INFORMATION
Name: Jeremy Schmid, RES
Mailing Address: 3600 Glenwood Ave., Suite 100
Raleigh, NC 27612
Telephone Number: 919.345.3034
Electronic Mail Address: [e-mail]
Select one:
I am the current property owner.
✓❑ I am an Authorized Agent or Environmental Consultant'
❑ Interested Buyer or Under Contract to Purchase
❑ Other,please explain.
C. PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION'
Name: RES Aster, LLC
Mailing Address: 3600 Glenwood Ave., Suite 100
Raleigh, NC 27612
Telephone Number: 919.345.3034
Electronic Mail Address: [e-mail]
' Must provide completed Agent Authorization Form/Letter.
2 Documentation of ownership also needs to be provided with request(copy of Deed, County GIS/Parcel/Tax Record).
Version:May 2017 Page 2

Landowner Authorization Form
Site: Tobacco Road (Greeson)
Property Legal Description
Deed Book/Page: 3217/0243
County:Alamance
Parcel ID Numbers:9810273348
Street Address: 4870 Mineral Springs Road, Apt A, Graham,NC 27253
Property Owner: Steven Gerald Greeson and wife.Deedra Greeson
Resource Environmental Solutions,the NC Division of Water Resources,and the US Army Corps of Engineers,
their employees,agents or assigns to have reasonable access to the above referenced property for the evaluation of
the property as a potential stream,wetland,and or riparian buffer restoration project,including conducting stream
and or wetland determinations and delineations,as well as issuance and acceptance of any required permit(s)or
certification(s).
Property Owner Address: 4870 Mineral Springs Road, Apt A, Graham,NC 27253
I/We hereby certify the above information to be true and accurate to the best of my/our knowledge.
�-- A'-� - - /0 -Z-� -
(Property Owner Authorized Signature) Date
`<LwPI'1 �6-11PL'�11
(Property Owner Printed Name)
- r, &A7 x -
-
(Property Owner Authorized Signature) Date
(Property Owner Printed Name)
4846-3189-9210,v. 1

LANDOWNER AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRITION:
PIN Number: 9810596562
Street Address: 5249 Thom Road, Graham,NC 27253
Property Owner(please print): M,+(L-V!N �6'L✓ /f/�'Gl/L r
PropeKply Owner-(please pr-iuk),•
The undersigned,registered property owner(s)of the above property,do hereby authorize
Resource Environmental Solutions,the NC Department of Environmental Quality,and the US
Army Corps of Engineers,their employees,agents or assigns to have reasonable access to the above
referenced property for the evaluation of the property as a potential stream,wetland and/or
riparian buffer mitigation project,including conducting stream and/or wetland determinations and
delineations,as well as issuance and acceptance of any required permit(s)or certification(s).
Property Owners(s)Address: c/o 2h--Vl N C----P-'L //J
(if different from above) q 0 3 6 li L AA/.D 12-D
Property Owner Telephone Number: �57 S
I/We hereby certify the above information to be true and accurate to the best of my/our knowledge.
(Property Own1W Authorized Signature) (Date)
(Property Owner Authorized Signature) (Date)

Jurisdictional Determination Request
F. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION(JD)TYPE (Select One)
❑ I am requesting that the Corps provide a preliminary JD for the property identified herein.
A Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination(PJD)provides an indication that there may
be "waters of the United States"or"navigable waters of the United States"on a property.
PJDs are sufficient as the basis for permit decisions. For the purposes of permitting, all
waters and wetlands on the property will be treated as if they are jurisdictional "waters of
the United States". PJDs cannot be appealed(33 C.F.R. 331.2); however, a PJD is
"preliminary"in the sense that an approved JD can be requested at any time. PJDs do
not expire.
❑ I am requesting that the Corps provide an approved JD for the property identified herein.
An Approved Jurisdictional Determination(AJD) is a determination that
jurisdictional "waters of the United States"or"navigable waters of the United
States" are either present or absent on a site. An approved JD identifies the limits of
waters on a site determined to be jurisdictional under the Clean Water Act and/or
Rivers and Harbors Act. Approved JDs are sufficient as the basis for permit
decisions. AJDs are appealable (33 C.F.R. 331.2). The results of the AJD will be
posted on the Corps website. A landowner,permit applicant, or other"affected
party" (33 C.F.R. 331.2)who receives an AJD may rely upon the AJD for five years
(subject to certain limited exceptions explained in Regulatory Guidance Letter 05-
02).
❑ I am unclear as to which JD I would like to request and require additional information
to inform my decision.
G. ALL REQUESTS
Map of Property or Project Area. This Map must clearly depict the boundaries of the
review area.
'❑ Size of Property or Review Area 130 acres.
✓❑ The property boundary(or review area boundary) is clearly physically marked on the site.
Version:May 2017 Page 4

Jurisdictional Determination Request
H. REQUESTS FROM CONSULTANTS
Project Coordinates (Decimal Degrees): Latitude: 35.973063
Longitude: -79.282234
✓� A legible delineation map depicting the aquatic resources and the property/review area.
Delineation maps must be no larger than I Ix17 and should contain the following: (Corps
signature of submitted survey plats will occur after the submitted delineation map has been
reviewed and approved).6
■ North Arrow
■ Graphical Scale
■ Boundary of Review Area
■ Date
■ Location of data points for each Wetland Determination Data Form or tributary
assessment reach.
For Approved Jurisdictional Determinations:
■ Jurisdictional wetland features should be labeled as Wetland Waters of the US, 404
wetlands, etc. Please include the acreage of these features.
■ Jurisdictional non-wetland features (i.e. tidal/navigable waters, tributaries,
impoundments) should be labeled as Non-Wetland Waters of the US, stream, tributary,
open water, relatively permanent water,pond, etc. Please include the acreage or linear
length of each of these features as appropriate.
■ Isolated waters, waters that lack a significant nexus to navigable waters, or non-
jurisdictional upland features should be identified as Non-Jurisdictional. Please
include a justification in the label regarding why the feature is non jurisdictional (i.e.
"Isolated", "No Significant Nexus", or"Upland Feature"). Please include the acreage
or linear length of these features as appropriate.
For Preliminary Jurisdictional Determinations:
■ Wetland and non-wetland features should not be identified as Jurisdictional, 404,
Waters of the United States, or anything that implies jurisdiction. These features can be
identified as Potential Waters of the United States, Potential Non-wetland Waters of
the United States, wetland, stream, open water, etc. Please include the acreage and
linear length of these features as appropriate.
❑ Completed Wetland Determination Data Forms for appropriate region
(at least one wetland and one upland form needs to be completed for each wetland type)
6 Please refer to the guidance document titled"Survey Standards for Jurisdictional Determinations"to ensure that the
supplied map meets the necessary mapping standards.http://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/Re ug latory-Permit-
Pro gram/Jurisdiction/
Version:May 2017 Page 5

Jurisdictional Determination Request
❑ Completed appropriate Jurisdictional Determination form
• PJDs,please complete a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form'and include the
Aquatic Resource Table
• AJDs,please complete an Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form'
❑ Vicinity Map
aAerial Photograph
❑ USGS Topographic Map
❑ Soil Survey Map
❑ Other Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map, Proposed Site
Plan,previous delineation maps, LIDAR maps, FEMA floodplain maps)
❑ Landscape Photos (if taken)
❑ NCWAM and/or NCWAM Assessment Forms and Rating Sheets
❑ NC Division of Water Resources Stream Identification Forms
❑ Other Assessment Forms
' www.saw.usace.army.mil/Portals/59/docs/regulatoM/regdocs/JD/RGL 08-02_App_A_Prelim JD Form fillable.pdf
' Please see hqp://www.saw.usace.army.miIA4issions/Re ug latory-Permit-Program/Jurisdiction/
Principal Purpose:The information that you provide will be used in evaluating your request to determine
whether there are any aquatic resources within the project area subject to federal jurisdiction under the regulatory
authorities referenced above.
Routine Uses:This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal,state,and local
government agencies,and the public,and may be made available as part of a public notice as required by federal
law.Your name and property location where federal jurisdiction is to be determined will be included in the
approved jurisdictional determination(AJD),which will be made available to the public on the District's website
and on the Headquarters USAGE website.
Disclosure:Submission of requested information is voluntary;however,if information is not provided,the
request for an AJD cannot be evaluated nor can an AJD be issued.
Version:May 2017 Page 6

Appendix 2 - PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD: 02/28/2022
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: ,Jeremy Schmid
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: CESW-RG-R
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND/OR
AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: NC County/parish/borough: Alamance city: Saxapahaw
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format):
Lat.: 35.973063 Long.: -79.282234
Universal Transverse Mercator: NAD83
Name of nearest waterbody: Motes Creek
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
❑ Field Determination. Date(s):
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES IN REVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO REGULATORY
JURISDICTION.
Site Latitude Longitude Estimated amount Type of aquatic Geographic authority
number (decimal (decimal of aquatic resource resource (i.e.,wetland to which the aquatic
degrees) degrees) in review area vs. non-wetland resource "may be"
(acreage and linear waters) subject (i.e., Section
feet, if applicable) 404 or Section 10/404)
see attached table

Wate tate - I Cowardin_Code I HGM_Code Peas Type I Amount I Units I Waters_Type Latitude Longitude
WA NORTH CAROLINA PFO Area 0.03875 ACRE DELINEATE 35.97726600 -79.27751100
WB NORTH CAROLINA PFO Area 0.171445 ACRE DELINEATE 35.97780900 -79.27976900
WC NORTH CAROLINA PEM Area 0.141662 ACRE DELINEATE 35.97292300 -79.28349300
WD NORTH CAROLINA PFO Area 0.053085 ACRE DELINEATE 35.97369700 -79.28405300
WE NORTH CAROLINA PFO Area 0.06499 ACRE DELINEATE 35.97411100 -79.28285100
WF NORTH CAROLINA PFO Area 0.134998 ACRE DELINEATE 35.97506100 -79.28201100
WG NORTH CAROLINA PEM Area 0.145074 ACRE DELINEATE 35.97590500 -79.28051100
WH NORTH CAROLINA PFO Area 0.008533 ACRE DELINEATE 35.97389300 -79.28323300
WI NORTH CAROLINA PEM Area 0.152273 ACRE DELINEATE 35.97678800 -79.28114300
WJ NORTH CAROLINA PEM Area 0.088607 ACRE DELINEATE 35.97567100 -79.28187800
WK NORTH CAROLINA PEM Area 0.323488 ACRE DELINEATE 35.97508700 -79.28270900
WL NORTH CAROLINA PEM Area 0.043784 ACRE DELINEATE 35.97398600 -79.28448900
WM NORTH CAROLINA PEM Area 0.03669 ACRE DELINEATE 35.97385200 -79.28480600
WN NORTH CAROLINA PEM Area 0.01431 ACRE DELINEATE 35.97342100 -79.28556700
WO NORTH CAROLINA PFO Area 0.092762 ACRE DELINEATE 35.97230300 -79.28639600
WP NORTH CAROLINA PEM Area 0.036325 ACRE DELINEATE 35.97278200 -79.28548300
WQ NORTH CAROLINA PFO Area 0.359891 ACRE DELINEATE 35.97180700 -79.29011400
WR NORTH CAROLINA PFO Area 0.326734 ACRE DELINEATE 35.97202100 -79.28862500
WS NORTH CAROLINA PEM Area 0.09445 ACRE DELINEATE 35.97246300 -79.28696000
WT NORTH CAROLINA PEM Area 0.060146 ACRE DELINEATE 35.97198800 -79.28621900
WU NORTH CAROLINA PFO Area 0.023881 ACRE DELINEATE 35.96867300 -79.29440900
WV NORTH CAROLINA PFO Area 0.016201 ACRE DELINEATE 35.96846400 -79.29821000
WW NORTH CAROLINA PEM Area 0.132872 ACRE DELINEATE 35.97264800 -79.29160200
TR1 NORTH CAROLINA R3 Linear 8132 FOOT DELINEATE 35.97659200 -79.27937000
MN1 NORTH CAROLINA R4 Linear 746 FOOT DELINEATE 35.97693500 -79.27979400
MN2 NORTH CAROLINA R4 Linear 1092 FOOT DELINEATE 35.97793100 -79.28201500
MN3 NORTH CAROLINA R4 Linear 524 FOOT DELINEATE 35.97429300 -79.28351600
MN4 NORTH CAROLINA R4 Linear 567 FOOT DELINEATE 35.97277700 -79.28352900
TR2 NORTH CAROLINA R4 Linear 582 FOOT DELINEATE 35.97270000 -79.28581700
S2 NORTH CAROLINA R4 Linear 201 FOOT DELINEATE 35.97286800 -79.28719000
MN5 NORTH CAROLINA R4 Linear 256 FOOT DELINEATE 35.97152400 -79.28674500
MN6 NORTH CAROLINA R4 Linear 644 FOOT DELINEATE 35.97044400 -79.28998000
MN9 NORTH CAROLINA R4 Linear 128 FOOT DELINEATE 35.97034500 -79.28945200
MN7 NORTH CAROLINA R4 Linear 494 FOOT DELINEATE 35.97237100 -79.29155400
MN8 NORTH CAROLINA R4 Linear 517 FOOT DELINEATE 35.96903200 79.29377700
D1 NORTH CAROLINA POW Linear 384 FOOT DELINEATE 35.96795200 -79.29694100
S1 NORTH CAROLINA R6 Linear 84 FOOT DELINEATE 35.97653900 -79.27906700

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

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

Dodson's Country
Store&Grill® Cooper School Q
3143
Citgo Gram Grocery • ,
L
_ C
Paws4ever
S4 g
/.4q cnQQ' 3143 ' N,�µ�NO
n
¢y \
Andersen Sterilizers The Pavilion
Qat Nicks Road
ParkQro7
1
Hunters Helping Kids
Archangel Battle
Q € DuchyAirpark© �«
y
o° Red Tail Grain
.0
I Q ' y United Methodist
4 a
Methodist Church r
3143
,,0
vCIRCLE K RANCH � 1
e' Q
J Watkins Heavy Hauling x
3165 v R�
a�Q aredsl+ew�ua1ry
j QCustom Home Services
3 007
n ssho
Tobacco Road `a
Mitigation Project 4F
1 S?
zt42
_ g.ambl^yate Or \ Q
I reensboro '
igh Poin
`°°`�"'"Burlington ha e 54
s
O 314s
Chapel Hill
ns rt f r 64
Carroll Construction Legend
And Landscape Supply
P� Q King Cohn Apiary Q Study Area 130 ac.)
Date: 2/15/2022
Figure 1 - Project Vicinity
` Drawn by:EJU
Tobacco Road Mitigation Project Checked by: JLS res
0 1,000 2,000
Feet Alamanee County, North Carolina 1 inch=2,000 feet

,.-� f/ 1/\J� _:57D J/� 1 :� �r ` \ �Jl\J\) _• _"`�1 �% •CJ 1
= 1 Q
o � 8 y
`.. ;1 .� � � �e /.�/ O _- -. \ \ I � ter}-',_ • i
i .•1 _ / Study Area(�130 ac.)
- ,, Cop. right;©�20�1r3 Na
Figure 2 - USGS Saxapahaw Quadrangle (1977) Date: 2/15/2022
` Drawn by:EJU
z Tobacco Road Mitigation Project res
Checked by: AS
0 1,000 2,000
IF
Feet Alamanee County, North Carolina 1 inch=2,000 feet

•'. ! i r� ,p ,I it r a. ��pt�.6' �
.t •: ,#, -:.. .w '.^ :,Y`, SAC �4ft r'F���. :�., - 't '
R�
lr
RSUannBH
� 1
It
R4SBC
p _
..X
•� t• '�n ,� R4SBC
r'
R4SBC
RSUBH
i
k , UBH
t�
PUBHhr.
PFO1A
Legend
Study Area (—130 ac.)
® NWI (USFWS January 2021)
PUBHh
Date: 2/15/2022
Figure 3 - National Wetlands Inventory
Drawn by:EJU
Tobacco Road Mitigation Project Checked by: AS
0 350 700 J
s
Feet Alamanee County, North Carolina 1 inch=700feet

CnC2/ CnD2 IrB CnE2 CnB2 HnE
/ CnB2 CnD2 CnB2 CnB2
CnD2 CnC2
MaB HnD
)e"' CnC2 U � CnE2
CnC2 MaC CnC2
W Ud
MaC CnE2 I
CnB2 CnB2
IrB
WtD
WtC \ U Ud
CnC2 /
J CnD2
CnB2 CnB2 CnC2
CnC2 CnB2 CnE2 CnE2
ChA 'Tho Rd -
nC2's CnD2 u
CnD2
CnC2
tC CnB2 CnD2
CnC2 CnB2
W CnD2
Cn_ B2 W
CnD2 ChA
CnB2
WtC CnE2
/ CnB2
- • - .
CnC2
/ CnC2 Study1 .
CnE2
CnD2 Hydric (100%)
CnD2 HnE -
CnB2 . Predominantly Hydric .. ...
CnC2 Predominantly Hydric
' CnC2
VZn .- CnB2 CnC2 Nonhydric (0%)
CnC2 CnD2
�w CnB2
Date:
ed Soils
_
1iy1►{:ea�i�J•f�f
��,

Waters Name Type Area/Length
WA Wetland 0.039 ac
�17 4 r t
P
WB Wetland 0.171 ac ��.�r +' � - _
WC Wetland 0.142 ac - R
WD Wetland 0.053 ac
WE Wetland 0.065 ac
WF Wetland 0.135 ac
WG Wetland 0.145 ac •-, `�
4
WH Wetland 0.009ac --
WI Wetland 0.152ac �, ,r i Wg
WJ Wetland 0.089 ac
WK Wetland 0.323 ac 9�2 WA
WL Wetland 0.044 ac
WM Wetland 0.Wt ac W1
WIN Wetland 0.014 ac
WO Wetland 0.093ac
..ee 0
WP Wetland 0.036 ac
WQ Wetland 0.360 ac WG
a
WR Wetland 0.327 ac
WS Wetland 0.094 ac -'-I r i
WT Wetland 0.060ac , 1 WK
WU Wetland 0.024ac �''�
WV Wetland 0.016ac
WW Wetland 0.133acEll
TR1 Stream 8132ft
TR2 Stream 582ft WD'
of f
D' WH '
MN1 Stream 746ft ' y„, I�b .,;, WIN
MN2 Stream 1092ft ,,WW '"
MN3 Stream 524 ft .: WP y WC "+ €
MN4 Stream 567 ft /
MN5 Stream 256ft .. . ... ` ' �co WSf �.�/
MN6 Stream 644It =. .. WR WO �R2 ,._...R., Alm
MN7 Stream 494 ft WQ
MN8 Stream 517 ft
MN9 Stream 128ft Z *�
S1 Stream 84f R
S2 Stream 201 ft 1
D1 Ditch 384tt '^
A
s
Mpg
Legend
Study Area 130 ac.)
Wv WU ® Potential Wetland Waters of the US
2�
Potential Non-Wetland Waters of the US
O�
10 Upland Datapoint
Y Wetland Datapoint
Date: 2/25/2022
Figure 5 -Waters of the US
wE OVERVIEW Drawn by:EJU
Tobacco Road Mitigation Project Checked by: JLS res
0 350 700
Feet Alamanee County, North Carolina 1 inch=700feet

'fit j y a
of
�,p 3 tij
Sheet 3
Legend
Study Area 130 ac.)
® Potential Wetland Waters of the US
Potential Non-Wetland Waters of the US
Date: 2/25/2022
Figure 5 -Waters of the US
Drawn by:EJU
Tobacco Road Mitigation Project Checked by: xxx
0 350 700 J
s
Feet Alamance County, North Carolina 1 inch=700feet

r..,�. r I • � ,:.: YmY ",..;r r ., ^,fig,. �, Y ,t`.e rY�s'4" rx:.-, .. -.,,f �:.i,, w, -.-r
t rF -n-
'
'.,,a 1 4 a::�-.. !s I �.�.,. �.,,.J, 4I��� ,, _��A �:i•�.. w ,�. .,e'7{ ".- ....�. ^` - ,y�1� . J+�..-' _
.'�S' �` K �a�k�r�•�',n��iii�sr r.,P�'�+ �r�` ���c e���t �"c r� �;=.,"' � � ,s z�,, /
M1T1 Imo'I V ` x LR r✓.p
W I y -
C
m IP
�a
r
WG
WJ
WK WF
Legend
Study Area (-130 ac.)
WL
We ® Potential Wetland Waters of the US
WM
WH Potential Non-Wetland Waters of the US
WD Upland Datapoint
WN MN4 10 Wetland Datapoint
Date: 2/25/2022
Figure 5 -Waters of the US
wE Sheet 1 Drawn by:EJU
Tobacco Road Mitigation Project Checked by: JLS 6) res
0 175 350
Feet Alamanee County, North Carolina 1 inch=350feet

-, 3:MI 1 + r n,i..`" �: `•: t ,� ,r...�z. .�.t� 4+F WI(-' -
•
,
n
y N
1
e
#
�e,� �'p5 �� ::5,�.�,:y" p'2e�'� r� i r ;,,,4J„�Yi �'y�c,5, T Y l ✓, .�1., 3,.. � a�,. } }�. Y.�e�.:X�. .?� �
✓M, ` , ' 'Y ,7..�,3����iti .� '+ h e ki °jtt'`�iC"`� ,,�a,:" awhet,, �, �,�I �.:;•,t T
uab'. Al
Y 1:: ,,,,�v. ✓w i? e •a, n
•`ir °'^"���� �.ydx;„* a t�
a
WE
wL
A c�i•. rir ��N4edb 4 '�+4� ..� * t�. c 4�� �b'� � � -r �,��+r r ra iy, y
44
WIVI h
+ice it
W N
W W k g 7 a•�aP� �R � �d _. A
" x
d :..
r
.. �• Jy, b Air 1, r _ ,
, i p
..n WS
WR Wo
WT r
,
WQ TR1
Z
9
Nt
t
t
MNs
s
Legend
Study Area (-130 ac.)
Potential Wetland Waters of the US
Potential Non-Wetland Waters of the US
` Upland Datapoint
Y Wetland Datapoint
Date: 2/25/2022
Figure 5 -Waters of the US
wE Sheet 2 Drawn by:EJU
Tobacco Road Mitigation Project Checked by: JLS 6) res
0 175 350
Feet Alamanee County, North Carolina 1 inch=350feet

t�WW
z,. a ^WR
i
J.
} �t
.t lug,
�
51 ,
Legend
Study Area -130 ac.)
Potential Wetland Waters of the US
Potential Non-Wetland Waters of the US
/
Upland Datapoint
Wetland Datapoint
Date: 2/25/2022
Figure 5 -Waters of the US
wE Sheet 3 Drawn by:EJU
Tobacco Road Mitigation Project Checked by: JLS 6) res
0 175 350
Feet Alamanee County, North Carolina 1 inch=350feet

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Tobacco Road City/County: Alamance Sampling Date: 02-Dec-21
Applicant/Owner: RES State: NC Sampling Point: DP-01
Investigator(s): J.Schmid Section,Township,Range: S T R
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Floodplain Local relief(concave,convex,none): flat Slope: 0.0% / 0.0
Subregion(LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.97726600 Long.: -79.27751100 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Chewacla NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes * No 0 (If no,explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ ,Soil ❑ ,or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes O No 0
Are Vegetation ❑ ,Soil ❑ ,or Hydrology ❑ naturally problematic? (If needed,explain any answers in Remarks.)
Summary of Findings -Attach site map showing sampling point locations,transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 0
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No 0 Is the Sampled Area
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0
within a Wetland? Yes ❑ No ❑
Remarks:
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators(minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators(minimum of one required; check all that aooly) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks(B6)
❑ Surface Water(Al) ❑ True Aquatic Plants(B14) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(B8)
❑ High Water Table(A2) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) ❑ Drainage Patterns(B10)
❑ Saturation(A3) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots(0) ❑ Moss Trim Lines(B16)
❑ Water Marks(Bl) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) ❑ Dry Season Water Table(C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits(B2) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) ❑ Crayfish Burrows(C8)
❑ Drift deposits(B3) ❑ Thin Muck Surface(C7) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust(B4) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks) ❑ stunted or stressed Plants(DI)
❑ Iron Deposits(B5) ❑ Geomorphic Position(D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(B7) ❑ Shallow Aquitard(D3)
❑ Water-stained Leaves(B9) ❑ Microtopographic Relief(D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna(B13) d❑ FAC-neutral Test(D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes C No 0 Depth(inches): 1
Water Table Present? Yes 0 No Depth(inches):
Saturation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0- No 0
(includes capillary fringe) Yes 0 No Depth(inches):
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant Sampling Point: DP-01
Species?
Absolute Rel.Strat. Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:_ ) %Cover Cover Status
Number of Dominant Species
1• Platanus occidentalis 10 d❑ 28.6% FACW That are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 6 (A)
2. Juniperus viroiniana 5 ❑ 14.3% FACU
Total Number of Dominant
3. Ostrva viroiniana 10 ❑ 28.6% FACU Species Across All Strata: 8 (B)
4. Cerds;laevigata 10 d❑ 28.6% FACW
5 0 ❑ 0.0% Percent of dominant Species o
6. 0 ❑ 0.0%
That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 75.0/o (A/B)
7 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index worksheet:
g 0 ❑ 0.0% Total%Cover of: Multiply by:
35 =Total Cover OBL species 5 x 1 = 5
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Carpinus caroliniana 10 d❑ 100.0% FAC FACW species 30 x 2 = 60
2 0 ❑ 0.0% FAC species 30 x 3 = 90
3 0 ❑ 0.0% FACU species 25 x 4 = 100
4 0 ❑ 0.0% _ UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
5 0 ❑ 0.0% _ column Totals: 90 (A) 255 (B)
6 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.833
7. 0 ❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
9 0 ❑ 0.o%
0 Dominance Test is>50%
10. 0 ❑ 0.0%
0 Prevalence Index is:53.0 i
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 10 =Total Cover ❑ Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
1. Salix nigra 5 0 100.0% OBL data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2. 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3. 0 ❑ 0.0% 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4.
0 ❑ 0.0% be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
5. 0 ❑ 0.0% _ Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6• 0 ❑ 0.0% _ Four Vegetation Strata:
0 ❑ 0.0% Tree stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding vines,3 in.
7• (7.6 cm)or more in diameter at breast height(DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) 5 =Total Cover regardless of height.
Sapling/shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding
1• Polystichum acrostichoides 10 ❑ 25.0% FACU vines,less than 3 in.DBH and greater than 3.28 ft(1 m)tall.
2. Onoclea sensibilis 10 ❑ 25.0% FACW Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
3. Microstegium vimineum 20 ❑ 50.0% FAC regardless of size,and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4 0 ❑ 0.0% Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
in height.
5. 0 ❑ 0.0%
6 0 ❑ 0.0% _ Five Vegetation Strata:
7. 0 ❑ 0.0°ro
Tree-Woody plants,excluding woody vines,approximately 20
$ 0 ❑ 0.0% ft(6 m)or more in height and 3 in.(7.6 cm)or larger in
0 ❑ 0.0% diameter at breast height(DBH).
9• Sapling stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
1 0 ❑ 0.0% _ vines,approximately 20 ft(6 m)or more in height and less
11. 0 ❑ 0.0% than 3 in.(7.6 cm)DBH.
12. 0 ❑ 0.0% Shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
vines,approximately 3 to 20 ft(1 to 6 m)in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 40 =Total Cover Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
0 ❑ 0.0% including herbaceous vines,regardless of size,and woody
1 species,except woody vines,less than approximately 3 ft(1
2. 0 ❑ 0.0% m)in height.
3. 0 ❑ 0.0% Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines,regardless of
4.
0 ❑ 0.0% height.
5. 0 ❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic
6. 0 ❑ 0.0% Vegetation
0 =Total Cover Present? Yes No -�
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix= National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

Soil Sampling Point: DP-01
Profile Description:(Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type 1 —Locz Texture Remarks
0-8 10YR 5/2 100 Silty Clay Loam
8-16 l0Y 5/2 95 10GY 5/4 5 Silty Clay
1 Type:C=Concentration.D=Depletion.RM=Reduced Matrix,CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining.M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol(Al) ❑ Dark Surface(S7) ❑ 2 cm Muck(A10)(MLRA 147)
❑ Histic Epipedon(A2) ❑ Polyvalue Below Surface(S8)(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Black Histic(A3) ❑ Thin Dark Surface(S9)(MLRA 147,148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox(A16)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) ❑d Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) (MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)
❑ Stratified Layers(A5) 0 Depleted Matrix(F3) (MLRA 136,147)
❑ 2 cm Muck(A10)(LRR N) ❑ Redox Dark Surface(F6) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface(All) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface(F7) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks)
❑ Thick Dark Surface(Al2) ❑ Redox Depressions(F8)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral(SS)(LRR N, ❑ Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR N,
MLRA 147,148) MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) ❑ Umbric Surface(F13)(MLRA 136,122)
❑ Sandy Redox(S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)(MLRA 148) 3 Indicators of hydrology
mushydrophytict
vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Stripped Matrix(S6) ❑ Red Parent Material(F21)(MLRA 127,147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type:
Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No O
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Tobacco Road City/County: Alamance Sampling Date: 02-Dec-21
Applicant/Owner: RES State: NC Sampling Point: DP-02
Investigator(s): J.Schmid Section,Township,Range: S T R
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Floodplain Local relief(concave,convex,none): flat Slope: 0.0% / 0.0
Subregion(LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.97726600 Long.: -79.27751100 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Chewacla NWI classification: Upland
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes * No O (If no,explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ ,Soil ❑ ,or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes O No O
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 O No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No O Is the Sampled Area
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O NO 0
within a Wetland? Yes � No
Remarks:
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators(minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators(minimum of one required; check all that aooly) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks(B6)
❑ Surface Water(Al) ❑ True Aquatic Plants(B14) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(B8)
❑ High Water Table(A2) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) ❑ Drainage Patterns(B10)
❑ Saturation(A3) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots(0) ❑ Moss Trim Lines(B16)
❑ Water Marks(Bl) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) ❑ Dry Season Water Table(C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits(B2) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) ❑ Crayfish Burrows(C8)
❑ Drift deposits(B3) ❑ Thin Muck Surface(C7) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust(B4) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks) ❑ stunted or stressed Plants(DI)
❑ Iron Deposits(B5) ❑ Geomorphic Position(D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(B7) ❑ Shallow Aquitard(D3)
❑ Water-stained Leaves(B9) ❑ Microtopographic Relief(D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna(B13) ❑ FAC-neutral Test(D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No C Depth(inches):
Water Table Present? Yes O NO Depth(inches):
Saturation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O No 0
(includes capillary fringe) Yes O No Depth(inches):
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant Sampling Point: DP-02
Species?
Absolute Rel.Strat. Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:_ ) %Cover Cover Status
Number of Dominant Species
1• Juniperus viroiniana 10 d❑ 16.7% FACU That are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 4 (A)
2. Liquidambar styraciflua 20 d❑ 33.3% FAC
Total Number of Dominant
3. Pinus taeda 10 ❑ 16.7% FAC Species Across All Strata: 9 (B)
4. Ulmus alata 10 d❑ 16.7% FACU
5. Carva glabra 10 d❑ 16.7% FACU Percent of dominant Species o
6. 0 ❑ 0.0%
That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 44.4/o (A/B)
7 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index worksheet:
g 0 ❑ 0.0% Total%Cover of: Multiply by:
60 =Total Cover OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Cornus amomum 10 ❑ 100.0% FACW FACW species 10 x 2 = 20
2.
0 ❑ 0.0% FAC species 40 x 3 = 120
3 0 ❑ 0.0% _ FACU species 60 x 4 = 240
4 0 ❑ 0.0% _ UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
5 0 ❑ 0.0% _ column Totals: 110 (A) 380 (B)
6 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.455
7 0 ❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
$ 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
9 0 ❑ 0.o%
❑ Dominance Test is>50%
10. 0 ❑ 0.0%
❑ Prevalence Index is:53.0 i
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 10 =Total Cover ❑ Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
1. 0 ❑ 0.0% data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2. 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3. 0 ❑ 0.0% i Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4.
0 ❑ 0.0% be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
5. 0 ❑ 0.0% _ Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6. 0 ❑ 0.0% _ Four Vegetation Strata:
0 ❑ 0.0% Tree stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding vines,3 in.
7 (7.6 cm)or more in diameter at breast height(DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) 0 =Total Cover regardless of height.
Sapling/shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding
1• Polystichum acrostichoides 10 ❑ 33.3% FACU vines,less than 3 in.DBH and greater than 3.28 ft(1 m)tall.
2. Lonicera japonica 20 ❑ 66.7% FACU Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
3.
0 ❑ 0.0% regardless of size,and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4 0 ❑ 0.0% Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
in height.
5. 0 ❑ 0.0%
6 0 ❑ 0.0% _ Five Vegetation Strata:
7 0 ❑ 0.0°ro
Tree-Woody plants,excluding woody vines,approximately 20
$ 0 ❑ 0.0% ft(6 m)or more in height and 3 in.(7.6 cm)or larger in
0 ❑ 0.0% diameter at breast height(DBH).
9• Sapling stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
1 0 ❑ 0.0% _ vines,approximately 20 ft(6 m)or more in height and less
11. 0 ❑ 0.0% than 3 in.(7.6 cm)DBH.
12. 0 ❑ 0.0% Shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
vines,approximately 3 to 20 ft(1 to 6 m)in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 30 =Total Cover Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
1• Smilax rotundifolia 10 d❑ 100.0% FAC including herbaceous vines,regardless of size,and woody
species,except woody vines,less than approximately 3 ft(1
2. 0 ❑ 0.0% m)in height.
3. 0 ❑ 0.0% Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines,regardless of
4.
0 ❑ 0.0% height.
5. 0 ❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic
6. 0 ❑ 0.0% Vegetation
10 =Total Cover
Present? Yes O No
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix= National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

Soil Sampling Point: DP-02
Profile Description:(Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inchesl _ Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type 1 ocz Texture Remarks
0-2 10YR 4/4 100 Loam
2-12 10YR 5/6 100 Loam
1 Type:C=Concentration.D=Depletion.RM=Reduced Matrix,CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining.M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol(Al) ❑ Dark Surface(S7) ❑ 2 cm Muck(A10)(MLRA 147)
❑ Histic Epipedon(A2) ❑ Polyvalue Below Surface(S8)(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Black Histic(A3) ❑ Thin Dark Surface(S9)(MLRA 147,148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox(A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(1`19)
❑ Stratified Layers(A5) ❑ Depleted Matrix(F3) (MLRA 136,147)
❑ 2 cm Muck(A10)(LRR N) ❑ Redox Dark Surface(F6) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface(All) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface(F7) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks)
❑ Thick Dark Surface(Al2) ❑ Redox Depressions(F8)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral(SS)(LRR N, ❑ Iron-Manganese Masses(1`12)(LRR N,
MLRA 147,148) MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) ❑ Umbric Surface(F13)(MLRA 136,122)
❑ Sandy Redox(S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)(MLRA 148) 3 Indicators of hydrology
mushydrophytict
vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Stripped Matrix(S6) ❑ Red Parent Material(F21)(MLRA 127,147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type:
Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Tobacco Road City/County: Alamance Sampling Date: 02-Dec-21
Applicant/Owner: RES State: NC Sampling Point: DP-03
Investigator(s): J.Schmid Section,Township,Range: S T R
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Hillside Local relief(concave,convex,none): concave Slope: 0.0% / 0.0
Subregion(LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.97780900 Long.: -79.27976900 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Chewacla NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes * No 0 (If no,explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ ,Soil ❑ ,or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes O No 0
Are Vegetation ❑ ,Soil ❑ ,or Hydrology ❑ naturally problematic? (If needed,explain any answers in Remarks.)
Summary of Findings -Attach site map showing sampling point locations,transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No 0
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No 0 Is the Sampled Area
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0
within a Wetland? Yes � No
Remarks:
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators(minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators(minimum of one required; check all that aooly) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks(B6)
❑ Surface Water(Al) ❑ True Aquatic Plants(B14) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(B8)
❑ High Water Table(A2) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) ❑ Drainage Patterns(B10)
❑ Saturation(A3) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots(0) ❑ Moss Trim Lines(B16)
❑ Water Marks(Bl) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) ❑ Dry Season Water Table(C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits(B2) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) ❑ Crayfish Burrows(C8)
❑ Drift deposits(B3) ❑ Thin Muck Surface(C7) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust(B4) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks) ❑ stunted or stressed Plants(DI)
❑ Iron Deposits(B5) ❑ Geomorphic Position(D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(B7) ❑ Shallow Aquitard(D3)
❑ Water-stained Leaves(B9) ❑ Microtopographic Relief(D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna(B13) ❑ FAC-neutral Test(D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No C Depth(inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth(inches):
Saturation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0- No 0
(includes capillary fringe) Yes No 0 Depth(inches): 4
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant Sampling Point: DP-03
Species?
Absolute Rel.Strat. Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:_ ) %Cover Cover Status
Number of Dominant Species
1• Liquidambar stvraciflua 30 d❑ 42.9% FAC That are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 6 (A)
2. Acer rubrum 30 d❑ 42.9% FAC
Total Number of Dominant
3. Platanus occidentalis 10 ❑ 14.3% FACW Species Across All Strata: 7 (B)
4. 0 ❑ o.o%
5 0 ❑ o.o% Percent of dominant Species o
6. 0 ❑ 0.0%
That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 85.7/o (A/B)
7 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index worksheet:
g 0 ❑ 0.0% Total%Cover of: Multiply by:
70 =Total Cover OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 0 0.0%
FACW species 15 x 2 = 30
❑ -
2 0 ❑ 0.0% - FAC species 110 x 3 = 330
3 0 ❑ 0.0% - FACU species 15 x 4 = 60
4 0 ❑ 0.0% - UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
5 0 ❑ 0.0% - column Totals: 140 (A) 420 (B)
6 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.000
7. 0 ❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
$ 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
9 0 ❑ 0.o%
0 Dominance Test is>50%
10. 0 ❑ 0.0%
0 Prevalence Index is:53.0 i
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 0 =Total Cover ❑ Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
1. Rosa multiflora 15 0 100.0% FACU data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2. 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3. 0 ❑ 0.0% 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4.
0 ❑ 0.0% be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
-
5. 0 ❑ 0.0% - Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6. 0 ❑ 0.0% - Four Vegetation Strata:
0 ❑ 0.0% Tree stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding vines,3 in.
7 (7.6 cm)or more in diameter at breast height(DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) 15 =Total Cover regardless of height.
Sapling/shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding
1• Juncus effusus 5 ❑ 14.3% FACW vines,less than 3 in.DBH and greater than 3.28 ft(1 m)tall.
2. Toxicodendron radicans 10 ❑ 28.6% FAC Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
3. Microstegium vimineum 20 ❑ 57.1% FAC regardless of size,and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4 0 ❑ 0.0% _ Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
in height.
5. 0 ❑ 0.0%
6 0 ❑ 0.0% - Five Vegetation Strata:
7. 0 ❑ 0.0°ro
Tree-Woody plants,excluding woody vines,approximately 20
$ 0 ❑ 0.0% ft(6 m)or more in height and 3 in.(7.6 cm)or larger in
0 ❑ 0.0% diameter at breast height(DBH).
9• Sapling stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
1 0 ❑ 0.0% - vines,approximately 20 ft(6 m)or more in height and less
11. 0 ❑ 0.0% than 3 in.(7.6 cm)DBH.
12. 0 ❑ 0.0% Shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
vines,approximately 3 to 20 ft(1 to 6 m)in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 35 =Total Cover Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
1• Vitis rotundifolia 10 ❑ 50.0% FAC including herbaceous vines,regardless of size,and woody
species,except woody vines,less than approximately 3 ft(1
2. Smilax rotundifolia 10 d❑ 50.0% FAC m)in height.
3. 0 ❑ 0.0% Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines,regardless of
height.
0 ❑ 0.0%
4. -
5. 0 ❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic
6. 0 ❑ 0.0% Vegetation
20 =Total Cover Present? Yes No -�
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix= National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

Soil Sampling Point: DP-03
Profile Description:(Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inchesl _ Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type 1 —Locz Texture Remarks
0-3 10YR 3/3 100 Sandy Clay Loam
3-16 2.5Y 6/2 90 10YR 4/6 10 Sandy Clay Loam
1 Type:C=Concentration.D=Depletion.RM=Reduced Matrix,CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining.M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol(Al) ❑ Dark Surface(S7) ❑ 2 cm Muck(A10)(MLRA 147)
❑ Histic Epipedon(A2) ❑ Polyvalue Below Surface(S8)(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Black Histic(A3) ❑ Thin Dark Surface(S9)(MLRA 147,148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox(A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(1`19)
❑ Stratified Layers(AS) 0 Depleted Matrix(F3) (MLRA 136,147)
❑ 2 cm Muck(A10)(LRR N) ❑ Redox Dark Surface(F6) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface(All) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface(F7) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks)
❑ Thick Dark Surface(Al2) ❑ Redox Depressions(F8)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral(SS)(LRR N, ❑ Iron-Manganese Masses(1`12)(LRR N,
MLRA 147,148) MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) ❑ Umbric Surface(F13)(MLRA 136,122)
❑ Sandy Redox(S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)(MLRA 148) 3 Indicators of hydrology
mushydrophytict
vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Stripped Matrix(S6) ❑ Red Parent Material(F21)(MLRA 127,147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type:
Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No O
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Tobacco Road City/County: Alamance Sampling Date: 02-Dec-21
Applicant/Owner: RES State: NC Sampling Point: DP-04
Investigator(s): J.Schmid Section,Township,Range: S T R
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Hillside Local relief(concave,convex,none): convex Slope: 0.0% / 0.0
Subregion(LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.97780900 Long.: -79.27976900 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Chewacla NWI classification: Upland
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes * No O (If no,explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ ,Soil ❑ ,or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes O No O
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 * No O
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No O Is the Sampled Area
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O NO 0
within a Wetland? Yes O No O
Remarks:
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators(minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators(minimum of one required; check all that aooly) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks(B6)
❑ Surface Water(Al) ❑ True Aquatic Plants(B14) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(B8)
❑ High Water Table(A2) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) ❑ Drainage Patterns(B10)
❑ Saturation(A3) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots(0) ❑ Moss Trim Lines(B16)
❑ Water Marks(Bl) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) ❑ Dry Season Water Table(C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits(B2) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) ❑ Crayfish Burrows(C8)
❑ Drift deposits(B3) ❑ Thin Muck Surface(C7) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust(B4) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks) ❑ stunted or stressed Plants(DI)
❑ Iron Deposits(B5) ❑ Geomorphic Position(D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(B7) ❑ Shallow Aquitard(D3)
❑ Water-stained Leaves(B9) ❑ Microtopographic Relief(D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna(B13) ❑ FAC-neutral Test(D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No C Depth(inches):
Water Table Present? Yes O NO Depth(inches):
Saturation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O No 0
(includes capillary fringe) Yes O No Depth(inches):
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant Sampling Point: DP-04
Species?
Absolute Rel.Strat. Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:_ ) %Cover Cover Status
Number of Dominant Species
1• Juniperus viminiana 10 ❑ 16.7% FACU That are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 6 (A)
2. Cerds;laevigata 30 d❑ 50.0% FACW
Total Number of Dominant
3. Liquidambar styraciflua 20 d❑ 33.3% FAC Species Across All Strata: 8 (B)
4. 0 ❑ o.o%
5 0 ❑ o.o% Percent of dominant Species o
6. 0 ❑ 0.0%
That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 75.0/o (A/B)
7 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index worksheet:
g o ❑ 0.0% Total%Cover of: Multiply by:
60 =Total Cover OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Liquidambar stvraciflua 20 d❑ 66.7% FAC FACW species 40 x 2 = 80
2. Cornus amomum 10 d❑ 33.3% FACW FAC species 70 x 3 = 210
3 0 ❑ 0.0% - FACU species 25 x 4 = 100
4 0 ❑ 0.0% - UPL species 10 x 5 = 50
5 0 ❑ 0.0% - column Totals: 145 (A) 440 (B)
6 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.034
7. 0 ❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
9 0 ❑ 0.o%
0 Dominance Test is>50%
10. 0 ❑ 0.0%
❑ Prevalence Index is:53.0 i
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 30 =Total Cover ❑ Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
1. Symphoricarpos orbiculatus 15 ❑ 60.0% FACU data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2. Elaeannus umbellata 10 ❑ 40.0% UPL ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3. 0 ❑ 0.0% 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4.
0 ❑ 0.0% be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
-
5. 0 ❑ 0.0% - Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6. 0 ❑ 0.0% - Four Vegetation Strata:
0 ❑ 0.0% Tree stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding vines,3 in.
7• (7.6 cm)or more in diameter at breast height(DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) 25 =Total Cover regardless of height.
Sapling/shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding
1, Microstegium vimineum 20 ❑ 100.0% FAC vines,less than 3 in.DBH and greater than 3.28 ft(1 m)tall.
2. 0 ❑ 0.0% Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
3.
0 ❑ 0.0% regardless of size,and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
-
4 0 ❑ 0.0% - Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
in height.
5. 0 ❑ 0.0%
6 0 ❑ 0.0% - Five Vegetation Strata:
7 0 ❑ 0.0°ro
Tree-Woody plants,excluding woody vines,approximately 20
$ 0 ❑ 0.0% ft(6 m)or more in height and 3 in.(7.6 cm)or larger in
0 ❑ 0.0% diameter at breast height(DBH).
9• Sapling stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
1 0 ❑ 0.0% - vines,approximately 20 ft(6 m)or more in height and less
11. 0 ❑ 0.0% than 3 in.(7.6 cm)DBH.
12. 0 ❑ 0.0% Shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
vines,approximately 3 to 20 ft(1 to 6 m)in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 20 =Total Cover Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
1• Vitis rotundifolia 10 d❑ 100.0% FAC including herbaceous vines,regardless of size,and woody
species,except woody vines,less than approximately 3 ft(1
2. 0 ❑ 0.0% m)in height.
3. 0 ❑ 0.0% Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines,regardless of
height.
0 ❑ 0.0%
4. -
5. 0 ❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic
6. 0 ❑ 0.0% Vegetation
10 =Total Cover Present? Yes No -�
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix= National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

Soil Sampling Point: DP-04
Profile Description:(Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inchesl _ Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type 1 ocz Texture Remarks
0-2 10YR 4/3 100 Loam
2-12 10YR 5/3 85 10YR 4/6 15 Clay Loam
1 Type:C=Concentration.D=Depletion.RM=Reduced Matrix,CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining.M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol(Al) ❑ Dark Surface(S7) ❑ 2 cm Muck(A10)(MLRA 147)
❑ Histic Epipedon(A2) ❑ Polyvalue Below Surface(S8)(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Black Histic(A3) ❑ Thin Dark Surface(S9)(MLRA 147,148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox(A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(1`19)
❑ Stratified Layers(A5) ❑ Depleted Matrix(F3) (MLRA 136,147)
❑ 2 cm Muck(A10)(LRR N) ❑ Redox Dark Surface(F6) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface(All) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface(F7) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks)
❑ Thick Dark Surface(Al2) ❑ Redox Depressions(F8)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral(SS)(LRR N, ❑ Iron-Manganese Masses(1`12)(LRR N,
MLRA 147,148) MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) ❑ Umbric Surface(F13)(MLRA 136,122)
❑ Sandy Redox(S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)(MLRA 148) 3 Indicators of hydrology
mushydrophytict
vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Stripped Matrix(S6) ❑ Red Parent Material(F21)(MLRA 127,147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type:
Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Tobacco Road City/County: Alamance Sampling Date: 02-Dec-21
Applicant/Owner: RES State: NC Sampling Point: DP-05
Investigator(s): J.Schmid Section,Township,Range: S T R
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Hillside Local relief(concave,convex,none): concave Slope: 0.0% / 0.0
Subregion(LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.97292300 Long.: -79.28349300 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Cullen clay loam NWI classification: PEM
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes * No O (If no,explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation d❑ Soil d❑ or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances' ? Yes O No O
g y gy ❑ g y 'present.
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 No O
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No O Is the Sampled Area
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No O
within a Wetland? Yes O No O
Remarks:
site heavily impacted by livestock access
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators(minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators(minimum of one required; check all that aooly) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks(B6)
❑ Surface Water(Al) ❑ True Aquatic Plants(B14) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(B8)
❑ High Water Table(A2) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) ❑ Drainage Patterns(B10)
❑ Saturation(A3) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots(0) ❑ Moss Trim Lines(B16)
❑ Water Marks(Bl) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) ❑ Dry Season Water Table(C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits(B2) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) ❑ Crayfish Burrows(C8)
❑ Drift deposits(B3) ❑ Thin Muck Surface(C7) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust(B4) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks) ❑ stunted or stressed Plants(DI)
❑ Iron Deposits(B5) ❑ Geomorphic Position(D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(B7) ❑ Shallow Aquitard(D3)
❑ Water-stained Leaves(B9) ❑ Microtopographic Relief(D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna(B13) d❑ FAC-neutral Test(D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No C Depth(inches):
Water Table Present? Yes C No O Depth(inches): 1
Saturation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0- No 0
(includes capillary fringe) Yes O No Depth(inches):
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant Sampling Point: DP-05
Species?
Absolute Rel.Strat. Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:_ ) %Cover Cover Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 0 ❑ 0.0% That are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 2 (A)
2 0 ❑ 0.o%
Total Number of Dominant
3 0 ❑ 0.0% Species Across All Strata: 2 (B)
4. 0 ❑ 0.0%
5 0 ❑ 0.0% Percent of dominant Species o
6. 0 ❑ 0.0%
That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 100.0/o (A/B)
7 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index worksheet:
g 0 ❑ 0.0% Total%Cover of: Multiply by:
0 =Total Cover OBL species 30 x 1 = 30
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 0 0.0%
FACW species 20 x 2 = 40
❑ -
2 0 ❑ 0.0% - FAC species 5 x 3 = 15
3 0 ❑ 0.0% - FACU species 10 x 4 = 40
4 0 ❑ 0.0% - UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
5 0 ❑ 0.0% - column Totals: 65 (A) 125 (B)
6 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index = B/A = 1.923
7. 0 ❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
$ 0 ❑ 0.0% �/❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
9 0 ❑ 0.o%
0 Dominance Test is>50%
10. 0 ❑ 0.0%
0 Prevalence Index is:53.0 i
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 0 =Total Cover ❑ Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
1. 0 ❑ 0.0% data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2. 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3. 0 ❑ 0.0% i Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4.
0 ❑ 0.0% be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
-
5. 0 ❑ 0.0% - Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6. 0 ❑ 0.0% - Four Vegetation Strata:
0 ❑ 0.0% Tree stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding vines,3 in.
7 (7.6 cm)or more in diameter at breast height(DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) 0 =Total Cover regardless of height.
Sapling/shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding
1, Juncos effuses 20 ❑ 30.8% FACW vines,less than 3 in.DBH and greater than 3.28 ft(1 m)tall.
2• Gratiola virginiana 10 ❑ 15.4% OBL Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
3• Xanthium strumarium 5 ❑ 7.7% FAC regardless of size,and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4• Sorghum halepense 10 ❑ 15.4% FACU Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
5. Murdannia keisak 20 d❑ 30.8% OBL in height.
6 0 ❑ 0.0% _ Five Vegetation Strata:
7. 0 ❑ 0.0°ro
Tree-Woody plants,excluding woody vines,approximately 20
$ 0 ❑ 0.0% ft(6 m)or more in height and 3 in.(7.6 cm)or larger in
0 ❑ 0.0% diameter at breast height(DBH).
9• Sapling stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
1 0 ❑ 0.0% - vines,approximately 20 ft(6 m)or more in height and less
11. 0 ❑ 0.0% than 3 in.(7.6 cm)DBH.
12. 0 ❑ 0.0% Shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
vines,approximately 3 to 20 ft(1 to 6 m)in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 65 =Total Cover Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
0 ❑ 0.0% including herbaceous vines,regardless of size,and woody
1 species,except woody vines,less than approximately 3 ft(1
2. 0 ❑ 0.0% m)in height.
3. 0 ❑ 0.0% Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines,regardless of
height.
0 ❑ 0.0%
4. -
5. 0 ❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic
6. 0 ❑ 0.0% Vegetation
0 =Total Cover Present? Yes No -�
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix= National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

Soil Sampling Point: DP-05
Profile Description:(Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type 1 —Locz Texture Remarks
0-1 10YR 3/3 100 Silty Clay Loam
1-10 2.5Y 4/2 90 2.5Y 5/8 10 Silty Clay Loam bedrock @ 10"
1 Type:C=Concentration.D=Depletion.RM=Reduced Matrix,CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining.M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol(Al) ❑ Dark Surface(S7) ❑ 2 cm Muck(A10)(MLRA 147)
❑ Histic Epipedon(A2) ❑ Polyvalue Below Surface(S8)(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Black Histic(A3) ❑ Thin Dark Surface(S9)(MLRA 147,148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox(A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)
❑ Stratified Layers(A5) 0 Depleted Matrix(F3) (MLRA 136,147)
❑ 2 cm Muck(A10)(LRR N) ❑ Redox Dark Surface(F6) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface(All) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface(F7) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks)
❑ Thick Dark Surface(Al2) ❑ Redox Depressions(F8)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral(SS)(LRR N, ❑ Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR N,
MLRA 147,148) MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) ❑ Umbric Surface(F13)(MLRA 136,122)
❑ Sandy Redox(S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)(MLRA 148) 3 Indicators of hydrology
mushydrophytict
vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Stripped Matrix(S6) ❑ Red Parent Material(F21)(MLRA 127,147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type:
Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No O
Remarks:
bedrock at 10"
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Tobacco Road City/County: Alamance Sampling Date: 02-Dec-21
Applicant/Owner: RES State: NC Sampling Point: DP-06
Investigator(s): J.Schmid Section,Township,Range: S T R
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Hillside Local relief(concave,convex,none): convex Slope: 0.0% / 0.0
Subregion(LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.97292300 Long.: -79.28349300 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Cullen clay loam NWI classification: Upland
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes * No O (If no,explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation d❑ Soil d❑ or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances' ? Yes O No O
g y gy ❑ g y 'present.
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 O No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No O Is the Sampled Area
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O NO 0
within a Wetland? Yes O No O
Remarks:
site heavily impacted by livestock access
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators(minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators(minimum of one required; check all that aooly) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks(B6)
❑ Surface Water(Al) ❑ True Aquatic Plants(B14) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(B8)
❑ High Water Table(A2) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) ❑ Drainage Patterns(B10)
❑ Saturation(A3) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots(0) ❑ Moss Trim Lines(B16)
❑ Water Marks(Bl) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) ❑ Dry Season Water Table(C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits(B2) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) ❑ Crayfish Burrows(C8)
❑ Drift deposits(B3) ❑ Thin Muck Surface(C7) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust(B4) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks) ❑ stunted or stressed Plants(DI)
❑ Iron Deposits(B5) ❑ Geomorphic Position(D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(B7) ❑ Shallow Aquitard(D3)
❑ Water-stained Leaves(B9) ❑ Microtopographic Relief(D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna(B13) ❑ FAC-neutral Test(D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No C Depth(inches):
Water Table Present? Yes O NO Depth(inches):
Saturation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O No 0
(includes capillary fringe) Yes O No Depth(inches):
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant Sampling Point: DP-06
Species?
Absolute Rel.Strat. Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:_ ) %Cover Cover Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 0 ❑ 0.0% That are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 0 (A)
2 0 ❑ 0.o%
Total Number of Dominant
3 0 ❑ 0.0% Species Across All Strata: 2 (B)
4. 0 ❑ 0.0%
5 0 ❑ 0.0% Percent of dominant Species o
6. 0 ❑ 0.0%
That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 0.0% (A/B)
7 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index worksheet:
g 0 ❑ 0.0% Total%Cover of: Multiply by:
0 =Total Cover OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 0 0.0%
FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
❑
2 0 ❑ 0.0% _ FAC species 10 x 3 = 30
3 0 ❑ 0.0% _ FACU species 70 x 4 = 280
4 0 ❑ 0.0% _ UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
5 0 ❑ 0.0% _ column Totals: 80 (A) 310 (B)
6 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.875
7. 0 ❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
$ 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
9 0 ❑ 0.o%
❑ Dominance Test is>50%
10. 0 ❑ 0.0%
❑ Prevalence Index is:53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 0 =Total Cover ❑ Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
1. 0 ❑ 0.0% data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2. 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3. 0 ❑ 0.0% i Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4.
0 ❑ 0.0% be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
5. 0 ❑ 0.0% _ Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6. 0 ❑ 0.0% _ Four Vegetation Strata:
0 ❑ 0.0% Tree stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding vines,3 in.
7 (7.6 cm)or more in diameter at breast height(DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) 0 =Total Cover regardless of height.
Sapling/shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding
1, Trifolium repens 30 0 37.5% FACU vines,less than 3 in.DBH and greater than 3.28 ft(1 m)tall.
2. Cvnodon dactylon 40 ❑ 50.0% FACU Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
3• Xanthium strumarium 10 ❑ 12.5% FAC regardless of size,and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4 0 ❑ 0.0% _ Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
in height.
5. 0 ❑ 0.0%
6 0 ❑ 0.0% _ Five Vegetation Strata:
7. 0 ❑ 0.0°ro
Tree-Woody plants,excluding woody vines,approximately 20
$ 0 ❑ 0.0% ft(6 m)or more in height and 3 in.(7.6 cm)or larger in
0 ❑ 0.0% diameter at breast height(DBH).
9• Sapling stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
1 0 ❑ 0.0% _ vines,approximately 20 ft(6 m)or more in height and less
11. 0 ❑ 0.0% than 3 in.(7.6 cm)DBH.
12. 0 ❑ 0.0% Shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
vines,approximately 3 to 20 ft(1 to 6 m)in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 80 =Total Cover Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
0 ❑ 0.0% including herbaceous vines,regardless of size,and woody
1 species,except woody vines,less than approximately 3 ft(1
2. 0 ❑ 0.0% m)in height.
3. 0 ❑ 0.0% Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines,regardless of
4.
0 ❑ 0.0% height.
5. 0 ❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic
6. 0 ❑ 0.0% Vegetation
0 =Total Cover
Present? Yes 0 No
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix= National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

Soil Sampling Point: DP-06
Profile Description:(Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type 1 ocz _ Texture Remarks
0-4 10YR 4/4 100 Clay Loam
4-12 2.5Y 6/4 85 10YR 4/6 15 Clay Loam
1 Type:C=Concentration.D=Depletion.RM=Reduced Matrix,CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining.M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol(Al) ❑ Dark Surface(S7) ❑ 2 cm Muck(A10)(MLRA 147)
❑ Histic Epipedon(A2) ❑ Polyvalue Below Surface(S8)(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Black Histic(A3) ❑ Thin Dark Surface(S9)(MLRA 147,148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox(A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)
❑ Stratified Layers(A5) ❑ Depleted Matrix(F3) (MLRA 136,147)
❑ 2 cm Muck(A10)(LRR N) ❑ Redox Dark Surface(F6) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface(All) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface(F7) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks)
❑ Thick Dark Surface(Al2) ❑ Redox Depressions(F8)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral(SS)(LRR N, ❑ Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR N,
MLRA 147,148) MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) ❑ Umbric Surface(F13)(MLRA 136,122)
❑ Sandy Redox(S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)(MLRA 148) 3 Indicators of hydrology
mushydrophytict
vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Stripped Matrix(S6) ❑ Red Parent Material(F21)(MLRA 127,147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type:
Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Tobacco Road City/County: Alamance Sampling Date: 02-Dec-21
Applicant/Owner: RES State: NC Sampling Point: DP-07
Investigator(s): J.Schmid Section,Township,Range: S T R
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Floodplain Local relief(concave,convex,none): concave Slope: 0.0% / 0.0
Subregion(LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.97590500 Long.: -79.28051100 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Chewacla NWI classification: PEM
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes * No 0 (If no,explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation d❑ Soil d❑ or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances' ? Yes 0 No O
g y gy ❑ g y 'present.
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 No 0
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No 0 Is the Sampled Area
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No 0
within a Wetland? Yes � No
Remarks:
site heavily impacted by livestock access
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators(minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators(minimum of one required; check all that ao)ly) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks(B6)
❑ Surface Water(Al) ❑ True Aquatic Plants(B14) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(B8)
❑ High Water Table(A2) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) ❑ Drainage Patterns(B10)
❑ Saturation(A3) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots(0) ❑ Moss Trim Lines(B16)
❑ Water Marks(Bl) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) ❑ Dry Season Water Table(C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits(B2) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) ❑ Crayfish Burrows(C8)
❑ Drift deposits(B3) ❑ Thin Muck Surface(C7) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust(B4) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks) ❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants(DI)
❑ Iron Deposits(B5) ❑ Geomorphic Position(D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(B7) ❑ Shallow Aquitard(D3)
❑ Water-Stained Leaves(B9) ❑ Microtopographic Relief(D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna(B13) d❑ FAC-neutral Test(D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes C No 0 Depth(inches): 2
Water Table Present? Yes 0 No Depth(inches):
Saturation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0- No 0
(includes capillary fringe) Yes 0 No Depth(inches):
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant Sampling Point: DP-07
Species?
Absolute Rel.Strat. Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:_ ) %Cover Cover Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 0 ❑ 0.0% That are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 2 (A)
2 0 ❑ 0.o%
Total Number of Dominant
3 0 ❑ 0.0% Species Across All Strata: 2 (B)
4. 0 ❑ 0.0%
5 0 ❑ 0.0% Percent of dominant Species o
6. 0 ❑ 0.0%
That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 100.0/o (A/B)
7 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index worksheet:
g 0 ❑ 0.0% Total%Cover of: Multiply by:
0 =Total Cover OBL species 20 x 1 = 20
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 0 0.0%
FACW species 40 x 2 = 80
❑ -
2 0 ❑ 0.0% - FAC species 10 x 3 = 30
3 0 ❑ 0.0% - FACU species 0 x 4 = 0
4 0 ❑ 0.0% - UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
5 0 ❑ 0.0% - column Totals: 70 (A) 130 (B)
6 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index = B/A = 1.857
7 0 ❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
$ 0 ❑ 0.0% �/❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
9 0 ❑ 0.o%
0 Dominance Test is>50%
10. 0 ❑ 0.0%
0 Prevalence Index is:53.0 i
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 0 =Total Cover ❑ Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
1. 0 ❑ 0.0% data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2. 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3. 0 ❑ 0.0% i Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4.
0 ❑ 0.0% be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
-
5. 0 ❑ 0.0% - Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6. 0 ❑ 0.0% - Four Vegetation Strata:
0 ❑ 0.0% Tree stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding vines,3 in.
7 (7.6 cm)or more in diameter at breast height(DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) 0 =Total Cover regardless of height.
Sapling/shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding
1• Juncus effusus 40 ❑ 57.1% FACW vines,less than 3 in.DBH and greater than 3.28 ft(1 m)tall.
2• Xanthium strumarium 5 ❑ 7.1% FAC Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
° OBL
i regardless of size,and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
3. Persicaria sagittata 20 ❑ 28.6/o
4. Epilobium anaciallidifolium 5 ❑ 7.1% FAC Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
in height.
5. 0 ❑ 0.0%
6 0 ❑ 0.0% - Five Vegetation Strata:
7. 0 ❑ 0.0%
Tree-Woody plants,excluding woody vines,approximately 20
$ 0 ❑ 0.0% ft(6 m)or more in height and 3 in.(7.6 cm)or larger in
0 ❑ 0.0% diameter at breast height(DBH).
9• Sapling stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
1 0 ❑ 0.0% - vines,approximately 20 ft(6 m)or more in height and less
11. 0 ❑ 0.0% than 3 in.(7.6 cm)DBH.
12. 0 ❑ 0.0% Shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
vines,approximately 3 to 20 ft(1 to 6 m)in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 70 =Total Cover Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
0 ❑ 0.0% including herbaceous vines,regardless of size,and woody
1 species,except woody vines,less than approximately 3 ft(1
2. 0 ❑ 0.0% m)in height.
3. 0 ❑ 0.0% Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines,regardless of
height.
0 ❑ 0.0%
4. -
5. 0 ❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic
6. 0 ❑ 0.0% Vegetation
0 =Total Cover Present? Yes No -�
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix= National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

Soil Sampling Point: DP-07
Profile Description:(Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type 1 —Locz Texture Remarks
0-6 10YR 4/2 75 7.5YR 4/4 25 Silty Clay Loam
6-16 10YR 7/2 70 5YR 4/6 30 Silty Clay Loam
1 Type:C=Concentration.D=Depletion.RM=Reduced Matrix,CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining.M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol(Al) ❑ Dark Surface(S7) ❑ 2 cm Muck(A10)(MLRA 147)
❑ Histic Epipedon(A2) ❑ Polyvalue Below Surface(S8)(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Black Histic(A3) ❑ Thin Dark Surface(S9)(MLRA 147,148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox(A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)
❑ Stratified Layers(A5) 0 Depleted Matrix(F3) (MLRA 136,147)
❑ 2 cm Muck(A10)(LRR N) ❑ Redox Dark Surface(F6) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface(All) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface(F7) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks)
❑ Thick Dark Surface(Al2) ❑ Redox Depressions(F8)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral(SS)(LRR N, ❑ Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR N,
MLRA 147,148) MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) ❑ Umbric Surface(F13)(MLRA 136,122)
❑ Sandy Redox(S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)(MLRA 148) 3 Indicators of hydrology
mushydrophytict
vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Stripped Matrix(S6) ❑ Red Parent Material(F21)(MLRA 127,147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type:
Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No O
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Tobacco Road City/County: Alamance Sampling Date: 02-Dec-21
Applicant/Owner: RES State: NC Sampling Point: DP-08
Investigator(s): J.Schmid Section,Township,Range: S T R
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Floodplain Local relief(concave,convex,none): convex Slope: 0.0% / 0.0
Subregion(LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.97590500 Long.: -79.28051100 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Chewacla NWI classification: Upland
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes * No O (If no,explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation d❑ Soil d❑ or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances' ? Yes O No O
g y gy ❑ g y 'present.
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 O No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No O Is the Sampled Area
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O NO 0
within a Wetland? Yes � No
Remarks:
site heavily impacted by livestock access
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators(minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators(minimum of one required; check all that aooly) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks(B6)
❑ Surface Water(Al) ❑ True Aquatic Plants(B14) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(B8)
❑ High Water Table(A2) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) ❑ Drainage Patterns(B10)
❑ Saturation(A3) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots(0) ❑ Moss Trim Lines(B16)
❑ Water Marks(Bl) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) ❑ Dry Season Water Table(C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits(B2) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) ❑ Crayfish Burrows(C8)
❑ Drift deposits(B3) ❑ Thin Muck Surface(C7) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust(B4) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks) ❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants(DI)
❑ Iron Deposits(B5) ❑ Geomorphic Position(D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(B7) ❑ Shallow Aquitard(D3)
❑ Water-Stained Leaves(B9) ❑ Microtopographic Relief(D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna(B13) ❑ FAC-neutral Test(D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No C Depth(inches):
Water Table Present? Yes O NO Depth(inches):
Saturation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O No 0
(includes capillary fringe) Yes O No Depth(inches):
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant Sampling Point: DP-08
Species?
Absolute Rel.Strat. Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:_ ) %Cover Cover Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 0 ❑ 0.0% That are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 0 (A)
2 0 ❑ 0.o%
° Total Number of Dominant
3 0 ❑ 0.0% Species Across All Strata: 3 (B)
4. 0 ❑ 0.0%
5 0 ❑ 0.0% Percent of dominant Species o
6. 0 ❑ 0.0%
That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 0.0% (A/B)
7 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index worksheet:
g 0 ❑ 0.0% Total%Cover of: Multiply by:
0 =Total Cover OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 0 0.0%
FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
2. ❑
0 ❑ 0.0% FAC species 0 x 3 = 0
3. 0 ❑ 0.0% _ FACU species 80 x 4 = 320
4 0 ❑ 0.0% _ UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
5 0 ❑ 0.0% _ column Totals: 80 (A) 320 (B)
6 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index = B/A = 4.000
7 0 ❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
$ 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
9 0 ❑ 0.o%
❑ Dominance Test is>50%
10. 0 ❑ 0.0%
❑ Prevalence Index is:53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 0 =Total Cover ❑ Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
1. 0 ❑ 0.0% data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2. 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3. 0 ❑ 0.0% i Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4.
0 ❑ 0.0% be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
5. 0 ❑ 0.0% _ Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6. 0 ❑ 0.0% _ Four Vegetation Strata:
0 ❑ 0.0% Tree stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding vines,3 in.
7 (7.6 cm)or more in diameter at breast height(DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) 0 =Total Cover regardless of height.
Sapling/shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding
1, Cvnodon dactvlon 20 ❑ 25.0% FACU vines,less than 3 in.DBH and greater than 3.28 ft(1 m)tall.
2• Trifolium repens 20 ❑ 25.0% FACU Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
3• Festuca arundinacea 40 ❑ 50.0% FACU regardless of size,and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4 0 ❑ 0.0% Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
in height.
5. 0 ❑ 0.0%
6 0 ❑ 0.0% _ Five Vegetation Strata:
7. 0 ❑ 0.0°ro
Tree-Woody plants,excluding woody vines,approximately 20
$ 0 ❑ 0.0% ft(6 m)or more in height and 3 in.(7.6 cm)or larger in
0 ❑ 0.0% diameter at breast height(DBH).
9• Sapling stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
1 0 ❑ 0.0% _ vines,approximately 20 ft(6 m)or more in height and less
11. 0 ❑ 0.0% than 3 in.(7.6 cm)DBH.
12. 0 ❑ 0.0% Shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
vines,approximately 3 to 20 ft(1 to 6 m)in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 80 =Total Cover Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
0 ❑ 0.0% including herbaceous vines,regardless of size,and woody
1 species,except woody vines,less than approximately 3 ft(1
2. 0 ❑ 0.0% m)in height.
3• 0 ❑ 0.0% Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines,regardless of
4.
0 ❑ 0.0% height.
5. 0 ❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic
6. 0 ❑ 0.0% Vegetation
0 =Total Cover
Present? Yes 0 No
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix= National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

Soil Sampling Point: DP-08
Profile Description:(Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inchesl _ Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type 1 ocz _ Texture Remarks
0-2 7.5YR 4/3 100 Clay Loam
2-12 7.5YR 5/6 100 Clay
1 Type:C=Concentration.D=Depletion.RM=Reduced Matrix,CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining.M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol(Al) ❑ Dark Surface(S7) ❑ 2 cm Muck(A10)(MLRA 147)
❑ Histic Epipedon(A2) ❑ Polyvalue Below Surface(S8)(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Black Histic(A3) ❑ Thin Dark Surface(S9)(MLRA 147,148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox(A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(1`19)
❑ Stratified Layers(A5) ❑ Depleted Matrix(F3) (MLRA 136,147)
❑ 2 cm Muck(A10)(LRR N) ❑ Redox Dark Surface(F6) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface(All) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface(F7) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks)
❑ Thick Dark Surface(Al2) ❑ Redox Depressions(F8)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral(SS)(LRR N, ❑ Iron-Manganese Masses(1`12)(LRR N,
MLRA 147,148) MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) ❑ Umbric Surface(F13)(MLRA 136,122)
❑ Sandy Redox(S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)(MLRA 148) 3 Indicators of hydrology
mushydrophytict
vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Stripped Matrix(S6) ❑ Red Parent Material(F21)(MLRA 127,147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type:
Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Tobacco Road City/County: Alamance Sampling Date: 02-Dec-21
Applicant/Owner: RES State: NC Sampling Point: DP-09
Investigator(s): J.Schmid Section,Township,Range: S T R
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Floodplain Local relief(concave,convex,none): concave Slope: 0.0% / 0.0
Subregion(LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.97180700 Long.: -79.29011400 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Chewacla NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes * No O (If no,explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ ,Soil ❑ ,or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes O No O
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 No O
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No O Is the Sampled Area
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No O
within a Wetland? Yes O No O
Remarks:
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators(minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators(minimum of one required; check all that aooly) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks(B6)
❑ Surface Water(Al) ❑ True Aquatic Plants(B14) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(B8)
❑ High Water Table(A2) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) ❑ Drainage Patterns(B10)
❑ Saturation(A3) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots(0) ❑ Moss Trim Lines(B16)
❑ Water Marks(Bl) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) ❑ Dry Season Water Table(C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits(B2) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) ❑ Crayfish Burrows(C8)
❑ Drift deposits(B3) ❑ Thin Muck Surface(C7) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust(B4) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks) ❑ stunted or stressed Plants(DI)
❑ Iron Deposits(B5) ❑ Geomorphic Position(D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(B7) ❑ Shallow Aquitard(D3)
❑ Water-stained Leaves(B9) ❑ Microtopographic Relief(D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna(B13) d❑ FAC-neutral Test(D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No C Depth(inches):
Water Table Present? Yes C No O Depth(inches): 3
Saturation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0- No 0
(includes capillary fringe) Yes O No Depth(inches):
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant Sampling Point: DP-09
Species?
Absolute Rel.Strat. Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:_ ) %Cover Cover Status
Number of Dominant Species
1• Platanus occidentalis 10 ❑ 16.7% FACW That are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 7 (A)
2. Liquidambar stvraciflua 20 d❑ 33.3% FAC
Total Number of Dominant
3. Acer rubrum 30 a 50.0% FAC Species Across All Strata: 7 (B)
4. 0 ❑ 0.0%
5 0 ❑ 0.0% Percent of dominant Species o
6. 0 ❑ 0.0%
That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
7 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index worksheet:
g 0 ❑ 0.0% Total%Cover of: Multiply by:
60 =Total Cover OBL species 20 x 1 = 20
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Carpinus caroliniana 10 d❑ 100.0% FAC FACW species 10 x 2 = 20
2 0 ❑ 0.0% FAC species 110 x 3 = 330
3 0 ❑ 0.0% FACU species 0 x 4 = 0
4 0 ❑ 0.0% - UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
5 0 ❑ 0.0% - Column Totals: 140 (A) 370 (B)
6 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.643
7. 0 ❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
9 0 ❑ 0.o%
0 Dominance Test is>50%
10. 0 ❑ 0.0%
0 Prevalence Index is:53.0 i
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 10 =Total Cover ❑ Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
1. Rubus pensilvanicus 30 0 100.0% FAC data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2. 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3. 0 ❑ 0.0% 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4.
0 ❑ 0.0% be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
-
5. 0 ❑ 0.0% - Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6. 0 ❑ 0.0% - Four Vegetation Strata:
0 ❑ 0.0% Tree stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding vines,3 in.
7• (7.6 cm)or more in diameter at breast height(DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) 30 =Total Cover regardless of height.
Sapling/shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding
1, Microstegium vimineum 10 ❑ 33.3% FAC vines,less than 3 in.DBH and greater than 3.28 ft(1 m)tall.
2. Juncus abortivus 20 ❑ 66.7% OBL Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
3.
0 ❑ 0.0% regardless of size,and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
-
4 0 ❑ 0.0% - Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
in height.
5. 0 ❑ 0.0%
6 0 ❑ 0.0% - Five Vegetation Strata:
7. 0 ❑ 0.0°ro
Tree-Woody plants,excluding woody vines,approximately 20
$ 0 ❑ 0.0% ft(6 m)or more in height and 3 in.(7.6 cm)or larger in
0 ❑ 0.0% diameter at breast height(DBH).
9• Sapling stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
1 0 ❑ 0.0% - vines,approximately 20 ft(6 m)or more in height and less
11. 0 ❑ 0.0% than 3 in.(7.6 cm)DBH.
12. 0 ❑ 0.0% Shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
vines,approximately 3 to 20 ft(1 to 6 m)in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 30 =Total Cover Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
1• Smilax rotundifolia 10 d❑ 100.0% FAC including herbaceous vines,regardless of size,and woody
species,except woody vines,less than approximately 3 ft(1
2. 0 ❑ 0.0% m)in height.
3. 0 ❑ 0.0% Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines,regardless of
height.
0 ❑ 0.0%
4. -
5. 0 ❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic
6. 0 ❑ 0.0% Vegetation
10 =Total Cover Present? Yes No -�
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix= National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

Soil Sampling Point: DP-09
Profile Description:(Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inchesl _ Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type 1 —Locz Texture Remarks
0-7 10YR 4/1 100 Silt Loam
7-16 10YR 4/1 80 10YR 5/8 20 Silty Clay Loam
1 Type:C=Concentration.D=Depletion.RM=Reduced Matrix,CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining.M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol(Al) ❑ Dark Surface(S7) ❑ 2 cm Muck(A10)(MLRA 147)
❑ Histic Epipedon(A2) ❑ Polyvalue Below Surface(S8)(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Black Histic(A3) ❑ Thin Dark Surface(S9)(MLRA 147,148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox(A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(1`19)
❑ Stratified Layers(AS) 0 Depleted Matrix(F3) (MLRA 136,147)
❑ 2 cm Muck(A10)(LRR N) ❑ Redox Dark Surface(F6) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface(All) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface(F7) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks)
❑ Thick Dark Surface(Al2) ❑ Redox Depressions(F8)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral(SS)(LRR N, ❑ Iron-Manganese Masses(1`12)(LRR N,
MLRA 147,148) MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) ❑ Umbric Surface(F13)(MLRA 136,122)
❑ Sandy Redox(S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)(MLRA 148) 3 Indicators of hydrology
mushydrophytict
vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Stripped Matrix(S6) ❑ Red Parent Material(F21)(MLRA 127,147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type:
Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No O
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Tobacco Road City/County: Alamance Sampling Date: 02-Dec-21
Applicant/Owner: RES State: NC Sampling Point: DP-10
Investigator(s): J.Schmid Section,Township,Range: S T R
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Floodplain Local relief(concave,convex,none): convex Slope: 0.0% / 0.0
Subregion(LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.97180700 Long.: -79.29011400 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Chewacla NWI classification: Upland
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes * No O (If no,explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ ,Soil ❑ ,or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes O No O
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 O No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No O Is the Sampled Area
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O NO 0
within a Wetland? Yes � No
Remarks:
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators(minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators(minimum of one required; check all that aooly) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks(B6)
❑ Surface Water(Al) ❑ True Aquatic Plants(B14) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(B8)
❑ High Water Table(A2) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) ❑ Drainage Patterns(B10)
❑ Saturation(A3) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots(0) ❑ Moss Trim Lines(B16)
❑ Water Marks(Bl) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) ❑ Dry Season Water Table(C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits(B2) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) ❑ Crayfish Burrows(C8)
❑ Drift deposits(B3) ❑ Thin Muck Surface(C7) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust(B4) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks) ❑ stunted or stressed Plants(DI)
❑ Iron Deposits(B5) ❑ Geomorphic Position(D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(B7) ❑ Shallow Aquitard(D3)
❑ Water-stained Leaves(B9) ❑ Microtopographic Relief(D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna(B13) ❑ FAC-neutral Test(D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No C Depth(inches):
Water Table Present? Yes O NO Depth(inches):
Saturation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O No 0
(includes capillary fringe) Yes O No Depth(inches):
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant Sampling Point: DP-10
Species?
Absolute Rel.Strat. Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:_ ) %Cover Cover Status
Number of Dominant Species
1• Juniperus viminiana 10 ❑ 15.4% FACU That are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 3 (A)
2. Ouercus alba 20 d❑ 30.8% FACU
Total Number of Dominant
3. Liquidambar styraciflua 20 ❑ 30.8% FAC Species Across All Strata: 6 (B)
4. Pinus taeda 15 d❑ 23.1% FAC
5 0 ❑ 0.0% Percent of dominant Species o
6. 0 ❑ 0.0%
That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 50.0/o (A/B)
7 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index worksheet:
g 0 ❑ 0.0% Total%Cover of: Multiply by:
65 =Total Cover OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 0 0.0%
FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
❑ -
2 0 ❑ 0.0% FAC species 45 x 3 = 135
3 0 ❑ 0.0% - FACU species 50 x 4 = 200
4 0 ❑ 0.0% - UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
5 0 ❑ 0.0% - column Totals: 95 (A) 335 (B)
6 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.526
7. 0 ❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
$ 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
9 0 ❑ 0.o%
❑ Dominance Test is>50%
10. 0 ❑ 0.0%
❑ Prevalence Index is:53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 0 =Total Cover ❑ Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
1. Juniperus virginiana 5 d❑ 100.0% FACU data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2. 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3. 0 ❑ 0.0% 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4.
0 ❑ 0.0% be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
-
5. 0 ❑ 0.0% - Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6. 0 ❑ 0.0% - Four Vegetation Strata:
0 ❑ 0.0% Tree stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding vines,3 in.
7 (7.6 cm)or more in diameter at breast height(DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) 5 =Total Cover regardless of height.
Sapling/shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding
1, Microstegium vimineum 10 ❑ 100.0% FAC vines,less than 3 in.DBH and greater than 3.28 ft(1 m)tall.
2. 0 ❑ 0.0% Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
3.
0 ❑ 0.0% regardless of size,and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
-
4 0 ❑ 0.0% Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
in height.
5. 0 ❑ 0.0%
6 0 ❑ 0.0% - Five Vegetation Strata:
7. 0 ❑ 0.0°ro
Tree-Woody plants,excluding woody vines,approximately 20
$ 0 ❑ 0.0% ft(6 m)or more in height and 3 in.(7.6 cm)or larger in
0 ❑ 0.0% diameter at breast height(DBH).
9• Sapling stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
1 0 ❑ 0.0% - vines,approximately 20 ft(6 m)or more in height and less
11. 0 ❑ 0.0% than 3 in.(7.6 cm)DBH.
12. 0 ❑ 0.0% Shrub stratum-Consists of woody plants,excluding woody
vines,approximately 3 to 20 ft(1 to 6 m)in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 10 =Total Cover Herb stratum-Consists of all herbaceous(non-woody)plants,
1• Lonicera japonica 15 0 100.0% FACU including herbaceous vines,regardless of size,and woody
species,except woody vines,less than approximately 3 ft(1
2. 0 ❑ 0.0% m)in height.
3. 0 ❑ 0.0% Woody vines-Consists of all woody vines,regardless of
height.
0 ❑ 0.0%
4. -
5. 0 ❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic
6. 0 ❑ 0.0% Vegetation
15 =Total Cover
Present? Yes 0 No
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix= National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

Soil Sampling Point: DP-10
Profile Description:(Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type 1 ocz _ Texture Remarks
0-4 7.5YR 4/4 100 Clay Loam
4-12 10YR 6/4 85 7.5YR 5/8 15 Clay Loam
1 Type:C=Concentration.D=Depletion.RM=Reduced Matrix,CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining.M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol(Al) ❑ Dark Surface(S7) ❑ 2 cm Muck(A10)(MLRA 147)
❑ Histic Epipedon(A2) ❑ Polyvalue Below Surface(S8)(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Black Histic(A3) ❑ Thin Dark Surface(S9)(MLRA 147,148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox(A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)
❑ Stratified Layers(A5) ❑ Depleted Matrix(F3) (MLRA 136,147)
❑ 2 cm Muck(A10)(LRR N) ❑ Redox Dark Surface(F6) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface(All) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface(F7) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks)
❑ Thick Dark Surface(Al2) ❑ Redox Depressions(F8)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral(SS)(LRR N, ❑ Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR N,
MLRA 147,148) MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) ❑ Umbric Surface(F13)(MLRA 136,122)
❑ Sandy Redox(S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)(MLRA 148) 3 Indicators of hydrology
mushydrophytict
vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Stripped Matrix(S6) ❑ Red Parent Material(F21)(MLRA 127,147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type:
Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

From: Emily U rnan
To: Emily U rnan
Subject: FW:Tobacco Road(SAW2021-00489)Preliminary JD Request
Date: Monday,March 27,2023 15:16:58
-----Original Message-----
From: Dailey, Samantha J CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <Samantha.J.Dailey(@usace.arm)l.mil>
Sent: Monday, March 27, 2023 10:34 AM
To:Jeremy Schmid <ischmid(@res.us>
Cc: Isenhour, Kimberly T CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <Kimberly.T.IsenhourCcDusace.army.mil>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE:Tobacco Road (SAW2021-00489) Preliminary JD Request
Hi Jeremy,
I hope you're doing well! I spoke to Kim and my intention was to send out a JD concurrence for this
project; I just never got around to it. We do not have to issue a JD in conjunction with the draft mit
plan, or at all, so long as we have a valid delineation and concur. You can consider this the Corps
concurrence with the Tobacco Road Site for future planning, etc. No additional documentation will
be provided regarding the JD. Please let me know if you have any questions.
Sam Dailey (she/her)
Chief, Charlotte Regulatory Field Office U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
8430 University Executive Park Drive, Suite 615 Charlotte, NC 28262
Email: Samantha.J.Dailey(@usace.arm)t.mil
Cell: [phone]
-----Original Message-----
From:Jeremy Schmid <jschmid(@res.us>
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2023 2:14 PM
To: Dailey, Samantha J CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <Samantha.J.Dailey(@usace.arm)l.mil>
Cc: Isenhour, Kimberly T CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <Kimberly.T.Isenhour(@usace.army.mil>
Subject: [URL Verdict: Neutral][Non-DoD Source] RE:Tobacco Road (SAW2021-00489) Preliminary JD
Request
Hey Sam,
I wanted to check-in on this. I know you typically issue the PJD after receiving the draft mitigation
plan but since this project has changed hands during that window I wasn't sure if that part had been
handed off.

Have a great weekend!
Jeremy Schmid
Senior Ecologist
RES I res.us <Blockedhttp://res.us/>
Mobile: [phone]
Restoring a resilient earth for a modern world
From: Jeremy Schmid
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 10:43 AM
To: Samantha.J.DaileyPusace.army.mil
Subject: Tobacco Road (SAW2021-00489) Preliminary JD Request
Hi Sam,
Hope you are doing well! I have attached a PJD request for the Tobacco Road Mitigation Site. We
performed the delineation back in early December while the state wide drought was still ongoing.
Despite the drought, the majority of the wetlands still had strong hydrology due to the massive
amount of seeps out there. The study area shown is slightly wider in areas than our proposed
easement in order to capture origins of some jurisdictional features. I know you have seen most of
the site but let me know if you would like to schedule a visit to see any of these features. And of
course let me know if you need anything else or have questions.
Thanks,
Jeremy Schmid, PWS

OMBIL Regulatory
Module (ORM
• Updated Aquatic Resources
• Impacts

Waters Name State Cowardin_Codel HGM_Code Meas_Type Amount Units Waters_Type NWPR_Determine_Code Latitude Longitude Local_Waterway
WA NORTH CAROLINA PFO Area 0.035625 ACRE DELINEATE 35.977266 -79.27751100 Motes Creek/Haw River
WB NORTH CAROLINA PFO Area 0.171444 ACRE DELINEATE 35.977809 -79.27976900 Motes Creek/Haw River
WC NORTH CAROLINA PEM Area 0.134831 ACRE DELINEATE 35.972923 -79.28349300 Motes Creek/Haw River
WD NORTH CAROLINA PFO Area 0.052599 ACRE DELINEATE 35.973697 -79.28405300 Motes Creek/Haw River
WE NORTH CAROLINA PFO Area 0.064989 ACRE DELINEATE 35.974111 -79.28285100 Motes Creek/Haw River
WF NORTH CAROLINA PFO Area 0.134106 ACRE DELINEATE 35.975061 -79.28201100 Motes Creek/Haw River
WG NORTH CAROLINA PEM Area 0.134938 ACRE DELINEATE 35.975905 -79.28051100 Motes Creek/Haw River
WH NORTH CAROLINA PFO Area 0.007824 ACRE DELINEATE 35.973893 -79.28323300 Motes Creek/Haw River
WI NORTH CAROLINA PEM Area 0.054262 ACRE DELINEATE 35.976788 -79.28114300 Motes Creek/Haw River
WJ NORTH CAROLINA PEM Area 0.088098 ACRE DELINEATE 35.975671 -79.28187800 Motes Creek/Haw River
WK NORTH CAROLINA PEM Area 0.323487 ACRE DELINEATE 35.975087 -79.28270900 Motes Creek/Haw River
WL NORTH CAROLINA PEM Area 0.043784 ACRE DELINEATE 35.973986 -79.28448900 Motes Creek/Haw River
WM NORTH CAROLINA PEM Area 0.03635 ACRE DELINEATE 35.973852 -79.28480600 Motes Creek/Haw River
WN NORTH CAROLINA PEM Area 0.01431 ACRE DELINEATE 35.973421 -79.28556700 Motes Creek/Haw River
WO NORTH CAROLINA PFO Area 0.092762 ACRE DELINEATE 35.972303 -79.28639600 Motes Creek/Haw River
WP NORTH CAROLINA PEM Area 0.036325 ACRE DELINEATE 35.972782 -79.28548300 Motes Creek/Haw River
WQ NORTH CAROLINA PFO Area 0.359889 ACRE DELINEATE 35.971807 -79.29011400 Motes Creek/Haw River
WR NORTH CAROLINA PFO Area 0.326733 ACRE DELINEATE 35.972021 -79.28862500 Motes Creek/Haw River
WS NORTH CAROLINA PEM Area 0.094449 ACRE DELINEATE 35.972463 -79.28696000 Motes Creek/Haw River
WT NORTH CAROLINA PEM Area 0.060146 ACRE DELINEATE 35.971988 -79.28621900 Motes Creek/Haw River
WU NORTH CAROLINA PFO Area 0.023881 ACRE DELINEATE 35.968673 -79.29440900 Motes Creek/Haw River
WV NORTH CAROLINA PFO Area 0.01602 ACRE DELINEATE 35.968464 -79.29821000 Motes Creek/Haw River
WW NORTH CAROLINA PEM Area 0.132871 ACRE DELINEATE 35.972648 -79.29160200 Motes Creek/Haw River
TR1 NORTH CAROLINA R3 Linear 7700 FOOT DELINEATE 35.976592 -79.27937000 Motes Creek/Haw River
MN1 NORTH CAROLINA R4 Linear 796 FOOT DELINEATE 35.976935 -79.27979400 Motes Creek/Haw River
MN2 NORTH CAROLINA R4 Linear 1069 FOOT DELINEATE 35.977931 -79.28201500 Motes Creek/Haw River
MN3 NORTH CAROLINA R4 Linear 189 FOOT DELINEATE 35.974293 -79.28351600 Motes Creek/Haw River
MN4 NORTH CAROLINA R4 Linear 396 FOOT DELINEATE 35.972777 -79.28352900 Motes Creek/Haw River
TR2 NORTH CAROLINA R4 Linear 271 FOOT DELINEATE 35.9727 -79.28581700 Motes Creek/Haw River
S2 NORTH CAROLINA R4 Linear 201 FOOT DELINEATE 35.972868 -79.28719000 Motes Creek/Haw River
MN5 NORTH CAROLINA R4 Linear 232 FOOT DELINEATE 35.971524 -79.28674500 Motes Creek/Haw River
MN6 NORTH CAROLINA R4 Linear 624 FOOT DELINEATE 35.970444 -79.28998000 Motes Creek/Haw River
MN9 NORTH CAROLINA R4 Linear 95 FOOT DELINEATE 35.970345 -79.28945200 Motes Creek/Haw River
MN7 NORTH CAROLINA R4 Linear 497 FOOT DELINEATE 35.972371 -79.29155400 Motes Creek/Haw River
MN8 NORTH CAROLINA R4 Linear 86 FOOT DELINEATE 35.969032 79.29377700 Motes Creek/Haw River
D1 NORTH CAROLINA POW Linear 384 FOOT DELINEATE 35.967952 -79.29694100 Motes Creek/Haw River
S1 NORTH CAROLINA R6 Linear 84 FOOT DELINEATE 35.976539 -79.27906700 Motes Creek/Haw River

Waters Name Name ActivityAmount Units Initially_Proposed_ Initially_Proposed_ Initially_Proposed_Pmposed_L Proposed_ Proposed_ Authorized_ Authorized_ Authorized_
� — — Length Width Amount ength Width Amount Length Width Amount
TR1 S1 Ecological restoration River/Stream YES Permanent Fill Area 1127 25 Stream Restoration
TR1 S2 Ecological restoration River/Stream YES Permanent Fill Area 50 11 Crossing
TR1 S3 Ecological restoration River/Stream YES Permanent Fill Area 302 33 Stream Restoration
TR1 S4 Ecological restoration River/Stream NO Temporary Fill Area 376 20 Layered Riffles
TR1 S5 Ecological restoration River/Stream YES Permanent Fill Area 50 20 Crossing
TR1 S6 Ecological restoration River/Stream YES Permanent Fill Area 40 24 Crossing
TR1 S7 Ecological restoration River/Stream NO Temporary Fill Area 150 15 Enhancement I
TR1 SS Ecological restoration River/Stream YES Permanent Fill Area 40 15 Crossing
TR1 S9 Ecological restoration River/Stream YES Permanent Fill Area 1948 28 Stream Restoration
MN1 S10 Ecological restoration River/Stream YES Permanent Fill Area 731 16 Stream Restoration
MN2 S11 Ecological restoration River/Stream YES Permanent Fill Area 30 25 Crossing
MN2 S12 Ecological restoration River/Stream YES Permanent Fill Area 532 28 Stream Restoration
MN4 S13 Ecological restoration River/Stream YES Permanent Fill Area 40 13 Crossing
MN6 S14 Ecological restoration River/Stream YES Permanent Fill Area 231 10 Stream Restoration
MN8 S15 Ecological restoration River/Stream YES Permanent Fill Area 86 8 Stream Restoration
WB WI Ecological restoration Non-Tidal Wetland NO Temporary Fill Area Acres 0.067869 Limits of Disturbance
WC W2 Ecological restoration Non-Tidal Wetland NO Temporary Fill Area Acres 0.040804 Limits of Disturbance
WD W3 Ecological restoration Non-Tidal Wetland NO Temporary Fill Area Acres 0.013977 Limits of Disturbance
W W4 Ecological restoration Non-Tidal Wetland NO Temporary Fill Area Acres 0.004053 Limits of Disturbance
WEF W5 Ecological restoration Non-Tidal Wetland YES Permanent Fill Area Acres 0.002235 Stream Plugs
WF W6 Ecological restoration Non Tide Wetland NO Temporary Fill Area Acres 0.091506 Limits of Disturbance
WG W7 Ecological restoration Non-Tidal Wetland NO Temporary Fill Area Acres 0.083287 Limits of Disturbance
WH W8 Ecological restoration Non Tide Wetland NO Temporary Fill Area Acres 0.007824 Limits of Disturbance
WI W9 Ecological restoration Non-Tidal Wetland YES Permanent Fill Area Acres 0.001 Stream Restoration
WI W10 Ecological restoration Non-Tidal Wetland NO Temporary Fill Area Acres 0.036101 Limits of Disturbance
WJ Wit Ecological restoration Non-Tidal Wetland YES Permanent Fill Area Acres 0.002316 Stream Restoration
WJ W12 Ecological restoration Non-Tidal Wetland NO Temporary Fill Area Acres 0.034047 Limits of Disturbance
WK WU Ecological restoration Non-Tidal Wetland YES Permanent Fill Area Acres 0.00855 Stream Restoration 8 Stream Plugs
WK W14 Ecological restoration Non-Tidal Wetland NO Temporary Fill Area Acres 0.065335 Limits of Disturbance
WL W15 Ecological restoration Non Tit Wetland NO Temporary Fill Area Acres 0.022798 Limits of Disturbance
WM W16 Ecological restoration Non-Tidal Wetland NO Temporary Fill Area Acres 0.001957 Limits of Disturbance
WO W17 Ecological restoration Non-Tidal Wetland NO Temporary Fill Area Acres 0.045258 Limits of Disturbance
WU W18 Ecological restoration Non-Tidal Wetland YES Permanent Fill Area Acres 0.002054 Stream Restoration
WU W79 Ecological restoration Non Tit Wetland NO Temporary Fill Area Acres 0.021827 Limits of Disturbance
WV W20 Ecological restoration Non-Tidal Wetland NO Temporary Fill Area Acres 0.002282 Limits of Disturbance

RegulatoryScopingLetter
Responses
• NC Wildlife Resources Commission
• NC Natural Heritage Program
• State Historic Preservation Office
• United States Fish and Wildlife Service
• Stream Determination Letter

V
9 North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Cameron Ingram, Executive Director
Via Email
28 March 2022
Emily Ulman
Resource Environmental Solutions,LLC
3600 Glenwood Avenue, Suite 100
Raleigh,NC 27612
SUBJECT: Environmental Review of the Tobacco Road Mitigation Site in Alamance County,North
Carolina.
Dear Ms.Ulman,
Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission(NCWRC)received your request for
review and comments on any possible concerns regarding the Tobacco Road Mitigation Site. Comments
are provided in accordance with provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act(48 Stat. 401, as
amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667e) and North Carolina General Statutes (G.S. 113-131 et seq.).
The Tobacco Road Mitigation Site is located northeast and northwest of the intersection of Thom Road
and NC Highway 54 near Saxapahaw,Alamance County,North Carolina. The proposed project would
restore, enhance, and protect perennial and intermittent streams,wetlands, and riparian buffers within a
41.87-acre conservation easement in the Cape Fear River basin. The existing land use is a mix of forested
and agricultural lands, including row crops and active pasture.
We have no known records for rare,threatened,or endangered species within the site. The lack of records
from the site does not imply or confirm the absence of federal or state-listed species. An on-site survey is
the only means to determine if the proposed project may impact federal or state rare,threatened, or
endangered species.
Mitigation projects often improve water quality and aquatic habitat. Establishing native,forested buffers
in riparian areas will help protect water quality,improve aquatic and terrestrial habitats,and provide a
travel corridor for wildlife species. We offer the following general recommendations to minimize impacts
to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife resources:
1. We recommend riparian buffers are as wide as possible,given site constraints and landowner
needs. NCWRC generally recommends a woody buffer of 100 feet on perennial streams to
maximize the benefits of buffers,including bank stability, stream shading,treatment of overland
runoff, and wildlife habitat.
Mailing Address: Habitat Conservation • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh,NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]

Page 2
28 March 2022
Tobacco Road Mitigation Site
Alamance County
2. We recommend a plant list that consists of species typically found in reference streams and the
appropriate natural vegetation community, as described by M.P. Schafale in The Guide To The
Natural Communities of North Carolina,Fourth Approximation
(https://www.ncOp.org/references/nhp-publications/fourth-approximation-descriptions).Also,
ensure the species planted occur naturally within Alamance County.
3. Avoid using orchard grass,fescue,or cereal rye,which exhibits allelopathic characteristics, or
any other non-native species for soil stabilization. Alternatively,use a grain, such as oats,wheat,
or browntop millet for temporary cover and native seed mixes for permeant seeding. We
recommend planting a mix of grasses and native,wildflower seed mixes that will create pollinator
habitat within the project boundary.
4. The use of biodegradable and wildlife-friendly sediment and erosion control devices is strongly
recommended. Silt fencing, fiber rolls and/or other products should have loose-weave netting
that is made of natural fiber materials with movable joints between the vertical and horizontal
twines. Silt fencing that has been reinforced with plastic or metal mesh should be avoided as it
impedes the movement of terrestrial wildlife species. Excessive silt and sediment loads can have
detrimental effects on aquatic resources including destruction of spawning habitat, suffocation of
eggs, and clogging of gills.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments. If I can be of additional assistance,please call(336)
269-0074 or email olivia.munzer(c�r�,ncwildlife.org.
Sincerely,
Olivia Munzer
Western Piedmont Habitat Conservation Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program

Roy Cooper,Governor
■■ ■ NC DEPARTMENT OF D_Reid Wilson,Secretary
■■■■i NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
■ ■■■ Misty Buchanan
Deputy Director,Natural Heritage Program
N CN H D E-17458
March 21, 2022
Matthew DeAngelo
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC
302 Jefferson Street
Raleigh, NC 27607
RE: Tobacco Road (updated)
Dear Matthew DeAngelo:
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:
httl2s://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 nev.butler(a)ncdcr.aov or 919-707-8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
Qv 121 W.JONES STREET.RALEIGH.NC 27603 • 1651 MAIL SERVICE CENTER.RALEIGH.NC 27699
& OFC 919.707.9120 • FAX [phone]

Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Tobacco Road (updated)
March 21, 2022
N CN H D E-17458
Element Occurrences Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Taxonomic EO ID Scientific Na Common Name Element Accuracy Federal State Global State
Group70 FObservation Occurrence Status Status Rank Rank
,� Date Rank
Dragonfly or 33764 Somatochlora Coppery Emerald 2004-Pre H? 5-Very --- Significantly G3G4 Sl?
Damselfly georgiana Low Rare
No Natural Areas are Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
No Managed Areas are Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Definitions and an explanation of status designations and codes can be found at https://ncnhde.natureserve.ora/help. Data query generated on March 21,2022;source: NCNHP,Q4,January 2022. Please
resubmit your information request if more than one year elapses before project initiation as new information is continually added to the NCNHP database.
Page 2 of 3

NCNHDE-17458: Tobacco Road (updated)
s
U
O s.
ayne Rd o�
t!
L
or
e creek.
� N
54 i
R V,
t `
I
a ,N School Rd
3
N
W+E gelhleM I
SaxaPah`'w
S w
March 21, 2022 1:27,893
Project Boundary i o.zzs o.as o.s mi
Buffered Project Boundary 0 0.375 0.75 1.5 km
Sources:Esri,HERE,Garmin,Intermap,increment P Corp.,GEBCO,USGS,
FAO,NPS,NRCAN,GeoBase,IGN,Kadaster NL,Ordnance Survey,Esri Japan,
METI,Esri China(Hong Kong),(c)OpenStreetMap contributors,and the GIS
User Community
Page 3 of 3

North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M.Bartos,Administrator
Governor Roy Cooper Secretary D.Reid Wilson
July 20, 2021
Samantha Dailey samantha.j.dailey( ,usace.aM.mil
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers—Wilmington District
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest,NC 27587
Re: Tobacco Road Mitigation Project, 35.973063, -79.282234, Alamance County, ER 21-1594
Dear Ms. Dailey:
Thank you for your notification of June 25, 2021, regarding the above-referenced undertaking. We have
reviewed the submittal and offer the following comments.
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would be affected
by the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36
CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-814-6579
or environmental.reviewkncdcr.gov. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the
above referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
Ramona Bartos, Deputy
State Historic Preservation Officer
Location:109 East Jones Street,Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address:4617 Mail Service Center,Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax:[phone]-6898

E"T OF rh United States Department of the Interior
9 FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh ES Field Office
551-F Pylon Drive
Ac a As Raleigh,North Carolina 27606
July 12, 2021
Samantha Dailey
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
Mitigation Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
Re: RES Cape Fear 02 UMB (Tobacco Road Mitigation)/SAW-2021-00489/Alamance County
Dear Mrs. Dailey:
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed the project advertised in the above
referenced Public Notice. The project, as advertised in the Public Notice, is expected to have
minimal adverse impacts to fish and wildlife resources. Therefore, we have no objection to the
activity as described in the permit application.
In accordance with the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, (ESA) and based on the
information provided, and other available information, it appears the action is not likely to
adversely affect federally listed species or their critical habitat as defined by the ESA. We believe
that the requirements of section 7 (a)(2) of the ESA have been satisfied for this project. Please
remember that obligations under the ESA must be reconsidered if: (1) new information identifies
impacts of this action that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner not previously
considered; (2)this action is modified in a manner that was not considered in this review; or, (3) a
new species is listed or critical habitat determined that may be affected by the identified action.
For your convenience a list of all federally protected endangered and threatened species in North
Carolina is now available on our website at<http://www.fws.gov/raleigh>. Our web page contains
a complete and updated list of federally protected species, and a list of federal species of concern
known to occur in each county in North Carolina.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to review and provide comments on the proposed action.
Should you have any questions regarding the project, please contact Kathy Mathews at (919) 856-
4520, extension 27.
Sincerely,
Pete Benjamin,
Field Supervisor
cc: NMFS, Beaufort, NC
EPA, Atlanta, GA
WRC, Raleigh

ROY COOPER
Governor
ELIZABETH S.BISER * 4
Secretary +`
S.DANIEL SMITH NORTH CAROLINA
Director Environmental Quality
March 17, 2022
Resource Environmental Solutions
Attn: Matt Butler
Delivered via email to: [e-mail]
Subject: On-Site Determination for Applicability to the Jordan Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 02B .0267)
Subject Property: Tobacco Road Mitigation Project
Dear Mr. Butler:
On February 23, 2022, 1 conducted an follow up on-site determination with you to review additional
features located on the subject project for stream determinations with regards to the above noted state
regulations.
The attached initialed and dated updated sketch and updated buffer subjectivity table below depict all
previous Division stream determinations as well as additional recent stream determinations conducted
during the original site visit on May 4, 2021 and the recent site visit on February 23, 2022. Please note
that the pond adjacent to stream MN1 on the attached map is not subject to the buffers because it does
not have an intermittent or perennial stream flowing into, or out of it. In addition, the Seep shown on
the attached map did scored less than 19 points on the DWR Stream Identification Form although may
be considered a jurisdictional feature by the US Army Corps of Engineers.
Stream ID UST Soil Survey Subjectivity
TR1 Yes Yes Yes
MN1 Yes Yes Yes
MN2 No No No
MN3 No No No
MN4 Yes Yes Yes
TR2 Yes Yes Yes
MN5 No No No
MN6 No No No
MN7 No No No
MN8 No No No
MN9 No No No
This on-site determination shall expire five (5)years from the date of this letter. The owner(or future
owners) should notify the Division (and other relevant agencies) of this decision in any future
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
Fr1 ^n l I'll
IVA Winston-Salem Regional Office 1 450 West Hanes Mill Road,Suite 3001 Winston-Salem,North Carolina 27105
OW" 336.776.9800

correspondences concerning this property. Landowners or affected parties that dispute this
determination made by the Division may request a determination by the Director of Water Resources.
This determination is final and binding, unless an appeal request is made within sixty(60) calendar days
of the date of this letter to the Director in writing.
If sending via U.S. Postal Service: If sending via delivery service(UPS, FedEx, etc.)
Paul Wojoski - DWR 401 & Buffer Paul Wojoski - DWR 401 & Buffer
Permitting Branch Supervisor Permitting Branch Supervisor
1617 Mail Service Center 512 N Salisbury St.
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Raleigh, NC 27604
This letter only addresses the features on the subject property and/or within the proposed project area
and does not approve any activity within buffers or within waters of the state. If you have any
additional questions or require additional information, please call me at 336-776-9693 or
[e-mail] determination is subject to review as provided in Articles 3 &4 of G.S.
150B.
Sincerely,
DocuSigned by:
466ED631098F411...
Sue Homewood
Winston-Salem Regional Office
Cc: Steven & Deedra Greeson,4870 Mineral Springs Rd,Apt A, Graham NC 27253
Ray Newlin, 903 Holland Rd, Fuquay-Varina NC 27526
Katie Merritt, 401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
DWR, Winston-Salem Regional Office
D E Q�� North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
Winston-Salem Regional Office 1 450 West Hanes Mill Road,Suite 300 1 Winston-Salem,North Carolina 27105
a�N^­fE^•„^^m^^wa^•Inv /'� 336.776.9800