20190080 Ver 1_Revised Mitigation Plan 2020_20200124

ID#* 20190080 Version* 1
Select Reviewer:*
Katie Merritt
Initial Review Completed Date 01/27/2020
Mitigation Project Submittal-1/24/2020
Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site?* O Yes a No
Type of Mitigation Project:*
r Stream r Wetlands rJ Buffer r Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:*
Lindsay Crocker
Project Information
..................................................................................................................................................................
ID#:* 20190080
Existing IDI
Project Type: r DMS r Mitigation Bank
Project Name: Boseman
County: Edgecombe
Document Information
Email Address:*
[e-mail]
Version: * 1
Existing Version
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Plans
File Upload: Boseman_100119_MP 2020_Reduced.pdf 12.97MB
Rease upload only one RDF of the complete file that needs to be subrritted...
Signature
Print Name:* Lindsay Crocker
Signature:*

MITIGATION PLAN
BOSEMAN BUFFER MITIGATION SITE
Edgecombe County, NC
NCDEQ Contract No. 7872
NCDMS ID No. 100119
NCDWR Project No. 2019-0800
RFP No. 16-007711

Tar-Pamlico River Basin
HUC 03020101
January 23, 2020
Prepared For:
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652

DRAFT MITIGATION PLAN
BOSEMAN BUFFER MITIGATION SITE
Edgecombe County, NC
NCDEQ Contract No. 7872 & NCDMS ID No. 100119
NCDWR Project No. 2019-0800
RFP No. 16-007711
Tar-Pamlico River Basin
HUC 03020101
Prepared For:

NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigaiton Services
1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
Prepared By: With Assistance From:

1117 Peachtree Walk NE, Suite 126 Venture 1, 940 Main Campus Dr., Suite 500
Atlanta, GA 30309 Raleigh, NC 27606
404-840-2697 919-754-5009
This Mitigation Plan has been written in conformance with the requirements of the following:
• 15A NCAC 02B.0295 Mitigaiton Program Requirements for Protection and Maintenance of Riparian
Buffers.
These documents govern DMS operations and procedures for the delivery and compensatory
mitigation.
Contributing Staff
Ted Griffith, Eco Terra Principal in Charge
Ryan Perry, Eco Terra Construction Oversight
Heather Smith, VHB Project Manager
Lane Sauls, VHB Quality Assurance

Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................................. 1
2.0 Mitigation Project Summary .............................................................................................................................................. 1
2.1 Existing Site Conditions ........................................................................................................................................................ 2
2.2 Watershed Characterization ............................................................................................................................................... 3
2.3 Soils .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 4
2.4 Geology ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 5
2.5 Vegetation ................................................................................................................................................................................. 5
2.6 Access and Site Constraints ................................................................................................................................................ 5
2.7 Site Resources .......................................................................................................................................................................... 5
3.0 Site Protection Instrument .................................................................................................................................................. 6
3.1 Site Protection Instruments Summary Information................................................................................................... 6
3.2 Current Ownership and Long-Term Protection .......................................................................................................... 6
4.0 Regulatory Considerations .................................................................................................................................................. 6
4.1 Threatened and Endangered Species ............................................................................................................................. 7
4.2 Cultural Resources ................................................................................................................................................................10
4.3 FEMA Floodplain Compliance ..........................................................................................................................................10
4.4 Other Environmental Issues ..............................................................................................................................................10
5.0 Implementation Plan ........................................................................................................................................................... 10
5.1 Parcel Preparation ................................................................................................................................................................10
5.2 Riparian Buffer and Adjacent Riparian Areas Restoration Activities .................................................................11
5.3 Determination of Credits ...................................................................................................................................................12
6.0 Monitoring Plan and Performance Standards ........................................................................................................ 14
6.1 Vegetation ...............................................................................................................................................................................14
6.2 Photo Reference Stations ..................................................................................................................................................14
6.3 Visual Assessments ..............................................................................................................................................................14
6.4 Reporting Performance Standards.................................................................................................................................14
6.5 Maintenance and Contingency Plans ...........................................................................................................................15
7.0 Stewardship................................................................................................................................................................................ 15
8.0 References ................................................................................................................................................................................... 16
Appendices
Appendix A: NCDWR Buffer Letters Appendix B: Draft Conservation Easement
Appendix C: Signed Categorical Exclusion

Boseman Buffer Mitigation-Mitigation Plan Page 1 DMS No: 100119 Final January 2020
1.0 Introduction
The Boseman Buffer Mitigaiton Site is a buffer restoration project located approximately 2.5 miles
southeast of the Town of Rocky Mount in Edgecombe County, NC (Figure 1). The underlying
project parcel is comprised of 276 acres of agricultural and forested areas. The Project Site is
approximately 14.9 acres along two unnamed tributaries to the Tar River. An expected
617,394.032 (ft2) riparain buffer credits will be generated by the project in the 03020101 8-digit
HUC of the Tar-Pamlico River Basin (Figure 2).

The Site is located within the Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03020101120030, a Targeted Local
Watershed (TLW) and North Carolina Department of Water Resources (NCDWR) sub-basin 03-03-
02. The unnamed tributaries flow into the Tar River approximately one and half miles downstream
of the project. According to the N.C. Division of Mitigation Services’ (DMS) 2010 Tar-Pamlico River
Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP) document, amended 2018, the project will support the
identified goals for the TLW, as well as the overall HUC. As stated in the RBRP, restoration of
riparian buffers to address agricultural runoff is a high priority for this 14-digit TLW HUC. The Boseman Buffer Mitgation Site will help to reduce future sediment and nutrient loading into the unnamed tributaries and downstream Tar River. It will also improve terrestrial habitats along these streams by establishing riparian corridors and allowing the land to undergo natural succession to forested community types. The area surrounding the streams is primarily
agricultural fields. The project will restore
vegetative buffers to a maximum of 115 feet
from the streams and will remove rotating crops
and fertilizer inputs. The restored riparian buffer
and adjacent riparian areas will filter runoff from
the surrounding farm fields. Invasive vegetation will be treated as needed within the project area
to promote native vegetation.
2.0 Mitigation Project Summary

The major goals of the proposed buffer restoration project are to address agricultural runoff,
including nutrients and sediment, protect the project site in perpetuity, and restore terrestrial
habitat. The detailed goals and objectives are found below in Table 1.

Boseman Buffer Mitigation-Mitigation Plan Page 2 DMS No: 100119 Final January 2020
Table 1: Goals and Objectives
Goal Objective Supported CU-wide and HUC RBRP Goals
Reduce
nutrient levels
Nutrient input will be decreased by filtering runoff from the agricultural fields through restored 115-foot wide
native buffer zones. The total amount of restored buffer and adjacent riparian areas will be 621,810 sq.ft.
Promote nutrient and sediment reduction in agricultural areas by restoring riparian buffers and adjacent riparian areas. *
Reduce sediment levels
Nutrient input will be decreased by filtering runoff from the agricultural fields through restored 115-foot wide native buffer zones. The total amount
of restored buffer and adjacent riparian area will be 621,810 sq.ft.
Promote nutrient and sediment reduction in agricultural areas by restoring riparian buffers
and adjacent riparian areas. *
Project protection in perpetuity
Implement a project in a TLW and
record a conservation easement.
Continue targeted implementation of projects
under the Buffer programs. #
Restore terrestrial habitat
Riparian buffer and adjacent riparian areas will be restored with native vegetation and invasive vegetation will be managed.
DMS’ programmatic goal,
North Carolina General
Statue 143-214.10#
* TLW and RBRP goal, # RBRP goal
2.1 Existing Site Conditions
Proposed buffer restoration will convert approximately 14.9 acres of agricultural fields along two
unnamed tributaries (hereinafter referred to as UT 1 and UT 2) to functioning riparian corridors.
The fields are currently in rotating row crops and early successional herbaceous vegetation. UT 1
enters the project site along the western property boundary and flows in an eastward direction.
UT 1 meets the definition of at least intermittent per the NCDWR On-Site Determination for
Applicability to the Tar-Pamlico Buffer Rules Letter (Buffer Letter), dated July 9, 2019 (Appendix A). UT 2 originates within the property boundary as an ephemeral channel (Reach 2a) and transitions to an intermittent channel (Reach 2b) (Buffer Letter) prior to it’s confluence with UT 1. There is a third unnamed tributary with a stream origin point within the property boundary and flows in an eastward direction to the confluence with UT 1. This tributary is at least intermittent per the Buffer Letter but is not being used to produce riparian buffer credit for this project. Project attributes associated with the proposed buffer site are provided in Table 2.

Boseman Buffer Mitigation-Mitigation Plan Page 3 DMS No: 100119 Final January 2020
Table 2: Buffer Project Attributes
Project Name Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site
Hydrologic Unit Code 03020101
River Basin Tar-Pamlico
Geographic Location (decimal degrees) 35.96451, -77.705926
Site Protection Instrument Conservation Easement
Total Credits (BMUs) 617,394.032
Types of Credits Riparian Buffer
Mitigation Plan Date October 2019
Initial Planting Date March 2020
Baseline Report Date March 2020
MY1 Report Date November 2020
MY2 Report Date November 2021
MY3 Report Date November 2022
MY 4 Report Date November 2023
MY 5 Report Date November 2024
Close out Report Date/Visit May 2025

In addition to buffer restoration on subject streams, per the Consolidated Buffer Mitigation Rules
(15A NCAC 02B 0.0295 (o)), alternative mitigation is proposed on the Site in the form of buffer
restoration on ephemeral channels. The proposed project is in compliance with these rules in the following ways: Buffer Restoration on Ephemeral Channels (15A NCAC 02B 0.0295 (o)(7)):
• NCDWR conducted a site visit on June 14, 2019 to evaluate the two unnamed tributaries on the Project (Figure 3).
• The mitigation area on the Site’s ephemeral channel (UT 2 Reach 2a) is located within the drainage area for UT 2 (Figure 3).
• The ephemeral channel is directly connected to UT 2 Reach 2b, an intermittent or perennial channel, and will be protected under a contiguous conservation easement boundary (Figure
3).
• The mitigation area on the ephemeral channel is less than 25% of the total buffer mitigaiton
area on the Site (Table 3).

2.2 Watershed Characterization
The Site is approximately 2.5 miles southeast of the Town of Rocky Mount on the south side of
NC Hwy. 97 (Figure 1). The Site is within the Tar River TLW (HUC 03020101120030) as described
Boseman Buffer Mitigation-Mitigation Plan Page 4 DMS No: 100119 Final January 2020
in the DMS 2010 Tar-Pamlico RBRP, amended August 2018. According to the 2018 RBRP, nearly
half of the 55-square mile Tar River drainage area consists of agriculturally related landuses and
42% of the land is either wetland or forested. The watershed has approximately 9% development with 1.4% denoted as impervious surface. There are 131 miles of stream channels in the drainage area and 44% of the stream channels are not currently buffered. Edgecombe County remains mostly undeveloped aside from the areas in and around the population centers of Rocky Mount, Tarboro, and Princeville. The County population decreased 6.7% between the 2010 census and 2017. Drainage areas for the on-site streams and buffer areas were determined by delineating
watersheds in USGS Stream Stats. Figure 4 shows the watershed boundaries for each unnamed
tributary. Table 3 describes the current land use and drainage area for each unnamed tributary.

Table 3: Drainage Area and Land Use
Reach Name NCDWR Stream Designation* Restored Buffer Area (acres/sq.ft.) Watershed Area (acres) Land Use
UT 1 Intermittent (at least) 11.26/490,568 167
49% Agriculture
41% Forested/Wetland UT 2 Reach 2a Ephemeral# 1.80/78,590 12
UT 2 Reach 2b Intermittent (at least) 1.21/52,652 19
Total: 14.27 acres /621,810sq.ft.
* Per the Buffer Letter (Appendix A), # Total mitigation on ephemeral channels is 12.6% of the total mitigated area and is in compliance with 15A NCAC 02B 0.0295(o)(7) which limits mitigation on ephemeral channels to no more than 25% of the total mitigated area. 2.3 Soils Elevations at and surrounding the Project Site are nearly level to gently sloping. Soils underlying
the area are mapped as loam and sandy loam and consist of the Roanoke and Wickham series
(Figure 5). Specific soil mapping units are listed in Table 4.

Boseman Buffer Mitigation-Mitigation Plan Page 5 DMS No: 100119 Final January 2020
Table 4: Boseman Buffer Site Soil Series
Soil Name Description
Roanoke loam (Ro) These soils are poorly drained. They are found in drainageways in the Piedmont, and upper and middle Coastal Plain. They have slow to very slow runoff and permeability.
Wickham sandy loam, 0-4% slopes (WkB)
These soils are well drained. They are found on stream terraces in
the Piedmont and Coastal Plain. They have medium to rapid runoff, and moderate permeability.

2.4 Geology
The Project Site is located within the Rolling Coastal Plain of the Middle and Upper Coastal Plains
physiographic province. Both the Middle and Upper Coastal Plains are characterized by broad,
flat terraces adjacent to low-gradient stream channels with elevations ranging from 300-1,000
feet. The Site is located in the Yorktown and Duplin Formation (Tpy) and is characterized by
fossiliferous clay with varying amounts of fine grained sand.

2.5 Vegetation Vegetative communities within the project area consist of row crops and early successional, herbaceous vegetation. The main difference in vegetative community is the current degree of wetness and the ability to cultivate crops. The wetter areas are not being used for row crops, but vegetation is being maintained. The wetter areas have wetland herbaceous vegetation present throughout. Typical herbaceous vegetation in the wetter areas includes soft rush (Juncus effusus), tear thumb (Polygonum sagittatum), and seed box (Ludwigia alternifolia). 2.6 Access and Site Constraints
Directions from Raleigh:
• Follow US-64 East Bypass to exit 470 for Atlantic Avenue
• Turn right onto NC-97 East/Atlantic Avenue and follow for 1.3 miles
• Turn right onto NC-97 East and follow for 4.6 miles
• Turn right onto a dirt road after passing Beacon Tower Lane

A permanent access easement from NC 97 was recorded as part of the project. There is one 25
foot break in the easement for the existing farm road.

There is one private airport, Thompson Farms Airport, within a five-mile radius. The restoration
of a riparian buffer and adjacent riparian areas is not expected to create issues with waterfowl
because no additional water resources will be created as part of the project. 2.7 Site Resources The Site has been in agricultural production since 1955 and no changes have been observed to the current stream configuration since that time (Figure 6). The property owner has verified that the property has been in some form of agricultural production for the past 75 years.
Boseman Buffer Mitigation-Mitigation Plan Page 6 DMS No: 100119 Final January 2020
NCDWR staff visited the Site on June 14, 2019 to determine subjectivity of on-site resources to
the Tar-Pamlico buffer rules and their suitability for riparian buffer mitigation per the Consolidated
Buffer Mitigation Rule (15A NCAC 02B 0.0295). The two unnamed tributaries were found to be suitable for riparian buffer mitigation in the Tar-Pamlico River Basin. The resulting NCDWR letters are in Appendix A. 3.0 Site Protection Instrument

3.1 Site Protection Instrument Summary Information
The property needed to restore the riparian buffer and adjacent riparian areas, access the
easement and manage the Site includes portions of the parcel listed in Table 5. The proposed
conservation easement on this property has not been recorded. A copy of the draft land
protection instrument is included in Appendix B.

All site protection instruments require a 60-day advance notification to the State prior to any
action to void, amend, or modify the document. No such action shall take place unless approved
by the State. 3.2 Current Ownership and Long-Term Protection The Site is located on one parcel owned by Joel Boseman et al. (Table 5). An option agreement for the project area was signed by the property owners and was recorded at the Edgecombe County Register of Deeds. The option agreement allows restriction of the land use in perpetuity through a conservation easement. Eco Terra will convey the conservation easement to the State to provide long term protection of the Site.
Table 5: Current Ownership and Long-Term Protection
Parcel Identification Number County Owner Acreage in Conservation Easement
Deed Book and Page Number
Site Protection Instrument
Identified Conservation Easement Holder
3880-38-6335 Edgecombe Joel Boseman
et al
14.9 ac To be
recorded
Conservation
Easement
State of North
Carolina
4.0 Regulatory Considerations
Table 6 summarizes the regulatory considerations for the proposed project. These considerations are expanded upon in Sections 4.1-4.4. A copy of the signed Categorical Exclusion Form is provided in Appendix C.

Boseman Buffer Mitigation-Mitigation Plan Page 7 DMS No: 100119 Final January 2020
Table 6: Regulatory Considerations
Parameter Applicable Resolved Supporting Documentation
Waters of the U.S. -Section 404 No N/A N/A
Waters of the U.S.-Section 401 No N/A N/A
Endangered Species Act Yes Yes Signed CE Appendix C
Historic Preservation Act Yes Yes Signed CE Appendix C
Coastal Zone Management Act No N/A N/A
FEMA Floodplain Compliance* Yes TBD TBD
Essential Fisheries Habitat No N/A N/A
*The floodplain development permit will be submitted to Edgecombe County once the conservation easement is recorded. 4.1 Threatened and Endangered Species The US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) identifies two federally threatened and endangered species and three proposed species under the
Endangered Species Act. One species is protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection
Act (Table 7).

Table 7: Federally Listed Species for Edgecombe County
Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status* Suitable Habitat
Haliaeetus leucocephalus Bald Eagle BGPA No
Picoides borealis Red-cockaded woodpecker E No
Necturus lewisi Neuse River waterdog PT No
Noturus furiosus Carolina madtom PE No
Fusconaia masoni Atlantic pigtoe PT No
Parvaspina steinstansana Tar River spinymussel E No
* BGPA - Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, E - Endangered, PT – Proposed Threatened, PE – Proposed Endangered
Bald eagle
Habitat for the bald eagle primarily consists of mature forest in proximity to large bodies of open
water for foraging. Large dominant trees are utilized for nesting sites, typically within 1.0 mile of
open water.

A desktop-GIS assessment of the project study area, as well as the area within a 1.13-mile radius
(1.0 mile plus 660 feet) of the project limits, was performed in April 2017 using 2013 color aerials.
The Tar River can be considered a potential feeding source within this radius. A juvenile bald eagle
was observed on-site in late 2018 and an on-site nest survey was conducted on June 3, 2019. During the survey very few trees capable of supporting a nest were observed and no nests were found. The majority of the forested area within 660’ of the study area contained successional growth trees. Additionally, information provided by NC Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) showed there were no known occurrences of the species within 1 mile of the project study area.
Boseman Buffer Mitigation-Mitigation Plan Page 8 DMS No: 100119 Final January 2020
Red-cockaded woodpecker
The red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) typically occupies open, mature stands of southern pines,
particularly longleaf pine (Pinus palustris), for foraging and nesting/roosting habitat. The RCW excavates cavities for nesting and roosting in living pine trees, aged 60 years or older, which are contiguous with pine stands at least 30 years of age to provide foraging habitat. The foraging range of the RCW is normally no more than 0.5 miles. A desktop-GIS assessment of the project study area was performed in May 2019 using 2017 color aerials. No areas within the project area are dominated by pine trees; the project area is devoid of mature forests and contains row crops and herbaceous vegetation. Additionally, information
provided by NCNHP showed there were no known occurrences of the species 1 mile of the project
study area.

Neuse River waterdog
In North Carolina, the Neuse River waterdog specific habitat characteristics include low to
moderate gradient streams and low current velocity. It is a fully aquatic salamander, never leaving
the water. It lacks lungs, getting oxygen from the water via external gills and needs clean, flowing
water with high dissolved oxygen concentrations. The species dwells in streams wider than 45 feet
(15 meters) but has been found in smaller creeks.

The study area is located in the Tar-Pamlico River basin. NCNHP records dated July 2018 show
the closest documented population of the Neuse River waterdog is located approximately 1.3 river miles downstream of the study area in the Tar River. The record for this population is categorized as “current”. The record is dated 2015. Suitable habitat for the Neuse River waterdog does not exist within the study area. The majority of the streams on-site are intermittent, and the perennial portions of the streams are heavily affected by sediment and fertilizer inputs from the surrounding farm fields. The perennial channel immediately downstream of the study area was experiencing eutrophication during a site visit on June 3, 2019. This same portion of the stream had no visible flow and the channel is approximately
nine to 12 feet wide. The proposed riparian buffer and adjacent riparian areas mitigation project
will not include any work within any stream channels. The project will consist of planting native
hardwood trees within 115 feet of the stream channels.

Carolina madtom
In North Carolina, the species occurs in riffles, runs, and pools in medium to large streams and
rivers. Ideally, it inhabits fresh waters with continuous, year-round flow and moderate gradient in
both the Piedmont and Coastal Plain physiographic regions. Optimal substrate for the Carolina
madtom is predominantly silt-free, stable, gravel and cobble bottom habitat, and it must have
cover for nest sites, including under rocks, bark, relic mussel shells, and even cans and bottles.
The study area is located in the Tar-Pamlico River basin. NCNHP records dated July 2018 show
the closest documented population of the Carolina madtom is located approximately 4.1 river miles downstream of the study area in the Tar River. The record for this population is categorized as “historical”. The record is dated 1985.
Boseman Buffer Mitigation-Mitigation Plan Page 9 DMS No: 100119 Final January 2020

Suitable habitat for the Carolina madtom does not exist within the study area. The majority of the
streams on-site are intermittent, and the perennial portions of the streams are heavily affected by sediment and fertilizer inputs from the surrounding farm fields. The perennial channel immediately downstream of the study area was experiencing eutrophication during a site visit on June 3, 2019. This same portion of the stream had no visible flow and the channel is approximately nine to 12 feet wide. Substrate within the on-site streams consists entirely of silt and is not suitable for this species. The proposed riparian buffer and adjacent riparian areas mitigation project will not include any work within any stream channels. The project will consist of planting native hardwood trees within 115 feet of the stream channels.

Atlantic pigtoe
In North Carolina, the preferred habitat of the Atlantic pigtoe is coarse sand and gravel, and rarely
in silt and detritus. Historically, the best populations existed in small creeks to larger rivers with
excellent water quality, where flows were sufficient to maintain clean, silt-free substrates.
The study area is located in the Tar-Pamlico River basin. NCNHP records dated July 2018 show
the closest documented population of the Atlantic pigtoe is located approximately 12.0 river miles
downstream of the study area in the Tar River. The record for this population is categorized as
“current”. The record is dated 2004.

Suitable habitat for the Atlantic pigtoe does not exist within the study area. The majority of the
streams on-site are intermittent, and the perennial portions of the streams are heavily affected by sediment and fertilizer inputs from the surrounding farm fields. The perennial channel immediately downstream of the study area was experiencing eutrophication during a site visit on June 3, 2019. This same portion of the stream had no visible flow and the channel is approximately nine to 12 feet wide. The proposed riparian buffer and adjacent riparian areas mitigation project will not include any work within any stream channels. The project will consist of planting native hardwood trees within 115 feet of the stream channels. Tar River spinymussel
The Tar spinymussel is endemic to the Tar and Neuse River drainage basins in North Carolina. This
mussel requires a stream with fast flowing, well-oxygenated, circumneutral pH water. The stream
bed should be composed of unconsolidated gravel and coarse sand. The water needs to be
relatively silt-free, and stream banks should be stable, typically with many roots from adjacent
riparian trees and shrubs.

The study area is located in the Tar-Pamlico River basin. NCNHP records dated July 2018 show
the closest documented population of the Tar River spinymussel is located approximately 14.6
river miles downstream of the study area in the Tar River. The record for this population is
categorized as “current”. The record is dated 2001.

Suitable habitat for the Tar River spinymussel does not exist within the study area. The majority of the streams on-site are intermittent, and the perennial portions of the streams are heavily affected by sediment and fertilizer inputs from the surrounding farm fields. The perennial channel
Boseman Buffer Mitigation-Mitigation Plan Page 10 DMS No: 100119 Final January 2020
immediately downstream of the study area was experiencing eutrophication during a site visit on
June 3, 2019. This same portion of the stream had no visible flow and the channel is approximately
nine to 12 feet wide. The proposed riparian buffer and adjacent riparian areas mitigation project will not include any work within any stream channels. The project will consist of planting native hardwood trees within 115 feet of the stream channels. 4.2 Cultural Resources The National Historic Preservation Act declares a national policy of historic preservation to protect, rehabilitate, restore, and reuse districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects significant in American architecture, history, archaeology, and culture, and Section 106 mandates that federal
agencies take into account the effect of an undertaking on a property that is included in, or is
eligible for inclusion in, the National Register of Historic Places.

There are no existing structures in the project area. The Site is not located near any sites listed on
the National Register with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). SHPO was contacted for
completion of the Categorical Exclusion and SHPO had no concerns or comments on the Site. The
approved Categorical Exclusion is in Appendix C.

4.3 FEMA Floodplain Compliance
The Site is located within the 100-year floodplain of the Tar River. A floodplain development
permit will be submitted to the Edgecombe County floodplain Manager once the conservation
easement is recorded. Proposed implementation of work will not commence until all required permits have been received. 4.4 Other Environmental Issues An EDR Radius Map Report with Geocheck was ordered for the Site through Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) on June 7, 2019 as part of the Categorical Exclusion. The target property and the adjacent properties are not listed in any of the Federal, State, or Tribal environmental databases searched by EDR. There are no known or potential hazardous waste sites identified within one mile of the Site. The Executive Summary of the EDR report is included in Appendix D.
5.0 Implementation Plan
The project design will restore high quality riparian buffers and adjacent riparian areas to two unnamed tributaries to the Tar River. The project will not have any adverse impacts to on-site wetlands; no grading activities will occur within jurisdictional wetland boundaries. Figure 7 depicts the planting plan for the Site. More detailed descriptions of the proposed restoration activitvy are found in Sections 5.1 through 5.3. 5.1 Parcel Preparation
The land proposed for buffer restoration is currently in agricultural production. The planting rows
will be ripped to improve soil compaction prior to planting in the upland areas. Sediment and
erosion control measures will be used to prevent sediment from entering the streams during a
rain event and may include sediment and erosion control fencing. Pre-emergent aquatic safe
herbicide will be used in the tree rows to control potential herbaceous weed competition.
Boseman Buffer Mitigation-Mitigation Plan Page 11 DMS No: 100119 Final January 2020
Additional post planting herbicide will be used within the planting rows for at least the first three
years as needed. The fields within the project area contain limited number of invasive plants and
an aquatic safe herbicide, such as Rodeo, will only be sprayed in areas where there is an existing population of non-native invasive plant species. All herbicide will be applied by a licensed herbicide applicator. In the event that drain tiles are found during construction, they will be removed. 5.2 Riparian Buffer and Adjacent Riparian Area Restoration Activities The revegetation plan for the buffer restoration area will include permanent seeding in the active farming areas. Seeding will not be applied to areas with an existing native herbaceous layer,
primarily the jurisdictional wetland areas. The Site will be planted to replicate a Coastal Plain Small
Stream Swamp (blackwater subtype) community with two planting zones, floodplain and mesic.
Proposed tree species are shown in Table 8.

Table 8: Proposed Species List
Scientific Name Common Name Planting Zone Approximate Percentage
Nyssa biflora Water tupelo Floodplain 10%
Platanus occidentalis Sycamore Floodplain 10%
Betula nigra River birch Floodplain 10%
Nyssa sylvatica Blackgum Both 15%
Quercus laurifolia Laurel oak Both 10%
Fraxinus pennsylvanica Green ash Floodplain 5%
Salix nigra Black willow Floodplain/Live stake 5%
Liriodendron tulipifera Tulip poplar Mesic 30%
Ilex opaca American holly Mesic 10%
Carpinus caroliniana American hornbeam Mesic 15%
Quercus nigra Water oak Both 10%
Quercus phellos Willow oak Both 10%
Quercus lyrata Overcup oak Floodplain 10%
Cornus amomum Silky dogwood Floodplain/Live stake 5%
Sorgastrum nutans Indian grass Permanent Seed Mixture N/A
Agrostis alba Redtop Permanent Seed Mixture N/A
Andropogon geradii Big bluestem Permanent Seed Mixture N/A
Panicum virgatum Switchgrass Permanent Seed Mixture N/A
Setaria italica Foxtail millet Temporary Seed Mixture N/A
Pennisetum glaucum Pearl top millet Temporary Seed Mixture N/A
Trees will be planted at a density sufficient to meet the performance standards outlined in the
Rule 15A NCAC 02B .0295 of 260 trees per acre at the end of five years. A density of approximately
600-800 trees per acre is proposed for the initial planting. No one tree species will be greater
than 50% of the established stems. An appropriate temporary seed mix will also be applied as
necessary to provide temporary ground cover for soil stabilization and reduction of sediment loss
during rain events. Temporary seed mix species are found in Table 8. This will be followed by an
appropriate permanent seed mixture.
Boseman Buffer Mitigation-Mitigation Plan Page 12 DMS No: 100119 Final January 2020

Vegetation management and herbicide applications may be needed to prevent competition of
invasive species with the planted species. Planting is scheduled to begin in March 2020. 5.3 Determination of Credits Mitigation credits shown in Table 9 and Figure 8 are based on surveyed top of banks of the unnamed tributaries and conservation easement. All areas within 115 feet from the features as measured perpendicular from the tops of banks will be devoted to generate buffer mitigation credits. Table 9 details the determination of credits.
Boseman Buffer Mitigation-Mitigation Plan Page 13 DMS No: 100119 Final January 2020
Table 9.Bosman Buffer Mitigation Site DMS # 100119, NCDWR # 2019-0800Project AreaN Credit Conversion Ratio (ft2/pound)P Credit Conversion Ratio (ft2/pound)Credit TypeLocationSubject? (enter NO if ephemeral or ditch 1)Feature TypeMitigation ActivityMin-Max Buffer Width (ft)Feature NameTotal Area (ft2)Total (Creditable) Area of Buffer Mitigation (ft2)Initial Credit Ratio (x:1)% Full Credit Final Credit Ratio (x:1) Convertible to Riparian Buffer? Riparian Buffer Credits Convertible to Nutrient Offset? Delivered Nutrient Offset: N (lbs) Delivered Nutrient Offset: P (lbs) BufferRuralYesI / PRestoration0-100UT 1484,071 484,0711100% 1.00000Yes484,071.000— —BufferRuralYesI / PRestoration101-200UT 16,497 6,497133% 3.03030Yes2,144.012— —BufferRuralNoEphemeralRestoration0-100UT 2 Reach 2a78,508 78,5081100% 1.00000Yes78,508.000— —BufferRuralNoEphemeralRestoration101-200UT 2 Reach 2a82 82133% 3.03030Yes27.060— —BufferRuralYesI / PRestoration0-100UT 2 Reach 2b52,640 52,6401100% 1.00000Yes52,640.000— —BufferRuralYesI / PRestoration101-200UT 2 Reach 2b12 12133% 3.03030Yes3.960— —Totals:621,810 621,810Enter Preservation Credits BelowEligible for Preservation (ft2):207,270Credit TypeLocationSubject?Feature TypeMitigation ActivityMin-Max Buffer Width (ft)Feature Name Total Area (sf) Total (Creditable) Area for Buffer Mitigation (ft2)Initial Credit Ratio (x:1)% Full Credit Final Credit Ratio (x:1) Riparian Buffer Credits Buffer—BufferPreservation—Preservation Area Subtotal (ft2):0Preservation as % Total Area of Buffer Mitigation:0.0%Ephemeral Reaches as % Total Area of Buffer Mitigation:12.6%Square FeetCredits621,810 617,394.03200.00000.00078590 621810621,810 617,394.032621810Square FeetCreditsNitrogen:0.0001. The Randleman Lake buffer rules allow some ditches to be classified as subject according to 15A NCAC 02B .0250 (5)(a).hosphorus:0.000last updated 11/22/2019Enhancement:Preservation:Total Riparian Buffer:TOTAL NUTRIENT OFFSET MITIGATIONMitigation TotalsNutrient Offset:0Tar-Pamlico 0302010119.16394297.54099TOTAL AREA OF BUFFER MITIGATION (TABM)Mitigation TotalsRestoration:
Boseman Buffer Mitigation-Mitigation Plan Page 14 DMS No: 100119 Final January 2020
6.0 Montoring Plan and Performance Standards
The Site monitoring plan was developed to demonstrate that the required performance standards are met and project goals and objectives are achieved. The monitoring report shall provide project
data and chronicle issues that arise during the five-year montiroing period. These reports will
assists in population of DMS databases and assist in the close-out process.

Table 10 summarizes the proposed monitoring plan components associated with this project.

Table 10: Monitoring Plan Components
Performance Standards Monitoring Protocol Reaches Quantity Frequency
Vegetation CVS Level II/Photos All 12 Annual
Reference Stations Photos All 10 Annual
Visual Assessments Visual Assessment/Photos All As needed Semi-annual

The performance standards for the Project follow approved cirteria presented in the Consolidated
Buffer Rule (15A NCAC 02B .0295). Annual monitoring and semi-annual site visits will be
conducted to assess the condition of the finished project. Performance standards will be
evaluated throughout the five-year post-construction monitoring period.

6.1 Vegetation
The Consolidated Buffer Rule (15A NCAC 02B .0295) requires survival of at least four native
hardwood trees and shrubs, and 260 stems per acre at the end of a five year monitoring period.
No one species will constitue greater than 50 percent of the stems. Twelve permanent vegetation 100 m2 monitoring plots, two percent of the planted area, will be placed throughout the Site to document tree survivial. Vegetation monitoring will follow the CVS-EEP Level II Protocol for Recording Vegetation (2008). The vigor, height, and diameter at breast height (DBH), if applicable, will be recorded during the monitoring visits. Approximate locations of permanent vegetation plots are shown on Figure 9. 6.2 Photo Reference Stations Photographs of vegetation plots will be taken each year and there will be an additional ten
photographs taken to document stream condition and easement integrity. These photos will be
taken at the same location and direction each year.

6.3 Visual Assessments
Visual assessments will be performed twice a year during the five years of monitoring. Areas of
concern, low stem density, invasive species or easement encroachment, will be mapped and
photographed and described in the monitoring report. Problem areas will be re-evaluated during
subsequent site visits.

6.4 Reporting Performance Standards
A baseline monitoring document and record drawing depicting deviations from the proposed
planting to the actual planting will be provided. Annual monitoring reports will use the DMS Riparian Buffer and Nutrient Offset Baseline and Annual Monitoring Report Template version 2.0
Boseman Buffer Mitigation-Mitigation Plan Page 15 DMS No: 100119 Final January 2020
(May 2017). The monitoring reports will be submitted to DMS in the fall of each year for a total
of five years or until performance standards have been met.
6.5 Maintenance and Contingency Plans Actions will be taken to correct issues identified in the annual monitoring reports that jeopardize the success of the project. If required, additional hardwood trees will be planted, invasive species will be controlled, and additional signage will be installed. These are examples and others may become necessary through the five-year monitoring period. 7.0 Stewardship

The Site will be marked with signage by the Provider prior to as-builts. The Provider will inspect
the boundary marking on a yearly basis and repair as needed during the monitoring period.

The Site will be transferred to the NCDEQ Stewardship Program. The Stewardship Program shall
serve as the conservation easement holder and long-term steward for the property and conduct
inspections of the Site to determine whether the conservation easement is being upheld. The NCDEQ Stewardship Program is developing an endowment system within the non-reverting, interest-bearing Conservation Lands Conservation Fund Account. The use of funds from the Endowment Account will be governed by North Carolina General Statue GS 113A-232(d)(3). Interest gained by the endowment fund may be used for stewardship, monitoring, stewardship administration, and land transaction costs, if applicable. No fencing is planned for this project. The draft Site Protection Instrument can be found in Appendix B.

Boseman Buffer Mitigation-Mitigation Plan Page 16 DMS No: 100119 Final January 2020
8.0 References
15A NCAC 02B .0295 Mitigation Program Requirements for Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Buffers. 2015.

N.C. Department of Environmental Quality. Division of Mitigation Services. 2018. Tar-Pamlico
River Basin Restoration Priorities.

N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources. N.C. State Historic Preservation Office. 2018.
(http://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/) (Accessed January 3, 2019)
N.C. Floodplain Mapping Program. 2018. N.C. Flood Risk Information System.
(https://fris.nc.gov/fris/Home.aspx?ST=NC) (Accessed January 3, 2019)

U.S. Census Bureau. 2018. QuickFacts, Edgecombe County, North Carolina. Updated 1 July, 2018
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/dashboard/edgecombecountynorthcarolina/PST045218

U.S. Department of Agriculture. Natural Resources Conservation Service. 1979. Soil Survey of
Edgecombe County, North Carolina. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2018. Web Soil Survey. (https://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/). (Accessed January 2, 2019) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2018. Endangered Species, Threatened Species, Federal Species of Concern, and Candidate Species, Edgecombe County, North Carolina. Updated 27 June 2018. (https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/edgecombe.html) U.S. Geological Survey. 2013. Hartsease. 1:24,000. North Carolina Topographic Quadrangle (7.5-
minute series). Reston, VA: U.S. Department of the Interior, USGS, 2013.

U.S. Geological Survey. 2018. StreamStats. (https://streamstats.usgs.gov/ss/) (Accessed January 3, 2019)

Vicinity MapBoseman Buffer Mitigation SiteTar-Pamlico 03020101Edgecombe County, North CarolinaJanuary 2020 ³2013 Hartsease USGS Quadrangle
1,200 0 1,200600
Feet
Legend
Parcel Boundary
Conservation Easement 14.9 acres
Figure1
Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI,
Esri China (Hong Kong), swisstopo, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community
Service AreaBoseman Buffer Mitigation SiteTar-Pamlico 03020101Edgecombe County, North CarolinaJanuary 2020 ³ESRI Topographic Basemap
34,000 0 34,00017,000
Feet
Legend
Service Area 8-digit HUC
Figure2
Project Site
NC Center for Geographic Information & Anaylsis
Existing Conditions Boseman Buffer Mitigation SiteTar-Pamlico 03020101Edgecombe County, North CarolinaJanuary 2020 ³2017 Aerial from NCOneMap
200 0 200100
Feet
Legend
Conservation Easement 14.9 acres
UT 1 (At Least Intermittent)
UT 2 Reach 2a (Ephemeral)
UT 2 Reach 2b (At Least Intermittent)
Figure3
NC Center for Geographic Information & Anaylsis
Drainage Area MapBoseman Buffer Mitigation SiteTar-Pamlico 03020101Edgecombe County, North CarolinaJanuary 2020 ³2017 Aerial from NCOneMap, Drainage Areas from StreamStats
400 0 400200
Feet
Legend
Conservation Easement 14.9 acres
UT 1 (At Least Intermittent)
UT 2 Reach 2a (Ephemeral)
UT 2 Reach 2b (At Least Intermittent)
Reach 2, Downstream Drainage Area 19.7 acres
Reach 1, Downstream Drainage Area 167.3 acres
Figure4
Stream Form 2
Stream Form 1
Stream Form 3
Soil SurveyBoseman Buffer Mitigation SiteTar-Pamlico 03020101Edgecombe County, North CarolinaJanuary 2020 ³1979 Printed NRCS Soil Survey of Edgecombe County, Map Sheets 9 & 13
700 0 700350
Feet
Legend
Conservation Easement 14.9 acres
Figure5
Historic 1955 AerialBoseman Buffer Mitigation SiteTar-Pamlico 03020101Edgecombe County, North CarolinaJanuary 2020 ³1955 Aerial from USGS Earth Explorer
500 0 500250
Feet
Legend
Conservation Easement 14.9 acres
Figure6
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Planting PlanBoseman Buffer Mitigation SiteTar-Pamlico 03020101Edgecombe County, North CarolinaJanuary 2020 ³2017 Aerial from NCOneMap
200 0 200100
Feet
Legend
Conservation Easement 14.9 acres
Floodplain Planting Zone 2.7 acres
Mesic Planting Zone 11.5 acres
Figure7
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Buffer Credit DeterminationBoseman Buffer Mitigation SiteTar-Pamlico 03020101Edgecombe County, North CarolinaJanuary 2020 ³2017 Aerial from NCOneMap
200 0 200100
Feet
Legend
UT 1 (At Least Intermittent)
UT 2 Reach 2a (Ephemeral)
UT 2 Reach 2b (At Least Intermittent)
0'-100' Credit Area UT 1 484,071 sq.ft., 484,071 BMUs
101'-200' Credit Area UT 1 6,497 sq.ft., 6,497 BMUs
0'-100' Credit Area UT 2 Reach 2a 78,508 sq.ft., 78,508 BMUs
101'-200' Credit Area UT 2 Reach 2a 82 sq.ft., 27.060 BMUs
0'-100' Credit Area UT 2 Reach 2b 52,640 sq.ft., 52,640 BMUs
101'-200' Credit Area UT 2 Reach 2b 12 sq.ft., 3.960 BMUs
Figure8
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Proposed Vegetation Plot LocationBoseman Buffer Mitigation SiteTar-Pamlico 03020101Edgecombe County, North CarolinaJanuary 2020 ³2017 Aerial from NCOneMap
200 0 200100
Feet
Legend
UT 1 (At Least Intermittent)
UT 2 Reach 2a (Ephemeral)
UT 2 Reach 2b (At Least Intermittent)
Proposed Vegetation Plots
Floodplain Planting Zone 2.7 acres
Mesic Planting Zone 11.5 acres
Figure9

APPENDIX A

ROY COOPER
Coverno+
MICHAEL S. REGAN
se Crelar5•
LINDA CULPEPPER
Director
Eca Terra Partners, LLC
Attention: Ted Griffith
1117 Peachtree Walk NE,
Suite 126
Atlanta, GA 30309
NOPTH CAROLINA
Environmentai Quality
July 9, 2019
DWR Project # 2019-0800 V2
Edgecombe County
Subject: On -Site Determination for Applicability to the Tar -Pamlico Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 02B .0259)
Project Name: Baseman Buffer Mitigation Site
Parcel ID Number: 388038633500; PIN 3880-38-6335
Address/ Location: 7488 NC 97, Battieboro, NC 27809, Edgecombe County
Lat. 35.963791, Long.-77.703655
Stream(s) Evaluated: Unnamed Tributaries to Tar River, Classified as C; NSW
Determination Date: 6/14/2019 Staff DWR, Shelton Sullivan
Dear Mr. Griffith,
On June 14, 2019, Shelton Sullivan of the Division of Water Resources (DWR) Central
Office conducted an on -site review of features located on the subject property at the
request of Ted Griffith of Eco Terra Partners, LLC. The purpose of the inspection was to
determine the presence or absence of streams on the site and their ephemeral /
intermittent/ perennial (E/l/P) characteristics and transition points and the applicability
of the Tar -Pamlico Riparian Area Protection Rules (15A NCAC 02B .0259) within the
proposed project easement.
The enclosed maps depict the Features evaluated and this information is also summarized
in the table below. Streams that are "Subject" are shown on the most recently published
NRCS Soil Survey of Edgecombe County and/or the most recent copy of the USGS
Topographic (at 1:24,000 scale) maps, have been located on the ground at the site, and
possess characteristics that qualify them to beat least intermittent streams. Features that
are "Not Subject" are not depicted on the required maps, not present on the property, or
have been determined to not be at least intermittent.
N o r I I i Carolina Uepai invent of Environmental Qua lily I [iivision of Waler Resources
512 Nortli Salisbw y 5"el 1 1617 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-Ibli
pw�.nar emwa�.r.m ow�nr` r
914 7079000

DWR #20190$C0 V2 Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site
Edgecombe County
Page 2 of 3
Please note that there may be other streams or Features located on the property
beyond the proposed project easement that may be subject to the Tar -Pamlico
Riparian Area Protection Rules, considered jurisdictional according to the US Army
Corps of Engineers, and subject to the Clean Water Act.
See the following table for the features rated during the DWR site visit:
Feature 1D
Feature Type
*E/1'P
Subject to
Start @
Stop CO)
Depicted on
Depicted on
Other
Buffer Rules
Soil Survey
USGS Tv o
Labeled as R1 on
aerial map
Continues
"I" at
provided, at
downstream
R1
Stream
least
Yes
northwestern
to the eastern
Yes
Yes
project
project
boundary
boundary
Labeled as R2A
Continues to
on aerial map
the flagged
"E"
provided, the
point 112g
R2A
Stream
No
southwestern
to rn
where the
Yes
Yes
project
stream
boundary
becomes
intermittent
Labeled RZB on
Continues
RZB
Stream
1 at
Yes
aerial map
downstream
Yes
Yes
least
provided
to confluence
with RI
Stream
Labeled R3 on
(not in the
aerial map
Continues
R3
current
1" at
Yes
provided; Begins
downstream
yes
Yes
proposed
least
on the eastern
to confluence
project
side of the main
with 111
houndspath
* E: Ephemeral, 1: Intermittent P: Perennial
This on -site determination shall expire five (5) years From the date of this letter.
Landowners or affected parties that dispute a determination made by the DWR may
request a determination by the Director. An appeal request must be made within sixty (60)
calendar days of the date of this letter to the Director in writing.
If sending via U.S. Postal Service:
DWR- 401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
c/o Karen Higgins
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
if sending via delivery service (UPS, Fed Ex, etc.)
DWR- 401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
c/o Karen Higgins
512 N Salisbury St
Raleigh, NC 27604
This determination is final and binding as detailed above, unless an appeal is requested within
sixty (60) calendar days.

DWR #20190800 V2 Baseman Buffer Mitigation Site
Edgecombe County
Page 3 of 3
This letter only addresses the stream features on the subject property and within the
proposed easement and the applicability of the buffer rules and does not approve any
activity within buffers or within waters of the state. If you have any additional questions
or require additional information, please call Shelton Sullivan at [phone]. This
determination is subject to review as provided in Articles 3 & 4 of G.S. 150B.
Sincerely,
Karen Higgins, Supervisor
401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
Enclosures. Photographs with Description; Site Map, Soil Survey, USGS Topo
cc: Joel Boseman, P.G, Box 550, Battleboro, NC 27809
Joel Boseman via email bosemariforms ahoo.com
Ted Griffith, Eco Terra Partners, LLC via email [e-mail]
401 & Buffer Permitting Branch files
Filename: 20190800V2_eoseman_Edgecombe 5treamCalls.docx

Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site Photographs, 6-14-2019 [continued]
R2B; E hemeral to Intermittent transition point
Confluence of R2B and Rl
R3 confluence with Rl

�j
k
-- oq Legend
i Reach 1, Intermittent �-
�1. Stream Centerline (Ephemeral)
-• Stream Centerline (Intermittent)
y y Conservation Easement Option 1
Parcel Boundary
.,_ r f - Edgecombe County 2-Foot
-- Contours
Reach 2h, Intermittent
Reach 2a, Ephemeral r
Ar
� 'I ,
N;Cs Center far Geographic Information ;Aft, :yl`s s�
Existing Conditions
Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site N
��� Tar -Pamlico 03020101 200 100 0 200
~� Edgecombe County, North Carolina Figure
eo terrab� January 2019 Feet
2017 Aerial from NCOneMap

13
m
R

ROY COOPER
Govemor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
Secretary
LINDA CULPEPPER
alrroar
Ted Griffith
Eco Terra Partners, LLC
1117 Peachtree Walk NE, Suite 126
Atlanta, GA 30309
(via electronic mail: TedttEcoTerra.coni)
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
July 17, 2019
DWR# 2019-0800
Edgecombe County
Re: Site Viability for Buffer Mitigation & Nutrient Offset — Boseman Site
Located near 8019-7621, NC 97, Battleboro, NC
Tar -Pamlico 03020I01
Dear Mr. Griffith,
On June 7.2019, Katie Merritt, with the Division of Water Resources (DWR), received a request
from Eco Terra Partners, LLC (ETP) for an onsite mitigation determination near the above -
referenced site (Site). The Site is located within the Tar -Pamlico River Basin in the 8-digit
Hydrologic Unit Code 03020101. The Site is being proposed as part of full -delivery nutrient offset
and riparian buffer mitigation project for the Division of Mitigation Services (RFP #16-007711).
Staff from the Division of Mitigation Services were also present onsite. At your request, Ms. Merritt
performed an onsite assessment of riparian land uses adjacent to streams and channels onsite, which
are shown on the attached map labeled "Figure 1 B-Existing Conditions".
Ms. Merritt's evaluation of the features onsite and their associated mitigation determination for the
riparian areas are provided in the table below. This evaluation was made from Top of Bank (TOB)
and landward 200' from each feature for buffer mitigation pursuant to 15A NCAC 02B .0295
(effective November 1, 2015) and for nutrient offset credits pursuant to 15A NCAC 02B .0240.
Feature
W55]Ification
ISubject
Riparian Land uses
Buffer
?Nutrient
SMitigation Tyke Determination
wlin riparian areas
onsite
ter
adjacent to Feature
Credit
Offset
Buffer(0
200,)
Viable
Viable
Rule
Rl
Stream
Yes
Non -forested row crop fields
'Yes
Yes (non-
Non -forested areas - Restoration
with areas forested
forested ag
Site per 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (n)
downstream @ confluence w/
fields only)
R3
Forested Areas - Preservation Site
per 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(5)
Drain tiles shall be removed to restore
diffised flow
R2A
Ephemeral
No
Non -forested row swop fields
'Yes
Yes
Restoration Site per I5A NCAC 02B
.0295 (o)(7)
North Carollm. Department of knvirtnonental Quality I division of Water Resources
e:!r5fDF 512 North Salisbury Street 1 107 Mail Servloe Center I Ralrlgh. Nu+tfr r arullna �7h99 lhlT
919.707-9000

Baseman Site
Bco Terra
July 17, 2019
Feature
Clilssilication
t b-ect
Riparian Land use
Buffer
z Nutrient
sMiti ation Type Determinatiou
to
Offset
wjin_riparian areas
DDSAe
adiacent to Peature
Credit
Buffer
0[ 200')
VViabl
YOM
Bilk
R213
Stream
Yes
Non -forested row crop fields
Yes
Yes
Restoration Site per 15A NCAC 02B
.0295 (n)
R-3
Stream
Yes
Non -forested row crop fields
Yes
Yes
Restoration Site per 15A NCAC 02B
.0295 (n)
'Subjectivity calls for the features were determined by DWR in correspondence dated July 9, 2019 using the 1:24,000 scale quadrangle
topographic map prepared by USGS and the most recent printed version of the soil survey map prepared by the NRCS .
NC Division of Writer Resources - Methodolopv and Calculations for determining Nutrient Reductions associated with Riparian Bi&r
Establishment
Inc area of preservation credit within a buffer mitigation site shall comprise of no more than 25 percent (25%) of the total area of buffer
mitigation per I SA NCAC 0295 (o)(5) and 15A NCAC 0295 (o)(4). Site cannot be a Preservation Only site to comply with this rule.
;The area of the mitigation site on ephemeral channels shall comprise no more than 25 percent (25%) of'the total area of buffer
mitigation per 15A ]NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(7).
'All features proposed for buffer mitigation or nutrient offset, must have a conservation easemcni established that includes the tops of
channel banks when being measured perpendicular and landward from the banks, even when no credit is viable within the 50' riparian
butler.
The maps attached to this letter were prepared by ETP and were initialed by Ms. Merritt on July 17.
2019.
This letter does not constitute an approval of this site to generate mitigation credits. Pursuant to 15A
NCAC 02B .0295, a mitigation proposal and a mitigation plan shall be submitted to DVVR for written
approval prior to conducting any mitigation activities in riparian areas and/or surface waters for
buffer mitigation credit. Pursuant to 15A NCAC 02B .0240, a proposal regarding a proposed nutrient
load -reducing measure for nutrient offset credit shall be submitted to DWR for approval prior to any
mitigation activities in riparian areas and/or surface waters.
All vegetative plantings, performance criteria and other mitigation requirements for riparian
restoration, enhancement and preservation must fallow the requirements in 15A NCAC 02B .0295 to
be eligible for buffer and/or nutrient offset mitigation credits. For any areas depicted as not being
viable for nutrient offset credit above, one could propose a different measure, along with supporting
calculations and sufficient detail to support estimates of load reduction, for review by the DWR to
determine viability for nutrient offset in accordance with 15A NCAC 02B .0240.
Page 2 of 3

Boseman Site
Bco Terra
July 17, 2019
This viability assessment will expire on July 17, 2021 or upon the submittal of an As -Built Report to
the DWR, whichever comes first. This letter should be provided in all stream and wetland,
buffer and/or nutrient offset mitigation plans for this Site.
Sincerely,
e7
L Karen Higgins, Supervisor
401 and Buffer Permitting Branch
KAI l&m
Attachments: Figure ] B-Existing Conditions Map/Stream Determination
cc: File Copy (Katie Merritt)
Jeff Schaffer- DMS ( via electronic mail)
Page 3 of 3

APPENDIX B

NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 1 of 11

DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT
AND RIGHT OF ACCESS PROVIDED
PURSUANT TO
FULL DELIVERY
MITIGATION CONTRACT
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
EDGECOMBE COUNTY
SPO File Number: 33-UK
DMS Project Number: 100119
Prepared by: Office of the Attorney General
Property Control Section
Return to: NC Department of Administration
State Property Office
1321 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1321
THIS DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND RIGHT OF ACCESS, made
this 17th day of October, 2019, by Joel M. Boseman, (“Grantor”), whose mailing address is PO
Box 550 Battleboro, NC 27809, to the State of North Carolina, (“Grantee”), whose mailing
address is State of North Carolina, Department of Administration, State Property Office, 1321
Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1321. The designations of Grantor and Grantee as used
herein shall include said parties, their heirs, successors, and assigns, and shall include singular,
plural, masculine, feminine, or neuter as required by context.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-214.8 et seq., the State of
North Carolina has established the Division of Mitigation Services (formerly known as the
Ecosystem Enhancement Program and Wetlands Restoration Program) within the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources for the purposes of acquiring, maintaining, restoring,
enhancing, creating and preserving wetland and riparian resources that contribute to the protection
and improvement of water quality, flood prevention, fisheries, aquatic habitat, wildlife habitat, and
recreational opportunities; and
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 2 of 11

WHEREAS, this Conservation Easement from Grantor to Grantee has been negotiated,
arranged and provided for as a condition of a full delivery contract between Eco Terra Partners
LLC whose mailing address is 1117 Peachtree Walk NE Atlanta, GA 30309 and the North
Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, to provide stream, wetland and/or buffer
mitigation pursuant to the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality Purchase and
Services Contract Number 7872.
WHEREAS, The State of North Carolina is qualified to be the Grantee of a Conservation
Easement pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 121-35; and
WHEREAS, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources and the United States
Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District entered into a Memorandum of Understanding,
(MOU) duly executed by all parties on November 4, 1998. This MOU recognized that the
Wetlands Restoration Program was to provide effective compensatory mitigation for authorized
impacts to wetlands, streams and other aquatic resources by restoring, enhancing and preserving
the wetland and riparian areas of the State; and
WHEREAS, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the North Carolina
Department of Transportation and the United States Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington
District entered into a Memorandum of Agreement, (MOA) duly executed by all parties in
Greensboro, NC on July 22, 2003, which recognizes that the Division of Mitigation Services
(formerly Ecosystem Enhancement Program) is to provide for compensatory mitigation by
effective protection of the land, water and natural resources of the State by restoring, enhancing
and preserving ecosystem functions; and
WHEREAS, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, the North Carolina Division of Water Quality,
the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management, and the National Marine Fisheries Service
entered into an agreement to continue the In-Lieu Fee operations of the North Carolina Department
of Natural Resources’ Division of Mitigation Services (formerly Ecosystem Enhancement
Program) with an effective date of 28 July, 2010, which supersedes and replaces the previously
effective MOA and MOU referenced above; and
WHEREAS, the acceptance of this instrument for and on behalf of the State of North
Carolina was granted to the Department of Administration by resolution as approved by the
Governor and Council of State adopted at a meeting held in the City of Raleigh, North Carolina,
on the 8th day of February 2000; and
WHEREAS, the Division of Mitigation Services in the Department of Environmental
Quality, which has been delegated the authority authorized by the Governor and Council of State
to the Department of Administration, has approved acceptance of this instrument; and
WHEREAS, Grantor owns in fee simple certain real property situated, lying, and being in
Township NO. 7, Edgecombe County, North Carolina (the "Property"), and being more
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 3 of 11

particularly described as that certain parcel of land containing approximately 277.49 acres and
being conveyed to the Grantor by deed as recorded in Deed Book 1640 at Page 0667 of the
Edgecombe County Registry, North Carolina; and
WHEREAS, Grantor is willing to grant a Conservation Easement and Right of Access
over the herein described areas of the Property, thereby restricting and limiting the use of the areas
of the Property subject to the Conservation Easement to the terms and conditions and purposes
hereinafter set forth, and Grantee is willing to accept said Easement and Access Rights. The
Conservation Easement shall be for the protection and benefit of the waters of two unnamed
tributaries to the Tar River
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, terms, conditions, and
restrictions hereinafter set forth, Grantor unconditionally and irrevocably hereby grants and
conveys unto Grantee, its successors and assigns, forever and in perpetuity, a Conservation
Easement along with a general Right of Access.
The Conservation Easement Area consists of the following:
Tracts Number 3880-38-6335 containing a total of 14.919 acres as shown on the plats of
survey entitled “Final Plat, Conservation Easement for North Carolina Division of Mitigation
Services, Project Name: Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site, SPO File No. 33-UK, EEP
Site No. 100119, Property of Joel M. Boseman,” dated ___________, 2019 by Timothy P.
Murray, PLS Number L-4833 and recorded in the Edgecombe County, North Carolina Register
of Deeds at Plat Book _______ Pages __________.
See attached “Exhibit A”, Legal Description of area of the Property hereinafter referred to as the
“Conservation Easement Area”
The purposes of this Conservation Easement are to maintain, restore, enhance, construct,
create and preserve wetland and/or riparian resources in the Conservation Easement Area that
contribute to the protection and improvement of water quality, flood prevention, fisheries, aquatic
habitat, wildlife habitat, and recreational opportunities; to maintain permanently the Conservation
Easement Area in its natural condition, consistent with these purposes; and to prevent any use of
the Easement Area that will significantly impair or interfere with these purposes. To achieve these
purposes, the following conditions and restrictions are set forth:
I. DURATION OF EASEMENT
Pursuant to law, including the above referenced statutes, this Conservation Easement and
Right of Access shall be perpetual and it shall run with, and be a continuing restriction upon the
use of, the Property, and it shall be enforceable by the Grantee against the Grantor and against
Grantor’s heirs, successors and assigns, personal representatives, agents, lessees, and licensees.
II. GRANTOR RESERVED USES AND RESTRICTED ACTIVITIES
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 4 of 11

The Conservation Easement Area shall be restricted from any development or usage that
would impair or interfere with the purposes of this Conservation Easement. Unless expressly
reserved as a compatible use herein, any activity in, or use of, the Conservation Easement Area by
the Grantor is prohibited as inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation Easement. Any
rights not expressly reserved hereunder by the Grantor have been acquired by the Grantee. Any
rights not expressly reserved hereunder by the Grantor, including the rights to all mitigation
credits, including, but not limited to, stream, wetland, and riparian buffer mitigation units, derived
from each site within the area of the Conservation Easement, are conveyed to and belong to the
Grantee. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the following specific uses are
prohibited, restricted, or reserved as indicated:

A. Recreational Uses. Grantor expressly reserves the right to undeveloped recreational uses,
including hiking, bird watching, hunting and fishing, and access to the Conservation Easement
Area for the purposes thereof.

B. Motorized Vehicle Use. Motorized vehicle use in the Conservation Easement Area is
prohibited except within a Crossing Area(s) or Road or Trail as shown on the recorded survey plat.

C. Educational Uses. The Grantor reserves the right to engage in and permit others to engage
in educational uses in the Conservation Easement Area not inconsistent with this Conservation
Easement, and the right of access to the Conservation Easement Area for such purposes including
organized educational activities such as site visits and observations. Educational uses of the
property shall not alter vegetation, hydrology or topography of the site.

D. Damage to Vegetation. Except within Crossing Area(s) as shown on the recorded survey
plat and as related to the removal of non-native plants, diseased or damaged trees, or vegetation
that destabilizes or renders unsafe the Conservation Easement Area to persons or natural habitat,
all cutting, removal, mowing, harming, or destruction of any trees and vegetation in the
Conservation Easement Area is prohibited.

E. Industrial, Residential and Commercial Uses. All industrial, residential and commercial
uses are prohibited in the Conservation Easement Area.

F. Agricultural Use. All agricultural uses are prohibited within the Conservation Easement
Area including any use for cropland, waste lagoons, or pastureland.

G. New Construction. There shall be no building, facility, mobile home, antenna, utility
pole, tower, or other structure constructed or placed in the Conservation Easement Area.

H. Roads and Trails. There shall be no construction or maintenance of new roads, trails,
walkways, or paving in the Conservation Easement.

All existing roads, trails and crossings within the Conservation Easement Area shall be shown on
the recorded survey plat.

NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 5 of 11

I. Signs. No signs shall be permitted in the Conservation Easement Area except interpretive
signs describing restoration activities and the conservation values of the Conservation Easement
Area, signs identifying the owner of the Property and the holder of the Conservation Easement,
signs giving directions, or signs prescribing rules and regulations for the use of the Conservation
Easement Area.

J. Dumping or Storing. Dumping or storage of soil, trash, ashes, garbage, waste, abandoned
vehicles, appliances, machinery, or any other material in the Conservation Easement Area is
prohibited.

K. Grading, Mineral Use, Excavation, Dredging. There shall be no grading, filling,
excavation, dredging, mining, drilling, hydraulic fracturing; removal of topsoil, sand, gravel, rock,
peat, minerals, or other materials.

L. Water Quality and Drainage Patterns. There shall be no diking, draining, dredging,
channeling, filling, leveling, pumping, impounding or diverting, causing, allowing or permitting
the diversion of surface or underground water in the Conservation Easement Area. No altering or
tampering with water control structures or devices, or disruption or alteration of the restored,
enhanced, or created drainage patterns is allowed. All removal of wetlands, polluting or
discharging into waters, springs, seeps, or wetlands, or use of pesticide or biocides in the
Conservation Easement Area is prohibited. In the event of an emergency interruption or shortage
of all other water sources, water from within the Conservation Easement Area may temporarily be
withdrawn for good cause shown as needed for the survival of livestock on the Property.

M. Subdivision and Conveyance. Grantor voluntarily agrees that no further subdivision,
partitioning, or dividing of the Conservation Easement Area portion of the Property owned by the
Grantor in fee simple (“fee”) that is subject to this Conservation Easement is allowed. Any future
transfer of the Property shall be subject to this Conservation Easement and Right of Access and to the
Grantee’s right of unlimited and repeated ingress and egress over and across the Property to the
Conservation Easement Area for the purposes set forth herein.

N. Development Rights. All development rights are permanently removed from the
Conservation Easement Area and are non-transferrable.

O. Disturbance of Natural Features. Any change, disturbance, alteration or impairment of
the natural features of the Conservation Easement Area or any intentional introduction of non-
native plants, trees and/or animal species by Grantor is prohibited.

The Grantor may request permission to vary from the above restrictions for good cause
shown, provided that any such request is not inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation
Easement, and the Grantor obtains advance written approval from the Division of Mitigation
Services, 1652 Mail Services Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652.

III. GRANTEE RESERVED USES

A. Right of Access, Construction, and Inspection. The Grantee, its employees and agents,
successors and assigns, receive a perpetual Right of Access to the Conservation Easement Area
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 6 of 11

over the Property at reasonable times to undertake any activities on the property to restore,
construct, manage, maintain, enhance, protect, and monitor the stream, wetland and any other
riparian resources in the Conservation Easement Area, in accordance with restoration activities or
a long-term management plan. Unless otherwise specifically set forth in this Conservation
Easement, the rights granted herein do not include or establish for the public any access rights.

B. Restoration Activities. These activities include planting of trees, shrubs and herbaceous
vegetation, installation of monitoring wells, utilization of heavy equipment to grade, fill, and
prepare the soil, modification of the hydrology of the site, and installation of natural and manmade
materials as needed to direct in-stream, above ground, and subterraneous water flow.

C. Signs. The Grantee, its employees and agents, successors or assigns, shall be permitted to
place signs and witness posts on the Property to include any or all of the following: describe the
project, prohibited activities within the Conservation Easement, or identify the project boundaries
and the holder of the Conservation Easement.

D. Fences. Conservation Easements are purchased to protect the investments by the State
(Grantee) in natural resources. Livestock within conservations easements damages the
investment and can result in reductions in natural resource value and mitigation credits which
would cause financial harm to the State. Therefore, Landowners (Grantor) with livestock are
required to restrict livestock access to the Conservation Easement area. Repeated failure to do so
may result in the State (Grantee) repairing or installing livestock exclusion devices (fences)
within the conservation area for the purpose of restricting livestock access. In such cases, the
landowner (Grantor) must provide access to the State (Grantee) to make repairs.

E. Crossing Area(s). The Grantee is not responsible for maintenance of crossing area(s),
however, the Grantee, its employees and agents, successors or assigns, reserve the right to repair
crossing area(s), at its sole discretion and to recover the cost of such repairs from the Grantor if
such repairs are needed as a result of activities of the Grantor, his successors or assigns.

IV. ENFORCEMENT AND REMEDIES

A. Enforcement. To accomplish the purposes of this Conservation Easement, Grantee is
allowed to prevent any activity within the Conservation Easement Area that is inconsistent with
the purposes of this Conservation Easement and to require the restoration of such areas or features
in the Conservation Easement Area that may have been damaged by such unauthorized activity or
use. Upon any breach of the terms of this Conservation Easement by Grantor, the Grantee shall,
except as provided below, notify the Grantor in writing of such breach and the Grantor shall have
ninety (90) days after receipt of such notice to correct the damage caused by such breach. If the
breach and damage remains uncured after ninety (90) days, the Grantee may enforce this
Conservation Easement by bringing appropriate legal proceedings including an action to recover
damages, as well as injunctive and other relief. The Grantee shall also have the power and
authority, consistent with its statutory authority: (a) to prevent any impairment of the Conservation
Easement Area by acts which may be unlawful or in violation of this Conservation Easement; (b)
to otherwise preserve or protect its interest in the Property; or (c) to seek damages from any
appropriate person or entity. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Grantee reserves the immediate
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 7 of 11

right, without notice, to obtain a temporary restraining order, injunctive or other appropriate relief,
if the breach is or would irreversibly or otherwise materially impair the benefits to be derived from
this Conservation Easement, and the Grantor and Grantee acknowledge that the damage would be
irreparable and remedies at law inadequate. The rights and remedies of the Grantee provided
hereunder shall be in addition to, and not in lieu of, all other rights and remedies available to
Grantee in connection with this Conservation Easement.

B. Inspection. The Grantee, its employees and agents, successors and assigns, have the right,
with reasonable notice, to enter the Conservation Easement Area over the Property at reasonable
times for the purpose of inspection to determine whether the Grantor is complying with the terms,
conditions and restrictions of this Conservation Easement.

C. Acts Beyond Grantor’s Control. Nothing contained in this Conservation Easement shall
be construed to entitle Grantee to bring any action against Grantor for any injury or change in the
Conservation Easement Area caused by third parties, resulting from causes beyond the Grantor’s
control, including, without limitation, fire, flood, storm, and earth movement, or from any prudent
action taken in good faith by the Grantor under emergency conditions to prevent, abate, or mitigate
significant injury to life or damage to the Property resulting from such causes.

D. Costs of Enforcement. Beyond regular and typical monitoring expenses, any costs
incurred by Grantee in enforcing the terms of this Conservation Easement against Grantor,
including, without limitation, any costs of restoration necessitated by Grantor’s acts or omissions
in violation of the terms of this Conservation Easement, shall be borne by Grantor.

E. No Waiver. Enforcement of this Easement shall be at the discretion of the Grantee and
any forbearance, delay or omission by Grantee to exercise its rights hereunder in the event of any
breach of any term set forth herein shall not be construed to be a waiver by Grantee.

V. MISCELLANEOUS

A. This instrument sets forth the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the
Conservation Easement and supersedes all prior discussions, negotiations, understandings or
agreements relating to the Conservation Easement. If any provision is found to be invalid, the
remainder of the provisions of the Conservation Easement, and the application of such provision
to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is found to be invalid, shall not be
affected thereby.

B. Grantor is responsible for any real estate taxes, assessments, fees, or charges levied upon
the Property. Grantee shall not be responsible for any costs or liability of any kind related to the
ownership, operation, insurance, upkeep, or maintenance of the Property, except as expressly
provided herein. Upkeep of any constructed bridges, fences, or other amenities on the Property are
the sole responsibility of the Grantor. Nothing herein shall relieve the Grantor of the obligation to
comply with federal, state or local laws, regulations and permits that may apply to the exercise of
the Reserved Rights.

NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 8 of 11

C. Any notices shall be sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested to the
parties at their addresses shown herein or to other addresses as either party establishes in writing
upon notification to the other.

D. Grantor shall notify Grantee in writing of the name and address and any party to whom the
Property or any part thereof is to be transferred at or prior to the time said transfer is made. Grantor
further agrees that any subsequent lease, deed, or other legal instrument by which any interest in
the Property is conveyed is subject to the Conservation Easement herein created.

E. The Grantor and Grantee agree that the terms of this Conservation Easement shall survive
any merger of the fee and easement interests in the Property or any portion thereof.

F. This Conservation Easement and Right of Access may be amended, but only in writing
signed by all parties hereto, or their successors or assigns, if such amendment does not affect the
qualification of this Conservation Easement or the status of the Grantee under any applicable laws,
and is consistent with the purposes of the Conservation Easement. The owner of the Property shall
notify the State Property Office and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in writing sixty (60) days
prior to the initiation of any transfer of all or any part of the Property or of any request to void or
modify this Conservation Easement. Such notifications and modification requests shall be
addressed to:

Division of Mitigation Services Program Manager
NC State Property Office
1321 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1321

and

General Counsel
US Army Corps of Engineers
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, NC 28403

G. The parties recognize and agree that the benefits of this Conservation Easement are in gross
and assignable provided, however, that the Grantee hereby covenants and agrees, that in the event
it transfers or assigns this Conservation Easement, the organization receiving the interest will be a
qualified holder under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 121-34 et seq. and § 170(h) of the Internal Revenue Code,
and the Grantee further covenants and agrees that the terms of the transfer or assignment will be
such that the transferee or assignee will be required to continue in perpetuity the conservation
purposes described in this document.

VI. QUIET ENJOYMENT

Grantor reserves all remaining rights accruing from ownership of the Property, including
the right to engage in or permit or invite others to engage in only those uses of the Conservation
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 9 of 11

Easement Area that are expressly reserved herein, not prohibited or restricted herein, and are not
inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation Easement. Without limiting the generality of
the foregoing, the Grantor expressly reserves to the Grantor, and the Grantor's invitees and
licensees, the right of access to the Conservation Easement Area, and the right of quiet enjoyment
of the Conservation Easement Area,

TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said rights and easements perpetually unto the State of
North Carolina for the aforesaid purposes,

AND Grantor covenants that Grantor is seized of said premises in fee and has the right to
convey the permanent Conservation Easement herein granted; that the same is free from
encumbrances and that Grantor will warrant and defend title to the same against the claims of all
persons whomsoever.

NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 10 of 11

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Grantor has hereunto set his hand and seal, the day
and year first above written.

___________________________________ (SEAL)

NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF EDGECOMBE

I, _____________________________, a Notary Public in and for the County and State aforesaid,
do hereby certify that Joel M. Boseman, Grantor, personally appeared before me this day and
acknowledged the execution of the foregoing instrument.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and Notary Seal this the __________
day of ___________________, 2019.

________________________________________
Notary Public

My commission expires:

______________________________

NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 11 of 11

Exhibit A

[INSERT LEGAL DESCRIPTION]

I, TIMOTHY P. MURRAY, Professional Land Surveyor L-4833, certify that this
plat was drawn under my supervision from an actual survey made under my
supervision (deed description recorded in Book 1640, page 667; that the boundary
lines not surveyed are shown as bold dashed lines; that the ratio of precision as
calculated is 1: 20,000+ ; that this plat was prepared in accordance with G.S.
47-30 as amended. Witness my original signature, registration number and seal
this Xth day of October, A.D., 2019.

____________________________________________________ , PLS L-4833
a. That the survey creates a subdivision of land within the area of a county or municipality that has an
ordinance that regulates parcels of land.
b. That the survey is located in a portion of a county or municipality that is unregulated as to an ordinance
that regulates parcels of land.
c. Any one of the following:
1. That the survey is of an existing parcel or parcels of land or one or more existing easements and does not
create a new street or change an existing street. For the purposes of this subsection, an "existing parcel" or
"existing easement" is an area of land described in a single, legal description or legally recorded subdivision that
has been or may be legally conveyed to a new owner by deed in its existing configuration.
2. That the survey is of an existing feature, such as a building or other structure, or natural feature, such as a
watercourse. General Assembly Of North Carolina Session 2017 House Bill 454*-Second Edition Page 5
3. That the survey is a control survey. For the purposes of this subsection, a "control survey" is a survey that
provides horizontal or vertical position data for support or control of other surveys or for mapping. A control survey,
by itself, cannot be used to define or convey rights or ownership.
4. That the survey is of a proposed easement for a public utility as defined in G.S. 62-3.
d. That the survey is of another category, such as the recombination of existing parcels, a court-ordered
survey, or other exemption or exception to the definition of subdivision.
e. That the information available to the surveyor is such that the surveyor is unable to make a determination
to the best of the surveyor's professional ability as to provisions contained in (a) through (d) above.


___________________________________________ , PLS L-4833

APPENDIX C

Appendix A
Categorical Exclusion Form for Division of Mitigation Services Projects
Version 2
Note: Only Appendix A should to be submitted (along with any supporting documentation) as the environmental
document.
Part 1: General Project Information
Project Name:
County Name:
DMS Number:
Project Sponsor:
Project Contact Name:
Project Contact Address:
Project Contact E-mail:
DMS Project Manager:
Project Description
For Official Use Only
Reviewed By:
Date DMS Project Manager
Conditional Approved By:
Date For Division Administrator
FHWA
Check this box if there are outstanding issues
Final Approval By:
Date For Division Administrator
FHWA
Boseman Buffer Site
Edgecombe County
100119
Eco Terra, LLC
Ted Griffith
1117 Peachtree Walk NE, Suite 126, Atlanta, GA 30309
[e-mail]
Lindsay Crocker
The Boseman Buffer Site is a riparian buffer restoration project located approximately 6.5 miles northeast of Rocky Mount in
western Edgecombe County. Historically the site has been used for agriculture. The project includes planting approximately
610,000 square feet of riparian buffer along two unnamed tributaries to the Tar River, in Tar River Basin (03020101).
8/2/2019
Part 2: All Projects
Regulation/Question Response
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
Environmental Concern (AEC)?
Yes
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
Program?
Yes
No
N/A
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA)
1. Is this a “full-delivery” project? Yes
No
2. Has the zoning/land use of the subject property and adjacent properties ever been
designated as commercial or industrial?
Yes
No
N/A
3. As a result of a limited Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or potential
hazardous waste sites within or adjacent to the project area?
Yes
No
N/A
4. As a result of a Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous
waste sites within or adjacent to the project area?
Yes
No
N/A
5. As a result of a Phase II Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous
waste sites within the project area?
Yes
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
Historic Places in the project area?
Yes
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:
* prior to making an offer that the agency does not have condemnation authority; and
* what the fair market value is believed to be?
Yes
No
N/A
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Part 3: Ground-Disturbing Activities
Regulation/Question Response
American Indian Religious Freedom Act (AIRFA)
1. Is the project located in a county claimed as “territory” by the Eastern Band of
Cherokee Indians?
Yes
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
Places?
Yes
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
of antiquity?
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
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
listed for the county?
Yes
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
Habitat?
Yes
No
N/A
4. Is the project “likely to adversely affect” the specie and/or “likely to adversely modify”
Designated Critical Habitat?
Yes
No
N/A
5.Does the USFWS/NOAA-Fisheries concur in the effects determination? Yes
No
N/A
6. Has the USFWS/NOAA-Fisheries rendered a “jeopardy” determination? Yes
No
N/A
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Executive Order 13007 (Indian Sacred Sites)
1. Is the project located on Federal lands that are within a county claimed as “territory”
by the EBCI?
Yes
No
2. Has the EBCI indicated that Indian sacred sites may be impacted by the proposed
project?
Yes
No
N/A
3. Have accommodations been made for access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred
sites?
Yes
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 locally
important farmland?
Yes
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
water body?
Yes
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,
outdoor recreation?
Yes
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
project on EFH?
Yes
No
N/A
4. Will the project adversely affect EFH? Yes
No
N/A
5. Has consultation with NOAA-Fisheries occurred? Yes
No
N/A
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA)
1. Does the USFWS have any recommendations with the project relative to the MBTA? 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
federal agency?
Yes
No
N/A
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

\\vhb\gbl\proj\Raleigh\39077.02 EcoTerra_Boseman_Site\docs\VARIOUS\Categorical Exclusion\CE_Summary_Draft.docx

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) provides a Federal “Superfund” to clean up uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous-waste sites as well as accidents,
spills, and other emergency releases of pollutants and contaminants into the environment.
An EDR Radius Map Report with Geocheck was ordered for the site through Environmental Data
Resources, Inc on June 7, 2019. The subject property and adjacent properties were not listed on any Federal, State, or Tribal environmental databases queried by EDR. The assessment showed no evidence of “recognized environmental conditions” associated with the target property. The EDR Executive Summary is included in the Appendix. The entire report is available upon request.
National Historic Preservation Act (Section 106) The National Historic Preservation Act declares a national policy of historic preservation to protect rehabilitate, restore, and reuse districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects significant in American architecture, history, archaeology, and culture, and Section 106 mandates that the federal agencies take into account the effect of an undertaking on a property that is included in, or is eligible for inclusion in, the National Register of Historic Places.
The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) reviewed the project site at the request of Eco Terra with respect to any archeological and architectural resources related to the Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site. SHPO responded in a letter dated July 12, 2019, stating they “are aware of no historic resources which
would be affected by the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.” The Section 106 correspondences are included in the Appendix.
Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act (Uniform Act) These acts, collectively known as the Uniform Act, 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 establish uniform and equitable land acquisition policies.
The Boseman Buffer Mitigation site is a full-delivery project that includes land acquisition. Notification of the fair market value of the project property and the lack of condemnation authority by Eco Terra was provided to the landowner in a letter dated July 10, 2019. A copy of the letter is included in the Appendix.
Endangered Species Act (ESA) Section 7 of the ESA requires federal agencies, in consultation with and with the assistance of the Secretary of the Interior or of Commerce, as appropriate, to ensure that actions they authorize, fund or carry out are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of threatened or endangered species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat for these species.
\\vhb\gbl\proj\Raleigh\39077.02 EcoTerra_Boseman_Site\docs\VARIOUS\Categorical Exclusion\CE_Summary_Draft.docx
The official USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) species for the study are lists two federally listed species, red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) and Tar River spinymussel (Elliptio
steinstansana), and three species proposed for federal listing, Neuse River waterdog (Necturus lewisi), Carolina madtom (Noturus furiosus), and Atlantic pigtoe (Fusconaia masoni). Additionally, the USFWS website lists one species, bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) protected under the Bald and Golden
Eagle Protection Act (BGPA). The project site contains marginally suitable habitat for the bald eagle. A pedestrian survey was conducted on June 3, 2019 within areas with suitable habitat. No bald eagle nests were observed during the survey. Suitable habitat does not exist within the project for the remaining listed species.
A self-certification letter was submitted by VHB to the USFWS on August 1, 2019. VHB has not received any comments at the time of this writing about the proposed biological conclusions. A copy of the self-certification submittal and the confirmation of receipt email from USFWS are included in the Appendix.
Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA)
The FPPA requires that, before taking or approving any federal action that would result in conversion of farmland, the agency must examine the effects of the action using the criteria set forth in the FPPA, and if there are adverse effects, must consider alternatives to lessen them.
The Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site includes conversion of prime farmland. The AD-1006 Form was completed and submitted to the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). The completed form and correspondence documenting the submittal is included in the Appendix.
Fish and Wildlife Coordination (FWCA) The FWCA requires consultation with the USFWS and appropriate state wildlife agency on projects that alter or modify a water body. Reports and recommendations prepared by these agencies document
project effects on wildlife and identify measures that may be adopted to prevent loss or damage to wildlife resources.
The Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site includes riparian buffer restoration. There will be no in-channel work completed as a part of this project. VHB requested comment on the project from the NC Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) and USFWS. The Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) provided comments about including sediment and erosion control measures, and wider buffers than required by NCDWR are preferred in areas with listed species. A copy of the letters and email correspondence are included in the Appendix.
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) The MBTA makes it unlawful for anyone to kill, capture, collect, possess, buy, sell, trade, ship, import, or export any migratory bird. The indirect killing of birds by destroying their nests and eggs is covered by the MBTA, so construction in nesting areas during nesting seasons can constitute a taking.
VHB requested comment for the Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site from the USFWS regarding the MBTA. The USFWS has not responded at this time. All correspondence with the USFWS is included in the Appendix.

Categorical Exclusion Appendix
Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site
FORM-LBD-CCA
®kcehCoeG htiw tropeR ™paM suidaR RDE ehT
6 Armstrong Road, 4th floor
Shelton, CT 06484
Toll Free: 800.352.0050
www.edrnet.com
Boseman Buffer Site
7620 NC 97
Rocky Mount, NC 27801
Inquiry Number: 5676457.2s
June 07, 2019
SECTION PAGE
Executive Summary ES1
Overview Map 2
Detail Map 3
Map Findings Summary 4
Map Findings 8
Orphan Summary 9
Government Records Searched/Data Currency Tracking GR-1
GEOCHECK ADDENDUM
Physical Setting Source Addendum A-1
Physical Setting Source Summary A-2
Physical Setting SSURGO Soil Map A-5
Physical Setting Source Map A-12
Physical Setting Source Map Findings A-14
Physical Setting Source Records Searched PSGR-1
TC5676457.2s Page 1
Thank you for your business.
Please contact EDR at 1-800-352-0050
with any questions or comments.
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 2019 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.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5676457.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
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), the ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site
Assessments for Forestland or Rural Property (E 2247-16), the ASTM Standard Practice for Limited
Environmental Due Diligence: Transaction Screen Process (E 1528-14) or custom requirements developed
for the evaluation of environmental risk associated with a parcel of real estate.
TARGET PROPERTY INFORMATION
ADDRESS
7620 NC 97
ROCKY MOUNT, NC 27801
COORDINATES
35.9645470 - 35˚ 57’ 52.36’’Latitude (North):
77.7056290 - 77˚ 42’ 20.26’’Longitude (West):
Zone 18Universal Tranverse Mercator:
256004.8UTM X (Meters):
3983200.8UTM Y (Meters):
59 ft. above sea levelElevation:
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP ASSOCIATED WITH TARGET PROPERTY
5944948 HARTSEASE, NCTarget Property Map:
2013Version Date:
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY IN THIS REPORT
20140521Portions of Photo from:
USDASource:
5676457.2s Page 2
NO MAPPED SITES FOUND
MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
Target Property Address:
7620 NC 97
ROCKY MOUNT, NC 27801
Click on Map ID to see full detail.
MAP RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.)
ID DATABASE ACRONYMS ELEVATION DIRECTIONSITE NAME ADDRESS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5676457.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3
TARGET PROPERTY SEARCH RESULTS
The target property was not listed in any of the databases searched by EDR.
DATABASES WITH NO MAPPED SITES
No mapped sites were found in EDR’s search of available ("reasonably ascertainable ") government
records either on the target property or within the search radius around the target property for the
following databases:
STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Federal NPL site list
NPL National Priority List
Proposed NPL Proposed National Priority List Sites
NPL LIENS Federal Superfund Liens
Federal Delisted NPL site list
Delisted NPL National Priority List Deletions
Federal CERCLIS list
FEDERAL FACILITY Federal Facility Site Information listing
SEMS Superfund Enterprise Management System
Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site list
SEMS-ARCHIVE Superfund Enterprise Management System Archive
Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list
CORRACTS Corrective Action Report
Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD facilities list
RCRA-TSDF RCRA - Treatment, Storage and Disposal
Federal RCRA generators list
RCRA-LQG RCRA - Large Quantity Generators
RCRA-SQG RCRA - Small Quantity Generators
RCRA-CESQG RCRA - Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator
Federal institutional controls / engineering controls registries
LUCIS Land Use Control Information System
US ENG CONTROLS Engineering Controls Sites List
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5676457.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4
US INST CONTROL Sites with Institutional Controls
Federal ERNS list
ERNS Emergency Response Notification System
State- and tribal - equivalent NPL
NC HSDS Hazardous Substance Disposal Site
State- and tribal - equivalent CERCLIS
SHWS Inactive Hazardous Sites Inventory
State and tribal landfill and/or solid waste disposal site lists
SWF/LF List of Solid Waste Facilities
OLI Old Landfill Inventory
DEBRIS Solid Waste Active Disaster Debris Sites Listing
LCID Land-Clearing and Inert Debris (LCID) Landfill Notifications
State and tribal leaking storage tank lists
LUST Regional UST Database
LAST Leaking Aboveground Storage Tanks
INDIAN LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
LUST TRUST State Trust Fund Database
State and tribal registered storage tank lists
FEMA UST Underground Storage Tank Listing
UST Petroleum Underground Storage Tank Database
AST AST Database
INDIAN UST Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
State and tribal institutional control / engineering control registries
INST CONTROL No Further Action Sites With Land Use Restrictions Monitoring
State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites
INDIAN VCP Voluntary Cleanup Priority Listing
VCP Responsible Party Voluntary Action Sites
State and tribal Brownfields sites
BROWNFIELDS Brownfields Projects Inventory
ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Local Brownfield lists
US BROWNFIELDS A Listing of Brownfields Sites
Local Lists of Landfill / Solid Waste Disposal Sites
SWRCY Recycling Center Listing
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5676457.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5
HIST LF Solid Waste Facility Listing
INDIAN ODI Report on the Status of Open Dumps on Indian Lands
DEBRIS REGION 9 Torres Martinez Reservation Illegal Dump Site Locations
ODI Open Dump Inventory
IHS OPEN DUMPS Open Dumps on Indian Land
Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites
US HIST CDL Delisted National Clandestine Laboratory Register
US CDL National Clandestine Laboratory Register
Local Land Records
LIENS 2 CERCLA Lien Information
Records of Emergency Release Reports
HMIRS Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System
SPILLS Spills Incident Listing
IMD Incident Management Database
SPILLS 90 SPILLS 90 data from FirstSearch
SPILLS 80 SPILLS 80 data from FirstSearch
Other Ascertainable Records
RCRA NonGen / NLR RCRA - Non Generators / No Longer Regulated
FUDS Formerly Used Defense Sites
DOD Department of Defense Sites
SCRD DRYCLEANERS State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners Listing
US FIN ASSUR Financial Assurance Information
EPA WATCH LIST EPA WATCH LIST
2020 COR ACTION 2020 Corrective Action Program List
TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act
TRIS Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System
SSTS Section 7 Tracking Systems
ROD Records Of Decision
RMP Risk Management Plans
RAATS RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System
PRP Potentially Responsible Parties
PADS PCB Activity Database System
ICIS Integrated Compliance Information System
FTTS FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide
Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
MLTS Material Licensing Tracking System
COAL ASH DOE Steam-Electric Plant Operation Data
COAL ASH EPA Coal Combustion Residues Surface Impoundments List
PCB TRANSFORMER PCB Transformer Registration Database
RADINFO Radiation Information Database
HIST FTTS FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Administrative Case Listing
DOT OPS Incident and Accident Data
CONSENT Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees
INDIAN RESERV Indian Reservations
FUSRAP Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program
UMTRA Uranium Mill Tailings Sites
LEAD SMELTERS Lead Smelter Sites
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5676457.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6
US AIRS Aerometric Information Retrieval System Facility Subsystem
US MINES Mines Master Index File
ABANDONED MINES Abandoned Mines
FINDS Facility Index System/Facility Registry System
ECHO Enforcement & Compliance History Information
UXO Unexploded Ordnance Sites
DOCKET HWC Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket Listing
FUELS PROGRAM EPA Fuels Program Registered Listing
AIRS Air Quality Permit Listing
ASBESTOS ASBESTOS
COAL ASH Coal Ash Disposal Sites
DRYCLEANERS Drycleaning Sites
Financial Assurance Financial Assurance Information Listing
NPDES NPDES Facility Location Listing
UIC Underground Injection Wells Listing
AOP Animal Operation Permits Listing
PCSRP Petroleum-Contaminated Soil Remediation Permits
SEPT HAULERS Permitted Septage Haulers Listing
CCB Coal Ash Structural Fills (CCB) Listing
EDR HIGH RISK HISTORICAL RECORDS
EDR Exclusive Records
EDR MGP EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plants
EDR Hist Auto EDR Exclusive Historical Auto Stations
EDR Hist Cleaner EDR Exclusive Historical Cleaners
EDR RECOVERED GOVERNMENT ARCHIVES
Exclusive Recovered Govt. Archives
RGA HWS Recovered Government Archive State Hazardous Waste Facilities List
RGA LF Recovered Government Archive Solid Waste Facilities List
RGA LUST Recovered Government Archive Leaking Underground Storage Tank
SURROUNDING SITES: SEARCH RESULTS
Surrounding sites were not identified.
Unmappable (orphan) sites are not considered in the foregoing analysis.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5676457.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7
There were no unmapped sites in this report.
EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.
80
808 080
808 0
80
80
808 0
8 0
EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.

\\vhb\gbl\proj\Raleigh\39077.02 EcoTerra_Boseman_Site\docs\VARIOUS\Categorical Exclusion\USFWS & WRC Concurrence Request\USFWS\20190801_Boseman_USFWSConcurrenceRequest.docx

To: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (via electronic correspondence to [e-mail])

RE: Protected Species Assessment
Boseman Buffer Site
Battleboro, Edgecombe County, NC

VHB is under contract with Division of Mitigation Services through Eco Terra, LLC to provide biological
conclusions for federally protected species for the Boseman Buffer Site. The proposed project will entail
planting native hardwood trees along two unnamed tributaries to the Tar River and placing the project
under a permanent conservation easement. There will be no in-channel work during the course of the
project. This is a non-federal applicant and we are utilizing the Self-Certification Letter.

We have reviewed the most recent USFWS list of species, dated May 31, 2019, for the project area in
Edgecombe County. We have attached the following information to assist with your review.
• Protected Species Assessment including project description, habitat descriptions and proposed
biological conclusions for listed species;
• Figures-
o Figure 1. Vicinity Map
o Figure 2. Aerial Map
• Site photographs;
• Official Species List dated 5/31/2019
• NCDNCR Natural Heritage Program Correspondence
• Species Conclusion Table
• Online Project Review Request Letter
Sincerely,
VHB Engineering NC, P.C.

Heather Smith, LSS
Senior Environmental Scientist

To: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (via electronic correspondence to [e-mail])
Ref: 39077.02 August 1, 2019 Page 2
\\vhb\gbl\proj\Raleigh\39077.02 EcoTerra_Boseman_Site\docs\VARIOUS\Categorical Exclusion\USFWS & WRC Concurrence Request\USFWS\20190801_Boseman_USFWSConcurrenceRequest.docx
PROTECTED SPECIES ASSESSMENT
Boseman Buffer Site Edgecombe County, NC
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Boseman Buffer Site has been identified for the purpose of providing in-kind mitigation for unavoidable riparian buffer impacts in the Tar-Pamlico River Basin. The project site is located on NC-97 in Battleboro, NC (35.968728, -77.704679). The Edgecombe County property identification number is 3880-38-6335. The project entails placing a conservation easement on approximately 15 acres and planting the
site in native hardwood trees. The site has been in agricultural production since at least 1955. The areassurrounding the existing stream channels are devoid of woody vegetation and are planted with row crops.The project site is located within the 100-year floodplain of the Tar River. Please refer to Figure 1 for avicinity map of the project.
FEDERALLY PROTECTED SPECIES
As of May 31, 2019, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists five federally protected species for Edgecombe County (Table 1) and the bald eagle is protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. A brief description of each species’ habitat requirements follows, along with the biological
conclusions rendered based on habitat and survey results in the study area. Habitat requirements for each species are based on the current best available information from referenced literature and/or USFWS.
Table 1. Federally Protected Species Listed for Edgecombe County
Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status Habitat Present Biological Conclusion
Haliaeetus
leucocephalus Bald eagle BGPA Yes No Eagle Permit Required
Picoides borealis Red-cockaded woodpecker Endangered No No Effect
Necturus lewisi Neuse River waterdog Proposed Threatened No No Effect
Noturus furiosus Carolina madtom Proposed Endangered No No Effect
Fusconaia masoni Atlantic pigtoe Proposed Threatened No No Effect
Elliptio steinstansana Tar River spinymussel Endangered No No Effect
BGPA = Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
To: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (via electronic correspondence to [e-mail])

Ref: 39077.02 August 1, 2019 Page 3

\\vhb\gbl\proj\Raleigh\39077.02 EcoTerra_Boseman_Site\docs\VARIOUS\Categorical Exclusion\USFWS & WRC Concurrence Request\USFWS\20190801_Boseman_USFWSConcurrenceRequest.docx

Bald eagle
Optimal Survey Window: year-round; November – March (optimal to observe birds and nests); February – May (optimal to observe active nesting)
Habitat Description: Habitat for the bald eagle primarily consists of mature forest in proximity to large bodies of open water for foraging. Large dominant trees are utilized for nesting sites, typically within 1.0 mile of open water. Biological Conclusion: Not Required
A desktop-GIS assessment of the project study area, as well as the area within a 1.13-mile radius (1.0 mile
plus 660 feet) of the project limits, was performed in April 2017 using 2013 color aerials. There are no water bodies large enough and sufficiently open to be considered a potential feeding source within this radius. However, a juvenile bald eagle was observed on-site in late 2018 and an on-site nest survey was conducted on June 3, 2019. During the survey very few trees capable of supporting a nest were observed and no nests were found. The majority of the forested area within 660’ of the study area contained
successional growth trees. Additionally, information provided by NCNHP showed there were no known occurrences of the species within 1 mile of the project study area.
Due to the lack of suitable foraging habitat, the lack of known occurrences, the lack of nests observed, and the minimal impact anticipated for this project, it has been determined that this project will not affect this species and no Eagle Act permit is required. Red-cockaded woodpecker USFWS Recommended Survey Window: year-round; November-early March (optimal)
Habitat Description: The red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) typically occupies open, mature stands of southern pines, particularly longleaf pine (Pinus palustris), for foraging and nesting/roosting habitat. The RCW excavates cavities for nesting and roosting in living pine trees, aged 60 years or older, which are contiguous with pine stands at least 30 years of age to provide foraging habitat. The foraging range of
the RCW is normally no more than 0.5 miles. Biological Conclusion: No Effect A desktop-GIS assessment of the project study area was performed in May 2019 using 2017 color aerials.
No areas within the project area are dominated by pine trees; the project area is devoid of mature forests and contains row crops and herbaceous vegetation. Additionally, information provided by NCNHP showed there were no known occurrences of the species 1 mile of the project study area.
To: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (via electronic correspondence to [e-mail])

Ref: 39077.02 August 1, 2019 Page 4

\\vhb\gbl\proj\Raleigh\39077.02 EcoTerra_Boseman_Site\docs\VARIOUS\Categorical Exclusion\USFWS & WRC Concurrence Request\USFWS\20190801_Boseman_USFWSConcurrenceRequest.docx

Due to the lack of suitable foraging and nesting habitat, the lack of known occurrences within 1 mile of the study area, and the minimal impact anticipated for this project, the biological conclusion for this
species is “No Effect”. Neuse River waterdog
USFWS Recommended Survey Window: Undetermined Habitat Description: In North Carolina, the Neuse River waterdog specific habitat characteristics include low to moderate gradient streams and low current velocity. It is a fully aquatic salamander, never leaving
the water. It lacks lungs, getting oxygen from the water via external gills and needs clean, flowing water with high dissolved oxygen concentrations. The species dwells in streams wider than 15 meters but has
been found in smaller creeks. Biological Conclusion: No Effect The study area is located in the Tar-Pamlico River basin. NCNHP records dated July 2018 show the closest
documented population of the Neuse River waterdog is located approximately 1.3 river miles downstream of the study area in the Tar River. The record for this population is categorized as “current”. The record is dated 2015.
Suitable habitat for the Neuse River waterdog does not exist within the study area. The majority of the streams on-site are intermittent, and the perennial portions of the streams are heavily affected by sediment and fertilizer inputs from the surrounding farm fields. The perennial channel immediately downstream of the study area was experiencing eutrophication during a site visit on June 3, 2019. This same portion of the stream had no visible flow and the channel is approximately three to four meters wide. The proposed riparian buffer mitigation project will not include any work within any stream
channels. The project will consist of planting native hardwood trees within 200 feet of the stream channels. Given the nature of the project, the degraded condition of the streams, lack of habitat on-site and the avoidance of channel impacts, VHB is seeking concurrence with a “No Effect” biological conclusion for this
species. Carolina madtom USFWS Recommended Survey Window: Undetermined
Habitat Description: In North Carolina, the species occurs in riffles, runs, and pools in medium to large streams and rivers. Ideally, it inhabits fresh waters with continuous, year-round flow and moderate gradient in both the Piedmont and Coastal Plain physiographic regions. Optimal substrate for the Carolina madtom is predominantly silt-free, stable, gravel and cobble bottom habitat, and it must have cover for
nest sites, including under rocks, bark, relic mussel shells, and even cans and bottles.
To: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (via electronic correspondence to [e-mail])

Ref: 39077.02 August 1, 2019 Page 5

\\vhb\gbl\proj\Raleigh\39077.02 EcoTerra_Boseman_Site\docs\VARIOUS\Categorical Exclusion\USFWS & WRC Concurrence Request\USFWS\20190801_Boseman_USFWSConcurrenceRequest.docx

Biological Conclusion: No Effect
The study area is located in the Tar-Pamlico River basin. NCNHP records dated July 2018 show the closest documented population of the Carolina madtom is located approximately 4.1 river miles downstream of
the study area in the Tar River. The record for this population is categorized as “historical”. The record is dated 1985. Suitable habitat for the Carolina madtom does not exist within the study area. The majority of the streams on-site are intermittent, and the perennial portions of the streams are heavily affected by sediment and
fertilizer inputs from the surrounding farm fields. The perennial channel immediately downstream of the study area was experiencing eutrophication during a site visit on June 3, 2019. This same portion of the
stream had no visible flow and the channel is approximately three to four meters wide. Substrate within the on-site streams consists entirely of silt and is not suitable for this species. The proposed riparian buffer mitigation project will not include any work within any stream channels. The project will consist of planting native hardwood trees within 200 feet of the stream channels.
Given the nature of the project, the distance from known populations, the degraded condition of the streams, and the avoidance of channel impacts, the biological conclusion for this species is “No Effect”
Atlantic pigtoe USFWS Recommended Survey Window: Undetermined Habitat Description: In North Carolina, the preferred habitat of the Atlantic pigtoe is coarse sand and gravel, and rarely in silt and detritus. Historically, the best populations existed in small creeks to larger rivers with excellent water quality, where flows were sufficient to maintain clean, silt-free substrates.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect The study area is located in the Tar-Pamlico River basin. NCNHP records dated July 2018 show the closest documented population of the Atlantic pigtoe is located approximately 12.0 river miles downstream of
the study area in the Tar River. The record for this population is categorized as “current”. The record is dated 2004. Suitable habitat for the Atlantic pigtoe does not exist within the study area. The majority of the streams on-site are intermittent, and the perennial portions of the streams are heavily affected by sediment and
fertilizer inputs from the surrounding farm fields. The perennial channel immediately downstream of the study area was experiencing eutrophication during a site visit on June 3, 2019. This same portion of the stream had no visible flow and the channel is approximately three to four meters wide. The proposed riparian buffer mitigation project will not include any work within any stream channels. The project will consist of planting native hardwood trees within 200 feet of the stream channels.

To: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (via electronic correspondence to [e-mail])
Ref: 39077.02 August 1, 2019 Page 6
\\vhb\gbl\proj\Raleigh\39077.02 EcoTerra_Boseman_Site\docs\VARIOUS\Categorical Exclusion\USFWS & WRC Concurrence Request\USFWS\20190801_Boseman_USFWSConcurrenceRequest.docx
Given the nature of the project, the distance from known populations, the degraded condition of the streams, and the avoidance of channel impacts, the biological conclusion for this species is “No Effect”.
Tar River spinymussel
USFWS Recommended Survey Window: Year Round
Habitat Description: The Tar spinymussel is endemic to the Tar and Neuse River drainage basins in North Carolina. This mussel requires a stream with fast flowing, well-oxygenated, circumneutral pH water. The bottom should be composed of unconsolidated gravel and coarse sand. The water needs to be relatively
silt-free, and stream banks should be stable, typically with many roots from adjacent riparian trees and shrubs.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
The study area is located in the Tar-Pamlico River basin. NCNHP records dated July 2018 show the closest documented population of the Tar River spinymussel is located approximately 14.6 river miles
downstream of the study area in the Tar River. The record for this population is categorized as “current”. The record is dated 2001.
Suitable habitat for the Tar River spinymussel does not exist within the study area. The majority of the streams on-site are intermittent, and the perennial portions of the streams are heavily affected by sediment and fertilizer inputs from the surrounding farm fields. The perennial channel immediately downstream of the study area was experiencing eutrophication during a site visit on June 3, 2019. This same portion of the stream had no visible flow and the channel is approximately three to four meters wide. The proposed riparian buffer mitigation project will not include any work within any stream channels. The project will consist of planting native hardwood trees within 200 feet of the stream
channels.
Given the nature of the project, the distance from known populations, the degraded condition of the streams, and the avoidance of channel impacts, the biological conclusion for this species is “No Effect”.
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
In Reply Refer To:
Consultation Code: 04EN2000-2019-SLI-0962
Event Code: 04EN2000-2019-E-02196
Project Name: Boseman Buffer Site

Subject:List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project
location, and/or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
The species list generated pursuant to the information you provided identifies threatened,
endangered, proposed and candidate species, as well as proposed and final designated critical
habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and/or may be affected by
your proposed project. The species list fulfills the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of
species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Please feel free to
contact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to
federally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed critical
habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the
Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be
completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be
completed by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and
implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested
through the ECOS-IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list.
Section 7 of the Act requires that all federal agencies (or their designated non-federal
representative), in consultation with the Service, insure that any action federally authorized,
funded, or carried out by such agencies is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any
federally-listed endangered or threatened species. A biological assessment or evaluation may be
prepared to fulfill that requirement and in determining whether additional consultation with the
Service is necessary. In addition to the federally-protected species list, information on the
species' life histories and habitats and information on completing a biological assessment or
May 31, 2019
05/31/2019 Event Code: 04EN2000-2019-E-02196   2

evaluation and can be found on our web page at http://www.fws.gov/raleigh. Please check the
web site often for updated information or changes
If your project contains suitable habitat for any of the federally-listed species known to be
present within the county where your project occurs, the proposed action has the potential to
adversely affect those species. As such, we recommend that surveys be conducted to determine
the species' presence or absence within the project area. The use of North Carolina Natural
Heritage program data should not be substituted for actual field surveys.
If you determine that the proposed action may affect (i.e., likely to adversely affect or not likely
to adversely affect) a federally-protected species, you should notify this office with your
determination, the results of your surveys, survey methodologies, and an analysis of the effects
of the action on listed species, including consideration of direct, indirect, and cumulative effects,
before conducting any activities that might affect the species. If you determine that the proposed
action will have no effect (i.e., no beneficial or adverse, direct or indirect effect) on federally
listed species, then you are not required to contact our office for concurrence (unless an
Environmental Impact Statement is prepared). However, you should maintain a complete record
of the assessment, including steps leading to your determination of effect, the qualified personnel
conducting the assessment, habitat conditions, site photographs, and any other related articles.
Please be aware that bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668 et seq.), and projects affecting these species may require
development of an eagle conservation plan (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/
eagle_guidance.html). Additionally, wind energy projects should follow the wind energy
guidelines (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/) for minimizing impacts to migratory birds and
bats.
Guidance for minimizing impacts to migratory birds for projects including communications
towers (e.g., cellular, digital television, radio, and emergency broadcast) can be found at: http://
www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Hazards/towers/towers.htm; http://
www.towerkill.com; and http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Hazards/towers/
comtow.html.
Not all Threatened and Endangered Species that occur in North Carolina are subject to section 7
consultation with the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service. Atlantic and shortnose sturgeon, sea
turtles,when in the water, and certain marine mammals are under purview of the National Marine
Fisheries Service. If your project occurs in marine, estuarine, or coastal river systems you should
also contact the National Marine Fisheries Service, http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/
We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages
Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project
planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Tracking Number in
the header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project
that you submit to our office. If you have any questions or comments, please contact John Ellis
of this office at [e-mail].
05/31/2019 Event Code: 04EN2000-2019-E-02196   3

Attachment(s):
▪Official Species List
05/31/2019 Event Code: 04EN2000-2019-E-02196   1

Official Species List
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the
requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether
any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed
action".
This species list is provided by:
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
[phone]
05/31/2019 Event Code: 04EN2000-2019-E-02196   2

Project Summary
Consultation Code:04EN2000-2019-SLI-0962
Event Code:04EN2000-2019-E-02196
Project Name:Boseman Buffer Site
Project Type:** OTHER **
Project Description:Plant native hardwood stems along unnamed tributaries to the Tar River.
Project Location:
Approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https://
www.google.com/maps/place/35.963915877074676N77.70713591801106W
Counties:Edgecombe, NC
05/31/2019 Event Code: 04EN2000-2019-E-02196   3

Endangered Species Act Species
There is a total of 5 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.
Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include
species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species
list because a project could affect downstream species.
IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA
Fisheries , as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the
Department of Commerce.
See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially
within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office
if you have questions.
1.NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an
office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of
Commerce.
Birds
NAME STATUS
Red-cockaded Woodpecker Picoides borealis
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7614
Endangered
Amphibians
NAME STATUS
Neuse River Waterdog Necturus lewisi
There is proposed critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not
available.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6772
Proposed
Threatened
Fishes
NAME STATUS
Carolina Madtom Noturus furiosus
There is proposed critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not
available.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/528
Proposed
Endangered
1
05/31/2019 Event Code: 04EN2000-2019-E-02196   4
Clams
NAME STATUS
Atlantic Pigtoe Fusconaia masoni
There is proposed critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5164
Proposed
Threatened
Tar River Spinymussel Elliptio steinstansana
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1392
Endangered
Critical habitats
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S
JURISDICTION.
Species Conclusions Table
Project Name: Boseman Buffer Site
Date: August 1, 2019
Species / Resource Name Conclusion ESA Section 7 / Eagle Act
Determination
Notes / Documentation
Bald eagle
Haliaeetus leucocephalus
Unlikely to disturb nesting bald
eagles
No eagle act permit
required
No NCNHP records or suitable habitat within 1.13 miles. 2013 orthophoto used to look for
potential foraging water bodies. Nest survey conducted on June 3, 2019, no nests found.
Red-cockaded woodpecker
Picoides borealis No suitable habitat present No Effect There are no suitable pines within the study area for foraging or nesting. No NCNHP records or
suitable habitat within 1.0 mile.
Neuse River waterdog
Necturus lewisi No suitable habitat present No Effect
The on-site streams are mainly intermittent in flow regime and the perennial portions have water
quality that is negatively impacted by nutrient and sediment inputs from the surrounding farm
fields. The perennial channel immediately downstream of the site has no flow and eutrophication
on June 3, 2019. NCNHP record within 1.0 mile but no habitat on-site.
Carolina madtom
Noturus furiosus No suitable habitat present No Effect
The on-site streams are mainly intermittent in flow regime and the perennial portions have water
quality that is negatively impacted by nutrient and sediment inputs from the surrounding farm
fields. The perennial channel immediately downstream of the site has no flow and eutrophication
on June 3, 2019. No NCNHP records or suitable habitat within 1.0 mile.
Atlantic pigtoe
Fusconaia masoni No suitable habitat present No Effect
The on-site streams are mainly intermittent in flow regime and the perennial portions have water
quality that is negatively impacted by nutrient and sediment inputs from the surrounding farm
fields. The perennial channel immediately downstream of the site has no flow and eutrophication
on June 3, 2019. No NCNHP records or suitable habitat within 1.0 mile.
Tar River spinymussel
Elliptio steinstansana No suitable habitat present No Effect
The on-site streams are mainly intermittent in flow regime and the perennial portions have water
quality that is negatively impacted by nutrient and sediment inputs from the surrounding farm
fields. The perennial channel immediately downstream of the site has no flow and eutrophication
on June 3, 2019. No NCNHP records or suitable habitat within 1.0 mile.
Northern long-eared bat No suitable habitat present No Effect No tree cutting or vegetation removal will occur.
Critical habitat No critical habitat present No Effect N/A
Acknowledgement: I agree that the above information about my proposed project is true. I used all of the provided resources to make an informed
decision about impacts in the immediate and surrounding areas.
8/1/2019
Signature /Title Date
Raleigh Field Office
P.O. Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726

Date:__________________________

Self-Certification Letter

Project Name______________________________

Dear Applicant:

Thank you for using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) Raleigh Ecological
Services online project review process. By printing this letter in conjunction with your
project review package, you are certifying that you have completed the online project
review process for the project named above in accordance with all instructions
provided, using the best available information to reach your conclusions. This letter,
and the enclosed project review package, completes the review of your project in
accordance with the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544, 87 Stat.
884), as amended (ESA), and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C.
668-668c, 54 Stat. 250), as amended (Eagle Act). This letter also provides
information for your project review under the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (P.L. 91-190, 42 U.S.C. 4321-4347, 83 Stat. 852), as amended. A copy of this
letter and the project review package must be submitted to this office for this
certification to be valid. This letter and the project review package will be maintained
in our records.

The species conclusions table in the enclosed project review package summarizes
your ESA and Eagle Act conclusions. Based on your analysis, mark all the
determinations that apply:

“no effect” determinations for proposed/listed species and/or
proposed/designated critical habitat; and/or

“may affect, not likely to adversely affect” determinations for proposed/listed
species and/or proposed/designated critical habitat; and/or

“may affect, likely to adversely affect” determination for the Northern long-
eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) and relying on the findings of the January 5,
2016, Programmatic Biological Opinion for the Final 4(d) Rule on the
Northern long-eared bat;

“no Eagle Act permit required” determinations for eagles.

Applicant Page 2

We certify that use of the online project review process in strict accordance with the
instructions provided as documented in the enclosed project review package results in
reaching the appropriate determinations. Therefore, we concur with the “no effect” or
“not likely to adversely affect” determinations for proposed and listed species and
proposed and designated critical habitat; the “may affect” determination for Northern
long-eared bat; and/or the “no Eagle Act permit required” determinations for eagles.
Additional coordination with this office is not needed. Candidate species are not
legally protected pursuant to the ESA. However, the Service encourages consideration
of these species by avoiding adverse impacts to them. Please contact this office for
additional coordination if your project action area contains candidate species.
Should project plans change or if additional information on the distribution of
proposed or listed species, proposed or designated critical habitat, or bald eagles
becomes available, this determination may be reconsidered. This certification letter is
valid for 1 year. Information about the online project review process including
instructions, species information, and other information regarding project reviews
within North Carolina is available at our website http://www.fws.gov/raleigh/pp.html.
If you have any questions, you can write to us at [e-mail] or please contact
Leigh Mann of this office at 919-856-4520, ext. 10.

Sincerely,

/s/Pete Benjamin

Pete Benjamin
Field Supervisor
Raleigh Ecological Services

Enclosures - project review package
From:Raleigh, FW4
To:Smith, Heather
Subject:Confirmation of Project Receipt Re: [EXTERNAL] Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site Self-Certification [Filed 01 Aug
2019 08:06]
Date:Thursday, August 1, 2019 7:44:00 AM
Thank you for submitting your online project package. We will review your package
within 30 days of receipt. If you have submitted an online project review request
letter, expect our response within 30 days. If you have submitted an online project
review certification letter, you will typically not receive a response from us since the
certification letter is our official response. However, if we have additional questions or
we do not concur with your determinations, we will contact you during the review
period.
#A, mom
e:�icrra
ol�
May 30, 2019
Renee Gledhill -Earley
State Historic Preservation Office
4617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-4617
Re: Division of Mitigation Services Buffer Restoration Project in Edgecombe County
Boseman Buffer Site
Ms. Gledhill -Earley,
The Division of Mitigation Services {CMS} requests review and comment on any possible issues that might
emerge with respect to archaeological or cultural resources associated with a riparian buffer restoration
project (Figures 1 & 2).
The Bose man Buffer Site has been identified for the purpose of providing in -kind mitigation for
unavoidable riparian buffer impacts in the Tar -Pamlico River Basin- The project site is located on NC-97 in
Battleboro, NC (35-968728,-77.704679). The Edgecombe County property identification number is 3880-
38-6335. The project entails placing a conservation easement on approximately 15 acres and planting the
site in native hardwood trees. The site has been in agricultural production since at least 1955. The
existing stream channels are devoid of woody vegetation and are planted with row crops. The project site
is located within the 100-year floodplain of the Tar River and will require an Edgecombe County
floodplain development permit. Funding is not being sought from any state or federal agencies. No
architectural structures or archaeological artifacts have been observed or noted during the preliminary
surveys of the site for restoration purposes (See attached photos).
We are requesting a review of the site based on the attached information to determine the presence of
any historic properties or archaeological resources.
Sincerely,
Ted Griffith
Project Manager
[e-mail]
1117 Peachtree Walk NE, STE 126. Atlpnta. GA 30309 404.596.8004 EcoTerro.com
�whh�g7rWraj�ZaingnLi90?i 02 EcoTerra Bowman._Sltp%d4a%VARrOu5ltategonco
E.[IuaibnVW90530_ SM Ppr etter_ DmN dna ��
� .r Yrirl l,u� nn Ir=:r�•: I],J S!- -crici rrri-r r _r Vr_lod lei ill. r

North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Roy Cooper Office of Archives and History
Secretary Susi H. Hamilton Deputy Secretary Kevin Cherry
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6599

July 12, 2019

Ted Griffith
Eco Terra
1117 Peachtree Walk NE, Suite 126
Atlanta, GA 30309

Re: Create Boseman Buffer Site, NC 97, Battleboro, Edgecombe County, ER 19-1882

Dear Mr. Griffith:
Thank you for your letter of May 30, 2019, concerning the above project.
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would be affected by
the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.

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
[e-mail]. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the above
referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,

Ramona Bartos, Deputy
State Historic Preservation Officer
%04.00=
ecolerra..
July 101h 2019
Joel Bosema n
P4 Box 550
Battleboro, NC 27809
Dear Joel,
As part of the environmental documentation process in preparation for the
stream mitigation 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 requires that we inform you in writing that this conservation
easement transaction is voluntary and that the project is being developed
by Eco Terra Partners LLC for the North Carolina Division of Mitigation
Services (NCDMS). Neither Eco Terra nor NCDMS have the authority to
acquire the property by eminent domain. In addition, Eco Terra believes that
the agreed purchase price for the conservation easement area represents
the fair market value.
This letter is for your information, and you do not need to respond. As
always, please feel free to call me at 336-847-4566 with any questions.
Sincerely,
�'� P��
Ryan Perry
1111 Peachtree walk NE. STE 126. Atlanta, GA 30309 1 404.596.8004 : EcoTerra.com
W
F 11f01.0-1 Orl I t A )11'.A-1 CJINil IIF I(4 yVl: '411ny1,

U.S. Department of Agriculture
FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING
PART I (To be completed by Federal Agency)Date Of Land Evaluation Request
Name of Project Federal Agency Involved
Proposed Land Use County and State
PART II (To be completed by NRCS)Date Request Received By
NRCS
Person Completing Form:
Does the site contain Prime, Unique, Statewide or Local Important Farmland?
(If no, the FPPA does not apply - do not complete additional parts of this form)
YES NO Acres Irrigated Average Farm Size
Major Crop(s) Farmable Land In Govt. Jurisdiction
Acres: %
Amount of Farmland As Defined in FPPA
Acres: %
Name of Land Evaluation System Used Name of State or Local Site Assessment System Date Land Evaluation Returned by NRCS
Alternative Site Rating PART III (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Site A Site B Site C Site D
A. Total Acres To Be Converted Directly
B. Total Acres To Be Converted Indirectly
C. Total Acres In Site
PART IV (To be completed by NRCS) Land Evaluation Information
A. Total Acres Prime And Unique Farmland
B. Total Acres Statewide Important or Local Important Farmland
C. Percentage Of Farmland in County Or Local Govt. Unit To Be Converted
D. Percentage Of Farmland in Govt. Jurisdiction With Same Or Higher Relative Value
PART V (To be completed by NRCS) Land Evaluation Criterion
Relative Value of Farmland To Be Converted (Scale of 0 to 100 Points)
PART VI (To be completed by Federal Agency) Site Assessment Criteria
(Criteria are explained in 7 CFR 658.5 b. For Corridor project use form NRCS-CPA-106)
Maximum
Points Site A Site B Site C Site D
1. Area In Non-urban Use
(15)
2. Perimeter In Non-urban Use
(10)
3. Percent Of Site Being Farmed
(20)
4. Protection Provided By State and Local Government
(20)
5. Distance From Urban Built-up Area
(15)
6. Distance To Urban Support Services
(15)
7. Size Of Present Farm Unit Compared To Average
(10)
8. Creation Of Non-farmable Farmland
(10)
9. Availability Of Farm Support Services
(5)
10. On-Farm Investments
(20)
11. Effects Of Conversion On Farm Support Services
(10)
12. Compatibility With Existing Agricultural Use
(10)
TOTAL SITE ASSESSMENT POINTS 160
PART VII (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Relative Value Of Farmland (From Part V)100
Total Site Assessment (From Part VI above or local site assessment)160
TOTAL POINTS (Total of above 2 lines) 260
Site Selected: Date Of Selection
Was A Local Site Assessment Used?
YES NO
Reason For Selection:
Name of Federal agency representative completing this form: Date:
(See Instructions on reverse side) Form AD-1006 (03-02)
From:Smith, Heather
To:"Cortes, Milton - NRCS, Raleigh, NC"
Subject:RE: [External] RE: Boseman Buffer Site- Edgecombe County
Date:Thursday, August 1, 2019 8:03:49 AM
Attachments:AD1006_Boseman Buffer Site.pdf
image001.gif
Milton,
Here is the completed form for your records.
Thank you,
Heather Smith, LSSSenior Environmental Scientist
Venture I940 Main Campus Drive, Suite 500Raleigh, NC 27606-5217P 919.754.5019 | F 919.833.0034 [e-mail]
Engineers | Scientists | Planners | Designerswww.vhb.com
Proud to be named 2018 WTS Employer of the Year 
From: Cortes, Milton - NRCS, Raleigh, NC <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2019 12:07 PM
To: Smith, Heather <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [External] RE: Boseman Buffer Site- Edgecombe County
Importance: High
Heather:
Ok, attached the Farmland Conversion Impact Rating (AD1006) evaluation. Also, I attached
the Farmland Map I created out of the shape file you sent. For your reference.
If I can be of further assistance please let me know.
Best Regards;
Milton Cortes
State Soil Scientist
USDA NRCS
4407 Bland Rd., Suite 117
Raleigh, NC 27609
Desk: 919-873-2171
From: Smith, Heather <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2019 10:44 AM
To: Cortes, Milton - NRCS, Raleigh, NC <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [External] RE: Boseman Buffer Site- Edgecombe County

Milton, The revised package is attached.  Let me know if you need anything else for this. Thank you for your help with this! Heather Smith, LSSSenior Environmental Scientist

Venture I940 Main Campus Drive, Suite 500Raleigh, NC 27606-5217P 919.754.5019 | F 919.833.0034 [e-mail]
Engineers | Scientists | Planners | Designerswww.vhb.com
Proud to be named 2018 WTS Employer of the Year   
From: Cortes, Milton - NRCS, Raleigh, NC <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2019 7:52 AM
To: Smith, Heather <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [External] RE: Boseman Buffer Site- Edgecombe County
Importance: High

Heather:

I apologize. I thought that you had submitted an AD1006 request, before. Attached the set
of instructions I usually sent to our customers. It will give you two alternatives: 1. Created
the map as specified or 2. Send me a boundary shapefile of the area of interest. Either way
will work.

Thanks

Milton Cortes
USDA NRCS
Raleigh, NC
Desk: 919-873-2171

From: Smith, Heather <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2019 6:55 AM
To: Cortes, Milton - NRCS, Raleigh, NC <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [External] RE: Boseman Buffer Site- Edgecombe County

Milton,

If you send me an example of a map you need I can work on that. This is my first submitted like this.

Thanks,

Heather
Sent from my iPhone
On May 30, 2019, at 16:05, Cortes, Milton - NRCS, Raleigh, NC <[e-mail]> wrote:
Heather:

Please, can you send me the shape file of the Boseman Buffer Site? I need to
create a soils map, a map unit inventory and acreage inventory unless you
have a map like that.

Thanks

Milton Cortes
State Soil Scientist
USDA NRCS
4407 Bland Rd., Suite 117
Raleigh, NC 27609
Desk: 919-873-2171

From: Smith, Heather <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2019 3:49 PM
To: Cortes, Milton - NRCS, Raleigh, NC <[e-mail]>
Cc: Ted Griffith <[e-mail]>; Jamey O’Shaughnessey <[e-mail]>;
Sauls, Lane <[e-mail]>
Subject: Boseman Buffer Site- Edgecombe County

Milton, I am working on a categorical exclusion for a riparian buffer mitigation site in Battleboro inEdgecombe County.  Please find my attached Farmland Conversion Impact Rating Form AD-1006and site mapping.  Please let me know if you need any additional information. Thank you,
  Heather Smith, LSSSenior Environmental Scientist
 <image001.gif>
Venture I940 Main Campus Drive, Suite 500Raleigh, NC 27606-5217P 919.754.5019 | F 919.833.0034 [e-mail]
Engineers | Scientists | Planners | Designerswww.vhb.com
Proud to be named 2018 WTS Employer of the Year  
This communication and any attachments to this are confidential and intended only for the recipient(s). Any other use,
dissemination, copying, or disclosure of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us and destroy it immediately. VHB Engineering NC, P.C. is not responsible for
any undetectable alteration, transmission error, conversion, media degradation, software error, or interference with this
transmission.
VHB Engineering NC, P.C. | [e-mail]
This communication and any attachments to this are confidential and intended only for the recipient(s). Any other use,
dissemination, copying, or disclosure of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us and destroy it immediately. Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc. is not responsible
for any undetectable alteration, virus, transmission error, conversion, media degradation, software error, or interference
with this transmission or attachments to this transmission.
Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc. | [e-mail]
This electronic message contains information generated by the USDA solely for the
intended recipients. Any unauthorized interception of this message or the use or
disclosure of the information it contains may violate the law and subject the violator to
civil or criminal penalties. If you believe you have received this message in error, please
notify the sender and delete the email immediately.

\\gbldata\projects\Raleigh\39077.02 EcoTerra_Boseman_Site\docs\VARIOUS\Categorical Exclusion\WRC Letter.docx-NoPane.docx

July 8, 2019

Ref: 39077.02

Shannon Deaton
N.C. Wildlife Resource Commission
Division of Inland Fisheries
Habitat Conservation Program Manager
1721 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699

Re: Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site
Edgecombe County, North Carolina

Ms. Deaton,
VHB and Eco Terra, LLC request review and comment on any possible issues that may emerge with respect
to fish and wildlife issues associated with the proposed Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site. A USGS
Topographic Map and an Overview Site Map showing the approximate project area are enclosed.
The Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site is being developed to provide in-kind mitigation for unavoidable
riparian buffer impacts in the Tar-Pamlico River basin. The current stream channels lack a forested buffer
and the majority of the proposed project is currently in row crops. The site has been in agricultural use
since at least 1955.
Please feel free to contact me with any questions concerning this project.
Sincerely,
VHB Engineering NC, P.C.

Heather Smith, LSS
Senior Environmental Scientist
[e-mail]
919-754-5019

From:Dunn, Maria T.
To:Smith, Heather
Subject:RE: [External] Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site-FWCA Coordination
Date:Friday, July 26, 2019 3:28:49 PM
Dear Ms. Smith,

I have looked at the site located off NC Hwy 97 east of Rocky Mount for a NCDMS full delivery
project for riparian buffer mitigation in the Tar-Pamlico basin. The area is currently in agricultural use
with minimal to no buffer.

Since there was no detail provided regarding site plans, it is difficult to say whether or not the
project will provide successful mitigation. Site design is important to insure water quality and wildlife
benefits can be obtained through the project by means of floodplain connectivity, appropriate
vegetation, and travel corridors. The Tar River near this location is designated as critical habitat for
Atlantic sturgeon, is designated a primary nursery area, and has several listed fresh water mussels
within the river proper and some of its tributaries. Although these designations and species are not
present in the immediate project area, it is suggested if the project moves forward that
sedimentation and erosion control measures are appropriately installed and maintained throughout
project implementation to minimize introduced sediments to the system. Buffers larger than those
required by NCDWR for the Tar-Pamlico basin are appreciated in areas with listed species.

Thank you for the opportunity to review and provide comment. If I can be of additional service,
please do not hesitate to call or email.

Maria
------------------------------

Maria T. Dunn
Coastal Coordinator

NC Wildlife Resources Commission
943 Washington Sq. Mall
Washington, NC 27889
office: 252-948-3916
fax: [phone]

www.ncwildlife.org

Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

From: Smith, Heather <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, July 8, 2019 4:30 PM
To: Deaton, Shannon L. <[e-mail]>
Subject: [External] Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site-FWCA Coordination

CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an
attachment to [e-mail]

Shannon, Attached is the information for a new NCDMS full delivery project in the Tar-Pamlico River basin.  The project isa riparian buffer mitigation project, covering approximately, 15 acres. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you, Heather Smith, LSSSenior Environmental Scientist

Venture I940 Main Campus Drive, Suite 500Raleigh, NC 27606-5217P 919.754.5019 | F 919.833.0034 [e-mail]
Engineers | Scientists | Planners | Designerswww.vhb.com
Proud to be named 2018 WTS Employer of the Year  

This communication and any attachments to this are confidential and intended only for the recipient(s). Any other use, dissemination,
copying, or disclosure of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us and
destroy it immediately. VHB Engineering NC, P.C. is not responsible for any undetectable alteration, transmission error, conversion,
media degradation, software error, or interference with this transmission.
VHB Engineering NC, P.C. | [e-mail]
This communication and any attachments to this are confidential and intended only for the recipient(s). Any other use, dissemination,
copying, or disclosure of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us and
destroy it immediately. Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc. is not responsible for any undetectable alteration, virus, transmission error,
conversion, media degradation, software error, or interference with this transmission or attachments to this transmission.
Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc. | [e-mail]

Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

\\vhb\gbl\proj\Raleigh\39077.02 EcoTerra_Boseman_Site\docs\VARIOUS\Categorical Exclusion\USFWS Letter.docx-NoPane.docx

July 23, 2019

Ref: 39077.02

John Ellis
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Raleigh Field Office
Fish & Wildlife Biologist
P.O. Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726

Re: Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site
Edgecombe County, North Carolina

Mr. Ellis,
VHB and Eco Terra, LLC request review and comment on any possible issues that may emerge with respect
to fish, wildlife, or migratory bird issues associated with the proposed Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site. A
USGS Topographic Map and an Overview Site Map showing the approximate project area are enclosed.
The Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site is being developed to provide in-kind mitigation for unavoidable
riparian buffer impacts in the Tar-Pamlico River basin. The current stream channels lack a forested buffer
and the majority of the proposed project is currently in row crops. The site has been in agricultural use
since at least 1955.
Please feel free to contact me with any questions concerning this project.
Sincerely,
VHB Engineering NC, P.C.

Heather Smith, LSS
Senior Environmental Scientist
[e-mail]
919-754-5019

\\gbldata\projects\Raleigh\39077.02 EcoTerra_Boseman_Site\docs\VARIOUS\Mitigaiton Plan\Final\Response to DWR Comments Cover Letter.docx

January 23, 2020

Ref: 39077.02

NCDWR
1617 Mail Service Center,
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617

Re: DWR# 2019-0800 Boseman Mitigation Plan NCDWR Comments

Katie Merritt,
Please find the attached response to your comment letter dated, January 21, 2020. If you have any
questions please contact me at 919-754-5019 or email at [e-mail]

Sincerely,
VHB Engineering NC, P.C.

Heatther Smith, LSS
Senior Environmental Scientist
[e-mail]

CC: Lindsay Crocker, NCDMS
Ted Griffith, Eco Terra

Boseman Riparian Buffer Mitigation Plan DWR# 2019-0800 DWR staff (Katie Merritt) Comments
submitted 1/21/2020:
I . General Comments:
a. There is reference to an In-Lieu Fee Instrument on cover page. This instrument is for stream &
wetland compensatory mitigation. DWR & DMS have not entered into an Instrument governing
the operations and procedures for the delivery of Buffer Mitigation or Nutrient Offset. Please
remove reference. The reference has been removed.
b. Note that this site cannot be used to generate nutrient offset credits since no nutrient offset are
being proposed for DWR review and approval. If nutrient offset credits are proposed for this site,
DMS must provide an asset table and corresponding asset map that shows where Nutrient offsets
are proposed. The Site is not being proposed for nutrient offset and no nutrient offset credits are
included in the Mitigation Plan.
c. Consistent misuse of the term "riparian buffer" or "buffer" is used throughout the text and can
lead to confusion or misleading information. These terms are only to be used to describe the Tar-
Pamlico buffer, which is 0-50' from top of bank and has a Zone I & Zone 2. This also excludes
Ephemeral's. Please correct terminology where it is being misused and replace with " riparian
area" where applicable. Added “and adjacent riparian areas” where applicable. Kept the credit
type as “Riparian Buffer”
• Example: "The project includes the restoration of riparian buffers and adjacent riparian areas. "
2. Section 1.0
a. Page I, I st paragraph:
• Add language to clarify this site is being submitted for buffer mitigation credits to be
used in the 03020101 8-digit HUC of the Tar-Pamlico River Basin. Added “in the 03020101
8-digit HUC of the Tar-Pamlico River Basin (Figure 2).
• The riparian buffer credits are shown as 617,394.032. Add “ft2” for the unit. The “ft2”
unit has been added.
3. Add a service area map to the Figures. The Service area map should show the 03020101 8- digit
HUC of the Tar-Pamlico River Basin being serviced by this project. Added Figure 2 and updated
subsequent Figure numbers.
4. Section 2.0
a. Table I : clarify that 621,810 ft2 includes "riparian buffers and adjacent riparian areas
Added adjacent riparian areas.
b. Table 2 has unrealistic expectations for Initial Planting Date
Updated to March 2020
c. Table 3: when comparing to Table 9, the Restored buffer areas in this table are
inconsistent. UTl should be 490,568, but this table says 484,131; UT2 reach 2a should be
1.80 acres & 78,590ft; and UT2 reach 2b should be 1.21 acres & 52,652. Please explain.
(please note, that the 25% of the total mitigated area for ephemerals is calculated before
applying any ratios from the rule".) Updated Table 3 to be consistent with Table 9. The
percentage of mitigation on the ephemeral channel was calculated using total area not
buffer mitigation credits. 78,590 sq.ft./621,810 sq.ft.= 0.12639 or 12.6%. This is shown on
Table 9.

5. Section 2.6: Provide directions to the site & I didn't see where the Lat & Long were provided.
Added directions in Section 2.6. Lat/Long is in Table 2, under Geographic Location (decimal
degrees)
6. Section 2.7: correct typo for rule from 0.029 to .0295 Typo has been corrected.
7. Section 5.1: no mentioning of sediment & erosion control measures proposed. With this site's slope
along UTl & UT2, and the disking that will be necessary for site preparation, please explain how stormwater runoff during a rain event during site preparation, will be controlled such that sediment loss to the streams is prevented? Also need to clarify that the herbicide used will be one that is safe
for the stream systems and will be applied by a licensed sprayer. Updated the paragraph to the following, “The land proposed for buffer restoration is currently in agricultural production. The planting rows will be ripped to improve soil compaction prior to planting in the upland areas. Sediment and erosion control measures will be used to prevent sediment from entering the streams during a rain event and may include sediment and erosion control fencing. Pre-emergent aquatic safe herbicide will be used in the tree rows to control potential herbaceous weed competition. Additional post planting herbicide will be used within the planting rows for at least the first three
years as needed. The fields within the project area contain limited number of invasive plants and an aquatic safe herbicide, such as Rodeo, will only be sprayed in areas where there is an existing population of non-native invasive plant species. All herbicide will be applied by a licensed herbicide applicator. In the event that drain tiles are found during construction, they will be removed.” 8. Section 5.2: Planting a permanent seed mix that is abundant in annual and perennial pollinator
species is strictly voluntary but is being encouraged by DWR in other mitigation plans to promote
diversity and enhance the health of the herbaceous layer, which can also greatly benefit planted
stems. Planting in January 2020 is not likely. Change this date. A permanent seed mix is included
in Table 8. The planting date was updated to March 2020.
9. Section 5.3, last sentence: change to "All areas within 115 feet from features as measured
perpendicular from the tops of banks will be devoted to generate buffer mitigation credits"
Added sentence as stated above.
10. Table 9: This table needs additional information in order for DWR to confirm the information
provided is compliant with the rules.
a. Add columns for "Mitigation Type", "Total Area" (this is the area measured before ratios
are applied),"% Full Credit", "Final Credit Ratio" and complete the table. The Credit Ratio
column in the table doesn't follow the rule. It should be either 1:1, 2:1, 5:1 or 10:1
depending on the Mitigation Type (see 0295 (m) & (n)). The 3.03030 ratio should be in
the "Final Credit Ratio" column that you add. This column is where you apply the Credit
Ratio & % Full Credits columns. Updated Table 9 per the November 2019 “Project Credit
Table Template” found on NCDEQs website.
b. Change "Buffer Width" column to be "Min-Max Buffer Width" and complete the table.
Updated Table 9 per the November 2019 “Project Credit Table Template” found on
NCDEQs website.
c. Showing the width as 30-100 can imply the top of bank to thirty feet is not part of the
project. Therefore, it is preferred that the table actually show what the minimum­
maximum widths are with the applicable ratios applied. Example: if the minimum width is
top of bank and the max is 100, use 0-100' to describe the riparian areas within that min-
max buffer width and apply the applicable ratios and % reductions. Updated Table 9 per
the November 2019 “Project Credit Table Template” found on NCDEQs website.
d. Add " ft2 to the BMU column- Updated Table 9 per the November 2019 “Project Credit
Table Template” found on NCDEQs website.
e. There is not enough information to confirm that the calcs used to determine the
"creditable area" for the riparian areas adjacent to the ephemeral is correct and compliant
with 0295 (o)(7). Adding the "Total Area" column to the table will assist with this. See
previous comment in 3c. Updated Table 9 per the November 2019 “Project Credit Table
Template” found on NCDEQs website. The percentage of mitigation on the ephemeral
channel was calculated using total area not buffer mitigation credits. 78,590
sq.ft./621,810 sq.ft.= 0.12639 or 12.6%. This is shown on Table 9.

11. Section 6.0
a. Recommend combining sections 6.0 & 7.0 and adding more clarity such that DWR can
confirm compliance of .0295 (2)(B & E) and (4) is met. Combined Section 6.0 and 7.0.
b. Instead of Success Criteria, please use "Performance Standards" to be consistent with
.0295 terminology. Changed “Success Criteria” to “Performance Standards”
c. No clear understanding of the data collected is provided. What exactly will be collected?
DWR requires the Quantity & Quality of the stems in the plots be provided in monitoring
reports. Therefore, it is expected that heights of species counting towards your perf.
Criteria are included in the data along with the species name. Are you including Planted
& Volunteers? CVS level 1 implies no volunteers are being counted and collected, just
checking. CVS Level II will be used. Included information in Section 6.1 that vigor, height
and DBH, where applicable, will be recorded.
d. More detail needs to be provided. Provide information on what will be recorded in the
plots, will they be rotating or random plots, what size and shape are the plots, do they
make up a certain percentage of the planted area? Added in Section 6.1 that the plots will
be permanent 100 m2 and that the 12 plots account for 2% of the planted area of 621,810
sq.ft.
e. Need to include a Figure to reference here, showing the plot placement of your 12 plots.
Plot placement will need to be representative of the entire mitigation area, 0- 200' from
each tributary. Plot placement shown on Figure 9.
f Vegetation (7. I) - This paragraph is not 100% accurate. According to the 0295 (n)(2),
there are more parameters than just 260 stems/acre. Please correct. Added information
about having 4 native hardwood tree and shrub species and that no species will
constitute more than 50%.
12. Section 8.0 - This section describes what DENR stewardship will do. But what is the Provider
expected to do during their monitoring years 1-5? Identify how the boundary will be marked at
as-built. It says the stewardship program will install signage. . .but isn't that done at closeout? If
so, the provider needs to install their own temporary signs and mark the easement boundary
before As-Built as to avoid any confusion of where the boundaries are. Added information stating
Provider will install signage prior to as-builts.
13. Section 4.0- Thank you for providing the summary of the Cat. Ex findings. These findings
reference letters and correspondence in the Appendix, but I did not see the supporting materials
and correspondence provided. Can this be provided? EDR summary was provided. The entire
Categorical Exclusion package is included in Appendix C.
14. Figure 3:
a. Label the reaches so it can be compared to Table 3. Added reaches.
b. Identify what the drainage area is, not just the location of the drainage area. Are they
being shown in miles or acres? I'm assuming Table 3 should align with this figure. Added
drainage area in acres to figure.
15. Figure 7:
a. Do not use the Credit Ratio to describe the areas. Show the buffer widths as they are
provided in Table 9. It is preferred to show them as 0-100' and 101-??' for this particular
project. Changed to 0’-100’ and 101’-200’. I kept the 101’-200’ consistent with what was
selectable in November 2019 “Project Credit Table Template” so Table 9 would match the
figures.
b. Identify the riparian areas adjacent to the ephemeral channel separately from the area
adjacent to the streams. Use a different color. Distinguished between all reaches and
credit area by color on figure.

16. Was there an AD-1006 form required? The entire Categorical Exclusion package is included in
Appendix C, which includes the AD-1006 form.
17. Overall, if the riparian restoration, enhancement and preservation is done according to the plan
and addresses all comments and corrections provided by DWR, the site should provide a good
buffer mitigation project.
A response to all comments above, along with edits made to the final draft are requested by DWR prior to
final review & issuance of any plan approval. No work is to be done on the site until written DWR
approval has been provided in accordance with 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (n)(2).