20052116 Ver 3_401 Application_20171002

Corps Submittal Cover Sheet 1 „
S
Please provide the following info:
1. Project Name Caleb's Creek
2. Naive of Property Owner/Applicant: BOMA North Carolina, LLC
3. Name of Consultant/Agent: Wetlands & Waters, Inc. Attn: Perry Isner
*Agent authorization needs to be attached.
4. Related/Previous Action ID number(s): SAW -2015-01697 DWR #
5. Site Address: 168o Pine Tree Drive
6. Subdivision Name: Caleb's Creek
7. City: Kernersville
8. County: Forsyth
9. Lat: 36.o62387
10. Quadrangle Name:
11. Waterway: Abbotts Creek
12. Watershed: Lower Yadkin
13. Requested Action:
Long: -80.091225 (Decimal Degrees Please )
L"_1 Nationwide Permit #
General Pen -nit #
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Pre -Application Request
The following infonnation will be completed by Corps office:
Prepare File Folder
AID:
HUC 030401030202
Assign number in ORM
Authorization: Section 10
Project Description/ Nature of Activity/ Project Purpose:
D @1§OWR
D
(IC'T022017
D Q -WATER RE OUR ES
401 & BUFFER PERMITTING
Section 404
Site/Waters Name: Abbotts Creek HUC 030401030202
Keywords:
Begin Date

/ j/ WETLANDS
._,L & WATERS
September 18`h, 2017
Ms. Jean Gibby
US Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
CC: Ms. Sue Homewood
Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Water Resources
Winston Salem Regional Office
450 W. Hanes Mill Rd, Suite 300
Winston Salem NC 27105
RE: AID # SAW -2015-01697
Caleb's Creek
Nationwide Permit Verification
Kernersville, Forsyth County, NC
Ms. Gibby,
Attached, please find a Pre -Construction Notification for a Nationwide Permit Verification for a mixed-
use development located in Kernersville, Forsyth County, NC. The impacts associated with this project
are broken down by corresponding Nationwide Permit numbers on the tables attached with this
notification.
Proiect History
The approximately 875 acre site consists of an abandoned golf course, three large ponds that require
dam rehabilitation efforts, and extensive floodplain along Abbott's Creek. When this project was first
contemplated, it was intended to be a residential subdivision centered around a modernized and
improved golf facility. After extensive financial and environmental analysis, it was determined that the
golf course was not feasible and the decision was made to move forward with a mixed-use
residential/commercial development that incorporates large areas of common open space and
greenway walking trails. This alternative was deemed to be the least environmentally damaging, with
impacts only necessary for road and utility crossings, as well as dam rehabilitation.
In August of 2015, your office issued a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination with the Action ID
number referenced above. This determination serves as the basis for this permit verification.
Project Purpose
The purpose of the proposed project is to construct a mixed-use residential/commercial development in
order to meet the growing demands for housing and infrastructure in the region. The Town of
Kernersville will sign as a co -applicant for the impacts necessary for the completion of major public
thoroughfare right of ways through the project. These road improvements are part of the Kernersville
Thoroughfare and Street Plan, which is included with this submittal and would be completed
CHRISTOPHER HUYSMAN WETLANDS & WATERS, INC. TAMP BANDY
1 70 DEW DROP ROAD 41 OB LB PROPST DRIVE
SPARTA, NC 28675 CONOVER, NC 2861 3
336.406.0906 828.302.3437
[e-mail] [e-mail]

independent of the residential subdivision. All construction and permitting requirements will be the
obligation of the developer.
Project Need
Impacts to regulated features have been limited to road crossings necessary for completion of Town of
Kernersville thoroughfare roads, as well as the impacts necessary for the rehabilitation of the three
dams currently on site. These dam improvements are necessary to ensure the long term stability of the
impounded waters.
Impacts to the jurisdictional ponds will consist of stabilizing the existing earthen dams, installation of
primary and emergency spillway devices, as well as burying large diameter riprap/boulders at both the
inlets and outlets of the ponds. This large riprap will serve as an energy dissipator directly below both
the primary and emergency spillways. Riprap will be placed below the surface of the water and
submerged aquatic vegetation will be planted in order to increase stability of riprap and provide habitat
for aquatic wildlife. Extensive floodway analysis has been conducted to confirm that these efforts are
warranted and will provide the best method for protecting the downstream watershed, while
simultaneously minimizing impacts to the ponds themselves.
All impacts associated with roadway crossings are associated with the public thoroughfares mentioned
above and are necessary for access to high ground. All work will be done in the dry, with stream banks
returned to existing grade and stabilized with appropriate bio -engineering practices.
Proiect Description
The project consists of mixed-use development, residential (low, medium and high density),
commercial/office areas, a large amenity center, and a public school. Approximately 185 acres will be
left in common, passive -use open space. Incorporated throughout the subdivision as well as the open
space will be approximately 30,000 linear feet (5.7 miles) of greenway walking trails and 18,000 linear
feet (3.4 miles) of greenway biking trails. Infrastructure will consist of public thoroughfare roads,
internal subdivision circulation roads, and appurtenant parking facilities. Transportation approvals
mandate the establishment of multilane ingress and egress for safety and they dictate that the
driveways be located within a certain range of locations.
Stormwater management associated with construction efforts of the thoroughfare crossings will adhere
to specifications outline in the North Carolina Department of Transportation BMP Toolbox. Although
major thoroughfare right-of-ways will be turned over to the Town of Kernersville following construction,
stormwater approvals for this work will also be approved at the time of construction. Following
approval, the stormwater management plans will also be provided to the Division of Water Resources.
Avoidance and Minimization
The site has been carefully designed to avoid impacts to regulated features wherever possible. Where
impacts cannot be completely avoided, extensive engineering analysis has been done in order to
minimize impacts. The proposed stream crossings are perpendicular to the existing natural channels
and impacts are as narrow as possible to minimize impacts while allowing suitably functioning
infrastructure. Medians have been reduced to greatest extent practicable in order to minimize impacts
to aquatic resources. Proposed road locations are situated, to the maximum extent practicable, at
locations that have been previously impacted by existing roads or fairways. The proposed site
development eliminates the golf component of the prior project plans and replaces it with passive
recreational uses thereby reducing wetland impacts by over 4 acres. The applicant proposes that box
CHRISTOPHER HUYSMAN WETLANDS & WATERS, INC. TAMP BANDY
1 70 DEW DROP ROAD 41 08 LS PROPST DRIVE
SPARTA, NO 28675 CONOVER, NO 26613
336.406.0906 828.302.3437
CHRIS. [e-mail] [e-mail]

culverts will be sized with the consideration of natural stream design protocols and will be constructed
with sills that will maintain natural stream bed material that is a minimum of twelve (12) inches deep.
The applicant has designed a site plan that minimizes riparian habitat fragmentation through the
establishment of dispersal corridors along all remaining streams. Total impacts to open waters
necessary for completion of the dam rehabilitation totals 1.04 acres, approximately 5% of the total
surface area of open waters present on site. Road crossings will be designed to utilize retaining walls
and riprap dissipators in order to minimize impacts to regulated features. Riprap will be pressed into
the stream banks and will not be placed into the stream bed itself. Existing utility and road crossings will
be up -fitted and utilized wherever possible. Remaining jurisdictional Waters of the US consist of
approximately 30,000 linear feet of intermittent streams, 14,000 linear feet of perennial streams, 18
acres of jurisdictional open waters, and 15 acres of jurisdictional wetlands.
Mitigation
The applicant is proposing to mitigate for all permanent impacts to jurisdictional features, including the
impacts associated with the public thoroughfare roads. With the amount of preservation that will be
provided through local buffers, the applicant is proposing to provide compensatory mitigation at a ratio
of 2:1 for loss of aquatic features. As no mitigation banks with the credit types needed are available in
the area, the applicant is proposing to provide this compensatory mitigation through the Division of
Mitigation Services. An acceptance letter from DMS for the necessary impacts is included with this
request.
Please do not hesitate to let me know if you have any questions or if further information is required to
process this request.
Best regards,
Perry Isner /
CHRISTOPHER HUYSMAN WETLANDS & WATERS, INC. TAMP BANDY
1 70 DEW DROP ROAD 41 C8 LB PROPST DRIVE
SPARTA, INC 28675 CONOVER, INC 28613
336.406.0906 828.302.3437
[e-mail] [e-mail]

O -W A�'T�',
p � <
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form – Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A.
Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1a.
Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
❑X Section 404 Permit ❑ Section 10 Permit
1b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 3&14 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
X❑ Yes ❑ No
1d.
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
X❑ 401 Water Quality Certification – Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification – Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e.
Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification:
❑ YesX❑ No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes ❑X No
1f.
Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for
mitigation of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank
or in -lieu fee program.
❑X Yes ❑ No
1 g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
❑ Yes ❑X No
1h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes ❑X No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
Caleb's Creek
2b.
County:
Forsyth
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Kernersville
2d.
Subdivision name:
Caleb's Creek
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
BOMA North Carolina, LLC
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
B. 2954 p. 2403
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
Kory Reimann
3d.
Street address:
1668 Ridge Point Dr.
3e.
City, state, zip:
Bountiful, UT 84010-1054
3f.
Telephone no.:
3g.
Fax no.:
3h.
Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form – Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
❑ Agent ❑ Other, specify:
4b. Name:
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address:
4e. City, state, zip:
4f. Telephone no.:
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
Perry Isner
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
Wetlands & Waters, Inc.
5c. Street address:
2712 Minden Rd.
5d. City, state, zip:
Pleasant Garden, NC 27313
5e. Telephone no.:
704.773.4239
5f. Fax no.:
5g. Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 2 of 10

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
6874-65-5960.00, 6874-86-7026.00, 6874-82-3360.00
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
I Latitude: 36.062387 Longitude: -80.091225
1 c. Property size:
875 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
Abbotts Creek
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
WS -III
2c. River basin:
Lower Yadkin
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The site consists of a mixture of early and mid -succession forest and an abandoned golf course, as well as three large ponds. The land use
surrounding the site consists of agriculture and undeveloped land, along with some residential. 1-40 is directly north of the project.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 15.43
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 44,822
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
To construct a mix -used development to meet the growing housing demands of the region and meet the economic expectations of the owner.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
(see attached narrative)
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (includingall prior phases)in the past?
❑X Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
Preliminary ❑X Final
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Chris Huysman, Perry Isner
Agency/Consultant Company: Wetlands & Waters, Inc.
Other: WNR Consultants
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
08/04/15; SAW -2015-01697
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
❑ Yes ❑X No ❑ Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
❑X Yes ❑ No
6b. If yes, explain.
Due to the size of the project and in order to meet the economic pro forma the project will be phased out of necessity.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑ Wetlands ❑X Streams — tributaries ❑ Buffers ❑X Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
Wetland impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
2b.
Type of impact
2c.
Type of wetland
2d.
Forested
2e.
Type of jurisdiction
Corps (404,10) or
DWQ (401, other)
2f.
Area of
impact
(acres)
W1
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W2
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W3
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
UV4
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W5
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W6
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
2h. Comments:
see attached Impact Table for impacts to wetlands
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
Stream impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
3b.
Type of impact
3c.
Stream name
3d.
Perennial (PER) or
intermittent (INT)?
3e.
Type of
jurisdiction
3f.
Average
stream
width
(feet)
3g.
Impact
length
(linear
feet)
S1
Choose one
S2
Choose one
S3
Choose one
S4
Choose one
S5
Choose one
S6
Choose one
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
3i. Comments:
see attached Impact Table for impacts to streams
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then indivi ually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
impact number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable)
4c.
Type of impact
4d.
Waterbody
type
4e.
Area of impact (acres)
01
Choose one
Choose
02
Choose one
Choose
03
Choose one
Choose
04
Choose one
Choose
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments: see attached Impact Table for impacts to open waters
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, the complete the chart below.
5a.
Pond ID number
5b.
Proposed use or
purpose of pond
5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
5d.
Stream Impacts (feet)
5e.
Upland
(acres)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
P1
Choose one
P2
Choose one
5f. Total:
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require miti ation, then vou MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a. Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman ❑ Other:
6b.
Buffer Impact
number —
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Stream name
6e.
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f.
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet)
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet
B1
Yes/No
B2
Yes/No
B3
Yes/No
B4
Yes/No
B5
Yes/No
B6
Yes/No
6h. Total Buffer Impacts:
6i. Comments:
Page 5 of 10

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Original concepts for a golf -course have been eliminated, thereby greatly reducing impacts to jurisdictional features. The site plan has been
exhaustively designed to limit impacts to wetlands and streams wherever reasonably practicable. All impacts are necessary for internal circulation
and to connect existing ROW's to comply with DOT requirements. Approximately 185 acres will be left in natural open -space for passive recreation.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
The site will be constructed under an approved Erosion Control Plan. Site will be also be constructed in phases as to limit the number of areas
subject to impact at any one given time. Upon completion, all contours will be restored to previous conditions and fill slopes will be re -seeded with
appropriate bio -engineering practices and allowed to re -naturalize.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
❑X Yes No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
X❑ DWQ ❑X Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
❑ Mitigation bank
X❑ Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Quantity:
Quantity:
Quantity:
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
❑X Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
330 linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
warm
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
Yes QX No
buffer mitigation?
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
6c.
6d.
6e.
Zone
Reason for impact
Total impact
Multiplier
Required mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 7 of 10

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
❑ Yes ❑X No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
24 56
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
0 Yes ❑ No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
Project will adhere to Phase II standards under review by the Town of Kernersville. As this is a phased project, individual stormwater approvals will
be provided for separate phases prior to any construction. Stormwater control associated with the construction of the thoroughfare roads will adhere
to standards specified in the NC Department of Transportation BMP toolbox.
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
Kernersville
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which localgovernment's jurisdiction is thisproject?
Kernersville
0 Phase It
❑ NSW
3b. Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
F1 Yes Q No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
E]Coastal counties
❑HQW
4a. Which of the following state -implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ORW
(check all that apply):
❑Session Law 2006-246
❑ Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

F.
Supplementary Information
1.
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a.
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
❑ Yes ❑X No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b.
If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑ Yes ❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c.
If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
❑ Yes ❑ No
letter.)
Comments:
2.
Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a.
Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑Yes ❑X No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b.
Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
El Yes ❑X No
2c.
If you answered 'yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3.
Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a.
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
❑ Yes Q No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b.
If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
4.
Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a.
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
Site will utilize existing gravity -fed sanitary sewer line that is present on site and will upfit as necessary.
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
habitat? I ®Yes ❑ No
5b. Have you checked With the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
impacts? Yes No
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
5d What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
Site occurs in the range of the Northern Long -Eared Sat, however there are nn known h,bernaculum locations in Forsyth County and therefore we are
7tefur-ing to Corps gitdance for notification Natural Heritage Report detailing no Known occurrences uffederMy listed seems is aractxd
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat? Yes No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that We state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
1 0 Yes®Na
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA -designated 100 -year floodplain? Yes
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
Forsyth County GIS
Ow
e 04AJ tJ
Applicant/Agent's Printed NameApplicantlAgent's Signature Date
(A nt S signature is Noaltic only if an authorization
letter from the applicant is provided
Page 10 of 10

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
Table 1. Nationwide Permit 3 Impacts: Dam Rehabilitation
Stream Impact
Type of Impact
Stream Name
Perennial or
Type of
Average
Impact
Number -
P-2 - Permanent
Rip Rap Spillway
Intermittent
Jurisdiction
Stream
Length
Permanent or
0.15
P-4 - Permanent
Rip Rap Spillway
Pond
Width
(linear feet)
Temporary
Pond
0.1
Temporary
(feet)
Outlet/Rip Rap
JT to Abbotts
(linear feet)
R-1 - Permanent
Culvert
UT to Abbotts
S-1 -Permanent
Corps
6
Perennial
100
350
Creek
Spillway
c ,,,k
R-2 - Permanent
Total Stream Impacts 350
Open Water
Impact Number -
Permanent or
Temporary
Type of Impact
Waterbody
Type
Area of
Impact
(acres)
P-1 - Permanent
Intake/Outlet
Pond
0.2
P-2 - Permanent
Rip Rap Spillway
Pond
0.2
P-3 - Permanent
Intake/Outlet
Pond
0.15
P-4 - Permanent
Rip Rap Spillway
Pond
0.1
P-5 - Permanent
Intake
Pond
0.1
Total Open Water Impacts 1 0.75 1
Table 2. Nationwide Permit 14 Impacts: Public Thoroughfare Roads
Stream Impact
Type of
Stream Name
Perennial or
Type of
Average
Pipe Length
Rip Rap
Number -
Impact
Intermittent
Jurisdiction
Stream
Permanent
Length -
Permanent or
Width (feet)
(linear feet)
Temporary
Temporary
(linear feet)
R-1 - Permanent
Culvert
UT to Abbotts
Perennial
Corps
6
100
100
Creek
R-2 - Permanent
Culvert
UT to Abbotts
Intermittent
Corps
3
80
100
Creek
R-3 - Permanent
Culvert
UT to Abbotts
Intermittent
Corps
3
100
65
Creek
R-5 - Permanent
Culvert
Abbotts Creek
I Perennial
Corps
20
80
100
Total Stream Impacts
360
365
Wetland Impact
Type of
Type of
Forested
Type of
Area of
Number -
Impact
Wetland
Jurisdiction
Impact
Permanent or
(acres)
Temporary
R-4 - Permanent
Culvert
Bottomland
Yes
Corps
0.046
Hardwood Forest
Total Wetland
Impacts
0.046

R d
1/
�90111n-S drool Rd
s s
�• 3tk�ns-Ford Rd..
f 110.
2016 GavleProject Name:
`

USACE AID#:
SAW -2015-0169'
Section 404/401 Jurisdictio
Seasonal RPW's 30,833 LF
(depicted with light blue lines)
Perennial RPW's 13,989 LF
(depicted with dark blue lines)
Open Waters (Ponds)
(depicted as dark blue polygons)
Jurisdictional Wetlands
(depicted with green polygons)
1N
*Wetland Sketch provided for illustrative purposes for preliminary planning use only. Not intended
to be relied upon for exact location, dimensions, or orientation. All findings and assessments made
by wetland consultants regarding limits ofjurisdiction or permitting requirements are subject to
1,000 ft verification by the US Army Corps of Engineers, the NC DWR, and other appropriate local authorities.
ETLANDS
WA--1
WATERS
Figure 1: Approximate Depiction
of Waters and Wetlands
Caleb's Creek
Owner / Developer: BOMA NC, LLC
City / County: Kernersville, Forsyth
Tax PIN(s): (see attached parcel information)
Coordinates: Scale: Date:
Lat: 36.062387 Long: 80.091225 graphic 01/23/17

Forsyth County, NC
„WWETLANDS
J4, WATERS
Project Name:
Caleb's Creek
Owner / Developer: BOMA NC, LLC
City / County:
Kernersville, Forsyth
Tax PIN(s): 6874-65-5960.00, 6874-86-7026.00, 6874-82-3360.00
(,,;Pp attached parcel infrrmqtinn)
Figure 2: County GIS Coordinates: Scale: Date:
Lat: 36.062387 Long: -80.091225 graphic 01/23/17
IN

WETLANDS
& WATERS
Figure 3: USGS Topo Quad
Project Name: Caleb's Creek
Owner / Developer: BOMA NC, LLC
City / County: Kernersville, Forsyth
Tax PIN(s): 6874-65-5960.00, 6874-86-7026.00, 6874-82-3360.00
Coordinates:Scale: Date:
Lat: 36.062387 Long: -80.091225 nts 01/23/17
IN

1 200 401 :11 Ftet 1200 t' A
00 1000 2000 `BtE,
Map projection:-. Mercator Comer.... ..- tics:Z. - 17N WGS84
.-t.
/ -CIB - CaC') CIB
`--FcC2 �. F C A aC.-
v CaC
, . .►..'.' -__,:CIB
PcF2 CaDAll
;
FaC -= r
qp CaC ► / FcC2 FaB y-r—
CIC'
- - BtE PoF PcF2` FaB,
CIE FaF W FCD2�---
FcC2� FcC2aC
_ � CoCA POC
CIB Tcc FaC,, Fa;B
FaFFaC----
FaB
dennview-pr- FaC---
,4
P0B TdD
FaC-�cB2
PoF TdC
FcC2 FaB
. CIC CIB BtE r z'
FaC �Sm�F
-FcC2 PcF2
F TcC Te6 FaB
FcD2 CO FaC e
KFCD2 CoA FaF f r
CmC2
Tc C BtE
� B -_ /r FaB1 mB
�TcC --a--
t
oFcC2
FaF Trig
f aA ,
FaC
�d D
. • >3 TcC--- o
Tc TcCFcD2 FaC
FaC SmDt
a�
r. vedgecock Rd -

W& WETLANDS
WATERS
Figure 4b: Soil Survey
Project Name:
Owner / Developer:
City / County:
Tax PIN(s):
Coordinates:
Lat: 36.062387 Long: -80.091225
Caleb's Creek
BOMA NC, LLC
Kernersville, Forsyth
(see attached parcel information)
Scale:
graphic
01/23/17
A

WS&
WETLANDS
WATERS
ect Name:
Caleb's Creek
Owner / Developer: BOMA NC, LLC
City / County: Kernersville, Forsyth
Tax PIN(s):
(see attached parcel information)
Figure 4c: Soil Survey Coordinates: Scale:
Lat: 36.062387 Long: -80.091225 1 grahpic
Date:
01/23/17

NC Surface Water Classification
�' kls�cat
K Csatrr �
O
6'"e Gallen R.3
ic
at dv flag �-•
Abt,* Par►
a .Ridge Cir
is pes."�`ti`�
7
Tan,
Glenrrn„�.
�� II
r
Surface Water Classifications:
Stream Index: 12-119-(1)
se.n=,01 Rd Stream Abbotts Creek
X^tt Name:
Description: From source to a point 0.5
mile upstream of Davidson
County SR 1810
4
Classification: WS -III
,,01*1 11049 Date c f August 2, 1992
� rrr
Yadkin Pee -Dee
c A More info
c
✓= k
i n
z
Map►
LaaF
Cbb
CiaFF � 'Y
f alp -- ♦� '
� r _
1:36,112
- ---- Surface Water Classifications 0 0.35 0.7 1.4 mi TN
0 0.35 0,7 1.4 km
Project Name: Caleb's Creek
WETLANDS Owner / Developer: BOMA NC, LLC
UA6 —ALW&, WATERS city/county: Kernersville, Forsyth
Tax PIN(s). 6874-65-5960.00, 6874-86-7026.00, 6874-82-3360.00
Figure 6: Stream Classification Coordinates: Scale: Date:
Lat: 36.062387 Long: -80.091225 graphic 01/23/17

Forsyth County, NC Convert to PDF 5/5/2015
Parcel ID Property Address January 1 Property Owner
6874-65-5960.00 1680 Pine Tree Dr Boma North Carolina LIc
Summary Appraisal Report -Commercial Bldgs: 1
Disclaimer: The values and information provided on this property record card are based upon the best available
information on 01/01/2013. This information is subject to change because of changes to the property, correction of
ebsting information, additional information, oras the result of an appeal of the property.
Parcel Information
Block/Lot Neighborhood
5631 117B 321
Last 2 Recordations Available
Sale Date Estate Stamps Sale Price Book/Page
1/17/2008 60000 $30,000,000 2807/975
Assessed Values All Cards
Total Land Value Total Buildings Value Total Misc Imp Value Total Assessed Value
$16,625,210 $65,452 $125,700 $16,816,400
Road/Topography/Utilities
Roads Topography Utilities
RoadPubPaved Desirable
Land Valuation
Type Zoning Acres SgFt Rate Ut Size LC RF TO SH AC EZ Value
CL MU -S 0 23,707,965 1.65 0.5 1 1 1 0.85 1 1 1 $16,625,210
Total SgFt Total Acres Total Value
23,707,965 0 $16,625,210
Building Detail
Forsyth County considers all standard approaches to value. The assessed value on this building was
determined based upon the Income and Expense Approach.
Commercial Summary Information
Company Name Primary Address Occupancy Total Gross SgFt Net Lease SgFt Units
Old Pine Tree Golf Course 1680 Pine Tree DR MISC 0 0 0
Current Owners
Owner 1
Boma North Carolina Lic
Owner 2
Mailing Address
7206 146th Street CIR SW
City, State Zip
Palmetto Bay FL 33158-1600
N
Mobile
Maps and
Information 0
Disclaimer: The values and information provided on this property record card are based upon the best available
information on 01/01/2013. This information is subject to change because of changes to the property, correction of
ebsting information, additional information, oras the result of an appeal of the property.
Parcel Information
Block/Lot Neighborhood
5631 117B 321
Last 2 Recordations Available
Sale Date Estate Stamps Sale Price Book/Page
1/17/2008 60000 $30,000,000 2807/975
Assessed Values All Cards
Total Land Value Total Buildings Value Total Misc Imp Value Total Assessed Value
$16,625,210 $65,452 $125,700 $16,816,400
Road/Topography/Utilities
Roads Topography Utilities
RoadPubPaved Desirable
Land Valuation
Type Zoning Acres SgFt Rate Ut Size LC RF TO SH AC EZ Value
CL MU -S 0 23,707,965 1.65 0.5 1 1 1 0.85 1 1 1 $16,625,210
Total SgFt Total Acres Total Value
23,707,965 0 $16,625,210
Building Detail
Forsyth County considers all standard approaches to value. The assessed value on this building was
determined based upon the Income and Expense Approach.
Commercial Summary Information
Company Name Primary Address Occupancy Total Gross SgFt Net Lease SgFt Units
Old Pine Tree Golf Course 1680 Pine Tree DR MISC 0 0 0

Commercial Buildings Summary
Bldg Building Name Physical Addr Story Year Built Construction Occupancy Value
1 0 Teague LN 1 1970 1 BR 1108-Clubho $65,452
Total Buildings Value $65,452
Miscellaneous Improvements
Type
Construction
Height
Area
Year Built
Value
Pavilion 2
FR
1
1,104
1996
$2,939
Shed 4
CB
0
3,200
1970
$8,560
Paving Asp 1
ASPHALT
0
45,000
1970
$5,512
G Course 3
0
18
1970
$83,475
G Course 3
0
1
0
$4,638
Canopy 2
FR
0
1,120
0
$1,344
Walls
BRICK
0
180
0
$594
Paving Asp 2
ASPHALT
0
140,000
0
$14,000
Total Miscellaneous Value
Taxing Jurisdictions
Jurisidiction
Kemers\dle 100%
$125,700
Fire District
FD
Income Detail
Income information on this report reflects market research and not specific data from the property.
Total Section
Value
$614,265
$614,265
Cost Detail
Detail Appraisal Report - Commercial Bldg: 1 of 1
Total Addition
Value
$45,672
Depriciated Value
$65,452
$65,452
$45.672
Total Value from Cost
Local Replacement Physical Depr Econ/Func Depr
Multiplier Cost
0.87 $574,145 43% 80%
$246,882.35 ($197,506.00)
0.87 $574,145 43% 80%
$246,882.35 ($197,506.00)
Misc Imp. Value
Total Bldg Value
Land Value
Total All Bldgs
$513
$65,965
$16,625,210
$16,816,400
$121,062
$186,514
$16,625,210
$16,816,400
Building Information
Company Name Building Physical Address Occupancy Year Built Year Remod Condition
Old Pine Tree Golf Course 0 Teague LN 1108-Clubho 1970 0
Old Pine Tree Golf Course 0 Teague LN 1108-Clubho 1970 0
Foundation Construction Total Story Roof Roof Cover Ext Wallslnsul Walls insul Ceiling
1 BR 1 Mansard/Mansard
1 BR 1 Mansard/Mansard
Section Details

Occupancy
Sqft/
Base
Heat/
Heat!
Heat
Adj #
Story perimeter Cost Sqft Cost
$40
Units
Cost
AC 1
AC 2
Adj
Base Stories
Hgt
1156-
240
$40
No
STOOP2
Stoop
1
165
bhs
Cbhsbsmt
2,997
$34.64
Heat
0%
$0
10 1 1
1
1.0 1.02 $40.23 $120,569
1.0
240
$52
$12,480
100%1109-
Open Porches
240
$9,600
Canopy
FR
1,120
Heat
0 C
50%
1 1
2801
Ctryclub
2,997
$138.59
Pump
0%
$9.15
,1 1011
1.065 1.02 $164.73 $493,696
Wall
BRICK
180
100%
0
45%
90%
$594
Sketched Additions
Type
Description
Area
Rate
Value
PORCH4
Open Porches
153
$40
$6,120
BAUL1
Bal/Landing
168
$20.75
$3,486
PORCH4
Open Porches
240
$40
$9,600
STOOP2
Stoop
60
$15
$900
BAU1-1
Bal/Landing
168
$20.75
$3,486
P/PORCH4
Porch/Porch
240
$52
$12,480
PORCH4
Open Porches
240
$40
$9,600
Miscellaneous Improvements for this Bldg
Type
Const
Area
Rate
YearBuilt Condition Grade
Phy
EF
Value
Pavilion
FR
1,104
$17.75
1996 C
25%
80%
$2,939
Golf Course
18
$132,500
1970
65%
90%
$83,475
Paving Asp & Base
ASPHALT
45,000
$1.75
1970
65%
80%
$5,512
Shed -Small
CB
3,200
$26.75
1970 C
50%
80%
$8,560
Canopy
FR
1,120
$12
0 C
50%
80%
$1,344
Paving Asp & Base
ASPHALT
140,000
$2
0
75%
80%
$14,000
Wall
BRICK
180
$60
0
45%
90%
$594
Golf Course
1
$132,500
0
65%
90%
$4,638
Taxing Jurisdictions
Jurisidiction Fire District
Kemersville 100% FD

Property Report
Forsyth County, NC Convert to PDF 5/5/2015
Parcel ID Property Address January 1 Property Owner
6874-82-3360.00 Teague Ln Boyd J Brown
Detail Appraisal Report - Land
Current Owners
5/5/15, 2:36 PM
Owner 1
Boyd J Brown
Owner 2
Manuela H Brown
Mailing Address
1500 San Remo AVE STE 125
City, State Zip
CORAL GABLES FL 33146
WL
Mobile 0 �
r_r
CA"
Maps and A
-
Information
Disclaimer: The values and information provided on this property record card are based upon the best available
information on 01/01/2013. This information is subject to change because of changes to the property, correction of
existing information, additional information, or as the result of an appeal of the property.
Parcel Information
Block/Lot Neighborhood
5628119E 321
Last 2 Recordations Available
Sale Date Estate Stamps Sale Price Book/Page
12/19/2012 12000 $6,000,000 3097/2010
Assessed Values All Cards
Total Land Value Total Buildings Value Total Misc Imp Value Total Assessed Value
$5,798,402 $0 $0 $5,798,400
Road/Topography/Utilities
Roads Topography Utilities
RoadPrvGravel
Land Valuation
Type Zoning Acres SgFt Rate Ut Size LC RF TO SH AC EZ Value
CL MU -S 199.2 8,676,995 1.65 0.5 1 1 1 0.9 0.9 1 1 $5,798,402
http://maps.co-to rsyth.nc.us/Property_Report/DefauIt. aspx?pin=6...Desktop=true&mapIMag e=_ags_05b7216f2e3349ae9adf7egbc74aOf41.jpg Page 1 of 2

Property Report 5/5/15, 2:36 PM
Total SgFt Total Acres Total Value
8,676,995 199.20 $5,798,402
Building Detail
Forsyth County considers all standard approaches to value. The assessed value on this building was
determined based upon the Cost Approach.
Detall Appraisal Report - Land
Photo not availableSketch not available
Taxing Jurisdictions
Jurisldiction
Kemersville 100%
Fire District
FD
http://maps.co.forayth.nc.us/Property_Report/Defoult.aspx?pin=B... Des ktop-true&mapimage-_age_OSb7216f2e3349ee9adf7e9bc74nOf41.jpg Page 2 of 2

Caleb's Creek
IMPACT LOCATION
USACE AID#: SAW -2015-1
HUC: 03040103020:
Mixed Use
5
K,
F1 Residential - Low Density
P-3
F1 Residential - Medium Density
1 �
1 \
Residential - High Density P-4
P-5
F1Commercial / Office R-1
❑ Amenity
nSchool
Table 1. Nationwide Permit 14 Impacts: Publi
Stream Impact
Type of
Stream Name
Perennial or
Tyl
Number-
Impact
Intermittent
Juris
Permanent or
Area of
Impact
(acres)
P-1 - Permanent
Intake/Outlet
Pond
Temporary
P-2 - Permanent
Rip Rap Spillway
Pond
0.2
R-1 -Permanent
Culvert
UT to AbbottsCreek
Perennial
Cc
Rip Rap Spillway
Pond
0.1
P-5 - Permanent
Intake
R -2 -Permanent
Culvert
U7 tCAbbotTS
Intermittent
Cc
Creek
0.75
R-3 - Permanent
Culvert
UTtCrAebkotts
Intermittent
Cc
R-5 - Permanent
Culvert
Abbotts Creek
Perennial
Cc
Wetland Impact
Type of
Type of
Forested
Tyl
Number -
Impact
Wetland
Jurist
Permanent or
Temporary
R-4 -Permanent
Culvert
Bottomland
yes
Cc
Hardwood Forest
Total Wetland it
Table 2. Nationwide Permit 3 Impacts: Existir
Stream Impact Type of Impact Stream Name Perennial
Number - Intermitte
Permanent or
S-1 -Permanent
Outlet/Rip Rap Spillway
ur m Abbott'
eek
Perennia
Open Water
Impact Number-
Permanent or
Temporary
Type of Impact
Waterbody
Type
Area of
Impact
(acres)
P-1 - Permanent
Intake/Outlet
Pond
0.2
P-2 - Permanent
Rip Rap Spillway
Pond
0.2
P-3 - Permanent
Intake/Outlet
Pond
0.15
P-4 - Permanent
Rip Rap Spillway
Pond
0.1
P-5 - Permanent
Intake
Pond
0.1
Total Open Water Impacts
0.75
a I
WETLANDS
& WATERS
1N
1,000 ftj

Caleb's Creek
BOMA NC, LLC
SAW -2015.01697
Permit Drawings
Page 1 of 14
Ogden School Road Extension
Impact R-1
Plan View
I Gr
6' CVNORErE
2'-6' CURB W GUTTER
S' BIKE WJE,
Impact R-1
100 Lf. Triple 8'x8' RCBC
//��J j 1001.f. Total Riprap
160 YR. FLOOD PWN-/
_ V -r DURA & ourml
$ TA
`10
C)G —`_--
j`5' BIKE UNE
CURB W GUTTER
—S' CONCRETE SIDEWALK
2'-6' CURB Y DURFR
6' CONCRETE SIDEWALK 100 YR. FLOOD PWN
Y-8' CURB @ CURER
"QIP
2'-6' tURe W OIRTEA
6' CONCRETE SIDEWALX-
S ME
j -TOP OF WM
'
OF &*K
YR. FLOOD PWN
Y2- CURVE DATA
I Ro J5+4289
197 JD' /7.4' (RTJ
la 44' 58B
_ 1.0998'
76839
533,W

860
85`
85C
0
84°
w
84C
8K
PRELIMINARY LAYOUT
- - � -' � �--- - - � •' �aYi�i�Ylii1
I
1uu euu suu
Station (ft)
PROFILE
Caleb's Creek
Proposed Stream Crossing at Pinetree Branch
Ogden School Road West (R-1)
400
84
Caleb's Creek
BOMA NC, LLC
SAW -2015-01897
Permit Drawings
Page 2 of 14
Ogden School Road Extension
Impact R-1
Profile / Cross-section
5100
Station (ft)
CROSS-SECTION
0 5 10
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 5 ft.(Vert.)
0 25 60 100
( IN FEET )
1 inch - 60 ft(Vert)

89
88'
88
c
0
0 87'
W
87
86:
PRELIMINARY LAYOUT
�J7.IJ.t•7 1 � ... a
-ass---���-
��+�
1VU CUU 3UU
Station (ft)
PROFILE
Caleb's Creek
Proposed Stream Crossing at Fairway 7 Branch
Havenstraat Road (R-2)
400
!P
0
0
W
EXI
Caleb's Creek
SOMA NC, LLC
SAW -2015-01697
Permit Drawings
Page 3 of 14
Havenstraat Road
Impact R-2
Profile / Cross-section
Station (ft)
CROSS-SECTION
0 5 10
-I
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 5 ft(Vert.)
0 25 50 100
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 50 ft(VerL)

93C
92`
92C
L'3G
90G
900
0
PRELIMINARY LAYOUT
i�� � • � I - : =ter �
�
-.'�-I_\�,_�3TIy�i
----_
l3�Jrlylacme=
-----
M
100 200 300
Statlon (ft)
PROFILE
400
Caleb's Creek
Proposed Stream Crossing at Unnamed Tributary (to Fairway 7 Branch)
Havenstraat Road (R-3)
Caleb's Creek
BOMA NC, LLC
SAW -2015-01697
Permit Drawings
Page 4 of 14
Havenstrast Road
Impact R-3
Profile / Cross-section
5100
Station (ft)
CROSS-SECTION
0 5 10
( W FEET )
1 inch = 5 ft.(VerL)
0 25 50 100
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 60 fL(Vert.)

90(
89`
89(
c
0
41
d 88`
W
88(
87`
PRELIMINARY LAYOUT
MUNIQW41,06.4m. 11
�aa•I•ian•ia.�
�Jiliii�fiiiYrlii■Ii�iil�����ii��
.'
100 200 300
Station (ft)
PROFILE
Caleb's Creek
Proposed Stream Crossing at Pinetree Branch
Havenstraat Road (R-4)
400
0
d
w
Caleb's Creek
BOMA NC, LLC
SAW -2015-01697
Permit Drawings
Page 5 of 14
Havenstraat Road
Impact R-4
Profile I Cross-section
Station (ft)
CROSS-SECTION
0 5 10
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 5 ft(Vert)
0 25 60 100
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 50 ft(Vert)

PRELIMINARY LAYOUT
UPPER LAKE
PROPOSED PROPOSED
EMERGENCYPRIMARY
SPILLWAY SPILLWAY
R/
884.1
0
X 879.9
Impact P-1
EXISTING
UPPER DAM
Impact P-2
0.2 acres
881.9
\, MIDDLE LAKE
Caleb's Creek
Upper Lake Dam
Conceptual Repairs
PLAN VIEW
X
883.9
X
876.8
Caleb's Creek
BOMA NC, LLC
SAW -2015-01697
Permit Drawings
Page 6 of 14
Upper Lake Dam Repair
Impacts P-1 & P-2
Plan View
0 5 10
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 5 ft(Vert.)
0 25 50 100
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 50 ft(Ver-L)

e
W
0 100 200
Station (ft)
PROFILE
Caleb's Creek
Upper Lake Dam
Conceptual Repairs
300
PRELIMINARY LAYOUT
695
890 GR
nn
Caleb's Creek
SOMA NC, LLC
SAW -2015-01697
Permit Drawings
Page 7 of 14
Upper Lake Dam Repair
Impact P-1
Profile / Cross-section
5100 5200
Station (ft)
CROSS-SECTION
0 5 10
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 5 ft(Vert.)
0 25 50 100
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 60 ft.(Vert)
5300

PRELIMINARY LAYOUT
+ , DU WNSTREAM TI —IN OF EME GENCY
o SIPATDR AREA (100' X 50'
° 880
a �
FXISTING 7z
w �
GRADE \
875
870
0 100 200 300
Station (ft)
EMERGENCY SPILLWAY PROFILE
Caleb's Creek
Upper Lake Dam
Conceptual Repairs
Caleb's Creek
SOMA NC, LLC
SAW -2015-01897
Permit Drawings
Page 8 of 14
Upper Lake Dem Repair
Impact P•2
Profile
0 5 10
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 5 fL(Vert.)
0 25 50 100
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 50 ft.(Vert.)

Caleb's Creek
BOMA NC, LLC
PRELIMINARY LAYOUT
SAW2015-01697
Permit Drawings
Page 9 of 14
Middle Lake Dam Repair
I Impacts P-3 6 P-4
Plan View
WE
874.5
MIDDLE LAKE
PROPOSED
EMERGENCY
SPILLWAY
Impact P-3
0.15 acres EXISTING
MIDDLE DAM
op0
0 0
0 0 0
� o
Impact P-4
LOWER LAKE o.1 acres
Caleb's Creek PLAN VIEW
Middle Lake Dam
Conceptual Repairs
PROPOSED
PRIMARY
SPILLWAY
0 5 10
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 5 ft.(Vert.)
0 25 50 100
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 50 ft.(Vert.)

89
88
88
0 87,
_P
C,
W
87
86'
86
0
Caleb's Creek
Middle Lake Dam
Conceptual Repairs
100 200
Statlon (ft)
PROFILE
PRELIMINARY LAYOUT
300 47uu Z)uuu 5100
Station (ft)
CROSS-SECTION
Caleb's Creek
BOMA NC, LLC
SAW -2015-01697
Permit Drawings
Page 10 of 14
Middle Lake Dam Repair
Impact P-3
Profile / Cross-section
5200
0 5 10
( IN FEET >
1 inch - 6 ft.(Vert.)
0 25 50 100
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 50 ft.(Ver-L)
5300
W.A-�r��%���
J 1 � ��� 1!II►��3i�iliiiiiii�ii�,
1111111111111F. aim t��IFEMM��
�!�ST 1l;�rS7R;TJ�w_ .—
!j;,�_�s_
Caleb's Creek
Middle Lake Dam
Conceptual Repairs
100 200
Statlon (ft)
PROFILE
PRELIMINARY LAYOUT
300 47uu Z)uuu 5100
Station (ft)
CROSS-SECTION
Caleb's Creek
BOMA NC, LLC
SAW -2015-01697
Permit Drawings
Page 10 of 14
Middle Lake Dam Repair
Impact P-3
Profile / Cross-section
5200
0 5 10
( IN FEET >
1 inch - 6 ft.(Vert.)
0 25 50 100
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 50 ft.(Ver-L)
5300

885
880
870
PRELIMINARY LAYOUT
Caleb's Creek
BOMA NC, LLC
SAW -2015-01697
Permit Drawings
Page 11 of 14
Middle Lake Dem Repair
Impact P-4
Profile
EXIS IN
NO
DOWNSTREAM TIE.'–IN OF EMERSENCY
—/ SP LLWAY ATR C IV NG LAK / HAN
EMERGENC NO SHOWN FOR CLARITY
ELEV. 877.71
865
0
Caleb's Creek
Middle Lake Dam
Conceptual Repairs
100 200 300
Station (ft)
400
EMERGENCY SPILLWAY PROFILE
500 600
0 5 10
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 5 ft.(Vert.)
0 25 50 100
( W FEET )
1 inch = 50 ft.(VerL)

853.4
X
PRELIMINARY LAYOUT
&`, ;O RiN
122
� Impact S•1
350 linear feet
Caleb's Creek PLAN VIEW
Lower Lake Dam
Conceptual Repairs
860.8
Caleb's Creek
BOMA NC, LLC
SAW -2015-01697
Permit Drawings
Page 12 of 14
Lower Lake Dam Repair
Impact P-5 & S-1
Plan View
PROPOSED
EMERGENCY
SPILLWAY
EXISTING
LOWER DAM
Impact P-5
0.1 acres
PROPOSED
x �' �. PRIMARY
SPILLWAY
871.7
x - -
x.
0 30 60 120
(I,FEET )
1 inch = 60 ft.(VerL)

0
Ll
0
TOP OFIDAM —
Caleb's Creek
Lower Lake Dam
Proposed Repairs
PRELIMINARY LAYOUT
100 200
Station (ft)
PROFILE
300
Station (ft)
CROSS-SECTION
Caleb's Creek
BOMA NC, LLC
SAW -2015-01697
Permit Drawings
Page 13 of 14
Lower Lake Dam Repair
Impact P-5
Profile / Cross-section
0 5 10
( IN FEET )
1 inch - 5 ft.(Vert.)
0 25 50 100
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 50 ft.(Vert..)
5300

PRELIMINARY LAYOUT
875 --- -----
EMERGE CY
870
865
\ \ NOTES
860
TTMAND POP SED RIPRAP
DISSI ATOR AREA 305' X 25')
855 \ � _
EXIS IN _
850
0 100 200 300 400 500
Station (ft)
EMERGENCY SPILLWAY PROFILE
Caleb's Creek
Lower Lake Dam
Conceptual Repairs
Caleb's Creek
BOMA NC, LLC
SAW2015.01697
Permit Drawings
Page 14 of 14
Lower Lake Dam Repair
Impact S•1
Profile
0 5 10
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 5 ft.(Vert.)
0 25 50 100
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 50 ft.(Vert.)

roles
rNEEI�MIY Nu Y Nmtm n nac maw un NneMr
EN♦AM1NMFNOOaPiYG NrorPMA�NM�.IY
W Op1EAC�fM\NNAM�PMM�NENNYLL[E1uN10MC�CEWTM.
tl4rtYNRrtVOI1NYL •f,MM11W /IICWIlE1RNMIIN
BAi1M1 � �E WTN MMY ID1E [ M Y WTC oM n� neao tl IPJuv Y1E YY
INIIw.�Mu1�1T1eafNW./�b[IMa xREall•�Y
YMlaovat4/1W Ene[nnonnn YwiM nX.1a �•
caleb's creek
.aEE. b b EN,SE B..a
RIPARIAN BUFFER DETAIL
Impact Area
RL -7
3q'
..AP
.,✓ r' , V
91
11
I .I E
� d. �8i —• — -- � vlclNm7aAa y , m�
*. � RESIX%nCµouSMU iU=rY.^t•t�^sr-aL,:_°'.... ;y, ` EE�r'. .. m. H�
nr
Seasonal Tributary to Remain Undisturbed ^•�•�''�• —``
Buffer to be re -vegetated
following grading\10
tt�l ilo
_^APEN !PACE .'
28
' \ J
1D
•• +Man aur.
sw„ master zoning Plan
VI/i
03RMI-11. Ilk
rvvE OF 4Y4waEWESTED iW �euwrw ro vaso-eaAa�sl»ex�
SUFFERYARDS eu��aErwrnoE. .axe sru
Tree aEau�aeo nvamAo
x sran P.ual
F— 111— w, WATERSHED SITE DATA:
DENSITY CALCULATIONS: aEAREwiu-r. NUACREe
"! o on t .gtcs caEnoe m wren sr,cE: t.m A-
-UN-0—AC-1-
-
IM•Eav�W 9 MEA rggx TO �NS:O
1tdKaE EASnnSwrERAPEA3ArreRtN10
PEnwry srwn r�m�uTPEVEu0—oreo AcaE,aE uncea
INFRASTRUCTURE: NEw,ca cc oaE Nreavous A�ArnaaNxx �i ai.ease
_ xi s
91aEEr8. rUeuC ORUCfS,x Afie_S aawEavI0USA1ffArrRPOET�wTF9 v.RH
_ I —ECT. I.OS _
PRELIMINARY �6
NOT FOR 33
CONSTRUCTION E�
u _ SHEET
1 of 1

l
Mit* `ion Services
EMYI RO NME N T AL QUAL IT
September 26, 2017
Kory Reimann
BOMA NC, LLC
1668 Ridge Point Drive
Bountiful, UT 84010
Project: Caleb's Creek
ROY C'UOPER
MICHAL;L S. REGAN
Expiration of Acceptance: 31262018
County: Forsyth
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) is willing to
accept payment for compensatory mitigation for impacts associated with the above referenced project as
indicated in the table below. Please note that this decision does not assure that participation in the DMS in -
lieu fee mitigation program will be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation for project impacts.
It is the responsibility of the applicant to contact permitting agencies to determine if payment to the DMS will
be approved. You must also comply with all other state, federal or local government permits, regulations or
authorizations associated with the proposed activity including G.S. § 143-214.11.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not
received a copy of the issued 404 Permit/4011 Certification/LAMA permit within this time frame, this
acceptance will expire. It is the applicant's responsibility to send copies of the permits to DMS. Once DMS
receives a copy of the permit(s) an invoice will be issued based on the required mitigation in that permit and
payment must be made prior to conducting the authorized work. The amount of the in -lieu fee to be paid by
an applicant is calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and policies listed on the DMS website.
Based on the information supplied by you in your request to use the DMS, the impacts for which you are
requesting compensatory mitigation credit are summarized in the following table. The amount of mitigation
required and assigned to DMS for this impact is determined by permitting agencies and may exceed the
impact amounts show_ n_ below.
River Basin Impact Location Impact Type Impact Quantity
---
Yadkin 03040103 Warm Stream 360
Upon receipt of payment, DMS will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. The
mitigation will be performed in accordance with the In -Lieu Fee Program instrument dated July 28, 2010.
Thank you for your interest in the DMS in -lieu fee mitigation program. If you have any questions or need
additional information, please contact Kelly Williams at [phone].
cc: Perry Isner, agent
Sincerely,
James. 113 Stanfill
Assetmianagement Supervisor
State of North Carolina ! Environmental Quality ; Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 ; 317 W. Jones SueeL Suitc 3000
919 707 8976 T

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. SAW -2015-01697 County: Forsyth U.S.G.S. Quad: NC-KERNERSVILLE
Property Owner:
Address:
Telephone Number:
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Boma North Carolina, LLC
Mark Brown
1668 Ridge Point Drive
Bountiful, UT, 84010
Size (acres) 875
Nearest Waterway Abbotts Creek
USGS HUC 03040103
Copy
Nearest Town Kernersville
River Basin Lower Yadkin
Coordinates Latitude: 36.062387
Longitude: -80.091225
Location description: Boma North Carolina, LLC property known as the proposed Caleb's Creek development located off of
the intersection of Teague Lane and Ogden School Road, adjacent to Abbotts Creek, south of Kemersville, in Forsyth County,
North Carolina.
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
_ Based on preliminary information, there may be waters of the U.S. including wetlands on the above described project area
We strongly suggest you have this property inspected to determine the extent of Department of the Army (DA)
jurisdiction. To be considered final, a jurisdictional determination must be verified by the Corps. This preliminary
determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33
CFR Part 331). 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.
B. Approved Determination
There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described project area subject to the permit requirements
of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. 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.
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 strongly suggest you have the waters of the U.S. including wetlands on your project area delineated. Due to the
size of your property and/or our present workload, the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a
timely manner. For a more timely delineation, you may wish to obtain a consultant. To be considered final, any
delineation must be verified by the Corps.
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.
Page 1 of 2

_ 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 and/or wetlands without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). If you have any questions regarding this
determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact John Thomas at 919-5544884 x25 or
John.T.Thomes.JRjMusace.a rmv.m i I.
C. Basis For Determination: Site includes tributaries of Abbotts Creek which flows to the Yadkin River and on to
the Atlantic Ocean.
D. Remarks:
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the
particular site identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation
provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation
in USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources
Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in
B. above)
This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. 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
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 33 1.5, 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 RFAttbrm, it must be received at the above address by 10/04/2015.
**It is not necessary to submit an Al form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this
correspondence.** % C
Corps Regulatory Official:
Date: 8/04/2015

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://reug latorv.usacesurvey.con.
CC: Chris Huysman, Huysman & Brandy, Inc., 170 Dew Drop Road, Sparta, NC 28675

NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: Mark Brown
Boma North Carolina LLC
File Number: SAW -2015-01697
Date: August 4, 2015
Attached is:
See Section below
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter ofpermission)
A
PROFFERED PERMIT Standard Permit or Letter ofpermission)
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 army niil!'"Missions/CiviIWorkslRe.izulato!yProjzrammidPermits.aspx or
Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
• OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terns and conditions therein, you may request
that the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section 11 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 permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
• APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein,
You may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers 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 pen -nit 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.
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 1D 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 Il of this form and sending the form to the district engineer. This form
must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.

E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps regarding the
preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be appealed),
by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new information for further consideration by the
Corps to reevaluate the JD.
SECTION II - REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision oi• your objections to an initial
proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons or
objections are addressed in the administrative record.)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the
record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to
clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record.
However, you may provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative
record.
POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION:
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
appeal process you may contact:
also contact:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division,
Mr. Jason Steele, Administrative Appeal Review Officer
Attn: John Thomas
CESAD-PDO
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
60 Forsyth Street, Room l OM 15
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 any site investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in all site invest i.! ations.
Date:
Telephone number:
Signature of appellant oragent.
For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, John Thomas,
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 10M15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]

October 7, 2016
Perry Isner
Wetlands & Waters, Inc.
2712 Minden Rd.
Pleasant Garden, NC 27313
RE: Caleb's Creek
Dear Perry Isner:
PAT NU-CRORY
Grd rnrrr
SUSAN SLUTTZ
.Scrrtu:n
NCNHDE-2333
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, based on the project area mapped with your request, indicates that there are
no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, or conservation/managed areas
within the proposed project boundary. Please note that although there may be no documentation of natural
heritage elements within the project boundary, it does not imply or confirm their absence; the area may not have
been surveyed. The results of this query should not be substituted for field surveys where suitable habitat exists.
In the event that rare species are found within the project area, please contact the NCNHP so that we may
update our records.
The attached 'Potential Occurrences' table summarizes rare species and natural communities that have been
documented within a one -mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these records suggests that
these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area if suitable habitat exists and is
included for reference. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed area within a one -mile radius of the
project area, if any, are also included in this report.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation planning, project
review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria for regulatory decisions.
Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published without prior written notification to the
NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP
data may not be redistributed without permission.
The NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional correspondence if a Dedicated Nature
Preserve (DNP), Registered Heritage Area (RHA), Clean Water Management Trust Fund (CWMTF) easement,
or Federally -listed species are documented near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance, please
contact Suzanne Mason at suzanne.mason(@ncdcr.gov or 919.707.8637.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
-7 =`- Nlothing Compares �
State of North Carotica I Depwtnsew of lJatatal and cultural Resources
109 East?ames Sweet I Ra1eigtNC 27601
919,507-7,340

Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Caleb's Creek
October 7, 2016
NCN H D E-2333
No Element Occurrences are Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
No Natural Areas are Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Managed Areas Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Managed Area Name Owner Owner Type
Forsyth County Open Space Forsyth County: multiple local government Local Government
Definitions and an explanation of status designations and codes can be found at https://ncnhde.natureserve.org/contenVhelp. Data query generated on October 7, 2016; source: NCNHP, Q2 June 2016. Please resubmit your
information request if more than one year elapses before project initiation as new information is continually added to the NCNHP database.
Page 2 of 3

NCNHDE-2333: Caleb's Creek
October 7. 2016 1:48.067
❑ Project Boundary o 0.4 0.8 16 mi
❑ Buffered Project Bouncary o 3.15 1 2 krr
❑ Managed Area (MAREA) 3oet — ExCrit— n. HERE. C— In ,W. momma P Cw 3EECO Use
rAO NPC NMM I -P— Ir:N Ifnrta•en N1 (hdn— r—a—
WTI E.' Ch.. (4-g K-91, —s tcpo. Meptr Iw... C Oa .t,.ehi.p
CIXtobil R, IDM the SIS USCI CA rdy
Page 3 of 3

TOWN OF KERNERSVILLE
P.O. Box 728
Kernersville, NC 27285-0728
June 28, 2016
Mr. John Thomas
USACE Wilmington District
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Ste 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
Re: Town of Kernersville Thoroughfare Roads
Calebs Creek Development
Dear Mr. Thomas,
Dawn H. Morgan, Mayor
Curtis L. Swisher, Town Manager
134 East Mountain Street
Telephone [phone]
Fax [phone]
The purpose of this letter is to express the Town of Kernersville's support of the construction of
thoroughfare and collector roads within the Calebs Creek Development. The roads are part of our
progressive transportation planning and are depicted on our 2011 adopted Thoroughfare and Street
Plan as attached. In this case, these corridors link Teague Lane with both Union Cross Road and
Highway 66 for access to Interstate 40. In addition to better access to Calebs Creek these public
roads ensure safe passage of vehicles detoured off of Interstate 40 in the event of an accident and or
construction.
The Town of Kernersville will act as a joint applicant for the processing of permits to impacts
streams for the construction of roads that are part of the Town's thoroughfare plan. The developer
will be responsible for all costs and permit compliance within the Calebs Creek project area.
Inter -agency cooperation is imperative when it comes to a project of this scope, and thus the Town
of Kemersville would ask the Corps to please advise us if there is any additional information that
we can provide in advance of the forthcoming application by the developer.
If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you for your
time on this matter.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey AICP
Community Development Director
ALDERMEN
Kenny Crews - Irving Neal - Joe L. Pinnix Jr. - Tracey H. Shifflette - Chris Thompson
NORTH CAROLINA'S
PIEDMONT
TRIAD
i
J

will
ape
111110.
Ok
MOM
Its
VISION
., 111 ��� ►0 .
•••• . �� _ � �`�1� �i� mt• ori- ,:'-,�� ,`,`� y •\ FAle
im
rub■-- I:il�� �� � � � •�► :►R;i..-��.� l
— 40 '' 1� -�nl t�a�oCru• � , � Lr � - O O�� M
� �� ', •'��,�o��� Ilk` .. f• ��•• 40 � •
� : n�� ,....L;; ....' • tr� , A �' a tr �"
' • • • . • • • - • e�,4�� � z�1a�r'!� N ��'R �' ��, • i � �_��',�' / �_L 40 .(��i,�P�N ♦ iii(
�9 C', T. � ��i I„�I � lil �� 1111 I � d��.Z� �O' •� ITS^��' ��/
-•-• �`0/� 40 An
E Jai
P
:
'lir'"' �- `O�. / rr, .,f'" �'_.. v.' ��.•
�� �.Lno;■a1r•�/�
' II�
.
, � SII • �� 1 �= r.
will
ape
111110.
Ok
MOM
Its
VISION
., 111 ��� ►0 .
•••• . �� _ � �`�1� �i� mt• ori- ,:'-,�� ,`,`� y •\ FAle
im
rub■-- I:il�� �� � � � •�► :►R;i..-��.� l
— 40 '' 1� -�nl t�a�oCru• � , � Lr � - O O�� M
� �� ', •'��,�o��� Ilk` .. f• ��•• 40 � •
� : n�� ,....L;; ....' • tr� , A �' a tr �"
' • • • . • • • - • e�,4�� � z�1a�r'!� N ��'R �' ��, • i � �_��',�' / �_L 40 .(��i,�P�N ♦ iii(
�9 C', T. � ��i I„�I � lil �� 1111 I � d��.Z� �O' •� ITS^��' ��/
-•-• �`0/� 40 An
E Jai
P

=SFS DF6
�S F 3
r'
r
CD F 7
D F9 PSF8 ----- -
CD F4
l
/
CSF7
�SF6 —�
= SF4
-R CSF5
CSF2
DF3 00 DF.-
-� 5F1
_ t
I
SS
11 A
Goode earth
© 2016 Google
Watkins Ford Rd -
CD F8

NC DWn Stream identification Form Version 4-11
Date: 02/03115Caleb
Cree
Project/Site:SF f
Latitude: 36.058411
Evaluator: P. Isner
County: Forsyth
Longitude: -80.094453
Total Points:
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other Kernersville
Stream is at least intermittent 39.5
if 219 or perennial if 2 30*
Ephemeral Intermittent PeVnial
T
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology Subtotal =__L2_)
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
I" Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1 1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
Sketch: Stream form
Wetland ::::::;:`":::`
"artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = 10.5 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
0
No = 0
Yes = 3
1.5
C. Bioloav (Subtotal = 7
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5
Other = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch: Stream form
Wetland ::::::;:`":::`
Hedgecock
3
1
1
2
3
2
2
3
1
1
3
3
1
1.5
1
1
3
3
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
0

NC DWO Stream identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 02/03/15Ca
e Creek Project/Site:SF z
Latitude: 36.059316
Evaluator: P. Isner
County: Forsyth
Longitude: -80.095478
Total Points:
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other Kernersville
Stream is at least intermittent 27
Ephemeral IntepAittent Perennial
-Y
e.g. Quad Name:
if Z 19 or perennial ifs 30`
2
3
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 15 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1' Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
Stream form
Culvert
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = 7.S )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
0.5
No = 0
Yes = 3
24. Amphibians
C. Bioloav (Subtotal = 4.5 1
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1 1 1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75;
OBI = 1.5 Other = 0
`perennial streams may also be identified using
other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:
Stream form
Culvert
2
3
1
2
2
1
1
0
1.5
1.5
0
3
3
0
0.5
1
0
2
2
0
0
0
0.5
0
0
0

NC DWO Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 02/03/15
Caleb's Creek
Project/Site: Ca Ca 3
SF
Latitude: 36.07721
Evaluator: T. Bandy C. Huysman P. Isner
County: Forsyth
Longitude: -80.09182
Total Points:
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other Kernersville
Stream is at least intermittent 13
if 2 19 or Perennial if t30*
Ephheral Intermittent Perennial
T #�,"
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = 7 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
18' Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
Sketch:
"artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B_ Hvrimloov (Suhtotal = 1 1
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1 1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
0
No = 0
Yes = 3
1.5
C. Bioloov (Subtotal = S
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1 1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5
Other = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:
2
1
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
2
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

NC DWO Stream identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 02/05/15
Project/Site:Caleb Creek
SF4
Latitude: 36.061663
Evaluator: P. Isner
County: Forsyth
Longitude: -80.096611
Total Points:
Stream is least intermittent 16.5
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other Kernersville
at
Eph#Meral Intermittent Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
if Z 19 or perennial if z 30"
2
3
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 8.5 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1aContinuity 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,
sequence
0
1
2
3
-ripple-pool
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 = 0
Yes = 3
Sketch:
Stream form
"artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroloov (Subtotal = a 1
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
0
No = 0
Yes = 3
1.5
C. Bioloav (Subtotal = a
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1 1 1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75;
OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:
Stream form
P RPw
1
1
2
1
0
0
0.5
1
0
3
0
0
0.5
0.5
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
O

NC DWn Stream identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 02/05/15
Caleb Creek
Project/Site: Ca Ca 5
Latitude: 36.060362
Evaluator: P. Isner
County: Forsyth
Longitude: -80.096933
Total Points:
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other Kernersville
Stream is at least intermittent 23
Ephemeral InteVittent Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
if z 19 or perennial if z 30'
2
3
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 12.5 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1" Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
Sketch: Culvert
-- _.
Stream form
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
R_ Hvdroloav (Subtotal = S.r, 1
12. Presence of Baseflow
0 1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0 1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5 1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0 0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0 0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
1
C- Rinlnnv (Si ihtntal = C
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5 1
1 1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5
Other = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch: Culvert
-- _.
Stream form
P RPW
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
0.5
1
0
3
1
0.5
0.5
0.5
0
2
3
0
0
0
0
O
0
0

NC DWO Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 02/05/15
Caleb Creek
Project/Site: Ca Ca 6
SF
Latitude: 36.064963
Evaluator: P. Isner
County: Forsyth
Longitude: -80.099609
Total Points:
16
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other Kernersville
Stream is at least intermittent
if i 19 or perennial if i 30*
Eph eral Intermittent Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = 9 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
18' 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
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No
= 0
Yes = 3
- artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = a 1
12. Presence of Baseflow
0 1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0 1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5 1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0 0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0 0.5
1 1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
1.5
C. Bioloov (Subtotal =
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks 0
1
2
3
22. Fish 0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish 0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians 0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae 0
0.5 1
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5
Other = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch: P_RPW
Stream form
01
0
0
1
0
2
0.5
0.5
0
2
1
0
0.5
0.5
0
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

NC DWO Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 02/05/15
Project/Site:Ca Creek
Latitude: 36.o66249
Evaluator: P. Isner
County: Forsyth
Longitude: -80.102741
Total Points:
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other Kernersville
Stream is at least intermittent 22.5
Inteyfiittent Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
if z 19 or erennial if z 30* if
2
3
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 11 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1 a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
, 2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
Sketch:
P-RPW
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = S.S 1
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
0
No = 0 1Yes
= 3
1.5
C_ Rinlnnv (Suhtntal = 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
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1 1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75;
OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
`perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:
P-RPW
Stream form
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
0.5
0.5
0
3
0
0.5
1
1
0
3
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

NC DWO Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 04/09/15
Project/Site:Caleb's Creek
SF8
Latitude: 36.074265
Evaluator: P. Isner
County: Forsyth
Longitude: -80.100083
Total Points:
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other Kernersville
Stream is at least intermittent 23
if 2 19 or perennial if z 30'
Ephemeral IntepAittent Perennial
Y"'
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 10.5 )
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 0.5
1 1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
Notes:
No = 0
Yes = 3
aniticiai ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroloov (Siuhtotal = -7_s )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
E17.Soil -based evidence of high water table?
0.5
No = 0
Yes = 3
23. Crayfish
C. Bioloov (Subtotal = S
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5 1
1 1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5
Other = 0
`perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:
WL 11100 series
sRPW; DWQ DF1
non-RPW
2
1
1
1
1
1
0
2
0.5
1
0
3
0
1
0
0.5
3
2
2
0
0
0
0
1
0
0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Caleb's Creek City/County: Forsyth Sampling Date: 150203
Applicant/Owner: BOMA NC, LLC State: NC Sampling Point: DF 1
Investigator(s): TB, CH, PI Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): flat Slope (%): 1
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat: 36.058285 Long: -80.093922 Datum: WGS 84
Soil Map Unit Name: Codorus NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes _ ✓ No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil. or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ✓ No
Are Vegetation Soil, or Hydrology. naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes !� No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes _ No_ ✓ _ within a Wetland? Yes No ✓
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes. ✓ _ No-
Remarks:
o_Remarks: WL Series
WL Type Appx. Acreage
24 H R Weather 0.7 in. of rain within past 24 hours
Recent Weather
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is reouired: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
✓ Surface Water (Al)
True Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
High Water Table (A2)
✓ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Drainage Patterns (1310)
Saturation (A3)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (131)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
` Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (135)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
✓ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches): 3
Water Table Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
In floodplain, standing water present. Photo 1.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ) % Cover Species? Status
1. Platanus occidentalis 30 Y FACb
2. Acer rubrum 30 Y FAC
3. Fraxinus PennsYlvanica 15 Y FACV
5.
6.
75 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 37.5 20% of total cover: 15
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: 15 )
1. Acer rubrum 15 Y FAC
2.
5.
6.
15 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 7.5 20% of total cover: 3
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
5.
6.
50% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 51 )
1. Carex abscondita
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
50% of total cover: 2.5
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
= Total Cover
Caleb's Creek
Sampling Point: DF 1
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
❑ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Q✓ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
[] 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
ElProblematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
_ 20% of total cover: Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
5 Y FAC (7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
5 = Total Cover
20% of total cover: 1
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes ✓ No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL
Caleb's Creek
Sampling Point: DF 1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type Loci Texture Remarks
0-4 7.5 YR 6 /3 70 7.5 YR 5 /8 30 M fine
4-18 7.5 YR 5 /3 50 7.5 YR 5 /8 50 M fine
D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix. MS=Masked Sand Grains.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol (Al)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (Si) (LRR N,
MLRA 147,148)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Sc
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1719)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
— Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No ✓
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Caleb's Creek City/County: Forsyth Sampling Date: 150203
Applicant/Owner: BOMA NC, LLC State: NC Sampling Point: DF 2
Investigator(s): TB, CH, PI Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): flat Slope (%): 1
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat: 36.058467 Long: -80.093941 Datum: WGS 84
Soil Map Unit Name: Codorus NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes _ ✓ No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil. or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ✓ No
Are Vegetation Soil. or Hydrology. naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ _ No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes _ No_ ✓ _ within a Wetland? Yes No ✓
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes. _ No_
Remarks:
WL Type WL Series Appx. Acreage
24 HR Weather 0.7 in. of rain within past 24 hours
Recent Weather
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is reauired: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Surface Water (Al)
True Aquatic Plants (614)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
High Water Table (A2)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Drainage Patterns (1310)
_ Saturation (A3)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Moss Trim Lines (616)
Water Marks (131)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (62)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (133)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (135)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (613)
FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No ✓
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No ✓
Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No ✓
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
In floodplain, no standing water. Photo 2.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
%° Cover
Species?
Status
1. Liquidambar styracif/ua
30
Y
FAC
2. Acer rubrum
20
Y
FAC
3. Fraxinus pennsVlvanica
15
Y
FACV
A Platanus occidentalis
10
N
FACV
75 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 37.5 20% of total cover: 15
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: 15 )
1. Acer rubrum 10 Y FAC
3.-
10 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 5 20% of total cover: 2
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15' )
,.-Rosa multiflora 10 Y FACU
2.
Caleb's Creek
Sampling Point: DF 2
Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 6 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 8 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 75 (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x3=
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
❑ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Q✓ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
EjProblematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
6. be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
10 = Total Cover Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
50% of total cover: 5 20% of total cover: 2
Tree –Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ) approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
1. Carex abscondita 20 Y FAC (7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
5.
7
20 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 10 20% of total cover: 4
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1. Lonicera japonica 10 Y FAC
2. Smilax bona-nox 5 Y FACU
3.
4.
Sapling – Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub – Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb – All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine – All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
15 = Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover:
7.5 20% of total cover: 3 Present? Yes ✓ No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

Caleb's Creek
SOIL Sampling Point: DF 2
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
Histosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
Redox Features
Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
(inches)
Color (moist) %
Color (moist)
% Type
Loc2
Texture Remarks
0-6
7.5 YR 6 /4 80
7.5 YR
5
/8
20
M
fine
6-12
7.5 YR 5 /4 80
7.5 YR
5
/8
10
M
fine
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
10 YR
3
/3
10
M
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
12-20
7.5 YR 5 /3 60
7.5 YR
5
/8
30
M
fine
10 YR
3
/3
10
M
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Hydric Sol[ Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
` Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF1 2)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (Si) (LRR N,
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_Sandy
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No ✓
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Caleb's Creek City/County: Forsyth Sampling Date: 150203
Applicant/Owner: BOMA NC, LLC State: NC Sampling Point: DF 3
Investigator(s): TB, CH, PI Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat: 36.058405 Long: -80.094640 Datum: WGS 84
Soil Map Unit Name: Fairview NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes _ ✓ No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil. or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ✓ No
Are Vegetation Soil. or Hydrology. naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes _✓__ No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes _ ✓ _ No_ _ within a Wetland? Yes ✓ No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes. ✓ _ No_ _
Remarks: WL Series
WL Type Appx. Acreage
24 HR Weather 0.7 in. of rain within past z4 hours
Recent Weather
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
✓ Surface Water (Al)
True Aquatic Plants (614)
` Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
✓ High Water Table (A2)
✓ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
✓ Drainage Patterns (1310)
✓ Saturation (A3)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Moss Trim Lines (1316)
Water Marks (131)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (01)
Iron Deposits (135)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
✓ Water -Stained Leaves (139)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches): 4
Water Table Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches): 6
Saturation Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches): 6
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Wetland. Photo 3.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
wi boundar Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: % Cover Species? Status
1. Liquidambar styracif/ua 25 Y FAC
2. Acer rubrum 15 Y FAC
4.
50% of total cover: 20
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: WI boundary)
1. Acer rubrum
3.
6.
40 = Total Cover
20% of total cover: 8
15 Y FAC
15 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 7.5 20% of total cover: 3
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: WI boundary )
1. Cornus amumum 15 Y FACV
5.
15 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 7.5 20% of total cover: 3
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
1. Carex abscondita 20 Y FAC
2. Fragaria vesca 2 N FACU
3. Allium canadense 2 N FACU
4.
5.
6.
7.
11.
24 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 12 20% of total cover: 4.8
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: WI boundary
1. Lonicera japonica 20 Y FAC
Caleb's Creek
Sampling Point: DF 3
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 6 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 8 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 75 (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
X3=
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
❑ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Q✓ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
❑ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
Tree — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Sapling — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
2.
3.
4.
5. Hydrophytic
20 = Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover: 10 20% of total cover: 4 Present? Yes ✓ No
or on a separate
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

Caleb's Creek
SOIL Sampling Point: DF 3
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
Redox Features
_ Dark Surface (S7)
(inches)
Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Type Loci
Texture Remarks
0-4
10 YR 6 /1 80
10 YR 5 /8 20 M
fine
4-8
10 YR 6 /1 60
10 YR 5 /8 20 M
fine
(MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
10 YR 4 /1 20 M
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
8-20
10 YR 6 /1 100
Other (Explain in Remarks)
sand
'Tvoe: C=Concentration. D=Deletion. RM=Reduced Matrix. MS=Masked Sand Grains.
21-ocation: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
— Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (All)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1719) (MLRA 1481
wetland hydrology must be present,
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric
Soil Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Caleb's Creek City/County: Forsyth Sampling Date: 150203
Applicant/Owner: BOMA NC, LLC State: NC Sampling Point: DF 4
Investigator(s): TB, CH, PI Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): flat Local relief (concave, convex, none): flat Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat: 36.072909 Long: -80.09o835 Datum: WGS 84
Soil Map Unit Name: Codorus NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes _ ✓ No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil. or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ✓ No
Are Vegetation Soil, or Hydrology. , naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes _ No_ ✓ _ within a Wetland? Yes No ✓
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes. _ No_
Remarks: WL Series
WL Type Appx. Acreage
24 H R Weather 0.7 in. of rain within past 24 hours
Recent Weather
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is reauired:
check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Surface Water (Al)
True Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
High Water Table (A2)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Drainage Patterns (1310)
_ Saturation (A3)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (131)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (62)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (63)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (135)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Water -Stained Leaves (139)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Fill/grown up fairway.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
Caleb's Creek
Sampling Point: DF 4
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
% Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: 15' )
1. Lipuidambar styracif/ua 15 Y FAC
2.
15 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 7.5 20% of total cover: 3
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
5.
6.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
Species Across All Strata:
1. Dact0s alomerata
50
Y
FACU
2. Dichanthelium clandestinum
30
Y
FAC
3. Polygonum saaittatum
10
N
OBL
4. Solidaw altissima
10
N
FACU
5. Ludwigia alternifolia
10
N
FACV1
6. Carex abscondita
5
N
FAC
7.
8.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
1.
50% of total cover: 57.5
50% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate
115 = Total Cover
20% of total cover: 23
= Total Cover
20% of total cover:
2 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
3
(B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
66
(A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A)
(B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
❑ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
F✓ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
❑ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
Tree — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Sapling — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes ✓ No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Version 2.0

Caleb's Creek
SOIL Sampling Point: DF 4
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils 3:
Histosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
Redox Features
_
Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist)
% Type
Loci
Texture Remarks
0-2
10 YR 3 /3
100
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
— Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
sandy k
2-4
10 YR 5 /4
80
7.5 YR
5
/8
20
M
sandy k
4-8
10 YR 5 /8
60
2.5 Y
6
/6
30
M
sandy k
2.5 Y
6
/3
5
M
7.5 YR
5
/6
5
M
8-16
2.5 YR 4 /6
80
7.5 YR
5
/6
20
M
sandy k
'Type: C=Concentration, D=De letion RM -Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils 3:
Histosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_
Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Black Histic (A3)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_._
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
— Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (Si) (LRR N,
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_Sandy
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1719) (MLRA 1481
wetland hydrology must be present,
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
marks: Fill.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No ✓
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Caleb's Creek City/County: Forsyth Sampling Date: 150203
Applicant/Owner: BOMA NC, LLC State: NC Sampling Point: DF 5
Investigator(s): TB, CH, PI Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): flat Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat: 36.078721 Long: -80.o91650 Datum: WGS 84
Soil Map Unit Name: Casville NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes _ ✓ No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil. or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ✓ No
Are Vegetation Soil, or Hydrology. . naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes _ ✓ _ No_ _ within a Wetland? Yes ✓ No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes. ✓ _ No-
Remarks:
o_Remarks: WL Series
WL Type Appx. Acreage
24 HR Weather 0.7 in. of rain within past 24 hours
Recent Weather
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required:
check all that apply)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
✓ Surface Water (Al)
True Aquatic Plants (1314)
✓ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
✓ High Water Table (A2)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
✓ Drainage Patterns (1310)
✓ Saturation (A3)
✓ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (131)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
✓ Drift Deposits (B3)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
✓ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (135)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (133)
_ Water -Stained Leaves (139)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches): 2
Water Table Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches): 4
Saturation Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches): 4
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes We No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Wetland, upper beaver dam.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Caleb's Creek
Sampling Point: DF 5
6. Prevalence Index = B/A =
= Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: ❑ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) Q✓ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
1 3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0'
2. ❑ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
3. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
0 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
' Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
6• be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
= Total Cover Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: Tree — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb Stratum (Plot size: A boundary) approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
1. Leersia oraoides 60 Y OBL (7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
3.
4.
7
9.
10.
11.
60 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 30 20% of total cover: 12
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
5.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
rs here or on a separate sheet.)
Sapling — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes ✓ No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 •
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1
(A)
2.
Total Number of Dominant
3.
Species Across All Strata: 1
(B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100
(A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
= Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: )
FACW species x 2 =
1'
FAG species x 3 =
2.
FACU species x 4 =
3.
UPL species x 5 =
4.
Column Totals: (A)
(B)
5.
6. Prevalence Index = B/A =
= Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: ❑ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) Q✓ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
1 3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0'
2. ❑ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
3. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
0 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
' Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
6• be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
= Total Cover Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: Tree — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb Stratum (Plot size: A boundary) approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
1. Leersia oraoides 60 Y OBL (7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
3.
4.
7
9.
10.
11.
60 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 30 20% of total cover: 12
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
5.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
rs here or on a separate sheet.)
Sapling — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes ✓ No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL
Caleb's Creek
Sampling Point: DF 5
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Redox Features
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist) % Type Loc'
Texture Remarks
0-3
10 YR 4 /3
95
7.5 YR 5 /8 5 C PL
fine
3-12
7.5 YR 4 /1
90
5 YR 4 /6 10 C PL
fine
12-20
7.5 YR 4 /1
100
fine
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol (Al)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (Si) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
educed Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore_Lining, M=Matrix.
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes V No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Sc
Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes V No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Caleb's Creek City/County: Forsyth Sampling Date: 150203
Applicant/Owner: BOMA NC, LLC State: NC Sampling Point: DF 6
Investigator(s): TB, CH, PI Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): flat Local relief (concave, convex, none): flat Slope
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat: 36.078683 Long: -80.091808 Datum: WGS 84
Soil Map Unit Name: Pacolet NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes _ ✓ No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil. or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ✓ No
Are Vegetation Soil, or Hydrology, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes _ No_ ✓ _ within a Wetland? Yes No ✓
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes. _ No _
Remarks:
WL Type WL Series Appx. Acreage
24 H R Weather 0.7 in. of rain within past 24 hours
Recent Weather
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
— Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Surface Water (Al)
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
` Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
High Water Table (A2)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
_ Saturation (A3)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Moss Trim Lines (1316)
Water Marks (Bi)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (133)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (135)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
_ Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No le
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

Caleb's Creek
VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: DF 6
Hydrophytic
20 = Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover: 10 20% of total cover: 4 Present? Yes ✓ No
numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
) % Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 •
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: z (A)
2.
Total Number of Dominant
3.
Species Across All Strata: 3 (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 66 (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
= Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
OBL species x 1 =
SaDling Stratum (Plot size:
)
FACW species x 2 =
1
FAC species x 3 =
2•
FACU species x 4 =
3•
UPL species x 5 =
4.
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5.
6.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
= Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
❑ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
f
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
2 Dominance Test is
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
- >50%
Rosa multiflora
10 Y FACU
❑ 3 - Prevalence Index is s3.0'
1.
❑ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
2
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
3•
[� Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
4.
5•
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
6.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
10 = Total Cover
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
50% of total cover: 5 20% of total cover: 2
Tree — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 51
)
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
1. Leersia oraoides
30 Y OBL
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
2.
Sapling — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
3
approximately 20 It (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
4.
5.
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
6
7.
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
8
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
9.
ft (1 m) in height.
10.
Woody vine —All woody vines, regardless of height.
11.
30 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 15 20% of total cover: 6
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
30' )
1. Lonicera japonica
20 Y FAC
2. —
Hydrophytic
20 = Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover: 10 20% of total cover: 4 Present? Yes ✓ No
numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL
Caleb's Creek
Sampling Point: DF 6
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Redox Features
(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist) % Tvne Loci Texture Remarks
0-4
10 YR 4 /2
100
fine
4-10
7.5 YR 4 /6
100
fine
10-16
10 YR 4 /2
100
fine
RM=Reduced Matrix. MS=Masked Sand Grains.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol(A1)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (If observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Sc
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136,147)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF1 2)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No ✓
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Caleb's Creek City/County: Forsyth Sampling Date: 150203
Applicant/Owner: BOMA NC, LLC State: NC Sampling Point: DF 7
Investigator(s): TB, CH, PI Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): flat Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 1
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat: 36.07641 Long: -8o•o8994 Datum: WGS 84
Soil Map Unit Name: Casville NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes _ ✓ No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation _, Soil. or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ✓ No
Are Vegetation Soil. or Hydrology. . naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes _✓_ No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes _ ✓ _ No_ _ within a Wetland? Yes ✓ No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes. ✓ _ No_ _
Remarks:
WL Type WL Series Appx. Acreage
24 HR Weather 0.7 in. of rain within past 24 hours
Recent Weather
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is reauired: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Surface Water (Al)
True Aquatic Plants (614)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
✓ High Water Table (A2)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Drainage Patterns (1310)
Saturation (A3)
✓ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Moss Trim Lines (1316)
Water Marks (131)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (83)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (85)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Water -Stained Leaves (139)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches): 6
Saturation Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: WI boundary
1. Salix nigra
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
50% of total cover: 10
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
4
5
6
Caleb's Creek
Sampling Point: DF 7
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
% Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species
20 Y OBL That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A)
20 = Total Cover
20% of total cover: 4-
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
5.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 51 )
1. Ludwiqia alternifolia 15 Y FACV
2. Carex abscondita 15 Y FAC
4.
5.
7.
8.
50% of total cover: 15
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
4.
30 = Total Cover
20% of total cover: 6
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 3 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
❑ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Q✓ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
❑ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
Tree — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Sapling — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes ✓ No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL
Caleb's Creek
Sampling Point: DF 7
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
_ Histosol (Al)
Redox Features
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist) % Type Loc'
Texture Remarks
0-4
10 YR 4 /2
95
7.5 YR 5 /8 95 C PL
fine
4-12
7.5 YR 4 /1
90
7.5 YR 5 /8 10 C PL
fine
12-16
10 YR 4 /2
100
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
fine
RM=Reduced
ns.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136,147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_Sandy
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric
Soil Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Caleb's Creek City/County: Kernersville/Forsyth Sampling Date: 04121/15
Applicant/Owner: BOMA NC, LLC State: NC Sampling Point: DF8
Investigator(s): Huysman Isner Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 1
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat: 36.052158 Long: -80.091450 Datum: WGS 84
Soil Map Unit Name: Codorus NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes _ ✓ No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil. or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ✓ No
Are Vegetation Soil, or Hydrology. naturally problematic? (if needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes !� _ No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes _ No_ ✓ _ within a Wetland? Yes No we
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes. ✓ _ No_ _
Remarks: photo pt. 7 WL Series
WL Type Appx. Acreage
24 HR Weather heavyrainfall
Recent Weather
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is reauired:
check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
✓ Surface Water (Al)
True Aquatic Plants (814)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
High Water Table (A2)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Drainage Patterns (1310)
Saturation (A3)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (Bi)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
— Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
_ Shallow Aquitard (133)
_ Water -Stained Leaves (139)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches): 2
Water Table Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
No high water table/saturation. Surface water is direct result of recent rainfall.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ) % Cover Species? Status
1. Populus deltoides 30 Y FAC
2. Ulmus americana 30 Y FACV
3. Platanus occidentalis 10 N FACV
4.
5.
70 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 35 20% of total cover: 14
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: 15 )
1. Acer rubrum 25 Y FAC
3.
6.
25 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 12.5 20% of total cover: 5
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
6.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5' )
1. Carex sao. 15 Y FAC
2. Impatiens capensis 10 Y FACV
Caleb's Creek
Sampling Point: DF8
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 6 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 6 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x1 =
FACW species x2=
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
❑ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Q✓ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
❑ 3 - Prevalence Index is s3.0'
❑ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
EiProblematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Five Veqetation Strata:
Tree — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Sapling — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
5.
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
6
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
7•
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
g,
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
9
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
10.
11.
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
25 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 12.5
20% of total cover: 5
Woody Vine
Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1. Toxicodendron radicans
10 Y FAC
2.
3.
4.
5.
10 = Total Cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
50% of total cover: 5
20% of total cover: 2
Present? Yes ✓ No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL
Caleb's Creek
Sampling Point: DF8
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Tvpe Loc' Texture Remarks
0-4 10 YR 6 /3 50 10 YR 6 /2 30 C M fine
10 YR 5 /6 20
4-6 10 YR 4 /4 75 10 YR
6
/3
25
C
M fine
6-16 10 YR 6 /3 50 10 YR
6
/1
20
C
M fine
10 YR
6
/2
10
C
M
10 YR
4
/4
20
C
M
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced_ Matrix,_ MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Solls3:
Histosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
— Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodpfain Soils (F19)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF1 2)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
` Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (Si) (LRR N,
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No ✓
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont– Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Caleb's Creek City/County: Kernersville, Forsyth Sampling Date: 04/09/15
Applicant/Owner: BOMA NC, LLC State: NC Sampling Point: DF9
Investigator(s): Isner Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): interstream Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat: 36.074334 Long: -$0.099942 Datum: WGS 84
Soil Map Unit Name: Cecil NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes _ ✓ No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil. or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes OF No
Are Vegetation Soil. or Hydrology. , naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes _✓_ No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes _ ✓ No _ within a Wetland? Yes ✓ No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes. ✓ _ No
Remarks:
WL Type WL Series iiloo series Appx. Acreage
24 HR Weather
Recent Weather
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary
Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required:
check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (86)
Surface Water (Al)
True Aquatic Plants (814)
` Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
✓ High Water Table (A2)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Drainage Patterns (1310)
✓ Saturation (A3)
✓ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Moss Trim Lines (1316)
Water Marks (131)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
u Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (135)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches): 6
Saturation Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches): 6
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary frin e
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring
well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Caleb's Creek
Sampling Point: DF9
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species
1. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A)
2. Total Number of Dominant
3• Species Across All Strata: 6 (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 83 (A/B)
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: 15 )
1. Liquidambar styracif/ua 10 Y FAC
2. Salix nigra 5 Y OBL
3.
4.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
6. Prevalence Index = B/A =
15 = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
50% of total cover: 7.5 20% of total cover: 3 ❑ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15' ) Q✓ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
1. Rubus alleaheniensis 25 Y FACU Q 3 - Prevalence Index is s3.0'
2. ❑ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
3. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
ElProblematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
5.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
25 = Total Cover Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 1
50% of total cover: 12.5 20% of total cover: 5
Tree — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
) approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
1. Juncus effusus 30 Y FAC (7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
2. Poa spp. 10 Y FAC Sapling — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
3. SOl/dago alt/ss/ma 2 N FACU approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
4 than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
5. Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
R approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
7
50% of total cover: 21
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1. Lonicera iaponica
2.
42 = Total Cover
20% of total cover: 8.4
15 Y FAC
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
15
= Total Cover Vegetation
° 7.5 20% of total cover: 3 Present? Yes ✓ No
50 /° of total cover:
photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Version 2.0

SOIL
Description: (Describe to the depth needed to
or confirm
Caleb's Creek
Sampling Point: DF9
Depth
Matrix
Redox
Features
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
(inches)
Color (moist) %
Color (moist)
% ape Loc2
Texture Remarks
0-4
10 YR 4 /2 80
10 YR 5 /6
20 C PL
sandy k
4-16
10 YR 5 /2 45
10 YR 6 /6
50 C M
sandy k
10 YR 3 /2
5
soft masses
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol (Al)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (Si) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
educed Matrix, MS=Masked_Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
— Redox Depressions (F8)
✓ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Sc
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
— Redox Depressions (F8)
✓ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0