20081268 Ver 4_BPDP for PN_20200910

MEMORANDUM pres
3600 Glenwood Avenue, Suite 100 Raleigh, North Carolina 27612 919.209.1052 tel. [phone] fax
TO: NCDWR — Katie Merritt
Iy.ZeluMC mt M- vn- 117 ' ClOki
Brad Breslow — RES
DATE: September 2, 2020
RE: Response to Tull Wooten III Nutrient and Buffer Mitigation Project
NCDWR Project #2008-1268 v4
Note: Supplemental September 2, 2020 submission revisions in italics
Cover Page
1) the project number for the buffer bank is 2008-1268v4. Also, the project number for the stream bank is 2008-
12680 if you needed it.
This has been revised.
Table of Contents
2) There are photos provided in Section 1.3, but they aren't dated. Please add dates to these photos. If these
photos do not adequately describe existing conditions, or the conditions have changed since the submittal of
the BPDP or since the issuance of the Site Viability Letter, i need to know that. Provide language in this
section that better describes the existing conditions of the riparian areas and any changes that have occurred.
Dates have been added into the photo descriptions. The site conditions are the same as when the Site Viability
was conducted. Language has been added into Section 1.3 in regard to the existing conditions of the riparian
areas.
Figures List
3) looks different than Figure 10 of the Stream Plan. Explain and update figure accordingly. Since DWR and
USACE will have the same Easement, please show same boundaries.
The Stream & Wetland Mitigation plan was submitted prior to the BPDP, and there were additional
landowner constraints that had to be accounted for. Figure 3 now is consistent with the existing conditions
figure (Figure 5) of Stream and Wetland Mitigation plan. One area on TW4 is narrower than 30 feet because
the landowners wanted to preserve access to a waterfall on this reach. No credits will be generated in any areas
with less than 30 feet wide buffers; the credit estimate shown in Figure 8 estimates the yield with the likely
conservation easement. The as -built survey will be used to finalize the credityield in this area.
4) no vernal pools are shown in the figures, but it was noted as a possibility in the IRT comments on the Stream
Plan. If vernal pools are going to be constructed please show them on Figure 6. If the pools aren't being
planted with trees, the area of the pools will need to be excluded from credited areas. Add language to Section
3 that speaks to this comment if pools are going to be constructed.
RES does not typically call out or specifically design vernal pools. Vernal pools usually result during
construction if there is not enough spoil to fill the existing channel completely. The channel backfill detail
included in sheet D3 of the Stream and Wetland Mitigation Plan shows how these areas are handled if they
are needed due to cut/fill balance on -site. Per the IRT comments for the draft Stream and Wetland Mitigation
Plan, RES has set the max depth on these areas to 14". These areas, if they occur, will be planted and treated
the same as the rest of the site. They are not likely to be extensive and RES does not see the need to cut them
out. Furthermore, through design and construction analyses, RES has determined that there will be an
Tull Wooten III Draft Bank Parcel Development Plan August 2020

adequate amount of spoil associated with the stream restoration design to backfill the old channel
completely. If any vernal pools are not planted with trees, they will not meet performance standards and
therefore cannot be used to generate buffer or nutrient offset credit.
5) looks different than what was provided in the draft Stream Plan. Explain and update figure accordingly.
The Stream & Wetland Mitigation plan was submitted prior to the BPDP, and there were additional
landowner constraints that had to be accounted for. Figure 5 now is consistent with the historical conditions
figure (Figure 8) of Stream and Wetland Mitigation plan.
Mitigation Project Summary
6) Consistent misuse of the term "riparian buffer" or "buffer" is used throughout the BPDP and can lead to
confusion or misleading information. These terms are only to be used to describe the Neuse buffer, which is
0-50' from top of bank of subject streams and has a Zone 1 & Zone 2. This also excludes Ephemeral's. Please
correct terminology where it is being misused and replace with "riparian area" where applicable. Example:
"The project includes the restoration of riparian buffers and adjacent riparian areas."
This has been revised throughout the BPDP.
7) The MBI has EBX-Neuse I, LLC as the Bank Sponsor. Correct text to match the MBI
This has been revised.
8) and adjacent riparian areas are
This has been added.
9) and adjacent riparian areas
This has been added.
10) and adjacent riparian areas
This has been added.
11) whose water quality plan? DMS or DWR?
This has been revised.
12) and adjacent riparian areas
This has been added.
13) Riparian Buffer Credit or Nutrient Offset credit
This has been added.
14) r
This has been revised.
15) a
This has been revised.
16) Offset
This has been revised.
17) Mitigated
This has been revised.
18) see comments in the Table of Contents
Tull Wooten III Draft Bank Parcel Development Plan August 2020

This has been revised.
19) and adjacent riparian areas
This has been revised.
20) are
This has been revised.
21) riparian area instead of buffer
This has been revised.
Riparian Restoration and Preservation Implementation Plan
22) I have seen on other bank sites, where topsoil in riparian areas was removed and placed in wetland
restoration areas in order to provide better soil conditions for wetland areas receiving credit. Thus, the
riparian areas devoted to buffer and nturient offset end up lacking suitable soils for trees and vegetation to
grow, resulting in stunted tree growth and lack of herbaceous vegetation. Add details that provide DWR with
assurance that EBX will not do something like this on this site.
Since no wetland restoration is associated with the stream and wetland project, this should be a non -issue
for this project. Furthermore, when Priority 2 restoration is proposed, RES removes and stockpiles topsoil
along those reaches, then places the topsoil back down within the floodplain of the new channel. RES
understands that DWR expects no topsoil to be removed from riparian areas receiving buffer credit that are not
located in the floodplain or along the stream reaches.
23) including in the riparian areas
This has been revised.
24) riparian
This has been revised.
25) this may be where you discuss any vernal pools
See comment response above.
26) Neuse
This has been revised.
27) and adjacent riparian area
This has been revised.
28) riparian
This has been revised.
29) There is a ditch above TW3, according to the stream call and site viability letter and therefore creates non -
diffused flow within your proposed riparian restoration area. How is diffused flow from this ditch going to
be addressed? EBX may need to consider the use of the Clarification Memo on Diffused Flow here.
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Surface%2OWater%2OProtection/401/Buffer%20CIarificati
on%20Memos/Diffuse-Flow-for- Buffer- Mitigation -Sites -Buffer-Clarification-Memo-20080819.pdf
This ditch will not be touched, and planting will occur adjacent to the entire ditch within the conservation
easement. RES has adjusted the buffer crediting along TW3 to meet diffused flow requirements.
30) Planting a permanent seed mix that is abundant in annual and perennial pollinator species is strictly
voluntary but is being encouraged by DWR in other mitigation plans to promote diversity and enhance the
health of the herbaceous layer, which can also greatly benefit planted stems.
RES appreciates DWR requests and will do our best to include pollinator -friendly species in our seed mixture.
RES selects native plant seed mixes that support a variety of ecosystem functions and naturally, most of the
flowering plants will be attractive to native pollinators. As we do not buy the seed mix until closer to the
actual date of construction the actual seed that is bought will be dependent on the alignment of the
Tull Wooten III Draft Bank Parcel Development Plan August 2020

germination and time period of seeding along with the availability and cost at the time. RES will continue to
consider this request in all future projects.
31) reference the plan sheets provided in the Appendix.
This reference has been added.
32) add a column for Canopy/Sub Canopy and describe each species' category
This has been added to Table S.
33) 0295 (n)(2ss is not a Hardwood, and thus cannot be used towards performance standards. If EBX is planting
this species for a particular reason, DWR can consider approving alternative planting plans. Therefore,
please explain why Bald Cypress should be planted on this site.
RES will remove bald cypress from the planting list after discussions with DWR and internally. Bald cypress is
abundant in the lower floodplain; however, planting efforts are focused higher on the site in dryer conditions.
Nyssa aquatica (water tupelo) was also removed from the plan as it was selected as a compliment to the bald
cypress. The percentage of other planned species (Nyssa biflora, Platanus occidentalis, Quercus nigra, and
Quercus phellos) has been increased to achieve the desired planting density. The Tull Wooten III mitigation site
also generates stream and wetland credit. The planting plan in the approved mitigation plan for this site
includes planting bald cypress and water tupelo, at the ratios initially presented in the BPDP. RES will approach
the IRT about adjusting the entire planting plan as per this revision. In the case that we are unable to change
overall site composition, we will need to set up site planting to accomplish the revised BPDP planting plan within
buffer and nutrient areas only.
34) Add a note in the text committing to installing the boundary markers once construction is complete and
before DWR performs the As -Built site visit.
This has been added.
Monitoring Plan
35) for the Buffer and Nutrient Offset Bank.
This has been revised.
36) Of the 6 plots referenced here, only 1 is completely dedicated to measuring performance stds in the buffer
credit area, which is the 0-50'. The other plots are shared between buffer and stream non-std buffer credit
areas. There should be 3-4 plots located entirely within the buffer or nutrient offset credit areas. Therefore,
move the two plots on TW3 and the one plot on TW2 such that these 3 plots are only located in the 0-50'. It's
okay to share the plots that are entirely wthin the 0-50' with both DWR & USACE, but not okay to share the
plots where 1/2 of the plot is within buffer credit areas (0-50') and other 1/2 is within the stream credit area
(51-100)
Noted, and the vegetation plot locations have been updated to be located entirely within the 0-50 foot zone.
37) or nutrient offset credit
This has been revised.
38) make sure you are meeting diffused flow on the Ditch along Tw3. see previous comment
RES has adjusted the buffer crediting along TW3 to meet diffused flow requirements.
Mitigation Potential
39) table says 318.223
This has been revised.
40) i am looking for more details on how your project complies with special conditions in 0295 and where cited
in the viability letter as needing additional information. For this section, add details about how EBX has
complied with all of 0295 (o)(7) to be able to use the riparian areas for buffer mitigation. The rule refers to
watershed, hydrologic connectivity, etc. I also do not understand how you calculated 145,807 sqft as your
allowable mitigation on the ephemeral. Please explain.
In order to comply with 0295 (o)(7):
Tull Wooten III Draft Bank Parcel Development Plan August 2020

a) TW3 is a natural channel with discernable banks observable within crenulations on a USGS 7.5 minute
topographic map included in Figure 4.
b) a delineation of the watershed draining to the ephemeral channel is provided in Figure 4 and a larger
scale delineation of the same has been added to Figure 8.
c) The area proposed for mitigation is entirely contained within the contributing drainage area to the
ephemeral channel (80,954 sq ft).
d) The ephemeral channel is directly connected to an intermittent channel and is contiguously contained
within the mitigation project and within the conservation easement.
e) A diffuse flow deduction of 4,350 sq ft has been incorporated into the total mitigation area to account for
a ditch that enters the ephemeral reach. This results in a maximum crediting area of 76,604 sq ft.
f) Finally, the creditable area of the mitigation on this ephemeral channel is no more than 25% of the total
area of buffer mitigation. This results in a total creditable area of 43,274 sq ft of credit.
Language has been added to this section to show compliance with 0295 (o)(7). The original calculation for
the allow mitigation on ephemeral channels was a typo, this has been revised in Table 6. Moreover, The
Project Credit Table was used to calculate the mitigation assets.
41) make sure you update corresponding figures.
All figures have been revised.
42) please use the Project Credit Table template to measure and calculate your credits for this site. It's located
on our website and has been updated since November. In order to not use an outdated version of the Table
Template, please do not save the template to your computer.
The Project Credit Table was used to calculate the mitigation assets, and Table 6 has been revised
accordingly.
The buffer viability letter does not mention TW2-C as a feature on -site because TW2-Cis a reach label associated
with the stream restoration project on -site, it is not an added feature, During design of the stream project, it
was determined that the bottommost portion of TW2-B should be treated as preservation and therefore was
called TW2-C. The downstream limit of the stream is at a road crossing on -site and has not changed since the
viability call was made.
TW2-B is a small reach as a result of it being split into TW2-B and TW2-C, therefore, it was not shown on several
maps. The label has been added to all maps for clarity.
There are credit generating areas for nutrient and buffer credit in the 151-200' area along TW2-A. These areas
have been called out on Figure 8 for clarity.
Table 6 has been updated as per requested revisions.
43) when using the new Project Credit Table template, you will not have an option to choose 151-200' as your
Buffer Min -Max width. Therefore, choose 101-200' and in the "Feature Name" column, you will identify the
feature and then add in (), "(for widths 151'-200')"
The Project Credit Table was used to calculate the mitigation assets, and Table 6 has been revised accordingly
to include the identifiers.
44) I am not understanding how you calculated the ephemeral allowable amount. Once you complete the new
Project Credit Table, it should become more clear for me.
The Project Credit Table was used to calculate the mitigation assets, and Table 6 has been revised
accordingly.
45) Typo
This has been revised.
Figure 3
Tull Wooten III Draft Bank Parcel Development Plan August 2020

46) Label the ditch above TW3 as noted in the viability letter and stream call
This has been revised.
Figure 6
47) what happens to this ditch above the ephemeral reach of TW3?
This ditch will not be touched, but planting will occur adjacent to the entire ditch within the conservation
easement. Where the ditch enters the ephemeral reach, a buffer deduction of4,350 sq ft has been taken to adjust
for the diffuse flow requirement. This reduced total mitigation area on this reach from 80,954 to 76,604 sq ft.
However, ephemeral credit potential is limited to 25% of the total area of buffer mitigation; therefore, maximum
ephemeral yield potential is limited to 43,274 sq ft of credit. Table 6 documents the deduction.
Figure 7
48) Figure looks different than what was provided in the Stream Mitigation Plan. Explain.
The Stream & Wetland Mitigation plan was submitted prior to the BPDP, and there were additional
landowner constraints that had to be accounted for. Figure 7 now is consistent with the buffer zones figure
(Figure 1) of Stream and Wetland Mitigation plan.
Figure 8
49) What happens to this ditch?
This ditch will not be touched, but planting will occur adjacent to the entire ditch within the conservation
easement. Where the ditch enters the ephemeral reach, a buffer deduction of4,350 sq ft has been taken to adjust
for the diffuse flow requirement. This reduced total mitigation area on this reach from 80,954 to 76,604 sq ft.
However, ephemeral credit potential is limited to 25% of the total area of buffer mitigation; therefore, maximum
ephemeral yield potential is limited to 43,274 sq ft of credit. Table 6 documents the deduction.
50) Figure looks different than what was provided in the Stream Mitigation Plan. Explain.
The Stream & Wetland Mitigation plan was submitted prior to the BPDP, and there were additional
landowner constraints that had to be accounted for. Figure 8 now is consistent with the buffer zones figure
(Figure 10) of Stream and Wetland Mitigation plan.
Figure 12
51) move to be entirely within 0 - 5 0
This has been revised.
52) move to be entirely within 0 - 5 0
This has been revised.
53) move to be entirely within 0 - 5 0
This has been revised.
Tull Wooten III Draft Bank Parcel Development Plan August 2020

Bank Parcel Development Plan
Tull Wooten III Mitigation Site
May 2020
DWR Project #: 2008-1268v4 I Neuse River Basin I HUC 03020202
Lenoir County, North Carolina
Prepared By: Prepared For:
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC NC Department of Environmental Quality
For EBX Neuse I, LLC Division of Water Resources
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110 1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27605 Raleigh, NC 27699-1652

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 MITIGATION PROJECT SUMMARY.........................................................................................1
1.1 Project Location......................................................................................................................1
1.2 Project Overview....................................................................................................................1
1.2.1 Parcel Ownership...........................................................................................................
4
1.3 Existing Conditions.................................................................................................................4
1.3.1 Surface Water Classification..........................................................................................
4
1.3.2 Physiography and Soils..................................................................................................
4
1.3.3 Wetlands........................................................................................................................
5
1.3.4 Landscape Communities................................................................................................
6
1.3.5 Existing Conditions Photos............................................................................................
7
2 REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS..........................................................................................9
2.1 Threatened and Endangered Species.......................................................................................9
2.2 Cultural Resources..................................................................................................................9
2.3 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)/ Hydrologic Trespass ..........................10
3 RIPARIAN RESTORATION AND PRESERVATION IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ..............10
3.1 Site Preparation, Including Riparian Areas...........................................................................10
3.2 Methods.................................................................................................................................11
3.3 Riparian Restoration Activities.............................................................................................11
3.4 Riparian Preservation Activities...........................................................................................11
3.5 Planting Plan.........................................................................................................................12
3.6 Easement Boundaries............................................................................................................12
4 MONITORING PLAN.................................................................................................................13
4.1 Monitoring Protocol and Success Criteria............................................................................13
4.2 Adaptive Management Plan and Parcel Maintenance...........................................................13
5 LONG TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN......................................................................................14
6 FINANCIAL ASSURANCE........................................................................................................14
7 MITIGATION POTENTIAL........................................................................................................14
8 REFERENCES...............................................................................................................................0
Tull Wooten III Bank Parcel Development Package
Riparian Buffer Mitigation and Nutrient Offset Site i May 2020

FIGURES
Figure 1. Service Area
Figure 2. Project Vicinity
Figure 3. Existing Conditions
Figure 4. USGS Topographic
Figure 5. Historical Conditions
Figure 6. Stream Concept Design Plan
Figure 7. Buffer Zones
Figure 8. Conceptual Design Plan for Riparian Buffer Bank
Figure 9. Mapped Soils
Figure 10. National Wetlands Inventory
Figure 11. FEMA Map
Figure 12. Monitoring Plan
P1. Planting Plan
APPENDICES
Appendix A — NCDWR Stream Determination Letter and Mitigation Viability Letter
Appendix B — Conservation Easement Template
Appendix C — Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Submittal
Appendix D — Agency Correspondence
Tull Wooten III Bank Parcel Development Package
Riparian Buffer Mitigation and Nutrient Offset Site ii May 2020

MITIGATION PROJECT SUMMARY
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC (RES), through its wholly -owned subsidiary EBX Neuse I, LLC, is
pleased to provide this Bank Parcel Development Plan (BPDP) for the Tull Wooten III Riparian Buffer and Nutrient
Offset Mitigation Bank (Project). This Project is designed to provide riparian buffer mitigation credits for
unavoidable and authorized impacts due to development within the Neuse River Basin, United States Geological
Survey (USGS) 8-digit Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC — 03020202) (Figure 1). In addition, it will also provide
nutrient offset credits in the 03020202 HUC for existing and proposed development requiring such mitigation
(Figure 1). This BPDP is in accordance with the Consolidated Buffer Mitigation Rule 15A NCAC 02B .0295 and
the Tull Wooten III Mitigation Banking Instrument for Riparian Buffer Mitigation and Nutrient Offset Credits
(MBI), made and entered into by EBX-Neuse I, LLC acting as the Bank Sponsor (Sponsor), and the North Carolina
Department of Environmental Quality -Division of Water Resources (DWR). The BPDP has also been designed in
concurrence with the Tull Wooten III Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site in the Neu -Con Stream and Wetland
Umbrella Mitigation Bank (SAW# 2017-00847). The final mitigation plan for the Tull Wooten III Stream and
Wetland Mitigation Site has been submitted to the North Carolina Interagency Review Team (IRT) and is currently
being reviewed for final approval. The Tull Wooten Stream and Wetland mitigation bank proposes approximately
3,562.885 SMUs and 4.245 WMUs.
1.1 Project Location
The Tull Wooten III Mitigation Project is located within Lenoir County, less than two miles east of Kinston, North
Carolina, and can be accessed from Tower Hill Road (Figure 2). The Project is located within the Neuse River
Basin, North Carolina Department of Water Resources sub -basin 03-04-05 and United States Geological Survey
(USGS) 14-digit hydrologic unit code (HUC) 03020202060040 (Figure 1).
To access the Project, head north on Highway 58, and turn right onto E. Washington Street. E. Washington street
turns into Tower Hill Road. The project will be on the right after approximately 2.5 miles. The coordinates for the
project are 35.263220 °N and-77.539716'W.
1.2 Project Overview
This Project provides a unique opportunity to protect 103.84 acres of riparian habitat. The project encompasses two
easement locations and four unnamed tributaries upstream of the Neuse River, totaling 5,841 LF of existing stream,
that drain to a wetland slough directly adjacent to the Neuse River and abutting two closed -out mitigation bank
sites, Tull Wooten I and Tull Wooten II (Figure 3). The total drainage area for the Project is 136 acres (0.24 mil)
(Figure 4). Primary land use within the drainage area consists of approximately 56 percent forest and 42 percent
agricultural land. Impervious area covers less than one percent of the total watershed. Within the agricultural land
use, row crops make up 97 percent of the area, and the remaining area is pastureland. Although the project watershed
is primarily forested, most of the agricultural areas within the watershed are in close proximity to the Project and
play a significant role in the degradation of the Project streams. Historic and current land -use within the immediate
Project area have been primarily crop production. These activities have negatively impacted both water quality and
streambank stability along the Project streams. The resulting observed stressors include streambank erosion,
sedimentation, channel modification, and the loss of riparian buffers and adjacent riparian areas.
The Project area is comprised of two easement areas upstream of the Neuse River. Four unnamed reaches make up
six design reaches. Reach TW 1 is an intermittent steam, totaling 965 linear feet. This reach begins below an existing
agricultural road along the western end of the project and flows in a southerly direction towards the Neuse River
Tull Wooten III Bank Parcel Development Package
Riparian Buffer Mitigation and Nutrient Offset Site 1 May 2020

floodplain. One crossing is located on this reach. The upper portion of TW1 flows through a narrow valley for
approximately 500 feet before flattening out in a bottomland hardwood forest along the Neuse River floodplain
before entering a large wetland slough along the floodplain of the Neuse River. The reach is well vegetated with
native tree species, but also densely populated with Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense).
Reach TW2-A is 2,169 linear feet and originates in a disturbed forest outside of the Project before crossing an
agricultural road and flowing in a southerly direction towards the TW2-B. This intermittent reach has been relocated
to the valley edge and the small forested patch at the upstream end is densely populated with invasive species
primarily including Chinese privet and autumn olive (Eleagnus umbellata). Once leaving the small forested area
the reach lacks a riparian buffer due to row -crop production adjacent to the stream on both banks. The reach enters
back into a forested system and quickly drops to the Neuse River floodplain. The reach shows active signs of
widening and down -cutting before its confluence with Reach TW3. After the confluence with TW3, TW2-A drops
quickly, and has been down -cut to bedrock in some spots.
Reach TW2-B is 121 linear feet and begins just downstream of the confluence of TW2-A and TW3. This
intermittent reach flows in a southerly direction towards the Neuse River floodplain, where the channel meanders
through a mature bottomland forest; Chinese privet and autumn olive are prevalent throughout the understory.
Reach TW2-C is 210 linear feet and located downstream of TW2-B. This intermittent reach flows in a southerly
direction towards the Neuse River floodplain, where the channel meanders through a mature bottomland forest;
Chinese privet and autumn olive are present throughout the understory.
Reach TW3 is 511 linear feet ephemeral stream feature that originates in an agricultural field, downstream from a
ditch, and flows to the west before its confluence with reach TW2-A. The channel is oversized, does not actively
access its floodplain, and has been historically relocated to facilitate agricultural practices. The stream buffer and
adjacent riparian areas are in active row -crop production along both stream banks.
Reach TW4 is 1,865 linear feet and flows in a southerly direction towards the Neuse River floodplain. This
intermittent reach has an intact riparian buffer throughout most of the reach length. In some areas, the channel
meanders to the edges of the existing riparian buffer. Forested buffer is less than 50' wide in these areas.
The goal of the Project is to restore and preserve ecological function to the existing and newly restored streams and
riparian buffer and adjacent riparian areas by establishing appropriate plant communities while minimizing temporal
and land disturbing impacts. Restoration and preservation of the Neuse River riparian buffer (as defined in 15A
NCAC 02B .0233) and adjacent riparian areas is anticipated to reduce water quality stressors currently affecting the
Project area generated by agricultural activities, floodplain disconnection, stream straightening, and erosion of
stream banks. This Project is consistent with the management strategy for maintaining and protecting riparian areas
in the 2009 Neuse River Basinwide Water Quality Plan (NCDENR, 2009).
The Project involves restoring and preserving riparian buffers and adjacent riparian areas, and their functions to
compensate, in appropriate circumstances, for unavoidable and authorized riparian buffer impacts and nutrient load
reduction requirements. The buffer mitigation plan proposed is being submitted for review under the
Consolidated Buffer Mitigation Rule 15A NCAC 02B .0295 and 15A NCAC 02B.0703. DWR staff provided
a viability assessment for buffer mitigation on February 6, 2018. Correspondence regarding this assessment
is provided in Appendix A. This BPDP will generate Riparian Buffer or Nutrient credit within the riparian area
Tull Wooten III Bank Parcel Development Package
Riparian Buffer Mitigation and Nutrient Offset Site 2 May 2020

from the top of bank out to 50 feet and within the zone 151 to 200 feet from top of bank. Riparian areas greater than
50 feet from the top of bank out to 150 feet will generate additional stream credit in the Tull Wooten III Stream and
Wetland Mitigation Bank (Figure 7). As shown on Figure 7, this area is solely being used for the generation of
stream mitigation credits. Furthermore, the Tull Wooten III Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank will also preserve
wetlands and generate wetland credits onsite. Any area where wetland credits are proposed will be excluded from
the dedicated Riparian Buffer and/or Nutrient offset credit generation zones. These areas will not be used for the
generation of any other credit type (i.e. the same square foot of Riparian Area cannot be used to generate any
combination of Wetland credit, Nutrient Offset credits or Riparian Buffer credits).There will be no overlap in the
Riparian Buffer areas, Nutrient bank credit areas, Wetland credit areas, or buffer areas dedicated for additional
stream credit generation (Figure 7).
Of the total 103.84 acres in the conservation easement, the Tull Wooten III Project presents the opportunity to
perform 176,934 ftz (4.06 acres) of riparian buffer mitigation (before applying ratios and credit reductions) and
5,940 ft2 (309.957 pounds) of nutrient offset by establishing or preserving a native forested and herbaceous riparian
buffer plant community with a minimum width of 50 feet and a maximum of 200 feet from the top of bank of the
mitigated channels. Table 1 provides an overall summary of the total buffer mitigation credits.
Table I. Tull Wooten III Mitigation Project Mitigation Summary
Total Riparian Buffer Mitigation Credits
Mitigation Totals Used Area' Square Feet and Acres Credits
Restoration 130,929 ft2 (3.01 acres) 118,196.996
Preservation 46,005 ft2 (1.06 acres) 4600.500
Nutrient Offset 5,940 ft2 (0.136 acres) 309.9571bs
Total 176,934 (4.06 acres) 122,797.496 ftz (Buffer)
309.957 lbs (Nutrient)
'According to 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o) (4) and (5), "the area ofpreservation credit within a buffer mitigation site shall
comprise of no more than 25% of the total area of buffer mitigation.
Figure 8 shows the Conceptual Design for Riparian Buffer Bank Map and Section 3 provides details of the
mitigation determination on the Tull Wooten III Project. According to 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(4) and (5), "the
area of preservation credit within a buffer mitigation site shall comprise of no more than 25% of the total area of
buffer mitigation." The allowable preservation area on this site as affected by this regulation is 42,409 ft2.
In accordance with 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o) (7) "the area of the mitigation site on ephemeral channels shall
comprise no more than 25% of the total area of buffer mitigation." There is one channel within the project proposed
for buffer credit. As per the rule, it is a natural channel with discernable banks observable within crenulations on a
USGS 7.5-minute topographic map (Figure 4). The allowable mitigation on ephemeral reaches, for this project, is
43,974 ft2. Buffer mitigation on ephemeral reaches for the project is the allowable and totals 43,974 ft2. Moreover,
in accordance with 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o) (7), the entire area proposed for mitigation along the ephemeral reach,
TW3, is located within the contributing drainage area to the ephemeral channel, and is directly connected to an
intermittent reach downstream (Figure 4 and Figure 8). The channel is contiguously contained within the overall
mitigation project and conservation easement.
Tull Wooten III Bank Parcel Development Package
Riparian Buffer Mitigation and Nutrient Offset Site 3 May 2020

1.2.1 Parcel Ownership
The land required for the construction, management, and stewardship of this Project includes portions of the parcels
listed in Table 2. EBX-Neuse I will obtain conservation easements from the current landowners. The Wilmington
District Conservation Easement model template was utilized to draft the site protection instrument. Once recorded,
the secured easements will allow EBX-Neuse I to proceed with the Project development and protect the mitigation
assets in perpetuity. Once finalized, a copy of the land protection instrument(s) will be included in Appendix B.
Table 2. Parcel and Landowner Information
Landowners Pin or Tax Parcel ID Agreement Type County
453504518454
453514423982
Perry Brothers Properties LLC 453518315088 Easement Lenoir
453504722539
453518425024
453518406844
1.3 Existing Conditions
1.3.1 Surface Water Classification
The Project is comprised of four unnamed tributaries that drain to a wetland slough directly upstream of the Neuse
River (Figure 3). The current surface water classification for the Neuse River, is Class C and NSW. The primary
classification of Class C is defined by DWR as waters protected for uses such as secondary recreations, fishing,
wildlife, fish consumption, aquatic life, survival and maintenance of biological integrity, and agriculture. The
supplemental classification of NSW is Nutrient Sensitive Waters and is defined by DWR as waters needing
additional nutrient management due to being subject to excessive growth of microscopic or macroscopic vegetation.
1.3.2 Physiography and Soils
The Project resides in the Southeastern Floodplains and Low Terraces ecoregion. This ecoregion is comprised of
alluvium and terrace deposits of sand, clay, and gravel. The region includes low gradient streams, oxbow lakes,
ponds, and swamps. It has mostly thermic / aquic and some Udic soils. The region is generally a southern floodplain
forest and includes bottomland hardwood forest (bottomland oaks, red maple, sweetgum, green ash, bitternut
hickory) and cypress -gum swamp (water tupelo, swamp tupelo, bald cypress, pond cypress) (Griffith et al., 2002).
Existing soil information from the Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS) Web Soil Survey documents
several map units across the project (MRCS, 2018). Map units including nine soil series are mapped across the
Project and are summarized in Table 3. Project soil map units within the easement include Chewacla loam, Craven
fine sandy loam, Kenansville loamy sand, Kinston loam, Lumbee sandy loam, Norfolk loamy sand (three map units
ranging from zero to ten percent slopes), and Wagram loamy sand (Figure 9).
['able 3. Project Mapped Soil Series
Map Unit Map Unit Name Percent Drainage Class Hydrologic Landscape Setting
Hydric I Soil Group
Chewacla loam,
Ch frequently flooded 5 Somewhat poorly drained B/D Coastal plains and flood plains
Cv Craven fine sandy loam, 3 Moderately well drained D Ridges on marine terraces and
4 to 8 percent slopes coastal plains
Tull Wooten III Bank Parcel Development Package
Riparian Buffer Mitigation and Nutrient Offset Site 4 May 2020

Map Unit
Map Unit Name
Percent
Drainage Class
Hydrologic
Landscape Setting
Hydric
Soil Group
Ke
Kenansville loamy sand,
0
Well drained
A
Coastal plains and stream
0 to 6 percent slopes
terraces
Kb
Kalmia loamy sand, 2 to
5
Well drained
B
Stream terraces
6 percent slopes
Kn
Kinston loam,
90
Poorly drained
B/D
Coastal plains and flood plains
frequently flooded
Lu
Lumbee sandy loam
100
Poorly drained
A
Backswamps on stream terraces
Na
Norfolk loamy sand, 0
0
Well drained
A
Coastal plains and marine
to 2 percent slopes
terraces
Nb
Norfolk loamy sand, 2
0
Well drained
A
Marine terraces and coastal
to 6 percent slopes
plains
Nc
Norfolk loamy sand, 6
0
Well drained
A
Broad interstream divides on
to 10 percent slopes
marine terraces
Low ridges on marine terraces,
Wd
Wagram loamy sand, 10
0
Well drained
A
broad interstream divides on
to 15 percent slopes
marine terraces, and coastal
plains.
1.3.3 Wetlands
The US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetland Inventory Map depicts potential wetland areas
within the Project (Figure 10). These areas were investigated during wetland delineation in April 2018. Wetland
boundaries were delineated using current methodology outlined in the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987) as well as the regional supplement to the USACE
Wetland Delineation Manual: Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain region (USACE, 2010). Soils were characterized
and classified using the Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States, Version 7.0 (NRCS, 2010). Within
the boundaries of the proposed Project, seven jurisdictional wetlands are present in and adjacent to the Project
(Appendix C, Figure 3, Table 4). Wetlands are labeled as WA (Wetland A) through to WG (Wetland G);
described below in Table 4. A preliminary jurisdictional determination (PJD) request was sent to the USACE on
May 3, 2018 and wetland determinations were verified by the USACE on December 19, 2018. Updated PJD
materials, potential waters of the US map and supporting aquatic resource table, were sent to the USACE on
December 18, 2019. These revised materials include the refined wetland limits to exclude certain sand deposits
within WF that did not meet wetland criteria (Appendix Q.
Table 4. Jurisdictional Wetland Information
Wetland NCWAM Wetland Type Area (ac) Vegetation
ID Rating -
WA High Headwater 0.07 Tree Stratum:
Forest Red Maple (Ater rubrum), Green Ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica),
American Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), tulip poplar
WB High Headwater 0.07 (Liriodendron tulipifera), river birch (Betula nigra), and sweetgum
Forest (Liquidambar styraciflua)
Shrub Stratum:
Tull Wooten III Bank Parcel Development Package
Riparian Buffer Mitigation and Nutrient Offset Site 5 May 2020

Wetland
NCWAM
Wetland Type
Area (ac)
Vegetation
ID
Rating
WC
High
Headwater
0.02
Chinese privet, giant cane (Arundinaria gigantean), and American
Forest
hornbeam (Carpinus carohniana)
Herb Stratum:
Netted chain fern (Woodwardia areolate), sensitive fern (Onoclea
sensibilis), lizard's tail (Saururus cernuus), mayapple (Podophyllum
peltatum), Jack-in-the-pulpit (Arisaema triphyllum), soft rush (Juncus
WE
High
Headwater
3.31
effuses), and southern lady fern (Athyrium asplenioides)
Forest
Woody Vine Stratum:
Green briar (Smilax laurifolia)
WF
High
Riverine
42.32
Tree Stratum:
Swamp Forest
Red Maple, river birch, sweetgum, and water oak (Quercus nigra)
Shrub Stratum:
American holly (Ilex opaca)
Herb Stratum:
Netted chain fern and Virginia chain fern (Woodwardia virginica)
Woody Vine Stratum:
Green briar and Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica)
WG
High
Seep
0.03
Tree Stratum:
Red maple and tulip poplar
Shrub Stratum:
Chinese privet
Herb Stratum:
Netted chain fern, mayapple, southern lady fern, and Jack-in-the-pulpit
1.3.4 Landscape Communities
A. Existing Vegetation Communities
Currently, the northern portion of the parcel remains partially in agricultural use and is under row crop cultivation.
Much of the areas adjacent to the project streams are densely vegetated with Chinese privet. The southern of portion
of the easement remains forested. Vegetation around the unbuffered reaches of the Project are primarily composed
of herbaceous vegetation and some scattered trees. In general, these unbuffered riparian zones have been disturbed
due to regular land management activities.
The Project occurs along an ecotone, where the southern portion of the project is a cypress -gum swamp (Schafale,
2012), and the upland areas adjacent to the project reaches have vegetation characteristics of both the piedmont and
coastal plain forests (Schafale, 2012). Dominant canopy species across the Project included pignut Hickory (Carya
glabra), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), black walnut (Juglans nigra), bitternut hickory (Carya cordiformis),
water oak (Quercus nigra), red mulberry (Morus rubra), red elm (Ulmus rubra), and black oak (Quercus velutina).
Sub -canopy species included posion ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), saw greenbrier (Smilax bona-nox), laurel
greenbrier (Smilax laurifolia), roundleaf greenbrier (Smilax rotundifolia), northern spice bush (Lindera benzoin),
possumhaw (Viburnum nudum), American beautyberry (Callicarpa americana), and pokeweed (Phytolacca
americana). Furthermore, invasive species were also found within the vegetation survey plots, in the Project area,
and adjacent to the Project area including Chinese privet, and Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica).
Tull Wooten III Bank Parcel Development Package
Riparian Buffer Mitigation and Nutrient Offset Site 6 May 2020

B. Riparian Vegetation
The riparian buffer and adjacent riparian areas, specifically along TW2-A and TW3 and four small areas along
TW4, are in poor condition. These areas are devoid of trees or shrubs, and there is a heavy understory of invasives
throughout the site. Current riparian area conditions demonstrate significant degradation with a loss of stabilizing
vegetation due to past land management actions. Since the Buffer Viability Site Visit, on February 28, 2018, the
riparian buffer and adjacent riparian areas remain in the same condition, with no changes to the land uses as
described in the buffer viability letter dated March 12, 2018. Land uses associated with TW 1 and RW4 are entirely
forested from the top of the stream bank out to 200 feet from the feature. The land uses associated with TW2-A,
TW2-B, and TW3 are a combination of row crop production and forested areas within 0-200 feet of the features.
The photographs below are representative of current conditions.
1.3.5 Existing Conditions Photos
Looking upstream along Reach T W 1
(4/19/2019)
4;'"}, _
'�- � �{ .`�`�T y*.+� �:��X'•.!.-`,�"-III
5
Buffer condition along TW2-A
(07/06/2018)
Looking downstream along Reach TWl
(4/ 19/2019)
Buffer condition along TW2-A
(07/06/2018)
Tull Wooten III Bank Parcel Development Package
Riparian Buffer Mitigation and Nutrient Offset Site 7 May 2020

Looking upstream along reach TW2-B
(07/06/2018)
Bottom of TW2-C after confluence with wetland slough
(4/19/2019)
Looking at the left bank along reach TW3
(07/06/2018)
Tull Wooten III
Riparian Buffer Mitigation and Nutrient Offset Site
Looking downstream along reach TW2-13
(07/06/2018)
Bottom of TW2-C near confluence with wetland slough
(4/19/2019)
Looking downstream along reach TW3
(07/06/2018)
Bank Parcel Development Package
May 2020

Looking upstream along Reach TW4 before dropping quickly
into the Neuse floodplain
(04/03/2017)
2 REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS
Looking downstream along Reach TW4 before dropping
quickly into the Neuse floodplain
(04/03/2017)
2.1 Threatened and Endangered Species
Plants and animals with a federal classification of endangered or threatened are protected under provisions of
Sections 7 and 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. The USFWS database lists two Federally
listed species that may occur in proximity to the Project: red -cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) and sensitive
joint -vetch (Aeschynomene virginica). No protected species or potential habitat, long leaf pine savannah or coastal
marsh, for protected species was observed during preliminary project evaluations. Species and species habitat listed
in the USFWS database were inspected during the field investigation to determine whether they occur at the Project.
No individual species or habitats were identified on site. Potential impacts to species and habitat off site,
downstream, and within the vicinity of the Project were also considered. A letter received from the USFWS, dated
May 25, 2017, stated the "the proposed action is not likely to adversely affect any federally -listed endangered or
threatened species, their formally designated habitat, or species currently proposed for listed under the Act".
Moreover, the USFWS did recommend "that all practicable measurable taken to avoid adverse impacts to aquatic
species, including implementing directional boring methods and stringent sedimentation and erosion control
measures". Documentation is included in Appendix D.
2.2 Cultural Resources
A review of North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office GIS Web Service (accessed July 11, 2018) database
did reveal that the Project was adjacent to the Battle of Kinston Area #5 site, and State Listed site (SHPO, 2018).
Furthermore, the database revealed that there are 23 documented structures within a one -mile radius of the Project.
A letter was received from the SHPO on June 20, 2017 (Appendix D). The letter described that the Project is located
directly across from the Neuse River from Wyse Fork Battlefield (31JN306), a property that is eligible for listing
in the Nation Register of Historic Places. Furthermore, the letter stated that the eastern portion of the Project is
located within the Battle of Kinston Area #5. The SHPO has requested that a comprehensive archeological survey
of the property be conducted to identify battlefield features. An archaeology survey of the Project area has been
completed by Legacy Research Associates, a firm selected from the list provided by the SHPO. A copy of the
resulting archeological report was sent to the SHPO of May 9, 2019 for review and comment in advance of any
construction or ground disturbance. SHPO provided feedback that the proposed restoration activities will have no
effect any historic properties eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (Appendix D).
Tull Wooten III Bank Parcel Development Package
Riparian Buffer Mitigation and Nutrient Offset Site 9 May 2020

2.3 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)/ Hydrologic Trespass
According to the North Carolina Floodplain Mapping Information System, the Project is within several flood hazard
zones (FEMA, 2019). Approximately 32.0 acres of the southernmost portion of the Project is within the Neuse
Regulated Floodway (Figure 11). Approximately 39.5 acres of the middlemost portion of the Project is within the
FEMA 100-year flood zone (Zone AE, one percent annual chance of flooding) (Figure 11). No restoration activities
are proposed within the regulated floodway, and no impacts to the 100-year flood elevations are anticipated
downstream of the project. Additionally, there will be no hydrologic trespass on adjacent properties upstream or
downstream of the project. The Project can be found on Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Panel 4535 (map number
3720453500K), effective date April 16, 2013, and on FIRM panel 4534 (map number 3720453400K), effective
April 16, 2013.
3 RIPARIAN RESTORATION AND PRESERVATION IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Riparian restoration, preservation and nutrient offset areas adjacent to streams are shown in Figure 8 and were
approved by the DWR in the letters dated March 12, 2018 (Appendix A). The goal of the Project is to restore
ecological function to the existing streams, riparian buffers, and adjacent riparian areas by establishing appropriate
stream buffer plant communities where absent and to protect buffers and streams in perpetuity. The buffered
channels will provide water quality and habitat functions within the Neuse watershed, such as nutrient and sediment
removal, filtration of runoff from nearby agricultural fields, and improved aquatic and terrestrial habitat.
3.1 Site Preparation, Including Riparian Areas
Preparation within the Project will involve treating exotic invasive species; contoured ripping, seeding and planting,
and stream restoration. Prior to construction, authorization will be obtained to use the Nationwide Permit #27 under
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, and a DWR 401 Water Quality Certification under Section 401 of the Clean
Water Act. Following the issuance of the Nationwide Permit, an Erosion and Sediment Control permit will be
obtained. Stabilization and implementation of dispersal techniques will be utilized where surface flows become
concentrated to minimize the chances of non -diffuse flow. A combination of silt fence, erosion control wattles,
temporary seeding, and erosion control matting will be used to reduce erosion and stabilize soil in riparian areas
during any land disturbance activities. These erosion control measures shall be inspected and properly maintained
at the end of each working day to ensure measures are functioning properly until permanent vegetation is
established. Disturbed areas shall be seeded within ten working days and permanent vegetation shall be established
for all disturbed areas upon completion of final grading. Any topsoil that is removed during construction will be
stockpiled and placed over the site during final soil preparation. After construction activities, the subsoil will be
scarified and any compaction will be deep tilled before the topsoil is placed back over the site. This process should
provide favorable soil conditions for plant growth. Temporary and permanent riparian seeding shall be done in
accordance with the erosion control plan. Bare root plantings and live stakes shall be planted according to the
planting plan (Figure 12).
All riparian restoration and preservation activities will commence in concurrence with the stream and wetland
mitigation activities and not before. Therefore, the mitigation area where riparian restoration is being performed
may be altered slightly depending on the approval of the Stream Mitigation Plan for the Stream Mitigation Bank.
The riparian restoration areas will be surveyed and information will be provided in the As -Built report.
Tull Wooten III Bank Parcel Development Package
Riparian Buffer Mitigation and Nutrient Offset Site 10 May 2020

3.2 Methods
All restoration and preservation riparian activities will begin from the tops of the stream banks and extend a
minimum of 50 feet from the stream outward to a maximum of 200 feet perpendicular to the stream channel pursuant
to 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (effective November 1, 2015). Areas greater than 50 feet and less than 150 feet are being
pursued for additional stream credit for wider buffers; there will be no overlap in buffer, nutrient, stream, and
wetland crediting areas (Figure 7). Vegetation within riparian buffers and adjacent riparian areas, can vary
depending on disturbance regime and adjacent community types, so the protected buffer easement will be planted
with appropriate native species observed in the surrounding forest and species known to occur in similar
environments (Section 3.5).
3.3 Riparian Restoration Activities
Buffer restoration activities are proposed along TW2-A, TW3, and small portions of TW4 in accordance with the
Consolidated Buffer Mitigation Rule 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (n) (Figure 8). Stream restoration will address existing
impairments including, floodplain dislocation, bank erosion, nutrient input, and buffer degradation. Restoration
activities will include constructing a new channel within the natural valley with appropriate dimensions and pattern,
grading out a floodplain bench and backfilling the abandoned channel. In -stream structures such as log sills, rock
sills, constructed wood riffles, brush toes, step pools, and log vanes will be installed for stability and to improve
habitat. Habitat will further be improved through Neuse buffer and adjacent riparian area plantings, treating invasive
species, and increasing the buffer to at least 150 feet (up to 200 feet in some areas). Proposed riparian buffer
activities will improve riparian areas that will filter runoff from adjacent cropland, thereby reducing nutrient and
sediment loads to the channel. Planting will consist of a composition of native bare -root tree species specified in
Section 3.5. The restoration of plant communities within the Project will not only provide stabilization and improve
water quality within the easement limits, but will also provide ecological benefits to the entire watershed.
Furthermore, the middle portion of TW2-A will be pursued for nutrient offset credit, and is viable for buffer
restoration crediting in accordance with 15A NCAC 02B .0703 (Figure 8). This area will include the same activities
as described above.
Restoration activities will also include the permanent protection of the riparian buffer and adjacent riparian areas
from cutting, clearing, filling, grading, and similar activities that would affect the functioning of the buffer through
a conservation easement that will have clearly visible easement markers and signs (see Section 3.6 for further
description of the easement boundaries).
3.4 Riparian Preservation Activities
Buffer preservation is proposed along TW 1, a portion of TW2-A, TW2-B, TW2-C, TW3, and TW4, in accordance
with the Consolidated Buffer Mitigation Rule 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(5) (Figure 8). However, preservation
activities along TW3 will be preservation on non -subject streams in accordance with the Consolidated Buffer
Mitigation Rule 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(4). Preservation activities will consist of permanently protecting the
buffer from cutting, clearing, filling, grading, and similar activities that would affect the functioning of the buffer
through a conservation easement that will have clearly visible easement markers and signs (see Section 3.6 for
further description of the easement boundaries). No more than 25 percent of the total area of buffer mitigation will
be used for preservation credit pursuant to 15A NCAC 0295 (o)(5) and 15A NCAC 0295 (o)(4) and the rest of the
area will be protected in the conservation easement and not applied for credit. Furthermore, Buffer preservation can
only generate buffer mitigation credit and is not transferrable into nutrient offset credits.
Tull Wooten III Bank Parcel Development Package
Riparian Buffer Mitigation and Nutrient Offset Site 11 May 2020

3.5 Planting Plan
Mixed Hardwood Forest — Coastal Plain Subtype (Schafale, 2012) will be the target community type and will be
used for all areas within the Project. This forest system is common throughout Coastal Plain drainages and will
provide water quality and ecological benefits. All riparian restoration areas will be planted from top of bank back
at least 50-feet from the stream with bare root tree seedlings on nine by six-foot spacing to achieve an initial density
of 680 trees per acre (Figure 12 and Pl). Planting of the Project where riparian buffer restoration is being performed
will meet the performance standards outlined in the Rule 15A NCAC 02B .0295. The initial planting of bare root
trees will occur before Spring 2021. Wherever possible, mature vegetation will be preserved and incorporated into
the buffer. Some areas adjacent to the forested areas may require maintenance due to the rapid regeneration of some
species, such as red maple and sweetgum. The planting plan proposed for the project is shown in Table 5 and
Figure Pl.
fable S. Tree Planting List
Bare Root Planting Tree Species
Species
Common Name
Canopy/
Subcanopy
Spacing
(ft)
Unit Type
% of Total
Species
Composition
Betula nigra
River birch
Canopy
9X6
Bare Root
15
Liriodendron tulipifera
Tulip poplar
Canopy
9X6
Bare Root
10
Nyssa bii fora
Black gum
Canopy
9X6
Bare Root
15
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
Canopy
9X6
Bare Root
15
Quercus nigra
Water oak
Canopy
9X6
Bare Root
15
Quercus phellos
Willow oak
Canopy
9X6
Bare Root
15
Diospyros virginiana
Persimmon
Canopy
9X6
Bare Root
10
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Green ash
Canopy
9X6
Bare Root
5
Live Stake Tree Species
o
Species Common Name Canopy/Subcanopy /o of Total Species Composition
Salix nigra Black willow Subcanopy 60
Cornus amomum Silky dogwood Subcanopy 40
3.6 Easement Boundaries
Easement boundaries will be identified in the field to ensure clear distinction between the Project and adjacent
properties. Boundary markers will be installed once project construction is complete and before DWR performs the
as -built site visit. Boundaries may be identified by marker, bollard, post, tree -blazing, or other means as allowed by
Project conditions and/or conservation easement. Boundaries will be marked with signs identifying the property as
a mitigation project and will include the name of the long-term steward and a contact number. Boundary markers
disturbed, damaged, or destroyed will be repaired and/or replaced on an as needed basis. The easement boundary
will be checked annually as part of monitoring activities and the conditions as well as any maintenance performed
will be reported in the annual monitoring reports to DWR.
Tull Wooten III Bank Parcel Development Package
Riparian Buffer Mitigation and Nutrient Offset Site 12 May 2020

4 MONITORING PLAN
4.1 Monitoring Protocol and Success Criteria
Annual vegetation monitoring and visual assessments will be conducted. Riparian buffer vegetation monitoring will
be based on the "Carolina Vegetation Survey -Ecosystem Enhancement Program Protocol for Recording Vegetation:
Level 1-2 Plot Sampling Only Version 4.2" (Lee et al., 2006). As part of the stream mitigation plan, there will be
11 vegetation plots. Nine will be fixed plots, and two will be randomly placed each monitoring year. Vegetation
plots will be a minimum of 100 meters squared in size and will cover at least two percent of the planted mitigation
area for the Buffer and Nutrient Offset Bank (12.91 acres). Six of these plots will be placed within areas where RES
is seeking riparian buffer or nutrient offset credit. These plots will be measuring success of both the riparian buffer
crediting areas, and the stream crediting areas. Data from those plots measuring success of the areas where buffer
credit is being sought will be provided in the monitoring reports. These plots will be randomly placed throughout
the planted riparian mitigation area and will be representative of the riparian restoration areas. The following data
will be recorded for all trees in the plots: species, height, planting date (or volunteer), and grid location. All stems
in plots will be flagged with flagging tape (Figure 12).
Photos will be taken at all vegetation plot origins each monitoring year and be provided in the annual reports. Visual
inspections and photos will be taken to ensure that enhancement areas are being maintained and compliant. The
measures of vegetative success for the Project will be the survival of at least four native hardwood tree species,
where no one species is greater than 50 percent of the stems, established at a density of at least 260 planted trees
per acre at the end of Year 5. Native volunteer species may be included to meet the performance standards as
determined by NC Division of Water Resources.
A visual assessment of the conservation easement will also be performed each year to confirm:
• No encroachment has occurred;
• No invasive species in areas were invasive species were treated,
• Diffuse flow is being maintained in the conservation easement areas; and
• There has not been any cutting, clearing, filling, grading, or similar activities that would negatively
affect the functioning of the buffer.
RES must monitor the stream and wetland mitigation bank for a minimum of seven years, or until IRT approval.
Therefore, plots placed within riparian restoration areas that are outside of the mitigation area for buffer credits will
be monitored in accordance with the monitoring protocol in the Tull Wooten III Stream and Wetland Mitigation
Plan.
4.2 Adaptive Management Plan and Parcel Maintenance
Adaptive measures will be developed, or appropriate remedial actions taken if in the event that the site, or a specific
component of the site, fails to achieve the defined success criteria. Remedial actions will be designed to achieve the
success criteria specified in this BPDP, and will include identification of the causes of failure, remedial design
approach, work schedule, and monitoring criteria that will take into account physical and climatic conditions.
Initial plant maintenance may include a one-time mowing, prior to initial planting to remove undesirable species.
If mowing is deemed necessary by RES during the monitoring period, RES must receive approval by the DWR
prior to any mowing activities to ensure that no buffer violations have been performed. Failure to receive approval
Tull Wooten III Bank Parcel Development Package
Riparian Buffer Mitigation and Nutrient Offset Site 13 May 2020

to mow within the Neuse River buffer, as defined in 15A NCAC 02B .0233, by the DWR could result in Neuse
buffer violations and violations of the conservation easement. If necessary, RES will develop a species -specific
control plan.
5 LONG TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN
EBX—Neuse I, LLC (EBX-Neuse I), acting as the Bank Sponsor, will record a Conservation Easement with the
Lenoir County Register of Deeds Office for this site. The Conservation Easement will be assigned to North Carolina
Wildlife Habitat Foundation (NCWHF). All monitoring activities, including periodic inspections of the site to
ensure that restrictions required in the Conservation Easement are upheld, are the responsibility of EBX-Neuse 1,
LLC until the Bank Parcel is transferred to the NCWHF. Endowment funds required to uphold the Tull Wooten III
Bank Parcel conservation easement in perpetuity shall be negotiated prior to site transfer to the NCWHF.
The Bank Sponsor will ensure that the Conservation Easement has allowed for the implementation of an initial
monitoring phase, which will be developed during the design phase and conducted by the Bank Sponsor. The
Conservation Easement will allow for yearly monitoring and, if necessary, maintenance of the Parcel during the
initial monitoring phase. These activities will be conducted in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Tull
Wooten III Riparian Buffer Mitigation and Nutrient Offset Banking Instrument made and entered into by EBX-
Neuse I, LLC and DWR.
6 FINANCIAL ASSURANCE
The Sponsor will provide financial assurances in the form of Performance Bonds sufficient to assure one -hundred
percent (100 percent) completion of all mitigation work, required reporting and monitoring, and any remedial work
required. Financial assurances will be payable at the direction of the DWR to its designee or to a standby trust.
Financial assurances structured to provide funds to the DWR in the event of default by the Bank Sponsor are not
acceptable. The initial performance bond will be in the amount of at least $150,000 and shall be able to cover 100
percent of the costs associated with construction of the riparian restoration areas. The monitoring bond shall be in
the amount of at least $100,000 and shall be able to cover 100 percent of the costs associated with the monitoring
and maintenance of the riparian restoration areas for five years.
Performance bonds for monitoring shall be renewed to cover the next years monitoring period, with confirmation
of renewal provided to DWR with each annual monitoring report when applicable. DWR reserves the right to alter
the credit release schedule if monitoring reports are submitted without proof of bond renewals when applicable.
7 MITIGATION POTENTIAL
This Project has the potential to generate approximately 118,196.996 ftZ (2.71 acres) of riparian buffer restoration
credits, 4,600.50 ftZ (0.11 acres) buffer preservation credits, and 3 09.95 7 lbs (0.14 acres) of nutrient offset credits.
In accordance with 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(4) and (5), "the area of preservation credit within a buffer mitigation
site shall comprise of no more than 25% of the total area of buffer mitigation"; therefore, only 0.10 acres out of the
11.62 total acres available for preservation credit are allowable to be used to generate preservation mitigation
credits.
In accordance with 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o) (7) "the area of the mitigation site on ephemeral channels shall
comprise no more than 25% of the total area of buffer mitigation." There is one channel within the project proposed
for buffer credit. As per the rule, TW3 is a natural channel with discernable banks observable within crenulations
on a USGS 7.5-minute topographic map (Figure 4). The total creditable area for ephemeral reaches for this project,
Tull Wooten III Bank Parcel Development Package
Riparian Buffer Mitigation and Nutrient Offset Site 14 May 2020

is 76,604 ft, which includes one deduction of 4,350 sq ft of credit. After applying the crediting ratio described
above, the ephemeral reach will yield a total of 43,974 sq ft of credit. Moreover, in accordance with 15A NCAC
02B .0295 (o) (7), the entire area proposed for mitigation along the ephemeral reach, TW3, is located within the
contributing drainage area to the ephemeral channel, and is directly connected to an intermittent reach downstream
(Figure 4 and Figure 8). The channel is contiguously contained within the overall mitigation project and
conservation easement.
The width of the buffer/nutrient credit generation area will begin at the most landward limit of the top of bank or
the rooted herbaceous vegetation and extend landward to a distance of 50 feet. There will be no overlap of credit
generation between stream crediting areas (51-150 feet) and riparian buffer crediting areas (0-50 feet). Any areas
with buffers narrower than 20 feet will not generate credit.
The riparian buffer mitigation credits generated will service Neuse buffer impacts within the USGS 8-digit HUC
03020202 of the Neuse River Basin. The Nitrogen nutrient offsets generated will service nutrient load reduction
requirements where payments are authorized in 15A NCAC 02B .0703 within the USGS 8-digit HUC 03020202.
The total potential mitigation credits that the Parcel will generate are summarized in Table 6, and Figure 8.
Tull Wooten III Bank Parcel Development Package
Riparian Buffer Mitigation and Nutrient Offset Site 15 May 2020

Table 6. Tull Wooten III, 2008-126Rv4, Project Credits
Neuse03020202
Project Area
N Credit Conversion Ratio (ft'/pound)
P Credit Conversion Ratio (ft'/pound)
19.16394
N/A
Credit Type
Location
Subject?(enter
NO if
ephemeral or
ditch t)
Feature Type
Mitigation Activity
Min-Maz Buffer
Width (ft)
Feature Name
Total Area (ft')
Buffer
Total Area (ft)
Nutrient
Deductions
Total (Creditable)
Area tBuffer
Mitigation (Rt)
Credit
Ratio (x:l)
%Full Credit
Final Credit
Final
Ratio (z:l)
Convertible to
Riparian
Buffer?
Riparian Buffer
Credits
Convertible to
Nutrient Offset?
Delivered
Nutrient Offset:
N (Ibs)
Delivered
Nutrient
Offset: P (lb
Buffer
Rural
Ves
I/P
Restoration
0-50
TW2-A&TW4
84,652
84,652
1
100%
1.00000
Yes
84,652.000
Yes
Buffer
Rural
Yes
I/P
Restoration
101-200
TW2-A(151-200')
2,303
2,303
1
33%
3.03030
Yes
759.991
Yes
Buffer
Rural
No
Ephemeral
Restoration
0-50
TW3(diffuse flow deduction
of 4,350 sq ft)
31,624
4,350
27,274
1
100%
1.00000
Yes
27,274.000
Yes
—
Buffer
Rural
No
Ephemeral
Restoration
101-200
TW3 (151-200')
(ephemeral cap deduction of
3,435 sq ft)
19,435
3,435
16,700
1
33%
3.03030
Yes
5,511.006
Yes
—
—
Nutrient Offset
Rural
Yes
I/P
Restoration
101-200
TW2-A(151-200')
5,940
1
33%
No
Yes
309.957
Totals:
138,014
5,940
130,929
Enter Preservation Credits Below Elieible for Preservation ffttl: F 46,005
Feature Type
iviri-visix
Width (ft)
Total Area (ft)
Buffer
Preservation Area Subtotal (ft'): 46,005
Preservation as %Total Area of Buffer Mitigation:
Ephemeral Reaches as %Total Area of Buffer Mitigation:
1. The Randleman Lake buffer rules allow some ditches to be classified as subject according to 15A NCAC 02B .0250 (5)(a).
TOTAL AREA OF BUFFER MITIGATION (TASM)
Mitigation Totals
Square Feet
Credits
Restoration:
130,929
118,196.996
Enhancement:
0
0.000
Preservation:
46,005
4,600.500
Total Riparian Buffer:
176,934
122,797.496
TOTAL NUTRIENT
OFFSET MITIGATION
Mitigation Totals
I Square Feet
I Credits
Nutrient
Offset:
Nitrogen:
Phosphorus:
5,940
309.957
o.000

8 REFERENCES
Environmental Laboratory. (1987). U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report
Y-87-1. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). 20136. FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map: Panel 4535 (map
number 3720453500K). https://msc.fema. zov/portal/search. (Septembet 2019).
FEMA. 2013. FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map: Panel 4534 (map number 3720453400K). https://msc.fema.gov
/portal/search. (September 2019).
Griffith, G.E., Omernik, J.M., Comstock, J.A., Schafale, M.P., McNab, W.H., Lenat, D.R., MacPherson, T.F.,
Glover, J.B., and Shelburne, V.B., 2002, Ecoregions of North Carolina and South Carolina, (color poster
with map, descriptive text, summary tables, and photographs): Reston, Virginia, U.S. Geological Survey
(map scale 1:1,500,000).
Lee, T.L, Peet, R.K., Roberts, S.D., and Wentworth, T.R. 2006. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation,
Version 4.2. http://cvs.bio.unc.edu/protocol/cvs-eep-protocol-v4.2-levl-2.pdf.
North Carolina Office of Administrative Hearings (NCOAH). 2010. Rule 15A NCAC 0213.0703 - Nutrient Offset
Payments. http://reports.oah.state.nc.us/ncac.asp?folderName=\Title%2015A%20-
%20Environmental%2OQualit,\hgpter%2002%20%2OEnvironmental%2OMana ems. (February
2019).
NCDEQ (North Carolina Division of Environmental Quality). 2019. North Carolina Water Bodies Listed by River
Basin. https://ncdenr.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/
index.html?id=6el25ad7628f494694e259c80dd64265; accessed September 2019.
NCDEQ. 2009. Neuse River Basinwide Water Quality Plan.
https://files.nc. gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/PlanningBPUBPU/Neuse/Neuse%20PIans/2009%20PIan/N
R%20Basinwide%20Plan%202009%20-%2OFinal.pdf, accessed April 2020.
NCDEQ. 2019. Nutrient Sensitive Waters and Special Watersheds. hgps:Hdeq.nc.gov/about/divisions/energy-
mineral-land-resources/nsw-special-watersheds. (Septmeber 2019).
NCDWQ (North Carolina Division of Water Quality). 2011. A Guide to Surface Freshwater Classifications in North
Carolina. Raleigh. http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document librar/
et_file?p_1_id=1169848&folderld=2209568&name=DLFE-35732.pdf, accessed September 2019.
NCOAH. 2015.15A NCAC 02B.0295 - Mitigation Program Requirements for the Protection and Maintenance of
Riparian Buffers. http://reports.oah.state.nc.us/ncac.asp?folderName=\Title%2015A%20-
%20Environmental%2OQualit\�pter%2002%20%2OEnviromnental%2OMana ems. (September
2019).
NCOAH. 2015. 15A NCAC 02B .0703. - Mitigation Program Requirements for the Protection and Maintenance
of Riparian Buffers. http://ncrules.state.nc.us/ncac/title%2015a%20-
%20environmental%20quality/chapter%2002%20-
%20environmental%20management/subchapter%20b/15a%20ncac%2002b%20.0703.pdf . (September
2019).
Tull Wooten III Bank Parcel Development Package
Riparian Buffer Mitigation and Nutrient Offset Site 0 May 2020

NCDNCR (North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources). 2018. North Carolina State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO) GIS Web Service. http://www.hpo. ncdcr.gov/. (2018).
NCDNCR. 2018. Natural Heritage Program (NHP) GIS database. https://ncnhde.natureserve.org/. (2018).
NCNHP. 2019. Natural Heritage Elemental Occurrences. September 2019.
Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Web Soil
Survey. hgps://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/. (September 2019).
Schafale, M.P. 2012. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina, Fourth Approximation. North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, NCDENR, Raleigh, NC.
United State Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual: Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region (Version 2.0), ed. J. S. Wakeley, R. W.
Lichvar, and C. V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-10-20. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and
Development Center.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) - Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS). 1977. Soil
Survey of Lenoir County, North Carolina.
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USWFS). 2019. National Wetlands Inventory website. U.S. Department of the
Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. hqp://www.fws. gov/wetlands/. (September 2019).
USFWS. 2019. Information, Planning, and Conservation (IPAC) Online Screening Tool. https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/;
accessed September 2019.
Tull Wooten III Bank Parcel Development Package
Riparian Buffer Mitigation and Nutrient Offset Site 1 May 2020

Kenly
MI Olive
Rose Hill
Sncw Hill
ro
La Grange
KinstAi
iD,
on
Will1amstun
Brthel
LOD
llitl
I DO
GreenviRe
Washington
Ay (lien
ti
Tull Wooten III
Project
New Bern
CFO"il I HaveloA
Natmri�!
F.—
Leg
end
Moreh4
Service Area - 03020202 �41 "Cape porwit
Enier aid 1sle
Proposed Easement
N
Figure 1 - Service Area Date: 5/6/2020
W —A— E
Drawn by: MDE
Tull Wooten
s res
Mitigation Project Checked by: KAW
0 5 10
10
Lenoir County, North Carolina
1 inch = 10 miles
Miles

n.�
s�
a
r7r
N
°rken Re
a �
�b
+
7r�mati nve
N
ss
a
Eastrtd%, c„
a
re �
N
6
0
�
v
a6M�yf
N
Svc?
n
o
w! s!
J
�
CM.t,
ten h
ax HdMwap Park
r n
tno
C Br+ght Si
&mdnd St
C
fun6 SI a
T
N
c
r
Lmcdtr!
3t
w
uvinow st 5
z
1C`
U.tH n+
Legend
Proposed Easement
Tull Wooten I & II
Service Area - 03020202
Hydrologic Unit - 03020202060040
Tull Wooten II
Tull Wooten I
Greenville
6'A
law
JackSO135.255,-77.544
" Figure 2 - Project Vicinity Date: 5/6/2020
w e Tull Wooten III Drawn by: MDEres
,,000 2,00o Mitigation Project Checked by. KAW
Feet Lenoir County, North Carolina linch =2,OOOfeet

Tull Wooten I
''Z*' °*F
4
arm'
Ak

IN
. -,
At 10.0
— T � T T — Vr �► ! ,i �--
W me
9.1
t su • Tye JQN 4r
�• _ 3.3Q
L ~ lLIM-
Le
pend
Proposed Easement
® Drainage Area
N Figue 4 - USGS Quadrangle Date: 5/6/2020
Kinston (1984)
w - e Drawn by: MDE
res
s Tull Wooten III
0 1.00o 2,000 Mitigation Project Checked by KAW
1 inch - 2,000 feet
Feet Lenoir County, North Carolina

to
OPP"
r
I
Legend
Proposed Easement (103.88 ac)
Mitigation Approach
Wetland Preservation
Restoration
Enhancement I
a
Enhancement III
Preservation
It
" Figure 6 - Stream Concept Design Plan Date: 5/6/2020
-Aww e Tull Wooten III Drawn by: MDE res
0 300 600 Mitigation Project Checked by: KAW
inch=600feet
Lenoir County, North Carolina

DWR Riparian Buffer
Crediting Areas
0
Non -Standard Buffer
Width Credit Areas
fires
N
W E
S
0 300 600
Feet
Figure 7 - Buffer Zones
Tull Wooten III
Mitigation Project
Lenoir County,
North Carolina
Date: 8/31/2020 Drawn by: MDE
Checked by: BPB 1 in = 600 feet
Legend
QProposed
Easement
Tull Wooten I & II
Wetland Mitigation Area
—
NSBW Credit Area (51-
150')
Buffer Mitigation
0
Restoration - 0-50 ft
®
Restoration - 151-200 ft
Restoration - 0-50 ft
(Ephemeral)
®Restoration
- 151-200 ft
(Ephemeral)
0
Preservation - 0-50 ft
®
Preservation - 151-200 ft
0
Preservation - 0-50 ft
(Ephemeral)
Preservation - 151-200 ft
(Ephemeral)
'
Nutrient (151-200ft)
r,�r

Nutrient Credit Area
Legend
Buffer Mitigation
'1
���*it� :"emu► �/1 �.
r��f�ir.1►i��wi��I►`�`J►���
151-200 Preservation Area U
Along TW2-A
a
' F
151 -200 Restoration Area
Along TW2-A
Buffer deduction of 4,350 sgft �1 .
where diffuse flow cannot be
,l attained, in accordance with
15A NCAC 026 .0295 (o) (7). ' F
S �V (Cut out area not to scale)
Total Area of Buffer Mitigation one
r TW3 is 80,954 W. However, total
N allowable buffer mitigation on the •
W ephemeral reach, is 47,624 ft', in
accordance with 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o) (7).
No buffer credit generated along
TW4 where the riparian buffer
is less than 30 ft
(Buffer credit generated will
be calculated at As -Built)
TOTAL AREA OF BUFFER MITIGATION (TABM)
Mitigation Totals
Square Feet
Credits
0 Restoration:
130,929
118,196.996
Enhancement:
0
0.000
Preservation:
46,005
4,600.500
Total Riparian Buffer:
176,934
122,797.496
TOTAL NUTRIENT
OFFSET MITIGATION
Mitigation Totals
Square Feet
Credits
Nutrient Nitrogen:
309.957
Offset: �Phoslphorus:
5,940
0.000
Figure 8 - Conceptual Design Plan for Riparian Buffer Bank
w
V' Tull Wooten III Mitigation Project
g �
res
Lenoir County, North Carolina

V
3 A
Na
4
Nb
M
Kn
Lenoir County Soil Survey (1977)
IT 5
LV
Lv
+J
C Ch
107
w t
I a i
.NC
r
n
Na
Kb CFI. t
3 w
Lk
1111
Ch
water
Ch
I
NRCS Web Soil Survey (2020)
avid Ave
Ch
WWI Map Unit
Map Unit Name
Ch
Cv
Ke
Kb
WO Kn
Lu
Chewacla loam, frequently flooded
Craven fine sandy loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes
Kenansville loamysand, 0 to 6 percent slopes
Kalmia loamysand, 2 to 6 percentslopes
Kinston loam, frequently flooded
Lumbeesandyloam
Na
Nb
Nc
Norfolk loamysand, 0 to 2 percentslopes
Norfolk loamysand, 2 to 6 percentslopes
Norfolk loamysand, 6 to 10 percent slopes
Wd
Wagram loamy sand, 10 to 15 percentslopes
fires
0 300 600
Feet
Figure 9 - Mapped Soils
Tull Wooten III
Mitigation Project
Lenoir County, North Carolina
Date: 5/6/2020
Drawn by: MDE
Checked by: KAW
1 in = 600 feet
Legend
Proposed Easement
Hydric (100%)
Predominantly
Hydric (66-99%)
Predominantly
Hydric (33-65%)
Predominantly
Nonhydric (1-32%)
r
Nonhydric (0%)

WON
F01/2
[PF01/2F
PF01A
PF01/2F
PF01/2F
PF01/4A
PSS1/2Fx PUBHx
PSS1/2Fx
PUBHx
FISS1/2Fx
Ak

rr, .
� J
f F
ores
l
N
W E
S
0 200 400
Feet
Figure 12 - Monitoring Plan
Tull Wooten III
Mitigation Project
Lenoir County, North Carolina
Date: 5/11/2020 Drawn by: MDE
Checked by: KAW 1 in = 400 feet
Legend
oProposed Easemnet
Tull Wooten I & II
Wetland Preservation
Stream Mitigation
Approach
Restoration
Enhancement I
Enhancement III
Preservation
Buffer Mitigation
0 Restoration - 0-50 ft
®Restoration - 151-200 ft
ORestoration - 0-50 ft
(Ephemeral)
Restoration - 151-200 ft
(Ephemeral)
- Preservation - 0-50 ft
-Preservation - 151-200 ft
-Preservation - 0-50 ft
(Ephemeral)
-Preservation - 151-200 ft
(Ephemeral)
_Nutrient (151-200ft)
Monitoring Plan
® Planted Area (12.78 ac)
-Vegetation Plot Within Buffer
Mitigation Area
Note: There will be a total of 9 fixed vegetation plots Vegetation Plot Outside
to monitor the performance of the Stream Mitigation Buffer Mitigation Area
Project. Six of those fixed plots will also monitor the
performance o the Buffer Mitigation Project.

Appendix A
NCDWR Stream Determination Letter and Mitigation
Viability Letter

Warer Resources
E r1Vaw0Nmf Nt AL QUra L.1 r
March 12. 2018
Daniel Ingrain
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
(via electronic mail: din ram a?res.us }
ROY COOPER
MICHAEL S. REGAN
LINDA CULPEPPER
haermr Director
Re: Site Viability for Buffer Mitigation & Nutrient Offset — Tull Wooten III Site
2715 Tower Hill Rd, Kinston, NC
Neuse River Basin — 03020202 HUC
Lenoir County
Dear Mr. Ingram,
On February 6, 20I8, Katie Merritt, with the Division of Water Resources (DWR), received a request
from Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC (RES) for a site visit near the above referenced site in
the Neuse River Basin. The site visit was to determine the potential for riparian buffer mitigation
and nutrient offset adjacent to features shown on the attached figure labeled "Tull Wooten Ur'. On
February 28, 2018, Ms. Merritt performed a site assessment of the subject site, which is more
accurately shown in the attached maps labeled "Stream Call Map A" and "Stream Call Map B". This
site is also being proposed as a stream mitigation site by RES.
Ms, Merritt's evaluation of the features and their associated mitigation determination for the riparian
areas are provided in the table below. The evaluation was made from Top of Bank (TOB) out to
200' from each existing feature for buffer mitigation pursuant to 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (effective
November 1. 2015) and for nutrient offset credits pursuant to 15A NCAC 02B .0240.
Feature
classification
'Sub eCt
Riparian Land uses
Buffer
2Nutrient
Miti ation Type determination Win riparian
adjacent to Feature
areas
to Buffer
Credit
Offset Viable
Rule
10-2001
at 2,273
Viable
ibs acre
❑5
❑itch
No
Row crop agriculture
No
Yes
Nutrient Offset- Restoration Site per ISA
NCAC 02B .0295 (n)
*Buffer Mitigation Note: bitch does not comply
with 0295 (0)(8)
TW5
ditch
No
Combination of row
No
Yes (non-
Nutrient Offset- Restoration 5ite per ISA
crop agriculture and
forested fields
NCAC 02B .0295 Rnj
forested areas
only)
*Buffer Mitigation Note: Ditch does not comply
comply with 0295 (o)(S)
Suir of North Carolina I Envirnnmenlal Quality I Water Resowees
1617 Mail Service Center Rs}eirlt North Carolina 27699-1617
919 807 6300

Tull Wooten III Site
RES
March 12, 2018
Feature
Classification
r5ubiett
Riparian Land uses
Buffer
iNutrient
Mitigation Type Determination w1in riparian
adiacent to Feature
areas
to Buffer
Credit
Offset Viable
Rule
(0-2001
at 2,273
Viable
ibs acre
1W4
Stream
Yes
Non -forested pasture
Yes`
Yes (non-
Fields - Restoration Site per 15A NCAC 02B
grazed by cattle
forested fields
.0295 (n)
only)
Forested Areas - Preservation Site per 15A
NCAC 02B (o)(5)
03
Ditch
No
Row crop agriculture
No
No
N/A
Feature is hydrologically connected to an
ephemeral channel
TW3
Ephemeral
No
Combination of row
YeSAA
Yes (non-
fields - Restoration Site per 15A NCAC 02B
crap agriculture and
forested fields
.0295 (o)(7)
forested areas
only)
Forested Areas - Preservation Site per 15A
NCAC 026 (o)(7)
Must meet additionoi requirements under. 0295
{oJ(7) to be viable for buffer mitigation.
TW2-A
Stream
Yes
Combination of row
Yes"
Yes fnon-
fields - Restoration Site per 15A NCAC 028
crap agriculture and
forested fields
.0295 (n)
forested areas
only)
Forested Areas - Preservation Site per 15A
NCAC 02B (o)(5)
TW2-B
Stream
Yes
Combination of row
Yes3
Yes (riot?-
Fields - Restoration Site per 15A NCAC 02B
crop agriculture and
forested fields
.0295 (n)
forested areas
only)
Forested Areas - Preservation Site per I5A
NCAC 026 (0)(5)
D2
Ephemeral
No
Forested
Yes3.4
No
Forested Areas - Preservation Site per 15A
NCAC 02B (0)(7)
Mast meet additional requirements under. 0295
(o;(7) to be viable for buffer mitigation.
❑1-A
Ditch
No
Combination of row
No
No
N/A
crop agriculture and
forested areas
Feature is hydrologically connected to an
ephemeral channel
DI-B
Ephemeral
No
Combination of row
YesM
Yes (non-
Fields - Restoration Site per 15A NCAC 025
crop agriculture and
forested fields
.0295 (o)(7)
forested areas
only)
Forested Areas - Preservation Site per 15A
NCAC 02B (o)(7)
Must meet additional requirements under .0295
(o)(7) to be viable for buffer mitigation

Tull Wooten III Site
RES
March 12, 2018
Feature
Classification
'Subject
Riparian Land uses
adjacent to Feature
Buffer
Credit
Viable
=Nutrient
Offset Viable
Mitigation Type Determination Win ritiarian
to Buffer
areas
Rule
0-200'
at 2,273
Ibs acre
TW1
Stream
Yes
Forested
Yes'
No
Preservation 51te per 15A NCAC 02B (o)(5)
' Subjectivity calls for the features were determined by DWR in correspondence dated Match 5, 2018 using the 1:24,000
scale quadrangle topographic map prepared by USGS and the most recent printed version of the soil survey map prepared
by the NRCS.
NCE )AIsion oJ'Water Resources - Methodology and Calculations for determining Nutrient Reductions associated with
Riparian Ru## r Establishment
'The area ot'preservation credit within a buffer mitigation site shall comprise of no more than 25 percent (25%) of the total
area of buffer mitigation per 15A NCAC 0295 (❑)(5) and 15A NCAC 0295 (o)(4). Site cannot be a Preservation only site
to comply with this rule.
^The area of the mitigation site on ephemeral channel shall comprise no more than 25 percent (250%) of the total area of
buffer mitigation per 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(7).
The attached maps (Stream Call Map -A, Stream Call Map-B) showing the project site and features
were provided by Anthony Scarbraugh with DWR respectively and were initialed by Ms. Merritt on
March 12, 2018. This letter should be provided in any future stream, wetland, buffer and/or nutrient
offset mitigation plans for this Site.
This letter does not constitute an approval of this site to generate mitigation credits. Pursuant to 15A
NCAC 02B .0295, a mitigation proposal and a mitigation plan shall be submitted to DWR for written
approval prior to conducting any mitigation activities in riparian areas and/or surface waters for
buffer mitigation credit. Pursuant to 15A NCAC 02B .0240, a proposal regarding a proposed nutrient
load -reducing measure for nutrient offset credit shall be submitted to DWR for approval prior to any
mitigation activities in riparian areas and/or surface waters.
All vegetative plantings, performance criteria and other mitigation requirements for riparian
restoration, enhancement and preservation must follow the requirements in 15A NCAC 02B .0295 to
be eligible for buffer and/or nutrient offset mitigation credits. For any areas depicted as not being
viable for nutrient offset credit above, one could propose a different measure, along with supporting
calculations and sufficient detail to support estimates of load reduction, for review by the DWR to
determine viability for nutrient offset in accordance with 15A NCAC 02B .0240. For any areas
generating wetland mitigation credit, no butfer or nutrient offset credit can be generated.

Tull Wooten III Site
RES
March 12, 2018
This viability assessment will expire on March 12, 2020 or upon the submittal of an As -Built
Report to the DWR, whichever comes first. Please contact Katie Merritt at (919)-807-6371 if you
have any questions regarding this correspondence.
Sincerely,
l
ti
Karen Higgins, Supervisor
401 and Buffer Permitting Branch
KAHIkm
Attachments: Stream Call Map -A, Stream Call Map-B
cc: File Copy (Kane Merritt)
414

{�f
cz
V
E
ro
a)
cn
c
aj
a
0

h�
]D I �001, fir+
`� ry = ' W

K. - r1a
Water Resources
1:11virongltlllal L twlo.
March 5, 2018
Perry Grandchildren, LLC
Attn: Mr. Ely Perry
PO Box 1415
Kinston, NC 28503
ROY COOPER
MICHAEL S. REGAN
5ecrerrrr'r
LINDA CULPEPPER
Infer•ien Dworlor
OWR #08-1268 V2
LENOIR County
Subject: On -Site Determination for Applicability to Neuse River Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 02B .0233)
Subject Property/ Project Name: Tull Wooten III Mitigation Site
Address/Location: 2715 Tower Hill Road in Kinston, NC
Stream(s) Evaluated: Uts to Neuse River
Determination Date: 2/28/18
Staff: Anthony Scarbraugh
Determination Type:
Buffer:
Stream:
® Neuse (15A NCAC 02B .0233)
❑ Intermittent/Perennial Determination
❑ Tar -Pamlico (15A NCAC 02B .0259)
❑ Catawba (15A NCAC 02B .0243)
❑ Jordan (15A NCAC 02B .0267) (governmental
and/or interjurisdictional projects)
❑ Randleman (1SA NCAC 02B .0250)
❑ Goose Creek (15A NCAC 02B .0605-.0608)
Stream
E/1/P*
Not
Subject
Start@
Stop@
Soil
USGS
Subject
Survey
Topo
08-1268 V2 A
Ditch
X
Flag: 08-1268 V2 A
Flag: 08-1268
x
Begin
V2 A End
08-1268 V2 B
I
X
Flag: 08-1268 V2 B
Flag: 08-1268
X
x
Begin
V2 B End
08-1268 V2 C
Ditch
X
Flag: 08-1268 V2 C
Flag: 08-1268
X
Begin
V2 C Ephemeral
08-1268 V2 C
E
X
Flag: 08-1268 V2 C
Flag: 08-1268
X
Ephemeral
V2 C End
'Nothing Compares - -
Slate o1 North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Water Resnunces-Water Quality Regional Operations Seelion-Washington Regional 011iee
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, North Carolina 27889
252-946-6481

Tull Wooten 111 Mitigation Site
Page 2 of 3
Stream
E/I/P*
Not
Subject
Start@
Stop@
Soil
USGS
Subject
Survey
Topo
08-1268 V2 D
I
R
Flag: 08-1268 V2 D
Flag: 08-1268
X
Begin
V2 D End
08-1268 V2 E
E
X
Flag: 08-1268 V2 E
Flag: 09-1268
X
Begin
V2 E End
08-1268 V2 F
Ditch
X
Flag: 08-1268 V2 F
Flag: 08-1268
X
Begin
V2 F Ephemeral
08-1268 V2 F
E
X
Flag: 08-1268 V2 F
Flag: 08-1268
X
Ephemeral
V2 F E/I
08-1268 V2 F
I
X
Flag: 08-1268 V2 F
Flag: 08-1268
x
E/I
V2 F End
*E/I/P/NSP = Ephemeral/Intermittent/Perennial/No Stream Present
The Division of Water Resources has determined that the streams listed above and included on the
attached map have been located on the mast recent published NRCS Soil Survey of LENOIR County, North
Carolina and/or the most recent copy of the USGS Topographic map at a 1:24,000 scale and evaluated far
applicability to the NEUSE River Riparian Buffer Rule. Each stream that is checked "Not Subject" has been
determined to not be at least intermittent or not present on the property. Streams that are checked
"Subject" have been located on the property and possess characteristics that qualify them to be at least
intermittent streams. There may be other streams or features located on the property that do not appear
on the maps referenced above but may be considered jurisdictional according to the US Army Corps of
Engineers and subject to the Clean Water Act.
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) calendar days of date of this letter to the Director in
writing.
If sending via US Postal Service:
c/o Karen Higgins
DWR — 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
If sending via delivery service (UPS, FedFx, etc.):
clo Karen Higgins
DWR — 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
512 N. Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604
This determination is final and binding as detailed above, unless an appeal is requested within sixty (60)
days.
This determination only addresses the applicability to the buffer rules and does not approve any activity
within the buffers. The project may require a Section 404/401 Permit for the proposed activity. Any
inquiries regarding applicability to the Clean Water Act should be directed to the US Army Corps of
Engineers Washington Regulatory Field Office at (910)-251-4629.
If you have questions regarding this determination, please feel free to contact Anthony Scarbraugh at
[phone].

Tull Wooten III Mitigation Site
Page 3 of 3
Sincerely,
94t a
Robert Tankard, AssistIt Regional Supervisor
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Division of Water Resources, NCDEQ
cc: WaRO DWR File Copy
LASERFICHE
Katie Merritt, DWR 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit (via email)
Daniel Ingram, Resources Environmental Solutions, LLC (via email: [e-mail])

fs 0
•ice � �..
234 6
f
1 � r
�. r
I r�
A.
-
g
• r � �IlkTEE
ROT
• 7 . � i // Lr�O
• _ `�+ SBndp
_
110E
3 �� - i _ - + -a _- / ^ • ,)lit -a
w
'1 r :,
-„ + + - +/ f it Q 4 $0.0
S�waaws bTspoSal a
PAS ` .. _ � � � "• +r F w- - ... * - �` •+ � Y� ['� � •�
1
s • . y' a°�
41114
WT
40
:$0a r y Legend
Easement (37.76 ac)
Figure 'I - USGS Map Dote: 21512018
n . Drawnby MDE
Tull Wooten III Mitigation Site
rm,s
0 1.000 2000.
Lenoir County, North Carolina

eis l GoLY
Y `,
Pa
'• r� L u P
wri
Ke
IL. n' �< Ly Na y ; j1b..�
A�
I� J K b
A
�21 Ke
N b v INb
�.
Ft n
Ad
we cQ
• 1 i [ • b
f .1 Lo
Ch
} r i.. y
Kn Ke
K;i . a
Ch
s _ -
n Legend
~, i11ater , u '' Easement (37.76 ac)
Figure 3 - Soils Map date 21!V201B
n � [ O[awn 6y: MaE
Tull Wooten III Mitigation Site res
0 400 wo
Lenoir County, North Carolina
e

Appendix B
Conservation Easement Template

RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE
PERMANENT CONSERVATION EASEMENT
THIS CONSERVATION EASEMENT ("Conservation Easement") made this
day of , 201_ by and between
("Grantor") and ("Grantee").
The designation Grantor and Grantee as used herein shall include said parties,
their heirs, successors and assigns, and shall include singular, plural, masculine,
feminine or neuter as required by context.
RECITALS
WHEREAS, Grantor owns in fee simple certain real property situated, lying and
being in County, North Carolina, more particularly described in Exhibit A
attached hereto and incorporated herein (the "Property");
WHEREAS, Grantee is a charitable, not -for -profit or educational corporation,
association, or trust qualified under § 501 (c)(3) and § 170 (h) of the Internal Revenue
Code, and N.C. Gen. Stat. § 121-34 et seq., the purposes or powers of which include
one or more of the purposes (a) — (d) listed below;
(a) retaining or protecting natural, scenic, or open -space aspects of real

property;
(b) ensuring the availability of real property for recreational, educational,
or open -space use;
(c) protecting natural resources;
(d) maintaining or enhancing air or water quality.
WHEREAS, Grantor and Grantee recognize the conservation, scenic, natural, or
aesthetic value of the property in its natural state, which includes the following
natural communities: add or delete as appropriate: wetlands, streams, and riparian
buffers. The purpose of this Conservation Easement is to maintain streams, wetlands
and riparian resources and other natural values of approximately _acres, more or
less, and being more particularly described in Exhibit B attached hereto and
incorporated fully herein by reference (the "Conservation Easement Area"), and
prevent the use or development of the Conservation Easement Area for any purpose
or in any manner that would conflict with the maintenance of its natural condition.
WHEREAS, the restoration, enhancement and preservation of the Conservation
Easement Area is a condition of the approval of the Mitigation Banking Instrument
(MBI) and Mitigation Plan for the _
Army (DA) Action ID Number SAW -
the
Mitigation Bank in the
Mitigation Bank, Department of the
entitled "Agreement to Establish
River Basin within the State of
North Carolina", to be made and entered into by and between
acting as
the Bank Sponsor and the Wilmington District Corps of Engineers (Corps), in
consultation with the North Carolina Interagency Review Team (IRT). The
Mitigation Site has been approved by the Corps for use as a mitigation bank to
compensate for unavoidable stream and wetland impacts authorized by DA permits.
WHEREAS, the restoration, enhancement and preservation of the Conservation
Easement Area is also a condition of the approval of the Riparian Buffer
and Nutrient Offset Mitigation Banking Instrument (MBI) and Bank Parcel Development
Package (BPDP) for the Riparian Buffer and Nutrient Offset Mitigation
Bank, North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) Project ID# ,
which was approved by the NCDWR, and will be made and entered into by and
between , acting as the Bank Sponsor, and the NCDWR. The
Riparian Buffer and Nutrient Offset Site is intended to be used to
compensate for riparian buffer and nutrient impacts to surface waters.
WHEREAS, Grantor and Grantee agree that third -party rights of enforcement
shall be held by the NCDWR and the Corps (to include any successor agencies) ("Third -
Parties"), and may be exercised through the appropriate enforcement agencies of the
United States and the State of North Carolina, and that these rights are in addition to,
and do not limit, the rights of enforcement under the NC DWR Project ID# _
and the Department of the Army instrument number SAW -
("Mitigation Banking Instrument"), or any permit or certification issued by the Third -
Parties.
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the covenants and
representations contained herein and for other good and valuable consideration, the

receipt and legal sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, Grantor hereby
unconditionally and irrevocably grants and conveys unto Grantee, its heirs, successors
and assigns, forever and in perpetuity a Conservation Easement of the nature and
character and to the extent hereinafter set forth, over the Conservation Easement Area
described on Exhibit B, together with the right to preserve and protect the conservation
values thereof, as follows:
ARTICLE I.
DURATION OF EASEMENT
This Conservation Easement shall be perpetual. This Conservation Easement is
an easement in gross, runs with the land and is enforceable by Grantee against Grantor,
Grantor's personal representatives, heirs, successors and assigns, lessees, agents and
licensees.
ARTICLE II.
PROHIBITED AND RESTRICTED ACTIVITIES
Any activity on, or use of, the Conservation Easement Area inconsistent with
the purpose of this Conservation Easement is prohibited. The Conservation
Easement Area shall be preserved in its natural condition and restricted from any
development that would impair or interfere with the conservation values of the
Conservation Easement Area.
Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the following activities and
uses are expressly prohibited, restricted or reserved as indicated hereunder:
A. Disturbance of Natural Features. Any change disturbance, alteration or
impairment of the natural features of the Conservation Easement Area or any
introduction of non-native plants and/or animal species is prohibited.
B. Construction. There shall be no constructing or placing of any building,
mobile home, asphalt or concrete pavement, billboard or other advertising
display, antenna, utility pole, tower, conduit, line, pier, landing, dock or any other
temporary or permanent structure or facility on or above the Conservation
Easement Area.
C. Industrial, Commercial and Residential Use. Industrial, residential and/or
commercial activities, including any rights of passage for such purposes are
prohibited.
D. Agricultural, Grazing and Horticultural Use. Agricultural, grazing, animal
husbandry, and horticultural use of the Conservation Easement Area are prohibited.
E. Vegetation. There shall be no removal, burning, destruction, harming,
cutting or mowing of trees, shrubs, or other vegetation in the Conservation Easement
Area except as provided in the Mitigation Plan and Bank Parcel Development Plan.
Mowing of invasive and herbaceous vegetation for purposes of enhancing planted or

volunteer trees and shrubs approved in the Mitigation Plan and BPDP is allowable once
a year for no more than five consecutive years from the date on page I of this
Conservation Easement, except where mowing will negatively impact vegetation or
disturb soils. Mowing activities shall only be performed by and shall not
violate any part of Item L of Article II.
F. Roads and Trails. There shall be no construction of roads, trails or walkways
on the Conservation Easement Area; nor enlargement or modification to existing
roads, trails or walkways.
G. Signage. No signs shall be permitted on or over the Conservation Easement
Area, except the posting of no trespassing signs, signs identifying the conservation
values of the Conservation Easement Area, signs giving directions or proscribing rules
and regulations for the use of the Conservation Easement Area and/or signs identifying
the Grantor as owner of the Conservation Easement Area.
H. Dumping or Storage. Dumping or storage of soil, trash, ashes, garbage,
waste, abandoned vehicles, appliances, machinery or hazardous substances, or toxic or
hazardous waste, or any placement of underground or aboveground storage tanks or
other materials on the Conservation Easement Area is prohibited.
I. Excavation, Dredging or Mineral Use. There shall be no grading, filling,
excavation, dredging, mining or drilling; no removal of topsoil, sand, gravel, rock, peat,
minerals or other materials, and no change in the topography of the land in any
manner on the Conservation Easement Area, except to restore natural topography or
drainage patterns. For purposes of restoring and enhancing streams and wetlands
within the Conservation Easement Area, is allowed to perform grading,
filling, and excavation associated with stream and wetland restoration and
enhancement activities as described in the Mitigation Plan and authorized by
Department of the Army Nationwide Permit 27.
J. Water Quality and Drainage Pattern. There shall be no diking, draining,
dredging, channeling, filling, leveling, pumping, impounding or related activities, or
altering or tampering with water control structures or devices, or disruption or
alteration of the restored, enhanced, or created drainage patterns. In addition,
diverting or causing or permitting the diversion of surface or underground water into,
within or out of the easement area by any means, removal of wetlands, polluting or
discharging into waters, springs, seeps, or wetlands, or use of pesticide or biocides is
prohibited.
K. Development Rights. No development rights that have been encumbered
or extinguished by this Conservation Easement shall be transferred pursuant to a
transferable development rights scheme or cluster development arrangement or
otherwise.
L. Vehicles. The operation of mechanized vehicles, including, but not limited to,
motorcycles, dirt bikes, all -terrain vehicles, cars and trucks is prohibited other than for
temporary or occasional access by the Enter Sponsor Name, the Grantee, its

employees and agents, successors, assigns, NCDWR, and the Corps for purposes of
constructing, maintaining and monitoring the restoration, enhancement and
preservation of streams, wetlands and riparian areas within the Conservation
Easement Area..
M. Other Prohibitions. Any other use of, or activity on, the Conservation
Easement Area which is or may become inconsistent with the purposes of this grant,
the preservation of the Conservation Easement Area substantially in its natural
condition, or the protection of its environmental systems, is prohibited.
ARTICLE III
GRANTOR'S RESEVERED RIGHTS
The Grantor expressly reserves for himself, his personal representatives, heirs,
successors or assigns, the right to continue the use of the Conservation Easement Area
for all purposes not inconsistent with this Conservation Easement, including, but not
limited to, the right to quiet enjoyment of the Conservation Easement Area, the rights
of ingress and egress, the right to hunt, fish, and hike on the Conservation Easement
Area, the right to sell, transfer, gift or otherwise convey the Conservation Easement
Area, in whole or in part, provided such sale, transfer or gift conveyance is subject to
the terms of, and shall specifically reference, this Conservation Easement.
Notwithstanding the foregoing Restrictions, Grantor reserves for Grantor, its
successors and assigns, including acting as the Bank Sponsor, the right to
construct and perform activities related to the restoration, enhancement, and
preservation of streams, wetlands and riparian areas within the Conservation
Easement Area in accordance with the approved Mitigation Plan, the
Bank Parcel Development Package, and the two Mitigation Banking
Instruments described in the Recitals of this Conservation Easement.
ARTICLE IV.
GRANTEE'S RIGHTS
The Grantee or its authorized representatives, successors and assigns, the Corps
and NCDWR, shall have the right to enter the Property and Conservation Easement Area
at all reasonable times for the purpose of inspecting the Conservation Easement Area to
determine if the Grantor, or his personal representatives, heirs, successors, or assigns,
is complying with the terms, conditions, restrictions, and purposes of this Conservation
Easement. The Grantee, Enter Sponsor Name, and its authorized representatives,
successors and assigns, the Corps and NCDWR shall also have the right to enter and go
upon the Conservation Easement Area for purposes of making scientific or educational
observations and studies, and taking samples. The easement rights granted herein do
not include public access rights.
ARTICLE V
ENFORCEMENT AND REMEDIES
A. To accomplish the purposes of this Easement, Grantee, the Corps, and

NCDWR are allowed to prevent any activity on or use of the Conservation Easement
Area that is inconsistent with the purposes of this Easement and to require the
restoration of such areas or features of the Conservation Easement Area that may be
damaged by such activity or use. Upon any breach of the terms of this Conservation
Easement by Grantor that comes to the attention of the Grantee, the Grantee shall
notify the Grantor in writing of such breach. The Grantor shall have 30 days after
receipt of such notice to correct the conditions constituting such breach. If the breach
remains uncured after 30 days, the Grantee may enforce this Conservation Easement
by appropriate legal proceedings including damages, injunctive and other relief.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Grantee reserves the immediate right, without
notice, to obtain a temporary restraining order, injunctive or other appropriate relief if
the breach of the terms of this Conservation Easement is or would irreversibly or
otherwise materially impair the benefits to be derived from this Conservation
Easement. The Grantor and Grantee acknowledge that under such circumstances
damage to the Grantee would be irreparable and remedies at law will be inadequate.
The rights and remedies of the Grantee provided hereunder shall be in addition to,
and not in lieu of, all other rights and remedies available to Grantee in connection
with this Conservation Easement. The costs of a breach, correction or restoration,
including the Grantee's expenses, court costs, and attorneys' fees, shall be paid by
Grantor, provided Grantor is determined to be responsible for the breach. The Corps
and the NCDWR shall have the same rights and privileges as the said Grantee to
enforce the terms and conditions of this Conservation easement..
B. No failure on the part of the Grantee to enforce any covenant or provision
hereof shall discharge or invalidate such covenant or any other covenant, condition,
or provision hereof or affect the right to Grantee to enforce the same in the event of
a subsequent breach or default.
C. Nothing contained in this Conservation Easement shall be construed to
entitle Grantee to bring any action against Grantor for any injury or change in the
Conservation Easement Area resulting from causes beyond the Grantor's control,
including, without limitation, fire, flood, storm, war, acts of God or third parties, except
Grantor's lessees or invitees; or from any prudent action taken in good faith by Grantor
under emergency conditions to prevent, abate, or mitigate significant injury to life,
damage to property or harm to the Conservation Easement Area resulting from such
causes.
ARTICLE VI
MISCELLANEOUS
A. Warranty. Grantor warrants, covenants and represents that it owns the
Property in fee simple, and that Grantor either owns all interests in the Property which
may be impaired by the granting of this Conservation Easement or that there are no
outstanding mortgages, tax liens, encumbrances, or other interests in the Property
which have not been expressly subordinated to this Conservation Easement. Grantor
further warrants that Grantee shall have the use of and enjoy all the benefits derived
from and arising out of this Conservation Easement, and that Grantor will warrant and
defend title to the Property against the claims of all persons._

B. Subsequent Transfers. The Grantor agrees to incorporate the terms of this
Conservation Easement in any deed or other legal instrument that transfers any
interest in all or a portion of the Conservation Easement Area. The Grantor agrees to
provide written notice of such transfer at least sixty (60) days prior to the date of the
transfer. The Grantor and Grantee agree that the terms of this Conservation Easement
shall survive any merger of the fee and easement interests in the Conservation
Easement Area or any portion thereof and shall not be amended, modified or
terminated without the prior written consent and approval of the Corps.
C. Assignment. The parties recognize and agree that the benefits of this
Conservation Easement are in gross and assignable provided, however that the
Grantee hereby covenants and agrees, that in the event it transfers or assigns this
Conservation Easement, the organization receiving the interest will be a qualified
holder pursuant to 33 CFR 332.7 (a)(1), N.C. Gen. Stat. § 121-34 et seq. and § 501 (c)(3)
and § 170 (h) of the Internal Revenue Code, and the Grantee further covenants and
agrees that the terms of the transfer or assignment will be such that the transferee or
assignee will be required to continue in perpetuity the conservation purposes
described in this document.
D. Entire Agreement and Severability. The combined Mitigation Banking
Instruments: MBI with corresponding Mitigation Plan, and MBI with corresponding
BPDP, and this Conservation Easement sets forth the entire agreement of the parties
with respect to the Conservation Easement and supersedes all prior discussions,
negotiations, understandings or agreements relating to the Conservation Easement. If
any provision is found to be void or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction,
the remainder shall continue in full force and effect.
E. Obligations of Ownership. Grantor is responsible for any real estate taxes,
assessments, fees, or charges levied upon the Property. Grantor shall keep the
Property free of any liens or other encumbrances for obligations incurred by Grantor.
Grantee shall not be responsible for any costs or liability of any kind related to the
ownership, operation, insurance, upkeep, or maintenance of the Property, except as
expressly provided herein. Nothing herein shall relieve the Grantor of the obligation to
comply with federal, state or local laws, regulations and permits that may apply to the
exercise of the Reserved Rights.
F. Long -Term Management. Grantor is responsible for all long-term
management activities associated with fencing. These activities include the
maintenance and/or replacement of fence structures to ensure the aquatic resource
functions within the boundaries of the Protected Property are sustained.
G. Extinguishment. In the event that changed conditions render impossible the
continued use of the Conservation Easement Area for the conservation purposes, this
Conservation Easement may only be extinguished, in whole or in part, by judicial
proceeding.

H. Eminent Domain. Whenever all or part of the Conservation Easement Area
is taken in the exercise of eminent domain so as to substantially abrogate the
Restrictions imposed by this Conservation Easement, Grantor and Grantee shall join in
appropriate actions at the time of such taking to recover the full value of the taking,
and all incidental and direct damages due to the taking.
I. Proceeds. This Conservation Easement constitutes a real property interest
immediately vested in Grantee. In the event that all or a portion of the Conservation
Easement Area is sold, exchanged, or involuntarily converted following an
extinguishment or the exercise of eminent domain, Grantee shall be entitled to the fair
market value of this Conservation Easement as determined at the time of the
extinguishment or condemnation.
J. Notification. Any notice, request for approval, or other communication
required under this Conservation Easement shall be sent by registered or certified mail,
postage prepaid, to the following addresses (or such address as may be hereafter
specified by notice pursuant to this paragraph):
To Grantor:
[Name, address and fax number]
To Grantee:
[Name, address and fax number]
To Sponsor:
To the Corps:
US Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District Regulatory Division
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, NC 28403
To NCDEQ -DWR:
NCDEQ— Division of Water Resources
401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1601
K. Failure of Grantee. If at any time Grantee is unable or fails to enforce this
Conservation Easement, or if Grantee ceases to be a qualified grantee, and if within a
reasonable period of time after the occurrence of one of these events Grantee fails to
make an assignment pursuant to this Conservation Easement, then the Grantee's
interest shall become vested in another qualified grantee in accordance with an
appropriate proceeding in a court of competent jurisdiction.
L. Amendment. This Conservation Easement may be amended, but only in
a writing signed by all parties hereto, and provided such amendment does not
affect the qualification of this Conservation Easement or the status of the Grantee
under any applicable laws, and is consistent with the conservation purposes of this

grant.
M. Present Condition of the Conservation Easement Area. The wetlands, scenic,
resource, environmental, and other natural characteristics of the Conservation
Easement Area, and its current use and state of improvement, are described in Section
of the Mitigation Plan,_prepared by Grantor and acknowledged by the Grantor
and Grantee to be complete and accurate as of the date hereof. Both Grantor and
Grantee have copies of this report. It will be used by the parties to assure that any
future changes in the use of the Conservation Easement Area will be consistent with
the terms of this Conservation Easement. However, this report is not intended to
preclude the use of other evidence to establish the present condition of the
Conservation Easement Area if there is a controversy over its use.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said rights and easements perpetually unto Grantee for
the aforesaid purposes.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Grantor has hereunto set his hand and seal, the day
and year first above written.
(Signatures of the Grantor and Grantee in appropriate form)

Appendix C
Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Submittal

fires
May 3, 2018
Mr. Gary Beecher
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Washington Field Office
2407 West 5' Street
Washington, NC 27889
Dear Mr. Gary Beecher,
Resource Environmental Solutions (RES) is pleased to present this Request for a Preliminary Jurisdictional
Determination for Tull Wooten III Mitigation Site located in Kinston, Lenoir County, North Carolina. As part
of this scope of work, RES is submitting this request to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) for a
confirmation of the limits of Waters of the U.S. on the subject site.
The Tull Wooten III Mitigation Site (the "Site") contains six parcels totaling 643-acres in Lenoir County,
NC. The Site will involve the restoration, enhancement, and preservation of four unnamed tributaries to the
Neuse River. The Site is located within the Neuse River Basin (8-digit USGS HUC 03020202, 14-digit
USGS 03020202060040). This proposed Site will result in significant ecological improvements including
water quality improvement, habitat restoration, and a decrease in non -point source pollution from agricultural
practices. The GPS coordinates of the site are 35.2573°N and-77.5434°W.
The purpose of the site is to generate mitigation and ecological benefit in the Neuse River Basin. The stream
channels on the site have been classified using the North Carolina Division of Water Resources methodology.
Current stream conditions along the proposed reaches demonstrate habitat degradation as a result of impacts
from agriculture and a lack of riparian buffers. The restoration approach for this project will be a combination
of restoration and enhancement. Proposed treatment activities may range from minor bank grading and planting
to re-establishing stable planform and hydraulic geometry. The objective of this approach is to design a
geomorphically stable channel that provides habitat improvements and ties into the existing landscape. Within
the boundaries of the proposed project, nine jurisdictional wetlands are present. The Restoration Plan for the
site is currently in development.
Attachments for Reference
- Jurisdictional Determination Request Form
- Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form
- Landowner Authorization Form
- Project Vicinity Map
- Project Location Map (with topography)
- National Wetlands Inventory Map
- Aerial Imagery
- Soils Map
- Wetland Delineation Data Sheets
- Waters of the U.S. Delineation Map

fires
RES respectfully requests that the Corps confirm this delineation of Waters of the U.S. on this property. I
will contact you in the coming days to arrange a site visit for this purpose. Please contact me at (919)
345-3034 if you have any additional questions regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
Jeremy Schmid, PWS
Senior Ecologist
Attachments
412 N. 4th St. #300 1200 Camellia Blvd. #220 1434 Odenton Rd. 10055 Red Run Blvd. #130 302 Jefferson St. #110 33 Terminal Way #431
Baton Rouge, LA 70802 Lafayette, LA 70508 Odenton, MD 21113 Owings Mills, MD 21117 Raleigh, NC 27605 Pittsburgh, PA 15219
701 E. Bay St. #306 5020 Montrose Blvd. #650 2750 Prosperity Ave. #220 1521 W. Main 2n1 Floor 3751 Westerre Pkwy. #A 5367 Telephone Rd. 1371/2 East Main St. #210
Charleston, SC 29403 Houston, TX 77006 Fairfax, VA 22031 Richmond, VA 23233 Richmond, VA 23220 Warrenton, VA 20187 Oak Hill, WV 25901

urisdictional Determination Reauest
US Army Corps
of Engineers
Wilmington pistnd
This form is intended for use by anyone requesting a jurisdictional determination (JD) from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District (Corps). Please include all supporting
information, as described within each category, with your request. You may submit your request
via mail, electronic mail, or facsimile. Requests should be sent to the appropriate project
manager of the county in which the property is located. A current list of project managers by
assigned counties can be found on-line at:
http://www.saw.usace.LM.mil/Missions/Re ug latoiyPennitProgram/Contact/CountyLocator.aspx,
by calling 910-251-4633, or by contacting any of the field offices listed below. Once your
request is received you will be contacted by a Corps project manager.
ASHEVILLE & CHARLOTTE REGULATORY
FIELD OFFICES
US Army Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
RALEIGH REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
INSTRUCTIONS:
WASHINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
2407 West Fifth Street
Washington, North Carolina 27889
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
WILMINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
General Number: 910-251-4633
Fax Number: [phone]
All requestors must complete Parts A, B, C, D, E, F and G.
NOTE TO CONSULTANTS AND AGENCIES: If you are requesting a JD on behalf of a
paying client or your agency, please note the specific submittal requirements in Part H.
NOTE ON PART D — PROPERTY OWNER AUTHORIZATION: Please be aware that
all JD requests must include the current property owner authorization for the Corps to
proceed with the determination, which may include inspection of the property when
necessary. This form must be signed by the current property owner(s) or the owner(s)
authorized agent to be considered a complete request.
NOTE ON PART D - NCDOT REQUESTS: Property owner authorization/notification for
JD requests associated with North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
projects will be conducted according to the current NCDOT/USACE protocols.
NOTE TO USDA PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS: A Corps approved or preliminary JD
may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security Act of
1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in
USDA programs, you should also request a certified wetland determination from the local
office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
Version: May 2017 Page 1

Jurisdictional Determination Request
A. PARCEL INFORMATION
Street Address: 2915 Tower Hill Rd
City, State:
Kinston. NC
County: Lenoir
Parcel Index Number(s) (PIN): see table
B. REQUESTOR INFORMATION
Name: Jeremy Schmid
Mailing Address: 302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Telephone Number: 919-926-1473
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: see table
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number:
Electronic Mail Address:
' 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"
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.
Jeremy Schmid
Print Name
Capacity: ❑ Owner Authorized Agent3
4-9-20 1 8
Date
Signature
E. REASON FOR .ID 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 al[jurisdictional aquatic resources under Carps authority.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which may
require authorization from the Corps, and the JD would be used to avoid and minimize
impacts to jurisdictional aquatic resources and as an initial step in a future permitting
j]rDCeSS.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which may
require authorization from the Corps; this request is accompanied by my permit application
and the JD is to be used in the permitting process.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities in a navigable water of the
U.S. which is included on the district Section 10 list and/or is subject to the ebb and flow of
the tide.
HA 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:
For NCDOT requests following the current NCDOTIUSACE protocols. skip to Part E.
If there are multiple parcels owned by different parties, please provide the following for each additional parcel on a
continuation sheet.
5 Must provide agent authorization form/letter signed by owner(s),
Version: May 2017 Page 3

Exhibit C
LANDOWNER AUTHORIZATION FORM
Site: Tull -Wooten III Site
I911;11190111 PHIS M DMA a11*10RItIM[ A
Lenoir County Parcel ID Number: ) 4535-42-5024, 4535-31-5088, 4535-42-3982, 4535-51-8454,
4535-72-2539, and 4535-40-6844 in Lenoir County North Carolina as shown on Exhibit A
Street Address: 2915 Tower Hill Road, Kinston, NC shown on Exhibit A
Property Owner (please print): Perry Brothers Properties, LLC
The undersigned, registered property owner(s) of the above property, do hereby authorize
EBX, Neuse I, LLC, Resource Environmental Solutions ("RES"), the NC Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, and the US Army Corps of Engineers, their employees,
agents or assigns to have reasonable access to the above referenced property for the evaluation of
the property as a potential stream, wetland and/or riparian buffer mitigation project, including
conducting stream and/or wetland determinations and delineations.
Property Owners(s) Address: 518 Plaza Blvd., Suite 1
Kinston, NC 27501
Property Owner Telephone Number: 252-523-5107
I/We hereby certify the above j4ormation tie -tree and accurate to the best of my/our knowledge.
By:
AuthoriVO Signature)
K
11�

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 115 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:
Longitude
35.2570
-77.5440
A legible delineation map depicting the aquatic resources and the property/review area.
Delineation maps must be no larger than I Ix17 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.
aCompleted 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 ulatory-Permit-
Pro gram/Jurisdiction/
Version: May 2017 Page 5

Jurisdictional Determination Request
aCompleted 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'
Vicinity Map
Aerial Photograph
USGS Topographic Map
Soil Survey Map
OOther Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map, Proposed Site
Plan, previous delineation maps, LIDAR maps, FEMA floodplain maps)
❑ Landscape Photos (if taken)
❑ NCWAM and/or NCWAM Assessment Forms and Rating Sheets
NC Division of Water Resources Stream Identification Forms
Other Assessment Forms
' www.saw.usace.gM.mil/Portals/59/docs/re ug latorregdocs/JD/RGL 08-02_App_A_Prelim _JD_Form _fillable.pdf
' Please see http://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/Re ug latory-Permit-Program/Jurisdiction/
Principal Purpose: The information that you provide will be used in evaluating your request to determine
whether there are any aquatic resources within the project area subject to federal jurisdiction under the regulatory
authorities referenced above.
Routine Uses: This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal, state, and local
government agencies, and the public, and may be made available as part of a public notice as required by federal
law. Your name and property location where federal jurisdiction is to be determined will be included in the
approved jurisdictional determination (AJD), which will be made available to the public on the District's website
and on the Headquarters USAGE website.
Disclosure: Submission of requested information is voluntary; however, if information is not provided, the
request for an AJD cannot be evaluated nor can an AJD be issued.
Version: May 2017 Page 6

Appendix 2 - PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD: 04/24/18
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: ,Jeremy Schmid
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: CESAW-RG-W
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: Lenoir City: Kinston
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format):
Lat.: 35.2583 Long.:-77.5463
Universal Transverse Mercator: NAD83
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 table

Site
Name
Latitude
Longitude
Area (ac)/Length (LF)
Tull Wooten III
WA
35.2604
-77.5387
0.07
Tull Wooten III
WB
35.2583
-77.5379
0.07
Tull Wooten III
WC
35.2572
-77.5381
0.02
Tull Wooten III
WD
35.2583
-77.5465
0.07
Tull Wooten III
WE
35.2563
-77.5471
3.34
Tull Wooten III
WF
35.2534
-77.5463
42.32
Tull Wooten III
WG
35.2569
-77.5462
0.03
Tull Wooten III
TW 1
35.2567
-77.5461
1,879
Tull Wooten III
TW2
35.2578
-77.5437
2,636
Tull Wooten III
TW3
35.2577
-77.5433
511
Tull Wooten III
TW4
35.258
-77.538
1,865
*Revised December 18, 2019

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, USGS, NWI, Soil, Existing conditions, WOUS
❑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:
24k Kinston
❑ Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
❑■ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
State/local wetland inventory map(s):
FEMA/FIRM maps:
100-year Floodplain Elevation is:
Photographs: ❑ Aerial (Name & Date):
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
(National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
❑ 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
Jeremy Schmid oe o,eoa=„oous.oaao-,11h11®re,,�e
Signature and date of
person requesting PJD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)'
' 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.

e
_ r
a
n ' t�rlui= ,ter
r,.as or
0
= nLris N
A.'hij or
' - - - wh+r'R' a,
[, g nr r{n itvvo
,uu ha
^avl6 ,ti-
a
r z,r¢r
Ged-r L�
Legend
Study Area
N
wJ—E
5
0 500 1,000
Vicinity Map
Tull Wooten III Mitigation Site
Lenoir County, North Carolina
fJ�
._ FL�rl3tAh
X
Date: 5/3/2018
Drawn by: JLS
Checked by: ATP pires

•
Me bomb Mbk
Geor et .�
I
aj" = a -.t -
�. sa w
Legend
Study Area
N USGS Map Date: 5/3/2018
wE
Drawn by: AS
Tull Wooten III Mitigation Site
4 res
0 500 1,000 Checked by: ATP
Lenoir County, North Carolina
Feet

rY PUBHh
�'F' f' + PFO1A
*.
5 � _
�.; PSS1/2F
PF01/2F
r-
+
PFO1C4'.
:
PFO1C
PUBHx PFO1/2F
h } PFO1/2F
PFO1A,-
}{ Yee-,
PFO1A
PFO1/2F -
PF01/2F �
PSS1/2F
! ,<
PFO1/4A
.5 t PSS1/2Fx PUBHx
Legend
r' Vf -- �{ PSS1/2Fx
Study Area _ _ .:. PFOWA .. .. _ _-' ,' "~ PUBHx
NWI Wetlands PFO1/2F _Yv
-
" Y Date: 5/3/2018
NWI Map
g E
g Drawn by: JLS
w
Tull Wooten III Mitigation Site
0 5 500 1,000 Checked by: A-P
res
Lenoir County, North Carolina
Feet

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: Tull Wooten III City/County: Lenoir Sampling Date: 05-Apr-18
Applicant/Owner: Resource Environmental Solutions State: NC Sampling Point: DP-1
Investigator(s): ]. Schmid, M. Engel Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Toeslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope: 0.0 % / 0.0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat.: 35.260372885668 Long.: -77.5384975868876 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Norfolk loamy sand NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes O No O (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation __1 , Soil O , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes 0 No O
Are Vegetation O , Soil O or Hydrology F_ 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 C' No O
Is the Sampled Area
H dric Soil Present? Yes No C)
Y
�
Yes `-* No O
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O' No O
within a Wetland?
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required;
check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
O Aquatic Fauna (B13)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
O Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
[ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
[ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Dry Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2)
[ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
d❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
[ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
[ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
[ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
d❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
d❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No O
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes * No O
Depth (inches): 4
Yes * No O
Saturation Present?
Yes O No
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology
Present?
(includes capillary frinqe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: DP-1
Absolute
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 . Acer rubrum
20
d❑
33.3%
FAC
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
8 (A)
2. Fraxinus pennsylvanica
20
d❑
33.3%
FACW
3. Platanus occidentalis
20
d❑
33.3%
FACW
Total Number of DominantSpecies
Across All Strata:
9 (B)
4.
0
❑
0.0%
5.
0
❑
0.0%
Percent of dominant Species
❑
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
88.9% (A/B)
6.
o
o.o°r°
7.
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
8,
0
❑
0.0%
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of Total Cover: 30
20% of Total Cover: 12
60
= Total Cover
OBL species 30 x 1 = 30
Sapling or Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
FACW species 90 x 2 = 180
1.
0
❑
0.0%
FAC species 50 x 3 = 150
2.
0
❑
0.0%
FACU species 10 x 4 = 40
3.
0
❑
0.0%
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
4.
0
❑
0.o%
column Totals: 180 (A) 400 (B)
5.
5.
o
❑
% o.o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.222
o
❑
0.0
7.
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8.
0
❑
0.0%
❑ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
50% of Total Cover: 0
20% of Total Cover: 0
0
= Total Cover
0 2 - Dominance Test is > so%
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)❑
3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0 1
1. Ligustrum sinense
30
d❑
60.0%
FAC
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
2. Arundinaria gigantea
20
d❑
40.0%
FACW
3.
0
❑
0.0%
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
❑
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
o
0.0%
5.
0
❑
0.0%
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6.
0
❑
0.0%
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
50% of Total Cover: 25
20% of Total Cover: 10
50
= Total Cover
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
)
1 Woodwardia areolata
5
❑
9.1%
OBL
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
2. Onoclea sensibilis
5
❑
9.1%
FACW
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
3. Saururus cernuus
20
d❑
36.4%
OBL
4. Podophyllum peltatum
10
d❑
18.2%
FACU
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
5. Arisaema triphyllum
10
d❑
18.2%
FACW
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
6. ]uncus effusus
5
❑
9.1%
OBL
Shrub -Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
7,
0
❑
0.0%
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
8,
0
❑
0.0%
9.
0
❑
0.0%
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
❑
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
1 Q.
0
0.0%
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
11.
0
❑
0.o%
3 ft (1 m) in height.
12.
o
❑
o.o%
50% of Total Cover: 27.5
20% of Total Cover: 11
55
= Total Cover
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1 Smilax laurifolia
15
d❑ 100.0% FACW
2.
0
E. o.o%
3.
0
❑ o.o%
4.
0
❑ 0.0%
5.
0
❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic
-
Vegetation -
50% of Total Cover: 7.5 20% of Total Cover: 3
15
= Total Cover
Present? Yes ` No
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: DP-1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features _
(inches) Color (moist) % _
Color (moist) % Tvne 1 _ Loc2_
_Texture Remarks
0-2 IOYR 2/1 100
Muck
2-10 10YR 3/1 100
Sandy Loam
10-16+ IOYR 4/1 100
Sandy Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 21-ocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (LRR 0)
❑ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 153B)
❑ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
❑ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All)
❑ Depleted Ochric (FII) (MLRA 151)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
❑ Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR 0, S)
❑ Delta Ochric (1`17) (MLRA 151)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
3Indicators of vegetation and
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 149A)
mushydrophytict
wetland hydrology must be present,
hydrology
unless disturbed or problematic.
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
❑ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No O
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: Tull Wooten III City/County: Lenoir Sampling Date: 05-Apr-18
Applicant/Owner: Resource Environmental Solutions State: NC Sampling Point: DP-2
Investigator(s): ]. Schmid, M. Engel Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillside Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope: 0.0 % / 0.0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat.: 35.2603852232642 Long.:-77.5385323687457 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Norfolk loamy sand NWI classification: Upland
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes O No O (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation __1 , Soil L , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes 0 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 n
O
Is the Sampled Area
H dric Soil Present? Yes No
Y
Yes ` No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No C
within a Wetland?
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required;
check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
L Aquatic Fauna (B13)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
L Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Dry Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
d❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No 0
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes O No
Depth (inches):
Yes O NO
Saturation Present?
Yes 0 No
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology
Present?
(includes capillary frinqe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: DP-2
Absolute
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1. Quercus falcata
20❑
50.0%
FACU
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
5 (A)
2. Fraxinus pennsylvanica
20
d❑
50.0%
FACW
❑
Total Number of Dominant
3.
0
0.0%
Species Across All Strata:
7 (B)
4.
0
❑
0.0%
5.
o
❑
0.0%
Percent of dominant Species
El
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
71.4% (A/B)
6.
o
-o.o%
7.
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
8,
0
❑
0.0%
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of Total Cover: 20
20% of Total Cover: 8
40
= Total Cover
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling or Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
FACW species 65 x 2 = 130
1.
0
❑
0.0%
FAC species 40 x 3 = 120
2.
0
❑
0.0%
FACU species 40 x 4 = 160
3.
0
❑
0.0%
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
4.
0
❑
0.0%
column Totals: 145 (A) 410 (B)
5.
5.
o
❑
% o.o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.828
o
❑
0.0
7.
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8.
0
❑
0.0%
❑ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
50% of Total Cover: 0
20% of Total Cover: 0
0
= Total Cover
0 2 - Dominance Test is > so%
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)❑
3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0 1
1. Ligustrum sinense
30
d❑
75.0%
FAC
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
2. Arundinaria gigantea
10
d❑
25.0%
FACW
3.
0
❑
0.0%
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
❑
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
o
0.0%
5.
0
❑
0.0%
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6.
0
❑
0.0%
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
50% of Total Cover: 20
20% of Total Cover: 8
40
= Total Cover
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
)
1 Lonicera japonica
20❑
57.1%
FACU
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
2. Toxicodendron radicans
10
d❑
28.6%
FAC
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
3. Arisaema triphyllum
5
❑
14.3%
FACW
4.
0
❑
0.0%
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
5.
0
❑
0.0%
6.
0
❑
0.0%
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
7.
0
❑
0.0%
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
8.
0
❑
0.0%
9.
0
❑
0.0%
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
❑
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
1 Q.
0
0.0%
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
11.
0
❑
0.o%
3 ft (1 m) in height.
12.
o
❑
o.o%
50% of Total Cover: 17.5
20% of Total Cover: 7
35
= Total Cover
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1 Smilax laurifolia
30❑
100.0% FACW
2.
0
E. o.o%
3.
0
❑ 0.0%
4.
0
❑ 0.0%
5.
0
❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic
-
Vegetation -
50% of Total Cover: 15 20% of Total Cover: 6
30
= Total Cover
Present? Yes ` No
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: DP-2
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) % Tvne 1 _ Locz_ _Texture
0-5 IOYR 3/3 100 Loam
5-12+ 10YR 4/2 Sandy Loam
no
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 21-ocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (LRR 0)
❑ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 153B)
❑ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T) ❑ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) ❑ Depleted Ochric (FII) (MLRA 151)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A) ❑ Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR 0, S) ❑ Delta Ochric (1`17) (MLRA 151)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B) 3Indicators of hydrology
mushydrophytict
vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 149A) unless disturbed or problematic.
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
❑ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No O
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: Tull Wooten III City/County: Lenoir Sampling Date: 05-Apr-18
Applicant/Owner: Resource Environmental Solutions State: NC Sampling Point: DP-4
Investigator(s): ]. Schmid, M. Engel Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Bench Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope: 0.0 % / 0.0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat.: 35.258297457853 Long.: -77.5463957612125 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Norfolk loamy sand NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes O No O (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation __1 , Soil O , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes 0 No O
Are Vegetation O , Soil O or Hydrology F_ 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 C' No O
Is the Sampled Area
H dric Soil Present? Yes No C)
Y
�
Yes `-* No O
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O' No O
within a Wetland?
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required;
check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
O Aquatic Fauna (B13)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
O Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
[ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
[ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Dry Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2)
[ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
d❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
[ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
[ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
[ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
d❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No O
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes * No O
Depth (inches): 5
Yes * No O
Saturation Present?
Yes O No
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology
Present?
(includes capillary frinqe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
c., A..'>
Sampling Point: DP-4
Absolute
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1. Liriodendron tulipifera
10❑
20.0%
FACU
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
4 (A)
2. Acer rubrum
40
d❑ 80.0%
FAC
❑
Total Number of Dominant
3.
0
0.0%
Species Across All Strata:
6 (B)
4.
0
❑ 0.0%
5.
0
❑ 0.0%
Percent of dominant Species
❑
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
66.7% (A/B)
6.
o
o.o°r°
7.
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
8,
0
❑
0.0%
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of Total Cover: 25
20% of Total Cover: 10
50
= Total Cover
OBL species 5 x 1 = 5
Sapling or Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
FACW species 20 x 2 = 40
1.
0
❑
0.0%
FAC species 100 x 3 = 300
2.
0
❑
0.0%
FACU species 20 x 4 = 80
3.
0
❑
0.0%
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
4.
0
❑
0.0%
column Totals: 145 (A) 425 (B)
5.
5.
o
❑
% o.o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.931
o
❑
0.0
7.
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8.
0
❑
0.0%
❑ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
50% of Total Cover: 0
20% of Total Cover: 0
0
= Total Cover
0 2 - Dominance Test is > so%
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)❑
3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0 1
1. Ligustrum sinense
40❑
100.0%
FAC
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
2.
0
❑
0.0%
3.
0
❑
0.0%
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
❑
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
o
0.0%
5.
0
❑
0.0%
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6.
0
❑
0.0%
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
50% of Total Cover: 20
20% of Total Cover: 8
40
= Total Cover
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
)
1 Woodwardia areolata
5
❑
12.5%
OBL
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
2. Podophyllum peltatum
10
d❑
25.0%
FACU
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
3. Athyrium asplenioides
20
50.0%
FAC
4, Arisaema triphyllum
5
❑
12.5%
FACW
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
5.
0
❑
0.0%
6.
0
❑
0.0%
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
7.
0
❑
0.0%
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
8.
0
❑
0.0%
9.
0
❑
0.0%
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
❑
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
1 Q.
0
0.0%
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
11.
0
❑
0.o%
3 ft (1 m) in height.
12.
o
❑
o.o%
50% of Total Cover: 20
20% of Total Cover: 8
40
= Total Cover
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1 Smilax laurifolia
15❑
100.0% FACW
2.
0
E. o.o%
3.
0
❑ o.o%
4.
0
❑ 0.0%
5.
0
❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic
-
Vegetation -
50% of Total Cover: 7.5 20% of Total Cover: 3
15
= Total Cover
Present? Yes ` No
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: DP-4
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) % Tvoe 1 Loc2 _Texture Remarks
0-4 IOYR 3/2 Loam
4-12+ 10YR 4/1 IOYR 5/6 10 PL Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 21-ocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (LRR 0)
❑ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
d❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 153B)
❑ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T) ❑ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) ❑ Depleted Ochric (FII) (MLRA 151)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A) ❑ Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR 0, S) ❑ Delta Ochric (1`17) (MLRA 151)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B) 3Indicators of hydrology
mushydrophytict
vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 149A) unless disturbed or problematic.
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
❑ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No O
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: Tull Wooten III City/County: Lenoir Sampling Date: 05-Apr-18
Applicant/Owner: Resource Environmental Solutions State: NC Sampling Point: DP-5
Investigator(s): ]. Schmid, M. Engel Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillside Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope: 0.0 % / 0.0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat.: 35.2582160958151 Long.:-77.5465188609157 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Norfolk loamy sand NWI classification: Upland
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes O No O (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation O , Soil O , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes 0 No O
Are Vegetation O , Soil O or Hydrology F_ 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
O
Is the Sampled Area
H dric Soil Present? Yes No
Y
Yes ` No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O No C
within a Wetland?
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required;
check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
O Aquatic Fauna (B13)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
O Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
[ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
[ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Dry Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2)
[ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
[ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
[ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
[ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No 0
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes O No
Depth (inches):
Yes O NO
Saturation Present?
Yes O No
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology
Present?
(includes capillary frinqe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: DP-5
Absolute
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 . Acer rubrum
30
d❑ 100.0%
FAC
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
4 (A)
2.
o
❑ o.o°ro
❑
Total Number of Dominant
3.
0
0.0%
Species Across All Strata:
6 (B)
4.
0
❑ 0.0%
5.
0
❑ 0.0%
Percent of dominant Species
❑
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
66.7% (A/B)
6.
o
o.o°r°
7.
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
8,
0
❑
0.0%
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of Total Cover: 15
20% of Total Cover: 6
30
= Total Cover
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling or Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
FACW species 35 x 2 = 70
1.
0
❑
0.0%
FAC species 75 x 3 = 225
2.
0
❑
0.0%
FACU species 30 x 4 = 120
3.
0
❑
0.0%
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
4.
0
❑
0.0%
column Totals: 140 (A) 415 (B)
5.
5.
o
❑
% o.o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.964
0
❑
0.0
7.
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8.
0
❑
0.0%
❑ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
50% of Total Cover: 0
20% of Total Cover: 0
0
= Total Cover
0 2 - Dominance Test is > so%
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)❑
3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0 1
1. Ligustrum sinense
30
❑
50.0%
FAC
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
2. Ilex opaca
5
❑
8.3%
FAC
3. Arundinaria gigantea
15
d❑
25.0%
FACW
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4. Ligustrum japonicum
10
❑
16.7%
FAC
5.
0
❑
0.0%
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6.
0
❑
0.0%
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
50% of Total Cover: 30
20% of Total Cover: 12
60
= Total Cover
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
)
1 Lonicera japonica
20
d❑
66.7%
FACU
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
2. Podophyllum peltatum
10
d❑
33.3%
FACU
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
3.
0
❑
0.0%
4.
0
❑
0.0%
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
5.
0
❑
0.0%
6.
0
❑
0.0%
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
7.
0
❑
0.0%
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
8.
0
❑
0.0%
9.
0
❑
0.0%
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
❑
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
1 Q.
0
0.0%
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
11.
0
❑
0.o%
3 ft (1 m) in height.
12.
o
❑
o.o%
50% of Total Cover: 15
20% of Total Cover: 6
30
= Total Cover
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1 Smilax laurifolia
20❑
100.0% FACW
2.
0
E. o.o%
3.
0
❑ 0.0%
4.
0
❑ 0.0%
5.
0
❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic
-
Vegetation -
50% of Total Cover: 10 20% of Total Cover: 4
20
= Total Cover
Present? Yes ` No
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: DP-5
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) % Tvoe 1 _ Locz_ _Texture Remarks
0-12 30YR 3/3 Loam
12-16+ 2.5Y 5/4 Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 21-ocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (LRR 0)
❑ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 153B)
❑ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T) ❑ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) ❑ Depleted Ochric (FII) (MLRA 151)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A) ❑ Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR 0, S) ❑ Delta Ochric (1`17) (MLRA 151)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B) 3Indicators of hydrology
mushydrophytict
vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 149A) unless disturbed or problematic.
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
❑ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No O
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: Tull Wooten III City/County: Lenoir Sampling Date: 05-Apr-18
Applicant/Owner: Resource Environmental Solutions State: NC Sampling Point: DP-6
Investigator(s): ]. Schmid, M. Engel Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope: 0.0 % / 0.0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat.: 35.2551095758227 Long.:-77.5476580385901 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Lumbee sandy loam NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes O No O (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation O , Soil O , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes 0 No O
Are Vegetation O , Soil O or Hydrology F_ 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 C' No O
Is the Sampled Area
H dric Soil Present? Yes No C)
Y
�
Yes `-* No O
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O' No O
within a Wetland?
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required;
check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
O Aquatic Fauna (B13)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
O Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
[ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
[ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Dry Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2)
[ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
d❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
[ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
[ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
[ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
d❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
d❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No O
Depth (inches): 1
Water Table Present? Yes O No OO
Depth (inches):
Yes * No O
Saturation Present?
Yes O No
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology
Present?
(includes capillary frinqe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: DP-6
Absolute
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 .
Acer rubrum
30❑
42.9%
FAC
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
6 (A)
2.
Liquidambar styraciflua
20
d❑
28.6%
FAC
3.
Betula nigra
10
❑
14.3%
FACW
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
7 (B)
4.
Quercus nigra
10
❑
14.3%
FAC
5.
o
❑
0.0%
Percent of dominant Species
❑
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
85.7% (A/B)
6.
o
o.o°r°
7.
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
8,
0
❑
0.0%
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of Total Cover: 35
20% of Total Cover: 14
70
= Total Cover
OBL species 50 x 1 = 50
Sapling or Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
FACW species 40 x 2 = 80
1 .
0
❑
0.o%
FAC species 70 x 3 = 210
2.
0
❑
0.0%
FACU species 10 x 4 = 40
3.
0
❑
0.0%
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
4.
0
❑
0.0%
column Totals: 170 (A) 380 (B)
5.
5.
o
❑
% o.o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.235
o
❑
0.0
7.
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8.
0
❑
0.0%
❑ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
50% of Total Cover: 0
20% of Total Cover: 0
0
= Total Cover
0 2 - Dominance Test is > so%
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)❑
3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0 1
1. Ilex opaca
10❑
100.0% FAC
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
2.
0
❑
0.0%
3.
0
❑
0.0%
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
❑
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4. _
o
0.0%
5.
0
❑
0.0%
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6.
0
❑
0.0%
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
50% of Total Cover: 5
20% of Total Cover: 2
10
= Total Cover
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
)
1 Woodwardia areolata
40
d❑
80.0% OBL
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
2. Woodwardia virginica
10
d❑
20.0% OBL
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
3.
0
❑
0.0%
4.
0
❑
0.0%
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
5.
0
❑
0.0%
6.
0
❑
0.0%
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
7.
0
❑
0.0%
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
8.
0
❑
0.0%
9.
0
❑
0.0%
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
❑
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
1 Q.
0
0.0%
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
11.
0
❑
0.o%
3 ft (1 m) in height.
12.
o
❑
o.o%
50% of Total Cover: 25
20% of Total Cover: 10
50
= Total Cover
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1 Smilax laurifolia
30❑
75.0% FACW
2. Lonicera japonica
10
d❑ 25.0% FACU
3.
0
❑ 0.0%
4.
0
❑ 0.0%
5.
0
❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic
-
Vegetation -
50% of Total Cover: 20 20% of Total Cover: 8
40
= Total Cover
Present? Yes ` No
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: DP-6
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) % Tvoe 1 _ Locz Texture
0-20+ 10YR 2/1 Loam
Remarks
muck texture on surface
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 21-ocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (LRR 0)
❑ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 153B)
❑ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T) ❑ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) ❑ Depleted Ochric (FII) (MLRA 151)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)❑ Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR 0, S) ❑ Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B) 3Indicators of hydrology
mushydrophytict
vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 149A) unless disturbed or problematic.
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
❑ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No O
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: Tull Wooten III City/County: Lenoir Sampling Date: 05-Apr-18
Applicant/Owner: Resource Environmental Solutions State: NC Sampling Point: DP-7
Investigator(s): ]. Schmid, M. Engel Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope: 0.0 % / 0.0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat.: 35.2552256733103 Long.: -77.5476930549034 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Lumbee sandy loam NWI classification: Upland
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes O No O (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation __1 , Soil L , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes 0 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 n
O
Is the Sampled Area
H dric Soil Present? Yes No
Y
Yes ` No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No C
within a Wetland?
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required;
check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
L Aquatic Fauna (B13)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
L Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Dry Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
d❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No 0
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes O No
Depth (inches):
Yes O NO
Saturation Present?
Yes 0 No
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology
Present?
(includes capillary frinqe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
C i-7
Sampling Point: DP-7
Absolute Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
1. Acer rubrum
)
% Cover
30❑
Cover
37.5%
Status
FAC
Number of Dominant Species
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 6 (A)
2. Quercus nigra
30
37.5%
FAC
3. Liquidambar styraciflua
20
25.0%
-
FAC
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 6 (B)
4.
o
❑
0.0%
5,
6,
o
o
❑
❑
0.0%
o.o°r°
Percent of dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
7.
0
❑
mo%
_
Prevalence Index worksheet:
8,
0
❑
_mo%
Total % Cover of: Multiplv by:
50% of Total Cover: 40
20% of Total Cover: 16
80
= Total Cover
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling or Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
FACW species 40 x 2 = 80
1 ,
0
❑
0.o%
FAC species 90 x 3 = 270
2.
0
❑
0.0%
FACU species 0 x 4= 0
3,
0
❑
0.o%
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
4.
0
❑
0.0%
column Totals: 130 (A) 350 (B)
5,
5.
o
❑
o.o°r°
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.692
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7. 0 ❑ 0.0%
8,
0
❑
0.0%
-
❑ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
50% of Total Cover: 0
20% of Total Cover: 0
0
= Total Cover
2 - Dominance Test is > 500/b
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)❑
3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0 1
1. Ilex opaca
_ 10
❑
25.0%
FAC
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
2. Vaccinium corymbosum
30
❑
75.0%
FACW
3,
0
❑
0.0%
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
4,
o
❑
0.0%
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
5. 0 ❑ 0.0%
6.
❑
0.0%
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
50% of Total Cover: 20
20% of Total Cover: 8
_0
40
= Total Cover
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
)
1 .
2.
0
0
❑
❑
0.00%
0.00%
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
3.
0
❑
0.00%
4.
0
❑
0.00%
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
5.
0
❑
mo%
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
6.
7.
0
0
❑
❑
0.0%
0.0%
_
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
$,
0
❑
0.0%
9,
0
❑
0.0%
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
1 Q,
0
❑
0.0%
herbaceous
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
except woody vines, less than approximately
11.
0
❑
0.o%
3 ft (1 m) in height.
12.
o
❑
0.0%
50% of Total Cover: 0
20% of Total Cover: 0
0
= Total Cover
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
)
1. Smilax laurifolia 10 d❑ 100.0% FACW
2,
0
❑
0.o%
3,
0
❑
o.o%
4.
0
❑
o.o%
5.
50% of Total Cover: 5
20% of Total Cover: 2
0
10
❑ 0.0%
=Total Cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes ❑ NO ❑
.
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: DP-7
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) % Tvoe t _ Locz_
Texture Remarks
0-8 IOYR 3/2
Sandy Loam
8-16+ 10YR 4/3
Loamy Sand
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 21-ocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (LRR 0)
❑ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 153B)
❑ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
❑ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All)
❑ Depleted Ochric (FII) (MLRA 151)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
❑ Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR 0, S)
❑ Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
3Indicators of vegetation and
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
mushydrophytict
wetland hydrology must be present,
hydrology
unless disturbed or problematic.
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
❑ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No O
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: Tull Wooten III City/County: Lenoir Sampling Date: 05-Apr-18
Applicant/Owner: Resource Environmental Solutions State: NC Sampling Point: DP-8
Investigator(s): ]. Schmid, M. Engel Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope: 0.0 % / 0.0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat.: 35.2559797883112 Long.:-77.5469683149764 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Lumbee sandy loam NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes O No O (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation __1 , Soil O , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes 0 No O
Are Vegetation O , Soil O or Hydrology F_ 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 C' No O
Is the Sampled Area
H dric Soil Present? Yes No C)
Y
�
Yes `-* No O
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O' No O
within a Wetland?
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required;
check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
O Aquatic Fauna (B13)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
O Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
[ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
[ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Dry Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2)
[ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
d❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
[ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
[ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
[ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
d❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
d❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No O
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes * No O
Depth (inches): 2
Yes * No O
Saturation Present?
Yes O No
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology
Present?
(includes capillary frinqe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
c.. ,;o.7
Sampling Point: DP-8
Absolute Rel.Strat. Indicatorl Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
)
1 . Liquidambar styraciflua
2. Betula nigra
3. Acer rubrum
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
50% of Total Cover: 25
20% of Total Cover: 10
Sapling or Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
50% of Total Cover: 0
20% of Total Cover: 0
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
1 . Ligustrum sinense
2. Carpinus caroliniana
3.
4.
5.
6.
50% of Total Cover: 45
20% of Total Cover: 18
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
)
1 , Arisaema triphyllum
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
50% of Total Cover: 5
20% of Total Cover: 2
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
)
1 Smilax laurifolia
2.
3.
4.
5.
50% of Total Cover: 0
20% of Total Cover: 0
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
10
❑
20.0%
FAC _
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
30
❑
60.0%
FACW
Total Number of Dominant
10
❑
20.0%
-
FAC
Species Across All Strata:
0
❑
0.0%
0
❑
0.0%
Percent of dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
0
❑
0.o%
0
❑
0.o%
_
Prevalence Index worksheet:
0
❑
o.o%
Total % Cover of:
50
= Total Cover
OBL species 0
FACW species 40
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
80
10
0
0
0
0
90
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
❑ 0.o% _
❑ 0.0% _
❑ 0.0% _
❑ 0.0% _
❑ 0.0% _
❑ 0.0% _
❑ 0.0% _
❑ 0.o%
= Total Cover
d❑ 88.9% FAC
❑ 11.i% FAC
❑ om/o
❑ 0.no _
❑ 0.0% _
❑ 0.0%
= Total Cover
FAC species 110
FACU species 0
UPL species 0
Column Totals: 150
5 (A)
5 (B)
100.0% (A/B)
Multiply by:
x 1 =
0
x2=
80
x 3 =
330
x 4 =
0
x 5 =
0
(A)
410 (B)
- I Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.733
d❑ 100.0% FACW
❑ _0.0%
❑ 0.0%
❑ 0.0%
❑ 0.0% _
❑ 0.0% _
❑ 0.0%
❑ 0.0%
❑ 0.0%
❑ 0.0%
❑ 0.0%
❑ 0.0%
= Total Cover
0
❑
0.0% FACW
0
❑
0.0%
0
❑
0.0%
0
❑
0.0%
0
❑
0.0%
0
= Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
❑ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
❑ 2 - Dominance Test is > 500/b
3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0 1
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH)
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
3 ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes * No 0
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: DP-8
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) % Tvoe 1 Loc2 _Texture Remarks
0-3 IOYR 3/2 Loam
3-12+ 10YR 4/2 IOYR 5/8 15 PL Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 21-ocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (LRR 0)
❑ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
d❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 153B)
❑ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T) ❑ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) ❑ Depleted Ochric (FII) (MLRA 151)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A) ❑ Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR 0, S) ❑ Delta Ochric (1`17) (MLRA 151)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B) 3Indicators of hydrology
mushydrophytict
vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 149A) unless disturbed or problematic.
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
❑ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No O
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: Tull Wooten III City/County: Lenoir Sampling Date: 05-Apr-18
Applicant/Owner: Resource Environmental Solutions State: NC Sampling Point: DP-9
Investigator(s): ]. Schmid, M. Engel Section, Township, Range: S T R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope: 0.0 % / 0.0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat.: 35.2552256733103 Long.: -77.5476930549034 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Lumbee sandy loam NWI classification: Upland
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes O No O (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation __1 , Soil L , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes 0 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 n
O
Is the Sampled Area
H dric Soil Present? Yes No
Y
Yes ` No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No C
within a Wetland?
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of 2 required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required;
check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
L Aquatic Fauna (B13)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
L Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
❑ Drainage Patterns (B10)
❑ Saturation (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Water Marks (Bl)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Dry Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (B2)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No 0
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes O No
Depth (inches):
Yes O NO
Saturation Present?
Yes 0 No
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology
Present?
(includes capillary frinqe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Dominant
Sampling Point: DP-9
Absolute
Rel.Strat.
Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover
Cover
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 , Quercus nigra
20
d❑
33.3%
FAC
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
5 (A)
2. Acer rubrum
20
d❑
33.3%
FAC
3. Liquidambar styraciflua
20
d❑
33.3%
FAC
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
6 (B)
4.
0
❑
0.0%
5.
0
❑
0.0%
Percent of dominant Species
❑
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
83.3% (A/B)
6.
o
o.o°r°
7.
0
❑
0.0%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
8,
0
❑
0.0%
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of Total Cover: 30
20% of Total Cover: 12
60
= Total Cover
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling or Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
FACW species 10 x 2 = 20
1.
0
❑
0.0%
FAC species 130 x 3 = 390
2.
0
❑
0.0%
FACw species 10 x 4 = 40
3.
0
❑
0.0%
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
4.
0
❑
0.0%
column Totals: 150 (A) 450 (B)
5.
5.
o
❑
% o.o
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.000
o
❑
0.0
7.
0
❑
0.0%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
8.
0
❑
0.0%
❑ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
50% of Total Cover: 0
20% of Total Cover: 0
0
= Total Cover
0 2 - Dominance Test is > so%
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)❑
3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0 1
1. Ligustrum sinense
60❑
85.7% FAC
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
2. Ilex opaca
10
❑
14.3% FAC
3.
0
❑
0.0%
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
❑
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
o
0.0%
5.
0
❑
0.0%
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
6.
0
❑
0.0%
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
50% of Total Cover: 35
20% of Total Cover: 14
70
= Total Cover
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
)
1
0
❑
0.0%
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
.
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
2.
0
❑
0.0%
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
3.
0
❑
0.0%
4.
0
❑
0.0%
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
5.
0
❑
0.0%
6.
0
❑
0.0%
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
7.
0
❑
0.0%
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
8.
0
❑
0.0%
9.
0
❑
0.0%
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
❑
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
1 Q.
0
0.0%
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
11.
0
❑
0.o%
3 ft (1 m) in height.
12.
o
❑
o.o%
50% of Total Cover: 0
20% of Total Cover: 0
0
= Total Cover
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1 Smilax laurifolia
10❑
50.0% FACW
2. Lonicera japonica
10
d❑ 50.0% FACU
3.
0
❑ 0.0%
4.
0
❑ 0.0%
5.
0
❑ 0.0%
Hydrophytic
-
Vegetation -
50% of Total Cover: 10 20% of Total Cover: 4
20
= Total Cover
Present? Yes ` No
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: DP-9
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) % Tvoe 1 _ Locz_ Texture
0-12+ 30YR 3/2 Sandy Loam
1 Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 21-ocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Remarks
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (LRR 0)
❑ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 153B)
❑ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T) ❑ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) ❑ Depleted Ochric (FII) (MLRA 151)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A) ❑ Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ Sandy Muck Mineral (Sl) (LRR 0, S) ❑ Delta Ochric (1`17) (MLRA 151)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B) 3Indicators of hydrology
mushydrophytict
vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (MLRA 149A) unless disturbed or problematic.
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
❑ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No O
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

Appendix D
Agency Correspondence

North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Roy Cooper Office of Archives and History
Secretary Susi H. Hamilton Deputy Secretary Kevin Cherry
June 20, 2017
Kyle Barnes
Wilmington District, US Army Corps of Engineers
Washington Regulatory Office
2407 West 5' Street
Washington, NC 27889
Re: EBX-Neuse I, LLC Tull -Wooten III Mitigation Site, SAW 2017-00847, Lenoir County, ER 17-1052
Dear Mr. Barnes:
We have received a public notice concerning the above referenced project. We have reviewed the information
provided and offer the following comments.
The project area is located directly across the Neuse River from Wyse Fork Battlefield (31JN306), a Civil War
historic property that is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. In addition, the eastern
portion of the project area is located within the Battle of Kinston Area #5. Intact earthworks (31LR372)
associated with this portion of the battlefield have been identified within 500 feet of the easternmost proposed
easement. Since the project area has not been systematically surveyed for the purposes of identifying
archaeological sites, other significant features may be present in the area of potential effect for the proposed
project.
Prior to the initiation of any ground disturbing activities within the project area, we recommend that a
comprehensive archaeological survey of the subject property be conducted by an archaeologist experienced in
the identification of battlefield features. The purpose of this survey will be to identify and evaluate the
significance of archaeological remains that may be damaged or destroyed by the proposed project. Potential
effects on unknown resources must be assessed prior to the initiation of construction activities. Please note that
our office now requests consultation with the Office of State Archaeology Review Archaeologist to discuss
appropriate field methodologies prior to the archaeological field investigation.
One paper copy and a digital copy of all resulting archaeological reports, as well as one paper copy and a digital
copy of the North Carolina site form for each site recorded, should be forwarded to the Office of State
Archaeology, through this office, for review and comment as soon as they are available and in advance of any
construction or ground disturbance activities. A list of archaeological consultants who have conducted or
expressed an interest in contract work in North Carolina is available at www.archaeology.ncdcr.gov/
ncarch/resource/consultants.htm. The archaeologists listed, or any other experienced archaeologist, may be
contacted to conduct the recommended survey.
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6599

The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill -Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-807-6579 or
environmental.reviewgncdcr.gov. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the above
referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
k,�PaLO��
(�T
6WRamona M. Bartos

North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Roy Cooper
Secretary Susi H. Hamilton
March 28, 2019
Office of Archives and History
Deputy Secretary Kevin Cherry
Debora Joy djoyklegacy-research.com
Legacy Research Associates
125 West Woodridge Drive
Durham, NC 27707
Re: Scope of Work for Archaeological Survey and Site Evaluation, Tull Wooten III Mitigation Site,
Lenoir County, ER 17-1052
Dear Ms. Joy:
Thank you for sending the scope of work for the archaeological and historical investigations to be conducted in
advance of the above -referenced undertaking. We find the proposed pedestrian and shovel testing survey
methods consistent with Office of State Archaeology guidelines. Given the potential for earthworks associated
with Civil War battles in the vicinity, we also recommend that publicly available LiDAR data be used to create
digital elevation maps of the project area.
We concur that close -interval shovel testing is an appropriate site assessment activity. Additional investigations,
such as test unit excavation, systematic metal detecting, or additional archival research may also be appropriate
depending on the type of resource identified.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 and 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act and
the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36
CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill -Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-814-6579 or
environmental.reviewgncdcr.gov. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the above
referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
boilRamona M. Bartos
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6599

North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Roy Cooper
Secretary Susi H. Hamilton
July 2, 2019
Brad Breslow
Resource Environmental Solutions
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Office of Archives and History
Deputy Secretary Kevin Cherry
Re: Archaeological Identification Survey, Tull -Wooten III Mitigation Site, Lenoir County, ER 17-1052
Dear Mr. Breslow:
Thank you for your letter transmitting the archaeological report for the project noted above. We have reviewed
this report and offer the following comments.
We find the completed survey and documentation consistent with the submitted scope of work and the North
Carolina Office of State Archaeology (OSA) Standards and Guidelines. No archaeological sites were identified
as a result of the survey, and the proposed undertaking will have no effect on any historic properties eligible for
listing in the National Register of Historic Places.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill -Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-807-6579 or
environmental.reviewgncdcr.gov. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the above
referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
6011Ramona Bartos, Deputy
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6599

United States Department of the Interior
FIST l AND W1LDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh FS Feld Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
May 25, 2017
Daniel Ingram
Resource Environmental Solutions. LLC
302 Jefferson St_, Suite 110
Raleigh. NC 27605
Re: Modification of Tull -Wooten III Mitigation Site — Lenoir County, NC
Dear Mr. Ingram,
This letter is to inforn-i you that the Service has established an on-Iine project planning and
consultation process which assists developers and consultants in determining whether a
federally-]isted species or designated critical habitat may be affected by a proposed project. For
future projects. please visit the Raleigh Field Office's project planning website at
https:llwwtiv.fws.gov/raleii4h/pp.html. If you are only searching for a list of species that may be
present in the project's Action Area, then you may use the Service's Information, Planning, and
Consultation System ( IPaC j website to determine if any listed, proposed, or candidate species
may be present in the Action Area and generate a species list. The IPaC website may be viewed
athttps://ecos.fws.gov/ii2ac/. The IPaC web site contains a complete and frequently updated list
of all endangered and threatened species protected by the provisions of the Endangered Species
Act of 1973. as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)(Act). a list of federal species of concern' that
are known to occur in each county in North Carolina, and other resources.
Section 7 of the Act requires that a]I federal agencies (or their designated non-federal
representative). in consultation with the Service, insure that any action federally authorized,
funded, or carried out by such agencies is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any
federally -listed endangered or threatened species. A biological assessment or evaluation may be
prepared to fulfill that requirement and in determining whether additional consultation with the
Service is necessary. In addition to the federally -protected species list, information on the
species' life histories and habitats and infonnation on completing a biological assessment or
evaluation and can be found on our web page at http://www.fws.gov/raleigh, Please check the
web site often for updated information or changes.
i The term "federal species of concern" refers to those species which the Service believes might be in need of
concentrated conservation actions. Federal species of concern receive no legal protection and their designation does
not necessarily imply that the species will eventually be proposed For listing as a federally endangered or threatened
species. However. we recommend that all practicable measures be taken to avoid or minimize adverse impacts to
federal species of concern,

If your project contains suitable habitat for any of the federally -listed species known to be
present within the county where your project occurs, the proposed action has the potential to
adversely affect those species, As such, we recommend that surveys be conducted to determine
the species' presence or absence within the project area, The use of North Carolina Natural
Heritage program data should not be substituted for actual field surveys.
If you determine that the proposed action may affect (i.e., likely to adversely affect or not likely
to adversely affect) a federally -protected species, you should notify this office with your
determination, the results of your surveys, survey methodologies, and an analysis of the effects
of the action on listed species, including consideration ot'direct, indirect, and cumulative effects,
before conducting any activities that might affect the species, If you determine that the proposed
action wi 11 have no effect (i.e.. no beneficial or adverse. direct or indirect effect) on federally
listed species. then you are not required to contact our office for concurrence (unless all
Environmental Impact Statement is prepared). However, you should maintain a complete record
of the assessment, including steps leading to your determination of effect, the qualified personnel
conducting the assessment, habitat conditions, site photographs, and any other related articles.
With regard to the above -referenced project, we offer the following remarks, Our comments are
submitted pursuant to, and in accordance with. provisions of the Endangered Species Act,
Based on the information provided and other information available, it appears that the proposed
action is not likely to adversely affect any federally -listed endangered or threatened species, their
formally designated critical habitat, or species currently proposed for listing under the Act at
these sites, We believe that the requirements of section 7{a}(2) of the Act have been satisfied for
your project. Please remember that obligations under section 7 consultation must be
reconsidered if. (1) new information reveals impacts of this identified action that may affect
listed species or critical habitat in a manner not previously considered; (2) this action is
subsequently modified in a manner that was not considered in this review: or, (3) a new species
is listed or critical habitat determined that may be affected by the identified action,
However, the Service is concerned about the potential impacts the proposed action might have
on aquatic species. Aquatic resources are highly susceptible to sedimentation. Therefore. we
recommend that all practicable measures be taken to avoid adverse impacts to aquatic species,
including implementing directional boring methods and stringent sediment and erosion control
measures. An erosion and sedimentation control plan should be submitted to and approved by
the North Carolina Division of Land Resources, Land Quality Section prior to construction,
Erosion and sedimentation controls should be installed and maintained between the construction
site and any nearby down -gradient surface waters. In addition, we recommend maintaining
natural, vegetated buffers on all streams and creeks adjacent to the project site.
The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission has developed a Guidance Memorandum is
copy can be found on our website at (http:llwww.fws,govlraleigh) to address and mitigate
secondary and cumulative impacts to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife resources and water quality.
We recommend that you consider this document in the development of your projects and in
completing an initiation package for consultation (if necessary).

We hope you find our web page useful and informative and that following the process described
above will reduce the time required, and eliminate the need, for general correspondence for
species' lists. If you have any questions or comments, please contact Emily Wells of this office
at [phone] ext. 25.
Sincerely,
- q�-)
c vPete g iliaui�ii�
�b Field Supervisor