20200018 Ver 1_Technical Proposal_20191029

W YLDLA NDS
ENGINEERING
August 13, 2019
Ms. Marjorie Barber
NC DEQ-Division of Mitigation Services
217 West Jones Street, Suite 3409-1
Raleigh, NC 27603
RE: Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Proposal — Laurel Valley Mitigation Site
Catawba River Basin Cataloging Unit 03050101; Burke County, NC
In response to RFP 16-007875 - Full Delivery Project
Dear Ms, Barber,
As an authorized representative of Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands), I am pleased to present to
the NC Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) the following proposal to provide stream credits in the
Catawba River Basin (Cataloging Unit 03050101) in response to RFP 16-007975. This proposal is a firm
offer from Wildlands and remains open for acceptance by the NC Department of Environmental Quality
(DEQ) until February 9, 2020, which is 180 days from the closing date of the above -referenced RFP.
As a fully licensed engineering firm, Wildlands will serve as the contracting entity and lead designer with
Kee Mapping & Surveying providing professional surveying services. The key individuals on the
Wildlands Team have worked together on numerous projects over multiple years and will operate
smoothly as a cohesive unit.
Wildlands is committed to creating an excellent ecological restoration project at the Laurel Valley
Mitigation Site and is proposing two options using a combination of stream restoration and
preservation. Option 1 will develop 4,875 warm stream credits while Option 2 will develop 4,450 warm
stream credits.
The Site is an active cattle farm and includes East Prong Hunting Creek and its tributaries. Cattle
currently have access to all Site streams with the exception of UT1 Reach 1. Site streams are severely
eroded throughout and have poor bedform diversity due to embeddedness. Perched culverts bisect
each of the tributaries, impacting aquatic habitat passage. This project will improve water quality and
ecology in this watershed through cattle exclusion, buffer reforestation, reconnecting streams to the
historic floodplain, restoring stream dimension and function, and reconnecting fragmented habitats.
Wildlands' Laurel Valley Mitigation Site submittal includes one signed, original Technical Proposal; four
photocopies of the Technical Proposal; one U5B flash drive containing one electronic copy of the
Technical Proposal and the Project Site boundaries in ArCGIS format; one signed, original Cost Proposal;
and one photocopy of the Cost Proposal. All paper contained within this proposal is 100% recycled, 30%
post -consumer content.
With our diverse, yet unified team we offer the expertise, understanding_, and commitment to ensure
this project's success.
Sincerely,
khawn'wilkerson, President
WWildlands Engineering, Inc. (P) 704.332.7754 • (F) 704.332.3306 • 1430 South Mint St, Suite 104 1 Chariotte, NC 28203

0
�,1, �STATF 0,,
�FSSE QUA/
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Request for Proposal #
16-007875
For internal State agency processing, including tabulation of proposals in the Interactive Purchasing
System (IPS), please provide your company's Federal Employer Identification Number or alternate
identification number (e.g. Social Security Number). Pursuant to G.S. 132-1.10(b) this identification number
shall not be released to the public. This page will be removed and shredded, or otherwise kept
confidential, before the procurement file is made available for public inspection.
This page is to be filled out and returned with your proposal.
Failure to do so may subject your proposal to rejection.
ID Number:
56-0651376
Federal ID Number or Social Security Number
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Vendor Name
Sealed, mailed or hand delivered responses ONLY will be accepted for this
solicitation.

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Quality
Refer ALL Inquiries regarding this RFP to:
Request for Proposal #: 16-007875
Marjorie Barber
M a d o rie. ha rbe rp_ned enr-gov
Proposals will be publicly opened: August 13, 2019
[phone]
Contract Type: Open Market
Using Agency: Division of Mitigation Services
Commodity No. and Description:962-73
Requisition No.: N/A
Restoration ! Reclamation Services of Land
and other Properties
EXECUTION
In compliance with this Request for Proposals (RFP), and subject to all the conditions herein, the undersigned Vendor offers and
agrees to furnish and deliver any or all items upon which prices are bid, at the prices set opposite each item within the time
specified herein. By executing this proposal, the undersigned Vendor certifies that this proposal is submitted competitively and
without collusion (G,S. 143-54), that none of its officers, directors, or owners of an unincorporated business entity has been
convicted of any violations of Chapter 78A of the General Statutes, the Securities Act of 1933, or the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (G.S. 143-59,2), and that it is not an ineligible Vendor as set forth in G.S. 143-59.1. False certification is a Class I felony.
Furthermore, by executing this proposal, the undersigned certifies to the best of Vendor's knowledge and belief, that it and its
principals are not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible or voluntarily excluded from covered
transactions by any Federal or State department or agency. As required by G.S. 143A&5, the undersigned Vendor certifies that
it, and each of its sub -Contractors for any Contract awarded as a result of this RFP, complies with the requirements of Article 2 of
Chapter 54 of the NO General Statutes, including the requirement for each employer with more than 25 employees in North
Carolina to verify the work authorization of its employees through the federal E-Verify system. G.S. 133-32 and Executive Order
24 (2009) prohibit the offer to, or acceptance by, any State Employee associated with the preparing plans, specifications, estimates
for public Contract; or awarding or administering public Contracts; or inspecting or supervising delivery of the public Contract of
any gift from anyone with a Contract with the State, or from any person seeking to do business with the State. By execution of this
response to the RFP, the undersigned certifies, for your entire organization and its employees or agents, that you are not aware
that any such gift has been offered, accepted, or promised by any employees of your organization.
Failure to execute/sign proposal prior to submittal shall render proposal invalid and it WILL BE REJECTED.
Late proposals cannot be accepted.
COMPLETEIFORMAL NAME OF VENDOR:
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
STREET ADDRESS:
P.O. Box:
ZIP:
1430 S. Mint Street, Suite 104
nla
28203
CITY & STATE & ZIP:
TELEPHONE NUMBER:
TOLL FREE TEL. NO:
Charlotte, NC 28203
[phone]
nla
PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS ADDRESS IF DIFFERENT FROM ABOVE (SEE INSTRUCTIONS TO VENDORS ITEM #12):
nla
PRINT NAME & TITLE OF PERSON SIGNING ON BEHALF OF VENDOR:
FAX NUMBER:
Shawn D. Wilkerson, President
[phone]
VE R'S AUHQ SIGNATURE :
DATE:
EMAIL:
08/1312019
[e-mail]
Oft(r valid for at least 180 days from date of proposal opening. After this time, any withdrawal of offer shall be made in writing,
effective upon receipt by the agency issuing this RFP.
ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL
If any or all parts of this proposal are accepted by the State of North Carolina, an authorized representative of the Department of
Environmental quality shall affix hislher signature hereto and this document and all provisions of this Request for Proposal
along with the Vendor proposal response and the written results of any negotiations shall then constitute the written agreement
between the parties. A copy of this acceptance will be forwarded to the successful Vendors},
FOR STATE USE ONLY: Offer accept and Contract awarded this day of , 2019, as indicated on the
attached certification, by
[Authorized Representative of department of Environmental Quality]
ver. -ierjna

PART D - Executive Summary
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) is proposing two options to provide warm stream credits within
the Catawba River Basin Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03050101 at the Laurel Valley Mitigation Site (Site)
in Burke County, NC. The project will include restoration and preservation of East Prong Hunting Creek
and two of its unnamed tributaries (UT1 and UT2). In Option 1, UT1 will tie to East Prong Hunting Creek
within the Site limits and provide 4,875 warm stream credits. In Option 2, UT1 will tie to the existing
offsite receiving channel and provide 4,450 warm stream credits. Wildlands has recorded options to
acquire up to 13 acres of conservation easement on the Site.
The Site is an active cattle farm, and the
streams are in various stages of impact due to
cattle grazing and perched culverts. Cattle
currently have access to all of the Site streams
except UT1 Reach 1. Site streams are in various
stages of evolution, with a predominant
condition of extensive erosion and incision.
While instream habitats such as riffles and
pools are present, they are impacted by
embeddedness from bank erosion. Large woody
debris (LWD) is minimal within the Site. The
riparian buffer along East Prong Hunting Creek
and UT2 is narrow to nonexistent and upland
erosion from grazing areas reaches Site streams
unfiltered. The riparian buffer along UT1 Reach
2 exists generally along one side.
This project will improve water quality and ecology through riparian buffer establishment, stream and
habitat restoration, exclusion of livestock and farm equipment, and alleviation of perched culverts,
resulting in a decrease in nutrient and sediment loads from the Site and improved aquatic and terrestrial
habitat. The specific evaluation criteria outlined in the Division of Mitigation's (DMS's) Request for
Proposals will be met as summarized in Part G of this proposal.
In summary, the mitigation plan for the Site will include the following:
• Cattle exclusion from the Site's streams and riparian buffers;
• Reconnection of incised streams to their historic floodplain;
• Enhancement of habitat functions through in -stream structures and native riparian buffers;
• Protection for stream channels from further channel manipulation and vegetation impact for
agricultural purposes;
• Reduction of sediment and nutrient loadings by filtering overland runoff from agricultural fields
and providing treatment through protected buffers;
• Generation of either 4,875 or 4,450 warm stream credits through restoration and preservation;
and
• Conservation of up to 13 acres of restored land in perpetuity.
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART D
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page D.1

PART E - Corporate Background and Experience
1.0 Corporate Background
The Wildlands Team is a multidisciplinary group of professionals that brings together the expertise
necessary to create outstanding ecological restoration projects in a timely and cost-effective manner.
Wildlands, the primary offeror, is headquartered in Charlotte, NC. Wildlands has offices in Charlotte, NC;
Raleigh, NC; Asheville, NC; Charleston, SC; and Fairfax, VA. Our 62 employees dedicated to
environmental restoration have positioned Wildlands as a leader in ecosystem restoration in the
southeastern United States.
Wildlands has teamed with Kee Mapping & Surveying (Kee) for survey and easement services for the
Site. Kee is a well -established professional land surveying firm based out of Asheville, NC. Kee has
worked on a variety of projects with Wildlands staff and their experience includes geomorphic
assessment surveys, Global Positioning System (GPS) control for NC State Plane survey work, boundary
surveys for property net verification, easement platting, legal descriptions, and easement
monumentation. Early coordination and frequent communication ensures that everyone understands
their role in the project and can complete tasks in a timely and efficient manner.
Wildlands will consider one of the following five contractors specializing in
stream work or another qualified contractor:
• Baker Grading, based in Old Fort, NC
• Carolina Environmental Contracting, Inc., based in Mount Airy, NC
• KBS Earthworks, based in Julian, NC
• Land Mechanic Designs, Inc., based in Willow Spring, NC
• North State Environmental, Inc., based in Winston Salem, NC
2.0 Ability to Complete all Phases of the Proposal
Wildlands' success is owed to the skills and abilities of its diverse and
talented staff. Wildlands' staff expertise includes planning, ecology, biology, economics, civil
engineering, real estate, AutoCAD, Geographic Information System (GIS), land management,
environmental consulting, and habitat construction. Our collection of professionals allows for a seamless
approach to planning, permitting, design, construction, and management of restoration projects. We
fully understand the permitting process at the federal, state, and local level. Wildlands has five NC
Certified Floodplain Managers (CFMs) on staff to address local, state, and FEMA floodplain permitting
requirements. We have extensive experience with categorical exclusions, 401/404 permitting, and
sediment and erosion control plans.
3.0 Similar Projects
Wildlands has completed numerous projects involving stream restoration, wetland restoration, and
mitigation banking. Several of these projects are summarized below
Lyle Creek Mitigation Site, Catawba County, NC- Wildlands completed
ecological restoration work at a site northwest of Lake Norman in
Catawba County, NC. The project provided 5,571 stream credits and 7.0
wetland credits on unnamed tributaries to Lyle Creek in the Catawba
river basin. The project included categorical exclusion documentation,
existing conditions assessment, landowner coordination, conservation
easement acquisition, stream and wetland restoration design,
permitting, construction, and post -construction monitoring.
Construction was completed in 2012. This project was successfully
closed out in 2019.
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART E
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Page E.1

Henry Fork Mitigation Site, Catawba County, NC- This project, which
involves the reclamation of a former golf course, will deliver 4,500
stream credits and 4.0 wetland credits through restoration and
enhancement of streams and rehabilitation, re-establishment, and
enhancement of wetlands. In addition, outside of the credited activities,
Wildlands purchased the expansive floodplain of the Henry Fork river,
which was placed in permanent conservation easement at no credit as a
value-added benefit of the project. The project is currently in the fourth
year of post -construction monitoring.
Owl's Den Mitigation Site, Lincoln County, NC- Wildlands is developing
a full -delivery project in Lincoln County on two unnamed tributaries to
Howards Creek. The project is expected to provide 2,400 stream credits
in the Catawba river basin and 8.0 wetland credits via wetland re-
establishment, rehabilitation, and enhancement. The project includes
categorical exclusion documentation, existing conditions assessment,
landowner coordination, conservation easement acquisition, stream
and wetland restoration design, permitting, construction, and seven
years of post -construction monitoring. Detailed hydrologic modeling
was completed to study wetland -groundwater connections. This project
is in the fourth year of post -construction monitoring.
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site, Alexander County, NC -This project will
provide 4,058 stream credits on two unnamed tributaries of Elk Shoals
Creek in the Catawba River Basin. The project will decrease nutrient and
sediment loads from the watershed by eliminating widespread bank
erosion, connecting the onsite streams to their floodplains, and
restoring native riparian buffers. The project will create significant
ecological improvement through exclusion of cattle from the stream
and through restoration of aquatic and terrestrial habitats on
headwater systems. Construction is expected to begin in early 2020. The
project is currently in the design phase.
Lone Hickory Mitigation Site, Yadkin County, NC- This project is
expected to provide 12,900 stream credits and 8.0 wetland credits in
the Yadkin River basin. The site includes a steep, confined valley stream
channel on the eastern portion of the site and a flatter stream -wetland
complex near the South Deep Creek floodplain on the western portion
of the site. The project includes stream and wetland restoration design,
hydrologic modeling for wetland design, permitting, construction, and
post -construction monitoring. Construction was completed in spring
2019 and the site is currently in the post -construction monitoring phase.
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART E
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Page E.2

Big Harris Creek Mitigation Site, Cleveland County, NC- This project will
provide approximately 25,836 stream credits in the Broad River basin.
The project includes stream enhancement and restoration design, water
quality Best Management Practices (BMPs) design, permitting,
construction, and five years of post -construction monitoring. Nine
storm water BMPs have been implemented to treat agricultural runoff.
This agricultural watershed is impacted by bank erosion and loss of
riparian buffer. Wildlands negotiated credit development with the IRT
to recognize a lighter touch approach directed at distinct functional
stressors within the system. Construction was completed in spring 2018
and the project is now in the second year of post -construction
monitoring.
Scaly Bark Creek Mitigation Site, Stanly County, NC— Wildlands
performed ecological restoration work at a site near Albemarle, NC. The
full -delivery project delivered 6,415 stream credits on Scaly Bark Creek
and six unnamed tributaries in the Yadkin River basin for DMS. The
project included categorical exclusion documentation, existing
conditions assessment, landowner coordination, conservation easement
acquisition, restoration design, permitting, construction, and five years
of post -construction monitoring. Wildlands successfully completed
CLOMR and LOMR packages for this project. This project was
successfully closed out in 2016.
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site, Union County, NC- Wildlands is
developing a full -delivery project in rural Union County on Norkett
Branch and four tributaries. The project is expected to provide 10,098
stream credits for DMS in the Yadkin river basin. The project includes
existing site assessment, conservation easement acquisition, permitting,
stream restoration design, construction, and seven years of post -
construction monitoring of geomorphic stability and vegetation.
Detailed hydraulic modeling was completed for CLOMR and LOMR
approvals. Two stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) were
constructed to treat headwater agricultural runoff and will provide
stream credits. This project is currently in the sixth year of post -
construction monitoring.
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site, Rockingham County, NC -
Wildlands performed ecological restoration work at a site in Reidsville,
NC. The full -delivery project provided 4,900 stream credits and 12.7
wetland credits on Little Troublesome Creek, Irvin Creek, and one of its
unnamed tributaries in the Cape Fear river basin for DMS. The project
included categorical exclusion documentation, existing conditions
assessment, landowner coordination, conservation easement
acquisition, stream and wetland restoration design, permitting,
construction, and five years of post -construction monitoring. Wildlands
also performed detailed hydraulic modeling of the proposed restoration
design for CLOMR and LOMR submittals to satisfy FEMA requirements.
This project was successfully closed out in 2017.
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART E
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Page E.3

4.0 Lead Consultant and Team Members
Wildlands is a licensed engineering firm in NC and will act as prime consultant for this contract. Staff
from our Charlotte, NC and Asheville, NC offices will complete this project. Wildlands has teamed with
Kee to offer the best possible team to DMS. As indicated above in Section 1.0, Wildlands will select a
specialty stream contractor from our provided list of qualified firms.
LEAD CONSULTANT
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. - Headquarters
Charlotte, NC Office Location
oft 1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104
AW Charlotte, NC 28203
WILDLANDS (P) 704.332.7754 (F) 704.332.3306
E N G I N E E R I N G
TEAM MEMBERS
Firm Contact:
Shawn Wilkerson, President; [e-mail]
North Carolina S-Corporation
Federal Identification Number: 56-0651376
Asheville, NC Office Location
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
167-B Haywood Road
Asheville, NC 28806
Kee Mapping and Surveying, PA
P.O. Box 2566
Asheville, NC 28802
1-4 (P) 828.575.9021
Firm Contact:
Phillip Brad Kee, PLS; [e-mail]
Services to be Provided: Professional surveying services
5.0 Project Manager Experience
Mr. Neuhaus serves as a water resources engineer in Wildlands' Asheville office. He has eight years of
experience working on a variety of projects including stream and wetland restoration, stormwater
management, erosion and sediment control, hydrologic modeling, and groundwater modeling. Mr.
Neuhaus' duties include field data collection, site analysis, design development, preparation of
construction plans, earthwork estimation, construction administration, and post -construction
monitoring of mitigation sites. He also provides hydrologic modeling and water budget analysis including
groundwater modeling for wetland restoration projects. Additional information on Mr. Neuhaus's
experience is provided below in Section 7.0.
6.0 Project Approach
The Wildlands Team takes a holistic, integrated approach to site restoration. The following text outlines
some key aspects of our multi -disciplinary project approach. Site -specific project plans are further
described in Part G of this proposal.
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART E
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page EA

6.1 Site Selection
The Wildlands Team carefully selects project sites where ecological
restoration can be maximized. Our sites are reviewed by our
environmental scientists and engineers during the selection process
to ensure that ecological uplift can be achieved within regulatory
parameters related to floodplain management, protected species,
and existing wetland resources. We consult with the existing
landowners to explain the restoration process and the conservation
easement conditions. We review the site with our contractor to
identify potential construction challenges and opportunities.
6.2 Property Owner Coordination
Property owner coordination begins during the site selection stage and continues throughout the
project. We meet with families to understand the existing and future land use plans for the site. We
work to fully explain the restoration process and review site plans at the conceptual design stage and
final design stage with the property owners to make sure that their concerns are addressed. Our project
manager is the point of contact throughout the project so that the property owners always know who
can answer any questions that may arise.
6.3 Contractor Coordination
Wildlands draws on our contractor's construction expertise early in the project planning phase. We
consult with our contractor so that the project can be designed and constructed in an efficient and cost-
effective manner. We work to identify on -site materials that are native to the existing ecosystem and
that should be incorporated into the restoration project to best mimic natural systems for the site
locale. For example, cobble material embedded in excavated material on mountain stream sites can be
sorted and used for riffle construction. We also know that coordination and flexibility during
construction is the key to a successful restoration site.
6.4 Site Assessment
Numerous methods of assessment are used to quantify and qualify
the site and upstream watershed's stability, nutrient loads, sediment
transport, hydrologic and hydraulic properties, plant and animal
habitat, ecology, soil conditions, and functional uplift potential. Our
assessment is carried out by surveyors trained in natural channel
assessment and by field scientists and engineers trained in stream
and wetland assessment and design who know what characteristics
to look for that will aid in design. Wildlands looks for predictors of
future stability problems, such as upstream development and
concentrated overland flow paths.
6.5 Permitting
A project's schedule can be completely disrupted if the permitting for the project is not performed
correctly. The Wildlands Team understands the critical steps necessary for acquiring these permits in a
timely and efficient manner. Methods used to ensure a rapid permitting process include on -site
meetings with the various permitting agency representatives prior to design, as well as staying up-to-
date on the regulations associated with ecosystem restoration. These steps allow for the submittal of a
thorough and accurate permitting application for our projects.
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART E
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page E.5

6.6 Site Design
Once the existing conditions are documented and evaluated, the preferred alternative selected, and
base -mapping developed, a design discharge range is selected based on the project goals. Natural
channel design parameters will be developed based on reference reach data, hydraulic modeling, and
sediment transport assessment. Wildlands has five CFMs on staff who can evaluate design options to
optimize floodplain function and minimize off -site adverse flood elevation impacts. During the
preliminary design the plan view channel location is set, cross -sections for riffles and pools are designed,
and in -stream habitat and grade control structures are located. General grading limits, details, and
easement locations are included at this stage. Property owner input and contractor coordination help to
assure that the proposed design meets the multi -faceted design goals.
6.7 Construction
The Wildlands Team is familiar with the policies, procedures, and {
practices necessary to construct natural channel design and wetland
restoration projects. Wildlands has provided construction {
administration and observation services for over 72 miles of stream v
work and 444 acres of wetland work.
6.8 Monitoring
Monitoring is an important component to any stream restoration or
enhancement work. The Wildlands Team has experience in both developing monitoring plans for
mitigation projects and in implementing those plans. Our monitoring plan experience includes as -built
surveys and determining whether the project has met its success criteria after the required time period.
7.0 Key Personnel Resumes (Prime and Subconsultant)
This section provides resumes for the Wildlands project manager and the managing staff for our survey
subcontractor on this project. An additional description of the Wildlands project manager's abilities is
provided in Section 5.0. Resumes for remaining personnel on the team are provided in Part F.
Eric Neuhaus, PE — Wildlands Project Manager
Mr. Neuhaus has eight years of experience in executing a wide variety of water resources planning and
engineering projects.
JOB CLASSIFICATION: Water Resources Engineer
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THIS PROJECT: Project Manager; Design; Permitting
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS: Professional Engineer (NC)
TOTAL YEARS EXPERIENCE: 8 years
EDUCATION: MS, Biological Systems Engineering, Virginia Tech, 2013
BS, Civil Engineering, University of Tennessee, 2010
ADDITIONAL TRAINING: Rogen Level I — 111, 2015-2017
River Course 101 - Stream Morphology and Assessment, 2013
River Course 201 - Natural Channel Design Principles, 2013
HEC-RAS (ASCE), 2013
Stream Restoration Design Techniques, 2012
Sediment Transport Fundamentals, 2012
Stormwater Design and Erosion and Sediment Control
Techniques, 2009
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART E
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page E.6

PROJECT EXPERIENCE AT WILDLANDS
Banner Farm Mitigation Site
Henderson County, NC
Wyant Lands Mitigation Site
Lincoln County, NC
Owl's Den Mitigation Site
Lincoln County, NC
Big Harris Creek Mitigation Site
_Cleveland County, NC
Candy Creek Mitigation Site
Guilford County, NC
Henry Fork Mitigation Site
Catawba County, NC
PROJECT DETAILS
PROJECT ROLE
6,194 stream credits;
16.0 wetland credits
Project Manager
6,800 stream credits;
12.0 wetland credits
Project Manager
2,400 stream credits;
Design; Modeling;
8.0 wetland credits
Construction Administration
25,836 stream credits;
Construction Administration
9 BMPs
I
15,456 stream credits I Design
4,500 stream credits; Design; Modeling;
4.0 wetland credits Construction Administration
Reedy Creek Design -Build Stream 25,974 stream credits Design
Restoration Project Charlotte, NC
Brad Kee, PLS—Surveyor Subconsultant
With over 20 years of experience in land surveying, Mr. Kee has been a leader in providing high quality
site surveys for clients ranging from land developers to conservation agencies. Mr. Kee is experienced in
geomorphic assessment surveys, conservation easement surveys, boundary surveys for property net
verification, GPS control for NC State Plane survey work, easement platting, legal descriptions, and
easement monumentation. For projects large and small, Kee Mapping & Surveying uses the same care
and integrity to achieve accurate documentation.
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATION: Professional Land Surveyor NC L-4647
PROJECT EXPERIENCE (WILDLANDS PROJECTS)
Reedy Creek Design -Build Stream Restoration Project
Charlotte, NC
Candy Creek Mitigation Site
Guilford County, NC
Owl's Den Mitigation Site
Lincoln County, NC
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Union County, NC
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Guilford County, NC
Little Pine Creek III Stream & Wetland Restoration
Project Alleghony County, NC
PROJECT DETAILS I PROJECT ROLE
25,974 stream credits
15,456 stream credits
2,400 stream credits;
8.0 wetland credits
10,098 stream credits
6,488 stream credits;
130,680 buffer credits
7,017 stream credits;
1.4 wetland credits
Topographic and
As -Built Survey
Project Surveyor;
Easement Plats
Project Surveyor;
Easement Plats
Project Surveyor;
Easement Plats
Project Surveyor;
Easement Plats
Project Surveyor;
Easement Plats J
8.0 DBE/HUB Participation
Three of our potential contractors are woman -owned businesses: Carolina Environmental Contracting,
Inc., Land Mechanic Designs, Inc., and North State Environmental, Inc.
%AV Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART E
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Page E.7

PART F - Project Organization
1.0 Organizational Chart
The following illustrates the organization of personnel that will be assigned to this project.
■ WILDLANDS Charlotte, NC Office performed by Engin edbyervices will be
employees of
licensed corporate entities
■ WRDLANDs Asheville, NC Office
■ KEE MAPPING& SURVEYING Asheville, NC df{Ice
2.0 Qualifications and Experience
Brief resumes presenting the qualifications, experience, and assigned project responsibilities of each
project team member are presented on the following pages. Resumes for the Wildlands project
manager, Mr. Eric Neuhaus, and for the project manager for Kee were presented in Part E, Section 7.0.
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page F.1

Shawn Wilkerson
Mr. Wilkerson has 21 years of professional experience in water resources, focusing on surface water
hydrology and restoration. He has managed and designed a diverse range of projects, including wetland/
Best Management Practice (BMP) construction and monitoring, stream restoration and enhancement,
and watershed planning for flood control and water quality improvements. Mr. Wilkerson plays a key
role in initial site evaluation for mitigation and conservation easement acquisition. In the roles of
principal -in -charge or project manager, Mr. Wilkerson has overseen and managed design and
construction for more than 34 miles of stream restoration projects. Several of his key projects have
involved mitigation banking and turn -key mitigation solutions. In his role at Wildlands, he also serves as
the leader of a 62-person team of scientists and engineers that focuses on ecological restoration and
assessments. Mr. Wilkerson focuses on integrating ecologically responsible projects within the
constraints of impacted landscapes while using his experience and education to manage and create
innovative and successful projects.
JOB CLASSIFICATION: President
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THIS PROJECT: Principal -in -Charge
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS: NC Real Estate Broker, 2000
TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE: 21 years
EDUCATION: MS, Civil Engineering, University of North Carolina at Charlotte,
1998
BA, English Literature, Appalachian State University, 1993
ADDITIONAL TRAINING: Rosgen Levels I through IV, 1998-2003
PSMJ Project Manager Boot Camp, 2004, 2014
Mecklenburg Habitat Assessment Protocol Training, 2000
PROJECT EXPERIENCE AT WILDLANDS
Big Harris Creek Mitigation Site
Cleveland County, NC
Henry Fork Mitigation Site
Catawba County, NC
Candy Creek Mitigation Site
Guilford County, NC
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Union County, NC
Scaly Bark Creek Mitigation Site
Stanly County, NC
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
Rockingham County, NC
Lyle Creek Mitigation Site
Catawba County, NC
PROJECT DETAILS
25,836 stream credits;
9 BMPs
4,500 stream credits;
4.0 wetland credits
PROJECT ROLE
Project Manager
Principal -in -Charge
15,456 stream credits Principal -in -Charge
10,098 stream credits Principal -in -Charge
Principal -in -Charge; Project
6,415 stream credits Manager; Conservation
Easement Acquisition
4,900 stream credits; Principal -in -Charge; Project
12.7 wetland credits Manager
5,571 stream credits;
7.0 wetland credits
Principal -in -Charge;
Conservation Easement
Acquisition
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page F.2

Jake McLean, PE, CFM
Mr. McLean has 14 years of experience in ecological restoration, stormwater management design,
planning and modeling, floodplain management, and hydrologic/hydraulic analysis. At Wildlands, he is
responsible for managing stream restoration and stormwater quality BMP projects, performing
hydrologic and hydraulic modeling to support natural channel design, performing floodplain
management consulting and modeling, and preparation of construction documents. Mr. McLean has
experience with municipal, non-profit, state and federal restoration and stormwater projects. He has
extensive experience developing and overseeing compensatory mitigation projects from initial site
identification through construction and monitoring.
JOB CLASSIFICATION:
Senior Water Resources Engineer
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THIS PROJECT:
QA/QC Manager
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS:
Professional Engineer; Certified Floodplain Manager
TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE:
14 years
EDUCATION:
MS, Civil Engineering, Auburn University, 2002
BS, Civil Engineering, Auburn University, 2000
ADDITIONAL TRAINING:
NCSU Department of Biological & Agricultural Engineering:
Rivercourse 1-3, 2005-2006
Stream Restoration Construction Training, 2006
Stormwater BMP Academy, 2005
Bioretention / Stormwater Wetlands, 2005
Stormwater BMP Inspection and Maintenance, 2012
HEC-RAS Unsteady Flow Modeling, 2011
Geomorphic Assessment Workshop, 2006
Natural Channel Design Workshop, 2006
PROJECT EXPERIENCE AT WILDLANDS
PROJECT DETAILS PROJECT ROLE
Shake Rag Mitigation Site
6,472 stream credits Project Manager
Madison County, NC
Henry Fork Mitigation Site
4,500 stream credits; 4.0 wetland credits Project Manager
Catawba County, NC
Big Harris Creek Mitigation Site
25,836 stream credits; 9 BMPs Design
Cleveland County, NC
Candy Creek Mitigation Site
15,456 stream credits Design
Guilford County, NC
Western Stream Initiative
Multiple projects totaling 15,000 LF Design
Multiple Counties in Western NC
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page F.3

Andrea Eckardt
Ms. Eckardt has 20 years of experience in watershed management, environmental planning, permitting,
and geographic information systems (GIS). She currently serves as a senior environmental planner for
Wildlands. She specializes in environmental permitting, watershed management, project development
and implementation, citizen/agency facilitation, grant writing, conservation easement coordination, and
GIS mapping. Ms. Eckardt has experience with municipal and state improvement projects, school and
university improvement projects, non-profit improvement projects, and private development projects.
Ms. Eckardt has facilitated State Property Office coordination of easements for 484 acres of
conservation easements in NC.
JOB CLASSIFICATION: Senior Environmental Planner
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THIS PROJECT: Categorical Exclusions; Conservation Easement Acquisition Lead
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS: none
TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE: 20 years
EDUCATION: MS, Environmental Science, Applied Ecology, Indiana
University, 1996
BS, Biology, Wake Forest University, 1994
ADDITIONAL TRAINING: Consultant Regulatory Workshop, 2007
Financial Benefits of Conservation Easements: Conservation
Programs and Tax Incentives for NC Landowners, 2006
Project Manager Boot Camp, 2005, 2014
Natural Resource Leadership Institute, 2001
PROJECT EXPERIENCE AT WILDLANDS PROJECT DETAILS PROJECT ROLE
Various Full -Delivery Projects 26 full -delivery Categorical Exclusion;
Multiple Counties in NC projects Conservation
Easement Acquisition
Big Harris Creek Mitigation Site 25,836 stream credits; Mitigation Plan Lead
Cleveland County, NC 9 BMPs
Box Creek Wilderness Area Stream Mitigation Bank
158,400 LF (30 miles) Project Manager
Rutherford County, NC
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site 4,900 stream credits; Project Manager
(existing condition
Rockingham County, NC 12.7 wetland credits
and design phase)
Crooked Creek #2 Restoration Project
Union County, NC
Burnetts Chapel Mitigation Site
Guilford County, NC
Lone Oak Mitigation Bank
Albemarle County, VA
5,672 LF of stream;
11.5 acres of wetland
9.2 buffer credits
38,000 LF
Project Manager
(conceptual phase)
Project Manager
Permitting; Banking
Instrument
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Page FA

Mimi Caddell
Ms. Caddell has four years of experience related to watershed resources. She has assisted with water
quality grant projects such as stormwater best management practices and conservation land monitoring
in Western North Carolina. Additionally, she is experienced with community outreach by working with
volunteer groups on invasive plant species projects and carrying out watershed education programs. At
Wildlands, Ms. Caddell primarily works on vegetation and geomorphic assessments and data processing,
GIS mapping, and site maintenance.
JOB CLASSIFICATION: Environmental Scientist
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THIS PROJECT: Categorical Exclusions; Existing Conditions Survey; Monitoring
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS: none
TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE: 4 years
EDUCATION: BS, Environmental Science, University of North Carolina at
Chapel Hill, 2014
ADDITIONAL TRAINING: NC Stream Assessment Method — Certification Training, NCAEP,
2018
River Course 101: Stream Morphology Assessment, 2017
Stormwater BMP Maintenance & Inspection, 2015
PROJECT EXPERIENCE AT WILDLANDS
Deep Meadow Mitigation Site
Union County, NC
Big Harris Creek Mitigation Site
Cleveland County, NC
Candy Creek Mitigation Site
Guilford County, NC
Henry Fork Mitigation Site
Catawba County, NC
Hopewell Mitigation Site
Randolph County, NC
Crooked Creek #2 Restoration Project
Union County, NC
PROJECT DETAILS
2,746 stream credits;
8.1 wetland credits
25,836 stream credits;
9 BMPs
15,456 stream credits
4,500 stream credits;
4.0 wetland credits
PROJECT ROLE
Existing Conditions
Assessment
Monitoring
Existing Conditions
Assessment; Monitoring
Monitoring
7,463 stream credits Monitoring
5,672 stream credits;
11.5 wetland credits Monitoring
Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page F.5

Jordan Hessler
Mr. Hessler currently serves the Asheville office as an Environmental Scientist/Designer. He has four
years of experience in civil engineering, Auto CAD applications, Graphic information systems,
stormwater management, and soil and sediment control measures. additional skills include wetland land
delineation and permitting, construction quality assurance, landscape design, vegetation surveys,
threatened and endangered species surveys.
JOB CLASSIFICATION: Environmental Scientist/Designer
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THIS PROJECT: Existing Conditions Survey; Monitoring
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS: none
TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE: 4 years
EDUCATION: BS, Biology (concentration in ecology & evolution), Western
Carolina University, 2015
AAS, Horticulture Technology, Haywood Community College,
2011
ADDITIONAL TRAINING: Wetland Delineation & Permitting Training
NC State: River Course 201 Natural Channel Design
NCDOT Level 1 Erosion & Sediment control/stormwater
certification
Southern Appalachian Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and
Tricoptera Identification Training
PROJECT EXPERIENCE AT WILDLANDS
Shake Rag Branch Mitigation Site
Madison County, NC
Banner Farm Mitigation Site
Henderson County, NC
Wyant Lands Mitigation Site
Lincoln County, NC
Henry Fork Mitigation Site
Catawba County, NC
Vile Creek Mitigation Site
Alleghany County, NC
PROJECT DETAILS
6,472 stream credits
6,194 stream credits;
16.0 wetland credits
6,800 stream credits;
12.0 wetland credits
4,500 stream credits;
4.0 wetland credits
5,000 stream credits;
5.0 wetland credits
PROJECT ROLE
Existing Conditions
Assessment
Existing Conditions
Assessment; Design
Assistance
Existing Conditions
Assessment; Design
Assistance
Monitoring
Monitoring
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Page F.6

Robert Bugg, ALC
Mr. Bugg is a seasoned real estate broker and land acquisition professional with a 17-year history as a
Realtor® focusing primarily on land acquisition and entitlement for development and mitigation. In his
career he has purchased, sold, or brokered over $50M in real estate. He holds the esteemed Accredited
Land Consultant (ALC) designation which required over 90 hours of class time and over $10M in land
sales.
Mr. Bugg has been responsible for identification, landowner negotiation, and closure of conservation
easements and land use agreements on over 840 acres representing 112,000 feet of stream mitigation,
50 acres of buffer mitigation, and 100 acres of wetlands mitigation. In addition to helping identify and
close easements for Wildlands, Mr. Bugg is also responsible for our mitigation credit sales to local
developers from our existing mitigation banks.
JOB CLASSIFICATION: Director of Land Acquisition
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THIS PROJECT: Conservation Easement Acquisitions
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS: NC & SC Realtor° Broker, Accredited Land Consultant, Unlimited
NC General Contractor's License
TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE
EDUCATION:
PROJECT EXPERIENCE AT WILDLANDS
Big Harris Creek Mitigation Site
Alamance County, NC
Lone Hickory Mitigation Site
Yadkin County, NC
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Guilford County, NC
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Union County, NC
Owl's Den Mitigation Site
Lincoln County, NC
Devil's Racetrack Mitigation Site
Johnston County, NC
17 years
BA, Psychology, The University of the South, 1990
Burnetts Chapel Mitigation Site (Phase 1)
Guilford County, NC
Reedy Creek Design -Build Stream Restoration
Project Charlotte, NC
PROJECT DETAILS PROJECT ROLE
25,836 stream credits; Conservation Easement
9 BMPs Acquisition; Realtor
12,900 stream credits; 8.0 Conservation Easement
wetland credits Acquisition; Realtor
6,488 stream credits; Conservation Easement
130,680 buffer credits Acquisition; Realtor
10,098 stream credits Conservation Easement
Acquisition; Realtor
2,400 stream credits;
Conservation Easement
8.0 wetland credits
Acquisition; Realtor
18,527 stream credits;
Conservation Easement
67.0 wetland credits
Acquisition; Realtor
407,649 buffer credits Conservation Easement
Acquisition
25,974 stream credits Conservation Easement
Acquisition
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Page F.7

Sam Davis, El
Mr. Davis has four years of stormwater management design and modeling, site design, and
hydrologic/hydraulic analysis. At Wildlands, he is responsible for design assistance for stream
restoration and storm water quality BMP projects, performing hydrologic and hydraulic modeling, and
final preparation of construction documents.
JOB CLASSIFICATION: Environmental Designer
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THIS PROJECT: Design
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS: Engineering in Training
TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE: 4 years
EDUCATION:
PROJECT EXPERIENCE AT WILDLANDS
Deep Meadow Mitigation Site
Union County, NC
Lone Hickory Mitigation Site
Yadkin County, NC
Big Harris Creek Mitigation Site
Cleveland County, NC
Candy Creek Mitigation Site
Guilford County, NC
BS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of North
Carolina at Charlotte, 2014
PROJECT DETAILS
2,746 stream credits;
8.1 wetland credits
12,901 stream credits
25,836 stream credits;
9 BMPs
15,456 stream credits
PROJECT ROLE
Existing Conditions
Assessment, Design
Assistance
Existing Conditions
Assessment, Design
Assistance
Plan Production
Plan Production
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page F.8

Ian Eckardt, PWS
Mr. Eckardt has 13 years of experience in stream geomorphic assessments, stream classification,
wetland delineation, protected species surveys, sediment sampling and analysis, water quality
monitoring, groundwater monitoring, surveying, and vegetation assessment. He currently serves as an
environmental scientist for Wildlands Engineering and is responsible for regulatory permitting, agency
correspondence, wetland delineations, geomorphic surveys and assessments, protected species surveys,
and post -construction monitoring.
JOB CLASSIFICATION:
Environmental Scientist
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THIS PROJECT:
Permitting
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS:
Professional Wetland Scientist
TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE:
13 years
EDUCATION:
MS, Earth Science, University of North Carolina at Charlotte,
2007
BA, Geology, NC State University, 2001
ADDITIONAL TRAINING:
NC SAM Certificate Training, 2017
Basic Processes in Hydric Soils, 2013
Advanced Problems in Hydric Soil Evaluation, 2013
Rosgen Level I, 2013
Surface Water Identification Training and Certification, 2013
NC WAM Certificate Training, 2010
Management of Invasive and Exotic Vegetation in Riparian
Areas, 2009
North Carolina Rare Plant Identification Workshops, 2007 &
2011
Delineation of Piedmont and Coastal Plain Jurisdictional
Wetlands, 2007
PROJECT EXPERIENCE AT WILDLANDS
PROJECT DETAILS
PROJECT ROLE
Deep Meadow Mitigation Site
2,746 stream credits;
Existing Conditions Assessment
Union County, NC
8.1 wetland credits
Big Harris Creek Mitigation Site
25,836 stream credits;
Existing Conditions Assessment
Cleveland County, NC
9 BMPs
Henry Fork Mitigation Site
4,500 stream credits;
Existing Conditions Assessment;
Catawba County, NC
4.0 wetland credits
Permitting
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
6,488 stream credits;
Existing Conditions Assessment;
Guilford County, NC
130,680 buffer credits
Categorical Exclusion; Permitting;
Monitoring
NorkeExisting
t Branch Mitigation Site
Conditions Assessment;
Union County, NC
Union
10,098 stream credits
Categorical Exclusion; Permitting;
Monitoring
Owl's Den Mitigation Site
2,400 stream credits;
Existing Conditions Assessment;
Lincoln County, NC
8.0 wetland credits
Categorical Exclusion; Permitting;
Monitoring
Lyle Creek Mitigation Site
5,571 stream credits;
Monitoring
Catawba County, NC
7.0 wetland credits
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page F.9

Ben McGuire
Mr. McGuire has six years of experience in stream construction, erosion and sediment control, and BMP
projects. He has assisted with several grant funded projects for water quality in Western North Carolina.
Mr. McGuire has experience with construction administration, surveying, monitoring, project
acquisition, landowner relations, and permitting.
JOB CLASSIFICATION: Construction Manager
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THIS PROJECT: Construction Administration
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS: none
TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE: 6 years
EDUCATION: BS, Environmental Studies, University of North Carolina at
Wilmington, 2011
ADDITIONAL TRAINING: Rosgen Level I —Applied Fluvial Geomorphology, 2015
NCDOT Erosion and Sedimentation Control/Stormwater
Certification
BMP Inspection and Maintenance Certification
PROJECT EXPERIENCE AT WILDLANDS PROJECT DETAILS PROJECT ROLE
Reedy Creek Design -Build Stream Restoration 25,974 stream credits Construction
Project Charlotte, NC Administration
Little Pine Creek II Stream & Wetland 4,156 LF of streams; Construction
Restoration Project: Redesign
5.4 acres of wetlands Administration
Alleghany County, NC
Lone Hickory Mitigation Site 12,900 stream credits; Construction
Yadkin County, NC 8.0 wetland credits Administration
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Union County, NC
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Guilford County, NC
Devil's Racetrack Mitigation Site
Johnston County, NC
Maney Farm Mitigation Site
Chatham County, NC
10,098 stream credits Monitoring;
Maintenance
6,488 stream credits;
3.0 buffer credits Monitoring
18,527 stream credits;
67.0 wetland credits Monitoring
4,922 stream credits Monitoring
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page F.10

Kristi Suggs
Ms. Suggs currently serves as a senior environmental scientist and the monitoring lead coordinator for
Wildlands. She has over 15 years of experience in watershed management, environmental planning and
permitting, and GIS. Her expertise includes geomorphic assessments, stream classification, wetland
delineation, biological and habitat assessment, protected species surveys, sediment sampling and
analysis, water quality monitoring, groundwater monitoring, benthic macroinvertebrate sampling,
vegetation assessment, GIS mapping, and post -construction monitoring.
JOB CLASSIFICATION: Senior Environmental Scientist
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THIS PROJECT: Monitoring Lead
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS: none
TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE: 15 years
EDUCATION: MS, Earth and Environmental Resource Management, University
of South Carolina, 2005
BS, Animal Veterinary Science, West Virginia University, 1995
ADDITIONAL TRAINING: NC Wetland Assessment Method Training Certification, 2016
NC Stream Assessment Method Training Certification, 2016
NC Natural Heritage Data Explorer Training, 2015
Mussel Identification Workshop -Atlantic Slope Species of NC
and SC, 2015
Piedmont Rare Species and Mafic Rock Communities Workshop,
2014
2011 Rare Plant & Community Identification Workshop, 2011
Surface Water Identification and Training Class, V. 4.0, 2010
Wetland Delineation and Jurisdictional Determination: Post
Rapanos-Carabel, 2008
Stream Restoration Design Introduction, Existing Conditions
Analysis, and Preliminary Design, 2007
Intermittent and Perennial Stream Identification for Regulatory
Applications, 2007
PROJECT EXPERIENCE AT WILDLANDS
Reedy Creek Design -Build Stream
Restoration Project Charlotte, NC
Candy Creek Mitigation Site
Guilford County, NC
Big Harris Creek Mitigation Site
Cleveland County, NC
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Union County, NC
Henry Fork Mitigation Site
Catawba County, NC
Hopewell Mitigation Site
Randolph County, NC
PROJECT DETAILS PROJECT ROLE
25,974 stream credits As -built monitoring report
15,456 stream credits Monitoring
25,836 stream credits; Monitoring
9 BMPs
10,098 stream credits Monitoring
4,800 stream credits;
4.2 wetland credits Monitoring
7,463 stream credits Monitoring
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Page F.11

Part G -Technical Approach
The Laurel Valley Mitigation Site (Site) is
located in Burke County approximately
3.5 miles southeast of Morganton
(Figure 1). East Prong Hunting Creek and
two of its unnamed tributaries, which
have been named for this proposal, will
be restored and preserved as part of this
project. East Prong Hunting Creek drains
to Rhodhiss Lake on the Catawba River.
Three municipalities, Granite Falls,
Lenoir, and Valdese have public water
intakes along the lake. The Site is located
within the Hunting Creek targeted local
watershed (TLW) Hydrologic Unit Code
(HUC) 03050101060050 and is being
submitted for mitigation credit in the
Catawba 03050101 (Catawba 01)
Cataloging Unit (CU). East Prong Hunting Creek is defined in the 2018 North Carolina Integrated Report
as Water Supply IV waters and is 303(d) listed as impaired. East Prong Hunting Creek is Category 5 listed
for exceeding the fecal coliform bacteria criteria.
The 2009 Upper Catawba River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP), as amended in July 2018, lists broad
restoration goals including:
• restoring nutrient and sediment impaired streams to Lake Rhodhiss;
• implementing best management practices (BMPs) around the urban and suburban watersheds
of Morganton;
• increasing agricultural BMPs within heavily agricultural sub -watersheds of TLWs; and
• continuing watershed restoration efforts in the LWP for Lake Rhodhiss.
The RBRP notes that the Hunting Creek watershed is over 19% agricultural and has 41% non -forested
riparian buffers. The 2010 NC DWR Catawba River Basinwide Water Quality Plan notes that Hunting
Creek provides significant annual nonpoint source nutrient loading (nitrogen and phosphorus) to Lake
Rhodhiss.
The 2009-2011 Hunting Creek Local Watershed Plan (LWP) documents identified major functional
stressors in the watershed as urban development; stormwater runoff; stream bank erosion; increased
sedimentation within streams; degraded riparian buffers, including lack of woody vegetation;
agricultural and residential land management practices; and fecal coliform and nutrient inputs. The Site
was identified in the Hunting Creek LWP as site ID 14. Site ID 14 was ranked as a medium priority
potential stream restoration project in the Hunting Creek watershed.
The Catawba River Basin is also discussed in the 2015 North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission's
(NCWRC) Wildlife Action Plan (WAP). This report notes that riparian habitat loss, excessive
sedimentation, and nutrient loading from poorly managed agricultural and development operations are
widespread problems within the basin. The WAP discusses the importance of habitat conservation and
restoration to address current problems affecting species and habitats.
Restoration of the Site streams will directly and indirectly address stressors identified in the RBRP, NC
DWR Plan, LWP, and the NCWRC WAP by excluding livestock, creating stable stream banks, and
restoring a forest in agriculturally maintained buffer areas. These actions will reduce fecal, nutrient, and
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.1

sediment inputs to East Prong Hunting Creek, and ultimately to Rhodhiss Lake and the Catawba River, as
well as reconnect instream and terrestrial habitats on the Site. Restoration of the Site is directly in line
with recommended management strategies outlined in the RBRP. Up to 13 acres of land will be placed
under permanent conservation easement to protect the Site in perpetuity.
Sources:
NC Division of Mitigation Services. 2009/2018. Upper Catawba River Basin Restoration Priorities.
httDS://files.nc.Rov/ncdea/Mitigation%20Services/Watershed Plannine/Catawba River Basin/2018 UDDer Catawba RBRP.Dd
f
NC Division of Water Resources. 2010. Catawba River Basinwide Water Quality Plan.
https://files. nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Qual itV/Plan n ing/BPU/BPU/Catawba/Catawba%20Plans/2010%20PIa n/Entire%202010-
Catawba%20PIan.pdf
NC Division of Mitigation Services. Hunting Creek Local Watershed Plan (and links within).
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Mitigation%20Services/Watershed Planning/Catawba River Basin/Hunting Creek/Hunting%20Crk
%20 LW P%20Fa ct%20Sheet. pdf
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission. 2015. North Carolina Wildlife Action Plan. Raleigh, NC.
http://ncwildlife.org/Portals/0/Conserving/documents/2015WildlifeActionPlan/NC-WAP-2015-All-Documents.pdf
1.0 Project Goals and Objectives
The major goals of the proposed stream mitigation project are to provide ecological and water quality
enhancements to the Catawba River Basin while creating a functional riparian corridor at the site level.
Specific enhancements to water quality and ecological processes are outlined in Table G.1.
Table G.1 Ecological and Water Quality Goals of the Mitigation Project
Goal
Objective
CU-Wide RBRP Goals Addressed
Exclude livestock
Install livestock fencing as needed to exclude livestock
Reduce nutrient and sediment
from stream
from stream channels and riparian areas or remove
inputs to Lake Rhodhiss.
channels.
livestock from adjacent fields.
Restore and
Convert active cattle pasture to forested riparian buffers
enhance native
along all Site streams, which will slow and treat sediment
Reduce nutrient and sediment
floodplain
laden runoff from adjacent pastures and fields before
inputs to Lake Rhodhiss.
entering streams. Protect and enhance existing forested
vegetation.
riparian buffers. Treat invasive species.
Improve the
Reconstruct stream channels slated for restoration with
stability of stream
stable dimensions and appropriate depth relative to the
Reduce nutrient and sediment
channels.
existing floodplain. Add bank revetments and instream
inputs to Lake Rhodhiss.
structures to protect restored/ enhanced streams.
Install habitat features such as constructed steps, cover
Improve instream
logs, and brush toes on restored reaches. Add woody
Improve impaired aquatic
habitat.
materials/ LWD to channel beds. Construct pools of varying
habitats.
depth.
Permanently
Establish a conservation easement on the Site. Exclude
protect the project
livestock from Site streams, remove impoundments and
Reduce nutrient and sediment
site from harmful
daylight streams, and remove fields from the riparian
inputs to Lake Rhodhiss.
uses.
buffer.
2.0 Project Description
The following section describes the existing conditions at the Site in terms of geomorphic condition,
watershed, soils, geology, cultural resources, species of concern, regulated floodplain zones, and site
constraints. Figure 2 provides a Site map.
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.2

2.1 Existing Site Conditions
The Site is an active farm composed of cattle pastures
barns, and a house. East Prong Hunting Creek and two
of its unnamed tributaries (UTs) flow through the Site.
East Prong Hunting Creek generally flows northwest
through the Site, from a culvert under Laurelwood
Road as depicted on Figure 2. UT1 originates offsite
and flows northeast through a driveway culvert before
leaving the Site. UT2 originates offsite and flows
generally northeast to join East Prong Hunting Creek.
Much of the Site, including East Prong Hunting Creek
and UT2, is dominated by pasture grasses such as
fescue (Festuca spp.) with scattered trees along the top
of bank and adjacent floodplain. Canopy species within
these areas are primarily black willow (Salix nigra), red
maple (Acer rubrum), tag alder (Alnus serrulata),
flowering dogwood (Corn us florida), sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), tulip poplar (Liriodendron
tulipifera), box elder (Acer negundo), elderberry (Sambucus nigra), black walnut (Juglans nigra), and
black cherry (Prunus serotine). In addition to pasture grasses, other herbaceous species include
jewelweed (Impatiens capensis), ironweed (Vernonia fasciculata), Carolina horsenettle (Solanum
carolinense), pokeweed (Phytolacca decandra), spiderwort (Murdannia keisak), and smartweed
(Polygonum spp.).
The wooded areas along one or both sides of UT1 consists of a mature forest. Canopy species in these
areas include American beech (Fagus grandifolia), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), white oak
(Quercus alba), red maple, tulip poplar, sourwood (Oxydendrum arboretum) and sweet gum
(Liquidambarstyraciflua). The understory layer primarily consists of small pockets of Chinese privet
(Ligustrum sinense), American holly (Ilex opaca), and spicebush (Lindera benzoin), Japanese stiltgrass
(Microstegium vimineum), Christmas fern (Polystichum acrostichoides), and greenbrier (Smilax sp.).
A review of historic aerials from 1947 to 2016 shows that East Prong Hunting Creek and UT2 have
existed in their same approximate location and with the same pattern for over 72 years. Aerials
potentially show that UT1 historically flowed into East Prong Hunting Creek within the Site boundary but
was rerouted between 1976 and 1984 to leave the Site at its current location. Aerials show some
changes to the agricultural management of the land. Open pastures were present between 1947 and
1964 that generally match the existing open pasture limits. Between 1976 and 1984, the open pastures
were allowed to grow up substantially. By 1993 the woods had been cleared to reestablish open
pastures as they exist currently.
Historic aerial photos are provided for review in the appendix. Details about the existing streams and
associated reaches are provided in Section 2.2 below. Figure 2 maps stream stressors, including erosion
and incision.
2.2 Existing Conditions — Streams
East Prong Hunting Creek
East Prong Hunting Creek flows west onto the Site through a 48" culvert under Laurelwood Road. Within
the Site limits, cattle have access to the entire stream and its narrow, sporadic buffer. The pasture is
actively grazed, and the stream banks are devoid of stabilizing vegetation. As a result, stream banks are
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.3

severely eroded and exhibit rotational failure. The
stream bed substrate is cobbles and gravels embedded
with fines from the bank erosion. Instream habitat is
limited to riffles, runs, and shallow pools with very little
woody debris, leaf packs, or root mats. Incision along
East Prong Hunting Creek is moderate to high with bank
height ratios ranging from 2 to 5. It appears that the
stream is widening and attempting to reestablish
pattern. A large woody debris jam is holding a 1-ft
headcut in place just downstream of the UT2
confluence.
Table G.2a Summary of Potential for Functional Uplift — East Prong Hunting Creek
Functional
Potential for Functional Uplift
Category
East Prong Hunting Creek has a high volume of fine sediment load from bank erosion and is
moderately to highly incised, preventing deposition of fines on a bench or floodplain and resulting in
embedded stream substrate. Priority 1 restoration will correct the onsite erosion and incision and
Water
provide an area for fine sediments delivered from upstream to deposit. The riparian buffer is non -
Quality
functioning on both sides of East Prong Hunting Creek for its entire length. Cattle have direct access to
the stream channel and graze up to the top of the stream banks, resulting in nutrient and fecal
coliform loading to the stream channel. The proposed conservation easement will allow for buffers
greater than the 30-feet required for Mountain streams, excluding cattle and restoring a wide
vegetative riparian zone.
Hydrology
East Prong Hunting Creek is moderately to highly incised and raising the channel will restore a
floodplain to attenuate peak flows and support stream and floodplain functions both on and offsite.
East Prong Hunting Creek has a narrow, sporadic riparian buffer, and restoration of the riparian zone
Habitat
will create an uninterrupted forested corridor within the Site. Restoration will also provide additional
bedform habitat and introduce large woody debris to a stream with limited available habitats due to
embeddedness.
UT1
UT1 originates offsite near an inactive quarry as depicted on Figure 2. At the upstream limit, UT1 flows
through a narrow, steep, wooded valley and has low banks and varied habitat including snags, roots
mats, pools, and leaf packs. The stream continues in this condition for approximately 400 LF until it
flows through a 36" driveway culvert. Cattle do not have access to the reach upstream of the culvert.
The outlet end of the culvert is perched approximately 1-ft
eroded above base flow water surface and adjacent stream slopes
are eroded. Downstream of the culvert, cattle have access to
both sides of the stream. The channel is incised and
disconnected from its floodplain while tortuous meanders
have caused widespread bank erosion and undercut banks.
The right buffer is wide and wooded while the left buffer
consists of a narrow row of trees on the edge of an open
pasture. Channel substrate consist of gravel and cobble sized
material that has been embedded with bank erosion
sediment. The stream flows under a cattle gate and becomes
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page GA

straight with a wooded buffer on the left floodplain and open pasture on the right floodplain. The
stream appears to be actively dredged and ditched with no bedform diversity from the cattle gate until
it leaves the Site, approximately 250 LF.
Table G.2b Summary of Potential for Functional Uplift — UT1
Functional
Potential for Functional Uplift
Category
The riparian buffer is non-functioning for one side of UT1, and the proposed conservation easement will allow for
Water
riparian buffers. Cattle activity and incision prevents deposition of fines on a bench or floodplain, resulting in
Quality
embedded stream substrate. Priority 1 restoration will correct the onsite erosion and incision and provide a
depositional storage area for fine sediments.
Hydrology
Restoration of a floodplain will attenuate peak flows from the watershed and support stream functions onsite.
UT1's habitat is impaired due to a perched culvert and channel incision. Restoration will improve aquatic organism
Habitat
passage by raising the channel to alleviate the perched culvert and providing aquatic bedform habitats, including
introduction of large woody debris (LWD).
UT2
UT2 enters the Site from a wooded upstream parcel
and is heavily impacted by cattle activity in the fringe
of the woods. The stream then flows out of the
woods through an open pasture with no buffer. The
channel is moderately incised with alternating bank
erosion caused by cattle trampling. The stream
continues in this condition for approximately 600 LF
before flowing through a perched 24" culvert used as
a cattle crossing. Downstream of the culvert, the
stream flows another 350 LF through open pasture
before entering a narrow wooded buffer for 150 LF. A
significant volume of sediment is input into the
stream within the narrow buffer due to cattle
trampling and wallow areas. Downstream of the
narrow buffer, the left buffer widens, bank heights decrease, and the stream is relatively stable for
approximately 100 LF. Downstream of the stable section, the buffer disappears, and the stream
becomes more incised with eroding banks and multiple cattle wallows before connecting with East
Prong Hunting Creek. UT2 exhibits low bedform diversity and high sedimentation due to cattle trampling
and eroding banks. Incision ranges from low in the stable section to moderate in the rest of the reach.
The valley is relatively narrow.
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.5

Table G.2c Summary of Potential for Functional Uplift — UT2
Functional
Potential for Functional Uplift
Category
The riparian buffer is non-functioning for most of UT2's length, and the proposed conservation easement will
Water
allow for riparian buffers. UT2 has a high volume of fine sediment loads from bank erosion and cattle activity and
Quality
incision prevents deposition of fines on a bench or floodplain, resulting in embedded stream substrate. Priority 1
restoration will correct the onsite erosion and incision and provide a depositional storage area for fine sediments.
Most of UT2 is incised. Restoration of a floodplain will attenuate peak flows from the watershed and support
Hydrology
stream functions onsite. Additionally, UT2 will be routed through the broad floodplain of East Prong Hunting
Creek, which will further restore natural floodplain and hydrology, reducing local time of concentration and
attenuating peak flows.
UT2 has fragmented riparian buffers and is bisected by a perched culvert, and restoration of the riparian zone will
create an uninterrupted forested corridor from the upstream wooded parcels to the wooded riparian zone of
Habitat
East Prong Hunting Creek. Restoration will improve aquatic organism passage by removing the perched culvert.
Restoration will also provide additional bedform habitat and introduce large woody debris (LWD) to UT2, which
have limited available habitats due to embeddedness.
2.3 Existing Conditions - Watershed
The Site is located in Burke County within the Hunting Creek targeted local watershed HUC
03050101060050 and DWR Subbasin 03-08-31. All onsite streams drain to East Prong Hunting Creek
which is classified as Water Supply IV waters. Water Supply IV waters are a water supply source for
drinking, culinary, or food processing purposes. Water Supply IV waters are also protected for Class C
uses. Class C waters are protected for secondary recreation, fishing and fish consumption, wildlife,
aquatic life, and agriculture. Secondary recreation includes wading, boating, and other uses involving
human body contact with water where such activities take place in an infrequent, unorganized, or
incidental manner.
The Site topography, as indicated on the Morganton South 7.5 minute topographic quadrangle, shows a
wide floodplain of the East Prong Hunting Creek oriented northeast through the Site (Figure 3). UT2
flows north in a moderately sloped valley to join East Prong Hunting Creek. UT1 flows northward in a
moderately sloped valley to join East Prong Hunting Creek downstream of the site boundary. Drainage
areas for the project reaches were delineated using USGS North Carolina StreamStats Version 4 (Figure
4). Land uses draining to the project reaches are a mix of forested, agricultural (pasture/hay fields),
shrubland, and some development. The land use was calculated using the National Land Cover Database
(NLCD) for 2011. The impervious area within the project catchment at the downstream end was
calculated to be 14.4 acres, or approximately 1.1% of the project catchment using USGS North Carolina
StreamStats Version 4. The watershed areas and current land uses are summarized in Table G.3, below.
Table G.3 Drainage Areas and Associated Land Use
NC DWR
Reach
Stream
Intermittent/
Watershed
Watershed
Land Use
Name
Identification
Perennial Status
Area (acres)
Area (sq. mi.)
Form Scores
12%Agricultural, 12%
East Prong
45
Perennial
1,274
1.99
Developed, 75% Forested,
Hunting Creek
1% Shrubland
15% Agricultural, 32%
UT1
46
Perennial
136
0.21
Developed, 49% Forested, 4%
Shrubland
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.6

NC DWR
Reach
Stream
Intermittent/
Watershed
Watershed
Land Use
Name
Identification
Perennial Status
Area (acres)
Area (sq. mi.)
Form Scores
13%Agricultural, 4%
UT2
42
Perennial
155
0.24
Developed, 82% Forested, 1%
Shrubland
Notes: Land Use Source — National Land Cover Database 2011 (NLCD 2011), Multi -Resolution Land Characteristics (MRLC)
consortium, https://www.mrlc.gov/nlcd20ll.php and visual assessment of the 2018 aerial.
2.4 Soils
The proposed project is mapped by the Web Soil Survey for Burke County. Project area soils are
described below in Table GA Figure 5 provides a soil map of the Site.
Table G.4 Project Soil Types and Descriptions
Soil Name
Description
AaA — Arkaqua loam, 0 to 2%
This series consists of somewhat poorly drained on floodplains. The
slopes, occasionally flooded
permeability is high and low surface runoff. This soil is suited for woodland
and poorly suited for cropland due to wetness and flooding.
CvA— Colvard sandy loam, 0 to
This series consists of well drained soils on floodplains. The permeability is
3% slopes, occasionally flooded
moderate and very low surface runoff. This soil is well suited for woodland
and suited for cropland.
FaC2 — Fairview sandy clay
This series consists of well drained soils on ridges and interfluves. This soil has
loam, 8 to 15%slopes,
moderate permeability and low surface runoff.
moderately eroded
FaD2 — Fairview sandy clay
This series consists of well drained soils on ridges and interfluves. This soil has
loam, 15 to 25% slopes,
moderate permeability. This soil is suited for woodland and unsuited for
moderately eroded
cropland due to erodibility and steepness.
RhE — Rhodhiss sandy loam, 25
This series consists of well drained soils on hillslopes on ridges. This soil has
to 45%
moderate permeability and high surface runoff. This soil is suited for
slopes
woodland and unsuited for cropland due to erodibility.
Source: Soil Survey of Burke County, North Carolina, USDA-NRCS,
https://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx
2.5 Geology
The Site is located in the Tugaloo and Cat Square terranes of the Piedmont physiographic province. The
Piedmont province is characterized by rolling, well rounded hills and long low ridges, with elevations
ranging from 300 to 1500 feet above sea level. The Tugaloo terrane is composed of metamorphosed
sedimentary and volcanic rocks deposited on rifted continental and newly created oceanic crust off the
coast of the ancient North American continent from about 480 to 570 million years ago. The Cat Square
terrane is composed of deformed metamorphic rocks that have been intruded by younger granitic rocks.
The underlying geology is mapped as migmatitic granitic gneiss (OCgm) and inequigranular biotite gneiss
(CZpg). The migmatitic granitic gneiss from the Cambrian to Ordovician period (455 to 540 million years
in age) is described as foliated to massive, granitic to quartz dioritic with biotite gneiss and amphibolite
common. The inequigranular biotite gneiss from the Late Proterozoic to Cambrian period (500 to 900
million years in age) is described as weakly foliated to massive and contains plagioclase megacrysts.
Source: Geologic Map of North Carolina 1:500,000 scale.
Compiled by Philip M. Brown at el. Raleigh, NC, North Carolina Geological Survey
https://ncdenr. maps. arcais. com/appsIMapSeries/index. html?appid=a8281cbd24b84239b29cd2co798d4a10
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.7

2.6 Cultural Resources and Significant Natural Heritage Areas
There are no sites listed on the National Register with the State Historic Preservation Office within one
mile of the Site. The archaeological site files at the North Carolina Office of State Archaeology (OSA)
have not yet been reviewed. All appropriate cultural resource agencies will be contacted for their review
and comment prior to any land disturbing activity. The NC Natural Heritage Program (NHP) references
three areas including Broughton Hospital/Keller Knob, Yellow Mountain/Ironmonger Mountain, and
Smith Cliff/Henry Fork River near the Site. The NHP Managed Areas also reference six areas including
South Mountain State Park, one NC Clean Water Management Trust Fund easement, a Foothills
Conservancy of North Carolina Preserve, Burke County Open Space, one NC Division of Mitigation
Services Easement, and one NC Department of Transportation Mitigation Site within five miles of the
Site (Figure 1).
2.7 Threatened and Endangered Species
Wildlands searched the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and NHP databases for federally listed
threatened and endangered plant and animal species in Burke County, NC. Currently, there are ten
species federally listed for this specific county which include the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus),
the bog turtle (Glyptemys muhlenbergii), the northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis), the
dwarf -flowered heartleaf (Hexastylis naniflora), Heller's blazing star (Liatris helleri), mountain golden
heather (Hudsonia montana), small whorled pogonia (Isotria medeoloides), spreading avens (Geum
radiatum), white irisette (Sisyrinchium dichotomum), and rock gnome lichen (Gymnoderma lineare). A
pedestrian survey conducted on July 30, 2019, indicated that the Site could provide potential habitat for
the northern long-eared bat, dwarf -flowered heartleaf, small whorled pagonia, and white irisette but no
individuals were located at the time. No suitable habitat was identified for the bog turtle. The remaining
listed plant species are found along high elevation areas; therefore, no habitat exists on the Site for
those species. Wildlands will conduct a review of the Site for protected species upon award of contract
and will coordinate with USFWS and NCWRC as necessary based on that review.
Table G.5 Federally Protected Threatened and Endangered Species in Burke County, NC
Species
Federal Status
Habitat
Vertebrate
Bald eagle (Haliaeetus
Bald and Golden
Habitat includes estuaries, large lakes, reservoirs, rivers, and some
leucocephalus)
Eagle Protection
seacoasts. In winter, the birds congregate near open water in tall
Act
trees for spotting prey and night roosts for sheltering.
Threatened
Inhabit open -canopy, herbaceous sedge meadows and fens, wet cow
Bog turtle (Glyptemys
(Similarity of
pastures, and shrub swamps bordered by wooded areas. Depend on
muhlenbergii)
Appearance)
wetland microhabitats for foraging, nesting, basking, hibernation, and
shelter.
Northern long-eared bat
Threatened
Roost in 3" dbh dead and alive trees with exfoliating bark, crevices or
(Myotis septentrionalis)
hollows during summer months. Caves or mines during winter months.
Vascular Plant
Dwarf -flowered
Acidic soils along bluffs and adjacent slopes, in boggy areas next to
heartleaf (Hexastylis
Threatened
streams and creek heads, and along the slopes of nearby hillsides and
naniflora)
ravines
Heller's blazing star
Threatened
Found on high elevation ledges of rock outcrops and cliffs in shallow
(Liatris helleri)
acid soils
Mountain golden
This species grows on exposed quartzite cliffs at elevations of 2,800 to
heather (Hudsonia
Threatened
4,000 feet.
montana)
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.8

Species
Federal Status
Habitat
Small whorled pogonia
This species is usually found in open, somewhat dry, hardwood or
(Isotria medeoloides)
Threatened
mixed hardwood and softwood forests, with scarce shrub and herb
layers, small breaks in canopy.
Spreading avens (Geum
This species grows in full sun on the shallow acidic soils of high-
radiatum)
Endangered
elevation cliffs (above 4,200 feet), rocky outcrops, steep slopes, and
on gravelly talus.
White to
The species is found on mid elevation slopes, characterized by open,
chic
Endangered
dry to moderate -moisture oak hickory forests. Usually grows in
dichoin mum
dichotomum)
shallow soils on regularly disturbed sites (such as woodland edges and
roadsides) and over rocky, steep terrain.
Lichen
This species is primarily limited to vertical rock faces where seepage
Rock gnome lichen
Endangered
water from forest soils above flows during (and only during) very wet
(Gymnoderma lineare)
times. It appears the species needs a moderate amount of light, but
that it cannot tolerate high -intensity solar radiation.
Species and habitat information from the following websites:
https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/burke.html; and https://www.ncnhp.org/data/species-community-search
2.8 Floodplain Compliance
The Site is represented on the Burke County Flood Map 3710271200J. None of the Site streams are
mapped in a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) within the project limits.
2.9 Site Constraints and Access
One external easement break and two internal easement crossings are proposed to maintain future
landowner access throughout the project parcel. An external easement break along UT1 allows for an
existing driveway culvert crossing. Two new internal easement crossings on UT1 and UT2 allow for
access between fields and across the property; however, no improvements are planned during
construction. Wildlands' option agreement with the landowner requires that he use NRCS specifications
if he constructs a future stream crossing. The option agreement further dictates that if a future crossing
is a ford, gates are to be installed to prohibit livestock from accessing the stream except in short periods
of supervised cattle rotation. After restoration, the landowner may remove cattle from all or a part of
the property. Wildlands will provide fencing along the perimeter of the easement of any sections of the
property where cattle will be present. The landowner will be required to install fencing if cattle are
returned to the property in the future. The breaks are summarized and numbered below in Table G.6
and depicted on Figure 6.
Table G.6 Easement Crossings
No.
Width (ft)
Location
Internal or External
Crossing Type
1
50
UT1
External
Existing driveway culvert
Break for future access — no
2
50
UT1
Internal
improvements
3
50
UT2
Internal
Break for future access — no
improvements
The conservation easement boundary will be established after existing conditions survey to exclude the
overhead utilities which may run along the northwestern downstream property line. No other known
utilities are present within the conservation easement area.
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.9

The easement boundaries around all streams proposed for mitigation credit provide the required 30-
foot minimum riparian buffer for mountain county streams and exceeds 30-feet along East Prong
Hunting Creek. The entire easement area can be accessed for construction, monitoring, and long-term
stewardship from Laurelwood Road.
There are three airports within the five -mile radius from the Site as illustrated on Figure 1. The Clyde
Valley Airport is located west of the site and is a single turf, private runway. The Grace Hospital
Emergency Medical Airport is located north-northwest of the site and is a private heliport that consists
of a single helipad for the hospital. The Silver Creek Airport is northwest of the Site and is a private,
single turf runway with seven aircraft based on the field.
3.0 Project Development
The Wildlands Team proposes to restore a high quality of ecological function to the streams and riparian
corridors on the Site. The project design will be developed to avoid adverse impacts to existing streams,
wetland resources, or mature wooded vegetation. Different management objectives are proposed for
different portions of the project area. These activities are discussed below and summarized in Tables
G.7a and 7b. Figures 6a and 6b illustrates the conceptual design for the Site.
3.1 Stream Mitigation Approach
Currently, the streams throughout the Site are extensively
impacted by cattle grazing. The primary stressors to Site
streams are livestock trampling, lack of stabilizing stream
bank and riparian vegetation, active erosion, upland
erosion and sedimentation, incision, and fragmented
aquatic habitat.
Wildlands' approach to restoring streams on the Site
includes a multi -tiered approach including preservation
and Priority 1 restoration with Priority 2 restoration limited
to confluences and transition zones.
UT1 Reach 1, from the upstream project boundary to the
existing driveway culvert crossing, is relatively stable
geomorphically with a wide wooded buffer. Cattle do not have access to this reach. This reach is slated
for preservation. Localized invasive species treatment will also take place where needed.
Restoration level practices are proposed on the remainder of the Site where persistent, systemic incision
and erosion cannot be addressed through spot treatment. East Prong Hunting Creek will be raised using
a transitional length of Priority 2 restoration beginning at the existing road culvert to correct moderate
to high incision. A Priority 1 design will be achieved as quickly as possible, and the stream will be
meandered through the broad floodplain. Priority 1 restoration will continue to the downstream project
extents, where a transitional length of Priority 2 restoration will be required to tie the stream into the
existing channel.
Restoration of UT1 Reach 2 will begin just downstream of the existing driveway culvert. The channel will
be raised to eliminate the perched culvert condition and reestablish aquatic organism passage. The
widespread erosion along the left bank will be addressed by relocating the channel into the center of
the valley. UT1 Reach 2 will likely be designed as a Rosgen B-type stream, with energy dissipated
vertically over steps, at the upstream extents. Moving downstream as the valley widens, the stream will
gain sinuosity and transition to a Rosgen C-type stream, with energy dissipated laterally through
meander geometry. Option 1 and Option 2 specify different downstream tie-in locations for UT1 Reach
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.10

2. In Option 1, the channel will be aligned through the open pasture and connect to East Prong Hunting
Creek within the Site limits. This alignment mimics what appears to be the natural historic alignment
prior to 1976. In Option 2, the channel will tie into the existing receiving channel further up valley.
Restoration of UT2 will begin at an internal crossing at the existing woodline. UT2 will be raised to tie
into the natural valley floor and Priority 1 restoration will continue downstream to East Prong Hunting
Creek. The perched culvert will be removed to eliminate habitat fragmentation and the blockage to
aquatic organism passage. Cattle will be excluded from the easement. The upper section of UT2 will
most likely be designed as a Rosgen B-type channel and will transition to a Rosgen C-type channel in the
flatter East Prong Hunting Creek floodplain.
Buffers will be planted as described in Section 3.2. In areas where invasive species are present, these
plants will be removed either as part of grading activities or treated with herbicide prior to buffer
planting. Restoration of riparian buffers will create an uninterrupted wooded corridor for wildlife,
connecting Site streams to upstream wooded tracts.
This proposed work will not only improve Site streams but will directly address several of the stressors
identified in the LWP and RBRP, including addressing channelization, sedimentation from agriculture,
eroding stream banks, and restoring degraded riparian buffers. The project will benefit downstream
waters in this water supply watershed by directly reducing sediment, nutrients, and fecal coliform
sources. Overall, approximately 13 acres will be preserved in perpetuity on the Site.
f;: �•.1' A. - JUNE 2012 JULY 2013 JUNE 2014
All project reaches will be designed to create stable, functional stream channels. Design will be based on
reference reach and sediment transport analyses. Dimension, pattern, and profile will be designed to
allow for frequent overbank flooding, provide stable bank slopes, and enable biological lift. This
approach will provide hydrologic connectivity between creeks and floodplains, and will also create
vertical and lateral stability. Treating invasive vegetation
and establishing stable bank slopes will allow for a native
and diverse riparian zone to grow which will improve
nutrient removal. A diverse bedform and addition of LWD
will provide habitat for an increased number of species of
insects, fish, and amphibians. This diverse bedform will be
established using instream structures appropriate for the
geomorphic setting such as log steps, rock steps, log vanes,
and constructed riffles and rock cascades.
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.11

Wildlands will begin the project by identifying the best design
approach to meet the stated project objectives and implement
the appropriate degree of intervention. A combination of
analog, empirical, and analytical design approaches will
potentially be used. Reference streams will be identified and
will serve as one of the primary sources of information on
which restoration designs are based. Modeling and other
detailed analyses will be used as appropriate to develop or
verify designs. Wildlands has developed a general approach to
be used as the basis for stream restoration design. The design
approach, which is tailored to each site, continues to develop as additional projects are implemented.
Some of the key elements of the methods are described below.
Generally, stream designs will be based on a design discharge range that, in most cases, will
approximate the bankfull discharge but will be selected to meet the objectives of the design. The
discharge will be determined through detailed hydrologic analyses using the best available information
such as local or regional stream gage records, empirical regional stream flow estimates, hydrologic
modeling results, and reference stream flows. Other discharges (such as baseflow or flows to support
instream habitat features) will also be considered during the design process based on the specific
project objectives.
Conservation easement areas will be marked per DMS guidelines, and crossings will be constructed to
exclude livestock access as discussed in Section 2.9. Native riparian buffers measuring a minimum of 30-
feet from the proposed top of bank will be planted along all restored and enhanced streams on the Site.
Restored buffer widths will exceed 30-feet along East Prong Hunting Creek.
3.2 Vegetation Plan
The Site will be planted following construction of the project.
The planting plan will be based on an appropriate nearby
reference community and will be developed to restore
appropriate strata (canopy, understory, shrub, and
herbaceous layers).
The canopy will be restored through planting of bare root
trees. The understory and shrub layers will be restored
through a combination of planting bare root, low growth
species and installing live stake shrub species. The
herbaceous layer will be restored by seeding the disturbed
area with a native seed mix with an emphasis placed on
creating good soil contact to encourage germination.
4.0 Proposed Mitigation
Two options are proposed. Both options are a combination of
restoration and preservation, with the only difference being
the downstream terminus location of UT1. Under Option 1,
Wildlands proposes to generate 4,875 warm stream credits
(Table G.7a and Figure 6a). Under Option 2, Wildlands
proposes to generate 4,450 warm stream credits (Table G.7b
and Figure 6b).
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.12

The mitigation credit calculation was derived using the US Army Corps of Engineers' Stream Mitigation
Guidance, and was based on Wildlands' conceptual design for maximum ecological uplift.
Given the existing conditions of the stream channels, the disturbance factors, and the constraints,
management objectives for each reach have been established. The management objective, the
mitigation type, and proposed amount of stream mitigation is presented below.
Table G.7a Stream Credits proposed for the Laurel Valley Mitigation Site — OPTION 1
Stream Credits
Reach
Management Objectives
Type of
Mitigation
Length
(feet)1
Ratio
Stream
Credits
RESTORATION
East Prong
Hunting Creek
Restore appropriate dimension, pattern, and
profile with Priority 1 restoration. Install habitat
structures, allow bankfull floodplain access.
Establish native riparian buffer and exclude cattle.
Restoration
1,188
1:1
1,188
UT1 Reach 2
2,006
1:1
2,006
UT2
1,631
1:1
1,631
Restoration Subtotal
1 4,825
4,825
PRESERVATION
UT1 Reach 1
Preserve stream channel in perpetuity.
Preservation
500
10:1
50
Preservation Subtotal
OPTION 1 TOTAL:
5,325
4,875
Note 1: Lengths are approximate based on professional judgement and exclude crossing locations.
Table G.7b Stream Credits proposed for the Laurel Valley Mitigation Site — OPTION 2
Stream Credits
Reach
Management Objectives
Type of
Mitigation
Length
(feet)1
Ratio
Stream
Credits
RESTORATION
East Prong
Hunting Creek
Restore appropriate dimension, pattern, and
profile with Priority 1 restoration. Install habitat
structures, allow bankfull floodplain access.
Establish native riparian buffer and exclude cattle.
Restoration
1,188
1:1
1,188
UT1 Reach 2
1,581
1:1
1,581
UT2
1,631
1:1
1,631
Restoration Subtotal
1 4,400
4,400
PRESERVATION
UT1 Reach 1
Preserve stream channel in perpetuity.
Preservation
500
10:1
50
Preservation Subtotal
OPTION 2 TOTAL:
4,900
4,450
Note 1: Lengths are approximate based on professional judgement and exclude crossing locations.
5.0 Current Ownership and Long Term Protection
The Site is located on one parcel, and an option agreement for the purchase of a conservation easement
as shown on Figures 6a and 6b have been signed by the landowners. The Memoranda of Option are on
record at the Burke County Register of Deeds. The option agreements allow Wildlands to purchase a
conservation easement on the property. The Memoranda of Option are valid for a minimum of 180 days
from the closing date of RFP 16-007875. Wildlands will convey the conservation easement to the State
to provide long term protection of the Site. The conservation easement agreement will ensure the right
of entry abilities of Wildlands, its contractors, and the future easement holder in any future land
transactions. Copies of the Memoranda of Option are included in the appendix. The landowners, parcel
identification number, and deed book and page numbers for the Memoranda of Option are summarized
in Table G.8.
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Page G.13

Table G.8 Property Owners for the Double Rock Mitigation Site
Property Owner
Parcel ID
Number
Memorandum of Option
Deed Book
Page Number
John Hewat Jr.
2712409543
2418
120 (4)
6.0 Scope of Work and Project Phasing
Table G.9 describes the tasks and deliverables required by the Scope of Work outlined in RFP 16-007875.
Note that all deliverables will be provided following the requirements of Attachment H to the RFP. Table
G.10 provides the proposed schedule for accomplishing each Scope of Work task. The Wildlands Team
has experience handling tightly scheduled projects with many stakeholders. We understand the
importance of clear communication and adherence to deadlines. We will establish additional internal
deadlines to keep the project milestones on track. Each task will be staffed with the appropriate
technical and management staff to ensure quality and timely completion.
Table G.9 Summary Scope of Work for the Laurel Valley Mitigation Site
Task #
Task Name
Task Summary
DMS Deliverable
• Onsite meeting with the IRT and DMS
to discuss concepts of the mitigation
plan and obtain concurrence on
planned work and crediting.
• Approved Categorical Exclusion
• Conduct DMS/FHWA guidelines for
document - emailed Adobe PDF.
Environmental and
environmental screening to identify
• IRT meeting minutes — emailed Adobe
1
threatened/endangered species,
PDF.
Project Screening
environmental, or cultural issues on
• DMS Full Delivery Landowner
the Site.
Authorization Form (if applicable).
• Secure DMS Full Delivery Landowner
• USACE Public Notice (if applicable).
Authorization Form (if applicable).
• Satisfy USACE public notification
process (if applicable).
• 4 preliminary review items outlined in
the RFP, submitted electronically as
defined in Attachment H.
• Create conservation easement
. 5 final deliverables outlined in the
2
Property
documents and plats.
RFP, submitted electronically and in
• Close and record the conservation
hard copy as defined in Attachment H.
easement.
. Installation of boundary marking
documented with As -Built survey
during Task 6.
• 2 hard copies and 1 electronic "Draft"
Mitigation Plan and survey.
Mitigation Plan
•Develop asite-specific mitigation plan,
• 3 hard copies and 1 electronic "Final
(Final Draft) and
appropriate for the Site.
Draft" Mitigation Plan and survey.
3
Financial
• Revise per DMS and IRT review
• Performance Bond (may be retired
Assurance
comments.
after completion of Task 6)
• 2 Completed PCN forms and 2 hard
copies of the "Final" Mitigation Plan. 1
copy of both submitted electronically.
4
Permitting and
• Secure all necessary permits and/or
• 1 electronic copy of approved permits
Earthwork
certifications for Site construction.
prior to beginning earthwork.
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.14

Task #
Task Name
Task Summary
DMS Deliverable
• Construct the Site.
• Written notification of earthwork
completion.
Mitigation Site
Planting and
• Complete planting of Site.
• Written notification of planting and
5
Installation of
monitoring device installation
Monitoring
• Install monitoring devices.
completion.
Devices
• 1 hard copy and 1 electronic copy of
Baseline
• Conduct baseline monitoring.
"Draft" Baseline Monitoring Document
• Perform as -built survey.
and As -Built drawings. Electronic copy
Monitoring Report
• prepare baseline monitoring
of surveys.
6
(Including As -Built
Drawings)
document.
• 1 hard copy and 1 electronic copy of
Approved by DMS
• Prepare as -built survey drawings.
"Final" Baseline Monitoring Document
• Install easement markers and signage.
and As -Built drawings. Electronic copy
of surveys.
7
Monitoring Year 1
• Monitor the Site.
• Prepare the monitoring report.
8
Monitoring Year 2
• Monitor the Site.
• Prepare the monitoring report.
p g p
• 1 hard copy and 1 electronic copy of
each "Draft" annual monitoring report.
9
Monitoring Year 3
• Monitor the Site.
• Prepare the monitoring report.
Electronic copy of survey.
• 1 hard copy and 1 electronic copy of
• Monitor the Site.
10
Monitoring Year 4
• prepare the monitoring report.
each "Final" annual monitoring report.
Electronic copy of survey.
• Monitor the Site.
11
Monitoring Year 5
• prepare the monitoring report.
12
Monitoring Year 6
• Monitor the Site.
• Prepare the monitoring report.
• 1 hard copy and 1 electronic copy of
• Monitor the Site.
the "Draft" annual monitoring report
Monitoring Year 7
• Prepare the monitoring report.
and closeout report. Electronic copy of
13
and Close -Out
• Prepare closeout report.
survey.
. 1 hard copy and 1 electronic copy of
Process
•Attend closeout meetings and present
the "Final" annual monitoring report
final project to IRT.
and closeout report. Electronic copy of
survey.
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.15

Table G.10 Project Schedule for the Laurel Valley Mitigation Site
Proposed Time to
Proposed Completion
Project Milestone
Completion
Date (assuming NTP on
(from date of NTP)
January 1, 2020)
Task 1. Regulatory Site Visit & Environmental Screening
3 months
April 1, 2020
Task 2. Submit Recorded Conservation Easement on the Site
1 year, 6 months
July 1, 2021
Task 3. Mitigation Plan Approved by DMS and Financial
1 year, 6 months
July 1, 2021
Assurance
Task 4. Mitigation Site Earthwork Completed
2 years, 6 months
July 1, 2022
Task 5. Mitigation Site Planting & Installation of Monitoring
3 years
January 1, 2023
Devices
Task 6. Baseline Monitoring Report (Including As -Built
3 years, 2 months
March 1, 2023
Drawings) Approved by DMS
Task 7. Submit Monitoring Report #1 to DMS*
3 years, 11 months
December 1, 2023
Task 8. Submit Monitoring Report #2 to DMS*
4 years, 11 months
December 1, 2024
Task 9. Submit Monitoring Report #3 to DMS*
5 years, 11 months
December 1, 2025
Task 10. Submit Monitoring Report #4 to DMS*
6 years, 11 months
December 1, 2026
Task 11. Submit Monitoring Report #5 to DMS*
7 years, 11 months
December 1, 2027
Task 12. Submit Monitoring Report #6 to DMS*
8 years, 11 months
December 1, 2028
Task 13. Submit Monitoring Report #7 to DMS* and
9 years, 11 months
December 1, 2029
complete Close -Out Process
*Meets success criteria (schedule progression has been developed assuming that the site meets success criteria each
monitoring year)
7.0 Performance Standards and Monitoring Plan
The performance criteria for the Site will follow approved performance criteria presented in the DMS
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Plan Template and Guidance (June 2017) and the October 2016 IRT
Mitigation Monitoring Guidance. Annual monitoring and semi-annual site visits will be conducted to
assess the condition of the completed project. Specific performance standard components are proposed
for stream morphology, hydrology, vegetation, and wetland hydrology. The stream restoration and
enhancement I reaches of the project will be assigned specific performance criteria components for
hydrology, vegetation, and geomorphology. The enhancement II reaches will be assigned specific
performance criteria components for vegetation only. Wetland restoration will be assigned specific
performance criteria components for hydrology. Performance criteria will be evaluated throughout the
(up to) seven years of post -construction monitoring. If all stream, vegetation, and hydrologic
performance criteria have been successfully met and at least four bankfull events have occurred during
separate years, Wildlands may propose to terminate stream, wetland, and/or vegetation monitoring
after five years with written approval from the USACE and North Carolina Interagency Review Team
(IRT). An outline of the performance criteria components follows.
7.1 Stream Morphological Parameters and Channel Stability
Dimension
Riffle cross sections on the restoration reaches should be stable and should show little change in
bankfull area, bank height ratio, and width -to -depth ratio. Riffle cross sections should fall within the
parameters defined for channels of the appropriate stream type. If any changes do occur, these changes
will be evaluated to assess whether the stream channel is showing signs of instability. Changes in the
channel that indicate a movement toward stability or enhanced habitat include a decrease in the width -
to -depth ratio in meandering channels or an increase in pool depth. Remedial action would not be taken
if channel changes indicate a movement toward stability.
k6w Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.16

In order to assess channel dimension performance, permanent
cross sections will be installed on restoration and enhancement I
reaches per the IRT Mitigation Monitoring Guidelines (October
2016). Each cross section will be permanently marked with pins to
establish its location. Cross section surveys will include points
measured at all breaks in slope, including top of bank, bankfull,
edge of water, and thalweg. Cross section and bank pin surveys (if
applicable) will be conducted in monitoring years one, two, three,
five, and seven.
Profile and Pattern
Longitudinal profile surveys will be conducted during the as -built
survey but will not be conducted during the seven-year
monitoring period unless other indicators during the annual monitoring indicate a trend toward vertical
and lateral instability. If a longitudinal profile is deemed necessary, monitoring will follow standards as
described in the Stream Channel Reference Sites: An Illustrated Guide to Field Technique (Harrelson et.
al., 1994) for the necessary reaches.
Substrate
Substrate materials in the restoration and enhancement I reaches should indicate a progression towards
or the maintenance of coarser materials in the riffle features and smaller particles in the pool features.
However, natural variations in pool and riffle substrate is expected as a result of sediment transport
processes in steeper sloped channels. A reach -wide pebble count will be performed in each restoration
and enhancement I reach in monitoring years one, two, three, five, and seven for classification
purposes. A wetted pebble count will be performed during the baseline survey at surveyed riffles to
characterize the pavement.
7.2 Hydrology
Stream
Four bankfull flow events, occurring in separate years, must be documented on the restoration reaches
within the seven-year monitoring period. Stream monitoring will continue until success criteria in the
form of four bankfull events in separate years have been documented. Bankfull events will be
documented using photographs and either a crest gage or a pressure transducer, as appropriate for Site
conditions. The selected measurement device will be installed in the stream within a surveyed riffle
cross section. Photographs will also be used to document the occurrence of debris lines and sediment
deposition.
Where restoration or enhancement activities are proposed for intermittent streams, monitoring gauges
will be installed to track the frequency and duration of stream flow events. Continuous surface water
flow within the tributaries must be documented to occur every year for at least 30 consecutive days
during the seven-year monitoring period. This 30-day period of flow can occur at any point during the
year. Additional monitoring may be required if surface water flow cannot be documented due to
abnormally dry conditions.
7.3 Vegetation
The final vegetative success criteria will be the survival of 210 planted stems per acre in the riparian
corridors at the end of the required monitoring period (year seven). The interim measure of vegetative
success for the site will be the survival of at least 320 native species stems per acre at the end of the
third monitoring year and at least 260 stems per acre at the end of the fifth year of monitoring. Also,
trees must average six feet in height at the end of the fifth monitoring year, and eight feet in height at
the end of the seventh monitoring year. If this performance standard is met by year five and stem
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.17

density is trending towards success (i.e., vigor), and invasive species are not threatening ecological
success, monitoring of vegetation on the Site may be terminated with written approval by the USACE in
consultation with the IRT. The extent of invasive species coverage will also be monitored and controlled
as necessary throughout the required monitoring period.
Vegetation monitoring quadrants will be installed across the Site to measure the survival of the planted
trees. The number of monitoring quadrants required, and frequency of monitoring will be based on the
October 2016 IRT Mitigation Monitoring Guidance. Vegetation monitoring will occur in the summer and
will follow the CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation (2008) or another DMS approved protocol.
7.4 Other Parameters
Photo Reference Stations
Photographs should illustrate the Site's vegetation and morphological stability on an annual basis. Cross
section photos should demonstrate no excessive erosion or degradation of the banks. Longitudinal
photos should indicate the absence of persistent mid -channel bars within the channel or vertical
incision. Grade control structures should remain stable. Deposition of sediment on the bank side of vane
arms is preferable. Maintenance of scour pools on the channel side of vane arms is expected.
Photographs will be taken once a year to visually document stability for seven years following
construction. Permanent markers will be established and located with GPS equipment, so that the same
locations and view directions on the Site are photographed each year. Photos will be used to monitor
restoration and enhancement areas, as well as vegetation plots.
Longitudinal reference photos will be established at regular intervals along the channel by taking a
photo looking upstream and downstream. Cross sectional photos will be taken of each permanent cross
section looking upstream and downstream. Reference photos will also be taken for each of the
vegetation plots. Representative digital photos of each permanent photo point, cross section, and
vegetation plot will be taken when the stream and vegetation assessments are conducted. The
photographer will make every effort to consistently maintain the same area in each photo over time.
Visual Assessments
Visual assessments should support the specific performance standards for each metric as described
above. Visual assessments will be performed along stream reaches on a semi-annual basis during the
seven-year monitoring period. Problem areas such as channel instability (e.g. lateral and/or vertical
instability, instream structure failure/instability and/or piping, headcuts), vegetation health (e.g. low
stem density, vegetation mortality, invasive species, or encroachment), beaver activity, or livestock
access will be noted. Areas of concern will be mapped and photographed and will be accompanied by a
written description in the annual report. Problem areas will be re-evaluated during each subsequent
visual assessment. Should remedial actions be required, a plan of action will be provided in the annual
monitoring report.
eenthic Macroinvertebrates
If required by DWR as part of the project's permitting process, benthic macroinvertebrate sampling will
be performed on the restored site. Any required sampling will be performed using DWR Standard
Operating Procedures for Benthic Macroinvertebrates (October 2012).
7.5 Reporting Performance Criteria
Using the DMS Baseline Monitoring Report Template (June 2017), a baseline monitoring document and
as -built record drawings of the project will be developed for the constructed Site. Annual monitoring
reports will be prepared in the fall of each year of monitoring and submitted to DMS. These reports will
be based on the DMS Annual Monitoring Template (June 2017) and Closeout Report Template (June
2017). Full monitoring reports will be submitted to DMS in monitoring years 1, 2, 3, S, and 7.
Abbreviated monitoring reports will be submitted in monitoring years 4 and 6. Closeout monitoring
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.18

period will be seven years beyond completion of construction or until performance standards have been
met.
7.6 Maintenance and Contingency Plans
The Wildlands Team will develop necessary adaptive measures or implement appropriate remedial
actions if the site or a specific component of the site fails to achieve the success criteria outlined above.
The project -specific monitoring plan developed during the design phase will identify an appropriate
threshold for maintenance intervention based on the monitored items. Any actions implemented will be
designed to achieve the success criteria previously specified and will include a work schedule and
updated monitoring criteria (if applicable).
8.0 Quality Control
The Wildlands Team takes pride in the quality of services that we
deliver to our clients. We strive to exceed our clients' expectations.
To maintain the highest level of quality, Wildlands has an established
Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) protocol that every
member of our staff follows.
At the beginning of a project, the necessary level of QA/QC is
determined based on the size and complexity of the project. At a
minimum, the project manager and an assigned QA/QC manager will
function to control the quality of the project. The project manager
provides day-to-day QA/QC and may assign task leaders to provide
task -specific quality control (QC) functions. The QA/QC manager is a
knowledgeable senior staff member who is not assigned to function
in a lead capacity on other areas of the project. This provides the
QA/QC manager objective views of the quality of work.
Our QC program includes established procedures for processes
performed from project inception through implementation and
monitoring of the project. For example, Wildlands has developed
standardized checklists and pre -defined procedures for activities such
+.wren W mk
w.�
Phtm (01 iM118loi Mllpotlon Reyoa Iz.'W cmmbs
Ra B.
Aae<
e.
ae.� aw
er
as field surveys of stream cross -sections and profiles, pebble counts,
benthic surveys, bank stability assessments, natural channel design, permitting, contract document
preparation, post -construction baseline survey, and post construction monitoring. The checklists are
largely based on the most current DMS guidelines to ensure that all required information is included in
the correct format. Task leaders assigned for each activity train project team members in the application
of these procedures. The task leaders assist the project manager by providing day-to-day QC functions,
such as establishing clear decisions and directions to team members in the field, checking the
completeness and accuracy of checklists, constant supervision, and documentation of all decisions,
assumptions, and recommendations. The role of the project manager in QC is to monitor and maintain
project schedule and budget, address any concerns the client may have, constantly assess company
resources, and review all of the checklists.
During the conceptual and preliminary design stages, the project manager and the task leader will
perform a review of the design data, plans, technical specifications, and construction estimate for
accuracy, correct approach, and general overall quality of the product and compliance with DMS
formats before submission to the client. Sediment sampling, groundwater gage monitoring, and
pressure transducer surface flow monitoring are frequently used during the design phase to validate the
design criteria and analytical models. The project manager will perform a similar review at final design as
will the QA/QC manager. During the construction phase, the project manager and the construction task
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.19

manager will regularly meet to provide updates and discuss any issues. The goal of the QC process is to
provide the highest quality product to our client by completing tasks correctly the first time. By
completing procedural processes once, Wildlands helps ensure that we deliver the best products at a
minimum cost to our clients.
QA is performed to confirm that the QC program is effectively practiced, and to provide feedback on
further developments needed in the QC program. The QA/QC manager leads the CIA program; however,
the project manager, task leaders, and project team staff also play large roles. It is each person's
responsibility to notify the QA/QC manager whenever discrepancies and inefficiencies are found in the
set of procedural activities that make up the QC process. The objective of QA is the continual
improvement of the total delivery process to enhance quality, productivity, and customer satisfaction.
We are continually improving the QC process so that our latest products and services are better than the
previous ones.
8.1 Deliverables
The project schedule is established during the scoping phases of a project and it is the project manager's
responsibility to maintain the schedule. A work plan is developed at the outset of a project and shared
internally with team members so that milestone deadlines and work requirements are clearly outlined.
Review time is built into this internal schedule to ensure that adequate review takes place.
The QA form, which is maintained by the QA/QC manager, is established at the beginning of the project
and is maintained throughout the life of the project. Reviews of technical data, design parameters,
reports, plan sheets, hydraulic models, and supporting calculations are tracked on the form. Included on
this form are requirements that a professional staff member, who is not involved in the project on a
day-to-day basis, review the design calculations, hydraulic models, reports, plans, and all other types of
project deliverables. Conformance with DMS report templates and a final grammar/spelling/formatting
review are also integrated into the QA review process.
8.2 Construction
Wildlands team members are familiar with the policies, procedures, and practices necessary to
construct natural channel design and stream mitigation projects. Wildlands has provided construction
administration and observation services of over 72 miles of stream work and 444 acres of wetland work.
We believe that project implementation is the ultimate key to a successful project and, to achieve this, it
is extremely important to have our most experienced staff members involved on all construction
projects. Our team knows how to oversee construction so that the project is completed on time and in
compliance with all federal, state, and local permits. Several members of the proposed project team
have assisted with construction services for the DMS restoration sites, many of which have performed
successfully for multiple years.
Table G.11 Wildlands Team Member Construction Oversight Experience
3
r
�
M
_J
L
3
Z
`
CU
C
Project
Details
W
00
Big Harris Creek Mitigation Site
25,836 stream credits; 9 BMPs
x
x
Henry Fork Mitigation Site
4,807 stream credits; 4.2 wetland credits
x
x
Lone Hickory Mitigation Site
12,900 stream credits; 8.0 wetland credits
x
x
Western Stream Initiative
Multiple projects totaling 15,000 LF
x
Reedy Creek Design -Build Stream Restoration
25,974 stream credits
x
Project
Little Pine II Stream Restoration Project
4,156 LF of streams; 5.4 acres of wetlands
x
Owl's Den Mitigation Site
2,400 stream credits; 8.0 wetland credits
x
W Laurel Valley Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.20

Proposal Number: 16-007875 Vendor: Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
ATTACHMENT B: INSTRUCTIONS TO VENDORS
1. READ, REVIEW AND COMPLY: It shall be the Vendor's responsibility to read this entire document, review all
enclosures and attachments, and any addenda thereto, and comply with all requirements specified herein,
regardless of whether appearing in these Instructions to Vendors or elsewhere in this RFP document.
2. LATE PROPOSALS: Late proposals, regardless of cause, will not be opened or considered, and will automatically
be disqualified from further consideration. It shall be the Vendor's sole responsibility to ensure the timely submission
of proposals.
3. ACCEPTANCE AND REJECTION: The State reserves the right to reject any and all proposals, to waive any
informality in proposals and, unless otherwise specified by the Vendor, to accept any item in the proposal.
4. BASIS FOR REJECTION: Pursuant to 01 NCAC 05B .0501, the State reserves the right to reject any and all offers,
in whole or in part, by deeming the offer unsatisfactory as to quality or quantity, delivery, price or service offered,
non-compliance with the requirements or intent of this solicitation, lack of competitiveness, error(s) in specifications
or indications that revision would be advantageous to the State, cancellation or other changes in the intended project
or any other determination that the proposed requirement is no longer needed, limitation or lack of available funds,
circumstances that prevent determination of the best offer, or any other determination that rejection would be in the
best interest of the State.
EXECUTION: Failure to execute page 1 of the RFP (Execution Page) in the designated space shall render the
proposal non -responsive, and it will be rejected.
ORDER OF PRECEDENCE: In cases of conflict between specific provisions in this solicitation or those in any
resulting contract documents, the order of precedence shall be (high to low) (1) any special terms and conditions
specific to this RFP, including any negotiated terms; (2) requirements and specifications and administration
provisions in Sections 4, 5 and 6 of this RFP; (3) North Carolina General Contract Terms and Conditions in
ATTACHMENT C: NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS; (4) Instructions in
ATTACHMENT B: INSTRUCTIONS TO VENDORS; (5) ATTACHMENT A: PRICING, and (6) Vendor's proposal.
7. INFORMATION AND DESCRIPTIVE LITERATURE: Vendor shall furnish all information requested in the spaces
provided in this document. Further, if required elsewhere in this proposal, each Vendor shall submit with its proposal
any sketches, descriptive literature and/or complete specifications covering the products and Services offered.
Reference to literature submitted with a previous proposal or available elsewhere will not satisfy this provision.
Failure to comply with these requirements shall constitute sufficient cause to reject a proposal without further
consideration.
RECYCLING AND SOURCE REDUCTION: It is the policy of the State to encourage and promote the purchase of
products with recycled content to the extent economically practicable, and to purchase items which are reusable,
refillable, repairable, more durable and less toxic to the extent that the purchase or use is practicable and cost-
effective. We also encourage and promote using minimal packaging and the use of recycled/recyclable products in
the packaging of commodities purchased. However, no sacrifice in quality of packaging will be acceptable. The
Vendor remains responsible for providing packaging that will adequately protect the commodity and contain it for its
intended use. Vendors are strongly urged to bring to the attention of purchasers those products or packaging they
offer which have recycled content and that are recyclable.
CERTIFICATE TO TRANSACT BUSINESS IN NORTH CAROLINA: As a condition of contract award, each out -of -
State Vendor that is a corporation, limited -liability company or limited -liability partnership shall have received, and
shall maintain throughout the term of The Contract, a Certificate of Authority to Transact Business in North Carolina
from the North Carolina Secretary of State, as required by North Carolina law. A State contract requiring only an
isolated transaction completed within a period of six months, and not in the course of a number of repeated
transactions of like nature, shall not be considered as transacting business in North Carolina and shall not require a
Certificate of Authority to Transact Business.
10. SUSTAINABILITY: To support the sustainability efforts of the State of North Carolina we solicit your cooperation
in this effort. Pursuant to Executive Order 156 (1999), it is desirable that all print responses submitted meet the
Ver: 10/23/18 Page 29 of 41

Proposal Number: 16-007875 Vendor: Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
following:
• All copies of the proposal are printed double sided.
• All submittals and copies are printed on recycled paper with a minimum post -consumer content of 30%.
• Unless absolutely necessary, all proposals and copies should minimize or eliminate use of non -recyclable or
non -reusable materials such as plastic report covers, plastic dividers, vinyl sleeves, and GBC binding. Three -
ringed binders, glued materials, paper clips, and staples are acceptable.
• Materials should be submitted in a format which allows for easy removal, filing and/or recycling of paper and
binder materials. Use of oversized paper is strongly discouraged unless necessary for clarity or legibility.
11. HISTORICALLY UNDERUTILIZED BUSINESSES: The State is committed to retaining Vendors from diverse
backgrounds, and it invites and encourages participation in the procurement process by businesses owned by
minorities, women, disabled, disabled business enterprises and non-profit work centers for the blind and severely
disabled. In particular, the State encourages participation by Vendors certified by the State Office of Historically
Underutilized Businesses, as well as the use of HUB -certified vendors as subcontractors on State contracts.
12. RECIPROCAL PREFERENCE: G.S. 143-59 establishes a reciprocal preference requirement to discourage other
states from favoring their own resident Vendors by applying a percentage increase to the price of any proposal from
a North Carolina resident Vendor. To the extent another state does so, North Carolina applies the same percentage
increase to the proposal of a vendor resident in that state. Residency is determined by a Vendor's "Principal Place
of Business," defined as that principal place from which the overall trade or business of the Vendor is directed or
managed.
13. INELIGIBLE VENDORS: As provided in G.S. 147-86.59 and G.S. 147-86.82, the following companies are
ineligible to contract with the State of North Carolina or any political subdivision of the State: a) any company
identified as engaging in investment activities in Iran, as determined by appearing on the Final Divestment List
created by the State Treasurer pursuant to G.S. 147-86.58, and b) any company identified as engaged in a boycott
of Israel as determined by appearing on the List of restricted companies created by the State Treasurer pursuant
to G.S. 147-86.81. A contract with the State or any of its political subdivisions by any company identified in a) or b)
above shall be void ab initio.
14. CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION: To the extent permitted by applicable statutes and rules, the State will maintain
as confidential trade secrets in its proposal that the Vendor does not wish disclosed. As a condition to confidential
treatment, each page containing trade secret information shall be identified in boldface at the top and bottom as
"CONFIDENTIAL" by the Vendor, with specific trade secret information enclosed in boxes, marked in a distinctive
color or by similar indication. Cost information shall not be deemed confidential under any circumstances.
Regardless of what a Vendor may label as a trade secret, the determination whether it is or is not entitled to protection
will be determined in accordance with G.S. 132-1.2. Any material labeled as confidential constitutes a representation
by the Vendor that it has made a reasonable effort in good faith to determine that such material is, in fact, a trade
secret under G.S. 132-1.2. Vendors are urged and cautioned to limit the marking of information as a trade secret or
as confidential so far as is possible. If a legal action is brought to require the disclosure of any material so marked
as confidential, the State will notify Vendor of such action and allow Vendor to defend the confidential status of its
information.
15. PROTEST PROCEDURES: When a Vendor wishes to protest the award of The Contract awarded by the Division
of Purchase and Contract, or awarded by an agency in an awarded amount of at least $25,000, a Vendor shall
submit a written request addressed to the State Purchasing Officer at: Division of Purchase and Contract, 1305 Mail
Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1305. A protest request related to an award amount of less than $25,000 shall
be sent to the purchasing officer of the agency that issued the award. The protest request must be received in the
proper office within thirty (30) consecutive calendar days from the date of the Contract award. Protest letters shall
contain specific grounds and reasons for the protest, how the protesting party was harmed by the award made and
any documentation providing support for the protesting party's claims. Note: Contract award notices are sent only
to the Vendor actually awarded the Contract, and not to every person or firm responding to a solicitation. Proposal
status and Award notices are posted on the Internet at https://www.ips.state.nc.us/ips/. All protests will be handled
pursuant to the North Carolina Administrative Code, 01 NCAC 05B .1519.
Ver: 10/23/18 Page 30 of 41

Proposal Number: 16-007875 Vendor: Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
16. MISCELLANEOUS: Any gender -specific pronouns used herein, whether masculine or feminine, shall be read and
construed as gender neutral, and the singular of any word or phrase shall be read to include the plural and vice
versa.
17. COMMUNICATIONS BY VENDORS: In submitting its proposal, the Vendor agrees not to discuss or otherwise
reveal the contents of its proposal to any source, government or private, outside of the using or issuing agency until
after the award of the Contract or cancellation of this RFP. All Vendors are forbidden from having any
communications with the using or issuing agency, or any other representative of the State concerning the solicitation,
during the evaluation of the proposals (i.e., after the public opening of the proposals and before the award of the
Contract), unless the State directly contacts the Vendor(s) for purposes of seeking clarification or another reason
permitted by the solicitation. A Vendor shall not: (a) transmit to the issuing and/or using agency any information
commenting on the ability or qualifications of any other Vendor to provide the advertised good, equipment,
commodity; (b) identify defects, errors and/or omissions in any other Vendor's proposal and/or prices at any time
during the procurement process; and/or (c) engage in or attempt any other communication or conduct that could
influence the evaluation or award of a Contract related to this RFP. Failure to comply with this requirement shall
constitute sufficient justification to disqualify a Vendor from a Contract award. Only those communications with the
using agency or issuing agency authorized by this RFP are permitted.
18. TABULATIONS: Bid tabulations can be electronically retrieved at the Interactive Purchasing System (IPS),
https://www.ips.state.nc.us/ips/BidNumberSearch.aspx. Click on the IPS BIDS icon, click on Search for Bid, enter
the bid number, and then search. Tabulations will normally be available at this web site not later than one working
day after the bid opening. Lengthy or complex tabulations may be summarized, with other details not made available
on IPS, and requests for additional details or information concerning such tabulations cannot be honored.
19. VENDOR REGISTRATION AND SOLICITATION NOTIFICATION SYSTEM: The North Carolina electronic Vendor
Portal (eVP) allows Vendors to electronically register for free with the State to receive electronic notification of current
procurement opportunities for goods and Services of potential interests to them available on the Interactive
Purchasing System, as well as notifications of status changes to those solicitations. Online registration and other
purchasing information is available at the following website: http://ncadmin.nc.gov/about-doa/divisions/purchase-
contract.
20. WITHDRAWAL OF PROPOSAL: Proposals that have been delivered by hand, U.S. Postal Service, courier or other
delivery service may be withdrawn only in writing and if receipt is acknowledged by the office issuing the RFP prior
to the time for opening proposals identified on the cover page of this RFP (or such later date included in an
Addendum to the RFP). Written withdrawal requests shall be submitted on the Vendor's letterhead and signed by
an official of the Vendor authorized to make such request. Any withdrawal request made after the opening of
proposals shall be allowed only for good cause shown and in the sole discretion of the Division of Purchase and
Contract.
21. INFORMAL COMMENTS: The State shall not be bound by informal explanations, instructions or information
given at any time by anyone on behalf of the State during the competitive process or after award. The State is
bound only by information provided in writing in this RFP and in formal Addenda issued through IPS.
22. COST FOR PROPOSAL PREPARATION: Any costs incurred by Vendor in preparing or submitting offers are the
Vendor's sole responsibility; the State of North Carolina will not reimburse any Vendor for any costs incurred or
associated with the preparation of proposals.
23. VENDOR'S REPRESENTATIVE: Each Vendor shall submit with its proposal the name, address, and telephone
number of the person(s) with authority to bind the firm and answer questions or provide clarification concerning the
firm's proposal.
24. INSPECTION AT VENDOR'S SITE: The State reserves the right to inspect, at a reasonable time, the equipment,
item, plant or other facilities of a prospective Vendor prior to Contract award, and during the Contract term as
necessary for the State's determination that such equipment, item, plant or other facilities conform with the
specifications/requirements and are adequate and suitable for the proper and effective performance of the Contract.
Ver: 10/23/18 Page 31 of 41

Proposal Number: 16-007875 Vendor: Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
ATTACHMENT C: NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL CONTRACT TERMS & CONDITIONS
1. PERFORMANCE AND DEFAULT:
a) It is anticipated that the tasks and duties undertaken by the Vendor shall include services or the
manufacturing, furnishing, or development of goods and other tangible features or components as
deliverables that are directly correlated and/or ancillary to the services performed. Except as provided
immediately below, and unless otherwise mutually agreed in writing prior to award, any service deliverables
or ancillary services provided by Vendor in performance of the contract shall remain property of the State.
During performance, Vendor may provide proprietary components as part of the service deliverables that
are identified in the solicitation response. Vendor grants the State a personal, permanent, non -transferable
license to use such proprietary components of the service deliverables and other functional ities, as provided
under this Agreement. Any technical and business information owned by Vendor or its suppliers or licensors
made accessible or furnished to the State shall be and remain the property of the Vendor or such other
party, respectively. Vendor agrees to perform its services under the contract in the same or similar manner
provided to comparable users. The State shall notify the Vendor of any defects or deficiencies in
performance of its services or failure of service deliverables to conform to the standards and specifications
provided in this solicitation. Vendor agrees to remedy defective performance or any nonconforming
deliverables upon timely notice provided by the State.
b) Vendor has a limited, non-exclusive license to access and use State Data provided to Vendor, but solely for
performing its obligations under this Agreement and in confidence as may be further provided herein. Vendor
or its suppliers shall at a minimum, and except as otherwise specified and agreed herein, provide assistance
to the State related to all services performed or deliverables procured hereunder during the State's normal
business hours. Vendor warrants that its support, customer service, and assistance will be performed in
accordance with generally accepted and applicable industry standards.
c) If, through any cause, Vendor shall fail to fulfill in a timely and proper manner the obligations under The
Contract, the State shall have the right to terminate The Contract by giving written notice to the Vendor and
specifying the effective date thereof In that event and subject to all other provisions of this contract, all
finished or unfinished deliverable items under this contract prepared by the Vendor shall, at the option of the
State, become its property, and the Vendor shall be entitled to receive compensation for units actually
produced, if any, in an amount determined by reducing the total amount due had the full number of Units
been produced pro rata, such that the ratio of the final compensation actually paid to the original total amount
due in accordance with Attachment A (as amended, if applicable) is equal to the ratio of the Units actually
generated to the total Units identified in Attachment A.
d) In the event of default by the Vendor, the State may procure the goods and services necessary to complete
performance hereunder from other sources and hold the Vendor responsible for any excess cost occasioned
thereby. In addition, in the event of default by the Vendor under The Contract, or upon the Vendor filing a
petition for bankruptcy or the entering of a judgment of bankruptcy by or against the Vendor, the State may
immediately cease doing business with the Vendor, immediately terminate The Contract for cause, and may
take action to debar the Vendor from doing future business with the State.
GOVERNMENTAL RESTRICTIONS: In the event any Governmental restrictions are imposed which necessitate
alteration of the goods, material, quality, workmanship or performance of the Services offered prior to acceptance,
it shall be the responsibility of the Vendor to notify the Contract Lead at once, in writing, indicating the specific
regulation which required such alterations. The State reserves the right to accept any such alterations, including any
price adjustments occasioned thereby, or to cancel the Contract.
AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS: Any and all payments to the Vendor shall be dependent upon and subject to the
availability of funds to the agency for the purpose set forth in The Contract.
4. TAXES: Any applicable taxes shall be invoiced as a separate item.
a) G.S. 143-59.1 bars the Secretary of Administration from entering into Contracts with Vendors if the Vendor
or its affiliates meet one of the conditions of G.S. 105-164.8(b) and refuses to collect use tax on sales of
tangible personal property to purchasers in North Carolina. Conditions under G.S. 105-164.8(b) include: (1)
Ver: 10/23/18 Page 32 of 41

Proposal Number: 16-007875 Vendor: Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Maintenance of a retail establishment or office, (2) Presence of representatives in the State that solicit sales
or transact business on behalf of the Vendor and (3) Systematic exploitation of the market by media -
assisted, media -facilitated, or media -solicited means. By execution of the proposal document the Vendor
certifies that it and all of its affiliates, (if it has affiliates), collect(s) the appropriate taxes.
b) The agency(ies) participating in The Contract are exempt from Federal Taxes, such as excise and
transportation. Exemption forms submitted by the Vendor will be executed and returned by the using agency.
c) Prices offered are not to include any personal property taxes, nor any sales or use tax (or fees) unless
required by the North Carolina Department of Revenue.
SITUS AND GOVERNING LAWS: This Contract is made under and shall be governed and construed in accordance
with the laws of the State of North Carolina, without regard to its conflict of laws rules, and within which State all
matters, whether sounding in Contract or tort or otherwise, relating to its validity, construction, interpretation and
enforcement shall be determined.
PAYMENT TERMS: Payment terms are Net not later than 30 days after receipt of a correct invoice or acceptance
of goods, whichever is later. The using agency is responsible for all payments to the Vendor under the Contract.
Payment by some agencies may be made by procurement card, if the Vendor accepts that card (Visa, MasterCard,
etc.) from other customers, and it shall be accepted by the Vendor for payment under the same terms and conditions
as any other method of payment accepted by the Vendor. If payment is made by procurement card, then payment
may be processed immediately by the Vendor.
7. AFFIRMATIVE ACTION: The Vendor will take affirmative action in complying with all Federal and State
requirements concerning fair employment and employment of people with disabilities and concerning the treatment
of all employees without regard to discrimination on the basis of any prohibited grounds as defined by Federal and
State law.
8. CONDITION AND PACKAGING: Unless otherwise provided by special terms and conditions or specifications, it is
understood and agreed that any item offered or shipped has not been sold or used for any purpose and shall be in
first class condition. All containers/packaging shall be suitable for handling, storage or shipment.
9. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY WARRANTY AND INDEMNITY: Vendor shall hold and save the State, its officers,
agents and employees, harmless from liability of any kind, including costs and expenses, resulting from infringement
of the rights of any third party in any copyrighted material, patented or patent -pending invention, article, device or
appliance delivered in connection with The Contract.
a. Vendor warrants to the best of its knowledge that:
i. Performance under The Contract does not infringe upon any intellectual property rights of any
third party; and
ii. There are no actual or threatened actions arising from, or alleged under, any intellectual property
rights of any third party;
b. Should any deliverables supplied by Vendor become the subject of a claim of infringement of a patent,
copyright, trademark or a trade secret in the United States, the Vendor, shall at its option and expense,
either procure for the State the right to continue using the deliverables, or replace or modify the same to
become non -infringing. If neither of these options can reasonably be taken in Vendor's judgment, or if
further use shall be prevented by injunction, the Vendor agrees to cease provision of any affected
deliverables and refund any sums the State has paid Vendor and make every reasonable effort to assist
the State in procuring substitute deliverables. If, in the sole opinion of the State, the cessation of use by
the State of any such deliverables due to infringement issues makes the retention of other items acquired
from the Vendor under this Agreement impractical, the State shall then have the option of terminating the
Agreement, or applicable portions thereof, without penalty or termination charge; and Vendor agrees to
refund any sums the State paid for unused Services or Deliverables.
c. The Vendor, at its own expense, shall defend any action brought against the State to the extent that such
action is based upon a claim that the deliverables supplied by the Vendor, their use or operation, infringes
on a patent, copyright, trademark or violates a trade secret in the United States. The Vendor shall pay
those costs and damages finally awarded or agreed in a settlement against the State in any such action.
Such defense and payment shall be conditioned on the following:
i. That the Vendor shall be notified within a reasonable time in writing by the State of any such
claim; and
Ver: 10/23/18 Page 33 of 41

Proposal Number: 16-007875 Vendor: Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
ii. That the Vendor shall have the sole control of the defense of any action on such claim and all
negotiations for its settlement or compromise provided, however, that the State shall have the
option to participate in such action at its own expense.
d. Vendor will not be required to defend or indemnify the State if any claim by a third party against the State
for infringement or misappropriation results from the State's material alteration of any Vendor -branded
deliverables or services, or from the continued use of the deliverable(s) or Services after receiving notice
of infringement on a trade secret of a third party.
10. TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE: If this contract contemplates deliveries or performance over a period of time,
the State may terminate this contract at any time by providing 60 days' notice in writing from the State to the Vendor.
In that event, any or all finished or unfinished deliverables prepared by the Vendor under this contract shall, at the
option of the State, become its property. If the contract is terminated by the State as provided in this section, the
State shall pay for those items for which such option is exercised, less any payment or compensation previously
made.
11. ADVERTISING: Vendor agrees not to use the existence of The Contract or the name of the State of North Carolina
as part of any commercial advertising or marketing of products or Services. A Vendor may inquire whether the State
is willing to act as a reference by providing factual information directly to other prospective customers.
12. ACCESS TO PERSONS AND RECORDS: During and after the term hereof, the State Auditor and any using
agency's internal auditors shall have access to persons and records related to The Contract to verify accounts and
data affecting fees or performance under the Contract, as provided in G.S. 143-49(9).
13. ASSIGNMENT: No assignment of the Vendor's obligations nor the Vendor's right to receive payment hereunder
shall be permitted.
However, upon written request approved by the issuing purchasing authority and solely as a convenience to the
Vendor, the State may:
a) Forward the Vendor's payment check directly to any person or entity designated by the Vendor, and
b) Include any person or entity designated by Vendor as a joint payee on the Vendor's payment check.
In no event shall such approval and action obligate the State to anyone other than the Vendor and the Vendor shall
remain responsible for fulfillment of all Contract obligations. Upon advance written request, the State may, in its
unfettered discretion, approve an assignment to the surviving entity of a merger, acquisition or corporate
reorganization, if made as part of the transfer of all or substantially all of the Vendor's assets. Any purported
assignment made in violation of this provision shall be void and a material breach of The Contract.
14. INSURANCE:
COVERAGE - During the term of the Contract, the Vendor at its sole cost and expense shall provide commercial
insurance of such type and with such terms and limits as may be reasonably associated with the Contract. As a
minimum, the Vendor shall provide and maintain the following coverage and limits:
a) Worker's Compensation - The Vendor shall provide and maintain Worker's Compensation Insurance, as
required by the laws of North Carolina, as well as employer's liability coverage with minimum limits of $500,000.00,
covering all of Vendor's employees who are engaged in any work under the Contract in North Carolina. If any work
is sub -contracted, the Vendor shall require the sub -Contractor to provide the same coverage for any of his employees
engaged in any work under the Contract within the State.
b) Commercial General Liability - General Liability Coverage on a Comprehensive Broad Form on an
occurrence basis in the minimum amount of $1,000,000.00 Combined Single Limit. Defense cost shall be in excess
of the limit of liability.
c) Automobile - Automobile Liability Insurance, to include liability coverage, covering all owned, hired and non -
owned vehicles, used within North Carolina in connection with the Contract. The minimum combined single limit
shall be $250,000.00 bodily injury and property damage; $250,000.00 uninsured/under insured motorist; and
$2,500.00 medical payment.
REQUIREMENTS - Providing and maintaining adequate insurance coverage is a material obligation of the Vendor
and is of the essence of The Contract. All such insurance shall meet all laws of the State of North Carolina. Such
Ver: 10/23/18 Page 34 of 41

Proposal Number: 16-007875 Vendor: Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
insurance coverage shall be obtained from companies that are authorized to provide such coverage and that are
authorized by the Commissioner of Insurance to do business in North Carolina. The Vendor shall at all times comply
with the terms of such insurance policies, and all requirements of the insurer under any such insurance policies,
except as they may conflict with existing North Carolina laws or The Contract. The limits of coverage under each
insurance policy maintained by the Vendor shall not be interpreted as limiting the Vendor's liability and obligations
under the Contract.
15. GENERAL INDEMNITY: The Vendor shall hold and save the State, its officers, agents, and employees, harmless
from liability of any kind, including all claims and losses accruing or resulting to any other person, firm, or corporation
furnishing or supplying work, Services, materials, or supplies in connection with the performance of The Contract,
and from any and all claims and losses accruing or resulting to any person, firm, or corporation that may be injured
or damaged by the Vendor in the performance of The Contract and that are attributable to the negligence or
intentionally tortious acts of the Vendor provided that the Vendor is notified in writing within 30 days from the date
that the State has knowledge of such claims. The Vendor represents and warrants that it shall make no claim of any
kind or nature against the State's agents who are involved in the delivery or processing of Vendor deliverables or
Services to the State. The representation and warranty in the preceding sentence shall survive the termination or
expiration of The Contract.
16. ELECTRONIC PROCUREMENT:
a) Purchasing shall be conducted through the Statewide E-Procurement Service. The State's third -party agent shall
serve as the Supplier Manager for this E-Procurement Service. The Vendor shall register for the Statewide E-
Procurement Service within two (2) business days of notification of award in order to receive an electronic purchase
order resulting from award of this contract.
b) THE SUCCESSFUL BIDDER(S) SHALL PAY A TRANSACTION FEE OF 1.75% (.0175) ON THE TOTAL
DOLLAR AMOUNT (EXCLUDING SALES TAXES) OF ALL GOODS INCLUDED ON EACH PURCHASE ORDER
ISSUED THROUGH THE STATEWIDE E-PROCUREMENT SERVICE. This applies to all purchase orders, regardless
of the quantity or dollar amount of the purchase order. The transaction fee shall not be stated or included as a separate
item on the invoice. There are no additional fees or charges to the Vendor for the services rendered by the Supplier
Manager under this contract. Vendor will receive a credit for transaction fees they paid for the purchase of any item(s)
if an item(s) is returned through no fault of the Vendor. Transaction fees are non-refundable when an item is rejected
and returned, or declined, due to the Vendor's failure to perform or comply with specifications or requirements of the
contract.
c) Vendor or its Authorized Reseller, as applicable, will be invoiced monthly for the State's transaction fee by the Supplier
Manager. The transaction fee shall be based on a) purchase activity for the prior month, or b) purchases for which the
supplier invoice has been paid. Unless Supplier Manager receives written notice from the Vendor identifying with
specificity any errors in an invoice for the transaction fee within thirty (30) days of the receipt of invoice, such invoice
shall be deemed to be correct and Vendor shall have waived its right to later dispute the accuracy and completeness of
the invoice. Payment of the transaction fee by the Vendor is due to the account designated by the State within thirty
(30) days after receipt of the invoice for the transaction fee. If payment of the transaction fee is not received by the State
within this payment period, it shall be considered a material breach of contract. Pursuant to G.S. 147-86.23, the Service
will charge interest and late payment penalties on past due balances. Interest shall be charged at the rate set by the
Secretary of Revenue pursuant to G.S. 105-241.21 as of the date the balances are past due. The late -payment penalty
will be ten percent (10%) of the account receivable. Within thirty (30) days of the receipt of invoice, Vendor may dispute
in writing the accuracy of an invoice. No interest shall be charged on disputed and overdue amounts to the extent the
State agrees to reduce or adjust the amount in dispute. The Supplier Manager shall provide, whenever reasonably
requested by the Vendor in writing (including electronic documents), supporting documentation from the E-Procurement
Service that accounts for the amount of the invoice.
d) The Supplier Manager will capture the order from the State approved user, including the shipping and payment
information, and submit the order in accordance with the E-Procurement Service. Subsequently, the Supplier Manager
will send those orders to the appropriate Vendor on State Contract. The State or State -approved user, not the Supplier
Manager, shall be responsible for the solicitation, bids received, evaluation of bids received, award of contract, and the
payment for goods delivered.
e) Vendor shall at all times maintain the confidentiality of its user name and password for the Statewide E-Procurement
Ver: 10/23/18 Page 35 of 41

Proposal Number: 16-007875 Vendor: Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Services. If Vendor is a corporation, partnership or other legal entity, then the Vendor may authorize its employees to
use its password. Vendor shall be responsible for all activity and all charges by such employees. Vendor agrees not to
permit a third party to use the Statewide E-Procurement Services through its account. If there is a breach of security
through the Vendor's account, Vendor shall immediately change its password and notify the Supplier Manager of the
security breach by email. Vendor shall cooperate with the State and the Supplier Manager to mitigate and correct any
security breach.
17. SUBCONTRACTING: Performance under The Contract by the Vendor shall not be subcontracted without prior
written approval of the State's assigned Contract Lead. Unless otherwise agreed in writing, acceptance of a Vendor's
proposal shall include approval to use the subcontractor(s) that have been specified therein.
18. CONFIDENTIALITY: Any State information, data, instruments, documents, studies or reports given to or prepared
or assembled by or provided to the Vendor under The Contract shall be kept as confidential, used only for the
purpose(s) required to perform The Contract and not divulged or made available to any individual or organization
without the prior written approval of the State.
19. CARE OF STATE DATA AND PROPERTY: The Vendor agrees that it shall be responsible for the proper custody
and care of any data owned and furnished to the Vendor by the State (State Data), or other State property in the
hands of the Vendor, for use in connection with the performance of The Contract or purchased by or for the State
for The Contract. Vendor will reimburse the State for loss or damage of such property while in Vendor's custody.
The State's Data in the hands of the Vendor shall be protected from unauthorized disclosure, loss, damage,
destruction by a natural event or other eventuality. Such State Data shall be returned to the State in a form acceptable
to the State upon the termination or expiration of this Agreement. The Vendor shall notify the State of any security
breaches within 24 hours as required by G.S. 14313-1379. See G.S. 75-60 et seq.
20. OUTSOURCING: Any Vendor or subcontractor providing call or contact center services to the State of North
Carolina or any of its agencies shall disclose to inbound callers the location from which the call or contact center
services are being provided.
If, after award of a contract, the contractor wishes to relocate or outsource any portion of performance to a location
outside the United States, or to contract with a subcontractor for any such performance, which subcontractor and
nature of the work has not previously been disclosed to the State in writing, prior written approval must be obtained
from the State agency responsible for the contract.
Vendor shall give notice to the using agency of any relocation of the Vendor, employees of the Vendor,
subcontractors of the Vendor, or other persons providing performance under a State contract to a location outside
of the United States.
21. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS: Vendor shall comply with all laws, ordinances, codes, rules, regulations, and
licensing requirements that are applicable to the conduct of its business and its performance in accordance with
The Contract, including those of federal, state, and local agencies having jurisdiction and/or authority.
22. ENTIRE AGREEMENT: This RFP and any documents incorporated specifically by reference represent the entire
agreement between the parties and supersede all prior oral or written statements or agreements. This RFP, any
addenda hereto, and the Vendor's proposal are incorporated herein by reference as though set forth verbatim.
All promises, requirements, terms, conditions, provisions, representations, guarantees, and warranties contained
herein shall survive the contract expiration or termination date unless specifically provided otherwise herein, or
unless superseded by applicable Federal or State statutes of limitation.
23. ELECTRONIC RECORDS: The State will digitize all Vendor responses to this solicitation, if not received
electronically, as well as any awarded contract together with associated procurement -related documents. These
electronic copies shall constitute a preservation record and shall serve as the official record of this procurement
with the same force and effect as the original written documents comprising such record. Any electronic copy,
printout or other output readable by sight shown to reflect such record accurately shall constitute an "original."
24. AMENDMENTS: This Contract may be amended only by a written amendment duly executed by the State and the
Vendor.
Ver: 10/23/18 Page 36 of 41

Proposal Number: 16-007875 Vendor: Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
25. NO WAIVER: Notwithstanding any other language or provision in The Contract, nothing herein is intended nor
shall be interpreted as a waiver of any right or remedy otherwise available to the State under applicable law. The
waiver by the State of any right or remedy on any one occasion or instance shall not constitute or be interpreted
as a waiver of that or any other right or remedy on any other occasion or instance.
26. FORCE MAJEURE: Neither party shall be deemed to be in default of its obligations hereunder if and so long as it
is prevented from performing such obligations as a result of events beyond its reasonable control, including without
limitation, fire, power failures, any act of war, hostile foreign action, nuclear explosion, riot, strikes or failures or
refusals to perform under subcontracts, civil insurrection, earthquake, hurricane, tornado, or other catastrophic
natural event or act of God.
27. SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY: Notwithstanding any other term or provision in The Contract, nothing herein is intended
nor shall be interpreted as waiving any claim or defense based on the principle of sovereign immunity or other State
or federal constitutional provision or principle that otherwise would be available to the State under applicable law.
Ver: 10/23/18 Page 37 of 41

Proposal Number: 16-007875 Vendor: Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
ATTACHMENT D: LOCATION OF WORKERS UTILIZED BY VENDOR
In accordance with NC General Statute 143-59.4, the Vendor shall detail the location(s) at which performance will occur,
as well as the manner in which it intends to utilize resources or workers outside of the United States in the performance
of this Contract. The State will evaluate the additional risks, costs, and other factors associated with such utilization prior
to making an award. Please complete items a, b, and c below.
a) Will any work under this Contract be performed outside the United States? ❑ YES ® NO
If the Vendor answered "YES" above, Vendor must complete items 1 and 2 below:
List the location(s) outside the United States where work under this Contract will be performed by the Vendor,
any sub -Contractors, employees, or other persons performing work under the Contract:
n/a
2. Describe the corporate structure and location of corporate employees and activities of the Vendor, its affiliates
or any other sub -Contractors that will perform work outside the U.S.:
n/a
b) The Vendor agrees to provide notice, in writing to the State, of the relocation of the
Vendor, employees of the Vendor, sub -Contractors of the Vendor, or other persons ❑X YES ❑ NO
performing services under the Contract outside of the United States
NOTE: All Vendor or sub -Contractor personnel providing call or contact center services to
the State of North Carolina under the Contract shall disclose to inbound callers the
location from which the call or contact center services are being provided.
c) Identify all U.S. locations at which performance will occur:
Design: Asheville, NC; Charlotte, NC / Survey: Asheville, NC
Ver: 10/23/18 Page 38 of 41

Proposal Number: 16-007875 Vendor. Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
ATTACHMENT E: CERTIFICATION OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
Name of Vendor: Wildlands En ineerin , Inc.
The undersigned hereby certifies that: [check all applicable boxes]
❑ The Vendor is in sound financial condition and, if applicable, has received an unqualified audit opinion for the
latest audit of its financial statements.
Date of latest audit:
® The Vendor has no outstanding liabilities, including tax and judgment liens, to the Internal Revenue Service or
any other government entity.
® The Vendor is current in all amounts due for payments of federal and state taxes and required employment -
related contributions and withholdings.
❑ The Vendor is not the subject of any current litigation or findings of noncompliance under federal or state law.
® The Vendor has not been the subject of any past or current litigation, findings in any past litigation, or findings
of noncompliance under federal or state law that may impact in any way its ability to fulfill the requirements of
this Contract.
® He or she is authorized to make the foregoing statements on behalf of the Vendor.
Note: This is a continuing certification and Vendor shall notify the Contract Lead within 15 days of any material
change to any of the representations made herein.
If any one or more of the foregoing boxes is NOT checked, Vendor shall explain the reason in the space below;
Box 1 is not checked, because, although Wildlands is in sound financial condition, our CPA has recommended that a full audit is not
necessary for a firm of our size. Our CPA performs an annual CPA review of our financials for our bonding company, produces quarterly
statements for our bonding company, and is actively involved in reconciliations and our other regular accounting duties on a monthly basis.
Box 4 is not checked, because, On April IElth, 2019 Wildlands was served with a summons and complaint by a former planting
subcontractor for a non-flMS project; the complaint alleges Wildlands owes it certain sums of money. Wildlands disputes the allegations
and maintains it paid the subcontractor for all work the subcontractor properly performed under the contract. The subcontractor
improperly performed work at the subject mitigation site, did not correct the improper work, and thus was not paid for and which work
had to be corrected by another planting subcontractor. The subcontractor also invoiced Wildlands for items that were not a part of the
contract between Wildlands and the subcontractor.
JW--_ b. 08/13/2019
Si aturs Date
Shawn D. Wilkerson President
Printed Name Title
[This Certification must be signed by an individual authorized to speak for the Vendor]
Ver 10123/18 Page 39 of 41

Proposal Number: 16-007875 Vendor.- Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
ATTACHMENT F: SUPPLEMENTAL VENDOR INFORMATION
HISTORICALLY UNDERUTILIZED BUSINESSES
Historically Underutilized Businesses (HUBs) consist of minority, women and disabled business firms that are at least
fifty-one percent owned and operated by an individual(s) of the categories. Also included in this category are disabled
business enterprises and non-profit work centers for the blind and severely disabled.
Pursuant to G.S. 143B-1361(a), 143-48 and 143-128.4, the State invites and encourages participation in this
procurement process by businesses owned by minorities, women, disabled, disabled business enterprises and non-
profit work centers for the blind and severely disabled. This includes utilizing subcontractors to perform the required
functions in this RFP. Any questions concerning NC HUB certification, contact the North Carolina Office of Historically
Underutilized Businesses at [phone]. The Vendor shall respond to question #1 and #2 below.
a) Is Vendor a Historically Underutilized Business? ❑ Yes X❑ No
b) Is Vendor Certified with North Carolina as a Historically Underutilized Business? ❑ Yes ® No
If so, state HUB classification:
Ver: 10/23/18 Page 40 of 41

Proposal Number: 16-007875 Vendor. Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
ATTACHMENT G: VENDOR'S INFORMATION
Vendors Primary Contact (or Project Manager)
Name:
Eric Neuhaus, PE
Agency:
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Title:
Water Resources Engineer
Address:
167-B Haywood Road
City:
Asheville
State/ Zip:
NC/ 28806
Telephone:
[phone]
Fax:
[phone]
Email:
[e-mail]
Vendors Execution Address (Where the contract should be mailed forsignature)
Name:
Shawn D. Wilkerson
Agency:
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Title:
President
Address:
1430 S. Mint Street, Suite 104
City:
Charlotte
State/ Zip:
NC/ 28203
Telephone:
[phone]
Fax:
[phone]
Email:
[e-mail]
Vendors Payment (Remit To) Address (Where the checks should be mailed
(This address should agree with the "Remit -To" address associated with the Vendor's Tax ID. This information
must be verified with the Vendor's Corporate Accounting Office)
Name:
Shawn D. Wilkerson
Agency:
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Title:
President
Address:
1430 S. Mint Street, Suite 104
City:
Charlotte
State/ Zip:
NC/ 28203
Telephone:
[phone]
Fax:
[phone]
Email:
[e-mail]
Ver: 10/23/18 Page 41 of 41

RFP 16-007875
Tasks and Deliverables
Format
Delivery Method
ATTACHMENT H
Task #
Task Description
Task Deliverable
Hardcopy (#)
Adobe PDF
MS Word
Digital Survey in AutoCAD
Digital Survey in ArcMap
E-Mail
USB Flash Drive
Compact Disc
Notes:
(.dwg)**
(.shp)**
Environmental & Project
Approved Categorical Exclusion
x
x
Screening
Regulatory Agency Post -contract site visit
x
x
Meetine Minutes
DMS SPO
DMS SPO
DMS SPO
DMS SPO
DMS
SPO
DMS
SPO
DMS
SPO
Draft Conservation Easement
x x
x
x
Preliminary Conservation Easement Survey
x x
x x
x
x
x
x
Draft Attorney's Report/30-year title search
x
x
Draft Title Attorneys"Schedule A"
x
x
2
Property
...................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Recorded Conservation Easement
1
x x
x
x
x
Final Conservation Easement Survey
1
x x
x x
x x
x
x
x
x
x
.........................................................
Final Attorneys Report/30-year title search;
......
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
......... .........
deeds; documentation
1
x
Original Title Insurance Policy
1
_
_
x
Survey monumentation installation
Draft Mitigation Plan 2
..............................................................
Final Draft Mitigation Plan
.......... ... 3
including revisions made during deliverable
review)
......... ..... .........
Financial Assurance 1
3 I Mitigation Plan & Financial
Assurance
Final Mitigation Plan
2
documented on As -Built Survey per Task 6
x x x
.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
DMS will upload the Final Draft Mitigation Report to the IRT Sharepoint for review by
x x x IRT members, and distribute a hardcopy each to USACE and DWR.
............. ____. ...................... ____. ____...... ____. ____. ..... ..... .........
x
DMS will distribute the Final Mitigation Plan to the USACE.
.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Vendor will upload to Final Mitigation Plan to the NC Division of Water Resources
online document library at the following link:
Instructions for uploading documents are found online at the following link:
https://edocs.deg.nc.gov/WaterResources/0/doc/620121/Pagelaspx
DMS will distribute 1 signed PCN to the USACE, and return 1 signed PCN to the
........................................................
.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Vendor. The Vendor will upload the returned, signed PCN with the Final Mitigation
PCN forms (completed with DMS as
2
Plan to the NC Division of Water Resources online document library at the link
Permittee, Vendor as Agent)
provided above.
4
Permitting
Permits and certifications
x
x
Planting & monitoring
5
installation
Written documentation
x
.............................................
.............................
.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
x
Draft Baseline Monitoring report, As -Built
1
x
x
x
x
Drawings digital.delrverables
..........
..........................
......... ......... ......
......... .........
.................. .........
......... ......
... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ..........
Baseline Monitoring & As-
Final Baseline Monitoring report, As -Built
Vendor will upload to Final Baseline Monitoring Report and As
6
Built Drawings
Drawings, digital deliverables (including
Built Drawings to the NC Division of Water Resources online
revisions made during deliverable review &
1
x
x
x
x
document library at the link provided above.
Quality Control)
Draft Annual Monitoring Report & digital
1
x
.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
x
x
deliverables
7-12
Monitoring Years 1-6
Final Annual Monitoring Report &digital
Vendor will upload to Final Mitigation Plan to the NC Division of Water Resources
deliverables
1
x
x
x
online document library at the link provided above.
Draft Annual Monitoring Report#7,
1
x
.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
x
x
Closeout Report & digital deliverables
Monitorin Year 7 and
g
13
project Closeout
Final Annual Monitoring Report #7, Closeout
Vendor will upload to Final Mitigation Plan to the NC Division of Water Resources
Report& digital deliverables
1
x
x
x
online document library at the link provided above.

Technical Proposal Evaluation Criteria
Rating Form
Offeror:
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Site Name:
Laurel Valley Mitigation Site: OPTION 1
River Basin
/ Catalog
Catawba 03050101
Unit:
RFP
Number:
Date of Site
Evaluation:
TBD
Type/Amt of
M itigation
Offered:
Proposal
Review
TBD
Committee:
Alternate
TBD
Attendees:

Section 1. Minimum Requirements
Yes/No
or N/A
1- For stream mitigation projects, does the Technical Proposal adequately document the historical presence of
stream(s) on the project site, provide the drainage areas (acres) and provide a ccu rate, process -based descriptions
ofaII project stream rea ches a nd tributaries?
2- For proposals that i nclude wetland mitigation, does the technical proposal adequately document the presence of
hydri c soil i ndicators (i ncluding soil boring logs prepared by a Li censed Soil Scientist a nd a ma p showing soil boring
locations and mapped soil series)?
3- For proposals that i nclude wetland mitigation, does the proposed success hydroperiodfollow the I RTGuidance
for the proj ect s ite a nd soil series? I fthe proposed hyd roperiod d iffers from the I RT gu i dance, j ustification must be
provi ded i n the RFP.
4- Does the proposal adequately document the physical, chemical and/or biological i mpairments that currently
exi ston the projectsite?
5- Does DMS agree with the overa II mitigation a pproach (proposed I evels of i ntervention) presented? [The
Tech ni cal Proposal must demonstrate that the proposed mitigation a ctivities a re a ppropriate for exi sting s ite
conditionsand watershed characteristics (e.g., adjacentIand use/land cover), andareoptimized toyield maximum
fu ncti onal ga ins.]
6- Does DMS agree with the proposed credit structure(s) described in the proposal?
7- Does the proposed project avoid significant a dverse i mpacts to exi sting wetl ands a nd/or streams?
8- Does the proposal adequately describe how the projectwi II advance DMS watershed plan ninggoa Is?
9- For a ny proposed Priority 2 restoration, i s P2j ustified a nd/or limited to "ti e-i ns"?
An a nswer of No i n th is s ection mea ns the Tech nical Proposal i s rejected. Continue or Reject?

Section 2. Functional Uplift Evaluation
Functional
Functional
Planning Identified
Category
Functional Stressor
Uplift Potential
Stressor
Check box below if
Completethis sectionfor identified
stressoris identified
Check boxes belowto identify
functional stressors ONLY. Selecttheoption
through watershed
stressors addressed by proposal.
that best describes the upl ift potential for
planning
■ RWP
I
LWP
the majorityof the projectarea.
Non-functioning riparian
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
>_
buffer / wetl and vegetation
ca
Sediment
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
❑ Nutrients
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
N
C Fecal Coliform
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
>ro
Other
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
Peak Flows
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
O
Artificial Barriers
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
O
L-i Ditching/Draining
Low
Moderate
High
I!V!e!r!yHigh
2
❑ Other
Low
Moderate
High
Ha bitat Fragmentation
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
Limited Bedform Diversity
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
F)
2
L� AbsenceofLargeWoody
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
Debris
❑ Other
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
Total Count
Total
� O
Count
c6 4f
— -0
Multiplier
Multiplier
ro Z5
x1
x3
x6
x10
x4
x6
C V)
O CLO
Count x Function
Count x
Planning
v
Multiplier
Multiplier
0
L ca
—
A
Sumof
B
a
Sumof Function
Planning

Adjusted Risk Factor
Total
Restoration
Restoration
Enhancement
Total Restoration and Enhancement Feet
Risk Adjusted Score
and
Feet
Feet
Enhancement Feet
(Sum of Function AX Factorc)
Enhancement
Restoration Feet + ( 2 )
Feet
c
D
Risk Adjusted Score D+ PlanningB =
Section 3. General
E I Total Function and Planning
im1
What percent of the request does the proposed stream
project provide? (if applicable)
point
o
3 points
0
6 points
0
10 points
0
Physical constraints or barriers
>5%
2-5%
<2%
None
Easement Continuity
>12
8-12
0-8
Project Density
I >10
1 8-10
4-8
<4
Total
1 2
1 3
6
Section 4. Final Score and Proposal Rating
Total Function and
E
Planning
F
Total General
Final Score
(E+F)
Proposal Rating
(Final Score x 0.01)
M

Technical Proposal Evaluation Criteria
Rating Form
Offeror:
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Site Name:
Laurel Valley Mitigation Site: OPTION 2
River Basin
/ Catalog
Catawba 03050101
Unit:
RFP
Number:
Date of Site
Evaluation:
TBD
Type/Amt of
M itigation
Offered:
Proposal
Review
TBD
Committee:
Alternate
TBD
Attendees:

Section 1. Minimum Requirements
Yes/No
or N/A
1- For stream mitigation projects, does the Technical Proposal adequately document the historical presence of
stream(s) on the project site, provide the drainage areas (acres) and provide a ccu rate, process -based descriptions
ofaII project stream rea ches a nd tributaries?
2- For proposals that i nclude wetland mitigation, does the technical proposal adequately document the presence of
hydri c soil i ndicators (i ncluding soil boring logs prepared by a Li censed Soil Scientist a nd a ma p showing soil boring
locations and mapped soil series)?
3- For proposals that i nclude wetland mitigation, does the proposed success hydroperiodfollow the I RTGuidance
for the proj ect s ite a nd soil series? I fthe proposed hyd roperiod d iffers from the I RT gu i dance, j ustification must be
provi ded i n the RFP.
4- Does the proposal adequately document the physical, chemical and/or biological i mpairments that currently
exi ston the projectsite?
5- Does DMS agree with the overa II mitigation a pproach (proposed I evels of i ntervention) presented? [The
Tech ni cal Proposal must demonstrate that the proposed mitigation a ctivities a re a ppropriate for exi sting s ite
conditionsand watershed characteristics (e.g., adjacentIand use/land cover), andareoptimized toyield maximum
fu ncti onal ga ins.]
6- Does DMS agree with the proposed credit structure(s) described in the proposal?
7- Does the proposed project avoid significant a dverse i mpacts to exi sting wetl ands a nd/or streams?
8- Does the proposal adequately describe how the projectwi II advance DMS watershed plan ninggoa Is?
9- For a ny proposed Priority 2 restoration, i s P2j ustified a nd/or limited to "ti e-i ns"?
An a nswer of No i n th is s ection mea ns the Tech nical Proposal i s rejected. Continue or Reject?

Section 2. Functional Uplift Evaluation
Functional
Functional
Planning Identified
Category
Functional Stressor
Uplift Potential
Stressor
Check box below if
Completethis sectionfor identified
stressoris identified
Check boxes belowto identify
functional stressors ONLY. Selecttheoption
through watershed
stressors addressed by proposal.
that best describes the upl ift potential for
planning
■ RWP
I
LWP
the majorityof the projectarea.
Non-functioning riparian
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
>_
buffer / wetl and vegetation
ca
Sediment
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
❑ Nutrients
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
N
C Fecal Coliform
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
>ro
Other
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
Peak Flows
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
O
Artificial Barriers
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
O
L-i Ditching/Draining
Low
Moderate
High
I!V!e!r!yHigh
2
❑ Other
Low
Moderate
High
Ha bitat Fragmentation
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
Limited Bedform Diversity
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
F)
2
L� AbsenceofLargeWoody
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
Debris
❑ Other
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
Total Count
Total
� O
Count
c6 4f
— -0
Multiplier
Multiplier
ro Z5
x1
x3
x6
x10
x4
x6
C V)
O CLO
Count x Function
Count x
Planning
v
Multiplier
Multiplier
0
L ca
—
A
Sumof
B
a
Sumof Function
Planning

Adjusted Risk Factor
Total
Restoration
Restoration
Enhancement
Total Restoration and Enhancement Feet
Risk Adjusted Score
and
Feet
Feet
Enhancement Feet
(Sum of Function AX Factorc)
Enhancement
Restoration Feet + ( 2 )
Feet
c
D
Risk Adjusted Score D+ PlanningB =
Section 3. General
E I Total Function and Planning
im1
What percent of the request does the proposed stream
project provide? (if applicable)
point
o
3 points
0
6 points
0
10 points
0
Physical constraints or barriers
>5%
2-5%
<2%
None
Easement Continuity
>12
8-12
0-8
Project Density
I >10
1 8-10
4-8
<4
Total
1 2
1 3
6
Section 4. Final Score and Proposal Rating
Total Function and
E
Planning
F
Total General
Final Score
(E+F)
Proposal Rating
(Final Score x 0.01)
M

---------------------
. 03050101.060020
NC ClearrWater MIanagement'
�*%.TrustFund Easement y:j' • -. .
03050101030070 :f�VMorgantonr
:, ff 50101060040 , - -
030501010301I -`` •'f fry
Morganton . y.
North CarolPna/chool for
the Deaf Historic District
f_ � r
rr•� TLVER :ORF
Broughton Hospital
Historic Distric
NCDMS Con ervation f
j/••
` CLYDE VALLEY AIRPORT Project Location
South Mountains Game Land
South Mounta''LNorth Slope
y
`1
Five Mile Radius
0 Project Location
County Line
Municipalities
=Catawba 01 River Basin
^'03050101'OS0020' � � .. 1 .
• '�� tL '03050101080030 '
"`"��+r��`�` ••
03050101070040 � : e e — • :
Historic Districts _ . . . . .
' 0305 090010 Drexel
Dunavant Cotton Manufacturing Co -
'!Jr . . . . . . . . . Valdese . .
>, • �,: fir , �•
,CEO �ME'R'GENCY'MEDICAL AIRPORT , , : �:
©�03050101060050 S v — _
77 /r Burke County Open Space : : : >•j ' .
NC Department of Transportation
AeMitigation Site,
03
Yellow Mountain/ Ironmonger Mountain
Smith 1 Cliff/Henry Fork River
Registered Heritage Area
Broughton Hospital/ Keller Knob
is
y. J V
NC Clean Water Management
Trust Fund Easement
Smith Cliff/ Henry Fork River'
•
. Foothills Conservancy of T�
- North Carolina Preserver
�•,� __,.�-,tiS� ms Hill / Little River Uplad's :'
Hydrologic Unit Code (14-Digit) Significant Natural Heritage Areas
Targeted Local Watersheds - NC Natural Heritage Program Managed Areas :
• • • • Water Supply Watershed Local Watershed Plan
0 DMS Conservation Easements �303d Listed Streams :
NC Historic Preservation Areas 0� Airports :
.................:
South Mountains Henry
t Fork Watershed +
kkWILDLANDS
%ENGINEERIfJG
Figure 1 Vicinity Map
0 0.75 1.5 Miles Laurel Valley Mitigation Site
I I I I t Catawba River Basin (03050101)
Burke County, NC

'a
0

0, r
Project Parcel 4
4 ■
1 11
C5m E�
Proposed Conservation Easement '� ■{
i�
VA
Moe
-OWN
'i
■
Morganton South, NC USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Quadrangle
Figure 3 USGS Topographic Map
W I L D L A N D S 0 250 500 Feet Laurel Valley Mitigation Site
E N G I N E E R I N G Catawba River Basin 03050101
I I I I I
Burke County, NC

� .fr � +Y f" !I !J `�-�.. ,� f! � .1'� `� �'�~l .. �+� ��- fF '� ���,•.!`-. • ��O Ys\
:� i: w§' 4 / � ,_�! , I �' ,.fir '.r" �. -� �,.7'•' I
XA
' _�-y _.. -._ _ - -- �1'• f {��/ �`� -i`�` 1. -� l � � � \ r '1 _ ' � �� -�. /`� i~��
ij
'�� — �- ''R1F' __ � ' i i�� .1.(f �•� ��r �..r I :,� � rJ '� ,,.` �, `I y..� skyi e r`
ter.. "� �ti � ;•+� �, �'�..=�- _ —�'_ _ � �� �:�' ,11�, j � � � , �% w
' ; . �' i ` --•milr__ �! � ��: J 1 �� f
Rn !{5 � j _ , yl�l � 1� . •,`� , :I�! r� _t•'� _� ;�� ,' J� J `./� s.a, i
.� • a UTl (136-AC) �'� �=L� ,fl � i "+ -�t�L�
••f [ ' f % � �•�l / - lam% -- �.
rx
r
A
JA
''o• a L��. r1 rl�� •\ � � .b �.
•;r � J goo � �� �
a • /%1
1
_ r

Parcels
Project Parcel
Proposed Conservation Easement
AaA - Arkaqua loam, 0 to 2% slopes, occasionally flooded
CvA - Colvard sandy loam, 0 to 3% slopes, occasionally flooded
FaC2 - Fairview sandy clay loam, 8 to 15% slopes, moderately eroded
FaD2 - Fairview sandy clay loam, 15 to 25% slopes, moderately eroded
Project Streams
Non -Project Streams
Topographic Contours (5')
VOk WILD LAND S
&"'1111 EIvGIINEERING
oil
AaA
00
00 rw_ lhh� ow
�A
► ' Z6
!
.. A�
r i + t
! " P
y
1;
L�•. f ! k
r
r � h
,r
�r
r'•�ef 3
i
Figure 5 Soils Map
Laurel Valley Mitigation Site
0 300 600 Feet Catawba River Basin 03050101
1 1 1 1 1 Burke County, NC

Project Parcel �► ` �' # =- !
rig Proposed Conservation EasementInternal Crossing ► ,y i .. __
External Crossing s 1'. 4 "' xil . swap -
Rutherford Electric Utility Easement (20') t ,.� • . ' .�►.
Stream Preservation
50' Internal Crossing
Stream Restoration - -
�'
Non -Project Streams � � ''." �'� _ � ■
Existing Driveway
Topographic Contours (5')
I
r , r
OCrossing ID- "loll r
IB
i•—
r
Ir
50' External Crossing
(Existing Culvert) /
50' Internal Crossing
i y
Figure 6a Concept Map -Option 1
Laurel Valley Mitigation Site
W L D LANDS %XV0 I I I I I k ENGINEERING 0 300 600 Feet Catawba River Basin 03050101
Burke County, NC

Project Parcel n Y 4—Co
+ ; Proposed Conservation Easement 1
MAD
Internal Crossing _ _ , f� fr'�•
® External Crossing-
F
Rutherford Electric Utility Easement (20) _ _ '` _ %'•
Stream Restoration ` 50' Internal CrossingOM
Stream Preservation r ��
Non -Project Streams
Existing Driveway
Topographic Contours (5')
OCrossing ID
ASAA
• I "Y�
50' External Crossing �+
(Existing Culvert)
x
50' Internal Crossing
►
4. ..
WILD LAND S
ENGINEERING
0 300 600 Feet
I I I I I
Figure 6b Concept Map - Option 2
Laurel Valley Mitigation Site
Catawba River Basin 03050101
rill Burke County, NC

INQUIRY M 5733275.5 1 N
YEAR: 2009
(FE500 DR

Aor 4
folk
1Lw � lut<
f
P tt
s
t �'*r'�.
• a �" ~ �
INQUIRY k 5733275.5 ��Jr /� N
YEAR: 1984
= 500' FOR

r
'4 L•F ,F _
f� - •• - i r 'r�•'
Z
r '+" .. i+r,k7.!S. _5r 1.i'-!'+:�! _r1�,�y •.k4r I� ','�' 1,.1tF.. 1
r• 4 J l
Or
el
' Y'� �(' �.� _."i_~.'�._ •'�{' �.., •. '.:• t;•r ;' .+Wig• %-. •ti
t L •s �.� F1 } _
�,
IF
L
1 •} it '�yf ,h•. ' �,' : r•�'' ,�•' } ' �,-}C ��_.-''L+k£� { � 1 �_ _iL �ti w'''
.. •• ' J .�Lr. br 1 !r - � Lam' • 1 {
ni.
�C - 'y{nLa � r. `#'��'! y}� -' � -� f7 4, �,. ,�i- i • • • Vr -M1 it �4
L •'• vL •'� 5t i 3'•. 1� 11 y•• ,' -
' �� � �, •-�r-'o kF"•i� 'ifs r•L'•'. <L i5.{. - :,
yY
r•

16.
%tick

. 1,
r IMF '
x

J
JOKL
dp
�4
.0 do
db
# - J
4
. At

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Dater
Project/Site.,a
Latitude:' •�r`� �� yn
Evaluator: �A.. ,A� .
County: 1
Longitude: - i &i
-total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent C
Stream Determination circle gno
Other 7
if a 78 or perennial if;-,30, J
Ephemeral Intermittent erennia
e.g. Quad Name:
r 1 i_'
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = [ l)
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
I a, Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
B. Headcuts
4'' ''
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10, Natural valley
0
0.5
1
L 1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
"artificial ditches are not rated; see discussio s in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = i � ]
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
2 1
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Sail -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
C. Bioiogy (Subtotal = 1 V 5
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
_ A
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
Q4,
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0:4•
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5
• t_her-
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: r - . C
Sketch:
11

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 'Z �l
ProjecVSite: L qA, Il U
Latitude: ? 1�
Evaluator: ���I �-
County:
Longitude: -
Total Paints:
Stream is at least intermittent �-�
Stream Determination (circle ej
Other I
�•
if a 19 or perennial if a 30*
n
Ephemeral Intermitteerennia
e.g. Civad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 1._� )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a- Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3_
5" Active/relict floodpiain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1 "5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology Subtotal =
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
❑
1
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
❑
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1 _7>
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes =
C. Biology (Subtotal = 1 L_ ) -
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
__3-
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
❑
1
2
22. Fish
_0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1,'S
24. Amphibians
6-
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1 #
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5
Other =_0)
.perennial streams may also he identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
4
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date:
ProjecSiteL
La u f0
Latitude: > C4cj L
Evaluator: AA j
County: '{ �' +,f
Longitude:
-
Total Points:
Stream is at feast intermittent r�
if � Igor erenniaf if a 30' � ,
Stream Determination {�'
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennia
Other
.g. eQuad Name: 11
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 1 `
)
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a' Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
(" 3 _
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
_
3�
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
)
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
" 1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2-
3
8. Headcuts
07
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.
1
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1,'a
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes =
"artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = I o .5 1
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
r 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
❑
1
-2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0_ lu
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes
C. Biolow [Subtotal = 1 "2-, L-5 )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3. ''
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
_1
0
20. Macrobentho5 (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3�
22. Fish
D
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1. 7
1.5
24. Amphibians
D
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
D
1 --
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 , Other =
"perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: T r
4
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: �f� �r�
Project/Site:
V
Latitude: ' %
Evaluator: ' -
County: �.. �i
Longitude: -
;
Total Points:
Stream is at feast intermittent r] `j
Stream Determin ion (circle one)
fi'6
Other
if z 19 orperennial if a 34' L =
Ephemeral erNf�m tlPerennial
e.g. Quad Name: - -
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a' Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
_ 1
2 _
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
- ��
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0 Y
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
B. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 7,
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 1 (.) . 1 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
7
1.7
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
a.
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or plies
0
t 0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes =
G. Biology (Subtotal = }
1 B. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0.-----
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22. Fish
D
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5- '
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5 ,
1
1.5
26, Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5
Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See P. 35 of manual.
Notes: -
Sketch:
ti
t2-

f
lk
n
f
F
a
•
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
I.
W1*1d1ands Engineering, Inc.
1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28203
Attention: Lee Knight Caffe-ry
■
INSTRUMENT p 2017030946
FOR REGISTRRTION REGISTER OF DEEDS
Stephanie R. Norman
Burke County, NC
08/12/2019 at 019,36:49 PM
Book 2418 Page 120 (4)
FEE: $26. 00
INSTRUMENT # 2017030946
SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE
MEMORANDUM OF OPTION
a
s
This Memorandum of Option (this "Memorandum") is between John Hewa
("Seller"), and Wl"Idlands Engineering, Inc., a North Carolina corporation ("Buyer").
This memorandum will become effective when all
Memorandum will be the date this Memorandum is signed by
Seller does hereby give and grant to Buyer
easement on a portion of real property comprised of
Drive in Morganton, Burke County
740, Page 1512 Property').
"'
Property").
This op
(the
"
Lion e)
North Carolina, r
4
Tres on March 13, 20220
parties
the last
have signed it.
party to sign it.
t, Jr., an individual
The date of this
-F
the right and option to purchase a conservation
approximately 72.04 acres located at 3923 Hawkins
ecorded in that county's Register of Deeds at Book
•
The provisions set forth in an, Option Agreement between the parties with an effective date of
August 12, 2019 are hereby incorporated in this memorandum.
Each party i's signing this emorandu on the date stated below that party's signature.
F
{
a
ri
r
11
7
+
I

I
BK 24
I
18 PG 121
PF
DOC# 2017030946
a
BUYER:
WILDLANDS ENGINEERING, INC., a North Ca
corporq ion
By:
Date:
awn u. vvii
'911l')
t
kerson, President
C
t
rol*ina
SELLER:
JOHN HEWAT., JR.
By: LWOOP
Jov F wat, Jr.
Date:
=1
In
0
U
0
t

a
BK 2418 PG 122 DOC# 2017030946
r
a
•
is President
authorized t
T
Date.—
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
0
certify that Shawn D. Wilkerson personally appeared before me this, day, acknowledging tn me that he
as President, being
of Wildlands Engineering, Inc., a Iorth Carolina corpo,ration and that he,
o do so, executed the foregoing on behalf of Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
.F
■
a
Nor Nme
Official Signature o Notary
�C7
Notary's printed or typed name
My commission expires:
3
■
ZUZ
0
W
4

0
BK 2418 PG 123
DOC# 2017030946
0
0
County, North Carolina
1 certify that the following person persona
or she signed the foregoing document:
A jW/
e&v a'� o n
Name of principal
Date: �'
(Official Seal)
RO ERT W.. BUGG-
N0'TdARY ULIC
Mecklenbuileg County
North Carolaina
F
11
Ily appeared before me this day, acknowledging to me that he
ti
L
uffictui 3ignuuure of ivutury
Notary's printed or typed name
My commission expires.- a'amp c?3a1
4
4
i
•