20130455 Ver 1_Mitigation Plans_20130419

20130455
MITIGATION PLAN
Twin Bays Restoration Site
Duplin County, North CarolLia
EEP Contract 004739
EEP Project Number 95363
Cape Fear Basin
Cataloging Unit 03030007
Prepared for:
r-d;j
ecosystem
PROGRAM
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1652
FINAL —APRIL 2013
rn
z
zZ
�
0
4-<
Orn
O�
U rl
V
O
L'3
�WR
AP'1 I � �Cli
NR - WATER 61U1A1U-TY

a
i
•
MITIGATION PLAN
Twin Bays Restoration Site
Duplin County, North Carolina
EEP Contract 004739
EEP Project Number 95363
Cape Fear Basin
Cataloging Unit 03030007
Prepared for:
-,cosysteill
rk.n.;nti•.
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1652
Prepared by:
1111111`
�w �
mmmmro �
Ki C ii � � �,n
_4�
_._
nommo_
mmmmmMM&_ hona
KCI
IN V RONMENTAL TECNNOLOG ES
AND CONSTRUCTION, INC
\"'" I \II,,'I \1
KCI Associates of North Carolina, PC
4601 Six Forks Rd, Suite 220
Raleigh, NC 27609
(919) 783 -9214
FINAL —April 2013

Mitigation Plan Twin Bays Restoration Site
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This mitigation plan has been written in conformance with the requirements of the following
• Federal rule for compensatory mitigation project sites as described in the Federal Register Title 33
Navigation and Navigable Waters Volume 3 Chapter 2 Section § 332 8 paragraphs (c)(2) through (c)(14)
• NCDENR Ecosystem Enhancement Program In -Lieu Fee Instrument signed and dated July 28, 2010
- _ These documents govern NCEEP operations and procedures for the delivery of compensatory mitigation
The Twin Bays Wetland Restoration Site (TBWRS) is a full - delivery mitigation project being developed for
the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) The TBWRS is former non - riparian wetland
system in the Cape Fear Basin (03030007 8 -digit HUC) in southern Duphn County, North Carolina that
has been substantially modified to maximize agricultural production The site offers the chance to
restore impacted agricultural lands to non - riparian wetland habitat
The Cape Fear River Basin Restoration Priorities state the goals for the TBWRS's 14 -digit HUC are to
expand restoration opportunities and repair riparian buffers (NCDENR EEP, 2009) The project goals for
TBWRS are in line with the basin priorities and include the following
- Slow and treat the runoff of upslope agricultural drainage
- Restore a Hardwood Flats Community
- Develop valuable wetland habitat niches within a drained agricultural landscape
The project goals will be addressed through the following objectives
- Fill field ditches to restore surface flow retention and elevate local groundwater levels
- Redevelop longer wetland flow patterns to increase surface flow retention time
t - Modify an existing pond to its natural seep condition to feed the downslope wetland
- Restore a native forested hardwood wetland community using natives trees and seed mixes
The site is located within a flat interstream divide that spans two unnamed tributaries to Rock Fish Creek
and is currently used for agriculture The majority of the site will be restored to non - riparian wetland
with one smaller portion preserved as upland habitat The ditches and ponds across the site will be filled
and redeveloped to retain and distribute surface flow across the site Once site grading is complete, the
non - riparian communities will be planted as Hardwood Flats (NCWAM, v 4 1 2010) The site will be
monitored for seven years or until the success criteria are met
R= Restoration RE= Restoration Equivalent of Creation or Enhancement
Twin Bays Restoration Site, Duplin County
Mitigation Credits
Stream
Riparian
Wetland
Non - riparian
Wetland
Buffer
Nitrogen
Nutrient
Offset
Phosphorous
Nutrient
Offset
Type
R
RE
R
RE
R
RE
Acres
-
Credits
-
TOTAL CREDITS
11 1

Mitigation Plan
Twin Bays Restoration Site
i
4
1
5
4 _
1
_ J
1_/

Mitigation Plan
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Twin Bays Restoration Site
1.0
RESTORATION PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
................. ............................... 1
2.0
SITE SELECTION ......................................................................................
............................... 1
2.1
Directions
1
2 2
Site Selection
1
2.3
Vicinity Map
3
2.4
Watershed Map
4
2 5
Soil Survey
5
2.6
Current Condition Plan View
6
2.7
Historical Condition Plan View
7
2.8
Site Photographs
9
3.0
SITE PROTECTION INSTRUMENT ......................................................
.............................10
3.1
Site Protection Instrument Summary Information
10
3.2
Site Protection Instrument Figure
11
4.0
BASELINE INFORMATION ...................................................................
.............................12
4.1
Watershed Summary Information
13
42
Reach Summary Information
13
4.3
Wetland Summary Information
13
44
Regulatory Considerations
13
5.0
DETERMINATION OF CREDITS ...........................................................
.............................15
6.0
CREDIT RELEASE SCHEDULE ...............................................................
.............................16
7.0
MITIGATION WORK PLAN ....................................................................
.............................18
7.1
Target Wetland Types and Plant Communities
18
7.2
Design Parameters
18
7.3
Data Analysis
19
7.4
Proposed Mitigation Plan View
21
8.0
MAINTENANCE PLAN .............................................................................
.............................22
9.0
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS .. ...........................................................
.............................23
10.0
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS .......................................................
.............................24
11.0
LONG -TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN .....................................................
.............................25
12.0
ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN ......................................................
.............................25
13.0
FINANCIAL ASSURANCES .....................................................................
.............................26
14.0
OTHER INFORMATION ...........................................................................
.............................26
14.1
Definitions
26
14.2
References
27
143
Appendix A. Site Protection Instrument
29
14.4
Appendix B Baseline Information Data
43
14 5
Appendix C. Mitigation Work Plan Data and Analyses
87
14.6
Appendix D Project Plan Sheets
115

Mitigation Plan
IV
Twin Bays Restoration Site

r
Mitigation Plan Twin Bays Restoration Site
1.0 RESTORATION PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
EEP develops River Basin Restoration Priorities to guide its restoration activities within each of the
state's 54 cataloging units RBRPs delineate specific watersheds that exhibit both the need and
opportunity for wetland, stream and riparian buffer restoration These watersheds are called Targeted
Local Watersheds (TLWs) and receive priority for EEP planning and restoration project funds
The 2009 Cape Fear River Basin RBRP identified HUC 03030007090040 (Rock Fish Creek) as a Targeted
Local Watershed (http //www nceep net /services /lwps/ cape _fear /RBRP %20Cape %20Fear%202008 pdf)
The watershed is characterized by 43% forested and 42% agricultural area with impacts to streams
including channelization and nonpoint source pollution
Rock Fish Creek was listed on the North Carolina 303(d) list in 2006, 2008, and 2010 for impaired
biological integrity with the source of impairment undetermined, however, it is no longer listed in 2012
The Twin Bays Wetland Restoration Site ( TBWRS) Project was identified as a wetland opportunity to
improve habitat within the TLW
f
The project goals address stressors identified in the TLW and include the following
- Slow and treat the runoff of upslope agricultural drainage
' - - Restore a Hardwood Flats Community
- Develop valuable wetland habitat niches within a drained agricultural landscape
The project goals will be addressed through the following project objectives
- Fill field ditches to restore surface flow retention and elevate local groundwater levels
- Redevelop longer wetland flow patterns to increase surface flow retention time
- Modify an existing pond to its natural seep condition to feed the downslope wetland
- Restore a forested hardwood wetland community using native trees and seed mixes
2.0 SITE SELECTION
2.1 Directions
The TBWRS is located on a single parcel located off of Cornwallis Road approximately two miles
northwest of Wallace, North Carolina To reach the site from Raleigh proceed east on 1 -40 for
approximately 69 miles Then travel on US -117 south toward Wallace Turn right onto NC -41 South /East
Main Street Travel for two miles (East Main Street turns into West Main Street and then Wallace
Highway) Next, take a slight right onto Cornwallis Road The site will be approximately 0 5 mile ahead
on the right
2.2 Site Selection
The site is part of the 03030007 USGS Cataloging Unit (Cape Fear) The Cape Fear River Basin as a whole
is experiencing a large amount of habitat alteration due to population growth from Wilmington and its
- surrounding metropolitan area As a result, the focus in this watershed is on mitigating impacts from
l-_ stormwater and protecting and /or restoring existing habitat (NCDENR EEP, 2009)
� 1

Mitigation Plan Twin Bays Restoration Site
The project site is bounded by Cornwallis Road to the west, a ditch along the property line to the south,
and agricultural land to the east and north The site has a long history of hydrologic modification in
order to allow for farming to take place on the property The existing site conditions are shown in
Section 2 6 and seen in site photographs (Section 2 8) Within the 03030007 unit, the Rock Fish Creek
drainage (03030007090040) remains relatively unaffected by urban development The nearest named -
downstream water body is a reach of Rock Fish Creek (DWQ 18- 74 -29b), which is classified as Class C
with the supplemental listing of Swamp Waters (Sw) Rock Fish Creek and its tributaries are not listed as
impaired under the 2012 303(d) listing However, less than 0 1% of the 14 -digit HUC is protected and
approximately 42% of its land use is in agriculture (NCDENR EEP, 2009) The project watershed for the
TBWRS is comprised of 25 4 total acres Current land use in the project watershed consists of agriculture
(23 6 ac /93 %), forest (0 6 ac /2 %), and low- intensity development (1 2 ac /5 %) The approximate total
impervious cover of the project watershed is 2 0%
Historic aerials from Duplin County were examined for any information about how the site hydrology
and vegetation have changed over the last century They were obtained from the USGS EarthExplorer,
USDA NAIP, and NC OneMap for 1950, 1959, 1974, 1982, 1993, 1998, 2005, and 2010 The reviewed
aerials are found in Section 2 7 The first aerial photo from 1950 shows that a small portion of the site
may have been forested at this time, but this changed by 1959, when the majority of the site is cleared
and a ditch is visible running west to east through the center of the site The site remained relatively
unchanged through 1974, although a dark signature of either vegetation or wetted land appears in the
middle of the site In 1993, additional ditches have been installed that drain the site from the north to
the south The land cover remains in agriculture currently The surrounding area is rural with low
development pressure at this time These land use trends indicated that restoring this property back to a
forested wetland will provide an important habitat enhancement in the watershed
The site lies within the Carolina Flatwoods (Level IV 63h) ecoregion of the Coastal Plain physiographic v
province This low- gradient region generally has fine -loamy and coarse -loamy soils with high water
tables The geology at the site is classified as part of the Peedee Formation, which has sand, clayey sand,
and clay with patches of limestone in the upper portions
The soils at the site were also examined for their wetland potential The Soil Survey of Duplin County has
the TBWRS mapped as the Rains fine sandy loam soils series A detailed investigation confirmed that the
Rains series occupies the majority of the site, particularly around the perimeter, but also determined
that the central portion of the site contains Torhunta soils The Rains series is described as a poorly
drained soil located on flats or broad interstream divides on marine terraces Similarly, the Torhunta
series is a very poorly drained soil found on flats on marine terraces or depressions on stream terraces
There is also a small inclusion of a Murville /Leon complex in the southwestern corner and an area of
Udorthents along the ponded seeps in the north - central wooded section of the site The northeastern
corner of the TBWRS has a small area of Goldsboro With the exception of the Goldsboro soil, all of the
mapped soils at the TBWRS site are hydric soils that have been drained through on -site ditching The soil
data sheets and a map of the soil borings are included in Appendix C
Based on these watershed and site - specific attributes, the TBWRS was selected as an ideal candidate for
wetland mitigation The restored site will expand forested wetland habitat in an area that has been
actively used for agriculture since at least 1950
2
.�a

Mitigation Plan
2.3 Vicinity Map
WAYN E
LENOIR
DONE S
SAMPSON DUPLIN
ON SLOW
PENDER
U
°gipRv
a
Q'
�q
v
c
m
{
x
F
Reo`°��Ra
f �
Charty Rd
a
% ) MU R PHY
{r FARMS Y
917
RJ
HENDERSON
FIELD �n
Twin Bays Restoration Site
of
r
pP
V I
FW L 1
3
f
w�
R4
. / N &TrKA
PROJECT SITE VICINITY MAP
N
' °F °
'
TWIN BAYS RESTORATION SITE
I
DUPLIN COUNTY, NC
A
3

Mitigation Plan
2.4 Watershed Map
Twin Bays Restoration Site
-�g'•. � i 15U
j
y I
1
CP
I`
ROSE HILL QUAD
r'
r
' m
i
ff % • •
' J
•
114g
` O WALLACE WEST QUAD' , 8 ? • ��
o
f`
Q Project Watershed (25.4 acres)
f
( Proposed Project Boundary
PROJECT SITE WATERSHED MAP Source. USGSDRG& 1
800 400 0 800 Rose fill (1984) and
Feet TWIN BAYS RESTORATION SITE V%flaoeV*st(1984),
DUPUN COUNTY, NC
4

Mitigation Plan
2.5 Soil Survey
le-•-
GoA
NbB ..
Oki
.x
RaA
S
GoA
/NbB
Twin Bays Restoration Site
=i
.aw
RaA
NbA
NbB
"9
i
Project Parcel
ENSLRU Proposed Easement Area (11.7 ac)
PROJECT SITE NRCS SOIL SURVEY MAP So rms USDA %RGS SD!Daa Mal
Soo aoo o wo TWIN BAYS RESTORATION SITE vc Stakwrde �ha acery 20'0
Feet
DUPLIN COUNTY, NC
5

Mitigation Plan
2.6 Current Condition Plan View
Twin Bays Restoration Site

Mitigation Plan
2.7 Historical Condition Plan View
Twin Bays Restoration Site

Mitigation Plan Twin Bays Restoration Site

Mitigation Plan
2.8 Site Photographs
Twin Bays Restoration Site

Mitigation Plan
3.0 SITE PROTECTION INSTRUMENT
Twin Bays Restoration Site
3.1 Site Protection Instrument Summary Information
The land required for the construction, management, and stewardship of this mitigation project includes
portions of the following parcels The conservation easement documents were finalized in October
2012 A copy of the land protection Instrument is included in Appendix A
10
Landowners
PIN
County
Site Protection
Deed Book and
Acreage
Instrument
Page Number
protected
Parcel A
Danny B Keir
2396 -0025-
Duplin
Conservation
DB 1666 PG 116
11 72 acres
2193
Easement
10

Mitigation Plan
3.2 Site Protection Instrument Figure
Twin Bays Restoration Site
L — Project Parcel
Project Easement
^a
7 ..
DANNY B KEIR1";"
.PIN:239600252193 F '
c,
� r
SITE PROTECTION INSTRUMENT FIGURE Source, NC Stakwde
1eo $° 0 160 TWIN BAYS RESTORATION SITE '"'awry 2010
Feet DUPUN COUNTY, NC
11

Mitigation Plan
4.0 BASELINE INFORMATION
Twin Bays Restoration Site
Items addressed in the Categorical Exclusion in Appendix B
12
Project Information
Project Name
Twin Bays Wetland Restoration Site
County
Duplin County
Project Area (acres)
1172 acres
Project Coordinates (lat and long)
34 748418 N, -78 027129 W
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province
Coastal Plain
River Basin
Cape Fear
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8 -digit
03030007
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14 -digit
03030007090040
DWQ Sub -basin
18- 74 -29b
Project Drainage Area (acres)
25 4 acres
Project Drainage Area Percentage of
Impervious Area
2%
CGIA Land Use Classification
93% Cultivated, 2% Mixed Shrubland, and 5% Low- Intensity Development
Wetland Summary Information
Parameters
Wetland Area 1
Size of Wetland (acres)
111 acres
Wetland Type (non- riparian, riparian
riverine or riparian non - riverine)
Non - riparian
Mapped Soil Series
Rains
(Torhunta, Murville /Leon and Udorthents by detailed soil investigation)
Drainage class
Poorly drained
Soil Hydric Status
Drained Hydric
Source of Hydrology
Hillside seepage / precipitation
Hydrologic Impairment
Ditching and Crops
Native vegetation community
Crops
Percent composition of exotic
invasive vegetation
0%
Regulatory Considerations
Regulation
Applicable?
Resolved'?
Supporting
Documentation
Waters of the United States — Section
404
Yes
Applying I in g for NWP 27
Jurisdictional
Determination
Waters of the United States — Section
401
Yes
Applying I in g for NWP 27
Jurisdictional
Determination
Endangered Species Act*
No
N/A
N/A
Historic Preservation Act*
No
N/A
N/A
Coastal Zone Management Act
(CZMA)/ Coastal Area Management
Act (CAMA)
No
N/A
N/A
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
No
N/A
FEMA Floodplain
Checklist
Essential Fisheries Habitat*
No
N/A
N/A
Items addressed in the Categorical Exclusion in Appendix B
12

Mitigation Plan Twin Bays Restoration Site
4.1 Watershed Summary Information
The site is within the 03030007 USGS Cataloging Unit (Cape Fear) The Cape Fear River Basin as a whole
is experiencing a large amount of habitat alteration due to population growth from Wilmington and its
surrounding metropolitan area According to 1996 land cover data from the North Carolina Center for
Geographic Information and Analysis (CGIA), only 3% of the Cape Fear River Basin is developed, but the
area is expected to continue to grow The predominant land uses are 48% forest and 14% agriculture
The project watershed for the TBWRS is comprised of 25 4 total acres Current land use in the project
watershed consists of agriculture (23 6 ac /93 %), forest (0 6 ac /2 %), and low- intensity development (12
ac /5 %) The approximate total impervious cover of the project watershed is 2 0% The nearest named
downstream water body is a reach of Rock Fish Creek The project area is located in the United States
Geological Survey (USGS) Rose Hill and Wallace West Quadrangles (1984)
4.2 Reach Summary Information
Not applicable for this project
4.3 Wetland Summary Information
Currently, there are no existing wetlands present The wetland data forms are included in Appendix B
Based on field topographic survey data and LIDAR elevation data, the contours at the site range from 60
— 64 feet The topography of the site begins with the higher elevations at the northern edge of the site,
which is the top of the small project watershed The highest elevations curve around the two existing
forested portions in the north - central and northwestern portions of the site The drained hydric soils at
the site experience approximately a 2' change in elevation as the slope grades down slightly toward the
southern end of the site
A jurisdictional determination delineation was completed in which the ditch network installed at the site
_ was identified as jurisdictional tributaries (see Appendix B for jurisdictional determination plat) The
ditch network consists of channels that generally drain the site from the north to the south Three
primary ditches carry water from the northern edge of the site toward the center of the project and all
discharge into a main ditch that runs west to east across the extent of the site A small portion of runoff
is collected from Cornwallis Road The central ditch then discharges into another ditch running north to
south This southeastern ditch flows into an off -site ditch running west to east along the southern
property line In addition to the modifications made to the site with ditching, the TBWRS also contains a
small pond in the north - central wooded portion of the site A past landowner created a pond berm to
capture flow from two seeps to the north This pond is hindering the dispersal of seepage flow across
the site to the south Existing vegetation around the pond and in isolated sections along the ditches
includes laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia), red bay (Persea borbonia), sweet bay (Magnolia virginiana), and
giant cane (Arundmana gigantea)
4.4 Regulatory Considerations
A jurisdictional determination was submitted to the US Army Corps of Engineers on October 9, 2012 and
approved on October 30, 2012 Following the completion of the mitigation plan, a pre - construction
notification (PCN) will be completed to apply for a Nationwide 27 Permit (NWP) to comply with Sections
13

Mitigation Plan
Twin Bays Restoration Site
401 and 404 of the Clean Water Act with the Wilmington District of the US Army Corps of Engineers and
the NCDENR Division of Water Quality
TBWRS is not located within the FEMA 100 -year floodplain and therefore a flood study is not anticipated
for this project
14

Mitigation Plan
5.0 DETERMINATION OF CREDITS
Twin Bays Restoration Site
Twin Bays Restoration Site, Duplm County
Mitigation Credits
Nitrogen
Phosphorous
Stream
Riparian
Non - riparian
Buffer
Nutrient
Nutrient
Wetland
Wetland
Offset
Offset
Type
R
RE
R
RE
R
RE
-_ °° _
;�u^ -aye
�-
Acres
-
111
-
Credits
-
111
-
TOTAL CREDITS
111
Project Components
Probed
Restoration
Component
Stationing/
Existing
Approach
-or-
Restoration
Mitigation
Footage/
Footage
-or-
Location
(PI, Pill etc
Restoration
Ratio
Acreage
or Acreage
ReachlD
Equivalent
Central and
Southern portion
Wetland Area 1
of project
111 acres
-
Restoration
it 1 acres
1 1
easement
Component Summation
Buffer
Restoration
Stream
Riparian Wetland
Non - riparian Wetland
Upland
(square
Level
(Imearfeet)
(acres)
(acres)
(acres)
feet)
Non-
Rivenne
Rivenne
- - - -
_
_ -,• --
Restoration
111 acres
-
Enhancement
Enhancement I
Enhancement II
Creation
Preservation
-
=
0 4 acre
High Quality
Preservation
TOTAL
111 acres*
0 4 acre
R= Restoration RE= Restoration Equivalent of Creation or Enhancement
*Additional 0 2 acre is under the utility easement and not included in the determination of credits
15

Mitigation Plan
6.0 CREDIT RELEASE SCHEDULE
Twin Bays Restoration Site
All credit releases will be based on the total credit generated as reported by the as -built survey of the
mitigation site Under no circumstances shall any mitigation project be debited until the necessary DA
authorization has been received for its construction or the District Engineer (DE) has otherwise provided
written approval for the project in the case where no DA authorization is required for construction of
the mitigation project The DE, in consultation with the Interagency Review Team (IRT), will determine if
performance standards have been satisfied sufficiently to meet the requirements of the release -
schedules below In cases where some performance standards have not been met, credits may still be
released depending on the specifics of the case Monitoring may be required to restart or be extended,
depending on the extent to which the site fails to meet the specified performance standard The release
of project credits will be subject to the criteria described as follows
Forested Wetlands Credits
Monitoring
Credit Release Activity
Interim
Total
Year
Release
Released
0
Initial Allocation —see requirements below
30%
30%
1
First year monitoring report demonstrates performance
10%
40%
standards are being met
2
Second year monitoring report demonstrates performance
10%
50%
standards are being met
3
Third year monitoring report demonstrates performance
10%
60%
standards are being met
4
Fourth year monitoring report demonstrates performance
10%
70%
standards are being met
5
Fifth year monitoring report demonstrates performance
10%
80%
standards are being met, Provided that all performance standards are
met, the IRT may allow the NCEEP to discontinue hydrologic monitoring
after the fifth year, but vegetation monitoring must continue for an
additional two years after the fifth year for a total of seven years
6
Sixth year monitoring report demonstrates performance
10%
90%
standards are being met
7
Seventh year monitoring report demonstrates performance
10%
100%
standards are being met, and project has received close -out
approval
Initial Allocation of Released Credits
The initial allocation of released credits, as specified in the mitigation plan can be released by the NCEEP
without prior written approval of the DE upon satisfactory completion of the following activities
- Approval of the final Mitigation Plan
- Recordation of the preservation mechanism, as well as a title opinion acceptable to the USACE
covering the property
- Completion of project construction (the initial physical and biological improvements to the --
mitigation site) pursuant to the mitigation plan, Per the NCEEP Instrument, construction means
that a mitigation site has been constructed in its entirety, to include planting, and an as -built
report has been produced As -built reports must be sealed by an engineer prior to project
closeout, if appropriate but not prior to the initial allocation of released credits
ITI

Mitigation Plan
Twin Bays Restoration Site
Receipt of necessary DA permit authorization or written DA approval for projects where DA
permit issuance is not required
Subsequent Credit Releases
- All subsequent credit releases must be approved by the DE, in consultation with the IRT, based on a
determination that required performance standards have been achieved For stream projects a reserve
of 15% of a site's total stream credits shall be released after two bank -full events have occurred, in
separate years, provided the channel is stable and all other performance standards are met In the event
that less than two bank -full events occur during the monitoring period, release of these reserve credits
shall be at the discretion of the IRT As projects approach milestones associated with credit release, the
NCEEP will submit a request for credit release to the DE along with documentation substantiating
achievement of criteria required for release to occur This documentation will be included with the
annual monitoring report
17

Mitigation Plan
7.0 MITIGATION WORK PLAN
7.1 Target Wetland Types and Plant Communities
Twin Bays Restoration Site
Wetland plantings shall consist of native species commonly found in the Hardwood Flats Community
(NCWAM, v 4 1 2010) Trees and shrubs will be planted at a density of 968 stems per acre (9 feet x 5
feet spacing) to achieve a mature survivability of two hundred sixty (210) stems per acre after seven
years Woody vegetation planting will be conducted during dormancy Species to be planted may consist
of the following consistent with a hardwood flat (NCWAM, v 4 1 2010)
Common Name
Red maple
Red chokeberry
Tulip poplar
Sweetbay
Swamp red bay
Swamp chestnut oak
Water oak
Cherrybark oak
American elm
Highbush blueberry
Scientific Name
Wetland Indicator
Acer rubrum
FACW
Aronia arbut►foha
FACW
Liriodendron tulipifera
FACW
Magnolia virginiona
FACW
Persea palustris
FACW
Quercus michauxii
FACW
Quercus nigra
FAC
Quercus pagoda
FAC
Ulmus americana
FACW
Vaccinium corymbosum
FACW
A herbaceous seed mix composed of appropriate native species will also be developed and used to
further stabilize and restore the wetland
All of the above options will be marked and surveyed as per EEP's requirements contained within
http / /portal ncdenr org /web /eep /fd- forms - templates In addition, the easement boundaries will be
marked with salt- treated wooden posts placed approximately 100 feet apart Each line post will be
marked with a conservation easement placard Corner posts will be marked with signs stating
"Conservation Easement Corner "
7.2 Design Parameters
The mitigation approach for the TBWRS will aim to restore the hydrology and vegetation components to
this non - riparian wetland system The available historic data, detailed soils mapping, and topographic
and geographic positions suggest that a hardwood flat used to exist at the TBWRS (NCWAM, v 4 1
2010) The site will be restored to a condition that resembles the former wetland community A local
comparable reference wetland system was identified approximately 0 5 mile north of the restoration
site and was used to aid in design of a wetland community most suited to the area Please see the
mitigation overview in Section 7 4 and the wetland plans included in Appendix D The following
elements of functional uplift are expected from this project
1 Increase in groundwater recharge
2 Increase in sediment trapping and filtration
3 Increase in carbon storage
4 Increase in biochemical cycling of nutrients and other pollutants
5 Increase in habitat utilization by wildlife (migrants and residents)
6 Increase in landscape patch structure
18

Mitigation Plan Twin Bays Restoration Site
Non - Riparian Wetland Restoration –11 1 acres
All of the existing drained hydnc soils will be restored to a non - riparian wetland system The primary
yi restoration action will be to fill the existing ditches across the site in order to restore hydrology Clay
ditch plugs will be installed along the lengths of the ditches Existing spoil will be used as available to fill
the remainder of the ditches The primary receiving ditch, which runs west to east, will remain open
Detailed topographic survey will be used to design slight grading modifications to redirect and lengthen
overland flow paths in order to retain and treat surface hydrology longer Surface roughness variations
will also be enhanced in areas where the years of agricultural production have overly compacted the
soil
The small wooded section with ponded seeps in the north - central portion of the site will also be
restored The deep portions of pond will be filled in to recreate ephemeral ponding conditions and the
berms will be selectively breached, allowing the seeps that feed the ephemeral pond to flow into the
downslope wetlands, while still maintaining existing mature trees that have grown up in this area
Following the completion of site grading, the non - riparian wetland will be planted as a Hardwood Flats
Community as described in Section 7 1 Proposed project conditions are shown in Section 7 4
Upland Inclusions – 0 4 acre of Upland Inclusions
There are 0 4 acres of uplands located in the forested northeastern corner of the project boundary This
area will remain undisturbed and will be included in the TBWRS conservation easement Once the
grading is completed, the unvegetated portion of this upland area will be planted as a Hardwood Flats
Community as described in Section 7 1
Reference Wetland
A suitable reference wetland was found approximately 0 5 mile north of the TBWRS The reference
wetland is comprised of deciduous hardwoods over a shrub layer with broad - leaved evergreens and is
consistent with the Hardwood Flats Community that will be the primary wetland type at the project site
A groundwater monitoring well has been installed to document the reference wetland hydrology during
the course of monitoring
7.3 Data Analysis
The numerous modifications to the hydrology of the TBWRS have effectively drained the historic
wetlands on -site The development of a network of field ditches has significantly altered the retention of
surface hydrology in these areas The pre and post - restoration effects of ditching on wetland hydrology
was evaluated using a hydrologic budget for the site (see Appendix C)
Existing Conditions
Existing site hydrology was modeled by developing an annual water budget that calculates hydrologic
inputs and outputs in order to calculate the change in storage on a monthly time step In order to set up
the water budget, historic climatic data were obtained from the North Carolina State Climatic Office
The weather station in Maysville, North Carolina was used, which is the closest station with the longest
period of record and is approximately 46 miles to the northeast of TBWRS Monthly precipitation totals
from the entire period of record (1945 -2011) were reviewed and three years were selected to represent
a range of precipitation conditions dry year (1990), average year (1973), and wet year (1991)
19
I-

Mitigation Plan Twin Bays Restoration Site
Potential inputs to the water budget include precipitation, groundwater, and surface inputs For
precipitation, the data from the three selected years were used in the budget Groundwater inputs likely
exist, particularly in the upper portions of the site, but they were considered to be negligible to be
conservative for the purposes of this study Surface water input was calculated using the USDA Soil
Conservation Service (SCS) runoff curve number equation (USDA, SCS 1986)
Outputs from the site include potential evapotranspiration (PET), groundwater, and surface water
diversion PET was calculated by the Thornthwaite method using mean monthly temperatures
determined from the chosen years of record 1990, 1973, and 1991 Surface water was assumed entirely
lost since there is no surface storage in the existing conditions model
Once the inputs and outputs were determined, a net monthly total was calculated in inches and used to
estimate a yearly water budget The model assumes unsaturated conditions at the beginning of the
year Because the TBWRS consisted of two separate soils (Rains and Torhunta), two models were used
for the water budget A maximum wetland water volume of 5 4 inches was calculated based on the
specific yield of 0 15 for 36 inches of Rains soil and a maximum wetland water volume of 4 68 inches
was calculated based on the specific yield of 013 for 36 inches of Torhunta soil The resulting
hydrographs for the average and wet years show a seasonal pattern The model shows that the majority
of hydrologic inputs to the site come during the rainy spring months for the average year and during
both the spring months and late summer /early fall for the wet year The site begins to lose saturation in
the upper twelve inches in the late spring and early summer months for both years However, after late
spring, the wet year shows an increase in hydrologic inputs that continues through the summer months
and then decreases in fall The average year does not see an increase in hydrologic inputs until the late
fall The dry year shows very little hydrology overall It is clear from the existing model output that the
deep ditches within the site are exerting a larger influence on the site's storage capacity than the water
budget is accurately able to predict The site is currently not achieving the wetland hydrology that the
model predicts
Proposed Conditions
A modified water budget was developed to analyze the effect of mitigation actions described in Section
7 2 on the site hydrology Two models were used for the proposed conditions water budget to account
for both soil types observed in TBWRS To estimate the impact from surface roughening, an additional
2 4 inches of hydrologic capacity was added to the calculations to represent surface roughness All
surface flow is assumed to be retained in the proposed condition, because it will no longer be
immediately routed off the site Based on these changes, the budget shows the site potentially attaining
jurisdictional wetland hydrology in portions of the spring and summer for the average and wet years
when compared to the existing conditions The dry year remains relatively unchanged from the pre -
construction condition, indicating that the site's wetland hydrology may be susceptible to drought
conditions
The southernmost ditch, adjacent to the restoration area, will be left open and not filled It is anticipated
that leaving this ditch open will have minimal impacts to the overall hydrologic performance of the site
The hydrologic influence of this ditch was modeled using Lateral Effect, a software program that
determines the lateral effect of a drainage ditch or borrow pit on adjacent wetland hydrology (NCSU
BAE, 2011) This software determined that the potential horizontal drainage influence averages 76'
20

Mitigation Plan
7.4 Proposed Mitigation Plan View
I .. I
"All . hi
Twin Bays Restoration Site
r -
pis x X
Non - Riparian Wetland Restoration (11.1 ac)
Upland Inclusion (0.4 ac)
Proposed Easement Area (11.7 ac)
r
Ditches to be filled
® Utility Easement (0.2 ac)
PROJECT SITE PROPOSED MITIGATION PLAN VIEW Souro NC srare.,de N
0 120 Imagery . 2010.
Feet TWIN BAYS RESTORATION SITE
DUPUN COUNTY, NC
21

Mitigation Plan
8.0 MAINTENANCE PLAN
Twin Bays Restoration Site
The site will be monitored on a regular basis, with a physical inspection of the site conducted a
minimum of once per year throughout the post - construction monitoring period until performance
standards are met These site inspections may identify site components and features that require
routine maintenance Routine maintenance should be expected most often in the first two years
following site construction and may include the following
Component /Feature
Maintenance Through Project Close -Out
Routine wetland maintenance and repair activities may include securing of loose coir
Wetland
matting and supplemental installations of live stakes and other target vegetation within the
wetland Areas where stormwater and floodplain flows intercept the wetland may also,
require maintenance to prevent scour
Vegetation shall be maintained to ensure the health and vigor of the targeted plant
community Routine vegetation maintenance and repair activities may include
Vegetation
supplemental planting, pruning, mulching, and fertilizing Exotic invasive plant species shall
be controlled by mechanical and /or chemical methods Any vegetation control requiring
herbicide application will be performed in accordance with NC Department of Agriculture
(NCDA) rules and regulations
Site boundaries shall be identified in the field to ensure clear distinction between the
mitigation site and adjacent properties Boundaries may be identified by fence, marker,
Site Boundary
bollard, post, tree - blazing, or other means as allowed by site conditions and /or
conservation easement Boundary markers disturbed, damaged, or destroyed will be
repaired and /or replaced on an as needed basis
Additionally, a utility right of way exists adjacent to the restored wetland, but because there is no
creditable acreage within this right of way, it is not expected that the utility maintenance will affect the
restored wetland
u
22

Mitigation Plan
9.0 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
Twin Bays Restoration Site
The TBWRS will be monitored to determine if the development of the wetland indicators on site meet
the standards for mitigation credit production as presented in Section 5 0 The credits will be validated
upon confirmation that the success criteria described below are met The site will be monitored for
performance standards for seven years after completion of construction
Hydrologic Performance
Verification of hydrologic performance standards within the wetland mitigation area will be determined
- through evaluation of automatic recording well data supplemented by documentation of wetland
hydrology indicators as defined in the 1987 US ACOE Wetland Delineation Manual (Manual) Twelve
automatic recording gauges will be established within the restoration area of the site
To meet success criteria, the upper 12 inches of the soil profile will display continuously saturated or
inundated conditions for at least 8% of the growing season with a 50% probability of reoccurrence
during normal weather conditions A "normal" year is based on NRCS climatological data for Duplin
County using the 30th to 70th percentile thresholds as the range of normal as documented in the USACE
Technical Report "Accessing and Using Meteorological Data to Evaluate Wetland Hydrology, April 2000 "
The soil survey for Duplin County does not contain growing season data, therefore, due to its close
r proximity, the Sampson County soil survey was used The estimated growing season begins March 18
and ends November 11 (239 days) KCI will monitor soil temperature to verify that the local growing
season is consistent with the NRCS published data and reserves the right to present this information as a
modifier to the number of days saturation is required to achieve jurisdictional status
Due to the inherent variability in the sites soils and associated drainage characteristics, it is unlikely that
the project will exhibit uniform hydrologic conditions across the site, making a single hydrologic
performance criterion unrepresentative of the sites performance As such, the gauge data can be
evaluated and presented as a spatial average with each gauge representing the area half the distance to
adjacent gauges The spatial average will be the calculated value for comparison with the performance
standard for credit validation Gauges representing areas not achieving a minimum of 6 5% saturation
will be considered non - attaining even if the spatial average exceeds the credit validation performance
standard
Vegetation Success
The vegetation success criteria will comply with guidance included in "Monitoring Requirements and
Performance Standards for Stream and /or Wetland Mitigation" (NCDENR EEP, 2011), which states that
the plots must achieve a stem density of 320 stems /acre after three years, 260 stems /acre after five
years, and 210 stems /acre after seven years to be considered successful In addition to density
requirements, plant height will be monitored within the monitoring plots to ensure that trees average
10 feet in height after seven years
23

Mitigation Plan
10.0 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Twin Bays Restoration Site
Annual monitoring data will be reported using the EEP monitoring template The monitoring report shall —
provide a project data chronology that will facilitate an understanding of project status and trends,
population of EEP databases for analysis, research purposes, and assist in decision making regarding
project close -out
Required
Parameter
Quantity
Frequency
Notes
Yes
Groundwater
7 -8 gauges distributed
Annual
Groundwater monitoring gauges with data
Hydrology
throughout the restored
recording devices will be installed on site,
wetland and an additional 4
the data will be downloaded on a monthly
gauges to determine the
basis during the growing season
effect of the open ditch
Yes
Vegetation
Will be distributed to
During
Vegetation will be monitored using the
ensure sufficient coverage
monitoring
Carolina Vegetation Survey (CVS) protocols
of planted vegetation
years 1, 2, 3,
5, and 7
Yes
Exotic and
Annual
Locations of exotic and nuisance vegetation
nuisance
will be mapped
vegetation
Yes
Project
Semi- annual
Locations of vegetation damage, boundary
boundary
encroachments, etc will be mapped
The first scheduled monitoring will be conducted during the first full growing season following project
completion Monitoring shall subsequently be conducted annually for a total period of seven years or
until the project meets its success criteria
Groundwater elevations will be monitored to evaluate the attainment of jurisdictional wetland
hydrology Verification of wetland hydrology will be determined by automatic recording well data
collected within the project area and reference wetland Seven to eight automatic recording gauges will
be established within the mitigation areas Daily data will be collected from the automatic gauges for a
minimum of a 5 -year monitoring period following wetland construction A nearby reference wetland will
also be monitored using the same procedures for comparative analysis (see Appendix B for reference
wetland data sheet and location map) Additionally, to monitor the effect of the unfilled ditch described
in Section 7 3, two sets of coupled gauges will be established perpendicular to the unfilled ditch Each
set will include a well that is 20' from the open ditch and one that is 80' from the ditch The first set will
be established one third of the distance from Cornwallis Road to the eastern project boundary and the
second set will be established at two thirds of that distance A figure in Appendix C shows the potential
gauge locations at the site
Beginning at the end of the first growing season, KCI will monitor the planted vegetation in monitoring
years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7 or until the success criterion is met The survivability of the vegetation plantings
will be evaluated using a sufficient number of 100 mZ vegetative sampling plots randomly placed
throughout the restored wetland Permanent monuments will be established at the corners of each
monitoring plot and documented by either conventional survey or GPS These plots will be monitored
according to the current CVS /EEP monitoring protocol The vegetation monitoring will follow the Level 2
method of the current CVS -EEP protocol (http //cvs bio unc edu /methods htm)
24

Mitigation Plan Twin Bays Restoration Site
Photograph reference points (PRPs) will be established to assist in characterizing the site and to allow
qualitative evaluation of the site conditions The location of each photo point will be marked in the
monitoring plan and the bearing /orientation of the photograph will be documented
Annual monitoring reports will be prepared and submitted after all monitoring tasks for each year are
completed The report will document the monitored components and include all collected data,
analyses, and photographs Each report will provide the new monitoring data and compare the most
recent results against previous findings The monitoring report format will be similar to that set out in
the most recent EEP monitoring protocol
11.0 LONG -TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN
Upon approval for close -out by the Interagency Review Team (IRT), the site will be transferred to the
NCDENR Division of Natural Resource Planning and Conservation's Stewardship Program This party shall
be responsible for periodic inspection of the site to ensure that restrictions required in the conservation
easement are upheld Endowment funds required to uphold easement and deed restrictions shall be
negotiated prior to site transfer to the responsible party
- , The NCDENR Division of Natural Resource Planning and Conservation's Stewardship Program currently
houses EEP stewardship endowments within the non - reverting, interest - bearing Conservation Lands
Stewardship Endowment Account The use of funds from the Endowment Account is governed by North
Carolina General Statute GS 113A- 232(d)(3) Interest gained by the endowment fund may be used only
for the purpose of stewardship, monitoring, stewardship administration, and land transaction costs, if
applicable The NCDENR Stewardship Program intends to manage the account as a non - wasting
endowment Only interest generated from the endowment funds will be used to steward the
compensatory mitigation sites Interest funds not used for those purposes will be re- invested in the
Endowment Account to offset losses due to inflation
12.0 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Upon completion of site construction KCI will implement the post - construction monitoring protocols
previously defined in this document Project maintenance will be performed as described previously in
this document If, during the course of annual monitoring it is determined the site's ability to achieve
site performance standards are jeopardized, KCI will notify the EEP and the USACE of the need to
develop a Plan of Corrective Action The Plan of Corrective Action may be prepared using in -house
technical staff or may require engineering and consulting services Once the Corrective Action Plan is
prepared and finalized KCI will
1 Notify the EEP and USACE as required by the Nationwide 27 permit general conditions
2 Revise performance standards, maintenance requirements, and monitoring requirements as
necessary and /or required by the USACE
3 Obtain other permits as necessary
4 Implement the Corrective Action Plan
5 Provide the USACE a Record Drawing of Corrective Actions This document shall depict the extent
and nature of the work performed
25

Mitigation Plan
13.0 FINANCIAL ASSURANCES
Twin Bays Restoration Site
Pursuant to Section IV H and Appendix III of the Ecosystem Enhancement Program's In -Lieu Fee
Instrument dated July 28, 2010, the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
has provided the U S Army Corps of Engineers Wilmington District with a formal commitment to fund
projects to satisfy mitigation requirements assumed by EEP This commitment provides financial
assurance for all mitigation projects implemented by the program
14.0 OTHER INFORMATION
14.1 Definitions
8 -digit Catalog Unit (CU) — The USGS developed a hydrologic coding system to delineate the country into
uniquely identified watersheds that can be commonly referenced and mapped North Carolina has 54 of
these watersheds uniquely defined by an 8 -digit number EEP typically addresses watershed — based
planning and restoration in the context of the 17 river basins (each has a unique 6 -digit number), 54
catalog units and 1,601 14 -digit hydrologic units
14 —digit Hydrologic Unit (HU) — In order to address watershed management issues at a smaller scale, the
U S Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) developed methodology to delineate and uniquely
identify watersheds at a scale smaller than the 8 -digit catalog unit A hydrologic unit is a drainage area
delineated to nest in a multilevel, hierarchical drainage system Its boundaries are defined by
hydrographic and topographic criteria that delineate an area of land upstream from a specific point on a
river, stream or similar surface waters North Carolina has 1,601 14 -digit hydrologic units
DWQ— North Carolina Division of Water Quality
EEP — The North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement combines existing wetlands restoration initiatives
(formerly the Wetlands Restoration Program or NCWRP) of the N C Department of Environment and
Natural Resources with ongoing efforts by the N C Department of Transportation (NCDOT) to offset
unavoidable environmental impacts from transportation - infrastructure improvements
Native vegetation community — a distinct and reoccurring assemblage of populations of plants, animals,
bacteria and fungi naturally associated with each other and their population, as described in Schafale,
M P and Weakley, A S (1990), Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina, Third
Approximation
Project Area - includes all protected lands associated with the mitigation project
RBRP - The River Basin Restoration Priorities are documents that delineate specific watersheds _
(Targeted Local Watersheds) within a River Basin that exhibit both the need and opportunity for
wetland, stream and riparian buffer restoration
TLW - Targeted Local Watershed, are 14 -digit hydrologic units which receive priority for EEP planning
and restoration project funds
USGS — United States Geological Survey
t

i
Mitigation Plan
14.2 References
Twin Bays Restoration Site
Environmental Laboratory 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report
Y -87 -1 Vicksburg, MS U S Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station
Faber- Langendoen, D, Rocchio, J , Schafale, M , Nordman, C, Pyne, M , Teague, J , Foti, T, Comer, P
2006 Ecological Integrity Assessment and Performance Measures for Wetland Mitigation
NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia
Lindenmayer, D B , and J F Franklin 2002 Conserving forest biodiversity A comprehensive multiscaled
approach Island Press, Washington, DC
NCDENR, Division of Water Quality 2012a Surface Water Classification Last accessed 11/2012 at
http //portal ncdenr org /web /wq /ps /csu
NCDENR, Division of Water Quality 2012b 2012 Final 303(d) list Raleigh, NC Last accessed 11/2012 at
http //portal ncdenr org /web /wq /ps /mtu /assessment
NCDENR, Ecosystem Enhancement Program 2011 Monitoring Requirements and Performance
Standards for Stream and /or Wetland Mitigation Last accessed 11/2012 at
http / /portal ncdenr org /c/ document _library /get_file ?p_I_id= 1169848 &folderld = 2288101 &nam
e =DLFE -39234 pdf
NCDENR, Ecosystem Enhancement Program 2009 Cape Fear River Basin Restoration Priorities 2009
Raleigh, NC Last accessed 10/2012 at http / /www nceep net /services /lwps /cape_fear/
RBRP %20Cape %20Fear %202008 pd'f
NCSU BAE North Carolina State University, Biological and Agricultural Engineering 2011 Method to
Determine Lateral Effect of a Drainage Ditch on Adjacent Wetland Hydrology Last accessed
11/2012 at http / /www bae ncsu edu /soil _water /projects /lateral_effect html
t NCSU State Climate Office of North Carolina 2012 Climate Data for Maysville, NC
- NC Wetland Functional Assessment Team 2010 NC Wetland Assessment Method (NC WAM) User
Manual, version 4 1 Last accessed 11/2012 at http / /portal ncdenr org /c /document_
li bra ry/get_fi le?u u id= 76f3c58b -dab8- 4960- ba43- 45b7faf06f4c &grou pfd =38364
Peet, R K, Wentworth, T S , and White, P S 1998 A flexible, multipurpose method for recording
vegetation composition and structure Castanea 63 262 -274
Rosgen, D (1996), Applied River Morphology, 2nd edition, Wildland Hydrology, Pagosa Springs, CO
Schafale, M P and Weakley, A S 1990 Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina,
Third Approximation, NC Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh, NC
Sprecher, S W 2000 Accessing and Using Meteorological Data to Evaluate Wetland Hydrology
Headquarters, U S Army Corps of Engineers, Operations Division, Regulatory Branch
27

Mitigation Plan Twin Bays Restoration Site
i
Stream Mitigation Guidelines, April 2003, US Army Corps of Engineers Wilmington District
USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service 2010 Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United
States a Guide for Identifying and Delineating Hydric Soils, Version 7 0
USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Water and Climate Center 2007 RUSLE2 Related
Attributes Table for Duplin, North Carolina Last accessed 11/2012 at
http / /soildatamart nres usda gov /Survey aspx ?County =NC061
USDA, Soil Conservation Service 1986 Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds Technical Release 55
Washington, DC Soil Conservation Service
USDA 1905 Soil Survey of Duplin County, North Carolina United States Department of Agriculture
USDA 1985 Soil Survey of Sampson County, North Carolina United States Department of Agriculture
Young, T F and Sanzone, S (editors) 2002 A framework for assessing and reporting on ecological
condition Ecological Reporting Panel, Ecological Processes and Effects Committee EPA Science
Advisory Board Washington, DC
s �)
28

Mitigation Plan
14.3 Appendix A. Site Protection Instrument
W7
Twin Bays Restoration Site

Mitigation Plan
30
Twin Bays Restoration Site

B1737 P0104 15:02 - 25.000
Davis
Duplin 11II County, I IIII II II III II III page (III{ Deeds H a Be it o of 10 PROP
Davis H. Brinson Register of Deeds
11 -29 -2012 15:02:25.000 Duplin County, NC
NC REVENU7 STAMP: $282.00 (4167948)
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DUPLIN COUNTY
SPO File Number 3 1 -0
EEP Site ID Number 95363 (Twin Bays)
Prepared by: Office of the Attorney General
Property Control Section
Return to: NC Department of Administration
State Property Office
1321 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1321
,STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,
COUNTY OF DUPLIN
Repro
�ryon llieloaae6Tm and the
Book and Pape shown on the e FJrst t
Page
hereof, and is being returned for
Your safekeeping.
Davis N. Stinson, Register of Deed¢
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
PROVIDED PURSUANT TO
FULL DELIVERY
MITIGATION CONTRACT
THIS CONSERVATION EASEMENT DEED, made this day of
NOVEMBER , 2012, by Danny B. Keir and wile, Annice Morrison Keir (collectively,
"Grantor'), whose mailing address is 5114 Clear Run Drive, Wilmington NC 28403, to the
State of North Carolina, ("Grantee "), whose mailing address is State of North Carolina,
Department of Administration, State Property Office, 1321 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC
27699 -1321. The designations ol'Grantor and Grantee as used herein shall include said parties,
their heirs. successors, and assigns. and shall include singular, plural, masculine, feminine. or
neuter as required by context.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of N.C. Gen. Stat. ti 143 -214.8 et sec1., the State
of North Carolina has established the Ecosystem Enhancement Program (formerly known as the
Wetlands Restoration Program) within the Department of Environment and Natural Resources
for the purposes of acquiring, maintaining, restoring, enhancing, creating and preserving wetland
and riparian resources that contribute to the protection and improvement of water quality, flood
prevention, fisheries, aquatic habitat, wildlife habitat. and recreational opportunities, and
WHEREAS, this Conservation Easement from Grantor to Grantee has been negotiated,
arranged and provided fior as a condition ol'a full delivery contract between KCI Technologies, Inc.
and the North Carolina Department ol' Enviromment and Natural Resources, to provide stream,
wetland and /or buffer mitigation pursuant to the North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources Purchase and Services Contract Number 004739.

IIIII 111111 lIIIIIIIIIII II III I IIIII III 11-29-2012 02
61131 80105 15 02 25 000 ,
Duplin County, NC Register of Deeds page 2 of 10 PROP
WHEREAS, The State of North Carolina is qualified to be the Grantee of a Conservation
Easement pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 121 -35; and =
WHEREAS, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the North Carolina
Department of Transportation and the United States Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington
District entered into a Memorandum of Agreement, (MOA) duly executed by all parties in
Greensboro, NC on July 22, 2003, which recognizes that the Ecosystem Enhancement Program
is to provide for compensatory mitigation by effective protection of the land, water and natural ;
resources of the State by restoring, enhancing and preserving ecosystem functions; and
WHEREAS, the acceptance of this instrument for and on behalf of the State of North
Carolina was granted to the Department of Administration by resolution as approved by the
Governor and Council of State adopted at a meeting held in the City of Raleigh, North Carolina,
on the 8h day of February 2000; and
WHEREAS, the Ecosystem Enhancement Program in the Department of Environment
and Natural Resources, which has been delegated the authority authorized by the Governor and
Council of State to the Department of Administration, has approved acceptance of this
instrument; and
WHEREAS, Grantor owns in fee simple certain real property situated, lying, and being
in Rockfish Township, Duplin County, North Carolina (the "Property"), and being more -
particularly described as that certain parcel of land containing approximately 31.958 net acres,
described as "Tract C" on plat recorded in Map Book 23, Page 315, Duplin County Registry, and
being conveyed to the Grantor by deed as recorded in Deed Book 1645 at Page 99 of the Duplin
County Registry, North Carolina; and
WHEREAS, Grantor is willing to grant a Conservation Easement over the herein
described areas of the Property, thereby restricting and limiting the use of the included areas of
the Property to the terms and conditions and purposes hereinafter set forth, and Grantee is willing
to accept such Conservation Easement. This Conservation Easement shall be for the protection
and benefit of Rockfish Creek.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, terms, conditions, and
restrictions hereinafter set forth, Grantor unconditionally and irrevocably hereby grants and
conveys unto Grantee, its successors and assigns, forever and in perpetuity, a Conservation
Easement along with a general Right of Access.
The Easement Area consists of the following:
Conservation Easement containing a total of 11.72 acres as shown on the plat of survey entitled
"Final Plat, Conservation Easement for North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program,
Project Name- Twin Bays Wetland Restoration Site, EEP Project #: 95363, SPO #: 31 -0,"
dated August 20, 2012 by James M. Gellenthin, PLS Number L -3860 and recorded in the
Duplin County, North Carolina Register of Deeds at Map Book 26 Page 384.
( wi,crt,w mii I aunlc,li i I in B,t\.. - I.LII ) \' ILi 2

IIII III IIII IIII IIIIIIII II II1I1 II I I III Davis 137 H. Bri s 6 02- 25PROP
Duplin County, NC Register of Deeds page 3 of 10
See attached "Exhibit A ", Legal Description of area of the Property hereinafter referred to as the
"Easement Area"
The purposes of this Conservation Easement are to maintain, restore, enhance, construct,
create and preserve wetland and/or riparian resources in the Easement Area that contribute to the
protection and improvement of water quality, flood prevention, fisheries, aquatic habitat, wildlife
habitat, and recreational opportunities; to maintain permanently the Easement Area in its natural
condition, consistent with these purposes; and to prevent any use of the Easement Area that will
significantly impair or interfere with these purposes. To achieve these purposes, the following
conditions and restrictions are set forth:
I. DURATION OF EASEMENT
Pursuant to law, including the above referenced statutes, this Conservation Easement and
Right of Access shall be perpetual and it shall run with, and be a continuing restriction upon the
use of, the Property, and it shall be enforceable by the Grantee against the Grantor and against
Grantor's heirs, successors and assigns, personal representatives, agents, lessees, and licensees.
II. GRANTOR RESERVED USES AND RESTRICTED ACTIVITES
The Easement Area shall be restricted from any development or usage that would impair
or interfere with the purposes of this Conservation Easement. Unless expressly reserved as a
compatible use herein, any activity in, or use of, the Easement Area by the Grantor is prohibited
- as inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation Easement. Any rights not expressly
reserved hereunder by the Grantor have been acquired by the Grantee. Any rights not expressly
reserved hereunder by the Grantor, including the rights to all mitigation credits, including, but
not limited to, stream, wetland, and riparian buffer mitigation units, derived from each site within
the area of the Conservation Easement, are conveyed to and belong to the Grantee. Without
limiting the generality of the foregoing, the following specific uses are prohibited, restricted, or
` reserved as indicated.
A. Recreational Uses. Grantor expressly reserves the right to undeveloped recreational
uses, including hiking, bird watching, hunting and fishing, and access to the Easement Area for
the purposes thereof
B. Motorized Vehicle Use. Motorized vehicle use in the Easement Area is prohibited.
C. Educational Uses. The Grantor reserves the right to engage in and permit others to
engage in educational uses in the Easement Area not inconsistent with this Conservation
Easement, and the right of access to the Easement Area for such purposes including organized
educational activities such as site visits and observations. Educational uses of the property shall
not alter vegetation, hydrology or topography of the site.
D. Vegetative Cutting. Except as related to the removal of non - native plants, diseased or
damaged trees, or vegetation that destabilizes or renders unsafe the Easement Area to persons or
natural habitat, all cutting, removal, mowing, harming, or destruction of any trees and vegetation
in the Easement Area is prohibited
I I . , 3
�J

IIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIII i�3� P ot 25B l s nPROP
Duplin County, NC Register of Deeds page 4 of 10
E. Industrial, Residential and Commercial Uses. All industrial, residential and
commercial uses are prohibited in the Easement Area.
F. Agricultural Use. All agricultural uses are prohibited within the Easement Area
including any use for cropland, waste lagoons, or pastureland.
G. New Construction. There shall be no building, facility, mobile home, antenna, utility
pole, tower, or other structure constructed or placed in the Easement Area
H. Roads and Trails. There shall be no construction of roads, trails, walkways, or paving
in the Easement Area.
I. Signs. No signs shall be permitted in the Easement Area except interpretive signs
describing restoration activities and the conservation values of the Easement Area, signs
identifying the owner of the Property and the holder of the Conservation Easement, signs giving
directions, or signs prescribing rules and regulations for the use of the Easement Area.
J. Dumping or Storing. Dumping or storage of soil, trash, ashes, garbage, waste,
abandoned vehicles, appliances, machinery, or any other material in the Easement Area is
prohibited.
K. Grading, Mineral Use, Excavation, Dredging. There shall be no grading, filling,
excavation, dredging, mining, drilling; removal of topsoil, sand, gravel, rock, peat, minerals, or
other materials.
L. Water Quality and Drainage Patterns. There shall be no diking, draining, dredging,
channeling, filling, leveling, pumping, impounding or diverting, causing, allowing or permitting
the diversion of surface or underground water in the Easement Area. No altering or tampering
with water control structures or devices, or disruption or alteration of the restored, enhanced, or
created drainage patterns is allowed. All removal of wetlands, polluting or discharging into
waters, springs, seeps, or wetlands, or use of pesticide or biocides in the Easement Area is
prohibited. In the event of an emergency interruption or shortage of all other water sources,
water from within the Easement Area may temporarily be used for good cause shown as needed
for the survival of livestock and agricultural production on the Property.
M. Subdivision and Conveyance. Grantor voluntarily agrees that no subdivision,
partitioning, or dividing of the underlying Property owned by the Grantor in fee simple ("fee ")
that is subject to this Easement is allowed. Unless agreed to by the Grantee in writing, any future
conveyance of the underlying fee and the rights conveyed herein shall be as a single block of
property. Any future transfer of the fee simple shall be subject to this Conservation Easement.
Any transfer of the fee is subject to the Grantee's right of unlimited and repeated ingress and
egress over and across the Property to the Easement Area for the purposes set forth herein.
N. Development Rights. All development rights are permanently removed from the
Easement Area and are non - transferrable.
4

IIIII111111 llllllllllll IIIIIIllillIII
Davis 137 H. Bri so 02 25 POOP
Duplin County, NC Register of Deeds page 5 of 10
O. Disturbance of Natural Features. Any change, disturbance, alteration or impairment of
the natural features of the Easement Area or any intentional introduction of non - native plants,
trees and/or animal species by Grantor is prohibited.
The Grantor may request permission to vary from the above restrictions for good cause
shown, provided that any such request is not inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation
Easement, and the Grantor obtains advance written approval from the N.C. Ecosystem
Enhancement Program, whose mailing address is 1652 Mail Services Center, Raleigh, NC
27699 -1652.
III. GRANTEE RESERVED USES
A. Right of Access, Construction, and Inspection. The Grantee, its employees and agents,
successors and assigns, are hereby granted and receive a perpetual non - exclusive easement for
access to the Easement Area over the Property at reasonable times to undertake any activities to
restore, construct, manage, maintain, enhance, and monitor the stream, wetland and any other
riparian resources in the Easement Area, in accordance with restoration activities or a long -term
management plan. Unless otherwise specifically set forth in this Conservation Easement, the
`- rights granted herein do not include or establish for the public any access rights. The
recommended access to the site from Cornwallis Road is shown on the plat of survey entitled
"Final Plat, Conservation Easement for North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program,
Project Name: Twin Bays Wetland Restoration Site, EEP Project #: 95363, SPO #: 31 -0,"
dated August 20, 2012 by James M. Gellenthin, PLS Number L -3860 and recorded in the
i Duplin County, North Carolina Register of Deeds at Map Book 26 Page 384.
IL
B. Restoration Activities. These activities include planting of trees, shrubs and herbaceous
vegetation, installation of monitoring wells, utilization of heavy equipment to grade, fill, and
prepare the soil, modification of the hydrology of the site, and installation of natural and
-" manmade materials as needed to direct in- stream, above ground, and subterraneous water flow.
C. Signs. The Grantee, its employees and agents, successors or assigns, shall be permitted
to place signs and witness posts on the Property to include any or all of the following: describe
the project, prohibited activities within the Conservation Easement, or identify the project
boundaries and the holder of the Conservation Easement.
D. Fences. The Grantee, its employees and agents, successors or assigns, shall be permitted
to place fencing on the Property to restrict livestock access. Although the Grantee is not
responsible for fence maintenance, the Grantee reserves the right to repair the fence, at its sole
discretion.
IV. ENFORCEMENT AND REMEDIES
A. Enforcement. To accomplish the purposes of this Conservation Easement, Grantee is
allowed to prevent any activity within the Easement Area that is inconsistent with the purposes
of this Easement and to require the restoration of such areas or features in the Easement Area
that may have been damaged by such unauthorized activity or use. Upon any breach of the terms
of this Conservation Easement by Grantor, the Grantee shall, except as provided below, notify
('On,,(I�tllion I a,L171111t ( I %, II1 I',i\ - k'_!. ) \, 1 "II

IIIIIIIIIiI
1111111111111111111 Jill III Davis 1737 P0109s5n02 25P000
Duplan County, NC Register of Deeds page 6 of 10
the Grantor -in writing of such breach and the Grantor shall have ninety (90) days after receipt of
such notice to correct the damage caused by such breach. If the breach and damage remains
uncured after ninety (90) days, the Grantee may enforce this Conservation Easement by bringing
appropriate legal proceedings including an action to recover damages, as well as injunctive and
other relief. The Grantee shall also have the power and authority, consistent with its statutory
authority: (a) to prevent any impairment of the Easement Area by acts which may be unlawful
or in violation of this Conservation Easement; (b) to otherwise preserve or protect its interest in
the Property; or (c) to seek damages from any appropriate person or entity. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, the Grantee reserves the immediate right, without notice, to obtain a temporary
restraining order, injunctive or other appropriate relief, if the breach is or would irreversibly or
otherwise materially impair the benefits to be derived from this Conservation Easement, and the
Grantor and Grantee acknowledge that the damage would be irreparable and remedies at law
inadequate. The rights and remedies of the Grantee provided hereunder shall be in addition to,
and not in lieu of, all other rights and remedies available to Grantee in connection with this
Conservation Easement
B. Inspection. The Grantee, its employees and agents, successors and assigns. have the
right, with reasonable notice, to enter the Easement Area over the Property at reasonable times
for the purpose of inspection to determine whether the Grantor is complying with the terms.
conditions and restrictions of this Conservation Easement.
C. Acts Beyond Grantor's Control. Nothing contained in this Conservation Easement
shall be construed to entitle Grantee to bring any action against Grantor for any injury or change
in the Easement Area caused by third parties, resulting from causes beyond the Grantor's control,
including, without limitation, fire, flood, stone, and earth movement, or from any prudent action
taken in good faith by the Grantor under emergency conditions to prevent, abate, or mitigate
significant injury to life; or damage to the Property resulting from such causes
D. Costs of Enforcement. Beyond regular and typical monitoring expenses, any costs
incurred by Grantee in enforcing the terms of this Conservation Easement against Grantor,
including, without limitation, any costs of restoration necessitated by Grantor's acts or omissions
in violation of the terms of this Conservation Easement, shall be borne by Grantor.
E. No Waiver. Enforcement of this Easement shall be at the discretion of the Grantee and
any forbearance, delay or omission by Grantee to exercise its rights hereunder in the event of any
breach of any term set forth herein shall not be construed to be a waiver by Grantee.
V. MISCELLANEOUS
A. This instrument sets forth the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the
Conservation Easement and supersedes all prior discussions, negotiations, understandings or
agreements relating to the Conservation Easement. If any provision is found to be invalid, the
remainder of the provisions of the Conservation Easement, and the application of such provision
to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is found to be invalid, shall not be
affected thereby.
B. Grantor is responsible for any real estate taxes, assessments, fees, or charges levied upon
the Property. Grantee shall not be responsible for any costs or liability of any kind related to the
., 1, 11 1 1 1 - 6

IIIII IIIIII IIIIIIflllll IIIIIIIIIIIIII Davis * Br 15 02 25PROP
Duplin County, NC Register of Deeds page 7 of 10
ownership, operation, insurance, upkeep, or maintenance of the Property, except as expressly
provided herein Upkeep of any constructed bridges, fences, or other amenities on the Property
are the sole responsibility of the Grantor. Nothing herein shall relieve the Grantor of the
obligation to comply with federal, state or local laws, regulations and permits that may apply to
the exercise of the Reserved Rights.
C. Any notices shall be sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested to the
parties at their addresses shown herein or to other addresses as either party establishes in writing
upon notification to the other.
D. Grantor shall notify Grantee in writing of the name and address and any party to whom
the Property or any part thereof is to be transferred at or prior to the time said transfer is made.
Grantor further agrees that any subsequent lease, deed, or other legal instrument by which any
interest in the Property is conveyed subject to the Conservation Easement herein created.
E. The Grantor and Grantee agree that the terms of this Conservation Easement shall survive
any merger of the fee and easement interests in the Property or any portion thereof
F. This Conservation Easement and Right of Access may be amended, but only in writing
signed by all parties hereto, or their successors or assigns, if such amendment does not affect the
qualification of this Conservation Easement or the status of the Grantee under any applicable
laws, and is consistent with the purposes of the Conservation Easement The owner of the
Property shall notify the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in writing sixty (60) days prior to the
initiation of any transfer of all or any part of the Property. Such notification shall be addressed
1 to. Justin McCorkle, General Counsel, US Army Corps of Engineers, 69 Darlington Avenue,
Wilmington, NC 28403
G. The parties recognize and agree that the benefits of this Conservation Easement are in
gross and assignable provided, however, that the Grantee hereby covenants and agrees, that in
the event it transfers or assigns this Conservation Easement, the organization receiving the
interest will be a qualified holder under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 121 -34 et seq. and § 170(h) of the
Internal Revenue Code, and the Grantee further covenants and agrees that the terms of the
transfer or assignment will be such that the transferee or assignee will be required to continue in
perpetuity the conservation purposes described in this document.
VI. QUIET ENJOYMENT
Grantor reserves all remaining rights accruing from ownership of the Property, including
the right to engage in or permit or invite others to engage in only those uses of the Easement
Area that are expressly reserved herein, not prohibited or restricted herein, and are not
inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation Easement. Without limiting the generality of
the foregoing, the Grantor expressly reserves to the Grantor, and the Grantor's invitees and
licensees, the right of access to the Easement Area, and the right of quiet enjoyment of the
Easement Area
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said rights and easements perpetually unto the State of
North Carolina for the aforesaid purposes.
(ow;cl \,Itiom I a"rm,:nt ( I \, III B,i,- - Kel!) \> >>.i 7

IIII IIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIII II III III III III 11 29 2012
B1737 jkl 11 , 5 ©2 -25 . o00
Duplin County, NC Register of Deeds p rinson PROP
page 8 of 10
AND Grantor covenants that Grantor is seized of said premises in fee and has the right to
m Conservation convey the permanent Conseation Easement herein granted; that the same is free from
encumbrances and that Grantor will warrant and defend title to the same against the claims of all
persons whomsoever.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Grantor has hereunto set his hand and seal, the day
and year first above written.
L (SEAL)
Danny B. fjlir
Annice Morrison Keir
NORTH CAROLINA
ODUNTY OF NEW HANOVER
1. ROBERT G COLLINS a Notary Public in and for the County and State
aforesaid, do hereby certify that Danny 11. Keir and Annice Morrison Keir, Grantor,
personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged the execution of the foregoing=
instrument.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and Notary Seal this the
day of NOVEMBER ___, 2012.
Notary Public.
My commission expires:
SEPTEMBER 19, 2015
1
8

JI I! I B1737 P0112 111-29-2 5 02 25000
�) IIIIIIII III�IIIIIIII IIIIIIII 111111 Davis H. Branson PROP
-- Duplin County, NC Register of Deeds page 9 of 10
Exhibit A
Conservation Easement Description
A parcel of land to be used for conservation easement purposes located on lands now or formerly owned by Danny
B. Keir (DB 1666 Pg 116), located in Rockfish Township, Duplin County, North Carolina and being more
particularly described as follows:
Commencing at a found railroad spike in the center of Comwallis Road (60 foot public right -of -way) at the
Southwest corner of said Danny B. Keir lands; said point having State Plane Coordinates (NAD '83) of
Northing-364604.71 and Easting:2291890.15; Thence South 82 °54'05" East on the South line of said lands owned
by Danny B Keir, a distance of 34.37 feet to the intersection with the Easterly right -of —way line of Cornwallis
Road (NCSR 1101), Thence North 22 °07' I8" West, on the said Easterly right -of -way line of Cornwallis Road, a
distance of 5.67 feet to the Point of Beginning;
Thence N 22 °07'18" W, continuing on the Easterly line of Cornwallis Road, a distance of 459.93 feet to a point;
Thence N 29 °06'58" E a distance of 243 43 feet to a point on a Southwesterly line of lands now or formerly owned
by Larry Allen Keir, Jr. (DB 1645 PG 107);
Thence S 34 °16'08"
E, on the said Southwesterly line of Larry Allen Keir, Jr. lands, a distance of 5.37 feet to a
point;
Thence N 28 °38'16"
E on the Southeasterly line of said Larry Allen Keir, Jr. lands a distance of 93.28 feet to a point;
Thence N 06 °2639"
E, on the Easterly line of said Larry Allen Keir, Jr. lands, a distance of 81 86 feet to a point;
Thence S 89 °35'35"
E a distance of 82.68 feet to a point;
Thence S 06 °22'31"
W a distance of 284.75 feet to a point,
Thence S 82 14543"
E a distance of 162.72 feet to a point;
Thence N 14 °37'28"
E a distance of 266.95 feet to a point;
Thence S 75 °01'38"
E a distance of 105.07 feet to a point;
Thence S 17 142'38"
W a distance of 207.27 feet to a point;
Thence S 71 °55'53"
E a distance of 174 39 feet to a point;
Thence N 12 °11'01"
E a distance of 195 71 feet to a point,
Thence S 70 °36'57"
E a distance of 44.79 feet to a point;
Thence S 10 024'40"
E a distance of 183 19 feet to a point;
Thence S 22 °51'13"
E a distance of 624 43 feet to a point;
Thence N 82 °50'51"
W a distance of 852 09 feet to the Point of Beginning.
Containing 510721 square feet or 11.72 acres.
( !)IItiL'I��111�111 i'�11:I1111�11 I \�I11 fia\ - �1L11 r :� ��1 9
� 1

IIIII'III�I IIIIIIIIIIII IIII(IIIIIIIII 11 -00z 2 2012
Bi�3t P0113 ,5 25 000
Duplin County, NC Register of Deeds p Brinson PROP
page I0 of 10
Exhibit A (Continued)
Point Table (Table of Coordinates)
Point
Northing
Easting
Description
1
364605.59
2291922.18
Easement Corner
2
365031.66
2291748.98
Easement Corner
3
365244.33
2291867.43
Easement Corner
4
365239.90
2291870.45
Easement Corner
5
365321.77
2291915.16
Easement Corner
6
365403.11
2291924.35
Easement Corner
7
365402.52
2292007.03
Easement Corner
8
365119.54
2291975.41
Easement Corner
9
365099.04
2292136.83
Easement Corner
10
365357.33
2292204.23
Easement Corner
11
365330.19
2292305.74
Easement Corner
12
365132.74
2292242.68
Easement Corner
13
365078.65
2292408.47
Easement Corner
14
365269.95
2292449.77
Easement Corner
15
365255.09
2292492.02
Easement Corner
16
365074.91
2292525.13
Easement Corner
17
1364499.50
2292767.64
Easement Corner
Conwr�atioii I awnici ti 1 I %\ in B,i� , h:u i \, ail t0

NOTES
, !NI$ Ml 0015 b1 REr Pf<fN, \ UVU IDAI+I tl Rl 11p 1111$ C \,LA� I
T.,A, ED rARf'r1 TIt V I POVNU,R 1„U)A(FM T kN1 \X v+`T
F r(IM D FED LIILI IIA1i(F R(C00.1 114 r,LP iV (n vT1nAN(`x itr! <L' \!4v*il E(y\ L U
"" J0 IN111Fr FLD IUr
f)IStA,G`I(C4 1cE Ny)r(111HlVNII , JNG UtSIPVCttINUC fJ0.l `FE!I
t nitf c( )Mr•1 EUIt
+ lntIrffrwllr f R l }Lri, lSel l\lcnf tInt ( \ +V 'F 1tL%IU l NI\UI n c NW\F V 'Mm-
IT D llTX,) N iL <IV nI 5lVn
0 \l R 1rEV C R iVrTARI l IDllltSr1l E R\AfI t,IICI `MItIL I
I ' N
T 1, 01 PI U hIAKF% \Rr
nalldl
LnGDVI�«eTHERxn-nenG
, ntf0 nr11 xrn+EO + <,nO1NU x`nn
cVN)CCI rRUl rnlil 5X140114 LS TA• VV +IBfP AS 11101*11111C0N
0 > &IDU+F =IIIRiUI F. MDI L' All I RAI r NAr 112n'+M) Ell rR' \I'rb N
naA r
s
vU L N-111 KDLni`Lll II IT 1 101111+(1 CRfDIU1lU CIIM1INC !I L -1 111 11 `115
$UR,1`
1 t`1 \ri rLA", I WXU V\ E6 Fr`Rl rRlllkC 1CR MUU cLU nT Ii RrL irrc
Jii$ERN c llnNS THE ttEi NORA rv.$1 -X' AL \\(V ILAO rl THI} KP\ 0EP \ L I
IT XTNAL IN - ` M_" IS 00 IET", IIUPI2FN' 11`0S11Yy.S A0.r PEfLRTV_EU
i Rr AI`dJ IN,It,J001\ r0.DCAl IM1`SIT."', 1111111110 'ON LUPe<CFlr Mrl
(L1AiNIVF!)CAIi- n 1AL •na }ISI t
I
STATE CF 1+0H111 CAROLINA
]jJP! IN 1.0{1,14 R (. �rl• ,E
l Nr: J lYTHAT' lt IE MAR
Or DUPLIN jL H T!Y LENTIFy HE MAP
OR PLAT LLFSTr THIS CERTIFICATION ISAFFIXED
R
MEc SALL $TPTUTCRY REOVIREWENTS FOR
- RECONOINC _ T
, (! 2.b 70L Z
I VIETN OFFICER JADE �
j1]I, I(JIIII DUPLIN COUNTY SUBDIVISION
ADMINISTRAT07 CERT THAT PURSUANT IU IHF SUR`/EYOR'S
CERTIFICA C%+AvP ovAL)_— _- OR (NO A?PhO,AL)__-
IS RECn`UIRF�7,t TH,E OUPI -11 CO}1,72LBD VI'.ION ADMINISTRATOR
UPLIN COJ`1 IN DMIYISIRAT -)R
LARRY ALLEN KEIR SR
PIN 2396 0026127
DB 1645 PG 103
DANNY B KEIR
e PIN 239600252193
LARRY ALIEN KEIR M M9 23 PG 315
PIN 239600157401 DB 1666 PG 116
MB 23 PG 315
DB 1645 PG 1111 11 11111311 !
LARRY ALLEI KEIR .R Y
A/
IN 23960015831E Ir.
\ MB 23 PG STS J S75-.,
\ ` OB 16x5 PG 507 I YID X10 SOJ E
r „ -+ \ORX_r \1 RGY 'rl %'' •i �r ='3C '0. Cm • u /1. 372.
7729 506 71 ; 9
iz
` \ \ EE; r� )�c'OYJ, n t• r;ry
17; e u
10 {ra I
t� .W t} a�' • r o
Q ,� 2 •ice 5824s 43 E - e �tsIN391 4 • '
�rr?nritk�r1I,� ..(�.r =i
Al �?'E^ e"• =-�y W r ?Y„;,lr»K ( ee
x 9 3 f2
p in- ��Z�O} \ \mp <\
O ox, p;
z
6I.—Itp.6-1
,, £ ?�z � 9('.� i� 1 ".�+s� P 6C_ Ll+cF; t53.” +'�?•' - i s � +� "�� » i e wCdlhF�ic �rc i' 9 �^.
I G'� ✓` ✓ om yw xfi�7, 7`_S'1„"`n - �= ri�,¢ :771,,,7 � z
n to ✓O\ f d\ \v��1 ,7 s ✓PAS 'e� ` x' s i` .` ��' - ?,'•ems !?rJ
J,po✓ £� \13tr,� 7 v�JT�°dtaN�`��.�".T� S �� T �"$^� M� ;-�J ��
, JAMESV GEILENl4N HEXED, L`ACLAItFTHFT -IS
UN7)ER MY SUPERVIE10VF 0— SJRLrEY MADE
LLNDFR t1Y SUFE1MStON
T HATT4E SOUNOANIES NOT SURVEVE') ARE r LEANLY IIL. TEG AS \ \ \LL B •ii "'+/` .y. s$ 4; ° ^r r A �` r ,ry
RF n1A
IHE I +AT O
17141E 0.V 1FVY
AnGN ns $HG
I pNAWf. FFpAIItfORM
RCClSIGHASCAL, IRA -EO15 !'R1.DA THAN 100CU H �,+rArM \ fS
I MrS RE RESEN AN C fIL 9C NDPR, 4tRJ TANGY
PRE1 A0.EU IN ACCORDANCE L 1 H C 5 Ai OC AS AhSENDE y`'
MY ORIGINAL 61ia+AlURE REG STRATKM
L' VV0.tlElA�Ayy�r r `� C/ .('ryy {- \ V 7'l,.'JY` 'eT t� x` rj / '��) (('� }r (' ,iE',, f T•'
NJVEA 6E4 011 . / � OV H+�I� \ \/' \ ErTr\k���� A` ^T'}r }n� .C•C`^�4"t:>f�lm7 »'�(L' S";'3i t'+ '
•I D9YCr� " t/ Jr x Q� SF A I 'S�t : \ \ - T'(L'6 'F 7 °:£ 3 'PAS --y1 i� "'��,- .•r' - +t �(' r'�'"' 'g
24 _
JAMES M GELIENTITIN - <1 4licy r_i`.19r +_ z >a "4 n ;dP'#'B`G
nlES tI GELLFNTII,j MiGVE5,10VAl LAN- $JRLEION�f,4l ^s�
CCR1FV iCH£iOl_(YJ,'tt[G AS REUJIREU IN(rb 4l t0lfl(IA���"++�µr+ - 2-18;,,1% p 7L_
- HATTHFSVRVEY 16 (,F ANf (HCRCATC4l1R "aUr'H r'=- ij ''' \\ - N825, 05W q {
DTME6 [xCFP1 MN'V HEmfl➢IIY'01lF,Ffi000�c1
i/ `,�''�jti ,C z '� T i \� Flcltn f`Nhl MARY LILLIAN WELLS
^ N 1 V i _ \ \ \ PIN 239603331632
hOP�i'+Li "TI1hA UrCt t}t + +IA'9ER L S` �'z \ } OB 538 PG A22
JAMES M GELLENTF6N . "�r { , ".LL • \ \ -- -- - -- -- -- - - - ---
LINE TABLE
LINE
LENGTH
BEARING
_1
11602
14579101 E_—
L2
s2 71
S3224 28 E
L3
7673
N57'5007 A
L4
12604
5349606
L5
L6
9328
13612
N 3816E
N06 26 39'E
1_7
2957
N323442W
L8
8911
55791 25 W
L9
6292
N3 22 1 w
L10
20 25
1453 25 30 E
L`I
250s
N 539 E
L 2
4369
N53-2 36 E
L13
9357
N352 56 "W
L14
4008
S15 747
L15
12067
534'1608 E
L16
537
53496 8
1107
81 86
M06 6 39
r»
,M1
1S71<
N64g2 30 W 206 YJ -
a
S
RICHARD "GGINS C/O
GEORGE LARKIN P
PIN 239600351896
DB 947 PG 197
t ti yaF
'71 FYirN `
7_1
*Sr, t a �.
v auk Pm
VICINITY MAP
(NOT TO SC.LE;
STATE OF NCPTH C,ROI IN
DUPLIN ('OU TTY lj,��,G w.
TA_ MA ON THIS T`E Fef�: _DAOY OF A'W4 r202`rJ
REGISTERLD IN MA^ ROOK
bc q5_10-
RFGIS� F DFED_ 7
IIiIN 11111111111111111111111111111 ��?� (10384 e1en32 36IIIT
Duple, County NC Register of Deeds page 1 of 1
EXISTING PK NAIL
ril FXISi NC IRON
0 5/8 REBAR SET ri/ 325 AIUMINLIM
CID WpTN STATE SE TL
A fALCULr• n PyNT
FX �TINC MONUMENT
VEN C.DNSERVA ION EASEFIENt FOR
THt STATE OF NC ECOSYS`FM
FNHAt1CZUENT f`ROGnAM
P r 3 POINT t F PLGIN ]INC
CVI_RFEAO MW'
GRAPHIC SCALF
10^ >a w 200
1 INCH - 100 FEET
r FINAL PLAT
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
FOR
NORTH CAROLINA ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM
PROJECT NAME TWIN BAYS WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
EEP PROJECT # 95363
SPO FILE NO 31 U PROPER71 OF DANNY B KFkR
1P -
CAPE FEAR RIVER BASIN CATALOGING UNIT 030300(17
ROCKFISH TOWNSHIP DUPLIN COU14TY NC _
'i -13AS drw•,,
u x.6 +ccr
—_—
T1ATF r SCAL`_ SHEET
. ,ac oat m
car a9nPI
I 1 Of
I ALGJSI 20 2C12 I - 100 _
KCI ASSOCIATES OF N C
FNGIN =EkS SURVJ_YC'FS ANI) �:LAJNERS
KCI+t0' SIX IORKS -OA,) SUITF 220
--
AssOcIA r`_ j RALEIGH NC 274J9 I
NOgT I I AROLINf 'HON_ 1-1,1) 7D3 -9:14 F,Iy (9,e, -F3 926`_7
__20 .)255
_C 0)'A - -- - -- — - -- — -- — -- - - -j

Mitigation Plan
14.4 Appendix B. Baseline Information Data
43
Twin Bays Restoration Site

Mitigation Plan
44
1
Twin Bays Restoration Site
L
J
J
^1

Mitigation Plan
USACE Wetland Determination Forms
45
Twin Bays Restoration Site

Mitigation Plan
46
Twin Bays Restoration Site
l
J
1
J
' J
- 1

WETLAND DETERMINA'T'ION DATA FORM -- Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site 1J1 A) (7; ; t `;
City/County �> . ' '= . Sampling Date 9 - 2 le / z --
ApplicantlOwner / <e'r l af`A? _ _ State _ 16 Sampling Point
Investigator(s) .S S)Z-'1 c ^`,
Section Township, Range
Landform (hdlslope, terrace, etc) A2 r _ ?,;, , °-
Local relief (concave, convex, none) 11 e,U 4e- Slope ( %) O
Subregion (LRR or MI.RA) 7`
Let 3y i�hl� 5_3 r' % N Long fd' e'/ :j` �J'P Datum
Sod Map Unit Name fst F!= _ _
-__ _ _ NWI classification
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this
time of year? Yes r-' No -- (If no, explain in Remarks )
Are Vegetation ✓ , Sod or Hydrology v---
srgnificanity disturbed? Are - Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No +
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrotogy
naturally problernatr0 (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks }
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Presento Yes
No V-
the Sampled Area
Hydric Sod Presents Yes +%
No
✓
within a Wetland? Yes No ✓
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
No _-
Geomorphic Position (132)
Remarks
eJ��n ln' e' ✓, �1r2.! i4�Grl�(( Gin�/,'e•�Y� �J{i: �; d. {�t� !i� �.r"i�t'/.a:i�`J+
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Se ary Indicator-; (minimum of two required)
Pnmaiv Indicators minimum of one is ieguned, check all that anp L
_ Surface Sod Cracks (136)
_ Surface Water (Al) —
Aquatic Fauna (13 13)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88)
High Water Table (A2) —
Marl Deposits (615) (LRR U)
_w Drainage Patterns (610)
Saturation (A3) _
Hydrogen Sulfide Odoi (C1)
_ Moss Tinn Lines (1316)
Water Marks (131) _
Oxidized Rhrzospheres along Living Roots (C3)
Dry - Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (82) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Sods (C6)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (134)
) hin Muck Surface (C f)
Geomorphic Position (132)
Iron Deposits (135) _
Other (Explain in Remarks)
-_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Water - Stained Leaves (139)
Sphagnum moss (138) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations -
Surface Water Present) Yes No
Depth (inches)
Water 1 able Present? Yes No
v-'- Depth (inches) % /6
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth (inches)
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes No V"
(inctudes caprllar�fringe) _ ^ _
— _
_
Describe 0ecorded Data (stream gauge monitoring
well aerial photos, previous inspections) if available
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region -- Version 2 0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants Sampling Point bNo
6
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet.
7
Tree Stratum (Plot size )
° Over Spec ies? Status
Humber of Dominant Species
1
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC
Total Number of Dominant
(A)
2
3
Species Across All Strata
(B)
4
of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
1
Percent of Dominant Species
2
5
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC
(A/B)
6
4
Prevalence Index worksheet
5
7
6
Sapling /Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
7
Total % Cover of Muitoly by
8
8
Herb — All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
g
of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 ft tali
10
OBL species x 1 =
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3 28 ft in
= Total Cover
height
50% of total cover
20% of total cover
FACW species x 2 =
= Total Cover
FAC species x 3 =
20% of total cover
Saolino /Shiub Stratum (Plot size )
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size )
1
FACU species x 4 =
2
1
3
2
4
UPL species x 5 =
5
Column Totals (A)
(B)
'3
Prevalence Index = B/A =
4
5
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
6
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
7
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
8
3 - Prevalence Index Is 53 0'
= Total Cover
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
50% of total cover
20% of total covet
Herb Stratum/ (Plot size
'Indicators
of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
1
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
2
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata
3
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in (7 6 cm) or
4
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
5
height
6
Sapling /Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
7
than 3 in DBH and greater then 3 28 ft (1 m) tall
8
Herb — All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
g
of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 ft tali
10
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3 28 ft in
11
height
12
= Total Cover
50% of total cover
20% of total cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size )
1
2
3
4
5
Hydrophytic
= Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover 20% of total cover
Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region —Version 2 0

SOIL Sampling Point (7(''11
Profile Description (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators;
Depth
Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils'
Redox Features
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR 5, T, U)
(inches)
Color fmoist)
%
Color (mast) % Tie
L'7_ Texture Remarks
-0-Y
�d��n' 11
Iao
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
ye
h4
L" Depleted Matrix (F3)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (177.0)
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
(MLRA 1538)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
_ Marl (1710) (LRR U)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
'Type C= Concentration, D= Deplet +on, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains
location PL =Pore Lining, M =Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted )
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils'
Histosol (Al)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR 5, T, U)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
— Histic Epipedon (A2)
— Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Black Hishc (A3)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
Reduced Vertic (1`18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Sods (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
L" Depleted Matrix (F3)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (177.0)
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 1538)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
_ Marl (1710) (LRR U)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
✓ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Iron- Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
Indicators of hydrophyhc vegetation and
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
_ Umbnc Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Mucky Mineral (81) (LRR O, S)
_ Delta Ochnc (F17) (MLRA 151)
unless disturbed or pi obiemahc
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Sods (F19) (MLRA 149A)
_ Stripped Matrix (86)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (1720) (MLRA
149A, 153C, 1530)
_ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed)
Type
Depth (inches)
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓`^ No
US Army Coi ps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region –Version 2 0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site City/County i / J , e 1 Sampling ing Date -
Applicant/Owner
State Air Sampling Point
Investigator(s) >Jli� -'" Section, Township, Range
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc) i, =';'„ ' ` Local relief (concave, convex, none) i r r ^, = r 'f - Slope
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) l_ R 7 Lat 3") ri f /.�,-5/ /J Long %� o/ j i "i �R/ Datum
Sod Map Unit Name _ t'1�2 ��f ,�fi___ _ _ NWI classification --- /'!f) <<.__�
Are climatic ! hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes u' No (If no, explain in Remarks )
Are Vegetation ✓ Sod or Hydrology ` significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No
Are Vegetation Sod or Hydrology naturally problematic? (if needed, explain any answers in Remarks )
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, Important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
----T Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil PresenO Yes v No
within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No i•' `
Remarks
, i � t° , ^' /'l <• jll,-i' ;� , I' ,'It , ^q J. -� �) i ' }l. ti;r ., r% `_7(+'�';')i °.(1a/
includes capillary fnnge) __
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge monitoring well, aerial photos previous inspections), if available
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2 0
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicates (nummum of one is ieguued check all that apply)
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
— Surface Water (Al) _
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) —
Marl Deposits (1315) (LRR U)
W Drainage Patterns (B10)
Sdturahon (A3) _
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
— Water Marks (B1) —
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (B2) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_.__ Drift Deposits (133) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Sods (CO)
— Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (Cg)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (134) _
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Geomorphic Position (132)
— Iron Deposits (135) ,
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (05)
Water - Stained Leaves (B9)
_ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Flefcl Observations
Surface Water Present'> Yes No
Depth (inches)
Winter I able Present? Yes No
>> Depth (inches)
Saturation Presents Yes No
Depth (inches)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No V
includes capillary fnnge) __
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge monitoring well, aerial photos previous inspections), if available
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2 0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants Sampling Point r'! ?` r
Tree Stratum (Plot size )
1
2
3
4
5
6
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet
ve Species? Status Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (A/B)
= Total Cover
50% of total cover 20% of total cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size )
1
2
3
4
5
50% of total cover
Remarks (If observed, list morphological adaptations
= Total Cover
20% of total cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No t'
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region —Version 2 0
Prevalence Index worksheet,
7
Total % Cover of Multiply by
8
OBL species x 1 =
= Total Cover
50% of total cover
20% of total cover
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size )
FACU species x 4 =
1
UPL species x 5 =
2
'
Column Totals (A) (B)
3
4
Prevalence Index = B/A =
5
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
6
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
r_
7
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
8
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53 0'
= Total Cover
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
50% of total cover
20% of total cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size 1 / >I )
'Indicators of hydnc soil and wetland hydrology must
I S /i i
% l r> /`� y
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
2
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata,
3
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in (7 6 cm) or
4
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height
Sapling /Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in DBH and greater than 3 28 ft (1 m) tall
5
6
7
8
Herb —Ali herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
g
of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 ft tall
Woody vine —All woody vines greater than 3 28 ft in
10
11
height
12
= Total Cover
50% of total cover 20% of total cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size )
1
2
3
4
5
50% of total cover
Remarks (If observed, list morphological adaptations
= Total Cover
20% of total cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No t'
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region —Version 2 0

SOIL Sampling Point )_VV' ,)_.
Profile Description (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (mast) % Twe lo-7
Texture Remarks
/,�j /? -3// on
P S
12 - /c / .: YA %8
/o - �/'i
Fib~
'Type C= Concentration D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains
ZLocation PL =Pore Lining, M =Matrix
Hydrlc Soil Indicators (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted )
Indicators for Problematic Hydrlc Soils3
_ Histosol (Al)
— Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
+_
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Black Histic (A3)
_ _ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
„ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19) (LRR P, S, T)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 1538)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
_ Redox Depressions (178)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
_ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A41)
^_
_ Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Iron- Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
u Umbnc Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Mucky Mineral (Si) (LRR O, S)
Delta Ochnc (F17) (MLRA 151)
unless disturbed or problematic
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Reduced Vencc (1`18) (MLRA 150A, 1508)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplarn Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
i Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type
Depth (inches)
Hydrlc Soil Presents Yes No
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2 0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site i r/.'/ City /County / %;,�/�it !'% :>>' 'I Sampling Date
Applicant/Owner State JJG Sampling Point TY 1-
Investigator(s) Section, Township Range
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc) %�dr r( rt �? c: Local relief (concave, convex, none) `F'i Slope m
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) 1_!\ )~ Lat ri i }'� '�� �/ Long rl�' ) >' . `7 °% (1/ Datum
Sod Map Unit Name t �' _ _ _ __—_— — NWI classification __ --
Are climatic f hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year'r Yes ✓ No (If no, explain in Remarks )
Are Vegetation , Sod or Hydrology + ' significantly disturbed? Are 'Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No
Are Vegetation Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic) (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No V
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes v No
�- within a Wetland? Yes No �
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
PnmaiyIndicatois (minunum of one is required check all that apply)
_ Surface Sod Cracks (66)
Surface Water (At) _
Aquatic Fauna (8 13)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
_ Drainage Patterns (610)
Saturation (A3) T
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
— Moss Tnm Lines (616)
Water Marks (81) _
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
_ Ory- Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (82) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (63) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
— Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (09)
Algal Mat or Crust (84) _
1 hin Muck Surface (C7)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Iron Deposits (85)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Shallow Aquitard (03)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Water- Stained Leaves (69)
Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Obsorvations
- - -- - -
-- ----- --- - -- -- - - - - -- - -- - - - - -- --
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches)
Water Table Present? Yes No
k--- Depth (inches) 7 �S
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth (inches) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No ✓j
includes ca olio fnn e
_
mrng we rial ll, ae photos, previous inspections) d available
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, motor
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region – Version 2 0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants Sampling Point
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2 0
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size )
% Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (A)
2
Total Number of Dominant
3
Species Across All Strata (B)
4
Percent of Dominant Species
5
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (A/B)
6
Prevalence Index worksheet
7
8
Total % Cover of Multiply by
OBL species x 1 =
= Total Cover
50% of total cover
20% of total cover
FACW species x 2 =
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size
)
FAC species x 3 =
1
FACU species x 4 =
2
UPI. species x 5 =
Column Totals (A) (B)
3
4
Prevalence Index = B/A =
5
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
6
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
7
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
8
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53 0'
= Total Cover
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
50% of total cover
20% of total cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size ) tiny i
'indicators of hydnc sod and wetland hydrology must
1
T-"
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
2
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata
3
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in (7 6 cm) or
4
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
5
height
Sapling /Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
6
7
than 3 in DBH and greater than 3 28 ft (1 m) tall
8
Herb —All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
9
of size and woody plants less than 3 28 ft tall
10
Woody vine —All woody vines greater than 3 28 ft in
11
height
12
= Total Cover
50% of total cover
20% of total cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size )
1
2
3
4
5
Hydrophyllc
= Total Cover
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
50% of total cover
20% of total cover
Remarks (if observed, list morphological adaptations below)
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2 0

SOIL Sampling Point 1)(14" "
Profile Description (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators )
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (mast) %
_ Color (moist) % Type Loc4
Texture Remarks
Ito _;1 ' tp/2_
'Type C= Concentration, D =De letion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains
Location PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils'
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (LRR 0)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A, B)
— Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Sods (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
Stratified Layers (A5)
^_
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (1720)
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Redox Dark Surface (176)
(MLRA 15313)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
^_
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
— Marl (F10) (LRR U)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All)
_ Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Coast Pfaine Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A) Umbnc Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
_ Delta Ochnc (F17) (MLRA 151)
unless disturbed or problematic
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (84)
Reduced Vertic (1`18) (MLRA 150A, 1508)
Sandy Redox (S5)
— Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
_
✓Dark Surface (87) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Type
Depth (inches)
Remarks
Hydric Soil Present? Yes V J No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region – Version 2 0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
ProlecttSite City /County Sampling Date 2�" -
ApplicantlOwner State IVr- Sampling Point PP t3 a-
Investigator(s) S }�t)'l => -� Section, Township Range
Landform (hdislope, terrace, etc) !. s)l z, J/) Local relief (concave, convex, none) _ "I zvjc vye Slope ( %) O - ?
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) G-A Lat 311 v4)q q Long rl8 'i 'qo ir,' /),t% Datum
Soil Map Unit Name " —__ NWI classification Are climatic 1 hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes t No (If no, explain in Remarks)
Are Vegetation ✓ , Sod or Hydrology t ' significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No
Are Vegetation Sod or Hydrology naturally problematic? (if needed, explain any answers in Remarks )
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No v
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ No
within a Wetland? Yes No ✓
Wetland Hydrology Present) Yes No ✓
Remarks
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators,
-- _
-
Secondary Indicators - (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required, check all that apply)
— Surface Soil Cracks (136)
— Surface Water (At) _
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
— Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) —
Marl Deposits (615) (LRR U)
— Drainage Patterns (B10)
_ Saturation (A3) —
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
— Moss Trim Lines (B16)
— Water Marks (B1) —
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
— Dry - Season Water Table (C2)
— Sediment Deposits (62) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
— Drift Deposits (83) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (CO)
„ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (84) ___.
i hin Muck Surface (C7)
Geamorphic Position (D2)
Iron Deposits (135) --
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
— PAC- Neutral Test (05)
Wdter•Stamed Leaves (89)
i Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
FreldObservations
- - - -
-- -
- - - -- -� _ - - u- —" -- V_ - - --
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches)
Water Table Present? Yes No
�� Depth (inches)
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth (inches)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capol� fnAe_Z_
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2 0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants Sampling Point !)�' - '
Herb Stratum (Plot size � n'I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Indicators of hydnc sod and wetland hydrology must
I ✓J- be present, unless disturbed or problematic
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in (7 6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height
Sapting /Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines less
than 3 in DBH and greater than 3 28 ft (i m) tall
Herb —AII herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 it tall
Woody vine —All woody vines greater than 3 28 ft in
height
=Total Cover
50% of total cover 20% of total cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size )
1
2
3
4
5 Hydrophytic
= Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover 20% of total cover Present?
Remarks (If observed, list morphological adaptations below)
Yes No t/
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2 0
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size )
% Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (A)
2
Total Number of Dominant
3
Species Across All Strata (B)
4
Percent of Dominant Species
5
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (A/B)
6
Prevalence Index worksheet
7
Total % Cover of Multiply by
8
OBL species x 1 =
= Total Cover
FACW species x 2 =
50% of total cover
20% of total cover
FAC species x 3 =
Saoling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size )
FACU species x 4 =
1
UPL species X5=
2
Column Totals (A) (B)
3
4
Prevalence Index = B/A =
5
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators*
6
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
7
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
8
3 - Prevalence Index is 53 0'
= Total Cover
problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
50% of total cover
20% of total cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size � n'I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Indicators of hydnc sod and wetland hydrology must
I ✓J- be present, unless disturbed or problematic
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in (7 6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height
Sapting /Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines less
than 3 in DBH and greater than 3 28 ft (i m) tall
Herb —AII herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 it tall
Woody vine —All woody vines greater than 3 28 ft in
height
=Total Cover
50% of total cover 20% of total cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size )
1
2
3
4
5 Hydrophytic
= Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover 20% of total cover Present?
Remarks (If observed, list morphological adaptations below)
Yes No t/
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2 0

SOIL
Sampling Point
Profile Description (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of indicators )
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Tvpe Loc Texture Remarks
h 3//
'Type C= Concentration, D =De ietion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains
ZLocation PL =Pore Lining, M =Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted )
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils'
_ Histosol (Al)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
^_
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Black Histic (A3)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
, Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (173)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Sods (1720)
_ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 153B)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_, Red Parent Material (TF2)
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
— Marl (F10) (LRR U)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1)
— Depleted Ochnc (F11) (MLRA 151)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al 2)
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
_ Umbnc Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
_ Delta Ochnc (F17) (MLRA 151)
unless disturbed or problematic
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Reduced Vertic (1718) (MLRA 150A, 1508)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Fioodplam Soils (F19) (M LRA 149A)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
✓ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed).
Type
Depth (inches)
Remarks
Hydric Soil Present? Yes tr No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region –Version 2 0

\I
Mitigation Plan
i,
,
l~
� 1
Reference Wetland
59
Twin Bays Restoration Site

Mitigation Plan
.1
Twin Bays Restoration Site

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site _/0 //J 1& -4625 AI!,�< f lu lc.. Iulf 7Z-0 11//5 City /County / Atollld Sampling Date //- 5 - 20 f z
Cr C F_ /� !
ApphcanUOvmer _ Y �/ State /�� Sampling Point 1�P�t I
Investigator(s) 5 57rn k,, 5 1, P ) /W /.i)J7" Section, Township, Range
Landform (hill slope, terrace, etc) Local relief (concave, convex, none) Slope ( %) ra i
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) L. RR 7- Lat N :21�'r 04 r' i 2211 i Long W 6,1 n `61 !t! � J r Datum
Sod Map Unit Name _ Pd1VX' -q4 _ NWI classification
Are climatic I hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ✓ No (If no explain in Remarks )
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ✓" No
Are Vegetation Sod or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks )
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ No within a Wetland? Yes ✓ No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes U` No
Remarks
Nl'.Z ))t I,a, C�ItS f �`/ /�• !1 �'. 5• l�S , f/ ;G( J %tc A2eFeaC,1%ce- Gc ff r/-tr y16 f , vr.. G,- �-YLA / ,, S;- -6)/
21 6'gr, &_>f,,t,etj' !t{t��'i.•f �N ✓1Ci! /2�i� �S' �� /� ?(i 1Y /S e /t /,' /�c FS Q r ).?.1 f'J 11 e41 (t DNeh (M
OF
7rt�9 <b pvec� 5hratil� (�tJerr L<�rlit (0e) % 800Ad LeAtx(2 tQ_t1c%JrEC�r:S,
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators'
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required, check all that apply)
r Surface Water (Al) _
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ High Water Table (A2) _
Marl Deposits (615) (LRR U)
Saturation (A3) _
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Water Marks (61) _
Oridized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
_ Sediment Deposits (62) —
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Drift Deposits (63) T
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Sods (C6)
— Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
— Iron Deposits (85) ^
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
✓ Waler- Stained Leaves (69)
Field Qbservatlons
Surface Water Present) Yes No
Depth (inches)
Water Table Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches) �} 2 „
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two re ui
_ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
— Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88)
_ Drainage Patterns (610)
_✓ Moss Trim Lines (616)
_ Dry - Season Water Table (C2)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (CO)
✓Geomorphic Positron (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
✓FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
--,-, Sphagnum moss (08) (LRR T, U)
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes \✓ No
(stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections)
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2 0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants Sampling Point P('t-, I
i
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size J7�� )
% over
c s? St us
Number of Dominant Species
�
1 1?crt / %I�t� �/c ,biz <'�" , ^s J�( ?!'r!1
ti�0
✓ j1JG
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC ) (A)
2 J4%/� �G'! ��L,e_.' i� i4 � t i' (.`e ✓l lq��ct�
3 �}
��
0 20% of total cover
3 Swc dc ll M - hf21' drl /7+ Zf S7rr; , L " t {! ��.
't)
✓ Iif
Total Number of Dominant
1
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
FAC species x 3 =
Species Across All Strata t (B)
4
V,
rr/1GU)
FACU species x4=
5
26
,i
Percent of Dominant Species
UPL species x 5 =
3 i&-dba r ° / ^ ti '
: w C
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC i �� �� (AIS)
6
Column Totals (A)
r
4 r,�� t°trtMn_T keel Ni
2-0
7
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is _3 0
Prevalence Index worksheet,
8
50% of total cover :5 2 ' `> 20% of total cover
Total % Cover of Multiply by
'Indicators of hydnc sod and wetland hydrology must
100
= Total Cover
OBL species x 1=
50% of total cover
0 20% of total cover
Z C)
FACW species x 2 =
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size 30
)
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
FAC species x 3 =
1 S[NCCyL�otr Aln� / ?h /`�lJrJi a +�ul2r�t.
36
V,
rr/1GU)
FACU species x4=
2 1, 1I e,C L\Au-dyttS aAtrio ,
26
,i
1-7/4-1
UPL species x 5 =
3 i&-dba r ° / ^ ti '
: w C
• -
Woody vine -All woody vines greater than 3 28 ft in
Column Totals (A)
r
4 r,�� t°trtMn_T keel Ni
2-0
V
<_W
Prevalence Index = B/A=
5 / ^r d,") +:�fi
10
✓
F (_0
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
6
I
S
F k} }
_ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
7
_✓ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
8
,
(B)
2.a = Total Cover
50% of total cover 11_ ,'3 20% of total cover +�
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size ?� )
1
1 . "AIr /ov /f-t it I, F)4ti.1
2
3
4
5 Hydrophyttc
= Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover 10, 20% of total cover Present? Yes ✓ No
Remarks (If observed, list morphological adaptations below)
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region -Version 2 0
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is _3 0
Total Cover
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
50% of total cover :5 2 ' `> 20% of total cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size 1 i -1 )
'Indicators of hydnc sod and wetland hydrology must
1
61; 6i} ct ) nJc--AI CAI 41,I(XV-ta. ye c 26 ✓ tAeW
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
2
6 rQh rh& (N t c t'rJ - Woo h( rv2i ^Xta J i R-9)nl tpi r3 ✓ 0F,
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata,
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in (7 6 cm) or
3
4
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
5
height
SaplinglShrub - Woody plants, excluding vines less
6
7
than 3 in DBH and greater than 3 28 ft (1 m) tall
Herb - All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
8
9
of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 ft tali
10
Woody vine -All woody vines greater than 3 28 ft in
11
height
12
2.a = Total Cover
50% of total cover 11_ ,'3 20% of total cover +�
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size ?� )
1
1 . "AIr /ov /f-t it I, F)4ti.1
2
3
4
5 Hydrophyttc
= Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover 10, 20% of total cover Present? Yes ✓ No
Remarks (If observed, list morphological adaptations below)
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region -Version 2 0

-- SOIL Sampling Pant J%n' I
Profile Description (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators )
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Twe Loc
Texture Remarks
I ?P- (' IN 16 C, m P)-
V ,
'Type C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced
Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains
location PL =Pore Lining, M =Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils'
_ Histosol (A1)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Thin Dark Surface (89) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Sods (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
_ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 1538)
_ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Red Parent Matenal (TF2)
_ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TFi 2)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
_ Marl (F10) (LRR U)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Iron- Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
T Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
Umbnc Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
unless disturbed or problematic
_ Sandy Gieyed Matrix (S4)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 1506)
Sandy Redox (85)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
^_
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153 D)
Dark Surface (87) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed)
Type
Depth (inches)
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region —Version 2 0

KCI
SUBJECT
JOB NUMBER SHEET _
DESIGN DATE
CHECK _ DATE
Leading through Excellence e www kci com o (£300) 572 7496
U CI
l J■
F-12
th �lyC 44')
l C�J X <' $<2EC1Ccn7 l^ f�- 0--'a 7'
/ .,�c rf,
/ �?�� J 1/J D ,�L �L ^• j C.� / 11 ��nc�� }�i �1 XlL.rt[ f
/ c,''I /x[14 xii�ti U,r%Y` 3v Vo iil i..l r/2.,tirtu- All 4 17t� /�z/u� l..r�Z� G T/� / °(((�,,,rrr e/ N'k s. -ytiy�
t
;�7� �0 }�i ��jic_ s� ��i 37 , !� 7` elC- � r/J jlCi
( its, �rLfJ1l it %-� t , %/— K �h� (c` i �c� �� ; /�� D -���f ? �(1� %hc,l )4� �iF /° /r�� Gr / %,� Gk, �:'� lr� ✓/
�l <L- JCI�r :lG ���C a��(•F�6✓ �(/t t4� l 7- L �n}�s %/J�2_JTl ��?� (I.,Z..� �)2.a c c<<37 i`C �t�� l��r�(.
/-CY`' /

Mitigation Plan Twin Bays Restoration Site
65

Mitigation Plan Twin Bays Restoration Site -
J
l
t ,
M.

9
l
i
Mitigation Plan Twin Bays Restoration Site
FHWA Categorical Exclusion Form
67

Mitigation Plan
m
Twin Bays Restoration Site
I I
1

r�
Ecosystem
PROGRAM
October 15, 2012
Mr. Tim Morris
KCI Associates of NC, PA
Landmark Center II, Suite 220
4601 Six Forks Road
Raleigh NC 27609
Subject: Categorical Exclusion
Twin Bays Wetland Restoration Project
Cape Fear River Basin — CU# 03030007
Duplin County, North Carolina
Contract No. 004739, RFP No. 16- 004102
Dear Mr. Morris:
Attached please find the approved Categorical Exclusion form for the subject full delivery
project. Please include a copy of the approval form in your Mitigation Plan. You may submit
your invoice for completion of the Task 1 deliverable for review and approval.
If you have any questions, or wish to discuss this matter further, please contact me at any time.
I can be reached at (910) 796 -7475, or email me at kristin.miguez(Dncdenr.gov.
Sincerely,
Kristin E. Miguez, Project Manager
cc: Donnie Brew, FHWA
file
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 11699 -1652
A
NCDENR
/ 919 715 -0476 / www.n(eep.net

Categorical Exclusion Form for Ecosystem Enhancement
Program Projects
W
Part
1: General •
Project
•
Project Name:
Twin Bays Non riparian Wetland
Duplin County, NC
Mitigation Project
Count Name:_
EEP Number:
95363
KCI Technolo ies, Inc.
Project Sponsor:
Project Contact Name:
Tim Morris
Project Contact Address:
4601 Six Forks Rd, Suite 220, Raleigh, NC 27609
Project Contact E -mail:
[e-mail]
EEP Project Mana er:
Kristin Mi uez
_
Project Description
For Official Use Only
Reviewed By:
� 1
Date
EEP Projectt ana ` r j
Conditional Approved By:
Date _
For Division Administrator
FHWA
Check this box if there are
outstanding issues
Final Approval By:
Date
For Division Administrator
FHWA
Version 1.4, 8118105

Part 2: All Projects
Response
Coastal Zone Management Act CZMA
1. Is the project located in a CAMA county?
❑ Yes
® No
2. Does the project involve ground- disturbing activities within a CAMA Area of
❑ Yes
Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ No
® N/A
3. Has a CAMA permit been secured?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
4. Has NCDCM agreed that the project is consistent with the NC Coastal Management
❑ Yes
Program?
❑ No
® N/A
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act CERCLA
1. Is this a "full- delivery" project?
® Yes
❑ No
2. Has the zoning /land use of the subject property and adjacent properties ever been
❑ Yes
designated as commercial or industrial?
® No
❑ N/A
3. As a result of a limited Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or potential
❑ Yes
hazardous waste sites within or adjacent to the project area?
® No
❑ N/A
4. As a result of a Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous
❑ Yes
waste sites within or adjacent to the project area?
❑ No
® N/A
5. As a result of a Phase II Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous
❑ Yes
waste sites within the project area?
❑ No
® N/A
6. Is there an approved hazardous mitigation plan?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
National Historic Preservation Act Section 106
1. Are there properties listed on, or eligible for listing on, the National Register of
❑ Yes
Historic Places in the project area?
® No
2. Does the project affect such properties and does the SHPO/THPO concur?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
3. If the effects are adverse, have they been resolved?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real PropertV Acquisition Policies Act Uniform
Act
1. Is this a "full- delivery" project?
® Yes
❑ No
2. Does the project require the acquisition of real estate?
® Yes
❑ No
❑ N/A
3. Was the property acquisition completed prior to the intent to use federal funds?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ N/A
4. Has the owner of the property been informed:
® Yes
• prior to making an offer that the agency does not have condemnation authority; and
❑ No
• what the fair market value is believed to be?
❑ N/A
�,..,. .... 4 A 01 4 0 /!1 G

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

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

Mitigation Plan
74
Twin Bays Restoration Site

Mitigation Plan
Jurisdictional Determination
75
Twin Bays Restoration Site

Mitigation Plan
76
Twin Bays Restoration Site

U.S, ARMY JL CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id SAW -2012 -01285 County Dunlin U S G S Quad Wallace West
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Property Ownei. Danny B. Keir Agent: KCI Associates of NC
Address, 5114 Clear Run Drive attn: Steven F. Stokes
Wilmington, NC 28403 Address- Landmark Center II, Suite 220
4601 Six Forks Road
Raleigh, NC 27609
Property description.
Size (acres) -13 Nearest Town Wallace
Nearest Waterway UT to Rock Fish Creek River Basin Northeast Cane Fear
USGS HUC 03030007 Coordinates 34.748806 N - 78.027356 W
Location description* The property is located on the east side of Cornwallis Road approximately 0 45 mi north of its
intersection with NC 41 near Wallace, Duplin County North Carolina The Proiect Area is located in the
southwestern half of PIN #: 239600252193
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
_ Based on preliminary information, there may be wetlands on the above described property We strongly suggest you have
this property inspected to determine the extent of Department of the Army (DA) jurisdiction To be considered final, a
,jurisdictional determination must be verified by the Corps This preliminary determination is not an appealable action
under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process ( Reference 33 CFR Part 33 1)
B. Approved Determination
_ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described property subject to the permit requirements of
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act Unless there is a change in the law or
our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification
X There are waters of the U S on the above described project area subject to the permit requirements of Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification
_ We strongly suggest you have the wetlands on your property delineated. Due to the size of your property and /or our
present workload, the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner For a more timely
delineation, you may wish to obtain a consultant To be considered final, any delineation must be verified by the Corps
X The waters of the US son your project area have been delineated and the delineation has been verified by the Corps
We strongly suggest you have this delineation surveyed Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed and verified by
the Coips Once verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA jurisdiction on your
property which, provided there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied upon foi a period not to
exceed five years
The waters of the U S including wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accui ately depicted on the plat
signed by the Corps Regulatory Official identified below on _ Unless there is a change in the Iaw or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification
_ There are no wateis of the U S , to include wetlands, present on the above described project area which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344) Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this detei mination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification
The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act
(CAMA) You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Morehead City, NC, at (252) 808 -2808 to
determine their requu ements
Page 1 of 2

Placement of di edged or fill material within waters of the US and/or wetlands without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311) If you have any questions regarding this
determination and /or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Mr. David E. Bailey at (910) 251 -4469 !
David. E.Bailey2Pusace.army.mil .
C. Basis For Determination
The site exhibits features with Ordinary High Water. The waters on -site include an 4 unnamed tributaries (UTs) to
Rock Fish Creek and a small pond all Relatively Permanent Waters (RPWs) which flow via another UT to Rock Fish
Creek (RPW) and Rock Fish Creek (RPW) to the Northeast Cape Fear River, a Traditionally Navigable Water.
D. Remarks
The Waters of the US were delineated by Steve Stokes (KC1) with changes made in the field by Dave E. Bailey
(USACE), and are approximated as the shaded areas on the attached figure entitled "Jurisdictional Tributary
Delineation Map of Twin Bays Wetland Restoration dated 8/20/2012.
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Actjurisdiction for the
particular site identified in this request The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation
provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985 If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation
in USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources
Conservation Service, prior to starting work
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in -'
B. above)
This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. If you object to this
determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR part 331 Enclosed you will find a
Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form if you request to appeal this
determination you must submit a completed RFA form to the following address
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn, Jason Steele, Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Room 1OM15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303 -8801
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for 1
appeal under 33 CFR part 331 5, and that it has been received by the District Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP.
Should you decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by December 29, 2012 -
* *It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the District Office if you do not object to the determination in this -
correspondence **
Corps Regulatory Official
Date October 30, 2012 Expiration Date October 30, 2017
Copy furnished
Chad Cobuin , NCDENR -DWQ, 127 Cardinal Drive Extension, Wilmington, NC 28405

DANNY B. KEIR ETAL
PIN 239600157401
MB 23 PG 315
\ DB 1645 PG 107
\ \
DANNY B. KEIR ETA
\ \ PIN 239600158316
\ M8 23 PG 315
\\ \ \ 1645 PG 107
\
24"
LARRY ALLEN KEIR, SR
PIN 239600261271
D8 1645 PG 103
JURISDICTIONAL
TRIBUTARY
CONTINUES
PAST PROJECT
LIMITS
�ll!llll Jrl l
I \
\\ \ 3'
\\ \\\ \\ a
4.9
' �
4.5' 4 4
� r-s 2'
\
\
\
\
ki
/
� I
i
3'
DANNY B. KEIR
PIN 239600252193
MB 23 PG 315
DB 1666 PG 116
A2, '
STUDY -AR-bA -
517,704 SF
11.88 ACRES _ _
\ - - -oo- - \ \4\5'
4' \
1\ r-4.1
Ksy
\ - - - - 6RbSSI
5 4'
9 r-5.3'
\ * ** JD IS FOR THE EXISTING KEIR * **
\\ PROPERTY (TWIN BAYS) LABELED AS STUDY
\ AREA AND DOES NOT EXTEND ONTO
\ \\ ADJACENT PROPERTIES
PROPOSED
CONSERVATION
- EASEMENT
LINE
2.2' \ \
JURISDICTIONAL
TRIBUTARY
CONTINUES
- -- PAST PROJECT
r 4 / LIMITS
1.2'
MARY LILLIAN WELLS FLOW— W -&--
PIN 239603331632
DB 1538 PG 422
W
IT ... MT
n
i,, *SITf
p
R
b
.wuts.wt.wr
L1J
VICINITY MAP
N NOT TO SCALE
S
E
LINEAR FEET OF
RICHARD WIGGINS Cho JURISDICTIONAL
GEORGE LARKIN, JR
PI 23
N 9003589
947 PG 11976 TRIBUTARY - 3,340'
JURISDICTIONAL
TRIBUTARY - 16,900 S.F.
(0.39 ACRES)
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 75 150 300
"O!!�
1 INCH = 150 FEET
JURISDICTIONAL TRIBUTARY
DELINEATION MAP
FOR
TWIN BAYS WETLAND RESTORATION
ROCKFISH TWP, DUPLIN COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
AUGUST 20 2012 1 1" = 150' 1 1 OF 1
Z KCI ASSOCIATES OF N.C.
ENGINEERS, SURVEYORS AND PLANNERS
KCI4601 SIX FORKS ROAD, SUITE 220
ASSOCIATES OF RALEIGH, NC 27609
NORTH CAROLINA PHONE [phone] • FAX [phone]
C -0764

I Mitigation Plan Twin Bays Restoration Site
r a
. 1
}
y
i
FEMA Floodplain Checklist
81

Mitigation Plan Twin Bays Restoration Site
J
-'1
_J
+_ J
82

r�
-, osystelil
EEP Floodplain Requirements Checklist
This form was developed by the National Flood Insurance program, NC Floodplain
Mapping program and Ecosystem Enhancement Program to be filled for all EEP projects.
The form is intended to summarize the floodplain requirements during the design phase
of the projects. The form should be submitted to the Local Floodplain Administrator
with three copies submitted to NFIP (attn. State NFIP Engineer), NC Floodplain Mapping
Unit (attn. State NFIP Coordinator) and NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program.
Project Location
Name of project:
Twin Bays Wetland Restoration Project
Name if stream or feature:
N/A
County:
Duplin
Name of river basin:
Cape Fear
Is project urban or rural?
Rural
Name of Jurisdictional
municipality /county:
Wallace, Duplin County
DFIRM panel number for
entire site:
2396)
Consultant name:
KCI Technologies, Inc.
Phone number:
919 - 783 -9214
Address:
4601 Six Forks Rd.
Raleigh, NC 27609
FEMA_ Floodplain _Checklist4- 23- 12.docx Page 1 of 3

Design Information
Provide a general description of project (one paragraph) Include project limits on a
reference orthophotograph at a scale of 1" = 500"
Summarize stream reaches or wetland areas according to their restoration priority
Example
Reach
Length
Priority
Wetland 1
11 I acres
N/A
Floodplain Information
Is project located in a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA)?
C Yes E No
If project is located in a SFHA, check how it was determined
F Redehneation
F Detailed Study
F Limited Detail Study
r Approxmlate Study
i Don't know
List flood zone designation
Check if applies
r- AE Zone
F000dway
[; Non - Encroachment
None
r- A Zone
C Local Setbacks Required
C No Local Setbacks Required
If local setbacks are required, list how many feet
Does proposed channel boundary encroach outside floodway /non-
encroachment /setbacks
FEMA_Floodplain Check Iist4 -23 -12 docx Page 2 of 3

C Yes E No
Land Acquisition (Check)
F State owned (fee simple)
F` Conservation easment (Design Bid Build)
1✓ Conservation Easement (Full Delivery Project)
Note if the project property is state - owned, then all requirements should be addressed to
the Department of Administration, State Construction Office (attn Herbert Neily,
919 807 -4101
Is community /county participating in the NFIP program?
Yes U No
Note if community is not participating, then all requirements should be addressed to
NFIP attn State NFIP Engineer, 919 715 -8000
Name of Local Floodplain Administrator
Phone Number
Floodplain Requirements
This section to be filled by designer /applicant following verification with the LFPA
r No Action
i No Rise
F Letter of Map Revision
r- Conditional Letter of Map Revision
f— Other Requirements
List other requirements
Comments
Project is not located in ajurisdictional floodplain
Name
Title
FEMA_Floodplam_Checklist4 -23 -12 docx
Signature
Date
Page 3 of 3

Mitigation Plan
Twin Bays Restoration Site

Mitigation Plan
14.5 Appendix C. Mitigation Work Plan Data and Analyses
87
Twin Bays Restoration Site

Mitigation Plan
EU3
Twin Bays Restoration Site

Mitigation Plan
Groundwater Modeling /Hydrologic Budget
m
Twin Bays Restoration Site

Mitigation Plan
J
1
Twin Bays Restoration Site
1
J
_J

Mitigation Plan
Twin Bays Restoration Site - Existina Conditions - Rains Soils
Twin Bays Restoration Site
Dry Year
Water In uts
Water Out uts
Change in
Storage
Excess
Water
Wetland
Volume
1990
P
Si
Gi
PET
So
Go
January
207
000
000
080
000
2.80
-1 53
000
000
February
1.86
0.01
0.00
1.25
0.01
2.80
2.19
0.00
0.00
March
5.96
1 03
000
1 60
1 03
2.80
1 56
0.00
1 56
April
250
002
000
239
002
2.80
-2 69
000
0001
May
595
1 034
000
3.84
034
1 280
-069
000
000
June
0.86
0.00
0.00
5.99
0.00
2.80
-7.93
0.00
0.00
JL11Y
221
000
000
682
000
280
-741
000
0.00
August
572
0 15
000
599
0 15
280
-307
0.00
000
September
033
000
000
422
000
280
-669
000
000
October
3.64
060
0.00
2.71
0.60
2.80
-1.87
0.00
0.00
November
391
1 53
000
1 15
1 53
1 280
-004
0.00
0 00
December
1 60
001
000
090
001
280
2 10
000
0 00
Annual Totals
I o'_, 64
6 8 -�
0 Oc
3 ;j
6 65
3J 60
AV . Year
Water Inputs
Wafer Outputs
Change in
Storage
Excess
Water
Wetland
Volume
1973
P
Si •
Gi
PET
So
Go
January
4.51
0.08
0.00
0.45
0.08
2.80
126
0.00
1.26
February
4.34
0.14
0.00
0.32
0.14
2.80
1.22
0.00
2.48
March
4 97
029
000
1 84
029
2 80
0.33
000
2 82
April
5 53
1 07
000
2 19
1 07
280
0 54
000
3 36
May
3 06
1 024
000
3 65
024
2 80
-3 39
000
000
June
8.70
1.89
0.00
5.48
1.89
2.80
0.42
0.00
0.42
July
3 96
004
0.00
565
0 04
2 80
4 49
000
000
August
7 71
073
000
553
073
2 80
-0 62
0 00
0.00
September
370
1 17
1 0 00
443
1 17
2 80
-3 53
0 00
000
October
1 05
003
0.00
241
1 003
2 80
-4 16
0001
0.00
November
1 047
000
000
1 26
0.00
2 80
-3 59
000
000
December
1 7 84
1 17
0.00
058
1 17
2 80
446
000
446
Annual Totals
I o'_, 64
6 8 -�
0 Oc
3 ;j
6 65
3J 60
Wet Year
Water Inputs
Water Outputs
Change in
Storage
Excess
Water
Wetland
Volume
1991
P
Si'
Gi
PET
So
Go
January
7.8
0.69
0.00
0.62
0.69
2.80
4.38
0.00
4.38
February
1.97
0.07
0.00
0.90
0.07
2.80
-1.73
0.00
2.65
March
506
0 36
0.00
1 65
0 36
280
061
0 00
326
April
445
086
000
307
0 86
2 80
-142
000
1 83
May
3 13
1 006
000
5 31
006
280
-4.98
000
0001
June
9 39
1 2 23
000
5 19
223
2 80
140
0.00
1 40
July
1435
330
000
6 29
3.30
2.80
526
1.26
540
August
9 75
0.88
000
5.33
088
2 80
1 62
1 62
540
September
6 65
1 09
000
3 83
1 09
2 80
002
002
540
October
2 8
0.06
0.00
2.08
1 006
2 80
-2 08
000
3 32
November
204
007
000
0 95
007
2 80
-1 71
0001
1 62
December
1 3.04
1 0.09
0.00
0.63
0.09
2.80
-0.39
0.00
1.23
Annual Totals
1 70.431
9.76
0.00
35.84
9.76
33.60
91

Mitigation Plan
Twin Bays Restoration Site - Existina Conditions - Torhunta Soils
Twin Bays Restoration Site
Dry Year
Water In uts
Water Outputs
Change in
Storage
Excess
Water
Wetland
Volume
1990
P
Si •
Gi
PET
So
Go
January
2.07
0.00
0.00
0.80
0.00
2.60
-1.33
0.00
0.00
February
1 8
0.01
0.00
1 25
001
260
-1.99
000
0.00
March
5.96
1.03
0.00
1.60
1.03
2.60
1.76
0.00
1.76
April
2.50
002
000
2.39
002
2.60
-2.49
0001
0.00
May
5951
034
000
3.84
0.34
1 260
-0.49
0.00
0.00
June
086
000
000
5.99
000
260
-773
000
0.00
July
221
000
000
6.82
000
260
-721
0.00
000
August
5.72
0.15
0.00
5.99
0.15
2.60
-2.87
0.00
0.00
September
033
000
000
4.22
000
260
1 -6.49
000
0.00
October
364
060
1 000
2 71
060
2_60
-1 67
000
0 00
November
391
1.53
000
1 15
1 1 53
1160
0 16
0.00
0 16
December
1.60
0.01
0.00
0.90
1 17
2.60
-1.90
0.00
0.00
Annual Totals
55 e1
6 65
0 00
_f_.a.01
6 85
20
Avg. Year
Water Inputs
Water Outputs
Change in
Storage
Excess
Water
Wetland
Volume
1973
P
Si '
Gi
PET
So
Go
January
4 51
008
000
0.45
0 08
2 60
146
0 00
1 46
February
4 34
0 14
000
032
0.14
2.60
1 42
000
2 88
March
4 97
029
000
1 84
029
260
053
000
3 42
April
5 53
1 07
0 00
2 19
1 07
2 60
1 074
0 00
4 16
May
3.061
0.24
0.00
3.65
0.24
2.60
-3.19
0.00
0.97
June
870
1 89
000
5.48
1 89
260
062
0 00
1 59
July
3.96
0.04
0.00
5.65
0.04
2.60
11.29
0.00
0.00
August
7 71
073
000
5 53
073
2 60
-042
000
000
September
3.70
1.17
0.00
1 4.43
1.17
2.60
-3.33
0.00
0.00
October
1 05
003
0 00
241
1 0.03
2 60
-3.96
000
000
November
0471
000
000--
00
1.26
0.00
260
-339
000
0.00
December
7 841
1 17
0 00
0 58
1 17
260
4 66
0.00
4 66
Annual Totals
55 e1
6 65
0 00
3219
6 85
20
Wet Year
Water Inputs
Water Outputs
Change in
Storage
Excess
Water
Wetland
Volume
1991
P
Si '
Gi
PET
So
Go
January
78
069
000
062
069
2.60
458
000
458
February
1 97
007
000
090
007
260
-1 53
000
305
March
506
036
000
1 65
0 36
260
081
000
386
April
4.45
0.86
0.00
3.07
0.86
2.60
-1.22
0.00
2.63
May
3 131
006
000
531
006
260
-4.78
000
000
June
939
223
0.00
5 19
223
260
1 60
0.00
1 60
July
14 35
330
000
629
3 30
260
546
238
468
August
9.75
0.88
0.00
5.33
0.88
2.60
1.82
1.82
4.68
September
665
1 09
000
383
1 09
2.60
1 022
0.22
4 68
October
28
006
000
208
1 006
260
-1 88
000
2.80
November
204
007
000
095
007
2 60
-1 51
000
1.30
December
304
009
000
063
0.09
260
-0 19
0.00
1 11
Annual Totals
70.43
9.76
0.00
35.84
9.76
31.20
92

Mitigation Plan
0
M
7
M97
d
t
u
C
E
2
0
d
0 4
v
c
r
d 3
2
1
0
Jai Jz.� Fr
Hydrologic Budget
Existing Conditions - Rains Soil Series
�
Growing Season
March 18 - Nov. 11
G
Maximum Capacity
(Ground Surface)
•
A
12" Below
Ground Surface
A
A - ,
A
93
Ot,
0
Twin Bays Restoration Site
1.8 in. -Jurisdictional
Boundary (12° below
ground)
5.4 in - 1A aximum
CapacityfSal Surface
Dry Year 09W
x Average Year (1973)
-- r-- Wet Year (1991;

Mitigation Plan
D
7
N 6
d
t
u
c
O7 c
E
0
v
0 4
v
c
R
a+
d 3
2
1
C
Hydrologic Budget
Existing Conditions - Torhunta Soil Series
Growing Season
March 18 - Nov. 11
Maximum Capacity
(Ground Surface)
I�
A
A
i
12' Belo,,, Ak _
Ground Surface
dep,`,� QIF
�e
94
Twin Bays Restoration Site
1.56 in. - Jurisdictional
Boundary (12' below
ground)
4.68 in- Maximum
Capacity /Soil Surface
• Dry Year (1990)
f Average Year (1973)
- -*- - Wet Yea (1991)

Mitigation Plan
Twin Bays Restoration Site - Proposed Conditions - Rains Soils
Twin Bays Restoration Site
Dry Year
Water In uts
Water Out uts
Change in
Storage
Excess
Water
Wetland Volume
1990
P
Si'
GI
PET
So
Go
January
207
000
000
0.80
0.00
2.80
-1 53
000
000
February
1 86
001
000
1 25
000
280
-2 18
000
000
March
5.96
1 03
0.00
1 60
0.00
2.80
260
0.00
2.60
April
250
002
0.00
2.39
000
280
-267
0.00
0.00
May
5.95
0 3
0.00
3.84
0.00
2.80
-0.35
0.00
0.00
June
086
000
0.00
599
000
280
-793
000
0.00
July
221
000
0,00
6.82
000
280
-741
0.00
0.00
August
532
0.15
0.00
5.99
0.00
2.80
-2.92
0.00
0.00
September
033
000
0.00
422
000
280
-669
000
000
October
164
0.60
0.00
2.71
0.00
2.80
-1.26
0.00
0.00
November
1 3.91
153
0.00
1 15
000
280
1.50
000
1 50
December
1 1 60
001
0.00
090
000
2 80
-209
000
000
Annual Totals
Annual Totals
7043
c, V,
; n, ,
35.84
�:: m`
33.60
Avg. Year
Water In uts
Water Outputs
Change In
Storage
Excess
Water
Wetland Volume
1973
P
51 •
GI
PET
So
Go
January
451
008
0.00
045
000
280
134
000
1.34
February
4.34
0.14
0.00
0.32
0.00
280
1.36
0.00
2.70
March
4 97
029
000
1 84
000
280
062
000
3.32
April
5 53
1 07
000
2 19
000
280
162
000
4 93
May
306
024
0.00
365
000
280
-3 16
000
178
June
870
1 89
000
548
000
280
231
000
409
July
3.96
0.04
0.00
5.65
0.00
280
-4.45
0.00
0.00
August
7 71
073
000
553
000
280
0 11
000
0 11
September
3.70
1.17
0.00
4.43
0.00
2.80
-2.36
0.00
0.00
October
1.05
0.03
0.00
2.41
0.00
2.80
-4.13
0.00
0.00
November
047
0.00
000
126
0.00
280
-359
000
0.00
December
784
1 17
000
058
000
280
562
000
5.62
Annual Totals
7043
c, V,
; n, ,
35.84
�:: m`
33.60
Wet Year
Water In ufs
Water Outputs
Change In
Storage
Excess
Water
Wetland Volume
1991
P
Si •
Gi
PET
so
Go
January
78
0.69
0.00
0.62
0.00
2,80
5.07
0.00
5.07
February
1 97
007
000
090
0.00
280
-166
0.00
3.41
March
506
0.36
0.00
1.65
0.00
2.80
0.97
0.00
4.37
April
4.45
0.86
0.00
3.07
0.00
280
-0.57
0.00
3.81
May
3 13
006
0.00
5 31
000
280
-493
000
000
June
9 39
223
000
5 19
000
2 80
3 63
000
3 63
July
14 35
330
0 00
629
000
280
8 56
4 39
7 80
August
975
088
000
533
000
2 80
2 51
2 51
780
September
6.65
1.09
0.00
3.83
0.00
2.80
1.12
1.12
7.80
October
2 8
0 06
000
208
0.00
280
-201
000
5 79
November
2.04
0.07
0.00
0.95
0.00
2.80
-1.64
0.00
4.15
December
304
009
000
063
0.00
280
-030
000
385
Annual Totals
7043
9.76
0.00
35.84
0.00
33.60
Note An increase in capacity of 0 2 feet (2 4 inches) of surface water is assumed based on the creation of microtopography during -. etland restoration
95

Mitigation Plan
Twin Bays Restoration Site - Proposed Conditions - Torhunta Soils
Twin Bays Restoration Site
Dry Year
Water In uts
Water In uts
Water Out Is
Change In
Storage
Excess
Water
Wetland Volume
1990
P
SI •
GI
PET
So
Go
January
2.07
000
000
080
0.00
2.60
-1.33
000
0.00
February
1.86
0.01
0.00
1.25
0.00
2.60
-1.98
0.00
0.00
March
596
1
000
1.60
0 00
2.60
2.80
000
280
April
2.50
0.02
0.00
2.39
0.00
2.60
-2.47
0.00
0.33
May
5.95
034
0.00
3.84
000
260
-0.15
000
0.17
June
086
000
000
599
000
260
-773
000
000
July
2.21
0.00
0.00
6.82
0.00
2.60
-7.21
0.00
0.00
August
5 72
015
000
5.99
000
260
-2.72
000
0.00
September
0 33
000
000
422
000
260
-6.49
000
0.00
October
364
060
0.00
2 71
0.00
260
-1.06
0.00
000
November
391
1 53
000
1 15
0.00
260
1 70
000
1 70
December
1 60
0.01
000
0 90
000
260
-1 89
000
000
Annual Totals
70.43
9.76
' s , :+
" 09
J1 ` .
31.20
Avg. Year
Water In uts
Water Outputs
Change m
Storage
Excess
Water
Wetland Volume
1973
P
-St.-
GI
PET
So
Go
Janus
4.51
0.08
0.00
0.45
0.00
2.60
1.54
0 -00
1.54
February
4 34
0.14
0.00
032
0.00
260
1.56
000
310
March
4.97
019
0.00
1.84
0.00
260
0.82
0.00
3.92
April
5 53
1 07
0.00
2 19
000
260
1 82
000
1 5.73
May
3 06
024
000
365
coo
260
-296
000
278
June
870
1 89
000
548
0.00
2 60
251
000
529
July
3 96
0 04
000
5.65
0.00
260
-4.25
0.00
1 04
August
771
073
0 00
5 53
000
260
0 31
0 00
1 36
September
3 70
1 17
0 00
443
000
260
-2 16
0 00
000
October
1 05
003
0 00
2 41
000
260
-3 93
0 00
000
November
0.47
0.00
0.00
1 1.26
0.00
2.60
-3.39
0.00
0.00
December
7.84
1 17
000
0 58
0.00
260
582
0 00
582
Annual Totals
Annual Totals
70.43
9.76
' s , :+
" 09
J1 ` .
31.20
Wet Year
Water In uts
Water Out IS
Change in
Storage
Excess
Water
Wetland Volume
1991
P
SI •
GI
PET
So
Go
January
7 8
069
000
062
000
260
527
000
527
February
1 97
007
000
090
0 00
260
-146
000
381
March
5 06
036
000
165
000
260
1 17
0 00
4.97
April
445
0 86
000
307
000
260
-037
000
461
May
313
006
000
531
000
260
473
000
000
June
9 39
2 23
000
5 19
000
2.60
3.83
000
3.83
July
14.35
3.30
0.00
6.29
0.00
260
8.76
5.51
7.08
August
975
088
000
533
000
260
2 7 1
271
708
September
6.65
1.09
0.00
3.83
0.00
2.60
1.32
1.32
7.08
October
28
006
000
208
000
260
-181
000
5.27
November
2.04
0.07
0.00
0.95
0.00
2.60
-144
0.00
3.83
December
304
009
000
063
000
260
-010
000
3 73
Annual Totals
70.43
9.76
0.00
35.84
0.00
31.20
Note An increase incapacity of 0 2 feet t2 4 rnchesl of surface .eater is assumed based on the creation of microtopography during ..etland restoration
M

Mitigation Plan
41
7
w 6
as
L
u
_
E 5
7
0
y
d
4
v
61 3
2
N
Hydrologic Budget
Proposed Conditions - Rains Soil Series
Growing Season -
March 18 - Nov. 11
Maximum Capacity
(2.4 in. Above Ground Surface)
1
ns
1 A
L
!
12" Below
1 r' Ground Surface
4 1 '
l i
S !
1 i i
1 1
Jan. Feb. March April May June July August Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.
97
Twin Bays Restoration Site
7.8 in - Maximum
Capacity at 2.4 inches
above soil surface
Ground Surface
1.8 in. - J u d sdicti onal
Boundary (12° below
ground)
0 r Year (1990)
Average Year (197 Y
- -r - Wet Year (199 1)

Mitigation Plan
0
7
N
N
d
c
5
d
E
7
�° 4
d
� 3
as
F
C
Hydrologic Budget
Proposed Conditions - Torhunta Soil Series
Growing Season
March 18 -Nov. 11
is
Maximum Capacity
(2.4 in. Above Ground Surface)
♦ ♦ ♦ A
® 12" Below
Ground Surface
t�
Jan. Feo f1arch April May June July August Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec
W
Twin Bays Restoration Site
I
7.08 in - Mammum
Capacity at 2.4 inches
above soil surface
Ground Surface
1.581n - Jurisdictional
Boundary 02'. below
ground)
Dry ear (1990)
A Average Year (1973)
i— - Wet Year 0991)

Soil Delineation and Characterization
..

100

A detailed soils investigation at the TBWRS was conducted by a licensed soil scientist (# 187) to
determine the extent and distribution of the hydric soils and to classify the predominate soils to the soil
series level The investigation consisted of delineating the hydric soil boundaries with pink flagging and
wooden survey stakes in accordance with the US Army Corps of Engineers, Wetland Delineation Manual
(1987) and the USDA Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States A Guide for Identifying and
Delineating Hydric Soils, Version 7 0 (2010) Areas that were identified as possible hydric soil mapping
units were surveyed at a higher intensity until the edge of the mapping unit was identified The
boundary of the hydric and non- hydric soil mapping units were then followed by continual sampling and
observations as the boundary line was identified and delineated In those areas where the boundary was
found to be a broad gradient rather than a distinct break, microtopography, landscape position, soil
textural changes, redoximorphic features, and depleted matrices were additionally considered to
identify the extent of the hydric soils
In developing a detailed soils map, several soil borings were advanced on the site in the general hydric
soil areas identified by landscape position, vegetation and slope Once the hydric soil borings were
' identified, the soil scientist marked the points and established a visual line to the next auger boring
where again hydric soil conditions were confirmed by additional borings The soil scientist moved along
the edges of the mapping unit and marked each point along the line To confirm the hydric soil mapping
unit and taxonomic classification, soil borings were advanced to a depth of 50 inches The soil profile
descriptions identified the individual horizons in the topsoil and upper subsoil as well as the depth,
color, texture, structure, boundary, and evidence of restrictive horizons and redoximorphic features
l Delineated hydric soils boundaries were in contrast to those mapped in the Soil Survey of Duplin County,
North Carolina The delineated hydric soil boundaries are shown in the following figure, Detailed Soils
Map
Taxonomic Classification
The predominant soils identified on the site were of the Rains (Fine - loamy, siliceous, semiactive, thermic
Typic Paleaquults) soil series and the Torhunta (Coarse - loamy, siliceous, active, acid, thermic Typic
Humaquepts) soil series Inclusions of other soil series include Murville /Leon complex (Sandy, siliceous,
thermic Umbric Endoaquods), Udorthents, Goldsboro (Fine- loamy, siliceous, subactive, thermic Aquic
Paleudults) The Rains and Torhunta series are listed as hydric soils in Duplin County, North Carolina
They are defined as hydric due to saturation for a significant period during the growing season These
two soils are listed as hydric on the federal, state and local lists The Rains and Torhunta series are also
listed by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) as hydric soils
Profile Description
The Rains series is described as very deep, poorly drained, moderately permeable soils typically found
on flats and in depressions throughout the Coastal Plain They are formed in loamy sediments with
slopes ranging from 0 to 2 percent The Torhunta series is described as very poorly drained soils that
formed in upland bays and on stream terraces in the Coastal Plain Slopes range from 0 to 2 percent
101

Typical Pedon Description of the Rains mapping unit
RAINS SERIES
TAXONOMIC CLASS: Fine - loamy, siliceous, semiactive, thermic Typic Paleaquults
TYPICAL PEDON: Rains loamy sand -- forested (Colors are for moist soil, unless otherwise indicated )
A--0 to 7 inches, very dark gray (10YR 3/1) sandy loam, dark gray (10YR 4/1) dry, weak fine granular
structure, very friable, many fine and medium roots, very strongly acid, clear smooth boundary (4 to 10
inches thick)
Eg - -7 to 12 inches, light brownish gray (10YR 6/2) sandy loam, weak fine granular structure, very friable,
many fine and few medium roots, many fine pores, few fingers of A horizon in upper part, very strongly
acid, clear wavy boundary (0 to 11 inches thick)
Btgl - -12 to 20 inches, gray (10YR 6/1) sandy loam, weak coarse subangular blocky structure, friable, few
fine and medium roots, many fine pores, many clay bridging between sand grains, few medium
prominent yellowish brown (10YR 5/6) masses of oxidized iron in lower half, very strongly acid, gradual
wavy boundary
Btg2 - -20 to 40 inches, gray (10YR 6/1) sandy clay loam, weak medium subangular blocky structure,
friable, few fine and medium roots, many fine pores, few faint clay films on faces of peds, few coarse
pockets of gray sandy loam, common medium prominent yellowish brown (10YR 5/6) masses of oxidized
iron, few fine prominent red (2 5YR 4/6) masses of oxidized iron, very strongly acid, gradual wavy
boundary
Btg3 - -40 to 52 inches, gray (10YR 6/1) sandy clay loam, weak medium subangular blocky structure, firm,
few fine pores, few faint clay films on faces of peds, few fine and medium prominent red (2 5YR 4/6) and
yellowish brown (10YR 5/6) masses of oxidized iron, very strongly acid, gradual wavy boundary
Btg4 - -52 to 62 inches, gray (10YR 6/1) sandy clay loam, weak medium subangular blocky structure,
friable, few faint clay films on faces of peds, few medium prominent brownish yellow (10YR 6/6) masses
of oxidized iron, very strongly acid, gradual wavy boundary (Combined thickness of the Btg horizon is
more than 40 inches )
BCg - -62 to 79 inches, gray (10YR 6/1) sandy clay loam, weak coarse subangular blocky structure, friable,
few fine distinct brownish yellow (10YR 6/6) masses of oxidized iron, very strongly acid, gradual wavy
boundary (0 to 20 inches thick)
2Cg - -79 to 85 inches, light gray (10YR 7/1) sand, single grain, loose, very strongly acid
TYPE LOCATION: Florence County, South Carolina, about 2 0 miles southeast of Timmonsville, 11 miles
south of intersection of State Highway 45 and U S Highway 76, 150 feet west of State Highway 45
102

RANGE IN CHARACTERISTICS: Solum thickness ranges from about 60 to more than 80 inches Depth to
bedrock is more than 5 feet Content of rock fragments range from 0 to 5 percent by volume The soil is
extremely acidic to strongly acidic throughout, unless the surface has been limed
The A horizon or Ap horizon (where present) has a hue of 10YR or 2 5Y, value of 2 to 5, chroma of 1 to 2,
or is neutral with value of 2 to 5 The texture is sand, loamy coarse sand, loamy sand, loamy fine sand,
coarse sandy loam, sandy loam, fine sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, or loam
The Eg horizon has a hue of 10YR to 5Y, value of 4 to 7, chroma of 0 to 2, or is neutral with value of 4 to
7 The texture is sand, loamy coarse sand, loamy sand, loamy fine sand, coarse sandy loam, sandy loam,
fine sandy loam, very fine sandy loam, or loam Redoximorphic features (where present) have iron
depletions in shades of brown, yellow, olive, or gray and masses of oxidized iron or iron- manganese
masses in shades of red, yellow, or brown
The Btg horizon has a hue of 10YR to 5Y, value of 4 to 7, chroma of 1 to 2, or is neutral with value of 4 to
7 The texture is typically, sandy clay loam or clay loam and includes sandy loam, fine sandy loam, or
loam in the upper part and sandy clay in the lower part Redoximorphic features have iron depletions in
shades of brown, yellow, olive, or gray and masses of oxidized iron or iron- manganese masses in shades
of red, yellow, or brown
The BCg horizon or BCtg horizon (where present) has a hue of 10YR to 5Y, value of 4 to 7, chroma of 1 to
2, or is neutral with value of 4 to 7 The texture is sandy loam, fine sandy loam, sandy clay loam, or
sandy clay Redoximorphic features have iron depletions in shades of brown, yellow, olive, or gray and
masses of oxidized iron or iron- manganese masses in shades of red, yellow, or brown
The Cg horizon (where present) has a hue of 10YR to 5Y, value of 4 to 7, chroma of 1 or 2, or is neutral
with value of 4 to 7 The texture is coarse sandy loam, sandy loam, fine sandy loam, loam, sandy clay
loam, or clay loam, and may be stratified with finer or coarser - textured materials Redoximorphic
features have iron depletions in shades of brown, yellow, olive, or gray and masses of oxidized iron or
iron- manganese masses in shades of red, yellow, or brown
The 2Cg horizon has a hue of 10YR to 5Y, value of 4 to 7, chroma of 1 or 2, or is neutral with value of 4 to
\ J
7 The texture is coarse sand, sand, fine sand, loamy coarse sand, or loamy sand and may be stratified
with finer- textured material
Typical Pedon Description of the Torhunta mapping unit
TORHUNTA SERIES
TAXONOMIC CLASS: Coarse - loamy, siliceous, active, acid, thermic Typic Humaquepts
TYPICAL PEDON: Torhunta fine sandy loam -- cultivated (Colors are for moist soil unless otherwise
stated )
Ap - -O to 9 inches, black (10YR 2/1) fine sandy loam, weak medium granular structure, friable, many fine
roots, strongly acid, abrupt wavy boundary (0 to 12 inches thick )
103

A - -9 to 15 inches, very dark gray (10YR 3/1) loamy sand, weak medium granular structure, very friable,
many fine roots, thin coats of organic matter on grains, very strongly acid, gradual wavy boundary (4 to
15 inches thick )
Bg - -15 to 40 inches, dark grayish brown (10YR 4/2) fine sandy loam, weak fine subangular blocky
structure, friable, slightly sticky and slightly plastic, many fine roots in upper part, thin silt coatings on
sand grains, few loamy sand and sand pockets, extremely acid, gradual wavy boundary (10 to 25 inches
thick )
Cg1 - -40 to 48 inches, dark grayish brown (10YR 4/2) loamy sand, common medium faint gray (10YR 5/1)
and brown (10YR 5/3) mottles, single grained, very friable, few sand pockets, extremely acid, diffuse
wavy boundary (0 to 10 inches thick )
Cg2 - -48 to 80 inches, grayish brown (10YR 5/2) sand, single grained, loose, uncoated sand grains, very
strongly acid
TYPE LOCATION: Wayne County, North Carolina, 15 miles south of New Hope, 0 4 mile northeast of
intersection of Roads 1712 and 1713, 50 feet south of Road 1713 and 50 feet northeast of power line
poles
RANGE IN CHARACTERISTICS: Torhunta soil has loamy textured horizons that range from 20 to 50 inches
thick The soil reaction ranges from extremely acid through strongly acid, unless the surface has been
limed
The Ap or A horizon has hue of 10YR, 2 5Y, or it is neutral, value of 2 or 4, and chroma of 0 to 2 It is
sandy loam, fine sandy loam, loam, loamy sand or their mucky analogues
The Bg horizon has hue of 10YR, 2 5Y, or it is neutral, value of 4 to 6, and chroma of 0 to 2 Mottles are
in shades of brown or yellow It is sandy loam or fine sandy loam
The BCg horizon, where present, has hue of 10YR, 2 5Y, or it is neutral, value of 4 to 7, and chroma of
0 to 2 Mottles are in shades of yellow or brown It is sandy loam, fine sandy loam, loamy sand, or sand
The Cg horizon has colors of the BCg horizon and in addition, has hue of 5GY or 5G, value of 4 to 6,
and chroma of 1 It is loamy sand, loamy fine sand, sand, or sandy loam
104

MMNMENWMFIIIII�
MMEMMMF41111�
mmmwld �
KC I
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH CANOWNA, PA
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Client: KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A. Date: September 21, 2011
Project: Twin Bays Wetland Restoration Site Project #: 20110659P -CF 07
County: Duplin State: NC
Location: Cornwallis Road Wallace, NC Site /Lot: Boring # I
Soil Series: Rains
Soil Classification: Fine - loamy, siliceous, semiactive, thermic Typic Paleaquults
AWT: 60" SHWT: 0 -12" Slope: 0 -1% Aspect:
Elevation: Drainage: Poorly Drained Permeability: Moderate
Vegetation: Soybeans
Borings terminated at 60 Inches
HORIZON
DEPTH (IN)
MATRIX
MOTTLES
TEXTURE
STRUCTURE
CONSISTENCE
BOUNDARY
NOTES
Ap
04
10YR 3/1
fsl
I f r
mfr
cs
A
4-6
IOYR 3/1
I OYR 4/3171 If
sl
1 fsbk
mfr
cs
Plow pan
Btg 1
6 -10
10YR 4/2
I OYR 4/4f l d
scl
I fsbk
mfr
gw
Bt g2
10 -15
I OYR 4/1
I OYR 4 /6[2d
scl
2msbk
mfr
gw
B t3
15 -30
IOYR 4/1
IOYR 4/6c2d
cl
2msbk
mfr
gw
Bt g4
3040
I OYR 4/1
I OYR 4/6c2d
scl -sc
I msbk
mfr
gw
sand lenses
Bt 5
4048
10YR 5/1
10YR 5/2c2f
scl
I msbk
mfr
gw
I OYR 5/1 sand lenses
IOYR 5 /6fld
BCg
48 -60
IOYR 5/1
IOYR 5 /4cId
scl
lcsbk- massive
mfr
sand lenses
COMMENTS:
The Rains series is a poorly drained soil of the upper Coastal Plain that occur on Flats, depressions and Carolina bays.
This Rains soil almost meets the percent clay content criteria for the Coxsville series a clayey soil.
The Coxville series is a poorly drained soil of the Coastal Plain that occur on Flats, carolina bays and depressions
This Rains series is a drained hydric soil by ditching.
This Rains soil has slow runoffand a seasonally high water table at or near the surface during wet seasons, typically between 0 -12 inches.
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: 9121/2011

K C I
ASSOCIATES O!' SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
NORIIi CARCUNA, PA
Client: KCl Associates of North Carolina, P.A. Date: September 21, 2011
Project: Twin Bays Wetland Restoration Site Project #: 20110659P -CF 07
County: Duplin State: NC _
Location: Cornwallis Road Wallace, NC Site /Lot: Boring # 2
Soil Series: Pantego
Soil Classification: Fine - loamy, siliceous, semiactive, thermic Umbric Paleaquults
AWT: >62" SFIWT: 0 -12" Slope: 0 -1% Aspect:
Elevation: Drainage: Very Poorly Drained Permeability: Moderate slow
Vegetation: Soybeans
Borings terminated at 62 Inches
HORIZON
DEPTH (IN)
MATRIX
MOTTLES
TEXTURE
STRUCTURE
CONSISTENCE
BOUNDARY
NOTES
Ap
0 -7
I OYR 3/1
Is
I f r
mfr
cs
A
7 -12
I OYR 3 /1
IOYR4 /3nf
Is
Im 1
mfr
cs
Btg 1
12 -19
IOYR 4/2
10YR 4/411d
sl
Imsbk
mfr
gw
_
Bt 2
19 -23
I OYR 5/2
I OYR 4/4171 d
sl
I msbk
mfr
w
Bt g3
23 -30
I OYR 5/2
7.5YR 5/8c2d
scl
2msbk
mfr
=w
10YR 5/1
Bt g4
3042
IOYR 5/2
IOYR 5 /Ic2d
scl -sc
2msbk
mfr
w
75YR 5 /8c2d
Bt g5
4248
10YR 5/2
IOYR 5 /1c2d
scl
Icsbk
mfr
gw
IOYR 5/4171 d
BC g1
48 -54
I OYR 5/2
SO
Icsbk
infY
gw
sand lenses IOYR 7/2
Cg
54-62
10YR6/1
IOYRS /6c2d
sc
massive
mli
COMMENTS:
This Pantego soil is an inclusion in the Rains series
The Pantego series is a very deep, very poorly drained soil formed in thick loamy deposits in nearly level and slightly depressional areas
of the Southern Coastal Plain and Atlantic Coast Flatwoods.
This Pantego series is a drained hydric soil by ditching.
This Pantego soil is ponded to very slow runoff and the seasonally high water table is at or near the surface during wet seasons, typically between 0 -12 inches.
DESCRIBED BY.
DATE: 9/21/2011

mmmmmmm'4111�
KCI
ASSOCIATES OF
NOKIH CAROLLN& PA
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Client:
KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A.
Project:
Twin Bays Wetland Restoration Site
County:
Duplin
Location:
Comwallis Road Wallace, NC
Date: September 26, 2011
Project #: 20110659P-CF 07
State: NC
Site /Lot: Boring # 3
Soil Series: Torhunta
Soil Classification: Coarse - loamy, siliceous, active, acid, thermic Typic Humaguepts
AWT: 50" SIiWT: 0 -12' Slope: 0 -1% Aspect:
Elevation: Drainage: Very Poorly Drained Permeability: Moderately rapid
Vegetation: Soybeans
Borings terminated at 50 Inches
HORIZON
DEPTH (IN)
MATRIX
MOTTLES
TEXTURE
STRUCTURE
CONSISTENCE
BOUNDARY
NOTES
Ap
0 -8
10YR 3/1
Ifs
I f r
mfr
aw
B I
8 -12
IOYR 5/2
s
sg
ml
gw
B 2
12 -16
I OYR 6/1
I OYR 5 /4fl d
s
sg
ml
gw
B 3
16 -27
I OYR 6/2
7.5YR 6/2c2d
sl
I fsbk
mfr
gw
B 4
27 -38
I OYR 6/2
l OYR 5/2c2d
sl
I fsbk
mfr
gw
slightly cemented
I OYR 5/6m3d
B 5
38 -44
10YR 511
10YR 5/4c2d
Is
Icsbk
mfr
gw
Cg
44 -50
10YR 511
I OYR 5/2c2d
s
massive
ml -mti
sand lenses with clay balls
5/ I OYc2
COMMENTS:
The Torhunta series consist of very poorly drained soils in upland bays and on stream terraces in Coastal Plain
The Torhunta series is a drained hydric soil by ditching.
The Torhunta soil has slow runoff and the seasonally high water table is at or near the surface during wet seasons, typically between 0 -12 inches.
DESCRIBED BY
DATE: 9/26/2011

OMMENEWNW`
WMMMMWIIIW�
wmmmldo�
mwmmmmmgb�
nmmmmmma�
K C I
ASSOCIATES OF SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
NORTH CAROIM PA
Client: KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A. Date: September 26, 2011
Project: Twin Bays Wetland Restoration Site Project #: 20110659P -CF 07
County: Duplin State: NC
Location: Cornwallis Road Wallace, NC Site /Lot: Boring # 4
Soil Series: Torhunta Variant
Soil Classification: Coarse - loamy, siliceous, active, acid, thermic Typic Humaquepts
AWT: 22" SI•IWT: 0 -12" Slope: 0 -2% Aspect:
Elevation: Drainage: Very Poorly Drained Permeability: Moderately rapid
Vegetation: Soybeans
Borings terminated at 45 Inches
HORIZON
DEPTH (IN)
MATRIX
MOTTLES
TEXTURI:
STRUCTURE
CONSISTENCE
BOUNDARY
NOTES
Ap
0 -10
IOYR3 /1
fs
Imgr
mfr
gs
B 1
10 -22
1 OYR 6/1
s
sg
ml
gw
slightly cemented
Bg2
22 -24
IOYR 4/1
Is
sg
ml
gw
slightly cemented
C 1
24 -32
I OYR 6/I
Is
massive
Inl
9w
strongly cemented
C 2
32-40
IOYR6 /1
5 /1OYc2Id
s -Is
massive
ml
PW
C 3
4045
IOYR 4/1
5 /I0Yc2
scl
massive
mfi
sand lenses with clay balls
COMMENTS:
Torhunta does not have scl texture in the C horizon. Additionally, Torhunta does not typically have a fragipan. This is an inclusion in Torhunta mapping unit.
The Torhunta series consist of very poorly drained soils in upland bays and on stream terraces in Coastal Plain.
The Torhunta series is a drained hydric soil by ditching.
The "Torhunta soil has slow runoffand the seasonally high water table is at or near the surface during wet seasons, typically between 0 -12 inches.
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: 9/26/2011

Ft�f
1
'a _ � grit alter
-
.r
Delineated Soils Proposed Easement Area (11 7 a
(11.3 ac hydric 10.4 ac non - hydric) N Spring
Goldsboro (non - hydnc) ,, Sand Spot
hturvilleiLeon (hydric) A Soil Borings
Rains (hydnc)
Existing Ditches
,! Torhunta (hydric)
Pond
UdorthentsSpnngs (formerry hydric)
PROJECT SITE DETAILED SOILS MAP mage Source h'c N
,so ao TWIN BAYS RESTORATION SITE Satewde:magery.20fO
DUPLIN COUNTY, NC
109

110

Potential Wetland Gauge Locations
111
f

112

1�3R
t
T 4
r
O
Non - Riparian Wetland Restoration (11 1 ac)"
Upland Inclusion (0.4 ac)
i
Proposed Easement Area (11.7 ac)
XXX Ditches to be filled
O Wetland Gauge
POTENTIAL WETLAND GAUGE LOCATIONS
120 60 120 F
reec TWIN BAYS RESTORATION SITE
DUPLIN COUNTY, NC
113

14.6 Appendix D. Project Plan Sheets
115

e
N
N
O
N
4t
0
V
O
0
H
U
O
U
�a
OH
COp�NZN GNVa � 117 40
y
PROJECT
LOCATION HIGH SCHOOL RD
Cy! C Pg�NRO TEACHEY
CkFN `OG
NFC�yO CO � ,
�o
P� 41
NPN�,OOP ROCK FISH CREEK WALLACE
VICINITY MAP
NOT TO SCALE
DIRECTIONS FROM RALEIGH
PROCEED EAST ON 1 -40 FOR APPROXIMATELY 70 MILES TAKE EXIT 369,
US -117 S TAKE A LEFT ONTO US -117 S TRAVEL APPROXIMATELY 15 MILES
AND THEN TAKE A RIGHT ONTO E MAIN ST IN WALLACE, NC TRAVEL 2 MILES
AND TURN RIGHT ONTO CORNWALLIS RD THE SITE WILL BE ON THE RIGHT
APPROXIMATELY 0 4 MILES AHEAD
INDEX OF SHEETS
I
TITLE SHEET
2
GENERAL NOTES & PROJECT LEGEND
J
DETAILS
4
GRADING PLAN
5
PLANTING PLAN
6
BOUNDARY MARKING PLAN
7 - 10
EROSION CONTROL PLAN
GRAPHIC SCALES
50 -25 0 50 100
GRADING, PLANTING PLANS,
AND BOUNDARY MARKING
-80 -40 0 80 120
EROSION CONTROL OVERVIEW
PROJECT DATA
TWIN BAYS
RESTORATION SITE
DUPLIN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
CAPE FEAR RIVER BASIN
ROCK FISH CREEK WATERSHED
03030007090040
CHFFT d r
, R Q
NONRIPARIAN WETLAND RESTORATION = 11 1 ACRES
PROJECT TOTAL AREA OF DISTURBANCE = 12 0 ACRES
Prepared In the Office of PROJECT ENGINEER
Prepared for
KCI Associates Pt ILeM
of North Carolina,P.A.
SUITE 220 LANDMARK CENTER II 4601 SIX FORKS RD RALEIGH NC 27609 p SEAL
ENGINEERS -PLANNERS •ECOLOGISTS :7
Q
GARY M MRYNCZA P E �' � Ala j�CeI11eI�t
PROJECT ENGINEER
STATE
FtP PPO1I.CT NlISI6PP
SIIPI?T
NTAL
,IILPP�
.C.
95363
95363
g
j®
A
SUBMITTED WIT1 MRIGATION PLAN
NOV 2012
B
SUBMITTED FOR EROSION CONTROL PERMIT
MAR 2012
REVISIONS
PROGRAM
JEFFJUREK
JOE PFEIFFER CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR
WETLAND DESIGN
P.E
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT PROGRAll
SIGNATGRE

GENERAL NOTES
SEA►
p t 7279)
BEARING AND DISTANCES'
ALL BEARINGS ARE NAD 1983 GRID BEARINGS.
ALL DISTANCES AND COORDINATES SHOWN ARE HORIZONTAL (GROUND) VALUES
ALL INFORMATION IS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING KCI CONTROL POINTS.
NORTHING EASTING ELEVATION
KCI #1 364644 92 2291890 51 5967
KCI #2 365002 05 2291745 40 6047
KCI #4 36S18114 2292298 01 6406
GRADING:
- PROPOSED GRADE LINES IN THE PLANS ARE A GENERAL GUIDE FOR GRADING EXACT TIE OUTS FROM THE DITCH TO THE
RESTORED WETLAND SHALL BE GRADED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER
UTILITY /SUBSURFACE PLANS.
-NO SUBSURFACE PLANS ARE AVAILABLE ON THIS PROJECT EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES HAVE NOT BEEN VERIFIED.
THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING A UTILITY LOCATOR AND ESTABLISHING THE EXACT LOCATION OF ANY
AND ALL EXISTING UTILITIES IN THE PROJECT REACH
0
z
5
O
V
F
x
w
G
m
N
0
0
Z W
o s
U
0
.—
rr(+Ja
�l-^4
PROJECT LEGEND
*-4v z w N
w �Q
TOPOGRAPHY " V �w 3 N p �N O K �Z _ WETLAND MITIGATION z 2 0
NF
ga 0O
\ %\ O w
Proposed Filled Ditches ;� Minor Contour Line — — — — z s�
Z a
w
w
Proposed Ditch Plug ® Major Contour Line _ _M
W1E MARCH 2013
Temporary Rock Silt Screen 5 NTS
GENERAL
NOTES &
Temporary Bridge Mat Crossing ® PROJECT
LEGEND
SHEET 2 OF
Proposed Contour ��
Z
Proposed Stabilized Drainage Outfall
0
�
a
U
W =
H F
SEDIMENTATION & EROSION
MISCELLANEOUS
� z
QZ
o
m H Z
Stabilized Construction Entrance
Existing Overhead Wire and Poles OHw
D
o Z
��
a
Silt Fence SF
Existing Woods Line1
w
U
Limits of Disturbance —LOD-
J
W1E MARCH 2013
Temporary Rock Silt Screen 5 NTS
GENERAL
NOTES &
Temporary Bridge Mat Crossing ® PROJECT
LEGEND
SHEET 2 OF

A
DITCH
PLUG
EXISTING DITCH
�B
- 1A
J
3'
EXISTING GRADE ELEVATION
41 4 1 EXISTING DITCH BOTTOM
0
SECTION A -A
DITCH PLUG DETAIL
NIRMILUTT
5 p 32791
B
DITCH PLUG b
EXISTING GRADE ELEVATION
VAR EXISTING VAR
DITCH WIDTH
SECTION B -B
SCALE NTS
NOTE
SEE PLAN SHEETS FOR LOCATIONS OF DITCH PLUGS
USE SELECT MATERIAL, CLASS I OR SUITABLE
SALVAGED MATERIAL, IF AVAILABLE FOR DITCH PLUGS
FINISHED WETLAND GRADE
� '`i0--
j, SELE CLASS ERIAL,, �O o' MIN —� —,I WETLAND OUTFALL TO RECEIVING WATER
1�j�o�cOO �S� _ TIE BOTTOM OF STRUCTURE INTO
�J�00 X00 O 00O�Q EXISTING BANKS / OUTFALL AT LEAST
/ 0 O�� g8 g 2 0�if i_--- ��05'BELOWGRADE
0
-5 MIN'
CLASSISTONE
PROFILE VIEW
STABILIZED DRAINAGE OUTFALL
SCALE NTS
NOTE
IF AVAILABLE SUITABLE SALVAGED MATERIAL
MAY BE SUBSTITUTED FOR SELECT MATERIAL, CLASS I
z
0
a
0
0
a
z
z
0
52
w
o �
0
ter,•
t �
y �o
1� z N n
11z z WN
V N NJ
s m <<
w a LI
z
� z wf
p� KO
mill z N<
o a K
z
W
z
J
O
O
W
H w
0
} Z z
Q O
M H z
z� 0
O z
� Z
� Ja
W
� D
W
U
g
J
NTS
DETAILS

\\ n\
o
It
32733
o
I� II MBE ��.
S d II \ \ !
Cot,
ON
EASEMEN
m
1/111 v� ?
l(i�l� / / / /lr E'p� \lI /
l //l4 / l
z
g
in
i \
IIIVJI 1 PARTIALLY FILL DEPRESSION
I it /lull /l!¢ I /// / WITH ADJACENT SPOIL CREATING
1Q POND
z
N
414 / /h /V �l AN EPHEMERAL
lll� /
a
/ \ 1 1 BREACH POND BERMS IN SELECT
�%
LOCATIONS TO ENCOURAGE FLOW
LOCATE BERM BREAKS
C
Z
\
DISPERSAL
I /1111 III / I TO MINIMIZE IMPACTS TO MATURE
1 /ll/ TREES
9 A
IIIII, (
IIII� lb
1 1
4gilh /rolls li
t
vv �q
ki11141d'l/1111 /l
1 ,
/IIIIIl4 11i`l
If
a
0
11)
( , \\ `\ '/ //
It�i / —50 —25 0
50 100
f
\
Il.�k
rr
' 6/, — -- --
_��*'` •\
' GRAPHIC
SCALE
F�3
-60,
�1{
\�\\
iq1
/r.
Vh 6>
\ \ \ \\ \
\ \ \ \ \` 59-
/L INSTALL DITCH
\ \ {/x PLUG (TYP )
_ _
--
v Z W N
z
6 - -- -
`
<°
s a
o
Z Y,
\ y\
K�
Z�
\
s0.
w v
z
��� \ \�\
r.
^•"v<.�„r''
MNA
Lu
y. 5'�-
..:
Of
>.
z
}+1
O
kz
U) d
KC1\ \
/ IA
t�Ld
w
CONSERVgTION
_
_EASEMENT
MiE. MARCH 2013
s u GRAPHIC
'
NOTE SURFACE ROUGHENING WILL
GRADING
OCCUR THROUGHOUT THE EASEMENT
r
PLAN
TO ALLEVIATE SOIL COMPACTION AND
INSTALL STABILIZED
DRAINAGE OUTFALL
TO ENHANCE SURFACE WATER STORAGE
(TMP'
SHEET 4 OF 10

IS
k br
o 6
II It c(\ , OPtH'C
SEAL >
32733 °z
6j, 4 u/\ CONSER •'•�21IAE�
VA77ON
IY �i v \\� �✓ EASEMENT
z S2
I l Il i
�p i/ �\ I Il�lJrlhgn% l� /r f g �
o H
a
WETLAND PLANTING PLAN 2 tz
i
llllllll ( Uur "t' / \ Ij i, / \
.i NON - RIPARIAN WETLAND RESTORATION c
HARDWOOD FLATS VEGETATIVE COMMUNITY w
11 7A r
18" - 24 BARE ROOT MATERIAL �
\_;f /; i r1j1Ul l 1\ \IIl 111 968 STEMS /ACRE (9 X 5' SPACING) RANDOM SPECIES PLACEMENT y
COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME WETLAND INDICATOR % OF TOTAL # OF PLANTS Q
RED MAPLE ACER FACW 5 00
SWEETBAY MAGNOLIA MAGNOLIA VIR VIRGINIANA FACW 4 500
h� /
it/ 4111 / SWAMP RED BAY PERSEA PALUSTRIS FACW 4 500
TULIP POPLAR LIRIODENDRON TULIPIFERA FACW 13 1 500
AMERICAN ELM ULMUS AMERICANA FACW 13 1,500
\, ,, / 11111\ CHERRYBARK OAK QUERCUS PAGODA FAC 18 2000
_ \_ _ lI' \ / SWAMP CHESTNUT OAK QUERCUS MICHAUXII FACW 26 3,000 J
\, WATER OAK QUERCUS NIGRA FAC 13 1,500
\ I /II 11 RED CHOKEBERRY ARONIA ARBUTIFOLIA FACW 2 250
HIGHBUSH BLUEBERRY VACCINIUM CORYMBOSUM FACW 2 250 V'
X/ �\ /'\ /� / !lily\
\rllll 100 11600
\'601 / /\ /� / ll I NOTE THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE STEMS MAYBE CHANGED AT THE ENGINEERS
/ �j DISCRETION HOWEVER ONE SPECIES MAY OCCUPY NO MORE THAN 25% OF THE
\\ \\ \ \ I TOTAL STEMS AND AT LEAST FIVE SPECIES MUST BE USED
Ix
\ /\
V33V3333
\/_ /� d� V�p
NO
\ V \ / \ \\ / \\/ \ \ t 1 / m
J \V Al v , v I .I, A �`..I� z
\�ONIN( \ \A� V / /��i 3 000
vvvv��vt�vv / `� \/ � / w�\ will
\\ '56L, \ e
q / 4a
Vv
VA %
I\% Xx \,/ �`� I \_ rl till � �
�OQv "v - Sri A , 5� ` / \ �� /�� "�
/ \ / \ \ \ \ III 11 �` } Z z
\ \ \? \ \� ��� ��/ \���� ' / -\ \\\d1{� -50 -25 0 50 100 m 0
\./ �/ / 1 'tl� / / GRAPHIC SCALE ? of p
IL
L
_ t
Ow-
CONSERVATION
r DATE MARCH 2013
SCALE GRAPHIC
PLANTING
PLAN
SHEET 5 OF 10

®A \\ Z
\\A\
1AVAV A
\ \A
d,
�, ru
6� n, ♦ W \ ,
,,p C) / g
°4/
A
� I frll�llrl 1, � r
\ I ,I,rrlq,rrF\ ,,!�, , -50 -25 0 50 100
hilrh 6�l , r
ll1,
i lhlll 1 i!r' i GRAPHIC SCALE
I
/' !r
1) fill
j1A CA
sm
'ot 3273
eu h l i 4l 1�
EASEMENT BOUNDARY MARKING
C)
THE EASEMENT BOUNDARY WILL BE MARKED
WITH METAL POSTS AND CONSERVATION EASEMENT
i' f', i 1n SIGNS AT THE CORNERS AND AT A MINIMUM OF 200'
INTERVALS ALONG THE BOUNDARY
E`1
' r, 1p
Z1,11
O5 18' REBAR 30 IN LENGTH WITH 3 -114 ALUMINUM CAPS
ON ALL EASEMENT CORNERS CAPS SHALL MEET EEP
SPECIFICATIONS 13ERNSTEN RBD5325 IMPRINTED WITH
NC STATE LOGO #89087 OR EQUIVALENTS AFTER
INSTALLATION CAPS SHALL BE STAMPED WITH THE
CORRESPONDING NUMBER
•5 -FOOT TALL DURABLE WITNESS POST AT EACH CORNER
IN THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT POSTS SHALL BE MADE
OF MATERIAL THAT WILL LAST A MINIMUM OF 20 YEARS
THE PROVIDER SHALL ATTACH A CONSERVATION EASEMENT
SIGN TO EACH WITNESS POST AND PLACE ADDITIONAL SIGNS
AT NO MORE THAN 200 -FOOT INTERVALS ON BOUNDARY LINES
\ _
\ JIM
\ 11 p 132'1
IL
--60, MIN
if if
� M \
4 }K \i \P
\Q 1 \ \ \\ \ I! fl
V AVA E II ` It
c)
nvvv�w ' - - - - -- �4r1� w
vvv
O% -�r�l - s� 11 ` - - - - -v
r� \\ ` \c) _ - J I ul
- - -_ -_� I+I 1
�0��
\ \ u 1
��
\\ �t \ \ P11ry1
qd C)
\\ 1 \ P I
\ Ijll 11 r
11111
tilli
GE =- _ ; 1`x1,1 ------
5
a
0
a
c�
F
x
0
K
m
w
o
it
0
:4
w Q
n NJ
�3 V 0K
1 U
Z N�
a ac
oz
111111Z w
0 a
w
z
J
U
W
H
U O
>- z z
QO
m P: z
Z � o
O U
� z
J
W o
W
U
DATE. MARCH 2013 1
BOUNDARY
MARKING
PLAN

NOTES
1 IT IS THE INTENT OF THESE PLANS THAT AS SOON AS AN AREA OF GRADING
IS COMPLETE IT SHALL BE STABILIZED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE EROSION
CONTROL PRACTICES DESCRIBED IN THESE PLANS DUE TO THE ANTICIPATED
DURATION AND SEQUENCE OF THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES, THE
CONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO MINIMIZE, AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, THE AMOUNT
OF THE AREA THAT IS DISTURBED AT ONE TIME
2 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL EXERCISE EVERY REASONABLE PRECAUTION
THROUGHOUT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT TO PREVENT EROSION
AND SEDIMENTATION EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE INSTALLED AND
MAINTAINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROJECT PLANS, NORTH CAROLINA
SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL GUIDELINES AND AS DIRECTED BY
THE DESIGNER
3 ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL SHALL BE STOCKPILED WITHIN THE LIMITS OF
DISTURBANCE FOR LATER USE AS EMBANKMENT MATERIAL THE CONTRACTOR
IS RESPONSIBLE FOR INSTALLING APPROPRIATE STABILIZATION MEASURES
AROUND THE STOCKPILE AREA(S) AND ANY TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT SPOIL
AND TOPSOIL PILES TO PREVENT EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION
4 IN THE EVENT OF A STORM, THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR
REMOVAL OR PROTECTION OF ANY EQUIPMENT TOOLS MATERIALS OR
OTHER ITEMS NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE WORK THAT COULD BE AFFECTED
BY STORMWATER
5 AFTER THE WETLAND GRADING CALLED FOR IN THE PLANS IS COMPLETED,
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELY INSTALL APPROPRIATE STABILIZATION
MATERIALS AS CALLED FOR IN THE PLANS TO STABILIZE THE SOIL AND PROVIDE
IMMEDIATE SEDIMENT /EROSION CONTROL
6 EACH SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICE WILL BE REMOVED AFTER ALL
WORK IN THE CORRESPONDING CONSTRUCTION PHASE HAS BEEN
COMPLETED AND THE AREAS HAVE BEEN STABILIZED
7 THE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE AND STAGING AREA IDENTIFIED ON THE
PLANS PROVIDE THE ONLY ACCESS POINTS INTO THE LIMITS OF
DISTURBANCE NO ADDITIONAL ACCESS POINTS SHALL BE USED WITHOUT
APPROVAL OF THE DESIGNER
8 SILT FENCE SHALL BE INSTALLED ON THE LOW SIDE OF ANY TEMPORARY
OR PERMANENT SPOIL AND TOPSOIL PILES THESE SPOIL PILES SHALL ALSO
BE SEEDED AND MULCHED FOR VEGETATIVE STABILIZATION ON THE SAME
DAY THEY ARE CREATED ALL SPOIL MATERIAL SHALL STAY ON THE SITE
AND SHALL NOT BE REMOVED FROM THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
9 ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES WILL BE CHECKED FOR
STABILITY AND FUNCTIONAL OPERATION FOLLOWING EVERY RUNOFF
PRODUCING RAIN EVENT AND /OR AT LEAST ONCE PER WEEK ANY NEEDED
MAINTENANCE OR REPAIRS SHALL BE MADE IMMEDIATELY TO MAINTAIN ALL
MEASURES AS DESIGNED ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT SHALL BE REMOVED FROM
CONTROL MEASURES WHEN THEY REACH APPROXIMATELY 50% OF THEIR
FUNCTIONAL CAPACITY THESE MEASURES SHALL BE REPAIRED IF DISTURBED
DURING MAINTENANCE ALL SEEDED AREAS SHALL BE FERTILIZED RESEEDED
AND MULCHED, AS NECESSARY, TO PROMOTE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF
VEGETATION COVER
10 THE CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AND EROSION CONTROL CONTACT FOR THIS SITE
IS TIM MORRIS OFFICE PHONE - 919 - 783 -9214 CELL PHONE - 919 - 793 -6886
GROUND STABILIZATION
SITE AREA
STABILIZATION
DESCRIPTION
TIME FRAME
PERIMETER DIKES,
STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
SWALES DITCHES
7 DAYS
AND SLOPES
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
HIGH QUALITY
BRIDGE MAT MAT STREAM CROSSING
WATER (HOW)
7 DAYS
ZONES
Z
0
U
SLOPES STEEPER
THAN 3 1
7 DAYS
SLOPES 3 1 OR
FLATTER
7 DAYS
ALL OTHER AREAS
0
w
WITH SLOPES FLATTER
7 DAYS
THAN 4 1
SUMMER MIX (MAY 15 - AUGUST 15)
INSPECTIONS
WEEKLY INSPECTIONS REQUIRED
SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION
THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR FOLLOWING THE SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANS AND THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS, AS DIRECTED BY THE
DESIGNER CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROCEED IN THE SPECIFIED MANNER UNLESS OTHERWISE
DIRECTED OR APPROVED BY THE DESIGNER THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS, ALONG WITH THE
INSTRUCTIONS CONTAINED IN THE PLANS CONSTITUTE THE SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION
PHASE 1 INITIAL SITE PREPARATION
A IDENTIFY PROJECT BOUNDARY, LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE SENSITIVE AREAS, STAGING AREAS
STABILIZED ENTRANCES AND ACCESS POINTS WITH THE DESIGNER
B CONSTRUCT ENTRANCE AND STAGING AREAS AND THEIR ASSOCIATED SEDIMENT AND EROSION
CONTROL DEVICES IN A MANNER TO SUPPORT EXECUTION OF THE WETLAND RESTORATION IN
PHASES AS INDICATED IN THE PLANS AND AS DIRECTED BY THE DESIGNER
PHASE 2 WETLAND RESTORATION GRADING
A FILLING EXISTING DITCHES /DEPRESSIONS
i CLEAR VEGETATION AS NEEDED TO INSTALL SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL MEASURES
INSTALL SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AS DEPICTED ON THE PLANS
n INSTALL PROPOSED OUTLET STABILIZATION STRUCTURES
in FILL DITCHES /DEPRESSIONS AS INDICATED IN THE PLANS USING ADJACENT SPOIL MATERIAL,
MAKING SURE TO DEWATER THE EXISTING DITCHES AS INDICATED ON THE PLANS
iv INSTALL ROCK SILT SCREENS AT OUTLET STABILIZATION STRUCTURES
v SEED AND MULCH COMPLETED WORK AREAS THIS SHALL BE DONE WITHIN 72 HOURS OF
REACHING FINAL GRADE WHEN FILLING DITCHES /PONDS /DEPRESSIONS AND MAY OCCUR PRIOR
TO PHASE 2 A in
B SURFACE ROUGHENING
i BEGINNING ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE WETLAND RESTORATION AREA AND PROGRESSING
TOWARDS THE SOUTHERN SIDE OF THE SITE ROUGHEN THE SOIL TO AN APPROXIMATE DEPTH OF
8" TO ALLEVIATE COMPACTION AND MIMIC NATURAL WETLAND MICROTOPOGRAPHY THIS WILL
INCREASE THE STORAGE OF SURFACE WATER IN THE WETLAND AND PROMOTE VEGETATION
ESTABLISHMENT
n SEED AND MULCH COMPLETED WORK AREAS THIS SHALL BE DONE WITHIN 72 HOURS OF
SURFACE ROUGHENING
PHASE 3 TREE PLANTING
A PLANTS SHOULD BE PLANTED DURING THE DORMANT SEASON (NOVEMBER 17 - MARCH 17)
B PREPARE AND PLANT TREES IN ACCORDANCE WITH PLAN SHEETS 7 -10 AND AS DIRECTED BY THE
DESIGNER
PHASE 4 COMPLETION OF PROJECT SITE
A PHASE 4 CAN BE INITIATED AFTER THE WETLAND GRADING WORK IS COMPLETED, AFTER THE SITE IS
STABLIZED WITH REQUIRED VEGETATIVE COVER, AND PRIOR TO PHASE 3
B REMOVE ALL REMAINING WASTE MATERIALS, AND THE EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AND RESTORE THE
REMAINING STAGING AND STOCKPILING AREAS AND CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES TO THEIR PRIOR
CONDITION SEED AND MULCH ALL DISTURBED AREAS UTILIZING THE SEED /MULCH MIXES SPECIFIED IN
THE PLANS
RAIN GAUGE MUST BE PRESENT AT SITE
INSPECTIONS REQUIRED AFTER 0 5" RAIN EVENTS
INSPECTIONS ARE ONLY REQUIRED DURING
"NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS"
INSPECTION REPORTS MUST BE AVAILABLE
ON -SITE DURING BUSINESS HOURS UNLESS A SITE
SPECIFIC EXEMPTION IS APPROVED
RECORD MUST BE KEPT FOR 3 YEARS AND
AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST
ELECTRONICALLY - AVAILABLE RECORDS MAY BE
SUBSTITUTED UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS
SEDIMENTATION & EROSION
m
0yv w
s N
9 w
^ �2 z
l w
ilill
D
w
CONTROL PLAN LEGEND
DITCHES TO BE FILLED
ADD 10 LBS /ACRE OF MILLET TO ABOVE
STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
SILT FENCE
5F—
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
BRIDGE MAT MAT STREAM CROSSING
ROCK SILT SCREEN (STD DRAWING 1636 01)
L k3J
0
0
sw 'F
tz
MULCHING
SEEDED AREAS ARE TO BE PROTECTED BY SPREADING STRAW MULCH
UNIFORMLY TO FORM A CONTINUOUS BLANKET (75% COVERAGE = 2
TONS /ACRE)
PERMANENT SEED MIX
SUMMER MIX (MAY 15 — AUGUST 15)
APPLICATION RATE (IN MIX)
SPECIES % OF MIX LBS/ACRE
REDTOPPANICGRASS - PANICUM RIGIDULUM 28 5 6
BEAKED PANICGRASS - PANICUM ANCEPS 20 4 0
RIVER OATS - CHASMANTHIUM LATIFOLIUM 20 40
VIRGINIA WILDRYE ELYMUS VIRGINICUS 20 40
SWITCHGRASS - PANICUM VIRGANTUM 10 20
LEATHERY RUSH - JUNCUS CORIACEUS 2 04
NOTE 100 20
m
0yv w
s N
9 w
^ �2 z
l w
ilill
D
w
t�
a
o 0
jai
Yx
z
o
_w
;,�
Z
0
ADD 10 LBS /ACRE OF MILLET TO ABOVE
a
o
in
MIXTURE FOR A TOTAL OF 30 LBS /ACRE
Q
TEMPORARY SEED MIX
Z
0
U
Z
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL UTILIZE THE FOLLOWING SEED /FERTILIZER
o
J
MIX IN SEEDING ALL DISTURBED AREAS WITHIN THE PROJECT LIMITS
0
w
O
SUMMER MIX (MAY 15 - AUGUST 15)
o
Of
GERMAN MILLET SETARIA ITALICA 20 LBS / ACRE
w°
U
BROWNTOP MILLET UROCHLOA RAMOSA 20 LBS / ACRE
K
f
(IN MIX)
W
WINTER MIX (AUGUST 15 - MAY 15)
m
m
LBS /ACRE
F
RYE GRAIN SECALE CEREALE 120 LBS / ACRE
28
56
N
0:
O
BEAKED PANICGRASS - PANICUM ANCEPS
20
40
Z
FERTILIZER 750 LBS /ACRE
RIVER OATS - CHASMANTHIUM LATIFOLIUM
20
40
Q O
VIRGINIA WILDRYE - ELYMUS VIRGINICUS
LIMESTONE 2000 LBS /ACRE
FERTILIZER SHALL BE 10 -10 -10 ANALYSIS UPON SOIL ANALYSIS
m �z
Z
A DIFFERENT RATIO OF FERTILIZER MAY BE USED
10
20
Z Q
Z)
LEATHERY RUSH - JUNCUS CORIACEUS
SEEDBED PREPARATION
04
g
THE SEEDBED SHALL BE COMPRISED OF LOOSE SOIL AND NOT
S
COMPACTED THIS MAY REQUIRE MECHANICAL LOOSENING
0
OF THE SOIL SOIL AMENDMENTS SHOULD FOLLOW THE FERTILIZER
AND LIMING DESCRIPTION IN THE ABOVE SECTIONS FOLLOWING
NOT
ADDED LBS /ACRE OF RYE TO ABOVE
100
SEEDING, MULCHING SHALL FOLLOW THE BELOW APPLICATION
i-
rT
METHODS AND AMOUNTS AREAS CONTAINING SEVERE SOIL
=�
COMPACTION WILL BE SCARIFIED TO A DEPTH OF 8 INCHES
MULCHING
SEEDED AREAS ARE TO BE PROTECTED BY SPREADING STRAW MULCH
UNIFORMLY TO FORM A CONTINUOUS BLANKET (75% COVERAGE = 2
TONS /ACRE)
PERMANENT SEED MIX
SUMMER MIX (MAY 15 — AUGUST 15)
APPLICATION RATE (IN MIX)
SPECIES % OF MIX LBS/ACRE
REDTOPPANICGRASS - PANICUM RIGIDULUM 28 5 6
BEAKED PANICGRASS - PANICUM ANCEPS 20 4 0
RIVER OATS - CHASMANTHIUM LATIFOLIUM 20 40
VIRGINIA WILDRYE ELYMUS VIRGINICUS 20 40
SWITCHGRASS - PANICUM VIRGANTUM 10 20
LEATHERY RUSH - JUNCUS CORIACEUS 2 04
NOTE 100 20
m
0yv w
s N
9 w
^ �2 z
l w
ilill
D
w
t�
a
o 0
jai
Yx
z
o
_w
;,�
ADD 10 LBS /ACRE OF MILLET TO ABOVE
MIXTURE FOR A TOTAL OF 30 LBS /ACRE
Q
Z
J
O
Of
WINTER MIX (AUGUST 15 — MAY 15)
U
APPLICATION RATE
(IN MIX)
W
SPECIES
% MIX
LBS /ACRE
F
REDTOPPANICGRASS - PANICUM RIGIDULUM
28
56
N
0:
O
BEAKED PANICGRASS - PANICUM ANCEPS
20
40
Z
Z
RIVER OATS - CHASMANTHIUM LATIFOLIUM
20
40
Q O
VIRGINIA WILDRYE - ELYMUS VIRGINICUS
20
40
m �z
Z
SWITCHGRASS - PANICUM VIRGANTUM
10
20
Z Q
Z)
LEATHERY RUSH - JUNCUS CORIACEUS
2
04
D_
O
0
NOT
ADDED LBS /ACRE OF RYE TO ABOVE
100
20
i-
J
MIXTURE FOR A TOTAL OF 30 LBS /ACRE
W
R'
❑
FERTILIZER AND LIMESTONE SHALL BE APPLIED AT THE RATE
U
OF 750 LBS / ACRE AND 2000 LBS / ACRE, RESPECTIVELY
g
FERTILIZER SHALL BE 10 -10 -10 ANALYSIS UPON SOIL
ANALYSIS
Q
A DIFFERENT RATIO OF FERTILIZER MAY BE USED
NOTE FERTILIZER IS ONLY TO BE APPLIED ONCE
IF TEMPORARY SEED
AND FERTILIZER IS APPLIED PRIOR TO PERMANENT
SEED THEN FERTILIZER
SHALL NOT BE APPLIED WITH THE PERMANENT SEED
w1E MARCH 2013
SGLE N T S
EROSION
CONTROL
PLAN

NOTES
8' MAX
METAL POST
12% GAUGE MIN
USE CLASS I STONE FOR
J
MIDDLE AND VERTICAL WIRES
LINEAR FOOT)
STRUCTURALSTONE
10 GAUGE MIN
I
TOP AND BOTTOM
USE STONE NO 57 FOR
STRAND
SEDIMENT CONTROL
I I
—'
FILTER FABRIC
I I
—'
WIRE
CONSTRUCT SILT SCREEN A
NOTES
MAXIMUM OF 7 FT ABOVE
COMPACTED FILL
IN WIDTH AND WITH A MINIMUM
NORMAL FLOW DEPTH,
OF 6 LINE WIRES WITH 12" STAY
SPACING
USE FILTER FABRIC A MINIMUM
TOP OF BANK
OF 36' IN WIDTH AND FASTEN
III
—II_
I�I I E
ADEQUATELY TO THE WIRE AS
- -I
1 I
BASE OF STREAM —�
DIRECTED BY THE DESIGNER
EXTENSION OF L I
FABRIC AND
I
PROVIDE 5' STEEL POST OF THE
TOP VIEW
STEEL POST
I 2' -0" DEPTH
SELF - FASTENER ANGLE STEEL TYPE
I
I
TOP OF BANK
SILT FENCE DETAIL --
NOT TO SCALE
1-6 MIN
L
2 —.i F-
3MAX
STONE #57 J 1\
j STREAM BEDS
S
1
STRUCTURAL
STONE
I
1.6 MIN
CROSS SECTION
FRONT VIEW
TEMPORARY ROCK SILT SCREEN
NOT TO SCALE
STREAM CROSSING MAINTENANCE
1 INSPECT TEMPORARY CROSSING
AFTER EACH RAINFALL EVENT FOR
ACCUMULATION OF DEBRIS,
BLOCKAGE EROSION OF ABUTMENTS
AND OVERFLOW AREAS CHANNEL
SCOUR RIPRAP DISPLACEMENT, OR
PIPING ALONG CULVERTS
2 REMOVE DEBRIS, REPAIR AND
REINFORCE DAMAGED AREAS
IMMEDIATELY TO PREVENT FURTHER
DAMAGE TO THE INSTALLATION
A]
AJ
PLAN
MAT
"1 STONE
FOR APPROACH
STABILIZATION
EXISTING
CHANNEL
FILTER FABRIC
FOR DRAINAGE
SECTION AA
NOT TO SCALE
1 BRIDGE LOCATIONS DEPICTED ON SITE PLANS ARE APPROXIMATE AND
ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE DEPENDING ON THE AREA THAT IS BEING
WORKED UPON
2 WIDTH OF EACH MAT IS DEPENDENT ON THE SIZE OF THE EQUIPMENT
MEANT TO CROSS IT
3 DISTANCE BETWEEN MATS IS DEPENDENT ON THE DISTANCE BETWEEN
TRACKS ON THE EQUIPMENT MEANT TO CROSS IT
4 APPROACH STABILIZATION COMPOSED OF CLASS 1 STONE, WILL BE
REQUIRED FOR EACH SECTION OF THE BRIDGE
BRIDGE MAT CROSSING
PLACE AS SPECIFIED IN THE PLANS AND APPROVED BY THE DESIGNER
/ t
o
o
0
SIDE SLOPE �N
CLASS'A' STONE
8 I MIN DEPTH
(OVER FILTER FABRIC)
NOTES
1 TURNING RADIUS SUFFICIENT TO ACCOMODATE LARGE
TRUCKS SHALL BE PROVIDED
2 ENTRANCE(S) SHOULD BE LOCATED TO PROVIDE FOR UTILIZATION
BY ALL CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES
I 3 MUST BE MAINTAINED IN A CONDITION WHICH WILL PREVENT
Sp TRACKING OR DIRECT FLOW OF MUD ONTO STREETS PERIODIC
1 cT TOPDRESSING WITH STONE WILL BE NECESSARY
\ 4 ANY MATERIAL TRACKED ONTO THE ROADWAY MUST BE CLEANED
UP IMMEDIATELY
5 GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE SHALL BE LOCATED AT ALL
POINTS OF INGRESS AND EGRESS UNTIL SITE IS STABILIZED
FREQUENT CHECKS OF THE DEVICE AND TIMELY MAINTENANCE
MUST BE PROVIDED
6 INSTALL A CULVERT IF NECESSARY TO ACCOMODATE ROADWAY
� DRAINAGE
c7° ¢ 7 SIDE SLOPES FOR ENTRANCE MUST BE AT LEAST 2 1 SLOPE
F11
STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
SCALE NTS
SEAL
pt 71733 t
O
o
0
r
r
Z
w �Q
�Z
�3 N QK
�S w "U
Z of
a 0O
Mill Z Nw
z a
z
w
DATE
a
Z
J
O
a
U
W
H
O
Z Z
QO
m H z
Z
of O
FS O Z
U) J
W O_
O
� o
W
g
J
EROSION
CONTROL
PLAN
8' MAX
METAL POST
12% GAUGE MIN
(1 33 Ib PER
MIDDLE AND VERTICAL WIRES
LINEAR FOOT)
10 GAUGE MIN
I
TOP AND BOTTOM
STRAND
-=mn_m
I I
—'
FILTER FABRIC
I I
—'
WIRE
FILTER FABRIC
NOTES
USE WIRE A MINIMUM OF 32"
COMPACTED FILL
IN WIDTH AND WITH A MINIMUM
OF 6 LINE WIRES WITH 12" STAY
SPACING
USE FILTER FABRIC A MINIMUM
_
OF 36' IN WIDTH AND FASTEN
III
—II_
I�I I E
ADEQUATELY TO THE WIRE AS
- -I
1 I
1
DIRECTED BY THE DESIGNER
EXTENSION OF L I
FABRIC AND
I
PROVIDE 5' STEEL POST OF THE
I QI, II
WIRE INTO TRENCH I
STEEL POST
I 2' -0" DEPTH
SELF - FASTENER ANGLE STEEL TYPE
I
I
SILT FENCE DETAIL --
NOT TO SCALE
O
o
0
r
r
Z
w �Q
�Z
�3 N QK
�S w "U
Z of
a 0O
Mill Z Nw
z a
z
w
DATE
a
Z
J
O
a
U
W
H
O
Z Z
QO
m H z
Z
of O
FS O Z
U) J
W O_
O
� o
W
g
J
EROSION
CONTROL
PLAN

LARRY ALLLN KEIR SR /
PIN 259600261271
DE 1645 PG 103
\ 1 s
SITE ACCESS P0 9 ss �e III Om
—56- _
/
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
\ MARY LILLIAN WELLS
PIN 139603331632
\
DO 1538 PG 422
SEAL Qo
pt 92733 44'
C Z
0
a m
o �
z
O U
z N
Z
O
O
w
0
0
G
f
m
N
m�
—80 —40 0 80 160
GRAPHIC SCALE v�o
t rti
��VOcC
RICHARD WIGGINS C/O
GEORGE LARM N JR
PIN 239600351596
DO 947 PG 197
NOTE
ALL DITCHES WITHIN SITE ARE DEFINED
"JURISDICTIONAL TRIBUTARIES" BY THE
TO ROCKFISH
CREEK US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
TOTAL DISTURBED AREA = 11 7 AC
w "a
O 5z
7 m J
<m
w ¢u
z mr
aoc O
z a
w
Z
zi
O
U
LLI
H
c/) O
} Z z
Q O
mP: z
z� O
O U
F— Z
� a
W
W
U
5
[LE GRAPHIC
EROSION
CONTROL
PLAN
LARRY ALLLN KEIR JR
N
PIN 239500157401
p �h
�� DANNY E hEIR
ME 23 PG 515
fh
\ PIN 239600252193
DO 1645 PG 107
f
\ MS 23 PG 315
NDB 1666 PG 116
6J 1
\ !
1 1 _
lli , I
"t
v
fill"
�I�V
/1v
DANNY E I\EIR
PIN 239600252193
MB 23 PG 315
DO 1665 PG 116y�et
I \
\ \
1 1 \ f
1
sE
DANNY 3 LEIR
PIN 239600252193
MB 23 PG 315
\
DE 1666 PG 116
PROJECT LOCATION 1\ \\ \
LAT 34 478418 N
/' \ ��
\ /, I •60. — _ _ — 11
LONG 78 027129 W
r
\ 1 s
SITE ACCESS P0 9 ss �e III Om
—56- _
/
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
\ MARY LILLIAN WELLS
PIN 139603331632
\
DO 1538 PG 422
SEAL Qo
pt 92733 44'
C Z
0
a m
o �
z
O U
z N
Z
O
O
w
0
0
G
f
m
N
m�
—80 —40 0 80 160
GRAPHIC SCALE v�o
t rti
��VOcC
RICHARD WIGGINS C/O
GEORGE LARM N JR
PIN 239600351596
DO 947 PG 197
NOTE
ALL DITCHES WITHIN SITE ARE DEFINED
"JURISDICTIONAL TRIBUTARIES" BY THE
TO ROCKFISH
CREEK US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
TOTAL DISTURBED AREA = 11 7 AC
w "a
O 5z
7 m J
<m
w ¢u
z mr
aoc O
z a
w
Z
zi
O
U
LLI
H
c/) O
} Z z
Q O
mP: z
z� O
O U
F— Z
� a
W
W
U
5
[LE GRAPHIC
EROSION
CONTROL
PLAN

\p r�
.II 111 \
I III `
II U� COD \
\
II II \ I
S I \ 1
OI o \ I
-too
I
O /vl / / / /l✓ 6p,� 11 Q
/ ij cQ O 1' lV�j1l /lll /111
P" / 1 O
// v 11111 /Ilhl 11// 1
1111`j /� / /d1/ \1 Ilj l,1 1 L X00
\ //
}
d/ O , / 1111/111111
lgi
11
0 v l 1111'
\ / �1 11111
/l /11 IJJi:I I
° 1 o
f yr fl, Abp -64, , �w
top �}
6a-
'60,
\ \\U
INSTALL ROCK
\ VAp
SILT SCREEN
V AAA A �1 I
\ \\ r' \
\\\
\ \\ \
`\ \%
0 \ \ \\ P
O \
It \ \ \ \
1�
\ \V
INSTALL SCE IN LOCATION
OF EXISTING REINFORCED
CONCRETE PIPE
NOTE TEMPORARY BRIDGE MAT
CROSSING MAY BE MOVED AS
NECESSARY AND AS APPROVED
BY THE DESIGNER
INSTALL ROCK
SILT SCREEN
\ —�-
INSTALL TEMPORARY
a
BRIDGE MAT CROSSING
q I S�AGING I
_AREA
1
<O
0
1
1
I
1
>1 \ \00
g \
p.�
iI
"{1 <00 `
1 I
\ 56 _ - - - - -- l <O
INSTALL ROCK 17i
SF SILT SCREEN
SF
Io
1 {r
SF I
-�O 1 SF_ I
4.
CPtH O"0`•.
�.
SEAL
[ 32733
-50 -25 0 50 100
GRAPHIC SCALE
w 0
0
a 41
� o �
z
z w
m o
z
0
G
N
f-
�) z Z
w
W U
N
z
liiill
z
W
H
Z
CO O
F-
<
zZ_
F0
W
w
EVITZ
o °f
n'o
52
hJ
oW
o<
lV
N.
Ym
0O
OZ
X2
�W
49
Z
J
O
U
2
O
Z
Z
O
U
Z
J
a
L
U
5
DATE MARCH 2013 1
EROSION
CONTROL
PLAN