20181154 Ver 1_401 Application_20200902

DWR
Dlrlslon of Water Resources
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
April 11, 2020 Ver 3.1
Initial Review
Has this project met the requirements for acceptance in to the review process?*
r Yes
r No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
C Yes r No
Change only if needed.
BIMS # Assigned
20181154
Is a payment required for this project?*
r No payment required
r Fee received
r Fee needed - send electronic notification
Select Project Reviewer*
Erin Davis:eads\ebdavis
Information for Initial Review
1a. Name of project:
Banner Branch Mitigation Project
1a. Who is the Primary Contact?*
Emily Dunnigan
1b. Primary Contact Email:*
[e-mail]
Date Submitted
9/2/2020
Nearest Body of Water
Banner Branch
Basin
Roanoke
Water Classification
C
Site Coordinates
Latitude:
36.525421
A. Processing Information
County (or Counties) where the project is located:
Stokes
Is this a NCDMS Project
r Yes r No
Longitude:
-80.203265
Is this project a public transportation project?*
r Yes r No
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
W Section 404 Permit (wetlands, streams and waters, Clean Water Act)
r Section 10 Permit (navigable waters, tidal waters, Rivers and Harbors Act)
Version#*
1
Reviewing Office*
Central Office - [phone]
1c. Primary Contact Phone:*
[phone]
V
1b. What type(s) of permit(s) do you wish to seek authorization?

W Nationwide Permit (NWP)
r Regional General Permit (RGP)
r Standard (IP)
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
r Yes r No
Nationwide Permit (NWP) Number:
NWP Numbers (for multiple NWPS):
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
W 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular
r Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
r Individual Permit
27 - Restoration
le. Is this notification solely for the record because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWR 401 Certification:
For the record only for Corps Permit:
F- 401 Water Quality Certification - Express
F- Riparian Buffer Authorization
1f. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?*
r Yes r No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
r Yes r No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
r Yes r No
Acceptance Letter Attachment
eApproval Letter Banner Branch_SAW-2018-01760.pdf
1h. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties?
r Yes r No
1j. Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?
4 Yes r No
B. Applicant Information
1d. Who is applying for the permit?
r Owner W Applicant (other than owner)
le. Is there an Agent/Consultant for this project?*
r Yes r No
2. Owner Information
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
Jason M. Pendleton and April R. Pendleton
2b. Deed book and page no.:
000660 and 00166
2c. Responsible party:
2d.Address
Street Address
P.O. Box 1000
Address Line 2
City
Lawsonville
Rbstal / Zip Cate
27022
2e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
2g. Email Address:*
info@v,raterlandsolutions.com
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
Anthony Boles
State / Province / Region
NC
Country
us
2f. Fax Number:
211.91 KB
r Yes r No
r Yes r No
U

2b. Deed book and page no.:
000682 and 02370, 000682 and 02367
2c. Responsible party:
2d.Address
Street Address
1133 Salty Lane
Address tine 2
City
Lawsonville
Postal / Zip Code
27022
2e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
2g. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
Gregory Young
2b. Deed book and page no.:
000593 and 01738
2c. Responsible party
2d.Address
Street Address
2241 Moore Road
Address tine 2
city
Lawsonville
Postal / Zip Code
27022
2e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
2g. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
Gilmer O'Neil Watkins
2b. Deed book and page no.:
000690 and 02193
2c. Responsible party
2d.Address
Street Address
0 Clark Road
Address Line 2
City
Lawsonville
Postal / Zip Code
27022
2e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
2g. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
3. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
3a. Name:
Lin Xu
3b. Business Name:
NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services (DMS)
3c.Address
State / Province / Rion
NC
Country
us
2f. Fax Number:
State / Province / Iagion
NC
Country
us
2f. Fax Number:
State / Province / legion
NC
Country
us
2f. Fax Number:

Street Address
217 West Jones Street
Address tine 2
City
State / Rwince / Rion
Raleigh
NC
Postal / Zip Code
Country
27603
United States
3d. Telephone Number:
3e. Fax Number:
[phone]
3f. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
4. Agent/Consultant (if applicable)
4a. Name:
Emily Dunnigan
4b. Business Name:
Water & Land Solutions, LLC.
4c.Address
Street Address
7721 Six Forks Road
Address tine 2
Suite 130
city
State / Rwince / Rion
Raleigh
NC
Postal / Zip (ode
Country
27613
United States
4d. Telephone Number:
4e. Fax Number:
[phone]
4f. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
Agent Authorization Letter*
Banner Branch —Landowner Auth_ALL _signed.pdf
139.69KB
C. Project Information and Prior Project History O
1. Project Information
1b. Subdivision name:
(if appropriate)
1c. Nearest municipality/ town:
Lawsonville
2. Project Identification
2a. Property Identification Number:
6041-51-6912, 6041-54-2358, 6041-74-9397,
2b. Property size:
6041-63-2233, 6041-72-9563, 6041-42-1746
42.4
2c. Project Address
Street Address
1133 Salty Lane
Address Line 2
City
State / Rwince / legion
Raleigh
NC
Postal / Zip (ode
Country
27022
United States
3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project:*
Banner Branch
3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water:*
C

3c. What river basin(s) is your project located in?*
Roanoke
3d. Please provide the 12-digit HUC in which the project is located.
030101030301
4. Project Description and History
4a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this application:*
The majority of the existing stream reaches and wetland areas have been significantly altered as a result of historic and current agricultural practices on the site including ditching,
culverting of the stream, and stream channelization. These practices have altered the hydrology of the site and has allowed unfiltered flow of sediment and excess nutrients from
agricultural use. See section 3 of the Mitigation Plan for more detail.
4b. Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this project (including all prior phases) in the past?*
r Yes r No r Unknown
4d. Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the USGS topographic map indicating the location of the project site. (for DWR)
BB_Figure02_Topo.pdf
1.12MB
4e. Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the published County NRCS Soil Survey map depicting the project site. (for DWR)
BB_Figure03_Soil.pdf 1.04MB
4f. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
3.89
4g. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
16,280
4h. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:*
The primary purpose of the project is to restore, enhance, preserve and protect approximately 15,707 linear feet of stream and 6.182 acres of wetlands which flowdirectly into Snow
Creek and into the Roanoke River. See section 1 of the attached Mitigation Plan for specific goals and objectives intended to improve aquatic resource functions through the NCDMS
full -delivery program. The Mitigation Plan provides detailed project descriptions, site mapping, and design plans of the existing conditions and proposed design approach to generate
these assets, as well as the proposed credit release schedule, vegetation planting plan, and performance monitoring plan to be implemented after construction is completed. See
Section 1 of the Mitigation Plan for more detail.
41. Describe the overall project in detail, including indirect impacts and the type of equipment to be used:*
The proposed stream restoration, enhancement, and preservation activities will be conducted on 14 stream reaches in the project area which are tributaries to the Roanoke River.
Activities will consist of filling the impaired/channelized portions of existing streams and restoring natural floodplain connections within reaches. Further work to fill non -jurisdictional
agricultural ditches on the site will enhance and re-establish approximately 6.182 acres of wetlands on the site. Work will be conducted using track hoe excavators, dump trucks, tractors
with disk harrow or rippers, and other equipment typically used in restoration projects for channel construction, minor floodplain grading and in -stream structure installation. See
Mitigation Plan for proposed restoration practices and design approaches for each of the 14 stream reaches as well as common construction elements. See section 1 of the Mitigation
Plan for more detail.
4j. Please upload project drawings for the proposed project.
BB_Figure06_PCN Impacts.pdf
2.27MB
BB_ Figure07_Forest Impacts.pdf
2.28MB
Signed PJD.pdf
1.61MB
Banner Branch —Landowner Auth_ALL _signed.pdf
139.69KB
BannerBranch_100080_CatEx 2018.pdf
1.25MB
5. Jurisdictional Determinations
5a. Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the propertyor proposed impact areas?*
r Yes r No
Comments:
5b. If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made?*
r Preliminary r Approved r Not Verified r Unknown r N/A
Corps AID Number:
SAW-2018-01760
5c. If 5a is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): George Lankford
Agency/Consultant Company: George Lankford, LLC
Other:
r Unknown
5d. List the dates of the Corp jurisdiction determination or State determination if a determination was made bythe Corps or DWR
Site visit conducted by Bryan Roden -Reynolds on 2/12/2020 and PJD issued on 2/13/2020
5d1. Jurisdictional determination upload
Signed PJD.pdf
1.61 MB
6. Future Project Plans

6a. Is this a phased project?*
r' Yes r• No
Are any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permits(s) used, or intended to be used, to authorize any part of the proposed project or related activity?
No
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory _ U
1. Impacts Summary
la. Where are the impacts associated with your project? (check all that apply):
V Wetlands W Streams -tributaries F Buffers
F- Open Waters F Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
2a1 Reason (?)
2b. Impact type * M
2c. Type of W.*
2d. W. name *
2e. Forested *
2C Type of
Jurisdicition*(?)
2g. Impact
area
W1
Excavation
P
Headwater Forest
W1
Yes
Corps
0.180
(acres)
W2
Excavation
P
Headwater Forest
W3
�Corps
0.090
(acres)
W3
Excavation
P
Headwater Forest
W6B
Corps
0.005
(acres)
W4
Excavation
P
Headwater Forest
W6A
No
Corps
0.000
(acres)
W5
Excavation
P
Riverine Swamp Forest
W2
Yes
Corps
0.010
(acres)
2g. Total Temporary Wetland Impact
0.000
2g. Total Wetland Impact
0.285
2g. Total Permanent Wetland Impact
0.285
2h. Comments:
The proposed stream restoration practices will provide a more natural hydrology and flow regime. The riparian buffer area will be planted with native
species woody vegetation that is more tolerant of wetter conditions. The design approach will also improve existing areas of adjacent fringe, toe of
slope or marginally functioning wetlands through higher water table conditions (elevated stream profiles) and a more frequent out of bank flooding.
3. Stream Impacts
3a. Reason for impact (?)
3b.lmpact type *
3c. Type of impact*
3d. S. name *
3e. Stream Type *
Type of
3g. S. width *
3h. Impact
F
(?)
�3f.
Jurisdiction*
length*
S1
Restoration
Permanent
Stabilization ]ffRl
Perennial
Corps6
399
Average (feet)
(linearfeet)
S2
Restoration
Tem orar
P Y
Stabilization
LIT1-R2
Perennial
Corps
P
12
1,872
Average (feet)
(linearfeet)
S3
Restoration
Tem orar
P Y
Stabilization
Lr1A
Intermittent
Corps
P
3
410
Average (feet)
(linearfeet)
S4
Restoration
Tem ora
P rY
Stabilization
LIT1B
Intermittent
Corps
P
7
391
Average (feet)
(linearfeet)
S5
Restoration
Permanent
Relocation
tJr1C
Intermittent
Corps
P
4
158
Average (feet)
(linearfeet)
S6
Restoration
Permanent
Relocation
LIT2
Perennial
Corps12
1,315
Average (feet)
(linearfeet)
S7
Restoration
Tem orar
P Y
Stabilization
LIT2A
Intermittent
Corps
P
4
289
Average (feet)
(linearfcet)
S8
Restoration
Permanent
Relocation
LIT3
Perennial
Corps
P
6
338
Average (feet)
(lir�rfeet)
S9
Restoration
Permanent
Relocation
13B-R1
Perennial
Corps
P
15
986
Average (feet)
(lir�rfeet)
S10
Restoration
Permanent
Relocation
1313-R2
Perennial
Corps
14
2,080
Average (feet)
(linearfeet)
S11
Restoration
Permanent
Relocation
1313-R3
Perennial
Corps
15
478
Average (feet)
(linearfeet)

��2�RestorationP
Permanent
Relocation
Ur4-R1
Perennial
Cor s
10
4,624
Average (feet)
(linearfeet)
��3�RestorationP
Permanent
Stabilization
Ur4-R2
Perennial
Corps
11
1,722
gverage (feet)
(linear feet)
Permanent
Culvert
Ur1-R2
Perennial
Cor s��4�Crossing P
Aver�ge(feet)
(lin�rfeet)
S15
Crossing
Temporary
Culvert
Ur1-R3
Perennial
Corps
9
48
Average (feet)
(linearfeet)
3i. Total jurisdictional ditch impact in square feet:
31. Total permanent stream impacts:
12,140
31. Total stream and ditch impacts:
3546
31. Total temporary stream impacts:
3,010
3j. Comments:
Impacts due to the enhancement and relocation of the stream to natural valley and stabilization of eAsting channels will provide a net gain in
ecological function to the stream and wetland system.
FElmpact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
la. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:
Proposed stream and wetland impacts and mitigation activities will restore, enhance, preserve and protect approbmately 15,707 linear
feet of stream and 6.182 acres of wetland that flow directly to Snow Creek and into the Roanoke River. Based on the Project location, the restoration
of on -site wetlands and streams are likely the best solution to providing significant water quality benefits to offset lost aquatic resource functions.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:
Sedimentation and Erosion Control measures will be implemented during the construction phase per the NCDEMLR - Land Quality SSEC Planning and
Design Manual and approved permit conditions. The stream restoration work will involve filling the old degraded channel and constructing stable
design channels. The contractor will work outside the degraded stream banks and only enter the channel from specific locations designated on the
plans to minimize buffer disturbances. A pump-around/dewatering operation will be utilized to minimize sediment entering downstream.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
r Yes r No
2b. If this project DOES NOT require Compensatory Mitigation, explain why:
Proposed stream and wetland impacts and mitigation activities will restore, enhance, preserve and protect approbmately 15,707 linear feet of stream and 6.182 acres of wetland that
flow directly to Snow Creek and into the Roanoke River. Based on the Project location, the restoration of on -site wetlands and streams are likely the best solution to providing significant
water quality benefits to offset lost aquatic resource functions.
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR) U
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
r Yes r No
If no, explain why:
No Stormwater devices or pipe drainage networks are proposed for this project. All stormwater shall be considered diffuse flow through the stream buffers via stable vegetated channels,
natural floodplain topography and ephemeral conveyances.
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250?*
r Yes r No
2b. Does this project meet the requirements for low density projects as defined in 15ANCAC 02H .1003(2)?
r Yes r No
Comments:
Project site meets the criteria for Low Density development and will not increase overall percent imperviousness. Site plan is well below 24 % impervious surface area. Storrrmrater/diffuse
flows will be transported via stable vegetated channels and across restored stream channels and natural floodplain topography.
G. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation

1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of public (federal/state) land?*
r Yes r No
1b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State (North Carolina)
Environmental Policy Act (NEPAISEPA)? *
r Yes r No
1c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized bythe State Clearing House?*
r Yes r No
NEPAor SEPA Final Approval Letter
BannerBranch_100080_CatEx 2018.pdf
2. Violations (DWR Requirement)
1.25 MB
2a. Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules (15ANCAC 2H .0500), Isolated Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), or DWR Surface Water or Wetland Standards or
Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?*
r Yes f• No
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWR Requirement)
3a. Will this project result in additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?*
r Yes r No
3b. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
Proposed stream and wetland impacts and mitigation activities will restore, enhance, preserve and protect appropmately 15,707 linear
feet of stream and 6.182 acres of wetland that flowdirectly to Snow Creek and into the Roanoke River. Based on the Project location, the restoration
of on -site wetlands and streams are likely the best solution to providing significant water quality benefits to offset lost aquatic resource functions.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project?*
r Yes r Nor NIA
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or habitat?*
r Yes r No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?*
r Yes r No
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Asheville
5d. Is another Federal agency involved?*
r Yes r No
What Federal Agency is involved?
USFWS/NCWRC
5e. Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?
r Yes r No
5f. Will you cut any trees in order to conduct the work in waters of the U.S.?
r Yes r No
5g. Does this project involve bridge maintenance or removal?
r Yes r No
5h. Does this project involve the construction/installation of a wind turbine(s)?*
r Yes r No
r Unknown
5i. Does this project involve (1) blasting, and/or (2) other percussive activities that will be conducted by machines, such as jackhammers, mechanized pile drivers, etc.?
r Yes r No
5j. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?
USFWS database and the NCWRC Natural Heritage Program, see addendum for more information. Letters were sent to USFWS/NCWRC. Refer to the
Categorical Exclusion in App 11 of the Mitigation Plan.
Consultation Documentation Upload
BannerBranch_100080_CatEX 2018.pdf 1.25MB
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*

O Yes
r No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat?*
NOAA Essential Fish Habitat Mapper
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation status?*
r Yes
r No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?*
NC Office of Archives and History website and the NRIS database was searched. The project area does not contain any listed properties. See the
approved Categorical Exclusion (CE) Document in Mitigation Plan for additional information.
7c. Historic or Prehistoric Information Upload
BannerBranch_100080_CatEx_2018.pdf 1.25MB
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?*
r Yes r No
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?*
FEMA National Flood Hazard Layer Firm Panel 6040, eff: 05/16/2007.
Miscellaneous
Comments
Miscellaneous attachments not previously requested.
Stream ID Forms.pdf
932.59KB
BB_ Figure01_Location.pdf
395.96KB
BB_Figure05_Floodplairi
1.13MB
BB_Figure06_PCN Impacts.pdf
2.27MB
BB_Figure07_Forest Impacts. pdf
2.28MB
BB_Figure04_6dsting Hydrography.pdf
1 MB
Banner Branch_MP_100080_FINAL_IRT Response Letter.pdf
207.61KB
BannerBranch_100080_MP_2020.pdf
81.97MB
Signature Page PCN_ BannerBranch.pdf
1.26MB
Signature
*
P By checking the box and signing below, I certify that:
• I have given true, accurate, and complete information on this form;
• I agree that submission of this PCN form is a "transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act');
• I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act');
• I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a written signature; AND
• I intend to electronically sign and submit the PCN form.
Full Name:
Lin Xu
Signature
Full Name (Co -Signor)*
Emily Dunnigan
Co -Signor Signature
o9�S�r c4ar yip
Date
9/2/2020
u

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
❑X Yes ❑ No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑X Yes ❑ No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
USFWS database and the NCWRC Natural Heritage Program, see addendum for more information. Letters were sent to USFWS/NCWRC. Refer to
the Categorical Exclusion in App 11 of the Mitigation Plan.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ❑X No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
NOAA Essential Fish Habitat Mapper
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes ❑X No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
NC Office of Archives and History website and the NRIS database was searched. The project area does not contain any listed properties. See letter in
Appendix 11 of mitigation plan.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?
❑ Yes ❑X No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
FEMA National Flood Hazard Layer Firm Panel 6040, eff: 05/16/2007.
Lin Xu
Li.w xw
9/2/2020
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Date
Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant is provided.)
Emily Dunnigan //lta2rlr.QC�+✓ 7/24/2020
Co-Applicant/Agent's Printed Name Co- Ap cant/Agent's ignature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 10 of 10

LANDOWNER AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Deed Book: 000660 Page: 00166 County: Stokes
Parcel ID Number: 6041-51-6912, containing 34.9 acres, more or less
6041-54-2358, containing 102.9 acres, more or less
Street Address: 0 Pendleton Farm Rd & HW 704 E
Lawsonville, NC 27022
Property Owner (please print): Jason Pendleton, April Pendleton
Property Owner (please print)�
: S Ov-� C �'`,
The undersigned, registered property owner(s) of the above property, do hereby authorize
Water & Land Solutions. LLC
Water and Land Solutions, the NC Department of Environmental Quality, and the US Army Corps
of Engineers, their employees, agents or assigns to have reasonable access to the above referenced
property for the evaluation of the property as a potential stream, wetland and/or riparian buffer
mitigation project, including conducting stream and/or wetland determinations and delineations, as
well as issuance and acceptance of any required permit(s) or certification(s).
Property Owners(s) Address: PO BOX 1000
(if different from above)
Lawsonville, NC 27022
Property Owner Telephone Number: 336-601-1480
Property Owner Telephone Number:
I/We hereby certify the above information to be true and accurate to the best of my/our knowledge.
9-41-i 91

LANDOWNER AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Deed Book: 000682 Page: 02370, 02367 County:
Stokes
Parcel ID Number: 6041-74-9397. containing 106.7 acres, more or less
6041-63-2233, containing 60.9 acres, more or less
Street Address: 1100 Salty Lane
Lawsonville, NC 27022
Property Owner (please print): DTB FARMS OF STOKES COUNTY LLC, Anthony o s
Property Owner (please print): %gr�jr/it5OT j±d^eS U Z e Of! X* i / mf/ -545�
The undersigned, registered property owner(s) of the above property, do hereby authorize
Water & Land Solutions,
LLC
Water and Land Solutions, the NC Department of Environmental Quality, and the US Army Corps
of Engineers, their employees, agents or assigns to have reasonable access to the above referenced
property for the evaluation of the property as a potential stream, wetland and/or riparian buffer
mitigation project, including conducting stream and/or wetland determinations and delineations, as
well as issuance and acceptance of any required permit(s) or certification(s).
Property Owners(s) Address: 1133 Salty Lane
(if different from above)
Lawsonville, NC 27022
Property Owner Telephone Number: 336-408-6907
Property Owner Telephone Number:
I/We hereby certify the above information to be true and accurate to the best of my/our knowledge.
(Property Owner Authorized Signature) (Date)

LANDOWNER AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Deed Book: 000593 Page: 01738 County: Stokes
Parcel ID Number: 6041-72-9563, containing 92.5 acres, more or less
Street Address: 2241 Moore Road
Lawsonville, NC 27022
Property Owner (please print): Gene Young Farm LLC, Gregory Young
Property Owner (please print):
The undersigned, registered property owner(s) of the above property, do hereby authorize
Water&& Land Solutions. LLC
Water and Land Solutions, the NC Department of Environmental Quality, and the US Army Corps
of Engineers, their employees, agents or assigns to have reasonable access to the above referenced
property for the evaluation of the property as a potential stream, wetland and/or riparian buffer
mitigation project, including conducting stream and/or wetland determinations and delineations, as
well as issuance and acceptance of any required permit(s) or certification(s).
Property Owners(s) Address: 5803 Hunting Lodge Road
(if different from above)
Pleasant Garden, NC 27022
Property Owner Telephone Number:
Property Owner Telephone Number.
I/We hereby certify the above information to be true and accurate to the best of my/our knowledge.
(Property Owner Authorized Signature)
(Date)

LANDOWNER AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Deed Book: 000690
Stokes
Page: 02193
Parcel ID Number: 6041-42-1746, containing 75.0 acres, more or less
Street Address: 0 Clark Road
Lawsonville, NC 27022
Property Owner (please print): Watkins, Gilmer O'Neil
Property Owner (please print): 61"I w V'
County:
The undersigned, registered property owner(s) of the above property, do hereby authorize
Water & Land Solutions
LLC
Water and Land Solutions, the NC Department of Environmental Quality, and the US Army Corps
of Engineers, their employees, agents or assigns to have reasonable access to the above referenced
property for the evaluation of the property as a potential stream, wetland and/or riparian buffer
mitigation project, including conducting stream and/or wetland determinations and delineations, as
well as issuance and acceptance of any required permit(s) or certification(s).
Property Owners(s) Address: 1562 Clark Road
(if different from above)
Lawsonville, NC 27022
Property Owner Telephone Number: 336-817-6495
Property Owner Telephone Number:
I/We hereby certify the above information to be true and accurate to the best of my/our knowledge.
(Property Owner Authorized Signature) (Date)
(Property Owner Authorized Signature) (Date)

Legend
Stokes Co. Hydrography J HUC-12
Proposed Conservation Easement Stokes County
Q TLW: 03010103180010 NC Counties
TLWs
HUC-8 (Roanoke 03)
0 50 100
o Miles
Project is located in
TLW HUC-14: 03010103180010
NC
//"A
INEZ
/WATER &LAND'"
J SOLUTIONS
2.5 `5
Mi
Stokes County
State of Virginia
"5P Stokes County
2
v�
JP
J
Cn
FENCE
FIGURE
Banner Branch Vicinity Map
Mitigation Project
NAD 1983 2011 State Plane
North Carolina FIPS 3200 FT US

Legend
Q Conservation Easement
Catchment 1: 564 acres
Catchment 2: 224 acres
AROLINA
LJt�~
01
III/ -- J PIS
58
1148
FJ
i
06 i p
lip
�,A -
I
Nettleridge Quadrangle
0 500 1,000
r North Carolina -Stokes Co.
Feet
copyright:© 2013 National GeographilC�Society, i-cubed
USGS FIGURE
WATER & LAN U' Banner Branch Topographic
SOLUTIONS Mitigation Project Map
NAD 1983 2011 State Plane 2
North Carolina FIPS 3200 FT US
Catchment Area: 788 acres
Impervious Cover: 2%
Dominant Land Use: Agriculture (50% pasture/hay) -
Forest (48% deciduous/evergreen/mixed) ck

Legend
QConservation Easement
—Existing Stream
Soil Map Units (NRCS Data from Web Soil
Survey)
CeB2: Clifford sandy clay loam, 2-8%
slopes, moderately eroded
�1
WX
UT4-R2
N
0 500 1,000
Feet
WATER & LAND
SOLUTIONS
CeC2: Clifford sandy clay loam, 8-15% FpB2: Fairview -Poplar Forest complex, 2-
slopes, moderately eroded 8% slopes, moderately eroded
CsA: Codorus loam, 0-2% slopes, FpC2: Fairview -Poplar Forest complex, 8-
occasionally flooded 15% slopes, moderately eroded
Dak Dan River & Comus, 0-4% slopes, FpD2: Fairview -Poplar Forest complex, 15-
occasionally flooded 25% slopes, moderately eroded
DpB2: Danripple sandy clay loam, 2-8% W: Water
slopes, moderately eroded
FpC2
• UT2A �
UT1-R3
UT2\�
CeB2
BB-R3
.iI L UT3
Banner Branch
Mitigation Project
,CeB2
CeC2
• Banner Branch
Iaiwl �BB-Rtlk'
�` �'.
FIGURE
NRCS
Soils Map 3
NAD 1983 2011 State Plane
North Carolina FIPS 3200 FT US

r Legend
QConservation Easement
— —Existing Stream
Existing Wetlands (verified) +
Hydric Soils-3.6 acres (LSS Determined)
UT1 A
� 1
W7 UT1 C
W5A
W5B
c 95 .!!'
W6A r W5
l y i W6B UT1-R2
� •�
i
t
1 UT4-R1 A W2
r UT1 B
i
- UT2A
UT2
UT1-R3
r W3
Banner Branch
t � BB-R1
BB-R2
8
�S
W1
BB-R3
N W4
�I UT3
0 600 �i 1,200
Feet . E D• IGI b, G E E G Y`h E=/A� bids
1 'T GIS
jig
Existing FIGURE
WATER & LAND" Banner Branch Hydrography
SOLUTIONS Mitigation Project Map 4
NAD 1983 2011 State Plane
North Carolina FIPS 3200 FT US

Legend _
Q Conservation Easement
— Existing Stream
2ft Contours t
Minor
— Major i.
1154 L 1
UT1-R1 WA
UT1 C
0
O
i
Existing Culvert UT1A
Crossing
UT1-R2 •
�o
UT4-R1
O > Q
rn
rn °' UT1 B
Existing Culvert
Crossing
I U T2
� UT2A UT1-R3
�_ rn I .��� . � .♦ 1 �22
00 o ��
0 o w
�kn%.,- rn 00 O ,
j ^Do / Banner Branch
q i 1 BB-R1
Existing Ford
�" Existing Ford Crossing
Crossing h, �i1,106
1 /BB-R2 �
O o
X,
UT4-R2
BB-R3
v T
Existing Culvert
Crossing o
N 1 �uTa Project reaches are not within any
��° FEMA mapped floodplains or
0 600 1,200 �0 regulated streams.
Feet o ��, � � ,.� Icl be�.C'a _
:i m IGN, I%P,
FIGURE
WATER & LAND" Banner Branch FEMA Floodplain
SOLUTIONS Mitigation Project Map
5
NAD 1983 2011 State Plane
North Carolina FIPS 3200 FT US

t
UT4-R1
Legend
Conservation Easement
Proposed Stream Top of Bank
'
® Wetlands (verified)
UT1-R1
40 Permanent Wetland Impacts (-0.29 acres)
Stream Impacts
UT1A
UT1C
W5A
�Stream Impact: 40ft culvert
W5B
UT1 -R2
Impact W4:
0.0002 acres in W6A
Impact W3: 0.005 acres in W6B
500 1,01
WATER & LAND TM
SOLUTIONS
ft�W5
[Impact W5: 0.01 acres in W2 es in W2
UT2 UT B
ft culvert
r
Stream Impact: 48ft culvert
I st
JT2A
4�
Banner Branch
di
0 —P-01t
T
MAP I I -.ffT4 r--m F MoTiTA
Wi4 I BB-R3 UT3
t SR- 0,
N,
. . . . . . . . . e,. EarEarthst r Geog ph CS, CNE 4./,irbus DS, W,SQAZ1US
piling, A F. id, EI'MM1101 ser
Banner Branch N Impacts FIGURE
Mitigation Project Map
NAD 1983 2011 State Plane 6
North Carolina FIPS 3200 FT US

t
UT4-R1
Legend
Conservation Easement
Proposed Stream Top of Bank
'
® Wetlands (verified)
UT1-R1
40 Permanent Wetland Impacts (-0.29 acres)
Stream Impacts
UT1A
UT1C
W5A
�Stream Impact: 40ft culvert
W5B
UT1 -R2
Impact W4:
0.0002 acres in W6A
Impact W3: 0.005 acres in W6B
500 1,01
WATER & LAND TM
SOLUTIONS
ft�W5
[Impact W5: 0.01 acres in W2 es in W2
UT2 UT B
ft culvert
r
Stream Impact: 48ft culvert
I st
JT2A
4�
Banner Branch
di
0 —P-01t
T
MAP I I -.ffT4 r--m F MoTiTA
Wi4 I BB-R3 UT3
t SR- 0,
N,
. . . . . . . . . e,. EarEarthst r Geog ph CS, CNE 4./,irbus DS, W,SQAZ1US
piling, A F. id, EI'MM1101 ser
Banner Branch N Impacts FIGURE
Mitigation Project Map
NAD 1983 2011 State Plane 6
North Carolina FIPS 3200 FT US

Legend y
Conservation Easement
_ ` j� `•jig k. :r «+
i Proposed Stream 4'K
y ® Wetlands (verified)
Permanent Forest Impacts 0.4 acres)
UT1-R1
- Temporary Forest Impacts 5.2 acres)
UT1A
- TV
F
W77 W5A
W5B
UT1-R2
1v� ' W5
UT4-R1
i
♦ W2
2:
UT2 +n ; . - UT1 B
U T2A 3
UT1-R3
j
Banner Branch
W3
4,A �/►. BB-R1
Y
j BB-R2
r
1 � �
W4 BB-R3
UT3 +
W1 ..
SR-16n2
0 250 500 1,000 Fe
So �e: E-sri, Digit IGlobe, GeoE e, E=arthst, I Geograr`, i �CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USC A. K,
Gem piling, Aerog id, IGN, IGP, s isstopo, nd the r IS User Comr`urnity
WATER & LAND TM Banner Branch Forest Impacts FIGURE
Mitigaiton Project Map
SOLUTIONSNAD 1983 2011 State Plane 7
North Carolina FIPS 3200 FT US

Legend y
Conservation Easement
_ ` j� `•jig k. :r «+
i Proposed Stream 4'K
y ® Wetlands (verified)
Permanent Forest Impacts 0.4 acres)
UT1-R1
- Temporary Forest Impacts 5.2 acres)
UT1A
- TV
F
W77 W5A
W5B
UT1-R2
1v� ' W5
UT4-R1
i
♦ W2
2:
UT2 +n ; . - UT1 B
U T2A 3
UT1-R3
j
Banner Branch
W3
4,A �/►. BB-R1
Y
j BB-R2
r
1 � �
W4 BB-R3
UT3 +
W1 ..
SR-16n2
0 250 500 1,000 Fe
So �e: E-sri, Digit IGlobe, GeoE e, E=arthst, I Geograr`, i �CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USC A. K,
Gem piling, Aerog id, IGN, IGP, s isstopo, nd the r IS User Comr`urnity
WATER & LAND TM Banner Branch Forest Impacts FIGURE
Mitigaiton Project Map
SOLUTIONSNAD 1983 2011 State Plane 7
North Carolina FIPS 3200 FT US

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: , $', r Projectl5ite:
Evaluator: �L County: ' 0#-E
Total Points: Stream Determination
scream is at least intermittent S Ephemeral Intermitter
if a 19 orperennial if a 30•
r� Latitude: 36dr)1 '3V Q
S Longitude: �% 7
[q1yJ4.wwj Other JII4,1
Perennia a g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = Gw -U )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1° Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
i
2
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
8. Headcuts
0
2 3
9. Grade control
0 CO
1 1.5
10. Natural valley
0 0.5
1 1 5
11 Second or greater order channel
a
No = 0
es = 3
B. Hydrology (Subtotal ==
12. Presence of Baseflow
13. Iran oxidizing bacteria
14. Leaf litter
15. Sediment on plants or debris
16. Organic debris lines or piles
17. Soil -based evidence of high water
_C. Biology (Subtotal =
18. Fibrous roots in streambed '
19. Rooted upland plants in slreambe(
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abi
21. Aquatic Mollusks
22. Fish
23. Crayfish
24. Amphibians
25. Algae
26. Welland plants in streambed
'perennial streams may also be idenlitied i
(Votes:
Sketch,
�nnm u� manoai
r t! }
table?
0.5
0 0.5
FACW = 0.
other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
2 C3
3
0.5 0
1.5
1.5
EYe S]-- E
0
0
3
3
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5

.NC DWO Stream Identification Form Vercinn d_11 Re.01MIL AIU A
Date: 3 . $ ,
Project/Site:
r
Latitude:
Evaluator: �. LL�
County: 3wer
Longitude:'16 OIL 'fY-y a
Total Points: "3. S
Stream is at least intermittent7
Stream Determination (cir e gng
Other Netflelvp6cl Ne-
if 2 79 ar erennia! if � 30,ere
Ephemeral Intermitter nn
a g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = • v)
18,Continuity of channel bed and bank
Absent
0
Weak
1
Moderate
2
Str ng
r 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
yp
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
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
8. Weadculs
0
1
2
9. Grade control
4
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
.5
11. Second or greater order channel
a
No = 0
es
ai unum uucnes are nor Fared; see alscusslons in manual
B. HvdroloCv (Subtotal = I
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
14. Leaf litter
1.5
em
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0 Ile0.5
1
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
o = D
Yes = 3
lR_ 101 [a.8 L'i N-111 C W P] �AKIil
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
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
5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Welland 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 DWO Stream Identification Form Versinn 4.11 "tl, XAAZ4zY_i
Date: 3 . $ `$
ProjecUSite: J' R :
Latitude:
I ,+
Evaluator:
K,
Ewl
County:
ty: S-r
°
Longitude: go IZ'2Y.32°
Total Points: q41.
Stream is at least intermittent Q
Stream Determination (circa
Ephemeral Intermittent erennl
Other 1VElj16p&-e� /1/r�
Quad Name:
if 2 98 orperennial if a 30'
e g
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = d � D)
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 se uence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
i
2
5. Activelrelict noodplain
0
1
2
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
Kil
2
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.
10. Natural valley
0
1
5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
es = 3
anmciai ancnes are not rated; See disc ssions in manual
B. Hvdroloov (Subtotal = q• O )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1d7
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
- 0.5
17. Sail -based evidence of high water table?
o = 0
Yes = 3
L. MoRiuY tbumotal = _ x . D 1
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
Cp
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
1
1,5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Welland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5
PLhLer =
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Dotes:
Sketch:

NC DWO Stream Identitientinn Fnrm Vnrcinn d.1 I 1?d.111FP J&AADA
Date: 3 , x�„ f
--
ProjecYSite: /Y15 .. V
Latitude: e •
�1 .o
Evaluator: G'.
County:
Longitude: �$b�jz/41 &
Total Points:
Sdearn is at least intermittent 3 y o
Stream Determination (circ one)
Ephemeral Intermittent
Other
z f 9 or erennial if 2 30'
erennia
e.g Quad Name: LAif
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 7, 7 t
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
18 Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2 Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ri le- ool sequence
0
1
(,
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
g
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
t
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
5
731
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes
amnciai dii es are not ratea; see aiscussions in manual
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = ok • 5 1
12. Presence of Basellow
0
1
3
13 Iron oxidizing bacteria
D
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
05
1
15
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
05
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes 3
tEM.7t.1t.P1'tta7rlilt7M
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenlhos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
21. Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22_ Fish
0
1
1 5
23. Crayfish
0
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
05
1
15
25. Algae
0
05
1
15
26. Welland 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:
r
Sketch:
VTz
��
�a�nvwC�r�n+�+ `drover

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 A44AM
Date: 2.7-" � Project/Site: �� Latitude: �s S r�
Evaluator: 4 cam] County: 7 S Longitude: • 54�A17, y94
TotStream
Points: Stream Determination (cir ne} Other �u&71i Pvao
Stream is at least lintermittent?30Ephemeral Intermittent ere e if i9 orperennial if z 3t7' Q • Q g. Quad Name: 4
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = 13 -5 t
Absent
Weak
Moderate
18. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
7
2
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
^
ri le- ool sequence
0
v
2
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
t
2
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
2
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
10. Natural valley
0
J
0.5
1
11. Second or greater order channel
No
Yes = 3
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology Subtotal = .5
12- Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
QLv
2
14 Leaf litter
1 S
C S
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
5
1
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
05
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes - 3
C. Biolo Subtotal = TO)
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
1
21. Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
22. Fish
0.5
1
23. Crayfish
0.5
1
24. Amphibians
0.5
1
25. Algae
0.5
1
26. Welland 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:
VTi ~0'\
terra
vrii d C� G-5 w►�,rK�
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
0
1-5
1.5
0
0
3
3
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5

Latitude: 3 �(
Longitude: %7—
�1
Other fjcl Y_�Xmg i
e.g. Quad Name: 4
2
2
Yes f- l )I
3
3
3
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Dale: 3 ,g ProjectfSite: .,
Evaluator: GCounty:
Total Points: Stream Determination c
i? 3 Stream is at least intermittent 31,o
� q
_ if ? 19 orperenniaf f a 0,J 1 . Q Ephemeral Intermitte tl
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = l • D�
la'Continuity of channel bed and bank
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
4. Particle size of stream substrate
5. Active/relict floodplain
6. Depositional bars or benches
7. Recent alluvial deposits
8. Headculs
9. Grade control
10. Natural valley
11. Second or greater order channel
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology Subtotal = g • a
12. Presence of Basellow
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
14. Leaf litter
15. Sediment on plants or debris
16. Organic debris lines or piles
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
Absent
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
No=0
0
a
0
Weak
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0.5
1
4-0.5
No=0

NC DW4 Stream Identification Forth Version 4.11 NAA40L Aft6V
Date:
Project/Site:
Latitude: .4l�3 YN
Evaluator: C. Z5
County: 5-ra'-EI�5
Longitude:' g6CPrz.'
Total Points:If
Stream is at least intermittent nn
Stream Determination (cir
Other 0179,":
if Z 19 orperennial if a 30' V .
Ephemeral Intermittenterevnia
e g Quad Name: I�t
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = P1 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1' Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
E2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
rioole-pool sequence
0
1
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
.2
5. Aclivelrelicl floodplain
0
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
i
1r2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
. 3
A. Headcuts
ICU)
1
2
3
9, control
140
05
1
1.5
10. Nalura alley
0
0.5
1
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes
"artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroioav (Subtotal = ql.6 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
(0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1
05
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
'3=1
1,5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
1 0
1 05
1
1,5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
INo = 0
Yes :kl/
C. Biology (Subtotal = ff. 5 )
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
0
1
z
3
22_ Fish
05
i-)
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
9
1.5
24, Amphibians
SL5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
1
1.5
26. Welland plants in streambed
MO = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p 35 of manual, ar
Notes: 'ttri 4, L E P T'k QM5 StX 1'&CdAg.t U
Sketch: u-r !
v

NC DWO Streanr-Identification Form Version 4.11 B 'I4 AdA
Date: 3 , Z
ProjecUStte:
Latitude- IF 55/�c�l
Evaluator. +�bzm�
County: 5WS
Longitude-86°���IV
Total points:
Stream DeteUmhsaUnq.LWrcle one)
Other AAXD %:)C--
Stream 1s of least mlemLftnt .9 115
NZ 19 or alifx3fl•
Ephemeral termittent erennial
e g Quad Name:
A. Geomorphoio Subtotal = 1
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
I'- Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
3
-channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
aol sequence,
0
2
3
4. Particle sibkof stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Adiv licl Rood lain
0
Q2
3
6. Deposfii6nal bars or benches
0
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
®
2
3
B. Headcuts
1
-2
3
9. Grade control
eW
0.5
1
15
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
15
11. Second or greater order channel
Not✓
Yes = 3
a wluw wlYl . ww wwI IYIQII, - .p1IIi III IIIOIIWI
B. Hvdroloov (Subtotal = -% 57 1
12. Presence of BaseAow
0
i
1 Ij3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf filter
1.5
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.
1
Is
16. Organic debris lines or plies
0
0.5
U1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes
C. Biolow (Subtotal = GU. d 1
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diverWty and abundance)
0
1
3
21 _ Aquatic Mollusks
-0
2
3
22. Fish
00
1
15
23. Crayfish
CP 5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
1
1.5
2S. Algae
05
1
1.5
26. Welland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 15 Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using aUrer melhWs. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
V. r•n •
n
4mm tR.
Sketch:
Vtr-OL4
011A
r �L
I

NC Dfq Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: il) , -�. 8 Projecllalte: Lr Latitude �r! YIN
Evaluator: County: C 0
�► tY� ��J Longitude:r ,Tz> iZ P''0
Total Points:
leas Stream Dele (circle one) Other AA6YAeP0 6
stream is at least intermittent a� . b Ephemeral termlttan Perennial e 9 Quad Name:
ifz f8 or renMa111 z 30• P
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = a)
Absent
Weak
Mode
1' Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
2
2, Sinuosity of channel along thalwe
0
1
2
3 In -channel structure ex. riffle -pool. step -pool,
rippl"ool sequence
0
2
4 Particle size or stream substrate
0
2
5 Activelmlid floodplain
0
1
2
6 Deposillonal tsars or benches
0
2
7 Recent alluvial deposits
1
2
13 Headculs
1
2
9 Grade control
0
05
1
10. Natural valley
0 1
0 5
11. Second or greater order channel
No
0
artificial ditches are not rated. we discussions In menuai
B. Hydrology Subtotal
12 Presence of Basellow
0
i
2
13 Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
fl
2
14 Lear litter
15
15 Sediment on plants or debris
0
ANco
1
1670rganic debris lines or piles
0
5
1
17, Sail -based evidence or high water table?
= 0
C. Biology Sublolal = 6.S
19 Fibrous roots in streambed
3 11
19 Rooted upland plants to streambed
2
1
20 Macrobenihos (note driersity and abundance)
0
1
2
21 A ualic Mollusks
U1
2
22 Fish
CO)0
5
1
23 Crayfish
(�
05
1
24 Amphibians
1
25 Algae
0
1
26 Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0 75
OBL = 15 C
'perennial streams may also be Identified using other methods Seep 35 of manual
Notes*
C
r,n•.e�► s
Sketch
Yes = 3
=0
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
1.5
15
3
0
15
15
0
a
3
3
75
1.5
1.5
1.5

NC DW Stream Identification
Date: . Z.?,• f)'
Evaluator. G
Total Points:
Stream is of feast inleffnWent
B. N drolo Subtotal
12 Presence of Basellow
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
14 Leaf btler
15. Sediment on plants or debris
16. Organic debris lines or piles
17. Soil -based evidence of high water to
C. Biology tSublotal =
18 Fibrous roots in streambed
19 Rooted upland plants In streambed
20 Macmbenthos (note diversity and abun
21 Aquatic Mollusks
22 Fish
23 Crayfish
24 Amphibians
25 Algae
26 Weiland plants in slreambed
'perennial streams may also be tdendGed us
Sketch
rersion 4.11
ProjecUSlte: Lrrj C Latitude 3C.3/ i Z9 I
County: 15- Longitude:rt`D l2,�st'pV,
Stream Dete ati circle one) other AAiF-TRGF d4V* w
Ephemera intennitten Perennial & g quad Name: /,14
0 11 2 3
1 2 3
15 i 0
011A.1 i5
0 0,5 1 1,5
? No = 0 Yes 3
2 1 0
3 2 1 0
0 rl 2 3
2 3
lm 05 1 1.5
0 05 1 15
0 r0 1 15
05 1 15
FACW = 0 75. om = i 5 ther =
ottrar methods Seep 35 of manual.
ve , �1
LLt� ;arras
Ur-1c
;ter or%z•%

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 .dAJLo LI-A ARA"
Date: 1 S
Project/Site: VM
Latitude: z ,?/ - X, a Al
Evaluator: K
County: J Jvxe�
Longitude:8'o°���iCf( 6Z!
Total Points: /
Stream is at least intermiltenl (p
Stream Determ n circle one)
other I1.91�J
.
it z 19 or perennial it Z 30*
Ephemera ntermltien Perennial
a g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology {Subtotal = ! F Absent T Weak I Moderate Strona
1" Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3 V
2. Sinuosity of channel along lhalweg
0
1
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
i
2
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
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
2
3
B. Headcuts
0
n
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.
11. Second or greater order channel
a
o = 0
Yes = 3
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
1
2
14. Leaf litter
1.5
KV
0.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
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
G. Biology (Subtotal = . O )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20. Macrobenlhos (note diversity and abundance)
D
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
El��
0.5
1
1.5
26. Welland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL =1.5
War =
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 3 . g(g Project/Site: r�
Evaluator: JL. VJS� � County:
Total Points:
Stream is of least intermittent Stream Dete
Z • � Ep hemera Intermitter
if � i9 orperennial if z 30'
Latitude: ° r ' S # f
Longitude: PO
2- /q. $� U
one) Other Ak7WF9KE IUCG
nnial e g Quad Name: r -)A
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = f7. V
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1° Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
Yin -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
n le- oot sequence
0
1
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
3
5. Activelrelict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
2
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
0 0.5
g. Grade control
1
10. Natural valley
0 0.5
1 1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 22
Yes = 3
"4 III...... al
L Hvdroloov (Subtotal = �. 5 w
12. Presence of Baseflow
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
14. Leaf litter
15. Sediment on plants or debris
16. Organic debris lines or piles
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
C. Biology (Subtotal = 7_,Q
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abu
21. Aquatic Mollusks
22. Fish
23. Crayfish
24. Amphibians
25. Algae
26. Wetland plants in streambed
'perennial streams may also be identified u
Notes:
Sketch:
0 1
2
Cg,
0 1
3
1.5 1
0.5
0
0 5
i
1.5
0 0.5
1
1.5
No
Yes
3 2
0
3 2
0
0 1
2
3
"0 1
2
3
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
1
1.5
0 0.5
1
1.5
0 05
1
1.5
other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
FACW = 0.75. OBL = 1.5 61her =

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 M-4 rQ tRfIA
Date: 3.12.. 1$
Project/Site:
I , y
Latitude: a Ar. 4N
N��
Evaluator: C' -b��
County: .SToK�S
E.ongitude:,��/a
Total Points:
Stream Determination (clr_q1&4umj
OtherME7F-G7A0C45 AX;
Stream is at least intermittent �r1 C
if a 19 or perennial if z 30• R J
Ephemeral Intermitter erenni
a g. Quad Name: (fj�
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = < . )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
,a, Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
2
3
4. Parlicte size of stream substrate
0
1
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
3
B. Headculs
G>_
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5 1
1
1.
11. Second or greater order channel
No
Yes = 3
arliticial ditches are not rated; see discussions In manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = ?.0 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
©
3
13 Iran oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
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
U3
C. Biology Subtotal = "k. o
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in slreambed
U
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
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
o- JV
1 1
1.5
25. Algae
0
I 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: rr; d'
1�,�,tier• ,cL4,.n
Ml sQ � x yS s'
Sketch:
>i
�+ R f Fence,
Ur3 r�...
UT - 3
r61ema �
ei-W lIti.lAatJtS
x
A.6 ' i
4")

NC' nW(I Stream Irlonfifirnfinn Tinrm Vr.rcinn d 11 "Aa mtao gagL /
Date: 3�- l $
Project/Site: c+ ' q
Latitude:r3
Evaluator: C�+�nL3
County:
Longitude:-
Total Points:
Stream is of least fnf nt
Stream De circle one)
Other
if z f 9 orperennial N z 3t7` 3.0
a 30,
Ephemera Intermittent Perennial
e g Quad Name: U�
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = $. )
18' Continuity of channel bed and bank
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
3. In -channel structure. ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ri I ool se uenoe
4 Particle size of stream substrate
5. Active/relict floodplam
6 Depositional bars or benches
7. Recent alluvial deposits
B. Headculs
9. Grade control
10. Natural valley
11. Second or greater order channel
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdrologv (Subtotal = %. o )
sent
Weak
Mod rate
Stroi
0
1
3
0
1
2
3
0
2
3
0
2
3
0
2
3
1
2
3
0
2
3
0
1
0.5
2
1
3
1.5
0
05
1
1.5
No 0
Yes = 3
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
(D
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
0.5
CD
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1 1.5
V. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
__+
No = 0
Yes 3
lr�.1191W. kl�11.1 W Y_I � I
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20, Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
1
2
2
3
3
22, Fish
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
El
l
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
25. Algae
0.5
1
1
1.5
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL =1.5 Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be idenliW using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
0
Sketch:
tn� "
Ln: u
UT* -aA
u
v.- y . �'_
' 016
Af6 R3
0
Co.5 S.L.Iv
9.5

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4-11
Dale: ' +
ProjectlSite: -•
dbd , �S
Latitude:IV
Evaluator: 1� �7�LC(�/
County: 5TorII_IG5
Longitude:_X6 d12-'3a, 0/
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent 3 7 5
z
Stream Determination (circle one)
Ephemeral Intermittent erenma
Other /Vi TL6A'V ''*7 I✓�i
e.g. Quad Name: t/fj
if 19 or erennial 30'
if z
A. Geomorphology ( Subtotal = 5 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1' Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
D
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ri le- ool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
.5
11. Second or greater order channel
ORO = 0
Yes = 3
-aninam hitches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdrolwv (Subtotal = It it I
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5)
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0 El
.5
i
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes =
U. 1:51010 IV (subtotal = I. a )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
D
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
.5
1.5
25. Algae
0
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FAGW = 0.75; OBL = 1. Other =
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:
,
V
p3
W4-�

4 WATER & LAND SOLUTIONS
10940 RAVEN RIDGE ROAD, SUITE 200, RALEIGH, NC 27614
{919) 614 - 5111 [ woterlandsolutions.com
October 10, 2018
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
Attn: Jeff Schaffer, Eastern Supervisor, Project Management
217 West Jones Street, Suite 3000-A
Raleigh, NC 27603
RE: Categorical Exclusion for Banner Branch Mitigation Project, NCDEQ DMS Full -Delivery Project
ID #100080, Contract #7610, Roanoke River Basin, Cataloging Unit 03010103, Stokes County, NC
Dear Mr. Schaffer:
The project is located in Stokes County near the Lawsonville Community. In addition, the project is located in
the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) Sub -basin 03-02-01, in the Targeted Local
Watershed 03010103180010, all of the Roanoke River Basin. The project reaches are along Banner Branch
and unnamed tributaries to Banner Branch. Banner Branch flows south to its confluence with Snow Creek
near Lawsonville, North Carolina. Banner Branch is listed by the NCDEQ NCDWR as 'C' from its source to
Snow Creek.
The Banner Branch Mitigation Project is a full -delivery project for the NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services (DMS)
identified and contracted to provide stream and wetland mitigation credits for permitted, unavoidable impacts in the
Roanoke River Basin, Cataloging Unit 03010103. The project will involve the potential restoration, enhancement,
preservation, and permanent protection of unnamed tributaries (Reaches UT1-R1, UT1-R2, UT1-R3, UT1A, UT113,
UT1C, UT11), UT2, UT2A, UT3, BB-R1, BB-R2, BB-R3, UT4-R1 and UT4-R2), totaling over 14,000 linear feet of existing
streams. In addition, approximately 4.0 acres of degraded riparian wetlands will be returned to their natural function,
utilizing wetland re-establishment, rehabilitation and enhancement approaches by implementing Priority Level I
Stream Restoration, livestock exclusion, and limited removal of overburden soil above the hydric soils, and re -
vegetation. In addition, the adjacent riparian wetlands and riparian buffers will be restored and the entire restored
corridor will be protected by a permanent conservation easement, approximately 37.5 acres in size, to be held by the
State of North Carolina.
The project site consists of a degraded headwater stream and riparian wetland system that flows through a riparian
corridor between active agricultural fields and then into Banner Branch, which eventually drains to the Roanoke
River. The proposed restoration project not only has the potential to provide at least 12,000 stream mitigation credits
and 3.0 wetland mitigation credits, but will also provide significant ecological improvements and functional uplift
through habitat restoration, and through decreasing nutrient and sediment loads from the project watershed.
Based on the review of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) county list (06-27-2018), the following
species are considered federally -listed in Stokes County:
Invertebrate Parvaspina collina James spinymussel
Vascular Plant Cardamine micranthera Small-anthered bittercress
Vascular Plant Helianthus schweinitzii Schweinitz's sunflower
Vertebrate Myotis Northern Long-eared bat
septentrionalis

Definitions of Federal Status Codes:
E = endangered. A taxon "in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range."
T = threatened. A taxon "likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant
portion of its range."
(Federal status information referenced from https://ecos.fws.gov i ac/)
Invertebrates
James spinymussel (Parvaspina collinaj
Federal Status: Endangered
Habitat: This freshwater mussel is found in the James River drainage and the Dan/Mayo River systems within the
Roanoke River drainage in Virginia, North Carolina, and West Virginia. The James spinymussel is a small freshwater
mussel slightly less than three inches in length. Adults have a dark brown shell with prominent growth rings and
occasionally, short spines on each valve. Young mussels have a shiny yellow shell with or without one to three short
spines.
Range: The species historical range included Virginia, West Virginia.
(Species profile information referenced from: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/snecies/2212)
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Streams were assessed for the presence of freshwater mussels and none nor their associates (e.g. Asian clams) were
observed during the stream investigations. Due to the small size and landscape position of the headwater stream
systems that comprise the project, suitable habitat was not observed within the project area. A review of the July
2018 NCNHP database indicates no known occurrence within 1.0 mile of the project area.
Vascular Plants
Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii)
Family: Asteraceae
Federal Status: Endangered
Best Search Time: late August through October
Description: Schweinitz's sunflower is a perennial that regularly grows approximately 61/2 feet tall (though it can be
shorter if young or injured) and can occasionally reach heights of 16 feet. It has thickened roots that are specially
designed to store starch. The stem is purple, and the upper third bears secondary branches at 45-degree angles. The
leaves are arranged in pairs on the lower part of the stem but usually occur singly on the upper part. Leaves grow
out from the stem at a right angle, and the tips of the leaves tend to droop. The leaves are thick and stiff, with a rough
upper surface. They have broad spiny hairs that are directed toward the tip, and soft white hairs cover the underside.
The plant produces small yellow flowers. Schweinitz's sunflower blooms from late August until frost. It's able to
colonize through the dispersal of seeds that readily germinate without a dormant period. In good conditions, it can
grow 3 to 6 feet in a year and can live for decades.
Habitat: It occurs in full to partial sun and is found in areas with poor soils, such as thin clays that vary from wet to
dry. This preference for poor soil helps minimize competition from other species.
Range: Piedmont region of North and South Carolina.

Threats: Habitat destruction, fire suppression, alteration of native habitat, roadside and utility right-of-way
maintenance, industrial development, mining, encroachment by exotic species, and highway construction and
improvement have all contributed to the decline of Schweinitz's sunflower. This species occurs in many rapidly
developing areas within the piedmont region of North and South Carolina. As these areas develop, Schweinitz's
sunflower loses habitat.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
WLS biologists conducted numerous field reviews of the project site during the Winter, Spring and Summer of 2018
and no occurrence or evidence of Schweinitz's sunflower was observed in the project area. Marginal habitat for
Schweinitz's sunflower exists within the project area. Based on a review of the NCDEQ Natural Heritage Program's
available Natural Heritage Element Occurrences (NHEO) GIS shapefile
(https:[/ncnhde.natureserve.org/content/data-download), updated in July 2018, there are no occurrences within
the project area. The implementation of the proposed project is not anticipated to have an adverse effect on the
Schweinitz's sunflower.
(Species profile information referenced from:
https://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmis/listed species/Schweinitzs sunflower.html)
Small-anthered bittercress (Cardamine micrantheral
Family: Brassicaceae
Federal Status: Endangered
Best Search Time: April through May
Description: Small-anthered bittercress is an erect, slender perennial herb with fibrous roots and one (or rarely
more) simple or branched stem growing 7.9 - 15.8 inches (in) 2 - 4 decimeters tall. Basal leaves are 0.4 - 2 in (1 - 5
centimeters; cm) long, and 0.2 - 0.8 in (0.5 - 2 cm) wide. The stem leaves are alternate and mostly unlobed, 0.4 - 0.6
in (1-1.5 cm) long. Flowering and fruiting occur in April and May. The flowers, surrounded by leafy bracts, have four
white petals, six stamens, and small, round anthers.
Habitat: Small-anthered bittercress is found in seepages, wet rock crevices, stream banks, sandbars, and wet woods
along small streams, in fully to partially -shaded areas.
Range: Small-anthered bittercress is known only from the Dan River basin in north -central North Carolina (Stokes
County) and south-central Virginia (Patrick County).
Threats: With a very limited range, and found in close association with water, the plant is threatened by stream
impoundments, channelization, water contamination, as well increased stormwater runoff which can abnormally
increase the volume and velocity of stream flows, eroding stream banks and beds. Encroachment of invasive exotic
plant species, like Japanese honeysuckle, is also a threat. Many remaining sites are adjacent to agricultural fields and
pastures. Accidental herbicide drift or run off could be detrimental, as could trampling and erosion on sites where
livestock are allowed free access.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
WLS biologists conducted numerous field reviews of the project site during the Winter, Spring and Summer of 2018
and no occurrence or evidence of Small-anthered bittercress was observed in the project area. Marginal habitat for
Small-anthered bittercress exists within the project area. Based on a review of the NCDEQ Natural Heritage
Program's available Natural Heritage Element Occurrences (NHEO) GIS shapefile
(https:[/ncnhde.natureserve.org/content/data-download), updated in July 2018, there are no occurrences within
the project area. The implementation of the proposed project is not anticipated to have an adverse effect on the
Small-anthered bittercress.

(Species profile information referenced from: https://www.fws.gov/raleiglhlsnecies/es small-
anthered bittercress.html)
Vertebrates
Northern Long-eared Bat Lvotisseptentrionalisj
Family: Vespertilionidae
Federal Status: Threatened
Description: The northern long-eared bat is a medium-sized bat about 3.0 to 3.7 inches in length but with a wingspan
of 9 to 10 inches. As its name suggests, this bat is distinguished by its long ears, particularly as compared to other
bats in its genus, Myotis, which are actually bats noted for their small ears (Myotis means mouse -eared).
Northern long-eared bats emerge at dusk to fly through the understory of forested hillsides and ridges feeding on
moths, flies, leafhoppers, caddisflies, and beetles, which they catch while in flight using echolocation. This bat also
feeds by gleaning motionless insects from vegetation and water surfaces.
Breeding begins in late summer or early fall when males begin swarming near hibernacula. After copulation, females
store sperm during hibernation until spring, when they emerge from their hibernacula, ovulate, and the stored sperm
fertilizes an egg. This strategy is called delayed fertilization. After fertilization, pregnant females migrate to summer
areas where they roost in small colonies and give birth to a single pup. Maternity colonies, with young, generally have
30 to 60 bats, although larger maternity colonies have been observed. Most females within a maternity colony give
birth around the same time, which may occur from late May or early June to late July, depending where the colony is
located within the species range. Young bats start flying by 18 to 21 days after birth. Adult northern long-eared bats
can live up to 19 years.
Habitat: During summer, northern long-eared bats roost singly or in colonies underneath bark, in cavities, or in
crevices of both live and dead trees. Males and non -reproductive females may also roost in cooler places, like caves
and mines. This bat seems opportunistic in selecting roosts, using tree species based on suitability to retain bark or
provide cavities or crevices. It has also been found, rarely, roosting in structures like barns and sheds. Northern long-
eared bats spend winter hibernating in caves and mines, called hibernacula. They typically use large caves or mines
with large passages and entrances; constant temperatures; and high humidity with no air currents. Specific areas
where they hibernate have very high humidity, so much so that droplets of water are often seen on their fur. Within
hibernacula, surveyors find them in small crevices or cracks, often with only the nose and ears visible.
Range: The species historical range included Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida,
Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota,
Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota,
Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, West
Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming. See below for information about where the species is known or believed to occur.
Threats: White -nose syndrome, a fungal disease known to affect bats, is currently the predominant threat to this bat,
especially throughout the Northeast where the species has declined by up to 99 percent from pre -white -nose
syndrome levels at many hibernation sites. Although the disease has not yet spread throughout the northern long-
eared bats entire range (white -nose syndrome is currently found in at least 25 of 37 states where the northern long-
eared bat occurs), it continues to spread. Experts expect that where it spreads, it will have the same impact as seen
in the Northeast.
Biological Conclusion: May Affect
WLS biologists conducted numerous field reviews of the project site during the Winter, Spring and Summer of 2018
and no occurrence or evidence of Northern Long-eared Bats was observed in the project area. Based on a review of
the NCDEQ Natural Heritage Program's available Natural Heritage Element Occurrences (NHEO) GIS shapefile

(https://ncnhde.natureserve.orgJcontent/data-download), updated in July 2018, and the USFWS Asheville Field
Office website (updated September 4, 2018), the project area is located entirely outside of the red highlighted areas
(12 digit HUC) that the USFWS has determined the be representative of any area that may require consultation. The
implementation of the proposed project is not anticipated to have an adverse effect on the Northern Long-eared Bat.
(Species profile information referenced from: https://ecos.fws.govlecp/sl2ecies/9045)
The implementation of the Banner Branch Mitigation Project is considered a "Ground -disturbing Activity", and
therefore the required "Appendix A, Categorical Exclusion Form for Ecosystem Enhancement Program Projects,
Version 1.4" "Checklist" (Parts 1 through 3) has been completed and is attached. Copies of required correspondence
and supporting documentation, including the following are also attached:
• Project figures and photolog sent to each of the review/regulatory agencies:
o Figure 1 Project Location
o Figure 2 USGS Topographic Map
o Figure 3 NRCS Soils Map
o Figure 4 LiDAR Map
o Banner Branch Mitigation Project Pre -Restoration Photo Log
• Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) Environmental Risk Review Report.
• Copy of consultation correspondence with the USFWS through the IPAC system.
• Copy of correspondence with and resulting minimal comments from the NCWRC.
• Copy of correspondence with and resulting finding of "no comment" from the North Carolina State Historic
Preservation Office (NCSHPO) due to their finding of no historic resources that would be affected by the
project.
• NCSHPO Map of Records.
• Copy of correspondence with and resulting finding regarding farmland conversion from the United States
Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS).
• USDA Farmland Conversion Impact Rating Worksheet (Form AD-1006).
• Copy of written landowner correspondence required under the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real
Property Acquisition Policies Act.
Submission of this Categorical Exclusion document fulfills the environmental documentation requirements
mandated under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 40 CFR Parts 1500-1508).
Please contact me if you have any further questions or comments.
Sincerely,
Water & Land Solutions, LLC
Kayne M. Van Steil
Vice President, Ecosystem Design Services
10940 Raven Ridge Road, Suite 200
Raleigh, NC 27614
Office Phone: [phone]
Mobile Phone: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

Appendix A
Categorical Exclusion Form for Ecosystem Enhancement
Program Projects
Version 1.4
Note: only Appendix A should to be submitted (along with any supporting documentation) as the
environmental document.
■
Project Name:
Banner Branch Mitiqlation Project
Count Name:
Stokes Count
EEP Number:
DIMS Project #100080, DIMS Contract #7610
Project Sponsor:
Water & Land Solutions, LLC
Project Contact Name:
Ka ne VanStell
Project Contact Address:
10940 Raven Ridge Road, Ste. 200, Raleigh, NC 27614
Project Contact E-mail:
ka ne waterlandsolutions.com
EEP Project Man a er: Jeff Schaffer
Project
-Description
The Banner Branch Mitigation Project is a full -delivery project for the NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) identified and
contracted to provide stream and wetiand mitigation credits for permitted, unavoidable impacts in the Roanoke River Basin,
Cataloging Unit 03010103. The project will involve the potential restoration. enhancement, preservation, and permanent protection
of unnamed tributaries (Reaches UT1-R1, UT1-R2. UT3-R3, UT1A, LIT 1B, UT1C, UT10, UT2. UT2A. UT3, 138-R1, BB-R2, 1311-R3,
UT4-R1 and UT4-R2), totaling over 14.000 linear feet of existing streams. In addition, approximately 4.0 acres of degraded riparian
wetlands will be returned to their natural function, utllizing wetland re-estabilshment, rehabilitation and enhancement approaches
by implementing Priority Level I Stream Restoration, livestock exclusion, and limited removal of overburden soil above the hydric
soils, and re -vegetation. In addition, the adjacent riparian wetlands and riparian buffers will be restored and the entire restored
corridor will be protected by a permanent conservation easement, approximately 37.5 acres in size, to be held by the State of
North Carolina. The project site consists of a degraded headwater stream and riparian wetland system that flaws through a riparian
corridor between active agricultural fields and then into Banner Branch Creek. which eventually drains to the Roanoke River. The
proposed restoration project not only has the potential to provide at least 12.000 stream mitigation credits and 3 wetland mitigation
credits, but will also provide significant ecological improvements and functional uplift Through habitat restoration, and through
decreasing nutrient and sediment loads from the roiect watershed.
For Official Use Only
Reviewed gy:
10/11/2018
Date EEP Project Manager
Conditional Approved By:
Date For Division Administrator
FHWA
❑ Check this box if there are outstanding issues
Final Approval By:
Date For Division Administrator
FHWA
Version 1.4. 8116/05

2: All Projects
Regulation/QuestionPart
..
Coastal Zone Management Act CZMA
1. Is the project located in a CAMA county?
❑ Yes
® No
2. Does the project involve ground -disturbing activities within a CAMA Area of
❑ Yes
Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ No
® N/A
3. Has a CAMA permit been secured?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
4. Has NCDCM agreed that the project is consistent with the NC Coastal Management
❑ Yes
Program?
❑ No
® N/A
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liabilit Act CERCLA
1. Is this a "full -delivery" project?
® Yes
❑ No
2. Has the zoning/land use of the subject property and adjacent properties ever been
❑ Yes
designated as commercial or industrial?
® No
❑ N/A
3. As a result of a limited Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or potential
❑ Yes
hazardous waste sites within or adjacent to the project area?
® No
❑ N/A
4. As a result of a Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous
❑ Yes
waste sites within or adjacent to the project area?
❑ No
® N/A
5. As a result of a Phase 11 Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous
❑ Yes
waste sites within the project area?
❑ No
® N/A
6. Is there an approved hazardous mitigation plan?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
National Historic Preservation Act Section 106
1. Are there properties listed on, or eligible for listing on, the National Register of
❑ Yes
Historic Places in the project area?
® No
2. Does the project affect such properties and does the SHPO/THPO concur?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
3. If the effects are adverse, have they been resolved?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act Uniform
Act
1. Is this a "full -delivery" project?
® Yes
❑ No
2. Does the project require the acquisition of real estate?
® Yes
❑ No
❑ N/A
3. Was the property acquisition completed prior to the intent to use federal funds?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ N/A
4. Has the owner of the property been informed:
® Yes
* prior to making an offer that the agency does not have condemnation authority; and
❑ No
* what the fair market value is believed to be?
❑ N/A
Version 1.4, 8/16/05

3: Ground -Disturbing Activities
Regulation/QuestionPart
..
American Indian Relic0ous Freedom Act AIRFA
1. Is the project located in a county claimed as "territory" by the Eastern Band of ❑ Yes
Cherokee Indians? ® No
2. Is the site of religious importance to American Indians?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
3. Is the project listed on, or eligible for listing on, the National Register of Historic
❑ Yes
Places?
❑ No
® N/A
4. Have the effects of the project on this site been considered?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
Antiquities Act AA
1. Is the project located on Federal lands?
❑ Yes
® No
2. Will there be loss or destruction of historic or prehistoric ruins, monuments or objects
❑ Yes
of antiquity?
❑ No
® N/A
3. Will a permit from the appropriate Federal agency be required?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
4. Has a permit been obtained?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
Archaeological Resources Protection Act ARPA
1. Is the project located on federal or Indian lands (reservation)?
❑ Yes
® No
2. Will there be a loss or destruction of archaeological resources?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
3. Will a permit from the appropriate Federal agency be required?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
4. Has a permit been obtained?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
Endangered Species Act ESA
1. Are federal Threatened and Endangered species and/or Designated Critical Habitat
® Yes
listed for the county?
❑ No
2. Is Designated Critical Habitat or suitable habitat present for listed species?
® Yes
❑ No
❑ N/A
3. Are T&E species present or is the project being conducted in Designated Critical
❑ Yes
Habitat?
® No
❑ N/A
4. Is the project "likely to adversely affect" the specie and/or "likely to adversely modify"
❑ Yes
Designated Critical Habitat?
❑ No
® N/A
5. Does the USFWS/NOAA-Fisheries concur in the effects determination?
® Yes
❑ No
❑ N/A
6. Has the USFWS/NOAA-Fisheries rendered a "jeopardy" determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
Version 1.4, 8/16/05

Executive Order 13007 Indian Sacred Sites
1. Is the project located on Federal lands that are within a county claimed as "territory"
❑ Yes
by the EBCI?
® No
2. Has the EBCI indicated that Indian sacred sites may be impacted by the proposed
❑ Yes
project?
❑ No
® N/A
3. Have accommodations been made for access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred
❑ Yes
sites?
❑ No
® N/A
Farmland Protection Policy Act FPPA
1. Will real estate be acquired?
® Yes
❑ No
2. Has NRCS determined that the project contains prime, unique, statewide or locally
® Yes
important farmland?
❑ No
❑ N/A
3. Has the completed Form AD-1006 been submitted to NRCS?
® Yes
❑ No
❑ N/A
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act FWCA
1. Will the project impound, divert, channel deepen, or otherwise control/modify any
® Yes
water body?
❑ No
2. Have the USFWS and the NCWRC been consulted?
® Yes
❑ No
❑ N/A
Land and Water Conservation Fund Act Section 6 f
1. Will the project require the conversion of such property to a use other than public,
❑ Yes
outdoor recreation?
® No
2. Has the NPS approved of the conversion?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
Maq nuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation and Manaciement Act Essential Fish
Habitat
1. Is the project located in an estuarine system?
❑ Yes
® No
2. Is suitable habitat present for EFH-protected species?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
3. Is sufficient design information available to make a determination of the effect of the
❑ Yes
project on EFH?
❑ No
® N/A
4. Will the project adversely affect EFH?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
5. Has consultation with NOAA-Fisheries occurred?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
Migratory Bird Treat Act MBTA
1. Does the USFWS have any recommendations with the project relative to the MBTA?
❑ Yes
® No
2. Have the USFWS recommendations been incorporated?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
Wilderness Act
1. Is the project in a Wilderness area?
❑ Yes
® No
2. Has a special use permit and/or easement been obtained from the maintaining
❑ Yes
federal agency?
❑ No
® N/A
Version 1.4, 8/16/05