20110106 Ver 1_Year 3 Monitoring Report_20150415

20 �l�v��
Bu ff0o IFRats Restoration Site
Monitoring Report 1D Y03
IEIEP Project # 94647
IEIEP Contract # 003273
` Submitted to:
�"L'
=Cos_ stm
;T
�t
NCEEP, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleibh, NC D rl m CJ�`!�'
Construction Completed: October 2
Data Collection: June 2014
Submitted: January 2015 pENR -wATEK RE'
MITTI T
TRANSPORTATION PERMITTING UNI

Monitoring and Design Firm
KCI
TECHNOLOGIES
KCI
ASSOCIATES OF NC
ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGIES
AND CONSTRUCTION, INC.
Landmark Center II, Suite 220
4601 Six Forks Road
Raleigh, NC 27609
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
"+ Project Manager: Tim Morris
Email: [e-mail]
Project No: 20100798
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site KCI Associates of NC. PA
EEP Project # 94647 2014 -MY03

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY / PROJECT ABSTRACT .................................... ..............................1
1.1 Vegetation Success Criteria ................................................................ ..............................2
1.2 Hydrology Success Criteria ................................................................. ..............................2
1.3 Soil Success Criteria ............................................................................. ..............................3
2.0 METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................. ..............................3
3.0 REFERENCES .................................................................................................... ..............................4
Appendix A — Project Vicinity Map and Background Tables
Figure 1. Project Site Vicinity Map ............................................................................... ..............................6
Figure 2. Project Site Mitigation Plan View .................................................................. ..............................7
Table1 — Project Components ....................................................................................... ..............................8
Table 2 — Project Activity and Reporting History ......................................................... ..............................9
Table3 — Project Contacts ............................................................................................. ..............................9
Table 4 — Project Attributes ........................................................................................ ............................... 10
Appendix B — Visual Assessment Data
Figure 3. Current Condition Plan View ...................................................................... ............................... 12
Table 5 — Vegetation Condition Assessment .............................................................. ............................... 13
PhotoPoint Photos ...................................................................................................... ............................... 14
VegetationPlot Photos ................................................................................................ ............................... 18
Appendix C — Vegetation Plot Data
Table 6 — Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment ........................................................... ............................... 26
Table 7 — CVS Vegetation Plot Metadata ................................................................... ............................... 27
Table 8 — CVS Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot and Species ........................... ............................... 28
Appendix D — Hydrologic Data
30 -70 Percentile Graph ............................................................................................... ............................... 31
Precipitation and Water Level Plots ............................................................................ ............................... 32
Table 9 — Wetland Hydrology Criteria Attainment ..................................................... ............................... 43
Appendix E — Soil Data
SoilProfile Descriptions ............................................................................................... .............................45
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site KC1 Associates of NC. PA
EEP Project 1194647 2014 -MY03

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY / PROJECT ABSTRACT
The Buffalo Flats Restoration Site (BFRS) is a full - delivery project that was developed for the North
Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP). Construction was completed in October 2011. The site
is within the 03040105 Watershed Cataloging Unit (8 -digit HUC) and the Local Watershed Unit (14 -digit
HUC) 03040105020050. In EEP's most recent publication of excluded and Targeted Local
Watersheds /Hydrologic Units, this 14 -digit HUC has been identified as a Targeted Local Watershed.
The project goals and objectives are listed below.
Project Goals
• Create diverse bottomland hardwood and low elevation seep communities that are integrated into
the Dutch Buffalo Creek Corridor.
• Buffer nutrient and sediment impacts to Dutch Buffalo Creek from adjacent grazing practices.
Project Objectives
• Fill field ditches and ponds to slow the removal of hydrology from the site.
• Redevelop wetland microtopography to capture surface hydrology and slow subsurface drainage.
• Plant the mitigation area with species native to bottomland riparian forest and low elevation seep
communities.
• Install livestock exclusion fencing.
The project site, which is protected by a 20.2 -acre permanent conservation easement held by the State of
North Carolina, is situated in Cabarrus County in the Southern Outer Piedmont ecoregion of the Piedmont
physiographic province. The site is located on a single parcel located off of Gold Hill Road approximately
six miles northeast of Concord, North Carolina.
An additional 2.6 acre permanent conservation easement located adjacent and contiguous with the project
site is held by KCI Technologies and contains 1.6 acres of restored riparian wetlands. This site is
monitored as an additional, non - creditable component of the site that is available to make up for any
portions of the BFRS that do not achieve the target success criteria.
The BFRS provided mitigation for wetland impacts within Hydrologic Unit 03040105 by restoring,
preserving, and creating 20.2 acres of wetland, generating 11.6 riparian wetland mitigation units
(WMU's) and 3.4 non - riparian WMU's.
The BFRS will be monitored to determine if the project is on -track to meeting jurisdictional wetland
status. In the restoration areas, the wetland site will be deemed successful once hydrology is established
and vegetation success criteria are met. In the creation area, success will be achieved if wetland hydrology
and vegetation are present along with indicators of hydric soils.
1.1 Vegetation Success Criteria
The wetland mitigation is comprised of four areas that combine preservation, creation, and restoration.
The site will be monitored for at least seven years or until the success criteria are achieved. The success
criteria for the planted species in mitigation areas will be based on density measured from monitoring
plots. The site will demonstrate the re- establishment of targeted vegetative communities based on survival
of planted species and volunteer colonization, with an average stem density of 320 stems /acre after three
years, 288 stems /acre after four years, 260 stems /acre after five years, and 210 stems /acre after 7 years.
To determine the success of the planted mitigation area, thirteen permanent vegetation monitoring plots
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 2 KCl Associates of NC, PA
EEP Project 9 94647 2014 -MY03

(10 by 10 meters) have been established in the wetland restoration and creation areas at a density that
statistically represents the total mitigation acreage. Three of these plots are located in Wetland Area 1,
nine of these plots are located in Wetland Area 2, and one plot is located in Wetland Area 3. The average
density of these plots will determine whether the site meets the success criterion. Non - target species must
not constitute more than 20% of the woody vegetation based on permanent monitoring plots.
The third -year vegetation monitoring was based on the Level 2 CVS -EEP vegetation monitoring protocol.
The site's average density for this monitoring period was 607 planted stems /acre. Twelve of the thirteen
plots had greater than 320 planted stems /acre. Including volunteers, the site averaged 1,806 total
stems /acre. The site received supplemental planting in January 2013. During the second -year vegetation
monitoring, some of the supplemental planted species may have been recorded as volunteers. During the
2014 monitoring season, KCI mapped the location of these species and recorded them as planted stems.
Additionally an extra vegetation monitoring plot was installed in an adjacent restored wetland, which is
described in Section 1.2. This vegetation plot was found to have a planted and total stem density of 1,052
total stems /acre.
1.2 Hydrology Success Criteria
Due to the inherent variability in the site's features and its geomorphic position, it is unlikely that the
project will homogeneously exhibit common hydrologic conditions across the site, making a single
hydrologic performance criterion unrepresentative of the sites performance. As such, the gauge data will
be evaluated as a spatial average with each gauge representing the area half the distance to adjacent
gauges or wetland type boundaries. The spatial average by wetland type will be the calculated value for
comparison with the performance standard for credit validation. Gauges not achieving a minimum of 5%
saturation will be considered non - attaining even if the spatial average exceeds the credit validation
performance standard (5% for non - riparian and 10% for riparian).
The water table of the restored wetlands must be within 12" of the soils surface continuously for at least
5% (12 days) in the non- riparian wetland area (3.4 acres) and 10% (25 days) in the riparian wetland area
(11.6 acres), (50% probability of reoccurrence) of the growing season during normal weather conditions.
A "normal" year is based on NRCS climatological data for Cabarrus County, and using the 30th to 70th
percentile thresholds as the range of normal, as documented in the USACE Technical Report "Accessing
and Using Meteorological Data to Evaluate Wetland Hydrology" (Sprecher, 2000).
The growing season for Cabarrus County extends from March 23 to November 11 for a total of 233 days
(NRCS 1995). An automatic recording gauge was installed on the site on May 23, 2013 to record the soil
temperature at 30 cm below the ground surface. If these data demonstrate the soil temperature is above
biological zero (43 °F) beyond the 233 day range, it can be used to document the extended growing season
(Skaggs, 2012). In the interest of being conservative, this data was used to define the beginning of the
growing season and the Cabarrus County Soil Survey was used to define the end of it. For 2014 this
resulted in a growing season of 249 days, beginning on March 8 and ending on November 11.
The daily rainfall data was obtained from a local weather station in Kannapolis, NC; provided by the NC
State Climate Office. For the 2014 -year, the months of March and April experienced above average
rainfall, while May, August, and November experienced average rainfall. The months of June, July,
September, and October recorded below average rainfall for the site. Overall, the area experienced below
average rainfall during the 2014 growing season.
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 3 KCI Associates of NC, PA
EEP Project # 94647 2014 -MY03

In addition to the wetlands that have been monitored at this site so far, there is also a small 1.2 acre
riparian wetland that is contiguous to and was restored at the same time as this site. This additional
wetland area is within an adjacent 2.6 acre conservation easement held by KCI Technologies, but is not
included in the creditable assets for this site. One additional wetland gauge was installed in this restored
riparian wetland on March 20, 2014. This wetland will be monitored as an additional component of the
site that is not creditable, but is considered an ancillary benefit/feature of the site. During the site's third
growing season, all eight wells in the riparian areas met the success criterion of having saturated soil
conditions occurring within 12 inches of the ground surface for a minimum continuous period of 10% (23
days) of the growing season during average climatic conditions. All three wells in the non- riparian areas
met the success criterion of 5% (12 days) of the growing season. Additionally, the extra well met the
hydrology success criteria with 46 consecutive days of saturated soil conditions. Overall, wetland
hydrology was achieved at all eleven groundwater monitoring gauges in the riparian and non - riparian
restoration areas.
1.3 Soil Success Criteria
Beginning in Monitoring Year 2, soils were monitored within the 1.2 acre wetland creation area on site.
Two permanent monitoring plots were established adjacent to Well 6 and Well 7 and soil profiles will be
monitored yearly for evidence of the development of redoximorphic features by a licensed soil scientist.
Soil profiles will be compared from year to year and changes will be documented in the yearly monitoring
reports. Although several studies exist in the scientific literature that investigate temporal changes in soils
resulting from wetland creation projects, there are no studies that suggest that jurisdictional hydric soils
will develop under the appropriate hydrology conditions within the seven -year monitoring period. As
such, KCI will monitor the soils for changes in chroma, organic matter content and document other
indications that the soil is subject to low oxygen conditions. These indicators would include oxidized root
channels, concretions, mottles and other observations that suggest the soil is subject to low oxygen
conditions etc.
A detailed soils profile description was conducted at two permanent monitoring plots by a licensed soil
scientist (# 187) on July 14, 2014. Both soil plots met the hydric soil criteria with an indicator of redox
depressions (F8). Additionally, evidence that the seasonal high water table has continued to develop more
fully can be seen in the increased mottling present in the soil this year. No mottles were reported within
either soil profile during MY -02, but during the current year, mottles ranging from 5 —'20% of their
respective soil horizons were reported, especially within the upper 12 inches of the soil. This indicates the
continuation of anaerobic conditions in the soil caused by saturated conditions. See Appendix E for both
soil profile descriptions.
Summary information /data related to the occurrence of items such as beaver or encroachment and
statistics related to performance of various project and monitoring elements can be found in the tables and
figures in the report appendices. Narrative background and supporting information formerly found in
these reports can be found in the Baseline Monitoring Report and in the Mitigation Plan documents
available on the EEPs website. All raw data supporting the tables and figures in the appendices are
available from EEP upon request.
2.0 METHODOLOGY
The CVS -EEP protocol, Level 2 ( http: / /cvs.bio.unc.edu /metliods.htm) was used to collect vegetation data
from the site. The vegetation monitoring was completed on June 23, 2014.
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 4 KCI Associates of NC. PA
EEP Project # 94647 201444Y03

3.0 REFERENCES
Lee, M.T., R.K. Peet, S.D. Roberts, and T.R. Wentworth. 2006. CVS -EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation,
Version 4.0 ( http : / /cvs.bio.unc.edu /methods.htm)
USACE. 2003. Stream Mitigation Guidelines. USACE, NCDENR -DWQ, USEPA, NCWRC.
Skaggs, R. Wayne. 2012. Effect of Growing Season on the Criterion for Wetland Hydrology. Society of
Wetland Scientists. Wetlands 32:1135 -1147
Sprecher, S. W. and Warne, A. G. 2000. "Accessing and Using Meteorological Data to Evaluate Wetland
Hydrology," ERDC /EL TR- WRAP- 00 -01, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center,
Vicksburg, MS.
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 5 KCI Associates of NC. PA
EEP Project # 94647 2014 -A4Y03

Appendix A
Project Vicinity Map and Background Tables
Buffalo Flais Restoration Site 6 KCl Associates of NC, PA
EEP Project 9 94647 2014 -MY03

RANEST
ROWAN COUNTY
Y
A
rp
r
CONCORD
G
R
r
Z
RUFF
COUNTYN \
IREDELL ROWAN
CABARRUS
MECKLENBURG i
Lek
dutch BO07
0
STANLY
L
0 0.25 0.5 1 PROJECT SITE VICINITY MAP
Miles BUFFALO FLATS RESTORATION SITE A
CABARRUS COUNTY NC
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 7 KC1 Associates of NC, PA
EEP Project # 94647 2014 -MY03

I .r
v
1
[[L�
E771 Nonriparian Restoration (3.4 ac) Conservation Easement
Riparian Creation (1.2 ac) Streams
® Riparian Restoration (11.2 ac)
Upland (4.4 ac)
f
tr.
s .ice:
J
:• �' �•
r'
.: • u ';
r
.*pol
{ 1• 1 _ •� f '1r`
j v ter• �'.
�� 44 � iS" •
PROJECT SITE MITIGATION PLAN VIEW
BUFFALO FLATS RESTORATION SITE source ortbortnagery.
CABARRUS COUNTY, NC Cabarrus County 2009
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site ACC Associates q/'A'C'. PA
EF.P Project 4 94647 2014 -A?Y03

Table 1. Project Components
Project Number and Name: 94647 - Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Mitigation
Credits
Non-
Nitrogen
Riparian
Phosphorous
Stream
Wetland
riparian
Buffer
Nutrient
Nutrient Offset
Wetland
Offset
Type
R
RE
R
RE
R
RE
Acres
-
-
11.2
1.2
3.4
-
Credits
-
-
11.2
0.4
3.4
-
-
-
-
TOTAL
11.6
3.4
CREDITS
Project Components
Project
Restoration
Existing
Restoration
Component
Stationing/
Approach
-or-
Mitigation
Footage/
Footage
-or-
Location
(pl, PH etc.)
Restoration
Ratio
Acreage
or Acreage
Reach ID
Equivalent
Southeastern
Wetland Area 1
corner of
3.4 acres
-
Restoration
3.4 acres
1:1
project
North to south
throughout the
Wetland Area 2
11.2 acres
-
Restoration
11.2 acres
1:1
center of
project
West - central
Wetland Area 3
portion of the
1.2 acres
-
Creation
1.2 acres
3:1
project
Component Summation
Buffer
Restoration
Stream
Riparian Wetland
Non - riparian
Upland
(square
Level
(linear feet)
(acres)
Wetland (acres)
(acres)
feet
r
Riverine
Non-
'fir,,.
µ
=s,
Riverine
; °.
"F✓-
a,kv;, ;'k,+,,,,�
't {rt
';,r,..
Restoration
-
11.2 acres
-
3.4 acres
-
-
Enhancement
M ' >< r0:"444a
-
-
-
-
�r,
Enhancement I
„, "x:�.. * ".z'e,w.rouz ^.*5'V.
Ei`+,'.j nl„"1,+,=.u"ut ,k"
, .. lM,..'' z%^ a"' c,'.^< 4, oR, v�r,;,., ?.. �5✓` �K%:' rttt'. e«:
YS:`« FW' t' t« m`,., Yt' �Y. �a39
°rY;r:@'= t.Sxa %"^i."Y`,�d�`$
Enhancement 11
-
.t3, -..
*a- •- dar'a,..T'vr
F.m"r. *�,,;. ®; 'r. % ", ,y, ; «,,,.,x; ,,,.'E
iz },^,z,.,yµ,
Creation
p.� .. "....
1.2 acres
-
-
y• >`';...4 :v,.,,,,,
_
Preservation
-
-
-
-
°, =. '`
4.4 acres
High Quality
Preservation
TOTAL
12.4 acres
-
3.4 acres
' ' ° : "
4.4 acres
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 9 KCl Associates of NC, PA
EEP Project # 94647 2014 -MY03

Table 2. Project Activity & Reporting History
Project Number and Name: 94647 - Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Elapsed Time Since Grading Complete: 3 yr 2 months
Elapsed Time Since Planting Complete: 2 yr 9 months
Number of Reporting Years: 3
Activity or Report
Data Collection
Complete
Actual Completion
or Delivery
Mitigation Plan
Dec 10
Final Design - Construction Plans
Raleigh, NC 27609
Dec 10
Construction
_
Oct 11
Planting
Fax: [phone]
Feb 12
Baseline Monitoring/Report
Feb/March 12
July 12
Year 1 Monitoring
Oct 12
Dec 12
Supplemental Planting
Jan 13
Soil temperature gauge installed
Contact: Mr. Tim Morris
May 13
Invasive Species Maintenance'``,<<
Aug13
Year 2 Monitoring
Oct 13 1
Dec 13
Year 3 Monitoring
June 14 1
Nov 14
Table 3. Project Contacts
Project Number and Name: 94647 - Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Design Firm
KCI Associates of North Carolina, PA
Landmark Center 11, Suite 220
4601 Six Forks Rd.
Raleigh, NC 27609
Contact: Mr. Tim Morris
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
KCI Environmental Technologies and
Construction Contractor
Construction, Inc.
Landmark Center 11, Suite 220
4601 Six Forks Rd.
Raleigh, NC 27609
Contact: Mr. Tim Morris
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Planting Contractor
Bruton Nurseries and Landscapes
PO Box 1197
Freemont, NC 27830
Contact: Mr. Charlie Bruton
Phone: [phone]
Monitoring Performers
MY00 -MY03
KCI Associates of North Carolina, PA
Landmark Center II, Suite 220
4601 Six Forks Rd.
Raleigh, NC 27609
Contact: Mr. Adam Spiller
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 10 KCI Associates of NC. PA
EEP Project # 94647 2014 -MY03

Table 4. Project Attribute Table
Project Number and Name: 94647 — Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
County
Cabarrus County
Project Area (acres)
20.20 acres
Project Coordinates (lat. and long.)
35.456988 N, - 80.496325 W
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province
Piedmont
River Basin
Yadkin -Pee Dee
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8 -digit
03040105
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14 -digit
03040105020050
DWQ Sub -basin
03 -07 -12
Project Drainage Area (acres)
106 acres
Project Drainage Area Percentage
of Impervious Area
1%
CGIA Land Use Classification
3.6% Cultivated, 54.1% Managed Herbaceous Cover, 32.5%
Hardwoods, 5.2% Southern Yellow Pine, and 4.6% Water
Mixed Upland
Bodies
Wetland Summary Information
Parameters
Wetland Area 1
Wetland Area 2
Wetland Area 3
Size of Wetland (acres)
3.4 acres
11.2 acres
1.2 acres
Wetland Type (non- riparian, riparian
riverine or riparian non - riverine)
Non - riparian
Riparian non - riverine
Riparian non - riverine
Mapped Soil Series
Chewacla
(Wehadkee and Armenia by
detailed soil investigation)
Chewacla
(Wehadkee and Armenia by
detailed soil investigation)
Chewacla
Drainage class
Poorly drained
Poorly drained
Somewhat poorly
drained
Soil Hydric Status
Drained Hydric
Drained Hydric
Non hydric
Source of Hydrology
Hillside seepage
Surface /Overbank Flow
Surface /Overbank Flow
Hydrologic Impairment
Ditching and Pasture
Ditching and Pasture
Ditching and Pasture
Native vegetation community
Pasture
Pasture
Pasture
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site l 1 KC/ Associates of NC PA
EEP Project # 94647 2014 -MY03

Appendix B
Visual Assessment Data
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 12 KCl Associates of NC, PA
EEP Project # 94647 2014 -MY03

Table 5. Vegetation Condition Assessment
Project Number and Name: 94647 — Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Planted Acreage 15.8 Easement Acreage 20.2
Number of
Combined
Vegetation Category
Definitions
Mapping Threshold
CCPV Depiction
Polygons
Acreage
% of Planted Acreage
Very limited cover of both woody and
1. Bare Areas
0.1 acres
Pattern and Color
0
0.00
0.0%
herbaceous material.
Woody stem densities clearly below
Not Depicted,
2. Low Stem Density
target levels based on MY3, 4, or 5
0.1 acres
Covers Most of
0
0.00
0.00/0
Areas
stem count criteria.
Restoration Area
Total
0
0.00
0.0 %'
Areas with woody stems of a size
3. Areas of Poor
class that are obviously small given the
0.25 acres
Pattern and Color
0
0.00
0.0%
G
Growth Rates or Vigor
monitoring year.
Cumulative Total
0
0.00
0.0%
4. Invasive Areas of
Areas or points (if too small to render
las
1000 SF
Pattern and Color
0
0.00
0.0%
Concern
polygons at map scale).
5. Easement
Areas or points (if too small to render
I
none
Pattern and Color
0
0.00
0.0%
Encroachment Areas
as polygons at map scale).
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 14 KCl Associates of NC PA
EEP Project # 94647 2014 -MY03

Photo Point 1: View looking west, from the southeastern
corner of the project site. 3/1/2012— Baseline
Photo Point 2: View looking north, from the southeastern
corner of the project site. 3/1/2012— Baseline
Photo Point 3: View looking south, from the eastern
easement boundary. 3/1/2012— Baseline
Photo Point 1: View looking west, from the southeastern
Photo Point 2: View looking north, from the southeastern
Photo Point 3: View looking south, from the eastern
easement boundary. 7/14/2014 - MY03
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 15 K(7 associates of AC, PA
FF.P Project # 94647 2014- b1Y'03

Photo Point 4: View looking west, from the eastern
easement boundary. 3/1/2012— Baseline
Photo Point 5: View looking north. from the eastern
Photo Point 6: View looking southwest, from the eastern
easement boundary. 3/1/2012— Baseline
Photo Point 4: View looking west, from the eastern
easement boundary. 7/14/2014 - MY03
Photo Point 5: View looking north, from the eastern
easement boundary. 7/14/2014 - MY03
Photo Point 6: View looking southwest, from the eastern
easement boundary. 7/14/2014 - MY03
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 16 KCl ,-associates of ,1C. PA
EEP Project ,. 94647 2014- .tf }'03

Photo Point 7: View looking northwest, from the eastern
easement boundary. 3/1/2012— Baseline
Photo Point 8: View looking southwest, from the eastern
easement boundary. 3/1/2012— Baseline
Photo Point 9: View looking west, from the eastern
easement boundary. 3/1/2012— Baseline
Photo Point 7: View looking northwest, from the eastern
easement boundary. 7/14/2014 - MY03
Photo Point 8: View looking southwest, from the eastern
easement boundary. 7/14/2014 - MY03
Photo Point 9: View looking west, from the eastern
easement boundary. 7/14/2014 - MY03
f3i. fulo f lots Restaution.S'ite 17 KC I Associates o1'NC, 14
EEP Project 4 94647 2014- .Al)'03

polo
Photo Point 10: View looking north, from the eastern
easement boundary. 3/1/2012— Baseline
Photo Point 11: View looking south, from the north
eastern corner of the project site. 3/1/2012— Baseline
Photo Point 10: View looking north, from the eastern
easement boundary. 7/14/2014 - MY03
Photo Point 11: View looking south, from the north
eastern corner of the project site. 7/14/2014 - MY03
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 18 Kf I Associates of A'C. PA
EEP Project 4 94647 2014- .11}'03

Vegetation Plot Photos
Vegetation Plot 1: 6/18/14 — MY -03
Vegetation Plot 2: 6/18/14 — MY -03
Rgffalo Flats Restoration Site 19 KCI Associates of :1'C'. P; i
EEP Project # 94647 2014- Al)'03

Vegetation Plot 3: 6/18/14 — MY -03
Vegetation Plot 4: 6/18/14 — MY -03
Bi ,falo Flats Restoration Site 20 KCI Associates ?f AC, PA
££P Project = 94647 2014- 1fY"03

Vegetation Plot 5: 6/1 8/14 — MY -03
Vegetation Plot 6: 6/19/14 — MY -03
B: fjalo Flats Restoration Site 21 AY 7 ; Associates of A ( P:1
EEP Project � 94647 1014 -.11) 113

Vegetation Plot 7: 6/19/14 — MY -03
Vegetation Plot 8: 6/19/14 — MY -03
Bt ffalo Flats Restoration Site 22 KCl Associates of NC, PA
EEP Project # 94647 201-1- :11P03

Vegetation Plot 9: 6/19/14 — MY -03
Vegetation Plot 10: 6/19/14 — MY -03
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 13 KCI Associates ql'.\'('. PA
EEP Project ~ 946.17 2014 -.11) 03

Vegetation Plot 11: 6/19/14 — MY -03
Vegetation Plot 12: 6/19/14 — MY -03
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 24 KC'I Associales of AC. PA
EEP Project � 94647 ?014- .11)'03

Vegetation Plot 13: 6/19/14 — MY -03
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 25 KCl Associates gfNC. PA
EEP Prgjeo .o 94647 2014- NIY'03

Appendix C
Vegetation Plot Data
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 26 KCI Associates of IVC, PA
EEP Project 4 94647 2014 -MY'03

Table 6. Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment
Project Number and Name: 94647 - Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Vegetation Plot ID
Vegetation Survival Threshold
Met? (320 planted stems /acre)
Monitoring Year 03
Planted Stem Density
(stems /acre)
Monitoring Year.03
Total Stem Density
(stems /acre)
1
Yes
688
890
2
No
283
283
3
Yes
405
1,295
4
Yes
445
1,214
5
Yes
526
1,214
6
Yes
364
688
7
Yes
567
4,613
8
Yes
931
1,781
9
Yes
850
1,619
10
Yes
567
1,174
11
Yes
607
1,781
12
Yes
931
3,966
13
Yes
728
2,954
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 27 KC1 Associates of NC, PA
EEP Project # 94647 2014 -MY03

Table 7. CVS Vegetation Plot Metadata
Project Number and Name: 94647 - Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Report Prepared By
Dale Prihoda
Date Prepared
6/23/2014 10:00
database name
KCI- 2013 -B.mdb
database location
M: \2010 \20100798 Buffalo Flats \Vegetation
computer name
12- 3ZV4FP1
file size
161321216
DESCRIPTION OF WORKSHEETS IN THIS DOCUMENT ------------
Metadata
Description of database file, the report worksheets, and a summary of project(s)
and project data.
Proj, planted
Each project is listed with its PLANTED stems per acre, for each year. This
excludes live stakes.
Proj, total stems
Each project is listed with its TOTAL stems per acre, for each year. This includes
live stakes, all planted stems, and all natural /volunteer stems.
Plots
List of plots surveyed with location and summary data (live stems, dead stems,
missing, etc.).
Vigor
Frequency distribution of vigor classes for stems for all plots.
Vigor by Spp
Frequency distribution of vigor classes listed by species.
Damage
List of most frequent damage classes with number of occurrences and percent of
total stems impacted by each.
Damage by Spp
Damage values tallied by type for each species.
Damage by Plot
Damage values tallied by type for each plot.
Planted Stems by Plot and Spp
A matrix of the count of PLANTED I iving stems of each species for each plot; dead
and missingstems are excluded.
ALL Stems by Plot and spp
A matrix of the count of tota I I ivi ng stems of each s peci es (pl a nted a nd natura I
volunteers combined) for each plot; dead and missing stems are excluded.
PROJECT SUMMARY-------------------------------------
Project Code
94647
project Name
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Description
Wetland Restoration Site
River Basin
Yadkin River Basin
Sampled Plots
13
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 28 KCI Associates of NC PA
EEP Project 9 94647 2014 -A4Y03

Table 8. CVS Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot and Species
Project Number and Name: 94647 - Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE
Current Plot Data
(MY3 -2014)
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species
Type
E94647
-EEP -1
E94647
-EEP -2
E94647 -EEP -3
E94647-EE
-4
E94647
-EEP -5
E94647
-EEP -6
E94647 -EEP
-7
E94647 -EEP
-8
PnoLS
P -all
T
POOLS
P -all
T
PnOLS
P -all
T
PnoLs
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
Acer ne undo
boxelder
Tree
5
7
2
3
8
4
EN
5
5
6
4
[:=I
8
5
9
688
688
890
7
283
283
11
Acer rubrum
red maple
Tree
445
1214
526
526
1214
364
1 364
16991
567
1 567
1 4613
4
931
1781
4
2
73
Baccharis halimi olia
eastern baccharis
Shrub
I
Betula ni ra
river birch
Tree
1
1
1
3
3
3
1
l
1
2
2
2
Diospyros vir iniana
common persimmon
Tree
1
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
3
3
3
14
2
1
1
1
1
1
Juni erus vir iniana
eastern redcedar
Tree
I
Li uidambar st raci ua
sweet um
Tree
2
2
6
2
7
8
Liriodendron tuli i era
tuli tree
Tree
2
2
2
N ssa a uatica
water tupelo
Tree
11
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
Pinus taeda
loblolly pine
Tree
l
Platanus occidentalis
Americansycamore
Tree
2
2
2
1
1
7
3
l
1
1
2
2
8
1
1
1 12
Po ulus deltoides
eastern cottonwood
Tree
uercus
oak
Tree
uercus lauri olia
laurel oak
Tree
4
4
4
1
1
l
1
1
l
uercus l rata
overcup oak
Tree
uercus michauxii
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
2
2
2
3
3
3
1
1
1
3
3
3
4
4
4
uercus pagoda
cherr bark oak
Tree
5
5
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
4
4
4
4
4
2
2
3
7
7
7
uercus palustris
pin oak
Tree
4
4
4
2
2
2
1
1
1
uercus hellos
willow oak
Tree
2
2
2
2
2
2
8
8
8
6
6
6
1
1
l
3
3
3
9
9
9
Ulmus americana
American elm
Tree
1
Unknown
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE
17
17
22
7
7
7
10
10
1 32
11
11
30
13
13
1 30
9
9
17
14
14
114
23
23
1 44
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
I
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
1
5
5
8
4
4
4
5
5
7
3
3
8
4
EN
5
5
6
8
[:=I
5
5
9
688
688
890
283
283
283
405
405
1295
445
445
1214
526
526
1214
364
1 364
16991
567
1 567
1 4613
931
931
1781
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 29 KCI Associates of NC. PA
EEP Project 9 94647 2014 -MY03

Table 8. CVS Stem Count -Total and Planted by Plot and Species Cont.
Project Number and Name: 94647 - Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Current Plot Data (MY3 -2014)
Annual Means
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species
Type
E94647 -EEP -0009
E94647- EEP
-10
E94647- EEP
-11
E94647- EEP -12
E94647- EEP -13
MY3 2014
MY2 2013
MYl 2012
MYO 2012
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
I T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoIS
P -all
T
JPnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
IP-aill
T
Acer negundo
boxelder
Tree
9
9
11
61
41
16
Acer rubrum
red maple
Tree
4
8
2
1
3
101
53
5
Baccharis halimifolia
eastern baccharis
Shrub
1
1
3
Belula nigra
river birch
Tree
3 1
3
3
1 2
2
1 2
3
3
3
6
6
6
1
1
1
1 22
22
1 22
25
25
25
27
27
27
47
47
47
Diospyros virginiana
common persimmon
Tree
I
1
2
1
1
5
5
4
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
3
3
12
3
5
4
4
35
6
6
41
17
17
118
30
14
Juniperus virginiana
eastern redcedar
Tree
3
4
Liquidambarslvraciflua
sweetgum
Tree
2
1
3
2
35
25
7
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
Tree
I 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
4
5
4
4
7
4
4
4
Nyssa aqualica
water tupelo
Tree
2
2
2
4
4
1 4
1
1
1
3
3
3
5
5
5
1 18
18
18
18
18
18
16
16
16
6
6
6
Pinus laeda
loblolly pine
Tree
1
Plalanus occidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
3
3
6
1
1
4
4
4
13
8
I
8
32
1
1
5
24
24
93
3
3
84
3
3
33
Populus deltoides
eastern cottonwood
Tree
1
2
2
Quercus
oak
Tree
I
I
4
4
11
1
1
1
3
3
3
Quercus laurifolia
laurel oak
Tree
1
6
6
6
7
7
7
10
10
10
19
19
19
Quercus lvrala
overcup oak
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Quercus michauxii
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
13
13
13
15
Quercus pagoda
cherry bark oak
Tree
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
2
2
2
39
39
40
1 36
36
39
42
42
43
24
24
24
Quercus palustris
pin oak
Tree
1
1
7
1 7
7
7
7
7
8
8
8
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
6
6
6
2
2
2
1
1
1
2
4
4
4
44
44
46
34
34
37
29
29
29
14
14
14
Ulmus americana
JAmerican elm
Tree
I
Unknown
3
3
3
11
11
11
124
124
124
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems r AC
21
21
40
14
14
29
15
15
44
23
23
98
18
18
73
195
195
1 580
142
142
410
152
152
231
237
123 7
1 237
1
I
1
1
1
13
13
13
13
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
.02
0.32
0.32
0.32
0.32
6
6
9
6
6
9
6
6
J1781
5
5
12
L72
6
10
11
11
19
11
11
18
11
11
17
7
7
7
850
850
1619
567
567
1174
607
607
931
931
39628
2954
607
1 607
1 1806
1 442
442
1,276
473
1 473
719
738
1738
1 738
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 30 KCI Associates of NC, PA
LEP Project # 94647
2014 -MY03

Appendix D
Hydrologic Data
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 31 1.CI Associates of NC, PA
EEP Project 4 94647 2014-AfYO3

7.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
w
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
30 -70 Percentile Graph
WETS Station Name: Burlington Fire Stn 45
cc a�i cz Q- ca O V Q O
�- 2 ¢ g '' ¢ V) o z
Date
2014 Rainfall —IF— 30% Less Than f 30% Greater Than
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 32 KCI Associates of NC. PA
EEP Project 4 94647 2014 -MY03

w
C
O
W
L
6�
R
3
^O
G
O
L
N
658
657
656
655
654
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 1 - Nonriparian (12 Days Minimum)
4
3.5
3
2.5
H
7
1.5
0.5
653
ill
I r
A
I
a - p
u l
Fy n
u l
1 !211_1,
-9
11
La �
J
I I' l
X11
L
1 y!
ll -�
f l
1-1114-
1111)
I V 1
-
14 —
I � n
1
r
r 0
r
N
O�
N
In
N
N
J
to
N
N
J
N
W
N
w
O
w
A
A
oo
A
A
to
c
A
A
a
{
7
A
A
w
A
w
3
w
A
b
A
O
>>
A
'O
A
00
a
fl
A
w
A
w
A
w
A
`3
A
a
A
c
A
=
i-
A
c`
A
Ro
A
>>
c
A
c
?
n
T?
A
B
A
D
A
00
o
A
�
A
O�
0
A
to
0
A
o
<
A
z
o
A
z
O
A
z
o
A
Date
Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface - -- Sensor Depth Rainfall
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 33 KC1 Associates of NC, PA
EEP Project # 94647 1014 -MY03

658
657
F
c 656
co
La
L
d
3 655
e
0
0
L
N
654
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 2 - Riparian (25 Days Minimum)
4
3.5
3
2.5
1.5
0.5
653
Ri4
-F%I
P
1
^'Lu,
11' 11111'
II I
iuiI
iwl
I
III
N
11,L
p—
A,y
In
V`^II'11
i
YulA
JL
-!'
14 .
'1^'r
i
I 0
N
Cs
—
N
In
N
—
--
—
N
J
—
N
W
--
N
W
'O
N
to
N
—
N
J
N
w
--
N
w
O
A
'O
A
r
A
A
U
A
A
A
A
A
A
W
3
A
�
A
O
a
A
'O
a
A
00
a�_°
?
�
A
T
A
to
A
N
A
A
O
00
J
A
a
W
a
O
'D
r
O'
0
CA
0
o
N
z
--�
z
O
z
Date
z
�.
Sensor Depth Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface Rainfall
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 34 KCI Associates of NC, PA
EEP Project 9 94647 2114 -MY03

657
656
w
C
O
w
CO
6a
W
655
3
c
0
L
Z
�
654
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 3 - Riparian (25 Days Minimum)
4
3.5
3
7 �
m
2
1.5
0.5
653 iu r n I! n•IJ U
III LJU Un
I1IIUI IMl I I I I
AnL n__
n III III x I I PI 11I1- -
11 N Jtp/A
II A 1 0
N
` O 1O 90 (./I A
U -- N
A w
-- N J — IJ
a O 'P 00 ,� T v.
'W — N
.^ N --
W .Z — IJ IJ — —
O ,_, � t- W O
—
�p r O Q'
N W — N W
c.n Z N — O
a a a >v 3
a
C_ >= a n
0
0 o z z z
A A A A A A
A A A
A A A A A A A
A A
A A A A A A A
A A A A
A ? A A A
Date
Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface -- - Sensor Depth Rainfall
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site > > KCl Associates of NC. PA
EEP Project # 94647 2013 -MY03

660
660
659
659
w
c 658
R
w 658
L
a+
CC
3
0
657
L
Pi
657
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 4 - Nonriparian (12 Days Minimum)
4
3.5
3
2.5
5'
2
1.5
0.5
656 ill' 1� rx ti1 n", 111 411 P1 1k11111rw► ,1�i –� ; fi ill L— 1 r11111Jti,11 14 ,'I - A I i 0
.' O �O Oo cn A A w O 'O 00 T cn ,_ N 7 O ,_ 00 J A w O 'O 00 T C.n N — O
c` c D D b rn O O o Z z Z
A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A '""• '"• A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A
A A
Date
Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface Sensor Depth Rainfall
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 36 KCI Associates of NC. PA
EEP Project # 94647 2014 -MY03

657
656
w
655
_
0
R
W 654
L
6r
R
'0 653
L
a.�
652
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
H- drorraph
Wetland Gauge 5 - Riparian (25 Days Minimum)
4
3.5
3
-) 5
1.5
0.5
651 ,,.,,, .. n ,.., ,.... ,u. „I „l, I LJ „I ,n.
,LI,
_._�6 11 --
fit ,11 .,, ,•„„1 IL I1
11 L ,I AI 1 0
- r r
'
N -_]
� p Ir
N N W O
T V N —
=
o C o z z z
_ _ _ _ _ _
A A A A A A A A A A A A A A
A A A
A A A A
A L y
A A A A A
Date
y
Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface — — Sensor Depth Rainfall
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 37 KC1 Associates of NC, PA
EEP Project tt 94647 2014 -MY03

657
656
w
c 655
:a
v
L
L
3 654
e
0
0
L
L
653
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 6 - Riparian- Creation (25 Days Minimum)
4
3.5
3
2.5
N
I.5
0.5
652 1lJ..11..._I__\ A l .L(.].' ►1,1,1.0
1 II 1 t I V— 11 1 II 1 (Wt 1 1 1 1
N II L 11 __ A nJ 1 II _.1 t �j l /� _ 1 p N J IJ�[!_l
1..1 A I ........__ -1. 0
N O, N
O 10 00 u, A
`�
Vi N N J N
A w _. O oo c.n
1 D 2
W N w u N Vi N IJ V
N - O Oo �l w O 'O oo
- I ` D In 1 O
N W N w
C, u, N - O
1 Z 1
;v
>v >> a
o 0 o z z z
A A A A A A
A A ?
? A A 4. A
A i- A A
Date
Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface -- Sensor Depth Rainfall
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 38 KCI Associates of NC, PA
EEP Project 4 94647 2014 -MY03

659
658
657
C
O
ti
til
656
_
s
a
0
L
W
655
Buffalo Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 7 Riparian- Creation (25 Days Minimum)
4
3.5
3
2.5
7 E.
y
1.5"
1
0.5
654 N�„ �� n ,a n uyJ
InIm,all „ ,n,_wi II,,
nun 1�-- {y„rn,�„�•�,,,�
dun It„ n1
„n' 1 0
O 'O Oo
'P
A W
r O 'G
w
9 r
w a a a
a a
r
A A A A
A A A A A A A A ?
A A A A A A A
A A A A
Date
Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface -- Sensor Depth Raint ill
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 39 KCl Associates o % NC. PA
EEP Project # 94647 2014 -MY03

659
658
w
e
0
d 657
W
L
3
C
7
O
L
V 656
655
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 8 - Riparian (25 Days Minimum)
4
3.5
3
2.5
a�
�.
0.5
ii r,, r• n, �_rr Y uli 41 r 4 1 1 n ,8T, —H-r, 1rr 1- 1 Vi I i � R 11iL`p - ,r- rit -iL =i l i r 11� 1111� r r ,� a n! I f A it 1 0
N O, -- N t.A N — -+ -- N J N W -- N W 10 — N ll, N — N J W N W
O 1O Ir lA A A W O 'O r T V, N -- r J A 'C r
a a a w c` c` c` c` c` = a s ( C O O o z z z
a. a 5 5 A y fQ ago rc v v o< 0 0 0
A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A
Date
Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface — - Sensor Depth Rainfall
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 40 KCI Associates of NC, PA
EEP Project # 94647 2014 -MY03

659
658
657
w
c 656
R
a 655
11
3
e
0
V 654
653
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 9 - Riparian (23 Days Minimum)
4
3.5
3
25
a
2
0
1.5
0.5
652 1" P . u � 4 41 . ,N 1 !"
1 1, _T 1111 , . . L , 1 1 1 , 1,6
It 14 p-='1, I, . f 1,_.g,
_ I yn_.c_u 1
0 L I I A —_ -� 0
N a, N In N
A � A W
N -,] N W
O 'O 00 r In - N
N W ,D N cn N
— O . 00 J A W
N
O 'O Oo
J N W N W
O1 v� N O
;v M 3
a
b a a a w 3
a to
__ = a a
,
n CD CD
b z ,
o 0 o z z z
_? _ a 7
v v w ?
? ? __ M r o rro �_
v
0 < 0 0 0
A — �.
A A A A A A A A
A '-' A
A A A A A
A �. A
A A A A A A A
-� --
A A A
A
A A A A A
Date
Ground\% ater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface Sensor Depth Rainfall
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 41 KCI Associates of NC, PA
EEP Project 0 94647 2014 -MY03

662
661
660
w
0
ca
659
W
L
d
3
0 658
0
L
V
657
656
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Hydrograph
Wetland Gauge 10 - Nonriparian (12 Days Minimum)
w O O oo ;,h cn A A w D O f r T U ` N 7 oo -;4 D A w c:p T to
D Y > C c` c` c` c` c a D zn v� v� O O o Z Z Z O D
Q 0- '�+ 'O `< r= C C i
A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A 41-
A A A A A A A
Date
-4
3.5
2.5
m
� d
o'
1.5
0.5
0
Groundwater Depth Ground Surface 12 Inches Below Ground Surface Sensor Depth Rainfall
Buffalo Flats Restoration Site 42 KC! Associates of NC, PA
EEP Project # 94647 2014 -MY03

Table 9. Wetland Hydrology Criteria Attainment Table
Project Number and Name: 94647 - Buffalo Flats Restoration Site
Success Criteria Achieved / Max Consecutive Days During Growing Season (Percentage)
Wetland Area 1
Success Criteria 12
MY -01
MY -02
MY -03
days (5 %)
2012
2013
2014
MY -04
MY -05
Well
Yes /23
Yes /64
Yes /60
(9.7 %)
(27.5 %)
(23.9%
Well 4
No /6
Yes /33
Yes /52
(2.4% )
(14.2 %)
(20.9%
Well 10
No /0
No /1
Yes /78
(Installed May 23, 2012)
0 %)
(0.4 %)
(31.1 %)
Wetland Area 2
Success Criteria _
MY -01
MY -02
MY -03
days (10 %)
2012
2013
2014
MY -04
MY -05
Well
No /20
Yes /36
Yes /58
8.6%
15.2%
23.3%
Well
Yes /134
Yes /236
Yes/ 120
(57.300)
(100 %)
(48.0 %)
Well
Yes /28
Yes/ 172
Yes /60
(11.8 %)
(73.6 %)
(23.9 %)
Well 8
No/ 19
Yes /98
Yes /61
(7.9 %)
(42.0 %)
(24.5 %)
Well
Yes /23
Yes /103
Yes /67
10.0 %)
(44.2 %)
26.9%
Wetland Area 3
Success Criteria
MY -01
MY -02
MY -03
25 days (10 %)
2012
2013
2014
N1Y -04
MY -05
Well 6 (Creation .Area)
Yes /25
Yes /71
Yes /61
(10.7 %)
(30.5 %)
(24.5 %)
Well 7 (Creation Area)
No /18
Yes /70
Yes /62
(7.50/o)
(30.0% )
(24.7 %)
B i ffido Flak Resioraliou Sift, 43 i.(T Issociales of NC, 1'. 1
EF.P PrglecI - 9404 X014- .11)'03

Appendix E
Soil Data
Huffido khas Kestorulion,Site 44 KCI.Issociules P.
E1:T Projeci ;� 9404 7 2014 -1I }03

KC I
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH CAROLINA, PA
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Client:
Project-
KCI Associates of North Carolina. P.A.
Buffalo Flats Wetland Restoration Site
County:
Cabarrus
Location:
4939 Gold Hill Road
Soil Series:
Chewacla Variant
Date: July 14, 2014
Project #: 20100798 6MO.Y3
State: NC
Site /Lot: MW# 6
Soil Classification: Fine - loamy. mixed, active, thermic Fluvaquentic Dystrochrepts
AWT: 54" SHWT: 8 -12" Slope: 0 -1% Aspect:
Elevation: —655 Drainage: Poorly Drained Permeabilit3 Moderate to Moderately sloe.
Vegetation: Herbaceous: Predominantly Virginia Wildrye with planted River Birch, Green Ash, American Sycamore
Borings terminated at 62 Inches
HORIZON
DEPTH (IN)
MATRIX
MOTTLES
TEXTURE
STRUCTURE
CONSISTENCE
HOUNDARY
NOTES
Ap
0 -3
IOYR 5:3
5YR 4/6c2p
I
If�r
dl
cs
5YR mottles 510
7.5YR 5/8fl It
AB
3 -8
IOYR 513
5YR 4/6c2lL
1
21nabk
dsh
cs
IOYR 6/2c Id
10"o mottles
B gI
8 -14
10YR 41;2
10YR 2 /1 flf
1
21nsbk
dsh
es
IOmnt concretions& NIn masses
B 2
14 -18
10YR -112
7 5YR 5/8 0 d
I
2msbk
dsh
gs
B g 3
18 -34
10YR 4/2
IOYR 4 /lc2f
sl
Icsbk
mfi
gw
moist soil conditions
IOYR 4/3c2f
few 5 -25mm concretions
B ,4
34 -37
5/10Y
ION'R 4/6c2p
scl
Icsbk
Ink
gw
few fine Nln masses
IOY'R 3 /1 fll'
C!1
37 -47
510Y
IOYR.- , /Iflf
c
massive
ntfi
!w
few'_ -5mnt nraceliNtn concretions
Mn masses
C2
47 -56
IOYR4 /It?f
c
massive
mfi
w
S/N
;! I ON,
7.5Y'R 3!2
C O
56 -62
IOYR 7.1
IOYR 4/ 1 c2p
se
m:LSSi%e
mfi
10 °o mottles. 10 -15mm concretions
5/Nc2
to °o mottles
10YR 5/8c2d
- ^0° o mottles
COMNIEN rs.
No surface water present.
Very dry conditions.
Meets hydric soil criteria F8: Redox Depressions
using Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual Fastern Mountains and Piedmont Region ( Version 2.0)
Meets hydric soil criteria for 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual: paragraph 44 (12).
DESCRIBED BY. SFS DATE. 7!14,2014

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: City /County: ('Pl W Yf/Mr 2,:krG • � Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: All: Sampling Point: 41109 ,
: s
Investi ator �i '` f` . 5 G',^ 1;'r
9 () Section, Township, Range: �1
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): F/9 ez411 a Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope ( %): 0 1
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): L.P l\' Lat: 3rd ° `/ '9,6 , AF) 0 Long; "OR ✓,'.�' t , ra• �
Datum: /✓ /l h `.�..�
Soil Map Unit Name; �f{)l�.e'.(�,. (�i2.- .rr2_ -�r1 NWI classification: h
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes t/ No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ✓ No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ti No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes v'_.
' No
Remarks:
let .3"t' ;.2,, P) - L4)i }::.,�,
� r
Alo,).Z ?..),d,4 'r 6, !�!e?ir., 9: r; .'( L!, l.i+-,.' c /J9. 6 ) i tYA'1Il ltl1,
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
v` 'Surface Soil Cracks (66)
Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (814)
-Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
_ Saturation (A3)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (616)
Water Marks (131)
_ 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 (134)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (65)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Water- Stained Leaves (B9)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
_ Aquatic Fauna (1313)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
V' Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
7
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: w> ? )
1, f� /tt /'hit.<� i/ VcR Vii i C.�uS 5U
4. i�✓'ri��nz.�,a, ta( -n viS�tlVit,�rC���
5.
6.
7.
1C
11
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
Sampling Point: , ; i w ' !o
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant I
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 C) (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of.
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
✓ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
V"2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is s3.0'
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
r!`i r..
cw
i 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
F& .lti3 Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling /Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (t
m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
Total Cover of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
50% of total cover: D 20% of total cover: //>
Woody vine -All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
hcinht
50% of total cover:
Remarks: (include photo numbers here or on a separate
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
= Total Cover Present?
20% of total cover:
Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: 41 W W- 4f"
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
Redox Features
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
(inches)
Color (moist) %
Color (moist)
%
Type
Loc
Texture Remarks
0 ".'i
I D �; - rl3 2'-
5 yR, 'fl&
5
t''
d enrz, 1 F
r
3
r
pt ? 'Aa end,
!D
1)
1—%2L
8- 15►
I0yk: `T
10 2' I
d,
('
i11
Of1R1>t It`�W, �. €+r��'lcall&n AAN7rt <^ ,
/
r
Q M�
18'3 �,
/ f'. �., I t>
10 A
Y >1
R'is ?�ti • + At) ~ a -'a :iml LAItP,'!� il[6ltcl�
a3') - :3`�
/l) Y
lO t /,P- Y/6 0-2P
i;1)
I 0
'Tvoe: C= Concentration. D= Dealetion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
✓ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes V' No
l /tceFQ. /' ;.'tee.. 9&1/ Ae
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

an-Nownr4h—
K T
ASSOCIATES of SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
NORTH G4ROUNA, PA
Client: KCE Associates of North Carolina. P.A. Date: July 14, 2014
Project: Buffalo Flats Wetland Restoration Site Project #: 20100798 6MO.Y3
County: Cabarrus State: NC
Location: 4939 Gold Hill Road Site /Lot: MW# 7
Soil Series: Chewacla Variant
Soil Classification: Fine - loamy, mixed, actiy'e. thermic Fluvayuentic Dystrochrepts
aWT: >51" SHWT: 0 -14 Slope: 0 -1% Aspect:
Elevation: —657 Drainage: Somewhat Poorly Drained Permeabilit, slow
Vegetation: Herbaceous: Predominantly Virginia Wildrye with Cherry -bark Oak, Red Maple
Borings terminated at 51 Inches
HORIZON
DEPTH tINI
MATRIX
MOTTLES
TEXTURE
STRUCTURE
CONSISTENCE
BOUNDARY
NOTES
Ap
0 -2
IOYRJig
51'R414c2d
I
Ifgr
di (loose)
cs
%redox concentrations in
matrix & pore spaces
Al
2 -5
IOYR62
IOYR5i3c2f
I
Ifabk
dh(hard)
cs
Soil drv_. brittle Rcompacted
51'R 4/6c2
5% mottles
AB
5 -8
1OYR42
5YR 5/8c2p
SI
Ifable
dh(hard)
cs
20'. mottles
redos in concentrations and pore spaces
20, oxidized rom channels
Bwl
8 -II
10\ "R 4i3
IOYR 2, 1 c2
sl
Ifabk
cs
Soo Stn masses
5 Y SBflf
Bw2
11 -I4
10YR 5,3
7.5Y'R 5/6c2d
I
Imshk
cw
5 -IOmm concretions
few common concentrations
B;
I4-17
10YR 52
10YR 5'8c2d
I
Itnsbk
cw
sery brittle
Bc
17 -23
I ON'R 2! I
Iron R: Nin rocIS
0
deh
cs
S -'Snuo Iron R NIn concretions
10YR 5/8
Extremeiv hard, auger resistant
B r 1
23 -30
10YR 5.2
10YR 5,8c2d
scl
2msbk
mfr
gw
_0 "o morales
IO'R 54c2f
15 00 mottles
many, common Sin concretions
B 2
30-35
51110Y
7.5YR 5i8c2d
sc
21nsbk
mfi
'w
200. mottles
B r3
35 -42
10YR 4/1
T51'R 5/8nn2p
se
Icsbk
mB
g1A
few Smm concretions
B ;4
42 -50
ION'R 512
7 5Y 5/8n12p
sc
Icsbk
Inli
rw
few 25mm concretions
CL!
50 -51
10YR 5.2
7.5YR52m2 r
scl
massive
mtt
10 0o mottles, moist sod
R
51
Auger refusal
COMMENTS:
No surface water present.
The SHWT develops more fully each year from surface saturation from ocerhank flooding and inundation and is maintained due to
the very slow permeability of the compacted. angular structured subsurface horizons.
Meets hydric soil criteria F3: Depleted Matrix and F8: Redox Depressions
using Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region (Version 2.0)
17 -23 inch horizon is extremely hard and mostly auger impenetrable
DESCRIBED BY. SFS DA I E 7/14/2014

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: % % It City /County: k' "t' ' ;:,11v /e Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner:
State: ri[:. Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): t,% e ! '` ' Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): %s:: {. `* Local relief (concave, convex, none): wx; r Slope ( %): D 1
Subregion (L R R or M LRA): l.h'F; p Lat: ,j�>�,2`I L�<�.1 Long: _(ONO "`a ��`/ 1!'' Datum: iUA h 3's'
Soil Map Unit Name: . Ei 0 J: r ; r a , ! + : r, , / NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ✓ No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ✓ No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes V No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
HYDROLOGY
�� 1 ��`.l:�a �i...' ��f��',. � f!i .`,r -� `- St'Cr✓ y(;, � 1• ?�.h.711 v�f- R.c•.n. /t
(I .
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (66)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
ZSparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (610)
Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (0)
_ Moss Trim Lines (1316)
_ Water Marks (131)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (134)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
— Water - Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (134)
_ Aquatic Fauna (1313)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (135)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
­f Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes \­-__
­- No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: /Vi
Absolute Dominant Indicatoi
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status
1.
3.
N
17
= i otai Uover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot
1.
2.
3.
4.
17
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: _3(' )
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A /B)
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A = I
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
v' 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
_ 4 • Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic H dro h tic Ve et t o ' (E I
Hydrophytic
5 Vegetation
= Total Cover Present? Yes No
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ifr� 1 0 li
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
r
,
V r;��
i
_ y p y g a n xp an)
'Indicators
of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.; .,,_; „P-1;.< 7!01[14!:;9
r'nci.f.
,•
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
6
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
7•
height.
8.
Sapling /Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
9.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
10.
m) tall.
11.
Herb - All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
Total Cover
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
50% of total cover: 7 `-
20% of total cover: I
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
height.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Hydrophytic
5 Vegetation
= Total Cover Present? Yes No
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ifr� 1 0 li
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to
Depth
Matrix
(inches)
Color moist %
0 °1.
)0 1/L4z
_ Black Histic (A3)
Y),
rn Ilk `J/3
II- I L� ��1..`.j3 q0
q5
l
-:23
'Tvpe: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM
Hydric Soil Indicators:
or
Redox Features
_ Dark Surface (S7)
Color (moist)
%
Type
Loc
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
10L ; ?- x3 6;0
10
C
rn
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (176)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
lot tx) c 2P
5
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
yv)
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
10
3Indicators of hydrophylic vegetation and
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
n- f
Type: �E- h0;Iyu 0;j
Texture
2; )
Sampling Point: i4l
Remarks
Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soil
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_✓ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (176)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_✓ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophylic vegetation and
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
n- f
Type: �E- h0;Iyu 0;j
Depth (inches): 6 (t i ' O I,,, I All ? )j, ")
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ No "
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0