20180795 Ver 1_401 Application_20191125

ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
Secretary
TIM BAUMGARTNER
Director
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
November 25, 2019
Mac Haupt, Acting 401& Buffer Permitting Unit Supervisor
Division of Water Resources
401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 - 1617
REC6VEDII)EAkIDWR
NOV 2 5 2019
V,Ajer Re ouc an
Par►rit iM9
Re: Permit Application- Slingshot Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site Mitigation Project,
Rockingham County (DMS Full Delivery Project)
Dear Mr. Haupt:
Attached for your review is 404/401 permit application package for the subject project. A memo
for the permit application fee is also included in the package. Per agreement between DMS and
DWR, the hard copy of the final mitigation plan is not included in the submittal. However, the
electronic copy of the final mitigation plan along with all other electronic files have been
uploaded to NC DWR's file system. 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
Permit Application Fee Memo
D_E
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Mitigation Services
217 W. Jones Street 1 1652 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652
919.707.8976

ROY COOPER
Governor
NCHAEL S. REGAN
Secretary
TIM BAUMGARTNER
Director
MEMORANDUM:
TO: Debby Davis
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
FROM: Lin Xu �x
SUBJECT: Payment of Permit Fee
401 Permit Application
DATE: November 25, 2019
The Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) is implementing a mitigation project for
Slingshot Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site Mitigation Project in Rockingham County
(DMS IMS # 100058). The activities associated with this restoration project involve
stream 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 # 2984, 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: Mac Haupt, DWR
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Mitigation Services
217 W. Jones Street 1 1652 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652
919.707.8976

Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
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 Permit
1b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 27 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
X❑ Yes ❑ No
1 d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
❑X 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
1h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes 0 No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project:
Slingshot Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site
2b. County:
Rockingham
2c. Nearest municipality / town:
Reidsville
2d. Subdivision name:
--
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
DIMS Project ID No. 100058
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Robert L. Wheless
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
1269, 277
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
3d. Street address:
1400 Front Street
3e. City, state, zip:
Reidsville, NC 27320
3f. Telephone no.:
336-634-3862
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: Permittee
4b. Name:
Lin Xu
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
NC Division of Mitigation Services
4d. Street address:
217 West Jones St.
4e. City, state, zip:
Raleigh, NC 27603
4f. Telephone no.:
919-707-8319
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
[e-mail]
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
Worth Creech
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
Restoration Systems, LLC
5c. Street address:
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 211
5d. City, state, zip:
Raleigh, NC 27604
5e. Telephone no.:
919-755-9490
5f. Fax no.:
919-755-9492
5g. Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 2 of 10

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
la. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID): 1170686
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): I
Latitude: 36.33348 Longitude:-79.715103
1 c. Property size:
12 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
Lake Hunt
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
WS-II1, B, NSW
2c. River basin:
Cape Fear
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 Site drainage area is dominated by pasture, agricultural land, and sparse residential property. Impervious surfaces account for less than 5
percent of the upstream watershed land surface.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 0.689
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 4,116
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
Stream restoration, enhancement (Level 1 and Level 2), and preservation; in addition to riparian wetland restoration and enhancement.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
A detailed description of proposed activities is provided in the attached Mitigation Plan. The project will be completed with standard earth -moving equip
0
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project(including all priorphases) in thepast?
❑X Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
Preliminary ❑ Final
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): W. Grant Lewis
Agency/Consultant Company:
Other: Axiom Environmental, Inc.
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
Site visit on August 22, 2018; the signed Notification of Jurisdictional Determination dated May 7, 2019 is attached..
6. 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 ❑X Streams — tributaries ❑X Buffers ❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond 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
LB
SEE ATTACHED TABLE
PA
SH
SG
SD
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
2h. Comments:
Permanent impacts to small wetiand areas are anticipated by construction of proposed stream channels. Temporary impacts to wetlands are limited to
enhancement activities including planting with native forest species. Jurisdictional wetland areas will be avoided to the maximum extent practicable;
however, some encroachment will be necessary during project construction. Construction -related impacts will be temporary and all areas will be
restored to pre -project elevations and planted appropriately.
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
Choose one
SEE ATTACHED TABL
-
S2
Choose one
-
-
S3
S4
S5
S6
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
3i. Comments:
Project activities include restoration of 2501 If, enhancement (Level 1) of 391 If, enhancement (Level 11) of 254 If, and preservation of 39 If of stream
channels. No impacts are anticipated in conjunction with Enhancement (level II) and Preservation activities. Please see the attached Mitigation Plan.
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
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable)
4c.
Type of impact
4d.
Waterbody
type
4e.
Area of impact (acres)
01 -
Choose one
Choose
O2 -
Choose one
Choose
03 -
Choose one
Choose
04 -
Choose one
Choose
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments: NA
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: NA
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 ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman © Other: Jordan Lake
6b.
Buffer Impact
number —
Permanent (P) or
Temporary
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Stream name
6e.
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f.
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet)
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet
B1 -
See attached table
Yes/No
B2 -
Yes/No
B3
Yes/No
B4 -
Yes/No
B5 -
Yes/No
B6 -
Yes/No
6h. Total Buffer Impacts:
0
0
6i. Comments: All impacts to riparian buffers involve planting with native vegetation and removal of invasive species. No impervious surface is
created and all buffers are being converted from active pasture land to a wooded riparian buffer consisting of native vegetation.
Page 5 of 10

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1 a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
This is a stream and wetland mitigation project. As a result, avoidance and minimization were not part of the original design planning. The proposed
project is anticipated to increase the function and length of jurisdictional stream.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
The only activities that will take place within the stream are filling and stabilization of banks, placement of channel bed material, and the installation of
cross vanes and drop structures. No machinery will be driven within existing stream channels. If water is present, channels will be temporarily
dewatered and all work will be performed in the dry. Impacts to jurisdictional areas are designed to benefit hydrology and vegetative communities.
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
❑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 © 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:
U
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).
NA.
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.
NA; however, numerous marsh treatment areas are included in the Site design.
❑ 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 ® No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
No impervious surfaces will be generated by the proposed project. On -site stormwater will be treated by a marsh treatment areas or flow through
vegetated riparian buffers prior to flowing into surface waters.
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
NA
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?
Local -Winston Salem
❑ Phase II
3b. Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
© NSW
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
X Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑Yes ❑X 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 ❑X 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)
la. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
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
❑X Yes ❑ No
letter.) Please see the Approved Categorical Exclusion Form (Appendix E of the Detailed
Comments: Mitigation Plan)
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,
❑Yes © No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
❑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.
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.
NA - No sewage will be generated by the proposed project.
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

S. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
® Yes
❑ No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
® Yes
❑ No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Raleigh
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
USFWS Raleigh Field Office Website, informal Section 7 review
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes
® No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
NOAA Fisheries Essential Fish Habitat Mapper v2.0 (online)
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
El Yes
®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?
.Consultation with SHPO
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?
❑ Yes
® No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map 3710798400J, Panels 7984 and 7994, effective September 3, 2007
�( � )6c
J��,��1 v
,,/.Lx // y
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Applicant/Agent's Signature
Date
(Agent's signature Is valid only If an authorization
letter from the applicant isprovided.)
Worth Creech
i ,
11/22/19
Restoration Systems, LLC
Co-Applicant/Agent's Signature
Co-Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
(Agents signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant is provided.)
Date
Page 10 of 10

Proposed Impacts Inventory - Slingshot Mitigation Site
WFn ANn IMPArTC
Wetland impact number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
Type of impact
Type of wetland
Forested
Type of jurisdiction
Corps (404,10) or
DWQ 401, other)
Area of impact
(acres)
JA (P)
Stream Restoration
Headwater Wetland
Yes
Corps
0.0002
JB (T)
Planting
Headwater Wetland
Yes
Corps
0.010
JB (P)
Stream Restoration
Headwater Wetland
Yes
Corps
0.050
JC (T)
Planting
Headwater Wetland
No
Corps
0.002
JC (P)
Stream Restoration
Headwater Wetland
No
Corps
0.0005
GE (T)
Planting
Headwater Wetland
No
Corps
0.480
GE (P)
Stream Restoration
Headwater Wetland
No
Corps
0.030
SC (T)
Planting
Headwater Wetland
No
Corps
0.001
SC (P)
Stream Restoration
Headwater Wetland
No
Corps
0.00005
GA (T)
Planting
Headwater Wetland
No
Corps
0.050
GA (P)
Planting
Headwater Wetland
No
Corps
0.040
Total Wetland Impacts
0.66
STREAM IMPACTS
Stream
Stream Impact Number
Average
Permanent (P) or
Type of Impact*
Stream Name
PER or INT
Type of Jurisdiction
Stream WidthLf,V-e
Temporary (T)
(feet)
Slingshot Creek** (P)
Relocation
Slingshot Creek
PER
Corps
743
Slingshot Creek** (T)
Stabilization
Slingshot Creek
PER
Corps
2225
UT3(P)
Relocation
UT3
PER
Corps
275
UTi (T)
Stabilization
UTS
PER
Corps
448
UT2 (P)
Relocation
UT2
PER
Corps
130
Total Stream & Tributary Impacts
3821
* No impacts are anticipated in conjunction with Enhancement (level 11) or Preservation activities.
**The stream was originally called Troublesome Creek on the PJD package; the name was changed to Slingshot Creek during detailed planning at the
request of NCDMS.
OPEN WATER IMPACTS
Open Water Impact
Waterbody
Number Permanent (P) or
Name of Waterbody
Type of Impact
Type
Area of Impact (acres)
Temporary (T)
NONE
Total Open Water Impacts
0
BUFFER IMPACTS
Buffer Impact Number
Buffer
Zone 2Impact
Permanent (P) or
Reason for Impact
Stream Name
Mitigation
Zone i Impact (ft sq)
(ft sq)
Temporary (T)
Required
P
Stream Restoration
Slingshot Creek & Uts
No
205,052
114,752
Total Buffer Impacts
205,052
114,7SZ

� e N,OrAcU01,
n •i x A—Er—entM. rnc•
f ,
tv
r u�
i
I`
Prepared for:
l - -
A /
Copyright:02013 National Geographic "' a"f •� �../
Society icubed `� * /� ` \ •1 . Project:
SLINGSHOT CREEK
2414 I STREAM AND
w \\` — �i� _ / ` *, I r1i�r WETLAND
• MITIGATION SITE
ocldngham County. N
_ '_ // •tom\\ l\ /�s - '� 7 i,Sd� ✓ ' Mws THk87
/ RdAwiil�
ti...-. __�- �_�. _ / 1 � _' to ' •,. `� -
"Reidsville _- Jam\,`� l H SITE LOCATION
'e . i�d .'3rti.m ce
Seat' i/ / \toc�e � '��•~ �� 11/ ( ,i 1 .�`. - '/' w �
t:mp�" rs,r ardern' A '•� 1 v., _
Drawn by:
1sa �_.., i i��� t ■� / KRJ
►alo wsA �. • 1 _ ( _(' Date:
i0 Arrtrettl �/ 333UUUNNN
DEC 2018
/ ._ , / t• er _ Scale.
USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Map (Reidsville, NC Quad) project No.
t':•' 18-013
Cem Directions to the Site from Raleigh:
From Raleigh travel west on Id0 for - 45 miles
Take Exit 148 onto NC-54W toward Graham/Chapel HIM and turn right onto Harden Street
Travel- 1.6 miles, then turn right onto NC-87 N/W Elm Street FIGURE
NOV' - _ - After- 5 miles, turn right onto NC-87 N/Cssipee Road
Travel - 19.3 miles, then turn left and stay on NC-87 N
y y After - 4.1 miles, turn left toward US-158, then turn left onto US-158 W 1
_ - After- 0.9 miles, take a slight right onto Iron Works Road, then take a right onto Harbor Road
-_-Cap
The Site is located north of the end of Harbor Road
c py ghC®'2013 Nationale graphic Latitude: 36.334687' N, Longitude: 79.711665' W
' Soc ety. -cubed \ -

SAW-2018-01170
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. SAW-2018-01170 County: Rockingham U.S.G.S. Quad: NC -Reidsville
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Property Owner: NCDEO DMS
Attn: Tim Baumgartner
Address: 1619 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1619
Size (acres) —12 Nearest Town Reidsville
Nearest Waterway UT to Troublesome Creek / Lake Hunt River Basin Cape Fear
USGS 14UC 03030002 Coordinates 36.333480 N,-79.715103 W
Location description: The project area is located approximately 0.1 mile north of the northern terminus of Harbor Road, near
Reidsville, Rockingham County, North Carolina. The Project Area is shown as the "Slingshot Creek Stream Restoration Site
Easement" on the attached Figure 3, titled "Slingshot Creek Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Potential Waters of the US."
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
® There appear to be waters including wetlands, on the above described project area, that may be subject to Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). The
waters including wetlands, have been delineated, and the delineation has been verified by the Corps to be sufficiently
accurate and reliable. The approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated
August 2018. Therefore this preliminary jurisdiction determination may be used in the permit evaluation process,
including determining compensatory mitigation. For purposes of computation of impacts, compensatory mitigation
requirements, and other resource protection measures, a permit decision made on the basis of a preliminary JD will treat
all waters and wetlands that would be affected in any way by the permitted activity on the site as if they are jurisdictional
waters of the U.S. This preliminary determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory Program
Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331). However, you may request an approved JD, which is an
appealable action, by contacting the Corps district for further instruction.
❑ There appear to be waters including wetlands, on the above described project area/property, that may be subject to Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). However,
since the waters including wetlands, have not been properly delineated, this preliminary jurisdiction determination may not be
used in the permit evaluation process. Without a verified wetland delineation, this preliminary determination is merely an
effective presumption of CWA/RHA jurisdiction over all of the waters including wetlands, at the project area, which is not
sufficiently accurate and reliable to support an enforceable permit decision. We recommend that you have the waters including
wetlands, on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a
timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can be verified by the Corps.
B. Approved Determination
❑ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described project area/property subject to the permit
requirements of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for
a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ There are waters including wetlands, on the above described project area/property subject to the permit requirements of Section
404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ We recommend you have the waters including wetlands, on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be
able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that
can be verified by the Corps.
❑ The waters including wetlands, on your project area/property have been delineated and the delineation has been verified by the
Corps. The approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated MAP DATE. If you wish to
have the delineation surveyed, the Corps can review and verify the survey upon completion. Once verified, this survey will

SAW-2018-01170
provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA and/or RHA jurisdiction on your property which, provided there is no
change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years.
❑ The waters including wetlands, have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the Corps
Regulatory Official identified below on SURVEY SIGNED DATE. Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described project area/property which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA).
You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Morehead City, NC, at [phone] to determine their
requirements.
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US, including wetlands, without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). Placement of dredged or fill material, construction or
placement of structures, or work within navigable waters of the United States without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Sections 9 and/or 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC § 401 and/or 403). If you have any questions
regarding this determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact David Bailey at [phone] X 30 or
David.E. Bailey2(j'usace.army.mil.
C. Basis For Determination: See the Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination form dated 5/7/2019.
D. Remarks: None.
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the particular site
identified in this request. The del ineation/determ i nation may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security
Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in USDA programs, you should request
a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in B.
above)
This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. If you object to this
determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. Enclosed you will find a
Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this determination you
must submit a completed RFA form to the following address:
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn: Jason Steele, Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Room 1OM15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for appeal
under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP. Should you
decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by Not applicable.
**It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this correspondence.**
Digitally signed by
BAILEY.DAVID.E.1379283736
Corps Regulatory Official: Date: 2019.05.07 11:48:14 -04'00'
Date of JD: 5/7/2019 Expiration Date of JD: Not applicable
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we continue to do so,
please complete our Customer Satisfaction Survey, located online at http://corpsinapu.usace.ai-iny.mil/cm apex/Pp= 136:4:0.
Copy furnished:
Grant Lewis, Axiom Environmental, Inc., 218 Snow Avenue, Raleigh, NC 27603
Sue Homewood, NCDEQ-DWR, 450 W. Hanes Mill Rd, Suite 300, Winston-Salem, NC 27105

to
Legend bzp Troublesome Creek
�- Slingshot Creek Stream Restoration Site Easement
Potential Perennial Streams = 3944.1 If '"�• S J" i JA Wetland
-- Potential Intermittent Streams = 172.0 If 1 0.021 acres
1M Potential Wetlands = 0.689 acres
o Wetland GPS Points UT-3 to A,+orr, EnrYor,nera� tM
Wetland Data Form Locations Troublesome Creek prepared for.
PPP
NC WAM Form Location
NCDWR Form Locations
JB'Netland !
�( NCSAM Form Locations ', '� n fT • - -' s
4-foot elevation contours (LiDAR 2007) ` Main Channel (UT to
- _ Troublesome Creer - •'��
✓:
tM
d-
UPPER CAPE FEAR
UMBRELLA
MITIGATION BANK
".. `t.....s - 7:` �{ -ti,�fl`{ ,4.'Y"' JC Wetland
0.007 acres Rockingham County. NC
Title
SLINGSHOT CREEK
STREAM AND
7
a ! TLAND TIO
SC Wetland - MITIGATION SITE
POTENTIAL
0.001 acresi WATERS OF THE US
Notes.
"'J, 'I,,i.J
UT-1 to y,. + e,ckgm,rod im,oerr S,,,m
Troublesome Creep zo+a ,,,�i C On..p
p,gm, (o m NC On,Map
M. NC ionln,. proIbr by
i o ,�,. _ �-; ; co d�atonac -11)ro,mamn
0 0
'. GA Weiland coo
0
0.088 acres
l
`+T Teo
i2018
o.
Main Channel fUT tom o o.
I- F` n - Scale: 1:2000
?�4 UT-2 to Project No.: 18-013
Troublesome Creek
FIGURE
3
0 250 500 1,000
Feet

SAW-2018-01170
NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: NCDEQ DMS Attn: Tim Baum artner File Number: SAW-2018-01170 Date: 5/7/2019
Attached is:
See Section below
❑
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT Standard Permit or Letter of ermission)
A
❑
PROFFERED PERMIT Standard Permit or Letter ofpermission)
B
❑
PERMIT DENIAL
C
F-11
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
D
ZI
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
E
SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision.
Additional information maybe found at or Imp: ��ww.usace.anny.miI/Mission; CivilWorksi"Rey(uIatorvProi4ramandPerm its. aspx
or the Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You ►nay accept or object to 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.
• 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 permit 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 11 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 I1 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 11 of this form and sending the form to the district 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.

SAW-2018-01170
SECTION I1- REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an initial
proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons or
objections are addressed in the administrative record.)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the
record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to
clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record.
However, you may provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative
record.
POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION:
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
appeal process you may contact:
also contact:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division
Mr. Jason Steele, Administrative Appeal Review Officer
attn: David E. Bailey
CESAD-PDO
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
60 Forsyth Street, Room 10M15
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
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 oppontuni to participate in all site investi rations.
Date:
Telephone number:
Signature of appellant or agent.
For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, David Bailey, 69 Darlington Avenue, Wilmington, North Carolina
28403
For Permit denials, Proffered Permits and Approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this form to:
Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Jason Steele, Administrative Appeal
Officer, CESAD-PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 10M15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]

Appendix 2 - PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD: 5/7/2019
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: Grant Lewis - Axiom Environmental, Inc, 219 Snow Avenue, Raleigh, Nc 27603
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: CESAW-RG-R, SAW-2018-01170
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND/OR
AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: NC County/parish/borough: Rockingham City: Reidsville
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format):
Lat.: 36.333480 Long.:-79.715103
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: UT to Troublesome Creek / Lake Hunt
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
0 Office (Desk) Determination. Date: 5/7/2019
0 Field Determination. Date(s): 1/6/2015
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES IN REVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO REGULATORY
JURISDICTION.
Site
number
Latitude
(decimal
degrees)
Longitude
(decimal
degrees)
Estimated amount
of aquatic resource
in review area
(acreage and linear
feet, if applicable)
Type of aquatic
resource (i.e., wetland
vs. non -wetland
waters)
Geographic authority
to which the aquatic
resource "may be"
subject (i.e., Section
404 or Section 10/404)
See attached

Site Number/ Feature
Name
Latitude
Longitude
Cowardin
Class
Estimated amount of
aquatic resource in review
area
Class of aquatic
resources
Main Channe (UT to
Troublesom Creek)
36.335113
-79.711581
R3UB1/2
2808.4 feet
Non -section 10 -
Non -wetland
UT 1 to Troublesome
Creek
36.33468
-79.710414
R3U61/2
968.2 feet
Non -section 10 -
Non -wetland
UT 2 to Troublesome
Creek
36.333898
-79.712397
R3UB1/2
130.4 feet
Non -section 10 -
Non -wetland
UT 3 to Troublesome
Creek
36.3371
-79.7102
R2UB1/2
172.0 feet
Non -section 10 -
Non -wetland
UT 1A to Troublesome
Creek
36.3374
-79.7095
R3U61/2
37.1 feet
Non -section 10 -
Non -wetland
GA
36.334091
-79.713219
PSS1
0.088 acres
Non -section 10-
Wetland
GE
36.334714
-79.711486
PSS1
0.513 acres
Non -section 10-
Wetland
SC
36.33531
-79.711542
PSS1
O.00lacres
Non -section 10-
Wetland
Jc
36.335981
-79.710591
PSS1
0.007 acres
Non -section 10-
Wetland
JB
36.33692
-79.709894
PSS1
0.059acres
Non -section 10-
Wetland
JA
36.337071
-79.709727
PSS1
0.021 acres
Non -section 10-
Wetland

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

SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply)
Checked items should be included in subject file. Appropriately reference sources
below where indicated for all checked items:
❑■ Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor:
Map: Aerial, soils, and topo maps (Axiom)
0 Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor.
❑■ Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rationale:
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
❑■ U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: 1:24,000 Reisdville Quad
❑■ Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Rockingham Co. Soil Survey
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
IN
State/local wetland inventory map(s):
FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: .(National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
0 Photographs: ❑■ Aerial (Name & Date): 2014 NC OneMap
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
a
Other information (please specify): LiDAR (NC Floodmaps)
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily
been verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for later jurisdictional
determinations.
Signature and date of
Regulatory staff member
completing PJD
Signature and date of
person requesting PJD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)'
' Districts may establish timeframes for requestor to return signed PJD forms. If the requestor does not respond
within the established time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is
necessary prior to finalizing an action.

This preliminary JD finds that there "may be" waters of the United States on the
subject project site, and identifies all aquatic features on the site that could be
affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information:
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not
necessarily been verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for
later iurisdictional determinations.
Digitally signed by
BAI LEY. DAV I D. E.13 79283736
Date: 2019.05.07 11:43:36
04'00'
Signature and date of
Regulatory Project Manager
(REQUIRED)
4
'.04 �•4'�Mw.r e�..a
W. Grant Lewis;�,�
oau.: mse.m mo5:�s:vi asm
Signature and date of
person requesting preliminary JD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)

Jurisdictional Determination Request
A. PARCEL INFORMATION
Street Address: 1400 Front Street
City, State
County
Reidsville, NC
Rockinaham
Parcel Index Number(s) (PIN): 170686
B. REQUESTOR INFORMATION
Name: Grant Lewis - Axiom Environmental, Ind
Mailing Address: 218 Snow Avenue
Telephone Number:
Electronic Mail Address:
Select one:
❑ I am the current property owner.
❑✓ I am an Authorized Agent or Environmental Consultant
❑ Interested Buyer or Under Contract to Purchase
Other, please explain.
Raleigh, NC 27603
[phone]
[e-mail]
C. PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION
Name: Robert L. Wheless
Mailing Address: 1400 Front Street
Telephone Number:
Electronic Mail Address:
Reidsville, NC 27320
[phone]
1 Must provide completed Agent Authorization Form/Letter.
2 Documentation of ownership also needs to be provided with request (copy of Deed, County GIS/Parcel/Tax Record).
Version: May 2017 Page 2

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

Jurisdictional Determination Request
F. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD) TYPE (Select One)
✓❑ I am requesting that the Corps provide a preliminary JD for the property identified herein.
A Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) provides an indication that there may
be "waters of the United States" or "navigable waters of the United States"on a property.
PJDs are sufficient as the basis for permit decisions. For the purposes of permitting, all
waters and wetlands on the property will be treated as if they are jurisdictional "waters of
the United States". PJDs cannot be appealed (33 C.F.R. 331.2); however, a PJD is
"preliminary" in the sense that an approved JD can be requested at any time. PJDs do
not expire.
❑ I am requesting that the Corps provide an approved JD for the property identified herein.
An Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD) is a determination that
jurisdictional "waters of the United States" or "navigable waters of the United
States" are either present or absent on a site. An approved JD identifies the limits of
waters on a site determined to be jurisdictional under the Clean Water Act and/or
Rivers and Harbors Act. Approved JDs are sufficient as the basis for permit
decisions. AJDs are appealable (33 C.F.R. 331.2). The results of the AJD will be
posted on the Corps website. A landowner, permit applicant, or other "affected
party" (33 C.F.R. 331.2) who receives an AJD may rely upon the AJD for five years
(subject to certain limited exceptions explained in Regulatory Guidance Letter 05-
02).
❑ I am unclear as to which JD I would like to request and require additional information
to inform my decision.
G. ALL REQUESTS
✓❑ Map of Property or Project Area. This Map must clearly depict the boundaries of the
review area.
✓❑ Size of Property or Review Area -1 2 acres.
❑ The property boundary (or review area boundary) is clearly physically marked on the site.
Version: May 2017 Page 4

Jurisdictional Determination Request
H. REQUESTS FROM CONSULTANTS
❑
Project Coordinates (Decimal Degrees): Latitude:
36.333480
Longitude:-79.715103
F✓ A legible delineation map depicting the aquatic resources and the property/review area.
Delineation maps must be no larger than I Ix17 and should contain the following: (Corps
signature of submitted survey plats will occur after the submitted delineation map has been
reviewed and approved).6
■ North Arrow
■ Graphical Scale
■ Boundary of Review Area
■ Date
■ Location of data points for each Wetland Determination Data Form or tributary
assessment reach.
For Approved Jurisdictional Determinations:
■ Jurisdictional wetland features should be labeled as Wetland Waters of the US, 404
wetlands, etc. Please include the acreage of these features.
■ Jurisdictional non -wetland features (i.e. tidal/navigable waters, tributaries,
impoundments) should be labeled as Non -Wetland Waters of the US, stream, tributary,
open water, relatively permanent water, pond, etc. Please include the acreage or linear
length of each of these features as appropriate.
■ Isolated waters, waters that lack a significant nexus to navigable waters, or non -
jurisdictional upland features should be identified as Non -Jurisdictional. Please
include a justification in the label regarding why the feature is non jurisdictional (i.e.
"Isolated", "No Significant Nexus", or "Upland Feature"). Please include the acreage
or linear length of these features as appropriate.
For Preliminary Jurisdictional Determinations:
■ Wetland and non -wetland features should not be identified as Jurisdictional, 404,
Waters of the United States, or anything that implies jurisdiction. These features can be
identified as Potential Waters of the United States, Potential Non -wetland Waters of
the United States, wetland, stream, open water, etc. Please include the acreage and
linear length of these features as appropriate.
✓❑ Completed Wetland Determination Data Forms for appropriate region
(at least one wetland and one upland form needs to be completed for each wetland type)
Please refer to the guidance document titled "Survey Standards for Jurisdictional Determinations" to ensure that the
supplied map meets the necessary mapping standards. http://www.saw.usace.army.miI/Missions/Regulatory-Permit-
Proeram/Juri sdiction/
Version: May 2017 Page 5

Jurisdictional Determination Request
aCompleted appropriate Jurisdictional Determination form
• PJDs, please complete a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form' and include the
Aquatic Resource Table
• AJDs, please complete an Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form'
F4 Vicinity Map
FVI Aerial Photograph
USGS Topographic Map
a Soil Survey Map
Other Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map, Proposed Site
Plan, previous delineation maps, LIDAR maps, FEMA floodplain maps)
Landscape Photos (if taken)
NCWAM and/or NCWAM Assessment Forms and Rating Sheets
NC Division of Water Resources Stream Identification Forms
Other Assessment Forms
7 www.saw.usace.army.mil/Portals/59/docs/re ulatory/regdocs/JD/RGL 08-02 App A Prelim JD Form fillablepdf
' Please see http://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/Re ug latory-Permit-Program/Jurisdiction/
Principal Purpose: The information that you provide will be used in evaluating your request to determine
whether there are any aquatic resources within the project area subject to federal jurisdiction under the regulatory
authorities referenced above.
Routine Uses: This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal, state, and local
government agencies, and the public, and may be made available as part of a public notice as required by federal
law. Your name and property location where federal jurisdiction isto be determined will be included in the
approved jurisdictional determination (AJD), which will be made available to the public on the District's website
and on the Headquarters USAGE website.
Disclosure: Submission of requested information is voluntary; however, if information is not provided, the
request for an AJD cannot be evaluated nor can an AJD be issued.
Version: May 2017 Page 6

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
69 DARLINGTON AVENUE
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403-1343
November 12, 2019
Regulatory Division
Re: NCIRT Review and USACE Approval of the NCDMS Slingshot Creek Mitigation Site /
Rockingham County / SAW-2018-01170/ NCDMS Project # 100058
Mr. Tim Baumgartner
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
Dear Mr. Baumgartner:
The purpose of this letter is to provide the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
(NCDMS) with all comments generated by the North Carolina Interagency Review Team (NCIRT) during
the 30-day comment period for the Slingshot Creek Stream and Wetland Draft Mitigation Plan, which
closed on September 25, 2019. These comments are attached for your review.
Based on our review of these comments, we have determined that no major concerns have been
identified with the Draft Mitigation Plan, which is considered approved with this correspondence.
However, several minor issues were identified, as described in the attached comment memo, which must
be addressed in the Final Mitigation Plan.
The Final Mitigation Plan is to be submitted with the Preconstruction Notification (PCN)
Application for Nationwide permit approval of the project along with a copy of this letter. Issues identified
above must be addressed in the Final Mitigation Plan. All changes made to the Final Mitigation Plan
should be summarized in an errata sheet included at the beginning of the document. If it is determined
that the project does not require a Department of the Army permit, you must still provide a copy of the
Final Mitigation Plan, along with a copy of this letter, to the appropriate USACE field office at least 30
days in advance of beginning construction of the project. Please note that this approval does not preclude
the inclusion of permit conditions in the permit authorization for the project, particularly if issues
mentioned above are not satisfactorily addressed. Additionally, this letter provides initial approval for the
Mitigation Plan, but this does not guarantee that the project will generate the requested amount of
mitigation credit. As you are aware, unforeseen issues may arise during construction or monitoring of the
project that may require maintenance or reconstruction that may lead to reduced credit.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter, and if you have any questions regarding this
letter, the mitigation plan review process, or the requirements of the Mitigation Rule, please call me at
919-554-4884, ext 60.
Sincerely,
BROWN I NGXINI BERLY Digitallysignedby
BROWNINGAMBERLY.DANIELLE.
DANIELLE.152768351
1527683510
0 Date: 2019.11.12 15:37:30-05'00'
Kim Browning
Mitigation Project Manager
for Tyler Crumbley
Enclosures
Electronic Copies Furnished:
NCIRT Distribution List
Jeremiah Dow— NCDMS
Ray Holz, Worth Creech—RS

'.r
/./
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF:
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
69 DARLINGTON AVENUE
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403-1343
CESAW-RG/Browning
MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD
RP'-
NN
DID
MITIGATr.', ("ES
October 28, 2019
SUBJECT: Slingshot Creek Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site - NCIRT Comments during 30-day Mitigation
Plan Review
PURPOSE: The comments listed below were received during 30-day comment period in accordance with
Section 332.8(g) of the 2008 Mitigation Rule in response to the Notice of NCDMS Mitigation Plan Review.
NCDMS Project Name: Slingshot Creek Stream and Wetland Site, Rockingham County, NC
USACE AID#: SAW-2018-01170
NCDMS #: 100058
30-Day Comment Deadline: September 25, 2019
DWR Comments, Mac Haupt and Erin Davis:
l . This site is in the Jordan Lake watershed, are there any plans to pursue riparian buffer or nutrient offset
strategy?
2. The number of crossings for the size of the site is a negative aspect of this site. Is there any way at least
one crossing could be removed?
3. Section 3.5- DWR noted that there is only one soil profile boring listed in the Appendix. Given that this
site has wetland restoration credit, a much more thorough soil characterization will need to occur before
DWR will approve the proposed wetlands in this mitigation plan. During the site visit, DWR field notes
stated that many of our soil cores did not see lower chromas required for hydric soils.
4. Section 8.1.1- Outfall Structures- DWR does not support the use of the Terracell drop structure. DWR
prefers the utilization of natural materials in the channel bed. Moreover, DWR does not believe the slope
change is so drastic that the artificial structure is warranted.
5. Section 8.3- Wetland Restoration — the plan states that, "...the construction of ephemeral pools will add
an important component to groundwater restoration activities. These activities will result in the restoration
of 1.02 acres of jurisdictional ....riverine wetlands." DWR would like to stress that if ephemeral pools
are counted as wetland restoration then they will need to be constructed so that there is periodic drying.
6. Table 14 Planting Plan- DWR is recommending a cap of 5% in the planting of Green Ash due to the green
ash borer.
7. Table 16- Monitoring Table-DWR requires a stream gauge on UT3 in the upper third of the reach.
8. Table 16- DWR likes the fact that benthic macroinvertebrates will be monitored.
9. From a landscape position standpoint, DWR would rather not have mitigation sites draining (in close
proximity) into ponds or lakes.
10. Figure 513- there are areas which appear to be in green where the current channel exists. Are these areas
meant to be proposed for wetland restoration credit? If these areas are proposed for wetland credit, DWR
believes restoration credit may not be appropriate.

11. DWR notes that there were no photos of the site in the mitigation plan. It is often beneficial in the review
of the document to have the photos, especially if it has been awhile since the site visit. In addition, DWR
would like to see photos associated with the cross sections (Appendix B) if at all possible.
12. Design sheet 2C- shows an engineered riffle with rip rap being placed on the bank slope. DWR does not
approve of rip rap being placed on the banks.
13. Design sheet 4- DWR needs to see a scale on these sheets. Also, the thick dashed black line, is that limits
of disturbance? DWR prefers that significant markings on the plan view be clearly labeled.
14. Design sheet 8- DWR does not believe the utilization of a Terracell structure is warranted when the rest
of the project was using log cross vanes.
15. Design sheet E2- What activities will be done to return the areas utilized as haul roads back to natural
conditions?
16. What percentage of this project has less than 50 foot buffers?
USACE Comments, Kim Browning:
1. The correct USACE Action ID is SAW-2018-01170. Please correct the cover page.
2. Please depict photo points/digital image stations on Figures 10. If the fixed cross-section locations are to
be used, please describe that in the text in section 7.1.
3. Section 8.3- Wetland Restoration — The inclusion of ephemeral/vernal pools is acceptable, and should be
8-14" depressions that dry up yearly so that predatory species cannot colonize.
a. This section also discusses filling drainage ditches. If ditches are to be filled, please show these
areas on the construction plans, and the length of the ditch plug.
4. It would be beneficial to add some coarse woody debris to the depressional areas in the buffers and
throughout the adjacent wetlands for habitat, and to help store sediment, increase water
storage/infiltration, and absorb water energy during overbank events.
5. Please discuss how fescue will be treated within the buffer establishment area.
6. UT3- should have a flow gauge in the upper third of the reach.
7. Section 7.0- Potential constraints... the last sentence is unclear.
8. Table 1- Are additional credits for macroinvertebrate sampling being sought? If so, please clarify this
table.
9. Table 16- Will fixed photo points be monitored annually? If so, please indicate if they will be at all cross -
sections, or depict on monitoring map.
10. Table 17 Success Criteria —Streams, please add a statement (regarding UT3) at least 30-days continuous
surface water flow for intermittent streams.
11. Stream restoration will bisect existing wetlands where Slingshot Creek intersects with GA Wetland, and
where UTl intersects with GE Wetland. At least one wetland gauge should be installed in wetland GE to
ensure no functional loss.
12. Figure 3 in the JD —All streams are referred to as Troublesome Creek. Isn't this Slingshot Creek? Was
this what it was called when proposed as a bank site? Please use consistent labeling throughout the review
period, and it's especially important for the PCN to track impacts.
13. When submitting the PCN, please include an estimate of the number of trees, or acres, to be cleared for
the NLEB 4(d) Rule.
14. Table 14--Please confirm that one target community is being proposed for the entire Project Site (stream
side, wetland, and upland areas). If multiple planting zones are proposed, please show zones on a
figure/design sheet and reference in the planting table.
BROWNINGNM Digitally signed by
B R O W N I N G. K I M B E R L Y. D A N I
BERLY.DANIELLE ELLE.1527683510
Date: 2019.10.28 15:43:5 2
.1527683510-04'00'
Kim Browning
Mitigation Project Manager
Regulatory Division

Slingshot Mitigation Plan Comment Responses:
DWR Comments, Mac Haupt and Erin Davis:
1. This site is in the Jordan Lake watershed, are there any plans to pursue riparian buffer or nutrient offset
strategy?
• No, RS has not been contracted by DMS for butter or nutrient credits.
2. The number of crossings for the size of the site is a negative aspect of this site. Is there any way at least
one crossing could be removed?
• No, the conservation easement has already been recorded. The farthest downstream
crossing was originally 45' in width and scaled down to a 25' width based on the IRT field
notes. The additional crossings are required by the landowner.
3. Section 3.5- DWR noted that there is only one soil profile boring listed in the Appendix. Given that this
site has wetland restoration credit, a much more thorough soil characterization will need to occur
before DWR will approve the proposed wetlands in this mitigation plan. During the site visit,
DWR field notes stated that many of our soil cores did not see lower chromas required for hydric
soils.
• Additional soil profiles have been added to the appendix, with the locations depicted on
Figure 4.
4. Section 8.1.1- Outfall Structures- DWR does not support the use of the Terracell drop structure. DWR
prefers the utilization of natural materials in the channel bed. Moreover, DWR does not believe the
slope change is so drastic that the artificial structure is warranted.
• Terracel has been changed to Drop Structure in Figure 513, Figure 713, and in the text of the
document.
5. Section 8.3- Wetland Restoration — the plan states that, "...the construction of ephemeral pools will add
an important component to groundwater restoration activities. These activities will result in the
restoration of 1.02 acres of jurisdictional ....riverine wetlands." DWR would like to stress that if
ephemeral pools are counted as wetland restoration then they will need to be constructed so that
there is periodic drying.
• Ephemeral pools will be constructed such that they dry during the summer and will have
woody debris habitat incorporated into the feature.
6. Table 14 Planting Plan- DWR is recommending a cap of 5% in the planting of Green Ash due to the green
ash borer.
• The planting list has been updated to include species ordered for the Site. The final
planting list includes 400 green ash, which is less than 4% the total number of planted
stems.
7. Table 16- Monitoring Table-DWR requires a stream gauge on UT3 in the upper third of the reach.
This is an Ell reach added by the IRT/DMS. As the channel was identified by the IRT.
confirmed to be a stream by NCDWR and the Corps of Engineer during a PDJ, and no
channel alternation work is to be conducted within, or adjacent to the channel, we
respectfully request to leave this gauge off the monitoring protocol for the Site.
8. Table 16- DWR likes the fact that benthic macroinvertebrates will be monitored.
• Good.
9. From a landscape position standpoint, DWR would rather not have mitigation sites draining (in close
proximity) into ponds or lakes.
• This is an unavoidable aspect of this Site and was discussed during our initial Site visit.
Note: Downstream, Lake Reidsville, is a municipal drinking water source for the Town of
Reidsville and the local government is very appreciative of the project for the water quality
benefit.
10. Figure 513- there are areas which appear to be in green where the current channel exists. Are these areas
meant to be proposed for wetland restoration credit? If these areas are proposed for wetland credit,
DWR believes restoration credit may not be appropriate.
• RS has successfully performed and received R credit in old stream channels in the past. We

have data from many similar projects that shows that these areas are successfully converted
back to wetlands.
11. DWR notes that there were no photos of the site in the mitigation plan. It is often beneficial in the
review of the document to have the photos, especially if it has been awhile since the site visit. In
addition, DWR would like to see photos associated with the cross sections (Appendix B) if at all
possible.
• Appendix J has been added to the document and contains Site photographs. Photographs of
existing conditions cross sections is not available.
12. Design sheet 2C- shows an engineered riffle with rip rap being placed on the bank slope. DWR does
not approve of rip rap being placed on the banks.
• This has been removed from the plans set.
13. Design sheet 4- DWR needs to see a scale on these sheets. Also, the thick dashed black line, is that
limits of disturbance? DWR prefers that significant markings on the plan view be clearly labeled.
• Completed
14. Design sheet 8- DWR does not believe the utilization of a Terracell structure is warranted when the rest
of the project was using log cross vanes.
• Terracel has been changed to Drop Structure in Figure 5B. Figure 713, and in the text of the
document.
15. Design sheet E2- What activities will be done to return the areas utilized as haul roads back to natural
conditions?
• See construction notes, these will be added to the haul road sheets.
16. What percentage of this project has less than 50 foot buffers?
UT 4 has less than a 50-foot buffer on its right bank, as it enters the property. UT 4 is a
preservation reach and accounts for less than 2% of the buffer area. All other streams have
a minimum 50-foot buffer on both stream banks.
USACE Comments, Kim Brownin-a:
17. The correct USACE Action ID is SAW-2018-01 170. Please correct the cover page.
• The USACE Action ID has been updated.
18. Please depict photo points/digital image stations on Figures 10. If the fixed cross-section locations are
to be used, please describe that in the text in section 7.1.
• A note was added to Table 15 indicating the following. "Visual Assessment will be
complimented by permanent photographic points located at each permanent cross section
and vegetation plot."'
19. Section 8.3- Wetland Restoration — The inclusion of ephemeral/vernal pools is acceptable, and should
be 8-14" depressions that dry up yearly so that predatory species cannot colonize.
• Ephemeral pools will be constructed no deeper than 12 inches, will incorporate woody
debris for habitat, and will be expected to dry during summer months.
20. This section also discusses filling drainage ditches. If ditches are to be filled, please show these areas on
the construction plans, and the length of the ditch plug.
• Channel plugs will be added to the construction plans.
21. It would be beneficial to add some coarse woody debris to the depressional areas in the buffers and
throughout the adjacent wetlands for habitat, and to help store sediment, increase water
storage/infiltration, and absorb water energy during overbank events.
• Woody debris will be included as small piles in the riparian and wetland areas for habitat.
22. Please discuss how fescue will be treated within the buffer establishment area.
RS acknowledges that this site does face challenges based on the existing vegetation. These
challenges will be overcome through a combination of herbicide applications and
mechanical site prep techniques. Preliminary herbicide treatments have already been made
targeting woody non-native invasive species (NNIS) including Kudzu, Tree of Heaven.
Privet, and Multiflora Rose (September 2019) both within the site boundaries and along the

10
margins of the site on the parent tract. An additional herbicide treatment for privet and
fescue is planned before the end of 2019 (pre -construction). During construction
mechanical site prep techniques including ripping will be used to diminish any remaining
undesired pasture grasses and facilitate tree establishment. The planned permanent seed
mix will also mitigate the regrowth of fescue by including cool season forbs. After
construction a regular herbicide program will be implemented targeting both dense pasture
grasses and NNIS. This integrated approach will provide a high level of control of fescue
and other undesired species and will support establishment of the desired hardwood forest
community.
23. UT3- should have a flow gauge in the upper third of the reach.
• This is an Ell reach added by the IRT/DMS. As the channel was identified by the IRT,
confirmed to be a stream by NCDWR and the Corps of Engineer during a PDJ, and no
channel alteration work is to be conducted within, or adjacent to the channel, we
respectfully request to leave this gauge off the monitoring protocol for the Site.
24. Section 7.0- Potential constraints... the last sentence is unclear.
• Section 7.0 was altered to clarify work conducted for the document.
25. Table 1- Are additional credits for macroinvertebrate sampling being sought? If so, please clarify this
table.
RS is not seeking extra credit for macro invertebrate sampling on this project.
26. Table 16- Will fixed photo points be monitored annually? If so, please indicate if they will be at all
cross- sections, or depict on monitoring map.
• A note was added to Table 15 indicating the following. "Visual Assessment will be
complimented by permanent photographic points located at each permanent cross section
and vegetation plot."
27. Table 17 Success CriteriaStreams, please add a statement (regarding UT3) at least 30-days
continuous surface water flow for intermittent streams.
• The statement was added to Table 17 Success Criteria for streams.
28. Stream restoration will bisect existing wetlands where Slingshot Creek intersects with GA Wetland, and
where UT1 intersects with GE Wetland. At least one wetland gauge should be installed in wetland
GE to ensure no functional loss.
• An additional groundwater gauge was added to Wetland GE to ensure no functional loss.
In addition. Table 16 was updated to include 10 groundwater gauges, instead of 9
groundwater gauges.
29. Figure 3 in the JD —All streams are referred to as Troublesome Creek. Isn't this Slingshot Creek? Was
this what it was called when proposed as a bank site? Please use consistent labeling throughout
the review period, and it's especially important for the PCN to track impacts.
• During our NCDMS review it was requested we change the name fi-om Troublesome Creek
(as designated in the PJD submittal) to Slingshot Creek.
30. When submitting the PCN, please include an estimate of the number of trees, or acres, to be cleared for
the NLEB 4(d) Rule.
• We will include an estimate of the number of trees. or acres to be cleared in our PCN
submittal.
31. Table 14--Please confirm that one target community is being proposed for the entire Project Site
(stream side, wetland, and upland areas). If multiple planting zones are proposed, please show
zones on a figure/design sheet and reference in the planting table.
• Figures 8A and 8B (Planting Plan) depict the locations of planting zones and the number
of species to be planted within each planting zone. The table depicted in the figures match
Table 14 in the document, which specifies species and number of seedlings to be planted
in each planting zone.