20200016 Ver 1_Technical Proposal_20191025

WILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
August 13, 2019
Ms. Marjorie Barber
NC DEQ-Division of Mitigation Services
217 West Jones Street, Suite 3409-1
Raleigh, NC 27603
RE: Wiidlands Engineering, Inc. Proposal — Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site
Yadkin Diver Basin Cataloging Unit 03040104; Montgomery County, INC
In response to RFP 16-007879 - 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 (DIMS) the following proposal to provide stream credits in the
Yadkin River Basin jCataloging Unit 03040104) in response to RFP 16-007879. 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
Turner Land 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.
Wild#ands is committed to creating an excellent ecological restoration project at the Cross Creek Ranch
Mitigation Site and is proposing two options for consideration, including:
Option 1: 9,580 warm stream mitigation credits and 5.0 wetland mitigation credits utilizing a
combination of stream restoration, enhancement, and preservation and wetiand restoration.
Caption Z; 9,108 warm stream mitigation credits and 5.0 wetland mitigation credits utilizing a
combination of stream restoration and enhancement and wetland restoration,
Wildlands' Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site submittal includes ane signed, original Technical Proposal;
four photocopies of the Technical Proposal; one USB 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, -
Shawn Wilkerson, President
W Wildlands Engineering, inc. (P) 704.332.7754 • (F) 704.332.330E + 1430 Soulh Mint St, Suite 104 • Charlotte, NC 28203

0
�,1, �STATF 0,,
�FSSE QUA/
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Request for Proposal #
16-007879
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.
Ver: 12/3/18

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Quality
Refer ALL Inquiries regarding this RFP to:
Request for Proposal #: 16-007879
Marjorie Barber
Mar'orie.barber ncdenr, ov
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.: NIA
Restoration I 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 alf 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.& 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 fordebarment, declared ineligible or voluntarily excluded from covered
transactions by any Federal or State department or agency. As required by G.S. 143-4&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 64 of the NC 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, a 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 executelsign proposal prior to submittal shalt 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
n/a
28203
CITY & STATE & ZIP:
TELEPHONE NUMBER:
TOLL FREE TEL. NO:
Charlotte, NC 28203
[phone]
nla
PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS ADDRESS 1F DIFFERENT FROM ABOVE (SEE INSTRUCTIONS TO VENDORS ITEM #12):
n/a
PRINT NAME & TITLE OF PERSON SIGNING ON BEHALF OF VENDOR:
FAX NUMBER:
Shawn D. Wilkerson, President
[phone]
V DOR'S AUTH RI2SD SIGNATURE°: DATE:
EMAIL.
D. 08/13/2019
[e-mail]
D fer 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 his/her 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 Vendor's),
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: 12/3/1 a

PART D - Executive Summary
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) is presenting two mitigation
options to provide stream credits and wetland credits for the service
area for the Yadkin River Basin, Cataloging Unit 03040104 at the Cross
Creek Ranch Mitigation Site (Site) in Montgomery County, NC. Option 1
proposes to provide 9,580 warm stream credits and 5.0 wetland
credits, option 2 proposes to provide 9,108 warm stream credits and
5.0 wetland credits for the specified service area. The project will
involve restoration, enhancement, and preservation of Clarks Creek, Big
Branchand five unnamed tributaries (UT1UT1AUT16UT to Bi , , , , g
Branch, and UT3) as well as wetland re-establishment. Wildlands has recorded options to acquire up to
approximately 72 acres of conservation easement on the Site.
The Site is an active cattle farm with managed agricultural fields. The streams, wetlands, and riparian
zones are in various stages of impact due to cattle grazing and timber management. While bedform such
as riffles and pools are present, streams are impacted by varying severity of bank erosion and incision.
Stream incision is common along reaches proposed for restoration. The riparian buffer is generally
impaired on one or both sides of the Site streams. Areas of invasive vegetation are extensive throughout
the Site and are further decreasing the riparian habitat value of the existing vegetation.
Wildlands is committed to creating an excellent ecological restoration project at the Site. This project
will improve water quality and ecology through riparian buffer re-establishment, stream and habitat
restoration, exclusion of livestock, and restoration of wetlands, 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. Wildlands proposes two options for consideration, including:
Option 1: 9,580 warm stream mitigation credits and 5.0 wetland mitigation credits utilizing a
combination of stream restoration, enhancement, and preservation and wetland restoration.
Option 2: 9,108 warm stream mitigation credits and 5.0 wetland mitigation credits utilizing a
combination of stream restoration and enhancement and wetland restoration.
These options provide the same wetland management recommendations, the only difference being the
exclusion of UT1A, UT1 Reach 1, and UT to Big Branch stream work from Option 2. In summary, the
proposed Site includes:
• Generation of stream and wetland credits;
• Protection for stream channels from further channel manipulation and vegetation management for
agricultural purposes;
• Elimination of the water quality impacts of cattle access to streams and floodplains;
• Reduction of sediment and nutrient loadings by filtering overland runoff;
• Enhancement of habitat functions through channel restoration and enhancement and riparian
wetland restoration;
• Restoration of channel-floodplain connectivity;
• Improvements to water quality in the WS-IV classified Pee Dee River, part of the Yadkin River Basin;
• Improvements to water quality in the Clarks Creek targeted local watershed (TLW)
03040104020020, part of the Yadkin River Basin;
• Improvements to water quality in the 303(d) impaired Clarks Creek, part of the Yadkin River Basin;
and
• Conservation of up to 72 acres of restored land in perpetuity.
W Cross Creek Ranch 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 Turner Land Surveying (Turner) for survey and easement services for the Site.
Turner is a full service professional land surveying firm located in Swannanoa, NC. Turner has worked on
a variety of projects with Wildlands staff and their experience includes geomorphic assessment surveys,
conservation easement platting & monumentation, establishing site control (conventional & GPS),
creation of 3D-models for restoration projects built using GPS machine control equipment, and as -built
surveys. 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
Scaly Bark Creek Mitigation Site, Stonly 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
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART E
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Page E.1

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 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.
Hopewell Mitigation Site, Randolph County, NC- This stream
mitigation site will restore, enhance, and preserve a total of 12,519
existing linear feet (LF) of perennial and intermittent stream in
Randolph County, NC. The project is intended to provide 7,463 stream
credits. The project includes categorical exclusion documentation,
existing conditions assessment, landowner coordination, conservation
easement acquisition, stream restoration design, permitting,
construction, and seven years of post -construction monitoring.
Construction was completed in 2015 and the fifth year of post -
construction monitoring is underway.
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.
Agony Acres Mitigation Site, Guilford County, NC- Wildlands is
currently performing ecological restoration work for DMS at a full -
delivery site in Guilford County, north of the Town of Gibsonville. The
project is expected to provide 6,488 stream credits and 3.0 buffer
credits on four unnamed tributaries to Reedy Fork in the Cape Fear
river basin. The project includes categorical exclusion documentation,
existing conditions assessment, landowner coordination, conservation
easement acquisition, stream restoration design, permitting,
construction, and seven years of post -construction monitoring.
Construction was completed in summer 2014 and the fifth year of
post -construction monitoring is underway.
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART E
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Page E.2

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.
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.
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 Cross Creek Ranch 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 office will complete this project. Wildlands has teamed with Turner 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
1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28203
AW(P) 704.332.7754 (F) 704.332.3306
W ILDLANDS Firm Contact:
ENGINEERING Shawn Wilkerson, President; [e-mail]
North Carolina S-Corporation
Federal Identification Number: 56-0651376
TEAM MEMBERS
Turner Land Surveying (woman -owned business)
P.O. Box 148
R N E R Swannanoa, NC 28778
(P) 919-827-0745
Firm Contact
Lissa Turner, PLS, CFS, President; [e-mail]
Services to be provided: Professional Surveying Services
5.0 Project Manager Experience
Mr. Aaron Earley currently serves as a project manager and senior water resources engineer for
Wildlands' Charlotte, NC, office. His duties include managing environmental restoration and storm water
quality BMP projects, performing hydrologic and hydraulic modeling to support natural channel design,
and final preparation of construction documents. He has 19 years of experience in storm water
management design and modeling, ecological restoration, floodplain delineation, and
hydrologic/hydraulic analysis. Additional information on Mr. Earley'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 Cross Creek Ranch 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 Cross Creek Ranch 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.
Aaron Earley, PE, CFM — Wildlands Project Manager
Mr. Earley has 19 years of experience in storm water management design and modeling, ecological
restoration, floodplain delineation, and hydrologic/hydraulic analysis.
JOB CLASSIFICATION: Senior Water Resources Engineer
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THIS PROJECT: Project Manager; Permitting
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS: Professional Engineer (NC); Certified Floodplain Manger (NC)
TOTAL YEARS EXPERIENCE: 19 years
EDUCATION: Master of Civil Engineering, NC State University, Raleigh, NC, 1999
BS, Textile Engineering, NC State University, Raleigh, NC, 1996
ADDITIONAL TRAINING: Hydraulic Modeling for Stream Restoration and Sediment
Transport, 2011
Low Impact Development Certification, NC Cooperative
Extension, 2010
River Morphology & Applications, Wildland Hydrology, 2008
Fluvial Geomorphology for Engineers, Wildland Hydrology, 2007
Project Manager Boot Camp, PSMJ Resources, 2004
HEC-RAS for Stream Restoration, Pennsylvania State University,
2002
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART E
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page E.6

PROJECT EXPERIENCE AT WILDLANDS
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
Guilford County, NC
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site
Alexander County, NC
Candy Creek Mitigation Site
Guilford County, NC
Deep Meadow Mitigation Site
Union County, NC
Reedy Creek Design -Build Stream Restoration
Project Charlotte, NC
Glassy Creek Stream Restoration Project
Charlotte. NC
Crooked Creek #2 Restoration Project
Union County, NC
PROJECT DETAILS I PROJECT ROLE
5,344 stream credits Project Manager
4,058 stream credits Project Manager
15,456 stream credits I Project Manager
2,746 stream credits;
8.1 wetland credits
25,974 stream credits
3,505 LF
5,672 LF of stream;
11.5 acres of wetland
Project Manager
Assistant Project
Manager/ Lead Di
Project Manager
Project Manager/
Lead Engineer
er
David Turner, PLS— Surveyor Subconsultant
Mr. Turner has performed land surveying and project management for over 20 years. He has held
positions of increasing responsibility culminating with his licensure as a Professional Land Surveyor in
North Carolina in 2005. Mr. Turner's responsibilities include management of field operations, data
management, safety training, and maintaining field equipment. He has experience supporting civil
engineering, environmental design, land development, cadastral mapping, construction, and property
conveyance projects through land surveying. In addition to stream and wetland survey work, his years of
surveying also include multiple conservation easements, 3D machine control models, boundaries,
ALTA/ACSM land title surveys, recombination/ subdivisions, construction stakeouts, topographic
surveys, as -built surveys, wetland delineation surveys, and municipal surveys.
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATION: Professional Land Surveyor NC L-4551
PROJECT EXPERIENCE AT TURNER
Martin Dairy Stream Mitigation Site
Orange County, NC
Falling Creek Mitigation Bank
Wayne County, NC
Maney Farms Stream Mitigation Site
Chatham County, NC
Hopewell Stream Mitigation Site
Randolph County, NC
Foust Creek Mitigation Site
Alamance County, NC
Devil's Racetrack Mitigation Site
Johnston County, NC
PROJECT DETAILS
2,000 stream credits
PROJECT ROLE
Project Surveyor
18,900 stream credits;
56.0 wetland credits Project Surveyor
4,748 stream credits
7,463 stream credits
4,708 stream credits;
3.3 wetland credits
18,527 stream credits;
57.0 wetland credits
Project Surveyor
Project Surveyor
Project Surveyor
Project Surveyor
DBE/HUB Participation
Our surveyor and three of our potential contractors are woman -owned businesses: Turner Land
Surveying, PLLC; Carolina Environmental Contracting, Inc., Land Mechanic Designs, Inc., and North State
Environmental, Inc.
kv Cross Creek Ranch 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.
Principal -in -Charge Project Manager QA/QC Manager
Shawn Wilkerson Aaron Earley, PE, CFM Emily Reinicker, PE, CFM
Ian Eckardt, PWS
Aaron Earley, PE, CFM
Christine Blackwelder
Josh Short, El
■ WILDLANDS Charlotte, NC Office Engineering services will be
performed by employees of
■licensed corporate entities
TURNER LAND SURVEYING Swannanoa, NC Office
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. Aaron Earley, and for the project manager for Turner were presented in Part E, Section
7.0.
W Cross Creek Ranch 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
PROJECT DETAILS
PROJECT ROLE
Big Harris Creek Mitigation Site
25,836 stream credits;
Project Manager
Cleveland County, NC
9 BMPs
Henry Fork Mitigation Site
4,500 stream credits;
principal -in -Charge
Catawba County, NC
4.0 wetland credits
Candy Creek Mitigation Site
15,456 stream credits
Principal -in -Charge
Guilford County, NC
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
10,098 stream credits
Principal -in -Charge
Union County, NC
Scaly Bark Creek Mitigation Site
Principal -in -Charge; Project
Stanly County, NC
6,415 stream credits
Manager; Conservation
Easement Acquisition
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
4,900 stream credits;
Principal -in -Charge; Project
Rockingham County, NC
12.7 wetland credits
Manager
Lyle Creek Mitigation Site
5,571 stream credits;
Principal -in -Charge;
Catawba County, NC
7.0 wetland credits
Conservation Easement
Acquisition
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page F.2

Emily Reinicker, PE, CFM
Ms. Reinicker currently serves as a senior water resources engineer for Wildlands' Charlotte, NC, office.
Her duties include technical review and project management for ecological restoration projects. She has
20 years of professional experience in water resources and civil engineering, including hydrologic and
hydraulic modeling, natural channel design, regulatory research, watershed analysis, and stormwater
management. She has been involved in the design of more than 23 miles of stream restoration and
enhancement work in NC.
JOB CLASSIFICATION:
Senior Water Resources Engineer
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THIS PROJECT:
QA/QC Manager
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS:
Professional Engineer; Certified Floodplain Manager
TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE:
20 years
EDUCATION:
BS, Biosystems Engineering with a Minor in Environmental
Engineering, Clemson University, 1999
ADDITIONAL TRAINING:
Hydraulic Modeling for Stream Restoration and Sediment
Transport, 2011
Applied Fluvial Geomorphology for Engineers, 2006
Project Manager Boot Camp, 2004, 2014
Stormwater BMP Academy, 2004
Advanced HEC-RAS Training, 2002
Floodplain Map Revision Workshop (FEMA), 2001
Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Construction Practices
Workshop (US Army Corps of Engineers), 2000
Using Best Management Practices to Improve Water Quality
and Reduce Flood Damages in Urban Watersheds, 2000
PROJECT EXPERIENCE AT WILDLANDS
Lone Hickory Mitigation Site
Yadkin County, NC
Big Harris Creek Mitigation Site
Cleveland County, NC
Owl's Den Mitigation Site
Lincoln County, NC
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Union County, NC
Lyle Creek Mitigation Site
Catawba County, NC
Scaly Bark Restoration Site
Stanly County, NC
Reedy Creek Design -Build Stream Restoration
Project Charlotte, NC
PROJECT DETAILS PROJECT ROLE
12,900 stream credits;
8.0 wetland credits Project Manager
25,836 stream credits; Assistant Project
9 BMPs Manager
2,400 stream credits;
8.0 wetland credits Project Manager
10,098 stream credits Project Manager
5,779 stream credits; Assistant Project
7.0 wetland credits Manager
6,415 stream credits Lead Designer
25,974 stream credits Project Manager
W Cross Creek Ranch 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
Various Full -Delivery Projects
Multiple Counties in NC
Big Harris Creek Mitigation Site
Cleveland County, NC
Box Creek Wilderness Area Stream Mitigation Bank
Rutherford County, NC
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
Rockingham County, NC
Crooked Creek #2 Restoration Project
Union County, NC
Burnetts Chapel Mitigation Site
Guilford County, NC
Lone Oak Mitigation Bank
Albemarle County, VA
PROJECT DETAILS
26 full -delivery
projects
25,836 stream
credits; 9 BMPs
PROJECT ROLE
Categorical Exclusion;
Conservation
Easement Acquisition
Mitigation Plan Lead
158,400 LF (30 miles) Project Manager
4,900 stream credits;
12.7 wetland credits
5,672 LF of stream;
11.5 acres of wetland
9.2 buffer credits
38,000 LF
Project Manager
(existing condition
and design phase)
Project Manager
(conceptual phase)
Project Manager
Permitting; Banking
Instrument
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page FA

Henry Reed
Mr. Reed is serving as an environmental scientist and assisting with assessment and monitoring for the
western division of Wildlands. His current role at Wildlands includes many aspects of stream and
wetland monitoring including surveying, vegetation assessment, invasive species identification and
control, water quality monitoring, and sediment sampling and analysis.
JOB CLASSIFICATION: Environmental Scientist
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THIS PROJECT: Categorical Exclusions; Existing Conditions Survey; Monitoring
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS: none
TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE: 1 year
EDUCATION: BS, Geology, Clemson University, 2018
ADDITIONAL TRAINING: Wetland Delineation Training, Richard Chinn, 2019
PROJECT EXPERIENCE AT WILDLANDS PROJECT DETAILS PROJECT ROLE
Big Harris Creek Mitigation Site 25,836 stream credits;
Cleveland County, NC 9 BMPs Monitoring
Candy Creek Mitigation Site
Guilford County, NC
Henry Fork Mitigation Site
Catawba County, NC
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Union County, NC
Owl's Den Mitigation Site
Lincoln County, NC
15,456 stream credits Monitoring
4,800 stream credits; Monitoring
4.2 wetland credits
10,098 stream credits Monitoring
2,400 stream credits; Monitoring
8.0 wetland credits
%A11 Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Page F.5

Ella Wickliff
Ms. Wickliff serves as an environmental scientist for Wildlands. Her background includes biologic and
geomorphic surveys, hydrologic monitoring, and surface water quality sampling. At Wildlands, she
assists with various aspects of stream and wetland monitoring including geomorphic assessment,
biological and habitat assessment, vegetation assessment, data processing, and GIS mapping.
JOB CLASSIFICATION:
Environmental Scientist
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THIS PROJECT:
Categorical Exclusions; Existing Conditions Survey; Monitoring
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS:
none
TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE:
1 year
EDUCATION:
MS, Earth Science, University of North Carolina at Charlotte,
2018
BS, Environmental Science, University of North Carolina at
Chapel Hill, 2016
ADDITIONAL TRAINING:
Wetland Delineation Training, Richard Chinn, 2019
River Course 101: Stream Morphology and Assessment, 2019
Surface Water Identification Training and Certification, 2018
NCDWR Macroinvertebrate Qual 4 Method
PROJECT EXPERIENCE AT WILDLANDS
PROJECT DETAILS
PROJECT ROLE
Henry Fork Mitigation Site
4,800 stream credits;
Monitoring
Catawba County, NC
4.2 wetland credits
Owl's Den Mitigation Site
2,400 stream credits;
Monitoring
Lincoln County, NC
8.0 wetland credits
Candy Creek Mitigation Site
15,456 stream credits
Monitoring
Guilford County, NC
Big Harris Creek Mitigation Site
25,836 stream credits;
Monitoring
Cleveland County, NC
9 BMPs
Reedy Creek Design -Build Stream
25,974 stream credits
Monitoring
Restoration Project Charlotte, NC
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site
4,058 stream credits
Existing Conditions
Alexander County, NC
Assessment
Double H Farms Mitigation Site
6,500 stream credits;
Existing Conditions
Alleghany County, NC
1.7 wetland credits
Assessment
W Cross Creek Ranch 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
57.0 wetland credits
Acquisition; Realtor
407,649 buffer credits Conservation Easement
Acquisition
25,974 stream credits Conservation Easement
Acquisition
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Page F.7

Christine Blackwelder
Ms. Blackwelder is a technical leader in stream restoration and her duties include assessment and
design of ecological restoration projects, as well as conducting internal technical trainings. Ms.
Blackwelder has 16 years of professional experience in environmental restoration and is skilled in
watershed assessment methodology, geomorphic assessments, natural channel design, bid document
development, construction management, and monitoring techniques.
JOB CLASSIFICATION: Senior Environmental Scientist
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THIS PROJECT: Design
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS: none
TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE: 16 years
EDUCATION: BA, Environmental Science, University of Virginia, 2002
ADDITIONAL TRAINING: Sediment Transport in Stream Assessment and Design, 2014
Rosgen Level I - IV, 2006-2008
Project Manager Boot Camp, 2008, 2014
Aquatic Insect Collection Protocols for Stream Mitigation
Projects, 2006
Stream Restoration Construction Training, 2005
Erosion and Sediment Control Inspector, 2003
Erosion and Sediment Control Plan Reviewer, 2003
OSHA 10 Hour Safety Training, 2009
PROJECT EXPERIENCE AT WILDLANDS
PROJECT DETAILS
PROJECT ROLE
Reedy Creek Design -Build Stream
Assistant Project Manager;
Restoration Project Charlotte, NC
25,974 stream credits
Design; Construction
Administration
Little Pine Creek III Stream & Wetland
7,017 stream credits;
Project Manager;
Restoration Project
1.4 wetland credits
Lead Designer
Alleghany County, NC
Little Pine Creek II Stream & Wetland
4,156 LF of streams;
Restoration Project: Redesign
5.4 acres of wetlands
Project Manager; Lead Designer
Alleghany County, NC
Lone Hickory Mitigation Site
12,900 stream credits;
Lead Environmental Scientist
Yadkin County, NC
8.0 wetland credits
Big Harris Creek Mitigation Site 25,836 stream credits; project Scientist
Alamance County, NC 9 BMPs
Lyle Creek Mitigation Site 5,571 stream credits; Assistant Project Manager;
Design; Construction
Catawba County, NC 7.0 wetland credits
Administration
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page F.8

Josh Short, El
Mr. Short has two years of experience with water resources, specifically dealing with water quality
improvement projects. He has led field and laboratory activities that integrated wetland vegetation and
ecological processes to promote improved water quality. Additionally, he has assisted with public
education and outreach programs related to stormwater management. His duties at Wildlands include
existing conditions assessment, construction administration, design assistance, and GIS mapping of
ecological restoration and stormwater projects.
JOB CLASSIFICATION:
Environmental Designer
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THIS PROJECT:
Design
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS:
Engineer in Training
TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE:
2 years
EDUCATION:
BS Biosystems Engineering, Emphasis
in Ecological Engineering,
Clemson University, 2017
ADDITIONAL TRAINING:
River Course 302 — HEC-RAS for Stream Restoration, 2019
River Course 201— Natural Channel Design Principles, 2018
River Course 101— Stream Morphology
and Assessment, 2018
PROJECT EXPERIENCE AT WILDLANDS
PROJECT DETAILS
PROJECT ROLE
Double H Farms Mitigation Site
6,500 stream credits;
Alleghany County, NC
1.7 wetland credits
Designer
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site
4,058 stream credits
Existing Conditions Assessment;
Alexander County, NC
Designer
Plantation Branch Mitigation Site
5,045 stream credits
Designer
Surry County, NC
Reedy Creek Design -Build Stream
25,974 stream credits
Construction Administration
Restoration Project Charlotte, NC
Key Mill Mitigation Site
5,987 stream credits
Existing Condition Assessment
Surry County, NC
Big Harris Creek Mitigation Site
25,836 stream credits;
plan Production
Alamance County, NC
9 BMPs
Candy Creek Mitigation Site
15,456 stream credits
Monitoring
Guilford County, NC
Cannon Creek Mitigation Site
16,241 stream credits
Monitoring
Berkeley County, SC
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page F.9

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:
Existing Conditions Survey; 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
Scaly Bark Creek Mitigation Site
6,415 stream credits
Monitoring
Stanly County, NC
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page F.10

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;
57.0 wetland credits Monitoring
4,922 stream credits Monitoring
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Page F.11

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: Existing Conditions Survey; 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 Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Page F.12

Part G -Technical Approach
The Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site (Site) is
located in Montgomery County approximately 1.5
miles northwest of Mount Gilead and 4.5 miles
east of Norwood (Figure 1). Clarks Creek, Big
Branch, and multiple unnamed tributaries will be
restored, enhanced, and preserved as part of this
project. Three areas of relic wetlands are
proposed for re-establishment within the
floodplains of project streams. Clarks Creek drains
to the Pee Dee River just downstream of the
Norwood Dam on Lake Tillery. The Pee Dee River
is classified as water supply V (WS-V) and Class B.
WS-V is generally a water supply that drains to a
drinking water supply. Class B waters are
protected for primary and secondary human recreation. Secondary recreations include wading, boating,
and other infrequent or incidental uses involving human body contact. Primary recreations include all
recreational activities that involve human body contact, such as swimming, diving, and skiing. Clarks
Creek is defined as Class C waters. Class C waters are protected for secondary recreation, fishing and fish
consumption, wildlife, aquatic life, and agriculture. The Site is located in the Clarks Creek targeted local
watershed HUC 03040104020020 and is being submitted for mitigation credit in the Yadkin 04 Service
Area.
The 2009 Lower Yadkin -Pee Dee River Restoration Priorities (RBRP) lists specific goals of: continuation of
watershed improvement projects, protection of natural resources, and the development of
management strategies for stormwater impacts. The Clarks Creek watershed contains multiple animal
operations and is discussed specifically in the RBRP with the priority for the continuation of
implementing projects within the target local watershed. The 2014 North Carolina Integrated Report
lists Clarks Creek as a 303(d) impaired stream with an overall category rating of 5, meaning the stream
exceeds the criteria in almost all categories.
The Yadkin River Basin is also discussed in the 2015 North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission's
(NCWRC) Wildlife Action Plan (WAP). This report notes that excessive sedimentation and nutrient inputs
are primary causes of stream habitat degradation in the basin.
Restoration of the Site streams will directly and indirectly address stressors identified in the RBRP and
the NCWRC WAP by excluding livestock, creating stable stream banks and restoring a forest in
agriculturally maintained buffer. These actions will reduce fecal, nutrient, and sediment inputs to project
streams, and ultimately to the Pee Dee 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 and NCWRC WAP. Option 1 will place approximately 72 acres under permanent conservation
easement or Option 2 will place approximately 63 acres under permanent conservation easement to
protect the Site in perpetuity.
Sources:
NC Division of Mitigation Services. 2009. Lowe Yadkin Pee -Dee River Basin Restoration Priorities.
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/M itigation%20Services/Watershed_Planning/Yadkin_River_Basin/Lower%20Yadkin_Pee_Dee_RBRP
_2009_Fi na 1092010. pdf
North Carolina Environmental Quality. 2014. Category 5 Water Quality Assessments-303(d) List.
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeg/Water%20Quality/Planning/TMDL/303d/2014/2014 303dlist.pdf
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission. 2015. North Carolina Wildlife Action Plan. Raleigh, NC.
http://ncwildlife.org/Portals/0/Conserving/documents/2015W i Id I ifeAction Plan/NC-WAP-2015-AI I-Docu ments.pdf
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.1

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 Yadkin 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 GA Ecological and Water Quality Goals of the Mitigation Project
CU-Wide RBRP Stressors/Sources
Goal
Objective
Addressed
Reduce sediment from
Exclude livestock
Install and improve livestock fencing as needed to exclude
agriculture/bank erosion.
from stream
livestock from stream channels, riparian areas, proposed
Protection of natural resources
wetland areas and/or remove livestock from adjacent
within TLW. Reduction of
channels.
fields.
nutrients to 303(d) receiving
waters.
Construct stream channels that will maintain a stable
Reduce sediment inputs; Improve
Stabilize eroding
pattern and profile considering the hydrologic and
freshwater habitat. Protection of
stream banks
sediment inputs to the system, the landscape setting, and
natural resources within TLW.
the watershed conditions.
Reduction of nutrients to 303(d)
receiving waters
Restore and
Convert active cattle pasture and previously maintained
Sediment from agriculture/bank
enhance native
agricultural areas to forested riparian buffers along all Site
erosion. Poor riparian buffer
floodplain and
streams and wetlands. Treat invasive vegetation along
vegetation. Protection of natural
wetland
stream corridors. Protect and enhance existing forested
resources within TLW.
vegetation.
riparian buffers.
Sediment from agriculture.
Reconstruct stream channels slated for restoration with
Moderate to severe bank erosion.
Improve the
stable dimensions and appropriate depth relative to the
Channelization and
stability of stream
existing floodplain. Add bank revetments and instream
sedimentation. Protection of
channels.
structures to protect restored/ enhanced streams.
natural resources within TLW.
Reduction of sediment to 303(d)
receiving waters.
Install habitat features such as constructed steps, cover
Protection and enhancement of
Improve instream
logs, and brush toes on restored reaches. Add woody
natural resources within TLW.
and wetland
materials/ LWD to channel beds. Construct pools of varying
Reduction of nutrients and
habitat.
depth. Remove farm pond and re-establish forested
sediment to 303(d) receiving
riparian wetland habitat.
waters.
Sediment from agriculture. Poor
Reduce sediment
riparian buffer vegetation.
and nutrient input
Restore riparian stream corridor and pocket wetland areas
Protection of natural resources
from adjacent
to slow and filter runoff from adjacent agricultural fields.
within TLW. Reduction of
agricultural fields
sediment and nutrients to 303(d)
receiving waters.
Sediment from agriculture.
Permanently
Establish a conservation easement on the Site. Exclude
Poor riparian buffer vegetation.
protect the project
livestock and remove an existing impoundment from the
protection of natural resources
site from harmful
within TLW. Reduction of
uses.
Site.
nutrients and sediment to 303(d)
receiving waters.
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.2

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.
2.1 Existing Site Conditions
The Site is currently an active farm composed
of cattle pastures and previously deforested
timber areas. Clarks Creek, Big Branch, and
five unnamed tributaries (UTs) flow through
the Site. The UTs have been given names for
the organizational purposes of this proposal.
Clarks Creek enters the site from the northeast
under NC-73. After its confluence with UT1,
Clarks Creek flows south towards its
confluence with Big Branch. Big Branch also
enters the Site from NC-73 flowing southwest
towards Clarks Creek. UT1 and UT113 flow
south toward Clarks Creek. UT1A, UT to Big
Branch, and UT3 are all headwater tributaries
that originate within the project boundary.
Project streams flow through a mix of pasture, early successional forest, and some mature forest. The
cattle pastures on the Site are dominated by pasture grasses such as fescue, dogfennel (Eupatorium
capillifolium), and Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense). Prominent native species observed within the
project areas include common bottlebrush grass (Elymus hystrix), river oats (Chasmanthium latifolium),
deer tongue witch grass (Dicanthelium clandestinum), black walnut (Juglans nigra), eastern red cedar
(Juniperus virginiana), American sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), winged elm (Ulmus alata), green ash
(Fraxinus pennsylvanica), dwarf hackberry (Celtis tenuifolia), American elm (Ulmus americana), leathery
rush (Juncus coriaceus), persimmon (Diospyros virginiana), black willow (Salix nigra), soft rush (Juncus
effuses), and shallow sedge (Carex lurida). Primary invasive species identified within the project area
included Chinese privet, multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica),
marsh dewflower (Murdannia keisak), Brazilian vervain (Verbena braziliensis), and blackberry (Rubus
SO.
A review of historic aerials from 1955 to 2016 shows that onsite streams have existed in their same
approximate location for 58 years. There have been minor changes to land management, but generally
the site has been managed in agriculture and timber, consistent with current land use. The agricultural
pond proposed for removal can be seen in the 1955 aerial. It appears that riparian buffers along UT1 and
UT113 were clear cut sometime prior to 1955, and while some revegetation has occurred, it appears
these streams have remained in this condition since the initial clearing. With little to no riparian
corridor, UT1 and UT113 can be clearly seen in the 1951 and 1993 aerial, along with floodplain ditching
observed on -site (Figure 2). 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 and key features, including erosion, incision, bedrock, existing culverts, and headcuts.
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.3

2.2 Existing Conditions — Streams
Clarks Creek
Clarks Creek flows under NC-73 and through an
adjacent parcel before entering the Site limits.
Upstream of its confluence with UT1, the right
floodplain of Clarks Creek is currently in pasture with
some evidence of cattle activity and grazing. The left
floodplain is currently in an early successional stage of
reforestation. Bedform along Clarks Creek is
dominated by angular bedrock, boulder, cobble, and
gravel material for its entirety. The hardened bed
material has prevented the stream from downcutting
and provides a stable vertical profile with minor
stream incision. Clarks Creek is mildly laterally unstable, primarily due to the lack of vegetation along the
banks. As shown in Figure 2, active bank erosion was noted at isolated locations along the reach.
Downstream of the UT1 confluence, Clarks Creek turns and continues flowing south towards Big Branch
in a similar geomorphic condition (vertically stable and dominated by large, hardened bed material, with
isolated areas of bank erosion). The right floodplain is fenced from the adjacent cattle pasture and the
left floodplain is currently fallow, but vegetation within the riparian corridor is dominated by invasive
Chinese privet. A previously removed or failed dam can be seen along this portion of the reach.
Downstream of the confluence with Big Branch, Clarks Creek turns southwest and flows toward the
property boundary.
Table G.2a Summary of Potential for Functional Uplift — Clarks Creek
Functional
Potential for Functional Uplift
Category
Clarks Creek is vertically stable but exhibits minor bank erosion from the lack of adequate and
appropriate bank vegetation within the riparian corridor. Targeted grading and enhancement work
along the reach will aim to stabilize the isolated areas of bank erosion which will reduce fine sediment
Water
and improve stream function. Invasive vegetation and a lack of native species along the entire riparian
Quality
corridor have reduced functioning of the stream buffer along Clarks Creek. While cattle do not have
direct access to the stream channel or graze up to the top of the stream bank, cattle impact adjacent
to the stream including fecal material and wallowing are apparent on site. The proposed conservation
easement will allow for buffers at a minimum of 50-feet as required for Piedmont streams, restoring a
wide vegetative riparian zone which will be protected from adjacent cattle impacts.
Clarks Creek's minor lateral instability has resulted in isolated bank erosion and fallen trees when
Hydrology
combined with large peak flows. Blockages have created barriers and increased lateral instability in
the immediate areas. Stabilizing eroding banks, improving riparian corridors, and removing existing
blockages will improve the stream stability and hydraulic function.
The Clarks Creek riparian buffer is dominated by invasive Chinese privet. Restoration of the riparian
Habitat
zone will create an uninterrupted forested corridor with native species to improve terrestrial habitat.
Enhancement practices including minor grading and bank stabilization will reduce fine sediment
loading, improving aquatic habitat along the reach.
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page GA

Big Branch
Big Branch flows west into the proposed project boundary
from a perched concrete box culvert under NC-73. The bed
of the existing culvert is elevated 18" to 24" above the low
flow thalweg of the existing channel. Currently, the NC-73
culvert is creating a blockage for aquatic species to move
upstream at low flow.
Downstream of the culvert, Big Branch flows through an
unconfined valley with a narrow riparian corridor, moderate
sinuosity, and moderate slope. Bedform is dominated by
larger cobbles and gravels consistent with the geology
typically found in the Carolina Slate Belt. The stream is
laterally unstable and incised, with evidence of bank erosion
for nearly the entirety of the reach (Figure 2). Active bank
erosion impacting channel function was observed at multiple
locations and at almost every outside meander. Dimension
along Big Branch is oversized and potentially entrenched.
The channel is incised and disconnected from the active
floodplain for almost the entirety of the project reach.
Ditching to drain the right floodplain was observed along Big
Branch upstream of the confluence with Clarks Creek. While
cattle impacts along Big Branch are minimal, overall channel
function has been heavily degraded by adjacent agricultural
land use.
Table G.2b Summary of Potential for Functional Uplift — Big Branch
Functional
Potential for Functional Uplift
Category
Big Branch is actively eroding and contributing fine sediment into the system, creating water quality stressors at
the Site level and for the receiving streams. Depositional features including bankfull benches and floodplain
Water
wetland areas have been negatively impacted by vegetation management for agriculture and ditching to
Quality
promote drainage. Proposed Priority 1 restoration will reconnect active floodplains, create depositional areas
including point bars and bankfull benches, and restore the previously drained floodplain wetlands. Proposed
restoration will improve nutrient uptake and limit fine sediment induction into receiving streams.
Big Branch is currently incised, and restoration of a floodplain will attenuate peak flows from the watershed and
Hydrology
support stream functions onsite. Additionally, floodplain ditches along Big Branch will be filled which will further
restore natural floodplain wetland hydrology, reducing local time of concentrations and attenuating peak flows.
Restoration of Big Branch will repair fragmented riparian buffers, and restoration of the riparian zone will create
an uninterrupted forested corridor from NC-73 to the downstream project limits. Restoration will improve
Habitat
aquatic organism passage by raising channel bed elevations and allowing aquatic passage through the perched
NC-73 box culvert. Restoration will also provide additional bedform habitat, introduce large woody debris
(LWD), reduce fine sediment from critical pool habitat, and re-establish floodplain wetland habitat for aquatic
and terrestrial species.
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.5

UT1 Reach 1
UT1 Reach 1 enters the Site from a wooded parcel and flows southeast through the project parcel.
Vegetation beyond the riparian corridor along the reach was timbered sometime during 2014 according
to aerial photography of the Site. A narrow riparian corridor was left along the stream when the
floodplain was timbered and areas beyond the riparian corridor were allowed to revegetate on their
own (not replanted). An existing failing culvert at the downstream end of the reach has served as a
grade control; downstream of the failing culvert, the stream has headcut and become incised. The
culvert in combination with in situ gravel and cobble bed material have prevented downcutting and
incision upstream. Appropriate dimension and adequate stream and floodplain connection have
eliminated potential active bed and bank erosion. Overall, UT1 Reach 1 is stable and functioning in its
current condition. Cattle do not currently have access to UT1 Reach 1.
UT1A
UT1A originates within the proposed conservation easement downstream of an agricultural pond and
flows east towards its confluence with UT1. Similar to UT1 Reach 1, floodplain vegetation beyond the
riparian corridor was timbered sometime during 2014 according to aerial photography of the Site. A
narrow riparian buffer was left along the stream when the floodplain was timbered and areas beyond
the riparian corridor were allowed to revegetate on their own (not replanted). An appropriate stream
dimension along UT1A has contributed to a stable system with suitable stream and floodplain
connection. Erosion and incision along the reach is minimal and cattle do not currently have access to
UT1A.
UT to Big Branch
UT to Big Branch is a headwater tributary that originates within the project boundary and flows north
toward Big Branch. Like UT1 Reach 1 and UT1A, vegetation beyond the riparian corridor was timbered
and allowed to revegetate. A series of two small headcuts exist along the stream with some minor
incision below each headcut. Outside of these isolated locations, the stream is not actively eroding or
incising. Cattle do not currently have access to UT1A.
Table G.2c Summary of Potential for Functional Uplift — UT1 Reach 1, UT1A, UT to Big Branch
Functional
Potential for Functional Uplift
Category
The floodplain buffer along UT1 Reach 1, UT1A, and UT to Big Branch has been negatively impacted from logging
Water
but is still maintaining some function as a result of an intact riparian corridor. Invasive treatment measurements
Quality
and supplemental planting along the riparian corridor would improve retention times, sediment reduction, and
nutrient reduction.
UT1 Reach 1, UT1A, and UT to Big Branch all have appropriate dimension and floodplain connection. Planting and
Hydrology
invasive treatment measurements within the floodplain corridor may reduce velocities in depositional floodplain
areas.
Habitat
Instream habitat along UT1 Reach 1, UT1A, and UT to Big Branch is satisfactory. Floodplain habitat could be
improved with invasive treatments and planting of native bare roots.
UT1 Reach 2 and 3
UT1 Reach 2 begins just downstream of a currently failing culvert and headcut and flows southeast until
its confluence with UT113. At the upstream extent, the channel is actively eroding and incising. Bedform
along the reach is marginal, with some gravel and cobble size material and riffle pool sequencing. The
stream flows through an unconfined alluvial valley with a moderate slope. Cattle currently have access
to the entirety of UT1 Reach 2 and impacts including cattle paths, trampled banks, wallow areas, and
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.6

erosion from hoof shear were observed along the reach.
Riparian corridor and floodplain vegetation are a mix of
maintained pasture and invasive species. A series of spur
ditches have been dug along UT1 Reach 2 to drain the
adjacent floodplain areas. Stream and floodplain
connection are moderate along the reach, with some
areas able to access the floodplain and other areas
confined to an eroded or entrenched section of channel.
Coarse bed material is contributing to vertical stability,
but the lack of adequate bank vegetation has created a
laterally unstable stream system. Currently, an existing
dirt farm road ford crosses the channel just upstream of
its confluence with UT113.
UT1 Reach 3 begins at the confluence of UT1 Reach 2 with UT113 and flows south under an existing farm
road before its confluence with Clarks Creek. The channel condition is similar to UT1 Reach 2, with
moderate bedform and vertical stability, but poor lateral stability. Floodplain and riparian corridor
vegetation are dominated by invasive species. The existing culverted farm road crossing is failing and in
need of repair. Downstream of the farm road crossing, the channel has incised down to bedrock grade
control. Vegetation along this section continues to be made up primarily of invasive species and lateral
stability is still lacking. Cattle have access to UT1 Reach 3 upstream of the existing farm road crossing but
are fenced out downstream of the road.
UT1B
UT113 originates off the project parcel and flows south onto the Site toward its confluence with UT1
Reach 2. UT113 flows through an unconfined alluvial valley with a moderate slope. The floodplain
vegetation along the reach consists of maintained pasture with a narrow riparian corridor primarily
made up of invasive vegetation. Cattle have access to the entirety of UT113 and impacts including wallow
areas and cattle paths were observed along the reach. Channel bedform is consistent with other streams
on Site with larger material creating some vertical stability. However, a lack of adequate riparian
vegetation combined with the current cattle access have created a laterally unstable system with
downstream meander migration and actively eroding meander bends. In areas lacking hardened bed
material, the stream has begun to incise and isolate itself from the active floodplain. Similar to UT1
Reach 2, spur ditches can be seen draining the downstream floodplain areas of UT113.
Table G.2d Summary of Potential for Functional Uplift — UT1 Reach 2, 3, and UT16
Functional
Category
Potential for Functional Uplift
The riparian buffer is either maintained, non-functioning, or overrun with invasive vegetation for one or both
sides of UT1 Reach 2, 3, and UT113. The proposed conservation easement will allow for riparian buffers as well as
cattle exclusion from the project streams. UT1 Reach 2, 3, and UT1B have high volumes of fine sediment loads
from bank erosion and cattle activity. Lateral instability is preventing sediment transport equilibrium, resulting in
Water
Quality
embedded stream substrate. Priority 1 restoration will correct the onsite erosion and incision and provide a
depositional storage area for fine sediments. The cattle activity adjacent to and within these project reaches are a
large source of fecal coliform, sediment, and nutrient loading to the streams, but establishment of a native
riparian corridor along with cattle exclusion and restoration of a depositional floodplain will reduce these
instream stressors.
Restoration of an adjacent forested floodplain will attenuate peak flows from the watershed and support stream
Hydrology
functions onsite. Additionally, UT1 Reach 2 will be routed through the Proposed Wetland 2, which will further
restore natural floodplain wetland hydrology, reducing local time of concentrations and attenuating peak flows.
Failing culverts will be removed or replaced to restore proper hydraulic processes at these crossing locations.
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.7

Functional
Category
Potential for Functional Uplift
UT1 Reach 2, 3, and UT16 have fragmented riparian buffers overrun with invasive vegetation and impacted by
cattle activity. Restoration of the riparian zone will create a native forested corridor at the Site level. Filling of
Habitat
floodplain ditching and reconnection of proposed wetland and stream areas will promote aquatic habitat in
pocket floodplain wetlands. Reconstruction and removal of existing farm crossings will restore aquatic organism
passage to the project streams. Restoration will provide additional bedform, introduce large woody debris (LWD),
and reduce fine sediment from bank erosion to improve instream habitat.
UT3
UT3 is a headwater stream which originates on
Site downstream from an existing culverted
farm path crossing. The channel is severely
incised and completely disconnected from its
floodplain just downstream of the crossing. As
UT3 flows southeast toward the project parcel
boundary, it flows through a series of headcuts
as the stream oscillates between stability and
instability. A failed farm pond dam was observed
approximately one third of the way down the
reach. At this location the stream is actively
headcutting and eroding through legacy pond
bed sediments. Similarly, towards the
downstream end of the reach, a headcut is
migrating upstream and has created an incised
and eroding channel between the active headcut
and the project parcel boundary. Bedform in stable sections of the reach is good, but quickly
deteriorates downstream of any active headcuts. Similarly, lateral stability is good for a majority of the
reach, outside of areas downstream of headcuts and/or in short lengths of incised stream. The riparian
corridor along UT3 is a mature, established forest with minimal invasive vegetation beyond ground
cover species. UT3 is currently fenced and cattle are excluded from the stream.
Table G.2e Summary of Potential for Functional Uplift — UT3
Functional
Potential for Functional Uplift
Category
Water
Active headcuts along UT3 are contributing large amounts of fine sediment to the project stream and receiving
Quality
streams as they migrate and erode channel bed and banks. Proposed enhancement methods, including stabilizing
the existing headcuts, will reduce sediment and nutrient loads delivered to receiving waters.
Hydrology
Stabilizing headcuts and reconnecting incised sections of UT3 to the wooded riparian floodplain will reduce
velocities from peak flows and rehydrate areas of pocket floodplain wetland.
Headcuts along UT3 are preventing aquatic organism passage while contributing large amounts of fine sediment
Habitat
to critical riffle and pool habitat. Proposed enhancement activities will improve aquatic organism passage by
correcting the series of headcuts throughout UT3. Additionally, enhancement practices will reduce potential
habitat fragmentation which could result from headcut migration and future channel erosion and incision.
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.8

2.3 Existing Conditions — Potential Wetland Restoration Areas
The Site includes 5.0 acres of proposed wetland re-establishment across three different areas of the
Site. The areas proposed for wetland restoration through re-establishment are located along the
floodplain of UT1 Reach 2 and Big Branch. Based on aerial photography (see Appendix) the site has been
cleared and in cattle as far back as 1955 and has a history of ditching which has increased drainage
effects and impaired wetland hydrology and function.
Proposed wetland areas are shown in Figures 6a and 6b.
Proposed wetland 1 starts at the toe of slope along the
left floodplain of UT1 Reach 2 and extends towards the
right top of bank along the stream. An existing
agricultural drainage ditch currently extends from the
wetland area to the stream channel, altering the
hydrology of the relic wetland area. Proposed wetland 2
is in the right floodplain of UT1 Reach 2 adjacent to an
existing farm pond. At the upstream end of proposed
wetland 2, a groundwater seep, currently used by cattle
as a wallow area, pumps water from the toe of slope
through an existing drainage ditch and into an existing
agricultural farm pond. Based on Wildlands' discussion
with the property owner, the groundwater seep provides enough of a groundwater source to maintain
the water level in the existing pond year around. Within proposed wetland 2, there is also a series of
small agricultural ditches that flow from east to west towards UT1 Reach 2, altering the current
hydrology. Proposed wetland 3 is along the right floodplain of Big Branch, just upstream of the
confluence with Clarks Creek. Currently, two agricultural ditches drain the proposed wetland area.
Additionally, proposed wetland 3 is bordered by Big Branch, which is moderately incised and
disconnected from the floodplain wetland area and acting as a hydrologic drain. Vegetation within all
three areas proposed for wetland restoration has been maintained for agriculture or timber in the past 5
years, but wetland herbaceous species were observed within all three areas.
Project soils within the proposed wetland areas are mapped as Tillery or Baden-Tarrus soil series (Figure
5). Most soils within the proposed wetland areas are mapped as Tillery Silt Loam. To ensure adequate
soil conditions, a licensed soil scientist (LSS) visited the
Site on August 1, 2019, to perform a preliminary soil
evaluation. Hand auger borings were advanced
throughout the property to estimate the location and
extent of hydric soils within the proposed project area.
According to the report included in the Appendix, soils
observed on Site within proposed wetland areas are
more like the Wehadkee or Roanoke soil series. Borings
across the Site were mapped according to their hydric
classification (hydric/non-hydric) as well as their
corresponding hydric indicator (F3/F19). Corresponding
soil depths to appropriate hydric indicators are also
included within the LSS report included in the Appendix.
Hydric classification and depth to the appropriate hydric
soil indicator was based on the NRCS Field Indicator of Hydric Soils in the United States (Version 8.2,
2018). Indicator F3: depleted matrix and Indicator F19: Piedmont floodplain soils were the primary
hydric soil indicators used throughout the Site.
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.9

2.4 Existing Conditions - Watershed
The Site is located in Montgomery County within the Clarks Creek targeted local watershed HUC
03040104020020 and DWR Subbasin 03-07-10. All onsite streams drain to the Pee Dee River which is
classified as a water supply V (WS-V) and Class B. WS-V is generally a water supply that drains to a
drinking water supply. Class B waters are protected for primary and secondary human recreation, which
involve human body contact with water such as swimming.
The Site topography, as indicated on the Mount Gilead West, NC USGS Topo 7.5 minute topographic
quadrangle shows a very gently sloped valley of Clarks Creek oriented south through the Site (Figure 3)
with the associated tributaries having a moderate valley slope. All tributaries, excluding UT3, drain to
Clarks Creek within the Site boundary. Drainage areas for the project reaches were delineated using
USGS North Carolina StreamStats Verison 4 (Figure 4). Land uses draining to the project reaches are a
mix of forested, pasture/hay fields, herbaceous, and some medium to high density 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 111 acres, or approximately
0.68% of the project catchment using USGS North Carolina StreamStats Version 4. The watershed areas
and current land uses are summarized in Table G.31 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
70% forested, 12% agricultural,
Clarks
45.75
Perennial
16,338
25.53
7% shrubland, 6% herbaceous,
Creek
5% developed
44% forested, 21% agricultural,
Big Branch
37.5
Perennial
1,464
2.29
14% herbaceous, 14%
developed, 7% shrubland
UT to Big
65% forested, 22% developed,
24/33.5
Intermittent/Perennial
65
0.10
Branch
9% herbaceous, 4% shrubland
54% forested, 34% agriculture,
UT1
30.5
Perennial*
725
1.13
7% herbaceous, 4% developed,
1% shrubland
72%forested, 18%agriculture,
UT1A
23.5
Intermittent
59
0.09
10% herbaceous
42%, agriculture, 40% forested,
UT16
31
Perennial*
348
0.54
10% herbaceous, 7%
developed, 1% shrubland
55% agriculture, 36% forested,
UT3
31.5
Perennial*
96
0.15
6% shrubland, 2% developed,
1% herbaceous
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 latest available aerial imagery.
*Stream was dry during late July field review but scored 30 or greater on the NC DWR Stream Identification Form without
baseflow.
2.5 Soils
The proposed project is mapped by the Web Soil Survey for Montgomery County. Project area soils are
described below in Table G.4. Figure 5 provides a soil map of the Site.
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.10

Table G.4 Project Soil Types and Descriptions
Soil Name
Description
BdC — Badin - Tarrus Complex,
8-15% Slopes
BdD — Badin -Tarrus Complex,
15-25% Slopes
This series consists of moderately deep, well drained, moderately permeable
soils with medium runoff potential. These soils are typically found on
Be132 — Badin -Tarrus Complex,
2-8% Slopes, Moderately
hillslopes located along ridges in the Piedmont.
Eroded
BeC2 — Badin-Tarrus Complex,
8-15% Slopes, Moderately
Eroded
This soils series consists of very deep, somewhat poorly drained, moderately
CnA — Chenneby Silt Loam, 0-
permeable soils. These soils are typically found in loamy and silty sediments
2% Slopes, Frequently Flooded
along floodplains and depressions and are subject to occasional or frequent
flooding and ponding.
GoE — Goldston-Badin
This soils series consists of shallow, well drained to excessively drained,
Complex, 15-45% Slopes
moderately rapidly permeable soils. These soils are typically found on
hillslopes along ridges in the Piedmont.
OkA — Oakboro Silt Loam, 0-2%
This series consists of deep, moderately well drained and somewhat poorly
Slopes, Occasionally Flooded
drained soils. These soils are typically found on nearly level narrow
floodplains along perennial and intermittent streams.
ShA — Shellbluff Silt Loam, 0-2%
This soils series consist of very deep, well drained to moderately drained,
Slopes, Occasionally Flooded
moderately permeable soils that formed in fluvial sediments. They are
typically found along floodplains.
TeB —Tillery Silt Loam, 0-6%
This soil series consists of very deep, moderately well drained, moderate
Slopes, Rarely Flooded
permeable soils that are found on stream terraces.
Source: Soil Survey of Montgomery County, North Carolina, USDA-NRCS,
https://websoiIsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoiISurvey.aspx
2.6 Geology
The Site is in the Carolina terrane 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 Carolina terrane is composed of heated and deformed volcanic and
sedimentary rocks and is known for the numerous abandoned gold mines and prospects. Minor gold
mining and mineral production is still occurring, and companies are continuing to show interest in the
area. The underlying geology of the Site is mapped as Metamudstone and meta-argillite —Tillery
formation (CZmd1) located on the Carolina Slate Belt. Tillery formation mostly consists of laminated
siltstones and mudstones that metamorphosed to greenschist facies.
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/apps/MapSeries/index. html?appid=a8281cbd24b84239b29cd2co798d4a10
2.7 Cultural Resources and Significant Natural Heritage Areas
No surveyed sites listed on the North Carolina State Historic Preservation office are located within a mile
of the Site. The Mount Gilead Downtown Historic District (HPO Site ID: MG0037) is the closest NC
Historic Preservation Area and is located 2 miles southeast of the Site. The archaeological site files at the
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.11

North Carolina Office of State Archaeology (OSA) have not yet been reviewed. All appropriate cultural
resources agencies will be contacted for their review and comment prior to any land disturbing activity.
The NC Natural Heritage Program (NHP) Managed Areas referenced two Division of Mitigation Services
Easements, one national forest, one Catawba Lands Conservancy Easement, and one Three Rivers Land
Trust Easement within five miles of the Site (Figure 1).
2.8 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 Montgomery County, NC. Currently, there are
five species federally listed for this specific county which include the bald and golden eagle (Haliaeetus
leucocephalus, Aquila chrysaetos), red -cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis), Cape Fear shiner
(Notropis mekistocholas), smooth coneflower (Echinacea laevigata), and the Schweinitz's sunflower
(Helianthus schweinitzii). A pedestrian survey conducted on July 29 - 30, 2019, indicated that the Site
provides potential habitat for the smooth coneflower and the Schweinitz's sunflower, but no individuals
were located at the time. 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 Species in Montgomery County, NC
Species
Federal Status
Habitat
Vertebrate
Bald and Golden
Inhabit open and semi -open country, especially in hilly or
Golden eagle
Eagle Protection
mountainous regions where sufficient mammalian prey are near
(Aquila chrysaetos)
nesting sites. Nest mostly on rock ledges and cliffs, but sometimes
in large trees. Generally absent from intensely farmed areas.
Bald and Golden
Live near rivers, lakes, and marshes where they can find fish, their
Bald Eagle
Eagle Protection
staple food. In treeless regions, they may also nest in cliffs or on the
(Haliaeetus leucocephalus)
Act
ground. Bald eagles will also feed on waterfowl, turtles, rabbits,
snakes, and other small animals and carrion.
Live in mature pine forests —specifically those with longleaf pines
Red -cockaded woodpecker
averaging 80 to 120 years old and loblolly pines averaging 70 to 100
(Picoides borealis)
Endangered
years old. These woodpeckers excavate cavities exclusively in living
pine trees, preferring older pines infected with the fungal red heart
disease that softens heartwood.
Cape Fear shiner
Often found in shallow, rocky shoals within main river channels with
(Notropis mekistocholaJ
Endangered
clean substrate composed of gravel, cobble and boulders. In winter
months, they may migrate into smaller tributary streams.
Invertebrate: Vascular Plant
Typically found in open woods, glades, cedar barrens, roadsides,
Smooth coneflower
Endangered
clearcuts, dry limestone bluffs, and power line rights -of -way, usually
on magnesium and calcium rich soils
SchwOccurs
sunflower
in areas with poor soils, such as thin clays that vary from wet
(Helix thus
(Helianthus schweinitzii)
Endangered
to dry and found in areas of full to partial sun such as natural forest
opening or grasslands and along roadsides.
Species and habitat information from the following websites:
https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/montgomerV.html
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecpO/reports/species-by-cu rrent-ra nge-countv?fips=37123
https://www.ncnhp.org/data/species-community-search
2.9 Floodplain Compliance
The Site is represented on the Montgomery County Flood Maps 3710659400J and 3710659300J. Clarks
Creek and Big Branch are mapped in a Zone AE Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) and the downstream
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.12

500 LF of UT1 Reach 3 is included in Clarks Creek's mapped floodplain. UT1A, UT113, UT3, and UT to Big
Branch do not have designated SFHAs. Effective hydraulic modeling for Clarks Creek, Big Branch, and
UT1 will be obtained from the NC Floodplain Mapping Program. A no -rise condition will be pursued if
compatible with Priority 1 restoration and enhancement grading. If a no -rise condition is not attainable,
then a CLOMR will be prepared. Wildlands' engineers have successfully navigated the CLOMR process
for several similar full -delivery project sites. A LOMR will be completed if required after construction
using as -built survey data.
2.10 Site Constraints and Access
Two internal easement breaks are proposed to maintain landowner access throughout the project
parcels; one on UT113 and one on UT1 Reach 2/3. Each break will be fenced and gated if needed for
livestock exclusion.
The breaks are summarized and numbered below in Table G.6 and depicted on Figures 6a and 6b.
Table G.6 Easement Crossings
No.
Width (ft)
Location
Internal or External
Crossing Type
1
60
UT1B
Internal
Culverted
2
100
UT1 Reach 2/3
Internal
Culverted
Crossing 2 on UT1 Reach 2/3 is proposed to encompass an existing overhead utility line that will be
relocated through the proposed internal crossing. Underground water lines to supply cattle waterers
will also be included within both proposed crossings. No other known utilities are present within the
conservation easement area.
The easement boundaries around all streams proposed for mitigation credit meet the required 50-foot
minimum riparian buffer for Piedmont streams. The entire easement area can be accessed for
construction, monitoring, and long-term stewardship from NC-73. There are no airports within the five -
mile radius from the Site as illustrated on Figure 1.
3.0 Project Development
The Wildlands Team proposes to restore a high quality of ecological function to the streams, wetlands,
and riparian corridors on the Site. The project design will be developed to avoid significant adverse
impacts to existing streams, wetland resources, or mature wooded vegetation. Different management
objectives are proposed for different portions of the project area. Two potential restoration options are
presented in Figure 6a and Figure 6b and summarized in Table G.7a and G.7b below. The wetland
mitigation approach is the same in each of the two options presented.
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.13

3.1 Stream Mitigation Approach
Currently, the streams throughout the Site are
extensively impacted by a lack of riparian vegetation
along most project reaches. The primary stressors to Site
streams are sediment from eroding bed and banks and
nutrients introduced from adjacent agricultural practices,
primarily cattle. Wildlands' approach on the Site includes
restoration on UT1 Reach 2 and 3, UT1B, and Big Branch;
enhancement II on Clarks Creek and UT3; and
preservation on UT1 Reach 1, UT1A, and UT to Big
Branch. Restoration reaches will be designed using a
Priority 1 approach.
Streams proposed for preservation, including UT1A, UT1
Reach 1, and UT to Big Branch will be placed under conservation easement and protected from potential
future cattle and/or timber impact. Areas of instability, including headcuts along UT to Big Branch, will
be stabilized as part of the project to prevent future channel deterioration. Additionally, invasive species
within riparian corridors will be treated along these reaches and stream buffers will be supplementally
planted to improve plant densities and minimize impacts from previous timber activities within adjacent
floodplains.
Streams proposed for an Enhancement II approach, including UT3 and Clarks Creek, will be stabilized in
place using isolated bed and bank treatments and protected from cattle activity through exclusion.
Areas of instability, erosion and incision, active headcuts, and failing banks will be stabilized as part of
the project. Invasive species within riparian corridors will be treated along these reaches and native
floodplain vegetation will be planted to improve plant species and densities. The upstream right buffer
of Clarks Creek in the off -project stream section is within the Site limits and will be placed under
conservation easement to protect this portion of the riparian corridor. The downstream extent of Clarks
Creek flows off the project parcel and only the right floodplain will be placed in conservation easement.
Streams proposed for a Restoration approach, including
UT1 Reaches 2 and 3, UT1B, and Big Branch, will be
restored using a Priority 1 approach with some Priority 2
Restoration occurring at confluences and transition zones
only. Stream channels will be constructed with
appropriate dimension, pattern, and profile such that they
will be reconnected with their adjacent floodplains.
At the upstream end of UT1 Reach 2, the failing culvert
will be removed from the channel and an instream
structure will be installed as grade control to prevent
headcut migration. The proposed channel will tie to the
downstream end of UT1 Reach 1 and immediately
transition to a Priority 1 Restoration approach. UT1 Reach 2 will be realigned and given a natural
meandering pattern and the dimension will be restored to re-establish the natural flooding regime with
the adjacent wetlands proposed for restoration. UT1 Reach 2 will be transitioned down to a Priority 2
Restoration approach just downstream of the confluence with UT1B to allow the streams to pass
through the proposed culvert crossing (upstream end of UT1 Reach 3). After passing through the culvert,
UT1 Reach 3 will be restored using a Priority 2 approach as it flows towards Clarks Creek. The channel
will be rebuilt with appropriate stream dimension, pattern, and profile and the riparian corridor,
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.14

currently overrun with invasive vegetation, will be cleared, graded, and replanted. Methods along UT1
Reach 3 will be designed to provide adequate stream and floodplain connection within a reconstructed
Priority 2 valley.
The proposed UT113 stream alignment will tie to the existing stream alignment at the parcel boundary
and quickly transition to a Priority 1 approach. UT1B will be given a natural meandering pattern with
appropriate radius of curvature ratios, eliminating existing torturous meander bends along the reach.
Existing mature vegetation will be avoided as project constraints allow. A native riparian corridor will be
planted, and floodplain connection will be re-established to eliminate mass wasting and incision along
the reach and decrease associated fine sediment load. The reach will continue as a Priority 1 stream
restoration through the proposed culverted crossing to its confluence with UT1 Reach 2.
Big Branch will tie to the existing channel at the parcel boundary along NC-73. The proposed channel
bed elevation will be raised to meet the bottom of the existing concrete box culvert to eliminate the
current barrier for aquatic organism passage. Raising the channel bed elevation will also allow for a
quick transition to a Priority 1 restoration approach. Big Branch will be realigned with a natural
meandering pattern and rebuilt with appropriate channel dimension to reconnect the stream to the
adjacent floodplain, including the proposed wetland restoration area. Instream structures will be used
to provide grade control, reduce potential bank erosion, and provide instream habitat. Big Branch will
have a short Priority 2 restoration section as the stream ties back down to Clarks Creek at its
downstream extent.
JUNE 2014
Buffers will be planted as described in Section 3.3. 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 and downstream wooded tracts.
This proposed work will not only improve Site streams but will directly address several of the stressors
identified in the RBRP, including protection of natural resources, sedimentation from agriculture,
eroding stream banks, and restoring degraded riparian buffers. The project will benefit receiving waters
which are currently 303(d) listed by directly reducing sediment, nutrients, and fecal coliform sources.
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
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Page G.15

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.
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 easement breaks will be designed
to exclude livestock access at all locations. Native riparian buffers measuring a minimum of 50 feet from
the proposed top of bank will be planted along all restored and enhanced streams on the Site. Riparian
buffers along preservation reaches will be evaluated using a vegetation inventory post contract and
supplementally planted as deemed necessary.
3.2 Wetland Mitigation Approach
Wetlands 1 and 2 are proposed for restoration through re-
establishment along UT1 Reach 1. Additionally, an
agricultural farm pond included within the proposed
Wetland 2 boundary will be converted to riparian wetlands
as a method of wetland re-establishment. Based on the
preliminary LSS report included in the Appendix; soils
within Wetlands 1 and 2 are currently hydric with indicators
between 4" and 9" below the soil surface. Wetland
hydrology will be restored by routing UT1 Reach 2 through
the proposed wetlands and eliminating any spur ditches
currently routing water away from wetland areas. For
further hydrologic improvement, the groundwater seep
upstream of proposed Wetland 2 will be routed into
Wetland 2 and allowed to naturally infiltrate through the
floodplain towards the reconstructed channel. The berm
along the northeastern edge of the existing farm pond will
be removed and the pond bed will be regraded to match
existing valley topography.
Proposed Wetland 3 is slated for restoration through re-
establishment along Big Branch. Based on the preliminary
LSS report included in the Appendix; soils within Wetland 3
are currently hydric with indicators between 1" and 9"
below the soil surface. Wetland hydrology will be restored
"Aerialiew of Ditching within Proposed
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.16

by reconnecting Big Branch to the relic floodplain and filling the two drainage ditches currently removing
hydrology from proposed Wetland 3. No grading is anticipated in proposed Wetland 3 beyond what is
required to fill the existing drainage ditches and restore the adjacent stream.
Proposed wetland areas will be planted with native wetland vegetation and the surface of the wetlands
will be roughed to provide microtopography, increasing surface storage and retention times throughout
the wetlands.
3.3 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
The Site will be a combination of stream restoration, stream
enhancement, stream preservation, and wetland re-
establishment. Two options are proposed: Option 1 includes 9,580
stream credits and 5.0 riparian wetland credits (Table G.7a), and
Option 2 includes 9,108 stream credits and 5.0 riparian wetland
credits (Table G.7b). Both options provide the same treatment of
Site wetlands but differ in the proposed stream crediting based on
the inclusion of preservation reaches UT1A, UT1 Reach 1, and UT
to Big Branch. Figures 6a and 6b represent the management
objectives proposed.
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. The credit
calculations do not include any credit for areas along Clarks Creek where the proposed conservation
easement only bounds one side of the stream channel at the upstream and downstream extents. A
credit ratio of 3:1 to 4:1 is used for the enhancement II work proposed at the Site based on current
stream condition and potential for stream functional 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 and wetland mitigation is presented in the tables
below.
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.17

Table G.7a Mitigation Credits proposed for the Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site — OPTION 1
Stream Credits
Type of
Length
Mitigation
Reach
Management Objectives
Mitigation
(feet)l
Ratio
Credits
RESTORATION
Restore appropriate dimension, pattern, and
Big Branch
profile with Priority 1 restoration. Install habitat
Restoration
2,134
1:1
2,134
structures, allow bankfull floodplain access.
Establish native riparian buffer.
Restore appropriate dimension, pattern, and
profile with Priority 1 restoration. Install habitat
UT1
structures, allow bankfull floodplain access.
Restoration
3,420
1:1
3,420
Reaches 2 & 3
Establish native riparian buffer. Restore natural
stream and wetland flooding regime.
Restore appropriate dimension, pattern, and
UT113
profile with Priority 1 restoration. Install habitat
Restoration
1,504
1:1
1,504
structures, Establish native riparian buffer.
Restoration Subtotal
7,058
71058
ENHANCEMENT II
Exclude cattle, treat invasive vegetation and
Clarks Creek
establish native riparian buffer. Stabilize isolated
Enhancement II
3,360
4:1
840
locations of actively eroding banks.
Stabilize isolated locations of actively eroding
banks and migrating headcuts. Restore
UT3
appropriate dimension, pattern, and profile along
Enhancement II
3,630
3:1
1,210
short impacted sections of existing stream
channel. Permanently exclude cattle.
Enhancement II Subtotal
6,990
2,050
PRESERVATION
Treat invasive vegetation and establish native
UT1 Reach 1
riparian buffer.
preservation
1,269
10:1
127
Treat invasive vegetation and establish native
UT1A
riparian buffer.
Preservation
2,195
10:1
220
UT to Big
Treat invasive vegetation, establish native riparian
Branch
buffer, stabilize existing headcuts.
Preservation
1,254
10:1
125
Preservation Subtotal
4,718
472
TOTAL
18,766
9,580
Note 1: Lengths are approximate based on professional judgement and exclude crossing locations.
Wetland Credits
Reach
Management Objectives
Type of
Acreage Z
Ratio
Mitigation Credits
Mitigation
Re-establish hydrology by restoring
adjacent stream channels, filling
Wetlands 1, 2,
agricultural ditches, redirecting altered
Restoration —
and 3
groundwater seeps, and removing existing
Re-establishment
5.0
1:1
5.0
farm pond. Plant areas with native wetland
vegetation. Exclude cattle where present.
Restoration Subtotal
5.0
5.0
TOTAL
5.0
- - -
5.0
Note 2: Acreages are approximate based on professional judgement.
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.18

Table G.7b Mitigation Credits proposed for the Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site — OPTION 2
Stream Credits
Reach
Management Objectives
Type of
Length
Ratio
Mitigation
Mitigation
(feet)'
Credits
RESTORATION
Restore appropriate dimension, pattern, and
Big Branch
profile with Priority 1 restoration. Install habitat
Restoration
2,134
1:1
2,134
structures, allow bankfull floodplain access.
Establish native riparian buffer.
Restore appropriate dimension, pattern, and
profile with Priority 1 restoration. Install habitat
UT1
structures, allow bankfull floodplain access.
Restoration
3,420
1:1
3,420
Reaches 2 & 3
Establish native riparian buffer. Restore natural
stream and wetland flooding regime.
Restore appropriate dimension, pattern, and
UT113
profile with Priority 1 restoration. Install habitat
Restoration
1,504
1:1
1,504
structures, Establish native riparian buffer.
Restoration Subtotal
7,058
7,058
ENHANCEMENT II
Exclude cattle, treat invasive vegetation and
Clarks Creek
establish native riparian buffer. Stabilize isolated
Enhancement II
3,360
4:1
840
locations of actively eroding banks.
Stabilize isolated locations of actively eroding
banks and migrating headcuts. Restore
UT3
appropriate dimension, pattern, and profile along
Enhancement II
3,630
3:1
1,210
short impacted sections of existing stream
channel. Permanently exclude cattle.
Enhancement II Subtotal
6.990
2,050
TOTAL
14,048
9,108
Note 1: Lengths are approximate based on professional judgement and exclude crossing locations.
Wetland Credits
Reach
Management Objectives
Type of
Acreage Z
Ratio
Mitigation Credits
Mitigation
Re-establish hydrology by restoring
adjacent stream channels, filling
Wetlands 1, 2,
agricultural ditches, redirecting altered
Restoration —
and 3
groundwater seeps, and removing existing
Re-establishment
5.0
1:1
5.0
farm pond. Plant areas with native wetland
vegetation. Exclude cattle where present.
Restoration Subtotal
5.0
5.0
TOTAL
5.0
- - -
5.0
Note 2: Acreages are approximate based on professional judgement.
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.19

5.0 Current Ownership and Long Term Protection
The Site is located on two parcels, 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 Memorandum of
Option is on record at the Montgomery County Register of Deeds. The option agreement allows
Wildlands to purchase a conservation easement on the properties. The Memorandum of Option is valid
for a minimum of 180 days from the closing date of RFP 16-007879. 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. A copy of the Memorandum of Option is included in
the Appendix. The landowners, parcel identification number, and deed book and page number for the
Memorandum of Option are summarized in Table G.8.
Table G.8 Property Owners for the Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site
Property Owner
Parcel ID Number
Memorandum of Option
Deed Book
Page Number
Cross Creek Ranch Family LP
659400211254
829
877(4)
Cross Creek Ranch Family LP
659400503458
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 16-007879.
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 Cross Creek Ranch 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
• Create conservation easement
the RFP, submitted electronically as
2
Property
documents and plats.
defined in Attachment H.
• Close and record the conservation
• 5 final deliverables outlined in the
easement.
RFP, submitted electronically and in
hard copy as defined in Attachment H.
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.20

Task #
Task Name
Task Summary
DMS Deliverable
• 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.
• Secure all necessary permits and/or
• 1 electronic copy of approved permits
4
Permitting and
certifications for Site construction.
prior to beginning earthwork.
Earthwork
• 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
document.
• 1 hard copy and 1 electronic copy of
Drawings)
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.
Process
•Attend closeout meetings and present
• 1 hard copy and 1 electronic copy of
"Final"
final project to IRT.
the annual monitoring report
and closeout report. Electronic copy of
survey.
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.21

Table G.10 Project Schedule for the Cross Creek Ranch 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 11 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 Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.22

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.
Wetland
Groundwater monitoring will be conducted for seven years after construction to evaluate the hydrologic
state of the restored wetland areas. Wetland groundwater gages will be installed in accordance with the
techniques and standards described in the USACE document entitled "Technical Standard for Water -
Table Monitoring of Potential Wetland Sites" (ERDC TN-WRAP-05-2, June 2005). Groundwater
monitoring gages will be established throughout the proposed wetland areas to adequately characterize
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.23

the different soils, vegetation communities, and surface topographic variations that are found across the
site.
Soils within proposed wetland restoration areas are mapped as Tillery and Badin-Tarrus soil series based
on NRCS soils mapping. However, investigations performed by a LSS and included in the Appendix
characterize soils within proposed wetland areas as more like Roanoke and/or Wehadkee series. The
Jackson Springs 5 WNW NRCS WETS table defines the growing season as March 17t" to November 18tn
(246-days) for Montgomery County, NC for 50% probability of soil temperatures greater than 28 degrees
Fahrenheit. Based on the results from the LSS investigation, the NRCS WETS table, and Table 1(wetland
saturation threshold values) within the Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory
Mitigation Update dated October 24, 2016, Wildlands estimates the final performance criteria for the
wetland hydrology will be a groundwater level within 12 inches of the soil profile for a period between
9% and 16% (22 to 39 consecutive days) of the 246-day growing season.
Final project wetland performance standards for the Site will be evaluated and refined based on further
discussions with the Interagency Review Team(IRT) and LSS, Table 1 (wetland saturation threshold
values) within the Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update dated
October 24, 2016, appropriate hydrologic modeling, and potential reference well data. To determine a
more Site -specific growing season, soil temperature probes will be installed on -site and soil temperature
data will be collected for each individual monitoring year in accordance with USACE guidance.
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 seven feet in height at the end of the fifth monitoring year, and ten feet in height at
the end of the seventh monitoring year. If this performance standard is met by year five and stem
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.
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.24

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, 5, and 7.
Abbreviated monitoring reports will be submitted in monitoring years 4 and 6. Closeout monitoring
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).
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.25

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 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
W'r.­.
�A ,—
Exetlng Lantl Hlena Data
Prepared By Jab
Q,r9D owolaPmeDt,reDDDD�
Prepared �, gab
�,laa� e, gab
RepeR-Mttlgatlerl Plan Acumplsla
PrePareu ey
Re+lexao Ry Cata
Phns-fiD'A Plans fer MHl9atlen Plan RepeN �subri�IPce.'U camplele)
Piaparen ey '
Rerlaxea 6y safe
9edlmeni 6 Eraslan Caniml Permli Applimtlen PacFa9e
Prepared t
RRe�lexaG Y
BO°d Plnrre {sabrl�ltice. Y, ooRplera]
tsubmiaal vt�a •a camplsml
Pmpere9 ey
PrepareG gya ans ]are Isubni�al vta st oamplotal
specDlcminns :, campinta;i
PrepareG ar pare
einm _ acamPlotal
PrepareG Byn
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
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 QA program; however,
the project manager, task leaders, and project team staff also play large roles. It is each person's
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.26

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 CIA 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 CIA 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 DIMS report templates and a final grammar/spelling/formatting
review are also integrated into the CIA 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 DIMS restoration sites, many of which have performed
successfully for multiple years.
Table G.11 Wildlands Team Member Construction Oversight Experience
,
Y
;v
N
M
W
a
u
O
y
W
N
Y
0°
O
L
of
3
Ve
y
C
00
Project
Details
V
Big Harris Creek Mitigation Site
25,836 stream credits; 9 BMPs
x
Lone Hickory Mitigation Site
12,900 stream credits; 8.0 wetland credits
x
Reedy Creek Design -Build Stream
25,974 stream credits
x
x
x
Restoration Project
Candy Creek Mitigation Site
15,534 stream credits
x
Little Pine II Stream Restoration Project
4,156 LF of streams; 5.4 acres of wetlands
x
x
Crooked Creek #2 Restoration Project
5,672 LF of stream; 11.5 acres of wetland
x
Lyle Creek Mitigation Site
5,571 stream credits; 7.0 wetland credits
x
x
Western Stream Initiative
Multiple projects totaling 15,000 LF
x
W Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.27

Proposal Number: 16-007879 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: 16-007879 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: 16-007879 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: 16-007879 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: 16-007879 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: 16-007879 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: 16-007879 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: 16-007879 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: 16-007879 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: 16-007879 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 ® 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: Charlotte, NC / Survey: Swannanoa, NC
Ver: 10/23/18 Page 38 of 41

Proposal Number. 16-007879
Vendor: Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
ATTACHMENT E: CERTIFICATION OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
Name of Vendor: Wild lands Engineerinq, 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 condificn, 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 reconcfliations and our other regular accounting duties on a monthly basis
Box 4 is not checked, because, On April 18th, 2019 Wildlands was served with a summons and complaint by a former planting
subcontractor for a non-DMS project; the complaint alleges Wildlands owes it certain sums of money. Wildlands disputes the allegations
and maintains it paid the subcontractor for aIf work the subcontractor properly performed under the contract. The subcontractor
irnproperly 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 nat a part of the
contract between Wildlands and the subcontractor_
' 08/13/2019
S' ture 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: 16-007879 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 ® 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: 16-007879 Vendor. Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
ATTACHMENT G: VENDOR'S INFORMATION
Vendors Primary Contact (or Project Manager)
Name:
Aaron Earley, PE, CFM
Agency:
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Title:
Senior Water Resources Engineer
Address:
1430 S. Mint Street, Suite 104
City:
Charlotte
State/ Zip:
NC/ 28203
Telephone:
[phone]
Fax:
[phone]
Email:
[e-mail]
Vendors Execution Address (Where the contract should be mailed for signature)
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 16-007879
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:
Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - Option 1
River Basin
/ Catalog
Yadkin 03040104
Unit:
RFP
Number:
16-007879
Date of Site
Evaluation:
TBD
Type/Amt of
M itigation
Offered:
Proposal
Review
TBD
Committee:
Alternate
Attendees:
TBD

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 wetl and mitigation, does the technical proposal a d equately 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 a nd/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 project a rea.
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 FunctionAX Factorc)
Enhancement
Restoration Feet + ( 2 )
Feet
C
D
Risk Adjusted Score D+ PlanningB =
Section 3. General
E I Total Function and Planning
1 point
3 points
6 points
10 points
What percent of the request does the proposed wetland
project provide? (if applicable)
1%
>99%
What percent of the request does the proposed stream
project provide? (if applicable)
o
0
0
0
Physical constraints or barriers
>5%
2-5%
<2%
1 None
Easement Continuity
>12
8-12
0-
Project Density
>10
1 8-10
1 4-8
<4
Total
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)
4

Technical Proposal Evaluation Criteria
Rating Form
Offeror:
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Site Name:
Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site - Option 2
River Basin
/ Catalog
Yadkin 03040104
Unit:
RFP
Number:
16-007879
Date of Site
Evaluation:
TBD
Type/Amt of
M itigation
Offered:
Proposal
Review
TBD
Committee:
Alternate
Attendees:
TBD

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 wetl and mitigation, does the technical proposal a d equately 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 a nd/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 project a rea.
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 FunctionAX Factorc)
Enhancement
Restoration Feet + ( 2 )
Feet
C
D
Risk Adjusted Score D+ PlanningB =
Section 3. General
E I Total Function and Planning
1 point
3 points
6 points
10 points
What percent of the request does the proposed wetland
project provide? (if applicable)
1%
>99%
What percent of the request does the proposed stream
project provide? (if applicable)
o
0
0
0
Physical constraints or barriers
>5%
2-5%
<2%
1 None
Easement Continuity
>12
8-12
0-
Project Density
>10
1 8-10
1 4-8
<4
Total
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)
4

0000
�.....
• �� Uwharrie National Forest
03040104010020. •
• •, • t Y 03040104020010 • • • •,
Randle House : is ... .... ;
..........
1. ...... NC DMS Easement
.,! 1. �......................�.
0304(
• Project Location
1
\ .�
030401,04040020
NC DMS Easement
�4
} Uwharrie National Forest
11PF
'• S o304010 010040 '
.��.} µ L
Norwood �' ; ; • , i . J .r �' _ iiA!✓1 1mM11 Hlimrk D'
. . r.4
. , 03040104040030 '
IV— Gilead%'' W
=� } Y,
` ► - Three Rivers Land Trust Easement
1
03040,05060080 ver P 03040104010030 'j�. Q Yadkin/Middle Pee Dee
fin'` L� River Aquatic Habitat
Fo k Beands..
30401053 i .
1
s Catawba Lands Conservancy 1
. T'4''4 Easement - The Fork -�
it
JJ4000
03040105081060 ANSON i
� 03040104020040 1,
~ i MONTGOMERY I r �•~
t RICHMOND
Five Mile Radius
Project Location
--_•• j County Line
- Municipalities
QHydrologic Unit Code (8- Digit)
zON WILDLANDS
INGINEER1NC.
Hydrologic Unit Code (14-Digit)
Targeted Local Watersheds
Water Supply Watershed
= NC Historic Preservation Areas
Significant Natural Heritage Areas
NC Natural Heritage Program Managed Areas
303d Listed Streams
© Airports
Figure 1 Vicinity Map
0 0.75 1.5 Miles Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site
I I I I I Yadkin River Basin 03040104
Montgomery County, NC

h r li 4` 7
ip. 4p jk �+i
9 -,,. - � � Q" ill ���.. � n ♦'�
a
r �`� • .. ,� -1k.
Ilk - �� - - !C•.?-y'P'`�\ p��
Project Parcelst._z.:;,.f, r �i
Proposed Conservation Easement
Cattle Access
Existing Pond Y �' �Wyy� �''}r. ►. t - _'•
Bedrock '� �� ■ a1;
..........
Ditch �. � �� Failed Dam
�•" V
Incision • R;'. ` %'• 1 r iJ \
Erosion G
f L y! d=
Project Streams ;k 1°�
illL
Non -Project Streams - 6 �.
Headcut40
'"
■ Y • ��
❑ Existing Ford
0 Cattle WallowX. lit-
0
�� r
Existing Culvert ;,' s ,r.
n Reach Break > ■ �1` e- *�. ..'� R �;
Figure 2 Site Map
Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site
Yadkin River Basin 03040104
Montgomery County, NC

10
�Proposed Conservation Easement
Project Parcels
IP
14
.n .
L
W I L D L A N D S o 1,000 2,000 Feet
ENGINEERING I I I I I
Figure 3 USGS Topographic Map
Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site
Yadkin River Basin 03040104
Montgomery County, NC

•.71 r,
r
1 -
! ® l
[ Io n rC
_ !8rr�.h•Ra
i
Clarks Creek (,16;33- 81AC)
Projecti !
Non -Project Streams
Topographic
1
FM
„rH�h•�aaow�n i � _
"A UT1 B (348
k
' UT1 (7251AC) Clarks Creek.(16,33. AC).
UT1A (59 AC) 1 3 !
_ i/JJJL�
b ^ c 4
1► ,� � fBig Branch (11464•AC) -
UTi3 (96 AC) f
4W.
f a r1 .[. ����• Was h rng hi n ,Park+Fid
and
UT to Big Bran0i5 AC)_
4.
2015 Aen hoto raphy � so Rd •li _ yya���d� I� �i�T�9 1 4 %7 A'S� �h� d 3 _ a

GoE
Project Parcels
Proposed Conservation Easement
- BdC - Badin-Tarrus Complex, 8-15% Slopes
- II - Badin-Tarrus Complex, 15-25% Slopes
- BeB2 - Badin Tarrus Complex, 2-8% Slopes, Moderately Eroded
- BeC2 - Badin-Tarrus Complex, 8-15% Slopes, Moderately Eroded
- CnA - Chen neby Silt Loam, 0 to 2% Slopes, Frequently Flooded
- GoE - Goldston-Badin Complex, 15-45% Slopes
- OkA - Oakboro Silt Loam, 0-2% Slopes, Frequently Flooded
ShA - Shellbluff Silt Loam, 0 to 2% Slopes, Occasionally Flooded
- TeB - Tillery Silt Loam, 0-6% Slopes, Rarely Flooded
Project Streams
Non -Project Streams
WI LD LAST D S
ENGINEERING
CnA
1
wi
ke-
ShA
�.
` Bay'
♦
• � OkA
TeB
� •H
w,
Figure 5 Soils Map
Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site
0 600 1,200 Feet Yadkin River Basin 03040104
1 1 1 1 Montgomery County, NC

Figure 6a Concept Map Option 1
Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site
W I L D L A N D S
SV,i ENGINEERING 0 600 1,200 Feet Yadkin River Basin 03040104
I I I Montgomery County, NC

Figure 6b Concept Map Option 2
W I L D L A N D S 0 600 1,200 Feet Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site
Yadkin River Basin 03040104
ENGINEERING � I � I �
Montgomery County, NC

e�
�r

E
,
-
�
¥ �
16
�
��-

r . •'y -+v i. tom,.. � � �,
'�y�:. i�y,�w�..w ,.
' �le
N ♦ Z .12 4.
1
�wtix
s
�
f

� � Y
it
�+
ell
VA
Ar
Ir
to
ti
't
#NQUIRY #: 5729696.5
YEAR:1993
= 500' E D R

'
INQUIRY k 5729696.5
YEAR: 2006 ��Jr
r
= 500' EDR

tre • nsr�>.,v ems,,; ■
�i
1 ' • }i
1'
i i � - � �4� li •r; � a � ��
t
IA
+� N
f • qq
rl
;. ►'
ICI
19
1.rr
40
.I .''., 'f.=`y �".;i .i •. ..5'51• _t ►u i1i-a4� -
4f
k
1NQUiRY#:5729696.5 YEAR: 2012 1 N
■ � ,�
F
= 500' EDR ,i t;

Ir
INQUIRY k 5729696.5
YEAR! 2016 1 N
= 500' (rEDR

■
�
�
� % 2
\
�
\
°
6
r
� $
k�
-
)
4
!
a 3 k
� s
}!}�lz
\
\
® `
r■k4■■Kkkki
-
�
�
§
�
!
2
§
®
2
)
m
)
m \
$Lp
E!
kg!!
7
co
�
■�ma��a■m�f
%
�

to Y
aon
MYSm
a �
}
rriav�
�
4
3
N 'Y
r r
ip
to dd
I
Y1 Ip
d�
I
�
n
Ile
C
E
�
w
zl
gappp 9
y
o of
=
a
n
v
C
O
II
u5
II
N H
r
C
1
�
y
�
K4
a
n
y
al$
T
�:gza
to
m
OG ID
N N
[r MOH
N
H
Z

f
z
IA".1c.."!
i
-si» oI
F
r
a
I I
�
U�
g
�
�
M1L
S
4
4
�
E
_
3
� o
r
a
y E
IS
r mlEE�
c \Fs
�
�°06nrte�i
i �
X U
¢!ram
C�sK4+e�i�i
Z
N
6
P{'3
e}N
b ux
J]�
Cii
3
•- N
M r
II
c
I
n
n
�
ffi
O
I
g
m �
I
?I
q
r
9

wl
s
■
a
d
)
�
dk!
-%
/
_V
.$
�
.
:w
°
k
§
�-■;;;�
�
|3
}!\
§�
!
�~�
a
_
■);
$!.
■C22
rlt3
■■46
�44dk
2
*
com-
�
�
7
�
,
§
f
2
k
$
\
£
�■
k®
�®
&
gF
!Is7
I
�
|•
!
!
!
&
)\kd
■rAKKmKK�z
z$ �

G
0
�
�
�
.
/
;a§.4
k
�
;
|
}|
2
7)�:
!$
-a
!r
--■�,�_.,
4:
�

a m
zg6
-0
m�
m
O
a
w
v
u ,� Y'
IDm
O
c N
c c o Q dam-_ a
o w y a v }
$ u
d
L E
H
m
a u
ri
u s us
uv
m
� io
C' VY u m R O F 2
`w 4
r
°�
`p Y
r C
L
a
--0 m
Att;
m
y p?
^1 D
N t g x
} C
NDoE C U
'Q}
O
u Ise
cb n E
E� L
v voi 4 E22
�
c u �: t a m m o
n =' ti
y.
vs e
a• �
� ,�`e
y. 3 o o a
E
+a
¢
a v
a m w m c>> n a R aI
Y$
m
N L
Q-
— V U C y O
O N
r y
y
C u�
L �]
N aR
- s m s 3 d
�
a° 0/i a uo nr 3—' m—^ 0
3
m v N a m
t y
G m L E C E_ t
`�
o
61
L
U
1 a
^uq EY
z�
du
ay
c u
DEL3
sE`oR
w m
O�
`m
�acoG;4,_M
SO L
y 1-
nw u°m i
a
y
C O
ri Q,�.a
y�
a n r s 5 m 3 =�
`a
i
u_4p
"EZ -'nuE Ens
w a C
vt
m` u w
�C
sa
—
cn y a E— o
O W C
C„ a w f
YyJ-1y N O u yyi ? i
y
CL
ip ? _D
C 'L-'
✓+ O
j a m
m
o.
J
C
w
L C
U X.
w Q w l? L a W R
lfl O 3
"O L
0 Y m
3
ax>
cr
03 m aais"eY ELLe`.
cc
m`o:°
Z 0
0 r Z
Vh C
C R O
Q O
0
w
T
Z m in w0
J c _ 0 c}
0 Y a a
Ln at as ar
Ln
Qj
r
J
x 0 U
I-

\
/k
k_
/|
f
\
\
u
k
GE
41
£CID w
-a
)
\
/\
§
/
t
)
)
J
-
--2
Z3
In]
2cs
tu
u
C-
[
_Ln
im 0
kk
§
{
/
7up-
§

)
)
!
�
�
7
&
&
|
!
2
I|!
,
!�-
�
}�'
|
}
�
§
f
a
$
,
■
�
�
k
!
!
�
2
$
$
k
)||
k
§2!
!
|
;
£!
k
%
\
•
�
|
§
t
!
a
�
�
-
�
$
�
7
»
a
2
2
£«
$
k|!
Ii!
»

!
!
{
)
§
$
/5
§
!
�
£
{
\$I
•\\e
]
2
!
'
:
±
k.2
�
17!
)§�
!
|
■
�
�
k
�
£
�
|
ƒ
.
F!-
S
;
�
�
!
£
«
}
)
!
!
m
§
S
k.k
Ik�
}

|
�
;
!
`
ƒ
i
t
7
k
|
�$§
±
!
�
!
)$�
!$
2!!
777;
�
/
!
J
�
f
«
!
k
k
|
§�§
k
!
�
k
k
k
�
!
•
§
s@
—§
|,
§./
$j|
�
�
���

%Zjt*� WILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
0 250 500 Feet
Figure A
Premilinary Soils Investigation
Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site
Yadkin River Basin 030403-04
Montgomery County, NC

U Soil Profile 6 �IeB
�♦
GoE ♦�
N. \
o�
Soil Profile 4 �♦
�J r__
Boring
Depth to Hydric
Indicator
Soil Profile
BH1
Non Hydric
BH2
Non Hydric
BH3
Non Hydric
Soil Profile 1
BH4
Non Hydric
BH5
4" - F3
Soil Profile 2
BH6
4" - F3
BH7
Non Hydric
BH8
Non Hydric
BH9
4" - F19
BH10
4" - F19
BH11
4" - F3
Soil Profile 3
BH12
Non Hydric
BH13
1" - F3
BH14
9" - F3
BH15
Non Hydric
BH16
Non Hydric
BH2O
9" - F3
BH21
9" - F3
BH22
Non Hydric
BH23
12" - F3
BH24
10" - F3
BH25
9" - F3
Soil Profile 4
BH26
Non Hydric
BH27
0" - F3
Soil Profile 5
BH28
0" - F3
BH29
3" - F3
Soil Profile 6
BH30
Non Hydric
Soil Profile 5
BeC2
0
BeB2
GoE
Project Area
Existing Project Streams
Non -Project Streams
Soils Borings and Hydric Indicator Observed
within 10" of the Soil Surface
IL F19
♦ F3
• Non-Hydric
[-] Soil Profile
` `♦
�♦ , � � Soil Profile 1
S' Soil Profile 3
TeB ��`•.
BdC- Badin-Tarrus Complex, 8-15%Slopes �� �♦ � 1
` �♦ i ®� OkA
C `
BdD Badin-Tarrus Complex, l5-25%Slopes 0�
Be62- Badin-Tarrus Complex, 2-8% Slopes, Moderately Eroded
BeB2 O
` \ /
BeC2- Badin-Tarrus Complex, 8-15%Slopes, Moderately Eroded
♦� CnA- Chenneby Silt Loam, 0-2% Slopes, Freq Flooded, Hydric, WEI Rating= A `•�
GoE- Goldston-Badin Complex, 15-45% Slopes
FOkA- Oakboro Silt Loam, 0-2% Slopes, Freq Flooded Soil Profile 2 Golk
�♦
ShA- Shellbluff Silt Loam, 0-2% Slopes, Occ Flooded
1 '
I
Te6- Tillery Silt Loam, 0-6% Slopes, Rarely Flooded, Hydric, WEI Rating= D !
I '
Te '
Figure B
WILD LANDS Premilinary Soils Investigation
E N G I N E E R I N G 0 250 500 Feet Cross Creek Ranch Mitigation Site
Yadkin River Basin 03040104
Montgomery County, NC

{
\
.
\
\
§ (
Z
k
/
q
&�
w�—
OD
0
c
C6
�
t {
]s r
$
&
��
22 rd (
\\ \
b§ )
(�
§k (§§�
L
)
2 ;
/° }
0& k\)
��3k
>
p
(�
-
)
kk
\
f@
k
}
\c
\\
}/�
)
f|
�\®&
®E
®(2[
}I
§ o
/)
-
�
§f
{/■}
k\.
k
k\
*E
±[\\
\(
r�
$-
2{k-
-.
■
«&
`
�j\f
}
r$
\f
(k
®�
go
o
.0
|E
�§
�2\■//
§=
■-;
;\
Ian
■E
0
\
\
���/
_}
aE
{0
,
ae
£
§!§

/
n
4
+
t
§
�
k
& �
) ]
\
k ƒ `
�
/