20201146 Ver 1_Final DRAFT Prospectus_20200903

Newman Ranch Mitigation Bank
Draft Prospectus
Cape Fear River Basin
HUC 03030004
Prepared by: Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC
fires
Bank Sponsor: Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
919-209-1062
June 2020

Q
Table of Contents
1 INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................1
1.1 Project Description........................................................................................................................1
1.2 Project Location............................................................................................................................1
1.3 Service Area..................................................................................................................................1
1.4 Identified Watershed Needs..........................................................................................................
2
1.5 Purpose and Objectives.................................................................................................................
2
1.6 Technical Feasibility.....................................................................................................................
3
1.7 Site Ownership..............................................................................................................................
4
2 QUALIFICATIONS...................................................................................................................
4
2.1 Bank Sponsor................................................................................................................................
4
2.2 Bank Sponsor Qualifications........................................................................................................
4
3 EXISTING CONDITIONS.........................................................................................................
4
3.1 Existing Jurisdictional Waters of US ............................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
3.2 Existing Reach Conditions............................................................................................................
5
3.3 Physiography and Soils.................................................................................................................
8
3.3.1 General Physiographic and Geologic Characteristics.........................................................
8
3.3.2 Site Mapped Soil Series.........................................................................................................
8
3.4 Endangered/Threatened Species.................................................................................................10
3.5 Vegetation...................................................................................................................................11
3.6 Cultural Resources......................................................................................................................11
3.7 Constraints..................................................................................................................................11
4 PROPOSED BANK CONDITIONS.........................................................................................12
4.1 Conceptual Mitigation Plan........................................................................................................12
4.1.1 Stream Restoration and Enhancement................................................................................12
4.1.2 Wetland Enhancement and Preservation...........................................................................14
4.1.3 Monitoring..........................................................................................................................15
5 BANK ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION......................................................................16
5.1 Establishment and Operation of the Bank...................................................................................16
5.2 Proposed Credit Release Schedule..............................................................................................16
5.2.1 Initial Allocation of Released Credits.................................................................................17
5.2.2 Subsequent Credit Releases................................................................................................17
5.3 Financial Assurances...................................................................................................................18
5.4 Proposed Ownership and Long -Term Management...................................................................19
5.5 Assurance of Water Rights.........................................................................................................19
RES Cape Fear 04 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Newman Ranch Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site 1 June 2020

Q
List of Figures
Figure 1. Project Vicinity
Figure 2. Parcel Access
Figure 3. USGS Quadrangle
Figure 4. Land use
Figure 5. Existing Conditions
Figure 6. Historical Imagery
Figure 7. LiDAR Imagery
Figure 8. Project Constraints
Figure 9. Mapped Soils
Figure 10. Conceptual Design Plan
Appendices
Appendix A - DWR Stream Determination
Appendix B - NC SAM and NC WAM Forms
Appendix C - Landowner Authorization Forms
Appendix D - Photo Log
Appendix E - Forestry Plan
RES Cape Fear 04 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Newman Ranch Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site 11 June 2020

Q
1 INTRODUCTION
Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC ("EBX"), a wholly -owned subsidiary of Resource Environmental
Solutions ("RES"), is pleased to propose the RES Cape Fear 04 Umbrella Mitigation Bank (the `Bank").
The proposed umbrella structure of the Bank is designed to initially permit one mitigation site and establish
the umbrella banking instrument for future mitigation sites. The first site, Newman Ranch, has been
identified as having potential to help meet the compensatory mitigation requirements for stream and
wetland impacts in hydrologic unit 0303004 of the Cape Fear River Basin.
1.1 Project Description
The Newman Ranch Mitigation Site (the "Site") is located in Harnett County, NC, approximately 12.6
miles south of Spring Lake, NC (Figures 1). The Site consists of four parcels totaling 266 acres of
proposed conservation easement (Figure 2) within the overall drainage area of 1,898 ac (2.97 mil)
(Figure 3) and is located within a rural area. The Site is between two separate portions of the proposed
Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) Hornet's Nest Site. While each site could be developed
independently of the other, the combined easements will result in a much larger contiguous protected
corridor and high -quality aquatic habitat. The Hornet's Nest Site has a total easement area that is
approximately 30 acres and presents 4,812 LF of stream restoration and 14.35 acres of wetland re-
establishment and preservation. Therefore, a total of 296 acres and 22,820 LF of stream will be protected
in perpetuity when combining the totals on Hornet's Nest and Newman Ranch.
Land use within the project area is comprised of agriculture and forestry (Figure 4). Historic land
disturbance principally includes conventional agricultural practices, as well as a large section of timber
harvesting from the eastern portion of the Site (Figure 6).
The Site will involve the restoration, enhancement, and preservation of three unnamed tributaries to Little
River, which is located approximately 2,500 ft downstream of the project. The conceptual design presents
the opportunity to provide up to 13,076 stream mitigation units (SMU) and 112 Riparian Wetland
Mitigation Units (R-WMUs).
1.2 Project Location
To access the site from the town of Spring Lake, travel north approximately 9.5 miles on NC-210. Turn
right on Shady Grove Road and drive approximately 2.2 miles, to a dirt road that will take you to the
southern parcel of the project. The latitude and longitude for the site is 35.2346 ON and-78.9078 °W.
1.3 Service Area
This Bank will provide mitigation credits to offset unavoidable impacts to stream and wetland resources
within the Cape Fear 04 River Basin (8-digit USGS HUC 03030004). The Site is located in the Sand Hills
and Southeastern Floodplains and Low Terraces Level IV ecoregions within the Southeastern Plains level
III ecoregion. The Site is primarily characterized by agricultural use, forest, and very low -intensity
residential areas. Future sites may be developed in the Bank that provide stream and/or wetland mitigation.
RES Cape Fear 04 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Newman Ranch Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site 1 June 2020

P
1.4 Identified Watershed Needs
The North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) develops River Basin Restoration Priorities
(RBRP) to guide its restoration activities within each of the state's 54 cataloging units. Agricultural impacts
are prevalent throughout this watershed, including nonpoint source runoff and hydrologic modification.
Priorities in this watershed that this Site will help address include: 1) to promote projects that re-establish
riparian buffer and corridors, and 2) projects that address agricultural runoff, as well as stream restoration
projects that reestablish natural pattern, hydrology and habitat, especially in heavily ditched headwater
areas. This Bank supports the Cape Fear RBRP goals and presents an opportunity to restore over 14,000
linear feet of stream and riparian corridor. The proposed Umbrella Bank will provide improvements to
water quality, hydrologic function, and habitat. The project will address stressors identified in the watershed
through nutrient removal, sediment removal, runoff filtration, and improved aquatic and terrestrial habitat.
Based on the newly provided data from DMS on Targeted Resource Areas (TRA) for the Cape Fear 04
watershed, the project stream catchments are within the specified TRA for the potential to provide
functional uplift for habitat. The Project will support the goals of the Cape Fear RBRP, the Cape Fear 04
watershed specifically, and the Cape Fear 04 habitat TRA.
Functional uplift to hydrology, riparian buffers, water quality, and habitat will be achieved through
mitigation activities designed to address stressors onsite such as lack of sufficient vegetated buffer, timbered
and thinned buffer stands, and long-standing hydrologic manipulation from agricultural and forestry
practices (e.g. ditches, historic stream relocation, forestry bedding). The Project contains ditched headwater
valley stream systems that have created a groundwater draw down effect that has removed hydrology from
the wetlands in the valley floodplains. By restoring these headwater valley streams, the Project will improve
hydrology by bringing the water table to historic elevations; improve water quality by dispersing flow,
increasing residence times and reducing peak flows; and improve habitat by utilizing process -based
approaches and natural channel design that includes natural habitat structures and appropriate vegetation
planting.
1.5 Purpose and Objectives
The purpose of the proposed Site is to generate compensatory mitigation credits for inclusion in the RES
Cape Fear 04 Umbrella Mitigation Bank in the Cape Fear River Basin.
The project goals address stressors identified in the watershed, and include the following:
• Improve water transport from watershed to the channel in a non -erosive manner in a stable channel;
• Improve water quality within the restored channel reaches and downstream watercourses by
reducing sediment and nutrient loads;
• Improve flood flow attenuation on site and downstream by allowing for overbanks flows and
connection to the active floodplain, creating a headwater stream -wetland complex;
• Create and improve instream habitat;
• Restore and enhance native riparian and wetland plant communities; and
• Improve ecological processes by reducing water temperature, improving terrestrial and aquatic
habitat, and restoring a native plant community.
The project goals will be addressed through the following project objectives:
• Design a geomorphically stable stream -wetland system characterized by a braided, diffuse flow
pattern through a restored valley bottom;
RES Cape Fear 04 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Newman Ranch Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site 2 June 2020

Q
• Remove hydrologic manipulation from forestry practices such as filling ditches and removing
bedding;
• Add in -stream structures and bank stabilization measures to protect restored and enhanced streams;
• Install habitat features such as brush toes, constructed riffles, woody materials, and pools of varying
depths to restored and enhanced streams;
• Reduce bank height ratios and increase entrenchment ratios to reference reach conditions;
• Increase forested riparian buffers to at least 100 feet on both sides of the channel along the project
reaches with a hardwood riparian plant community;
• Restore wetlands by reconnecting the channel with the f7oodplain and removing aggraded
sediment;
• Treat exotic invasive species; and
• Establish a permanent conservation easement on the Project.
The proposed Site is designed to help meet these goals. The project will address stressors identified in the
watershed through nutrient removal, sediment removal, runoff filtration, and improved aquatic and
terrestrial habitat. These project goals will be achieved through stream restoration and enhancement.
1.6 Technical Feasibility
The technical feasibility of the Bank is assured due to RES' extensive experience with stream restoration
and enhancement and wetland restoration in North Carolina and throughout the Southeast. Examples of
EBX's success include the projects listed in Table 1.
Table 1. Summary of RES Projects across the State of North Carolina
Site
CountyBasin
Projects in various stages of
Broad
3 Projects
Various Counties
18,510
13.11
development, construction,
monitoring, and completion
Projects in various stages of
Cape Fear
15 Projects
Various Counties
89,177
82.8
development, construction,
monitoring, and completion
Projects in various stages of
Catawba
13 Projects
Various Counties
84,300
52.5
development, construction,
monitoring, and completion
French Broad
7 Projects
Henderson,
Mitchell
24,525
3.9
Projects in development
Little
Tennessee
2 Projects
Macon, Jackson
4,766
4.5
Projects in Monitoring
Lumber
12 Projects
Anson, Lenoir
4,098
69
Projects closed out
Projects in various stages of
Neuse
33 Projects
Various Counties
119,948
648.087
development, construction,
monitoring, and completion
Roanoke
3 Projects
Various Counties
20,331
112.2
Projects closed out
RES Cape Fear 04 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Newman Ranch Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site 3 June 2020

Tar -Pamlico
1 Project
Halifax
6,757
85.8
Projects closed out
White Oak
1 Project
Onslow
3,770
0
Project in Development
Projects in various stages of
Yadkin
18 Projects
Various Counties
90,784
0
development, construction,
monitoring, and completion
1.7 Site Ownership
The land required for the construction, management, and stewardship of this mitigation project includes
portions of the parcels listed in Table 2. A landowner map is also provided in Figure 2. EBX has obtained
a legal option to develop the mitigation project and protect with a permanent conservation easement the
necessary area on the subject parcels.
7
ect Parcel and Landowner Information
2 QUALIFICATIONS
2.1 Bank Sponsor
All the sites shall be established under the terms and conditions agreed to in the Newman Ranch Mitigation
Umbrella Banking Instrument (UMBI) and entered into by Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC (EBX),
acting as the Bank Sponsor.
Company Name: Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC
Company Address: 302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110, Raleigh, NC 27605
Contact Name: Brad Breslow
Telephone: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
2.2 Bank Sponsor Qualifications
RES is the nation's largest and most experienced dedicated ecological offset provider. RES develops and
supplies ecological solutions to help public and private sector clients obtain required permits for
unavoidable, project -related impacts to wetlands, streams, and habitats. RES helps clients proactively
manage risk from operations in environmentally sensitive areas by providing impact analyses, streamlining
permitting processes, and limiting liability and regulatory exposure.
Key RES milestones and achievements include:
■ Restoration, enhancement, and preservation of 58,024 acres of wetlands
■ Restoration of over 328 miles of streams
■ Rehabilitation, preservation, and/or management of over 15,000 acres of special -status species
habitat
■ Successful close-out of over 100 mitigation sites
■ Permitting and development of over 200 permittee-responsible mitigation projects
RES Cape Fear 04 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Newman Ranch Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site 4 June 2020

Q
■ Design, permitting, management, and development of 138 wetland, stream, species and
conservation banks
■ Delivery of 20,000 acres of custom, turnkey mitigation solutions
■ Design and construction of over 350 stormwater management facilities
■ Reductions of over 267 tons of water quality nutrients
■ Planting of over 17,400,000 trees across all operating regions
■ Development and operation of nurseries in three states including the largest coastal nursery in
Louisiana
■ Facilitation of compensatory mitigation and nutrient offsets for over 3,434 federal and state
permits
In North Carolina, RES and its affiliated companies have a long history of supplying mitigation contracts
with North Carolina state agencies. With a regional office in Raleigh staffed with full-time professionals,
RES has the ability to carry out existing projects, as well as secure and carry out new projects and banks in
the State.
3 EXISTING CONDITIONS
3.1 Existing Jurisdictional Waters of US
The USFWS National Wetland Inventory Map (NWI) indicates that there are many areas of wetlands within
the project limits (Figure 8). These areas include PFOIA, PFO1C, PF04A, PEM1Fh and PUBHh. There
may be potential for the presence of additional small, pocket wetlands within riparian areas of the Project
(Figure 7); therefore, any and all wetlands will be delineated by RES and approved by the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers (USACE) during the development phase of the project. The stream channels were classified
using North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NC DWR) methodology. Stream calls will be verified
by the USACE.
The current State classification for Lower Little River is Class C. Class C waters are protected for uses such
as secondary recreation, fishing, wildlife, fish consumption, and aquatic life including propagation, survival
and maintenance of biological integrity, and agriculture.
Water quality stressors currently affecting the Project include forestry operations, row crop production
and lack of forested riparian buffer. Field evaluations determined all reaches to be either intermittent or
perennial. A combination of stream restoration, enhancement, and preservation is proposed to increase
water quality and ecological function and protect these features in perpetuity. There is a proposed DMS
Hornet's Nest Site located adjacent to the project but it's conservation easement will not conflict with the
proposed project.
3.2 Existing Reach Conditions
In general, all or portions of the project streams do not function to their full potential. Current conditions
demonstrate significant habitat degradation as a result of impacts from watershed development and
agricultural and silvicultural land use, especially timber production (Figure 6). Project reaches are
moderately to severely degraded with incised channels and eroding banks and in some cases, water has
been diverted. Site reaches were assessed using the NC Stream Assessment Method (NC SAM). NC rating
forms are included in Appendix B, and results are summarized in Table 3. Some existing stream parameters
are summarized in Table 4.
RES Cape Fear 04 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Newman Ranch Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site 5 June 2020

0
Table 3. NC Stream Assessment Method Results
Reach 1
L
MF3-A
Overall Reach Rati
- ,
Low
MF3-B
Low
MF3-C
Medium
MF4-A
High
MF4-B
Low
MF5-A
High
MF5-B
Low
Table 4. Newman Ranch Project Stream Summary by Tributary
Stream
Drainage
Reach
riculturl
"
Reach 1
Hydrology
Determination
Area
Length
Score*Status
'roductio
M173-A
Perennial
32.5
1475
1506
am]
Both
MF3-B
Perennial
32.5
1120**
2110
Silviculture
MF3-C
Perennial
32.5
1666**
2450
Silviculture
M174-A
Perennial
33
864
196
Silviculture
MF4-B
Perennial
33
175**
4138
Silviculture
MF5-A
Intermittent
22.5
119
1883
Both
MF5-B
Perennial
32.5
201
3957
Both
*Stream determination score determined by NCDWR Stream Identification Form 4.11, see Appendix A.
**Drainage area based on current, diverted channel conditions
MF3
MF3 is a perennial reach that begins at the downstream limits of the proposed Hornet's Nest DMS
project. The reach originates within an Atlantic Cedar Headwater Forest and has been diverted from a
relic headwater valley by two ditches at the Northeast portion of the project. These ditches predate 1949
and originate adjacent to a decommissioned racetrack. Currently, MF3-A flows south until it's confluence
with MF5 which has been relocated and ditched. Water is diverted west through MF5 and then abruptly
turns south and drains offsite directly into the Little River through a large ditch approximately 10-12 foot
deep. Available contours and LiDAR suggest that the reach historically flowed east after it's confluence
with MF5 and continued under Buddy Barefoot Road. through a mixed planted pine/hardwood wetland
complex before exiting the property. Sections of MF3-B and MF3-C have been impounded due to beaver
activity in the surrounding area. Spoil piles were observed along the ditches at the upstream extent of the
relic headwater valley and are effectively keeping water from accessing the relic valley. Within the
diverting ditches M173 is mostly sand, carrying sediment downstream to its confluence with the other
reaches. Active bank incision has resulted in response to the channelization of the stream. Currently there
RES Cape Fear 04 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Newman Ranch Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site 6 June 2020

Q
are two culverts along this reach, both will be removed and upgraded to appropriate size to accommodate
stream flows upon project implementation.
MF4-A
MF4-A is a perennial stream originating just off property on the western extent of the project. The reach
flows through a forested wetland system before entering the footprint of a historic impoundment. A
portion of the reach was historically impounded until a recent dam breach. Historic aerials show that the
impoundment was built prior to 1949 and has had multiple breaches throughout the years (Figure 6). An
emergent marsh wetland has formed in the years following these dam failures but has gone back to an
open water system once dam improvements were made. Currently, MF4-A flows east through the old
pond bed that has now become an emergent marsh until just before the breached dam. This reach is
buffered heavily on both banks beyond 100 feet until entering the emergent marsh where all woody
vegetation is absent.
MF4-B
MF4-A transitions to MF4-B at a headcut that has formed just upstream of the breached pond dam. The
headcut continues to work itself upstream through decades of accumulated pond sediment. The reach
flows southeast through relic wetlands that have been ditched to enhance silviculture before being
diverted from its natural flow path under Buddy Barefoot Road. This diversion predates 1949 and
redirects flow to the south along Buddy Barefoot Road before its confluence with MF3-A. Within its 4-6
foot banks, MF4-B is actively sorting bed material, creating geomorphic attributes with light sinuosity.
The historic ditching and active incision fully limits the channels ability to access its floodplain and the
deep nature of the ditch has effectively drained adjacent wetlands now in silviculture. The channel
maintains a mostly sandy channel bed, carrying sediment downstream causing degradation to the water
quality within the project and in receiving waterways. The reach lacks a vegetated buffer as the
immediate areas surrounding the reach have recently been logged, bedded, and planted with loblolly pine.
An active forestry management plan including information on the establishment, management, and
recommendations specific to each stand are included in Appendix X... or available upon request?
MF5
MF5 is a perennial stream originating from a Sandhill Streamhead Swamp system at the southwestern
extent of the project. The reach flows east through the headwater wetland system until it is ditched about
a third of the way down and becomes MF5-B. A large spoil pile exists on the left bank of the ditch for the
remainder of the reach (MF5-B). The reach is fed by groundwater at its upstream extent and surface flow
becomes more evident as the reach flows east to the confluence of MF3. As MF5 drains east and receives
drainage from connecting ditches, stream attributes such as sediment sorting, wrack lines and geomorphic
features become increasingly evident. This reach is buffered heavily on the left bank and lacking a buffer
along the right bank due to recent logging. Flowing through historically drained wetland areas, most of
this reach's silviculture buffer relies heavily on ditch maintenance and drainage through historical
bedding to remove surface water and limit timber interaction with groundwater. As the steam flows east
channel incision becomes increasingly evident and fully limits the channels ability to access its
floodplain.
RES Cape Fear 04 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Newman Ranch Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site 7 June 2020

A
3.3 Existing Wetland Conditions
Detailed wetland delineation has not been performed, but extensive areas of hydric soil have been identified
within the proposed easement areas. Within the hydric soil limits, areas of existing wetlands are present
that have been impacted by past farming and logging practices, such as ditches, berms, and channel
relocation. Surrounding these wetlands, hydric soil has been drained and does not appear to meet all
required hydrologic parameters. During the project development period, a Professional Soil Scientist will
perform a hydric soil delineation in the areas proposed for wetland re-establishment and rehabilitation. The
Project's wetland boundaries will be delineated by RES and approved by the USACE during the decision
phase of the project. Wetland hydrology, water quality, and habitat was evaluated for the approximate
wetland areas using the NC Wetland Assessment Method. NCWAM rating forms are included in Appendix
B, and results are summarized in Table 5.
Table 5. NC Wetland Assessment Method Results
ApproachQuality
Wetland Area - I
1 - Rehabilitation
Hydrology
Condition
Medium
Condition
Low
Condition
IL
Low
Overall Wetland Rating
Low
1 - Preservation
High
High
High
High
2 - Rehabilitation
Medium
Low
Low
Low
3 - Re-establishment
Low
Low
Low
Low
3 - Rehabilitation
Low
Low
Low
Low
3 - Enhancement
Medium
Medium
Low
Medium
3 - Preservation
High
High
High
High
4 - Enhancement
Medium
High
Low
Medium
4 - Preservation
Medium
High
Medium
Medium
5 - Re-establishment
Medium
Low
Low
Low
5 - Enhancement
Low
Medium
Low
Low
5 - Preservation
Medium
High
High
High
3.4 Physiography and Soils
3.4.1 General Physiographic and Geologic Characteristics
The site is located in the Sand Hills and Southeastern Floodplains and Low Terraces Level IV ecoregions
within the Southeastern Plains level III ecoregion. Elevations and relief are greater than in the Southern
Coastal Plain (75), but generally less than in much of the Piedmont or in the more mountainous Blue Ridge.
streams in this area are relatively low -gradient and sandy -bottomed. The geologic composition of the region
is silty and silty clay soils.
3.4.2 Site Mapped Soil Series
The Harnett County Soil Survey (MRCS, 2006) depicts fourteen mapping units across the project site
(Table 6). The soil characteristics of these map units are summarized in Figure 9.
RES Cape Fear 04 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Newman Ranch Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site 8 June 2020

Table 6. Mapped
Soil Series
Map
Percent
Drainage
Hydrologic
Unit
Map Unit Name
Hydric
Class
Soil Group
Setting
bi
Alpin Sand, 0 to 6
AnB
percent slopes,
0%
Excessively
A
Interfluves
Drained
Southern Coastal Plain
Altavista fine sandy
loam, 0 to 3 percent
Moderately
Ridges, stream
AtA
o
0 /o
C
slopes, rarely flooded,
Well Drained
terraces
Southern Coastal Plain
Augusta fine sandy
Somewhat
Au
o
5 /o
B/D
Stream terraces
loam, rarely flooded
poorly drained
Bibb soils, frequently
Poorly
A/D
Floodplains
fl000ded
Drained
Poorly
Depressions,
Co
Coxville loam
95%
C/D
Drained
Carolina bays
Broad interstream
Nofolk loamy sand, 2
divides on marine
NoB
0%
Well Drained
A
to 6 percent slopes
terraces, flats on
marine terraces
Loamy mine spoil
Pd
Pits -Dumps complex
0%
N/A
N/A
or earth fill
Polawana loamy sand,
Very Poorly
Drainageways,
Pn
o
90 /o
A/D
frequently flooded
Drained
depressions, flats
Depressions on
Ps
Portsmouth loam,
90%
Very Poorly
B/D
stream terraces,
rarely flooded
Drained
flats on marine
terraces
Carolina bays on
marine terraces,
Rains sandy loam, 0 to
Poorly
broad interstream
Ra
90%
A/D
2 percent slopes
Drained
divides on marine
terraces, flats on
marine terraces
RES Cape Fear 04 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Newman Ranch Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site 9 June 2020

P
Map
Percent
Drainage
Hydrologic
Map Unit Name
Hydric
Class
GroupUnit
Soil
Setting
Symbo
State fine sandy loam,
StA
0 to 3 percent slopes,
0%
Well Drained
B
Stream terraces
rarely flooded
Broad stream
Wagram loamy sand, 0
divides on marine
WaB
5%
Well Drained
A
to 6 percent slopes
terraces, ridges on
marine terraces
Broad interstream
Wagram loamy sand,6
divides on marine
WaC
0%
Well Drained
A
to 10 percent slopes
terraces, ridges on
marine ridges
Wickham fine sandy
WkB
loam, 0 to 6 percent
5%
Well Drained
B
Stream terraces
slopes, rarely flooded
3.5 Endangered/Threatened Species
Plants and animals with a federal classification of endangered or threatened are protected under provisions
of Sections 7 and 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. The US Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) database (updated 26 March 2018) lists the Red -cockaded Woodpecker (Picoides borealis), the
American Alligator (Alligator mississippiensis), the Cape Fear shiner (Notropis mekistocholas) and the
Rough -leaved loosestrife (lysimachia asperulefolia) as endangered species in Harnett County, North
Carolina (Table 7). No protected species or potential habitat for protected species was observed during
preliminary site evaluations.
In addition to the USFWS database, the NC Natural Heritage Program (NHP) GIS database was consulted
to determine whether previously cataloged occurrences of protected species were mapped within two miles
of the project site. Results from NHP indicate that there are known occurrences of state threatened or
endangered species within a two-mile radius of the project area. Based on initial site investigations, no
impacts to state protected species are anticipated as a result of the proposed project.
The proposed project offers some potential to improve or create suitable habitat for several Federal Species
of Concern. Habitat may be improved or created for species that require riverine habitat by improving water
quality, in -stream and near -stream forage, and providing stable conditions not subject to regular
maintenance. The decision phase of the project will include USFWS coordination to confirm these findings.
RES Cape Fear 04 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Newman Ranch Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site 10 June 2020

0
Table 7. Federally Protected Species in Harnett County
Common Name
Vertebrate:
Scientific name Federal
do Status
Habitat
Present
Record
Status I
Red -cockaded Woodpecker
Picoides borealis E
No
Current
American Alligator
Alligator mississippiensis SAT
No
Current
Cape Fear Shiner
Notropis mekistocholas E
No
Current
Vascular Plant:
Rough -leaved loosestrife
Lysimachia asperulaefolia E
No
Current
E = Endangered
SAT = threatened due to similarity of appearance
3.6 Vegetation
Current land use around the Project is primarily comprised of active cropland and pine timbering with a
combination of disturbed Streamhead Pocosin, Streamhead Atlantic White Cedar Forest and Sandhill
Streamhead Swamp Forest. Common species within the Project include, pines (Pinus taeda mostly, and
areas of young Pinus palustris to the north of the project), red maple (Acer rubrum), southern magnolia
(Magnolia grandiflora), sweetbay magnolia (Magnolia virginiana), red bay (Persea borbonia), Atlantic
white cedar (Chamaecyparis thyoides), American holly (Ilex opaca), water oak (Quercus nigra),
flowering dogwood (Cornus florida), sea myrtle (Baccharis halimifolia), coastal doghobble (Leucothoe
axillaris), fetterbush (Lyonia lucida), gallberry (Ilex glabra), baygall bush (Ilex coriacea), sensitive fern
(Onoclea sensibilis), southern lady fern (Athyrium asplenioides), seedbox (Ludwigia alternifolia),
greenbrier (Smilax sp.), and river cane (Arundinaria gigantea). Pockets of sphagnum occur throughout the
sites in particularly wet areas near the western end of MF5-A and upstream extents of MF3. Exotic
invasive species are present throughout, including Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), Chinese
privet (Ligustrum sinense), and multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora).
3.7 Cultural Resources
On April 21, 2020 the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) website
(http://gis.ncdcr.gov) database was reviewed to determine if any listed or potentially eligible historic or
archeological resources in the proposed Newman Ranch Site existed. This search did not reveal an
occurrence within the project area. There were 2 historical sites within a 0.5-mile radius of the Site;
Thorbiskope (HT0020) and Ellershe 1974 (CD0007). The environmental screening phase of the Project
will include SHPO coordination to confirm these findings.
3.8 Constraints
There are few known constraints at the Newman Ranch Site. The Project is not within a mapped FEMA
Regulatory Floodway or 100-year floodplain. Also, no overhead or underground utilities are located within
the proposed buffer. No existing land uses (such as residential) will constrain the proposed mitigation
design. Buddy Barefoot Road bisects the middle of the project and contains one culvert crossing each for
MF-3 and MF-4. There is also one culvert on the upper limits of MF3-A. (Figure 8).
RES Cape Fear 04 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Newman Ranch Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site 11 June 2020

Q
4 PROPOSED BANK CONDITIONS
4.1 Conceptual Mitigation Plan
The Site presents the opportunity to provide 13,076 stream mitigation units (SMUs) and 112 riparian
wetland mitigation units (R-WMUs) (Figure 10).. These will be derived from a combination of stream and
wetland restoration, enhancement, and preservation. Table 8 details the mitigation.
Table 8. Proposed Mitigation Summary
Reach
Stream
Mitigation Type
Mitig!!��
Existing ng Length L
Mitigation Ratio
SMUs
MF3-A
Restoration
1,506
1:1
1,505.931
MF3-B
Restoration
2,110
1:1
2,110.115
MF3-C
Enhancement II
2,450
2.5:1
980.191
MF4-A
Preservation
1,964
10:1
196.400
M174-13
Restoration
4,138
1:1
4,138.000
MF5-A
Preservation
1,883
10:1
188.305
MF5-13
Restoration
3,957
1:1
3,956.793
Total
18,008
13,075.734
"The Wilmington District Stream Buffer Credit Calculator (USACE, January 2018) was utilized to calculate the approximate
credit adjustment for the Project
Wetland ID
Mitigation Type
MitigationWetland
Acres
Mitigation Ratio
WMUs
Rehabilitation
42.92
1.5:1
28.613
Area 1
Preservation
3.69
10:1
0.369
Area 2
Rehabilitation
23.72
1.5:1
15.813
Preservation
36.82
10:1
3.682
Enhancement
11.07
2:1
5.535
Area 3
Rehabilitation
6.99
1.5:1
4.660
Re-establishment
13.90
1:1
13.900
Preservation
105.15
10:1
10.515
Area 4
Enhancement
20.12
2:1
10.060
Preservation
23.67
1 10:1
2.367
Area 5
Enhancement
11.04
2:1
5.520
Re-establishment
11.29
1:1
11.290
Total
310.38
112.325
4.1.1 Stream Restoration, Enhancement, and Preservation
Stream restoration efforts will be accomplished through analyses of geomorphic conditions and watershed
characteristics. The design approach will apply a combination of analytical and reference reach -based
design methods that meet objectives commensurate with both ecological and geomorphic improvements.
Proposed treatment activities may range from minor bank grading and planting to re-establishing stable
planform and hydraulic geometry. For reaches requiring full restoration or extensive enhancement, natural
design concepts will be applied and verified through rigorous engineering analyses and modeling. The
objective of this approach is to design a geomorphically stable channel that provides habitat improvements
and ties into the existing landscape.
RES Cape Fear 04 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Newman Ranch Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site 12 June 2020

Q
The Project will include stream restoration, enhancement level II, and preservation.
Stream restoration is proposed for reaches M173-13, MF3-A, M174-13, and M175-13. All but the latter will
incorporate the design of a single -thread channel, likely designed as Rosgen C-type channels, with
parameters based on data taken from reference sites to be identified later, published empirical relationships,
regional curves developed from existing project streams, and NC Regional Curves. MF5-B will incorporate
a process -based restoration approach, using an undersized channel, low floodplain, and associated habitat
structures to create a stream -wetland complex, while still maintaining a stable main channel. Structures will
be installed on all restored reaches for grade control, channel stability, and to improve in -stream habitat.
Finally, riparian buffers will be restored and protected in perpetuity. Conceptual plan views are provided in
Figure 10.
Design parameters, including active channel, habitat and floodplain features will be developed from
analysis of suitable on and off -site reference streams. Analytical design techniques will be an important
element of the Project and will be used to determine the design discharge and to verify the design as a
whole. The design approach is based on initial stream assessment and recent IRT experience on other
project sites in this ecoregion.
Engineering analyses will be performed using various hydrologic and hydraulic models to verify the
reference reach/analog based design. A combination of methods will be used to estimate bankfull flows,
and flows corresponding to other significant storm events. A HEC-RAS model will then be used to
simulate water surface elevations of flows generated by the hydrologic analysis. The development of the
HEC model is an important component to the design; therefore, model input parameters are field verified
when possible. Through this hydrologic analysis, the design discharge (typically referenced as bankfull or
dominant discharge) will be determined. The subsequent design for M173-A, MF3-B, MF4-B, and MF5-B
will be based on this calculated discharge.
While using the same various hydrologic and hydraulic models to determine bankfull flow, MF5-B will
be designed in a "Stage-0" process -based restoration approach. Using an undersized channel,
approximately 50% of the determined bankfull flow, the channel will overtop more frequently where it
will engage with adjacent large woody debris and habitat structures to create a stream -wetland complex.
This approach in headwater systems significantly increases nutrient capture, water table level, habitat
diversity, as well as attenuates peak flow downstream.
As part of the design process for all reaches, a qualitative analysis of sediment supply will be performed
by characterizing watershed conditions. A combination of windshield surveys, existing land use data, and
historical aerial photography, followed up by ground-truthing, will be analyzed to assess existing and past
watershed conditions and to determine if any changes occurred that would significantly impact sediment
supply. Design parameters developed through the analyses of reference reach data, watershed
characterizations, and hydrologic and hydraulic modeling will be confirmed using the Sediment Transport
Analysis components within HEC-RAS in conjunction with shear stress and velocity analyses.
Engineering analyses are performed concurrently with geomorphic and habitat studies. While the stream
design will be verified through simulations of hydrology and fluvial processes, analogs of desirable
habitat features will be derived from reference sites and integrated into the project design. Both in -stream
and riparian habitat features will be designed. In -stream structures will be used throughout the project to
RES Cape Fear 04 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Newman Ranch Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site 13 June 2020

P
act as grade control and for bank stabilization by dissipating and redirecting the stream's energy. Bank
stability may further be enhanced through the installation of brush mattresses, live stakes and cuttings
bundles.
The riparian buffer areas will be planted with native species creating a vegetated buffer, which will
provide numerous water quality and ecological benefits. Stream banks will be stabilized using a
combination of grading, erosion control matting, bare -root plantings, native material revetment techniques
(i.e., bioengineering), structure placement, and sod transplants where possible. In addition, exotic invasive
species, especially Chinese privet, will be treated to ensure survival of planted, native vegetation. The
stream and adjacent riparian areas will be protected by a minimum 50-foot conservation easement which
will be fenced to exclude livestock as needed.
Enhancement II at a 2.5:1 ratio is proposed for M173-C. Such enhancement activities will include bank
grading and benching, structure installation, planting a minimum 50-foot buffer with native hardwood
trees. In addition, extensive treatment of Chinese privet and other exotic invasive species is also proposed
to promote a more healthy, diverse buffer.
Preservation is proposed for MF3-A and M174-A. Preservation activities will include buffer planting and
protecting the reach in perpetuity.
4.1.2 Wetland Restoration, Enhancement, and Preservation
The Project provides an excellent opportunity for the re-establishment, rehabilitation, enhancement, and
preservation of Headwater Forest and Bottomland Hardwood -type wetland communities. The wetland re-
establishment and rehabilitation areas are labeled as: Area 1, Area 2, and Area 3 and are located along
MF4-B, MF3-A, and MF5-B. The valleys of MF4 and MF5 were historically ditched to promote
improved conditions for pine timber growth and row crop production. The historic ditching coupled with
presence of field verified Polawana and Portsmouth soils characterized by a loamy surface underlain by
sand indicate a potential drainage effect extending beyond the edges of the 200-foot-wide floodplain,
therefore, eliminating the natural wetland functions (hydrology and vegetation) of these areas. Extensive
land -use practices have altered the hydrology and vegetation significantly to where jurisdiction has been
removed. The wetland enhancement areas (Area 3, Area 4, Area 5) are located near MF4-A, MF3-B and
below MF5-B. Extensive land -use practices have altered vegetation significantly. Although jurisdiction
remains in these areas, the removal of loblolly pine and planting of native hardwoods will improve the
vegetative community structure. Additionally, the wetland preservation areas (Area 3, Area 4, Area 5) are
located near M174-A, the lower west portion of the project and M173-13, respectively. Surrounding land use
consists of active forestry and row crop production. Hydric soils within the proposed wetlands will be
verified through auger borings by a licensed soil scientist.
Therefore, wetland restoration and enhancement activities will include:
• Plugging, backfilling, and stabilizing multiple drainage ditches;
• Selective logging of mature loblolly pine to promote native hardwood dominant community;
• Grading restoration areas to match historical contours and promote detention and infiltration;
RES Cape Fear 04 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Newman Ranch Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site 14 June 2020

Q
• Reconnecting surface drainage to hydric soil areas in conjunction with headwater valley and
stream restoration;
• Planting herbaceous seed mix and native tree species commonly found in headwater and
bottomland hardwood forests.
The resulting natural communities will provide ecological function far surpassing the current state and
approaching the pre -disturbance condition.
4.1.3 Monitoring
Stream stability, hydrology, and vegetation survival will be monitored across the site to determine the
success of the stream and buffer mitigation. Stream stability will be monitored with cross section surveys
and visual assessment stream walks. Vegetation survival rates will be monitored using vegetation plots over
approximately two percent of the planted area.
Wetland hydrology will be monitored to document hydrologic conditions in the wetland restoration areas.
This will be accomplished with automatic recording pressure transducer gauges installed in representative
locations across the restoration areas as well as the preservation wetland areas for reference conditions.
The gauges will be downloaded quarterly and wetland hydroperiods will be calculated during the growing
season. The hydrology success criterion for the Project is to restore the water table so that it will remain
continuously within 12 inches of the soil surface for at least 12 percent of the growing season at each
groundwater gauge location. Gauge installation will follow current NCIRT guidance. Visual observations
of primary and secondary wetland hydrology indicators will also be recorded during quarterly site visits.
4.1.3.1 As -Built Survey
An as -built survey will be conducted following construction to document channel size, condition, and
location. The survey will include a complete profile of Thalweg, water surface, bankfull, and top of bank
to compare with future geomorphic data. Longitudinal profiles will not be required in annual monitoring
reports unless requested by USACE. Stream channel stationing will be marked with stakes placed near the
top of bank every 200 feet.
4.1.3.2 Visual Monitoring
Visual monitoring of all mitigation areas will be conducted a minimum of twice per monitoring year by
qualified individuals. The visual assessments will include vegetation density, vigor, invasive species, and
easement encroachments. Visual assessments of stream stability will include a complete streamwalk and
structure inspection. Digital images will be taken at fixed representative locations to record each monitoring
event, as well as any noted problem areas or areas of concern. Results of visual monitoring will be presented
in a plan view exhibit with a brief description of problem areas and digital images. Photographs will be
used to subjectively evaluate channel aggradation or degradation, bank erosion, success of riparian
vegetation, and effectiveness of erosion control measures. Longitudinal photos should indicate the absence
of developing bars within the channel or an excessive increase in channel depth. Lateral photos should not
indicate excessive erosion or continuing degradation of the banks over time. A series of photos over time
should indicate successional maturation of riparian vegetation.
RES Cape Fear 04 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Newman Ranch Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site 15 June 2020

Q
4.1.3.3 Cross Sections
Permanent cross -sections will be installed at a minimum of one per 20 bankfull widths with half in pools
and half in shallows. All cross-section measurements will include bank height ratio and entrenchment ratio.
Cross -sections will be monitored annually. There should be little change in as -built cross -sections.
4.1.3.4 Vegetative Success Criteria
Vegetation monitoring plots will be a minimum of 0.02 acres in size and cover a minimum of two percent
of the planted area. Planted area indicates all area in the easement that will be planted with trees. Existing
wooded areas are not included in the planted area. The following data will be recorded for all trees in the
plots: species, height, planting date (or volunteer), and grid location. Monitoring will occur each year during
the monitoring period. Invasive and noxious species will be monitored and controlled so that none become
dominant or alter the desired community structure of the site. If necessary, RES will develop a species -
specific control plan.
4.1.3.5 Adaptive Management
If, during the course of annual monitoring, it is determined that the site's ability to achieve site performance
standards are jeopardized, RES will notify the USACE of the need to develop a Plan of Corrective Action.
If tree mortality affects 40 percent or greater of the canopy in a stream restoration area, then a
remedial/supplemental planting plan will be developed and implemented for the affected area(s). If beaver
activity poses a threat to project stability or vegetative success, RES will trap beavers and remove
impoundments as needed. All beaver management activities will be documented and included in annual
monitoring reports. Once the Corrective Action Plan is prepared and finalized RES will:
1. Notify the USACE as required by the Nationwide 27 permit general conditions.
2. Revise performance standards, maintenance requirements, and monitoring requirements as
necessary and/or required by the USACE.
3. Obtain other permits as necessary.
4. Prepare Corrective Action Plan for review and approval by IRT.
5. Implement the Corrective Action Plan.
6. Provide the IRT a Record Drawing of Corrective Actions. This document shall depict the extent
and nature of the work performed.
5 BANK ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION
5.1 Establishment and Operation of the Bank
This Site shall be established under the terms and conditions of the RES Newman Ranch Mitigation Site
Bank made and entered into by and among EBX, LLC, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Marine Fisheries
Services, the North Carolina Department of the Environment and Natural Resources, the North Carolina
Division of Water Resources, and the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, collectively, the
Interagency Review Team.
5.2 Proposed Credit Release Schedule
All credit releases will be based on the total credit generated as reported in the approved mitigation
plan of the Site. Under no circumstances shall any mitigation project be debited until the necessary DA
RES Cape Fear 04 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Newman Ranch Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site 16 June 2020

Q
authorization has been received for its construction or the District Engineer (DE) has otherwise
provided written approval for the project in the case where no DA authorization is required for
construction of the mitigation project. The DE, in consultation with the IRT, will determine if
performance standards have been satisfied sufficiently to meet the requirements of the release
schedules below. In cases where some performance standards have not been met, credits may still be
released depending on the specifics of the case. Monitoring may be required to restart or be extended,
depending on the extent to which the site fails to meet the specified performance standard. The release
of project credits will be subject to the criteria described in Table 9 and 10.
5.2.1 Initial Allocation of Released Credits
The initial allocation of released credits, as specified in the mitigation plan can be released by the IRT with
written approval of the DE upon satisfactory completion of the following activities:
a) Execution of the UMBI by the Sponsor and the USACE
b) Approval of the final mitigation plan
c) Mitigation site must be secured
d) Delivery of financial assurances.
e) Recordation of the long-term protection mechanism and title opinion acceptable to the USACE
f) Issuance of the 404-permit verification for construction of the site, if required.
5.2.2 Subsequent Credit Releases
The second credit release will occur after the completion of implementation of the Mitigation Plan and IRT
approval of the Baseline Monitoring Report and As -built Survey. All subsequent credit releases must be
approved by the DE, in consultation with the IRT, based on a determination that required performance
standards have been achieved. As projects approach milestones associated with credit release, the Sponsor
will submit a request for credit release to the DE along with documentation substantiating achievement of
criteria required for release to occur. This documentation will be included with the annual monitoring
report.
Table 9. Stream Credit Release Schedule
Release
Interim
Credit Release Activity
11
Total Release
Milestone
Release
id
1
Site Establishment (includes all required criteria stated
15%
15%
above)
2
Completion of all initial physical and biological
15%
30%
im rovements made pursuant to the Mitigation Plan
3
Year 1 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are
10%
40%
stable and interim performance standards have been met
4
Year 2 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are
10%
50%
stable and interim performance standards have been met
5
Year 3 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are
10%
60%
stable and interim performance standards have been met
6*
Year 4 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are
5%
65%
stable and interim performance standards have been met
(75%**)
7
Year 5 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are
u
10 /0
75%
stable and interim performance standards have been met
85%*
RES Cape Fear 04 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Newman Ranch Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site 17 June 2020

*Please note that vegetation plot data may not be required with monitoring reports submitted during these
monitoring years unless otherwise stated by the Mitigation Plan or directed by the IRT.
* * 10% reserve of credits to be held back until the bankfull event performance standard has been met.
Table 10. Wetland Credit Release Schedule
Release
Miles,
redit Release Activity
Interim
Release
Total
Released
Site Establishment (includes all required criteria stated above)
I
15%*
15%
Baseline Monitoring Report and As -built Survey
2
15%
30%
First year monitoring report demonstrates performance standards
3
are being met.
10%
40%
Second year monitoring report demonstrates performance standards
4
are being met.
10%
50%
Third year monitoring report demonstrates performance standards
5
are being met.
15%
65%
Fourth year monitoring report demonstrates performance standards
6
are being met.
5%
70%
Fifth year monitoring report demonstrates performance standards
7
are being met.
15%
85%
Sixth year monitoring report demonstrates performance standards
8
are being met.
5%
90%
Seventh year monitoring report demonstrates performance
9
standards are being met, and project has received close-out
10%
10%
approval.
*Includes 100 percent of preservation credits generated
'Includes the 10% reserved for when a project meets the bankfull event performance. Bankfull monitoring is not required
on reaches where in -stream work is not conducted.
5.3 Financial Assurances
The Sponsor shall provide financial assurances in the form of a Performance Bond to the IRT sufficient to
assure completion of all mitigation work, required reporting and monitoring, and any remedial work
required. Financial assurances shall be payable at the direction of the USACE to his designee or to a standby
trust. Financial assurances structured to provide funds to the USACE in the event of default by the Bank
Sponsor are not acceptable. A financial assurance must be in the form that ensures that the USACE receives
notification at least 120 days in advance of any termination or revocation.
RES Cape Fear 04 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Newman Ranch Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site 18 June 2020

P
5.4 Proposed Ownership and Long -Term Management
EBX, LLC, acting as the Bank Sponsor, will establish a Conservation Easement, and will monitor the Site
for a minimum of seven years. The Mitigation Plan will provide detailed information regarding bank
operation, including long term management and annual monitoring activities, for review and approval by
the IRT. Upon approval of the Sites by the IRT, the site will be transferred to a long-term land steward. The
long-term steward shall be responsible for periodic inspection of the site to ensure that restrictions required
in the Conservation Easement or the deed restriction document(s) are upheld. Endowment funds required
to uphold easement and deed restrictions shall be negotiated prior to site transfer to the responsible party.
The Bank Sponsor will ensure that the Conservation Easement will allow for the implementation of an
initial monitoring phase, which will be developed during the design phase and conducted by the Bank
Sponsor. The Conservation Easement will allow for yearly monitoring and, if necessary, maintenance of
the Site during the initial monitoring phase. These activities will be conducted in accordance with the terms
and conditions of the RES Newman Ranch Mitigation Site Bank made and entered into by EBX, LLC and
USACE.
5.5 Assurance of Water Rights
Sufficient water rights exist to support the long-term sustainability of the site, as there are no "severed"
rights on the property.
RES Cape Fear 04 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Newman Ranch Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site 19 June 2020

t,u
IOrnrhnly ka
x, ❑
nderson
C reek
„zo
x, 0
.91
d
S
Q
s
,tza
r�o
�•
.an :.v`.a.,......::r� rr+n .•
..'yr "r• `-.i"i " 2407
�;i
'�,.'Y •� w .� A
Rd
ti .+ ter. `.'.: -+r.��
_'� •ti''' �.r"�s'+ . ryt
Siler
City Pittsboro
Legend
Z-,..
Newman Ranch I I
u4uaY' nna
Proposed Easement
•ri Yri a az,
Proposed NCDMS Easement
Buies Crc
Cape Fear River Basin - 03030004 ` _ aeo
Dunn
Cape Fear River Basin - 03030004090010
CD
- NC DMS Conservation Easement (NCDMS June 2019)
r n,Y ,a
NC NHP Element Occurrence (NC NHP October 2019) •^LL °=� t•' Aberd Fort Sra � g9
� rP "'y � a'y .r y�.l6
Fayetteville
- Other Managed Area (NC NHP July 2019)'T; - •:1
L CD se
Hope R
5 Mile Aviation Zone (NONE) y'a
"� ` 35.2346,-78.9078
" Figure 1 - Project Vicintiy Date: 6/23/2020
w E res
Newman Ranch Drawn by: GDS
0 0 5 Mitigation Project Checked by. MDE
Mile Harnett County, North Carolina inch = t mile

7
A&

Alk

r, .77
R
eap�r � • u� ' .L icy ' //
Or ,
yam, F `' `V �� y •.y � t y
`-el
s
� r
Apr. `•�.
Le-gen• f . '�
Proposed
Proposed NCDMS Easement Modified Stream
Project Parcel Existing Ditch
Figure 5 - Existing Conditions MOM -
I C
L ,
_ .�•�*��::'�16 O�#sue �—W— _ • - , .. • � �

rw
4- ffol
t
Proposed Easement
I&A
Figure 6 - Historical Imagery

i
IlL /I
Legend
Proposed Easement Value
High 66.7578
Proposed NCDMS
L— — —
Easement
-
Low: 32.522
NOAA, 2001
N
Figure 7 - LiDAR Date: 6/23/2020
resNewman Ranch Drawn by: GDS
0 710 1,500 Mitigation Project Checked by: MDE
Feet Harnett County, North Carolina 1 inch 1,500 feet

S,f ,
�pl�t fia •.. N
�:tt9€r:L•n •.� `Fri
1
i Lr
Legend
Proposed Easement - 357.42 ac
Mitigation Approach
Enhancement
Preservation
- Re-establishment
Rehabilitation
Mitigation Approach
Restoration
Enhancement II
Preservation
3
W E
S
0 750 1,500
Stream Mitigation
Reach ID
Approach
Length (ft)
Ratio
SMU
MF3-A
Restoration
1,506
1
1,506.000
MF3-B
Restoration
2,110
1
2,110.000
MF3-C
Enhancement II
2,450
2.5
980.000
MF4-A
Preservation
1,964
10
196.400
s.
MF4-B
Restoration
4,138
1
4,138.000
MF5-A
Preservation
1,883
10
188.300
t
MF5-B
Restoration
3,956
1
3,956.000
Total
18,007
13,074.700
Wetland Mitigation
Wetland ID
Approach
Area (ac)
Ratio
WMU
Rehabilitation
42.92
1.5
28.613
Area 1
Preservation
3.69
10
0.369
Area 2
Rehabilitation
23.72
1.5
15.813
Preservation
36.82
10
3.682
Enhancement
11.07
2
5.535
Area 3
Rehabilitation
6.99
1.5
4.660
Re-establishment
13.90
1
13.900
Preservation
105.15
10
10.515
Area 4
Enhancement
20.12
2
10.060
Preservation
23.67
10
2.367
Area 5
Enhancement
11.04
2
5.520
Re-establishment
11.29
1
11.290
Totall
310.38
1
1 112.325
Figure 10 - Concept Plan
Date: 6/24/2020
Newman Ranch
Drawn by: MDE
res
Mitigation Project
Checked by: BPB
Harnett County, North Carolina
1 inch = 1,500 feet

Appendix A- NC DWR Stream Determination

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date:
Project/Site:
Latitude:
Evaluator:
County:
Longitude:
Total Points:
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other
Stream is at least intermittent
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
if >_ 19 or perennial if >_ 30"
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = )
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
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
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
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
Q 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
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
1 0.5
1
1 1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal =
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
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 Identification Form Summary
REACH
MF4
MF3
MF5
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =)
15.5
15
7.5
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
1
2
1
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
2
2
1
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
1
1
1
4. Particle size of stream substrate
1
1
1
5. Active/relict floodplain
1
1
1
6. Depositional bars or benches
2
2
1
7. Recent alluvial deposits
2
2
1
8. Headcuts
1
0
0
9. Grade control
0
0
0
10. Natural valley
1.5
1
0.5
11. Second or greater order channel
3
3
0
B. Hydrology (Subtotal =)
11.5
11.5
9
12. Presence of Baseflow
3
3
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
2
2
1
14. Leaf litter
1
1
0.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris
1
1
1
16. Organic debris lines or piles
1.5
1.5
0.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
3
3
3
C. Biology (Subtotal =)
6
6
6
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
3
3
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
3
3
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and
abundance
0
0
0
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
0
0
22. Fish
0
0
0
23. Crayfish
0
0
0
24. Amphibians
0
0
0
25. Algae
0
0
0
26. Wetland plants in streambed
0
0
0
Total Points Subtotal= 33 1 32.5 1 22.5
Stream Determinationl Perennial I Perennial I Intermittent

Appendix B- NC SAM Forms

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Newman Ranch - MF3-A
Stream Category la3
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Function Class Rating Summary
Date of Evaluation 5/22/2020
Assessor Name/Organization Jeremy Schmid- RES
NO
NO
NO
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW
(4) Floodplain Access LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer HIGH
(4) Microtopography LOW
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology LOW
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(1) Water Quality HIGH
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA
(1) Habitat
(2) In -stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow HIGH
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability MEDIUM
(3) In -stream Habitat LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Stream -side Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation MEDIUM
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat NA
Overall

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Newman Ranch - MF3-B
Stream Category la3
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Function Class Rating Summary
Date of Evaluation 5/22/2020
Assessor Name/Organization Jeremy Schmid- RES
NO
NO
NO
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW
(4) Floodplain Access LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer HIGH
(4) Microtopography LOW
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology LOW
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(1) Water Quality HIGH
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA
(1) Habitat
(2) In -stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow HIGH
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability MEDIUM
(3) In -stream Habitat LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Stream -side Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation MEDIUM
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat NA
Overall

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Newman Ranch - MF3-C
Stream Category la3
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Function Class Rating Summary
Date of Evaluation 5/22/2020
Assessor Name/Organization Jeremy Schmid- RES
NO
NO
NO
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW
(4) Floodplain Access LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer HIGH
(4) Microtopography LOW
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology LOW
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(1) Water Quality HIGH
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA
(1) Habitat
(2) In -stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow HIGH
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability MEDIUM
(3) In -stream Habitat LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Stream -side Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation MEDIUM
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat NA
Overall

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Newman Ranch - MF4-A
Stream Category la3
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Function Class Rating Summary
Date of Evaluation 5/22/2020
Assessor Name/Organization Jeremy Schmid- RES
NO
NO
NO
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation HIGH
(4) Floodplain Access HIGH
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer HIGH
(4) Microtopography MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology HIGH
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(1) Water Quality HIGH
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA
(1) Habitat
(2) In -stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow HIGH
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability HIGH
(3) In -stream Habitat LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat NA
Overall

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Newman Ranch - MF4-B
Stream Category la3
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Function Class Rating Summary
Date of Evaluation 5/22/2020
Assessor Name/Organization Jeremy Schmid- RES
NO
NO
NO
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW
(4) Floodplain Access LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer LOW
(4) Microtopography LOW
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability MEDIUM
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology LOW
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(1) Water Quality LOW
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration LOW
(3) Thermoregulation LOW
(2) Indicators of Stressors NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA
(1) Habitat
(2) In -stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow HIGH
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability MEDIUM
(3) In -stream Habitat LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat LOW
(3) Stream -side Habitat LOW
(3) Thermoregulation LOW
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat NA
Overall

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Newman Ranch - MF5-A
Stream Category la3
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Function Class Rating Summary
Date of Evaluation 5/22/2020
Assessor Name/Organization Jeremy Schmid- RES
NO
NO
NO
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation HIGH
(4) Floodplain Access HIGH
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer HIGH
(4) Microtopography MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology HIGH
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(1) Water Quality HIGH
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA
(1) Habitat
(2) In -stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow HIGH
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability HIGH
(3) In -stream Habitat LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat NA
Overall

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Newman Ranch - MF5-B
Stream Category la3
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Function Class Rating Summary
Date of Evaluation 5/22/2020
Assessor Name/Organization Jeremy Schmid- RES
NO
NO
NO
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW
(4) Floodplain Access LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer MEDIUM
(4) Microtopography LOW
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology LOW
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(1) Water Quality HIGH
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA
(1) Habitat
(2) In -stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow HIGH
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability MEDIUM
(3) In -stream Habitat LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat LOW
(3) Stream -side Habitat LOW
(3) Thermoregulation MEDIUM
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat NA
Overall

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual
Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Newman Ranch- WA1 - Preservation
Date
5/22/20
Wetland Type Headwater Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Jeremy Schmid- RES
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open
water (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Rating Summary
Function Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Physical Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
HIGH
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
MEDIUM
Vegetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology Condition
HIGH
Water Quality Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Habitat Condition
HIGH
Overall Wetland Rating HIGH

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual
Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Newman Ranch- WA1 - Rehabilitation
Date
5/22/20
Wetland Type Headwater Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Jeremy Schmid- RES
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open
water (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Rating Summary
Function Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Physical Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
LOW
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
MEDIUM
Vegetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Habitat Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual
Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Newman Ranch- WA2 - Rehabilitation
Date
5/22/20
Wetland Type Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Jeremy Schmid- RES
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open
water (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Rating Summary
Function Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Soluble Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Physical Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
MEDIUM
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Vegetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Habitat Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual
Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Newman Ranch- WA3 - Enhancement
Date
5/22/20
Wetland Type Headwater Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Jeremy Schmid- RES
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open
water (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Rating Summary
Function Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Physical Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
LOW
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
MEDIUM
Vegetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Habitat Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating MEDIUM

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual
Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Newman Ranch- WA3 - Preservation
Date
5/22/20
Wetland Type Headwater Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Jeremy Schmid- RES
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open
water (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Rating Summary
Function Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
HIGH
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Physical Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
HIGH
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
MEDIUM
Vegetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology Condition
HIGH
Water Quality Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Habitat Condition
HIGH
Overall Wetland Rating HIGH

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual
Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Newman Ranch- WA3 - Rehabilitation
Date
5/22/20
Wetland Type Headwater Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Jeremy Schmid- RES
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open
water (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Rating Summary
Function Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Physical Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
LOW
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
MEDIUM
Vegetation Composition
Condition
LOW
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology Condition
LOW
Water Quality Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Habitat Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual
Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Newman Ranch- WA3 - Re-establishment
Date
5/22/20
Wetland Type Headwater Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Jeremy Schmid- RES
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open
water (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Rating Summary
Function Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Physical Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
LOW
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
HIGH
Vegetation Composition
Condition
LOW
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology Condition
LOW
Water Quality Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Habitat Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual
Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Newman Ranch- WA4 - Enhancement
Date
5/22/20
Wetland Type Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Jeremy Schmid- RES
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open
water (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Rating Summary
Function Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Soluble Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Physical Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
LOW
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Vegetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Habitat Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating MEDIUM

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual
Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Newman Ranch- WA4 - Preservation
Date
5/22/20
Wetland Type Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Jeremy Schmid- RES
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open
water (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Rating Summary
Function Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Soluble Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Physical Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
HIGH
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Vegetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Habitat Condition
MEDIUM
Overall Wetland Rating MEDIUM

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual
Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Newman Ranch- WA5 - Enhancement
Date
5/22/20
Wetland Type Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Jeremy Schmid- RES
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open
water (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Rating Summary
Function Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Soluble Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Physical Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
LOW
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Vegetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology Condition
LOW
Water Quality Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Habitat Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual
Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Newman Ranch- WA5 - Preservation
Date
5/22/20
Wetland Type Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Jeremy Schmid- RES
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open
water (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Rating Summary
Function Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Soluble Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Physical Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
HIGH
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Vegetation Composition
Condition
HIGH
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Habitat Condition
HIGH
Overall Wetland Rating HIGH

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual
Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Newman Ranch- WA5 - Re-establishment
Date
5/22/20
Wetland Type Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Jeremy Schmid- RES
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open
water (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Rating Summary
Function Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Soluble Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Physical Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
MEDIUM
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Vegetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology Condition
LOW
Water Quality Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Habitat Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

Appendix C- Landowner Authorization Forms

DocuSign Enveiope ID: EEBB2C54-086E-49F6-B6DF-2F6FF0697C93
OFFER TO PURCHASE AND CONTRACT - VACANT LOT/LAND
[Consult "Guidelines" (form 12G) for guidance in completing this form]
NOTE- This contract is intended for unimproved real property that Buyer will purchase only for personal use and does not have
immediate plans to subdivide. It should not be used to sell property that is being subdivided unless the property has been platted,
properly approved and recorded with the register of deeds as of the date of the contract. If Seller is Buyer's builder and the sale involves
the construction of a new single family dwelling prior to closing, use the standard Offer to Purchase and Contract —New Construction
(Form 800-T) or, if the construction is completed, use the Offer to Purchase and Contract (Form 2-T) with the New Construction
Addendum (Form 2A3-T).
For valuable consideration, the receipt and legal sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, Buyer offers to purchase and Seller
upon acceptance agrees to sell and convey the Property on the terms and conditions of this Offer To Purchase and Contract and any
addendum or modification made in accordance with its terms (together the "Contract").
1. TERMS AND DEFINITIONS: The terms listed below shall have the respective meaning given them as set forth adjacent to each
term.
(a) "Seller": Mitchell Forest, LP
(b) "Buyer": Colonel Land, LLC
(c) "Property": The Property shall include all that real estate described below together with all appurtenances thereto including the
improvements located thereon.
NOTE: If the Property will include a manufactured (mobile) home(s), Buyer and Seller should consider including the Manufactured
(Mobile) Home provision in the Additional Provisions Addendum (Standard Form 2AI I-T) with this offer.
Street Address: 663 ac. +1- portion of 2246 Shady Grove Road
City: Spring Lake Zip: 28390
County: Harnett , North Carolina
NOTE: Governmental authority over taxes, zoning, school districts, utilities and mail delivery may differ from address shown.
Legal Description- (CompleteALL applicable)
Plat Reference: LotfUnit , Block/Section _ , Subdivision/Condominium
, as shown on Plat Book/Slide 2015 at Page(s)
The PINIPID or other identification number of the Property is: 663 ac. +1- portion of PIN: 0524-91-2407
Other description: See attached Exhibit A
Some or all of the Property may be described in Deed Book 2473
(d)
at Page 283
109
paid in U.S. Dollars upon the following terms:
BY DUE DILIGENCE FEE made payable and delivered to Seller by the Effective
Date
BY INITIAL EARNEST MONEY DEPOSIT made payable and delivered to Escrow
Agent named in Paragraph 1(f) by ❑ cash ❑ personal check ❑ official bank check
® wire transfer, ❑ electronic transfer, EITHER ❑ with this offer OR ® within five
(5) days of the Effective Date of this Contract.
BY (ADDITIONAL) EARNEST MONEY DEPOSIT made payable and delivered to
Escrow Agent named in Paragraph 1(f) by cash, official bank check, wire transfer or
electronic transfer no later than 5 p.m. on
TIME BEING OF THE ESSENCE.
BY ASSUMPTION ofthe unpaid principal balance and all obligations of Seller on the
existing loan(s) secured by a deed of trust on the Property in accordance with the
attached Loan Assumption Addendum (Standard Form 2A6-T).
BY SELLER FINANCING in accordance with the attached Seller Financing
Addendum (Standard Form 2A5-T).
BALANCE of the Purchase Price in cash at Settlement (some or all of which may be
paid with the proceeds of a new loan)
Page I of 11
® This form jointly approved by:
North Carolina Bar Association
North Carolina Association of REALTOW, Inc.
REALTOTi�
orrorruKIr*
Buyer initials
y Seller initial
STANDARD FORM 12-T
Revised 7120I8
CD 712019

DocuSign Envelope 1D: EEBB2C54-086E-49F6-B6DF-2F6FF0697C93
19. EXECUTION: This Contract may be signed in multiple originals or counterparts, all of which together constitute one and the same
instrument.
20. COMPUTATION OF DAYSII'IME OF DAY: Unless otherwise provided, for purposes of this Contract, the term "days" shall
mean consecutive calendar days, including Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays, whether federal, state, local or religious. For the purposes
of calculating days, the count of "days" shall begin on the day following the day upon which any act or notice as provided in this Contract
was required to be performed or made. Any reference to a date or time of day shall refer to the date and/or time of day in the State of
North Carolina.
THE NORTH CAROLINA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS®, INC. AND THE NORTH CAROLINA BAR ASSOCIATION MAKE NO
REPRESENTATION AS TO THE LEGAL VALIDITY OR ADEQUACY OF ANY PROVISION OF THIS FORM IN ANY SPECIFIC
TRANSACTION. IF YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND THIS FORM OR FEEL THAT IT DOES NOT PROVIDE FOR YOUR LEGAL
NEEDS, YOU SHOULD CONSULT A NORTH CAROLINA REAL ESTATE ATTORNEY BEFORE YOU SIGN IT.
This offer shall become a binding contract on the Effective Date. Unless specifically provided otherwise, Buyer's failure to timely
deliver any fee, deposit or other payment provided for herein shall not prevent this offer from becoming a binding contract, provided
that any such failure shall give Seller certain rights to terminate the contract as described herein or as otherwise permitted by law.
1/14/2020
Date:
Buyer-
Date, -
Buyer:
Entity Buyer:
Colonel Land LLC
(Name of LLC/Cor oration Partne hip/Trust/etc.)
By:
Name: Darrell Whi
Title: Authorized Signatory
Date:
Portia Newman
SellerV,8058F9237771492 1/14/2020
Date:
ncu g y:
Marion Klingler
Seller:
2B710-871DESWB.-
Entity Seller:
Mitchell Forest, LP
(Name of LLC/Corporation/Partn ,Tf4c.)
U cu5igned tfy:
By AZ-9"
Name:
�L'��zn Mar_tC
Title: Manager
Date: January 8, 2020 Date�/14/2020
WIRE FRAUD WARNING
manager/partner/own(
1/13/2020
TO BUYERS: BEFORE SENDING ANY WIRE, YOU SHOULD CALL THE CLOSING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO
VERIFY THE INSTRUCTIONS. IF YOU RECEIVE WIRING INSTRUCTIONS FOR A DIFFERENT BANK, BRANCH
LOCATION, ACCOUNT NAME OR ACCOUNT NUMBER, THEY SHOULD BE PRESUMED FRAUDULENT. DO NOT SEND
ANY FUNDS AND CONTACT THE CLOSING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IMMEDIATELY.
TO SELLERS: IF YOUR PROCEEDS WILL BE WIRED, IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT YOU PROVIDE WIRING
INSTRUCTIONS AT CLOSING IN WRITING IN THE PRESENCE OF THE ATTORNEY. IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO ATTEND
CLOSING, YOU MAY BE REQUIRED TO SEND AN ORIGINAL NOTARIZED DIRECTIVE TO THE CLOSING ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE CONTAINING THE WIRING INSTRUCTIONS. THIS MAY BE SENT WITH THE DEED, LIEN WAIVER AND TAX
FORMS IF THOSE DOCUMENTS ARE BEING PREPARED FOR YOU BY THE CLOSING ATTORNEY. AT A MINIMUM, YOU
SHOULD CALL THE CLOSING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO PROVIDE THE WIRE INSTRUCTIONS. THE WIRE
INSTRUCTIONS SHOULD BE VERIFIED OVER THE TELEPHONE VIA A CALL TO YOU INITIATED BY THE CLOSING
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO ENSURE THAT THEY ARE NOT FROM A FRAUDULENT SOURCE.
WHETHER YOU ARE A BUYER OR A SELLER, YOU SHOULD CALL THE CLOSING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AT A
NUMBER THAT IS INDEPENDENTLY OBTAINED. TO ENSURE THAT YOUR CONTACT IS LEGITIMATE, YOU SHOULD
NOT RELY ON A PHONE NUMBER IN AN EMAIL FROM THE CLOSING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, YOUR REAL ESTATE
AGENT OR ANYONE ELSE.
Page 9 of I 1
STANDARD FORM 12-T
Revised 712018
© 7/2018

DoouSign Envelope M: EEBB2C54-086E-49F6-66DF-2F6FF6697C93
EXHIBIT A
48
_ r
-4d Ado
R
Buyer InitialsJ, Seller Initials: m

Appendix D- Photo Log

MF2-B in foreground with Wetland 4, Shady Grove Rd in
background and Buddy Barefoot Rd. on right
May 22, 2020
Looking south along Buddy Barefoot Rd. MF1-A and W5
on right. W2 to the left of road
May 22, 2020
Looking east at W4 and MF2. Buddy Barefoot Rd. in
background
May 22, 2020
Z
}
W4 and MF2 in foreground, MF 1-B and W2 in top
portion of photo. Eastern parcel boundary on right side of
photo
May 22, 2020
Looking at breached dam of W5 on MF1-A
May 22, 2020
Looking east directly above Buddy Barefoot Rd. MF3 in
center, W 1 in far top right
May 22, 2020

Appendix E — Forestry Plan

-Xftf cr K csc) u rcc
Management, L.LC.
♦♦'.1< FORESTRY CONSULTANTS
�t Forest Management Plan
�K
t-
�.d• �r', �. �� ,1 r yr. r,7 ., �, Cy#�°,- � X r 'F 7r = .
f t f c r- ri 7 y
k-
f _
ti ;1
r '''� >L .•—:5e. .. .. - _ `� — 'yam �.�' •ti'' '
Mitchell Forest LP.
Harnett County, NC
xr 1 PIN: 0524-91-2407
P.O. BOX 933, WADESBORO, NC 28170
WADESBORO, NC OFFICE: 704-694-6436 ANDERSON, SC OFFICE: 864-367-2205 FAX: [phone]
www.LI'Lerfore,5try.com

It
SINCL 1978
March 25t", 2020
Mitchell Forest LP.
809 Canyon Creek Lane
Fuquay Varina, NC 27526
Dear Landowner:
Klkcr Kcsourcc
Management, LLC
FORESTRY CONSULTANTS
Enclosed is a forest management plan for property you own in
Harnett County, NC. The forest management plan entails the following information:
➢ Sound forest management objectives
➢ Description of the Forest Management Process
➢ Management recommendations
Please examine this document closely, and let me know if there is any additional
information you should require. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions or
comments.
Sincerely,
Michael Huculak
Consulting Forester
Kiker Resource Management, LLC
NCRF#1813
SCRF#1924
NC Real Estate Broker #303476
P.O. Box 933, WADESBORO, NC 28170
WADESBORO, NC OFFICE; 704-694-6436 ANDERSON, SC OFFICE; 864-367-2205 FAX; 704-694-6868
www.LiLe-rfore5try.com

Forest Management Recommendations
Forest management recommendations have been made for each stand of the
tract. These recommendations are summarized by stand below. The stand numbers
referenced correspond to the numbers on the stand map (in the Appendix).
PIN: 0524-91-2407
Stand #
Stand_Type
Timber Type
Acres
1
LL-2018
Planted Longleaf Pine established in 2018
53.48
2
LB-1988
Planted Loblolly Pine established in 1988
95.16
3
LL-2019
Planted Longleaf Pine established in 2019
55.44
4
LB-2019
Planted Loblolly Pine established in 2020
23.49
5
LL-2019
Planted Longleaf Pine established in 2019
44.34
6
LB-2020
Planted Loblolly Pine established in 2019
33.19
7
LB-2019
Planted Loblolly Pine established in 2019
23.57
8
LL-2019
Planted Longleaf Pine established in 2019
21.39
9
LB-1988
Semi -natural Loblolly Pine established in 1988
304.72
10
LB-2007
Semi -natural Loblolly Pine established in 2007
9.10
11
LB-2011
Semi -natural Loblolly Pine established in 2011
162.26
12
LB-2015
Semi -natural Loblolly Pine established in 2015
119.17
13
LB-2016
Semi -natural Loblolly Pine established in 2016
45.01
14
LL-2011
Semi -natural Longleaf Pine established in 2011
15.78
15
LL-2016
Semi -natural Longleaf Pine established in 2016
60.17
16
MH
Mixed Hardwoods
78.15
17
HP
Mixed Hardwood -Pine
32.21
18
Open
N/A
6.75
19
Field
N/A
161.25
20
Ag Building
N/A
1.03
21
Pond
N/A
23.13
22 LB-2020 Planted Loblolly Pine established in 2020 33.03
23 LL-2018 Planted Longleaf Pine established in 2018 16.45
Total GIS Acres 1418.27
Mitchell Forest LP. Tract
Stand 1— 53.48 Acres
Stand 1 refers to a longleaf pine stand established in December 2018. This stand
had a chemical site preparation and was planted on an 8' x 10' (545 TPA) spacing with
containerized longleaf pine seedlings. The current stand conditions are summarized
below:
• Acres = 53.48
3

• Age =1
• Average trees per acre = 545
• Average basal area per acre = N/A
• Average height of dominant trees = N/A
• Average DBH = N/A
Recommendations:
1. Monitor the tract for continued survival and future silvicultural activities
(thinning, release spray, prescribed burn etc.).
Stand 2 — 95.16 Acres
Stand 2 refers to a stand of planted loblolly pine established in 1988. This stand
was 1st thinned in 2011. Stand 2 is mature and ready for a final harvest:
• Acres = 95.16
• Age = 30
• Average trees per acre = 160
• Average basal area per acre = 140 sq. ft
• Average height of dominant trees = 70 ft
• Average DBH = 13 in
Recommendations:
1. Continue to monitor forest health annually until market conditions dictate
proper timing for a final harvest.
Stand 3 — 55.44 Acres
Stand 3 refers to a longleaf pine stand established in November of 2019. This
stand had a chemical site preparation and was planted on an 8' x 10' (545 TPA) spacing
with containerized longleaf pine seedlings. The current stand conditions are summarized
below:
• Acres = 55.44
• Age = N/A
• Average trees per acre = 545
• Average basal area per acre = N/A
• Average height of dominant trees = N/A
• Average DBH = N/A
Recommendations:
1. Monitor the tract for continued survival and future silvicultural activities
(thinning, release spray, prescribed burn etc.).
N

Stand 4 — 23.49 Acres
Stand 4 refers to a stand of planted loblolly pine established in early 2020. This
stand was damaged by flooding from Hurricane Florence in September 2018. This stand
had a chemical site preparation and was planted on an 8' x 10' (545 TPA) spacing with
containerized loblolly pine seedlings. The current stand conditions are summarized
below:
• Acres = 23.49
• Age = N/A
• Average trees per acre = N/A
• Average basal area per acre = N/A
• Average height of dominant trees = N/A
• Average DBH = N/A
Recommendations:
1. Monitor the tract for continued survival and future silvicultural activities
(thinning, release spray, prescribed burn etc.).
Stand 5 — 44.34 Acres
Stand 5 refers to a stand of planted longleaf pine established in 2019. This stand
was damaged by flooding from Hurricane Florence in September 2018. This stand had a
chemical site preparation and was planted on an 8' x 10' (545 TPA) spacing with
containerized longleaf pine seedlings. The current stand conditions are summarized
below:
• Acres = 44.34
• Age = N/A
• Average trees per acre = N/A
• Average basal area per acre = N/A
• Average height of dominant trees = N/A
• Average DBH = N/A
Recommendations:
1. Monitor the tract for continued survival and future silvicultural activities
(thinning, release spray, prescribed burn etc.).
Stand 6 — 33.19 Acres
Stand 6 refers to a stand of planted loblolly pine established in 2020. This stand
was damaged by flooding from Hurricane Florence in September 2018. This stand had a
chemical site preparation and was planted on an 8' x 10' (545 TPA) spacing with
5

containerized loblolly pine seedlings. The current stand conditions are summarized
below:
• Acres = 33.19
• Age = N/A
• Average trees per acre = N/A
• Average basal area per acre = N/A
• Average height of dominant trees = N/A
• Average DBH = N/A
Recommendations:
1. Monitor the tract for continued survival and future silvicultural activities
(thinning, release spray, prescribed burn etc.).
Stand 7 — 23.57 Acres
Stand 7 refers to a stand of planted loblolly pine established in early 2020. This
stand was damaged by flooding from Hurricane Florence in September 2018. This stand
had both chemical and mechanical site preparation (v-shear and bedding) and was
planted on a 6' x 14' (518 TPA) spacing with containerized loblolly pine seedlings. The
current stand conditions are summarized below:
• Acres = 23.57
• Age = N/A
• Average trees per acre = N/A
• Average basal area per acre = N/A
• Average height of dominant trees = N/A
• Average DBH = N/A
Recommendations:
1. Monitor the tract for continued survival and future silvicultural activities
(thinning, release spray, prescribed burn etc.).
Stand 8 — 21.39 Acres
Stand 8 refers to a stand of planted longleaf pine established in 2019. This stand
was damaged by flooding from Hurricane Florence in September 2018. This stand had a
chemical site preparation and was planted on an 8' x 10' (545 TPA) spacing with
containerized longleaf pine seedlings. The current stand conditions are summarized
below:
• Acres = 21.39
• Age = N/A
• Average trees per acre = N/A
• Average basal area per acre = N/A
• Average height of dominant trees = N/A
• Average DBH = N/A
6

Recommendations:
1. Monitor the tract for continued survival and future silvicultural activities
(thinning, release spray, prescribed burn etc.).
Stand 9 — 304.72 Acres
Stand 9 refers to a semi natural loblolly pine stand established in 1988. Most
portions of this stand were 1st thinned between 2006-2008. Stand 9 is mature and ready
for a final harvest. Stand description details below:
• Acres = 304.72
• Age = 30
• Average trees per acre = 150
• Average basal area per acre = 120 sq. ft
• Average height of dominant trees = 72 ft
• Average DBH = 12.5 in
Recommendations:
1. Continue to monitor forest health annually until market conditions dictate
proper timing for a final harvest.
Stand 10 — 9.10 Acres
Stand 10 refers to a semi natural loblolly pine stand established in 2007. Stand
description details below:
• Acres = 9.10
• Age = 12
• Average trees per acre = 480
• Average basal area per acre = 90 sq. ft
• Average height of dominant trees = 35 ft
• Average DBH = 7 in
Recommendations:
1. No silvicultural activities are planned at this time for this stand. The stand will be
monitored for a thinning harvest in the next 3+/- years to promote stand health
and productivity.
Stand 11-162.26 Acres
Stand 11 refers to a semi natural loblolly pine stand established in 2011. Stand
description details below:
• Acres = 162.26
7

• Age =8
• Average trees per acre = 530
• Average basal area per acre = 50 sq. ft
• Average height of dominant trees = 20 ft
• Average DBH = 3.5 in
Recommendations:
1. No silvicultural activities are planned at this time for this stand. The stand will be
monitored for a thinning harvest in the next 7+/- years to promote stand health
and productivity.
Stand 12—119.17 Acres
Stand 12 refers to a semi natural loblolly pine stand established in 2015. Stand
description details below:
• Acres = 119.17
• Age = 4
• Average trees per acre = 545
• Average basal area per acre = N/A
• Average height of dominant trees = 8.5
• Average DBH = N/A
Recommendations:
1. No silvicultural activities are planned at this time for this stand. The stand will be
monitored for a thinning harvest in the next 11+/- years to promote stand health
and productivity.
Stand 13 — 45.01 Acres
Stand 13 refers to a semi natural loblolly pine stand established in 2016. Stand
description details below:
• Acres = 45.01
• Age =3
• Average trees per acre = 545
• Average basal area per acre = N/A
• Average height of dominant trees = 6 ft
• Average DBH = 1 in
Recommendations:
1. No silvicultural activities are planned at this time for this stand. The stand will be
monitored for a thinning harvest in the next 12+/- years to promote stand health
and productivity.
0

Stand 14 —15.78 Acres
Stand 14 refers to a semi natural longleaf pine stand established in 2011. Stand
description details below:
• Acres = 45.01
• Age =8
• Average trees per acre = 545
• Average basal area per acre = 30 sq. ft
• Average height of dominant trees = 15 ft
• Average DBH = 2 in
Recommendations:
1. No silvicultural activities are planned at this time for this stand. The stand will be
monitored for a thinning harvest in the next 7+/- years to promote stand health
and productivity.
Stand 15 — 60.17 Acres
Stand 14 refers to a semi natural longleaf pine stand established in 2016. Stand
description details below:
• Acres = 60.17
• Age =3
• Average trees per acre = 545
• Average basal area per acre = N/A
• Average height of dominant trees = 3 ft
• Average DBH = N/A
Recommendations:
1. No silvicultural activities are planned at this time for this stand. The stand will be
monitored for a thinning harvest in the next 12+/- years to promote stand health
and productivity.
Stand 16 — 78.15 Acres
below:
Stand 16 refers to a stand of mixed hardwoods. Current stand data is listed
• Acres = 78.15
• Age = 35 +/- years
• Average trees per acre = 140
• Average basal area per acre = 100 sq. ft./ acre
• Average height of dominant trees = 65 ft.
• Average DBH = 11 inches
0

Recommendations:
Parts of this stand are located adjacent to intermittent streams and will reside as
a streamside management zone (SMZ) to be designated along perennial and
intermittent streams, wetland areas, and other bodies of open water where extra
precaution is needed in performing forest management activities. The purpose of the
SMZ is to slow and spread the surface water flow and trap and filter out sediment
before it reaches the stream channel or body of water. The SMZ also provides stream
shade and functions as a buffer when fertilizers, pesticides, etc. are applied to the
adjacent lands.
No forest management activities are scheduled at this time.
Stand 17 — 32.21 Acres
Stand 17 refers to a stand of mixed hardwoods and pine. Current stand data is
listed below:
• Acres = 32.21
• Age = 35+/- years
• Average trees per acre = 130
• Average basal area per acre = 80 sq. ft./ acre
• Average height of dominant trees = 65 ft.
• Average DBH = 11 inches
Recommendations:
Parts of this stand are located adjacent to intermittent streams and will reside as
a streamside management zone (SMZ) to be designated along perennial and
intermittent streams, wetland areas, and other bodies of open water where extra
precaution is needed in performing forest management activities. The purpose of the
SMZ is to slow and spread the surface water flow and trap and filter out sediment
before it reaches the stream channel or body of water. The SMZ also provides stream
shade and functions as a buffer when fertilizers, pesticides, etc. are applied to the
adjacent lands.
No forest management activities are scheduled at this time.
Stand 18 — 6.75 Acres
time.
Stand 18 contains open areas that will not be under forest management at this
10

Stand 19—161.25 Acres
Stand 19 contains agriculture fields areas that will not be under forest
management at this time.
Stand 20 —1.03 Acres
Stand 20 contains an agriculture building that will not be under forest
management at this time.
Stand 21— 23.13 Acres
Stand 21 contains pond areas that will not be under forest management at this
time.
Stand 22 — 33.03 Acres
Stand 22 refers to a stand of planted loblolly pine established in 2020. This stand
had a chemical site preparation and was planted on an 8' x 10' (545 TPA) spacing with
containerized longleaf pine seedlings. The current stand conditions are summarized
below:
• Acres = 33.03
• Age = N/A
• Average trees per acre = N/A
• Average basal area per acre = N/A
• Average height of dominant trees = N/A
• Average DBH = N/A
Recommendations:
1. Monitor the tract for continued survival and future silvicultural activities
(thinning, release spray, prescribed burn etc.).
Stand 23 —16.45 Acres
Stand 23 refers to a stand of planted longleaf pine established in 2018. This
stand had a chemical site preparation and was planted on an 8' x 10' (545 TPA) spacing
with containerized longleaf pine seedlings. The current stand conditions are summarized
below:
• Acres = 16.45
• Age = 1
• Average trees per acre = N/A
• Average basal area per acre = N/A
• Average height of dominant trees = N/A
11

• Average DBH = N/A
Recommendations:
1. Monitor the tract for continued survival and future silvicultural activities
(thinning, release spray, prescribed burn etc.).
Conclusion
I feel the proposed forest management plan is the most efficient and effective
way to meet the desired management objectives of the landowner. Each of the
management objectives set by Kiker Resource Management, LLC can be met through
the use of sound, modern forest management practices. Please feel free to contact me
with any questions or comments you may have.
12