20231323 Ver 1_CHMC Asheboro - NWP_Supporting_Documentation with Appendicies_20230925

Nationwide Permit Request
Supporting Documentation
Cone Health MedCenter (CHMC) Asheboro
Spero Road
Asheboro, Randolph County, North Carolina
Terracon Project No. EN237279
September 25, 2023
Prepared for:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
Applicant:
The Moses H Cone Memorial Hospital
1200 N Elm Street
Greensboro, NC 27401
Prepared by:
Terracon Consultants, Inc.
1800 Reynolds Avenue
North Charleston, South Carolina 29405
In collaboration with:
Stimmel Associates, PA
601 N Trade Street, Suite 200
Winston Salem, NC 27101

r Terracon
September 25, 2023
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
Re: Nationwide Permit Supporting Documentation
CHMC Asheboro
1271 Spero Road
Asheboro, Randolph County, North Carolina
Terracon Project No. EN237279
Dear Project Manager:
1800 Reynolds Avenue
North Charleston, SC 29405
P(843) 884-1234
On behalf of The Moses H Cone Memorial Hospital, Terracon Consultants, Inc. is requesting
a Nationwide Permit application review of the approximately 65.17-acres site located at
Spero Road in Asheboro, Randolph County, North Carolina. The approximate center of the
site is located at 35.749641N, and-79.828711W.
Enclosed, please find the Nationwide Permit Supporting Documentation for the above
referenced project. Please contact Josh Hoke at [e-mail] with any questions
regarding this material, or if you require any additional information. Thank you for your
consideration and assistance with this important project.
Sincerely,
Terracon Consultants, Inc.
Josh Hoke, PWS Andy Ruocco, PWS
Senior Environmental Scientist Principal / Environmental Manager
Facilities I Environmental I Geotechnical I Materials i

NWP Supporting Documentation
CHMC Asheboro I Randolph County, North Carolina d ierracon
September 25, 2023 1 Terracon Report No. EN237279
Table of Contents
September25, 2023.............................................................................. i
1.0 PROJECT AND WETLANDS IMPACT SUMMARY..................................1
2.0 PROJECT LOCATION.....................................................................1
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION................................................................1
4.0 PROJECT PURPOSE AND NEED.......................................................2
5.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS................................................................2
5.1 Wetlands and Waters of the U.S............................................................................ 2
5.2 Uplands.............................................................................................................. 3
5.3 Local Hydrology...................................................................................................3
6.0 ALTERNATIVES............................................................................3
6.1 Alternative A: No-Action....................................................................................... 3
6.2 Alternative B: Onsite Alternatives.......................................................................... 3
6.3 Alternative C: Preferred Alternative........................................................................ 4
7.0 MITIGATION................................................................................4
8.0 WATER QUALITY..........................................................................4
9.0 STORMWATER.............................................................................5
10.0 CULTURAL RESOURCES DESKTOP REVIEW......................................5
11.0 FEDERALLY PROTECTED SPECIES...................................................6
11.1 Federal Status Explanation.................................................................................... 7
11.1.1 Critical Habitat................................................................................................. 7
11.2 Technical Assistance............................................................................................. 7
11.3 Migratory Bird Treaty Act Protection....................................................................... 7
11.4 EFFECT DETERMINATIONS.................................................................................... 8
11.4.1 Mammals........................................................................................................8
11.4.2 Clams.............................................................................................................8
11.4.3 Plants.............................................................................................................9
11.5 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS.............................................................................. 9
Facilities I Environmental I Geotechnical I Materials ii

NWP Supporting Documentation
CHMC Asheboro I Randolph County, North Carolina
September 25, 2023 1 Terracon Report No. EN237279
Appendices
Appendix A Permit Drawings
Appendix B Jurisdictional Determination Request
Appendix C Supporting Documentation
r rerracon
Facilities I Environmental I Geotechnical I Materials iii

NWP Supporting Documentation
CHMC Asheboro I Randolph County, North Carolina
September 25, 2023 1 Terracon Report No. EN237279
,, Terracon
PROJECT AND WETLANDS IMPACT SUMMARY
Project Summary
Project:
CHMC Asheboro
Name / Applicant:
The Moses H Cone Memorial Hospital
Agent:
Josh Hoke / Terracon Consultants, Inc.
Location:
1271 Spero Road
Asheboro, Randolph County, North Carolina
35.74964°N,-79.82871°W
Watershed:
Lower Yadkin (03040103)
Nearest Water Body:
McDowell Creek
Wetlands and WOTUS Impacts Summary
Application Type:
Nationwide Permit 58
Total Wetland Impacts:
Total Temporary Wetland Impacts: 8 square feet
Total Permanent Wetland Impacts: 0.013 acres
Total Stream Impacts
Total Temporary Stream Impacts: 40 linear feet
Total Permanent Stream Impacts: 0.0 linear feet and 0.0 acres
Total Property Acres:
Approximately 65.17 acres
Mitigation:
Mitigation is not required for this project based on sizes of
impacts.
Current Zoning Classification/
Dominant Adjacent Land Use:
B2 General Commercial District (City of Asheboro Zoning)
Impact Type:
Fill
Critical Habitat:
No
Endangered Species Act
Determination:
Not likely to adversely affect
Wetland and WOTUS Systems:
Non -Section 10 Waters
Existing Permits & Determinations:
Jurisdictional Determination Request (Attached)
PROJECT LOCATION
The approximately 65.17-acres site located at 1271 Spero Road in Asheboro, Randolph County, North
Carolina. The site is identified as Randolph County Parcel Number 7752481417. The as approximate
center of the site is located at 35.749640N, and-79.82871°W and is situated on the Asheboro and
Randleman, NC, United States Geological Survey (USGS) Topographic Maps. See the Site Location
Map in Appendix A.
.4.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project consists of the development of a pump station with a 6" force main and an
associated gravel road for access. A total of approximately 0.878 acres of jurisdictional freshwater
wetlands have been identified on the site and wetland impacts are located predominantly within the
access road portion near the northeast corner of the site. A gravel road crossing is proposed within the
Facilities 1 Environmental , Geotechnical I Aaterials 1

NWP Supporting Documentation
CHMC Asheboro I Randolph County, North Carolina r ierracon
September 25, 2023 1 Terracon Report No. EN237279
wetland area to meet the proposed development requirements. The 6" forcemain will cross a wetland
area near the southeast corner of the site. In addition to the wetland impacts, the 6" forcemain will
cross an intermittent Tributary called McDowell Creek and an unnamed intermittent tributary resulting
in temporary impacts. The pump station area is outside of the wetlands identified on the site.
The proposed permanent impacts include 0.013 acres (595 square feet) of fill for the construction of the
utility access road. Additionally, 8 square feet of temporary wetland impacts are proposed outside of
the 0.013 acres of fill for installing the 6" forcemain. Temporary impacts to streams include a 20 linear
foot impact to McDowell Creek and 20 linear foot impact to an unnamed tributary to install the 6"
forcemain. All three temporary impacts are a result of temporary surface excavation to install the 6"
forcemain. Temporary impacts will be backfilled after the installation of the forcemain and regraded to
pre -project conditions. The proposed freshwater wetland and stream impacts were unavoidable to allow
for the proposed development to meet the project purpose and need.
■ Total permanent wetland impacts: 0.013 acres.
■ Total temporary wetland excavation impacts: 8 square feet.
■ Total Temporary stream impacts: 40 linear feet
4.0 PROJECT PURPOSE AND NEED
The purpose of the project is to develop a pump station for the Cone Health Medical Center in Asheboro,
Randolph County, North Carolina to support the medical Center. The applicant has identified a need for
the pumpstation at the site, which requires new supporting infrastructure including a new 6" utility and
access road.
5.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
Wetlands and Waters of the U.S.
The locations of waters of the US (WOTUS), including wetlands on the proposed project site were
delineated by Terracon Consultants from February 22 to July 7, 2022. Terracon has included a
Jurisdictional Determination (JD) request with this application in Appendix B and the applicant is seeking
a PJD letter at this time.
The WOTUS located on the site consisted of six non -section 10 freshwater wetlands that consist of a
forested habitat, four tributaries, and one ditch.
The site is within the Yadkin Pee -Dee River Basin and McDowell Creek Watershed of Randolph County.
The wetlands appear to drain southwest to McDowell Creek which flows off of the site near the southwest
corner into Greens Branch which eventually discharges into Lake Lucas to the west. The wetlands include
dominant vegetation made up of a tree and sapling layer that consists of sweetgum (Liquidambar
styraciflua L.) and red maple (Acerrubrum), Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense) and eastern red cedar
(Juniperus virginiana). The understory is moderately dense with a dominate vegetative species of shrubs
and woody vines that consists of Japanese stiltgrass (Microstegium vimineum), southern lady fern
Facilities I Environmental I Geotechnical I Materials 2

NWP Supporting Documentation
CHMC Asheboro I Randolph County, North Carolina ■ rerracon
September 25, 2023 1 Terracon Report No. EN237279
(Athyrium asplenioides), jack-in-the-pulpit (Arisaema triphyllum), common greenbrier (smilax
rotundifolia), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), soft rush (Juncus effusus), and false nettle
(Boehmeria cylindrica).
Three potential intermittent streams and one perennial stream were identified on the site. Intermittent
streams on site included approximately 1,883 linear feet inside the study area. The perennial stream is
approximately 1,618 linear feet on site and is shown as McDowell Creek on the most current version of
the 1:24,000 Scale quadrangle topographic map and the most current NRCS Soil Survey for Randolph
county. All potential streams flowed from northeast/east to southwest where they drain offsite into
Greens Branch. An approximately 162 linear foot ditch was also identified on site.
plands
The uplands located on the site consists of a forested habitat with cleared unimproved roads to provide
access around the site. The forested habitat dominate vegetative species within the overstory consists
of eastern red cedar (Juniperus virginiana) northern red oak (Quercus rubra), tulip tree (Liriodendron
tulipifera), eastern hemlock (Tsuga canadensis) and sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua L.). The
forested habitat consists of a moderate to thin understory with a dominate species of wax myrtle (Morella
cerifera), inkberry (Ilex glabra), crepe myrtle (Lagerstroemia indica), loblolly pine (Pinus taeda),
southern red oak (Quercus falcata), and muscadine vine (Vitis rotundifolia).
Local rlydrology
The site is located in the Lower Yadkin subbasin [Hydrological Unit Code (HUC) 03040103]. The wetlands
and WOTUS on the site drain southwest to McDowell Creek which flows off of the site near the southwest
corner into Greens Branch which eventually discharges into Lake Lucas to the west. Lake Lucas is not
listed on the 2006 North Carolina Water Quality Assessment and Impaired Waters List (2006 Integrated
305(b) and 303(d) Report). The project will cause minimal disruption to the local hydrology.
6.0 ALTERNATIVES
Alternatives were considered in accordance with the 404(b)(1) Guidelines associated with the CWA of
1972, Federal Register, 40 CFR Part 230.
Alternative A: No -Action
The no -action alternative would prevent the project from being completed either through no federal
decision or by not conducting the proposed project. The no -action alternative was rejected because it
does not meet the project purpose.
Alternative B: Onsite Alternatives
Onsite design alternatives were developed in an effort to avoid and/or minimize impacts to aquatic
resources. Based on the location of wetlands and streams, site size constraints, capacity needs, and
dimensions of the property boundary relative to development requirements, all of the site designs
evaluated would require similar or greater levels of impacts to WOTUS.
Facilities I Environmental I Geotechnical I Materials 3

NWP Supporting Documentation
CHMC Asheboro I Randolph County, North Carolina ■ Ferracon
September 25, 2023 1 Terracon Report No. EN237279
Alternative C: Preferred Alternative
The preferred onsite design alternative requires permanent impacts to approximately 0.013 acres of
freshwater wetlands in order to meet the requirements of the proposed pumpstation. The location of
the impacts is also dictated by the size constraints of the site and existing adjoining residential
development to the north and west of the site and I-73 to the east. The proposed onsite development
has been designed to avoid and minimize impacts to WOTUS to the maximum extent practicable.
7.0 MITIGATION
Section 404 of the CWA requires permits for the discharge of dredged or fill material into WOTUS,
including wetlands. Jurisdictional wetlands are defined by 33 C.F.R. § 328.3(b) and are protected by
Section 404 of the CWA (33 U.S.C.A. § 1344), which is enforced by the USACE, Wilmington District in
North Carolina.
In accordance with Nationwide Permit General Condition 23(c) and (d), no mitigation is proposed for
the 0.013 acres of wetland impacts as it is less than the mitigation threshold of 0.1 acres, and the
project will not result in the loss of stream bed onsite. No mitigation is proposed for this project.
8.0 WATER QUALITY
The site is located within the Lower Yadkin subbasin (HUC# 03040103) in Randolph County. The eastern
side of the subbasin nearest the site consists primarily of the Uwharrie River and its tributaries starting
in Randolph County and ending in Montgomery County at the Yadkin River. The subbasin spans 1,190
square miles in the central portion of North Carolina. The Lower Yadkin subbasin is located in the Yadkin
Pee Dee River Basin and is the second largest river basin in North Carolina traveling 203 miles. The
basin covers approximately 7,220 square miles and includes 5,862 miles of freshwater streams and
rivers, and 22,988 acres of freshwater lakes and reservoirs. Forested land covers half of the basin,
including the federal lands of the Pee Dee National Wildlife Refuge, the Blue Ridge Parkway and the
50,000-acre Uwharrie National Forest, which lies completely within the basin.
The site's receiving water body, McDowell Creek runs into Greenes Branch and then Back Creek Lake.
Greenes Branch is classified as WS-II, HQW (waters used as sources of water supply for drinking,
culinary, or food processing purposed were a WS-I is not feasible. All WS-II waters are HQW [High
Quality Waters] by supplemental classification). Back Creek Lake, is documented as having exceeded
criteria for chlorophyll on the 2022 North Carolina 303d List. The 2022 Lake and Reservoir Assessments
Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin report states that Back Creek Lake is historically determined to be eutrophic
since monitoring by DWR began in 1989 due to issues with nutrient and chlorophyll
The closest downstream water quality monitoring station from the project site is 21NC03WQ-YAD1813,
which is located approximately 2 river miles west of the site in Back Creek Lake.
This project meets the specific conditions and regional conditions of the 401 Water Quality Certification.
The proposed wetland and stream impacts associated with the project will not result in an increase of
turbidity in the receiving water systems that is substantially different from its current layout except
Facilities I Environmental I Geotechnical I Materials 4

NWP Supporting Documentation
CHMC Asheboro I Randolph County, North Carolina r ierracon
September 25, 2023 1 Terracon Report No. EN237279
during the duration of construction. Additionally, no oils or other pollutants will be released into the
receiving water systems as a result of this project. All work performed during construction will be
conducted in a manner to prevent interference with legitimate water uses. No non -allowable discharges
into receiving waters will result in associated environmental impacts. The project is not likely to have
an adverse effect on water quality.
9.0 STORMWATER
The applicant will implement best management practices that will minimize erosion and migration of
sediments on and off the project site during and after construction. Additionally, land disturbance activity
will comply with the North Carolina National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General
Permit as applicable. These practices will include the use of appropriate grading and sloping techniques
and erosion prevention and sediment control measures capable of preventing erosion, migration of
sediments, and bank failure. All disturbed land will be stabilized and sloped where appropriate with a
minimum 3:1 slope upon project completion as applicable. Once the project is initiated, it will be carried
to completion in an expeditious manner, minimizing the period of disturbance to the environment.
Temporary best management practices such as silt fence and/or other diversionary structures will be
used during construction as applicable. Permanent stabilization of embankments will contain
appropriately sized rip -rap over geotextile liner or other similar approved permanent erosion control
features where applicable. Temporary and permanent stormwater controls may be used to minimize
sedimentation and erosion and minimize impact to the wetland areas.
10.0 CULTURAL RESOURCES DESKTOP REVIEW
Background research was conducted on August 17, 2023, using the North Carolina Department of
Natural and Cultural Resources Heritage Program (NCNHP) mapper depicting North Carolina historic
resources. The area examined was a 0.25-mile radius around the project area. Based on the results of
the background research, there are no recorded aboveground historic resources within a 0.25-mile
radius of the project (Figure 1).
Facilities I Environmental I Geotechnical I Materials 5

NWP Supporting Documentation
CHMC Asheboro I Randolph County, North Carolina
September 25, 2023 1 Terracon Report No. EN237279
IN ferracon
yms Rock Duar'ry Rd ', Y— Sr
�
A
LL
e
A
tl
R
V
• ; cpeu,�l Ave
o
SITE,
a
Spero Re
a
9// wsfr�dy'
D
� X - AaMharn
Rd ysd I' C +�H'� Park H
9f a
u
9a a
o 0
P
�
o
i F
q�
F
No -tarn Lake Rd
�
Md. ri ra:•; °T
6 6rr^`h
•
•c � w � 4
r n
.•
... ..... • 2� .� v Unger++
Legend
", W aeasr�y si
Approximate Site Boundary
�• _ t J
Savoes: Esri, H�HE, 3armin, USGS, Intamap, Il3CR EM ENT P, T[F�an, �s ri Japan, hEil, Esri�hina`p
• • • • • ' 1?A Mile Buffe r
{Hong Kvrgj. BFI Koss. BFi (Thailand). RGCC. {q Owi-St--W p mnt4butim. and the GIs Zia O
`""'
C.vmmunity x aah[cy
N
Cultural Resourr s
e�
`p
W7erracon
CRCM Asheboro
"�
- •�
Spero Road
d
0 0.125 0.25
0.5
Ashboro, Randolph County, North Carolina
J+-
Miles
11.0 FEDERALLY PROTECTED SPECIES
The following federally threatened, and endangered species are listed by the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) North Carolina Ecological Services Field Office and as potentially occurring
within the project boundaries based on the information obtained from the Information, Planning, and
Conservation (IPaC) search engine.
Table 2: USFWS IPaC Official Species List Summary
Class
Listed Species
Federal Status
Mammals
Tricolored Bat (Perimyotis subflavus)
Proposed Endangered
Clams
Atlantic Pigtoe (Fusconaia masoni)
Threatened
Insects
Monarch Butterfly (Danaus piexippus)
Candidate
Plants
Schweinitz's Sunflower (Heiianthus schweinitzii)
Endangered
Sources: USFWS - IPaC Official Species List generated on August 17, 2023 (Project Code: 2023-0118533)
The monarch butterfly was listed in the IPaC report as a candidate species and not discussed further in the report.
Facilities I Environmental I Geotechnical I Materials

NWP Supporting Documentation
CHMC Asheboro I Randolph County, North Carolina is Terracon
September 25, 2023 1 Terracon Report No. EN237279
— Federal Status Explanation
According to the ESA, threatened species are those species "which are likely to become an endangered
species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range". Species listed
as endangered are considered to have a higher risk of extinction and are defined by the ESA as "any
species which is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range".
11.1.1 Critical Habitat
On August 17, 2023 Terracon utilized the USFWS IPaC search engine to identify critical habitat that may
occur on the site. According to IPaC (Project Code: 2023-0118533), there are no critical habitats,
national wildlife refuges or fish hatcheries within the project boundaries. A copy of the USFWS IPaC
Report is included in Appendix C.
11.E 1 ecnnlcal HSSI�)Lcincl
Terracon requested technical assistance from the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) on
August 17, 2023 regarding documented natural heritage resources on the site or in the vicinity of the
site.
Based on the response provided by NCNHP, there are no species records for rare species, important
natural communities, natural areas, and/or conservation/managed areas within the proposed project
boundary.
Additionally, two natural communities, Dry Oak -Hickory Forest and Piedmont Monadnock Forest, and
one natural area, Back Creek Mountain were documented within a one -mile radius of the project area.
As noted by NCNHP, their data is maintained for the purposes of conservation planning, project review,
and scientific research, and not intended to be used as the primary criteria for regulatory decisions. A
copy of the response provided by the NCNHP is included in Appendix C.
11.3 Migratory Bird Treaty Act Protection
Below is a list of birds of concern because they occur on the USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern
(BCC) list or warrant special attention in the project location. The following migratory BCC were listed
by IPaC:
Species: common name (scientific name)
Breeding Season
Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus)
Sep 1 to Jul 31
Chimney Swift (Chaetura pelagica)
Mar 15 to Aug 25
Prairie Warbler (Dendroica discolor)
May 1 to Jul 31
Red-headed Woodpecker (Melanerpes erythrocephalus)
May 10 to Sep 10
Wood Thrush (Hylocichla mustelina)
May 10 to Aug 31
Migratory birds and bald and golden eagles conservation concern are included in Table 2 above but are
not discussed in further detail in this survey report.
Facilities I Environmental I Geotechnical I Materials 7

NWP Supporting Documentation
CHMC Asheboro I Randolph County, North Carolina r ierracon
September 25, 2023 1 Terracon Report No. EN237279
Bald and golden eagles, having been delisted under the ESA, are still afforded federal protections under
the BGEPA (16 U.S.C. 668-668c), enacted in 1940. Under the BGEPA it is unlawful to take, possess,
sell, purchase, barter, offer to sell, possess, transport, export or import, bald or golden eagles, alive or
dead, including any part (including feathers), nest (including inactive nests), or egg, unless allowed by
permit. Suitable habitat for the bald eagle (Haiiaeetus ieucocephaius) was not identified during the field
visit performed by Terracon on May 18, 2022 and September 23, 2022.
The site was not surveyed for migratory bird species of concern. However, please be aware that these
species are protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918, which prohibits any activity, intentional
or unintentional, resulting in take of migratory birds (50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)).
11.4 EFFECT DETERMINATIONS
The following determinations were made for each species, based on the likelihood of that species
occurring on the site, or being impacted by development of the site. These effect determinations are
listed in order of priority from lowest to highest and are based on USFWS standard language
implemented for Section 7 Consultation.
■ "No effect" - will not affect listed species
■ "Not likely to adversely affect" - effects are expected to be completely beneficial,
discountable or insignificant
■ "Likely to adversely affect" - adverse effects to listed species may occur
The following is a brief description of each federally listed threatened and endangered species located
on the IPaC Official Species List for the site. The site was assessed for each of the species and its
recognized habitat. Comments are provided regarding results of the onsite habitat assessment
regarding species habitat and occurrence and the type of project.
11.4.1 Mammal-
Tri-colored Bat (Perimyotis subfiavus)
The tri-colored bat, also known as the eastern pipistrelle, is an edge species commonly inhabiting
wooded areas near agricultural properties or open water. Tri-colored bats require humid mines or caves
for hibernation and roosting sites. This insectivorous bat species feeds predominantly during dusk and
is commonly the first bat species to emerge from roosting sites. Sexes live separately except for
breeding during, females form small colonies, while males are typically solitary. A major threat to the
tri-colored bat includes white nose syndrome, which is a serious disease adversely effecting many bat
species across the eastern United States.
There will be "no effect" to the tri-colored bat because its suitable habitat was not identified on the site.
11.4.E %.iu,i.
Atlantic pigtoe (Fusconaia masoni)
The Atlantic pigtoe is a freshwater mussel once found in Atlantic Slope drainages from the James River
Basin in Virginia to the Altamaha River Basin in Georgia. The preferred habitat of the Atlantic pigtoe is
coarse sand and gravel in fast flowing, well oxygenated streams and restricted to fairly pristine
Facilities I Environmental I Geotechnical I Materials 8

NWP Supporting Documentation
CHMC Asheboro I Randolph County, North Carolina is ierracon
September 25, 2023 1 Terracon Report No. EN237279
habitats. It is less common in sand and cobble and is rarely in silt and detritus or mixtures of those
substrates. Historically, the best populations existed in small creeks to large river with excellent water
quality, where flows were sufficient to maintain clean, silt -free substrates. This is considered to be a
species of relatively fast waters with high quality riverine/large creek habitat. It is typically found in
headwaters or rural watersheds. The Atlantic pigtoe can be found today in seven of 12 river basins the
mussel used to occupy. The current distribution includes the James, Chowan, Roanoke, Tar, Neuse,
Cape Fear and the Pee Dee River basins. Historical records (>20 years) exist in the Catawba, Edisto,
Savannah, Ogeechee, and Altamaha River basins.
There will be "no effect" to the Atlantic pigtoe because its suitable habitat was not identified on the site.
11.4.3 Plants
Schweinitz's Sunflower (Heiianthus schweinitzii)
The Schweinitz's sunflower is a tall and brilliant perennial sunflower species native to the Piedmont
Prairie. Historically, Schweinitz's sunflowers have inhabits the grasslands and savannahs of the
Carolinas, favoring open or lightly wooded zones, such as along well drained hilltops, ridges, and
sunny grasslands. The species is often found in shallow soils with exposed boulders and bedrock.
Schweinitz's sunflower requires disturbance and openings and is most abundant on unforested
roadsides, electric line corridors and other permanently maintained openings. The flower blooms late,
from August to frost and is composed of relatively small, 2 to 3-inch flowers with yellow disk flowers
(center portion) and yellow ray flowers (petals surrounding the center). The plant generally ranges
from 3 to 6-feet tall but can grow up to 16 feet.
There will be "no effect" to the Scweinitz's sunflower because its suitable habitat was not identified on
the site.
11.5 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
According to technical assistance provided by NCNHP, there are no species records for rare species,
important natural communities, natural areas, and/or conservation/managed areas within the proposed
project boundary.
Additionally, two natural communities, Dry Oak -Hickory Forest and Piedmont Monadnock Forest, and
one natural area, Back Creek Mountain were documented within a one -mile radius of the project area.
As noted by NCNHP, their data is maintained for the purposes of conservation planning, project review,
and scientific research, and not intended to be used as the primary criteria for regulatory decisions. A
copy of the response provided by the NCNHP is included in Appendix C.
The proposed project will have "no effect" on the federally threatened and endangered species or critical
habitat evaluated during this assessment.
Facilities I Environmental I Geotechnical I Materials 9

r ierracon
APPENDIX A
Permit Drawings
Facilities I Environmental I Geotechnical I Materials

601 N. Trade Street
Stimmel
200
Inston
W Salem, NC
Landscape Architecture
27101-2916
Civil Engineering
StimmeI Associates, PA Land Planning
P:336.723.1067
F:336.723.1069
EXHIBIT
f-
date: 08/14/2023 job #: 22-001
project: Cone Health MedCenter Asheboro
scale: 1" = 300' sheet 1 of 4
description: OVERALL WETLAND AND WOTUS IMPACTS
.......... )'
SEAL r �
027912
�'. 8-31-2023 = C
TE M PO RARY I M PACT #2 1\
/ TEMPORARY
IMPACT #3
TEMPORARY
/ I M PACT #4
/ / I

601 N. Trade Street
Stimmel
200
Inston
W Salem, NC
Landscape Architecture
27101-2916
Civil Engineering
StimmeI Associates, PA Land Planning
P:336.723.1067
F:336.723.1069
EXHIBIT
date: 08/14/2023 job #: 22-001
project: Cone Health MedCenter Asheboro
scale: 1" = 30' sheet 1 of 4
description: WETLAND IMPACT#1
�� ----- -
SPERO ROAD
CA �'�.
— — r:
SEAL
027912 � 4
�= 8-31-2023
\\ 12' WIDE GRAVEL PUMP STATION
ACCESS ROAD
jffl'o — OHU
OHU S �OHHU —
o
0 0
0 0 0
17 '7 17 °
17 17 17
WL-
IMPACT #1
PUMP STATION ACCESS ROAD WETLAND IMPACTS:
SF IMPACT WITHIN WETLAND W3 (PER THE WETLAND
AND WOTUS DELINEATION REPORT)
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■ "�■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
00000 \ V
0 0 0 0 0
'7 17 17 °
F o 0
0
0
o17 mo o
C a°
0
117
17/
o
685
680
675
670
34"WHO
n
3+00

601 N. Trade Street
Stimmel
200
Inston
W Salem, NC
Landscape Architecture
27101-2916
Civil Engineering
StimmeI Associates, PA Land Planning
P:336.723.1067
F:336.723.1069
EXHIBIT
8"'1141 iiIts,, I
''S S `
SEAL r _
027912 '
�'. 8-31-2023
..........., <
L. H `�
,���'►rr u u ��sti��� /
TEMPORARYIMPACT #2
6" FORCEMAIN STREA,M-tMPACTS:
20 LF IMPACT WITHIN IMTERMITTEN TRIBUTARY T1
(MCDOWELL CREEK) (PER THE WET ND AND WOTUS
LINEATION REPORT)
MCDOWELL CREEK
660
650
640
date: 08/14/2023 job #: 22-001
project: Cone Health MedCenter Asheboro
scale: 1" = 30' sheet 1 of 4
description: STREAM IMPACT#2
. � oo�o�o�o�o�o�o�o�o�o�o�o�o�o.
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0\
'7 0'7 0'7 0'7 0'7 0'7 0'7 0
0000000000000\
000000000000
00000000000\
_14- o000000000000
0000000000000000\
00000000000000000
7'7 7'7 7'7 7'7 7'7 7'7 7'7 7'7 C
0000000V'7V'7
000000000 0 \
00000 0 00
00 00
_'7\NV
\ \ \ \ EX. 50' STREAM BUFFER
TEMP. IMPACT #2: FM PLAN AND PROFILE
SCALE: 1" = 100'
630 "
4+00
5+00 6+00

601 N. Trade Street
Stimmel
200
Inston
W Salem, NC
Landscape Architecture
27101-2916
Civil Engineering
StimmeI Associates, PA Land Planning
P:336.723.1067
F:336.723.1069
EXHIBIT
date: 08/14/2023 job #: 22-001
project: Cone Health MedCenter Asheboro
scale: 1" = 30' sheet 1 of 4
description: WETLAND AND STREAM IMPACTS #3 & #4
CA
♦��, 1� S S
6" FORCEMAIN
SEAL r'
027912
8-31-2023Z.
s,�+, TEMPORARY IMPACT #3
6" FORCEMAIN STREAM IMPACTS:
20 LF IMPACT WITHIN IMTERMITTENT TRIBUTARY T3
(PER THE WETLAND AND WOTUS DELINEATION REPORT)
I
TEMPORARY IMPACT #4
6" FORCEMAIN WETLAND IMPACTS:
16 LF 18 SF IMPACT WITHIN WETLAND W5 (PER THE
WETLAND AND WOTUS DELINEATION REPORT)
I I I
I I I
TRIBUTARY T3
OI
O
I I
°
I
TEMP. IMPACT #3 AND #4: FM PLAN AND PROFILE
SCALE: 1" = 100'
660 660
I I
EXISITING GRADE II I W
650 650
51)
20 LF
STREAM IMPACT 16 LF/8 SF
WETLAND IMPACT
640 640
36" MIN.
CDVER
PR P. D.I R J. R P. D.I R..
T. 1. 5' BE11D T. 22. EN
6" FORCEMAIN I I
I I I
630 IFF630
12+00 13+00 14+00
I I

,d ierracon
APPENDIX B
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Facilities I Environmental I Geotechnical I Materials

urisdictional Determination Reauest
US Army Corps
of Engineers.
Wilmington District
This form is intended for use by anyone requesting a jurisdictional determination (JD) from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District (Corps). Please include all supporting
information, as described within each category, with your request. You may submit your request
via mail, electronic mail, or facsimile. Requests should be sent to the appropriate project
manager of the county in which the property is located. A current list of project managers by
assigned counties can be found on-line at:
http://www.saw.usace.aimy.mil/Missions/Re ul�atoiyPermitProi4ram/Contact/CountyLocator.aspx,
by calling 910-251-4633, or by contacting any of the field offices listed below. Once your
request is received you will be contacted by a Corps project manager.
ASHEVILLE & CHARLOTTE REGULATORY
FIELD OFFICES
US Army Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
RALEIGH REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
INSTRUCTIONS:
WASHINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
2407 West Fifth Street
Washington, North Carolina 27889
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
WILMINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
General Number: 910-251-4633
Fax Number: [phone]
All requestors must complete Parts A, B, C, D, E, F and G.
NOTE TO CONSULTANTS AND AGENCIES: If you are requesting a JD on behalf of a
paying client or your agency, please note the specific submittal requirements in Part H.
NOTE ON PART D — PROPERTY OWNER AUTHORIZATION: Please be aware that
all JD requests must include the current property owner authorization for the Corps to
proceed with the determination, which may include inspection of the property when
necessary. This form must be signed by the current property owner(s) or the owner(s)
authorized agent to be considered a complete request.
NOTE ON PART D - NCDOT REQUESTS: Property owner authorization/notification for
JD requests associated with North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
projects will be conducted according to the current NCDOT/USACE protocols.
NOTE TO USDA PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS: A Corps approved or preliminary JD
may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security Act of
1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in
USDA programs, you should also request a certified wetland determination from the local
office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
Version: May 2017 Page 1

Jurisdictional Determination Request
A. PARCEL INFORMATION
Street Address: 1271 Spero Road
City, State: Asheboro
County: Randolph
Parcel Index Number(s) (PIN): See supporting documentation
B. REQUESTOR INFORMATION
Name: Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital
Mailing Address: 1200 North Elm Street
Greensboro, NC 27401
Telephone Number: [phone]
Electronic Mail Address: [e-mail]
Select one:
ZI am the current property owner.
❑ I am an Authorized Agent or Environmental Consultanti
❑ Interested Buyer or Under Contract to Purchase
❑ Other, please explain.
C. PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION'
Name: Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital
Mailing Address: 1200 North Elm Street
Greensboro, NC 27401
Telephone Number: [phone]
Electronic Mail Address: [e-mail]
1 Must provide completed Agent Authorization Form/Letter.
z Documentation of ownership also needs to be provided with request (copy of Deed, County GIS/Parcel/Tax Record).
Version: May 2017 Page 2

Jurisdictional Determination Request
D. PROPERTY ACCESS CERTIFICATION',4
By signing below, I authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on -
site investigations, if necessary, and issuing a jurisdictional determination pursuant to Section
404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. I, the
undersigned, am either a duly authorized owner of record of the property identified herein, or
acting as the duly authorized agent of the owner of record of the property.
Print Name
Capacity: ❑✓ Owner ❑ Authorized Agent'
Date
Signature
E. REASON FOR JD REQUEST: (Check as many as applicable)
❑ I intend to construct/develop a projector perform activities on this parcel which would be
designed to avoid all aquatic resources.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a projector perform activities on this parcel which would be
designed to avoid all jurisdictional aquatic resources under Corps authority.
I intend to construct/develop a projector perform activities on this parcel which may
require authorization from the Corps, and the JD would be used to avoid and minimize
impacts to jurisdictional aquatic resources and as an initial step in a future permitting
process.
❑✓ I intend to construct/develop a projector perform activities on this parcel which may
require authorization from the Corps; this request is accompanied by my permit application
and the JD is to be used in the permitting process.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities in a navigable water of the
U.S. which is included on the district Section 10 list and/or is subject to the ebb and flow of
the tide.
❑ A Corps JD is required in order obtain my local/state authorization.
❑ I intend to contest jurisdiction over a particular aquatic resource and request the Corps
confirm that jurisdiction does/does not exist over the aquatic resource on the parcel.
❑ I believe that the site may be comprised entirely of dry land.
Other:
s For NCDOT requests following the current NCDOT/USACE protocols, skip to Part E.
a If there are multiple parcels owned by different parties, please provide the following for each additional parcel on a
continuation sheet.
s Must provide agent authorization form/letter signed by owner(s).
Version: May 2017 Page 3

Jurisdictional Determination Request
F. JURISDICTIONAL DETERNIINATION (JD) TYPE (Select One)
7 I am requesting that the Corps provide a preliminM JD for the property identified herein.
A Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) provides an indication that there may
be "waters of the United States" or "navigable waters of the United States"on a property.
PJDs are sufficient as the basis for permit decisions. For the purposes of permitting, all
waters and wetlands on the property will be treated as if they are jurisdictional "waters of
the United States". PJDs cannot be appealed (33 C.F.R. 331.2); however, a PJD is
"preliminary" in the sense that an approved JD can be requested at any time. PJDs do
not expire.
❑ I am requesting that the Corps provide an approved JD for the property identified herein.
An Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD) is a determination that
jurisdictional "waters of the United States" or "navigable waters of the United
States" are either present or absent on a site. An approved JD identifies the limits of
waters on a site determined to be jurisdictional under the Clean Water Act and/or
Rivers and Harbors Act. Approved JDs are sufficient as the basis for permit
decisions. AJDs are appealable (33 C.F.R. 331.2). The results of the AJD will be
posted on the Corps website. A landowner, permit applicant, or other "affected
party" (33 C.F.R. 331.2) who receives an AJD may rely upon the AJD for five years
(subject to certain limited exceptions explained in Regulatory Guidance Letter 05-
02).
❑ I am unclear as to which JD I would like to request and require additional information
to inform my decision.
G. ALL REQUESTS
Map of Property or Project Area. This Map must clearly depict the boundaries of the
review area.
✓❑ Size of Property or Review Area 64.58 acres.
❑ The property boundary (or review area boundary) is clearly physically marked on the site.
Version: May 2017 Page 4

Jurisdictional Determination Request
H. REQUESTS FROM CONSULTANTS
Project Coordinates (Decimal Degrees): Latitude:
35.74964 N
Longitude: -79.82871 W
A legible delineation map depicting the aquatic resources and the property/review area.
Delineation maps must be no larger than 1 Ix 17 and should contain the following: (Corps
signature of submitted survey plats will occur after the submitted delineation map has been
reviewed and approved).6
■ North Arrow
■ Graphical Scale
■ Boundary of Review Area
■ Date
■ Location of data points for each Wetland Determination Data Form or tributary
assessment reach.
For Approved Jurisdictional Determinations:
■ Jurisdictional wetland features should be labeled as Wetland Waters of the US, 404
wetlands, etc. Please include the acreage of these features.
■ Jurisdictional non -wetland features (i.e. tidal/navigable waters, tributaries,
impoundments) should be labeled as Non -Wetland Waters of the US, stream, tributary,
open water, relatively permanent water, pond, etc. Please include the acreage or linear
length of each of these features as appropriate.
■ Isolated waters, waters that lack a significant nexus to navigable waters, or non -
jurisdictional upland features should be identified as Non -Jurisdictional. Please
include a justification in the label regarding why the feature is non jurisdictional (i.e.
"Isolated", "No Significant Nexus", or "Upland Feature"). Please include the acreage
or linear length of these features as appropriate.
For Preliminary Jurisdictional Determinations:
Wetland and non -wetland features should not be identified as Jurisdictional, 404,
Waters of the United States, or anything that implies jurisdiction. These features can be
identified as Potential Waters of the United States, Potential Non -wetland Waters of
the United States, wetland, stream, open water, etc. Please include the acreage and
linear length of these features as appropriate.
Completed Wetland Determination Data Forms for appropriate region
(at least one wetland and one upland form needs to be completed for each wetland type)
6 Please refer to the guidance document titled "Survey Standards for Jurisdictional Determinations" to ensure that the
supplied map meets the necessary mapping standards. hM2://www.saw.usace.4rmy.mil/Missions/Regulatoly-Permit-
Pro gram/Jurisdiction/
Version: May 2017 Page 5

Jurisdictional Determination Request
F4Completed appropriate Jurisdictional Determination form
• PJDs, please complete a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form' and include the
Aquatic Resource Table
• AJDS• please complete an Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form'.
Vicinity Map
Aerial Photograph
USGS Topographic Map
Soil Survey Map
Other Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map, Proposed Site
Plan, previous delineation maps, LIDAR maps, FEMA floodplain maps)
Landscape Photos (if taken)
NCSAM and/or NCWAM Assessment Forms and Rating Sheets
NC Division of Water Resources Stream Identification Forms
hJ Other Assessment Forms
' www.saw.usace.4rmy.mil/Portals/59/docs/regulatory/readocs/JD/RGL 08-02_App A Prelim _JD_Form fillable.pdf
8 Please see hM2://www.saw.usace.4M.mil/Missions/Regulatory-Permit-Program/Jurisdiction/
Principal Purpose: The information that you provide will be used in evaluating your request to determine
whether there are any aquatic resources within the project area subject to federaljurisdiction under the regulatory
authorities referenced above.
Routine Uses: This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal, state, and local
government agencies, and the public, and may be made available as part of a public notice as required by federal
law. Your name and property location where federal jurisdiction is to be determined will be included in the
approved jurisdictional determination (AJD), which will be made available to the public on the District's website
and on the Headquarters USAGE website.
Disclosure: Submission of requested information is voluntary; however, if information is not provided, the
request for an AJD cannot be evaluated nor can an AJD be issued.
Version: May 2017 Page 6

.a irrcn
August 19, 2022
The Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital
1200 North Elm Street
Greensboro, NC
Attn: Mr. Adam Bricker
P: [phone]
E: [e-mail]
Re: Wetland and WOTUS Delineation
MCHS-Randolph Campus
1271 Spero Road
Asheboro, Randolph County, North Carolina
Terracon Project No. 75227019
Dear The Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital:
7337-G West Friendly Avenue
Greensboro, NC 27410
P [phone]
Terracon.com
Terracon Consultants, Inc. (Terracon), has completed the requested wetlands and waters of the United
States delineation for the approximately 64.58-acre property located at 1271 Spero Road in Asheboro,
Randolph County, North Carolina. The study area is mostly undeveloped, forested land with several
private structures within four parcels depicted in Exhibit 1 (Randolph County PINs: 7752396762 (1.36
AC), 7752398870 (0.46 AC), 7752399337 (10.53 AC), and 7752389302 (52.79 AC). Terracon staff
was tasked with evaluating features that may be considered subject to jurisdiction and permitting
requirements under Sections 404 and 401 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and under the North Carolina
Isolated and Other Non-404 Jurisdictional Wetlands and Waters program.
Background Research
Prior to the initiation of field efforts, several available resources were reviewed, including the U.S.
Geological Survey 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles Randleman and Asheboro, North Carolina,
(published on January 1, 1981 and January 1, 1994, respectively) the NRCS published Soil Surveys
of Randolph County, North Carolina, aerial photography, and other publicly available mapping
resources. Field work was conducted by technical staff from February 22, 2022.
Topography
Topography in the study area consists of mostly gentle sloping hills. Elevations range from a high of
approximately 690 feet above mean sea level (MSL) down to approximately 620 feet above MSL
(Exhibit 1) based on a review of USGS mapping and other online resources.

MCHS-Randolph Campus) Asheboro, Randolph County, NC aerr con
August 19, 2022 1 Terracon Project No. 75227019
Soils
Five (5) soil mapping units potentially occur within the study area as depicted in Exhibit 2. The cur-
rent soil survey issued by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) of the U.S. De-
partment of Agriculture (USDA) does not depict hydric soil mapping units (i.e. wetland soil) as being
within the site boundary. The NRCS categorizes the Badin-Tarrus complex and Georgeville silt loam
mapping units on -site as 0% hydric soil, not normally conducive to exhibiting wetland conditions.
Wetlands and Waters
Section 404 of the CWA requires regulation of discharges into waters of the U.S. (WOTUS). Although
the principal administrative agency of the CWA is the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) has major responsibility for implementation, permitting,
and enforcement of provisions of the CWA. Water bodies such as rivers, lakes, and streams are
subject to jurisdictional consideration under the Section 404 program. However, by regulation, certain
wetlands are also considered WOTUS.
Currently WOTUS are assessed by the CWA's pre-2015 definition of WOTUS. This definition of
WOTUS includes the implementation of rulemaking as decided in the Supreme Court's decision of the
consolidated cases Rapanos v. United States and Carabell v. United States.
Specifically, the following waters will be under federal jurisdiction pursuant to the CWA:
• Traditional navigable waters (TNWs)
• Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
• Non -navigable tributaries of traditional navigable waters that are relatively permanent where
the tributaries typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (3 months)
• Wetlands that directly abut such tributaries
• Relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water "forming geographic
features" that are described in ordinary parlance as "streams, oceans, rivers, and lakes".
These are Relatively Permanent Waters (RPWs).
The following waters will be considered jurisdictional if a significant nexus (contributes to the physical,
chemical, or biological integrity of downstream TNWs) exists between these features and traditional
navigable waters:
• Non -navigable tributaries that are not relatively permanent
• Wetlands adjacent to non -navigable tributaries that are not relatively permanent
• Wetlands adjacent to but that do not directly abut a relatively permanent non -navigable
tributary
The following waters will be considered non jurisdictional under the CWA:
• Swales or Erosional features (gullies, small washes characterized by low volume, infrequent
or short duration flows)
• Ditches (including roadside ditches) excavated wholly in and draining only uplands and that
do not carry a relatively permanent flow of water.
However, wetlands and other waterbodies that do not fall under federal regulation may be subject to
jurisdiction by the N.0 Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) under the state's Isolated and Other
Non-404 Jurisdictional Wetlands and Waters program.
Explore with us 2

MCHS-Randolph Campus) Asheboro, Randolph County, NC jerracon
August 19, 2022 1 Terracon Project No. 75227019
Our delineation methodology generally follows the guidance outlined in the Regional Supplement to
the USACE Wetland Delineation Manual for the Eastern Mountains an Piedmont Region Version 2.0,
which states that areas must exhibit three distinct characteristics to be considered jurisdictional
wetlands: 1) prevalence of hydrophytic (water tolerant) plants; 2) presence of hydric soils; and 3)
sufficient wetland hydrology indicators within 12 inches of the ground surface.
The study area was also reviewed for the presence of WOTUS tributaries (stream channels) using
criteria provided by the USACE and the NCDWR. When present, intermittent, and perennial
tributaries, and certain other surface waters, are also considered jurisdictional by the USACE and/or
NCDWR.
Preliminary Delineation Results
During Terracon's review of the approximately 64.58-acre study area, six potential wetlands, four
potential tributaries, and one potential ditch were delineated (Exhibit 3). The potential wetlands,
tributaries, and surface waters were flagged with pink flagging labeled "Wetland Delineation".
These delineation results are considered preliminary and are subject to change pending review by
USACE and/or NCDWR. Exhibit 3 is not a replacement for a traditional survey and is suitable for
preliminary planning purposes only and for use by a surveyor to aid in locating flags. Terracon's
professional opinion is that the delineated features on property would be subject to Section 404
jurisdiction. Terracon has been tasked with preparing a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD)
suitable for submittal to the USACE requesting their concurrence on the delineation. No
communication with the regulator agencies will occur without the client's prior approval. Tables 1-3
contain the specific information for the potential wetlands, potential tributaries, and potential ditches
that were delineated. The potential wetlands were classified according to the North Carolina Wetland
Assessment Method (NCWAM).
Explore with us 3

MCHS-Randolph Campus) Asheboro, Randolph County, NC irrn
August 19, 2022 1 Terracon Project No. 75227019
Table 1. Potential Wetlands within MCHS-Randolph Campus Study Area
Map
NCWAM
Approximate
Hydrophytic
Hydric Soil
Indicators of
Label
Classification
Size (Acres)
Vegetation
(Munsell
Hydrology
Color)
Red maple, fringed
7.5 YR 5/2
Drainage patterns,
W1
Headwater
0.228
sedge, and
matrix with
water -stained
Forest
/0 15 5 YR
leaves, high water
common rush
5/8 redox
table, saturation
Aquatic fauna,
drainage patterns,
7.5 YR 5/2
water -stained
Headwater
Red maple, fringed
matrix with
leaves, geomorphic
W2
0 .382
sedge, and
Forest
common rush
15% 5 YR
position, oxidized
5/8 redox
rhizospheres, and
hydrogen sulfide
odor
Aquatic fauna,
2.5 Y 5/2
drainage patterns,
Red maple, fringed
matrix with
water -stained
W3
Headwater
0 .043
sedge, and
35% 2.5 YR
leaves, geomorphic
Forest
7/6 and
position, oxidized
common rush
2.5Y 7/2
rhizospheres, and
redox
hydrogen sulfide
odor
2.5YR 5/2
matrix with
Drainage patterns,
Headwater
Red maple, small-
water -stained
W4
Forest
0.200
spike false nettle
a 20%
leaves, high water
10YR 5/8
redox
table, saturation
Aquatic fauna,
2.5YR 5/2
drainage patterns,
water -stained
Headwater
Japanese stiltgrass,
matrix with
leaves, geomorphic
W5
0.025
southern lady fern,
o
a 20 /o
Forest
jack in -the -pulpit
10YR 5/8
position, oxidized
rhizospheres, and
redox
hydrogen sulfide
odor
Aquatic fauna,
drainage patterns,
2.5YR 5/2
water -stained
Japanese stiltgrass,
matrix with
W6
Headwater
0.025
southern lady fern,
o
a 20 /o
leaves, geomorphic
Forest
position, oxidized
jack in -the -pulpit
10YR 5/8
rhizospheres, and
redox
hydrogen sulfide
odor
Explore with us 4

MCHS-Randolph Campus) Asheboro, Randolph County, NC ',�„�
August 19, 2022 1 Terracon Project No. 75227019
Table 2. Potential tributaries within the MCHS- Randolph Campus Study Area
NCDWR
Approximate
Approximate
Subject to
Map
Flow Regime
Stream
Length inside
Length outside
Riparian Buffer
Label
Score
Study Area
Study Area
(Y or N)
(Linear Feet)
(Linear Feet)
T1
Intermittent
25.75
652
N
T2
Perennial
30.25
1,618
42
Y
T3
Intermittent
21.5
986
N
T4
Intermittent
28
245
245
N
Table 3. Potential Ditches within the MCHS- Randolph Campus Study Area
Map Label
Approximate Length inside
Subject to Riparian Buffer
Study Area (Linear Feet)
(Y or N)
D1
162
N
Riparian Buffers/Setbacks
The study area is within the Yadkin Pee -Dee River Basin and McDowell Creek Watershed of Randolph
County. Per the Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance (RC UDO), a 100-foot riparian
buffer may apply to perennial streams that are mapped on the most current version of the 1:24,000
scale (7.5 minute) quadrangle topographic map (Exhibit 1) or depicted on the most current NRCS Soil
Survey for Randolph County (Exhibit 2).
Onsite potential tributary,T2 is depicted as the perennial McDowell Creek on the published soil survey
map and USGS topographic map (Exhibit 1 and Exhibit 2). Based on Terracon's assessment
intermittent tributaries, T1, T3, and T4 would not be subject to a riparian buffer. Concurrence from
USACE and Randolph County in regard to T1, T3, and T4 would be required to confirm stream
classification and buffer eligibility.
Terracon makes no definitive statement regarding buffers that are associated with landscaping,
viewsheds, zoning, or any purpose other than for the protection of aquatic resources.
Recommendations
Potential wetlands and waters have been delineated on the MCHS-Randolph Campus project site.
Upon your approval, a Preliminary JD Request Package, suitable for submittal to the USACE, and an
NCDWR Buffer Determination Request, can be prepared. Note however, a JD review is not a
prerequisite for Section 404/401 permitting. It is important to note that applying for a Section 404 permit
from USACE or a State Isolated/ Non-404 permit also triggers the need for compliance with the
Endangered Species Act and the Historic Preservation Act. Terracon is experienced with ensuring
compliance with the above regulatory requirements as well as offering full service permitting
assistance.
Explore with us 5

MCHS-Randolph Campus) Asheboro, Randolph County, NC
August 19, 2022 1 Terracon Project No. 75227019
rr Terracon
Please contact our office if you have questions regarding this evaluation.
Sincerely,
Terracon Consultants, Inc.
Alyson A. Frisch
Senior Staff Scientist
Environmental Services
Robert T. Turnbull
Department Manger I
Environmental Services
Explore with us 6

9W
Yadkin -Pee-- River Basin
Legend
❑ Site Boundary (± 64.58 acres)
0 250 500 1,000
Feet
11
r
i3a if o
Fh,lii f,
FJ gsFt�-hor..
h}rd 5ch +
r
DATA SOURCES:
USGS 7.5 Quad Topographic Maps (Asheboro
and Randleman, NC) issued 2019. Project Study
Area based on data provided by Randolph
County GIs, Realty Trust Group, LLC, and
Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital Operating
PM:
AAF
Project No.
75227019
USGS Topographic Map
EXHIBIT
No.
Drawn By:
Scale:
AAF
Scale as Shown
1rerracon
MCHS-Randolph Campus
1271 Spero Road
Checked By: RTT
Filename:
75227019-ExhibitI
Asheboro, Randolph County, North Carolina
Approved By:
Date:
7327-G West Fnendly Avenue Greensboro, NC 27410
RTT
August 2022
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]

r —
6�'i�t" �-
LC
x41 �' F
9tH2 ,
502
-!: .0c6c
DW
2006 NRCS Soil Survey
Map Unit Label
Soil Series Name
BaB
Badin-Tarrus complex, 2 to 8% slopes
BtB2
Badin-Tarrus complex, 2 to 8%slopes, moderately eroded
BtC2
Badin-Tarrus complex, 8 to 15% slopes modertely eroded
GbC
Georgeville silt loam, 4 to 15 % slopes, extremely stony
Ge132
I Georgeville silty clay loam, 2 to 8 % slopes
J
• j'1
{BAR
G b C
! ! _-e c; fir
r
5 ,
Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin
Leg
end d DATASOURCES
g 0 500 1,000 2,000 ESRI Orthoimagery issued October 2018. USDA
Site Boundary (± 64.58 acres) NRCS Randolph County Soil Survey, issued in
Feet 2006. Project Study Area based on data
provided by Randolph County GIS, Realty Trust
Group, LLC, and Moses H. Cone Memorial
Hospital Operating Corporation.
PM:
AAF
Project No.
75227019
NRCS Soils
EXHIBIT
NO.
Drawn By:
Scale:
AAF
As Shown
Irerracon
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
MCHS-Randolph Campus
2
Checked By: EW
Filename:
75227019- Exhibit 2
Asheboro, Randolph County, North Carolina
Approved By: EW
Date:
7327-G West Friendly Avenue Greensboro, NC 27410
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
August 2022

Note:. ,•. i , r t
These are preliminary delineation results _
and subject to regulatory review and 1 r
concurrence. This is not a replacement for a „ J W3
traditional survey and is suitable for preliminary 4
planning purposes only and for use by a s
surveyor to aid in locating flags.
IL
MANS —
I �'� x ♦� 1
W1
t
'tW flIWIA129
W4
W6 1
X r
T`y
�2 T4
Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin
s';'
{ ;►
Legend
Onsite Potential Wetland ( ± 0.878 AC)
Onsite Potential Ditch ( ±162 LF)
Offsite Potential Wetland ( ± 0.006 AC)
Offsite Potential Tributary ( ± 287 LF)
Site Boundary ( ± 64.58 acres)
— Onsite Potential Tributary ( ± 3,256 LF)
� •'' 'µxi•
W5
}
410 250 500 z
Feet
DATA SOURCES:
ESRI Orthoimagery issued October 2018. USDA
NRCS Web Soil Survey, dated September 15,
2021. Project Study Area based on data
provided by Randolph County GIs, Realty Trust
Group, LLC, and Moses H. Cone Memorial
PM:
AAF
Project No.
75227019
Potential Wetlands and Waters of the U.S.
EXHIBIT
NO.
Drawn By:
Scale:
AAF
Scale as Shown
Irerracon
MCHS-Randolph Campus
1271 Spero Road
Checked By: RTT
Filename:
75227019-Exhibit2
Asheboro, Randolph County, North Carolina
Approved By: RTT
Date:
7827-G West Fnendl Avenue Greensboro, NC 27410
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
August 2022

MCHS-Randolph Campus
Potential Aquatic Resources
Potential Wetlands
Map Label
Acres (AC)
W1
0.228
W2
0.382
W 3
0.043
W4
0.200
W 5
0.006
W6
0.025
Potential Tributaries
Map Label
Linear Feet (LF)
T1
652
T2
1,618
T3
986
Potential Ditches
Map Label
Linear Feet (LF)
D1
162
162

MCHS-Randolph Campus
Potential Aquatic Resources
Flag Sequence Tables
Potential Tributaries
Feature within
Flag ID
Map ID
Study Area
Flag Numbers
(Y or N)
TA
T1
Y
TA1-TA28; TA1 tt TB; TA28 tt Study Area Boundary
TB1-TB53; TB1 at culvert along Study Area Boundary; TB53 tt Study
TB
T2
Y
Area Boundary
TRA
T3
Y
TRA1-TRA38; TRA1 tt TB44; TRA38 tt Study Area Boundary
TRB
T4
N
TRB1-TRB8; TRB1 tt TB53; TRB9 tt WRA
❑ Offsite Potential Tributary
Potential Ditches
Subject to
Riparian Buffer
Flag Numbers
Flag ID
Map ID
(Y or N)
DA
i D1
N
DA1-DA10; DA1 =Start; DA10 tt WA
Potential Wetlands
Isolated
Flag ID
Map ID
Feature
Flag Numbers
YorN
WA1-WA9; WA1 tt WB and TA; WA9 tt WC; WB1-WB14; WB14 tt
WA, WB, WC
W1
N
WA4; WC1-WC27; WC1 tt WA9; WC27 tt WC1
WD1-WD4; WD1 tt Study Area Boundary and TA;
WD
W2
N
WD4 tt Study Area Boundary
WE1-WE25; WE1 tt culvert; WE25 tt WE1; WE13-W20 = offsite;
WE
W3
N
WE12 tt Study Area Boundary, WE21 tt Study Area Boundary
WRC
W4
N
WRC1-WRC15; WRC1A-WRC7A; WRC15 = WRC7A; WRCIA=TRB
WRB
W5
Y
WRB1-WRB5; WRB5 tt WRB1
WRA
W6
N
WRA1-WRA8; WRA1 ttTRB; WRA1A-WRA8A; WRABAtt WRA8
"tt" = the flag ties to

ferracon
0126`5E
v .. _ )
Photo 1: View of typical hydrology and vegetation
within disturbed areas of potential forested wetlands
onsite (i.e. W1-W6).
OA2--JE:T1 s
Photo 3: View of typical hydrology and vegetation
within disturbed uplands, within utility right-of-way
access road, traversing the eastern study area
boundary from north to south, facing northeast.
.. F .I 1 1171. -4 -" 1: 1131 1, awl
Photo 5: View of typical hydric soil profile of potential
forested wetlands onsite.
Wetland and WOTUS Delineation
MCHS - Randolph Campus
1271 Spero Road
Asheboro, Randolph County, North Carolina
Collection Date: February 22-3uly7, 2022
Terracon Project Number: 75227019
Photo 2: View of typical hydrology and vegetation
within forested areas of potential forested wetlands
onsite (i.e. W1-W6).
Alk
�f tea. Ct yi
Photo 4: View of typical hydrology and vegetation
within forested uplands onsite, facing north-
northwest.
q,pj-R; Il • lbvawn i'&"J--SF+j7ft A I." - .
Photo 6: View of typical non-hydric soil profile of
uplands onsite.
Explore with us 1

Wbrracon
Photo 7: View of typical potential tributaries onsite (i.e.
T1-T4).
Wetland and WOTUS Delineation
MCHS - Randolph Campus
1271 Spero Road
Asheboro, Randolph County, North Carolina
Collection Date: February 22-July7, 2022
Terracon Project Number: 75227019
Explore with us 2

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Projec- MCHS-Randolph Campus City/County: Randolph Sampling Date: 2-23-22
The Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital NC we , wet,
Applicant/Owner:p State: Sampling Point: VVC w@ WD wet
Investigator(s): Terracon- A. Frisch Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 8-15
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR Lat: 35.748704 N Long:-79.827100 W Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Badin-Tarrus complex, 8 to 15 percent slopes, moderately eroded NWI classification: Norse
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes x No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes x No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary
Indicators (minimum of two required)
❑Surface
❑
Soil Cracks (136)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that aDDly)
❑
Surface Water (Al) ❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑
High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑✓
Drainage Patterns (B10)
0
Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
❑
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑
Water Marks (131)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
❑
Sediment Deposits (132)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑
Drift Deposits (133)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Iron Deposits
Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑
❑✓
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Geomorphic Position
❑
❑
(135)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
❑
(D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
❑
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
El
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 4"
Water Table Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 6"
Saturation Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches):4"
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
WA wet, WB wet,
Sampling Point:WC wet, WD wet
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size. 30ft Radius ) % Cover Species? Status
1. None Present
2.
3. _
4.
5. _
6.
7. _
0
50% of total cover: 0
Saplinq/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30ft Radius )
1. Acer rubrum 1 C
2. Liquidambar styraciflua 1 C
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
= Total Cover
20% of total cover: 0
Yes FAC
Yes FAC
20 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 10 20% of total cover: 4
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30ft Radius )
1 Microstegium vimineum 30
2. Carex crinita 20
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
60
50% of total cover: 30
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30ft Radius )
1. Smilax rotundifolia 5
2.
3.
4.
5.
50% of total cover: 2.5
oto numbers here or on a separate
Yes FAC
Yes FACW
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 75 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 75 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is <-3.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
= Total Cover of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
20% of total cover: 12
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Yes FAC
5 = Total Cover
20% of total cover: 1
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont -Version 2.0

SOIL
WA wet, WB wet,
Sampling Point: WC wet, WD wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc Texture Remarks
0-10 7.5YR 5/2 85 5YR 5/8 15 C M Loam
10-20 7.5YR 5/2 75 5YR 5/8 25 C M Loam
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion,
Hvdric Soil Indicators:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11;
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Tvpe: None
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
Depth (inches): None
Remarks:
F3- Depleted Matrix.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Sc
Dark Surface (S7) ❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) ❑ (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Depleted Matrix (F3) ❑ (MLRA 136, 147)
Redox Dark Surface (F6) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: MCHS-Randolph Campus City/County: Randolph Sampling Date: 2-23-22
Applicant/Owner: The Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital State: NC Sampling Point:WE wet
Investigator(s): Terracon- R Cooper,D Warren Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hlllslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%):8-15
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR Lat: 36.752666 N Long:-79.827153 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Badin-Tarrus complex, 8 to 15 percent slopes, moderately eroded NWI classification: None
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation X , Soil X , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes x No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes x No
Remarks:
WE is located across a utility right-of-way access road which has been elevated an ditched on both sides. The
roadside shoulders have been routinely mowed due to maintenance along access road. The area's vegetation
appears to have been cleared of trees and shrubs in the past. Fill material was present within the soil profile of WE.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
0 Surface Water (Al)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (131)
0 Sediment Deposits (132)
Q Drift Deposits (133)
0 Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Iron Deposits (135)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
0 Water -Stained Leaves (139)
0 Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Field Observations:
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
Drainage Patterns (1310)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth (inches): NA
Water Table Present? Yes X No Depth (inches): 4"
Saturation Present? Yes X No Depth (inches):4" Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks:
No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WE wet
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size. 30ft ) % Cover Species? Status
,.None Present
2.
5.
6.
7.
50% of total cover:
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30ft )
1. Liquidambar styracilflua
2. Acer rubrum
3. Juniperus virginiana
4.
6.
7.
8.
50% of total cover: 32.5
= Total Cover
20% of total cover:
30 Yes FAC
30 Yes FAC
5 No FACU
bo = Total Cover
20% of total cover: 13
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30ft )
1 Microstegium vimineum 30
2.Juncus effusus 20
3.
4.
6.
7.
8.
50% of total cover: 25
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30ft )
1. Smilax rotundifolia
2. Lonicera japonica
4.
5.
Yac FA(:
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 120 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 120 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is :53.0'
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
Yes rAUVV
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
50 = Total Cover of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
20% of total cover: 10
— Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
heiaht.
5 Yes FAC
.ii Yac FA('
10 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 5 20% of total cover: 2
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: WE wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
Redox Features
(inches)
Color (moist) %
Color (moist)
%
Type,
Loc2
Texture Remarks
0-6
2.5Y 5/2 65
2.5Y 7/6
20
C
M
Loam
2.5Y 7/2
15
C
M
Loam
6-20
2.5Y 5/2 58
2.5Y 7/6
40
C
M
Loam
7.5R 5/8
2
C
M
Loam
Hvdric Soil Indicators:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
❑2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
0 Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type: None
Depth (inches): None
Remarks:
F3- Depleted Matrix.
Dark Surface (S7)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
on:
rL=rore Lining, ivi=iviatnx.
Indicators
❑
for Problematic Hydric So
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
❑(MLRA
147, 148)
❑
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: MCHS-Randolph Campus City/County: Randolph Sampling Date:7-7-22
Applicant/Owner: The Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital State: NC Sampling Point: WRA wet,
Terracon- R Cooper,D Warren WRC wet
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Flat Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 8-15
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR Lat: 727685.29ft N Long: 1753876.76ft E Datum: WGS 84
Soil Map Unit Name: Badin-Tarrus complex, 8 to 15 percent slopes, moderately eroded NWI classification: None
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes x No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes x No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
0 Surface Water (Al)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (131)
0 Sediment Deposits (132) [
Q Drift Deposits (133) r
Algal Mat or Crust (134) Lr
Iron Deposits (135) L
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
0 Water -Stained Leaves (139)
0 Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No X
Water Table Present? Yes X No _
Saturation Present? Yes X No
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
Drainage Patterns (1310)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Depth (inches): NA
Depth (inches):4"
Depth (inches):4" Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
WRA wet,
Sampling Point: WRC wet
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft Radius ) % Cover Species? Status
,.None Present
2.
5.
6.
7.
50% of total cover:
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30ft Radius )
,.None Present
2.
3.
4.
6.
7.
8.
50% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size. 30ft Radius )
1 Microstegium vimineum 30
2 Athyrium asplenioides 20
3 Arisaema triphyllum 10
4.
6.
7.
8.
50% of total cover: 30
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30ft Radius )
,.None Present
4.
5.
= Total Cover
20% of total cover:
= Total Cover
20% of total cover:
Yac FA(:
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 3 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/g)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is :53.0'
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
Yes rHG
Yes FACW Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
60 = Total Cover
20% of total cover: 12
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
heiaht.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL
WRA wet,
Sampling Point: WRC wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type, LocZ Texture Remarks
0-20 2.5YR 5/2 80 10YR 5/8 20 C M Clay Loam
Hvdric Soil Indicators:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
❑2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
0 Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type: None
Depth (inches): None
Remarks:
F3- Depleted Matrix.
Dark Surface (S7)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
Indicators
❑
for Problematic Hydric So
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
❑(MLRA
147, 148)
❑
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: MCHS-Randolph Campus City/County: Randolph Sampling Date:7-7-22
Applicant/Owner: The Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital State: NC Sampling Point:WRB wet
Investigator(s): Terracon-R.Cooper, D.Warren Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Depression Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 8-15
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR Lat: 727494.67ft N Long: 1754754.29ft E Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Badin-Tarrus complex, 8 to 15 percent slopes, moderately eroded NWI classification: None
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes x No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes x No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
0 Surface Water (Al)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (131)
0 Sediment Deposits (132)
Q Drift Deposits (133)
0 Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Iron Deposits (135)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
0 Water -Stained Leaves (139)
0 Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Field Observations:
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
Drainage Patterns (1310)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth (inches): NA
Water Table Present? Yes X No Depth (inches): 2"
Saturation Present? Yes X No Depth (inches):2" Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks:
No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WRB wet
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft Radius )
% Cover
Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1. Liquidambar styraciflua
40
Yes FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
4
(A)
2 Acer rubrum
15
Yes FAC
Total Number of Dominant
3.
Species Across All Strata:
5
(B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
80
(A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
55
= Total Cover
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
50% of total cover: 27.5
20% of total cover:
OBL species
x 1 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30ft Radius )
FACW species
x 2 =
1 Acer rubrum
10
Yes FAC
FAC species
x 3 =
2 Ligustrum sinense
5
Yes FACU
FACU species
x 4 =
3
UPL species
x 5 =
4
Column Totals:
(A)
(B)
6.
7.
8.
50% of total cover: 7.5
Herb Stratum (Plot size. 30ft Radius )
1 Boehmeria cylindrica
2.
3.
4.
6.
7.
8.
50% of total cover: 5
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30ft Radius )
,.None Present
4.
5.
5 = Total Cover
20% of total cover: 3
1 n vPq FA( VV
10 = Total Cover
20% of total cover: 2
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is :53.0'
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
heiaht.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: WRB wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type, LocZ Texture Remarks
0-20 10YR 5/2 80 7.5Y 5/6 20 C M Clay Loam
Hvdric Soil Indicators:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
❑2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
0 Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type: None
Depth (inches): None
Remarks:
F3- Depleted Matrix
Dark Surface (S7)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
Indicators
❑
for Problematic Hydric So
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
❑(MLRA
147, 148)
❑
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: MCHS-Randolph Campus City/County: Randolph Sampling Date:2-23-22
Applicant/Owner: The Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital State: NC Sampling Point: WE up
Investigator(s): Terracon-A. Frisch Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): HIIISIope Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%):8-15
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR Lat: 35.752626 N Long: -79.828699 W Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Badin-Tarrus complex, 2 to 8 percent slopes, moderately eroded NWI classification: None
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No X
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes Nox within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes Nox
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
0 Surface Water (Al)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (131)
0 Sediment Deposits (132) [
Q Drift Deposits (133) r
Algal Mat or Crust (134) Lr
Iron Deposits (135) L
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
0 Water -Stained Leaves (139)
0 Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No X
Water Table Present? Yes No X
Saturation Present? Yes No X
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
Drainage Patterns (1310)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Depth (inches): NA
Depth (inches): NA
Depth (inches): NA Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Nox
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WE up
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size. 30ft Radius ) % Cover Species? Status
1. Quercus rubra 55 Yes FACU
2. Liquidambar styracilflua 20 Yes FAC
5.
6.
7.
50% of total cover: 37.5
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30ft Radius )
1. Liquidambar styraciflua
2. Quercus rubra
3.
4.
6.
7.
8.
10 = Total Cover
20% of total cover: 15
40 Yes FAC
15 Yes FACU
50% of total cover: 27.5
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30ft Radius )
1. Andropogon virginicus 2C
2. Polystichum acrostichoides 5
3.
4.
6.
7.
8.
50% of total cover: 12.5
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30ft Radius )
1. Gelsemium sempervirens
4.
5.
�" = Total Cover
20% of total cover: 11
Yac FA(:II
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 65 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 160 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 41 (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
0
x 1 =
0
FACW species
0
x 2 =
0
FAC species
65
x 3 =
195
FACU species
95
x 4 =
380
UPL species
0
x 5 =
0
Column Totals:
160
(A)
575 (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.59
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is :53.0'
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
Yes rHCU
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
25 = Total Cover of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
20% of total cover: 5
- Woody vine -All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
heiaht.
5 Yes FAC
5 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 2.5 20% of total cover: 1
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No X
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: WE up
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
Redox Features
(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist) %
Type,
LocZ
Texture Remarks
0-10
7.5YR 6/4
70
7.5YR 5/8 30
C
M
Loam
10-16
7.5YR 6/3
65
7.5YR 5/8 35
C
M
Loam
16-20
7.5YR 6/3
50
7.5YR 5/8 20
C
M
Loam
Hvdric Soil Indicators:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
❑2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
0 Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type: None
Depth (inches): None
Remarks:
7.5YR 6/1 30 C M
Dark Surface (S7)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
on:
rL=rore Lining, ivi=iviatnx.
Indicators
❑
for Problematic Hydric So
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
❑(MLRA
147, 148)
❑
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: MCHS-Randolph Campus City/County: Randolph Sampling Date.
.7-7-22
Applicant/Owner: The Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital State: NC Sampling Point:WRC up
Investigator(s): Terracon-R.Cooper, D.Warren Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): HIIISIope Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%):8-15
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR Lat: 727685.29ft N Long: 1754302.95ft E Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Badin-Tarrus complex, 8 to 15 percent slopes, moderately eroded NWI classification: None
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes Nox within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes Nox
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
0 Surface Water (Al)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (131)
0 Sediment Deposits (132) [
Q Drift Deposits (133) r
Algal Mat or Crust (134) Lr
Iron Deposits (135) L
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
0 Water -Stained Leaves (139)
0 Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No X
Water Table Present? Yes No X
Saturation Present? Yes No X
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
Drainage Patterns (1310)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Depth (inches): NA
Depth (inches): NA
Depth (inches): NA Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Nox
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WRC up
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft Radius )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 Liquidambar styraciflua
20
Yes
FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
6
(A)
2 Juniperus virginiana
5
Yes
FAC
3. Quercus rubra
5
No
FACU
Total Number of Dominant
9
Species Across All Strata:
(B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
66
(A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
40
= Total Cover
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
50% of total cover: 20
20% of total cover:8
OBL species
x 1 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30ft Radius )
FACW species
x 2 =
1 Ligustrum sinense
25
Yes
FACU
FAC species
x 3 =
2 Acer rubrum
15
Yes
FAC
FACU species
x 4 =
3 Ilex opaca
15
Yes
FACU
UPL species
x 5 =
4
Column Totals:
(A)
(B)
6.
7.
8.
55 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 27.5
20% of total cover: 11
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30ft Radius )
1 Onoclea sensibilis
35 Yes FACW
2 Carex crinata
10 Yes FAC
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
45 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 22.5
20% of total cover:9
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30ft Radius )
1 Parthenocissus quinquefolia
10 Yes FACU
9 Toxicodendron radicans
5 Yes FAC
4.
5.
15 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 7.5 20% of total cover:3
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is :53.0'
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
heiaht.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: WRC up
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type, LocZ Texture Remarks
0-20 2.5Y 6/2 60 2.5Y 7/4 25 C M Loam
Hvdric Soil Indicators:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
❑2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
0 Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type: None
Depth (inches): None
Remarks:
2.5Y 8/2 15 C M Loam
Dark Surface (S7)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
Indicators
❑
for Problematic Hydric So
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
❑(MLRA
147, 148)
❑
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: MCHS-Randolph Campus City/County: Randolph Sampling Date:7-7-22
Applicant/Owner: The Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital State: NC Sampling Point:WRA up
Investigator(s): Terracon-R.Cooper, D Warren Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): HIIISIope Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%):8-15
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR Lat: 727347.18ft N Long: 1753894.40ft E Datum: WGS84
Soil Map Unit Name: Badin-Tarrus complex, 8 to 15 percent slopes, moderately eroded NWI classification: None
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes Nox within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes Nox
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
0 Surface Water (Al)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (131)
0 Sediment Deposits (132) [
Q Drift Deposits (133) r
Algal Mat or Crust (134) Lr
Iron Deposits (135) L
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
0 Water -Stained Leaves (139)
0 Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No X
Water Table Present? Yes No X
Saturation Present? Yes No X
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
Drainage Patterns (1310)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Depth (inches): NA
Depth (inches): NA
Depth (inches): NA Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Nox
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
WRA up
Sampling Point:
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft Radius )
% Cover
Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1. Liriodendron tulipifera
30
Yes FACU
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
3
(A)
2 Tsuga canadensis
20
Yes FACU
3 Ulmus americans
10
No FACW
Total Number of Dominant
Species Species Across All Strata:
(B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
60
(A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
60
= Total Cover
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
50% of total cover: 30
20% of total cover: 12
OBL species
x 1 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30ft Radius )
FACW species
x 2 =
,.None Present
FAC species
x 3 =
2
FACU species
x 4 =
3
UPL species
x 5 =
4
Column Totals:
(A)
(B)
6.
7.
8.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size. 30ft Radius )
1 Polystichum acrostichoides 20 Yes FAC
2 Microstegium vimineum 10 Yes FAC
3.
4.
6.
7.
8.
50% of total cover: 15
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30ft Radius )
1 Toxicodendron radicans
4.
5.
30 = Total Cover
20% of total cover: 6
10 Yes FAC
10 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 5 20% of total cover: z
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is :53.0'
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
heiaht.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: WRA up
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type, Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-20 7.5Y 5-6 100 None Loam
Hvdric Soil Indicators: r
❑ Histosol (Al) Lr
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2) L
❑ Black Histic (A3) C
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) C
❑ Stratified Layers (A5) r
L
❑2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
C
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
❑ Thick Dark Surface C
(Al2)
❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N, r
Lr
MLRA 147, 148)
L
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
C
Sandy Redox (S5)
0 C
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:None
Depth (inches): None
Remarks
Dark Surface (S7)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
Indicators
❑
for Problematic Hydric So
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
❑(MLRA
147, 148)
❑
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 2/ 2 3/ 2 0 2 2
Project/Site: MCHS -
Randol h Cam us
Latitude: 35.750093 N
Evaluator: Terracon- A. Frisch
County: Randolph
Longitude:- 7 9 . 8 2 6 8 0 5 W
Total Points:
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other TA
Stream is at least intermittent 25.75
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
if >_ 19 or perennial if >_ 30`
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 12 . 5 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 7 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = 6.25 )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL =
1.5 Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Macrobenthic Sampling:
Sketch:Sampled under grade control, riffles, and pools within
100-ft reach for approximately 15 minutes.
- 10 Caddisfly larvae
- 2 Gilled snails
- 5 Water pennies
-Multiple species of amphibians (salamanders and frogs/tadpoles)

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 2/ 2 3/ 2 0 2 2
Project/Site: MCHS -
Randol h Cam us
Latitude: 35.748316 N
Evaluator: Terracon- A. Frisch
County: Randolph
Longitude:-79.826765 W
Total Points:
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other TB
Stream is at least intermittent 30.25
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
if>_ 19 or erennial if 30`
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 15 . 5 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 7.5
)
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = 7.25 )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL =
1.5 Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Macrobenthic Sampling:
Sketch: Sampled under grade control, riffles, and pools within
100-ft reach for approximately 15 minutes.
- Crayfish mounds but no live individuals observed
- 5 Caddisfly larvae
- 5 Gilled snails
- 2 Water pennies
->5 Mosquitofish (did not count)
-Multiple species of amphibians (frogs/tadpoles)

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 7/ 8 7/ 2 0 2 2
Project/Site: MCHS -
Randolph Campus
Latitude: 35.74575 N
Evaluator: Terracon-D.Warren
County: Randolph
Longitude: - 7 9 . 8 2 9 5 7 W
Total Points:
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other TRA
Stream is at least intermittent 21.5
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
if >_ 19 or perennial if >_ 30`
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 12 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 5.5
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = 4
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL =
1.5 Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 7/ 7/ 2 0 2 2
Project/Site: MCHS -
Randolph Campus
Latitude: 3 5. 74694
Evaluator: Terracon-D.Warren
County: Randolph
Longitude:-79.82822
Total Points: 28
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other TRB
Stream is at least intermittent
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
if >_ 19 or perennial if >_ 30`
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 16 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdrologv (Subtotal = 6 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
1 0.5
1
1 1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal =
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL =
1.5 Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

,d ierracon
APPENDIX C
Supporting Documentation
Facilities I Environmental I Geotechnical I Materials

Hoke, Josh
From: Hoke, Josh
Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2023 8:17 AM
To: 401 [e-mail]
Subject: Pre -filing meeting request - Cone Health MedCenter Asheboro
Hello,
I would like to make a pre -filing meeting request for a forcemain water line and access road project in Asheboro, North
Carolina.
Project Name: Cone Health MedCenter Asheboro
Project Location: The approximately 65.17-acres site is located south of the intersection of Spero Road and Country Lane
Road, Randolph County, North Carolina. The approximate center of the site is located at 35.74964°N, and-79.82871°W
Waterbody: tributary of McDowell Creek
Total Wetland Impacts Proposed: Permanent wetland impacts will be less than 0.10 acres for fill to construct an access
road leading to a pumpstation. Temporary wetland impacts include cutting 18 If/8sf of cutting to install a new 6"
forecemain line. The cut will be filled and regraded to existing conditions
Total Stream Impacts Proposed: Temporary stream impacts include 40 If of cutting to install the 6" forcemain line.
Temporary stream impacts will be refilled and graded to the existing conditions.
Applicant contact info:
The Moses H Cone Memorial Hospital
1200 N Elm Street
Greensboro, NC 27401
Agent contact info:
Josh Hoke
Terracon Consultants
1800 Reynolds Avenue
North Charleston, SC 29405
843-277-8377, [e-mail]
Thank you,
Josh Hoke, PWS
Senior Staff Scientist I Environmental
m iwrwon
1800 Reynolds Avenue I North Charleston, SC 29405
D [phone] 1 P [phone] 1 M [phone]

0osh.hoke()terracon.com I Terracon.com
Terracon provides environmental, facilities, geotechnical, and materials consulting engineering services delivered with
responsiveness, resourcefulness, and reliability.
Private and confidential as detailed here (www.terracon.com/disclaimer). If you cannot access the hyperlink, please e-mail
sender.

Hoke, Josh
From: 401 Pre File <401 Pre [e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2023 8:17 AM
To: Hoke, Josh
Subject: Automatic reply: [External] Pre -filing meeting request - Cone Health MeclCenter
Asheboro
This email confirms receipt of your pre -filing meeting request. Please retain this email for your records and
submit this documentation as part of your 401 application (PCN Application) as required by federal law. DWR
will not be able to accept your application without this federally required documentation. 401 applications
received without documentation that a pre -filing meeting request was submitted at least 30 days prior will be
returned as incomplete.
Responses to this email are not monitored.
If you need to contact 401/Buffer Permitting Staff, please use the following link(s) to access of staff contact
Iist(s).
For Non -Transportation Central Staff:
https://deg.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/water-quality-permitting/401-buffer-permitting/401-
buffer-permitting-contacts
For Non -Transportation Regional
Staff: https://edocs.deg.nc.gov/WaterResources/DocView.aspx?dbid=0&id=2162034&cr=1
For all Transportation Projects Including NCDOT Projects:
https://deg.nc.gov/a bout/divisions/water-resources/water-resources-permits/transportation-
pe rm itt i ng/staff-contacts
Email correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties by an authorized
state official.

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
In Reply Refer To:
Project Code: 2023-0118533
Project Name: Cone Health MedCenter Asheboro
August 17, 2023
Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project
location or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
The enclosed species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as
well as proposed and final designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your
proposed project and/or may be affected by your proposed project. The species list fulfills the
requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the
Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). If your project area
contains suitable habitat for any of the federally -listed species on this species list, the proposed
action has the potential to adversely affect those species. If suitable habitat is present, surveys
should be conducted to determine the species' presence or absence within the project area. The
use of this species list and/or North Carolina Natural Heritage program data should not be
substituted for actual field surveys.
New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of
species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Please feel free to
contact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to
federally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed critical
habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the
Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be
completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be
completed by visiting the IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and
implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested
through the IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list.
The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species and the
ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) of the
Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 et seq.), Federal agencies are required to
utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of threatened and endangered

08/17/2023
species and to determine whether projects may affect threatened and endangered species and/or
designated critical habitat.
A Biological Assessment is required for construction projects (or other undertakings having
similar physical impacts) that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the
human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)
(c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a biological
evaluation similar to a Biological Assessment be prepared to determine whether the project may
affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat. Recommended
contents of a Biological Assessment are described at 50 CFR 402.12.
If a Federal agency determines, based on the Biological Assessment or biological evaluation, that
listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be affected by the proposed project, the
agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to 50 CFR 402. In addition, the Service
recommends that candidate species, proposed species and proposed critical habitat be addressed
within the consultation. More information on the regulations and procedures for section 7
consultation, including the role of permit or license applicants, can be found in the "Endangered
Species Consultation Handbook" at:
https://www.fws. gov/sites/defaultlfiles/documents/endangered-species-consultation-
handbook.pdf
Migratory Birds: In addition to responsibilities to protect threatened and endangered species
under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), there are additional responsibilities under the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) to
protect native birds from project -related impacts. Any activity, intentional or unintentional,
resulting in take of migratory birds, including eagles, is prohibited unless otherwise permitted by
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)). For more
information regarding these Acts, see https://www.fws.gov/program/migratory-bird-permit/what-
we-do.
The MBTA has no provision for allowing take of migratory birds that may be unintentionally
killed or injured by otherwise lawful activities. It is the responsibility of the project proponent to
comply with these Acts by identifying potential impacts to migratory birds and eagles within
applicable NEPA documents (when there is a federal nexus) or a Bird/Eagle Conservation Plan
(when there is no federal nexus). Proponents should implement conservation measures to avoid
or minimize the production of project -related stressors or minimize the exposure of birds and
their resources to the project -related stressors. For more information on avian stressors and
recommended conservation measures, see https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/threats-birds.
In addition to MBTA and BGEPA, Executive Order 13186: Responsibilities of Federal Agencies
to Protect Migratory Birds, obligates all Federal agencies that engage in or authorize activities
that might affect migratory birds, to minimize those effects and encourage conservation measures
that will improve bird populations. Executive Order 13186 provides for the protection of both
migratory birds and migratory bird habitat. For information regarding the implementation of
Executive Order 13186, please visit https://www.fws.gov/partner/council-conservation-
migratory-birds.

08/17/2023
3
We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages
Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project
planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Code in the header of
this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project that you submit
to our office.
Attachment(s):
• Official Species List
• Migratory Birds
OFFICIAL SPECIES LIST
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the
requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether
any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed
action".
This species list is provided by:
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
[phone]

08/17/2023
4
PROJECT SUMMARY
Project Code: 2023-0118533
Project Name: Cone Health MedCenter Asheboro
Project Type: Commercial Development
Project Description: medical office building
Project Location:
The approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:
www. google.com/maps/(a)35.749075399999995,-79.82863230022849,14z
Counties: Randolph County, North Carolina

08/17/2023 5
ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT SPECIES
There is a total of 4 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.
Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include
species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species
list because a project could affect downstream species.
IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA
Fisheriesi, as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the
Department of Commerce.
See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially
within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office
if you have questions.
1. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an
office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of
Commerce.
MAMMALS
NAME
Tricolored Bat Perimyotis subflavus
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/10515
CLAMS
NAME
STATUS
Proposed
Endangered
STATUS
Atlantic Pigtoe Fusconaia masoni Threatened
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5164
INSECTS
NAME
STATUS
Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus
Candidate
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743
FLOWERING PLANTS
NAME
STATUS
Schweinitz's Sunflower Helianthus schweinitzii
Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3849

08/17/2023 6
CRITICAL HABITATS
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S
JURISDICTION.
YOU ARE STILL REQUIRED TO DETERMINE IF YOUR PROJECT(S) MAY HAVE EFFECTS ON ALL
ABOVE LISTED SPECIES.
MIGRATORY BIRDS
Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act! and the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Actz.
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to
migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider
implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described below.
1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
3. 50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)
The birds listed below are birds of particular concern either because they occur on the
USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) list or warrant special attention in your
project location. To learn more about the levels of concern for birds on your list and how this
list is generated, see the FAQ below. This is not a list of every bird you may find in this location,
nor a guarantee that every bird on this list will be found in your project area. To see exact
locations of where birders and the general public have sighted birds in and around your project
area, visit the E-bird data mapping tool (Tip: enter your location, desired date range and a species
on your list). For projects that occur off the Atlantic Coast, additional maps and models detailing
the relative occurrence and abundance of bird species on your list are available. Links to
additional information about Atlantic Coast birds, and other important information about your
migratory bird list, including how to properly interpret and use your migratory bird report, can be
found below.
For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures
to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, click on the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE
SUMMARY at the top of your list to see when these birds are most likely to be present and
breeding in your project area.
BREEDING
NAME SEASON
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Breeds Sep 1 to
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention Jul 31
because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types
of development or activities.

08/17/2023
BREEDING
NAME SEASON
Chimney Swift Chaetura pelagica Breeds Mar 15
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA to Aug 25
and Alaska.
Prairie Warbler Dendroica discolor Breeds May 1
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA to Jul 31
and Alaska.
Red-headed Woodpecker Melanerpes erythrocephalus Breeds May 10
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA to Sep 10
and Alaska.
Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina Breeds May 10
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA to Aug 31
and Alaska.
PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be
present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project
activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read and understand the
FAQ "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting
to interpret this report.
Probability of Presence (■)
Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your
project overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4-week
months.) A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey effort (see
below) can be used to establish a level of confidence in the presence score. One can have higher
confidence in the presence score if the corresponding survey effort is also high.
How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:
The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in
the week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for
that week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee
was found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is
0.25.
2. To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of
presence is calculated. This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum
probability of presence across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of presence
in week 20 for the Spotted Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability of presence at week 12
(0.25) is the maximum of any week of the year. The relative probability of presence on
week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it is 0.05/0.25 = 0.2.

08/17/2023 8
3. The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical
conversion so that all possible values fall between 0 and 10, inclusive. This is the
probability of presence score.
Breeding Season( )
Yellow bars denote a very liberal estimate of the time -frame inside which the bird breeds across
its entire range. If there are no yellow bars shown for a bird, it does not breed in your project
area.
Survey Effort (1)
Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of surveys
performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. The number of
surveys is expressed as a range, for example, 33 to 64 surveys.
No Data (—)
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.
Survey Timeframe
Surveys from only the last 10 years are used in order to ensure delivery of currently relevant
information. The exception to this is areas off the Atlantic coast, where bird returns are based on
all years of available data, since data in these areas is currently much more sparse.
probability of presence breeding season I survey effort — no data
SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Bald
Nona CC
gle ��■■-9111111 111111111111
Vulnerable
Chimney Swift
BCC Rangewide - - - - -++- +III 11PI ■■pi 19-11 Jill Jill - - - - - - - - - - -
(CON)
Prairie Warbler
BCC Rangewide ---- —++— +�--—+' �111 Jill
— — — -
- — — —
+--- ---- ----
(CON)
Woodpecker ----—++—'�-- 'III Jill Jill Jill II—' +--- ---- ----
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Wood Thrush i7� ■■■ ■■■ ■■14
BCC Rangewide ---- —++— +�--—'+—'++ --+— --� —�-- --- -- — — — — ----
(CON)
Additional information can be found using the following links:
• Birds of Conservation Concern https://www.fws.gov/program/migratory-birds/species
• Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds https://www.fws.gov/library
collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take-mi rator.

08/17/2023
• Nationwide conservation measures for birds https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/
documents/nationwide-standard-conservation-measures.pdf
MIGRATORY BIRDS FAQ
Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts
to migratory birds.
Nationwide Conservation Measures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize
impacts to all birds at any location year round. Implementation of these measures is particularly
important when birds are most likely to occur in the project area. When birds may be breeding in
the area, identifying the locations of any active nests and avoiding their destruction is a very
helpful impact minimization measure. To see when birds are most likely to occur and be breeding
in your project area, view the Probability of Presence Summary. Additional measures or permits
may be advisable depending on the type of activity you are conducting and the type of
infrastructure or bird species present on your project site.
What does IPaC use to generate the list of migratory birds that potentially occur in my
specified location?
The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern
(BCQ and other species that may warrant special attention in your project location.
The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the Avian
Knowledge Network (AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, 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 IPaC 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 on data
provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). This data is derived from a growing
collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets.
Probability of presence data is continuously being updated as new and better information
becomes available. To learn more about how the probability of presence graphs are produced and
how to interpret them, go the Probability of Presence Summary and then click on the "Tell me
about these graphs" link.
How do I know if a bird is breeding, wintering or migrating in my area?
To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding,
wintering, migrating or year-round), you may query your location using the RAIL Tool and look

08/17/2023
at the range maps provided for birds in your area at the bottom of the profiles provided for each
bird in your results. If a bird on your migratory bird species list has a breeding season associated
with it, if that bird does occur in your project area, there may be nests present at some point
within the timeframe specified. If "Breeds elsewhere" is indicated, then the bird likely does not
breed in your project area.
What are the levels of concern for migratory birds?
Migratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern:
1. 'BCC Rangewide" birds are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) that are of concern
throughout their range anywhere within the USA (including Hawaii, the Pacific Islands,
Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands);
2. 'BCC - BCR" birds are BCCs that are of concern only in particular Bird Conservation
Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA; and
3. "Non -BCC - Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on
your list either because of the Eagle Act requirements (for eagles) or (for non -eagles)
potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities
(e.g. offshore energy development or longline fishing).
Although it is important to try to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, efforts should be made,
in particular, to avoid and minimize impacts to the birds on this list, especially eagles and BCC
species of rangewide concern. For more information on conservation measures you can
implement to help avoid and minimize migratory bird impacts and requirements for eagles,
please see the FAQs for these topics.
Details about birds that are potentially affected by offshore projects
For additional details about the relative occurrence and abundance of both individual bird species
and groups of bird species within your project area off the Atlantic Coast, please visit the
Northeast Ocean Data Portal. The Portal also offers data and information about other taxa besides
birds that may be helpful to you in your project review. Alternately, you may download the bird
model results files underlying the portal maps through the NOAA NCCOS Integrative Statistical
Modeling and Predictive Mapping of Marine Bird Distributions and Abundance on the Atlantic
Outer Continental Shelf project webpage.
Bird tracking data can also provide additional details about occurrence and habitat use
throughout the year, including migration. Models relying on survey data may not include this
information. For additional information on marine bird tracking data, see the Diving Bird Study
and the nanotag studies or contact Caleb Spiegel or Pam 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 options for
identifying what other birds may be in your project area, please see the FAQ "What does IPaC
use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location". Please be

08/17/2023 11
aware this report provides the "probability of presence" of birds within the 10 km grid cell(s) that
overlap your project; not your exact project footprint. On the graphs provided, please also look
carefully at the survey effort (indicated by the black vertical bar) and for the existence of the "no
data" indicator (a red horizontal bar). A high survey effort is the key component. If the survey
effort is high, then the probability of presence score can be viewed as more dependable. In
contrast, a low survey effort bar or no data bar means a lack of data and, therefore, a lack of
certainty about presence of the species. This list is not perfect; it is simply a starting point for
identifying what birds of concern have the potential to be in your project area, when they might
be there, and if they might be breeding (which means nests might be present). The list helps you
know what to look for to confirm presence, and helps guide you in knowing when to implement
conservation measures to avoid or minimize potential impacts from your project activities,
should presence be confirmed. To learn more about conservation measures, visit the FAQ "Tell
me about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory
birds" at the bottom of your migratory bird trust resources page.

08/17/2023
IPAC USER CONTACT INFORMATION
Agency: Terracon
Name: Josh Hoke
Address:
1800 Reynolds Ave
City:
North Charleston
State:
SC
Zip:
29405
Email
[e-mail]
Phone:
8432778377

Roy Cooper, Governor
■ ■■■
r ■■ ■ INC DEPARTMENT OF
■■,■i NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
■ ■■
August 17, 2023
Joshua Hoke
Terracon
1800 Reynolds Avenue
North Charleston, SC 29405
RE: MCHS-Randolph Campus Permitting; EN237279
Dear Joshua Hoke:
❑. Reid Wilson, Secretary
Misty Buchanan
Deputy Director, Natural Heritage Program
NCNHDE-23054
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
s 2
\
a a
�e
v
E
n =
3
3
E
o e
3 ®
v
3
e
3
CO
±
\g
4
\
3 d
CO %
}
0
/
(\
0
&%
/
\/
\/
Jƒ
CO
2
s CO
/s
\/
®
s
0
}
/
4
4
\
} s
»
_
\
\
CO
/
//
<
>x
®%
?
\_/
/
\
\(®
�0
\ /
/ \
/ ®
®
)
«//
�0
3/
/
\ /
CO
E \
\
Co%
xeyw\
o
CO
��
\ z Z/ 2
mw\eo
±/ 2
5 y
y
<
e6®sZ
4-J}oa
a
\%
. o u= g
<
a
9
t
30
Z
\ / �
m
o
-
4
—s
»
«a
e
\\
\\�
CO
Z
2 o
\mm
\
�z
E CC3±
E
/
/ /
e
3
$
±
/
3
5
CO/
\ \
/
CO=
0
jf
\/
y
`\
\
/E
/
E
O
§e
CO
(
\\
_
y
2
g
:
\
0
°\
»
CO
\
E
\
w
/ /§
/
? (D
y
o /
CO /
}
( \
\
\ (
u \
�°
CO
? g
x\
CO/
\\
©
-0z
e.g
\
y t e
.k
)
E.±
0
>E
E
\\
\
y
/
\
/
\
_
/ /
o
Of)/
\
\
\
�
/
\
/\
0
%
CO
—
a
\
\
\
0
\.2
( /
\
/
/
\
\
§
°
4
\ /
x
/ g
>
>
COa
\
\
O \
\
E
<
E
{
CO
% g
\ / n
\ E
\ E
\
CO©
CO
E} o
2 E
2 E
2\\
*
2
//\I//
0
\\
//
///
§
\
c

C
4+
t- E
^L'
^W
LL
U)
Q
E
_0-
O
0
I..I_
rI^
V J
U
14
LO
O
Co
N
I
W
2
Z
U
Z
C
aJ
�e
j
P
N
�
Q
�
N
u
w
r
o
�
F ay P_LteVl��e St
a
m r
c Q �
v s a
V
- Z
Q
J
0
,moo
C ar, Or
_ — -- US 220 B
UDI_-- County Rd
/. Lamb
(Za
p
5q
N
N
A�
d
9,�
O
r �
C v
O
Z N
O
Q
U
a
T
w
M
O
m
O
Lake Lucas Ra _ W
9.6 sean z+�
O. E -
°nzsm°p
M
O
M
CD
M
a