20191197 Ver 1_Bridge 224 Division 7 packet_20190910

:ve
a _
- _ 'Bend Rd
Bessemer
Maybrook Dr
t
neck
U)
- -
Qd`
E a�e°O
o
= f o
3 Naco Rd
N
xNash St
E Hanns Ln
-
Central Ave
a
tr
° 3
c Dawson Ave
a wilsonwood Ru
a Eastland Avc
Q
3
Meath St
-Drys
Cpapey rn Mountalnridtte Dr
Ra `e
v
: _ Hope Vall eV L"a
N
Y
Ter
Heath Pa,h " Holts Chapel
Rtl
Sauls Or
t
O
Afton Or
- V
rp
$ � o
T
o O
B D
x O at
Rd
McConnell
PROJECT LOCATION
J Pednu"� ,
01,M,Connerr� 36.059840,-79.725391
hlerroral
,.en Wry ;
o a
°A Y
AsterDf ---
McConn Rd -
-- -, t
m �
-
v
e��
v
B
Janet Ln
-t
Mc
a � d
m
_
-
oDr_ A C
�c m 4 S°Uthall Or
� SweetO I
N 'o _.
b ¢
o � o`
_
a o
`ram Edgewood Or w
� V n
J n Cor nerrock Or m
i Barbour Or 4
4 `u
14
Dr
Rd � p
ha"e
`' Sharpe Rd
cv, ¢j1 A
in
u U�9
`0
0` s
3 Sri
r=
`u
w
Eid pt
6p"e `
so+
r°.eavQ¢ �goto�e
v`de Dr
Dru
u O
Chippendale TOFarlow Rd
`o0k
y
a
�c`
0e o
fNs
a
F(s Castl°ton Rd ° Julius Ct
eSe MCCs`
m
o
ghr °
_ o Harbor R/
ti /Od age
ook Rd O
°c Or
q L
c
McGinty Dr Clovelly Or
�
m
Legend
� r
C
Study Area
0
- ,% v
2 zaai ,E Lec
3,d To
0 1,000 2,000
17BP.7.R.116
Feet
BRIDGE 224 OVER
90
SOUTH BUFFALO CREEK
FIGURE 1
PREPARED BY:
DATE:
STUDY AREA
GUILFORD COUNTY, NC
P_NN,
Jl
AUGUST
R­ 10N
2017

_ 7 1
� 1
4,*A
p
0
1�
1
•�� '` d0
i 1f a
r 1 •fit •� . ,+� �A0 .
Legend d�►. � � :,•
Study Area _.-_ ' ' ' 7 • • • ;
• • t ` : �!
0 400 800 17BP.7.R.116
Feet BRIDGE 224 OVER 90
SOUTH BUFFALO CREEK
FIGURE 2 PREPARED BY: DATE:
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC GUILFORD COUNTY, NC fir P_--a AUGUST
l'• Piro 10N 2017

;;.Y ,5 ,. � '1!Py A' K{ �i�, t7e f., •�{; Jt � :,C f K T, ;
1,
` 2 1
y - �"'"'tee •�f°�.e:�, . ���, S .
I`
t�' � ., r+i 4 � t t� �•. �� •r
� :� � of r / ! � yy�,� �' • � GF � Y ''��•
u Y ! _ tF a µh _ —•
4
d.. � �ft� �� r H I( _ � r��.f' !�Y'.�I ' i� 'fit � L�r, ,ne •. ��. p. r -
��'..
dl ky
Legend
Culvert
Stream
Wetland
Study Area

_ 1
Legend
Study Area
DEM
Elevation
High : 759.705
- Low: 688.902
0 100 200 17BP.7.R.116
Feet BRIDGE 224 OVER q<
SOUTH BUFFALO CREEK,oF�„sue
FIGURE 5 PREPARED BY: DATE:
GUILFORD COUNTY, NC E os°
LI DAR ETENO^^& AUGUST
� RESTO'R=- RATION 20

NC DWQ Stream Identif►cation Form Version 4.11 S9
Date: d d o /
Project/Site: o f �J�<
Latitude:3G o 55
Evaluators S .G
County: G�./ ��
Longitude,._7�
Total Points:
StreamDetermi circle one)
Other �L/GG«„sV;//oN
G
Stream is at least intermittent 1
if a 19 or Perennial if a 30- d I
Ephemeral nt�rmitten Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geornor holo (Subtotal = L0. 1
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
la Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
2
3
4. Panicle size of stream substrate
0
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain �, +
0
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
4-
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
1
2
3
6. Headcuts
0
1
3
9. Grade control -
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel °
No = 0
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = '/. -5- )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
�_2�
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
� �� 01
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
r'I
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5"
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
o = 0
Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = f )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19, Rooted upland plants in streambed
�3'1
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0 "
1
2
3
22. Fish
J
.0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
-0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
.0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
�_Q.)
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75, OBL = 1.5 OflZer
= 0
"perennial streams may also b identified using other
thods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: S / J t
-v
._,.
'e' h u G
Sketch:

USACE AID# DWQ # Situ#_ (indicate on attached map)
0 STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET -4p
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment: 1. Applicant's name: 1/= t)C% 2. Evaluator's name: ze- 4 « wry
3. Date of evaluation: 4 da+ / 4. Time of evaluation: `I 9 410
5. Name of stream: 6F1 T 4. S,./ 6. River basin: G�t.ir .,, ✓ F
7. Approximate drainage area: a /f� 8. Stream order:
9. Length of reach evaluated: /yo ' 10. County: lsU / t�
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any): /1/�✓t
Latitude (ex. 34.872312)3c ct> 9 /8 j Longitude (ex.-77.556611): - -)9,
Method location determined (circle)' GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map,identifying stream(s) location):
/
._` a /tee-�_<L��.I� �'� f� :. c�5.��•>..., aF k3n'�t :r� �+..i /f��v.,...r i1,e
14. Proposed channel work (if
v � s
15. Recent weather conditions: 'Wee,
a Ma ✓`<•'� �.
16. Site conditions at time of visit: &iW y 4 tce,e,. , i .A/a ry
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: _Section 10 _Tidal Waters _Essential Fisheries Habitat
_Trout Waters _Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters 4WaterSupply Watershed U 0-IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point?�O If yes, estimate the water surface area: d% 5 .
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES
21. Estimated watershed land use: � %Residential _%Commercial _%Industrial _/ %Agricultural
�% Forested ZEE% Cleared / Logged .%% Other ( --.I/ )
22. Bankfull width: 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): —' 1 e)
24. Channel slope down center of stream: _Flat (0 to 2%) Gentle (2 to 4%) _Moderate (4 to 10%) _Steep. (> 10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: _Straight Occasional bends _Frequent meander _Very sinuous _Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of thestream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Evaluator's Signature ✓(if& /I Date � /.J///9
This channel evaluation form is tntp ided to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and'envtronmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change —version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
,�
#
CHARACTERISTICS
ECOREGION POINT RANGE
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
I
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5
0-4
0-5
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = maxpoints)
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0-5
0-5
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
no buffer = 0; coma uous, wide buffer = maxpoints)
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0-4
0-4
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = maxpoints)
a
5
Groundwater discharge
0-3
0-4
0-4
U(no
discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points)
r..i
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0-4
0-2
y6
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
Entrenchment / floodplain access
0-5
0-4
0-2
p
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding= max points)
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0-4
0-2
no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands =max oints)
9
Channel sinuosity
0-5
0-4
0-3
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = maxpoints)
10
Sediment input
0-5
0-4
0-4
(extensive de osition= 0; little or no sediment =max points)
I I
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
NA*
0-4
0-5
(fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
0-4
0-5
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = maxpoints)
d
13
Presence of major bank failures
0-5
0-5
0-5
\ B s
W4
ry
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max oints)
d
14
Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0-4
0-5
(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points)
rn
15
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
p
0-5
0-4
0-5
(substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points)
16
Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes
0-3
0-5
0-6
riffle s/ri les or pools = 0; well -developed = maxpoints)
F,(no
HHabitat
1
complexity
0-6
0-6
0-6
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
.r
C�
18
Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0-5
0-5
(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = max points)
rtQ+i
19
Substrate embeddedness
NA*
0-4
0-4
3
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max)
20
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0-4
0-5
0-5
(no evidence = 0• common, numerous types = max oints)
21
Presence of amphibians
0 — 4
0 — 4
0 — 4
G7
O
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = maxpoints)
O
22
Presence of fish
0-4
0-4
0-4
�
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types =max points)
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0-5
0-5
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = maxpoints)
Total Points Possible
100
100
100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page)
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
e-

NC Division of Water Quality -Methodology for Identification of Intermittent and
Perennial Streams and Their Oriqins v. 4.11
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: ,5' 22j II g
Project/Site:&idG Z?i} sp
Latitude: 3fa.obo 2m-
Evaluator. A . 'f�rY+�-`�
County: �..�,�' 0f�
Longitude:
Total Points: 3a
Stream is at least intermittent `J
Stream Determination (circ
Other I�1r�L�'nyijlly
7la19or perenniallfa30`
Ephemeral Intermitter erenni
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =
2.5)
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
10 Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
t
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
2
3
5. Activeirelict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1)
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
S. Headcuts
0
1
2
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5 -
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
r No = 0
Yes = 3
`arthcial ditches are not rated: see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology Subtotal = Gi
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
C. Bioloov (Subtotal = (o 1
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22.-Fish
0.6
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5
Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: WR
Sketch:
41

USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
r
2. Evaluator's name: L/G�$.'4 i`1. \, c + w s
4. Time of evaluation:
6. River basin: h� r
8. Stream order:
10.County: <L�r� 1("�
/ 12. Subdivision name (if any): /V
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): �. 06Oa 3 `7 Longitude (ex. -77.556611): - %�, i,� 3 5
Method location determined (circle):C Topo Sheet Onho (Aerial) Photo/GIS Other GIS. Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby, roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
1. Applicant's name: /JG1D6 %
3. Date of evaluation: n i
5. Name of stream: 52 % T ? o S
l
7. Approximate drainage area: !`7
9. Length of reach evaluated: � 'Sty
1. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees
14. Proposed channel work (if
15. Recent
16. Site conditions at time
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: _Section 10 _Tidal Waters _Essential Fisheries Habitat
Habitat
_Trout Waters _Outstanding Resource Waters -Y Nutrient Sensitive Waters Water Supply Watershed �(I-IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? ES NO If yes, estimate the water surface area: > 4 G
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES N 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES' JO
21. Estimated watershed land use: %Residential %°Commercial %° Industrial _%Agricultural
o Forested 36%Cleared / Logged /V %Other ( a )
r r
22. Bankfull width: 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 3
24. Channel slope down center of stream: _Flat (0 to 2%) a Gentle (2 to 4%) _Moderate (4 to 10%) _Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: _Straight Occasional fiends _Frequent meander _Very sinuous _Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Evaluator's Signature zri✓I A ne- Date
This channel evaluation form is intnded to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
JJ
ECOREGION POINT RANGE
#
CHARACTERISTICS
SCORE
Coastal
PiedmontFO-5
ountain
I
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5
0-4
0-5
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0-5
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration =max points)
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
(no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = maxpoints)
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0-4
0-4
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)
Groundwater discharge
0-3
0-4
0-4
U5
(no discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points)
►r
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0-4
0-2
rA
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = maxpoints)
a(
7
Entrenchment / floodplain access
0-5
0-4
0-2
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0-4
0-2
no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = maxpoints)
9
Channel sinuosity
0-5
0-4
0-3
11
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = maxpoints)
d
10
Sediment input
0-5
0-4
0-4
extensive de osition= 0; little or no sediment =max points
I I
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
NA*
0-4
0-5
(fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = maxpoints)
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
0-4
0-5
,
>4
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max ints
13
Presence of major bank failures
0-5
0-5
0-5
II
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = maxpoints)
d
14
Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0-4
0-5
3
no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points
15
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0-5
0-4
0-5
(substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points)
16
Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes
0-3
0-5
0-6
no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well -developed = maxpoints)
1
Habitat complexity
0-6
0-6
0-6
I
F
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
I S
Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0-5
0-5
(no shadingvegetation = 0; continuous canopy = max points)
d,
19
Substrate embeddedness
NA*
0-4
0-4
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max)
20
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0-4
0-5
0-5
Q
no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = maxpoints)
21
Presence of amphibians
0- 4
0- 4
0- 4
D
O
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = maxpoints)
04
0
22
Presence of fish
0-4
0-4
0-4
p
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = maxpoints)
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0 - 5
0-1
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)
Total Points Possible
100
100
100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page)
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

Sc
NC DWO Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date;
Project/Site: i3 �,��� �� ~
Latitude:
Evaluator: '
/
county: h� �,�
Longitude;_
,� /
r
Total Points:
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other
Stream is at least intermittent 3'
S
Ephemeral Intermitten even
e.g. Quad Name: NG
if z 19 or erenniai na 30-
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =--/
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1' Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
2
3
6. Headcuts Q
0
1
<25
3
9. Grade control
'Ti--
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
- Ro = 0
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroloov (Subtotal = 6 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0-5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
' Yes = 3
C. Bioloav (Subtotal = 6 )
16. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
cq�'
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
<1r>
1
2
3
22. Fish
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians rrg5
0
0.5
4ff>
1.5
25. Algae
< ,
0:5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 'Other __10`
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: ;7j.
Sketch:

SG
USACE AID# DWQ # Site #_ (indicate on attached map)
1. Applicant's name: %,./G e ,!,
3. Date of evaluation: 4140 ib \\
5. Name of stream: Se 6C -r &.Tt+
7. Approximate drainage area: 5 A�
9. Length of reach evaluated: /GD
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees.
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 3G � 9 &'.a
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
2. Evaluator's name: 7 L<wZS
4. Time of evaluation: 11 I- '410
6. River basin:
r
8. Stream order: G5/
10. County: Gl
12. Subdivision name (if an �cN/A 11
Longitude (ex.-77.556611 ); _ /• lr) i �/ �d
Method location determined (circle)y G� PAS )Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
�C✓l �`��iv LDS tPorG� C/ G •�"/I�,/oaGP.IT.� G(�l.i-G.. ':�:�-^' mac./mad �<Can�<,.1�
14. Proposed channel work (if any^):
15. Recent weather conditions: lCt,'
16. Site conditions at time of visit:
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: _Section 10 _Tidal Waters _Essential Fisheries Habitat
_Trout Waters _Outstanding Resource Waters. Nutrient Sensitive Waters Water Supply Watershed —V-(I-IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES Jf yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad ma YES NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: _% Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial ol0% Agricultural
&Clo Forested —ao Cleared / Logged % Other
22. Bankfull width: d' 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): - 3
24. Channel slope down center of stream: _Flat (0 to 2%) !Gentle (2 to 4%) _Moderate (4 to 10%) _Steep (>I0%)
25. Channel sinuosity: _Straight _Occasional bends Frequent meander _Very sinuous _Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reachesthat display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Evaluator's Signature 22.—_ Date 4 /.a r �/A
This channel evaluation form is int ded to be used only as a guide to assist landowners an�ronmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
/
,. rr
ECOREGION POINT RANGE
#
CHARACTERISTICS
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
1
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5
0-4
0-5
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
2(extensive
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0-5
0-5
alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
1
no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = maxpoints)
d
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0-4
0-4
,
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = maxpoints)
5
Groundwater discharge
0-3
0-4
0-4
no discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points)
U
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0-4
0-2
r
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
Entrenchment / floodplain access
0-5
0-4
0-2
Q"
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0-4
0-2
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands -max points)
9
Channel sinuosity
0-5
0-4
0-3
>
3
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points)
10
Sedimentinput
0-5
0-4
0-4
(extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment = max points)
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
NA*
0-4
0-5
(fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = maxpoints)
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
0-4
0-5
3
>4
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = maxpoints)
1-4
13
Presence of major bank failures
0-5
0-5
0-5
.a
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = maxpoints)
/
14
Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0-4
0-5
E
(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points)
rA
15
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0-5
0-4
0-5
1
(substantial impact =0; no evidence =max points
of
16
Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes
0-3
0-5
0-6
no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well -developed = maxpoints)
F"
17
Habitat complexity
0-6
0-6
0-6
\
"
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
ai
18
Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0-5
0-5
(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy =maxpoints)
19
Substrate embeddedness
NA*
0-4
0-4
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max)
20
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0-4
0-5
0-5
(no evidence = 0; common numerous types = maxpoints)
> i
21
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0-4
0-4
l
O
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous type = max points)
c!
O
22
Presence of fish
0-4
0-4
0-4
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0-5
0-5
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)
Total Points Possible
100
100
100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page)
5
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

s.v
NC DWO Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: ro ��
daJc�
ProjecUSite: 3- am!
� �✓
Latitude: o
Evaluator: i� ��
County: L
l
Longitude:_7�
`
U'.1Fr✓
Total Points: /
(circl -
Other i sv
Stream is at least intermittent cl �
fa 19 orperennial if 2: 30' l
Ephemeral lntennittent erennia
Ephemeral
ral Intermittent
e.g. Quad Name: /UC
Quad
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =-IL 5)
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a- Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
<�
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
�3y.
8. Headcuts
1
2
3
9. Grade control
<irl•
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
11. or greater order channel
Second
No = 0
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 8
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
<zfn
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
___1 - -
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5-
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
tJo_=�._�
Yes = 3
C. Biolow (Subtotal = `1. S )
18, Fibrous roots in streambed
.:
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
'`
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) a P74t
0
1
- 2`-,
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
<`"' _
_1
2
3
22. Fish
0
`-0:5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
ZIOP
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians r iw 5
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 -
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: _ 41191 CA /
Sketch:

1. Applicant's name:
3. Date of evaluation:
5. Name of stream:
7. Approximate drainage area:
9. Length of reach evaluated: /�ov
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees.
USACE AID# DWQ# Site #_ (indicate on attached map)
ze • d;.
M STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment: ^�
2. Evaluator's name: F • LP6,;f
4. Time of evaluation:
6. River basin: G .>. &s- ✓
8. Stream order: c7 f
10. County: '1­11/
12.Subdivision name (ifany):
Latitude (ex. 34,872312): 3 o. / % 8 Longitude (ex.-77,556611): - <, >i - 3 S 5
Method location determined (circle): � Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
_ , _ � /_.i. . 1,_ . , _ , .// �_ ., _ . , ;>,_ . i — -i, —� / _ ,
14. Proposed channel work (if
15. Recent weather conditions:
16. Site conditions at time of
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: _Section 10 Tidal:Vaters _Essential Fisheries Habitat
_Trout Waters _Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters XWater Supply Watershed -2--(1-Iv)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? LYE: NO If yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES )NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? —YES NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: /O% Residential /4>%o Commercial /,�:5% Industrial % Agricultural
IC-) % Forested % Cleared / Logged % Other
22. Bankfull width: yo 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank):
24. Channel slope down center of stream: _Flat (0 to 2%) Gentle (2 to 4%) _Moderate (4 to 10%) Steep (> 10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: _Straight Occasional bends _Frequent meander _Very sinuous _Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Evaluator's Signature d�d�f!� i^ Date
This channel evaluation form is rat o ded to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and enviironmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change —version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
ECOREGION POINT RANGE
#
CHARACTERISTICS
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
1
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5
0-4
0-5
LI
no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0-5
0-5
1
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = maxpoints)
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0-4
0-4
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)
d
5
Groundwater discharge
0-3
0-4
0-4
(no discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = maxpoints)
d
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0-4
0-2
(no flood fain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
Entrenchment /floodplain access
0-5
0-4
0-2
l
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding= max points)
d
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0-4
0-2
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = maxpoints)
9
Channel sinuosity
0-5
0-4
0-3
--
extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points)
,
10
Sediment input
0-5
0-4
0-4
extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment max points)
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
NA*
0-4
0-5
(fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points)
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
0-4
0-5
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = maxpoints)
13
Presence of major bank failures
0-5
0-5
0-5
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
14
Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0-4
0-5
H(no
visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points)
rA
15
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0-5
0-4
0-5
(substantial impact =0; no evidence =max points)
'-
16
Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes
0-3
0-5
0-6
(no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well -developed = maxpoints)
F
H
17
Habitat complexity
0-6
0-6
0-6
��
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points
0.]
18
Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0-5
0-5
L 1
�
(no shadingvegetation = 0; continuous canopy =max points)
19
Substrate embeddedness
NA*
0-4
0-4
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max)
`-
20
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0-4
0-5
0-5
no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = maxpoints)
>+
0
21
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0-4
0-4
O
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types =maxpoints)
04
OO
22
Presence of fish
0-4
0-4
0-4
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
:7
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0-5
0-5
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)
a
Total Points Possible
100
100
100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page)
-�
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site: Bridge 224 over South Buffalo Creek City/County: Guilford County Sampling Date: 2/20/2018
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT State: NC Sampling Point: WA wet
Investigator(s): R. Lepslc Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0-1
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): 136 of P Lat: 36.060326 Long:-79•725789 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Chewacla NWI classification: PFO
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:
Floodplain of South Buffalo Creek. Floodplain pool / impoundment within wetland. Sample point
outside of impoundment.
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 (B16)
Water Marks (131)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (133)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
✓ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches): 9
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Standing water within wetland.
Not at sample point.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WA wet
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 3000 )
% Cover
Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1
Salix nigra
20
YES FACW
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 7 (A)
2
Liquidambar styraciflua
15
YES FAC
Total Number of Dominant
3•
Acer rubrum
15
YES FAC
Species Across All Strata: 8 (B)
4
Juglans nigra
10
NO FACU
Percent of Dominant Species
5
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 88 (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
8
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
60
= Total Cover
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling/Shrub
Stratum (Plot size: 30x30
)
FACW species x 2 =
1
Liquidambar styraciflua
5
NO FAC
FAC species x 3 =
2
Ilex decidua
10
YES FACW
FACU species x 4 =
3
Rosa multiflora
5
NO FACU
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: 0 (A) 0 (B)
4 Cephalanthus occidentalis 15 YES OBL
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 0
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
-
✓ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
—
3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
10.
—
4 Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
30x30
35
= Total Cover
—
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1
Microstegium vimineum
40
YES FAC
—
2
Agrimonia sp.
10
YES
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
6
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 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
10.
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
12.
50
= Total Cover
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 3000
)
height.
1
Smilax rotundifolia
50
YES FAC
2
Loniceria japonica
20
YES FACU
3.
4.
Hydrophytic
5
Vegetation
6,
Present? Yes No
70
= Total Cover
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: 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' Locz
Texture Remarks
0-1 10YR 3/2 100
loam
1-3 10YR 3/2 90
10YR 4/6 10 C PL
clay loam
3-12+ 10YR 4/1 70
7.5YR 4/6 20 C M
SCL
7.5YR 3/2 10
mg concretions
'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 (1719)
Stratified Layers (A5)
✓ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1719) (MLRA 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
Project/Site: Bridge 224 over South Buffalo Creek City/County: Guilford County Sampling Date: 2/20/2018
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT State: NC Sampling Point: WB wet
Investigator(s): R. Lepslc Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 1-3
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): 136 of P Lat: 36.060481 Long:-79.726493 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Chewacla NWI classification: PEM
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:
WB located in sparse wooded area and maintained powerline easement. Sample point in wooded
area.
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 (B16)
Water Marks (131)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (133)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (135)
✓ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
✓ Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches): 9
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring
well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Concave area sloping towards culvert
to WA
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WB wet
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 3000 )
% Cover
Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 Quercus phellos
40
YES FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A)
2 Liquidambar styraciflua
15
NO FAC
Total Number of Dominant
3• Acer rubrum
30
YES FAC
Species Across All Strata: 4 (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 75 (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
8
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
85
= Total Cover
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30x30
)
FACW species x 2 =
1.
FAC species x 3 =
2,
FACU species x 4 =
3.
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: 0 (A) 0 (B)
4.
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 0
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
-
✓ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
—
3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
10.
—
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
30x30
0
= Total Cover
—
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1 Cinna arundinacea
5
YES FACW
—
2 Lonicera japonica
LonicCare
5
YES FACU
sp.
5
YES
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
6
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 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
10.
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
12.
15
= Total Cover
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 3000
)
height.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Hydrophytic
5
Vegetation
6,
Present? Yes No
0
= Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Sparsely vegetated wooded area.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: WB Wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Type' Locz
Texture Remarks
0-1 10YR 4/1 95
7.5YR 4/6 5 C PL
clay loam
1-8 10YR 4/1 60
7.5YR 4/6 40 C PL and M
clay
8-12+ 10YR 4/1 70
7.5YR 4/6 20 C M
clay
7.5YR 3/2 10
mg concretions
'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 (1719)
Stratified Layers (A5)
✓ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1719) (MLRA 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
Project/Site: Bridge 224 over South Buffalo Creek City/County: Guilford County Sampling Date: 2/20/2018
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT State: NC Sampling Point: WA/WB up
Investigator(s): R. Lepslc Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 1-3
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): 136 of P Lat: 36.060326 Long:-79•725789 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Chewacla 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:
Same upland point for WA and WB. Upslope of WB. WA and WB separated by old earthen road
with culvert connection.
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 (B16)
Water Marks (131) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (133) _
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No `7
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:
Wetland hydrology indicators not present.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WAMB up
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 3000 )
% Cover
Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1
Ulmus americana
40
YES FACW
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A)
2
Liquidambar styraciflua
35
YES FAC
Total Number of Dominant
3•
Acer rubrum
60
YES FAC
Species Across All Strata: 7 (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5•
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 71 (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
8
135
= Total Cover
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling/Shrub
Stratum (Plot size: 30x30
)
FACW species x 2 =
1
Juniperus virginiana
15
YES FACU
FAC species x 3 =
2
Liquidambar styraciflua
10
YES FAC
FACU species x 4 =
3
Ligustrum sinense
5
NO FACU
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: 0 (A) 0 (B)
4.
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 0
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
-
✓ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
—
3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
10.
—
4 Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
30x30
30
= Total Cover
—
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb
Stratum (Plot size: )
1
Microstegium vimineum
75
YES FAC
— Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
2
Rosa multiflora
5
NO FACU
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3 Allium cernuum 5 NO FACU
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
6
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 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
10.
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
12.
85
= Total Cover
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 3000
)
height.
1
Loniceria japonica
40
YES FACU
2.
3.
4.
Hydrophytic
5
Vegetation
6,
Present? Yes No
40
= Total Cover
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: WA/WB up
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Type' Locz
Texture Remarks
0-1 10YR 4/3 100
loam
1-12+ 10YR 4/4 100
sandy loam
'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 (1719)
Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1719) (MLRA 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:
Hydric soil indicators not present.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site: Bridge 224 over South Buffalo Creek City/County: Guilford County Sampling Date: 2/20/2018
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT State: NC Sampling Point: WC wet
Investigator(s): R. Lepslc Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0-2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): 136 of P Lat: 36.060357 Long:-79.728040 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Wehadkee loam NWI classification: PFO
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:
Floodplain of SC. Sewer line run through wetland.
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 (B16)
Water Marks (131)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
✓ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (133)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (135)
✓ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery
(137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
✓ Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No ✓ Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes ✓
No Depth (inches): 4
Saturation Present? Yes ✓
No Depth (inches): 3
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge,
monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Standing water in wetland.
Not at sample point.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WC wet
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 3000 )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1
Acer rubrum
30
YES
FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A)
2
Liquidambar styraciflua
15
NO
FAC
Total Number of Dominant
3•
Acer ne undo
g
10
NO
FAC
Species Across All Strata: 9 (B)
4
Celtis laevigata
10
NO
FACW
5•
Platanus occidentalis
20
YES
FACW
Percent of Dominant Species
56
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (q/g)
6
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
25
YES
FACW
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
8
110
= Total Cover
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling/Shrub
Stratum (Plot size: 30x30
)
FACW species x 2 =
1
Acer negundo
5
YES
FAC
FAC species x 3 =
2
Ligustrum sinense
10
YES
FACU
FACU species x 4 =
3
Cornus amomum
5
YES
FACW
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: 0 (A) 0 (B)
4.
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 0
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
-
✓ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
—
3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
10.
—
4 Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
30x30
20
= Total Cover
—
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb
Stratum (Plot size: )
1
Glechoma hederacea
80
YES
FACU
— Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
2
Cerastium fontanum
15
NO
FACU
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
6
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 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
10.
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
12.
95
= Total Cover
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 3000
)
height.
1
Loniceria japonica
10
YES
FACU
2
Toxicodredron radicans
30
YES
FACU
3.
4.
Hydrophytic
5
Vegetation
6,
Present? Yes No
40
= Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Point within wooded area of wetland between sewer line and McConnell Road.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: WC wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Type' Locz Texture
Remarks
0-3 10YR 2/2 100
silt clay
3-12+ 10YR 3/1 80
7.5YR 4/6 20 D PL silt clay
'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 (1719)
Stratified Layers (A5)
✓ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) _
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8) _
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3Indicators
of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1719) (MLRA 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
Project/Site: Bridge 224 over South Buffalo Creek City/County: Guilford County Sampling Date: 2/20/2018
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT State: NC Sampling Point: WC up
Investigator(s): R. Lepslc Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0-2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): 136 of P Lat: 36.060357 Long:-79.728040 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Wehadkee 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 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:
Slightly upslope of WC near McConnell Road.
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 (B16)
Water Marks (131) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (133) _
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No `7
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:
Wetland hydrology indicators not present.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WC up
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 3000 )
% Cover
Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 Acer rubrum
30
YES FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
2 Quercus phellos
15
YES FAC
Total Number of Dominant
3.
Species Across All Strata: 7 (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 57 (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
8
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
45
= Total Cover
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30x30
)
FACW species x 2 =
1 Ulmus americana
15
YES FACW
FAC species x 3 =
2 Ligustrum sinense
30
YES FACU
FACU species x 4 =
3 Pyrus sp.
15
YES
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: 0 (A) 0 (B)
4.
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 0
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
-
✓ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
—
3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
10.
—
4 Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
30x30
60
= Total Cover
—
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1 Aspleniom platyneuron
2
YES FACU
—
2 Sceptridium dissectum
2
YES FAC
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
6
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 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
10.
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
12.
4
= Total Cover
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 3000
)
height.
1 Loniceria japonica
50
YES FACU
2.
3.
4.
Hydrophytic
5
Vegetation
6,
Present? Yes No
50
= Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Point slightly upslope of WA. Near McConnell Road.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: WC up
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Type' Locz
Texture Remarks
0-4 10YR 3/3 100
loam
4-12+ 10YR 4/4 100
sandy loam
'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 (1719)
Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1719) (MLRA 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:
Hydric soil indicators not present
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site: Bridge 224 over South Buffalo Creek City/County: Guilford County Sampling Date: 2/20/2018
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT State: NC Sampling Point: WD wet
Investigator(s): R. Lepslc Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0-2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): 136 of P Lat: 36.059736 Long:-79.727497 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Wehadkee loam NWI classification: PFO
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:
Floodplain of South Buffalo Creek and partly in floodplain of SC. Power line and sewer line run
through wetland.
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 (B16)
Water Marks (131)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (133)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (135)
✓ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery
(137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
✓ Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No ✓ Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes
No ✓ Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes ✓
No Depth (inches): 11
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge,
monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Standing water in wetland.
Not at sample point.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WD wet
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 3000 )
% Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 Acer rubrum
70 YES FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A)
2 Liquidambar styraciflua
30 YES FAC
Total Number of Dominant
3•
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5•
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 60 (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
8
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
100 = Total Cover
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30x30
)
FACW species x 2 =
1 Carpinus caroliniana
15 YES FAC
FAC species x 3 =
2 Ligustrum sinense
5 YES FACU
FACU species x 4 =
3.
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: 0 (A) 0 (B)
4.
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 0
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
-
✓ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
—
3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
10.
—
4 Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
30x30
20 = Total Cover
—
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1.
'
—
2.
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
6
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 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
10.
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
12.
0 = Total Cover
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 3000
)
height.
1 Loniceria japonica
15 YES FACU
2.
3.
4.
Hydrophytic
5
Vegetation
6,
Present? Yes No
15 = Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Point within wooded area of wetland between sewer line and power line.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: WD wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Type' Locz
Texture Remarks
0-1 10YR 3/2 100
clay loam
1-6 10YR 3/2 90
10YR 4/4 10 D M
clay loam
6-12+ 2.5Y 4/2 80
10YR 4/4 10 D M
clay
10YR 3/2 10
mg concretions
'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 (1719)
Stratified Layers (A5)
✓ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1719) (MLRA 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
Project/Site: Bridge 224 over South Buffalo Creek City/County: Guilford County Sampling Date: 2/20/2018
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT State: NC Sampling Point: WD up
Investigator(s): R. Lepslc Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 2-4
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): 136 of P Lat: 36.059736 Long:-79.727497 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Wehadkee 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 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:
Slightly upslope from WD. Between sewer line and power line.
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 (B16)
Water Marks (131) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (133) _
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No `7
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:
Wetland hydrology indicators not present.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WD up
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 3000 )
% Cover
Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1
Acer rubrum
40
YES FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 6 (A)
2
Quercus phellos
20
YES FAC
Total Number of Dominant
3•
Li uidambar st raciflua
9 y
30
YES FAC
Species Across All Strata: 9 (B)
q
Platanus occidentalis
15
NO FACW
5.
N ssa s Ivatica
y y
15
NO FAC
Percent of Dominant Species
67
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
8
120
= Total Cover
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling/Shrub
Stratum (Plot size: 30x30
)
FACW species x 2 =
1
Carpinus caroliniana
5
YES FAC
FAC species x 3 =
2
Ligustrum sinense
5
YES FACU
FACU species x 4 =
3
Acer rubrum
10
YES FAC
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: 0 (A) 0 (B)
q Rosa multiflora 5 YES FACU
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 0
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
-
✓ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
—
3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
10.
—
4 Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
30x30
25
= Total Cover
—
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb
Stratum (Plot size: )
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1.
—
2.
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
6
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 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
10.
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
12.
0
= Total Cover
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 3000
)
height.
1
Loniceria japonica
20
YES FACU
2
Toxicodrendron radicans
10
YES FAC
3.
4.
Hydrophytic
5
Vegetation
6,
Present? Yes No
30
= Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Point within wooded area of wetland between sewer line and power line.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: WD up
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Type' Locz
Texture Remarks
0-3 10YR 3/3 100
loam
3-12+ 10YR 4/3 100
sandy clay loam
'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 (1719)
Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1719) (MLRA 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:
Hydric soil indicators not present.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0