20240613 Ver 1_UWNI PCN Cover Letter & Attachments_20240423

�CAROLINA
ECOSYSTEMS 3040 NC 42 West, Clayton NC 27520
P:919-606-1065
April 2, 2024
Mr. Lyle Phillips
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
US Army Corps of Engineers
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
RE: Pre -Construction Notification: Nationwide Permit 58 & General Certification No. 4276
Upper West Neuse Interceptor Improvements
Wake County, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Phillips;
Carolina Ecosystems, Inc. (CEI), in conjunction with Black & Veatch, has prepared the
associated electronic Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) for the City of Raleigh Public Utilities
Department (CORPUD) in order to acquire a Section 404 Nationwide Permit 58 and a Section
401 Water Quality Certification No. 4276 for the above -referenced project. This electronic PCN
is being submitted for the project along with corresponding figures, tables, impact exhibits,
engineering plans, National Marine Fisheries Checklist, 2020 Request for PJD, and NCDWR
Buffer Determination. Additional details are provided below.
Project Description
CORPUD is planning sewer infrastructure improvements along the existing Upper West Neuse
Interceptor (UWNI) (Figure 1). The purpose of this project is to address critical needs of the
UWNI system identified through the CORPUD wastewater master planning process. The project
is proposed to reduce the risk of system failure while also addressing continued population
growth in the existing service area.
The UWNI serves a large portion of the greater Raleigh area, including the City of Raleigh and
portions of Wake County. The proposed project consists of the replacement of approximately
12,000 linear feet of gravity sewer lines along the Neuse River. The existing 48- and 54-inch
diameter pipe will be replaced with a new 60-inch pipe. The new pipe will be installed either
parallel to existing pipe or in the current location where constraints prevent parallel installation,
using temporary bypass pumping to maintain sewer service.
Potential Aquatic Resources in Proiect Area
A delineation of potential Waters of the US was performed in 2019 for the West Neuse
Interceptor corridor and UWNI. A request for a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination was
submitted in February 2020 (Attachment 2). Due to the elapsed time since that delineation (field
work was performed in 2019), the UWNI corridor was re -checked in 2023 and the following
adjustments made to the prior delineation.

Mr. Lyle Phillips
April 2, 2024
Page 2 of 4
- Extension of multiple wetland boundaries to cover temporary easement areas
- Removed wetland WAX — not within final project limits
- Adjusted wetland WAV — greenway connector constructed by adjacent development,
dividing wetland into WAV 1 and WAV2
- Removed upper portion of wetland WAU — does not meet indicators (Form attached)
- Conversion of previous identified pond PA into wetland WAS
- Removal of wetland WAL, WAM, WAN and WAO — area is developed and maintained
residential lawns lacking wetland indicators
- Added WZZ — possible continuation of WA from original delineation, added due to wider
access corridor for river crossing
The delineation information provided above and in the attached documentation is provided for
use during the permit review process. A jurisdictional determination is not being requested
unless determined necessary.
The existing NCDWR Buffer Determination (Attachment 3) is still valid until March 1lth, 2025
and no changes are proposed to the identified buffers.
Clean Water Act Impacts
Total impacts to waters of the U.S. are 374 linear feet of temporary stream impacts and 7.42
acres of temporary wetland impacts.
Temporary stream impacts would result from excavation of the exiting stream bed per the
attached plans to install the new pipe. Natural bed materials would be replaced above the pipe
encasement. Banks would be stabilized with riprap and natural vegetation as appropriate
depending on the slopes (see the attached engineering plans). All work would be performed in
the dry with bypass pumping and/or cofferdams. The Neuse River crossing is addressed in detail
in the attached National Marine Fisheries Checklist (Attachment 1).
Temporary wetland impacts would primarily result from clearing of the forested edges of the
construction corridor for staging and bypass pumping, and temporary excavation of wetlands
within current utility maintenance corridor for the installation of the new pipe. All disturbed
wetland areas will be returned to pre -construction elevations per the attached plans. Additional
details of each impact are provided in the electronic PCN, Impact tables, and Impact sheets. No
permanent conversion of forested wetlands is proposed, as the permanent maintained easement
for the new sewer line will be contained within the already cleared easement of the existing line
and greenway.
Neuse River Riparian Buffer Impacts
Riparian buffers will be impacted during construction, but no impervious areas will be added as
this is a replacement of the existing utility line. Temporary disturbance to existing, cleared
utility corridor was deemed a present and ongoing use under the Neuse Buffer rule. Riparian
buffer impacts to the Neuse River and several unnamed tributaries resulting from clearing within
existing easement or new easement would total 63,238 square feet of temporary Zone 1 impacts

Mr. Lyle Phillips Page 3 of 4
April 2, 2024
and 110,508 square feet of temporary Zone 2 impacts. All impacts are considered Deemed
Allowable or Allowable Upon Authorization per Item " J" the Table of Uses. Following
construction, all areas within riparian buffer zones will be returned to pre -construction elevation
contours and revegetated. A 30-foot corridor through buffer areas will require periodic mowing
for maintenance, but ground surfaces will be undisturbed.
Avoidance and Mitigation
Clearing in all forested areas outside of the existing and proposed CORPUD permanent utility
easement will be revegetated and no ongoing maintenance will occur in these temporary
construction easement areas. Cleared areas within the existing and proposed utility easements
will be revegetated but periodically mowed to maintain the easement. Mowing will be limited to
a 30-foot corridor in wetlands and buffers.
The existing 60-foot CORPUD utility easement is being used to the maximum extent practical
for construction of this project. Due to the depth of the pipe and the need for bypass pumping to
maintain sewer service, an additional 30 to 40-foot temporary construction easement is required
along the project, as shown in the attached construction plans. In general, this additional
temporary easement is located on the upland side (away from the river) of the existing easement,
except where constraints such as steep slopes or existing infrastructure and housing prevent it.
The crossing of the Neuse River is proposed to be constructed via open cut per the attached
plans. The crossing will be constructed in two segments with a cofferdam creating a dry work
area while maintaining downstream flow. The open cut construction is required due to the size
and slope of the pipe. To maintain the existing connections along the WNI, the replacement line
is at or close to the minimum allowable slope (0.05 to 0.06%). Bore or directional drilling
methods could not necessarily maintain this slope across the river for a pipe of this size. Refer to
the NMFS Checklist (Attachment 1) for additional details.
The preceding information, along with the associated electronic Pre -Construction Notification,
impact tables, figures, impact maps, engineering plans, and attachments are being submitted for
your review of this project. A copy of this application is also being provided to the NC Division
of Water Resources for their review and issuance of GC 4276.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at your earliest
convenience at [phone] or [e-mail].
Sincerely,
Carolina Ecosystems, Inc.
Philip May
Senior Environmental Scientist

Mr. Lyle Phillips
April 2, 2024
Cc: Stephanie Goss, NC DWR — 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
Julie R. Parham, P.E., Senior Project Administrator, CORPUD
Lee Campbell, P.E., Black & Veatch
Attachments:
Agent Authorization Form
Tables
Table 1 - Stream Impact Summary Table
Table 2 - Wetland Impact Summary Table
Table 3 - Buffer Impact Summary Table
Figures
Figure 1
- Vicinity Map
Figure 2
- USGS Map
Figure 3
- Impact Location Map
Figure 4
- NRCS Map
Impact Figures
Construction Plans
Attachment 1
- NMFS Checklist & Supplemental Information
Attachment 2
— 2020 PJD Request and Updates
Attachment 3
— NCDWR Buffer Determination
Page 4 of 4

3040 NC Hwy 42 West; Clayton, NC 27520
P:919-359-1102 — F:919-585-5570
PROPERTY ACCESS AND AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
Property Information
Property Address
and/or Description West Neuse Interceptor Replacement and Rehabilitation
Parcel Identification
Nurnber(s) (PIN) Existing City of Raleigh easements.
City: Raleigh State: NC County
Property Owner Information
Owner: ® Authorized Agent*: ❑
Name: City of Raleigh Public Utilities Department
Title: Janeen Goodwin, Senior Project Administrator
Wake
Property Size (Acres): 106.6
Street Address: One Exchange Plaza, Suite 620
City: Raleigh State: NC Zip Code: 27601
*Written proof of authorization from owner required.
Authorization.
I, the undersigned, a duly authorized owner of record of the property/properties identified herein, do authorize
representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) to enter upon the property herein
described for the purpose of conducting on -site investigations and issuing a determination associated with Waters of the
U.S. subject to Federal jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors
Act of 1899.
Additionally, I hereby grant Carolina Ecosystems, Inc. (CEI) staff, their designated contractors and representatives, as
well as other Federal, State or local authorities access to the above referenced property when necessary for the purposes of
conducting on -site environmental consulting services. I also grant CEI the authority to act as authorized agent on behalf of
the owner of the above listed property for the communication., submission, and/or application to relevant government
entities, including local, state, and federal authorities, for the review, acceptance, concurrence, and/or approval of
environmental information, documents, and/or permit requests concerning the above listed property. These services may
include regulatory determinations of environmental features on my property such as issuing a determination associated
with streams and wetlands. I certify that I am the legal owner or authorized agent of the legal owner of the above property
and have authority to grant such access.
Owner/Agent (signature) Date

Upper West Neuse Stream Impacts Table
Stream Impact Number
Stream ID
Sheet Number
Impact Type
Length (ft)
1
SR
3
T
86
2
SQ
4
T
78
4
SO
7
T
76
5
Neuse River
7
T
100
6
SIB
8
T
34
Tota l
374

Upper West Neuse Wetland Impacts Table
Wetland
Impact
Number
Wetland
ID
Sheet
Number
Temporary
Impact -
Forested
(Acres)
Temporary
Impact - Non -
forested
(Acres)
1
WBC
1
0.034
-
1
WBC
1
-
0.052
2
WAW
1
0.022
-
2
WAW
1
-
0.042
3
WAV1
1
-
0.037
4
WAV2
1
0.04
-
4
WAV2
1
-
0.034
5
WAV3
2
0.025
-
5
WAV3
2
-
0.011
6
WAU
2
0.007
-
6
WAU
2
-
0.01
7
WAT
3
0.115
-
7
WAT
3
-
0.189
8
WCA1
3
-
0.043
9
WCA2
3
-
0.013
10
WCA3
3
0.073
-
11
WAS
3
-
0.265
12
WAQ
4
0.345
-
12
WAQ
4
-
0.083
13
WAR1
4
0.001
-
14
WAR2
4
0.03
-
14
WAR2
4
-
0.057
15
WAP
4,5,6
2.256
-
15
WAP
4,5,6
-
3.228
16
WAK
7
0.097
-
17
WZZ
7
0.001
-
18
WA1
7
-
0.007
19
WA
7
-
0.022
20
WB
7
-
0.007
21
WC1
8
-
0.048
22
WC2
8
-
0.048
23
WF
8
-
0.118
24
WD
8
-
0.019
25
WE
8
-
0.009
26
W BA
8
-
0.029
27
WBB
8
-
0.004
Subtotals
3.046
4.375
Total
7.421

Upper West Neuse Buffer Impacts Table
Buffer Impact
Number
Stream ID
Sheet Number
Temporary Zone 1
Impact (ft2)
Temporary Zone 2
Impact (ft2)
Parallel vs Perpendicular
Crossing
1
Neuse River
1
689
-
Parallel
1
Neuse River
1
-
5,312
Parallel
2
Neuse River
1
-
3,430
Parallel
3
Neuse River
1
3,273
-
Parallel
3
Neuse River
1
-
9,476
Parallel
4
UT to Neuse River (SR)
2
1,620
-
Perpendicular
4
UT to Neuse River (SR)
2
-
915
Perpendicular
5
UT to Neuse River (SR)
2
1,292
-
Perpendicular
5
UT to Neuse River (SR)
2
-
1,018
Perpendicular
6
UT to Neuse River (SR)
2
3,024
-
Perpendicular
6
UT to Neuse River (SR)
2
-
3,046
Perpendicular
7
UT to Neuse River (SR)
2
6,799
-
Perpendicular
7
UT to Neuse River (SR)
2
-
13,862
Perpendicular
8
UT to Neuse River (SQ)
3
2,981
-
Perpendicular
8
UT to Neuse River (SQ)
3
-
2,042
Perpendicular
9
UT to Neuse River (SQ)
3
3,664
-
Perpendicular
9
UT to Neuse River (SQ)
3
-
3,611
Perpendicular
10
UT to Neuse River (SP)
4
1,664
-
Perpendicular
10
UT to Neuse River (SP)
4
-
2,849
Perpendicular
11
Neuse River
4
13,754
-
Parallel
11
Neuse River
4
-
20,989
Parallel
12
Neuse River
5
7,611
-
Parallel
12
Neuse River
5
-
18,201
Parallel
13
Neuse River
5
1,526
-
Parallel
13
Neuse River
5
-
9,655
Parallel
14
Neuse River
6
7,473
-
Perpendicular
14
Neuse River
6
-
7,957
Perpendicular
15
UT to Neuse River (SO)
6
2,210
-
Perpendicular
15
UT to Neuse River (SO)
6
-
1,600
Perpendicular
16
Neuse River
6
3,011
-
Perpendicular
16
Neuse River
6
-
4,650
Perpendicular
17
UT to Neuse River (SB)
7
1,600
-
Perpendicular
17
UT to Neuse River (SB)
7
-
1,203
Perpendicular
18
UT to Neuse River (SB)
7
1,047
-
Perpendicular
18
UT to Neuse River (SB)
7
-
692
Perpendicular
Total 1 63238 1 110508

Sanford
Creek
Greenway
Rolesville
Neuse River
Greenway
North Raleigh
Six Forks
F.
ll51 — —
Millbrook Mini City usau1
New Hope
yrth Hills I54a =
SR 2000
US 70;NC 50
US y4:6fusiness
Five Points
Wilders Grove
l�ao Milburnie 115401
Wake County
:; �! Knightdale
Raleigh
1 'rr
�. I a7,Us ,US 264
US 74!U$A6 t;NC 50
Southeast Raleigh_-
Caraleigh "eK
�.. _.. --Walnut Creek -. _= c'"•
35.8419479,-78.5316400 - --
Project Location: Map data 4) OpenStreetMap contributors, Microsoft, 6acebook, Inc. and
Wake County, NC its afFiiiates, Esri Community Maps�comtQlbi�itOrs, Map layer by_Esri
N Upper West Neuse Interceptor
1{'AROLINA Nklake County, NC
J _COSYSTEMS Miles Q Project Location
0 O.75 L5
Apri12U24 Figure 1: Fcinit Map
ESRI World Street Map

US 401
N
eVrAROLINA
J .COSYSTEMS NEENZ= Feet
0 5001,000
April 2024
6Ialoe Road
Athletic
omplex
r Rivor
riw ay
vrs rarm
Park
1 '1
Pabd 2
'�y Y
Page
Page
Page 5
00*4 Page 6
Alvi�Farm Map data OpenStreetMap contributors, Microsoft, Faceb4k Inc. and
Park its affiliates, Esri Community Maps contributors, Maer by Esri
Q Limits of Disturbance
Q Sheet Limits
ESRI World Street Map
Upper West Neuse Interceptor
Nklake County, NC
Figutvs 2,3,&4 Index NZap

C
r
r
►
■
ZOO
N © Limits of Disturbance Upper West Neuse Interceptor
`%CAROLINA N'Vake County, NC
.J-COSYSTEMS Feet - UWN Wetland
10 150 300 UWN Top of Bank
Figure 2: USGS Map
April 2024 Raleigh East, NC (2013) USGS 1:24000 Quadrangle Asap Page 1 of 6

- i
•
►
Q)
►o
N © Limits of Disturbance Upper West Neuse Interceptor
-O'N7AROLINA N'Vake County, NC
J COSYSTEMS NNNNNNNE== Feet - UWN Wetland
0 150 300 UWN Top of Bank
� Figure 2: USGS Map
April 2024 Raleigh East, NC (2013) USGS 1:24000 Qua&augle Asap Page 2 of 6

I
LANDINGS DR
I - __Wo
N
0CAROLINA
ECOSYSTEMS Feet
0 150 300
April 2024
WAQJW1,2
WARIJW13
10;0 @M-
L
WARJW15
Q Limits of Disturbance
_ UWN Wetland
UWN Top of Bank
Raleigh Bast, NC (2013) USGS 124000 Quadrangle Map
z
Upper West Neuse Interceptor
Wake County, NC
Figure 2: USGS Map
Page 3 of 6

E
E
1
'1
■
i
N Q Limits of Disturbance Upper West Neuse Interceptor
*4'1CAROLINA Wake County, NC
J-COSYSTEMS Feet - UWN Wetland
1i0 150 300 UWN Top of Bank
Figure 2: USGS Map
Apt 2024 Raleigh Bast, NC (2013) USGS 124000 Quadrangle Map page 4 of 6

[;1CAROLINA
VECOSYSTEMS
April 2024
WAK�W16
Wm
Feet
0 150 300
'07e RiyerJS5
© Limits of Disturbance
- UWN Wetland
UWN Tap of Bank
Raleigh East, NC (2013) USGS 1:24000 Quadrangle Asap
0
Upper W-est Neuse Interceptor
N'Vake County, NC
Figure 2: USGS Map
Page 5of6

LA/
IZ
Z
-7
N Q Limits of Disturbance Upper West Neuse Interceptor
`%CAROLINA Wake County, NC
J _COSYSTEMS Feet UWN Wetland
0 150 300 UWN Top of Bank
i Figure 2: USGS Map
Apt 2024 Raleigh Bast, NC (2013) USGS 124000 Quadrangle Map page 6 of 6

' ` ~ `� �r -•tom •�. J..
. �� 1 � 'yam-'�c' . � � •.
jk
r "Ir
ir
r , AIL
VAN. 6
a F ` .�
r� 1
A
r
� r
ft
'tea[- : �.-s —,, • r�" _
N Q Limits of Disturbance Upper West Neuse Interceptor
N'Vake Count►-, NC
Feet -UWN Wetland
0 150 300 UWN Top of Bank
Figure 3: Aquatic Resources Map
p Pa eIof6
ti ri12U24 2022 ESRI World Imagery g

wK
.�
'fir F• L % Vr� tA• _ :� r., A ti kti �f
l • .���. �
dv
r �/•
��� _ � � ram• - dilp
FL
Ilk IV x 40
or
+:i, _ - ,"irk' •-�� . �.R F r
why,,, Y `� � . • � r
r 4
yor r
00 R - , �•.
A0
■� r
Ma
r
R f
N Q Limits of Disturbance Upper West Neuse Interceptor
T
wokCAROLINA ''lake County, NC
EcOSYSTEMS MMMMMMMKZZZZ= Feet - UWN Wetland
0 150 300 UWN Top of Bank
Figure 3: Aquatic Resources Slap
April 2024 Page 2 of 6
p 2022 ESRi World Imagery

T + 1
_
�Y
f H
.ti M
i
AldL ;*I.
ti•
J*4 Ar,
X
a ~ I 8
IMP-WML
i►
- , ,.
PT
t
t IA.
N © Limits of Disturbance Upper West Neuse Interceptor
l N'Vake County, NC
Feet - UWN Wetland
0 150 300 UWN Top of Bank
Figure 3: Aquatic Resources ]lap
Pa e3of6
April 2024 2022 ESRI World Imagery g

r • r.'��/
"'��L",�
I ••
7 , r �
OL
yi L•
' " � q - '� .. .ti i • Ire'"
%.--. .��M. tray �'�i. - +'� r• y I
41
N
�'1"AROLI N A
J . COSYSTEMS 111MMINEEZZZ= Feet
0 150 300
I,
April 2024
�,. Limits of Disturbance
UWN Wetland
UWN Top of Bank
2022 ESRI World Imagery
�T.
Upper West Neuse Interceptor
Wake County, NC
Figure 3: Aquatic Resources Slap
Page 4 of 6

�r fir.• �►- , , +� .M~ a ��
AL
►. A *0-%. .
y 4
F' ,M
.01
bt
IN
AMMdw
kV
LN
A� �1
- ; r r i r►t
k
P
a
N G Limits of Disturbance Upper West Neuse Interceptor
�'1-AROLINA Wake County, NC
J . COSYSTEMS 111MM111KZZZZ= Feet UWN Wetland
0 150 300 UWN Top of Bank
Figure 3: Aquatic Resources Map
April 2024 Page 5 of 6
p 2022 ESRI World Imagery

7 _ .AS r
t •^ r _ •
WOO
N
�i)CAROLINA
VEcOSYSTEMS INESSIONEZZZ= Feet
0 150 300
April 2024
G Limits of Disturbance
UWN Wetland
UWN Top of Bank
2022 ESRI World Imagery
.A A, .
�psi r
Upper West Neuse Interceptor
Wake County, NC
Figure 3: Aquatic Resources Slap
Page 6 of 6

0
f
Y'
Wn-i(; y
.1 'Z
N Upper West Neuse Interceptor
CAROLINA Q Limits of Disturbance Wake County, NC
COSYSTEMS Feet
S� 0 150 300 UWN Tap of Bank
Figure 4: NRCS �Iap
April 202� Page I of 6
Wake County NRCS Sail Survey Maps 40 & 5D

4
J%
Aj
j
2
wMC
LwB
D
a •,ate,.
2
7 •°y ��
k. 1�
P
WM82
LwC2
L o D.
B/I lai.
N Upper West Neuse Interceptor
C'AROLINA Q Limits of Disturbance Wake County, NC
--COSYSTEMS Feet
0 150 300 UWN Top of Bank
Figure 4: NRCS �Iap
Apt 2024 Wake County NRCS Soil Survey Maps 40 & 50 Page 2 of 6

1
%--
WMD2,- _
DuCy .-
10, DuB
•.DuB
r
V y
i
a 13 2 WkE
-NO
Wrn
0 4[F
jz
MB2
N Upper West Neuse Interceptor
0'- AROLINA Wake County, NC
- COSYSTEMS Feet Q Limits of Disturbance
f D 150 300 UWN Top of Bank Figure 4: NRCS �Iap
April 2024 Page 3 of 6
Wake County NRCS Sail Survey Maps 40 & 5D

wF1182
DZ
A
D,
DUC
Lo,D
N
-'N 'AROLINA J= Limits of Disturbance
J . COSYSTEMS 111NN111KZZZZ= Feet
0 150 300 UWN Top of Bank
i
Apt 2024 Wake County NRCS Soil Survey Maps 40 & 50
l
I
I
Fe�
r
Upper West Neuse Interceptor
Wake County, NC
Figure 4: NRCS Map
Page 4 of 6

N+mC
Ap,
ir
01 LwC2
A
N Upper West Neuse Interceptor
0 CAROLINA Wake Connty, NC
NONEENNIZZ:= Feet Limits of Disturbance
0 150 300 UWN Top of Bank Figure 4: NRCS Map
April 2024 Wake County NRCS Soil Survey Maps 40 & 50 Page 5 of 6

�n F
_ LwC
••; ' _ WMB2
WMB y
cat
fwMC
Od
wn
k WMG.
WmB.2
F a�
y L
Apr
r
N Upper West Neuse Interceptor
0C-AROLINA Wake County, NC
.-COSYSTEM NNNNNNNKZZZZ= Feet Q Limits of Disturbance
0 150 300 UWN To of Bank
P Figure 4: NRCS �'Iap
April 2024 �' Page 6 of 6
Wake County NRCS Sail Survey Maps 40 & 5D

'GRANIrER�DG
�--
0
LAND
Z
CL
HOLLY RIDGE f A� ( 5 !TH CT �lG�
�UU �
o R,v�R LANDINGS -DR 'J
d rn
� SA
o p�
o Q d z
70 m
o CRAYFORD DR II( o
D
_U
�QY fR N U i
J��STMivsj�
Utz �q`
low -Creek
e
�P ~ �p1NG70N-LN F�
�Ar
71
UJ
250'
N Upper West Neuse Interceptor
r1CAROLINA f _ Limits of Disturbance Wake County, NC
ECOSYSTEMS � Feet
0 500 1,000 Q Sheet Limits
Wetland and Stream Impacts Index
April 2024 gal.gh bast, NC (2013) USGS 1240W Quadrangle Map

u
Z
W BC/W
WBC/Wl: Temporary Wetland Impact (Forested): 0 ac `
WBC/Wl: Temporary Wetland Impact (Non -Fore t 0.0 2 cre
WAW/W2: Temporary Wetland Impact (Foreste ) . 22 re
WAW/W2: Temporary Wetland Impact (Non -Forested): 0 42
WAV1/W3: Temporary Wetland. Impact (Non -Forested): .03 acre
WAV2/W4: Temporary Wetland Impact (Forested): 0.04 acre
'
WAV2/ W4: Temp ra W land I act (Non -Forested): .0 4 acre
I
I
I
I
A /W2
I
'
WAV1 3
J
AV I
f
r11CAROLINA
N
. —
�,,,,a Limits of Disturbance Temporary Stream Impact
Upper West Neuse Interceptor
WakeCouritgNC
ECOSYSTEMS
Feet
- 2ft Elevation Contour
Nyetland and Stream Impacts
0 50 too
1
® Temporary Wetland Forested Wetlands
April 2024
impact Proposed Sewer Alignment
page 1 of 8

WAV3/W5: Temporary Wetland
WAV3/W5: Temporary Wetland
WAU/W6: Temporary Wetland I
MUM& Temporary Wetland I
(Forested): 0.025 acre /
(Non -Forested): 0.011 acre
Forested); 0.007 acre
Non -Forested): 0.010 acre
/
WAV3/W5 /
/ /WAU/1
/
/
/
0 CAROLINAN . — Disturbance West Neuse Interceptor
� � � Limits of Disturnce � Temporary Stream Impact Wake Cotirity, NC
ECOSYSTEMS Feet — 2ft Elevation Contour
0 50 100 _ Forested Wetlands
® Temporary Wetland Wetland and Stream Impacts
April 2024 1 impact - Proposed Sewer Alignment page 2 of 8

wc,\ ws 11-11
WAT/W7: Temp—onHyf WeEandj
WCAS/WS: Temporary Wetland
WCA2/W9rTemporary Wetland
WCA3$/W10: emporary Wetlan
Sl: porary Stream Imps
WA ll:�Amporary Wetlan
(Foisted): 0.115 acre
(No,-orested): 0.189 acre
t (Non4orested): 0.043 acre
t (Non -Forested): 0.013 acre
ict (Forested): 0.073 acre
near feet (3,094 square feet)
(Non -Forested): 0.265 acre
1 1 1
1
1
11
1
1.
1
1 ��
0 CARN . — Disturbance West Neuse Interceptor
OLINA � � � Limits of Disturnce Temporary Stream Impact
ECOSYSTEMS 0 Feet WakeCourity,NC
2ft Elevation Contour
0 50 I00 Forested Wetlands
® Temporary Wetland Wetland and Stream Impacts
April 2024 1 Impact Proposed Sewer Alignment page 3 of 8

l
1
1' 1
W 12
1
I
/I
! 1
1
I 1
I I
I I
I I
I I
1 I
iI � WAQ/W12: emporary Wetland Impact (Forested): 0.345 acre
I WAQ/W12:ITemporary Wetland Impact (Non -Forested): 0.083 acre
WAR1/W13: Temporary Wetland Impact (Forested): 0.001 acre
WAR1/W13 + l� SQ/52: Te���oaa{{{{{{porary Stream Impact: 78 linear feet (1,019 square feet)
\ I WAR2/ W14: Temporary Wetland Impact (Forested): 0.030 acre
WAR2/ W14: TTemporary Wetla Impact (Non -Forested): 0.057 acre
WAP/ W 15 i at totals sh 'w n page 5
SQ/S
AR2/W14
L
w P 5 r
1
O. — Upper West Neuse Interceptor
N CAROLINA Disturbance Stream Impact Limits of Disturnce Temporary
ECOSYSTEMS Feet — 2ft Elevation Contour Wake County, NC
0 50 I00 Forested Wetlands
® Temporary Wetland Wetland and Stream Impacts
April 2024 impact Proposed Sewer Alignment page 4 of 8

III
f
r�
I
I
WAP W15 WAP W1 . T mporary Wetland (Foxes ): 2. 56 a r
WAP W1 : T porary Wetlan I (Non- rested : 2 ac
i
I1
1
I�
i
II
1
I
I
OCAROLINAN . — Upper West Neuse Interceptor
Limits of Disturbance� Temporary Stream Impact Wake Colirity, NC
ECOSYSTEMS Feet — 2ft Elevation Contour
0 50 I00 Forested Wetlands
® Temporary Wetland Wetland and Stream Impacts
7-
p-12024 1 impact Proposed Sewer Alignment page 5 of 8

1
. .............................. .......... f�
%I
1 F
t
A/ 15 impact o I sho
n e
1`
1
I
`
'
I
1
W P/W15
�l
i
1
I
r1CAROLINA
N
. —
Limits of Disturbance�
Temporary Stream Impact
Upper West Neuse Interceptor
Wake Cotirity, NC
ECOSYSTEMS
Feet
— 2ft Elevation Contour
Wetland and Stream Impacts
page 6 of 8
0 50 I00
1
® Temporary Wetland _ Forested Wetlands
impact - Proposed Sewer Alignment
April 2024

Rj
`/,
Neuse River/55
SO/54: Temporary Stre`a acE: 76 linear feet (3,442 square fft
Neuse River./S5: Tempo "am Impact: 100 linear feet (16,2
WAK/W16:pCemporary dImpact(Forested):0. 9 cre
WZZ/W17: Temporary la d Impact (Forested): 0.00 re
WAJ/W18:emaky n Impact (Non -Forest • 0.007 a
WA/W19: Temporary Wetland Impact (Non -Forested): crt
WB/W20: Temporary Wetland Impact (Noon -Forested : 0.00
N . — Upper West Neuse Interceptor
CAROLIIVA � � � Limits of Disturbance Temporary Stream Impact
ECOSYSTEMS Feet l Wake County, NC
- 2ft Elevation Contour
0 50 100 _ Forested Wetlands
® Temporary Wetland Wetland and Stream Impacts
April 2024 1 impact - Proposed Sewer Alignment page 7 of 8

WCl/W21
!
i
!
!
!
!
1
!
! !
!
C2 W 2 !
!
!
!
! !
1 !
/ !
/ 21: Te po ary Wetland Impact (Non -Forested): 0.048 acre
/ 22: Temporary Wetland Impact (Non -Forested): 0.048 acre
!
23; Tdmporary Wetland Impact (Non -Forested): 0.118 acre
WF/W23
24: Temporary Wetland Impact (Non -Forested): 0.019 acre
2S: Temporary Wetland Impact (Non -Forested): 0,009 acre
/W26 Temporary Wetland Impact (Non -Forested): 0.029 acre
/ 6: elinporary Stream Impact: 34 lines f eer t(14 uare feet)
Wetland Impact 04
!
!
/W emporary (Non -Forested): acre
!
1 �
l
26
j
SB/S6
1
WBB/W27
wE/w2_ s �
OCAROLINA
N
. —
Limits of Disturbance Temporary Stream Impact
Upper West Neuse Interceptor
Wake COMIty, NC
ECOSYSTEMS
Feet
0 50 I00
1
— 2ft Elevation Contour
® Temporary Wetland _ Forested Wetlands
Wetland and Stream Impacts
April 2024
impact - Proposed Sewer Alignment
page 8 of 8

GRANIrER�DG
a�
s�
LAND
$' ,-
C
I�
i
MR
HDLLY RIDGE FAR ' SM •TH GT
^' LANDINGS -DR
� z
oSAYBRpo m
z
70 m
o CRAYFORD DR II( j o
D
it
4 �� r
�I,,11ow-Creek �`F��� ► �` "
>y� �p1NGr0N-LN
250 'PY<�V
i1
C7
250��'
N Upper West Neuse Interceptor
r1CAROLINA f _ i Limits of Disturbance Wake County, NC
ECOSYSTEMS 00111111== Feet
0 500 1,000 Q Sheet Limits
Buffer Impacts Index
Apri12024 I Raleigh East, NC (2013) USGS 1:24000 Quadrangle Map

63: Temporary Z�n feet
BI: Temporary Z n p 2 re feet /
B2: Temporary Z�n I d ware feet
B3: Temporary Zo e I 3 ware feet /
B3: Temporary o I , are feet
B3
Oa
N — Proposed Sewer Alignment Zone 1 Buffer Upper West Neuse Interceptor
ECOSYSTEMS tTEMS Feet j_ � Limits of Disturbance Zone 1 Temporary Impact Wake County, NC
ECOSY
0 50 100 2ft Elevation Contour Zone 2 Buffer
Riparian Suffer Impacts
�
April 2024 — Neuse River TOB — Zone 2 Temporary Impact page 1 of 7

'1
1 B3
1
B3: Impacts on page ' 1`
B4: Temporary Zd e 1 m ct: 1, 0 squa fee
B4: TemporarZon 21 p : 915 ua feet
B5: Temporary Zone Im a • 1,292 square fe t
B emporary Zone 2 mp ct: ,018 square fee
6: Te ovary Zon I a 24 square �e
B empo ry Zone m ct. 3,046 square f 1
Te ora Zone 1 p 799 squarre
B empo ry ne 2 Im a• 1 62 squ e
1
I
l
l�
1
1 1�
1 1
1 1
1 1
1
1 1 B5 1
64 1 1
/ i \
1
66 }
B7
I
J
CAROLS
N — Proposed Sewer Alignment Zone 1 Buffer Upper West Neuse Interceptor
^—y
ECOSYSTTEE MS � � Feet �_ _Limits of Disturbance M Zone 1 Temporary Impact Wake County, NC
0 50 100 — 2ft Elevation Contour Zone 2 Buffer
Riparian Buffer Impacts
Ap- 2024 Neuse River TOB — Zone 2 Temporary Impact page 2 of 7

I
I 87
\ I
� � I
B mpilcts 0 a e 2 1
B8: Teripppra Z n 1 Im 2,9 1 ua e t I I
B8: p ra a Imp ct 2, 42 qu fe t
B9: T p ra 0 e Impa 3, squ r f et ' I
B9: p ra n 2 mpa 3 1 sq r f et
I I
� 1
� I
I I
J� I
j! I
! � I
I I
I 1
1
1 l
I I
I !
I
I I
B8 I
I
B9
1
I
I �
N — Proposed Sewer Alignment Zone 1 Buffer Upper West Neuse Interceptor
r1CAROLINA l
[4 I{ Limits of Disturbance '� Zone 1 Temporary Impact Wake County, NC
ECOSYSTEMS 1'6$j] Feet
0 50 100 2R Elevation Contour Zone 2 Buffer
Riparian Buffer Impacts
Aprn 2024 - Neuse River TOB - Zone 2 Temporary Impact page 3 of 7

N
TCAR OLINA
ECOSYSTEMS 0 Feet
0 50 100
Aprn 2024
B10
B10: Te ra Z n [,�Mact: 1,664 square feet
B10: Te ra Z e 2 Impaact: 2,849 square feet
1 B11: Te r ry en 2 Im Impt: 20,989 suzr: f
- ProposedSewer Alignment
Limits of Disturbance
- 2ft Elevation Contour
- Neuse River TOB
611
Zone 1 Buffer
Zone 1 Temporary Impact
Zone 2 Buffer
Zone 2 Temporary Impact
Upper West Neuse Interceptor
Wake County, NC
Riparian Buffer Impacts
Page 4 of 7

N
— Proposed Sewer Alignment
Zane 1 Buffer
Upper West Neuse Interceptor
r11EcoSY TE
ECOSYSTEMS
Feet
j_ Limits of Disturbance
�ZonelTemporarylmpact
Wake County,
ty,NC
0 50 100
�
— 2ft Elevation Contour
Zone 2 Buffer
Riparian Buffer Impacts
April 2024
— Neuse River TOB
— Zone 2 Temporary Impact
page 5 of 7

B13: pacts on page 5
B14: T mporary Zone 1 Impact: 7,473 square feet
B14: T mporary Zone 2 Impact: 7,957 square feet
B15: T mporary Zone 1 Impact: 2,210 square feet
B15: Temporary Zone 2 Impact: 1,600 square feet
B16: Temporary Zone 1 Impact: 3,011 square feet
B16: Temporary Zone 2 Impact: 4,650 square feet
B15
` B14
//
/ B16 `
/ � s
N — Proposed Sewer Alignment Zane 1 Buffer Upper West Neuse Interceptor
ri1CAROLINA j_ Limits of Disturbance Wake County, NC
ECOSYSTEMS � Feet �ZonelTemporarylmpact tS'�
0 50 100 — 2ft Elevation Contour Zone 2 Buffer
Riparian Suffer Impacts
April 2024 - Neuse River TOB - Zone 2 Temporary Impact page 6 of 7

1
1 !
! I!
1 !
! !
1 !
! !
! ! B17: Temporary`Zone 1 I pact:-1,600 square feet
! : Temporary Zone 2 Impact. 1,2 square feet
! ! Bl •Temporary Zone 11 act: V uare feet 18: Temporary Zone 2 Impa . 92 u fee
!
f!
f
!
!
y 17
B18
J
-
a
N — Proposed Sewer Alignment Zane 1 Buffer Upper West Neuse Interceptor
CAR
EcoSYSTETE MS j_ ? Limits of Disturbance Zone 1 Temporary Impact Wake County, NC
ECOSY
0 50 100 — 2ft Elevation Contour Zone 2 Buffer
Riparian Buffer Impacts
� Feet
April 2024 - Neuse River TOB - Zone 2 Temporary Impact page 7 of 7

vfi Tga E�a_B �vq'. ®5a and
Q os`svmofr3@ _ - _
UO
w £ g
F 3 p
o
ieve
_
J -
O z -
W- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
T-W
WWWWWI
w g g g g g g g g g g g g g o--------
UEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
ry
W LLI 0
� �
Q V H O
o �
O � � 2 N�
W m o a N ON m
N � �Z
w J Y r" o O
N (� >_� z U
LL .oa .,., , v Q m m
V a J m '< O
Q m Y LL
0
a ' w
C6
W v Y
U U �(�n/�
I J VJ
J W
J
W
CU
ry <
w=
w ww Z. �zo
��� = N a�NN
O --p� -
op=o % w ��
s a o
O_'=O p yw dU
Dpa �Y F
aa~ �j?¢'~
z9¢Wtt�pw
pwp=F¢W WFp.
w'z oJ¢�_¢o
p ¢Q�poo
OF=F �Ov~jWw
NmO�Kw 0(9 UOUv�
w aim
z D�Kmwmw¢Zhp oOw OX�xUW
F �y�ZWz��20w��tt�d�m2ttU'd'N
Fpw
u NOU wp2amWN¢So W o2¢zOOoz
¢ ¢FZOwaa~ovOiaOLLU¢ Fmpmm"w
- Ym wpNwp�F>¢(�v�iJi�Fm
Q �U�N¢�, zoJm�3JN�ONo�a p
pz¢¢.¢2
x
w w �ZF OjQWt/IOw2�
OpOui�m� wdN����K2�j�Ur~/�
¢ SpW wUmz z2ZU¢S2 J
¢ >ui�goOrizOa-�tt y°�O?
¢�aw<tt�rwOpo��¢wUaOwj
OU OwUpwppOraao�d¢¢a0iaia
LL Op wOOt=~¢000OJott>=J

>lawNtlw1 bw6tl tl[l
"I'®ywi S3UON lb'?J3 N3J
clwadJW IMOAMWul 4x AB MORG oLa o rM
_ m OwLL
S1N3W3AMJdW1 °p C7No
-,,,'N ;d HJ1V3A8N�tll9 HO1d302i31N1 3Sf13N lS3M HAddn
VN1-1MAVO H12JON 'HOl31VJ 30 lllO �w
op
o o- �Yaova
avo
®�a
O
—
ap - a vaaaa
WP
r
W
ME
U
85¢� �w
LL
F zzw oQzO o
��y
K
(JB�
3 3 S
oSrc urc -
Z�
3
Y g ®N
'�
O
Y w�rc
280,
-HUI
OU=aT
u
o5Pa ��5y
1,
mu auo x>oz aoo u_. wm�Zmz �3p
H
L.1_
9 H F-
I
S
9 6
LL
a
Q
LL
-
_
-
(]
ui
co
-
Po
-
30
���//�
yJ
—
_
¢
O H
�o -
i
_
- -
,O
OE
-
oa
�
I
I z—
I a
I
w
I
s I
v
o-
I
S I
Jz
-
d
I
S
I o
=o
z u
-
-
3
W
I z 0
I QQ �w
w-
I F < U
I Ed. o
6s
-
Jf
JJ a: i�WLL
W Z
_
-
I-
-
�
I
I
I
I
■3 I�
Eo I S
I
-
I
I
-
I
(n
-
z 3
I
�
O
y
Z
_ r

uDIMOdJcO ImGPwMul 4�A I MDRG S3UON -1VHDN�19 H-
V"s
HZ)IV3A8N:)V-18 S NaA3AMJdAl
HOId3OHzIINI zisnz]N lSzIAA HAddnaon
VNIIMAVO Hl2JOWHE)131Vl 30kilO
z
2— E8
- i el 0
2,
<o
ml
8!
-M M.—A I Ml'
HN
i4
U)
z
2
N
-�v
'2 C)
0
0
4b
D
LL i E < Z E 0
Z
ol ui
E
E
E
4 21
U)
<E
E g o
�o
0
o
�
o 5j
'o
o.
< �E
E
z E
<
b
o2
E<
1.
o
<
<
o2
P
o
F.
o
T T
>:
'E <
.o 12 t 'E 6
y
E
72 'o
o o o
1z z
< . M <
<
o 9 o
< 8.
o 2
1. lo
Is S,
I, -o < d z o o E7 <. . .
<
o q. o
X 7 1.
an �
S., 2 2 8- > W I u)
o l o�
oO
is
s 66
s �o 1, A., 02
-o R < 1.
o >: < < Zo
< Y. o� 2-
-1 1 75 '-o 1. lo
M, ol- 11 1.- z
L oz �o
< . -o .0
'o" < z -o
<
I�D , �-< Y,
Z.m <
cziz ol �o 2. �- �- < �: = wig
z o w 2 2 <
< o
C) (D
o
o om.
, , , d �, -t . 21", �� .1 - C w
>
o 2zrcoa 1
z o'. .1 HM s o
C) rT E W- w 11 �o
M'. z 'o 'o z
0
o> U o
o'21 2i o m rc 2 o' 1,
z< E N I I , L >- '.
C) M M- t
0
<
< I
6, p I z - . o
5: ,w00000 �, 11 1 —, 1. �w , -
000 z
o
<
o < < < < F
po zl:
o o
20 u I
�6
-0 7
<
_ _ g
0,
0, .0
o
<
0 < <
<
0 1 6 < -0
<
o
<
-. - E --, WE <
<
6 '.0
Ww
2
w
I = �- -, �-, �'- 11 g L < -oF xo 'u, 'o
L
E
o,
o �6 o Vo �-o 7o R Q� w., �,o w. �o �y P,:
o
<
'o , ! E , ! , , .7 <
< -, A 5P N
o4
A < o,
0 g 6 o
<
o,
ol.o �o Ho nN 'o
<
�>o
�o o ��-o
0 g �w w., 'o P
o
p, z o' I- lw
5, -o 12 s
P 7 0'. 1
< , 2o <= w� < < o < o w
< < <
E7
z 1 7 w o 71 o� o o 11 <
w
o 77 7 HI,
12 0 -o 1. F7
O o o, 8� 182�37
LD wl
<
rn
L on.- F g -7 'o zE7 -> � � ­F5 , -
ry
77 w
0 lo 0 2 " 6 41 < z 7. < o <in
�2 �2

w
bre ww i®yar �� SNOIlVIA3IH99V ONV ON3°J31
unpuoa,OD IWOW Mul4x ABA. el S3iON 1b 3N30 sQ
H:)1V3A9NJVle 0
�O
S1N3W3n02idWl
- °
m
��
10
a
6NV
HOld3OHzIl 1 3Sf13N lS3M HAddn
VNIIObJVO Hl2iON 'HEJI31Vl 30 Alllo
o o
¢
o
o
HhH
Q pP�Eo
-
-_
ea-&
�D�y
LL
w
�.§
5
a®
���� seed
vJ
c�.
Q
Q
a� s
�.A
�y
LL
Q
LL
- ui
U)
0INN
- --
o
g o
adaadsasI
��z'z z'z zzzz o0000o udauuaauaa d°adau rcrcrcrcarcrcarcrc mmr�m mm�n mm�n maim mm�n rrrrrrrrrr » » » > 33322 zm2Jv xa
pT -
-
O� �9
'HE_
°s-
- -- - `s -- wwwwww........... r a zzzzz=zz
mmmmmmmmmmm w�wwwwwiwwwi°�www6 iLLLLLLL o00o xxx,
o
- - °rz�o -ova d - - - ?�o �o - _
z a 3 o --> z - V o HE:
z
p -- 3� So -
w o - < _ d a - _
- - a z a - - _ 3 - ° p a - o g o - ? ° -
�i- ogo 3� oo - d�ao
o_z.
N _ 30 = - o` asp - o- ? po
-wm- _ z�3> zoo p�N -
o
>o - _ - w� - - o ��_ ��_ - as Sw _
-
a p - _-g� -- - d� - - <� ga _ _ _ -
`� aim - �¢= g E e3 a 9 - _ �� _ o
O - - _ o.
_ rc - _
h o = > -_-__ k _ 'a` -- F od -z -
m a° a¢ m r z

•••
wedo ww �.o
ew
�
e6Ntl the wepogr�bw4tltl[l
opuorLap lwaAtltl wul4xooAB�l.el9
1SI1133HSMVW A3IN 133HS
o�a6
dd�
H71V3n8JIJVla�
S1N3W3AM:JdWl
�No
HO1d302J31N1 3Sf13N 1S3M HAddn
VNIIOJVO H12JON 'HOI31b4J 30 ,kilO
o o
�,q� z s >m
U
o a
=,even
x € �sw
of
5
d
Z
O
o
5x
� o�
o
o�
o 0
0 0
w 5
y
w
o
0 0
0 0
0
w
ru
S s
s s
s s
s s
s s
s s
s o
oo
O
LL
0
W
``D^
VJ
L

••.• vu,wm, e"rx �� 00+0Z tl1S 0100+0L V1S
u,dn aHy, w,®ya.
?J3N13S A?JHlINVS „09 �
ni a pn�i3 i:�n o fie` d uolwadpW lwolw�wul4x®AB�I�ol9 IINI�HissMIS
OwLL
o S1N3W3AM:JdW1 �� C)
"'N �d11d '- HJ1V3A8 N3tl19 NO1d302i31N13Sf1 IN lS3M 2:Addn - -
"" VNPO VO HAJON 'HOI3lba �O IlIO o o
Ago z
- AM A- -vaaaa _ O 1H_ oK9to TF��
5m
ea osy sae
TMOHM Rom
wo �'� U x3➢n�
Mg
z O : Mu
ce ozpoog _ s 'a'® . 3 a
m o wHUM
ook
- 3. o s s ssd Z
��o sg O
z o3 �� o� U
RIUM
_-_ _ zap -
F w zua zwz 1,H urr'O'r owx u�ws zm�o zm �3 a w
U-
n
W
N �.z
�2RS
N
oZ
Ip�
LL
pNY�l
w
wlrLL
I
Idol
�o>� Ino
uua 6^A1 �i�l �i
- -
^N IliNllocr
—i
i'll i
{ I
I
Illil l�o+ moo.
_
0
5<
f
I
i
311
I
NON i m r d mg
w�
I
ew
'I
I;`11-�
11
51
Owl '011,
\jq y --I Vll�lc
y wewpww / Apo
w _
aw

os+aeoJ oo+ozvJs
4,
w"O-i
AiJVANVS„09
IIA10
HJiV3A8N3Vla
C)
S1N3W3AM:JdW1
dd��
HO1d302i31N1 3Sf13N lS3M HAddn
ola�°am
VN1-1MAVO H12iON 'HOI31Va 30 lllO
0 o
w a
-
-w=
a pP�soavma'_
of
o
o vv
a&jog
��
�?33 sad
y` ®a
z
s
N
N
�q9�
/Ol
-��01
-
�` E=gym � i✓�'� � - � 1
ye _
'M, ('iJ I�.os)croel—ino awl
m o C,a)se'e9�=Ni nNl
p �e.�z tila
,
�\
00 os�� / 8
y01 7,v No
L j
�y

••••
'
va°wwn e°,r"��
OS+Zb tl1S Ol 09+O£V1S
u' o •.
A-1
w"�' ®M=°
uolwad�W I�oRwul4x®AB�I�ol9
?J3N13S A?JHlINVS ,.09
IIA10
' In
°
S-LN3W3AM:JdWl
dd
"-..gym' .....,
N�ivanaNw�a _
H0ld30Hz1lN1 3Sf13N lS3M 2i3ddfl
a
""""""
bN1IMAVO Hl2iON 'H0131V 130 .11lO
0 0
0. �o ow°
o ° �Uv M-
O
Al i
s
�Q 1, s —oN
a°P�soavm3v�a
o
-
U
poLm o
m&
= q .
ow00000 zzUO°l°a--
_
=,ae9
z€ "sw.
of
0 pro
w
Hz
'30
sese®`=
Fz� Fw zo_wFo
o�
z -
..
v
g o
O
•
�sA11ds
zo<o
ow
z
3
�lsa
O
-
°-
U
21
,a)ss--in0ANl
(.09165''9,=NI'Ni
0— .1�
rluswaaivnn�
v
Og 3 0� ''L/
d�/1 b�N�
NiJ HOl W O �O� �

•••• •
,,,•'+o ff- o
:o
va°wwn e°,r"��
w"�'®��°
olwad�W IaoRa Wul4>f•A I A-R9
H01V 3A8NOtll9
00+09 V1S Ol OS+Zb V1S
?J3N13S A?JVlINVS ,.09
IIAIO
SlN3W3AM:Jd"l
HOld30Hz1lN1 3Sf13N 1S3M HAddn
VN11MAVO Hl2JON 'H0131Va 30 kilO
w o
a
In
�ap°p
o
UNm
O
of
acme
z
__ Po@mo & 3avEo -=s
o
spaZE
'J'�o �. §'.n waas
Q
z
fag.;
U
Q
LL
0
W
90-0133HS 33S NOIIVNNIINOO?JOd
_ 00+09 V1S - 3NIl HOIVUV
i
�-
Ni ANI
mol
�I�d"'
£0-O 133HS 33S NOlivnNI1N00 2103
09,Zb V1S - 3NIl HO1VW

••••
u' o' •.
_ � x,
t:o
-,, 'N dd
"""
vaewwn °iaa'"��
w"�'®� 1
uolwadjW I�oRwul4x®A B A-RG
HOlV 3A8NOtll9
00+09 tl1S 0100+09 V1S
?J3N13S A?JHlINVS,.09
llp10
S1N3W3AM:Jd"1
,y O1d3�2i31N1 3Sf13N 1S3M 2i3ddfl
VN1�02ibO H12iON 'H0a 131b�O lll0
0
In
p°p
f
°
UNo
sv
O
-_- a - _
In 2M
o
a.0
-- -'M
zEs is
U
of
66
W, U)
+ o
as s ®am
0
" v �5 ®€ALL
O
LL
0
W
U)
33S N011b
nNUN0
00_09 b1S - 0 a03
.f.- 3NITHOlbW
I�
p
wpm o �
o
ol
Za NI I —
M pl
wg ml I
0o i
-MATCH UNE -
ST p, 50+00
CONTINUATION SEE SHEET C-0

•• ••
„o o •.
t:o
-,, 'N dd
w^w� bia6" ��
uolwadJW lwnlI 4x ABMDRG
HOlV 3A8 NOtll9
00+pL Ol 00+09 V1S
AiIV11NVS ,.09
lIAlO
SlN3A3AM:JdAl
H01d30Hz1lN1 3Sf13N 1S3M HAddn
VN1-1MAVO Hl2iON 'H0131Va 30 .11lO
0
°
UNOwo
O
a peso mama=-
WH.
s 3a
U)
Z
w ow r<
w
NW.
o
o
y s sx
O
o
a
3 a�w
LL
O
LL
0
W
`V`^J
VJ
MATCH LINE - STA 70+00
FOR CONTINUATION SEE SHEET C-07 _
111 � i
x
I�
n
III`
I
06
gi
1J
E" I
M
a "J�o
it
f
P�o II
zw
mpo
_
��i 111
?I�I II
-J
I
III
AR
/ w
I
°
z�
mg
l--IIo I
I
I
,
Klil
1
II
f�l _ICI
\1\ ,II II
I
IIIII _2 —
I I
1
_IjI_ I IIII
I- 1
y I
90-0 33HS-3 NOLLVnNILNO
OO+pg b1g _ 3NIT ,y0�
HOLVW
—

••••
u'
�o
va°wwn e°,r"��
uolwad�W "w"�'®MP°
wul4x®AB�I�ol9
09+08 V1S 0100+OG V1S
?J3N13S AiJVANVS ,.09
In
�'.•.�
I��Iw
IIA10
zo
ran
:b
HOJ.V3A8NOVl9/�
S-LN3A3AM:JdWl
a� U��
rJ
HOld302J31N1 3Sf13N
1S3M 2i3ddfl
VN1-1MAVO Hl2JON 'HOI31Va 30 lllO
0 0
a
o
O
Ali o0
LL
K�s
g.,
z -
Z
v
a ® s 3a
z
O
0
n
N
rueno vi�•�33
Of
3 °M
80-0133HS 33S NOI1Vf1NI1NOO 2J03
09+09 V1S - 3NIl HO1VW
II
Iw
z am
p
s
c[
�SGE zooacE �.y-' Ea
tt�g�
-
-
w4M
F
w
wB'^A�—-%�
ill
z~�`•�r. o� I�
'ii �o
mO ram__ r3m¢¢o
pz
2-
�zt
rvtll
sy� e byy
I� �QtNy1H� 0 �I
�
f
�
oaf elz l�lw 1`jll lull
za�^�'��
~Waao�,
11 rc�a��m �PoPoin jl �l
o
�
I
I r�lll'�I'll
I
i
Ilolllf�
IIil
I
-
'Ilr�l I
�r\\
-- - m
_
W
I
1
1
�
III
a9
_
III 111 Ila�llll
F
I
'
m
lllllll�llll�ll
�
�
_z till
�
�o� nab e
g- II l' • �
`�y-� I
�''I
it
III
m F
I II I
� I —
900133HS 33S NOIlVf NI1N002iO3
00,01 V1S - 3NI-1 HO1VW
Q
LL
n
W
LO

••.•
vaewwn e�+rx ssi
05+L80109+08
V1S
d'. - ,
w"�'®� 1
olwadjW IaoRa aul4>f•A B VRG
?J3N13S A?JHlINVS ,.09
lIAlO
In
° `ro
No
:o
HOlV 3A8NOtll9
m OwLL
0-�
SlN3W3AMJdWl
HOld30Hz1lN1 3Sf13N
1S3M HAddn
_
o
o�ap°p
......
""
VN11MAVO Hl2JON 'H0131V' l 30 kilo
w o
a
o =
ava
O
-
LLp
a °Psosvm3 gv
= aEsq
U
o"
of
fr^aa£
z '
o so
z�
o&mv=
o
a� sa
�a �s3d
U)
z
L
'�Po �.� aa5
z
sy
)
of
LL
0
W
60-0133HS 33S NOIIVNNI1N00 b03
_ 09+LB VlS _ 3NIl H31VW
i
�md �lo.
f
f
�MATCH LINE -STA80+50
FOR CONTINUATION SEE SHEET C-07

•••• �a�bia6"�� OO+OOL V1S 0109+G8 V1S
AaVlINVS „09 ' •,o=ee �....a�- uolwadJW ImGPwMul 4x ABMDRG 0
.y��od ee IIAIO _ �m owLL
dd�'? HO1V3A8NOVla SlN3W3AM:JdWl °p� UN�
F
€ o"
c o0
_ p.
HO1d3OHZIIN1 3Sf13N lS3M HAddn �=
bNIl02ibO H12iON 'HJI3ly' j -�O'kil0 w o a o =
v«
- - B oa u av t8HOv°�
of
s 4 o v s a d Z
- ��° ys s ®am
za sy U
S�P10 HEES G- oAP \NE
,
MONSN'iP�'��i �`, ',01
oa=am=
of
\�' �'•,� `�a
o
--
.��,�,
y
\�
HMO
�41
Co
_
II
-
3
N v G —
u� � I
,P w
of
y,
80-� 133HS
OS+G833S NOIIVN NIlNO�
VLS-3NIl HOlVIN �10d

b�,�
00+0110100+00�vls
• w"�'®� 1 ?J3N13S A?JHlINVS ,.09 In
uolwadjW I-oRou Wul4>f•A B VRG lIAlO
HOlV 3A8 NOtll9 SlN3W3AMJd"l
,y �ap°pm UN�
-,, 'N dd O1d30Hz1lNl 3f13 SN lS3M HAddn
...,
""" " VN1-1MAVO Hl2JON 'HOl31Vl 30 lllO
O
�: a voaa
_
W�
Mi
acme
Z_
�=<a__ Po
Q
OU
--
MME
Q
LL
W
MATCH LINE -STA 110+00
_
—
D
FOR CONTINUATION SEE SHEET
C-11 _ _
/—
_ _
_ _ _
_ _
U)
W I-
�o=P
it
k „4mII',Ii, oop I
- I 1
I , I m a I
- 1 Y;
o�ye� w
o
MATCH LINE -STA 900+00
FOR CONTINUATION SEE SHEET C-09

�� adu wma.m
,... vacwa e�,rx ssi 09+6LL Ol 00+OLL VIS
®� 1 ?J3N13S A?JHlINVS,.09 'I
,u'�P� • uolwadLW launpaw"�'ul4>f•A B A-RG llA10
` ..
:o S1N3W3n02idWl �apV UN�
HOlV3A8 NOtll9 HOld3O zIlN1 3Sf13N lS3M HAddn
VN11MAVO Hl2iON 'H0131Vl 30 lllO
_ Mi
Mn
Ml
a v
s
acme O pa__ P o@m & 3avEo _=s o ONwaas
Of
O
LL
0
W
- - - - - - - U)
e�-O 133HS 33S No-LvnNI1N00 Z{03
— —ylS - 3NIl
—0s+61l
HO1VW
Ir✓rt
I � I _
it
f\ice
k Y
W "
J
r
I\
rQ
5 _oa k�l=W
I
O
6,o91 es oNnw m o 0
11NI
6 N
f HV I
NI
now3a 3e of ss eo isrcs
COB) OSLS98 Lg•N0 nNl
c,osl so s9L NiVw
uu�u a civH
w
nNI
NIA —
I —
-tH
-S.
I
I --
Z i 6i OLLtl15
109100'ZBl=l31N3 d _
'99L =N0 nNl
COB) 4Z'S84 = NI nNl
�081 -v1� o
H911 a31tlNJ

••••
ee ••.•.<-
..?+•
o ` "�•�_�;
-,, 'N dd
va cwe e°,r"��
w"�' ®M�°
uolwadjW IaoRa Wul4>�AB°I��19
HJ1V 3A8 N3tl19
09+bZL tl1S 0JVANV ., V1S
?J3N13S A?JHlINVS ,.09
Ina
SlN3W3AM:Jd"l
HOld30Hz1lNl 3Sf13N lS3M HAddn
VN1-1MAVO Hl2JON 'HOl31VJ 30 lllO
w o
a
°pm
fo
o =
6
r�
M
UN�
O
�: a voaa =
Mi
Mn
_N o
_ a v o acme
o.
z
spa__ mZ
o
Q
z
o�sa dog UP
U
Q
LL
0
W
D
U)
MPT�HUN�_STA�SNF�C��
U PITON SEE _ �
FOR CONTIN
i
awl � b
'I
l�Ztis`

• ••••
�a�bia6"�
bE'05+LEL V1S 0105+bZ1
V1S
d'.
w"� M®
olwad�-0W-W Wu14�A B VRG
?J3N13S AiJVANVS„ ID
T�/��'J
In
:�,
-,, dd
5
HOlV 3A8NOtll9
w
S-LN3W3AM:JdWl
'N ...
HOld3O2i3lNl 3Sf13N
lS3M HAddn
""""
VN1�02ibO H12JON 'HOI31Va 30 lllO
x o �m xo�
M ®� _
O
adz �2 o°aw�o �w o°�
=
�a ��°
�
ze
H
a z><oz�1
woW
aso
w�oox°-di�owxwLL°awoom
Z�x
-
�
Y°oz�Na��z�womxwaw
_Uww�oa°w�>x
-`3w�ww�o«w�wz¢awwso
aPvo
�
wo
'�z
<o�s=3w
<w=9
o�zIx
w a ¢_esv
a £�maoo===avvmo -a
g
& aOz
ax1 ��
F��5dawa
a33 $u
U)°°a
z�=
zJpa�wz_>ww�=ww�wwxz_ _��>Ysx
zoc��LL��mLL ozaawmw oaLLomos mo�mo�s
z� - � +
m��=
�
a
=e�ps
Oo
o
U
U�/
H ' 11
of
— l lib
7n l
nM
LL
,w/
i�R, I _ --
g ,
a
�m=op
on
o'$I
VN
AP-1 o i
�'Mp•TCH
S-TA�24+50�C_12
SHEE
ON
SEE
jI"
CONTINUA
.ce)n`l =NI i'Nl
=yly
f1NNli a3lvtiil
=
i
oas«=N1AN�
Eass�=N1nN�
(,09)—AII=N1AN1
�N3(HAA
Q
LL
n
W

MI a. ."bw6tl tl[l
'^°—yS3lIdO2Jd ?J01031100
•,,,,+off`.. ontl,amW1--Pw-14o1-ATVRe lINO o
,': s w
t:o m
� S-LN3W3AMJdWl
� e N�ivanaNw�e HO1d302i31N13Sf13N1S3M2i3ddn
"' VNIIMA 'O H12iON 'H0131Vl 30 lll0
_6 Op.
H- __Mi
z� v ti a�g 3 s,z U)
o
z _ U
O`
a�OR- � ¢�zEq�2��` s�3
LL
W
N U)
�.os) s--i�o AN: —
� nN o
NN:
etzs�=wia a
tiH�uaaiv�ir p
_ U
J
C,a) oseu =ino nw
O
m 4
m h4
J°
W

sllvizlo
UDIMOdJCO IMGPtlMul 4> A I MORG
SlN3A3AM:JdAl 6NO
HOId302i3INI zisnz]N lSzIAA HAddn
VNI-1MAVO Hl2iOWHE)131Vl 30kilO
9d z
p.
U)
z
R
pq 0
O
C)
LL
n
ui
U)
0
H
38
cl
C, <
-0
8
wm
<(
m wm
.10 -OH
l<
�-o
� 1-1 l< .0
ME
. . . . . . . . . . .
M0
o='
?2 0
ro ol 1 o -0 M,
<
maw 20'
10
11 - x �o
'oE
W o
lo
0
N
w
L)
(D
u
0 z N §
9, 2'
W,
<
A
3
ko
pq

olwadJW IMOAM Wul 4�A B MORG SlIHl34 `d.
:o S1NaAE]AMJdW1 °p- C)No
-,,,'N ;d HJ1V3A8 N�tll9 HO1d302i31N1 3Sf13N lS3M HAddn
oo
VN1-1MAVO H12JON 'H0131VJ 30 lllO 0 0
6 O
ooa - a
s.
a o x€m € wof
U)
saas=®3"� s$3? Z
s ° 4se u� �o a u p¢__ m ooamE v 3p_Ea =�so o' asx 0
4 o° €� O OU _ ¢ �SE� U
eg�� soo o�
n IOf
LL
m====
_ Gm
- - - w W
3 °o.F3. _
I _ _
ml�=z3 o N vJ
U)
-H
ml
z_Nma m co _ <
01
- _ w
K
� W r
VJ z
W u
—
6=
u�u � I�III
F p s > o
w N O _ ¢ �z
H
9 O
Fz M li li plop
¢¢m m
�d
mi m �-
ya
o
It\i
o a
o
zElw
o W
¢m \ ¢ solo o
yaood m o ma m a
_
\ rc3
P.
\ w
zi
o _m
z� how /

�idWMl bw6tltl[l
n ®tlwe SlIHl3a
uolwadJW lwolw�wul4x®AB�IOtll9
=,b%o S1NaVUA :JdAI
-,,,N.d�m, HJ1V3A9NJVle� o�a V
•• � 2i01d3Mi31N1 3Sf13N 1S3M 2i3ddfl
VN1-1MAVO H12iON 'HJI3lbZI -�O lllO w w = a
E_s
MM
Z
�
v
o
es�•�
�
sm��
sos
Z
ss
—W
PH
a€1w
-
o
0
3 oo
3oo �ia 0
cl
F
W
r °a'a'E jr W>o
W
mJ
>
8
3
a
�
Q
o
G
aid
mhFh
6� 5��
N'z
'�
W3F4 o€aFo'o;'o
o
b
_ oJ ox
o
_m wa m i
W - mz 3
U m o'Go 3
Z mom o
n Q O go m -zpo
02
o 'o'o,
o om o mm wk-o :oo"m�o
_ry a m �ss3m - 6 -
� m
t,oaOr-ra
I
z
O
F—
U
D
Of
H
U)
z
O
U
of
O
LL
0
w
D
U)
U)
l
ol
¢�
_
OD♦
6 � � ly
❑
o�p�*�s�
l• a
U'
�Y
=
g
El
El Z
W
iy
d
3
w
El p y
m
F
m
z
+
w
a
El
El
P�
W
El
El
El
El
�II�o

�a®®® ® `
• I
•
---®eCCC'wI�wCCCleae
......CC:CCCC.g
®®:CCCC::::::::C..
■.®.-.................................... ®,m
------------------
'', •
CITY OF RALEIGH
'LANFACP
FLA
STANDARD SILT
FENCE OUTLET
SW-20.24
a��g.a�
o o
o -
o-
oIaw
0
s § _
as
os w a= w
w w: wa M1o3
--
gm 3§W >3 -
pomp _ awo���mo s�=
-
oaawaoa>w=
w
CITY OF RALEIGH
AR -.ro: _
.
y
(ANDPRO.EN
lTOMFOc�E�•
TPP-08
_
pau
- zo
30
—
Z
\ 1
—�
—
—
_
3oo�zx
—
o
wh
F z
II
z woo
N-1—w
H'.
Pr=
o
Nw=r
o
o
CITY OF RALEIGH
STANDARD DETAIL
s LT BAG
SW-20.04
ow p"
a0.
mp
p��
o >
II�II
o
VI
o
o��
000 H
�
o
-
w o
>
a w �
�
as
a
-a
=s
w a =
a _I, za
a zs
_ F
-_
�A aaso
a§W_ -0
z
o 8awya'w4$�
- 66iG�
-w8
05'3'" QY
lI=D-
CITY OF RALEIGH
=i
DETAIL
ac
-
-
_STANDARD
o
e�STANDARDTREEx
PROTECTION DETAIL
TPP-01
LL
0
LLI
U)
U)

H- W
P m iHs-
Mh H I MAN
R-H
a -230-;. w,
P
-"NN
M
oa
- �92M
..;Iad,-O 4x A I A-RG
HZ)IV3A8N:)V18 0
0
0
T
oz—
T
lo
III —
0-
CITY OF RA EIGH
SW-20.08
sllvizlo
S-LNaAE]AM:JdAl
HOId3OH3INI zisnz]N lSzIAA HAddn
VNI-1MAVO Hl2iON 'HE)131Va 30 AiIO
qj�
p2i
8
M
ia
a
ON H-1.
o22
------
Z
E
4
E
9
1
CITY OF , MEIGH
O
SW-20. 11
crr
Ell
ON
.0, N
o
,o
olo
999-
>
CITY OF R EIGH
..—o SW-20.06
q (
T
Ro�
I( mea 21.
46
i
i
CITY OF RALEIGH
SW- 20. 15 io
z
0
w
0
w
z
0
F—
C)
D
of
F—
U)
z
0
C)
0L
O
LL
0
w
D
U)
L/)

UDJWOdJCO IMGPwMul 4�A I MOM sllvizlc
9 -1 0
SlNaAE]AM:JdAl C)
H:)iV3AV>I:)V
HOld3OHzIlM zism]N lSzIAA HAddn
VNI-102:IVO Hl2iOWHE)131V2l 30 AilO
Z
m 'i
A0
l i
51-
W
AN-
nm
44-. J
2 z
AE o
Z�M
-M 0
LL
10
-W 1, z ui
U)
0
XO
IMM 7 i
� 0
0
m
-0
N
0
0 z
g
20
.0 tz
iz
'o
IM, 65Z
'o
0
2
0
oNIA 11
NIN J-
A
k <zZ 10 lw
II w
'o 0.
z
OZ
0� 00
ZIM
< <
<
z
< '0
0
.0
00 2— N H

�� oN a�,oaa��aNdallo�a��� �da nsa.aduwm
1N3UV2iIfIO38 `JNIIONVH S1VI831VW ONV
NOUVA119V1S ONE oH9 ioHiNOO NOISOJ3
.•'off"' • uolwadJW ImGPwMul 4�A B°IDol9 S11V13O '3
?' m O w LL
t:o S1N3W3AM:JdWl ° p 0
HJ1V3A8N9tl19� o�aaV
c HO1d3OH31N1 3sn3N lS3M HAddn
bN1IO2ibO H12iON 'H0a 131bAO lll0 0 0
° s �` y zg ism
Eys4® =,esa - =,eta U `'x3€="s `gw "sw of
I. z�&mv ti ag s,m
u
PH
a O
_® �... ��
AU
of
v`E - �° _ ww
LL
o
_ o 3oE?n��.3oE -2a�oo
zLLI
o
Div _ -�
w w 3 x --'o 3 v - `- _ v 3
° ®ev - w 3 `5 E.3 v 3 `w E-o - w —
g® _ w 5Eo - E3E3 _ 3w 3o u _ o3 `w W
... ow vv� E.on ttcE,a toy - o� _ _ E U
E 2 «-- 3 3 Y, w E o - w E E't _ _ ¢ _ "' 3 =- _
o s= oo
2E�6 n== yo-> =Oo: ohs o- OS--- - V - w
Ot o3��° `0 0 03> 'ow-``t o > - �no3?-=� F - - v`->>
o -'o E v E `- s o E- ° o _ w "' W
3� 3�-v��`oN 'oE�3°; v�°3==s,2:o3s KL��' - �.��3��«
F° n ° ° E ° N O m n n ._ u s a rr o w - s o - c E c
a o z o° o a E = 3° ;: o° ' 3 N = 3 w a v 3 u n m o v o° a 3. o°
U W
z Oio n m m �. x •• r.i m
u
E E E - ° 0 3-? E - E - �.J
E =E 3 E o 3 Ew= 3 E« Ev - E o �-i
o
- - -z
IS
toi
`w E- - z-O vm 3o mow - 0 3 -> - = -oml o. vEo - - a }o-d'oo
n. U 3.= _ -o - 3 w°- - _�r w3 3 o>o °
o
z Eo -°' g zJ- E`E« 3EE
FLI
s_ _ 3 _ 2'.3 0 o 3 s _-- - o E `w 3 S x3 n 0= 3=
os _ a3Yo -� �° o o - ��., n3_c - o =3Y° - °mow- =rL EL=>3 YES a
Y,v > oa 3° 3� 3w m3� - O ��"� O �� a O«„o�Y,w ¢v /1
z - m v _ Y E _ ° a o� z w W nEw - °�°- 3w - -=t - O I —I
��a_nut tm« o:zn� _3 owuo`na „E,3oo` Fo93 uun QY�'o`on°��3 iv=i�°°°nwn n3� �uao° Z
5 z
�, 6 KEN m � -, 6 �o oiatiN m��, o� N m a� N m� atiN
x
o
z
3 = _�o o _ 3
Im
° c- - 3 - 2' .3 - cw.ovo
u .30 =�Ev c-O �.y E oxen% vz 3
.-o go w 75
-o'er ` € v E-_ a E v
75
z F « H« t 1.2
_ _ O 3 L u °- v
E
Q�=3 2- z o� s r r E $ 0
W '° O .' 3 0 o n E Y o
oG=°uo 5; a o v a- aY-1. - �.J
�-°w�oaa z E=�z= �° =tea - _ O
�zt ozu � a-_�;a �` ; _ o
- t? oll
Fa -��c °:q g+� >��°;; U
z E �" ° 4 a s-- E r a=` a m° a a i a o n Z
zi Ed w - oE2.d z;g p.. Nm v n
mom_ -oE zon mm
o
�
m
z
z
E" ='
E
Fo.3v�
vELL-
r
'o
H
�
c
o
wvw
^'
Y
.3y
Eve
��
�v
m
m
¢`w

��
oN
a�,oaa��aNdallo�a���
�da
,,,,,,,,,,
000""
�.•. N o
c
nsse.aauwm 4
aox•u•s4ana.c•wn e•,ou ssi
dmn ®•w�°
uopuorLap Iwolw'wul4xson9�I°�19
HJ1V3A8NOVl8
S1N3W32i1f103ii ONIlilOd3ii ONV ONId33N0800321
NOII3%SNI,MS l0HIN00 NOISM-R
SlIVl34
S1N3W IAO'6d WI
LIOld33`:3INI zism]N lS3M bAddn
VN1-102:IVO H12iON 'HEJI31Vl 30 AiIO
o o
a
m °p°
o
DO,N
.aqua
mvo a� ®r
OW.
ry`'" eat
po
"`-o
v/
m u�°
a s'a �' z
OU
o Q UP
U
a u s aQ
LL
a
d gr s
Q
w
E :«o
m3a
Ql
.3
Q
E
Z
> r o
E
w
-
- E°
D
K
W
r N o
Y
a-0 -
E _-
O
_
c 3
_
C a
E
3 a
O
w u E
o
o
a 3 E
0 3`
w
_
N
r
r
o u m o
to a =
.3
W
Z
E--
m o a
F
p -_-
w ¢� E o
o r _
G O n
¢ 0 0 0
V V
jc-
- _ --
lo
t o 3
_z
L Eo
,?.3 v E
O
z
v R.
_
°=
aE
W
o
-- E v n -
n/
z
w o
3 _
-
2 5-
_ - _
° v
--
-_
a
s.
o
c 0 -
o n
nY' c'°
nO A
En w 1O =_
v
C:7
z v
G
o.
m
3 y
o 3 E o E v
^
z z?
°m - ° m- -
w.
W-I
W`u-
Y
" 0;�
a -o
v a=o
v
O N
_ _
c« c c. o
a 3 a
3
za
c:e -aE vF
w
O�
a
o a��
O
'a= `o"
o
-
W
�o _
—
z
3 0 o 0-
E
a —E=Q
W
L
0 - w
z
_v3o-
z
z
w3w--
-
I --I
_-
Yti
E
t
Qz
ap
Ew_
goo
u 'd o
W
z - -
0 - E t
G zit t ��
O
sv
G3�€'0o
-
a v v�, t
z
o
-
--—
o
o
=
z
a °vo
o.3 �Ys
z
E
o
G�3n3
to
°�`nn3
$
3•
5 o
a d�C �caa
��
y$
"V'oquEae
b
�Ya o�8
os,9,c o�,Yc�e
��Edao
oy
Yr
-
�q
'er
Qgt�E�o�
��"av
E
E
E�
E r1 e
o
aa�
go
.c
og€=
E
v E
o p �, e o E n
5�
eYr
n
�-
� u
`a r
C U_ E
O
.-�. w 6
E'
a E' q
_
lac
E m°wa$ o?o
8 v �-nic
aEc`o
9E�
co��
E�E;
� 3 o
v
mE
P a
$
° W
E �
o �
qwD
o
E
=
`°•'�
�°
E c
m�
- A
� far
` ° a a
c
E
-
3
$ m
c-
E o m E
n
Bi
L E n�
�
v
R e
m
c EExo
x
ss mEsu
`o
axgQ rb
c�
o- u 3
n�
o� v
o---
F
v c
E F n
E o
E
e C a E v
Q
�
E
E
E a` m m S E a 9
� m
`a
`w
v
•
; C c
u 3 C E
u 3 C c
3 C E
EN d
oN
A � 3 �
_�
E
v� c
odwl
'L'`e
'q'

��
d�s��,,,
oN
a�,oaa��aNdallo�a���
unvnnarvv� n...ry.............. ........ .
a
........
•,••'^•,,
nsa.aduwm 4
areallasgaga spawn e�,ou ssi
unlWorLap Icuulwaayul4xsoABMD�l9
H71tl3A'8 JI7tl18 0
OHSSV1LItlN OIIDAHONt/
dHOTJ SS300V NOIlO(>?J1SN00
IIA10
S1N3W3A0 'HdWl
HOld3OHzIINI zism]N lS3M HAddn
bN1-102ibO H12iON 'HE)131bZI AO AlIO
o o
¢
�aa
z
m_ °
o 0
z
p
r n
w o
C)
ayv E_
=De ®r
O
o a _
v
S, v o4
cvn
—
w
vJ
c9
5a® ss3d
z
O o a
DCo
O
LL
0
W
D
U)
U)
s
b�
z
z�
a
3
0
021 3Sf10H8f1�0 �33H21V1
0
n0
U
Z
O
~ �
ill lill Z
J
U
Q
O
Z
Q
F
Z
o�
U y
Z
U
Q
J
0
W
O
lo
—
w
W
oeZ
—yn
0
U

�� adu wm
naowwa®ys.0 ssi L 'ON V3LItl NMOOAVI ONV
„?o _ uopumLaD lwueouaKul 4x AIMDRG OHOH SS3OOi N OIIDAHISNOO .QNo
+ `.. OwM
imp, �F a A
S�;N
b • dd H1tl3A9NJVa© SIN3W3n02d"I LL 04
um °p �Nm
H01d30HzIIN1 3Sf13N 1S3M HAddn
VNI-10bJVO H12iON 'HEJI31VJ 30 AllO o o
ayv a =De ®r O
i.. e Uv�� o c9 5a® ss3d z
/0
O
LL
0
W
0
i U)
U)
J�
Q�
�O
O
�z
x
O
'IY U 7:) 0 SS 2`�2
5e<�
l`I� If w0U)
Q
�o
�s
a
a
\ \ a
3
v o
w
\ U
\ O h
w F
r.
w U
� � z
_ x _
"� -- 2"o
/ > - -
Z o
-6o -

""" '"""
"""
��.dm� N4
.dwryoq�bw6tltl[l
.®ya.
u-IM-WCD I-OWM-14» ABM--W
S 8'b'E'ON OVON SS3OOV NouonH1SNOO
S-LN3W3A02JdWl
H0ld30Hz1lNl zism]N 1S3M HAddfl
VN1�02ibO H12iON 'H�JI3lb21 :-10 AllO
o
0 ,
oN6
°
p°
F
6.0
O
-
_
_-av
A
D
Of
lo
vJ
i.. e
5a® ss3d
z
O 0,
- a
s c am€
N
~ $ LL
O
LL
0
W
D
U)
U)

�dwepoq�bw6tltl[l
i ®ywr 9 •ON OV021 SS3OOH NOIlof1211SN0O
3 uolworLCD IYwalwMul4xooABMDtll9 o N o N W
SlNaAm]AO2JdWl
e HJ1tl3A5NJVle o 0 0 0 4 o�ops
•' ••°'°� 2iO1d302i31N1 3Sf13N 1S3M 2i3ddfl
v'
VNIIO2J 'O Hl2iON 'HEJI31Vl 30 AilO o o ¢ o
0 -ayv a W.M.
0 =Degul
W -
- w a - - -3a m&mv=
U�� o c9 5a® ss3d z
v
O�l3 U
LL
0
W
D
U)
U)
az.to"-AS
1 _
�* Uo
� y _
05

NMFS Endangered Species Act Section 7 Checklist
For common, minor coastal construction projects
Updated 09/15/2015
A) Project Identification
Lead Action Agency: United States Army Corps of Engineers
Agency Contact: (Phone, Email) Lyle Phillips; 919-554-4884 ext. 25; [e-mail]
Applicant Name/ Contact: (Phone, Email) City of Raleigh, Julie Parham, P.E.
Project Name & ID #: Upper West Neuse Interceptor
Are any aspects of the proposed project being authorized under a separate consultation? (SAJ general permits,
GRBO, SARBO, NWP, Programmatic consultation, etc.)
0
B) Project Location and Site Description
1. Address, including county and state, and description of property (public, residential,
commercial, industrial, etc.):
2. a) Latitude & Longitude:
i. Required to be submitted in Decimal Degrees and Datum (e.g., 27.71622 ,-80.25174 [NAD831)
H. Online conversion: http://transition.fcc.gov/mb/audio/bickel/DDDMMSS-decimal.html
�Teuse River crossing: 35.5359568,-78.5359568
3. Waterbody:
i. Name of the body of water on which the project is located (St. Johns River, Tampa Bay, Suwannee River, etc.)
ii. If riverine or estuarine, approximate navigable distance from marine environment (e.g., Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico)
The project crosses the Neuse River at one location that is approximate y 158 river miles
upstream of the Atlantic Ocean.
C) Project Site Resource Description
1. Existing Structures: (Describe current structures in project area)
L Marina, riprap, dock, etc.
ii. Number of slips. size (area of overwater structure), linear or square footage, location, orientation, etc.
The project area consists of a 3-mile long sewer replacement with one proposed crossing of the Neuse River. The existing 54" sewer line
is located approximately 300 feet downstream and below the river bed elevation.
2. Existing Conditions: (Describe the project area)
i. Substrate type, water quality, depth, etc.
ii. List any alterations to substrate type, water quality, depth, etc, resulting from the proposed action (qualitative and quantitative)
Please see attached document for description.
3. Seagrasses & Other Marine Vegetation
i. If a benthic survey was conducted provide date of survey and a copy of the report
ii. Species area of coverage estimates and density of species coverage (percentage) estimates
iii. Location relative to proposed structures. Provide detailed sketch of action area and location of marine vegetation
iv. List any impacts to seagrasses or other marine vegetation resulting from proposed action (square feet)
Seagrasses or other marine vegetation are not present within or immediately adjacent to the proposed crossing of the Neuse River.
4. Mangroves
L Species (red, black, or white)
ii. Area (square and linear feet). Provide detailed sketch of the action area and location of mangroves.
iii. List any impacts to mangroves resulting from the proposed action (square and linear feet)
No mangroves are present within or immediately adjacent to the proposed project.

5. Corals
i. If a benthic survey was conducted provide date of survey and a copy of the report
ii. Species Present
iii. Area of coverage and density estimates (percentage, include estimates for each species)
iv. Location relative to proposed structures. Provide detailed sketch of action area and location of corals.
v. List any impacts to corals resulting from proposed action (number and size of colonies and/or fragments)
Corals are not present within or immediately adjacent to the proposed project.
D) Project Description and Construction Methods
Yes, the applicant has agreed to follow the Mangroves and Seagrass Dock Construction Guidelines (Found here
Yes, the applicant has agreed to follow NMFS Johnson's Seagrass Dock Construction Guidelines (Found here)
❑X Yes, the applicant has agreed to follow the NMFS Sea Turtle and Smalltooth Sawfish Construction Conditions (Found here)
1. Project: (Please describe)
Please see attached document for description.
2. In Water Structures:
L Type of structure(s) (e.g. boat basin, riprap, seawall)
ii. Square and/or linear feet of structure(s)
iii. Number of new vessels/slips, if any
iv. Is this structure new, removal, or replacement?
No in -water structures will be installed for the proposed project. The crossing will be backfilled with natural bed materials and the banks
stabilized with riprap underlain with filter cloth to prevent bank erosion. A 315 square foot area of concrete casing will be exposed in the
river bed due to elevation of the existing line needing to be retained.
3.Overwater Structures:
i. Will the structure have grated decking?
ii. Proposed spacing between boards (0.5-inch, 0.75-inch, none, etc.)
iii. Height above mean high water (MHW) elevation
iv. Directional orientation of main axis of dock
v. Overwater area (calculate square footage)
vi. Is this structure new, removal or replacement?
No overwater structures are proposed for this project.
4. If the proposed structure is a fishing pier please answer the following:
i. Is the fishing pier public or private?
ii. How many people are expected to fish from the pier each day?
iii. What is the applicant's plan to address hook -and -line captures at the fishing pier?
iv. Will there be any educational signs posted?
N/A
S. Methods: (For pile installation, please see Pile Installation section below)
L Step-by-step construction methodology
ii. Demolition/ removal of existing structures and debris
iii. Location of work (barge, upland or both)
Please see attached documentation for description.
6. Pile Installation (Use additional rows for each combination of pile size and material)
Pile Material
Installation Method
Number of Piles
Pile Size (inches)
Max. number of piles
to be driven per day
Average number of
strikes per pile

Pile Material
Installation Method
Number of Piles
Pile Size (inches)
Max. number of piles
to be driven per day
Average number of
strikes per pile
Will piles be driven in a confined space (150' to nearest sound reflecting object)?
Yes C
No C
Will noise abatement be used?
Yes C
No C
Noise abatement details:
N/A
Pile Installation details/notes:
N/A
7. Dredging
Dredge Type: (Hopper, clamshell, etc.)
N/A
Area (sq. ft.) to be dredged:
N/A
Depth of cut:
N/A
Volume of material to be dredged: (cubic yards)
N/A
Sediment testing: (Has the material to be dredged been tested? Is there any contamination?)
N/A
Spoil disposal plans: (location of disposal area, sediment type at disposal area, etc.)
N/A
8. Artificial Reefs
Please refer to the artificial reef program websites for the particular state in which the project will occur:
Alabama: Florida; additional Florida guidance; Mississippi; Louisiana; South Carolina; North Carolina: Texas
i. Reef site selection (process details)
ii. Materials to be used
iii. Deployment Method
iv. Deployment schedule
N/A
9. Construction Schedule
i. Number of days/weeks/months of in -water work
ii. Daylight construction only?
iii. Seasonal restrictions?
Construction is anticipated to begin in summer 2024, and the river crossing work completed during 2025.
10. Conservation/ Protective Measures
How is conservation, or other protective measures, being incorporated into this project, if at all?
The following conservation/protection measures will be implemented:
• NMFS Sea Turtle and Smalltooth Sawfish Construction Conditions
• Project specific erosion and sediment control measures
• Cofferdams and pump -around systems will be used to establish dry work areas

Upper West Neuse Interceptor
NMFS Endangered Species Act Section 7 Checklist
Additional Information
8.1. Project Location and Site Description
The proposed project is located east of the City of Raleigh in the eastern portion of Wake County, NC.
The project entails the replacement of the Upper West Neuse Interceptor (UWNI) sewer line, within an
existing public utility easement. The project corridor is approximately 3 miles long and 38 acres in size.
The proposed project will consist of the replacement of existing 48 and 54-inch diameter pipe with a 60-
inch pipe and will be constructed, to the maximum extent possible, within the existing 60-foot City of
Raleigh Public Utilities Department (CORPUD) easement. Due to the depth required for the pipe and
required bypass pumping to maintain sewer service, an additional 30 to 40-foot temporary construction
easement is required along the project. The UWNI project corridor begins along the Neuse River
Greenway near Wallace Martin Way and continues south to Willow Bluff Drive and Beaverdam Creek.
The project crosses the Neuse River at a location approximately 0.15 miles southwest of Willow Bluff
Drive and 0.15 miles southeast of River Lake Circle. At the southern terminus of the project, the UWNI
will tie into existing wastewater infrastructure constructed as part of the West Neuse Interceptor (WNI).
In total, there are 27 wetlands and 5 stream crossings, including the Neuse River, along the project
corridor.
The project area consists primarily of existing maintained utility corridor and areas maintained adjacent
to the Neuse River Greenway, along with some undeveloped wooded areas, city park property, and
maintained residential areas. The Neuse River crossing location currently contains the existing 54-inch
sewer pipe. No other overhead or subterranean structures are in the immediate vicinity of the proposed
crossing area. The vicinity of the project area is largely suburban development with some undeveloped
forests and limited agriculture.
C.2. Project Site Resource Description - Existing Conditions
Within the survey reach, the channel ranged from 35 to 55 meters wide with banks two to four meters
high that generally exhibited some erosion and undercutting. Substrates consist primarily of
unconsolidated sand with sporadic boulders and cobble present in the reach, and occasional areas of
gravel and pebble. Silt and clay substrates were common along the riverbanks as well as areas of
rootmats. Significant woody debris was also present. Rip rap and bank stabilization is present below the
Lake Iris/Beaverdam Creek confluence with the Neuse River. Habitat consists primarily of run and riffle
habitats are essentially absent. A deeper thalweg run is present along the right descending bank in the
vicinity of the crossing and extending upriver. A few in stream sand and gravel bars were present
creating backwater areas on the downstream sides. Surrounding land use consists of a narrow to
moderate width buffer to residential development and the Neuse River greenway trail.
The 2022 Final 303(d) Integrated Report did not identify any impaired waters in the project area but,
does list the Neuse River south of the proposed corridor from its confluence with Crabtree Creek to
Auburn-Knightdale Road bridge as impaired due to copper and PCB levels.

D.1. Project
The purpose of the proposed project is to reduce the risk of system failure related to peak wet weather
events and to address the anticipated population growth and increasing sewer demands of the Triangle
area. Wastewater flows through the UWNI will be conveyed via gravity flow to the NREPI followed by
the East Neuse Regional Pump Station (ENRPS) and on to the Neuse River Resource Recovery Facility
(NRRRF) for treatment and effluent discharge.
The proposed project includes the 3-milelong UWNI. Easements and construction corridor are
approximately 80 to 100 feet wide. At the proposed Neuse River crossing, the corridor width would be
approximately 100 feet wide, including a 60-foot permanent easement centered on the proposed UWNI
line, and a 40-foot proposed construction corridor for dewatering and construction access. Permanent
maintenance corridors widths will vary from 30-feet wide within jurisdictional features and riparian
buffer areas to 60-feet in upland areas. The river crossing will not require additional permanently
maintained access. The existing sewer line downstream will be taken offline but retained as a bypass
pump in the event maintenance is needed on the proposed line in order to avoid future disturbance to
the river bed.
The substrate, depth and water quality at the Neuse River crossing are not proposed to be significantly
altered as a result of the proposed project. Suitable native excavated material will be placed over the
sewer pipe following installation. To protect the proposed sewer pipe, a concrete casing will be
constructed around the 60-inch UWNI. Due to the need to tie into existing sewer connections and
maintain minimum slope on the gravity sewer line, an approximate 45 foot segment of the WNI pipe's
concrete casing will intersect with the Neuse River bed. This will be constructed in the dry, and result in
a permanent change to substrate in a 315 square foot area, but will not change river bed elevations.
9 6VA
The river crossing will be accomplished in the dry via coffer dams that will separate the work area from
the active base flow of the river in segments. Approximately 60% of the channel will be exposed at any
one time. A turbidity curtain will be installed downstream of the cofferdam as additional protection, if
the river depth and flow allow this to be an effective preventative measure. The sewer line will be
installed and the substrate replaced prior to removing the coffer dam and opening another segment.
Due to the size of the sewer line and necessity of maintaining precise elevation to tie to existing sewer
connections, subsurface construction techniques were deemed not practicable after thorough
evaluation. The open -cut trench installation will include the temporary removal of existing substrate,
excavation of the trench, installation of the pipe, and backfill with substrate. As mentioned in the
project description above, a small area (315 square feet) of the river bed will intersect with the top of
the concrete casing but the river bed elevation will not be affected.
An emergency demobilization plan will be prepared and implemented if a high -flow event is anticipated
in the river during construction. The contractor will monitor weather forecasts immediately prior to and
during the river crossing construction. The emergency demobilization plan will include equipment
removal, backfilling the trench, restoring existing cross -sectional area of the river, and stabilization of
the river to protect against erosion.

D.9 Construction Schedule
Construction within the river is anticipated to take approximately 60 days to complete in two phases.
The work in the river will be seasonally restricted from May 1 to August 15, when river levels are low.
Construction will be performed during typical work hours from 7 am to 5pm, Monday through Friday.
However, exceptions to this may occur to accomplish critical -path work prior to impending storms or
other unforeseen factors. This will be coordinated with the City of Raleigh prior to extending work
hours/days.
Erosion and sediment controls will be implemented and maintained throughout construction. All
disturbed areas will be stabilized and restored to pre -construction contours. Stabilization measures
would include the placement of Class 2 riprap along the river bank. Vegetative stabilization of the river
bank was evaluated but, due to the high velocities along the river, was deemed impracticable.
D.10 Conservation/Protective Measures
Multiple conservation and protective measures have, and will be, implemented in the design and
construction of this project.
- Avoidance and minimization of stream and wetland impacts through the use of the existing
sewer corridor.
- Use of the greenway corridor to avoid excessive clearing and construction of access roads.
- Seasonal restrictions for the in -river work (see Schedule above).
- Erosion and sediment control plans reviewed and approved by the NC Department of Energy,
Mining, and Land Resources will be implemented, inspected, and maintained on site throughout
construction.
o Disturbed areas will be stabilized immediately after construction and final grading.
o Slopes greater than 10% will be protected with temporary stabilization.
o Silt fencing and stone outlets will be installed throughout the construction area.
- Stream crossings will be accomplished per the attached plans, including:
o Cofferdams and pump -around systems to maintain dry work areas
o Dewatering will be pumped through a filter bag (silt bag) to reduce turbidity
o The Neuse River crossing will have additional protective measures in place as described
in Methods, above.
- General construction best management practices will be implemented, including:
o Equipment maintenance and refueling will occur in upland areas away from aquatic
resources
o No live concrete will come in contact with flowing waters
- A mussel survey at the crossing was performed prior to construction. The report is attached.
Relocation of aquatic resources would be implemented, if required, prior to construction.
- The contractor will be required to comply with the NMFS Sea Turtle and Smalltooth Sawfish
Construction Conditions as they pertain to the Atlantic sturgeon.

Sanford
Creek
Greenway
Rolesville
Neuse River
Greenway
North Raleigh
Six Forks
F.
ll51 — —
Millbrook Mini City usTOi
New Hope
yrth Hills I _
`'-:'-SR 2000: . .
US 70;NC 50
US y4:6fusiness
Five Points
laao Wilders Grove Milburnie
Oberlin
Wake County li Knightdale
Raleigh
' I a7,Us ,US 264
US 70-,U$A6 t;NC 50
Southeast Raleigh_- ,.
Caraleigh "eK
i ---Walnut,Creek-
35.8419479,-78.5316400 - --
Project Location: Map data 4) OpenStreetMap contributors, Microsoft, 6acebook, Inc. and
Wake County, NC its afFiiiates, Esri Community Maps�comtQbi�itors, Map layer by_Esri
N Upper West Neuse Interceptor
1{'AROLINA Nklake County, NC
J-COSYSTEMS Miles Q Limits of Disturbance
0 O.75 L5
March 2024 Figure 1:Nlicinity Map
ESRI World Street Map

IS
J
GRANITt-,e,
W
LZ
J,
lira r'-
LA
7z,
DEER. CREEK TR
A,-
.H, SMITH g
%
-Dk
5A SRO
��FOR�Ilp I �-r—D .
t
ee
B
r
V-
------ 41
'x
4�.
1WH16w--CiI
Xx�".Z!
C--
Y--
---EJ)IN ' TON-LN -i - -- _ ` \ ' � 4 �' -- — _ L ��'�, - ,` I +
C x io
50
Olp
L
N
<) v,
50
>
r
N Upper West Neuse Interceptor
tTk%CAROLINA Wake County, NC
ECOSYSTEMS NEENZ= Feet = Limits of Disturbance
1� 0 500 1,000
Figure 2: Project Area Map
Raleigh East, NC (2013) USGS 1:24000 Quadrangle Map
March 2024

ikr-
lor
�• :, tFagy 'r. w•: �. yr a i;• � - '�� {ry ^• a
IF
{
-'t - IC —'
,•+^
4.
' -' a �' Upper West Neuse Interceptor.
''' +-----�- Crossing:'+Z.S River -Miles Upstream of
Atlantic Sturgeon Critical Habitat•-
ej
44F
ti k VAIr
•, r
or
42,
- '+�,'x+� � .. .ram j � •�[
-- - -Limits of Disturbance
'

Aquatic Species Survey Report
Upper West Neuse Interceptor
Wake County, North Carolina
Neuse River in Survey Reach
Prepared For:
13 BLACK & VEATCH
Prepared by:
EERl*e
March 23, 2023

Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction..........................................................................................................................
1
2.0 Target Species Descriptions.................................................................................................
2
2.1 Dwarf Wedgemussel (Alasmidonta heterodon)...............................................................
2
2.1.1 Species Characteristics..............................................................................................
2
2.1.2 Distribution, Habitat Requirements, and Status........................................................
2
2.1.3 Threats to Species.....................................................................................................
6
2.1.4 Designated Critical Habitat.......................................................................................
7
2.2 Atlantic Pigtoe (Fusconaia masoni).................................................................................
7
2.2.1 Species Characteristics..............................................................................................
7
2.2.2 Distribution, Habitat Requirements, and Status........................................................
8
2.2.3 Threats to Species...................................................................................................
10
2.2.4 Designated Critical Habitat.....................................................................................
11
2.3 Neuse River Waterdog (Necturus lewisi).......................................................................
12
2.3.1 Species Characteristics............................................................................................
12
2.3.2 Distribution, Habitat Requirements, and Status ......................................................
13
2.3.3 Threats to Species...................................................................................................
14
2.3.4 Designated Critical Habitat.....................................................................................
14
2.4 Carolina Madtom (Noturus furiosus).............................................................................
16
2.3.5 Species Characteristics............................................................................................
16
2.3.6 Distribution, Habitat Requirements, and Status ......................................................
16
2.3.7 Threats to Species...................................................................................................
18
2.3.8 Designated Critical Habitat.....................................................................................
18
3.0 Survey Efforts....................................................................................................................
19
3.1 Stream Conditions Neuse River.....................................................................................
19
3.2 Methodology..................................................................................................................
19
3.2.1 Mussels...................................................................................................................
19
3.2.2 Carolina Madtom....................................................................................................
20
3.2.3 Neuse River Waterdog............................................................................................
20
4.0 Results................................................................................................................................
21
4.1 Mussels...........................................................................................................................21
4.2 Carolina Madtom............................................................................................................
21
4.3 Neuse River Waterdog...................................................................................................
22
5.0 Conclusions........................................................................................................................22
6.0 Literature Cited..................................................................................................................
23
Appendix A: Figures
Figure 1: Project Vicinity & Survey Reach
Figure 2-1 to 2-4: NCNHP Element Occurrences and Designated Critical Habitats

1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Upper West Neuse Interceptor (UWNI) sewer infrastructure project proposed by the City of
Raleigh will include a crossing of the Neuse River in Wake County, North Carolina (Appendix
A: Figure 1). The US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information, Planning, and
Consultation (IPaC) system lists the Dwarf Wedgemussel (Alasmidonta heterodon, DWM),
Atlantic Pigtoe (Fusconaia masoni, AP), Neuse River Waterdog (Necturus lewisi, NRWD), and
Carolina Madtom (Noturus furiosus, CMT) as federally protected aquatic species that could
potentially be affected by activities in this location, as accessed in March 2023 (USFWS 2023).
As part of the federal permitting process that requires an evaluation of potential project -related
impacts to federally protected species, Three Oaks Engineering, Inc. (Three Oaks) was
contracted to perform surveys targeting these species for the UWNI.
Table 1 lists the nearest element occurrence (EO) in approximate river miles (RM) for target
species relative to the project crossing. Data is according to the NC Natural Heritage Program
database (NCNHP 2023) most recently updated in January 2023.
Table 1—Element Occurrences
Distance
from
EO
EO
crossing
First
Last
EO
Species Name
ID
Waterbod
Observed
Observed
Status*
Figure
7699
Neuse River
3.7
1951
1951
H
Dwarf
Wedgemussel
13799
Swift Creek/
36.4
March
October
C
2-1
Middle Creek
1991
2021
11071
Walnut Creek
6.3
1951
1951
H
Atlantic Pigtoe
October
2 2
14599
Crabtree Creek
21.0
May 2003
C
1995
January
8259
Neuse River
2.5
April 1919
H
Neuse River
Waterdog
March
December
2-3
40669
Crabtree Creek
11.3
C
2021
2022
In Project
August
August
Carolina
10676
Neuse River
Area
1888
1902
H
2-4
Madtom
3858
Little River
<50
June 1961
July 2005
C
* : C — NCNHP Current, H — NCNHP Historical
UWNI Aquatic Species Surveys March 2023
Three Oaks Job# 22-321 Page 1

2.0 TARGET SPECIES DESCRIPTIONS
2.1 Dwarf Wedgemussel (Alasmidonta heterodon)
2. L I Species Characteristics
The Dwarf Wedgemussel (DWM) was originally described
as Unio heterodon (Lea 1829). Simpson (1914) subsequently
placed it in the genus Alasmidonta. Ortmann (1919) placed it
in a monotypic subgenus Prolasmidonta, based on the
unique soft -tissue anatomy and conchology. Fuller (1977)
believed the characteristics of Prolasmidonta warranted
elevation to full generic rank and renamed the species
Prolasmidonta heterodon. Clarke (1981) retained the genus
name Alasmidonta and considered Prolasmidonta to be a subjective synonym of the subgenus
Pressodonta (Simpson 1900).
The specific epithet heterodon refers to the chief distinguishing characteristic of this species,
which is the only North American freshwater mussel that consistently has two lateral teeth on the
right valve and only one on the left (Fuller 1977). All other laterally dentate freshwater mussels
in North America normally have two lateral teeth on the left valve and one on the right. The
DWM is generally small, with a shell length ranging between 25 millimeters (mm) (1.0 inch) and
38 mm (1.5 inches). The largest specimen reported by Clarke (1981) was 56.5 mm (2.2 inches)
long, taken from the Ashuelot River in New Hampshire. The periostracum is generally olive
green to dark brown; nacre bluish to silvery white, turning to cream or salmon colored towards
the umbonal cavities. Sexual dimorphism occurs in DWM, with the females having a swollen
region on the posterior slope, and the males are generally flattened. Clarke (1981) provides a
detailed description of the species.
Nearly all freshwater mussel species have similar reproductive strategies; a larval stage
(glochidium) becomes a temporary obligatory parasite on a fish. Many mussel species have
specific fish hosts, which must be present to complete their life cycle. Based upon laboratory
infestation experiments, Michaelson and Neves (1995) determined that potential fish hosts for
the DWM in North Carolina include the Tessellated Darter (Etheostoma olmstedi) and the
Johnny Darter (E. nigrum). Recent genetics research (MacGuigan et. al. 2022) reveals that
Johnny Darter is no longer considered part of the fish fauna of North Carolina and that
Tessellated and Johnny Darters reported from the Neuse, Tar, Roanoke, and Chowan River
basins are Etheostoma sp. cfolmstedi "Tessellated" Darter. McMahon and Bogan (2001) and
Pennak (1989) should be consulted for a general overview of freshwater mussel reproductive
biology.
2.1.2 Distribution, Habitat Requirements, and Status
The historic range of the DWM is confined to Atlantic slope drainages from the Peticodiac River
in New Brunswick, Canada, south to the Neuse River, North Carolina. Occurrence records exist
from at least 70 locations, encompassing 15 major drainages, in 11 states and one Canadian
Province (USFWS 1993). When the recovery plan for this species was written, the DWM was
UWNI Aquatic Species Surveys March 2023
Three Oaks Job# 22-321 Page 2

believed to have been extirpated from all but 36 localities, 14 of them in North Carolina
(USFWS 1993). The most recent assessment (USFWS 2019) indicates that the DWM is currently
found in 16 major drainages, comprising approximately 75 "sites" (one site may have multiple
occurrences). At least 45 of these sites are based on less than five individuals or solely on relict
shells. It appears that the populations in North Carolina, Virginia, and Maryland are declining as
evidenced by low densities, lack of reproduction, or inability to relocate any individuals in
follow-up surveys. Populations in New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and Connecticut appear to be
stable, while the status of populations in the Delaware River watershed affected by the multiple
flood events between 2004 and 2006 are still being studied (USFWS 2019).
Strayer et al. (1996) conducted range -wide assessments of remaining DWM populations and
assigned a population status to each of the populations. The status rating is based on range size,
number of individuals and evidence of reproduction. Seven of the 20 populations assessed were
considered "poor," and two others were considered "poor to fair" and "fair to poor,"
respectively. Based on the most recent status assessment (USFWS 2019), many of these
populations have declined even further to the point that many of them are considered no longer
viable, or even extirpated. In North Carolina, populations are found in portions of the Neuse and
Tar River basins; however, they are believed to have been extirpated from the main stem of the
Neuse River.
The DWM inhabits creeks and rivers of varying sizes (down to approximately two meters wide),
with slow to moderate flow. A variety of preferred substrates have been described that range
from coarse sand, to firm muddy sand, to gravel (USFWS 1993). In North Carolina, DWM often
occurs within submerged root mats along stable streambanks. The wide range of substrate types
used by this species suggests that the stability of the substrate is likely as important as the
composition.
The most recent 5-year review (USFWS 2019) for the Dwarf Wedgemussel assessed the status of
the currently known populations of the species from Vermont to North Carolina. Each population
was evaluated based on its viability. Populations listed "unknown" are described to "not have
current information or enough information regarding population growth, age, and recruitment".
Below is a list of these populations, with details added for the main stem Neuse River
subpopulation that the Project is in closest proximity to (italicized below):
Upper/Middle Connecticut River Basin (Viability: Yes):
• Main Stem Upper Connecticut River, New Hampshire/Vermont. Viability: Yes
• Main Stem Middle Connecticut River, Massachusetts. Viability: No, historical and
presumed extirpated
• Mill River, Massachusetts. Viability: Yes
• Fort River, Massachusetts. Viability: Yes
• Ashuelot River, New Hampshire/Vermont. Viability: Yes
Lower Connecticut River Basin (Viability: Unknown):
• Muddy Brook, Connecticut. Viability: Yes
UWNI Aquatic Species Surveys March 2023
Three Oaks Job# 22-321 Page 3

• Stony Brook, Connecticut. Viability: Yes
• Farmington River, Connecticut. Viability: Unknown
• Podunk River, Connecticut. Viability: Unknown
• Philo Brook, Connecticut. Viability: Yes
Upper Delaware River Basin (Viability: Yes):
• Delaware River Main Stem, New York. Viability: Yes
• Neversink River, New York. Viability: Unknown
Middle Delaware River Basin (Viability: Unknown):
• Middle Delaware River Main Stem, New Jersey. Viability: Unknown
• Big/Little Flat Brook, New Jersey. Viability: Yes
• Paulins Kill, New Jersey, Viability: Yes
• Pequest River, Lake Aeroflex, New Jersey. Viability: Unknown
Housatonic River Basin (Viability: No, Likely Extirpated):
• Webatuk Creek, New York. Viability: No, Likely Extirpated
Tuckahoe River Basin (Viability: No, Likely Extirpated):
• Norwich Creek, Maryland. Viability: No, Likely Extirpated
• Long Marsh Ditch (Mason Branch), Maryland. Viability: No, Likely Extirpated
Chopank River Basin (Viability: No, Likely Extirpated):
• Herring Run, Maryland. Viability: No, Likely Extirpated
Lower Potomac River Basin (Viability: Unknown):
• Nanjemoy Creek, Maryland. Viability: Yes
• McIntosh Run, Maryland. Viability: Unknown
Upper Chesapeake Bay Drainage Basin (Viability: Unknown):
• Granny Finley Branch, Maryland. Viability: No, Likely Extirpated
• Tributary to Southeast Creek, Maryland. Viability: Yes
• Three Bridges Branch, Maryland. Viability: Unknown
Middle Potomac River Basin (Viability: No, Likely Extirpated):
• Aquia Creek, Virginia. Viability: No, Likely Extirpated
UWNI Aquatic Species Surveys March 2023
Three Oaks Job# 22-321 Page 4

Middle Chesapeake Bay Drainage Basin (Viability: Unknown):
• Rappahannock River, Virginia. Viability: No, Likely Extirpated
• Mountain Run, Virginia. Viability: Unknown
• Blue Run, Virginia. Viability: Unknown
York River Basin (Viability: No):
• Ni River, Virginia. Viability: No
• Po River, Virginia. Viability: Yes
• South Anna River, Virginia. Viability: No, Likely Extirpated
Chowan River Basin (Viability: No, Likely Extirpated):
• Nottoway River, North Carolina. Viability: No, Likely Extirpated.
Roanoke River Basin (Viability: Unknown):
• Tomahawk Creek, Virginia. Viability: Unknown
Upper Tar River Basin (Viability: No):
• Cub Creek, North Carolina. Viability: No
• Shelton Creek/Fox Creek, North Carolina. Viability: No
• North Fork, North Carolina. Viability: No, Likely Extirpated
• Ruin Creek, North Carolina. Viability: No, Likely Extirpated
• Tabbs Creek, North Carolina. Viability: No, Likely Extirpated
• Norris Creek, North Carolina. Viability: Unknown
• Fox Creek, North Carolina. Viability: No, Likely Extirpated
• Crooked Creek, North Carolina. Viability: No, Likely Extirpated
• Red Bud Creek, North Carolina. Viability: No, Likely Extirpated
• Cedar Creek, North Carolina. Viability: No, Likely Extirpated
• Stony Creek, North Carolina. Viability: No, Likely Extirpated
Lower Tar River Basin (Viability: No, Likely Extirpated):
• Chicod Creek, North Carolina. Viability: No, Likely Extirpated
Upper Fishing Creek Subbasin, Tar River Basin (Viability: Unknown):
• Long Branch, North Carolina. Viability: No, Likely Extirpated
• Shocco Creek, North Carolina. Viability: Unknown
• Little Shocco Creek, North Carolina. Viability: Yes
• Isinglass Creek, North Carolina. Viability: No
• Maple Branch, North Carolina. Viability: Yes
UWNI Aquatic Species Surveys March 2023
Three Oaks Job# 22-321 Page 5

Rocky Swamp, North Carolina. Viability: Unknown
Little Fishing Creek (Unnamed Tributary), North Carolina. Viability: Unknown
Ben's Creek, Tributary to Little Fishing Creek, North Carolina. Viability: Unknown
Neuse River Basin (Viability: No):
• Neuse River Main Stem, North Carolina. Viability: No, Likely Extirpated
• Buffalo Creek, North Carolina. Viability: No, Likely Extirpated
• White Oak Creek, North Carolina. Viability: No, Likely Extirpated
• Middle Creek, North Carolina. Viability: No, Likely Extirpated
• Eno River, North Carolina. Viability: No, Likely Extirpated
• Little River, North Carolina. Viability: Likely Extirpated
• Swift Creek, North Carolina. Viability: No
• Turkey Creek, North Carolina. Viability: Likely Extirpated
The Neuse River main stem population of DWM is believed to have been extirpated. The only
known extant population in the basin is in Swift Creek, which reaches its confluence with the
Neuse River approximately 36.4 RM downstream from the survey area. DWM were at one time
(1951) found in the Neuse River downstream of Milburnie, approximately 3.7 RM downstream
of the survey area (USFWS 2019, NCNHP 2023).
2.1.3 Threats to Species
The cumulative effects of several factors, including sedimentation, point and non -point
discharge, stream modifications (impoundments, channelization, etc.) have contributed to the
decline of this species throughout its range. The low numbers of individuals and the restricted
range of most of the surviving populations make them extremely vulnerable to extirpation from a
single catastrophic event or activity (Strayer et al. 1996). Catastrophic events may consist of
natural events such as flooding or drought, as well as human influenced events such as toxic
spills associated with highways, railroads, or industrial -municipal complexes.
Siltation resulting from substandard land -use practices associated with activities such as
agriculture, forestry, and land development has been recognized as a major contributing factor to
degradation of mussel populations. Siltation has been documented to be extremely detrimental to
mussel populations by degrading substrate and water quality, increasing potential exposure to
other pollutants, and direct smothering of mussels (Ellis 1936, Marking and Bills 1979).
Sediment accumulations of less than one inch have been shown to cause high mortality in most
mussel species (Ellis 1936). In Massachusetts, a bridge construction project decimated a
population of the DWM because of accelerated sedimentation and erosion (Smith 1981).
Sewage treatment effluent has been documented to significantly affect the diversity and
abundance of mussel fauna (Goudreau et al. 1988). Goudreau et al. (1988) found that recovery of
mussel populations may not occur for up to two miles below points of chlorinated sewage
effluent.
UWNI Aquatic Species Surveys March 2023
Three Oaks Job# 22-321 Page 6

The impact of impoundments on freshwater mussels has been well documented (USFWS 1992a,
Neves 1993). Construction of dams transforms lotic habitats into lentic habitats, which results in
changes in aquatic community composition. The changes associated with inundation adversely
affect both adult and juvenile mussels, as well as fish community structure, which could
eliminate possible fish hosts for upstream transport of glochidia. Muscle Shoals on the Tennessee
River in northern Alabama, once the richest site for naiads (mussels) in the world, is now at the
bottom of Wilson Reservoir and covered with 19 feet of muck (USFWS 1992b). Large portions
of all the river basins within the DWM's range have been impounded; this is believed to be a
major factor contributing to the decline of the species (Master 1986).
The introduction of exotic species such as the Asian Clam (Corbicula fluminea) and Zebra
Mussel (Dreissena polymorpha) has also been shown to pose significant threats to native
freshwater mussels. The Asian Clam is now established in most of the major river systems in the
United States (Fuller and Powell 1973), including those streams still supporting surviving
populations of the DWM. Concern has been raised over competitive interactions for space, food
and oxygen with this species and native mussels, possibly at the juvenile stages (Neves and
Widlak 1987, Alderman 1995). The Zebra Mussel, native to the drainage basins of the Black,
Caspian, and Aral Seas, is an exotic freshwater mussel that was introduced into the Great Lakes
in the 1980s and has rapidly expanded its range into the surrounding river basins, including those
of the South Atlantic slope (O'Neill and MacNeill 1991). This species competes for food
resources and space with native mussels and is expected to contribute to the extinction of at least
20 freshwater mussel species if it becomes established throughout most of the eastern United
States (USFWS 1992b). The Zebra Mussel is not currently known to be present in any river
supporting DWM populations.
2.1.4 Designated Critical Habitat
There is currently no Designated Critical Habitat for the Dwarf Wedgemussel.
2.2 Atlantic Pigtoe (Fusconaia masons)
2.2.1 Species Characteristics
The Atlantic Pigtoe was described by Conrad (1834) from
the Savannah River in Augusta, Georgia. Although larger
specimens exist, the Atlantic Pigtoe seldom exceeds 50 mm
(2 inches) in length. This species is tall relative to its length,
except in headwater stream reaches where specimens may
be elongated. The hinge ligament is relatively short and
prominent. The periostracum is normally brownish, has a
parchment texture, and young individuals may have
greenish rays across the entire shell surface. The posterior
ridge is biangulate. The interdentum in the left valve is
broad and flat. The anterior half of the valve is thickened
compared with the posterior half, and, when fresh, nacre in the anterior half of the shell tends to
be salmon colored, while nacre in the posterior half tends to be more iridescent. The shell has
UWNI Aquatic Species Surveys March 2023
Three Oaks Job# 22-321 Page 7

full dentation. In addition to simple papillae, branched and arborescent papillae are often seen on
the incurrent aperture. In females, salmon colored demibranchs are often seen during the
spawning season. When fully gravid, females use all four demibranchs to brood glochidia
(VDGIF 2014).
The Atlantic Pigtoe is a tachytictic (short-term) breeder, brooding young in early spring and
releasing glochidia in early summer. The Bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus) and Shield Darter
(Percina peliata) have been identified as potential fish hosts for this species (O'Dee and Waters
2000). Additional research has found Rosefin Shiner (Lythrurus ardens), Creek Chub (Semotilus
atromaculatus), and Longnose Dace (Rhinichthys cataractae) are also suitable hosts (Wolf
2012). Eads and Levine (2012) found White Shiner (Luxilus albeolus), Satinfin Shiner
(Cyprinella analostana), Bluehead Chub (Nocomis leptocephalus), Rosyside Dace (Clinostomus
funduloides), Pinewoods Shiner (Lythrurus matutinus), Swallowtail Shiner (Notropis procne),
and Mountain Redbelly Dace (Chrosomus oreas) to also be suitable hosts for Atlantic Pigtoe.
2.2.2 Distribution, Habitat Requirements, and Status
Johnson (1970) reported the range of the Atlantic Pigtoe extended from the Ogeechee River
Basin in Georgia north to the James River Basin in Virginia; however, recent curation of the H.
D. Athearn collection uncovered valid specimens from the Altamaha River in Georgia (USFWS
2021a). In addition, USFWS (2021c) citing Alderman and Alderman (2014) reported two shells
from the 1880's that also documented the historical occurrence in the Altamaha River Basin. It is
presumed extirpated from the Catawba River Basin in North and South Carolina south to the
Altamaha River Basin (USFWS 2021a, USFWS 2021c). The general pattern of its current
distribution indicates that the species is currently limited to headwater areas of drainages and
most populations are represented by few individuals. In North Carolina, aside from the
Waccamaw River, it was once found in every Atlantic Slope River Basin, and except for the Tar
River, it is no longer found in the main stem of the rivers within its historic range (Savidge et al.
2011). It is listed as Endangered in Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina, and as
Threatened in Virginia. It has a NatureServe rank of GI (Critically Imperiled) (Natureserve,
2018).
The Atlantic Pigtoe has been found in multiple physiographic provinces, from the foothills of the
Appalachian Mountains, through the Piedmont and into the Coastal Plain, in streams less than
one meter wide to large rivers. The preferred habitat is a substrate composed of gravel and coarse
sand, usually at the base of riffles; however, it can be found in a variety of other substrates and
lotic habitat conditions.
The 2021 species status assessment outlines the overall health of the currently known
populations of Atlantic Pigtoe in terms of population and habitat factors. Population factors
include Management Unit (MU) Occupancy, Approximate Abundance, and Reproduction.
Habitat Factors include Water Quality, Water Quantity, Connectivity, and Instream Habitat
(Substrate). Each factor is evaluated on a scale ranging from High -Moderate -Low -Very Low- 0.
Categories labeled 0 indicate either likely extirpation or a lack of data. The list below outlines
the resiliency of the overall river basin and Atlantic Pigtoe MU's, where the evaluated factors are
UWNI Aquatic Species Surveys March 2023
Three Oaks Job# 22-321 Page 8

listed by Combined Population, Combined Habitat, and Overall Resiliency, respectively. The
MU the project area is within (16) is italicized below (USFWS 2021c):
James River Basin (Low, Moderate, Low):
1. Craig Creek Subbasin — Craig/ Giles counties, VA (Moderate, High, Moderate)
2. Mill Creek — Bath/ Highland counties, VA (0, Moderate, 0)
3. Rivanna — Albemarle /Fluvanna counties, VA (0, Low, 0)
4. Upper James — Amhurst/Bedford/Botetourt/Lexington counties, VA (0, Moderate, 0)
5. Middle James — Buckingham/ Chesterfield/ Cumberland/ Goochland/ Henrico/
Powhatan counties, VA (0, Low, 0)
6. Appomattox — Appomattox/ Buckingham/ Cumberland/ Prince Edward counties, VA
(O, Moderate, 0)
Chowan River Basin (Low, Moderate, Low):
7. Nottoway —Brunswick/ Dinwiddie/ Greensville/ Appomattox/ Buckingham/
Cumberland/ Prince Edward counties, VA (Moderate, Low, Moderate)
8. Meherrin — Brunswick/ Charlotte/ Halifax/ Lunenburg/ Mecklenburg counties, VA
(Low, Moderate, Low)
Roanoke River Basin (Low, Moderate, Low):
9. Dan River Subbasin — Halifax/ Pittsylvania counties, VA and Caswell/ Granville/
Person/ Rockingham counties, NC (Low, Moderate, Low)
10. Roanoke — Halifax/ Northampton counties, NC (0, Moderate, G)
Tar River Basin (High, Moderate, High):
11. Upper/Middle Tar —Granville/ Franklin/ Nash/ Person/ Vance counties, NC (High,
Moderate, High)
12. Lower Tar- Beaufort/Edgecombe/Pitt counties, NC (Low, Moderate, Low)
13. Fishing Creek Subbasin — Franklin/Halifax/Nash/Warren counties, NC (High,
Moderate, High)
14. Sandy Swift Creek — Edgecombe/Franklin/Nash counties, NC (High, Moderate, High)
Neuse River Basin (Moderate, Low, Moderate):
15. Upper Neuse — Durham/Orange/Person counties, NC (Moderate, Low, Moderate)
16. Middle Neuse Durham/Franklin/Johnson/Wake/Wayne/Wilson counties, NC
(Moderate, Low, Moderate)
The Middle Neuse subpopulation of AP consists of several occurrences of the species.
Tributaries of nearby Crabtree Creek and Walnut Creek have had observations of the species;
however, it has not been observed in Crabtree Creek since 2003, and Walnut Creek since 1951.
The nearest extant population, as well as critical habitat for AP in Swift and Middle Creeks (Unit
UWNI Aquatic Species Surveys March 2023
Three Oaks Job# 22-321 Page 9

14) hosts a much more robust and frequently observed population. Swift Creek's confluence is
36.4 RM downstream of the survey area.
Cape Fear River Basin (Low, Low, Low):
17. New Hope — Chatham/Durham/Orange/Wake counties, NC (Moderate, Low,
Moderate)
18. Deep River Subbasin — Alamance/Chatham/Moore/Randolph counties, NC (Low,
Low, Low)
19. Cape Fear Mainstream — Cumberland/Harnett/Wake counties, NC (0, Low, 0)
20. Black — Bladen/Pender/Sampson counties, NC (0, High, 0)
Pee Dee River Basin (Low, Low, Low):
21. Muddy Creek — Davidson/Forsyth/Stokes counties, NC (0, Low, 0)
22. Uwharrie/Little — Davidson/Montgomery/Randolph counties, NC (Low, Moderate,
Low)
23. Goose/Lanes — Anson/Union counties, NC (0, Low, 0)
Catawba River Basin (O, Low, O): One shell was observed in the 1800s in Long Creek,
Gaston County, NC
Edisto River Basin (O, Moderate, O): Five shells were discovered in a European
collection, dating back to the 1800s, no individuals have been observed since. Precise
location of where shells originated is not known.
Savannah River Basin (O, Low, O): Type specimen collected from this MU in 1834
(Richmond County, GA). Dive surveys in 2006 collected individuals that were later
identified as Elliptios, not Atlantic Pigtoe.
Ogeechee River Basin (O, Moderate, O): Live individuals found in 1970s in
Williamson Swamp Creek (Johnson/Washington counties, GA), however it is presumed
extirpated due to a failure to locate Atlantic Pigtoe despite extensive surveys.
Altamaha River Basin (O, Moderate, O): Two shells were located in the 1800s within
this MU but have not been recorded since.
2.2.3 Threats to Species
Stressors of the AP as similar to those listed for the DWM in Section 3.1.3. All AP populations
are generally small in numbers and restricted to short reaches of isolated streams. As with the
DWM, the Zebra Mussel is not currently known to be present in any river supporting AP
populations.
UWNI Aquatic Species Surveys March 2023
Three Oaks Job# 22-321 Page 10

2.2.4 Designated Critical Habitat
As mentioned in Section 1.0, the Atlantic Pigtoe is listed as a Federally Threatened Species
under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) with Section 4(d) Rule and Critical Habitat
Designation. In accordance with Section 4 of the ESA, Critical Habitat for listed species consists
of:
(1) The specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is
listed, in which are found those physical or biological features (constituent elements) that
are:
a. essential to the conservation of the species, and
b. which may require special management considerations or protection
(2) Specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is listed
in accordance with the provisions of Section 4 of the Act, upon a determination by the
Secretary that such areas are "essential for the conservation of the species."
On November 16, 2021, USFWS listed the Atlantic Pigtoe as a Threatened species under the
ESA. Critical habitat was revised with the listing (86 FR 64000) and consists of the following
(USFWS 2021a):
• Unit 1 (JR1) - 29 river mi (46.7 river km) of Craig Creek in Craig and Botetourt
Counties, Virginia
• Unit 2 (JR2) - 1 mile (1.6-km) of Mill Creek in Bath County, Virginia
• Unit 3 (CR1) - 4 miles (6.6 km) of Sappony Creek in the Chowan River Basin in
Dinwiddie County, Virginia
• Unit 4 (CR2) - 64 river miles (103 river km) of the Nottoway River and a portion of
Sturgeon Creek in Nottoway, Lunenburg, Brunswick, Dinwiddie, and Greenville
Counties, Virginia
• Unit 5 (CR3) - 5 miles (8 km) of the Meherrin River in Brunswick County, Virginia
• Unit 6 (RR1) - 14 miles (22.5 km) of the Dan River in Pittsylvania County, Virginia and
Rockingham County, North Carolina
• Unit 7 (RR2) - 12 miles (19.3 km) of Aarons Creek in Granville County, North Carolina
and along the Mecklenburg County -Halifax County line in Virginia and North Carolina
• Unit 8 (RR3) —3 miles (4.8 km) of Little Grassy Creek in the Roanoke River Basin in
Granville County, North Carolina
• Unit 9 (TR1) - 91 miles (146.5 km) of the main stem of the upper and middle Tar River
as well as several tributaries (Bear Swamp Creek, Crooked Creek, Cub Creek, and
Shelton Creek), in Granville, Vance, Franklin, and Nash Counties, North Carolina.
• Unit 10 (TR2) - 50 miles (80.5km) of Sandy/Swift Creek in Granville, Vance, Franklin,
and Nash Counties, North Carolina
UWNI Aquatic Species Surveys March 2023
Three Oaks Job# 22-321 Page 11

• Unit 11 (TR3) - 85 miles (136.8 km) in Fishing Creek, Little Fishing Creek, Shocco
Creek, and Maple Branch located in Warren, Halifax, Franklin, and Nash Counties, North
Carolina
• Unit 12 (TR4) - 30 miles (48.3 km) of the Lower Tar River, lower Swift Creek and lower
Fishing Creek in Edgecombe County, North Carolina
• Unit 13 (NR1) - 60 river miles (95 river km) in four subunits including Flat River, Little
River, Eno River, and the Upper Eno River in Person, Durham, and Orange Counties,
North Carolina
• Unit 14 (NR2) - 61 river miles (98.2 river km) in five subunits including Swift Creek,
Middle Creek, Upper Little River, Middle Little River, and Contentnea Creek in Wake,
Johnston, and Wilson Counties, North Carolina
• Unit 15 (CFI) - 4 miles (6.4 km) of habitat in New Hope Creek in Orange County, North
Carolina
• Unit 16 (CF2) - 10 river miles (16.1 river km) of Deep River in Randolph County, North
Carolina, including the main stem as well as Richland Creek and Brush Creek
• Unit 17 (YR1) - 40 miles (64.4 km) of Little River in Randolph and Montgomery
Counties, North Carolina
*JR, CR, RR, TR, NR, CF and YR denote James River, Chowan River, Roanoke River, Tar
River, Neuse River, Cape Fear River and Yadkin River Basins, respectively.
Critical Habitat Unit 14 occurs closest to the corridor; the unit is 36.4 RM from the Project
located in Swift Creek (Appendix A, Figure 2-2).
2.3 Neuse River Waterdog (Necturus lewisa)
2.3.1 Species Characteristics
The Neuse River Waterdog (NRWD) is a fully aquatic salamander
and was first described by C.S. Brimley in 1924 as a subspecies of
the Common Mudpuppy (N. maculosus); it was elevated to species
status in 1937 by Percy Viosca, Jr.
The Neuse River Waterdog generally ranges in size from 6-9
inches (15.24 — 22.86 cm) in length; with a maximum length of 11
inches (27.94 cm). It has a somewhat stocky, cylindrical body with
smooth skin, a rather flattened, elongate head with a squared -off
nose, and small limbs. The tail is vertically flattened with fins on
both the top and bottom. Distinct from most salamanders, the
Neuse River Waterdog, and other Necturus species, have four toes
on each foot. The Neuse River Waterdog is a rusty brown color on
the dorsal side and dull brown or slate colored on the ventral side. Both dorsal and ventral sides
are strongly spotted but the ventral side tends to have fewer and smaller markings; spots are dark
bluish to black. They also have a dark line running through the eye. Adults are neotenous and
UWNI Aquatic Species Surveys March 2023
Three Oaks Job# 22-321 Page 12

retain three bushy, dark red external gills usually seen in larval amphibians. Both male and
female are similar in appearance and can be distinguished only through differences in the shape
and structure of the cloaca (Beane and Newman 1996; Conant and Collins 1998; EDGE of
Existence 2016).
Individuals become sexually mature at approximately 5-6 years of age. Breeding normally
occurs in the spring. The male deposits a gelatinous spermatophore that is picked up by the
female and used to fertilize between 30-50 eggs. The fertilized eggs are attached to the underside
of flat rocks or other submerged objects and guarded by the female until they hatch in June or
July (Conant and Collins 1998; EDGE of Existence 2016). The longevity of the Neuse River
Waterdog is unknown. However, its close relative, Necturus maculosus may live for over 30
years (USFWS 2021d).
2.3.2 Distribution, Habitat Requirements, and Status
The Neuse River Waterdog is found only in the Neuse and Tar River basins of North Carolina
(AmphibiaWeb 2006; Beane and Newman 1996; Frost 2016).
Neuse River Waterdogs inhabit rivers and larger streams, where they prefer leaf beds in quiet
waters. They need high levels of dissolved oxygen and good water quality. The Neuse River
Waterdog is generally found in backwaters off the main current, in areas with sandy or muddy
substrate. Adults construct retreats on the downstream side of rocks or in the stream bank where
they remain during the day. They are active during the night, leaving these retreats to feed.
Neuse River Waterdogs are carnivorous, feeding on invertebrates, small vertebrates, and carrion.
Neuse River Waterdogs are most active during winter months even when temperatures are below
freezing. During summer months, they will burrow into deep leaf beds and are rarely found. It
has been suggested that this inactivity in summer may be an adaptation to avoid fish predators,
which are more active at these times. In addition, Neuse River Waterdogs produce a defensive,
toxic skin secretion that is assumed to be distasteful to predators (AmphibiaWeb 2006; Beane
and Newman 1996; Conant and Collins 1998; EDGE of Existence 2016; NatureServe Explorer
2016).
The 2021 species status assessment outlines the overall health of the currently known
populations of Neuse River Waterdog in terms of population and habitat factors. Population
factors include Management Unit (MU) Occupancy and Site Occupancy. Habitat Factors include
Water Quality, Water Quantity, Connectivity, and Instream Habitat (Substrate). Each factor is
evaluated on a scale ranging from High -Moderate -Low -Very Low- 0. Categories labeled 0
indicate total loss. The list below outlines the resiliency of the overall river basin and Neuse
River Waterdog MU's, where the evaluated factors are listed by Combined Population,
Combined Habitat, and Overall Resiliency, respectively. The project is located in (MU 7) is
italicized below (USFWS 2021d):
Tar River Basin (Moderate):
1. Upper Tar— Franklin/Granville/ Person/ Vance counties, NC (Very Low, Moderate,
Very Low)
UWNI Aquatic Species Surveys March 2023
Three Oaks Job# 22-321 Page 13

2. Middle Tar- Edgecombe/Nash/ Wilson counties, NC (Moderate, Moderate, Moderate)
3. Lower Tar — Edgecombe/ Beaufort/ Pitt/ Lenoir/ Greene counties, NC (High,
Moderate, High)
4. Sandy -Swift — Edgecombe/Franklin/ Halifax/ Nash counties, NC (High, Moderate,
High)
5. Fishing Creek Subbasin — Edgecombe/ Halifax/ Nash counties, NC (Low, Moderate,
Low)
Neuse River Basin (Low):
6. Upper Neuse — Durham/ Granville/ Orange counties, NC (Low, Moderate, Low)
7. Middle Neuse Johnston/Wake/Wayne/Wilson counties, NC (Low, Low, Low)
8. Lower Neuse — Craven/ Greene/ Lenoir/ Pitt/ Wayne counties, NC (Moderate, Low,
Moderate)
Observations of the NRWD in the mainstem Neuse River near the project area are few, with the
latest occurrence in 1985 below Milburnie Dam 2.5 RM downstream from the survey area.
However, there have been multiple observations in nearby Crabtree Creek (the latest occurring in
December 2022) in its lower portion; showing that the species has persisted in this urbanized
area.
Trent River Basin (Very Low):
9. Trent — Jones/ Lenoir counties, NC (Very Low, Moderate, Very Low)
2.3.3 Threats to Species
Any factors that reduce water quality are threats to the Neuse River Waterdog. These can include
changes that result in siltation and pollution reducing habitat quality (e.g. channelization,
agricultural runoff, and industrial and urban development). Impoundments are also a threat to the
dispersal of the species as it is unable to cross upland habitat; Neuse River Waterdogs do not
climb and are unlikely to use fish passages (NatureServe Explorer 2016).
2.3.4 Designated Critical Habitat
The Neuse River Waterdog is listed under the ESA as a Threatened Species with Section 4(d)
Rule and Critical Habitat Designation. Critical habitat designation (CFR Vol. 86 No. 109)
consists of the following (USFWS 2021b):
• Unit 1 - 12.3 river mi (13.8 river km) of the Upper Tar River in Granville County
• Unit 2 - 10.5 river mi (16.9 river km) of Upper Fishing Creek in Warren County
• Unit 3 — 2 river mi (3.2 river km) of Bens Creek in Warren County
• Unit 4 - 82.8 river mi (133 river km) of lower Little Fishing Creek in Halifax, Nash,
Warren and Edgecombe Counties.
UWNI Aquatic Species Surveys March 2023
Three Oaks Job# 22-321 Page 14

• Unit 5 — 72.5-river-mi (116.8-river-km) segment of Sandy Creek and Red Bud Creek in
Franklin, and Nash Counties
• Unit 6 - 111-river-mi (179-river-km) segment of the Middle Tar River in Franklin, Nash,
and Edgecombe Counties
• Unit 7 - 59.9 river mi (96.3 river km) in the Lower Tar River Subbasin including portions
of Town Creek, Otter Creek, and Tyson Creek in Edgecombe and Pitt Counties
• Unit 8 - 43.9 river mi (70.6 river km) of the Eno River in Orange and Durham Counties
• Unit 9 - 15.2-river-mi (24.5-river-km) segment of the Flat River in Person and Durham
Counties
• Unit 10 - 30.8-river-mi (49.6-river-km) stretch of Middle Creek in Wake and Johnston
Counties
• Unit 11 - 24-river-mi (38.6-river-km) stretch of Swift Creek in Johnston County
• Unit 12 - 90.8-river-mi (146.1-river-km) segment of the Little River including Buffalo
Creek in Franklin, Wake, Johnston, and Wayne Counties
• Unit 13 - 20.8-river-mi (33.5-river-km) segment of Mill Creek in Johnston and Wayne
Counties
• Unit 14 — 43.2 river-mi (69.5 river -km) segment of Middle Neuse River in Wayne
County
• Unit 15 — 114.8 river-mi (184.8 river -km) segments of Contentnea Creek, Nahunta
Swamp and the Neuse River in Craven, Green, Lenoir, Pitt, Wayne, and Wilson Counties
• Unit 16 — 10.3 river-mi (16.5 river -km) segment of Swift Creek in Craven County
• Unit 17 — 32.5 river-mi (52.4 river -km) segments of Beaver Creek and Trent River in
Jones County
• Unit 18 — 2 river-mi (3.2 km) segment of Tuckahoe Swamp in Jones County
Critical Habitat Unit 11 occurs closest to the study area; the unit is 36.4 RM downstream from
the Project located at the confluence of Swift Creek with the Neuse River (Appendix A, Figure
2-3).
UWNI Aquatic Species Surveys March 2023
Three Oaks Job# 22-321 Page 15

2.4 Carolina Madtom (Noturus furiosus)
2.3.5 Species Characteristics
The Carolina Madtom (CMT) was
described as "a small catfish" at
Milburnie, near Raleigh, NC in the
Neuse River by Jordan and Meek
(Jordan 1889). The Carolina Madtom
reaches a maximum size of 132 mm
(5.2 inches). Compared to other
madtoms within its range, it has a
relatively short stout body and a
distinctive color pattern of three to four
� dark saddles along its back that connect
a long black stripe on the side running from the snout to the tail. The adipose fin is mostly dark,
making it appear that the fish has a fourth saddle. The Madtom is tan on the rest of its body and
yellow to tan between the saddles. The adipose fin and caudal fin are fused together, a
distinguishing characteristic from other members of the catfish family (Ictaluridae). There are no
speckles on the Madtom's belly, and the tail has two brown bands that follow the curve of the
tail. The Carolina Madtom, like other catfishes, has serrae on its pectoral fins and is thought to
have the most potent venom of any of the catfish species (NCWRC 2010).
2.3.6 Distribution, Habitat Requirements, and Status
The Carolina Madtom is endemic to the Piedmont/Inner Coastal Plain portion of the Tar/Pamlico
and Neuse River basins. It occurs in creeks and small rivers in habitats generally consisting of
very shallow riffles with little current over coarse sand and gravel substrate (Lee et al. 1980).
Burr et al. (1989) found most records came from medium to large streams, i.e., mainstem Neuse
and Tar Rivers and their major tributaries. The population in the Trent River system (part of the
Neuse River Basin) is isolated from the rest of the Neuse River Basin by salinity levels, so it is
therefore considered a separate population, though it had not been detected in the Trent River in
the five years prior to the formal listing (USFWS 2021e). In the lower portions of these rivers,
Carolina Madtom is usually found over debris piles in sandy areas. During nesting season, which
is from May to July, individuals prefer areas with plenty of cover to build their nests with shells,
rocks, sticks, bottles, and cans, being suitable cover types. Males guard the nests, in which
females may lay between 80 and 300 eggs.
Carolina Madtom is found in water that ranges from clear to tannin -rich, which is usually free -
flowing. It is generally rare throughout its range and is apparently in decline. The Tar River
population has historically been more robust than the Neuse River population (Burr et al. 1989),
which has shown declines in recent years (Midway 2008). The Little River of the Neuse River
Basin has the largest population of the Carolina Madtom in the Neuse River Basin, with records
from 2016 indicating continued presence (USFWS 2021e). A few specimens have been collected
from Swift Creek of the Neuse River Basin. Fishing Creek and Swift Creek of the Tar River
Basin are also productive systems in regard to Carolina Madtom populations, with around 14
UWNI Aquatic Species Surveys March 2023
Three Oaks Job# 22-321 Page 16

specimens collected in the mid-1980s from Swift Creek (water levels in Fishing Creek prevented
sampling during that study). In 2016, a total of 17 individuals were recorded in Swift Creek, and
a total of four individuals were recorded in Fishing Creek (USFWS 2021e). The Carolina
Madtom has been observed in at least 36 localities (Burr et al. 1989).
Carolina Madtom has a lifespan of about four years, with sexual maturity being reached around
two years in females and three years in males. Sampling for Carolina Madtom is most effective
at dawn and dusk when they are most active and feeding (Mayden and Burr 1981). Their diet
consists mostly of benthic macroinvertebrates, which they collect by scavenging for food on the
bottom of the stream.
The 2021 species status assessment outlines the overall health of the currently known
populations of Carolina Madtom in terms of population and habitat factors. Population factors
include Management Unit (MU) Occupancy, Approximate Abundance, and Reproduction.
Habitat Factors include Water Quality, Water Quantity, Connectivity, and Instream Habitat
(Substrate). Each factor is evaluated on a scale ranging from High -Moderate -Low -Very Low- 0.
Categories labeled 0 indicate either likely extirpation or a lack of data. The list below outlines
the resiliency of the overall river basin and Carolina Madtom MU's, where the evaluated factors
are listed by Combined Population, Combined Habitat, and Overall Resiliency, respectively. The
project is located within (MU 7) is italicized below (USFWS 2021e):
Tar River Basin (Moderate, Moderate, Moderate):
1. Upper Tar —Granville/ Franklin/ Vance counties, NC (Low, Moderate, Low)
2. Middle Tar - Edgecombe/ Franklin/ Nash counties, NC (0, Moderate, 0)
3. Lower Tar — Edgecombe/ Wilson counties, NC (0, Moderate, 0)
4. Fishing Creek Subbasin — Edgecombe/ Halifax/ Nash/ Warren counties, NC
(Moderate, Moderate, Moderate)
5. Sandy -Swift — Edgecombe/ Franklin/ Halifax/ Nash/ Vance/ Warren counties, NC
(High, Moderate, High)
Neuse River Basin (Very Low, Low, Very Low):
6. Upper Neuse — Durham/Orange counties, NC (0, Low, 0)
7. Middle Neuse Johnston/Wake/Wayne counties, NC (0, Low, 0)
8. Lower Neuse — Craven/ Greene/ Jones/ Lenoir/ Wayne counties, NC (0, Low, 0)
9. Little River— Franklin/ Johnston/ Wake/ Wayne counties, NC (Low, Moderate, Low)
10. Contentnea — Greene/ Lenoir/Wilson counties, NC (Low, Low, Low)
The Middle Neuse subpopulation of CMT is believed to have been lost as the species has not
been observed in the vicinity of the survey area since 1902. The nearest location where the
species has been seen recently is the Little River, which reaches its confluence with the Neuse
River near Goldsboro, over 50 RM downstream from the project area.
Trent River Basin (0, Moderate, 0):
UWNI Aquatic Species Surveys March 2023
Three Oaks Job# 22-321 Page 17

11. Trent — Jones/Lenoir/ Onslow counties, NC (O, Moderate, 0)
2.3.7 Threats to Species
Identified threats to the species include water pollution and construction of impoundments (Burr
et al. 1989). Carolina Madtom is susceptible to threats due to its limited range and low
population densities (Angermeier 1995, Burr and Stoekel 1999). As a bottom -dwelling fish,
Carolina Madtom is susceptible to habitat loss when stream bottoms are impacted by
urbanization, impoundments, deforestation, etc. In addition to development & pollution,
agricultural practices, forest conversion & management, and hydrologic modification (dams and
barriers), the USFWS (2021e) identified the Flathead Catfish (Pylodictis olivaris), an invasive
predator in Atlantic Slope drainages, as a major factor influencing the viability of the Carolina
Madtom, particularly in the Neuse River Basin.
2.3.8 Designated Critical Habitat
The Carolina Madtom is listed under the ESA as an Endangered Species with Critical Habitat
Designation. Critical habitat designation (CFR Vol. 86 No. 109) consists of the following
(USFWS 2021b):
• Unit 1 — 26 river miles [42 river kilometers (km)] of Tar River in Franklin, Granville, and
Vance Counties
• Unit 2 — 66 river miles (106 km) of Sandy/Swift Creek in Edgecombe, Franklin, Halifax,
Nash, and Warren Counties
• Unit 3 — 86 river miles (138 km) of the Fishing Creek Subbasin in Edgecombe, Franklin,
Halifax, Nash, and Warren Counties
• Unit 4 — 20 river miles (32 km) of the Upper Neuse River Subbasin (Eno River) in
Durham and Orange Counties
• Unit 5 — 28 river miles (45 km) of the Little River in Johnston County
• Unit 6 — 15 river miles (24 km) of Contentnea Creek in Wilson County
• Unit 7 — 15 river miles (24 km) of the Trent River in Jones County
The Study Area is located <50 RM from Critical Habitat Unit 5 in the Little River (Appendix A,
Figure 2-4).
UWNI Aquatic Species Surveys March 2023
Three Oaks Job# 22-321 Page 18

3.0 SURVEY EFFORTS
Surveys for target fish and mussel species were conducted on September 20, 2022, by Three
Oaks personnel Tim Savidge (Permit-ES0034), Tom Dickinson (Permit-ES00343), Lizzy
Stokes -Cawley, and Nathan Howell. Neuse River Waterdog survey efforts were completed by
Tom Dickinson, Trevor Hall, Tim Savidge, and Mark Guerard from February 27 to March 3,
2023.
3.1 Stream Conditions Neuse River
Within the survey reach, the channel ranged from 35 to 55 meters wide with banks two to four
meters high that generally exhibited some erosion and undercutting. Substrates consist primarily
of unconsolidated sand with sporadic boulders and cobble present in the reach, and occasional
areas of gravel and pebble. Silt and clay substrates were common along the riverbanks as well as
areas of rootmats. Significant woody debris was also present. Rip rap and bank stabilization is
present below the Lake Iris/Beaverdam Creek confluence with the Neuse River. Habitat consists
primarily of run and riffle habitats are essentially absent. A deeper thalweg run is present along
the right descending bank in the vicinity of the crossing and extending upriver. A few in stream
sand and gravel bars were present creating backwater areas on the downstream sides.
Surrounding land use consists of and narrow to moderate width buffer to residential development
and the Neuse River greenway trail.
3.2 Methodology
Surveys for mussels, Carolina Madtom, and Neuse River Waterdog were conducted from a point
approximately 400 meters downstream of the project crossing upstream to a point approximately
100 meters upstream of the proposed project crossing (Appendix A, Figure 1).
3.2.1 Mussels
Areas of appropriate habitat were searched, concentrating on the stable habitats preferred by the
target species. The survey team spread out across the river into survey lanes. Visual surveys were
conducted using mask and snorkel and weight belts to access deeper habitats. Tactile methods
were employed, particularly in streambanks and under submerged rootmats. All freshwater
bivalves were recorded and returned to the substrate. Timed survey efforts provided Catch Per
Unit Effort (CPUE) data for each species. Relative abundance for freshwater snails and
freshwater clam species were estimated using the following criteria:
UWNI Aquatic Species Surveys March 2023
Three Oaks Job# 22-321 Page 19

➢ (VA) Very abundant > 30 per square meter
➢ (A) Abundant 16-30 per square meter
➢ (C) Common 6-15 per square meter
➢ (U) Uncommon 3-5 per square meter
➢ (R) Rare 1-2 per square meter
➢ (P-) Ancillary adjective "Patchy" indicates an uneven distribution of the species within the
sampled site.
3.2.2 Carolina Madtom
During the mussel survey effort for the project, the presence of preferred habitats for the
Carolina Madtom were assessed and targeted visual surveys were conducted by overturning
rocks and debris in these areas in combination with a fine -mesh seine hauls. All habitat types in
the survey reach (riffle, run, pool, slack -water, etc.) were sampled.
Relative abundance reported was estimated using the following criteria:
➢ (VA) Very abundant: > 30 collected at survey reach
➢ (A) Abundant: 16-30 collected at survey reach
➢ (C) Common: 6-15 collected at survey reach
➢ (U) Uncommon: 3-5 collected at survey reach
➢ (R) Rare: 1-2 collected at survey reach
It should be noted that relative abundances of particular species can be affected by survey
methodologies and site conditions. Thus, some species, particularly those that are found in
deeper pools and runs and those that can seek cover quickly, may be under -represented, or not
detected within the survey reach.
3.2.3 Neuse River Waterdog
Methods were developed by Three Oaks in consultation with the USFWS and NCWRC and were
designed to replicate winter trapping efforts conducted as part of the recent species status
assessment undertaken by these agencies and collaborators. The NRWD is more active when
water temperatures are low, an adaptation that may help them avoid fish predation, thus, trapping
is generally conducted late October through March. Trapping during this time of year also
reduces the potential for unintended mortality (by drowning) of bycatch of small turtles and other
reptiles, as they are generally not active during the winter months.
A total of 10 trap sites were distributed upstream and downstream of the approximate outfall
location. Trap sites were selected based on habitat conditions and accessibility. Undercut banks,
with some accumulation of leaf packs, as well as back eddy areas within runs were the primary
microhabitats selected; however, all of the microhabitats (pool, riffle, run, etc.) occurring at a site
were sampled with at least one trap. Traps were baited with chicken livers and allowed to soak
overnight. The traps were checked daily, all species found within the traps were recorded, and
the traps were rebaited. Additional visual surveys were conducted by overturning cover objects
during mussel and fish surveys.
UWNI Aquatic Species Surveys March 2023
Three Oaks Job# 22-321 Page 20

4.0 RESULTS
Target species were not found during the survey efforts. The specific survey results are presented
below.
4.1 Mussels
A total of 9.3 person hours of mussel survey time were spent in the reach, with the five live
mussel species in Table 2 being found. Other mollusk species located included the Asian Clam
and the aquatic snail Pointed Campeloma (Campeloma decisum).
Table 2. CPUE for Freshwater Mollusks
Scientific Name
Common Name
# live
Abundance/
CPUE
Freshwater Mussels
CPUE
lasmidonta undulata
Floater
0, 4 fresh shell
—Triangle
lli do com lanata
Eastern Elli do
144
15.5/hr
lli do roanokensis
Roanoke Slabshell
6
0.6/hr
am silis radiata
Eastern Lam mussel
20
2.2/hr
Pyganodon cataracta
Eastern Floater
1
0.1/hr
Utterbackia imbecillis
Pondshell
1
0.1/hr
—Paper
Freshwater Snails and Clams
Relative
Abundance
Cam eloma decisum
Pointed Cam eloma
R
Corbicula uminea[Asian
Clam
VA
4.2 Carolina Madtom
A total of 16 fish species were collectively observed during visual efforts and captured using
seine netting (Table 3). The Carolina Madtom was not observed.
Table 3. Fish Survey Results: UWNI Neuse River
Scientific Name
Common Name
Relative Abundance
Ameiurus brunneus
Snail Bullhead
U
Cyprinella analostana
Satinfin Shiner
VA
Cyprinus carpio
Common Carp
U
Etheostoma sp. c.f. olmstedi
Tessellated Darter
A
Gambusia holbrooki
Eastern Mosquitofish
A
Ictalurus punctatus
Channel Catfish
C
Lepomis auritus
Redbreast Sunfish
A
Lepomis cyanellus
Green Sunfish
A
Lepomis macrochirus
Bluegill
VA
Micropterus salmoides
Largemouth Bass
C
Notropis hudsonius
Spottail Shiner
VA
UWNI Aquatic Species Surveys March 2023
Three Oaks Job# 22-321 Page 21

Notropis procne
Swallowtail Shiner
A
Noturus insignis
Margined Madtom
U
Percina nevisense
Chainback Darter
R
Percina roanoka
Roanoke Darter
C
Pylodictis olivaris
Flathead Catfish
U
4.3 Neuse River Waterdog
The NRWD was not captured during the trapping efforts. Several fish species were trapped
during the efforts in relatively low density (Table 4). One additional species not seen during fish
survey efforts, the Redear Sunfish (Lepomis microlophus), was captured.
Table 4. Neuse River Trapping Surveys Species Found 02/28-03/03/2023
Trap
Day 1
Day 2
Day 3
Day 4
I
2
Redbreast Sunfish
1
Spottail Shiner (1)
3
4
Bluegill Sunfish (1)
5
Satinfin Shiner 1
6
S ottail Shiner 2
7
g
—
—
9
Redear Sunfish (1)
10
5.0 CONCLUSIONS
These efforts provide updated survey data for the Upper West Neuse Interceptor Project. The
mussel results indicate that the study area supports a freshwater mussel fauna consisting of at
least six species including the state Threatened Triangle Floater and Eastern Lampmussel. Target
federally protected mussels, the Carolina Madtom, and the Neuse River Waterdog were not
observed. While other species were not found during these surveys, potential habitat is present;
thus, the presence of additional species cannot be altogether ruled out.
To offset impacts, a mussel relocation has been requested prior to instream construction of the
new interceptor line. Carefully planned and implemented mussel relocations can mitigate
impacts to mussel species from instream construction activities.
UWNI Aquatic Species Surveys March 2023
Three Oaks Job# 22-321 Page 22

6.0 LITERATURE CITED
Alderman, J. M. 1995. Monitoring the Swift Creek Freshwater mussel community. Unpublished
report presented at the UMRCC symposium on the Conservation and Management of
Freshwater Mussels II Initiative for the Future. Rock Island, IL, UMRCC.
Alderman, J. M. and J. D. Alderman. 2014. DRAFT 2014 Atlantic Pigtoe Conservation Plan.
Prepared for Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. Richmond, VA.
AmphibiaWeb: Information on amphibian biology and conservation [web application]. 2006.
Berkeley, California: AmphibiaWeb. Accessed: March 22, 2016.
http://amphibiaweb.org/index.html.
Angermeier, P. L. 1995. Ecological attributes of extinction -prone species: loss of freshwater
fishes of Virginia. Conservation Biology 9:143-158.
Beane, J. and Newman, J. T. 1996. North Carolina Wildlife Profiles — Neuse River Waterdog.
Division of Conservation Education, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission.
Brimley, C. S. 1924. The waterdogs (Necturus) of North Carolina. Journal of the Elisha Mitchell
Scientific Society 40: 166-168.
Burr, B. M., and J. N. Stoeckel. 1999. The natural history of madtoms (genus Noturus), North
America's diminutive catfishes. Pages 51-101 in E. R. Irwin, W. A. Hubert, C. F.
Rabeni, H. L. J. Schramm, and T. Coon, editors. Catfish 2000: Proceedings of the
International Ictalurid Symposium. Symposium 24. American Fisheries Society,
Bethesda, Maryland.
Burr, B. M., B.R. Kuhajda, W.W. Dimmick and J.M. Grady. 1989. Distribution, biology, and
conservation status of the Carolina madtom (Noturus furiosus, an endemic North
Carolina catfish. Brimleyana 15:57-86.
Clarke, A. H. 1981. The Tribe Alasmidontini (Unionidae: Anodontinae), Part L Pegias,
Alasmidonta, and Arcidens. Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology, No. 326. 101 pp.
Conant, R. and Collins, J.T. 1998. A Field Guide to the Reptiles and Amphibians of Eastern and
Central North America. Third Edition, Expanded. Houghton Mifflin Company. Boston,
Massachusetts.
Conrad, T.A. 1834. New freshwater shells of the United States, with coloured illustrations; and a
monograph of the genus Anculotus of Say; also a synopsis of the American naiades. J.
Dobson, 108 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 1-76, 8 pls.
Eads, C.B. and J.F. Levine. 2012. Refinement of Growout Techniques for Four Freshwater
Mussel Species. Final Report submitted to NC Wildlife Resources Commission, Raleigh,
NC. 15pp.
UWNI Aquatic Species Surveys March 2023
Three Oaks Job# 22-321 Page 23

EDGE of Existence website. "165. Neuse River Waterdog (Necturus lewisi)". Accessed: March
22, 2016. http://www.edgeofexistence.org/amphibians/species_ info.php?id=1361.
Ellis, M. M. 1936. Erosion Silt as a Factor in Aquatic Environments. Ecology 17: 29-42.
Frost, Darrel R. 2016. Amphibian Species of the World: an Online Reference. Version 6.0
(March 22, 2016). Electronic Database accessible at Amphibian Species of the World
(http://research.amnh.org/herpetology/amphibia/index.html). American Museum of
Natural History, New York, USA.
Fuller, S. L. H. 1977. Freshwater and terrestrial mollusks. In: John E. Cooper, Sarah S.Robinson,
John B. Fundeburg (eds.) Endangered and Threatened Plants and Animals of North
Carolina. North Carolina State Museum of Natural History, Raleigh.
Fuller, S. L. H. and C. E. Powell. 1973. Range extensions of Corbicula manilensis (Philippi) in
the Atlantic drainage of the United States. Nautilus 87(2): 59.
Goudreau, S. E., R. J. Neves, and R. J. Sheehan. 1988. Effects of Sewage Treatment Effluents on
Mollusks and Fish of the Clinch River in Tazewell County, Virginia. USFWS: 128 pp.
Johnson, R.I. 1970. The systematics and zoogeography of the Unionidae (Mollusca: Bivalvia) of
the southern Atlantic slope region. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology.
140: 263-449.
Jordan, D.S. 1889. Descriptions of fourteen species of freshwater fishes collected by the U.S.
Fish Commission in the summer of 1888. Proceedings of the United States National
Museum 11:351-362.Lea, I. 1828. Description of six new species of the genus Unio,
embracing the anatomy of the oviduct of one of them, together with some anatomical
observations on the genus. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society
3(N.S.):259-273 + plates iii-vi.
Lea, I. 1829. Description of a new genus of the family of naiades, including eight species, four of
which are new; also the description of eleven new species of the genus Unio from the
rivers of the United States: with observations on some of the characters of the naiades.
Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 3[New Seri es]:403-457, pls. 7-14.
Lee, D.S., C.R. Gilbert, C.H. Hocutt, R.E. Jenkins, D.E. McAllister, and J.R. Stauffer. 1980.
Atlas of North American freshwater fishes. North Carolina State Museum of Natural
History, Raleigh.
MacGuigan, D.J., Orr, O.D., Near, T.J. 2022. Phylogeography, hybridization, and species
discovery in the Etheostoma nigrum complex (Percidae: Etheostoma: Boleosoma). Mol
Phylogenet Evol. 2023 Jan;178 107645.
UWNI Aquatic Species Surveys March 2023
Three Oaks Job# 22-321 Page 24

Marking, L.L., and T.D. Bills. 1979. Acute effects of silt and sand sedimentation on freshwater
mussels. Pp. 204-211 in J.L. Rasmussen, ed. Proc. of the UMRCC symposium on the
Upper Mississippi River bivalve mollusks. UMRCC. Rock Island IL. 270 pp.
Master, L. 1986. Alasmidonta heterodon: results of a global status survey and proposal to list as
an endangered species. A report submitted to Region 5 of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. 10 pp. and appendices.
Mayden, R.L. and B.M. Burr. 1981. Life history of the slender madtom, Noturus exilis, in
southern Illinois (Pisces: Ictaluridae), Occas. Pap. Mus. Nat. Hist. Univ. Kans. 93:1-64
McMahon, R. F. and A. E. Bogan. 2001. Mollusca: Bivalvia. Pp. 331-429. IN: J.H. Thorpe and
A.P. Covich. Ecology and classification of North American freshwater invertebrates.
2ndedition. Academic Press.McRae, Sarah. 2017. Fish and Wildlife Biologist, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service. Raleigh, NC. Personal communication regarding target species.
Michaelson, D.L. and R.J. Neves. 1995. Life history and habitat of the endangered dwarf
wedgemussel Alasmidonta heterodon (Bivalvia: Unionidae). Journal of the North
American Benthological Society 14(2):324-340.
NatureServe. 2016. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application].
Version 7.L NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://explorer.natureserve.org.
(Accessed: January 2022). Species Accessed: Necturus lewisi
Natureserve. October 2018. Natureserve Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web
application]. Version 7.1. Natureserve, Arlingon, Virginia. Available
https:Hexplorer.natureserve. org/Taxon/ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.1066291 /Fusconai a_mas
oni. (Accessed January 2022). Species Accessed: Fusconaia masoni
Neves, R. J. and J. C. Widlak. 1987. Habitat Ecology of Juvenile Freshwater Mussels (Bivalvia:
Unionidae) in a Headwater Stream in Virginia. American Malacological Bulletin 1(5): 1-
7.
Neves, R.J. 1993. A state of the Unionids address. Pp. 1-10 in K.S. Cummings, A.C. Buchanan,
and L.M. Kooch, eds. Proc. of the UMRCC symposium on the Conservation and
Management of Freshwater Mussels. UMRCC. Rock Island IL.189 pp.
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP). 2023. Biotics Database. Division of Land
and Water Stewardship. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources. January 2023
version.
North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission (NCWRC). 2010. NCpedia profile for Carolina
Madtom (Noturus furiosus) [web application]. By Brian Watson, updated by Chris Wood.
June 14, 2010. http://ncpedia.org/wildlife/carolina-madtom Accessed November 4, 2016.
UWNI Aquatic Species Surveys March 2023
Three Oaks Job# 22-321 Page 25

O'Dee, S.H., and G.T. Waters. 2000. New or confirmed host identification for ten freshwater
mussels. Pp. 77-82 in R.A. Tankersley, D.I. Warmolts, G.T. Waters, B.J. Armitage, P.D.
Johnson, and R.S. Butler (eds.). Freshwater Mollusk Symposia Proceedings Part I.
Proceedings of the Conservation, Captive Care and Propagation of Freshwater Mussels
Symposium. Ohio Biological Survey Special Publication, Columbus.
O'Neill, C. R., Jr., and D. B. MacNeill. 1991. The zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha): an
unwelcome North American invader. Sea Grant, Coastal Resources Fact Sheet. New
York Sea Grant Extension. 12 pp.
Ortmann, A.E. 1919. A monograph of the naiades of Pennsylvania. Part III: Systematic account
of the genera and species. Memoirs of the Carnegie Museum 8(1): xvi-384, 21 pls.
Pennak, R. W. 1989. Fresh -water Invertebrates of the United States, Protozoa to Mollusca. New
York, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Savidge, T. W., J. M. Alderman, A. E. Bogan, W. G. Cope, T. E. Dickinson, C. B. Eads,S. J.
Fraley, J. Fridell, M. M. Gangloff, R. J. Heise, J. F. Levine, S. E. McRae, R.B. Nichols,
A. J. Rodgers, A. Van Devender, J. L. Williams and L. L. Zimmerman. 2011. 2010
Reevaluation of Status Listings for Jeopardized Freshwater and Terrestrial Mollusks in
North Carolina. Unpublished report of the Scientific Council on Freshwater and
Teresstrial Mollusks. 177pp.
Simpson, C.T. 1900. Synopsis of the naiades, or pearly fresh -water mussels. Proceedings of the
United States National Museum 22(1205):501-1044.
Simpson, C.T. 1914. A descriptive catalogue of the naiades, or pearly fresh -water mussels. Parts
I —III. Bryant Walker, Detroit, Michigan, xii + 1540 pp.
Smith, D. 1981. Selected freshwater invertebrates proposed for special concern status in
Massachusetts (Mollusca, Annelida, Arthropoda). MA Dept. of Env. Qual. Engineering,
Div. of Water Pollution Control. 26 pp.
Strayer, D. L., S. J. Sprague and S. Claypool, 1996. A range -wide assessment of populations of
Alasmidonta heterodon, an endangered freshwater mussel (Bivalvia: Unionidae). J.N.
Am. Benthol. Soc., 15(3):308-317.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1992a. Special report on the status of
freshwater mussels.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1992b. Endangered and Threatened species
of the southeast United States (The Red Book). FWS, Ecological Services, Div. of
Endangered Species, Southeast Region. Govt Printing Office, Wash, DC: 1,070.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1993. Dwarf Wedgemussel (Alasmidonta
heterodon) Recovery Plan. Hadley, Massachusetts. 527 pp.
UWNI Aquatic Species Surveys March 2023
Three Oaks Job# 22-321 Page 26

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2019. Dwarf Wedgemussel (Alasmidonta
heterodon) 5-year Review: Summary and Evaluation. Raleigh Ecological Services Field
Office. https:Hecos.fws.gov/docs/tess/species_ nonpublish/2774.pdf
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2021a. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants: Threatened Species Status with Section 4(d) Rule and Designation of Critical
Habitat for Atlantic Pigtoe. 50 CFR 17:86 FR 64000, 64000-64053. Docket Nos. FWS-
R4-ES-2018-0046FF09E21000 FXES 1111090FEDR 223.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2021b. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Threatened Species Status with Section 4(d) Rule for Neuse River Waterdog,
Endangered Species Status for Carolina Madtom, and Designations of Critical Habitat. 50
CFR 17:86 FR 30688, 30688-30751. Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2018-0092.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2021c. Species Status Assessment Report for
the Atlantic Pigtoe (Fusconaia masoni) Version 1.4.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ServCat/DownloadFile/201267
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2021d. Species Status Assessment Report for
the Neuse River Waterdog (Necturus lewisi) Version 1.2.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ServCat/DownloadFile/195540
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2021e. Species status assessment report for
the Carolina Madtom (Noturus furiosus). Version 1.2.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ServCat/DownloadFile/195532
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2023. USFWS Information for Planning and
Conservation (IPAC). Accessed February 2023.
https://ipac.ecosphere. fws.gov/location/E2HIQTNFOJB5 VE7CEDNP5CPJSM/resources
Viosca, P., Jr. 1937. A tentative revision of the genus Necturus, with descriptions of three new
species from the southern Gulf drainage area. Copeia 1937:120-138.
Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (VDGIF). 2014. Atlantic Pigtoe
Conservation Plan. Bureau of Wildlife Resources. VDGIF, Richmond, VA. 31 pp.
Wolf, E.D. 2012. Propagation, Culture, and Recovery of Species at Risk Atlantic Pigtoe.
Virginia Tech Conservation Management Institute, Project No. 11-108. 55pp.
UWNI Aquatic Species Surveys March 2023
Three Oaks Job# 22-321 Page 27

APPENDIX A
Figures
UWNI Aquatic Species Surveys March 2023
Three Oaks Job# 22-321 Page 28

UWNI Aquatic Species Surveys March 2023
Three Oaks Job# 22-321 Page 29

�**,\ EERI�, Prepared For:
o AwA
e*+1111111111111110
Lha
j lot
Aquatic Species Surveys
Upper West Neuse Interceptor
Project Vicinity & Survey Reach
Wake County, North Carolina
Gate March 2023
Scale: 0 5010C 200 Feet
Job No
22-321
Crawn By:
Checked By'.
TDH
TED
Figure

New Hop N
Church
.. North Hills
d1, I 21`. Survey Location
y.� i I sao d✓�a r2--
:o �
EO I D 18403
�4tip:
Five Points�-
1 Wilders Grove - Ls 1
West Ra 9 , - r i _
�.`. Seahol rd Stano 6•/3d EO I D 7699 htdal m�
Raleigh—
i
'-' `i i s Southeast Raleigh
t
r arale�g �
300E
{ Walnur r ek
/} 1
I ♦+
jj
f
o Garner
2
�:tnn ♦
4
Cr —
I
fi
US 70 — —
♦
JJJ ciayton
41
f
v
330.:
r '�320� ♦ ♦
EO ID 13799 `
1
132 9 ♦
f
ikson's Mills
[ao
f
p us 70 `\
k
S } � O
A Survey Location
- NCNHP EO: DWM
Stream
Prepared For:
y _
� o
Aquatic Species Surveys
Upper West Neuse Interceptor
Dwarf Wedgemussel Element
Occurences
Wake County, North Carolina
0
W"
Smdhfield
uy _
Nr sir. 2 y5
© Oo nStreetM'ap (and) ontributors, CC -BY -SA
Date March 2023
Scale 0 0,5 1 2 Miles
I I �
Job No
22-321
Crawn By:
TDH
Checked By'.
TED
Figure
2-1

9"9_
,A
93
NC 50
EO I D 14599
Store Park S
r a`
rn
�Ralei( EO ID 11071
�� rs
300
� 1b
i.
3 .
I
r
y EO I D 34956
5 401
z-�, Survey Location
- NCNHP EO: AP
Critical Habitat Unit 14, AP
Stream
Prepared For:
S��G1�lEERjy�r
p
W \ 1'A
0
D 4370
Survey Location
9
Aquatic Species Surveys
Upper West Neuse Interceptor
Atlantic Pigtoe Element
Occurences, and Critical Habitat
Wake County, North Carolina
r� {
EO I D 7026
EO I D 3081
�.74
r
111695
Wit on's Mills
0
7251 1
� 0 33a
a
9
mithfieI
95
93f
a0
©Op,,enStreetMap (and) contrijbutDrs, CC -BY -SA
Gate March 2023
Scale 0 0,5 1 2 Miles
I I I
Job No
22-321
Crawn By,
Checked By'.
TDH
TED
Figure
2-2

EO I D 12592
EO I D 8258
EO I D 446 i
,� fa•
EO ID 40669
,L
,1 ~
s 401 l
1
,4 EO I D 34764
A Survey Location
- NCNHP EO, NRWD
Critical Habitat, NRWD
Stream
Prepared For:
S��G1t1EERjy�,�'
a
9;1e33tt1`��'�
w EO ID 23f
1
Critical
Z0 �� Habitat-
�0 Survey 'Location Unit 12
32
EO I D 8259 41,
14
t3 J
2 - - ghtdale
N
Clayton
�333
375
v e
I on's Mills
EO ID 1633
Critical
0
Habitat ,
Unit '11
31
r 4 ?34`
Critical 9
9 Habitat thfield
Unit 10 !95
f3
a0
© Op
,enStreetMap (and) contrriybu�Drs CC -BY -SA
Aquatic Species Surveys
Upper West Neuse Connector
Neuse River Waterdog Element
Occurences, and Critical Habitat
Wake County, North Carolina
Gate March 2023
Scale 0 0,5 1 2 Miles
Job No
22-321
Crawn By,
Checked By'.
TDH
TED
Figure
2-3

IN
' z Survey Location
435—
EO ID 10676
..A
x
� r3
,A 14 rghtd le `-- ;
r .;
1
3�9 Clayton
309 .
370�
3 V 333
4 316
ro
W�,-n's Mill
s WEO ID 9621
\ o O
9 milhheld
'9s
d
xv
315
375 95
Survey Location
- NCNHP EO: CMT
Critical Habitat: CMT
Stream
Prepared For:
���141EERI,y�r
o
a
arA
b
I
O
• N
Critical
Habit
Unit Q
vn �n
.ace, u1
}
p ©O enStreetMap
(a
Aquatic Species Surveys
Upper West Neuse Interceptor
Carolina Madtom Element
Occurences, and Critical Habitat
Wake County. North Carolina
Habit
Unit
US 70 LO
EO I D 17447
EO I D 16142
0
US dbutors, CrC-BY-S4
Date. March 2023
Scale 0 0.5 1 2 3 Miles
I� _JI LL I
Job No,,
22-321
Drawn By.
Ghecked By'.
TDH
TED
Figure
2-4

Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions
ACTION ID #: SAW- Begin Date (Date Received):
Prepare file folder ❑ Assign Action ID Number in ORM ❑
1. Project Name [PCN Form A2a]: West Neuse Interceptor Replacement and Rehabilitation
2. Work Type: ❑Private ❑Institutional ❑✓ Government ❑ Commercial
3. Project Description / Purpose [PCN Form 133d and 133e]:
Repair and replace existing utility lines
4. Property Owner / Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A4]: City of Raleigh
5. Agent / Consultant [PNC Form A5 — or ORM Consultant ID Number]:
Phil May, Carolina Ecosystems, Inc.
6. Related Action ID Number(s) [PCN Form 135b]:
7. Project Location— Coordinates, Street Address, and/or Location Description [PCN Form Blb]:
Main alignment (37,000 linear feet) (35.859316,-78.528754) to (35.767832,-78.540184). A second
alignment (approx. 8,000 LF) runs NW/SE from (35.769250,-78.546848) to (35.750937,-78.537448)
8. Project Location— Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form Bla]: Existing and proposed City of Raleigh Easments
9. Project Location— County [PCN Form A2b]: Wake
10. Project Location —Nearest Municipality or Town [PCN Form A2c]: Raleigh
11. Project Information — Nearest Waterbody [PCN Form 132a]: Neuse River
12. Watershed / 8-Digit Hydrologic Unit Code [PCN Form 132c]: Upper Neuse - 03020201
Authorization: Section 10 ❑ Section 404 ❑✓
Regulatory Action Type:
❑ Standard Permit
Nationwide Permit #
Regional General Permit #
✓ Jurisdictional Determination Request
Section 10 and 404 ❑
❑ Pre -Application Request
❑ Unauthorized Activity
❑ Compliance
❑ No Permit Required
Revised 20150602

�� CAROLINA
ECOSYSTEM5
February 10, 2020
Mr. James Lastinger
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
US Army Corps of Engineers
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
RE: Request for Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination
West Neuse Interceptor Rehabilitation and Replacement
Wake County, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Lastinger,
3040 NC 42 West, Clayton NC 27520
P:919-359-1102 — F:919-585-5570
Carolina Ecosystems, Inc. (CEI) has completed a delineation of streams and wetlands for the
above referenced project comprising approximately 45,000 linear feet of sanitary sewer along
Crabtree Creek and Neuse River in Wake County, NC. The attached information, including
required forms, tables, and figures, is submitted for your review and determination of jurisdiction
under the Clean Water Act (CWA).
Project Description & Methodology
As shown in Figure 1, the proposed project is located in Raleigh, NC within the Neuse River
Basin (USGS Hydrologic Unit 03020201) and comprises approximately 98.79 acres.
Delineations were performed from September 19 to November 06, 2019, in compliance with
methodology set forth in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Wetland Delineation
Manual (USACE 1987) and subsequent guidance including the Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
regional supplement. Surface waters were assessed for jurisdiction under the CWA using field
indications of ordinary high water mark and the NC Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ)
Stream Identification Form Version 4.11.
Delineation Results
Figure 2 is presented using the Raleigh East, NC (2016) US Geological Survey 1:24,000
Quadrangle Map. Figure 3 presents the results of the delineation, including one pond, 19 streams
and 52 wetlands.
Table 1 presents detailed information on each aquatic resource within the study area, including
latitude/longitude, estimated amount and type of aquatic resource in the review area, and
geographic authority to which the resource may be subject. Based on field data, there are
approximately 4,455 linear feet of stream, including 2,939 feet of the Neuse River, 1,291 feet of
perennial stream and 225 linear feet of intermittent stream, 15.61 acres of wetland, and 0.13 acre
of surface water (pond) within the project corridor.

Mr. James Lastinger
February 10, 2020
West Neuse Interceptor Replacement and Rehabilitation
Page 2 of 2
We respectfully request your review of this information so that a preliminary jurisdictional
determination under the CWA may be obtained. If you have any questions, need additional
information, or would like to schedule a site visit, please contact me at your earliest convenience
at [phone] or [e-mail].
Sincerely,
Carolina Ecosystems, Inc.
Philip May
Senior Scientist
Attachments:
- Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form
- Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form: Appendix 2
- Agent Authorization Forms
- Table 1: Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Table
- Figure 1: Vicinity Map
- Figure 2: USGS Map
- Figure 3: Aquatic Features Map
- Figure 4: NRCS Map
- Stream and Wetland Data Forms

Jurisdictional Determination Request
A. PARCEL INFORMATION
Street Address: Multiple parcels in easements
City, State: Raleigh, NC
County: Wake
Parcel Index Number(s) (PIN): Various
B. REQUESTOR INFORMATION
Name: Philip M
Mailing Address: 3040 NC Highway 42 W
Clayton, NC 27520
Telephone Number: [phone]
Electronic Mail Address: [e-mail]
Select one:
❑ I am the current property owner.
✓❑ I am an Authorized Agent or Environmental Consultant'
❑ Interested Buyer or Under Contract to Purchase
❑ Other, please explain.
C. PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION
Name: City of Raleigh
Mailing Address: City easements (existing and proposed
Wake County, NC
Telephone Number: N/A
Electronic Mail Address: N/A
1 Must provide completed Agent Authorization Form/Letter.
z Documentation of ownership also needs to be provided with request (copy of Deed, County GIS/Parcel/Tax Record).
Version: May 2017 Page 2

Jurisdictional Determination Request
D. PROPERTY ACCESS CERTIFICATION',4
By signing below, I authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on -
site investigations, if necessary, and issuing a jurisdictional determination pursuant to Section
404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. I, the
undersigned, am either a duly authorized owner of record of the property identified herein, or
acting as the duly authorized agent of the owner of record of the property.
See Attached Agent Authorization Letters
Print Name
Capacity: ❑ Owner 7 Authorized Agents
Date
Signature
E. REASON FOR JD REQUEST: (Check as many as applicable)
❑ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be
designed to avoid all aquatic resources.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be
designed to avoid all jurisdictional aquatic resources under Corps authority.
I intend to construct/develop a projector perform activities on this parcel which may
require authorization from the Corps, and the JD would be used to avoid and minimize
impacts to jurisdictional aquatic resources and as an initial step in a future permitting
process.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which may
require authorization from the Corps; this request is accompanied by my permit application
and the JD is to be used in the permitting process.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a projector perform activities in a navigable water of the
U.S. which is included on the district Section 10 list and/or is subject to the ebb and flow of
the tide.
❑ A Corps JD is required in order obtain my local/state authorization.
❑ I intend to contest jurisdiction over a particular aquatic resource and request the Corps
confirm that jurisdiction does/does not exist over the aquatic resource on the parcel.
❑ I believe that the site may be comprised entirely of dry land.
❑✓ Other: Planned City of Raleigh sewer improvements
3 For NCDOT requests following the current NCDOT/USACE protocols, skip to Part E.
a If there are multiple parcels owned by different parties, please provide the following for each additional parcel on a
continuation sheet.
s Must provide agent authorization form/letter signed by owner(s).
Version: May 2017 Page 3

Jurisdictional Determination Request
F. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD) TYPE (Select One)
❑✓ I am requesting that the Corps provide a preliminary JD for the property identified herein.
A Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) provides an indication that there may
be "waters of the United States" or "navigable waters of the United States"on a property.
PJDs are sufficient as the basis for permit decisions. For the purposes of permitting, all
waters and wetlands on the property will be treated as if they are jurisdictional "waters of
the United States". PJDs cannot be appealed (33 C.F.R. 331.2); however, a PJD is
"preliminary" in the sense that an approved JD can be requested at any time. PJDs do
not expire.
❑ I am requesting that the Corps provide an approved JD for the property identified herein.
An Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD) is a determination that
jurisdictional "waters of the United States" or "navigable waters of the United
States" are either present or absent on a site. An approved JD identifies the limits of
waters on a site determined to be jurisdictional under the Clean Water Act and/or
Rivers and Harbors Act. Approved JDs are sufficient as the basis for permit
decisions. AJDs are appealable (33 C.F.R. 331.2). The results of the AJD will be
posted on the Corps website. A landowner, permit applicant, or other "affected
party" (33 C.F.R. 331.2) who receives an AJD may rely upon the AJD for five years
(subject to certain limited exceptions explained in Regulatory Guidance Letter 05-
02).
❑ I am unclear as to which JD I would like to request and require additional information
to inform my decision.
G. ALL REQUESTS
Map of Property or Project Area. This Map must clearly depict the boundaries of the
review area.
✓❑ Size of Property or Review Area 98.79 acres.
❑ The property boundary (or review area boundary) is clearly physically marked on the site.
Version: May 2017 Page 4

Jurisdictional Determination Request
H. REQUESTS FROM CONSULTANTS
Project Coordinates (Decimal Degrees): Latitude: 35.859262
Longitude:-78.528623
❑✓ A legible delineation map depicting the aquatic resources and the property/review area.
Delineation maps must be no larger than 11x17 and should contain the following: (Corps
signature of submitted survey plats will occur after the submitted delineation map has been
reviewed and approved).6
■ North Arrow
■ Graphical Scale
■ Boundary of Review Area
■ Date
■ Location of data points for each Wetland Determination Data Form or tributary
assessment reach.
For Approved Jurisdictional Determinations:
Jurisdictional wetland features should be labeled as Wetland Waters of the US, 404
wetlands, etc. Please include the acreage of these features.
Jurisdictional non -wetland features (i.e. tidal/navigable waters, tributaries,
impoundments) should be labeled as Non -Wetland Waters of the US, stream, tributary,
open water, relatively permanent water, pond, etc. Please include the acreage or linear
length of each of these features as appropriate.
Isolated waters, waters that lack a significant nexus to navigable waters, or non -
jurisdictional upland features should be identified as Non -Jurisdictional. Please
include a justification in the label regarding why the feature is non jurisdictional (i.e.
"Isolated", "No Significant Nexus", or "Upland Feature"). Please include the acreage
or linear length of these features as appropriate.
For Preliminary Jurisdictional Determinations:
Wetland and non -wetland features should not be identified as Jurisdictional, 404,
Waters of the United States, or anything that implies jurisdiction. These features can be
identified as Potential Waters of the United States, Potential Non -wetland Waters of
the United States, wetland, stream, open water, etc. Please include the acreage and
linear length of these features as appropriate.
Completed Wetland Determination Data Forms for appropriate region
(at least one wetland and one upland form needs to be completed for each wetland type)
6 Please refer to the guidance document titled "Survey Standards for Jurisdictional Determinations" to ensure that the
supplied map meets the necessary mapping standards. http://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/Re"latoiy-Permit-
Pro gram/Jurisdiction/
Version: May 2017 Page 5

Jurisdictional Determination Request
F4Completed appropriate Jurisdictional Determination form
• PJDs, please complete a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form' and include the
Aquatic Resource Table
• AJDs, please complete an Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form'
W1 Vicinity Map
zAerial Photograph
z USGS Topographic Map
Soil Survey Map
Other Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map, Proposed Site
Plan, previous delineation maps, LIDAR maps, FEMA floodplain maps)
Landscape Photos (if taken)
NCSAM and/or NCWAM Assessment Forms and Rating Sheets
NC Division of Water Resources Stream Identification Forms
FJ Other Assessment Forms
7 www.saw.usace.army.mil/Portals/59/docs/regulatory/readocs/JD/RGL_08-02_App A Prelim JD Form fillable.pdf
s Please see http://www.saw.usace.aM.niil/Missions/Re ulatory-Permit-Program/Jurisdiction/
Principal Purpose: The information that you provide will be used in evaluating your request to determine
whether there are any aquatic resources within the project area subject to federal jurisdiction under the regulatory
authorities referenced above.
Routine Uses: This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal, state, and local
government agencies, and the public, and may be made available as part of a public notice as required by federal
law. Your name and property location where federal jurisdiction is to be determined will be included in the
approved jurisdictional determination (AJD), which will be made available to the public on the District's website
and on the Headquarters USAGE website.
Disclosure: Submission of requested information is voluntary; however, ifinformation is not provided, the
request for an AJD cannot be evaluated nor can an AJD be issued.
Version: May 2017 Page 6

Appendix 2 - PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD:
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: Phil May -Carolina Ecosystems, Inc. 3040 NC Hwy 42 W, Clayton, NC 27520
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND/OR
AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: NC County/parish/borough: Wake city: Raleigh
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format):
Lat.: 35.859262 Long.:-78.528623
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: NeuSe River
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
❑ Field Determination. Date(s):
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES IN REVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO REGULATORY
JURISDICTION.
Site
number
Latitude
(decimal
degrees)
Longitude
(decimal
degrees)
Estimated amount
of aquatic resource
in review area
(acreage and linear
feet, if applicable)
Type of aquatic
resource (i.e., wetland
vs. non -wetland
waters)
Geographic authority
to which the aquatic
resource "may be"
subject (i.e., Section
404 or Section 10/404)
See Attached JD Table

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

SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply)
Checked items should be included in subject file. Appropriately reference sources
below where indicated for all checked items:
❑■ Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor:
Map:Vicinity Map
❑E Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor.
❑ Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rationale:
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
❑■ U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: Raleigh East, NC 2016 1:24k Quadrangle map
❑E Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Wake County, NC NRCS Maps 40, 50, 60, 70
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: .(National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
❑■ Photographs: ❑■ Aerial (Name & Date): 2017 NC Statewide Aerial Photography
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Other information (please specify):
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily
been verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for later jurisdictional
determinations.
Signature and date of
Regulatory staff member
completing PJD
Signature and date of
person requesting PJD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)'
01 /21 /2020
1 Districts may establish timeframes for requestor to return signed PJD forms. If the requestor does not respond
within the established time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is
necessary prior to finalizing an action.

3040 NC Hwy 42 West; Clayton, NC 27520
P:919-359-1102 — F:919-585-5570
PROPERTY ACCESS AND AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
Property Information
Property Address
and/or Description West Neuse Interceptor Replacement and Rehabilitation
Parcel Identification
Nurnber(s) (PIN) Existing City of Raleigh easements.
City: Raleigh State: NC County
Property Owner Information
Owner: ® Authorized Agent*: ❑
Name: City of Raleigh Public Utilities Department
Title: Janeen Goodwin, Senior Project Administrator
Wake
Property Size (Acres): 106.6
Street Address: One Exchange Plaza, Suite 620
City: Raleigh State: NC Zip Code: 27601
*Written proof of authorization from owner required.
Authorization.
I, the undersigned, a duly authorized owner of record of the property/properties identified herein, do authorize
representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) to enter upon the property herein
described for the purpose of conducting on -site investigations and issuing a determination associated with Waters of the
U.S. subject to Federal jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors
Act of 1899.
Additionally, I hereby grant Carolina Ecosystems, Inc. (CEI) staff, their designated contractors and representatives, as
well as other Federal, State or local authorities access to the above referenced property when necessary for the purposes of
conducting on -site environmental consulting services. I also grant CEI the authority to act as authorized agent on behalf of
the owner of the above listed property for the communication., submission, and/or application to relevant government
entities, including local, state, and federal authorities, for the review, acceptance, concurrence, and/or approval of
environmental information, documents, and/or permit requests concerning the above listed property. These services may
include regulatory determinations of environmental features on my property such as issuing a determination associated
with streams and wetlands. I certify that I am the legal owner or authorized agent of the legal owner of the above property
and have authority to grant such access.
Owner/Agent (signature) Date

West Neuse Interceptor Aquatic Resources in Review Area January 2020
Replacement and Rehabilitation
Table 1. Preliminary .Jurisdictional Determination Table
Site Name
Latitude
Longitude
Estimated
Amount of
Aquatic Resource
in Review Area
Type of aquatic resource
Geographic authority to which the aquatic
resource "may be" subject
Streams
Linear Feet
Neuse River
Various sections
throughout project area
2939
Non -Wetland waters
Section 404
SB (per)
35.8229
-78.5384
188
Non -Wetland waters
Section 404
SC (per)
35.8052
-78.5396
55
Non -Wetland waters
Section 404
SD (per)
35.8051
-78.5396
75
Non -Wetland waters
Section 404
SE (per)
35.8097
-78.5373
81
Non -Wetland waters
Section 404
SF (int)
35.7986
-78.5415
58
Non -Wetland waters
Section 404
SG (per)
35.7967
-78.5425
72
Non -Wetland waters
Section 404
SH (int)
35.7959
-78.5427
79
Non -Wetland waters
Section 404
SI (per)
35.7953
-78.5427
55
Non -Wetland waters
Section 404
SJ (per)
35.7857
-78.5372
108
Non -Wetland waters
Section 404
SK (per)
35.7816
-78.5381
107
Non -Wetland waters
Section 404
SL (int)
35.7792
-78.5387
55
Non -Wetland waters
Section 404
SM (int)
35.7784
-78.5387
33
Non -Wetland waters
Section 404
SN (per)
35.7753
-78.5401
95
Non -Wetland waters
Section 404
SO (per)
35.8308
-78.5366
149
Non -Wetland waters
Section 404
SP(per)
35.8379
-78.5319
40
Non -Wetland waters
Section 404
SQ (per)
35.8451
-78.5314
102
Non -Wetland waters
Section 404
SR (per)
35.8494
-78.5304
100
Non -Wetland waters
Section 404
SZA (per)
35.7603
-78.5402
64
Non -Wetland waters
Section 404
Total
4455

West Neuse Interceptor Aquatic Resources in Review Area January 2020
Replacement and Rehabilitation
Site Name
Latitude
Longitude
Estimated
Amount of
Aquatic Resource
in Review Area
Type of aquatic resource
Geographic authority to which the aquatic
resource "may be" subject
Wetlands
Acreage
WA
35.8290
-78.5377
0.05
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WB
35.8276
-78.5382
0.09
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WC
35.8263
-78.5384
0.43
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WD
35.8236
-78.5387
0.02
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WE
35.8229
-78.5386
0.64
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WF
35.8246
-78.5387
0.26
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WG
35.8216
-78.5384
0.03
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WH
35.8194
-78.5378
0.33
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WI
35.8182
-78.5381
0.43
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WJ
35.8173
-78.5378
0.54
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WK
35.8140
-78.5365
0.35
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WL
35.8123
-78.5350
0.11
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WM
35.8064
-78.5387
1.09
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WN
35.8039
-78.5392
0.02
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WO
35.8014
-78.5393
0.03
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WP
35.7992
-78.5412
0.61
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WQ
35.7982
-78.5415
0.02
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WR
35.7970
-78.5424
0.06
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WS
35.7958
-78.5426
0.02
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WT
35.7915
-78.5374
0.07
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WU
35.7884
-78.5366
1.32
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WV
35.7849
-78.5373
< 01
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WW
35.7815
-78.5381
0.01
Wetland Waters
Section 404

West Neuse Interceptor Aquatic Resources in Review Area
Replacement and Rehabilitation
January 2020
Estimated
Site Name Latitude Longitude Amount of Type of aquatic resource
Aquatic Resource
in Review Area
Wetlands
Acreage
Geographic authority to which the aquatic
resource "may be" subject
WX
35.7804
-78.5381
0.02
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WY
35.7793
-78.5385
0.04
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WZ
35.7788
-78.5389
0.21
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WAA
35.7787
-78.5387
0.16
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WAB
35.7778
-78.5392
0.06
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WAC
35.7779
-78.5391
< 01
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WAD
35.7774
-78.5391
0.27
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WAE
35.7769
-78.5395
0.08
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WAF
35.7767
-78.5393
0.02
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WAG
35.7694
-78.5397
0.12
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WAH
35.7687
-78.5397
0.01
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WAI
35.7679
-78.5401
0.09
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WAJ
35.8290
-78.5379
0.01
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WAK
35.8309
-78.5368
0.11
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WAL
35.8310
-78.5364
0.14
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WAM
35.8313
-78.5352
1.17
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WAN
35.8339
-78.5312
0.09
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WAO
35.8350
-78.5315
0.16
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WAP
35.8396
-78.5317
4.85
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WAQ
35.8467
-78.5309
0.20
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WAR
35.8448
-78.5313
0.10
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WAS
35.8490
-78.5304
0.08
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WAT
35.8513
-78.5307
0.26
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WAU
35.8550
-78.5298
0.14
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WAV
35.8550
-78.5300
0.29
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WAW
35.8581
-78.5293
0.09
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WAX
35.8591
-78.5286
0.08
Wetland Waters
Section 404
WZA
35,7603
-78.5402
< 01
Wetland Waters
Section 404

West Neuse Interceptor Aquatic Resources in Review Area January 2020
Replacement and Rehabilitation
Estimated
Amount of
Geographic authority to which the aquatic
Site Name
Latitude
Longitude
Type of aquatic resource
"may
Aquatic Resource
resource be" subject
in Review Area
Wetlands
Acreage
WZC
35.7639
-78.5433
0.05
Wetland Waters
Section 404
Total
15.43
Ponds
Acreage
PA
35.8492
-78.5304
0.13
Non -Wetland waters
Section 404

a
EVIM
❑❑
D
71,
440
kalnu
� • �11� —
L Ai
M
Latitude: 35.859262 / Longitude:-78.528623
ill
0
le
Wake County, NC � ❑Z_ V-�e�se RtL�
N West Neuse Interceptor
E)^[1CAROLINA Q Study Area Rehabilitation and Replacement
ECOSVSTEMS Miles Wake County, NC
0 0.5 1 0 Sheet Limits
February 2020 USGS Named Stream Figure 1: vicinity Map

VA
Mft
N 0 Study Area Wetland Map Date: February 2020 West Neuse Interceptor
Rehabilitation and Replacement
'+Intermittent Stream Pond Revised:
C�IGAROLINA Feet Wake Coun NC
ECOSYSTEMS 0 125 250 tiPerennial Stream
Revised: Figure 2: USGS Map
Raleigh East (2016) US Geological
Survey 1:24000 Quadrangle Map Revised: Sheet I of 12

M&L
i
JJJ
IR
O
low —
I N
lk
i
r
1
I�
N Study Area • Wetland Map Date: February 2020 West Neuse Interceptor
Rehabilitation and Replacement
D'%—Intermittent Stream Pond Revised: Wake County, Feet NC
ECOSYSTEMS 0 125 250 Perennial Stream
Revised: Figure 2: USGS Map
Raleigh East (2016) US Geological
Survey 1:24000 Quadrangle Map Revised: Sheet 2 of 12

i
Op
coo
N Study Area • Wetland Map Date: February 2020 West Neuse Interceptor
Rehabilitation and Replacement
Intermittent Stream Pond Revised:
O��11CAROLINA Feet Wake County,NC
ECOSYSTEMS 0 125 250 tiPerennial Stream
Revised: Figure 2: USGS Map
Raleigh East (2016) US Geological
Survey 1:24000 Quadrangle Map Revised: Sheet 3 of 12

x
r
r
1 �
M
N Study Area • Wetland Map Date: February 2020 West Neuse Interceptor
Rehabilitation and Replacement
_ '%. Intermittent Stream Pond Revised:
O((��^AROLINA Feet Wake County,NC
ECOSYSTEMS 0 125 250 tiPerennial Stream Revised:
Raleigh East (2016) US Geological Figure 2: USGS Map
Survey 1:24000 Quadrangle Map Revised: Sheet 4 of 12

I
4'A
�,
l
i
s�
r e ve,
N EM Study Area OW Wetland Map Date: February 2020 West Neuse Interceptor
Rehabilitation and Replacement
'+Intermittent Stream Pond Revised:
[�1GAROLINA Feet Wake Coun NC
ECOSYSTEMS 0 125 250 tiPerennial Stream
Revised: Figure 2: USGS Map
Raleigh East (2016) US Geological
Survey 1:24000 Quadrangle Map Revised: Sheet 5 of 12

r
1ge,ak
U
n
N Study Area Wetland Map Date: February 2020 West Neuse Interceptor
Rehabilitation and Replacement
'—
IntermittentStream Pond Revised:
C�ICAROLINA Feet Wake County, NC
ECOSYSTEMS 0 125 250 '—Perennial Stream Revised:
Raleigh East (2016) US Geological Figure 2: USGS Map
Survey 1:24000 Quadrangle Map Revised: Sheet 6 of 12

M
SHE
e
SF use
C
N 0 Study Area Wetland Map Date: February 2020 West Neuse interceptor
Rehabilitation and Replacement
'.Intermittent Stream Pond Rev sed:
O�11CAROLINA Feet Wake County,NC
ECOSYSTEMS 0 125 250 tiPerennial Stream
Rev sed: Figure 2: USGS Map
Raleigh East (2016) US Geological
Survey 1:24000 Quadrangle Map Revised: Sheet 7 of 12

I
d�
t
RM
wv
sj
0
N 0 Study Area • Wetland Map Date: February 2020 West Neuse Interceptor
Rehabilitation and Replacement
'%—Intermittent Stream Pond Revised:
C�IGAROLINA Feet Wake Countv, NC
ECOSYSTEMS 0 125 250 tiPerennial Stream Revised:
Figure 2: USGS Map
Raleigh East (2016) US Geological
Survey 1:24000 Quadrangle Map Revised: Sheet 8 of 12

W ' DR
CIR
0 Study Area • Wetland
mommomE== Feet �' Intermittent Stream Pond
0 125 250 tiPerennial Stream
Raleigh East (2016) US Geological
Survey 1:24000 Quadrangle Map
Map Date: February 2020 vrwu­­ .'"".'epwi
Rehabilitation and Replacement
Revised: Wake County, NC
Revised: Figure 2: USGS Map
Revised: Sheet 9 of 12

r '\Jir.
1
N Study Area • Wetland Map Date: February 2020 West Neuse Interceptor
Rehabilitation and Replacement
'.Intermittent Stream Pond Revised:
[�1GAROLINA Feet Wake Coun NC
ECOSYSTEMS 0 125 250 tiPerennial Stream Revised:
Raleigh East (2016) US Geological Figure 2: USGS Map
Survey 1:24000 Quadrangle Map Revised: Sheet 10 of 12

N
Study Area • Wetland
Map Date: February 2020
West Neuse Interceptor
Rehabilitation and Replacement
Revised:
0'.Intermittent
ECOSYSTEMS
Feet
0 125 250
Stream Pond
Perennial Stream
Wake County, NC
Revised:
Figure 2: USIiS Map
Raleigh East (2016) US Geological
Survey 1:24000 Quadrangle Map
Sheet 11 of 12
Revised:

/f Rv\ \�
'Fw
g Ra \
/� S4??--
ON
Q)
0,0
N 0 Study Area Wetland Map Date: February 2020 West Neuse Interceptor
Rehabilitation and Replacement
Intermittent Stream Pond Rev sed:
C�IGAROLINA Feet Wake Coun NC
ECOSYSTEMS 0 125 250 tiPerennial Stream Rev sed:
Raleigh East (2016) US Geological Figure 2: USGS Map
Survey 1:24000 Quadrangle Map Revised: Sheet 12 of 12

{-�- T
,jjW

INA
N Study Area 4W Wetland Map Date: Feb-ary 2020 West Neuse Interceptor
Revised: — Rehabilitation and Replacement
0,AROLINA., � OmEmK::� Feet Intermittent Stream Pond Wake County, NC
--'COSYSTE 0 125 250 ti Perennial Stream Revised: Figure 3: Aquatic Resources Map
2017 NC Statewide Aerial Photographs Revised: Sheet 4 of 12

a
N QStudy Area 4WWetland Map Date: February 2020 vrcau�cwc mrcrccywr
Rehabilitation and Replacement
Intermittent Stream Pon
:AROLINA Feet d Revised: Wake Coun NC
�r COSYSTEMS 0 125 250
ti Perennial Stream Revised. Figure 3: Aquatic Resources Map
2017 NC Statewide Aerial Photographs Revised: Sheet 6 of 12

94
�{ k
y P
N Stud Area Wetland Map Date: February 2020} West Neuse Interceptor
Y Rehabilitation and Replacement
'� Intermittent Stream Pond Revised:
�AROLINA Feet Wake Count NC
ECOSYSTEMS 0 125 250
ti Perennial Stream Revised' Figure 3: Aquatic Resources Map
2017 NC Statewide Aerial Photographs Revised: Sheet 7 of 12

• S �:,a
r
4 4,
R h4f*�,-'•-.-r• ate' '+�.�lF�`�' - .{ f L
iG OF
w r ±:
FA 4?r
-0 1�
r i �
;U
X.': i
All
OL
MMF .,
Pf
Pr
i P
N Q Stud Area Wetland Map Dare: February 2020 West Neuse Interceptor
Y Rehabilitation and Replacement
'� Intermittent Stream Pond Revised:
':AROLINA Feet Wake Count NC
0—ECOSYSTEMS 0 125 250
ti Perennial Stream Revised. Figure 3: Aquatic Resources Map
2017 NC Statewide Aerial Photographs Revised: Sheet 8 of 12

�I
..
- jr . . ja!?�L
Ww"
- Im
N Stud Area Wetland Map Date: Febmary 2020 West Neuse Interceptor
Y Rehabilitation and Replacement
Intermittent Stream Pond Revised: Wake County,NC
AROLINA Feet
ECOSYSTEMS 0 125 250 Revised:
ti Perennial Stream Figure 3: Aquatic Resources Map
2017 NC Statewide Aerial Photographs Revised: Sheet 9 of 12

id
� 1
k '�• qr .A r �' a'.t r f �ARM
k r
r s,
ri
ro - • 4 9
4 .'
kL
N Stud Area Wetland Map Date` February 2020 Vest Neuse Interceptor
Y Rehabilitation and Replacement
� Feet ti Intermittent Stream Pond Revised: Wake Count NC
0 125 250 Revised:
ti Perennial Stream Figure 3: Aquatic Resources Map
2017 NC Statewide Aerial Photouaphs Revised: Sheet 10 of 12

1k % 1. r tTpjjjjM
A
M.1
Lk
J
A 'I"
.1 .. Sk
Aj
4".
l)ate:Febmy2020 __,��T!_Neuselntercep
N C=j Study Area 4w Wetland Map or
acement
CCAROLINA mmmmmmg::� Feet Intermittent Stream Pond Revised: Wake C nty, NC
)ECOSYSTEMS 0 125 250 ti Perennial Stream Revised: Figure 3: Aquatic Resources Map
2017 NC Statewide Revised: Sheet 11 of 12

✓M' � '�' M1 fi -
h'
F
ti �
+� Ik
i r
'j
N Stud Area Wetland Map Date: Febmary 2020 west Neuse Interceptor
Y Rehabilitation and Replacement
EEEmEl==== Feet ti Intermittent Stream Pond Revised: wake County. NC
0 125 250 Revised:
ti Perennial Stream Figure 3: Aquatic Resources Map
2017 NC Statewide Aerial Photouaphs Revised: Sheet 12 of 12

e 1
} 1
1
' 1
r
X
r r
Wc
dr
r
BU .
r
m
r
r
m y Y Y Yr fi
r
r
L f
) ,
AAG • ,AL
1
1
N ry Map Date: Febma2020 West Nense Interceptor
Rehabilitation and Replacement
CAROLINA Feet Reused:
ECOSYSTEMS
0 125 250 0 Study Area Wake County, NC
0
Revised: Figure 4: NRCS Map
Wake County, NC Soil Survey Maps 40, 50, 60,70 Revised: Sheet 1 of 12

z
m
m B
k
—
rfr L '� r
{ LOD ,
A f
LwB
L 4
i ■ J + JJ
f
v U 7 }
45a •- D Lev Du B
U B
7
`y`y m D
- kE
me
LLI
N Map Date: February 2020 West Neuse Interceptor
Rehabilitation and Replacement
1Stud
CAROLINA Feet Revised.
Wake Coun
V NC
ECOSYSTEM! 0 125 250 0 y AY'0a
Revised: Figure 4: NRCS Map
Wake County, NC Soil Survey Maps 40, 50, 60, 70 Revised: Sheet 2 of 12

f
f
Y
m
_ k
• WmB2 �. I
Lo D
ti
Du B
{ 4
M B
I ■ -
J y - ■
r
Lo D
1 R
F■ � 4
I
u
i m
- B U ""I
� •F
IF
r
.� Lwc
N
N Map Date: February 2020 West Neuse Interceptor
Rehabilitation and Replacement
DCAROLINA Feet 0 Study Area Revised:
Wake County, V NC
ECOSYSTEMS 0 125 250
Revised: Figure 4: NRCS Map
Wake County, NC Soil Survey Maps 40, 50, 60,70 Revised: Sheet 3 of 12

ti
VrhB ' IF ,
T•
r
FaB
kE
B
r _
ric m
i
C. r
'5 a `'
f err 7..F
WmZ
V
I m F3
E1
I r
r� f�
kE
N Map Date: Febm ry 2020 West Neuse Interceptor
Rehabilitation and Replacement
AROLINA Feet Revised:
0 Study Area Wake County,NC
ECOSYSTEMS 0 125 250 Revised:
Figure 4: NRCS Map
Wake County, NC Soil Survey Maps 40, 50, 60,70 Revised: Sheet 4 of 12

Lr
kE
m82 1 LwC
M
5
I
�F
T T Ikk ' 7
�Ap D
■
VY
• 4
■ r
■
A P82-r
� � 1
_ k.'
W,6
k E r
L
CO
SL 'r
-s r
pk;z
N Map Date: February 2020 WeSt Neuse Interceptor
Rehabilitation and Replacement
1 AROLINA Feet Revsed:
Wake County, NC
SJ ,GOSYSTEMS 0 125 250 0 Study Area
Revised: Figure 4: NRCS Map
Wake County, NC Soil Survey Maps 40, 50, 60,70 Revised: Sheet 5 of 12

API-04C
AP8 r
v� P y �:
r ,r Y
S
d s I
� IS
- , L.-
� 1
+. •—` �� %
� y
w kS
1
% r 4
ApL wo
APB
f-
J # P D
�.
~L r I
pb
t
P :. Ap L U,
E -
�t6
N Map Date: Febnlary 2020 West Neuse Interceptor
Rehabilitation and Replacement
((�11CAROLINA Feet Reused:
�1'JECOSYSTEMS 0 125 250 0 Study Area Wake County, NC
Revised: Figure 4: NRCS Map
Wake County, NC Soil Survey Maps 40, 50, 60, 70 Revised: Sheet 6 of 12

-� a .�
44
} r r 7
cx
A'
r 4 ti.
r L
• e
LoC,
y
4 f• r�r
�Yyn�jl
r I T •
r
• r t � �p.i P *r
r f ^fir ~ '.r f•
Wn r
{
f ' 1 k E
P8
L r f • ` r ' p
{ ,dL
{
1 7
-�
N Map Dare: Febmary 2020 West Neuse Interceptor
Rehabilitation and Replacement
1CAROLINA -Feet Reused:
Wake County,NC
V �CO$YSTEM$ 0 Study Area 0 125 250
Revised: Figure 4: NRCS Map
Wake County, NC Soil Survey Maps 40, 50, 60,70 Revised: Sheet 7 of 12

1 ti
d.
`r n1 r x
� 5 �
Ro ALi }
•, ` ~ Oa r -
T a
IL
ApD
Auf
n.,
F w r
NPB . yfir!
}• `'O'
DuC
N Map Date: February 2020 West Neuse Interceptor
Rehabilitation and Replacement
0CAROLINA Study Revised,
ECOSYSTEMS 0 125 250 0 y Area Wake Coun NC
Revised: Figure 4: NRCS Map
Wake County, NC Soil Survey Maps 40, 50, 60,70 Revised: Sheet 8 of 12

DuC
f .
LoD
C R
• —
ApB ADD
Wn.
..'
/ .
LI LI '
# i
fj� I r
+ 4
pD
Uj
Wk ET
• Ali
V, p
_ d
p
�•{ w rl .
{ 1 • • ti.• �� it
N Map Date: February 2020 West Neuse Interceptor
:AROLINA
Rehabilitation and Replacement
-Feet Revised- 0 Study Area Wake Coun NC
OGCOSYSTEMS 0 125 250 Revised:
Figure 4: NRCS Map
Wake County, NC Soil Survey Maps 40, 50, 60,70 Revised: Sheet 9 of 12

ApD-
t3OqPOVV
P
r.
Arl*
Np B4)
f +
. o
Ili , Wn
■
WkE
rn
AfA-
J
Ap�h
N Map Date: February 2020 West Neuse Interceptor
Rehabilitation and Replacement
�:AROLINA Feet Revised,
.�CO6YSTEM6 0 125 250 0 Study Area Wake Count NC
Revised: Figure 4: NRCS Map
Wake County, NC Soil Survey Maps 40, 50, 60, 70 Revised: Sheet 10 of 12

� 1
4
i ..• ALL -
i
k�
A ;
WkE
•
l
w
_ a }
N Map Dace: February 2020 West Neuse Interceptor
Rehabilitation and Replacement
�DCAROLINA 0 Stud
Feet Revised:
ECOSYSTEMS 0 125 250 y Area Wake County, NC
Revised: Figure 4: NRCS Map
Wake County, NC Soil Survey Maps 40, 50, 60,70 Revised: Sheet 11 of 12

1
WkE
ApS.
I
p
}
r
■ ;h t
I
N Map Date: February 2020 West Neuse Interceptor
Rehabilitation and Replacement
OCAROLINA Feet Reused:
ECOSYSTEMS 0 125 250 0 Study Area Wake Coun NC
Revised: Figure 4: NRCS Map
Wake County, NC Soil Survey Maps 40, 50, 60,70 Revised: Sheet 12 of 12

NC DW stream Identifica ti(,r1 Form Venjon 4.11 L
Date; ' 41 4- -1 Projocki5its:
Evlu�tar:
Countk: L-8ngibuci:
TOUI �& ej em3:srrStream Deters ml%�kWrcle one) ' Other
ifx 29i tsar feat o 2:: 039rIr -7 Ephemeral n Mnjt%nG PvTenrrlal 4.
r�� r9 or re��r�� � z 3�• i � P � fir. Qwid AGrmw
A. Geumorphology (Subwlal =_
Cord jity of d nannal bed anO Wnk
2, !Sinuas4 of channel along Chalwag
3. In -channel skrudws: ex. dffle,pool, slop -pool,
dppde-p*Ql senSAOce
4. PMICIO W16ofatreem 9uuhairaii,-
5. Act Wreleet flDQ4plalr%
B. ❑apoaltronsl bms or burr. Mrr
T Reoent skro8I deposits
S. Header
53. Ursda ODnINil
10. Natural walleyr
11. Sec*M or greawr order channel _
ar c�I aHdaws ere rtD` raIed set dLcuWdaM In manual
R F fwdrnl onv r 2c:)iF,F xd = r r' 1
Absent
Wmk
PlAudorate
Strang
_
1
G
1"
2
3
G
2
3
4
�
�
2
1
2
3
g
i�
2
i
2
3
1
1.15
.
1
No
Yea=9
12. Presence of Besef7ow
1
0 1 _
2
13. Iron oxidizing bacWfid
2
3
74_ Lest lilt r
115 edimerid -an leafs or debris
O.S
-1
f 5
15. Or err'icc debrirf lines or pan 1 0
D.f�('1.
1.5
1 Spil-bsred Euldenc* of hsigh +++aler tQM? I+fo = 0
'des = �
U. 610100V r;2:iunt=I = — 1 — ---
18. Fibraus roofs in sbeembed
3
Z
1
0
W. Rooted upFand planes on streambW
.11
2
1
b
20. Mscratw t % �nq4r diwersply and abundance),
0
a
1
1
2
2
�
3
_
21. Aquaft Malkssks
2Z Fish
0
ft_3
1
1-5
M Crayflsh
0,5
I 1
1.5
24. Arnphilmn s
26. AI im
26, VffMnd pl*ft in 9MMIJ*d - _-- ---
•pemnnimI Wemm may ahsP #q bcsw�d wing grhrr rFZh7&. $FC r.
0 _ 135 1 1 5
�'. - 0.5 1 1,5
FAGV4 = g.75, OBL = 1, r � 0
a manual. I
Notes , '
-
Skabeh:

lq
N C` DW Q Strca4m ldeolti firstion Form Vle"t60 4A 1
Date: 1 Q '-7 j 1 Pr-Dj u c USho'W I i# { 4 s I.AftWe: . 715, d T
Ewa luator. f County; k.r ft Wqw4 P - U -?+
TOM PiArv�%1 - � . *Btrearn i�ete�lnat]a��e�rcle one} order
3 '69+F� J4G 9t rdet�l intrfc lrry Ephenwra ktr5term ' t Pez*nnaal R 4 o mwni C
it 79 ar wen�r'�M ff} 2&
A. GeamorPtolggy _
ij Cmtinudl or O*nrW bad and dank
2. S►nucwX of channel along
. In.Cn;hnriel *Iruclure: ex. df..k p d. al8p-1>06,
r -0001 SKIM. rl0@ _
4. ParlirJe size or51repm 9?jlj*;Irgt.- r-,
5. Ad %,cJnaIi!;t FaadPIain
. 1Japorwtianal berm aroLkncrtes
F. Racent alluvial dApoerla
U. 4�rrde aantral
10. Natural valleg - --
11. Seeornd argff.LtW 4 rhannel
@rrjficiRi 4111c" are not rum. tee discus i m Ln mua anl
S. Hydrology+ jgypto w & -__ 1
AEient
Weak Mad$rate
Strong
0
I
4
2
3
3
?.
1
2
3
�
1
2
2
�
_
1
0
1_
15
t5
0
_
1
Yes = 3
12. Presar" of Baaefloxw
0
CIV
2
3
T3. Iron z�xOizi'n bacteria
IL 0)
1
2
3
14. Leaf inter
1 5
Gj
0.5
b
15 Sediment on plants or aabis
a
1.5
tik Orgenic debne lines or piles
4
1
1.5
17 Soil-bnod Qwidur'G! of high rater iablB?
No = O
e®= 3
t' RinUwv i.^qi vest.A1 = 10 . 21, 1
I.B. Fibrvua mats In areambed 3
1
0
19• ROQ*d LVW4 plaMS in SireWbed
2
1
0
20. Mowobanthaa {vale dk owty and 43b.iminnoa5
0
1
eV
a
21. uatlo Mallusk9
0
1
2
2
22_ Fish
13
0.8
Is
23 G^ h
2+4. AnP'h"arla
0.5
1
1 �
5. Aloe
1
26. Wettand PWM* In Ore+mW _ E6Z= , M * 1.5 O"ri 0
'pamnnat wdns mmr also ba Id8i51111Ed balrq �&f mum See P. 55 a, manual.
iC KR� Ol l f 510921035

NC AN Stream l-dentifrueoatifm Form Versi" 4.11 may,
Eva luator_ r I~o unlyr-
9ft4v f5 M LO strearrt Ntterminatfon (tircia
�� � a� ram �!et'rrrdLrr;
Ark i-P or paremyaf d a 30• � Ephemsral Interminent ary
Latlh B- Y 1 795-333
LongEtude= - j S, Q ; i 6
ter
S,q. oa8? fQrrw
A. Geoma 21 {:Submal = R
Abawd
0
Weak
1
1
Mcd
2
2
StroruJ
3
1' i arrhnuitp qd 04nmul bed ahank
rrd
as' o�
2. Sinuf nnel &png ihaM+e
D
3. In•ch&mW lure: eY. 6If! &-pm1. 9b�"01,
ri seauence
a
1
3
A. PmrGde sire of 9ream sLog rraw r r
2
3
5. Aciv OrdIct F1
2
3
6. Da am0krud bars or bermes
0
3
7. REOeM allyyrral dUPCSitS
E1 P*adcuts
0
0
_ 1
1
9
2
1
3
1,6
9. Grade oontry
111. Nmtrr!'m1 Wllpp
11 Suand ar •eager order ets umof
w�
Yoe -I-
um u n twa i u3oms arc me ramm; mm a srprci inmanuBl
S. HYdrokvy {Subtotal = i 1
12. Pr*aonce of Basdaw
0
1
P
f3_ Irm ondLmLng bacteria
0
1
3
iA Iof liw
..5
1
0.E
0
S. ;Bedlnrwr on pbants ae cWhes
0.5
L
1.5
16. Orpnlc Iimf# or piles
0
Q.D
1
1.5
17. Sc}- sed evidence Df high wsWctsblO
= 0
Ft _
C. E LNCHd w (5r*t*IW ■ 11) ti
1 Q. Fibrous. *M% Ih 0eambbd
3
1 I
o
19. R m� d uplaw plarrta in atreembed
CID
2
1
_
G
24 rbGWa emhp5 Irig 1p dtYcr4uhy aro m4"ipr+71]
0
1
3
21 Agustrc f,lEo9uaE
1
2
3
2e Fish
0
17.5
1.5
23. i�reieh_
2 Amphibiw,s
0.�
7
1.5
W _
0.5
1
S_S
25. t4
-
t3.5
1
1.5
26. VMIBrd plent6 in etraer- bed FA W * 0,75. QBL s t.5 Olher
'pamrnvl simsms uM Jllib to Imnww L" Dow rmmads See F 3° oI mamal•
NON&s:
Sketch.

5L,
NC DWO stream ldentifcatioo F.Drm Versus 4.11
tmte: I r I
i
Vrq:1ud *. i }- I ��
LOWS; 351 1-7�-j 1 IG 0
Evaluat-Dr; 1
County,
t
Total Polints:
�Irgem �etarnilnatlaii �e4rela ones
rpr
Strrerri s ar.i-as' ind-�r �I
if 2! !9 orrxe r.k,W Vx30-
EpfY@RYel�l lermit�ei�tefi[1�mI
O
Md �ileG
A. o hC (Subtotal = .. .7 1 Absent
gate
stmng
1 Cor4tinulty of channel bed a,d bank ;
3
2. SLnwmrty of channel along -.rio6ftg 1 0
1
3
3, Imcbanrwl stfucture: ex. ririla-pom. ship -pool,
1
2
$
4, Riorucle t5 ft of s spa e
0
S. Aclnre.WictflmdWtm
5. DapGEADnEd here crr berrrhes
0
_
3
0
h
3
S
7. ReCehI anuvLod depCdrkR
i5 Hei uta
0
0
1
2
3
3
Oracle cmiral
_ G.0
0~ _
t N4 = 0
1 1-5
1-5
Yes ■ 3
1 Q- ma u rB , 'gey_
t 1 sewrid of $reWet order OW1110
aniff6al dufret ode ncc rved; sea disuw m in rrwrLW
p. Hrrdroloav fSubtotal = �, . "�7 k
12 1# 4t EO#i4M:w
G
2
3
13. Iran uMizirg beta
1A
1 _
t=�.
2
:3
14. Leai liner
04
0
15. Sediment on R leas or debris
0
L].v
'
1-5
15. Ord dobdi lifts of pi"
.0
1� $_
1
1,�
17. Soil -traced aw dence of high wMar table?
No = 0
1 'Yea =
C. siClwy (Souml = - ?
IF
3
1
1A. Raated u and oanu a i stresmbea
I
"Z4.' MaQcgberftho* QiW= Jimi3i Lr irrd aLu NlhAG6
21. ApuaLu MullusM
2
$
7
2
3
22. Ftsh
1
1-5
23 GMYHO
a
-~ $ -
1
1.6
24. Amplkmm
0.5
26. )AMUmd -pluls in strimimbed _ FACW= 4•7-5: 051.a 1.5,_ oD_�
-perenw s!x%rrtF 3pw aw tQ lim i6eo Luing, fldier mvinodc. See P. 35 or+nanlo
fames•
k i 4!1-r tom,

NC DIKQ Stream I denti ficatioo Form Version 4,11
Date: 1 0 Lj 161
!k.-
Latitu de-
ri+alust-Dr f !: , .
Coun h' #,
LvnQrtudia j
Total Poirm
a knmzr in8ermypa rr r I
Sa,
Stream Cewipinalian jc�-Cle ones
Ep&el ual Wterrn pmnrlial
r
k r7 Oval nemir
I-P e
A. eorwha (SLiMcIal = ' • I
Absent
Wuk
MO-darite
Shwg
1 ` Cominuity of cnannal bed and beak
Q
1
+
�
2. Sinvoalti W gl2innrl along %p6wog
0
1
{_ '2
$
3. In-chmnel gVuclurs: ex riffle-pao4, !$Wp.popl,
rl 1� I tie MM
!
I
2
3
4. Panic* um of�,alrre'arn sLmUwe
1
`2
3
,rl iC—g I�iclfl ri
-D
cfp
2
3
G. Npamional pars or benrhea
.0
$
3
7 R.eC$r51 mluvial deposiW
B Ni3wJ,-utsp
0
rye":
[
1
Y 3
2 3
9. GradB c*nirol
0
5
1 1 5
1 i.fa
1C Malufal va!:ey
11 SeCQn4 sF gr@i0er order channel
'Nc = 1�
Vea 3 3
anifiaal d eg are nrn filed; am as &J" rearwai -
.. P Fi drQ14 $uLM31 d-
1z
13 Iran uxkking b;q tin
0
7
7
3
14. Lasi I .ter
15. S'"irn4rrF 4r, pI51nrs Sir cicl;ris
1.5
0
1
0
1
1$. O anrc debris IIneE a- pilos
0
�C'S
1
1 5
iF oll-Inned e'vkier5ce o1 high w.-alu -ebkr ?
Na = 0
ea = 3 '
C. BI Subtotal
1 B. Fibrous roods in 51re3Lgldcd
.3
! i
0
19. Runted uplBud pl2n1a in 6trearnhad
3
1
20. hLacPDc a-tkm ;rote dI%Fwaxy ar4 WwwWorwj
E
1
2
3
21 AqueG,e hLALLEka
p-
1
2
3
22. Fish ..._
_:�¢-
95
1
1.6 ,
23. QjOi3h
..
0.5
1
1 •t
Phi. Asnphibiene
0
0.5
1
1.4
26 Algae
0
G.8
1 1
2& Vkdend lanm in ak+ftr+ 4
PA p 0.75; (AL = 1 6 C. or=
'r,erenilal 0ru9eG rnap alma to zSuMIM Ldft OTT MWMF M bW p 3!� 91
Notes: M r,.wie-Hi- dp,� yap , �oto,' -�

PHA 0 WQ Ntream lile##lt fkuti(m Form Vioraiam 4, 11
[Utz; Pra}e�atPSlea: , ..] I L#fitudla; ? c71
Evaluator_ b' t.�r r { Ccmty: 4 �' -r- — — Longitude: - t l
Total F*oin#9; SMW +m4naRion �qkr a ava) Other
Stearn r3 d! fe8sr117dL•17r11�QrJt rr,I
�Y ]9 a• mal �+x a lipburneral lnrenmitkE ferennlal Nanw,
A_ C-PaDnlofdhGI00w eMiNrrral = 7 CS f —kh-- nr I Wd#Lk I U„riPFRtA
1", canwudtyr of ehw # bed ar-d hank
0
2. Sinuosity Df --hannel Worog thahAgq
0
1
Y!
-1
`
3. In -channel stn ctjm ex riffle -pool, step-pawl,-
ri le*pool varog
I 0
1
4-_
4. Particle sLzLm or !;ream 3ubbiram
o
.1-�
s .
2
2
3
3
5. Acive4aLet ron pipin U
$. ❑ep;Tilional bars or benches
U
7. Recent elluvrel •depugds
�.
4
2
3
B. Grade conm
0.5
1
1.5
10. Wural uallvyr
1
us
11. Seo4" or g"er doer Chanrwl
Yes * 3
�a oncres ere nm rmnir mto oncii orm 4n manum
B. HvdrolDQY fSubt*tsl = { r ]
12. Bence of Beaeilaw
0
1j
3
13. Iron oxidizb%g hacieria
p
2
3
14. LAP of frfAer
1 5
-�'� =5
0.5
Q
15. Spolmejm m plants ce debris
0
1
1 b
16 Organic dehns Imes orpirag 0
1
1.5
17 Soil ha se d eiri Bnm of high water table? No = g
0
C. B141 Suk$1 1k
18. Fihrcua roots rn streamboa
3 2
1D. RW5&d inland plaft in gr"+gybed
2:0. MscrOtfen%oa {Holt Give sily wd ahuMancsd
0
1
_
21 Aquatr. MolluEks
o
2
3
22 Fi9h
23.rayrfi
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
fl
Q 5
1.5
25. Algae
0 5 _—_ 1 5
- - F�4GU'� _ o -f5. 'OtL = 4.5 Sher = Q
2e ' &-Hand plans in strew- bed
'perermlal Ww-r, avy Wco be ider;u6ed Lm g ether meMoft. Sec V. M rsf me Lw
Sk ct5:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control #. 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT.•
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority: AR335-15, paragraph5-2a)
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Wake Sampling Date: 09/19/19
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: NC Sampling Point: WA Up
Investigator(s): P. Butler Section, Township, Range: Raleigh
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope (%): 0-2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.828148 Long:-78.537813 Datum: WGS 84
Soil Map Unit Name: Wake Soils NWI classification: -
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
Form also represents uplands at WAJ
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 (1314)
_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 (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 (1313)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WA Up
Absolute Dominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1.
Pinus taeda
20 Yes
FAC
Number of Dominant Species
2.
Liquidambarstyraciflua
20 Yes
FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
3.
Carpinus caroliniana
20 Yes
FAC
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Ilex opaca
15 No
FACU
Species Across All Strata: 6 (B)
5.
Ulmus americana
15 No
FACW
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 66.7% (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
90 =Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
45 20% of total cover:
18
OBL species x 1 =
Saplina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species x 2 =
1.
Fagus grandifolia
10 Yes
FACU
FAC species x 3 =
2.
Carpinus caroliniana
10 Yes
FAC
FACU species x 4 =
3.
Ilex opaca
30 Yes
FACU
UPL species x 5 =
4.
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
3 Prevalence Index is !-3.0'
50 =Total Cover
4 Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
25 20% of total cover:
10
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
-Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2.
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3.
4•
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5.
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6
height.
7•
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9
(1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
=Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: WA Up
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-12
10YR 5/4 100 Loamy/Clayey
'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 (S1)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
—Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
—Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions(F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
—Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control #. 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT.•
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority: AR335-15, paragraph5-2a)
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Wake Sampling Date: 09/19/19
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: NC Sampling Point: WA Wet
Investigator(s): M. Harrell Section, Township, Range: Raleigh
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0-2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.828298 Long:-78.537775 Datum: WGS 84
Soil Map Unit Name: Wake Soils NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Form also represents wetland WAJ
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)
X Surface Water (Al) _True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
_Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
X High Water Table (A2) —Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (1310)
X Saturation (A3) X
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
X 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 (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 (1313)
X FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 1
Water Table Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 0
Saturation Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WA Wet
Absolute
Dominant
Indicato
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Species?
Status
1. Salix nigra
15
Yes
OBL
2. Nyssa biflora
20
Yes
FACW
3. Betula nigra
15
Yes
FACW
4. Platanus occidentalis
15
Yes
FACW
5. Acer rubrum
15
Yes
FAC
6. Carpinus caroliniana
10
No
FAC
7.
90
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
45
20% of total cover:
18
Saplina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
1.
Carpinus caroliniana
5
Yes
FAC
2.
Ligustrum sinense
5
Yes
FACU
3.
Ilex opaca
5
Yes
FACU
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
15
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
8
20% of total cover:
3
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
1.
Carex lurida
10
Yes
OBL
2.
Dulichium arundinaceum
10
Yes
OBL
3.
Boehmeria cylindrica
5
Yes
FACW
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
25
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
13
20% of total cover:
5
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30
)
1.
Lonicera japonica
20
Yes
FACU
2.
Smilax rotundifolia
5
Yes
FAC
3.
4.
5.
25
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
13
20% of total cover:
5
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
10 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
13 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
76.9% (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
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
-3 Prevalence Index is !-3.0'
_4 Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
(1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: WA Wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-12 10YR 4/2 95 7.5YR 4/6 5 C PUM Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
'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 (S1)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
—Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
—Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions(F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
—Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Raleigh Sampling Date: 16-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WE up
Investigator(s): P. Butler Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillside Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope: 1.0 % / 0.6 °
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.82064 Long.:-78.53659 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map unit Name: Wn - Wehadkee silt loam 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 O 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
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No Is the Sampled Area Yes ❑ No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain. Form also represents uplands at WB, WC, WD, WF, and WG
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ 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): 0
Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No
Depth (inches): 0
Yes ❑ No
Saturation Present?
Yes ❑ No
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WE uo
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
Liauidambar stvraciflua
35
d❑
46.7%
FAC
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A)
2• Pinus taeda
25❑
33.3%
FAC
d❑
Total Number of Dominant
3, Ulmus americans
15
20.0%
FACW
Species Across All Strata: 6 (B)
4•
0
❑
o.o%
5
0
❑
o.00/o
Percent of dominant Species
❑
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50.0% (A/B)
6.
0
0.00/0
7
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
75
= Total Cover
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
20
d❑
36.4%
FACU
FACW species 15 x 2 = 30
1. Ilex opaca
2• ]unlperusvlralnlana
25
d❑
45.5%
FACU
FAC species 65 x 3 = 195
3• Acer rubrum
5
❑
9.1%
FAC
FACU species 60 x 4 = 240
4, Liaustrumsinense
5
❑
9.1%
FACU
UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
5
0
❑
0.00/0
Column Totals: 140 (A) 465 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.321
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
❑ Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
❑ Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
55
= Total Cover
❑Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
j
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5• 0 ❑ o.00/o
6•
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
El
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
1
0
0.0%
_
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2
0
❑
0.00/0
_
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3
0
El0.0%
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o%
in height.
5•
0
6
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Five Vegetation Strata:
7•
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g•
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12•
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
0
= Total Cover
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1. Lonicera japonica
10
0
100.00/0
FACU
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2.
0
❑
0.00/0
m) in height.
3•
0
❑
0.00/0
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
_ 0
❑
0.00/0
height.
5• 0 ❑ 0.00/0
_
Hydrophytic
6•
0
❑
0.0%
Vegetation
Yes 0 No
10
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

.0
Sampling Point: WE
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 1 Locz `Texture
0-3 10YR 3/3 100 Loam
3-12 7.5YR 5/8 100
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Sandy Clay Loam
zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Dark Surface (S7)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 148)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Wake Sampling Date: 16-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WE wet
Investigator(s): M. Harrell Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Channel (active) Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope: 2.0 %
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.82239 Long.:-78.53846 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map unit Name: Wn - Wehadkee silt loam NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 0 No * (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No 0
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 0
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No 0 Is the Sampled Area Yes * No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No 0 within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain. Form also represents wetlands WD and WG
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
0 Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
0 High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
d❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
d❑ Saturation (A3)
d❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
d❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
0 FAC-neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No 0
Depth (inches): 2
Water Table Present? Yes No 0
Depth (inches): 0
Yes (* No 0
Saturation Present?
Yes No 0
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WE wet
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
Betula nicira
20
d❑
66.7%
FACW
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A)
2• Acer rubrum
10❑
33.3%
FAC
❑
Total Number of Dominant
3
0
0.0%
_
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
4•
0
❑
o.o%
-
5
0
❑
o.00/o
Percent of dominant Species
-
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
7
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
-
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
30
= Total Cover
OBL species 30 x 1 = 30
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
5
0
100.0%
FAC
FACW species 85 x 2 = 170
1. Acer rubrum
2
0
El0.0%
FAC species 15 x 3 = 45
3.
0
❑
0.00/0
FACU species 0 x 4= 0
4.
0
❑
0.0%
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
5
0
❑
0.0%
_
column Totals: 130 (A) 245 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 1.885
7
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
0 Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
0 Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
5
= Total Cover
❑ Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
j
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
5•
0
❑
o.00/o
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6•
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
-
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
0
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
j • Dulichium arundinaceum
25
26.3%
OBL
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2• Phalaris arundinacea
65
0
68.4%
FACW
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3. Carex lurida
5
❑
5.3%
OBL
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o%
in height.
5•
0
6
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Five Vegetation Strata:
7•
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g•
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12•
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
95
=Total Cover
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1
0
El0.0%
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2.
0
❑
0.0%
m) in height.
3.
0
❑
0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
_ 0
❑
0.0%
-
height.
'c
6
0
❑
0.0%
Vegetation
Yes * No 0
0
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

.Q
Sampling Point: WE wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type 1 Locz Texture
0-3 10YR 5/3 100
3-12 10YR 5/1 85 7.5YR 4/6 15 C PL Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil 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)
El Black Histic (A3)
El Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
El Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
0 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 Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
3 Indicators of vegetation and
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
wetland hydrology must be present,
hydrologymust
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No 0
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control #. 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT.•
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority: AR335-15, paragraph5-2a)
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Wake Sampling Date: 09/19/19
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: NC Sampling Point: WF Wet
Investigator(s): P. Butler Section, Township, Range: Raleigh
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0-2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.824706 Long:-78.538668 Datum: WGS 84
Soil Map Unit Name: Cm - Chewacla Soils NWI classification: PEM
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Form also represents wetlands WB and WC
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 (1314)
_Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) —Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (1310)
—Saturation (A3) X
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 (D1)
—Iron Deposits (135)
X Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water-Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
X FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WF Wet
Absolute Dominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1
Number of Dominant Species
2.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
3.
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Species Across All Strata: 4 (B)
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
=Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
OBL species x 1 =
Saplina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
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.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
3 - Prevalence Index is !-3.0'
=Total Cover
_
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
-Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1. Carex lurida
20 Yes
OBL
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2. Microstegium vimineum
60 Yes
FAC
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3. Boehmeria cylindrica 20 Yes FACW
4. Saururus cernuus
10 No
OBL
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5. Onoclea sensibilis
5 No
FACW
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6. Murdannia keisak
20 Yes
OBL
height.
7•
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9
(1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
135 =Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
68 20% of total cover:
27
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: WF Wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-10 10YR 4/2 80 10YR 4/6 20 C PUM Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
10-12 10YR 4/1 75 10YR 4/6 25 C PUM Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
'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 (S1)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
—Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
—Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions(F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
—Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
X Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control #. 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT.•
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority: AR335-15, paragraph5-2a)
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Wake Sampling Date: 09/24/2019
Applicant/Owner: Black and Veatch State: NC Sampling Point: WI Up
Investigator(s): P. Butler Section, Township, Range: N/A
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.817873 Long:-78.537940 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: RkA - Riverview fine sandy loam NWI classification: N/A
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes x No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes x No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No X Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
Form also represents uplands at WH and WJ
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 (1314)
_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 (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 (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 X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WI Up
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1.
Juglans nigra
25
Yes
FACU
Number of Dominant Species
2.
Acer rubrum
40
Yes
FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
3.
Carya glabra
20
Yes
FACU
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Species Across All Strata: 8 (B)
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50.0% (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
85
=Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
43
20% of total cover:
17
OBL species x 1 =
Saplina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species x 2 =
1.
Ligustrum sinense
40
Yes
FACU
FAC species x 3 =
2.
Carya glabra
10
Yes
FACU
FACU species x 4 =
3.
UPL species x 5 =
4.
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
3 Prevalence Index is !-3.0'
50
=Total Cover
4 Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
25
20% of total cover:
10
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
-Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1.
Microstegium vimineum
25
Yes
FAC
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2.
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3.
4•
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5.
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6
height.
7•
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9
(1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
25
=Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
13
20% of total cover:
5
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1.
Vitis rotundifolia
10
Yes
FAC
2.
Toxicodendron radicans
5
Yes
FAC
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
15
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
8
20% of total cover:
3
Present? Yes No X
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: WI Up
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-12 7.5YR 6/6 100 Loamy/Clayey
12-18 7.5YR 6/4 90 7.5YR 5/8 10 C M Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
'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 (S1)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
—Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
—Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions(F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
—Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control #. 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT.•
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority: AR335-15, paragraph5-2a)
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Wake Sampling Date: 09/24/19
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: NC Sampling Point: WI Wet
Investigator(s): M. Harrell Section, Township, Range: Raleigh
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): depression Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0-2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.824706 Long:-78.538668 Datum: WGS 84
Soil Map Unit Name: Wn - Wehadkee silt loam NWI classification: PEM
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Abnormally dry / drought conditions. Form also represents wetlands WH and WJ
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 (1314)
_Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) —Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (1310)
—Saturation (A3) X
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 (D1)
—Iron Deposits (135)
X Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water-Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
X FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WI Wet
Absolute Dominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1
Number of Dominant Species
2.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
3.
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Species Across All Strata: 4 (B)
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
=Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
OBL species x 1 =
Saplina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
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.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
3 - Prevalence Index is !-3.0'
=Total Cover
_
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
-Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1. Carex lurida
20 Yes
OBL
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2. Microstegium vimineum
60 Yes
FAC
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3. Boehmeria cylindrica 20 Yes FACW
4. Saururus cernuus
10 No
OBL
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5. Onoclea sensibilis
5 No
FACW
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6. Murdannia keisak
20 Yes
OBL
height.
7•
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9
(1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
135 =Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
68 20% of total cover:
27
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: WI Wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-10 10YR 4/2 80 10YR 4/6 20 C PUM Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
10-12 10YR 4/1 75 10YR 4/6 25 C PUM Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
'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 (S1)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
—Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
—Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions(F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
—Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
X Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control #. 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT.•
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority: AR335-15, paragraph5-2a)
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Wake Sampling Date: 10/17/2019
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: NC Sampling Point: WM Up
Investigator(s): M. Harrell Section, Township, Range: N/A
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): Convex Slope (%): 2-5
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.804154 Long:-78.539315 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: WaE Wake- Rolesville Complex NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
Form also represents uplands at WK, WL, and WN
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 (1314)
_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 (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 (1313)
X FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
x Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
x Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
x Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WM Up
Absolute
Dominant
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Species?
1. Pinus taeda
15
Yes
2. Quercus phellos
25
Yes
3. Liquidambar styraciflua
10
Yes
4.
5.
6.
7.
,iaicaior
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
FAC
Number of Dominant Species
FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
6 (A)
FAC
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
7 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
85.7% (A/B)
50
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
25
20% of total cover:
10
Saplina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
1.
Taxodium distichum
15
Yes
OBL
2.
Platanus occidentalis
5
No
FACW
3.
Quercus phellos
10
Yes
FAC
4.
Liquidambar styraciflua
5
No
FAC
5.
Acer rubrum
5
No
FAC
6.
7.
8.
9.
40
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
20
20% of total cover:
8
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30
)
1.
Lonicera japonica
15
Yes
FACU
2.
Smilax rotundifolia
15
Yes
FAC
3.
4.
5.
30
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
15
20% of total cover:
6
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
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
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is !-3.0'
_4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
(1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: WM Up
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-12
10YR 5/8 100 Loamy/Clayey Disturbed/mixed matrix
'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 (S1)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
—Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
—Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions(F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
—Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control #. 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT.•
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority: AR335-15, paragraph5-2a)
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Wake Sampling Date: 10/17/2019
Applicant/Owner: Black and Veatch State: NC Sampling Point: WM wet
Investigator(s): P. Butler Section, Township, Range: N/A
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 2-5%
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.805452 Long:-78.539712 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: ChA- Chewacla and Wehadkee Soils NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes x No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes x No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes x No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
—Surface Soil Cracks (136)
x Surface Water (Al) _True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
_Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
x High Water Table (A2) —Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (Cl)
x Drainage Patterns (1310)
x Saturation (A3) x
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 (D1)
—Iron Deposits (135)
x Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water-Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
x FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
x Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
x Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
x Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Surface water present within wetland but not at location where form completed.
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WM wet
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1.
Acer rubrum
40
Yes
FAC
Number of Dominant Species
2.
Taxodium distichum
30
Yes
OBL
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 7 (A)
3.
Betula nigra
15
No
FACW
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Species Across All Strata: 8 (B)
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 87.5% (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
85
=Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
43
20% of total cover:
17
OBL species 125 x 1 = 125
Saplina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species 40 x 2 = 80
1.
Betula nigra
25
Yes
FACW
FAC species 60 x 3 = 180
2.
Taxodium distichum
20
Yes
OBL
FACU species 5 x 4 = 20
3.
UPL species 5 x 5 = 25
4.
Column Totals: 235 (A) 430 (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 1.83
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
X 3 - Prevalence Index is !-3.0'
45
=Total Cover
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
23
20% of total cover:
9
_
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
-Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1.
Carex lurida
30
Yes
OBL
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2.
AA rdannia keisak
15
No
OBL
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3. Eupatorium capillifolium 5 No FACU
4.
Typha latifolia
30
Yes
OBL
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5.
Microstegium vimineum
20
Yes
FAC
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6
height.
7•
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9
(1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
100
=Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
50
20% of total cover:
20
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1.
Wisteria sinensis
5
Yes
UPL
2.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
5
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
3
20% of total cover:
1
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: WM wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-4 10YR 4/3 100 Loamy/Clayey
4-12 10YR 4/1 60 7.5YR 4/6 40 C PUM Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
'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 (S1)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
—Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
—Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions(F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
—Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
X Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Raleigh Sampling Date: 16-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: Wo up
Investigator(s): P. Butler Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillside Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope: 1.0 % / 0.6 °
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.80317 Long.:-78.54005 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Wo - Wehadkee and Bibb soils 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 O 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 ❑
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No Is the Sampled Area Yes ❑ No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain. Form also represents uplands at WP and WQ
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ 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): 0
Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No
Depth (inches): 0
Yes ❑ No
Saturation Present?
Yes ❑ No
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WO uo
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
Liquidambar stvraciflua
40
d❑
53.3%
FAC
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A)
2• Prunus avium
10
❑
13.3%
UPL
d❑
Total Number of Dominant
3• Pinus taeda
15
20.0%
FAC
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
4• Platanus occidentalis
10
❑
13.3%
FACW
5
0
❑
o.00/o
Percent of dominant Species
❑
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 60.0% (A/B)
6.
0
0.00/0
7
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
75
= Total Cover
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
50
d❑
71.4%
FACU
FACW species 10 x 2 = 20
1. Ligustrum sinense
2• Llguldambarstvraclflua
20
d❑
28.6%
FAC
FAC species 75 x 3 = 225
3
0
❑
0.00/0
FACU species 80 x 4 = 320
4
0
❑
0.0%
_
UPL species 10 x 5 = 50
5
0
❑
0.00/0
Column Totals: 175 (A) 615 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.514
7
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
0 Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
❑ Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
70
= Total Cover
❑Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
j
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5• 0 ❑ o.00/o
6•
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
El
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
1
0
0.0%
_
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2
0
❑
0.00/0
_
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3
0
El0.0%
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o%
in height.
5•
0
6
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Five Vegetation Strata:
7•
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g•
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12•
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
0
= Total Cover
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1. Lonicera japonica
30
0
100.00/0
FACU
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2.
_ 0
❑
0.0%
m) in height.
3•
_ 0
❑
0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
_ 0
❑
0.00/0
height.
5• 0 ❑ 0.00/0
_
Hydrophytic
6•
_ 0
❑
0.0%
Vegetation
Yes * No 0
30
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

Sampling Point: yyo
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 1 Locz `Texture
0-12 10YR 5/3 100 Sandy Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated 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 (All)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
❑ Dark Surface (S7)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 148)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Wake Sampling Date: 16-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WO wet
Investigator(s): M. Harrell Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope: 2.0 %
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.:-78.53918 Long.:-78.53918 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Wo - Wehadkee and Bibb soils NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 0 No * (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No 0
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 0
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No 0 Is the Sampled Area Yes * No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No 0 within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain.
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
d❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
0 FAC-neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No
Depth (inches): 0
Water Table Present? Yes 0 No
Depth (inches): 0
Yes (* No 0
Saturation Present?
Yes 0 No
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WO wet
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
Taxodium distichum
50
d❑
55.6%
OBL
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A)
2• Acer rubrum
30❑
33.3%
FAC
❑
Total Number of Dominant
3• Platanus occidentalis
10
11.1%
FACW
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
4•
0
❑
o.o%
5
0
❑
o.00/o
Percent of dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
7
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
-
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
90
= Total Cover
OBL species 100 x 1 = 100
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
5
d❑
100.0%
FAC
FACW species 10 x 2 = 20
1. Acer rubrum
2
0
❑
0.00/0
FAC species 50 x 3 = 150
3
0
❑
0.00/0
FACU species 5 x 4 = 20
4
0
❑
0.0%
-
-
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
5
0
❑
0.o%
_
Column Totals: 165 (A) 290 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 1.758
7
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
0 Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
0 Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
5
= Total Cover
❑ Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
j
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
5•
0
❑
o.00/o
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6•
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
-
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
d❑
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
j • Carex lurida
50
90.9%
OBL
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2• Ascleplas exaltata
5
❑
9.1%
FACU
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3
0
El0.0%
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o%
in height.
5•
0
6
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Five Vegetation Strata:
7•
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g•
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12•
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
55
=Total Cover
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1. Smilax rotundifolia
15
0
100.0%
FAC
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2•
0
❑
0.0%
m) in height.
3•
0
❑
0.00/0
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
_ 0
❑
0.0%
-
height.
Hydrophytic
6•
0
❑
0.00/0
Vegetation
Yes * No ❑
15
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

.Q
Sampling Point: WO wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
—(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type 1 Locz `Texture
0-4 10YR 4/4 95 7.5YR 4/4 5 C M Clay Loam
4-12 10YR 4/3 70 7.5YR 4/6 30 C M Clay Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil 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)
El Black Histic (A3)
El Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
El Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
❑ 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 Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
0 Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
3 Indicators of vegetation and
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
wetland hydrology must be present,
hydrologymust
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No 0
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Wake Sampling Date: 16-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WP wet
Investigator(s): M. Harrell Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope: 2.0 %
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.79956 Long.:-78.54128 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Cm- Chewacla soils NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 0 No * (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No 0
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 0
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No 0 Is the Sampled Area Yes * No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No 0 within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain. Form also represents wetland WQ
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
0 High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
0 Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
d❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
d❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
0 FAC-neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No
Depth (inches): 0
Water Table Present? Yes No 0
Depth (inches): 1
Yes (* No 0
Saturation Present?
Yes No 0
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WP wet
JpC{:IC,:
Absolute
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Cover
Status
1.
Acer rubrum
30
d❑ 33.39/6
FAC
2.
Betula niara
20
❑ 22.29/6
FACW
3.
Nyssa sylvatica
20
d❑ 22.29/6
FAC
4.
Carpinus caroliniana
15
❑ 16.79/6
FAC
5.
Magnolia virginiana
5
❑ 5.69/6
FACW
6.
0
❑ o.o%
7.
0
❑ o.o%
8.
0
❑ 0.0%
90
= Total Cover
Sapling-Saplina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
1. Acer rubrum
10
2. Llaustrum slnense
25
3. Carpinus carollnlana
10
4.
0
5.
0
6.
0
7
0
8
0
g
0
10.
0
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
45
1.
0
2.
0
3.
0
4.
0
5.
0
6.
0
7
0
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
0
1 . Dulichium arundinaceum
65
2. Microsteaium vimineum
10
3.
0
4.
0
5.
0
6.
0
7.
0
8
0
9.
0
10.
0
11.
0
12.
0
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
75
1. Smilax rotundifolia
15
2. Vitis rotundifolia
10
3.
0
4.
0
5.
_ 0
6.
_ 0
25
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
d❑ 22.2% FAC
d❑ 55.6% FACU
d❑ 22.2% FAC
❑ 0.0% _
❑ o.o%
❑ o.o%
❑ o.o%
❑ 0.0%
❑ 0.0%
❑ 0.0%
= Total Cover
❑ 0.0%
❑ 0.0%
❑ o.o%
❑ 0.0%
❑ o.o% _
❑ o.o% _
❑ o.o%
= Total Cover
d❑ 86.7% OBL
❑ 13.3% FAC
❑ 0.0% _
❑ o.o% _
❑ 0.0% _
❑ o.o% _
❑ o.o% _
❑ 0.0% _
❑ 0.0% _
❑ o.o% _
❑ 0.0% _
❑ o.o%
= Total Cover`
d❑ 60.09/6 FAC
❑ 40.09/6 FAC
❑ 0.0% _
❑ 0.0% _
❑ o.o% _
❑ 0.0% _
= Total Cover
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
8
(A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
9
(B)
Percent of dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
$$•9%
(A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply
by:
OBL species 65
x 1 =
65
FACW species 25
x 2 =
50
FAC species 120
x 3 =
360
FACU species 25
x 4 =
100
UPL species 0
x 5 =
0
Column Totals: 235
(A)
575
(B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
2.447
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
d❑ Dominance Test is > 50%
d❑ Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
❑ Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
regardless of height.
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
in height.
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 stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
m) in height.
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes * No ❑
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

.Q
Sampling Point: WP wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
—(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type 1 Locz `Texture
0-6 10YR 4/2 70 7.5YR 4/6 30 C M Clay Loam
6-12 10YR 4/1 70 7.5YR 4/6 30 C M Clay Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil 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)
El Black Histic (A3)
El Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
El Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
0 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 Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
3 Indicators of vegetation and
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
wetland hydrology must be present,
hydrologymust
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No 0
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control #. 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT.•
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority: AR335-15, paragraph5-2a)
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Wake Sampling Date: 10/17/2019
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: NC Sampling Point: WR Up
Investigator(s): P. Butler Section, Township, Range: N/A
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): Convex Slope (%): 2-5
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.795795 Long:-78.542962 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: WaE- Wake Rolesville Complex NWI classification: N/A
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
Form also represents uplands at WS
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 (1314)
_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 (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 (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 X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WR Up
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1.
Pinus taeda
30
Yes
FAC
Number of Dominant Species
2.
Quercus nigra
30
Yes
FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A)
3.
Liquidambarstyraciflua
30
Yes
FAC
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Species Across All Strata: 7 (B)
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 71.4% (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
90
=Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
45
20% of total cover:
18
OBL species x 1 =
Saplina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species x 2 =
1.
Quercus phellos
15
No
FAC
FAC species x 3 =
2.
Carpinus caroliniana
40
Yes
FAC
FACU species x 4 =
3.
Ulmus americana
30
Yes
FACW
UPL species x 5 =
4.
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
3 - Prevalence Index is !-3.0'
85
=Total Cover
_
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
43
20% of total cover:
17
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
-Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1.
Ligustrum sinense
30
Yes
FACU
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2.
Acerrubrum
5
No
FAC
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3.
4•
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5.
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6
height.
7•
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9
(1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
35
=Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
18
20% of total cover:
7
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1.
Lonicera japonica
5
Yes
FACU
2.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
5
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
3
20% of total cover:
1
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: WR Up
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-12
10YR 5/6 100 Loamy/Clayey
'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 (S1)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
—Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
—Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions(F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
—Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control #. 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT.•
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority: AR335-15, paragraph5-2a)
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Wake Sampling Date: 10/17/2019
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: NC Sampling Point: WR wet
Investigator(s): M. Harrell Section, Township, Range: N/A
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): crenulation Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0-2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.796955 Long:-78.542473 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: ChA NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes x No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes x No
Remarks:
Form also represents wetland WS
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)
X Surface Water (Al) _True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
_Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
X High Water Table (A2) —Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (1310)
X Saturation (A3) X
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)
X Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (134) _Other
(Explain in Remarks)
_Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
—Iron Deposits (135)
X Geomorphic Position (D2)
X Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
X Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
X FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 6
Saturation Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 4
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Surface water present within wetland but not at point where form completed.
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WR wet
Absolute Dominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1. Liquidambarstyraciflua
30 Yes
FAC
Number of Dominant Species
2. Platanus occidentalis
10 Yes
FACW
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 6 (A)
3. Acerrubrum
5 No
FAC
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Species Across All Strata: 6 (B)
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
45 =Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
23 20% of total cover:
9
OBL species x 1 =
Saplina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species x 2 =
1. Platanus occidentalis
5 Yes
FACW
FAC species x 3 =
2.
FACU species x 4 =
3.
UPL species x 5 =
4.
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
3 - Prevalence Index is !-3.0'
5 =Total Cover
_
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
3 20% of total cover:
1
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1. Persicaria pensylvanica
20 Yes
FACW
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2. Carex lurida
15 Yes
OBL
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3. Dulichium arundinaceum 15 Yes OBL
4•
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5.
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6
height.
7•
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9
(1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
50 =Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
25 20% of total cover:
10
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: WR wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-12 10YR 4/2 80 7.5YR 4/6 20 C PUM Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
'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 (S1)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
—Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
—Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions(F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
—Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
X Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Raleigh Sampling Date: 16-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WT up
Investigator(s): P. Butler Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope: 1.0 % / 0.6 °
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.85922 Long.:-78.54005 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map unit Name: Ro - Roanoke fine sandy loam NWI classification: -
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes * No O (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No O
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 O
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No Is the Sampled Area Yes O No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O No within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain. Form also represents uplands at WU
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ 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 O No
Depth (inches): 0
Water Table Present? Yes O No
Depth (inches): 0
Yes O No
Saturation Present?
Yes O No
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WT uo
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: _ )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 • Ouercus rubra
25
d❑
31.3%
FACU
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
2. Liguidambar stvraciflua
25❑
31.3%
FAC
❑
Total Number of Dominant
3. Betula nicira
10
12.5%
FACW
Species Across All Strata: 7 (B)
4. Facius cirandifolia
20
d❑
25.0%
FACU
5
0
❑
0.00/0
Percent of dominant Species
❑
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 57.1% (A/B)
6.
0
0.00/0
7
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
80
= Total Cover
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
20
d❑
44.4%
FACU
FACW species 20 x 2 = 40
1 • Ilex opaca
2. Llrlodendrontullplfera
5
❑
11.1%
FACU
FAC species 45 x 3 = 135
3. Acer rubrum
10
d❑
22.2%
FAC
FACU species 70 x 4 = 280
4. Ulmusamericana
10
d❑
22.2%
FACW
UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
5
0
❑
0.0%
Column Totals: 135 (A) 455 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.370
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
0 Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
❑ Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
45
= Total Cover
❑Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
j
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5. 0 ❑ o.00/o
6.
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
El
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
1
0
0.0%
_
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2
0
❑
0.00/0
_
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3
0
El0.0%
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o%
in height.
5.
0
6
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Five Vegetation Strata:
7.
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g.
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12.
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
0
= Total Cover
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1 Vitis rotundifolia
10
0
100.0%
FAC
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
•
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2.
0
❑
0.0%
m) in height.
3.
0
❑
0.00/0
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
_ 0
❑
0.00/0
height.
5. 0 ❑ 0.00/0
_
Hydrophytic
6.
0
❑
0.00/0
Vegetation
Yes * No 0
10
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

Sampling Point: WT
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 1 Locz `Texture
0-12 10YR 5/4 100 Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated 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 (All)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
❑ Dark Surface (S7)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 148)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Wake Sampling Date: 16-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WT wet
Investigator(s): M. Harrell Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope: 2.0 %
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.79200 Long.:-78.53848 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map unit Name: Ro - Roanoke fine sandy loam NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 0 No * (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No 0
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 0
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No 0 Is the Sampled Area Yes * No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No 0 within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain. Form also represents wetland WU
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
0 Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
0 High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
0 Saturation (A3)
d❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
d❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
d❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
0 FAC-neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No 0
Depth (inches): 2
Water Table Present? Yes No 0
Depth (inches): 0
Yes (* No 0
Saturation Present?
Yes No 0
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WT wet
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
Acer rubrum
75
d❑
83.3%
FAC
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A)
2• Betula nigra
5
❑
5.60/6
FACW
❑
Total Number of Dominant
3• Salix nigra
5
5.60/6
OBL
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
4• Liquidambar styraciflua
5
❑
5.6%
FAC
5
0
❑
0.00/0
Percent of dominant Species
-
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
7
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
-
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
90
= Total Cover
OBL species 35 x 1 = 35
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
15
d❑
50.0%
FAC
FACW species 5 x 2 = 10
1. Acer rubrum
2• Morelia cerlfera
15
d❑
50.0%
FAC
FAC species 125 x 3 = 375
3.
0
❑
0.0%
FACU species 0 x 4= 0
4.
0
❑
0.0%
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
5
0
❑
0.00/0
Column Totals: 165 (A) 420 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.545
7
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
0 Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
0 Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
30
= Total Cover
❑Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
j
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
5•
0
❑
o.00/o
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6•
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
-
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
d❑
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
j • Dulichium arundinaceum
25
83.3%
OBL
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2• Carex lurida
5
❑
16.7%
OBL
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3
0
El0.0%
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o%
in height.
5•
0
6
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Five Vegetation Strata:
7•
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g•
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12•
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
30
=Total Cover
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1. Smilax rotundifolia
15
0
100.0%
FAC
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2•
0
❑
0.0%
m) in height.
3•
0
❑
0.00/0
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
_ 0
❑
0.0%
-
height.
Hydrophytic
6•
0
❑
0.00/0
Vegetation
Yes * No ❑
15
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

.Q
Sampling Point: WT wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
—(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type 1 Locz `Texture
0-4 10YR 3/2 100 Loam
4-12 10YR 5/2 75 7.5YR 4/6 25 C PL Sandy Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil 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)
El Black Histic (A3)
El Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
El Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
0 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 Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
3 Indicators of vegetation and
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
wetland hydrology must be present,
hydrologymust
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No 0
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Raleigh Sampling Date: 16-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WW up
Investigator(s): P. Butler Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope: 1.0 % / 0.6 °
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.77911 Long.:-78.53789 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map unit Name: Wn - Wehadkee silt loam 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 O 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 ❑
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No Is the Sampled Area Yes ❑ No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain. Form also represents uplands at WV
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ 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): 0
Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No
Depth (inches): 0
Yes ❑ No
Saturation Present?
Yes ❑ No
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WW uo
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 , Pinus taeda
40
d❑
57.1%
FAC
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 6 (A)
2• Platanus occidentalis
10
❑
14.3%
FACW
d❑
Total Number of Dominant
3• Acer rubrum
20
28.6%
FAC
Species Across All Strata: 8 (B)
4•
0
❑
o.o%
5
0
❑
o.00/o
Percent of dominant Species
❑
_
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 75.0% (A/B)
6.
0
0.00/0
7
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
70
= Total Cover
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
15
d❑
20.0%
FACU
FACW species 30 x 2 = 60
1. Fagus grandifolia
2• Acer rubrum
20
d❑
26.7%
FAC
FAC species 140 x 3 = 420
3• Carpinuscarollnlana
30
d❑
40.0%
FAC
FACU species 25 x 4 = 100
4, Ouercus nigra
10
❑
13.3%
FAC
UPL species 0 x 5 - 0
5
0
❑
0.0%
Column Totals: 195 (A) 580 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.974
7
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
0 Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
0 Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
75
= Total Cover
❑Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
j
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5• 0 ❑ o.00/o
6•
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
_
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
d❑
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
1 • Arundinaria gigantea
20
100.0%
FACW
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2•
0
❑
0.00/0
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3
0
El0.0%
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o%
in height.
5•
0
6
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Five Vegetation Strata:
7•
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g•
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12•
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
20
=Total Cover
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1. Smilax rotundifolia
20
0
66.7%
FAC
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2. Lonicera iaponica
10❑
33.3%
FACU
m) in height.
3•
0
❑
0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
0
❑
0.00/0
height.
5• 0 ❑ 0.00/0
_
Hydrophytic
6•
_ 0
❑
0.0%
Vegetation
Yes * No 0
30
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

Sampling Point: yyyy u
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 1 Locz `Texture
0-12 10YR 5/4 100 Clay Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated 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 (All)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
❑ Dark Surface (S7)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 148)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Wake Sampling Date: 16-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WW wet
Investigator(s): M. Harrell Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Bench Local relief (concave, convex, none): flat Slope: 0.0 % / 0.0 °
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.78159 Long.:-78.53832 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map unit Name: Wn - Wehadkee silt loam NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 0 No * (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No 0
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 0
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No 0 Is the Sampled Area Yes * No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No 0 within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain. Form also represents wetland WV
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
0 High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
0 Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
d❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
0 FAC-neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No
Depth (inches): 0
Water Table Present? Yes No 0
Depth (inches): 10
Yes (* No 0
Saturation Present?
Yes No 0
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 8
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WW wet
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 , Betula nicira
5
d❑
50.0%
FACW
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A)
2• Acer rubrum
5❑
50.0%
FAC
❑
Total Number of Dominant
3
0
0.0%
_
Species Across All Strata: 4 (B)
4•
0
❑
o.o%
-
5
0
❑
o.00/o
Percent of dominant Species
❑
-
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 75.0% (A/B)
6.
0
0.00/0
-
7
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
-
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
10
= Total Cover
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species 15 x 2 = 30
1. Ligustrum sinense
25
0
100.0%
FACU
2.
0
❑
0.00/0
FAC species 5 x 3 = 15
3
0
❑
0.00/0
FACU species 25 x 4 = 100
4
0
❑
0.0%
-
-
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
5
0
❑
0.0%
_
Column Totals: 45 (A) 145 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.222
7.
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
0 Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
❑ Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
25
= Total Cover
❑Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
j
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
5•
0
❑
o.00/o
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6•
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
-
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
0
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
1 • Arundinaria tecta
10
100.0%
FACW
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2•
0
❑
0.00/0
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3
0
El0.0%
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o%
in height.
5•
0
6
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Five Vegetation Strata:
7•
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g•
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12•
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
10
=Total Cover
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1
0
❑
0.000
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2.
0
❑
0.00/0
m) in height.
3.
0
❑
0.00/0
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
_ 0
❑
0.00/0
height.
5• 0 ❑ 0.00/0
_
'c
6
0
❑
0.0%
Vegetation
Yes * No 0
0
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

.Q
Sampling Point: WW wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
Redox Features
—(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist) % Type 1 Locz
`Texture
0-3
10YR 3/3
100
Sandy Loam
3-6
10YR 5/4
80
7.5YR 4/6 20 C M
Sand
6-12
10YR 4/2
80
7.5YR 4/6 20 C M
Sandy Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil 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)
El Black Histic (A3)
El Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
El Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
0 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 Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
3 Indicators of vegetation and
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
wetland hydrology must be present,
hydrologymust
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No 0
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control #. 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT.•
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority: AR335-15, paragraph5-2a)
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Wake Sampling Date: 10/18/2019
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: NC Sampling Point: WY Wet
Investigator(s): M. Harrell Section, Township, Range: N/A
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): crenulation Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 0-2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.779215 Long:-78.538540 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: ChA Chewacla and Wehadkee loam NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Abnormally Dry Conditions. Form also represents WX, WZ, and WAA
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 (1314)
_Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) —Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (1310)
_Saturation (A3) X
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
X 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)
X 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)
X Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water-Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
X FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WY Wet
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1.
Ulmus americana
20
Yes
FACW
Number of Dominant Species
2.
Acer rubrum
45
Yes
FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 11 (A)
3.
Carpinus caroliniana
35
Yes
FAC
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Species Across All Strata: 12 (B)
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 91.7% (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
100
=Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
50
20% of total cover:
20
OBL species x 1 =
Saplina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species x 2 =
1.
Acer rubrum
10
Yes
FAC
FAC species x 3 =
2.
Ulmus americana
5
Yes
FACW
FACU species x 4 =
3.
Carpinus caroliniana
5
Yes
FAC
UPL species x 5 =
4.
Ligustrum sinense
5
Yes
FACU
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
3 Prevalence Index is !-3.0'
25
=Total Cover
4 Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
13
20% of total cover:
5
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
-Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1.
Carex lurida
15
Yes
OBL
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2.
Boehmeria cylindrica
5
Yes
FACW
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3. Dulichium arundinaceum 5 Yes OBL
4
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5.
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6
height.
7•
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9
(1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
25
=Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
13
20% of total cover:
5
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1.
Smilax rotundifolia
30
Yes
FAC
2.
Toxicodendron radicans
10
Yes
FAC
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
40
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
20
20% of total cover:
8
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: WY Wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-6 10YR 4/4 85 2.5YR 3/6 15 C PUM Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
6-12 10YR 5/1 85 7.5YR 4/6 15 C PUM Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
'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 (S1)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
—Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
—Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions(F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
—Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Raleigh Sampling Date: 16-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WAD up
Investigator(s): P. Butler Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope: 1.0 % / 0.6 °
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.78002 Long.:-78.53808 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map unit Name: Wn - Wehadkee silt loam 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 O 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 ❑
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No Is the Sampled Area Yes ❑ No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain. Form also represents uplands at WX, WY, WZ, WAA, WAB, WAC, WAE, and WAF
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ 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): 0
Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No
Depth (inches): 0
Yes ❑ No
Saturation Present?
Yes ❑ No
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WAD uD
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
Pinus taeda
40
d❑
47.1%
FAC
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
2• Pinus strobus
35❑
41.2%
FACU
El11.8%
Total Number of Dominant
3, Betula nigra
10
FACW
Species Across All Strata: 6 (B)
4•
0
❑
o.o%
5
0
❑
o.00/o
Percent of dominant Species
❑
_
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 66.7% (A/B)
6.
0
0.00/0
7
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
85
= Total Cover
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species 20 x 2 = 40
1. Carpinus caroliniana
15
❑
15.8%
FAC
2• Nyssa sylvatica
30
d❑
31.6%
FAC
FAC species 115 x 3 = 345
3• Acer rubrum
20
d❑
21.1%
FAC
FACU species 55 x 4 = 220
4, Liciustrumsinense
20
d❑
21.1%
FACU
UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
5, Platanus occidentalis
10
❑
10.5%
FACW
Column Totals: 190 (A) 605 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.184
7
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
0 Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
❑ Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
95
= Total Cover
❑Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
j
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5• 0 ❑ o.00/o
6•
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
El
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
1
0
0.0%
_
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2
0
❑
0.00/0
_
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3
0
El0.0%
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o%
in height.
5•
0
6
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Five Vegetation Strata:
7•
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g•
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12•
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
0
= Total Cover
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1. Vitis rotundifolia
10
0
100.0%
FAC
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2•
0
❑
0.0%
m) in height.
3•
0
❑
0.00/0
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
_ 0
❑
0.00/0
height.
5• 0 ❑ 0.00/0
_
Hydrophytic
6•
0
❑
0.00/0
Vegetation
Yes * No 0
10
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

Sampling Point: WAD
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 1 Locz `Texture
0-12 10YR 5/4 100 Clay Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated 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 (All)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
❑ Dark Surface (S7)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 148)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Wake Sampling Date: 16-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WAD wet
Investigator(s): M. Harrell Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Lowland Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope: 2.0 %
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.77722 Long.:-78.53914 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: WN - Wehadkee silt loam NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes * No O (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No O
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 O
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No O Is the Sampled Area Yes * No O
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No O within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain. Form also represents wetland WAB
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
0 Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
0 High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
0 Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
d❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
0 FAC-neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No O
Depth (inches): 2
Water Table Present? Yes No O
Depth (inches): 0
Yes (* No O
Saturation Present?
Yes No O
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WAD wet
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
Pinus taeda
35
d❑
46.7%
FAC
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 7 (A)
2•
Pinus serotina
20❑
26.7%
OBL
d❑
-
Total Number of Dominant
3•
Salix nicira
15
20.0%
OBL
Species Across All Strata: 8 (B)
4•
Acer rubrum
5
❑
6.7%
FAC
5
0
❑
o.00/o
Percent of dominant Species
❑
-
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 87.5% (A/B)
6.
0
0.00/0
-
7
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
-
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
75
= Total Cover
OBL species 63.7 x 1 = 63.7
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
45
d❑
56.3%
FAC
FACW species 33.3 x 2 = 66.6
1.
Pinus taeda
2•
Llguldambarstyraclflua
25
d❑
31.3%
FAC
FAC species 206.5 x 3 = 619.5
3•
Morelia cerlfera
10
❑
12.5%
FAC
FACU species 0 x 4 = 0
4
0
❑
0.0%
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
5
0
❑
0.00/0
Column Totals: 303.5 (A) 749.8 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.470
7
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
0 Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
0 Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
80
= Total Cover
❑Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
j
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5• 0 ❑ o.00/o
6•
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
-
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
d❑
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
j •
Microstegium vimineum
30
50.0%
FAC
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2•
]uncus effusus
20
d❑
33.3%
FACW
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3.
Carex lurida
10
❑
16.7%
OBL
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o%
in height.
5•
0
6
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Five Vegetation Strata:
7•
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g•
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12•
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
60
=Total Cover
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1.
Lonicera japonica
10
0
100.00/0
FACU
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2.
0
❑
0.00/0
m) in height.
3•
0
❑
0.00/0
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
_ 0
❑
0.0%
-
height.
Hydrophytic
6•
0
❑
0.0%
Vegetation
Yes * No ❑
10
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

.Q
Sampling Point: WAD wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type 1 Locz `Texture
0-5 10YR 4/4 100 Clay Loam
5-12 10YR 4/2 90 10YR 5/6 10 C M Clay Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil 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)
El Black Histic (A3)
El Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
El Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
0 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 Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
3 Indicators of vegetation and
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
wetland hydrology must be present,
hydrologymust
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No 0
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Wake Sampling Date: 16-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WAF wet
Investigator(s): M. Harrell Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Channel (active) Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope: 5.0 % / 2.9 o
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.77712 Long.:-78.53921 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map unit Name: Wn - Wehadkee silt loam NWI classification: PEM
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 0 No * (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No 0
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 0
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No 0 Is the Sampled Area Yes * No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No 0 within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain. Form also represents wetlands WAC and WAE
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
0 Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
0 High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
d❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
d❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
d❑ 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 0
Depth (inches): 2
Water Table Present? Yes No 0
Depth (inches): 0
Yes (* No 0
Saturation Present?
Yes No 0
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WAF wet
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: _ )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1
0
❑
0.0%
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑
-
Total Number of Dominant
3
0
0.0%
-
Species Across All Strata: 4 (B)
4.
0
❑
o.o%
-
5
0
❑
o.00/o
Percent of dominant Species
❑
-
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50.0% (A/B)
6.
0
0.00/0
-
7
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
-
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
0
= Total Cover
OBL species 60 x 1 = 60
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
30
d❑
50.0%
OBL
FACW species 5 x 2 = 10
j • Salix nigra
2. Platanusoccldentalls
5
❑
8.3%
FACW
FAC species 0 x 3 = 0
3. Llaustrumslnense
25
d❑
41.7%
FACU
FACU species 35 x 4 = 140
4
0
❑
0.00/0
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
5
0
❑
0.00/0
Column Totals: 100 (A) 210 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.100
7.
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
❑ Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
0 Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
60
= Total Cover
❑Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
j
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5. 0 ❑ o.00/o
6.
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
-
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
El
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
j • Carex lurida
5
16.7%
OBL
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2. Dulichium arundinaceum
25
d❑
83.3%
OBL
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3
0
El0.0%
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o%
in height.
5.
0
6
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Five Vegetation Strata:
7.
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g.
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12.
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
30
=Total Cover
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1 Lonicera japonica
10
0
100.00/0
FACU
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
•
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2.
0
❑
0.00/0
m) in height.
3.
0
❑
0.00/0
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
_ 0
❑
0.0%
-
height.
5. 0 ❑ 0.00/0
_
-
Hydrophytic
6.
0
❑
0.0%
Vegetation
Yes * No ❑
10
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

.Q
Sampling Point: WAF wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type 1 Locz `Texture
0-7 10YR 4/3 80 10YR 4/6 20 C M Loam
7-13 10YR 4/2 70 10YR 5/8 30 C M Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil 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)
El Black Histic (A3)
El Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
El Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
0 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 Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
3 Indicators of vegetation and
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
wetland hydrology must be present,
hydrologymust
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No 0
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Raleigh Sampling Date: 16-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WAG up
Investigator(s): P. Butler Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope: 1.0 % / 0.6 °
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.76787 Long.:-78.5404 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Cm- Chewacla soils NWI classification: -
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes * No O (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No O
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 O
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No Is the Sampled Area Yes O No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O No within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain. Form also represents uplands at WAH and WAI
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ 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 O No
Depth (inches): 0
Water Table Present? Yes O No
Depth (inches): 0
Yes O No
Saturation Present?
Yes O No
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WAG uD
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 , Betula nicira
35
d❑
41.20/.
FACW
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A)
2• Liguidambar stvraciflua
20❑
23.5%
FAC
❑
Total Number of Dominant
3• Acer rubrum
15
17.6%
FAC
Species Across All Strata: 7 (B)
4• Nyssa sylvatica
5
❑
5.9%
FAC
5• Prunus serotina
10
❑
11.8%
FACU
Percent of dominant Species
❑
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 71.4% (A/B)
6.
0
0.00/0
7
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
85
= Total Cover
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
15
d❑
42.9%
FAC
FACW species 35 x 2 = 70
1. Carpinus caroliniana
2• Fagusgrandlfolla
10
d❑
28.6%
FACU
FAC species 80 x 3 = 240
3• Acer rubrum
10
d❑
28.6%
FAC
FACU species 25 x 4 = 100
4
0
❑
0.0%
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
5
0
❑
0.0%
Column Totals: 140 (A) 410 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.929
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
0 Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
0 Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
35
= Total Cover
❑Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
j
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5• 0 ❑ o.00/o
6•
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
_
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
d❑
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
1 • Melica bulbosa
5
100.0%
FACU
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2•
0
❑
0.00/0
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3
0
El0.0%
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o%
in height.
5•
0
6
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Five Vegetation Strata:
7•
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g•
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12•
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
5
= Total Cover
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1. Vitis rotundifolia
15
0
100.0%
FAC
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2•
0
❑
0.0%
m) in height.
3•
0
❑
0.00/0
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
_ 0
❑
0.00/0
height.
5• 0 ❑ 0.00/0
_
Hydrophytic
6•
0
❑
0.00/0
Vegetation
Yes * No 0
15
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

.0
Sampling Point: WAG u
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 1 Locz `Texture
0-10 10YR 4/4 100 Loam
10-12 10YR 5/4 100
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Loam
zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Dark Surface (S7)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 148)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Wake Sampling Date: 16-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WAG wet
Investigator(s): M. Harrell Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Gulch or Gully Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope: 2.0 %
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.76877 Long.:-78.53983 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Cm- Chewacla soils NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 0 No * (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No 0
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 0
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No 0 Is the Sampled Area Yes * No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No 0 within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain. Form also represents wetland WAH
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
0 Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
0 High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
d❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
d❑ Saturation (A3)
d❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
d❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
d❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
0 Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
0 FAC-neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No 0
Depth (inches): 6
Water Table Present? Yes No 0
Depth (inches): 0
Yes (* No 0
Saturation Present?
Yes No 0
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WAG wet
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
Acer rubrum
25
d❑
33.3%
FAC
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 8 (A)
2• Nvssa svlvatica
25❑
33.30/6
FAC
d❑
Total Number of Dominant
3, Quercus michauxii
25
33.3%
FACW
Species Across All Strata: 9 (B)
4•
0
❑
o.o%
5
0
❑
o.00/o
Percent of dominant Species
❑
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: $$•9% (A/B)
6.
0
0.00/0
-
7
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
-
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
75
= Total Cover
OBL species 15 x 1 = 15
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
10
d❑
33.3%
FAC
FACW species 25 x 2 = 50
1. Acer rubrum
2• Crataegus brachyacantha
10
0
33.3%
OBL
FAC species 80 x 3 = 240
3• Llaustrumslnense
10
0
33.3%
FACU
FACU species 10 x 4 = 40
4
0
❑
0.0%
-
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
5
0
❑
0.00/0
Column Totals: 130 (A) 345 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.654
7
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
0 Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
0 Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
30
= Total Cover
❑Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
j
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
5•
0
❑
o.00/o
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6•
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
-
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
d❑
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
j • Carex lurida
5
50.0%
OBL
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2• Microstegium vimineum
5
d❑
50.0%
FAC
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3
0
El0.0%
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o%
in height.
5•
0
6
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Five Vegetation Strata:
7•
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g•
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12•
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
10
=Total Cover
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
Vitis rotundifolia
15
0
100.0%
FAC
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2•
0
❑
0.0%
m) in height.
3•
0
❑
0.00/0
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
_ 0
❑
0.0%
-
height.
Hydrophytic
6•
0
❑
0.00/0
Vegetation
Yes * No ❑
15
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

Sampling Point: WAG wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)_ Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type 1 Locz `Texture
0-12 10YR 4/2 70 7.5YR 4/6 30 C PL Clay Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated 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 (All)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
❑ Dark Surface (S7)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
0 Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 148)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No ❑
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Wake Sampling Date: 16-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WAI wet
Investigator(s): M. Harrell Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): flat Slope: 0.0 % / 0.0 °
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.7678 Long.:-78.5407 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Cm- Chewacla soils NWI classification: PEM
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes O No * (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No O
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 O
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No O Is the Sampled Area Yes * No O
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No O within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
0 Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
0 High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
0 Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
d❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
d❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
0 Aquatic Fauna (B13)
0 FAC-neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No O
Depth (inches): 2
Water Table Present? Yes No O
Depth (inches): 0
Yes (* No O
Saturation Present?
Yes No O
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WAI wet
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat. Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: _ )
% Cover
Cover Status
Number of Dominant Species
1
0
❑
0.0%
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑
-
Total Number of Dominant
3
0
0.0% -
Species Across All Strata: 1 (B)
4.
0
❑
o.o% -
5
0
❑
o.00/o
Percent of dominant Species
❑
-
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
6.
o
o.o°ro -
7.
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o -
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
0
= Total Cover
OBL species 0 x 1= 0
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
FACW species 90 x 2 = 180
2
0
El0.0%
FAC species 0 x 3= 0
3.
0
❑
0.00/0
FACU species 0 x 4= 0
4.
0
❑
0.00/0
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
5
0
❑
0.00/0 _
Column Totals: 90 (A) 180 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.000
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
0 Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
0 Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
0 Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
0
= Total Cover
❑ Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
j
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5. 0 ❑ o.00/o
6.
0
❑
_
o.00/o
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
-
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
0
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
1. ]uncus effusus
90
100.0% FACW
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2.
0
❑
0.00/0
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3
0
El0.0%
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o%
in height.
5.
0
6
0
❑
o.00/o _
Five Vegetation Strata:
7.
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g.
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12.
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
90
=Total Cover
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1
0
El0.0%
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2.
0
❑
0.0%
m) in height.
3.
0
❑
0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
_ 0
❑
0.00/0
height.
5. 0 ❑ 0.00/0
_
'c
6
0
❑
0.0%
Vegetation
Yes * No 0
0
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

Sampling Point: WAI wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)_ Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type 1 Locz `Texture
0-12 10YR 4/2 75 10YR 5/8 30 C PL Clay Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated 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 (All)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
❑ Dark Surface (S7)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
0 Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 148)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No ❑
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Raleigh Sampling Date: 16-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WAL up
Investigator(s): P. Butler Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope: 1.0 % / 0.6 °
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.831 Long.:-78.53607 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Wo - Wehadkee and Bibb soils NWI classification: -
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes * No O (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No O
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 O
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No Is the Sampled Area Yes O No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O No within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain. Form also represents uplands at WAK and WAM
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ 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 O No
Depth (inches): 0
Water Table Present? Yes O No
Depth (inches): 0
Yes O No
Saturation Present?
Yes O No
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WAL uo
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 , Ouercus phellos
10
d❑
40.0%
FAC
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 6 (A)
2• Carpinus caroliniana
10❑
40.0%
FAC
d❑
-
Total Number of Dominant
3• Pinus taeda
5
20.0%
FAC
Species Across All Strata: 10 (B)
4•
0
❑
o.o%
5
0
❑
o.00/o
Percent of dominant Species
❑
-
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 60.0% (A/B)
6.
0
0.00/0
-
7
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
-
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
25
= Total Cover
OBL species 10 x 1 = 10
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
20
d❑
50.0%
FAC
FACW species 0 x 2= 0
1• Quercus phellos
2• Llrlodendrontullplfera
10
d❑
25.0%
FACU
FAC species 95 x 3 = 285
3• Llaustrumslnense
10
d❑
25.0%
FACU
FACU species 45 x 4 = 180
4
0
❑
0.00/0
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
5
0
❑
0.00/0
Column Totals: 150 (A) 475 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.167
7
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
0 Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
❑ Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
40
= Total Cover
❑Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
1
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5• 0 ❑ o.00/o
6•
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
-
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
d❑
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
1 , Microsteaium vimineum
40
61.5%
FAC
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2• Persicaria amphibia
10
❑
15.4%
OBL
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3. Rubus argutus
15
d❑
23.1%
FACU
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o°ro
in height.
5•
o
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Five Vegetation Strata:
7•
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g•
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
-
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.00/0
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12•
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
65
= Total Cover
Herb stratum -Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1 Lonicera japonica
10
0
50.0%
FACU
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
•
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2. Smilax rotundifolia
10❑
50.0%
FAC
m) in height.
3•
0
❑
0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
0
❑
0.0%
-
height.
Hydrophytic
6• _
_ 0
❑
0.00/0
Vegetation
Yes * No ❑
20
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
catalpa 60
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

Sampling Point: WAL
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 1 Locz `Texture Remarks
0-6 10YR 5/8 100 Clay Loam disturbed
6-12 10YR 5/4 100
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated 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 (All)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Sandy Loam
zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
❑ Dark Surface (S7)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 148)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Wake Sampling Date: 16-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WAL wet
Investigator(s): M. Harrell Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope: 2.0 %
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.83096 Long.:-78.53627 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Wo - Wehadkee and Bibb soils NWI classification: PEM
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 0 No * (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation 0 , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No 0
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 0
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No 0 Is the Sampled Area Yes * No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No 0 within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain. Vegetation disturbed due to wetland being within a maintained utility corridor. Form also represents wetlands WAK and
WAM
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
0 Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
0 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 0 No
Depth (inches): 0
Water Table Present? Yes 0 No
Depth (inches): 0
Yes (* No 0
Saturation Present?
Yes 0 No
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WAL wet
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
Platanus occidentalis
15
d❑
75.0%
FACW
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A)
2• Betula nicira
5
❑
25.0%
FACW
❑
Total Number of Dominant
3
0
0.0%
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
4•
0
❑
o.o%
5
0
❑
o.00/o
Percent of dominant Species
❑
_
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 60.0% (A/B)
6.
0
0.00/0
7
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
20
= Total Cover
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species 20 x 2 = 40
1. Liguidambar stvraciflua
10
d❑
100.0%
FAC
2
0
❑
0.00/0
FAC species 10 x 3 = 30
3
0
❑
0.00/0
FACU species 110 x 4 = 440
4
0
❑
0.0%
_
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
5
0
❑
0.0%
_
Column Totals: 140 (A) 510 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.643
7.
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
0 Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
❑ Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
10
= Total Cover
❑Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
j
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5• 0 ❑ o.00/o
6•
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
_
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
0
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
Chasmanthium latifolium
60
100.0%
FACU
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2•
0
❑
0.00/0
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3
0
El0.0%
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o%
in height.
5•
0
6
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Five Vegetation Strata:
7•
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g•
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12•
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
60
=Total Cover
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1. Lonicera japonica
50
0
100.00/0
FACU
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2.
0
❑
0.00/0
m) in height.
3.
0
❑
0.00/0
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
_ 0
❑
0.00/0
height.
5• 0 ❑ 0.00/0
_
Hydrophytic
6•
_ 0
❑
0.0%
Vegetation
Yes * No 0
50
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

.Q
Sampling Point: WAL wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
Redox Features
—(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist) % Type 1 Locz `Texture
0-4
10YR 4/3
100
Sandy Loam
4-10
10YR 5/4
100
Sandy Loam
10-16
10YR 4/2
90
7.5YR 4/6 10 C PL Sandy Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil 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)
El Black Histic (A3)
El Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
El Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
0 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 Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
3 Indicators of vegetation and
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
wetland hydrology must be present,
hydrologymust
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No 0
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Raleigh Sampling Date: 16-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WAN up
Investigator(s): P. Butler Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope: 1.0 % / 0.6 °
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.83413 Long.:-78.53218 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Wo - Wehadkee and Bibb soils NWI classification: -
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes * No O (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No O
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 O No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No Is the Sampled Area Yes O No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O No within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain. Form also represents uplands at WAO
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ 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 O No
Depth (inches): 0
Water Table Present? Yes O No
Depth (inches): 0
Yes O No
Saturation Present?
Yes O No
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WAN uo
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 , Liquidambar stvraciflua
40
d❑
50.0%
FAC
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A)
2• Ilex opaca
20❑
25.0%
FACU
❑
Total Number of Dominant
3• ]uniperus virginiana
15
18.8%
FACU
Species Across All Strata: 6 (B)
4• Pinus taeda
5
❑
6.3%
FAC
5
0
❑
0.00/0
Percent of dominant Species
❑
_
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50.0% (A/B)
6.
0
0.00/0
7
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
80
= Total Cover
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
15
d❑
42.9%
FACU
FACW species 10 x 2 = 20
1. ]uniperus virginiana
2• Llguldambarstvraclflua
15
d❑
42.9%
FAC
FAC species 60 x 3 = 180
3• Ilex opaca
5
❑
14.3%
FACU
FACU species 65 x 4 = 260
4
0
❑
0.0%
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
5
0
❑
0.0%
Column Totals: 135 (A) 460 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.407
7
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
❑ Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
❑ Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
35
= Total Cover
❑Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
j
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5• 0 ❑ o.00/o
6•
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
_
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
d❑
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
1 • Arundinaria gigantea
10
100.0%
FACW
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2•
0
❑
0.00/0
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3
0
El0.0%
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o%
in height.
5•
0
6
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Five Vegetation Strata:
7•
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g•
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12•
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
10
=Total Cover
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1 Lonicera japonica
10
0
100.00/0
FACU
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
,
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2.
0
❑
0.00/0
m) in height.
3•
0
❑
0.00/0
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
_ 0
❑
0.00/0
height.
5• 0 ❑ 0.00/0
_
Hydrophytic
6•
0
❑
0.0%
Vegetation
Yes 0 No
10
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

Sampling Point: WAN
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 1 Locz `Texture
0-12 10YR 5/6 100 Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated 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 (All)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
❑ Dark Surface (S7)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 148)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Wake Sampling Date: 16-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WAN wet
Investigator(s): M. Harrell Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope: 2.0 %
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.83363 Long.:-78.5312 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Wo - Wehadkee and Bibb soils NWI classification: PEM
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 0 No * (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No 0
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 0
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No 0 Is the Sampled Area Yes * No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No 0 within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain. Form also represents wetland WAO
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
d❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
d❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
0 FAC-neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No
Depth (inches): 0
Water Table Present? Yes 0 No
Depth (inches): 0
Yes (* No 0
Saturation Present?
Yes 0 No
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WAN wet
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: _ )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1
0
❑
0.0%
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑
-
Total Number of Dominant
3
0
0.0%
-
Species Across All Strata: 4 (B)
4.
0
❑
o.o%
-
5
0
❑
o.00/o
Percent of dominant Species
-
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
7
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
-
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
0
= Total Cover
OBL species 5 x 1= 5
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
20
d❑
66.7%
FAC
FACW species 20 x 2 = 40
1 • Acer rubrum
2. Llguldambarstyraclflua
10
d❑
33.3%
FAC
FAC species 30 x 3 = 90
3.
0
❑
0.00/0
FACU species 0 x 4= 0
4.
0
❑
0.0%
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
5
0
❑
0.0%
Column Totals: 55 (A) 135 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.455
7
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
0 Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
0 Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
30
= Total Cover
❑Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
j
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5. 0 ❑ o.00/o
6.
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
-
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
0
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
1 • Arundinaria tecta
20
80.0%
FACW
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2. Carex lurida
5
0
20.0%
OBL
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3
0
El0.0%
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o%
in height.
5.
0
6
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Five Vegetation Strata:
7.
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g.
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12.
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
25
=Total Cover
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1
0
El0.0%
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2.
0
❑
0.0%
m) in height.
3.
0
❑
0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
_ 0
❑
0.00/0
height.
5. 0 ❑ 0.00/0
_
'c
6
0
❑
0.0%
Vegetation
Yes * No ❑
0
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

.0
Sampling Point: WAN wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
—(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type 1 Locz `Texture
0-8 10YR 4/4 100 Sandy Loam
8-15 10YR 4/2 90 7.5YR 4/6 10 C PL Sandy Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains
Hydric Soil Indicators:
zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Dark Surface (S7)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
0 Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 148)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
d❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No ❑
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Raleigh Sampling Date: 16-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WAP up
Investigator(s): P. Butler Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope: 1.0 % / 0.6 °
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.84375 Long.:-78.53144 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Wo - Wehadkee and Bibb soils 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 O 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
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No Is the Sampled Area Yes ❑ No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain. Form also represents uplands at WAQ and WAR
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ 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): 0
Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No
Depth (inches): 0
Yes ❑ No
Saturation Present?
Yes ❑ No
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WAP uo
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
Liguidambar stvraciflua
40
d❑
47.1%
FAC
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A)
2•
Acer rubrum
25❑
29.4%
FAC
❑
Total Number of Dominant
3•
Quercus nigra
10
11.8%
FAC
Species Across All Strata: 6 (B)
4,
Quercus alba
10
❑
11.8%
FACU
5
0
❑
o.00/o
Percent of dominant Species
❑
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50.0% (A/B)
6.
0
0.00/0
7
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
85
= Total Cover
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
1.
Ilex opaca
40
d❑
66.7%
FACU
2.
Ouercusalba
5
❑
8.3%
FACU
FAC species 95 x 3 = 285
3•
Llguldambarstvraclflua
5
❑
8.3%
FAC
FACU species 70 x 4 = 280
4•
Quercus nigra
10
❑
16.7%
FAC
UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
5
0
❑
0.00/0
Column Totals: 165 (A) 565 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.424
7
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
❑ Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
❑ Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
60
= Total Cover
❑Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
j
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5• 0 ❑ o.00/o
6•
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
El
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
1
0
0.0%
_
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2
0
❑
0.00/0
_
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3
0
El0.0%
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o%
in height.
5•
0
6
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Five Vegetation Strata:
7•
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g•
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12•
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
0
= Total Cover
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1.
Lonicera japonica
10
0
50.0%
FACU
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2.
Hedera helix
5❑
25.0%
FACU
m) in height.
3.
Vitis rotundifolia
5
0
25.0%
FAC
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
_
_ 0
❑
0.00/0
height.
5• 0 ❑ 0.00/0
_
Hydrophytic
6•
_ 0
❑
0.0%
Vegetation
Yes 0 No
20
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
carex sp 80
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

Sampling Point: WAP u
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 1 Locz `Texture
0-12 10YR 5/4 100 Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated 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 (All)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
❑ Dark Surface (S7)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 148)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Wake Sampling Date: 16-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WAP wet
Investigator(s): M. Harrell Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope: 2.0 %
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.84353 Long.:-78.53142 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Wo - Wehadkee and Bibb soils NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 0 No * (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No 0
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 0
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No 0 Is the Sampled Area Yes * No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No 0 within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain. Form also represents wetlands WAQ and WAR
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
0 Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
0 High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
0 Saturation (A3)
d❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
d❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
d❑ 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 0
Depth (inches): 2
Water Table Present? Yes No 0
Depth (inches): 0
Yes (* No 0
Saturation Present?
Yes No 0
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WAP wet
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
Ouercus phellos
25
d❑
29.4%
FAC
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 7 (A)
2• Acer rubrum
30❑
35.3%
FAC
d❑
Total Number of Dominant
3• Liquidambar styraciflua
30
35.3%
FAC
Species Across All Strata: 8 (B)
4•
0
❑
o.o%
5
0
❑
o.00/o
Percent of dominant Species
❑
-
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 87.5% (A/B)
6.
0
0.00/0
-
7
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
-
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
85
= Total Cover
OBL species 5 x 1 = 5
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
j Acer rubrum
20
d❑
57.1%
FAC
•
2• Llguldambarstyraclflua
15
d❑
42.9%
FAC
FAC species 130 x 3 = 390
3
0
❑
0.00/0
FACU species 5 x 4 = 20
4
0
❑
0.0%
-
-
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
5
0
❑
0.0%
Column Totals: 140 (A) 415 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.964
7
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
0 Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
0 Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
35
= Total Cover
❑Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
j
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5• 0 ❑ o.00/o
6•
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
-
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
d❑
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
j , Carex lurida
5
100.0%
OBL
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2•
0
❑
0.00/0
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3
0
El0.0%
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o%
in height.
5•
0
6
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Five Vegetation Strata:
7•
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g•
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12•
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
5
= Total Cover
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1 Smilax rotundifolia
10
0
66.7%
FAC
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
•
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2. Lonicera iaponica
5❑
33.3%
FACU
m) in height.
3•
0
❑
0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
0
❑
0.0%
-
height.
Hydrophytic
6•
0
❑
0.0%
Vegetation
Yes * No ❑
15
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

.Q
Sampling Point: WAP wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type 1 Locz `Texture
0-3 10YR 4/3 100 Loam
3-12 10YR 4/1 80 7.5YR 4/6 20 C PL Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil 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)
El Black Histic (A3)
El Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
El Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
0 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 Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
3 Indicators of vegetation and
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
wetland hydrology must be present,
hydrologymust
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No 0
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Raleigh Sampling Date: 16-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WAS up
Investigator(s): P. Butler Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillside Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope: 2.0 %
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.8499 Long.:-78.53024 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Cm- Chewacla soils 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 O 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 ❑
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No Is the Sampled Area Yes ❑ No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ 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): 0
Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No
Depth (inches): 0
Yes ❑ No
Saturation Present?
Yes ❑ No
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WAS uo
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
Betula nicira
40
d❑
61.5%
FACW
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
2• Pinus taeda
20❑
30.8%
FAC
❑
Total Number of Dominant
3• Platanus occidentalis
5
7.7%
FACW
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
4•
0
❑
o.o%
5
0
❑
o.00/o
Percent of dominant Species
❑
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 80.0% (A/B)
6.
0
0.00/0
7
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
65
= Total Cover
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
40
d❑
100.0%
FAC
FACW species 45 x 2 = 90
1. Carpinus caroliniana
2.
0
❑
0.00/0
FAC species 65 x 3 = 195
3
0
❑
0.00/0
FACU species 15 x 4 = 60
4
0
❑
0.0%
_
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
5
0
❑
0.0%
_
Column Totals: 125 (A) 345 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.760
7.
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
0 Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
0 Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
40
= Total Cover
❑Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
j
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
5•
0
❑
o.00/o
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6•
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
El
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
1
0
0.0%
_
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2
0
❑
0.00/0
_
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3
0
El0.0%
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o%
in height.
5•
0
6
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Five Vegetation Strata:
7•
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g•
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12•
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
0
= Total Cover
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1 Lonicera japonica
15
0
75.0%
FACU
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
,
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2. Vitis rotundifolia
5❑
25.0%
FAC
m) in height.
3•
0
❑
0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
0
❑
0.0%
height.
5• 0 ❑ o.o%
_
Hydrophytic
6• _
_ 0
❑
0.00/0
Vegetation
Yes NO
20
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
bamboo invasive present
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

.0
Sampling Point: WAS u
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 1 Locz `Texture
0-3 10YR 4/4 100 Loam
3-12 10YR 5/6 100
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Loam
zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Dark Surface (S7)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 148)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Wake Sampling Date: 16-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WAS -wet
Investigator(s): M. Harrell Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Lowland Local relief (concave, convex, none): flat Slope: 0.0 % / 0.0 °
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.84886 Long.:-78.53044 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Cm- Chewacla soils NWI classification: PEM
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 0 No * (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No 0
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 0
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No 0 Is the Sampled Area Yes * No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No 0 within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
0 High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
0 Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
d❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
0 FAC-neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No
Depth (inches): 0
Water Table Present? Yes No 0
Depth (inches): 6
Yes (* No 0
Saturation Present?
Yes No 0
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 4
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WAS -wet
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
Betula niara
10
d❑
66.7%
FACW
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A)
2• Acer rubrum
5❑
33.3%
FAC
❑
Total Number of Dominant
3
0
0.0%
_
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
4•
0
❑
o.o%
5
0
❑
o.00/o
Percent of dominant Species
❑
_
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
6•
o
o.o°ro
7
0
❑
0.0%
_
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
15
= Total Cover
OBL species 5 x 1 = 5
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
15
d❑
42.9%
FAC
FACW species 10 x 2 = 20
1. Acer rubrum
2• Carex lurlda
5
❑
14.3%
OBL
FAC species 40 x 3 = 120
3• Mlcrostealumvlmineum
15
0
42.9%
FAC
FACU species 0 x 4 = 0
4
0
❑
0.00/0
_
UPL species 0 x 5- 0
5
0
❑
0.00/0
Column Totals: 55 (A) 145 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.636
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
0 Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
0 Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
35
= Total Cover
❑Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
j
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5• 0 ❑ o.00/o
6•
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
El
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
1
0
0.0%
_
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2
0
❑
0.00/0
_
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3
0
El0.0%
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o%
in height.
5•
0
6
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Five Vegetation Strata:
7•
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g•
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12•
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
0
= Total Cover
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1. Vitis rotundifolia
5
0
100.0%
FAC
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2•
0
❑
0.0%
m) in height.
3•
0
❑
0.00/0
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
_ 0
❑
0.00/0
height.
5• 0 ❑ 0.00/0
_
Hydrophytic
6•
0
❑
0.00/0
Vegetation
Yes * No 0
5
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

Sampling Point: WAS -wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)_ Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type 1 Locz `Texture
0-12 10YR 4/2 80 7.5YR 4/6 20 C PL Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated 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 (All)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
❑ Dark Surface (S7)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
0 Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 148)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No ❑
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Raleigh Sampling Date: 16-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WAT up
Investigator(s): P. Butler Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillside Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope: 4.0 % / 2.3 °
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.8515 Long.:-78.53063 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map unit Name: WmC - Wedowee sandy loam 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 O 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 ❑
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No Is the Sampled Area Yes ❑ No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
0 FAC-neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No
Depth (inches): 0
Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No
Depth (inches): 0
Yes ❑ No
Saturation Present?
Yes ❑ No
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WAT uo
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 , Quercus albs
35
d❑
41.2%
FACU
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 7 (A)
2• Liguidambar stvraciflua
15❑
17.6%
FAC
d❑
Total Number of Dominant
3• Betula nigra
15
17.60/6
FACW
Species Across All Strata: 9 (B)
4, Quercus nigra
10
❑
11.8%
FAC
5• Pinus taeda
10
❑
11.8%
FAC
Percent of dominant Species
❑
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 77.8% (A/B)
6.
0
0.00/0
7
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
85
= Total Cover
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
25
d❑
45.5%
FACU
FACW species 30 x 2 = 60
1 • Ilex opaca
2• Platanusoccldentalls
10
d❑
18.2%
FACW
FAC species 60 x 3 = 180
3• Nyssa sylvatica
10
d❑
18.2%
FAC
FACU species 60 x 4 = 240
4. Carpinuscaroliniana
10
d❑
18.2%
FAC
UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
5
0
❑
0.0%
Column Totals: 150 (A) 480 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.200
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
0 Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
❑ Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
55
= Total Cover
❑Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
j
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
5•
0
❑
o.00/o
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6•
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
_
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
d❑
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
1. Arundinaria gigantea
5
100.0%
FACW
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2•
0
❑
0.00/0
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3
0
El0.0%
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o%
in height.
5•
0
6
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Five Vegetation Strata:
7•
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g•
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12•
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
5
= Total Cover
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1 Vitis rotundifolia
5
0
100.0%
FAC
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
•
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2•
0
❑
0.0%
m) in height.
3•
0
❑
0.00/0
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
_ 0
❑
0.00/0
height.
5• 0 ❑ 0.00/0
_
Hydrophytic
6•
0
❑
0.00/0
Vegetation
Yes * No 0
5
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

.0
Sampling Point: WAT
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 1 Locz `Texture
0-2 10YR 4/4 100 Sandy Loam
2-12 10YR 5/6 100 Sandy Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains
Hydric Soil Indicators:
zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Dark Surface (S7)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 148)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Wake Sampling Date: 16-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WAT wet
Investigator(s): M. Harrell Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): flat Slope: 0.0 % / 0.0 °
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.85135 Long.:-78.53091 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map unit Name: WmC - Wedowee sandy loam NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes O No * (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No O
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 O
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No O Is the Sampled Area Yes * No O
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No O within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
d❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
d❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
0 FAC-neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No
Depth (inches): 0
Water Table Present? Yes O No
Depth (inches): 0
Yes (* No O
Saturation Present?
Yes O No
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WAT wet
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
Pinus taeda
30
d❑
42.9%
FAC
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 8 (A)
2•
Acer rubrum
20❑
28.6%
FAC
❑
Total Number of Dominant
3•
Liriodendron tulipifera
10
14.3%
FACU
Species Across All Strata: 9 (B)
4•
Betula nicira
10
❑
14.3%
FACW
5
0
❑
0.00/0
Percent of dominant Species
❑
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 88.9% (A/B)
6.
0
0.00/0
-
7
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
-
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
70
= Total Cover
OBL species 5 x 1 = 5
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
10
d❑
50.0%
FAC
FACW species 25 x 2 = 50
1.
Acer rubrum
2•
Llguldambarstyraclflua
5
d❑
25.0%
FAC
FAC species 70 x 3 = 210
3•
Carpinuscarollnlana
5
d❑
25.0%
FAC
FACU species 15 x 4 = 60
4
0
❑
0.0%
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
5
0
❑
0.0%
Column Totals: 115 (A) 325 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.826
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
0 Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
0 Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
20
= Total Cover
❑Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
j
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5• 0 ❑ o.00/o
6•
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
-
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
d❑
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
j •
Carex lurida
5
25.0%
OBL
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2.
Osmunda cinnamomea
10
d❑
50.0%
FACW
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3.
Arundinaria tecta
5
d❑
25.0%
FACW
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o°ro
in height.
5•
o
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Five Vegetation Strata:
7•
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g•
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12•
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
20
=Total Cover
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1.
Lonicera japonica
5
0
100.00/0
FACU
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2.
0
❑
0.00/0
m) in height.
3•
0
❑
0.00/0
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
_ 0
❑
0.0%
-
height.
Hydrophytic
6•
0
❑
0.0%
Vegetation
Yes * No ❑
5
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

.Q
Sampling Point: WAT wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type 1 Locz `Texture
0-2 10YR 4/3 100 Clay Loam
2-12 10YR 5/1 80 7.5YR 4/6 20 C M Clay Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil 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)
El Black Histic (A3)
El Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
El Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
0 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 Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
3 Indicators of vegetation and
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
wetland hydrology must be present,
hydrologymust
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No 0
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Raleigh Sampling Date: 16-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WAV up
Investigator(s): P. Butler Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillside Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope: 2.0 %
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.85537 Long.:-78.52971 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Bu - Buncombe soils 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 O 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 ❑
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No Is the Sampled Area Yes ❑ No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain. Form also represents uplands at WAU
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ 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): 0
Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No
Depth (inches): 0
Yes ❑ No
Saturation Present?
Yes ❑ No
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WAV uo
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
Pinus taeda
20
d❑
21.1%
FAC
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A)
2. Ouercus niara
20
❑
21.1%
FAC
d❑
Total Number of Dominant
3• Betula niara
25
26.3%
FACW
Species Across All Strata: 8 (B)
4• Nvssa svlvatica
15
❑
15.8%
FAC
5• Ilex opaca
15
❑
15.8%
FACU
Percent of dominant Species
❑
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 62.5% (A/B)
6.
0
0.00/0
7
0
❑
0.0%
-
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
-
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
95
= Total Cover
OBL species 2 x 1 = 2
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
25
d❑
38.5%
FACU
FACW species 35 x 2 = 70
1. Ilex opaca
2• Nvssa svlvatica
15
d❑
23.1%
FAC
FAC species 70 x 3 = 210
3• Llaustrumslnense
15
d❑
23.1%
FACU
FACU species 60 x 4 = 240
4• Betula niara
10
❑
15.4%
FACW
UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
5
0
❑
0.00/0
Column Totals: 167 (A) 522 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.126
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
0 Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
❑ Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
65
= Total Cover
❑Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
j
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
5•
0
❑
o.00/o
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6•
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
-
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
d❑
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
j , Carex lurida
2
100.0%
OBL
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2•
0
❑
0.00/0
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3
0
El0.0%
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o%
in height.
5•
0
6
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Five Vegetation Strata:
7•
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g•
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12•
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
2
= Total Cover
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1. Lonicera japonica
5
0
100.00/0
FACU
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2.
0
❑
0.00/0
m) in height.
3.
0
❑
0.00/0
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
_ 0
❑
0.0%
-
height.
Hydrophytic
6•
0
❑
0.0%
Vegetation
Yes * No ❑
5
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

.Q
Sampling Point: WAV u
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 1 Locz `Texture
0-10 10YR 5/4 100 Loam
10-14 10YR 5/3 90 10YR 3/4 10 C M Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil 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)
El Black Histic (A3)
El Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
El Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
❑ 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 Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
3 Indicators of vegetation and
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
wetland hydrology must be present,
hydrologymust
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Wake Sampling Date: 16-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WAV wet
Investigator(s): M. Harrell Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): flat Slope: 0.0 % / 0.0 °
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.85506 Long.:-78.53026 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Bu - Buncombe soils NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 0 No * (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No 0
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 0
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No 0 Is the Sampled Area Yes * No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No 0 within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain. Form also represents wetland WAU
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
d❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
d❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
d❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
0 FAC-neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No
Depth (inches): 0
Water Table Present? Yes 0 No
Depth (inches): 0
Yes (* No 0
Saturation Present?
Yes 0 No
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WAV wet
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
Acer rubrum
45
d❑
69.2%
FAC
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 6 (A)
2• Ulmus americana
15❑
23.1%
FACW
El7.7%
Total Number of Dominant
3• Liquidambar styraciflua
5
FAC
Species Across All Strata: 6 (B)
4•
0
❑
o.o%
5
0
❑
o.00/o
Percent of dominant Species
-
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
7
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
-
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
65
= Total Cover
OBL species 15 x 1 = 15
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
10
d❑
100.0%
FAC
FACW species 25 x 2 = 50
1. Acer rubrum
2
0
❑
0.00/0
FAC species 70 x 3 = 210
3.
0
❑
0.00/0
FACU species 0 x 4= 0
4.
0
❑
0.0%
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
5
0
❑
0.0%
_
Column Totals: 110 (A) 275 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.500
7
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
0 Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
0 Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
10
= Total Cover
❑Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
j
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5• 0 ❑ o.00/o
6•
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
-
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
d❑
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
j • Carex lurida
15
60.0%
OBL
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2. Osmunda cinnamomea
10
d❑
40.0%
FACW
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3
0
El0.0%
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o%
in height.
5•
0
6
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Five Vegetation Strata:
7•
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g•
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12•
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
25
=Total Cover
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1. Smilax rotundifolia
10
0
100.0%
FAC
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2•
0
❑
0.0%
m) in height.
3•
0
❑
0.00/0
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
_ 0
❑
0.0%
-
height.
Hydrophytic
6•
0
❑
0.00/0
Vegetation
Yes * No ❑
10
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

.Q
Sampling Point: WAV wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type 1 Locz `Texture
0-3 10YR 4/4 100 Clay Loam
3-12 10YR 4/2 90 7.5YR 4/6 10 C M Clay Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil 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)
El Black Histic (A3)
El Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
El Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
0 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 Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
3 Indicators of vegetation and
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
wetland hydrology must be present,
hydrologymust
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No 0
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Raleigh Sampling Date: 16-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WAW up
Investigator(s): P. Butler Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillside Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope: 2.0 %
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.85897 Long.:-78.52901 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Cm- Chewacla soils 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 O 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 ❑
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No Is the Sampled Area Yes ❑ No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ 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): 0
Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No
Depth (inches): 0
Yes ❑ No
Saturation Present?
Yes ❑ No
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WAW uo
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
Betula niara
30
d❑
37.5%
FACW
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A)
2• Liauidambar stvraciflua
50❑
62.5%
FAC
❑
Total Number of Dominant
3
0
0.0%
_
Species Across All Strata: 6 (B)
4•
0
❑
o.o%
-
5
0
❑
o.00/o
Percent of dominant Species
❑
-
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 83.3% (A/B)
6.
0
0.00/0
-
7
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
-
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
80
= Total Cover
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species 30 x 2 = 60
1. Liauidambar styraciflua
45
d❑
69.2%
FAC
2• Acer rubrum
15
d❑
23.1%
FAC
FAC species 190 x 3 = 570
3• Llaustrumslnense
5
❑
7.7%
FACU
FACU species 10 x 4 = 40
4
0
❑
0.0%
-
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
5
0
❑
0.00/0
Column Totals: 230 (A) 670 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.913
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
0 Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
0 Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
65
= Total Cover
❑Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
j
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5• 0 ❑ o.00/o
6•
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
-
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
d❑
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
j , Microsteaium vimineum
80
100.0%
FAC
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2•
0
❑
0.00/0
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3
0
El0.0%
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o%
in height.
5•
0
6
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Five Vegetation Strata:
7•
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g•
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12•
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 _)
80
= Total Cover
Herb stratum -Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1. Lonicera japonica
5
0
100.00/0
FACU
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2.
0
❑
0.00/0
m) in height.
3•
0
❑
0.00/0
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
_ 0
❑
0.0%
-
height.
Hydrophytic
6•
0
❑
0.0%
Vegetation
Yes * No ❑
5
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

.0
Sampling Point: WAW
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 1 Locz `Texture
0-1 10YR 4/4 100 Sandy Loam
1-12 10YR 5/6 100 Sandy Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains
Hydric Soil Indicators:
zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Dark Surface (S7)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 148)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Wake Sampling Date: 16-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WAW wet
Investigator(s): M. Harrell Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Gulch or Gully Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope: 0.0 % / 0.0 °
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.85813 Long.:-78.52916 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Cm- Chewacla soils NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 0 No * (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No 0
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 0
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No 0 Is the Sampled Area Yes * No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No 0 within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
0 Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
d❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
d❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
d❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
0 Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
0 FAC-neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No 0
Depth (inches): 6
Water Table Present? Yes No 0
Depth (inches): 0
Yes (* No 0
Saturation Present?
Yes No 0
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WAW wet
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
Betula nigra
55
d❑
84.6%
FACW
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 8 (A)
2•
Nvssa svlvatica
10
❑
15.4%
FAC
❑
Total Number of Dominant
3
0
0.0%
_
Species Across All Strata: 9 (B)
4•
0
❑
o.o%
-
5
0
❑
o.00/o
Percent of dominant Species
❑
-
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 88.9% (A/B)
6.
0
0.00/0
-
7
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
-
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
65
= Total Cover
OBL species 40 x 1 = 40
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species 80 x 2 = 160
1.
Liguidambar stvraciflua
5
d❑
20.0%
FAC
2•
Nvssa svlvatica
5
d❑
20.0%
FAC
FAC species 45 x 3 = 135
3•
Betula nigra
15
d❑
60.0%
FACW
FACU species 10 x 4 = 40
4
0
❑
0.00/0
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
5
0
❑
0.00/0
Column Totals: 175 (A) 375 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.143
7
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
0 Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
0 Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
25
= Total Cover
❑Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
j
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5• 0 ❑ o.00/o
6•
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
-
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
d❑
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
j •
Dulichium arundinaceum
20
40.0%
OBL
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2•
Carex lurida
20
d❑
40.0%
OBL
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3.
Arundinaria tecta
10
d❑
20.0%
FACW
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o°ro
in height.
5•
o
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Five Vegetation Strata:
7•
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g•
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12•
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
50
=Total Cover
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1
Smilax rotundifolia
25
0
71.4%
FAC
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
,
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2.
Lonicera iaponica
10❑
28.6%
FACU
m) in height.
3•
0
❑
0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
0
❑
0.0%
-
height.
5• 0 ❑ 0.00%
_
-
Hydrophytic
6•
_ 0
❑
0.00/0
Vegetation
Yes No
35
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

.Q
Sampling Point: WAW wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type 1 Locz Texture
0-3 10YR 4/3 90 10YR 5/6 10 C M Sandy Clay
3-12 10YR 4/1 75 7.5YR 4/6 25 C M
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil 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)
El Black Histic (A3)
El Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
El Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
0 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 Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
3 Indicators of vegetation and
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
wetland hydrology must be present,
hydrologymust
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No 0
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Raleigh Sampling Date: 16-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WAX up
Investigator(s): P. Butler Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillside Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope: 2.0 %
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.85922 Long.:-78.5288 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Cm- Chewacla soils 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 O 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 ❑
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No Is the Sampled Area Yes ❑ No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ 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): 0
Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No
Depth (inches): 0
Yes ❑ No
Saturation Present?
Yes ❑ No
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WAX ur)
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
Pinus taeda
15
d❑
20.0%
FAC
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
2•
Liriodendron tulipifera
10
❑
13.3%
FACU
d❑
Total Number of Dominant
3•
Nyssa svlvatica
40
53.3%
FAC
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
4•
Platanus occidentalis
10
❑
13.3%
FACW
5
0
❑
o.00/o
Percent of dominant Species
❑
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 80.0% (A/B)
6.
0
0.00/0
-
7
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
-
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
75
= Total Cover
OBL species 5 x 1 = 5
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species 20 x 2 = 40
1.
Ilex opaca
25
d❑
41.7%
FACU
2•
Nyssa svlvatica
25
d❑
41.7%
FAC
FAC species 100 x 3 = 300
3.
Betula nlgra
10
❑
16.7%
FACW
FACU species 40 x 4 = 160
4
0
❑
0.00/0
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
5
0
❑
0.00/0
Column Totals: 165 (A) 505 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.061
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
0 Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
❑ Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
60
= Total Cover
❑Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
j
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5• 0 ❑ o.00/o
6•
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
-
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
d❑
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
j •
Microstegium vimineum
20
66.7%
FAC
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2•
Carex lurida
5
❑
16.7%
OBL
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3.
Polystichum acrostichoides
5
❑
16.7%
FACU
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o°ro
in height.
5•
o
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Five Vegetation Strata:
7•
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g•
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12•
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
30
=Total Cover
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1
0
El0.0%
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2.
0
❑
0.0%
m) in height.
3.
0
❑
0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
_ 0
❑
0.0%
-
height.
'c
6
0
❑
0.0%
Vegetation
Yes * No ❑
0
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

.0
Sampling Point: WAX u
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 1 Locz Texture
0-1 10YR 4/4 100 Sandy Clay Loam
1-12 10YR 5/6 100
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Candy r iAv I -
zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Dark Surface (S7)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 148)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Wake Sampling Date: 16-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WAX wet
Investigator(s): M. Harrell Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): flat Slope: 0.0 % / 0.0 °
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.85903 Long.:-78.52861 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Cm- Chewacla soils NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes O No * (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No O
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 O
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No O Is the Sampled Area Yes * No O
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No O within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
d❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
d❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
0 FAC-neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No
Depth (inches): 0
Water Table Present? Yes O No
Depth (inches): 0
Yes (* No O
Saturation Present?
Yes O No
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WAX wet
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 ,
Ulmus americana
50
d❑
62.5%
FACW
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 6 (A)
2•
Acer rubrum
15
❑
18.8%
FAC
❑
Total Number of Dominant
3•
NYssa sYlvatica
5
6.3%
FAC
Species Across All Strata: 7 (B)
4•
Carpinus caroliniana
5
❑
6.3%
FAC
5•
Ilex opaca
5
❑
6.3%
FACU
Percent of dominant Species
❑
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 85.7% (A/B)
6.
0
0.00/0
7
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
80
= Total Cover
OBL species 5 x 1 = 5
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
10
d❑
33.3%
FAC
FACW species 60 x 2 = 120
1.
NYssa sYlvatica
2•
Carpinuscarollnlana
10
d❑
33.3%
FAC
FAC species 65 x 3 = 195
3•
Acer rubrum
5
❑
16.7%
FAC
FACU species 15 x 4 = 60
4.
Ilex opaca
5
❑
16.7%
FACU
UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
5
0
❑
0.00/0
Column Totals: 145 (A) 380 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.621
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
0 Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
0 Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
30
= Total Cover
❑Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
j
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5• 0 ❑ o.00/o
6•
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
_
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
d❑
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
1 •
Arundinaria tecta
10
50.0%
FACW
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2.
Ilex opaca
5
d❑
25.0%
FACU
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3.
Dulichium arundinaceum
5
d❑
25.0%
OBL
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o%
in height.
5•
0
6
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Five Vegetation Strata:
7•
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g.
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12•
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
20
=Total Cover
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1.
Smilax rotundifolia
15
0
100.0%
FAC
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2•
0
❑
0.0%
m) in height.
3•
0
❑
0.00/0
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
_ 0
❑
0.00/0
height.
5• 0 ❑ 0.00/0
_
Hydrophytic
6•
0
❑
0.00/0
Vegetation
Yes * No 0
15
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

.Q
Sampling Point: WAX wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
Redox Features
(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist) % Type 1 Locz Texture
0-4
10YR 4/4
100
4-9
10YR 4/3
90
10YR 5/8 10 C M Clay Loam
9-16
10YR 4/2
85
7.5YR 4/6 15 C M Clay Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil 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)
El Black Histic (A3)
El Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
El Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
0 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 Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
3 Indicators of vegetation and
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
wetland hydrology must be present,
hydrologymust
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No 0
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Wake Sampling Date: 17-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WZA wet
Investigator(s): P. Butler Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Lowland Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope: 1.0 % / 0.6 °
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.76079 Long.: -78.54 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: ApC - Appling sandy loam NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes O No * (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No O
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 O
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No O Is the Sampled Area Yes * No O
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No O within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain. Adjacent upland is a maintained yard
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
0 Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
0 High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
0 Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
d❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
0 FAC-neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No O
Depth (inches): 1
Water Table Present? Yes No O
Depth (inches): 0
Yes (* No O
Saturation Present?
Yes No O
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WZA wet
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: entire )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 •
Betula nigra
40
d❑
61.5%
FACW
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A)
2.
Acer rubrum
20❑
30.8%
FAC
❑
Total Number of Dominant
3.
Liriodendron tulipifera
5
7.7%
FACU
Species Across All Strata: 7 (B)
4.
0
❑
o.o%
5
0
❑
o.00/o
Percent of dominant Species
❑
_
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 71.4% (A/B)
6.
0
0.00/0
7
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
65
= Total Cover
OBL species 10 x 1 = 10
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: entire
)
FACW species 135 x 2 = 270
1
Betula nigra
15
d❑
37.5%
FACW
•
2.
Acer rubrum
10
d❑
25.0%
FAC
FAC species 35 x 3 = 105
3.
Plnustaeda
5
❑
12.5%
FAC
FACU species 25 x 4 = 100
4•
Liciustrumsinense
10
d❑
25.0%
FACU
UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
5
0
❑
0.0%
Column Totals: 205 (A) 485 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.366
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
0 Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
0 Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
40
= Total Cover
❑Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
1
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
5.
0
❑
o.00/o
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6.
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
_
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
d❑
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
1 •
Arundinaria gigantea
80
88.9%
FACW
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2.
Carex lurida
5
❑
5.6%
OBL
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3.
Dulichium arundinaceum
5
❑
5.6%
OBL
_
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o%
in height.
5.
0
6
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Five Vegetation Strata:
7.
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g.
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
_
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12.
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: entire )
90
=Total Cover
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1
Lonicera japonica
10
0
100.00/0
FACU
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
•
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2.
0
❑
0.00/0
m) in height.
3.
0
❑
0.00/0
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
_ 0
❑
0.00/0
height.
5. 0 ❑ 0.00/0
_
Hydrophytic
6.
0
❑
0.00/0
Vegetation
Yes * No 0
10
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

.Q
Sampling Point: WZA wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type 1 Locz `Texture
0-3 10YR 4/4 95 7.5YR 4/6 5 C M Loam
3-12 7.5YR 5/1 85 7.5YR 4/6 15 C M Sandy Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil 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)
El Black Histic (A3)
El Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
El Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
0 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 Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
3 Indicators of vegetation and
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
wetland hydrology must be present,
hydrologymust
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No 0
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Raleigh Sampling Date: 17-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WZC up
Investigator(s): P. Butler Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillside Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope: 2.0 %
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.76399 Long.:-78.54305 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Me- Mantachie soils 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 O 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
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No Is the Sampled Area Yes ❑ No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ 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): 0
Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No
Depth (inches): 0
Yes ❑ No
Saturation Present?
Yes ❑ No
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WZC uo
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
Fagus cirandifolia
25
d❑
31.3%
FACU
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A)
2. Ouercus rubra
35
❑
43.80/6
FACU
0
Total Number of Dominant
3• Quercus alba
20
25.0%
FACU
Species Across All Strata: 7 (B)
4•
0
❑
o.o%
5
0
❑
o.00/o
Percent of dominant Species
❑
_
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 14.3% (A/B)
6.
0
0.00/0
7
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
80
= Total Cover
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
10
0
33.3%
FACU
FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
1. Ilex opaca
2• Fagusgrandlfolla
10
d❑
33.3%
FACU
FAC species 10 x 3 = 30
3• Carpinuscarollnlana
10
d❑
33.3%
FAC
FACU species 110 x 4 = 440
4
0
❑
0.0%
_
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
5
0
❑
0.0%
Column Totals: 120 (A) 470 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.917
7
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
❑ Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
❑ Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
30
= Total Cover
❑Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
j
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5• 0 ❑ o.00/o
6•
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
El
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
1
0
0.0%
_
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2
0
❑
0.00/0
_
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3
0
El0.0%
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o%
in height.
5•
0
6
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Five Vegetation Strata:
7•
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g•
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12•
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
0
= Total Cover
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1. Lonicera japonica
10
0
100.00/0
FACU
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2.
0
❑
0.00/0
m) in height.
3•
0
❑
0.00/0
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
_ 0
❑
0.00/0
height.
5• 0 ❑ 0.00/0
_
Hydrophytic
6•
0
❑
0.0%
Vegetation
Yes 0 No
10
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

.0
Sampling Point: WZC u
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 1 Locz `Texture
0-3 10YR 3/4 100 Loam
3-12 10YR 5/4 100
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Canrly I -
zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Dark Surface (S7)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 148)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: West Neuse Interceptor City/County: Wake Sampling Date: 17-3an-20
Applicant/Owner: City of Raleigh State: North Carolin Sampling Point: WZC wet
Investigator(s): P. Butler Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Lowland Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope: 1.0 % / 0.6 °
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 in LRR P Lat.: 35.76373 Long.:-78.54373 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Me- Mantachie soils NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 0 No * (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No 0
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 0
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No 0 Is the Sampled Area Yes * No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No 0 within a Wetland?
Remarks:
wet conditions/ recent rain
Hydrology
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired; check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
d❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ 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 (B3)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
d❑ 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 0 No
Depth (inches): 0
Water Table Present? Yes 0 No
Depth (inches): 0
Yes (* No 0
Saturation Present?
Yes 0 No
Wetland Hydrology
Depth (inches): 0
Present?
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/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: WZC wet
Absolute
JpC{:IC,:
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: entire )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 • Liquidambar stvraciflua
15
d❑
37.5%
FAC
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
2. Acer rubrum
25❑
62.5%
FAC
❑
Total Number of Dominant
3
0
0.0%
_
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
4.
0
❑
o.o%
5
0
❑
o.00/o
Percent of dominant Species
❑
_
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 80.0% (A/B)
6.
0
0.00/0
7
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
$
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
40
= Total Cover
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
30
d❑
85.7%
FAC
FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
1 • Liguidambar stvraciflua
2. Carpinuscarollnlana
5
❑
14.3%
FAC
FAC species 85 x 3 = 255
3
0
❑
0.00/0
FACU species 10 x 4 = 40
4
0
❑
0.0%
_
_
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
5
0
❑
0.0%
Column Totals: 95 (A) 295 (B)
6
0
❑
o.00/o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.105
7
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8
0
❑
0.00/0
❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
g
0
❑
o.o%
0 Dominance Test is > 50%
1 �•
0
El0.0%
❑ Prevalence Index is :53.0 1
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
35
= Total Cover
❑Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
1
0
❑
0.00/0
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
0
❑
0.0%
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
3
0
❑
0.00/0
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4
0
❑
0.00/0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
5.
0
❑
o.00/o
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6.
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Four Vegetation Strata:
7
0
El0.0%
Tree stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
-
-
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH),
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
0
= Total Cover
regardless of height.
El
Sapling/shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding
1
0
0.0%
_
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
2
0
❑
0.00/0
_
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
3
0
El0.0%
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
4'
0
El0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
Elo.o%
in height.
5.
0
6
0
❑
o.00/o
_
Five Vegetation Strata:
7.
0
❑
0.00/0
❑
Tree -Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
8
0
0.00/0
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
g.
0
❑
0.0%
diameter at breast height (DBH).
El
Sapling stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
1
0
0.0%
_
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
11.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
12.
0
❑
0.00/0
Shrub stratum - Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
0
= Total Cover
Herb stratum - Consists of all herbaceous (non -woody) plants,
1 Smilax rotundifolia
10
0
50.0%
FAC
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
•
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1
2. Lonicera iaponica
10❑
50.0%
FACU
m) in height.
3.
0
❑
0.0%
Woody vines - Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
4.
0
❑
0.00/0
height.
5. 0 ❑ 0.00/0
_
Hydrophytic
6.
_ 0
❑
0.0%
Vegetation
Yes * No 0
20
=Total Cover
Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Corridor portion of the wetland is maintained yard
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

.0
Sampling Point: WZC wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
—(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type 1 Locz `Texture Remarks
0-4 10YR 6/1 75 7.5YR 5/8 25 C PL/M Sandy Loam disturbed
4-12 10YR 5/3 90 7.5YR 5/6 10 C M Sandy Loam disturbed
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains
Hydric Soil Indicators:
zLocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Dark Surface (S7)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
0 Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR N,
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (1`12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 148)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes * No ❑
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

2023 Updates
on Following Pages

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Upper West Neuse Interceptor city/county: Wake County Sampling Date: 2023-06-26
Applicant/Owner: Raleigh State: North Carolina Sampling Point: WAU
Investigator(s): Phil May Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 0-2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.854827 Long:-78.529901 Datum: WGS84
Soil Map Unit Name: Chewacla and Wehadkee soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded 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
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 (1314)
_ 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 (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 (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 ✓
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WAU
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
30 )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1. Betula nigra
60
Y
FACW
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A)
2. Liquidambar styraciflua
20
Y
FAC
Total Number of Dominant
3•
Species Across All Strata: 7 (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 71.43 (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
80.0
= Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
40.0 20% of
total cover:
16.0
OBL species 0.00 x 1 = 0.00
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
15
)
FACW species 60.00 x 2 = 120.00
1. Liquidambar styraciflua
30
Y
FAC
FAC species 160.00 x 3 = 480.00
2. Ilex opaca
10
Y
FACU
FACU species 30.00 x 4 = 120.00
3
UPL species 0.00 x 5 = 0.00
4
Column Totals: 250.00 (A) 720.00 (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.88
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
2 -Dominance Test is >50%
9.
V 3 - Prevalence Index is :53.0'
40.0
= Total Cover
4 -Morphological Adaptations (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
20.0 20% of
total cover:
8.0
-
5
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1. Microstegium vimineum
90
Y
FAC
-
2.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3•
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
6
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
7.
height.
8.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
9•
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
10.
m) tall.
11.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
90.0
= Total Cover
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
50% of total cover:
45.0 20% of
total cover:
18.0
30
Woody vine -All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
)
height.
1. Smilax rotundifolia
20
Y
FAC
2. Lonicera japonica
20
Y
FACU
3.
4.
Hydrophytic
5.
Vegetation
40.0
= Total Cover
Present? Yes ✓ No
50% of total cover:
20.0 20% of
total cover:
8.0
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: WAU
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Type Loc
Texture Remarks
0-6 10YR 4/6 100
L
6-12 10YR 5/4 100
CL
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 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 (TF12)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al 2)
_ 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 (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
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Upper West Neuse Interceptor city/county: Wake County Sampling Date: 2023-06-26
Applicant/Owner: Raleigh State: North Carolina Sampling Point: WZZWet
Investigator(s): Phil May Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 0-2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.829808 Long:-78.536224 Datum: WGS84
Soil Map Unit Name: Riverview fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, occasionally flooded 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
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 (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
r Drainage Patterns (1310)
_ Saturation (A3)
r 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 (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
✓ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
r 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
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WZZwet
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
30 )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1. Betula nigra
30
Y
FACW
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 7 (A)
2. Liriodendron tulipifera
30
Y
FACU
3. Carpinus caroliniana
20
Y
FAC
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 8 (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 87.50 (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
80.0
= Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
40.0 20% of
total cover:
16.0
OBL species 80.00 x 1 = 80.00
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
15
)
FACW species 30.00 x 2 = 60.00
1. Carpinus caroliniana
40
Y
FAC
FAC species 110.00 x 3 = 330.00
2. Ilex opaca
20
Y
FAC
FACU species 30.00 x 4 = 120.00
3. Quercus nigra
20
Y
FAC
UPL species 0.00 x 5 = 0.00
4
Column Totals: 250.00 (A) 590.00 (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.36
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
2 -Dominance Test is >50%
9.
V 3 - Prevalence Index is :53.0'
80.0
= Total Cover
4 -Morphological Adaptations (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
40.0 20% of
total cover:
16.0
-
5
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1. Woodwardia areolata
80
Y
OBL
-
2.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3•
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
6
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
7.
height.
8.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
9•
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
10.
m) tall.
11.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
80.0
= Total Cover
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
50% of total cover:
40.0 20% of
total cover:
16.0
30
Woody vine -All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
)
height.
1. Smilax rotundifolia
10
Y
FAC
2.
3.
4.
Hydrophytic
5.
Vegetation
10.0
=Total Cover
Present? Yes ✓ No
50% of total cover:
5.0 20% of
total cover:
2.0
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: WZZwet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Type Loc
Texture Remarks
0-4 10YR 3/4 100
L
4-6 10YR 4/2 100
CL
6-15 10YR 5/2 60
10YR 3/6 40 C PL
CL
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 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 (TF12)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al 2)
_ 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 (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):
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: Upper West Neuse Interceptor city/county: Wake County Sampling Date: 2023-06-26
Applicant/Owner: Raleigh State: North Carolina Sampling Point: WZZUpI
Investigator(s): Phil May Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 0-2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.829969 Long:-78.536192 Datum: WGS84
Soil Map Unit Name: Riverview fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, occasionally flooded 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
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 (1314)
_ 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 (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 (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 ✓
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WZZupI
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1. Quercus nigra
40
Y
FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 6 (A)
2. Acer rubrum
30
Y
FAC
3. Pinus taeda
30
Y
FAC
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 10 (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 60.00 (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
100.0
=Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
50.0
20% of
total cover:
20.0
OBL species 0.00 x 1 = 0.00
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species 0.00 x 2 = 0.00
1. Ilex opaca
50
Y
FACU
FAC species 180.00 x 3 = 540.00
2. Fagus grandifolia
20
Y
FACU
FACU species 100.00 x 4 = 400.00
3. Carpinus caroliniana
20
Y
FAC
UPL species 0.00 x 5 = 0.00
4
Column Totals: 280.00 (A) 940.00 (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.36
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
2 -Dominance Test is >50%
9.
3 - Prevalence Index is :53.0'
90.0
= Total Cover
_
4 -Morphological Adaptations (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
45.0
20% of
total cover:
18.0
-
5
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1. Parthenocissus puinpuefolia
20
Y
FACU
-
2. Vitis rotundifolia
20
Y
FAC
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3•
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
6
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
7.
height.
8.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
9•
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
10.
m) tall.
11.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
40.0
= Total Cover
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
50% of total cover:
20.0
20% of
total cover:
8.0
30
Woody vine -All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
height.
1, Vitis rotundifolia
40
Y
FAC
2. Parthenocissus puinpuefolia
10
Y
FACU
3.
4.
Hydrophytic
5.
Vegetation
50.0
= Total Cover
Present? Yes ✓ No
50% of total cover:
25.0
20% of
total cover:
10.0
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: WZZupI
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Type Loc
Texture Remarks
0-4 10YR 3/4 100
L
4-9 10YR 4/4 100
L
9-15 10YR 4/3 100
SL
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 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 (TF12)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al 2)
_ 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 (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
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
Secretary
S. DANIEL SMITH
Director
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
March 19, 2020
City of Raleigh Public Utilities Department
Attn: Janice Goodwin
One Exchange Plaza, Suite 620
Raleigh, NC 27601
Subject: Buffer Determination Letter
Determination Date: 03/11/2020
Staff: Zach Thomas & Erin Deck
RRO #20-039
Wake County
Determination Type:
Buffer I Intermittent/Perennial
® Neuse (15A NCAC 2B .0233)
❑ Tar -Pamlico (15A NCAC 2B .0259) ❑ Intermittent/Perennial Determination (where local
❑ Jordan (15A NCAC 2B .0267) buffer ordinances apply)
(governmental and/or interjurisdictional
projects)
Project Name: West Neuse Interceptor
Address/Location: City of Raleigh Sewer Line along Neuse River/Neuse River Trail
Stream(s): Neuse River
D. �.._ North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
��J¢ Raleigh Regional Office 13800 Barrett Drive i Raleigh, North Carolina 27609
NA
at aus" 919.791,4200

Feature
E(I/ T
Not
Subject
Start@
Stop@
Soil
USGS
Subject (Z)
Survey
Topo
Neuse River
P
X
Throughout
X
X
A
X
X
Approx:
Confluence w/
B
UP
X
35.837901,
Neuse River
X
-78.531904
C
X
X
D
X
X
X
E
X
X
X
Approx:
Confluence w/
F
UP
X
35.805304
Neuse River
X
X
-78.539505
G
X
X
X
Approx:
Confluence w/
H
UP
X
35.796735,
Neuse River
X
-78.542460
Approx:
Confluence w/
I
UP
X
35.795330,
Neuse River
X
-78.542712
J
X
X
K
X
Not subject within 50ft of project
X
L
X
X
M
X
X
N
X
X
O
X
Not subject within 50ft of project
X
P
X
X
All other
Throughout
mapped
UP
X
(and within 50 feet of project boundary)
X
X
features
(1) E = Ephemeral, I = Intermittent, P = Perennial, NP - Not Present, NA=Not Applicable
(2) Refers to riparian buffer rules only. Stream, wetland, or pond impacts are still subject to applicable water quality standards and permitting requirements.
"Attached maps and GPS coordinates provided by Carolina Ecosystems"

Explanation: The stream(s)/pond(s) listed above has been located on the most recent published
NRCS Soil Survey of Wake County, North Carolina and/or the most recent copy of the USGS
Topographic map at a 1:24,000 scale. Each feature that is checked "Not Subject" has been
determined to not be an intermittent stream, perennial stream, a pond connected to a stream
feature, or the feature is determined not to be present. Stream features that are checked
"Subject" have been located on the property and possess characteristics that qualify it to be
subject to the buffer rules. There may be other streams located on the property that do not show
up on the maps referenced above and are therefore not subject to the buffer rules. However, if
the stream features are present on the tract they are subject to all other applicable North Carolina
stream standards and permitting requirements as outlined in 15A NCAC 02B, and may be
considered jurisdictional according to the US Army Corps of Engineers.
This on -site determination shall expire five (5) years from the date of this letter.
Landowners or affected parties that dispute a determination made by the DWR may
request a determination by the Director. An appeal request must be made within sixty (60)
days of date of this letter. A request for a determination by the Director shall be referred
to the Director in writing. If sending via US Postal Service: c/o Paul Wojoski; DWR — 401 &
Buffer Permitting Unit, 1617 Mail Service Center; Raleigh, NC 27699-1617. If sending via
delivery service (UPS, FedEx, etc.): Paul Wojoski; DWR — 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit, 512
N. Salisbury Street; Raleigh, NC 27604.
This determination is final and binding unless, as detailed above, an appeal is requested
within sixty (60) days.
This Project may require a Section 4041401 Permit for the Proposed activity. Any inquiries
should be directed to the US Army Corp of Engineers (Raleigh Regulatory Field Office) at
(919)-554-4884.
If you have questions regarding this determination, please feel free to contact:
Zach Thomas at [phone].
Sincerely,
Scott Vinson, Regional Sup isor
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Raleigh Regional Office
Division of Water Resources, NCDEQ
cc: Matt Harrell, Carolina Ecosystems (via email: [e-mail])
RRO DWR File Copy & Laserfrche

T ek4
_ +�
�l
s a
E
` }
_ 1 l
A
t
a, y
J+
T.
!'
S
N Map Dale: March 2020 West Nettse interceptor
Rehabilitation and Replacement
AROLINA MENNEN== Feet Revised: Coun t NCCtOSYSTEMS 0 125 250 C3 Study Area Wake
Revised: Figure 4: NRCS Map
Wake Count NC Soil Survey Maus 40. 50 60 70 Revised: Sheet 1 of 12

F
A 2
:Q
Yi
Feature B:
Subject at 35.837901,-78.531904
k
9
'd ®r,
t
Lo D
LOB
51
VV
'4 LC
N Map Ume: March 2020 !'Vest Neuse Interceptor
Rehabilitation and Replacement
QICAROLINA � Feet Revised: Wake Count NC
(!ECOSYSTEMS 0 125 250 OStudyArea Revised:
Figure 4: NRCS Map
Wake County, NC Soil Survey Maps 40 50 60 70 Revised: Sheet 3 of 12

� V �
a
kApD, � .r r« �
W
# k 1
A r
i
Ar
W82
611
M r
41
9• � p' 1
_ 1
r � J
`n + .
► k PC !
A
1
kE
-W
•i
»� .1
1
F
}
N Map Date: March 2020 West Neuse Interceptor
Rehabilitation and Replacement
(1CAROLINA Feet ��'� Wake Count N
/ECOSYSTEMS 0 125 250 C3 Study Area
Revised: Figure 4: NRCS Map
Wake County, NC Soil Smey Maps 40, 50 60,70 Revised: Sheet 10 of 12

00
i r _
Feature O: 'x
Not Subject Within 50' of Study Area
+�
e
W ti
i
12 x
.. Feature P:�—
Not Subject
N 1
1 g
lid
k
ApS'
Xy P
/EI
N Map Date: March 2020 West Neuse Interceptor
Rehabilitation and Replacement
tQ1CAROLINA Feet Revised: Wake County, NC
VECOSYSTEMS 0 125 250 OStudy Area
Rcviscd: Figure 4: NRCS Map
Wake County, NC Soil Survey Maps 40. 50 60 70 Revised: Sheet 12 of 12

Feature A:
Not Subject
�1
f/4
i,
t
�Y
�aP11
4 t
a'a
1 y
1
N Map Date: March 2020 West Neuse Interceptor
Rehabilitation and Replacement
OQQ11 CAROLINA Feet Revised:
ECOSYSTEMS 0 125 250 Study Area Wake County, NC
Revised: Figure 2: USGS Map
Raleigh East NC 2016 USGS 1:24000 Quadrangle Map Revised: Sheet 1 of 12

\A i
Subject Throughout
Subject Throughout
JePINE,'a
we
N Map Date: March 2020 ♦resr reuse ■merccpwr
Rehabilitation and Replacement
mDCAROLINA Feet Reu sed: Wak Count NC
�JECOSYSTEMS 0 125 250 OStudy Area
ltcviscd: Figure 2: USGS Map
Ralei East NC (2016) USGS 1:24000 Quadran I�p Revised: Sheet 2 of 12

�.i•ir .
Subject Throughout
Ox
Feature C:
Not Subject
Feature D: Not Subject
d
•
i�
a�
ti
Subject Throughout
N Map Date: March 2020 West Neuse Interceptor
Rehabilitation and Replacement
(1CAROLINA Feet Revised: County.N
(!ECOSYSTEMS 0 125 250 �StudyArea
Rcviscd: Figure 2: USGS Map
Raleigh East NC 2016USGS 1:24000 Quadrangle Mav Revised: Sheet 4 of 12

I"
� VA( -
- --�w GN
Lt.
z
Feature F:
blm` Subject at 35.805304,-78.539505
O �.
19 es. a e o
aaaarr
N Map Date: March 2020 West Neuse Interceptor
I Rehabilitation and Replacement
CAROLINA Feet
C3 Study Area Revised: Wake County, NC
0 125 250 Reviscd: Figure 2: USGS Map
E)ECOSYSTEMS lRaleigh East. NC (20161 USGS 1:24000 Quadranxie Ma Revised: Sheet 6 of 12

P
000
r�
Feature G:
Not Subject
�4.
Feature H:
Subject at 35.796735,-78.542460
1
i
Feature I:
Subject at 35.795330,-78.542712
O y
N Map Date: Mardi 2020 West Neuse Interceptor
Rehabilitation and Replacement
�1CAROLINA Feet Revised: Wake Count NC
(/ECOSYSTEMS 0 125 250 EM Study Area
Revised: Figure 2: USGS Map
Raleigh East. NC 2016 USGS 1:24000 Quadrangle Map Revised: Sheet 7 of 12

\ OiA
IA
moo\
a
L-I
Subject Throughout
coy
N Map Date: March 2020 ' wes[ ineuse in[erccp[or
Rehabilitation and Replacement
CAROLINA Feet Revised: u Wa to Cont NC
ECOSYSTEMS 0 125 250 OStudyArea
Rcviscd: Figure 2: USGS Map
Raleigh ELgt NC (2016) USGS 1:24000 Quadranole Map Revised: Sheet 8 of 12

I
Feature L:
Not Subject
h
4
F \
ar•
V^( j
V
F
Jr� ii
i
V
�a
N Map Uate: March 2020 West Neuse Interceptor
Rehabilitation and Replacement
CAROLINA mmmmmm=== Feet Revised: Wake C
ount NC
ECOSYSTEMS 0 125 250 Study Area
Revised: Figure 2: USGS Map
Ralei h East, NC (2016) USGS 1:24000 QuadranAle Mao Revised: Sheet 10 of 12

r.
ti
a
1
a
Feature M:
� Not Subject
O�
C
Feature N:
Not Subject
art_
urr�
1
•
25�
Subject Throughout
N ` Map Date: March 2020 West Neuse Interceptor
Rehabilitation and Replacement
[11CAROLINA �o Feet Revised: Wake Count N
+►ECOSYSTEMS 0 125 250 OStudy Area
Revised: Figure 2: USGS Map
Raleigh East NC 2016 USGS 1:24000 Quadrangle Map Revised: Sheet 11 of 12

,k
Feature P:
Not Subject
Feature O:
Not Subject Within 50' of Study Area
vw
Q00
N Map Date: March 2020 urea tveuse irnercep[ur
Rehabilitation d Replacement
��11CAROLINA Revised: Feet OStudyArea Wake Canount NC
V/ECOSYSTEMS 0 125 250 Revised: Figure 2: USGS Map
Raleigh East. NC 2016 USGS 1:24000 Quadrangle Map Revised: Sheet 12 of 12