20220451 Ver 1_Prospectus_DRAFT_BeaverTail_20220322

0
RES Catawba ESA Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Beaver Tail Mitigation Project
Draft Prospectus
Catawba River Basin
HUC 03050102
Prepared by: Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC
fires
Bank Sponsor: Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC (EBX)
3600 Glenwood Ave., Suite 100
Raleigh, NC 27612
919-209-1062
March 2022

Table of Contents
1 INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................................. I
1.1 Project Description........................................................................................................................1
1.2 Project Location............................................................................................................................1
1.3 Service Area..................................................................................................................................1
1.4 Identified Watershed Needs..........................................................................................................1
1.5 Purpose and Objectives.................................................................................................................2
1.6 Technical Feasibility.....................................................................................................................3
1.7 Project Site Ownership..................................................................................................................3
2 QUALIFICATIONS........................................................................................................................... 4
2.1 Bank Sponsor................................................................................................................................4
2.2 Bank Sponsor Qualifications........................................................................................................4
3 EXISTING CONDITIONS................................................................................................................5
3.1 Existing Jurisdictional Waters of US............................................................................................
5
3.2 Existing Reach Conditions............................................................................................................
5
3.3 Existing Wetland Conditions........................................................................................................
6
3.4 Physiography, Geology, and Soils................................................................................................
6
3.5 Endangered/Threatened Species...................................................................................................
7
3.6 Vegetation.....................................................................................................................................
8
3.7 Cultural Resources........................................................................................................................8
3.8 Constraints....................................................................................................................................
8
4 PROPOSED BANK CONDITIONS.................................................................................................9
4.1 Conceptual Mitigation Plan ..........................................................................................................
9
4.2 Stream Restoration........................................................................................................................
9
4.3 Wetland Re-establishment, Creation, Enhancement, and Preservation......................................10
5 MONITORING.................................................................................................................................11
5.1 As -Built Survey..........................................................................................................................11
5.2 Visual Monitoring.......................................................................................................................11
5.3 Cross Sections.............................................................................................................................12
5.4 Vegetative Success Criteria........................................................................................................12
5.5 Adaptive Management................................................................................................................12
6 BANK ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION...........................................................................12
6.1 Establishment and Operation of the Bank...................................................................................12
6.2 Proposed Credit Release Schedule..............................................................................................13
6.2.1 Initial Allocation of Released Credits.................................................................................13
6.2.2 Subsequent Credit Releases................................................................................................13
6.3 Financial Assurances..................................................................................................................15
6.4 Proposed Ownership and Long -Term Management...................................................................15
6.5 Assurance of Water Rights.........................................................................................................15
7 REFERENCES..................................................................................................................................16
RES Catawba ESA Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Beaver Tail Mitigation Project March 2022

List of Figures
Figure 1 - Project Vicinity
Figure 2 - Parcel Access
Figure 3 - USGS Quadrangle
Figure 4 - Land use
Figure 5 - Historical Photography
Figure 6 - Project Constraints
Figure 7 - LiDAR Imagery
Figure 8 - Existing Conditions
Figure 9 - Mapped Soils
Figure 10 - Conceptual Design Plan
Appendices
Appendix A - DWR Stream Determination
Appendix B - NC SAM and NC WAM Forms
Appendix C - Landowner Authorization Forms
Appendix D - Photo Log
Appendix E — Soil Report
RES Catawba ESA Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Beaver Tail Mitigation Project March 2022

I INTRODUCTION
Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC (EBB, a wholly owned subsidiary of Resource Environmental
Solutions (RES), is pleased to propose the establishment of the RES Catawba Expanded Service Area
(ESA) Umbrella Mitigation Bank (Bank). The proposed umbrella structure of the Bank is designed to
initially permit one mitigation site and establish the umbrella banking instrument for future mitigation sites.
The first site is the Beaver Tail Stream and Wetland Mitigation Project (Project). The Project has been
identified as having potential to help meet the compensatory mitigation requirements for stream and
wetland impacts in hydrologic unit 03050102 of the Catawba River Basin.
1.1 Project Description
The Project is located in Lincoln County, approximately six miles northwest of Lincolnton, North Carolina
within the South Fork Catawba River Watershed (HUC-030501020400) (Figure 1). The Project consists
of one parcel totaling 34.41 acres of conservation easement (Figure 2). The Project has a total drainage
area of 384 acres (Figure 3) and is located within a rural area. Land use within the project area is currently
comprised primarily of agricultural and forested land uses (Figure 4). Historic land disturbance principally
includes conventional agricultural practices (Figure 5).
The Project will involve the restoration of one unnamed tributary to Howards Creek (Reach LD1),
reestablishment, creation, enhancement, and preservation of wetlands. This tributary flows from the north
to southeast, and eventually drain into Howards Creek, near the bottom of the project. Howard's Creek
drains into the South Fork Catawba River.
1.2 Project Location
To access the Project from the town of Lincolnton, travel southwest on E Pine St, turn right on N Grove
St before driving northwest approximately 4 miles on Reepsville Road. Next turn left onto Owls Den
Road, then turn right onto Lutz Dairy Farm Rd which leads into the property. The latitude and longitude
of the Project is 35.502576,-81.320277.
1.3 Service Area
This Project is proposed to provide stream and wetland mitigation credits to offset unavoidable impacts to
stream resources within the South Fork Catawba watershed (8-digit HUC-03050102). This Project will be
included in the Catawba Expanded Service Area, which includes sections of Cataloging Units 03050101,
03050102, and 03050103. The Project is in the Southern Outer Piedmont Level IV ecoregion, within the
Piedmont Level III ecoregion. This Project is primarily characterized by agriculture use, forest, and very
low -intensity residential areas.
1.4 Identified Watershed Needs
The North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) develops River Basin Restoration Priorities
(RBRP) to guide its restoration activities within each of the state's 54 cataloging units. Agricultural
impacts are prevalent throughout this watershed, including nonpoint source runoff and hydrologic
modification. Priorities in this watershed that this Project will help address include: 1) to promote projects
that re-establish riparian buffer and corridors, and 2) projects that address agricultural runoff, as well as
stream restoration projects that re-establish natural pattern, hydrology, and habitat. This Bank supports the
Lower Catawba RBRP goals and presents an opportunity to provide improvements to water quality,
hydrologic function, and habitat within the watershed. The project will address stressors identified in the
watershed through nutrient removal, sediment removal, runoff filtration, and improved aquatic and
terrestrial habitat.
RES Catawba ESA Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Beaver Tail Mitigation Project March 2022

The Project is located within an identified TLW and the Indian Creek and Howard's Creek Local
Watershed Plan (LWP) from 2007. The goal of this project is to provide functional uplift for habitat,
sediment transport and runoff filtration within the Howard's Creek watershed. The Project will support
the goals of the Lower Catawba RBRP, the Catawba 02 watershed specifically, and the Indian Creek and
Howard's Creek LWP.
Functional uplift to hydrology, riparian buffers, water quality, and habitat will be achieved through
mitigation activities designed to address stressors onsite such as lack of sufficient vegetated buffer, cattle
erosion, and long-standing hydrologic manipulation from historic stream relocation.
1.5 Purpose and Objectives
The purpose of the proposed Project is to generate compensatory mitigation credits for inclusion in the
RES Catawba ESA Umbrella Mitigation Bank in the Catawba River Basin.
The project goals address stressors identified in the watershed, and include the following:
■ Improve water transport from watershed to the channel in a non -erosive manner;
■ Improve water quality within the restored channel reaches and downstream watercourses by
reducing sediment and nutrient loads;
■ Improve flood flow attenuation on site and downstream by allowing for overbanks flows and
connection to the active floodplain;
■ Create and improve instream habitat;
■ Restore and enhance native riparian and wetland plant communities; and
■ Improve ecological processes by reducing water temperature, improving terrestrial and aquatic
habitat, and restoring a native plant community.
The project goals will be addressed through the following project objectives:
■ Design a geomorphically stable stream -wetland system characterized by a single channel through
a restored valley;
■ Permanently exclude livestock from stream channels and their associated buffers;
■ Add in -stream structures and bank stabilization measures to protect restored and enhanced
streams;
■ Install habitat features such as brush toes, constructed riffles, woody materials, and pools of
varying depths to restored streams;
■ Reduce bank height ratios and increase entrenchment ratios to reference reach conditions;
■ Increase forested riparian buffers to at least 100-feet on both sides of the channel along the
project reaches with a hardwood riparian plant community;
■ Restore wetlands by reconnecting the channel with the floodplain and removing aggraded
sediment;
■ Treat exotic invasive species; and
■ Establish a permanent conservation easement on the Project.
The proposed Project is designed to help meet these goals. The project will address stressors identified in
the watershed through nutrient removal, sediment removal, runoff filtration, and improved aquatic and
terrestrial habitat. These project goals will be achieved through stream restoration, wetland
reestablishment, creation, enhancement, preservation, and buffer reestablishment.
RES Catawba ESA Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Beaver Tail Mitigation Project March 2022
2

1.6 Technical Feasibility
The technical feasibility of the Bank is assured due to RES' extensive experience with stream restoration
and wetland reestablishment, creation, enhancement, and preservation in North Carolina and throughout
the Southeast. Examples of EBX's success include the projects listed in Table 1.
Table]. Summary of RES Projects across the State of North Carolina
Projects in various stages of
Broad
3 Projects
Various Counties
18,510
13.11
development, construction, monitoring,
and completion
Projects in various stages of
Cape Fear
15 Projects
Various Counties
89,177
82.8
development, construction, monitoring,
and completion
Projects in various stages of
Catawba
13 Projects
Various Counties
84,300
52.5
development, construction, monitoring,
and completion
French Broad
7 Projects
Henderson, Mitchell
24,525
3.9
Projects in development
Little Tennessee
2 Projects
Macon, Jackson
4,766
4.5
Projects in Monitoring
Lumber
2 Projects
Anson, Lenoir
4,098
69
Projects closed out
Projects in various stages of
Neuse
33 Projects
Various Counties
119,948
648.087
development, construction, monitoring,
and completion
Roanoke
3 Projects
Various Counties
20,331
112.2
Projects closed out
Tar -Pamlico
1 Project
Halifax
6,757
85.8
Projects closed out
White Oak
1 Project
Onslow
3,770
0
Project in Development
Projects in various stages of
Yadkin
18 Projects
Various Counties
90,784
0
development, construction, monitoring,
and completion
1.7 Project Site Ownership
The land required for the construction, management, and stewardship of this mitigation project includes
portions of the parcels listed in Table 2. A landowner map is also provided in Figure 2. EBX has
obtained a legal option to develop the mitigation project and establish a permanent conservation easement
on the necessary area on the subject parcels.
Table 2. Project Parcel and Landowner Information
David Lutz 3604958258 Lincoln
RES Catawba ESA Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Beaver Tail Mitigation Project
Draft Prospectus
March 2022
3

2 QUALIFICATIONS
2.1 Bank Sponsor
The Project shall be established under the terms and conditions of the RES Catawba ESA Umbrella
Mitigation Banking Instrument made and entered into by EBX, LLC, acting as the Bank Sponsor.
Company Name: Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC
Company Address: 3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100, Raleigh, NC 27612
Contact Name: Patrick Korn
Telephone: [phone]
Email: pkorn(ares.us
2.2 Bank Sponsor Qualifications
RES is the nation's largest and most experienced dedicated ecological offset provider. RES develops and
supplies ecological solutions to help public and private sector clients obtain required permits for
unavoidable, project -related impacts to wetlands, streams, and habitats. RES helps clients proactively
manage risk from operations in environmentally sensitive areas by providing impact analyses,
streamlining permitting processes, and limiting liability and regulatory exposure.
Key RES milestones and achievements include:
■ Restoration, enhancement, and preservation of 58,024 acres of wetlands
■ Restoration of over 328 miles of streams
■ Rehabilitation, preservation, and/or management of over 15,000 acres of special -status species
habitat
■ Successful close-out of over 100 mitigation sites
■ Permitting and development of over 200 permittee-responsible mitigation projects
■ Design, permitting, management, and development of 138 wetland, stream, species, and
conservation banks
■ Delivery of 20,000 acres of custom, turnkey mitigation solutions
■ Design and construction of over 350 stormwater management facilities
■ Reductions of over 267 tons of water quality nutrients
■ Planting of over 17,400,000 trees across all operating regions
■ Development and operation of nurseries in three states including the largest coastal nursery in
Louisiana
■ Facilitation of compensatory mitigation and nutrient offsets for over 3,434 federal and state
permits
In North Carolina, RES and its affiliated companies have a long history of supplying mitigation contracts
with North Carolina state agencies. With regional offices in Raleigh, Charlotte, Mt. Airy, and Greensboro
that are staffed with full-time professionals, RES has the ability to carry out existing projects, as well as
secure and carry out new projects and banks in the State.
RES Catawba ESA Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Beaver Tail Mitigation Project
Draft Prospectus
March 2022
4

3 EXISTING CONDITIONS
3.1 Existing Jurisdictional Waters of US
The USFWS National Wetland Inventory Map (NWI) indicates that there are no areas of wetlands within
the Project limits (Figure 6). There may be potential for the presence of wetlands within riparian areas of
the Project; therefore, any and all wetland areas will be delineated by RES and approved by the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) during the development phase of the project. The stream channels
were classified using North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NC DWR) methodology (Appendix
A). Stream calls will be verified by the USACE.
The current State classification for Howard's Creek is C, whereas the South Fork Catawba River has a
classification of WS-IV. Class C waters are protected for uses such as secondary recreation, fishing,
wildlife, fish consumption, and aquatic life including propagation, survival and maintenance of biological
integrity, and agriculture. WS-IV waters are protected for sources of water supply for drinking, culinary,
or food processing purposes.
Water quality stressors currently affecting the Project include row crop production, cattle pasture, and a
lack of forested riparian buffer. Stream restoration is proposed to increase water quality and ecological
function and protect these features in perpetuity. There are no current conservation easements or options
that conflict with the proposed full delivery project.
3.2 Existing Reach Conditions
In general, all or portions of the project stream do not function to their full potential. Current conditions
demonstrate significant habitat degradation as a result of and agricultural land use, especially cattle
farming (Figure 4). Project reaches are moderately to severely degraded with incised channels and
eroding banks, with a lack of floodplain access and unbalanced sediment transport. Project reaches were
assessed using the NC Stream Assessment Method (NC SAM). NC rating forms are included in
Appendix B. Existing stream parameters and results from the NC SAM forms are summarized in Table
3.
Table 3. Project Stream Reach Summary by Tributary
LDI Perennial 31.5 384 3,958 Agriculture, Low
Forested
*Stream determination score determined by NCDWR Stream Identification Form 4.11, see Appendix A.
LDI
LDI is a perennial stream originating off -site at the northern extent of the Project. The reach flows south
through cattle pasture before entering a culvert below Lutz Dairy Farm Road. The channel is significantly
incised once it enters the Project and continues to be throughout. This area is heavily used by cattle which
has contributed to erosion and bank failure. Mass wasting is also evident in this area as a narrow buffer
and overgrazed herbaceous layer do not provide much stabilization. The upper half of the reach is lined
with larger trees that provide some shading but gives way to a non-existent canopy towards the lower half
RES Catawba ESA Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Beaver Tail Mitigation Project March 2022
5

before entering the culvert under Lutz Dairy Farm Road. The culvert also serves as a thoroughfare for
cattle to access the pasture just downstream of the road.
Downstream of the culvert, bank incision decreases slightly as the channel quickly exits active pasture
and gives way to a wider, 50-100 ft buffer on the right bank. The left bank buffer is largely absent with
row crops located adjacent to the stream. The channel appears to have been straightened and ditched in
this section with spoil existing on both banks. There are also significant depositions from the mass
wasting found in the upstream area. Despite the high level of deposition, there is still a lot of incision
present. The last third of LD1 flows through a bottomland hardwood wetland complex on the left bank
before it's confluence with Howard's Creek. The buffer on the right bank is narrow due to its proximity to
Daniels Road while the left bank contains a combination of fallow agriculture fields and an established
hardwood wetland complex. Vegetation in this area consists of mainly herbaceous and shrubby species
with woody vegetation existing beyond 100 ft of the channel.
Howard's Creek
Howard's Creek is a perennial mapped stream. The creek flows southeast and enters the Project near the
bottom of the easement area. Howard's Creek has a healthy riparian area on its left bank, that will include
the Project area and wetlands. The right bank is confined by Daniels Road for a short portion and then
agricultural fields as it flows southeast.
3.3 Existing Wetland Conditions
A wetland delineation has not been performed, but suspected wetlands occur in the forested riparian
corridor along the bottom of LD1 and the left buffer of Howard's Creek. There has been significant
aggradation of sediment in this area overtop the native soil horizon. A Professional Soil Scientist
performed an investigation to see if there was an opportunity to expand these wetlands in conjunction
with the adjacent stream restoration (Appendix E). Soils onsite were found to be suitable for wetland
restoration along with some reestablishment, creation, enhancement, and preservation opportunities. A
hydric soil delineation will be performed in these areas to evaluate full wetland uplift potential. Project
wetlands were assessed using the NC Wetland Assessment Method (NC WAM). NC rating forms are
included in Appendix B.
3.4 Physiography, Geology, and Soils
The Project is located within the Southern Outer Piedmont Level IV ecoregion. The physiography of this
ecoregion includes dissected irregular plains, some low rounded hills, and ridges with low to moderate
gradient streams with mostly cobble, gravel, and sandy substrates. Geologic formations within this region
include quaternary to tertiary sand and clay decomposition, with Precambrian and Paleozoic granite,
gneiss, schist, and metavolcanic rock. Most common natural vegetation found is white oak (Quercus
alba), southern red oak (Quercus falcata), black oak (Quercus velutina), mockernut hickory (Carya
tomentosa), pignut hickory (Carya glabra), Virginia pine (Pious virginiana), and shortleaf pine (Pinus
echinata) (USEPA, 2002). Other trees would include Tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), Maple (Acer
sp.) and Sweetgum (Liquidambar styrac flua).
The Natural Resource Conservation Service (MRCS) depicts six soil map units across the Project (Figure
9) (USDA-NRCS, 2021). The map units and soil characteristics of these map units are summarized in
Table 4. The Lloyd sandy clay loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes represents the largest composition of soil
units, with 50.6% area. Riverview loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes is next with 28.5%. Chewacla loam, 0 to 2
percent slopes is next with 15.2% of the study area. Helena sandy loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes at 3.8%,
RES Catawba ESA Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Beaver Tail Mitigation Project March 2022
11

Lloyd loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes with 1.5%, and finally Lloyd sandy clay loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes
at 0.5% of the study area. The mapped soil data presented here are for reference only. Additional work
will be conducted as needed to support the project.
Table 4. Mapped Soil Series within Project
ChA Chewacla loam, 0 to 2 percent 5% Somewhat poorly B/D Floodplains
slopes, frequently flooded drained
HeB
Helena sandy loam, 1 to 6
1%
Moderately Well
D
Ridges
percent slopes
Drained
LcD
Lloyd loam, 15 to 25 percent
0%
Well Drained
B
Hillslopes on Ridges
slopes
Lloyd sandy clay loam, 2 to 8
LdB2
percent slopes, moderately
0%
Well Drained
B
Interfluves
eroded
Lloyd sandy clay loam, 8 to 15
LdC2
percent slopes, moderately
0%
Well Drained
B
Hillslopes
eroded
RvA
Riverview loam, 0 to 2 percent
5%
Well Drained
B
Floodplains
slopes, occasionally flooded
3.5 Endangered/Threatened Species
Plants and animals with a federal classification of endangered or threatened are protected under
provisions of Sections 7 and 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. The US Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) database (updated 17 July 2020) lists the Northern Long-eared Bat (Myotis
septentrionalis), Monarch Butterfly (Danaus plexippus), Dwarf -flowered Heartleaf (Hexastylis
nan flora), and Michaux's Sumac (Rhus michauxii) as endangered species in Lincoln County, North
Carolina (Table 5). No protected species or potential habitat for protected species was observed during
preliminary site evaluations.
In addition to the USFWS database, the NC Natural Heritage Program (NHP) GIS database was consulted
to determine whether previously cataloged occurrences of protected species were mapped within two
miles of the project site (October 22, 2021). Results from NHP indicate that there is a known occurrence
of state threatened or endangered species within a two-mile radius of the project area, the Seagreen
Darter. Based on initial site investigations, no impacts to state protected species are anticipated as a result
of the proposed project.
The proposed project offers some potential to improve or create suitable habitat for several Federal
Species of Concern; Northern Long-eared Bats, Dwarf Heartleaf, and Monarch Butterfly. Habitat may be
improved or created for species that require riverine habitat by improving water quality, in -stream, and
RES Catawba ESA Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Beaver Tail Mitigation Project March 2022
7

near -stream forage, and providing stable conditions not subject to regular maintenance. The decision
phase of the project will include USFWS coordination to confirm these findings.
Table 5. Federally Protected Species in Wayne County
Status Present
Afmon'Name Scientific name Federal Habitat Record Status
Vertebrate:
Northern Long-eared Bat
Myotis septentrionalis
T
No
Current
Insect:
Monarch Butterfly
Danaus plexippus
C
Yes
Current
Flowering Plants:
Dwarf -flowered Heartleaf
Hexastylis naniflora
T
No
Current
Michaux's Sumac
Rhus michauxii
E
No
Current
C = Candidate
E = Endangered
T = Threatened
3.6 Vegetation
Current land use around the Project is primarily comprised of active cattle pasture, confined animal
feeding operations, cropland, low -density residential areas, and disturbed mixed hardwood and pine
forest. Common species found within the Project include, Loblolly Pine (Pious taeda), Red Maple (Acer
rubrum), American Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), Virginia pine (Pious virginiana), American Holly
(Ilex opaca) and Eastern Red Cedar (Juniperus virginiana). Greenbriar (Smilax sp.) and ferns
(Polystichum sp.) make up the sub -canopy of the Project. Exotic invasive species are present throughout
the Project, mainly Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense).
3.7 Cultural Resources
The North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) website (http://gis.ncdcr.gov) database
was reviewed to determine if any listed or potentially eligible historic or archeological resources in the
proposed Beaver Tail Project existed (October 22, 2021). This search did not reveal any occurrences
within the project area. However, there were three historical sites within a 0.5-mile radius of the Project:
Clarence Coon House (LN0156), Loretz House 1972 (LN005), and Daniel Hoke House (LN0216). The
environmental screening phase of the Project will include SHPO coordination to confirm these findings.
3.8 Constraints
There are few known constraints at the Beaver Tail Project. The Project is not within a mapped FEMA
Regulatory Floodway or 100-year floodplain. Also, no overhead or underground utilities are located
within the proposed buffer. There is an existing culvert under Lutz Dairy Farm Road that will not be
removed during construction. Current land use surrounding the project is forest, residential and
agricultural usage. The agricultural usage consists of row crops, chicken houses, and cow pasture. The
chicken houses are located on the left bank near the top of LD1. The cow pasture is around the upper part
of LD1 and near the culvert under Lutz Dairy Farm Road, while the lower section of LD1 has cropland
adjacent on the left bank (Figure 6).
RES Catawba ESA Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Beaver Tail Mitigation Project March 2022
E3

4 PROPOSED BANK CONDITIONS
4.1 Conceptual Mitigation Plan
The Project presents the opportunity to provide 3,958.000 warm stream mitigation units (SMUs) and
4.088 riparian wetland mitigation units (WMUs). These will be derived from a combination of stream
restoration and wetland reestablishment, creation, enhancement, and preservation. Table 6 details the
stream mitigation components and Table 7 details the wetland mitigation components. The preliminary
proposed conceptual design plan is shown in Figure 10.
Table 6. Proposed Stream Mitigation Summary for Beaver Tail Project
LD 1 Restoration 3,958 1:1 3957.891
Total
3,958
3,958.000
Table 7. Proposed Wetland Mitigation Summary for Beaver Tail Project
Wedand Mitigation
Wetland ID Mitigation Type Proposed Area (ac) Mitigation Ratio
WMUs
WA
Creation
1.12
3:1
0.373
WB
Re -Establishment
2.37
1:1
2.37
WC
Enhancement
0.59
3:1
0.39
WD
Preservation
2.15
10:1
0.22
Total
6.22
3.352
4.2 Stream Restoration
Stream restoration efforts will be accomplished through analyses of geomorphic conditions and watershed
characteristics. The design approach will apply a combination of analytical and reference reach -based
design methods that meet objectives commensurate with both ecological and geomorphic improvements.
All project reaches are proposed for restoration involving the realignment of the channel with appropriate
plan, profile, and cross section dimensions. Natural design concepts will be applied and verified through
rigorous engineering analyses and modeling. The objective of this approach is to design a geomorphically
stable channel that provides habitat improvements and ties into the existing landscape. Structures will be
installed on all restored reaches for grade control, channel stability, and to improve in -stream habitat.
Finally, riparian buffers will be restored and protected in perpetuity. Conceptual plan views are provided
in Figure 10.
Design parameters, including active channel, habitat and floodplain features will be developed from
analysis of suitable on and off -site reference streams. Analytical design techniques will be an important
element of the Project and will be used to determine the design discharge and to verify the design as a
RES Catawba ESA Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Beaver Tail Mitigation Project
Draft Prospectus
March 2022
0]

whole. The design approach is based on initial stream assessment and recent restoration experience on
other project sites in this ecoregion.
Engineering analyses will be performed using various hydrologic and hydraulic models to verify the
reference reach/analog-based design. A combination of methods will be used to estimate bankfull flows,
and flows corresponding to other significant storm events. A HEC-RAS model will then be used to
simulate water surface elevations of flows generated by the hydrologic analysis. The development of the
HEC model is an important component to the design; therefore, model input parameters are field verified
when possible. Through this hydrologic analysis, the design discharge (typically referenced as bankfull or
dominant discharge) will be determined. The subsequent design will be based on this calculated
discharge.
As part of the design process for all reaches, a qualitative analysis of sediment supply will be performed
by characterizing watershed conditions. A combination of windshield surveys, existing land use data, and
historical aerial photography, followed up by ground-truthing, will be analyzed to assess existing and past
watershed conditions and to determine if any changes occurred that would significantly impact sediment
supply. Design parameters developed through the analyses of reference reach data, watershed
characterizations, and hydrologic and hydraulic modeling will be confirmed using the Sediment Transport
Analysis components within HEC-RAS in conjunction with shear stress and velocity analyses.
Engineering analyses are performed concurrently with geomorphic and habitat studies. While the stream
design will be verified through simulations of hydrology and fluvial processes, analogs of desirable
habitat features will be derived from reference sites and integrated into the project design. Both in -stream
and riparian habitat features will be designed. In -stream structures will be used throughout the project to
act as grade control and for bank stabilization by dissipating and redirecting the stream's energy. Bank
stability may further be enhanced through the installation of brush mattresses, live stakes, and cuttings
bundles.
The riparian buffer areas will be planted with native species creating a vegetated buffer, which will
provide numerous water quality and ecological benefits. Stream banks will be stabilized using a
combination of grading, erosion control matting, bare -root plantings, native material revetment techniques
(i.e., bioengineering), structure placement, and sod transplants where possible. In addition, exotic invasive
species, especially Chinese privet, will be treated to ensure survival of planted, native vegetation. The
stream and adjacent riparian areas will be protected by a minimum 50-foot conservation easement.
4.3 Wetland Reestablishment, Creation, Enhancement, and Preservation
The Project provides an excellent opportunity for the reestablishment, creation, enhancement, and
preservation of Headwater Forest and Bottomland Hardwood -type wetland communities. Extensive land -
use practices have altered the hydrology and vegetation significantly to where jurisdiction has been
removed in some areas. The proposed wetland restoration will be closely tied to the stream restoration. The
proposed stream design is expected to restore wetland hydrology and vegetation throughout the stream
corridor. Therefore, wetland reestablishment, creation, and enhancement activities will include:
■ Grading reestablishment areas to match historical contours and promote detention and infiltration;
■ Removing surface material in order to lower the elevation of floodplain;
■ Reconnecting surface drainage to hydric soil areas in conjunction with stream restoration;
■ Planting herbaceous seed mix and native tree species commonly found in headwater and
bottomland hardwood forests.
RES Catawba ESA Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Beaver Tail Mitigation Project March 2022
10

The resulting natural communities will provide ecological function far surpassing the current state and
approaching the pre -disturbance condition.
5 MONITORING
Stream stability, hydrology, and vegetation survival will be monitored across the Project to determine the
success of the stream mitigation. Stream stability will be monitored with cross section surveys and visual
assessment stream walks. Vegetation survival rates will be monitored using vegetation plots over
approximately two percent of the planted area. The success criteria for the Project will follow current
accepted and approved success criteria presented in the 2003 USACE Wilmington District Stream
Mitigation Guidelines and subsequent NC Interagency Review Team (IRT) 2016 Wilmington District
Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update. Monitoring reports will be prepared annually and
submitted to the IRT. Specific success criteria components are presented below.
Wetland hydrology will be monitored to document hydrologic conditions in the wetland reestablishment
areas. This will be accomplished with automatic recording pressure transducer gauges installed in
representative locations across the restoration areas as well as the preservation wetland areas for reference
conditions. The gauges will be downloaded quarterly and wetland hydroperiods will be calculated during
the growing season. The hydrology success criterion for the Project is to restore the water table so that it
will remain continuously within 12-inches of the soil surface for at least 12-percent of the growing season
at each groundwater gauge location. Gauge installation will follow current NCIRT guidance. Visual
observations of primary and secondary wetland hydrology indicators will also be recorded during
quarterly site visits.
5.1 As -Built Survey
An as -built topographic survey will be conducted immediately following construction to document
floodplain grading, channel planform, profile, and dimension. The survey will include a complete profile
of centerline, thalweg, water surface, bankfull, and top of bank to compare with future geomorphic data.
Longitudinal profiles will not be required in annual monitoring reports unless requested by the IRT.
5.2 Visual Monitoring
Visual monitoring of all mitigation areas will be conducted a minimum of twice per monitoring year by
qualified individuals. A Current Conditions Plan View (CCPV) and associated tables will be submitted
every monitoring year in the annual monitoring report. The Current Condition Plan View (CCPV)
provides the spatial distributions and qualitative performance ratings for certain monitoring features.
Visual assessments will include vegetation density, vigor, invasive species, and easement encroachments.
Visual assessments of stream stability will include a complete stream walk and structure inspection.
Digital images will be recorded at fixed representative locations during each monitoring event, as well as
at any noted problem areas or areas of concern. Results of visual monitoring will be presented in a plan
view exhibit with a brief description of problem areas and digital images. Photographs will be used to
subjectively evaluate channel aggradation or degradation, bank erosion, success of riparian vegetation and
effectiveness of erosion control measures. Longitudinal photos should indicate the absence of developing
bars within the channel or an excessive increase in channel depth. Lateral photos should not indicate
excessive erosion or continuing degradation of the banks over time. A series of photos over time should
indicate successional maturation of riparian vegetation.
RES Catawba ESA Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Beaver Tail Mitigation Project March 2022
11

5.3 Cross Sections
Permanent cross -sections will be installed at approximately of one per 20 bankfull widths with half in
pools and half in riffles on all reaches that include restoration or significant channel stabilization. All
cross-section measurements will include bank height ratio and entrenchment ratio. There should be
minimal changes in the annual monitoring cross sections from the as -built cross sections. If changes do
take place, they will be evaluated to determine if they represent a movement toward a less stable
condition (for example downcutting or erosion) or are minor changes that represent an increase in
stability (for example settling, vegetative changes, deposition along the banks, or decrease in width/depth
ratio). Channel stability should be demonstrated through a minimum of four bankfull events documented
in the seven-year monitoring period. Cross-section surveys will occur in monitoring Years 1, 2, 3, 5, and
7.
5.4 Vegetative Success Criteria
Vegetation monitoring plots will be a minimum of 0.02 acres in size and cover approximately 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. Vegetation monitoring will occur in monitoring years 1, 2, 3, 5, and
7 during the monitoring period. The interim measures of vegetative success for the Projects will be the
survival of at least 320 planted three-year old trees per acre at the end of Year 3 and 260 five-year old
trees per acre at the end of Year 5. The final vegetative success criteria will be the survival of 210 trees
per acre with an average height of 10 feet at the end of Year 7 of the monitoring period. Invasive and
noxious species will be monitored and controlled so that none become dominant or alter the desired
community structure of the Project. If necessary, RES will develop a species -specific control plan.
5.5 Adaptive Management
The Mitigation Plan will include a detailed adaptive management plan that will address how potential
problems are resolved. In the event that the Project or a specific component of the Project fails to achieve
the defined success criteria, RES will notify the USACE of the need to develop necessary adaptive
management plans and/or implement appropriate remedial actions for the Project. 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. If needed, a corrective action plan will be
created to change the management of the Project, to meet success criteria. Once the Corrective Action
Plan is prepared and finalized RES will:
1. Notify the USACE as required by the Nationwide 27 permit general conditions.
2. Revise performance standards, maintenance requirements, and monitoring requirements as
necessary and/or required by the USACE.
3. Obtain other permits as necessary.
4. Prepare Corrective Action Plan for review and approval by IRT.
5. Implement the Corrective Action Plan.
Provide the IRT a Record Drawing of Corrective Actions. This document shall depict the extent
and nature of the work performed.
6 BANK ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION
6.1 Establishment and Operation of the Bank
This Project shall be established under the terms and conditions of the RES Catawba ESA UMBI made
and entered into by and among EBX, and the USACE, the United States Environmental Protection
RES Catawba ESA Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Beaver Tail Mitigation Project March 2022
12

Agency (USEPA), the USFWS, the National Marine Fisheries Services, the NCDWR, and the North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, collectively, the IRT.
6.2 Proposed Credit Release Schedule
All credit releases will be based on the total credit generated as reported in the approved mitigation plan
of the Project. Under no circumstances shall any mitigation project be debited until the necessary DA
authorization has been received for its construction or the District Engineer (DE) has otherwise provided
written approval for the project in the case where no DA authorization is required for construction of the
mitigation project. The DE, in consultation with the IRT, will determine if performance standards have
been satisfied sufficiently to meet the requirements of the release schedules below. In cases where some
performance standards have not been met, credits may still be released depending on the specifics of the
case. Monitoring may be required to restart or be extended, depending on the extent to which the Project
fails to meet the specified performance standard. The release of project credits will be subject to the
criteria described in Table 8 and Table 9.
6.2.1 Initial Allocation of Released Credits
The initial allocation of released credits, as specified in the mitigation plan can be released by the IRT
with written approval of the DE upon satisfactory completion of the following activities:
a) Execution of the UMBI by the Sponsor and the USACE
b) Approval of the final mitigation plan
c) Mitigation site must be secured
d) Delivery of financial assurances.
e) Recordation of the long-term protection mechanism and title opinion acceptable to the USACE
f) Issuance of the 404-permit verification for construction of the site, if required.
6.2.2 Subsequent Credit Releases
The second credit release will occur after the completion of implementation of the Mitigation Plan and
IRT approval of the Baseline Monitoring Report and As -built Survey. All subsequent credit releases must
be approved by the DE, in consultation with the IRT, based on a determination that required performance
standards have been achieved. As projects approach milestones associated with credit release, the Sponsor
will submit a request for credit release to the DE along with documentation substantiating achievement of
criteria required for release to occur. This documentation will be included with the annual monitoring
report.
Table 8. Streattr Credit Release .Schedtile
Project Establishment (includes all required criteria stated above) 15% 15%
Completion of all initial physical and biological improvements made 15% 30%
pursuant to the Mitigation Plan
Year 1 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are stable and 10% 40%
interim performance standards have been met
RES Catawba ESA Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Beaver Tail Mitigation Project
Draft Prospectus
March 2022
13

Year 2 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are stable and
50%
4
interim performance standards have been met
10/o o
(60%**)
Year 3 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are stable and
60%
5
interim performance standards have been met
10/o o
(70%**)
Year 4 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are stable and
65%
6*
interim performance standards have been met
5%
(75%**)
Year 5 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are stable and
75%
7
interim performance standards have been met
10/o o
(85%**)
8*
Year 6 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are stable and
5%
80%
interim performance standards have been met
(90%**)
Year 7 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are stable and
90%
interim performance standards have been met project has received
10%
9
close-out approval.
(100%**)
*Please note that vegetation data and cross section data may not be required with monitoring reports submitted during these
monitoring years unless otherwise stated by the Mitigation Plan or directed by the IRT.
* *10% reserve of credits to be held back until the bankfull event performance standard has been met.
Table 9.
Wetland Credit Release Schedule
Milestone
Credit Release Activity
InterimRelease
Release
Total Released
1
Site Establishment (includes all required criteria stated above)
15%
15%
2
Completion of all initial physical and biological improvements made
15%
30%
pursuant to the Mitigation Plan
Year 1 monitoring report demonstrates performance standards are
3
being met.
10%
40%
4
Year 2 monitoring report demonstrates performance standards are
10%
50%
being met.
Year 3 monitoring report demonstrates performance standards are
5
being met.
15%
65%
6*
Year 4 monitoring report demonstrates performance standards are
5%
70%
being met.
Year 5 monitoring report demonstrates performance standards are
7
being met.
15%
85%
8*
Year 6 monitoring report demonstrates performance standards are
5%
90%
being met.
RES Catawba ESA Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Beaver Tail Mitigation Project
Draft Prospectus
March 2022
14

Year 7 monitoring report demonstrates performance standards are 10% 100%
being met, and project has received close-out approval.
*Please note that vegetation data may not be required with monitoring reports submitted during these monitoring years unless
otherwise stated by the Mitigation Plan or directed by the IRT.
6.3 Financial Assurances
EBX, acting as the Bank Sponsor, shall provide financial assurances in the form of a Performance Bond
to the IRT sufficient to assure completion of all mitigation work, required reporting and monitoring, and
any remedial work required. Financial assurances shall be payable at the direction of the USACE to the
project designee or to a standby trust. Financial assurances structured to provide funds to the USACE in
the event of default by the Bank Sponsor are not acceptable. A financial assurance must be in the form
that ensures that the USACE receives notification at least 120 days in advance of any termination or
revocation.
6.4 Proposed Ownership and Long -Term Management
EBX, acting as the Bank Sponsor, will establish a Conservation Easement, and will monitor the Project
for a minimum of seven years. The Mitigation Plan will provide detailed information regarding bank
operation, including long term management and annual monitoring activities, for review and approval by
the IRT. Upon approval of the Project by the IRT, the Project will be transferred to a long-term land
steward. The long-term steward shall be responsible for periodic inspection of the site to ensure that
restrictions required in the Conservation Easement, or the deed restriction document(s) are upheld.
Endowment funds required to uphold easement and deed restrictions shall be negotiated prior to site
transfer to the responsible party.
EBX will ensure that the Conservation Easement will allow for the implementation of an initial
monitoring phase, which will be developed during the design phase and conducted by RES, on behalf of
EBX. The Conservation Easement will allow for yearly monitoring and, if necessary, maintenance of the
Project during the initial monitoring phase. These activities will be conducted in accordance with the
terms and conditions of the RES Catawba ESA UMBI made and entered into by EBX and USACE.
6.5 Assurance of Water Rights
Sufficient water rights exist to support the long-term sustainability of the Project, as there are no
"severed" rights on the property.
RES Catawba ESA Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Beaver Tail Mitigation Project
Draft Prospectus
March 2022
15

7 REFERENCES
Harman, W., R. Starr, M. Carter, K. Tweedy, M. Clemmons, K. Suggs, C. Miller. 2012. A Function -
Based Framework for Stream Assessment and Restoration Projects. US Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, DC EPA 843-K-12-006.
North Carolina National Heritage Program (NCNHP). 2021. "North Carolina Natural Heritage Data
Explorer." hiips://ncnhde.natureserve.org/. (Accessed October 2021).
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ). "Classifications." Water Resources
https:Hdeg .nc. gov/about/divisions/water-resources/planning/classification-standards/classifications.
(Accessed November 2021).
NC DEQ. "Indian Creek and Howards Creek Local Watershed Plan." Catawba 2010.
https:Hdeq.nc.gov/about/divisions/mitigation-service s/dms-planning/watershed-planning-
documents/catawba-river-basin-documents. (Accessed November 2021).
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR) 2012. "Water Quality
Stream Classifications for Streams in North Carolina." Water Quality
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/home. (Accessed November 2021).North Carolina Division of
Mitigation Services (NCDMS). "Lower Catawba River Basin Restoration Priorities". 2013.
North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources (NCDNCR). 2021. "NC State Historic
Preservation Office." NCSHPO. hLtps://www.ncdcr.gov/about/histoDL/division-histon*cal-
resource s/nc-state -historic-preservation-office (Accessed October 2021).
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2010. "Methodology for Identification of
Intermittent and Perennial Streams and Their Origins." NC DWR.
https:Hfile s.nc.gov/ncdeg/W ater%20Qualiiy/Surface%20Water%20Protection/401 /Policies_Guides_
Manuals/StreamID v_4pointl I_Final _sept_01_2010.pdf (Accessed October 2021).
Schafale, M.P. 2012. Guide to the Natural Communities of North Carolina, Fourth Approximation. North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, NCDENR, Raleigh, NC.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2002. "Ecoregions of North Carolina and
South Carolina." US EPA. https://www.epa.gov/eco-research/ecoregion-download-files-state-re ig on-
4. (Accessed November 2021).
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2018. "Threatened and Endangered Species in North
Carolina." North Carolina Ecological Services.
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/TTZT7UFHKNE2HM5AU2H5LI3B34/resources. (Accessed
October 2021).
United State Department of Agriculture — Natural Resource Conservation Service (USDA NRCS). 2021.
Web Soil Survey; htip:Hwebsoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov. (Accessed October 2021).
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2003. April 2003 NC Stream Mitigation Guidelines.
USACE. 2016. Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update.
RES Catawba ESA Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Beaver Tail Mitigation Project March 2022
16

,z11
Fre HoIinessI
Churc
Z,&
F1 N71 19 Warlick's Shortstop
s Boutique19
Union Elementary
urn
ro cpD bz '�Q'
1195
West Lincoln
High SchoQL
1438
Mi
illow Creek Inn r
y -J
F
a
n
�d
r va Daya
ch
da +m+ Lincolnton
�. Middle School y ,
D iel Lutheran Chu h New Vision Ministries
Rebecca'S Countr
c,
FI 1851 1203
v
ac
i
0
r
i
12tY2 v
12'9 Tractor Supply C.
Norris S. Childers
1201 Elementary School
:e rails
nas
Morganton
1*R1 Co ver
Legend Nevi ,
Proposed Easement f"
Lincoln t
5 Mile Aviation Zone Der,
14-Digit HUC: 03050102040040 - TLW olnto
8-Digit HUC: 03050102
NC NH Element Occurrence (NC NH July 2021) sz,
- NC DMS Conservation Easement (NCDMS June 2021) Shelby
Other Managed Area (NC NHP July 2021) K s G is
Mour'air
r Airports
0 Project Location B acksbura Clover
"9 Figure 1 - Project Vicinity Date: 2/15/2022
ill
Beaver Tail Drawn by: GDS res
Mitigation Project Checked by: MDE
0 05 1
Nile Lincoln County, North Carolina rl inch = 1 mile

'. *41
1, t fi
•Ar
x ; yr- ar �`. v k>
LUTZ DAVID R
-.� 3604958258 M i
:y ,p t
'mow: r
rt c
AT
4 f:
Legend '`'t � - " . � � •,
Proposed Easement
Project Parcel
Parcel
Parcel Access
Y tia
O Parking Spot
" Figure 2 - Parcel Access Date: z/zs/zozz
w e Drawn by: GDS ores
Beaver Tail
5 Miti ation Pro ect
0 250 5C0 g Checked by: MDE
Lincoln County,North Carolina 1 inch=SOO feet Resrorin r enrrn(or a modern word
Feet 9

//
�A /�/ / �� _9e0
832
810
\I 900 -
its
-
(.}
l'
y � G
Howards_'�
`f �) Creek•
Legend
Proposed Easement
LD1 - 384 ac
'• \
N
Figure 3 - USGS Quadrangle Date: 2/15/2022
w E Reepsville (1973) and Lincolnton West (1979)
Drawn by: GDS res
S Beaver Tail
0 1,000 2000 Mitigation Project Checked by: MDE
rl inch = 2,OOO feet
Feet Lincoln County, North Carolina

�'
4}.`��J�♦'t
.yam
a�,����
� e - ..
�> 41
"e
��..s � i ilGu��laFf,�f1ll�►iltllfl�(►�tp
v,r,� _ p 5�111IIiI�IIt�ICr�j����s
NX
Legend
Proposed Easement
Project Parcel
Land Use
Agriculture - 41 ac
Forest - 33.89 ac
i
. Residential/Farm Headquarters - 7.29 ac
Confined Animal Feeding Operation - 6.64 ac
- Impervious Surface - 0.76 ac
N
s
0 250 500
Feet
Figure 4 - Project Area Landuse
Beaver Tail
Mitigation Project
Lincoln County, North Carolina
� a
.t€L�JfjyE� 9 1 •4
7 I
Date: 2/15/2022
Drawn by: GDS res
Checked by: MDE
1 inch = 500 feet
a r, �g o yes

A4
44 �e
a2v
Ri(D (zo
ti
44
9.
4r,
Legend
'-Jill
Proposed Easement
Project Parcel
Adjacent Parcel
NWI Wetland (None), USFWS
12/01/2021
FEMA Zone AE (None)
Figure 6 - Project Constraints
Date: 2/15/2022
I F
IF,k g7
Drawn by: GDS
Beaver Tail
s Mitigation Project Checked by: MDE
0 250
Feet 500
Lincoln County, North Carolina 1 inch = 500 feet

777

Appendix A - NC DWR Stream Determination

UPI
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: Jahatary 11, 2.02.2.
Project/Site: 'Beaver Tail
Latitude: 35.505g3�ag2�S4f��a
Evaluator: -Patrick Koch
County: Lihcolh
Longitude:
Total Points:
�1,5
Stream Determination:
Other
if>_ 19 or perennial if>_ 30*
Stream is least intermittent
�ereVlVl ial i3D
e.g. Quad Name:
at
_
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 1(P)
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
RES Score
1 a. Continuity of channel bed and
bank
0
1
2
3
S+rohg - 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
Moderate, -
3. In -channel Structure: ex. riffle -pool,
step -pool, ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
1Modera+e - 2.
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
1Modera+e - 2.
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
-Aloseh+- D
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
Moderate, - 2.
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
Stroh - 3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
Aloseht - D
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
Weak-.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
Stroh -1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
No - D
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = q,5 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
S+rohg --
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
Aloseht - D
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
Abseh+-1.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
Weak- .5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
1 0.5
1 1
1 1.5
Stroh -1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water
table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
lies - 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = (P )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
-Abseht - �:k
19. Rooted upland plants in
streambed
3
2
1
0
A7seht - 3
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and
abundance
0
1
2
3
Aloseh+- D
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
Aloseh+- D
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
Aloseht - D
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
Abseht - D
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
Aloseht - D
25. Algae
1 0
1 0.5
1 1
1 1.5
1 Alo eht - D
26. Wetland plants in streambed
I
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
Outer = D
*perennial streams may also be identified
using
other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: Vid hot sample,
Sketch:
(Data Collected and Form Generated using ArcGIS Survey123)

(Data Collected and Form Generated using ArcG/S Survey123)

Appendix B - NC SAM and NC WAM Forms

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Beaver Tail
Stream Category Pa3
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Function Class Rating Summary
Date of Evaluation 01/11/2022
Assessor Name/Organization JLS - RES
NO
YES
YES
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology LOW
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Flood Flow LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW
(4) Floodplain Access MEDIUM
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer LOW
(4) Microtopography LOW
(3) Stream Stability LOW
(4) Channel Stability LOW
(4) Sediment Transport LOW
(4) Stream Geomorphology LOW
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(1) Water Quality LOW
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration LOW
(3) Thermo regulation MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance OMITTED
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA
(1) Habitat LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat LOW
(3) Baseflow HIGH
(3) Substrate LOW
(3) Stream Stability LOW
(3) In -stream Habitat LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat LOW
(3) Stream -side Habitat LOW
(3) Thermo regulation LOW
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat NA
Overall LOW

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual
Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Rehabilitation
Date
1-11-2022
Wetland Type Headwater Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Jeremy Schmid- RES
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open
water (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Rating Summary
Function Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Physical Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
LOW
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Vegetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Habitat Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual
Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Preservation
Date
1-11-2022
Wetland Type Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Jeremy Schmid- RES
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open
water (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Rating Summary
Function Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Particulate Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Soluble Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Physical Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
HIGH
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Vegetation Composition
Condition
HIGH
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology Condition
LOW
Water Quality Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Habitat Condition
HIGH
Overall Wetland Rating HIGH

Appendix C - Landowner Authorization

LANDOWNER AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRITION:
PIN Number: 3614053556
Street Address: 1560 Lutz Dairy Farm Road Lincolnton NC 28092
Property Owner (please print): JDA vl� t' ILtz -
Property Owner (please print):el L L t44z
The undersigned, registered property owner(s) of the above property, do hereby authorize
Resource Environmental Solutions, the NC Department of Environmental Quality, and the US
Army Corps of Engineers, their employees, agents or assigns to have reasonable access to the above
referenced property for the evaluation of the property as a potential stream, wetland and/or
riparian buffer mitigation project, including conducting stream and/or wetland determinations and
delineations, as well as issuance and acceptance of any required permit(s) or certification(s).
Property Owners(s) Address:
(if different from above)
Property Owner Telephone Number:
I/W ereby certify the above information to be true and accurate to the best of my/our knowledge.
(Property Owtho ner Aurize gnature) (Date)
(Date)

Appendix D - Photo Log

Beaver Tail Photo Log
Project stream origin (1/11/2022)
VZ
fr-
s
c
5 �
9 �
�' Ry4`
Xt
Upstream of culvert (11/1//2021)
Just downstream of culvert (11/1/2021)
Sweetgums on bank (11/1/2021)
Culvert (1/11/2022)
Near easement break looking downstream
(11/1/2021)

Mid project riparian area (11/1/2021)
Wetland buffer (11/1/2021)
Howard's Creek confluence upstream (1/11/2022)
Near bottom of Project looking downstream
Above confluence looking downstream (I l/l/2021)
Howard's Creek confluence downstream
(1/11/2022)

Appendix E - Soil Report

GEORGE K LANKFORD, LLC 238 Shady Grove Road
Pittsboro, NC 27312
919-602-0127 [e-mail]
February 4, 2022
Field Summary Notes
Beaver Tail Site — Preliminary Soil Evaluation
Provided to: Patrick Korn
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC
3600 Glenwood Avenue, Suite 100
Raleigh, NC 27612
A Preliminary Soil Investigation of the Beaver Tail mitigation site in Lincoln County was performed on
February 2, to evaluate soils suitable for potential wetland mitigation. This brief summary provides an
overview of the field work and is subject to change with incorporation of available resources during
preparation of the Preliminary Soil Report. This investigation provides limited evaluation of this site.
The site is along an unnamed tributary (UT) to Howards Creek and the left floodplain of Howards Creek.
The area appears to be abandoned pasture along the incised tributary and in a forested backwater area
adjacent to Howards Creek. The UT well below their floodplain, but Howards Creek appears to flood
occasionally. Soil units are broken into potential areas for creation and potential wetlands (Figure Sketch).
Soil
1. Soils of these floodplains are deep alluvial deposits derived from the contributing upland soil that
are reddish and Fe rich. Soils appear to have high iron that limits formation of depletions,
although there are areas with significant redox concentrations throughout many of the lower
elevation of the floodplain.
2. Depressions are present with hydric indicators meeting at least one of these indicators: F8-Redox
Depressions, F19-Piedmont Flood Plain Soils (test indicator in this area), and F21-Red Parent
Material (test indicator in this area). Indicators vary across the landscape and are discontinuous
within the HS1 area. These indicators are more common more extensive in the depressional
landscape of WI and W2.
3. The wetlands are based on soil indicators and landscape position. The W2 area also has the F3-
Depleted Matrix and is much wetter with areas of standing water in low swales and ditches.
4. Areas adjacent to the wetlands generally lacks indicators and tend to have a gentle slope that
trends toward a relatively higher elevation.
5. Soils range from sandy loam to sandy clay loam with areas of clay loam. A sandier texture was
encountered in a few profiles, but doesn't appear to pose hydrology problems for creation or
restoration.
6. The W2 wetland has an existing perimeter ditch along the toe of slope that is currently flooded.
This ditch flows off of the property to the south east onto the adjoining parcel and toward the
Owls Den Mitigation site to the east. This is most likely the source of the backed -up flow from
the restoration project.
Table of Estimated Soil Units
Soil Area
Est. Acres*
HS 1 creation
1.1
HS 2 creation
2.1
Total creation
3.2
Wetland W 1 enhancement or rehabilitation
0.6
Wetland W2(likely reservation or low-level enhancement
2.1
Total wetlands
2.7
*All acres shown are estimates

February 4, 2022
Field Summary Notes
Beaver Tail — Preliminary Soil Evaluation
Hydrology
1. Historic hydrology for this floodplain is primarily flow through with some recharge. A few areas
along in the backwater slopes have the potential for discharge, especially deeper lateral
hydrologic inputs. No significant or obvious discharge areas were observed, but are likely in W2.
2. Soils generally appear able to support a wetland hydrology due to the silt and clay content. The
absence of a continuous sandy subsoil within 24 inches would allow perching and surface
storage.
3. There does not appear to be overbank events along the UT. The floodplain depressions appear to
capture upland runoff and provide short term storage.
4. Howards Creek appears to flood regularly and sandy deposits were observed along HS2.
5. There are a few small surface ditches present for W1 and are approximated on the figure. Most
are relatively shallow.
Opportunities and Challenges
1. Interpretation of the jurisdictional wetlands will depend on the regulatory process due to the
challenging soil indicators.
2. Hydrologic restoration/enhancement/creation will require frequent overbank events and storage.
3. There does appear to be the potential to increase the HS2 are downstream toward Howards Creek.
4. The wetland creation on HS2 depends on being able to remove surface material and lower the
elevation. The amount of material will increase the construction cost and may be prohibitive.
5. There is a low existing berm along the UT. Raising the stream bed will require fill material prent
along the stream with loss of mature trees in existing buffer.
6. The berm/levee along Howards Creek is more substantial and large-scale removal is not advised.
Ongoing deposition of sandy materials into any restored or preserved wetlands should be
evaluated.
7. The silty soils across this site may present challenges to keep stable during construction and
establishment of the vegetative cover. There shouldn't be any nutrient issues.
S. The drainage feature leaving the property (at W2) needs to be evaluated for a potential down
gradient obstruction that may be removed by the landowner and maintenance of hydrology within
the project.
9. The small parcel between the site and the downstream Owls Den Mitigation site should be
explored for additional area. Although this area was not fully evaluated, especially in the back
water, a brief look into the woods found a large amount of sandy depositional material that would
need to be removed and may prohibit expanding into this area. This downstream area is wooded
and at least partial clearing would be needed if the depositional material is removed (potential for
large woody debris).
10. Due to the challenging soils, potential for existing wetland on the site, and the proposed creation,
regulatory buy in should be done with early open dialogue.
This site does have potential for wetland creation and wetland enhancement/preservation.
Thanks,
George Lankford
[phone]
Page 2 of 2 GEORGE K LANKFORD, LLC
238 Shady Grove Road
Pittsboro, NC 27312
919-602-0127

m
- `.MV
7 ��••
co
w
Qco
L
_
1.
W
m
U
U
L5