20210438 Ver 1_Protected Species Survey Report 10-12-2018_20210326

CIVIL ENGINEERING | ENVIRONMENTAL | SURVEYING | GIS | LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE | CONSTRUCTION SERVICES

5410 Trinity Road
Suite 102
Raleigh, NC 27607
P 919.866.4951
F 919.859.5663
www.timmons.com

October 12, 2018

Mr. Bryan Tompkins
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service-Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801

Re: Protected Species Survey and Habitat
Assessment; Stony Knoll Solar
(Approx. 441.6 acres)
Surry County, North Carolina

Dear Mr. Tompkins,

On behalf of Duke Energy Renewables, please find the enclosed Protected Species and
Habitat Assessment Report for the above referenced property (hereafter the “Site”). The
purpose of the investigation was to evaluate the Site for the presence or absence of federally
protected species or suitable habitat for federally protected species, which have the potential to
occur within the Site boundaries or in the immediate vicinity of the Site. Based upon the results
of this evaluation, the primary federal species of regulatory concern include: the bog turtle
(Glyptemys muhlenbergii), the northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis), Schweinitz’s
sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii), and the small whorled pogonia (Isotria medeoloides).
Following a review of the enclosed information, we are requesting an “agreement of findings”
from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).

The Site encompasses approximately 441.6 acres and is located north of the
intersection of Rockford Road and Robert Burrus Road in Surry County, North Carolina. Two
single family homes are located in the northwestern corner of the Site. The remainder of the Site
consists primarily of forested and agricultural lands with associated facilities. Easements with
overhead electrical utilities transect the center and southern portions of the Site from east to
west.

The bog turtle (Glyptemys muhlenbergii) is currently listed as threatened due to similarity
of appearance (T(S/A)) and is therefore, not subject to Section 7 consultation. Pursuant to the
USFWS guidelines, species listed as T(S/A) are not biologically endangered or threatened.

Areas of the Site classified as dry mesic oak-hickory forest were determined to exhibit
marginal suitable summer habitat for the northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis).
However, no known maternity roosts or hibernacula are documented at the Site or within one-
mile of the Site. Furthermore, the Site is located outside of the USFWS confirmed consultation
areas for this species. Therefore, a biological finding of “No Effect” is proposed for the northern
long-eared bat.

CIVIL ENGINEERING | ENVIRONMENTAL | SURVEYING | GIS | LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE | CONSTRUCTION SERVICES

5410 Trinity Road
Suite 102
Raleigh, NC 27607
P 919.866.4951
F 919.859.5663
www.timmons.com
Surveys for Schweinitz’s sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii) were completed under the
direct supervision of Duke Energy Renewable’s Senior Environmental Specialist, James
McRacken. Maintained open fields and utility easements at the Site were evaluated for potential
Schweinitz’s sunflower) habitat. Within these areas, sections that contained suitable soils
conducive to this species were surveyed on October 9th, 2018. No Schweinitz’s sunflower was
observed. In addition, no documented occurrences of Schweinitz’s sunflower occur within a two-
mile radius of the Site. A biological finding of “No Effect” is proposed for this species.

Potentially suitable habitat for the small whorled pogonia (Isotria medeoloides) at the
Site included mixed hardwood forested areas with moderate or sparse understory vegetation.
All potential habitat areas within the Site were surveyed for the small whorled pogonia from
June 26th to June 27th, which is within the USFWS recommended survey period. No small
whorled pogonia was observed. In addition, there are no documented occurrences of small
whorled pogonia within a three-mile radius of the Site. A biological finding of “No Effect” is
proposed for the small whorled pogonia.

Please review this enclosure and contact Anna Reusche at [phone] or
[e-mail] with any questions.

Sincerely,
Timmons Group

Eli Wright
Environmental Scientist II

Anna Reusche
Environmental Project Manager

PREPARED FOR:
DUKE ENERGY RENEWABLES
526 SOUTH CHURCH STREET
CHARLOTTE, NC 28202

STONY KNOLL SOLAR

PROTECTED SPECIES AND HABITAT
ASSESSMENT
& SURVEY

OCTOBER 2018

PREPARED BY:

5410 TRINITY ROAD, SUITE 102
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27607
PHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WWW.TIMMONS.COM
TIMMONS GROUP PROJECT NO 39949.006

Protected Species and Habitat Assessment & Survey Timmons Group
Stony Knoll Solar October 2018
Page i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

On behalf of Duke Energy Renewables, Timmons Group environmental scientists Eli
Wright, George Buchholz, Registered Environmental Manager (REM), Professional Wetland
Scientist (PWS), Anna Reusche, PWS, and environmental technician William Sally, conducted a
Protected Species Survey and Habitat Assessment from June 18th through June 27th, 2018
and on October 9th, 2018 to identify any protected individuals (plants or animals) and the
presence of suitable habitat of federally protected species within the project study limits of the
Stony Knoll Solar project (Site). Other preliminary environmental due-diligence investigations
have been initiated for the Site including a preliminary wetland and stream assessment as well
as a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment.

The Site encompasses approximately 441.6 acres and is located north of the
intersection of Rockford Road and Robert Burrus Road in Surry County, North Carolina (see
Figure 1: Vicinity Map). The Site is in the Piedmont Physiographic Province. It is bound in all
directions by a mix of forested lands, single family homes and agricultural lands. Two single
family homes are located in the northwestern corner of the Site. The remainder of the Site
consists primarily of forested and agricultural lands with associated facilities. Easements with
overhead electrical utilities transect the center and southern portions of the Site from east to
west.

The Site is located within the Upper Yadkin-Pee Dee watershed (Hydrologic Unit Code
HUC 03040101) and is drained by unnamed tributaries that flow east to West Double Creek
(see Figure 2: Hydrologic Unit Code Map). West Double Creek has a NC Division of Water
Resources Stream Index Number of 12-67-1 and a Stream Classification of Water Supply ‘C’.
The Site ultimately drains to the Yadkin River. The Site contains a 100-year floodplain
according to NC FIRM Map 3710590200K (effective date August 18, 2009). Floodplain areas
are generally located adjacent to perennial stream features within the southeastern sections of
the Site (See Figure 3: Environmental Inventory Map).

The results of this assessment indicate that the Site contains suitable habitat needed to
support populations of the federally threatened small whorled pogonia (Isotria medeoloides) and
marginally suitable habitat needed to support populations of the federally endangered
Schweinitz’s sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii).

All potential habitat areas within the Site were field surveyed for small whorled pogonia
from June 26th through June 27th, 2018 by Timmons Group environmental scientists Eli Wright
and George Buchholz, REM, PWS and environmental technician William Sally. The survey was
conducted during the optimal survey window, which is mid-May through early July, according to
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). No small whorled pogonia individuals were
observed during the field investigations. In addition, there are no documented occurrences of
small whorled pogonia within a three-mile radius of the Site, according to client conducted
coordination with the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP). Therefore, it is
believed that a biological finding of “No Effect” should be considered for the small whorled
pogonia.

Surveys for Schweinitz’s sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii) were completed under the
direct supervision of Duke Energy Renewable’s Senior Environmental Specialist, James
McRacken. Maintained open fields and utility easements at the Site were evaluated for potential
Schweinitz’s sunflower habitat. Within these areas, sections that contained suitable soils
conducive to this species were surveyed on October 9th, 2018. No Schweinitz’s sunflower was
observed. In addition, there are no documented occurrences of Schweinitz’s sunflower within a
two-mile radius of the Site. Therefore, a biological finding of “No Effect” is proposed.

Protected Species and Habitat Assessment & Survey Timmons Group
Stony Knoll Solar October 2018
Page ii
PROTECTED SPECIES HABITAT ASSESSMENT & SURVEY
STONY KNOLL SOLAR

TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................. i
1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................... 1
2.0 SITE INFORMATION ........................................................................................... 1
2.1 Site Location .............................................................................................. 1
2.2 Site Description .......................................................................................... 1
3.0 ASSESSMENT METHODS .................................................................................. 2
3.1 Preliminary Offsite Investigation/Data Review ........................................... 2
3.2 Field Investigation ...................................................................................... 4
4.0 ENDANGERED SPECIES HABITAT ASSESSMENT & SURVEY FINDINGS .... 4
4.1 Community Descriptions ............................................................................ 4
4.1.1 Dry-Mesic Oak-Hickory Forest ........................................................ 5
4.1.2 Bottomland Hardwood Forest ......................................................... 5
4.1.3 Maintained/Disturbed Areas ........................................................... 5
4.2 Wildlife Observations ................................................................................. 6
4.3 Protected Species Biological Findings ....................................................... 6
4.3.1 Northern Long-eared Bat (Myotis septentrionalis) .......................... 6
4.3.2 Small whorled pogonia (Isotria medeoloides) ................................. 7
4.3.3 Schweinitz's Sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii) ............................ 9
4.3.4 Other Species ............................................................................... 11
5.0 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................. 11
6.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 13

Protected Species and Habitat Assessment & Survey Timmons Group
Stony Knoll Solar October 2018
Page iii
APPENDICES

APPENDIX A – FIGURES
Figure 1 Vicinity Map
Figure 2 Hydrologic Unit Code Map
Figure 3 Environmental Inventory Map
Figure 4 Aerial Map with Contours
Figure 5A Biological Community Assemblage Map: Aerial
Figure 5B Biological Community Assemblage Maps: USGS
Figure 6A Protected Species Suitable Habitats Map: Aerial
Figure 6B Protected Species Suitable Habitats Map: USGS

APPENDIX B – USFWS DATABASE RESULTS
USFWS Surry County Endangered Species, Threatened Species, Federal Species of Concern,
and Candidate Species
USFWS IPaC Official Species List

APPENDIX C – PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG

APPENDIX D – VEGETATIVE SPECIES LIST

APPENDIX E – PROJECT AREA SOILS LIST

Protected Species and Habitat Assessment & Survey Timmons Group
Stony Knoll Solar October 2018
Page 1
1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
On behalf of Duke Energy Renewables, Timmons Group environmental scientists Eli
Wright, George Buchholz, REM, PWS, Anna Reusche, PWS, and environmental technician
William Sally, conducted a Protected Species Survey and Habitat Assessment from June 18th
through June 27th, 2018 and on October 9th, 2018 to identify potential suitable habitats of
federally protected species within the project study limits of the Stony Knoll Solar project
(Site).The purpose of the investigation was to evaluate the Site for federally protected species
and/or suitable habitat for federally protected species listed by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) as threatened (T) or endangered (E). Plants and animals with endangered or
threatened status are protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 (16 US 1531
et seq).

2.0 SITE INFORMATION
2.1 Site Location

The Site encompasses approximately 441.6 acres and is located north of the
intersection of Rockford Road and Robert Burrus Road in Surry County, North Carolina (see
Figure 1: Vicinity Map). The Site is in the Piedmont Physiographic Province. The Site is located
within the Upper Yadkin-Pee Dee watershed (HUC 03040101) and is drained by unnamed
tributaries that flow east to West Double Creek (see Figure 2: Hydrologic Unit Code Map). West
Double Creek has a NC Division of Water Resources Stream Index Number of 12-67-1 and a
Stream Classification of Water Supply ‘C’ (DEQ 2018). The Site ultimately drains to the Yadkin
River. The Site contains a 100-year floodplain according to NC FIRM Map 3710590200K
(effective date August 18, 2009). Floodplain areas are generally located adjacent to perennial
stream features within the southeastern sections of the Site (See Figure 3: Environmental
Inventory Map).

2.2 Site Description

The Site is bound in all directions by a mix of forested lands, single family homes and
agricultural lands. The Site can be accessed from both Robert Burrus Road and Old Wagon
Trail. Two single family homes are located in the northwestern corner of the Site. The
remainder of the Site consists primarily of forested and agricultural lands with associated
facilities. Easements with overhead electrical utilities transect the center and southern portions
of the Site from east to west. Portions of one pond are located along the southern boundary.
Topography at the Site is primarily characterized by steep hills and narrow valleys. Elevations at
the Site range from 1,050 feet above mean sea level (MSL) along the ridgelines to 870 feet
above MSL in the stream valleys and floodplains (see Figure 4: Aerial Map with Contours). The
Site contains both maintained/disturbed areas and forested areas (see Figure 5: Biological
Community Assemblage Map).

Protected Species and Habitat Assessment & Survey Timmons Group
Stony Knoll Solar October 2018
Page 2
3.0 ASSESSMENT METHODS
3.1 Preliminary Offsite Investigation/Data Review
A review of publicly available resources was performed prior to the onsite field
investigation to determine the potential habitat of federally protected threatened and
endangered species, and if present, the extent of these areas within the Site. These mapping
resources generally included, but were not limited to, the United States Geological Survey
(USGS) maps, the U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resource Conservation Service
(NRCS) soils database, and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands
Inventory (NWI) database. According to the NRCS Soil Survey of Surry County, North Carolina
the Site contains ten (10) soils series. A list of the soils present at the site is included as
Appendix E.

A review of publicly available databases regarding the potential occurrence of federally
protected species was conducted. Initially, a USFWS List of Endangered Species, Threatened
Species, Federal Species of Concern and Candidate Species for Surry County was reviewed
(Appendix B). A refined search, using the USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation
(IPaC) database, was also reviewed to provide a more detailed list of species and critical habitat
under USFWS jurisdiction that are known or expected to occur on or near the Site (Appendix B).
Potential federally protected species identified for the Stony Knoll Solar Site are summarized in
Table 1.
Protected Species and Habitat Assessment & Survey Timmons Group Stony Knoll Solar October 2018 Page 3 Table 1. USFWS Federally Protected Species identified within Surry County, North Carolina E - federally listed Endangered Species; S/A – species listed due to a Similarity in Appearance to another protected species, T - federally listed Threatened SpeciesCommon Name Scientific Name Species / Habitat Description Status* Database Result Survey Window (USFWS Recommended) Bog turtle Glyptemys muhlenbergii Reptile-Turtle/ mud, grass and sphagnum moss of bogs, swamps, and marshy meadows T (S/A) County List April 1 - October 1 (visual surveys) Northern Long-eared bat (NLEB) Myotis septentrionalis Mammal-Hibernating Bat / Over-winter hibernates in mountain caves. Typically roosts underneath bark, or in cavities of both live trees and snags T County List/ IPAC May 1 – September 15 (netting surveys) Schweinitz's sunflower Helianthus schweinitzii Vascular Plant – Herb / Full to partial sun in areas with poor soils that limit competition with other plants. Often found in roadsides and utility easements E County List/ IPAC Late August – October Small whorled pogonia Isotria medeoloides Vascular Plan – Herb / Typically found in dry woodlands; upland sites in mixed forest (second or third growth stage) E County List/ IPAC Mid May-Early July

Protected Species and Habitat Assessment & Survey Timmons Group
Stony Knoll Solar October 2018
Page 4
In addition to the review of federal databases, Timmons Group understands that a
review of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database was conducted
regarding natural heritage resources surrounding the Site. This review was conducted by the
Client through a collaborative agreement between the NCNHP and Duke Energy. The NCNHP
database provides results of potential occurrences of rare species, natural communities, and
Federally-listed species that have been documented within the immediate vicinity of a specific
Site. Based on coordination with the Client, it is understood that there are no documented
occurrences of federally threatened or endangered species within two miles of the Site. In
addition, the NCNHP database indicates two state identified species have been observed within
three miles of the Site; the Brook floater (Alasmidonta varicosa, Federal Species of Concern
and state endangered) and timber rattlesnake (Crotalus horridus, state species of concern).
3.2 Field Investigation
Timmons Group conducted field habitat assessments from June 18th through June 27th,
2018 and on October 9th, 2018 by walking transects on the Site. The objective of the field
assessment was to determine the presence of suitable habitat for federally protected species
within the Site. Timmons Group evaluated, documented, and took pictures of the vegetative
community assemblages during field investigations. Distribution and composition of vegetative
communities throughout the Site reflect variations in topography, soils, hydrology, and past and
present land use practices. Based on the vegetative community assemblages observed,
general communities and categories were defined and assessed throughout the Site (see
Figures 5A-B: Biological Community Assemblage Maps). Representative photographs of the
Site are provided in Appendix C: Photograph Log.
4.0 ENDANGERED SPECIES HABITAT ASSESSMENT & SURVEY FINDINGS
4.1 Community Descriptions
The Site contains maintained/disturbed areas and forested areas (see Figure 5A and 5B:
Biological Community Assemblage Map). Maintained/disturbed areas comprise approximately
33% of the Site and can be divided into five (5) general categories that are listed as follows:
maintained open fields, silviculture, utility easements, agricultural, and developed areas. Open
maintained fields consist of approximately 3% of the Site and appear to largely be maintained in
association with hunting practices. Silviculture areas comprise approximately 1% of the Site
and primarily includes a single stand which has been harvested within the past year. Utility
easements (approximately 1%) and developed areas (approximately 1%) have been present
since at least 1993 at the Site. Agricultural areas comprise approximately 27% of the Site and
have been present since at least 1993. Forested areas comprise approximately 67% of the Site
and can be divided into three general vegetative communities that are listed as follows: early
successional areas, dry-mesic oak-hickory forest, and bottomland hardwood forest (Schafale
and Weakley 1990). Early successional communities (approximately 7%) at the Site are areas
that appear to have been timbered before 1993 and now are comprised of primarily early-
successional vegetative species. The dry-mesic oak-hickory forest community (approximately
41%) at the Site includes forested areas dominated by mixtures of oak and hickory species with
scattered pine species that are unevenly aged with older trees present. Bottomland hardwood
forest community (approximately 20%) are located within geomorphic floodplains that are
intermittently inundated and are generally located throughout the Site.

Protected Species and Habitat Assessment & Survey Timmons Group
Stony Knoll Solar October 2018
Page 5
4.1.1 Dry-Mesic Oak-Hickory Forest
The dynamics of the dry-mesic oak-hickory forest community are unevenly aged with
older trees present and are generally dominated by even-aged pine stands which are replaced
by the climax oaks and hickories, only as the pines die. Logged areas may have a mixture of
hardwoods and pines. The dry-mesic oak-hickory forest community is dominated by white oak
(Quercus alba), red oak (Quercus rubra), pignut hickory (Carya glabra), and tulip poplar
(Liriodendron tulipifera) species. Other notable species observed within this community include:
sourwood (Oxydendrum arboreum), American beech (Fagus grandifolia), red maple (Acer
rubrum), Hophornbeam (Ostrya virginiana), sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua), eastern white
pine (Pinus strobus), shortleaf pine (Pinus echinata), American holly (Ilex opaca), eastern
redcedar (Juniperus virginiana), mountain laurel (Kalmia latifolia), common running-cedar
(Diphasiastrum digitatum), switch cane (Arundinaria tecta), common greenbrier (Smilax
rotundifolia), Christmas fern (Polystichum acrostichoides), and New York fern (Thelypteris
noveboracensis). Indian cucumber (Medeola virginiana) and large whorled pogonia (Isotria
verticillata), which are associates of small whorled pogonia, were observed in this community
type.
4.1.2 Bottomland Hardwood Forest
The bottomland hardwood forest community within the Site is located within geomorphic
floodplains that are intermittently to seasonally inundated and are generally throughout the Site.
The community is generally characterized by species which are tolerant of infrequent flooding,
however, wetlands do not dominate these systems likely due to presence of well drained soils
and incised stream channels that results in a lower water table. Notable vegetative species
observed within this community include: green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), tulip poplar
(Liriodendron tulipifera), sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua), American hornbeam (Carpinus
caroliniana), sourwood (Oxydendrum arboreum), red maple (Acer rubrum), northern spicebush
(Lindera benzoin), Chinese private (Ligustrum sinense), highbush blueberry (Vaccinium
corymbosum), switchcane (Arundinaria tecta), Japanese stilt grass (Microstegium vimineum),
and New York fern (Thelypteris noveboracensis).
4.1.3 Maintained/Disturbed Areas
The Site and can be divided into five (5) general categories that are listed as follows:
maintained open fields, silviculture, utility easements, agricultural, and developed areas. These
general categories are considered maintained/disturbed areas since past, intermittent, and/or
regular maintenance activities have occurred within these areas. At the time of the field
investigations, agricultural areas were cultivated as traditional row crops with fields planted in
corn (Zea mays), tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum) and wheat (Triticum aestivum). Silviculture
areas were in an early stage of secondary succession as harvesting activities occurred within
the past year. The open fields and utility easements both consist of similar species
compositions as these areas appeared to be maintained annually. Notable species in these
maintained areas included goldenrods (Solidago spp.), blackberries (Rubus argutus), Chinese
bushclover (Lespedeza cuneata), yellow crownbeard (Verbesina helianthoides), Japanese stilt
grass (Microstegium vimineum), common milkweed (Asclepias syriaca), butterfly weed
(Asclepias tuberosa), and littleleaf sensitive-briar (Mimosa microphylla) (Niering and Olmstead,
1979, Peterson 1968). The developed areas consisted of maintained residential facilities and
agriculture operation centers.

Protected Species and Habitat Assessment & Survey Timmons Group
Stony Knoll Solar October 2018
Page 6
4.2 Wildlife Observations

Common mammals which direct observation or evidence of presence was made at the
Site include gray squirrels (Sciurus carolinensis), raccoon (Procyon lotor), and white-tailed deer
(Odocoileus virginianus). Other mammals likely to be present within the Site include gray fox
(Urocyon cinereoargenteus), opossum (Didelphis virginiana), woodland vole (Microtus
pinetorum), deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus), woodchuck (Marmota monax), and the
northern short-tailed shrew (Blarina brevicauda).

The Site contains habitat for many songbirds including Carolina Chickadee (Poecile
carolinensis), Northern Cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis), Tufted Titmouse (Baeolophus bicolor),
and Carolina Wren (Thryothorus ludovicianus). Game birds and other non-song birds which
could inhabit the Site include Wild Turkey (Meleagris gallopavo), Wood Duck (Aix sponsa),
American Woodcock (Scolopax minor), and various Woodpeckers (Dryocopus spp.). In
addition, direct observation of Red-tailed Hawk (Buteo jamaicensis) was made at the Site.

Amphibian species which could be found within the Site include the American toad
(Anaxyrus americanus), American bullfrog (Lithobates catesbeianus), spring peeper
(Pseudacris crucifer), green frog (Lithobates clamitus), pickerel frog (Lithobates palustris),
common gray treefrog (Hyla versicolor) and the red-spotted newt (Notophthalmus viridescens).
Reptiles likely to be found within the Site include the six-lined racerunner (Cnemidophorus
sexlineatus), five-lined skink (Plestiodon fasciatus), broad-headed skink (Plestiodon laticeps),
the eastern fence lizard (Sceloporus undulatus), black rat snake (Pantherophis obsoletus),
garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis), timber rattlesnake (Crotalus horridus), and copperhead
(Agkistrodon contortrix). Direct observation of eastern box turtle (Terrapene carolina carolina)
was made at the Site.

4.3 Protected Species Biological Findings

Based upon the results of this evaluation, the primary federal species of regulatory
concern for the Stony Knoll Solar Site include: the northern long-eared bat, the small whorled
pogonia, and Schweinitz's sunflower.
4.3.1 Northern Long-eared Bat (Myotis septentrionalis)
In 2015, the USFWS listed the northern long-eared bat (NLEB) as threatened under the
Endangered Species Act (ESA), due to the impacts of white-nose syndrome, a disease linked to
the deaths of millions of cave-hibernating bats. The species seasonal and annual survival
largely depends on successfully hibernating and roosting their young and therefore, federal
protections focus on the locations where the NLEB hibernate and roost during the pup season
(USFWS, 2015).

“The NLEB is a medium-sized bat with a body length of 3 to 3.7 inches and a wingspan
of 9 to 10 inches. Their fur color can be medium to dark brown on the back and tawny to pale-
brown on the underside. As its name suggests, this bat is distinguished by its long ears,
particularly as compared to other bats in its genus, Myotis” (USFWS, 2015).

“NLEBs spend winter hibernating in caves and mines, called hibernacula. They use
areas in various sized caves or mines with constant temperatures, high humidity, and no air
currents. Within hibernacula, they occur most often in small crevices or cracks, often with only
the nose and ears visible. During the summer, NLEBs roost singly or in colonies underneath
bark, in cavities or in crevices of both live trees and snags. Males and non-reproductive females

Protected Species and Habitat Assessment & Survey Timmons Group
Stony Knoll Solar October 2018
Page 7
may also roost in cooler places, like caves and mines. They seem to be flexible in selecting
roosts, choosing roost trees based on suitability to retain bark or provide cavities or crevices.
This bat has also been found rarely roosting in structures, like barns and sheds. Maximum
lifespan for the NLEB is estimated to be up to 18.5 years” (USFWS 2015).

“The most immediate threat to NLEB populations is white-nose syndrome. Since
symptoms were first observed in New York in 2006, numbers of northern long-eared bats have
declined by up to 99 percent in the Northeast. Although there is uncertainty about the rate that
white-nose syndrome will spread throughout the species’ range, it is expected to spread
throughout the United States in the near future. Other sources of NLEB mortality include
impacts to hibernacula, loss or degradation of summer habitat, and impacts associated with
wind farm operations” (USFWS 2015).

The NLEB Final 4(d) rule, provides a framework to streamline Section 7 consultations
when federal actions “may affect” the NLEB but not result in a prohibited take. Federal agencies
have the option to rely upon the finding of the programmatic biological finding for the final 4(d)
rule to fulfill their project-specific Section 7 responsibilities by using this framework (USACE
2017). Under the BO, project related tree clearing is generally acceptable provided:

1.) No removal occurs of known NLEB maternity roost trees or any trees within 150 feet
of a known occupied maternity roost trees from June 1 through July 31
and
2) No removal occurs of any trees within 0.25 miles of a northern long-eared bat
hibernaculum at any time of year.

Biological Finding: The Site composition includes dry mesic oak-hickory forest which
likely provides some suitable summer habitat. Few large snags and/or suitable roost trees were
observed, and no caves were observed onsite. No NLEB hibernacula and/or roost trees were
observed onsite. In addition, there are no known hibernacula and/or roost trees within Surry
County, North Carolina according to the USFWS Asheville Ecological Services Regional Office
website. No observations of NLEBs have occurred within two miles of the Site as noted in
coordination with the NCNHP. In addition, the Site is located outside of the USFWS confirmed
consultation areas for this species. Based on the fact that there is not a known maternity
roost or hibernacula within Surry County and the Site is located outside of the USFWS
confirmed consultation areas, a biological finding of “No Effect” is proposed for the
northern long-eared bat.
4.3.2 Small whorled pogonia (Isotria medeoloides)
The small whorled pogonia is a scapose perennial herb growing from slender, hairy,
fibrous roots that radiate from a crown of horizontal rootstock. The stem is 9.5 to 25 cm (3.7 to
9.8 in) tall, and is robust, hollow, smooth, dusty green and glaucous. The leaves are drooping,
dusty green, and glaucous, elliptic to elliptic-obovate, 2 to 8.5 cm (0.8 to 3.3 in) long, 1.1 to 4 cm
(0.4 to 1.5 in) wide and borne in a single whorl of 5 to 7 at the apex of the stem. The flowers are
yellowish green, with oblanceolate to oblong-elliptic petals, with a length of 1.7 cm (0.67 in), 3
mm (0.12 in) wide with a rounded to obtuse apex where the petals are almost white at the lip
and are crested with pale green. The flower extends from the center of the whorled leaves with
flowering occurring between early May and early July. The fruit is an erect ellipsoid-cylindrical
capsule approximately 1.5 to 3 cm (0.6 to 1.2 in) long (Ware 1987, 1988).

Protected Species and Habitat Assessment & Survey Timmons Group
Stony Knoll Solar October 2018
Page 8
The small whorled pogonia generally occurs in mature, deciduous upland forests on
terrain that is nearly level or gently to moderately sloping in northerly and/or easterly directions.
In exceptional instances, the small whorled pogonia can occur on steep slopes or slopes of a
southerly exposure. The forest habitat consists of second and third generation deciduous tree
species in the canopy and where the understory is moderately open and sunlight mottles or
flecks play on the forest floor. Small whorled pogonia colonies occur on acidic sandy loam soils
having a pH of 4.3 to 5.5 that are considered as having a low to very low nutrient content (Ware
1987, 1988).

The small whorled pogonia is self-pollinating, and rarely produces more than one stem
per plant. As flowering ends, those plants in which pollination has occurred show immediate
enlargement of the ovary. The fruit reaches nearly full size by July, but it does not become ripe
until the fall, often not dehiscing until the late fall. A plant that produces a large flowering stem
one year may appear as a diminutive vegetative plant the following year, especially if its leaves
were damaged early in the previous season. Such damage could occur from several causes
(e.g. deer or insect browsing). The small whorled pogonia is particularly susceptible to activities
that alter canopy cover or increase inter-specific competition among plants (Terwilliger et al.,
1995).

The small whorled pogonia was listed as a federally endangered species on September
10, 1982. There are three main population centers of the small whorled pogonia: the
northernmost population occurs in the foothills of the Appalachian Mountains in New England
and northern coastal Massachusetts; the southernmost population occurs at the southeastern
extreme of the Blue Ridge Mountains, where North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, and
Georgia intersect; the central population occurs in the Piedmont and Coastal Plain
physiographic provinces of Virginia (Von Oettingen, 1992). According to NCNHP, there are
populations in North Carolina. Several disjoint populations occur in Delaware, New Jersey,
Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, and Ontario, Canada.

Biological Finding: Vegetation composition within the Site includes dry mesic oak-
hickory forest and adjacent bottomland hardwood forest with dense, moderately dense, and
moderately open understory vegetation. During the habitat assessment, it was determined that
the Site contains suitable habitat needed to support populations of small whorled pogonia.

From June 26th through June 27th, 2018, Timmons Group scientists Eli Wright, George
Buchholz, REM, PWS, and environmental technician William Sally conducted an intensive
search of approximately 175 acres of the Site identified as marginally suitable to good small
whorled pogonia habitat (See Figure 6: Protected Species Suitable Habitats Map). Areas of
potential habitat consisted of mixed hardwood forests with moderate or sparse understory
vegetation, large shaded areas, and moderate to steep slopes. No consideration was given to
slope aspect during the investigation for small whorled pogonia, as all slopes, regardless of
orientation, were searched. The small whorled pogonia survey was conducted by traversing
general contour transects spaced at approximately 25 to 50-foot intervals.

Field investigations were conducted during the optimal survey window as identified by
USFWS. All potential habitat areas within the study areas were intensively surveyed for small
whorled pogonia. Indian cucumber (Medeola virginiana) and large whorled pogonia (Isotria
verticillata), which are associates of small whorled pogonia, were observed on the Site.
However no small whorled pogonia was observed. A list of observed vascular vegetative

Protected Species and Habitat Assessment & Survey Timmons Group
Stony Knoll Solar October 2018
Page 9
species identified during the small whorled pogonia survey was generated and is provided in
Appendix D.

Furthermore, there are no documented occurrences of small whorled pogonia within a
two-mile radius of the Site according to Client initiated coordination with NCNHP. Therefore, a
biological finding of “No Effect” is proposed for small whorled pogonia.
4.3.3 Schweinitz's Sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii)
Schweinitz’s sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii) was federally listed as endangered on
May 7, 1991. This species, endemic to the piedmont of North Carolina and South Carolina, is
endangered by the loss of historic levels of natural disturbance from fire and grazing by native
herbivores, residential and industrial development, mining, encroachment by exotic species,
highway construction and improvement, and roadside and utility right-of-way maintenance
(Fields, 2007).

Schweinitz’s sunflower is a perennial species of the sunflower genus (Helianthus), a
large genus of the aster family (Asteraceae). Like some other members of the genus,
Schweinitz’s sunflower has thickened, tuberous rhizomes (resembling sweet potatoes), which
store starch and are the perennating structure for the species. Generally, the species is about 2
meters in height but can be substantially shorter if young, stressed, or injured (mowed plants
can flower at less than 0.5 meters) or substantially taller (plants in full sun and with little
competition frequently reach 3 meters and, exceptionally, 5 meters). The stem is usually
unbranched in its lower portion (unless the stem apex is injured or removed, as by mowing), but
the terminal one-third of the stem (in the inflorescence) is freely branched, with the branches
departing from the stem at about a 45-degree angle. The stem is usually pubescent but can be
nearly glabrous: it is often purple. Flowering occurs in late summer from September to
November in the Carolinas (Radford et al. 1968). Individuals can reproduce clonally through
underground rhizomes and are capable of producing seeds that mature in late autumn (Weakly
et al., 1994).

The original habitat of Schweinitz’s sunflower was most likely the “Piedmont prairie
ecosystem”. While the exact historic range of the prairies and their flora is uncertain, early
explorers such as John Lederer, John Lawson, and Mark Catesby reported large regions of
prairie or savanna in the Carolina Piedmont. Natural forces were no doubt a factor in keeping
succession at bay in historic times. Mammalian megafauna (bison and elk) that survived the
mass extinction at the end of the Pleistocene Epoch were reported in historic times in the
Carolina Piedmont. The grazing and trampling of plants by these large herbivores may have
maintained Piedmont savannas, similar to the ways that large herds of modern herbivores are
thought to maintain prairies and other grassland environments. Fire is also known to be a key
element that favors certain grasses and forbs and prevents encroachment of woody invasives.
To a certain degree fires are natural, often started by lightning during thunderstorms. However,
Native Americans also set fires to maintain open landscapes for agriculture and hunting. This
anthropogenic practice probably facilitated a large distribution pattern for H. schweinitzii and
other prairie-adapted species (Fields, 2007).

Currently habitat and distribution of Schweinitz’s sunflower is considered endemic to the
piedmont in North Carolina. While the possibility exists that this and certain other prairie species
may have always been endemic to the region, the range and abundance are no doubt greatly
reduced. A few fragments of prairie persist in the Carolina Piedmont, but there are few fires and

Protected Species and Habitat Assessment & Survey Timmons Group
Stony Knoll Solar October 2018
Page 10
essentially no megafauna to maintain the grassland habitat. Extant populations of Schweinitz’s
sunflower naturally occur in upland wood edges or openings, roadsides, and utility rights-of-way.
This is likely due to the periodic disturbance of such microsites by mowing, the effects of which
would be similar to the effects of grazing (Fields, 2007).

Another factor that may affect the distribution of Schweinitz’s sunflower is geology.
Though it is found primarily on soils derived from mafic rocks, Schweinitz’s sunflower apparently
also occurs on soils derived from intermediate or felsic rocks. The main unifying factors in all the
soils appears to be that they are thin, occur on upland interstream flats or gentle slopes, are
clayey in texture (and often also with substantial rock fragments), and (because of their
topographic position and texture) vary over the course of the year from very wet to very dry.
This set of conditions makes these soils poor for agricultural use and ideal for populations of
Schweinitz’s sunflower (Weakly et al. 1994).

Biological Finding: Vegetation composition within the Site includes maintained open
fields and easements with overhead electrical utilities. During the habitat assessment (June
26th and 27th), it was determined that the Site contained marginally suitable habitat capable of
supporting populations of Schweinitz’s sunflower. Areas of potential habitat consisted of
maintained/mowed utility easements and fields absent of trees (See Figure 6A and 6B:
Protected Species Suitable Habitats Map). In addition, subsets of these areas contain more
suitable soils conducive to Schweinitz’s sunflower populations. These soils have relatively
shallow bedrock, are overlaid by clayed soils, and correspond primarily with three (3) mapped
soils units:

1. FrC2—Fairview-Siloam complex, 8 to 15 percent slopes, moderately eroded. As
described by NRSC soils surveys, the Siloam component consists of saprolite parent
material derived from diorite and/or gabbro and/or diabase and/or gneiss with sandy
clay loam to 15 inches overlaid by bedrock.
2. FsE—Fairview-Stott Knob complex, 25 to 45 percent slopes. As described by NRSC
soils surveys, the Stott Knob component consists of saprolite parent material derived
from schist and/or gneiss with sandy loams and clay loams to 30 inches overlaid by
bedrock.
3. SrC—Siloam-Zion complex, 6 to 15 percent slopes. As described by NRSC soils
surveys, both the Siloam and Zion components consist of saprolite parent material
derived from diorite and/or gabbro and/or diabase and/or gneiss. These soils consist
of clay loams to 15 inches overlaid by bedrock

Surveys for Schweinitz’s sunflower were completed under the direct supervision of Duke
Energy Renewable’s Senior Environmental Specialist, James McRacken. Areas with potentially
suitable habitat were surveyed for Schweinitz’s sunflower on October 9th, 2018, during the
USFWS recommended survey window. Areas characterized as open/fallow fields were
observed to be densely vegetated with early successional and invasive species such as
goldenrod (Solidago spp.), tickseed (Coreopsis spp.), hairy leafcup (Smallanthus uvedalia),
bearded beggerstick (Bidens aristosa), and Japanese stilt grass (Microstegium vimineum).
Representative photographs of the areas surveyed are included in Appendix C: Photographic
Log. Vegetation within the utility easements was observed to have low diversity. Species
observed included goldenrod, tickseed, blackberry (Rubus argutus) and narrowleaf lespedeza
(Lespedeza angustifolia). No Schweinitz’s sunflower was observed. In addition, the NCNHP
has no documented occurrences of Schweinitz’s sunflower within a two-mile radius of the Site.
Based on the results of the survey as well as the lack of documented occurrences in the
county, a biological finding of “No Effect” is proposed for this species.

Protected Species and Habitat Assessment & Survey Timmons Group
Stony Knoll Solar October 2018
Page 11
4.3.4 Other Species
USFWS lists the Bog turtle (Glyptemys muhlenbergii) as threatened, due to similarity of
appearance (T(S/A)) and is therefore, not subject to Section 7 consultation. Per the USFWS,
species listed as T(S/A) are not biologically endangered or threatened.
5.0 CONCLUSIONS
Based upon the results of this evaluation, the primary federal species of regulatory
concern for the Stony Knoll Solar Site include: the northern long-eared bat, the small whorled
pogonia, and Schweinitz's sunflower. These species were identified based on review of the
USFWS county list of protected species for Surry County, North Carolina and a refined USFWS
IPAC database search of the Stony Knoll Solar project study limits. A summary of findings and
biological options for the Stony Knoll Solar Site is provided below in Table 2.
Protected Species and Habitat Assessment & Survey Timmons Group Stony Knoll Solar October 2018 Page 12 Table 2. Stony Knoll Solar Protected Species Assessment Summary Common Name Scientific Name Status* Potential Habitat Identified Onsite / Description Conclusions / Recommendations Bog turtle Glyptemys muhlenbergii T (S/A) Habitat Marginal to Poor / Scrub-shrub, marsh meadow at northern limits of the Site (0.14 ac) · No individuals identified during assessment or within 2-miles per NCNHP. · Not subject to Section 7 consultation. Northern Long-eared bat (NLEB) Myotis septentrionalis T Summer Habitat Marginal/ dry mesic oak-hickory forest with few snags and/or suitable roost trees · No known maternity roosts or hibernacula located within or near the Site. · Site is located outside of USFWS confirmed consultation areas. · Biological finding of “No Effect” is proposed. Schweinitz's sunflower Helianthus schweinitzii E Habitat Marginal/ Utility easements and maintained open fields free of trees · Survey of suitable habitats conducted on October 9, 2018. · No individuals identified during assessment or within 2-miles per NCNHP. · A biological finding of “No Effect” is proposed. Small whorled pogonia Isotria medeoloides E Habitat Marginal to Good / Dry mesic oak-hickory forest and upland bottomland hardwood forests with open subcanopy and slight slopes · Survey of suitable habitats conducted June 26-27, 2018. · No individuals identified during survey or within 3-miles per NCNHP. · A biological finding of “No Effect” is proposed. E - federally listed Endangered Species; S/A – species listed due to a Similarity in Appearance to another protected species, T - federally listed Threatened Species

Protected Species and Habitat Assessment & Survey Timmons Group
Stony Knoll Solar October 2018
Page 13
6.0 REFERENCES
Fields, Steven. 2007. Schweinitz’s Sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii Torrey And Gray),
(Asterales: Asteraceae) In Upper Piedmont South Carolina. Journal of the South
Carolina Academy of Science, 4, 1.

Niering, W. A. and N C Olmstead, 1979. The Audubon Society Field Guide to North American
Wildflowers. Alfred A. Knopf Publishing: New York, New York.

North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). 2018. Division of Water Resources
Surface Water Classifications.
https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/waterresources/planning/classification-
standards/classifications.

Peterson, R. T. 1968. A Field Guide to Wildflowers, Northeast and North-Central North America.
Houghton Mifflin Publishing: Boston, Massachusetts.

Radford, A. E., H. E. Ahles, and C. R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the Vascular Flora of the Carolinas.
University of North Carolina Press: Chapel Hill, North Carolina.

Schafale, Michael P., and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of
North Carolina. North Carolina Natural Heritage Programs. NCDENR

Terwilliger K., J. R. Tate, and S. L. Woodward. 1995. Small Whorled Pogonia, Isotria
medeoloides, In A Guide to Endangered and Threatened Species in Virginia. The
McDonald & Woodward Publishing Company: Blacksburg, Virginia.

United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2017. Standard Local Operating Procedures
for Endangered Species (SLOPES) for Wilmington District, Department of the Army
Permits Affecting Northern Long-Eared Bats in North Carolina. USACE Wilmington
District Public Notice, March 8, 2017.

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2015. Northern Long-Eared Bat (Myotis
septentrionalis) Fact Sheet. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: Midwest Region:
Bloomington, Minnesota.

Von Oettingen, S. L. 1992. Small Whorled Pogonia (Isotria medeoloides) Recovery Plan, First
Version. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region Five, Newton Croner, Massachusetts.

Ware, D.M.E. 1987. The Small Whorled Pogonia, Isotria medeoloides, in Virginia: Population
Ecology and Habitat Studies. Virginia Department of Agriculture Study No. SWP-DW-I-
3, Richmond, Virginia.

Ware, D.M.E.1988. The Population Ecology of Isotria medeolodies in Virginia with Comparisons
with Isotria verticillata. Virginia Department of Agriculture Study No. SWP-DW-IA,
Richmond, Virginia.

Weakley, A. S., Houk, R. D., and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1994. Recovery plan for
Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Southeast Region Atlanta, Georgia.

APPENDIX A
FIGURES
U.S.G.S. QUADRANGLE(S):DATE(S):WATERSHED(S):HYDROLOGIC UNIT CODE(S):
TIMMONS GROUP JOB NUMBER:PROJECT STUD Y LIMIT S:LATITUDE:LON GIT UDE:
STONY KNOLL SOLARSURRY COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINAFIGURE 1: VICINITY MAP
39949.006
36.285381-80.658593
441.6 ACRES COPELAND2016
03040101UPPER YADKIN (UPPER PEE DEE RIVER BASIN)
These plans and associated docum ents are the exclusive property of TIM MONS GRO UP and may not be reproduced in whole or in part and shall not be used for any purpose whatsoever, inclusive, but not limited to construction, bidding, and/or construction staking without the express written consent of TIMMONS GROUP.
Path: R:\805\39949.006-Stony_Knoll_Solar\GIS\Common Shared Exhibits\39949.006-VIC.mxd
5
0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000Feet
Site limits are approximate.Topographic imagery from USGS.
Site Limits
^_
05050001
03010103 03010104
06010102
03040101
03030002
06010103
03030003
03040103
06010108
03040102
03050101
03040104
03050102
0304010503050105 Legend
^_Site Marker
Upper Yadkin (03040101)
Hydrologic Unit Code
DRAWING DESCRIPTION
PROJECT NAME & LOCATION
SHEET NUMBERSCALE
1
DATE 06/21/2018
DESIGNED BY / DRAWN BY
PROJECT NAME
A. MEHFOUD
STONY KNOLL SOLAR
FIGURE 2:HYDROLOGICUNIT CODE MAP
REVISIONS
MM/DD/YY#DESCRIPTION
These plans and associated documents are theexclusive property of TIMMONS GROUP andmay not be reproduced in whole or in part andshall not be used for any purpose whatsoever,inclusive, but not limited to construction, bidding,and/or construction staking without the expresswritten consent of TIMMONS GROUP.
PROJECT NUMBER39949.006STONY KNOLL SOLARSURRY COUNTY,NORTH CAROLINA1001 Boulders Parkway, Suite 300Richmond, VA 23225TEL [phone]www.timmons.com[
PLANS PRINTED AS 11X17 ARE HALF SCALE0510
Miles
R:\805\39949.006-Stony_Knoll_Solar\GIS\Common Shared Exhibits\39949.006-HUC.mxd
NOTES:Site marker is approximate.HUC from USGS.Topographic basemap fromEsri Online.
H:1 " = 5 Miles
R o c k fo r d R dRo
c
k
f
o
r
dRdB u c k F o rk Rd
Ji
m
S
now
Rd Bogar
t
L
n
WolfeCreekTrlCartersFarm Ln
H a ig L n
JarvisPlantationRdHutton Vineyard LnCountryBottomsT rlCrissmanLnFoundersLnR
o
b
e
rt
Bu
rr
u
s
Rd
ShowHorseLnHoneyBirdLnBill Coe R d
OldWagonTrl Tangle H olly LnDobsonSpringTrl
FeD2
FeD2
FeD2
FeD2
CrB2
FsE
FeC2 FeC2
FeC2 FrD2
FeC2
FeD2
FeB2
FeB2
FeB2
FeB2
FeD2
CsA FsE
FeC2
FeC2
FeC2
FeC2
FeC2
FeC2
FrC2
FrC2
FeB2
FeC2
FeC2
FeD2
W
FrD2
FrD2
FeC2
FsE
FeC2
FeC2
W
FeD2
FeC2
FeC2
CsA
FsE
FsE
FeC2
FeC2
FeC2
W
FeD2
BbC
FeC2
BbB
FeC2
FeD2
BbC
BbC
DrB
CsA
CsA
FeC2
FeD2
FeB2
BbC
FsE
FeC2
FeC2
SrC FrC2
W
FeC2
FeB2
FeB2FrC2
FrC2
FeD2
FeC2
FeC2
FeC2
W
SrE
SrE
SrE
FsE
FsE
FeD2
FeD2
FeD2
SrC
FeC2
FeB2
FeB2
FeC2
WfC2
W
W
FeC2
WoD
WoD
FeB2
BbB FeC2 CsA
FeC2
FeC2FeC2 WfB2BbCFeD2
FsEFeC2FrC2W
Legend
Project Study Limits - 441.6 Acres
National Hydrography Dataset
National Wetlands Inventory
Zone A: 1% Annual Chance Flood Hazard
Hydric Soil Classification
Hydric
Non Hydric
Partially Hydric
DRAWING DESCRIPTION
PROJECT NAME & LOCATION
SHEET NUMBERSCALE1
DATE 06/11/2018
DESIGNED BY / DRAWN BY
PROJECT NAME
A. MEHFOUD
STONY KNOLL SOLAR
1 " = 350 'H:
FIGURE 3:ENVIRONMENTALINVENTORY MAP
REVISIONS
MM/DD/YY#DESCRIPTION
These plans and associated documents are theexclusive property of TIMMONS GROUP andmay not be reproduced in whole or in part andshall not be used for any purpose whatsoever,inclusive, but not limited to construction, bidding,and/or construction staking without the expresswritten consent of TIMMONS GROUP.
PROJECT NUMBER39949.006STONY KNOLL SOLARSURRY COUNTY,NORTH CAROLINA1001 Boulders Parkway, Suite 300Richmond, VA 23225TEL [phone]www.timmons.com[
PLANS PRINTED AS 11X17 ARE HALF SCALE0350700
SCALE (FEET)
R:\805\39949.006-Stony_Knoll_Solar\GIS\Common Shared Exhibits\39949.006-EIM.mxd
NOTES:Project Limits areapproximate.NWI from US Fish andWildlife Service.Soils data from SSURGO.National HydrographyDataset from USGS.Aerial imagery from NCOneMap.
Ma punit S ym bol Ma puni t Na m eBbBBraddock fine s andy loam, 2 to 8 perc ent s lopesBbCBraddock fine s andy loam, 8 t o 15 perc ent s lopesCsAColvard and Suc hes s oils , 0 t o 3 perc ent s lopes , oc c as ionally floodedDrBDillard fine s andy loam, 2 t o 8 perc ent s lopes , rarely floodedFeB2Fairview s andy c lay loam, 2 t o 8 perc ent s lopes , moderately erodedFeC2Fairview s andy c lay loam, 8 to 15 perc ent s lopes , moderately erodedFeD2Fairview s andy c lay loam, 15 t o 25 perc ent s lopes , moderat ely erodedFrC2Fairview-S iloam c omplex , 8 t o 15 perc ent s lopes , moderat ely erodedFsEFairview-St ott K nob c omplex , 25 to 45 perc ent s lopesSrCSiloam-Zion c omplex , 6 t o 15 perc ent s lopes
On S ite Soi l s
9859809659509459309108 7 0
845975
955
940
935
915
9
0
0
8
9
5
88
0
8
5
0 840970
9 2 0
1
0
3
0
1
0
1
0
9
1
5
1005
9 9 5990
1000
9
8
0
1025
1 0 2 0
925
920101598593091
0 915870875
855
850
8
4
5
960 935925915965950945940910920
9
0
5
1065
1060
1055
1045
1040
1035
1030
1010
1 0 5 0
10201025
1015
1
0
5
5
1
0
5
0
1045
1030
1060
1035
10151035
1025
1020
1 0 1 5
1 0 1 0
1000
10301005955950945910925
915
940
9
2
0108010751065106010551090108510701070
1065
1060105510501045
1075
1040
1015
995
990
985 100510001010
1005
1000
995
985
9909809409209509351070
1065
1060
1055
1050
895
870
8
8
5
860
8
6
5
855
1030
1010
1
0
0
5
10009
9
5990
98597588587510651060105510701
0
5
5 10501045965
9 5 5
9 7 0
960940935930104510401040
1 0 3 5
985980
9759659 7 5965
9609559501070
106510601055 1
0
6
0105
5101510101005100010009
9
0
985
980
92 5
9 2 0
89
5
8
8
5
8808758
4
0 835960925 905890 885875865
8609759709459 4 0
9358908 8 5
8
6
5
860
9709301040102510201010
995935
1050 97589010251
0
4
0
9101045
1 0 0 0 10051005
970
940
925 920
10 4 5 10401035101510201 0 1 0
10001005
995
1 0 0 0
995
9909 8 0975
965960
910915 905900890
8 9 0
1095
107510701
0
6
0
10601055
1050
1 0 4 0
10201 0 2 0
1020101510101005
10009909 9 0
98
5
980
980
9 8 0
980970
9759759659
6
0 9609659 6 0960 950940
94
5
9409 3 5
930925
9158
8
0
875
870
865
855845
840
835
835990
Legend
Project Study Limits - 441 .6 Acres
Topographic Contours - 5 feet
DRAWING DESCRIPTION
PROJECT NAME & LOCATION
SHEET NUMBERSCALE1
DATE 06/29/2018
DESIGNED BY / DRAWN BY
PROJECT NAME
E. WRIGHT
STONY KNOLL SOLAR
1 " = 300 'H:
FIGURE 4 -AERIAL MAP WITHCONTOURS
REVISIONS
MM/DD/YY#DESCRIPTION
These plans and associated documents are theexclusive property of TIMMONS GROUP andmay not be reproduced in whole or in part andshall not be used for any purpose whatsoever,inclusive, but not limited to construction, bidding,and/or construction staking without the expresswritten consent of TIMMONS GROUP.
PROJECT NUMBER39949.006STONY KNOLL SOLARSURRYCOUNTY,NORTH CAROLINA1001 Boulders Parkway, Suite 300Richmond, VA 23225TEL [phone]www.timmons.com[
PLANS PRINTED AS 11X17 ARE HALF SCALE0300 600
SCALE (FEET)
X:\805\39949.006-Stony_Knoll_Solar\GIS\Habitat Assessment\39949.006-Topo Aerial.mxd
NOTES:Topographic information fromUSGS dataAerial imagery from ESRI.
Legend
Project Study Limits - 441.6 Acres
Vegetative Co mm u nities
Early Successional Areas (29.31 Ac)
Dry-Mesic Oak-H ickory Forest (179.27 ac)
Bottomland Hardw ood F orest (87.25 ac)
Maintained /D isturbed Co mm u nities
Maintained Open Fields (11.14 ac)
Silviculture (4.02 ac)
Utility Easement (5.05 ac)
Agricultural Fields (119.82 ac)
Developed Areas (5.64 ac)
Wetlands
Palustrine Emergent (PEM )
Palustrine Forested (PFO)
Palustrine Open Water (POW )
Palustrine Scrub-Shrub (PSS)
Streams
Culvert
Ephemeral (R3)
Intermittent (R 4)
Perennial (R6)
DRAWING DESCRIPTION
PROJECT NAME & LOCATION
SHEET NUMBERSCALE1
DATE 06/29/2018
DESIGNED BY / DRAWN BY
PROJECT NAME
E. WRIGHT
STONY KNOLL SOLAR
1 " = 300 'H:
FIGURE 5A -BIOLOGICALCOMMUNITYASSEMBLAGEMAP: AERIAL
REVISIONS
MM/DD/YY#DESCRIPTION
These plans and associated documents are theexclusive property of TIMMONS GROUP andmay not be reproduced in whole or in part andshall not be used for any purpose whatsoever,inclusive, but not limited to construction, bidding,and/or construction staking without the expresswritten consent of TIMMONS GROUP.
PROJECT NUMBER39949.006STONY KNOLL SOLARSURRYCOUNTY,NORTH CAROLINA1001 Boulders Parkway, Suite 300Richmond, VA 23225TEL [phone]www.timmons.com[
PLANS PRINTED AS 11X17 ARE HALF SCALE0300 600
SCALE (FEET)
X:\805\39949.006-Stony_Knoll_Solar\GIS\Habitat Assessment\39949.006-Biological Community Assemblage-Aerial.mxd
NOTES:Vegetative community landtypes based on desktopanalysis and field validationby Timmons Group.Aerial imagery from ESRI.
Legend
Project Study Limits - 441.6 Acres
Vegetative Co mm u nities
Early Successional Areas (29.31 Ac)
Dry-Mesic Oak-H ickory Forest (179.27 ac)
Bottomland Hardw ood F orest (87.25 ac)
Maintained /D isturbed Co mm u nities
Maintained Open Fields (11.14 ac)
Silviculture (4.02 ac)
Utility Easement (5.05 ac)
Agricultural Fields (119.82 ac)
Developed Areas (5.64 ac)
Wetlands
Palustrine Emergent (PEM )
Palustrine Forested (PFO)
Palustrine Open Water (POW )
Palustrine Scrub-Shrub (PSS)
Streams
Culvert
Ephemeral (R3)
Intermittent (R 4)
Perennial (R6)
DRAWING DESCRIPTION
PROJECT NAME & LOCATION
SHEET NUMBERSCALE1
DATE 06/29/2018
DESIGNED BY / DRAWN BY
PROJECT NAME
E. WRIGHT
STONY KNOLL SOLAR
1 " = 300 'H:
FIGURE 5B -BIOLOGICALCOMMUNITYASSEMBLAGEMAP: USGS
REVISIONS
MM/DD/YY#DESCRIPTION
These plans and associated documents are theexclusive property of TIMMONS GROUP andmay not be reproduced in whole or in part andshall not be used for any purpose whatsoever,inclusive, but not limited to construction, bidding,and/or construction staking without the expresswritten consent of TIMMONS GROUP.
PROJECT NUMBER39949.006STONY KNOLL SOLARSURRYCOUNTY,NORTH CAROLINA1001 Boulders Parkway, Suite 300Richmond, VA 23225TEL [phone]www.timmons.com[
PLANS PRINTED AS 11X17 ARE HALF SCALE0300 600
SCALE (FEET)
X:\805\39949.006-Stony_Knoll_Solar\GIS\Habitat Assessment\39949.006-Biological Community Assemblage-USGS.mxd
NOTES:Vegetative community landtypes based on desktopanalysis and field validationby Timmons Group.USGS Topographic map fromESRI.
Legend
Project Study Limits (441.6 ac)
Bog Turtle Habitat (0.14 ac)
Schweinitz's Sunflower Habitat (8.68 ac)
SWP Habitat (174.6 ac) - S urveyed June 26-27, 2018
Shallow Soils (F rC2, F sE, SrC)
Perennial Stream s
DRAWING DESCRIPTION
PROJECT NAME & LOCATION
SHEET NUMBERSCALE1
DATE 06/29/2018
DESIGNED BY / DRAWN BY
PROJECT NAME
E. WRIGHT
STONY KNOLL SOLAR
1 " = 300 'H:
FIGURE 6A -PROTECTEDSPECIESSUITABLEHABITATS MAP:AERIAL
REVISIONS
MM/DD/YY#DESCRIPTION
These plans and associated documents are theexclusive property of TIMMONS GROUP andmay not be reproduced in whole or in part andshall not be used for any purpose whatsoever,inclusive, but not limited to construction, bidding,and/or construction staking without the expresswritten consent of TIMMONS GROUP.
PROJECT NUMBER39949.006STONY KNOLL SOLARSURRYCOUNTY,NORTH CAROLINA1001 Boulders Parkway, Suite 300Richmond, VA 23225TEL [phone]www.timmons.com[
PLANS PRINTED AS 11X17 ARE HALF SCALE0300 600
SCALE (FEET)
X:\805\39949.006-Stony_Knoll_Solar\GIS\Habitat Assessment\39949.006-Protected Species Habitats-Aerial.mxd
NOTES:Vegetative community landtypes based on desktopanalysis and field validationby Timmons Group.Aerial imagery from ESRI.
Legend
Project Study Limits (441.6 ac)
Bog Turtle Habitat (0.14 ac)
Schweinitz's Sunflower Habitat (8.68 ac)
SWP Habitat (174.6 ac) - S urveyed June 26-27, 2018
Shallow Soils (F rC2, F sE, SrC)
Perennial Stream s
DRAWING DESCRIPTION
PROJECT NAME & LOCATION
SHEET NUMBERSCALE1
DATE 06/29/2018
DESIGNED BY / DRAWN BY
PROJECT NAME
E. WRIGHT
STONY KNOLL SOLAR
1 " = 300 'H:
FIGURE 6B -PROTECTEDSPECIESSUITABLEHABITATS MAP:USGS
REVISIONS
MM/DD/YY#DESCRIPTION
These plans and associated documents are theexclusive property of TIMMONS GROUP andmay not be reproduced in whole or in part andshall not be used for any purpose whatsoever,inclusive, but not limited to construction, bidding,and/or construction staking without the expresswritten consent of TIMMONS GROUP.
PROJECT NUMBER39949.006STONY KNOLL SOLARSURRYCOUNTY,NORTH CAROLINA1001 Boulders Parkway, Suite 300Richmond, VA 23225TEL [phone]www.timmons.com[
PLANS PRINTED AS 11X17 ARE HALF SCALE0300 600
SCALE (FEET)
X:\805\39949.006-Stony_Knoll_Solar\GIS\Habitat Assessment\39949.006-Protected Species Habitats-USGS.mxd
NOTES:Vegetative community landtypes based on desktopanalysis and field validationby Timmons Group.USGS Topographic mappingfrom ESRI.

APPENDIX B
USFWS DATABASE RESULTS
6/30/2018 Surry County Endangered Species, Threatened Species,Federal Species of Concern, and Candidate Species
https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/surry.html 1/1

Endangered Species, Threatened Species,Federal Species of Concern, and Candidate Species,
Surry County, North Carolina

Updated: 06-27-2018
Common Name Scientific name Federal Status Record Status
Vertebrate:
Bog turtle Glyptemys muhlenbergii T (S/A)Current
Northern long-eared bat Myotis septentrionalis T Probable/Potential
Robust redhorse Moxostoma robustum ARS Historic
Invertebrate:
Brook floater Alasmidonta varicosa FSC Current
Vascular Plant:
Carolina Hemlock Tsuga caroliniana ARS Current
Schweinitz's sunflower Helianthus schweinitzii E Current
Small whorled pogonia Isotria medeoloides T Historic
Nonvascular Plant:
Lichen:
Definitions of Federal Status Codes: E = endangered. A taxon "in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range." T = threatened. A taxon "likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range." C = candidate. A taxon under consideration for official listing for which there is sufficient information to support listing. (Formerly "C1" candidate species.) BGPA =Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. See below. ARS = At Risk Species. Species that are Petitioned, Candidates or Proposed for Listing under the Endangered Species Act. Consultation under Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA is not required for Candidate or Proposed species;
although a Conference, as described under Section 7(a)(4) of the ESA is recommended for actions affecting species proposed for listing. FSC=Federal Species of Concern. FSC is an informal term. It is not defined in the federal Endangered Species Act. In North Carolina, the Asheville and Raleigh Field Offices of the US Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) define
Federal Species of Concern as those species that appear to be in decline or otherwise in need of conservation and are under consideration for listing or for which there is insufficient information to support listing at this
time.Subsumed under the term "FSC" are all species petitioned by outside parties and other selected focal species identified in Service strategic plans, State Wildlife Action Plans, or Natural Heritage Program Lists. T(S/A) = threatened due to similarity of appearance. A taxon that is threatened due to similarity of appearance with another listed species and is listed for its protection. Taxa listed as T(S/A) are not biologically endangered or
threatened and are not subject to Section 7 consultation. See below. EXP = experimental population. A taxon listed as experimental (either essential or nonessential). Experimental, nonessential populations of endangered species (e.g., red wolf) are treated as threatened species on public land, for
consultation purposes, and as species proposed for listing on private land. P = proposed. Taxa proposed for official listing as endangered or threatened will be noted as "PE" or "PT", respectively.
Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGPA):
In the July 9, 2007 Federal Register( 72:37346-37372), the bald eagle was declared recovered, and removed (de-listed) from the Federal List of Threatened and Endangered wildlife. This delisting took effect August 8,2007. After
delisting, the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (Eagle Act) (16 U.S.C. 668-668d) becomes the primary law protecting bald eagles. The Eagle Act prohibits take of bald and golden eagles and provides a statutory definition of
"take" that includes "disturb". The USFWS has developed National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines to provide guidance to land managers, landowners, and others as to how to avoid disturbing bald eagles. For mor
information, visit http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/baldeagle.htm
Threatened due to similarity of appearance(T(S/A)):
In the November 4, 1997 Federal Register (55822-55825), the northern population of the bog turtle (from New York south to Maryland) was listed as T (threatened), and the southern population (from Virginia south to Georgia)
was listed as T(S/A) (threatened due to similarity of appearance). The T(S/A) designation bans the collection and interstate and international commercial trade of bog turtles from the southern population. The T(S/A) designation
has no effect on land management activities by private landowners in North Carolina, part of the southern population of the species. In addition to its official status as T(S/A), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service considers the
southern population of the bog turtle as a Federal species of concern due to habitat loss.
Definitions of Record Status: Current - the species has been observed in the county within the last 50 years. Historic - the species was last observed in the county more than 50 years ago. Obscure - the date and/or location of observation is uncertain. Incidental/migrant - the species was observed outside of its normal range or habitat. Probable/potential - the species is considered likely to occur in this county based on the proximity of known records (in adjacent counties), the presence of potentially suitable habitat, or both.
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Ecological Services Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801-1082
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
http://www.fws.gov/nc-es/es/countyfr.html
In Reply Refer To:
Consultation Code: 04EN1000-2018-SLI-0577
Event Code: 04EN1000-2018-E-01543
Project Name: Stony Knoll

Subject:List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project
location, and/or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
The attached species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as
well as proposed and final designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your
proposed project and/or may be affected by your proposed project. Although not required by
section 7, many agencies request species lists to start the informal consultation process and begin
their fulfillment of the requirements under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
This list, along with other helpful resources, is also available on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service) Asheville Field Office's (AFO) website: https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/
cntylist/nc_counties.html. The AFO website list includes “species of concern” species that could
potentially be placed on the federal list of threatened and endangered species in the future. Also
available are:
Design and Construction Recommendations
https://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmls/project_review/Recommendations.html
Optimal Survey Times for Federally Listed Plants
https://www.fws.gov/nc-es/plant/plant_survey.html
Northern long-eared bat Guidance
https://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmls/project_review/NLEB_in_WNC.html
Predictive Habitat Model for Aquatic Species
https://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmls/Maxent/Maxent.html
July 11, 2018
07/11/2018 Event Code: 04EN1000-2018-E-01543   2

New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of
species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could require modifications of these lists.
Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the Act,
the accuracy of the species lists should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be
completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be
completed by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website or the AFO website (the AFO website dates each
county list with the day of the most recent update/change) at regular intervals during project
planning and implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be
requested through the ECOS-IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the
enclosed list or by going to the AFO website.
The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species and the
ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) of the
Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 et seq.), Federal agencies are required to
utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of threatened and endangered
species and to determine whether projects may affect threatened and endangered species and/or
designated critical habitat.
A Biological Assessment is required for construction projects (or other undertakings having
similar physical impacts) that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the
human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)
(c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a Biological
Evaluation similar to a Biological Assessment be prepared to determine whether the project may
affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat. Recommended
contents of a Biological Assessment are described at 50 CFR 402.12 and on our office's website
at https://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmls/project_review/assessment_guidance.html.
If a Federal agency (or their non-federal representative) determines, based on the Biological
Assessment or Biological Evaluation, that listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be
affected by the proposed project, the agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to
50 CFR 402. In addition, the Service recommends that candidate species, proposed species, and
proposed critical habitat be addressed within the consultation. More information on the
regulations and procedures for section 7 consultation, including the role of permit or license
applicants, can be found in the "Endangered Species Consultation Handbook" at: http://
www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/pdf/TOC-GLOS.PDF.
Though the bald eagle is no longer protected under the Endangered Species Act, please be aware
that bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16
U.S.C. 668 et seq.), and projects affecting these species may require additional consultation (see
https://www.fws.gov/southeast/our-services/permits/eagles/). Wind energy projects should follow
the wind energy guidelines (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/) for minimizing impacts to
migratory birds (including bald and golden eagles) and bats.
Guidance for minimizing impacts to migratory birds for projects including communications
towers (e.g., cellular, digital television, radio, and emergency broadcast) can be found at: http://
07/11/2018 Event Code: 04EN1000-2018-E-01543   3

www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Hazards/towers/towers.htm;
http://www.towerkill.com; and http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Hazards/
towers/comtow.html.
We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages
Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project
planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Tracking Number in
the header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project
that you submit to our office.
Attachment(s):
▪Official Species List
▪Migratory Birds
▪Wetlands
07/11/2018 Event Code: 04EN1000-2018-E-01543   1

Official Species List
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the
requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether
any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed
action".
This species list is provided by:
Asheville Ecological Services Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801-1082
[phone]
07/11/2018 Event Code: 04EN1000-2018-E-01543   2

Project Summary
Consultation Code:04EN1000-2018-SLI-0577
Event Code:04EN1000-2018-E-01543
Project Name:Stony Knoll
Project Type:** OTHER **
Project Description:The Site encompasses approximately 441.6 acres and is located north of
the intersection of Rockford Road and Robert Burrus Road in Surry
County, North Carolina. The Site is in the Piedmont Physiographic
Province. The Site is located within the Upper Yadkin-Pee Dee watershed
(Hydrologic Unit Code HUC 03040101) and is drained by unnamed
tributaries that flow east to West Double Creek. The scope of the project
includes due diligence for future acquisition.
Project Location:
Approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https://
www.google.com/maps/place/36.28742024600004N80.65713707075219W
Counties:Surry, NC
07/11/2018 Event Code: 04EN1000-2018-E-01543   3

Endangered Species Act Species
There is a total of 3 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.
Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include
species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species
list because a project could affect downstream species.
IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA
Fisheries , as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the
Department of Commerce.
See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially
within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office
if you have questions.
1.NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an
office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of
Commerce.
Mammals
NAME STATUS
Northern Long-eared Bat Myotis septentrionalis
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9045
Threatened
Flowering Plants
NAME STATUS
Schweinitz's Sunflower Helianthus schweinitzii
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3849
Endangered
Small Whorled Pogonia Isotria medeoloides
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1890
Threatened
Critical habitats
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S
JURISDICTION.
1
07/11/2018 Event Code: 04EN1000-2018-E-01543   1

Migratory Birds
Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act .
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to
migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider
implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described below.
1.The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
2.The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
3.50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)
The birds listed below are birds of particular concern either because they occur on the USFWS
Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) list or warrant special attention in your project location.
To learn more about the levels of concern for birds on your list and how this list is generated, see
the FAQ below. This is not a list of every bird you may find in this location, nor a guarantee that
every bird on this list will be found in your project area. To see exact locations of where birders
and the general public have sighted birds in and around your project area, visit the E-bird data
mapping tool (Tip: enter your location, desired date range and a species on your list). For
projects that occur off the Atlantic Coast, additional maps and models detailing the relative
occurrence and abundance of bird species on your list are available. Links to additional
information about Atlantic Coast birds, and other important information about your migratory
bird list, including how to properly interpret and use your migratory bird report, can be found
below.
For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures
to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, click on the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE
SUMMARY at the top of your list to see when these birds are most likely to be present and
breeding in your project area.
NAME BREEDING SEASON
Eastern Whip-poor-will Antrostomus vociferus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the
continental USA and Alaska.
Breeds May 1 to Aug 20
Red-headed Woodpecker Melanerpes erythrocephalus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the
continental USA and Alaska.
Breeds May 10 to Sep
10
Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the
continental USA and Alaska.
Breeds May 10 to Aug
31
1
2
07/11/2018 Event Code: 04EN1000-2018-E-01543   2

Probability Of Presence Summary
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be
present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project
activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read and understand the
FAQ “Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report” before using or attempting
to interpret this report.
Probability of Presence ()
Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your
project overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4-week
months.) A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey effort (see
below) can be used to establish a level of confidence in the presence score. One can have higher
confidence in the presence score if the corresponding survey effort is also high.
How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:
1.The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in
the week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for
that week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee
was found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is
0.25.
2.To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of
presence is calculated. This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum
probability of presence across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of presence
in week 20 for the Spotted Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability of presence at week 12
(0.25) is the maximum of any week of the year. The relative probability of presence on
week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it is 0.05/0.25 = 0.2.
3.The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical
conversion so that all possible values fall between 0 and 10, inclusive. This is the
probability of presence score.
Breeding Season ()
Yellow bars denote a very liberal estimate of the time-frame inside which the bird breeds across
its entire range. If there are no yellow bars shown for a bird, it does not breed in your project
area.
Survey Effort ()
Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of surveys
performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. The number of
surveys is expressed as a range, for example, 33 to 64 surveys.
No Data ()
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.
Survey Timeframe
07/11/2018 Event Code: 04EN1000-2018-E-01543   3

Surveys from only the last 10 years are used in order to ensure delivery of currently relevant
information. The exception to this is areas off the Atlantic coast, where bird returns are based on
all years of available data, since data in these areas is currently much more sparse.
SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Eastern Whip-poor-
will
BCC Rangewide (CON)
Red-headed
Woodpecker
BCC Rangewide (CON)
Wood Thrush
BCC Rangewide (CON)
Additional information can be found using the following links:
▪Birds of Conservation Concern http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/managed-species/
birds-of-conservation-concern.php
▪Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds http://www.fws.gov/birds/
management/project-assessment-tools-and-guidance/
conservation-measures.php
▪Nationwide conservation measures for birds http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/pdf/
management/nationwidestandardconservationmeasures.pdf
Migratory Birds FAQ
Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts
to migratory birds.
Nationwide Conservation Measures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize
impacts to all birds at any location year round. Implementation of these measures is particularly
important when birds are most likely to occur in the project area. When birds may be breeding in
the area, identifying the locations of any active nests and avoiding their destruction is a very
helpful impact minimization measure. To see when birds are most likely to occur and be breeding
in your project area, view the Probability of Presence Summary. Additional measures and/or
permits may be advisable depending on the type of activity you are conducting and the type of
infrastructure or bird species present on your project site.
What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified
location?
The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern
(BCC) and other species that may warrant special attention in your project location.
no data survey effort breeding season probability of presence
07/11/2018 Event Code: 04EN1000-2018-E-01543   4

The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the Avian
Knowledge Network (AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding,
and citizen science datasets and is queried and filtered to return a list of those birds reported as
occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project intersects, and that have been identified as
warranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that area, an eagle (Eagle Act
requirements may apply), or a species that has a particular vulnerability to offshore activities or
development.
Again, the Migratory Bird Resource list includes only a subset of birds that may occur in your
project area. It is not representative of all birds that may occur in your project area. To get a list
of all birds potentially present in your project area, please visit the E-bird Explore Data Tool.
What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs for the migratory birds
potentially occurring in my specified location?
The probability of presence graphs associated with your migratory bird list are based on data
provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). This data is derived from a growing
collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets .
Probability of presence data is continuously being updated as new and better information
becomes available. To learn more about how the probability of presence graphs are produced and
how to interpret them, go the Probability of Presence Summary and then click on the "Tell me
about these graphs" link.
How do I know if a bird is breeding, wintering, migrating or present year-round in my
project area?
To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding,
wintering, migrating or year-round), you may refer to the following resources: The Cornell Lab
of Ornithology All About Birds Bird Guide, or (if you are unsuccessful in locating the bird of
interest there), the Cornell Lab of Ornithology Neotropical Birds guide. If a bird on your
migratory bird species list has a breeding season associated with it, if that bird does occur in your
project area, there may be nests present at some point within the timeframe specified. If "Breeds
elsewhere" is indicated, then the bird likely does not breed in your project area.
What are the levels of concern for migratory birds?
Migratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern:
1."BCC Rangewide" birds are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) that are of concern
throughout their range anywhere within the USA (including Hawaii, the Pacific Islands,
Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands);
2."BCC - BCR" birds are BCCs that are of concern only in particular Bird Conservation
Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA; and
3."Non-BCC - Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on
your list either because of the Eagle Act requirements (for eagles) or (for non-eagles)
potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities
(e.g. offshore energy development or longline fishing).
07/11/2018 Event Code: 04EN1000-2018-E-01543   5

Although it is important to try to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, efforts should be made,
in particular, to avoid and minimize impacts to the birds on this list, especially eagles and BCC
species of rangewide concern. For more information on conservation measures you can
implement to help avoid and minimize migratory bird impacts and requirements for eagles,
please see the FAQs for these topics.
Details about birds that are potentially affected by offshore projects
For additional details about the relative occurrence and abundance of both individual bird species
and groups of bird species within your project area off the Atlantic Coast, please visit the
Northeast Ocean Data Portal. The Portal also offers data and information about other taxa besides
birds that may be helpful to you in your project review. Alternately, you may download the bird
model results files underlying the portal maps through the NOAA NCCOS Integrative Statistical
Modeling and Predictive Mapping of Marine Bird Distributions and Abundance on the Atlantic
Outer Continental Shelf project webpage.
Bird tracking data can also provide additional details about occurrence and habitat use
throughout the year, including migration. Models relying on survey data may not include this
information. For additional information on marine bird tracking data, see the Diving Bird Study
and the nanotag studies or contact Caleb Spiegel or Pam Loring.
What if I have eagles on my list?
If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to obtain a permit to avoid
violating the Eagle Act should such impacts occur.
Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report
The migratory bird list generated is not a list of all birds in your project area, only a subset of
birds of priority concern. To learn more about how your list is generated, and see options for
identifying what other birds may be in your project area, please see the FAQ “What does IPaC
use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location”. Please be
aware this report provides the “probability of presence” of birds within the 10 km grid cell(s) that
overlap your project; not your exact project footprint. On the graphs provided, please also look
carefully at the survey effort (indicated by the black vertical bar) and for the existence of the “no
data” indicator (a red horizontal bar). A high survey effort is the key component. If the survey
effort is high, then the probability of presence score can be viewed as more dependable. In
contrast, a low survey effort bar or no data bar means a lack of data and, therefore, a lack of
certainty about presence of the species. This list is not perfect; it is simply a starting point for
identifying what birds of concern have the potential to be in your project area, when they might
be there, and if they might be breeding (which means nests might be present). The list helps you
know what to look for to confirm presence, and helps guide you in knowing when to implement
conservation measures to avoid or minimize potential impacts from your project activities,
should presence be confirmed. To learn more about conservation measures, visit the FAQ “Tell
me about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory
birds” at the bottom of your migratory bird trust resources page.
07/11/2018 Event Code: 04EN1000-2018-E-01543   1

Wetlands
Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section
404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes.
For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers District.
Please note that the NWI data being shown may be out of date. We are currently working to
update our NWI data set. We recommend you verify these results with a site visit to determine
the actual extent of wetlands on site.
FRESHWATER FORESTED/SHRUB WETLAND
▪PFO1A
FRESHWATER POND
▪PUBHh
RIVERINE
▪R3UBH
▪R4SBC
▪R5UBH

APPENDIX C
PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Habitat Assessment Photographic Log
Stony Knoll Solar
October 12, 2018

1

Photo 1: Typical view of early successional area dominated by shortleaf pine (Pinus echinata). Dense
canopy cover makes this poor habitat for small whorled pogonia (SWP).
(6/18/18, E. Wright)

Photo 2: Typical view of Dry-mesic oak-hickory forest dominated by white oak (Quercus alba) and
American beech (Fagus grandifolia). Open canopy cover and gentle slopes makes this good habitat for
SWP. (6/27/2018, E, Wright)
Habitat Assessment Photographic Log
Stony Knoll Solar
October 12, 2018

2

Photo 3: Typical view of bottomland hardwood forest (6/26/2018 E. Wright)

Photo 4: Typical view of maintained opened fields used in association with hunting activities
(6/27/2017 E. Wright)
Habitat Assessment Photographic Log
Stony Knoll Solar
October 12, 2018

3

Photo 5: Typical view of silviculture area, harvested in last 12 months (6/27/2018 E. Wright)

Photo 6: Typical view of maintained utility easements. Note the dead shrubs, believed to have
been treated chemically to maintain an herbaceous dominated community. This habitat is
marginally suitable for Schweinitz’s sunflower (6/28/2017 E. Wright)
Habitat Assessment Photographic Log
Stony Knoll Solar
October 12, 2018

4

Photo 7: Typical view of agricultural areas planted in row crops (6/18/2018 E. Wright)

Photo 8: Typical view of developed areas. Shown is an abandoned tobacco drying house
formally used in association with agriculture activities. (6/19/2017 E. Wright)

Habitat Assessment Photographic Log
Stony Knoll Solar
October 12, 2018

5

Photo 9: Typical view of palustrine scrub-shrub (PSS) habitat along northern property boundary.
This Carex spp. dominated community provides marginally suitable habitat for Bog Turtle
(6/18/2018 E. Wright)

Photo 10: View of Indian cucumber. Note the distinctive wiry stem and flower/fruit structures.
(6/18/2017 E. Wright)
Habitat Assessment Photographic Log
Stony Knoll Solar
October 12, 2018

6

Photo 11: View of large whorled pagonia (Isotria verticillata) observed onsite. Note the
distinctive purple stem which, in part, differentiates this species from SWP (Isotria medeoloides)
(6/28/2017 E. Wright)

Photo 12: Typic view of perennial streams onsite. Note the eroded banks, observed throughout
the site, and shallow substrate. (6/19/2017 E. Wright)
Habitat Assessment Photographic Log
Stony Knoll Solar
October 12, 2018

7

Photo 13: Representative view of fallow fields located at the Site and areas surveyed for
Schweinitz’s sunflower. (10/9/2018, A. Reusche)

Photo 14: Power line easement located in the central portion of the Site surveyed for
Schweinitz's sunflower. (10/9/2018, A. Reusche)
Habitat Assessment Photographic Log
Stony Knoll Solar
October 12, 2018

8

Photo 15: Open field/fallow field located in southern portion of the Site surveyed for
Schweinitz’s sunflower. (10/9/2018, A. Reusche)

APPENDIX D
VEGETATIVE SPECIES LIST
Scientific Name Common Name Stratum*
Acer rubrum Red maple T,S,H
Adiantum pedatum Northern maidenhair fern H
Ailanthus altissima Tree of heaven T,S
Arisaema triphyllum Jack-in-the-pulpit H
Arundinaria tecta Switch-cane H
Asimina triloba Paw paw S,H
Asplenium platyneuron Ebony spleenwort H
Bidens aristosa Bearded beggarstick H
Boehmeria cylindrica Flase nettle H
Botrychium virginianum Rattlesnake fern H
Calycanthus floridus Carolina allspice S,H
Carpinus caroliniana American hornbeam S
Carya glabra Pignut hickory T,S,H
Carya tomentosa Mockernut hickory T,S,H
Cercis canadensis Eastern redbud T,S
Chasmanthium laxum Slender spikegrass H
Chimaphila maculata Spotted wintergreen H
Chionanthus virginicus Fringetree S
Coreopsis spp.Bearded beggarstick H
Cornus florida Flowering dogwood T,S
Desmodium nudiflorum Tick trefoil H
Dichanthelium clandestinum Deertongue H
Diphasiastrum digitatum Common running-cedar H
Epifagus virginiana Beech drops H
Euonymus americanus Strawberry bush H
Eutrochium purpureum Joe-Pye Weed H
Fagus grandifolia American beech T,S,H
Fraxinus americana Green ash T,S
Galium tinctorium Stiff bedstraw H
Goodyera pubescens Downy rattlesnake-plantain H
Hedera helix English ivy V,H
Hexastylis virginica Virginia heartleaf H
Ilex opaca American holly T,S,H
Impatiens capensis Spotted jewelweed H
Ipomoea purpurea Common morning glory V,H
Isotria verticillata Large whorled pogonia H
Juglans nigra Eastern black walnut T
Juncus effusus Soft needle rush H
Juniperus virginiana Red cedar S,H
Kalmia latifolia Mountain laurel S
Lespedeza angustifolia Narrowleaf lespedeza H
Ligustrum sinense Chinese privet S,H
Lindera benzoin Northern spicebush S
Scientific Name Common Name Stratum*
Liquidambar styraciflua Sweetgum T,S,H
Liriodendron tulipifera Tulip poplar T,S,H
Lonicera japonica Honeysuckle V,H
Lycopodium clavatum Clubmoss H
Magnolia fraseri Earleaf umbrella-tree T,S
Maianthemum racemosum False Solomon's seal H
Medeola virginiana Indian cucumber H
Microstegium vimineum Japanese stiltgrass H
Mitchella repens Partridgeberry H
Monotropa uniflora Indian pipe H
Nyssa sylvatica Blackgum T
Ostrya virginiana American hophornbeam T,S,H
Oxalis violacea Violet wood-sorrel H
Oxydendrum arboreum Sourwood T,S
Parthenocissus quinquefolia Virginia creeper V,H
Paulownia tomentosa Princess tree T
Phytolacca americana Pokeweed H
Pilea pumila Clearweed H
Pinus echinata Shortleaf pine T,S,H
Pinus strobus Eastern white pine T,S
Pinus virginiana Virginia pine T
Podophyllum peltatum Mayapple H
Polygonum spp.Knotweeds H
Polystichum acrostichoides Christmas fern H
Prunus serotina Black Cherry S
Pueraria montana Kudzu V,H
Quercus alba White oak T,S,H
Quercus phellos Willow oak S
Quercus prinus Chestnut oak S
Quercus rubra Northern red oak T,S,H
Rosa multiflora Multiflora rose S
Rubus spp.Blackberry H
Sambucus canadensis Elderberry S
Sassafras albidum Sassafras T,S,H
Smallanthus uvedalia Hairy leafcup H
Smilax bona-nox Catbrier V,H
Smilax rotundifolia Greenbrier V,H
Solidago spp.Goldenrods H
Symphyotrichum spp.Asters H
Toxicodendron radicans Poison ivy V.H
Vaccinium pallidum Lowbush blueberry H
Viburnum acerifolium Mapleleaf viburnum S
Viburnum nudum Possumhaw S
Scientific Name Common Name Stratum*
Viburnum prunifolium Blackhaw S
Viola cucullata Marsh blue violet H
Wisteria sinensis Chinese wisteria V,H
Woodwardia areolata Netted chain fern H
* T-Tree; S-Shrub; H-Herb; V-Vine

APPENDIX E
PROJECT AREA SOILS
Map UnitSoil Series NameLandformDrainage Classification PermeabilityAcidityBbBBraddock fine sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopesFans on mountain valleys Well drained Moderately high permeability pH 3.5-5.5 BbCBraddock fine sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Fans on mountain valleys Well drained Moderately high permeability pH 3.5-5.5CsAColvard and Suches soils, 0 to 3 percent slopesNatural levees on floodplains Well drained High permeability pH 4.5-7.8DrBDillard fine sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopesStream terracesModerately well drained Moderately low to moderately high permeability pH 4.5-6.5FeB2Fairview sandy clay loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes Ridges and interfluves Well drained Moderately high permeability pH 4.5-6.5FeC2Fairview sandy clay loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Ridges and interfluves Well drained Moderately high permeability pH 4.5-6.5FeD2Fairview sandy clay loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Ridges Well drained Moderately high permeability pH 4.5-6.5 FrC2Fairview-Siloam Complex, 8 to 15 percent slopesHillslopes on ridges Well drained Moderately high permeability pH 5.1-6.5FsEFairview-Stott Knob Complex, 25 to 45 percent slopesHillslopes on ridges Well drained Moderately high permeability pH 4.5-6.5SrCSiloam-Zion Complex, 6 to 15 percent slopesHillslopes on ridges Well drained Very low permeability pH 5.1-7.8PROJECT AREA SOILS