20211626 Ver 1_Draft Neu01 Prospectus v2 (SAW-2021-02321)_20211028

eco to r ra.
October 2021
Presented to:
North Carolina Interagency Review Team
Alder Valley
Mitigation Site
Prospectus
Part of the Eco Terra Neuse 01 Umbrella
Mitigation Bank
Durham County, NC
Hydrologic Cataloguing Unit
03020201 of the Neuse River Basin •
_ 1-"""7-'• _+-i y�� W
•
f •" . I �\ /��•r� � 7 u S .'� ti.�v sP
K ,� -i A W 1 Y �e".F (4 ris, ,yw.y `h� wr5' .La '�

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
Executive Summary
Eco Terra Partners, LLC (Eco Terra) respectfully presents the following Mitigation Site Prospectus to
provide stream and riparian buffer mitigation credits in the Neuse River Basin (Cataloging Unit
03020201). Eco Terra has entered into a contract to purchase an easement that would comprise the
Alder Valley Mitigation Site in northern Durham County, approximately two miles north of Bahama
in northern Durham County (Figure 1). The Alder Valley Mitigation Site is within 14-digit Hydrologic
Unit 03020201010030 associated with the Flat River and will be part of Eco Terra's Neuse 01
Umbrella Mitigation Bank.
The project will include the restoration and enhancement of streams, restoration of riparian buffers,
and the enhancement of wetlands within the Flat River watershed, a designated Targeted Local
Watershed. The Alder Valley Mitigation Site, or AVMS, will provide both ecological and water quality
benefits within the Flat River watershed and upper Neuse River Basin. Lake Michie, Durham's
primary drinking water supply, is situated approximately three miles downstream of the AVMS. In
addition, Falls Lake, Raleigh's primary drinking water supply, is further downstream. Although many
of these benefits are limited to the actual project location, others, such as sediment reduction and
nutrient removal and improved aquatic and terrestrial habitats, have larger overall effects.
The main purpose and goal of the AVMS is to restore streams and riparian buffers. Land use
conversion to a natural, native ecosystem, the promotion of water infiltration on-site, and reduction
of both nutrient and sediment runoff from the existing cattle pastures and agricultural fields will
constitute secondary goals. The Project will also serve to expand conservation lands along the Flat
River that are protected by the NC Land and Water Trust. These goals and objectives are consistent
with the NC Department of Environmental Quality's general restoration and protection goals, as well
as the Neuse Riparian Buffer Restoration Plan.
The construction plan for stream restoration areas will include the removal of an earthen dam,
channel reestablishment, channel realignment, stabilization, and
Site grading. Riparian buffers, extending outwards 200 feet from (Eco Terra anticipates the AVMS to
the top of bank will be restored with native vegetation. Existing generate up to:
degraded riparian and wetland areas will be enhanced by • 4,540 Stream Mitigation Units
removal of livestock, treatment of non-native vegetation, and (SMUs)
•
the installation of native trees. All areas within the AVMS will be 945,000 Buffer Mitigation Units
(BMUs)
protected with a conservation easement in perpetuity. • 993,000 Nutrient Offset Credits
The Eco Terra team has the mitigation experience, solid financial (51,816 lbs Nitrogen (N)/3,337
capability, and highly qualified personnel to successfully provide lbs Phosphorus (P))
these credits. The AVMS as proposed, will provide substantial
functional uplift to multiple unnamed tributaries of the Flat River and the Flat River watershed, as
well as assist with offsetting mitigation needs in Neuse River Basin.
ecoerro. Draft Prospectus—Alder Valley Mitigation Site 2

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
Table of Contents
Executive Summary 2
Introduction 4
Purpose, Need, and Feasibility 4
Service Area 7
Current Ownership and Long-Term Protection 7
Qualifications 8
Sponsor Qualifications 8
Consultant Qualifications 11
Existing Conditions 13
Project Development 23
Success Criteria 30
References 34
Tables
Table 1.AVMS Goals and Objectives
Table 2.AVMS Stream Morphological Snapshot— Existing Conditions
Table 3. Current Ownership and Long-Term Protection
Table 4. Federally Listed Species Potentially Occurring in Durham County
Table 5. Proposed Mitigation Credits
Table 6.AVMS Stream Morphological Table— Proposed Conditions
Table 7. Conceptual Planting Plan
Table 8. Conceptual Seed Mixes
Table 9. Proposed Ecological Uplift
Table 10. Proposed Stream and Riparian Buffer Credit Release
Figures
Figure 1. Vicinity Map
Figure 2. Proposed Service Area
Figure 3. Existing Conditions
Figure 4. LIDAR Map
Figure 5. Aerial Photograph
Figure 6. Soil Survey Map
Figure 7. Cultural Resources Map
Figure 8. Adjacent and Proximal Planning Elements Map
Figure 9. Conceptual Design
Appendices
Appendix A. Purchase and Sale Agreement Option
Appendix B. USACE/NCDWR Data Forms
eCojerrO_ Draft Prospectus—Alder Valley Mitigation Site 3

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
Introduction
The Alder Valley Mitigation Site (also referred to as the
AVMS, Site, or Project Site) is proposed to restore
streams and riparian buffers within the Flat River
watershed of the Neuse River Basin Hydrologic Unit
Code (HUC) 03020201. This Site is proposed as part of
Eco Terra's Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank. It is
within the upper Falls areas in northern Durham County
between the cities of Roxboro and Durham
approximately one mile east of US Highway 501 (Figure
1). Its 14-digit HUC watershed designation is
03020201010030. This watershed is identified by the NC
Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) as a
Targeted Local Watershed, or TLW. According to DEQ
(2027), the Neuse River Basin covers more than 6,200
square miles divided amongst four Cataloging Units (CUs) and 188 14-digit HUCs.
The Site is proposed to restore and/or enhance streams and restore riparian buffers in the upper
Neuse River Basin. It will directly address multiple stressors and contribute to overall water quality
issues in the basin. By combating these issues at their sources, maximum ecological uplift can be
achieved.
Facing north along UT 2 at an existing segment of
stream channel.
Purpose, Need, and Feasibility
The purpose of the AVMS is to provide mitigation for unavoidable losses of wetlands and waters of
the United States through effective ecological uplift measures. Restoration and enhancement
activities at the Site will focus on improving water
quality, as well as restoring aquatic and terrestrial
habitats within the immediate area, all benefits to the
Neuse River Basin.
General restoration and protection goals have been
developed by DEQ for the basin (DEQ, 2021). These are
to: promote nutrient reduction in municipal areas
through the implementation of stormwater best
management practices; promote nutrient and sediment
reduction in agricultural areas by restoring and
preserving wetlands, streams, and riparian buffers; and
continue targeted implementation of projects under the
nutrient offset and buffer programs, as well as focusing
NC Department of Transportation (NCDOT) sponsored
restoration in areas providing the most functional
improvement to the ecosystem.
Portion of the UT 2 channel heavily impacted by
livestock.
ecoterra_
Draft Prospectus - Alder Valley Mitigation Site
4

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
In addition, specific goals for the Cataloging Unit have been identified in the Neuse River Basin
Restoration Priorities (RBRP) document dated 2010, amended 2018. They include:
• support the Falls Lake Watershed Management Plan; a separate prioritization process for the
NC Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) will be developed in the next several years;
• continue to implement planning initiatives including the NC Division of Mitigation Services
(DMS) Phase IV Local Watershed Plan (LWP) for the Upper Neuse (incorporates updates for
DMS LWPs including Ellerbe Creek, Lake Rogers/ Ledge Creek, Lick Creek, Little Lick Creek,
and Upper Swift Creek), the Upper Neuse River Basin Association's Upper Neuse Watershed
Management Plan and the DMS Neuse 01 Regional Watershed Plan; and,
• protect, augment, and connect Natural Heritage Areas and other conservation lands.
The main purpose and goal of the Alder Valley Mitigation Site is to restore streams and riparian
buffers. Supplementary and/or secondary goals include land use conversion to a natural, native
ecosystem, the promotion of water infiltration, and reduction of both nutrient and sediment runoff
from the existing cattle pastures and agricultural fields. The Project will also serve to expand
conservation lands along the Flat River that are protected by the NC Land and Water Trust. These
goals and objectives are consistent with restoration and protection goals stated in the Neuse River
Basin Restoration Plan. Table 1 summarizes this information.
The proposed Project will achieve the above goals through the technical expertise of the Eco Terra
Team, the proven track records of Eco Terra and its consultants to deliver high quality mitigation,
and with suitable Site -specific physical characteristics. The following sections further describe the
Site and proposed mitigation concepts. Site implementation will help to satisfy the need to continue
watershed improvements, protect valuable wildlife resources, improve the management of
stormwater runoff, and contribute to the restoration of water quality.
The AVMS incorporates portions of one subwatershed associated with the Flat River. Four unnamed
tributaries (UTs) to the Flat River occur within the Project Area. Labeled as UTs 1 and 2, these
tributaries serve as the main surface water conduits. Two other tributaries (UT 3 and UT 4) empty
directly into UT 2. An irrigation pond was constructed more than 50 years ago and serves as the
confluence for UT 1 and UT 2. Downstream of the earthen dam, UT 1 flows eastward towards the
Flat River. Project feasibility was determined through preliminary on -site surveys of stream cross
sections (preliminary data provided in Table 2) and assessment of buffer areas.
%/
eolerra_
Draft Prospectus — Alder Valley Mitigation Site 5

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
Table 1:AVMS Goals and Objectives
Goal
Animal waste deposition will cease within jurisdictional resource areas and their
Reduce nutrient associated buffers. Fertilizers will no longer be applied to pasture and row crop
levels*
areas within the restored streams and buffers. The establishment of native buffer
vegetation will help to reduce runoff from the areas surrounding the Site and
prevent any remaining excess nutrients from entering off-site waterways.
The property will no longer be kept in a state of early succession for
Reduce sediment
pasture/livestock. Native vegetation will be allowed to establish and hold loose
levels* topsoil in place, reducing wind and runoff erosion. Ditches and/or drainage ways will
be plugged/filled to reduce hydrologic loss from the Site and prevent sediment loss
to off-site waters during large storm events.
The Alder Valley Mitigation Site offers both riparian buffer and nutrient offset credit
Implement
Nutrient Offset opportunities. Buffer widths extending as much as 200 feet from the top of bank
and Buffer outward, along both sides of the restored channels, will be implemented.As a result,
Projects*
additional opportunities will occur to further remove nutrients and reduce sediments
from entering on-site surface water resources.
Preserve/Protect
Work with local landowners to implement a project and record a conservation
land in
easement/purchase property.
perpetuity^
Connect property
to already Restore streams and buffers and enhance wetlands within a Conservation Easement
established that directly abuts to land designated as Critical Areas by the US Fish and Wildlife
Natural Heritage
Service and conservation lands managed by the NC Natural Heritage Program.
Areas or conserved
Improve habitat for both terrestrial and aquatic organisms and increase ecosystem
lands^ connectivity.
*Neuse River Basin general goal, ^ Neuse RBRP 03020207 goal
%°0
oerro_ Draft Prospectus—Alder Valley Mitigation Site 6

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
Table 2:AVMS Stream Morphological Snapshot—Existing Conditions*
Parameter UT 1 R1 UT 1 R2 UT 2 R1 UT R32 & UT 3 &4
Drainage Area (acres) —224 —500 —140 —205 —6
Drainage Area (sq. —0.35 —0.78 —0.22 —0.32 —0.01
miles)
Cross-Sect.Area, Abkf —9.5 NA —7.0 NA NA
(ft2)
Width, Wbkf(ft) —7.5 NA —6.5 NA NA
Width/Depth Ratio 5.9 NA 6.5 NA NA
(W/D)
uo Mean Depth, Dmean —1.3 NA —1.0 NA NA
(ft)
w Channel Slope, S (%) —0.5 NA —0.5 NA NA
Stream Type (Rosgen) G5 NA G5 NA NA
Bank Height Ratio, 1.5 NA 1.5 NA NA
BHR
Velocity (ft/s) —0.5 NA —0.5 NA NA
Discharge (ft3/s) —5 NA —3.5 NA NA
Entrenchment Ratio 1.3 NA 3.0 NA NA
Note: Stream data and all ratios are based on assumed elevations and limited survey.This data is for comparison
purposes only.Comprehensive data will be incorporated once stream surveys have been completed and designs are
prepared.
NA: Portions of the existing channels have been altered to the extent that measurements were not feasible due to lack of
bedform and Site and/or inundation (ponding).
Service Area
The AVMS will provide in-kind mitigation credits to offset stream and buffer impacts within Neuse
01 River Basin. The proposed service area is shown in Figure 2.
Current Ownership and Long-Term Protection
Eco Terra has entered into an agreement with William and Blanche McFarland for Purchase and Sale
of a conservation easement encompassing up to approximately 39 acres (Table 3). A Memo of the
Purchase and Sale agreement is provided in Appendix A. This agreement allows Eco Terra to
proceed with the proposed Site and to restrict the land use in perpetuity through a conservation
easement. Eco Terra is prepared to close on the Conservation Easement and will provide copies of
the deed of easement, title, survey, and map.
ecOjerra. Draft Prospectus—Alder Valley Mitigation Site 7

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
Table 3: Current Ownership and Long-Term Protection
Parcel PIN/ Acreage in Date of Agreement/ Identified
County Owner(s) Conservation Termination Period Conservation
Easement Easement Holder
0839-03-05-3998 McFarland, 10/7/2021
William A. & 39.06 To be determined
Durham County Blanche J. 2 Years
Qualifications
Sponsor Qualifications
Eco Terra Partners, LLC (Eco Terra) will be the Site sponsor.
The company was initiated five years ago with a single idea Contact Information
in mind: What can we do to help preserve our fragile Name: Eco Terra Partners, LLC
environment and improve our planet? Founded by Michael Address: 1328 Dekalb Avenue NE,Atlanta,
Beinenson, the firm has focused on stream, wetland, and Georgia 30307
buffer restoration, land conservation, and financing solar Contact Name: Norton Webster
Contact Telephone: [phone]
panels. The experienced team has decades of experience and Email: [e-mail]
is currently engaged with more than 32 projects throughout
the Southeastern US.
Eco Terra has been active with private mitigation Sites in NC. The following example projects are all
in the Mitigation Plan preparation phase, which includes the public comment period.
Three Creeks Farm Mitigation Site I Davidson County, NC
Eco Terra is currently working on the Three Creeks Farm Mitigation Site near the community of
Midway in Davidson County. This Yadkin River Basin property includes multiple stream channels,
wetlands, and significant buffer areas. As part of project implementation, Eco Terra will restore and
enhance five tributaries within the Abbotts Creek watershed, two wetland areas, and upland buffer.
These resources have all been impacted by livestock and hay production. The 32-acre easement
area will be ecologically uplifted by decreasing nutrient inputs and filtering runoff from the adjacent
pasturelands through buffer areas, as well as the conversion of active pasture to riparian buffers.
Project implementation is expected to occur in late 2022 and will result in the generation of 7,700
SMUs and 1.5 Wetland Mitigation Units (WMUs).
Lakey Creek Mitigation Site I Macon County, NC
The Lakey Creek Mitigation Site is situated approximately eight miles northwest of Franklin in
Macon County. Lakey Creek and several of its tributaries will undergo restoration and enhancement
activities. This project is within the Little Tennessee River Basin and includes stream, wetland, and
buffer restoration. Project goals are to exclude livestock from jurisdictional resources, reduce
nutrient and sediment loading, restore native buffer vegetation, and establish corridors for wildlife
eCojerrO_ Draft Prospectus—Alder Valley Mitigation Site 8

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
to utilize for travel, food, and cover. The project will ultimately generate 3,795 SMUs and 4.81
WMUs.
Auctioneer Forest Mitigation Site I Wayne County, NC
This mitigation Site is located in Wayne County approximately six miles northeast of Newton Grove
in the Neuse River Basin. The Site will ultimately generate more than 14 WMUs along Falling Creek.
It includes the restoration of degraded riparian wetlands. Implementation is anticipated in 2022 and
will result in substantial ecological improvements including, but not limited to terrestrial and aquatic
habitats and overall protection of a continuous forested corridor within the Neuse River Basin.
Memorial Wetland Mitigation Site I Lenoir County, NC
Eco Terra's Memorial Wetland Mitigation Site is located approximately seven miles south of Kinston,
in Lenoir County. The Site includes the restoration of non-riparian wetlands within the Neuse River
Basin. Nearly 16 WMUs will be generated as part of project implementation. Eco Terra will
reestablish non-riparian wetlands, remove invasive vegetation, exclude livestock, reduce sediment
and nutrient inputs within the Mott Swamp watershed. This project is currently undergoing
development.
In addition, the company has also been active with the DMS and its Full Delivery Program. The
following projects provide a brief representation of Eco Terra's experience to date.
Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site I Rocky Mount, NC
Eco Terra was awarded a full delivery contract through the DMS to provide 610,000 riparian buffer
credits in the Tar-Pamlico River Basin. The project will ultimately connect two unnamed tributaries to
the Tar River and restore a forested riparian corridor originating in the headwaters of the tributary
watersheds. Eco Terra has completed Site implementation and is on schedule to meet contracted
deliverables.
Kittrell Hill Buffer and Nutrient Offset Mitigation Site I Farmville, NC
Eco Terra recently designed and installed this private NC Division of Water Resources buffer bank in
the Tar River Basin (HUC 03020203). The project will ultimately generate 21,147.061 lbs of Nitrogen
offset credits and 363,817 square feet of buffer restoration credits. Currently 55% of the credits have
been released after successfully recording the easement on the property, installing specific riparian
vegetation, and assigning the conservation easement to a long-term steward for protection in
perpetuity.
Mushroom Meadow Mitigation Site I Milton, NC
Eco Terra was recently awarded this full delivery stream and wetland mitigation project in the upper
Roanoke River Basin along the Dan River. Project specifics include more than 3,000 linear feet of
stream restoration, five acres of wetland restoration, and associated riparian buffer restoration
outside of the normal 50-foot corridor. Surveys are complete and Eco Terra expects submittal of the
Mitigation Plan in early 2022. Construction is slated for 2023.
.t�
eCojerrO_ Draft Prospectus—Alder Valley Mitigation Site 9

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
Colonial Farms I Edgecombe County, NC
The Colonial Farms Wetland Mitigation Site is approximately 2.5 miles south of Tarboro, within the
Tar-Pamlico River Basin. This DMS project includes the restoration of riparian wetlands and covers
approximately 21 acres. Eco Terra anticipates the generation of 15.0 WMUs as a result of project
implementation activities.
Maple Swamp Wetland Site I Edgecombe County, NC
The Maple Swamp Wetland Site is approximately two miles northeast of the Town of Leggett in
Edgecombe County. It includes the restoration of forested non-riparian wetlands within the Fishing
Creek watershed of the Tar-Pamlico River Basin. This DMS-funded project will generate 9.11 WMUs
and will ultimately provide both ecological and water quality benefits within the basin. The project's
goals are to reduce nutrient and sediment inputs into Maple Swamp, as well as restore wetlands,
protect, augment, and connect Natural Heritage and conservation lands managed by the NC
Wildlife Resources Commission and NC Natural Heritage Program.
Maple Swamp Buffer Mitigation Site I Edgecombe County, NC
The Maple Swamp Buffer Mitigation Site is located in the vicinity of Eco Terra's Maple Swamp
Wetland Site in Edgecombe County. This DMS project includes the restoration of riparian buffers
along an unnamed tributary to Maple Swamp. Eco Terra anticipates the total output to generate
292,000 BMUs, 215 lbs on Nitrogen offsets, and 52 lbs of Phosphorus offsets. The total easement
area covers approximately 7.8 acres.
Kingfield Buffer Mitigation Site I Jones County, NC
This buffer mitigation Site is situated in Jones County, approximately 3.4 miles northeast of Trenton.
It includes the restoration of a riparian corridor along a tributary to Musselshell Creek within the
Trent River watershed. The restoration of Neuse riparian buffers and other riparian areas along the
streams at the Site will help to reduce the stressors of sediment and nutrient inputs from
conventional row crop agriculture and fecal coliform inputs from livestock. This project is being
funded by the DMS and will ultimately generate 315,000 BMUs.
Chinquapin Valley Buffer Mitigation Site I Jones County, NC
The Chinquapin Valley Buffer Mitigation Site is located approximately nine miles northwest of
Trenton in Jones County. This DMS funded project includes the restoration of a riparian corridor
along Chinquapin Branch, a tributary within the Trent River watershed. Eco Terra will generate
328,555 BMUs for mitigation offsets associated with the Neuse River Basin. The easement covers
approximately 8.2 acres in overall size. The goals of the project are to reduce sediment inputs and
nutrient levels, improve terrestrial wildlife habitats, protect a riparian stream corridor in perpetuity.
%°/
o erro_ Draft Prospectus—Alder Valley Mitigation Site 10

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
Consultant Qualifications
Eco Terra will utilize the services of two design consultants: VHB Engineering NC, P.C. and Soil,
Water, and Environment Group, LLC.
VHB Engineering NC, P.C. (VHB) is a full-service engineering,
environmental, planning, and design firm providing services Contact Information
throughout the eastern United States. VHB recently acquired Name: VHB Engineering NC, P.C.
Ecological Engineering, LLP, a hydraulic engineering and Address: 940 Main Campus Drive, Raleigh,
environmental consulting firm located in Cary, NC. Together, NC 27607
its combined staff provide complex mitigation design Contact Name: Heather Smith, LSS
Contact Telephone: [phone]
solutions for projects throughout the eastern US. VHB , Email: [e-mail]
employs more than 1,600 professionals working from 30
locations along the east coast.
Soil, Water, and Environment Group, LLC (SWE Group) has more than 20 years of experience in
ecological restoration and mitigation banking. From the first private mitigation Sites in North
Carolina, SWE staff has blazed the trail of ecological
restoration across the state, providing expertise in ecosystem Contact Information
services, design, permitting, planning, installation, Name: SWE Group, PLLC
management, maintenance, and monitoring. SWE group staff Address: 3216 Byers Drive, Suite B, Raleigh,
has experience with over two dozen mitigation projects and NC 27607
Sites in North Carolina and on the Atlantic coast including Contact Name: Scott Frederick, El, LSS
projects restoring a variety of wetlands, streams, coastal Contact Telephone: [phone]
estuaries, water resource buffers, nutrient offset forested \ Email: [e-mail]
buffers, and upland forest habitats.
The following project examples are included to provide depth of experience.
Ellington Branch Full Delivery Stream Restoration Project I Warren County, NC
VHB's staff recently completed and successfully closed out this full delivery project in the upper
Roanoke River Basin, in Warren County. It included 5,000 linear feet of Priority Level 1 and 2
restoration along Ellington Branch and one of its unnamed tributaries.
Responsibilities included the recordation of a conservation easement, existing channel and
topographic surveys, reference reach surveys, natural channel designs, hydraulic modeling, resource
agency coordination, permitting, construction and construction management, buffer restoration, as-
built plans, and five years of annual monitoring. Project goals were to decrease sedimentation,
improve water quality and increase wildlife habitat via creation of a continuous wooded stream
corridor, restoration of the two stream channels and restrict access to lands currently being utilized
for pasture and cattle grazing. The approach to the project concentrated on removing existing
sources of impairment, including livestock, and creating new, stable channels based on reference
reach data. During project closeout, the results quantified that sediment inputs were reduced more
than 96 percent on Ellington Branch and 98 percent along its unnamed tributary. Vegetation counts
ecojterra_ Draft Prospectus—Alder Valley Mitigation Site 11

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
were well above the minimum per acre requirements and water quality showed observable
improvements.
Watts Stream, Wetland, and Buffer Restoration Project I Perquimans County, NC
VHB recently completed and assisted with the closeout of this first order stream, non-riparian
wetland, and upland buffer project with the DMS in Perquimans County, NC. This innovative project
type was relatively new to existing mitigation requirements during its design phase in 2012. VHB
designed the headwater channel without using a particular channel classification or layout. Little
guidance was available during this phase and the project has been strictly monitored since
implementation. The project goal was ecological uplift including the restoration of ecological
function, the improvement of overall water quality and enhancement of native wildlife habitat. Three
main components; stream, wetland, and buffer restoration, served as the dominant inputs for
achieving this goal. VHB and DMS successfully closed out the project in October of 2020.
As part of the overall scope, VHB's staff installed and monitored ground and surface water wells
across the project Site to determine the water budget, completed all environmental reports and
documentation, mitigation designs, construction drawings, erosion and sediment control plans,
project manuals, and construction oversight.
Charles Williams (Sandy Creek) Stream, Wetland, and Buffer Mitigation Project I Randolph County,
NC
VHB staff assisted with the closeout at this project Site located in northeastern Randolph County
near the Town of Liberty. This design-bid-build project included approximately 2,000 linear feet of
stream enhancement along an unnamed tributary of Sandy Creek, 15 acres of buffer enhancement,
and two acres of wetland enhancement. Project implementation occurred during the 2010/2011
winter season. The goals were to reduce nutrient and sediment water quality stressors, provide for
uplift in water quality functions, improve instream and wetland aquatic habitat, including riparian
terrestrial habitat, and provide for greater overall instream and wetland habitat complexity and
quality. The objectives were to exclude livestock in its entirety from the Conservation Easement area,
install stream structures and plantings designed to maintain vertical stability, lateral stability, and
habitat, revegetate and supplement those areas lacking suitable vegetation along the easement
area, and rip the existing compacted soils throughout the areas void of woody vegetation.
UT Altamahaw Stream and Buffer Enhancement Project I Alamance County, NC
VHB staff recently completed monitoring efforts and a successful closeout of this Piedmont
enhancement Site. The UT Altamahaw Creek Stream and Buffer Enhancement Site is located
approximately 6.1 miles west-northwest of Burlington in Alamance County. Approximately 1,477
linear feet of perennial stream channel and 0.026 acres of jurisdictional wetlands were enhanced
within the 3.6-acre easement area.
Project implementation included supplemental riparian buffer planting under the mitigation
category of stream enhancement (Level II), auxiliary spillway stabilization immediately outside of the
easement area, and design of a modified level spreader to diffuse surface runoff in the vicinity of
the existing stream crossing. In addition, the Alamance County Soil and Water Conservation District
%°/
o�err o_ Draft Prospectus—Alder Valley Mitigation Site 12

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
also provided plans and construction oversight for enhancing the current stream crossing, adjacent
pasture areas, fencing, and livestock watering facilities.
The goals were to reduce nutrient and sediment water quality stressors, provide for uplift in water
quality functions, improve instream and wetland aquatic habitat, including riparian terrestrial habitat
and provide for greater overall instream and wetland habitat complexity and quality. One main
component, stream enhancement, served as the dominant input for achieving this goal.
Flat Swamp Neuse Riparian and Nutrient Offset Buffer Mitigation Site
SWE Group developed and implemented the design and construction of the 386-acre parcel
designated for Neuse riparian and nutrient offset buffer mitigation on behalf of the Site sponsors.
At the time, SWE successfully worked with the NC Division of Water Quality (DWQ) in establishing
the Site Parcel in the Flat Swamp Creek watershed within the US Geological Survey HUC 03020202
of the Neuse River Basin. The Site was successful, restoring Neuse riparian buffer vegetation and N
nutrient offset buffer vegetation (identical to non-riparian wetland hardwood flat species), and
improving water quality by reducing nutrients and sediment entering the headwaters of Flat Swamp
Creek. The Site monitoring period ended on schedule providing approximately 20.3 acres of Neuse
River Riparian Buffer credits and 763,455 lbs N offset credit. At the five year closeout, tree survival of
250,000 planted trees was over 90% with 687 trees/acre averaging 14 feet in height and two inches
in diameter, making it one, if not the most successful restoration Sites in the State according to
DWQ staff.
Existing Conditions
The Alder Valley Mitigation Site is situated along the
east side of Moores Mill Road across from the Lake
Winds Golf Course. Current land use within the
proposed easement area consists of pasture with
ongoing livestock rotation, row crops (currently in
soybeans and adjacent corn) and an approximately ` ", f -'• -Y
nine-acre irrigation pond (Figure 3). Land use west of
the Site is residential with an embedded golf course
while agricultural and forested lands surround the
remaining portions of the area. The floodplain
associated with the Flat River lies further to the east.
The Site is accessed directly from Moores Mill Road. Site Facing west across the irrigation pond. UT 1 enters the
conditions reflect land use concentrated to agricultural pond from the upper right side and UT 2 enters from
management, including both livestock and row crops. the upper left side of the photo.
These conditions are common throughout the entire
parcel. The riparian areas associated with the Flat River are protected via the NC Land and Water
Fund, formerly known as the Clean Water Management Trust Fund. This area directly abuts the
downstream end of the proposed conservation easement.
The Site occupies portions of the two main channels (UT 1 and UT 2) and the entire reaches of UTs 3
and 4. UTs 1 and 2 meet the parameters necessary for perennial classification. They converge at the
ecojterra_ Draft Prospectus—Alder Valley Mitigation Site 13

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
irrigation pond and UT 1 continues downstream. UTs 3 and 4 are classified as intermittent channels
and both empty into UT 2 upstream of the pond. Visual evidence of sediment and nutrient loading
was observed within and immediately upstream of the pond. Further upstream, riparian areas with
little to no forested buffer provide only meager riparian protection against current land use
activities. Periodic sediment and nutrient-laden runoff freely enters the Project streams from areas
within the proposed easement, including fecal coliform bacteria. Eco Terra reviewed historical data
and discovered that land use has not changed in 50 years. Figures 4 and 5 depict the LIDAR imagery
and an aerial photograph, respectively. The Flat River and its unnamed tributaries at and adjacent to
the Alder Valley Site are defined as Water Supply III (WS-III) Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW)
according the NC Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ).
14-Digit HUC Watershed Description and County Land Use
The Project Site is within the Flat River watershed. This watershed is bounded by the Cities of
Roxboro and Durham to the north and southwest, respectively, and Falls Lake to the southeast. It is
considered rural with moderate amounts of farmland and forest. The Flat River is considered one of
Lake Michie's (Durham's water supply) main tributaries. It also serves as a major source of water to
Falls Lake, Raleigh's water supply.
HUC 03020201010030 is identified as a Targeted Local Watershed by DEQ. The Flat River is
monitored annually by the City of Durham and concern remains for elevated fecal coliform and
sedimentation due to existing land use practices within the watershed.
The watershed consists of a mixture of rural density residential, forest lands, and agricultural lands
(both row crops and permitted animal operations). This portion of Durham County remains mostly
undeveloped aside from the economically influenced areas expanding northward along US 501
from the City of Durham and southward from the City of Roxboro. The surrounding properties are
mostly undeveloped with scattered residences along Moores Mill Road, with the exception of Lake
Winds Golf Course, a developed golf community. Land k ��15M 0:44V--vr
ry v }
use on the property has been consistent for the past 50 k �� .� °, ;
years. i r y,
v S
Durham County covers approximately 300 square miles
Its census in 2010 revealed the sixth most populous f �� t '
county in North Carolina, at 267,587 people. It is
estimated the County has experienced a nearly 20% = � � �
population increase since the last census in 2000. The >r
County Seat, Durham, is the largest populated area with
small portions of its city limits extending into both a �}
Wake and Orange Counties. , s ow #41
'
Soils and Geology -1.4! �� .__Y► a,..
The Site is located within the Natural Resource Facing downstream along UT 1 outside of the Project
Conservation Service (NRCS) Major Land Resource Area Area. Note the presence of a boulder/cobble substrate
(MLRA) 136 and the Piedmont physiographic province. indicative of the Carolina slate belt ecoregion.
This area is underlain by metamorphic rocks ranging in
%O/
eColterrO_ Draft Prospectus—Alder Valley Mitigation Site 14

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
age from the Later Proterozoic to Paleozoic Eras and is classified as the Carolina slate belt
ecoregion. Lignum and Herndon silt loam, and Davidson clay loam are the dominant soils
underlying the Project Area (Figure 6). Most soils mapped within the project area are considered
prime farmland and are not subject to frequent flooding. The Lignum silt loam is an upland soil but
is known to contain inclusions of Roanoke silt loam, a hydric soil.
According to the USDA-NRCS, the Lignum soil series range in slope from zero to 15 percent, has a
deep profile and is moderately to somewhat poorly drained with seasonally perched water tables.
These soils are found in the heads of drainageways and have a very slow permeability due to mixed
mineralogy. Herndon soils are found in uplands with slopes ranging from two to 25 percent. These
very deep soils are well drained and have moderate permeability. Both Lignum and Herndon soils
formed in residuum weathered from fine grained metavolcanic rocks. The Davidson soil series is
found on gently sloping to moderately steep uplands with a slope ranging from two to 15 percent.
These very deep soils are well drained and have moderate permeability. They weathered from dark
colored rocks high in ferromagnesian minerals.
Flat River Unnamed Tributaries
This project provides both short and long-term ecological uplift to four UTs associated with the Flat
River. Direct livestock access is currently unrestricted throughout portions of UT 2 and evidence of
hoof shear, trampling, and compaction is present. Overall, sediment inputs and past human-
alternations on all four of the channels have influenced bed material composition from
cobble/gravel to sand, clay, and silt, as well as contributed to impacts with dimension, pattern, and
profile geomorphology. Channel morphologies are characteristic of unstable stream channels and in
most cases, nonexistent. Nutrient inputs have adversely affected aquatic fauna and riparian
vegetation has been heavily manipulated by livestock and ongoing agricultural activities. Copies of
stream classification forms for each tributary are provided in Appendix B.
Historical aerial photography and current Site conditions reflect that both UT 1 and UT 2 have
undergone extensive modifications. Although the irrigation pond is present in the 1981 aerial
photograph, UT 1 appears to have altered during or following tree harvesting and influenced by
past beaver activity creating in-channel dams, new flow patterns, and tree destruction. The upper
reach of UT 2 appears to be a meandering channel with streamside wetlands. The reaches of the
pond extend well upstream along both tributaries. UTs 3 and 4 are not visible due to photo clarity;
however, wet signatures are present around both resources. Current photography depicts sediment
laden material along UT 1 and UT 2 and both channels appear anastomosed within the headwater
sections of the irrigation pond. UT 2 is straight, following a pathway that has been periodically
maintained over many decades. Preliminary channel measurements were taken along UTs 1 and 2.
These measurements only depict conditions at the time of survey and are not tied into any survey
grids or networks.
%°/
o�err o_ Draft Prospectus—Alder Valley Mitigation Site 15

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
Unnamed Tributary 1 -Reach 1 �i -� �" .:' .
Reach 1 along UT 1 enters the northern portion of the . ` =
Site via a 60-inch corrugated metal pipe under Moores w ._= ,� _
a
Mill Road. The pipe is perched approximately 1 foot at ,P �� {.`
its downstream (or eastern) invert. Although the pipe �`
4
was dry at the time of the field reconnaissance, - - ' : �+ � � �'
evidence of hydrology was observed within the ` '� ''T - ..
structure. The UT 1 channel exhibited standing water y
from the pipe invert to the wetland fringe associated r ffi�
with the downstream irrigation pond. This channel N E 3
Vim` Q, °,, r
appeared to have been previously widened and bank �� " _ ;,.
height ratios average between 1.5 and 2.0. The channel �''. r �; ► x=, ''' �'
classifies as a Rosgen "G5" stream type based on its Facing west at the upper portion of UT 1 at Moores
degree of entrenchment and high width/depth ratios. It Mill Road. Note the perched culvert.
exhibits very little bedform and receives only meager
protection from stream.side vegetation. Vegetation is
herbaceous and kept in a low state of natural succession.
Upstream of Project Area, the tributary originates via multiple headwater streams within the Lake
Winds Golf Course community. One large pond (named Bollinger Pond) exists within the watershed.
This pond appears to cover more than 10 acres in size and likely serves as one of.the main focus
points at the golf course.
Approximately 300 linear feet of channel exist
between Moores Mill Road and the emergent
wetland community associated with the
irrigation pond. Once the channel reaches this
transition zone, it becomes part of the pond.
;,;- a The length of channel through this zone is
, 5; Y y; approximately 350 linear feet. The channel
��. X � �� �_#,�. remains visible but lacks bed and bank and
7 most other attributes associated with natural
G e r 0 � ' ' stream channels. The distance from the pond
;� V ' fringe to the dam is approximately 1,000 feet,
=; 1 �, ' � < ; k which also includes the confluence with
Unnamed Tributary 2. Pond depths are
Facing east along UT 1 between Moores Mill Road and assumed to be between six and 10 feet with an
the farm pond. unknown depth of sediment.
16.0
ecojterro_ Draft Prospectus-Alder Valley Mitigation Site 16

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
Irrigation Pond
The irrigation pond covers approximately 8.7 acres in
total area and is situated at the confluence of the main
tributaries. During the visual reconnaissance, water was
stained but relatively clear. A wetland fringe was
observed around the pond's edge. Evidence of
sediment deposition was noted in the transition zones 441 ' � z
of both tributaries. The pond dam, located along the
northeast perimeter of the water body, is intact. Its
estimated vertical height along the backslope is
4
between 10 and 15 feet. Recent maintenance activities ; � r ' 5
were observed, including the possible addition of a �` � , ,;Y3 Y`
second standpipe or drainage conduit. The dam
Area of scour along the existing pond dam.
averages a top width of approximately 15 feet. One area
of scour/ erosion was observed, limiting the top width
to as narrow as eight feet.
Unnamed Tributary 1 -Reach 2
Downstream of the pond, this lower reach of UT 1 appears to be perennial in classification. It flows
in an easterly direction before turning southeast towards the Flat River. Approximately 400 linear
feet of channel transects the Project Area before the tributary enters the forested area, associated
with NC Land and Water managed property. Eco Terra ends the proposed easement at this location.
Once within the forested area, the tributary
i flows another 3,000 feet before emptying into
`\ ' « the Flat River.
f) 1
'7" Morphological characteristics along the UT 1
•. re�*s. yi, aaY¢4 '�� � F. "�fi`v, �
,'' Reach 2 channel have been severely impacted
•
throughout the Project Area as a result of
ongoing maintenance activities associated
- r with current land use protocols. Bed and bank
ti are sporadic and multiple outfalls were
observed along the downstream edge of the
". pond dam. The valley is more confined and
the channel appears more as a depressional
wetland compared to the downstream
Facing upstream and west along UT 1 Reach 2 from
the downstream end of the Project Area. characteristics (wooded and more natural in
appearance). The substrate is composed of
gravel and smaller particles. This changes once
the channel leaves the Project Area to natural cobbles and boulders, which dominate the bedform
material.
ecOlterro_ Draft Prospectus—Alder Valley Mitigation Site 17

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
Unnamed Tributary 2—Reach 1 „ 1
This perennial tributary enters the Project Site via a 24 :
inch concrete pipe under Moores Mill Road. The
downstream invert of this pipe was even with the4. Yr * •
existing stream bed. Overall, the channel is slightly
'
entrenched exhibiting very little to no bedformtcort. 1
variability and evidence of unrestricted livestock access ,'
is common. Incision, or down-cutting, is common along . ' '
� ti yam. - t :.Y
the upper portion of this reach and bank height ratios • ` s
7 - :No('
average between 1.5 and 2.0. These ratios decrease with y r • ;�' �
length; however, the channel remains unstable ';b �� �'�
throughout its reach. The G5 stream classification �i` : r��'
g .:.;
remains consistent along the upper portion of the Facing downstream along UT 2 Reach 1. Note the
channel. With a watershed size of more than 100 acres, trapezoidal channel and lack of buffer vegetation.
the tributary is fully capable of providing a direct source
of sediment and fecal coliform to the Flat River. If left untreated, these stressors will continue to
have a detrimental impact on downstream water quality, including two designated Critical Areas
established by the US Fish and Wildlife Service. The overall slope of the channel is less than one
percent.
Although minimal buffer vegetation does exist along portions of the reach, it is very narrow in
overall width with little diversity. Species observed were red maple (Acer rubrum), sugarberry or
hackberry (Celtis laevigata), willow oak (Quercus phellos), sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), eastern
red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), persimmon (Diospyros virginiana), tulip poplar (Liriodendron
tulipifera), and black walnut (Juglans nigra). In addition, non-native species including multiflora rose
(Rosa multiflora) and privet (Ligustrum sinense) were also noted. Multiple seeps and short tributaries
provide additional inputs to the channel. Although
canopy vegetation does sporadically exist, these areas
are not considered when comparing on-site resources
with a "closed" canopy. Where overstory canopy is
present, the understory of these areas is sparse. The
remainder of the buffer is open, consisting primarily of ,.a
herbaceous vegetation. The limited buffers alongReach i
gk.1 provide little protection from mass wasting and lack "-F n_
any means for nutrient uptake or removal due to their
limited area and composition. ,
Preliminary stream data information ascertained as part • - :: r:�
of this proposal effort, denotes characteristics consistent i'
with the Rosgen "G5" stream channel conditions. Facing upstream along UT 2 Reach 1 at a transitional
Bankfull width-depth ratios are less than 12 and area between open field and limited buffer.
entrenchment ratios exceed 2.0. Bank height ratios
ecojterro_ Draft Prospectus—Alder Valley Mitigation Site 18

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
averaged between 1.5 and 2.0 in the upper portion of this reach and decreased as channel slope
flattened. Anthropogenic site disturbance and periodic vegetation maintenance is obvious along
this reach.
Unnamed Tributary 2 -Reach 2
.1111111111111111111111111111
The second reach of the UT 2 channel has been
severely impacted by disturbance. Approximately 440 -
linear feet of this channel was potentially altered during ,
or following tree harvesting. Eco Terra has elected to _ .if
keep this portion of channel within the Project Area fig' s �" � �`
and conduct restoration activities (without the pursuit ' "�� �
•of credits) to ensure that both Reach 1, portions of z t u
Reach 2, and Reach 3 are connected and part of a
single project approach. The lack of bed and bank hti
features disqualified any attempts to determine the
channel classification. Currently, only herbaceous
Facingdownstream alongthe channelized and
vegetation remains within the buffer and this is
g recently mowed section of UT 2.
maintained on a periodic basis. This section of channel
provides a vital linkage between the upstream single thread and the existing irrigation pond.
Unnamed Tributary 2—Reach 3
This reach begins downstream of the disturbance along Reach 2 and continues into the
impoundment to its confluence with UT 1. The reach is impacted by backwater from the pond and is
currently inundated beneath the surface waters present. More information pertaining to the pond is
discussed in an earlier subsection.
Alder Valley Wetland Complex
The wetland complex associated with the Alder Valley Mitigation Site is separated into two distinct
categories: Headwater Forest and Floodplain Pool per the NC Wetland Assessment Methodology
(NCWAM). Headwater Forest wetlands are riparian wetlands that receive hydrology from overbank
flooding. These wetlands are typically located within small stream floodplain areas. In some
circumstances, they also receive groundwater from underlying conditions that result in additional
seepage. The other category consists of emergent conditions that are either permanently or
frequently inundated. Floodplain Pool wetlands generally occur along the fringes of a water feature
and receive hydrology based on the water elevation set at the standpipe or drain along the dam.
Four riparian wetland areas were discovered adjacent to the UT 2 Reach 1 channel. One additional
riparian wetland was identified along UT 2 Reach 3. All five of the Headwater Forest wetlands were
in poor condition due to current land use activities. The two Floodplain Pool wetlands were
observed in the transition areas from stream channel to open water. For the naming convention,
each wetland area has been assigned a letter combination (i.e., WA, WB, WC, etc.). Wetland data
forms are provided in Appendix B.
eCojerrO_ Draft Prospectus—Alder Valley Mitigation Site 19

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
Riparian Wetlands (degraded Headwater Forest)
Wetlands A, B, and C (WA, WB, and WC) are situated ,
ate,. _
along the south side of the UT 2 channel within the
portion of stream identified as Reach A. These wetlands
have been impacted from both past and current land
use activities, but still exhibit wetland hydrology,
hydrophytic vegetation, and hydric soils.
Wetland A, or WA, is visible from Moores Mill Road. n
This riparian wetland is dominated by herbaceous
vegetation including, but not limited to soft rush E 1
(Juncus effusus) sedge (Carex spp.) smartweed "
(Polygonum sp.), mint (Mentha sp.), and Japanese stilt
grass (Microstegium vimineum). Saturation was
observed at or near the soil surface. Clayey soils Facing east towards Wetland A. UT 2 Reach 1 is to the left of
dominate the upper profile. Although heavily impacted the photo.
by livestock and periodic mowing, Wetland A maintains
a visible nexus with UT 2 Reach 1 via UT 3. This intermittent channel was flowing during the Site
reconnaissance and exhibits typical flow regimes.
Wetland B (WB) is located immediately east of WA. Similar in landscape function and setting, this
wetland exhibits a more diverse vegetative composition. Willow oak, tag alder (Alnus serrulata),
sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), and black willow
(Salix nigra) serve as canopy/ understory components. 1 F ► +j ��s ,y a,
Coupled with jewelweed (Impatiens capensis), mint, "ik\► ,1 ' '' "i �.'
smartweed, soft rush, sedge, and false stinging nettle t ,•-'Y ¢.'t ' •
the vegetative diversityis high � �s
(Boehmeria cylindrica), g g ,�'
despite the degraded appearance and function. In F � l �� " ;' k
p g p p , ► 1 ��
addition, multiple stems of non-native species were also rl •
�'
observed. These included specimens of multiflora rose y" = •' .'
and Japanese stilt grass. Hydrology is very similar to WA
except that there is not a defined stream channel ri '1 ^ h ..� �. • •f
connecting this feature with UT 2. This depression is _ - , � _ .� �-•=::.-.;+-= 3,.1:.• ...,,,:=•-='.Rs.?�.�,
also dominated byclayey soils. r '= x'"`
Wetland C (WC) is along the southern side of UT 2. ;,•
Located downstream of WA and WB, this wetland is
dominated by tag alder. Other species present are Facing northeast from within Wetland C.
willow oak, sweetgum, black willow,jewelweed, and
Japanese stilt grass. UT 4 serves as a nexus connecting this wetland area to UT 2. Saturation is at or
near the soil surface throughout the feature.
Wetland D, or WD, is situated northwest of UT 2 within the existing cattle pasture. The vegetation
composition is entirely herbaceous and consists of ironweed (Vernonia sp.), soft rush, sedge, and
smartweed. Other attributes include hydrology within six inches of the soil surface, wetland drainage
patterns, oxidized rhizospheres, and consistency with the F3 hydric soil indicator (depleted matrix).
eCojterra- Draft Prospectus—Alder Valley Mitigation Site 20

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
Wetlands E (WE) and G (WG) are both emergent in
appearance and function and are situated along the
upper portion of the irrigation pond along UT 2 and UT
1, respectively. The hydrology of these wetlands is
dependent on the water level of the pond. Aster (Aster
sp.), ironweed, smartweed, tear-thumb (Persicaria sp.),
false stinging nettle,jewelweed, soft rush, and an
occasional stem of black willow are present. Their soils !` :;;':.:'_t-
are clayey with saturation at or near the surface. s =
Wetland F (WF) is the fifth riparian wetland. It is located • �' ` ` 7;•' .;
alongthe west side of UT 2 Reach 2. Dominant
yr
vegetation includes soft rush, smartweed, sedge, spike 1
rush (Eleocharis sp.), ironweed, and fescue (Festuca sp.).
Facing northeast at Wetland D.
Documented Cultural Resources
The NC State Historic Preservation Office's (SHPO) online mapping resource was reviewed to
determine the presence of known historic resources at or near the Project Site. According to the
database, there are no resources on the property that are associated with the Project. There are
however, ten historical resources and one historic district within one mile of the Project (Figure 7).
Based on available data, at least three of these resources have disappeared since their surveys.
Cultural Resources Noted Within One Mile of the Proposed Project Area:
1. DH1783 Hill Forest Log Houses (Study List: 1988). Located along State Forest Road
approximately one mile southeast of the Project Site. The resource has three circa
1933-1935 rustic log cottages.
2. DH2528 Quail Roost (Study List: 1988). This Site is situated near the corner of US 501
and Quail Roost Farm Road approximately one mile south of the Project Site.
3. DH2529 Quail Roost Barn Complex (Surveyed Only). Located along US 501
approximately one mile south of the Project Site.
4. DH25556 Rougemont Village Historic District (Study List): Located along Red
Mountain Road approximately one mile northwest of the Project Site. Includes
multiple homes, structures, etc.
5. DH2114 JJ Thacker House (Study List: 1988). Located along Red Mountain Road
approximately one mile northwest of the Project Site. Included as part of the
Rougemont Village Historic District
6. DH1806 James Young House (Surveyed Only). Located at the Red Mountain Road/
Quarterhorse Run intersection approximately one mile northwest of the Project Site.
7. DH1766 Holtkamp House (Surveyed Only). Located along Red Mountain Road
approximately one mile northwest of the Project Site.
8. DH2293 Thom's House (approximate Site) (Surveyed Only). Located along Red
Mountain Road approximately one mile northwest of the Project Site.
9. DH2202 Bowling Toms House— gone (Surveyed Only). Located near the Red
Mountain Road/ Moores Mill Road intersection approximately one mile north of the
Project Site.
eCojerrO_ Draft Prospectus—Alder Valley Mitigation Site 21

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
10. DH2530 Red Mountain Post Office- gone (Surveyed Only). Located along Red
Mountain Road approximately one mile north of the Project Site.
11. DH2195 Bowling Mill aka. Red Mountain Mill -gone (Study List:1986). Located along
Red Mountain Road approximately one mile northeast of the Project Site. Structure
included a 19th Century grist mill.
Protected Species
The US Fish and Wildlife Service Information for Planning and Consultation Species List dated
October 5, 2021 identifies five federally listed species under the Endangered Species Act as
potentially occurring at or near the Project location in Durham County (Table 4). According to the
NC Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) Data Explorer Report (dated October 2021), there are two
occurrences of federally listed species within one mile of the Project Site. These include the Atlantic
pigtoe and the Neuse River waterdog, both aquatic species. Critical Habitats have been established
for both species along the Flat River. These habitats do not extend into the Project Area. As part of
Task 1, a concurrence request will be submitted to the USFWS Raleigh Field Office.
Table 4: Federally Listed Species Potentially Occurring in Durham County
Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status* Suitable
Habitat
Fusconaia masoni Atlantic pigtoe PT No
Echinacea laevigata Smooth coneflower E Yes
Necturus lewisi Neuse River waterdog T No
Noturus furiosus Carolina madtom E No
Rhus michauxii Michaux's sumac E Yes
* E- Endangered,T-Threatened, PT-Proposed Threatened
Airports
There are no public airports within five miles of the Project Site. The closest airport is west of US
501, approximately six miles northwest of the Site. It is identified as The Raleigh Regional Airport at
Person County.
Adjacent and Proximal Planning Elements
The NC Natural Heritage Program data explorer identifies multiple managed and natural areas
within a five-mile radius of the Project Site (Figure 8). Closer to, and within one mile of the Project
Site, seven managed areas and two naturals area exist. None of these are within the proposed
conservation easement; however, several are in very close proximity. These include:
• Managed Area: NC Land and Water Fund Project (NC DNCR, NCLWF) ID 3532, 948.38
acres. Located on the parent property and downstream (east) of the Project Site.
• Managed Area: Farm and Ranch Lands Protection Program (USDA NRCS) Project ID
11350, 872.67 acres. Located on the parent property and outside of the Project Site.
• Managed Area: Durham County Easement (Durham County) ID 11782, 923.07 acres.
Located on the parent property and allows for extractive use.
eCojerrO_ Draft Prospectus-Alder Valley Mitigation Site 22

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
• Managed Area: Hill Demonstration Forest (NC State University)
ID 119, 2,427.8 acres. Borders parent property to the east.
• Managed Area: Hill Forest/ Flat River Dedicated Nature Preserve
(NC State University) ID 630, 149.22 acres. Situated along the Flat The US Fish and
River, adjacent to the parent property. Wildlife Service has
Managed Area: Critical Habitat— Neuse River Waterdog (USFWS), established Critical
• 2,605.61 acres. Situated along the Flat River, adjacent to the Habitat Areas for
parent property. two aquatic species in
Managed Area: NEU/Flat River Aquatic Habitat (PW), 265.02 the Flat River,
• acres. Situated along the Flat River, adjacent to the parent immediately
property. downstream of the
Natural Area: Flat River Slopes above Lake Michie (local, NCSU, Site.
• private), 2,504.27. Located on parent property.
• Natural Area: Eno-New Hope Wildlife Habitat Connectivity
(undefined). Includes the parent property.
Other Site Constraints
According to Federal Emergency Management Agency maps, no floodplains occur at or
immediately outside of the proposed conservation area. There are no other known constraints with
the Site.
Project Development
Once all restoration and enhancement amounts have been converted to Mitigation Units, the Alder
Valley Mitigation Site proposes to generate up to 4,540 SMUs, 945,700 BMUs, 0.3 WMUs, and
993,000 Nutrient Offset Credits (51,816 lbs N/ 3,337 lbs P). These credits were derived based on the
following criteria and further defined in Table 5. Although wetland communities exist within the Site,
no credits will be generated as a result of enhancement activities. Credit generation in these areas
will be covered under the BMU category.
%0/
eoUterra_ Draft Prospectus—Alder Valley Mitigation Site 23

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
Resource Parameter Metric Notes
Includes dimension, pattern, and profile. Based on linear
Restoration 1:1 Ratio footage calculated along the thalweg.
Streams
Enhancement II 2.5:1 Ratio Includes one of the three attributes mentioned above. Based
on linear footage calculated along the thalweg.
Includes establishment of the buffer area, planting, invasive
Riparian Restoration 1:1 Ratio species control, and fencing, where applicable.Values are
Buffers
measured in square feet.
Hydrology and hydric soils are present. Uplift is proposed by
Wetlands Enhancement N/A removing the sources causing impairment and planting
native vegetation.
Includes establishment of the buffer area, planting, invasive
Nutrient species control, and fencing, where applicable.Values are
Offset Restoration 1:1 Ratio measured in square feet. Specific amounts were determined
using DWR's Credit Calculation Tool v3 2020-08-03 file.
Table 5:AVMS Proposed Mitigation Credits
BMUs Nutrient Offset (Ibs)
Stream Reach Mitigation Approach SMUs 2
0-100 ft 100-200 ft
UT 1 - 1 Restoration 1,291 258,400 258,400
UT 1 -2 Restoration 907 181,400 181,400
UT 2—1 Restoration 1,170 234,200 234,200
UT 2—2 Restoration 0** 47,300 94,600
UT 2-3 Restoration 1,122 224,400 224,400
UT 3 Enhancement II 26 - -
UT 4 Enhancement II 24 - -
Totals 4,540 945,700 993,000 (51,816 lbs N.
3,337 lbs P)
SMU—Stream Mitigation Unit, BMU—Buffer Mitigation Unit
** No SMU or BMU credit amounts in the 0-50' buffer area were generated along UT 2 Reach 2 due to a potential site
alteration.These areas will be restored under good faith.
}/
ecO,jterra. Draft Prospectus—Alder Valley Mitigation Site 24

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
Stream Restoration/Enhancement Approach
Stream restoration efforts (channel dimension, pattern, and profile) are proposed along the entire
UT 1 and UT 2 channels. Restoration will be accomplished through a combination of analytical and
analog and/or reference reach-based design methods. The result will be Priority Level I stream
restoration, that reconnects the existing channels with their associated floodplains once bankfull
discharges occur. The cross-section geometry, planform, and profile will be modified to restore
appropriate capacity and sinuosity to the channelized streams. The Priority Level I stream restoration
will incorporate the design of single-thread, meandering channels with parameters based on data
taken from nearby reference Sites, empirical relationships, and NC Rural Piedmont Regional Curves.
Eco Terra estimates that up to 4, 490 linear feet of stream channel will be reconstructed.
Stream Enhancement Level II activities are proposed along UTs 3 and 4. Due to the limited length of
both channels, this level of enhancement provides the best opportunity for success without
additional risk. These activities will incorporate efforts to change at least one of the parameters
(channel dimension, pattern, or profile) while also restricting livestock access, revegetating the area,
and treating for non-native vegetation. Eco Terra estimates that up to 125 linear feet of stream
channel will be uplifted via the implementation of Ell design methodologies.
Current stream conditions demonstrate significant degradation with varying degrees of incision or
entrenchment as a result of historic straightening and channelization performed to promote both
livestock and agricultural-based management. Surveyed cross sections indicate significant Site
instability throughout the restoration reaches. To address the incision caused by channelization, the
proposed restoration design will incorporate raised bed elevations. Conceptual designs are
provided in Figure 9 and a proposed stream morphology table is provided in Table 6. No riparian
buffers currently exist along UT 1 and those associated with UT 2 are very narrow with limited
species variability.
The Alder Valley Site design approach will begin with a thorough study of existing conditions,
including the Site's streams and ditches, valleys, and watershed. Design parameters, including active
channel, habitat, and floodplain features, will be developed from analysis of suitable reference
streams and data gleaned from other existing Sites. Other empirical data sets such as the applicable
reference reach databases may be used to verify design parameters. Analytical design techniques
will be an important element of the project and will be used to determine the design discharge and
verify the design.
It is anticipated that months prior to the construction, the existing pond dam will be breached and
slowly dewatered according to the NC Division of Energy, Mineral, and Land Resources' (NCDEMLR)
guidance. The area will be dewatered before any work with pond sediment is conducted. Once the
area is deemed dry enough by the engineer to initiate earthwork, the dam will be removed. If the
material excavated is deemed suitable (via sediment testing) for reuse in the grading operation, it
will be stockpiled for future use. If the material is not suitable, the contractor will be required to
remove the material in its entirety from the Project Area. Any residual sediments will be excavated
to native ground, spread, and stabilized with an appropriate seed mix within the limits of the Project
Site. If remaining saturated residual sediments are present, they will be stockpiled in loose lifts and
%°/
rem erro_ Draft Prospectus—Alder Valley Mitigation Site 25

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
allowed to dry prior to reuse. This method will ultimately reduce the potential for unnecessary
sediment runoff and/or sloughing. The Mitigation Plan will detail plans, sequence of construction,
and any special notes regarding implementation. All work will be in accordance with the approved
Sediment and Erosion Control plan and other required permit conditions.
Table 6:AVMS Stream Morphological Table—Proposed Conditions*
Parameter UT 1 R1 UT 1 R2 UT 2 R1 UT R32 & UT 3 &4
Cross-Sect.Area,Abkf -9-11 -15-17 -5-8 -8-11 -1-2
(ft2)
Width,Wbkf(ft) TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
Width/Depth Ratio, >12 >12 >12 >12 >12
LES
W/D
Mean Depth, Dmean (ft) TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
Channel Slope, S (%) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
0
v Stream Type(Rosgen) C5 C5 C5 C5 C5
v,
0
0- Bank Height Ratio, BHR 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Velocity(ft/s) -0.5 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5
Discharge(ft3/s) -5 -5 -5 -5 -5
Entrenchment Ratio >2.2 >2.2 >2.2 >2.2 >2.2
Note: Stream data and all ratios are based on assumed elevations and limited survey.This data is for comparison
purposes only.Comprehensive data will be incorporated once stream surveys have been completed and designs are
prepared.
NA: Portions of the existing channels have been altered to the extent that measurements were not feasible due to lack of
bedform and Site and/or inundation (ponding).
TBD: To Be Determined.Comprehensive data will be incorporated once stream surveys have been completed and designs
are prepared.
Engineering analyses will be performed using various hydrologic and hydraulic models to verify the
reference reach/analog-based designs. It is anticipated that a combination of methods (including
HEC-HMS, Hydraflow Hydrographs, and flood frequency analysis) will be used to calculate flows
received by the channel for bankfull and other significant storm events. A HEC-RAS model will then
be used to simulate water surface elevations of flows generated by the hydrologic analysis. The
development of the HEC models is an important component to the design; therefore, model input
parameters are field verified when possible. Design parameters developed through the analyses of
reference reach data and hydrologic and hydraulic modeling will be confirmed using the Stable
Channel Design function and/or the Sediment Transport Analysis components within HEC-RAS.
While stream designs will be verified by simulations of hydrology and fluvial processes, analogs of
desirable habitat features will be derived from reference sites and integrated into the project design.
Both in-stream and riparian habitat features will be designed. In-stream woody and rock-based
structures such as constructed riffles, log vanes, and rock cross vanes will be used, as necessary,
throughout the project to act as grade control and for Site stabilization by dissipating and
redirecting the stream's energy. Site stability will be enhanced further through the installation of
eCojerrO_ Draft Prospectus-Alder Valley Mitigation Site 26

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
brush mattresses and cuttings consisting of species such as silky willow (Salix sericea) and silky
dogwood (Corpus amomum).
In-stream habitat is highly dependent on available cover and organic material. A quantitative habitat
assessment method will be used to measure type, location, and quantity of habitat in the reference
streams. During design, the habitat assessment results will be scaled appropriately to the design
parameters, and habitat features will be placed in the restored channels to mimic reference
conditions. This process provides a natural channel design that addresses aquatic function in
addition to stability.
Sections of abandoned UT 1 and UT 2 stream channels will be backfilled with material excavated
from the new channels to the elevation of the floodplain in areas adjacent to the new channel. The
floodplain will be planted with native species creating a vegetated buffer, which will provide
numerous water quality and ecological benefits. Species selection for re-vegetation of the riparian
buffer will consist of those identified during the reference survey and additional species suggested
by Schafale (2012) for the Mesic Mixed Forest and Piedmont Bottomland Hardwood Forest
communities. Conceptual species are listed in Table 7. Stream Sites will be stabilized using a
combination of erosion control matting, bare-root plantings, soil bio-engineering techniques,
structure placement, live stakes and sod transplants, where possible. The stream and adjacent
riparian areas will be protected by a minimum 50-foot permanent conservation easement on each
side of the stream, although actual buffer easement widths may range near 400 feet.
Table 7: Conceptual Planting Plan
Scientific Name Common Name Stratum Forest Type
Asimina triloba Paw paw Understory BHF
Carpinus caroliniana Ironwood Understory BHF
Carya ovata Shagbark Hickory Canopy BHF
Celtis laevigata Hackberry Canopy BHF
Fagus grandifolia American beech Canopy MMF
Ilex opaca American holly Understory MMF, BHF
Liriodendron tulipifera Tulip poplar Canopy MMF, BHF
Ostrya virginiana American hophornbeam Canopy MMF
Quercus alba White oak Canopy MMF, BHF
Quercus michauxii Swamp chestnut oak Canopy BHF
Quercus pagoda Cherrybark oak Canopy BHF
Quercus rubra Northern red oak Canopy MMF
Ulmus americana American elm Canopy BHF
Forest Type: MMF—Mesic Mixed Forest, BHF—Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Note:Actual species will be based on reference community composition and available supply.
When these components are combined, a highly functioning low gradient gravel channel with
diverse habitats will be established. According to Stream Mitigation Guidelines (2003) published by
the USACE, the US Environmental Protection Agency, the NC Wildlife Resources Commission, and
eCojerra_ Draft Prospectus—Alder Valley Mitigation Site 27

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
the NC Department of Environmental Quality, the proposed restoration will meet the guidelines of
stream restoration and will be subject to a mitigation ratio of 1:1. The project will also follow the IRT
Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update (2016).
Riparian Buffer Approach
The restoration of the riparian buffers along the Project streams aims to reduce the main stressors
of sediment and nutrient inputs. The Project will provide ecological uplift by planting and ultimately
establishing a riparian buffer corridor along the Project streams. The corridor will be planted at a
density suitable to meet the requirements for buffer mitigation stated in the Consolidated Buffer
Mitigation Rule 15A NCAC 02B. 0295 (CBMR). The restored riparian buffer will reduce the amount of
sediment and nutrients that are entering the Project streams by restoring up to 993,000 square feet
of riparian buffer. The Project will be implemented in a DMS identified TLW and will meet and
exceed the goal of targeted implementation of projects under the Buffer programs. This approach
will help enhance water quality on a watershed level by concentrating projects within targeted
areas.
The revegetation plan for the buffer restoration area will include permanent seeding, planting bare
root trees, and treatment of invasive plant species (as necessary). The planting will consist of a
minimum of four native hardwood tree species. Two planting zones will be established, one for the
areas receiving periodic overbank flows and the other for the upland areas. The specific tree species
chosen will depend on availability at the time of planting and will be detailed in the Mitigation Plan.
The restored Neuse River riparian buffer area will be protected with a conservation easement
extending up to 200 feet outward on either side of the channel from the top of the restored stream
bank.
Wetland Enhancement Approach (No Credit Generation)
According to the NC Wetland Assessment Method (NCWAM), the five riparian wetlands are
classified as Headwater Forest wetlands. The two emergent wetlands fall under the Floodplain Pool
classification. The Headwater Forest (NCWAM) wetland complex will be enhanced through
revegetation and removal of livestock. Because credit is being generated for riparian buffer and
nutrient offset, no credits will be offered as part of this Project. Once the pond dam is breached, the
existing Floodplain Pool wetlands will likely loose hydrology. Minor grading, no deeper than six
inches may occur in areas with compacted soils or highly disturbed areas from past agricultural
activities that are shown during a detailed topographic survey. These areas will be planted with
native hardwood trees to promote the growth of vegetation typically found in a Piedmont
Bottomland Hardwood (Schafale, M.P., 2012)
Site Preparation and Stabilization
All disturbed areas will be stabilized to prevent erosion. To provide a rapid herbaceous cover,
planting of a temporary seed mix will be implemented, as required by the NCDEMLR. All disturbed
areas within the buffer will receive an appropriate permanent riparian seed mix (Table 8).
eCojerrO_ Draft Prospectus-Alder Valley Mitigation Site 28

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
Table 8: Conceptual Seed Mixes
Common Application
Scientific Name Common Name Scientific Name
Name Period
Permanent Cover Temporary Cover
Agrostis perennans Autumn bentgrass Hordeum sp. Barley Winter
Andropogon gerardii Big bluestem Secale cereal Winter rye Winter
Coreopsis lanceolata Lanceleaf coreopsis Panicum ramosum Browntop millet Summer
Elymus virginicus Virginia wildrye Pennisetum glaucum Pearl millet Summer
Panicum virgatum Switchgrass Sorghum bicolor Sudangrass Summer
Rudbeckia hirta Black-eyed susan Setaria italica German foxtail Winter
millet
Schizachyrium scoparium Little bluestem
Sorghastrum nutans I Indian grass
Tripsacum dactyloides Eastern gammagrass
Marking and Protecting of Easement Boundary
The easement boundary will be protected in perpetuity. It has been agreed upon by the landowners
and provides adequate protection for all resources proposed as part of the Project. The easement
has been strategically located to connect adjacent natural habitats and extend wildlife corridors
throughout the Project Site and surrounding areas.
Marking and protecting of the easement boundary will utilize various methods depending upon the
existing land use. All easement areas will utilize rebar on all corners with aluminum survey caps. All
livestock areas will be fenced with a minimum of five strands of barbed wire or woven wire including
at least one strand of barbed wire. Conservation easement signs will be posted at all corners, gates,
access points, and at 200-foot intervals.
Project Ecological Uplift
The restoration streams and enhancement of existing wetlands at the Project Site will help reduce
the potential of sediment and nutrient inputs from reaching the Flat River. A Conservation Easement
will protect the Site in perpetuity. Ecological uplift will be achieved by restoring stream channels to a
natural dimension, pattern, and profile and enhancing riparian wetland vegetation with appropriate
species. With the ultimate conversion of land use from agricultural to forest, an intact riparian
ecosystem will be created similar to other stable systems along the Flat River. The Flat River is
currently identified as a Critical Area for two freshwater mussel species. It also serves as one of the
main sources for Falls Lake, Raleigh's drinking water supply. It is imperative that this watershed and
inherent natural resources be protected to the maximum extent practicable. The Site will be planted
at a density suitable to meet requirements for stream, wetland, and buffer mitigation according to
current US Army Corps of Engineers and NC Division of Water Resources guidance.
This project will address multiple goals set forth by the State for the protection of aquatic and
natural resources. Table 9 summarizes the proposed ecological uplift provided by the Project.
%0/
eoUterra_ Draft Prospectus—Alder Valley Mitigation Site 29

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
Table 9: Proposed Ecological Uplift
Activity Goal Addressed Uplift
Improve water quality by reestablishing the connections
Stream Reduce nutrient and sediment between the stream channels and their floodplains. This
Restoration & inputs; Increase dissolved oxygen; increases retention time on-Site for the filtering of
Enhancement Improve hydrologic connection sediment and nutrients prior to flows reaching their
receiving waters
Improve water quality by allowing diffuse flow from
surrounding cattle pasture to filter through a vegetated
Reduce nutrient and sediment
Riparian Buffer inputs; Runoff infiltration; riparian buffer and forested wetland. This increases
Restoration Restoration of habitats retention time on-Site for sediment, nutrients, and fecal
coliform to settle or be absorbed. The vegetated buffer
will provide wildlife habitat with a native food source.
Reduce nutrient, sediment,and fecal Improve water quality by allowing diffuse flow from
Planting stream-
coliform reduction by restoring surrounding cattle pasture to filter through a vegetated
riparian buffers riparian buffer and forested wetland.This increased runoff
side locations AND
retention time in the vegetated buffer allows sediment,
with native Enhance/restore wetlands
nutrients, and fecal coliform to settle out or be absorbed.
hardwood trees AND
Restore terrestrial habitats The vegetated buffer will provide wildlife habitat with a
native food source.
Enhance existing Improve water quality by increasing time water spends in
degraded the wetland before it reaches the Flat River. In addition,
wetlands Enhance wetlands via vegetation the restoration of stream channels will allow for the
establishment
(secondary hydrologic reconnection to the floodplain during bankfull
benefit) events.
Recording a
Improve water quality by focusing project implementation
conservation Protect project in perpetuity
in targeted areas to increase the density of projects.
easement.
Success Criteria
The success of the planted vegetation, wetland hydrology, and integrity of the easement boundary
will be monitored on a yearly basis for a minimum of seven years to determine overall project
success and the expected ecological uplift described in the Project Development Section. The
success criteria for the Alder Valley Site will follow current accepted and approved success criteria
presented in the USACE Stream Mitigation Guidelines, IRT requirements, and any subsequent
guidance. Specific success criteria components are presented below. Monitoring reports will be
prepared annually and submitted to the IRT.
�fI
eCojerra_ Draft Prospectus—Alder Valley Mitigation Site 30

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
As-Built Survey
An as-built survey will be conducted following construction to document channel size, condition,
and location, as well as buffer elevations. The survey will include plan views, dimension and
longitudinal profile data to compare with future geomorphic data.
Visual Monitoring
Visual monitoring of all mitigation areas will be conducted a minimum of twice per monitoring year
by qualified individuals. The visual assessments will include vegetation density, vigor, invasive
species, and easement encroachments. Visual assessments of ditch plug stability will occur. Digital
images will be recorded at fixed representative locations during each monitoring event; any noted
problem areas or areas of concern will also be photographed and mapped. Results of visual
monitoring will be presented in a plan view exhibit with a brief description of problem areas and
digital images. Photographs will be used to subjectively evaluate channel aggradation or
degradation, bank erosion and success of riparian vegetation. A series of photos over time should
indicate successional maturation of non-riparian vegetation.
Hydrology
Permanent cross sections will be installed at a minimum of one per 20 bankfull widths with half in
pools and half in riffles along the restoration reaches. Cross section measurements will include bank
height ratio and entrenchment ratio. Cross sections will be monitored annually. Morphological
changes are anticipated during and immediately after the first several bankfull events; however,
these changes should be minimal as the channels attempt to acquire equilibrium. These changes
should become less apparent as yearly data is accumulated. If major changes begin to take place,
they will be evaluated to determine rationale and whether or not the end result is a less stable
condition (i.e., down-cutting or erosion). Minor changes commonly observed generally represent an
increase in stability (i.e., settling, vegetative changes, deposition along the banks, or decrease in
width/depth ratio). Bank height ratios shall not exceed 1.2, and entrenchment ratios shall be no less
than 1.4 within restored reaches. Channel stability should be demonstrated through a minimum of
two bankfull events documented in the seven-year monitoring period.
Surface Flow and Hydrology
Surface flow stages will be recorded via pressure transducers or crest gages strategically placed
along each of the UTs. These gages will depict high flow elevations for the determination of bankfull
events.
Vegetative Success Criteria
Specific and measurable success criteria for plant density within the wetland restoration areas on
the Site will follow IRT Guidance. Vegetation monitoring plots will be a minimum 0.02 acres (100 m2)
in size and will cover a minimum of two percent of the planted area. The following data will be
recorded for all trees in the plots: species, height, planting date (or volunteer), and grid location.
Monitoring will occur in Years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7. The interim measures of vegetative success for the
Site will be the survival of at least 320 three-year old trees per acre at the end of Monitoring Year 3,
and 260 trees per acre at the end of Monitoring Year 5. The final vegetative success criteria will be
the survival of 210 trees per acre at the end of Monitoring Year 7 of the monitoring period. Invasive
eCokerra_ Draft Prospectus—Alder Valley Mitigation Site 31

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
and noxious species will be monitored and controlled so that none become dominant or alter the
desired community structure of the Site. If necessary, Eco Terra will develop a species-specific
control plan.
Other Criteria
In addition to normal criteria proposed with similar type projects, Eco Terra proposes to provide
pre- and post-condition assessments for benthic macroinvertebrates, water quality, and fish
assessments along UTs 1 and 2. The details of the methodology and reporting of these parameters
will be presented in the mitigation plan and agreed upon by the IRT prior to construction.
Remedial Actions
The Mitigation Plan will include a detailed adaptive management plan that will address how
potential problems are resolved. In the event that the Site, or a specific component of the Site fails
to achieve the defined success criteria, Eco Terra will develop necessary adaptive management plans
and/or implement appropriate remedial actions for the Site in coordination with the IRT. Remedial
action required will be designed to achieve the success criteria specified previously, and will include
identification of the causes of failure, remedial design approach, work schedule, and monitoring
criteria that will take into account physical and climatic conditions.
Proposed Credit Release Schedule
All credit releases will be based on the total credit generated as reported by the as-built survey of
the Site. The pre-construction credit release will be based on the total amount in the Final
Mitigation Plan. The second credit release will be based on the As-built survey and will adjust the
total released credits based on the actual constructed or enhanced channel lengths. The IRT will
determine if performance standards have been satisfied sufficiently to meet the requirements of the
release schedule below. In cases where some performance standards have not been met, credits
may still be released depending on the specifics of the case. At the direction of the IRT, monitoring
may be required to be extended, depending on the extent to which the site fails to meet the
specified performance standard. The release of project credits will be subject to the criteria
described in Table 10.
%°/
o�err o_ Draft Prospectus—Alder Valley Mitigation Site 32

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
Table 10: Proposed Stream, Buffer, and Nutrient Offset Credit Release
Release Credit Release Activity Interim Credit Release/
Milestone Total Release
1 Site Establishment(includes all required criteria stated above) 15%/15%
2 Baseline Monitoring Report and As-built survey 15%/30%
3 First year monitoring report demonstrates success criteria being met 10%/40%
4 Second year monitoring report demonstrates success criteria being 10%/50%
met
5 Third year monitoring report demonstrates success criteria being met 10%/60%*
6 Fourth year monitoring report demonstrates success criteria being 5%/65%*
met
7 Fifth year monitoring report demonstrates success criteria being met 10%/75%*
8 Sixth year monitoring report demonstrates success criteria being met 5%/80%*
9 Seventh year monitoring report demonstrates success criteria being 10%/90%*
met
*10%reserve of credits to be held back until the bankfull event performance standard has been met. The 10%credit
release will be awarded in the monitoring period demonstrating success of the bankfull requirement.
Proposed Ownership and Long-Term Management
Eco Terra Partners, LLC, acting as the Sponsor, will establish a conservation easement, and will
monitor the Site for a minimum of seven years. The Mitigation Plan will provide detailed information
regarding Site operation, including long term management and annual monitoring activities, for
review and approval by the IRT. Upon approval of the Site by the IRT, the Site will be transferred to a
long-term land steward (to be determined in the Mitigation Plan). The long-term steward will be
responsible for periodic inspection of the Site to ensure the terms of the conservation easement are
being upheld. Endowment funds required to maintain the conservation easement will be negotiated
with the responsible party.
Assurance of Water Rights
Sufficient water rights exist to support the long-term sustainability of the Site, as there are no
severed rights on the property.
eCojerrO_ Draft Prospectus—Alder Valley Mitigation Site 33

Eco Terra Partners, LLC I Alder Valley Mitigation Site, Durham County, NC
References
N.C. Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). 2021. Neuse River Basin Documents. Available:
https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/mitigation-services/dms-planning/watershed-planning-
documents/neuse-river-basin.
N.C. Department of Environmental Quality. Division of Mitigation Services. 2010. Neuse River Basin
Restoration Priorities 2010, Amended August 2018.
N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources. N.C. State Historic Preservation Office. 2021.
(https://nc.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=79ea671 ebdcc45639f086025
7d5f5ed7) (Accessed October, 2021).
N.C. Floodplain Mapping Program. 2020. N.C. Flood Risk Information System.
(https://fris.nc.gov/fris/Home.aspx?ST=NC) (Accessed October, 2020).
N.C. Natural Heritage. Data Explorer. 2021. https://ncnhde.natureserve.org/ (Accessed October,
2021)
N.C. Wetland Assessment Method (NCWAM) User Manual. Prepared by the NC Wetland Functional
Assessment Team. v.5.1. 2015.
Schafale, M.P. 2012. Guide to the Natural Communities of North Carolina: Fourth. North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, NCDENR. Raleigh, North
Carolina. 217 pp.
US Army Corps of Engineers. Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation
Update. North Carolina Interagency Review Team — October 24, 2016.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2021. Official Soils Description.
(https://soilseries.sc.egov.usda.gov).
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2021. Web Soil Survey.
(https://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/). (Accessed October, 2021).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2021. Endangered Species, Threatened Species, Federal Species of
Concern, and Candidate Species, Durham County, North Carolina. Assessed October 5, 2021.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/report/species-listings-by-current-range-county?fips=37063
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2021. Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) request. Dated
October 5, 2021.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/GFETV74O0FEZRAOU7CG74UIZFU/resources
edS erra_ Draft Prospectus—Alder Valley Mitigation Site 34

Figures

Pro.ect Site
40411111.11111118. ilifek'' s 1
400111,, II IPA At*4
...051101.111* will drItiNt-le
..... abielLveN,, , „.
OW.iv - ' -..,,,
*0 •_,.„5 I lilt
Town of :ry,County of Durham,State
of North Carolina DOT,Esri,HERE,
Garmin,USGS, NGA,EPA,USDA,NPS
' Legend f >>/./,,, , fif
r ' 0 7�: � ��� t�' ` /� • '-��- a Tam»
0 Proposed Conservation Easement , f -,- - )' �.\` t� t ��' \ 'd
11 fr,"-(2' . \ - - ---'n
00 E?
(..I / // _-.. •
' -�� fig..,//,/. \ /I1���v' , /�� . (\ ; I�zi � )- -N) ,JI
,i v I A ( qT. (�\� A{ i` J^6-" ��rl / �r,, V 1 ` / //J� �!J/� 1 'C-
III r
i 7, Ro ,„o, 4v):„ Y ) •
�_'/ i _ \; yv"j,_-(;1i)i,*-- ‘),,;(*- / ,f:y r i'.,_,.-,-f,iJc` 1 C \C 1, 1 " !'. . sc r.\.--cc-?c-r.. ,_r,) 1 `�,'-\
( 44
00
V ,;),,,' \. . il--,.. '--.- ,-- ii.
r lP' ,ir op I
s 9 ' 1 l ` /1i��))t1, e} o Ma 1 .��JINj 3 / r, -,,-,-4-..,-(, ,, c%
':'\ Wrfr f I t ' (s. ).( 0 T., j, „.
-} \-7--,' fi ap'ii tr----- 'N. A:.! i ---))19!'?.. !•ek•. • ;it.ii 7- r-11\ \:,,.\, , ikt/ ,..i;
0. I l P (T,)3 N ....." A r , , „ , c .\ . ..r ; , ..,._„\_25,_ , . \,_
A , ,, .....)
A i -)r- .-z) )1 -,, . ,) \- --,14e.k 2.,,,:__L, rob°erMe:::(Al.—) ,,)S_t--_-__--3\c'j)c_:'', t);1)\,,\,/,t7. -4-;,,r-lz,((----_/<-1-"\--
' \ ,i `,\ ) ., i.-A c �� , ..c)! .art.J v r� � .
�. fJ7 o NiJ � `. 111 C , � it
<ç/pL
`� l I o l 1r. _. -7 )) 411)1 .? �� 1 (J�� �\
\I ) . 0 ( - C'' '- ' C /(4%c, I/a 1010V'r N
r :) .- ,.0,/,__, , 4#- „_....1.,4
( s
viii/-1 ), , \ 'm . r ;.,,� .:,'- --)-I ( --- -,.o r, J %'' v it = ill
�C, , � ��`\ya, , fir` ,�2Ja :, ✓ (op)JI / � t \, •bx-(-_I 11 � �Jf(/�j�-' ,/^/" /
rr V /i .,•8 1, !ti ALL ROOIT HMI R'Tr: rt. / n - ` ' St __�1. , 1 l _ 2 *`
-11',/7 /.\_\ / ,, rr-, 1 M ''%?';‘,24&‘:--------- -,ri- f )/ '• e-__pk_ _ ,-.',;,/,-.S - ,\ .-- ,-_:
'iV- - •A WO. in _,I 4 (A -)-it ON Pvil, ' _1(
(l((:? ./ )11.0 r-),
f'ssS
K_eif �' ! ' � � pr , �, ��� � �� .. ����� �Jn I nt y .�'- fr )
/ `..- ` �i� ,� I\ Cou t �"s':ur. am,State of"North Carolina DOT` � arm' '1\
f;`l \ r � (7( r-(c/i---,� . _-i- /1 1 'INCREMENT P, Intermap,U`SGS, MET!' :tf,t USDA
...›
Figure 1: Vicinity Map N
00 Alder Valley Mitigation Site w- E
Neuse 03020201 S
Am' Durham County, NC
eco, terra, October 2021 0 0.25 0.5 1
Miles
USGS Topographic Quadrangles: Rougemont&Lake Michie

39
,ceyville — Legend
- "'
c7' .568 Fr0 Proposed Conservation Easement
,eat• FI'"'' I 0 8-Digit HUC 03020201
orrl
Project Site
Ha ma
Sapam
Sdtaa
occ aikk.r.chi
Saponi Selina -
$ Lane
Moue
Butner I....,.lili•,:,r
Met. - L.in.I•n1•I
u�_ Hilsbareugh
--c �-40
• n
Rec
•kr
Ia Durham E H -• ,
"� ',Yak•-F••r--.I 2.61r Nashville
Orr y•F1. C' it
5e3t
Chapel Hilo 4C•31.,
x fir
eser'..)
C.:, 4%
.i•i ii.!I I (
n
s Cary F.iii i5Lilc ',Vended
a.•_.ti•, Raleigh fl
laittsborowiis
a Everett Gainer
- •
IAl .La e S F1,v . �ye'g`°(. •
• Holly Lame rS ,
.__-. CP'ne .'prin9s Ben son F 5° Clayton N
.,,,
poop R..,m l - _ o1
S ea ron - �
- - /
' Hems F. quay- b.•-it
°e Rese voir I
' q}Id lit
5.n.i rr®
erh •
Selma
3•r Smith(iela , opynen Sn
Ai' i-
x 2-11 fr
Ra. 11 B. c+
Salford a 3. Park m /
•?, Four-Oaks L
13uIe5
Creek Coals :
Li Ding(on cr_
Benson
B G-dsboro
y wLa / -�
469 ft Erwin
Din /
Walkerlawn
Cohan
Sdtsa Cohair-
Lemhe,
ffe
ti atnLt' . Sdr.
C. n;r.aridrZ Olive
..r: F......, r ilr.r,r
Sp r mg Lake •
Esri, HERE,Garmin,USGS, NGA,EPA,USDA, NPS
•
Fors Bragg ._
For!Bragg
Military
Figure 2: Proposed Service Area N
`0 Alder Valley Mitigation Site W- E
Neuse 03020201 s
Durham County, NC
eco h erra, October 2021 0 5 10 20
Miles
ESRI Topographic Basemap

a •‘ - j '
, ,.. V tii,j3 ' , ,....,•
VI —
C.
�QI )--- /
V
f
Cip 2
/ _
Z
„---5--f 7---- __
---------_, ...,-;-:.;.:,ii:!:..i...:!::.E.:..,:,:i:.::.:.::::..:.:':::::...: ,.----
-. - 1- .... _ . .......::::...„,....,.::::„:„...„:„:„.:.:....,..::•::.:::.,:.::.:::..,..:....:.:„...„....„:, .., ,
i(
> o .-----
".••.".••"..."•••.".•..
.,,„,... , ,� ..:.:„......„.:,,.:.,:...:.:„.,,,,:.,:::)..„,:...••.:.„,,:.,:::).:,.::::.::::.:.
• • ••ia, .
, _......„..._ —
. ,,,,,,, .
. . .:.........•
..
---) ' ( 1 . 0
C.
i A..v...„ _____,,, . %.„ . 1/ ,,,, i
,\
u.
c0
.1
r„,,,,,.__,
ir
CT r--(t.4.7/
\....____
i, ,--7-----' .- -\..........\----............_ , -(.'''--.'.'.'.'.'.*''.'''':''''' '.-'---( _ _
-"- ----"N-// Legend i
'- tt, Q Proposed Conservation Easement UT2(reach 2)
dyi 0 ;I r:1 Degraded Wetlands UT2(reach 3)
i1: Existing Pond lb UT3
.41" — — UT1(reach 1) c >UT4
____ j licriammimmilmimma• = = UT1(reach 2) NCDOT 2'Contours
^\ VF — UT2(reach 1)r —Figure 3: Existing Conditions N
0
0 Alder Valley Mitigation Site w- E
Neuse 03020201 S
' d"� Durham County, NC
eco terra® October 2021 0 250 500 1,000
NC Onemap 2017 Aerial � Feet

Legend �
Proposed Conservation Easement
,A,
vii
Ui`
} f -ti,i„, g'
.. a i 1.
k, 3
s 04- -, S tx ,,f a r 7- .� s. a ;tit,.
,;fit f *` '"w Aa a `ku
4i s ° s“,7 4, �, sS a t;',,,,:',,,,-,,,,,,,„,At�
" )t16n fix` gZtget$}y'. h ' 5`fi +
k^} t a P �1s 6,64r�, y xe"e .'ate , ''� .'"�1..n: �, „3W„
Figure 4: LiDAR N
Alder Valley Mitigation Site w+e
'*)= Neuse 03020201 S
Durham County, NC
aco terra® October 2021 0 375 750 1,500
QL2 LIDAR DEM _� Feet

ry
Legend .��• . ,ta.
r
Proposed Conservation Easement r ,�
r .
' • aie
1
a r
. ......v., -.-..,. itt-tair ..L. ,„
a!
k . !II:110111b.
64 . gek4
. . .
.. .
., 4: 1 mil
411114 ,, ....„ 1 .„ ,,, lir - --r.7 ,-- ,
l'-
I to;ry
11 ,• i 1 • �.
1
-
..,,,,. ; , .
4. i ife:, ,
. .
I
.,,,,, _.
.. _ I t
r
Corum% cif Du'h m %S:attc o�Ner d crl D Elfl CC)7,E rli,HE'.E C gn a ossur.
INCRE i F.G17 P 11F3mmulp,USSG'SS.MitaO/NIASSN0 EP UED. i
Figure 5: Historical 1981 Aerial N
Alder Valley Mitigation Site W+E
Neuse 03020201 s
Durham County, NC
eco terra. October 2021 0 500 1,000 2,000
Feet
USGS Explorer Single Frame Aerial

•p. J dJ�L J i�]� -14 i
74 Legend ,-,1,41tviopso
H
A0 Proposed Conservation Easement
M ,,, 1 r\-:, -'\,.......,---
it e
- _
r LgB Da B
v iiii , GeB
0. HrB
Ai 4 Mi4 4.
-`� ,
/ 1
#-4" - fi4
tkt —�- UaB "
HrB GeD
.. _ . .
i
irB
. .,
DaC
ii
Ir8 _ e
1 '?
A
L.� j�
/
►:. Da1 . -A
____.,/ / ' ----on.lir .1.P.imMor a--. ....--.. a .m .. . ..--.. . m• ....awe— --.. ,mE, ,
/ 1 f /1 k
f/
/
I i r
aftillikkkir- C\ ''''''
1.
Figure 6: Soil Survey N
Alder Valley Mitigation Site w+e
Neuse 03020201 s
ecolarra. Durham County, NC
October 2021 0 250 500 1,000
Feet
NRCS 1974 Soil Survey of Durham, NC Map Sheet #1

qv4 • 4 "4
brill 4, 1,. •-• '...
''.-1•• . 4-wf. V . . d..,.1' _ ,4" , Ill,*li •I'
I d "..:: 'W., .. ... . ' o ;)NN, . I. P •+ ,101V, Se. A•
lk, '. . '4"l' VIIIP . _, ,( r- . et- _ •
r k os VI Lt.
i.' -111: Bowling Mill ,,, , , :••• - .
• P.,•44,-- ;t.:i_
.. -(Red Mountain r
X
r , Thom's House Bowling-Toms i, Mill) (Gone)
IM•
k, (Approximate House(Gone) . ,
1•.) d 4'
site) . * Red Mountain
L-.. • .---"?°! '3..X4'. IL -' *Ill 4 I Post Office %
I. .'''d '''' Lull--r!:•••ii„' '' ,..1HoltIcainp_ • ‘479rIl 4: (Gone)
,
- use, _
J -
k •
Hp mr its°4%
. .....1 , ames, .. , 4/1 ' • •I• - ' 4, 1
ito.-ili.
v . I
k, - Hoyse
.
, ,, o ••• . Ill \ .1
- t i • 1
, ) 7 4/' 4,-'1 '.• . . - ••.
. 11111i•%
' I i,i.1 r • • .•' . , `.441:,:' t•
,A,1 ''t- '" •
•• wilit" 4
. i l'• • _ :••
. 4." . • (
.•l'',.
:,*,-IP.I..'I-4 I•,r)*- 2,:.: - #'.', . ,.a..'w 1,11/4, 1;' . -.„v4 d ;,s
. l .
vcr
q - -if - e,x')4i,•Vt , - -.i. ...
.
1
"1 I•: .,r:. -0%,_:.
4
f- , ,. , . 7 .
. : .
O'd
ft.
' • ' .7,,7,
.....
,. . .
' • ■r 16. .. --4.
". N.f•'IN .
i , Illi ' , IL 44 W' ''''qi.;,
• .
I ''''''- • -_.14..•.•,••4', -1
.4. v 91k. • :.. ''' "s.i. '''.. 7
. -
,- -
• .. -,,'•!:,.#... :,..'''14 '11" 1.• 'L.--' 'IS1- iiiiik
66-1-0,.. -.4 • '-'-'4..:•:', .
-,..• 9. itr:i., • L• -' • 4, .
•s„,..._;.;'•:•.t.,,irr,1/2,.: --J.,,v..- ',.7 _ r i.4 t-A
f I 6‘
. 'VII Forest
•.:‘''':' - -1.-.-' Log Houses ,
- , ..•:,ree-z. , , , _0#.-4. , ...,::
:,......•!,.,..•;1..,,„7.:•;,ir..,... ''''•.,..,.: ',.% h.: ,
..4_ , ..: , : ...-- 0,,,1 ,.13.-.%., .......N,
._ ra
6fr!"44 ;; tr .‘r) "
%1,4'.' • r i It?-. .. 4. ti• ,
.. - , .• - . ' ,„„-,,,. .4-I, ',.C.::!' . ,,-.i ,, IT Q • ,. .uail rn .,.-
. 4_ . 7,
RoostBa Complex tvit ;:L.:
• 111\ill
. ifilir - .— Quail Roost / -
, ...
._ hin
- Legend
•641.'
=I Proposed Conservation Easement
- '1101- I • Pik
. • •t =I One-mile Buffer
• -
'1•4,-', : s ' ,-.''''
'ii. till N.41 - NCSHPO Historic Points
• ,. _, .04 .., , ..
, . Surveyed only,Gone
.
-:: • ,r,,., . Individual Study List entry
is .,••••• ' f.
, • . s
. ., ,., ..,' 4.7.. t.;* • • Study List,Gone
"It•• •• . • $. :-.•
..r. 1;- ,,v./ . ,.._
•••••••••;-;,;i1,...40.41 , :•'...,- • ' A Both on the Study List and Determined Eligible
• , IL .
6 _ .
fi. ,2. owe r... , Surveyed Only
Awe e•
1.. . ,
. 31
Figure 7: Cultural Resources N
Alder Valley Mitigation Site W+E
Neuse 03020201 s
Durham County, NC
ecoiterra,, October 2021
0 0.13 0.25 0.5
NCSHPO Data Miles

2 @y u f
P A"R•' Timberlake - . - I
1
O.,F1e1 Ka rS
f a
crvmtr�•4 i
3
y
6 a
•PgWeV Rd / AX>
1w �AAA� rc
d 0 i4,chwchya
Ul'a 0dr -
T. )6\ • R�S A, 9 4R 1
•
•l - _ PERSON
` nRHAkA _ -. - — _. Ii
S1tii
C4
co,Ec ,, c
.,_,
, ...g. „7, ,-. iwo .y,pc .:1,
,,, ,....._,..‘,,I
fi t.
0 AAAA4 /►AAAAAAAAAAr ..00p, A
�p m F uugemont w ►AAAAAAAA _ _ jAAAAAAA�jAj/Aj�r��/jA�,.
av ewerlir,, ��AAAAAA�A� ►AAAAAAAA►AAAAA�
AAAAAAAA/ A�AAAA♦
yy�� Coors* ill 1A<� �'��AAAAAAA�� \�AAAAAAAAAAAAA��AAAAA�'.:�AS•
��� ►Ar • P�A 1AA, a>AAAAAAA; ♦AA.dA
1.►AAAAA��A�A�A AAAAIjAAAjAAAjAAAAt:AA�►i�®�iOAA
i `C ,7.' AA •AAA. AAA. '�,.AAA�AAA.AAAI
♦.AA' S1►AAA.A
.,` S.L ,„,k1. 4,►AAAAAA �AAAAAAAAAt AAA
V �/AAAAAAA��-���►AAAAA,.1 IAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAtAAAAA
-22
�r ►AAA AAA 3AAAAAAAAAVAA
�'k�0 z . [i NI ►�I' -4• > <►AAAAAAAAAAA� �AAAAAAAA
■r �� ` 1��AA�AA` �A��♦CAI ��� AAAAAAAAAA� AAAAAA.'
`� , .���,-, ►4 ♦ •4 �AAAAAA�� �`►AAAAAAAAAA
r d �Q�l�S, � •• *�' D "''m . ,�AAAAAAI 4,-, ��`r ti"4Ae- AAAC6'g o' ►As�, a ���:'. ►AAAAAdA ♦AABahama 1A~yA• , ' ,AA4�,AAAAAA$f%Rdx G.urae Hapkt�Ra A��►�� - w - ``� ►A�AA,�AAAA`►AAAAAAAAAA�<1.L- �,/ 7AA�♦AA�AA� `, � , A�1�iAAAAAAA��A►�
® % �, .,►��.' A`,A�4, �AA�,►AAj'��AAAAAAA♦�AA♦i.
4,AAA4, •AAA�N1"
`6� -���AA� A y� ��I t� �A0
—• �AAAA ��/�� �� I•/i���AAAAA�AAAA�♦A�AA<'/�i
►AAA a A ' / 7,Ai;I 4,..:AA►A 441
f ±AAAAAAAA �'`� A �AI ii,�" �.AD�AAAAA►AAAAA�♦���t,
A.AAi'�•�►.�tA�/ �rAA�A•As�A,f��t��+��rl A�A♦A' ����
�A�A AAAAA �AAA' AAA'►AA� ♦
iA.4 ~A` I► .♦A►.AAAA'►AAAA��► '•AAAAAf`' AAAAAA►AAAAA�,AAA♦
�IAA 1�A AAAA �'►V�rAAAAAAA�I r�►AAAA�r AA :►AAAAA��AAA
AAA A:lAAAA .ADr►A♦AAAAA♦;!'4:' AA14 !•44'- -��AA♦►AAA
.,it' `�AAAAA����� ����AAAAA<�j
` /`AA��►��� >>AAA
i�♦�► � �.►AA4 ����AA<►►t \Id
�� �AA� '��A��>��♦��� At 4. AAAAAAA�►►A�AAI, lI' � iA �AAAAAAAA����AAAAAAA
' .ra w is r,,�,m r � 4:' a4AAA/AAA AAA♦- AA'
• ►ArAA IAAj1 AAAAAAA�1� ��A���4
.AAAA',►A �A!iAA� N�
1 ��� 1� Q AA LA�� AAA ♦A
F x°' I t r.�, .-o �A� AAAAAAAA� ♦��
ss ► f 'it- - 4��A�♦•�AAii IAAAA� o'
AA ,i ' •w � ♦ A 1AA ,4`0 t a4� , * �A 440kA . L+td r+ � , o, A< 4` 44� A •1 .g .1�AAi n,,, Legend w,Y C. AAAAAA� ' .A
!1 Managed Areas Natural Areas T�. f4 �A4�i'iiiiiii - �aii. i�
I= Proposed Conservation Easement ��,A� AAAAAA� - ►'. -A� �A
I=5-mile Buffer 5zn ce�r,fry �' �►AAAAAAAA♦ �A�►AA��l�
cwe 4� c._►A,AAAAAAAAAAAI`AAAAAAt�
❑ Dedicated Nature Preserve � ExceptionalAj�►AAAAAAAAAAAAA�►AAAAAAAAAA���,
41
❑ Registered Heritage Area El Very High •N�� - o ' �
4! :) �AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA,0
El Conservation Easement High 1� j AAAAAAAAAAAAA‘:,
❑ Other Protection ❑ Moderate •�i1A���. AA�li. 1AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAOAAAAA�,
»'!is AAA i �AiAAA�AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA:.
Federal Ownership General "m w�►AAr i• ►�jAAAAAAAAAA►AAAAAAAAAAA
�s, ♦♦♦♦AAAAAAAA♦
State Ownership Unranked �'►� _ '-`AAAAAAAAAAAA'►AAAAAAAAAAA'
.� iA AZAA�!►AAAAAAA
Local Government Ownership �!j `��I�'T..I, ,� I��.�AAAA�� A�►��AAAAAA4
Private IAd' ��;-.�AA�►A k��.►A��AAAAAA�AAAAAAAAAAAA
.: 1� ' ►� ♦� '7 AA..��AAAAAAAAAAAAAA�AAAAAAAAAAAA
► - b .A4 1AAAA 4 44# AAA.li�AA�A�A�AA4:., A�AIAA
Figure 8: Planning Elements N
`,/ Alder Valley Mitigation Site w+E
Neuse 03020201 s
Durham County, NC
eco terra® October 2021 0 0.5 1 2
NC Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) � � Miles

11
l ar I r '`: r
2.
....„,..,„...., . ..4
�IV- ih; ��
A il'a i . i
4it 1 . .• , 4, o, z l. r
it .,ii s I !µ •- w 'iM
3 • �'• Ito44
1.,, ...., 1 .4 %so . : .,
"I"\N"-- . .j ' „
lit.- ',A t 1kt t ilk
._‘,
111 i - , ,..
4 i - - ' . -- -
tilt
liet
II
... . . •._ _ ilk tr . .
i •
• sl;,
i IA. 04
o f _- _ ii II .
1.
titi. - r .
e 640:-
it 1
•_if ,_ ,..
-„..
Ilk
`• ) `
.`:
4 Total: 4,540 SMUs
mop 0 Conservation Easement
Enhancement II 50 SMUs
ri,�Y I. ••— Restoration 4,490 SMUs
Restoration No Credit
� ! Riparian Buffer Credit 0-50'449,200 sq.feet
Riparian Buffer Credit 51-100'496,500 sq.feet
r - Nutrient Offset Credit 101-200'993,000 sq.feet, 51,816 lbs of N,3,337 lbs of P
Y • 1
Figure 9: Conceptual Design N
, :," Alder Valley Mitigation Site w+E
Neuse 03020201 s
Durham County, NC
eco terra® October 2021 0 125 250 500
Feet
ESRI Aerial Basemap

Appendix A.
Purchase and Sale Agreement Option

Book9488 - Page 967 Page 1 of 10
For Registration Sharon A. Davis
Register of Deeds
Durham County, NC Cross Reference:
DB363/P541)
Electronically Recorded Register of Deeds
2021 Oct 08 10:38 AM Durham County,NC
Book: 9488 Page: 967
NC Rev Stamp: $ 0.00 Fee: $ 26.00
Instrument Number: 2021051395
MEMO
File/Return to: Michael Beinenson
Eco Terra Partners
1328 Dekalb Ave NE
Atlanta,GA 30307
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF DURHAM
THIS MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT(this"Memorandum")is hereby made this ;' .ay of_
04, " , 2021, by and between ECO TERRA PARTNERS, LLC, a Georgia limited liability
company,whose mailing address is 1328 Dekalb Ave NE Atlanta,GA 30307(herein"Buyer")and Blanche
J McFarland, an individual resident of the State of North Carolina, whose mailing address is 1403 Moores
Mill Rd. Rougemont,NC 27572(herein"Seller").
1. For good and valuable consideration, Seller and Buyer have entered into that certain
Agreement for Purchase and Sale of Conservation Easement of even date herewith(the"Agreement").
2. Pursuant to the Agreement, Seller has agreed to sell and Buyer has agreed to purchase a
permanent conservation easement containing approximately 39.06 acres, more or less, over a portion of
the Seller's real property located in Durham County, State of North Carolina. The Seller's property (the
"Property")is described on Exhibit A.The portion of the Seller's Property which consists of the easement
property is also set forth on Exhibit A (the "Easement Property"); the Easement Property is more
particularly depicted on Exhibit A-1. The final legal description for the property encumbered by the
proposed conservation easement shall be determined by a survey and, upon consummation of the
Agreement, incorporated into a Deed of Conservation Easement to be conveyed by Seller and recorded in
the Register of Deeds.
4. Seller and Buyer have agreed to execute and record this Memorandum in accordance with
the terms of the Agreement to give public notice of the Agreement and this Memorandum shall not
supersede or in any way modify the terms and conditions of the Agreement. The Agreement shall run with
the land and shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto,their respective heirs, legal
representatives,administrators, successors,and assigns.
5. This Memorandum shall expire, and the Agreement shall no longer run with the land, or
be considered a cloud upon title, upon the earlier to occur of(i) a termination of the Agreement by Buyer
(subject, however, without limiting any rights Buyer may retain which survive a termination of the
Agreement); (ii) the conveyance and subsequent recording of the Deed of Conservation Agreement from
Seller as contemplated by the Agreement; or(iii)the date that is two(2)years from the day and year first
above written.
Submitted electronically by "Eco Terra Partners LLC"
in compliance with North Carolina statutes governing recordable documents
and the terms of the submitter agreement with the Durham County Register of Deeds.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the undersigned have executed this Memorandum of Agreement as of
the day and year first above written.
BUYER:
ECO TERRA PARTNERS, LLC
B : (SEAL)
Na e: Mich einenson
Title: Presidoh t
Date: ®I - • -\
STATE OF GEORGIA
COUNTY OF DEKALB
On this day of CI' 4 l ,2021,before me personally appeared Michal Beinenson,to me known
to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he
executed the same as his free act and deed.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal in the County
and State aforesaid,the day and year above written.
ii
Ns cry Public
My Commission Expires:
! IAS. Z ?1"4 2
0 00outttueet440
IRES 1 r
sus G O27. 4 it
®490 N e ®s®®®4®®®®®®®®
2

SELLER:
BLANCHE J MCFARLAND
EAL)
Date: ®l Qi° •2,`
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF DURHAM
On this 1 day of 0 oe , 2021, before me personally appeared Blanche J McFarland, to me
known to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that
s/he executed the same as his/her free act and deed.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal in the County
and State aforesaid,the day and year above written.
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
MY Commission Expires 5 25 2025 \ \\\ N 111/6///
ci0o ,() TARi- 1
o AUBL\G
�T 1 cauN ; \\
'�///Il111���

Exhibit A
Attached to and made a part of that certain Agreement for Purchase and Sale of Conservation Easement
dated , 2021 by and between ECO TERRA PARTNERS, LLC, a Georgia limited
liability company (`Buyer");and Blanche J McFarland, an individual resident of the State of North
Carolina.
Legal Description of the Property
That property identified with PIN 0839-03-05-3998 and conveyed pursuant to that certain Deed/Grant of
Will recorded at Deed Book 363 Page 540 in the Register of Deeds, Durham County,North Carolina;
Legal Description of the Easement Property
A portion of the Property,comprising in total a parcel of real property consisting of 311.02 acres, more or
less and depicted on Exhibit A-1 attached hereto; and as more particularly described pursuant to the legal
description set forth on the Easement Survey obtained by Buyer, which legal description, upon receipt,
shall be deemed to be fully incorporated herein.

Exhibit A-1
[See Attached Maps
iT:i,,,r.,:N4: ''':.; 1.,,,,,it.l.c.„,li' -.4, ' ' i'-,,,ii.;i::::.-,47'
30'Farm Crossing `
NI "90 Farm Crossing
,,......„,.......,•...!:, ,.,.
,,,
t
re, ��'
y u�
' !,i.,./4!1''''.64;:: . -4. '''''
r d
li
�f 1 b0'Easement Exception y
Sultabie for current specso
li" + ^ for twaiane Nt O07 toed' • $
�t
41
'"gyp xp
4- '
9
,.a Le end
Proposed Rroject Area 39.06 Acres
i.- :,.i:l.;".54"-''4:! '', 4'.--:1 - -`'...A.-..i.;.,-7`1,1iri - -'''::-..;,1:1:
.1.,.tr,,,,,,:„.-10„ ..,...,,,,,.. ....:, -. . ,,-.:..;:,,:„..,... , . .---*t.
.„
Q Property Line
Stream Cen#erline
Figure i;Site Map
Owner:William&Blanche McFarland ve
County:Durham s
eco ter'CI pi" t90s6i
B-Digit HOC:Neuse 0302D201 0 Z5o 500 1,000
NC Onemap Z018 Aerial Foot

Appendix B.
USACE/ NCDWR Data Forms

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control#:0710-xxxx,Exp:Pending
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET—Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority:AR 335-15,paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: Alder Valley Mitigation Site City/County: Durham Sampling Date: 10/6/21
Applicant/Owner: Eco Terra State: NC Sampling Point: WA
Investigator(s): H. Smith Section,Township, Range: N/A
Landform(hillside,terrace,etc.): floodplain Local relief(concave,convex, none): concave Slope(%): 0-1
Subregion(LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 36.207515 Long:-78.902995 Datum: WGS 1984
Soil Map Unit Name: Lignum silt loam NWI classification: none
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no,explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation X , Soil X ,or Hydrology X significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes No X
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 X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
The area is in active cattle grazing and the adjacent stream has been modified in the past. The Antecedent Precipitation Tool states the area is
experiencing"Wetter than Normal"conditions. VHB believes this area would continue to meet all wetland parameters under normal conditions based
on the hydric soils and hydrophitic vegetation.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators(minimum of one is required;check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks(B6)
_Surface Water(A1) _True Aquatic Plants(B14) _Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(B8)
_High Water Table(A2) _Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(C1) _Drainage Patterns(B10)
X Saturation(A3) X Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots(C3) _Moss Trim Lines(B16)
_Water Marks(B1) _Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) _Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
_Sediment Deposits(B2) _Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) Crayfish Burrows(C8)
_Drift Deposits(B3) _Thin Muck Surface(C7) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
Algal Mat or Crust(B4) Other(Explain in Remarks) _Stunted or Stressed Plants(D1)
_Iron Deposits(B5) _Geomorphic Position(D2)
_Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(B7) _Shallow Aquitard(D3)
Water-Stained Leaves(B9) _Microtopographic Relief(D4)
Aquatic Fauna(B13) X FAC-Neutral Test(D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth(inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No X Depth(inches):
Saturation Present? Yes X No Depth(inches): 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos, previous inspections),if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG,JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: WA
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30' ) %Cover Species? Status Dominance Test worksheet:
1. No rooted trees Number of Dominant Species
2. That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 1 (A)
3. Total Number of Dominant
4. Species Across All Strata: 1 (B)
5. Percent of Dominant Species
6. That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
7. _ Prevalence Index worksheet:
=Total Cover Total%Cover of: Multiply by:
50%of total cover: 20%of total cover: OBL species 10 x 1 = 10
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15' ) FACW species 45 x 2= 90
1. No rooted shrubs FAC species 0 x 3= 0
2. FACU species 0 x 4= 0
3. _ UPL species 0 x 5= 0
4. Column Totals: 55 (A) 100 (B)
5. Prevalence Index =B/A= 1.82
6. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7. _1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8. X 2-Dominance Test is>50%
9. X 3-Prevalence Index is<-3.0'
=Total Cover 4-Morphological Adaptations'(Provide supporting
50%of total cover: 20%of total cover: data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 15' ) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1. Juncus effusus 40 Yes FACW 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2. Eleocharis palustris 10 No OBL present,unless disturbed or problematic.
3. Persicaria pensylvanica 5 No FACW Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
4. Tree-Woody plants,excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm)or
5. more in diameter at breast height(DBH), regardless of
6. height.
7. Sapling/Shrub-Woody plants,excluding vines, less
8. than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9. (1 m)tall.
10. Herb-All herbaceous(non-woody)plants, regardless
11. of size,and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
55 =Total Cover Woody Vine-All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50%of total cover: 28 20%of total cover: 11 height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 9.1 m )
1. No rooted vines
2.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
=Total Cover Vegetation
50%of total cover: 20%of total cover: Present? Yes X No
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG,JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: WA
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) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-3 7.5YR 4/4 100 Loamy/Clayey
3-14 10YR 4/1 70 10YR 4/6 30 C PL/M Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_Histosol(A1) _Polyvalue Below Surface(S8)(MLRA 147, 148) _2 cm Muck(A10)(MLRA 147)
_Histic Epipedon(A2) _Thin Dark Surface(S9)(MLRA 147,148) _Coast Prairie Redox(A16)
Black Histic(A3) _Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1)(MLRA 136) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) _Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) _Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)
_Stratified Layers(A5) X Depleted Matrix(F3) (MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck(A10)(LRR N) _Redox Dark Surface(F6) _Red Parent Material(F21)
_Depleted Below Dark Surface(A11) _Depleted Dark Surface(F7) (outside MLRA 127,147, 148)
_Thick Dark Surface(Al2) _Redox Depressions(F8) Very Shallow Dark Surface(F22)
_Sandy Mucky Mineral(S1) Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR N, Other(Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) MLRA 136)
_Sandy Redox(S5) _Umbric Surface(F13)(MLRA 122,136) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Stripped Matrix(S6) _Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)(MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Dark Surface(S7) Red Parent Material(F21)(MLRA 127, 147,148) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type:
Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Doesn't meet F19 due lack of sediment deposition from the small stream.
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG,JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control#:0710-xxxx,Exp:Pending
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET—Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority:AR 335-15,paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: Alder Valley Mitigation Site City/County: Durham Sampling Date: 10/6/21
Applicant/Owner: Eco Terra State: NC Sampling Point: WB
Investigator(s): H. Smith Section,Township, Range: N/A
Landform(hillside,terrace,etc.): floodplain Local relief(concave,convex, none): concave Slope(%): 0-1
Subregion(LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 36.208034 Long:-78.902546 Datum: WGS 1984
Soil Map Unit Name: Lignum silt loam NWI classification: None
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no,explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation X , Soil X ,or Hydrology X significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes No X
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 X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
The area is in active cattle grazing and the adjacent stream has been modified in the past. The Antecedent Precipitation Tool states the area is
experiencing"Wetter than Normal"conditions. VHB believes this area would continue to meet all wetland parameters under normal conditions based
on the hydric soils and hydrophitic vegetation.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators(minimum of one is required;check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks(B6)
_Surface Water(A1) _True Aquatic Plants(B14) _Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(B8)
_High Water Table(A2) _Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(C1) _Drainage Patterns(B10)
X Saturation(A3) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots(C3) _Moss Trim Lines(B16)
_Water Marks(B1) _Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) _Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
_Sediment Deposits(B2) _Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) Crayfish Burrows(C8)
_Drift Deposits(B3) _Thin Muck Surface(C7) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
Algal Mat or Crust(B4) Other(Explain in Remarks) _Stunted or Stressed Plants(D1)
_Iron Deposits(B5) _Geomorphic Position(D2)
_Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(B7) _Shallow Aquitard(D3)
Water-Stained Leaves(B9) _Microtopographic Relief(D4)
Aquatic Fauna(B13) X FAC-Neutral Test(D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth(inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No X Depth(inches):
Saturation Present? Yes X No Depth(inches): 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos, previous inspections),if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG,JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: WB
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30' ) %Cover Species? Status Dominance Test worksheet:
1. No rooted trees Number of Dominant Species
2. That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 6 (A)
3. Total Number of Dominant
4. Species Across All Strata: 8 (B)
5. Percent of Dominant Species
6. That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 75.0% (A/B)
7. _ Prevalence Index worksheet:
=Total Cover Total%Cover of: Multiply by:
50%of total cover: 20%of total cover: OBL species 20 x 1 = 20
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ) FACW species 22 x 2= 44
1. Alnus serrulata 3 Yes OBL FAC species 19 x 3= 57
2. Quercus phellos 2 Yes FAC _ FACU species 7 x 4= 28
3. Liquidambar styraciflua 2 Yes FAC UPL species 0 x 5= 0
4. Salix nigra 2 Yes OBL Column Totals: 68 (A) 149 (B)
5. _ Prevalence Index =B/A= 2.19
6. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7. _1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8. X 2-Dominance Test is>50%
9. X 3-Prevalence Index is<-3.0'
9 =Total Cover 4-Morphological Adaptations'(Provide supporting
50%of total cover: 5 20%of total cover: 2 data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 15' ) _Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1. Juncus effusus 10 No FACW 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2. Persicaria sagittata 15 Yes OBL present,unless disturbed or problematic.
3. Carex sp. 5 No FACW Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
4. Microstegium vimineum 15 Yes FAC Tree-Woody plants,excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm)or
5. Impatiens capensis 5 No FACW more in diameter at breast height(DBH), regardless of
6. Boehmeria cylindrica 2 No FACW height.
7. Sapling/Shrub-Woody plants,excluding vines, less
8. than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9. (1 m)tall.
10. Herb-All herbaceous(non-woody)plants, regardless
11. of size,and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
52 =Total Cover Woody Vine-All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50%of total cover: 26 20%of total cover: 11 height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 5' )
1. Lonicera japonica 3 Yes FACU
2. Rosa multiflora 4 Yes FACU
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
7 =Total Cover Vegetation
50%of total cover: 4 20%of total cover: 2 Present? Yes X No
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG,JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: WB
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) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-3 10YR 3/3 100 Loamy/Clayey
3-14 2.5Y 5/1 90 2.5Y 5/6 10 C M Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_Histosol(A1) _Polyvalue Below Surface(S8)(MLRA 147, 148) _2 cm Muck(A10)(MLRA 147)
_Histic Epipedon(A2) _Thin Dark Surface(S9)(MLRA 147,148) _Coast Prairie Redox(A16)
Black Histic(A3) _Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1)(MLRA 136) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) _Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) _Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)
_Stratified Layers(A5) X Depleted Matrix(F3) (MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck(A10)(LRR N) _Redox Dark Surface(F6) _Red Parent Material(F21)
_Depleted Below Dark Surface(A11) _Depleted Dark Surface(F7) (outside MLRA 127,147, 148)
_Thick Dark Surface(Al2) _Redox Depressions(F8) Very Shallow Dark Surface(F22)
_Sandy Mucky Mineral(S1) Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR N, Other(Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) MLRA 136)
_Sandy Redox(S5) _Umbric Surface(F13)(MLRA 122,136) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Stripped Matrix(S6) _Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)(MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Dark Surface(S7) Red Parent Material(F21)(MLRA 127, 147,148) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type:
Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG,JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control#:0710-xxxx,Exp:Pending
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET—Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority:AR 335-15,paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: Alder Valley Mitigation Site City/County: Durham Sampling Date: 10/6/21
Applicant/Owner: Eco Terra State: NC Sampling Point: WC
Investigator(s): H. Smith Section,Township, Range: N/A
Landform(hillside,terrace,etc.): floodplain Local relief(concave,convex, none): concave Slope(%): 0-1
Subregion(LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 36.209252 Long:-78.898396 Datum: WGS 1984
Soil Map Unit Name: Lignum silt loam NWI classification: None
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no,explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation X , Soil X ,or Hydrology X significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes No X
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 X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
The area is in active cattle grazing and the adjacent stream has been modified in the past. The Antecedent Precipitation Tool states the area is
experiencing"Wetter than Normal"conditions. VHB believes this area would continue to meet all wetland parameters under normal conditions based
on the hydric soils and hydrophitic vegetation.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators(minimum of one is required;check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks(B6)
_Surface Water(A1) _True Aquatic Plants(B14) _Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(B8)
_High Water Table(A2) _Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(C1) _Drainage Patterns(B10)
X Saturation(A3) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots(C3) _Moss Trim Lines(B16)
_Water Marks(B1) _Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) _Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
_Sediment Deposits(B2) _Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) Crayfish Burrows(C8)
_Drift Deposits(B3) _Thin Muck Surface(C7) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
Algal Mat or Crust(B4) Other(Explain in Remarks) _Stunted or Stressed Plants(D1)
_Iron Deposits(B5) _Geomorphic Position(D2)
_Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(B7) _Shallow Aquitard(D3)
Water-Stained Leaves(B9) _Microtopographic Relief(D4)
Aquatic Fauna(B13) X FAC-Neutral Test(D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth(inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth(inches):
Saturation Present? Yes X No Depth(inches): 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos, previous inspections),if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG,JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: WC
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30' ) %Cover Species? Status Dominance Test worksheet:
1. Quercus phellos 2 No FAC Number of Dominant Species
2. Liquidambar styraciflua 2 No FAC That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 3 (A)
3. Total Number of Dominant
4. Species Across All Strata: 3 (B)
5. Percent of Dominant Species
6. That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
7. _ Prevalence Index worksheet:
4 =Total Cover Total%Cover of: Multiply by:
50%of total cover: 2 20%of total cover: 1 OBL species 35 x 1 = 35
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15' ) FACW species 5 x 2= 10
1. Alnus serrulata 25 Yes OBL FAC species 64 x 3= 192
2. Salix nigra 10 Yes _ OBL FACU species 0 x 4= 0
3. UPL species 0 x 5= 0
4. Column Totals: 104 (A) 237 (B)
5. _ Prevalence Index =B/A= 2.28
6. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7. _1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8. X 2-Dominance Test is>50%
9. X 3-Prevalence Index is<-3.0'
35 =Total Cover 4-Morphological Adaptations'(Provide supporting
50%of total cover: 18 20%of total cover: 7 data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 15 ) _Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1. Microstegium vimineum 60 Yes FAC 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2. Impatiens capensis 5 No FACW present,unless disturbed or problematic.
3. Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
4. Tree-Woody plants,excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm)or
5. more in diameter at breast height(DBH), regardless of
6. height.
7. Sapling/Shrub-Woody plants,excluding vines, less
8. than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9. (1 m)tall.
10. Herb-All herbaceous(non-woody)plants, regardless
11. of size,and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
65 =Total Cover Woody Vine-All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50%of total cover: 33 20%of total cover: 13 height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 5'
1. No rooted vines
2.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
=Total Cover Vegetation
50%of total cover: 20%of total cover: Present? Yes X No
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG,JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: WC
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) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-3 10YR 4/3 85 10YR 4/6 15 C M Loamy/Clayey Distinct redox concentrations
3-14 10YR 5/1 80 10YR 6/6 20 C M Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_Histosol(A1) _Polyvalue Below Surface(S8)(MLRA 147, 148) _2 cm Muck(A10)(MLRA 147)
_Histic Epipedon(A2) _Thin Dark Surface(S9)(MLRA 147,148) _Coast Prairie Redox(A16)
Black Histic(A3) _Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1)(MLRA 136) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) _Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) _Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)
_Stratified Layers(A5) X Depleted Matrix(F3) (MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck(A10)(LRR N) _Redox Dark Surface(F6) _Red Parent Material(F21)
_Depleted Below Dark Surface(A11) _Depleted Dark Surface(F7) (outside MLRA 127,147, 148)
_Thick Dark Surface(Al2) _Redox Depressions(F8) Very Shallow Dark Surface(F22)
_Sandy Mucky Mineral(S1) Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR N, Other(Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) MLRA 136)
_Sandy Redox(S5) _Umbric Surface(F13)(MLRA 122,136) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Stripped Matrix(S6) _Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)(MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Dark Surface(S7) Red Parent Material(F21)(MLRA 127, 147,148) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type:
Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Soils doesn't meet F19 due lack of sediment depostion from the small adjacent stream.
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG,JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control#:0710-xxxx,Exp:Pending
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET—Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority:AR 335-15,paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: Alder Valley Mitigation Site City/County: Durham Sampling Date: 10/6/21
Applicant/Owner: Eco Terra State: NC Sampling Point: WD
Investigator(s): H. Smith Section,Township, Range: N/A
Landform(hillside,terrace,etc.): floodplain Local relief(concave,convex, none): concave Slope(%): 0-1
Subregion(LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 36.209493 Long:-78.901691 Datum: WGS 1984
Soil Map Unit Name: Lignum silt loam NWI classification: None
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no,explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation X , Soil X ,or Hydrology X significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes No X
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 Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks:
The area is in active cattle grazing and the adjacent stream has been modified in the past. The Antecedent Precipitation Tool states the area is
experiencing"Wetter than Normal"conditions. VHB believes this area would continue to meet all wetland parameters under normal conditions based
on the hydric soils and hydrophitic vegetation.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators(minimum of one is required;check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks(B6)
_Surface Water(A1) _True Aquatic Plants(B14) _Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(B8)
_High Water Table(A2) _Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(C1) _Drainage Patterns(B10)
_Saturation(A3) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots(C3) _Moss Trim Lines(B16)
_Water Marks(B1) _Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) _Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
_Sediment Deposits(B2) _Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) Crayfish Burrows(C8)
_Drift Deposits(B3) _Thin Muck Surface(C7) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
Algal Mat or Crust(B4) Other(Explain in Remarks) _Stunted or Stressed Plants(D1)
_Iron Deposits(B5) _Geomorphic Position(D2)
_Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(B7) _Shallow Aquitard(D3)
X Water-Stained Leaves(B9) _Microtopographic Relief(D4)
Aquatic Fauna(B13) X FAC-Neutral Test(D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth(inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth(inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth(inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos, previous inspections),if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG,JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: WD
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30' ) %Cover Species? Status Dominance Test worksheet:
1. No rooted trees Number of Dominant Species
2. That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 2 (A)
3. Total Number of Dominant
4. Species Across All Strata: 2 (B)
5. Percent of Dominant Species
6. That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
7. _ Prevalence Index worksheet:
=Total Cover Total%Cover of: Multiply by:
50%of total cover: 20%of total cover: OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15' ) FACW species 85 x 2= 170
1. No rooted shrubs FAC species 0 x 3= 0
2. _ FACU species 0 x 4= 0
3. UPL species 0 x 5= 0
4. Column Totals: 85 (A) 170 (B)
5. _ Prevalence Index =B/A= 2.00
6. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7. _1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8. X 2-Dominance Test is>50%
9. X 3-Prevalence Index is<-3.0'
=Total Cover 4-Morphological Adaptations'(Provide supporting
50%of total cover: 20%of total cover: data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 15 ) _Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1. Vernonia noveboracensis 50 Yes FACW 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2. Juncus effusus 20 Yes FACW present,unless disturbed or problematic.
3. Carex sp. 5 No FACW Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
4. Persicaria pensylvanica 10 No FACW Tree-Woody plants,excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm)or
5. more in diameter at breast height(DBH), regardless of
6. height.
7. Sapling/Shrub-Woody plants,excluding vines, less
8. than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9. (1 m)tall.
10. Herb-All herbaceous(non-woody)plants, regardless
11. of size,and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
85 =Total Cover Woody Vine-All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50%of total cover: 43 20%of total cover: 17 height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 5'
1. No rooted vines
2.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
=Total Cover Vegetation
50%of total cover: 20%of total cover: Present? Yes X No
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG,JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: WD
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) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-12 10YR 4/1 90 10YR 4/4 10 C M Loamy/Clayey Distinct redox concentrations
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_Histosol(A1) _Polyvalue Below Surface(S8)(MLRA 147, 148) _2 cm Muck(A10)(MLRA 147)
_Histic Epipedon(A2) _Thin Dark Surface(S9)(MLRA 147,148) _Coast Prairie Redox(A16)
Black Histic(A3) _Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1)(MLRA 136) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) _Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) _Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)
_Stratified Layers(A5) X Depleted Matrix(F3) (MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck(A10)(LRR N) _Redox Dark Surface(F6) _Red Parent Material(F21)
_Depleted Below Dark Surface(A11) _Depleted Dark Surface(F7) (outside MLRA 127,147, 148)
_Thick Dark Surface(Al2) _Redox Depressions(F8) Very Shallow Dark Surface(F22)
_Sandy Mucky Mineral(S1) Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR N, Other(Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) MLRA 136)
_Sandy Redox(S5) _Umbric Surface(F13)(MLRA 122,136) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Stripped Matrix(S6) _Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)(MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Dark Surface(S7) Red Parent Material(F21)(MLRA 127, 147,148) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type:
Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Soils doesn't meet F19 due lack of sediment depostion from the small adjacent stream.
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG,JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Version 2.0

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 0cit0-42e.r 6, 2021 Project/Site: AL.a4.4-Va keAd UT#1 Latitude: 36.213954
Evaluator: LaweSaudy, VI-16 County: Dw4-14.avwCoww}y, NC Longitude: -78.903339
Total Points:Stream is at Stream Determination Other: Daher takew
least intermittent if> 19 or 30.25
perennial if> 30* Ephemeral Intermittent Perenni)2OOfeehoVyofMooreyMUARol,
A.Geomorphology(Subtotal= 14.0 ) Absent Weak Moderate Strong
la. Continuity of channel bed and bank 0 1 2 3�
2.Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0 1 CO 3
3. In channel structure: riffle pool, step pool, ripple pool sequence 0 CD 2 _ 3
4. Particle size of stream substrate 0 CD 3
5.Active/relict floodplain 0 CD 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 0 C1 2 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits 0 1 C _ 3
8. Headcuts 0 C1 2 3
9.Grade Control 0 C:5) 1 1.5
10. Natural Valley 0 0.5 1
11.Second or greater order channel (No=0-) Yes=3
aartificial ditches are not rated;see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal= 9.0 )
12. Presence of Baseflow 0 1 0 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 0 C1 2 3
14. Leaf litter 1.5 01 0.5 0
15.Sediment on plant or debris 0 0.5 1
16. Organic debris lines or piles 0 0i. 1 1.5
17.Soil-based evidence of high water table No=0 CYes=3T
C. Biology (Subtotal= 7.25)
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 3 2 C1 0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 3 (7 1 0
20. Macrobenthos(note diversity and abundance) a) 1 2 3
21.Aquatic Mollusks U 1 2 3
22. Fish 0 0.5 CD 1.5
23. Crayfish 0 0.5 Cl) 1.5
24.Amphibians 0 C) 1 1.5
25.Algae 0 0.5 0 1.5
26.Wetland plants in streambed FAf /7 0.75D OBL= 1.5; Other=0
* perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual
Notes/Sketch:
Tltie,e*vi-re,w e,u.r -er pc-v(iovI,of fki y c!^.0-414,.e 1,way oL,r y a-'!-ti,w,e,of t Itie,svhe,vi si t' kowenveV, resew! of
1-IA-i ,cltiatiw.eL may lye,-HA-e cowl ri.l-t factor. Tln-i ,over-wide,cltiatAw e L e>..,14.i,1244-5.a lya-wlc In.e.i g lvl-ra-hi.o-lye,Fwe,e,w
1.5 awol,2.0 awol,iy i.Vt,a cwvrewl-y hyl e,of�. 6ack,wa r iy e il-de 4A*f rowt,1'e In-e aol-wv- ry of-HAz n zo rlyy
ol-owwyire.a.m,p-owoG.

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: Oototire r 6, 2021 Project/Site: Ald.ev-V .tLey UT#2 Latitude: 36.207724
Evaluator: Lam.e,Saudy, VH6 County: Dwrk4.4 Couwty, NC Longitude: -78.903470
Total Points:Stream is at Stream Determination Other: Deuta,pai,wf-take ,all-pram
least intermittent if> 19 3 8.00
or perennial if> 30* Ephemeral IntermittentCPerennial 150 fe-0-eVS'ofMosrekMW Rd,.
A.Geomorphology(Subtotal=20.0 ) Absent Weak Moderate Strong
la. Continuity of channel bed and bank 0 1 2 C
2.Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0 1 U 3
3. In-channel structure: riffle-pool, step-pool, ripple-pool sequence 0 1 2 03
4. Particle size of stream substrate 0 1 2 U
5.Active/relict floodplain 0 1 2 0
6. Depositional bars or benches 0 1 n 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits 0 2 _ 3
8. Headcuts 0 01 2 3
9.Grade Control 0 C3 1 1.5
10. Natural Valley 0 0.5 1 0
11.Second or greater order channel (No=0-) Yes=3
aartificial ditches are not rated;see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal= 10.0)
12. Presence of Baseflow 0 1 0 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 0 1 Q 3
14. Leaf litter 1.5 01 0.5 0
15.Sediment on plant or debris 0 0.5 CD 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles 0 0.5 © 1.5
17.Soil-based evidence of high water table No=0 CYes=3T
C. Biology (Subtotal= 8.0)
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 2 1 0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 0 2 1 0
20. Macrobenthos(note diversity and abundance) 0 ( 1) 2 3
21.Aquatic Mollusks U 1 2 3
22. Fish CD 0.5 1 1.5
23. Crayfish 0 ® 1 1.5
24.Amphibians 0 0� 1 1.5
25.Algae CD 0.5 1 1.5
26.Wetland plants in streambed FACW=0.75; OBL= 1.5; ther=0
* perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual
Notes/Sketch:
T y h-i.ca,cc tt{z Uwtv a.c21-e.ol,c a vw.el,w l- ve rl i.cal.,Ibu wk,Y avtel.bu.wk,k.-2i gI4-ra-l-i,oi,ra.v..g u1g f ro-vw 1.5 to-2.0.

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: Octobeti-6, 2021 Project/Site: AL6.er Valley UT'3 Latitude: 36.207893
Evaluator: Lam.e.Sandy, VH6 County: PA4'k44,.Cou.wty, NC Longitude: -78.902812
Total Points:Stream is at Stream Determination Other:
least intermittent if> 19 22.50
or perennial if> 30* Ephemeral m itted Perennial
A.Geomorphology(Subtotal= 10.5 ) Absent Weak Moderate Strong
la. Continuity of channel bed and bank 0 1 ED 3
2.Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0 1 U 3
_
3. In channel structure: riffle pool, step pool, ripple pool sequence 0 1Q 2 3
4. Particle size of stream substrate 0 CD 2 3
5.Active/relict floodplain 0 U 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 0 D 2 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits C0 1 2 3
8. Headcuts 0 0 2 3
9.Grade Control 0 1 1.5
10. Natural Valley 0 0.5 0 1.5
11.Second or greater order channel (No=0-) Yes=3
aartificial ditches are not rated;see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal= 6.0)
12. Presence of Baseflow 0 1 0 _ 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria DO 1 2 3
14. Leaf litter 1.5 1 ED 0
15.Sediment on plant or debris 0 C3 1 _ 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles Ci) 0.5 1 L 1.5
17.Soil-based evidence of high water table No=0 CYes=3-)
C. Biology (Subtotal= 6.0)
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 3 C) 1 0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 3 CD 1 0
20. Macrobenthos(note diversity and abundance) 0 ( 1) 2 3
21.Aquatic Mollusks U 1 2 3
22. Fish CD 0.5 _ 1 1.5
23. Crayfish 0 ® 1 1.5
24.Amphibians 0 0� 1 1.5
25.Algae CD 0.5 1 1.5
26.Wetland plants in streambed FACW=0.75; OBL= 1.5; (tber=0 D
* perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual
Notes/Sketch:
Stre.cww s.,rcresz to- wve ram(-f t000lvkai.w wt+Lcu0 d,wil,HA,UT 2 cltia44442L Ca,}tLez i,wp ty a.Yt O42 1 wy

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: Ocitai,Vr 6, 2021 Project/Site: AL6.er VaU.e y UT*4 Latitude: 36.209233
Evaluator: La.r•.e,Sandy, VH5 County: Dwr14..44,.Cou.wty, NC Longitude: -78.901484
Total Points:Stream is at Stream Determination Other:
least intermittent if> 19 22.50
or perennial if> 30* Ephemeral Intermitted Perennial
A.Geomorphology(Subtotal= 7.0 ) Absent Weak Moderate Strong
la. Continuity of channel bed and bank 0 1 20 3
2.Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0 01 2 3
3. In-channel structure: riffle-pool, step-pool, ripple-pool sequence CD 1 2 - 3
4. Particle size of stream substrate 0 CD 2 3
5.Active/relict floodplain CD 1 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 0 CD 2 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits CD 1 2 3
8. Headcuts CD 1 2 3
9.Grade Control 0 0.5 ED 1.5
10. Natural Valley 0 0.5 'CD 1.5
11.Second or greater order channel No=0 Yes=3
aartificial ditches are not rated;see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal= 8.0)
12. Presence of Baseflow 0 1 0 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 0 1 20 3
14. Leaf litter 1.5 1 0
15.Sediment on plant or debris 0) 0.5 1 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles 0 03 1 1.5
17.Soil-based evidence of high water table No=0 Yes=3
C. Biology (Subtotal= 7.5)
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 3 �2 1 0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed CD 2 1 0
20. Macrobenthos(note diversity and abundance) 0 U 2 3
21.Aquatic Mollusks U 1 2 3
22. Fish ® 0.5 _ 1 1.5
23. Crayfish 0 1 1.5
24.Amphibians 0 03 1 1.5
25.Algae 0 ® 1 1.5
26.Wetland plants in streambed FACW=0.75; OBL= 1.5; aher=0 D
* perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual
Notes/Sketch:
Stre.cww s.ervey to-co-vwve ram(-f L000llokaikv we/I-La-0.0U wil,HA,UT 2 Ca,}tLez i w aC z area 042viov