FalconRidge_DraftProspectus_Combined_2022

0
RES Yadkin 03 Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Falcon Ridge Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
Draft Prospectus
Yadkin 03 River Basin
HUC 03040103
Prepared by: Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC
fires
Bank Sponsor: Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC
3600 Glenwood Avenue, Suite ioo
Raleigh, North Carolina 27612
919-209-1055
February 2022

Table of Contents
1 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................... 1
1.1 Project Description.............................................................................................................
1
1.2 Project Location..................................................................................................................
1
1.3 Service Area.........................................................................................................................
1
1.4 Identified Watershed Needs...............................................................................................
1
1.5 Purpose and Objectives......................................................................................................
2
1.6 Technical Feasibility...........................................................................................................
2
1.7 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..............................................................................................8
3.4 Physiography and Soils.......................................................................................................8
3.5 Endangered/Threatened Species.......................................................................................
9
3.6 Vegetation.........................................................................................................................10
3.7 Cultural Resources............................................................................................................10
3.8 Constraints........................................................................................................................10
4 PROPOSED BANK CONDITIONS....................................................................
11
4.1 Conceptual Mitigation Plan...............................................................................................11
4.1.1 Stream Restoration, Enhancement, and Preservation................................................12
4.1.2 Wetland Enhancement and Preservation.................................................................14
4.1.3 Monitoring.................................................................................................................15
5 BANK ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION...................................................16
5.1 Establishment and Operation of the Bank.......................................................................16
5.2 Proposed Credit Release Schedule...................................................................................16
5.2.1 Initial Allocation of Released Credits........................................................................17
5.2.2 Subsequent Credit Releases.......................................................................................17
5.3 Financial Assurances........................................................................................................18
5.4 Proposed Ownership and Long -Term Management.......................................................18
5.5 Assurance of Water Rights...............................................................................................19
6. REFERENCES................................................................................................ 20
Falcon Ridge Stream and Wetland Draft Prospectus
Mitigation Bank i February 2022

0
List of Figures
Figure 1. Project Vicinity
Figure 2. Parcel Access
Figure 3. Existing Conditions
Figure 4. Historical Imagery
Figure 5. USGS Quadrangle
Figure 6. Soils Map
Figure 7. Project Constraints
Figure 8. Conceptual Design
Appendices
Appendix A- NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Appendix B - NC SAM Forms
Appendix C - Landowner Authorization
Falcon Ridge Stream and Wetland Draft Prospectus
Mitigation Bank ii February 2022

0
i INTRODUCTION
Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC (EBX, LLC), a wholly owned subsidiary of Resource Environmental
Solutions (RES), is pleased to propose the establishment of the RES Yadkin 03 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 Falcon Ridge 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 03040103 of
the Yadkin River Basin.
i.i Project Description
The Falcon Ridge Mitigation Project (Project) is located in Randolph County, NC, approximately 3.8 miles
south of Sophia, NC (Figure 1). The Project consists of two parcels totaling 59.35 acres of conservation
easement (Figure 2). The Project is located within a rural area, and land use within the project area is
comprised of agriculture, forests, and low -intensity residential areas (Figure 3).
The Project will involve the restoration, enhancement, and preservation of eight unnamed tributaries to
Caraway Creek, which is located approximately 4,000 feet downstream of the project. The conceptual design
presents the opportunity to provide up to 6,985 stream mitigation units (SMU), utilizing non-standard buffer
tool guidance, which will be described in detail in the mitigation plan and 0.43 Riparian Wetland Mitigation
Units (R-WMUs).
1.2 Project Location
To access the Project from the town of Sophia, travel south approximately 1.2 miles on NC-311. Turn right
on Plainfield Road and continue for 2.4 miles to the eastern end of the project. The coordinates for the
Project are 35.787,-79.865.
1.3 Service Area
This Bank will provide mitigation credits to offset unavoidable impacts to stream resources within the Yadkin
03 River Basin (8-digit USGS HUC 03040103). The Project is located in the Carolina Slate Belt level IV
ecoregion within the Piedmont level III ecoregion. The Project is primarily characterized by agricultural use,
forest, and very low -intensity residential areas. Future sites may be developed in the Bank that provide
stream and/or wetland mitigation.
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 reestablish natural pattern, hydrology and habitat, especially in heavily ditched headwater
areas. This Bank supports the Lower Yadkin RBRP goals and presents an opportunity to restore up to 9,730
linear feet of stream and riparian corridor through stream restoration, enhancement, and preservation. The
Falcon Ridge Stream and Wetland Draft Prospectus
Mitigation Bank 1 February 2022

0
Project is located within a Targeted Local Watershed (Carraway Creek, 14-digit HUC 03040103050040),
which is anticipated to experience continued growth, mainly in residential and agricultural land uses, for the
foreseeable future. The proposed Umbrella Bank will provide improvements to water quality, hydrologic
function, and habitat. The project will address stressors identified in the watershed through nutrient
removal, sediment removal, runoff filtration, and improved aquatic and terrestrial habitat.
1.5 Purpose and Objectives
The purpose of the proposed Project is to generate compensatory mitigation credits for inclusion in the
RES Yadkin 03 Umbrella Mitigation Bank in the Yadkin River Basin. The project goals address stressors
identified in the watershed, and include the following:
• Improve water transport from watershed to channels in a non -erosive manner;
• Improve water quality within the restored channel reaches and downstream watercourses by
reducing sediment and nutrient loads as well as excluding livestock;
• Improve flood flow attenuation downstream by allowing for overbanks flows and connection to the
active floodplain;
• Improve instream habitat;
• Enhance and protect a headwater forest wetland community; 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 and reconstruct stream channels sized to convey bankfull flows that will maintain a stable
dimension, profile, and planform based on watershed and reference reach conditions;
• Permanently exclude livestock from stream channels, their associated buffers, and wetlands;
• Add in -stream structures and bank stabilization measures to protect restored and enhanced
streams;
• Install habitat features such as brush toes, constructed riffles, woody materials, and pools of varying
depths to restored and enhanced streams;
• Reduce bank height ratios and increase entrenchment ratios to reference reach conditions;
• Increase forested riparian buffers to at least 100 feet on both sides of the channel along the project
reaches with a hardwood riparian plant community;
• Enhance and protect wetlands by raising stream bed elevations and planting native wetland plant
species;
• 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, enhancement, and
preservation, wetland enhancement, and riparian buffer reestablishment.
1.6 Technical Feasibility
The technical feasibility of the Bank is assured due to RES' extensive experience with stream and wetland
restoration and enhancement in North Carolina and throughout the Southeast. Examples of EBX's success
include the projects listed in Table 1.
Falcon Ridge Stream and Wetland Draft Prospectus
Mitigation Bank 2 February 2022

Table i. Summar_y of RES Projects across the State of North Carolina
Basin
Site
County
SMUS
NVMUS
Status
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,
24,525
3.9
Projects in development
Mitchell
Little
2 Projects
Macon, Jackson
4,766
4.5
Projects in Monitoring
Tennessee
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 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, LLC 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. Falcon Ridge Landowner Information
Falcon Ridge Stream and Wetland Draft Prospectus
Mitigation Bank 3 February 2022

I
2 QUALIFICATIONS
2A Bank Sponsor
The Project shall be established under the terms and conditions of the RES Yadkin 03 Umbrella Mitigation
Bank made and entered into by Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC, acting as the Bank Sponsor.
Company Name: Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC
Company Address: 3600 Glenwood Avenue, Suite 100 Raleigh, NC 27612
Contact Name: Brad Breslow
Telephone: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
2.2 Bank Sponsor Qualifications
RES is the nation's largest and most experienced dedicated ecological offset provider. RES develops and
supplies ecological solutions to help public and private sector clients obtain required permits for
unavoidable, project -related impacts to wetlands, streams, and habitats. RES helps clients proactively
manage risk from operations in environmentally sensitive areas by providing impact analyses, streamlining
permitting processes, and limiting liability and regulatory exposure.
Key RES milestones and achievements include:
■ Restoration, enhancement, and preservation of 58,024 acres of wetlands
■ Restoration of over 328 miles of streams
■ Rehabilitation, preservation, and/or management of over 15,000 acres of special -status species
habitat
■ Successful close-out of over 100 mitigation sites
■ Permitting and development of over 200 permittee-responsible mitigation projects
■ 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 and Charlotte 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.
Falcon Ridge Stream and Wetland Draft Prospectus
Mitigation Bank 4 February 2022

I
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 3); however during initial site evaluation, the presence of five small, pocket wetlands
were observed within riparian areas of the Project; therefore, any and all wetlands will be delineated by RES
and approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) during the design phase of the project. The
stream channels were classified using North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NC DWR) methodology.
Stream calls will be verified by the USACE during the decision phase of the project.
The Project area includes unnamed tributaries to Caraway Creek, which eventually drains to the Pee Dee
River by way of the Uwharrie River. The current State classification for Caraway Creek is Class C. Class C
waters have protections supporting "secondary recreation, fishing, wildlife, fish consumption, aquatic life
including propagation, survival and maintenance of biological integrity, and agriculture. Secondary recreation
includes wading, boating, and other uses involving human body contact with water where such activities take
place in an infrequent, unorganized, or incidental manner" (NCDEQ, 2020).
Water quality stressors currently affecting the Project include row crop and livestock production along with
a lack of forested riparian buffer. Field evaluations determined all reaches to be either intermittent or
perennial. A combination of stream restoration and enhancement 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 Project. To the east of Plainfield Road is an easement for the
"Heath Dairy Road" NCDMS project; this is not anticipated to impact the delivery of the Falcon Ridge
Mitigation Project (Figure 1).
3.2 Existing Reach Conditions
In general, all or portions of the project streams do not function to their full potential. Current conditions
demonstrate significant habitat degradation as a result of impacts from watershed development and
agricultural land use, especially row crop production and cattle farming (Figure 3). Project reaches are
moderately to severely degraded with incised channels and eroding banks and do not have riparian buffers.
Some existing stream parameters are summarized in Table 3.
Historically, the landuse throughout the eastern portion of the Project and its adjacent land has been used
primarily for agricultural purposes since before 1969 (Figure 4). Between 1980 and 1993 the farmland was
greatly expanded, with the majority of the wooded areas cleared to accommodate for cattle pasture.
Between 1993 and the mid-2000s, portions of the pastureland were left fallow throughout the Project,
specifically the western side, with the southeast portion still functioning as active cattle pasture. Based on
Google Earth Imagery and physical site evaluations, the northern reaches of the Project were also left fallow
sometime after 2019.
Falcon Ridge Stream and Wetland Draft Prospectus
Mitigation Bank 5 February 2022

Table 3. Falcon Ridge Project Stream Summary by Tributary
Overall Reach
Hydrology
Stream
Drainage
Reach
Active Pasture or
Rating (NC
Reach ID
Status
Determination
Area
Length
RowCrop
Stream
Score
(acres)**
(LF)
Assessment)
None; historically
PR1-A
Intermittent
21
9
278
Low
pasture
Row Crop; historically
PR1-131
Intermittent
21
51
1,028
Low
both
Row Crop; historically
PR1-132
Intermittent
21
52
95
Low
both
None; historically
PR1-C
Perennial
31
123
280
Low
pasture
PR1-D
Perennial
31
173
1,288
Row Crop
Low
PR1-E
Perennial
31
284
582
None
High
Row Crop; historically
PR2
Intermittent
20.5
21
595
Low
both
None; historically
PR3
Intermittent
23.5
68
841
Low
pasture
None; historically
PR4-A
Intermittent
20.5
17
694
Low
pasture
None; historically
PR4-B
Intermittent
20.5
23
478
Low
pasture
PR5-A
Intermittent
20
52
347
Both
Low
PR5-B
Intermittent
20
58
447
Both
Low
PR6
Intermittent
21.5
23
489
Active Pasture
Low
PR7-Al
Intermittent
20.5
15
559
Active Pasture
Low
PR7-A2
Intermittent
20.5
33
329
Active Pasture
Low
PR7-B
Intermittent
20.5
41
520
Active Pasture
Low
PR7-C1
Intermittent
20.5
45
329
Active Pasture
Low
PR7-C2
Intermittent
20.5
46
192
None
Low
PR8
Intermittent
23
11
359
Active Pasture
Low
*Stream determination score determined by NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11, see Appendix A.
**See Figure 5
Project reaches were assessed using the NC Stream Assessment Method (NC SAM). NC SAM rating forms
are included in Appendix B.
PRi
PR1 is composed of six reaches based on treatment levels (PR1-A, PR1-131, PR1-132, PR1-C, PR1-D, and PR1-
E) and is the primary drainage feature of the Project (Figure 5). PR1-A starts as an intermittent reach
originating from a headcut in the northeast corner of the Project and flows southwest through a relic pasture
before the transition to PR1-13. Riparian buffers are non-existent for both reaches. PR1-131 splits off from
PR2 at a headcut in the channel, below which the channel incises significantly with actively eroding banks
throughout, transitioning briefly to PR1-132 and then into PR1-C, where it transitions to perennial. PR1-C
continues from PR1-132 at the treeline and flows southwest towards its confluence with PR3 where the
Falcon Ridge Stream and Wetland Draft Prospectus
Mitigation Bank 6 February 2022

I
stream begins to stabilize, and the valley flattens out. Riparian buffers are narrow and sparse at the top of
the reach but widen downstream just before a fence line. The reach ends just downstream of the fence line
and leaves the pasture giving way to a wider riparian buffer as it transitions into PR1-D. PR1-D is a perennial
reach that flows south through an old pond bed. The dam to the pond has since breached and been
removed. The reach has down cut through legacy sediment that accumulated when the area was
impounded but some jurisdictional wetlands still remain (Wetlands 3 and 4). The reach has active bank
erosion and incision throughout, and the reach steadily incises as it approaches the relic dam and
confluence with PR5. Riparian buffers are narrow to non-existent for most of its length. PR1-E starts just
below the old dam and flows southwest directly into Caraway Creekjust offsite. The reach has greater than
100-foot buffers through its full length. The majority of the wooded area throughout PR1, excluding PR1 -
E, (and most of the forested areas throughout the Project) is dominated by Chinese privet (Ligustrum
sinense).
PR2
PR2 originates from a culvert on the eastern boundary of the Project and flows west through relic pasture
until it's confluence with PR1-B. One jurisdictional wetland was noted on the downstream portion of this
reach (Wetland 5). Riparian buffers are sparse and narrow throughout and a row crop field edge exists just
100 feet from the left bank.
PR
PR3 is an intermittent stream that originates just north of the Project boundary and flows south through
relic pasture to a confluence with PR1-C. Riparian buffers are sparse throughout and are dominated by
invasive plants and non -riparian tree species typically found in upland communities.
PR
PR4 is split into two reaches (PR4-A and PR4-B) in the northwest corner of the Project. PR4-A is an
intermittent reach that originates just west of the Project boundary and flows southeast through relic
pasture to a fence line. Riparian buffers are narrow to non-existent for most of its length. The reach
transitions into PR4-B on the other side of the fence line and flows south through Wetland 4 until its
confluence with PR1-D. Buffers are wider than 100 feet in this area, but canopy species are sparse and the
subcanopy is dominated by Chinese privet.
PR
PR5 is split into two reaches (PR5-A and PR5-B) and originates north of the Project easement, intermittently
flowing south into the easement (as PR5-A) where it comes to a confluence with PR6. PR5-A has a wooded
buffer that ranges from 30-50 feet and is surrounded by row crop fields on either side. The reach continues
west as the buffer remains intact until it transitions to PR5-B. The riparian buffer is greater than 50 feet off
each bank, but invasive species are prevalent. PR5-B flows northwest to its confluence with PR1. Riparian
buffers are narrow and sparse throughout this portion of the stream, and active bank erosion and channel
incision have channelized this reach.
PR6
PR6 is an intermittent stream originating as a wetland seep (Wetland 1) in a pasture and flows west through
active pasture to its confluence with PR5-A. The reach loses some definition before the confluence with
Falcon Ridge Stream and Wetland Draft Prospectus
Mitigation Bank 7 February 2022

0
PR5-A. A hand -laid rock dam is located near the upstream portion of the stream. Riparian buffers are non-
existent for the majority of the reach but are present once the reach exits the pasture just before the
confluence.
PR7
PR7 is split into five reaches based on treatment levels (PR7-Al, PR7-A2, PR7-B, and PR7-C1, and PR7-C2)
which originate on the eastern side of the Project and flow northwest through a farm pond and through a
wooded area before the confluence with PR5. PR7-A is an intermittent stream originating at a headcut in
the field and flowing west through active pasture past the confluence with PR8. The reach (beginning as
PR7-Al) loses some definition before the confluence with PR8 because of a parallel ditch and berm that
collect runoff from the northern side of the reach. The ditch joins the reach midway down (transitioning to
PR7-A2) through a breach in the berm and channel definition is regained thereafter. Riparian buffers are
narrow for most of the reach and only exist on the right bank of PR7-A2. PR7-A2 flows through a
jurisdictional wetland (Wetland 2) immediately before its confluence with PR7-B. PR7-B flows northwest
from PR7-A2 at the fence line through an approximately 0.92-acre constructed farm pond, to the wooded
area. Cattle are fenced out of the pond, but the areas upslope are in active pasture outside the fencing.
Reach PR7-C (split into PR7-C1 and PR7-C2) flows north from just downstream of the pond outfall to the
confluence with PR5. The reach has more than 50-foot buffers through the majority of its length.
PR8
PR8 is an intermittent stream originating from a pond outfall located just offsite to the south. The reach
flows north through an active pasture to its confluence with PR7-A. The reach loses some definition as it
enters the property due to heavy cattle traffic but regains it thereafter. The reach loses some definition once
again as it flows into Wetland 2 and the confluence with PR7-A. Riparian buffers are non-existent for the
entire reach.
3.3 Existing Wetland Conditions
There are currently five wetlands within the project area on -site. Wetland 1 and Wetland 2 are located in an
active pasture where soil and vegetation have been severely disturbed due to high cattle traffic. Wetlands
3 and 4 are located in a relic pond bottom. Wetland 5 is located in a relic pasture where soil and vegetation
disturbance remain. There has been significant aggradation of sediment throughout the Project overtop
the native soil horizon, due to both current and historic land uses (Figure 4). There may be an opportunity
to expand these wetlands in conjunction with the adjacent stream restoration. During the project
development period, a Professional Soil Scientist will perform a hydric soil delineation in these areas to
evaluate wetland re-establishment potential.
3.4 Physiography and Soils
The Project is located in the Carolina Slate Belt level IV ecoregion within the Piedmont level III ecoregion.
Some landforms throughout this ecoregion are rugged, such as the Uwharrie Mountains, while other areas
consist of rolling hills opening to valleys formed by trellised drainage patterns. The geologic composition
of the region is silty and silty clay soils. Because this region contains some of the lowest water -yielding rock
units in the Carolinas, water levels among streams and wells tend to run low or completely dry (USEPA).
Falcon Ridge Stream and Wetland Draft Prospectus
Mitigation Bank 8 February 2022

0
The Randolph County Soil Survey (NRCS, 2006) depicts four mapping units across the Project (Table 4). The
map units are Badin-Tarrus complex, 15 to 25 percent slopes, Badin-Tarrus complex, two to eight percent
slopes, moderately eroded, Badin-Tarrus complex, eight to 15 percent slopes, moderately eroded, and
Georgeville silt loam, two to eight percent slopes. The soil characteristics of these map units are summarized
in Figure 6.
Table 4. Mapped Soil Series
Map
Unit Map Unit Name
Percent
Drainage
Hydrologic
Landscape
Symbol
Hydric
Class
Soil Group
Setting
Badin-Tarrus complex,
Hillslopes on
BaD 15 to 25 percent
0%
Well Drained
B/C
ridges
slopes
Badin-Tarrus complex,
Bt132
2 to 8 percent slopes,
0%
Well Drained
B/C
Inter hives
moderately eroded
Badin-Tarrus complex,
8 to 15 percent
Hillslopes on
BtC2
0%
Well Drained
B/C
slopes, moderately
ridges
eroded
Georgeville silt loam,
GaB
0% °
Well Drained
B
Interfluves
2 to 8 percent slopes
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 (accessed January 20, 2022) lists the Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii) as
an endangered species and the Atlantic Pigtoe clam (Fusconaia masoni) as a threatened species in Randolph
County, North Carolina (Table 5). The Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) is protected under the Bald
and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGPA) and prohibits take of bald and golden eagles. 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 or natural communities were
mapped within one mile of the Project. Results from NHP indicate that there are no known occurrences of
state threatened or endangered species within a one -mile radius of the project area. Based on initial site
investigations, no impacts to state protected species are anticipated as a result of the proposed project.
The proposed project offers some potential to improve or create suitable habitat for several Federal Species
of Concern. Habitat may be improved or created for species that require riverine habitat by improving water
Falcon Ridge Stream and Wetland Draft Prospectus
Mitigation Bank 9 February 2022

I
quality, in -stream and near -stream forage, and providing stable conditions not subject to regular
maintenance. The decision phase of the project will include USFWS coordination to confirm these findings.
Table 5. Federally Protected Species in Randolph County
Common Name Scientific name Federal Habitat Record
Status Present Status
Vertebrate:
Bald eagle
Haliaeetus leucocephalus
BGPA
No
Current
Clam:
Atlantic Pigtoe
Fusconaia masoni
T
No
Current
Vascular Plant:
Schweinitz's sunflower
Helianthus schweinitzii
E
No
Current
E = Endangered, T= Threatened BGPA = Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
3.6 Vegetation
The Project is characterized primarily by row crop production with areas of disturbed riparian and upland
forest. The southern portion of the Project is comprised of actively grazed pasture. Most of the row crop
production consists of soybean or corn. Upland and riparian species along the existing streams include
American beech (Fagus grandifolia), red mulberry (Morus rubra), winged elm (Ulmus alata), tulip poplar
(Liriodendron tulipifera), hickory (Carya sp.), eastern red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), white oak (Quercus
alba), honey locust (Gleditsia triacanthos), pine (Pinus sp.), sweet gum (Liquidambarstyraciflua), persimmon
(Diospyros virginiana), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), scarlet oak (Quercus coccinea), red maple (Acer
rubrum), American sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), tag alder (Alnus serrulata), and black willow (Salix
nigra). Invasive species including Chinese privet, Japanese stiltgrass (Microstegium vimineum), and tree of
heaven (Ailanthus altissima) occur heavily throughout much of the wooded areas within the Project
boundaries.
3.7 Cultural Resources
On January 20, 2022, 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 Falcon Ridge Project existed. This search did not reveal any
occurrence within the project area. There were no historical sites within a 0.5 mile radius of the Project
either. 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 Falcon Ridge Project. The Project is not within a mapped FEMA
Regulatory Floodway or 100-year floodplain. No existing land uses (such as residential) will constrain the
proposed mitigation design. Old barbed-wire fencing exists intermittently throughout most of the forested
areas within the proposed easement, specifically on reaches PR1, PR4, PRS, and PR7. All posts and wire will
be removed and any ground disturbance will be graded and stabilized. Additionally, areas that are currently
in cattle pasture will be fenced to ensure cattle are excluded permanently from the Project. The dam at the
Falcon Ridge Stream and Wetland Draft Prospectus
Mitigation Bank 10 February 2022

I
top of the existing pond along PR7-B will be entirely removed as part of the restoration approach. A hand -
laid rock dam along PR6 will also be removed. A pile of rocks exists on the upper end of PR1-D that
resembles a smaller dam. All debris from active and past dam removal will be removed and stream
embankments stabilized. A culvert crossing associated with the dam at the downstream portion of PR1-D
will be removed during construction (Figure 7).
4 PROPOSED BANK CONDITIONS
4.1 Conceptual Mitigation Plan
The Project presents the opportunity to provide 6,985 stream mitigation units (SMUs) and 0.43 riparian
wetland mitigation units (R-WMUs) (Figure 8). Table 6 details the mitigation types and SMUs/R-WMUs
generated. These will be derived from a combination of stream restoration, enhancement, preservation, and
wetland enhancement and preservation. SMUs have been adjusted in accordance with Section XI(C) -
"Procedures to Calculate Credits for Non-standard Buffer Widths," published in the October 2016
Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update GIS analysis and a spreadsheet
tool provided by the USACE in January 2018. A detailed description of the methodology and calculations
will be included in the mitigation plan.
Falcon Ridge Stream and Wetland Draft Prospectus
Mitigation Bank 11 February 2022

Table 6. Proposed Mitigation Summary
PR1-A
Enhancement 1
278
1.5
185.333
PR1-131
Restoration
1,028
1
1,028.000
PR1-132
Enhancement 1
95
1.5
63.333
PR1-C
Enhancement 111
280
5
56.000
PR1-D
Restoration
1,288
1
1,288.000
PR1-E
Preservation
582
10
58.200
PR2
Enhancement 1
595
1.5
396.667
PR3
Enhancement 111
841
5
168.200
PR4-A
Enhancement 11
694
2.5
277.600
PR4-13
Enhancement 111
478
5
95.600
PR5-A
Enhancement 111
347
5
69.400
PR5-13
Restoration
447
1
447.000
PR6
Enhancement 11
489
2.5
195.600
PR7-Al
Restoration
559
1
559.000
PR7-A2
Enhancement 11
329
2.5
131.600
PR7-13
Restoration
520
1
520.000
PR7-C1
Enhancement 111
329
5
65.800
PR7-C2
Restoration
192
1
192.000
PR8
Restoration
359
1
359.000
Total
9,730
6,156.333
Buffer Credit Adiustment
896.240
W1 Enhancement 0.12 2:1 0.060
W2 Enhancement 0.30 2:1 0.148
W3 Preservation 1.30 10:1 0.130
W4 Preservation 0.86 10:1 0.086
W5 Preservation 0.03 10.1 0.003
Total 2.61 0.427
4.1.1 Stream Restoration, Enhancement, and Preservation
Stream restoration efforts will be accomplished through analyses of geomorphic conditions and watershed
characteristics. The design approach will apply a combination of analytical and reference reach -based
design methods that meet objectives commensurate with both ecological and geomorphic improvements.
Proposed treatment activities may range from minor bank grading and planting to re-establishing stable
planform and hydraulic geometry. For reaches requiring full restoration or extensive enhancement, natural
design concepts will be applied and verified through rigorous engineering analyses and modeling. The
objective of this approach is to design a geomorphically stable channel that provides habitat improvements
and ties into the existing landscape.
Falcon Ridge Stream and Wetland Draft Prospectus
Mitigation Bank 12 February 2022

0
The Project will include priority level 1 stream restoration, priority level 2 stream restoration, enhancement
level I, II, and III, and preservation.
Stream restoration is proposed for reaches PR1-131, PR1-D, PR5-13, PR7-Al, PR7-13, PR7-C2, and PR8 and will
incorporate the design of a single -thread channel, likely designed as Rosgen C-type channels, with
parameters based on data taken from reference sites to be identified later, published empirical relationships,
regional curves developed from existing project streams, and NC Regional Curves. The pond on reach PR7-
B will be removed as part of its restoration activities, and accumulated pond muck will be removed and/or
mixed with appropriate substrate to create more ideal soil. Structures will be installed on all restored reaches
for grade control, channel stability, and to improve in -stream habitat. Cattle exclusion fencing will be
installed along reaches PR7-Al, PR7-13, and PR8. Finally, riparian buffers will be restored and protected in
perpetuity. Conceptual plan views are provided in Figure 8.
Enhancement I at a 1.5:1 ratio is proposed for PR1-A, PR1-132, and PR2. Such enhancement activities will
include bank grading and benching, structure installation, and planting a minimum 50-foot buffer with
native hardwood trees. In addition, extensive treatment of Chinese privet and other exotic invasive species
is also proposed to promote a more healthy, diverse buffer.
Enhancement II at a 2.5:1 ratio is proposed for PR4-A, PR6, and PR7-A2 . Such enhancement activities will
include bank grading and benching, structure installation, planting a minimum 50-foot buffer with native
hardwood trees, and excluding cattle with fencing from PR6 and PR7-A2. In addition, extensive treatment
of Chinese privet and other exotic invasive species is also proposed to promote a more healthy, diverse
buffer.
Enhancement III at a 5:1 ratio is proposed for PR1-C, PR3, PR4-13, PR5-A, and PR7-C1. Enhancement activities
will include buffer planting and extensive treatment of Chinese privet and other exotic invasive species is
also proposed to promote a more healthy, diverse buffer.
Preservation is proposed for PR1-E. Preservation activities will include buffer planting near the confluence
with PR5-13, removing the existing dam in the same area, and protecting the reach in perpetuity.
Design parameters, including active channel, habitat and floodplain features will be developed from analysis
of suitable on and off -site reference streams. Analytical design techniques will be an important element of
the Project and will be used to determine the design discharge and to verify the design as a whole. The
design approach is based on initial stream assessment and recent IRT experience on other project sites in
this ecoregion.
Engineering analyses will be performed using various hydrologic and hydraulic models to verify the
reference reach/analog based design. A combination of methods will be used to estimate bankfull flows,
and flows corresponding to other significant storm events. A HEC-RAS model will then be used to simulate
water surface elevations of flows generated by the hydrologic analysis. The development of the HEC model
is an important component to the design; therefore, model input parameters are field verified when
possible. Through this hydrologic analysis, the design discharge (typically referenced as bankfull or
dominant discharge) will be determined. The subsequent design will be based on this calculated discharge.
Falcon Ridge Stream and Wetland Draft Prospectus
Mitigation Bank 13 February 2022

0
As part of the design process, 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 which will be
fenced to exclude livestock as needed.
4.1.2 Wetland Enhancement and Preservation
The Project provides an excellent opportunity for the enhancement and preservation of Headwater Forest
and Bottomland Hardwood -type wetland communities. The wetland enhancement areas (W1, W2) are
located in the headwaters of reaches PR6 and PR7. Historically, the area is in active pasture and cows have
full access to the area. This practice has eliminated the natural wetland functions (vegetation) while heavy
traffic has also altered hydrology. Additionally, the wetland preservation areas (W3, W4, and W5) are located
within the floodplain of PR1 and PR2. These areas were once impounded and has recovered through the
formation of a stream channel and surrounding wetlands. Although jurisdiction remains in this area, the
restoration of reach PR1-D will improve hydrology for surrounding wetlands. Hydric soils within the
proposed wetlands will be verified through auger borings by a licensed soil scientist.
Therefore, wetland enhancement activities will include:
• Fencing out livestock (W1 and W2);
• Grading restoration areas to match historical contours and promote detention and infiltration;
• Improving hydrology to W3, W4, and W5 in conjunction with stream restoration and enhancement;
• Planting herbaceous seed mix and native tree species commonly found in headwater forests and
bottomland hardwood forests.
The resulting natural communities will provide ecological function far surpassing the current state and
approaching the pre -disturbance condition.
Falcon Ridge Stream and Wetland Draft Prospectus
Mitigation Bank 14 February 2022

0
4.1.3 Monitoring
Stream stability, hydrology, and vegetation survival will be monitored across the Project to determine the
success of the stream, wetland, and associated riparian buffer mitigation. Stream stability will be monitored
with cross section surveys and visual assessment stream walks. Stream and wetland hydrology will be
monitored using automatic pressure transducers to measure the flow and bankfull events of streams and
continuous hydroperiods of wetlands. Vegetation survival rates will be monitored using vegetation plots
over approximately two percent of the planted area.
4.1.3.1 As -Built Survey
An as -built survey will be conducted following construction to document channel size, condition, and
location. The survey will include a complete profile of Thalweg, water surface, bankfull, and top of bank to
compare with future geomorphic data. Longitudinal profiles will not be required in annual monitoring
reports unless requested by USACE. Stream channel stationing will be marked with stakes placed near the
top of bank every 200 feet.
4.1.3.2 Visual Monitoring
Visual monitoring of all mitigation areas will be conducted a minimum of twice per monitoring year by
qualified individuals. The visual assessments will include vegetation density, vigor, invasive species, and
easement encroachments. Visual assessments of stream stability will include a complete stream walk and
structure inspection. Digital images will be taken at fixed representative locations to record each monitoring
event, as well as any noted problem areas or areas of concern. Results of visual monitoring will be presented
in a plan view exhibit with a brief description of problem areas and digital images. Photographs will be used
to subjectively evaluate channel aggradation or degradation, bank erosion, success of riparian vegetation,
and effectiveness of erosion control measures. Longitudinal photos should indicate the absence of
developing bars within the channel or an excessive increase in channel depth. Lateral photos should not
indicate excessive erosion or continuing degradation of the banks over time. A series of photos over time
should indicate successional maturation of riparian vegetation.
4.1.3.3 Cross Sections
Permanent cross -sections will be installed at a minimum of one per 20 bankfull widths with half in pools
and half in shallows. All cross-section measurements will include bank height ratio and entrenchment ratio.
Cross -sections will be monitored annually. There should be little change in as -built cross -sections.
4.1.3.4 Vegetative Success Criteria
Vegetation monitoring plots will be a minimum of 0.02 acres in size and cover a minimum of two percent
of the planted area. Planted area indicates all area in the easement that will be planted with trees. Existing
wooded areas are not included in the planted area. The following data will be recorded for all trees in the
plots: species, height, planting date (or volunteer), and grid location. Monitoring will occur each year during
the monitoring period. Invasive and noxious species will be monitored and controlled so that none become
dominant or alter the desired community structure of the Project. If necessary, RES will develop a species -
specific control plan.
Falcon Ridge Stream and Wetland Draft Prospectus
Mitigation Bank 15 February 2022

I
4.1.3.5 Adaptive Management
If, during the course of annual monitoring, it is determined that the Project's ability to achieve Project
performance standards are jeopardized, RES will notify the USACE of the need to develop a Plan of
Corrective Action. If tree mortality affects 40 percent or greater of the canopy in a stream restoration area,
then a remedial/supplemental planting plan will be developed and implemented for the affected area(s). If
beaver activity poses a threat to project stability or vegetative success, RES will trap beavers and remove
impoundments as needed. All beaver management activities will be documented and included in annual
monitoring reports. Once the Corrective Action Plan is prepared and finalized RES will:
1. Notify the USACE as required by the Nationwide 27 permit general conditions.
2. Revise performance standards, maintenance requirements, and monitoring requirements as
necessary and/or required by the USACE.
3. Obtain other permits as necessary.
4. Prepare Corrective Action Plan for review and approval by IRT.
5. Implement the Corrective Action Plan.
6. Provide the IRT a Record Drawing of Corrective Actions. This document shall depict the extent and
nature of the work performed.
5 BANK ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION
5.1 Establishment and Operation of the Bank
This Project shall be established under the terms and conditions of the RES Falcon Ridge Mitigation Project
Bank made and entered into by and among EBX, LLC, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Marine Fisheries Services,
the North Carolina Department of the Environment and Natural Resources, the North Carolina Division of
Water Resources, and the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, collectively, the Interagency
Review Team.
5.2 Proposed Credit Release Schedule
All credit releases will be based on the total credit generated as reported in the approved mitigation plan
of the 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 7 and Table 8.
Falcon Ridge Stream and Wetland Draft Prospectus
Mitigation Bank 16 February 2022

5.2.1 Initial Allocation of Released Credits
The initial allocation of released credits, as specified in the mitigation plan can be released by the IRT with
written approval of the DE upon satisfactory completion of the following activities:
a) Execution of the UMBI by the Sponsor and the USACE
b) Approval of the final mitigation plan
c) Mitigation site must be secured
d) Delivery of financial assurances.
e) Recordation of the long-term protection mechanism and title opinion acceptable to the USACE
f) Issuance of the 404 permit verification for construction of the site, if required.
5.2.2 Subsequent Credit Releases
The second credit release will occur after the completion of implementation of the Mitigation Plan and IRT
approval of the Baseline Monitoring Report and As -built Survey. All subsequent credit releases must be
approved by the DE, in consultation with the IRT, based on a determination that required performance
standards have been achieved. As projects approach milestones associated with credit release, the Sponsor
will submit a request for credit release to the DE along with documentation substantiating achievement of
criteria required for release to occur. This documentation will be included with the annual monitoring report.
Table 7. Stream Credit Release Schedule
Release
interim
Milestone
Credit Release Activity
Release
Total Released
Site Establishment (includes all required criteria stated
1
above)
15%
15%
Completion of all initial physical and biological
2
im rovements made pursuant to the Mitigation Plan
°
15/°
°
30%
3
Year 1 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are
10%
40%
stable and interim performance standards have been met
4
Year 2 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are
50%
stable and interim performance standards have been met
10%
(60%**)
5
Year 3 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are
60%
stable and interim performance standards have been met
10%
(70%**)
6*
Year 4 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are
°
5/°
65%
stable and interim performance standards have been met
(75%**)
Year 5 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are
75%
7
stable and interim performance standards have been met
°
10%
(85%**)
8*
Year 6 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are
°
5/°
80%
stable and interim performance standards have been met
(90%**)
9
Year 7 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are
stable and interim performance standards have been met
10%
90%
project has received close-out approval.
(100%**)
*Please note that vegetation plot data may not be required with monitoring reports submitted during these monitoring years unless
otherwise stated by the Mitigation Plan or directed by the IRT.
**10% reserve of credits to be held back until the bankfull event performance standard has been met.
Falcon Ridge Stream and Wetland Draft Prospectus
Mitigation Bank 17 February 2022

I
Table 8. Wetland Credit Release Schedule
Release
Interim
Total
Milestone
Credit Release Activity
Release
Released
1
Site Establishment (includes all required criteria stated above)
15%
15%
2
Baseline Monitoring Report and As -built Survey
15%
30%
First year monitoring report demonstrates performance
3
standards are being met.
10%
40%
Second year monitoring report demonstrates performance
4
0
10%
0
50%
standards are being met.
Third year monitoring report demonstrates performance
5
0
15/0
0
65/0
standards are being met.
Fourth year monitoring report demonstrates performance
6
0
5/0
0
70%
standards are being met.
Fifth year monitoring report demonstrates performance
7
standards are being met.
15/0
85/0
Sixth year monitoring report demonstrates performance
8
standards are being met.
5/0
90%
Seventh year monitoring report demonstrates performance
9
standards are being met, and project has received close-out
10%
100%
approval.
5.3 Financial Assurances
The Sponsor shall provide financial assurances in the form of a Performance Bond to the IRT sufficient to
assure completion of all mitigation work, required reporting and monitoring, and any remedial work
required. Financial assurances shall be payable at the direction of the USACE to his designee or to a standby
trust. Financial assurances structured to provide funds to the USACE in the event of default by the Bank
Sponsor are not acceptable. A financial assurance must be in the form that ensures that the USACE receives
notification at least 120 days in advance of any termination or revocation.
5.4 Proposed Ownership and Long -Term Management
EBX, LLC, 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 Project 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 Project transfer to the
responsible party.
The Bank Sponsor will ensure that the Conservation Easement will allow for the implementation of an initial
monitoring phase, which will be developed during the design phase and conducted by the Bank Sponsor.
The Conservation Easement will allow for yearly monitoring and, if necessary, maintenance of the Project
Falcon Ridge Stream and Wetland Draft Prospectus
Mitigation Bank 18 February 2022

0
during the initial monitoring phase. These activities will be conducted in accordance with the terms and
conditions of the RES Falcon Ridge Mitigation Project Bank made and entered into by EBX, LLC and USACE.
5.5 Assurance of Water Rights
Sufficient water rights exist to support the long-term sustainability of the Project, as there are no "severed"
rights on the property.
Falcon Ridge Stream and Wetland Draft Prospectus
Mitigation Bank 19 February 2022

I
6. REFERENCES
North Carolina National Heritage Program (NCNHP). 2022. "North Carolina Natural Heritage Data Explorer."
https://ncnhde.natureservg.orgZ. (Accessed January 2022).
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ). "Classifications." Water Resources
https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/planning/classification-
standards/classifications. (Accessed December 2021).
NC DEQ. "Lower Yadkin - Pee Dee River Basin Restoration Plan 2009." Yadkin Pee Dee 2009.
https:Hdeq.nc.gov/about/divisions/mitigation-services/dms-planning/watershed-planning-
documents/yadkin-river-basin-documents. (Accessed December 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.orci/web/wq/home. (Accessed December 2021).
North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources (NCDNCR). 2022. "NC State Historic
Preservation Office." NCSHPO. https://www.ncdcr.gov/about/history/division-historical-
resources/nc-state- historic- preservation -off ice (Accessed January 2022).
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2010. "Methodology for Identification of Intermittent
and Perennial Streams and Their Origins." NC DWR.
https://files.nc.ciov/ncdeg/Water%2OQuality/Surface%2OWater%2OProtection/401/Policies Guides
Manuals/StreamlD v 4point11 Final sept 01 2010.pdf. (Accessed August 2021).
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2002. "Ecoregions of North Carolina and South
Carolina." US EPA. https://www.epa.ciov/eco-research/ecoreciion-download-files-state-re_ iq on-4.
(Accessed December 2021).
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2022. "Threatened and Endangered Species in North
Carolina." North Carolina Ecological Services. https:Hecos.fws.gov/ipac/. (Accessed January 2022).
United State Department of Agriculture — Natural Resource Conservation Service (USDA NRCS). 2022. Web
Soil Survey; http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.ciov. (Accessed January 2022).
Falcon Ridge Stream and Wetland Draft Prospectus
Mitigation Bank 20 February 2022

Figures

P
11 Flea Market®WNW
I n \
l009 I� 10i Townley
Equestrian Center
ilding
Hardware 9
lRul�.
New Market itan Park Q 1_% TI
New arket
/ as
t " A 220
�*
a-�~ SOp a 19sz
W
Beez Ne z Q almart Supercenter Q �q
"sr Randleman
1 5-2-21 � W 19sz
a
2270 E2734
a
C
: �F Re Snyder Farms
Place for the Hoer+ Food Lion ® Wo
lsr �
Triple T get Rangt O NC DMS Project Site zzo
Cara w , e o
1539 } s
1415
North Pointe of A-heboro Falcon Ridge
Mitigation Project
Winston-Salem
tv-_ G en
Clemmors qi,
Advarce Hig oint
IJocksviile FV Thomasvihe
f4
Lexlrgton
Legend bo1
land
Proposed Easement Ash As b
c, :hurt' ra
Yadkin River Basin - 03040103
J a Denton Y�
TLW - HUC 03040103050040 in. t
5 Mile Aviation Zone r, _
Natural Areas (NC NHP January 2021) New i
Concord s,1;
Managed Area (NC NHP January 2021) a9
Albemarle
" Figure 1 - Project Vicinity Date: 2/15/2022
Falcon Ridge Drawn by: EJU
0 o.s , res
s Mitigation Project Checked by: JRM
Miles
Randolph County, North Carolina 1 inch = 1 miles

Le-gend
Proposed Easement
Project Parcel
Parcel
Access Route
0 Parking
N
W E
0 250 500
Feet
Figure 2 - Parcel Access Date: 2/15/2022
Drawn by: EJU
Falcon Ridge
Mitigation Project Checked by: JRM
Randolph County, North Carolina 1 inch = 500 feet
�resl

Legend
Proposed Easement
Project Parcel
Existing Wetlands
NWI Wetlands (USFWS January 2021)
® Existing Pond
Existing Stream
Perennial
-- Intermittent
0-- Impaired Drainage Ditch
Existing Dam
Q Relic Dam
EM
,rat*�* ���I�L�1/�ii�1♦
1'
250 500
E
LM
0
IUBH'11,4h _
f�
Figure 3 - Existing Conditions Date: 211512022
Falcon Ridge
Drawn by: EJU ores
Mitigation Project Checked by:1RM
Randolph County, North Carolina 1 mcn = 500 feet

rr ,,,1980
" _ v
s
Source: USGS Earth Explorer Source: USGS Earth
010
" .Ar wF
s r
j,
�t �
raj 0
.� . x
,!ANN=
,rat*■�I�L�1/`� ii�1♦
pro,
N
w — e
0 500 1.000
Source: NC One Map Source: NC One Map
Figure 4 - Historical Conditions Date: 2/15/2022
Drawn by: EJU
Falcon Ridge res,
Mitigation Project Checked by:1RM
Randolph County, North Carolina 1 inch = 1,000 feet

Reach I D Drainage Area (ac)
PR1-A 9
PR1-B2 52 I
PR1-C 123
PR1-E 284
P R2 2168
PR4-A 17
PR4-B 23
PR5-A 52
^�
PR5-B 58 �• - /T � -mow, ' '--.,��. �G. � `c� �, • -_
PR6 23 ; � �—��-� � '"� �� � ; � ,•
PR7-A1 15
r
PR7-A2 33 �' - 1 l� r sa,
PR7-B 41 \ `
PR7-C1 45
PR7 C 2 46
PR8 11 rao_
-
Legend
Proposed Easement `
Drainage Area (284 ac)—
PR1 (284 ac)
PR3 (68 ac) �� �?. 0
PR4 (23 ac)
® PR5 (58 ac)
® PR6 (23 ac)
®1� - - j `J ter, •\ .
PR7 (46 ac) -, 1
PR8 (11 ac)
•" Figure 5 - USGS Quadrangle Date: 2/15/2022
Randleman (7982)
— e
Falcon Ridid
ge Drawn by: EJU
s Mitigation Project Checked by:1RM
ores
0 1,000 2,000
Feet
Randolph County, North Carolina 1 inch =2,000 feet

E
PUSA
PUSA Q
Legend
Proposed Easement
NWI Wetlands (USFWS January 2021)
FEMA Zone AE (None)
® Existing Pond
Existing Dam
Q Relic Dam
rr�' :iinlrr�►�►;;c�til
A01
y �,, a�
A, a,
Existing Barbed-wire
Fencing Throughout
r
I
01:1:11
" Figure 7 - Project Constraints Date: 2/14/2022
w E Drawn by: EJU
Falcon Ridge
5 Mitigation Project Checked by: JRM
250 soo
Feet
Randolph County, North Carolina 1 mcn = soo feet
fires

Stream Mitigation
teach ID
Approach
Length
PR1-A
Enhancement 1
278
PR1-131
Restoration
1,02
PR1-132
Enhancement 1
95
PR1-C
Enhancement 111
280
PR1-D
Restoration
1,28E
PR1-E
Preservation
582
PR2
Enhancement 1
595
1.5 185.333
1 1,028.000
1.5 63.333
5 56.000
1 1,288.000
10 58.200
1.5 396.667
PR7-13
Restoration 520 1
1
520.000
PR7-C1
Enhancement III 329 1
5
65.800"
PR7-C2
Restoration 192
1
192.000
PR8
Restoration 359
1
359.000
Total 9,730
6,156.333
Credit Loss in Required Buffer
-67.870
Credit Gain for Additional Buffer
896.240
Total Adjusted SMUs
6,984.703
A Q
Pp
Wetland Miti ation
etland ID
Approach
I Area (ac)
Ratio
WMU
1
Enhancement
0.12
2
0.060
2
Enhancement
0.30
2
0.148
Remaining Dam Debris/Culvert
To Be Removed
(Stream Embankments Stabilized)
Old Fencing Posts and W
Be Removed Through
Remaining Dam Debris
To Be Removed
(Stream Embankments Stabilizes'
,am To Be
Removed
Legend A�
�92
Proposed Easement (59.35 ac. +/-) Stream Approach
W2
Project Parcel Restoration (1:1) z
a,
® Existing Pond Enhancement I (1.5:1)
y
Wetland Approach Enhancement II (2.5:1)
® Enhancement Enhancement III (5:1)
® Preservation Preservation (10:1)
X--X Proposed Fenceline Existing Dam
Q Relic Dam
" Figure 8 - Conceptual Design Date: 2/15/2022
w E Drawn by: EJU
Falcon Ridge
VOW 5 Mitigation Project Checked by:1RM
0 275 550
Randolph County, North Carolina
Feet
1 inch = 550 feet
6resl

Appendix A- NC DWQ Stream Identification
Form Version 4.11

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date:
Project/Site:
Latitude:
Evaluator:
County:
Longitude:
Total Points:
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other
Stream is at least intermittent
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
if >_ 19 or perennial if >_ 30`
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdrologv (Subtotal = )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
1 0.5
1
1 1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal =
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL =
1.5 Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Summary
REACH
PR1-A/B
PR1-C/D/E
PR2
PR3
PR4
PR5
PR6
PR7
PR8
Coordinates
35.79098
-79.860766
35.788331
-79.864627
35.789508
-79.860885
35.789295
-79.864359
35.789005
-79.865623
35.785626
-79.862653
35.78503
-79.862299
35.782621
-79.863619
35.782185
-79.862883
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =)
11
16
11.5
13.5
9.5
11.5
9.5
11.5
10
1' Continuity of channel bed and bank
3
3
2
3
2
2
1
3
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step-
pool, ripple -pool sequence
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
4. Particle size of stream substrate
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
5. Active/relict fioodplain
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
6. Depositional bars or benches
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
0
1
0
1
1
0
8. Headcuts
1
0
0
1
0
11
0
9. Grade control
0.5
0.5
1
0
0
00
ao
0
10. Natural valley
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.51.5
1
11. Second or greater order channel
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
B. Hydrology (Subtotal =)
4
9
4
4
5
2.5
6
3
7
12. Presence of BaseFlow
1
2
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1.5
0.5
1.5
1.5
1
1.5
1.5
1.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0.5
1
0
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
1
1.5
1.5
1
1
1
1
1
1
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
0
3
0
0
0
0
3
0
3
C. Biology (Subtotal =)
6
6
5
6
6
6
6
6
6
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and
abundance
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
22. Fish
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
23. Crayfish
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
24. Amphibians
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
25. Algae
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
26. Wetland plants in streambed
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total Points Subtotal= 21 1 31 1 20.5 1 23.5 1 20.5 1 20 1 21.5 1 20.5
1 23
Stream Determinationj Intermittent I Perennial I Intermittent I Intermittent I Intermittent I Intermittent I Intermittent I Intermittent
I Intermittent

Appendix B- NC SAM Forms

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Falcon Ridge Date of Evaluation
Stream Category Pal (PR1-A) Assessor Name/Organization
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
09/10/2019
JLS - RES
NO
YES
Intermittent
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
(2) Baseflow
(2) Flood Flow
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
(4) Floodplain Access
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
(4) Microtopography
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
(1) Water Quality
(2) Baseflow
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Indicators of Stressors
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
YES
OMITTED
NA
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
YES
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
(2) In -stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability
(3) In -stream Habitat
(2) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(3) Flow Restriction
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Overall
LOW
LOW

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Falcon Ridge Date of Evaluation
Stream Category Pal (PR1-B) Assessor Name/Organization
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
09/10/2019
JLS - RES
NO
YES
Intermittent
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
(2) Baseflow
(2) Flood Flow
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
(4) Floodplain Access
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
(4) Microtopography
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
(1) Water Quality
(2) Baseflow
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Indicators of Stressors
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
YES
OMITTED
NA
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
YES
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
(2) In -stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability
(3) In -stream Habitat
(2) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(3) Flow Restriction
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
LOW
LOW
HIGH
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
LOW
LOW
HIGH
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Overall
LOW
LOW

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Falcon Ridge Date of Evaluation
Stream Category Pa2 (PR1-C) Assessor Name/Organization
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
JLS - RES
NO
YES
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology HIGH
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Flood Flow HIGH
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation MEDIUM
(4) Floodplain Access HIGH
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer LOW
(4) Microtopography LOW
(3) Stream Stability HIGH
(4) Channel Stability HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport LOW
(4) Stream Geomorphology HIGH
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(1) Water Quality LOW
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation MEDIUM
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation 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 HIGH
(3) In -stream Habitat LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat LOW
(3) Stream -side Habitat LOW
(3) Thermoregulation LOW
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat NA
Overall LOW

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Falcon Ridge Date of Evaluation
Stream Category Pa2 (PR1-D) Assessor Name/Organization
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
09/10/2019
JLS - RES
NO
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 LOW
(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 MEDIUM
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation LOW
(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) Thermoregulation LOW
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat NA
Overall LOW

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Falcon Ridge Date of Evaluation
Stream Category Pa2 (PR1-E) Assessor Name/Organization
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
09/ 10/2019
JLS - RES
NO
YES
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology HIGH
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Flood Flow HIGH
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation HIGH
(4) Floodplain Access HIGH
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer HIGH
(4) Microtopography LOW
(3) Stream Stability HIGH
(4) Channel Stability HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport LOW
(4) Stream Geomorphology HIGH
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(1) Water Quality HIGH
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance OMITTED
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA
(1) Habitat HIGH
(2) In -stream Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Baseflow HIGH
(3) Substrate LOW
(3) Stream Stability HIGH
(3) In -stream Habitat HIGH
(2) Stream -side Habitat HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat NA
Overall HIGH

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Falcon Ridge Date of Evaluation
Stream Category Pal (PR2) Assessor Name/Organization
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
09/10/2019
JLS - RES
NO
YES
Intermittent
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
(2) Baseflow
(2) Flood Flow
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
(4) Floodplain Access
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
(4) Microtopography
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
(1) Water Quality
(2) Baseflow
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Indicators of Stressors
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
YES
OMITTED
NA
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
YES
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
(2) In -stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability
(3) In -stream Habitat
(2) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(3) Flow Restriction
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Overall
LOW
LOW

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Falcon Ridge Date of Evaluation
Stream Category Pa2 (PR3) Assessor Name/Organization
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
JLS - RES
NO
YES
Intermittent
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
(2) Baseflow
(2) Flood Flow
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
(4) Floodplain Access
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
(4) Microtopography
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
LOW
LOW
HIGH
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
LOW
LOW
HIGH
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
(1) Water Quality
(2) Baseflow
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Indicators of Stressors
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
YES
OMITTED
NA
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
YES
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
(2) In -stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability
(3) In -stream Habitat
(2) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(3) Flow Restriction
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Overall
LOW
LOW

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Falcon Ridge Date of Evaluation
Stream Category Pal (PR4-A) Assessor Name/Organization
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
,051JI11891281110*1
JLS - RES
NO
YES
Intermittent
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
(2) Baseflow
(2) Flood Flow
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
(4) Floodplain Access
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
(4) Microtopography
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
(1) Water Quality
(2) Baseflow
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Indicators of Stressors
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
YES
OMITTED
NA
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
YES
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
(2) In -stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability
(3) In -stream Habitat
(2) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(3) Flow Restriction
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Overall
LOW
LOW

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Falcon Ridge Date of Evaluation
Stream Category Pal (PR4-B) Assessor Name/Organization
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
,05111891281110*1
JLS - RES
NO
YES
Intermittent
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
(2) Baseflow
(2) Flood Flow
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
(4) Floodplain Access
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
(4) Microtopography
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
HIGH
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
HIGH
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
(1) Water Quality
(2) Baseflow
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Indicators of Stressors
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
LOW
HIGH
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
YES
OMITTED
NA
LOW
HIGH
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
YES
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
(2) In -stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability
(3) In -stream Habitat
(2) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(3) Flow Restriction
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Overall
LOW
LOW

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Falcon Ridge Date of Evaluation
Stream Category Pal (PR5-A) Assessor Name/Organization
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
09/10/2019
JLS - RES
NO
YES
Intermittent
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
(2) Baseflow
(2) Flood Flow
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
(4) Floodplain Access
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
(4) Microtopography
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
(1) Water Quality
(2) Baseflow
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Indicators of Stressors
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
LOW
HIGH
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
YES
OMITTED
NA
LOW
HIGH
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
YES
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
(2) In -stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability
(3) In -stream Habitat
(2) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(3) Flow Restriction
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Overall
LOW
LOW

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Falcon Ridge Date of Evaluation
Stream Category Pal (PR5-B) Assessor Name/Organization
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
09/10/2019
JLS - RES
NO
YES
Intermittent
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
(2) Baseflow
(2) Flood Flow
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
(4) Floodplain Access
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
(4) Microtopography
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
(1) Water Quality
(2) Baseflow
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Indicators of Stressors
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
LOW
HIGH
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
YES
OMITTED
NA
LOW
HIGH
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
YES
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
(2) In -stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability
(3) In -stream Habitat
(2) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(3) Flow Restriction
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Overall
LOW
LOW

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Falcon Ridge Date of Evaluation
Stream Category Pal (PR6) Assessor Name/Organization
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
09/10/2019
JLS - RES
NO
YES
Intermittent
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
(2) Baseflow
(2) Flood Flow
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
(4) Floodplain Access
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
(4) Microtopography
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
(1) Water Quality
(2) Baseflow
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Indicators of Stressors
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
YES
OMITTED
NA
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
YES
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
(2) In -stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability
(3) In -stream Habitat
(2) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(3) Flow Restriction
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Overall
LOW
LOW

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Falcon Ridge Date of Evaluation
Stream Category Pal (PR7-A) Assessor Name/Organization
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
09/10/2019
JLS - RES
NO
YES
Intermittent
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
(2) Baseflow
(2) Flood Flow
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
(4) Floodplain Access
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
(4) Microtopography
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
(1) Water Quality
(2) Baseflow
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Indicators of Stressors
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
YES
OMITTED
NA
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
YES
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
(2) In -stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability
(3) In -stream Habitat
(2) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(3) Flow Restriction
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Overall
LOW
LOW

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Falcon Ridge Date of Evaluation
Stream Category Pal (PR7-B) Assessor Name/Organization
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
09/10/2019
JLS - RES
NO
YES
Intermittent
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
(2) Baseflow
(2) Flood Flow
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
(4) Floodplain Access
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
(4) Microtopography
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
(1) Water Quality
(2) Baseflow
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Indicators of Stressors
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
YES
OMITTED
NA
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
YES
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
(2) In -stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability
(3) In -stream Habitat
(2) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(3) Flow Restriction
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Overall
LOW
LOW

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Falcon Ridge Date of Evaluation
Stream Category Pal (PR7-C) Assessor Name/Organization
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
JLS - RES
NO
YES
Intermittent
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
(2) Baseflow
(2) Flood Flow
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
(4) Floodplain Access
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
(4) Microtopography
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
HIGH
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
HIGH
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
(1) Water Quality
(2) Baseflow
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Indicators of Stressors
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
LOW
HIGH
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
YES
OMITTED
NA
LOW
HIGH
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
YES
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
(2) In -stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability
(3) In -stream Habitat
(2) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(3) Flow Restriction
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Overall
LOW
LOW

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Falcon Ridge Date of Evaluation
Stream Category Pal (PR8) Assessor Name/Organization
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
09/10/2019
JLS - RES
NO
YES
Intermittent
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
(2) Baseflow
(2) Flood Flow
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
(4) Floodplain Access
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
(4) Microtopography
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
(1) Water Quality
(2) Baseflow
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Indicators of Stressors
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
YES
OMITTED
NA
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
YES
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
(2) In -stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability
(3) In -stream Habitat
(2) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(3) Flow Restriction
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Overall
LOW
LOW

Appendix C- Landowner Authorization Forms

PROPERTY ACCESS AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRITION:
Deed Boob: 001144 Page: 00366 County: Randolph
Parcel ID Number: 7744304852
Street Address: 2855 Sundew Rd, Randleman, NC 27317
Property Owner (please print): Kenneth Grant York, and wife, Patsy B. York
Project Sponsor (please print): Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC
Property Owner and Project Sponsor have entered into that certain Exchange Sale Agreement for
the property, dated February 3, 2022 (the Agreement). Subject to the terms of the Agreement the
Property Owner authorized Project Sponsor and its agents, engineers, representatives and
contractors to enter the Property at any reasonable time to conduct environmental and soil
testing, engineering studies, and any other inspections and evaluations necessary to
evaluate the property.
Therefore, the undersigned authorized signatory of the Project Sponsor, does hereby authorize
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC, the NC Division of Water Resources, 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 hereby certify the above information to be true and accurate to the best of my/our knowledge.
(Authorized Signature)
2/22/2022
(Date)

PROPERTY ACCESS AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRITION:
Deed Boob: 1205; 1198; 00003E Page: 378; 1247; 00562 County: Randolph
Parcel ID Number: 7744406570; 7744521577; 7744420536
Street Address: near the intersection of Plainfield Rd and Spero Rd, Randleman, NC 27317
Property Owner (please print): Phillip O'Neil Ridge and wife, Meredith F. Ridge
Project Sponsor (please print): Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC
Property Owner and Project Sponsor have entered into that certain Purchase and Sale Agreement
for the property, dated August 8, 2019 (the Agreement). Subject to the terms of the Agreement the
Property Owner authorized Project Sponsor and its agents, engineers, representatives and
contractors to enter the Property at any reasonable time to conduct environmental and soil
testing, engineering studies, and any other inspections and evaluations necessary to
evaluate the property.
Therefore, the undersigned authorized signatory of the Project Sponsor, does hereby authorize
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC, the NC Division of Water Resources, 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: 2991 Spero Road
(if different from above) Randleman, NC 27317
Property Owner Telephone Number:
I hereby certify the above information to be true and accurate to the best of my/our knowledge.
(Authorized Signature)
2/22/2022
(Date)