20230533 Ver 1_Goldrock Aspalt Plant_NWP 39 Submittal_Final_2023-04-14_20230728

-40- WithersRavenel
.. our People. Your Success.
April 6, 2023
US Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
Mr. Billy Standridge
2407 West Fifth St.
Washington, NC 27889
NC Division of Water Resources
401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
Ms. Stephanie Goss
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699
Re: FSC Goldrock Asphalt Plant - NWP 39 PCN Submittal
Battleboro, Nash County, NC
USACE AID: SAW-2021-02689
WR Project #02080270.01
Dear Mr. Standridge and Ms. Goss,
On behalf of FSC II, LLC, we are requesting authorization from the USACE to use NWP 39 for
0.342 acres of permanent impacts to jurisdictional wetlands for construction of the proposed FSC
Goldrock Asphalt Plant. We are also requesting a 401 WQC from NCDWR for the above
referenced impacts.
The proposed asphalt plant project is located on one parcel (PIN: 384400549375) totaling±16.83-
acres located immediately south of 7526 N. Halifax Road, Battleboro, Nash County (Lat:
36.059323°N;-77.828442°W).
The project is in the Tar -Pamlico basin and onsite waters drain to Swift Creek. The Water Quality
Classification for Swift Creek is: C;NSW and the Stream Index Number is: 28-78(2.5). The
cataloging unit for the site is 03020101.
Proposed Project
The purpose of the proposed project is construction of a new larger asphalt plant to meet the
ongoing demand for asphalt product. The proposed asphalt plant is located adjacent to an existing
Wake Stone facility and the existing but undersized FSC Gold Rock asphalt site. Being located so
near an existing source of material eases logistics and results in significantly less dump truck traffic
on local roads.
The three primary reasons for the need to construct a larger plant are as follows:
• Safety - currently there is not enough space within the existing asphalt facility for employees to
see around stockpiles due to the limited space. Truck traffic must be extremely careful navigating
the stock area due to blind turns and limited sight distance creating a greater potential of an
incident.
• Production - the current asphalt plant located on the north side of N. Halifax Road has a limited
stockpile area, not allowing for the correct size piles of material to facilitate drying of the product
prior to running it through the plant. Wetter material results in a slowing of production. The
increased stockpile area within the new proposed asphalt plant will allow for more time between
receiving the wet material from the rock quarry and when it can be processed through the plant.
115 MacKenan Drive I Cary, NC 2751i
t: 919.469.3340 1 www.withersravenel.com I License No. F-1479
Asheville I Cary I Charlotte I Greensboro I Lumberton I Pittsboro I Raleigh I Southern Pines I Wilmington

FSC Goldrock Asphalt Plant 4: Withers Rave n e l
Battleboro, Nash County
NWP 39 PCN Submittal Our People. YourSur�-
• Cost - decreased production from the high moisture content results in higher costs. Essentially,
the facility needs to dry out all the material as it goes through the asphalt plant. The wetter the
material, the more it costs to dry it out. The more fuel used to dry out the material means that
more emissions are produced and higher costs that are incurred.
Once the proposed new asphalt plant is constructed and operational, the existing asphalt plant will
be decommissioned, and the land returned to Wake Stone Corporation.
Project History
WithersRavenel completed a delineation of the project area in February 2022.
WR submitted an AJD request for the project site on December 20, 2021. Kyle Barnes, USACE,
field verified the onsite wetlands on February 1, 2022.
A PJD/AJD request was submitted to the USACE on January 9, 2023 that included an updated
review area that included an old borrow pit constructed in uplands. The PJD/AJD was issued on
March 10, 2023. A copy of the PJD/AJD has been included as an attachment.
There are no depicted streams on the USGS or Nash Co. Soil Survey within the project area, and
therefore a formal riparian buffer determination from NCDWR was not required.
Proposed Impacts
The proposed project will result in 0.342 acres of permanent wetland impacts (Wetland A). The
proposed permanent wetland impacts are necessary for construction of sufficiently large areas of
gravel yard stockpile area (Impact W1 - 0.294 ac), a 20' wide gravel haul road (Impact W2 - 0.045
ac) over a narrow finger of Wetland A and a SCM outfall to Wetland A (Impact W3 - 0.003 ac).
Large areas of gravel yard are required for efficient and safe movement of large
equipment/vehicles and aggregate storage.
No streams or surface other waters are located on the site. No impacts are proposed for
construction of the asphalt plant facility, utilities, or the primary access.
Avoidance and Minimization
Prior to site plan design, the applicant requested that a detailed wetland delineation be conducted
so that impacts to wetlands and "waters" could be minimized.
Proposed permanent wetland impacts for construction of the asphalt plant facility and
infrastructure have been minimized to only those necessary for construction of the gravel yards,
gravel haul road crossing, and a SCM outfall.
Proposed impacts for the project have been designed to avoid impacts by designing a site around
Wetland A to the greatest extent possible while still making the project feasible. Impacts to
Wetland A are unavoidable due to the geographic position of the wetland which is centrally
located within the project area and the need to create enough gravel yard space for safe
equipment movement and sufficient aggregate storage (Impact W1). Furthermore, the proposed
internal gravel haul road was designed to cross Wetland A at the narrowest location to minimize
impacts (Impact W2). Impacts due to rip rap dissipater pads are necessary at one weir outlet due
to the greater slope (Impact W3) from SCM 1. Rip rap dissipater impacts were minimized to just
one SCM weir outfall structure.
Page 2 of 4

FSC Goldrock Asphalt Plant 4: Withers Rave n e l
Battleboro, Nash County
NWP 39 PCN Submittal 7urPeople. Your Surc-
The SCMs design incorporates the location and shape of Wetland A to minimize wetland impacts.
Hydrology of Wetland A will be maintained through the SCMs being designed to capture onsite
runoff and discharge treated water back into Wetland A. Drainage pipes will also be installed
within the current location of drainage swales to convey offsite drainage into Wetland A as
currently occurs. The design of the SCMs and offsite drainage pipes will provide the same upland
runoff volume into Wetland A as the predevelopment conditions. Additionally, the hydrology of
Wetland A is primarily provided through groundwater fluctuation. Therefore, the long-term
viability and integrity of Wetland A will be maintained in the post -development condition.
The hydrologic connectivity of Wetland A to downstream waters will be maintained in the post -
development condition. Currently, Wetland A drains into a drainage pipe under 1-95 which
eventually outfalls into downstream wetlands on the south side of 1-95. The culvert beneath the
proposed haul road will continue to convey drainage through Wetland A to the pipe under 1-95. .
The existing asphalt plant is immediately adjacent to the proposed site. Space is not available at
the current asphalt plant to allow for expansion. Furthermore, the proposed site is immediately
opposite of N. Halifax Road from the existing facility and the rock quarry where the plant sources
raw materials making the choice of the location of the proposed asphalt plant the only feasible
option. The project location allows for increased public safety by minimizing the time aggregate
delivery trucks spend on N. Halifax Road.
Construction techniques used to avoid or minimize impacts include installation of erosion &
sediment control devices prior to construction. Silt fencing will be installed around all
disturbed areas to prevent sediment from escaping into undisturbed areas or offsite, and
access during construction will be within uplands.
Mitigation
The proposed project will result in 0.342 acres of permanent wetland impacts from construction
of the facility. Because the proposed permanent wetland impacts requested exceed the 0.10-acre
mitigation threshold, the applicant proposes to provide wetland mitigation. The applicant proposes
to mitigate for the 0.342 acres of proposed permanent wetland impacts through the purchase of
offsite mitigation credits at a 2:1 ratio, resulting in the provision of 0.684 acres of wetland
mitigation credits.
WithersRavenel coordinated with mitigation banks servicing this HUC to inquire on the availability
of mitigation credits. No mitigation credits were available in this HUC from private mitigation
banks, therefore a copy of a letter of acceptance from NCDMS has been provided as an
attachment.
Stormwater Management Plan
The stormwater management plan consists of two wet pond SCMs to serve the site's stormwater
needs. The stormwater management plan will be reviewed and approved by Nash County as the
designated authority.
Page 3 of 4

FSC Goldrock Asphalt Plant
Battleboro, Nash County
NWP 39 PCN Submittal
4: WithersRavenel
Our People. Your Succ-
Please feel free to contact me if you have questions or require additional information to complete
your review.
Sincerely,
WithersRavenel
Rick Trone
Environmental Scientist
Attachments:
• PCN Form
• Pre -Filing Meeting Documentation
• Agent & Access Authorization Forms
• Aerial Exhibit
• USGS Quads
• Nash County Soil Survey
• Wetland Delineation Exhibit
• USACE Jurisdictional Determination (SAW-2021-02689)
• WR Threatened & Endangered Species Assessment Report
• NCDMS Letter of Acceptance for Wetland Mitigation
• Impact Exhibits
Page 4 of 4

■■ WithersRavenel
lipOur People. Your Success.
PCN FORM

4/14/23, 10:30 AM
Submission Completed
1 DW'R
111211
11314islon of Water ReSowrS4*
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
For Nationwide Permits and Regional General Permits
(along with corresponding Water Quality Certifications)
April 13, 2022 Ver 4.3
Please note: fields marked with a red asterisk * below are required. You will not be able to submit the form until all
mandatory questions are answered.
Also, if at any point you wish to print a copy of the E-PCN, all you need to do is right -click on the document and you can
print a copy of the form.
Below is a link to the online help file.
https://edocs.deq. nc.govlWaterResources/0/edocl6247041PCN%20Help%20File%202018-1-30. pdf
A. Processing Information
Pre -Filing Meeting Date Request was submitted on: *
1 /27/2023
If this is a courtesy copy, please fill in this with the submission date.
Is this project connected with ARPAfunding?*
Yes No
County (or Counties) where the project is located: *
Nash
Is this a NCDMS Project*
O Yes No
Click Yes, only if NCDMS is the applicant or co -applicant.
hftps://edocs.deq.nc.gov/Forms/Form/Submit 1 /21

4/14/23, 10:30 AM
Submission Completed
DO NOT CHECK YES, UNLESS YOU ARE DMS OR CO -APPLICANT.
Is this project a public transportation project?*
Yes No
This is any publicly funded by municipal,state or federal funds road, rail, airport transportation project.
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps: *
Section 404 Permit (wetlands, streams and waters, Clean Water Act)
Section 10 Permit (navigable waters, tidal waters, Rivers and Harbors Act)
Has this PCN previously been submitted?*
Yes
No
1 b. What type(s) of permit(s) do you wish to seek authorization?*
Nationwide Permit (NWP)
Regional General Permit (RGP)
Standard (IP)
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?*
Yes No
Nationwide Permit (NWP) Number: 39 - Commercial/Institutional Developments
NWP Numbers (for multiple NWPS):
List all NW numbers you are applying for not on the drop down list.
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR: *
check all that apply
401 Water Quality Certification - Regular
Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
Individual 401 Water Quality Certification
401 Water Quality Certification - Express
Riparian Buffer Authorization
le. Is this notification solely for the record because written approval is not required?
*
For the record only for DWR 401 Certification: Yes No
https://edocs.deq.nc.gov/Forms/Form/Submit 2/21

4/14/23, 10:30 AM Submission Completed
For the record only for Corps Permit: Yes No
1f. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?*
Yes No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program.
Yes No
Acceptance Letter Attachment
Click the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach document
FSC Gold Rock Asphalt Plant DMS acceptance.pdf
FILE TYPE MUST BE PDF
1 h. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties?*
Yes No
1 j. Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?*
Yes No
315.71 KB
Link to trout information: http://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory-Permit-Program/Agency-
Coord i nation/Trout.aspx
B. Applicant Information
1 a. Who is the Primary Contact?*
Rick Trone
1 b. Primary Contact Email:
[e-mail]
m
1d. Who is applying for the permit?*
Owner
(Check all that apply)
1e. Is there an Agent/Consultant for this project?*
Yes No
2. Owner Information
1 c. Primary Contact Phone:*
(xxx)xxx-xxxx
[phone]
Applicant (other than owner)
https://edocs.deq.nc.gov/Forms/Form/Submit 3/21

4/14/23, 10:30 AM Submission Completed
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
Wake Stone Property Company
2b. Deed book and page no.:
3110/684
2c. Contact Person:
(for Corporations)
Samuel Bratton
2d. Address*
Street Address
6821 Knightdale BLVD
Address Line 2
City State / Province / Region
Knightdale NC
Postal / Zip Code Country
27545 USA
2e. Telephone Number:*
(XXX)X oc-XXXX
[phone]
2f. Fax Number:
(XXX)X oc-XXXX
2g. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
3. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
3a. Name: *
Brent Wood
3b. Business Name:
(if applicable)
FSC II, LLC
https://edocs.deq.nc.gov/Forms/Form/Submit 4/21

4/14/23, 10:30 AM Submission Completed
3c. Address*
Street Address
701 Corporate Center Dr.
Address Line 2
Suite 101
City
State / Province / Region
Raleigh
NC
Postal / Zip Code
Country
27607
USA
3d. Telephone Number:*
[phone] 3e. Fax Number:
(XXX)X oc-XXXX (XXX)XXX-XXXX
X Email Address:*
[e-mail]
4. Agent/Consultant (if applicable)
4a. Name:
Rick Trone
4b. Business Name:
(if applicable)
WithersRavenel
4c. Address*
Street Address
115 MacKenan Drive
Address Line 2
City State / Province / Region
Cary NC
Postal / Zip Code Country
27511 USA
4d. Telephone Number:*
[phone] 4e. Fax Number:
(XXX)X oc-XXXX (XXX)XXX-XXXX
https://edocs.deq.nc.gov/Forms/Form/Submit 5/21

4/14/23, 10:30 AM
Submission Completed
4f. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
C. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Project Information
1 a. Name of project:*
Goldrock Asphalt Plant
1b. Subdivision name:
(if appropriate)
1c. Nearest municipality / town:*
Battleboro
2. Project Identification
2a. Property Identification Number: 2b. Property size:
(tax PIN or parcel ID) (in acres)
PIN: 384400549375 ±25.81
2c. Project Address
Street Address
7526 N. Halifax Road
Address Line 2
City State / Province / Region
Battleboro NC
Postal / Zip Code Country
27809 USA
2d. Site coordinates in decimal degrees
Please collect site coordinates in decimal degrees. Use between 4-6 digits (unless you are using a survey -grade GPS
device) after the decimal place as appropriate, based on how the location was determined. (For example, most mobile
phones with GPS provide locational precision in decimal degrees to map coordinates to 5 or 6 digits after the decimal
place.)
https://edocs.deq.nc.gov/Forms/Form/Submit 6/21

4/14/23, 10:30 AM Submission Completed
Latitude: * Longitude: *
36.059323-77.828442
ex: 34.208504-77.796371
3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project: *
Swift Creek
3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water:
C:NSW
Surface Water Lookup
3c. What river basin(s) is your project located in?*
Tar -Pamlico
3d. Please provide the 12-digit HUC in which the project is located.
030201010803
River Basin Lookup
4. Project Description and History
4a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the
time of this application:*
The site is vacant and has been logged. A Wake Stone quarry is located across N. Halifax Road and the site
is bordered by 195 to the east. A mixture of commercial, industrial, and agricultural land use surrounds the site
with a small residential amount of residential to the southwest of the site.
4b. Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this project (including all prior phases) in the
past? *
Yes No Unknown
4f. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
1.82
4g. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
(intermittent and perennial)
0
hftps://edocs.deq.nc.gov/Forms/Form/Submit 7/21

4/14/23, 10:30 AM Submission Completed
4h. Explain the purpose of the proposed project: *
The purpose of the proposed project is construction of a new larger asphalt plant to meet the ongoing
demand for asphalt product.
41. Describe the overall project in detail, including indirect impacts and the type of equipment to be used: *
The proposed asphalt plant is located adjacent to an existing Wake Stone facility and the existing but
undersized FSC Gold Rock asphalt site. Being located so near an existing source of material eases logistics
and results in significantly less dump truck traffic on local roads.
The three primary reasons for the need to construct a larger plant are as follows:
• Safety — currently there is not enough space within the existing asphalt facility for employees to see around
stockpiles due to the limited space. Truck traffic must be extremely careful navigating the stock area due to
blind turns and limited sight distance creating a greater potential of an incident.
• Production — the current asphalt plant located on the north side of N. Halifax Road has a limited stockpile
area, not allowing for the correct size piles of material to facilitate drying of the product prior to running it
through the plant. Wetter material results in a slowing of production. The increased stockpile area within the
new proposed asphalt plant will allow for more time between receiving the wet material from the rock quarry
and when it can be processed through the plant.
• Cost — decreased production from the high moisture content results in higher costs. Essentially, the facility
needs to dry out all the material as it goes through the asphalt plant. The wetter the material, the more it costs
to dry it out. The more fuel used to dry out the material means that more emissions are produced and higher
costs that are incurred.
Once the proposed new asphalt plant is constructed and operational, the existing asphalt plant will be
decommissioned, and the land returned to Wake Stone Corporation.
The proposed project will result in 0.342 acres of permanent wetland impacts (Wetland A). The proposed
permanent wetland impacts are necessary for construction of sufficiently large areas of gravel yard stockpile
area (Impact W1 - 0.294 ac), a 20' wide gravel haul road (Impact W2 - 0.045 ac) over a narrow finger of
Wetland A and a SCM outfall to Wetland A (Impact W3 - 0.003 ac).
Large areas of gravel yard are required for efficient and safe movement of large equipment/vehicles and
aggregate storage.
No streams or surface other waters are located on the site. No impacts are proposed for construction of the
asphalt plant facility, utilities, or the primary access.
5. Jurisdictional Determinations
5a. Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the property or proposed impact areas?*
Yes
No
Unknown
https://edocs.deq.nc.gov/Forms/Form/Submit 8/21

4/14/23, 10:30 AM Submission Completed
Comments:
WithersRavenel completed a delineation of the project area
in February 2022.
5b. If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made?*
Preliminary Approved
Corps AID Number:
Example: SAW-2017-99999
SAW-2021-02689
Not Verified Unknown N/A
5c. If 5a is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known):
Agency/Consultant
Company:
Other:
Troy Beasley
WithersRavenel
5d. List the dates of the Corp jurisdiction determination or State determination if a determination was made by
the Corps or DWR.
WR submitted an AJD request for the project site on December 20, 2021. Kyle Barnes, USACE, field verified
the onsite wetlands on February 1, 2022.
A PJD/AJD request was submitted to the USACE on January 9, 2023 that included an updated review area
that included an old borrow pit constructed in uplands. The PJD/AJD was issued on March 10, 2023. A copy
of the PJD/AJD has been included as an attachment.
There are no depicted streams on the USGS or Nash Co. Soil Survey within the project area, and therefore a
formal riparian buffer determination from NCDWR was not required.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?*
Yes
No
https://edocs.deq.nc.gov/Forms/Form/Submit 9/21

4/14/23, 10:30 AM
Submission Completed
Are any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permits(s) used, or intended to be used, to
authorize any part of the proposed project or related activity? This includes other separate and distant
crossing for linear projects that require Department of the Army authorization but don't require pre -
construction notification.
No
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Where are the impacts associated with your project? (check all that apply):
Wetlands Streams -tributaries Buffers
Open Waters Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland
area impacted.
"W." will be used in the table below to represent the word "wetland".
2a. Site
#* (?)
2a1 Reason*
(?)
2b. Impact
type* M
2c. Type of W. *
Unknown
2d. W. name*
Wetland A
2e.
Forested
Yes
2f. Type of
Jurisdicition*
(?)
Both
2g.
Impact
area
0.294
W1
Fill Grading
P
(acres)
W2
Crossing
P
Unknown
Wetland A
Yes
Both
0.045
(acres)
W3
SCM Outfall
P
Unknown
Wetland A
Yes
Both
0.003
(acres)
2g. Total Temporary Wetland Impact
0.000
2g. Total Permanent Wetland Impact
0.342
2g. Total Wetland Impact
0.342
https://edocs.deq.nc.gov/Forms/Form/Submit 10/21

4/14/23, 10:30 AM
Submission Completed
21. Comments:
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
hftps://edocs.deq.nc.gov/Forms/Form/Submit 11 /21

4/14/23, 10:30 AM
Submission Completed
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project: *
Prior to site plan design, the applicant requested that a detailed wetland delineation be
conducted so that impacts to wetlands and "waters" could be minimized.
Proposed permanent wetland impacts for construction of the asphalt plant facility and
infrastructure have been minimized to only those necessary for construction of the gravel
yards, gravel haul road crossing, and a SCM outfall.
Proposed impacts for the project have been designed to avoid impacts by designing a
site around Wetland A to the greatest extent possible while still making the project
feasible. Impacts to Wetland A are unavoidable due to the geographic position of the
wetland which is centrally located within the project area and the need to create enough
gravel yard space for safe equipment movement and sufficient aggregate storage (Impact
W1). Furthermore, the proposed internal gravel haul road was designed to cross Wetland
A at the narrowest location to minimize impacts (Impact W2). Impacts due to rip rap
dissipater pads are necessary at one weir outlet due to the greater slope (Impact W3)
from SCM 1. Rip rap dissipater impacts were minimized to just one SCM weir outfall
structure.
The SCMs design incorporates the location and shape of Wetland A to minimize wetland
impacts. Hydrology of Wetland A will be maintained through the SCMs being designed to
capture onsite runoff and discharge treated water back into Wetland A. Drainage pipes
will also be installed within the current location of drainage swales to convey offsite
drainage into Wetland A as currently occurs. The design of the SCMs and offsite drainage
pipes will provide the same upland runoff volume into Wetland A as the predevelopment
conditions. Additionally, the hydrology of Wetland A is primarily provided through
groundwater fluctuation. Therefore, the long-term viability and integrity of Wetland A will
be maintained in the post -development condition.
The hydrologic connectivity of Wetland A to downstream waters will be maintained in the
post -development condition. Currently, Wetland A drains into a drainage pipe under 1-95
which eventually outfalls into downstream wetlands on the south side of 1-95. The culvert
beneath the proposed haul road will continue to convey drainage through Wetland A to
the pipe under 1-95.
The existing asphalt plant is immediately adjacent to the proposed site. Space is not
available at the current asphalt plant to allow for expansion. Furthermore, the proposed
site is immediately opposite of N. Halifax Road from the existing facility and the rock
quarry where the plant sources raw materials making the choice of the location of the
proposed asphalt plant the only feasible option. The project location allows for increased
public safety by minimizing the time aggregate delivery trucks spend on N. Halifax Road.
https://edocs.deq.nc.gov/Forms/Form/Submit 12/21

4/14/23, 10:30 AM
Submission Completed
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction
techniques:*
Construction techniques used to avoid or minimize impacts include installation of erosion
& sediment control devices prior to construction. Silt fencing will be installed around all
disturbed areas to prevent sediment from escaping into undisturbed areas or offsite, and
access during construction will be within uplands.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the
State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
Yes
M
2c. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
DWR
Corps
2d. If yes, which mitigation option(s) will be used for this project?
Mitigation bank Payment to in -lieu fee program Permittee Responsible Mitigation
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
Yes No
4b. Stream mitigation requested: 4c. If using stream mitigation, what is the stream
(linear feet) temperature:
0
NC Stream Temperature Classification Maps can be found under the Mitigation Concepts tab on the Wilmington
District's RIBITS website.
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWR only):
(square feet)
0
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
(acres)
0.342
4h. Comments
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
(acres)
0
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
(acres)
0
https://edocs.deq.nc.gov/Forms/Form/Submit 13/21

4/14/23, 10:30 AM
Submission Completed
6. Buffer mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) - required
by DWR
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires buffer mitigation? If yes,
you must fill out this entire form - please contact DWR for more information.
Yes No
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required
by DWR)
*** Recent changes to the stormwater rules have required updates to this section .***
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
la. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified within one of the NC
Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
Yes No
For a list of options to meet the diffuse flow requirements, click here.
If no, explain why:
No buffered features are located on the project site.
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250? *
Yes No
2b. Does this project meet the requirements for low density projects as defined in 15A NCAC 02H .1003(2)?*
Yes No
To look up low density requirement click here 15A NCAC 02H .1003(2).
Comments:
The stormwater management plan consists of two wet pond SCMs to serve the site's stormwater needs. The
Stormwater management plan will be reviewed and approved by Nash County as the designated authority.
https://edocs.deq.nc.gov/Forms/Form/Submit 14/21

4/14/23, 10:30 AM Submission Completed
G. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of public
(federal/state) land?*
Yes No
2. Violations (DWR Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated Wetland
Rules (15A NCAC 21-1.1300), or DWR Surface Water or Wetland Standards or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC
2B .0200)? *
Yes No
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWR Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in additional
development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? *
Yes No
3b. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
The project will not result in additional development that could impact downstream water
quality.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project? *
Yes No N/A
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps
Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or habitat?*
Yes No
https://edocs.deq.nc.gov/Forms/Form/Submit 15/21

4/14/23, 10:30 AM
Submission Completed
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?*
Yes No
5d. Is another Federal agency involved?*
Yes No Unknown
5e. Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?*
Yes No
5f. Will you cut any trees in order to conduct the work in waters of the U.S.?
Yes No
5g. Does this project involve bridge maintenance or removal?*
Yes No
Link to the NLEB SLOPES document: http://saw-reg.usace.army.mil/NLEB/1-30-17-signed_NLEB-SLOPES&apps.pdf
5h. Does this project involve the construction/installation of a wind turbine(s)?**
Yes No
51. Does this project involve (1) blasting, and/or (2) other percussive activities that will be conducted by
machines, such as jackhammers, mechanized pile drivers, etc.?*
Yes No
https://edocs.deq.nc.gov/Forms/Form/Submit 16/21

4/14/23, 10:30 AM
Submission Completed
5j. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or
Designated Critical Habitat?*
https://edocs.deq.nc.gov/Forms/Form/Submit 17/21

4/14/23, 10:30 AM Submission Completed
On 3/21/2022 & 4/5/2023, WR generated an official species list using USFWS'
Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC), located at
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/ which is attached. The IPaC Species List identified
Tricolored Bat (proposed endangered), Neuse River Waterdog (Threatened), Carolina
Madtom (Endangered), Atlantic Pigtoe (Threatened), Tar River Spinymussel
(Endangered), Yellow Lance (Threatened) and Michaux's Sumac (Endangered) as
potentially occurring within the vicinity of the project. The IPaC did not identify any critical
habitat within the proposed project.
WR submitted a project review request to the NCNHP through their Data Explorer
webpage, located at: https://ncnhde.natureserve.org/, to identify known occurrences of
federally listed threatened or endangered species within 1.0 mile of the review area. The
3/21/2023 NCNHP Project Review Letter listed Neuse River Waterdog (Threatened),
Red -Cockaded Woodpecker (RCW)(Endangered), Yellow Lance (Threatened), Atlantic
Pigtoe (Threatened), Tar River Spinymussel (Endangered), and Carolina Madtom
(Endangered) potentially occurring within 1.0 miles of the Project.
The project site largely consisted of loblolly pine plantation. Pedestrian surveys
completed in October 2021, March 2022 and May 2022 did not identify any occurrences
of federally listed threatened or endangered species, or species proposal for listing under
the ESA. Marginal habitat for Michaux's Sumac was determined to exist in the
southeastern portion of the review area which was characterized as "early successional".
Suitable habitat for RCW was not present within the project area as the site was logged
between 1998 & 1999 and replanted with loblolly pine. Therefore, the approximate age of
the onsite loblolly pine forest is 24 years old, which is too young for potential RCW
habitat. Based on an absence of streams, rivers, or other suitable onsite habitat and
anticipated sediment and erosion control measures installed prior to development of the
project, WR concludes the proposed project will not adversely affect the listed aquatic
species.
At the time of the 5/13/2022 survey, the tricolored bat was not listed by the USFWS for
protection under the ESA. The USFWS proposed to list the tricolored bat as an
endangered species under the Endangered Species Act on September 13, 2022, largely
because of white -nose syndrome, a disease that affects cave -dwelling bats and is
decimating hibernating bat species. There has been no critical habitat designated for the
tricolored bat at this time. Based on the review of the NCNHP GIS data there are no
known occurrences of the tricolored bat within 1.0 miles of the review area.
The upland portions of the onsite loblolly pine plantation have been clearcut since the
5/13/2022 surveys and is not considered potential habitat. The remaining onsite forested
areas are within the wetlands and is considered potential habitat due to the presence of
mature trees. Targeted surveys for tricolored bat have not been conducted.
Construction of the proposed asphalt plant will require tree clearing within the wetland
areas as a result of the wetland impacts necessary to construct the project.
https://edocs.deq.nc.gov/Forms/Form/Submit 18/21

4/14/23, 10:30 AM
Submission Completed
Approximately 0.34 acres of wetlands will be impacted and will result in tree clearing.
$ieEssentW Fishi+ta:bkaibi(CervplssRegLg ftrfont)well as no
known occurrences within 1.0 miles. Therefore, WR concludes that the proposed
@ti��� pry jecetl��°cudr i�r��l�ieareagtnthU �'e$1189aNd as an Essential Fish Habitat?
They%thodology and results .,, Mug 5/13/2022 survey for federally listed species has
been provided as an attachment to this application.
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat?
There are no waters classified as EFH in Nash County.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
Link to the State Historic Preservation Office Historic Properties Map (does not include archaeological data:
http_//gis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal governments have designated as
having historic or cultural preservation status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties
significant in North Carolina history and archaeology)?*
Yes No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological
resources? *
WR reviewed the NC State Historic Preservation Office's online database, located at:
http://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/, to determine if there were any known historic or cultural
resources within or in the vicinity of the proposed project. The database review did not
identify any known resources within or in the vicinity of the proposed project.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
Link to the FEMA Floodplain Maps: https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain? *
Yes No
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? *
FEMA Flood Maps
https://edocs.deq.nc.gov/Forms/Form/Submit 19/21

4/14/23, 10:30 AM Submission Completed
Miscellaneous
Comments
Please see attached Cover Letter and Attachments.
Please use the space below to attach all required documentation or any additional information you feel is
helpful for application review. Documents should be combined into one file when possible, with a Cover Letter,
Table of Contents, and a Cover Sheet for each Section preferred.
Click the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach document
Cover Letter and Attachments_Final.pdf 14.78MB
File must be PDF or KMZ
Signature
By checking the box and signing below, I certify that:
• The project proponent hereby certifies that all information contained herein is true, accurate, and complete
to the best of my knowledge and belief'; and
• The project proponent hereby requests that the certifying authority review and take action on this CWA401
certification request within the applicable reasonable period of time.
• 1 have given true, accurate, and complete information on this form;
• 1 agree that submission of this PCN form is a "transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC
General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• 1 agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC
General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• 1 understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as
a written signature; AND
• 1 intend to electronically sign and submit the PCN form.
Full Name:*
Rick Trone
Signature*
Date
4/14/2023
https://edocs.deq.nc.gov/Forms/Form/Submit 20/21

■■ WithersRavenel
lipOur People. Your Success.
PRE -FILING MEETING
DOCUMENTATION

From: Trone, Rick
To: 401PreFile(c ncdenr.aov
Subject: FSC Goldrock Site Pre -Filing Meeting Request (WR#02080279.01)
Date: Friday, January 27, 2023 2:17:00 PM
On behalf of FSCII, LLC d/b/a Fred Smith Company, we are requesting a Pre -filing meeting for the
following project:
Project Name: FSC Goldrock Site
County: Nash
Applicant Name: FSCII, LLC d/b/a Fred Smith Company
Applicant Contact: Brent Wood
Applicant Phone: [phone]
Thank you,
Rick Trone
❑®
115 MacKenan Drive Cary, NC 27511
Office: 919.469.3340 Direct 919.538.8184
rtrone(@withersravenel.com
ININININIo
CONFIDENTIALITY AND NONDISCLOSURE

■■ WithersRavenel
lipOur People. Your Success.
AGENT AND ACCESS
AUTHORIZATION FORMS

� Our People. Your Success.
AUTHORIZATION FOR PROPERTY ACCESS
The undersigned owner(s), Wake Stone Property Company, do(es) hereby authorize WithersRavenel, Inc.
to access the ±16.83-acre parcel, Nash Co. PIN: 384400549375, located immediately south of 7526 N
Halifax Road, Battleboro, NC for the purpose of environmental regulatory agency review (US Army Corps
of Engineers, NC Division of Water Quality, NC Division of Coastal Management, US Fish and Wildlife
Service, local Municipalities, etc.) and approvals (i.e. wetland delineation, stream/buffer determination,
environmental permitting, etc.) at the request of the contract purchaser.
This authorization does not bind the current property owner(s) to financial responsibility for services
rendered on the subject property by WithersRavenel, Inc.
This agreement shall continue in effect until completion/termination of the purchase contract for the subject
property.
Contract Purchaser's Agent Info:
WithersRavenel. Inc.
115 MacKenan Drive
Cary, NC 27511
Tel. [phone]
Date: I / . ;� L2.
Signature of Owner(s):
�i mve / 7—L3AA /
Namee-- Print` Title
Signature
�d I A%/,4Gti 041�
Mailing address
City ` State Zip
Phone: / A(56- /!®o
Email: .4M I�R.e4�- ie^�'l
}
... , . f en...l. "t PHHtsbwo I Raleigh
/1 4$ 'deAll

10 WithersRavenel
I. Our People. Your Success.
AUTHORITY FOR APPOINTMENT OF AGENT
The undersigned contract purchaser, FSC II, LLC does hereby appoint WithersRavenel, Inc.
as his, her, or it's agent for the purpose of petitioning the appropriate local, state and federal
environmental regulatory agencies (US Army Corps of Engineers, NC Division of Water
Quality, NC Division of Coastal Management, local municipalities, etc.) for: a) review and
approval of the jurisdictional boundaries of onsite jurisdictional areas (wetlands, streams,
riparian buffers, etc.) and/or; b) preparation and submittal of appropriate environmental
permit applications/requests for the ±16.83-acre parcel, Nash Co. PIN: 384400549375,
located immediately south of 7526 N Halifax Road, Battleboro, INC.
The Client does hereby authorize that said agent has the authority to do the following acts
on behalf of the owner:
(1) To submit appropriate requests/applications and the required
supplemental materials;
(2) To attend meetings to give representation on behalf of the Client.
(3) To authorize access to subject property for the purpose of
environmental review by appropriate regulatory agencies.
This authorization shall continue in effect until completion of the contracted task or
termination by the Client.
Agent's Name, Address & Telephone:
WithersRavenel, Inc.
115 MacKenan Drive
Cary, NC 27511
Tel. [phone]
Date: November 18, 2021
Signature of Client:
FSC II, LLC by Brent Wood, VP
(Nam - ri t (Title)
(Signature)
701 Corporate Center Drive
Mailing Address
Raleigh, NC 27607
City State Zip
Phone: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
115 MacKenan Drive I Cary, NC 27511
t: 919.469.3340 1 f: 919.467.6008 1 www.withersravenel.com I License No. C-0832
Asheville I Cary I Greensboro I Pittsboro I Raleigh I Wilmington

::WithersRavenel
Our People. Your Success.
AERIAL EXHIBIT

IIAL
AFM
1
ADIU d ws13fn — nd wev:e zzoz Iz nq—a 'FoDYd—bmpwog uopou7wl W jou ".pnf\W3\owm4S— OPM\'oo+woD — 3U—to16czoea\oczo-40\00\-"A

::WithersRavenel
Our People. Your Success.
USGS QUADS

AM 'A31SW38 - pd U'-BlT £ZOZ '£ WV 'f-"-ooM-5-P*Rlq[4-3 Nod\aoo\owoa4£- Nopm\,papo8 - ou-to,6a088\oao-8o\80\71

rEll
Ln
L
�w
CORP
IIAL
o %Is
i
ti
U
W
i j- --
�'
Q
z
Q
CL
CL
J
Q
w
i i
U z
0
V)
o
1
U o
`n
6f
�
t
0
CL
Q
U
i
U o
J o
NED
� R �• I
AM 'XTtW8 — na LS:L IT CZOZ 's WV 'f-"-PM-6MD•g10l4x3 NOd\W3\---4S-®N0PM\lpaPIo0 - OU-l0'BLZ080\0LZ0-80\00VA

::WithersRavenel
Our People. Your Success.
NASH COUNTY SOIL SURVEY

AOM1 'AMSV3B — Yld OO:BI:£ £ZOZ 'S ludy 'AbpsaupaM—Bx.p's4iq!4x3 NOd\M\--IS—apuollaM\M=PIOO — OS!—W'6LZO9O\OLZO-90\00\:N

::WithersRavenel
Our People. Your Success.
WETLAND DELINEATION
EXHIBIT

1
CL 1-5Q
\ \ \
r�
Q
W
Q
F-
U
W
O
a
W
z
CD
cc
W
LL
LL
CO
0
°aa
�a�
C-4
N Z W
W Z
Q � —
� Q U
co W cc d
N W
o H 0
W0
p 0
W0O
F-
a w p
pCCZ
p=a
a F-
p�
QQo
CD
U w C7
cc
CD
fn z
J
O
CO W U
W
> V/
O Z
N a Q 0
N Z H
O CC Q
r ~ 0
F- 0
N � J
Z CD fn CD
ccQLL, O
Z Z
0H0
m U Z W
po0�
LU
W m
p H Q
0zCD2
U Q p X
W
0 OOVCC
QQa(L
W W W Q
Z Z p W
W W Z Q
p p W W
p p CC Z
ZZQO_
Q Q W H
�LU LU20
W
O r N M
z
Z
Q
J
J
Q
2
CL
Q
U
O
J
O
U
V)
LL
AOLL 'A31MB — pd 6£:I IT SZOZ 'S WdV 'MPGWDOM—5-P*Rl714x3 NDd\M\---4S— NOPM\'P-PPD — OU—l0'BLZ080\OLZO-80\60VA

■■ WithersRavenel
lipOur People. Your Success.
USACE JURISDICTIONAL
DETERMINATION

SAW-2021-02689
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. SAW-2021-02689 County: Edgecombe U.S.G.S. Quad: NC -Drake
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERNIINATION
Requestor:
FSC II, LLC
Brent Wood
Address:
701 Corporate Center Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
Telephone Number:
[phone]
E-mail:
Brent.wood(&constructionpartners.net
Size (acres) 25.81 Nearest Town Rocky Mount
Nearest Waterway Swift Creek River Basin Pamlico
USGS HUC 03020101 Coordinates Latitude: 36.059323
Longitude:-77.828442
Location description: The review area for this Jurisdictional Determination totals approximately 25.81 acres and is located
immediately south of 7526 N Halifax Road in Rocky Mount, Nash County, NC. The review area is identified by Nash County
PIN: 384400549375, and a portion of Nash Count PINS: 384400517036 and 384400415741. The review area consists of a
Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) portion that totals approximately 25.5 acres and an Approved Jurisdictional
Determination (AJD) portion that totals approximately 0.3 acres.
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
® There appear to be wetlands within the PJD review area, that may be subject to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33
USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). The wetlands have been delineated, and
the delineation has been verified by the Corps to be sufficiently accurate and reliable. The approximate boundaries of these waters
are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated 12/5/2022. Therefore this preliminary jurisdiction determination may be used in
the permit evaluation process, including determining compensatory mitigation. For purposes of computation of impacts,
compensatory mitigation requirements, and other resource protection measures, a permit decision made on the basis of a
preliminary JD will treat all waters and wetlands that would be affected in any way by the permitted activity on the site as if they
are jurisdictional waters of the U.S. This preliminary determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory Program
Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331). However, you may request an approved JD, which is an appealable
action, by contacting the Corps district for further instruction.
❑ There appear to be wetlands on the above described project area/property, that may be subject to Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). However, since the
wetlands have not been properly delineated, this preliminary jurisdiction determination may not be used in the permit evaluation
process. Without a verified wetland delineation, this preliminary determination is merely an effective presumption of CWA/RHA
jurisdiction over all of the wetlands at the project area, which is not sufficiently accurate and reliable to support an enforceable
permit decision. We recommend that you have the wetlands on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be
able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that
can be verified by the Corps.
B. Approved Determination
❑ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described project area/property subject to the permit
requirements of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for
a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ There are wetlandson the above described project area/property subject to the permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act (CWA) (33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this determination may be
relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.

SAW-2021-02689
❑ We recommend you have the wetlands on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to accomplish
this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can be verified by
the Corps.
❑ The wetlands on your project area/property have been delineated and the delineation has been verified by the Corps. The
approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated . We strongly suggest you have this
delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed and verified by the Corps. Once verified, this survey
will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA jurisdiction on your property which, provided there is no change in
the law or our published regulations, may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years.
® There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present within the AJD review area that are subject to the permit
requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US, including wetlands, without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). Placement of dredged or fill material, construction or
placement of structures, or work within navigable waters of the United States without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Sections 9 and/or 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC § 401 and/or 403). If you have any questions
regarding this determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Billy W. Standrid2e at [phone] or
Billy.w. standridge(a,usace. army.mil.
C. Basis For Determination: See the attached preliminary and approved iurisdictional determination
forms dated 3/10/2023.
D. Remarks: The AJD and PJD review areas are depicted on the attached Aquatic Resources Exhibit —
Goldrock Tract, dated 12/05/2022.
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the particular site
identified in this request. The delineation/determination 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 request
a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in B.
above)
If you object to this determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. Enclosed
you will find a Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and Request for Appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this
determination you must submit a completed RFA form to the following address:
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn: Mr. Philip A. Shannin
Administrative Appeal Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Floor M9
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8803
AND
PHILIPA.SHANNINkUSACE ARMY.MIL
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for appeal
under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP. Should you
decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by 5/9/2023.
**It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this correspondence.**
Date of JD: 3/10/2023 Expiration Date of AJD: 03/09/2028 Expiration Date of PJD: Not applicable

SAW-2021-02689
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we
continue to do so, please complete our Customer Satisfaction Survey, located online at
hAps://re ug latory.ops.usace.army.mil/customer-service-survey
Agent
Address:
Telephone Number:
E-mail:
WithersRavenal, Inc.
Troy Beaslev
219 Station Road, Suite 101
Wilmington, NC 28405
[phone]
tb easlevnwithersravenel.com

1
iEM
3 E
AFM
m
2
X
w
v7
UN
�o
ON
V7 Ln
LJ J O\
� N
Q
z
o a
N ()
T 0
N J
za
00
�z
�0
ma
w
wCD
Fa
w 00
J LU
a�
�a
02
0 X
z0
0 oC
�a
a
as
W
zw
Zi
W a
CD
z0
J Q
F 0
LLI
O
LU
O r N
z
ADIUM 'HS13M — nd wort zzoz 'Z mq—a ',%PMj—6MPWDS uOItDUJ W IDW".pnf\M\.WM4S— NDPM\)PWDlo'J — 3U—l0'6LZ080\OLZ0—QD\W\71

NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
lAlicant:
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
FSC II LLC, Brent Wood File Number: SAW-2021-02689 Date: 3/10/2023
ched is:
See Section below
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission)
A
PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission)
B
PERMIT DENIAL
C
❑X
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
D
❑X
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
E
SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision.
Additional information may be found at or http://www.usace.army.miUMissions/CivilWorks/RegulatoryProgramandPenuits.aspx
or the Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
• OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request
that the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district
engineer. Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will
forfeit your right to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your
objections and may: (a) modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your
objections, or (c) not modify the permit having deternimed that the permit should be issued as previously written. After
evaluating your objections, the district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in
Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
• APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein,
you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Adnimlstrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of
this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days
of the date of this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Adnimlstrative Appeal Process by
completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division
engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or provide new
information.
• ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the
date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
• APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers
Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the district engineer. This form
must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.

E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps regarding the
preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be appealed),
by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new information for further consideration by the
Corps to reevaluate the JD.
SECTION II - REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMI
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an initial
proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons or
objections are addressed in the administrative record.)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the
record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to
clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record.
However, you may provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative
record.
POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION:
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
appeal process you may contact:
also contact:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division
MR. PHILIP A. SHANNIN
Attn: Billy W. Standridge
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL REVIEW OFFICER
Washington Regulatory Office
CESAD-PDS-O
U.S Army Corps of Engineers
60 FORSYTH STREET SOUTHWEST, FLOOR M9
2407 West Fifth Street
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8803
Washington, North Carolina 27889
PHONE: [phone]; FAX [phone]
EMAIL: PHILIP.A.SHANNIN(a USACE.ARMY.MIL
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government
consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15-day
notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportum to participate in all site investi ations.
Date:
Telephone number:
Signature of appellant or agent.
For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Attn: Billy W. Standridge, 69 Darlington Avenue, Wilmington, North
Carolina 28403
For Permit denials, Proffered Permits and Approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this form to:
Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Philip Shannin, Administrative
Appeal Officer, CESAD-PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 1OM15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]

PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD: 3/10/2023
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: Troy Beasley — WithersRavenel; 219 Station Road, Suite
101, Wilmington, NC 28405
Wilmington District, FSC Goldrock / South of 7526 N
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Halifax Road / Nash County, SAW-2021-02689
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Immediately south of 7526 N Halifax Road
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND/OR
AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: NC County/parish/borough: Nash County City: Battleboro
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat.: 36.059323°N Long.:-77.828442°W
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Swift Creek (Stream Index: 28-78-(2.5))
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
M Field Determination. Date(s): 02/02/2022 & 01/26/2023
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES IN REVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO REGULATORY
JURISDICTION.
Site
Latitude (decimal
Longitude
Estimated amount of
Type of aquatic
Geographic authority to
Number
degrees)
(decimal degrees)
aquatic resources in
resources (i.e.,
which the aquatic resource
review area (acreage
wetland vs. non-
"may be" subject (i.e.,
and linear feet, if
wetland waters)
Section 404 or Section
applicable
10/404
Wetland A
36.059323°N
-77.828442°W
1.82 acres
Wetland
Section 404

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

SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply)
Checked items should be included in subject file. Appropriately reference sources below where
indicated for all checked items:
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor: Troy
Beasley — WithersRavenel
Map:
® 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: USGS Quad (2019) — Drake 1:24K
® Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Nash Co. Soil Survey (1989) — Sheet 5
❑ 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)
M Photographs: ®Aerial (Name & Date): Aerial (2022) - NConemap
or ❑Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
M Other information (please specify): LIDAR
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.
;6A � k�!A-
Signatur and date of Regula ory
staff member completing PJD
03/10/2023
Troy Beasley - WithersRavenel
Authorized Agent — 12/05/2022
Signature and date of person
requesting PJD (REQUIRED,
unless obtaining the signature
is impracticable) t
1 Districts may establish timeframes for requester to return signed PJD forms. If the requester 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.

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION L• BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD): 3/10/2023
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Wilmington District, FSC Goldrock / South of 7526 N Halifax Road / Nash County,
SAW-2021-02689
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The review area for this Jurisdictional Determination totals
approximately 25.81 acres is located immediately south of 7526 N Halifax Road in Rocky Mount, Nash County, NC. The review area is identified by
Nash County PIN: 384400549375, and a portion of Nash Count PINs: 384400517036 and 384400415741. The review area consists of a Preliminary
Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) portion that totals approximately 25.5 acres and an Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD) portion that
totals approximately 0.3 acres.
State: NC County/parish/borough: Edgecombe City: Rocky Mount
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 36.059323 , Long.-77.828442
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Swift Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows:
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03020101
❑ Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
❑ Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc... ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a different JD form:
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
® Field Determination. Date(s): 02/02/2022 & 01/26/2023
SECTION H: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There are no "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the review area.
[Required]
❑ Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
❑ Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce. Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There are not "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply):'
El TNWs, including territorial seas
❑ Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
El Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
❑ Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non -wetland waters: linear feet, wide, and/or acres.
1 Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
2 For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally" (e.g.,
typically 3 months).
Pagel of 8 Form Version 10 June 2020

Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on:
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non -regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):'
❑X Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional. Explain:
The only aquatic resource with the AJD review area is 0.23-acre man-made pond excavated entirely within uplands. The pond
does not have any hydrologic connection to any potential jurisdictional waters.
SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
F. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete Section
I LA.1 and Section IILD.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections IILA.1 and 2 and Section
III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section HLB below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetlandadjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent":
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps determine
whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non -navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent waters"
(RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3 months). A wetland
that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round (perennial) flow, skip to
Section I LD.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow, skip to Section IILD.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and EPA
regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a relatively
permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even though a significant
nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody' is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must consider
the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for analytical purposes,
the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is the tributary, or its adjacent
wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section I LB.1 for the tributary, Section I LB.2 for any
onsite wetlands, and Section I LB.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite and offsite. The determination whether a
significant nexus exists is determined in Section I LC below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size:
Drainage area:
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
❑ Tributary flows through tributaries before entering TNW.
s Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.
4Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and West.
Page 2 of 8 Form Version 10 June 2020

Project waters are river miles from TNW.
Project waters are river miles from RPW.
Project waters are aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNWS:
Tributary stream order, if known:
(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: ❑Natural
El Artificial (man-made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man -altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: .
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
❑ Silts ❑ Sands ❑ Concrete
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel ❑ Muck
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type/% cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
Tributarycondition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry:
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for -
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year:
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is:. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow:. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
❑ Bed and banks
❑ OHWM6(check all indicators that apply):
❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank ❑ the presence of litter and debris
❑ changes in the character of soil ❑ destruction of terrestrial vegetation
❑ shelving ❑ the presence of wrack line
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent ❑ sediment sorting
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑ sediment deposition
❑ water staining
❑ other (list):
El Discontinuous OHWM.' Explain:
❑ scour
❑ multiple observed or predicted flow events
❑X abrupt change in plant community
'Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.
6A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where the
OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow regime (e.g., flow
over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.
Page 3 of 8 Form Version 10 June 2020

If factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
❑ High Tide Line indicated by: ❑ Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects ❑ survey to available datum;
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ❑ physical markings;
El physical markings/characteristics El vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
El tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
El Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
❑ Habitat for.
❑Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally -sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: Explain:
Surface flow is:
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow:. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non-TNW:
❑ Directly abutting
El Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
El Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are river miles from TNW.
Project waters are aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: .
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed characteristics;
etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
Page 4 of 8 Form Version 10 June 2020

(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:
❑ Habitat for.
❑Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally -sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis:
Approximately acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.
For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERDIINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed by any
wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of a TNW.
For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, has more
than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW. Considerations when
evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow of water in the tributary and
its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine
significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a
tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of
significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and discussed in
the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to TNWs, or to
reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and other
species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream food webs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or biological
integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented below:
Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain findings
of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section IILD:
2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands,
then go to Section IILD:
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of presence or
absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to Section IILD:
D. DETERDIINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL THAT
APPLY):
1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
❑ TNWs: linear feet, wide, Or acres.
Page 5 of 8 Form Version 10 June 2020

❑ Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
❑ Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that tributary is
perennial:
❑ Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year)are jurisdictional. Data
supporting this conclusion is provided at Section IILB. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows seasonally:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
❑ Tributary waters: linear feet wide.
❑ Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non-RPWs' that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
❑ Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a TNW is
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section IILC.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
❑ Tributary waters: linear feet, wide.
❑ Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
❑ Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
❑ Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale indicating that tributary
is perennial in Section IILD.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly abutting an RPW:
❑ Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is seasonal
in Section IILB and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
❑ Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and with
similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this conclusion is
provided at Section IILC.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
❑ Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and with
similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is
provided at Section IILC.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.'
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
El Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
El Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
❑ Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
'See Footnote # 3.
'To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section 111.13.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
Page 6 of 8 Form Version 10 June 2020

E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE, DEGRADATION
OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY SUCH WATERS (CHECK
ALL THAT APPLY):"
❑ which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
❑ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
❑ which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
❑ Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
❑ Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
❑ Tributary waters: linear feet, wide.
❑ Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
F. NON -JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
❑ Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based sole on the "Migratory
Bird Rule" (MBR).
❑ Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
❑X Other. (explain, if not covered above): 0.23-acre man-made pond excavated entirely within uplands.
Provide acreage estimates for non -jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR factors (i.e.,
presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional judgment (check all
that apply):
❑Non -wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams):linear feet, wide.
❑Lakes/ponds: acres.
❑ Other non -wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non -jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a
finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
❑Non -wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams):linear feet, wide.
❑Lakes/ponds: acres.
❑ Other non -wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked and
requested, appropriately reference sources below):
❑X Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant: PJD/AJD Submitted by WithersRavenel
0 Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
❑X Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
'OPrior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for review
consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.
Page 7 of 8 Form Version 10 June 2020

❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑USGS NHD data.
❑USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
❑X U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: USGS 2019 Quad - Drake-1:241C
❑X USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Nash Co. Soil Survey (1989) - Sheet 5.
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
❑X Photographs: ❑X Aerial (Name & Date): NCOne Map 2022 Aerial
Or ❑X Other (Name & Date): Site photographs.
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Applicable/supporting case law:
❑ Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
❑X Other information (please specify): LiDAR
B.ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:
N/A
Page 8 of 8 Form Version 10 June 2020

■■ WithersRavenel
lipOur People. Your Success.
WR THREATENED & ENDANGERED
SPECIES ASSESSMENT

,,� WithersRavenel
Our People. Your Success.
April 6, 2023
Brent Wood, Vice President
FSC II, LLC
701 Corporate Center Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
Re: FSC - Gold Rock Asphalt Plant
Battleboro, Nash County, NC
Federally Listed Threatened & Endangered Species Assessment Report
WR Project #02080279.01
Mr. Wood,
On 3/13/2022, WithersRavenel (WR) completed a site review of the FSC - Gold Rock Asphalt Plant
project area (Review Area) for the purpose of evaluating for the presence of federally listed threatened
and endangered species and/or potential habitat within the review area. The review area is ±16.83
acres located on Nash County PIN 384400549375 adjacent to the Wake Stone quarry and the existing
FSC Gold Rock Plant on N. Halifax Road (Lat: 36.059323°N; Long:-77.828442°W) as depicted in the
attached exhibits.
The review area is in the Tar -Pamlico River basin (HUC 03020101) and onsite waters drain to Swift
Creek. The water Quality Classification for Swift Creek is Class C; NSW and the Stream Index Number
is 28-78-(2.5).
WR surveyed the review area for the presence of federally listed threatened and endangered species,
or their potential habitat, protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). This report summarizes
the findings of the survey.
Proposed Activities
The project proposes to construct a new asphalt plant, aggregate storage, and associated
infrastructure within the review area.
Site Conditions
The review area consists of undeveloped land adjacent to the existing FSC Gold Rock Plant and Wake
Stone quarry and contains woodlands, wetlands, ditches, an abandoned road/path, and an old
irrigation pond. The review area contained two vegetative communities characterized as planted pine
forest and early successional as shown on the Vegetative Communities Exhibit. The adjoining areas
include the Wake Stone Corporation quarry, FSC Goldrock Plant, residential development, wooded
areas, and Interstate 95.
The planted pine forest comprised most of the review area. The vegetative composition consists
primarily of planted rows Loblolly Pine (Pinus toedo) with a significant component of hardwoods
including American holly (Ilex spp.), Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), sweetgum (Liquidambor
styrocifluo), water oaks (Quercus nigra), tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera) and red maple (Acer rubrum).
Based on review of historic aerials, the review area consisted of a mixture of farmland and forest prior
to 1998. Between 1998 and 1999 the forested portions of the review area were clearcut. Prior to
2005, the clearcut area and farmland were planted with rows of pines. Therefore, the approximate
A5 MacKenan Drive, Cary, NC 27511
t: y1y.-+U7.3340 I f: Y19.467.6008 I www.withersravenel.com I License No. r - 1479
4sheville I Cary I Charlotte JGreensboro I Lumberton IPittsboro I Raleigh I Southern Pines lWilmington

■■ WithersRavenel
10 Our People. Your Success.
FSC - Gold Rock Asphalt Plant
Battleboro, Nash County
age of the onsite planted pine forest is 24 years old. Between 2016 and 2017 the southwestern
portion of the review area was cleared and left to naturally regenerate.
Since the 5/13/2022 site visit, the planted pine forest within the upland portions of the review area
has been logged for timber production and now consists of a clearcut. Logging within onsite wetlands
has not occurred.
The early successional community is associated with abandoned road/path leading into the site from
N. Halifax Road and the southwestern portion of the review area that was cleared between 2016 and
2017. The vegetation composition within this community consists of a mixture of Bahia grass
(Paspolum notatum), fescue ( Festuca spp.), broomsedge ( Andropogon virginicus), dog fennel
(Eupatorium capillifolium), beggar's tick (Bidens pilosa), blackberry (Rubus floricomus), greenbriar (Smilax
rotundifolia) and early successional tree saplings including red maple, sweetgum, and loblolly pine were
growing in some areas.
Threatened & Endangered Species Review
Methodology
WR reviewed the US Fish and Wildlife Service's online threatened and endangered species database.
An official species list was generated using USFWS' Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaQ
located at https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/, on 3/22/2022 and 4/5/2023. This species list identifies
threatened, endangered, proposed and on
species, as well as proposed and designated critical
habitat, that are known or expected to be on or near the proposed project. The IPaC list specified that
there are there are three federally listed endangered species (Carolina Madtom, Tar River Spinymussel,
and Michaux's Sumac), three federally listed threatened species (Neuse River Waterdog, Atlantic
Pigtoe, and Yellow Lance) and one proposed endangered species (Tricolored Bat) that may be affected
by the proposed project. The IPaC list has been provided as an attachment. The IPaC list notes there
are no critical habitats at the proposed project location.
On 3/22/22 and 4/5/2023 WR submitted a project review request to the NCNHP through their Data
Explorer webpage, located at: https://ncnhde.natureserve.org/, to identify known occurrences of
federally listed threatened or endangered species within 1.0 mile of the review area. The NCNHP
project review also listed the Neuse River Waterdog, Yellow Lance, Tar River Spinymussel, Atlantic
Pigtoe, and Carolina Madtom. Additionally, the NCNHP project review lists the Red -Cockaded
Woodpecker within 1.0 mile of the review area, as documented in the attached letter from NCNHP
dated 3/21/2023.
On 5/13/2022, WR conducted a pedestrian survey to assess vegetative communities and identify
potential habitat for, or occurrences of federally listed species within or immediately adjacent to the
review area. The review area contains two vegetative communities which consisted of planted pine
forest and early successional as noted in the Site Conditions section of this report.
Species Synopsis and Pedestrian Survey Results
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) maintains lists of species that receive Federal protection
under the Endangered Species Act. Endangered (E) status refers to "any species which is in danger of
extinction throughout all or a significant part of its range," and Threatened (T) status refers to any
species which is "likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range" (Endangered Species Act, Section 3). Plants and animals classified as
Endangered (E) or Threatened (T) by the USFWS are protected under the provisions of Section 7 and
Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. The following table presents federally
rage 2 of 8

::WithersRavenel
Our People. Your Success.
FSC - Gold Rock Asphalt Plant
Battleboro, Nash County
listed species by the USFWS known or expected to occur on or near the project area referenced above
as listed on 4/5/2023.
Common Name
Scientific Name
Federal
Habitat
Biological Determination
Status
Present
Bald Eagle
Haliaeetus leucocephalus
BGPA*
No
No Effect
Red -Cockaded
Picoides borealis
E
No
No Effect
Woodpecker
Neuse River
Necturus lewisi
T
No
No Effect
Waterdog
Carolina Madtom
Noturus furiosus
E
No
No Effect
Atlantic Pigtoe
Fusconaia masoni
T
No
No Effect
Tar River
Elliptio steinstansana
E
No
No Effect
Spinymussel
Yellow Lance
Elliptio lanceolata
T
No
No Effect
Michaux's Sumac
Rhus michauxii
E
Yes
No Effect
Tricolored Bat
Perimyotis subflavus
PE'
Yes
Not Likely to Adversely
Affect
BGPA* - Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
PE* - Proposed Endangered
Bald Eagle (BGPA)
Habitat for the bald eagle primarily consists of mature forest in proximity to large bodies of open water
for foraging. Large dominant trees are utilized for nesting sites, typically within 1.0 mile of open water.
WR reviewed the NC Natural Heritage Program GIS data to determine the location of the known bald
eagle nest sites and their distance from the review area. Based on the NC Natural Heritage Program
GIS data, there are no known occurrences of bald eagle nesting/roosting sites or potential foraging
habitat within 1.0 mile of the review area. The US Fish and Wildlife Services' "National Bald Eagle
Management Guidelines" (May 2007) specifies that activities taking place more than 660' from a bald
eagle nest will have no effect on the nesting activities.
During the pedestrian surveys, no bald eagles or their nests were observed in or within 660' adjacent
to the review area and no bald eagles were observed in flight. Additionally, there is no potential
foraging habitat within 1.0 miles and therefore a survey of the areas within 660' of the review area
was not required.
Based on a lack of suitable nesting habitat, and lack of nearby records, WR concludes that the project
will have No Effect on bald eagles.
Biological Determination - No Effect
Red -Cockaded Woodpecker (E)
The red -cockaded woodpecker (RCW) occurs in extensive tracts of open stands of mature pines,
particularly longleaf pine (Pinus palustris), for foraging and nesting/roosting habitat, typically 70 to 100
Page 3 of 8

::WithersRavenel
Our People. Your Success.
FSC - Gold Rock Asphalt Plant
Battleboro, Nash County
acres or more. The red -cockaded woodpecker is rarely found in deciduous or mixed pine -hardwoods.
The RCW excavates cavities for nesting and roosting in living pine trees, aged 60 years or older, which
are contiguous with pine stands at least 30 years of age to provide foraging habitat. Optimal habitat
is characterized as a broad savanna with a scattered overstory of large pines and a dense groundcover
containing a diversity of grass, forbs, and shrub species. Midstory vegetation is sparse or absent.
Frequent fires maintain the quality of the RCW's habitat. The foraging range of the RCW is normally
no more than 0.5 miles.
Review of the NCNHP GIS data identified one known occurrence of RCW within 1.0 mile of the
proposed project. Based on the NCNHP GIS data, this RCW occurred (EO ID#9727) is located
approximately 1,000 If south of the project area on the east side of 1-95, near mile marker 144. The
RCW occurrence was observed in 1979 and there haven't been any additional observations since.
Additionally, the accuracy of the location is specified as "medium".
The onsite planted pine forest is on 24 years old which is much too young to be considered suitable
habitat. During the pedestrian surveys on 5/13/2022 no RCWs or nesting cavities were observed
within the review area. Furthermore, the planted pine forest within onsite uplands has been logged
since the 5/13/2022 site visit. Logging within onsite wetlands has not occurred.
Based lack of suitable habitat within the project area due to the young age of the pine trees and no
observations of nesting cavities or birds prior to logging activities, WR concludes that the project will
have No effect on the Red -Cockaded Woodpecker.
Biological Determination - No Effect
Neuse River Waterdog (T)
The Neuse River waterdog is a permanently aquatic salamander that can grow up to 11 inches long.
It has a reddish -brown body with an irregular pattern of large blue or black spots, and the belly is
typically dull brown or gray color with spots similar to those seen elsewhere on the body. Adults have
elongated heads with squared -off noses, cylindrical trunks and tails that are laterally compressed and
ridged. Three dark -red, bushy gills project from either side of the head and a dark line runs through
the eye. The limbs are rather small, and the front and hind feet have four toes. The Neuse River
waterdog is endemic to the Neuse and Tar River basins and have specific habitat characteristics of low
to moderate gradient streams and low current velocity and are typically found in streams wider than
15 meters. The Neuse River waterdog requires relatively high oxygen levels and water quality and is
found in large accumulations of submerged leaves in eddies and or backwaters of streams.
The proposed project area lacks any potential habitat for the Neuse River waterdog as there are no
streams within the project area. Therefore, WR concludes that the project will have No Effect on the
Neuse River waterdog.
Biological Determination - No Effect
Carolina Madtom (E)
The Carolina madtom is a small fish, growing to only 5 inches at their largest, and have a short, tan
body with three wide dark saddles across the back and a black lateral stripe and dark blotch on their
adipose fin. Carolina madtom is endemic to the Neuse and Tar River basins and prefer free -flowing
small to medium freshwater rivers with clean sand or gravel bottoms. They are typically found in very
shallow water with little or no current. During the summer, they can be found hiding under mussel
shells, logs, pieces of bark and other cover.

::WithersRavenel
Our People. Your Success.
FSC - Gold Rock Asphalt Plant
Battleboro, Nash County
The proposed project area lacks suitable habitat for the Carolina Madtom as there are no rivers within
the project area. Therefore, WR concludes that the project will have No Effect on the Carolina
Madtom.
Biological Determination - No Effect
Atlantic Pigtoe (T)
The Atlantic Pigtoe is a freshwater mussel with a chunky, rhombus shape, like that of a pig's hoof/toe.
The outer shell is yellow to dark brown and parchment -like, while the inner layer is iridescent blue to
salmon, white or orange. The Atlantic pigtoe rarely exceeds 2-inches in length. The preferred habitat
for the Atlantic pigtoe is coarse sand and gravel in small creeks and large rivers with excellent water
quality, where flows are sufficient to maintain clean, silt free substrates. In NC, Atlantic pigtoe is found
in the James, Chowan, Roanoke, Tar, Neuse, Cape Fear, and Pee Dee River basins.
The proposed project area lacks suitable habitat for the Atlantic pigtoe as there are no streams within
the project area. Therefore, WR concludes that the project will have No Effect on Atlantic pigtoe.
Biological Determination - No Effect
Tar River Spinymussel (E)
The Tar River Spinymussel is endemic only to the Tar River and Neuse River systems in North Carolina.
The brownish shell is rhomboid -shaped, up to 2.4 inches (6 cm) long, with 0-6 spines on each valve.
The shell is rather smooth and shiny, with concentric rings, and ends in a blunt point. Younger
individuals are orange -brown with greenish rays streaking outward from the hinge area. Adults are
darker with less distinct rays. The Tar River Spinymussel lives in relatively silt -free uncompacted gravel
and/or coarse sand in fast -flowing, well oxygenated stream reaches. It is found in association with
other mussels, but it is never very numerous. It feeds by syphoning and filtering small food particles
that are suspended in the water.
The proposed project area lacks suitable habitat for the Tar River spinymussel as there are no streams
within the project area. therefore, WR concludes that the project will have No Effect on Tar River
Spinymussel.
Biological Determination - No Effect
Yellow Lance (T)
The yellow lance is a freshwater mussel found in the Chowan, Tar and Neuse River basins in North
Carolina. The yellow lance is a bright yellow elongate mussel with a shell over twice as long as tall,
usually not more the 86mm (3.4 inches) in length. The yellow lance is a sand -loving species often found
buried deep in clean, coarse to medium sand and sometimes migrating with shifting sands, although it
has been found in gravel substrates. The species is dependent on clean moderate flowing water with
high dissolved oxygen content in riverine or larger creek environments.
The proposed project area lacks suitable habitat for the yellow lance as there are no streams within
the project area. therefore, WR concludes that the project will have No Effect on yellow lance.
Biological Determination - No Effect
Page 5 of 8

::WithersRavenel
Our People. Your Success.
FSC - Gold Rock Asphalt Plant
Battleboro, Nash County
Michaux's Sumac (E)
Michaux's sumac is typically found in the inner Coastal Plain and lower Piedmont and grows in sandy
or rocky, open, upland woodlands on acidic or circumneutral, well drained sands or sandy loam soils.
This species is also found around maintained railroad, roadside, power line and utility rights -of -way,
areas where forest canopies have been opened up by blow downs and/or storm damage; small wildlife
food plots, abandoned building sites, under moderately dense pine or pine/hardwood canopies; and
in and along edges of other artificially maintained clearings undergoing natural succession. In the
central Piedmont, it occurs on clayey soils derived from mafic rocks. Michaux's sumac is shade
intolerant and, therefore, grows best where disturbance (i.e., mowing, clearing, grazing, periodic fire)
maintains its open habitat. Michaux's sumac flowers from June to July, while the fruit, a red drupe, is
produced through the months of August to October.
The project area contains suitable habitat for Michaux's Sumac within the early successional
community. Pedestrian surveys completed on 5/13/2022 did not identify any occurrences of
Michaux's sumac within the project area. Therefore, WR concludes that the project will have No
Effect on Michaux's sumac.
Biological Determination - No Effect
Tricolored Bat (PE)
At the time of the 5/13/2022 survey, the tricolored bat was not listed by the USFWS for protection
under the ESA. The USFWS proposed to list the tricolored bat as an endangered species under the
Endangered Species Act on September 13, 2022, largely because of white -nose syndrome, a disease
that affects cave -dwelling bats and is decimating hibernating bat species. There has been no critical
habitat designated for the tricolored bat at this time.
The tricolored bat is a small insectivorous bat that is distinguished by its unique tricolored fur and
often appears yellowish to nearly orange. Tricolored bats are typically 3 to 3.5 inches long and have
an average weight of 0.25 ounces. The tricolored bat is distinguished by its unique tricolored fur that
appears dark at the base, lighter in the middle and dark at the tip. Tricolored bats often appear
yellowish, varying from pale yellow to nearly orange, but may also appear silvery -gray, chocolate
brown or black.
During the winter, tricolored bats are often found in caves and abandoned mines, although in the
southern United States, where caves are sparse, tricolored bats are often found roosting in road -
associated culverts where they exhibit shorter torpor bouts and forage during warm nights. During
the spring, summer, and fall, tricolored bats are found in forested habitats where they roost in trees,
primarily among leaves of live or recently dead deciduous hardwood trees, but may also be found in
Spanish moss, pine trees, and occasionally human structures. Based on the review of the NCNHP GIS
data there are no known occurrences of the tricolored bat within 1.0 miles of the review area.
The upland portions of the onsite planted pine forest have been clearcut and is not considered
potential habitat. The remaining onsite forested areas are within the wetlands and is considered
potential habitat due to the presence of mature trees. Targeted surveys for tricolored bat have not
been conducted.
Construction of the proposed asphalt plant will require tree clearing within the wetland areas as a
result of the wetland impacts necessary to construct the project. Approximately 0.34 acres of
wetlands will be impacted and will result in tree clearing.
Page 6 of 8

::WithersRavenel
Our People. Your Success.
FSC - Gold Rock Asphalt Plant
Battleboro, Nash County
There are no known maternity roosts within 0.25 miles of the review area, as well as no known
occurrences within 1.0 miles. Therefore, WR concludes that the proposed activities are not likely
adversely affect the tricolored bat.
Biological Determination - Not Likely to Adversely Affect
Summary
The review area does not contain occurrences of, or potential habitat for the Bald Eagle, Neuse River
Waterdog, Carolina Madtom, Atlantic Pigtoe, Tar River Spinymussel, Yellow Lance, or Michaux's
Sumac and the proposed activity will have no effect on these species. The review area does contain
potential habitat for tricolored bat in which there will be ±0.34 acres of tree clearing to construct the
proposed project. However, WR concludes that the proposed activities are not likely to adversely
affect tricolored bat.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns regarding the contents of this
report.
Sincerely,
Rick Trone
Environmental Scientist
WithersRavenel
Attachments:
1) Aerial Exhibit
2) Approved Wetland Delineation Exhibit
3) Vegetative Communities Exhibit
4) USGS Quadrangle Exhibits
5) USFWS IPaC Official Species List (4/5/2023)
6) NCNHP Project Review Letter (3/21/2023)
7) RCW Occurrence Location Exhibit
8) Photo Documentation
Troy Beasley
Director of Natural Resources
WithersRavenel
Page 7 of 8

::WithersRavenel
Our People. Your Success.
FSC - Gold Rock Asphalt Plant
Battleboro, Nash County
REFERENCES
1. 2021 Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina. Compiled by Brenda
L. Wichmann. N.C. Natural Heritage Program; NC Department of Natural and Cultural Resources.
2. 2022 Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Animal Species of North Carolina. Compiled by
Judith A. Ratcliffe and Meredith Wojcik. N. C. Natural Heritage Program; NC Department of
Natural and Cultural Resources.
3. Flora of the Southern and Mid -Atlantic States - May 2015 version by Alan S. Weakly, University
of North Carolina Herbarium.
5. Natural Heritage Program Database Search at: https://ncnhde.natureserve.org/ accessed
3/22/2022 and 4/5/2023.
6. NC Natural Heritage Program Project Review Letter dated 4/5/2023.
7. USFWS IPaC Official Species List dated 4/5/2023.
Page 8 of 8

■■ WithersRavenel
.. Our People. Your Success.
AERIAL EXHIBIT

N
N
CD
J
Q
J
Q
AM IA31SV39 - "d 44:1£Z CZOZ 19 IMcV 'AD9-m4l-0M9'-kN m wd-y 3fl\a40\-.Do4s-..Dawn\IP.waJ - 3U-lo16czo80\oczo-40\40\."A

::WithersRavenel
Our People. Your Success.
APPROVED WETLAND DELINEATION EXHIBIT

1
CL 1-5Q
\ \ \
r�
Q
W
Q
F-
U
W
O
a
W
z
CD
cc
W
LL
LL
CO
0
°aa
�a�
C-4
N Z W
W Z
Q � —
� Q U
co W cc d
N W
o H 0
W0
p 0
W0O
F-
a w p
pCCZ
p=a
a F-
p�
QQo
CD
U w C7
cc
CD
fn z
J
O
CO W U
W
> V/
O Z
N a Q 0
N Z H
O CC Q
r ~ 0
F- 0
N � J
Z CD fn CD
ccQLL, O
Z Z
0H0
m U Z W
po0�
LU
W m
p H Q
0zCD2
U Q p X
W
0 OOVCC
QQa(L
W W W Q
Z Z p W
W W Z Q
p p W W
p p CC Z
ZZQO_
Q Q W H
�LU LU20
W
O r N M
z
Z
Q
J
J
Q
2
CL
Q
U
O
J
O
U
V)
LL
AOLL 'A31MB — pd 6£:I IT SZOZ 'S WdV 'MPGWDOM—5-P*Rl714x3 NDd\M\---4S— NOPM\'P-PPD — OU—l0'BLZ080\OLZO-80\60VA

::WithersRavenel
Our People. Your Success.
VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES EXHIBIT

.�i V17
v
ca
>a
rp —
o:
t
2i .Ell
h
``
C - R
Ss%
m
IT
x
1, w
H V)
W w
LL
z
IL
W 4 O
U
F- J
Q Z �.,.. w
x J IL 0
aLLI �
W U w
oC D U
Q r >
W
J.
a
j o6 u
WAz
°s
02 �
Z
O
N Z
¢ J o
O CL
LL
W
r a Q
\ p 2
wCL
z
w ` Q0
Q w a U Q
u 0 z Ln
0
U n rA ,
CL i i
0
� f Q
Will 'AMSUS — Yld BZ:SS:Z MZ 'S HAV 'A-P—yl—B,P'sl!9!4x3 Nodaa 3Vi\M\a—IS—apuollaM\Y=PIoO — OS!—W'6LZ080\OLZO-90\00\:A

::WithersRavenel
Our People. Your Success.
USGS QUADRANGLE EXHIBITS

I �
t �I
a,
rroLn
4j : r AFAW
bEASLEY HP
p
„ II
w
Q
i'
O
f
W U
s P ' Got—f i
LV
Ofi
ii n
asF- W
r
' CL
orml
Q z
LLJ
o S Y o
U CD
CD
CL
J J
_ `� 0
t '' ILL
U
AM •A31SV39 - "d es:z¢x ezoz •e ,tiM •ADpwnui -15-p am a wd>a 3 Aa4 owns-. lDPM\IPaaot - 3U-to16czoea\DLZD-e0\s0\."A

N
rEll
Ln
L
�w
CORP
IIAL
l �
4
y
W
\
r
r
LU
ti
r
o
�' •' 1 .ti r* r` I _ Z o
Q
CL
CL
W
Q w i U z
0
cUn o
U o Lrn 6f
CL tIdle
U
U i
U
U
U o cn
LL o
AM •A31SV39 - qd K:sex ezoz •e itiM •ADpwn4l -bmpamLn ixd>a 3 Aaea\-WM4S .NDPM\)Po+w0D - 3U-t0•6czos0\oczo-e0\s0\."A

::WithersRavenel
Our People. Your Success.
USFWS IPaC OFFICIAL SPECIES LIST
4/5/2023

4/5/23, 3:45 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
IPaC U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
IPaC resource list
This report is an automatically generated list of species and other resources such as critical
habitat (collectively referred to as trust resources) under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's
(USFWS) jurisdiction that are known or expected to be on or near the project area referenced
below. The list may also include trust resources that occur outside of the project area, but
that could potentially be directly or indirectly affected by activities in the project area.
However, determining the likelihood and extent of effects a project may have on trust
resources typically requires gathering additional site -specific (e.g., vegetation/species VII.N.
surveys) and project -specific (e.g., magnitude and timing of proposed activities) information.
Below is a summary of the project information you provided and contact information for the
USFWS office(s) with jurisdiction in the defined project area. Please read the introduction to
each section that follows (Endangered Species, Migratory Birds, USFWS Facilities, and NWI
Wetlands) for additional information applicable to the trust resources addressed in that
section.
Location
Nash County, North Carolina
Local office
JN�v
u
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
L [phone]
1@ [phone]
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/QTTNMUEKNZA55EQJJU IJODFQNQ/resources 1 /12

4/5/23, 3:45 PM
MAILING ADDRESS
IPaC: Explore Location resources
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
PHYSICAL ADDRESS
551 Pylon Drive, Suite F
Raleigh, INC 27606-1487
�o�
Foy
C.010
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/QTTNMUEKNZA55EQJJU IJODFQNQ/resources 2/12

4/5/23, 3:45 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
Endangered species
This resource list is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an analysis
of project level impacts.
The primary information used to generate this list is the known or expected range of each
species. Additional areas of influence (AOI) for species are also considered. An AOI includes
areas outside of the species range if the species could be indirectly affected by activities in
that area (e.g., placing a dam upstream of a fish population even if that fish does not occur at
the dam site, may indirectly impact the species by reducing or eliminating water flow
downstream). Because species can move, and site conditions can change, the species on this
list are not guaranteed to be found on or near the project area. To fully determine any
potential effects to species, additional site -specific and project -specific information is often
required.
Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act requires Federal agencies to "request of the
Secretary information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be
present in the area of such proposed action" for any project that is conducted, permitted,
funded, or licensed by any Federal agency. A letter from the local office and a species list
which fulfills this requirement can only be obtained by requesting an Official species list from
either the Regulatory Review section in IPaC (see directions below) or from the local field
office directly.
For project evaluations that require USFWS concurrence/review, please return to the IPaC
website and request an official species list by doing the following:
1. ❑raw the project location and click CONTINUE.
2. Click DEFINE PROJECT.
3. Log in (if directed to do so).
4. Provide a name and description for your project.
5. Click REQUEST SPECIES LIST.
Listed speciesl and their critical habitats are managed by the Ecological Services Program of
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the fisheries division of the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA Fisheries).
Species and critical habitats under the sole responsibility of NOAA Fisheries are not shown
on this list. Please contact NOAA Fisheries for species under their jurisdiction.
1. Species listed under the Endangered Species Act are threatened or endangered; IPaC also
shows species that are candidates, or proposed, for listing. See the listing status page for
more information. IPaC only shows species that are regulated by USFWS (see FAQ).
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/QTTNMUEKNZA55EQJJU IJODFQNQ/resources 3/12

4/5/23, 3:45 PM
IPaC: Explore Location resources
2. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an office
of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of
Commerce.
The following species are potentially affected by activities in this location:
Mammals
NAME STATUS
Tricolored Bat Perimyotis subflavus Proposed Endangered
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/10515
Amphibians
NAME STATUS
Neuse River Waterdog Necturus lewisi Threatened
Wherever found i
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does
not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecplspecies/6772
Fishes
NAM E - STATUS
ry
Carolina Madtom Noturus furiosus Endangered
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does
not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecplspecies/528
Clams
NAME STATUS
Atlantic Pigtoe Fusconaia masoni Threatened
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does
not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5164
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/QTTNMUEKNZA55EQJJU IJODFQNQ/resources 4/12

4/5/23, 3:45 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
Tar River Spinymussel Parvaspina steinstansana Endangered
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1392
Yellow Lance Elliptio lanceolata
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does
not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4511
Insects
NAME
Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Threatened
STATUS
Candidate
4 tN
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecptspecies/9743
Flowering Plants
NAME
XY1000,
STATUS
Michaux's Sumac Rhus michauxii Endangered
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gay ecptspecies/5217
Critical habitats
Potential effects to critical habitat(s) in this location must be analyzed along with the
endangered species themselves.
There are no critical habitats at this location.
Migratory birds
Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act! and the Bald and Golden
Eagle Protection Acts.
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/QTTNMUEKNZA55EQJJU IJODFQNQ/resources 5/12

4/5/23, 3:45 PM
IPaC: Explore Location resources
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to
migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and
consider implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described below.
1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
Additional information can be found using the following links:
• Birds of Conservation Concern https://www.fws.gov//program/migratory-birds/species
• Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds
https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take-
migratory-birds
• Nationwide conservation measures for birds
https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/documents/nationwide-standard-con seryati on-
measures.pdf
The birds listed below are birds of particular concern either because they occur on the
USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) list or warrant special attention in your
project location. To learn more about the levels of concern for birds on your list and how
this list is generated, see the FAQ below. This is not a list of every bird you may find in this
location, nor a guarantee that every bird an this list will be found in your project area. To see
exact locations of where birders and the general public have sighted birds in and around
your project area, visit the E-bird data mapping tool (Tip: enter your location, desired date
range and a species on your list). For projects that occur off the Atlantic Coast, additional
maps and models detailing the relative occurrence and abundance of bird species on your
list are available. Links to additional information about Atlantic Coast birds, and other
important information about your migratory bird list, including how to properly interpret and
use your migratory bird report, can be found below.
For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization
measures to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, click on the PROBABILITY OF
PRESENCE SUMMARY at the top of your list to see when these birds are most likely to be
present and breeding in your project area.
NAME
BREEDING SEASON
American Kestrel Falco sparverius paulus Breeds Apr 1 to Aug 31
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular
Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9587
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/QTTNMUEKNZA55EQJJU IJODFQNQ/resources 6/12

4/5/23, 3:45 PM
IPaC: Explore Location resources
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area,
but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential
susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of
development or activities.
Brown -headed Nuthatch Sitta pusilla
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular
Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
Chimney Swift Chaetura pelagica
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC} throughout 4s
range in the continental USA and Alaska.
Probability of Presence Summary
Breeds Sep 1 to jul 31
Breeds Mar 1 to Jul 15
Breeds Mar 15 to Aug 25
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely
to be present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your
project activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read and
understand the FAQ "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before
using or attempting to interpret this report.
Probability of Presence ( )
Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 1 Qkm grid cell(s)
your project overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4-
week months.) A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey
effort (see below) can be used to establish a level of confidence in the presence score. One
can have higher confidence in the presence score if the corresponding survey effort is also
high.
How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:
The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in
the week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events
for that week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted
Towhee was found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in
week 12 is 0.25.
2. To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of
presence is calculated. This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum
probability of presence across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of
presence in week 20 for the Spotted Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability of presence
at week 12 (0.25) is the maximum of any week of the year. The relative probability of
presence on week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it is 0.05/0.25 = 0.2.
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/QTTNMUEKNZA55EQJJU IJODFQNQ/resources 7/12

4/5/23, 3:45 PM
IPaC: Explore Location resources
3. The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical
conversion so that all possible values fall between 0 and 10, inclusive. This is the
probability of presence score.
To see a bar's probability of presence score, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.
Breeding Season( )
Yellow bars denote a very liberal estimate of the time -frame inside which the bird breeds
across its entire range. If there are no yellow bars shown for a bird, it does not breed in your
project area.
Survey Effort (1)
Vertical black lines superimposed on probability Of presence bars indicate the number of
surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. The
number of surveys is expressed as a range, for example, 33 to 64 surveys.
To see a bars survey effort range, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.
0
No Data [—)
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.
Survey Timeframe
Surveys from only the last 10 years are used in order to ensure delivery of currently relevant
information. The exception to this is areas off the Atlantic coast, where bird returns are
based on all years of available data, since data in these areas is currently much more sparse.
-, probability of presence breeding season I survey effort — no data
SPECIES
JAN
FEB
MA} APR MN,' JUN JUL AUG
SEP OCT NOV DEC
American
Kestrel
_ '
_
i�li■l ��ii ii�� �ir ■�i�
- - — — -- — } f
BCC - BCR
Bald Eagle
.. „_ ,... — — --
- • - — — -- — - �� 111-1
Non -BCC
Mimii■ `ir`i■WEIM me■i`
i im■i ilifr riri
i`a■ Mona 40
Vulnerable
aded
V—
--�-r —" t-
NuQthatch
BCC - BCR
Chimney Swift
�— —111 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111
—'�— —
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory
birds.
Nationwide Conservation Measures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize impacts to all
birds at any location year round. Implementation of these measures is particularly important when birds
are most likely to occur in the project area. When birds may be breeding in the area, identifying the
locations of any active nests and avoiding their destruction is a very helpful impact minimization measure.
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/QTTNMUEKNZA55EQJJU IJODFQNQ/resources 8/12

4/5/23, 3:45 PM
IPaC: Explore Location resources
To see when birds are most likely to occur and be breeding in your project area, view the Probability of
Presence Summary. Additional measures or permits may be advisable depending on the type of activity
you are conducting and the type of infrastructure or bird species present on your project site.
What does IPaC use to generate the list of migratory birds that potentially occur in my specified
location?
The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC), and other
species that may warrant special attention in your project location.
The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the Avian Knowledge
Network (AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey., banding, and citizen science
datasets and is queried and filtered to return a list of those birds reported as occurring in the 10km grid
cell(s) which your project intersects, and that have been identified as warranting special attention because
they are a BCC species in that area, an eagle (Eagle Act requirements may apply), or a species that has a
particular vulnerability to offshore activities or development.
Again, the Migratory Bird Resource list includes only a subset of birds that may occur in your project area.
It is not representative of all birds that may occur in your project area. To get a list of all birds potentially
present in your project area, please visit the Rapid Avian Information Locator (RAIL) Tool.
What does 1PaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs for the migratory birds potentially
occurring in my specified location?
The probability of presence graphs associated with your migratory bird list are based an data provided by
the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). This data is derived from a growing collection of survev, banding, and
Citizen science Ciatasets.
Probability of presence data is continuously being updated as new and better information becomes
available. To learn more about how the probability of presence graphs are produced and how to interpret
them, go the Probability of Presence Summary and then click on the "Tell me about these graphs" link.
How do I know if a bird is breeding, wintering or migrating in my area?
t
To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding, wintering,
migrating or year-round), you may query your location using the RAIL Tool and look at the range maps
provided for birds in your area at the bottom of the profiles provided for each bird in your results. If a bird
on your migratory bird species list has a breeding season associated with It, if that bird does occur in your
project area, there may be nests present at some point within the timeframe specified. If "Breeds
elsewhere" is indicated, then the bird likely does not breed in your project area.
What are the levels of concern for migratory birds?
Migratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern:
1. "BCC Rangewide" birds are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) that are of concern throughout their
range anywhere within the USA (including Hawaii, the Pacific Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin
Islands);
2. "BCC - BCR" birds are BCCs that are of concern only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in
the continental USA; and
3. "Non -BCC - Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on your list either
because of the Eagle Act requirements (for eagles) or (for non -eagles) potential susceptibilities in
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/QTTNMUEKNZA55EQJJU IJODFQNQ/resources 9/12

4/5/23, 3:45 PM
IPaC: Explore Location resources
offshore areas from certain types of development or activities (e.g. offshore energy development or
longline fishing).
Although it is important to try to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, efforts should be made, in
particular, to avoid and minimize impacts to the birds on this list, especially eagles and BCC species of
rangewide concern. For more information on conservation measures you can implement to help avoid and
minimize migratory bird impacts and requirements for eagles, please see the FAQs for these topics.
Details about birds that are potentially affected by offshore projects
For additional details about the relative occurrence and abundance of both individual bird species and
groups of bird species within your project area off the Atlantic Coast, please visit the Northeast Ocean Data
Portal. The Portal also offers data and information about other taxa besides birds that may be helpful to
you in your project review. Alternately, you may download the bird model results files underlying the portal
maps through the NOAA NCCOS Integrative Statistical Modeling and Predictive Mapping of Marine Bird
Distributions and Abundance on the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf project webpage.
Bird tracking data can also provide additional details about occurrence and habitat use throughout the
year, including migration. Models relying on survey data may not include this information. For additional
information on marine bird tracking data, see the ❑iving Bird Study_ and the nanotag st_ udfes or contact
Caleb Spiegel or Pam Loring.
What if I have eagles on my list?
If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to obtain a permit to avoid violating
the Eagle Act should such impacts occur.
Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report
The migratory bird list generated is not a list of all birds in your project area, only a subset of birds of
priority concern. To learn more about how your list is generated, and see ❑ptions for identifying what
other birds may be in your project area, please see the FAQ "What does IPaC use to generate the migratory
birds potentially occurring in my specified location". Please be aware this report provides the "probability
of presence" of birds within the 14 km grid cell(s) that overlap your project; not your exact project
footprint. On the graphs provided, please also look carefully at the survey effort (indicated by the black
vertical bar) and for the existence of the "no data" indicator (a red horizontal bar). A high survey effort is
the key component. If the survey effort is high, then the probability of presence score Can be viewed as
more dependable. in contrast, a low survey effort bar or no data bar means a lack of data and, therefore, a
lack of certainty about presence of the species. This list is not perfect; it is simply a starting point for
identifying what birds of concern have the potential to be in your project area, when they might be there,
and if they might be breeding (which means nests might be present). The list helps you know what to look
for to confirm presence, and helps guide you in knowing when to implement conservation measures to
avoid or minimize potential impacts from your project activities, should presence be confirmed. To learn
more about conservation measures, visit the FAQ "Tell me about conservation measures I can implement
to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds" at the bottom of your migratory bird trust resources
page.
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/QTTNMUEKNZA55EQJJU IJODFQNQ/resources 10/12

4/5/23, 3:45 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
Facilities
Wildlife refuges and fish hatcheries
Refuge and fish hatchery information is not available at this time
Wetlands in the National Wetlands Inventory
(NWI)
Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes.
For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the focal U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers District. #
Wetland information is not available at this time
This can happen when the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) map service is unavailable, or
for very large projects that intersect many wetland areas. Try again, or visit the NWI map to
view wetlands at this location. A
Data limitations
The Service's objective of mapping wetlands and deepwater habitats is to produce reconnaissance level
information on the location, type and size of these resources. The maps are prepared from the analysis of
high altitude imagery. Wetlands are identified based on vegetation, visible hydrology and geography. A
margin of error is inherent in the use of imagery; thus, detailed on -the -ground inspection of any particular
site may result in revision of the wetland boundaries or classification established through image analysis.
The accuracy of image interpretation depends on the quality of the imagery, the experience of the image
analysts, the amount and quality of the collateral data and the amount of ground truth verification work
conducted. Metadata should be consulted to determine the date of the source imagery used and any
mapping problems.
Wetlands or other mapped features may have changed since the date of the imagery or field work. There
may be occasional differences in polygon boundaries or classifications between the information depicted
on the map and the actual conditions on site.
Data exclusions
Certain wetland habitats are excluded from the National mapping program because of the limitations of
aerial imagery as the primary data source used to detect wetlands. These habitats include seagrasses or
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/QTTNMUEKNZA55EQJJU IJODFQNQ/resources 11 /12

4/5/23, 3:45 PM
IPaC: Explore Location resources
submerged aquatic vegetation that are found in the intertidal and subtidal zones of estuaries and
nearshore coastal waters. Some deepwater reef communities (coral or tuberficid worm reefs) have also
been excluded from the inventory. These habitats, because of their depth, go undetected by aerial
Imagery.
Data precautions
Federal, state, and local regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over wetlands may define and describe
wetlands in a different manner than that used in this inventory. There is no attempt, in either the design or
products of this inventory, to define the limits of proprietary jurisdiction of any Federal, state, or local
government or to establish the geographical scope of the regulatory programs of government agencies.
Persons intending to engage in activities involving modifications within or adjacent to wetland areas should
seek the advice of appropriate Federal, state, or local agencies concerning specified agency regulatory
programs and proprietary jurisdictions that may affect such activities.
�o�
Foy
C;.010
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/QTTNMUEKNZA55EQJJU IJODFQNQ/resources 12/12

::WithersRavenel
Our People. Your Success.
NCNHP PROJECT REVIEW LETTER
3/21/2023

Roy Cooper, Governor
■ ■■■
r ■■ ■ INC DEPARTMENT OF
■■,■i NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
■ ■■
March 21. 2023
Troy Beasley
Withers & Ravenel
115 MacKenan Drive
Cary, NC 27511
RE: FSC Gold Rock; 02080279.01
Dear Troy Beasley:
❑. Reid Wilson, Secretary
Misty Buchanan
Deputy Director, Natural Heritage Program
NCNHDE-21332
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide
information about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
Based on the project area mapped with your request, a query of the NCNHP database indicates that
there are no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, and/or
conservation/managed areas within the proposed project boundary. Please note that although there
may be no documentation of natural heritage elements within the project boundary, it does not
imply or confirm their absence; the area may not have been surveyed. The results of this query
should not be substituted for field surveys where suitable habitat exists. In the event that rare
species are found within the project area, please contact the NCNHP so that we may update our
records.
The attached `Potential Occurrences' table summarizes rare species and natural communities that
have been documented within a one -mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these
records suggests that these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area
if suitable habitat exists. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed areas within a one -mile
radius of the project area, if any, are also included in this report.
If a Federally -listed species is found within the project area or is indicated within a one -mile radius of
the project area, the NCNHP recommends contacting the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for
guidance. Contact information for USFWS offices in North Carolina is found here:
httr)s://www.fws.gov/offices/Directory/ListOffices.cfm?statecode=37.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation
planning, project review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria
for regulatory decisions. Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published
without prior written notification to the NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information
source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP data may not be redistributed without permission.
The NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional correspondence if a
Dedicated Nature Preserve, Registered Heritage Area, Land and Water Fund easement, or Federally -
listed species are documented near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance,
please contact Rodney A. Butler at rod ney.butler�ncdcr.gov or 919-707-8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
DEPAR7HEN7 OF NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
121 W. JONES STREET. RALEIGH. NC 27603 • 1691 MAIL SERVICE CENTER. RALEIGH. NC 27609
OFC 919.707.9120 • FAX [phone]

CO CO
N N
M
M
N
M
M
M
M
M
M
N M
M
�
O
N M
M
N
M
(�
M
M
M
N 0
0
0 0
0
0
0
000
M
O_
aJ
+CC3
D
aJ �
. c a
aJ
aJ
. c
a aJ
aJ
aJ
aJ
a
. -
C
a) Co a)
.O
U+
+
O+
+
+
+
O
O O
+�
CO C
aJ co
_0
aJ C
Cl O
f0
aJ
f0
a
Q
C CO
O aJ
co
CO
aJ
CO
CO
aJ
CO
aJ
C
CO Q O
Q
C LF CO
O C
CL
n (�
U
-
�
-S V) U
U O7
W
W
W
W
(n
O
Ln
_
� aJ
�
a
N
o to
C
C
C
N
N
LL
C
CO
CO
W
W
W
>)4�4
E E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E E
E
a
i7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7 7
i
7
a s
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a s
>
O a
CO
Q
J
au)
+O
C �
aJ
CO
0)
E
C CO T
W
CO
Q
W
Q
W
W
W
W
W
W W
W
W
O
Q
0
u
FTI
W
(aJ
Q
CO O � 0 M
c o N N
E
r-I
O
O)
O
N
M
N
f)
N
M
CONI 1.O
O
N
O
N
O
CC)
I N
N—
N
N
ONLLJ
-CO
O
O
O
CCO
O
QO
QO
O
m
O
QO
O
0O
0
CL
O
UO
O u T
U Z Z
22 o
N
OM
O9
O
M
CO UCl) U
V LL
QJN
O
O
O
O
_
O
NNO
O
O
N O
ONN
O
CO aJ Z
O
Q
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N N
N
aJ
O
�
O
Q CL
CL
O
+
CO
E
m
}
Cl
—
a)
in
cn
in
CO
O
CO
a)
cn
a)
E
>
-0
O x
CO
cn
� Z
-
�_
O
O
c
CO
Q
E
Q
E
CO
0
CO Q
O
> -,
O
LL
fp
CL
CO
J
CO
C
CO E
U
O
aJ
U
a)
J
c>
a
a)O
J
c
>o
E
�°
O>
O r
O
E
O
—
E
CO
CO—
O
i
a)
O
OO
O
i
CO
U
Q
O
U
J
Z
U
Q
}
W
U
Z
U O_
COn
W
CO
c
Q
n
CO
cn
E
CO
cn c-
�
N
CO
ECO
—
ro
CO
CO
+
O
H
a)
a)
c
CO
a)
�
o
u
=
o
a)
E
�
O
��
O
aa)
OOE
CO
E
0
o
C
CO E
E�
COCOcn
O
A
U
E U
0
CO
Z
— cn
o
U
+3
C
E
CO
U
n3
to
cn
E
7
.E
-
—
a
a) U
�
in (D
�
cn
�
O
�
CO
O
o
Ln
=
U)
=
E
Cl
E C
co
O
U
�
�CO
T
CO
c
E
O
O
C
n
Q
n
Q
in
+
CO
x
�
O�
u0
E+
o
E N
u
O O
O
x
CO
Q
Q
0
cn
E
E
>
E O
O
>,
a)
O (n
a) i
Z
LL
Q
—_
W
—_
W
LL
J
J
CL
a)
cn (n
—
—
>
O O
Z J
O
U
ro
f6 CO
CO
z
O
o
M
N
co
co
N
N
M
N
QO
0-)
_
QO
O
QW
00 N
(0
M
N
M
M
M
N
M
N
M
M
N
CO
CO
CO
N
O
N
N M
N
U
W O
O O
Q
COa)--0
+ E
CO
y E
+
CO
+
CO
+
CO
+
CO
+
CO
+
CO
+
CO
+
CO
+
CO
+ + CO
CO CO
O —
a co
E xx 0
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
cn cn
cn
�
E ._
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
o 0
0
W (3
m Q CO
U
LL
CO LL
CO LL
CO LL
CO LL
CO LL
CO LL
CO LL
CO LL
CO LL LL
(3
Mi
N
a

■
M M / \
s 2
\ \ / a.
o e e ©
g 2 g 9
>
3 d M e
2 \ .g cog / / 2 ,
7
\ \
�
B
�
Al
zy
E z
e y
\\
E\
/ M
y
\ �
u %
■
�
§
u u
0 §
\ / D-
ra
s
/

U
O
_0
rO
V
U
LL
N
M
M
r
N
W
M
z
U
z
c�
G
Ln
0
8b
00
N
O
8p DN
0
a0 PIo9
o
K
'6b
C
m
a tiN
�c
Rio
� W
v
A 3
m o.
°nzsm°S.
z1°
2 Lu
Z < 0m
N �
a v w -0
o �
G 73
0
M f6 N -6 m
N
N d N
O
®®ao
:1
QI
a)
a

::WithersRavenel
Our People. Your Success.
RCW OCCURRENCE LOCATION EXHIBIT

a)
c
a�
>
ro -
tA
`a
L Ell
AF'
U � Q
Z0E-
LU It Q ti
-
m LL o ti
Cl)
Z
m
U00
0 a p0
-
=
O>- =
JZLvJ
w
az
Z
O
oc
�
Q
U
O
J
Ss,
LLJ
z
W
U
U
O
U
Q
LU
OC
'
LU
d
>
oWC
Od
Q
�
6.
z
6
y
z
Q°
CL
J
Q
'
C
Cn z
O
Q O
W 00
J
Y v
_
U
Q
o
z
O z
� o
�
0
Q
U
-
U
U
L o
0
Q
Will 'A319tl3B - Yld W:9LZ MZ '9 VdV 'A-P—yl-B,P'sl!9!4x3 Nodaa 3Vi\M\a—IS-apuollaM\Y=PIoO - O9!-W'6LZ09O\OLZO-90\90\:A

::WithersRavenel
Our People. Your Success.
PHOTO DOCUMENTATION

WithersRavenel
.. Our People. Your Success.
FSC Goldrock Asphalt Plant - Battleboro, Nash County
Photographic Documentation
Photo 1: View of typical conditions within Planted Pine Forest community in southern portion of
review area near 1-95 (taken 5/13/2022).
Photo 2: View of typical conditions within Planted Pine Forest community in northeastern portion of
review area (taken 5/13/2022).
115 MacKenan Drive I Cary, NC 27511
t: 919.469.3340 f: 919.467.6008 1 www.withersravenel.com I License No. F-1479
Asheville I Cary I Charlotte Greensboro I Lumberton I Pittsboro I Raleigh I Southern Pines I Wilmington

::WithersRavenel
Our People. Your Success.
Photo 3: View of typical conditions within Planted Pine Forest community within onsite wetlands in
central portion of review area (taken 5/13/2022).
Photo 4: View of entrance road from N. Halifax Rd facing south. Early successional community can be
seen in the distance (taken 3/24/2023).
Page 2 of 4

::WithersRavenel
Our People. Your Success.
Photo 5: View of clearcut within the upland areas of the Planted Pine Forest community in the western
portion of the review area, facing southeast from access road (taken 3/24/2023).
Photo 6: View of clearcut within the upland areas of the Planted Pine Forest community near irrigation
pond in the southern portion of the review area, facing east (taken 3/24/2023). Early
Successional Community can be seen in the right edge of photo.
Page 3 of 4

::WithersRavenel
Our People. Your Success.
Photo 7: View of clearcut within the upland areas of the Planted Pine Forest community in the eastern
portion of the review area, facing south (taken 3/24/2023).

■■ WithersRavenel
lipOur People. Your Success.
NCDMS LETTER OF ACCEPTANCE
FOR WETLAND MITIGATION

ROY COOPER
Governor
ELIZABETH S. BISER
Secretary
MARC RECKTENWALD
Director
Brent Wood
Fred Smith Company
701 Corporate Center Dr, Suite 101
Raleigh, NC 27607
Project: FSC Gold Rock Asphalt Plant
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
March 27, 2023
Expiration of Acceptance: 9/27/2023
County: Nash
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) is willing to
accept payment for compensatory mitigation for impacts associated with the above referenced project as
indicated in the table below. Please note that this decision does not assure that participation in the DMS in -
lieu fee mitigation program will be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation for project impacts.
It is the responsibility of the applicant to contact permitting agencies to determine if payment to the DMS will
be approved. You must also comply with all other state, federal or local government permits, regulations or
authorizations associated with the proposed activity including G.S. § 143-214.11.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not
received a copy of the issued 404 Permit/401 Certification within this time frame, this acceptance will
expire. It is the applicant's responsibility to send copies of the permits to DMS. Once DMS receives a copy
of the permit(s) an invoice will be issued based on the required mitigation in that permit and payment must
be made prior to conducting the authorized work. The amount of the in -lieu fee to be paid by an applicant is
calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and policies listed on the DMS website.
Based on the information supplied by you in your request to use the DMS, the impacts for which you are
requesting compensatory mitigation credit are summarized in the following table. The amount of mitigation
required and assigned to DMS for this impact is determined by permitting agencies and may exceed
the impact amounts shown below.
River Basin
Impact Location
8-di it HUC
Impact Type
Impact Quantity
Tar -Pamlico
03020101
Non -Riparian Wetland
0.342
Upon receipt of payment, DMS will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. The
mitigation will be performed in accordance with the In -Lieu Fee Program instrument dated July 28, 2010.
Thank you for your interest in the DMS in -lieu fee mitigation program. If you have any questions or need
additional information, please contact [e-mail].
Sincerely,
/ v�
FOR James. B Stanfill
Deputy Director
cc: Rick Trone, agent
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Mitigation Services
217 West Jones Street [ 1652 Mail Service Center I Raleigh. North Carolina 27699-1652
OP9aIGnent of rnrnonmenldl a�al� �f 919,707,8976

::WithersRavenel
Our People. Your Success.
I M PACT EXHIBITS

¢
ry �
o
'"
4
z
�
z
a
�
3
�
�m
N
•� �
rL
�
rl ci
ei
w
LL
t7
Z l7
� N
m
N011V3lJl73dS
y
LL o
p
-OtldWl
0 p
j F
Z
Q
0
J u
—
O
Z
g
NOIltlDOl-tldWl
3 3
3
3
dV.
amm
3 I
ow
W
w \ I I
U a
` I I
I

��WIM' M 6LbL-J #asua�II WEE'694'6L6] INI�O11D H11ON A Nf10J H5IN ufi/? N
a�Nti��a�ua�e� ewstiti dbWl�bdWl4Ndl13M
le s,aa����3 /1 1NV�d l�VHdSV ezor✓ar✓e��
Jauaneasja4a!M /� NDoa a�o� Ds� s " "o, e I ea -N
z
Z 0
0 zz
z ag
LLJ
W a 3
�
J
b
U
, O
'1 �
m
_
... ` /
r�U
.. - j
- ram, -.�'✓
�
.. ..
-.
II 1 47
r
1 �
(7V ,
w U
5 104 4 I j II
j i j
3 i t H J LL
�o 1n5-
V 3,
w co _
N
CL
is ,1 .0
Nh
-
1
c'
(SSVdA9 39VN1V21O 311SddO)
d d a, d 9 d�21 bZ
/ a ,
.z
o ���r 0
V 1
3 d d d b3'-, 4J ;
w !
4 4 4 ;4 4 4
01 J o S Ip It
0z
J 1 o r
i h `✓5 !
1 1

8 11-4— 16LbL-J #a 1-II WEE'69-61 tlNI10iVD Hli ON A NnOD HSVN
LL_J "SI"ll-ld111-113 dVWiDVdWI4Nb'113M
s,aIN 1, l s,a, � 1 s,aa���13 /1 1NVld 1lVHdsV ezor✓br✓e��
Iauaneds-Jaya!M /\ NDOa a1OD DSJ e ,ea oN
o g
+ o
0
ZZ
0