20200363 Ver 1_401 Application_20200311

Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions
ACTION ID #: SAW -
Prepare file folder ❑
1. Project Name [PCN Form A2a]: Boykin Solar, LLC
Begin Date (Date Received):
Assign Action ID Number in ORM ❑
2. Work Type: ❑Private ❑ Institutional []Government ❑ Commercial
3. Project Description / Purpose [PCN Form 133d and 133e]:
Installation of an access road and temporary crossing in order to facilitate the construction of a utility scale solar farm.
4. Property Owner / Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A4]: Forrest Cold ren
5. Agent / Consultant [PNC Form A5 — or ORM Consultant ID Number]:
Catherine L. Carston, Pilot Environmental, Inc.
6. Related Action ID Number(s) [PCN Form 135b]:
D
MAR 1 1 2020
dEO-WATER REOM!ES
BUFFER I
7. Project Location —Coordinates, Street Address, and/or Location Description [PCN Form Blb]:
Boykin Road, Fayetteville, North Carolina
35.104605,-78.746043
8. Project Location —Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form Bla]: 0479-45-2358
9. Project Location — County [PCN Form A2b]: Cumberland
10. Project Location — Nearest Municipality or Town [PCN Form A2c]: Fayetteville
11. Project Information — Nearest Waterbody [PCN Form 132a]: Bakers Swamp
12. Watershed / 8-Digit Hydrologic Unit Code [PCN Form 132c]: 03030004
Authorization: Section 10 ❑ Section 404 ❑
Regulatory Action Type:
Standard Permit
✓ Nationwide Permit #
Regional General Permit #
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Section 10 and 404 ❑
Pre -Application Request
Unauthorized Activity
HCompliance
No Permit Required
Revised 20150602

W AT fiRQC^
P Y
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Pre -Construction Notification PCN Form
A. Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1 a.
Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit El Section 10 Permit
1 b.
Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: NWP 14 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes
® No
1 d.
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
® 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e.
Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification. -
El Yes ® No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes ® No
1f.
Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in -lieu
fee program.
❑ Yes
® No
1 g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
❑ Yes
® No
1 h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes
® No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
Boykin Solar, LLC
2b.
County:
Cumberland
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Wade
2d.
Subdivision name:
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no:
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Multiple - Please see attached parcel information and agent authorizations
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
3d.
Street address:
3e.
City, state, zip:
3f.
Telephone no.:
3g.
Fax no.:
3h.
Email address:
Page 1 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is.
❑ Agent ® Other, specify: Lease Holder
4b. Name:
Forrest Coldren
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
Boykin Solar, LLC
4d. Street address:
600 Park Offices Dr, Suite 285
4e. City, state, zip:
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
4f. Telephone no.:
919-813-7990
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
[e-mail]
5. AgenWonsultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
Catherine L. Carston
5b. Business name
(if applicable).
Pilot Environmental, Inc.
5c. Street address,
PO Box 128
5d. City, state, zip:
Kernersville, NC 27285
5e. Telephone no..
336.712.7381
5f. Fax no.:
5g. Email address: [e-mail]
Page 2 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
0479-45-2358
Latitude:35.104605 Longitude: -
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
78.746043
(DD DDDDDD) (-DD.DDDDDD)
1 c. Property size:
290 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to
Bakers Swamp
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
Class C
2c. River basin:
Cape Fear
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The site contains undeveloped wooded land and timbered land. Residential and commercial development are located
within the vicinity of the site.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
Wetland=96 Ac
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
Streams=0 LF
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The purpose of the proposed project is to construct a utility scale solar farm.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The overall project consists of development of the site with a proposed solar farm. To facilitate development of the site
and construction of the proposed wetland crossings, clearing and grading is necessary. Graders, haulers, excavators and
other heavy equipment will be used during site development.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
® Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments: USACE SAW-2018-00826
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
®Preliminary ❑Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Agency/Consultant Company: Pilot Enviromental, Inc.
Name (if known): David Brame/Seren Homer
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
USACE SAW-2018-00826 dated 6/26/19
S. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
❑ Yes ® No ❑ Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
Page 3 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? ❑ Yes ® No
6b. If yes, explain.
Impacts to streams/wetlands, outside of those proposed in this application, are not anticipated as a result of the proposed
project.
Page 4 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply)-
0 Wetlands ❑ Streams - tributaries ❑ Buffers
❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a
2b.
2c.
2d.
2e
2f.
Wetland impact
Type of jurisdiction
number —
Type of impact
Type of wetland
Forested
(Corps - 404, 10
Area of impact
Permanent (P) or
(if known)
DWQ — non-404, other)
(acres)
Temporary T
W1 ®P ®T
Fill
Scrub Shrub
® Yes
❑ No
® Corps
® DWQ
0.077/0.020
W2 ❑ P ®T
Temporary
Crossing
Scrub Shrub
® Yes
El No
® Corps
® DWQ
0.145
W3 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W4 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W5 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W6 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts
0.077/0.166
2h Comments: Wetland impact 1 will permanently impact 0.077 acres of wetland associated with fill for road crossing and
temporarily impact 0 020 acres of wetlands by installation of a temporary coffer dam with a pump around. Wetland impact 2
will temporarly impact of 0.145 acres of wetland associated with the installation of overhead powerlines. Permanent impacts
are not associated with intallation of the powerlines.
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
3b.
3c.
3d.
3e.
3f.
3g.
Stream impact
Type of impact
Stream name
Perennial
Type of jurisdiction
Average
Impact
number -
PER or
(Corps - 404, 10
swidth
Permanent P or
()
intermittent ttent
DWQ —non-404,
(linear
Temporary (T)
(INT)?
other)
(feet)
feet)
S1 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S2 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S3 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S4 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S5 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S6 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
3i. Comments: Stream impacts are not proposed.
Page 5 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below
4a
4b
4c.
4d
4e.
Open water
Name of waterbody
impact number—
(if applicable)
Type of impact
Waterbody type
Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or
Temporary
01 ❑P❑T
02 ❑P❑T
03 ❑P❑T
04 ❑P❑T
4f. Total open water impacts
4g Comments: Open water impacts are not proposed.
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a.
5b.
5c.
5d.
5e.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
Stream Impacts (feet)
Upland
Pond ID
Proposed use or purpose
(acres)
number
of pond
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
P1
P2
5f. Total
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres).
5j Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico ❑ Other:
Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman
6b.
6d.
6e
6f.
6g.
Buffer impact
number —
LReason
Buffer
Zone 1 impact
Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P) or
Stream name
mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
Temporary
required?
B1 ❑P❑T
El Yes
❑ No
B2 ❑P❑T
El Yes
❑ No
B3 ❑ P ❑ T
I[]
❑ Yes
No
6h. Total buffer impacts
6i. Comments: Buffer impacts are not proposed.
Page 6 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Due to development of the site with a solar farm, a road is needed to provide access for construction and long term
maintenance of the site. The road width has been minimized to the extent practical (16-feet wide) to safely accomidate tractor
trailers and other heavy equipment. The road crossing will utilize a temporary coffer dam with a pump around to avoid
dewatering of the down -gradient wetlands during construction. Additionally, 2 24-inch culverts will be installed below the road
to prevent possibility of future interuptions of wetland functions due to construction of the access road. The culverts will
discharge into a riprap apron, to be keyed into the wetland bed to match the existing grade, to prevent scour or channelization
of the down -gradient wetland. The crossing location was selected in an area where the wetland is the narrowest and contains
no streams, thus avoiding additional impacts to WoUS.
In order to provide interconnection of the site, construction of a utiliy line is necessary. In order to facilitate placement of the
powerlines, an area of existing vegetation must be removed to allow for running of the aerial cables. The width of the
easement has been minimized to the extent possible (approximately 20-feet) to allow for access of equipment and to avoid
impediment to the electrical lines. During construction of the powerlines, temporary log matts will be utlized as needed in wet
areas in order to avoid excess disturbance to the wetland during equipment use. The log matts will be removed following
completion of the utlity line. Vegetation within the crossing will not be stumped or grubbed. The powerline crossing location
was selected in an area where the wetland is as narrow as feasibly possible, thus avoiding additional impacts to WoUS to the
extent possible.
The remaining site development, including the solar arrays, inverters and remainder of the access road have been designed to
avoid impacts to WoUS. There are approximately 96 acres of wetlands located on the site. The remaining 95.757 acres of
wetlands are being avoided.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
The clearing limits will be staked and silt fence will be used. A temporary coffer dam will be installed upgradient of the
proposed culvert. During construction, water will be pumped around the construction footprint. All excess material will be
immediately removed from the crossing area and stock -piled for back -fill or permanently discarded in upland areas. Upon
completion of the culvert installation and road construction, the temporary sand bag coffer dam will be removed and any flow
will be diverted through the culvert. Following construction, any temporary disturbance areas will be restored to similar pre -
construction conditions, matted and seeded/live staked.
During construction of the the powerlines, temporary log matts will be utlized as needed in wet areas in order to avoid excess
disturbance to the wetland during equipment use. The log matts will be remved following completion of the powerlines.
Vegetation will not be stumped or grubbed.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the Stage
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
❑ Yes ® No
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ❑ Corps
❑ Mitigation bank
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
❑Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete If Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type
Quantity
Page 7 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

3c Comments:
4. Complete If Maldng a Payment to In4leu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
❑ Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature-
❑ warm ❑ cool ❑cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments:
S. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required
Zone
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund).
6h Comments:
Page 8 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
❑ Yes ® No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
❑Yes ®No
Comments:
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
2.09 %
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
® Yes ❑ No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
❑ Certified Local Government
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
® DWQ Stormwater Program
❑ DWQ 401 Unit
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
Cumberland County
® Phase II
3b. Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
❑ NSW
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ® No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑ Coastal counties
4a. Which of the following state -implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ HQW
® ORW
(check all that apply):
❑ Session Law 2006-246
❑ Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached?
❑ Yes ® No
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 9 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
❑ Yes ® No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑ Yes ® No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.)
❑ Yes ® No
Comments: A NEPA or SEPA is not required as part of this project.
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑ Yes ® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
❑ Yes ® No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
El Yes No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
We are not aware of additional development that will result which will impact nearby WoUS.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
Wastewater will not be generated by the proposed project.
Page 10 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

S. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
❑ Yes ® No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
® Yes ❑ No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
® Raleigh
❑ Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
Pilot contacted the USFWS to request their review and comment pertaining to threatened and endangered species known
to occur in Cumberland County, North Carolina during previous environmental assessments. The USFWS reviewed the
project and issued comments dated 5.25.2018 (attached) and 4.12.2019 (attached). Based on our observations and
USFWS consultation, the proposed project was not likely to adversely affect federally protected species provided that
impacts to wetlands could be avoided. Once wetland crossing locations were determined to be necessary, Pilot
conducted a detailed survey within the crossing locations to determine if pondberry or american alligator may be affected
by the proposed crossings. Pilot did not identify evidence of american alligators or pondberry within the proposed
crossing locations. The survey results have been provided to the USFWS for review and comment. Based on our
observations the project will not affect these species. Suitable habitat for other species known to occur within
Cumberland County is not present on the site. Therefore, the project is not likely affect other federally protected species
or their habitat.
S. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
Pilot reviewed the NOAA Essential Fish Habitat Mapper. Based on a map query of the site location, the site is not located
in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat. Best management practices and the use of temporary sediment and
erosion control devices will be used to prevent sediment from entering down -gradient waterbodies
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes ® No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
The SHPO reviewed the proposed project as part of an intergovernmental agency review and issued comments dated
12.19.13 (attached).
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?
❑ Yes ® No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? 3720046800J (Drawing 4)
Page 11 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

C��� 1 Cam.
Catherine L. Carston
3.9.2020
Applicant/Agent's Signature
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name (Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant Date
is provided.)
Page 12 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

AGENT AUTHORIZATION
This form authorizes PEI to act as our agent in stream/wetland matters including U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers and North Carolina Division of Water Resources field verification and permitting.
Property Address: 4000 Lee Rd, Wade, NC 28303
Applicant Information:
Name: Forrest M. Coldren, Permitting Specialist
Address: 600 Park Offices Dr, Suite 285, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
(Mailing) PO Box 13092, Durham, NC 27709
Telephone Number:
919-813-7990
Fax Number:
E-mail Address:
[e-mail]
ze '') r�
Signature: 7
y U' -✓ Date: 1/29/2020

as .µme
-
,
_N.
r
r rnigh SC p
a �i•
mm
� tl
per
r bf .s. .�'.�• � •, �,� - .gam � ':_
N � 9 P •,.. ^�, F p '^w...ww,N h e ^,.1�„ 'M°
m
. w
\
ly
F ,
r /�+ -r`•E «wan ,a �.r..
w +
r
30
:
.". `NiF f.► �' ' Fµ�a s r k r�•,x .."µ,
T
tx
LEGEND
Site Boundary
Drawing 1 USGS Topographic Map
USGS Topographic Map Boykin Solar
Vander and Stedman, NC E `' �; f - r Approximate 284 Acre Tract
Quadrangles RUM Fayetteville, Cumberland County, NC
Scale: 1" = 2,000' R , ^ T F � V R A N N = YJ T 1 � , F � � Pilot Project 3344

Drawing 2
USDA Web Soil Survey
of Cumberland County NC
Scale: 1' = 600'
�
A
5NTA. t R" [
Web Soil Map
Boykin Solar
Approximate 284 Acre Tract
Fayetteville, Cumberland County, NC
Pilot Project 3344

W
A A
4
AV
�, E:A
_.
h s
,, St
Cad .
aB
m . � ��► '� =Site Boundary
AuA � ..
Drawing 2A Published Soil Map
USDA Soil Survey Boykin Solar
of Cumberland County, NC Approximate 284 Acre Tract
Published 1984, Sheet 12 and 13 I ! "'�"� Fayetteville, Cumberland County, NC
Not to Scale P i A T T „' a n Al,.: Id T.1 A f Pilot Project 3344

LEGEND
Fit -A wker Emurderl
I,
rrr_9awater rorrted)Shrutl
M.a
Uwanne and ruterine beepwater
rruarinr and Marine
li rmhw;tr"r Pond
1.10
_ _... _ . .F ..,.. - �. ,...._ .. _. ..
�1 RWEftYB
�.
low nFiBPT
�
}
NWI Map
Drawing 3
'f K
USFWS NWI
rB
Boykin Solar
-
"� ��'�
Approximate 284 Acre Tract
Wetlands Mapper
,�
PILOT
��
Fayetteville, Cumberland County, NC
-
Scale: 1" 600'
-
' '' P`1OT E%k''R�4N"NTAt wt
Pilot Project3344

\$
khma.
�
y z y«
.z� ^ �
..

Drawing 5
Aerial Imagery from ESRI
and Pilot GPS Data
Scale: 1" = 600'
Date: 4.20.18
Revised: 7.25.18
PILOT
P i[1)T Er. •l11! 1& eNTAL.
Wetland Map
Boykin Solar
Approximate 275 Acre Tract
Fayetteville, Cumberland County, NC
Pilot Project 3344

Drawing 5A
Aerial Imagery from ESRI
and Pilot GPS Data
Scale: 1" = 600'
Date: 4.20.18
Revised: 7.25.18
FBILOT
PIIDT Ek s' k0 qN'e NTl. t. F 4. t
Wetland Map
Boykin Solar
Approximate 9 Acre Tract
Fayetteville, Cumberland County, NC
Pilot Project 3344

NCHPO HPOWEB
{P
OD0167 McPha1l.H+reuse
wand Fana7 Gimplex 1991
ty
Nr
CD1473 Have
Xf —
"K-_fia4l3absaromRd-^-^.^.,.x,,:,
tr.
"-: n „wr,�„s CD14� lquse
6,,q,6 at
VzT
t'.4 C.r ,
r�
w
jF a stover
CD0164 Eastover S h001
■
+r po"gN ,, KI)
":D1472 Holue
CDO140 WilWord Houne
•r ■ 1984
JV
w,
*Ll
3/9/2020, 11:29:20 AM
1:36,112
':' i
■ � : '..Local districts &boundaries
DOE districts &boundaries
SL individual resources & centerpoints
0 0.33 0.65 1.3mi
=Determined
■
+ ��II II --r-j
Local individual resources & centerpoints
Eligible Boundary
SL Individual Entry
0 0.5 1 2 km
0 Local Landmark
�L____�I'�``'`�
Both DOE and Study List Boundary
♦ SL and DOE entry
■ Local Landmark, Gone
DOE individual resources & centerpoints
■ Study List Entry, Gone
Local HD Center Point
A Determined Eligible
SL and DOE, Gone
Surveyed Only individual resources & centerpoints A DOE, Gone
*' SLHD Center Point
Surveyed Only
♦ SL and DOE
SLDOEHD Center Point
'g Surveyed in NRHD
A SL and DOE, Gone
NR districts & boundaries
Surveyed Only, Gone
* DOEHD Center Point
=National Register Boundary
Surveyed in NRHD, Gone
SLDOEHD Center Point
Blockface- Multiple properties
SL districts & boundaries
Sources: Esri, HERE, Gamin, Intennap, increment P Corp.,
., Blockface in NRHD
Study List Boundary
GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL,
Both SL and Determined Eligible Boundary
Ordnance Survey, Earl Japan, METI, Esd China (Hong Kong), (c)
Surveyed Area, No designation
OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community
x. Surveyed Area in NHRD
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office
County of Cumberland, State of North Carolina DOT, Earl, HERE, Garmin, INCREMENT P, USGS, METI/NASA, EPA, USDA (

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM —Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: Boykin Solar City/County: Fayetteville/Cumberland Sampling Date: 4 18 18
Applicant/Owner. Boykin Solar, LLC State: NC Sampling Point: DPA
Investigator(s) Brame Section, Township, Range: NA
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.) Flat Local relief (concave, convex, none): Relatively flat Slope (%): 1-2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) T Lat: 35 111500° Long 35.111500° Datum: WGS 84
Sod Map Unit Name- Coxville loam (Co) NWI Classification: None
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology _significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation _,Soil _,or Hydrology_ naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks )
OUMMAKT Ur I INLANta, —
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydnc Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Remarks.
HYDROLOGY
site
Yes X No
Is the Sampled Area
Yes X No within a Wetland?
Yes X No
Yes X No
etc.
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required• check all that agply) _
Surface Sod Cracks (B6)
X Surface Water (Al)
_ Aquatic Fauna (1313) _
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
X High Water Table (A2)
_ Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U) _
Drainage Patterns (1310)
X Saturation (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) _
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (B1)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) _
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (62)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) _
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (B3)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) _
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
X Algal Mat or Crust (64)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7) _
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Iron Deposits (B5)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks) _
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
X
FAC-Neutral Test (135)
Water -Stained Leaves (69)
X
Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Presents Yes X No _
Depth (inches): 2
Water Table Present? Yes X No _
Depth (inches): Surface
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Saturation Present? Yes X No _
Depth (inches): surface
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available -
Remarks:

VEGETATION (Five Strata) - Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point DP-1
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size 30 )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 Magnolia virginiana
5
Y
FACW
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 12 (A)
2. Ilex opaca
5
Y
FAC
3. Pinus taeda
10
Y
FAC
Total Number of Dominant
4
Species Across All Strata 12 (B)
5.
6
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 100 (A/B)
20
= Total Cover
50 % of total cover:
10
20 % of total cover-
4
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of Multiply by -
Sapling Stratum (Plot size. 30 )
OBL species x 1 =
1 Persea borboma
5
Y
FACW
FACW species X 2=
2 Magnolia virginiana
5
Y
FACW
FAC species X 3=
3. Ilex opaca
5
Y
FAC
4
FACU species X 4 =
5
UPL species X 5 =
6
Column Totals (A) (B)
15
= Total Cover
50 % of total cover
7.5
20 % of total cover
3
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Shrub Stratum (Plot size- 30 )
1.
— 1 — Rapid Test for Hydrophybc Vegetation
X 2 — Dominance Test is > 50%
2
3
_ 3 — Prevalence Test is 5 3.0'
4
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
5.
'Indicators of hydnc soil and wetland hydrology must
6
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
0
= Total Cover
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
50 % of total cover
0
20 % of total cover:
0
Tree — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 10 )
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
1. Arundinana gigantea
5
FAC
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH)
2. Woodwardia areolata
10
Y
OBL
Sapling — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
3 Osmunda cinnamomea
5
FACW
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
4 Juncus effuses
10
Y
FACW
than 3 in. (7 6 cm) DBH.
5. Carex intumescens
10
Y
OBL
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
6
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
7.
8
Herb —All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
g
herbaceous vines, regardless of size. Includes woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
10
3 ft (1 m) in height
11.
40
= Total Cover
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height
50 % of total cover:
20
20 % of total cover-
8
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30
H dro h c
Y P Yti
1 Smilax qlauca
5
Y
FAC
Vegetation
2 Smilax rotundifolia
10
Y
FAC
Present? Yes X No
3. Rubus argutus
10
Y
FAC
4.
5
25
= Total Cover
50 % of total cover:
125
20 % of total cover
5
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet )

SOIL
Sampling Point DP-1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.)
Depth Matnx Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-6 10 YR 3/1 100 Loam
6-18 10YR 5/1 85 10YR 5/6 15 C M Loam
'Type* C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grams 2Location• PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
_ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Coast Praine Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR 0, S)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer
Type*
Depth (inches)
Remarks
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR 0)
Thin Dark Suface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 2 cm Muck (Al 0) (LRR S)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F1) (LRR 0)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Sods (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Anomalous Bnght Loamy Sods (F20)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 153B)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Marl (F10) (LRR U)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Ochnc (F11) (MLRA 151)
Iron Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR 0, P, T)
3Indicators of Hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Umbnc Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present, unless
_ Delta Ochnc (F17) (MLRA 151)
disturbed or problematic.
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
Piedmont Floodplam Sods (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Sods (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
Hydrlc Soil Present? Yes X No

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM —Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: Boykin Solar City/County: Fayetteville/Cumberland Sampling Date: 4.18 18
Applicant/Owner Boykin Solar, LLC State: NC Sampling Point: DP-2
Investigator(s): Brame Section, Township, Range: NA
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.) Flat Local relief (concave, convex, none): Relatively flat Slope (%): 1-2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): T Lat: 35. 35 110878° Long:-78.754493° Datum: WGS 84
Soil Map Unit Name: Goldsboro loamy sand (GoA) NWI Classification, None
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No_ (If no, explain in Remarks)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology _significantly disturbed'2 Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil _ , or Hydrology_ naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks)
OuMmAKT ur rirvulnua — Anacn sne map snovAng sampiing point locations transacts Important features etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X Is the Sampled Area
wlthln a Welland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks*
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply) _
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ Aquatic Fauna (1313) _
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
High Water Table (A2)
_ Marl Deposits (1315) (LRR U) _
Drainage Patterns (610)
Saturation (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) _
Moss Trim Lines (1316)
Water Marks (B1)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) _
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (62)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) _
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (133)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) _
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7) _
Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Iron Deposits (65)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
X
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_
Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes _ No X
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes _ No X
Depth (inches).
Saturation Present? Yes _ No X
Depth (inches): 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks:

VEGETATION (Five Strata) - Use scientific names of plants Sampling Point DP-2
Dominance Test worksheets
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 Pinus taeda
15 Y FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC.
8 (A)
2
3,
Total Number of Dominant
4
Species Across All Strata*
8 (B)
5.
6
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC
100 (A/B)
15 = Total Cover
50 % of total cover 7.5
20 % of total cover 3
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of
Multiply by:
Sapling Stratum (Plot size 30 )
OBL species
x 1 =
1 Pinus taeda
5 Y FAC
FACW species
X 2=
2. Magnolia virgmiana
5 Y FACW
FAC species
X 3 =
3
FACU species
X 4 =
4
5
UPL species
X 5 =
6,
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
10
= Total Cover
50 % of total cover: 5
20 %
of total cover: 2
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Shrub Stratum (Plot size 30 )
1. Baccharis halimifolia
10
Y FAC
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2. Ligustrum smense
5
Y FAC
X 2 - Dominance Test is > 50%
3
_ 3 - Prevalence Test is 5 3.0'
4.
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
5.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
6
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
15
= Total Cover
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
50 % of total cover: 7.5
20 %
of total cover- 3
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb Stratum (Plot size 10 )
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
1 Arundmana gigantea
5
FAC
(7 6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH)
2 Rubus argutus
40
Y FAC
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
3.
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
4,
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH
5.
Shrub -Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
6
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
7.
8
Herb -All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
9
herbaceous vines, regardless of size. Includes woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
10.
3 ft (1 m) in height.
11.
45
= Total Cover
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height
50 % of total cover. 225 20 % of total cover 9
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 Hydrophytic
1 Smilax rotundifolia 5 Y FAC Vegetation
2. Vitis rotundifolia 5 Y FAC Present? Yes X No
3
4
5.
10 = Total Cover
50 % of total cover, 5 20 % of total cover: 2
Remarks, (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)

SOIL
Sampling Point DP-2
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-3 10 YR 4/1 100 Loam
3-18 10YR 5/3 90 10YR 4/6 10 C M Loam
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
_ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T. U)
Layer (If observed):
Type
Depth (inches):
Remarks
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Solls3:
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
Thin Dark Suface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (171) (LRR O)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,13)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (172)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Sods (F20)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 153B)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Marl (F10) (LRR U)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Ochnc (1711) (MLRA 151)
_ Iron Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T) a
Umbnc Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U) Indicators of ogy m tivegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present, unless
_ Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151) disturbed or problematic.
Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
Piedmont Floodplam Sods (F19) (IVILRA 149A)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Sods (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C,153D)
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X

14 Ot
United States Department of the Interior
oP FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh ES Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
,tiCH 3 '% Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
May 25, 2018
David Brame
Pilot Environmental Inc.
PO Box 128
Kernersville, NC 27285
Re: Boykin Solar Farm — Cumberland County, NC
Dear Mr. Brame:
This letter is in response to your request for information on your proposed solar project, listed
above. Our comments are submitted pursuant to, and in accordance with, provisions of the
Endangered Species Act (the Act).
Based on the information provided and other information available, it appears that the proposed
action is not likely to adversely affect any federally -listed endangered or threatened species, their
formally designated critical habitat, or species currently proposed for listing under the Act at
these sites. We believe that the requirements of section 7(a)(2) of the Act have been satisfied for
your project. Please remember that obligations Linder section 7 consultation must be
reconsidered if: (1) new information reveals impacts of this identified action that may affect
listed species or critical habitat in a manner not previously considered; (2) this action is
subsequently modified in a manner that was not considered in this review; or, (3) a new species
is listed or critical habitat determined that may be affected by the identified action.
However, the Service is concerned about the potential impacts the proposed action might have
on aquatic species. Aquatic resources are highly susceptible to sedimentation. Therefore, we
recommend that all practicable measures be taken to avoid adverse impacts to aquatic species,
including implementing directional boring methods and stringent sediment and erosion control
measures. An erosion and sedimentation control plan should be submitted to and approved by
the North Carolina Division of Land Resources, Land Quality Section prior to construction.
Erosion and sedimentation controls should be installed and maintained between the construction
site and any nearby down -gradient surface waters. We recommend maintaining natural,
vegetated buffers on all streams and creeks adjacent to the project site.
The Service recommends that solar facilities be sited in areas that are previously disturbed, or
sites that do not impact mature forest, wetlands, or streams. The North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission has developed a Guidance Memorandum (a copy can be found on our
website at (http://www.fws.gov/raleigh) to address and mitigate secondary and cumulative
impacts to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife resources and water quality. We recommend that you

consider this document in the development of your projects and in completing an initiation
package for consultation (if necessary).
In addition, we encourage the use of natural vegetation management practices (such as sheep
grazing) and the planting or seeding of native pollinator plant species where possible on the site,
and other efforts to improve habitat for various species (such as bird houses and bat boxes).
Please note our specific recommendations, below.
Invasive Exotic Species — the Service is concerned with the introduction and spread of invasive
exotic species in association with the proposed project. Without active management, including
the revegetation of disturbed areas with native species, the project area will likely be a source for
the movement of invasive exotic plant species. Exotic species are a nu jor contributor to species
depletion and extinction, second only to habitat loss. Exotics are a factor contributing to the
endangered or threatened status of more than 40 percent of the animals and plants on the Federal
List of Endangered and "Threatened Wildlife and Plants.' It is estimated that at least 4,000 exotic
plant species and 2,300 exotic animal species are now established in the United States, costing
more than $130 billion a year to control2. Additionally, the U.S. Government has many
programs and laws in place to combat invasive species (see www.invasivespecies.gov) and thus
cannot spend money to counter these efforts. Specifically, Section 2(a)(3) of Executive Order
13112 Invasive Species (February 3. 1999) directs federal agencies to "not authorize, fund, or
carry out actions that it believes are likely to cause or promote the introduction or spread of
invasive species in the United States or elsewhere." Despite their short-term erosion control
benefits, many exotic species used in soil stabilization seed mixes are persistent once they are
established, thereby preventing the reestablishment of native vegetation. Many of these exotics
plants3 are also aggressive invaders of nearby natural areas, where they are capable of displacing
already established native species. Therefore, we strongly recommend that only native plant
species be used in association with all aspects of this project.
Pollinator Recommendations — Although solar energy production is a fast-growing
Renewable energy source that can lessen overall impacts to natural resources when compared to
conventional energy sources (coal, oil, gas, etc.), we believe solar farms can adversely affect
valuable natural resources if they are not properly planned and constructed. Impacts to natural
resources from the construction, operation, and maintenance of solar farms include: the removal
of forests and riparian buffers; creation of monotypic habitat; introduction of invasive species:
use of herbicides; creation of large, clear open spaces; and barriers created from fencing.
Recent evidence indicates that pollinators, especially native bees and monarch butterflies, are in
serious decline. Habitat losses and diminished native food sources have decreased the
populations and diversity of pollinators throughout the country. For these reasons, we
recommend that solar facilities be sited in areas that are previously disturbed (fallow fields,
closed industrial sites, etc.) or sites that do not impact mature forests, streams, or wetlands. To
offset the overall impacts of solar facilities and/or to increase the habitat and species diversity
within the solar facility area, we further recommend the following measures be implemented into
project design:
1. Sow native seed mixes with plant species that are beneficial to pollinators throughout the
site. Taller growing pollinator plant species should be planted around the periphery of the

site and anywhere on the site where mowing can be restricted during the summer months.
Taller plants, left un-mowed during the summer, would provide benefits to pollinators,
habitat to ground nesting/feeding birds, and cover for small mammals. Low
growing/groundeover native species should be planted under the solar panels and
between the rows of solar panels. This would provide benefits to pollinators while also
minimizing the amount of maintenance such as mowing and herbicide treatment. Using a
seed mix that includes milk weed species (milk weed is an important host plant for
monarch butterflies) is especially beneficial. The following website provides a
comprehensive list of native plant species that benefit pollinators:
littps://mail.google.com/mail/u/q/#advancedscarcli/subject=pollinator&subset=all&has=a
vita&within=l d&sizeoperato►=s_sl&sizeunit=s_smb/14f0366dba7d3bda?projector=l .
Additional information regarding plant species, seed mixes, and pollinator habitat
requirements can be provided upon request.
2. Create openings in fencing to allow passage for small mammals and turtles.
3. If possible, the solar field should be designed with open areas spread throughout the
project site and planted and maintained with taller/pollinator friendly plant species. This
practice would benefit pollinators, create diversity throughout the site, and provide much
needed shelter islands to aid in the movement of small mammals and birds.
4. Mitigate for the loss of forested habitat. Though the loss of forested habitat cannot be
fully mitigated when cleared for solar facilities, we believe measures should be
implemented into the design plans to offset the impacts of the project to the greatest
extent practicable. We recommend the construction and placement of bat and bird boxes
throughout the site along with perch poles that are large enough to be used by raptors.
5. Provide nesting sites for pollinator species. Different pollinators have different needs for
nesting sites. Therefore, we recommend designing the solar facility to maintain a diverse
array of habitats to accommodate varied pollinators from hummingbirds to butterflies to
bees. Hummingbirds typically nest in trees or shrubs while many butterflies lay eggs on
specific host plants. Most bees nest in the ground and in wood or dry plant stems. For
additional information and actions that can be taken to benefit pollinators please visit the
following website:
http://www.(Nvs.gov/polIinators/poIIinatorpages/yourhelp.litmI
The Service has established an on-line project planning and consultation process which assists
developers and consultants in determining whether a federally -listed species or designated
critical habitat may be affected by a proposed project. For future projects, please visit the
Raleigh Field Office's project planning website at littns://www.fws��,ov/rateigl / ,V.ht►nl. If you
are only searching for a list of species that may be present in the project's Action Area, then you
may use the Service's Information, Planning, and Consultation System (IPaC) website to
determine if any listed, proposed, or candidate species may be present in the Action Area and
generate a species list. The IPaC website may be viewed at https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/. The
IPaC web site contains a complete and frequently updated list of all endangered and threatened
species protected by the provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16

U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)(Act), a list of federal species of concern that are known to occur in each
county in North Carolina, and other resources.
if you have any questions or comments, please contact Kathy Matthews of this office at (919)
956-4520 ext. 27.
Sincerely,
Pete Benjamin
Field Supervisor
1 Wilcove, D. S., D. Rothstein, J. Dubow, A. Phillips, and E. Losos, 1998. Quantifying threats to imperiled species
in the United States. BioScience 48:607615,
'- Pimentel, D., L. Lach, R. Zuniga, and D. Morrison. 2000. Environmental and economic costs of nonindigenous
species in the United States. BioScience 50:5365,
3 The term "federal species of concern" refers to those species which the Service believes might be in need of
concentrated conservation actions. Federal species of concern receive no legal protection and their designation does
not necessarily imply that the species will eventually be proposed for listing as a federally endangered or threatened
species. However, we recommend that all practicable measures be taken to avoid or minimize adverse impacts to
federal species of concern.
8

CNT `rh
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh ES Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27630-3726
April 121, 2019
Seren Homer
Pilot Environmental Inc,
PO Box 128
Kernersville, NC 27285
Re: Boykin Solar (Additional Area) — Cumberland County, NC
Dear Mrs. Homer:
This letter is in response to your request for information on your proposed solar project, listed
above, Our comments are submitted pursuant to, and in accordance with, provisions of the
Endangered Species Act (the Act).
Based, on the information provided and other information available, it appears that the proposed
action is not likely to adversely affect any federally -listed endangered or threatened species, their
formally designated critical habitat, or species currently proposed for listing under the Act at
these sites. We believe that the requirements of section 7(a)(2) of the Act have been satisfied for
your project. Please remember that obligations under section 7 consultation must be
reconsidered if. (1) new information reveals impacts of this identified action that may affect
listed species or critical habitat in a manner not previously considered; (2) this action is
subsequently modified in a manner that was not considered in this review; or, (3) a new, species
is listed or critical habitat determined that may be affected by the identified action.
However. the Service is concerned about the potential impacts the proposed action might have
on aquatic species. Aquatic resources are highly susceptible to sedimentation. Therefore, we
recommend that all practicable measures be taken to avoid adverse impacts to aquatic species,
including implementing directional boring methods and stringent sediment and erosion control
measures, An erosion and sedimentation control plan should be submitted to and approved by
the North Carolina Division of Land Resources, Land Quality Section prior to construction.
Erosion and sedimentation controls should be installed and maintained between the construction
site and any nearby down -gradient surface waters. We recommend maintaining natural,
vegetated buffers on all streams and creeks adjacent to the project site.
The Service recommends that solar facilities be sited in areas that are previously disturbed, or
sites that do not impact mature forest, wetlands, or streams. The North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission has developed 1I Guidance Memorandum (a copy can be found on our
website at (http://w%vw.fws.gov/raleigii) to address and mitigate secondary and cumulative

impacts to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife resources and water quality. We recommend that you
consider this document in the development of your projects and in completing an initiation
package for consultation (if necessary).
In addition, we encourage the use of natural vegetation management practices (such as sheep
grazing) and the planting or seeding of native pollinator plant species where possible on the site,
and other efforts to improve habitat for various species (such as bird houses and bat boxes).
Please note our specific recommendations, below.
Invasive Exotic Species — the Service is concerned with the introduction and spread of invasive
exotic species in association with the proposed project. Without active management, including
the revegetation ofdisturbed areas with native species, the project area will likely be a source for
the movement of invasive exotic plant species. Exotic species are a major contributor to species
depletion and extinction, second only to habitat loss. Exotics are a factor contributing to the
endangered or threatened status of more than 40 percent of the animals and plants on the Federal
List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants.1 It is estimated that at least 4,000 exotic
plant species and 2.300 exotic animal species are now established in the United States, costing
more than $130 billion a year to control`. Additionally, the U.S. Government has many
programs and laws in place to combat invasive species (see www.invasivespecies.gov) and thus
cannot spend money to counter these efforts. Specifically, Section 2(a)(3) of Executive Order
13112 Invasive Species (February 3, 1999) directs federal agencies to "not authorize, fund, or
carry out actions that it believes are likely to cause or promote the introduction or spread of
invasive species in the United States or elsewhere." Despite their short-term erosion control
benefits, many exotic species used in soil stabilization seed mixes are persistent once they are
established, thereby preventing the reestablishment of native vegetation. Many of these exotics
plants, are also aggressive invaders of nearby natural areas, where they are capable of displacing
already established native species. Therefore, we strongly recommend that only native plant
species be used in association with all aspects of this project.
Pollin.atoi• Recommendations — Although solar energy production is a fast-growing
Renewable energy source that can lessen overall impacts to natural resources when compared to
conventional energy sources (coal, oil, gas, etc.), we believe solar farms can adversely affect
valuable natural resources if they are not properly planned and constructed. Impacts to natural
resources from the construction, operation, and maintenance of solar farms include: the removal
of forests and riparian buffers; creation of nionotypic habitat: introduction of invasive species;
use of herbicides; creation of large, clear open spaces; and barriers created from fencing.
Recent evidence indicates that pollinators, especially native bees and monarch butterflies, are in
serious decline. Habitat losses and diminished native food sources have decreased the
populations and diversity of pollinators throughout the country. For these reasons, we
recommend that solar facilities be sited in areas that are previously disturbed (fallow fields,
closed industrial sites, etc.) or sites that do not impact mature forests, streams, or wetlands. To
offset the overall impacts of solar facilities and/or to increase the habitat and species diversity
within the solar facility area, we further recommend the following measures be implemented into
project design:

Sow native seed mixes with plant species that are beneficial to pollinators throughout the
site. Taller growing pollinator plant species should be planted around the periphery of the
site and anywhere on the site where mowing can be restricted during the summer months.
Taller plants, left un-mowed during the summer, would provide benefits to pollinators,
habitat to ground nesting/feeding birds, and cover for small mammals. Low
growing/groundcover native species should be planted under the solar panels and
between the rows of solar panels. This would provide benefits to pollinators while also
minimizing the amount of maintenance such as mowing and herbicide treatment. Using a
seed mix that includes milk weed species (milk weed is an important host plant for
monarch butterflies) is especially beneficial. The following website provides a
comprehensive list of native plant species that benefit pollinators:
llttps://mail.google.com/illail/li/O/itfidvaiicecisearcli/subject=pollinator&subset=al I&has=a
vita&witliin=l d&sizeoperator=s_sl&sizelinit=s_smb/l 4fD366dba7d3bda?projecto1=) .
Additional information regarding plant species, seed mixes, and pollinator habitat
requirements can be provided upon request.
2. Create openings in fencing to allow passage for small mammals and turtles.
3. If possible, the solar field should be designed with open areas spread throughout the
project site and planted and maintained with taller/pollinator friendly plant species. This
Practice would benefit pollinators, create diversity throughout the site, and provide much
needed shelter islands to aid in the movement of small mammals and birds.
4. Mitigate for the loss of forested habitat. Though the loss of forested habitat cannot be
fully mitigated when cleared for solar facilities, we believe measures should be
implemented into the design plans to offset the impacts of the project to the greatest
extent practicable. We recommend the construction and placement of bat and bird boxes
throughout the Site along with perch poles that are large enough to be used by raptors.
Provide nesting sites for pollinator species. Different pollinators have different needs for
nesting sites. 'Therefore, we recommend designing the solar facility to maintain a diverse
array of habitats to accommodate varied pollinators from hummingbirds to butterflies to
bees. Hummingbirds typically nest in trees or shrubs while many butterflies lay eggs on
specific host plants. Most bees nest in the ground and in wood or dry plant steins. For
additional information and actions that can be taken to benefit pollinators please visit the
following website:
http://www.iws.go\,/pollinators/liolliiiatorpages/yourlicip.litml
The Service has established an on-line project planning and consultation process which assists
developers and consultants in determining whether a federally -listed species or designated
critical habitat may be affected by a proposed project. For future projects, please visit the
Raleigh Field Office's project planning website at https://www.fivs.gov/raleiLh/lg.html. If you
are only searching for a list of species that may be present in the project's Action Area, then you
may use the Service's Information, Planning, and Consultation System (IPaC) website to
determine if any listed, proposed, or candidate species may be present in the Action Area and
generate a species list. The IPaC website may be viewed at littl)s:Hccos.lvvs.�!ov/ipac/. The

IPaC web site contains a complete and frequently updated list of all endangered and threatened
species protected by the provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)(Act), a list of federal species of concern that are known to occur in each
county in North Carolina, and other resources.
If you have any questions or comments, please contact Kathy Matthews of this office at (919)
856-4520 ext. 27.
Sincerely,
Fete $eCl�cttTttll.
Field Supervisor
' Wilcove, D. S., D. Rothstein, J. Dubow, A. Phillips, and E. Losos. 1998. Quantifying threats to imperiled species
in the United States. BioScience 48:607615.
2 Pimentel, D., L. Lach, R. Zuniga, and D, Morrison. 2000. Environmental and economic costs of nonindigenous
species in the United States, BioScience 50:5365.
3 The term "federal species of concern" refers to those species which the Service believes might be in need of
concentrated conservation actions. Federal species of concern receive no legal protection and their designation does
not necessarily imply that the species will eventually be proposed for listing as a federally endangered or threatened
species. However, we recommend that all practicable measures be taken to avoid or minimize adverse impacts to
federal species of concern.
4

AGENT AUTHORIZATION
This form authorizes Pilot to act as our agent in stream/wetland matters including U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers and North Carolina Division of Water Resources field verification and
permitting.
Property Address: James Dail Road, Eastover NC
Owner Information: Frederick White (milia white heirs)
Address: 3290 James Dail Road
Wade, NC 28395
Telephone Number: 910-322-4958
Fax Number:
E-mail Address: [e-mail]
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION REQUEST
D. PROPERTY ACCESS CERTIFICATION
By signing below, I authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting
on -site investigations, if necessary, and issuing a jurisdictional determination pursuant to
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. I,
the undersigned, am either a duly authorized owner of record of the property identified herein,
or acting as the duly authorized agent of the owner of record of the property.
Frederick White
Print Name
Capacity: X_ Owner _ Authorized Agent
nihF;hnl 4
Signature

AGENT AUTHORIZATION
This form authorizes Pilot to act as our agent in stream/wetland matters including U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers and North Carolina Division of Water Resources field verification and
permitting.
Property Address:
Owner Information:
Address:
4)2/ !1 c
1,04K
Telephone Number: 9/ 9y4, %
Fax Number:
E-mail Address:
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION REQUEST
D. PROPERTY ACCESS CERTIFICATION
By signing below, I authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting
on -site investigations, if necessary, and issuing a jurisdictional determination pursuant to
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. I,
the undersigned, am either a duly authorized owner of record of the property identified herein,
or acting as the duly authorized agent of the owner of record of the property.
Print Name
Capacity: ✓Owner —Authorized Agent
Date
Signature

AGENT AUTHORIZATION
This form authorizes Pilot to act as our agent in stream/wetland matters including U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers and North Carolina Division of Water Resources field verification and
permitting.
Property Address: 4101 Lee Road, Wade. NC
CumbelC , d Count�I PTN 0479-45-235$
CGumbarl.znd County PTN 0479-44-9627
Owner Information:
Address: 3340 Quarry Drive, l,ayettevilie, NC 28303-4695
Telephone Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address: [e-mail]
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION REQUEST
D. PROPERTY ACCESS CERTIFICATION
By signing below, I authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting
on -site investigations, if necessary, and issuing a jurisdictional determination pursuant to
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. I,
the undersigned, am either a duly authorized owner of record of the property identified herein,
or acting as the duly authorized agent of the owner of record of the property.
J , Duane Cilli.ani — owner
Print Name
Capacity: _Owner X Authorized Agent
04/13/2018
Date
Signature

ArcGIS Web Map
3/9/2020, 12:11:56 PM 1:43,183
0 0.35 0.7 1.4 mi
0 0.5 1 2 km
CCGIS-TAX MAPPING
CCGS\ ESRI Charlotte
CCGIS
CCGIS
CCGI S \ ESRI Charlotte i CCGIS i CC Flaming & City of Fay Planning I CCGIS- TAX MAPPING i CCGIS\CCPlanrrvng i

Property Summary
Tax Year: 2020
REID
10479452358000
PIN 0479-45-2358 1 Property Owner GILLIAM, J DUANE HEIRS
Location Address 14000 LEE RD
property Description
Ownets Mailing Address— 3340 QUARRY DR
FAYETTEVILLE NC 28303
Administrative Data
Transfer Information
Property Value T
Old Map #
Deed Date
10/30/2009 Total Appraised Land Value $544,625 ;
Market Area
14080
Deed Book
1008274 Total Appraised Building Value
Township
~ NONE
Deed Page
100656 Total Appraised Misc
Planning
COUNTY
Revenue Stamps
Improvements Value_
Jurisdiction
Total Cost Value $544,625 1
Package Sale Date
_
City
Total Appraised Value -Valued $544,625 1
- _—_
Package Sale Price
'Fire District
0161-EASTOVER
-
- -- -. By cost
u Land Sale Date
10/30/2009 -
Other Exemptions
Spec District
PS0005-SPECIAL—
FIRE,RECREATION
-
Land Sale Price
,Exemption Desc
Land Class
F100-RURAL
- -- - — - --
-- Use Value Deferred $457,327 "
--- ----- --
Improvement Summary
'- -------------- '
History REID
1 Historic Value Deferred
1
Total Buildings
0
�$457,327
Total Deferred Value !'
History REID
Total Units
'0 - -"--- ----
2
Total Taxable Value $87,298
Total Living Area
:0
'Acreage
1278.66
- -
-
_�___-
Total Gross Leasable Area 0
Permit Date
-
Permit #
Building Summary
Misc Improvements Summary
Card i Unit Base Eff Phys Depr (% Econ Depr (% Funct Depr (% I Common Interest (%
# i Quantity Measure 1 Type ; Price Year I Bad) 'Bad) Bad) Good) Value I
No Data
Total Misc Improvements Value Assessed:
Land Summary
_Land Class. F100-RURAL Deeded Acres._278.66_ Calc_u_lated_Acres• 284.57
Zoning ! Soil Class I Description I Size Rate 1 Land Adjustment
Al 1 2096-RURAL-ACREAGE 204.22 BY THE ACRE PRICE $15,500 '
Al 2300-SWAMP-WASTE ' 74.44 BY THE ACRE PRICE $300
Total Land Value Assessed: $544,625 - " _ _ ___ ____. __ _____ _ __ __ __-•__.. __ _ ___ . ---__ ___
I Land Value
T- $522,293
$22,332
Ownership History
I Owner Name Deed Type v I %o Ownership Stamps I Sale Price ; Book w I Page Deed Date
Current I GILLIAM, J DUANE HEIRS WD-WARRANTY DEED 100, 0, 100666 :10/30/2009
Notes Summary
-- - - - - -- - -- - ---- -- --------- - - - -- ----- ---- --- ----- - ---
Building Card Date Line Notes
` No Data - - - - - - - - - -