20110677 Ver 3_MidAtlantic Industrial_Section 404_401 Permit Appl Rev_March 2024_20240325

DAVEY..",-
Resource Group
March 22, 2024
TO: US Army Corps of Engineers NC Division of Water Resources
69 Darlington Avenue 1617 Mail Service Center
Wilmington, NC 28403 Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
RE: Mid -Atlantic Industrial Project; Brunswick County, NC
Standard Permit/Individual 401 WQC Application
Action ID# SAW-2008-01015
DWR Project # 20110677
To Whom It May Concern:
In November of 2022, Davey Resource Group, Inc. submitted a Section 404/401 permit application
for the Mid -Atlantic Industrial Project to the USACE and NCDWR on behalf of the Brunswick Business
& Industry Development. This project is located north of U.S. Highway 74/76 in Brunswick County,
NC and proposed impacts to 11.7 acres of non -riparian wetlands and 1.58 acres of non -stream Waters
of the US to construct an EV battery manufacturing facility and buildings for associated suppliers
within the industrial park. The NC DWR issued an Individual 401 WQC authorizing these impacts on
4/11/2023. The USACE has not yet issued a permit.
The development footprint of a portion of the overall project was recently modified to accommodate
a manufacturing facility for Epsilon Advanced Materials. This increased the project area by
approximately 50 acres in the central part of the part. It also increased proposed wetland impacts to
14.79 acres and open water channel impacts to 1.95 acres. Enclosed is a revised Section 404/401
permit application for this project.
If you have any questions, or would like to discuss the application, please do not hesitate to call.
Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely,
Kim Williams
Environmental Scientist
Encl.
Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
3805 Wrightsville Ave., Suite 15, Wilmington, NC 28403

MID -ATLANTIC INDUSTRIAL PROJECT
Brunswick County, NC
Section 404/401 Permit Application
March 2024
TABLE OF CONTENTS, FIGURES, & APPENDICES
1.0
ENGINEERING FORM 4345
2.0
AUTHORIZATION FORM
3.0
PROJECT NARRATIVE
4.0
TABLE OF IMPACTS
PROJECT AREA MAPS
Figure 1. Vicinity Map
Figure 2. Topographic Map
Figure 3. Soils Map
Figure 4. Aerial Photograph
SITE PLAN DRAWINGS
Figures 5 & 6. Preferred Site Plans
Figures 7 & 8. Rejected Site Plans
APPENDIX A. WETLAND INFORMATION
APPENDIX B. STREAM FORMS, WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORMS, MAP, PHOTOS
APPENDIX C. RARE SPECIES INFORMATION
APPENDIX D. LCFUMB CREDIT RESERVATION LETTER

1.0 ENGINEERING FORM 4345

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
Form Approved -
APPLICATION FOR DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT
OMB No. 0710-0003
33 CFR 325. The proponent agency is CECW-CO-R.
Expires: 01-08-2018
The public reporting burden for this collection of information, OMB Control Number 0710-0003, is estimated to average 11 hours per response, including the time for
reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send
comments regarding the burden estimate or burden reduction suggestions to the Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, at whs.mc-
alex.esd.mbx.dd-dod-information-collections(a)mail.mil. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to
any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR
APPLICATION TO THE ABOVE EMAIL.
PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT
Authorities: Rivers and Harbors Act, Section 10, 33 USC 403; Clean Water Act, Section 404, 33 USC 1344; Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act,
Section 103, 33 USC 1413; Regulatory Programs of the Corps of Engineers; Final Rule 33 CFR 320-332. Principal Purpose: Information provided on this form will
be used in evaluating the application for a permit. 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. Submission of requested information is
voluntary, however, if information is not provided the permit application cannot be evaluated nor can a permit be issued. One set of original drawings or good
reproducible copies which show the location and character of the proposed activity must be attached to this application (see sample drawings and/or instructions) and
be submitted to the District Engineer having jurisdiction over the location of the proposed activity. An application that is not completed in full will be returned. System
of Record Notice (SORN). The information received is entered into our permit tracking database and a SORN has been completed (SORN #A1145b) and may be
accessed at the following website: http://dpcld.defense.gov/Privacy/SORNslndex/DOD-wide-SORN-Article-View/Article/570115/al 145b-ce.aspx
(ITEMS 1 THRU 4 TO BE FILLED BY THE CORPS)
1. APPLICATION NO.
2. FIELD OFFICE CODE
3. DATE RECEIVED
4. DATE APPLICATION COMPLETE
(ITEMS BELOW TO BE FILLED BY APPLICANT)
5. APPLICANT'S NAME
8. AUTHORIZED AGENT'S NAME AND TITLE (agent is not required)
First - Bill Middle - Last - Early
First — Kim Middle - Last -Williams
Company -Brunswick Business & Industry Development
Company — Davey Resource Group, Inc.
E-mail Address - bill.earlyCciDbrunswickbid.com
E-mail Address — [e-mail]
6. APPLICANT'S ADDRESS:
9. AGENT'S ADDRESS:
Address-1175 Turlington Avenue, Suite 202
Address- 3805 Wrightsville Avenue; Suite 15
City - Leland State - NC Zip - 28451 Country -USA
City -Wilmington State NC Zip -28403 Country - USA
7. APPLICANT'S PHONE NOs. w/AREA CODE
10. AGENTS PHONE NOs. w/AREA CODE
a. Residence b. Business [phone] c. Fax
a. Residence b. Business 910-452-0001 c. Fax [phone]
STATEMENT OF AUTHORIZATION
11. 1 hereby authorize, to act in my behalf as my agent in the processing of this application and to furnish, upon request,
supplemental information in support of this permit application.
SEE ATTACHED
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE
NAME, LOCATION, AND DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT OR ACTIVITY
12. PROJECT NAME OR TITLE (see instructions)
Mid -Atlantic Industrial Project
13. NAME OF WATERBODY, IF KNOWN (if applicable)
14. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS (if applicable)
Bear Creek
Address: Off Hwy 74/76
15. LOCATION OF PROJECT
Latitude: 34.305932 -N Longitude:-78.179067 -W
City - Northwest State- NC
Zi -
16. OTHER LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS, IF KNOWN (see instructions)
State Tax Parcel ID 01400001; 0140000102, 0140000104; 0140000201 Municipality Northwest
Section - Township - Range -
ENG FORM 4345, MAY 2018 PREVIOUS EDITIONS ARE OBSOLETE. Page 3 of 1

17. DIRECTIONS TO THE SITE
From Wilmington, take Highway 74/76 into Brunswick County. Site is on the right, just before entering Columbus County
(see Figure 1).
18. Nature of Activity (Description of project, include all features)
The project consists of constructing an EV battery manufacturing facility and other buildings intended for use by suppliers
o the EV battery industry. The EV battery manufacturing facility will be located in the northwestern part of the site and is
made up of thirteen separate buildings (total of 5,776,300 sf) with parking and access corridors to be planned between
buildings. Access to the site will be provided off of Highway 74/76. A spine road will run along the western project boundary
o provide access throughout the tract. Rail access will be provided from the CSX Railroad, which is currently located just
north of the site. The rail will extend into the central part of the tract. Two separate parking areas will be located in the
northwestern and southwestern portions of the site. The Epsilon Advanced Materials facility will be located in the
central part of the site. Two additional buildings will be located in the southern part of the tract (See Project Narrative).
19. Project Purpose (Describe the reason or purpose of the project, see instructions)
The purpose of the project is to construct an EV battery manufacturing facility and supporting suppliers within the Mid
tlantic Industrial Park, and by doing so, to provide significant economic benefits to Brunswick County and the region.
(See Project Narrative).
USE BLOCKS 20-23 IF DREDGED AND/OR FILL MATERIAL IS TO BE DISCHARGED
20. Reason(s) for Discharge
To provide a large, level site on which to construct a manufacturing facility, supporting buildings, parking, and access
roads (See Project Narrative).
21. Type(s) of Material Being Discharged and the Amount of Each Type in Cubic Yards:
Type Clean, compacted sub -grade soil materials, clean ABC aggregate, pavement etc
Amount in Cubic Yards TBD
22. Surface Area in Acres of Wetlands or Other Waters Filled (see instructions)
14.79 acres of 404 wetlands & 1.95 acres of jurisdictional Waters of the US (non -stream)
23. Description of Avoidance, Minimization, and Compensation (see instructions)
The applicant evaluated several off -site and on -site alternatives and determined that the preferred project is the least
environmentally damaging yet practicable alternative (see project narrative). The applicant proposes to mitigate for
the unavoidable wetland impacts by purchasing credits from the Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank at a 1.5:1
mitigation to impact ratio.
ENG FORM 4345, MAY 2018 Page 3 of 2

24. Is Any Portion of the Work Already Complete? ❑ Yes �X No IF YES, DESCRIBE THE COMPLETED WORK
25. Addresses of Adjoining Property Owners, Lessees, Etc., Whose Property Adjoins the Waterbody (if more than can be entered here, please attach a supplemental list).
a. Address- Previously Submitted
City - State - Zip -
b. Address -
City - State - Zip -
c. Address -
City - State - Zip -
d. Address -
City - State - Zip -
e. Address -
City - State - Zip -
26. List of Other Certificates or Approvals/Denials received from other Federal, State, or Local Agencies for Work Described in This Application.
AGENCY TYPE APPROVAL' IDENTIFICATION DATE APPLIED DATE APPROVED DATE DENIED
NUMBER
Would include but is not restricted to zoning, building, and flood plain permits
27. Application is hereby made for permit or permits to authorize the work described in this application. I certify that this information in this application is
complete and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the work described herein or am acting as the duly authorized agent of the
applicant.
DRG (Agent) 03/22/24
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE SIGNATURE OF AGENT DATE
The Application must be signed by the person who desires to undertake the proposed activity (applicant) or it may be signed by a duly
authorized agent if the statement in block 11 has been filled out and signed.
18 U.S.C. Section 1001 provides that: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States
knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up any trick, scheme, or disguises a material fact or makes any false, fictitious or fraudulent
statements or representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious or fraudulent
statements or entry, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years or both.
ENG FORM 4345, MAY 2018 Page 3 of 3

2.0 SIGNED AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM

DAVIEY#.
Resource Group
APPILLCANT
AGENT A L1T1 IORTZATION FORM
ro wI lialb! IT MAY C.XNM .,
I. liho umin igod, bcrcby AkghCirrZd LAY* ROCINIft GIXKLp W OUL ;kS GUF #g4nS kp Ike
prepraLian and mpLmmialcm -ul iplAi pLicln rvLBwd LLl the SoLfioa 44W401 pcLrniiL 4jprlic-u6Dn
for L i - i y1jC - lFkt Vial 111,vk TK-o*S lu.�in Heumui& County, NC. All q%icsiiorts
.�'� My irl y,
Simi Nprm
Dmw
��uuu,¢�vury� cem + Phane: Sid_d9-Ma , F■r:4iftA;t.Ntl
$H5 VAr hl{UIII0 A.MaILUD, SUlta 11+ W11W*TW% NC 2901

3.0 PROJECT NARRATIVE

PROJECT NARRATIVE
MID -ATLANTIC INDUSTRIAL PROJECT
BRUNSWICK COUNTY, NC
MARCH 2O24
Action ID# SAW-2008-01015
DWR Project # 20110677
INTRODUCTION
The Mid -Atlantic Industrial Park is located immediately north of U.S. Highway 74/76 in the western
part of Brunswick County, North Carolina, adjacent to the Columbus County border. On behalf of a
prospective user, Brunswick Business & Industry Development (Applicant) is applying for an Individual
Permit for wetland and Waters of the US impacts needed for the development of an 813-acre portion
of the industrial park. The proposed development includes an Electric Vehicle (EV) battery
manufacturing facility with additional buildings planned for potential suppliers of the battery
industry. Total proposed impacts from the project are 14.79 acres of wetlands and 1.95 acres of non -
stream Waters of the US.
The original Section 404/401 permit application for this project was submitted in November of 2022
and proposed impacts to 11.7 acres of wetlands and 1.58 acres of open water channels. NCDWR
issued a 401 WQC for the project and the USACE is still reviewing the application. The site plan for the
industrial park was recently modified to include the Epsilon Advanced Materials (EAM) facility and the
Duke Energy substation in the central part of the tract. The layout of this facility requires an
expansion of the project boundaries by 50 acres and an increase in proposed wetland and waters
impacts.
The project narrative below has been revised to include information about the additional land added
to the project area, more details regarding off -site and on -site alternatives considered, and
information about EAM's site plan. The purpose and need of the overall project has not changed from
the original submittal.
PURPOSE & NEED
The purpose of the project is to construct an EV battery manufacturing facility and buildings for
supporting suppliers within the Mid -Atlantic Industrial Park, and by doing so, to provide significant
economic benefits to Brunswick County and the region. It is anticipated that the project will generate
between 3,000 to 7,000 new jobs.
Mid -Atlantic Industrial Project; Brunswick County 1
IPApplication; Project Narrative

OWNERSHIP
The site consists of four parcels. Brunswick County currently owns Parcels 01400001, 0140000104,
and 0140000102 (— 550 ac). Mark Stanaland currently owns Parcel 0140000201 (— 27 acres), but
Brunswick County has this parcel under contract.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Site Location and Attributes
The project site is located immediately north of US Highway 74/76 (a four -lane divided highway) in
Northwest (Brunswick County), North Carolina and just east of the Columbus/Brunswick County line
(Figures 1 and 2). Northwest Road NE (State Route 1419) bounds the project area to the north. An
existing 8-inch water main is located within the Northwest Road right-of-way (ROW) at this location.
A CSX mail rail line is located just north of the project area. This rail line provides direct access to the
North Carolina State Port at Wilmington (located approximately 18 miles to the east). A Piedmont
Natural Gas line is co -located adjacent to the rail line. An 8-inch sanitary sewer force main is located
within the northern ROW of US Highway 74/76 (on the southern side of the project). Existing Duke
transmission lines transect the property and can provide substantial energy needs to the future end -
user. A 115k transmission line is located within the northern portion of the site. Duke Energy has
agreed to relocate this 115k line. Two additional lines (115k and 230k) are located within a 175-ft
easement further south on the property (located between the proposed manufacturing plant and
warehouse facilities). These transmission lines will remain in place, and the 115k line to the north will
be relocated and co -located with these lines.
Hnhitnt
The tract has historically been utilized for timber production, and most of the site currently supports
a canopy of loblolly pines (Pinus taeda) in stands of varying ages. Smaller clusters of longleaf pines (P.
palustris) are located in the south-central part of the site. Several dirt roads provide access
throughout the property. As indicated above, there are existing overhead transmission lines that
transect the property. These utility corridors are mowed and support goldenrod, dog fennel, and
other herbaceous species.
The site has been harvested several times over the last 24 years, with clear -cutting occurring in
different parts of the tract in 1998, 2005, and 2006. Additional thinning of stands occurred in 2010
and early 2018. More mature pine stands are located in the southcentral, central, and eastern
portions of the property. These areas contain pine trees that are between 6" and 18" DBH. The older
pines (greater than 12" DBH) are infrequent. Like many other sections of the tract, this area supports
a fairly dense understory of red maple (Acer rubrum) and sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua) shrubs
and trees. More recently harvested areas of the tract support loblolly pines that are 4" to 8" diameter
Mid -Atlantic Industrial Project; Brunswick County 2
IPApplication; Project Narrative

at breast height (DBH). These areas exhibit a moderate to thick shrub layer of red maple, sweetgum,
and loblolly pine.
Wetlands within the site can be characterized as headwater wetlands, hardwood flats, and pine flats.
They are densely vegetated and support a canopy of loblolly pine and/or red maple and sweetgum
trees. Additionally, a thick shrub layer of fetterbush (Lyonia lucida), gallberry (Ilex glabra), and pine is
present. Several forestry and roadside ditches transect the site. These ditches vary in size and flow
regime but are generally 3- to 4-ft deep with low flow. As discussed further below, several of the
ditches have been identified as jurisdictional Relatively Permanent Waters (RPWs) (non -stream). The
banks of on -site ditches are stable and are densely vegetated.
Wetlands & Water Classifications
The most recent wetland delineation of the tract was performed by Land Management Group, Inc.
(now Davey Resource Group, Inc.) and was approved by Mr. Brad Shaver of the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers in July of 2018 (Appendix A). The site contains approximately 54.1 acres of wetlands, 11.7
miles of RPWs, and 1.3 miles of non -jurisdictional ditches. The wetlands and RPWs tie into Bear
Branch off -site. Bear Branch is a first -order tributary of the Cape Fear River and is classified as a Class
C; Sw waterbody by the NC Division of Water Resources. The C classification is given to waters
protected for secondary recreation, fishing, wildlife, fish and aquatic life propagation and survival,
agriculture and other uses suitable for Class C. Secondary recreation includes wading, boating, and
other uses involving human body contact with water where such activities take place in an
infrequent, unorganized, or incidental manner. There are no restrictions on watershed development
or types of discharges. The Sw classification stands for Swamp Waters and is a supplemental
classification intended to recognize those waters which have low velocities and other natural
characteristics which are different from adjacent streams.
Staff of DRG evaluated wetlands at four locations within the site using the NC Wetland Assessment
Method (NCWAM) (Appendix B). Three wetlands were determined to be of an overall medium quality
and one wetland rated as low quality. DRG staff also evaluated several channels within the site using
the NC DWR Stream Identification Form Version 4.11. Enclosed in Appendix B are the stream forms,
site photos, and a location map. According to the data collected, none of these channels meet the
geomorphic and/or hydrologic requirements to be classified as a stream.
Soils
According to the Brunswick County Generalized Soil Survey, the site is predominantly Woodington
fine sandy loam (Wo), with some Foreston loamy fine sand (Fo), Rains fine sandy loam (Ra),
Lynchburg fine sandy loam (Ly), Goldsboro fine sandy loam (GoA), Pantego mucky loam (Pn), and
Baymeade fine sand (BaB) (Figure 3).
Mid -Atlantic Industrial Project; Brunswick County 3
IPApplication; Project Narrative

Federally Protected Species
A list of federally protected species was identified using the US Fish and Wildlife Service's
Information, Planning, and Consultation (IPaC) system (Table 1; Appendix Q. Species with the federal
classification of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or Officially Proposed (P) for such listing are
protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended and the Bald and Golden
Eagle Protection Act.
A search of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database was also conducted to
determine whether any state or federally listed rare species have previously been observed on or
within a 0.5-mile radius of the site (Appendix Q. According to their files, one state -listed plant species
was observed within the site in 1950. Additionally, several rare plant and animal species have been
observed within a one -mile radius of the tract. Several of these occurrences have a habitat range that
could potentially overlap into the project area. Most of these records are historic and have not been
observed in the area in over 50 years.
Habitat with the potential for supporting these federally protected species (Table 1) was identified by
reviewing aerial photographs, soils maps, and topographic maps of the property and by walking
throughout the site. Sea turtles, piping plover, and red knot are all found in either coastal or marine
habitats and would not be located within the proposed project. The other species listed in the table
are discussed below.
Table 1. Federally protected endangered and threatened species that may occur within the project area per
the USFWS IPaC system (see Appendix C).
Habitat
Status
Habitat Description
Present in
Common Name
Scientific Name
US NC
Project Area?
ANIMALS
American Alligator
Alligator
T
T
Freshwater swamps, marshes,
No
mississippiensis
(S/A)
rivers, and lakes
Haliaeetus
Nest in large trees near open
Bald Eagle
leucocephalus
BGPA
T
water
No
Shallow waters (except when
Green Sea Turtle
Chelonia mydas
T
T
migrating) inside reefs, bays,
No
and inlets; open beaches are
required for nesting.
Nearshore and inshore waters
Kemp's Ridley Sea
Lepidochelys kempii
E
E
of the northern Gulf of Mexico;
No
Turtle
open beaches are required for
nesting.
Leatherback Sea
Dermochelys
Tropical and temperate waters
Turtle
E
E
of the Atlantic, Pacific, and
No
coriacea
Indian Oceans
Mid -Atlantic Industrial Project; Brunswick County 4
IPApplication; Project Narrative

Habitat
Status
Habitat Description
Present in
Common Name
Scientific Name
US NC
Project Area?
Estuarine and oceanic waters;
Loggerhead Sea
bays, lagoons, salt marshes,
Turtle
Caretta caretta
T
T
creeks, ship channels, and the
No
mouths of large rivers
Orton Pond and pond on Sand
Magnificent
Planorbella
Hill Creek; formerly Greenfield
Ramshorn
magnifica
PE
E
Lake (endemic to North
No
Carolina)
East population migrates
between central Mexico and
Monarch Butterfly
Danaus plexippus
C
Canada; requires nectar
Yes
habitat including milkweed
plants.
Hibernates in caves and
mines; roosts underneath
bark, in cavities or in crevices
Northern Long-eared
Myotis
T
of both live trees and snags.
Yes
Bat
septentrionalis
They are site generalists and
can be found in a range of
forested areas.
coastal beaches, sand flats at
Piping plover
Charadrius melodus
T
T
the ends of sand spits and
No
barrier islands
Red -Cockaded
Open pine woodlands and
Yes — no RCWs
Woodpecker
Picoides borealis
E
E
savannas with large old pines
or cavities
observed
Intertidal, marine habitats,
Red Knot
Calidris canutus rufa
T
especially near coastal inlets,
No
estuaries, and bays
Roosts in trees, primarily among
Tri-Colored Bat
Perimyotis subflavus
PE
leaves. Hibernates in culverts,
Yes
tree cavities, and abandoned
wells.
PLANTS
Cooley's Meadowrue
Thalictrum cooleyi
E
E
Moist to wet bogs and savannas
No
with neutral soils
Ecotones between pine
Rough -leaved
Lysimachia
savannas and pocosins, on moist
Loosestrife
asperulaefolia
E
E
to seasonally saturated sands,
No
on organic soils overlaying sand
Mid -Atlantic Industrial Project; Brunswick County
I P Application; Project Narrative

KEY:
Status Definition
E Endangered: A taxon "in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of
its range."
T Threatened: A taxon "likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future
throughout all or a significant portion of its range."
T(S/A) Threatened due to similarity of appearance - a species that is threatened due to
similarity of appearance with other rare species and is listed for its protection.
BGPA Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act.
C Candidate for Listing
P Proposed for Listing
American Alligator
The American alligator lives primarily in freshwater swamps and marshes, but also in rivers,
lakes, and smaller bodies of water. The site does not provide suitable habitat for this species.
Bald Eagle
Bald eagles in the southeast typically build their nests in the zone between forests and marsh or
open water. Nests are built in dominant live pines or cypress trees that provide a clear flight
path. Some large pines exist in sections of the site. However, the project area is not located in
close proximity to open water. Therefore, the site does not contain appropriate habitat for the
bald eagle.
Magnificent Ramshorn
The magnificent ramshorn is a large freshwater snail that is adapted to still or slow -flowing
aquatic habitats such as beaver ponds or man-made mill ponds. The species is endemic to
southeastern North Carolina and was historically known from only four sites in the lower Cape
Fear River Basin. However, all four sites appear to be extirpated. The site does not provide
suitable habitat for this species.
Monarch Butterfly
The monarch butterfly is globally distributed throughout 90 countries, islands, and island groups.
North American populations are well known for their long-distance migration. In eastern North
America, monarchs travel north in the spring, from Mexico to Canada, over two to three
successive generations, breeding along the way. They then migrate back to Mexico in the fall.
Therefore, eastern North America can provide both breeding and migrating habitat. Adult
monarch butterflies require a variety of blooming nectar resources, which they feed on
throughout their migration and breeding seasons (spring through fall). Monarchs also need
milkweed for both egg laying and larval feeding within this habitat. Most of the site is densely
vegetated with woody species and does not provide suitable habitat for this species. However,
Mid -Atlantic Industrial Project; Brunswick County 6
IPApplication; Project Narrative

the utility line corridors support herbaceous species and provide appropriate breeding and
migrating habitat for this species.
Northern Long-eared Bat
The northern long-eared bat (NLEB) was listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act
in 2015 (80 FIR 17974) because of population declines caused by white -nose syndrome and the
continued spread of the disease. The northern long-eared bat hibernates during the winter in
caves and mines with constant temperatures, high humidity, and no air currents. During the
winter and summer, they roost alone or in colonies underneath bark, in cavities or in crevices of
both live trees and snags. They are site generalists and can be found in a range of forested areas
from large contiguous forested blocks to small, wooded lots; densely vegetated stands to more
open stands; and hardwood forests to mixed pine/hardwood forests. No hibernacula appear to
exist within the project area. The site is forested and could potentially provide appropriate
winter and summer roosting habitat. DRG staff completed the NLEB Determination Key for the
project, which resulted in a "May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect" determination (Appendix
Q.
Red -Cockaded Woodaecker
The red -cockaded woodpecker (RCW) is generally found in open pine woodlands and savannas
with large old pines for nesting and roosting habitat. Cavity trees are located in open stands with
little or no hardwood midstory or overstory. Minimum age of trees needed for excavating
cavities in is between 60 and 80 years depending on tree and site factors. Foraging habitat is
provided in pine and pine hardwood stands 30 years old or older with foraging preference for
pine trees 8- inch DBH or larger. In the southern coastal plain (including Brunswick County),
however, pines used for foraging and nesting may be smaller and shorter than in other
populations. Groups will use wet pine flatwoods, pond pine woodland, and high pocosin for
foraging and nesting. Suitable RCW foraging or nesting habitat include pine or pine/hardwood
stands in which 50% or more of the dominant trees are pines and the dominant pine trees are 30
years of age or older or >_8-inches DBH. In suitable, well -stocked pine habitat, sufficient foraging
habitat can be provided on 80 to 125 acres.
The site has been harvested several times over the last 24 years, with clear -cutting occurring in
different parts of the tract in 1998, 2005, and 2006. Additional thinning of stands occurred in
2010 and early 2018. Areas harvested over the last 15 years (+/-) currently support loblolly pines
that are 4" to 8" diameter at breast height (DBH) and a moderate to thick shrub layer of red
maple (Acer rubrum), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), and loblolly pine. These areas are
generally too young and densely vegetated to provide suitable nesting or foraging habitat.
More mature pine stands are located in the southcentral, central, and eastern portions of the
property. These areas contain pine trees that are between 6" and 18" DBH. While there is
typically a dense shrub layer present, the canopy above the shrub layer is fairly open. These
Mid -Atlantic Industrial Project; Brunswick County 7
IPApplication; Project Narrative

areas appear to provide suitable nesting and foraging habitat for the red cockaded woodpecker.
Surveys were conducted in these stands of older and larger pines. No cavities or RCWs were
observed. Therefore, although the site does contain suitable nesting and foraging habitat for this
species, it does not appear to currently support any nesting colonies. Appendix B. of the USFWS
RCW SLOPES Manual is included in Appendix C.
Tri-Colored Bat
The tri-colored bat's range includes the eastern half of the United States as well as sections of
Canada and Central America. During the spring, summer and fall, tricolored bats are found in
forested habitats where they roost in trees, primarily among leaves. During the winter, they are
found roosting in culverts, tree cavities, and abandoned water wells in the southern U.S.
Tricolored bats exhibit high site fidelity with many individuals returning year after year to the
same roosting location and hibernaculum. According to correspondence from the USFWS, tri-
colored bats are known to occur in relatively close proximity to the site. The site is forested and
could potentially provide appropriate winter and summer roosting habitat.
Cooley's Meadowrue
The species inhabits sunny, moist places such as open, savanna -like forest edges and clearings,
wet savannas, and ecotones between wet savannas and non-riverine swamp forests. This species
is found in circumneutral soils shallowly underlain by coquina limestone. According to the NRCS
Soil Survey of Brunswick County, NC, wetlands within the site consist of soils that are strongly
acidic. Therefore, the site does not appear to provide suitable habitat for Cooley's meadowrue.
Rough -Leaved Loosestrife
Rough -leaved loosestrife generally occurs in the ecotones between pine savannas and pocosins,
on moist to seasonally saturated sands. Because this plant is shade -intolerant, moist areas
exposed to sunlight provide suitable habitat. Wetlands, ditch banks, and adjacent uplands within
the site are densely vegetated and do not appear to provide suitable habitat for this species.
T&E Conclusions
The project area provides suitable habitat for the northern long-eared bat, red -cockaded
woodpecker, and tri-colored bat. DRG staff performed an RCW survey in areas of suitable
habitat, and no RCW cavities or birds were observed. Tree clearing will be needed to construct
the site, which may affect the NLEB and tri-colored bat. The NLEB Determination Key was
completed for this project, which resulted in a MANLAA determination. The Applicant plans to
work with the USFWS to limit potential impacts to both bat species. No impacts to any other
federally listed species are anticipated.
Cultural Resources
The NC State Historic Preservation Office HPOWEB GIS Service was reviewed to determine if there are
any known historic or cultural resources on or adjacent to the project area. According to their
Mid -Atlantic Industrial Project; Brunswick County 8
IPApplication; Project Narrative

website, no known historic or cultural resources have been documented on or adjacent to the project
area. SHPO responded to the original application and had no comments.
Zoning
Most of the site is zoned Industrial General (I-G), Brunswick County's heavy industrial classification
zoning. According to the Unified Development Ordinance for Brunswick County (2015), "the I-G
District is intended to provide locations for enterprises engaged in a broad range of manufacturing,
processing, creating, repairing, renovating, painting, cleaning, or assembly of goods, merchandise or
equipment. Lands in this District are to be located on or near Major Thoroughfares as identified in
the Brunswick County Comprehensive Transportation Plan; to rail service; and to in -place
infrastructure such as water, sewer, and/or natural gas." A portion of the central project area is
zoned Rural Low Density Residential (RR). This classification is intended to accommodate
nonresidential agricultural uses and low -density residential development, as well as limited
nonresidential uses that are supportive of the County's traditional agricultural orientation including
farming, silviculture operations and related activities. The additional 27 acres that was recently added
to the project is currently zoned Rural Low Density Residential. Brunswick County is in the process of
rezoning this to Heavy Industrial.
The Brunswick County CAMA Land Use Plan (LUP) Future Land Use Map (2012) classifies most of this
area as Industrial. The LUP states that caution should be taken to prohibit/limit conflicts with
adjacent growth and that most industrial growth should be located in existing or future industrial
parks. A small portion of the central project area is classified as Conservation.
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
The study area identified in this application was limited to tracts in North Carolina that are a
minimum of 600 acres, have direct rail access, are in close (— 20 miles) proximity to port and airport
access, have direct access to a four -lane highway or interstate, have available high -power electric
lines, natural gas line, water and sewer infrastructure (with a potential to increase capacity), flat
topography, have a labor supply available and was close to a workforce training center. Several sites
in North Carolina were considered.
Mid -Atlantic Industrial Project; Brunswick County 9
IPApplication; Project Narrative

Off -Site Alternative #1: Person County Mega Park
Edwin Robertson Rd; Woodale, NC (Person County)
Parcel ID#: 0909-00-17-9298.000; 0909-00-01-1802.000; 0909-00-31-9026.000
The Person County Mega Park is 1,350 acres in size and has a readily available skilled workforce since
it is in close proximity to RDU, Greensboro, and several municipalities in Virginia. However, it only
lists 20 MW of electricity. Additionally, the site is over 150 miles to the Port of Norfolk, 44 miles to an
Interstate, and rail is two miles from the site. Gas is available with an 8" line whereas the Mid -Atlantic
site has 20" on the southside and an additional 10" gas line on the northside of the site. The site is
also divided by roads.
It is unknown if a wetland delineation has been performed within the site. Story's Creek, Marlowe
Creek and several of their tributaries (Roanoke River Basin) run through the site and it is likely that
significant stream and wetland impacts would be needed to construct a project as large as the Mid -
Atlantic project. These waterbodies are classified by NCDWR as C. This designation is given to waters
protected for uses such as aquatic life propagation, survival and maintenance of biological integrity
(including fishing and fish), wildlife, secondary contact recreation, and agriculture. Secondary contact
recreation means wading, boating, other uses not involving human body contact with water, and
activities involving human body contact with water where such activities take place on an infrequent,
unorganized, or incidental basis.
Because the park lacks vital utilities needed for this type of project and would likely result in
significant environmental impacts, it was rejected from further consideration.
Mid -Atlantic Industrial Project; Brunswick County 10
IPApplication; Project Narrative

Off -Site Alternative #2: Kingsboro CSX Select Site
US Hwy 64 Alt W; Kingsboro Rd; Harts Chapel Rd; Rocky Mount, NC (Edgecombe County)
Parcel ID: 4709454299; 4709360159; 4709430716; 4709132669; 3799747201; 3799457509;
3799618998;3799428754;3799252283
This 1,449-acre site is located in Edgecombe County. This site has gas, rail, water and sewer
infrastructure. However, there is a challenge for labor supply at this location, being a generally rural
area. Furthermore, this site is 75 miles to a commercial airport, 125 miles to the Port of Norfolk, and
has limited electric supply.
Walnut Creek (Tar River Basin) and several of its tributaries extend through the western half and the
northeastern part of the site. Walnut Creek is classified as Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW) and WS-
IV. The NSW classification is a supplemental classification given to waters needing additional nutrient
management due to being subject to excessive growths of microscopic or macroscopic
vegetation.WS-IV classification is given to waters used as sources of water supply for drinking,
culinary, or food processing purposes where a WS-I, II or III classification is not feasible. These waters
are also protected for Class C uses. WS-IV waters are generally in moderately to highly developed
watersheds or Protected Areas. It appears that wetland and stream impacts have been previously
authorized by the USACE (SAW-2008-02741) and NCDWR for the eastern portion of the site where
the majority of uplands exist, and that site development is underway in this location. Developing
remaining portions of this site would result in significant wetland and stream impacts.
Because of limited labor supply, electric supply, and environmental impacts, it was not considered a
feasible alternative.
Mid -Atlantic Industrial Project; Brunswick County 11
IPApplication; Project Narrative

Off -Site Alternative #3: International Logistics Park
Hwy 74/76; Northwest, NC (Brunswick and Columbus Counties)
Parcel ID: 2240.00-02-3255.000; 2240.00-00-6803.000; 0140000801; 01400008; 0140000807
The 800-acre International Logistics Park is located south of US Highway 74/76, on the opposite side
of the highway from the preferred tract (Figure 10). This site is zoned Industrial and has access off an
interstate highway. The site has limited wetlands or streams on site. Although it meets many of the
Applicant's site requirements, it does not have rail access. Additionally, the site does not currently
have access to natural gas and a line would have to be bored under US Highway 74/76. Therefore, it
was not considered a feasible alternative.
Alternative #4: Preferred Tract
The preferred tract is an 813-acre site located within the western part of Brunswick County, NC,
adjacent to the Columbus County border (Figures 1-3). The site meets all of the Applicant's
requirements listed above. The site is located off a major interstate (Highway 74/76), has rail access
from the CSX Railroad (located directly north of the site), and has access to high power electric lines,
a natural gas line, and water and sewer utilities. The site is also located in an area that has an
available labor supply and is in close proximity to a workforce training center through the local
community colleges. The site's location between the Wilmington metropolitan statistical area (MSA)
and Myrtle Beach MSA allows it to draw a larger workforce within a 60-minute drive time. The site is
also located in the Port of Wilmington Foreign Trade Zone and within a Federally designated
Mid -Atlantic Industrial Project; Brunswick County 12
IPApplication; Project Narrative

Opportunity Zone. Finally, the region is considered to have a high quality of life, which would be a
benefit to the company's employees.
One of the greatest strengths of this site is the presence of three high -power transmission lines
bisecting the site and allowing for the delivery of substantial electrical needs of the end -user.
Furthermore, natural gas adjoins the site on three sides with large transmission lines, and water,
wastewater and fiber are also available at the site.
On -Site Alternatives
Once the tract was selected, the project engineers developed several site designs. Ultimately, the
Applicant selected the design that will meet the operational design standards of the end -user, while
achieving the desired economic benefits of the County and minimizing environmental impacts to the
extent feasible and practicable.
Alternative #1: No -Action Alternative
The no -action alternative would keep the site in its current, undeveloped condition and would
prevent the Applicant from developing it. The no -action alternative is not considered feasible for
several reasons. This alternative would leave up to 700 acres of uplands undeveloped. The inability to
expand development within this tract of land would be a significant loss of return for the owners and
a loss of an industrial park for the community. This industrial park is especially important to the area
because it has both interstate and rail access. Furthermore, the project is expected to have an
economic benefit on the region. It is anticipated that the project could bring between 3,000 and
7,000 new jobs to the area. It also has the potential to attract other manufacturing companies to the
area and further improve economic conditions in this region. For these reasons, the No -Action
Alternative is not considered feasible.
Alternative #2: Preferred Proiect
The proposed project includes an EV battery manufacturing facility and other buildings intended for
use by suppliers to the EV battery industry (Figure 5). The EV battery manufacturing facility will be
located in the northwestern part of the site and is made up of thirteen separate buildings (total of
5,776,300 square feet) with parking and access corridors to be planned between buildings. Separate
buildings are needed to provide clean room manufacturing, lab and assembly areas requiring unique
HVAC systems to maintain strict temperature and humidity controls, and to maintain the correct
pressurization between spaces in order to minimize or avoid product contamination. Access to the
site will be provided off of Highway 74/76. A spine road will run along the western project boundary
to provide access throughout the site. Rail access will be provided from the CSX Railroad, which is
currently located just north of the site. The rail will extend into the central part of the tract. Two
separate parking areas will be located in the northwestern and southwestern portions of the site.
Note that an existing 115 KV line that currently runs through the northwestern portion of the tract
Mid -Atlantic Industrial Project; Brunswick County 13
IPApplication; Project Narrative

(and through the middle of the EV battery plant) will be relocated south of the plant and will run
parallel to the existing Duke powerline easement.
The proposed EV battery plant will bring suppliers to the EV battery industry, which will be located in
multiple buildings in the park: two located directly off Hwy 74/76 (one 2,000,000 sf and one 942,000
sf) and another facility in the central part of the site. This central area will be leased to Epsilon
Advanced Materials (EAM) and will consist of a 1.5 million -square -foot graphite anode manufacturing
facility. The facility will utilize green technologies to produce high -capacity anode materials for
electric vehicle batteries. Rail will tie into their site in the western part of their project area and will
be used to bring in materials needed for operations. Their site will also contain a Duke Energy
substation, stormwater ponds, and a water treatment area. The water treatment area will be used
for treating effluent from the cooling tower, boiler blow down, and desulphurization system filtrate
effluent.
EAM has certain requirements for their facility layout, and it was determined that the area originally
set aside for EAM was not large enough to accommodate this layout. Therefore, the Applicant
needed to acquire additional land directly adjacent to this area. The Applicant originally evaluated a
30-acre area directly north and east of the EAM project area. A preliminary assessment conducted by
DRG found that the northern portion contained approximately 1.5 acres of wetlands and the eastern
portion was uplands (Figure 6.). In order to minimize wetland impacts, the applicant omitted the
northern piece and expanded the eastern piece to accommodate the acreage needed by EAM. DRG
evaluated this entire eastern section (27 acres total) and found it to consist entirely of uplands. Gary
Beecher with the USACE performed a site visit on 2/28/24 and concurred with this assessment.
Once EAM's boundary was finalized, the engineer evaluated several different configurations to
achieve the end goals of the user and to minimize wetland impacts (Figures 6-8). Their operation
requires a specific configuration of buildings for manufacturing and assembly. Additionally, the
substation needed to line up with two electric buildings so that power lines could run directly to
them. Close coordination with Duke Energy was required to achieve the optimal location of the
substation. Initially, the substation was located partially or mostly in a 4.2-acre wetland pocket
(Figures 7 & 8). Duke agreed to push the substation north out of the wetlands. However, Duke has
requirements about the location of access roads to the substation and a portion of a road will run
through the wetland pocket. Additionally, their 150-ft Right of Way will extend through wetlands in
order to tie into the 115 kV line located south of the project area. An electric pole will also be
installed in the wetlands, but fill is expected to be minimal. However, the wetlands within the R/W
will need to be mowed. Since this wetland pocket is currently forested, at a minimum, there will be a
habitat conversion. Note that this is currently shown as a permanent impact (access road and R/W)
on the site plan until we can obtain additional information from Duke Energy about the extent of
work that will be needed within their R/W.
Mid -Atlantic Industrial Project; Brunswick County 14
IPApplication; Project Narrative

Additionally, the size of the water treatment area was reduced as much as possible while still being
large enough to serve its purpose. It was initially shown to be 6.6 acres but has been reduced to 3.3
acres. Additionally, stormwater ponds were situated in topographically low areas in the northern part
of the site and are sized to accommodate the large amount of impervious cover needed for the site.
The final EAM site plan is shown to impact 4.96 acres of wetlands and 0.66 acres of open water
ditches (Figure 6).
The overall project is expected to provide considerable economic benefit to the region. It is
anticipated that the project will bring between 3,000 and 7,000 new jobs to the region once it is
completely built. The jobs associated with this industry sector will average $70,000 annually, which is
significantly higher than Brunswick County's current private sector wage of $42,500. This project has
the support of local and state government. The potential investment for the overall project is
expected to range between $2-6 Billion. The anticipated capital investment will add between $10
million & $30 million in new revenue to Brunswick County to provide County services to Brunswick
County residents. These efforts will contribute to building more resilient, secure and trusted supply
chains, which are essential for the sustainability and competitiveness of the EV industry in the United
States.
POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Total proposed impacts from the project are 14.79 acres of non -riparian wetlands and 1.95 acres of
non -stream Waters of the US (Figure 5). The impacts to wetlands have the potential to cause the loss
of functions and values often ascribed to these types of wetlands (e.g. habitat values, floodwater
retention functions, and nutrient and sediment retention functions). However, these removed or
degraded functions will be offset by compensatory mitigation through an approved mitigation bank
within the Lower Cape Fear River watershed (see Mitigation section below).
In addition, the Applicant will develop and implement a stormwater plan and a sedimentation and
erosion control plan to reduce the potential for erosion or runoff into wetlands and other water
bodies located off site.
Tree clearing will be needed to construct the site, which may affect the NLEB and tri-colored bat. DRG
has completed a determination key for the NLEB and it resulted in a "May Affect, Not Likely to
Adversely Affect" determination.
MITIGATION
To mitigate proposed wetland impacts, the Applicant plans to purchase compensatory mitigation
credits at a 1.5:1 mitigation to impact ratio from the Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank
(LCFUMB). The purchase of these credits will ensure the replacement of in -kind wetlands.
Furthermore, since the LCFUMB has already been implemented, there will be no temporal loss of
wetland functions. Attached is a credit reservation letter from the LCFUMB.
Mid -Atlantic Industrial Project; Brunswick County 15
IPApplication; Project Narrative

4.0 TABLE OF IMPACTS

Mid -Atlantic Industrial Project
Table of Impacts
Impact Label
2022 Plan
2024 Plan
Reason for Change
Wetland Impact #1
6.9
6.9
Wetland Impact #2
2
2
Wetland Impact #3
0.54
0.54
Wetland Impact #4
0.39
0.39
Wetland Impact #5
1.6
1.6
Wetland Impact #6
0.24
1.04
EAM footprint
Wetland Impact #7
0
2.36
Duke ROW
Open Water Impact #1
0.257
0.257
Open Water Impact #2
0.3
0.3
Open Water Impact #3
0.067
0.067
Open Water Impact #4
0.176
0.176
Open Water Impact #5
0.075
0.16
EAM footprint
Open Water Impact #6
0.185
0.185
Open Water Impact #7
0.128
0.128
Open Water Impact #8
0.128
0.128
Open Water Impact #9
0.11
0.11
Open Water Impact #10
0.11
0.11
Open Water Impact #11
0.01
0.01
Open Water Impact #12
0.01
0.02
Road Widening
Open Water Impact #13
0.01
0.25
Road Improvements
Open Water Impact #14
0.01
0.02
Road Widening
Open Water Impact #15
0
0.03
Rail Crossing
TOTAL WETLAND IMPACTS
11.7
14.79
TOTAL OPEN WATER IMPACTS
1.58
1.95
Change in Impact =

SITE MAPS
Figure 1. Vicinity Map
Figure 2. Topographic Map
Figure 3. Soils Map
Figure 4. Aerial Photograph

. t
�
■
I
^ � \
..
��
f'
G
2§
�«
x�

i7�Y• ' /// � Y K- is •rff •�' � - r•`r' ��
+ 4 } I. •.•� J ti
L 1
� { n
�� f t •;It' I�1' ,f
b f t
L' ear: � ��• - \tip � � _
`r
fir - �..7� • - - - _
,yam' [~ Y •�' -" � " •.� � 'fff /Jr/Jf I �Jr r L
i'-. •I It ti • _ _f -r�._�•11 �!• �r I } `f - ' f l � .._ �•\. w
O $
OICl)
Q
z�

/ /_
a t
� \
o \
� \ {_
\
_ )
x.4
a 4
w $
=Z
c .;
Eq
.o
■}§`
US
}\\
■/)�
/k n
2ƒ �\
_ )m
� f \§ t\
/ // e
\ �
/
` < . \ \\
. . . . \ \
�
\\e\ / §\
-=39
\j� \\)/
/ \ ){mo \{2)
}\\\\}\�\
/t)/ 22®
- efa\.a /){(
_ - MLL c-®}
< (D
)§0
S={>

SITE PLANS
PREFERRED PROJECT SITE PLANS
Figure 5. Overall Impact Map
Figure 6. Final EAM Site Plan with 4.96 Ac of Wetland Impact
REJECTED ON -SITE ALTERNATIVES
Figure 7. EAM Alternative Site Plan with 5.29 Ac of Wetland Impact
Figure 8. EAM Alternative Site Plan with 6.83 Ac of Wetland Impact

co W rd w w e
ov vi = = QZO
O �
- H2
- e
r I I
a s� LTT
a CLu
r a
r wr r L
a o
q /
�� II
bl I�
w
e
m w
a -- - —
t w I
I
_ _
Wes' a _________ x eo I
j
a.
ns
aj
r
a I
I � I
1 r I = I ¢r z
lu
y
f0
Z
I
W O Q
N m
�iAllw p �
oo� o �� � • s„OW
5 I
LLp� o
t _ SSE 53
N
_ 1 1
- � U
.. m w
.. Q
I ire
LL m Z
I � •
W
.� 1' _
w a w
1 1 I
r r { 1 J
y
J
P a,
_ - f
`a -
z
LL
� �xr
F. 1
J W<.
o
I
I
II
I III I
- w III
F yeas -
'll
-III a
'I

uu u
LO
"
In v w Cl! tp
O
S
w
S
E -
In IA
.■ .■ a
a
a ■
a L
■
Fio
a gu ■
■
3
a
_
�
z 3z .. ■
■
a a
a�
w
a.
m � 1
rl s
a
1�
III
=ju
'LL' o Wo�
10 U
wU-j
ABE A 3999E - I W W
AL
AL Z O
_ a SSE ! + - `3AAAA li 0 m
■ 1 N Q
- qq - 0. w m 0
a �� N Q
p■ I I I I L1J
I li J
��g 113 113
.... JI�ffi IIII IIII IIII IIII IIII IIII IIII II IIIIIIIIIIII I
- ` RIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIItI1IRII �: �.� <ItIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIItI1IH
a _ RIIIIIIIIIt1R �..� <tIIIIIIIIt1H
I
I x
w
s��—-----—-——
mommomm
=s III
I'll
i it

011,
c0 m N In ... R c Y N
LU
ow r a a to Z
.� .� a a O 0aF-
a�
H2 E
aN
a CL u ■ ■ _ - �� 0 3
a -
ao ■ ■
•> -
a o I
I
y�Y I II
� i Ili
s.
wa
z .
a�
= I I
e e
1 I
.w
it 1
W
s
I
I
I
I II
1
u
IL
3 II
I ® 5 0 Z
W
- W W >
W Z
I <
wm
e
_ 5 N
j AAEo3 - I 0 Q co
_ o N OR p
� IL � I m
Z
'@ 5I I II
Q
I H J
I II
— W
I
1 I
r J
III. 1
o �
I
RPM
Leo in
— - HIHHHHHH � e HHHHHHH -
131,3113
z
1;
.o .
X
I
LL
-- ---- --- --- --- --- - -
711
- s r
w =V I
� I
_ w I
_ t
_ I o
L a
li
I
I I
I

APPENDIX A.
WETLAND INFORMATION
Approved Jurisdictional Determination for Larger Site
USACE-Approved Wetland Map for Addl 27 Acres
Preliminary Wetland Map of Addl 30 Acres (EAM Rejected Alternative)

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
Property Owner:
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. SAW-2008-01015 County: Brunswick County U.S.G.S. Quad: Acme
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Mr. Michael Walters
1887 Oakton Church Road
Address: Fairmont, NC 28340
Agent: Land Management Group Inc.
attn: Mr. Wes Fryar
3805 Wriehtsville Ave, Suite 15
Wilmington, NC 28340
Size (acres) 1,140.87 Nearest Town Delco
Nearest Waterway Bear Branch River Basin Cape Fear
USGS HUC 03030005 Coordinates Latitude: 34.3069
Longitude:-78.1856
Location description: The site is located between Delco and Maco in Brunswick County along the
Columbus/Brunswick County line on NC 74/76.
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
_ There are waters, including wetlands, on the above described project area, that may be subject to Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). The
waters, including wetlands, have been delineated, and the delineation has been verified by the Corps to be sufficiently
accurate and reliable. Therefore this preliminary jurisdiction determination maybe used in the permit evaluation process,
including determining compensatory mitigation. For purposes of computation of impacts, compensatory mitigation
requirements, and other resource protection measures, a permit decision made on the basis of a preliminary JD will treat all
waters and wetlands that would be affected in any way by the permitted activity on the site as if they are jurisdictional
waters of the U.S. This preliminary determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory Program
Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331). However, you may request an approved JD, which is an
appealable action, by contacting the Corps district for further instruction.
_ There are wetlands on the above described property, that may be subject to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). However, since the
waters, including wetlands, have not been properly delineated, this preliminary jurisdiction determination may not be
used in the permit evaluation process. Without a verified wetland delineation, this preliminary determination is merely an
effective presumption of CWA/RHA jurisdiction over all of the waters, including wetlands, at the project area, which is
not sufficiently accurate and reliable to support an enforceable permit decision. We recommend that you have the
waters of the U.S. on your property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a
timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can be verified by the Corps.
B. Approved Determination
_ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described property subject to the permit requirements of
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC
§ 1344). Unless there is a change in law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period
not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
X There are waters of the U.S., including wetlands, on the above described project area subject to the permit requirements
of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
_ We recommend you have the waters of the U.S. on your property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to
accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that
can be verified by the Corps.
Page 1 of 5

SAW-2008-01015
X The waters of the U.S., including wetlands, on your project area have been delineated and the delineation has been
verified by the Corps. We strongly suggest you have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be
reviewed and verified by the Corps. Once verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to
CWA jurisdiction on your property which, provided there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be
relied upon for a period not to exceed five years.
_ The waters of the U.S., including wetlands, have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat
signed by the Corps Regulatory Official identified below on . Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
_ There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described project area which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
_ The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act
(CAMA). You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Morehead City, NC, at [phone] to
determine their requirements.
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US, including wetlands, without a Department of the Army permit
may constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). Placement of dredged or fill material,
construction or placement of structures, or work within navigable waters of the United States without a Department of the
Army permit may constitute a violation of Sections 9 and/or 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC § 401 and/or 403). If
you have any questions regarding this determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Brad Shaver at
[phone] or Brad. E.Shaver(a usace.army.mil.
C. Basis For Determination: See attached Approved JD forms.
D. Remarks: The site was field verified with Land Management Group on 5/22/2018. During the
review changes were requested which are reflected on the attached field sketch.
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the
particular site identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation
provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation
in USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources
Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information for Approved Jurisdiction Determinations (as indicated in Section B. above)
If you object to this determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.
Enclosed you will find a Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and Request for Appeal (RFA) form. If you request
to appeal this determination you must submit a completed RFA form to the following address:
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn: Jason Steele, Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Room 1OM15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Page 2 of 5

SAW-2008-01015
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for
appeal under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP.
Should you decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by 9/27/2018_.
It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this
correspondence.
Digitally signed by
SH AV E R. B RA D SHAVER.BRAD.E.1276601756
DN: c=US, o=U.S. Government,
.E.1276601756 cn=SDHAVER.BRAD.E.1276601756
Corps Regulatory Official: Date: 2018.07.707:29:57-04'00'
Date: July 27, 2018 Expiration Date: July 27, 2023
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we
continue to do so, please complete our Customer Satisfaction Survey, located online at
http://corpsmapu.usace.army.mil/cm apex/f?p=136:4:0.
Page 3 of 5

SAW-2008-01015
NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: North West Tract/Michael Walters
File Number: SAW-2008-01015
Date: July 26, 2018
Attached
is: D
See Section below
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission)
A
PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission)
B
PERMIT DENIAL
C
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
D
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
E
SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision.
Additional information may be found at http://www.usace.atmy.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/RegulatoLyProyramandPetmits.aspx or
Corps re lations at 33 CFR Part 331.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature
on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the
permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
• OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request that the
permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section li of this form and return the form to the district engineer. Your
objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will forfeit your right to appeal
the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your objections and may: (a) modify the
permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your objections, or (c) not modify the permit
having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After evaluating your objections, the district engineer
will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature
on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the
pennit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
• APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered pennit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terns and conditions therein, you
may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form
and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of
this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative
Appeal Process by completing Section 11 of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form
must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or
provide new information.
• ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the date of
this notice means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
• APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers Administrative
Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by
the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
Page 4 of 5

E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps
regarding the preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved
JD (which may be appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new
information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD.
SECTION II39ZEQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your
objections to an initial proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to
this form to clarify where your reasons or objections are addressed in the administrative record.)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps
memorandum for the record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the
review officer has determined is needed to clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps
may add new information or analyses to the record. However, you may provide additional information to clarify
the location of information that is alreadv in the administrative record.
POINT OF CONTACT FORILESTIONS OR INFORMATION:
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
appeal process you may contact: also contact:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Mr. Jason Steele, Administrative Appeal Review Officer
Attn: Brad Shaver CESAD-PDO
69 Darlington Ave U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
Wilmington, NC 28403 60 Forsyth Street, Room I OMI 5
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government
consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15 day
notice of anv site investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in all site investigations.
Date: I Telephone number:
Signature of appellant or
For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Attn: Brad Shaver, 69 Darlington Avenue, Wilmington, North
Carolina 28403
For Permit denials, Proffered Permits and approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this form to:
Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Jason Steele,
Administrative Appeal Officer, CESAD-PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 1OM15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]
Page 5 of 5

r:
R 'lid•. •"`
O
O
f�4 l
_ w
jr
f Q w
r
lL { N !n
F 00
fr a
O� �N
. U
-_ o
IL a
a
- r
a�= E t o"
' U
_ Z
rn TJ co�
4 0
aNi U o cs
M U Q xt
a O N Q�
i Z C
`t
# 3
rn 2 -y
O oa
w r
o o 0 z°
f• ULO N O) N m`
L
00 N d .U-� o �_'
V 17 V af 05
- a
(O N - w E
00
i O -
O O N O U RM o
U) zQ m
Q N O O
' o U
O E_ -o rn Z
` Q h
Om �<o
•JC 0 V Z i
u A

L:\WETLANDS\2022 WETLANDS FILES\DRGNCW22.303 --- N
Project Chronos, Brunswick Business & Industry Development\Maps\Additional 10 acres 0 100 200 400
Boundaries are approximate and not meant to be absolute. ft
Map Source: 2020 NC OneMap Aerial Photography Scale applies to 11X17" print.
Mid -Atlantic Industrial Park
Stanaland Tract
DAVEY
Section 404/401
Brunswick County, NC
Resource Group
Delineation
3805 Wrightsville Avenue
Post USACE Sketch
Map Date: November 2023
Wilmington, NC 28403
nRC,Nc\An? ins
[phone]

NOTE: This is not a survey. This map has been developed from
interpretation of aerial photography and soil survey maps. All boundaries
depicted are considered approximate. There has been no on -site verification
of potential 404 wetland limits. In addition, this map does not include
information related to coastal wetlands, buffer rules, jurisdictional
v waters/streams, nor other local or county environmental site constraints. On -
site wetland evaluations are highly recommended prior to specific land -use
f decisions.
r
a�
Legend
MOriginal Project Boundary
Wetlands On Site
Additional Area Considered (— 30 ac)
• Potential Waters of the US on Adjacent Property
Potential Wetlands on Adjacent Property (-1.5 ac)
�L. 7.
ii
N 0 150 300 600
Boundaries are approximate and not meant to be absolute. ft
Scale to 11X17"
applies print.
Map Source: 2020 NC OneMap Aerial Photography
Mid -Atlantic Industrial Project
DAVEYI
Wetland Assessment of
Brunswick County, NC
Resource Group
Adjacent Tract
.July 2023
3805`rightsAlle
Originally Considered for
DRG NCW22.303
e
Wilmington, NC 28403
EAM Expanded Area
[phone]

APPENDIX B.
STREAM FORMS & WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORMS

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 10-6-22
Project/Site: MAIP; SF1
Latitude: 34.31192
Evaluator: John Perry - DRG
County: Brunswick
Longitude:-78.1917
Total Points:
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other
Stream is at least intermittent 11.5
Ephe era I Interm.ttent Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
if >_ 19 or perennial if >_ 30`
I
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 2.5 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
1 0
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
<No =
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 3 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
OQ
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
1 0.5
1
1 1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
<es =
C. Biology (Subtotal = 6
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
OQ
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL =
1.5 her =
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: Dry, no sign of flow. Looking across property line, there is no sign of groundwater/baseflow. Marginal signs of redox.
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 10-6-22
Project/Site: MAIP; SF2
Latitude: 34.31707
Evaluator: John Perry - DRG
County: Brunswick
Longitude:-78.17636
Total Points:
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other
Stream is at least intermittent 6.5
Ephe eraI Interm.ttent Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
if>_ 19 or perennial if>_ 30'
I
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 0.5 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
1 0
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
<No =
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 0 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
OQ
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
1 0.5
1
1 1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
<es =
C. Biology (Subtotal = 6
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3Q
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
OQ
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL =
1.5 her =
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: Black gums, ferns, river cane, swamp titi present. Spread out, no central channel. No signs of flow or water.
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 10-6-22
Project/Site: MAIP; SF3
Latitude: 34.31317
Evaluator: John Perry - DRG
County: Brunswick
Longitude:-78.18151
Total Points:
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other
Stream is at least intermittent 6
Ephe eraI Interm.ttent Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
if>_ 19 or perennial if>_ 30'
I
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 0 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
1 0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
<No =
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 0 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
OQ
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
OQ
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
1 0.5
1
1 1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
o®--
Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = 6
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3Q
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
OQ
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL =
1.5 her =
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: Incised - 3 ft. No sign of flow or groundwater. Straight, artificially incised.
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 10-6-22
Project/Site: MAIP; SF4
Latitude: 34.31209
Evaluator: John Perry - DRG
County: Brunswick
Longitude:-78.17966
Total Points:
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other
Stream is at least intermittent 6
Ephe eraI Interm.ttent Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
if>_ 19 or perennial if>_ 30'
I
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 0 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
1 0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
<No =
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 0 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
OQ
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
OQ
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
1 0.5
1
1 1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
o®--
Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = 6
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
OQ
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL =
1.5 her =
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: Incised - 4 feet. No sign of flow. Very straight channel, side case material on edges. Almost completely straight for - 90 yds.
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 10-6-22
Project/Site: MAIP; SF5
Latitude: 34.38886
Evaluator: John Perry - DRG
County: Brunswick
Longitude:-78.1742
Total Points:
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other
Stream is at least intermittent 7.5
Ephe eraI Interm.ttent Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
if>_ 19 or perennial if>_ 30'
I
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 1.5 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
1 0
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
<No =
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 0 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
OQ
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
OQ
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
1 0.5
1
1 1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
o®--
Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = 6
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
OQ
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL =
1.5 her =
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: Incised - 2 feet. No sign of flow or standing water. Straight feature.
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 10-6-22
Project/Site: MAIP; SF6
Latitude: 34.30559
Evaluator: John Perry - DRG
County: Brunswick
Longitude:-78.17399
Total Points:
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other
Stream is at least intermittent 6.5
Ephe eraI Interm.ttent Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
if>_ 19 or perennial if>_ 30'
I
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 0.5 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
1 0
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
<No =
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 0 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
OQ
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
OQ
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
1 0.5
1
1 1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
o®--
Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = 6
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
OQ
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL =
1.5 her =
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: Incised - 2.5 feet. Appears manmade. Bone dry the entire channel. No water or signs of flow, side cast material periodically on bank.
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 10-6-22
Project/Site: MAIP; SF7
Latitude: 34.30577
Evaluator: John Perry - DRG
County: Brunswick
Longitude:-78.17544
Total Points:
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other
Stream is at least intermittent 10.5
Ephe eraI Interm.ttent Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
if>_ 19 or perennial if>_ 30'
I
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 1.5 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
1 0
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
<No =
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 3 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
OQ
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
OQ
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
1 0.5
1
1 1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
es =
C. Biology (Subtotal = 6
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
OQ
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5
her =
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: Incised - 4 feet and side cast. Dry, no signs of water. - 4 inches of sand on top, but some redox below.
Sketch:

IL
r� ou
x,.
rJT
k4
L t
09,6'
t
� • �F �#+ . y7r
•t e , d.r. r • r + � r f •

}-
-r.Yf�
1 •4 �,
ms�-
r��I
• T
,�-t. _
_ _
1
91
-
.ti t�
'a
.; i
f J• -
_ � X
+ J %

V)
U O
w_ I--
O O
a a
a�
�O
LLc
=)
oa
z W
U_ H
H V)
z cm
aX
Q z
oW
_a
a

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies user ivianuai version om
USACE AID #
NCDWR#
Project Name
Chronos
Date of Evaluation
7-6-22
Applicant/Owner Name
Brunswick Business & Industry
Wetland Site Name
NC WAM 1
Development
Wetland Type
Hardwood Flat
Assessor Name/Organization
Wesley Fryar/Davey
Resource Group
Level III Ecoregion
Middle Atlantic Coastal Plain
Nearest Named Water Body
Bear Creek
River Basin
Cape Fear
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit
03030005
County
Brunswick
NCDWR Region
❑ Yes ® No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude/Longitude (deci-deqrees)
34.309885/-78.178624
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), hog 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 wetland, 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
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 compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less
diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
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).
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 redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
❑C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic 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
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 wetland 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 and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
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 disturbed.)
❑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 into 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 OF OF 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 contiguous
naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries 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. Artificial 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 assessment area is clear cut,
select option "C."
®A 0
❑B 1 to 4
❑C 5to8
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 composed 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
o ®A ®A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
m ❑B ❑B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
U ❑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
1E ®B ®B Moderate density shrub layer
U) ❑C ❑C Shrub layer sparse or absent
-0 ❑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
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
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. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
❑A ❑B ❑C ❑D
f •� r .
1 r
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 Overbankflow 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

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name NC WAM 1
Wetland Type Hardwood Flat
Date of Assessment 7-6-22
Wesley Fryar/Davey
Assessor Name/Organization Resource Group
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
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)
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 Ratina Summa
Function Sub -function Metrics Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition LOW
Sub -surface Storage and
Retention Condition HIGH
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Particulate Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Physical Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Pollution Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
MEDIUM
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
MEDIUM
Vegetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Ratina Summa
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Habitat
Condition
MEDIUM
Overall Wetland Rating MEDIUM

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies user ivianuai version om
USACE AID #
NCDWR#
Project Name
Chronos
Date of Evaluation
7-6-22
Applicant/Owner Name
Brunswick Business & Industry
Wetland Site Name
NC WAM 2
Development
Wetland Type
Headwater Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Wesley Fryar/Davey
Resource Group
Level III Ecoregion
Middle Atlantic Coastal Plain
Nearest Named Water Body
Bear Creek
River Basin
Cape Fear
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit
03030005
County
Brunswick
NCDWR Region
❑ Yes ® No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude/Longitude (deci-deqrees)
34.3153677/-78.177978
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), hog 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 wetland, 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
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 compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less
diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
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).
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 redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
❑C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic 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
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 wetland 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 and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
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 disturbed.)
❑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 into 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 contiguous
naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries 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. Artificial 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 assessment area is clear cut,
select option "C."
®A 0
❑B 1 to 4
❑C 5to8
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 composed 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
o ®A ®A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
m ❑B ❑B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
U ❑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
1E ®B ®B Moderate density shrub layer
U) ❑C ❑C Shrub layer sparse or absent
-0 ❑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
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
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. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
❑A ❑B ❑C ❑D
f •� r .
1 r
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 Overbankflow 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
Zero Order

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name NC WAM 2
Wetland Type Headwater Forest
Date of Assessment 7-6-22
Wesley Fryar/Davey
Assessor Name/Organization Resource Group
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 Ratina Summa
Function Sub -function Metrics Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition MEDIUM
Sub -surface Storage and
Retention Condition MEDIUM
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Particulate Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
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
HIGH
Vegetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Ratina Summa
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Habitat
Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating MEDIUM

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies user ivianuai version om
USACE AID #
NCDWR#
Project Name
Chronos
Date of Evaluation
7/6/22
Applicant/Owner Name
Brunswick Business & Industry
Wetland Site Name
NCWAM 3
Development
Wetland Type
Headwater Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Wesley Fryar/Davey
Resource Group
Level III Ecoregion
Middle Atlantic Coastal Plain
Nearest Named Water Body
Bear Creek
River Basin
Cape Fear
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit
03030005
County
Brunswick
NCDWR Region
❑ Yes ® No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude/Longitude (deci-deqrees)
34.318168,-78.185078
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), hog 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 wetland, 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
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 compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less
diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
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).
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 redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
❑C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic 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
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 wetland 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 and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
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 disturbed.)
❑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 into 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 contiguous
naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries 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. Artificial 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 assessment area is clear cut,
select option "C."
®A 0
❑B 1 to 4
❑C 5to8
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 composed 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
o ®A ®A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
m ❑B ❑B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
U ❑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
1E ®B ®B Moderate density shrub layer
U) ❑C ❑C Shrub layer sparse or absent
-0 ❑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
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
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. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
❑A ❑B ❑C ❑D
f •� r .
1 r
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 Overbankflow 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
berm along road leads to increased inundation, zero order

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name NCWAM 3
Wetland Type Headwater Forest
Date of Assessment 7/6/22
Wesley Fryar/Davey
Assessor Name/Organization Resource Group
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 Ratina Summa
Function Sub -function Metrics Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition MEDIUM
Sub -surface Storage and
Retention Condition MEDIUM
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
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
HIGH
Vegetation Composition
Condition
HIGH
Function Ratina Summa
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

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies user ivianuai version om
USACE AID #
NCDWR#
Project Name
Chronos
Date of Evaluation
7/6/22
Applicant/Owner Name
Brunswick Business & Industry
Wetland Site Name
NC WAM 4
Development
Wetland Type
Headwater Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Wesley Fryar/Davey
Resource Group
Level III Ecoregion
Middle Atlantic Coastal Plain
Nearest Named Water Body
Bear Creek
River Basin
Cape Fear
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit
03030005
County
Brunswick
NCDWR Region
❑ Yes ® No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude/Longitude (deci-deqrees)
34.311995/-78.191451
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), hog 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 wetland, 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
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 compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less
diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
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).
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 redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
❑C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic 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
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 wetland 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 and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
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 disturbed.)
❑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 into 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 contiguous
naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries 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. Artificial 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 assessment area is clear cut,
select option "C."
®A 0
❑B 1 to 4
❑C 5to8
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 composed 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
o ®A ®A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
m ❑B ❑B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
U ❑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
1E ❑B ❑B Moderate density shrub layer
U) ®C ®C Shrub layer sparse or absent
-0 ❑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
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
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. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
❑A ❑B ❑C ❑D
f •� r .
1 r
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 Overbankflow 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

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name NC WAM 4
Wetland Type Headwater Forest
Date of Assessment 7/6/22
Wesley Fryar/Davey
Assessor Name/Organization Resource Group
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
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) YES
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 Ratina Summa
Function Sub -function Metrics Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition LOW
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
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
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
HIGH
Vegetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Ratina Summa
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
LOW
Water Quality
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Habitat
Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

. ailmrw.",
S4
si
Kp
S5
�7 sry,
All
pr
V,
e
ILL

APPENDIX C.
RARE SPECIES INFORMATION

Roy Cooper, Governor
■�■a NC DEPARTMENT OF
J•■■� NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
■ ■G■
December 29. 2023
Kim Williams
Davey Resource Group, Inc.
3805 Wrightsville Avenue
Wilmington, NC 28403
RE: Mid -Atlantic Industrial Project
Dear Kim Williams:
D_ Reid Wilson, Secretary
Misty BUChanan
Deputy Director, Natural Heritage grogram
041011 dK WZEAS[:1
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide
information about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
A query of the NCNHP database indicates that there are records for rare species, important natural
communities, natural areas, and/or conservation/managed areas within the proposed project
boundary. These results are presented in the attached `Documented Occurrences' tables and map.
The attached `Potential Occurrences' table summarizes rare species and natural communities that
have been documented within a one -mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these
records suggests that these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area
if suitable habitat exists. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed areas within a one -mile
radius of the project area, if any, are also included in this report.
If a Federally -listed species is documented within the project area or indicated within a one -mile
radius of the project area, the NCNHP recommends contacting the US Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) for guidance. Contact information for USFWS offices in North Carolina is found here:
httr)s://www.fws.gov/offices/Directory/ListOffices.cfm?statecode=37.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation
planning, project review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria
for regulatory decisions. Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published
without prior written notification to the NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information
source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP data may not be redistributed without permission.
Also please note that the NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional
correspondence if a Dedicated Nature Preserve, Registered Heritage Area, Land and Water Fund
easement, or an occurrence of a Federally -listed species is documented near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance,
please contact the NCNHP at natural.heritage�dncr.nc.gov.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
DEPARTMEN7! OF NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
121 W. JONES STREET, RnLDO i. NC 27603 . 16-D MAIL SERVICE C D,4TER. RALEIGH, NC 27699
OFC 3}9.707.9120 • FAX 919.707.IN21

■
E .
z
$ E
\ E
t/
e
�
/ e
/ E
sz
2 �» �
=a
E \
_ O
/®
0
o_
}
e ± |
\
t
/
\
\
>
s
§
\
c

CO CO
g 2
\\
0
0
/
\ a v e
e
e
e
CO\�
\
\
\\\�
es
a\
_ _
- e
u
3 /
/
e /
e /
/ / / e
% %`
%
/
°
O %
/
% /
% %
% 3 § / %
/
/ /
% %
s ®
®
z
® z
® ±
± ± ` z ®
`
~ 0
« ±
®
® ©�
e
/
7
7
e
e e o s
o
> e
0
\
�
\ \
\
/
/
/
\
2
H
}
>
/
>
>
4
E
4 4.D 4
4
4
4
g
=
%
4%
4 0
0 00 o
0
0
0
/
\\\\
e
u
e
e
v
v v x v
v
v
v
§
<
6
?
�
\
(
t =
\\
E
/ƒ
CI.
ƒ
x 2 2 2
2
2
x
4 0g
°
®
j
\g0
»
s.=av
\ \
N
\
/
/
y
»ece
®
a
»
e
yg�/
=
e o
3
m®
®
e
& y o 0
¢
&
0
s -
a 2
e
±
e 2
% %
%
3
© \ 3
c
©
\
\
//
E Z
e
o 0
0
a
3 y e v
¢
3
e
�
/ ©
7
\
\
3
\ % % %
\
$
/
\ 4\
°
<
g \
y\
\
2
2
\
/
COe
Z
0
e
e
\
Ln
0
\
0
E
%
%
\ z(\
/
CO
E
E
®
5 2//
^
-
u
\
-0
®
®
« > ® -0
CO1
\
/ \
\
CO
0
>
>
=
e 2 \ )
=
§
m
-
E
\
\
\
/ z » u
e=
\
%
\ /
2
/
E
o
0
0
\/\ ./
0
0
2 0
E
O
§
e
e
Z
s> a o
2
2
s 3
§
/
\
E \
/
E
e
e .2 2
CO
e
k
` 5 3«
-
k
3
?
e
/ .J » %
s =
%
a
CO
?
\
\
/
\ \
CO 0
>
»
e
u
u=
e
u
e r
=.
E
e e/ E E
®
\/CO
o
\
%
y
o
c o
e s
m
3 3 z e.2.2
CO
y e
s
»
_ _ = CO = _
/
= s
m
\
/
E
E
\ E
0 (\
\ /.\ \ \
° >
2
_
/
/
\ /
\ /
E E 4 0 2 2
-i
\ \
\
u
/
C)
\
\
/
/
\
\ / / %
\
0
±
cc)%
m
CO
/
\
\
/ \ \
/
/
\
\
\
\ \ \ \
<
\
\
CO
CO
CO
g
x
x x
x
6 6 6 6
6
6
6
/
t
\\\\m
°
E
Cl
\
Ln E \
E
®
E/
/ / / /
/
/
/
CO
w e
g
m
\\\\
\
\
\
0
CO
/
j
�
\
\
CO
2
E
}
O
CO
\
\
\
E
0
0
\
ƒ
\
\
CO
/
x
0
ra
s
\
c

CL
V
r
W
■
fi
L�
F�
s�
t
u ch v
r
4
L' 9
P
Z � i
8 y
J L
r
J•
N
a

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
In Reply Refer To:
Project Code: 2024-0030997
Project Name: Mid -Atlantic Industrial Project
December 29, 2023
Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project
location or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
The enclosed species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as
well as proposed and final designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your
proposed project and/or may be affected by your proposed project. The species list fulfills the
requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the
Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). If your project area
contains suitable habitat for any of the federally -listed species on this species list, the proposed
action has the potential to adversely affect those species. If suitable habitat is present, surveys
should be conducted to determine the species' presence or absence within the project area. The
use of this species list and/or North Carolina Natural Heritage program data should not be
substituted for actual field surveys.
New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of
species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Please feel free to
contact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to
federally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed critical
habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the
Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be
completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be
completed by visiting the IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and
implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested
through the IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list.
The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species and the
ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) of the
Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 et seq.), Federal agencies are required to
utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of threatened and endangered

12/29/2023
species and to determine whether projects may affect threatened and endangered species and/or
designated critical habitat.
A Biological Assessment is required for construction projects (or other undertakings having
similar physical impacts) that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the
human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)
(c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a biological
evaluation similar to a Biological Assessment be prepared to determine whether the project may
affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat. Recommended
contents of a Biological Assessment are described at 50 CFR 402.12.
If a Federal agency determines, based on the Biological Assessment or biological evaluation, that
listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be affected by the proposed project, the
agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to 50 CFR 402. In addition, the Service
recommends that candidate species, proposed species and proposed critical habitat be addressed
within the consultation. More information on the regulations and procedures for section 7
consultation, including the role of permit or license applicants, can be found in the "Endangered
Species Consultation Handbook" at:
https://www.fws. gov/sites/defaultlfiles/documents/endangered-species-consultation-
handbook.pdf
Migratory Birds: In addition to responsibilities to protect threatened and endangered species
under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), there are additional responsibilities under the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) to
protect native birds from project -related impacts. Any activity, intentional or unintentional,
resulting in take of migratory birds, including eagles, is prohibited unless otherwise permitted by
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)). For more
information regarding these Acts, see https://www.fws.gov/program/migratory-bird-permit/what-
we-do.
The MBTA has no provision for allowing take of migratory birds that may be unintentionally
killed or injured by otherwise lawful activities. It is the responsibility of the project proponent to
comply with these Acts by identifying potential impacts to migratory birds and eagles within
applicable NEPA documents (when there is a federal nexus) or a Bird/Eagle Conservation Plan
(when there is no federal nexus). Proponents should implement conservation measures to avoid
or minimize the production of project -related stressors or minimize the exposure of birds and
their resources to the project -related stressors. For more information on avian stressors and
recommended conservation measures, see https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/threats-birds.
In addition to MBTA and BGEPA, Executive Order 13186: Responsibilities of Federal Agencies
to Protect Migratory Birds, obligates all Federal agencies that engage in or authorize activities
that might affect migratory birds, to minimize those effects and encourage conservation measures
that will improve bird populations. Executive Order 13186 provides for the protection of both
migratory birds and migratory bird habitat. For information regarding the implementation of
Executive Order 13186, please visit https://www.fws.gov/partner/council-conservation-
migratory-birds.

12/29/2023
3
We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages
Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project
planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Code in the header of
this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project that you submit
to our office.
Attachment(s):
• Official Species List
• USFWS National Wildlife Refuges and Fish Hatcheries
• Bald & Golden Eagles
• Migratory Birds
OFFICIAL SPECIES LIST
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the
requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether
any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed
action".
This species list is provided by:
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
[phone]

12/29/2023
4
PROJECT SUMMARY
Project Code: 2024-0030997
Project Name: Mid -Atlantic Industrial Project
Project Type: New Constr - Above Ground
Project Description: Industrial project
Project Location:
The approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:
www. google.com/maps/(a)34.30809025,-78. 18114168580294,14z
r
¢�k
Counties: Brunswick and Columbus counties, North Carolina

12/29/2023 5
ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT SPECIES
There is a total of 14 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.
Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include
species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species
list because a project could affect downstream species.
IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA
Fisheriesi, as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the
Department of Commerce.
See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially
within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office
if you have questions.
1. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an
office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of
Commerce.
MAMMALS
NAME
STATUS
Northern Long-eared Bat Myotis septentrionalis
Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9045
Tricolored Bat Perimyotis subflavus
Proposed
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Endangered
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/10515
BIRDS
NAME
STATUS
Piping Plover Charadrius melodus
Threatened
Population: [Atlantic Coast and Northern Great Plains populations] - Wherever found, except
those areas where listed as endangered.
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6039
Red -cockaded Woodpecker Picoides borealis
Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7614
Rufa Red Knot Calidris canutus rufa
Threatened
There is proposed critical habitat for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1864

12/29/2023
H.
REPTILES
NAME
STATUS
American Alligator Alligator mississippiensis
Similarity of
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Appearance
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/776
(Threatened)
Green Sea Turtle Chelonia mydas
Threatened
Population: North Atlantic DPS
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6199
Kemp's Ridley Sea Turtle Lepidochelys kempii
Endangered
There is proposed critical habitat for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5523
Leatherback Sea Turtle Dermochelys coriacea
Endangered
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1493
Loggerhead Sea Turtle Caretta caretta
Threatened
Population: Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1110
SNAILS
NAME STATUS
Magnificent Ramshorn Planorbella magni fica Endangered
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6216
INSECTS
NAME STATUS
Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus Candidate
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743
FLOWERING PLANTS
NAME STATUS
Cooley's Meadowrue Thalictrum cooleyi Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3281
Rough -leaved Loosestrife Lysimachia asperulaefolia Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2747

12/29/2023
CRITICAL HABITATS
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S
JURISDICTION.
YOU ARE STILL REQUIRED TO DETERMINE IF YOUR PROJECT(S) MAY HAVE EFFECTS ON ALL
ABOVE LISTED SPECIES.
USFWS NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE LANDS
AND FISH HATCHERIES
Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a
'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to
discuss any questions or concerns.
THERE ARE NO REFUGE LANDS OR FISH HATCHERIES WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA.
BALD & GOLDEN EAGLES
Bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Acti and the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act2.
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to bald or
golden eagles, or their habitats3, should follow appropriate regulations and consider
implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described in the links below. Specifically,
please review the "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles".
1. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
2. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
3. 50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)
There are bald and/or golden eagles in your project area.
For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures
to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, see the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE
SUMMARY below to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your
project area.
NAME
BREEDING SEASON
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Breeds Sep 1 to
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention Jul 31
because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain
types of development or activities.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1626

12/29/2023
E3
PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be
present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project
activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read "Supplemental
Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles", specifically the FAQ section titled "Proper
Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret
this report.
Probability of Presence (■)
Green bars; the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project
overlaps during that week of the year.
Breeding Season( )
Yellow bars; liberal estimate of the timeframe inside which the bird breeds across its entire
range.
Survey Effort (1)
Vertical black lines; the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s)
your project area overlaps.
No Data (—)
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.
probability of presence breeding season I survey effort — no data
SPECIES
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
JUL AUG
SEP OCT NOV DEC
Bald Eagle
+++i +i+i ii'+ +++++++
IN 116
++++
loom
""kNon-BCC +++ ++fi +iii
mmmmM�---- non`
`■■ ■��� ����
Vulnerable
Additional information can be found using the following links:
• Eagle Management https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management
• Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds https://www.fws.gov/library
collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take-mi rator.
• Nationwide conservation measures for birds https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/
documents/nationwide-standard-conservation-measures.pdf
• Supplemental Information for Migratory Birds and Eagles in IPaC https://www.fws.gov/
media/supplemental-information-mi ratory-birds-and-bald-and-golden-ea les-may-occur-
project-action

12/29/2023
MIGRATORY BIRDS
Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Acti and the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act2.
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to
migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider
implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described in the links below. Specifically,
please review the "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles".
1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
3. 50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)
For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures
to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, see the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE
SUMMARY below to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your
project area.
BREEDING
NAME
SEASON
American Kestrel Falco sparverius paulus
Breeds Apr 1 to
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions
Aug 31
(BCRs) in the continental USA
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9587
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus
Breeds Sep 1 to
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention
Jul 31
because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types
of development or activities.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1626
Brown -headed Nuthatch Sitta pusilla
Breeds Mar 1 to
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions
Jul 15
(BCRs) in the continental USA
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9427
Chimney Swift Chaetura pelagica
Breeds Mar 15
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
to Aug 25
and Alaska.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9406
Prairie Warbler Dendroica discolor
Breeds May 1
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
to Jul 31
and Alaska.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9513

12/29/2023
10
BREEDING
NAME
SEASON
Prothonotary Warbler Protonotaria citrea
Breeds Apr 1 to
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
Jul 31
and Alaska.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9439
Red-headed Woodpecker Melanerpes erythrocephalus
Breeds May 10
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
to Sep 10
and Alaska.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9398
Swallow-tailed Kite Elanoides forficatus
Breeds Mar 10
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
to Jun 30
and Alaska.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8938
Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina
Breeds May 10
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
to Aug 31
and Alaska.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9431
PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be
present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project
activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read "Supplemental
Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles", specifically the FAQ section titled "Proper
Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret
this report.
Probability of Presence (■)
Green bars; the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project
overlaps during that week of the year.
Breeding Season( )
Yellow bars; liberal estimate of the timeframe inside which the bird breeds across its entire
range.
Survey Effort (1)
Vertical black lines; the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s)
your project area overlaps.
No Data (—)
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.
0 probability of presence breeding season I survey effort — no data

12/29/2023
11
SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
American Kestrel +++� I +++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ +.,— ++++ ++++ ++++
BCC - BCR `gym= ==== ==== rE■■ hi
Bald Eagle ■■■` ____ __ I Jill 116 ..� Jill ++++ III khNon-BCC +++i +i+j iiNi +iii
Vulnerable
--- iii
———
Brown-headedI��� I 10111P iq+111h 11111111111111111111
Nuthatch
BCC -BCR
Chimney Swift BCC Rangewide ++�.
Prairie Warbler �1""' F
BCC Rangewide +++ �— --- �—++ ++ —'� ��++— ++++ �—�� —�-- ---�
(CON)
Prothonotary ++++ ++++ ++++ MillsWarbler 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 . ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++
BCC Rangewide bommo mmmm
(CON)
Red-headed Woodpecker I III Jill l i l t I.1+11111 +111 ++++ P+11 111+ 111+ +4 I I I I I
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Swallow-tailed Kite ����
BCC Rangewide ++++ ++++ ++++ 1++1 ++11 ,11+ +111 11..................
(CON)
Wood Thrush 111 Jill Jill 1116 — — — — — — — — — — — — ----
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Additional information can be found using the following links:
• Eagle Management https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management
• Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds https://www.fws.gov/library
collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take-mi rator.
• Nationwide conservation measures for birds https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/
documents/nationwide-standard-conservation-measures.pdf
• Supplemental Information for Migratory Birds and Eagles in IPaC https://www.fws.gov/
media/SUDDlemental-information-mip-ratorv-birds-and-bald-and-p-olden-eas7les-mav-occur-
project-action

12/29/2023
IPAC USER CONTACT INFORMATION
Agency:
Private Entity
Name:
Kim Williams
Address:
3805 Wrightsville Avenue
Address Line 2: Suite 15
City: Wilmington
State: NC
Zip: 28403
Email [e-mail]
Phone: [phone]

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
In Reply Refer To: December 29, 2023
Project code: 2024-0030997
Project Name: Mid -Atlantic Industrial Project
Federal Nexus: yes
Federal Action Agency (if applicable): Army Corps of Engineers
Subject: Technical assistance for 'Mid -Atlantic Industrial Project'
Dear Kim Williams:
This letter records your determination using the Information for Planning and Consultation
(IPaC) system provided to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) on December 29, 2023,
for 'Mid -Atlantic Industrial Project' (here forward, Project). This project has been assigned
Project Code 2024-0030997 and all future correspondence should clearly reference this number.
Please carefully review this letter. Your Endangered Species Act (Act) requirements are not
complete.
Ensuring Accurate Determinations When Using IPaC
The Service developed the IPaC system and associated species' determination keys in accordance
with the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA; 87 Stat. 884, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.) and based on a standing analysis. All information submitted by the Project proponent into
IPaC must accurately represent the full scope and details of the Project.
Failure to accurately represent or implement the Project as detailed in IPaC or the Northern
Long-eared Bat Rangewide Determination Key (Dkey), invalidates this letter. Answers to certain
questions in the DKey commit the project proponent to implementation of conservation
measures that must be followed for the ESA determination to remain valid.
Determination for the Northern Long -Eared Bat
Based upon your IPaC submission and a standing analysis, your project is not reasonably certain
to cause incidental take of the northern long-eared bat. Unless the Service advises you within 15
days of the date of this letter that your IPaC-assisted determination was incorrect, this letter
verifies that the Action is not likely to result in unauthorized take of the northern long-eared bat.

Project code: 2024-0030997 IPaC Record Locator: 814-136401592 12/29/2023
Other Species and Critical Habitat that May be Present in the Action Area
The IPaC-assisted determination for the northern long-eared bat does not apply to the following
ESA -protected species and/or critical habitat that also may occur in your Action area:
• American Alligator Alligator mississippiensis Similarity of Appearance (Threatened)
• Cooley's Meadowrue Thalictrum cooleyi Endangered
• Green Sea Turtle Chelonia mydas Threatened
• Kemp's Ridley Sea Turtle Lepidochelys kempii Endangered
• Leatherback Sea Turtle Dermochelys coriacea Endangered
• Loggerhead Sea Turtle Caretta caretta Threatened
• Magnificent Ramshorn Planorbella magni fica Endangered
• Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus Candidate
• Piping Plover Charadrius melodus Threatened
• Red -cockaded Woodpecker Picoides borealis Endangered
• Rough -leaved Loosestrife Lysimachia asperulaefolia Endangered
• Rufa Red Knot Calidris canutus rufa Threatened
• Tricolored Bat Perimyotis subflavus Proposed Endangered
You may coordinate with our Office to determine whether the Action may cause prohibited take
of the animal species listed above. Note that if a new species is listed that may be affected by the
identified action before it is complete, additional review is recommended to ensure compliance
with the Endangered Species Act.
Next Step
Consultation with the Service is necessary. The project has a federal nexus (e.g., Federal funds,
permit, etc.), but you are not the federal action agency or its designated (in writing) non-federal
representative. Therefore, the ESA consultation status is incomplete and no project activities
should occur until consultation between the Service and the Federal action agency (or designated
non-federal representative), is completed.
As the federal agency or designated non-federal representative deems appropriate, they should
submit their determination of effects to the Service by doing the following.
1. Log into IPaC using an agency email account and click on My Projects, click "Search by
record locator" to find this Project using 814-136401592. (Alternatively, the originator of
the project in IPaC can add the agency representative to the project by using the Add
Member button on the project home page.)
2. Review the answers to the Northern Long-eared Bat Range -wide Determination Key to
ensure that they are accurate.
3. Click on Review/Finalize to convert the `not likely to adversely affect' consistency letter to
a concurrence letter. Download the concurrence letter for your files if needed.
DKey Version Publish Date: 10/19/2023
2of11

Project code: 2024-0030997 IPaC Record Locator: 814-136401592 12/29/2023
If no changes occur with the Project or there are no updates on listed species, no further
consultation/coordination for this project is required for the northern long-eared bat. However,
the Service recommends that project proponents re-evaluate the Project in IPaC if: 1) the scope,
timing, duration, or location of the Project changes (includes any project changes or
amendments); 2) new information reveals the Project may impact (positively or negatively)
federally listed species or designated critical habitat; or 3) a new species is listed, or critical
habitat designated. If any of the above conditions occurs, additional coordination with the
Service should take place before project implements any changes which are final or commits
additional resources.
If you have any questions regarding this letter or need further assistance, please contact the
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office and reference Project Code 2024-0030997 associated
with this Project.
DKey Version Publish Date: 10/19/2023 3 of 11

Project code: 2024-0030997 IPaC Record Locator: 814-136401592 12/29/2023
Action Description
You provided to IPaC the following name and description for the subject Action.
1. Name
Mid -Atlantic Industrial Project
2. Description
The following description was provided for the project 'Mid -Atlantic Industrial Project':
Industrial project
The approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https://
www.google.com/maps/(a)34.30809025,-78.18114168580294,14z
ane�h
DKey Version Publish Date: 10/19/2023 4 of 11

Project code: 2024-0030997 IPaC Record Locator: 814-136401592 12/29/2023
DETERMINATION KEY RESULT
Based on the answers provided, the proposed Action is consistent with a determination of "may
affect, but not likely to adversely affect" for the Endangered northern long-eared bat (Myotis
septentrionalis).
QUALIFICATION INTERVIEW
1. Does the proposed project include, or is it reasonably certain to cause, intentional take of
the northern long-eared bat or any other listed species?
Note: Intentional take is defined as take that is the intended result of a project. Intentional take could refer to
research, direct species management, surveys, and/or studies that include intentional handling/encountering,
harassment, collection, or capturing of any individual of a federally listed threatened, endangered or proposed
species?
No
2. Your project overlaps with an area where northern long-eared bats may be present year-
round. Time -of -year restrictions may not be appropriate for your project due to bats being
active all year.
Do you understand that your project may impact bats at any time during the year and time -
of -year restrictions may not apply to your project?
Yes
3. The action area does not overlap with an area for which U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
currently has data to support the presumption that the northern long-eared bat is present.
Are you aware of other data that indicates that northern long-eared bats (NLEB) are likely
to be present in the action area?
Bat occurrence data may include identification of NLEBs in hibernacula, capture of
NLEBs, tracking of NLEBs to roost trees, or confirmed NLEB acoustic detections. Data
on captures, roost tree use, and acoustic detections should post-date the year when white -
nose syndrome was detected in the relevant state. With this question, we are looking for
data that, for some reason, may have not yet been made available to U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
No
4. Does any component of the action involve construction or operation of wind turbines?
Note: For federal actions, answer `yes' if the construction or operation of wind power facilities is either (1) part
of the federal action or (2) would not occur but for a federal agency action (federal permit, funding, etc.).
No
DKey Version Publish Date: 10/19/2023
5 of 11

Project code: 2024-0030997 IPaC Record Locator: 814-136401592 12/29/2023
5. Is the proposed action authorized, permitted, licensed, funded, or being carried out by a
Federal agency in whole or in part?
Yes
6. Is the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Federal Railroad Administration (FRA),
or Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funding or authorizing the proposed action, in
whole or in part?
No
7. Are you an employee of the federal action agency or have you been officially designated in
writing by the agency as its designated non-federal representative for the purposes of
Endangered Species Act Section 7 informal consultation per 50 CFR § 402.08?
Note: This key may be used for federal actions and for non-federal actions to facilitate section 7 consultation and
to help determine whether an incidental take permit may be needed, respectively. This question is for information
purposes only.
No
8. Is the lead federal action agency the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or Federal
Communications Commission (FCC)? Is the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) funding or authorizing the proposed action,
in whole or in part?
No
9. Is the lead federal action agency the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)?
No
DKey Version Publish Date: 10/19/2023 6 of 11

Project code: 2024-0030997 IPaC Record Locator: 814-136401592 12/29/2023
10. Have you determined that your proposed action will have no effect on the northern long-
eared bat? Remember to consider the effects of any activities that would not occur but for
the proposed action.
If you think that the northern long-eared bat may be affected by your project or if you
would like assistance in deciding, answer "No" below and continue through the key. If you
have determined that the northern long-eared bat does not occur in your project's action
area and/or that your project will have no effects whatsoever on the species despite the
potential for it to occur in the action area, you may make a "no effect" determination for
the northern long-eared bat.
Note: Federal agencies (or their designated non-federal representatives) must consult with USFWS on federal
agency actions that may affect listed species [50 CFR 402.14(a)]. Consultation is not required for actions that will
not affect listed species or critical habitat. Therefore, this determination key will not provide a consistency or
verification letter for actions that will not affect listed species. If you believe that the northern long-eared bat may
be affected by your project or if you would like assistance in deciding, please answer "No" and continue through
the key. Remember that this key addresses only effects to the northern long-eared bat. Consultation with USFWS
would be required if your action may affect another listed species or critical habitat. The definition of Effects of
the Action can be found here: https://www.fws.gov/media/northern-long-eared-bat-assisted-determination-key
selected -definitions
No
11. Your project overlaps with an area where northern long-eared bats may be present year-
round.
Is suitable northern long-eared bat habitat present within 1000 feet of project activities?
Yes
12. Will the action cause effects to a bridge?
No
13. Will the action result in effects to a culvert or tunnel?
Yes
14. Do the interior dimensions of the culvert or tunnel equal or exceed 4.0 feet (1.3 meters) in
height and 130 feet (40 meters) in length? Answer "No" if the affected culvert(s) or tunnel
is smaller in either of these two dimensions.
No
DKey Version Publish Date: 10/19/2023 7 of 11

Project code: 2024-0030997 IPaC Record Locator: 814-136401592 12/29/2023
15. Does the action include the intentional exclusion of northern long-eared bats from a
building or structure?
Note: Exclusion is conducted to deny bats' entry or reentry into a building. To be effective and to avoid harming
bats, it should be done according to established standards. If your action includes bat exclusion and you are
unsure whether northern long-eared bats are present, answer "Yes." Answer "No" if there are no signs of bat use
in the building/structure. If unsure, contact your local U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services Ecological Services Field
Office to help assess whether northern long-eared bats may be present. Contact a Nuisance Wildlife Control
Operator (NWCO) for help in how to exclude bats from a structure safely without causing harm to the bats (to
find a NWCO certified in bat standards, search the Internet using the search term "National Wildlife Control
Operators Association bats"). Also see the White -Nose Syndrome Response Team's guide for bat control in
structures
No
16. Does the action involve removal, modification, or maintenance of a human -made structure
(barn, house, or other building) known or suspected to contain roosting bats?
No
17. Will the action directly or indirectly cause construction of one or more new roads that are
open to the public?
Note: The answer may be yes when a publicly accessible road either (1) is constructed as part of the proposed
action or (2) would not occur but for the proposed action (i.e., the road construction is facilitated by the proposed
action but is not an explicit component of the project).
No
18. Will the action include or cause any construction or other activity that is reasonably certain
to increase average daily traffic on one or more existing roads?
Note: For federal actions, answer `yes' when the construction or operation of these facilities is either (1) part of
the federal action or (2) would not occur but for an action taken by a federal agency (federal permit, funding,
etc.). .
No
19. Will the action include or cause any construction or other activity that is reasonably certain
to increase the number of travel lanes on an existing thoroughfare?
For federal actions, answer `yes' when the construction or operation of these facilities is
either (1) part of the federal action or (2) would not occur but for an action taken by a
federal agency (federal permit, funding, etc.).
No
20. Will the proposed action involve the creation of a new water -borne contaminant source
(e.g., leachate pond pits containing chemicals that are not NSF/ANSI 60 compliant)?
No
DKey Version Publish Date: 10/19/2023
8 of 11

Project code: 2024-0030997 IPaC Record Locator: 814-136401592 12/29/2023
21. Will the proposed action involve the creation of a new point source discharge from a
facility other than a water treatment plant or storm water system?
No
22. Will the action include drilling or blasting?
Yes
23. Will the drilling or blasting affect known or potentially suitable hibernacula, summer
habitat, or active year-round habitat (where applicable) for the northern long-eared bat?
Note: In addition to direct impacts to hibernacula, consider impacts to hydrology or air flow that may impact the
suitability of hibernacula. Additional information defining suitable summer habitat for the northern long-eared bat
can be found at: https://www.fws.gov/media/northern-long-eared-bat-assisted-determination-key-selected-
definitions
Yes
24. Will the proposed action result in the cutting or other means of knocking down, bringing
down, or trimming of any trees suitable for northern long-eared bat roosting?
Note: Suitable northern long-eared bat roost trees are live trees and/or snags >_3 inches dbh that have exfoliating
bark, cracks, crevices, and/or cavities.
Yes
DKey Version Publish Date: 10/19/2023 9 of 11

Project code: 2024-0030997 IPaC Record Locator: 814-136401592 12/29/2023
PROJECT QUESTIONNAIRE
Enter the extent of the action area (in acres) from which trees will be removed - round up
to the nearest tenth of an acre. For this question, include the entire area where tree removal
will take place, even if some live or dead trees will be left standing.
828
In what extent of the area (in acres) will trees be cut, knocked down, or trimmed during the
inactive (hibernation) season for northern long-eared bat? Note: Inactive Season dates for spring
staging/fall swarming areas can be found here: https://www.fws.gov/media/inactive-season-dates-swarming-and-
staging-areas
0
In what extent of the area (in acres) will trees be cut, knocked down, or trimmed during the
active (non -hibernation) season for northern long-eared bat? Note: Inactive Season dates for
spring staging/fall swarming areas can be found here: https://www.fws.gov/media/inactive-season-dates-
swarming-and-staging-areas
828
Will all potential northern long-eared bat (NLEB) roost trees (trees >_3 inches diameter at
breast height, dbh) be cut, knocked, or brought down from any portion of the action area
greater than or equal to 0.1 acre? If all NLEB roost trees will be removed from multiple
areas, select `Yes' if the cumulative extent of those areas meets or exceeds 0.1 acre.
Yes
Enter the extent of the action area (in acres) from which all potential NLEB roost trees will
be removed. If all NLEB roost trees will be removed from multiple areas, entire the total
extent of those areas. Round up to the nearest tenth of an acre.
828
For the area from which all potential northern long-eared bat (NLEB) roost trees will be
removed, on how many acres (round to the nearest tenth of an acre) will trees be allowed
to regrow? Enter `0' if the entire area from which all potential NLEB roost trees are
removed will be developed or otherwise converted to non -forest for the foreseeable future.
0
Will any snags (standing dead trees) >_3 inches dbh be left standing in the area(s) in which
all northern long-eared bat roost trees will be cut, knocked down, or otherwise brought
down?
No
Will all project activities by completed by April 1, 2024?
No
DKey Version Publish Date: 10/19/2023
10 of 11

Project code: 2024-0030997 IPaC Record Locator: 814-136401592
12/29/2023
IPAC USER CONTACT INFORMATION
Agency:
Private Entity
Name:
Kim Williams
Address:
3805 Wrightsville Avenue
Address Line 2:
Suite 15
City:
Wilmington
State:
NC
Zip:
28403
Email
[e-mail]
Phone:
9104520001
LEAD AGENCY CONTACT INFORMATION
Lead Agency: Army Corps of Engineers
Name: Gary Beecher
Email: [e-mail]
DKey Version Publish Date: 10/19/2023 11 of 11

RCW SLOPES Manual — North Carolina
March 2022
Appendix B — Red -cockaded Woodpecker Effects Determination Key
Mid -Atlantic Industrial Project; Brunswick Co.
ORM2 No.:
USFWS Reference No. (if applicable): SAW-2008-01015
Date 02/15/24
US Army Corps
a1 Eng noers
1) Is the action areal located within the RCW consultation area (see Appendix A and project -specific
results from a project -specific IPaC or internal USACE GIS review)?
a) Yes......................................................................................................................................... go to 2
b) No...................................................................................................................................... No effectZ
2) Is the action area' located in the northeastern coastal plain (see Appendix A)?
a) Yes.......................................................................................................................................... go to 3
b) No (the project is located in piedmont, sandhills, or southeastern coastal plain).................go to 4
3) Is the action area' located in a forested area with pine trees present in northeast North Carolina (e.g.,
high pocosin, Atlantic white cedar, nonriverine swamp forests, pond pine woodland, coastal fringe
evergreen forest, wet successional pine/pine-hardwood forest, or pine plantation or uplands)? If yes,
are the pine trees greater than 30 years of age (if stand age is not readily determined, refer to Table
1 for a description of the minimum dbh of 30-year-old pines associated with each community type).
If the answer to both of these questions is yes, choose Yes below. If the answer to one or both
questions is no, then choose No below.
a) Yes.......................................................................................................................................... go to 8
b) No...................................................................................................................................... No effectZ
4) Is the action area' located within suitable RCW foraging or nesting habitat (pine or pine/hardwood
stands in which 50% or more of the dominant trees are pines and the dominant pine trees are 30
years of age or older or >_8-inches dbh')?
a) Yes.......................................................................................................................................... go to 5
b) No...................................................................................................................................... No effectZ
5) Will any activity in the action area' remove trees equal to or greater than 8 inches dbh; or will any
activity occur within 200 feet of known RCW cavity trees? If unable to determine the location of a
cavity tree with confidence, contact the USFWS Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office.
a) Yes (to one or both)............................................................................................................... go to 6
b) No............................................................................................................................................ NLAA'
12

RCW SLOPES Manual — North Carolina
March 2022
6) Is the action areal located in suitable RCW nesting habitat (in the sandhills and piedmont: pine or
pine/hardwood stands that contain pines 60 years in age or older or >_10 inches dbh; in the
southeastern coastal plain: pine or pine/hardwood stands that contain pines >_8 inches dbh, including
but not limited to pine flatwoods, pocosin, pine savannah, upland pine/hardwood)?
a) Yes........................................................................................................................................... go to 9
b) No............................................................................................................................................goto7
7) Does suitable nesting habitat occur within 0.5 miles of suitable foraging habitat that would be
impacted by any activity in the action areal?
a) Yes......................................................................................................................................... go to 9
b) No............................................................................................................................................ NLAA3
8) Refer to Table 1 in the SLOPES for the northeastern North Carolina habitat type in the action areal.
Are pine trees with a dbh equal to or greater than that shown in Table 1 proposed to be removed in
the action areal, or is the action areal within 200 feet of a cavity tree? If the answer to either of these
questions is yes, choose Yes below. If unable to determine the location of a cavity tree with
confidence, then contact the USFWS Raleigh Field Office.
a) Yes......................................................................................................................................... go to 9
b) No............................................................................................................................................ NLAA3
9) Contact the appropriate USACE representative for a pre -application meeting to determine if a survey
is necessary (for a list of USACE representatives please see the contact list at http://saw-
reg.usace.army.mil/FO/PM List.pdf). Note that project -specific information, such as a delineation of
waters of the U.S., project plans, and details concerning certain activities on disturbances that would
occur in the action areal (e.g. percussive activities, forest management, or similar disturbances), may
be needed for the USACE to determine the action area(s)l of the project. If a survey is required and
agreed to by the applicant, all suitable RCW nesting habitat within 0.5 miles of the action areal should
be surveyed according to USFWS protocol for the presence of RCW cavity trees'. If the applicant is
unwilling or unable to conduct the survey, standard consultation with the USFWS should begin. Such
surveys are conducted by running line transects through stands and visually inspecting all medium-
sized and large pines for evidence of cavity excavation by RCWs. Transects must be spaced so that all
trees are inspected and are run north -south.
Was a survey performed?
a) Yes, a survey was performed, and RCW cavity trees were observed .................................... go to 10
b) Yes, the survey was submitted to the USFWS for concurrence, and the USFWS concurred with the
results (no RCW cavity trees were observed).......................................................................... NLAA3
c) No, the USACE determined that a survey was not required and the USFWS
concurred................................................................................................................................. NLAA3
d) No, a survey was not performed....................................................................Consultation required'
Survey of project area was performed by DRG (see additional info below).
10) Does the project involve activities or disturbances in the action areal (e.g., percussive activities, forest
management, or similar disturbances) within the 200-foot cavity tree buffer, and/or cause removal or
damage to RCW cavity trees (e.g., via root compaction, soil compaction)? If yes to either or both then
consultation is required.
a) Yes.................................................................................................................Consultation required'
b) No......................................................................................................................................... go to 11
13

RCW SLOPES Manual — North Carolina
March 2022
11) Has a foraging habitat analysis (FHA)' been conducted to determine whether enough foraging habitat
would remain for each RCW group post -project? For information on how to conduct an FHA', refer to
the "Procedures for Determining Foraging Habitat Availability" and the Private Land Guidelines.'
a) Yes, the FHA' has been submitted to the USFWS for concurrence' and the USFWS concurred that
adequate amounts of foraging habitat would remain post -project ...................................... NLAA3
b) Yes, and review of the FHA' by the USACE along with concurrence from USFWS determined
inadequate amounts of foraging habitat would remain post -project Consultation required'
c) No, an FHA' has not been conducted..........................................................Consultation required'
'Action Area means all areas to be affected directly or indirectly by the Federal action and not merely the immediate area involved
in the action. Please contact the appropriate USACE representative for any questions as to the action area for the Federal action.
For a list of USACE representatives, please see the contact list at: http://saw-reg.usace.army.miI/FO/PMList.pdf.
'No effect — The proposed project would result in no effect to this species and/or its federally designated critical habitat (if
applicable). Further consultation with the USFWS Raleigh and Asheville Ecological Services field offices is not necessary for the
project as described.
3NLAA—The proposed project may affect but is not likely to adversely affect this species and/or its designated critical habitat (if
applicable). NLAA determinations for projects made pursuant to this key require no further consultation with the USFWS Raleigh
and Asheville Ecological Services field offices, therefore, consultation is considered complete for this species. For General Permits,
submittal of a Pre -Construction Notification to the USACE will be required for all NLAA determinations.
4Follow link to USFWS RCW Recovery Plan, Appendix 4 for additional information on nesting and foraging habitats, and survey
protocol (https://www.fws.gov/rcwrecovery/files/RecoveryPlan/survey protocol.pdf)
-'Consultation required — Contact the USACE to begin this consultation process. For a list of USACE representatives please see the
contact list at http://saw-reg.usace.army.miI/FO/PMList.pdf. Further consultation with the USFWS Raleigh and Asheville
Ecological Services field offices is necessary to discern if the activity would result in a "no effect," "not likely to adversely affect,"
or "likely to adversely affect" determination.
6Follow links for additional information on conducting FHA (https://www.fws.gov/rcwrecovery/matrix.html) and for
determining foraging habitat availability(https://www.fws.gov/ncsandhills/files/fha data collection procedures.pdf).
'Follow link for additional information regarding determination for adequate amount of foraging habitat
(https://www.fws.gov/rcwrecovery/files/RecoveryPlan/private lands guidelines.pdf).
8 FHA —When an FHA is conducted, the USACE must provide the FHA to USFWS for review and concurrence
Additional Information
The tract has historically been utilized for timber production, and most of the site currently supports a
canopy of loblolly pines (Pinus taeda) in stands of varying ages. Smaller clusters of longleaf pines (P. palustris)
are located in the south-central part of the site. Several dirt roads provide access throughout the property.
As indicated above, there are existing overhead transmission lines that transect the property. These utility
corridors are mowed and support goldenrod, dog fennel, and other herbaceous species.
The site has been harvested several times over the last 24 years, with clear -cutting occurring in different
parts of the tract in 1998, 2005, and 2006. Additional thinning of stands occurred in 2008, 2010 and early
2018. More mature pine stands are located in the southcentral, central, and eastern portions of the
property. These areas contain pine trees that are between 6" and 18" DBH. The older pines (greater than
12" DBH) are infrequent. Like many other sections of the tract, this area supports a fairly dense understory
of red maple (Acer rubrum) and sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua) shrubs and trees. More recently
14

RCW SLOPES Manual — North Carolina
March 2022
harvested areas of the tract support loblolly pines that are 4" to 8" diameter at breast height (DBH). These
areas exhibit a moderate to thick shrub layer of red maple, sweetgum, and loblolly pine. These areas are
generally too young and densely vegetated to provide suitable nesting or foraging habitat.
More mature pine stands are located in the southcentral, central, and eastern portions of the property.
These areas contain pine trees that are between 6" and 18" DBH. While there is typically a dense shrub layer
present, the canopy above the shrub layer is fairly open. These areas appear to provide suitable nesting and
foraging habitat for the red cockaded woodpecker. Surveys were conducted in these stands of older and
larger pines. No cavities or RCWs were observed. Therefore, although the site does contain suitable nesting
and foraging habitat for this species, it does not appear to currently support any nesting colonies.
The additional 30 acres that was more recently added to the project consists of loblolly pines, red maple,
and sweetgum trees. The pines appear to be approximately 20 years old (average 6"-10" DBH). A dense
understory and shrub layer of pines, red bay, horse sugar, titi, and black gum is also present. Because of the
relatively young age of pines and overall amount of hardwoods in this area, it does not appear to be suitable
RCW nesting or foraging habitat.
15

APPENDIX D.
LCFUMB CREDIT RESERVATION LETTER

LOWER CAPE FEAR UMBRELLA MITIGATION BANK
STATEMENT OF CREDIT AVAILIBILITY
March 22, 2024
TO: Brunswick Business & Industry Development FROM: Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank
c/o Bill Early c/o Davey Resource Group Inc
1175 Turlington Avenue #202 3805 Wrightsville Avenue, Suite 15
Leland, NC 28451 Wilmington, NC 28403
Project: Mid -Atlantic Industrial Park (Brunswick County, NC)
Dear Mr. Early:
Pursuant to the recent credit request submitted on your behalf, the Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation
Bank (LCFUMB) is providing confirmation of acceptance to supply mitigation credits for proposed non -
riparian wetland impacts associated with the Mid -Atlantic Industrial Park project (Brunswick County, NC).
This acceptance is conditional upon receipt of payment as outlined below. Please refer to the table below
depicting the type and quantity of credits requested and reserved for your project.
I Mitigation Type
I Credits Reserved
Fee Per Unit
Fee
Stream
1 0.0 I
$740.09
$0.00
Non -Riparian Wetland
I 22.2
$64,727.61a
$1,436,952.94
-
[Riparian (Riverine) Wetland
0.0
$76,150.13
$0.00
Total Fee
$1,436,952.94
'Note that the quoted fee represents a 15% discount for mitigation credit needs equal to 10 or more credits. For mitigation needs
less than 10 credits, the retail fee of $76,150.13 will apply.
Based upon receipt of your email transmitted on March 21, 2024, LCFUMB will reserve 22.2 non -riparian
wetland credits for a period of up to 90 days from the date of this letter. Note that requests to reserve
credits beyond 90 days will require a deposit. Please contact us if you need a reservation to extend beyond
the 90-day period.
Upon request for receipt of credit transfer, LCFUMB will issue an invoice in the amount of $1,436,952.94.
Upon receipt of payment, LCFUMB will provide an executed Transfer of Credit Certificate. Note that all
payments must be made with certified funds. It is the applicant's responsibility to ensure that the credit
types and amounts requested are consistent with the compensatory mitigation requirements of the permit(s)
issued. LCFUMB and/or its agents are not responsible for determining the applicant's mitigation
requirements. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me by phone at
[phone] or by email at [e-mail]
Sincerely,
Davey Resource Group Inc. (agent for LCFUMB)
iJ
Christian Preziosi
Principal Consultant