The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20230801 Ver 1_SouthFork_FinalProspectus SOUTH FORK MITIGATION SITE Lincoln County, North Carolina FINAL PROSPECTUS Part of South Fork Mitigation, LLC’s South Fork Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank NCDWR Project No. USACE Action ID No. TBD SAW-2023-00927 Catawba River Basin HUC 03050102 SPONSORED BY: PREPARED BY: PREPARED FOR: USACE & NCIRT 117 Centrewest Court Cary, NC 27513 621 Hillsborough St Suite 500 Raleigh, NC 27603 151 Patton Avenue, Suite 208 Asheville, NC 28801 August 2023 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Eco Terra, LLC (Eco Terra) respectfully presents the following Mitigation Site Prospectus to provide riparian wetland mitigation credits in the Catawba River Basin Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03050102 (Catawba 02). Eco Terra has entered into a contract to purchase an easement that would comprise the South Fork Mitigation Site (Site) in central Lincoln County, approximately 1.5 miles northwest of the City of Lincolnton, North Carolina (Figure 1). The Site is within the 14-digit HUC 03050102040030 associated with the Middle South Fork Catawba River watershed, a Targeted Local Watershed (TLW), and will be the first Site incorporated in South Fork Mitigation, LLC’s private commercial South Fork Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank. The proposed project will include re-establishment, rehabilitation, enhancement, and preservation of riparian wetlands in the floodplain of the South Fork Catawba River. The Site will provide both ecological and water quality benefits within the TLW and Catawba 02 River Basin. The City of Lincolnton water intake and Water Treatment Plant is located approximately 2000 feet southeast of the Site on the bank of the South Fork Catawba River, and further downstream the Town of High Shoals and Town of Dallas withdraw water from the South Fork Catawba River for their municipal water supplies. Downstream of the Catawba 02 watershed, the South Fork Catawba River flows into Lake Wylie, the water supply for the Town of Cramerton, NC and City of Rock Hill, SC. Terrestrial benefits of the proposed project are limited to the Site and surrounding area; however, water quality benefits of the Site will benefit the entire lower Catawba 02 watershed and greater lower Catawba River Basin. The main purpose and goal of the Site is to restore, enhance, and preserve riparian wetlands. Land use conversion to a natural, native ecosystem, the promotion of water storage and infiltration on- site, and reduction of nutrient and sediment runoff from the existing agricultural fields constitute secondary goals. These goals and objectives are consistent with the NC Department of Environmental Quality’s (DEQ) general restoration and protection goals, as well as the Catawba River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP) document and the Catawba River Basinwide Water Quality Plan. Construction of the proposed wetland mitigation project will include grading and planting. Existing degraded riparian wetland areas will be enhanced and degraded wetlands will be re- established and/or rehabilitated by filling existing drainage ditches, removing constructed field crowns, treatment of non-native vegetation, and the installation of a variety of native trees. A conservation easement will be established on the project parcels to protect resources within the Site in perpetuity. The Eco Terra team has the mitigation experience, solid financial capability, and highly qualified personnel to successfully provide these credits. As proposed, the Site will provide substantial uplift to the form and function of riparian wetlands in the floodplain of the South Fork Catawba River and will assist with offsetting mitigation needs in Catawba 03050102 River Basin. South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page i TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................... 1 2 PURPOSE, NEED, & FEASIBILITY ......................................................................................................... 1 2.1 Goals & Objectives ....................................................................................................................................... 2 2.2 Service Area .................................................................................................................................................... 3 3 CURRENT OWNERSHIP & LONG-TERM PROTECTION ..................................................................... 3 4 QUALIFICATIONS ................................................................................................................................. 4 4.1 Sponsor Qualifications ................................................................................................................................ 4 4.2 Consultant Qualifications ........................................................................................................................... 5 4.2.1 McAdams .............................................................................................................................. 6 4.2.2 Natural Resource Consultants............................................................................................... 8 5 EXISTING CONDITIONS ....................................................................................................................... 9 5.1 14-Digit HUC & Surrounding Land Use ............................................................................................ 10 5.2 Geology and Soils ...................................................................................................................................... 10 5.3 Existing Wetlands ....................................................................................................................................... 11 5.3.1 Riverine Swamp Forest (forested) ....................................................................................... 12 5.3.2 Former Riverine Swamp Forest (agricultural fields) ........................................................... 13 5.3.3 Former Riverine Swamp Forest (farm road depressions) ................................................... 13 5.3.4 Former Riverine Swamp Forest (ditches) ............................................................................ 13 5.4 Existing Vegetation ................................................................................................................................... 14 6 REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS ..................................................................................................... 14 6.1 401/404 .......................................................................................................................................................... 14 6.2 FEMA............................................................................................................................................................... 14 6.3 Biological Resources ................................................................................................................................. 14 6.4 Cultural Resources ..................................................................................................................................... 15 6.5 Airports .......................................................................................................................................................... 17 6.6 Adjacent & Proximal Planning Elements .......................................................................................... 17 6.7 Site Constraints ........................................................................................................................................... 17 6.8 Project Risks & Uncertainties ................................................................................................................ 18 6.9 Assurance of Water Rights ..................................................................................................................... 18 South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page ii 7 PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION & ECOLOGICAL UPLIFT .................................................................... 18 7.1 Wetlands ....................................................................................................................................................... 19 7.1.1 Hydrology ............................................................................................................................ 19 7.1.2 Vegetation ........................................................................................................................... 21 7.2 Site Protection ............................................................................................................................................. 22 7.3 Ecological Uplift .......................................................................................................................................... 22 8 MONITORING & PERFORMANCE STANDARDS .............................................................................. 23 8.1 As-Built Survey ............................................................................................................................................ 24 8.2 Wetland Hydrology ................................................................................................................................... 24 8.3 Vegetation .................................................................................................................................................... 24 8.4 Visual Assessments ................................................................................................................................... 25 8.5 Remedial Actions ....................................................................................................................................... 26 9 PROPOSED CREDIT RELEASE SCHEDULE ......................................................................................... 26 10 PROPOSED OWNERSHIP & LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT ............................................................. 28 11 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................................... 29 TABLES 1 Project Goals and Objectives...……………………………………………………………………………………………...……2 2 Current Ownership & Long-Term Protection………………………………………………………………………..……3 3 Existing Wetland Resources………………………………………………………………………………………………….….12 4 Federally Listed Threatened and Endangered Species Potentially Near Site………………………….…15 5 Proposed Mitigation Quantities and Credits………………………..…………………….………………….…………18 6 Proposed Project Credits……….………………………………………………………………….……………………..………19 7 Conceptual Seeding Species……….…………………………….…...…………………………….…………….……………21 8 Conceptual Planting Plan…..…………..…………………………….…...………………………….…………….……………22 9 Proposed Ecological Uplift……………..…………………………….…...…………………………….…………….…………23 10 Proposed Credit Release Schedule…………………………….…...…………………………….…………….…………28 South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page iii FIGURES 1 Vicinity Map 2 Credit Service Area Map 3 Existing Conditions Site Map 4 Site Watershed Map 5 Site LiDAR Map 6 USGS Map 7 NRCS Site Soils Map 8 NHP & SHPO Resources Map 9 Proposed Conditions Site Map SITE PHOTOS & HISTORIC AERIAL IMAGERY APPENDICES A Agent Authorization Forms B Purchase and Sale Agreements C Site Soils Report D Jurisdictional Determination & Supporting Documents E Effective FEMA FIRM Panel 3710362300J South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page 1 1 INTRODUCTION The South Fork Mitigation Site (Site) is a proposed wetland restoration site in the floodplain of the South Fork Catawba River. The Site is located approximately 1.5 miles northwest of Lincolnton within the eight-digit Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03050102 of the Catawba River Basin (Figure 1). The Site is located within the 14-digit HUC 03050102040030 associated with the Middle South Fork Catawba River watershed; a Target Local Watershed (TLW) as identified by the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) in the 2007 Catawba River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP) document (EEP, 2007). The Middle South Fork Catawba watershed is included in the Indian Creek and Howards Creek Local Watershed Plan (LWP) due to being a water supply watershed (City of Lincolnton) and ample opportunities within the watershed to implement ecological restoration projects (EEP, 2010). The South Fork Mitigation Site is proposed to be the first site incorporated into South Fork Mitigation, LLC’s South Fork Catawba Umbrella Mitigation Bank. The South Fork Mitigation Site is proposed to re-establish, rehabilitate, and enhance approximately 24.3 acres of riparian wetlands, and preserve an additional 1.8 acres of riparian wetland in the floodplain of South Fork Catawba River. Total, the project will generate approximately 23.312 riparian wetland mitigation units (WMUs) for sale within the service area (Figure 2). Development of the Site will directly address multiple ecological and environmental stressors listed in the RBRP and LWP. By addressing these stressors at their source, maximum ecological uplift can be achieved. 2 PURPOSE, NEED, & FEASIBILITY The purpose of the Site is to provide mitigation credits for unavoidable losses and impacts to riparian wetlands through effective ecological uplift measures. Proposed wetland restoration practices will focus on improving water quality, as well as improving terrestrial and aquatic habitat in the area. Ecological benefits of the proposed project realized at the Site will benefit the greater lower Catawba River Basin. The Catawba River Basinwide Water Quality Plan (DEQ, 2010) lists turbidity, low pH, copper, dissolved oxygen, temperature, fecal coliform as major stressors of water quality within the Catawba River Basin. Urban development, excess nutrient loading, and nonpoint source runoff are listed as key stressors specific to the 03050102 HUC. The Indian Creek and Howards Creek LWP identifies degraded/deforested riparian buffers, degraded wetlands, fecal coliform and nutrient inputs, impervious cover and stormwater runoff, and accelerated soil erosion and sedimentation from upland sites as key stressors to the TLW. The latest Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) Targeted Resource Areas map identifies the Site as being within a water quality, habitat, and hydrology Targeted Resource Area (TRA). South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page 2 Generally, goals listed in the RBRP for the 03050102 HUC aim to reduce nutrient and sediment loads produced by agricultural operations and nonpoint source pollutant loads associated urban development delivered to surface waters. The LWP aims to achieve similar goals to the RBRP through stream, riparian buffer, and wetland mitigation projects, agricultural and urban stormwater best management practices, and institutional measures. Establishment of a wetland mitigation site, protected in perpetuity by a recorded conservation easement, will directly address many of the goals listed in the RBRP and LWP. Specific goals of the South Fork Mitigation Site are discussed in Section 2.1. 2.1 Goals & Objectives The overarching goal of the Site is to restore and improve the function of degraded riparian wetlands and preserve existing, functioning wetland resources. Secondary goals include land-use conversion, promotion of on-site water storage and infiltration, and reduction of nutrient and sediment runoff from active agricultural fields. The proposed project will also expand existing forested areas in the floodplain of the South Fork Catawba River. These goals and objectives are consistent with those discussed in the RBRP and LWP. Table 1 summarizes the goals of the Site. Table 1: Project Goals and Objectives Goal Objective Reduce sediment and nutrient loading in surface waters adjacent to the Site. Cease application of fertilizers, pesticides, and other agricultural products at the Site. Promote storage and infiltration of runoff on Site to allow nutrient cycling processes to occur. Reduce sediment runoff from the Site. Cease agricultural practices on Site which disturb soils and remove vegetative cover. Filter sediment laden runoff from upland sources. Restore function of impaired and degraded wetlands. Fill existing ditches on Site which accelerate surface and sub-surface drainage. Remove constructed field crowns to unbury hydric soils. Re- establish native vegetation on Site to promote nutrient and water cycling, filtration, and sub-surface hydrology regulation. Improve and expand terrestrial habitat in the floodplain of the South Fork Catawba River. Plant a diverse stand of native trees and shrubs typical of the desired wetland community. Treat invasive vegetation to limit and/or prevent growth within the Site boundary. Increase overall biodiversity at the Site. Replace existing row-crop monoculture with a diverse native forest. Re-establish natural hydrologic function and processes at the Site. Re- establish diverse micro habitats suitable for supporting the life processes of native flora and fauna. Preserve/Protect land in perpetuity. Establish a permanent conservation easement on the project parcels to prevent future land-use conversions and protect valuable natural resources. The South Fork Mitigation Site will achieve the above goals through the technical expertise of the South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page 3 Eco Terra Team, the proven track records of Eco Terra and its consultants to deliver high quality mitigation, and with suitable site-specific physical characteristics. The following sections further describe the Site and proposed mitigation concepts. Implementation of the South Fork Mitigation Site will help to satisfy the need to continue watershed improvements, protect valuable wildlife resources, improve the management of stormwater runoff, and contribute to the restoration of water quality. 2.2 Service Area The Site will provide in-kind mitigation credits to offset riparian wetland impacts within the Catawba 03050102 River Basin. The proposed service area for the Site is shown in Figure 2. 3 CURRENT OWNERSHIP & LONG-TERM PROTECTION Eco Terra has entered into an agreement with Charles and Angela Beatty and Lucas and Ariana Beatty for Purchase and Sale of a conservation easement on several parcels located northwest of the intersection of Startown Road and Reepsville Road in Lincolnton, NC. The proposed conservation easement will encompass approximately 35.1 acres across eight adjoining parcels (Table 2). A Memo of the Purchase and Sale agreement for each parcel is provided in Appendix B. This agreement allows Eco Terra to proceed with the proposed Site and to restrict the land use within the Site boundary on each parcel in perpetuity through establishment of a conservation easement. Eco Terra is prepared to close on the Conservation Easement and will provide copies of the deed of easement, title, survey, and map. Table 2: Current Ownership & Long-Term Protection Parcel ID No. Owner(s) Conservation Easement Area (ac) Date of Agreement & Termination Long-Term Easement Holder 3623273737 Beatty, Charles A. & Angela R. 2.42 2022-12-12 / 2024-12-12 TBD 3623271505 Beatty, Charles A. & Angela R. 1.50 2022-12-12 / 2024-12-12 TBD 3623179595 Beatty, Charles A. & Angela R. 1.52 2022-12-12 / 2024-12-12 TBD 3623178466 Beatty, Charles A. 0.61 2022-12-12 / 2024-12-12 TBD 3623289380 Beatty, Lucas & Ariana T. 4.51 2023-01-24 / 2025-01-24 TBD 3623396785 Beatty, Charles A. 6.02 2022-12-12 / 2024-12-12 TBD 3623292106 Beatty, Charles A. & Angela R. 13.35 2022-12-12 / 2024-12-12 TBD 3623396295 Beatty, Charles A. & Angela R. 5.22 2022-12-12 / 2024-12-12 TBD South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page 4 4 QUALIFICATIONS 4.1 Sponsor Qualifications South Fork Mitigation, LLC, a disregarded entity of Eco Terra LLC, a Georgia Limited Liability Company with further registration with North Carolina Secretary of State will be the Site sponsor. Eco Terra was initiated six years ago with a single idea in mind: What can we do to help preserve our fragile environment and improve our planet. Founded by Michael Beinenson, the firm has focused on stream, wetland, and buffer restoration, land conservation, and financing solar projects. The experienced team has decades of experience and is currently engaged with more than 32 projects throughout the Southeastern US. Eco Terra has been active with private mitigation sites in NC. The following example projects are all in the Mitigation Plan preparation phase, which includes the public comment period. Three Creeks Farm Mitigation Site | Davidson County, NC Eco Terra is currently working on the Three Creeks Farm Mitigation Site near the community of Midway in Davidson County. This Yadkin River Basin property includes multiple stream channels, wetlands, and significant buffer areas. As part of project implementation, Eco Terra will restore and enhance five tributaries within the Abbotts Creek watershed, two wetland areas, and upland buffer. These resources have all been impacted by livestock and hay production. The 32-acre easement area will be ecologically uplifted by decreasing nutrient inputs and filtering runoff from the adjacent pasturelands through buffer areas, as well as the conversion of active pasture to riparian buffers. Project implementation is expected to occur in late 2023 and will result in the generation of 7,700 SMUs and 1.5 Wetland Mitigation Units (WMUs). Lakey Creek Mitigation Site | Macon County, NC The Lakey Creek Mitigation Site is situated approximately eight miles northwest of Franklin in Macon County. Lakey Creek and several of its tributaries will undergo restoration and enhancement activities. This project is within the Little Tennessee River Basin and includes stream, wetland, and buffer restoration. Project goals are to exclude livestock from jurisdictional resources, reduce nutrient and sediment loading, restore native buffer vegetation, and establish corridors for wildlife to utilize for travel, food, and cover. The project will ultimately generate 3,795 SMUs and 4.81 WMUs. In addition, the company has also been active with the DMS and its Full Delivery Program. The following projects provide a brief representation of Eco Terra’s experience to date. South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page 5 Mushroom Meadow Mitigation Site | Milton, NC Eco Terra was recently awarded this full delivery stream and wetland mitigation project in the upper Roanoke River Basin along the Dan River. Project specifics include more than 3,000 linear feet of stream restoration, five acres of wetland restoration, and associated riparian buffer restoration outside of the normal 50-foot corridor. The Final Mitigation Plan was submitted in January 2023 and construction is slated to begin later in the year. Colonial Farms | Edgecombe County, NC The Colonial Farms Wetland Mitigation Site is approximately 2.5 miles south of Tarboro, within the Tar-Pamlico River Basin. This DMS project includes the restoration of riparian wetlands and covers approximately 21 acres. Eco Terra anticipates the generation of 15.0 WMUs as a result of project implementation activities. Maple Swamp Wetland Site | Edgecombe County, NC The Maple Swamp Wetland Site is approximately two miles northeast of the Town of Leggett in Edgecombe County. It includes the restoration of forested non-riparian wetlands within the Fishing Creek watershed of the Tar-Pamlico River Basin. This DMS-funded project will generate 9.1 WMUs and will ultimately provide both ecological and water quality benefits within the basin. The project’s goals are to reduce nutrient and sediment inputs into Maple Swamp, as well as restore wetlands, protect, augment, and connect Natural Heritage and conservation lands managed by the NC Wildlife Resources Commission and NC Natural Heritage Program. This project was planted in Spring 2022 and has been accepted for Monitoring Year 1. Alder Valley Mitigation Site | Durham County, NC The Alder Valley Mitigation Site is located between the City of Durham and Roxboro in Durham County. The site includes restoration and enhancement of tributaries to the Flat River and 200- foot-wide riparian buffers in the Upper Falls Lake watershed. The site will expand existing conservation lands along the Flat River and suitable habitat for threatened and endangered species, such as the Carolina Madtom, Neuse River Waterdog, and Atlantic Pigtoe. The site is expected to generate 5642 SMUs, 925,706 BMUs, and 46,973 Nitrogen / 3,025 Phosphorous NOCs. The Final Mitigation Plan is expected to be submitted in Fall 2023. 4.2 Consultant Qualifications McAdams will serve as the engineer and technical review firm for the Site. Natural Resource Consultants, LLC (NRC) will provide environmental review and monitoring support. South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page 6 4.2.1 McAdams McAdams is a full-service civil engineering, land planning, landscape architecture and geomatics firm headquartered in Raleigh, North Carolina with offices in Raleigh and Charlotte, North Carolina and Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas. McAdams has built its reputation throughout the industry over 44 years by delivering unmatched expertise and unwavering commitment to clients in a variety of markets including municipal, education, healthcare and energy, as well as commercial and residential development. McAdams specifically brings many years of experience supporting all components of mitigation banking from site search, developing mitigation plans and instruments, negotiating easements, performing engineering design services, permitting, construction oversight, and monitoring. Our staff have experience with buffer, stream, wetland, and nutrient offset mitigation sites across North Carolina. The following project examples are included to provide depth of experience. Maple Swamp Wetland Mitigation Project | Edgecombe County, NC McAdams developed construction drawings and assisted with land disturbance permitting for a 15.34-acre wetland mitigation site in Edgecombe County, North Carolina to generate Non- Riparian WMUs in the Tar-Pamlico River Basin for Eco Terra, LLC. McAdams completed all grading, earthwork estimates, and erosion control sequencing in the preparation of construction documents. The site was permitted through the Interagency Review Team for all mitigation components and NC DEMLR for erosion control. Through the project permitting process, McAdams coordinated with Eco Terra and regulatory agencies to finalize design components for construction and assist in as-built approval. This project was planted in Spring 2022 and has been accepted for Monitoring Year 1. Colonial Farms Wetland Mitigation Project | Edgecombe County, NC McAdams developed construction drawings and assisted with land disturbance permitting for a 21.82-acre wetland mitigation site in Edgecombe County, North Carolina to generate Riparian WMUs in the Tar-Pamlico River Basin for Eco Terra, LLC. McAdams completed all grading, earthwork estimates, and erosion control sequencing in the preparation of construction documents. The site was permitted through the Interagency Review Team for all mitigation components and NC DEMLR for erosion control. Through the project permitting process, McAdams coordinated with Eco Terra and regulatory agencies to finalize design components for construction and assist in as-built approval. The project was constructed in Spring 2022. Alder Valley Mitigation Site | Durham County, NC McAdams designed and developed construction drawings for the Alder Valley Mitigation Site, including restoration and enhancement of tributaries to the Flat River and 200-foot-wide riparian South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page 7 buffers. McAdams worked with Eco Terra and local and state authorities to develop a dam removal plan as part of the stream and riparian buffer restoration project. Careful consideration was given to the design and sequencing of proposed dam removal and erosion and sediment control plan to protect high-quality resources, threatened and endangered species, and identified critical habitat areas downstream. McAdams will continue to work with Eco Terra to finalize the Mitigation Plan and complete land disturbance permitting. The Final Mitigation Plan is expected to be submitted in Fall 2023. Laurel Springs Full Delivery Stream and Wetland Restoration Project | Avery County, NC Laurel Springs is a stream and wetland mitigation site located in Avery County, NC that was developed by Restoration Systems to provide 4,231 Stream Mitigation Units (SMUs) and 3.688 Riparian Wetland Mitigation Units (WMUs). McAdams worked with Restoration Systems and Axiom Environmental (Axiom) to develop construction drawings and assist with land disturbance permitting for the project. McAdams completed all grading, earthwork estimates, and erosion control sequencing in the preparation of construction documents. The site was permitted through the Interagency Review Team for all mitigation components and Avery County for erosion control. Through the project permitting process, McAdams coordinated with Axiom, Restoration Systems and the contractor to finalize design components for construction. Construction was completed in Fall 2021 and the site was planted in early 2022. Swamp Grape Full Delivery Stream and Wetland Restoration Project | Robeson County, NC Swamp Grape is a stream and wetland mitigation site located in Robeson County, NC that was developed by Restoration Systems to provide 3,228 SMUs and 12.706 Riparian WMUs. McAdams worked with Restoration Systems and Axiom to develop construction drawings and assist with land disturbance permitting for the project. McAdams completed all grading, earthwork estimates, and erosion control sequencing in the preparation of construction documents. The site was permitted through the Interagency Review Team for all mitigation components and the North Carolina Division of Energy, Mineral and Land Resources (NC DEMLR) for erosion control. Through the project permitting process McAdams coordinated with Axiom, Restoration Systems, and the contractor to finalize design components for construction. Construction was completed in Fall 2021 and the site was planted in early 2022. Crane Full Delivery Stream and Wetland Restoration Project | Lee County, NC Crane is a stream and wetland mitigation site located in Lee County, NC that was developed by Restoration Systems to provide 3,533 SMUs and 14.593 Riparian WMUs to the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services to offset unavoidable impacts to natural resources in the Cape Fear River basin. McAdams worked with Restoration Systems and Axiom to develop construction drawings and assist with land disturbance permitting for the project. McAdams completed all South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page 8 grading, earthwork estimates, and erosion control sequencing in the preparation of construction documents. The site was permitted through the Interagency Review Team for all mitigation components and the North Carolina Division of Energy, Mineral and Land Resources (NC DEMLR) for erosion control. Through the project permitting process McAdams coordinated with Axiom, Restoration Systems, and the contractor to finalize design components for construction. Construction was completed in Spring and Summer 2022. 4.2.2 Natural Resource Consultants Natural Resource Consultants, LLC (NRC) is a women-owned private consulting firm in Raleigh, North Carolina led by a principal investor with more than 30 years of experience in surface water and wetland delineation, assessment, and permitting. NRC staff have experience with permitting and monitoring stream and wetland permittee-responsible mitigation (PRM), stream relocations, and streambank stabilizations. Beth Page Stream Restoration | Durham County, NC NRC staff assisted with the monitoring and closeout of this PRM site in Durham. In 2016, a highly degraded unnamed tributary to Stirrup Iron Creek was restored using natural channel design techniques to fulfill a portion of the mitigation requirements associated with an Individual Permit for the Beth Page residential subdivision. The objective was to design a channel with the appropriate dimension, pattern, and profile to provide a stable channel connected to the floodplain and establish a native forested riparian plant community. Approximately 2,000 linear feet of perennial stream were restored. NRC staff conducted visual assessments of stream stability and vegetation monitoring and provided recommendations for adaptive management and regulatory coordination for closeout in 2020. Lowlands Wetland Mitigation Site | Johnston County, NC This wetland re-establishment/enhancement project was constructed on the floodplain of the Neuse River as a PRM site for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline project in 2018. The site includes approximately 23 acres of riparian wetland re-establishment, 19 acres of riparian and non-riparian enhancement, and 23 acres of non-riparian preservation. The objective of the project was to provide functional uplift through the restoration of the attendant hydrologic and biologic functions of a bottomland hardwood forest. NRC staff provide visual and vegetative monitoring and are assisting with converting the site to a wetland mitigation bank. Alder Valley Mitigation Site | Durham County, NC NRC staff worked with McAdams and Eco Terra to complete data form assessments of existing jurisdictional features and a preliminary threatened and endangered species assessment at the South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page 9 Alder Valley Mitigation Site. Post construction, NRC staff will provide long-term monitoring support for the site. Duke University Stream Restoration | Durham County, NC Since 2018, NRC staff have assisted with vegetation monitoring and developing an adaptive management plan for this PRM site on an unnamed tributary to Sandy Creek located on the Duke University campus in Durham. This stream restoration project was constructed in 2013 to satisfy part of the mitigation requirements for an Individual Permit to construct a water reclamation pond. The goal of the project is to convert approximately 3,500 linear feet of an eroding and degraded perennial stream to a natural, stable system with restored aquatic habitat, riparian corridor, and floodplain. 5 EXISTING CONDITIONS The Site is situated northwest of the intersection of Startown Road and Reepsville Road in Lincolnton, NC, approximately 1500 feet east of the South Fork Catawba River. The Site is accessed from Reepsville Road via a private drive adjacent to the Lincoln County Water Treatment plant. The entirety of the proposed easement area is located within the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) mapped South Fork Catawba River. The eastern boundary of the proposed easement area is defined by topographic change from floodplain to uplands. Current land use within the proposed easement area consists of cropland and Piedmont Swamp Forest (Figure 3). Review of historic aerial imagery shows current land use has remained consistent since prior to 1950. Farming ceased on an approximately 8.1-acre forested area in the southwest corner of the Site sometime between 1984 and 1993. In this area a semi-mature forest of inundation-tolerant tree and shrub species has grown around a matrix of jurisdictional wetlands that have formed in the footprint of ditches. Northeast of the forested area, agricultural cropland comprise the majority of the Site. Over time, these areas have been crowned using material excavated from the series of ditches dredged between planting rows and along the perimeter of the fields. A narrow riparian corridor exists along the primary drainage ditch located on the western boundary of the Site and in several low-lying areas adjacent to ditches in the northern portion of the Site. Existing wetlands in the central and northern portion of the Site have been severely impacted by agricultural practices, hydrologic alteration, and invasive plant species. See Section 5.3 for discussion of existing wetland resources on site. The Site has a 132.6-acre watershed (Figure 4) consisting of low-density residential, forested, and agricultural lands. The Site receives most of its hydrologic input from upland areas to the east. Onsite hydrology generally flows towards the southwest corner of the Site via constructed inter- South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page 10 row and perimeter ditches (Figure 5). Runoff collected by the main ditch on the west side of the Site, wetland 2 (see Section 5.3), exits the project area via a 30-inch culvert beneath Site access road. A smaller culvert draining wetland 3 (see Section 5.3) passes beneath the Site access road just south of the 30-inch culvert. A jurisdictional channel forms downstream of the 30-inch culvert and conveys runoff to the South Fork Catawba River. Topography surrounding the Site is shown on the Lincolnton West 7.5-minute quadrangle map (Figure 6). The Site is bordered to the south and west by cropland and a silviculture operation exists on the adjacent property to the north. Active livestock pasture, rural residential developments, and forested areas border the eastern Site boundary. 5.1 14-Digit HUC & Surrounding Land Use The Site is located within the Middle South Fork Catawba watershed, 14-digit HUC 03050102040030. The 5.4-square mile TLW is situated in rural, central Lincoln County, just northeast of the City of Lincolnton. The Middle South Fork Catawba watershed consists primarily of managed agricultural areas (51%), forested/shrub lands (31%), and low-density residential development (13%) (EEP, 2010). Less than 1% of the watershed is covered by high-density development and impervious cover. HUC 03050102040030 is identified as a TLW by DEQ due to being a water supply watershed. The City of Lincolnton Water Treatment Plant is located approximately 2000 feet southeast of the Site on the bank of the South Fork Catawba River. In 2013 the Water Treatment Plant provided approximately 3.082 MGD of clean, potable water to the City of Lincolnton (Lincolnton, 2023). According to the United States Census Bureau, Lincolnton had an estimated population of 11,352 in June 2021, an increase of approximately 3% from census data published in April 2020. Incorporated areas of Lincolnton cover approximately 8.68-sqaure miles. Areas outside of the city limits remain largely rural, dominated by managed agricultural areas. Generally, land use within the 14-digit HUC is representative of the remainder of western Lincoln County. Narrow forested corridors along streams, ditches, and other low-lying areas parcel the adjacent agricultural fields. Urban development is sparse and is localized to unincorporated townships scattered throughout the county. 5.2 Geology and Soils The Site is located within the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Major Land Resource Area (MLRA) number 136 – Southern Piedmont, and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Level IV Ecoregion 45b – Southern Outer Piedmont. This area is underlain with Precambrian and Paleozoic metamorphic and igneous rocks (NRCS, 2022), covered by deep saprolite and clayey South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page 11 subsoils (EPA, 2002). NRCS Web Soil Survey (NRCS, 2023) shows Chewacla and Lloyd soils are mapped within the Site boundary (Figure 7). Chewacla soils are typical of the South Fork Catawba River floodplain and Lloyd soils are typical of the upland areas adjacent to the floodplain. Both soils mapped on the Site are designated as prime farmland. However, Chewacla soils are only considered prime farmland if they are drained and either protected from flooding or not frequently flooded during the growing season. Soil & Forestry Services of the Carolinas, PA performed a hydric soil mapping evaluation of the Site on March 1, 2023. Soil morphological features and presence of hydric soil indicators were evaluated in 45 borings. Although not mapped in the area, the Licensed Soil Scientist found that the Chastain Series was the best fit for the soils observed on the Site due to the consistent presence of gleyed, expansive clay subsoil, which are not characteristics present in Chewacla or Wehadkee soils. A report of the evaluation is provided in Appendix C. According to NRCS, the Chastain soil series ranges in slope from zero to two percent and has a deep profile that formed in clayey alluvial sediments. These soils are poorly drained, have low permeability, and are frequently or occasionally flooded for brief to very long periods. Chastain loam, frequently flooded soils are not designated as prime farmland. 5.3 Existing Wetlands According to the NC Wetland Assessment Methodology (NCWAM), the existing wetland complex at the Site is typical of a Riverine Swamp Forest. Existing wetlands exhibit various degrees of degradation ranging from shallow ditches through forested areas to large ditches constructed to provide agricultural drainage to complete conversion to agricultural fields. Riverine Swamp Forests typical of the Site are found on the wettest portions of large floodplains and other permanent water bodies. These wetlands are seasonally to semi-permanently inundated by ground water and surface runoff. Overbank flooding can also be a source of water for this type of wetland. The Site contains six additional noncontiguous wetlands that are remnants of current and historical agricultural conversion. A non-jurisdictional pond is located in the central part of the Site on the southwest boundary. Most of the wetlands on the Site are connected by ditches and culverts. Contiguous wetlands were divided based on their similarity of condition and sequentially numbered for identification. Noncontiguous wetlands were also assigned an identification number. A preliminary/approved jurisdictional determination request for the Site is provided in Appendix D. Wetland and upland data forms to support the delineation and NCWAM Field Assessment Results and Wetland Rating Sheets are provided in Appendix D. Table 3 describes the existing wetland resources on site. South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page 12 Table 3: Existing Wetland Resources Parameter Wetland 1 Wetland 2 Wetland 3 Wetland 4 Wetland 5 Wetland Area (ac) 1.218 1.553 2.174 0.46 0.285 NCWAM Classification Riverine Swamp Forest Riverine Swamp Forest Riverine Swamp Forest Riverine Swamp Forest Riverine Swamp Forest Soil Series Chastain Chastain Chastain Chastain Chastain Drainage Class Poorly Drained Poorly Drained Poorly Drained Poorly Drained Poorly Drained Hydric Soil Status Yes No Yes Yes No Source of Hydrology Groundwater/ Runoff Groundwater/ Runoff Groundwater/ Runoff Groundwater/ Runoff Groundwater/ Runoff NCWAM Rating Medium Low Low Low Low Parameter Wetland 6 Wetland 7 Wetland 8 Wetland 9 Wetland 10 Wetland Area (ac) 1.375 0.232 0.164 0.182 0.031 NCWAM Classification Riverine Swamp Forest Riverine Swamp Forest Riverine Swamp Forest Riverine Swamp Forest Riverine Swamp Forest Soil Series Chastain Chastain Chastain Chastain Chastain Drainage Class Poorly Drained Poorly Drained Poorly Drained Poorly Drained Poorly Drained Hydric Soil Status Yes No Yes No No Source of Hydrology Groundwater/ Runoff Groundwater/ Runoff Groundwater/ Runoff Groundwater/ Runoff Groundwater/ Runoff NCWAM Rating Low Low Medium Low Low Parameter Wetland 11 Wetland 12 Wetland 13 Wetland 14 Wetland Area (ac) 0.0003 0.0006 0.009 0.069 NCWAM Classification Riverine Swamp Forest Riverine Swamp Forest Riverine Swamp Forest Riverine Swamp Forest Soil Series Chastain Chastain Chastain Chastain Drainage Class Poorly Drained Poorly Drained Poorly Drained Poorly Drained Hydric Soil Status No No No No Source of Hydrology Groundwater/ Runoff Groundwater/ Runoff Groundwater/ Runoff Groundwater/ Runoff NCWAM Rating Low Low Low Low 5.3.1 Riverine Swamp Forest (forested) Wetlands 1, 3, 4, 6, and 8 (W1, W3, W4, W6, and W8) are situated in the forested areas of the Site. From a review of historical aerial photos, Wetlands 4 and 6 have been forested since at least 2005. These wetlands are dominated by red maple (Acer rubrum), sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua), green ash (Franxinus pennsylvanica), and American elm (Ulmus americana). W1, W3, and W8 have been forested for at least 33 years. These more mature wetlands are dominated by the same South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page 13 species but also include some willow oak (Quercus phellos) and water oak (Quercus nigra). The center of these wetlands and shallow ditches within and connecting these wetlands were inundated three to four inches deep during the field investigation. The outer edges of the wetlands were saturated to the surface. Clayey soils comprise the upper horizons of the soil profile. A network of ditches connects W3 and W6 to an off-site stream downstream of the Site access road. W1, W4, and W8 are separated from the other Riverine Swamp Forest wetlands by narrow strips of upland. Signs of overland flow were observed between W4 and Wetland 5 (ditch). W1 and W8 are similarly situated to the contiguous wetlands and provide the same ecological functions. 5.3.2 Former Riverine Swamp Forest (agricultural fields) Wetlands 10 and 14 (W10 & W14) are areas in the agricultural fields that were saturated to the surface with some areas of inundation, contained water-stained plant debris, and met the F3 hydric soil indicator (depleted matrix). These wetlands were sparsely vegetated with hedge hyssop (Gratiola viscidula) and hairy buttercup (Ranunculus sardous). 5.3.3 Former Riverine Swamp Forest (farm road depressions) Wetlands 11, 12, and 13 (W11, W12, & W13) are depressions in the farm road created by farm equipment access over time. These wetlands are sparsely vegetated with hedge hyssop and hairy buttercup and inundated two to four inches deep with unconsolidated mud bottoms. At least two species of tadpoles and water fleas (Daphnia spp.) were abundant in these wetlands. Although W11, W12, and W13 are not contiguous to any of the aforementioned wetlands, these wetlands are similarly situated and provide some of the same ecological and water quality and quantity functions. 5.3.4 Former Riverine Swamp Forest (ditches) Wetlands 2, 5, 7, and 9 (W2, W5, W7 and W9) are ditches constructed to provide drainage for agricultural production. W2 is the main ditch running along the farm road and the northwest boundary of the Site. W5, W7, and W9 are secondary ditches that drain to W2. W2 controls the hydrology by discharging to the off-site stream near the southwest corner of the Site. Water in this ditch varied from 6 inches to 1.5 feet in depth, and moderate flow was observed during the field investigation. A continuous spoil pile, approximately 2-3 feet tall, of previously dredged material parallels W2 along the eastern side of the ditch. W2 contains submerged aquatic and emergent vegetation including, but not limited to, hedge hyssop, green arrow-arum (Peltandra virginica), common rush (Juncus effusus), and sedge (Carex spp.). W2 and W5 have forested edges. W7 and W9 run through the open agricultural field, lack woody vegetation, and have sparse aquatic vegetation. These ditches have unconsolidated mud bottoms and were inundated four to six inches deep during the field investigation. Ditches in the existing drainage network are spaced South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page 14 approximately 80-160 feet apart, separated by constructed field crowns approximately 12-36 inches in height. 5.4 Existing Vegetation According to the Guide to the Natural Communities of North Carolina – Fourth Approximation (Schafale, 2012), forested wetlands on the Site are classified as Piedmont Swamp Forest. Upland forested areas are characterized as Bottomland Hardwood Forest (High Subtype). Dominant vegetation observed in the forested wetlands are discussed above. Red maple, sweet gum, tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), American elm, and water oak dominated the Bottomland Hardwood Forest (High Subtype) portion of the Site. Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense) is common in uplands, along the forest edges, and adjacent to the main ditch in the southwestern third of the Site. In forested patches located in the northeast thirded of the Site, Chinese privet is the dominate species in the understory. 6 REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS 6.1 401/404 NRC investigated the presence of potential jurisdictional features at the Site on March 1, 8, and 16, 2023. Wetlands were classified based on current function and potential for function improvement based on the goals of the proposed wetland restoration project. As described in Section 5.3 above, all areas meeting the criteria for wetlands were determined to be jurisdictional based on their adjacency to Relatively Permanent Water located off-site to the southwest, which is a tributary to the South Fork Catawba River. Pond (P1) was constructed in high ground and determined to be non-jurisdictional. A preliminary/approved jurisdictional determination request for the Site is provided in Appendix D. 6.2 FEMA The entirety of the Site is located in the FEMA mapped floodplain of the South Fork Catawba River per FEMA FIRM panel number 3710362300J, dated August 16, 2007 (Appendix E). The Site is located outside of the regulated floodway. As part of the Site planning and permitting a floodplain development permit will be submitted to Lincoln County. 6.3 Biological Resources The US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) Species List dated August 17, 2023 identifies four federally listed species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) that may occur within the Site and/or may be affected by the proposed project (Table 4). No Critical Habitats were identified within or near the Site. An NC Natural Heritage Program South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page 15 (NHP) Data Explorer Report dated August 17, 2023 indicates one occurrence of a federally listed species within one mile of the Site. This is a historic occurrence of Michaux’s sumac (Rhus michauxii). Suitable habitat for Michaux’s sumac and monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus) occurs along field edges. A limited area of suitable habitat for dwarf-flowered heartleaf (Hexastylis naniflora) occurs on the steep slope that extends into the southeast boundary of the Site. Surveys for protected plant species will be completed during the optimal survey windows. As a candidate species, monarch butterfly receives no statutory protection under the ESA. Forested areas of the Site and the culvert beneath the Site access road in the southwest corner of the Site are suitable habitat for Tricolored Bat (Perimyotis subflayus) (TCB). Based on past experience, TCB is not expected to be listed before late 2023. Once TCB is listed, a bat survey would be required to determine their presence or absence. Without a survey, impacts could be avoided by restricting tree clearing during the bat’s active season (generally April to November) and averting culvert disturbance. Table 4: Federally Listed Threatened and Endangered Species Potentially Near Site Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status Suitable Habitat Perimyotis subflavus Tricolored Bat1 Proposed Endangered Yes Danaus plexippus Monarch Butterfly Candidate Yes Hexastylis naniflora Dwarf-flowered Heartleaf1 Threatened Yes Rhus michauxii Michaux's Sumac1 Endangered Yes 1. Optimal Survey Window a. Tri-colored Bat: May 1 – Sep 15 b. Dwarf-flowered Heartleaf: Mar – May c. Michaux’s Sumac: May - Oct 6.4 Cultural Resources The NC State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) Geographic Information Service (GIS) Web Service was reviewed to identify known historic resources at or near the Site. There are no historic resources located within the Site boundary. However, twenty-four historic resources are located within one mile of the Project (Figure 8). Cultural Resources Noted Within One Mile of the Proposed Project Area: 1. LN0264 Carpenter-Blanton House (Study List: 1986). Located on east side of Andy Logan Road, 0.5 mile northwest of Project Area. 2. LN0414 (former) Elm Grove Cotton Mill (Surveyed Only). Located at NW juncture of Reepsville Road and S Fork Catawba River 0.5 mile southeast of Project Area. South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page 16 3. LN0290 (former) Lincolnton Waterworks (Surveyed only). Located at the end of N Laurel Street in Lincolnton approx. one mile east of Project Area. 4. LN0265 Robinson-Finger House (Surveyed Only). Located west side Startown Road, 0.5 mile north of junction with Reepsville Road. 5. LN0795 Ramsours Mill Mass Grave Monument (Surveyed only). Located on grounds of Battleground Middle School 0.6 mile east of Project Area. 6. LN0322 Houses (Blockface). 600 block of Forney Avenue 0.75 miles southeast of Project Area. 7. LN0286 Reinhardt-Brown House (Surveyed Only). Located at 611 Forney Avenue 0.75 miles southeast of Project Area. 8. LN0323 Houses (Blockface). 500 block of Forney Avenue 0.8 mile southeast of Project Area. 9. LN0316 Houses (Blockface). 600 block of N Grove Street 0.75 miles southeast of Project Area. 10. LN0278 House (Surveyed Only). Located at 702 N Grove Street 0.75 miles southeast of Project Area. 11. LN0315 House (Surveyed Only). 700 block of N Grove Street 0.75 miles southeast of Project Area. 12. LN0317 Houses (Blockface). 500 block of N Grove Street 0.8 mile southeast of Project Area. 13. LN0325 Houses (Blockface).400 block of Bonview Avenue 0.9 mile southeast of Project Area. 14. LN0280 Kiser-Hoyle House (Surveyed Only). Located at 514-516 N Grove Street 0.9 mile southeast of Project Area. 15. LN0319 Houses (Blockface). 300 block of N Grove Street 1 mile southeast of Project Area. 16. LN0318 Houses (Blockface). 400 block of N Grove Street 1 mile southeast of Project Area. 17. LN0281 William H. Lohr House (Surveyed Only). Located at 515-517 N Grove Street 0.9 mile southeast of Project Area. 18. LN0415 (former) Black Ox Mill Village (Surveyed Area). 300 block of Bonview Avenue & 400 block of N High Street 1 mile southeast of Project Area. 19. LN0324 Houses (Blockface). 500 block of Bonview Avenue 0.9 mile southeast of Project Area. 20. LN0416 Black Ox-Duplan Corporation Mill (National Register: 2022). Located at 215 W Bonview Avenue 1 mile southeast of Project Area. 1920 2-story brick cotton mill, c. 1929 1-story brick addition & three 1947 concrete block rayon processing plant additions South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page 17 21. LN0603 Ramseur's Mill Battleground (Surveyed Only). Located on grounds of Battlefround Middle School 0.6 mile east of Project Area. 22. LN0289 Shrum-Middleton House (Surveyed Only). Located at 842 N Aspen Street 0.9 mile east of Project Area. 23. LN0279 House (Surveyed Only). Located at 614 N Grove Street 0.75 miles southeast of Project Area. 24. LN0571 National Guard Motor Vehicle Storage Building (Surveyed Only). Located on east side of US 321 North 0.9 mile east of Project Area. 6.5 Airports There are no public airports within five miles of the Site. The Lincoln County Regional Airport is the closest airport to the Site, located approximately 6.2 miles to the east. The next closest airport is the Hickory Regional Airport, located approximately 18 miles to the northwest of the Site. 6.6 Adjacent & Proximal Planning Elements The NHP data explorer was used to identify managed and natural areas within proximity of the Site. The NHP data explorer identified several managed areas within one mile of the Site, listed below. No natural areas were identified within one mile of the Site. None of the identified managed areas are within the proposed Site boundary. 1. City of Lincolnton – City Park. Located on east site of N. Aspen Street. Located approximately 1 mile east of Site. 2. Catawba Lands Conservancy – Boy Scouts Preserve. Located south of Reepsville Road. Located approximately 0.6 miles southwest of Site. 3. USDA, NRCS Wetland Reserve Program Easement. Located west of the intersection of Reepsville Road and Andy Logan Road. Located approximately 1 mile west of the Site. 6.7 Site Constraints A single agricultural crossing through the project area provides the only constraint to the Site. Eco Terra will improve an existing farm path by re-grading the path as necessary and placing gravel along its length. To maintain hydraulic and hydrologic connectivity between the northern and southern portions of the Site, existing culverts will be removed and permanent ford crossings will be installed in their place. The crossing will be located with a maximum 30-foot-wide internal break in the credit areas (Figure 9). Eco Terra will coordinate with Lincoln County to ensure the proposed crossing meets the width and grade requirements set forth in the local ordinance(s). South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page 18 No other easements or land-use agreements, known to Eco Terra or the owner, will affect the establishment and performance of the Site. The Site will be restored to a forested riparian wetland as it would exist if not previously cleared for agricultural production. 6.8 Project Risks & Uncertainties Nuisance animals such as beaver (Castor canadensis), deer (Odocoileus virginianus), and other foraging species pose the greatest threat to the Site. Deer may forage on newly planted trees and shrubs, impacting the survival rate and density of planted stems in the restored wetland. Beaver activity has been observed in the northern perimeter ditch at the Site. Beaver may impact the Site during the monitoring period by removing vegetation and constructing dams in the restored wetland area and adjacent agricultural ditches. Resources and services provided by the USDA or other entities will be used to manage nuisance animals. 6.9 Assurance of Water Rights Sufficient water rights exist to support the long-term sustainability of the Site, as there are no severed rights on the affected properties. 7 PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION & ECOLOGICAL UPLIFT Proposed wetland restoration activities at the Site include grading, ditch filling, surface roughening, and planting. The proposed credit area is defined by a 50-foot offset from the proposed conservation easement (Figure 9). The 50-foot offset is included in the proposed Site design to establish an enforceable buffer between the credit generating area and adjacent land uses and management practices. The area within the 50-foot buffer will receive remedial mitigation treatment, including grading and planting, similar to the remainder of the Site. After all Site improvements have been completed, the Site proposes to generate approximately 23.312 riparian WMUs. These credits are calculated using standard mitigation ratios used by the USACE Wilmington district for wetland mitigation projects (Table 5 and 6). Figure 9 displays the proposed wetland mitigation approach for the Site. Table 5: Proposed Mitigation Quantities and Credits Mitigation Level Area (ac) Mitigation Ratio (X:1) Proposed Credits Re-establishment 20.301 1.0 20.301 Rehabilitation 2.234 1.0 2.234 Enhancement 1.791 3.0 0.597 Preservation 1.803 10.0 .180 TOTAL 26.129 23.312 South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page 19 Table 6: Proposed Project Credits Mitigation Level Stream Wetland Coastal Marsh Warm Cool Cold Riparian Non- Riparian Restoration Re-establishment 20.301 Rehabilitation 2.234 Enhancement 0.597 Enhancement I Enhancement II Creation Preservation 0.180 TOTAL --- --- --- 23.312 --- --- 7.1 Wetlands Current Site conditions demonstrate significant alteration and impairment of riparian wetlands which existed prior to land clearing and conversion for agricultural production. Historic presence of wetlands at the Site is best demonstrated by the presence of hydric soils across the Site, and the presence of high-quality wetlands in the forested southwest corner of the Site. The proposed restoration plan addresses hydrologic and vegetative deficiencies of the Site created by previous land conversion and current land management activities. Re-establishment of appropriate surface and subsurface hydrology and a native forest, with respect to the reference condition, will directly address the goals of the Site discussed in Section 2.1 of this report. Once these deficiencies are corrected, the Site will be a fully functioning riparian wetland ecosystem. 7.1.1 Hydrology Primary hydrology impairments at the Site include ditching and field crowning. Secondary impairments to Site hydrology include deforestation, surface smoothing, and soil structure disturbances caused by current and past agricultural practices. The proposed mitigation will directly address primary hydrology impairments through site grading. In the northern portion of the Site, elevated field crowns will be removed from areas called out as “Shallow Hydric Soils” in the Site Soils Report (Appendix C), bringing the previously buried depleted soils back to within six inches of the surface to meet the definition of hydric soils. Grading depths will vary based on borings taken across the Site. No grading is proposed in areas shown as hydric soils. Overburden removed from the field crowns will be used to fill existing ditches and swales on the interior and perimeter of the Site. Clay ditch plugs will be constructed South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page 20 intermittently throughout the existing ditch network to mitigate against the preferential flow of subsurface hydrology. Existing ditches may be partially filled in some areas to create micro topography and facilitate the development of shallow vernal pools and habitat variance. Vernal pools will be no greater than 12 inches deep. Minimal grading efforts are proposed within the forested southern portion of the Site. The existing row of spoils adjacent to main primary drainage ditch (Wetland 2) will be intermittently graded to the elevation of the adjacent floodplain to minimize mature tree damage. Graded material will be used to construct intermittent ditch plugs within and partially fill the existing ditch. Intermittent ditch plugs are planned to be constructed in the existing ditch extending south and west from Wetland 3 to increase hydraulic retention on site. Construction activities within the existing forested area will be carefully planned and carried out to create minimal disturbance within the area. To maintain adequate drainage for the adjacent crop field west of the Site, Eco Terra will construct a ditch, similar in dimension to the existing ditch on the western side of the Site, west of the Site boundary. Offset distance from the proposed Site boundary, and dimension of the proposed ditch will be determined using groundwater models. The ditch will be designed such that it does not negatively impact hydrology within the proposed credit area. The proposed drainage ditch will be located entirely outside of the conservation easement to be owned and maintained by the property owner. Secondary impairments to Site hydrology will be addressed through site grading and reforestation. Re-establishment of a native, hardwood forest community will promote capillary rise of the local water table due to plant uptake. During mass grading of the Site, surface roughening techniques will be used to establish variance in local topography to promote runoff interception and storage. Retention of overland runoff will promote groundwater recharge at the Site, increasing the local water budget and the overall likely success of the project. Surface roughening techniques may include disking and/or ripping the wetland restoration area, creation of vernal pools, and other techniques deemed appropriate for the Site and approved of by the IRT. Continual disturbance to site soils due to current land management practices interferes with establishment of proper soil structure. Soil structure is critical to maximize surface water infiltration and unrestricted fluctuation of the local groundwater table. Ceasing current land management practices will allow site soils to stabilize and establish structure conducive to the hydrology of functioning wetlands. South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page 21 7.1.2 Vegetation The revegetation plan prepared for the Site will include temporary seeding, permanent seeding, planting bare root trees, and invasive species management (as necessary). All disturbed areas will receive temporary and permanent seeding. Temporary seed will consist of species listed in the NCDEQ Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual. Temporary seeding species will be selected based on the seeding schedule provided in the design manual. Permanent seeding species will consist of those typical a Riverine Swamp wetland community and identified in the reference wetland and likely will include flowering pollinator varieties. Additionally, species typical of a Bottomland Hardwood Forest will be seeded on the eastern fringe areas of the Site where prolonged inundation is less likely to occur. Conceptual permanent seeding species are listed in Table 7. Table 7: Conceptual Permanent Seeding Species Scientific Name Common Name Planting Zone Gratiola viscidula Hedge Hyssop PSF Ranunculus sardous Hairy Buttercup PSF Peltandra virginica Green Arrow-arum PSF Saururus cernuus Lizards Tail PSF Boehmeria cylindrica False Nettle PSF Juncus effusus Common Rush PSF/BHF Carex spp. Sedge PSF/BHF Scirpus cyperinus Woolgrass PSF/BHF PSF = Piedmont Swamp Forest, BHF = Bottomland Hardwood Forest Reforestation of the Site will be achieved by planting bare root trees at a density sufficient to achieve interim and long-term stem density performance standards. Tree species planted at the Site will be native species typical of a Piedmont Swamp Forest and Piedmont Bottomland Hardwood Forest communities, as described by Schafale (2012), and identified in the reference wetland community, selected to promote strata diversity. Less inundation-tolerant species typical of a Piedmont Bottomland Hardwood Forest will be planted on the eastern fringe of the Site where soil conditions will be less saturated than other areas of the Site. Table 8 provides a conceptual planting plan for the Site. Actual species, and quantity of each species, planted at the Site will depend on availability at local nurseries at the time of construction. Invasive species present at the Site will be treated via mechanical and chemical means. Most of the invasive species management will occur prior to site planting. Invasives management will continue throughout the monitoring period as deemed necessary by Eco Terra and the IRT. South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page 22 Table 8: Conceptual Planting Plan Scientific Name Common Name Planting Zone Vegetative Strata Ulmus americana American Elm PSF Overstory Quercus lyrata Overcup Oak PSF Overstory Platanus occidentalis Sycamore PSF Overstory Betula nigra River Birch PSF Overstory Salix nigra Black Willow PSF Overstory Quercus machauxii Swamp Chestnut Oak PSF*/BHF Overstory Quercus phellos Willow Oak PSF*/BHF Overstory Quercus nigra Water Oak PSF*/BHF Overstory Quercus alba White Oak BHF* Overstory Liriodendron tulipifera Tulip Poplar BHF Overstory Ilex decidua Possumhaw PSF Understory Cephalanthus occidentalis Buttonbush PSF Understory Rosa palustris Swamp Rose PSF Understory Cornis amomum Silky Dogwood PSF Understory Carpinus caroliniana American hornbeam PSF*/BHF Understory PSF = Piedmont Swamp Forest, BHF = Bottomland Hardwood Forest * Species to be planted at low density in specified planting zone 7.2 Site Protection The Site will be protected in perpetuity by a conservation easement to be established on each of the project parcels and recorded at the Lincoln County Register of Deeds. All corners of the conservation easement and property line intersections will be marked with permanent rebar monuments with survey caps. The conservation easement will be well marked, with signage installed at each corner of the recorded easement and along the entire boundary. 7.3 Ecological Uplift Reestablishment, rehabilitation, enhancement, and preservation of wetlands at the Site will greatly improve ecological function at the site level and will improve water quality within the greater Catawba 02 watershed. The existing condition of the Site, with exception of the forested area in the southwest corner of the Site, is a monoculture of non-native vegetation that diminishes terrestrial habitat and water quality by dividing adjacent forested areas, contributing excess nutrients and sediments to downstream surface waters, and minimizing ecosystem services provided by riparian wetlands. Of the 34 sub watersheds analyzed in the Indian Creek and Howards Creek LWP, the Middle South Fork Catawba TLW scored among the lowest in hydrology and water quality (EEP, 2010). According to NCWAM assessments 12 of the 14 existing wetland resources on site have an Overall Wetland South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page 23 Rating of Low, with only two receiving a rating of Medium. Given time for site stabilization, vegetation establishment, and groundwater adjustments, it is expected that all wetlands on site, existing and reestablished, would receive an Overall Wetland Rating of High. Implementation of the Site will directly address water quality stressors discussed in the Catawba River Basinwide Water Quality Plan (DEQ, 2010) and contribute to achieving goals set forth by the state in the LWP and the Catawba River RBRP (EEP, 2007). Table 9 outlines the proposed ecological uplift of the Site. Table 9: Proposed Ecological Uplift Restoration Activity Site Specific Goal Addressed Proposed Uplift Site Grading 1. Reduce sediment and nutrient loading in surface waters adjacent to the Site. 2. Restore function of impaired and degraded wetlands. 3. Increase overall biodiversity of flora and fauna at the Site. Improve retention of Site hydrology by filling drainage ditches and promoting surface storage and infiltration of overland runoff; Improve water quality by uncovering buried hydric soils, allowing microbial nutrient processing cycles to be re-established; Create micro topography variations across the Site to support diverse plant and animal species and life processes. Wetland Reforestation 1. Reduce sediment runoff from the Site. 2. Improve and expand terrestrial habitat in the floodplain of the South Fork Catawba River. 3. Increase overall biodiversity at the Site. Improve water quality by reducing the export of Site soils via vegetative stabilization; Increase overall soil health and microbial function by promoting soil structure formation and providing input of organic material; Increase richness and ecological productivity of the Site by establishing a stand of native trees and shrubs suited for supporting physicochemical functions of riparian wetlands and the flora and fauna which reside there. Record Conservation Easement Preserve/Protect land in perpetuity. Restore the Site to a functioning riparian wetland ecosystem; Increase quantity of riparian wetland area in the floodplain of the South Fork Catawba River. 8 MONITORING & PERFORMANCE STANDARDS The Site will be monitored for a minimum seven monitoring years following site improvements and planting. A monitoring plan will be developed to ensure the Site’s performance in relation to the proposed performance standards can be accurately assessed and monitored throughout the monitoring period. The monitoring plan and performance standards established for the Site will follow approved standards and guidance put forth by the USACE Wilmington District in conjunction with the IRT (USACE, 2016). Annual monitoring reports for the Site will be developed South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page 24 each monitoring year (MY) and submitted to the IRT no later than April 1 of the following year (per the mitigation banking instrument (MBI)). 8.1 As-Built Survey An as-built survey of the Site will be completed following construction. If appropriate, the survey will be conducted following planting and installation of monitoring devices. At a minimum, the survey will meet the requirements set forth by the IRT for as-built surveys. Results of the as-built survey will be presented in the As-Built (MY0) report and record drawings. Deviations from the approved Site construction drawings will be redlined and discussed in the MY0 report. 8.2 Wetland Hydrology Groundwater wells will be installed at the Site to monitor sub-surface hydrology. The quantity and location of groundwater wells to be installed at the Site will be agreed upon by Eco Terra and the IRT during development of the mitigation plan. Groundwater wells will be installed in accordance with the USACE’s “Technical Standard for Water- Table Monitoring of Potential Wetland Sites” document (USACE, 2005). Monitoring wells will be GPS located and detailed soil profiles will be recorded at each location. Groundwater elevation will be continuously monitored via automated pressure transducer data collectors. Groundwater elevation will be collected minimum twice per day. Per the Licensed Soil Scientist report, Site soils are most similar to the Chastain Series. Latest guidance put forth by the USACE and NCIRT (USACE, 2016) indicates Chastain soils have a 12- 16% hydroperiod during the growing season. In accordance with the same guidance, Eco Terra proposes that a minimum 10% hydroperiod during the growing season be used as wetland hydrology success criteria for the first two monitoring years (MY1 and MY2). For monitoring years 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 (MY3-7) minimum wetland hydrology success criteria shall be a 12% hydroperiod during the growing season. These minimum success criteria assume normal rainfall patterns during each monitoring year. Groundwater monitoring data will be presented in each annual monitoring report. 8.3 Vegetation Vegetation plots (10 meters x 10 meters) will be established randomly across the Site. Vegetation plots will include fixed and random plots and will exist in sufficient quantity to include a minimum of 2% of the total planted area. Random plots will comprise no more than 50% of the vegetation plots located on Site. South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page 25 Fixed plots will be located with sub-meter Global Positioning System (GPS) and corners of the plot will be marked. Planted vegetation within each fixed plot will be inventoried during baseline monitoring. GPS with sub 30cm accuracy will be used to locate each stem and will be recorded for future monitoring events. Data collected on stems within fixed vegetation plots will include species, height, GPS location, vigor, damage, and date (of planting or observation for volunteers). Random vegetation plots will be located with GPS annually. Data collected on stems within the random vegetation plots will include species and height. Photos will be taken from the origin of each vegetation plot (or a chosen corner for random plots), looking diagonally across the plot, and included in the annual monitoring reports to provide visual context to the measured and observed data within each plot. Invasive or nuisance plant species recognized within the buffer will be monitored during Site visits throughout the monitoring period. Any areas of concern (i.e. insufficient species composition, high mortality rates, invasive species, etc.) will be photographed and mapped. A discussion of the problem and following remedial action (if any) will be included in the annual monitoring reports. Species composition, stem density, and survival rate of planted and volunteer tree and shrub species will be evaluated annually for each plot and for the Site as a whole. Data collected for each vegetation plot will be presented in the annual monitoring reports. Mortality will be calculated based on comparison to the baseline (previous) report’s living stem count. Vegetation surveys will be completed in monitoring years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7. Interim performance standards for vegetation will be minimum of 320 stems/acre in monitoring year three (MY3), a minimum of 260 stems/acre in year five (MY5), and a minimum of 210 stems/acre in year seven (MY7). Trees are expected to average a height of seven feet in MY5 and average a height of 10 feet in MY7. Vegetation monitoring will occur between July 1st and the end of the growing season for each monitoring year. 8.4 Visual Assessments Visual monitoring of the Site will be conducted a minimum of twice per year throughout the monitoring period. Visual assessments of the Site will include assessment of the restored wetlands, vegetation, and the Site boundary. Any areas of concern will be photographed and mapped. A discussion of the problem and following remedial action (if any) will be included in the annual monitoring report. Visual assessment of the boundary will include ensuring the boundary is clearly marked with appropriate signage. Photo points will be established along the Site boundary. Photos taken from the same location throughout the monitoring period should show successional maturation of the restored Site. South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page 26 8.5 Remedial Actions The Mitigation Plan will include a detailed adaptive management plan that will address how potential problems at the Site will be resolved. In the event that the Site fails to achieve performance standards defined in the Mitigation Plan, Eco Terra, in conjunction with the IRT, will develop an adaptive management plan and implement remedial actions to ensure the long-term success of the Site. Adaptive management plans will include identification of the of the cause(s) of failure, remedial design approach, work schedule, and monitoring criteria that will take into account physical and climatic conditions of the Site. 9 PROPOSED CREDIT RELEASE SCHEDULE All credit releases will be based on the total credit generated as reported by the as-built survey of the Site. The pre-construction credit release will be based on the total amount in the Final Mitigation Plan. The IRT will determine if performance standards have been satisfied sufficiently to meet the requirements of the release schedule below. In cases where some performance standards have not been met, credits may still be released depending on the specifics of the case. At the direction of the IRT, monitoring may be required to be extended, depending on the extent to which the site fails to meet the specified performance standard. The release of project credits will be subject to the criteria described in Table 10. The first credit release (Milestone 1) will occur upon establishment of the mitigation bank, and upon completion of the following criteria: 1. Execution of the MBI or UMBI by the Sponsor (South Fork Mitigation, LLC) and the USACE 2. Approval of the final Mitigation Plan 3. The mitigation bank site must be secured 4. Delivery of the financial assurances described in the Mitigation Plan 5. Recordation of the long-term protection mechanism and the title option acceptable to the USACE 6. Issuance of the 404-permit verification for construction of the site, if required The following conditions apply to the credit release schedule: 1. For mitigation banks, implementation of the approved Mitigation Plan must be initiated no later than the first full growing season after the date of the first credit transaction (credit sale). 2. After the second milestone, the credit releases are scheduled to occur on an annual basis, assuming that the annual monitoring report has been provided to the USACE in accordance with Section IV (General Monitoring Requirements) of this document, and that South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page 27 the monitoring report demonstrates that interim performance standards are being met and that no other concerns have been identified on-site during the visual monitoring. All credit releases require written approval from the USACE. 3. The credits associated with the final credit release milestone will be released only upon a determination by the USACE, in consultation with the NCIRT, of functional success as defined in the Mitigation Plan. South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page 28 Table 10: Proposed Credit Release Schedule Credit Release Milestone Release Activity Interim Credit Release Total Credits Released 1 Site Establishment (includes all required criteria stated above) 15% 15% 2 Completion of all initial physical and biological improvements made pursuant to the Mitigation Plan 15% 30% 3 Year 1 monitoring report demonstrates that interim performance standards have been met 10% 40% 4 Year 2 monitoring report demonstrates that interim performance standards have been met 10% 50% 5 Year 3 monitoring report demonstrates that interim performance standards have been met 15% 65% 6* Year 4 monitoring report demonstrates that interim performance standards have been met 5% 70% 7 Year 5 monitoring report demonstrates that interim performance standards have been met 15% 85% 8* Year 6 monitoring report demonstrates that interim performance standards have been met 5% 90% 9 Year 7 monitoring report demonstrates that interim performance standards have been met 10% 100% * Vegetation plot data not required with monitoring report unless requested by the IRT 10 PROPOSED OWNERSHIP & LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT Acting as the Sponsor, South Fork Mitigation, LLC will establish a conservation easement and monitor the Site for a minimum of seven years. The Mitigation Plan will provide detailed information regarding Site operation, including long-term management and annual monitoring activities. Upon approval of the Site by the IRT, the Site will be transferred to a long-term land steward (to be determined in the Mitigation Plan). The long-term steward will be responsible for periodic inspection of the Site to ensure the terms of the conservation easement are being upheld. Endowment funds required to maintain the conservation easement will be negotiated with the responsible party and discussed in the Mitigation Plan. South Fork Mitigation Site – Final Prospectus August 2023 Catawba 03050102 Page 29 11 REFERENCES Lincolnton, City of. 2023. Water Treatment Plant. Retrieved from https://ci.lincolnton.nc.us/196/Water-Treatment-Plant Lee, Michael T., Peet, Robert K., Steven, D, Wentworth, Thomas R. 2006. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation Version 4.0 Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2023. Web Soil Survey. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). 2022. NC Surface Water Classifications. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). Division of Water Quality. 2010. Catawba River Basinwide Water Quality Plan. North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP). 2007. Catawba River Basin Restoration Priorities. Amended March 2013. North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP). 2010. Indian Creek and Howards Creek Local Watershed Plan. Schafale, M.P. 2012. Guide to the Natural Communities of North Carolina: Fourth. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, NCDENR. Raleigh, North Carolina. 217 pp. United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2016. Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update. United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2005. Technical Standard for Water Table Monitoring of Potential Wetland Sites. (ERDC TN-WRAP-05-2, June 2005) United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2022. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agriculture Handbook 296 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2002. Ecoregions of North Carolina. Eco Terra, LLC | South Fork Mitigation Site FIGURES Prepared For:SOUTH FORK MITIGATION SITE VICINITY MAP Catawba 03050102Lincoln County, North Carolina ±FIGURE 100.50.25 Miles Proposed Conservation Easement Project Site Lincoln County Prepared For:SOUTH FORK MITIGATION SITE CREDIT SERVICE AREA MAP Catawba 03050102Lincoln County, North Carolina ±FIGURE 20105 Miles Proposed Conservation Easement Catawba 02 - Credit Service Area CATAWBA 03050102 Prepared For:SOUTH FORK MITIGATION SITE EXISTING CONDITIONS SITE MAP Catawba 03050102Lincoln County, North Carolina ±FIGURE 30350175 Feet Proposed Conservation Easement (35.1 ac) Lincoln County Parcels Existing Wetlands Existing Pond Existing Culverts S ou th F o r k C a t a w b a River South F orkCatawbaRiver S i p e R d An d re w s Dr S t a r t o w n Rd Re epsvilleRd Prepared For:SOUTH FORK MITIGATION SITE SITE WATERSHED MAP Catawba 03050102Lincoln County, North Carolina ±FIGURE 40500250 Feet Proposed Conservation Easement (35.1 ac) Site Drainage Area (132.6 ac) Lincoln County 2ft Contours Prepared For:SOUTH FORK MITIGATION SITE SITE LIDAR MAP Catawba 03050102Lincoln County, North Carolina ±FIGURE 50350175 Feet Proposed Conservation Easement (35.1 ac) Existing Culverts LiDAR Elevations 742 ft 870 ft Prepared For:SOUTH FORK MITIGATION SITE USGS MAP Catawba 03050102Lincoln County, North Carolina ±FIGURE 601,500750 Feet Proposed Conservation Easement Lincolnton West USGS 7.5-Minute Topographic Quadrangle Prepared For:SOUTH FORK MITIGATION SITE NRCS SITE SOILS MAP Catawba 03050102Lincoln County, North Carolina ±FIGURE 70350175 Feet Proposed Conservation Easement ChA - Chewlaca loam, 0-2% slopes, frequently flooded LcD - Lloyd loam, 15-25% slopes LdC2 - Lloyd sandy clay loam, 8-15% slopes, moderately eroded Prepared For:SOUTH FORK MITIGATION SITE NHP & SHPO RESOURCES MAP Catawba 03050102Lincoln County, North Carolina ±FIGURE 800.50.25 Miles Proposed Conservation Easement 1 Mile Radius NHP Managed Areas SHPO Historic Resource Boundaries SHPO Histroic Resources Prepared For:SOUTH FORK MITIGATION SITE PROPOSED CONDITIONS SITE MAP Catawba 03050102Lincoln County, North Carolina ±FIGURE 90350175 Feet Proposed Conservation Easement (35.1 ac) Proposed Credit Area OverallProjectArea Proposed Wetland Reestablishment (20.301 ac, 20.301 WMU) Proposed Wetland Rehabilitaiton (2.234 ac, 2.234 WMU) Proposed Wetland Enhancement (1.791 ac, 0.597 WMU) Proposed Wetland Preservation (1.804 ac, 0.180 WMU) Lincoln County Parcels FordCrossing 30ft Internal Access Easement Proposed Drainage Ditch Eco Terra, LLC | South Fork Mitigation Site SITE PHOTOS & HISTORIC AERIAL IMAGERY Eco Terra, LLC | South Fork Mitigation Site View north along western boundary of proposed conservation easement. View southeast from above existing agricultural crossing. Eco Terra, LLC | South Fork Mitigation Site View southwest from above existing agricultural crossing. View north from above existing agricultural crossing. Eco Terra, LLC | South Fork Mitigation Site View south from above existing agricultural crossing. Existing 30-inch culvert downstream of Wetland 2. Eco Terra, LLC | South Fork Mitigation Site Wetland 1. Wetland 2. Eco Terra, LLC | South Fork Mitigation Site Existing culvert beneath agricultural crossing and inter-row ditch. Typical inter-row ditch. Eco Terra, LLC | South Fork Mitigation Site Typical perimeter ditch. 7252995.5 2020 = 500' 7252995.5 2016 = 500' 7252995.5 2012 = 500' 7252995.5 2009 = 500' 7252995.5 2006 = 500' 7252995.5 1998 = 500' 7252995.5 1993 = 500' 7252995.5 1984 = 500' 7252995.5 1976 = 500' 7252995.5 1964 = 500' 7252995.5 1961 = 500' 7252995.5 1950 = 500' 7252995.5 1938 = 500' Eco Terra, LLC | South Fork Mitigation Site APPENDIX A Agent Authorization Forms Eco Terra, LLC | South Fork Mitigation Site APPENDIX B Purchase and Sale Agreements Eco Terra, LLC | South Fork Mitigation Site APPENDIX C Site Soils Report March 20, 2023 Natural Resource Consultants Attn: Jennifer Burdette 308 W Millbrook Rd, Suite D #200 Raleigh, NC 27609 Re: Hydric Soil Mapping-S. Fork Catawba Project-Lincoln County, NC Jennifer, On March 1, 2023 S&FS personnel visited the Charles Beatty property in Lincoln County. The purpose of our visit involved performing a hydric soil mapping evaluation for the project area. The subject area evaluated included portions of the following Lincoln County tax parcel numbers: 21737, 22792, 21738, 22796, 17477, 17479, 22798, 16421, and 22795. Site Conditions: The evaluated area involved approximately 43 acres. The overwhelming majority of the area involved floodplain and toe slope landscape positions. Most of the evaluated area is currently in agricultural use. The northern and southern portions of the subject property predominantly supported bottomland hardwood forest. Much of the wooded acreage included ponded areas at the time of our visit. Recent weather conditions including several periods of rainfall. The subject property contained several stream features as well as agricultural ditches. Methodology: At random locations S&FS personnel evaluated soil conditions via hand auger borings. Most soil borings were advanced to a depth of 36 inches. In some locations soil conditions were degraded due to ponded conditions resulting in sampling to depths less than 36 inches. Borings were approximately located using GPS technology (see map). Profile descriptions were prepared based on soil morphological features including horizons, textures, colors, structure and redoximorphic features (see attachment). The presence or absence of hydric soil indicators was evaluated for each soil boring. Hydric soil determinations were based referencing Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States (Version 8.2, 2018). A review of the USDA Soil Survey of Lincoln County, North Carolina (1995) depicts the Chewacla soil series (Fine-loamy, mixed, thermic Fluvaquentic Dystrochrepts) mapped for the overwhelming majority of the area of study. The Chewacla series is described as frequently flooded, somewhat poorly drained soils formed in recent alluvium. Findings: In all 45 hand auger borings were advanced in the area of study. Soil morphological features were evaluated along with the presence of hydric soil indicators. Soil areas were classified as outlined below. A black circle indicates the soil boring location and depth to hydric soil indicators. H-Hydric soils containing a loamy gleyed matrix (F2), depleted matrix (F3) or redox depressions (F8). SH-“Shallow hydric” soils with a depleted matrix greater than the current depths required for hydric soil designation. These areas occur in lower elevations of the agricultural fields and if not for plowing or creation of berms may be hydric soils. N-Non-hydric soils. Depending on location within the project area (flat, floodplain areas or upland toe slopes) most like Altavista, Chewacla or Gaston. Indicator F2: Loamy Gleyed Matrix “A gleyed matrix that occupies 60% or more of a layer starting at a depth <=30 cm (12 inches) from the soil surface.” Indicator F3: Depleted Matrix “A layer that has a depleted matrix with 60% or more chroma of 2 or less and that has a minimum thickness of either: a. 5 cm (2 inches) if the 5 cm starts at a depth <=10 cm (4 inches) from the soil surface, or b. 15 cm (6 inches), starting at a depth <=25 cm (10 inches) from the soil surface. Indicator F8: Redox Depressions “In closed depressions subject to ponding, 5% or more distinct or prominent redox concentrations occurring as soft masses or pore linings in a layer that is 5 cm (2 inches) or more thick and starts at a depth <+10 cm (4 inches) from the soil surface.” Typical Soil Profiles CHASTAIN SERIES (Chastain not mapped in the area, best fit for floodplain soil with clay subsoil) [Actual location B3] TAXONOMIC CLASS: Fine, mixed, semiactive, thermic Fluvaquentic Typic Endoaquepts A--0 to 10 inches; dark grayish brown (7.5YR 4/6) clay: weak fine subangular structure; friable; with 30% 10YR 5/2 iron deletions. Btg—10 to 30 inches; G1 6/N clay; massive structure; firm, 5YR 4/6 and 2.5Y 6/8 masses of oxidized iron Respectfully, Wendell Overby, LSS Signature:__________________________________________________ Seal: Boring locations with depth to hydric soil indicator H-Hydric soils (10.57 acres) N-Non hydric soils (7.8 acres) SH-Shallow hydric soils (18.17 acres) Non-project area (2.46 acres) Existing ditch / creek Project area LEGEND Eco Terra, LLC | South Fork Mitigation Site APPENDIX D Jurisdictional Determination & Supporting Documents Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions ACTION ID #: SAW- Begin Date (Date Received): Prepare file folder Assign Action ID Number in ORM 1. Project Name [PCN Form A2a]: 2. Work Type: Private Institutional Government Commercial 3. Project Description / Purpose [PCN Form B3d and B3e]: 4. Property Owner / Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A4]: 5. Agent / Consultant [PNC Form A5 – or ORM Consultant ID Number]: 6. Related Action ID Number(s) [PCN Form B5b]: 7. Project Location – Coordinates, Street Address, and/or Location Description [PCN Form B1b]: 8. Project Location – Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form B1a]: 9. Project Location – County [PCN Form A2b]: 10. Project Location – Nearest Municipality or Town [PCN Form A2c]: 11. Project Information – Nearest Waterbody [PCN Form B2a]: 12. Watershed / 8-Digit Hydrologic Unit Code [PCN Form B2c]: Authorization: Section 10 Section 404 Section 10 and 404 Regulatory Action Type: Standard Permit Pre-Application Request Nationwide Permit # Unauthorized Activity Regional General Permit # Compliance Jurisdictional Determination Request No Permit Required Revised 20150602 South Fork Catawba Mitigation Site The project area is a proposed conservation easement for a wetland mitigation site including 4.8 acres of enhancement, 2.8 acres of preservation, 8.9 acres of re-establishment, and 8.7 acres of rehabilitation. See attached parcel information Jennifer Burdette - NRC 35.483987, -81.274849 See attached parcel information Lincoln Lincolnton South Fork Catawba River 03050102 308 W Millbrook Road, Ste D #200, Raleigh, NC 27609 919.422.3605 Natural Resource Consultants March 31, 2023 US Army Corps of Engineers Charlotte Regulatory Field Office via CharlotteNCREG1@usace.army.mil Re: Preliminary/Approved Jurisdictional Determination Request South Fork Catawba Mitigation Site Lincolnton, Lincoln County, NC NRC Project #: 23005 To Whom It May Concern: On behalf of EcoTerra, Natural Resource Consultants (NRC) has conducted a delineation of surface waters and wetlands on an approximately 35-acre project area for a wetland mitigation site located at 979 Startown Road in Lincolnton, Lincoln County, North Carolina. We are requesting a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination of the delineation of wetlands within the project area and an Approved Jurisdictional Determination of the non-jurisdictional pond within the project area. The following items are attached for your use and review:  Jurisdictional Determination Request Form  Appendix 2 – Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) Form  Property Owner Certification Forms (C. Beatty, L. Beatty)  Lincoln GIS of Properties  Figure 1. USGS Topographic Map  Figure 2. NRCS Web Soil Survey  Figure 3. Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Map  Figure 4. USFWS National Wetlands Inventory Map  Figure 5. NC Regulatory Floodplains Map  Wetland Data Forms (6 wetland, 5 upland)  NC WAM Forms  Aquatic Resources Table (Excel file attached to email)  Rapanos – Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD) Form (Word file attached to email) Please contact me if you would like to schedule a site visit. Sincerely, Natural Resource Consultants Jennifer Burdette Sr. Environmental Consultant Version: May 2017 Page 1 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.army.mil/Missions/RegulatoryPermitProgram/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: (828) 271-7980 Fax Number: (828) 281-8120 RALEIGH REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE US Army Corps of Engineers 3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105 Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587 General Number: (919) 554-4884 Fax Number: (919) 562-0421 WASHINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE US Army Corps of Engineers 2407 West Fifth Street Washington, North Carolina 27889 General Number: (910) 251-4610 Fax Number: (252) 975-1399 WILMINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE US Army Corps of Engineers 69 Darlington Avenue Wilmington, North Carolina 28403 General Number: 910-251-4633 Fax Number: (910) 251-4025 INSTRUCTIONS: All requestors must complete Parts A, B, C, D, E, F and G. NOTE TO CONSULTANTS AND AGENCIES: If you are requesting a JD on behalf of a paying client or your agency, please note the specific submittal requirements in Part H. NOTE ON PART D – PROPERTY OWNER AUTHORIZATION: Please be aware that all JD requests must include the current property owner authorization for the Corps to proceed with the determination, which may include inspection of the property when necessary. This form must be signed by the current property owner(s) or the owner(s) authorized agent to be considered a complete request. NOTE ON PART D - NCDOT REQUESTS: Property owner authorization/notification for JD requests associated with North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) projects will be conducted according to the current NCDOT/USACE protocols. NOTE TO USDA PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS: A Corps approved or preliminary JD may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in USDA programs, you should also request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work. Version: May 2017 Page 2 A. PARCEL INFORMATION Street Address: _______________________________________________ City, State: _______________________________________________ County: Parcel Index Number(s) (PIN): B. REQUESTOR INFORMATION Name: Mailing Address: _________________________________________ Telephone Number: _________________________________________ Electronic Mail Address: ________________________________________ Select one: I am the current property owner. I am an Authorized Agent or Environmental Consultant1 Interested Buyer or Under Contract to Purchase Other, please explain. ________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ C. PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION2 Name: Mailing Address: Telephone Number: Electronic Mail Address: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 Must provide completed Agent Authorization Form/Letter. 2 Documentation of ownership also needs to be provided with request (copy of Deed, County GIS/Parcel/Tax Record). 979 Startown Road Lincolnton, NC Lincoln See attached parcel information Jennifer Burdette - NRC 308 W Millbrook Road, Ste D #200 Raleigh, NC 27609 919-422-3605 burdette@nrconsultnc.com See attached parcel information Version: May 2017 Page 3 D. PROPERTY ACCESS CERTIFICATION3,4 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 Agent5 Date Signature E. REASON FOR JD REQUEST: (Check as many as applicable) I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be designed to avoid all aquatic resources. I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be designed to avoid all jurisdictional aquatic resources under Corps authority. I intend to construct/develop a project or 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 project or 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:___________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ 3 For NCDOT requests following the current NCDOT/USACE protocols, skip to Part E. 4 If there are multiple parcels owned by different parties, please provide the following for each additional parcel on a continuation sheet. 5 Must provide agent authorization form/letter signed by owner(s). Jennifer Burdette - NRC 3/31/2023 The project area is a proposed mitigation site and the JD would be used to establish a baseline for proof of ecological uplift. Version: May 2017 Page 4 F. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD) TYPE (Select One) I am requesting that the Corps provide a preliminary JD for the property identified herein. A Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) provides an indication that there may be “waters of the United States” or “navigable waters of the United States”on a property. PJDs are sufficient as the basis for permit decisions. For the purposes of permitting, all waters and wetlands on the property will be treated as if they are jurisdictional “waters of the United States”. PJDs cannot be appealed (33 C.F.R. 331.2); however, a PJD is “preliminary” in the sense that an approved JD can be requested at any time. PJDs do not expire. I am requesting that the Corps provide an approved JD for the property identified herein. An Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD) is a determination that jurisdictional “waters of the United States” or “navigable waters of the United States” are either present or absent on a site. An approved JD identifies the limits of waters on a site determined to be jurisdictional under the Clean Water Act and/or Rivers and Harbors Act. Approved JDs are sufficient as the basis for permit decisions. AJDs are appealable (33 C.F.R. 331.2). The results of the AJD will be posted on the Corps website. A landowner, permit applicant, or other “affected party” (33 C.F.R. 331.2) who receives an AJD may rely upon the AJD for five years (subject to certain limited exceptions explained in Regulatory Guidance Letter 05- 02). I am unclear as to which JD I would like to request and require additional information to inform my decision. G. ALL REQUESTS Map of Property or Project Area. This Map must clearly depict the boundaries of the review area. Size of Property or Review Area acres. The property boundary (or review area boundary) is clearly physically marked on the site. 35 Version: May 2017 Page 5 H. REQUESTS FROM CONSULTANTS Project Coordinates (Decimal Degrees): Latitude: ______________________ Longitude: ______________________ A legible delineation map depicting the aquatic resources and the property/review area. Delineation maps must be no larger than 11x17 and should contain the following: (Corps signature of submitted survey plats will occur after the submitted delineation map has been reviewed and approved).6 North Arrow Graphical Scale Boundary of Review Area Date Location of data points for each Wetland Determination Data Form or tributary assessment reach. For Approved Jurisdictional Determinations: Jurisdictional wetland features should be labeled as Wetland Waters of the US, 404 wetlands, etc. Please include the acreage of these features. Jurisdictional non-wetland features (i.e. tidal/navigable waters, tributaries, impoundments) should be labeled as Non-Wetland Waters of the US, stream, tributary, open water, relatively permanent water, pond, etc. Please include the acreage or linear length of each of these features as appropriate. Isolated waters, waters that lack a significant nexus to navigable waters, or non- jurisdictional upland features should be identified as Non-Jurisdictional. Please include a justification in the label regarding why the feature is non-jurisdictional (i.e. “Isolated”, “No Significant Nexus”, or “Upland Feature”). Please include the acreage or linear length of these features as appropriate. For Preliminary Jurisdictional Determinations: Wetland and non-wetland features should not be identified as Jurisdictional, 404, Waters of the United States, or anything that implies jurisdiction. These features can be identified as Potential Waters of the United States, Potential Non-wetland Waters of the United States, wetland, stream, open water, etc. Please include the acreage and linear length of these features as appropriate. Completed Wetland Determination Data Forms for appropriate region (at least one wetland and one upland form needs to be completed for each wetland type) ____________________________________________________________________________ 6 Please refer to the guidance document titled “Survey Standards for Jurisdictional Determinations” to ensure that the supplied map meets the necessary mapping standards. http://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory-Permit- Program/Jurisdiction/ 35.483987 -81.274849 Version: May 2017 Page 6 Completed appropriate Jurisdictional Determination form PJDs, please complete a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form7 and include the Aquatic Resource Table AJDs, please complete an Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form8 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 Other Assessment Forms _____________________________________________________________________________ 7 www.saw.usace.army.mil/Portals/59/docs/regulatory/regdocs/JD/RGL_08-02_App_A_Prelim_JD_Form_fillable.pdf 8 Please see http://www.saw.usace.army.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 federal jurisdiction under the regulatory authorities referenced above. Routine Uses: This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal, state, and local government agencies, and the public, and may be made available as part of a public notice as required by federal law. Your name and property location where federal jurisdiction is to be determined will be included in the approved jurisdictional determination (AJD), which will be made available to the public on the District's website and on the Headquarters USAGE website. Disclosure: Submission of requested information is voluntary; however, if information is not provided, the request for an AJD cannot be evaluated nor can an AJD be issued. Appendix 2 - PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD: B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: (USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND/OR AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES) State: County/parish/borough: City: Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat.: Long.: Universal Transverse Mercator: Name of nearest waterbody: E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): Office (Desk) Determination. Date: Field Determination. Date(s): TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES IN REVIEW AREA WHICH “MAY BE” SUBJECT TO REGULATORY JURISDICTION. Site number Latitude (decimal degrees) Longitude (decimal degrees) Estimated amount of aquatic resource in review area (acreage and linear feet, if applicable) Type of aquatic resource (i.e., wetland vs. non-wetland waters) Geographic authority to which the aquatic resource may be subject (i.e., Section 404 or Section 10/404) See Attached Aquatic Resource Table Excel file 3/31/2023 Jennifer Burdette - NRC, 308 W Millbrook Road, Ste D #200, Raleigh, NC 27609 NC Lincoln Lincolnton 35.483987 -81.274849 17N South Fork Catawba River 1) The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review area, and the requestor of this PJD is hereby advised of his or her option to request and obtain an approved JD (AJD) for that review area based on an informed decision after having discussed the various types of JDs and their characteristics and circumstances when they may be appropriate. 2) In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or a Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring “pre- construction notification” (PCN), or requests verification for a non-reporting NWP or other general permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an AJD for the activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware that: (1) the permit applicant has elected to seek a permit authorization based on a PJD, which does not make an official determination of jurisdictional aquatic resources; (2) the applicant has the option to request an AJD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit authorization, and that basing a permit authorization on an AJD could possibly result in less compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) the applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting the terms and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4) the applicant can accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply with all the terms and conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation requirements the Corps has determined to be necessary; (5) undertaking any activity in reliance upon the subject permit authorization without requesting an AJD constitutes the applicant’s acceptance of the use of the PJD; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps permit authorization based on a PJD constitutes agreement that all aquatic resources in the review area affected in any way by that activity will be treated as jurisdictional, and waives any challenge to such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance or enforcement action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7) whether the applicant elects to use either an AJD or a PJD, the JD will be processed as soon as practicable. Further, an AJD, a proffered individual permit (and all terms and conditions contained therein), or individual permit denial can be administratively appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331. If, during an administrative appeal, it becomes appropriate to make an official determination whether geographic jurisdiction exists over aquatic resources in the review area, or to provide an official delineation of jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review area, the Corps will provide an AJD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable. This PJD finds that there “may be” waters of the U.S. and/or that there “may be” navigable waters of the U.S. on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in the review area that could be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information: SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply) Checked items should be included in subject file. Appropriately reference sources below where indicated for all checked items: Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor: Map: ________________. Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor. Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report. Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rationale: _______. Data sheets prepared by the Corps: ________. Corps navigable waters’ study: ____________. U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas: ________. USGS NHD data. USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps. U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: _________. Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: __________. National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: ________. State/local wetland inventory map(s): ____________. FEMA/FIRM maps: ________________. 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: ____.(National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929) Photographs: Aerial (Name & Date): ______. or Other (Name & Date): ______. Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter: __________. Other information (please specify): ______________. IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily been verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for later jurisdictional determinations. Signature and date of Signature and date of Regulatory staff member person requesting PJD completing PJD (REQUIRED, unless obtaining the signature is impracticable)1 1 Districts may establish timeframes for requestor to return signed PJD forms. If the requestor does not respond within the established time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is necessary prior to finalizing an action. Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Map (Figure 3) 1:24,000; Lincolnton, NC (Figure 1) NRCS Web Soil Survey (Figure 2) USFWS National Wetlands Inventory Map (Figure 4) NC Regulatory Floodplains Map (Figure 5) 2021 Orthoimagery via NC OneMap (Figure 3) Supporting Photographs 3/22/23, 10:08 AM Map with Parcel Information https://arcgisserver.lincolncounty.org/taxparcelviewer/PropertyReport.aspx?vacinity=false&akpar=21737 1/1 Lincoln County, NC Office of the Tax Administrator, GIS Mapping Division Lincoln County and its mapping contractors assume no legal responsibility for the information contained on this map. This map is not to be used for land conveyance. The map is based on NC State Plane Coordinate System 1983 NAD. Date: 3/22/2023 Parcel ID 21737 Owner BEATTY CHARLES A Map 3623 Mailing 979 STARTOWN RD Account 242371 Address LINCOLNTON, NC 28092 Deed 2502 631 Last Transaction Date 04/14/2021 Sale Price $0 Plat 20 011 Subdivision CHARLES A BEATTY MAP 2 Lot 5 Land Value $81,828 Improvement Value $0 Total Value $81,828 Previous Parcel -----All values for Tax Year 2023 ----- Description #5 CHARLES A BEATTY MAP#2 Deed Acres 13.566 Address STARTOWN RD Tax Acres 13.388 Township LINCOLNTON Tax/Fire District NORTH 321 Main Improvement Value Main Sq Feet Stories Year Built Zoning District Calc Acres R-25 13.39 Voting Precinct Calc Acres ST36 13.39 Watershed 13.36 0.03 Sewer District 13.39 Census County Tract Block 109 070800 4000 13.39 Flood Zone Description Panel SHA X 3710362400 0.06 X NO FLOOD HAZARD 3710362400 0.35 SHA X 3710362300 0.45 AE SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA BASE ELEVATION DETERMINED - 100 YEAR 3710362300 6.89 X NO FLOOD HAZARD 3710362300 4.88 AE SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA BASE ELEVATION DETERMINED - 100 YEAR 3710362400 0.77 3/22/23, 10:10 AM Map with Parcel Information https://arcgisserver.lincolncounty.org/taxparcelviewer/PropertyReport.aspx?vacinity=false&akpar=22792 1/1 Lincoln County, NC Office of the Tax Administrator, GIS Mapping Division Lincoln County and its mapping contractors assume no legal responsibility for the information contained on this map. This map is not to be used for land conveyance. The map is based on NC State Plane Coordinate System 1983 NAD. Date: 3/22/2023 Parcel ID 22792 Owner BEATTY CHARLES A BEATTY ANGELA R Map 3623 Mailing 979 STARTOWN RD Account 282452 Address LINCOLNTON, NC 28092 Deed 3021 33 Last Transaction Date 03/19/2021 Sale Price $211,000 Plat Subdivision FINGER Lot 2 Land Value $170,222 Improvement Value $0 Total Value $170,222 Previous Parcel -----All values for Tax Year 2023 ----- Description #2 FINGER Deed Acres 17.75 Address STARTOWN RD Tax Acres 17.344 Township LINCOLNTON Tax/Fire District NORTH 321 Main Improvement Value Main Sq Feet Stories Year Built Zoning District Calc Acres R-25 17.34 Voting Precinct Calc Acres ST36 17.34 Watershed 14.51 1.2 1.64 Sewer District 17.34 Census County Tract Block 109 070800 4000 17.34 Flood Zone Description Panel SHA X 3710362300 0.54 AE SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA BASE ELEVATION DETERMINED - 100 YEAR 3710362300 7.1 X NO FLOOD HAZARD 3710362300 9.71 3/22/23, 10:07 AM Map with Parcel Information https://arcgisserver.lincolncounty.org/taxparcelviewer/PropertyReport.aspx?vacinity=false&akpar=21738 1/1 Lincoln County, NC Office of the Tax Administrator, GIS Mapping Division Lincoln County and its mapping contractors assume no legal responsibility for the information contained on this map. This map is not to be used for land conveyance. The map is based on NC State Plane Coordinate System 1983 NAD. Date: 3/22/2023 Parcel ID 21738 Owner BEATTY CHARLES A BEATTY ANGELA R Map 3623 Mailing 979 STARTOWN RD Account 282452 Address LINCOLNTON, NC 28092 Deed 3033 184 Last Transaction Date 04/21/2021 Sale Price $0 Plat Subdivision FINGER Lot PT 3, PT 4 & ADJ Land Value $535,905 Improvement Value $1,025,807 Total Value $1,561,712 Previous Parcel -----All values for Tax Year 2023 ----- Description PT 3 & 4 BEATTY LD & ADJ Deed Acres 0 Address 979 STARTOWN RD Tax Acres 123.716 Township LINCOLNTON Tax/Fire District NORTH 321 Main Improvement CUSTOM HOME Value $684,796 Main Sq Feet 2952 Stories 1 Year Built 2016 Zoning District Calc Acres R-25 123.72 Voting Precinct Calc Acres ST36 123.72 Watershed 22.11 11.44 90.17 Sewer District 123.72 Census County Tract Block 109 070800 4003 0.3 109 070800 4000 123.42 Flood Zone Description Panel SHA X 3710362400 0.2 AEFW FLOODWAY AREA - 100 YEAR FLOOD HAZARD 3710362300 26.62 SHA X 3710362300 0.32 AE SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA BASE ELEVATION DETERMINED - 100 YEAR 3710362300 60.35 X NO FLOOD HAZARD 3710362300 16.92 AEFW FLOODWAY AREA - 100 YEAR FLOOD HAZARD 3710362400 6.92 X NO FLOOD HAZARD 3710362400 0.14 AE SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA BASE ELEVATION DETERMINED - 100 YEAR 3710362400 12.25 3/22/23, 10:11 AM Map with Parcel Information https://arcgisserver.lincolncounty.org/taxparcelviewer/PropertyReport.aspx?vacinity=false&akpar=22796 1/1 Lincoln County, NC Office of the Tax Administrator, GIS Mapping Division Lincoln County and its mapping contractors assume no legal responsibility for the information contained on this map. This map is not to be used for land conveyance. The map is based on NC State Plane Coordinate System 1983 NAD. Date: 3/22/2023 Parcel ID 22796 Owner BEATTY LUCAS BEATTY ARIANNA TIMMERMAN Map 3623 Mailing 1947 AUTUMN WOOD CT Account 293035 Address LINCOLNTON, NC 28092 Deed 3198 44 Last Transaction Date 09/22/2022 Sale Price $0 Plat 18 91 Subdivision CHARLES A BEATTY & HOLLY L BEATTY J Lot 2 Land Value $56,108 Improvement Value $0 Total Value $56,108 Previous Parcel -----All values for Tax Year 2023 ----- Description #2 LT CHARLES A BEATTY &Deed Acres 11.791 Address ANDREWS DR Tax Acres 11.791 Township LINCOLNTON Tax/Fire District NORTH 321 Main Improvement Value Main Sq Feet Stories Year Built Zoning District Calc Acres R-25 11.79 Voting Precinct Calc Acres ST36 11.79 Watershed 0.97 10.82 Sewer District 11.79 Census County Tract Block 109 070800 4000 11.79 Flood Zone Description Panel SHA X 3710362300 0.27 AE SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA BASE ELEVATION DETERMINED - 100 YEAR 3710362300 6.64 X NO FLOOD HAZARD 3710362300 4.88 3/22/23, 10:12 AM Map with Parcel Information https://arcgisserver.lincolncounty.org/taxparcelviewer/PropertyReport.aspx?vacinity=false&akpar=17477 1/1 Lincoln County, NC Office of the Tax Administrator, GIS Mapping Division Lincoln County and its mapping contractors assume no legal responsibility for the information contained on this map. This map is not to be used for land conveyance. The map is based on NC State Plane Coordinate System 1983 NAD. Date: 3/22/2023 Parcel ID 17477 Owner BEATTY CHARLES A BEATTY ANGELA R Map 3623 Mailing 979 STARTOWN RD Account 282452 Address LINCOLNTON, NC 28092 Deed 3021 24 Last Transaction Date 03/19/2021 Sale Price $124,000 Plat Subdivision FINGER Lot 8 Land Value $219,686 Improvement Value $0 Total Value $219,686 Previous Parcel -----All values for Tax Year 2023 ----- Description FINGER LD Deed Acres 21.38 Address REEPSVILLE RD Tax Acres 22.009 Township LINCOLNTON Tax/Fire District NORTH 321 Main Improvement Value Main Sq Feet Stories Year Built Zoning District Calc Acres R-25 22.01 Voting Precinct Calc Acres ST36 22.01 Watershed 17.86 4.15 Sewer District 22.01 Census County Tract Block 109 070800 4000 22.01 Flood Zone Description Panel X NO FLOOD HAZARD 3710362300 13.01 SHA X 3710362300 0.65 AE SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA BASE ELEVATION DETERMINED - 100 YEAR 3710362300 8.36 3/22/23, 10:14 AM Map with Parcel Information https://arcgisserver.lincolncounty.org/taxparcelviewer/PropertyReport.aspx?vacinity=false&akpar=17479 1/1 Lincoln County, NC Office of the Tax Administrator, GIS Mapping Division Lincoln County and its mapping contractors assume no legal responsibility for the information contained on this map. This map is not to be used for land conveyance. The map is based on NC State Plane Coordinate System 1983 NAD. Date: 3/22/2023 Parcel ID 17479 Owner BEATTY CHARLES A BEATTY ANGELA R Map 3623 Mailing 979 STARTOWN RD Account 282452 Address LINCOLNTON, NC 28092 Deed 3021 24 Last Transaction Date 03/19/2021 Sale Price $124,000 Plat Subdivision FINGER Lot PT 9 Land Value $8,939 Improvement Value $0 Total Value $8,939 Previous Parcel -----All values for Tax Year 2023 ----- Description FINGER LD RD 1008 Deed Acres 3.3 Address REEPSVILLE RD Tax Acres 3.238 Township LINCOLNTON Tax/Fire District NORTH 321 Main Improvement Value Main Sq Feet Stories Year Built Zoning District Calc Acres R-25 3.24 Voting Precinct Calc Acres ST36 3.24 Watershed 3.1 0.14 Sewer District 3.24 Census County Tract Block 109 070800 4000 3.24 Flood Zone Description Panel AE SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA BASE ELEVATION DETERMINED - 100 YEAR 3710362300 2.99 SHA X 3710362300 0.17 X NO FLOOD HAZARD 3710362300 0.07 3/22/23, 10:15 AM Map with Parcel Information https://arcgisserver.lincolncounty.org/taxparcelviewer/PropertyReport.aspx?vacinity=false&akpar=22798 1/1 Lincoln County, NC Office of the Tax Administrator, GIS Mapping Division Lincoln County and its mapping contractors assume no legal responsibility for the information contained on this map. This map is not to be used for land conveyance. The map is based on NC State Plane Coordinate System 1983 NAD. Date: 3/22/2023 Parcel ID 22798 Owner BEATTY CHARLES A BEATTY ANGELA R Map 3623 Mailing 979 STARTOWN RD Account 282452 Address LINCOLNTON, NC 28092 Deed 3021 33 Last Transaction Date 03/19/2021 Sale Price $211,000 Plat Subdivision FINGER Lot PT 9 Land Value $7,527 Improvement Value $0 Total Value $7,527 Previous Parcel -----All values for Tax Year 2023 ----- Description FINGER LD RD 1008 Deed Acres 3.3 Address REEPSVILLE RD Tax Acres 2.788 Township LINCOLNTON Tax/Fire District NORTH 321 Main Improvement Value Main Sq Feet Stories Year Built Zoning District Calc Acres R-25 2.79 Voting Precinct Calc Acres ST36 2.79 Watershed 2.56 0.23 Sewer District 2.79 Census County Tract Block 109 070800 4000 2.79 Flood Zone Description Panel AE SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA BASE ELEVATION DETERMINED - 100 YEAR 3710362300 2.76 SHA X 3710362300 0.03 3/22/23, 10:44 AM Map with Parcel Information https://arcgisserver.lincolncounty.org/taxparcelviewer/PropertyReport.aspx?vacinity=false&akpar=16421 1/1 Lincoln County, NC Office of the Tax Administrator, GIS Mapping Division Lincoln County and its mapping contractors assume no legal responsibility for the information contained on this map. This map is not to be used for land conveyance. The map is based on NC State Plane Coordinate System 1983 NAD. Date: 3/22/2023 Parcel ID 16421 Owner BEATTY CHARLES A Map 3623 Mailing 979 STARTOWN RD Account 242371 Address LINCOLNTON, NC 28092 Deed 2502 631 Last Transaction Date 02/11/2015 Sale Price $131,000 Plat Subdivision FINGER Lot PT 9 Land Value $9,547 Improvement Value $0 Total Value $9,547 Previous Parcel -----All values for Tax Year 2023 ----- Description FINGER LD RD 1008 Deed Acres 3.3 Address REEPSVILLE RD Tax Acres 3.12 Township LINCOLNTON Tax/Fire District NORTH 321 Main Improvement Value Main Sq Feet Stories Year Built Zoning District Calc Acres R-25 3.12 Voting Precinct Calc Acres ST36 3.12 Watershed 3.12 Sewer District 3.12 Census County Tract Block 109 070800 4000 3.12 Flood Zone Description Panel AEFW FLOODWAY AREA - 100 YEAR FLOOD HAZARD 3710362300 0.05 AE SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA BASE ELEVATION DETERMINED - 100 YEAR 3710362300 3.07 $ FIGURE 1. USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP SOUTH FORK OF THE CATAWBA MITIGATION SITE LINCOLNTON, LINCOLN COUNTY, NC NOTES: 1. USGS; 7.5 MINUTE, QUAD, LINCOLNTON WEST, NORTH CAROLINA; 2019 2. LAT: 35.483987, LONG: -81.274849 3. The project area is approximately 35 acres in size. 3/31/2023 Alec DATE: JOB NO: DRAWN BY: C:\Users\NRC\NRC Server\Projects\23005 S Fork Catawba\GIS\23005-Catawba-USGS.mxd, 3/31/2023 12:31:23 PM, Alec PROJECT AREA FEATURE A 1VERSION: Legend Project Area 1 inch = 2,000 feet 23005 Natural ResourceConsultants 0 2,0001,000 Feet ANDRE W S D R ChA ChA LcD LcD LdC2 LcD LcD LdC2 NC Center for Geographic Information & Analysis $ FIGURE 2. NRCS WEB SOIL SURVEY SOUTH FORK OF THE CATAWBA MITIGATION SITE LINCOLNTON, LINCOLN COUNTY, NC NOTES: Web Soil Survey SSURGO Spatial Data: Lincoln County (Version 10, Sep 16, 2019) C:\Users\NRC\NRC Server\Projects\23005 S Fork Catawba\GIS\23005-Catawba-Fig 7 Web SS.mxd, 3/31/2023 1:01:10 PM, Alec 3/31/2023 Alec DATE: JOB NO: DRAWN BY: 1VERSION: 2021 Legend Project Area Soil Map Unit Natural ResourceConsultants 23005 1 inch = 350 feet 0 300150 Feet Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Hydric Soil RatingChA Chewacla loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded NoLcD Lloyd loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes NoLdC2 Lloyd sandy clay loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes, moderately eroded No #*#* #* #* !R !R !R !R !R!R !R DP9 DP8 DP7 DP4 DP3 DP2 DP1 DP11 DP10 REEPSVILLE R D ANDRE W S D R SAG E F I E L D L N $ LEGEND Potential Wetland Waters of the US Non-jurisdictional Ponds 2-ft Contours !R Culverts Project Area PJD Area AJD Area Wetland Determination Data Forms Wetland Data Form #*Upland Data Form FIGURE 3. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION MAP SOUTH FORK OF THE CATAWBA MITIGATION SITE LINCOLNTON, LINCOLN COUNTY, NC PJD AREA W1 +/- 1.218 ac C:\Users\NRC\NRC Server\Projects\23005 S Fork Catawba\GIS\23005-Catawba-Fig 3 Ex Conditions.mxd, 3/31/2023 2:45:06 PM, Alec 3/31/2023 Alec DATE: JOB NO: DRAWN BY: 1VERSION:Natural ResourceConsultants 1 inch = 250 feet 23005 0 250125 Feet W3 +/- 0.733 ac W8 +/- 0.164 ac W2 +/- 1.553 ac W4 +/- 0.460 ac W6 +/- 1.375 ac W5 +/- 0.285 ac W2 W9 +/- 0.182 ac W7 +/- 0.232 ac W10 +/- 0.031 ac W13 +/- 0.009 ac W11 +/- 0.003 ac W12 +/- 0.006 ac P1 (Non-jurisdictional) +/- 0.071 ac W14 +/- 0.069 ac AJD AREA PFO1/3B R4SBC R2UBH REEPSVILLE R D ANDRE W S D R $ LEGEND Project Area 2-ft Contours NWI Wetland Classification Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Riverine FIGURE 4. USFWS NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY MAP SOUTH FORK OF THE CATAWBA MITIGATION SITE LINCOLNTON, LINCOLN COUNTY, NC C:\Users\NRC\NRC Server\Projects\23005 S Fork Catawba\GIS\23005-Catawba-Fig 11 NWI.mxd, 2/28/2023 10:33:52 AM, Alec 2/28/2023 Alec DATE: JOB NO: DRAWN BY: 1VERSION:Natural ResourceConsultants 1 inch = 250 feet 23005 0 250125 Feet REEPSVILLE R D ANDRE W S D R $ LEGEND Project Area 2-ft Contours NC Regulatory Floodplains Floodway 100-Year Floodplain 500-Year Floodplain FIGURE 5. NC REGULATORY FLOODPLAINS MAP SOUTH FORK OF THE CATAWBA MITIGATION SITE LINCOLNTON, LINCOLN COUNTY, NC C:\Users\NRC\NRC Server\Projects\23005 S Fork Catawba\GIS\23005-Catawba-NC Floodplain Map.mxd, 3/29/2023 3:08:56 PM, Alec 3/29/2023 Alec DATE: JOB NO: DRAWN BY: 1VERSION:Natural ResourceConsultants 1 inch = 250 feet 23005 0 250125 Feet WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORMS #1-111 1. (Data Forms #5 and #6 omitted; located outside the current project area) Project/Site:Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point: Investigator(s): Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Lat:Long: Soil Map Unit Name: X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. X No X No X X No X X X X X X X Yes X Yes X Yes X X U.S. Army Corps of Engineers WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT: (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a) Microtopographic Relief (D4) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Aquatic Fauna (B13) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Wetland Hydrology Present? Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) NoYes 3 No No Water Table Present? Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Drainage Patterns (B10) Moss Trim Lines (B16) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Surface Water (A1) High Water Table (A2) Saturation (A3) Water Marks (B1) Wetland Hydrology Indicators: True Aquatic Plants (B14) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) HYDROLOGY Geomorphic Position (D2) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) 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) Iron Deposits (B5) City/County:S Fork Catawba Mitigation Site Lincolnton/Lincoln DP1 - wet 03/08/23 NC No Section, Township, Range:N/AJennifer Burdette (NRC) 0-2concaveditch Datum:NAD83-81.27345435.485472LRR P, MLRA 136 N/ANWI classification:ChA - Chewacla loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded Slope (%):Local relief (concave, convex, none): Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.) significantly disturbed? naturally problematic? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Remarks: Is the Sampled AreaYes Yes Yes Hydric Soil Present? Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Nowithin a Wetland?Yes Sediment Deposits (B2) Drift Deposits (B3) Remarks: Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: 0 0 Depth (inches): Depth (inches): Depth (inches): No Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Surface Water Present? Field Observations: ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.(A/B) 7. 50% of total cover:20% of total cover:x 1 = Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 2 = 1.x 3 = 2.x 4 = 3.x 5 = 4.Column Totals:(B) 5. 6. 7. 8.X 9.X 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting 50% of total cover:20% of total cover: Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 50% of total cover:20% of total cover: Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 50% of total cover:20% of total cover:Yes X =Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) )5' =Total Cover OBL OBL Yes 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% VEGETATION (Four Strata)– Use scientific names of plants. 43 17 15 55 Yes Yes FAC FACU 90 55 240 Multiply by: 90 2.50Prevalence Index = B/A = 45 Yes FACW Prevalence Index worksheet: FACW Total % Cover of: 30 60 (A) (B) (A) 15 615 38 15' Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata: Woody Vine – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in height. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? =Total Cover Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. 15') 75 Yes Yes 40 20 Fraxinus pennsylvanica Gratiola virginiana 20Fraxinus pennsylvanica FACW Carex crinita 15 30 Ligustrum sinense Tree Stratum ) =Total Cover Ulmus alata Acer rubrum Fraxinus pennsylvanica 30') 85 Indicator Status 40 30 No Dominant Species? Yes 10 FACU OBL species FACW species FAC species Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute % Cover 71.4% Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) No DP1 - wet 5 7 FACU species UPL species Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 0 475 0 190 Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0 X Depth (inches):X Sampling Point: Yes Restrictive Layer (if observed): Remarks: Hydric Soil Present? Type: Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Loc2 M 80 Loamy/Clayey Loamy/Clayey Loamy/Clayey 97 C Color (moist) Matrix C10YR 5/1 10YR 4/2 7.5YR 4/6 7.5YR 4/63-8 0-3 DP1 - wetSOIL 8-16 10YR 5/2 Type1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) 60 Redox FeaturesDepth (inches)Color (moist)Remarks 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. 7.5YR 4/7 % Prominent redox concentrations Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Redox (S5) % M20 Prominent redox concentrations Texture Prominent redox concentrations 3 M C40 Stripped Matrix (S6) Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,Other (Explain in Remarks) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)MLRA 136) Dark Surface (S7)unless disturbed or problematic.Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148) No Hydric Soil Indicators: Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Redox Depressions (F8) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136) Depleted Matrix (F3) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: (MLRA 147, 148) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 136, 147) Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Red Parent Material (F21) (outside MLRA 127, 147, 148) 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N) ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0 308 W Millbrook Road, Ste D #200, Raleigh, NC 27609 1 of 1 Natural Resource Consultants DP #1 - Supporting Photograph Photo 1. View of DP1 between flags #320 and 321 at W6 (3/8/23) Project/Site:Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point: Investigator(s): Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Lat:Long: Soil Map Unit Name: X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. No X X No X No X Yes X Yes X Yes X X U.S. Army Corps of Engineers WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT: (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a) Microtopographic Relief (D4) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Aquatic Fauna (B13) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Wetland Hydrology Present? Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) NoYes No No Water Table Present? Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Drainage Patterns (B10) Moss Trim Lines (B16) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Surface Water (A1) High Water Table (A2) Saturation (A3) Water Marks (B1) Wetland Hydrology Indicators: True Aquatic Plants (B14) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) HYDROLOGY Geomorphic Position (D2) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) 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) Iron Deposits (B5) City/County:S Fork Catawba Mitigation Site Lincolnton/Lincoln DP2 - up 03/08/23 NC No Section, Township, Range:N/AJennifer Burdette (NRC) 0-2concaveridge Datum:NAD83-81.27333435.485405LRR P, MLRA 136 N/ANWI classification:ChA - Chewacla loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded Slope (%):Local relief (concave, convex, none): Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.) significantly disturbed? naturally problematic? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Remarks: Is the Sampled AreaYes Yes Yes Hydric Soil Present? Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Nowithin a Wetland?Yes Sediment Deposits (B2) Drift Deposits (B3) Remarks: Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Depth (inches): Depth (inches): Depth (inches): No Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Surface Water Present? Field Observations: ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.(A/B) 7. 50% of total cover:20% of total cover:x 1 = Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 2 = 1.x 3 = 2.x 4 = 3.x 5 = 4.Column Totals:(B) 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting 50% of total cover:20% of total cover: Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 50% of total cover:20% of total cover: Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 50% of total cover:20% of total cover:Yes X =Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) )5' =Total Cover FACU FACU Yes 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% VEGETATION (Four Strata)– Use scientific names of plants. 30 12 10 0 Yes No FAC FAC 159 0 224 Multiply by: 30 3.33Prevalence Index = B/A = 15 Yes FACW Prevalence Index worksheet: FACU Total % Cover of: 53 56 (A) (B) (A) FACUNo 5 820 12 1 15' Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata: Woody Vine – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in height. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? =Total Cover Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. 15') 24 Juniperus virginiana Yes No 5 25 Ilex decidua Galium aparine 3Viola sororia FAC Lonicera japonica 15 40 Ligustrum sinense Tree Stratum ) =Total Cover Liquidambar styraciflua Acer rubrum Liriodendron tulipifera 30') 60 Indicator Status 10 40 No Dominant Species? Yes 15 FACU OBL species FACW species FAC species Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute % Cover 40.0% Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) No DP2 - up 2 5 FACU species UPL species Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 0 413 0 124 Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0 Depth (inches):X Sampling Point: Yes Restrictive Layer (if observed): Remarks: Hydric Soil Present? Type: Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Loc2 95 Loamy/Clayey Loamy/Clayey 100 Color (moist) Matrix C7.5YR 4/4 7.5YR 4/4 10YR 4/112-16 0-12 DP2 - upSOIL Type1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Redox FeaturesDepth (inches)Color (moist)Remarks 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. % Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Redox (S5) % M5 Clay loam Texture Clay loam Stripped Matrix (S6) Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,Other (Explain in Remarks) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)MLRA 136) Dark Surface (S7)unless disturbed or problematic.Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148) No Hydric Soil Indicators: Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Redox Depressions (F8) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136) Depleted Matrix (F3) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: (MLRA 147, 148) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 136, 147) Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Red Parent Material (F21) (outside MLRA 127, 147, 148) 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N) ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0 308 W Millbrook Road, Ste D #200, Raleigh, NC 27609 1 of 1 Natural Resource Consultants DP #2 - Supporting Photograph Photo 1. View of DP2 between flags upslope of W6 (3/8/23) Project/Site:Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point: Investigator(s): Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Lat:Long: Soil Map Unit Name: X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. X No X No X X No X X X X X X Yes X Yes X Yes X X Sediment Deposits (B2) Drift Deposits (B3) Remarks: Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: 0 0 Depth (inches): Depth (inches): Depth (inches): No Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Surface Water Present? Field Observations: Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.) significantly disturbed? naturally problematic? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Remarks: Is the Sampled AreaYes Yes Yes Hydric Soil Present? Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Nowithin a Wetland?Yes City/County:S Fork Catawba Mitigation Site Lincolnton/Lincoln DP3 - wet 03/08/23 NC No Section, Township, Range:N/AJennifer Burdette (NRC) 0-2concaveflat Datum:NAD83-81.27456735.485453LRR P, MLRA 136 N/ANWI classification:ChA - Chewacla loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded Slope (%):Local relief (concave, convex, none): Surface Water (A1) High Water Table (A2) Saturation (A3) Water Marks (B1) Wetland Hydrology Indicators: True Aquatic Plants (B14) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) HYDROLOGY Geomorphic Position (D2) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) 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) Iron Deposits (B5) U.S. Army Corps of Engineers WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT: (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a) Microtopographic Relief (D4) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Aquatic Fauna (B13) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Wetland Hydrology Present? Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) NoYes 1 No No Water Table Present? Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Drainage Patterns (B10) Moss Trim Lines (B16) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Crayfish Burrows (C8) ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.(A/B) 7. 50% of total cover:20% of total cover:x 1 = Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 2 = 1.x 3 = 2.x 4 = 3.x 5 = 4.Column Totals:(B) 5. 6. 7. 8.X 9.X 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting 50% of total cover:20% of total cover: Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 50% of total cover:20% of total cover: Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 50% of total cover:20% of total cover:Yes X 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) No DP3 - wet 5 6 FACU species UPL species Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 0 505 0 235 Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: FACU OBL species FACW species FAC species Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute % Cover 83.3% Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 85 Fraxinus pennsylvanica Ligustrum sinense Tree Stratum ) =Total Cover Liquidambar styraciflua Acer rubrum Fraxinus pennsylvanica 30') 60 Indicator Status 20 10 Yes Dominant Species? Yes 5 25 No15 Acer negundo 35 20 Acer rubrum Boehmeria cylindrica Carex crinita 75 15' Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata: Woody Vine – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in height. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? =Total Cover Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. 15') 90 18 1743 45 Prevalence Index worksheet: FACW Total % Cover of: 70 20 (A) (B) (A) Yes Yes 210 75 80 Multiply by: 140 2.15Prevalence Index = B/A = FAC 70 FACW No FAC 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% VEGETATION (Four Strata)– Use scientific names of plants. 30 12 30 75 No Yes FAC FAC Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) )5' =Total Cover OBL FACW Yes =Total Cover ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0 X X Depth (inches):X Dark Surface (S7)unless disturbed or problematic.Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148) No Hydric Soil Indicators: Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Redox Depressions (F8) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136) Depleted Matrix (F3) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: (MLRA 147, 148) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 136, 147) Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Red Parent Material (F21) (outside MLRA 127, 147, 148) 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N) Stripped Matrix (S6) Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,Other (Explain in Remarks) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)MLRA 136) Clay Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Redox (S5) % M30 Clay loam Texture Clay loam 15 M C31 DP3 - wetSOIL 14-16 7.5YR 3/5 Type1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) 71 Redox FeaturesDepth (inches)Color (moist)Remarks 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. 10YR 4/2 % Matrix C7.5YR 3/4 10YR 4/2 7.5YR 4/4 10YR 4/13-14 0-3 Loc2 M 70 Loamy/Clayey Loamy/Clayey Loamy/Clayey 85 C Color (moist) Sampling Point: Yes Restrictive Layer (if observed): Remarks: Hydric Soil Present? Type: Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0 308 W Millbrook Road, Ste D #200, Raleigh, NC 27609 1 of 1 Natural Resource Consultants DP #3 - Supporting Photograph Photo 1. View of DP3 between flags #258 and 259 at W4 (3/8/23) Project/Site:Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point: Investigator(s): Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Lat:Long: Soil Map Unit Name: X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. X No No X X No X Yes X Yes X Yes X X Sediment Deposits (B2) Drift Deposits (B3) Remarks: Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Depth (inches): Depth (inches): Depth (inches): No Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Surface Water Present? Field Observations: Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.) significantly disturbed? naturally problematic? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Remarks: Is the Sampled AreaYes Yes Yes Hydric Soil Present? Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Nowithin a Wetland?Yes City/County:S Fork Catawba Mitigation Site Lincolnton/Lincoln DP4 - up 03/08/23 NC No Section, Township, Range:N/AJennifer Burdette (NRC) 0-2convexridge Datum:NAD83-81.27453535.485335LRR P, MLRA 136 N/ANWI classification:ChA - Chewacla loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded Slope (%):Local relief (concave, convex, none): Surface Water (A1) High Water Table (A2) Saturation (A3) Water Marks (B1) Wetland Hydrology Indicators: True Aquatic Plants (B14) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) HYDROLOGY Geomorphic Position (D2) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) 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) Iron Deposits (B5) U.S. Army Corps of Engineers WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT: (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a) Microtopographic Relief (D4) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Aquatic Fauna (B13) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Wetland Hydrology Present? Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) NoYes No No Water Table Present? Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Drainage Patterns (B10) Moss Trim Lines (B16) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Crayfish Burrows (C8) ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.(A/B) 7. 50% of total cover:20% of total cover:x 1 = Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 2 = 1.x 3 = 2.x 4 = 3.x 5 = 4.Column Totals:(B) 5. 6. 7. 8.X 9. 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting 50% of total cover:20% of total cover: Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 50% of total cover:20% of total cover: Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 50% of total cover:20% of total cover:Yes X 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) No DP4 - up 4 5 FACU species UPL species Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 0 518 0 162 Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: FACU OBL species FACW species FAC species Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute % Cover 80.0% Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 45 Viburnum dentatum Ligustrum sinense Tree Stratum ) =Total Cover Quercus nigra Acer rubrum Liquidambar styraciflua 30') 90 Indicator Status 40 40 No Dominant Species? No 25 15 No Yes 5 5 Acer rubrum Lonicera japonica 20Allium canadense FACU Ilex opaca 2 15' Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata: Woody Vine – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in height. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? =Total Cover Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. 15') 27 6 923 14 Prevalence Index worksheet: FAC Total % Cover of: 130 32 (A) (B) (A) Yes 390 0 128 Multiply by: 0 3.20Prevalence Index = B/A = 0 FAC Yes FAC 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% VEGETATION (Four Strata)– Use scientific names of plants. 45 18 10 0 Yes Yes FAC FAC Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) )5' =Total Cover FACU FACU No =Total Cover ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0 Depth (inches):X Dark Surface (S7)unless disturbed or problematic.Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148) No Hydric Soil Indicators: Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Redox Depressions (F8) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136) Depleted Matrix (F3) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: (MLRA 147, 148) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 136, 147) Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Red Parent Material (F21) (outside MLRA 127, 147, 148) 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N) Stripped Matrix (S6) Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,Other (Explain in Remarks) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)MLRA 136) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Redox (S5) % Clay loam Texture Clay DP4 - upSOIL Type1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Redox FeaturesDepth (inches)Color (moist)Remarks 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. % Matrix 7.5YR 4/4 7.5YR 4/4 8-16 0-8 Loc2 100 Loamy/Clayey Loamy/Clayey 100 Color (moist) Sampling Point: Yes Restrictive Layer (if observed): Remarks: Hydric Soil Present? Type: Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0 308 W Millbrook Road, Ste D #200, Raleigh, NC 27609 1 of 1 Natural Resource Consultants DP #4 - Supporting Photograph Photo 1. View of DP4 upslope of W4 (3/8/23) Project/Site:Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point: Investigator(s): Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Lat:Long: Soil Map Unit Name: X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. X No X No X X No X X X X X X Yes X Yes X Yes X X U.S. Army Corps of Engineers WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT: (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a) Microtopographic Relief (D4) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Aquatic Fauna (B13) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Wetland Hydrology Present? Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) NoYes 0.5 No No Water Table Present? Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Drainage Patterns (B10) Moss Trim Lines (B16) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Surface Water (A1) High Water Table (A2) Saturation (A3) Water Marks (B1) Wetland Hydrology Indicators: True Aquatic Plants (B14) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) HYDROLOGY Geomorphic Position (D2) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) 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) Iron Deposits (B5) City/County:S Fork Catawba Mitigation Site Lincolnton/Lincoln DP7 - wet 03/08/23 NC No Section, Township, Range:N/AJennifer Burdette (NRC) 0-2concaveflat Datum:NAD83-81.27675135.482215LRR P, MLRA 136 N/ANWI classification:ChA - Chewacla loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded Slope (%):Local relief (concave, convex, none): Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.) significantly disturbed? naturally problematic? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Remarks: Is the Sampled AreaYes Yes Yes Hydric Soil Present? Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Nowithin a Wetland?Yes Sediment Deposits (B2) Drift Deposits (B3) Remarks: Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: 0 0 Depth (inches): Depth (inches): Depth (inches): No Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Surface Water Present? Field Observations: ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.(A/B) 7. 50% of total cover:20% of total cover:x 1 = Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 2 = 1.x 3 = 2.x 4 = 3.x 5 = 4.Column Totals:(B) 5. 6. 7. 8.X 9.X 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting 50% of total cover:20% of total cover: Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 50% of total cover:20% of total cover: Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 50% of total cover:20% of total cover:Yes X =Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) )5' =Total Cover OBL FACU Yes 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% VEGETATION (Four Strata)– Use scientific names of plants. 40 16 10 12 10 No FACW Yes Yes FAC FAC 180 12 48 Multiply by: 44 2.68Prevalence Index = B/A = 22 No FACW Prevalence Index worksheet: FACW Total % Cover of: 60 12 (A) (B) (A) 5 12 11 15' Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata: Woody Vine – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in height. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? =Total Cover Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. 15') 22 Yes No 10 2 Fraxinus pennsylvanica Lonicera japonica 2Carex crinita OBL Smilax laurifolia 10 4 Ligustrum sinense Tree Stratum ) =Total Cover Liquidambar styraciflua Acer rubrum Ulmus americana Fraxinus pennsylvanica 30') 80 Indicator Status 20 40 No Dominant Species? No 2 FACU OBL species FACW species FAC species Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute % Cover 75.0% Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) No DP7 - wet 3 4 FACU species UPL species Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 0 284 0 106 Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0 X Depth (inches):X Sampling Point: Yes Restrictive Layer (if observed): Remarks: Hydric Soil Present? Type: Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Loc2 85 Loamy/Clayey Loamy/Clayey 70 C Color (moist) Matrix C10YR 4/1 10YR 5/1 7.5YR 4/6 7.5YR 4/615-16 0-15 DP7 - wetSOIL Type1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Redox FeaturesDepth (inches)Color (moist)Remarks 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. % Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Redox (S5) % M15 Prominent redox concentrations Texture Prominent redox concentrations 30 M Stripped Matrix (S6) Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,Other (Explain in Remarks) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)MLRA 136) Dark Surface (S7)unless disturbed or problematic.Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148) No Hydric Soil Indicators: Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Redox Depressions (F8) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136) Depleted Matrix (F3) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: (MLRA 147, 148) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 136, 147) Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Red Parent Material (F21) (outside MLRA 127, 147, 148) 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N) ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0 308 W Millbrook Road, Ste D #200, Raleigh, NC 27609 1 of 1 Natural Resource Consultants DP #7 - Supporting Photograph Photo 1. View of DP7 at flag #343 at W8 (3/8/23) Project/Site:Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point: Investigator(s): Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Lat:Long: Soil Map Unit Name: X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. X No No X X No X X Yes X Yes X Yes X X Sediment Deposits (B2) Drift Deposits (B3) Remarks: Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Depth (inches): Depth (inches): Depth (inches): No Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Surface Water Present? Field Observations: Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.) significantly disturbed? naturally problematic? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Remarks: Is the Sampled AreaYes Yes Yes Hydric Soil Present? Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Nowithin a Wetland?Yes City/County:S Fork Catawba Mitigation Site Lincolnton/Lincoln DP8 - up 03/08/23 NC No Section, Township, Range:N/AJennifer Burdette (NRC) 0-2convexridge Datum:NAD83-81.27682935.482061LRR P, MLRA 136 N/ANWI classification:ChA - Chewacla loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded Slope (%):Local relief (concave, convex, none): Surface Water (A1) High Water Table (A2) Saturation (A3) Water Marks (B1) Wetland Hydrology Indicators: True Aquatic Plants (B14) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) HYDROLOGY Geomorphic Position (D2) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) 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) Iron Deposits (B5) U.S. Army Corps of Engineers WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT: (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a) Microtopographic Relief (D4) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Aquatic Fauna (B13) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Wetland Hydrology Present? Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) NoYes No No Water Table Present? Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Drainage Patterns (B10) Moss Trim Lines (B16) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Crayfish Burrows (C8) ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.(A/B) 7. 50% of total cover:20% of total cover:x 1 = Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 2 = 1.x 3 = 2.x 4 = 3.x 5 = 4.Column Totals:(B) 5. 6. 7. 8.X 9. 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting 50% of total cover:20% of total cover: Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 50% of total cover:20% of total cover: Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 50% of total cover:20% of total cover:Yes X 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) No DP8 - up 6 7 FACU species UPL species Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 0 620 0 215 Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: FACW OBL species FACW species FAC species Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute % Cover 85.7% Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 60 Liquidambar styraciflua Fraxinus pennsylvanica Tree Stratum ) =Total Cover Liquidambar styraciflua Acer rubrum Liriodendron tulipifera Ulmus americana 30') 100 Indicator Status 20 50 No Dominant Species? No 10 30 Smilax rotundifolia Yes Yes No 20 Ligustrum sinense 15 5 Acer rubrum Carex crinita 5Rubus allegheniensis FACU Lonicera japonica 10 15' Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata: Woody Vine – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in height. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? FAC =Total Cover Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. 15') 55 FACNo 11 1230 28 Viola sororia 5 15 Prevalence Index worksheet: FACU Total % Cover of: 130 40 (A) (B) (A) Yes Yes 390 20 160 Multiply by: 50 2.88Prevalence Index = B/A = FACU 25 FAC No FAC 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% VEGETATION (Four Strata)– Use scientific names of plants. 50 20 10 20 20 Yes FACW Yes Yes FAC FAC Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) )5' =Total Cover FACU OBL No =Total Cover ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0 Depth (inches):X Dark Surface (S7)unless disturbed or problematic.Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148) No Hydric Soil Indicators: Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Redox Depressions (F8) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136) Depleted Matrix (F3) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: (MLRA 147, 148) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 136, 147) Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Red Parent Material (F21) (outside MLRA 127, 147, 148) 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N) Stripped Matrix (S6) Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,Other (Explain in Remarks) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)MLRA 136) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Redox (S5) % 10 Silt loam Texture Silt loam DP8 - upSOIL Type1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Redox FeaturesDepth (inches)Color (moist)Remarks 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. % Matrix 7.5YR 5/6 7.5YR 4/4 7.5YR 4/614-16 0-14 Loc2 90 Loamy/Clayey Loamy/Clayey 100 Color (moist) Sampling Point: Yes Restrictive Layer (if observed): Remarks: Hydric Soil Present? Type: Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0 308 W Millbrook Road, Ste D #200, Raleigh, NC 27609 1 of 1 Natural Resource Consultants DP #8 - Supporting Photograph Photo 1. View of DP8 upslope and south of W8 (3/8/23) Project/Site:Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point: Investigator(s): Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Lat:Long: Soil Map Unit Name: X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. X No X No X X No X X X X X X X Yes X Yes X Yes X X U.S. Army Corps of Engineers WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT: (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a) Microtopographic Relief (D4) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Aquatic Fauna (B13) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Wetland Hydrology Present? Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) NoYes 0.5 No No Water Table Present? Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Drainage Patterns (B10) Moss Trim Lines (B16) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Surface Water (A1) High Water Table (A2) Saturation (A3) Water Marks (B1) Wetland Hydrology Indicators: True Aquatic Plants (B14) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) HYDROLOGY Geomorphic Position (D2) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) 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) Iron Deposits (B5) City/County:S Fork Catawba Mitigation Site Lincolnton/Lincoln DP9 - wet 03/08/23 Duke Energy NC No Section, Township, Range:N/AJennifer Burdette (NRC) 0-2concaveflat Datum:NAD83-81.27709235.481966LRR P, MLRA 136 N/ANWI classification:ChA - Chewacla loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded Slope (%):Local relief (concave, convex, none): Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.) significantly disturbed? naturally problematic? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Remarks: Is the Sampled AreaYes Yes Yes Hydric Soil Present? Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Nowithin a Wetland?Yes Sediment Deposits (B2) Drift Deposits (B3) Remarks: Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: 0 0 Depth (inches): Depth (inches): Depth (inches): No Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Surface Water Present? Field Observations: ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.(A/B) 7. 50% of total cover:20% of total cover:x 1 = Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 2 = 1.x 3 = 2.x 4 = 3.x 5 = 4.Column Totals:(B) 5. 6. 7. 8.X 9.X 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting 50% of total cover:20% of total cover: Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 50% of total cover:20% of total cover: Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 50% of total cover:20% of total cover:Yes X =Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) )5' =Total Cover No 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% VEGETATION (Four Strata)– Use scientific names of plants. 35 14 10 0 Yes Yes FAC FAC 210 0 0 Multiply by: 20 2.88Prevalence Index = B/A = 10 Prevalence Index worksheet: FACW Total % Cover of: 70 0 (A) (B) (A) 1 25 1 15' Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata: Woody Vine – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in height. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? =Total Cover Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. 15') 1 10 1 10 Acer rubrum Tree Stratum ) =Total Cover Liquidambar styraciflua Acer rubrum Ulmus americana 30') 70 Indicator Status 20 40 No Dominant Species? Yes FAC OBL species FACW species FAC species Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute % Cover 100.0% Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) No DP9 - wet 3 3 FACU species UPL species Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 0 230 0 80 Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0 X X Depth (inches):X Sampling Point: Yes Restrictive Layer (if observed): Remarks: Hydric Soil Present? Type: Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Loc2 95 Loamy/Clayey Loamy/Clayey 100 Color (moist) Matrix C7.5YR 4/3 10YR 4/2 10YR 5/12-16 0-2 DP9 - wetSOIL Type1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Redox FeaturesDepth (inches)Color (moist)Remarks 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. % Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Redox (S5) % M10 Silt loam Texture Distinct redox concentrations Stripped Matrix (S6) Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,Other (Explain in Remarks) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)MLRA 136) Dark Surface (S7)unless disturbed or problematic.Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148) No Hydric Soil Indicators: Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Redox Depressions (F8) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136) Depleted Matrix (F3) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: (MLRA 147, 148) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 136, 147) Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Red Parent Material (F21) (outside MLRA 127, 147, 148) 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N) ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0 308 W Millbrook Road, Ste D #200, Raleigh, NC 27609 1 of 1 Natural Resource Consultants DP #9 - Supporting Photograph Photo 1. View of DP9 at flag #121 at W1 (3/8/23) Project/Site:Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point: Investigator(s): Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Lat:Long: Soil Map Unit Name: X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. X No X No X X No X X X X X Yes X Yes X Yes X X Sediment Deposits (B2) Drift Deposits (B3) Remarks: Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: 0 0 Depth (inches): Depth (inches): Depth (inches): No Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Surface Water Present? Field Observations: Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.) significantly disturbed? naturally problematic? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Remarks: Is the Sampled AreaYes Yes Yes Hydric Soil Present? Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Nowithin a Wetland?Yes City/County:S Fork Catawba Mitigation Site Lincolnton/Lincoln DP10 - wet 03/08/23 NC No Section, Township, Range:N/AJennifer Burdette (NRC) 0-2concaveditch Datum:NAD83-81.27457335.484760LRR P, MLRA 136 N/ANWI classification:ChA - Chewacla loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded Slope (%):Local relief (concave, convex, none): Surface Water (A1) High Water Table (A2) Saturation (A3) Water Marks (B1) Wetland Hydrology Indicators: True Aquatic Plants (B14) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) HYDROLOGY Geomorphic Position (D2) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) 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) Iron Deposits (B5) U.S. Army Corps of Engineers WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT: (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a) Microtopographic Relief (D4) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Aquatic Fauna (B13) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Wetland Hydrology Present? Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) NoYes 1 No No Water Table Present? Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Drainage Patterns (B10) Moss Trim Lines (B16) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Crayfish Burrows (C8) ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.(A/B) 7. 50% of total cover:20% of total cover:x 1 = Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 2 = 1.x 3 = 2.x 4 = 3.x 5 = 4.Column Totals:(B) 5. 6. 7. 8.X 9.X 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting 50% of total cover:20% of total cover: Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 50% of total cover:20% of total cover: Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 50% of total cover:20% of total cover:Yes X 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) No DP10 - wet 1 1 FACU species UPL species Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 0 5 0 5 Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: OBL species FACW species FAC species Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute % Cover 100.0% Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Tree Stratum ) =Total Cover 30') Indicator Status Dominant Species? Alisma subcordatum 5 15' Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata: Woody Vine – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in height. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? =Total Cover Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. 15') 5 13 Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: 0 0 (A) (B) (A) 0 5 0 Multiply by: 0 1.00Prevalence Index = B/A = 0 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% VEGETATION (Four Strata)– Use scientific names of plants. 5 Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) )5' =Total Cover OBLYes =Total Cover ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0 X Depth (inches):X Dark Surface (S7)unless disturbed or problematic.Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148) No Hydric Soil Indicators: Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Redox Depressions (F8) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136) Depleted Matrix (F3) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: (MLRA 147, 148) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 136, 147) Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Red Parent Material (F21) (outside MLRA 127, 147, 148) 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N) Stripped Matrix (S6) Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,Other (Explain in Remarks) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)MLRA 136) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Redox (S5) % M30 Silt clay Texture Prominent redox concentrations DP10 - wetSOIL Type1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Redox FeaturesDepth (inches)Color (moist)Remarks 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. % Matrix C10YR 6/2 10YR 5/2 5Y 5/62-12 0-2 Loc2 70 Loamy/Clayey Loamy/Clayey 100 Color (moist) Sampling Point: Yes Restrictive Layer (if observed): Remarks: Hydric Soil Present? Type: Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0 308 W Millbrook Road, Ste D #200, Raleigh, NC 27609 1 of 1 Natural Resource Consultants DP #10 - Supporting Photograph Photo 1. View of DP10 at W7 (3/16/23) Project/Site:Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point: Investigator(s): Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Lat:Long: Soil Map Unit Name: X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. No X No X X No X Yes X Yes X Yes X U.S. Army Corps of Engineers WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT: (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a) Microtopographic Relief (D4) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Aquatic Fauna (B13) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Wetland Hydrology Present? Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) NoYes No No Water Table Present? Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Drainage Patterns (B10) Moss Trim Lines (B16) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Surface Water (A1) High Water Table (A2) Saturation (A3) Water Marks (B1) Wetland Hydrology Indicators: True Aquatic Plants (B14) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) HYDROLOGY Geomorphic Position (D2) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) 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) Iron Deposits (B5) City/County:S Fork Catawba Mitigation Site Lincolnton/Lincoln DP11 - up 03/08/23 NC No Section, Township, Range:N/AJennifer Burdette (NRC) 0-2concaveditch Datum:NAD83-81.27463235.484785LRR P, MLRA 136 N/ANWI classification:ChA - Chewacla loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded Slope (%):Local relief (concave, convex, none): Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.) significantly disturbed? naturally problematic? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Remarks: Is the Sampled AreaYes Yes Yes Hydric Soil Present? Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Nowithin a Wetland?Yes Sediment Deposits (B2) Drift Deposits (B3) Remarks: Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Depth (inches): Depth (inches): Depth (inches): No Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Surface Water Present? Field Observations: ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.(A/B) 7. 50% of total cover:20% of total cover:x 1 = Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 2 = 1.x 3 = 2.x 4 = 3.x 5 = 4.Column Totals:(B) 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting 50% of total cover:20% of total cover: Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 50% of total cover:20% of total cover: Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 50% of total cover:20% of total cover:Yes X =Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) )5' =Total Cover FAC UPL No 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% VEGETATION (Four Strata)– Use scientific names of plants. 0 60 0 0 Multiply by: 0 4.64Prevalence Index = B/A = 0 Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: 20 0 (A) (B) (A) 2255 15' Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata: Woody Vine – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in height. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? =Total Cover Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. 15') 110 No Yes 5Lamium amplexicaule 85Secale cereale UPL Ranunculus sardous 20 Tree Stratum ) =Total Cover 30') Indicator Status Dominant Species? OBL species FACW species FAC species Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Absolute % Cover 0.0% Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) No DP11 - up 0 1 FACU species UPL species Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 450 510 90 110 Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0 Depth (inches):X Sampling Point: Yes Restrictive Layer (if observed): Remarks: Hydric Soil Present? Type: Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Loc2 100 Loamy/Clayey Loamy/Clayey Loamy/Clayey 100 Color (moist) Matrix 10YR 3/6 10YR 4/4 3-11 0-3 DP11 - upSOIL 11-16 10YR 4/1 Type1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) 80 Redox FeaturesDepth (inches)Color (moist)Remarks 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. 7.5YR 5/6 % Silt clay Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Redox (S5) % Silt clay Texture Silt clay 30 Stripped Matrix (S6) Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,Other (Explain in Remarks) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)MLRA 136) Dark Surface (S7)unless disturbed or problematic.Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148) No Hydric Soil Indicators: Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Redox Depressions (F8) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136) Depleted Matrix (F3) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: (MLRA 147, 148) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 136, 147) Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Red Parent Material (F21) (outside MLRA 127, 147, 148) 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N) ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0 308 W Millbrook Road, Ste D #200, Raleigh, NC 27609 1 of 1 Natural Resource Consultants DP #11 - Supporting Photograph Photo 1. View of DP11 upslope of W7 (3/16/23) NC WAM FORMS NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0 USACE AID # NCDWR# Project Name S Fork Catawba Mitigation Site Date of Evaluation 03/08/2023 Applicant/Owner Name EcoTerra Wetland Site Name W1 Wetland Type Riverine Swamp Forest Assessor Name/Organization Jennifer Burdette (NRC) Level III Ecoregion Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body South Fork Catawba River River Basin Catawba USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit 03050102 County Lincoln NCDWR Region Mooresville Yes No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees) 35.481700, -81.277306 Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area) Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following. • Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.) • Surface and sub-surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), ho g lagoons, etc.) • Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.) • Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear-cutting, exotics, etc.) Is the assessment area intensively managed? Yes No Regulatory Considerations - Were regulatory considerations evaluated? Yes No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area. Anadromous fish Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA) Publicly owned property N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer) Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout Designated NCNHP reference community Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream What type of natural stream is associated with the wetla nd, if any? (check all that apply) Blackwater Brownwater Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) Lunar Wind Both Is the assessment area on a coastal island? Yes No Is the assessment area’s surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? Yes No Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? Yes No 1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition – assessment area condition metric Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment area based on evidence an effect. GS VS A A Not severely altered B B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive sedimentation, fire-plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compact ion, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration) 2. Surface and Sub-Surface Storage Capacity and Duration – assessment area condition metric Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and duration (Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch ≤ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and sub-surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable. Surf Sub A A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered. B B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation). C C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change ) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines). 3. Water Storage/Surface Relief – assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT). AA WT 3a. A A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep B B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep C C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep D D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep 3b. A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot 4. Soil Texture/Structure – assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes) Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature. Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional indicators. 4a. A Sandy soil B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redox imorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres) C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redox imorphic features D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil E Histosol or histic epipedon 4b. A Soil ribbon < 1 inch B Soil ribbon ≥ 1 inch 4c. A No peat or muck presence B A peat or muck presence 5. Discharge into Wetland – opportunity metric Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub-surface pollutants or discharges (Sub). Examples of sub-surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank , underground storage tank (UST), etc. Surf Sub A A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area B B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetla nd and stressing, but not overwhelming the treatment capacity of the assessment area C C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area a nd potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive sedimentation, odor) 6. Land Use – opportunity metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands) Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M). WS 5M 2M A A A > 10% impervious surfaces B B B Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants C C C ≥ 20% coverage of pasture D D D ≥ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land) E E E ≥ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb F F F ≥ 20% coverage of clear-cut land G G G Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent drainage and/or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area. 7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer – assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands) 7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water? Yes No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8. Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed. 7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is wetland? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the .water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbe d.) A ≥ 50 feet B From 30 to < 50 feet C From 15 to < 30 feet D From 5 to < 15 feet E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches 7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width. ≤ 15-feet wide > 15-feet wide Other open water (no tributary present) 7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend in to the bank of the tributary/open water? Yes No 7e. Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed? Sheltered – adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic. Exposed – adjacent open water with width ≥ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic. 8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area – wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp Forest only) Check a box in each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and the wetland complex at the assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries. WT WC A A ≥ 100 feet B B From 80 to < 100 feet C C From 50 to < 80 feet D D From 40 to < 50 feet E E From 30 to < 40 feet F F From 15 to < 30 feet G G From 5 to < 15 feet H H < 5 feet 9. Inundation Duration – assessment area condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands) Answer for assessment area dominant landform. A Evidence of short-duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days) B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation C Evidence of long-duration inundation or very long-duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more) 10. Indicators of Deposition – assessment area condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands and all marshes) Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition). A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels. B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland. C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland. 11. Wetland Size – wetland type/wetland complex condition metric Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable , see User Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select “K” for the FW column. WT WC FW (if applicable) A A A ≥ 500 acres B B B From 100 to < 500 acres C C C From 50 to < 100 acres D D D From 25 to < 50 acres E E E From 10 to < 25 acres F F F From 5 to < 10 acres G G G From 1 to < 5 acres H H H From 0.5 to < 1 acre I I I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre J J J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre K K K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut 12. Wetland Intactness – wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only) A Pocosin is the full extent (≥ 90%) of its natural landscape size. B Pocosin type is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size. 13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas – landscape condition metric 13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contigu ous naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundari es are formed by four-lane roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors the width of a four-lane road or wider, urban landscapes, maintained fields (pasture and agriculture), or open water > 300 feet wide. Well Loosely A A ≥ 500 acres B B From 100 to < 500 acres C C From 50 to < 100 acres D D From 10 to < 50 acres E E < 10 acres F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats 13b. Evaluate for marshes only. Yes No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands. 14. Edge Effect – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland) May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificia l edges include non-forested areas ≥ 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors, and clear -cuts. Consider the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directions? If the assessme nt area is clear cut, select option ”C.” A 0 B 1 to 4 C 5 to 8 15. Vegetative Composition – assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat) A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata compo sed of appropriate species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area. B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions , but still largely composed of native species characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata. C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non - characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in at least one stratum. 16. Vegetative Diversity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non-tidal Freshwater Marsh only) A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (< 10% cover of exotics). B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics. C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (> 50 % cover of exotics). 17. Vegetative Structure – assessment area/wetland type condition metric 17a. Is vegetation present? Yes No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18. 17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non-marsh wetlands. A ≥ 25% coverage of vegetation B < 25% coverage of vegetation 17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non-marsh wetlands. Consider structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately. AA WT A A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes B B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps C C Canopy sparse or absent A A Dense mid-story/sapling layer B B Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer C C Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent A A Dense shrub layer B B Moderate density shrub layer C C Shrub layer sparse or absent A A Dense herb layer B B Moderate density herb layer C C Herb layer sparse or absent 18. Snags – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability). B Not A 19. Diameter Class Distribution – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are present. B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH. C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees. 20. Large Woody Debris – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) Include both natural debris and man-placed natural debris. A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability). B Not A 21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion – wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non-Tidal Freshwater Marsh only) Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. P atterned areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water. A B C D 22. Hydrologic Connectivity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only) Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D. A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area. B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area. C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area. D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area. Notes Surrounding ditches disrupt overland flow to the wetland Ca n o p y Mi d -St o r y Sh r u b He r b NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0 Wetland Site Name W1 Date of Assessment 03/08/2023 Wetland Type Riverine Swamp Forest Assessor Name/Organization Jennifer Burdette (NRC) Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) YES Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N) NO Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N) NO Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N) NO Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N) NO Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N) NO Sub-function Rating Summary Function Sub-function Metrics Rating Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition MEDIUM Sub-surface Storage and Retention Condition MEDIUM Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition MEDIUM Condition/Opportunity MEDIUM Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Particulate Change Condition MEDIUM Condition/Opportunity MEDIUM Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Soluble Change Condition LOW Condition/Opportunity LOW Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Physical Change Condition LOW Condition/Opportunity LOW Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Pollution Change Condition NA Condition/Opportunity NA Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NA Habitat Physical Structure Condition HIGH Landscape Patch Structure Condition MEDIUM Vegetation Composition Condition HIGH Function Rating Summary Function Metrics Rating Hydrology Condition MEDIUM Water Quality Condition LOW Condition/Opportunity LOW Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Habitat Condition HIGH Overall Wetland Rating MEDIUM 308 W Millbrook Road, Ste D #200, Raleigh, NC 27609 1 of 1 Natural Resource Consultants W1 - Supporting Photograph Photo 1. View of W1 NC WAM assessment area (3/8/23) NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0 USACE AID # NCDWR# Project Name S Fork Catawba Mitigation Site Date of Evaluation 03/08/2023 Applicant/Owner Name EcoTerra Wetland Site Name W2 Wetland Type Riverine Swamp Forest Assessor Name/Organization Jennifer Burdette (NRC) Level III Ecoregion Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body South Fork Catawba River River Basin Catawba USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit 03050102 County Lincoln NCDWR Region Mooresville Yes No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees) 35.481525, -81.277690 Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area) Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following. • Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.) • Surface and sub-surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), ho g lagoons, etc.) • Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.) • Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear-cutting, exotics, etc.) Is the assessment area intensively managed? Yes No Regulatory Considerations - Were regulatory considerations evaluated? Yes No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area. Anadromous fish Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA) Publicly owned property N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer) Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout Designated NCNHP reference community Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream What type of natural stream is associated with the wetla nd, if any? (check all that apply) Blackwater Brownwater Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) Lunar Wind Both Is the assessment area on a coastal island? Yes No Is the assessment area’s surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? Yes No Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? Yes No 1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition – assessment area condition metric Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment area based on evidence an effect. GS VS A A Not severely altered B B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive sedimentation, fire-plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compact ion, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration) 2. Surface and Sub-Surface Storage Capacity and Duration – assessment area condition metric Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and duration (Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch ≤ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and sub-surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable. Surf Sub A A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered. B B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation). C C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change ) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines). 3. Water Storage/Surface Relief – assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT). AA WT 3a. A A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep B B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep C C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep D D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep 3b. A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot 4. Soil Texture/Structure – assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes) Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature. Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional indicators. 4a. A Sandy soil B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redox imorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres) C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redox imorphic features D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil E Histosol or histic epipedon 4b. A Soil ribbon < 1 inch B Soil ribbon ≥ 1 inch 4c. A No peat or muck presence B A peat or muck presence 5. Discharge into Wetland – opportunity metric Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub-surface pollutants or discharges (Sub). Examples of sub-surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank , underground storage tank (UST), etc. Surf Sub A A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area B B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetla nd and stressing, but not overwhelming the treatment capacity of the assessment area C C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area a nd potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive sedimentation, odor) 6. Land Use – opportunity metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands) Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M). WS 5M 2M A A A > 10% impervious surfaces B B B Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants C C C ≥ 20% coverage of pasture D D D ≥ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land) E E E ≥ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb F F F ≥ 20% coverage of clear-cut land G G G Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent drainage and/or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area. 7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer – assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands) 7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water? Yes No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8. Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed. 7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is wetland? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the .water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbe d.) A ≥ 50 feet B From 30 to < 50 feet C From 15 to < 30 feet D From 5 to < 15 feet E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches 7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width. ≤ 15-feet wide > 15-feet wide Other open water (no tributary present) 7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend in to the bank of the tributary/open water? Yes No 7e. Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed? Sheltered – adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic. Exposed – adjacent open water with width ≥ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic. 8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area – wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp Forest only) Check a box in each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and the wetland complex at the assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries. WT WC A A ≥ 100 feet B B From 80 to < 100 feet C C From 50 to < 80 feet D D From 40 to < 50 feet E E From 30 to < 40 feet F F From 15 to < 30 feet G G From 5 to < 15 feet H H < 5 feet 9. Inundation Duration – assessment area condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands) Answer for assessment area dominant landform. A Evidence of short-duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days) B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation C Evidence of long-duration inundation or very long-duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more) 10. Indicators of Deposition – assessment area condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands and all marshes) Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition). A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels. B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland. C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland. 11. Wetland Size – wetland type/wetland complex condition metric Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable , see User Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select “K” for the FW column. WT WC FW (if applicable) A A A ≥ 500 acres B B B From 100 to < 500 acres C C C From 50 to < 100 acres D D D From 25 to < 50 acres E E E From 10 to < 25 acres F F F From 5 to < 10 acres G G G From 1 to < 5 acres H H H From 0.5 to < 1 acre I I I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre J J J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre K K K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut 12. Wetland Intactness – wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only) A Pocosin is the full extent (≥ 90%) of its natural landscape size. B Pocosin type is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size. 13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas – landscape condition metric 13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contigu ous naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundari es are formed by four-lane roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors the width of a four-lane road or wider, urban landscapes, maintained fields (pasture and agriculture), or open water > 300 feet wide. Well Loosely A A ≥ 500 acres B B From 100 to < 500 acres C C From 50 to < 100 acres D D From 10 to < 50 acres E E < 10 acres F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats 13b. Evaluate for marshes only. Yes No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands. 14. Edge Effect – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland) May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificia l edges include non-forested areas ≥ 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors, and clear -cuts. Consider the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directions? If the assessme nt area is clear cut, select option ”C.” A 0 B 1 to 4 C 5 to 8 15. Vegetative Composition – assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat) A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata compo sed of appropriate species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area. B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions , but still largely composed of native species characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata. C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non - characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in at least one stratum. 16. Vegetative Diversity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non-tidal Freshwater Marsh only) A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (< 10% cover of exotics). B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics. C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (> 50 % cover of exotics). 17. Vegetative Structure – assessment area/wetland type condition metric 17a. Is vegetation present? Yes No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18. 17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non-marsh wetlands. A ≥ 25% coverage of vegetation B < 25% coverage of vegetation 17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non-marsh wetlands. Consider structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately. AA WT A A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes B B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps C C Canopy sparse or absent A A Dense mid-story/sapling layer B B Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer C C Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent A A Dense shrub layer B B Moderate density shrub layer C C Shrub layer sparse or absent A A Dense herb layer B B Moderate density herb layer C C Herb layer sparse or absent 18. Snags – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability). B Not A 19. Diameter Class Distribution – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are present. B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH. C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees. 20. Large Woody Debris – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) Include both natural debris and man-placed natural debris. A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability). B Not A 21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion – wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non-Tidal Freshwater Marsh only) Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. P atterned areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water. A B C D 22. Hydrologic Connectivity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only) Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D. A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area. B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area. C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area. D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area. Notes Wetland has been ditched over 1 foot while surrounding ditches disrupt overland flow to the wetland Ca n o p y Mi d -St o r y Sh r u b He r b NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0 Wetland Site Name W2 Date of Assessment 03/08/2023 Wetland Type Riverine Swamp Forest Assessor Name/Organization Jennifer Burdette (NRC) Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) YES Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N) NO Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N) NO Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N) NO Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N) NO Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N) NO Sub-function Rating Summary Function Sub-function Metrics Rating Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition LOW Sub-surface Storage and Retention Condition LOW Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition LOW Condition/Opportunity LOW Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Particulate Change Condition LOW Condition/Opportunity LOW Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Soluble Change Condition LOW Condition/Opportunity LOW Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Physical Change Condition LOW Condition/Opportunity LOW Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Pollution Change Condition NA Condition/Opportunity NA Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NA Habitat Physical Structure Condition MEDIUM Landscape Patch Structure Condition LOW Vegetation Composition Condition LOW Function Rating Summary Function Metrics Rating Hydrology Condition LOW Water Quality Condition LOW Condition/Opportunity LOW Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Habitat Condition LOW Overall Wetland Rating LOW 308 W Millbrook Road, Ste D #200, Raleigh, NC 27609 1 of 2 Natural Resource Consultants W2 - Supporting Photographs Photo 1. View of W2 NC WAM assessment area (3/8/23) Photo 2. View of W2 NC WAM assessment area (3/8/23) 308 W Millbrook Road, Ste D #200, Raleigh, NC 27609 2 of 2 Natural Resource Consultants Photo 3. View of W2 lower section (3/8/23) NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0 USACE AID # NCDWR# Project Name S Fork Catawba Mitigation Site Date of Evaluation 03/08/2023 Applicant/Owner Name EcoTerra Wetland Site Name W3 Wetland Type Riverine Swamp Forest Assessor Name/Organization Jennifer Burdette (NRC) Level III Ecoregion Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body South Fork Catawba River River Basin Catawba USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit 03050102 County Lincoln NCDWR Region Mooresville Yes No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees) 35.481700, -81.277306 Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area) Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following. • Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.) • Surface and sub-surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), ho g lagoons, etc.) • Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.) • Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear-cutting, exotics, etc.) Is the assessment area intensively managed? Yes No Regulatory Considerations - Were regulatory considerations evaluated? Yes No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area. Anadromous fish Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA) Publicly owned property N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer) Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout Designated NCNHP reference community Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream What type of natural stream is associated with the wetla nd, if any? (check all that apply) Blackwater Brownwater Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) Lunar Wind Both Is the assessment area on a coastal island? Yes No Is the assessment area’s surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? Yes No Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? Yes No 1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition – assessment area condition metric Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment area based on evidence an effect. GS VS A A Not severely altered B B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive sedimentation, fire-plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compact ion, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration) 2. Surface and Sub-Surface Storage Capacity and Duration – assessment area condition metric Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and duration (Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch ≤ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and sub-surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable. Surf Sub A A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered. B B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation). C C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change ) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines). 3. Water Storage/Surface Relief – assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT). AA WT 3a. A A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep B B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep C C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep D D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep 3b. A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot 4. Soil Texture/Structure – assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes) Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature. Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional indicators. 4a. A Sandy soil B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redox imorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres) C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redox imorphic features D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil E Histosol or histic epipedon 4b. A Soil ribbon < 1 inch B Soil ribbon ≥ 1 inch 4c. A No peat or muck presence B A peat or muck presence 5. Discharge into Wetland – opportunity metric Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub-surface pollutants or discharges (Sub). Examples of sub-surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank , underground storage tank (UST), etc. Surf Sub A A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area B B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetla nd and stressing, but not overwhelming the treatment capacity of the assessment area C C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area a nd potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive sedimentation, odor) 6. Land Use – opportunity metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands) Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M). WS 5M 2M A A A > 10% impervious surfaces B B B Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants C C C ≥ 20% coverage of pasture D D D ≥ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land) E E E ≥ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb F F F ≥ 20% coverage of clear-cut land G G G Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent drainage and/or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area. 7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer – assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands) 7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water? Yes No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8. Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed. 7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is wetland? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the .water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbe d.) A ≥ 50 feet B From 30 to < 50 feet C From 15 to < 30 feet D From 5 to < 15 feet E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches 7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width. ≤ 15-feet wide > 15-feet wide Other open water (no tributary present) 7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend in to the bank of the tributary/open water? Yes No 7e. Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed? Sheltered – adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic. Exposed – adjacent open water with width ≥ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic. 8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area – wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp Forest only) Check a box in each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and the wetland complex at the assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries. WT WC A A ≥ 100 feet B B From 80 to < 100 feet C C From 50 to < 80 feet D D From 40 to < 50 feet E E From 30 to < 40 feet F F From 15 to < 30 feet G G From 5 to < 15 feet H H < 5 feet 9. Inundation Duration – assessment area condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands) Answer for assessment area dominant landform. A Evidence of short-duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days) B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation C Evidence of long-duration inundation or very long-duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more) 10. Indicators of Deposition – assessment area condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands and all marshes) Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition). A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels. B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland. C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland. 11. Wetland Size – wetland type/wetland complex condition metric Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable , see User Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select “K” for the FW column. WT WC FW (if applicable) A A A ≥ 500 acres B B B From 100 to < 500 acres C C C From 50 to < 100 acres D D D From 25 to < 50 acres E E E From 10 to < 25 acres F F F From 5 to < 10 acres G G G From 1 to < 5 acres H H H From 0.5 to < 1 acre I I I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre J J J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre K K K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut 12. Wetland Intactness – wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only) A Pocosin is the full extent (≥ 90%) of its natural landscape size. B Pocosin type is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size. 13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas – landscape condition metric 13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contigu ous naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundari es are formed by four-lane roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors the width of a four-lane road or wider, urban landscapes, maintained fields (pasture and agriculture), or open water > 300 feet wide. Well Loosely A A ≥ 500 acres B B From 100 to < 500 acres C C From 50 to < 100 acres D D From 10 to < 50 acres E E < 10 acres F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats 13b. Evaluate for marshes only. Yes No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands. 14. Edge Effect – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland) May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificia l edges include non-forested areas ≥ 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors, and clear -cuts. Consider the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directions? If the assessme nt area is clear cut, select option ”C.” A 0 B 1 to 4 C 5 to 8 15. Vegetative Composition – assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat) A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata compo sed of appropriate species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area. B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions , but still largely composed of native species characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata. C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non - characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in at least one stratum. 16. Vegetative Diversity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non-tidal Freshwater Marsh only) A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (< 10% cover of exotics). B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics. C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (> 50 % cover of exotics). 17. Vegetative Structure – assessment area/wetland type condition metric 17a. Is vegetation present? Yes No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18. 17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non-marsh wetlands. A ≥ 25% coverage of vegetation B < 25% coverage of vegetation 17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non-marsh wetlands. Consider structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately. AA WT A A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes B B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps C C Canopy sparse or absent A A Dense mid-story/sapling layer B B Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer C C Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent A A Dense shrub layer B B Moderate density shrub layer C C Shrub layer sparse or absent A A Dense herb layer B B Moderate density herb layer C C Herb layer sparse or absent 18. Snags – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability). B Not A 19. Diameter Class Distribution – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are present. B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH. C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees. 20. Large Woody Debris – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) Include both natural debris and man-placed natural debris. A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability). B Not A 21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion – wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non-Tidal Freshwater Marsh only) Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. P atterned areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water. A B C D 22. Hydrologic Connectivity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only) Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D. A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area. B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area. C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area. D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area. Notes Sections of the wetland have been ditched approximately 1 foot, and surrounding ditches disrupt overland flow to the wetland. Ca n o p y Mi d -St o r y Sh r u b He r b NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0 Wetland Site Name W3 Date of Assessment 03/08/2023 Wetland Type Riverine Swamp Forest Assessor Name/Organization Jennifer Burdette (NRC) Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) YES Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N) NO Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N) NO Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N) NO Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N) NO Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N) NO Sub-function Rating Summary Function Sub-function Metrics Rating Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition LOW Sub-surface Storage and Retention Condition LOW Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition LOW Condition/Opportunity LOW Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Particulate Change Condition LOW Condition/Opportunity LOW Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Soluble Change Condition LOW Condition/Opportunity LOW Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Physical Change Condition LOW Condition/Opportunity LOW Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Pollution Change Condition NA Condition/Opportunity NA Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NA Habitat Physical Structure Condition HIGH Landscape Patch Structure Condition MEDIUM Vegetation Composition Condition HIGH Function Rating Summary Function Metrics Rating Hydrology Condition LOW Water Quality Condition LOW Condition/Opportunity LOW Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Habitat Condition HIGH Overall Wetland Rating LOW 308 W Millbrook Road, Ste D #200, Raleigh, NC 27609 1 of 2 Natural Resource Consultants W3 - Supporting Photographs Photo 1. View of W3 NC WAM assessment area (3/8/23) Photo 2. View of W3 NC WAM assessment area (3/8/23) 308 W Millbrook Road, Ste D #200, Raleigh, NC 27609 2 of 2 Natural Resource Consultants Photo 3. View of W3 NC WAM assessment area (3/8/23) NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0 USACE AID # NCDWR# Project Name S Fork Catawba Mitigation Site Date of Evaluation 03/08/2023 Applicant/Owner Name EcoTerra Wetland Site Name W4 Wetland Type Riverine Swamp Forest Assessor Name/Organization Jennifer Burdette (NRC) Level III Ecoregion Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body South Fork Catawba River River Basin Catawba USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit 03050102 County Lincoln NCDWR Region Mooresville Yes No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees) 35.485534, -81.274413 Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area) Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following. • Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.) • Surface and sub-surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), ho g lagoons, etc.) • Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.) • Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear-cutting, exotics, etc.) Is the assessment area intensively managed? Yes No Regulatory Considerations - Were regulatory considerations evaluated? Yes No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area. Anadromous fish Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA) Publicly owned property N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer) Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout Designated NCNHP reference community Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream What type of natural stream is associated with the wetla nd, if any? (check all that apply) Blackwater Brownwater Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) Lunar Wind Both Is the assessment area on a coastal island? Yes No Is the assessment area’s surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? Yes No Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? Yes No 1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition – assessment area condition metric Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment area based on evidence an effect. GS VS A A Not severely altered B B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive sedimentation, fire-plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compact ion, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration) 2. Surface and Sub-Surface Storage Capacity and Duration – assessment area condition metric Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and duration (Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch ≤ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and sub-surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable. Surf Sub A A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered. B B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation). C C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change ) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines). 3. Water Storage/Surface Relief – assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT). AA WT 3a. A A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep B B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep C C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep D D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep 3b. A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot 4. Soil Texture/Structure – assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes) Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature. Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional indicators. 4a. A Sandy soil B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redox imorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres) C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redox imorphic features D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil E Histosol or histic epipedon 4b. A Soil ribbon < 1 inch B Soil ribbon ≥ 1 inch 4c. A No peat or muck presence B A peat or muck presence 5. Discharge into Wetland – opportunity metric Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub-surface pollutants or discharges (Sub). Examples of sub-surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank , underground storage tank (UST), etc. Surf Sub A A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area B B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetla nd and stressing, but not overwhelming the treatment capacity of the assessment area C C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area a nd potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive sedimentation, odor) 6. Land Use – opportunity metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands) Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M). WS 5M 2M A A A > 10% impervious surfaces B B B Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants C C C ≥ 20% coverage of pasture D D D ≥ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land) E E E ≥ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb F F F ≥ 20% coverage of clear-cut land G G G Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent drainage and/or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area. 7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer – assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands) 7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water? Yes No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8. Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed. 7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is wetland? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the .water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbe d.) A ≥ 50 feet B From 30 to < 50 feet C From 15 to < 30 feet D From 5 to < 15 feet E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches 7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width. ≤ 15-feet wide > 15-feet wide Other open water (no tributary present) 7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend in to the bank of the tributary/open water? Yes No 7e. Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed? Sheltered – adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic. Exposed – adjacent open water with width ≥ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic. 8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area – wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp Forest only) Check a box in each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and the wetland complex at the assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries. WT WC A A ≥ 100 feet B B From 80 to < 100 feet C C From 50 to < 80 feet D D From 40 to < 50 feet E E From 30 to < 40 feet F F From 15 to < 30 feet G G From 5 to < 15 feet H H < 5 feet 9. Inundation Duration – assessment area condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands) Answer for assessment area dominant landform. A Evidence of short-duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days) B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation C Evidence of long-duration inundation or very long-duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more) 10. Indicators of Deposition – assessment area condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands and all marshes) Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition). A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels. B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland. C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland. 11. Wetland Size – wetland type/wetland complex condition metric Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable , see User Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select “K” for the FW column. WT WC FW (if applicable) A A A ≥ 500 acres B B B From 100 to < 500 acres C C C From 50 to < 100 acres D D D From 25 to < 50 acres E E E From 10 to < 25 acres F F F From 5 to < 10 acres G G G From 1 to < 5 acres H H H From 0.5 to < 1 acre I I I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre J J J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre K K K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut 12. Wetland Intactness – wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only) A Pocosin is the full extent (≥ 90%) of its natural landscape size. B Pocosin type is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size. 13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas – landscape condition metric 13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contigu ous naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundari es are formed by four-lane roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors the width of a four-lane road or wider, urban landscapes, maintained fields (pasture and agriculture), or open water > 300 feet wide. Well Loosely A A ≥ 500 acres B B From 100 to < 500 acres C C From 50 to < 100 acres D D From 10 to < 50 acres E E < 10 acres F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats 13b. Evaluate for marshes only. Yes No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands. 14. Edge Effect – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland) May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificia l edges include non-forested areas ≥ 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors, and clear -cuts. Consider the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directions? If the assessme nt area is clear cut, select option ”C.” A 0 B 1 to 4 C 5 to 8 15. Vegetative Composition – assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat) A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata compo sed of appropriate species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area. B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions , but still largely composed of native species characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata. C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non - characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in at least one stratum. 16. Vegetative Diversity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non-tidal Freshwater Marsh only) A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (< 10% cover of exotics). B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics. C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (> 50 % cover of exotics). 17. Vegetative Structure – assessment area/wetland type condition metric 17a. Is vegetation present? Yes No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18. 17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non-marsh wetlands. A ≥ 25% coverage of vegetation B < 25% coverage of vegetation 17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non-marsh wetlands. Consider structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately. AA WT A A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes B B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps C C Canopy sparse or absent A A Dense mid-story/sapling layer B B Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer C C Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent A A Dense shrub layer B B Moderate density shrub layer C C Shrub layer sparse or absent A A Dense herb layer B B Moderate density herb layer C C Herb layer sparse or absent 18. Snags – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability). B Not A 19. Diameter Class Distribution – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are present. B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH. C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees. 20. Large Woody Debris – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) Include both natural debris and man-placed natural debris. A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability). B Not A 21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion – wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non-Tidal Freshwater Marsh only) Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. P atterned areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water. A B C D 22. Hydrologic Connectivity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only) Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D. A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area. B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area. C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area. D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area. Notes Overbank flow to the wetland is disrupted by surrounding ditches Ca n o p y Mi d -St o r y Sh r u b He r b NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0 Wetland Site Name W4 Date of Assessment 03/08/2023 Wetland Type Riverine Swamp Forest Assessor Name/Organization Jennifer Burdette (NRC) Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) YES Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N) NO Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N) NO Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N) NO Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N) YES Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N) NO Sub-function Rating Summary Function Sub-function Metrics Rating Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition LOW Sub-surface Storage and Retention Condition LOW Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition LOW Condition/Opportunity LOW Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Particulate Change Condition MEDIUM Condition/Opportunity MEDIUM Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Soluble Change Condition MEDIUM Condition/Opportunity MEDIUM Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Physical Change Condition LOW Condition/Opportunity LOW Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Pollution Change Condition NA Condition/Opportunity NA Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NA Habitat Physical Structure Condition MEDIUM Landscape Patch Structure Condition LOW Vegetation Composition Condition MEDIUM Function Rating Summary Function Metrics Rating Hydrology Condition LOW Water Quality Condition LOW Condition/Opportunity LOW Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Habitat Condition LOW Overall Wetland Rating LOW 308 W Millbrook Road, Ste D #200, Raleigh, NC 27609 1 of 1 Natural Resource Consultants W4 - Supporting Photograph Photo 1. View of W4 NC WAM assessment area (3/8/23) NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0 USACE AID # NCDWR# Project Name S Fork Catawba Mitigation Site Date of Evaluation 03/08/2023 Applicant/Owner Name EcoTerra Wetland Site Name W5 Wetland Type Riverine Swamp Forest Assessor Name/Organization Jennifer Burdette (NRC) Level III Ecoregion Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body South Fork Catawba River River Basin Catawba USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit 03050102 County Lincoln NCDWR Region Mooresville Yes No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees) 35.485515, -81.273955 Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area) Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following. • Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.) • Surface and sub-surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), ho g lagoons, etc.) • Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.) • Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear-cutting, exotics, etc.) Is the assessment area intensively managed? Yes No Regulatory Considerations - Were regulatory considerations evaluated? Yes No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area. Anadromous fish Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA) Publicly owned property N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer) Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout Designated NCNHP reference community Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream What type of natural stream is associated with the wetla nd, if any? (check all that apply) Blackwater Brownwater Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) Lunar Wind Both Is the assessment area on a coastal island? Yes No Is the assessment area’s surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? Yes No Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? Yes No 1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition – assessment area condition metric Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment area based on evidence an effect. GS VS A A Not severely altered B B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive sedimentation, fire-plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compact ion, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration) 2. Surface and Sub-Surface Storage Capacity and Duration – assessment area condition metric Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and duration (Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch ≤ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and sub-surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable. Surf Sub A A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered. B B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation). C C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change ) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines). 3. Water Storage/Surface Relief – assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT). AA WT 3a. A A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep B B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep C C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep D D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep 3b. A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot 4. Soil Texture/Structure – assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes) Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature. Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional indicators. 4a. A Sandy soil B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redox imorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres) C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redox imorphic features D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil E Histosol or histic epipedon 4b. A Soil ribbon < 1 inch B Soil ribbon ≥ 1 inch 4c. A No peat or muck presence B A peat or muck presence 5. Discharge into Wetland – opportunity metric Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub-surface pollutants or discharges (Sub). Examples of sub-surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank , underground storage tank (UST), etc. Surf Sub A A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area B B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetla nd and stressing, but not overwhelming the treatment capacity of the assessment area C C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area a nd potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive sedimentation, odor) 6. Land Use – opportunity metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands) Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M). WS 5M 2M A A A > 10% impervious surfaces B B B Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants C C C ≥ 20% coverage of pasture D D D ≥ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land) E E E ≥ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb F F F ≥ 20% coverage of clear-cut land G G G Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent drainage and/or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area. 7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer – assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands) 7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water? Yes No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8. Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed. 7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is wetland? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the .water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbe d.) A ≥ 50 feet B From 30 to < 50 feet C From 15 to < 30 feet D From 5 to < 15 feet E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches 7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width. ≤ 15-feet wide > 15-feet wide Other open water (no tributary present) 7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend in to the bank of the tributary/open water? Yes No 7e. Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed? Sheltered – adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic. Exposed – adjacent open water with width ≥ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic. 8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area – wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp Forest only) Check a box in each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and the wetland complex at the assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries. WT WC A A ≥ 100 feet B B From 80 to < 100 feet C C From 50 to < 80 feet D D From 40 to < 50 feet E E From 30 to < 40 feet F F From 15 to < 30 feet G G From 5 to < 15 feet H H < 5 feet 9. Inundation Duration – assessment area condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands) Answer for assessment area dominant landform. A Evidence of short-duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days) B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation C Evidence of long-duration inundation or very long-duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more) 10. Indicators of Deposition – assessment area condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands and all marshes) Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition). A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels. B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland. C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland. 11. Wetland Size – wetland type/wetland complex condition metric Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable , see User Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select “K” for the FW column. WT WC FW (if applicable) A A A ≥ 500 acres B B B From 100 to < 500 acres C C C From 50 to < 100 acres D D D From 25 to < 50 acres E E E From 10 to < 25 acres F F F From 5 to < 10 acres G G G From 1 to < 5 acres H H H From 0.5 to < 1 acre I I I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre J J J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre K K K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut 12. Wetland Intactness – wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only) A Pocosin is the full extent (≥ 90%) of its natural landscape size. B Pocosin type is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size. 13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas – landscape condition metric 13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contigu ous naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundari es are formed by four-lane roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors the width of a four-lane road or wider, urban landscapes, maintained fields (pasture and agriculture), or open water > 300 feet wide. Well Loosely A A ≥ 500 acres B B From 100 to < 500 acres C C From 50 to < 100 acres D D From 10 to < 50 acres E E < 10 acres F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats 13b. Evaluate for marshes only. Yes No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands. 14. Edge Effect – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland) May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificia l edges include non-forested areas ≥ 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors, and clear -cuts. Consider the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directions? If the assessme nt area is clear cut, select option ”C.” A 0 B 1 to 4 C 5 to 8 15. Vegetative Composition – assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat) A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata compo sed of appropriate species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area. B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions , but still largely composed of native species characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata. C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non - characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in at least one stratum. 16. Vegetative Diversity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non-tidal Freshwater Marsh only) A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (< 10% cover of exotics). B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics. C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (> 50 % cover of exotics). 17. Vegetative Structure – assessment area/wetland type condition metric 17a. Is vegetation present? Yes No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18. 17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non-marsh wetlands. A ≥ 25% coverage of vegetation B < 25% coverage of vegetation 17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non-marsh wetlands. Consider structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately. AA WT A A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes B B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps C C Canopy sparse or absent A A Dense mid-story/sapling layer B B Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer C C Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent A A Dense shrub layer B B Moderate density shrub layer C C Shrub layer sparse or absent A A Dense herb layer B B Moderate density herb layer C C Herb layer sparse or absent 18. Snags – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability). B Not A 19. Diameter Class Distribution – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are present. B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH. C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees. 20. Large Woody Debris – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) Include both natural debris and man-placed natural debris. A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability). B Not A 21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion – wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non-Tidal Freshwater Marsh only) Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. P atterned areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water. A B C D 22. Hydrologic Connectivity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only) Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D. A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area. B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area. C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area. D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area. Notes Wetland has been ditched, disrupting overbank flow out of the wetland while surrounding ditches disrupt overland flow to the wetland. Ca n o p y Mi d -St o r y Sh r u b He r b NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0 Wetland Site Name W5 Date of Assessment 03/08/2023 Wetland Type Riverine Swamp Forest Assessor Name/Organization Jennifer Burdette (NRC) Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) YES Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N) NO Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N) NO Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N) NO Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N) NO Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N) NO Sub-function Rating Summary Function Sub-function Metrics Rating Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition LOW Sub-surface Storage and Retention Condition LOW Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition LOW Condition/Opportunity LOW Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Particulate Change Condition HIGH Condition/Opportunity HIGH Opportunity Presence (Y/N) YES Soluble Change Condition HIGH Condition/Opportunity HIGH Opportunity Presence (Y/N) YES Physical Change Condition LOW Condition/Opportunity LOW Opportunity Presence (Y/N) YES Pollution Change Condition NA Condition/Opportunity NA Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NA Habitat Physical Structure Condition LOW Landscape Patch Structure Condition LOW Vegetation Composition Condition MEDIUM Function Rating Summary Function Metrics Rating Hydrology Condition LOW Water Quality Condition HIGH Condition/Opportunity HIGH Opportunity Presence (Y/N) YES Habitat Condition LOW Overall Wetland Rating LOW 308 W Millbrook Road, Ste D #200, Raleigh, NC 27609 1 of 1 Natural Resource Consultants W5 - Supporting Photographs Photo 1. View of W5 NC WAM assessment area (3/8/23) Photo 2. View of W5 NC WAM assessment area (3/8/23) NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0 USACE AID # NCDWR# Project Name S Fork Catawba Mitigation Site Date of Evaluation 03/08/2023 Applicant/Owner Name EcoTerra Wetland Site Name W6 Wetland Type Riverine Swamp Forest Assessor Name/Organization Jennifer Burdette (NRC) Level III Ecoregion Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body South Fork Catawba River River Basin Catawba USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit 03050102 County Lincoln NCDWR Region Mooresville Yes No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees) 35.485386, -81.273522 Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area) Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following. • Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.) • Surface and sub-surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), ho g lagoons, etc.) • Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.) • Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear-cutting, exotics, etc.) Is the assessment area intensively managed? Yes No Regulatory Considerations - Were regulatory considerations evaluated? Yes No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area. Anadromous fish Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA) Publicly owned property N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer) Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout Designated NCNHP reference community Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream What type of natural stream is associated with the wetla nd, if any? (check all that apply) Blackwater Brownwater Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) Lunar Wind Both Is the assessment area on a coastal island? Yes No Is the assessment area’s surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? Yes No Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? Yes No 1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition – assessment area condition metric Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment area based on evidence an effect. GS VS A A Not severely altered B B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive sedimentation, fire-plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compact ion, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration) 2. Surface and Sub-Surface Storage Capacity and Duration – assessment area condition metric Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and duration (Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch ≤ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and sub-surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable. Surf Sub A A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered. B B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation). C C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change ) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines). 3. Water Storage/Surface Relief – assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT). AA WT 3a. A A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep B B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep C C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep D D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep 3b. A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot 4. Soil Texture/Structure – assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes) Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature. Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional indicators. 4a. A Sandy soil B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redox imorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres) C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redox imorphic features D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil E Histosol or histic epipedon 4b. A Soil ribbon < 1 inch B Soil ribbon ≥ 1 inch 4c. A No peat or muck presence B A peat or muck presence 5. Discharge into Wetland – opportunity metric Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub-surface pollutants or discharges (Sub). Examples of sub-surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank , underground storage tank (UST), etc. Surf Sub A A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area B B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetla nd and stressing, but not overwhelming the treatment capacity of the assessment area C C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area a nd potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive sedimentation, odor) 6. Land Use – opportunity metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands) Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M). WS 5M 2M A A A > 10% impervious surfaces B B B Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants C C C ≥ 20% coverage of pasture D D D ≥ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land) E E E ≥ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb F F F ≥ 20% coverage of clear-cut land G G G Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent drainage and/or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area. 7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer – assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands) 7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water? Yes No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8. Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed. 7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is wetland? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the .water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbe d.) A ≥ 50 feet B From 30 to < 50 feet C From 15 to < 30 feet D From 5 to < 15 feet E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches 7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width. ≤ 15-feet wide > 15-feet wide Other open water (no tributary present) 7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend in to the bank of the tributary/open water? Yes No 7e. Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed? Sheltered – adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic. Exposed – adjacent open water with width ≥ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic. 8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area – wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp Forest only) Check a box in each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and the wetland complex at the assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries. WT WC A A ≥ 100 feet B B From 80 to < 100 feet C C From 50 to < 80 feet D D From 40 to < 50 feet E E From 30 to < 40 feet F F From 15 to < 30 feet G G From 5 to < 15 feet H H < 5 feet 9. Inundation Duration – assessment area condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands) Answer for assessment area dominant landform. A Evidence of short-duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days) B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation C Evidence of long-duration inundation or very long-duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more) 10. Indicators of Deposition – assessment area condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands and all marshes) Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition). A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels. B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland. C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland. 11. Wetland Size – wetland type/wetland complex condition metric Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable , see User Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select “K” for the FW column. WT WC FW (if applicable) A A A ≥ 500 acres B B B From 100 to < 500 acres C C C From 50 to < 100 acres D D D From 25 to < 50 acres E E E From 10 to < 25 acres F F F From 5 to < 10 acres G G G From 1 to < 5 acres H H H From 0.5 to < 1 acre I I I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre J J J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre K K K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut 12. Wetland Intactness – wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only) A Pocosin is the full extent (≥ 90%) of its natural landscape size. B Pocosin type is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size. 13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas – landscape condition metric 13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contigu ous naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundari es are formed by four-lane roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors the width of a four-lane road or wider, urban landscapes, maintained fields (pasture and agriculture), or open water > 300 feet wide. Well Loosely A A ≥ 500 acres B B From 100 to < 500 acres C C From 50 to < 100 acres D D From 10 to < 50 acres E E < 10 acres F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats 13b. Evaluate for marshes only. Yes No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands. 14. Edge Effect – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland) May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificia l edges include non-forested areas ≥ 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors, and clear -cuts. Consider the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directions? If the assessme nt area is clear cut, select option ”C.” A 0 B 1 to 4 C 5 to 8 15. Vegetative Composition – assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat) A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata compo sed of appropriate species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area. B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions , but still largely composed of native species characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata. C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non - characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in at least one stratum. 16. Vegetative Diversity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non-tidal Freshwater Marsh only) A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (< 10% cover of exotics). B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics. C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (> 50 % cover of exotics). 17. Vegetative Structure – assessment area/wetland type condition metric 17a. Is vegetation present? Yes No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18. 17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non-marsh wetlands. A ≥ 25% coverage of vegetation B < 25% coverage of vegetation 17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non-marsh wetlands. Consider structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately. AA WT A A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes B B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps C C Canopy sparse or absent A A Dense mid-story/sapling layer B B Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer C C Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent A A Dense shrub layer B B Moderate density shrub layer C C Shrub layer sparse or absent A A Dense herb layer B B Moderate density herb layer C C Herb layer sparse or absent 18. Snags – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability). B Not A 19. Diameter Class Distribution – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are present. B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH. C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees. 20. Large Woody Debris – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) Include both natural debris and man-placed natural debris. A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability). B Not A 21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion – wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non-Tidal Freshwater Marsh only) Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. P atterned areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water. A B C D 22. Hydrologic Connectivity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only) Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D. A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area. B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area. C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area. D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area. Notes Part of the wetland has been ditched disprupting overbank flow to surrounding area Ca n o p y Mi d -St o r y Sh r u b He r b NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0 Wetland Site Name W6 Date of Assessment 03/08/2023 Wetland Type Riverine Swamp Forest Assessor Name/Organization Jennifer Burdette (NRC) Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) YES Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N) NO Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N) NO Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N) NO Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N) YES Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N) NO Sub-function Rating Summary Function Sub-function Metrics Rating Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition LOW Sub-surface Storage and Retention Condition LOW Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition LOW Condition/Opportunity LOW Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Particulate Change Condition MEDIUM Condition/Opportunity MEDIUM Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Soluble Change Condition MEDIUM Condition/Opportunity MEDIUM Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Physical Change Condition LOW Condition/Opportunity LOW Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Pollution Change Condition NA Condition/Opportunity NA Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NA Habitat Physical Structure Condition LOW Landscape Patch Structure Condition LOW Vegetation Composition Condition LOW Function Rating Summary Function Metrics Rating Hydrology Condition LOW Water Quality Condition LOW Condition/Opportunity LOW Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Habitat Condition LOW Overall Wetland Rating LOW 308 W Millbrook Road, Ste D #200, Raleigh, NC 27609 1 of 1 Natural Resource Consultants W6 - Supporting Photograph Photo 1. View of W6 NC WAM assessment area (3/8/23) NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0 USACE AID # NCDWR# Project Name S Fork Catawba Mitigation Site Date of Evaluation 03/08/2023 Applicant/Owner Name EcoTerra Wetland Site Name W7, W9 - W14 Wetland Type Riverine Swamp Forest Assessor Name/Organization Jennifer Burdette (NRC) Level III Ecoregion Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body South Fork Catawba River River Basin Catawba USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit 03050102 County Lincoln NCDWR Region Mooresville Yes No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees) 35.484761, -81.274540 Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area) Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following. • Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.) • Surface and sub-surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), ho g lagoons, etc.) • Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.) • Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear-cutting, exotics, etc.) Is the assessment area intensively managed? Yes No Regulatory Considerations - Were regulatory considerations evaluated? Yes No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area. Anadromous fish Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA) Publicly owned property N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer) Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout Designated NCNHP reference community Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream What type of natural stream is associated with the wetla nd, if any? (check all that apply) Blackwater Brownwater Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) Lunar Wind Both Is the assessment area on a coastal island? Yes No Is the assessment area’s surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? Yes No Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? Yes No 1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition – assessment area condition metric Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment area based on evidence an effect. GS VS A A Not severely altered B B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive sedimentation, fire-plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compact ion, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration) 2. Surface and Sub-Surface Storage Capacity and Duration – assessment area condition metric Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and duration (Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch ≤ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and sub-surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable. Surf Sub A A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered. B B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation). C C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change ) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines). 3. Water Storage/Surface Relief – assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT). AA WT 3a. A A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep B B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep C C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep D D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep 3b. A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot 4. Soil Texture/Structure – assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes) Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature. Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional indicators. 4a. A Sandy soil B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redox imorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres) C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redox imorphic features D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil E Histosol or histic epipedon 4b. A Soil ribbon < 1 inch B Soil ribbon ≥ 1 inch 4c. A No peat or muck presence B A peat or muck presence 5. Discharge into Wetland – opportunity metric Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub-surface pollutants or discharges (Sub). Examples of sub-surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank , underground storage tank (UST), etc. Surf Sub A A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area B B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetla nd and stressing, but not overwhelming the treatment capacity of the assessment area C C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area a nd potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive sedimentation, odor) 6. Land Use – opportunity metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands) Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M). WS 5M 2M A A A > 10% impervious surfaces B B B Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants C C C ≥ 20% coverage of pasture D D D ≥ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land) E E E ≥ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb F F F ≥ 20% coverage of clear-cut land G G G Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent drainage and/or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area. 7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer – assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands) 7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water? Yes No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8. Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed. 7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is wetland? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the .water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbe d.) A ≥ 50 feet B From 30 to < 50 feet C From 15 to < 30 feet D From 5 to < 15 feet E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches 7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width. ≤ 15-feet wide > 15-feet wide Other open water (no tributary present) 7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend in to the bank of the tributary/open water? Yes No 7e. Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed? Sheltered – adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic. Exposed – adjacent open water with width ≥ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic. 8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area – wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp Forest only) Check a box in each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and the wetland complex at the assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries. WT WC A A ≥ 100 feet B B From 80 to < 100 feet C C From 50 to < 80 feet D D From 40 to < 50 feet E E From 30 to < 40 feet F F From 15 to < 30 feet G G From 5 to < 15 feet H H < 5 feet 9. Inundation Duration – assessment area condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands) Answer for assessment area dominant landform. A Evidence of short-duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days) B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation C Evidence of long-duration inundation or very long-duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more) 10. Indicators of Deposition – assessment area condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands and all marshes) Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition). A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels. B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland. C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland. 11. Wetland Size – wetland type/wetland complex condition metric Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable , see User Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select “K” for the FW column. WT WC FW (if applicable) A A A ≥ 500 acres B B B From 100 to < 500 acres C C C From 50 to < 100 acres D D D From 25 to < 50 acres E E E From 10 to < 25 acres F F F From 5 to < 10 acres G G G From 1 to < 5 acres H H H From 0.5 to < 1 acre I I I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre J J J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre K K K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut 12. Wetland Intactness – wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only) A Pocosin is the full extent (≥ 90%) of its natural landscape size. B Pocosin type is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size. 13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas – landscape condition metric 13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contigu ous naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundari es are formed by four-lane roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors the width of a four-lane road or wider, urban landscapes, maintained fields (pasture and agriculture), or open water > 300 feet wide. Well Loosely A A ≥ 500 acres B B From 100 to < 500 acres C C From 50 to < 100 acres D D From 10 to < 50 acres E E < 10 acres F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats 13b. Evaluate for marshes only. Yes No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands. 14. Edge Effect – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland) May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificia l edges include non-forested areas ≥ 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors, and clear -cuts. Consider the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directions? If the assessme nt area is clear cut, select option ”C.” A 0 B 1 to 4 C 5 to 8 15. Vegetative Composition – assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat) A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata compo sed of appropriate species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area. B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions , but still largely composed of native species characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata. C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non - characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in at least one stratum. 16. Vegetative Diversity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non-tidal Freshwater Marsh only) A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (< 10% cover of exotics). B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics. C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (> 50 % cover of exotics). 17. Vegetative Structure – assessment area/wetland type condition metric 17a. Is vegetation present? Yes No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18. 17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non-marsh wetlands. A ≥ 25% coverage of vegetation B < 25% coverage of vegetation 17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non-marsh wetlands. Consider structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately. AA WT A A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes B B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps C C Canopy sparse or absent A A Dense mid-story/sapling layer B B Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer C C Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent A A Dense shrub layer B B Moderate density shrub layer C C Shrub layer sparse or absent A A Dense herb layer B B Moderate density herb layer C C Herb layer sparse or absent 18. Snags – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability). B Not A 19. Diameter Class Distribution – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are present. B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH. C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees. 20. Large Woody Debris – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) Include both natural debris and man-placed natural debris. A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability). B Not A 21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion – wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non-Tidal Freshwater Marsh only) Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. P atterned areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water. A B C D 22. Hydrologic Connectivity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only) Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D. A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area. B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area. C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area. D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area. Notes Wetland has been ditched disrupting overbank flow Ca n o p y Mi d -St o r y Sh r u b He r b NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0 Wetland Site Name W7, W9 - W14 Date of Assessment 03/08/2023 Wetland Type Riverine Swamp Forest Assessor Name/Organization Jennifer Burdette (NRC) Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) YES Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N) YES Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N) NO Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N) NO Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N) YES Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N) NO Sub-function Rating Summary Function Sub-function Metrics Rating Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition LOW Sub-surface Storage and Retention Condition LOW Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition LOW Condition/Opportunity LOW Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Particulate Change Condition LOW Condition/Opportunity LOW Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Soluble Change Condition MEDIUM Condition/Opportunity MEDIUM Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Physical Change Condition LOW Condition/Opportunity LOW Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Pollution Change Condition NA Condition/Opportunity NA Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NA Habitat Physical Structure Condition LOW Landscape Patch Structure Condition LOW Vegetation Composition Condition LOW Function Rating Summary Function Metrics Rating Hydrology Condition LOW Water Quality Condition LOW Condition/Opportunity LOW Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Habitat Condition LOW Overall Wetland Rating LOW NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0 USACE AID # NCDWR# Project Name S Fork Catawba Mitigation Site Date of Evaluation 03/08/2023 Applicant/Owner Name EcoTerra Wetland Site Name W8 Wetland Type Riverine Swamp Forest Assessor Name/Organization Jennifer Burdette (NRC) Level III Ecoregion Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body South Fork Catawba River River Basin Catawba USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit 03050102 County Lincoln NCDWR Region Mooresville Yes No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees) 35.481503, -81.275710 Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area) Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following. • Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.) • Surface and sub-surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), ho g lagoons, etc.) • Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.) • Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear-cutting, exotics, etc.) Is the assessment area intensively managed? Yes No Regulatory Considerations - Were regulatory considerations evaluated? Yes No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area. Anadromous fish Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA) Publicly owned property N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer) Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout Designated NCNHP reference community Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream What type of natural stream is associated with the wetla nd, if any? (check all that apply) Blackwater Brownwater Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) Lunar Wind Both Is the assessment area on a coastal island? Yes No Is the assessment area’s surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? Yes No Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? Yes No 1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition – assessment area condition metric Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment area based on evidence an effect. GS VS A A Not severely altered B B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive sedimentation, fire-plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compact ion, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration) 2. Surface and Sub-Surface Storage Capacity and Duration – assessment area condition metric Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and duration (Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch ≤ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and sub-surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable. Surf Sub A A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered. B B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation). C C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change ) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines). 3. Water Storage/Surface Relief – assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT). AA WT 3a. A A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep B B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep C C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep D D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep 3b. A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot 4. Soil Texture/Structure – assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes) Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature. Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional indicators. 4a. A Sandy soil B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redox imorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres) C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redox imorphic features D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil E Histosol or histic epipedon 4b. A Soil ribbon < 1 inch B Soil ribbon ≥ 1 inch 4c. A No peat or muck presence B A peat or muck presence 5. Discharge into Wetland – opportunity metric Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub-surface pollutants or discharges (Sub). Examples of sub-surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank , underground storage tank (UST), etc. Surf Sub A A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area B B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetla nd and stressing, but not overwhelming the treatment capacity of the assessment area C C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area a nd potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive sedimentation, odor) 6. Land Use – opportunity metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands) Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M). WS 5M 2M A A A > 10% impervious surfaces B B B Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants C C C ≥ 20% coverage of pasture D D D ≥ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land) E E E ≥ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb F F F ≥ 20% coverage of clear-cut land G G G Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent drainage and/or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area. 7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer – assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands) 7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water? Yes No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8. Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed. 7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is wetland? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the .water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbe d.) A ≥ 50 feet B From 30 to < 50 feet C From 15 to < 30 feet D From 5 to < 15 feet E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches 7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width. ≤ 15-feet wide > 15-feet wide Other open water (no tributary present) 7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend in to the bank of the tributary/open water? Yes No 7e. Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed? Sheltered – adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic. Exposed – adjacent open water with width ≥ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic. 8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area – wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp Forest only) Check a box in each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and the wetland complex at the assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries. WT WC A A ≥ 100 feet B B From 80 to < 100 feet C C From 50 to < 80 feet D D From 40 to < 50 feet E E From 30 to < 40 feet F F From 15 to < 30 feet G G From 5 to < 15 feet H H < 5 feet 9. Inundation Duration – assessment area condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands) Answer for assessment area dominant landform. A Evidence of short-duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days) B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation C Evidence of long-duration inundation or very long-duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more) 10. Indicators of Deposition – assessment area condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands and all marshes) Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition). A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels. B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland. C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland. 11. Wetland Size – wetland type/wetland complex condition metric Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable , see User Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select “K” for the FW column. WT WC FW (if applicable) A A A ≥ 500 acres B B B From 100 to < 500 acres C C C From 50 to < 100 acres D D D From 25 to < 50 acres E E E From 10 to < 25 acres F F F From 5 to < 10 acres G G G From 1 to < 5 acres H H H From 0.5 to < 1 acre I I I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre J J J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre K K K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut 12. Wetland Intactness – wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only) A Pocosin is the full extent (≥ 90%) of its natural landscape size. B Pocosin type is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size. 13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas – landscape condition metric 13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contigu ous naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundari es are formed by four-lane roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors the width of a four-lane road or wider, urban landscapes, maintained fields (pasture and agriculture), or open water > 300 feet wide. Well Loosely A A ≥ 500 acres B B From 100 to < 500 acres C C From 50 to < 100 acres D D From 10 to < 50 acres E E < 10 acres F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats 13b. Evaluate for marshes only. Yes No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands. 14. Edge Effect – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland) May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificia l edges include non-forested areas ≥ 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors, and clear -cuts. Consider the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directions? If the assessme nt area is clear cut, select option ”C.” A 0 B 1 to 4 C 5 to 8 15. Vegetative Composition – assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat) A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata compo sed of appropriate species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area. B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions , but still largely composed of native species characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata. C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non - characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in at least one stratum. 16. Vegetative Diversity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non-tidal Freshwater Marsh only) A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (< 10% cover of exotics). B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics. C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (> 50 % cover of exotics). 17. Vegetative Structure – assessment area/wetland type condition metric 17a. Is vegetation present? Yes No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18. 17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non-marsh wetlands. A ≥ 25% coverage of vegetation B < 25% coverage of vegetation 17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non-marsh wetlands. Consider structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately. AA WT A A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes B B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps C C Canopy sparse or absent A A Dense mid-story/sapling layer B B Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer C C Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent A A Dense shrub layer B B Moderate density shrub layer C C Shrub layer sparse or absent A A Dense herb layer B B Moderate density herb layer C C Herb layer sparse or absent 18. Snags – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability). B Not A 19. Diameter Class Distribution – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are present. B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH. C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees. 20. Large Woody Debris – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes) Include both natural debris and man-placed natural debris. A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability). B Not A 21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion – wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non-Tidal Freshwater Marsh only) Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. P atterned areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water. A B C D 22. Hydrologic Connectivity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only) Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D. A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area. B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area. C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area. D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area. Notes Overland flow to W8 is disrupted by surrounding ditches Ca n o p y Mi d -St o r y Sh r u b He r b NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0 Wetland Site Name W8 Date of Assessment 03/08/2023 Wetland Type Riverine Swamp Forest Assessor Name/Organization Jennifer Burdette (NRC) Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) YES Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N) NO Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N) NO Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N) NO Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N) NO Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N) NO Sub-function Rating Summary Function Sub-function Metrics Rating Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition MEDIUM Sub-surface Storage and Retention Condition LOW Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition MEDIUM Condition/Opportunity MEDIUM Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Particulate Change Condition MEDIUM Condition/Opportunity MEDIUM Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Soluble Change Condition MEDIUM Condition/Opportunity MEDIUM Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Physical Change Condition LOW Condition/Opportunity LOW Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Pollution Change Condition NA Condition/Opportunity NA Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NA Habitat Physical Structure Condition HIGH Landscape Patch Structure Condition MEDIUM Vegetation Composition Condition HIGH Function Rating Summary Function Metrics Rating Hydrology Condition MEDIUM Water Quality Condition LOW Condition/Opportunity LOW Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO Habitat Condition HIGH Overall Wetland Rating MEDIUM 308 W Millbrook Road, Ste D #200, Raleigh, NC 27609 1 of 1 Natural Resource Consultants W8- Supporting Photograph Photo 1. View of W8 NC WAM assessment area (3/8/23) Eco Terra, LLC | South Fork Mitigation Site APPENDIX E Effective FEMA FIRM Panel FLOOD HAZARD INFORMATION SPECIAL FLOODHAZARD AREAS OTHER AREAS OFFLOOD HAZARD OTHERAREAS GENERALSTRUCTURES Without Base Flood Elevation (BFE) With BFE or Depth Regulatory Floodway Areas Determined to be Outside the 0.2% Annual Chance Floodplain Non-accredited Levee, Dike, or Floodwall Zone A,V, A99 Zone AE, AO, AH, VE, AR Zone X HTTP://FRIS.NC.GOV/FRIS THE INFORMATION DEPICTED ON THIS MAP AND SUPPORTINGDOCUMENTATION ARE ALSO AVAILABLE IN DIGITAL FORMAT AT NORTH CAROLINA FLOODPLAIN MAPPING PROGRAM FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAPNORTH CAROLINA PANEL MAP NUMBER MAP REVISED SEE FIS REPORT FOR ZONE DESCRIPTIONS AND INDEX MAP Cross Sections with 1% Annual ChanceWater Surface Elevation (BFE) Coastal Transect OTHERFEATURES Profile Baseline Hydrographic Feature Limit of Study Limit of Moderate Wave Action (LiMWA) Jurisdiction Boundary Accredited or Provisionally AccreditedLevee, Dike, or Floodwall Coastal Transect Baseline SCALE 1 inch = 500 feet Map Projection: North Carolina State Plane Projection Feet (Zone 3200) Datum: NAD 1983 (Horizontal), NAVD 1988 (Vertical) PANEL LOCATOR LOGO LOGO NOTES TO USERS For information and questions about this map, available products associated with this FIRM including historic versions of this FIRM, how to order products or the National Flood Insurance Program in general,please call the FEMA Map Information eXchange at 1-877-FEMA-MAP (1-877-336-2627) or visit the FEMA Map Service Center website at http://msc.fema.gov. An accompanying Flood Insurance Study report, Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) or Letter of Map Amendment (LOMA) revising portions of this panel, and digital versions of thisFIRM may be available. Visit the North Carolina Floodplain Mapping Program website at http://www.ncfloodmaps.com,or contact the FEMA Map Service Center. Communities annexing land on adjacent FIRM panels must obtain a current copy of the adjacent panel as well asthe current FIRM Index. These may be ordered directly from the Map Service Center at the number listed above. For community and countywide map dates refer to the Flood Insurance Study report for this jurisdiction. To determine if flood insurance is available in the community, contact your Insurance agent or call the National Flood Insurance Program at 1-800-638-6620. Base map information shown on this FIRM was provided in digital format by the North Carolina FloodplainMapping Program (NCFMP). The source of this information can be determined from the metadata available in thedigital FLOOD database and in the Technical Support Data Notebook (TSDN). ACCREDITED LEVEE NOTES TO USERS: If an accredited levee note appears on this panel check with your localcommunity to obtain more information, such as the estimated level of protection provided (which may exceed the1-percent-annual-chance level) and Emergency Action Plan, on the levee system(s) shown as providing protection.To mitigate flood risk in residual risk areas, property owners and residents are encouraged to consider floodinsurance and floodproofing or other protective measures. For more information on flood insurance, interested parties should visit the FEMA Website at http://www.fema.gov/business/nfip/index.shtm. PROVISIONALLY ACCREDITED LEVEE NOTES TO USERS: If a Provisionally Accredited Levee (PAL) noteappears on this panel, check with your local community to obtain more information, such as the estimated level of protection provided (which may exceed the 1-percent-annual-chance level) and Emergency Action Plan, on thelevee system(s) shown as providing protection. To maintain accreditation, the levee owner or community isrequired to submit the data and documentation necessary to comply with Section 65.10 of the NFIP regulations. If the community or owner does not provide the necessary data and documentation or if the data and documentationprovided indicates the levee system does not comply with Section 65.10 requirements, FEMA will revise the floodhazard and risk information for this area to reflect de-accreditation of the levee system. To mitigate flood risk in residual risk areas, property owners and residents are encouraged to consider flood insurance and floodproofing or other protective measures. For more information on flood insurance, interested parties should visit the FEMAWebsite at http://www.fema.gov/business/nfip/index.shtm. LIMIT OF MODERATE WAVE ACTION NOTES TO USERS: For some coastal flooding zones the AE Zonecategory has been divided by a Limit of Moderate Wave Action (LiMWA). The LiMWA represents the approximatelandward limit of the 1.5-foot breaking wave. The effects of wave hazards between the VE Zone and the LiMWA(or between the shoreline and the LiMWA for areas where VE Zones are not identified) will be similar to, but lesssevere than those in the VE Zone. COASTAL BARRIER RESOURCES SYSTEM (CBRS) NOTE This map may include approximate boundaries of the CBRS for informational purposes only. Flood insurance is notavailable within CBRS areas for structures that are newly built or substantially improved on or after the date(s)indicated on the map. For more information see http://www.fws.gov/habitatconservation/coastal_barrier.html, theFIS Report, or call the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Customer Service Center at 1-800-344-WILD. CBRS Area Otherwise Protected Area Channel, Culvert, or Storm Sewer 0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard, Areas of 1% Annual Chance Flood with Average Depth Less Than One Foot or With Drainage Areas of Less Than One Square MileFuture Conditions 1% Annual Chance Flood HazardArea with Reduced Flood Risk due to LeveeSee Notes Zone X Zone X Zone X 36231:6,000 %,012 18.2 !(8 1320000 FEET 630000 FEET 1320000 FEET 640000 FEET 1330000 FEET 640000 FEET 1330000 FEET 630000 FEET This digital Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) was produced through a uniquecooperative partnership between the State of North Carolina and the FederalEmergency Management Agency (FEMA). The State of North Carolina hasimplemented a long term approach to floodplain management to decrease the costs associated with flooding. This is demonstrated by the State's commitment to map flood hazard areas at the local level. As a part of this effort, the State ofNorth Carolina has joined in a Cooperating Technical State agreement withFEMA to produce and maintain this digital FIRM. NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM )))) )))) ZONE AE ZONE AE ZONE AE ZONE AE ZONE AE ZONE AE ZONE AE ZONE AE E Mcbee S t P e l l D r E Rho d e s S t N O a k S t Motz Ave Wood m o n t C i r N F l i n t S t N L a u r e l S t BattlegroundRd BrooksideDr Hi l l t o p R d E C a r t e r S tM o n r o e S t E Hoke S t Old L i n c o l n t o n C r o u s e R d E Congre s s S t S p a k e R d N C e d a r S t S G o v e r n m e n t S t Victo r S t S H i g h S t S i p e R d E Sycam o r e S t M a s s a p o a g R d E u r e y S t Bonvie w A v e Jenning s S t S P o p l a r S t S A c a d e m y S t W C h i l d s S t All e n L n N G o v e r n m e n t S t N H i g h S t S C e d a r S t N A c a d emy St W C o n g r e s s S t W Church S t Old S h a d y B r o o k T r l S M a d i s o n S t Buff St H e r s h e l L a c k e y R d W 2 n d S t R oberta A v e H il l s i d e S t E Pine S t WestwardDr W 3 r d S t S R h y n e S t E P a r k D r W estvie w D r W Water S t N A c a d e m y S t r e e t E x t Car o l i n a C i r Better b r o o k L n F o r n e y A v e Dogwood Dr W i l l o w S t E Alexan d e r S t E C h u r c h S t Redding Ln M a g n a Vista D r E SumnerSt Pond T r l E Liberty S t Grovedale D r E Cherry S t E Dixon S t L o uise A v e Alexande r S t Charlesv o i x A v e W Pine S t Sand hill D r Moorland L n E Ch e s t n u t S t W Water Str e e t E x t H i l l c r e s tDr Esta t e D r Dorse t L n Vie w m o n t L n Mauney Dr Tin y T r l Ma d i s o n S t DeatonAve L i n c o l n v i e w R d Skip Lawin g D r Wi l t s h i r e L n Lore R d L i n w o o d D r Andrew s D r BobBurginRd Bexle y L n Gr i e r S t S G r o v e S t B alsam Dr Car W a s h D r N P o p l a r S t L e e A v e W P a r k D r W Main Street Ext E l m G r o v e R d Cl e a r L a k e T r l Mcginnis A v e N o r m a n F a i r A v e Legionaire Dr D a v i s R d Ro c k h i l l L n Sage Field Ln Jeb S e agleDr Hillside Dr E Water S t W S y c a m o r e S t St a r t o w n R d S H i g h w a y 3 2 1 R ee p s ville Rd N G r o v e S t N A s p e n S t NAspenSt W Main S t ¬«27 ¬«150 ¬«150 ¬«182 ¬«27 i00 1 i03 9 i0 2 8 i431 i028 i03 0 i03 2 i00 5 i01 5 i011 i02 5 i02 0 i00 3 i340 i320 i333 i410 i041 i324 i02 6 i44 6 i015 i44 8 i307 i35 0 i052 i299 i45 3 i37 6 i392 CITY OF LINCOLNTON 370147 CITY OF LINCOLNTON 370147 CITY OF LINCOLNTON 370147 CITY OF LINCOLNTON 370147CITY OF LINCOLNTON ETJ 370147 CITY OF LINCOLNTON ETJ 370147 CITY OF LINCOLNTON ETJ 370147 LINCOLN COUNTY UNINCORPORATED AREAS 370146 7 6 4 . 2 764.2 76 4 . 2 770. 7 77 3 . 1 7 5 9 . 2 77 4 . 1 76 4 . 2 770. 0 768. 3 76 1 . 0 76 4 . 2 766 . 9 78 7 . 9 78 2 . 7 76 7 . 8 764. 2 77 0 . 3 7 7 0 . 0 76 4 . 2 764 . 2 77 1 . 6 7 6 4 . 2 760 . 7 769. 4 764.2 77 0 . 6 76 1 . 4 7 6 7 . 6 7 7 7 . 4 764.2 763 . 8 762.8 763.6 765.7 762 . 1 764.2 763.3 76 4 . 2 7 6 9 . 6 764.2 7 7 0 . 1 762.7 76 4 . 3 764.2 762.5 770. 3 7 7 0 . 2 76 4 . 9 765.3 ZZ3030 ZZ3036 ZZ3041 FA0873 FA0836 FA0839 FA0837 FA1510 FA1512 FA1511 FA5032 FA5057 FA5073 i493 i0 3 0 i26 2 i061 i01 0 i25 8 i441 i03 7 i26 4 i288 i472 Howards Creek Lithia InnBranchTributary 1 LithiaInnBranch ClarksCreek Clarks CreekTributary 1 ClarksCreek WalkerBranch WalkerBranch South ForkCatawba River SouthFork CatawbaRiver South ForkCatawbaRiver 81°15'30"W 81°15'30"W 81°16'0"W 81°16'0"W 81°16'30"W 81°16'30"W 81°17'0"W 81°17'0"W 35°29'0"N 35°29'0"N 35°28'30"N 35°28'30"N 35°28'0"N 35°28'0"N IREDELL COUNTY BURKE COUNTY CATAWBA COUNTY CLEVELAND COUNTY GASTON COUNTY 2646 2666 2686 3606 36663626363636463656 3686 3696 4606 4616 2644 2664 2684 3604 3625 3635 3644 3664 3685 3695 4605 4615 4625 3624 3634 3684 3694 4604 4614 2642 2662 2682 3603 3613 3623 3633 3643 3653 3662 3683 3693 4603 4613 4623 3602 3612 3622 3632 3642 3652 3682 3692 4602 4612 4622 2681 2691 3601 3611 3621 3631 3641 3651 3660 3681 3691 4601 4611 3680 3690 4600 46102660 I 0 500 1,000250Feet 0 150 30075 Meters BM5510 D North Carolina Geodetic Survey bench mark BM5510 ? BM5510z National Geodetic Survey bench markContractor Est. NCFMP Survey bench mark Panel Contains: COMMUNITY CID PANEL SUFFIX 3623LINCOLN COUNTY 370146 J 3623LINCOLNTON, CITY OF 370147 J 3710362300J 8/16/2007