20150414 Ver 1_401 Application_20160718

Mitigation Services
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
MEMORANDUM:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
Sharon Jones
Lin Xu LX
Payment of Permit Fee
401 Permit Application
July 18, 2016
PAT MCCRORY
Governor
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
Seerelare
The Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) is implementing a mitigation project for
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site Restoration Project in Rutherford County.(DMS
IMS # 96920). The activities associated with this restoration project involve stream and
wetland restoration related temporary stream and wetland impact. To conduct these
activities the DMS must submit a Pre -construction Notification (PCN) Form to the
Division of Water Resources (DWR) for review and approval. The DWR assesses a fee
of $570.00 for this review.
Please transfer $570.00 from DMS Fund # 2981, Account # 535120 to DWR as
payment for this review. If you have any questions concerning this matter I can be
reached at 919-707-8319. Thanks for your assistance.
cc: Karen Higgins, DWR
State of North Carolina Environmental Quality I Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center 1 217 W. Jones Street, Suite 3000 1 Raleigh, NC 27609-1652
919 707 8976 T

Mitigation Services
ENV IRON MENTAL QUA L I TY
July 18, 2016
PAT MCCRORY
Governor
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
SecrelmT
Landon Davidson, Water Resources — Water Quality Regional Supervisor
NC DEQ Asheville Regional Office
2090 U.S. 70 Highway
Swannanoa, NC 28778 - 8211
Re: Permit Application — Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site Restoration Project, Rutherford
County (DMS Full Delivery Project)
Dear Mr. Davidson:
Attached for your review is 404/401 permit application package for the subject project. Please
feel free to contact me with any questions regarding this plan (919-707-8319).
Thank you very much for your assistance.
Attachment: 404/401 Permit Application Package
Final Mitigation Plan
Cc: Karen Higgins
Sincerely
—�� /—;O /
Lin Xu
State of North Carolina Environmental Quality I Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center 1217 W. Jones Street, Suite 3000 1 Raleigh, NC 27609-1652
919 707 8976 T

110 PAT MCCRORY
Governor
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
secreran
Mitigation Services
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
July 18, 2016
Karen Higgins, 401& Buffer Permitting Unit Supervisor
Division of Water Resources
401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,NC 27699 - 1617
Re: Permit Application—Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site Restoration Project, Rutherford
County(DMS Full Delivery Project)
Dear Ms. Higgins:
Attached for your review is 404/401 permit application package for the subject project. Another
copy has been sent to the Asheville Regional Office for review. A memo for the permit
application fee is also included in the package. Please feel free to contact me with any questions
regarding this plan(919-707-8319).
Thank you very much for your assistance.
Sincerely
Lin Xu
Attachment: 404/401 Permit Application Package
Final Mitigation Plan
Permit Application Fee Memo
CD containing all electronic files
State of North Carolina Environmental Quality I Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center 1217 W.Jones Street,Suite 3000 I Raleigh,NC 27609-1652
919 707 8976 T

E3 0� VJA �<G
o � -r
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A.
Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1 a.
Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
❑x Section 404 Permit Section 10 ❑ rmit
1 b.
Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 27 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes ❑x No
1 d.
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
❑Q 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e.
Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification:
❑ Yes ❑x No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes ❑x No
1f.
Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for
mitigation of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank
or in -lieu fee program.
❑ Yes ❑x No
1 g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
❑ Yes ❑x No
1 h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes ❑ No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site
2b.
County:
Rutherford
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Rutherfordton, NC
2d.
Subdivision name:
NA
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
NA
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Scott & Sandra Hughes
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
DB 827 PG 454; DB 825 PG 447
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
NA
3d.
Street address:
1356 Rock Road
3e.
City, state, zip:
Rutherfordton, NC 28139
3f.
Telephone no.:
[phone]
3g.
Fax no.:
3h.
Email address:
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4.
Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a.
Applicant is:
❑ Agent ❑ Other, specify:
4b.
Name:
Tim Baumgartner
4c.
Business name
(if applicable):
NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services
4d.
Street address:
217 West Jones Street, Suite 3000A
4e.
City, state, zip:
Raleigh NC 27603
4f.
Telephone no.:
919-707-8543
4g.
Fax no.:
4h.
Email address:
[e-mail]
5.
Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a.
Name:
Timothy J. Morris
5b.
Business name
(if applicable):
KCI Technologies, Inc.
5c.
Street address:
4601 Six Forks Road, Suite 220
5d.
City, state, zip:
Raleigh, NC 27609
5e.
Telephone no.:
[phone]
5f.
Fax no.:
[phone]
5g.
Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 2 of 10

B.
Project Information and Prior Project History
1.
Property Identification
1a.
Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
1621005716140000 and 1621005609790000
1 b.
Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.407997 Longitude: -81.937
1 c.
Property size:
9.45 acres
2.
Surface Waters
2a.
Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
Cathey's Creek
2b.
Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
WS -V
2c.
River basin:
Broad
3.
Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The project site is bounded by interspersed pastureland and forested land to the east, agricultural land and Rock Road to the north-northwest, and
Cathey's Creek to the southwest. The site has a long history of hydrologic modification in order to allow for grazing to take place. The surrounding area
is rural with low development pressure at this time.
3b.
List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 1.38
3c.
List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 1,485
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
This project aims to restore impacted agricultural land to integrated stream/wetland ecosystem.
3e.
The
Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
project will involve stream and wetland restoration activities. This work uses equipment such as bulldozers, track hoes, track and dump trucks.
4.
Jurisdictional Determinations
4a.
Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (includingall prior phases in the past?
❑x Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
Comments:
4b.
If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
❑x Preliminary ❑ Final
4c.
If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Steve Stokes
Agency/Consultant Company:
Other: KCI Associates of NC
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
7/27/2015
5.
Project History
5a.
Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
❑ Yes ❑x No ❑ Unknown
5b.
If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6.
Future Project Plans
6a.
Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes ❑x No
6b.
If yes, explain.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑x Wetlands Strea x — tributaries Buffers Open \❑ters P❑d Construction ❑
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
2b.
2c.
2d.
2e.
2f.
Wetland impact
Type of impact
Type of wetland
Forested
Type of jurisdiction
Area of
number
Corps (404,10) or
impact
Permanent (P) or
DWQ (401, other)
(acres)
Temporary T
W1 T
Fill
Headwater Wetland
No
Corps
0.07
W2 T
Fill
Headwater Wetland
No
Corps
0.04
W3 T
Fill
Headwater Wetland
No
Corps
0.04
W4 T
Fill
Headwater Wetland
No
Corps
0.04
W5 T
Fill
Headwater Wetland
No
Corps
0.16
W6 T
Fill
Headwater Wetland
No
Corps
0.15
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
0.78
2h. Comments:
Additionally, W7 will also be filled for 0.28 acres of temporary wetland impacts. Existing fringe wetlands along man-made drainage features will be filled
to allow the local groundwater elevation to restore jurisdictional hydrology within surrounding areas. Impacted (filled) areas will ultimately be restored
as part of the overall mitigation plan and thus are considered temporary impacts for the purpose of this application.
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
3b.
3c.
3d.
3e.
3f.
3g.
Stream impact
Type of impact
Stream name
Perennial (PER) or
Type of
Average
Impact
number
intermittent (INT)?
jurisdiction
stream
length
Permanent (P) or
width
(linear
Temporary (T)
(feet)
feet)
S1 P
Relocation
UT to Cathey's Creek
PER
Corps
1,485
S2 -
Choose one
-
S3 -
Choose one
-
S4 -
Choose one
-
-
S5 -
Choose one
-
-
S6 -
Choose one
-
-
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
1,485
3i. Comments:
Relocate the channelized stream to its historic landscape position.
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

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

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
We are applying for a Nationwide 27 permit. This permit authorizes impacts to jurisdictional waters for the purpose of conducting aquatic habitat
restoration, establishment and enhancement activities. This project will provide stream and wetland mitigation credits for impacts elsewhere within this
8 -digit HUC. The site offers an ideal opportunity to improve a headwater stream and to restore areas of impacted agricultural land to wetland habitat.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
In order to reestablish wetland hydrology throughout a much larger area, drainage features will be filled. We anticipate that filling these ditches will
result in the upward movement of groundwater that would in turn serve to extend the hydroperiod and allow the growth and propagation of hydrophytic
vegetation. A pump around will be utilized to conduct all stream restoration work in the dry. Sediment and erosion control measures such as silt fence,
straw wattles, rock silt screens and daily stabilization will be used to minimize impacts during construction.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
❑ Yes ❑x No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ❑ Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
❑ Mitigation bank
El Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Quantity:
Quantity:
Quantity:
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
❑ Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
Choose one
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

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

E.
Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1.
Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a.
Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
❑ Yes ❑x No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b.
If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
❑ Yes ❑ No
2.
Stormwater Management Plan
2a.
What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
0
2b.
Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ Yes ❑x No
2c.
If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
This
is a wetland restoration project. Therefore, no impervious area will be created.
2d.
If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative
description of the plan:
2e.
Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
3.
Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a.
In which localgovernment's jurisdiction is thisproject?
Sampson County
❑ Phase II
❑ NSW
3b.
Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
4.
DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑Coastal counties
❑ HQW
4a.
Which of the following state -implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ORW
(check all that apply):
❑Session Law 2006-246
❑ Other:
4b.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
5.
DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a.
Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5b.
Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

F.
Supplementary Information
1.
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a.
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
❑x Yes
❑ No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b.
If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑x Yes
❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c.
If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
❑ Yes
❑X No
letter.) A Categorical Exclusion report has been prepared and has been distributed to the
Comments: IRT for review.
2.
Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a.
Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
E] Yes
❑x No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b.
Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
El Yes
❑x No
2c.
If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3.
Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a.
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
❑Yes
❑x No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b.
If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance
with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
This is a stream and wetland restoration project. This project will neither influence nearby land uses nor stimulate growth.
4.
Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a.
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
be
This
is a stream and wetland restoration project, no wastewater will generated.
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
❑ Yes ❑x No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑x Yes ❑ No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
-NC Wildlife Resources Commission. Carolina Wildlife Profiles. http://www.ncwildlife.org/fs_index_07_conservation.htm
-United States Fish and Wildlife Service. North Carolina's Threatened and Endangered Species.http://www.fws.gov/southeast/.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ❑x No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
Essential Fish Habitat Mapper v3.0. http://www.habitat.noaa.gov/protection/efh/efhmapper/index.html
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes ❑x No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
Onsite archaeological survey of the Sandy Bridge Farm Stream and Wetland Restoration area by Archaeological Consultants of the Carolinas, Inc. in
August 2015.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA -designated 100 -year floodplain?
❑x Yes ❑ No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
This is a NC DMS Restoration project. It is not expected that the project will raise the flood elevation for this area. Coordination with the local flood
plain administrator will be performed, in necessary.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
NC Floodmaps. http://fris.nc.gov/fris/Index.aspx?FIPS=161&ST=NC&user=General%2OPublic
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Date
Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant is provided.
Page 10 of 10

Attachments to PCN
A. Impact Map
B. JD Determination
C. Categorical Exclusion Report

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF >[ NIGINFFRS-1
WILIMINGTCN DISTRICT
Acilior.i ]LE.: SAW-21015-CIOMI County: Rutterfarcl U.S.G.S. quad: NC-RUIIHERFORI11T01\ NCR11I11
NOTIFICATICN CE JIURISDICTIONALDIEITERMINATICN
Praparty Clwnei lAgerid: Scott & Sanidraa llughes/S11eve Shakes, KCI Technologies llnic.
Adc nes s: 4 601 Six Fanlcs Road, Si iter MCI, Bar c mairk Ceniler II Raleig ll, Norllh Claralina XA609
Ted eplh orae Na.: 5119 ,1812! 17
Property descnipltion:
Siza Nacres): 10.2 acres
Nearest Town: Rluilherfhrdloni
Neanesl A a1(inway: C artb eN s C rt6 River Has in: Upper E nozid
C aorcir.iale:: 3-1.4.l 149SIN, -811.936 1ICI2W H) dredaglia Uniil Coca: C13(19(1105
Locaitior Elescription: 'Ill side is located al 113516 Rack Rcaac, Ruthcinftuadilciri, in Rlulflerfdre Counity. Cocmditales:
35.4114519N, 41I.93(X2W
Indicate Which ofIthe Follomin11 Apply:
A. Pref im i nary DEltcr m i nation
X Elais(ic an piieliminar} imfarmatiom, there n ay be waiters and wethinds at the aatove c escribed prapearty. We s anigly
suc&isI yciu have this prapcirty ins Flucilec to c ellenriine'the eirlenit (if E eF artnteinl ed the Awry (IDA; jurisdictiani. To Ile
cans idercid fmad, a jurisdaclicane1 dailermiiralion mush be verifiec t the Corps. 'Ilhi9 Flreliminiary d ul nation is not an
appealable acllan t nu er the Rleglulaloryl Praggzam Administrative Appleal Psiacess ( Reference 33 CFR Part 331' . ; . If N au
wish, you may raclLesl an aiplFlrovec JE lIwllich may to aippleai by aarn'dacslingl the C arf s c istrlict far further inistructioni.
Also, youi maty ppiavic a new iriform align fcm furllher cansideratiori by the Corps to reevaluiaie lhei JEL
B. Approved D elterminali on
There ane Naavigatlhi Wanlers aflIIll a Uniilec Slates A ilhin the eibave c ascribed pnapeirty sutfact to tha permit requiremerrts of
9actioni 10 of thea Rlivers avid Hanbars Act avid Sed ian 4(14 ofli1hca Claan Water Act. Unless theme is a allanige it the law ar
our plubl is P, ed nepullat lar s, this deteuminaliani may t e relied ulllan fcm a period neat 10 exceed fivai years Blom the darter of this
not iflcartian.
These area wialers and wallarids ori the above descuiibec plraplerty suibjeat ilo thea pprmiiil neac'llcrnands of Seclian 404 cif the
Clean Water Aat (C WA; (133 USC § 134z UniI(is s lherea is a changa it 111e law as caur plublishec neglulalians, This
detarminaitioni n aaN be reliead upon fan a per: ad riot 11a exceed five years filam the daple of this niolificaatian.
Wei strangl131 stggeS1l Not have the mal ens avid v♦iel lanids on your flpioplert} call itcal cc. Due to 111e simci caflyaurVnoAlerty
and/or aur present workload, ilhe Carpis may nol ba aablla to aacomf Ilish this wathind c e:lineatiar,i in a tin e.ly manner. Fan a
mane 11imely c elineailian, you may wish to ablain a canisultanl_ Io ba cansidcred final, arty delineation musl be verified by
1ha Corps.
Thea wanlens ane wiellamdls an your lllpaoplarty Have been dalinea l and the cc linealican has beer i vcinified by 1he C arps. We
sdanigly su€ Mcast yaui haves this delineiatiom surveyed. Upani aamplallion, this sunieN sh auld b e re v iew ec ane ver:ifI& E lhei
Corps. Orica verified, this survey will plrovic a cin accuranle deiplict.ian aflall arenas sut.ject to CWA jurisdialian oni your
plraplerty which, provided ilhere is no changle in th a law un aur pluiblishec neglulal:ians, may t e reified uplan fear a pleric mal to
axcaud fiva Nears.
_ 31he waters avid wetlands have been delineal and suweyed and ane eiccwaitely deapiailec an thci pllat signed by the Carps
Rcigullatary Offlaial identified bellow an . Un:less there is ai change in the law ar our publishec requilalicans, this
deterrin ioni may be relied) upon fan a period riat ilo exceed five ycaars fi am the dale afllhis nolificaaliein.
Ill area nio waiters afltl a U.S., to include weitlands, prescan'I an the above c escar:bed praperty which aue subject to thci
permit rcaquiiremeinils of Seciliani 4(14 afthci Cleiaan Walcr Aat (:13 L SC ] 344;. Urdess there is a ahar le in the law or our
puiblisbec ren u laialians, This daterminzationi may tl e reified up an fcm a pciriad nat la wwaed five ycaars fifom tb e dame cif this
nati f aati am.

Acilion 11d.: SAW -21(11 51-0 0 8 2111
Placement of midgad ai fill maleuial v itHri Valens of then LIS and/an wetlamics vuiilhau l a Department oflthe Army plermit may
aar.istitute a violation of faction 3(1'1 of the Clean Water Act (33 LSC § 131 ],. lfNau haute anry queslians ragarcirg Itis
celerminalian and/or ilhe ClcaTs nepulaloryl program, p lease a cnlacl Willhim Hlliullt a1 8: 8-,1111-1980.
C. Basis For Determinallicln
Thea sit et cantains wel lane s as c Ettein—Ti Cy 1 he 15187 Cargis cif Brigirecim Weil/oriid Deiliniearlian Mcinucil and the Inteirim
Rci51icnctll'IupfIlkimev l to the Ckrrp,ls cj Engine ears Weit,lor cs Dallrealicn Manuc k Ecislc rni Mc critair or d Pietdmani Regiori. IlhErse
wErt laric s arEi adjacent to strEiam cli annels lacatec an thea rinopEmty 1 hal Etxh ib it indica 1 ans of auc it ary high vv a 1 er rrianli The
stream channel ori 1:11a grcrplerty is ari unriarriec linit utany lc Cla1 heys ClneEik v hicN flaws irto the l plpeu Ell RivEm to 1 hei
Braac fliver. Thci Erciad Rlvicir hetcomes a fcicilion :10 watar in Hot 1h Carolinas then flaws to thea Coniglarcre River and
the I�lantcie River, bufdre flawirig into then Atlarilia Ocreian.
D. Reimark�i: J uris dictionoll "Waters all tEc US" havcr butinr idelntif>leld an this property as deipiicited
by submitted Jlutisdicltianal Raquesll PaclWagc on filer.
E. Attenllion USDA Program) Participants
Thiscelirearl ian/celcirmiir.ialianhas been conrductec tokertifylhcllimilsafCarps' C]ear WalanAct jtmiscictionfor ille
particular sits keritifiec it 'Ibis regt est. Tfia c elineanlian/determinatian may, nal bei valid for the ,Nellariid caniscmvalicn
proVsicns ofl'Ihci Faoc feicurity A ct oft l fl85. If you or ylotr icinanl ara USDA Program pain iciiplarts, or aniliaiplale pan icipaitioni
iri USDA giiagnams, you shot ld requasl a certified wethind c e'dennir artier frlom ilhci lociatl office cifltlie Narttral Rescurccis
C onservatlicn Service, priar to slartingl work.
F. Appealls Infbrmationl (v is infaurmralicni applies only 10 approvtecl j uirisdictioniatl determiniations as indiaatt(td in
BI. all ave)
A.tactIm iia this verification is an apppraved jurisdict:ianal celerrnin.alicm. If131au erre riot it agroemert with llhart approved
jurisdicVorial c eleirmiriatian, you can malda an ac rrliniisrlrativa appeal unc or 33 CFR 331. Ericloseid you wall fintd a riequest far
appeal t[RFA; form. If yot iii cis i to arpplea I ilhis celermir,alian you must sthmil a complleted RE fbnn to the fallomiinigl
aide ress:
US Armyl Corps cif Enigineens
South Atlami(i Divisicmt
Atm: Jason Stender, Review Officer
60 Harsyth Stteel S)Mi, Raom 1(IM 115
Maritai, C eiaii is 30303-88(11
Ini order fkm ami REIA to be accclprled liy the C caps, the C etrpls must deiteirminct 1harl it is ciomplletei, )hal it meells 1ha crviieria for
appetal undar 33 CFR plan 33 1.5, amd ilhat i1 has been reaeivad By the Diviision C if- ca within ( Cl cays oflthe dame of thcr NAP.
Shauld ycru decide to submit ani REIA ficii it mus'I he received at the above adcham widhin (0 days cif lhei issue daile belaix.
**It is nal neaessarry la sutlmit an RFA ftirm to the Eliv isian Officte if yciui do not ab' cit to the de1arminartior.i in'Jhis
cion esplon id anice.
Corps Reguilartary Of ficial: William Hlliat
119sua Elater. Jlully 217, 3015 Expiration Data: Jt iy 21(, 21(11 51
OA

Me WiWinglori Eli stilict is carrimittad to plrovidirig the Highest lave] of support to the public. Ta help) user isuire we canlinue to
do so, please complete the Cuistameu Satisfaction 9urveN IacERed at our website at littp:/ilper�l.riwp.usaco.army.mil/stnvey-Html
to compllete the survary anline.
CF: Sciotil & Sandra IHuigha9, 1396 Rlcick Rodd, Rullherfordton, NC 28139,
3

WITIFICATION, OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS..AND
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: Steve Stokes, KCI Technologies Inc.
File Number: SAW -2015- Date: July 27, 2015
00827
Attached is: See Section below
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission) A
PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission) B
PERMIT DENIAL C
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION D
X PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION E
HECTICN 11- Thei followirg'idenitifieis'yaur rigtis and option,i iiegarding an admin:isitrallive appeal of1hei at over
decision. ' Addilionial information may be found at
llft://www.usaaei.army.nul/CECW/Fage,Vi_e mateiriial,i.as x oji,Corps regulation's al 33 CFR Part 331.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Pennit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Pennission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights
to appeal the permit, including its terns and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
• OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request that
the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district engineer.
Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will forfeit your right
to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your objections and may: (a)
modify the pen -nit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your objections, or (c) not modify
the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After evaluating your objections, the
district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights
to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
• APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you
may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this
form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the
date of this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process
by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division
engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or
provide new information.
• ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the
date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
• APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers Administrative
Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received
by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.

E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps
regarding the preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an
approved JD (which may be appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may
provide new information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD.
SBCTIO N 11- REQUEST FIC RI APPIEA LI or OBJECT]IIO NS TO AN INITIA L F ROFFERED PERMIT
REASONS FOR APF E AL ORI OBJIECTICNS: QDescrille your reascr s itiii allFlealing th(i c ecisiori cr ycuu cbjecliar s ilo ari
:initial) praffeued permil it clear ciancise stalemenils. YaL mai attach a&ilianal infarmalian ilo this farm to clarify vrhere yaur reasons
ar abjectioris arei ac dressed in the admir.iislrative ueccmd
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum
record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is neclarify
Jto
the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record.
you may provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative record.
POINT OF CONTAC T FOR QUESTIONS C R In F ORMATION :
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the appeal
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
process you may contact:
also contact:
William Elliott, Project Manager
Mr. Jason Steele, Administrative Appeal Review Officer
USACE, Asheville Regulatory Field Office
CESAD-PDO
151 Patton Ave
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
RM 208
60 Forsyth Street, Room 10M15
Asheville, NC 28801
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
828-271-7980
Phone: [phone]
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government
consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15 day
notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in all site investigations.
L ate:
Telephone number:
Signature of appellant or agent.
For arlFlualsi or. InitiA Plraffeired Permits send this fonm to:
Elistniall Eriginuer, Wilmington Rdgulatar3l Div isfan, Attr.: Willlfam Elliott, 69 Darlington Avcuuie, Whilmiriglor,
Ncirth Carolina 28403
For Permit dcinkils, Pncifferddl Elenmits arid) aipproved Jurisdlidllicna] Eletemimfr aticoois mind this farm ila:
Division En€linden, Commaridlen, U.S. Army Engiriedr Divfsicini, Suuth Allar ilia, Attri: Mr. Jascirii Stdelci,
Adminiistnative Appcial Offlecir, C EISAD-TIDO, 60 Flarsytli Street, Roam 10Ml _', Atllantii, Gdongia 2-103031-M01
Ph em e: (404) 96 1-91311

ATTACHMENT A
RRELIMINARYJIJRI.EDIC111CNAU DEITERMINATICN FCRM
BACKG RC UND IN RC RMAIJON
A. REI PC RT COM PLJB1lIC N DAME FOR PRE IJIMINA RY JURISDICTIONAL
DEITEIRMINA'TIION ijJD): ; 2 jj Et L _';? 0 /S—
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OR PERSON REICLES111NG PRELIMINARY JD:
SteNe Sul es, KCI Technologies Inc.
4 601 Sig F orks Road, Suite 220, Landmark Clenler 11, Raluiglh, NC .17609
C. DISIIRICT C F FICE FIIJB NA MIE, AND NL MIBER: 0i
D. RROJECI'n LOCA TIC N(S) AND BACKGRCL ND INK RMATICN:
'1356 Rock Rodd, Rulheri ondton, IN CI
MUSE THE ATTACHECI TIAIBLE TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE WATERBODISS AT DIFFHRBNT
SITES]
State: NC Couri4/parish/borough: Futherfarc City: Ruterondton
Center ceordirlates of site (laVlong in degree decimal forrriail;:
Lal. 35.40511 ON; Long. -81.9371 °w
Universal Transverse Meicaior:
N ame of nearest waterbody: aEdheysCreek
Identify Ilestimaile; amCL rlt of waters ir1 the review ane a:
Norl-welland waters:
11,48,1 linear feel: 7 width (fl) and/or acres.
Cowardin Clasls: Riveuine
Stream) Flow Henenniai
Wetlands: 1.38 acres.
Cowardin Class: 9miengent
Name of ariywaten bodiesi on ite siite that Faye beein idelrlilified as Selation 10
waters:
Tidal:
Non -Tidal:

EI. REVIEW PERHORMEC ACR MITE EVA LUA TIIC N (CHECK ALL THAT
AMY]
EOffice (Desk; Determination. DallEl:
❑ Field Dale rmination. Datells) :
SURRCR71ING DATA. Data1 remiewed fdin preliminary JD
(check all that apply - checked items should be included it ciasiel file) and,
where checked and recuested, anpropeiaitely nellenence selurces below]:
0 Marls, plans, plotci ar plat submitile d by or on behalf of the
applicant/conSIL Itarill: Viciriity Map
❑✓ Dala sheets prelpared/submittlec by or on behalf of it
apr li ntaonSL Itani.
Cffice concurs wilt data sheetsAlcelineation nelporl.
Office does not concur with data oheals/delir ealion re port.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:,
❑ Corps navigable wate ns' study:
CU.S. Geological Elurvey Hyc rellagic Atlas:
❑ USIGS NHD data
❑ USC SI 8 and 12 digit F UC maps
❑✓ U.S. Geological SL mey mapils) . Cile scale & quad narrier 12411 Rutherkrdton North (101:)
❑ lJ SIDA Nato ral Resources Conservatian Service S oil Slt, rvey.
Citation:
❑ N ational wellands invelr tory rriaplls) . Cite nary
❑ State/Local wetland invelnlory map(s):
E FBMA/FIRM rrlaps:
❑ 100 -year Flloodplairl Ellevalion is:
ISN ational Gelode cilia Ve d ical DaiilL m oft •19219;
WAt otogllaphs: Fv-� Aerial IIN ame & Datel) : 21010 Slalewide Aerial Rholographs or
❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Rue%ious determinatiori(s; . File r o. and date of response lefteii:
❑ Citer infoimalion (please sipecifA):

1. The Clorps of engineers belie%es it at there may to junisc ictional wailers of the
Uniled States ori the sL bjeici site, anc it a permit aipplicarill or oilier afiecilec party
who reiquested this preliminary J❑ is t eneby advised of his or t er opticin la
request and obtain an approved jwiisdiciional delerminaIlion (JD) for it at site.
N evert f Bless, the penmil applicant or other person who ne quesied it is
preliminary , D has declinec to e) ercise the option to obtain an approvec . D in
it is instance ar d at thi;i time.
2. Iri any ciiicc rrzilance wt elle a permit ariplicani obiaiins ari individc all perrr it, on
a N ationwide C eneral Perrr ill (INWR) or olt er gerieinal penmiii veniilicatiori requiring
"pre-corzirLction notification" (PCN;, on requests verification fon a non -reporting
NWR on otheir gerieral permit, and the permit aplplicani has noil requestec an
appro%ed JD for tt a acdivily, It a permiiil applicant is t eret y made aware of It e
follow ing: (1) the permit applicar t f as elected to seek a clermit authorization
based ori a preliminary , D, whit t c oe s riot make an offloial determinatiori of
jL risdiclional walers; (2) that It a appliciant has the option to request an approvec
D before accepting the to i oris and cont itions of It a penrriil aL 111' orizalion, anc
It at basing a permit authorization on an applroveic . D count possibly result in less
compensatory mitigation being recluired c r c iffereriil special conditions; 113) ihail
It ei aprilicant t as the right to reiquesi ari individual permit rathein than acceptirig
the fermis and conditions of It a NWP or other general permit authoniaatiori; (4)
thal the applicanll car accept a pe rrr it authorization and It ereby acl rete to comiclly
with all the le anis and conditions of if at plermiil, including wt atever mitigation
neiquireme rills the Corps has determined to be nie ciessary; 115; that underlak ing
any activity in reliance upon the sut jecd permit authorization without nequeslling
an approved Al aonstitutes tt ell applicant's accepilance of It a use of it ei
ple limiinaryl J❑, br.1 that either iorrri of JD will be processed as soon as is
pnaclicable; 116) accepting a perrr it authorization (e.g., signing a pnoffeled
individual penmiit, or underiak ing any activity iri reliance on any form of Corps
pe mr it authooization based on a prelimins ryl JD constitutes agiieemerit that all
wetlands and other water bodies on It ell site affecteid in any way by that activity
are jL risdictional wateir: of the Uriited States, ar d precludes any at allenge llo
SL ch jt, risdiclion in any adrr inislralive or juc icial comipliance c r eriforcemerill
action, or in any administrative appeal cir in any Federal court; and I17) whether
the applican9 elects louse eithe r an approved JD oii a preilimiriaryl . D, thall JD
will be prccesseid as soon as is piiaciicable. Auriher, an approved JD, a proffered
iridi%idLa[ permit (land all terms and condiilions contained theiiiein), or individual
permit c enial can be admiinislnatively appealed PL rsuarit to 33 C.A.R. Parl 331,
and It at in any ac minis1raiive appeal, jurisdictional issues can be raised 11see 33
C.R.R. 331.5(a]112;;. If, curing It at adminislrali%ei apteal, it becorries rieceissary
to make an official deleirmiinaliein %t ether C WA ,jurisdiction exists o%er a site, or
ilei provide an official delineation of ,jurisdictional waters ori the site, It a Corps will
provide ar approved JD to accomplish that reisull, as soori as is plracticat le.

-Ih is preliminary, D finds it at It ere "maybe" waters of it a Unilled States on the
SL bject project site, and identifies all aquatic features on the site that could to
affealec by the proposed anti% illy, based on tt a follawing infonrriation:
IMPORTANT NOW: The inkrmailion necoedeid en tlhisi ikmm has nct
neicessanily been verified by the Ccrpsi and should not he relied upoin kir
1akv 'unisdictieinal detleieminaiilicins.
�2L
Signatuie and date of Sigriatune and daile of
Regulatory Rro�ect Menageui person requ eisting preliminary J 0
(REQUIRED) (REG UIR130, ur less obtaining
the sic nature is impoacliciable)

M
of
om
a
w
a✓
4
�I
C.1
CI
al
C
al
�
O•
u
-PI
w
N
�-
p0
A
d
VJ
CD
(11
CD
CD
CD
CD
CD
cI
0
0
0
0
0
CD
rrA O
A
n
�dbbb�
C17
CrJ
Cn
CrJ
Cr
►z
tr
►z
l?
r °
� ai
W
a.
O
N
O
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
O`I
A
�
Ccl
ul
a
-PI
.4I
-PI
J
u e
n
CEJ
O
LA
�A
Ul
rlA
LA
w
w
w
w
u
r
�!.A
�A
�AUuu>�
oOClw
�.p
�-
oo
"o
-;�,
al
OCl
-0I
cxl
a
!PI
C
OCI
lo,I
C
oa
t,:
lg�-
C
1C
v
a
ai
ai
ai
oa
oa
oa
oa
C
�c
"C
"C
z
"C
�c
�c
L,
U.
U.
4:
U.
W
r+'
u
--
,
,
O`I
u
a
al
oa
oa
�1
d
w
a✓
4
�I
C.1
CI
al
C
al

I
4
t
✓
Y
r
e
ht
mb
-. i �
•e
y Iil I
�
�•
-
fig

Categorical Exclusion Form for
Division of Mitigation Services Projects
Version 1.4
Note: Only Appendix A should to be submitted (along with any supporting documentation) as the
environmental document.
Version 1.4, 8/18/05
Project Name:
ProjectPart 1: General • e
Sandy Bridge Farm Stream and Wetland Restoration
Site
Coun Name:
Rutherford County, NC
EEP Number:
96920
Project S onsor:
KCI Technologies, Inc.
Project Contact Name:
Tim Morris
Project Contact Address:
4601 Six Forks Rd, Suite 220, Raleigh, NC 27609
Project Contact E-mail:
tim.morris kci.com
EEP Project Mana er:
Har Tsomides
ProjectDescription
For Official Use Only
Reviewed By:
(o I.ot
Date v
DMS Pr ject Manager
Conditional Approved By:
Date
For Division Administrator
FHWA
❑ Check this box if there are
outstanding issues
Final Approval By:
Date
For Division A mmistrator
FHWA
Version 1.4, 8/18/05

Part 2: All Projects
Regulation/Question ..
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA)
1. Is the project located in a CAMA county?
❑ Yes
® No
2. Does the project involve ground -disturbing activities within a CAMA Area of
❑ 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 Liabilit 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 Property 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
ElNo
* what the fair market value is believed to be?
❑ N/A
Version 1.4, 8/18/05

Part 3: Ground -Disturbing Activities
Regulation/Question ..
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?
❑ 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?
❑ 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
❑ Yes
of antiquity?
❑ No
® N/A
3. Will a permit from the appropriate Federal agency be required?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
4. Has a permit been obtained?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
Archaeological 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?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
4. Has a permit been obtained?
❑ 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 USFWS/NOAA-Fisheries concur in the effects determination?
❑ Yes
(By virtue of no -response)
❑ No
® N/A
6. Has the USFWS/NOAA-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"
❑ 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
❑ Yes
sites?
❑ No
® N/A
Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA)
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?
® Yes
❑ No
❑ N/A
Land and Water Conservation Fund Act (Section 6(f))
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?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 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
❑ Yes
project on EFH?
❑ No
® N/A
4. Will the project adversely affect EFH?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
5. Has consultation with NOAH-Fisheries occurred?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
Miaratory Bird Treat Act MBTA
1. Does the USFWS have any recommendations with the project relative to the MBTA?
❑ Yes
® No
2. Have the USFWS recommendations been incorporated?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
Wilderness Act
1. Is the project in a Wilderness area?
❑ Yes
® No
2. Has a special use permit and/or easement been obtained from the maintaining
❑ Yes
federal agency?
❑ No
® N/A
Version 1.4, 8/18/05

Appendix
Supporting Documentation for
Categorical Exclusion Form for NC DENR Division of Mitigation
Services (DMS) Projects
Contents
Limited Phase I ESA — EDR Report
Radius Report
Sanborn Map
Historic Topography Report
Agency Letters
State Historic Preservation Office Letter
United States Fish and Wildlife Service Letter with RTE Report
N RCS Letter
NC Wildlife Resources Commission Letter
NC Natural Heritage Program Letter
Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians Letter
Rutherford County Airport Note
Uniform Act Letter
Letter References
Figure 1 — Vicinity Map
Figure 2 — Project Watershed
Figure 3 — Watershed Land Use
Figure 4 — Project Area
Agency Response
State Historic Preservation Office Response
- Archaeological Survey Report (Archaeological Consultants of the
Carolinas, Inc.
Farmland Conversion Form (AD -1006) and USDA Letter
NC Natural Heritage Program Letter
Rutherford County Airport Authority Letter

Limited Phase I ESA
1. Radius Report
2. Sanborn Map
3. Historic Topography

Sandy Bridge Farm
1356 Rock Road
Rutherfordton, NC 28139
Inquiry Number: 4326486.2s
June 15, 2015
6 Armstrong Road, 4th floor
www.edrnet.comt.com Shelton, CT 06484
(rEDR'5Environmental Data Resources Inc Toll Free: 2.0050
FORM-LBD-CCA

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A search of available environmental records was conducted by Environmental Data Resources, Inc (EDR).
The report was designed to assist parties seeking to meet the search requirements of EPA's Standards
and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries (40 CFR Part 312), the ASTM Standard Practice for
Environmental Site Assessments (E 1527-13) or custom requirements developed for the evaluation of
environmental risk associated with a parcel of real estate.
TARGET PROPERTY INFORMATION
ADDRESS
1356 ROCK ROAD
RUTHERFORDTON, NC 28139
COORDINATES
Latitude (North):
Longitude (West):
Universal Tranverse Mercator:
UTM X (Meters):
UTM Y (Meters):
Elevation:
35.4096000 - 35° 24'34.56"
81.9370000 - 81' 56' 13.20"
Zone 17
414922.2
3918672.0
875 ft. above sea level
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP ASSOCIATED WITH TARGET PROPERTY
Target Property Map:
Most Recent Revision
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY IN THIS REPORT
35081-D8 RUTHERFORDTON NORTH, NC
2002
Portions of Photo from: 20120816
Source: USDA
TC4326486.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1

Target Property Address:
1356 ROCK ROAD
RUTHERFORDTON, NC 28139
Click on Map ID to see full detail.
MAP
ID SITE NAME ADDRESS
NO MAPPED SITES FOUND
MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
DATABASE ACRONYMS
RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.)
ELEVATION DIRECTION
4326486.2s Page 2

DETAIL MAP - 4326486.2S
SITE NAME: Sandy Bridge Farm CLIENT: KCI Technologies, Inc.
ADDRESS: 1356 Rock Road CONTACT: Tim Morris
Rutherfordton NC 28139 INQUIRY #: 4326486.2s
LAT/LONG: 35.4096 / 81.937 DATE: June 15, 2015 5:46 pm
Copyright «o 2015 EDR, Inc (c 2010 Tale Atlas Rel. 07/2009.
Target Property
o 1116
Ire 114 Miles
A,
Sites at elevations higher than
or equal to the target property
Indian Reservations BIA
Hazardous Substance
Sites at elevations lower than
-
Oil & Gas pipelines from USGS
Disposal Sites
the target property
0
100 -year flood zone
1
Manufactured Gas Plants
�
500 -year flood zone
r
Sensitive Receptors
National Priority List Sites
0
National Wetland Inventory
Dept. Defense Sites
0
State Wetlands
This report includes Interactive Map Layers to
display and/or hide map information. The
legend includes only those icons for the
default map view.
SITE NAME: Sandy Bridge Farm CLIENT: KCI Technologies, Inc.
ADDRESS: 1356 Rock Road CONTACT: Tim Morris
Rutherfordton NC 28139 INQUIRY #: 4326486.2s
LAT/LONG: 35.4096 / 81.937 DATE: June 15, 2015 5:46 pm
Copyright «o 2015 EDR, Inc (c 2010 Tale Atlas Rel. 07/2009.

MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
Distance Target
Total
Database (Miles) Property
< 1/8
1/8-1/4
1/4-1/2
1/2 - 1
> 1
Plotted
STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Federal NPL site list
NPL 1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
0
Proposed NPL 1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
0
NPL LIENS TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
Federal Delisted NPL site list
Delisted NPL 1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
0
Federal CERCUS list
CERCLIS 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
FEDERAL FACILITY 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site List
CERC-NFRAP 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list
CORRACTS 1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
0
Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD facilities list
RCRA-TSDF 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
Federal RCRA generators list
RCRA-LQG 0.250
0
0
NR
NR
NR
0
RCRA-SQG 0.250
0
0
NR
NR
NR
0
RCRA-CESQG 0.250
0
0
NR
NR
NR
0
Federal institutional controls /
engineering controls registries
US ENG CONTROLS 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
US INST CONTROL 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
LUCIS 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
Federal ERNS list
ERNS TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
State- and tribal - equivalent NPL
NC HSDS 1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
0
State- and tribal - equivalent CERCLIS
SHWS 1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
0
State and tribal landfill and/or
solid waste disposal site lists
SWF/LF 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
OLI 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
State and tribal leaking storage tank lists
LUST 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
TC4326486.2s Page 4

Database
MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
Distance Target Total
(Miles) Property < 1/8 1/8-1/4 1/4-1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted
LUST TRUST 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
LAST 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
INDIAN LUST 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
State and tribal registered storage tank lists
US HIST CDL
TP
Local Land Records
0
LIENS 2
TP
UST 0.250
0
0
NR
NR
NR
0
AST 0.250
0
0
NR
NR
NR
0
INDIAN UST 0.250
0
0
NR
NR
NR
0
FEMA UST 0.250
0
0
NR
NR
NR
0
State and tribal institutional
control/ engineering control registries
INST CONTROL 0.500
State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites
INDIAN VCP 0.500
VCP 0.500
State and tribal Brownfields sites
BROWNFIELDS 0.500
ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Local Brownfield lists
0
US BROWNFIELDS
0.500
Local Lists of Landfill/ Solid
Waste Disposal Sites
NR
ODI
0.500
DEBRIS REGION 9
0.500
SWRCY
0.500
HIST LF
0.500
INDIAN ODI
0.500
Local Lists of Hazardous waste /
Contaminated Sites
NR 0
US CDL
TP
US HIST CDL
TP
Local Land Records
0
LIENS 2
TP
Records of Emergency Release Reports
HMIRS
TP
IMD
0.500
SPILLS
TP
SPILLS 80
TP
SPILLS 90
TP
Other Ascertainable Records
RCRA NonGen / NLR
0.250
0 0
0
NR
NR 0
0 0
0
NR
NR 0
0 0
0
NR
NR 0
0 0
0
NR
NR 0
0
0
0
NR
NR 0
0
0
0
NR
NR 0
0
0
0
NR
NR 0
0
0
0
NR
NR 0
0
0
0
NR
NR 0
0
0
0
NR
NR 0
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR 0
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR 0
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR 0
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR 0
0
0
0
NR
NR 0
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR 0
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR 0
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR 0
0
0
NR
NR
NR 0
TC4326486.2s Page 5

MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
EDR HIGH RISK HISTORICAL RECORDS
EDR Exclusive Records
EDR MGP 1.000
EDR US Hist Auto Stat 0.250
EDR US Hist Cleaners 0.250
EDR RECOVERED GOVERNMENT ARCHIVES
Exclusive Recovered Govt. Archives
RGA HWS TP
RGA LF TP
RGA LUST TP
- Totals -- 0
0 0 0 0 NR 0
0 0 NR NR NR 0
0 0 NR NR NR 0
NR
Search
NR
NR
NR 0
NR
NR
NR
NR
Distance Target
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR 0
Total
Database
(Miles) Property
< 1/8
1/8 - 1/4
1/4-1/2
1/2 - 1
> 1
Plotted
DOT OPS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
DOD
1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
0
FUDS
1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
0
CONSENT
1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
0
ROD
1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
0
UMTRA
0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
US MINES
0.250
0
0
NR
NR
NR
0
TRIS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
TSCA
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
FTTS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
HIST FTTS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
SSTS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
ICIS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
PADS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
MLTS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
RADINFO
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
FINDS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
RAATS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
RMP
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
UIC
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
DRYCLEANERS
0.250
0
0
NR
NR
NR
0
NPDES
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
INDIAN RESERV
1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
0
SCRD DRYCLEANERS
0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
COAL ASH
0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
Financial Assurance
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
LEAD SMELTERS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
US AIRS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
EPA WATCH LIST
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
US FIN ASSUR
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
COAL ASH EPA
0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
PCB TRANSFORMER
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
COAL ASH DOE
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
2020 COR ACTION
0.250
0
0
NR
NR
NR
0
PRP
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
EDR HIGH RISK HISTORICAL RECORDS
EDR Exclusive Records
EDR MGP 1.000
EDR US Hist Auto Stat 0.250
EDR US Hist Cleaners 0.250
EDR RECOVERED GOVERNMENT ARCHIVES
Exclusive Recovered Govt. Archives
RGA HWS TP
RGA LF TP
RGA LUST TP
- Totals -- 0
0 0 0 0 NR 0
0 0 NR NR NR 0
0 0 NR NR NR 0
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR 0
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR 0
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR 0
0
0
0
0
0 0
TC4326486.2s Page 6

MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
Distance Target Total
Database (Miles) Property < 1/8 1/8-1/4 1/4-1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted
NOTES:
TP = Target Property
NR = Not Requested at this Search Distance
Sites may be listed in more than one database
TC4326486.2s Page 7

Sandy Bridge Farm
1356 Rock Road
Rutherfordton, NC 28139
Inquiry Number: 4326486.3
June 15, 2015
6 Armstrong Read, 41M Floor
Shell -on. Conn-ecticut 0484
EDW Tall Free: BOO.252_0135O
www.1adtrti1g-t Com

Certified Sanborn® Ma
Site Name:
Sandy Bridge Farm
1356 Rock Road
Rutherfordton, NC 28139
EDR Inquiry # 4326486.3
Client Name:
KCI Technologies, Inc.
4601 Six Forks Road
Raleigh, NC 27609
Contact: Tim Morris
(rEDRO
6/15/15
The Sanborn Library has been searched by EDR and maps covering the target property location as provided by KCI
Technologies, Inc. were identified for the years listed below. The Sanborn Library is the largest, most complete
collection of fire insurance maps. The collection includes maps from Sanborn, Bromley, Perris & Browne, Hopkins,
Barlow, and others. Only Environmental Data Resources Inc. (EDR) is authorized to grant rights for commercial
reproduction of maps by the Sanborn Library LLC, the copyright holder for the collection. Results can be authenticated
by visiting www.edrnet.com/sanborn.
The Sanborn Library is continually enhanced with newly identified map archives. This report accesses all maps in the
collection as of the day this report was generated.
Certified Sanborn Results:
Site Name:
Sandy Bridge Farm
Address:
1356 Rock Road
City, State, Zip:
Rutherfordton, NC 28139
Cross Street:
P.O. #
20157877
Project:
Sandy Bridge Farm
Certification #
AB6A-433A-B4D2
UNMAPPED PROPERTY
This report certifies that the complete holdings
Library, LLC collection have been searched
supplied target property information, and fire
covering the target property were not found.
Limited Permission To Make Copies
Sanborn® Library search results
Certification # AB6A-433A-B4D2
The Sanborn Library includes more than 1.2 million
fire insurance maps from Sanborn, Bromley, Perris &
Browne, Hopkins, Barlow and others which track
of the Sanborn historical property usage in approximately 12,000
based on client American cities and towns. Collections searched:
insurance maps
f Library of Congress
V' University Publications of America
N EDR Private Collection
The Sanborn Library LLC Since 1866TM
KCI Technologies, Inc. (the client) is permitted to make up to FIVE photocopies of this Sanborn Map transmittal and each fire insurance map
accompanying this report solely for the limited use of its customer. No one other than the client is authorized to make copies. Upon request made
directly to an EDR Account Executive, the client may be permitted to make a limited number of additional photocopies. This permission is
conditioned upon compliance by the client, its customer and their agents with EDR's copyright policy; a copy of which is available upon request.
Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark notice
This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, Inc. It cannot be
concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR
IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE
MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL
RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF
ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE, ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL,
INCIDENTAL CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY
LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS". Any analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk
levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing
any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment performed by an
environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any property. Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be
construed as legal advice.
Copyright 2015 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of
Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission.
EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are
the property of their respective owners.
4326486 - 3 page 2

Sandy Bridge Farm
1356 Rock Road
Rutherfordton, NC 28139
Inquiry Number: 4326486.4
June 15, 2015
6 Armstrong Read, 41M Floor
Shell -on. Conn-ecticut 0484
EDW Tall Free: BOO.252_0135O
www.1adtrti1g-t Com

Historical Topographic Map
TARGET QUAD
SITE NAME: Sandy Bridge Farm
CLIENT: KCI Technologies, Inc.
N
NAME: RUTHERFORDTON
ADDRESS: 1356 Rock Road
CONTACT: Tim Morris
Rutherfordton, NC 28139
INQUIRY#: 4326486.4
TNORTH
MAP YEAR: 1966
LAT/LONG: 35.4096 / -81.937
RESEARCH DATE: 06/15/2015
SERIES: 7.5
SCALE: 1:24000

Historical Topographic Map
S � 1
g?qtv
L\ \
i r
_ 1jP
` ('
jx
. 040 1066,)x<
�a l
�4' _,, �, ,��'�� •ti , inn � ice,, ° � � _,r�, � -- .z,--�j J � n}
�,_ 1 `� �r `011 d`' � •� .�� `�\ � r c fr
a'
l��! �`I l Y _ I•yl 4Y r� \�+� Vf ��, � � ��� f7/] i7_ � .�/ X � �we�. If..i....�r 1 �`� .'� \\\F
TARGET QUAD
SITE NAME: Sandy Bridge Farm
CLIENT: KCI Technologies, Inc.
N
NAME: RUTHERFORDTON
ADDRESS: 1356 Rock Road
CONTACT: Tim Morris
TNORTH
Rutherfordton, NC 28139
INQUIRY#: 4326486.4
MAP YEAR: 1993
LAT/LONG: 35.4096 / -81.937
RESEARCH DATE: 06/15/2015
SERIES: 7.5
SCALE: 1:24000

Historical Topographic Map
TARGET QUAD
SITE NAME: Sandy Bridge Farm
CLIENT: KCI Technologies, Inc.
N
NAME: RUTHERFORDTON
ADDRESS: 1356 Rock Road
CONTACT: Tim Morris
TNORTH
Rutherfordton, NC 28139
INQUIRY#: 4326486.4
MAP YEAR: 2002
LAT/LONG: 35.4096 / -81.937
RESEARCH DATE: 06/15/2015
SERIES: 7.5
SCALE: 1:24000

Agency Letters

KCI
TECHNOLOGIES
June 16, 2015
ENGINEERS SCIENTISTS SURVEYORS CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS
Landmark Center H, Suite 220 4601 Six Forks Road Raleigh, NC 27609 [phone] [phone] Fax
Ms. Renee Gledhill -Earley
Environmental Review Coordinator
State Historic Preservation Office
4617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-4617
Subject: Cultural Resources Review
Sandy Bridge Farm Stream and Wetland Restoration Project
KCI Job # 20157877
Dear Mrs. Gledhill -Earley:
On behalf of our client, the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (DMS), KCI Technologies, Inc.
requests review and comment on any possible issues that might emerge with respect to archaeological or cultural
resources associated with a potential stream and wetland restoration project on the above referenced site. The
subject site, known as the Sandy Bridge Farm stream and wetland restoration site, is located north-northeast of
Rutherfordton, North Carolina in the central portion of Rutherford County (Figure 1). Specifically, the site is
located 2.2 miles north on Rock Road from the intersection of US 64 and US 74A. It is situated within the
03050105 (Broad River Basin) Watershed Cataloging Unit and the 03050105070020 Local Watershed Unit (Figure
2). Land use in the watershed is primarily agricultural or forest land (Figure 3). Please accept the attached
information as a submittal for cultural resources review by the State Historic Preservation Office and the Office of
State Archaeology.
The planned stream and wetland restoration work aims to restore the hydrology and vegetation components to this
riparian wetland system by filling existing ditches across the site and stabilizing the site with native vegetation.
There will not be any impacts to existing structures (buildings, barns, etc.) on the subject property. No architectural
structures or archeological artifacts have been observed or noted during preliminary surveys of the site for
restoration purposes. In addition, the majority of the site has historically been disturbed due to agricultural purposes
such as cattle grazing, ditching and draining. Proposed mitigation actions are shown on Figure 4.
Please feel free to contact me at 919-278-2511, should you have any questions or require any further information
concerning the extent of site disturbance associated with this project. Thank you in advance for your assistance.
Sincerely,
Timothy J. Morris
Senior Environmental Scientist
Ecosystem Dynamics Practice
KC1 TECHNOLOGIES www.kci.com
Employee -Owned Since 1988

KCIENGINEERS SCIENTISTS SURVEYORS CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS
Landmark Center 11, Suite 220 4601 Six Forks Road Raleigh, NC 27609 [phone] [phone] Fax
TECHNOLOGIES
June 16, 2015
Ms. Marella Buncick,
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801
Subject: Endangered Species Act, Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, Migratory Bird Treaty Act
Sandy Bridge Farm Stream and Wetland Restoration Site
KCI Job # 20157877
Dear Mr. Benjamin:
Please accept this information pertaining to the proposed Sandy Bridge Farm stream and wetland
restoration site for natural area and rare species review by the US Fish and Wildlife Service. The subject
site, known as the Sandy Bridge Farm stream and wetland restoration site, is located north-northeast of
Rutherfordton, North Carolina in the central portion of Rutherford County (Figure 1). Specifically, the
site is located 2.2 miles north on Rock Road from the intersection of US 64 and US 74A. It is situated
within the 03050105 (Broad River Basin) Watershed Cataloging Unit and the 03050105070020 Local
Watershed Unit (Figure 2). Land use in the watershed is primarily agricultural or forest land (Figure 3).
A portion of the site (Figure 4) is currently under investigation as a wetland restoration project for the
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services. The funding for this project comes from the USDOT
Federal Highway Administration through the North Carolina Department of Transportation. Land use at
this site is primarily pastureland. The planned restoration work aims to restore the hydrology and
vegetation components to this riparian wetland system by filling drainage ditches, restoring a channelized
stream to a meandering channel integrated with riparian wetlands, reducing the impacts of adjacent
agricultural practices, and stabilizing the site with native vegetation. All of the wetland restoration
actions will focus on reconnecting the restoration areas to existing wetlands to expand wetland habitat and
the forested corridor along Catheys Creek. Besides expanding wetland habitat, it will also increase the
buffering capacity before runoff reaches Catheys Creek. There will not be any impacts to existing
structures (buildings, barns, etc.) on the subject property. As part of the environmental documentation
process (Categorical Exclusion), coordination with the NCWRC and the USFWS is required for
compliance with the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act and the Endangered Species Act.
We have already obtained an updated species list for Rutherford County from your web site. The rare,
threatened and endangered species for this county are included in Attachment 1. We are requesting that
you please provide any known information for any additional species, if any, in the county that we should
be aware of in the development of this project. The USFWS will be contacted if additional studies find
suitable habitat for any listed species or if we determine that the project may affect one or more federally
listed species or designated critical habitat. Please provide comments on any possible issues that might
KCI TECHNOLOGIES www.kci.com
Employee -Owned Since 1988

emerge with respect to endangered species, migratory birds or other trust resources from the construction
of a stream and wetland restoration project on the subject property.
If we have not heard from you in 30 days we will assume that our species list is correct, that you do not
have any comments regarding associated laws, and that you do not have any information relevant to this
project at the current time.
We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please feel free to contact us with
any questions that you may have concerning the extent of site disturbance associated with this project.
My phone number is 919-278-2511 and my email address is tim.morriskkci.com
Sincerely,
Timothy J. Morris
Project Manager
Enclosures
KCI TECHNOLOGIES
www.kci.com
Employee -Owned Since 1988

Endangered Species Review for Sandy Bridge Farm Stream and Wetland
Restoration Site
Rutherford County, North Carolina
A review of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) listing of federally
endangered species, threatened species, species of concern and candidate species revealed
three endangered species, three threatened species, and twelve federal species of concern
in Rutherford County (Table 1).
Table 1. Species in Rutherford County, North Carolina listed under the federal
Endangered Species Act.
Major
Common
Federal Status/
Taxonomic
Scientific Name
Name
Record Status
Group
Vertebrate
Dendroica
Cerulean
FSC/Current
cerulea
warbler
Vertebrate
Myotis leibii
Eastern
FSC/Current
small -footed bat
Vertebrate
Aneides aeneus
Green
FSC/Current
salamander
Vertebrate
Myotis sodalis
Indiana bat
Endangered/Current
Vertebrate
Myotis
Northern
Threatened/Current
septentrionalis
long-eared bat
Pituophis
Northern pine
Vertebrate
melanoleucus
snake
FSC/Obscure
melanoleucus
Neotoma
Southern
Vertebrate
floridana
Appalachian
FSC/Current
haematoreia
eastern woodrat
Vascular Plant
Packera
Blue Ridge
FSC/Current
millefolium
Ragwort
Vascular Plant
Juglans cinerea
Butternut
FSC/Current
Vascular Plant
Hexastylis
Dwarf -flowered
Threatened/Current
naniflora
heartleaf
Vascular Plant
Solidago
Granite dome
FSC/Current
simulans
goldenrod
Vascular Plant
Saxifraga
Gray's saxifrage
FSC/Current
caroliniana
Vascular Plant
Silene ovata
Mountain
FSC/Historic
catchfly
Vascular Plant
Hexastylis
Mountain
FSC/Current
contracta
heartleaf
Vascular Plant
Isotria
Small whorled
Threatened/Current
medeoloides
pogonia
Vascular Plant
Monotropsis
Sweet pinesap
FSC/Current
odorata

Vascular Plant
Sisyrinchium
White irisette
Endangered/Current
dichotomum
Lichen
Gymnoderma
Rock gnome
Endangered/Current
lineare
lichen
Species and Habitat Description (Threatened and Endangered Species)
Indiana Bat (Myotis sodalis)
Indiana bats can be found throughout the eastern half of the United States. Indiana bats
hibernate during winter in caves or, occasionally, in abandoned mines. For hibernation,
they require cool, humid caves with stable temperatures, under 50° F but above freezing.
Very few caves within the range of the species have these conditions. Hibernation is an
adaptation for survival during the cold winter months when no insects are available for
bats to eat. Bats must store energy in the form of fat before hibernating. During the six
months of hibernation the stored fat is their only source of energy. If bats are disturbed or
cave temperatures increase, more energy is needed and hibernating bats may starve. After
hibernation, Indiana bats migrate to their summer habitat in wooded areas where they
usually roost under loose tree bark on dead or dying trees. During summer, males roost
alone or in small groups, while females roost in larger groups of up to 100 bats or more.
Indiana bats also forage in or along the edges of forested areas.
Northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis)
The northern long-eared bat is federally listed as a threatened species under the
Endangered Species Act. Northern long-eared bats spend winter hibernating in caves and
mines, called hibernacula. They use areas in various sized caves or mines with constant
temperatures, high humidity, and no air currents. Within hibernacula, surveyors find
them hibernating most often in small crevices or cracks, often with only the nose and ears
visible. During the summer, northern long-eared bats roost singly or in colonies
underneath bark, in cavities or in crevices of both live trees and snags (dead trees). Males
and non -reproductive females may also roost in cooler places, like caves and mines.
Northern long-eared bats seem to be flexible in selecting roosts, choosing roost trees
based on suitability to retain bark or provide cavities or crevices. This bat has also been
found rarely roosting in structures, like barns and sheds. Threats to the northern long-
eared bat include disease (namely the White -nose syndrome), wind farm operation
mortality, and removal of habitat via converting forests to other land uses.
Dwarf -flowered heartleaf (Hexastylis naniflora)
Dwarf -flowered heartleaf is a low -growing evergreen perennial plant that is federally
listed as a threatened species. Dwarf -flowered heartleaf grows in acidic soils along bluffs
and adjacent slopes, in boggy areas next to streams and creek heads, and along the slopes
of nearby hillsides and ravines. It can be found in the upper piedmont region of Western
North Carolina and upstate South Carolina. The greatest threat to dwarf -flowered
heartleaf is conversion of habitat to agricultural, residential, commercial, and industrial
uses. Habitat may also be eliminated through the construction of reservoirs, which floods
habitat.

Small whorled pogonia (Isotria medeoloides)
The small whorled pogonia is a member of the orchid family that is currently listed as a
threatened species. Although widely distributed, the small whorled pogonia is rare. It is
found in 17 eastern states and Ontario, Canada. Populations are typically small with less
than 20 plants. This orchid grows in older hardwood stands of beech, birch, maple, oak,
and hickory that have an open understory. Sometimes it grows in stands of softwoods
such as hemlock. It prefers acidic soils with a thick layer of dead leaves, often on slopes
near small streams. The primary threat to the small whorled pogonia is the past and
continuing loss of populations when their habitat is developed for urban expansion. Some
forestry practices eliminate habitat. Also, habitat may be degraded or individual plants
lost because of recreational activities and trampling.
White Irisette (Sisyrinchium dichotomum)
The white irisette is a perennial herb that is found in specific regions of North and South
Carolina. The species is found on mid -elevation slopes, characterized by open, dry to
moderate -moisture oak -hickory forests. White irisette usually grows in shallow soils on
regularly disturbed sites (such as woodland edges and roadsides) and over rocky, steep
terrain. It is currently threatened by human -related disturbances, such as development.
Rock Gnome Lichen (Gymnoderma lineare)
Found in the Southern Appalachian Mountains, the Rock gnome lichen is primarily
limited to vertical rock faces where seepage water from forest soils above flows during
(and only during) very wet times. It appears that the species needs a moderate amount of
light, but that it cannot tolerate high-intensity solar radiation. It does well on moist,
generally open, sites, with northern exposures, but needs at least partial canopy coverage
where the aspect is southern or western.
Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGPA)
The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGPA) prohibits the killing, selling or
otherwise harming of eagles, their nests and their eggs. The bald eagle was delisted as
endangered in 1995 and as threatened in 2007. The BGPA continues to protect the
species regardless of its delisted status. Bald eagles have been documented in Rutherford
County.
Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus)
Bald eagles like lakes and other large bodies of water. During the summer, they can be
seen soaring above lakes and in the nearby trees. They prefer lakes and reservoirs with
lots of fish and surrounding forests. In the winter, bald eagles can be seen around
unfrozen lakes and hunting along coastlines, reservoirs and rivers. During the migration,
bald eagles are seen near all types of water habitats. The bald eagle is an opportunistic
feeder which subsists mainly on fish, which it swoops down and snatches from the water
with its talons. It builds the largest nest of any North American bird and the largest tree
nests ever recorded for any animal species, up to 4 m (13 ft) deep, 2.5 m (8.2 ft) wide,
and 1 metric ton (1.1 short tons) in weight. Sexual maturity is attained at the age of four

to five years. The bald eagle typically requires old-growth and mature stands of
coniferous or hardwood trees for perching, roosting, and nesting. Tree species reportedly
is less important to the eagle pair than the tree's height, composition and location.
Perhaps of paramount importance for this species is an abundance of comparatively large
trees surrounding the body of water. Selected trees must have good visibility, be over
20 in (66 ft) tall, an open structure, and proximity to prey.
Potential Habitat at the Sandy Bridge Farm Stream and Wetland Restoration Site
Habitat for Indiana bat (Mvotis sodalis)
Indiana bats find habitat in small to medium river and stream corridors with well-
developed riparian woods and in woodlots within 1 to 3 miles of small to medium rivers
and streams during the summer. During the winter, they hibernate in mines and caves.
Since the project area is currently used for agricultural production, it provides no suitable
habitat for Indiana bats.
Biological Conclusion: No effect
Habitat for Northern long-eared bat (Mvotis septentrionalis)
Hibernating in caves in the winter, and roosting in both live and dead trees in the winter,
the Northern long-eared bat finds habitat in forested areas along the eastern and north
central portion of the United States. Since the project site is currently in agricultural
production, there is no suitable habitat for this species.
Biological Conclusion: No effect
Habitat for Dwarf -flowered heartleaf (Hexastylis naniflora)
The Dwarf -flowered heartleaf grows along slopes, ravines, and valleys, and as well as in
boggy areas adjacent to streams. Its current threats include conversion of its native habitat
into other land uses. Since our project site has been altered by channelizing the stream
and converting the land into agricultural areas, there is currently no suitable habitat for
the Dwarf -flowered heartleaf at the project site.
Biological Conclusion: No effect
Habitat for Small whorled po og nia (Isotria medeoloides)
The small whorled pogonia lives in the open understories of old stands of hardwood
trees. Since the current land use of the project site is agricultural land, all trees on the site
have been historically removed, and there is no suitable habitat for this species at the site.
Furthermore, the channelization of the stream prevents it from finding habitat along the
small stream.
Biological Conclusion: No effect
Habitat for White irisette (Sisyrinchium dichotomum)

The White irisette is a vascular plant that inhabits dry to medium moisture environments,
with a preference for areas that regularly undergo disturbance events. Furthermore, it
prefers shallow soils in rocky and steep terrain. The project area is currently used as
agricultural land and does not have this disturbed, rocky substrate that the White irisette
occupies. Additionally, the site topography is generally flat as it is located within the
floodplain of Cathey Creek. The presence of water at the restoration site also precludes
the area from being a suitable habitat for the White irisette due to its preference for dry to
medium moisture conditions. Because of this and the specific habitat requirements of the
White irisette, we can safely conclude that there is no potential habitat for them within
the bounds of the project.
Biological Conclusion: No effect
Habitat for Rock Gnome Lichen (Gymnoderma lineare)
The Rock gnome lichen grows on wet, partially shaded, steep escarpments of vertical
rock faces. Since the project area consists of a stream and former wetland area that is now
under current agricultural production, there is an inherent lack of these habitat conditions
at the project site. Due to the particular need for vertical rock faces to grow on, we
conclude that there is no potential habitat for the Rock gnome lichen within the bounds of
the project.
Biological Conclusion: No effect
Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus)
Nesting habitat for the Bald Eagle does not exist within the boundaries of the project
area. Furthermore the project does not exist on a large body of water and mature trees do
not exist on the site. Adjacent areas along Cathey's Creek are generally composed of
second growth timber and do not appear to present nesting habitat for the bald eagle.
Biological Conclusion (BGPA) — No effect

Reference:
NCDENR, Wildlife Resources Commission. 2006. Carolina Wildlife Profiles.
http://www.ncwildlife.orWfs index 07 conservation.litin
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2006. North Carolina's Threatened and
Endangered Species. http://www.fws.gov/southeast/.

KCIENGINEERS SCIENTISTS SURVEYORS CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS
Landmark Center II, Suite 220 4601 Six Forks Road Raleigh, NC 27609 [phone] [phone] Fax
TECHNOLOGIES
June 3, 2015
Mr. Milton Cortes
USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service
4407 Bland Road, Suite 117
Raleigh, NC 27609
Subject: Farmland Conversion Impact Rating
Sandy Bridge Farm Stream and Wetland Restoration Project
KCI Job Number - 20157877
Dear Mr. Clary:
The purpose of this letter is to inform NRCS of our contractual intent to complete a stream and wetland restoration
project on the Hughes farm in Rutherford County. This work is expected to occur over the course of the next year.
The subject site, known as the Sandy Bridge Farm stream and wetland restoration site, is located north-northeast of
Rutherfordton, North Carolina in the central portion of Rutherford County (Figure 1). Specifically, the site is located
2.2 miles north on Rock Road from the intersection of US 64 and US 74A. It is situated within the 03050105
(Broad River Basin) Watershed Cataloging Unit and the 03050105070020 Local Watershed Unit (Figure 2). Land
use in the watershed is primarily agricultural or forest land (Figure 3).
A portion of the Hughes Property (Figure 4) is currently under investigation as a stream and wetland restoration
project for the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services. The funding for this project comes from the USDOT
and Federal Highway Administration. Land use at this site is primarily pastureland. The planned restoration work
aims to restore the hydrology and vegetation components to this riparian wetland system by filling existing ditches
across the site and stabilizing the site with native vegetation.
Following the review of the included documentation, please provide a determination regarding any potential impacts
from farmland conversion associated with this project. Included is the Farmland Conversion Impact Rating Form
(AD -1006); please complete Parts II, IV and V. Please feel free to contact me at tim.morriskkci.com, or 919-278-
2511, should you have any questions or require any further information concerning the extent of site disturbance
associated with this project. Thank you in advance for your assistance.
Sincerely,
Timothy J. Morris
Senior Environmental Scientist
Ecosystem Dynamics Practice
KCI TECHNOLOGIES
www.kci.com
Employee -Owned Since 1988

KCI
TECHNOLOGIES
June 15, 2015
ENGINEERS SCIENTISTS SURVEYORS CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS
Landmark Center II, Suite 220 4601 Six Forks Road Raleigh, NC 27609 [phone] [phone] Fax
Ms. Shannon Deaton
Habitat Conservation Program Manager
NC Wildlife Resources Commission, Division of Inland Fisheries
1721 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Subject: Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act
Sandy Bridge Farm Stream and Wetland Restoration Project
KCI Project Number - 20157877
Dear Ms. Deaton:
The purpose of this letter is to request review and comment from the NC Wildlife Resources Commission with
respect to potential fish and wildlife impacts associated with the above referenced project. The subject site, known
as the Sandy Bridge Farm stream and wetland restoration site, is located north-northeast of Rutherfordton, North
Carolina in the central portion of Rutherford County (Figure 1). Specifically, the site is located 2.2 miles north on
Rock Road from the intersection of US 64 and US 74A. It is situated within the 03050105 (Broad River Basin)
Watershed Cataloging Unit and the 03050105070020 Local Watershed Unit (Figure 2). Land use in the watershed
is primarily agricultural or forest land (Figure 3).
A portion of the site (Figure 4) is currently under investigation as a stream and wetland restoration project for the
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services. The funding for this project comes from the USDOT Federal
Highway Administration through the North Carolina Department of Transportation. Land use at this site is
primarily pastureland. The planned restoration work aims to restore the hydrology and vegetation components to
this riparian wetland system by filling existing ditches across the site and stabilizing the site with native vegetation.
As part of the environmental documentation process (Categorical Exclusion), coordination with the NCWRC and
the USFWS is required for compliance with the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act.
Following the review of the included documentation, please provide a determination of the potential effects to
wildlife associated with this project. Please feel free to contact me at tim.morris(a)kci.com, or 919-278-2511, should
you have any questions or require any further information concerning the extent of site disturbance associated with
this project. Thank you in advance for your assistance.
Sincerely,
Timothy J. Morris
Senior Environmental Scientist
Ecosystem Dynamics Practice
KCI TECHNOLOGIES
www.kci.com
Employee -Owned Since 1988

KCIENGINEERS SCIENTISTS SURVEYORS CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS
Landmark Center II, Suite 220 4601 Six Forks Road Raleigh, NC 27609 [phone] [phone] Fax
TECHNOLOGIES
June 15, 2015
Ms. Allison Weakley
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program
1601 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27529
Subject: Natural Heritage Review
Sandy Bridge Farm Stream and Wetland Restoration Project
KCI Project Number: 20157877
Dear Ms. Weakley:
Please accept this information pertaining to the proposed Sandy Bridge Farm stream and wetland restoration site for
natural area and rare species review by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program. The subject site, known as the
Sandy Bridge Farm stream and wetland restoration site, is located north-northeast of Rutherfordton, North Carolina
in the central portion of Rutherford County (Figure 1). Specifically, the site is located 2.2 miles north on Rock Road
from the intersection of US 64 and US 74A. It is situated within the 03050105 (Broad River Basin) Watershed
Cataloging Unit and the 03050105070020 Local Watershed Unit (Figure 2). Land use in the watershed is primarily
agricultural or forest land (Figure 3).
A portion of this property (Figure 4) is currently under investigation for a stream and wetland restoration project for
the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services. The vegetation at this site is primarily pastureland with small
areas of both wetland and upland forest occurring within and adjacent to the project area. The planned restoration
work aims to restore the hydrology and vegetation components to this wetland system by filling existing ditches
across the site and stabilizing the site with native vegetation.
Following the review of the included documentation, please provide a determination of the potential effects to
endangered species, wildlife, or migratory birds associated with this project.
Please feel free to contact me at [phone], should you have any questions or require any further information
to process this request. Thank you in advance for your assistance.
Sincerely,
Timothy J. Morris
Senior Environmental Scientist
Ecosystem Dynamics Practice
Attachments
KCI TECHNOLOGIES
www.kci.com
Employee -Owned Since 1988

KCIENGINEERS SCIENTISTS SURVEYORS CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS
Landmark Center 11, Suite 220 4601 Six Forks Road Raleigh, NC 27609 [phone] [phone] Fax
TECHNOLOGIES
June 19, 2015
Mr. Tyler Howe
Tribal Historic Preservation Specialist
Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians
Tribal Historic Preservation Office
P.O. Box 455
Cherokee, NC 28719
Subject: Project Comment Request
NC DENR Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) - Sandy Bridge Farm Stream and Wetland Restoration
Project in Rutherford County, NC
KCI Project Number: 20157877
Dear Mr. Howe,
The NC DENR Division of Mitigation Services (formerly the Ecosystem Enhancement Program) requests review
and comment on any possible issues that might emerge with respect to archaeological or religious resources
associated with a potential wetland and stream restoration project on the above referenced site. The subject site is
located north-northeast of Rutherfordton, North Carolina in the central portion of Rutherford County (Figure 1).
Specifically, the site is located 2.2 miles north on Rock Road from the intersection of US 64 and US 74A. It is
situated within the 03050105 (Broad River Basin) Watershed Cataloging Unit and the 03050105070020 Local
Watershed Unit (Figure 2). Land use in the watershed is primarily agricultural or forest land (Figure 3).
A portion of this property (Figure 4) is currently under investigation for a stream and wetland restoration project for
the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services. The vegetation at this site is primarily pastureland with small
areas of both wetland and upland forest occurring adjacent to the project area. The planned restoration work aims to
restore the hydrology and vegetation components to this wetland system by filling existing ditches across the site,
realigning the existing stream and stabilizing the site with native vegetation.
No architectural structures or archeological artifacts have been observed or noted during preliminary surveys of the
site for restoration purposes. In addition, the majority of this site has historically been disturbed due to agricultural
purposes such as tilling, clearing and hydrologic manipulation (primarily ditching).
We ask that you review this site based on the attached information to determine if you know of any existing
resources that we need to be made aware of. In addition, please let us know the level your future involvement with
this project needs to be (if any). A similar comment request letter has been sent to the North Carolina State
Preservation Office for compliance with Section 106 of the Historic Preservation Act.
We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please feel free to contact the below referenced
DMS Project Manager with any questions that you may have concerning the extent of site disturbance associated
with this project.
KCI TECHNOLOGIES www.kci.com
Employee -Owned Since 1988

Sincerely,
Timothy J. Morris
Senior Environmental Scientist
Ecosystem Dynamics Practice
Cc: Harry Tsomides, DMS Project Manager harry.tsomides(a)ncdenr.gov — 828-545-7057
Attachments
KCI TECHNOLOGIES
www.kci.com
Employee -Owned Since 1988

Rutherford County Airport — Due to the proximity of the project to the Rutherford County Airport and
the potential for the project to be in conflict with FAA Advisory Circular 150/5200-33B, KCI requested a
site meeting with Rutherford County Manager Steve Garrison and others at the County with interest in
the project. Rutherford County Airport is owned and operated by the County through the Rutherford
County Airport Authority. This field meeting occurred on July 6, 2014. The results of that meeting are
detailed in the "Agency Response" Section of this report.

KCIENGINEERS SCIENTISTS SURVEYORS CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS
Landmark Center 11, Suite 220 4601 Six Forks Road Raleigh, NC 27609 [phone] [phone] Fax
TECHNOLOGIES
June 16, 2015
Mr. Scott Hughes and Mrs. Sandra Hughes
1356 Rock Road
Rutherfordton, NC 28139
Subject: Notification of Uniform Act Provisions
KCI Job Number — 20157877
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Hughes:
As part of the environmental documentation process in preparation for the stream and wetland restoration project on
your property, this letter is to inform you of provisions in the Federal Highway Administration Uniform Relocation
Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended, referred to as the Uniform Act.
The Uniform Act was developed to provide for uniform and equitable treatment of persons displaced from their
homes, businesses, non-profit associations, or farms by federal and federally -assisted programs, and establishes
uniform and equitable land acquisition policies. The Act assures that such persons are treated fairly, consistently,
and equitably, and so that they will not suffer disproportionate injuries.
This act applies to any project which utilizes federal funds for the purchase of any interest in real property, including
conservation easements. A portion of the funding for this project is ultimately provided by the US Department of
Transportation, through the NC Department of Transportation for in-kind mitigation to offset impacts from
transportation projects in the area, and therefore we are required to inform you of the following provisions.
The provisions of this act require that we inform you in writing that this conservation easement transaction is
voluntary and that the project is being developed by KCI for the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
(NCDMS), and as a result, KCI or NCDMS does not have the authority to acquire the property by eminent domain
in the event negotiations fail to reach an amicable agreement. In addition, the Act requires that we indicate the
agreed purchase price of $12,000 per acre.
This letter is for your information, and no response is necessary. Please feel free to contact me at 919-278-2511,
should you have any questions or require any further information.
Sincerely,
Timothy J. Morris
Senior Environmental Scientist
Ecosystem Dynamics Practice
KCI TECHNOLOGIES
www.kci.com
Employee -Owned Since 1988

BURKE
MCDOWELL
RUTHERFORD
POLK
CLEVELAN
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
RUTHERFORDTON
Project Site Location
u County Boundary
Major Roads
Minor Roads
t Airports Within 5 -mi Radius
Major Rivers
Cities and Towns
RUTHERFORD COUNTY
+ AIRPORT
SPINDALE
74
0 0.75 1.5 FIGURE 1. VICINITY MAP
SANDY BRIDGE FARM RESTORATION SITE
Miles RUTHERFORD COUNTY, NC
FOREST CITY 74
221

VQ
m
f J!,.
7"
L�-
�_
}. (rte - ���` '� _z� �� ? � �a `�' `•, � - � � � • t�-
e,.b x —
rr
!rr
r
—'3`� f � rte' `— �``: �. � a• I > J ++- `��:.
•1�•--
�'
Proposed Easement
Q Project Watershed (1.31 sq mi)
Q 14-digit HUC Boundaries \
Tributary 1 (Project Reach)
Q Quadrangle Boundaries ! t , {, 1 %( ,,\
FIGURE 2. USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP N
0 1,000 2,000 Source: USGSOR
SANDY BRIDGE FARM RESTORATION SITE RutnerfordtonMorth
Feet RUTHERFORD COUNTY, NC Quad (1993).

Agency Responses

btu. STATE ai
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Pat McCrory
Secretary Susan Kluttz
July 20, 2015
Timothy J. Morris
KCI Technologies
Landmark Center Il, Suite 220
4601 Six Forks Road
Raleigh, NC 27609
Office of Archives and History
Deputy Secretary Kevin Cherry
Re: Sandy Bridge Farm Stream and Wetland Restoration Project, Rutherfordton, KCI 20157877,
Rutherford County, ER 15-1439
Dear Mr. Morris:
Thank you for your letter of June 16, 2015, concerning the above project.
There are no known recorded archaeological sites within the project boundaries. However, the project area has
never been systematically surveyed to determine the location or significance of archaeological resources. The
project area is located immediately east of an unevaluated historic archaeological site, 31RF174**, and is in
close proximity to the Gilbert Town Historic District. Based on the topographic and hydrological situation and
the density of archaeological sites in the area, there is a high probability for the presence of prehistoric or
historic archaeological sites.
We recommend that a comprehensive survey be conducted by an experienced archaeologist to identify and
evaluate the significance of archaeological remains that may be damaged or destroyed by the proposed project.
Potential effects on unknown resources must be assessed prior to the initiation of construction activities.
Two copies of the resulting archaeological survey report, as well as one copy of the appropriate site forms,
should be forwarded to us for review and comment as soon as they are available and well in advance of any
construction activities.
A list of archaeological consultants who have conducted or expressed an interest in contract work in North
Carolina is available at www.archaeology.ncdcr.gov/ncarch/resource/consultants.htm. The archaeologists listed, or
any other experienced archaeologist, may be contacted to conduct the recommended survey.
We have determined that the project as proposed will not have an effect on any historic structures.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
Part 800.
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 276994617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6599

Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill -Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-807-6579 or
environmental.reviewgncdcr.gov. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the
above referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
6�vRamona M. Bartos

Archaeological Survey of the
Sandy Bridge Farm Stream and Wetland Restoration Area
Rutherford County, North Carolina
Prepared by
Michael Keith O'Neal
Archaeological Consultants of the Carolinas, Inc.
August 2015
Introduction
In August 2015, Archaeological
Consultants of the Carolinas, Inc. (ACC),
conducted an archaeological survey of the
Sandy Bridge Farm Stream and Wetland
Restoration Area in Rutherford County,
North Carolina (Figure 1). This project
was conducted on behalf of KCI
Associates of North Carolina. The
objectives of this survey were to identify
all archaeological resources within the
project tract, evaluate their significance
based on National Register of Historic
Places (NRNP) criteria, and determine the
potential effects of the proposed
substation on identified resources.
The Project Tract
Ruthertard
f County
41
Project Rrea
w�
eaMXbAeaw..b lM1e Qt3 uXN
Figure 1. Map showing the location of the project area.
The wetland restoration area is located southeast ofthe Rock Road crossing of Catheys Creek (Figure
2). The survey tract encompasses approximately 9 acres. The tract is predominantly located in a floodplain
associated with an unnamed tributary of Catheys Creek (Figure 3). The unnamed creek flows approximately
north to south through the center of the tract. The tract is currently used as pasture for long horn steer and
horses (Figure 4). Drainage ditches are present in the western portion of the tract and are oriented northwest
to southeast (Figure 5). Erosion throughout the area is quite significant, particularly along the creek banks.
1

FAV.
,rte IM. MWI1�
1
Gilbert Town.
Historic District {
r:- 4 l
i
5
31RFf28, { •ii r
V P
1
Sandy Bridge Farm
Project Tract u
District Boundary
Recorded Site 0 100 200
I _ - Gib" Town Loci SEE[::=
! Melem
Figure 2. Map showing the location of the project tract (1966 Rutherfordton North, NC USGS 7.5
minute topographic quadrangle).
Background Research
Background research included a review of records on file at the Office of State Archaeology in
Raleigh, North Carolina to identify previously recorded archaeological resources in the vicinity of the prof ect
tract. This task also included examination of historic highway maps, aerial photography, and historic
topographic maps. No archaeological sites are located within the project tract. However, the project tract
is located in the eastern portion of the Gilbert Town Historic District (see Figure 2). Gilbert Town is
associated with William Gilbert whose house served as the Rutherford County courthouse in the 1780s. The
town was an important trading center and was used as a camp for both American and British forces during
the Revolutionary War (NRHP Registration Form). The district encompasses approximately 460 acres of
cultivated land and woodland. The boundaries were determined based on the relative integrity (lack of
development and other disturbances) in the area surrounding Gilbert Town. In total, the district includes 20
tax parcels. The project tract is within Parcel 8 and is described as open pasture with woodland along
Catheys Creek. No buildings or structures associated with Gilbert Town proper are located in the project
tract.
2

.-_, �• - • y'� ++r','`� rip �} r' j -
� a
Figure 3. View of the unnamed tributary in the project tract, looking north.
Figure 4. General view of the pasture in the project tract, looking south.
3

Figure 5. View of a drainage ditch in the western portion of the tract, looking
northwest.
Within the Gilbert Town Historic District, is archaeological site 31RF 128**, Historic Gilbert Town
(see Figure 2). In 2004, an archaeological reconnaissance of the area was conducted by the South Carolina
Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology (SCIAA; Smith and Legg 2004). Smith and Legg (2004)
identified eight activity loci within the site (Table 1), all of which are located west of Catheys Creek. None
of the identified activity loci are within the project tract, and site 31RF128** will not be impacted by the
proposed wetland restoration..
Table 1. Summary of Activity Loci in Historic Gilbert Town (31RF128**)
Locus
I Description
1
18`h - 19`' century house site
2
18`h century historic site - unknown function
3
small domestic site or military camp
4
domestic site and/or military camp
5
possible location ofmain camp under command of British Major Patrick Ferguson (September 1780)
6
Hampton -McKinney House
7
Gilbert Cemetery
8
18`h century cemetery
4

One additional archaeological site (31RF174**) is located approximately 270 meters northwest of
the project tract along the unnamed drainage. This site was recorded during an investigation for bridge
replacements along Catheys Creek and its tributaries (Halvorsen 2006). The site consists of two granite
grinding stones and a "presumed placer (mining) pit" (Halvorsen 2006:36). It was recommended not eligible
for the NRNP. Being well outside of the wetland restoration area, this site will not be impacted by proposed
restoration.
Geological and soil data for the project area were also examined. The data were obtained from the
published soil survey and online resources (Keenan and Harris 1997; USDA 2015). Two soil types,
Chewacla loam and Dorian loam, are present in the tract (Figure 6). These soil types encompass 91 and 9
percent of the project tract, respectively. Chewacla loam forms on floodplains, is somewhat poorly drained,
and frequently flooded. Poorly drained soils are generally view as having low potential for the presence of
archaeological remains. Dorian loam forms on flats on stream terraces, is moderately well drained, and
rarely flooded. This soil type was considered to have high archaeological potential.
'i
bi
v
c2¢
ti
Sandy Bridge Farm
Tract5wndary Soil Type
Road Ch€wacla loam(ChA)
4 -foot contour Dc ran loam (Do9)
a 40 so 120 160
Meters
Figure 6. Map showing the soils in the project tract.

Figure 7. Aerial view of the Sandy Bridge Farm project tract.
Field Investigation
The project tract was surveyed by excavating shovel tests at 20 meter intervals along parallel
transects spaced 20 meters apart. Transects were oriented along the creek in the southern and eastern
portions of the tract. Transects in the northwestern portion of the tract were oriented with the drainage
ditches. Figure 7 presents an aerial image showing the ditches and the creek. Areas exhibiting exposed
subsoil were visually inspected for archaeological remains. In total, 84 shovel tests were excavated. Shovel
test soil profiles typically consisted of 10 to 15 cm of reddish brown sandy loam overlaying red sandy clay.
No archaeological remains were identified in the shovel tests.
Summary and Recommendations
The Sandy Bridge Farm Stream and Wetland Restoration tract encompasses approximately 9 acres
of pasture. The area is severely disturbed by flooding, erosion, and land -use practices. No archaeological
deposits were identified during this investigation. As no significant archaeological resources will be
impacted by the proposed restoration, archaeological clearance is recommended.
0

References Cited
Halvorsen, Scott E.
2006 Replacement of Bridges 37 and 39 on SR 1520 over Cathey's Creek and Fork of Cathey's
Cree; Rutherford County, North Carolina. North Carolina Department of Transportation,
Raleigh.
Keenan, Scott C. and J. Craig Harris
1997 Soil Survey of Rutherford County, North Carolina. United States Department of
Agriculture, Washington, D.C.
Smith, Steven D. and James B. Legg
2004 Archaeological Reconnaissance of Historic Gilbert Town, 31RF128, Rutherford County,
North Carolina. South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology, Columbia.
United States Department of Agriculture
2015 Web S o i l Survey, Electronic Document
http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov/app[WebSoilSurvey.aspx. Accessed August 2015.
United States Geological Survey (USGS)
1966 Rutherfordton North, NC 7.5 minute topographic quadrangle.
7

btu. STATE ai
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Pat McCrory
Secretary Susan Kluttz
September 25, 2015
Michael O'Neal
Archaeological Consultants of the Carolinas, Inc.
121 East First Street
Clayton, NC 27520
Re: Sandy Bridge Farm Stream and Wetland Restoration Project, Rutherfordton,
Rutherford County, ER 15-1439
Dear Mr. O'Neal:
Office of Archives and History
Deputy Secretary Kevin Cherry
Thank you for your email of August 24, 2015, transmitting the archaeological survey report by Archaeological
Consultants of the Carolinas (ACC) for the above project.
During the course of the survey, no sites were located within the project area. ACC has recommended that no
further archaeological investigation be conducted in connection with this project. We concur with this
recommendation since the project will not involve significant archaeological resources.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill -Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-807-6579 or
environmental.reviewnncdcr.gov. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the above
referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
Ramona M. Bartos
cc: Timothy J. Morris, KCI Technologies
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6599

United States Department of Agriculture
Natural Resources Conservation Service Milton Cortes, Assistant State Soil Scientist
4407 Bland Road, Suite 117 Telephone No.: [phone]
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609 Fax No.: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]
August 14, 2015
Timothy J. Morris
Senior Associate
KCI Associates of NC, P.A.
Landmark Center lI, Suite 220
4601 Six Forks Road
Raleigh, NC 27609
Mr. Morris
The following information is in response to your review request in the Sandy Bridge Farm Wetland
Restoration Project, Rutherford Co. NC
Projects are subject to Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA) requirements if they may irreversibly convert farmland
(directly or indirectly) to nonagricultural use and are completed by a Federal agency or with assistance from a Federal
agency.
For the purpose of FPPA, farmland includes prime farmland, unique farmland, and land of statewide or local
importance. Farmland subject to FPPA requirements does not have to be currently used for cropland. It can be forest
land, pastureland, cropland, or other land, but not water or urban built-up land.
Farmland means prime or unique farmlands as defined in section 1540(c)(1) of the Act or farmland that is determined
by the appropriate state or unit of local government agency or agencies with concurrence of the Secretary to be
farmland of statewide of local importance.
"Farmland" does not include land already in or committed to urban development or water storage. Farmland "already
in" urban development or water storage includes all such land with a density of 30 structures per 40 -acre area.
Farmland already in urban development also includes lands identified as "urbanized area" (UA) on the Census Bureau
Map, or as urban area mapped with a "tint overprint" on the USGS topographical maps, or as "urban -built-up" on the
USDA Important Farmland Maps. See over for more information.
The area in question meets one or more of the above criteria for Farmland. Farmland area will be affected or
converted. Enclosed is the Farmland Conversion Impact Rating form AD 1006 with PARTS II, IV and V completed by
NRCS. The corresponding agency will need to complete the evaluation, according to the Code of Federal Regulation
7CFR 658, Farmland Protection Policy Act.
If you have any questions, please contact me at number above.
Sincerely,
Milton Cortes
Assistant State Soil Scientist
Helping People Help the Land
An Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer

Projects and Activities Subject to FPPA
Projects are subject to FPPA requirements if they may irreversibly convert farmland (directly or indirectly) to
nonagricultural use and are completed by a Federal agency or with assistance from a Federal agency.
Assistance from a Federal agency includes:
• Acquiring or disposing of land.
• Providing financing or loans.
• Managing property.
• Providing technical assistance
Activities that may be subject to FPPA include:
• State highway construction projects, (through the Federal Highway Administration)
• Airport expansions
• Electric cooperative construction projects
• Railroad construction projects
• Telephone company construction projects
• Reservoir and hydroelectric projects
• Federal agency projects that convert farmland
• Other projects completed with Federal assistance.
Activities not subject to FPPA include:
• Federal permitting and licensing
• Projects planned and completed without the assistance of a Federal agency
• Projects on land already in urban development or used for water storage
• Construction within an existing right-of-way purchased on or before August 4, 1984
• Construction for national defense purposes
• Construction of on-farm structures needed for farm operations
• Surface mining, where restoration to agricultural use is planned
• Construction of new minor secondary structures such as a garage or storage shed.

U.S. Deplarlment cif AgricIL Iture
FARMHAND CONVERSION IMPACT RAITIING
PART 1117k1 bel cicirrpielleid tl y Feideira,lAgElnciy)
[late Of Land Evaluation Request 6,118,119
Name01Rnoject Sancy Bridge Rann V\ellanc Reslonaliun Rncijecrl
Federal Agency Irl\IaIved NC DCIT,IRHWA
Pnoposed Land Lse Slreanl anc Welland Miligatian
Clounty Arld Slate Rulh Elrianc Caunty NCI
PART 11(7kl bei cicimpieifed by AIFICEI)
[late Requesl Relceivec N NRCIS
Doers the) sille ecirnlain pnime, unique, stalewic a cin local impartalnl farmlainc? Yes N a
(if na, IItle FFIFIA daese r c,1 aeF p 1y — co roll camAlleile aidditicined pair s cif Ilflis form). ® `-
Acnrls Irrigalel l
norie
Aveilalile Farm Size
E13 acnes
Majon Clnop(s)
CC RN
Ram able Land In Govt. Jun'sdiction
AcnEis: 339,807 aha al
Amouni 011 Fllarmland Asl Defined in RPRA
Acnes: 94,99] arC 19
Narne Oil Land Evalualion Syslem Used
RullhEirfanc Co. LE1cIA
b ame 011 Local Site Assessment Sysic im
N/A
❑ale Land Evalualion RvIumed Eq h RCS
Fludusl '14, 2a'19 Ey eniail NRCS• MC
PART III 117ki be ciomipikille d fly Feldeirsi,l AgEinciy)
:lite FI
anernative Mme Kali ing
Site El :lite Cl lite ❑
A. Total Acnas Tc BEI ConVE10Eld ❑inEictly
EI.EI
B. Tatal Acnas 1a BEI CanvEIMEid Inc inectly
(I. CI
C. Tcdal Acnes In Site
EI.EI
(1.C1 (I.CI (I. CI
HART IV (;Ta bel acimple teed by A11FICS) Lanc Elvaluailion Informatian
A. Tclta l Acocs Pnirnc Anc Unique Fairmlanc
E111
B. Tcitait Acneis Slatew idea Anc Local Imlpartanl Rarmiland
(I.CI
C. Rementage C I Farmlanc In Caunty C n llacal C ay. . Unit Ta Ele Con%ertec
(LCH E12
D. Reincentagel Of Flarmla rid In Govt. Jurisdiction W th Same Or h ighen REdalivc Value
1.71
BART V (;Ta bEi acimfpter,lec by NRCS,I Land Evalualion Crileirian
Ralulivel Value C1 Farmlainc 110 Be Ccenverled (Saalda of 01 ilo 'XI0 Pcinllsel
EI'l
a a a
HART VI QTa bee cecimfllAeited by Alec erail Agar cly,l
Sile Assessment Clli tenia (ITHese cnleria are wif,lair ed in 7 CFA 696111(b)
Maximum
Roints
'I. Aneal In Nanunban L SEI
'15
15
2. Reinimelen In � anurbain Use
'10
10
3. Renicenl Of Site Being Rlanmeid
30
30
4. Rraleclian Rna%idec By S1alel Anc Vocal Glavennmanll
30
a
5. Distance) Rnarn Urtan BuilluplArev
'15
'15
6. Distance) -10 Urban Support Seir%Iicels
'15
'15
3. Size C f Pnesenl Fawn Unit Comflarec 110 A%ElnaiglEl
'10
71
EI. Cneialicin CI1 Nanilarmable Rannlland
'I(I
CI
f1. Availadiliiy Cf Harm SuPlglcir Eleniices
9
9
'I(I. Cn-Farm Invastmenls
3(1
210
'11. Effecs Cf Canversian C in Rarrn SuPF1ar Services
'I(I
a
12. Compalibilily With Blxisling Agriaulluliad Use
'I(I
CI
110TAIL SI118 ASSESSMENT ROINTS
'IED
1(171
CI a a
RAR7 VII (To bel acirnglailec by FE is cm iA Agler cy,l
Redadive Valuei Cf Rarmland (gram Part V)
Ia0
EI11
CI a a
11oialSite AasessmenI (Rom Pan V1Mcivilonabcal
site assessmerll)
11E1(I
1a]
a a a
110 -IAL PCIINTS (TollaeAcif above 2 driesij
.IEI(I
IEIB
(I a (1
SileSalecleid:
Da1eC11Salecion
Was A Local Site A,,Isessment Used?
YEIs El No
Reas an For Selection
(See 1nsplruci ars an ilelversle sic ill Farm AO -1006 (10-83)
1 tis form Rias electranioally p roduaecI bbl National Production 9 ervices Stafl

ALTi'PA'A
FACDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Office of Land and Water Stewardship
Pat Mc Cory BW Gos&V
Governor Dim,ror
June 22, 2015
Thomas Seelinger
KCI Technologies, Inc.
4601 Six Forks Road
Raleigh, NC 27609
[e-mail]
RE: Sandy Bridge
Dear Thomas Seelinger:
Donald R. van der Vaart
Secretary
NCNHDE-402
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide information
about natural heritage resources from our database that have been compiled for the project referenced
above.
A query of the NCNHP database, based on the project area mapped with your request, indicates that there
are no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, or conservation/managed
areas within the proposed project boundary, or within a one -mile radius of the project boundary.
Please note that the results of this query should not be substituted for site-specific surveys where suitable
habitat exists. Although there may be no documentation of natural heritage elements within the project
boundary, it does not imply or confirm their absence; the area may not have been surveyed. In the event
that rare species are found within the project area, please contact the NCNHP so that we may update our
records.
Please also note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation
planning, project review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria for
regulatory decisions. Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published without prior
written notification to the NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information source in these
publications. Maps of NCNHP data may also not be redistributed without permission.
Thank you for your inquiry. If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need
additional assistance, please contact Allison Schwarz Weakley at all ison.weakley&ncdenr.gov or
919.707.8629.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
Page 1 of 2

NCNHDE-402: Sandy Bridge
June 22, 2015
Project Boundary
0 Buffered Project Boundary
Page 2 of 2
1:24,181
4 0.2 0.4 0.8 mi
0 0.325 0.65 1.3 km
^erg s: Eve. HERE. PeLp _ T_­`2
lml p. increment p Cwp.
GES, USG S. Fqp_ NPS. NRCAN. Ge Base, I GN, NadmVer NL.

north c arolin a'si
RUTHERFORD COUNTY
A IRIDIC RT AUTHC RITY
622 AairportAload, Alr,therfordton NIC 28139 (82 8) 287-0800)
Jlu1M 14, 2C11
Stephen F. Slokus, LLS
KIC1 Teahnollcig.'jas
IlandmaAl Center 11, Suite 220
46011 Six FoAls Road
Raleigh, NC x7609
Rei: Sandy Bridga Stream and Welland Restoration Stile and Mull eirfard C ountyl Airport
Dear Mn. Slokcis:
Aftar reviow ofl the malciria;ls you piovidad and our July (, :1015 s:ila viis:il, Rulhclrftmd Counly
Airport Auithorityl (if 1l rs 1Iha following opinion of Mout priojeicit:
As slated ;in PAA Advisary Ciricullan 1'10/_` 200-331EI (Hazaridousi Wilatifei Attnactantsi on cin Near
A,iipcintsi, Mold added):
SEICAIGN 1.
GENERAL SEPAR,�ITION CPJ71ERIA FIGR HAZE REIOUS WYLDLIFIEI AT71RAIC71ANTS
ON OR NEAR AIRPORTS
1-1. 1W7Yr16D UCTION.....
Tlie FAA rec ci tin e r dsi ilhei mi imimum mpanaticin criiteria ouilt ined below for land-wiei
prat iliccLF that ailtrGic A hazaridciusi wildlife tic 2lhe viiein, t)I of airporitsi. Please note 21hat FAA
criiter,ia includes land wits that caumi mows tient of hazaridousi whldilfw on, limb an acnossi
the airporit'�i alpnoach or aepartune air6pacie on a,in openailions anea (AOA).....
TAe bassi fon the sieparaticin cnihin,ia comlainea in this 6wiction can be found iiri Eximiingl
F14A regujlmilion. Me sepanailion a,isitancesi area based on (1) flight pailtenns cf p.isiton-
powereid aircraft and turbine jtciwerea aircraft, (2� the alti'tuidei at nAich mosil sitrikesl
happen (78 pF nci nt miciu n hr, den 1, 000 feiet vnd 90 pF rici nt oc cu ri hit, den 3, 000 filet above
grciun d level), and (3I, National Transportailion Safety) Boand (N716B) rec cimmondations.
i -3. AIRPORTS SERVING TLAU11NE PC WERED 1IhICRAIFT. Airports �ieiltingl Jeul A
fue it ncirin ally se rviEi turbine poweined airim f I. NbtWitkitanJ ing mane %Iringeiml
requirements fon �peciific iland usiesi, the FAA recomimieinds a separation disitancie of
Mlemilers (f the Board
M0laie,I9enfcek, Che iirmcin 9rycn Kling)
Eadie Hod and, Nice Choirman Gregg Lovelace
f ala n R n

J
10,6100 filet at thesie airporitsi for any of the Aaaardousi niildbfe attnactanits mentioned A
Secitioni I an fon new ainporil denielopmeint prcjectsi meant to acicommodatei airnnaft
movement. Thisi a isitance is to he rnaiinilainea between an airport's AGA and the
hazardow114ilalife atilractant......
1-4. FROTECRIGN GF AFPRGACHI DEPA11TURE, AND CIRCLIWG AIASPACE. For
all aiirporils, the FAA reeommenidsi a distances of S stailute mulles between the farithest
edge of the auport's AOA and the haaardouis ndidlifei attraiatant if the attractant coidd
cau: a hazardousi wildlife movement into or acriossi the all noaah or departure airspace.
SEICHIC Nl2.
LAND -USE PRACNCES GN GR NEI R AIRPORTS THAT PGAENTIALLIMA71TRAICT
HAZARDOUS "LDLIIFIE.
2-4. WETLANDS. Wttlanasi provide a variety) of furicilions ana can bei negulateid byl
local, ,itaile, and Feaenail laws. Nbnmally, wetlandsi ane attriactiiue to micinyl typesi of
wildlife, iincluaing many which rank high on the list of hazardouii wiiildl,ifei speciesi (Table
P.
c. Mitigation for wetland impacts f inmi ciirport pro.,'eictsi. WL -bland mitiigGulion micl be
neciessiary when unciucuidabk weilland distunbances neizhi from new a,inport 6cieloprneint
pricjects on pro)*eictsi neiquireid to cicirireict wilidilife hazarids from wetlanwi. Wetlana
mitigaticin must be aesiigpea sio .it does not crecule a wildlife llaziara. The FAA
necomimieinds that weitland miitiggdon projecits thuit may atilract haaardous mu Wliifei be
site d ouitsiide c f the sieparaCtins idents avid in Sections 1-� th nouigh 1-4.
(3) Miiliglailion Bank'ng. Wi?tland mhligailion banking is ilhe cneation on nesuloratiion of
wetiland in ordein to pnoviidc mitiigntiion criea;its that can he usiea ilo cffsieit llerimitilea
wetland lossiesi. Mhligailion bank'ngl benefitsi weilland rcsourciui llyl proviiding adtiance
rieplaceiment for permiJued wetland lo,�ises; comiciliaailing small projEctsi Milo kingeri,
beulten-dasiigned and managed unitsi; ana eneouriaging iinilegraticin of wetland mbligation
priojecils wiilh xiailerLyhed l ilariniirig. Thisi lasiil bencfit i,,i mosiil helpful fon a,irpontlroj'ectsi, as
xae tlan d iiml acts mitigate d outside of the sieparati'onsi identified in Sectior,isi 1-2 through
1-4 can shill he located xuthin the siame watersiheid. Weitland mitigciilion flanks rr ietiirig
ilhei separcitiion criteria offein an evoilogiically siouna alpnoach to mitigation .in these
situations. AJiTarit eperatons should work with local wotersihed managlemeinil agenciiesi or
cinganizatiansi to deivelc p m;itigailion bank'ng fciri we ililand iml ac ifs cin airpoiit priol eirtyl.
SECTION 4.
FAA NGTIFIICATIONI AND REVAEWI OF FRGPOSED LAND -USE PRACHICEl
CHANGES IN IHE VlICJWITYGFPUBIIIC-ULSEAIIRPGRTS
4-i. FAA REVIEW GF FRGFOSED LAND -USE PRACTICE CHANGES )W THE
VICINIITY GT I PUBLIIC-USE AIRPOP TS.
a. The FAA disiaounagesi ilhe aeielopment of xaste aislcisal and others facilitieLs, a isicumed
in Se a on 2, located x ith,in the S, 000/161, 0061 focal ar,iileriia spec,ifiea in Se et,ions 1-2

31
through J -4.
4-3. OTHELAI HAND -USE PRACTICE CHANIGE6. As a mailtein cf policyU tiles FAA
encourages cperators cf pubilic-use airpontsi who becicimie ciwar6 of proposeid lana use
procilicei chang,esi that may atilract haivinaous wilal fes wiiilhin 5 siilailute rruile of thairi
a,irplontsi to pnonptilyl notify ilhe FAA.......
a. Air!lants Mail hcniei reieeiveid Federal gnanil-in-Grid assiistancc. Aiirports that ha►e
received Hdenal grant -in -arid ascsiistance are nequured by thein gnant aassuiraanices to
take appropriate actions to nestnict the use of land next ilo or hican the airport to uses
th cit are compatible m th r ormml aiirlport operations, N e F14A recommit ndsi that
airport operators to the extent practiciaablei opposes off -airport land -vise changes or
practicesi within the sieparaticros idents lied in Sectionis 1-2 through J-4 tlat may
attract h aaandouis wiildliii c. Faiilune to do sio miay lead to n oncompliianice mitt,
apllicable gnanil wsuiranciesi 71hei FAA will not apllnove the Ilacerneinil of airlant
aeveublpment pnojecils peintaining ilo ainerafil rr,ciiement in the vicinity of halicinaous
xilalije attractcints withciut a7priolri;iatei rruiiligat,ivei rrieiasures. Alncrieasiing ilhe iinilensiity
of xiilaliife contrcil ejforils ;isi ncit a siubsitituile for elimiinatiing or rieauc,ingl a prioposeid
wilalije hazand. Airponi openailomi shoula identify ha3ardous wildlife atilracilantsi and
any associated wh&ife hcvara& during any lilanniing priocess fon new a,inlort
a eveiilol menti no'c c it1i.
Based on thea distunbanau extent disausseac in the fiald, and shown on thea navisad conceptual Site
Plan provided b y MCI (9hleel 5 of /; July 3015), tho pnopased SandY1 Brk ga'lilrciam and Wletlland
Rl(istorailion Sita 11111a Projecit) i;i approximately 4,000 feet south of Rlutherford Claunity Airport's
Runway 11 and dircicitlyl wiilhiin itsi appnoach and daparture airspaou. Runway 1's eilcavaticin is
approximal ea Y1 1,058 Mat abova mean scia level. At :i 1 s northlarn and, juist downstream caf I the
eaxislinig wooden bridge 1121.1.410717 °; -811.93734F), lhlea Brajact's ellavation its approximatelly 86E
fbet above mean scia level I1i.e. apprcaxirratellyl 192 ket lowar lhlan Runway 1, based on Geogl(a
Barth alemation data).
Thu Rluthlerfond Couinly Airrlart:aarvas turbinci-powered aincnaft and sills Jlat-A fuel.
While not diiiectly pnavidiing wetland miligafon for iirr.pacits associated with thea Airport, beciausu
it is funded by an NO Division of Wigatiian Sarvices Full Daliveryj conitracil, the Brojeact does
offset impacts na;iullling frcam NCDCT-funded projecls. Similarly, while AC 1f10/`_1200-3313
speaifieallly aiddrussas lhea citing of wetland rastoralion projects wicid to offscit impacit:i rasulling
frame airport impriomements, 1Ihea implications afllha rasullant increase of wildlifta hlaaands are 1Ihea
sama.
Beacauisa the Priojecit is 'loss thlan 10,000 horizontal feet from Runway 1 and less thlan 200 verlicall
faet frami Rluinway 1, iTit was d:ircicitlyl associiallad with Ruthlerfond County Airport conistruation, as
slated abovea in AAA AC 1f0/_`1200 -2121B, Ilei Sponsor wcau1A be rcaquiread to find analhan
altearnative I1i.e. formally opposa :il,. Afteri aanversatiicans with NCDOT DliVsion of Avialion

4
Bnviiranmanlal Program stafft thea Sponiscar blas been acvised thlat, as long as thea safety ofl the
fllyinig plub]ic is nol deorcaascac, project acanaurnence can b ca pnovidod.
After evaluation of lhea eaalagilaal and waters quaait3i bencifits associated wiilh thle Projcacat,
caor.vansalior.is with KICI, and anallypis bM 1Ihca 8ponison'si engineering and enmirionmental consultant
(JWK D:iakson), thla Sponsors hareaby concurs w:ilh the piioject, provided thlat thle followinEl
conditions ane agrlaed upon:
1. KCI will pvavic'o 111a Sponsors and llleairi caonsul4ant thle final priopased design plans,
including monitoring well locations, upon aompllatimn.
a. KCI wil] considem prcaposcad modificatians to well locations prcavidcac by the Spansor (if
any) and, ifl implemoritatican of wela locaat:ion mod:ifraations are not fb;llowed, pnovicca
teaahrlicall jusl ifical ion fora 1Ihis ceaaision.
?I. KC I will priomide 11.1a Spansor with) daily surfacca and grounidwatur depthl data foci all wells.
Data will be pravidcac monthllM lhroughoul thle monitoring periiad.
4. If wall data ;indaaate uinacaeaptable llcavahi of sunfacea watem (o.g. % 6 :inchcas) for caxlended
periiads (a.g. >110 aor.isecaulive days;, KICI will world withl thle Spansior an acaceptablo
herr adial actian to decmcaasc✓eliminate risks to the flying public.
9. MCI will grant 1Ihca '.Sponsan access to the Flnajact silo thrloughcaul the monitaring pariod to
cavaluate risks 1a thle flying public.
'Hhank you ftir thle apportunityl to vemieaw Mea Brajcacat.
Sincero l y,
Mich
enfiald
Chairman, Rluthemfbnd County Airport Aulhlcariily Bomid
ac: Jleinriifear M. Flullcar, B.E. NCI Eivisian oflAviialior.i

KCI
TECHNOLOGIES
August 12, 2015
ENGINEERS SCIENTISTS SURVEYORS CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS
Landmark Center II, Suite 220 4601 Six Forks Road Raleigh, NC 27609 [phone] [phone] Fax
Mr. Michael Benfield, Chairman
Rutherford County Airport Authority Board
622 Airport Road
Rutherfordton NC 28139
Subject: Response to July 14, 2015 Letter
Sandy Bridge Farm Stream and Wetland Restoration Site and Rutherford County Airport
KCI Project Number: 20157877
Dear Mr. Benfield,
This letter is in response to the July 14, 2015 letter from your office (attached). We appreciate the Airport Authority
working with us on this project. As indicated in our field meeting held in early July, we feel that the final condition
of the site will actually be better than the current condition of the site relative to concerns identified in your letter
and in FAA Advisory Circular 150/5200-33B. The current condition of the site is that of active pasture containing
areas of open water in the form of ditches. These ditches will be filled as part of the construction of this project
reducing the prevalence of open water. The grazed pasture also may encourage waterfowl due to the limited cover
for predators. The post construction condition will deter waterfowl, especially Canada geese due to the
unmaintained and dense cover of vegetation that will serve to recruit predators. This cover will eventually give way
to a hardwood forest community further discouraging most species of waterfowl from the property.
Regarding the five conditions outlined on Page 4 of the letter, KCI agrees to concur with all of those obligations,
however; we would request that we be able to work with the Airport Authority to determine when the monitoring
period can be terminated based on the data that is provided over time. Since positive drainage will be provided
across the site we do not believe there will be any areas where we will have >6 inches of standing water for >1 Odays
unless Catheys Creek (the adjacent river) is out of bank. This type of flooding event would need to be considered an
abnormal condition that our site would have no effective influence on. The monthly monitoring (Condition 3),
especially during the non -growing season, will be costly to us and we would like to be able to cease monitoring
when it becomes clear that there isn't going to be an impact to the operation of the airport. We assume that we will
have enough data by the second year of monitoring to make that determination, however we would just appreciate
an acknowledgement from the Airport Authority stating that monitoring can be discontinued based on trends in that
data that support "no effect".
Please feel free to contact me at [phone], or at [e-mail], should you have any questions or
require any further information to process this request. Thank you in advance for your assistance.
Sincerely,
Timothy J. Morris
Senior Environmental Scientist, Ecosystem Dynamics Practice
Attachments
Cc: Steve Stokes, KCI, Steve Garrison, Rutherford County
KCI TECHNOLOGIES
www.kci.com
Employee -Owned Since 1988

north carolina's
RUTHERFORD COUNTY
AIRPORT AUTHORITY
622 Airport Road, Rutherfordton NC 28139 [phone])
September 7, 2015
Stephen F. Stokes, LLS
KCI Technologies
Landmark Center II, Suite 220
4601 Six Forks Road
Raleigh, NC 27609
Re: Sandy Bridge Stream and Wetland Restoration Site and Rutherford County Airport
Dear Mr. Stokes:
After review of the materials you provided and our July 6, 2015 site visit, Rutherford County
Airport Authority offers the following opinion of your project:
As stated in FAA Advisory Circular 150/5200-33B (Hazardous Wildlife Attractants on or Near
Airports, bold added):
SECTION 1.
GENERAL SEPARATION CRITERIA FOR HAZARDOUS WILDLIFE ATTRACTANTS
ON OR NEAR AIRPORTS
1-1. INTRODUCTION.....
The FAA recommends the minimum separation criteria outlined below for land -use
practices that attract hazardous wildlife to the vicinity of airports. Please note that FAA
criteria include land uses that cause movement of hazardous wildlife on, into or across the
airport's approach or departure airspace or air operations area (AOA).....
The basis for the separation criteria contained in this section can be found in existing FAA
regulation. The separation distances are based on (])flight patterns of piston powered
aircraft and turbine powered aircraft, (2) the altitude at which most strikes happen (78
percent occur under 1,000 feet and 90 percent occur under 3,000 feet above ground
level), and (3) National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) recommendations.
1-3. AIRPORTS SERVING TURBINE POWERED AIRCRAFT. Airports selling Jet -A
fuel normally serve turbine powered aircraft. Notwithstanding more stringent
requirements for specific land uses, the FAA recommends a separation distance of 10,000
Members of the Board
Michael Benfield, Chairman Bryan King
Eddie Holland, Vice Chairman Greg Lovelace
Alan Toney

2
feet at these airports for any of the hazardous wildlife attractants mentioned in Section
2 or for new airport development projects meant to accommodate aircraft movement. This
distance is to be maintained between an airport's AOA and the hazardous wildlife
attractant......
1-4. PR OTECTION OFAPPROA CH, DEPARTURE, AND CIR CLING AIRSPA CE. For all
airports, the FAA recommends a distance of 5 statute miles between the farthest edge of
the airport's AOA and the hazardous wildlife attractant if the attractant could cause
hazardous wildlife movement into or across the approach or departure airspace.
SECTION 2.
LAND -USE PRACTICES ON OR NEAR AIRPORTS THAT POTENTIALLY ATTRACT
HAZARDOUS WILDLIFE.
2-4. WETLANDS. Wetlands provide a variety of functions and can be regulated by local,
state, and Federal laws. Normally, wetlands are attractive to many types of wildlife,
including many which rank high on the list of hazardous wildlife species (Table 1).
c. Mitigation for wetland impacts form airport projects. Wetland mitigation may be
necessary when unavoidable wetland disturbances result from new airport development
projects or projects required to correct wildlife hazards from wetlands. Wetland mitigation
must be designed so it does not create a wildlife hazard. The FAA recommends that
wetland mitigation projects that may attract hazardous wildlife be sited outside of the
separations identified in Sections 1-2 through 1-4.
(3) Mitigation Banking. Wetland mitigation banking is the creation or restoration of
wetland in order to provide mitigation credits that can be used to offset permitted wetland
losses. Mitigation banking benefits wetland resources by providing advance replacement
for permitted wetland losses; consolidating small projects into larger, better -designed and
managed units; and encouraging integration of wetland mitigation projects with watershed
planning. This last benefit is most helpful for airport projects, as wetland impacts
mitigated outside of the separations identified in Sections 1-2 through 1-4 can still be
located within the same watershed. Wetland mitigation banks meeting the separation
criteria offer an ecologically sound approach to mitigation in these situations. Airport
operators should work with local watershed management agencies or organizations to
develop mitigation banking for wetland impacts on airport property.
SECTION 4.
FAA NOTIFICATION AND REVIEW OF PROPOSED LAND -USE PRACTICE
CHANGES IN THE VICINITY OF PUBLIC- USE AIRPORTS
4-1. FAA REVIEW OF PROPOSED LAND -USE PRACTICE CHANGES IN THE
VICINITY OF PUBLIC -USE AIRPORTS.
a. The FAA discourages the development of waste disposal and other facilities, discussed
in Section 2, located within the 5, 000/10, 000 foot criteria specified in Sections 1-2 through
1-4.

3
4-3. OTHER LAND -USE PRACTICE CHANGES. As a matter of policy, the FAA
encourages operators of public -use airports who become aware of proposed land use
practice changes that may attract hazardous wildlife within 5 statute mile of their airports
to promptly notify the FAA.......
a. Airports that have received Federal grant-in-aid assistance. Airports that have
received Federal grant-in-aid assistance are required by their grant assurances to
take appropriate actions to restrict the use of land next to or near the airport to uses
that are compatible with normal airport operations. The FAA recommends that
airport operators to the extent practicable oppose off -airport land -use changes or
practices within the separations identified in Sections 1-2 through 1-4 that may
attract hazardous wildlife. Failure to do so may lead to noncompliance with
applicable grant assurances. The FAA will not approve the placement of airport
development projects pertaining to aircraft movement in the vicinity of hazardous
wildlife attractants without appropriate mitigative measures. Increasing the intensity
of wildlife control efforts is not a substitute for eliminating or reducing a proposed
wildlife hazard. Airport operators should identify hazardous wildlife attractants and
any associated wildlife hazards during any planning process for new airport
development projects.
Based on the disturbance extent discussed in the field, and shown on the revised conceptual Site
Plan provided by KCI (Sheet 5 of /; July 2015), the proposed Sandy Bridge Stream and Wetland
Restoration Site (the Project) is approximately 4,000 feet south of Rutherford County Airport's
Runway 1 and directly within its approach and departure airspace. Runway 1's elevation is
approximately 1,058 feet above mean sea level. At its northern end, just downstream of the
existing wooden bridge (35.410717 °; -81.937343°), the Project's elevation is approximately 866
feet above mean sea level (i.e. approximately 192 feet lower than Runway 1, based on Google
Earth elevation data).
The Rutherford County Airport serves turbine -powered aircraft and sells Jet -A fuel.
While not directly providing wetland mitigation for impacts associated with the Airport, because
it is funded by an NC Division of Mitigation Services Full Delivery contract, the Project does
offset impacts resulting from NCDOT-funded projects. Similarly, while AC 150/5200-33B
specifically addresses the citing of wetland restoration projects used to offset impacts resulting
from airport improvements, the implications of the resultant increase of wildlife hazards are the
same.
Because the Project is less than 10,000 horizontal feet from Runway 1 and less than 200 vertical
feet from Runway 1, if it was directly associated with Rutherford County Airport construction, as
stated above in FAA AC 150/5200-33B, ,the Sponsor would be required to find another alternative
(i.e. formally oppose it). After conversations with NCDOT Division of Aviation Environmental
Program staff, the Sponsor has been advised that, as long as the safety of the flying public is not
decreased, project concurrence can be provided.

4
After evaluation of the ecological and water quality benefits associated with the Project,
conversations with KCI, and analysis by the Sponsor's engineering and environmental consultant
(WK Dickson), the Sponsor hereby concurs with the project, provided that the following
conditions are agreed upon:
1. KCI will provide the Sponsor and their consultant the final proposed design plans,
including monitoring well locations, upon completion.
2. KCI will consider proposed modifications to well locations provided by the Sponsor (if
any) and, if implementation of well location modifications are not followed, provide
technical justification for this decision.
3. KCI will provide the Sponsor with daily surface and groundwater depth data for all wells.
Data will be provided monthly throughout the monitoring period.
4. If well data indicate unacceptable levels of surface water (e.g. > 6 inches) for extended
periods (e.g. >10 consecutive days), KCI will work with the Sponsor on acceptable
remedial action to decrease/eliminate risks to the flying public.
5. KCI will grant the Sponsor access to the Project site throughout the monitoring period to
evaluate risks to the flying public.
The Airport Sponsor agrees that, once it is confident that the Sandy Bridge Farm Stream and
Wetland Restoration Site (Site) is not a wildlife attractant that would pose danger to the flying
public, ongoing hydrologic monitoring of the site will no longer be necessary. The Sponsor and
its environmental consultant (WK Dickson) will work with KCI to determine at what point site
conditions (e.g. the combination of surface hydrology and vegetative cover) warrant this.
Thank you for the opportunity to review the Project.
Sincerely,
Michael Benfield
Chairman, Rutherford County Airport Authority Board
cc: Jennifer M. Fuller, P.E. NC Division of Aviation

Affidavit of Public Notice

N I hirer all OPPe Irtun Ity -
SElndy Brie ii Aan►nI
Straldm and Wei Jane
Reertoratlem
AFIF IDAVIIT OF1 PUBLJICATION
Pircijecl
NCI
STATE OF NORTH CAI9I01JINA
Technolciglieis, Inc.
oses to purchase
RUTHERFORD COUNTM
ccinse
ccnseirvallcm eErsemenl rights
on apiprax'mai ily 110.5 Eicres cel
e x i s l i n gl f a r m l a n d in
Rulheirtaiid Clounty, � C. The
Bafbre th e u nidelrsigniec , a N char Au blicl of I salic C ou m y and State, c u ly
sites is located .1.2 miles nark
corrirrlissicineld, glualified, ani- aulbariDed by law tci administer oartbs, pelrsonally
cin Rock l iac cram the
intensecticn all L S 64 and L S
appearec
74 A. The purpose of accluiringl
the ease'ri nights is la
Pam Dixc n
pnuvide mitigerlion fon Impacts
Io weitlancs 1Ili It have, all will,
uesull Aram existing) cir fulunei
whci beili frrsl dull swarm, depases avid says: 11halt thely are
ccivedcipmeni in this ansa.
Anyone ceisiringl Thal an
inllcnircalianal Plubiic meeting
Sales Rep resentathie
be I eild for this plrorllosec
adcin ily miliI a recluEisl by
regisi(iiied leilen Io li
(ii Flartneu, plub]is heu, cir oilhclr afficiuv cir erripllayere aluilhoniaelc to make this
7lecihnologliEis, Inc. al 460.1 six
Rucks F aac Suite
arffclatvif cif1THIH DAILYCOUMIERI, arlewsplaplerplublishec, issued and enrtelred as
, 212-1,
REdEiigh, INC 2716(19. Requersls
secal� ty ay
nt cilass mail In be tciwn of FCIPJES31 CI "OY In., aid C ciuni and Sllzi tbal lhei
must tie pas-Imarked by
1It ursday, duly
acre aulbclriaed tel mai affidavit zinc swicim silagemanil; )hart Ihe1 niatice or citbelr
21,11, 21(115. It
ac dNiairal infonmEdian is
leglal acver iselmenit, a true) ccipN of which is attached hereto, was rlulllished ini THE
nequlned, please conlacl Jim
❑A IIL1f COURTIER an 1ha fallowing c ales:
Mannis all 919-2178-2511.
The priojeci is being
cumplle1ed ton the North
ClEinalinei C epaiitment at
N atuiv I Resources, Div'siain
A n e 213, 2 01 S
of
Millgaitian Sa ices iIE MSJ .
DMI nesanves the riglhl to
c etanmine N a pr bile m eelin g
and th al s aid nelwspathl e1r ini wll ich s u c 1h nal ice, plan en, c aau marit, or leglal
will be held.
acvar istimert Was publisheld wei art 11he11irria of each ars elven' SUclll plublicalian, a
nelwspapelr melee it g all cif toe requ iremenil s ari c cluadifieanl ian s of Seciliani 1-5917 of tl h e
General Stalutles of Ncrrh Carcdina and was ai quiz ifiec newispapecr wilhin the meaning)
of Suclielni 1-50 afltha Ccir eral SlartuteS cifNortib Caiialinia.
Th' he 113rd daM of Jeune, 2015.
AN\- ry`
Pam Dixon, Sailers Mcipresenllalivel
Sworn to alnc st hsaribec helfbre me 11h is llhcl 3rd day oflJunie, 2(115
"Cini() CI. B14olaryl Aub tic,
NN
i�
MN commissicT emphies: Aehruiai 18, 3017.
59
f �