20130456 Ver 1_Mitigation Plans_20130419

fTill001 Wei 0[1WL
Bear Basin Restoration Site
Onslow County, North Carolina
EEP Contract 004741
EEP Project Number 95362
White Oak Basin
Cataloging Unit 03030001
20130456
+41:k�
7�
Prepared for:
rd;J
Ecosystem
PROGRAM
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1652
FINAL - APRIL 2013
o NR - WATE8 " l

MITIGATION PLAN
Bear Basin Restoration Site
Onslow County, North Carolina
EEP Contract 004741
EEP Project Number 95362
White Oak Basin
Cataloging Unit 03030001
Prepared for:
r
Ecosystem
PROGRAM
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1652
Prepared by:
4
I
KC
T`TTTT
^ 1 ENVIRONMEm MNOLOGIES
1 ` AND CONSTRUCTION. INC.
KCI Associates of North Carolina, PC
4601 Six Forks Rd, Suite 220
Raleigh, NC 27609
(919) 783 -9214
FINAL - April 2013

Mitigation Plan Bear Basin Restoration Site
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This mitigation plan has been written in conformance with the requirements of the following
• Federal rule for compensatory mitigation project sites as described in the Federal Register Title 33
Navigation and Navigable Waters Volume 3 Chapter 2 Section § 332 8 paragraphs (c)(2) through (c)(14)
• NCDENR Ecosystem Enhancement Program In -Lieu Fee Instrument signed and dated July 28, 2010
These documents govern NCEEP operations and procedures for the delivery of compensatory mitigation
The Bear Basin Restoration Site (BB) is a full - delivery mitigation project being developed for the North
Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) The BB is in the White Oak 01 Basin (030300018 -digit
HUC) in Onslow County, North Carolina that has been substantially modified to maximize agricultural
production The site offers the chance to restore impacted agricultural lands to non - riparian wetland
habitat
Consistent with the goals set forth in the White Oak River Basin Restoration Priorities ( WORBRP),
(Breeding, 2010) the Bear Basin project will help achieve the following goals
- Protect and improve water quality by reducing sediment and nutrient inputs
- The protection of a watershed draining into shellfish harvesting waters
Additional goals not included in the WORBRP include
Provide habitat for aquatic flora and fauna by improving physical structure and vegetative
composition
Increase the local hydroperiod by encouraging both surface and subsurface storage and
retention
Restore and establish a functional wetland community
These goals will be accomplished through implementation of the following objectives
- Fill field ditches to restore surface flow retention and elevate local groundwater levels
- Redevelop longer wetland flow patterns to increase surface flow retention time
- Restore a wetland vegetation community through maintenance and germination of volunteer
wetland vegetation from adjacent seed sources, planting of wetland trees and shrubs, and
incorporation of a custom wetland seed mix
The site is located approximately 5 miles to the west of the Town of Richlands in Onslow County, North
Carolina The site has undergone significant modifications (clearing and ditching) that have altered the
site's hydrologic and vegetative composition since at least 1982 The site will be restored to non - riparian
wetland with two sections of upland inclusion. The ditches across the site will be filled and redeveloped
to retain and distribute surface flow across the site Once site grading is complete, the non - riparian
communities will be planted as Hardwood Flats (NCWAM, v 4 1 2010) The site will be monitored for
seven years or until the success criteria are met

Mitigation Plan Bear Basin Restoration Site
Bear Basin Restoration Site, Onslow County
Mitigation Credits
Stream
Riparian
Wetland
Non - riparian
Wetland
Buffer
Nitrogen
Nutrient
Offset
Phosphorous
Nutrient
Offset
Type
R
RE
R
RE
R
RE
�';�
BOB - "_
Acres
100
Credits
10 0
TOTAL CREDITS
100
R= Restoration RE= Restoration Equivalent of Creation or Enhancement

Mitigation Plan
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Bear Basin Restoration Site
1.0
RESTORATION PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES .................................. ..............................1
2.0
SITE SELECTION .................................................................................... ............................... 2
21
Directions
2
22
Site Selection ......
2
2.3
Vicinity Map
4
24
Watershed Map
5
25
Soil Survey ..
6
26
Current Condition Plan View
7
27
Historical Condition Plan View
..8
28
Site Photographs
10
3.0
SITE PROTECTION INSTRUMENT ........................................................... .............................12
3 1
Site Protection Instrument Summary Information
12
32
Site Protection Instrument Figure
13
4.0
BASELINE INFORMATION ..................................................................... .............................14
41
Watershed Summary Information
15
42
Reach Summary Information
.15
43
Wetland Summary Information
15
44
Regulatory Considerations
15
5.0
DETERMINATION OF CREDITS .............................................................. .............................16
6.0
CREDIT RELEASE SCHEDULE .................................................................. .............................17
7.0
MITIGATION WORK PLAN .................................................................... .............................19
71
Target Wetland Types and Plant Communities
19
72
Design Parameters
19
73
Data Analysis.
20
74
Proposed Mitigation Plan View
22
8.0
MAINTENANCE PLAN ......................................................................... ............................... 23
9.0
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS .............................................................. ............................... 24
10.0
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS .......................................................... ............................... 25
11.0
LONG -TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN ..................................................... ............................... 26
12.0
ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN ........................................................ ............................... 26
13.0
FINANCIAL ASSURANCES ...................................................................... .............................27
14.0
OTHER INFORMATION ....................................................................... ............................... 27
141
Definitions
27
142
References
29
143
Appendix A Site Protection Instrument
31
144
Appendix B Baseline Information Data
43
145
Appendix C Mitigation Work Plan Data and Analyses
85
146
Appendix D Project Plan Sheets
111

Mitigation Plan
IV
1
Bear Basin Restoration Site
J
1
1
.I

Mitigation Plan Bear Basin Restoration Site
1.0 RESTORATION PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
EEP develops River Basin Restoration Priorities to guide its restoration activities within each of the
state's 54 cataloging units. RBRPs delineate specific watersheds that exhibit both the need and
opportunity for wetland, stream and riparian buffer restoration These watersheds are called Targeted
Local Watersheds (TLWs) and receive priority for EEP planning and restoration project funds
The 2010 White Oak River Basin Restoration Priorities identified HUC 03030001010010 (Upper New
4 _ ' River Watershed) as a Targeted Local Watershed (http //portal ncdenr org /c /document_
' li bra ry/get_file ?uu id= 1c0b7e5a- 9617- 4a44- a5f8- df017873496b &groupld= 60329) The watershed is
characterized by 51% forested and 44% agricultural area with impacts to streams including increased
agricultural inputs, road construction impacts, and channelization
The 2010 White Oak River Basin RBRP identified poor riparian zones and fragmented forests as mayor
stressors within this TLW The Bear Basin Restoration Site (BB) Project was identified as a wetland
restoration opportunity to improve habitat and hydrologic regime within the TLW
1
Consistent with the goals set forth in the White Oak River Basin Restoration Priorities ( WORBRP),
(Breeding, 2010) the Bear Basin project will help achieve the following goals
- Protect and improve water quality by reducing sediment and nutrient inputs
- The protection of a watershed draining into shellfish harvesting waters
Additional goals not included in the WORBRP include
- Provide habitat for aquatic flora and fauna by improving physical structure and vegetative
composition
- Increase the local hydroperiod by encouraging both surface and subsurface storage and
retention
- Restore and establish a functional wetland community
These goals will be accomplished through implementation of the following objectives
- Fill field ditches to restore surface flow retention and elevate local groundwater levels
- Redevelop longer wetland flow patterns to increase surface flow retention time
- Restore a wetland vegetation community through maintenance and germination of existing
wetland seed stores, planting of wetland trees and shrubs, and incorporation of a custom
wetland seed mix
1

Mitigation Plan
2.0 SITE SELECTION
2.1 Directions
Bear Basin Restoration Site
The BB is located on a single parcel located off of Jesse Williams Road approximately 5 miles to the west
of the Town of Richlands in Onslow County, North Carolina To reach the site from Raleigh proceed east
on 1 -40 for approximately 72 miles Then travel on NC -24 east toward Magnolia and travel for six miles
Turn right to remain on NC -24 East for an additional 19 miles Next, turn left onto Jesse Williams Road
The site will be approximately 0 8 mile ahead on the right after the pine forest
2.2 Site Selection
The site is part of the 03030001 USGS Cataloging Unit (White Oak 01) The White Oak River Basin as a
whole is experiencing a large amount of habitat alteration due to population growth mainly in Onslow
County in the vicinity of the City of Jacksonville As a result, the focus in this watershed is on mitigating
impacts to water quality from nonpoint source pollution and protecting and /or restoring existing habitat
(NCDENR EEP, 2010)
The project site is bounded by Jesse Williams Road to the north, a ditch along the property line to the
west and south, and agricultural land to the east The site has undergone significant modifications
(clearing and ditching) that have altered the site's hydrologic and vegetative composition since at least
1982 The deeply entrenched ditches have severely altered the site's historic hydrologic regime,
effectively reducing or eliminating the wetland hydroperiod on the site The existing site conditions are
shown in Section 2 6 and seen in site photographs (Section 2 8) Within the White Oak Basin, the Upper
New River drainage (03030001010010) remains relatively unaffected by urban development The site
drains to the Upper New River (DWQ Subbasin19 -(1)), which is located approximately 0 5 miles west of
the project site The Upper New River is classified as Class C with the supplemental listing of nutrient
sensitive waters (NSW) Currently, there are no portions of the 14 -digit HUC that are protected and
approximately 44% of its land use is in agriculture (NCDENR EEP, 2010) Impervious cover in the 14 -digit
HUC is approximately 3 6% The project watershed for the BB is comprised of 32 7 total acres The land
use distribution in the project watershed closely mirrors the land use within the 14 -digit HUC, and
consists of primarily agriculture (14 4 ac /44 %) and forest (16 3 ac /50 %) The approximate total
impervious cover of the project watershed is 2 0%
Historic aerials from Onslow County were examined for any information about how the site hydrology
and vegetation have changed over the last century They were obtained from USGS Earth Explorer from
1950, 1958, 1964, 1974, 1982, 1993, 1998, and 2010 The reviewed aerials are included in Section 2 7
From this photographic record, it is apparent that the area surrounding the project site has been a mix
of agricultural and forested land for many years Prior to 1982, the site appears in a forested condition
adjacent to existing agricultural fields to the east Sometime between 1974 and 1982 the site was
cleared and ditched for crop production From 1982 to the present time, the photos indicate that the
site has not been significantly altered from its present day condition The land cover remains in
agriculture currently The surrounding area is rural with low development pressure at this time These
land use trends indicated that restoring this property back to a forested wetland will provide an
important habitat enhancement in the watershed
The site lies within the Castle Hayne geologic formation of the Coastal Plain physiographic province The
primary rock type in these areas is limestone with dolomite existing as a common secondary rock type
2

Mitigation Plan Bear Basin Restoration Site
The site topography is generally flat with only 2 feet of elevation change across the site (exclusive of site
ditching)
According to the Onslow County Soil Survey, the sods within the project site are mapped as Rains fine
sandy loam and Stallings loamy fine sand A detailed investigation of the mapped soils resulted in
several changes to the type and boundaries of these two sod series The soil mapped as Rains fine sandy
loam is more appropriately described as Pantego mucky loam (also a poorly drained soil), and the area
mapped as Stallings loamy fine sand was more accurately described as Lynchburg fine sandy loam, a
somewhat poorly drained sod The restoration area will be focused on the areas determined to be
underlain by Pantego mucky loam Both the mapped soils and the field - verified soils are described in
detail in Appendix C
Based on these watershed and site - specific attributes, the BB was selected as a candidate for wetland
mitigation The restored site will expand forested wetland habitat in an area that has been actively used
for agriculture since at least 1982
3

Mitigation Plan
2.3 Vicinity Map
Bear Basin Restoration Site
DONE S
CRAVEN
DU PLIN
S
JONES COUNTY LOW CARTERET
0
ti PENDER
4-
c
c
� yTaa Re
8a tEe Ln
y;ae!W
N
fi /HELL AND PURGATORY
i ras +hN�Re
n
as r
i
24
2a
DUPLIN COUNTY ONS OW GOY
24
Za
yet
m s
°Sk a
� F
p,a
% N m F•a�a ne
i
PROJECT SITE VICINITY MAP
BEAR BASIN RESTORATION SITE
ON SLOW COU NTY, NC
4

Mitigation Plan
2.4 Watershed Map
Bear Basin Restoration Site
f dyF
t � V
t
j
% i !(
.1 _ II�L a1MO M�MLANp > AO� 1 �1t i
,
ry
NN it
IF
C3 Project Watershed (32.7 acres)
Proposed Project Boundary
PROJECT SITE WATERSHED MAP Sourm USGSDRGa N
1.500 750 0 t 500 RchWMa(1981)
Feet BEAR BASIN RESTORATION SITE aidPot*310(1980)
ONSIOW COUNTY, NC
5

Mitigation Plan
2.5 Soil Survey
Bear Basin Restoration Site

Mitigation Plan
2.6 Current Condition Plan View
Bear Basin Restoration Site

Mitigation Plan
2.7 Historical Condition Plan View
Bear Basin Restoration Site

Mitigation Plan Bear Basin Restoration Site

Mitigation Plan
2.8 Site Photographs
a
Lateral drainage ditch draining to the southeast. 9/12/2011
Evidence of extended periods of ponding. 9/12/2011
Bear Basin Restoration Site
View of fields looking southwest from the northeast corner of the
site. 9/12/2011
Facing north - typical view of ditchline. 9/12/2011
View of fields looking southwest from the northeast corner of the
Facing south - typical view of ditchline. 9/12/2011 site. 9/12/2011
10

Mitigation Plan Bear Basin Restoration Site
11

Mitigation Plan
3.0 SITE PROTECTION INSTRUMENT
Bear Basin Restoration Site -
3.1 Site Protection Instrument Summary Information
The land required for the construction, management, and stewardship of this mitigation project includes -
portions of the following parcels The conservation easement documents were finalized in October -
2012 A copy of the land protection instrument is included in Appendix A
12
Site Protection
Deed Book and
Acreage
Landowners
PIN
County
Instrument
Page Number
protected
Kenneth
4413 -0481-
Conservation
Parcel A
Onslow
DB 531 PG 388
119 acres
Jones
3247
Easement
12

Mitigation Plan
3.2 Site Protection Instrument Figure
Bear Basin Restoration Site
13

Mitigation Plan
4.0 BASELINE INFORMATION
Bear Basin Restoration Site
Items addressed in the Categorical Exclusion in Appendix B
14
Project Information
Project Name
Bear Basin Wetland Restoration Site
County
Onslow County
Project Area (acres)
119 acres
Project Coordinates (lat. and long.)
34 925365 N , -77 607461 W
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province
Coastal Plain
River Basin
White Oak
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8 -digit
03030001
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14 -digit
03030001010010
DWQ Sub -basin
03 -05 -02
Project Drainage Area (acres)
32 7 acres
Project Drainage Area Percentage of
Impervious Area
2%
CGIA Land Use Classification
44% Cultivated, 4% Managed Herbaceous Cover, 50% Southern Yellow Pine,
and 2% High Intensity Developed
Wetland Summary Information
Parameters
Wetland Area 1
Size of Wetland (acres)
10 0 acres
Wetland Type (non - riparian, riparian
riverine or riparian non - riverine)
Non - riparian
Mapped Soil Series
Rains and Stallings
(Pantego and Lynchburg by detailed sod investigation)
Drainage class
Poorly drained
Soil Hydric Status
Drained Hydric
Source of Hydrology
Precipitation
Hydrologic Impairment
Ditching and Crops
Native vegetation community
Crops
Percent composition of exotic
invasive vegetation
0%
Regulatory Considerations
Regulation
Applicable?
Resolved?
Supporting
Documentation
Waters of the United States — Section
404
Yes
Applying I in g for NWP 27
Jurisdictional
Determination
Waters of the United States — Section
401
Yes
Applying I in g for NWP 27
Jurisdictional
Determination
Endangered Species Act*
No
N/A
N/A
Historic Preservation Act*
No
N/A
N/A
Coastal Zone Management Act
(CZMA)/ Coastal Area Management
Act (CAMA)
No
N/A
N/A
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
No
N/A
N/A
Essential Fisheries Habitat*
No
N/A
N/A
Items addressed in the Categorical Exclusion in Appendix B
14

_ Mitigation Plan
4.1 Watershed Summary Information
Bear Basin Restoration Site
The site is within the 03030001 USGS Cataloging Unit (White Oak 01 Basin) The White Oak River Basin
as a whole is experiencing a large amount of habitat alteration due to population growth mainly in
Onslow County According to 1996 land cover data from the North Carolina Center for Geographic
Information and Analysis (CGIA), only 3% of the watershed is developed, but the area is expected to
continue to grow The predominant land uses are 49% forest and 12% agriculture
The project watershed for the BB is comprised of 32 7 total acres Current land use in the project
watershed consists of agriculture (14 4 ac/44%), forest (16 3 ac /50 %), and high - intensity development
(0 8 ac /2 %) The approximate total impervious cover of the project watershed is 2 0% The site drains to
the Upper New River, which is located approximately 0 5 mile west of the project site The project area
is located in the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Potters Hill (1980) and Richlands (1981)
Quadrangles
4.2 Reach Summary Information
Not applicable for this project
4.3 Wetland Summary Information
Currently, there are no existing wetlands present The wetland data forms are included in Appendix B
The project site has experienced significant hydrologic and vegetative modifications to allow for
agricultural development A jurisdictional determination delineation was completed in which the ditch
network installed at the site was identified as jurisdictional tributaries (see Appendix B for jurisdictional
determination plat) The historic aerials indicate that the existing ditches were installed on the site
sometime after 1974 The site contains two interior ditches that serve to drain the site to the southeast
where they enter a perimeter ditch that carries water in a northeasterly direction, eventually
discharging into an unnamed tributary to the New River The site topography is generally flat with only
2 feet of elevation change across the site (exclusive of site ditching) This site is not located within a
geomorphic floodplain or a topographic crenulation and is not contiguous with a body of open water
This was the basis for the designation of the site as non - riparian restoration At the time of the first site
visit (September 2011), the site was planted in corn The site was planted in soybeans at the time of the
second site visit (October 2012) Currently, there are no cattle grazing on the property The surrounding
area is rural with low development pressure at this time
4.4 Regulatory Considerations
A jurisdictional determination was submitted to the US Army Corps of Engineers on October 9, 2012 and
approved on October 31, 2012 Following the completion of the mitigation plan, a pre - construction
notification (PCN) will be completed to apply for a Nationwide 27 Permit (NWP) to comply with Sections
401 and 404 of the Clean Water Act with the Wilmington District of the US Army Corps of Engineers and
the NCDENR Division of Water Quality
BB is not located within the 100 -year floodplam of the New River and therefore a flood study is not
anticipated for this project
15

Mitigation Plan
5.0 DETERMINATION OF CREDITS
Bear Basin Restoration Site
Bear Basin Restoration Site, Duplm County
Mitigation Credits
Nitrogen
Phosphorous
Riparian
Non - riparian
Stream
Buffer
Nutrient
Nutrient
Wetland
Wetland
Offset
Offset
Type
R
RE
R
RE
R
RE
Acres
-
100
-
Credits
100
-
TOTAL CREDITS
10 0
Project Components
Project
Restoration
Component
Stationing/
g
Approach
-or-
Restoration
Mitigation
f000tot agge/
Footage
-or-
Location
(PI, PH etc.)
Restoration
Ratio
Acreage
or Acreage
ReachlD
Equivalent
Central and
Wetland Area 1
Southwestern
10 0 acres
Restoration
10 0 acres
11
corner of project
Component Summation
Buffer
Restoration
Stream
Riparian Wetland
Non - riparian Wetland
Upland
(square
Level
(linear feet)
(acres)
(acres)
(acres)
feet)
Non-
;`< _
r ,! .- -
_
Rroenne
Y.,,
Rivenne
r
5,
Restoration
-
-
10 0 acres
-
Enhancement
Enhancement I
Enhancement ll
Creation
t
�k
Preservation
-"
19 acres
High Quality
Preservation
TOTAL
10 0 acres
19 acres
R= Restoration RE= Restoration Equivalent of Creation or Enhancement
16

Mitigation Plan Bear Basin Restoration Site
6.0 CREDIT RELEASE SCHEDULE
All credit releases will be based on the total credit generated as reported by the as -built survey of the
mitigation site Under no circumstances shall any mitigation project be debited until the necessary DA
authorization has been received for its construction or the District Engineer (DE) has otherwise provided
written approval for the project in the case where no DA authorization is required for construction of
the mitigation project The DE, in consultation with the Interagency Review Team (IRT), will determine if
performance standards have been satisfied sufficiently to meet the requirements of the release
schedules below In cases where some performance standards have not been met, credits may still be
' released depending on the specifics of the case Monitoring may be required to restart or be extended,
depending on the extent to which the site fails to meet the specified performance standard The release
of project credits will be subject to the criteria described as follows
Forested Wetlands Credits
Monitoring
Interim
Total
Year
Credit Release Activity
Release
Released
0
Initial Allocation — see requirements below
30%
30%
1
First year monitoring report demonstrates performance
10%
40%
standards are being met
2
Second year monitoring report demonstrates performance
10%
50%
standards are being met
3
Third year monitoring report demonstrates performance
10%
60%
standards are being met
4
Fourth year monitoring report demonstrates performance
10%
70%
standards are being met
5
Fifth year monitoring report demonstrates performance
10%
80%
standards are being met, Provided that all performance standards are
met, the IRT may allow the NCEEP to discontinue hydrologic monitoring
after the fifth year, but vegetation monitoring must continue for an
additional two years after the fifth year for a total of seven years
6
Sixth year monitoring report demonstrates performance
10%
90%
standards are being met
7
Seventh year monitoring report demonstrates performance
10%
100%
standards are being met, and project has received close -out
approval
Initial Allocation of Released Credits
The initial allocation of released credits, as specified in the mitigation plan can be released by the NCEEP
without prior written approval of the DE upon satisfactory completion of the following activities
- Approval of the final Mitigation Plan
- Recordation of the preservation mechanism, as well as a title opinion acceptable to the USACE
covering the property
- Completion of project construction (the initial physical and biological improvements to the
mitigation site) pursuant to the mitigation plan, Per the NCEEP Instrument, construction means
that a mitigation site has been constructed in its entirety, to include planting, and an as -built
report has been produced As -built reports must be sealed by an engineer prior to project
closeout, if appropriate but not prior to the initial allocation of released credits
17

Mitigation Plan
Bear Basin Restoration Site
- Receipt of necessary DA permit authorization or written DA approval for projects where DA
permit issuance is not required
Subsequent Credit Releases
All subsequent credit releases must be approved by the DE, in consultation with the IRT, based on a
determination that required performance standards have been achieved For stream projects a reserve
of 15% of a site's total stream credits shall be released after two bank -full events have occurred, in
separate years, provided the channel is stable and all other performance standards are met In the event
that less than two bank -full events occur during the monitoring period, release of these reserve credits
shall be at the discretion of the IRT As projects approach milestones associated with credit release, the
NCEEP will submit a request for credit release to the DE along with documentation substantiating
achievement of criteria required for release to occur This documentation will be included with the
annual monitoring report
18

Mitigation Plan Bear Basin Restoration Site
7.0 MITIGATION WORK PLAN
7.1 Target Wetland Types and Plant Communities
Wetland plantings shall consist of native species commonly found in the Hardwood Flats Community
(NCWAM, v 4 1 2010) Trees and shrubs will be planted at a density of 968 stems per acre (9 feet x 5
feet spacing) to achieve a mature survivability of two hundred ten (210) stems per acre after seven
years Woody vegetation planting will be conducted during dormancy Species to be planted may consist
of the following consistent with a hardwood flat (NCWAM, v. 412010)
Common Name
Scientific Name
Wetland Indicator
Red maple
Acer rubrum
FACW
Red chokeberry
Aron►a arbut►foha
FACW
Tulip poplar
Linodendron tulipifera
FACW
Sweetbay magnolia
Magnolia virg►niana
FACW
Swamp red bay
Persea palustris
FACW
Swamp chestnut oak
Quercus m►chaux►►
FACW
Water oak
Quercus n►gra
FAC
Cherrybark oak
Quercus pagoda
FAC
American elm
Ulmus amencana
FACW
Highbush blueberry
Vacc►nium corymbosum
FACW
An adjoining upland area in the northern portion of the easement will be planted at 625 stems per acre
and will include an equal mix of red maple (Acer rubrum), cherrybark oak (Quercus pagoda), Shumard
oak (Quercus shumardii), and persimmon (D►ospyros v►rg►n►ana) A custom herbaceous seed mix
composed of appropriate native species found in reference communities will also be developed and
used to further stabilize and restore the wetland
All of the above options will be marked and surveyed as per EEP's requirements contained within
http //portal ncdenr org/web /eep /fd- forms - templates In addition, the easement boundaries will be
marked with salt- treated wooden posts placed approximately 100 feet apart Each line post will be
marked with a conservation easement placard Corner posts will be marked with signs stating
"Conservation Easement Corner "
7.2 Design Parameters
The mitigation approach for BB will focus on restoring an integrated wetland ecosystem that will buffer
i and support the Upper New River basin Restoration actions will focus on reestablishing an appropriate
wetland hydroperiod by filling ditches, surface roughening, and planting the site with appropriate
hydrophytes The site will be restored to a condition that resembles the former wetland community A
local comparable reference wetland system was identified approximately 015 mile northeast of the
restoration site and was used to aid in design of a wetland community most suited to the area Please
see the mitigation overview in Section 7 4 and the wetland plans included in Appendix D The following
elements of functional uplift are expected from this project
- 1 Increase in flood storage
2 Increase in groundwater recharge
3 Increase in sediment trapping and filtration
19

Mitigation Plan Bear Basin Restoration Site
4 Increase in carbon storage
5 Increase in biochemical cycling of nutrients and other pollutants
6 Increase in habitat utilization by wildlife (migrants and residents)
7 Increase in landscape patch structure
Non - Riparian Wetland Restoration —10 0 acres
This site offers the potential to develop 10 acres of non - riparian wetlands within the Upper New River
basin Restoration actions would include filling approximately 2,500 linear feet of drainage ditches,
removing sidecast ditch spoils, eliminating field crowning, and scarifying the existing compacted surface
soils The primary receiving ditch, which runs west to east, will remain open Following the completion
of site grading, the non - riparian wetland will be planted as Hardwood Flats Community as described in
Section 7 1 Proposed project conditions are shown in Section 7 4
Upland Inclusions —1 9 acre of Upland Inclusions
In addition to the wetland components being offered, approximately 2 acres of upland buffer will be
included within the northern portion and southeastern corner of the easement area to augment the
sites potential to buffer pollutants from adjacent agricultural land and the existing roadway Once the
grading is completed, the northern portion will be planted as an upland zone while the southeastern
corner will be planted as the Hardwood Flats Community as described in Section 7 1
Reference Wetland
A suitable reference wetland was found approximately 0 15 mile northeast of the BB and on the
opposite side of Jesse Williams Road The reference wetland is comprised of deciduous hardwoods over
a shrub layer with broad leaved evergreens and is consistent with the Hardwood Flats Community that
will be the target wetland type at the project site A groundwater monitoring well has been installed to
document the reference wetland hydrology during the course of monitoring
7.3 Data Analysis
The numerous modifications to the hydrology of the BB have effectively drained the historic wetlands
on -site The development of a network of field ditches has significantly altered the retention of surface
hydrology in these areas The pre and post - restoration effects of ditching on wetland hydrology was
evaluated using a hydrologic budget for the site (see Appendix C)
Existing Conditions
Existing site hydrology was modeled by developing an annual water budget that calculates hydrologic
inputs and outputs in order to calculate the change in storage on a monthly time step In order to set up
the water budget, historic climatic data were obtained from the North Carolina State Climatic Office
The weather station in Maysville, North Carolina was used, which is the closest station with the longest
period of record and is approximately 21 miles to the east of BB Monthly precipitation totals from the
entire period of record (1945 -2011) were reviewed and three years were selected to represent a range
of precipitation conditions dry year (1990), average year (1973), and wet year (1991)
Potential inputs to the water budget include precipitation, groundwater, and surface inputs For
precipitation, the data from the three selected years were used in the budget Groundwater inputs likely
exist, but they were considered to be negligible to be conservative for the purposes of this study
Surface water input was calculated using the USDA Soil Conservation Service (SCS) runoff curve number
equation (USDA, SCS 1986)
20

Mitigation Plan Bear Basin Restoration Site
Outputs from the site include potential evapotranspiration (PET), groundwater, and surface water
diversion PET was calculated by the Thornthwaite method using mean monthly temperatures
determined from the chosen years of record 1990, 1973, and 1991 Surface water was assumed entirely
lost since there is no surface storage in the existing conditions model.
Once the inputs and outputs were determined, a net monthly total was calculated in inches and used to
estimate a yearly water budget The model assumes unsaturated conditions at the beginning of the
year A maximum wetland water volume of 3 6 inches was calculated based on the specific yield of 0 10
for 36 inches of Pantego soil The resulting hydrographs for the average and wet years show a seasonal
pattern The model shows that the majority of hydrologic inputs to the site come during the rainy spring
months for the average year and during both the spring months and late summer /early fall for the wet
year The site begins to lose saturation in the upper twelve inches in the late spring and early summer
months for both years However, after late spring, the wet year shows an increase in hydrologic inputs
that continues through the summer months and then decreases in fall The average year does not see an
increase in hydrologic inputs until the late fall The dry year shows very little hydrology overall It is clear
from the existing model output that the ditches within the site are exerting a larger influence on the
site's storage capacity than the water budget is accurately able to predict The site is currently not
achieving the wetland hydrology that the model predicts
Proposed Conditions
A modified water budget was developed to analyze the effect of mitigation actions described in Section
7 2 on the site hydrology All surface flow is assumed to be retained in the proposed condition, because
it will no longer be immediately routed off the site To estimate the impact from surface roughening, an
additional 2 4 inches of hydrologic capacity was added to the calculations to represent surface
roughness Based on these changes, the budget shows the site potentially attaining jurisdictional
wetland hydrology in portions of the spring and summer for the average and wet years when compared
to the existing conditions The dry year remains relatively unchanged from the pre - construction
condition, indicating that the site's wetland hydrology may be susceptible to drought conditions
The southernmost ditch adjacent to the restoration area will be left open and not filled per landowner
requirements The northern top 400'of the westernmost ditch will be filled and the drainage from the
NCDOT ditch coming in from the northwest will be brought into the restored wetland The lower 650' of
the westernmost ditch will remain open similar to the southern ditch line It is anticipated that leaving
portions of these ditches open will have minimal impacts to the overall hydrologic performance of the
site The hydrologic influence of the ditches was modeled using Lateral Effect, a software program that
determines the lateral effect of a drainage ditch or borrow pit on adjacent wetland hydrology (NCSU
BAE, 2011) This software determined that the potential horizontal drainage influence averages 85'
Additional groundwater gauges will be installed to quantify the effect of these unfilled ditches (see
Section 10 0)
21

Mitigation Plan
Bear Basin Restoration Site
7.4 Proposed Mitigation Plan View
' Proposed Easement Area (11.9 ac)
f ifj Non- riparian Wetland Restoration (10.0 ac)
Upland Inclusion (1.9 ac)
XXX Ditches to be filled
Utility Easement
"X�
PROJECT SITE PROPOSED MITIGATION PLAN VIEW Nosgssoum* Nortncsmhn& N
eo so 0 160 BEAR BASIN RESTORATION SITE St�tnnC�Ortnam�gsry 20 to
F«; ONSLOW COUNTY, NC
22

Mitigation Plan
8.0 MAINTENANCE PLAN
Bear Basin Restoration Site
The site will be monitored on a regular basis, with a physical inspection of the site conducted a
minimum of once per year throughout the post - construction monitoring period until performance
standards are met These site inspections may identify site components and features that require
routine maintenance Routine maintenance should be expected most often in the first two years
following site construction and may include the following
Component /Feature
Maintenance Through Project Close -Out
Routine wetland maintenance and repair activities may include securing of loose coir
Wetland
matting and supplemental installations of live stakes and other target vegetation within the
wetland Areas where stormwater and floodplam flows intercept the wetland may,also
require maintenance to prevent scour
Vegetation shall be maintained to ensure the health and vigor of the targeted plant
community Routine vegetation maintenance and repair activities may include
Vegetation
supplemental planting, pruning, mulching, and fertilizing Exotic invasive plant species shall
be controlled by mechanical and /or chemical methods Any vegetation control requiring
herbicide application will be performed in accordance with NC Department of Agriculture
(NCDA) rules and regulations
Site boundaries shall be identified in the field to ensure clear distinction between the
mitigation site and adjacent properties Boundaries may be identified by fence, marker,
Site Boundary
bollard, post, tree - blazing, or other means as allowed by site conditions and /or
conservation easement Boundary markers disturbed, damaged, or destroyed will be
repaired and /or replaced on an as needed basis
Additionally, a utility right of way exists adjacent to the restored wetland, but because there is no
creditable acreage within this right of way, it is not expected that the utility maintenance will affect the
restored wetland
23

Mitigation Plan
9.0 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
Bear Basin Restoration Site
The BB will be monitored to determine if the development of the wetland indicators on site meet the
standards for mitigation credit production as presented in Section 5 0 The credits will be validated upon _
confirmation that the success criteria described below are met The site will be monitored for
performance standards for seven years after completion of construction
Hydrologic Performance
Verification of hydrologic performance standards within the wetland mitigation area will be determined
through evaluation of automatic recording well data supplemented by documentation of wetland
hydrology indicators as defined in the 1987 US ACOE Wetland Delineation Manual (Manual) Sixteen
automatic recording gauges will be established within the restoration area of the site
To meet success criteria, the upper 12 inches of the soil profile will display continuously saturated or
inundated conditions for at least 8% of the growing season with a 50% probability of reoccurrence
during normal weather conditions A "normal' year is based on NRCS climatological data for Onslow
County using the 30th to 70th percentile thresholds as the range of normal as documented in the USACE
Technical Report "Accessing and Using Meteorological Data to Evaluate Wetland Hydrology, April 2000 "
According to the Natural Resources Conservation Service, the growing season for Onslow County is
considered to extend from March 18th to November 16th, comprising 243 days (NRCS, 2002) KCI will -
monitor soil temperature to verify that the local growing season is consistent with the NRCS published
data and reserves the right to present this information as a modifier to the number of days saturation is
required to achieve jurisdictional status
Due to the inherent variability in the sites soils and associated drainage characteristics, it is unlikely that
the project will exhibit uniform hydrologic conditions across the site, making a single hydrologic
performance criterion unrepresentative of the sites performance As such, the gauge data can be
evaluated and presented as a spatial average with each gauge representing the area half the distance to
adjacent gauges The spatial average will be the calculated value for comparison with the performance
standard for credit validation Gauges representing areas not achieving a minimum of 6 5% saturation
will be considered non - attaining even if the spatial average exceeds the credit validation performance
standard
Vegetation Success
The vegetation success criteria will comply with guidance included in "Monitoring Requirements and _
Performance Standards for Stream and /or Wetland Mitigation" (NCDENR EEP, 2011), which states that
the plots must achieve a stem density of 320 stems /acre after three years, 260 stems /acre after five
years and 210 stems /acre after seven years to be considered successful In addition to density
requirements, plant height will be monitored within the monitoring plots to ensure that trees average
10 feet in height after seven years
24

I ' '
I�
Mitigation Plan
10.0 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Bear Basin Restoration Site
Annual monitoring data will be reported using the EEP monitoring template The monitoring report shall
provide a project data chronology that will facilitate an understanding of project status and trends,
population of EEP databases for analysis, research purposes, and assist in decision making regarding
project close -out.
Required
Parameter
Quantity
Frequency
Notes
Yes
Groundwater
7 -8 gauges distributed
Annual
Groundwater monitoring gauges with data
Hydrology
throughout the restored
recording devices will be installed on site,
wetland and an additional 8
the data will be downloaded on a monthly
gauges to determine the effect
basis during the growing season
of the open ditch
Yes
Vegetation
Will be distributed to ensure
During
Vegetation will be monitored using the
sufficient coverage of planted
monitoring
Carolina Vegetation Survey (CVS) protocols
vegetation
years 1, 2,
3, 5, and 7
Yes
Exotic and
Annual
Locations of exotic and nuisance vegetation
nuisance
will be mapped
vegetation
Yes
Project
Semi-
Locations of vegetation damage, boundary
boundary
annual
encroachments, etc will be mapped
The first scheduled monitoring will be conducted during the first full growing season following project
completion. Monitoring shall subsequently be conducted annually for a total period of seven years or
until the project meets its success criteria
Groundwater elevations will be monitored to evaluate the attainment of jurisdictional wetland
hydrology Verification of wetland hydrology will be determined by automatic recording well data
collected within the project area and reference wetland Seven to eight automatic recording gauges will
be established within the mitigation areas Daily data will be collected from the automatic gauges for a
minimum of a 5 -year monitoring period following wetland construction A nearby reference wetland will
also be monitored using the same procedures for comparative analysis (see Appendix B for reference
wetland data sheet and location map) Additionally, to monitor the effect of the unfilled ditches
- described in Section 7 3, four sets of coupled gauges will be established perpendicular to each unfilled
ditch Each set will include a gauge that is 20' from the open ditch and another gauge that is 80' from
the ditch Two sets of the coupled gauges will be used at the unfilled ditch along the southern project
boundary The first set will be established one -third of the distance from the western project boundary
and the second set will be established at two - thirds of that distance The two remaining sets of gauges
will also be established perpendicular to the 650' of unfilled ditch along the western project boundary
The first set will be established one -third of the distance from where the ditch is left open to the
southern project boundary and the second set will be established at two - thirds of that distance A figure
in Appendix C shows the potential gauge locations at the site
Beginning at the end of the first growing season, KCI will monitor the planted vegetation in monitoring
years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7 or until the success criterion is met The survivability of the vegetation plantings
will be evaluated using a sufficient number of 100 mz vegetative sampling plots randomly placed
throughout the restored wetland Permanent monuments will be established at the corners of each
monitoring plot and documented by either conventional survey or GPS These plots will be monitored
25

Mitigation Plan Bear Basin Restoration Site
according to the Level 2 method of the current CVS /EEP monitoring protocol (http //cvs bio unc edu/
methods htm)
Photograph reference points (PRPs) will be established to assist in characterizing the site and to allow
qualitative evaluation of the site conditions The location of each photo point will be marked in the
monitoring plan and the bearing /orientation of the photograph will be documented
Annual monitoring reports will be prepared and submitted after all monitoring tasks for each year are
completed The report will document the monitored components and include all collected data,
analyses, and photographs Each report will provide the new monitoring data and compare the most
recent results against previous findings The monitoring report format will be similar to that set out in
the most recent EEP monitoring protocol
11.0 LONG -TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN
Upon approval for close -out by the Interagency Review Team (IRT), the site will be transferred to the
NCDENR Division of Natural Resource Planning and Conservation's Stewardship Program This party shall
be responsible for periodic inspection of the site to ensure that restrictions required in the conservation
easement are upheld Endowment funds required to uphold easement and deed restrictions shall be
negotiated prior to site transfer to the responsible party
The NCDENR Division of Natural Resource Planning and Conservation's Stewardship Program currently
houses EEP stewardship endowments within the non - reverting, interest - bearing Conservation Lands
Stewardship Endowment Account The use of funds from the Endowment Account is governed by North
Carolina General Statute GS 113A- 232(d)(3) Interest gained by the endowment fund may be used only
for the purpose of stewardship, monitoring, stewardship administration, and land transaction costs, if
applicable The NCDENR Stewardship Program intends to manage the account as a non - wasting
endowment Only interest generated from the endowment funds will be used to steward the
compensatory mitigation sites Interest funds not used for those purposes will be re- invested in the
Endowment Account to offset losses due to inflation
12.0 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Upon completion of site construction KCI will implement the post - construction monitoring protocols
previously defined in this document Project maintenance will be performed as described previously in
this document If, during the course of annual monitoring it is determined the site's ability to achieve
site performance standards are jeopardized, KCI will notify the EEP and the USACE of the need to
develop a Plan of Corrective Action The Plan of Corrective Action may be prepared using in -house
technical staff or may require engineering and consulting services Once the Corrective Action Plan is
prepared and finalized KCI will
1 Notify the EEP and USACE as required by the Nationwide 27 permit general conditions
2 Revise performance standards, maintenance requirements, and monitoring requirements as
necessary and /or required by the USACE
3 Obtain other permits as necessary
4 Implement the Corrective Action Plan
26

Mitigation Plan Bear Basin Restoration Site
5 Provide the USACE a Record Drawing of Corrective Actions This document shall depict the extent
and nature of the work performed
13.0 FINANCIAL ASSURANCES
Pursuant to Section IV H and Appendix III of the Ecosystem Enhancement Program's In -Lieu Fee
Instrument dated July 28, 2010, the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
has provided the U S Army Corps of Engineers Wilmington District with a formal commitment to fund
projects to satisfy mitigation requirements assumed by EEP This commitment provides financial
assurance for all mitigation projects implemented by the program
14.0 OTHER INFORMATION
14.1 Definitions
8 -digit Catalog Unit (CU) — The USGS developed a hydrologic coding system to delineate the country into
uniquely identified watersheds that can be commonly referenced and mapped North Carolina has 54 of
these watersheds uniquely defined by an 8 -digit number EEP typically addresses watershed — based
planning and restoration in the context of the 17 river basins (each has a unique 6 -digit number), 54
catalog units and 1,601 14 -digit hydrologic units
14 —digit Hydrologic Unit (HU) — In order to address watershed management issues at a smaller scale, the
U S Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) developed methodology to delineate and uniquely
identify watersheds at a scale smaller than the 8 -digit catalog unit A hydrologic unit is a drainage area
delineated to nest in a multilevel, hierarchical drainage system. Its boundaries are defined by
hydrographic and topographic criteria that delineate an area of land upstream from a specific point on a
river, stream or similar surface waters North Carolina has 1,601 14 -digit hydrologic units
DWQ— North Carolina Division of Water Quality
EEP — The North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement combines existing wetlands restoration initiatives
(formerly the Wetlands Restoration Program or NCWRP) of the N C. Department of Environment and
Natural Resources with ongoing efforts by the N C Department of Transportation (NCDOT) to offset
unavoidable environmental impacts from transportation - infrastructure improvements.
Native vegetation community — a distinct and reoccurring assemblage of populations of plants, animals,
bacteria and fungi naturally associated with each other and their population, as described in Schafale,
M P and Weakley, A S (1990), Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina, Third
Approximation
Project Area - includes all protected lands associated with the mitigation project
RBRP - The River Basin Restoration Priorities are documents that delineate specific watersheds
(Targeted Local Watersheds) within a River Basin that exhibit both the need and opportunity for
wetland, stream and riparian buffer restoration
27

Mitigation Plan
Bear Basin Restoration Site
TLW - Targeted Local Watershed, are 14 -digit hydrologic units which receive priority for EEP planning
and restoration project funds r
USGS — United States Geological Survey
28
r�
�l
� l

Mitigation Plan
14.2 References
Bear Basin Restoration Site
Breeding, Rob. 2010 White Oak River Basin Restoration Priorities 2010 Raleigh, NC NCDENR,
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Last accessed 02/2013 at http //portal ncdenr org /c/
document _li bra ry/get_file ?uu id= 1c0b7e5a- 9617- 4a44- a5f8- df017873496b &groupld =60329
Environmental Laboratory 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report
Y -87 -1 Vicksburg, MS U S Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station
Faber - Langendoen, D , Rocchio, J , Schafale, M , Nordman, C, Pyne, M , Teague, J , Fob, T, Comer, P
2006 Ecological Integrity Assessment and Performance Measures for Wetland Mitigation
NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia
Lindenmayer, D B., and J F Franklin 2002 Conserving forest biodiversity A comprehensive multiscaled
approach Island Press, Washington, DC
Natural Resources Conservation Service 2002 Climate Information — Wetlands Retrieval for North
Carolina Last accessed 10/2012 at http //www wcc nres usda gov /ftpref /support/
climate /wetlands /nc/37133 txt
NCDENR, Ecosystem Enhancement Program 2011 Monitoring Requirements and Performance
Standards for Stream and /or Wetland Mitigation Last accessed 11/2012 at
http //portal ncdenr.org/c/ document _library/get_file ?p_l_id= 1169848 &folderld = 2288101 &nam
e =DLFE -39234 pdf
NC Natural Heritage Program 2012 Heritage Data Search Last accessed 10/2012 at
http //portal ncdenr org /web /nhp /database- search\
NCSU BAE North Carolina State University, Biological and Agricultural Engineering 2011 Method to
Determine Lateral Effect of a Drainage Ditch on Adjacent Wetland Hydrology Last accessed
11/2012 at http //www bae ncsu edu /soil _water /projects /lateral_effect html
NCSU, State Climate Office of North Carolina 2012 Climate Data for Maysville, NC
NC Wetland Functional Assessment Team 2010 NC Wetland Assessment Method (NC WAM) User
Manual, version 4 1 Last accessed 11/2012 at http //portal ncdenr org /c /document_
Iibra ry/get_file'? uuid= 76f3c58b -dab8- 4960- ba43- 45b7faf06f4c &grou pfd =38364
Peet, R K., Wentworth, TS, and White, P S 1998 A flexible, multipurpose method for recording
vegetation composition and structure Castanea 63 262 -274
Rosgen, D (1996), Applied River Morphology, 2nd edition, Wildland Hydrology, Pagosa Springs, CO
Schafale, M P and Weakley, A S 1990 Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina,
Third Approximation, NC Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh, NC
Sprecher, S W 2000 Accessing and Using Meteorological Data to Evaluate Wetland Hydrology
Headquarters, U S Army Corps of Engineers, Operations Division, Regulatory Branch
29

Mitigation Plan
Bear Basin Restoration Site
Stream Mitigation Guidelines, April 2003, US Army Corps of Engineers Wilmington District
USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service 2010 Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United
States a Guide for Identifying and Delineating Hydnc Soils, Version 7 0
USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Water and Climate Center 2012 RUSLE2 Related
Attributes Table for Onslow, North Carolina Last accessed 11/2012 at
http //soildatamart nres usda gov /Survey aspx ?County =NC133
USDA, Sod Conservation Service 1986 Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds Technical Release 55
Washington, DC Soil Conservation Service
USDA 1992 Sod Survey of Onslow County, North Carolina United States Department of Agriculture
USFWS 2012 Environmental Conservation Online System - Species by County Report Last accessed
10/2012 at. http //ecos fws gov /tess_ public/ countySearchlspeciesByCountyReport action ?fips
=37133
Young, T F and Sanzone, S (editors) 2002 A framework for assessing and reporting on ecological
condition Ecological Reporting Panel, Ecological Processes and Effects Committee EPA Science
Advisory Board Washington, DC
30

(7;
I�
l -1
Mitigation Plan Bear Basin Restoration Site
14.3 Appendix A. Site Protection Instrument
31

Mitigation Plan
32
' Y1
Bear Basin Restoration Site
_J
1
1
l
_ J
l
}
- -1
_T

110111111091011IM1i1
Do o ID: 010296830009 Type. CRP
Recorded: 02/08/2013 at 03:15:20 PM
Fee Amt: $285.00 Pape i of 9
Revenue Tax: $239.00
Onalow County NO
Rebecca L. Poilaard Reg. ofQDee�eds
BK3928 Pa 76 -%+ 84
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA CONSERVATION EASEMENT
PROVIDED PURSUANT TO
- FULL DELIVERY
MITIGATION CONTRACT
ONSLOW COUNTY
SPO File Number 67 -AW
EEP Site ID Number 95362 (Bear Basin)
_ Prepared by: Office of the Attorney General
Property Control Section
Return to: NC Department of Administration
State Property Office C_ 5 e Tom. ;
1321 Mail Service Center . ,o
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1321
THIS CONSERVATION EASEMENT DEED, made this � day of
IoCv -&Ir 2013 by Kenneth W. Jones and wife, Sue Jones Jones ("Grantor'),
whose mailing a dress is 322 Jonestown Road, Pink Hill NC 28572, to the State of North
Carolina, ( "Grantee "), whose mailing address is State of North Carolina, Department of
Administration, State Property Office, 1321 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699 -1321. The
designations of 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.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143 -214.8 et sew., the State
of North Carolina has established the Ecosystem Enhancement Program (formerly known as the
Wetlands Restoration Program) within the Department of Environment and Natural Resources
for the purposes of acquiring, maintaining, restoring, enhancing, creating and preserving wetland
and riparian resources that contribute to the protection and improvement of water quality, flood
prevention, fisheries, aquatic habitat, wildlife habitat, and recreational opportunities; and
WHEREAS, this Conservation Easement from Grantor to Grantee has been negotiated,
arranged and provided for as a condition of a full delivery contract between KCI Technologies,
Inc. and the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, to provide
stream, wetland and/or buffer mitigation pursuant to the North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources Purchase and Services Contract Number 004741.
ColiSf'rvatto"I ase-t1-lent (Both Plasm - joueq) V:!.rtf

I �
WHEREAS, The State of North Carolina is qualified to be the Grantee of a Conservation
Easement pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 121 -35; and
WHEREAS, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the North Carolina _
Department of Transportation and the United States Army Corps of Engmeets, Wilmington
District entered into a Memorandum of Agreement, (MOA) duly executed by all parties in
Greensboro, NC on July 22, 2003, which recognizes that the Ecosystem Enhancement Program
is to provide for compensatory mitigation by effective protection of the land, water and natural
resources of the State by restoring, enhancing and preservmg ecosystem functions; and
WHEREAS, the acceptance of this instrument for and on behalf of the State of North
Carolina was granted to the Department of Administration by resolution as approved by the _
Governor and Council of State adopted at a meeting held in the City of Raleigh, North Carolina, _
on the a day of February 2000, and
WHEREAS, the Ecosystem Enhancement Program in the Department of Environment
and Natural Resources, which has been delegated the authonty authorized by the Governor and
Council of State to the Department of Administration, has approved acceptance of this
instrument; and
WHEREAS, Grantor owns in fee simple certain real property situated, lying, and being
in Richlands Township, Onslow County, North Carolina (the "Property "), and being more
particularly described as that certain parcel of land containing approximately 42.40 acres,
desenbed as "Tract No 5" on plat recorded in Map Book 9, Page 35, Onslow County Registry
and being conveyed to the Grantor by deed as recorded in Deed Book 531 at Page 388 of the
Onslow County Registry, North Carolina; and -
WHEREAS, Grantor is willing to grant a Conservation Easement over the herein -
descnbed areas of the Property, thereby restricting and limiting the use of the included areas of ;
the Property to the terms and conditions and purposes hereinafter set forth, and Grantee is willing
to accept such Conservation Easement. This Conservation Easement shall be for the protection
and benefit of New River '
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, terms, conditions, and
restrictions hereinafter set forth, Grantor unconditionally and irrevocably hereby grants and
conveys unto Grantee, its successors and assigns, forever and in perpetuity, a Conservation _
Easement along with a general Right of Access.
The Easement Area consists of the following:
Conservation Easement containing a total of 11.94 acres as shown on the plat of survey entitled
"Final Plat, Conservation Easement for North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program,
Project Name: Bear Basin Non - Riparian Wetland Restoration Site, EEP Project #: 95362,
SPO #: 67 -AW," dated August 23, 2012 by James M. Gellenthin, PLS Number L -3860 and
recorded in the Onslow County, North Carolina Register of Deeds at Map Book 6c Jr Pages
I $ -
Conservation Easomcnt (113t ,ar Bashi - Jonv�) Q If 2

i
See attached "Exhibit A ", Legal Description of area of the Property hereinafter referred to as the _
i
"Easement Area'
The purposes of this Conservation Easement are to maintain, restore, enhance, construct,
- create and preserve wetland and/or riparian resources in the Easement Area that contribute to the
protection and improvement of water quality, flood prevention, fisheries, aquatic habitat, wildlife
habitat, and recreational opportunities, to maintain permanently the Easement Area in its natural
condition, consistent with these purposes; and to prevent any use of the Easement Area that will
significantly impair or interfere with these purposes. To achieve these purposes, the following
- conditions and restrictions are set forth:
I. DURATION OF EASEMENT
Pursuant to law, including the above referenced statutes, this Conservation Easement and
Right of Access shall be perpetual and it shall run with, and be a continuing restriction upon the
use of, the Property, and it shall be enforceable by the Grantee against the Grantor and against
Grantor's heirs, successors and assigns, personal representatives, agents, lessees, and licensees.
II. GRANTOR RESERVED USES AND RESTRICTED ACTIVITES
The Easement Area shall be restricted from any development or usage that would impair
or interfere with the purposes of this Conservation Easement. Unless expressly reserved as a
compatible use herein, any activity in, or use of, the Easement Area by the Grantor is prohibited
as inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation Easement. Any rights not expressly
reserved hereunder by the Grantor have been acquired by the Grantee Any rights not expressly
reserved hereunder by the Grantor, including the rights to all mitigation credits, including, but
not limited to, stream, wetland, and riparian buffer mitigation units, derived from each site within
the area of the Conservation Easement, are conveyed to and belong to the Grantee. Without
limiting the generality of the foregoing, the following specific uses are prohibited, restricted, or
reserved as indicated:
A. Recreational Uses. Grantor expressly reserves the right to undeveloped recreational
uses, including hiking, bird watching, hunting and fishing, and access to the Easement Area for
the purposes thereof.
B. Motorized Vehicle Use. Motorized vehicle use in the Easement Area is prohibited.
C. Educational Uses. The Grantor reserves the right to engage in and permit others to
engage in educational uses in the Easement Area not inconsistent with this Conservation
Easement, and the right of access to the Easement Area for such purposes including organized
educational activities such as site visits and observations. Educational uses of the property shall
not alter vegetation, hydrology or topography of the site.
D. Vegetative Cutting. Except as related to the removal of non - native plants, diseased or
damaged trees, or vegetation that destabilizes or renders unsafe the Easement Area to persons or
natural habitat, all cutting, removal, mowing, harming, or destruction of any trees and vegetation
in the Easement Area is prohibited.
Con - €cnv ztwn F-as ;inent (Rear Basm - Jones) v?.rtf

E. Industrial, Residential and Commercial Uses. All industrial, residential and
commercial uses are prohibited in the Easement Area.
F. Agricultural Use. All agricultural uses are prohibited within the Easement Area
including any use for cropland, waste lagoons, or pastureland.
G. New Construction. There shall be no building, facility, mobile home, antenna, utility
pole, tower, or other structure constructed or placed in the Easement Area.
H. Roads and Trails. There shall be no construction of roads, trails, walkways, or paving
in the Easement Area.
1. Signs. No signs shall be permitted in the Easement Area except interpretive signs
describing restoration activities and the conservation values of the Easement Area, signs
identifying the owner of the Property and the holder of the Conservation Easement, signs giving
directions, or signs prescribing rules and regulations for the use of the Easement Area.
J. Dumping or Storing. Dumping or storage of soil, trash, ashes, garbage, waste,
abandoned vehicles, appliances, machinery, or any other material in the Easement Area is
prohibited.
1{. Grading, Mineral Use, Excavation, Dredging. There shall be no grading, filling,
excavation, dredging, mining, drilling; removal of topsoil, sand, gravel, rock, peat, minerals, or
other materials.
L. Water Quality and Drainage Patterns. There shall be no diking, draining, dredging,
channeling, filling, leveling, pumping, impounding or diverting, causing, allowing or permitting
the diversion of surface or underground water in the Easement Area. No altering or tampering
with water control structures or devices, or disruption or alteration of the restored, enhanced, or
created drainage patterns is allowed. All removal of wetlands, polluting or discharging into
waters, springs, seeps, or wetlands, or use of pesticide or biocides in the Easement Area is
prohibited. In the event of an emergency interruption or shortage of all other water sources,
water from within the Easement Area may temporarily be used for good cause shown as needed
for the survival of livestock and agricultural production on the Property.
M. Subdivision and Conveyance. Grantor voluntarily agrees that no subdivision,
partitioning, or dividing of the underlying Property owned by the Grantor in fee simple ("fee')
that is subject to this Easement is allowed. Unless agreed to by the Grantee in writing, any future
conveyance of the underlying fee and the rights conveyed herein shall be as a single block of
property. Any future transfer of the fee simple shall be subject to this Conservation Easement.
Any transfer of the fee is subject to the Grantee's right of unlimited and repeated ingress and
egress over and across the Property to the Easement Area for the purposes set forth herein.
N. Development Rights. All development rights aie permanently removed from the
Easement Area and are non - transferrable.
Conservation rasernent (Be, -w fla,sin - .iori ,) v.) },f 4

O. Disturbance of Natural Features. Any change, disturbance, alteration or impairment of
the natural features of the Easement Area or any intentional introduction of non - native plants,
trees and/or animal species by Grantor is prohibited.
The Grantor may request permission to vary from the above restrictions for good cause
shown, provided that any such request is not inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation
Easement, and the Grantor obtains advance written approval from the N.C. Ecosystem
Enhancement Program, whose mailing address is 1652 Mail Services Center, Raleigh, NC
27699 -1652.
III. GRANTEE RESERVED USES
A. Right of Access, Construction, and Inspection. The Grantee, its employees and agents,
successors and assigns, are hereby granted and receive a perpetual non - exclusive easement for
access to the Easement Area over the Property at reasonable times to undertake any activities to
restore, construct, manage, maintain, enhance, and monitor the stream, wetland and any other
riparian resources in the Easement Area, in accordance with restoration activities or a long -term
management plan. Unless otherwise specifically set forth in this Conservation Easement, the
rights granted herein do not include or establish for the public any access rights.
B. Restoration Activities. These activities include planting of trees, shrubs and herbaceous
vegetation, installation of monitoring wells, utilization of heavy equipment to grade, fill, and
prepare the soil, modification of the hydrology of the site, and installation of natural and
- manmade materials as needed to direct in- stream, above ground, and subterraneous water flow.
C. Signs. The Grantee, its employees and agents, successors or assigns, shall be permitted
to place signs and witness posts on the Property to include any or all of the following: describe
the project, prohibited activities within the Conservation Easement, or identify the project
boundaries and the holder of the Conservation Easement.
D. Fences. The Grantee, its employees and agents, successors or assigns, shall be permitted
to place fencing on the Property to restrict livestock access. Although the Grantee is not
responsible for fence maintenance, the Grantee reserves the right to repair the fence, at its sole
discretion.
IV. ENFORCEMENT AND REMEDIES
A. Enforcement. To accomplish the purposes of this Conservation Easement, Grantee is
allowed to prevent any activity within the Easement Area that is inconsistent with the purposes
of this Easement and to require the restoration of such areas or features in the Easement Area
that may have been damaged by such unauthorized activity or use. Upon any breach of the terms
of this Conservation Easement by Grantor, the Grantee shall, except as provided below, notify
the Grantor -in writing of such breach and the Grantor shall have ninety (90) days after receipt of
such notice to correct the damage caused by such breach. If the breach and damage remains
uncured after ninety (90) days, the Grantee may enforce this Conservation Easement by bringing
appropriate legal proceedings including an action to recover damages, as well as injunctive and
other relief. The Grantee shall also have the power and authority, consistent with its statutory
authority: (a) to prevent any impairment of the Easement Area by acts which may be unlawful
Con ervattoi) Fa5epient (13car basil) - €onest v2.rt

or in violation of this Conservation Easement; (b) to otherwise preserve or protect its interest in
the Property; or (c) to seek damages from any appropriate person or entity. 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 is or would irreversibly or
otherwise materially impair the benefits to be derived from this Conservation Easement, and the
Grantor and Grantee acknowledge that the damage would be irreparable and remedies at law
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,
B. Inspection. The Grantee, its employees and agents, successors and assigns, have the
right, with reasonable notice, to enter the Easement Area over the Property at reasonable times
for the purpose of inspection to determine whether the Grantor is complying with the terms,
conditions and restrictions of this Conservation Easement.
C. Acts Beyond Grantor's Control. 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 Easement Area caused by third parties, resulting from causes beyond the Grantor's control,
including, without limitation, fire, flood, storm, and earth movement, or from any prudent action
taken in good faith by the Grantor under emergency conditions to prevent, abate, or mitigate
significant injury to life-, or damage to the Property resulting from such causes.
D. Costs of Enforcement. Beyond regular and typical monitoring expenses, any costs
incurred by Grantee in enforcing the terms of this Conservation Easement against Grantor,
including, without limitation, any costs of restoration necessitated by Grantor's acts or omissions
in violation of the terms of this Conservation Easement, shall be borne by Grantor.
E. No Waiver. Enforcement of this Easement shall be at the discretion of the Grantee and
any forbearance, delay or omission by Grantee to exercise its rights hereunder in the event of any
breach of any term set forth herein shall not be construed to be a waiver by Grantee.
V. MISCELLANEOUS
A. This instrument 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 invalid, the
remainder of the provisions of the Conservation Easement, and the application of such provision
to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is found to be invalid, shall not be
affected thereby.
B. Grantor is responsible for any real estate taxes, assessments, fees, or charges levied upon
the Property. 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. Upkeep of any constructed bridges, fences, or other amenities on the Property
are the sole responsibility of the Grantor. 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.
Cofnse3- adon Easemen.- (Bea( B ;Sin - Jones) Q rir 6

C. Any notices shall be sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested to the
parties at their addresses shown herein or to other addresses as either party establishes in writing
upon notification to the other
D. Grantor shall notify Grantee in writing of the name and address and any party to whom
the Property or any part thereof is to be transferred at or prior to the time said transfer is made.
Grantor further agrees that any subsequent lease, deed, or other legal instrument by which any
interest in the Property is conveyed subject to the Conservation Easement herein created.
E. The Grantor and Grantee agree that the terms of this Conservation Easement shall survive
any merger of the fee and easement interests in the Property or any portion thereof.
F. This Conservation Easement and Right of Access may be amended, but only in writing
signed by all parties hereto, or their successors or assigns, if 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 purposes of the Conservation Easement. The owner of the
Property shall notify the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in writing sixty (60) days prior to the
- initiation of any transfer of all or any part of the Property Such notification shall be addressed
to: Justin McCorkle, General Counsel, US Army Corps of Engineers, 69 Darlington Avenue,
Wilmington, NC 28403
G. 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 under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 121 -34 et seq. 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.
VI. QUIET ENJOYMENT
Grantor reserves all remaining rights accruing from ownership of the Property, including
the right to engage in or permit or invite others to engage in only those uses of the Easement
Area that are expressly reserved herein, not prohibited or restricted herein, and are not
inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation Easement. Without limiting the generality of
the foregoing, the Grantor expressly reserves to the Grantor, and the Grantor's invitees and
licensees, the right of access to the Easement Area, and the right of quiet enjoyment of the
Easement Area
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said rights and easements perpetually unto the State of
North Carolina for the aforesaid purposes
AND Grantor covenants that Grantor is seized of said premises in fee and has the right to
convey the permanent Conservation Easement herein granted; that the same is free from
encumbrances and that Grantor will warrant and defend title to the same against the claims of all
persons whomsoever.
onsell "itIon Eascinc -lit (B tr 8'&;11) - JMilesD NI,rtf 7

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Grantor has hereunto set his hand and seal, the day
and year first above written.
4e-,� _ (SEAL)
Kenneth W. Jones
5V-Q--S" (SEAL)
Sue Jones d6nes
NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF ONSLOW
I, ^ a'Notary Public in and for the County and State
aforesaid, do hereb certify that Kenneth W. Jones and wife, Sue Jones Jones, Grantor,
personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged the execution of the foregoing
instrument.
IN W S WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and Notary Seal this the
day of 2013.
N& Public V ��'� ���d► CS
My commission expires. 0. A\V
owcoo
H ,
Conservanon Eas oineot 1, "Bear Basin - lono,y) 0 of 8

Exhibit A
Conservation Easement Description
A parcel of land to be used for conservation easement purposes located on lands now or formerly
owned by Kenneth W. Jones (DB 531 Pg 388), located in Richlands Township, Onslow County,
North Carolina and being more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at a set iron pin at the intersection of the Southeasterly right -of -way line of Jesse
Williams Road (60 foot public right -of -way) and the West line of said lands owned by Kenneth
W. Jones; said point having State Plane Coordinates (NAD '83) of Northing:431134.41 and
' Eastmg.2417125.15;
Thence N 22 °59'18" E, on the said Southeasterly right -of -way line of Jesse Williams Road
\ (NCSR 1233), a distance of 364.54 feet to a point;
Thence S 26 °12'37" E a distance of 1209.57 feet to a point on the Northwesterly line of lands
a now or formerly owned by MR Hogs (DB 1687 Pg 917);
Thence S 62 °10'31" W, on the said Northwesterly line of MR Hogs lands, a distance of 721.97
feet to a point at the Southwest comer of said lands of Kenneth W. Jones;
Thence N 02 °00'29" W, on the West line of Kenneth W. Jones lands, a distance of 1087.28 feet
to the Point of Beginning.
Containing 520,207 square feet or 11.94 acres.
Point Table (Table of Coordinates)
Point
Northing
Easting
Description
1
431134 41
2417125 15
Easement Corner
2
431470.00
2417267.52
Easement Corner
3
430384.79
2417801.74
Easement Corner
4
430047.80
2417163.25
Easement Corner
t. �<illSwE';IXIIO31 L-I -%i.Ni VnL (Boar i3,isin - Jones" ,,IrCf 9

NOTES
/ •
FOUND \
IRON PIPE\
NORTHING
I THIS PLAT DOES NOT REPM5LNT A DOUNDARY SURVEY OF THE PARENT
DESCRIPTION
1
TRACTS THE PARENT TRACT BOUNDARIES ADJACENTT OTHIS EASEMENT ARC NOT
CHANGED BY THIS NAT RoUNDARY BOORMATI°4 SHOWN HEREON WAS DIFRIVED
\
THIS PLAT IS NOT SUBJECT TO THE ONSLOW COUNTY
SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS
FROM DEEDS AND MAPS OF RECORD IN ONSLOW COUNTY ALONG W NTH
MONUMENT ATION FOUND IN TI IL FIELD
431470 00
2417267 52
1 DISTANCES SHOWN ARE HOIU7ONTALGR0UND DISTANCES IN US SURVFYKEF
V
'
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED
ESMT CORNER
DATE D VISION I RSTR TO
3 AREA COMPUTED BY COORDINATE METHOD
h�
1 ESMT CORNER
4 THE BASIS OT THE MERI DIAHS Al. COORDINATLS FOR THIS PLAT IS THE
\
NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANECOORDINATF SYSTEM NORTH AMERICA' DATUM
KENNEL H W JONES
PARCE
.3
1983 MAD 0) BASED ON DIFFERENTIAL CPS OBSLRVATIONS PERFORMED I'
AUGUSTN12 At L DISTANCES AM GROUND UNLESS OTHERWISF NO TED
m
441
5 DEEDKEFERENCES ASSHOWNHEREON
�/I'\FIN
I, SVWEC TPROPIRTH SKNOWNAST- H— BER-ASRNOWNHCREON
a0
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
ONSLOW COUNTY
7 SUBJECT PROPERTIES PARTIALLY LIE N '-IN THE AREA DESIGNATED AS ZONE X
BASED O' FWERALFLOODINSURANCEMTEMAP37MMINOIPFFLCTIVENDV3
t
I REVIEW OFFICER
m
60
OF ONSLOW COUNTY CERTIFY THAT THE MAP
R NOUNDCRGROUNDUOUTYIOCATIN4PFRFORMID DURING THE COURSE OF THIS
OR PLAT WHICH THIS CERTIFICATION IS AFFIXED
SURVEY
i3
MEETS ALL STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS FOR
FAMILY LTD PA
RECORDING
9 COGRUNATES WERE DUCEDWITIIRTR CAPS
/
\
OBSITI nAt;N5 THE TIO ANA 2MEIONALACCURACY OTIERTKDERIVEIL
OB9LRN TIONS
D
S002MEMONS IZONTALFOSITMNA
92
\
%FRCIGROI
TORITIOVISRSU )VMO
TON E SCALE FA TOR -0MS SITONS ARE Nkf FRFNCED TO NAVT3S8IGtOIDD31
COMBINED SCALE ERROR � 0999889501
2`25
VIEW OFFICER GATE
<<- L 38 &0 af�
/
KPICIEN R JAMES 92gL1
FOUND
BENT PI
ELECTRIC MEMBERSHIP
2 }� CORPORATION
PARCEL / 70 -177
' 58922 29-E 565.91
— —
PIN 441301526304
D8 30T] PG 975 ,..,,.,.
EROS NO -
REM DITCH
WNFIELD SMITH JR
PARCEL 18 -130
PDT. 441301511017
DB 1672 PG 878
IWIWIIW1111WUW11N58WPgil5WW9 W01111111111W WI
Doc ID 01024342DO01
Recorded 01/11/2013 at 12 41 04 PM Amt 821 00 Page 1 of 1
0 D610M ODUDtY
Rebecca L Ro1-1 Rep
(6''�5 198
\� __
KENNETH W JONES
PARCEL / 30-176
PIN 441301813247
DO 531 PG 366
POINT TABLE
/ •
FOUND \
IRON PIPE\
NORTHING
I EASING
DESCRIPTION
1
431134 41
\
ESMT CORNER
2
431470 00
2417267 52
ESMT CORNER
V
430384 79
241 7801 74
ESMT CORNER
4
430047 80
h�
1 ESMT CORNER
\
T
KENNEL H W JONES
PARCE
.3
1y
m
441
6� �ya6
�/I'\FIN
a0
I JAMES M. GELLENTHIN HEREBY DECLARE THAT THIS MAP WAS DRAWN
_
UNDER MY SUPERVISION FROM A SURVEY MADE UNDER MY SUPERVISION.LppTFF1W"'1%
t
v, r
60
�$
'
PMCISK3N AS CALCURATED IS GREATER THAN 1110000 THAT e '4y
AND HAS�n'- ��GSS /O
SM11H ANN POWERS
i3
FAMILY LTD PA
PAR Ckl / 18 -131
PIN. 01
1082
/
\
OB 1344 PC 504
92
\
V
2`25
5441631'W
<<- L 38 &0 af�
0 50 POWER LINE EASEMENT
FOR JONES -ONSLOW
FOUND
BENT PI
ELECTRIC MEMBERSHIP
2 }� CORPORATION
1"6
�F
NPRIHICAROLIMA REGISTRATION NUMBER L- 3860 -, O J�(.•
FOUND
MIL DISK
FOUND
- I(ENNE7H p'��
PARCEL / 30-176
5 PIN "1301813247
°
SENT PIN
DO 531 PC 385
59
CONTROL CORNER
-FOUND IRON PIPE
EXISTING PK NAIL
c�
0\
�Op
U
S
)
u
5/8" REBAR SET w/ 32$ ALUMINUM
EROS NO -
REM DITCH
WNFIELD SMITH JR
PARCEL 18 -130
PDT. 441301511017
DB 1672 PG 878
IWIWIIW1111WUW11N58WPgil5WW9 W01111111111W WI
Doc ID 01024342DO01
Recorded 01/11/2013 at 12 41 04 PM Amt 821 00 Page 1 of 1
0 D610M ODUDtY
Rebecca L Ro1-1 Rep
(6''�5 198
\� __
KENNETH W JONES
PARCEL / 30-176
PIN 441301813247
DO 531 PG 366
POINT TABLE
POINT
NORTHING
I EASING
DESCRIPTION
1
431134 41
1 241712515
ESMT CORNER
2
431470 00
2417267 52
ESMT CORNER
3
430384 79
241 7801 74
ESMT CORNER
4
430047 80
2417163 25
1 ESMT CORNER
11CINITY MAF
(NOT TO SCALE)
--*FOUND
PIN
GRAPHIC SCALE
200 0 100 200 400
I INCH - 200 FEET
A
\ \IFGWND
ONE COON
CONTROL .y�e01
58991 29 "E 920 00'
S84W29 E
\
205,68
CEOARON 02899)
431 is 26
R
8 m
CSF 0 99989108
\
T
KENNEL H W JONES
PARCE
.3
1y
m
441
6� �ya6
�/I'\FIN
a0
I JAMES M. GELLENTHIN HEREBY DECLARE THAT THIS MAP WAS DRAWN
_
UNDER MY SUPERVISION FROM A SURVEY MADE UNDER MY SUPERVISION.LppTFF1W"'1%
t
THAT THE BOUNDARIES NOT SURVEYEDARECLEARLY INDICATED A TKATTVIE A
INFORMATION
'
PMCISK3N AS CALCURATED IS GREATER THAN 1110000 THAT e '4y
AND HAS�n'- ��GSS /O
-
i3
DOES REPRESENT AN OFFICIAL BOUNDARY SURVEY /'!
PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE WTIN G S 47 30 AS AMENDED
55696 31 "W
MY OPIG SIGNATURE, REGISTRATIOTNUMK�DS E� `
Q
\
\^\
s'-'
E
95,5
4TH OF LARY 2013 G
SEAL }�
V
2`25
5441631'W
<<- L 38 &0 af�
\'005vp
14345
\ `T
1"6
LEGEND
NPRIHICAROLIMA REGISTRATION NUMBER L- 3860 -, O J�(.•
JAMES M GELLENTHIN ;;�5�.��SUE,• ��
,L+j9 3�
CONTROL CORNER
-FOUND IRON PIPE
EXISTING PK NAIL
c�
0\
�Op
N 431562 83
E 2420073 46
EXISTING IRON
)
O
5/8" REBAR SET w/ 32$ ALUMINUM
41p1M1 1111/
��` nWP•A
A4 NALO` FARMS LUC
A
CAP WITH STATE SEAL
CALCULATED POINT
I JMAE$M GELLENTIBIN PROFESSIONAL LANG $URVEYOTi NO L.] R
Ci ii
CERTIFY TO THE FOLLOtMNG AS REOUIRED IN G S 47J (FX11) P A Q•'•
QL lam%
PARQl 31F1742
.•A �FESS`/Q.
THAT THE SURVEY IS OF ANOTHER CATEGORY $UCH AS TH •4A
!�
PIN 18 3 0 4 8 0819 7
Pc 40
\ FOUND
EXISTING MONUMENT
RECOm ARCELS ACOU ORD R
9r1
�A DB 3872
\ PINCHED
PIPE
NEW CONSERVATION EASEMENT FOR
v
°TM mmo of 191 a SEAL
m u
�Lo
O
i
HAL50 FAT015 LlC
PARCEL 30 -174 2
flN 441301
4
C 40
OB 3872 PG b
\
$
NOR C PAOLTNA R GISTRATION NUMBER L -386 y 1�•�
JAMES M GELLENTHIN
/
x
--*FOUND
PIN
GRAPHIC SCALE
200 0 100 200 400
I INCH - 200 FEET
A
CONTROL .y�e01
CORNER
IRON PIPE .�
NCGS MON
N 430711 32\ }A
E2418419 74 ��O
CEOARON 02899)
431 is 26
R
CSF 0 99989108
T
5
m
6� �ya6
I JAMES M. GELLENTHIN HEREBY DECLARE THAT THIS MAP WAS DRAWN
_
UNDER MY SUPERVISION FROM A SURVEY MADE UNDER MY SUPERVISION.LppTFF1W"'1%
t
THAT THE BOUNDARIES NOT SURVEYEDARECLEARLY INDICATED A TKATTVIE A
INFORMATION
'
PMCISK3N AS CALCURATED IS GREATER THAN 1110000 THAT e '4y
AND HAS�n'- ��GSS /O
-
i3
DOES REPRESENT AN OFFICIAL BOUNDARY SURVEY /'!
PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE WTIN G S 47 30 AS AMENDED
MY OPIG SIGNATURE, REGISTRATIOTNUMK�DS E� `
Q
4TH OF LARY 2013 G
SEAL }�
V
<<- L 38 &0 af�
iY v,L �0 I
1"6
LEGEND
NPRIHICAROLIMA REGISTRATION NUMBER L- 3860 -, O J�(.•
JAMES M GELLENTHIN ;;�5�.��SUE,• ��
•
EXISTING PK NAIL
••••;P7111 (jE� -` ���E`�
FIELD DNCH
Q
EXISTING IRON
)
O
5/8" REBAR SET w/ 32$ ALUMINUM
41p1M1 1111/
��` nWP•A
A4 NALO` FARMS LUC
A
CAP WITH STATE SEAL
CALCULATED POINT
I JMAE$M GELLENTIBIN PROFESSIONAL LANG $URVEYOTi NO L.] R
Ci ii
CERTIFY TO THE FOLLOtMNG AS REOUIRED IN G S 47J (FX11) P A Q•'•
QL lam%
PARQl 31F1742
.•A �FESS`/Q.
THAT THE SURVEY IS OF ANOTHER CATEGORY $UCH AS TH •4A
!�
PIN 18 3 0 4 8 0819 7
Pc 40
❑
EXISTING MONUMENT
RECOm ARCELS ACOU ORD R
9r1
�A DB 3872
NEW CONSERVATION EASEMENT FOR
v
°TM mmo of 191 a SEAL
m u
�Lo
O
THE STATE OF NC ECOSYSTEM
- r L -3860 �,
ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM
_Z
y
P O B
POINT OF BEGINNING
NOR C PAOLTNA R GISTRATION NUMBER L -386 y 1�•�
JAMES M GELLENTHIN
- OHW
OVERHEAD WARES
FOUND
wV4N4OIOIONNN`V
ON PIPE
--*FOUND
PIN
GRAPHIC SCALE
200 0 100 200 400
I INCH - 200 FEET

Mitigation Plan
14.4 Appendix B. Baseline Information Data
43
Bear Basin Restoration Site

Mitigation Plan
44
_J
r
J
Bear Basin Restoration Site
/
1
l /
l
1

Mitigation Plan
USACE Wetland Determination Forms
45
Bear Basin Restoration Site

Mitigation Plan
46
Bear Basin Restoration Site

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site d3 "', n U City/County' RichL•oyw,� Sampling Date
ApplicanUOwner /I ` "� i�1iJ� -• ��r / State Sampling Point D01 ( 14 112. N&J
Investigator(s) s S %,CGS Section Township, Range
Landform (hrllslope terrace, etc) FIAT Local relief (concave, convex, none) f 1 9 it Slope ( %)
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) L-R R T Lat 31� ° 5- 3`7• /FJ N Long '77 G 361 ? 41 SG PJ Datum
Soil Map Unit Name "' !� r f ' -, Y,,, - NWI classification
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes f No (If no, explain in Remarks )
Are Vegetation ✓ , Sal—, or Hydrology ✓ significantly disturbed) Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophyttc Vegetation Present? Yes No � is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No t-,-
within a Wetland? Yes No �
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks
L` /J /�1 ?Jc di: /_) l�5 rJ� /?i:• „�tcl illy /✓ /� 11-cel) /v —,0,1
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators.
Secondary
Indicators (minimum of two recurred)
Primary Indicators (nroinmuin of one is recurred, check all that apply) —
Surface Soil Cracks (138)
_ Surface Water (Al) _
Aquatic Fauna (3 13) —
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
_ High Water Table (A2) _
Marl Deposits (B16) (LRR U) _
Drainage Patterns (1310)
^ Saturation (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) _-
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (B1) _
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) _
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 (84)
Thin Muck Surface (C7) _
Geomorphic Position (132)
µ Iron Deposits (35)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks) —
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—
FAC- Neutral Test (135)
Water - Stained Leaves (139)
_
Sphagnum moss (138) (LRR T. U)
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches)
Water Table Present? Yes No �� Depth (inches) > IR'
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No �✓
(includes capillary fringed _
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 (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants Sampling Point
= Total Cover
50% of total cover 20% of total cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size )
1
2
3
4
5 Hydrophytic
=Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover 20% of total cover Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region —Version 2 0
1
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size
OA Cover Species Status
Number of Dominant Species
1
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (A)
Total Number of Dominant
2
3
Species Across All Strata (B)
4
Percent of Dominant Species
5
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (AB)
6
7
Prevalence Index worksheet
Total % Cover of, Multiply by
OBL species x 1 =
8
=Total Cover
50% of total cover
20% of total cover
FACW species x2=
Saolina /Shrub Stratum (Plot size )
1
FAC species x3=
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species X5=
Column Totals (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A=
2
3
4
5
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
6
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
7
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
6
3 - Prevalence Index is 53 0'
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
= Total Cover
50% of total cover
20% of total cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size
Indicators of hydnc soil and wetland hydrology must
1
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
2
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree -- Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in (7 6 cm) or
3
4
more in diameter at breast height (DBH) regardless of
5
height
Sapling/Shrub —Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in DBH and greater than 3 28 ft (1 m) tall
Herb —All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 ft tall
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3 28 ft in
6
7
8
g
10
11
height
12
= Total Cover
50% of total cover 20% of total cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size )
1
2
3
4
5 Hydrophytic
=Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover 20% of total cover Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region —Version 2 0
1

SOIL Sampling Point b p1Y 1
Profile Description (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (mast) orb
Color (moist) % Tvger Loc7 Texture Remarks
1D `/S /ter SG
at e
/n.`' ' rr
D c 01
br liij FsL
$Type C--Concentration, D =De ietion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains
2Location PL =Pore Lining, M =Matrix
Hydrlc Soil Indicators (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydnc Soils'
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Polyvalue Maw Surface (88) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
_ Histic t pipedai (A2)
_ Thin Dark Surface (39) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
_ Reduced Vencc (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, 5, T)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Solis (F20)
_ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 153B)
_ 5 em Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
_ Redox Depressions (178)
r Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
_ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All)
_ Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al 2)
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
_ Umbnc Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
_ Delta Ochne (F17) (MLRA 151)
unless disturbed or problematic
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 15DA, 1508)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
7WR=9s,trIctIve Layer (if observed)*
Type
Depth (inches)
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
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 C,e +/c l�i /!t� City /County 4)rririlRn145 % 00 516, t Sampling Date
Applicant/Owner K� r;`' � � -�'f i' S �"% -fit State //C Sampling Point A ! %-
Investigator(s) Section, Township, Range
Landform (hillslope terrace, etc Local relief (concave, convex, none) :f - " Slope
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) f / �� Lat ,' A ' 5'a ' 3 ? z5 Long r7 7 6- fn 2 5 • e�Y IAJ Datum
Sod Map Umt Name AamIs !R.n "c �r NWI classification
Are climatic ! hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ✓ No (If no, explain in Remarks)
Are Vegetation ✓ , Soil , or Hydrology ✓ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No
Are Vegetation Sod 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.
Hydrophyuc Vegetation Present? Yes No t -' Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes �' No
within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No �- -
Remarks
%ts'!•' %eLlj,,1,1,3 /S ,e ^/- t�: e �e1 /F it ) I �j/ .d�, ! -�/ .S1V r'r. 0
HYDROLOGY
Primary Indicators (minnnum of one is required check all that apply)
_ Surface Sod Cracks (B6)
_ Surface Water (At) _
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
High Water Table (A2) _
Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
_ Drainage Patterns (B10)
_ Saturation (A3) _
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
_ Water Marks (B1) _
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (62) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
, Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (B3) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Titled Sods (C6)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C0)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) _
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Geomorphic Position (132)
_ Iron Deposits (B5)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Shallow Aquitard (133)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Water - Stained Leaves (B9)
_ Sphagnum moss (08) (LRR T, U)
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches) _
Water rable Present? Yes No i,: Depth (inches)
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
(includes cap�llmy fringe) _
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 (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants Sampling Point 1"3 P4�r ;2-
= Total Cover
50% oft otal cover 20% of total cover
Woody Vine Stratum, (Plot size )
1
2
3
4
5 Hydrophytic
= Total Cover Vegetation
500/6 of total cover _ 209'° of total cover
Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region —Version 2 0
Hosciure uominanr inoicaror
uommance iesr wormsneer
Tree Stratum (Plot size )
% Cover Snecies Status
Number of Dominant Species
1
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (A)
2
Total Number of Dominant
3
Species Across All Strata (B)
4
Percent of Dominant Species
5
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (A/B)
6
7
Prevalence Index worksheet,
Total % Cover of Multiply by,
OBL species x 1 =
8
= Total Cover
50% of total cover
20% of total cover
FACW species x2=
Saolina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size )
FAC species x3=
1
FACU species x4=
UPL species x5=
Coiumn Totals (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = BIA =
2
3
4
5
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators.
6
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetahon
7
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
8
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53 0'
= Total Cover
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
500/6 of total cover
20% of total cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size �j )
i
Indicators of hydnc soil and wetland hydrology must
1 V
1 �r ,� . i
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
2
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata.
3
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in (7 6 cm) or
4
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height
Sapling/Shrub —Woody plants excluding vines, less
than 3 in DBH and greater than 3 28 ft (1 m) tall
Herb — Ali herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless
5
6
7
8
9
of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 ft tall
10
Woody vine —AII woody vines greater than 3 28 ft in
11
height
12
= Total Cover
50% oft otal cover 20% of total cover
Woody Vine Stratum, (Plot size )
1
2
3
4
5 Hydrophytic
= Total Cover Vegetation
500/6 of total cover _ 209'° of total cover
Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region —Version 2 0

SOIL Sampling Point be _' �'
Profile Description (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators )
Depth Matnx
Redox Features
finches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Type' oc Texture Remarks
0-10
/Dlf'e ' /a. ��a'
r
/or, a Cr YN-1
See.
Type C= Concentration, D= Depletlon, RM= Reduced Matrix MS= Masked Sand Grains
Location PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted )
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soll?
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface ($e) (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 O)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A B)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodptain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_, Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
_ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T. U)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 1538)
_ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U) _ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
_ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1)
_ Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
Thick Dark Surface (All 2)
_ Iron- Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T) Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Coast Prairie Redox (Al 6) (MLRA 150A) _ Umbnc Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
_ Delta Ochnc (F17) (MLRA 151)
unless disturbed or problematic
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 15M 1508)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
Piedmont Floodpiain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
` Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 1530)
_ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (If observed),
Type
Depth (inches)
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2 0 1

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site .IjeX,, /'fJ5L City /County i 1 �''1 n!/ %`7 `r /tl.<1 Sampling Date
ApplicantiOvrner f.��7 / >� ! �1 �i' ° DF ,tie- State AIL, Sampling Point
Investigator(s) �� 7 O f P r� Section, Township, Range
Landform (hdlslope, terrace etc) /fir` Local relief (conca ve, convex, none) i l %! )' Slope ( %) �� Y
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) Lat 3,� rib `i � -711, V/ —"Al Long 97 r' 3& '/,?, 12 "VJ Datum
�J
Sod Map Unit Name kr /,rc� J f .+lrs- „!g — NWI classification ti ^. /!r'
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ✓ No (If no, explain in Remarks)
Are Vegetation is Soil ­or Hydrology ✓ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No V
Are Vegetation Sod , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If heeded, explain any answers in Remarks )
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, Important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Sod Present? Yes u'l No within a Wetland? Yes No ✓
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No ✓
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators —
—� Secondary
Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required check all that apply)
_ Surface Sod Cracks (BO)
_ Surface Water (At) _
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
— Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (38)
_ High Water Table (A2) _
Marl Deposits (815) (LRR U)
_ Drainage Patterns (810)
_ Saturation (A3) _
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Moss Trim Lines (316)
Water Marks (81) r
^_
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132) —
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_„ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Sods (C6)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (CJ)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (84) _
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Iron Deposits (65)
�_
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Shallow Aquitard (03)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
_ Water - Stained Leaves (B9)
_ Sphagnum moss (DS) (LRR T, U)
Field Obser atlons
—
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches)
Water I able Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches) ' !
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth (inches) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary innge) ___
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring welt, aerial photos, previous inspections) if available
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2 0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants Sampling Point (`�P" fi
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size ) % Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (A)
Total Number of Dominant
2
x4=
3
Species Across All Strata (B)
Column Totals
4
Percent of Dominant Species
5
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (A/B)
6
7
Prevalence Index worksheet
G
Total °IV Cover of Multiply by
8
= Total Cover
50% of total cover 20% of total cover
Saplino/Shrub Stratum (Plot size )
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
= Total Cover
50% of total cover 20% of total cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size
1 &r//ai Xi a
2
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x4=
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophylic Vegetation Indicators
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophylic Vegetation
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53 0'
_ Problematic Hydrophylic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydnc soil and welland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
3
4
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in (7 6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height
Sapling /Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in DBH and greater than 3 28 ft (1 m) tall
Herb — All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 ft tall
Woody vine —All woody vines greater than 3 28 ft In
height
5
6
7
8
g
10
11
12 - — —
= Total Cover
50% oft otal cover 20% of total cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size )
1
2
3
4
5 Hydrophytic
= Total Cover Vegetation v -
50% of total cover 20% of total cover __ Present? Yes No
Remarks (If observed, list morphological adaptations below)
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region —Version 2 0

SOIL. Sampling Point j�17 w .3
Profile Description. (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators )
Depth
Matrix
Redox
Features
(inches)
Cot moist %
Color (most)
% Type'LLoc� Texture Remarks
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
)) r3
icl % ►vn
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (LRR P, S, T)
firnQ
16 2U
,'t�T ^�2. `�`�
_ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 1538)
_ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
'Type C--Concentration. D--Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains
`Location PL =Pore Lining, M =Malnx
Hydric Soil Indicators (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted )
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils°.
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
_ Hisbc Epipedon (A2)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (LRR P, S, T)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
_ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 1538)
_ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
_ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
✓" Depleted Below Dark Surface (All)
_ Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
31ndicators ofhydrophytic vegetation and
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
_ Umbnc Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
, Delta Ochnc (F17) (MLRA 151)
unless disturbed or problematic
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) _ Reduced Vertc (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
_ Sandy Redox (S5) _ Piedmont Floodpiain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6) _ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Type
Depth (inches)
/ 1
4, ' .� ) ka' ,I Lt. ^_ �" i � t� lit „
r
Hydric Soil Present? Yes I- No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2 0

Mitigation Plan
56
Bear Basin Restoration Site
_ -JI
J
1
J
�1
i
1
�J
t

Mitigation Plan
Reference Wetland
57
Bear Basin Restoration Site

Mitigation Plan
58
Bear Basin Restoration Site

1
P
1
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site t? elk, . k, All S /n,l RC %,,.6> cc LCTI G A, City /County 1rY J r` =r ✓ ) 0/154) AJ Sampling Date
Applicanvowner X-011 i r F? State _ !� 6 Sampling Point mil' J
Investigator(s) S. 5j) A V S U X1 1A /,) 7' Section, Township, Range
Landform (hdlslope, terrace, air-) p�ri `r. eel, t Local relief (concave, convex, none) ��� cXim- Slope ( %) 0-1
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) LRR r Lat �1 ay'n 55 'q(, 4" Long w O W 3( ' 25.9 " Datum
Sod Map Unit Name / Qa /I 7t _ NWI classification Prc) /,9
LJ
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes V No (if no, explain in Remarks )
Are Vegetation , Sod or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Sod 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? Y
Yes v
v'✓ N
No I
Is the Sampled Area
Hydnc Sod Present? Y
Yes v
v-' N
No w
within a Wetland? Yes t/ No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Y
Yes ✓
✓ N
No
Remarks
Rel'15 %, -,,e-z, re,,,, ,
,cf .
.r J r
rt, =- r�;, •�n� ^ mf /',o f e.r -+dte,-, f.!" 1z"
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators, Secondary Indicators (ininimum of two reouuec
Pnmary Indicators (mi nmum of one is required, check all that aonly) _ Surface Soil Cracks (88)
_ Surface Water (A1) — Aquatic Fauna (813) T Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88)
_ High Water Table (A2) _ Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U) ✓Drainage Patterns (B1o)
_ Saturation (A3) _ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) ✓ Moss Trim Lines (BIG)
_ Water Marks (B1) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) _ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
— Sediment Deposits (B2) — Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) _ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (83) _ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Sods (CG) _ Saturabon Visible on Aerial Imagery (CO)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (84) _ Thin Muck Surface (C7) _✓ Geomorphic Position (02)
_ Iron Deposits (B5) _ -- Other (Explain in Remarks) Shallow Aquitard (03)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) ✓FAC- Neutral Test (05)
Water - Stained Leaves (B9) _ Sphagnum moss (08) (LRR T, U)
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches)
Water Table Present? Yes No ✓ Depth (inches)
Saturation Presents Yes No Depth (inches) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks //1� --- -- - --___ - . _- -_- - -- __
V'ye"z -Ab/e6
- US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2 0
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches)
Water Table Present? Yes No ✓ Depth (inches)
Saturation Presents Yes No Depth (inches) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks //1� --- -- - --___ - . _- -_- - -- __
V'ye"z -Ab/e6
- US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2 0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants Sampling Point 01 1 -
Tree Stratum (Plot size 30 )
1
Absolute
%Cover
Dominant Indicator
Species? Slatus
✓ FifC
Dominance Test worksheet
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 7 (A)
7ota1 Number of Dominant
Species Across Alt Strata '7 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species r
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC ir' 0Y6 (A(B)
2 Lo 6/e /luP,�tc - t?»a5 >t�eedn 15 ✓
3 Sr�EeT
fit/ Al - LfQrlrtfll n dnC SYo�mtrfl +t <<- 5 AL
4
5
6
7
Prevalence Index worksheet
Total %Cover of Mult+Diybv'
OBL species x t =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
8
70 = Total Cover
50% of total cover 35 20% of total cover i `
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size 36 ' )
c ✓ (�GW
� S�•1 - :r�, , h',:rt • ! er e- c,���/rr�t-rrs �
2,5ty4«A7,(,06 10 A f ;,/i l3i-F/oRl-t, 20 ✓ 031,
3 So(tzllarfl {ji <��i %>>+ BhcautanY- 1/o ^erNl�+:+forr,wsrtn+ )5 r4 ew
4 �r�(,�IJc,� /p - �/c c f . "ii(R is t,• 10
5
io
F&
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators.
n✓1 _ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_ 72- Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index Is 53 0'
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydrae soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
6 T,tr ur014, Ae ehA -F)OM 10 r/tGW
7 1^Oi1\h10RSt )clyl«! S ,*Ioei(. iincYorio- 1:5 EAC12
8
30 = Total Cover
50% of total cover 20% of total cover 2/0
Herb Stratum (Plot size I hl )
1 5ruq i% A ell 3v - pf g:='n arc 1 t• 5fsr+5 � ✓" F A(-L�J
2 c i� � s> ,a ��c5 /r - C./ r fAi2g -, At 4oIjcL
_5
✓'
4:p414J
Deflnitlons of Four Vegetation Strata
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in (7 6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines less
than 3 in DBH and greater than 3 28 ft (1 m) tail
Herb -Ail herbaceous non -woody) ( poly) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 ft tall
Woody vine -Alt woody vines greater than 3 28 ft in
height
3 A X 6u5'A ihLe iAa P+,1i;tm 4nemosu+n 5 ✓ rr4err,1
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
/5 = Total Cover
50% of total cover mil• 20% of total cover 3
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size )
1
2
3
4
5 Hydrophytic
= Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover 20% of total cover Present? Yes No
Remarks (If observed, list morphological adaptations below)
i bQ
7
G9r711T�GfJ�✓ G- �6ct� .,lizfv1N+.�L(.Q1gGt.s�� -.°tv jC a
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2 0

SOIL Sampling Pant 1
or
Depth Matnx
Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (m(Ast) % Typed'
Texture Remarks
IOr?' f 60
10
01 t 0o
s�L
t 20 I or'/' ��rM 80
10 91= `ly, 26
:5 e L
() ~ r J'
O f ? e 20 C ty)
+�'f4
.5e&
i .5 C PL-
T
rV. Jr �. �L !31
C C_
T e C= Concentrati�etton, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains
'Type
Location PL =Pore Lining, M =Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators (Applicable to all
LRRs, unless otherwise noted )
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Solls
_ 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 (F1) (LRR O)
— Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside M LRA 150A, B)
j _ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplam Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Sods (F20)
_ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T. U)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 1538)
_ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Red Parent Matenal (TF2)
_ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ t cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
_ Mad (F10) (LRR U)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
A Depleted Ochnc (F11) (MLRA 151)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Iron- Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, 7j 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Coast Prauie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A) f Umbnc Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_, Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
_ Delta Ochric (FIT) (MLRA 151)
unless disturbed or problematic
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 1508)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1719) (MLRA 149A)
_ Stripped Matrix (86)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Sods (F20) (MLRA
149A, 153C, 153D)
_ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S. T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed).
Type
Depth (inches)
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ No
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2 0

Mitigation Plan
62
Bear Basin Restoration Site

Mitigation Plan
Bear Basin Restoration Site
63

Mitigation Plan
Bear Basin Restoration Site J
1
�J
1
r
64 - -
1

Mitigation Plan
FHWA Categorical Exclusion Form
65
Bear Basin Restoration Site

Mitigation Plan
66
Bear Basin Restoration Site
_1

r�
Ecosystem
PROGRAM
November 14, 2012
Mr. Tim Morris
KCI Associates of NC, PA
Landmark Center II, Suite 220
4601 Six Forks Road
Raleigh NC 27609
Subject: Categorical Exclusion
Bear Basin Wetland Restoration Project
White Oak River Basin — CU# 03030001
Onslow County, North Carolina
Contract No. 004741, RFP No. 16- 004107
Dear Mr. Morris:
Attached please find the approved Categorical Exclusion form for the subject full delivery
project. Please include a copy of the approval form in your Mitigation Plan. You may submit
your invoice for completion of the Task 1 deliverable for review and approval.
If you have any questions, or wish to discuss this matter further, please contact me at any time.
I can be reached at (910) 796 -7475, or email me at kristin.miguez(ZDncdenr.gov.
Sincerely,
Kristin E. Miguez, Project Manager
cc: Donnie Brew, FHWA
file
NCDENR
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699 -1651 / 919 -71S -0416 / www.nceep.net

Categorical Exclusion Form for Ecosystem Enhancement
Program Projects
Version 1.4
Nute: Only Appendix A should to ue submitted (along with any supporting documentation) as the
environntental dQ1,11tnent,
Part
Project
1: General •
•
Project Name:
Bear Basin Wetland Restoration Project
County Name:
Onslow County, NC
EEP Number:
95362
_
Project Sponsor: T
KCI Technologies, Inc.
Project Contact Name:
Tim Morris
Project Contact Address:
4601 Six Forks Rd, Suite 220, Raleigh, NC 27609
Pro ect Contact E -mail:
[e-mail]
EEP Project Mana er:
Kristin Mi uez
Project
For Official Use Only
Reviewed By:
`f
L
.
Date
EEP Project Manager
Conditional Approved By:
Date
For Division Administrator
FHWA
❑ Check this box if there are
outstanding issues
Final Approval By:
I
fJ/
Date
or Division Administrator
FHWA
RECEIVED
2,�' 2
NC ECOS`- S'r EF1
EN(-IANC-E *RENT PROGRAM
Version 1.4. 8/18/05

Part 2: All Projects
RegulationyQUestion Response
Coastal Zone Mana ement Act CZMA
1. Is the project located in a CAMA county?
0 Yes
❑ No
2. Does the project involve ground- disturbing activities within a CAMA Area of
El Yes
Environmental Concern (AEC)?
® No
❑ N/A
3. Has a CAMA permit been secured?
Yes
❑ No
® N/A
4. Has NCDCM agreed that the project is consistent with the NC Coastal Management
Yes
Program?
❑ No
® N/A
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act CERCLA
1. Is this a "full- delivery" project?
® Yes
❑ No
2. Has the zoning /land use of the subject property and adjacent properties ever been
❑ Yes
designated as commercial or industrial?
® No
❑ N/A
3. As a result of a limited Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or potential
❑ Yes
hazardous waste sites within or adjacent to the project area?
® No
❑ N/A
4. As a result of a Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous
❑ Yes
waste sites within or adjacent to the project area?
❑ No
® N/A
5. As a result of a Phase II Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous
❑ Yes
waste sites within the project area?
❑ No
® N/A
6. Is there an approved hazardous mitigation plan?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
National Historic Preservation Act Section 106
1. Are there properties listed on, or eligible for listing on, the National Register of
❑ Yes
Historic Places in the project area?
® No
2. Does the project affect such properties and does the SHPO/THPO concur?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
3. If the effects are adverse, have they been resolved?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real PropertV Acquisition Policies Act Uniform
Act
1. Is this a "full- delivery" project?
® Yes
❑ No
2. Does the project require the acquisition of real estate?
® Yes
❑ No
❑ N/A
3. Was the property acquisition completed prior to the intent to use federal funds?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ N/A
4. Has the owner of the property been informed:
® Yes
• prior to making an offer that the agency does not have condemnation authority; and
❑ No
• what the fair market value is believed to be?
❑ N/A
Version 1.4, 8/18/05

Part 3: Ground-Disturbing Activities
Regulation/Question Response
American Indian Religious Freedom Act AIRFA
1. Is the project located in a county claimed as "territory' by the Eastern Band of Yes
Cherokee Indians? ® No
2. Is the site of religious importance to American Indians?
Ll Yes
❑ No
® N/A
3. Is the project listed on, or eligible for listing on, the National Register of Historic
Yes
Places?
❑ No
® N/A
4. Have the effects of the project on this site been considered?
Ll Yes
❑ No
® N/A
Antiquities Act AA
1. Is the project located on Federal lands?
Yes
® No
2. Will there be loss or destruction of historic or prehistoric ruins, monuments or objects
LJ Yes
of antiquity?
❑ No
® N/A
3. Will a permit from the appropriate Federal agency be required?
LJ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
4. Has a permit been obtained?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
Archaeolo ical Resources Protection Act ARPA
1. Is the project located on federal or Indian lands (reservation)?
❑ Yes
® No
2. Will there be a loss or destruction of archaeological resources?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
3. Will a permit from the appropriate Federal agency be required?
LJ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
4. Has a permit been obtained?
LJ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
Endangered Species Act ESA
1. Are federal Threatened and Endangered species and /or Designated Critical Habitat
® Yes
listed for the county?
❑ No
2. Is Designated Critical Habitat or suitable habitat present for listed species?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ N/A
3. Are T &E species present or is the project being conducted in Designated Critical
Yes
Habitat?
® No
❑ N/A
4. Is the project "likely to adversely affect" the specie and /or "likely to adversely modify"
Yes
Designated Critical Habitat?
❑ No
® N/A
5. Does the U SFWS/N OAA- Fisheries concur in the effects determination?
Yes
(By virtue of no- response)
❑ No
❑ N/A
6. Has the USFWS /NOAH- Fisheries rendered a "jeopardy' determination?
Yes
❑ No
® N/A
Version 1.4, 8/18/05

Executive Order 13007 Indian Sacred Sites
1. Is the project located on Federal lands that are within a county claimed as "territory"
LJ Yes
by the EBCI?
® No
2. Has the EBCI indicated that Indian sacred sites may be impacted by the proposed
❑ Yes
project?
❑ No
® N/A
3. Have accommodations been made for access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred
7YeS
sites?
❑ No
® N/A
Farmland Protection Policy Act (F PA)
1. Will real estate be acquired?
Yes
❑ No
2. Has NRCS determined that the project contains prime, unique, statewide or local
® Yes
important farmland?
❑ No
❑ N/A
3. Has the completed Form AD -1006 been submitted to NRCS?
Yes
❑ No
❑ N/A
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act FWCA
1. Will the project impound, divert, channel deepen, or otherwise control /modify any
® Yes
water body?
❑ No
2. Have the USFWS and the NCWRC been consulted?
N Yes
❑ No
❑ N/A
Land and Water Conservation Fund Act Section 6
1. Will the project require the conversion of such property to a use other than public,
❑ Yes
outdoor recreation?
® No
2. Has the NPS approved of the conversion?
El Yes
❑ No
® N/A
Magnuson-Stevens FisherV Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish
Habitat
1. Is the project located in an estuarine system?
❑ Yes
® No
2. Is suitable habitat present for EFH- protected species?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
3. Is sufficient design information available to make a determination of the effect of the
El Yes
project on EFH?
❑ No
® N/A
4. Will the project adversely affect EFH?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
5. Has consultation with NOAA- Fisheries occurred?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
Migratory Bird Treaty Act MBTA
1. Does the USFWS have any recommendations with the project relative to the MBTA?
El Yes
® No
2. Have the USFWS recommendations been incorporated?
El Yes
❑ No
® N/A
Wilderness Act
1. Is the project in a Wilderness area?
El Yes
® No
2. Has a special use permit and /or easement been obtained from the maintaining
El Yes
federal agency?
❑ No
® N/A
Version 1.4, 8/18/05

Mitigation Plan
72
Bear Basin Restoration Site
L

Mitigation Plan
Jurisdictional Determination
73
Bear Basin Restoration Site

Mitigation Plan
74
� J
Bear Basin Restoration Site
i
i

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id SAW - 2012 -01391 County Onslow U S G.S Quad- Richlands
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Property Owner Kenneth Jones Agent KCI Associates of NC
Address- 322 Jonestown Road attn• Steven F. Stokes
Pink Hill, NC 28572 Address, Landmark Center II. Suite 220
4601 Six Forks Road
Raleigh, NC 27609
Property description-
Size (acres) —17 Nearest Town Richlands
Nearest Waterway Cowford Branch River Basin White Oak
USGS HUC 03030001 Coordinates 34.925626 N - 77.607253 W
Location description The property is located on the east side of Jesse Williams Road approximately 0 8 mi north of
its intersection with NC 24. near Richlands. Onslow County, North Carolina The Project Area is located in the
southwestern corner of Parcel #: 30 -176.
\ LL Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
Based on preliminary information, there may be wetlands on the above described property We strongly suggest you have
this property inspected to determine the extent of Department of the Army (DA) jurisdiction. To be considered final, a
jurisdictional determination must be verified by the Corps This preliminary determination is not an appealable action
under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process( Reference 33 CFR Part 331).
B. Approved Determination
There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described property subject to the permit requirements of
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Unless there is a change in the law or
our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification
X There are waters of the U S on the above described project area subject to the permit requirements of Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
_ We strongly suggest you have the wetlands on your property delineated. Due to the size of your property and/or our
present workload, the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner For a more timely
delineation, you may wish to obtain a consultant To be considered final, any delineation must be verified by the Corps
X The waters of the US son your project area have been delineated and the delineation has been verified by the Corps
We strongly suggest you have this delineation surveyed Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed and verified by
the Corps Once verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA jurisdiction on your
property which, provided there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied upon for a period not to
exceed five years
The waters of the U S including wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat
signed by the Corps Regulatory Official identified below on _ Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification
There are no waters of the U S , to include wetlands, present on the above described project area which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification
The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Aiea Management Act
(CAMA). You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Morehead City, NC, at (252) 808 -2808 to
determine their requirements
Pagel of 2

Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US and/or wetlands without a Department of the Army permit may C
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). If you have any questions regarding this
determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Mr. David E. Bailey at (910) 251 -4469 /
David. E. Bailey2Qusace.armv.mil.
C. Basis For Determination
The site exhibits features with Ordinary High Water. The waters on -site include an 3 unnamed tributaries (UTs) to
C_owford Branch - all Relatively Permanent Waters (RPWs) which flow via another Cowford Branch (RPW) to the New
River, a Traditionally Navigable Water.
D. Remarks
The Waters of the US were delineated by Steve Stokes (M), with changes made in the field by Dave E. Bailey
(USACE), and are approximated as the shaded areas on the attached figure entitled "Jurisdictional Tributary
Delineation Mai) for Bear Basin Non - Riparian Wetland Restoration Site". dated 8/20/2012_.
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delmeation/detennination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the
particular site identified in this request The delmeation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation
provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation
in USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources
Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in
B. above)
This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site If you object to this
determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR part 331. Enclosed you will find a
Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form If you request to appeal this -,
determination you must submit a completed RFA form to the following address
1
US Army Corps of Engineers ?
South Atlantic Division
Attn Jason Steele, Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Room IOM15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303 -8801
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for
appeal under 33 CFR part 3315, and that it has been received by the District Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP
Should you decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by December 30 2012
* *It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the District Office if you do not object to the determination in this
correspondence
Corps Regulatory Official:
Date October 31, 2012 Expiration Date October 31, 2017
Copy furnished
Joanne Steenhuis , NCDENR -DWQ, 127 Cardinal Drive Extension, Wilmington, NC 28405 (l

SMITH ANN POWERS
FAMILY LTD PA CONSERVATION
PARCEL # 18 -131 / EASEMENT
PIN: 441304610801 BOUNDARY
DB 1342 PG 594
V/1
q �k 11
O� 1
�73,/ 2.2'
CID
hcv \�
� g 2.8
�
X2.0'
WINFIELD SMITH JR
PARCEL # 18 -130
PIN: 441304511017
DB 1672 PG 678
STUDY AREA
520,200 SF
11.9 ACRES
--3.2'
l 2.0'
I
1,
z\ a
5'
2.4'
3.7'
KENNETH W JONES
PARCEL # 30 -176
PIN: 441304813247
DB 531 PG 388
3.3'
i
3.1'
JURISDICTIONAL
TRIBUTARY
CONTINUES
PAST PROJECT
r- LIMITS
3.2'
v �--- * SJ TE
J
M R HOGS
PARCEL # 30 -174.2
PIN: 441304809497
DB 1687 PG 917
* ** JD IS FOR THE EXISTING JONES * **
PROPERTY (BEAR BASIN) LABELED AS
STUDY AREA AND DOES NOT EXTEND ONTO
ADJACENT PROPERTIES
A
N VICINITY MAP
NOT TO SCALE
s
W E
S
LINEAR FEET OF JURISDICTIONAL
TRIBUTARY - 3,348'
JURISDICTIONAL
TRIBUTARY - 9,223 S.F.
(0.21 ACRES)
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 75 150 300
1 INCH = 150 FEET
.-
JURISDICTIONAL TRIBUTARY
DELINEATION MAP
FOR
BEAR BASIN NON- RIPARIAN WETLAND
RESTORATION SITE
RICHLANDS TWP, ONSLOW COUNTY
AUGUST 20, 2012 1 1" = 150' I 1 OF 1
Z KCI ASSOCIATES OF N.C.
ENGINEERS, SURVEYORS AND PLANNERS
KCI4601 SIX FORKS ROAD, SUITE 220
ASSOCIATES OF RALEIGH, NC 27609
NORTH CAROLINA PHONE [phone] * FAX [phone]
C -0764

Mitigation Plan
C
1
FEMA Floodplain Checklist
79
Bear Basin Restoration Site

Mitigation Plan
80
Bear Basin Restoration Site
i
I
1
_1
1
J
_ J
}

r�
Ecosystem
1.1.(1( :KAM
EEP Floodplain Requirements Checklist
This form was developed by the National Flood Insurance program, NC Floodplain
Mapping program and Ecosystem Enhancement Program to be filled for all EEP projects.
The form is intended to summarize the floodplain requirements during the design phase
of the projects. The form should be submitted to the Local Floodplain Administrator
with three copies submitted to NFIP (attn. State NFIP Engineer), NC Floodplain Mapping
Unit (attn. State NFIP Coordinator) and NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program.
Project Location
Name of project:
Bear Basin Wetland Restoration Project
Name if stream or feature:
N/A
County:
Onslow
Name of river basin:
White Oak
Is project urban or rural?
Rural
Name of Jurisdictional
municipality /county:
Onslow County
DFIRM panel number for
entire site:
4413
Consultant name:
KCI Technologies, Inc.
Phone number:
919- 783 -9214
Address:
4601 Six Forks Rd.
Raleigh, NC 27609
FEMA_ Floodplain _Checklist4- 23- 12.docx Page 1 of 3

Design Information
Provide a general description of project (one paragraph) Include project limits on a
reference orthophotograph at a scale of 1" = 500"
Summarize stream reaches or wetland areas according to their restoration priority
Example
Reach
Length
Priority
Wetland 1
10 0 acres
N/A
Floodplain Information
Is project located in a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA)?
C Yes E No
If project is located in a SFHA, check how it was determined:
C Redelineation
F, � Detaiiled Study
r- Limited Detail Study
F, Approximate Study
I° Don't know
List flood zone designation
Check if applies
M AE Zone
F loodway
Non - Encroachment
E None
r A Zone
(� Local Setbacks Required
No Local Setbacks Required
If local setbacks are required, list how many feet
Does proposed channel boundary encroach outside floodway /non-
encroachment/setbacks?
FEMA_Floodplam_Checklist4 -23 -12 docx Page 2 of 3

Q✓ Yes E No
Land Acquisition (Check)
F' State owned (fee simple)
f _J Conservation easment (Design Bid Build)
r Conservation Easement (Full Delivery Project)
Note if the project property is state - owned, then all requirements should be addressed to
the Department of Administration, State Construction Office (attn: Herbert Neily,
919 807 -4101
Is community/county participating in the NFIP program?
E Yes E: No
Note- if community is not participating, then all requirements should be addressed to
NFIP attn: State NFIP Engineer, 919 715 -8000
Name of Local Floodplain Administrator -
Phone Number
Floodplain Requirements
This section to be filled by designer /applicant following verification with the LFPA
r No Action
ri No Rise
r Letter of Map Revision
i Conditional Letter of Map Revision
F Other Requirements
List other requirements:
Comments:
Project is not located in a jurisdictional floodplain
Name
Title:
FEMA_Floodplam_Checklist4 -23 -12 docx
Signature
Date.
Page 3 of 3

Mitigation Plan
84
J
Bear Basin Restoration Site
J
,j
,z
y
J

i
� l
i t
Mitigation Plan
14.5 Appendix C. Mitigation Work Plan Data and Analyses
85
Bear Basin Restoration Site

Mitigation Plan
86
Bear Basin Restoration Site

Mitigation Plan
Groundwater Modeling/Hydrologic Budget
87
Bear Basin Restoration Site

Mitigation Plan
88
Bear Basin Restoration Site
_i
l
_J
�J
_J

Mitigation Plan
Bear Basin Restoration Site - Existing Conditions
Bear Basin Restoration Site
Dry Year
I Water to uts
Water Outputs
change In
Storage
Excess
Water
Wetland
Volume
1990
P
SI'
Gi
PET
So
Go
January
2.07
0.00
0.00
0.80
0.00
2.40
-1.13
0.00
0.00
February
1.86
0.05
0.00
1.25
0.05
2.40
-1.79
0.00
0.00
March
5.96
0.30
0.00
1.60
0.30
2.40
1.96
0.00
1.96
April
2.50
0.04
0.00
2.39
0.04
2.40
-2.29
0.00
0.00
May
5.95
0.10
0.00
3.84
0.10
2.40
-0.29
0.00
0.00
June
0.86
0.00
0.00
5.99
0.00
2.40
-7.53
0.00
0.00
Ju
2.21
0.00
0.00
6.82
0.00
2.40
-7.01
0.00
0.00
August
5.72
0.04
0.00
5.99
0.04
2.40
-2.67
0.00
0.00
September
0.33
0.00
0.00
4.22
0.00
2.40
1 -6.29
0.00
0.00
October
3.64
0.04
0.00
2.71
0.04
2.40
-1.47
0.00
0.00
November
3.91
0.60
0.00
1 1.15
0.60
2.40
0.36
0.00
0.36
December
1.60
0.05
0.00
1 0.90
0.05
2.40
-1.70
0.00
0.00
Annual Totals
> 9
S3
CKo
35.84
1 2.65
1 28.80
AV . Year
Water Inputs
Water Outputs
Change in
Storage
Excess
Wa*r
Wetland
Volume
1973
P
Si'
Gi
PET
So
Go
January
4.51
0.01
0.00
0.45
0.01
2.40
1.66
0.00
1.66
February
4.34
0.06
0.00
0.32
0.06
2.40
1.62
0.00
3.28
March
4.97
0.00
0.00
1.84
0.00
2.40
0.73
0.42
3.60
April
5.53
0.13
0.00
2.19
0.13
2.40
0.94
0.94
3.60
May
3.06
0.01
0.00
3.65
0.01
2.40
-2.99
0.00
0.61
June
8.70
0.64
0.00
5.48
0.64
2.40
0.82
0.00
1.43
July
3.96
0.08
0.00
5.65
0.08
2.40
-4.09
0.00
0.00
August
7.71
0.11
0.00
5.53
0.11
2.40
-0.22
0.00
0.00
September
3.70
0.39
0.00
4.43
0.39
2.40
-3.13
0.001
0.00
October
1.05
0.02
0.00
2.41
0.02
2.40
-3.76
0.00
0.00
November
1 0.47
1 0.00
0.00
1.26
1 0.00
2.40
-3.19
0.00
0.00
December
7.84
0.18
0.00
0.58
1 0.18
2.40
4.86
1.26
3.60
Annual Totals
> 9
S3
CKo
35.84
1 2.65
1 28.80
Wet Year
Water Inputs
Water Outputs
Change in
Storage
Excess
Water
Wetland
Volume
1991
P
Si'
GI
PET
So
Go
January
7.8
0.01
0.00
0.62
0.01
2.40
4.78
0.00
3.60
February
1.97
0.01
0.00
0.90
0.01
2.40
-1.33
0.00
2.27
March
5.06
0.05
0.00
1.65
0.05
2.40
1.01
0.00
3.28
April
4.45
0.26
0.00
3.07
0.26
2.40
-1.02
0.001
2.26
May
3.13
1 0.01
0.00
5.31
0.01
2.40
-4.58
0.00
0.00
June
9.39
0.48
0.00
5.19
0.48
2.40
1.80
0.00
1.80
Ju
14.35
1.51
0.00
6.29
1.51
2.40
5.66
3.86
3.60
August
9.75
0.09
0.00
5.33
0.09
2.40
2.02
2.02
3.60
September
6.65
0.16
0.00
3.83
0.16
2.40
0.42
0.42
3.60
October
2.8
0.01
0.00
2.08
0.01
1 2.40
-1.68
0.00
1.92
November
1 2.04
1 0.01
0.00
0.95
0.01
2.40
-1.31
0.00
0.62
December
1 3.04
1 0.05
0.00
0.63
0.05
2.40
0.01
0.00
0.63
Annual Totals
1 70.431
2.65
0.00 1
35.84
1 2.65
1 28.80
89

Mitigation Plan
9
8
7
a 6
d
r
C
d 5
E
'o
d
4
v
C
w
a
3
2
1
Hydrologic Budget
Existing Conditions
Growing Season
March 18 - Nov. 16
Maximum Capacity
(Ground Surface)
At
12" Below
Ground Surface
\ � I
Vill
CZP
90
dap
Bear Basin Restoration Site
1.2 n. - Jurisdictional
Boundary (12' below
ground)
3.6 n- FYI aximum
Capa itylSoil Surface
Dry Year (1990)
-w Average Year (1973)
- -r - WetYear (1991)

Mitigation Plan
Bear Basin Restoration Site - Proposed Conditions
Bear Basin Restoration Site
Dry Year
Water In uts
Water Out uts
Change in
StOra a
Excess
Water
Wetland Volume
1990
P
Si -
Gi
PET
So
Go
January
2.07
0.00
0.00
0.80
0.00
2.40
-1.13
0.00
0.00
February
1.86
0.05
0.00
1.25
0.00
2.40
-1.75
0.00
0.00
March
5.96
0.30
0.00
1.60
0.00
2.40
2.26
0.00
2.26
Apcil
2.50
004
0.00
2.39
0.00
2.40
-2.25
0.00
0.02
May
5.95
0.10
0.00
3.84
0.00
2.40
-0.19
0.00
0.00
June
0.86
0.00
0.00
5.99
0.00
2.40
-7.53
0.00
0.00
July
2.21
0.00
0.00
6.82
0.00
2.40
-7.01
0.00
0.00
August
5.72
0.04
0.00
5.99
0.00
2.40
-2.63
0.00
0.00
September
0.33
0.00
0.00
4.22
0.00
2.40
-6.29
0.00
0.00
October
3.64
0.04
0.00
2.71
0.00
2.40
-1.42
0.00
0.00
November
3.91
0.60
0.00
1.15
0.00
2.40
0.96
0.00
0.96
December
1.60
0.05
0.00
0.90
1 0.00
2.40
-1.66
0.00
0.00
Annual Totals
: as
2.65
^i
1 35.84
c,'
v;;
Av . Year
Water In uts
Water Out uts
Change in
Storage
Excess
Water
Wetland Volume,
1973
P
Si -
Gi
PET
So
Go
January
4.51
0.01
0.00
0.45
0.00
2.40
1.67
0.00
1.67
February
4.34
0.06
0.00
0.32
0.00
2.40
1.68
0.00
3.35
March
4.97
0.00
0.00
1.84
0.00
2.40
0.74
0.00
4.09
April
5.53
0.13
0.00
2.19
0.00
2.40
1.07
0.00
5.16
May
3.06
0.01
0.00
3.65
0.00
2.40
-2.98
0.00
2.18
June
8.70
0.64
0.00
5.48
0.00
2.40
1.47
0.00
3.64
July
3.96
0.08
0.00
5.65
0 -00
2.40
-4.01
0.00
0.00
August
7.71
0.1 t
0.00
5.53
0.00
2.40
-0.11
0.00
0.00
September
3.70
0.39
0.00
4.43
0.00
2.40
-2.74
0.00
0.00
October
1.05
0.02
0.00
2.41
0.00
2.40
-3.73
0.00
0.00
November
0.47
0.00
0.00
1.26
0.00
2.40
-3.19
0.00
0.00
December
7.84
0.18
0.00
0.58
0.00
2.40
5.03
0.00
5.03
Annual Totals
: as
2.65
^i
1 35.84
c,'
v;;
Wet Year
ater Inpu ts
Water Outputs
Changein
Storage
Excess
Water
Wetland VohmM
1991
P
$I ,
Gi
PET
So
Go
January
7.8
0.01
0.00
0.62
0.00
2.40
4.79
0.00
4.79
February
1.97
0.01
0.00
0.90
0.00
2.40
-1.32
0.00
3.47
March
5.06
0.05
0.00
1.65
0.00
2.40
1.06
0.00
4.53
April
4.45
0.26
0.00
3.07
0.00
2.40
-0.77
0.00
3.76
May
3.13
0.01
0.00
5.31
0.00
2.40
-4.57
0.00
0.00
June
9.39
0.48
0.00
5.19
0.00
2.40
228
0.00
2.28
July
14.35
1.51
0.00
6.29
0.00
2.40
7.17
1.64
7.80
August
9.75
0.09
0.00
5.33
0.00
2.40
2.12
2.12
7.80
September
6.65
0.16
0.00
3.83
0.00
2.40
0.59
0.59
7.80
October
2.8
0.01
0.00
2.08
0.00
2.40
-1.66
0.00
6.14
November
2.04
0.01
1 0.00
0.95
0.00
1 2.40
-1.301
0.00
4.84
December
3.04
0.05
1 0.00
1 0.63
1 0.00
1 2.40
1 0-061
0.00
4.90
Annual Totals
70.43
2.65
1 0.00
1 35.84
1 0.00
1 28.80
Mote: An increase in capacity of 0.2 feet (2.4 inches) of surface water is assumed based on the creation of microtopography during wetland restoration.
91

Mitigation Plan
9
7
76
c
-V 5
7
O
i
d
3 4
c
a
3 3
2
Hydrologic Budget
Proposed Conditions
Growing Season
March 18 -Nov. 16
Maximum Capacity
(2.4 in. Above Ground Surface)
kA
■
`l
r 12" Below
I
Ground Surface
I
I
Jan. Feb. March April May June July August Sept Oct. Nov. Dec.
92
Bear Basin Restoration Site
6.0 in - Maximum
Capacity at 2.4 inches
above soil surface
Ground Surface
1.2 in. - Junsdictional
Boundery (12" below
ground)
Dry Year (1990)
- - a Average Year (1973)
--t — — WetYear(1991)

Soil Delineation and Characterization
93

94

A detailed sods investigation at the BB was conducted by a licensed soil scientist (# 187) to determine
the extent and distribution of the hydric soils and to classify the predominate soils to the sod series
level The investigation consisted of delineating the hydric sod boundaries with pink flagging and
wooden survey stakes in accordance with the US Army Corps of Engineers, Wetland Delineation Manual
(1987) and the USDA Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States A Guide for Identifying and
Delineating Hydric Soils, Version 7 0 (2010) Areas that were identified as possible hydric soil mapping
units were surveyed at a higher intensity until the edge of the mapping unit was identified The
boundary of the hydric and non-hydric soil mapping units were then followed by continual sampling and
observations as the boundary line was identified and delineated In those areas where the boundary was
found to be a broad gradient rather than a distinct break, microtopography, landscape position, soil
textural changes, redoximorphic features, and depleted matrices were additionally considered to
identify the extent of the hydric sods
In developing a detailed sods map, several sod borings were advanced on the site in the general hydric
soil areas identified by landscape position, vegetation and slope Once the hydric soil borings were
identified, the soil scientist marked the points and established a visual line to the next auger boring
where again hydric soil conditions were confirmed by additional borings The sod scientist moved along
the edges of the mapping unit and marked each point along the line To confirm the hydric soil mapping
unit and taxonomic classification, soil borings were advanced to a depth of 50 inches The soil profile
descriptions identified the individual horizons in the topsoil and upper subsoil as well as the depth,
color, texture, structure, boundary, and evidence of restrictive horizons and redoximorphic features
Delineated hydric soils boundaries were in contrast to those mapped in the Sod Survey of Onslow
County, North Carolina The delineated hydric soil boundaries are shown in the following figure, Detailed
Sods Map
Taxonomic Classification
The predominant soils identified on the site were of the Pantego (Fine - loamy, siliceous, semiactive,
thermic Umbric Paleaquults) soil series Inclusions of the Lynchburg (Fine - loamy, siliceous, semiactive,
thermic Aeric Paleaquults) sod series were also identified The Pantego and Lynchburg series are listed
as hydric soils in Onslow County, North Carolina They are defined as hydric due to saturation for a
significant period during the growing season These two soils are listed as hydric on the federal, state
and local lists The Pantego and Lynchburg series are also listed by the Natural Resources Conservation
Service (NRCS) as hydric sods
" Profile Description
\} The Pantego series is described as very deep, very poorly drained, moderately permeable sods typically
found on uplands They are formed in moderately fine textured sediments with slopes ranging from 0 to
1 percent The Lynchburg series is described as very deep, somewhat poorly drained, moderately
permeable soils found on uplands They are formed in moderately fine textured sediments with slopes
of less than 2 percent These sods are very strongly acidic or strongly acidic throughout unless the
surface has been limed
95

Typical Pedon Description of the Pantego mapping unit
PANTEGO SERIES
TAXONOMIC CLASS: Fine - loamy, siliceous, semiactive, thermic Umbric Paleaquults
TYPICAL PEDON: Pantego loam -- cultivated field (Colors are for moist soil unless otherwise stated )
Ap - -O to 10 inches, black (10YR 2/1) loam, weak fine granular structure, very friable, many fine roots,
very strongly acid, gradual wavy boundary (0 to 12 inches thick)
A--10 to 18 inches, very dark gray (10YR 3/1) loam, weak fine granular structure, friable, very strongly
acid, clear smooth boundary (4 to 14 inches thick)
Bt - -18 to 27 inches, very dark gray (10YR 3/1) sandy clay loam, weak fine subangular blocky structure,
friable, few faint clay films on faces of peds and in pores, very strongly acid, gradual wavy boundary (0
to 18 inches thick)
Btgl - -27 to 42 inches, gray (10YR 5/1) sandy clay loam, few fine and medium distinct mottles of
brownish yellow (10YR 6/6); weak fine and medium subangular blocky structure, friable; slightly sticky,
few faint clay films on faces of peds, very strongly acid, gradual smooth boundary
Btg2 - -42 to 55 inches, gray (10YR 6/1) sandy clay loam, few medium and coarse distinct mottles of
yellowish brown (10YR 5/6), weak fine subangular blocky structure, friable, slightly sticky, few faint clay
films on faces of peds, very strongly acid, gradual wavy boundary
Btg3 - -55 to 65 inches, gray (10YR 6/1) sandy clay loam, weak coarse subangular blocky structure, friable,
few faint clay films on faces of peds, very strongly acid (Combined thickness of the Btg horizons is 30 to
more than 60 inches )
TYPE LOCATION: Pitt County, North Carolina, 1/2 mile south of Winterville, North Carolina, on Highway
11, 100 feet west from road
RANGE IN CHARACTERISTICS: Solum thickness is greater than 60 inches The soil is strongly acid, very
strongly acid, or extremely acid except where the surface has been limed Some pedons have an Oa
horizon that has hue of 10YR, value of 2 or 3, and chroma of 1, or it is neutral and has value of 2 It is less
than 8 inches thick
The A or Ap horizon has hue of 10YR or 2 5Y or is neutral, value of 2 or 3, and chroma of 0 to 2 It is
loamy fine sand, loamy sand, fine sandy loam, sandy loam, loam, or mucky analogues of these textures
Some pedons have an Eg horizon that has hue of 10YR or 2 5Y or is neutral, value of 4 to 6, and chroma
of 0 to 2 It is loamy sand, loamy fine sand, sandy loam, fine sandy loam, or loam Some pedons have a
BEg horizon that has hue of 10YR or 2 5Y, value of 4 or 6, and chroma of 1 or 2 It is loam, sandy loam,
fine sandy loam, or sandy clay loam
The Bt horizon, where present, has hue of 10YR or 2 5Y, value of 3, and chroma of 1 or 2 It has the same
textures as the Btg horizon The Btg horizon has hue of 10YR to 5Y, value of 4 to 7, and chroma of 1 or 2
96

with few to common mottles of higher chroma The Btg horizon is sandy clay loam, sandy loam, sandy
clay, or clay loam, fine sandy loam, or sandy loam Some pedons have a BCg horizon that has hue of
10YR or 2 5Y, value of 4 to 7, and chroma of 1 or 2. It is sandy clay loam, clay loam, sandy clay, sandy
loam, or fine sandy loam
The Cg horizon, where present, has hue of 10YR or 2 5Y, value of 5 to 7, and chroma of 1 or 2 with
higher chroma mottles It is sandy clay loam, clay loam, sandy loam, fine sandy loam, loamy fine sand,
fine sand, loamy sand, or sand
Typical Pedon Description of the Lynchburg mapping unit
LYNCHBURG SERIES
TAXONOMIC CLASS: Fine - loamy, siliceous, semiactive, thermic Aeric Paleaquults
TYPICAL PEDON: Lynchburg loamy fine sand -- cultivated (Colors are for moist soil )
Ap - -O to 6 inches, very dark gray (10YR 3/1) loamy fine sand, weak medium granular structure, very
friable, common fine roots, few medium roots, very strongly acid, clear smooth boundary (3 to 11
inches thick)
E--6 to 10 inches, light olive brown (2 5Y 5/4) loamy fine sand, weak medium subangular blocky
structure, very friable, common fine roots, few fine pores, common medium distinct dark gray (10YR
4/1) iron depletions, very strongly acid, clear smooth boundary (0 to 10 inches thick)
Bt - -10 to 17 inches, light olive brown (2 5Y 5/4) sandy clay loam, weak medium subangular blocky
structure; friable, common fine roots, few fine pores, few faint clay films on faces of some peds,
common medium distinct light brownish gray (2 5Y 6/2) iron depletions and many medium distinct
yellowish brown (10YR 5/6), and few fine medium prominent red (2 5YR 4/8) masses of oxidized iron,
very strongly acid, clear wavy boundary
Btgl - -17 to 30 inches, light brownish gray (2 5Y 6/2) sandy clay loam, weak medium subangular blocky
structure, friable, few fine roots, few fine pores, common faint clay films on faces of some peds, many
medium prominent yellowish brown (10YR 5/6) and common medium prominent red (2 5YR 4/6)
masses of oxidized iron, very strongly acid, gradual smooth boundary.
Btg2 - -30 to 65 inches, gray (10YR 6/1) sandy clay loam, weak medium subangular blocky structure,
friable, few fine roots, common faint clay films on faces of peds; many medium prominent yellowish
brown and many medium prominent red (2 5YR 4/8) masses of oxidized iron, very strongly acid, gradual
smooth boundary
Btg3 - -65 to 80 inches, gray (10YR 5/1) clay, weak medium subangular structure, firm, few fine roots, few
faint clay films on faces of peds, many medium prominent strong brown (7 5YR 5/8) and few fine
prominent red (2 5YR) masses of oxidized iron and few medium faint greenish gray (5BG 6/1) iron
depletions, very strongly acid (Combined thickness of the Bt horizons are more than 40 inches )
97

J
TYPE LOCATION: Colleton County, South Carolina, 3,000 feet southwest of junction of U S Highway 21
and Seaboard Coastline Railroad in Ruffin, 4 southwest of junction of U S Highway 21 and South
Carolina Secondary Road 272, 100 feet north of U S Highway 21
RANGE IN CHARACTERISTICS: Solum thickness is 60 to more than 80 inches Depth to bedrock is more
than 6 feet Content of pebbles range from 0 to 10 percent by volume The soil is strongly acid, very
strongly acid, or extremely acid except where the surface has been limed
Ap horizon or A horizon (where present) has a hue of 10YR or 2 5Y, value of 2 to 5, and chroma of 1 to 2,
or is neutral with value of 2 to 5 It is sand, fine sand, loamy sand, loamy fine sand, sandy loam, fine
sandy loam, or loam
The E horizon has a hue of 10YR or 2 5Y, value of 4 to 7, chroma of 1 to 4 It is sand, fine sand, loamy
sand, loamy fine sand, sandy loam, fine sandy loam, or loam Redoximorphic features (where present)
have masses of oxidized iron in shades of red, yellow, or brown and iron depletions in shades of brown,
yellow, olive, or gray
The Bt horizon has a hue of 10YR or 2 5Y, value of 4 to 6, and chroma of 3 to 8 It is sandy clay loam, but
ranges to sandy loam, fine sandy loam, loam or clay loam The particle size control section contains less
than 30 percent silt Redoximorphic features (where present) have masses of oxidized iron in shades of
red, yellow, or brown and iron depletions in shades of brown, yellow, olive, or gray
The Btg horizon has a hue of 10YR to 5Y, value of 4 to 7, chroma of 1 to 2, or is neutral with value of 4 to
7 It is sandy loam, fine sandy loam, loam, sandy clay loam, or clay loam Some pedons are sandy clay or
clay at a depth of 40 inches or more Redoximorphic features (where present) have masses of oxidized
iron in shades of red, yellow, or brown and iron depletions in shades of brown, yellow, olive, or gray
The BCg horizon has a hue of 10YR to 5Y, value of 4 to 7, chroma of 1 or 2, or is neutral with value of 4 to
7 It is sandy loam, fine sandy loam, loam, sandy clay loam, clay loam, sandy clay, or clay Redoximorphic
features (where present) have masses of oxidized iron in shades of red, yellow, or brown and iron
depletions in shades of brown, yellow, olive, or gray
98

K C I
ASSOCIATES VP SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
MOM CAMOUw VA
Client: KCI Associates of North Carolina, P A Dale: September 12.2011
Project: Near Basin Wetland Restoration Site Project k: 20110639P•WO 01
Ceaaty: Onslow State: NC
Location: US IMY 258 Site/Lo1: Boring t 23
Soil Series: Parilm
Sell (lassilicalion: 1 ine- loamy. stlwcous, semiactive. Ihemiic Umbrtc Pal aguults
AW'r: >60 SIM': 0-12 Slope: 0 -2% Aspect:
Elevation: DritbtW: Very Poorly Drained Permeability: Moderate
Veltrintlon: Corn
lleriap terminated at 60 laehes
COMMENTS
The Pantego series consists of very deep, very poorly drained soils fwmcd in thick loamy deposits in nearly level and slightly dcpressional areas
of the Southern Coastal Plain and Atlantic Coast Flatwoods
This Pantego series is a drained hydric soil by ditching.
The Pantego soil is porW d to very slow woolf and the seasonally high water table is at w near the surface during writ
seasons, typically between 0 -12 inches.
DESCRIBED BY
DATE 9/12MII

KC1 CI
NORI11 t.UbLX.w FA
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Client: KCI Associates of North Carolina, P. A. _ Dale: September 12. 2011
Project: Bear Basin Wetland Restoration Site Project q: 20110659P -W(1 01
County: Onslow State: NC
Location: US HW Y 258 Site/Lot: Boring d 24
Soil Series: Pantcgo
Soil Clasri/fead": Fine -loamy, sdiccous, serriactive. thermic Umbric Paleaquiths
Awr: 20- SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 0-29* Aspect:
Ekvatiun: Drainage: Very Poorly Drained Permeability: Moderate
vegetation: Corn
Borlep terminated at 60 Inches
FIORITON
DEM(H0IN)
MATRIX
MOM.r.S
TEXTURE
%MUC tJRE
BOUNDARY
NOTES
Ap
0-I I
IOYR3/1
fsl
If r
mfr
w
FIC
11-14
I OYR 6/2
sl
I fsbk
mfr
cw
Bl 1
14 -30
IOYR 6JI
I OYR 6d6c2d
scl
I msbk
mfr
gw
HI R2
30-42
IOYR 6/1
I OYR 516c2d
scl
_msbk
mfr
w
Big3
1 42.60
10YR 511
I OYR 516-2(!
scl
Icsbk
mfr
tending to masrive
7 SYR Sik2
COMMENTS
The Pantego sencs consists of very deep, very poorly drained soils formed in thick loamy deposits in dearly level and slightly depressional artta
of the Southern Coastal Plain and Atlantic Coast Flatwoods.
This Pantego series is a drained hydne sod by ditching
The Pantego soil is ponde-d to very slow runoff and the s(:asonally high Hater table is at or near the surl'in:e during %yet
seasons. typically between 0-12 inches.
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE q /I'!`011

mmmmmmmm-410�
------ dh�
mmmmrd �
KCI
ASSOCIATES OP
Nam CANOILVA, 111
(:Ilene: KCI Associates of North Carolina P.A
Project: Bear Basin WMani Restoration Site
Cously: Onslow
Location: US IIWY 258
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Dote: Seplcmber 12.24M
I
Project N: 20110659P-WO 01
State: NC
Sitell.ot: Boring 1137
Soil series: Panted
Soil Classirwalioa: Fine - loamy, siliceous, semtactive, thermic Umbrc Palaquuhs
AWT: 33' S1IWT: 0 -12' Slope: 0-1% aspect:
Mmmiw: Dtaisage: Very Poorly Drained Penpeability: - Moderate
Vegetation: Corn
Borings terminated at 60 Inches
iIORIZON
DUPrll(IN)
MATRIX
morim.s
1EX111RF.
STRUC -rI1RE
CONSlS71MF
BOUNDARY
NOTES
Ap
0 -10
IDYR 3A
fsl
I Ily
inli
a
Fg
10-12
IOYR 62
W
I Isbk
mfr
cw
Bt I
12.18
IDYR 5/2
IDYR 51(w.2d
sl
Ifsbk
mfr
gw
18 -21
IDYR 62
IDYR 96c2d
scl
2msbk
mfr
9W
4/8c2
Bt
21.33
IOYR 6/1
R 4""
scl
2msbk
mfr
w
Bt 4
33 48
IDYR 62
r25YR
R 614c2t
scl
Imsbk
mfr
w
Ht
48.60
IDYR 6/2
R IV -Ic2d
A
Imsbk
mfr
COMMENTS
The Pantego sores consists of very deep, very poorly drained sods forted in thick- loamy deposits in nearly Idwel and slightly depressional arras
of the Southern Coastal Plain and Atlantic Coast Flatwrmds.
This Pantego sertum is a drained hydric soil by ditching.
fhe Pantego sod is pond ed to very slow runriff and du-, seasonally high water table is at or near the surface duting wet
seasons, typically bemeen 0 -12 inches
DESCRIBED BY:
DATI: 91152011

KCI
ASSOCIATES OF
Noffni CAMLM PA
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Client ICI Associates of North Carolina, P A Dole: September 12, 2011
Project, Bear Basin Wetland Kestoranon Site Project H: 2011065911-WO 01
County. Onslow State. NC
Location US HW Y 253 She /Lot: Boring p 12
Soil Series Pantego,
Soil Classification. Fine -loamy siliceous semincine thermte Umbrie Paleaquults
AMT. 36" SHRT: 0-12' Slope 0-1% Aspect:
Elevation Drainage: Very Poorly Drained Permeability- Moderate
Vegetation: Corn
Borings terminated at 60 Inches
COMMCNTS
The Pantego sates consists of vety deep, %cry poorly drained soils formed in thick loamy deposits in nearly level and slightly depresstonal areas
of the Southern Coastal Plain and Atlantic Coast Flatwoods
r his Pantego series is a drained hydric sot by ditching.
The Pantego soil is ponded to very slow nmoff and the seasonally high water table is at or near the surface during wet
seasons typacall) between 0-12 inches
DESCRIBI D BY
DA 11, 9/15/2011
�y",
"P.��®
COMMCNTS
The Pantego sates consists of vety deep, %cry poorly drained soils formed in thick loamy deposits in nearly level and slightly depresstonal areas
of the Southern Coastal Plain and Atlantic Coast Flatwoods
r his Pantego series is a drained hydric sot by ditching.
The Pantego soil is ponded to very slow nmoff and the seasonally high water table is at or near the surface during wet
seasons typacall) between 0-12 inches
DESCRIBI D BY
DA 11, 9/15/2011

.K�C�j
ASSOCIATES Of SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
P40M r.wiv. M
Cheat: KCl Associates of North Carolina, P A Date: September 12, 2011
Project: Bow Basin Wetland Restoration Site Project M: 20110659P -WO 01
Coaaty: Ottslow Slate: NC
t.oatioa: us MY Y 258 SitetLel: Boring p 30
Soil Series: Pantego
Soil chmiAeadoa: Firte -loamy. stliceous, semiactivc. Ihcrmic Umbric Pakaquults
%RT: 31' SIIWT: 0 -12" Slope: 0-1% Aswt:
f.Ievatinn: Drainage. Very Poorly Dritned Peroeability: Moderalely slow
Vegetation: Corn
Borings teratiamed at 61) IacYes
COMMENTS:
The Pantego series consists of very deep, very poorly drained soils formed in thick loamy deposits in nearly level and slightly depressional areas
of the Southern Coastal Plain and Atlantic Coast Flatwoods.
This Pantego series is it drained hydric soil by ditching.
The Pantego soil is ponded to very slow runoff and the seasonally high water table is at or new the surface during wet
seasons. typically betwecn 0-12 itches. 1'
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: 9/15/2011

GEMMEMEM-0�
MMMMW411�
GIWMWW&�
MMMMMIO�
WMMMMMAI�
KCI
ASSOCIATES OF
PMR1 (AWtM& FA
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Client. KCI Associates of Nonh Carolina. P A_ Date: September 12.2011
Project: Bear Basin Wetland Restoration Site Project 0. 10110659P -WO 01
County onslow Stale: NC
t.oeutian: USHWY258 Site/Lot: Bormg42
Soil Screw Lynchburg Variant
Soil Ctamifrcation. _Fine-loamy siliceous, subactive. thermic AIYic Palcagiiults
AWT. 160" SII%VT. 18" Slope- 0-1% Aspect:
ElevnUoa Druinnge• Somewhat Poorly Drained Permeability: Moderate
Vegetation: Corn
Borings terminated at 60 Inches
ItORIZON
DEFlltt1,
MAW X
MOHLES
tt-CTURE
STRUCTURE
CONSIsrLNCh
BOUNDARY
NOTES
AV
0-7
IOYR 411
fSl
1 f
mvfr
Cs
Al-
7 -10
IOYR4/1
10YR5d2cId
fsl
I (gr
mvrr
cw
G
10-15
IOYR 5/6
IOYR 514c3f
vfsi -fsl
Ifsbk
msfr
cs
BE
15 -I8
IOYR5/6
IDYRSnc2d
vfsl -fsl
Imsbk
mvfr
cs
Mgt
18 -36
10YR7 /1
IOYR6/4c2d
fsl
2msbk
mfr
AW
7.5YR 51811
Bt g2
3648
10YR 618
sl
I msbk
mfr
ttw
IOYR 7/1
H1g3
48-60
10YR6/8
I0YR7 /im3d
sc1 -cl
Imsbk
mfr
COMMI-N!S
I lie 1 ynchburg series is a very deep somewhat poorly drained soil of the Lower and Upper Atlantic Coastal Plain that occur ou Manse terraces and I lats
Dominant chrome 2 matrix for this Lynchburg soil description ranges from 10 to 18 inches below the surface
Seasonally high water table rot the Lynchburg series typically ranges from 6 to 18 inches
DESCRIBED BY
DATE 9/15/2011
_i
J

105

106

Potential Wetland Gauge Locations
107

108

109

110

14.6 Appendix D. Project Plan Sheets
111

I
112

10
N
N
O
N
QQ
0
U
O
O
�I
ti
z
0
U
F PROJECT
v N�RiF
`p �R LOCATION
� m
m
258 p
rc
�y 0
T WARREN TAYLOR
RD �
iu RrC x
HODS LOOa
�O 24
m� HewR /�
R
3
ze
VICINITY MAP
NOT TO SCALE
DIRECTIONS FROM RALEIGH
PROCEED EAST ON 1 -40 FOR APPROXIMATELY 74 MILES THEN TAKE EXIT 373 FOR
NC -24 E/ NC -903 TOWARDS KENANSVILLE TAKE A LEFT OFF 1-40 ONTO NC -24 E/ NC -903
AFTER 6 MILES TAKE A RIGHT TO STAY ONTO NC -24 E IN 19 MILES TAKE A LEFT ONTO
JESSE WILLIAMS RD THE SITE WILL BE ON THE RIGHT APPROXIMATELY 0 8 MILES UP
THE ROAD
INDEX OF SHEETS
I
TITLE SHEET
2
GENERAL NOTES & PROJECT LEGEND
3
DETAILS
4
GRADING PLAN
S
PLANTING PLAN
6
BOILNOARY MARKING PLAN
7 - 20
EROSION CONTROL PLAN
GRAPHIC SCALES
—50 —25 0 50 100
GRADING, PLANTING PLANS,
AND BOUNDARY MARKING
—100-50
0 100 200
EROSION CONTROL OVERVIEW
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM
PROJECT DATA
WETLAND AREA 1
NONRIPARIAN WETLAND RESTORATION = 100
BEAR BASIN
RESTORATION SITE
ONSLOW COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
WHITE OAK RIVER BASIN
UPPER NEW RIVER WATERSHED
03030001010010
ACRES
PROJECT TOTAL AREA OF DISTURBANCE = 11 9 ACRES
Prepared In the Office of PROJECT ENGINEER
Prepared for
]SCI Associates � ARp''•.,,
.�� of North Carolina, P.A. �^
SUITE 220 LANDMARK CENTER II 460151X FORKS RD RALEIGH NC 27609 ••� •; ,
ENGINEERS •PLANNERS • ECOLOGISTS
SEAL
p � 32733
GARY M MRYNCZA P E kai m"Stem
srnn n
nix rxorecr NUxno-x a
aRrt n
nrtnl
95362 95362
MAR 1013
REVISIONS
Ot y0 0yry
ON
PROJECT ENGINEER � ement
.� '.AEL � ••`, PRbC +RAM
• '� " " "���••• JEFF JUREK
TIM MORRIS CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR
R'E7TAND DESIGN
P F_
Ot y0 0yry
ON
PROJECT ENGINEER � ement
.� '.AEL � ••`, PRbC +RAM
• '� " " "���••• JEFF JUREK
TIM MORRIS CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR
R'E7TAND DESIGN
P F_

GENERAL NOTES
BEARING AND DISTANCES
PROJECT
LEGEND
ALL BEARINGS ARE NAD
1983 GRID BEARINGS
ALL DISTANCES AND COORDINATES
SHOWN ARE HORIZONTAL (GROUND) VALUES.
ALL INFORMATION IS BASED ON THE
FOLLOWING KCI CONTROL POINTS.
NORTHING
EASTING
ELEVATION
KCI #1 431237 21
2417150 71
7367
KCI #2 431724 26
2417353 88
7207
KCI #4 431028 93
2417063 63
7338
KCI #5 430006 55
2417155 40
7138
KCI #6 429900 06
2417167 62
7134
KCI #7 429818 61
2417196 00
7150
KCI #8 429704 40
2417202 01
7128
KCI #9 429551 61
2417228 46
6990
KCI #10 429417 13
2417245 89
6931
UTILITY /SUBSURFACE PLANS
-NO SUBSURFACE PLANS ARE AVAILABLE ON THIS PROJECT EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES HAVE NOT BEEN VERIFIED
THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING A UTILITY LOCATOR AND ESTABLISHING THE EXACT LOCATION OF ANY
AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES IN THE PROJECT REACH
k
S
p 327U
111110"1
dIIIII -I'
F
f
m
H
1 vr�
PROJECT
LEGEND
N
h
WETLAND MITIGATION
TOPOGRAPHY
' ' w =¢
o U y J
S 41 10
\y' g O
Proposed Filled Ditches
�� ?' ,
Minor Contour Line — — —
^< Z y%
d
00
XX
Z
Proposed Ditch Plug
®
Mayor Contour Line _ _,o_ _
w <�
Proposed Stabilized Drainage Outlet
Proposed Contour
z
J
0
Q
U
W
H 0
SEDIMENTATION &
EROSION
MISCELLANEOUS
O
Fn z �
ao Z
mI.-- o
Stabilized Construction Entrance
Existing Overhead Wire
o 3
m 0
m _J
Silt Fence
SF
w 0
v
Z
g
Limits of Disturbance
—LOD-
a
Temporary Rock Silt Screen
s MARCH 2073
sous N T S
GENERAL
NOTES &
Temporary Bridge Mat Crossing
®
PROJECT
LEGEND

EXISTING DITCH
F- B
Ai- - -- - - -- i A
L L�
DITCH PLUG o
EXISTING GRADE ELEVATION
41 _' 4
I_ VAR I EXISTING I VAR
DITCH WIDTH
SECTION B -B
3'
DITCH
PLUG
1 EXISTING GRADE ELEVATION
`--� B 4 4 1 EXISTING DITCH BOTTOM
- - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - --
-----------
PLAN VIEW
0
SECTION A -A
DITCH PLUG DETAIL
SCALE NTS
NOTE
SEE PLAN SHEETS FOR LOCATIONS OF DITCH PLUGS
USE SELECT MATERIAL, CLASS I OR SUITABLE
SALVAGED MATERIAL, IF AVAILABLE FOR DITCH PLUGS
FINISHED WETLAND
X SELECT MATERIAL,
CLASS I
5 MIN'
5' MIN — Irp�l WETLAND OUTFALL TO RECEIVING WATER
�o
XS TIE BOTTOM OF STRUCTURE INTO
O� EXISTING BANKS / OUTFALL AT LEAST
d' d' 0 5' BELOW GRADE
CLASSISTONE
PROFILE VIEW
STABILIZED DRAINAGE OUTFALL
SCALE NTS
NOTE
IF AVAILABLE SUITABLE SALVAGED MATERIAL
MAY BE SUBSTITUTED FOR SELECT MATERIAL, CLASS I
sm
]2773
y'L'MAEI ,
5
F
c
s
0
E
0
a
0
�v;
f 6
F
0-y= w "Q
�z
� N N
W 0,V
�1 Z 41 F
Y
o�
Z
W
w
Z
Zo Z
QO
m�
m 0
W
w
DETAILS

D
C
Nj0 Cg70
i "ALL i
9i733
O
Z
—50 —25 0 50 100
GRAPHIC SCALE
o
Z
O
N_
6
Z
�
�
F
a
N
c�
E
111
r
1
�
I
1
1
F
m
EASEMENT
- -
1
"
y
CpNSERVATION
n
41a
- --
' - -- — ��------------ ''
-- --- - - - - --
II
.Ia
I III
I
705
705
I 111
\,
I
tl a
la
" o°
o m ~a
U n Z
Qo
xI-
\O\
yley
1,
5 �g
KC1 \\ \
//
705
,1
w
+
705
11114
\ \\
\
\
70+5
705
111
III
INSTALL ROCK
STABILIZED OUTLET
Q
\
1114
INSTALL DITCH
- - _ _ - 72_ - - - PLUG (TYP)
11 y
2
L F-
��\ \;\
- - -
0:
in Z
\ =
\
1
Q ly
Z
c/) Z
ll
o
m
m 1=
0
m 1
Q Q
C0
z4$ ATjpN
m►
Z
c~n
w z
Rte\ EgSF
,
o
w1E MARCH 2013
scut. GRAPHIC
A
NOTE SURFACE ROUGHENING WILL
KCI#5
GRADING
OCCUR THROUGHOUT THE EASEMENT
PLAN
TO ALLEVIATE SOIL COMPACTION AND
TO ENHANCE SURFACE WATER STORAGE
I SHEET 4 OF 10

0
/
g-
�I
WETLAND PLANTING ZONE
UPLAND PLANTING ZONE
—50 —25 0 50 100
NON - RIPARIAN WETLAND RESTORATION
GRAPHIC SCALE
HARDWOOD FLATS VEGETATIVE COMMUNITY
104AC
18 - 24 BARE ROOT MATERIAL
\ \/ \
IS. - 24 " BARE ROOT MATERIAL
968 STEMS /ACRE (9' X 5 SPACING) RANDOM SPECIES PLACEMENT
COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME WETLAND INDICATOR % OF TOTAL
# OF PLANTS
RED MAPLE ACER RUBRUM FACW
4
500
SWEETBAY MAGNOLIA MAGNOLIA VIRGINIANA FACW
4
500
SWAMP RED BAY PERSEA PALUSTRIS FACW
4
500
TULIP POPLAR LIRIODENDRON TULIPIFERA FACW
14
1500
AMERICAN ELM ULMUS AMERICANA FACW
7
750
CHERRYBARK OAK QUERCUS PAGODA FAC
24
2500
SWAMP CHESTNUT OAK QUERCUS MICHAUXII FACW
24
2500
WATER OAK QUERCUS NIGRA FAC
14
1500
RED CHOKEBERRY ARONIA ARBUTIFOLIA FACW
25
250
HIGHBUSH BLUEBERRY VACCINIUM CORYMBOSUM FACW
25
250
100
10 500
NOTE THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE STEMS MAY BE CHANGED AT THE ENGINEER S
DISCRETION HOWEVER ONE SPECIES MAY OCCUPY NO MORE THAN 25% OF THE
TOTAL STEMS AND AT LEAST FIVE SPECIES MUST BE USED
0
/
g-
�I
UPLAND PLANTING ZONE
—50 —25 0 50 100
GRAPHIC SCALE
16AC
18 - 24 BARE ROOT MATERIAL
625 STEMS /ACRE (9 X 5 SPACING) RANDOM SPECIES PLACEMENT
COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME WETLAND INDICATOR %OF TOTAL
# OF PLANTS
RED MAPLE ACER RUBRUM FACW
25
250
CHERRYBARK OAK QUERCUS PAGODA FAC
25
250
SHUMARD OAK QUERCUS SHUMARDII FACU
25
250
COMMON PERSIMMON DIOSPYROS VIRGINIANA FAC
25
250
100
1000
NOTE THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE STEMS MAYBE CHANGED AT THE ENGINEERS
DISCRETION HOWEVER ONE SPECIES MAY OCCUPY NO MORE THAN 25% OF THE
TOTAL STEMS AND AT LEAST FIVE SPECIES MUST BE USED
I
\ /\
I
CONSERVATION E k
/y\\/
/X\/ x
1 X\\
v
\\ \/
H --
/0
ONE
�5
5
0
u
E
x
r
w
E
z
0
sn-
N
J r-'
�F
m
N
�s 0
� w
Z NF
Mir
2 oz
Y
Z
w <�
�C
C
Z
C7
FJ5z
O
m Q -
Q c
W O
v,
Lu
� C
PLANTING
PLAN
:ET 5 OF 10
>ELL
mu
—50 —25 0 50 100
GRAPHIC SCALE
I
\ /\
I
CONSERVATION E k
/y\\/
/X\/ x
1 X\\
v
\\ \/
H --
/0
ONE
�5
5
0
u
E
x
r
w
E
z
0
sn-
N
J r-'
�F
m
N
�s 0
� w
Z NF
Mir
2 oz
Y
Z
w <�
�C
C
Z
C7
FJ5z
O
m Q -
Q c
W O
v,
Lu
� C
PLANTING
PLAN
:ET 5 OF 10

EASEMENT BOUNDARY MARKING
.:
THE EASEMENT BOUNDARY WILL BE MARKED
SEAL
WITH METAL POSTS AND CONSERVATION EASEMENT
SIGNS AT THE CORNERS AND AT A MINIMUM OF 200'
32733 P� '
INTERVALS ALONG THE BOUNDARY
7th UEI ,,
-50 -25 0 50 100
518 REBAR 30 IN LENGTH WITH 3-1/4 ALUMINUM CAPS
• ON ALL EASEMENT CORNERS CAPS SHALL MEET EEP
GRAPHIC SCALE
SPECIFICATIONS ((BERNSTEN RBD5325 IMPRINTED WITH
#B9D87 OR EQUIVALENT) AFTER
NC STATE LOGO
INSTALLATION CAPS SHALL BE STAMPED WITH THE
CORRESPONDING NUMBER
-FOOT TALL DURABLE WITNESS POST AT EACH CORNER
IN THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT POSTS SHALL BE MADE
•6
OF MATERIAL THAT WILL LAST A MINIMUM OF 20 YEARS
THE PROVIDER SHALL ATTACH A CONSERVATION EASEMENT
SIGN TO EACH WITNESS POST AND PLACE ADDITIONAL SIGNS
AT NO MORE THAN 20D -FOOT INTERVALS ON BOUNDARY LINES
1
\
CE
5
a
z
(7
E
f
f
N
y
z
N
Wr
4—
t r
j
Y ;
N
f m
1� FQ
6 V 52
N
"0
U
Z 0 F
a wZ
x
w XS
W J
F, W
Z
W
Q
z
J
O
Q
U
W F-
H 0:
Z (n z
W Z
Q O z
00 ~ o
IU
O
3
0
J
m LLI z
W O
C6
0
z
g
U
a
6CAlE. GRAPHIC
BOUNDARY
MARKING
PLAN

NOTES
1 IT IS THE INTENT OF THESE PLANS THAT AS SOON AS AN AREA OF GRADING
IS COMPLETE IT SHALL BE STABILIZED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE EROSION
CONTROL PRACTICES DESCRIBED IN THESE PLANS DUE TO THE ANTICIPATED
DURATION AND SEQUENCE OF THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES, THE
CONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO MINIMIZE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, THE AMOUNT
OF THE AREA THAT IS DISTURBED AT ONE TIME
2 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL EXERCISE EVERY REASONABLE PRECAUTION
THROUGHOUT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT TO PREVENT EROSION
AND SEDIMENTATION EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE INSTALLED AND
MAINTAINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROJECT PLANS NORTH CAROLINA
SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL GUIDELINES AND AS DIRECTED BY
THE DESIGNER
3 ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL SHALL BE STOCKPILED WITHIN THE LIMITS OF
DISTURBANCE FOR LATER USE AS EMBANKMENT MATERIAL THE CONTRACTOR
IS RESPONSIBLE FOR INSTALLING APPROPRIATE STABILIZATION MEASURES
AROUND THE STOCKPILE AREA(S) AND ANY TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT SPOIL
AND TOPSOIL PILES TO PREVENT EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION
4 IN THE EVENT OF A STORM, THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR
REMOVAL OR PROTECTION OF ANY EQUIPMENT TOOLS MATERIALS OR
OTHER ITEMS NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE WORK THAT COULD BE AFFECTED
BY STORMWATER
5 AFTER THE WETLAND GRADING CALLED FOR IN THE PLANS IS COMPLETED
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELY INSTALL APPROPRIATE STABILIZATION
MATERIALS AS CALLED FOR IN THE PLANS TO STABILIZE THE SOIL AND PROVIDE
IMMEDIATE SEDIMENT /EROSION CONTROL
6 EACH SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICE WILL BE REMOVED AFTER ALL
WORK IN THE CORRESPONDING CONSTRUCTION PHASE HAS BEEN
COMPLETED AND THE AREAS HAVE BEEN STABILIZED
7 THE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE AND STAGING AREA IDENTIFIED ON THE
PLANS PROVIDE THE ONLY ACCESS POINTS INTO THE LIMITS OF
DISTURBANCE NO ADDITIONAL ACCESS POINTS SHALL BE USED WITHOUT
APPROVAL OF THE DESIGNER
8 SILT FENCE SHALL BE INSTALLED ON THE LOW SIDE OF ANY TEMPORARY
OR PERMANENT SPOIL AND TOPSOIL PILES THESE SPOIL PILES SHALL ALSO
BE SEEDED AND MULCHED FOR VEGETATIVE STABILIZATION ON THE SAME
DAY THEY ARE CREATED ALL SPOIL MATERIAL SHALL STAY ON THE SITE
AND SHALL NOT BE REMOVED FROM THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
9 ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES WILL BE CHECKED FOR
STABILITY AND FUNCTIONAL OPERATION FOLLOWING EVERY RUNOFF
PRODUCING RAIN EVENT AND /OR AT LEAST ONCE PER WEEK ANY NEEDED
MAINTENANCE OR REPAIRS SHALL BE MADE IMMEDIATELY TO MAINTAIN ALL
MEASURES AS DESIGNED ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT SHALL BE REMOVED FROM
CONTROL MEASURES WHEN THEY REACH APPROXIMATELY 50% OF THEIR
FUNCTIONAL CAPACITY THESE MEASURES SHALL BE REPAIRED IF DISTURBED
DURING MAINTENANCE ALL SEEDED AREAS SHALL BE FERTILIZED, RESEEDED
AND MULCHED AS NECESSARY, TO PROMOTE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF
VEGETATION COVER
10 THE CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AND EROSION CONTROL CONTACT FOR THIS SITE
IS TIM MORRIS OFFICE PHONE - 919- 783 -9214 CELL PHONE - 919 - 793.6886
GROUND STABILIZATION
SITE AREA
STABILIZATION
DESCRIPTION
TIME FRAME
PERIMETER DIKES,
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
SWALES, DITCHES
7 DAYS
AND SLOPES
ROCK SILT SCREEN (STD DRAWING 1636 01)
HIGH QUALITY
METHODS AND AMOUNTS AREAS CONTAINING SEVERE SOIL
WATER (HQW)
7 DAYS
ZONES
40
SLOPES STEEPER
RIVER OATS - CHASMANTHIUM LATIFOLIUM
VIRGINIA WILDRYE - ELYMUS VIRGINICUS
THAN 3 1
7DAYS
SLOPES 3 1 OR
TONS /ACRE)
FLATTER
7DAYS
ALL OTHER AREAS
AND FERTILIZER IS APPLIED PRIOR TO PERMANENT SEED THEN FERTILIZER
WITH SLOPES FLATTER
7 DAYS
THAN 4 1
04
INSPECTIONS
WEEKLY INSPECTIONS REQUIRED
SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION
THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR FOLLOWING THE SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANS AND THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS, AS DIRECTED BY THE
DESIGNER CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROCEED IN THE SPECIFIED MANNER UNLESS OTHERWISE
DIRECTED OR APPROVED BY THE DESIGNER THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS ALONG WITH THE
INSTRUCTIONS CONTAINED IN THE PLANS CONSTITUTE THE SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION
PHASE 1 INITIAL SITE PREPARATION
A IDENTIFY PROJECT BOUNDARY, LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE, SENSITIVE AREAS STAGING AREAS,
STABILIZED ENTRANCES AND ACCESS POINTS WITH THE DESIGNER
B CONSTRUCT ENTRANCE AND STAGING AREAS AND THEIR ASSOCIATED SEDIMENT AND EROSION
CONTROL DEVICES IN A MANNER TO SUPPORT EXECUTION OF THE WETLAND RESTORATION IN
PHASES AS INDICATED IN THE PLANS AND AS DIRECTED BY THE DESIGNER
PHASE 2 WETLAND RESTORATION GRADING
A FILLING EXISTING DITCHES /DEPRESSIONS
1 CLEAR VEGETATION AS NEEDED TO INSTALL SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL MEASURES
INSTALL SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AS DEPICTED ON THE PLANS
II INSTALL PROPOSED OUTLET STABILIZATION STRUCTURES
111 FILL DITCHES /DEPRESSIONS AS INDICATED IN THE PLANS USING ADJACENT SPOIL MATERIAL,
MAKING SURE TO DEWATER THE EXISTING DITCHES AS INDICATED ON THE PLANS
iv INSTALL ROCK SILT SCREENS AT OUTLET STABILIZATION STRUCTURES
v SEED AND MULCH COMPLETED WORK AREAS THIS SHALL BE DONE WITHIN 72 HOURS OF
REACHING FINAL GRADE WHEN FILLING DITCHES /PONDS /DEPRESSIONS AND MAY OCCUR PRIOR
TO PHASE 2 A ill
B SURFACE ROUGHENING
i BEGINNING ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE WETLAND RESTORATION AREA AND PROGRESSING
TOWARDS THE SOUTHERN SIDE OF THE SITE ROUGHEN THE SOIL TO AN APPROXIMATE DEPTH OF
8" TO ALLEVIATE COMPACTION AND MIMIC NATURAL WETLAND MICROTOPOGRAPHY THIS WILL
INCREASE THE STORAGE OF SURFACE WATER IN THE WETLAND AND PROMOTE VEGETATION
ESTABLISHMENT
II SEED AND MULCH COMPLETED WORK AREAS THIS SHALL BE DONE WITHIN 72 HOURS OF
SURFACE ROUGHENING
PHASE 3 TREE PLANTING
A PLANTS SHOULD BE PLANTED DURING THE DORMANT SEASON (NOVEMBER 17 - MARCH 17)
B PREPARE AND PLANT TREES IN ACCORDANCE WITH PLAN SHEETS 7 -10 AND AS DIRECTED BY THE
DESIGNER
PHASE 4 COMPLETION OF PROJECT SITE
A PHASE 4 CAN BE INITIATED AFTER THE WETLAND GRADING WORK IS COMPLETED, AFTER THE SITE IS
STABLIZED WITH REQUIRED VEGETATIVE COVER, AND PRIOR TO PHASE 3
B REMOVE ALL REMAINING WASTE MATERIALS, AND THE EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AND RESTORE THE
REMAINING STAGING AND STOCKPILING AREAS AND CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES TO THEIR PRIOR
CONDITION SEED AND MULCH ALL DISTURBED AREAS UTILIZING THE SEED /MULCH MIXES SPECIFIED IN
THE PLANS
RAIN GAUGE MUST BE PRESENT AT SITE
INSPECTIONS REQUIRED AFTER 0 5" RAIN EVENTS
INSPECTIONS ARE ONLY REQUIRED DURING
"NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS'
INSPECTION REPORTS MUST BE AVAILABLE
ON -SITE DURING BUSINESS HOURS UNLESS A SITE
SPECIFIC EXEMPTION IS APPROVED
RECORD MUST BE KEPT FOR 3 YEARS AND
AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST
ELECTRONICALLY - AVAILABLE RECORDS MAY BE
SUBSTITUTED UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS
SEDIMENTATION & EROSION
CONTROL PLAN LEGEND
DITCHES TO BE FILLED
r\ ^r
STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
H
SILT FENCE
% OF MIX
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
oo-
BRIDGE MAT STREAM CROSSING
REDTOPPANICGRASS - PANICUM RIGIDULUM
ROCK SILT SCREEN (STD DRAWING 1636 01)
56
�M
SEAL
p 32733 t:
TEMPORARY SEED MIX
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL UTILIZE THE FOLLOWING SEED /FERTILIZER
MIX IN SEEDING ALL DISTURBED AREAS WITHIN THE PROJECT LIMITS
SUMMER MIX (MAY 15 - AUGUST 15)
GERMAN MILLET SETARIA ITALICA 20 LBS / ACRE
BROWNTOP MILLET UROCHLOA RAMOSA 20 LBS / ACRE
WINTER MIX (AUGUST 15 - MAY 15)
RYE GRAIN SECALE CEREALE 120 LBS / ACRE
PERMANENT SEED MIX
SUMMER MIX (MAY 15— AUGUST 15)
Z
w s
a rn
K F
i
o
z
Z
O
0
w
0
v
y
FERTILIZER 750 LBS / ACRE
LIMESTONE 2000 LBS /ACRE
FERTILIZER SHALL BE 10 -10-10 ANALYSIS UPON SOIL ANALYSIS
A DIFFERENT RATIO OF FERTILIZER MAY BE USED
SEEDBED PREPARATION
APPLICATION RATE (IN MIX)
THE SEEDBED SHALL BE COMPRISED OF LOOSE SOIL AND NOT
H
SPECIES
% OF MIX
LBS / ACRE
AND LIMING DESCRIPTION IN THE ABOVE SECTIONS FOLLOWING
REDTOPPANICGRASS - PANICUM RIGIDULUM
28
56
METHODS AND AMOUNTS AREAS CONTAINING SEVERE SOIL
BEAKED PANICGRASS - PANICUM ANCEPS
20
40
;:. =s
RIVER OATS - CHASMANTHIUM LATIFOLIUM
VIRGINIA WILDRYE - ELYMUS VIRGINICUS
20
20
40
40
TONS /ACRE)
SWITCHGRASS - PANICUM VIRGANTUM
10
20
AND FERTILIZER IS APPLIED PRIOR TO PERMANENT SEED THEN FERTILIZER
LEATHERY RUSH - JUNCUS CORIACEUS
2
04
NOTE
ADD 10 LBS /ACRE OF MILLET TO ABOVE
100
20
rT
MIXTURE FOR A TOTAL OF 30 LBS /ACRE
WINTER MIX (AUGUST 15 — MAY 15)
APPLICATION
RATE (IN MIX)
w
SPECIES
% OF MIX
LBS / ACRE
w
REDTOPPANICGRASS - PANICUM RIGIDULUM
28
56
BEAKED PANICGRASS - PANICUM ANCEPS
20
40
r�o
RIVER OATS - CHASMANTHIUM LATIFOLIUM
20
40
VIRGINIA WILDRYE - ELYMUS VIRGINICUS
20
40
► / w
06
SWITCHGRASS - PANICUM VIRGANTUM
10
20
z
a
LEATHERY RUSH - JUNCUS CORIACEUS
2
04
S
o z
z
NOTE
ADD 10 LBS /ACRE OF RYE TO ABOVE
100
20
w
w
MIXTURE FOR A TOTAL OF 30 LBS /ACRE
w
FERTILIZER 750 LBS / ACRE
LIMESTONE 2000 LBS /ACRE
FERTILIZER SHALL BE 10 -10-10 ANALYSIS UPON SOIL ANALYSIS
A DIFFERENT RATIO OF FERTILIZER MAY BE USED
SEEDBED PREPARATION
W
THE SEEDBED SHALL BE COMPRISED OF LOOSE SOIL AND NOT
H
COMPACTED THIS MAY REQUIRE MECHANICAL LOOSENING
Z W
OF THE SOIL SOIL AMENDMENTS SHOULD FOLLOW THE FERTILIZER
AND LIMING DESCRIPTION IN THE ABOVE SECTIONS FOLLOWING
Q Q
SEEDING MULCHING SHALL FOLLOW THE BELOW APPLICATION
m
METHODS AND AMOUNTS AREAS CONTAINING SEVERE SOIL
COMPACTION WILL BE SCARIFIED TO A DEPTH OF 8 INCHES
Q<
MULCHING
m
SEEDED AREAS ARE TO BE PROTECTED BY SPREADING STRAW MULCH
W
UNIFORMLY TO FORM A CONTINUOUS BLANKET (75% COVERAGE = 2
TONS /ACRE)
NOTE FERTILIZER IS ONLY TO BE APPLIED ONCE IF TEMPORARY SEED
AND FERTILIZER IS APPLIED PRIOR TO PERMANENT SEED THEN FERTILIZER
SHALL NOT BE APPLIED WITH THE PERMANENT SEED
Q
Z
J
O
Q
U
S
H
O
Z
Z
M
O
U
O
z
Z
O
C6
0
Z
2
U
I� NTS 1
EROSION
CONTROL
PLAN

NOTES
USE CLASS I STONE FOR
STRUCTURAL STONE
}
USE STONE NO 57 FOR
"
SEDIMENTCONTROL
1 �__,e
CONSTRUCT SILT SCREEN A
G
MAXIMUM OF 1 FT ABOVE
°rx�-a.l�
NORMAL FLOW DEPTH
A
1 �__-�
TOP OF BANK J
���
e..e�
•a��::
C— M�.:.:s�
••���
i �
•• � °•S�el'eE-
BASE OF STREAM)
�:i= •e•��
ems:
°�.�eii
••••�se•�II�•�.
TOP VIEW
TOP OF BANK
1� "MFN
I /
I
1r i
2
1�
STONE #57 —/
STREAM BED
STR CTURAL
STONE
1-6"MIN
CROSS SECTION
FRONT VIEW
TEMPORARY ROCK SILT SCREEN
NOT TO SCALE
STREAM CROSSING MAINTENANCE
1 INSPECT TEMPORARY CROSSING
AFTER EACH RAINFALL EVENT FOR
ACCUMULATION OF DEBRIS
BLOCKAGE EROSION OF ABUTMENTS
AND OVERFLOW AREAS CHANNEL
SCOUR, RIPRAP DISPLACEMENT, OR
PIPING ALONG CULVERTS
2 REMOVE DEBRIS REPAIR AND
REINFORCE DAMAGED AREAS
IMMEDIATELY TO PREVENT FURTHER
DAMAGE TO THE INSTALLATION
A]
AJ
PLAN
MAT
'1' STONE
FOR APPROACH
STABILIZATION
EXISTING
CHANNEL
FILTER FABRIC
FOR DRAINAGE
SECTION AA
NOT TO SCALE
1 BRIDGE LOCATIONS DEPICTED ON SITE PLANS ARE APPROXIMATE AND
ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE DEPENDING ON THE AREA THAT IS BEING
WORKED UPON
2 WIDTH OF EACH MAT IS DEPENDENT ON THE SIZE OF THE EQUIPMENT
MEANT TO CROSS IT
3 DISTANCE BETWEEN MATS IS DEPENDENT ON THE DISTANCE BETWEEN
TRACKS ON THE EQUIPMENT MEANT TO CROSS IT
4 APPROACH STABILIZATION, COMPOSED OF CLASS 1 STONE, WILL BE
REQUIRED FOR EACH SECTION OF THE BRIDGE
BRIDGE MAT CROSSING
PLACE AS SPECIFIED IN THE PLANS AND APPROVED BY THE DESIGNER
/
/ Pg
°wl'E \
CLASS'A'STONE
81N MIN DEPTH
(OVER FILTER FABRIC)
NOTES
1 TURNING RADIUS SUFFICIENT TO ACCOMODATE LARGE
TRUCKS SHALL BE PROVIDED
2 ENTRANCE(S) SHOULD BE LOCATED TO PROVIDE FOR UTILIZATION
BY ALL CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES
3 MUST BE MAINTAINED IN A CONDITION WHICH WILL PREVENT
TRACKING OR DIRECT FLOW OF MUD ONTO STREETS PERIODIC
TOPDRESSING WITH STONE WILL BE NECESSARY
4 ANY MATERIAL TRACKED ONTO THE ROADWAY MUST BE CLEANED
UP IMMEDIATELY
5 GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE SHALL BE LOCATED AT ALL
POINTS OF INGRESS AND EGRESS UNTIL SITE IS STABILIZED
FREQUENT CHECKS OF THE DEVICE AND TIMELY MAINTENANCE
MUST BE PROVIDED
6 INSTALL A CULVERT IF NECESSARY TO ACCOMODATE ROADWAY
DRAINAGE
7 SIDE SLOPES FOR ENTRANCE MUST BE AT LEAST 2 1 SLOPE
STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
SCALE NTS
8' MAX
METAL POST 1234 GAUGE MIN
(1 33 lb PER MIDDLE AND VERTICAL WIRES
LINEAR FOOT)
10 GAUGE MIN
TOP AND BOTT
STRAND 1
l� I � I X44- J45 'h!'�•5'- �!'�A'�SLp 5�4�� 5��4'}" �
FILTER FABRIC -'
WIRE FILTER FABRIC --��
NOTES
USE WIRE A MINIMUM OF 32" COMPACTED FILL
IN WIDTH AND WITH A MINIMUM
OF 6 LINE WIRES WITH 12" STAY _
SPACING I I -III -I I II
USE FILTER FABRIC A MINIMUM
OF 36" IN WIDTH AND FASTEN I I =I I I� 8"
ADEQUATELY TO THE WIRE AS EXTENSION OF I I
DIRECTED BY THE DESIGNER I I
PROVIDE 5 STEEL POST OF THE FABRIC AND � 4 �� �I STEEL POST
SELF - FASTENER ANGLE STEEL TYPE WIRE INTO TRENCH I�=� I I 2' -0' DEPTH
I I
SILT FENCE DETAIL L --
NOT TO SCALE
SEAL
-p y 327333p
z
Z
O
M
U
W�
y
�I w
N N�
a
Z OU
2 NF
Mo
z e�
w
Q
Z
O
Q
U
W F_
H �
Z N z
Fn Z
<0 Z
m H O
wU
O
O
m U
LU O
to
O
Z
x
U
I O11F. MARCH 2013 1
EROSION
CONTROL
PLAN
1 �__,e
°.:�..a.:•,
ۥ
°rx�-a.l�
•�•r�a
1 �__-�
=
e..e�
•a��::
C— M�.:.:s�
••���
i �
•• � °•S�el'eE-
fe•'..eeeeesi
3.�:.L90
�:i= •e•��
ems:
°�.�eii
••••�se•�II�•�.
SEAL
-p y 327333p
z
Z
O
M
U
W�
y
�I w
N N�
a
Z OU
2 NF
Mo
z e�
w
Q
Z
O
Q
U
W F_
H �
Z N z
Fn Z
<0 Z
m H O
wU
O
O
m U
LU O
to
O
Z
x
U
I O11F. MARCH 2013 1
EROSION
CONTROL
PLAN

0
z
*OARCAq�,�,
SEAL 5
a
o' mu
'yam
.t
yt�rt�'
PROJECT PARCEL
z
�
a
z
o
h
z
z
0
N
O
O
SMITH ANN POWERS
KENNETH N! JONES
FAMILY LTG PA PARCEL # 30 -176
PARCEL N 1E -131
PIN 441304813347
PIN 441304610801
DB 531 PC 388
DB t342 PG 594
U�.
SITE ACCESS
1
KENNETH W JONES
/ -
PARCEL k 30 -176
PIN 44,304313247
rn
\/
DB 531 PG 368
m O K
t I I
\\ yg{
N�
a as
�a
'f� L
Z 1 2
Z YF
Ay
o
oZ
\ o
I
I
A \
=
N �
w
1
N
J
Zz
i
11
M R HOGS
�+ PARCEL N 30 -1742
11
PIN 441304609497
�l
a
DB 1687 PG 917
Q
O `\
z
z
D '
X
N 1
m
�
\
U
1
m
�
v
Z
\
\
S
O
\1
Z (n z
N Z
O z
✓
m�
WINFIELD
SMITH JR
PARCEL N 16 -130
It/
0
msf0
'9y
Q U
Q O 3
PIN 441304511017
O
es
LImJ O
DB 1672 PG 676
/
y�o
_
LU z
of O
vi
-l00 -50 0 100 200
z
g
GRAPHIC SCALE
YJ
d'
Mm MARCH 2013
swe GRAPHIC
NOTE
ALL DITCHES WITHIN SITE ARE DEFINED
EROSION
"JURISDICTIONAL TRIBUTARIES BY THE
CONTROL
US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
PLAN
SHEET 9 OF 19
TOTAL DISTURBED AREA = 11 9 AC

\
\ LOD
\ f
STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION
ENTRANCE INSTALL TEMPORARY \
CULVERT AT DITCH CROSSING \
(12" MINIMUM) \
NOTE TEMPORARY BRIDGE MAT
CROSSING MAY BE MOVED AS
NECESSARY AND AS APPROVED
BY THE DESIGNER
SEAL
32737
—50 —25 0 50 100
GRAPHIC SCALE
0
W
K
}J =
G? ^J
om
w �Q
�s y °0
I�I
Z "U
2 w F
of
w O
i e�
w
Q
Z
J
O
Q
U
W F
H
Z fn z
U) Z }
0 F
m F- O
< W U
m O
J
W z
0: O
Z
g
U
K
I Mm MARCH 2013 1
EROSION
CONTROL
PLAN