20200775 Ver 1_Technical Proposal (Opt. B)_2019_20200312

1017 Main Campus Drive, Suite 1200 • Raleigh, North Carolina 27606 • 919-582-5850
November 5, 2019
Ms. Marjorie Barber
Purchasing Agent
North Carolina Department of Environmental Services, Division of Mitigation Services
217 West Jones Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
RE: PROPOSAL #16-008012: Full Delivery Projects to Provide Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Credits within
the Cataloging Unit 03040201 of the Yadkin Pee -Dee River Basin — Proposed Middendorf Springs Stream and
Wetland Restoration
Dear Ms. Barber:
Freese and Nichols, Inc. (FNI) appreciates the opportunity to provide this proposal to assist the North Carolina Division
of Mitigation Services in their request for stream and wetland mitigation in the Yadkin River Basin Cataloging Unit
03040201.
Freese and Nichols offers the Division of Mitigation Services the same team that has designed many thousands of linear
feet of successful stream restoration projects throughout North Carolina and the United States. We propose an
exceptional leadership team, with project manager and technical directors, Ian Jewell, JD and Bryan M. Dick, PhD, PE,
PH who have successfully led the design and implementation of other NCDMS/EEP stream and wetland restoration sites.
The proposed team has an outstanding background and training in all aspects of the work, and a proven record of
successful projects across the state and nationwide in many ecoregions with a challenging diversity of stressors that
impair ecological function. Supporting Mr. Jewell is a diverse team of technical experts in fields such as restoration
ecology, fluvial geomorphology, geology, environmental assessments, environmental permitting, stormwater
management, sediment and erosion control and construction management.
The Middendorf Springs Restoration Project consists of eight channelized and modified, highly stressed channels and
drained hydric soils that are adjacent to Jones Creek and currently under tillage practices (row crops). One of the
proposed options presented in this proposal allows DMS to get all of the requested SMU and WMU credits in one
contiguous site. Also, please note that we are only able to propose a portion of the site's wetland restoration potential
due to the limits of this RFP's maximum requested WMU. We have the option to provide an additional 15-18 contiguous
acres of wetland restoration (WMU) if desired.
We ask for your strong consideration of this project as you make your selection.
Sincerely,
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
I
Bryan . Dick, PhD, PE, PH
Associate

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS
3 November 5, 2019
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs

Title Page

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL#: 16 -008012

Full Delivery Projects to Provide Stream and Riparian
Wetland Mitigation Credits within the
Cataloging Unit 03040201 of the Yadkin Pee-Dee River
Basin as described in the Scope of Work

Submitted by:

FREESE AND NICHOLS, INC.
1017 Main Campus Drive, Suite 1200
Raleigh, North Carolina 27606
P: 919-582-5850
Mike Ways, PE, CFM
Vice President | Principal
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

Request for Proposal #
16-008012
______________________________________________________
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:

______________________________________________________
Federal ID Number or Social Security Number

___________________________________________________
Vendor Name
Sealed, mailed or hand delivered responses ONLY will be accepted for this
solicitation.

75-1531935
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
4 November 5, 2019

5 November 5, 2019
6 November 5, 2019
7 November 5, 2019
8 November 5, 2019
State of North Carolina
Department of Environmental Quality
Request for Clarification # 01 — Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Bid Number: RFP #:16-008012
Date: December 13, 2019
Commodity: 962-73 - Restoration Reclamation
Services of Land and other Properties
Description: Full Delivery Projects to provide
Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation
Credits within the Cataloging Unit 03040201 of
the Yadkin River Basin
Contact: Brooke Wells Name/email: brooke.wells�7u ncdenr.gov Phone: [phone]
During the onsite technical review of the Middendorf Springs Stream and Wetland Restoration bid submittal,
DMS staff questioned whether the installation of existing drainage tiles and ditches were a violation Section 404
and/or 401 of the Clean Water Act. Representatives of Freese and Nichols, Inc. responded the activities were
exempt by agricultural activities.
INSTRUCTIONS:
1. Return one signed copy of this clarification request via email (pdf) along with the requested information in
accordance with the RFP cited below by 12:00 noon on December 19, 2019.
Provide documentation in accordance with RFP Section 2.8 IMPORTANT INFORMATION AND
RESTRICTIONS c) 6. "Properties that have been timbered, filled, or manipulated (stream channel dredging or
channel re -alignment) in violation of federal or state rules or statues." Documentation of review and approval by
USDA Farm Service Agency or Natural Resources Conservation Service is acceptable. Such documentation
may include the authorizations) to conduct such agricultural activities (i.e. the US Department of Agriculture
Appendix to Form for AD-1026 Highly Erodible Land Conservation (HELC) and Wetland Conservation
(WC) Certification.)
Failure to provide the requested information may result in rejection of the bid submittal.
Does Freese and Nichols, Inc. agree to provide the following information? V
Yes or No
Sign Clarification:
Vendor:
Authorize
Date: Q 1(1
Name and Title (Typed): M\YsG I q�CE ?(Z1;5j,Fir'3'i J %g1Y1CIPaL-

From:Bryan Dick
To:Wells, Brooke; Mike Wayts
Cc:Ian Jewell
Subject:[External] RE: Clarification Request: RFP 16-008012 - Middendorf Springs (Freese & Nichols)
Date:Tuesday, December 17, 2019 3:27:46 PM
Attachments:image001.png
T1963.pdf
NRCS-CPA-026e.pdf
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an
attachment to [e-mail]
Ms. Wells,
Please find attached the documents which were provided by Anson County NRCS, FSA and the
property owner showing compliance with USDA farm conversion processes and wetland
conservation processes. We have reviewed the materials and the CPA-026 from 2013 indicates that
the USDA made wetland and crop determinations in 2013 as a part of the paperwork for conversion
to arable land and classified the wetlands found on the tract as NW or “exempt from conservation
compliance provisions”. The key provided in the USDA form reflects that NW means non-wetland or
prior converted wetland, or feature that does not currently meet the criteria of a wetland. We
believe this shows compliance with all appropriate processes.

Please let us know if we need to reach out to Anson County USDA or NRCS and obtain any other
documents related to the process the landowner followed to convert land use.

V/R
Bryan

Bryan M Dick, PhD, PE, PH
Associate
Freese and Nichols Inc
864-506-1465

From: Wells, Brooke <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, December 13, 2019 3:23 PM
To: Mike Wayts <[e-mail]>
Cc: Bryan Dick <[e-mail]>; Ian Jewell <[e-mail]>
Subject: Clarification Request: RFP 16-008012 - Middendorf Springs (Freese & Nichols)

External Email. Use caution when clicking links or opening attachments.
Good afternoon,

During the onsite technical review of the Middendorf Springs Stream and Wetland
Restoration bid submittal, DMS staff questioned whether the installation of existing
drainage tiles and ditches were a violation Section 404 and/or 401 of the Clean Water Act.
Representatives of Freese and Nichols, Inc. responded the activities were exempt by
agricultural activities.

INSTRUCTIONS:

1.     Return one signed copy of this clarification request via email (pdf) along with the
requested information in accordance with the RFP cited below by 12:00 noon on
December 19, 2019.

Provide documentation in accordance with RFP Section 2.8 IMPORTANT INFORMATION
AND RESTRICTIONS c) 6. “Properties that have been timbered, filled, or manipulated
(stream channel dredging or channel re-alignment) in violation of federal or state rules or
statues.” Documentation of review and approval by USDA Farm Service Agency or Natural
Resources Conservation Service is acceptable. Such documentation may include the
authorization(s) to conduct such agricultural activities (i.e. the US Department of
Agriculture Appendix to Form for AD-1026 Highly Erodible Land Conservation
(HELC) and Wetland Conservation (WC) Certification.)

Failure to provide the requested information may result in rejection of the bid submittal.

Thank you,

Brooke Wells
[phone] office
[e-mail]

NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
Physical: 217 West Jones St., 3rd Floor, Suite 3000A, Raleigh, N.C. 27603

Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

This electronic mail message is intended exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is
addressed. This message, together with any attachment, may contain the sender's
organization's confidential and privileged information. The recipient is hereby notified to treat
the information as confidential and privileged and to not disclose or use the information except
as authorized by sender's organization. Any unauthorized review, printing, retention, copying,
disclosure, distribution, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action
in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is
prohibited. If you received this message in error, please immediately contact the sender by
reply email and delete all copies of the material from any computer. Thank you for your
cooperation.
AD-1026 (Page 1) (02-06-12)
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Form Approved -- WAS No. 0560.DISS
Farm Service Agency
HIGHLY ERODIBLE LAND CONSERVATION (HELC) AND
WETLAND CONSERVATION (WC) CERTIFICATION
tSea Page 2 forNondiscrimrna on, Privacy Act and Paperwork Reduction Act Statements).
1. Name of Producer
1 ►'���'R"lRrl U fir[ t_' OrZ_ 'a l
2. Tax Identification Numbet (Last 4 digits)
q�
I
3. Crop Year
2oaa
k, Do you have any interest in lRnd that produces or could produce an agricultural commodtty7 If "YES", or if you are a Farm Loan
"NO",
YES
NO
.
Applicant, continue with Item 5. If and you are not a farm loan applleant, go to Item 12 and sign and date.
5 For farm loan applicants only: Will you conduct any activities for fish production, trees, vineyards, shrubs,.bullding construction, or other
non-agricultural purposes on lands for which a wetland determination has not been completed by NRCS or Aimy Corps of Englneers?
6. Are you a landlord or tenant on any farm that will not be in compliance with HELC and WC provisions? if "YES , enter the farm
number or contact your County'FSA Office before completing This farm. 'Farm Number:
�CCantact our GOun FSA Pfflce if nu are unsure of the hl h erodible sand !_=L�ar wetland determinat;oas a ifsabre fo ourfannin lnferesfs.
i 7. I]o any of your landlords refuse to comply with Ht LC requirements on any Farms? If "YES", enter the farm number or contact your.
County FSA Office before completing this form —Farm Number: _
8. . List affiliated pens ns with farmtng interests. See age 2 foran� xplanation. Enter "NONE , if applicable.
1?0,nnI-e 91�t.lCSOJI 4r%drew rJ4rle5¢n
'Deeln,,s ai rI esorl Aq.-O" �ue-I SO
9. During the crop year entered In Item 3 above, or the term of a requested USDA loan, did you or will you plant and produce an agricultural
commodity on land forwhlch an HEL determination has not been made?
110, Since December 23, 1985, or during the current crop year, or during the term of a requested USDA loan, has anyone performed, or vain
anyone perform any adiviiies,to;
A. Create new drainage systems, w conduct land leveling, filing, dredging, land clearing, excavation:, 4r stump removal, that has NOT .
been evaluated by NRCS? If 'YEW, Indicate year(s); '- 41 Z
S. Improve or modify an existing drainage system that has NOT been evaluated by NRCS? if "YES", Indicate yead(gl:
C. Maintain an existing drainage system that has NOT been'evaluated by NRCS? if ".YES", Indicate the yaar(s):
Mote: Maintenance 1s tha repair, rehablfitatlon, or replacement of the capacity ofexlsiing drainage systems to aAotw for the continued use ofwe@ands
currently In agricultural production and the continued management of other areas as they ware used before Deco nbar 23, 1965, This aflims a person to
reaunstruct or maintain the capacity of the orfginaf aysfem or install a replacement system that is more durable orv/91 reaflze loivermaintenance a- costs.
l 1. If "YES" to Items 5, 9, 1 DA,IOB and/or IDC enter the followin for the land the answer applies ta:
A. Farm andiortracWold number: �Sr�; 2G , 3t7o 7 = �7 T 196 5 F `3e�7 -T 90
77�s
B. Activity: CIFeCtr VJ00algnc� + - coywer-F tCow cr-OP�
r.
C. Current land use (specify crops): -r- e e _5
D. County- A MS -oil__ _
A "YES, answer In items 9 or 10 authorizes FSA to refer this AD-1026 to NRCS, If you check "YES", to Item 10C, NRCS does not have to
conducf carflfiad wetland determination. (Contact your County FSA Office if you are unsure about the answers to Items 9 or 10.)
Can tinuous AD-1026.Certification:
I have read the AA-1926Appendia and understand and agree that my eligibility for certain USDA. program benefits is contingent upon this
certification of compliance with highly erodible land conservation and wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985 as
amended, and if a deterFnination is made that reAlts in a violation and ineligibility, I agree to refund all applicable payments.
I agree to the terms and conditions stated on AD-1026 Appendix on all land in which I have or will have an interest and understand that I
am responsible for any non-compliance with these provisions,
• I agree that I will file a revised Ali-1026 if there are ouy changes in my operation or activities that may affect compliance with these
provisions.
I understand that affiliated persons are also subject to compliance with these provisions and their failure to comply or file AD-1026 will
result in loss of eligibility to persons or enterprises with whom they are affiliated, (See Page 2 of thisforinfor affillated persons.)
12. Producer's Certification:
I hereby certify that the information on this farm is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, and I authorize NRCS to'ma.ke a IIELC
andlor certified zvettand determination on the tract or arm members listed above.
12A. Producer's Signature ($y) 12B. Title/Relationship (Individual Signing in the Representative 120. Date (bfM-DD-YYM
capacity)
13, Referral to NRCS (Completed by FSA). Sign and date 13A. Signature of FSA Representative 13B. Date (,eft✓•nA-Y1? 17
if a NRCS determination is needed for any reason
Including a "YES" answer in Item 9, 1 QA, ABeK r1t3C4., f M
ORIGINAL FSA'COPY
NRCS COPY
SEP 17 2012
PRODUCER'S COPY
ANSON COUNTY FSA

United States Department of Agriculture
4—j N K S
Natural Resources Conservation Service
3230 presson Rd., Suite B,
Monroe. NC 28112-9196
[phone]
September 19, 2012
THURMAN BURLESON & SONS
28838 KENDALLS CHURCH RD
lzjcBFIELD, NC 28137
Aaron; this letter is a summarization of the discussions, decisions and
In regards to our field visit today, harvesting and clearing of the property located at the
findings up to this point on the timber
southwest quadrant of the intersection of Gulledge Rd and NC Hwy. 742 south of W adesboro,
NC.
1. Matt Vincent with the NC Forest Service was onsite. was do be con Forest Service did woodland
not regulate any smz zones when the harvested area
as aspects such as erosion control,
to cropland. He further stated
etc stillall
remained in forestry
This therefore leaves the
stream protection/blocking,
landowner the right to harvest any and all trees up to and along the stream bank,
2. Provisions of the USDA Farm Bill only apply wland is "made possible to plant". Thus
when
is
any and all woodland can be harvested at the landowner the p ann0ing pTOC ss fogx the
done (either wholly or by phases) USDA will assist y _
woodland to cropland conversion. The first steep is to contact
o tent tSDA Far andto rvidelineate
Agency and complete an AD1026 form indicating Y Accurate
the area of conversion (it appears this step has been taken, see attached form).
tract outlines are being established at this time, seetheattached
the highly erodible land ed re
of harvest. Once a determination has been made identifying rod le not stump
wetland acres on this property we will assist you with the planning process. and/or pile the area before this planning assistance is offered. In summary, You are
cleared to harvest any and all timber as desired, but not to stump and/or pile. We look
forward to assisting you with this process.
Sincerely;
Richard E. Pigg
soil Conservation Technician
lieve you
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination against its custers. if you r participating
in a program prthated
discrimination when obtaining services from USDA, participating in a USDA program,
receives financial assistance from USDA, you may file a complaint with USDA. Information about how to file a
the e disability, and where
discrimination complaint
ro Gams alnd activities D n the basis basis of iracetcoloretnationalfor Corigin, ivil R1gag USDA prohibits
discrimination in a programs arental status, religion, sexual
applicable, sex (including gender identity and expression), marital status, familial status, p
orientation, poetical beliefs, genetic information, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual's income is derived from
any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all Programs-)

Steen W. Troxler
Commissioner
Mr. Dale Newport
44558 NC Hwy. 8
New London, NC
Dear Mr. Newport:
North Carolina Department of Agriculture
28127-8558
and Consumer Services
N. C. Forest Service
District 3 Headquarters
1163 N. US Highway 1
Rockingham, NC 28379-8513
October 2, 2012
T
Wib L. Owen
Assistant Commissioner
State Forester
l am writing you this note in reference to our meeting regarding the land clearing operation being
conducted by Mr. Thurman Burleson & Sons south of Wadesboro in Anson County. (Please
refer to the attached maps).
Given the attached documentation and the discussion that we had in the field on the site, this
land clearing (which includes logging of the trees to be removed), is not a forest management
operation but rather a land clearing operation for the establishment of agriculture. Given that,
the water quality regulation for agricultural land clearing would apply, not forestry. However, if
this property is to revert back into forestry the landowner will be held to any regulations that
would apply.
If the Forest Service can be of any assistance in any future matters please don't hesitate to call
myself or the County office, which the project occurs. �i
MVljm
Enc.
incett RF
ater Quality F
1616 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1616
Phone: [phone] - FAX: [phone] • www.ncforestservice.gov
An Equal Opportunity Employer
"Information provided to or gathered by the NC Forest Service is subject to the NC Public Records Law
and may be disclosed to third parties upon request."

USDA United States Department Natural Resources MRCS-CPA-026e
of Agriculture Conservation Service 9/2012
HIGHLY ERODIBLE LAND AND WETLAND CONSERVATION DETERMINATION
Name
Address:
IThurman Burleson & Sons
Request
Date: 9/17/2012
County: Anson
28908 Kendalls Ch Rd Richfield NC
Agency or Person
FSA
Tract No:1963
FSA Farm P q11 a
Requesting Determination:
No.:.IZgW
Section I - Highly Erodible Land
Is a soil survey now available for making a highly erodible land determination? Yes
Are there highly erodible soil map units on this farm? I Yes
Fields in this section have undergone a determination of whether they are highly erodible land (HEL) or not; fields
for which an HEL Determination has not been completed are not listed. In order to be eligible for USDA benefits,
a person must be using an approved conservation system on all HEL.
Field(s)
HEL(Y/N)
Sodbust (Y/N)
Acres
Determination Date
2
Yes
Yes
217.10
9/24/2013
The Highly Erodible Land determination was completed in the Field
Section II - Wetlands
Fields in this section have had wetland determinations completed. See the Definition of Wetland Label Codes for
additional information regarding allowable activities under the wetland conservation provisions of the Food
Security Act and/or when wetland determinations are necessary to determine USDA program eligibility.
Field(s)
Wetland
Label*
Occurrence
Year (CW)
Acres
Determination
Date
Certification
Date
2
NW
217.10
9/24/2013
The wetland determination was completed in the Field It was Mailed to the person on
Remarks:
I certify that the above determinations are rrect and were conducted in accordance with policies and procedures
contained in the National Food Security Act Manual.
Signature Designated Conservationist
Date
n� r
?/_7 /3
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national
origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all
programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape,
etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at 202-720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Assistant
Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Stop 9410, Washington, DC 20250-9410, or call toll -free at [phone]
(English) or [phone] (TDD) or [phone] (English Federal -relay) or [phone] (Spanish Federal -relay) USDA rs an equal
opportunity provider and employer.

USDA United States
Departmentt
AgricultureultureAnson County, North Carolina
Farm 4112
Tract 1963
2015 Program Year
CLU
Acres
HEL
Crop
1
12.04
HEL
2
97.39
HEL
3
118.87
HEL
Page Cropland Total: 228.3 acres
Base Image Layer flown in 2014
Map Created March 26, 2015
Common Land Unit
Cropland
QTract Boundary
Wetland Determination
0 Restricted Use
V Limited Restrictions
Exempt from Conservation
Compliance Provisions
USDA FSA maps are for FSA Program administration only. This map does not represent a legal survey or reflect actual ownership; rather it depicts the information provided directly from the producer andfor the NAIF imagery. i ne proaucer
accepis the data'as Wand assumes all risks associated with its use. The USDA Farm Service Agency assumes no responsibility for actual or consequential damage incurred as a result of any user's reliance on this data outside FSA Programs.
VWtlend identifiers do not represent the size, shape, or specific determination of the area. Refer to your original determination (CPA-026 and attached maps) for exact boundaries and determinations or contact NRCS.

United States Department Natural Resources NRCS-CPA-026e
of Agriculture 9/2012
Conservation Service
HIGHLY ERODIBLE LAND AND WETLAND CONSERVATION DETERMINATION
Name
Address:
IThurman Burleson & Sons
Request
Date. 9/17/2012
County: Anson
28908 Kendalls Ch Rd Richfield NC
Agency or Person
FSA
Tract No:1963
FSA Farm
Requesting Determination:
No.:
Section I - Highly Erodible Land Z00 kC.o n
Is a soil survey now available for making a highly erodible land determination? Yes
Are there highly erodible soil map units on this farm? I Yes
Fields in this section have undergone a determination of whether they are highly erodible land (HEL) or not; fields
for which an HEL Determination has not been completed are not listed. In order to be eligible for USDA benefits,
a person must be using an approved conservation system on all HEL.
Field(s)
HEL(Y/N)
Sodbust (Y/N)
Acres
Determination Date
2
Yes
Yes
217.10
9/24/2013
The Highly Erodible Land determination was completed in the Field
Section II - Wetlands
Fields in this section have had wetland determinations completed. See the Definition of Wetland Label Codes for
additional information regarding allowable activities under the wetland conservation provisions of the Food
Security Act and/or when wetland determinations are necessary to determine USDA program eligibility.
Field(s)
Wetland
Label*
Occurrence
Year (CW)
Acres
Determination
Date
Certification
Date
2
NW
217.10
9/24/2013
The wetland determination was completed in the Field It was Mailed to the person on Inj 7917G
I certify that the above determinations are cXirect and were conducted in accordance with policies and procedures
contained in the National Food Security Act Manual.
Signature Designated Conservationist
Date
("W"9z
�3
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national
origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all
programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape,
etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at 202-720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Assistant
Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Stop 9410, Washington, DC 20250-9410, or call toll -free at [phone]
(English) or [phone] (TDD) or (866) 377-W2 (English Federal -relay) or [phone] (Spanish Federal -relay). USDA is an equal
opportunity provider and employer.

p
IiT— 14w -... '. - - - - PP� .1 -
ik
kkk
ke
jc V'4
k 4,
YPIV
pl.
A V
Pw
45).
10
ol
J j1. fl
Jr.
I

USDA United States
amDepartment of Agriculture Anson County, North Carolina
4 �
s
r
a Page Cropland Total: 228.3 acres
j�
Sy
Farm 4112
Tract 1963
2015 Program Year
CLU
Acres
HEL
Crop
1
12.04
HEL
2
97.39
UHEL
3
118.87
UHEL
1
67
Base Image Layer flown in 2014
Map Created January 08, 2015
2 ,
Common Land Unit
Cropland
Tract Boundary
Wetland Determination Identifiers
0 Restricted Use
+ A' 287.$ 575 1.150 ❑ Limited Restrictions
• ■ �� f 1 Exempt from Conservation
LL immoklow�Fee Compliance Provisions
USDA FSA maps are for FSA Program administration only. This map does not represent a legal survey or reflect actual ownership. rather it depicts the information provided directly from the producer and/or the NAIP imagery. The producer
accepts the dala'as is' and ass umes all risks associated with its use. The USDA Farm Service Agency assumes no responsibility for actual or consequential damage incurred as a result of any user's reliance on this data outside FSA Programs
Wetland identiters do not represent the size, shape, or specific determination of the area. Refer to your original determination (CPA-026 and attached maps) for exact boundaries and determinations or contact NRCS

f=S„/ �i�a 7�l gG.3

United States Department Natural Resources NRCS-CPA-026e
of Agriculture Conservation Service 9/2012
HIGHLY ERODIBLE LAND AND WETLAND CONSERVATION DETERMINATION
Nance
Address:
IThurman Burleson & Sons
Request
Date: 9/17/2012
County: Anson
28908 Kendalls Ch Rd Richfield NC
Agency or Person
FSA
Tract No:1963
FSA Farm
Requesting Determination:
No.: 3887
Section I - Highly Erodible Land
I Is a soil survey now available for maldns a hiahly erodible land determination? I Yes
Are inere nigniy eroaime sort map units on uus rarurt I Yes
Fields in this section have undergone a determination of whether they are highly erodible land (BEL) or not-, fields
for which an HEL Determination has not been completed are not listed. In order to be eligible for USDA benefits,
a person must be using an approved conservation system on all HEL.
Field(s)
HEL(Y/N)
Sodbust (Y/N)
Acres
Determination Date
2
Yes
Yes
217.10
9/24/2013
The Highly Erodible Land determination was completed in the Field
Section II - Wetlands
Fields in this section have had wetland determinations completed. See the Definition of Wetland Label Codes for
additional information regarding allowable activities under the wetland conservation provisions of the Food
Security Act and/or when wetland determinations are necessary to determine USDA program eligibility.
Field(s)
Wetland
Label*
Occurrence
Year (CV)
Acres
Determination
Date
Certification
Date
2
NW
217.10
9/24/2013
The wetland determination was completed in the Field It was Mailed to the person on In/7Q 17G
I certify that the above determinations are Mrect and were conducted in accordance with policies and procedures
contained in the National Food Security Act Manual.
Signature Designated Conservationist
Date
1ph
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national
origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all
programs.) Persons with disabilities who require altemative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape,
etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at 202-720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Assistant
Secretary for Civil Rights,1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Stop 9410, Washington, DC 20250-9410, or call toll -free at [phone]
(English) or [phone] (fDD) or [phone] (English Federal -relay) or [phone] (Spanish Federal -relay). USDA is an equal
opportunity provider and employer.

*DEFINITIONS OF WETLAND LABELS
AW Artificial Wetland: An area that was formerly a non -wetland area under natural conditions but now exhibits
wetland characteristics because of the influence of human activities. These areas are exempt from the Food
Security Act of 1985, as amended. This label includes irrigation induced wetlands.
CC Commenced Conversion: A wetland, farmed wetland, farmed wetland pasture, or converted wetland on which the
conversion began but was not completed before December 23, 1985, was approved by FSA to continue, and the
conversion was completed by January 1, 1995.
CPD COE Permit with Mitigation: A converted wetland authorized by a permit issued under Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act. Production of agricultural commodities is allowed subject to conditions of the permit.
CMW Categorical Minimal Effect: A wetland that meets specific categories of conversion activities that have been
determined by NRCS to have minimal effect, individually and cumulatively, on the functions and values of the
wetland and the wetlands in the watershed.
CW Converted Wetland: A wetland converted between December 23, 1985, and November 28, 1990. Production of an
agricultural commodity or additional manipulation of these areas will yield UDSA benefit ineligibility. Also, these
areas are wetlands converted after December 23, 1985, by a county, drainage district, or similar entity. For these
instances, production of an agricultural commodity or forage for mechanical harvest or additional manipulation
will cause ineligibility for USDA program benefits.
CW+year Converted Wetland + (year the conversion occurred): A wetland converted after November 28, 1990, where the
USDA program participant is ineligible for benefits until the wetland is restored or mitigated unless an exemption
applies.
CWNA Converted Wetland Non -Agricultural Use: A wetland converted after November 28, 1990, to a use other than
agricultural commodity production. Label not used for certified wetland determinations completed after 2/2008.
CWTE Converted Wetland Technical Error: A wetland converted or commenced after December 23, 1985, based on an
incorrect NRCS determination. This label does not apply to obvious wetlands as defined in the National Food
Security Act Manual.
FW Farmed Wetland: A wetland that was manipulated and planted before December 23, 1985, but still meets inundation
or saturation criteria These areas may be farmed and maintained as documented before December 23, 1985, as
long as they are not abandoned (i.e., management or maintenance for commodity production ceased for 5
consecutive years).
FWP Farmed Wetland Pasture or Havland: A wetland that is used for pasture or haying, was manipulated and planted
before December 23, 1985, but still meets the inundation or saturation criteria. These areas may be farmed and
maintained as documented before December 23, 1995, as long as they are not abandoned (i.e., management or
maintenance for commodity production ceased for 5 consecutive years).
MIW Mitigation Exemption: A converted wetland, farmed wetland or farmed wetland pasture of which the acreage,
functions and values lost have been compensated for through an NRCS-approved mitigation plan.
MW Minimal Effect Exem ion: A converted wetland that is exempt from the wetland conservation provisions of the
Food Security Act of 1985, as amended, based on an NRCS determination that the conversion has or will have a
minimal effect, individually and cumulatively, on the functions and values of the wetland and the wetlands in the
watershed.
MWM Mitigation Site: The site of wetland restoration, enhancement, or creation serving as mitigation for the mitigation
exemption (MIW) site.
NI Not Inventoried: An area where no wetland determination has been conducted. Label not used for certified wetland
determinations completed after 2/2008.
NW Non -Wetland: An area that does not contain a wetland. Also includes wetlands converted before December 23,
1985, but a commodity crop was not produced and the area does not meet wetland criteria (not been abandoned).
PC Prior -Converted Cropland: A wetland converted to cropland before December 23, 1985, and as of December 23,
1985, was capable of being cropped and did not meet farmed wetland hydrology criteria. These areas are not
subject to the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985, as amended, unless further
drainage manipulation affects adjacent wetlands.
PC/NW Prior Converted Crouland/Non-Wetland: An area that contains both PC and NW.
TP Third -Party Exemption: A wetland converted after December 23, 1985, by a third party who is not associated with
the participant, and the conversion is not a result of a scheme or device. A third party does not include
predecessors in interest on the tract, drainage districts, or other local government entities.
W Wetland: An area meeting wetland criteria that was not converted after December 23, 1985. These areas include
farmed wetlands and farmed wetland pasture that have been abandoned.
WX Manipulated Wetlands: A wetland manipulated after December 23, 1985, but the manipulation was not for the
purpose of making production possible and production was not made possible. These areas include wetlands
manipulated by drainage maintenance agreements.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national
origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all
programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape,
etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at 202-720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Assistant
Secretary for Civil Rights,1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Stop 9410, Washington, DC 20250-9410, or call toll -free at [phone]
(English) or [phone] (T'DD) or [phone] (English Federal -relay) or [phone] (Spanish Federal -relay). USDA is an equal
opportunity provider and employer.

Anson County Tractsl963 & 3007
HEL Determination
N
Feet
0 255510 1,020 1,530 2,040
Map Created By:
Chris Childers
9/24/2013
USDA

United States Department
of Agriculture Natural Resources
Conservation Service

NRCS-CPA-026e
8/2013
HIGHLY ERODIBLE LAND AND WETLAND CONSERVATION DETERMINATION

Name
Address:
Request
Date:

County:
Agency or Person
Requesting Determination:
Tract No: FSA Far m
No.:
Section I - Highly Erodible Land
Is a soil survey no w available for making a highly erodible land deter mination? Are there highly erodible soil map units on this far m?
Fields in this section have undergone a determination of whether they are highly erodible land (HEL) or not; fields
for which an HEL Determination has not been completed are not listed. In order to be eligible for USDA benefits,
a person must be using an app roved conservation system on all HEL.

Field(s) HEL(Y/N) Sodbust (Y/N) Acres Determination Date
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
The Highly Erodible Land determination was comp leted in the
Section II - Wetlands

Fields in this section have had wetland determinations completed. See the Definition of W etland Label Codes for
additional information regarding allowable activities under the wetland conservation p rovisions of the Food
Security Act and/or when wetland determinations are necessary to determine USDA program eligib ility.

Field(s Wetland
Label*
Occurrence
Year (CW)

Acres Determination
Date
Certification
Date
-
-
-
-
-
The wetland determination was completed in the - . It was - . to to the person on
Remarks:

I certify that the above determinations are correct and were conducted in accordance with policies and procedures
contained in the National Food Security Act Manual.
Signature Designated Conser vationist Date

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin,
gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.)
Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should
contact USDA’s TARGET Center at 202-720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Assistant Secretary for
Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Stop 9410, Washington, DC 20250-9410, or call toll-free at [phone] (English) or (800) 877-
8339 (TDD) or [phone] (English Federal-relay) or [phone] (Spanish Federal-relay). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and
employer.
CPA-026e Sup plemental Worksheet Section I – Highly Erodible Land
Field(s) HEL (Y/N) Sodbust (Y/N) Acres Determination Date

Remarks:

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national
origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all
programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape,
etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at 202-720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Assistant
Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Stop 9410, Washington, DC 20250-9410, or call toll-free at [phone]
(English) or [phone] (TDD) or [phone] (English Federal-relay) or [phone] (Spanish Federal-relay). USDA is an equal
opportunity provider and employer
CPA-026e Sup plemental Worksheet Section II - Wetlands

Field(s)
Wetland
Label
Occurrence
Year (CW)

Acres
Determination
Date
Certification
Date

Remarks:

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national
origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all
programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape,
etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at 202-720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Assistant
Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Stop 9410, Washington, DC 20250-9410, or call toll-free at [phone]
(English) or [phone] (TDD) or [phone] (English Federal-relay) or [phone] (Spanish Federal-relay). USDA is an equal
opportunity provider and employer
*DEFINITIONS OF WETLAND LABELS

AW Artificial Wetland: An area that was formerly a non-wetland area under natural conditions but now exhibits
wetland characteristics because of the influence of human activities. These areas are exempt from the Food
Security Act of 1985, as amended. This label includes irrigation induced wetlands.
CC Commenced Conversion: A wetland, farmed wetland, farmed wetland pasture, or converted wetland on which the
conversion began but was not completed before December 23, 1985, was approved by FSA to continue, and the
conversion was completed by January 1, 1995.
CPD COE Permit with Mitigation: A converted wetland authorized by a permit issued under Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act. Production of agricultural commodities is allowed subject to conditions of the permit.
CMW Categorical Minimal Effect: A wetland that meets specific categories of conversion activities that have been
determined by NRCS to have minimal effect, individually and cumulatively, on the functions and values of the
wetland and the wetlands in the watershed.
CW Converted Wetland: A wetland converted between December 23, 1985, and November 28, 1990. Production of an
agricultural commodity or additional manipulation of these areas will yield UDSA benefit ineligibility. Also, these
areas are wetlands converted after December 23, 1985, by a county, drainage district, or similar entity. For these
instances, production of an agricultural commodity or forage for mechanical harvest or additional manipulation
will cause ineligibility for USDA program benefits.
CW+year Converted Wetland + (year the conversion occurred): A wetland converted after November 28, 1990, where the
USDA program participant is ineligible for benefits until the wetland is restored or mitigated unless an exemption
applies.
CWNA Converted Wetland Non-Agricultural Use: A wetland converted after November 28, 1990, to a use other than
agricultural commodity production. Label not used for certified wetland determinations completed after 2/2008.
CWTE Converted Wetland Technical Error: A wetland converted or commenced after December 23, 1985, based on an
incorrect NRCS determination. This label does not apply to obvious wetlands as defined in the National Food
Security Act Manual.
FW Farmed Wetland: A wetland that was manipulated and planted before December 23, 1985, but still meets inundation
or saturation criteria. These areas may be farmed and maintained as documented before December 23, 1985, as
long as they are not abandoned (i.e., management or maintenance for commodity production ceased for 5
consecutive years).
FWP Farmed Wetland Pasture or Hayland: A wetland that is used for pasture or haying, was manipulated and planted
before December 23, 1985, but still meets the inundation or saturation criteria. These areas may be farmed and
maintained as documented before December 23, 1985, as long as they are not abandoned (i.e., man agement or
maintenance for commodity production ceased for 5 consecutive years).
MIW Mitigation Exemption: A converted wetland, farmed wetland or farmed wetland pasture of which the acreage,
functions and values lost have been compensated for through an NRCS-approved mitigation plan.
MW Minimal Effect Exemption: A converted wetland that is exempt from the wetland conservation provisions of the
Food Security Act of 1985, as amended, based on an NRCS determination that the conversion has or will have a
minimal effect, individually and cumulatively, on the functions and values of the wetland and the wetlands in the
watershed.
MWM Mitigation Site: The site of wetland restoration, enhancement, or creation serving as mitigation for the mitigation
exemption (MIW) site.
NI Not Inventoried: An area where no wetland determination has been conducted. Label not used for certified wetland
determinations completed after 2/2008.
NW Non-Wetland: An area that does not contain a wetland. Also includes wetlands converted before December 23,
1985, but a commodity crop was not produced and the area does not meet wetland criteria (not been abandoned).
PC Prior- Converted Cropland: A wetland converted to cropland before December 23, 1985, and as of December 23,
1985, was capable of being cropped and did not meet farmed wetland hydrology criteria. These areas are not
subject to the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985, as amended, unless further
drainage manipulation affects adj acent wetlands.
P C/NW Prior Converted Cropland/Non-Wetland: An a r e a t ha t c ont a i n s bot h P C a nd N W.
TP Third-Party Exemption: A wetland converted after December 23, 1985, by a third party who is not associated with
the participant, and th e c on ve r s i on i s n o t a r e s u l t o f a scheme or device. A third party does not include
predecessors in interest on the tract, drainage districts, or other local government entities.
W Wetland: An area meeting wetland criteria that was not converted after December 23, 1985. These areas include
farmed wetlands and farmed wetland pasture that have been abandoned.
WX Manipulated Wetlands: A wetland manipulated after December 23, 1985, but the manipulation was not for the
purpose of making production possible and production was not made possible. These areas include wetlands
manipulated by drainage maintenance agreements.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin,
gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.)
Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should
contact USDA’s TARGET Center at 202-720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Assistant Secretary for
Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Stop 9410, Washington, DC 20250-9410, or call toll-free at [phone] (English) or (800)
877-8339 (TDD) or [phone] (English Federal-relay) or [phone] (Spanish Federal-relay). USDA is an equal opportunity provider
and employer.
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS
9 November 5, 2019
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs

1.0 Executive Summary

INTRODUCTION

The Middendorf Springs Stream and Wetland Mitigation project, located in Anson County, NC involves the
restoration of approximately 5.0 acres of riparian wetland units and the restoration of up to 13,000 feet stream
mitigation units from eight unnamed tributary streams to South Fork Jones Creek. The project is located in the
Yadkin River Basin, USGS Hydrologic Unit 03040201, and 14-digit HUC 03040201020030. This site is not located in
a targeted resource area, however the justification of why this site would likely be included in one or several TRA’s
if the modeling were conducted today is provided. Namely, the land use has changed substantially from the land
use data used in the model. A detailed discussion of this is located on pages 22-23.

PROJECT SITE OVERVIEW / EXISTING CONDITIONS

The project site consists of eight existing stream systems (8 total unnamed tributaries) which drain to South Fork
Jones Creek and approximately 20 acres of drained and row-crop farmed hydric soils in the floodplain of South
Fork Jones Creek. Due to limitations of the advertised riparian WMU’s (5 WMUs), we propose the wetland re-
establishment of the 5 acres of hydric soils that are closest to the South Fork Jones Creek. The remaining acres
on-site (~15) are available, upon request, and we are hopeful to add those acres for a large contiguous
rehabilitated wetland at some point in the future when the State requests more credits. Hydric soils areas were
approximated by a NC Licensed Soil Scientist and a more detailed analysis will be completed if awarded the
project. It should be noted that the project will provide additional wetland rehabilitation of approximately 3 acres
of impaired wetlands that are associated with the 8 stream systems, which we are not counting in the WMU’s.
These areas would have restored hydrology as a result of the restoration of deeply incised and channelized
streams (relative to bankfull height) and the removal of agricultural activity by placement of the easements on
the streams. If awarded the project, the mitigation plan will have a detailed accounting of all hydric soils and will
propose credits on any available credits of WMU’s as contingency to ensure successfully meeting the commitment
of WMU amount.

Both the streams and wetlands of the site demonstrate extensive signs of manipulation from agricultural clearing
and continued manipulation and management from row-crop farming. These anthropogenic modifications
include: the deepening, straightening of the streams, ditching and drainage of hydric soils, removal of vegetation
right up to the top of the bank of the streams in many places, fertilizer, fecal coliforms from manure applications,
herbicide and pesticide applications that would directly interact with the waters of the streams and equipment
crossings and direct filling of the channel to promote farming all possible acreage. The following proposal provide
the documentation of the readily apparent signs of these manipulations to these stream and wetland systems.

Each of the eight sub-basins that have proposed stream restoration for this site had observable spring flow after
approximately 3 weeks without rainfall on the initial site reconnaissance by FNI in September of 2019. The first
detailed site assessment was completed approximately 4 days after a rainfall event and moderate to strong flow
was present in each of the eight proposed systems, even though this county was still classified as being in
“Moderate Drought” by the U.S. Drought Monitor site. Actually, FNI has evaluated more than 8 potential sites for
project consideration within 15 miles of this site and no other site had flows similar to this site due to the drought.
Strong groundwater interaction of these manipulated streams is documented herein and is supported by pockets
of hydric soils along the systems and typically at the head of the proposed restoration reaches.
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS
10 November 5, 2019
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs

Drain tiles were easily located in the proposed wetland restoration areas on the initial site visit, and had strong
flows (1/3 pipe full flows for 4” drain pipe) discharging from the drainage systems directly into the South Fork
Jones Creek. These were apparent for several acres of the locations in which the LSS identified hydric soils. The
LSS believes that a very thorough investigation of the soils will reveal another 2-3 acres of rehabilitation hydric
soils within the proposed stream easements. Project geomorphologist, Dr. Juan Moya, has researched this site
and finds the occurrence of the many springs along the prominent ridge to South Fork Jones Creek to be classically
associated with the Middendorf Formation. The explanation of the site conditions is discussed in greater detail in
the following proposal.

PROPOSED RESTORATION

The most extensive proposed restoration option for this site will restore or enhance 8 streams for 13,000 SMU’s
and wetland re-establishment (5 WMUs) by the disruption and/or removal of drainage systems, channel
modifications, fill in the stream valley, and raising of the channels to natural elevations within the riparian corridor.
As described in detail below, the approach to the channel design is to use moderate to low sinuosity alignments
that would be appropriate for these systems and is located along what is believed to be the relict channel corridor
for both tributaries. We have observations from the site, nearby moderately stable reference conditions and we
feel that high sinuosity is not appropriate for these systems.

For the riparian wetlands, the drainage features such as trench drains and ditches will be removed or plugged to
restore hydrology. The WMUs that would already be within the stream easement are treated as contingency and
will see substantial uplift from the restoration of hydrology from raised channel beds, and the removal of harmful
and annual agricultural manipulations. Stressors and all impairments observed in site reconnaissance are included
in the following proposal.
Option A Summary Stream Mitigation Units: 11230
Riparian Wetland Mitigation Units: 5
Option B Summary Stream Mitigation Units: 13000
Riparian Wetland Mitigation Units: 5
Option C Summary Stream Mitigation Units: 8084
Riparian Wetland Mitigation Units: 5

OPPORTUNITY TO EXPAND UPON WETLAND RESTORATION
The LSS found that a large area of hydric soils exists within the row-cropped floodplain of South Fork Jones Creek.
This site has the potential to restore some 20-25 acres in total. Whether now or in the future, FNI has the option
to provide restoration of much more than 5 acres of WMU.

ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES FOR THIS SITE
Three “Options” for mitigation are proposed to allow acceptance of lesser amounts or types of mitigation units as
needed to balance other projects within the HUC. Those options are detailed in the proposed mitigation section
of the report and associated tables presenting SMU/WMU for each of the options.
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS
11 November 5, 2019
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs

2.0 Corporate Background and Experience
FIRM BACKGROUND
FNI is a client-focused, regionally based firm with national expertise. We meet client needs with responsiveness and
flexibility. Dating back to our firm’s founding in 1894, we put relationships first — clients, teaming partners and staff
— and seek long-term relationships, many of which are counted in decades, not years.
FNI provides a broad range of services to plan, design and manage public infrastructure projects. We help our clients
through every stage of the project life cycle: planning, design, program management, funding procurement,
regulatory compliance, construction management, and operations and maintenance. Our project teams are known
for exceeding client expectations through innovative concepts and high-performing designs.
FNI’s more than 800 multidiscipline professionals serve as trusted advisors to local government clients from offices in
North Carolina, Georgia, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma and Texas. Locally, FNI offers the resources of 30
professionals in our Raleigh, Charlotte, Greensboro and Winston-Salem offices. Because we are a regional firm, we
make decisions locally, making us responsive, flexible and adaptable to the needs of the State.
ABILITY TO CARRY OUT ALL PHASES OF THE PROPOSAL
FNI’s ecological engineering practice leaders, Bryan Dick, PhD, PE, PH and Ian Jewell, JD have the ability to carry out
all phases of the proposal. They have completed mitigation design on over 100 sites in 22 states across the U.S. and
have specifically worked on multiple NC DMS (EEP and DOT) projects. Bryan and Ian are supported by an in-house
team of experienced scientists, geologists, biologists, foresters, construction managers and engineers. Having
designed and managed these projects in the past, our team is aware of the processes and all aspects of the work. Our
team has a track record of providing quality projects for the State of North Carolina and is devoted to continuing to
provide mitigation sites to the State.
SIMILAR MITIGATION PROJECTS
GLADE CREEK STREAM RESTORATION AT VINEYARD PARK,
PHASE I | Roanoke County
FNI led the design and construction
oversight of the design-build
restoration of approximately 3,000
feet of stream restoration and bank
stabilization on a heavily eroded and
incised urban stream channel in
Vineyard Park, Roanoke County,
Virginia. The design-build project
was aimed at reducing streambank
erosion to help meet the County’s
TMDL load reduction requirements
for nitrogen and phosphorous to
maintain the renewals of their MS4
permit. FNI was part of a three-firm design-build team that worked closely with the
County to handle design, permitting, public relations, construction documentation
preparation, construction and monitoring of the project. The project was completed
in 2016 and has withstood substantial floods over the past few years.

LOCATION
Roanoke County, Virginia
REFERENCE
David Henderson, PE
Roanoke County Engineer
540-772-2083
Dhenderson@
roanokecountyva.gov
TEAM MEMBERS
Mike Wayts
Bryan Dick
Ian Jewell
Emily Darr

STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS
12 November 5, 2019
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs

GLADE CREEK STREAM RESTORATION AT VINEYARD PARK,
PHASE II | Roanoke County
FNI led the design, permitting and
construction oversight of the
restoration of approximately 2,500
feet of stream restoration and bank
stabilization on a heavily eroded and
incised urban stream channel that
threatened the loss of infrastructure
and facilities in Vineyard Park in
Vinton, Virginia. The project was
aimed at reducing streambank
erosion to help meet the County’s
TMDL load reduction requirements
for nitrogen and phosphorous to
maintain the renewals of their MS4 permit. The project stream flows through a very
busy urban sports complex, and is constrained by sports fields, parking, Norfolk
Southern Railroad corridor, FEMA flood constraints and valley/geology. Substantial
coordination with multiple stakeholders and project phasing was required
specifically with continuation of the use of the fields during construction and
coordinating the extension of the existing greenway through the park and how it
related to channel alignment and stability.

LOWER BOIS D’ARC STREAM MITIGATION |
North Texas Municipal Water District (NTMWD)
FNI assisted with permitting and
design of 17,068-acre Bois d ’Arc
Lake and associated mitigation. As
part of the permitting effort, FNI is
assisting the district with
development of a compensatory
mitigation plan and design. This
design involved approximately
150,000 feet of stream restoration,
6,000 acres of wetland restoration
and associated upland restoration
on a tract of land known as Riverby
Ranch. Streams being restoraed
range from flat, coastal-plain -like channels to steeper headwater streams. The
restortion appraches range from modification of plan, profile, and dimension for
tens of thousands of feet of channel, to spot-stabilization of erosional areas,
placement of in-stream structures such as log vanes and sills and the fencing out of
cattle. The mitigation credit being given for the stream restoration is bason on a
‘functional uplift ‘ approach using Rapid Geomorphic Assessment (RGA).
LOCATION
Fannin County, Texas
REFERENCE
Robert McCarthy
Manager of Permitting,
Compliance & Special Studies
972-442-5405
[e-mail]
TEAM MEMBERS
Mike Wayts
Bryan Dick
Ian Jewell
Emily Darr
Lydia Ward
Michael Votaw
Conner Kee
Stephen Norair

LOCATION
Roanoke County, Virginia
REFERENCE
David Henderson, PE
Roanoke County Engineer
540-772-2083
Dhenderson@
roanokecountyva.gov
TEAM MEMBERS
Mike Wayts
Bryan Dick
Ian Jewell
Emily Darr

STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS
13 November 5, 2019
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs

DAISY FARMS WATER SUPPLY PROJECT | Daisy Farms, LLC
Daisy Farms is a 6,000-acre farming
facility that produces milk for Daisy
Brand products. The water supply
project consists of the expansion of
an existing dam on Williams Pond to
create an approximately 198-acre
lake, a diversion structure on Aud’s
Creek, a sump channel, and a large
sump pond to provide a reliable
source of water for the livestock
operation at the farm.
FNI is providing engineering, water
rights, Section 404 permitting and
mitigation design support for the agricultural project. Section 404 permitting efforts
include delineation of waters of the U.S., impacts analysis, TXRAM functional
assessment, the design of more than 4,000 LF of on-site stream restoration,
preparation of the mitigation plan, preparation of the conservation easement
request, preparation of the public notice for the USACE, and coordination with the
USACE. FNI is currently in the final stages of the Section 404 individual permit
process with submittal of the final mitigation plan and stream restoration design
being the last step before permit authorization. FNI has already completed the
water rights permitting process and obtained the water use permit from TCEQ. FNI
will provide construction and bid documents of the entire project.
LAKE RALPH HALL AND LEON HURSE DAM |
Upper Trinity Regional Water District (UTRWD)
Lake Ralph Hall is a proposed
reservoir on the North Sulphur River.
The reservoir will be the
impoundment resulting from the
proposed Leon Hurse Dam. Both the
proposed reservoir and the proposed
dam will be owned and operated by
UTRWD. The project was
recommended as a water supply
alternative for in the 2006, 2011 and
2016 Region C Water Plans and the
2007, 2012, and 2017 Texas State
Water Plan).
The project will be used as municipal water supply for customers of UTRWD in North
Central Texas. FNI provided engineering services to analyze and design the dam and
spillway in accordance with Texas Commission on Environmental Quality’s
requirements. Leon Hurse Dam will be classified as a large-sized, high-hazard dam.
LOCATION
Paris, Texas
REFERENCE
N/A (Private Client)
TEAM MEMBERS
Bryan Dick
Ian Jewell
Emily Darr
Lydia Ward

LOCATION
Ladonia, Texas
REFERENCE
Larry Patterson
Director, Operations & Water
Resources
972-219-1228
[e-mail]
TEAM MEMBERS
Bryan Dick
Ian Jewell
Emily Darr
Lydia Ward
Will Huff

STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS
14 November 5, 2019
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs

OFFICE LOCATIONS
FNI will manage NCDEQ’s Project from the firm’s
Winston-Salem office, with support from the Charlotte,
Greensboro and Raleigh offices. In addition, FNI has
access to the resources of more than 800 employees in
23 offices across Georgia, Louisiana, New Mexico,
North Carolina, Oklahoma and Texas.
PROJECT MANAGER EXPERIENCE /
MULTIDISCIPLINARY APPROACH
FNI’s Project Manager, Ian Jewell, has conducted all aspects of the proposed work
on past NC DMS projects and many other mitigation and stream restoration sites
across the U.S. He has 15+ years of experience with stream restoration design and
has evolved his design approach through lessons learned for dozens of past
projects. Ian has managed stream restoration construction jobs in excess of 50,000
LF and $22 million. He has completed the design of more than 500,000 LF of natural
channel design projects. He has worked on projects as small as a few hundred feet
and as large as 50 miles on a single site. Ian is adept at assigning the appropriate
level of effort to the projects needs and constraints. As the project manager, Ian
will use the company’s multidisciplinary approach by implementing a diverse team
of technical experts to execute the project.
RESUMES OF KEY PERSONNEL
KEY PERSONNEL
MIKE WAYTS, PE, CFM | PRINCIPAL-IN-CHARGE
Mike Wayts is an FNI Vice President/Principal and the firm’s North Carolina Division
Manager. Nearly all of Mike’s 23-year career has been dedicated to stormwater
solutions. Prior to relocating to North Carolina, Mike served as the firm Stormwater
Practice Leader and managed many numerous stream restoration projects,
including the award-winning University Channel Restoration, which involved 3,700
LF of natural channel rehabilitation. Mike is also an effective presenter at public
meetings and has the unique ability to clearly communicate complex issues to
diverse stakeholders.
BRYAN DICK, PHD, PE, P H | PROJECT DIRECTOR/TECHNICAL LEAD
Bryan Dick is an FNI Associate, Ecological Engineering/Geomorphology Practice Lead and Hydrologist. He has designed
wetlands ranging from thousands of acres of restored coastal systems to small, pocket wetlands for stormwater
management. His experience includes a variety of water resources-related projects, including watershed
studies/assessments, H&H design and analysis, innovative stormwater management and permitting, and
BMP/remediation design. Bryan has designed more than 100 bioengineered stormwater control measures, such as
subsurface flow wetlands, filtering wetland basins and green-tree impoundments for habitat, as well as several thousand
acres of wetlands across the U.S. Bryan’s education and experience, from wildlife biology and forestry to civil engineering
and hydrology, touches on all sides of ecological engineering and wetland system projects. The depth and breadth of
his experience allows him to communicate the needs of multiple disciplines and parties in a manner that keeps projects
moving forward within the project team, the stakeholders and the permitting agencies.

FNI OFFICE LOCATIONS
Atlanta, GA
Austin, TX
Baton Rouge, LA
Charlotte, NC
Corpus Christi, TX
Dallas, TX
Denton, TX
El Paso, TX
Fort Worth, TX
Frisco, TX
Greensboro, NC
Houston, TX
Las Cruces, NM
Lubbock, TX
Midland, TX
New Orleans, LA
Oklahoma City, OK
Pearland, TX
Raleigh, NC
San Antonio, TX
San Marcos, TX
Tulsa, OK
Winston-Salem, NC
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS
15 November 5, 2019
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs

IAN JEWELL, JD | PROJECT MANAGER
Ian Jewell is an FNI Associate, technical expert and project manager in water and natural resources projects,
specifically stream restoration, natural resource investigations, bioengineering, stormwater, erosion control,
ecological restoration design, channel stability analysis, and regulatory compliance and permitting. He has more
than 15 years of experience providing a wide variety of technical services, including regulatory compliance
management, stormwater permitting and design, river stability assessments, H&H assessments, ecological
engineering, stream restoration design, project management, regulatory negotiation, wetlands delineation and
permitting, erosion control design and permitting, watershed assessments and sediment transport modeling.
EMILY DARR, PE, CFM, ENV SP | DESIGN | PERMITTING
Emily Darr is an FNI Project Engineer. Emily specializes in stream restoration, streambank stabilization and
geomorphic assessments. She is experienced in environmental assessments, soil and water quality testing, fluid
mechanics, and the development and use of GIS models.
LYDIA WARD, EI, ENV SP | DESIGN | PERMITTING
Lydia Ward is an FNI Engineering Intern in the firm’s Winston-Salem office. Lydia has experience with closed system
design and hydraulic modeling for municipal stormwater projects. She is proficient in HEC-RAS (steady, unsteady
flow and 2-D) and HEC-HMS and has co-presented at several HEC-RAS 2-D training classes hosted by FNI. Lydia is
also trained in GIS and its integration into flood models.
MATT CARTWRIGHT, PE | CONSTRUCTION
Matt Cartwright is an FNI Associate and Construction Manager with more than 16 years of experience with a wide
variety of disciplines, including water and sewer lines, pump stations and lift stations, membrane treatment plants,
water and wastewater treatment plants, elevated and ground storage tanks, and general site development. Matt
is NACE certified to provide coating inspections, as well as inspection training for City staff.
SUB-VENDORS
NORTH STATE ENVIRONMENTAL (North State), established in 1994, excels in restoring waterways
to their natural habitat by means of erosion control, stormwater management, bioengineering, reforestation and
wetlands reconstruction and renovation. Being able to combine the love of water, a strong understanding of
erosion control, and desire to have a positive impact on nature has driven the continued success of North State to
be a nationally recognized, and extremely experienced stream restoration firm.
MCDANIEL CONSTRUCTION, Inc. (McDaniel), located Blacksburg, SC, has more than 40 years of
experience in site and commercial construction. They will serve to provide general site services, if needed, in
hauling and wetland grading.
MCKIM & CREED, INC. (McKim & Creed), is one of the largest, most technically advanced full-service
geomatics firms in the Southeast. Ranked first by ENR Southeast, McKim & Creed has maintained a commitment
to the advancement of the industry by providing cutting-edge technology and cost-effective data collection. Our
team provides airborne and mobile LiDAR/scanning, unmanned aerial systems, subsurface utility engineering and
hydrographic and conventional surveying services.
EFIRD LANDSCAPING AND LAWN SERVICES (Efird)

DBE/HUB PARTICIPATION
Currently we do not have any DBE/HUB Subconsultants, however if we see an opportunity later in the project to
utilize a Disadvantaged business, we will contact you to discuss adding said subconsultant to the project.
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS
16 November 5, 2019
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs

PLANTINGS
Efird
SURVEY
McKim & Creed
MONITORING
Stream and Wetland
Monitoring
Stephen Noirair
Connor Kee, GIT
Vegetation Monitoring
Tom Dixon
Michael Lane
Kelsey Calvez
CONSTRUCTION
Construction Oversight
Bryan Dick, PhD, PE, PH
Matt Cartwright, PE

McDaniel
Southern Traditions
DESIGN
Natural Channel Design
Bryan Dick, PhD, PE, PH
Ian Jewell, JD
Emily Darr, PE, CFM, ENV SP
Lydia Ward, EIT, ENV SP
George Fowler
Will Huff
Site Assessment
Stephen Noirair
Connor Kee, GIT
Barrett Slate
Vegetation Design
Tom Dixon
Michael Votaw
Michael Lane
Kelsey Calvez
Jamie Joyner, CFM
Jason Currie, PE, CFM

Emily Darr, PE, CFM, ENV SP
Lydia Ward, EI, ENV SP
3.0 Project Organization
PROPOSED STAFFING

PERMITTING
Categorical Exclusion
Lydia Ward, EI, ENV SP
Sediment Erosion Control
Lydia Ward, EI, ENV SP
Emily Darr, PE, CFM, ENV SP
Joint Permit Coordination
Ian Jewell, JD
NC DMS
PROJECT MANAGER
Ian Jewell, JD
PRINCIPAL-IN-CHARGE
Mike Wayts, PE, CFM
PROJECT DIRECTOR/
TECHNICAL LEAD
Bryan Dick, PhD, PE, PH
17 November 5, 2019
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs

MIKE WAYTS, PE, CFM
PRINCIPAL-IN-CHARGE
Mike Wayts is an FNI Vice President/Principal and the firm’s Division Manager for North
Carolina. Mike specializes in the management of multidiscipline teams for municipal
infrastructure projects, especially related to water, wastewater and stormwater utilities. His
client-service background includes the full range of engineering services, from master
planning and capital-improvement-plan development to sustainable design and client
representation during construction. Mike is an effective presenter at public involvement
meetings, where he has a unique ability to clearly communicate complex issues to diverse
stakeholders. He also is skilled in facilitating regional collaborations and in developing Low-
Impact Development solutions that help accomplish his clients’ goals.
RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Restoration of Glade Creek at Vineyard Park Phase I | Roanoke County, VA | Principal-in-
Charge | Design of approximately 2,500 feet of stream restoration and bank stabilization to
reduce erosion to meet the County’s TMDL reduction requirements for phosphorus.
Restoration of Glade Creek at Vineyard Park Phase II | Roanoke County, VA | Principal-in-
Charge | Design of approximately 2,500 feet of stream restoration in Vineyard Park in
Vinton.
University Channel Erosion Restoration | City of Garland | Project Manager | Erosion and
flood control solutions for approximately 3,700 LF of University Channel.
Highland Creek Drainage Improvements | City of Carrollton | Project Engineer | Design
storm analysis evaluating existing water velocity and flood levels for Highlands Creek.
IAN JEWELL, JD
PROJECT MANAGER
Ian Jewell is an FNI Associate, Technical Expert and Project Manager in water and natural
resources projects. His background encompasses a wide variety of technical services,
including regulatory compliance management, stormwater permitting and design, river
stability assessments, H&H assessments, ecological engineering, stream restoration design,
project management, regulatory negotiation, wetlands delineation and permitting, erosion
control design and permitting, watershed assessments and sediment transport modeling. He
has assisted with the design of 450,000+ feet of stream restoration, dozens of stormwater
BMPs and thousands of feet of riverbank stabilization across dozens of states.
RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Badin Inn Stream Restoration Design | North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program|
Project Scientist | Regulatory review, feasibility analysis, report writing, and construction
document preparation for a 4,000-foot restoration of a stream.
Williams Pond Update | Daisy Farms, LLC |Task Lead | Engineering design, water rights,
Section 404 permitting, and mitigation design support for expansion of an existing dam on
Williams Pond to create an approximately 198-acre lake, a diversion structure on Aud’s
Creek, a sump channel, and a large sump pond.
Daisy Farms Stream Mitigation | Daisy Farms | Task Lead | Expansion of an existing dam on
Williams Pond to create an approximately 198-acre lake, a diversion structure on Aud’s
Creek, a sump channel, and a large sump pond.
EXPERIENCE
23 years
EDUCATION
BS, Civil Engineering
REGISTRATION
Professional Engineer,
North Carolina
#039905
Certified Floodplain
Manager #NC-12-
0487
Stormwater BMP
Reviewer Certification
EXPERIENCE
15 years
EDUCATION
JD, Law
BS, Environmental
Science
REGISTRATION
Licensed Attorney,
North Carolina
#41345
Rosgen - Level IV
18 November 5, 2019
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs

BRYAN DICK, PhD, PE, PH
PROJECT DIRECTOR | TECHNICAL LEAD
Bryan Dick is an FNI Associate, Ecological Engineering/Geomorphology Practice Leader and
Hydrologist. He has worked as a riverbank stabilization/restoration Technical Lead and
Engineer-of-Record on some of the larger contaminated river sites in the U.S. and has
completed 450,000+ feet of stream restoration and bank stabilization design and
construction. Bryan has also served as the Project Manager or Technical Lead for several
thousand miles of watershed/stream geomorphic assessments. His PhD work has advanced
the fields of dendrochronology and engineering by pioneering methods of using the sediment
and climate change modeling.
RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Badin Inn Stream Restoration Design | North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program|
Project Manager| Design and construction of 4,050 LF of stream mitigation units through
the restoration of 3,700 feet of an unnamed tributary to Little Mountain Creek.
Restoration of Glade Creek at Vineyard Park Phase I | Roanoke County | Project Manager
| Design of approximately 2,500 feet of stream restoration and bank stabilization to reduce
erosion to meet the County’s TMDL reduction requirements for phosphorus
Restoration of Glade Creek at Vineyard Park Phase II | Roanoke County | Project Manager
| Design of approximately 2,500 feet of stream restoration in Vineyard Park in Vinton.
Developed the grant proposal and feasibility study that was submitted to SLAF to obtain
grant funding for the project.
EMILY, DARR, PE, CFM, ENV SP
DESIGN | PERMITTING
Emily Darr is an FNI Project Engineer. Emily specializes in stream restoration, streambank
stabilization and geomorphic assessments. She is experienced in environmental
assessments, soil and water quality testing, fluid mechanics, and the development and use
of GIS models.
RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Restoration of Glade Creek at Vineyard Park Phase I | Roanoke County | Project Manager |
Design of approximately 2,500 feet of stream restoration and bank stabilization to reduce
erosion to meet the County’s TMDL reduction requirements for phosphorus.
Restoration of Glade Creek at Vineyard Park Phase II | Roanoke County | Project Manager
| Design of approximately 2,500 feet of stream restoration in Vineyard Park in Vinton.
Williams Pond Update | Daisy Farms, LLC | Project Engineer | Engineering design, water
rights, Section 404 permitting, and mitigation design support for expansion of an existing
dam to create an approximately 198-acre lake, a diversion structure, a sump channel, and a
large sump pond.
Hanalei River Valley Irrigation Intake Protection/Streambank Stabilization - Monitoring
and Flood Occurrence Response | State of Hawaii | Design Engineer | Preliminary
investigation, hydrologic analysis, geomorphic assessment and conceptual design of a repair
of the Hanalei Wildlife Refuges irrigation intake from the Hanalei River, which is located on
the island of Kauai.

EXPERIENCE
23 years
EDUCATION
PhD, Fluvial
Geomorphology
MEng, Fluid Mechanics
and Hydrology
BS, Civil Engineering
BS, Forest Resource
Management
REGISTRATION
Professional Engineer,
North Carolina #035724
Professional Hydrologist
Rosgen - Level IV
EXPERIENCE
6 years
EDUCATION
BS, Biological
Engineering
REGISTRATION
Professional
Engineer, North
Carolina #048934
Certified Floodplain
Manager #NC-15-
0621
Envision
Sustainability
Professional
19 November 5, 2019
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs

LYDIA WARD, EI, ENV SP
NATURAL CHANNEL DESIGN
Lydia Ward is an FNI Engineering Intern in the firm’s Winston-Salem office. Lydia has
experience with closed system design and hydraulic modeling for municipal stormwater
projects. She is proficient in HEC-RAS (steady, unsteady flow and 2-D) and HEC-HMS and has
co-presented at several HEC-RAS 2-D training classes hosted by FNI. Lydia is also trained in
GIS and its integration into flood models.
RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Lower Bois d’Arc Stream Mitigation | North Texas Municipal Water District | Engineering
Intern
Lake Ralph Hall and Leon Hurse Dam | Upper Trinity Regional Water District | Engineering
Intern
On-Call Stormwater Services | Roanoke County | Engineering Intern
Holly Springs Watershed Management | Town of Holly Springs | Engineering Intern
On-Call Stormwater Services | City of Raleigh | Engineering Intern
Hamilton-Montlieu Drainage Improvements | City of High Point | Engineering Intern

MATT CARTWRIGHT, PE
CONSTRUCTION OVERSIGHT
Matt Cartwright is an FNI Associate and Construction Manager, who leads the North
Carolina region’s Construction Services Group. His background encompasses a wide variety
of disciplines, including water and sewer lines, pump stations and lift stations, water and
wastewater treatment plants, membrane treatment plants, elevated and ground storage
tanks, stormwater management, and general site development. Matt has extensive
experience preparing cost estimates from the conceptual phase through final design, and
regularly uses multiple sources to deliver accurate cost estimates, including Cost Works, RS
Means, ENR Cost Indices, market trends and DOT Average Low Bid Unit Prices.
RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Streambank/Stormwater Canal Rehabilitation | Clear Brook City Municipal Utility |
Construction Manager
Big Creek Spillway Restoration | Fort Bend County Drainage District | Cost Estimator
Lake Texana Dam Rehabilitation | Lavaca Navidad River Authority | Construction Manager
Liberty County Levee Repairs | Liberty County Water Control and Improvement District |
Construction Manager
Disaster Recovery Services | Harris County Flood Control District | Construction Manage
EXPERIENCE
3 years
EDUCATION
BS, Environmental
Engineering
BS, Environmental
Science
REGISTRATION
Engineering Intern, NC
Envision Sustainability
Professional
Rosgen – Level III
EXPERIENCE
16 years
EDUCATION
BS, Civil Engineering
REGISTRATION
Professional Engineer,
North Carolina
#048638

STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
20 November 5, 2019

4.0 Technical Approach
Project Location

The Middendorf Springs Stream and Wetland Restoration Project is located in the Yadkin Pee-Dee River
Basin in Anson County, North Carolina (Exhibit 1 and Exhibit 2). The project site is approximately 7 miles
south-southwest of Wadesboro, NC and 6 miles west of Morven, NC. Specific site information is
summarized in Table 4.1.

Table 4.1. Summary of Middendorf Springs Location Information
County Parcel Acreage Parcel Owner(s) 7.5-minute
Quadrangles
Coordinates
(UTM NA027)
Anson 344 RTB Associates,
LLC & DEB, LLC Morven West 34° 51’ 45.39” N
80° 06’ 37” W
River Basin USGS 8-digit
Catalogue Unit
NCDWQ River Sub-
basin 14-digit HUC NCDEQ
Classification
Yadkin Pee-Dee 03040201 Lower Pee-Dee 03040201020030 C

Project Goals and Objectives

The Middendorf Springs project proposes to provide both stream mitigation units (SMU) and riparian
wetland mitigation units (WMU) in the amounts shown in Tables 4.8 through 4.11. This will be
accomplished through the restoration or enhancement of eight unnamed tributaries to South Fork Jones
Creek [stream index 13-42-2]. South Fork Jones Creek flows to Jones Creek and then the Pee Dee River.
The proposed project would also include the wetlands restoration (re-establishment) of 5 acres of riparian
wetland by removing ditches and drain tile networks on an area of existing hydric soils. Goals and
objectives developed to address on-site stressors/impairments and provide ecological benefits and
functional uplift are summarized in Table 4.2.

Table 4.2. Summary of Middendorf Springs On-Site Stressors, Goals, and Objectives
On-Site Stressor/Impairment Goals to Address/Remove
Stressor
Objectives
Lack of riparian buffer, leading to
lack of riparian habitat, streambank
instability and lack of filter for
runoff of non-point source
pollutants such as fertilizers and
pesticides into stream
Restore riparian buffer and
native vegetation
communities.
• Establishment of minimum
50 ft buffer along channel
• Plant with native riparian
community including deep
rooted woody vegetation
along streambanks
Ditching and Straightening of
Stream Channels leading to lack of
bedform diversity and lack of
floodplain access, increased
Restore natural channel
geometry to ditched streams
to provide functional uplift

• Restore or enhance 11,306
feet of existing stream
• Restore stream dimension,
pattern, and profile
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
21 November 5, 2019

On-Site Stressor/Impairment Goals to Address/Remove
Stressor
Objectives
velocity during stormflows and lack
of large woody debris in channel.
• Establish stable channel
form
• Establish a 50-foot riparian
buffer on both banks
High sediment loads from
streambank and bed erosion as
well as hillslope processes from
row crop operations both within
the project site and upstream.
Reduce sediment loads
through stream restoration
and enhancement activities
• On restored reaches, create
new channel through
floodplain and fill existing
channel or leave as oxbow
pond areas

Ditching and draining of former and
existing wetlands, leading to
degradation of wetland function
Restore wetland hydrology and
function
• Plug/fill ditch network that
is currently draining the
wetlands area
• Remove drain and other
drainage features within
wetland

Watershed Approach

South Fork Jones Creek and its tributaries are not discussed in the Pee Dee River Basin Restoration Plan
(RBRP) or in any NCDMS Local Watershed Plans (LWPs) and is not located in any targeted resource areas
(TRAs); however, the project area is surrounded by catchments associated with habitat and hydrology
TRAs (Exhibit 1), which display similar land use and impairment. Specifically, the project site is similar to
these other areas in that:

• The site is almost entirely covered by row crop operation, has extensive channelization of
streams and drain tiles are present in hydric soil areas.
• The site drains to South Fork Jones Creek as do immediately adjacent properties that are
included in the TRA. Jones Creek is listed in the Yadkin Basinwide Water Quality plans as
impacted by habitat degradation. Stressors/impairments present at the other sites within TRAs
and draining to South Fork Jones Creek are the same or similar as at the Middendorf Springs
Mitigation site. For example, nutrient inputs from row crop operations and sediment from
eroding streambanks within the site is transported downstream to South Fork Jones Creek.
• A hydrology TRA ends at the ridgeline at the north side of the property, from which the project
streams originate and thus is an immediately adjacent watershed.
• Most importantly, in 2016 the land use changed on the project site from timber production to
row crop production. In reviewing the TRA model information on NCDMS’s website, it appears
that US Environmental Protection Agencies (EPA) Restoration Potential Screening Tool (RPS Tool)
and the National Land Cover Dataset (NLCD) were used as model inputs. One of the stressors
accounted for in these datasets is land use and agricultural operations. The 2016 NLCD dataset
was released in early 2019, and according to EPA’s documentation, their tool uses older NLCD
data and not the latest 2016 dataset. Thus, it is likely that the model results may have excluded
the current row crop impacts in its ranking of the site,
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
22 November 5, 2019

Figure 1. Image from NCDMS Yadkin 201 RFP Map showing project site (in red) and Surrounding Targeted Resource Areas. Note
that land use of project site is similar to Properties within adjacent TRAs in South Fork Jones Creek watershed. (Accessed Online,
October 2019).

For this reason, FNI believes that the Middendorf Springs project site should be included in TRA at least
for habitat, based on the extensive channelization of streams which has led to lack of bedform in the
project channels, lack of riparian buffer, lack of woody debris and lack of suitable habitat for aquatic
organisms. Hydrology has also been impacted based on channelization of project streams, which are
incised and therefore unable to provide natural flood attenuation and reduced velocity during flooding as
a stable channel would.

The Middendorf Springs Mitigation project will address current on-site stressors/impairments by restoring
the extensively channelized and denuded stream systems on the project site to natural channels,
consisting of natural, stable geometry. In addition, areas of drained and cropped wetlands will also be
restored to provide ecological and functional uplift. By doing so the project will:
• Restore habitat features to the project streams, including recruitment of large woody debris
• Increase bedform diversity through creation of riffle-pool sequences in restored channels
• Reconnect channelized streams to South Jones Creek and restore stable channel form, thereby
promoting flood attenuation and reduction of shear stress and velocity in the channel.
• Establish a minimum 50 ft riparian buffer on all streams, thereby promoting both riparian habitat
diversity as well as filtering of nutrients from agricultural applications.
• Restore wetland hydrology to existing areas of hydric soils to provide wetlands restoration (re-
establishment) and functional uplift of wetlands on-site.

STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
23 November 5, 2019

Other restoration efforts in the immediate watershed include the Jones Creek Mitigation Site, located
approximately 2.5 miles downstream along South Jones Creek. That project restored approximately 30
acres of wetland and approximately 3,000 feet of stream. According to the 5-year monitoring
report, the site achieved the hydrology, vegetation and stream success criteria specified in the
Restoration Plan. The Middendorf Springs Mitigation Site would seek to expand on this success through
additional stream restoration and wetland restoration activities, thus furthering the improvement of
water quality and functional uplift in the South Jones Creek watershed.

Project Description
Overview of Existing Site Features

The Middendorf Springs Mitigation Site consists of eight existing unnamed tributaries (Tributaries 1A, 1B,
1C, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6) which drain to South Fork Jones Creek as well as areas of drained and manipulated
hydric soil within the floodplain of South Fork Jones Creek (see Exhibit 5). Some existing jurisdictional
wetlands occur on-site, some of which are heavily degraded through ditching and drain tiles, while others
are moderately functioning as emergent wetlands. The project property is currently used for row crops.

None of the unnamed tributaries have been given a classification by NCDEQ thus they receive the
classification of South Fork Jones Creek which is classified as a “Class C” surface waters, which is defined
as “waters protected for uses such as secondary recreation, fishing, wildlife, fish consumption, aquatic life
including propagation, survival and maintenance of biological integrity, and agriculture” (NCDEQ, 2003).
South Fork Jones Creek flows into Jones Creek which then flows to the Pee Dee River.

The land use of the specific watersheds of the two tributaries consists almost entirely of row crops and
unimproved farm roads. Gulledge Rd forms the upper watershed boundary for the project streams.
Wooded areas are located on the eastern end of the parent tract on an additional unnamed tributary to
South Jones Creek, which is not proposed as part of this project. Other wooded areas are located on the
steam on the western property boundary

Summaries of site features and mitigation site components are presented in Table 4.3 and Table 4.4,
respectively.

STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
24 November 5, 2019

Table 4.3. Summary of Middendorf Springs Mitigation Project Site Features
County Anson
14-Digit HUC 03040201020030
USDA Mapped Soil Types
Nanford gravelly fine sandy loam (NgC),
McQueen loam (MrB),
Chewacla loam (ChA),
Emporia loamy sand (EmB),
Nanford-Emporia Complex (NsB),
Badin channery silt loam (BaC),
Ailey loamy sand (AeB)
Geologic Unit(s) Middendorf Formation, Metamudstone and
Meta-Argillite
Anticipated Cultural Resources
The closest historic sites are Deep Creek School
(AN0514) and Faulkner House (AN0464), located
2.5 miles east of the project area, and John Perry
Ratliff House (AN0208), located 1 mile west of
the project area – there are no anticipated
impacts to these sites
Protected Species Issues
Red-cockaded Woodpecker (Picoides borealis) –
Endangered
Schweinitz’s Sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii) –
Endangered
Carolina Heelsplitter (Lasmigona decorata) –
Endangered
No Critical Habitat for these species is located
within the project area.
Known Site Constraints None
Mapped FEMA Floodplain/Floodway
Relevant Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs):
3710646000J
The proposed mitigation reaches are located
outside the FEMA Special Flood Hazard Area
(SFHA) – No flooding analysis will be needed for
these channels
Adjacent NC Natural Heritage Program Sites
Hightower Flat Rocks Natural Area, 5 miles NE of
project site; NCDMS Jones Creek Mitigation
Project (2429), located on South Fork Jones Creek
2.5 miles downstream of the confluence with
Middle Fork Jones Creek
Air Transport Facilities Within 5 Miles* None
*See Exhibit 2

STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
25 November 5, 2019

Table 4.4. Summary of Mitigation Site Components and Impacts
Site Component Intermittent /
Perennial
Existing
Length /
Acres
Current Impacts
Tributary 1A Perennial 2,855 ft
Stream channelized and incised with eroding
streambanks, nutrient inputs from row-crop
operations, sparse vegetated riparian buffer,
farm vehicle crossings, lack of habitat
diversity in channel bed.
Tributary 1B Intermittent 590 ft
Stream channelized and incised with eroding
streambanks, nutrient inputs from row-crop
operations, limited vegetated riparian buffer,
farm vehicle crossings, lack of habitat
diversity in channel bed.
Tributary 1C Intermittent 698 ft
Stream channelized and incised with eroding
streambanks, nutrient inputs from row-crop
operations, limited vegetated riparian buffer,
farm vehicle crossings, lack of habitat
diversity in channel bed.
Tributary 2
Intermittent

Perennial
100 ft

2,080 ft
Stream channelized and deeply incised with
eroding streambanks and bed, nutrient
inputs from row-crop operations, absent
vegetated riparian buffer, farm vehicle
crossings, lack of habitat diversity in channel
bed.
Tributary 3 Perennial

2,185 ft

Stream channelized and deeply incised with
eroding streambanks and bed, nutrient
inputs from row-crop operations, little to no
vegetated riparian buffer, farm vehicle
crossings, lack of habitat diversity in channel
bed.
Tributary 4 Intermittent 830 ft
Stream channelized and deeply incised with
eroding streambanks, nutrient inputs from
row-crop operations, absent vegetated
riparian buffer, farm vehicle crossings, lack of
habitat diversity in channel bed.
Tributary 5
Intermittent

Perennial
100 ft

660 ft
Stream channelized and deeply incised with
eroding streambanks, nutrient inputs from
row-crop operations, sparely vegetated
riparian buffer, 1 farm vehicle crossing, lack
of habitat diversity in channel bed.
Tributary 6
Intermittent

Perennial
100 ft

2,243 ft
Stream channelized and deeply incised with
eroding streambanks, nutrient inputs from
row-crop operations, sparely vegetated
riparian buffer, 1 farm vehicle crossing, lack
of habitat diversity in channel bed.
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
26 November 5, 2019

Site Component Intermittent /
Perennial
Existing
Length /
Acres
Current Impacts
Wetland Area 1 - 4 ac
Hydrology modified through ditching and
drain tiles; absence of wetland vegetation;
plowed and planted with row crops.
Wetland Area 2 - 1 ac
Hydrology modified through ditching and
drain tiles; absence of wetland vegetation;
plowed and planted with row crops.

Existing Streams

The eight existing channels in the Middendorf Springs mitigation site are extensively modified through
channelization and straightening. On many of the streams, row crops are currently planted directly up to
the top of bank of the channel. Some existing wetland pockets occur at the heads of the individual streams
and throughout the channels, where soils were found to be hydric. The channels have relatively flat to
steep slopes (0.63% to 3.4%), with relatively shallow and broad valleys. The streams generally flow
parallel to each other down a wide slope towards South Fork Jones Creek. Because of the channelization,
all of the tributaries exhibit unstable bedform, headcuts, bank erosion and incision, as well as farm
vehicular impacts. Current riparian vegetation is either absent or degraded, with little to no buffer on all
streams. The channelization of the streams has created instability in the form of moderate to severe
streambank erosion and streambed erosion. All of channel appear to be actively downcutting and
attempting to widen in order to regain a stable channel form, and as a result extensive erosion is occurring,
releasing sediment downstream into South Fork Jones Creek.

All of these channels are considered headwater streams, but they exhibit very strong baseflow and
channel formation indicators relative to their drainage areas, which range from approximately 12 acres to
93 acres. As discussed in the geology section below, it appears that the sandstone/clay geology of the
Middendorf formation (which is one of the main geologic formations of the “Carolina sandhills” region)
on the ridgeline and upper slope of the project area has created numerous springs at a consistent
elevation where it contacts the underlying Meta-argillite/Meta-mudstone slate belt formation below. As
a result, these springs feed both existing headwater wetlands and the streams below them, leading to
perennial status for nearly all of the channels within the project reach.

A detailed description of each stream reach is provided below, and an overview of the channels is depicted
on Exhibit 5:

Tributary 1 (1A, 1B, and 1C)

Tributary 1 (comprised of Tributaries 1A, 1B, and 1C) is the westernmost of the tributaries proposed for
mitigation. Tributary 1A originates in a wooded area on the adjacent property and then forms the
property boundary for approximately 1,050 feet before entering the project site, where both banks are
contained within the property. From there, the stream flows approximately 1,800 feet before its
confluence with South Jones Creek at the southern edge of the property. When it enters the project site,
Tributary 1A has a drainage area of approximately 50 acres.

STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
27 November 5, 2019

Tributary 1A is the largest tributary on the project, with a width of approximately 8 feet and a depth of
approximately 2 to 3 feet deep. Bankfull depth, based on regional curves would be approximately 1.2 feet
thus the channel is relatively incised. The channel slope is approximately 1.6%. The valley is relatively
broad relative to the channel size, with an average width of 150 feet within the project area, indicating
that channel is naturally unconfined and should have some natural level of sinuosity.

Impacts to the channel include the historic channelization of the natural stream, which has created a high
bank height ratio and severe incision. This in turn has led to severe bank erosion along the channel and
lack of natural bedform as the channel attempts to regain stable geometry. Additional impacts include
farm equipment crossings and fertilizer and pesticide application in the steam, as there is little to no
vegetated buffer from the existing row crop operations.

Tributary 1A ranks as “Perennial” on the DEQ Stream Identification Form (see Appendix for form).
Indicators of perennial status include:
· Fish and frogs observed in the channel
· Strong geomorphic indicators including continuous bank, thalweg along channel
· Seasonal high water table indicators in the toe of the streambed
· Presence of baseflow five days after a rainfall of 1.6 inches, during a period of “Moderate drought”

In addition, the very strong and well defined valley, the drainage area size (of approximately 50 acres at
the head of the project and 124 acres at the bottom) and presence of large sandstone gravel in the bed
all strongly indicate the historic presence of a natural channel in this location. The stream is shown as a
“blue line” on the most recent version of the USGS topo map. Finally, Chewacla soils, which are derived
from alluvium, extend up the valley for almost the full length of the stream channel, within the project
area indicating that this a historical stream.

Figure 2. Looking upstream at Tributary 1. Stream
has been channelized causing erosion and
impairment. Images were taken on October 25,
2019 with approximately 1.6 inches of rain having
occurred on October 20, 2019. According to the US
Drought Monitor, Anson County was still in a
moderate drought as of October 22, 2019. Site soil
conditions were generally dry and several other sites
within 10 miles, which we checked on this day, had
no stream flow.
Figure 3. Looking upstream at Tributary 1A. Note the equipment
crossing and vehicle impacts, sparsely vegetated buffer and
sediment issues. Images were taken on October 25, 2019 with
approximately 1.6 inches of rain having occurred on October 20,
2019. According to the US Drought Monitor, Anson County was still
in a moderate drought as of October 22, 2019. Site soil conditions
were generally dry and several other sites within 10 miles, which we
checked on this day, had no stream flow.
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
28 November 5, 2019

Connecting to Tributary 1A are Tributaries 1B and 1C.
These channels both originate on a westward-facing slope
leading down towards the valley of Tributary 1A. As with all
other tributaries on the project, the streams have been
channelized and straightened, leading to bank and bed
erosion. These streams have slightly more vegetated buffer
than the other channels on the project, but it consists of
young (2 to 3 year) growth of pioneer tree species such as
loblolly pine and sweetgum. The channels both ranked as
“Perennial” on the DEQ Stream Identification Form several
hundred feet downstream from prominent headcuts, at
which point they are ranked as “Intermittent”. Above the
headcuts, a headwater wetland is present on both reaches,
indicating the presence of a spring or high water table that
feeds the channels below. Although the drainage areas are
relatively small (20 acres on Tributary 1B and 12 acres
Tributary 1C), both have well-defined valleys leading into
the valley of Tributary 1A.

Tributary 2

Tributary 2 originates within a natural crenulation on the
downslope headed towards Gulledge Rd. Within this
crenulation, a wetland has developed, indicating the
presence of a spring and/or high water table intercepting
with the ground surface that feeds the natural channel.
Above this point, there are no indications of natural
channel features, but below this spring a natural channel
has formed at a headcut with strong geomorphic and
hydrologic features (discussed below). Tributary 2 has
a width of approximately 4 feet, a top of bank depth of
approximately 2 to 3 feet and an assumed bankfull
depth of 0.8 feet (based on regional curve data). The
average bed slope is approximately 2.52%. The valley is
somewhat laterally confined, but still has a broad,
shallow shape with an average width of 35 to 50 feet,
Figure 4. Looking at downstream end of Tributary
1A where it ties into South Fork Jones Creek. The
stream is heavily incised from where it was
channelized to connect to the creek. Images were
taken on October 25, 2019 with approximately 1.6
inches of rain having occurred on October 20, 2019.
According to the US Drought Monitor, Anson County
was still in a moderate drought as of October 22,
2019. Site soil conditions were generally dry and
several other sites within 10 miles, which we
checked on this day, had no stream flow.
Figure 5. Looking downstream at eroded bed of Tributary
2. Images were taken on October 25, 2019 with
approximately 1.6 inches of rain having occurred on
October 20, 2019. According to the US Drought Monitor,
Anson County was still in a moderate drought as of
October 22, 2019. Site soil conditions were generally dry
and several other sites within 10 miles, which we checked
on this day, had no stream flow
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
29 November 5, 2019

which is still relatively large compared with the channel width.

As with Tributary 1, impacts to the channel include the channelization of the natural stream system,
creating incision and bank erosion. This in turn has led to severe bank and bed erosion along the channel
and lack of natural bedform. The channel appears to be actively incising as evidenced by several headcuts
and prominent bed scour. Additional impacts include farm equipment crossings and fertilizer and
pesticide application directly up to and into the stream. Virtually no vegetated buffer is present on this
reach, aside from row crops.

Tributary 2 ranks as “Perennial” on the DEQ Stream Identification Form (see Appendix for form) for most
of its length. A form filled out at the headcut below the headwater wetland scored a high “Intermittent”,
while a form taken approximately fifty feet below that scored Perennial. Some key indicators of perennial
status include:
· Frogs observed in the channel, extensive algae growth present and iron-oxidizing bacteria
observed
· Consistent geomorphic indicators including continuous bank, some bedform formation, natural
floodplain and valley and benching
· Seasonal high water table indicators in the toe of the streambed
· Presence of baseflow

Most importantly, the very well-defined valley and the
presence of a spring at the head of this reach strongly
supports the historical presence of a stream at this
location. Although the drainage area is only
approximately 25 acres, the spring provides baseflow
and groundwater interaction at the stream origin.

Tributary 3

Tributary 3 originates from a natural drainageway that
starts near Gulledge Rd. For most of the length of the
drainageway, the channel is ephemeral, but a headcut
approximately 470 feet upstream of the project site
defines the beginning of groundwater interaction and
intermittent stream features. Tributary 3 has a width
of approximately 5 feet and depths ranging from 2 to
3 feet, with an assumed bankfull depth around 0.8
feet. The average channel slope is approximately
2.0%. The valley is shallow and broad with a width of
50 to 85 feet, indicating the historic stream channel
was relatively unconfined in its valley prior to
channelization and supports a natural level of
sinuosity.

Figure 6. Looking at the upstream end of Tributary 3. Note the
lack of bedform diversity and complete lack of vegetated
buffer. Images were taken on October 25, 2019 with
approximately 1.6 inches of rain having occurred on October
20, 2019. According to the US Drought Monitor, Anson County
was still in a moderate drought as of October 22, 2019. Site soil
conditions were generally dry and several other sites within 10
miles, which we checked on this day, had no stream flow.
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
30 November 5, 2019

Channel impacts include channelization of the
stream, creating incision and severe bank erosion
along the channel and lack of natural bedform.
Additional impacts include farm equipment crossings
and fertilizer and pesticide application directly in the
stream due to lack of vegetated buffer. Some sparse
vegetation is present in the riparian zone, including
willow (Salix spp.) and goldenrod, at the upstream
end but the downstream end completely lacks a
buffer and the majority of the riparian area is
covered in row crops.

Channel impacts include channelization of the
stream, creating incision and severe bank erosion
along the channel and lack of natural bedform.
Additional impacts include farm equipment crossings
and fertilizer and pesticide application directly in the
stream due to lack of vegetated buffer.

Tributary 3 ranks as “Perennial” on the DEQ Stream
Identification Form (see Appendix for form) at the
start of the reach below an existing wetland. Above
the wetland, the stream ranked as “Intermittent”
beginning at a headcut approximately 470 feet
upstream of the wetland. Some key indicators of
perennial status include:
· Fish and frogs observed in the channel, along with algae
· Strong geomorphic indicators including continuous bank, pool formation and deposition in the
channel. Large gravel-sized particles of alluvium are present in the streambed.
· Seasonal high water table indicators in the toe of the streambed
· Presence of baseflow across all parts of the channel (pools and riffles) 4 days after a moderate
rain event (1.6 inches) during a period of “moderate drought”

A very well-defined valley and floodplain the presence of headwater wetlands, from which this reach
originates, strongly supports the historic presence of the stream at this location. The drainage area is
approximately 14.5 acres at the head of the project and 61.4 acres at the downstream end.

Tributary 4

Tributary 4 is a tributary of Tributary 3 and begins near Gulledge Rd as an ephemeral channel. In this most
upstream area, the stream shows signs of erosion and scour from stormwater flows, but quickly returns
to a less defined channel that lacks features of a jurisdictional channel. The stream appears to intercept
the water table approximately 460 feet upstream of its confluence with Tributary 3. The stream begins in
the project site after it crosses under an existing farm road.

Figure 7. Looking at the downstream end of Tributary 3. Note
the lack of bedform diversity and complete lack of vegetated
buffer. Images were taken on October 25, 2019 with
approximately 1.6 inches of rain having occurred on October
20, 2019. According to the US Drought Monitor, Anson County
was still in a moderate drought as of October 22, 2019. Site
soil conditions were generally dry and several other sites
within 10 miles, which we checked on this day, had no stream
flow.
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
31 November 5, 2019

As with the other reaches, the stream is channelized, leading to a relatively high bank height ratio and
incision and moderate to severe bank erosion along the channel and lack of natural bedform. The stream
depth is approximately 2 feet with an assumed bankfull depth of 0.8 ft., indicating incision. The average
width is approximately 3 feet. The stream is actively eroding due to the channelization and the stream’s
attempt to evolve to a stable form. Some sparse vegetation is present in the riparian zone, however the
majority of the riparian area is covered in row crops.

Tributary 4 ranks as “Intermittent” on the DEQ Stream Identification Form (see Appendix for form) at a
point immediately downstream of the existing farm road. Some key indicators of intermittent status
include (form included in Appendix):
· Geomorphic indicators including continuous bank, slight pool formation and small amount of
deposition in the channel.
· Lack of rooted upland plants or fibrous roots in the streambed
· Seasonal high water table indicators in the toe of the streambed
· Presence of baseflow 5 days after a moderate rainfall event (1.6 inches) during a period of
moderate drought

Figure 9. Looking downstream at eroded bed of Tributary 4.
Agricultural fields located on either side of channel indicate
high nutrient loads entering stream and lack of buffer.
Images were taken on October 25, 2019 with approximately
1.6 inches of rain having occurred on October 20, 2019.
According to the US Drought Monitor, Anson County was
still in a moderate drought as of October 22, 2019. Site soil
conditions were generally dry and several other sites within
10 miles, which we checked on this day, had no stream flow.
Figure 8. Looking upstream at eroded bed of Tributary 4.
Agricultural fields located on either side of channel indicate
high nutrient loads entering stream and lack of buffer. Images
were taken on October 25, 2019 with approximately 1.6
inches of rain having occurred on October 20, 2019.
According to the US Drought Monitor, Anson County was still
in a moderate drought as of October 22, 2019. Site soil
conditions were generally dry and several other sites within
10 miles, which we checked on this day, had no stream flow.
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
32 November 5, 2019

As with the other channels, the historic
presence of a channel at this location is
supported by a very well-defined valley
through the length of the project reach, at
which interaction with the water table was
observed to begin. The drainage area is
approximately 28 acres at the head of the
project and 33 acres and the downstream end.

Tributary 5

Tributary 5 originates at a headcut between
Tributaries 4 and 6. Although a relatively short
reach, at approximately 760 feet, the drainage
area (of approximately 16 acres) extends a
substantial distance into the property and
surrounds a very broad, shallow valley that
does not have evident channel features until
the appearance of the headcut that starts
Tributary 5. Unlike the other tributaries, there
do not appear to be any headwater wetlands present at
the origin of the reach. An abundance of large gravel
alluvium in the soil and channel banks, even at the
headcut stream origin, suggests that this stream runs
over an old terrace of South Fork Jones Creek. Tributary
5 has a width of approximately 4 feet and incised depths
ranging from 3 to 4 feet. The bankfull depth of a channel
this size would be approximately 0.5 feet based on
regional curves. The average bed slope is approximately
2.0%. The valley is very broad and shallow and suggests
that the stream was unconfined prior to channelization,
supporting the need to regain sinuosity through
restoration efforts. The drainage area is approximately
10.5 acres at the head of the project and 16 acres and
the downstream end.

As with the other reaches in the project, the
channelization of the stream has led to incision and bank
erosion as the channel attempts to cut down and widen
to regain stable channel form. The incision varies from
extreme to moderate progressing downstream. The
riparian area of the stream is completely covered in row
crops, with a total absence of native vegetation or
woody stems that would help stabilize the banks.

Tributary 5 ranks as “Perennial” on the DEQ Stream
Identification Form beginning shortly after the headcut
which defines the start of the project reach (see
Figure 10. Headcut at beginning of Tributary 5. Note the lack of
buffer between channel and agricultural fields. Images were taken
on October 25, 2019 with approximately 1.6 inches of rain having
occurred on October 20, 2019. According to the US Drought Monitor,
Anson County was still in a moderate drought as of October 22, 2019.
Site soil conditions were generally dry and several other sites within
10 miles, which we checked on this day, had no stream flow.
Figure 11. Looking upstream at Tributary 5. Note the
excessive sedimentation and streambank erosion caused
by the channelization of this stream. Images were taken
on October 25, 2019 with approximately 1.6 inches of rain
having occurred on October 20, 2019. According to the US
Drought Monitor, Anson County was still in a moderate
drought as of October 22, 2019. Site soil conditions were
generally dry and several other sites within 10 miles,
which we checked on this day, had no stream flow.
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
33 November 5, 2019

Appendix for form). At the headcut, the stream ranks as Intermittent. Some key indicators of perennial
status include:
· Frogs observed in the channel
· Strong geomorphic indicators including continuous bank, natural valley and floodplain, recent
deposits, gavel sized cobble and formation of benches within channel where stream is attempting
to stabilize
· Seasonal high water table indicators in the toe of the streambed
· Presence of baseflow after 4 days of no rain

Tributary 6

Tributary 6, the easternmost channel of
the project, originates at a series of
headwater, spring-fed wetlands. The fact
that wetlands have developed at the
stream origin, attests to the presence of a
spring and/or high water table
intercepting with the ground surface that
feeds the natural channel below. A soil
scientist mapped these as three hydric
soil pockets. Some of these are actively
mowed while others are unmowed, and
are populated by willows, bulrush, soft
rush, sedges and other hydrophytic
vegetation. The channelization of the
natural stream begins next to the most
upstream wetland area, and the stream in
this location has been channelized to a
depth of 3 to 4 feet. This is impacting the
function and value of this wetland, and
although not proposed in this proposal, it
is likely that any efforts to raise the
channel will benefit the hydrology and functional value of the wetland. The channelized stream exhibits
moderate to severe bank erosion along its length through the proposed easement and is contributing to
sediment entrainment downstream into South Fork Jones Creek. Tributary 6 has an average width of
approximately 4 feet. The average channel slope is approximately 2.0%. The valley is broad, shallow and
very well defined and appears to have cut through former terraces of South jones Creek. With a width
of 40 to 50 feet it indicates that the historic stream channel likely had some level of sinuosity across this
valley before it was channelized.

Figure 12. Looking downstream at Tributary 6. Note the lack of
vegetated buffer on right bank of the channel. Images were taken on
October 25, 2019 with approximately 1.6 inches of rain having occurred
on October 20, 2019. According to the US Drought Monitor, Anson
County was still in a moderate drought as of October 22, 2019. Site soil
conditions were generally dry and several other sites within 10 miles,
which we checked on this day, had no stream flow.
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
34 November 5, 2019

Existing riparian vegetation varies from
young shrubs and herbaceous species
on one side of the stream (left bank)
consisting of willows. Invasive
Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera
japonica) is also present in the riparian
area, and restoration efforts will need
to focus on removing this invasive
species.

Tributary 6 ranks as “Perennial” on the
DEQ Stream Identification Form at the
beginning of the project reach (see
Appendix for form). Some key
indicators of perennial status include:
· Fish and frogs observed in the
channel
· Strong geomorphic indicators
including continuous bank,
some interior sinuosity along
channel thalweg
· Seasonal high water table
indicators in the toe of the
streambed
· Presence of baseflow after 5 days of no rains, during a period of “moderate drought”.

A very well-defined valley and the presence of a headwater wetlands, at which interaction with the water
table was observed at the head of this reach strongly supports the continued presence of baseflow in the
channel as well as the historic presence of the stream. A drainage area of 23.5 acres at the head of the
project also strong supports perennial status, as this appears to be well within the size at which channels
on this property form (see Geology discussion below).

Table 4.5. Summary of Geomorphic Variables for Existing Streams
Stream
Drainage
Area
(acres)
Width to Depth
Ratio (ft/ft)
Entrenchment
Ratio Sinuosity Bank Height
Ratio (ft/ft) % Slope
Tributary 1A 124 6.67 2.25 1.01 2.5 1.64%
Tributary 1B 20 5 3 1.00 5 3.39%
Tributary 1C 12 3.75 4 1.01 5 0.63%
Tributary 2 25 5 3 1.02 5 2.52%
Tributary 3 61 6.25 2.4 1.01 5 2.01%
Tributary 4 33 3.75 5 1.02 3.75 2.41%
Tributary 5 16 5 2 1.02 5 1.97%
Tributary 6 44 5 3.75 1.01 5 2.01%

Figure 13. Looking downstream at Tributary 6. Note the lack of vegetated
buffer on right bank and erosion occurring due to the channelization the
stream. The stream flows through a well-defined natural valley at this
location. Images were taken on October 25, 2019 with approximately 1.6
inches of rain having occurred on October 20, 2019. According to the US
Drought Monitor, Anson County was still in a moderate drought as of
October 22, 2019. Site soil conditions were generally dry and several
other sites within 10 miles, which we checked on this day, had no stream
flow.
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
35 November 5, 2019

Existing Wetlands and Hydric Soils

The Middendorf Springs Mitigation site includes a
number of areas of hydric soils, as confirmed and
mapped by a licensed soil scientist (see Soils
Report in Appendix). Some of these are areas are
assumed to be currently jurisdictional, based on
field investigations using the 1987 US Army Corps
of Engineers (USACE) Wetlands Delineation
Manual (USACE, 1987) with Eastern Mountains
and Piedmont Regional Supplement (USACE,
2012). Others are lacking in the features necessary
to be currently jurisdictional and are former
wetlands that have been modified through
draining and ditching. See Exhibit 5 for overview
of existing features.

One relatively large area of hydric soils
(approximately 19.5 acres) (Wetland 1) is lacking
in the hydrology and vegetation necessary to be
considered jurisdictional. This area is located in
the southwest portion of the property within the
floodplain of South Fork Jones Creek (see Exhibit
5). The area consists entirely of row crops and is
lacking in hydrophytic vegetation. In the eastern
ditch, plastic drain tiles are in place and drain
directly into South Fork Jones Creek. The area has
sedimented in from agricultural activities and
sediment delivery from hillslope erosion. This has
led to a lack of wetland hydrology indicators.

Figure 14. Existing Wetland 1 located within row crop field.
Hydrophytic vegetation is absent in areas disturbed by
plowing, ripping, and application of fertilizer, including
chicken manure.
Figure 15. Looking at the west side of Wetland 1. Wetland
is heavily impacted by agricultural field activities.
Figure 16. Looking downstream on Stream 2 at Wetland 2.
Wetland is located within row crop field. Hydrophytic
vegetation is absent in areas disturbed by plowing, ripping,
and application of fertilizer, including chicken manure
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
36 November 5, 2019

Another area of hydric soil is located to the west
of Tributary 2 (Wetland 2). This area consists of a
large, assumed jurisdictional wetland.
Hydrophytic vegetation present at this location
includes Bullrush (Scirpus cyperinus), Sedge
(Carex spp.) willow (Salix spp). and cattail (Typha
latifolia). However, the hydric soils extend
outside of this existing wetland for approximately
1 acre but hydrophytic vegetation is absent and
the hydric soils are completely covered by row
crops and show impacts from plowing and deep
ripping of the soil. Hydrology is impacted by the
channelization of the adjacent stream channel
and by four 4” diameter drain tiles placed in the
wetland area.

Together these two areas are proposed for
Wetland Restoration (Re-establishment) to meet
the 5 acre of wetland mitigation credits that are being requested by this Request for Proposals. However,
many other areas of hydric soils exist on the site, some of which are currently assumed jurisdictional
wetlands (pending final verification by the USACE). Many of these exist as emergent wetland pockets
occurring intermittently along Tributaries and will likely benefit from raising tributary channel beds
through restoration activities.

Figure 18. Photo of existing drain tiles that disrupt the
hydrology of Wetland 2. Drain tiles are also installed at ditch
outlet on Wetland 1.
Figure 17. Existing channelized ditch located in Wetland 2
disrupts wetland hydrology. Wetland is located in row crop
field and heavily impacted by agricultural activities.
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
37 November 5, 2019

Geologic and Geomorphologic Setting

The Middendorf Springs Mitigation Site lies at the intersection of two distinct geologic formations: the
Middendorf Formation, which is a Cretaceous-aged sandstone and mudstone formation, most often
associated with the Carolina Sandhills region; and a Cambrian/Late Protozoic Meta-argillite and meta-
mudstone formation associated with the volcanic “Slate Belt” region. On the project site, the Middendorf
formation is mapped on the ridgeline and upper portions of the long slope towards South Fork Jones
Creek, while the Slate Belt formation is mapped on the lower slope, valley bottom and floodplain area.
The presence of rounded, gravel-sized sandstone alluvium far up the slope and high above South Fork
Jones Creek suggests that the site may consist of a series of terraces above the Creek, through which new
headwater valleys have cut. The interface between the younger Middendorf formation, which is overlain
by sandy, well-drained sandy loams, and the older Slate Belt formations appears to consistently produce
a number of springs across the landscape at a similar elevation, which are evidence by the numerous
headwater wetlands and headcuts from which groundwater are flowing strongly even 4 to 5 days after a
modest rain event. These springs appear to produce streams with indications of perennial flow at
relatively small drainage areas (12 acres to 93 acres) relative to other areas of the Slate Belt. The other
major geomorphic feature of the site is the valley of South Fork Jones Creek, which consists of the alluvial
Chewacla soil. This valley is relatively wide and shows indications of abandoned channels, such as that
present in Wetland 1. Areas of hydric soils are present throughout this floodplain, as mapped by a soil
scientist, some of which support existing wetlands.

Figure 19. Conceptual model of geomorphology and groundwater hydrology at site based on cross-section cut along ridge
adjacent to Tributary 2. Note that upper slope area is comprised of Sandy Loams from marine deposit (Emporia Loamy Sand),
which has depth to bedrock greater than 72 inches. A terrace is present mid-slope, along which alluvial gravels are observed.
The soils here are derived from meta-argillite slate belt bedrock (Nanford Series) which has a depth to confining layer of around
4o inches. Springs are present around this elevation across the site, and headwater wetland have formed. The origins of
intermittent and perennial flowing streams are consistently around this elevation. Finally, the floodplain of South Fork Jones
Creek also has extensive hydric soil formation in soils derived from alluvial deposits (Chewacla).

Project Development

Due to extensive stressors, impacts and modifications of the project streams, proposed restoration
activities will target removing or minimizing impacts and stressors for each reach, as well as establishing
the abiotic and biotic conditions necessary for the greatest functional and ecological uplift. The mitigation
components of the preferred option for the Middendorf Springs project (Option A) include:
• The restoration of Tributaries 1A, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6
• Restoration (Re-establishment) of Wetlands 1 and 2

Stream Origin consistent at
Around 380’ for all Tribs
Alluvial Terrace (Alluvium gravels at
surface)
Zone of Recharge
Marine Deposits (Sandy Loam)
South Fork Jones Creek

Wetlands
Wetlands and Springs
Unknown depth to confining layer Meta-argillite derived soils
Alluvial Soils
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
38 November 5, 2019

In Option B, Tributaries 1A, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 would be restored, Tributaries 1B and 1C would be enhanced,
and Wetlands 1 and 2 would be re-established. Finally, Option C provides an alternative where all streams
would be enhanced through Enhancement Level 1 activities. These options are summarized in Tables 4.8
through 4.11. The proposed activities to restore these systems, as well as the anticipated function uplift,
are further described below.
Stream Restoration Approach

The general approach to the restoration of Tributaries 1A through Tributary 6 is to restore the pattern,
dimension and profile of these headwater channels, as all of these streams have been severely impacted
by channelization and straightening, causing severe incision, bank erosion and channel instability. Full
restoration of these reaches is warranted because of the complete lack of natural planform which, in
addition to prevent creation of bedform diversity, also increases slope and shear stress in the channel.
The valley shape and valley width relative to the stream width as well as the valley slopes indicate that
some level of sinuosity was once present in these systems and that these were not just confined, straight
steep channels as would be typical in some areas of the piedmont. Relict meanders and low points within
the valleys indicate where the streams were once flowing across their floodplains. By restoring planform,
the other variables of dimension and profile must also be restored as well. The exception to this is on
Tributaries 1B and 1C, which are steeper and shorter reaches but still heavily incised and impacted. These
would benefit from grade control from the use of small structures as well as creation of pools to enhance
bedform and provide aquatic organism refuge, thus Enhancement Level I is most warranted here. These
streams are proposed as part of Option B only, with Option A encompassing the restoration of Tributaries
1A through 6. A third alternative (Option C) is to restore Tributaries 1A through 6 with Enhancement Level
I activities. This would include establishing interior benches along all stream reaches, establishing stable
dimension and planting a vegetated buffer, but not realigning channels. This is not considered the
optimum approach to provide maximum functional uplift, but is provided here as an option for reduced
credit opportunity.

All stream channels will be designed with stable dimension based off analysis of sediment transport
capacity and competency, taking into account the potentially high sediment loads delivered from row
crop activities. An analogue design approach will be used whereby the geometry of stable reference
streams will be scaled and applied to the project steams to establish appropriate pattern and profile.

Project reaches will be placed in a perpetual conservation easement. Throughout the site a minimum 50-
foot wide riparian buffer, measured from the top of each bank will be included within the conservation
easement. The re-vegetation plan for the site will include the planting of live stakes to stabilize stream
banks, planting of bare-root trees in riparian buffers, and control of invasive exotic vegetation species as
needed.

In general, the goal of the planting scheme will be to establish headwater streams consistent with
Piedmont Headwater Stream Forest. The FNI Team’s planting plan will incorporate the use of native trees
and shrubs. The typical planted canopy trees would include trees that have performed successfully on
other restoration projects in the area including paw paw (Asimina triloba), green ash (Fraxinus
pennsylvanica), river birch (Betula nigra) and black willow (Salix nigra). Reference vegetation surveys will
be conducted to establish appropriate native species composition. By performing these restoration and
enhancement activities the Project Team will restore site conditions to those suitable for re-colonization
of native aquatic and terrestrial species. A detailed summary of proposed mitigation methods and why
they are warranted is summarized in Table 4.6.
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
39 November 5, 2019

Overall, significant functional and ecological uplift is expected by enacting restoration measures along all
project streams. Table 4.8 provides an overview of potential function uplift from proposed restoration
activities Exhibit 6 depicts a conceptual alignment and conservation easement boundary of the restored
channels.

Table 4.6. Summary of Proposed Mitigation Approach
Location/Type of
Restoration
Description of Restoration
Activities Why Activities are Warranted
Tributaries 1B, 1C
Enhancement
Level I
Construct bankfull bench to
provide stable dimension based on
sediment transport requirements
and construct interior floodplain
Due to the steep and confined nature of
the valley, realignment of channels into
sinuous planform is not warranted and
necessary, but establishment of bench will
help relieve shear stress in high flow
events.
Streambanks will be laid back at
stable slope and lined with coir
matting,
Channels are incised and extensive bank
erosion is present, thus streambank
stabilization measures are necessary.
Install small in-channel structures
such as log sills to provide grade
control, establish pools and
increase bedform diversity
Channelized streams lack bedform
diversity, and are actively downcutting,
thus both grade control and pool creation
is necessary.
Establish minimum 50 ft riparian
buffer with native woody and
herbaceous species.
There is a sparse natural riparian buffer
containing very little woody vegetation;
buffer will provide filter for nutrients from
fertilizer application, provide enhanced
habitat and provide stability for
streambank soils and slopes.
Tributaries 1A, 2,
3, 4, 5, 6
Restoration

Establish new, sinuous channel
based on stable reference
condition

Streams are channelized and lack stable
planform, dimension and bedform. Thus,
re-alignment is necessary to establish
natural channel characteristics. Broad
valley supports some level of sinuosity
although being a headwater system it will
not be overly sinuous.
Raise channel bed elevation to
reconnect streambanks to
floodplain (Priority 1 Restoration)
Streams currently lack floodplain access,
increasing energy during moderate and
high flow events.
Establish natural bedform with
pool-riffle sequence and deep pool
habitat to provide diversity of
habitat and refuge during drought
Channelized streams lack natural,
stable bedform.
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
40 November 5, 2019

Location/Type of
Restoration
Description of Restoration
Activities Why Activities are Warranted
Establish 50 ft riparian buffer with
native woody and herbaceous
species
Little to no natural riparian buffer
containing native woody and herbaceous
vegetation; buffer will provide filter for
nutrients from fertilizer application,
provide enhanced habitat and provide
stability for streambank soils and slopes.
Install small in-channel
structures where necessary to
help maintain grade and
establish bedform.
Newly graded streams will need some
protection of outside bends and grade
while vegetation becomes established.
Use of wood will provide structures sized
appropriately for the project.

Wetland Restoration Approach

A similar wetland restoration approach will be used at Proposed Riparian Wetlands 1 and 2. Current land
use, hydric soil characteristics, and hydrologic conditions are generally consistent at both locations. The
main focus of restoration efforts will be to remove past manipulation, including the ditches and plastic
drain tiles from both wetlands. Ground disturbance activities will be minimized to the extent necessary to
restore wetland hydrologic conditions at each location:

• Remove drain tiles from Wetlands 1 and Wetland 2
• Plug existing ditches and swales, where present
• In order to restore function of riparian wetland topography, numerous depressions
(approximately 8 inches in depth) and micro-topography features will be constructed across each
hydric soil area. A rough-grade finish will be provided using existing hydric topsoil material to
establish the final wetland restoration and ensure disruption of the historic grading and
intentional draining of the wetlands from past land use.
• Conduct restoration activities on Tributary 2, which will raise bed of channelized stream to
reconnect to floodplain, and will raise water table, restoring hydrology to Wetland 2
• Bare-root seedlings of select native species will be installed across the wetland restoration areas.
Seedling will be installed using a random planting pattern at a density of 420 stems per acre.
• The wetland restoration areas will also be seeded with a native riparian wetland seed mix.

STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
41 November 5, 2019

Potential Function Uplift
Table 4.7. Summary of Potential Uplift from Restoration Activities
Watershed Needs
Addressed (Stressors/
Impairments)
Potential
Functional
Uplift
Explanation
Focus of
TRAs
Covering
Project Site
Water Quality
Non-functioning
riparian
buffer/wetland
vegetation
High Non-functioning buffer - will attempt to provide
greater than 50 ft buffer width where possible
No
Sediment
High
The majority of sediment sources are on-site
from rill erosion and streambank erosion,
sediment transport is out of balance.
No
Nutrients High
Nutrients are on site for majority of resource
from fertilizer application, some off-site sources
upstream
No
Fecal Coliform High
Chicken manure fertilizer is currently used as
fertilizer on row crops fields. Establishment of
wooded riparian buffers will help protect streams
from direct contact with this manure and reduce
level of fecal coliform bacteria entering stream
channel relative to current condition.
No
Hydrology
Peak flows
High
Channels are incised, limiting floodplain access.
Restoration will regain access to floodplain bench
to attenuate flows.
No
Ditching/Draining High
Wetland areas proposed for restoration currently
have several ditches and multiple drain lines, as
well as the channelized stream running through
the wetland that is lowering the groundwater
table. Substantial discharge was observed from
existing drain tiles during a period of moderate
drought, indicating that groundwater within
wetland areas is not functioning to its potential.
Removal of these drainage systems will greatly
increase function relative to current conditions.
No
Habitat
Limited Bedform
Diversity

High
The project streams have very little bedform,
except where they have scoured small pools
through the process of degrading. Restoration
will restore bedform variability.
No
Absence of Large
Woody Debris

Very High
No large woody debris is currently present in any
of the channels. Restoration to a sinuous pattern
and re-establishment of buffer will help recruit
large woody debris in channel.
No

STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
42 November 5, 2019

Conservation Easement Markings and Crossings

The two crossings proposed for the project are located on Tributary 1 and Tributary 6 at existing farm
roads. The crossing on Tributary 1 will only be included in Option B, as the proposed easement does not
extend across the existing farm road at this location in Options A or C. At each of these crossings, an 80-
foot wide break in the easement will be maintained along the existing farm roads to allow the property
owners access across the property through the proposed conservation easement. A 20’ bottomless culvert
is proposed to be installed at these two crossing locations to connect the upstream and downstream ends
of the channel. In addition, all conservation easement boundaries will be marked with NCDMS
conservation easement signs.

Proposed Mitigation

The proposed mitigation credits for this project and the method in which they were derived are outlined
in the tables below.

Table 4.8. Proposed Mitigation Option A
Restored
Length/Acres Mitigation Type Ratio Mitigation Credits
Tributary 1A 2188 Restoration 1:1 2188
Tributary 2 2616 Restoration 1:1 2616
Tributary 3 2622 Restoration 1:1 2622
Tributary 4 996 Restoration 1:1 996
Tributary 6 2808 Restoration 1:1 2808
Riparian Wetland 1 4 Restoration
(Re-establishment) 1:1 4
Riparian Wetland 2 1 Restoration
(Re-establishment) 1:1 1
Option A Summary
Total Stream Mitigation Units: 11230
Total Riparian Wetland Mitigation Units: 5
Extra SMU - Contingency 500
Extra WMU - Contingency 3

STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
43 November 5, 2019

Table 4.9. Proposed Mitigation Option B
Restored
Length/Acres Mitigation Type Ratio Mitigation Credits
Tributary 1A - Upper 1055 Enhancement Level II
(Low Uplift)
No Credit - Half
Buffer Property
Line
0
Tributary 1A - Lower 2188 Restoration 1:1 2188
Tributary 1B 590 Enhancement Level I 1.5:1 393
Tributary 1C 698 Enhancement Level I 1.5:1 465
Tributary 2 2616 Restoration 1:1 2616
Tributary 3 2622 Restoration 1:1 2622
Tributary 4 996 Restoration 1:1 996
Tributary 5 912 Restoration 1:1 912
Tributary 6 2808 Restoration 1:1 2808
Riparian Wetland 1 4 Restoration
(Re-establishment) 1:1 4
Riparian Wetland 2 1 Restoration
(Re-establishment) 1:1 1
Option B Summary
Total Stream Mitigation Units: 13,000
Total Riparian Wetland Mitigation Units: 5
Extra SMU - Contingency 700
Extra WMU - Contingency 3

Table 4.10. Proposed Mitigation Option C
Restored
Length/Acres Mitigation Type Ratio Mitigation Credits
Tributary 1A 2188 Enhancement Level I 1.5:1 1458
Tributary 2 2616 Enhancement Level I 1.5:1 1744
Tributary 3 2622 Enhancement Level I 1.5:1 1748
Tributary 4 996 Enhancement Level I 1.5:1 664
Tributary 5 912 Enhancement Level I 1.5:1 608
Tributary 6 2808 Enhancement Level I 1.5:1 1872
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
44 November 5, 2019

Restored
Length/Acres Mitigation Type Ratio Mitigation Credits
Riparian Wetland 1 4 Restoration
(Re-establishment) 1:1 4
Riparian Wetland 2 1 Restoration
(Re-establishment) 1:1 1
Option C Summary
Total Stream Mitigation Units: 8094
Total Riparian Wetland Mitigation Units: 5
Extra SMU - Contingency 300
Extra WMU - Contingency 4

Table 4.11. Summary of Mitigation Credits by Option
Total Stream
Mitigation Units
Total Riparian Wetland
Mitigation Units
Option A 11,230 5
Option B 12,855 5
Option C 8,094 5

Current Ownership and Long-Term Protection

The Middendorf Springs Mitigation Project is located on two parcels totaling approximately 344 acres
(parcel numbers 646000745113 and 647000042754) which are owned by RTB Associates, LLC & DEB, LLC.
Long-term protection of the mitigation site will be provided via conveyance of a conservation easement
to the State that encompasses the reaches and wetlands of this project. FNI has executed an option
contract with the landowners for the purchase of this conservation easement. The option contract was
recorded at the Anson County Register of Deeds, and a copy of the option is included in Appendix B.

Project Phasing

The project will be initiated upon notice to proceed from NCDMS. The overall project is expected to
require nine years to complete within the ten-year contract length. The project start date will be one week
following the final execution of the contract and all milestone deliverables will be determined from that
date. The schedule does not account for potential delays, which may include agency review and approvals,
seasonal constraints, and inclement weather. Key project milestones are summarized in Table 4.12.

Table 4.12. Summary of Proposed Project Tasks and Deadlines
Task Task Description Completion Date
1 Conduct on-site meeting with agencies and submit Categorical
Exclusion Checklist Month 3
2 Submit recorded Conservation Easement and final closing
documentation Month 10
8084
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
45 November 5, 2019

3 Mitigation Plan approved by NCDMS and IRT, Pre-Construction
Notification submitted to NCDMS, and Financial Assurance Issued Month 7-12
4 Obtain Section 404/401 Permit, Land Disturbance Permit,
Complete Site Earthwork Month 16 – Month 22
5 Complete Site Planting and Installation of Monitoring Devices Month 28
6 Submit Baseline Monitoring Document to NCDMS, with Record
Drawings Month 28
7 Monitoring Report #1 (meets success criteria) Month 36 (submitted)
8 Monitoring Report #2 (meets success criteria) Month 48 (submitted)
9 Monitoring Report #3 (meets success criteria) Month 60 (submitted)
10 Monitoring Report #4 (meets success criteria) Month 72 (submitted)
11 Monitoring Report #5 (meets success criteria) Month 84 (submitted)
12 Monitoring Report #6 (meets success criteria) Month 96 (submitted)
13 Monitoring Report #7 and Closeout Report (meets success
criteria) Month 108 (submitted)

The following sections provide a description of project tasks.
Task 1: On Site Meeting with Agencies and Environmental Screening

Task 1 will include:
• An on-site meeting with the IRT and NCDMS to discuss the proposed mitigation plan and identify
concerns or issues related to that plan. Any concerns will be addressed prior to conveyance of the
Conservation Easement or development of the formal Mitigation Plan
• An environmental screening of the Project Name using the most current Categorical Exclusion
Form for Ecosystem Enhancement Projects (CE Form)

The CE Form requires compliance with several acts and regulations. The following list documents
compliance of the proposed project with each regulation:
• American Indian Religious Freedom Act – The proposed project is located within Anson County,
which is not claimed as an American Indian territory.
• Antiquities Act – The proposed project is not located on Federal or American Indian Lands.
• Archaeological Resources Protection Act – The proposed project is not located on Federal or
American Indian Lands.
• Executive Order 13007 (Indian Sacred Sites) – The proposed project is not located on Federal or
American Indian Lands.
• National Historic Preservation Act – The FNI Team will consult with the SHPO.
• Department of Transportation Act – If significant historic sites are located within the project limits,
the FNI Team will also consult with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA).
• Land and Water Conservation Fund Act – The proposed project does not include public parklands.
• Farmland Protection Policy Act – The proposed project requires the acquisition of real estate;
however, the project does not involve the conversion of a prime farmland soil or a soil of
statewide importance to non-farm use. The Anson County NRCS will be contacted to verify this
upon execution of a contract with NCDMS.
• Uniform Relocations Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act – The proposed project
requires the acquisition of real estate; however, the project does not involve the conversion of a
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
46 November 5, 2019

prime farmland soil or a soil of statewide importance to non-farm use. The Anson County NRCS
will be contacted to verify this upon execution of a contract with NCDMS.
• Threatened and Endangered Species and/or Critical Habitat – The USFWS will be contacted to
assess whether species or critical habitats are listed for Anson County and if the project is likely
to impact any them.
• Special Use Permits and/or Easements – The proposed project is not located within or adjacent
to a Wilderness Area.
• The FNI Team will screen the proposed project for potential hazardous waste sites or underground
storage tanks, evaluate the potential for protected species and migratory birds, and screen the
proposed project site for invasive species.
• The FNI Team will evaluate the potential for the project to impact a unique or important natural
resource or impact the quality of adjacent water resources.
Task 2: Property Acquisition – Conservation Easement

Task 2 will include:
• Protection of the proposed project in perpetuity provided by the FNI Team through a
Conservation Easement, which will ensure that future activities (including mining, hydraulic
fracturing, dredging, timbering, and building) do not alter the restored site. The Conservation
Easement will include conditions that allow the NCDMS and/or its authorized representatives to
enter the property for the purpose of inspecting, monitoring, repairing, and/or any other activities
necessary to maintain the proposed project.
• Conveyance from the FNI Team to the State of North Carolina of the rights to all mitigation derived
from the site within the area of the Conservation Easement(s) as part of their obligations.

Prior to recordation of the Conservation Easement, the FNI Team will submit electronic copies of
the following to the NCDMS Project Manager and the North Carolina Department of
Administration – State Property Office (SPO) Real Property Agent for review:
o Draft Conservation Easement in Microsoft word document form
o Preliminary survey plat in Adobe PDF form
o Digital easement file in AutoCAD (.dwg) and ArcMap (.shp) format
o Copy of the attorney’s report on title based on a 30-year search including all supporting
deeds and documentation
o Title attorney’s “Schedule A” complete with any documents describing possible
exceptions to title and exhibits

Upon execution of a contract with NCDMS, the FNI Team will prepare and submit to NCDMS a recorded
Conservation Easement, held by the State of North Carolina. The Conservation Easement will have a good,
marketable title free of liens and encumbrances. The FNI Team will retain the services of a North Carolina
licensed surveyor to conduct a boundary survey for use in preparing the Conservation Easemen t. It
anticipated that FNI will use Mr. Todd Everhart, PLS of Lexington, NC to complete the boundary survey.

Surveys will be geo-referenced and provided in Adobe Acrobat and ArcGIS formats. The submitted
preliminary plat will closely match the project area(s) shown in the project technical proposal location
map. NCDMS and the SPO will review and notify the FNI Team of the approval of these documents prior
to recordation. A title insurance policy to the State of North Carolina in the amount of the purchase price
will be provided for each property by Task 5.
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
47 November 5, 2019

The FNI Team will submit a paper copy of the recorded easement with the invoice for Task 2 deliverables
to the NCDMS Project Manager. The FNI Team will send the original recorded Conservation Easement and
a copy of final recorded survey plat to the SPO. The FNI Team will send the final easement boundary survey
in AutoCAD (.dwg) format, ArcGIS format, as well as a legible file in Adobe Acrobat format to the NCDMS
Project Manager and to the SPO. Surveys will meet specifications as set forth in the latest Full Delivery
Requirement for Completion of Survey for Conservation Easements, as found on the NCDMS website. The
FNI Team will instruct its attorney to forward the original title policy to the State Propert y Office as soon
as it is available.

A fully executed Conservation Easement will be provided to NCDMS along with a copy of the surveyed
property boundary and deed documents.
Task 3: Site-Specific Mitigation Plan

The FNI Team will develop a site-specific mitigation plan for the proposed project and submit it to NCDMS
for review, comment, and approval. The mitigation plan will follow the latest NCDMS Stream and Wetland
Mitigation Plan Template and Guidance.

The FNI Team will develop a Mitigation Plan that:
Presents the goals and objectives of the mitigation project;
Describes the project watershed and existing conditions of the mitigation project;
Presents the stream reference site evaluation to guide the restoration design and planting;
Details the mitigation plan, which will include riparian wetland restoration, priority 1 stream restoration,
enhancement levels 1 and 2, and vegetation planting; and
Summarizes the stream and wetland restoration monitoring plan and success criteria
The FNI Team will submit copies of the Draft and Final Mitigation Plan per current submittal requirements.

As part of the Mitigation Plan, the Team will evaluate the following:
Technical Studies – Several technical studies will be conducted to support the design of the proposed
project. The studies will include surveying the site topography, sampling and mapping the underlying
soils of the site, characterizing the surface water and groundwater hydrology, identifying and
surveying a reference reach for stream restoration design, and identifying and surveying appropriate
reference vegetation plots for wetland and riparian buffer restoration planting.
Topography – The FNI Team will collect topographic data for the entirety of the easement acreage. A
boundary survey will be conducted by a PLS along with the topographic survey for use in preparing
the Conservation Easement.
Soils – The FNI Team will characterize the soils within the project areas to inform wetland restoration,
planting methods and species chosen for planting.
Hydrology –The FNI Team will use HECRAS and other appropriate models to assess existing site
hydrology. Monitoring wells will be installed in hydric soil areas to assess groundwater hydrology
prior to wetland restoration.
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
48 November 5, 2019

Reference Surveys – The FNI Team will characterize a reference reach as a basis for stream restoration
design within the Mitigation Plan. The characterization will include surveys of longitudinal profile,
channel form, cross-section, and substrate. The characterization will include soil profiles and
vegetation characterization. The FNI Team will also identify a reference wetland on a similar soil type
and landscape position that will inform wetland restoration design and planting.
The FNI Team will provide financial assurance for the Middendorf Springs Mitigation Project in accordance
with the forms and conditions described in the RFP. The financial assurance will be in effect and submitted
with the Task 3 deliverable and will cover 55% of the total value of the contract through Task 6. After the
successful completion of Task 6, the financial assurance will cover 25% of the total value of the contract
and will be reduced yearly in accordance with the payment schedule after successful completion of yearly
deliverables (as approved by NCDMS) and subsequent release of credits by the IRT. The financial
assurance will remain in effect until the FNI Team has received written notification that the requirements
of Task 13 (Project Closeout) have been met.
Task 4: Permits and/or Certifications and Site Earthwork

The FNI Team will develop application packages for and secure the following: 1) a Nationwide Permit No.
27 from the US Army Corps of Engineers; 2) a NCDENR DWR Section 401 Water Quality Certification; 3),
and an Erosion & Sediment Control Permit from the NCDENR Land Quality Section. The site is not located
within a FEMA-regulated floodplain.

The FNI Team will meet with the regulatory agencies and develop permit applications that address project
purpose and need, alternatives, limits of disturbance, and project benefits and demonstration of
compliance. The applications will include the supporting information required to obtain the required
permits before initiating construction activities. Following permit approval, the FNI Team will submit one
copy of applicable permits and certifications to NCDMS prior to implementation of the earthwork portion
of the mitigation project.

The FNI Team will initiate earthwork following submittal of approved permits and certifications to NCDMS.
Site earthwork will include the following activities:
• Stream channel construction and stabilization
• Grading to restore wetland hydrology in hydric soil areas
• Grading for restoration of the West and Middle Tributaries
The FNI Team staff are experienced in mitigation construction oversight and will oversee all construction
efforts to ensure proper methods are followed, permit conditions are met, and the project is built as
designed. Upon completion of earthwork, the FNI Team will notify NCDMS in writing of the completion
date and will submit payment request.
Task 5: Planting and Installation of Monitoring Devices and Plots

Following construction, the wetland restoration areas and riparian buffer will be seeded with a ground
cover of native herbaceous species and seedlings of woody species will be planted, maintained, and
monitored. In general, the goal of the planting scheme will be to establish headwater wetland and riparian
forest communities consistent with a Headwater Wetland (NC WAM v4.1) and a Piedmont Headwater
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
49 November 5, 2019

Stream Forest (Hardpan Subtype) (Schafale, 2012). The FNI Team’s planting plan will incorporate the use
of native trees and shrubs.

Tree species will be established through the planting of bareroot seedlings of hardwood species native to
the area, at a density of 436 trees per acre. The overall goal of the planting density is to attain a minimum
density of 210 trees per acre at the end of the monitoring period (seven years). The previous 2009
restoration on this tract exceeded this density. If available, planting stock will be obtained from sources
within 200 miles of the site.

Seedling Planting will be established in a naturalized pattern to avoid creating rows and monotypic
stands. Tree species will be established within zones that reflect the preferable hydrologic regimes of
each species; areas with the longer periods of inundation or soil saturation will be planted with wetland
species. To encourage a higher diversity of woody plant species on the site, planting patterns will include
leaving small gaps to provide open areas for recruitment.
A diversity of herbaceous species will be established in unvegetated areas to stabilize soil through a
seeding program. The FNI Team staff experienced in tree planting will oversee all planting efforts to ensure
proper plant handling, storage, and installation methods are followed in order to achieve the highest
planting success.

Installation of Monitoring Devices and Plots – The FNI Team will install monitoring devices and plots in
the stream and wetland restoration areas in accordance with the Final Mitigation Plan, which will be
developed using the following protocols:
• Stream and Wetland Mitigation Monitoring Guidelines (NCDMS, 2014)
• Information and materials related to the protocol published at the following website:
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/eep/process-and-protocol.
Monitoring Devices and Plots will be stipulated in the Final Mitigation Plan, and will include:
Riparian buffer and wetland vegetation monitoring plots
• Wetland hydrology gauges (monitoring wells)
• Benchmarked stream cross-sections
• Stream crest gauges, including one continuous stage recorder, if feasible
• Permanent photo points
• Rain gauge
• Stream survey station reference stakes.
Upon completion of planting and installation of monitoring devices/plots, the FNI Team will notify NCDMS
in writing of the completion date.
Task 6: Baseline Monitoring Report and As-Built / As-Planted Plans

Following construction, the FNI Team will develop a Draft Baseline Monitoring Report in accordance with
the most recent NCDMS As-Built Baseline Monitoring Report Template. The Draft Baseline Monitoring
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
50 November 5, 2019

Report will include a summary of the project, a detailed description of the success criteria, the monitoring
schedule and methodology, a description of the mitigation proposal, and maintenance and contingency
plans.

A set of as-built Draft Record Drawings, developed in accordance with NCDMS guidelines, will also be
included in the Baseline Monitoring Report. The Draft Record Drawings will be submitted with the most
current NCDMS criteria.

The vegetation monitoring plan will be submitted as a component of the baseline monitoring report will
use the protocol stipulated in the Final Mitigation Plan.

The FNI Team will submit three hard copies of the Draft Baseline Monitoring Report and the Draft Record
Drawings to NCDMS for review and approval. After revising the Draft Baseline Monitoring Report and
Draft Record Drawings to comply with comments received from NCDMS, the FNI Team will submit Final
Baseline Monitoring Report and Final Record Drawing in accordance with the most recent submittal
requirements.
Tasks 7-13: Monitoring and Maintenance

The FNI Team will be responsible for the success of the mitigation project. Annual monitoring of the site
will be carried out for a period of seven years following completion of restoration and enhancement
activities, or until the restoration site is deemed successful. At least 180 days will separate the completion
of initial vegetation planting and the initiation of the first-year monitoring event. Monitoring will be
conducted according to the most recent NCDMS Stream and Wetland Mitigation Monitoring Guidelines
and the Final Mitigation Plan. Monitoring will be conducted each year and the subsequent report will be
submitted to NCDMS before December 1st of that year. Direct sampling and measurement techniques
will be employed as well as photo-documentation. Based on field observations and annual monitoring
results, The FNI Team will determine if actions are required to reach or exceed the success criteria outlined
in the Mitigation Plan. Monitoring Reports will follow the format established in the NCDMS Annual
Monitoring Template. The 7th Year monitoring report will include a closeout report that provides an
assessment of the monitoring data collected from the entire monitoring period. The closeout report will
follow the format established in the most recent Closeout Report

Vegetation Monitoring Requirements
Successful restoration of the vegetation on a mitigation site is dependent upon hydrologic restoration,
active planting of preferred canopy species, and volunteer regeneration of the native plant community.
Permanent plots of sample vegetation will be installed in each of the target communities, as directed by
NCDMS monitoring guidance and the Final Mitigation Plan. At a minimum, vegetation data collected
within the plots will include height and survival by species, with volunteers counted separately from
planted stems. Vegetation plots will be monitored for 7 years, with monitoring events occurring in years
1, 3, 5, and 7. If supplemental monitoring occurs, results may be considered towards meeting performance
standards. At least 180 days between March 1 and November 30 will separate the completion of initial
vegetation planting and the initiation of the first year of monitoring. At the end of the first growing season,
species composition, density, and survival will be evaluated. Photographs of each vegetation plot will be
taken from the southwest corner looking northeast. For each subsequent year, until the final success
criteria are achieved, the restored site will be evaluated between July and September.
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
51 November 5, 2019

Wetland Hydrology Monitoring Requirements
Automated wetland hydrology gauges will be installed in the wetland restoration areas to characterize
hydrology in variable conditions such as soil type, topography, and off-site influences. Groundwater
elevation data will be downloaded at least quarterly throughout the monitoring period and will be
presented in reports as summary tables and graphs. An on-site rain gauge will also be installed and
monitored during the monitoring period.

Stream Channel Monitoring Requirements
As-built surveys will be conducted upon completion of channel construction to document baseline
conditions. As-built surveys will include measurements typically documented during subsequent channel
geomorphological surveys. A longitudinal profile of the thalweg, water surface, bankfull, and top of bank
will also be collected during the as-built survey of the constructed channel to compare with future
geomorphological data, if necessary.
Reference stakes, indicating the surveyed station and corresponding to the as-built survey, will be
installed in the riparian buffer near the stream bank every 100 feet along the length of the stream.
Permanent, monumented cross-sections will be installed such that at least 2 riffles and 2 pools will be
monitored over the length of representative meander wavelengths for each distinct stream reach. Should
design features merit additional cross sections, these will be installed as needed, generally at a rate of 1
cross-section per 20 bankfull channel widths. Approximately 50% of cross-sections will occur at pools and
50% at riffles. All channel cross-sections will include measurements of Bank Height Ratio and
Entrenchment Ratio, which will be documented in monitoring reports. Channel cross-sections will be
monitored for 7 years, with monitoring events occurring in years 1, 3, 5, and 7.

The occurrence of bankfull events within the monitoring period will be documented by the use of crest
gages and photographs. The crest gage will be installed on the floodplain within 10 feet of the restored
channel. The crest gage will record the highest watermark between site visits, and the gage will be checked
each time there is a site visit to determine if a bankfull event has occurred. If feasible, one continuously
recording crest gauge will be installed. Photographs will be used to document the occurrence of debris
lines and sediment deposition on the floodplain during monitoring site visits.

Pebble counts will be performed along transects at riffles and pools, with the distribution of riffle and pool
samples based on the percent of pools and riffles present within the reach. The pebble counts will be
taken at features with established cross-sections.

Photographs will be used to visually document restoration success. Reference photos will be taken once
a year. Permanent markers will be established to ensure that the same locations and view directions on
the site are monitored in each monitoring period. Reference photos will also be taken at each permanent
cross-section. Photographs will be taken of both banks at each cross-section. The survey tape will be
centered in the photographs of the bank. The water line will be located in the lower edge of the frame
and as much of the bank as possible will be included in each photo. Photographers will make an effort to
consistently maintain the same area in each photo over time.

In the event that the site or a specific component of the site fails to achieve the defined success criteria,
the FNI Team will develop necessary adaptive management plans and/or implement appropriate remedial
actions for the site in coordination with NCDMS and the review agencies. Remedial action required will
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
52 November 5, 2019

be designed to achieve the success criteria specified previously and will include a work schedule and
monitoring criteria that will take into account physical and climatic conditions.

Noxious Species Control Plan
Invasive and noxious species establishment within the mitigation site will be minimized through the
establishment of native plant species as part of the planting and seeding program. The FNI Team will
prepare an invasive and noxious species Control Plan specifically for this site. Routine monitoring will be
conducted during site monitoring activities to detect establishment of invasive and noxious species.
Depending upon the species and the extent of the population, the FNI Team will employ an appropriate
control method in accordance with the Control Plan. Control methods could include hand-pulling, use of
a glyphosate herbicide, or mechanical mowing. The method used to control and eliminate invasive and
noxious plant species will be carefully chosen so as to not adversely impact water quality or desirable
native plant species. FNI staff experienced in invasive species control will oversee all efforts to eradicate
target species while minimizing non-target impacts. Also, only properly licensed pesticide applicators will
be employed to ensure proper handling, storage, and application methods are followed for all herbicides.

Success Criteria

The following success criteria are anticipated for the Middendorf Springs Project, in accordance with the
most recent NCDMS Stream and Wetland Mitigation Monitoring as well as the 2003 Stream Mitigation
Guidelines issued by the USACE and DWR. These success criteria will ensure the goals of the ecological
uplift per reach as described in Section 5.3.4.

Streams

Monitoring of the stability of the channel will occur after the first growing season and will continue
annually for a period of 7 years or until two bankfull events have been documented. Bankfull events must
be documented during separate monitoring years.

The dimension, pattern, and profile of the stream should show no radical change during the 7 -year
monitoring period. To determine the presence, magnitude and extent of any changes, the longitudinal
profile and cross-sections will be re-surveyed annually. Cross-sections of successive monitoring years will
be overlaid to verify no significant change in the dimension from year to year. Similarly, the longitudinal
profiles will be overlaid to confirm a stable bed profile, i.e. riffle-pool spacing should remain fairly constant
and there should be a general lack of aggradation and degradation.

The criteria for hydrological success will be as follows:

1. All stream channels must receive sufficient flow throughout the monitoring period to maintain an
Ordinary High-Water Mark (OHWM) in accordance with the requirements of RGL 05-05, dated
December 7, 2005, which establishes the extent of USACE jurisdiction for non-tidal waters for
CWA Section 404. Channels that are determined to be non-jurisdictional will not be eligible to
receive credit.
2. Continuous surface water flow within the tributaries must be documented to occur every year for
at least 30 consecutive days during the prescribed monitoring period. This 30-day period can occur
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
53 November 5, 2019

at any point during the year. Additional monitoring may be required if surface water flow cannot
be documented due to abnormally dry conditions.
3. BHR must not exceed 1.2 at any measured riffle cross-section. This standard only applies to
reaches of the channel where BHR is adjusted to reference condition through design and
construction. Exceptions to this requirement may be approved on a case-by-case basis, but all
exceptions must be included in the final approved Mitigation Plan.
4. ER must be no less than 1.4 at any measured riffle cross-section. This standard only applies to
reaches of the channel where ER is altered to reference condition through design and
construction. Exceptions to this requirement may be approved on a case-by-case basis, but all
exceptions must be included in the final approved Mitigation Plan.
5. BHR and ER at any measured riffle cross-section should not change by more than 10% from the
baseline condition during any given monitoring interval (e.g., no more than 10% between years 1
and 2, 2 and 3, 3 and 5, or 5 and 7).
6. When bank pin arrays are required, average bank pin measurements at each cross section (i.e.,
length of pin exposed due to lateral movement of the bank) cannot exceed 10% of as-built bankfull
width during any given monitoring interval (e.g., no more than 10% between years 1 and 2, 2 and
3, 3 and 5, or 5 and 7), and individual bank pin measurements must not exceed 20% of as-built
bankfull width over the duration of monitoring. When cross sections are added to document bank
movement in certain areas, bankfull cross sectional area must not increase by more than 15%
over the duration of monitoring.
7. The stream project shall remain stable and all other performance standards shall be met through
four (4) separate bankfull events, occurring in separate years, during the monitoring years 1
through 7.

Vegetation

Monitoring of vegetation will follow protocols established in the most recent version of the Carolina
Vegetative Survey-DMS Protocol – Level 1. Sample plot distribution will be correlated with the
hydrological monitoring locations to help correlate data between vegetation and hydrology parameters.
Success will be determined by survival of target species within the sample plots. A minimum of 260
stems/acre must survive for at least seven years after initial planting. At least six different representative
tree and shrub species should be present on the entire site. If the vegetative success criteria are not met,
the cause of failure will be determined, and an appropriate corrective action will be taken.

The criteria for vegetative success will be as follows:

• A minimum survival rate of 320 trees per acre in the riparian buffer at the end of 3 years.
• A minimum survival rate of 260 trees per acre in the conservation easement at the end of 5 years.
• A minimum of 210 Stems per acre must be present in the conservation easement at the end of
year 7.
• The species composition in the riparian buffer meets the diversity criteria established at the
beginning of the project.
• In addition, trees in each plot must average 7 feet in height by year 5 and 10 feet in height by year
7.

STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
54 November 5, 2019

Wetlands

Wetland hydrology will be considered successful by two possible metrics, per the 1987 USACE Wetland
Delineation Manual. One criterion provides for hydrologic success if the soil is ponded, flooded, or
saturated within 12 inches of the soil surface continuously for at least 12.5 percent of the growing season,
assuming normal precipitation. The second alternative measurement of success would be to attain
ponded, flooded, or saturated conditions within 12 inches of the soil surface continuously between 5 and
12.5 percent of the growing season, provided the hydric soil and hydrophytic vegetation wetland criteria
are also met.

In Anson County, the growing season is typically 227 days, assuming a temperature of above 28 degrees
F and a frequency of 5 of 10 years (NRCS, 1992). The growing season in Anson County typically occurs
between approximately March 24 to November 6 in a given calendar year. To meet the hydrology
requirement, the FNI Team will collect data to document that the restored wetlands are saturated for
between 11 to 28 consecutive days annually during the growing season. If there are no normal
precipitation years during the first seven years of monitoring, to meet success criteria, the FNI Team will
continue to monitor hydrology at the site until the site shows that it has been inundated or saturated as
described above during a normal precipitation year. Additionally, we will ensure the Percent
Saturation/Hydroperiod Thresholds are met for Chewacla Soils as shown in Latest Wilmington District
Compensatory mitigation guidelines. Based on the most recent guidelines, Chewacla soils must maintain
wetland saturation of 10%-12% during the growing season.

Quality Control

FNI is committed to providing NCDMS with the highest quality of engineering, construction management,
environmental, and project management services. This quality pursuit takes into account NCDMS
expectations and objectives, as well as applicable laws, regulations, codes and standards. FNI policies and
procedures that govern quality-affecting activities will be used to accomplish project goals and objectives
in a cost-effective and efficient manner. FNI’s commitment to quality is made with full awareness that
project assignments are becoming increasingly complex, and often demand exact conformance to unique
contractual, technical and regulatory requirements. These important aspects of project scope mandate
that our approach to quality is organized and directed using consistent and accessible management
methods and processes, as well as in accordance with schedule.

Accordingly, our Quality Management Plan is designed to assist the project manager to successfully meet
the requirements of project scope execution, while keeping our commitment to quality commensurate
with the specific needs of your project. Specifically, for stream restoration, the quality control process is
two-phased. The first phase is quality control during the design process and the second phase is QA/QC
during the construction process.

For the design phase, every deliverable is accompanied by a quality control review from an independent
engineer or designer not involved in the day-to-day production. During the planning or concept phase of
design, the quality control review is aimed primarily at the fundamental processes of the design. Specific
items that are reviewed include ensuring that the concept design meets the programmed scope; the type
of channel is appropriate for the watershed; cross-sectional area, bankfull and sinuosity are calculated
correctly; slope, sediment transport and flooding analysis calculations are complete and appropriate for
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
PROPOSAL #16-008012 – Middendorf Springs
55 November 5, 2019

the type of stream to be constructed and that all supporting documentation is presented in a clear and
concise manner. As the project progresses from concept to design plans, the quality control review takes
on a more traditional role. For each deliverable, a formal plan review is scheduled which looks at the
design plans to make sure that all references are noted correctly, stream alignments and profiles are
depicted properly, structures and other details are noted and on the correct sheets, all quantities are
accounted for and included in the cost estimate, bid documents, technical specifications and special
provisions agree with the plans and the plans are assembled properly. To accomplish this task, we typically
create a check set of plans where the quality control reviewer notes any comments in red, the project
designer makes any necessary corrections and places a note on the check set. When the corrections are
complete, the QC reviewer verifies that the corrections have been made and the check set is placed in the
project file.

We have found that a detailed review early in the design process often uncovers some area of concern,
that if addressed properly, helps to ensure that the project gets off to a good start and problems are
minimized during the final design process.

FNI has provided construction management for most of our design projects. We have provided full and
part time construction oversight, depending on the project and needs of the client. Oversight will be
performed by an experienced stream Construction Manager who reports to the Project Manager. The
Construction Manager will provide day-to-day oversight, and acts as liaison between the contractor and
the design team. Our proposed construction oversight team has extensive construction experience, and
more importantly, has extensive experience with river and stream stabilization and restoration projects.

During construction, The FNI Team personnel check the contractors’ work to ensure that the project is
constructed according to the plans and specifications, as well as completed on schedule and in compliance
with federal, state or local permits. Structural elevation, alignment, and channel profile is checked using
state of the art RTK -GPS survey equipment to verify channel location, pattern, cross-sectional area,
bankfull, structure and floodplain elevations. Erosion control measures are inspected on an ongoing basis
to ensure they are in place and functioning. Typically, an on-site weekly meeting is often held with the
contractor to review progress and respond to any questions. Project records are kept, including daily logs,
weather logs and minutes of all meetings. Upon completion of construction, FNI will walk the site with
the Ecosystem Enhancement Program final inspection.

Proposal Number: 16-008012 Vendor: __________________________________________
Ver: 4/22/19 Page 29 of 41
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.
5. 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.
6. 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.
8. 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.
9. 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
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Proposal Number: 16-008012 Vendor: __________________________________________
Ver: 4/22/19 Page 30 of 41
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.
16. MISCELLANEOUS: Any gender-specific pronouns used herein, whether masculine or feminine, shall be read and
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Proposal Number: 16-008012 Vendor: __________________________________________
Ver: 4/22/19 Page 31 of 41
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 submitted electronically may be withdrawn at any time prior to the
date for opening proposals identified on the cover page of this RFP (or such later date included in an Addendum to
the RFP). 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.
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Proposal Number: 16-008012 Vendor: __________________________________________
Ver: 4/22/19 Page 32 of 41
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 functionalities, 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.

2. 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.
3. 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)
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Proposal Number: 16-008012 Vendor: __________________________________________
Ver: 4/22/19 Page 33 of 41
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.
5. 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.
6. 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. NON-DISCRIMINATION:
a. The Vendor will take necessary action to comply 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.
b. The vendor will take necessary action to ensure its internal employee policies and procedures are consistent
with Executive Order #82 (Roy Cooper, December 6, 2018), which extends workplace protections and
accommodations to pregnant employees.
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
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Proposal Number: 16-008012 Vendor: __________________________________________
Ver: 4/22/19 Page 34 of 41
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
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
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Proposal Number: 16-008012 Vendor: __________________________________________
Ver: 4/22/19 Page 35 of 41
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
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
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Proposal Number: 16-008012 Vendor: __________________________________________
Ver: 4/22/19 Page 36 of 41
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
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. 143B-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
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Proposal Number: 16-008012 Vendor: __________________________________________
Ver: 4/22/19 Page 37 of 41
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.
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.

Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Proposal Number: 16-008012 Vendor: __________________________________________
Ver: 4/22/19 Page 38 of 41
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.
If the Vendor answered “YES” above, Vendor must complete items 1 and 2 below:
1.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:
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.:
c)Identify all U.S. locations at which performance will occur:
a)Will any work under this Contract be performed outside the United States? YES NO
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
performing services under the Contract outside of the United States
YES NO
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.
3
3
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
N/A
N/A
Raleigh and Winston-Salem, North Carolina; Austin and Fort Worth, Texas
Proposal Number: 16-008012
Vendor: Freese and Nichols, Inc.
ATTACHMENT E: CERTIFICATION OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
Name of Vendor: Freese and Nichols, 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: December 31, 2018
21 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.
0 The Vendor is not the subject of any current litigation or findings of noncompliance under federal or state law.
91 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:
Cynthia P. Milrany, CPA
Printed Name
November 5, 2019
Date
Chief Financial Officer I Vice President/Principal
Title
[This Certification must be signed by an individual authorized to speak for the Vendor]
Ver 4/22/19 Page 39 of 41

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Proposal Number: 16-008012 Vendor: __________________________________________
Ver: 4/22/19 Page 40 of 41
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: ________________________________________________________________
X
X
N/A
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Proposal Number: 16-008012 Vendor: __________________________________________
Ver: 4/22/19 Page 41 of 41
ATTACHMENT G: VENDOR’S INFORMATION
Vendors Primary Contact (or Project Manager)
Name:
Agency:
Title:
Address:
City: State/ Zip:
Telephone: Fax:
Email:
Vendors Execution Address (Where the contract should be mailed for signature)
Name:
Agency:
Title:
Address:
City: State/ Zip:
Telephone: Fax:
Email:
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:
Agency:
Title:
Address:
City: State/ Zip:
Telephone: Fax:
Email:
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
P.O. Box 980004
Fort Worth Texas 76198-0004
817-735-7300 817-735-7491
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Mike Wayts, PE, CFM
Freese and Nichols, Inc.
Vice President/Principal | North Carolina Division Manager
1017 Main Campus Drive, Suite 1200
Raleigh North Carolina 27606
919-582-5850 N/A
[e-mail]
Same as above
[e-mail]
Anson
Chesterfield
Marlboro
Richmond
Stanly
Union
Darlington
Montgomery Moore
Kershaw
Scotland
Dillon
Lee
Cabarrus
Lee
Lancaster
030402010202
Exhibit 1Middendorf SpringsWetland & Stream Restoration Hydrologic Location
Legend
Project Site
Project Local Watershed
Non-Targeted Local Watershed
Targeted Local Watershed
Lakes
County Boundaries
Middendorf Springs
Wetland & Stream Restoration
Site Location
¯0 7 143.5 Miles
1 in = 7 miles 531 N Liberty St
Winston-Salem, NC 27101
¯Exhibit 2Middendorf SpringsWetland & Stream Restoration Project Location and Air Transport Facility Map531 N Liberty St
Winston-Salem, NC 27101oo ooooooooooooooooooooooooo§¨¦77
§¨¦95
§¨¦485
§¨¦85 §¨¦73
§¨¦95
Morven, NC
McFarlan, NC
Mount Croghan, SC
Wadesboro, NC
Stat
e

R
d

1
0
0
3
State Hwy 742State Hwy 742 SSta
te
Rd
1114
State Rd 1120
State
Rd 1
1
10
Cason Oldfield Rd
Bethel
R
dState Rd 1122Dickie Little Rd1123Tanner Hill
R
dGulledge R
d
Pvt DrPvt DrState
Hwy
742
5 Miles
0 2.5 51.25 Miles
oAirports
Project Site Tracts
Project Area 5-mi
Buffer
NHD Waterbodies
Populated Places
¯Exhibit 3Middendorf SpringsWetland & Stream Restoration Drainage Area
NCDOT GIS Unit, Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar
Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the
GIS User Community
531 N Liberty St
Winston-Salem, NC 27101
0 1,000 2,000500 Feet
Legend
Drainage Area
Project Site Tracts
Existing Channel
Proposed Channel
1 inch = 1,000 feet
Tributary 1A
Drainage Area = 92.7 Acres
Tributary 2
Drainage Area = 25.1 Acres
Tributary 3
Drainage Area = 28.5 Acres
Tributary 5
Drainage Area = 16.2 Acres
Tributary 6
Drainage Area = 44.2 Acres
Tributary 1B
Drainage Area = 19.7 Acres
Tributary 1C
Drainage Area = 11.8 Acres
Tributary 4
Drainage Area = 32.9 Acres
ChA
NsB
EmB
NgC
BaB
AeB
NgC
AeB
EmB
BgD
EmB
NsB
MrB
EmB
GoE
MrB
BaC
ChA
PnBEmBAeC
BaC
EmB
EmB
NgC
NsB
NgC
AeB
BgD
EmB
BaC
AeB
AeB
EmC
NsB
AeB
NgC
AeB
LgC PnB
AeB
GoE
W
W
W
W
BaC
BaC
PnB
BaC
W
BaC
CmA
AeB
CmA
EmB
BaC
CmA
AeB
EmBAeB¯0 800 1,600400 Feet
Legend
Existing Channel
Project Site Tracts
Proposed Easement
Hydric Soils
Exhibit 4Middendorf SpringsWetland & Stream RestorationNRCS Soil Survey Map
3
5
8 3603
6
2
3
4
4 3463
5
6
36
4
354
3523483
5
0366 368370372374376378 380382
3
8
4
386388390
392394396342398400
338
402
40440640
8
410340412414
416
418420
336422
424426
334
332
330
328
430
428
3263243224323203184344
3
6
4
3
8
316440
442444
314318328
352
43
0
3
6
0
3
7
6
32
0
43
2
3
3
4
43
0 434408350336424432406
390344370
404368400418
32
8
4
4
0
3
8
0354402434438436316364434
3
8
4
4
1
8
41637432
0
342
3864
3
0
4
3
4
4344
1
6
4
1
4
34
2
420382
416
4
3
2
41
04223364
3
0
3
8
4342362
428
314428
330400 412414422
4264204
3
6
426430
416
434
37
4
440
438
37
0
4
2
6
3
3
4
324 3524
2
8428 366402436398
434
4364
1
6
42
8 384420432
414
418434
3663
6
0
39841242
6 422432
39
6332 408372432436
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus
DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
¯0 710 1,420355 Feet
Legend
Drainage Tile
Headcut
Groundwater Seep
2' Contour
Hydric Soils
Perennial Stream
Intermittent Stream
Existing Ditch
Existing Wetlands
Project Site Parcels
Exhibit 5Middendorf SpringsWetland & Stream RestorationExisting Conditions
Existing
Tributary 1A
Existing
Tributary 2
Existing
Tributary 4
Existing
Tributary 5
Existing
Tributary 6
Existing South Fork Jones Creek
Existing
Tributary 1B
Existing
Tributary 1C
Existing
Tributary 3
Existing
Headcut
Existing
Groundwater Seep
Existing Headcut
Existing Headcut
Existing Drainage
Tiles and Ditch
Series of
Existing
Headcuts
Existing Drainage
Tiles and Ditches
Existing Ditch
3583603623
4
4 34635
6
364354
352348350366368
3
7
0
372374376378380382
384
3
8
6 388390
392394396342
398
400338402 40440640
8
410
340 412414416
418420
336 422424426
334
332
330328430
428
326 324322432
3203184
3
4
4364
3
8
31644044244
4
434
432
4163163
2
0
3
3
6436
390438414
434
328
3
8
4
376364
352404352360356412334350
43
0 418400418 370440
4
3
0
4023184
3
8
368328434
342
4
1
8 432410
37432
0
3324
0
6430330
4
2
6
432
342
42
8
3
8
2
416
386422336324
43
6
430
342362
438
428442
428
408414422
43
2 426420436
424430
41637
4
37
0
4
2
6
3
3
4
412
380
42
8
40
2
436434398434
434
4
1
6 42838442
0 4144
1
6434
3663
6
0
39842
6 422396408372432436
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus
DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community ¯0 720 1,440360 Feet
Legend
Existing Channel
Proposed Easement
Project Site Tracts
2' Contour
Proposed Riparian
Wetland
Existing Wetland
Proposed Restoration
Channel
Proposed Restoration
Centerline
Proposed
Enhancement 1
Proposed
Enhancement 2
Proposed Wetland 1 Restoration
Exhibit 6Middendorf SpringsWetland & Stream RestorationConceptual Plan
Existing South Fork Jones Creek
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe,
GeoEye, Earthstar
Geographics, CNES/Airbus
DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID,
50'
See
Inset Map
Start of
Tributary 1A - Lower
Restoration Reach
Below Road Crossing
Note:
End all Proposed Tributaries
at Confluences with
South Fork Jones Creek
Start of
Proposed
Tributary 2
Start of Proposed Tributary 4
Below Road Crossing
Start of Proposed Tributary 6
Below Existing Wetland
Start of Proposed
Tributary 5 at Headcut
Start of Proposed
Tributary 1C at Headcut
Start of Proposed
Tributary 1B at Headcut
Proposed Wetland 2
Restoration
Start of Proposed Tributary 3
Below Existing Wetland
Proposed
Tributary 3
Start of
Proposed
Tributary 1A
at Confluence
with
Tributary 1C
80' Crossing
Location
80' Crossing
Location
Tributary 1A - Upper
Option A Option B Option CTributary 1A - Upper -Enhancement Level 2 -Tributary 1A - Lower Restoration Restoration Enhancement Level 1Tributary 1B -Enhancement Level 1 -Tributary 1C -Enhancement Level 1 -Tributary 2 Restoration Restoration Enhancement Level 1Tributary 3 Restoration Restoration Enhancement Level 1Tributary 4 Restoration Restoration Enhancement Level 1Tributary 5 Restoration Restoration Enhancement Level 1Tributary 6 Restoration Restoration Enhancement Level 1Wetland 1 Restoration Restoration RestorationWetland 2 Restoration Restoration Restoration
Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed¯0 720 1,440360 Feet
Legend
Proposed Easement
Project Site Tracts
Proposed Restoration
Channel
Exhibit 7Middendorf SpringsWetland & Stream RestorationUSGS Topographic Map
Existing Middle Jones Creek
Proposed
Tributary 1A
Proposed
Tributary 2
Proposed Tributary 4
Proposed Tributary 6
Proposed
Tributary 5
Proposed Tributary 1C
Enhancement Reach
Proposed Tributary 1B
Enhancement Reach
Proposed
Tributary 3
Start of
Proposed
Tributary 1A
Enhancement
Reach
TR►04-Aell J -
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: `Q �, $/ 15
Project/Site: Mf' a^jyf
County:At&af %.-
Latitude:
Longitude:
Evaluator: !G7¢ R M>
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other
if a 19 or erennial if Z 30'
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 1L1.
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
18. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1.,2
2
3
9. Grade control
0
CL.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
e artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual -------`'
B. Hydrology Subtotal = 61
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
C 0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3 _) d
C. Biology (Subtotal =)
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
L 3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
A.1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1.5
24. Amphibians
0.5
1.5
25. Algae
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other =
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

Ti�i r3vr+rp-Y
NC DWD Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 19 `� 8 /
ProjectlSite: McQtdQr�
Latitude:
Evaluator: 1 C
M
County: A
Longitude:
Or,
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
Stream Determ' n (circle one)
Other
if t 19 or perennial if 2 30
Ephemera termitten erennial
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =-iL=i
Absent
Weak
1
Moderate
2
±K�!3
1 "*Continuity of channel bed and bank
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
C-1D
1
-
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
7-27T
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
1
2
2
3
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
8. Headcuts
0
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
C, 1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
C No = 0
Yes = 3
"artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroloov (Subtotal = 14..57-
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
C. Bioloav [Subtotal = t_ ]
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22. Fish
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1
1 1.5
25. Algae
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5
Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
ffEq ACU-r
Date: 1 l
Project/Site: I'dc(e4 aj,,/`IG
Latitude:
Evaluator: C J �r M
County: Q
Longitude:
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
Stream Dete ' circle one)
Other
if t 19 orerennial if 2 30'
ermittent Ephemeral nterennial
e.g. Quad Name:
r-9
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = I -../-
Absent
Weak
Moderate
18, Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
-C
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
1
2
2
3
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
8. Headcuts
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5j
1
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
. artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdrologv (Subtotal = 7 l
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0)7
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = L, ) r1 �J
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0.5
1
1
1.5
25. Algae
0.5
1
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5
ther =
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

_rgIBuT4toy
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
a pS o�
H767�4Durr
Date: , O o� $ -1
Project/Site: Mjkdd�A dr C-
Latitude:
Evaluator: ! GJ `9 ✓�M p
County:An's Q
Longitude:
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other
if 2! 19 orperennial if 2! 30'
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = o•s )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
18' Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
Lcf1)
2
8. Headcuts
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
C. do = 0
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology Subtotal =
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
lec 1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal =}
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5
Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream ldentitication Norm Version 4.11
Date: 0 �1 1 a Project/Site: `
d- f`
Evaluator: C F SM County: AtSon-
Total Points: Stream Determination
Stream is at least intermittent Ephemeral Intermitter
if a 19 or perennial if z 30'
Treevr,,* v .3 testa -%
n Latitude:
Longitude:
sir i Other
erennial e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 1 5 }
1 a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
Absent
Weak
Moderate
imna
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = ]
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5D
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
L
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
C. Bioloav (Subtotal = 7..5 ]
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
03
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
C 0.5D
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
L 0.5)
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5
<55her = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

T9100-491( 1-t 100' Ds VAc
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 ff E..+DG(.--T
Date: to/98/1 ( Project/Site: MWn i Latitude:
Evaluator: >G M
County: Sc
Longitude:
Total Points:
Stream De circle one)
Other
Stream is at least intermittent
if z 19 or perennial if a 30' ��.
Ephemeral ntermittent Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = I
I . S )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1 a Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
3
8. Headcuts
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0.5
1
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 5? )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
C. Biolow (Subtotal =
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
irt 3)
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22. Fish
23. Crayfish _
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
I
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5
Other =
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

TRis 1/5/1 - @ /oo'PS
NC DWQ Stream Identiificatiion Form Version 4.11 QF #,60 CU 7-
Date: 101g811 q
Project/Site: XkW4(f
Latitude:
Evaluator: /C RM>
County:
&S0r-
Longitude:
Total Points: ^�
Stream Determination (circle
Other
Stream is at least intermittent �1
Ephemeral Intermittent erennia
e.g. Quad Name:
if t 19 or perennial if? 30
w
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = I K.5 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
S ng
18 Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
CD
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
C No = 0
Yes = 3
"artificial ditches are not rated; see dis ssions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0_2,5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
C__0_-_y
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes 7-_3
C. Bioloav (Subtotal = _ 7 ]
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1 1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
.perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
B 0-54 P_ � 0
0S E� Ni> OF
pie2ij�_7=
Date: /
Project/Site: MI`dCf-�
Latitude:
Evaluator: ! CT & aM
County: An'w�"
Longitude:
Total Points: I
Stream is at least intermittent
Stream Determination (cir
Ephemeral Intermittent ia erenn
Other
Quad Name:
if t 19 or perennial if z 30'
e.g.
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =At, 5 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1 a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
(�:D
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
9. Grade control
K, 0
0.5
1
1
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
- artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = R y
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5)
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
C 0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = 7( }
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
Cy
1
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

ACE
BURLESON MITIGATION SITE
Hydric Soil Investigation
Envisonmentel, [.EC.
Executive Summary
The Burleson Mitigation Site is located near the Town of Morven, Anson County, North
Carolina. A site investigation was undertaken to determine the presence/absence of
hydric soils within one area of this property, located along Jones Creek. The investigation
was conducted by NC Licensed Soil Scientist, Jan Gay (#1158) on 27 and 30 October 2019.
Thirteen areas of hydric soil were identified, totaling approximately 17 acres. It is highly
likely that additional hydric soil areas are present within this area.
Introduction
The Burleson Mitigation Site is located within a currently fallow agricultural field near the Town of
Morven, Anson County, North Carolina. A portion of this site is being considered as a riparian wetland
mitigation area. One area of this property, totaling approximately 200 acres, was targeted for the hydric
soil investigation. This report outlines key personnel, methodology, and results.
The investigation area is located within a currently fallow agricultural field, with a rolling landscape. The
hydric soil investigation focused on the lower lying areas, either along Jones Creek or the unnamed
tributaries within the site that flow into Jones Creek.
Due to time constraints, the hydric soil investigation effort was not a complete review of the entire area,
but a focused evaluation in areas with a high probability of containing hydric soils. It is very likely that
other areas of hydric soil are present within the review area.
Key Personnel
Mr. Jan Gay, NC Licensed Soil Scientist #1158, conducted the hydric soil delineation. Mr. Gay has been a
Licensed Soil Scientist for more than 22 years, as well as a professional ecologist. Mr. Gay has conducted
jurisdictional wetland delineations for more than 24 years, across 7 states.
Methods
The field investigation centered on identification of soil characteristics following criteria set forth by the
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States Version
8.2 (USDA 2018). Soil characteristics evaluated include horizon depth, soil texture, moist soil color
(determined using a Munsell color chart), and identification of any other soil features (mottles, depletions,
Mn concentrations, etc.).
The field investigation was conducted using a hand auger to evaluate the soil profile across the study area.
The investigation area was subjected to a pedestrian survey, with a hand auger evaluation conducted in
areas deemed likely to contain hydric soils. The hand auger evaluation was conducted to a depth of 3
feet, or until a hydric soil indicator was identified. After a hydric soil had been identified in the field, a

series of soil borings were conducted on a closer spacing, to establish a boundary for a hydric soil unit. A
transect of soil borings was conducted, beginning within the hydric soil unit, and continued until a non-
hydric soil was encountered. Flagging tape was hung at this boundary and location data was collected,
using a hand help Garmin GPSMAP 64st, which is a non -survey grade unit. The gps data was used to
approximate hydric soil unit boundaries.
Prior to initiation of the field effort, available resources were reviewed, including available NRCS online
soil mapping and USGS topographic mapping. Seven soil mapping units are shown as present within the
study areas, Ailey loamy sand, 2-8% slopes; Badin channery silt loam, 2-8% slopes; Chewacla loam, 0-2%
slopes, frequently flooded; Emporia loamy sand, 2-8% slopes; McQueen loam, 1-6% slopes; Nanford-
Emporia complex, 2-8% slopes; and Nanford gravelly fine sandly loam, 8-15% slopes. .
Results
Thirteen areas of hydric soil were delineated. The hydric soil areas were typically linear in shape,
associated with stream channels in the area. The investigation indicated that several of the linear stream
features originating within the property have hydric soil pockets at or near the channel origins.
Hydric Soil Site 1 is approximately 10.5 acres in areal extent. This site is located in the floodplain area of
Jones Creek and appears to have been part of the historical channel.
Hydric Soil Site 2 is approximately 0.4 acre in areal extent. This site is located adjacent to a small unnamed
tributary to Jones Creek and appears to be part of the floodplain.
Hydric Soil Site 3 is approximately 0.2 acre in areal extent. This site is located south of Site 2 and
encompasses both sides of the unnamed tributary.
Hydric Soil Site 4 is approximately 2.8 acres in areal extent. This site near the confluence of a small stream
channel and Jones Creek.
Hydric Soil Site 5 is approximately 1.5 acres in areal extent. This site is located in the floodplain area of
Jones Creek and did not have an apparent connection to any of the stream channels within the property.
Hydric Soil Site 6 is approximately 0.2 acre in areal extent. This site is located near the boundary of the
review area, within the floodplain of Jones Creek.
Hydric Soil Site 7 is >0.1 acre in areal extent. This site is adjacent to a small unnamed tributary to Jones
Creek.
Hydric Soil Site 8 is approximately 0.3 acre in areal extent. This site is adjacent to a small unnamed
tributary to Jones Creek.
Hydric Soil Site 9 is approximately 0.3 acre in areal extent. This site appears to be a wet area associated
with an unnamed tributary to Jones Creek.
Hydric Soil Site 10 is approximately 0.1 acre in areal extent. This site is located at the origin of an unnamed
tributary to Jones Creek and may have been a headwater area.
Hydric Soil Site 11 is approximately 0.1 acre in areal extent. This site is located in the floodplain area of
Jones Creek and appears to have a connection to an unnamed tributary.

Hydric Soil Site 12 is >0.1 acre in areal extent. This site is located near the origin of an unnamed tributary
to Jones Creek and may have been part of a headwater area or wet floodplain.
Hydric Soil Site 13 is approximately 0.5 acre in areal extent. This site is located along an unnamed tributary
to Jones Creek.
As previously noted, it is highly likely that additional areas of hydric soil are present within the
investigation site.
On 27 and 30 October 2019, 1 conducted the soil evaluation
within the Burleson Mitigation Site and delineated the hydric
soil boundaries as shown in this report.
.3t
U�b�c 2u! 1

Figure 2. Young’s Mill Mitigation Site Soil Map.
Figure 1. Young’s Mill Mitigation Site Hydric Soil Areas.
Soil Boring Unit 1 Hydric Soil Indicator:Depleted Matrix
Depth (inches)Color Texture Notes
0-10 2.5Y 5/1 Silty Clay Loam
10-14 2.5Y 5/2 Silty Clay Loam
Soil Boring Unit 2 Hydric Soil Indicator:Depleted Matrix
Depth (inches)Color Texture Notes
0-14 10YR 5/2 Silty Clay Loam
Soil Boring Unit 3 Hydric Soil Indicator:Depleted Matrix
Depth (inches)Color Texture Notes
0-5 2.5Y 5/2 Silty Clay Loam
5-14 10YR 5/1 Silty Clay Loam
Soil Boring Unit 4 Hydric Soil Indicator:Depleted Matrix
Depth (inches)Color Texture Notes
0-14
Soil Boring Unit 5 Hydric Soil Indicator:Depleted Matrix
Depth (inches)Color Texture Notes
0-16 2.5Y 5/1 Silty Clay Loam
Soil Boring Unit 6 Hydric Soil Indicator:Depleted Matrix
Depth (inches)Color Texture Notes
0-14 10YR 5/2 Silty Clay Loam
Soil Boring Unit 7 Hydric Soil Indicator:Depleted Matrix
Depth (inches)Color Texture Notes
0-3 10YR 5/2 Silty Clay Loam
3-14 10YR 5/1 Silty Clay Loam
Soil Boring Unit 8 Hydric Soil Indicator:None met
Depth (inches)Color Texture Notes
0-3 10YR 5/2 Silty Clay Loam
3-14 10YR 5/1 Silty Clay Loam
Soil Boring Unit 9 Hydric Soil Indicator:Depleted Matrix
Depth (inches)Color Texture Notes
0-12 2.5Y 5/2 Silty Clay Loam
Soil Boring Unit 10 Hydric Soil Indicator:Depleted Matrix
Depth (inches)Color Texture Notes
0-14 2.5Y 5/2 Silty Clay Loam
Soil Boring Unit 11 Hydric Soil Indicator:Depleted Matrix
Depth (inches)Color Texture Notes
0-3 10YR 5/2 Silty Clay Loam
3-14 10YR 5/1 Silty Clay Loam
Soil Boring Unit 12 Hydric Soil Indicator:Depleted Matrix
Depth (inches)Color Texture Notes
0-14 2.5Y 5/1 Silty Clay Loam
Soil Boring Unit 13 Hydric Soil Indicator:Depleted Matrix
Depth (inches)Color Texture Notes
0-12 10YR 5/2 Silty Clay Loam
10% 10YR 5/6 concentrations
5% 10YR 4/4 concentrations
10% 10YR 5/6 concentrations
5% 10YR 5/4 concentrations
5% 10YR 5/6 concentrations
wet area associated with channel
5% 10YR 5/4 concentrations. Appears to be a headwater area
5% 10YR 5/4 concentrations
5% 10YR 5/6 concentrations
5% 10YR 4/4 concentrations
10% 7.5YR 5/4 concentrations, free water at 14"
5% 10YR 4/4 concentrations
5% 10YR 5/4 concentrations
5% 10YR 5/4 concentrations
5% 10YR 5/4 concentrations
5% 10YR 5/6 concentrations
Possible Buried/Impacted Depleted Matix
5% 10YR 5/6 concentrations
FILED
ANSON COUNTY, NC
GREG L. EUDY
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF ANSON
FILED Oct 31, 2019
AT 01:31 pm
BOOK 01223
START PAGE
END PAGE
Freese and Nichols, Inc INSTRUMENT #
31 N. Liberty St. Winston-Salem RECORDING
North Carolina 27101 EXCISE TAX
CONSERVATION EASEMENT OPTION AGREEMENT
0293
0297
02259
$51.00
(None)
THIS OPTION AGREEMENT (Option), made and entered into this 9 day of AF , 2019, is by and
between RTB Associates LLC and DEB Associates LLC (Sellers), and Freese and Nichols, Inc (Buyer).
WITNESSETH
In consideration of $250.00 and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which is hereby
acknowledged, and of the agreements contained in this Option, Seller hereby grants to the Buyer the exclusive right
and option to receive a perpetual Conservation Easement over certain defined lands owned by the Seller (Parent Tract).
The Parent Tracts for the intended Conservation Easements are in Anson County, North Carolina and are more
particularly described as follows:
Being an approximate 241.50 acre tract or parcel, more or less, as described in Deed Book 013 , Page 322, in
the Office of the Register of Deeds for Anson County, North Carolina and dated Sept 4, 2012.
The perpetual Conservation Easement will permanently protect the restoration, enhancement or preservation of two
unnamed tributaries to Little Mountain Creek and associated riparian wetlands. The easement area of the Parent Tract
(Easement Area) will begin at the centerlines of the restored stream alignments as shown in the exhibit, which will
approximately parallel the alignments of existing tributaries shown in the Easement Exhibit, and extend outwardly
approximately 65 feet from the top of bank of the restored stream alignment and run as the streams meander to the
property boundary of the Parent Tract. If applicable, wetland easement boundaries will be located approximately 20'
beyond the limits of the proposed restoration wetlands. The extent of the easements will depend on the project option
that is selected by the North Carolina Department of Mitigation Services (DMS) in the public RFP process. This
description is approximate only, and a final boundary of the Conservation Easement will be documented upon the
Buyer acting on this Option. In the event that the project is awarded to the Buyer by the State for only a portion of the
proposed project, the Buyer reserves the right to exercise the Option for only those tributaries or wetlands for which
the project is awarded. An exhibit of Proposed RTB and ETB Easement defining the approximate locations of each
stream and the riparian wetlands on the Parent Tract is attached and intended to provide the intended locations for
easement. This option represents the maximum easement potential of this option contract and FNI commits to
submitting options that encompass that amount to State, with the award by the State determining the final easement
acreage.
The following terms, provisions, and conditions are further agreed to:
1

OPTION PERIOD. This option shall remain in effect from the date that this Option has been executed by the
Seller until nine months from the date of execution of this Option. In the event that Buyer's offer to provide
mitigation units to the State of North Carolina (hereinafter referred to as State) in connection with the State's
Request for Proposals #: 16-007879 is accepted or rejected by the State of North Carolina before nine months
from the execution of this Option, Buyer shall notify Seller of acceptance or rejection within ten days of such
acceptance or rejection. This Option shall be exercised upon posting, by certified mail, fax or written notice
to the Seller at the following address: 28838 Kendalls Church Rd, Richfield, NC 28137. Exercise shall be
deemed timely if such written notice is mailed or delivered on or before the date first set forth in this paragraph.
2. PURCHASE PRICE. The total purchase price for the Easement Area shall be assigned on a unit price per acre,
subject to final survey, pending the option that is selected by the State as assigned below:
Maximum acreage as shown on the attached exhibit: 38.0 Ac (If State Accepts Additional 5 Ac over
Advertisement)
Unit Price: $30.000.00 / Ac
3. CLOSING A closing of the sale of this Conservation Easement under this Option shall be held within 90
days of the exercise of this Option; provided, however, that in the event of objections to title or condition of
land at closing, and diligent efforts on Seller's part to cure said objections, a closing shall be held within a
reasonable time following the removal of said objections.
4. EVIDENCE OF TITLE. Upon receipt of this signed Option, the Buyer will have title to the Easement Area
examined, and if applicable, obtain a preliminary title insurance commitment. The title examination and/or
commitment must evidence the Seller's ability to deliver clear title at closing as set forth below. All costs
necessary to procure the title examination and, if applicable, the title commitment and final title insurance
policy to be issued at closing, shall be the responsibility of the Buyer.
TITLE. At closing, the Seller shall convey clean, good, insurable and marketable title to the Easement Area
together with all rights necessary to protect the Easement Area in perpetuity, including legal access, all
mineral rights and all development rights, to the State of North Carolina, free and clear of all liens,
encumbrances, restrictions, rights, or exceptions unless except those of record as are acceptable to the State.
It is noted that the Buyer is acting on behalf of the State as facilitator of the acquisition of the Conservation
Easement, which will be titled directly to the State.
6. TITLE DEFECTS. If for any reason the Seller cannot deliver title of the Easement Area at closing as
required by Paragraph 5 of this Option, the State may elect to a) accept the Conservation Easement with title
as is; b) refuse to accept the Conservation Easement; or c) allow the Seller additional time to pursue
reasonable efforts to correct the problem, including bringing any necessary quiet title actions or other
lawsuits.
7. SUBJECT TO SURVEY. It is understood and intended that the final Easement Area and Conservation
Easement under this Option is subject to final design, approval and survey by the Buyer with these costs paid
by the Buyer.
8. DOCUMENTS FOR CLOSING. The Seller shall execute and deliver at closing a Conservation Easement,
any owner's affidavits or documents required by a title insurance company to remove the standard title
policy exceptions, and any other documents necessary to close in accordance with the terms of this Option.
These documents will be prepared at the expense of the Buyer.
9. PROPERTY TAXES. Any delinquent real estate taxes and all levied assessments are the Seller's
responsibility and should be satisfied of record by the Seller at or before closing. Any deferred taxes on the
2

Easement Area, which become due as a result of this conveyance, shall be the responsibility of the Seller.
Real estate taxes for the year in which the transaction is closed shall be the responsibility of the Seller and
not prorated, as the State is not receiving fee simple title.
10. MISCELLANEOUS CLOSING EXPENSES. The Seller will pay any documentary stamp tax, real estate
transfer fee or any similar charge due upon conveyance of title to the State. The Buyer will pay recording
fees.
11. POSSESSION. Unless otherwise agreed in writing, the Seller will deliver possession of the Easement Area
to the State at closing subject to no leases, mortgages, liens or other reserved rights, and in the condition set
forth below in Paragraph 12.
12. CONDITION OF PROPERTY/ RISK OF LOSS. The Seller shall not transfer or encumber any interests in
the Easement Area prior to closing. The Seller shall keep the Easement Area in its current condition until
closing and shall prevent and refrain from any use of the Easement Area, for any purpose or in any manner
that would diminish its value or adversely affect the Buyer's intended use of the Easement Area.
In the event of any adverse change in the condition of the Easement Area, whether said change is caused by
Seller or by forces beyond Seller's control, the State may elect to a) refuse to accept the Easement Area; b)
accept the Easement Area, or a portion thereof, in which case there may be an equitable adjustment of the
purchase price based on a change in circumstances; or c) require restoration of the Easement Area to its
condition at the time this Option was granted.
13. RIGHT OF ENTRY AND INSPECTION. The Buyer and its agents shall have the right to enter upon the
Property at reasonable times for surveying, engineering, conducting environmental inspections and
assessments to detect hazardous or toxic substances, and other reasonable purposes related to this transaction.
Based upon the results of the environmental inspections and assessments, or upon other conditions revealed
to be unsuitable to the Buyer, the Buyer may elect to refuse to accept the Easement Area.
14. REMEDIES. In addition to any other remedy specifically set forth in this Option, the Buyer has the right to
enforce the provisions of this Option through an action for specific performance, injunctive relief, damages,
contribution or any other available proceedings in law or equity. The election of any one remedy available
under this Option shall not constitute a waiver of any other available remedies.
15. BINDING EFFECT. This Option becomes effective when signed by the Seller and shall then apply to and
bind the Seller and Seller's heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns.
16. COMPLETE AGREEMENT. This Option constitutes the sole and complete agreement between the parties
and cannot be changed except by written agreement.
17. NO WAIVER. No provision of the Option shall be deemed amended or waived unless such amendment or
waiver is set forth in a writing signed by the Buyer. No act or failure to act by the Buyer shall be deemed a
waiver of its rights hereunder, and no waiver in any one circumstance or of any one provision shall be
deemed a waiver in other circumstances or of other provisions.
18. ASSIGNMENT. The Buyer has the right to assign this Option. In the event of such assignment, the assignee
will have all the rights, powers, privileges and duties held by the Buyer pursuant to this Option.

IN TESTIMONY THEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands and seals, or if corporate have caused this
instrument to be executed in their corporate names by their duly authorized representatives as of the dates indicated
below.
RTB Associates LLC & DEB Associates LLC
Freese and choIs, Inc
By:
NORTH CAROLINA COUNTY OFa •, / y
I, De ✓, `( M . '7P,k d (S i I 1 , a Notary Public in and for the County and State aforesaid, do hereby certify
that kv-,Al d fi 511 -e1m -) and be-,,, ,'s E . 6N %I L.S --, , (Sellers), personally appeared before
me this day and acknowledged the execution of the foregoing instrument.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and Notary Seal this the 2-1 day of
O cyl-v b e ✓ , 2019.
Notary Public
My commission expires:
/ .2 -// Q /'z-v / I
NORTH CAROLINA COUNTY OF
F
ID M. RUDISILLOTARY PUBLICCounty, North Carolinasion Expires Dec. 10, 2019
I, a Notary Public in and for the County and State aforesaid, do hereby certify
that acting for Freese and Nichols, Inc. (Buyer) personally appeared before
me this da and acknowledged the execution of the foregoing instrument.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and Notary Seal this the 2 day of
G 2019.
My commission expires:
4
Phyllis Rummage
Notary Public
Stanly County
North Carolina
My C0fn=b8l0n Expires 0&21/2624

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK