20200034 Ver 1_Mitigation Plans_20200106

PART B: TITLE PAGE
TECHNICAL PROPOSAL AND RESTORATION PLAN
PIERCE TERRACE WETLAND MITIGATION SITE
GATES COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
RFP #16-007907
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS
TO PROVIDE NON -RIPARIAN WETLAND MITIGATION CREDITS
WITHIN CATALOGING UNITS 03010203 AND 03010204 OF THE CHOWAN RIVER BASIN
Prepared for:
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA
Restoration Systems, LLC
Authorized Representative: George Howard
Ph: 919-755-9490
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 211
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Prepared by:
AUGUST 2019
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603

TECHNICAL APPROACH AND RESTORATION PLAN
PIERCE TERRACE WETLAND MITIGATION SITE
GATES COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
RFP #16-007907 - FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE NON -RIPARIAN WETLAND MITIGATION CREDITS WITHIN
CATALOGING UNITS 03010203 AND 03010204 OF THE CHOWAN RIVER BASIN
PART D. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Restoration Systems, L.L.C. (RS) is pleased to provide you with this Proposal in response to the Request for Proposals
(RFP) #16-007907 dated May 6, 2019. This Proposal describes the merits of the Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation
Site (Site/Project); general content of this technical proposal includes the following;
- Corporate & Team background, experience, and Project organization
- Proposed mitigation (Project description, goals, objectives, development, and success criteria)
- Proposed implementation schedule
- Current ownership and long-term protection of the Site
- Quality assurance and control procedures
IRS recognizes that Per the RFP, 100% of wetland credits generated, must be achieved through wetland restoration.
Per the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), "wetland
restoration is the manipulation of the physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of a site with the goal of
returning natural/historic functions to a former wetland." The generation wetland mitigation credit via restoration
is achieved through either wetland re-establishment of wetland rehabilitation. These practices are defined in the
RFP and by the EPA as;
Re-establishment: appropriate for sites that are "not currently jurisdictional wetlands as defined in the 1987 US
Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and USACE regional supplements, and are devoid of the
proper community type of vegetation." Re-establishment results in rebuilding a former wetland and results in a
gain of wetland acres.
Rehabilitation: appropriate for sites that "are degraded (poorly functioning) jurisdictional wetlands that have
been drained or otherwise manipulated, resulting in a significant loss of wetland function. Wetland
Rehabilitation should restore most, if not all -natural and historic functions to a degraded wetland."
Based on the definitions above and those within the RFP, 100% of the credit generated from this Proposal, will be
from the re-establishment of a former non -riparian wetland.
Situated on marine terraces adjacent to Bennett's Creek and Lassiter Swamp, the Site is within the United States
Geological Survey (USGS) 8-digit Cataloging Unit 03010203 (Chowan 03 Watershed). Specifically, the Site is within
the USGS 14-digit Cataloging Unit, and the North Carolina Division of Water Resources' (NCDWR) Targeted Local
Watershed 03010203040040. The Site is positioned 2 miles west of Sunbury and is less than 1-mile east of
Merchants Millpond State Park (MMSP), a listed natural area by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program. In
addition to the Sites proximity to a high -value ecological resource, the Site surrounds an existing 27.1 acre NC DMS
conservation easement, the Hofler Wetland Mitigation Site (NC DMS Project No. 95355). Project waters drain into
Bennett's Creek approximately 1-mile upstream of MMSP.
Per the RFP, IRS has provided two options for review. They are;
♦ Option 1: 50 Non -Riparian Wetland Mitigation Units to fulfill the requested credits within the Chowan
03010203 Cataloging Unit, and
♦ Option 2: 105 Non -Riparian Wetland Mitigation Units to fulfill the requested credits within the Chowan
03010203 and 03010204 Cataloging Units.
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site Part D — Executive Summary
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

Option 1 encompasses 71.1 acres, and Option 2 encompasses 127.5 acres of agricultural land used for row crop
production (see Figures 5A-B Appendix A for Site easements and proposed activities for each option). Within each
option, is the 27.1 acre Hofler Mitigation Site, a DMS non -riparian wetland mitigation site constructed in the fall of
2014. Both options provide for restoration and protection of aquatic resources with a conservation easement and
will result in net gains in hydrology, water quality, and habitat (physical, chemical, and biological) functions.
Mitigation credit outlined in this Proposal, are calculated per the requirements stipulated in the RFP. Summarized in
the following tables, is the mitigation crediting for each option.
Option 1 Proposed Mitigation Units
Wetland Mitigation Type
Type
Acreage
Mitigation Ratio
Non -Riparian WMU
Re-establishment
Non -Riparian
50
1:1
50
Rehabilitation
Non -Riparian
-----
1.5:1
-----
Enhancement
Non -Riparian
-----
2:1
-----
Creation
Non -Riparian
-----
10:1
-----
Totals
50 acres
50 WMUs
Option 2 Proposed Mitigation Units
Wetland Mitigation Type
Type
Acreage
Mitigation Ratio
Non -Riparian WMU
Re-establishment
Non -Riparian
105
1:1
105
Rehabilitation
Non -Riparian
-----
1.5:1
-----
Enhancement
Non -Riparian
-----
2:1
-----
Creation
Non -Riparian
-----
10:1
-----
Totals
105 acres
105 WMUs
Numerical calculations presented in this Proposal are based on Option 2 and a 127.5 acres conservation easement.
Implementation of the Site will result in direct functional uplift to the following identified stressors;
♦ Peak Flows: reduction of peak flows from Site and adjacent offsite receiving waters to MMSP by restoring
surface and subsurface water storage
♦ Artificial Barriers: removeal of culverted driveway crossings, on -site topographic barriers, and improving
offsite drainage outlets
♦ Ditching/Draining: improving off -site ditches and removing Site ditches and/or drainage features that direct
surface and subsurface water to receiving waters
♦ Non-functioning Riparian Buffer/Wetland Vegetation: restoring 127.5 acres of row crop agricultural land to
a native forest conditions
♦ Nutrients & Sediment: the permanent reduction of nutrients and sediment leaving the Site, totaling 1,270
Ibs nitrogen/year, 2,223 Ibs phosphorous/year, 501.65 tons of soil/yr, and cessation of agriculture biowaste
applications (poultry litter)
♦ Direct Pollutant Input: (cessation of aerial and ground broadcast herbicide applications and improving
offsite ditches coupled with installation of inline marsh treatments along remaining ditches)
♦ Habitat Fragmentation: a wetland interstream flat adjacent to the MMSP, and connecting an existing NC
DMS conservation easement to MMSP via surrounding timberlands.
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site Part D — Executive Summary
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

PART E.CORPORATE AND TEAM BACKGROUND & EXPERIENCE
Restoration Systems (RS) and the RS Team of Axiom Environmental, Sungate Design Group, K2 Design Group, Land
Mechanic Designs, and Carolina Silvics, offers DMS a team that is uniquely qualified to accomplish the objectives
outlined in the RFP.
The RSTeam offers an unmatched 90+years of combined regulatory insight and relationships within North Carolina's
compensatory mitigation profession. Since RS' inception in 1998, the company has provided over 431,000 linear feet
stream and 3,400 acres of wetland mitigation in North Carolina. Since 2007, the RS Team has worked collaboratively
on permitting, designing, implementing and managing 21 compensatory mitigation projects in North Carolina,
totaling 105,227 linear feet for stream and 83.10 acres of wetland mitigation. Several factors make the RS Team the
preferred choice, including:
Experience and Expertise
♦ RS— Pioneer of "Full -Delivery," outcome -based, mitigation with the first such contract in North Carolina for
the Department of Transpiration and NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program (now DMS) in 2000
♦ RS — Sponsor of 69, Full -Delivery, outcome -based, compensatory mitigation projects in NC (46 with DMS,
16 mitigation banks, seven permitted responsible)
♦ RS — 200 + negotiated and acquired purchase agreements within NC
♦ RS — 38 projects successfully closed -out by regulatory agencies within NC
Regulatory & Policy Knowledge
♦ Axiom — Sandy Smith was a co-author and is now teaching the North Carolina Wetland Assessment Method
(NC WAM) & North Carolina Stream Assessment Method (NC SAM)
♦ RS — First Post 2008 Mitigation Rule Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank in NC — Cripple Creek
♦ RS — First and only large scale dam removal from mitigation credit in NC (thee in total)
♦ RS — Environmental public policy background (US Senate) with a focus on wetlands, water quality, and
species issues
♦ RS — State & non-profit advocacy
• Former Trustee of the North Carolina Clean Water Management Trust Fund
• Board of the NC Coastal Federation
• Board of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill — Institute for the Environment
• Board of the North Carolina Wildlife Habitat Foundation
RS' Proven Management — A Collaborative & Responsive Approach to Meeting DMS' RFP Objectives
♦ A multi -disciplinary, results -driven team that understands DMS' objectives
♦ Responsive, schedule -focused delivery that keeps DMS informed and projects on track
♦ Open-minded, flexible team amendable to new ideas and DMS/regulatory agency input
♦ An engaging and collaborative communication -based approach to identifying, permitting, designing, and
managing compensatory mitigation projects. Our approach places a high value on DMS/regulatory agency
input in the development of an optimal solution
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site Part E. Corporate Background & Experience
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

SECTION 1: RS' CORPORATE BACKGROUND AND EXPERIENCE
As Project Sponsor, RS will coordination Project development with the DMS and regulatory agencies. RS will manage
all work out of its Raleigh Headquarters, located at 1101 Haynes St. Suite 211, Raleigh, NC 27604. This location allows
RS to meet with DMS staff in person within a matter of minutes and enables RS immediate access to state & federal
regulatory personnel.
As a leading environmental restoration and mitigation banking firm with more than seventy-five (75) sponsored
mitigation banks, permittee-responsible, and full -delivery mitigation sites across eight (8) States and US Army Corps
Districts, RS fully understands the complexities of providing cost-effective compensatory mitigation. RS' sole
business activity is restoring and protecting water, land, and endangered species habitat by purchasing permanent
conservation easements, fee -simple interests, or deed restrictions from property owners, while physically restoring
the waterways, vegetation, and habitat to exceed current function and duplicate historic ecological conditions as
practicable. This work requires a collaborative multi -disciplinary approach led by RS staff in coordination with
independent licensed and certified consultants. RS employees hold a wide range of certifications and professional
licenses, including Professional Wetland Scientist (PWS) certification, Licensed Soil Scientist (LSS), Certified Public
Accountant (CPA), Licensed Real Estate Agent (LREA), and a General Contractor's (GC) license. These licenses in
conjunction with RS staff backgrounds in policy, environmental science, landscape architecture, real estate,
construction management, and economics, allow RS the tractability to overcome ecological and regulatory variables
that are inherently a part of providing full -delivery compensatory mitigation.
In 1996 RS' principal George Howard managed and sold the state's first commercial mitigation bank to the North
Carolina Department of Transportation (Barra Farms Mitigation Bank — 623 acres). In 1998, Howard co-founded
Restoration Systems with the intent of evolving the Full -Delivery processes to better assist the North Carolina
Department of Transportation with their compensatory mitigation needs. Working with Dr. David Robinson and Mr.
David Schiller of NCDOT, RS assisted with the development of the first Full -Delivery RFP for compensatory mitigation
in the United States, issued in 2000 for wetlands mitigation in the Neuse River basin.
RS has since entered into forty-six full -delivery contracts with the North Carolina in -lieu fee program, the Division of
Mitigation Services and its predecessors. When combined with other projects inside and outside of North Carolina,
RS has entered into full -delivery contracts for stream mitigation totaling over 525,000 linear feet of stream and 4,100
acres of wetlands. In total, RS' ecological restoration projects and investments total over 115,000 acres of wetlands,
forests, and prairies and 75 miles of streams, rivers, and bayous. To -date, RS has successfully closed out thirty-eight
(38) compensatory mitigation projects.
Of the 38 successfully closed -out projects, 36 have been full -delivery, turn -key, based mitigation projects. Of those,
RS provided 98.6% of its contracted credits. In detail, RS has provided:
♦ 99.33% of Stream Credits (213,434 Units of the 214,870 Contracted)
♦ 98.09% of Wetland Credits (1,753 Units of the 1,787 Contracted)
♦ 100% of Water Quality Credits (183,340 Units)
♦ 97.09% Riparian Buffer Credits (310 Units of the 320 Contracted)
RS has achieved this success through its proven ability to identify and provide innovative and cost-effective
compensatory mitigation for its clients. Specific examples RS performance, are;
♦ Large -Scale Dam Removal: Carbonton, Lowell, & Milburnie Dam
• North Carolina's first, second, and third large-scale dam removal projects for compensatory mitigation
credit (the only three to have occurred). Restoring 50+ miles for anadromous fish passage, spawning
grounds, and threatened and endangered habitat for fish (Cape Fear shiner — Notropis mekistocholas),
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site Part E. Corporate Background & Experience
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

freshwater mussels (Tar River spiny mussel — Elliptio steinstansana), and other aquatic species (Neuse
River Waterdog — Necturus lewisi).
♦ Pioneer of Water Quality Projects
2007: North Carolina and the Nation's first privately sponsored retail water quality mitigation bank
located in the Neuse River Watershed; Wellon's Farm — 32 acres, and Lane Island 52 acres.
2008: Virginia's First Water Quality Mitigation Bank located in the James River Watershed; Cranston's
Mill Pond —174-acre parcel.
♦ Large & Small Mitigation Projects
• 2000 & 2002: Bear Creek & Sleepy Creek, 300+ Acres of wetland restoration and enhancement, Neuse
River Basin of North Carolina.
• 2010 Summit Seep: four wetland mitigation units in the Yadkin River Basin, of North Carolina.
• 2014 & 2015: Katy Prairie Stream Mitigation Site, 20+ miles of Priority-1 Natural Channel Design, San
Jacinto River Basin of Text.
• 2018: Shaw's Run, 2,200 linear feet of stream restoration and 4.4 acres of wetland restoration, Lumber
River Basin of North Carolina.
♦ Diverse & Large -Scale Client Base
Full -Delivery Compensatory Mitigation Contracts with the NC Division of Mitigation Services (45
projects), North Carolina Department of Transportation (DOT) (10 projects), Tennessee DOT, Texas
DOT, Three Airport Authorities, and over 600 sales from RS Sponsored Compensatory and Water
Quality Mitigation Banks.
As described above and throughout this Proposal, RS' vast experience with permitting, managing, and most
importantly, closing -out compensatory mitigation projects makes it uniquely qualified to Sponsor this Project.
Lessons learned from each of our projects throughout the county are applied to every project moving forward;
ensuring RS' adaptability in an ever -changing regulatory climate and science -driven profession. The following pages
provide a robust background on all RS' sponsored projects. RS employees were intimately involved with all aspects
of development, implementation, monitoring, and closure of the projects listed below.
Following RS' Project List, is a detailed description of the RS Team and the proposed management of the Project.
The Project's Key Personnel are listed along with brief resumes and the Team's organization. Key Personnel of the
RS Team have extensive knowledge and experience with wetland restoration design, permitting, construction, and
first-hand experience managing compensatory mitigation projects. Their addition as RS Team members amplifies RS'
unique experience with practical local knowledge and staff resources to meet timelines and exceed expectations.
Space Purposefully Left Blank
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site Part E. Corporate Background & Experience
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

v M..
o m v v °
v v
o
0
0
O
0
O
0
O
0
O
o
o
0
O
0
O
0
o
0
0
O
0
O
0
O
o ^
c a o o
oo
O
O
O
O
o
o
O
O
O
O
O
O
0 a �
v
v a)
V yaj
)n ^
y
�
Ln
Ln
N
O
V m
V Z
N
�
oo
Ln
Ln
Ln
i y
U
m
Ln Ln
O
N
m
ti
a�
I,
.--i
o0
O
of
o0
oo
N i
l�D
n
lN0
o
OOi
O
n
V
oo
U Vf
lD'
V
m'
(n
In
lo'
o
M
Ln
m
m
m
m
G
0,0
y7
C
C
m
a
(0
a
C
E
C
N
m
a
E
C
m
G
E
'a
'a
m
m
N
N
N
N
i
O-
L
m
O-
C
O
C
O
L
m
rL
i
O'
7
7
L
C
O
L
m
a
C
p
m
in
t%
Z
Z
in
in
m
m
in
Z
in
Z
in
m
m
VI
v)
C
C
7
C
�
C
txo
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
p
7
3 N
4d
Ln
O
v
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
�, �
7
O
i
O
+Y-'
m 0
'C N
N
'C N
G)
G)
G)
G)
G)
G)
0
G)
0
G)
y p
N
N
C
O T
O
O
O T
y
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
p LL
O
O
V
U
LL
U
U
U
V
U
U
V
u
u
u
v
`m
I
a
w
oo
v
oo
Ln
Ln
v
N
in
m
wAg
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
i&
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
(N
(N
N
N
C
cN
G
0
V4)
_
•?
vc)n
v)n
Icn
Icn
Icn
Ln
LnVcc)
lc/7
VI
VI
VI
LnIcn
Iccn
G
C
C
C
G
G
G
G
G
G
C
C
C
C
C
C
V
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
h
C
O
m
m
V
9
j_.i
c-I
N
N
V
N
N
.--I
rl
V
Ln
m
N
m
m
V
c-I
=
cc
O
14
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
O
O
O
N
O
N
O
O
N
O
G
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
c-I
O
O
O
O
.--I
O
O
c-I
O
'
p
fV
In
N
m
m
m
N
N
V
Ln
m
N
V
N
c-I
Ln
Q
O
In
O
m
O
m
O
m
O
m
O
m
O
m
O
m
O
m
O
m
O
m
O
m
O
m
O
m
O
m
O
m
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
'NO
0
=
4)
Y
m
p
V
m
LL
m
LL
m
LL
m
LL
h
p
V
p
m
m
4J
Vf
Ll
3
z
a
m
o.
o.
o.
Z
Z
m
a
Z
F m
r
m
C
m
LL
V
V
V
J
m
J
LL
V
U
O
W
m
V
U
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
U
V
V
V
V
V
V
N
s
t
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
O
Z
C
E
E
aj
0
y
i
O a
T
co
C
'Q
m
G)
V
m
m
Y
L
m
�'
•m
�n
O-
a)
U
N
m
.
O
E
to
r
C
V
O
O
E
a1
r
L
3
u
L
co
3
a
c
c
y
3
o
v
Y
a
>
a m
n
a
o
m
m
uo
o
°
O
�
o n
w
_
a
Q
a
T
m
m
m
v
c�
v
o
Q
V
U
0
6L
c-I
rl
ri
m
rl
ri
V1
rl
l0
ri
o2S
Ln
O
C 0)
0 0
m O
m �
� LL
� LL
m �

v M..
'O
w u -o
o m
o
0
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
'.
0
0
0
0
O
0
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
�+ w w
e N
C Q O O
O
.ti
0
O
ti
O
ti
O
ti
O
ti
0
O
ti
O
O
ti
O
ti
O
ti
0
ti
^
O
ti
O
ti
O
ti
O
ti
N
m
N
V O V
+N+ N
N N
V yC
N
V
Ln
�
G)
00
V m
Ln
++
00
N
+'
O
�
LnV
Z
N
Y
r
�
N
I
N
m
M
~
^
Ln
y
U
m
o
o
�
M
M
o
y
O
Un
ID
G)
0
N
O
O
O
On
O00
O
0
a
O
al i
U Vf
lD
I�
O
ID
Ln
w
l0
O
rn
r,
V
m
N
cri
O
Lr
O
C
m
C
m
C
m
G
O
a
C
c
M
a
C
�O
'O
C
G
y
c
N
E
�
�
E
E
E
O
E
O
E
E
m
Em
EO
j
7
O
O.
7
i
O.
p
i
O.
i
i
N
i
N
i
i
O.
E
i
G
i
N
m
Z
Z
Ln
co
in
Z
in
in
in
t3
in
coaD
in
Z
0
Ln
in
7
7
7
7
7
7
C
7
7
do
7
7
7
7
C
7
7 N
0
0
0
0
0
0
m
N
N
N
N
N
N
m
v
y0-.,
E
O
N
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
C
O>
N
O
N
O
y
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
ai
O>
N
O
O
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
aL
V
V
V
V
V
as
`m
rn
in
in
M
rn
O
r,
ID
ID
rn
'T
in
Ln
v
n
"Ag
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
i&
C
N
N
N
N
N
(V
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
NLn
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln
�
�
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln
V
M
O
r,
O
O
N
O
N
O
c-I
O
N
O
N
O
c-I
O
00
O
V
O
O
O
O
O
O
=
N
.--I
.-I
O
N
ti
O
O
O
O
N
O
N
O
�--i
'
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
-I
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
M
c-I
O
M
Ln
O
M
M
O
M
N
O
M
Ln
O
M
M
O
M
M
O
M
M
O
M
a
O
w
M
O
M
N
O
M
M
O
M
N
O
M
M
O
M
c-I
O
w
00
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
a)
m
`m
`m
m
`m
m
m
m
_
al
?
N
O
3
LL
a)
N
3
m
LL
a)
LL
a)
LL
a)
V
2
LL
a)
N
Ll
a)
N
LL
a)
V
0
m
m
a)
Z
m
yCL
m
aJ
Z
m
m
m
a)
LL m
m
DJ
Z
m
aJ
Z
m
LL m
V
U
V
V
V
V
V
V
Y
V
V
V
V
V
U
V
V
U
U
V
V
V
V
V
U
m
N
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
++
V
C
O
E
m
E
m
y
>
L
L
m
0
c
>
O
Y
UD
O
O
m
a)
O
x
T
3
N
tOo
v
m
Ln
V
m
p
O
O
a
0
LL
5
m
=
x
x
—'
L
,�
a
—
o
m
V
C7
v
2
=
J
J
3
O
J
0
Il
a -I
00
rl
Ol
ri
O
N
ti
N
N
N
M
N
V
N
Ln
N
w
N
Il
N
00
N
Ol
N
O
M
ti
M
N
M
02S
C
O
m
m
m
a�
12
O
G
O
V
ui
t
m
LL
0
O

v M..
0
0
0
o V
ti
ti
ti
ti
OQ
a
V
N N
V yaj
ut
00
m
in
Lq
V m
O
ti
ut +'
y
lD
rn
N
�n
as
V �
Z
N
Y C
Ln
4)i
^
�
N
�
m
ti
o
m
o
m
�
U
�
E
a
ti
O
ON
o0
ti
ti
v1
00
al i
N
�--i
.Ni
O
O
a
n
U !n
Ln�
N
M
m
00Ol
Ln
�
G
C
N
C
(0
m
2
2
O
O
E
a
E
r
E
E
E
E
E
E
y
v
7
C
O-
m
E
O-
O-
o
O
O
O-
m
y
y
v
7
v
7
v
v
v
7
c
7
c
7
in
m
in
in
"
v)
=
z
z
N
N
m
m
7
m
in
in
m
Z
Z
41
m
c
m
m
b0
0
o
c
E
a
E
E
O
E
O
O
O
O
O
O
a)
m
p
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
N
y
O LL
y
y
v
O
O
y
O
O
O
O
O
O
Q
O
LL
v
LL
LL
LL
U
aL
U
LL
V
U
U
U
v
V
0)
N
00
00
00
00
O
a)
I,
a)
V
^
Ln
00
m
W
T !=
C
ti
O
N
ti
O
N
ti
O
N
ti
O
N
.--i
O
N
.ti
O
N
.--i
O
N
.--i
O
N
.ti
O
N
O
O
N
O
O
N
.--i
O
N
O
O
N
.--i
O
N
O
O
N
O
O
N
�'
v)
v)
to
to
to
to
v)
v)
v)
to
VI
VI
VI
VI
C
C
V
0
0
0
0
0
m
m
=
m
O
O
N
O
m
O
N
O
N
O
m
O
m
O
V
O
00
O
N
O
m
O
m
O
Ln
O
N
O
O
a -I
O
N
O
O
O
N
O
O
O
N
O
N
O
.--I
O
N
O
c-I
O
N
O
O
O
N
O
c-I
O
O
O
N
O
_
'
Ln
O
m
N
O
m
M
O
M
V
O
m
m
O
m
N
O
M
N
O
M
V
O
m
V
O
m
c-I
O
w
N
O
m
m
O
m
N
O
m
c-I
O
w
M
O
M
00
00
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
m
VI
LL
Y
�
(0
(0
LL
a)
m
m
a
a
E
a
a
a
E
L o
a
a,
y
L o
(V
E
OC m
V
Z
m
J
(0
Z
Z
}
J
LL m
Z
Z
LL m
CL
(0
V
V
V
V
�'•�
V
V
V
U
U
V
U
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
a
y
H
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
C
7
O C
a
N
O.
it
al
a)
m
++
N
.,
O
E
0
O
O
O
a)
i
c�
al
C
Z
m
LL
O
O
+�
E
GCV
E
O
O O
LL
a
O.
L
N
L
'�
to
>
=
al
.>
O
Y
V
(0
i U
a7
m
m
C
i
m
V
>
>
m
In
m
I17
m
lD
m
I�
m
00
m
Ol
m
O
v
c-I
v
N
v
m
v
v
V1
v
1D
Q
Q
N
a
00
a
02S

M..
m m 7
u
o m" °„ $
a
a
a
o
z
z
z
r_a o 0
0 a` �
v
v v
V yaj
'O
In
On
0
O1
00
a m
0
M
Ln
I
lD
ID
m
Lf1
N
c
00
m
r,
Ln
'O
l-Zt0
Ln
n
000
m
Ln
O
00
00+%
o
n
m
m
°
M
~
V Z
a)
N
m
r,
m
VI
"a
i y
U
00
n
I,
N
Lq
In
a>
N
01
O
0
O
00
00
00
m
tV
O
I�
N i
v�i
ti
a
m
O
U !n
00
V1
Ill
N
c-I
O1
^y
O
m
_
m
'6
O
O
O
Z
JCC O
C
�
C
c
\
C
O
G
m
i
Lt
•�
�'
0)
`
m
L
C
0)
0)
C
m
'�
0) 0)
m
m
m
m
0)
m i
v
CO 2
Z
CO
N
Z
m
m
Z
Z
m O
to
N
to
N
N
N
7
a -I
O
3
O
C
O
VI
C
^
C
C
O
to
C
N
C
N
C
N
C
N
C
N
N
O
+-'
\ +'
"O O
O
O
O
\
"6 O
O
O
O
O
O
m
0) 0
+-' m
.c 0)
E m
.c 0)
+= m
0 0)
0) 0
+' m
.c 0)
+' m
.c 0)
+' m
•c 0)
+' m
•c 0)
+= m
0 0)
N
O
O T
p
O T
O T
O>
O T
O T
O T
O T
O T
C
U
O1
00
O
n
a)
Ln
0)
r,
r,
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln
m m
W
O
O
c
O
O
O
0
O
O
O
O
0
O
O
O
r
O
c
O
c
0
i .E
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
C
m
C
m
C
m
m
m
C
m
C
m
G
m
C
m
C
m
C
m
C
m
C
m
(.7
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
V
=
N
O
0
c-I
O
a -I
O
a -I
O
N
O
c-I
O
a -I
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
0
O
O
0
N
0
N
0
N
0
c-I
0
N
0
N
0
O
0
O
0
O
0
0
0
•
m
O
N
0
N
0
N
0
V
0
N
0
N
0
m
0
m
0
m
0
m
0
In
0
°�
m
m
m
N
m
m
m
m
m
m
00
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
=
? •N
m
N
LL
Y"
.�
0)
0)
0)
u0
0)
0)
`m
N
`m
0)
`m
0)
`m
0)
Q
w
m
m
Q
m
LL
0
Z
Z
Z
'n
Z
Z
Q
m
Q
m
Q
m
Q
m
V
V
V
V
V
w
m
; °
U
z
a
U
z
U
z
U
z
X
V
z
V
z
V
z
V
z
U
z
V
z
H
4)
3
C
C
O
a,
i
'a
C
0)
a)C
—
�0
m
N
O
O.
O
a)
V
m
O
•i a)O
LL
MEL
co
V
V
H
c
V
a
w
m
>
a
C
CL
'�
m
LL
T L
LL
N
0)
O
m
V
m
.CL
=
m
Y
01
Q
-0
V
m
O
4
7
O
Q"
Q1
0
00
01
O
a
Ln
Ln
Ln
In
Ln
V1
V1
Ln
In
L!1
lD
02S
Ln
O
r_ 0)
0 0
m O
10
� LL
� LL
m �

cu Y -
N )0
O
O
O
O
O
O
Q O V
.ti
.ti
ti
ti
ti
O a
V
aN+ W
W .O
V yaj
N �
N
� W
L 7
V m
N
Y
�
(V '-
i a+
N
V �
N
Z
'~
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
Np
O
On
p
i y
V
N
O
m
w
N
c-i
N
N
'T
^O
00
00
Ln
0
00
00
M
1O
w i
oc
r
n
w
a)
O
N
�o
V Vf
0
N
N
N
n
ON
lD'
ONO
C
O
CL
+
C
y
N
0
L
Y
CC
CC
CC
CC
�
CC
�
�
CC
CC
CC
�
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
i
i
N
N
i
L1
N
aJ
O.
N
i
i
i
N
In
In
In
In
In
d'
Z
In
d'
3�to
In
In
In
e-0
C
to
C
N
c
N
7
bD
C
7
7
7
C
C
C
O
N O
N
N
E
E
.
.
C
m
O
O
O
O
Ln
Ln
m
O
Y
O
O
a
C
a
C
+�
+�
-C
YO
-O
-C
O
t0
O
t0
O
N
-O
af0+ O
C w
C N
O
O
E
E
N
N
N
m
w
N
w
N
(V
N
C
'0
'0
a)
N
y)
}}
0
O
O}
O
O
O
O}
O}
O}
O
V
U
V
V
V
V
0
0
W
`m
0)
n
a
Ln
Ln
00
'T
O
G)
0)
m
00
a
a
Ln
tD
w m
O
O
O
O
ti
O
ti
O
ti
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
ti
O
ti
O
O
O
} =
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
C
C
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
~
O
~
O
O ,d0
X
w
L
C
L G
H
O
H
O
H
O
�N
O
C
C
C
C
C
C
m
c0
>
�-,�`
O
N
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
Z
(0
(v
C
H
H
x
H
an
H
O
O
O
N
O
Ln
O
m
O
N
O
O
N
O
m
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
NMO
Oa
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
N
O
ON
O
N
c-I
a -I
-I
O0V
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
MM
Nmm
mm
mmmNNN
00
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
Gl
N
Y
L(v
La)
V n1
i
w
-6 W
a)
LL
(v
bD C
W
b
m
0)
a
w
a1
O
aN+
E
N
�c C
N
O
N
O.
CL
O.
C
O
m
Z
}
In
N
N
i1
LL m
u
D
Z
C G)
Z
N
Z
In
In
VI
V
V
V
O^
F-
V
a
U
V
X
V
V
U
C
Y
U
U
Z
V
U
U
X
X
X
Z
Z
H
Z
Z
Z
f0
Z
Z
H
Z
Z
Z
H
H
H
N
00
�
CYC
G
C
C
+�'
Y
>
(0
0
V
41
0
V
7
E
�,
t0
2
m
a1
V
i
LL
a1
0)
7
2
O
O
a
in C7
°-
o
V
3
m
v
2
'L`°m
0
a
C
7
�
T
W
W
a)
=
C
(0
m
N
00
O
N
m
O
N
N
00
LL
LL
LL
m
O
V
7
m
Q
O
V
"
M
M
m
>
?
0]
N
m
m
Y
Y
Y
O
N
Y
Y
Gc-I
N
m
V
Ln
lD
I�
OJ
01
O
a
m
a
r
n
n
n
n
r
co
0
O

M..
m m 7
u
o m a y$
o
o +• ^
rn
c a o 0
0 a` �
�
o
O
o
0
�
0
o
v Q
o
-
rn
�
o
v Q
V V
I,
O
O
N
V V
O
r
ri
oa
V m
V m
M
NN
OCi
V O
V O
V
Z
Z
N
O
O
OO
V
N
V
'O m
'p m
lA
U y
3
Oat
W
V y
3
ry
m
E
= E
m
a y
L
c
o
v y
n
ri
V
�
c
Y
c
Y
c
Y
c
Y
a)
Y
T
~
-O
O
U
V
V
V
U
n
O
a)
al
al
al
a)
m
�
m
as
}i
d
CL
CL
CL
CL
c
c
m
m
m
V'
L
ut
vt
vt
vt
ut
a)
a)
a)
a)
a)
e-I
7
r_
O
v
m
C m
E
E
E
E
E
N
N
O
O}
a
a
a
U
....
V
a
a
v a
O O
�
O w
m m
N
O
V1
V1
ti
V1
o0
V1
ti
Ln
c 7
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
i m
V i
V
O
O
0
m
(N
.7
z
0
m
m
m
m
m
a
L
O O
m
C i
=
N
O
N
O
V �a
np
O
z
z
z
z
z
O
oob
o
a o
VbD
m .0
L i N
= y
a)
oa
c
m m
w a
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
mm
y 0
? v V
Y
V
Y
Vf
Z
X
H
in
le
v)
Y
O
Z
X
~
O O
u
v a,
m
j m
al
Y
Y
a
V i
+
a
a)
3
Y
3
"
N
V
V cL.)
O
E
m
.mc
c
v 0 mp
T
a
a
m O
c m
a+
m
a)
o
G)
s
m
m
o
m
E
m r
0 m v
a
in
in
9=
m
a)
U
— O
V m C
L
n
W
al
LA
W
W
W
W
Z r
o2S

SECTION 2: RS TEAM BACKGROUND
RS' multidisciplinary approach is carried over to the selection of sub -consultants, which together comprise the RS
Team. For the past decade, RS has maintained the same core RS Team for all NC projects (full -delivery, permitte
responsible, and privately sponsored mitigation banks). The RS Team is comprised of RS, acting as Sponsor and
Project Manager, and five sub -consultants. To date, the RS Team has worked together on implementing and
managing 21 compensatory mitigation projects in North Carolina, totaling 105,227 linear feet for stream and 83.10
acres of wetland mitigation. RS' relationship with many of RS Team sub -consultants extends beyond this set team.
Below is a summary of the experience RS has with each sub -consultant based on the number of projects in which
they provided services to RS. The table also provides the sub -consultants role for this Project. Below the table, is a
brief narrative of each sub -consultant.
Table 1: RS & Subconsultant Project History
Subconsultant
Axiom
Environmental
Sungate Design
Group
K2 Design Group
Land Mechanics
Design
Carolina Silvics
No. of RS Projects
Involved With
53
22
66
39
60
Design and
Professional
Planting and
Project Role
Surveying
Construction
Vegetation
Monitoring Services
Engineering Services
Management
♦ Axiom Environmental (Axiom): http://axiomenvironmental.org
Project Role: Design and Monitoring Services
Axiom is a full service environmental consulting firm with over 100 years of combined experience. Axiom offers
a full spectrum of natural systems investigations and natural resources restoration services. Axiom and RS have
worked collaboratively on 53 mitigation projects.
The Axiom team of professionals consists of Licensed Soil Scientists, Professional Wetland Scientists, a Licensed
Wildlife Damage Control Agent, a geologist, botanists, biologists, and mitigation design specialists. Axiom offers
services in support of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA),
Clean Water Act, and Endangered Species Act. These services cover a wide range of activities including:
- Stream and Wetland Restoration Design
Environmental Permitting
Ecological Surveys
Biological Assessments
H2O Quality Sampling
NEPA/SEPA Documentation
Transportation Environmental Studies
Protected Species Assessments
- Stream and Wetland Delineations
- Buffer Determinations
- Comprehensive Plant and Animal Surveys
Axiom Staff in Publications
- Mitigation Banking
- Mitigation Site Searches
- Feasibility Studies
- Mitigation Monitoring
- Construction Plan Development
- Construction Implementation
- Construction Oversight
- Benthic Macroinvertebrate Surveys
- Coastal Studies
Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Surveys
Forest Service Plant and Animal Surveys
The North Carolina Wetland Assessment Method (NCWAM) & The North Carolina Stream Assessment Method:
Development of a Rapid Wetland Assessment Method and Use for Compensatory Mitigation John R. Dorney,
LeiLani Paugh, Alexander P. (Sandy) Smith, Thomas (Brad) Allen, Matthew T. Cusack, Rick Savage, Emily B.
Hughes, Breda Munoz
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site Part E. Corporate Background & Experience
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

♦ Sungate Design Group (Sungate): http://sungatedesign.com
Protect Role: Professional Engineering Services
Sungate is a civil and environmental engineering consulting firm located on Jones Franklin Road in Raleigh, NC.
Established in 1991, Sungate employs 14 professionals including five Professional Engineers, seven Engineering
Technicians, one CAD technician, and an administrative manager. Sungate is properly certified with the Office
of the Secretary of State and licensed with the North Carolina Board of Registration for Professional Engineers
and Land Surveyors (license number C-0890). Sungate has provided engineering services on 22 of IRS sponsored
mitigation projects in NC.
Sungate provides a full range of services related to water resources, including modeling, design, permitting and
construction administration. Sungate's staff has extensive experience with FEMA regulations, NC Department
of Environmental Quality regulations, DWR and USACOE environmental permit requirements, natural channel
design, NCDOT procedures and policies for highway drainage design and bridge and culvert analysis, and erosion
control design and implementation.
Sungate has professional expertise in all phases of basin studies and flood studies from data collection,
evaluation and analysis, public participatory process, conceptual design, environmental permitting, hydraulic
studies, site design, and engineering, permitting and approval, construction documentation and project
administration. All of the firm's professional engineers have extensive experience with FEMA floodway
modifications, HEC-2, and HEC-RAS backwater modeling software, as well as HEC-HMS and HydroCAD hydrologic
modeling software.
Sungate performs a variety of water resource services within North Carolina for public clients including Wake
County and the NCDOT, as well as private clients including many engineering and architectural firms.
Furthermore, Sungate has served continuously as the Town Engineer for the Town of Carrboro since 1995, flood
study and drainage plan consultant reviewer for the Town of Holly Springs since 1998 and was awarded Wake
County Facilities Design & Construction Capital Improvement Projects On -Call Contract for the last 22 years.
♦ K2 Design Group (K2)
Protect Role: Baseline, Topographic & Property Surveying, As -Built Survey
Since 2000, K2 has provided surveying services on 66 of IRS' mitigation projects in NC. Owner and principal
surveyor John Rudolph holds professional land survey licenses for North Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia,
and is a licensed, Certified Professional in Sedimentation and Erosion Control. K2 provides clients with wetland
mapping, stream, and conservation area mapping while meeting various requirements required by state and
federal agencies. K2 has provided marine survey services for many dam removals in NC and topographic
mapping in coastal and inland areas. K2 Design Group has worked on several extensive boundary surveys for
the US Department of the Navy, the most significant being over 5,000 acres.
♦ Land Mechanic Design (LIVID): https:Hlandmechanicdesigns.com
Proiect Role: Construction
Land Mechanic Designs, Inc. is a leading stream and wetland restoration construction company dedicated to
restoring the ecosystem to its original state. LMD's mission is to provide stream and wetland restoration
construction using proven designs, techniques, and natural resources to protect our environment, as well as
provide a benefit to our clients and future generations. LIVID has provided construction related services on 39
of IRS' mitigation projects.
LIVID has direct experience with restoring streams and wetlands at various locations and conditions throughout
the Southeastern US. LIVID is committed to using the latest and most efficient methods, materials, and expertise
to provide customers with an optimal result. LMD has the knowledge and resources to ensure the job is done
right, on budget and on -time.
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site Part E. Corporate Background & Experience
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

♦ Carolina Silvics: http://www.carolinasilvics.com
Protect Role: Planting and Vegetation Management
Founded in 1999, Carolina Silvics is a forestry and natural resources contracting firm dedicated to the
stewardship and sound management of our forests and natural communities. Carolina Silvics' registered
foresters, ecologists, and forestry technicians love what they do and bring that enthusiasm to every project.
Carolina Silvics has provided forestry -related services on 60 of RS' mitigation projects.
Carolina Silvics' prides itself on having a diverse client portfolio, including projects for government, private
sector, and non -profits alike. Carolina Silvics believes that building strong client relationships is incredibly
important, and they work closely with clients to engender complete trust.
Carolina Silvics' team has a great wealth of experience and knows that, despite the complexity of the restoration
process and the seemingly competing interests of the stakeholders, at the end of the day a successful site is
everyone's goal.
Project Management & Key Team Members (the RS Team)
As described throughout this Proposal, RS' vast experience permitting, managing, and most importantly closing -out
compensatory mitigation projects makes it uniquely qualified to fulfill the PFP's objectives. Lessons learned from
each of our projects throughout the county are applied to every project moving forward; ensuring RS' adaptability
in an ever -changing regulatory climate and science -driven profession. Adding RS Team members to the equation
amplifies RS' unique experience with practical local knowledge and staff resources to meet timelines and exceed
expectations.
Key Personnel for this Project exhibit extensive knowledge and experience in wetland restoration design, permitting
and constructing. Having a specialized restoration team with highly trained and skilled members and first-hand
experience with compensatory mitigation projects will ensure timely achievement of the RFP's Objectives.
Though structurally formal, the RS Team will work collaboratively to optimize the implementation of the Site. RS will
manage all communications with regulatory agencies to ensure a succinct messaging network. Compensatory
mitigation projects require complex solutions to design, permitting, and construction. These type of projects require
a multi -disciplinary team; which is the precise strength of the RS Team. The RS Team of engineers and scientists will
review project data and designs jointly in the context of overall Project objectives; improving performance and
outcome. This approach allows RS Team members to be involved in Project development/design, and to stay
engaged throughout the construction and monitoring phases. This model incorporates quality assurance and control
into every aspect of the Project. The RS Team's approach to quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) will
provide detailed oversight from multiple individuals to produce high -quality deliverables and maintain project
schedules. A detailed description of RS QA/QC measures is provided in Section 1.8 of the Technical Approach and
Restoration Plan.
Raymond Holz, who is a member of the American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA), will serve as Senior Project
Manager. During his nine years with RS, Raymond has performed dozens of Site Identification and Mitigation
Feasibility Studies and currently oversees Mitigation Implementation Services at RS. He has worked on over a dozen
NC DMS full -delivery projects; his responsibilities have included site identification and acquisition, vegetation
management, project oversite (permitting, construction, yearly monitoring and, remedial action planning),
coordination with DIMS Project Managers, and management of project closeouts' with the North Carolina
Interagency Review Team. To date, Raymond has successfully "closed -out" ten compensatory mitigation projects for
Restoration Systems. His diverse experience in managing compensatory mitigation projects will ensure timely
delivery of project tasks.
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site Part E. Corporate Background & Experience
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

The Key Team Member table below outlines all members involved with the Project, their role, and responsibilities.
A projected workload for their involvement with the Project is provided as a percentage of their total work time.
Key Team Members
Projected
Key Team
Role
Responsibilities
Workload (as %
Member
of total time)
Raymond Holz
Management Team:
Primary POC with DMS
Project performance management
5%
Sr. Project Manager /
Project development and consultant management
RS
Operations Manager
Inter -Agency Review Team coordination
Alex Baldwin, LSS,
Management Team:
Landowner coordination/easement acquisition
PWS
RS Wetland Scientist
10%
Sr. RS Scientist & QA/QC
Prepare water budgets as needed
RS
Manager
RS Chief QA/QC Manager
Matthew Harrell
Management Team:
Habitat expert
Responsible for overseeing the monitoring, maintenance
2%
Project Manager (Day -to-
Coordinating and reviewing annual monitoring reports
RS
Day Operations)
Development of remedial action plans if required
Construction oversight for RS
Worth Creech, GC
Management Team:
Managing the quality of work and budget costs
Communicating with Project Manager, Designer, and
2%
RS
Construction Lead
Engineer of Record
Preparing work schedules for contractors
Delegate and oversee main project tasks
Design Team:
Peer & technical reviewer of deliverables
Grant Lewis, LSS
Lead and assist with fieldwork, designs, and deliverables
Sr. Project Manager
Permit Application
o
5/0
Axiom
Stream/Wetland Designer
Attend project meetings as needed
Construction management and oversight
Lead environmental scientist for project tasks including but
Kenan Jernigan
Design Team:
not limited to resource delineations, functional assessments,
monitoring, and construction oversight and maintenance
10%
Axiom
Environmental Lead
Prepare environmental documents and deliverables;
Conduct peer reviews on project deliverables
Lead engineer working collaboratively with Design Team Sr.
Josh Dalton, PE,
Design Team:
PM on the design approach
CPESC
Conduct hydrologic and hydraulic analysis as needed
2%
Lead Engineer (Engineer
Delegate and oversee CADD tasks
Sungate
of Record)
Preparation of deliverables
Attend project meetings as needed
John Rudolph, PLS
Design Team:
Lead and oversee project boundary, topographic,
construction, and as -built surveys
o
5/0
K2 Design
Survey Lead
Delegate appropriate supporting staff
Review and approve all final surveys
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site Part E. Corporate Background & Experience
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

Key Team Members
Key Team
Member
Role
Responsibilities
Projected
Workload (as o
of total time)
Lloyd A. Glover
Implementation Team:
Construction of the Project
Adherence to all permit conditions
Land Mechanic
Sr. Construction
Communicating with Project Manager, Designer, and
5%
Designs
Manager/Site Foreman
Engineer of Record
Attend project meetings as needed
Mary Margaret
-Review planting and planting material plans
McKinney &Josh
Implementation Team:
-Acquire planting stock
Merritt
Oversee hardwood planting
2%
Forestry Lead
Carolina5ilvics
Vegetation management
Key Team Member Resumes
Below is a brief overview of each Key Team Member's resume and project experience over the past three years. Full
resumes can be provided at the request of the Division.
Table 2: Key Team Member Resumes
Name and Proposed Role
Key Mitigation Project Experience (Past 3 yrs.)
Raymond Holz, ASLA — Restoration Systems
Roles: Sr. Project Manager/ Operations Manager / Agency
Environmental assessment and natural resource
Coordination Lead
No. of Relevant Projects: 15+
investigations
Professional Licenses, Certifications, and Training:
Site identification/land acquisition
Stream Mechanics — Function -Based Framework for Stream
Natural systems restoration design
Assessment & Restoration Projects, NCSU Nutrient Management
Construction management
Training / Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation, NCSU — MDC for
- Monitoring
Stormwater BMP, NCSU/NCDOT Level I: Erosion & Sediment
Project Closeout
Control Installer/Inspector
Alex Baldwin — Restoration Systems
Roles: Senior Environmental Scientist / QA-QC Manager
No. of Relevant Projects: 20+
Environmental assessment and natural resource
Professional Licenses, Certifications, and Training: NC Licensed
investigations
Soil Scientist (#1297), Professional Wetland Scientist (#2221), NC
Natural systems restoration design
Wetland & Stream Assessment Method Certifications, NCSU River
Monitoring
Course — 201 NDC Principles, NCDWR Surface Water ID
Site identification / land acquisition
Certification (#934T-1116), NCSU Stormwater BMP Certification
(#2508)
Matthew Harrell — Restoration Systems
Roles: Project Manager — Day to Day Operations / Site Acquisition
Environmental assessment and natural resource
No. of Relevant Projects: 12+
investigations
Professional Licenses, Certifications, and Training:
Site identification/land acquisition
NC Prescribed Burner #NCFS-685. NWCG FF-2 certified, plus
Natural systems restoration design / management
additional classes including NCFS Atmospheric Dispersion
Controlled Burn
Modeling course, NC DA&CS Licensed Pesticide Applicator #032-
Monitoring
7392, NC Wetland Assessment Method Certification
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site
Part E. Corporate Background & Experience
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

Table 2: Key Team Member Resumes
Name and Proposed Role
Key Mitigation Project Experience (Past 3 yrs.)
Worth Creech — Restoration Systems
Environmental assessment and natural resource
Roles: Construction Manager
No. of Relevant Projects: 20+
investigations
Professional Licenses, Certifications, and Training:
Site identification / land acquisition
NC Unlimited Building General Contractor's License, NC, #64807,
Natural systems restoration design
Rosgen Level I Certification, NC Stormwater BMP Inspection, and
Construction management
Maintenance Certificate, NCEEP/NCSY Stream Restoration
- Monitoring
Construction Training Certificate
Project Closeout
W. Grant Lewis —Axiom
Roles: Environmental assessment, natural resource investigations,
Environmental assessment and natural resource
technical approach, stream & wetland design
investigations
No. of Relevant Projects: 20+
Natural systems restoration design
Professional Licenses, Certifications, and Training:
Construction management
NC Licensed Soil Scientist (#1233), Society of Wetland Scientists,
Monitoring
Professional Wetland Scientist, Applied Fluvial Geomorphology
Project Closeout
(Rosgen Level 1, 11, III, and IV)
Kenan Jernigan — Axiom
Roles: Environmental assessment, natural resource investigations,
Environmental assessment and natural resource
and technical approach
investigations
No. of Relevant Projects: 20+
Natural systems restoration design
Professional Licenses, Certifications, and Training:
Construction management
NC Wetland Assessment Method Certification — 2012, Surface
Monitoring
Water Identification Training and Certification — 2014, NC Stream
Project Closeout
Assessment Method Certification — 2017
Josh Dalton, PE, PCESC — Sungate
Roles: Lead Engineer, non-traditional / innovative practices
No. of Relevant Projects: 20+
Environmental assessment and natural resource
Professional Licenses, Certifications, and/or Training:
investigations
Professional Engineer— North Carolina, South Carolina,
Natural Systems Restoration Design & Engineering
Certified Professional in Erosion and Sediment Control,
Sediment & Erosion Control Design
NCDOT Level III Designer of Erosion and Sediment Control Plans,
Dam Removal Engineering
NCSU Stormwater BMP Inspector, NCDEMLR Stormwater BMP
Plan Reviewer
John Rudolph — K2 Design
- Natural systems restoration design
s:
Roles: Surveyor
Environmental assessment and natural resource
No. Relevant Projects: 20+
Professional Licenses, Certifications, and Training:
investigations
Professional Land Surveyor North Carolina L-4194, Virginia
Monitoring
0403003029, South Carolina ELS.30298, Certified Professional in
Land Acquisition
Erosion and Sediment Control (national license) - CPESC 2226
Project Closeout
Lloyd A. Glover— Land Mechanic Designs
Roles: Senior Project Manager/Site Foreman
No. of Relevant Projects: 70+
Natural systems restoration design
Professional Licenses, Certifications, and Training:
- Construction and management
Level I & 11 NCDOT Erosion and Sedimentation Control/Storm
Environmental assessment and natural resource
Water Certification
Stream Restoration Construction Training NCSU 2005
investigations
Stormwater BMP Inspection and Maintenance Cert.
MSHA Certified
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site
Part E. Corporate Background & Experience
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

Table 2: Key Team Member Resumes
Name and Proposed Role Key Mitigation Project Experience (Past 3 yrs.)
Mary Margaret McKinney — Carolina Silvics
Roles: Registered Forester
No. of Relevant Projects: 20+
Professional Licenses, Certifications, and Training:
North Carolina Registered Forester 1996
NC Commercial Ground Pesticide Applicator - Aquatics, Forestry,
and Ornamental & Turf Grass 2014
Master of Science in Forestry with a minor in Plant Community
Ecology 1996 — North Carolina St University
Josh Merritt — Carolina Silvics
Roles: Project Manager for Vegetation Success
No. of Relevant Projects: 20+
Professional Licenses, Certifications, and Training:
NC Commercial Ground Pesticide Applicator- Aquatics,
Forestry, and Ornamental & Turf Grass (Since 2015)
NCDOT Level 1 Erosion & Sediment Control/Stormwater
Inspector/Installer
Space Purposefully Left Blank
Monitoring
Natural systems restoration design
Environmental assessment and natural resource
investigations
Environmental assessment and natural resource
investigations
Monitoring
Monitoring
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site Part E. Corporate Background & Experience
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

PART F: PROJECT ORGANIZATION
RS will lead the Team as Offeror/Sponsor, providing project management support and coordination between the RS
Team members, the DMS, and regulatory entities (County, State, and Federal) for the life of the proposed project.
Raymond Holz from RS will act as Senior Project Manager for the Site. He will oversee all aspects of implementation,
monitoring, and closeout in close collaboration with RS & Team staff, the NC Division of Mitigation Services, and
under the regulatory review of the North Carolina Interagency Review Team. Raymond will be the primary contact
for the DMS on this project. RS' Project Manager, Alex Baldwin will lead day to day operations, land acquisition,
categorical exclusions review, general landowner relations, mitigation plan development, and project compliance.
Work on this project will be performed primarily by staff from the following office locations:
Restoration Systems
1101 Haynes Street Suite 211
Raleigh, NC 27604
/7X7"
Akiom Environmental, Inc.
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
The following graphic provides a visual representation of the Project's organizational structure.
George Howard
(RS)
RS' CEO, Project's Authorized
Representative
RS Support Staff
Alex Baldwin, LSS,
Sr. RS Scientist, CA/QC
PWS
Manager,& Project Manager
(Day -to -Day Operations)
Matthew Harrell
Habitat Specialist
Worth Creech, GC
Construction Manager
Lloyd Glover & Charles Hill
Land Mechanic Designs
Construction Lead
M. McKinney & Josh Merritt
Carolina Silvics
Forestry Lead
NC DMS / NC IRT
Raymond Holz
(RS)
Sr. Project Manager /
Operations Manager
Grant Lewis, LSS
(Axiom)
Stream/Wetland Designer
Kenan Jernigan
(Axiom)
Environmental Lead
Josh Dalton, PE, CPESC
(Sungate)
Lead Engineer (Engineer of
Record)
John Rudolph, PLS
Carolina Silvics
Survey Lead
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)
Part F. Project Organization

TECHNICAL APPROACH AND RESTORATION PLAN
PIERCE TERRACE WETLAND MITIGATION SITE
GATES COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
RFP #16-007907 - FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE NON -RIPARIAN WETLAND MITIGATION CREDITS WITHIN
CATALOGING UNITS 03010203 AND 03010204 OF THE CHOWAN RIVER BASIN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART G:
TECHNICAL APPROACH...................................................................................................................1
1.1
Project Goals and Objectives...........................................................................................................1
1.2
Project Description..........................................................................................................................5
1.2.1 Soils.................................................................................................................................5
1.2.2 Existing Land Use.............................................................................................................6
1.2.3 Nutrient Model................................................................................................................6
1.2.4 Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation(RUSLE).................................................................7
1.2.5 Site Design and Implementation Constraints..................................................................7
1.3
Project Development......................................................................................................................8
1.3.1 Wetland Restoration (Re-establishment)........................................................................8
1.3.2 Forest Restoration...........................................................................................................9
1.3.3 Fence / Easement Marking...........................................................................................10
1.3.4 Nuisance Species Management....................................................................................10
1.4
Proposed Mitigation......................................................................................................................10
1.5
Current Ownership and Long-term Protection.............................................................................11
1.6
Project Phasing..............................................................................................................................11
1.7
Success Criteria.............................................................................................................................12
1.8
Quality Control..............................................................................................................................13
1.9
References.....................................................................................................................................16
LIST OF TABLES
Table1.
RBRP Goals.................................................................................................................................................1
Table2A.
INC WAM Summary....................................................................................................................................2
Table 2B.
Targeted Functions, Goals, Objectives, and Uplift Evaluation...................................................................3
Table 3.
Project Background Information................................................................................................................5
Table4.
Site Soils.....................................................................................................................................................6
Table 5.
Threatened and Endangered Species........................................................................................................7
Table 6A.
Option 1 Mitigation Activities and Credit Potential Summary.................................................................10
Table 6B.
Option 2 Mitigation Activities and Credit Potential Summary.................................................................10
Table7.
Current Ownership..................................................................................................................................11
Table 8.
Proposed Project Schedule......................................................................................................................11
Table9.
Monitoring Schedule................................................................................................................................12
Table10.
Success Criteria........................................................................................................................................12
Table 11.
Compatibility of Performance Criteria to Project Goals and Objectives..................................................12
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)
Table of Contents

APPENDICES
Appendix A. Figures
Figure 1. Site Location
Figure 2. Hydrologic Unit Map
Figure 3. Topography and Drainage Features
Figure 4. Existing Conditions and Soils
Figure 5A. Proposed Conditions Option 1
Figure 5B. Proposed Conditions Option 2
Appendix B. Stream & Wetland Data
NCWAM Forms
Nutrient Model
Soil Boring Logs
RUSLE Equation
Water Budget
Appendix C. NHP Report
Appendix D. Memorandum of Option Agreements & Landowner Authorization Form
Appendix E. Technical Proposal Score Sheet
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site Table of Contents
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

PART G: TECHNICAL APPROACH
1.1 Project Goals and Objectives
The Pierce Terrace Mitigation Site (Site) is located within Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) 03010203040040 and
subbasin 03-01-01. Site goals and objectives are tied to the Chowan River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP) report
(NCEEP 2009), which documents goals for the Chowan River Basin. These goals are summarized below, along with
Site objectives for addressing and achieving the PBRP Goals through the Project's proposed mitigation activities.
Table 1. RBRP Goals
RBRP Goal
Site Objectives Addressing RBRP Goals
1. Restoring 105 acres of wetland
2. Removing from the Site:
Implement wetland, stream, and shoreline restoration
- 1,270 Ibs Nitrogen/yr
projects that reduce sources of sedimentation,
- 21223 Ibs Phosphorus/yr
nutrient pollution, and surface runoff by restoring
3. Ceasing the loss of 503.62 tons of soil/yr from the
hydrology and vegetation, stabilizing banks and
Site
restoring natural geomorphology where appropriate.
4. Planting 107 acres of non -riparian wetland flats & 20
acres of upland buffer
5. Removing 127.5 acres of agriculture from production
Work with landowners, local governments, local
Restoring and protecting at a minimum, 105 acres of
conservancies and other nongovernmental groups to
wetlands immediately adjacent to a NCDMS wetland
protect and restore watersheds through restoration
mitigation site and 1-mile from Merchants Millpond State
and preservation.
Park (MMSP).
Restore streams and riparian buffers to provide shade
Reducing peak flows to receiving waters by restoring
and temperature control and increase in stream
surface and subsurface water storage, thus reducing
woody debris for habitat.
erosive forces in receiving waters.
Restore and protect sensitive aquatic resources to
Restoring and protecting at a minimum, 105 acres of
improve habitat and species diversity through the
wetlands which drain directly to the receiving waters of
restoration of wetlands, streams and riparian buffers.
MMSP.
Develop Local Watershed Plans in the basin to identify
and address water quality impacts through a
consensus based local stakeholder process. These
plans will work to identify specific wetland, stream,
NA
and riparian buffer restoration projects as well as
preservation, enhancement and best management
practice strategies.
Cooperate and partner with local resource agencies to
help leverage federal and state grant funding for
NA
watershed restoration efforts.
The Site is not located in a Local Watershed Planning (LWP) area, Regional Watershed Plan (RWP), or Targeted
Resource Area (TRA); however, the Site encompasses the NCDMS Hofler Wetland Mitigation Site (NCDMS Project
No. 95355) and is adjacent to Merchants Millpond State Park (MMSP), a listed natural area by the North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program.
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site page 1
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

Site specific mitigation goals and objectives were developed through the use of North Carolina Wetland Assessment
Method (NC WAM) analyses of the drained wetland systems at the Site (NC WFAT 2010). Site functional assessment
data forms are available in Appendix B including NC WAM, nutrient and sediment models, and soil boring logs. NC
WAM assessment data is summarized in Table 2A. Metrics targeted to meet the Site's goals and objectives are
depicted in bold.
Table 2A. NC WAM Summary
NC WAM Sub -function Rating Summary
WAM AA
Wetland Type
Hardwood Flat
(1) HYDROLOGY
LOW
(2) Surface Storage & Retention
LOW
(2) Sub -surface Storage and Retention
LOW
(1) WATER QUALITY
LOW
(2) Pathogen change
NA
(2) Particulate Change
NA
(2) Soluble change
NA
(2) Physical Change
NA
(2) Pollution change
LOW
(1) HABITAT
LOW
(2) Physical Structure
LOW
(2) Landscape Patch Structure
LOW
(2) Vegetative Composition
LOW
OVERALL
LOW
Based on NC WAM output, all three of the primary wetland functional metrics (Hydrology, Water Quality, and
Habitat), as well as 6 sub -metrics are under -performing as exhibited by a LOW metric rating. LOW performing
metrics are to be targeted for functional uplift through mitigation activities, goals and objectives, as well as,
monitoring and success criteria.
Wetland metrics targeted for functional uplift, tied to defined Site -specific project goals and objectives are presented
in the following table.
Space Purposefully Left Blank
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site page 2
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

.Q
C
m
N
U
O
m
O
vi
C
O
Z
C
7
LL
N
m
H
,n
c >.
on
`°
m
a)N
C:
>
—
O
L
N
m
O
m
41
ate+ ate+ 7
N N N
— z
O
C: C
•L O
N
Q
E O
N
E
av
}'
U
C (n
h.0 7
0 ,+-+
U1
OL O
O U
a
h0
m
u
i
O
C: (A
G0
U1 _0
U
L
O LS
C
O
C
°�° O
0�
m
c
v 0
U
U
M
U
W
-a aO_
m
C
t4
E
v U
0 C:�
-O co
O N
Q-
a
d
0
+�-+
C
O
O
a
o
n
O c-
c CL
-6
o �'
°
t+
m
N
U
C O
41
41 0
7
N
'i GA
E
N N
=
u
N
O
41
CL
W
L
E
-0>±,'_.L(A
-6
C:
C U)
C:
O E
�n
C
L
O W
C
� b.0
v O
-6
:3m
>
ED
`n
O
a) .O N a-.+
>O
Q
L
0
>
\ c
7
O
7
\ u
m
C;
C
Y
N
U1
L O L
Q
U1
L Q
7
�'
v m
N
N
Z L
N UA
U C
+-+ p
c
.�
v�
+-+
7
41
u v
—
O
O
O
a:+
C
O
Q
u
E
U1 -a
_� coo
>
N i
v
OA
CO aO+
'0
O
CL M
U
O
7
C
O
L W>
C
O
U1
41 N
>
tCo 7
'n
N
0
+-+ Q
O
O
O
c
O
v i
C
•�
w N y
Q h0
C
W v�i �n
}'
7--
to
C
U
O N
a-+
��
O
m
p
C_ N
O
:�
7
U1
N U1
U1
i i
_c -O
C L
_
.c w O
> -6 Q
3:
110 Q
C
(�6
N
> U
^, N _�
O V
_
N
C
C
m
m 2i
.�
L
U_
O
•� (L6 -0
t4 C
?�
•� U
>j
N
L E m
i LO
U L
N
U
L
0
v m
p
O
U
\ 41
•O
+�
O
CO 0
CL
L
Q
v
O
-6
C: L
•m m
C N
0 I 7
O
C
41
C C
I m
of
�c
O
t
v v u
E
'� +'
v
� t
v(
O
O
+-+
a
O O
L
L o
a o -a
+-+ },
� o �,
E
z o
Ln
O
,� z o—±
+-+ L
o-0
°
N
L1
L
O
Q W
N
N W
v
N
O
C
^ O O
41 O
_
m
O
U1
� v
0
C
O
>
� •�
C L
GA 0
O
t y.,
a_+
U
—
+�.+
t4 O
O
U
a_+
W C
L.
0 >j
N -O
>
L
O
O O 3: �
-O
L
U1
Wu
N
N
Lnc:
7
y.,
O
O O
W 41
7 >
O
U1 U
N U1
O OLO
L
h.0
N `i E W O
C
O .Q >
t
N
U
Q
m
—
a�
U1
O
CL U Q m
._
-O
1A
•i
V
•i m
41 C
}.� 7
U a-.+
41 L
U
N
>
C W 'L C
am+ C
f6
ECL
v
_
E�
: C:°
v a
-
)
m O
)
°u
mv
v v
C v
+� +�
E
+� O
E
c N
3
m +�
+v h0
O
O N N
i1 av
41 .0
+-' 7 U
�n E
E D
m
C -a O m
ov
E
vC:_0 c E
-0 co
x >'
'O
am+ C O m
N hA
E w
=
L
4.2 N
E LS
a% :
L
> O
O Q L C
"'
C_ O 0
°
E� C 3
m
m
O
O O
a CL
m
v c_r 0 O
cr m a U -0
O
C7
•
•
C
of
O
41
C
C
O
-
t
CJ
O
�
*'
N
� -0
C
C
U C
0
?
O
0
i ,0
ct
7
L1
-a
d'
C:m
W
a)0
�n v
N
�n L
O
N
F
a
a
N
=
N
bb,O
m
F-
P�

�
§
k
C
2
±
_
�
2
m
k
;
�
0
�
k
@
LL
2
ƒ
F-
m
e
: ° _
k fu
) 7 %
cu
/ 2 : \ @
c .E '- a \
q
ƒ k / /
/ a)
tE
_ --2 m
= : / / 0 &
§
�
§ 5 = � _
' @ E f 5 k
/
k_
) 0 ) _
\
m
\ \ 2 \ § ®
�
\ a / )
k
2 / _
2 2 E {
=
.
= % \ :
% 2 e ;
( a)CL \ a)\
\ Z 7 2 p
� ;
o
_
a
0
/ a a
2 § @ m
@
u
) ° M A & °
S
}
; > = >.
�/t7
\2 ,
'
17
g a) o _ \
\ 2 E$ k m ®
: E \ w 7 \ a / §
W ___ r ;
E ƒ 2 / / ) 2
_
m g ®® + _ ® _
�.
_
_ _ _ 2
¥
E ° _ \ E § ;
± u \ (2 » ® f m m
]
m = 2 = = t
_
\
k
2 \ 0 { \ _
—
a
®
= m 2 y g ® §
@
g
\
§ t E{= 2 2 m m\
±
/ ®
\ 2 § -Q § 7 . \ § '=
e
o
�
u ® 0 _ - -0
§ 2
2 -E
\
§
\ § : § * { k /
/
= _ ; ƒ ; @
-
J
\2
_
& _ = Q. _ —
s _0
9
�
& E
/ 2 � ` § / ° f / ({
%
% > _ § — 3 % _
—
k
\
\
\ / / } \ / \ / ƒ (
} }
u
E CL
S
/
/
2
\ ƒ
&e
m
/ \
$
.
( u
) 2
\
« J / _
/ � f /
C
±
2 / k
w
/ > E
\
m
$
» u
F

1.2 Project Description
The Site is located approximately 2 miles west of Sunbury, 5 miles northeast of Gatesville, and immediately east of
MMSP (Figure 1, Appendix A). General project information is included in the following table.
Table 3. Project Background Information
Project Information
Site
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site
County
Gates
Easement Area
127.5 acres
Site Coordinates (latitude & latitude)
36.431500,-76.649894
Site Elevations
11 feet
Site Receiving Streams
Bennett's Creek and Lassiter Swamp
Physiography &Watershed Information
Physiographic Province
Coastal Plain
Level IV Ecoregion
Mid -Atlantic Flatwoods
River Basin
Chowan
USGS 14-digit HUC
03010203040040
NCDWR Sub -basin
03-01-01
Targeted Local Watershed
Yes
LWP, RWP, TRA*
No, No, No
Water Quality Information
Receiving Stream Index Number
25-17
Best Use Classification
C, NSW
303d List
No
Drainage Area & Land Use Information
Existing Site Land Use
Soybeans and Cotton
Site Drainage Area
NA
Site Drainage Area Land Use
NA
Site Drainage Area Percentage Impervious Surface
<2%
*LWP=Local Watershed Plan, RWP=Regional Watershed Plan, TRA=Targeted Resource Area
1.2.1 Soils
Based on Web Soil Survey mapping (USDA 2019), the Site contains the soil series outlined in the following table.
Existing wetlands and drained hydric soils were mapped by licensed soil scientists (NC LSS # 1233 and NC LSS # 1297)
on July 31, 2019 as soils of the Bladen and Pantego series (Figure 4, Appendix A); soil boring logs are included in
Appendix B.
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site page 5
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

Table 4. Site Soils
Map Unit
Map Unit Name
Hydric
Description
Symbol
(Classification)
Status
This series consists of poorly drained soils found on
Bladen loam
depressions and flats. The parent material is clayey and loamy
BnA
(TypicAlbaqults)
Hydric
marine deposits and/or fluviomarine deposits. Depth to the
seasonal high-water table is 0-12 inches. Depth to restrictive
features is more than 80 inches. Slopes are 0-2 percent.
Non-hydric,
This series consists of moderately well -drained soils found on
Craven fine sandy loam
may contain
flats on marine terraces and ridges on marine terraces. The
CrA, CrB
(Aquic Hapudults)
hydric
parent material is clayey marine deposits. Depth to the
inclusions
seasonal high-water table is 24-36 inches. Depth to restrictive
features is more than 80 inches. Slopes are 0-4 percent.
This series consists of moderately well -drained soils found on
Non-hydric,
flats on marine terraces and broad interstream divides on
GoA
Goldsboro fine sandy loam
may contain
marine terraces. The parent material is loamy marine
(Aquic Paleudults)
hydric
deposits. Depth to the seasonal high-water table is 24-36
inclusions
inches. Depth to restrictive features is more than 80 inches.
Slopes are 0-2 percent.
Non-hydric,
This series consists of somewhat poorly drained soils found on
Lenoir loam
may contain
flats on broad interstream divides and terraces. The parent
LeA
(Aeric Paleaquults)
hydric
material is clayey marine deposits. Depth to the seasonal
inclusions
high-water table is 12-30 inches. Depth to restrictive features
is more than 80 inches. Slopes are 0-2 percent.
This series consists of very poorly drained soils found on flats
on marine terraces and broad interstream divides on marine
PnA
Pantego fine sandy loam
Hydric
terraces. The parent material is loamy marine deposits.
(Umbric Paleaquults)
Depth to the seasonal high-water table is 0-12 inches. Depth
to restrictive features is more than 80 inches. Slopes are 0-1
percent.
1.2.2 Existing Land Use
Intensive agricultural practices exist across the entire Site. Agricultural fields within and adjacent to the Site are
subject to routine fertilizer and herbicide applications including poultry litter. Site ditches are excavated on an annual
basis to remove sediment loss from agricultural practices as the result of traditional plowing methods and fields left
fallow outside of the growing season. All native vegetation and woody material has been removed from the Site. In
general, all wetland functions associated with hydrology, water quality, and habitat have been removed.
Adjacent land management activities include silviculture and agriculture practices. These areas include lateral
ditching, shallow surface drains, subsurface drains, and planting beds to rapidly remove surface and subsurface
water from these poorly drained soils which contribute nutrient, sediment, and fecal coliform into Merchant
Millpond State Park.
1.2.3 Nutrient Model
A preliminary land use nutrient model was developed for the Site. The model uses estimates of nitrogen and
phosphorus inputs from livestock (USDA 2015 and USDA 1992), nutrient management for typical fields, pasture, and
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site page 6
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

hay crops in North Carolina (NC State 2016), and nutrient inputs for urban areas (SMRC 2016). Model inputs include
Site area, percent land use, rainfall, number and species of livestock, and row -crop type. Using published values of
nitrogen and phosphorus the model predicts the nutrient input of fertilizer and/or waste generated by livestock
associated with land use. A copy of the model input and output is presented in Appendix B.
Based on the land use nutrient model, cessation of land use activities at the Site may result in a direct reduction of
1,270 pounds of nitrogen and 2,223 pounds of phosphorus per year. In addition, direct evidence of bio-agriculture
waste application was observed during field reviews. Bio-agricultural waste not included in the nutrient model
estimates; however, cessation of the application of these materials represents a functional uplift to the Site.
1.2.4 Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE)
The Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE) estimates soil loss from rill and interrill (sheet and rill) erosion
caused by rainfall and its associated overland flow. The equation uses rainfall pattern, soil type, topography, crop
system and management practices to generate long-term average annual rates of erosion on field slopes (USDA
2001). The structure of the RUSLE is based on the Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE), which is given by:
A=RKLSCP Where,
A = average annual soil loss from rill and interrill erosion caused by rainfall and its associated overland
flow (tons ac-1 yr 1),
R = the factor for climatic erosivity,
K = the factor for soil erodibility measured under a standard condition,
L = the factor for slope length,
S = the factor for slope steepness,
C = the factor for cover -management, and
P = the factor for support practices.
Based on current land use conditions and agricultural practices at the Site, 501.65 tons per year of soil are lost,
contributing to downstream erosion and sedimentation. Using an average soil density of 2.65g/cm3 (USDA, 2019),
it can be determined that 224.65 cubic yards of soil are lost each year on Site, or 1.768 cubic yards per acre. Equation
inputs and results are provided in Appendix B.
1.2.5 Site Design and Implementation Constraints
No known Site constraints, that may hinder proposed mitigation activities, were identified during field surveys.
Potential constraints reviewed include the following.
Threatened & Endangered Species
Listed federally protected species are listed are summarized in the following table along with potential habitat and
a preliminary biological conclusion for each (USFWS 2019).
Table 5. Threatened and Endangered Species
Common Name
Habitat at
Biological
(Scientific Name)
Federal Status
Site
Conclusion
American alligator
Threatened (S/A)
No
No Effect
(Alligator mississippiensis)
Northern long-eared bat
(Myotis septentrionalis)
Threatened
No
No Effect
Red -cockaded woodpecker
Endangered
No
No Effect
(Picoides borealis)
West Indian manatee
Endangered
No
No Effect
(Trichechus manatus)
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site page 7
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

Cultural Resources
Field visits were conducted at the Site in July 2019 and no structures or other features that may be eligible for
inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places were identified within proposed easement boundaries; however,
coordination with State Historic Preservation Office will occur prior to construction activities to determine if any
significant cultural resources are present.
North Carolina Natural Heritage Elements
A query of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database indicates there are no records for rare
species, important natural communities, natural areas, or conservation/managed areas within the proposed project
boundary. Within a one -mile radius of the Site, NCNHP lists several element occurrences (Appendix C). In addition,
the Site surrounds a DMS conservation easement (Figures 4-5, Appendix A).
FEMA
Inspection of the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map 3720699800J, Panel 6998, effective July 20, 2009 indicates that
the Site is not located within a mapped flood zone. Therefore, a "Conditional Letter of Map Revision" (CLOMR) will
not be required for this Site.
Utilities
A powerline crosses the Site near Silver Springs Road. Discussions with Dominion Energy have been initiated to move
the powerline out of the Site. Utilities should not pose a hindrance to Site development.
Air Transport Facilities
No air transport facilities are located within 5 miles of the Site. The nearest airport is Liles Field airport located 5.12
miles to the north in Corapeake, NC.
1.3 Project Development
1.3.1 Wetland Restoration (Re-establishment)
Alternatives for wetland re-establishment are designed to restore a fully functioning wetland system, which will
provide surface water storage, nutrient cycling, removal of imported elements and compounds, and will create a
variety and abundance of wildlife habitat.
Portions of the Site underlain by hydric soils have been impacted by ditching, vegetative clearing, agriculture
plowing, and other land disturbances associated with land use management. Wetland re-establishment options will
focus on the restoration of vegetative communities and historic groundwater tables, and the re-establishment of
soil structure and microtopographic variations. In addition, the construction of (or provisions for) surface water
storage depressions (ephemeral pools) will also add an important component to groundwater restoration activities.
Large woody debris/material will also be added to the Site to facilitate habitat development and provide a carbon
source for development of wetland functions. These activities will result in the re-establishment of approximately
105 acres of jurisdictional non -riparian wetlands.
Ditch Improvement
A key aspect of this wetland restoration project involves maintaining suitable, arable farmland outside the
conservation easement. Landowner requirements include leaving drainage features outside the easement and
upgrading two ditches leading away from the Site to keep the adjacent farmland suitable for agriculture. This will
require connecting a ditch north of the Site through a culverted agriculture road crossing and directing surface water
away from the Site towards the north. A second ditch running parallel to an entrance road will be cleaned,
potentially deepened, and stabilized. These improvements/actions will result in a long-term balance between
achievement of Site goals/objectives and maintaining adjacent land uses.
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site page 8
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

To maintain adjacent agriculture operations, several surface swales are proposed to direct Site hydrology to the
offsite ditch network. Surface swales are expected to be approximately 0.5 ft in depth and are proposed to be
disconnected draws that direct water away from agriculture fields towards drainage features. If necessary, drop
structures may be used to hinder headcut development through the Site. Drop structures will be constructed of
woody debris, rock or marl, and or natural fiber matting. Drop structures are not proposed to be constructed within
the boundaries of the wetland restoration area and will not be included in mitigation crediting areas.
Water Budget
A preliminary water budget for the was calculated to determine the Site's potential for meeting wetland hydrology
success criteria. Considering the wetland type being restored, a hardwood flat, the water budget equation was
modified to only account for precipitation as the hydrological input and evapotranspiration as the hydrological
output associated with this non -riparian wetland type.
In order to calculate the Site's water budget, monthly precipitation and evapotranspiration rate data were acquired
from the BUCKS weather station data available from NC Climate retrieval and Observations Network of the Southeast
database. Based on the available data the water budget yields ^3.4-feet surplus of water across the entire 105-acre
Site on an annual basis. Considering the limited hydrologic outlets associated with the Site the proposed wetland
project will be able to meet the wetland hydrology requirement during years of normal precipitation. Equation inputs
and results are provided in Appendix B.
Wetland Buffer
Approximately 22.5 acres of the Site has been mapped as non-hydric, or Class B hydric soil and is not currently
proposed for wetland restoration credit. This portion of the Site may, if necessary, be excavated for ditch backfill
material. The areas will be excavated to form closed, elliptical depressions no more than 1 foot in depth. Within
these areas surficial soils will be removed, stockpiled, and redistributed across the borrow area. These areas are
expected to develop wetland features of soil, hydrology, and vegetation and are proposed as non -crediting wetland
buffers. At this time, we are not able to quantify the area of wetland creation until a detailed cut fill analysis has
been completed; however, it is expected that the RFP need will be met by wetland restoration areas.
NCDMS Hofler Wetland Mitigation Site
A benefit of this project includes the proximity to the Hofler mitigation site, and the opportunity to incorporate the
Site with an existing NCDMS conservation easement. In 2018 a network of ditches were excavated along the
agricultural field immediately adjacent to the conservation easement of the Hofler mitigation site. The proposed
project will fill these ditches to connect the hydrology between the two projects. The proposed Site includes wetland
buffers within the conservation easement to avoid installation of future ditches in adjacent areas that will remain in
agricultural production. IRS is also proposing to remove the existing berm within the conservation easement of the
Hofler site to allow full restoration of surface hydrology for both projects.
1.3.2 Forest Restoration
Restoration of forest allows for development and expansion of characteristic species across the landscape. Ecotonal
changes between community types contribute to diversity and provide secondary benefits, such as enhanced
feeding and nesting opportunities for mammals, birds, amphibians, and other wildlife.
Revegetating the Site will provide overall system stability, shade, and wildlife habitat. In addition, viable
communities will improve system biogeochemical function by filtering pollutants from overland and shallow
subsurface flows.
Variations in vegetative planting will occur based on topography and hydrologic condition of soils. Vegetative species
composition will be based on Reference Forest Ecosystems (RFEs), site -specific features, and community descriptions
from Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina (Schafale and Weakley 1990). Community
associations to be utilized include: 1) Nonriverine Wet Hardwood Forest and 2) Nonriverine Swamp Forest.
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site page 9
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

Bare -root seedlings within the Nonriverine Wet Hardwood Forest and Nonriverine Swamp Forest will be planted at
a density of approximately 680 stems per acre on 8-foot centers. Planting will be performed between November 15
and March 15 to allow plants to stabilize during the dormant period and set root during the spring season. Potential
species planted within the Site may include the following.
Nonriverine Wet Hardwood Forest
1. Bald cypress (Taxodium distichum)
2. Swamp chestnut oak (Quercus michauxii)
3. Laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia)
4. Cherrybark oak (Quercus pagoda)
5. Tulip tree (Liriodendron tulipifera)
6. American elm (Ulmus americana)
7. Swamp tupelo (Nyssa sylvatica var. biflora)
8. River birch (Betula nigra)
Nonriverine Swamp Forest
1. Bald cypress (Taxodium distichum)
2. Swamp tupelo (Nyssa sylvatica var. biflora)
3. Atlantic white cedar (Chamaecyparis thyoides)
4. Pond pine (Pinus serotina)
5. Tulip tree (Liriodendron tulipifera)
6. Sweetbay (Magnolia virginiana)
7. Red bay (Persia borbonia)
Note: Some portions of the Site may be more characterized by a Wet Pine Flatwoods vegetative community;
however, final vegetative communities will be determined from a reference forest during the detailed planning
phase of the project.
1.3.3 Fence / Easement Marking
The entire easement area will be fenced and/or appropriately marked to identify the easement boundaries per
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and Interagency Review Team (IRT) requirements.
1.3.4 Nuisance Species Management
Cattails and other potential nuisance species will be monitored over the course of the 7-year monitoring period.
Appropriate actions to ameliorate any negative impacts regarding vegetation development and/or water
management will occur on an as -needed basis.
1.4 Proposed Mitigation
Mitigation outlined in this proposal is designed to provide the following, as calculated in accordance with the
requirements stipulated in RFP #16-007907.
Table 6A. Option 1 Mitigation Activities and Credit Potential Summary
Mitigation Type
Wetland Type
Acreage
Mitigation
Ratio
Riparian Riverine
WMU
Re-establishment
Non -Riparian
50
1:1
50
Rehabilitation
Non -Riparian
---
1.5:1
---
Totals
50 acres
50 WMUs
Table 6B. Option 2 Mitigation Activities and Credit Potential Summary
Mitigation Type
Wetland Type
Acreage
Mitigation
Ratio
Riparian Riverine
WMU
Re-establishment
Non -Riparian
105
1:1
105
Rehabilitation
Non -Riparian
---
1.5:1
---
Totals
105 acres
105 WMUs
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site page 10
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

1.5 Current Ownership and Long-term Protection
Current property ownership and parcel information is as follows:
Table 7. Current Ownership
Current Property Owner
Parcel ID Number
S & M Farms, LLC
6998127746000
Hellen H Pierce
6998161267000
Restoration Systems has an Agreement for the Purchase and Sale of a Conservation Easement with both property
owners. A memorandum of each Agreement is recorded at the Gates County Register of Deeds (Appendix D). Each
Agreement has an examination period of 18-months. Upon approval of the contract, Restoration Systems will place
a conservation easement over the subject parcel; such easement will be conveyed to the State of North Carolina.
Restoration Systems will remain responsible for project implementation, achievement of success criteria, and
management actions. A long-term management plan that in general will include protecting the Site from
encroachment, trespass, clearing, and other violations that interfere with conservation purposes will be developed
for the Site and incorporated into the mitigation plan. Other activities may be incorporated based on site -specific
considerations.
1.6 Project Phasing
A tentative project phasing schedule is presented below and commences upon contract execution.
Table 8. Proposed Project Schedule
Task
Project Milestones
Months from Contract Execution
Task 1
Regulatory Site Visit & Environmental Screening
3
Task 2
Submit Recorded Conservation Easement on the Site
12
Task 3
Mitigation Plan (Final Draft) and Financial Assurance
12
Task 4
Mitigation Site Earthwork Complete
24
Task 5
Mitigation Site Planting and Installation of Monitoring Devices
28*
Task 6
Baseline Monitoring Report (including As -built Drawings)
28*
Task 7
Submit Monitoring Report #1 to NCDMS
Dec. after Task 6
Task 8
Submit Monitoring Report #2 to NCDMS
Dec. - 2yrs after implementation
Task 9
Submit Monitoring Report #3 to NCDMS
Dec. - 3yrs after implementation
Task 10
Submit Monitoring Report #4 to NCDMS
Dec. - 4yrs after implementation
Task 11
Submit Monitoring Report #5 to NCDMS
Dec. - 5yrs after implementation
Task 12
Submit Monitoring Report #6 to NCDMS
Dec. - 6yrs after implementation
Task 13
Submit Monitoring Report #7 to NCDMS and Complete Project
Close-out Process
Dec. - 7yrs after implementation
and Spring after submittal of
Report #7
* Time frame is dependent upon seasonal conditions at completion of Site implementation.
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site page 11
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

1.7 Success Criteria
The following tables summarize the monitoring schedule and success criteria for this project, which follow the
October 24, 2016 NC Interagency Review Team Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation
Update.
Table 9. Monitoring Schedule
Resource
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Wetlands
Vegetation
Visual Assessment
Report Submittal
Table 10. Success Criteria
Wetland Hydrology
• Saturation or inundation within the upper 12 inches of the soil surface for, at a minimum, 10 percent of the
growing season, during average climatic conditions (as per the 2016 stream mitigation guidelines).
Vegetation
• Within planted portions of the Site, a minimum of 320 stems per acre must be present at year 3; a
minimum of 260 stems per acre must be present at year 5; and a minimum of 210 stems per acre must be
present at year 7.
• In the Coastal Plain counties, trees must average 7 feet in height at year 5, and 10 feet in height at year 7 in
each plot.
• Planted and volunteer stems are counted, provided they are included in the approved planting list for the
Site; natural recruits not on the planting list may be considered by the IRT on a case -by -case basis.
• Any single species can only account for up to 50% of the required number of stems within any vegetation
plot.
Table 11. Compatibility of Performance Criteria to Project Goals and Objectives
Goals
Objectives
Success Criteria
(1) HYDROLOGY
• Till agriculture ditches
• Attain Wetland Hydrology
Minimize downstream
• Deep rip soils to reduce compaction and increase
Success Criteria
flooding to the
soil surface roughness
• Attain Vegetation Success
maximum extent
• Plant native hardwood forest
Criteria
possible.
• Protect the Site with a perpetual conservation
• Conservation Easement
easement
recorded
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site page 12
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

Table 11. Compatibility of Performance Criteria to Proiect Goals and Obiectives (Continued)
Goals
Objectives
Success Criteria
(1) WATER QUALITY
• Remove agricultural land/inputs
Remove direct
. Provide surface roughness and reduce compaction
nutrient and pollutant
through deep ripping/plowing
• Attain Wetland Hydrology
inputs from the Site
Success Criteria
and reduce
• Provide a buffer between wetlands and adjacent
• Attain Vegetation Success
contributions to
existing ditches and agriculture fields
Criteria
downstream waters.
• Plant woody riparian buffer
• Restore/enhance jurisdictional wetlands
(1) HABITAT
• Deep rip soils to reduce compaction and increase
soil surface roughness
• Plant native hardwood forest to provide organic
• Attain Wetland Hydrology
Improve habitat for
matter and shade
Success Criteria
wildlife dependent
• Increase interstream flat wetland area adjacent to
• Attain Vegetation Success
upon interstream
Merchants Millpond State Park
Criteria
flats.
• Develop a wetland hardwood flat adjacent to pine
• Conservation Easement
plantations and agriculture fields increasing
recorded
ecotonal boundaries
• Restore/enhance jurisdictional wetlands
1.8 Quality Control
Our core business at IRS is full -delivery ecosystem restoration (usually within the context of compensatory
mitigation); as such, our projects are repeatedly scrutinized, and more importantly, our compensation is tied directly
to project quality. The continued success of our firm is directly related to our ability to continue to meet the cost,
quality, and schedule requirements of our projects. Thus, quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) is of the
utmost importance to our compensation and reputation.
The RS Team's client/consultant collaborative, multi -disciplinary, team approach ensures the work product is of the
highest caliber and professionalism. The approach allows IRS Team members to be involved in the project
development and design, and to stay involved throughout construction and monitoring phases. This model
incorporates QA/QC into every aspect of design, construction, and monitoring. The very nature of the IRS Team
approach results in internal QA/QC by consultants before documents are sent to IRS for additional technical and peer
reviews. As IRS receives deliverables from our consultants, IRS assigns the appropriate IRS staff based on background
and familiarity with the project to provide a technical review of the materials. Once the technical review is complete,
a second IRS professional provides an independent peer review before the product delivery to the client. This process
provides detailed oversight from multiple individuals to provide high -quality deliverables and maintain project
schedules.
The IRS QA/QC program is made up of a broad range of measures, both general and specific, to ensure that all
deliverables submitted to the contracting organization meet projected schedules, follow appropriate formats, and
comply with applicable laws, regulations, and permits.
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site page 13
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

♦ General Measures:
• Staff Qualifications — RS employs personnel who are trained or experienced in varied specific aspects
of environmental restoration. Examples include regulatory affairs, permitting, design, geomorphology,
chemistry, biology, soils, Geographic Informational Systems (GIS), invasive species management.
• Field Training — Staff members attend periodic workshops for training in pertinent topics to improve
and maintain necessary skills related to stream/wetland design and construction. RS periodically holds
internal workshops and field studies led by experienced staff members to ensure that the team of
Project Managers is up-to-date on current practices and technology. Staff members have also attended
stream/wetland restoration and water quality workshops, including those held by North Carolina State
University's Stream Restoration Institute (SRI), focusing on proper procedures related to ecological
restoration practices.
Internal Experience - Office staff members attend regular workshops lead by professional organizations
to remain current on best practices and aware of new evolutions in environmental restoration. A
support team backs all projects. Senior level professionals are consulted to guide the process from start
to finish successfully.
♦ Specific Measures:
• Project Implementation - The core of RS's project implementation QA/QC program utilizes points of
task changeover within the restoration process. Procedural verification steps at each of these
changeover points provide opportunities for control and correction, minimizing waste while ensuring
a project meets its objectives.
• Quality Control — Ecosystem restoration projects
0 Site evaluation
■ Identify and document constraints, on and off -site, that will affect restoration objectives,
design, and construction
o Design evaluation
■ Verify design meets objectives and is practicable given construction constraints and site -
specific conditions
o Construction plan evaluation
■ Ensure construction plan is consistent with permit conditions and efficiently implements
the design (i.e., limits number of phases, efficient mobilization timeline, etc.)
o Construction environmental and permit compliance
■ Routine inspection of construction activities to ensure environmental compliance and
that all work is performed according to specifications and limitations of acquired permits
o Design and construction reconciliation
■ Reconcile construction drawings with implementation routinely, especially before
transitioning between construction phases
o Construction drawing and as -built reconciliation
■ Verify the accuracy of as -built drawings and reconcile with construction drawings, noting
deviations and their explanations
o Site close out
Confirm planting was performed with appropriate species composition and density
Check that all excess construction materials have been removed and all
features/structures are in a completed condition
• Assignment of specific tasks and responsibilities — Specific tasks that occur throughout the life of a
project are assigned to specific individuals who are trained and/or experienced to perform that task.
All arrangements are overseen by senior management.
♦ Project Implementation:
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site page 14
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

RS' Implementation and Construction QA/QC program is a collaborative effort between the Sr. Project
Manager and Construction Manager. Either the project manager or the construction manager (or both) will
be on -site, along with other trained personnel listed above, during construction hours to ensure
environmental compliance and the appropriate implementation of the project's design.
• Deliverable Preparation — a series of measures are taken in the preparation of deliverables to ensure
each product meets the expectations of the customer in a timely manner.
• Checklists and Templates — RS staff has developed internal guidelines, checklists and templates for the
preparation of all deliverables to ensure compliance with appropriate requirements and schedules.
Checklists are created to ensure that all required paperwork is included when assembling submittal
packages and for easy delegation of the workflow.
• Peer Review of Documents — All submitted deliverables are reviewed by several qualified individuals.
Once a document has been generated internally or received from an assigned consultant, it is entered
into a three -round process of internal review. It is first reviewed by staff members with experience in
editing, and then the document is passed on to staff members with specific expertise in a given area to
further ensure accuracy. Finally, where applicable, maps and diagrams are reviewed by an experienced
GIS Managerfor accuracy. Once all comments have been made, the document is edited and distributed
for a final round of review by staff members and the assigned Project Manager before packaging.
• Prolect Managers' Meetings — All managers meet weekly to update company management on the
status of each project, including the projected future timeline of tasks. In-between each meeting, there
are daily communication exchanges when project timeline milestones are reached or immediate
coordination is needed.
• Prolect Coordination and Tracking — Restoration Systems' Project Manager and Construction Manager
utilize appropriate computer software to produce a Gantt chart for each project. These charts
graphically display the schedule for each project and are used to identify potential delays, overload
points, and other issues related to schedules. Each chart is reviewed weekly at the Project Managers'
meeting.
♦ 24/7 Response Time:
RS central location and commitment to the highest degree of service is epitomized by its 24-hour response
protocol. RS commits to respond to all clients, landowners, and consultants within a 24-hour or sooner
period. RS' redundancy of management is key to the success of this program. RS holds weekly project
manager meetings to ensure if the named project manager is unavailable to respond, another project
manager can answer the call and determine the best course of action. Therefore, RS can accommodate any
situation that our clients, landowners, or consultants might have under needing immediate attention from
RS personnel.
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site page 15
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

1.9 References
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP). 2009. Chowan River Basin Restoration Priorities (online).
Available:
https://deg.nc.gov/about/divisions/mitigation-services/dms-planning/watershed-planning-documents/chowan-
river-basin (July 26, 2019).
North Carolina State University (NC State 2016). NC State University and A&T State University Cooperative
Extension Resources. 2016 North Carolina Agricultural Chemicals Manual. Available:
http://content.ces.ncsu.edu/north-carolina-agricultural-chemicals-manual
North Carolina Wetland Functional Assessment Team (NC WFAT) 2010. N.C. Wetland Assessment Method (NC
WAM) User Manual. Version 4.1.
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina: Third
Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. Raleigh, North Carolina.
Stormwater Manager's Resource Center (SMRC). 2016. The Simple Method to Calculate Urban Stormwater Loads.
Available:
http://www.stormwatercenter.net/monitorini;%20and%20assessment/simple%20meth/simple.htm
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2016. Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory
Mitigation Update.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1992. Natural Resources Conservation Service. Agricultural
Waste Management Handbook. Available at
http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/technical/nra/dma/?cid=nres143 014211
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2001. Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation Version 2 Handbook.
Available at online https://www.nres.usda.gov/Internet/FSE DOCUMENTS/nres144p2 025079.pdf
(August 8, 2019)
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2015. Animal Manure Management (NRCS) available at
http://www. n res. u sd a.gov/wps/po rta I/n res/d eta i I/n hj/tech n i ca I/cp/cta/?
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2019. Web Soil Survey (online). Available:
http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx [July 26, 2019].
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2018. Endangered Species, Threatened Species, Federal Species of
Concern, and Candidate Species, Gates County, North Carolina (online, updated June 27, 2018). Available:
https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/gates.htmi [July 30, 2019].
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site page 16
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

APPENDIX A
FIGURES
Figure 1. Site Location
Figure 2. Hydrologic Unit Map
Figure 3. Topography and Drainage Area
Figure 4. Existing Conditions and Soils
Figure 5A. Proposed Conditions Option 1
Figure 5B. Proposed Conditions Option 2
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site Appendices
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

O O O
U W U o 0 0
r5 (� T Z J p NwN
yy Z W O 7 O LL
O F O 0 N UTOM
W Q N O v
"6 U 0 Q Z m.L
C N
a 0 WF N N Y A p
a a d� F o o in a
• • ` Zlo
w
,I' • i - 1 N C GI ?i Z f7
4 O
ti f�. 1• ��1+ �i J v fa0 M J C N _
r a
� CIL
v 0 �E q u,�tNy m z"
I} 4� r g �9 �LL�uz vN A m ?
�_� a =
10 m U .. '-OUP A A..A o-ro O
tip �� m_, =Z7�J A 6 E�
Z = r COO O Z oE C C r r N N n
'..may •LS U 9 K W y E O o E 0 0 o C o M M
z a w ro c E m y o r o 0-- O O 2 w o
A t._==E_v
O� 1 ooy co E E o EEEE;c NY
P s6 C
O OD d r..... �M r NJ
• V
co
. . . . . . . . . . .
p
r} 4I���}'r f
i 4 I
150
o
z
o
v Tv

qLLJ / o / } _
�� - 88 ±
$ Wz / gk a
�( » 22 0
| ` 22 / > t E
2 �� 7 6
! / z a 5 3 /
.16 _
(19
2 2
m a :
§0 @ -
\- E
\_j/ \ (
! ` .
/\
\�
:re.
p .
)D ®� -
07\£�
�
®6 d

W W ° 0 0
U F C) } o 0
• �'� a a W N J M 0 uJ
�w of
M
o WQ 0 �zz7
~ ¢ U
00 a qaw z LL
OLL
o W 0 6 0 m m o
a a F o o (n a
U
1
4 X)
E
J ~ E
• W
ov
` w_o
O
O O
C C)
O U)
U �
U �
C)
N Z
� C
U
N '
C d W
wooJ
N
O�
0
�n
Z — Q oI

U w C� 0 0 0
fn ato N
v (n z UZJ 0 o W
Y
w 0 O 0 Q ° of
W N 001 Ln
3 w0z - LL
a
A O
o o cn a`
r
l/`rT-' =E z v t'� � '��✓%ic-
�`ti JIB o
wID
co
w 0 rn rn
' �: '`y, 1��� _ �1 m `• +'j�,�,,/1 t o u)
C o h ocj�wo
Cie
m w
6 C
_ _ f --
_ _ - _ - _ T'a w (7 (n w w z ❑ �o
m -
U P roti. �•`,i. �. y 0 0 0 O
a ;
a- - - - - - - - 1
tt
1
1
1
.,- - - - - - - - - - - - -
1
1
1
1
/
r
r
It
0
0
Z �Q
It
X
w
a
J
oLL
0
�n

U w O 60 0 0
z x W Z O M o
LU
WO tnOZ Q Q.A
OHO
wQ v
o
W Oz ILz~ 9 L+
N U(9 �00 IL
IL 6
Q Z
Q N O w 0
p I ? m N l
E
II w O
t.� I .. ' � �� � { � � � �N � Y to
F. r a aai `o m
r m n m a)
►, w w u m m w
O Q J O O c
;t m m
m .m
o
N
Q ° o
t c Z o a U
'•\ A U U a H w w w a O U J
1� N X N (4 .0. .0. O C
\• \ .o a w c7 a` m co
t ;
Y
\
II
Q O�
w ❑o
Q x6
( C
O U
z E
H N O
Q � C
w ww
z
w C N
iD O
H ?o N
� O L
w a
U �❑
a
0 0�
Ca
z � o
ry
oLL
O'
O

U w C) 0 0 0
w Z N > 0 � O
LU
w O in Z Q W
OFO
w Q U Q z IL0~ 9 LO
Q Z
.
0
. IL
Q N O w C� N U A U
a` 0- d F C, C, cn 0-
W
.✓ fw r ,� o C
U) a m aai aai m o
Z o a) E o
o O a (�
r► ,� 1 T• ,• o z o a a a o a ` o w
U a
(1) O J
w 0� cc o 0 o a
1� m000O I 1 1 I
.� •� 1 � v � 1 1 1 ' I i
.. `.----- - - - - -�
1 a
1
�'• 1 W Do
YR/ <
s. - •\� 1 4:•irt O E
1 Z
` N Q tOn w
C
YI W W w
W o
z C N
a
LU o
D

APPENDIX B
STREAM & WETLAND DATA
NCWAM Forms
Nutrient Model
Soil Boring Logs
Nutrient Model
RUSLE Equation
Water Budget
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site Appendices
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Wetland AA
Date of Assessment
7/31/2019
Wetland Type Hardwood Flat
Assessor Name/Organization
A. Baldwin/RS
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Rating Summary
Function Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Sub -surface Storage and
Retention
Condition
LOW
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
NA
Particulate Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
NA
Physical Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
NA
Pollution Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
YES
Habitat Physical Structure Condition LOW
Landscape Patch Structure Condition LOW
Veaetation Composition Condition LOW
Function Ratina Summa
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
LOW
Water Quality
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Habitat
Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

v 0
'O +7+ O
c O 3 a
a 3 z° E
L L U Q
tLo -0
N
J LJ
w E v ¢ v
0 w 5 °J Q
m
: v
c
W
7
Z
w
7
C
16
J
7 7 O lD w O u1
7 r N
Ln
C
a a
p_ 7 'M-I LLn O O
Z a
ar ooaj UM
N a o t
m p = w
d
+7+
U
� a
.° O I M
O d O N V1 O O N
� .-I � N
o O
z o o 0 0
a
0
3
Of
o
Z)
v
7 N
o �
U > N c
w V .
Q w
Ln 7 O
7 e 7
> n
�� 7
v
E E ° ¢c
Q o N
N o0 N
N t' II
E 7 v
V ? J
v E 3 m
'ui E m c
aj = U = Q
N �
E E
v v
0: 0:
Z a

AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919- 215-1693
SOIL BORING LOG
Date:
7/31/2019
Project/Site:
Pierce Terrace
County, State:
Gates County, NC
Sampling Point/
Coordinates:
Soil Profile A (36.435153,-76.653365)
Investigator:
W. Grant Lewis
Soil Series:
Bladen
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
Notes: Location is shown on
Figure 4.
Depth (inches)
Matrix
Mottling
Texture
Color
%
Color
%
0-9
2.5 Y 5/2
100
fine sandy loam
9-14+
2.5 Y 6/2
80
10 YR 6/8
15
clay loam
2.5 Y 8/1
5
clay loam
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number: 1233
Signature:
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis

AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919- 215-1693
SOIL BORING LOG
Date:
7/31/2019
Project/Site:
Pierce Terrace
County, State:
Gates County, NC
Sampling Point/
Coordinates:
Soil Profile B (36.432226,-76.654255)
Investigator:
W. Grant Lewis
Soil Series: Pantego
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
Notes: Location is shown on
Figure 4.
Depth (inches)
Matrix
Mottling
Texture
Color
%
Color
%
0-9
10 YR 3/2
100
sandy loam
9-12+
2.5 Y 6/2
80
10 YR 6/8
20
clay loam
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number: 1233
Signature:
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis

AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919- 215-1693
SOIL BORING LOG
Date:
7/31/2019
Project/Site:
Pierce Terrace
County, State:
Gates County, NC
Sampling Point/
Coordinates:
Soil Profile C (36.430601,-76.651965)
Investigator:
W. Grant Lewis
Soil Series:
Bladen
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
Notes: Location is shown on
Figure 4.
Depth (inches)
Matrix
Mottling
Texture
Color
%
Color
%
0-9
2.5 Y 5/2
100
sandy loam
9-14
2.5 Y 5/2
90
10 YR 5/6
10
fine sandy loam
14-20+
2.5 Y 5/2
85
2.5 Y 5/1
10
sandy loam
10 YR 6/6
5
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number: 1233
Signature:
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis

AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919- 215-1693
SOIL BORING LOG
Date:
7/31/2019
Project/Site:
Pierce Terrace
County, State:
Gates County, NC
Sampling Point/
Coordinates:
Soil Profile D (36.433839,-76.645792)
Investigator:
W. Grant Lewis
Soil Series:
Bladen
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
Notes: Location is shown on
Figure 4.
Depth (inches)
Matrix
Mottling
Texture
Color
%
Color
%
0-7
2.5 Y 5/3
100
fine sandy loam
7-14
2.5 Y 5/2
75
2.5 YR 6/2
20
clay loam
10 YR 6/8
5
14+
2.5 Y 6/2
80
10 YR 6/8
15
clay
10 YR 4/6
5
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number: 1233
Signature:
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis

LLI
J C
N O
O
'a)
C
O L
r, -0
R C
W a) d
LA U
LA N N
J O J
— v �
O cr
N _0 11
N� g
O
L
°J •0
N
u
a
a,
LA
GJ
00
N
M II
11 C:
a
C
00 _
U1 U
n U
N Ln 0 Z
L
O N � O
v v
�� CU
0 � m Y
U 70
Li U v v
Y C N
a
O
W
O
C
d
M N
OU
I I
M
L O
O L
u U
Ll +�+
f1 L
C O
a) Z
bb O
M
C v
CM
C f6
L /
O
> U
,
O
U
!Z
O
U
v
01
O
11
FL
N
N
v
C
o
t
ULO
o
0
0
11
U E
Z •
C:
L
W
? 'E
O
O O M
U
o
-0 w
C >
01 II
C7 > t
O
° L°n
L O U
O U C
M
p
�
v M
C3) 0
L
> v v
o C7
o
CL
w
o O-
w
v U U1
o
N
ti O
O
o
\
-0 C
C O E
UP
U
ti o
II
CLn
p
o C:
v
� o
oU�
_0
av
U1 } 2 0
2
C3) 0
C Q II
O L
GA
O E O Q
O
w M C7
Q
CO L
4 C G.0 =
(6
U1
U Li
C O
Q
Lnv
N
L L a) •L
> ;���
(A
V
O U
Q
i2 m
6
U
v
�
Q
>
a
00
w
Q. v 0)
o O
�
U
i
C i
O
N a
i
U
N
�p
ate+ U
U1
G
a �
aO
L U
0
C:
z
O
U
N
C °
Y
U
Q
�O
°
O
O
fV
N �
i p
° 'a
Lli
01
i
L
O �
v
01 i
M
'O N
i
U
fu
> N
O
(A
—
U
C
0
lD ->-
v
a
N
Ln
O
E a
O
O M
Qj
H
Ln
M
m
E N
O
01
L
U N
a
y�
0.0
I I
Ln
+ N
EA
CY)�
r4 N N
• i •+Oj
o
41
Ln
II II C
>
+,
z
fh
V N N
O
iF
ti
C
Q
C >;
L
M
•O
+
II
Now
i
OO•
N
Uz
N
to
O
J O
41
J
EA G0 liL
n
i
11
in
> 0
a
v
41
H
O
O

Pierce Terrace Water Balance Calculation
Water Budget Equation
The hydrologic cycle of a wetland can be expressed in a water budget that accounts for water
inflows and outflows to the system, as follows:
where:
AS = [P + Si + G;] — [ET + So +Go]
AS = change in volume of water storage in a defined area over time
P = precipitation
Si = surface -water inflow
G; = ground -water inflow
ET = evapotranspiration
So = surface water outflow
Go = groundwater outflow
Water Budget Calculation Assumptions
This drained Hardwood Flat wetland will be restored as two wetland polygons. The following
assumptions apply to the water budget calculation:
1. Precipitation that falls within the 105-acre footprint will be the primary hydrologic input.
2. Surface -water and ground -water inflow will be secondary hydrologic inputs and are not
expected to be critical factors in restoring wetland hydrology. This is assumed because
of the landscape position of the wetland is an interstream divide and the surrounding
land use practices mostly being forestry which convey water down gradient through a
network of ditches. The Site is surrounded by Hydric B soils which will provide
supplemental hydrological inputs.
3. Currently surface water outflow for the site is being conveyed off the Site via a ditch
network system, and will be eliminated by removal of existing ditches and associated
outlets. Water will leave the Site once it reaches a set elevation to be determined during
final design in order to prevent hydrologic trespass on adjacent properties.
4. The primary soil series associated with the Site is Bladen loam 0-2% slopes (NRCS soil
mapunit BnA) which is poorly drained with slow permeability. Land management
practices for this soil series include forestry and agricultural, both activities include a
ditch network system coupled with surface manipulation to remove hydrological inputs
in order to achieve sustainable production. Once the Site's ditches are filled and outlets

removed the hydrological inputs will be retained resulting in restoration of wetland
hydrology.
Based on these assumptions it is assumed that no significant groundwater or surface water
inflow/outflow will occur at the Site to the degree that it will affect the restoration of wetland
hydrology. Applying these assumptions to the water budget equation, modifies the water balance
equation for the Site to:
AS = [P] — [ET]
Precipitation
The USDA NRCS provides Wetlands Climate Tables through the Agricultural Applied Climate
System (AgACIS) which includes climate data and summary reports. There are two AgACIS
weather stations in Gates County, however both had incomplete datasets that could not be used
for this exercise. As an alternative The State Office of North Carolina at NCSU developed the
NC Climate Retrieval and Observations Network of the Southeast Database (NC CRONOS)
which provides precipitation data. There is one NC CRONOS weather station listed for Gates
County. The weather station used is Buckland Elementary (ID — BUCK) which is located —6-
miles to the west northwest of the Site in Gates County. The weather station was established in
September 2006 and data is limited therefore precipitation data is the average of precipitation
data collected from 2015 — 2019.
Evapotranspiration
As discussed above in the water budget calculation assumptions surface water and groundwater
outflows will be eliminated during construction of the Site, leaving evapotranspiration as the
only water loss for the system after construction is complete. The NC CRONOS BUCK weather
station also provides Daily Reference Crop Evapotranspiration (ETo) and Daily Crop
Evapotranspiration (ETc) for the previous 48-months at their weather stations around the state. A
crop coefficient is multiplied by the ETo in order to calculate ETc.
The data was accessed from the NC CRONOS BUCK weather station in August 2019, and
provided ETo and ETc data. Field soybean at mid -season growth stage was selected for ETc as
this crop has the highest water loss through evapotranspiration of the crops previously grown at
the Site. The ETo and ETc data provided was from Jan 2015 — July 2019, and was averaged for
each month in order to perform the water budget calculation.

Summary of Water Budget Analysis
Month
Total
Precipitation
(in)
Wetland
Area (ac)
Direct
Precipitation
on Wetland
(ac-ft)
Total
Water
Available
(ac-ft)
Avg Eto
Rate (in)
Avg Etc
Rate (in)
ET Water
Loss (ac-ft)
Water
Budget Net
Balance +/-
(ac-ft)
Water
Budget
Remaining
Total +/-
(ac-ft)
Jan
3.48
105
30.47
30.47
1.21
1.39
3.52
26.95
Feb
3.58
105
31.33
31.33
1.74
2.00
5.23
26.10
53.05
Mar
4.26
105
37.28
37.28
2.74
3.15
9.78
27.49
80.55
Apr
3.61
105
31.57
31.57
4.10
4.72
12.41
19.15
99.70
May
4.84
105
42.31
42.31
4.76
5.47
19.30
23.01
122.71
Jun
5.76
105
50.36
50.36
5.20
5.98
25.08
25.27
147.98
J u I
8.61
105
75.32
75.32
5.43
6.24
39.18
36.14
184.12
Aug
5.12
105
44.80
44.80
4.72
5.43
20.28
24.52
208.64
Sep
7.78
105
68.03
68.03
3.37
3.88
21.98
46.05
254.69
Oct
5.71
105
49.92
49.92
2.34
2.69
11.19
38.73
293.42
Nov
3.47
105
30.38
30.38
1.27
1.46
3.71
26.68
320.10
Dec
4.31
105
37.71
37.71
1.01
1.16
3.65
34.06
354.16
Totals:
60.51
529.46
529.46
37.89
43.57
175.30
354.16
Results and Conclusions
The monthly and annual water budget results for the proposed wetlands are presented in the
"Water Budget Net Balance +/-" column of the table above. A monthly running total of the water
budget is presented in "Water Budget Remaining Total +/-" column of the table above. No water
deficits were observed in the calculation during any month of the year. A water surplus is
available on a monthly and annual basis. This analysis reflects monthly water budget conditions
based on monthly direct precipitation and subtracting monthly evapotranspiration to arrive at
monthly water budget summaries.
Based on this calculation -3.4-feet surplus of water will cover the entire 105-acre Site on an
annual basis. Considering the limited hydrologic outlets associated with the Site the proposed
wetland project will be able to meet the wetland hydrology requirement during years of normal
precipitation.
R eferen r.es
Kreiser, G.S. 2003. A Wetland Restoration Project: Water Budget and Nutrient Analysis of a
Drained Carolina Bay (Master's Thesis). Retrieved from NCSU Library Repository. (Accessed
on December 14, 2018 https:Hrepository.lib.ncsu.edu/handle/1840.16/243)
Mitsch, W.J., and J.G. Gosselink. 2000. Wetlands. 3rd edition. John Wiley & Sons, New York,
NY, USA.

APPENDIX C
NHP REPORT
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site Appendices
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

MEN Roy Cooper. Governor
•s ; NC DEPARTMENT OF Susi Hamilton, Secretary
■■ ■■ NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
013
0 Walter Clark, director, Land and Water Stewardship
NCNHDE-9899
August 1, 2019
Allison Keith
Axiom Environmental
218 Snow Ave
Raleigh, NC 27603
RE: Pierce Terrace ; 19-001.06
Dear Allison Keith:
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide
information about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
A query of the NCNHP database indicates that there are records for rare species, important natural
communities, natural areas, and/or conservation/managed areas within the proposed project
boundary. These results are presented in the attached `Documented Occurrences' tables and map.
The attached `Potential Occurrences' table summarizes rare species and natural communities that
have been documented within a one -mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these
records suggests that these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area
if suitable habitat exists. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed areas within a one -mile
radius of the project area, if any, are also included in this report.
If a Federally -listed species is documented within the project area or indicated within a one -mile
radius of the project area, the NCNHP recommends contacting the US Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) for guidance. Contact information for USFWS offices in North Carolina is found here:
httr)s://www.fws.gov/offices/Directory/ListOffices.cfm?statecode=37.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation
planning, project review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria
for regulatory decisions. Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published
without prior written notification to the NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information
source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP data may not be redistributed without permission.
Also please note that the NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional
correspondence if a Dedicated Nature Preserve, Registered Heritage Area, Clean Water
Management Trust Fund easement, or an occurrence of a Federally -listed species is documented
near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance,
please contact Rodney A. Butler at rod ney.butlerCo�ncdcr.aov or 919-707-8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
DEPAR7HEN7 OF NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
121 W. JONES STREET. RALEIGH. NC 27603 • 1691 MAIL SERVICE CENTER. RALEIGH. NC 27609
OFC 919.707.9120 • FAX [phone]

ƒ
\ \
e = 2 _
\
~ /
/ $
/ E / e
-
CO
/
\
CO
CO
%M E D-
3
}
U)
32>
/
/ § / E
a
®
j
} / \ °
»« ~
\
COo
\ \ /
»
3
±
®%\o
0 cn
\:
\
e 0 e
\ \
.\
ƒ
\
c
/ J m
2
m
y \ { \
tg
z
3
o
?ƒ
s
m cnE
±eg
/z
�\
%e
§
z
_
%_
% / 3
\
E
\
\
%
ƒ / 2 \
e
§f
± s
\
z m / .y
z
e E = u
J>2»
E2
�\
: \
\±
CO
±z
} m
\
s 2
:
\
4
\/ 2 3
4/\
3
\
/ \
®
2 \
\ \
U /
s
e
} e z z
=az
ƒ %
:
�z
\
\
=e
\ \
/
a§
t »
/_
°
s
/ 3 % /
/ 2
t /D
\ \
\ -co
�
CO \
.
/ / \ \
\ c
s
»
%
/ - ® 5
> a 2 2
\
\ }
) \
±
0
Z\/
u2
^
«u
//\
u= e
o e z
:
\/
=
2:
\.\
=
c.£4z
CC3U
/?{
)�
/
e e w
\
/ 2
/
/
\
D/\/
s%/
\\
m
®
®
Iƒ
\
/ o e
z
§
0
/
\ z
w o z
y
e
=2
\
\ n
$
Lij
C)
��
� -0
T
\\ ( \
©
(
\
y
6
\
®
»3
e
e
3
E e 2 e
D-
u
3 -
®
0 ^
\\
»
`
LE
5^
\
\
}2J}
e
\\
�\
COs
± J 0 9
u
\
�2
(
3
§ ® ° \
.k
\
E
\ t
2
=
u?/ z
e
m
.\ :
\
E
(u/*
%
cn
��\
m
\\
2
s
»
®
\ K
ee
CO
u
e 2 \
/
%
$
\�
z
Z
\
/\�\
/
\
./\}
j{
CO\
\/_ /
\
\
0)Ln
0 \
_
`
°
°
\
\�
/ 'u«
\
) \ \
\
\
° CO\
\
/
3 2
\
/ m a CO
`
/
\ -
3 «
/ ©
g r _
/
2 /
y /
:
/
u
e o z
a=
§
_
e\
/\
\ CO u)
/
\
\ =
s3
sG
\
/\ e g g
2
g
g .2
3\
\§
(
` ®� 0 M
\
«
}Z
Z
//©\/
\
/ z
0
s e e e%
0
e
c e
0=
Z
5 Z 3% s
Z
x
x Z,J
11
j}
s
§
/

®
3
3
2 e
2
s
3
3
s
s
s
e
s
s
3
s
s
\\
®
/
/
e
v
v
e
e
e
v
a
/
e
3
3
\®
3
a
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
CO//
\
>
>
s
e > _
>
%
o
u
//
c e
e e.9
\.9 %
c e
/
.` %
e e w
e e
e
°
%
® 2
/ %
(
(
/ %
(
6 /
®2
/
2
g®
\ 2
y 2
z
/ /
o J o
2 E
%
±
/
J o
E 2±\®/
®
®
s
s
®
e® e
s
e
® e=
s e
s
e
/
7
7
7
e
» 7®
7
e
2
/
Ln
\ \
/ CO
CO
CO
co
$
/
®
§
e
s
e
4
E
E
E
E
E
}
\
%
\
f
\
\
\
ƒ
\
\
\
\
\
CO
/
x
e
v
x
x
x
v
v
x
v
&
v
y
4
6
6
6
6
6
\
(
a
\
E(/
e
2
0
0
0
0
4
e
o
2
0
2
/\�
/
\/0%/
o
e
C
e
o m
^
0
/
~
3
0
/
/
/
3
\
x
e
\
±
\
3
6
x
e
s
y
m Z\
2
m w m
2%%
e e
e
\
—
o
%
o
o
0
3
v
0
»
0
©
3
o
)
\ t
/ ®
y/
4 ^ °
G a
m
\
3
6
\
/
¢
3
\
\
\
+
« /
t
\
\
\
~
\
\
\
\
\
\
Cl
a
®
\
/
(
-000COLn
\
COm
Z
7 E
\
CO
\
§ /
/
/
\
E
/
®
\
e
/
C _
CO
\
\
E
/
_
/
CO
® /
o
/
E
\
o
CO
=
%
/
§
d E
g
j
\
\
/
\
\ /
\
\
u
\
—
\
/
/
\
0
/
\
t
/
~
E
/
.k
E
CO
CO
z/
/
CO
+
y
e
e
k
?
E
\
o
\ w
2
s
?
6
%
H
m
»
g
«
\
u
»
g
` }
\
»
m
m
®
n
\
OD
\
\
\
e
©
/
2
\
\
/
$
\
*
/
E
Z
2
~
\
%
\
/
D
_
m
a
\
?
y v
3
E
-E
o
r
>
®
(Da)
E
z x�
—
z
2 3
r
/
_
e
5
®
\
/ f
E
\
\
y 2
\ >
\ 3
%
0
.
/
E »
e
o
\
o
—
D-
-0
. 2
ƒ
\
_
/ /
%
/
/
\
\ ƒ
\
u
/ /
/ /
\ \
3
\
/
CO
Ln o
\
\
v
»
v
g
e
/
0-)/
e
o
\ \
\
\
/
\
\
\
\
\
/
\
\
%
\
°
>
>
CO
CO
CO
0 \
CO
^
^
\
\
\
t o—
3
®
—
COCO
CO_o
/
—/
CO
CO
2
e= z
co
E
E
E
f
o
f
a)
E}/
E}
f
E
E
E
=
E
=
E
u
u
u
/
\
\
\
CO
CO
CO
\
\
\
\
\
/ \
do
\
/
/
/
■
■
s
_
/

CO CO
�n FT,
o v
N
n C
S�
D
c
ro Nam.
O
— c CO
o O
N
CO �
o
D
U O
N E O
O)
c
n
cQ�
0
D- O n
CO
U =
to
W
m
CO
W �
U
E E
u
3:
7 7
J
N N
O
U
Q
M M
+
N
O
C
�
E
CO W
I CD
U FY
W
O
O
E O
O N
CO + ro N C0
U) > O
Q J � Q (-0
n o
R oN
o
E
o E CO
cn E
0 z o
co co E
O
E N
E o 3:
N Q
c
O
co
c
N
E E
�z
U E
CO
D
c E in
E u o
o n a cn
0
U o Qo
N — C0
u O En
N W M
O
O CO
O� a
c O CO
N C n D
0)OX 0 cn
W CJ >
CO
o
O
O
O
� U
N
CO
U)
D
D
u
c
D
c
CO
N
O
C
CO
CO
O
CO
>
CO
J
L
i
S
E
U � E E
D-
E f6
m
O
C
CO
CO
O
Ln
CO
>
CO _�
=
N
n
N
>,
N
r0 r0 r0
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
u
O n n n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
C C
O O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
U) CO CO
N N
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
�
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O cJ
N N
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
C C C
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
O CC3 CC3
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
+ O+
O+
O+
O+
O+
O+
O+
O
a s
v>
v>
v>
v>
v>
v>
v>
v
CO
O O
Q U)
Q U)
Q U)
Q U)
Q U)
Q U)
Q Ln
Q Ln
0 C-
Q
O c c
E,
E,
E,
E,
E,
E,
E,
E
Q—
c 0 0
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
c
v O
> >
°+Jo
>oo
E COf
of
of
of
of
of
of
CO
I
O U U
D-co
-0D-
co
-0D-
co
-0D-
co
-0D-
co
-0D-
co
-0Q-0
co
co
OL
j
W z z
c
co
c
co
c
co
c
co
c
co
c
co
c
co0
c
co
v
o
0 0 0
0
a
O N
in
u u u
U OU
OU
OU
OU
OU
OU
OU
O
,n
Z Z Z
Z to
Z to
Z to
Z to
Z to
Z to
Z to
Z to
co
�
N
�
0
c
N
co
E
z
SEE
SEE
SEE
SEE
SEE
SEE
SEE
SEE
E
N
E
0
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
CO
°cn'
CO
E
CO in
W
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
� �
u
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
CO
CC3 CC3
c
CO
c
CO
c
CO
c
CO
c
CO
c
CO
c
CO
c
CO
'
COo
E E
CO'W
o co �o o
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
E
C
a)
>
a)
>
a)
>
a)
>
a)
>
a)
>
a)
>
a)
>
D
O
o
E.���
0 0
6
Z Q 0
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
—
CO
CO — —
cn
CO
N
N O
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
Q
0
M c
M c
M c
M c
m c
m c
m c
m c
E
��
N
cn
N
N
� N
� N
� N
� N
� N
� N
� N
F,
Z
�._
N E
a)E
a)E
a)E
a)E
a)E
a)E
a)E
O
CO�
0 CO
c 0
cn a)cn
c
c a)cn
c a)cn
IDcn
c
IDcn
c
c 0)
Ln 0)
c
Ln 0)c
c
a)
,n
,n
,n
,n
,n
,n
,n
,n
Zcn�
��Z��Quwuwuwuwuwuwuwuw
T
QI

s
!r
M
n
z
u
z
U
7
O
C6
O
N
T
J,
N
a

e
U
�
�
�
e
C)
$_
n
�
�
00
CY)
W
r)
2
Z
U
Z
He
I.
_
/

APPENDIX D
MEMORANDUM OF OPTION AGREEMENT
LANDOWNER AUTHORIZATION FORM
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site Appendices
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

Filed: 08108I2019 10:05:15 AM
MARY C. HORTON, Register of Deeds
Gates County, NC
Handed Back to Restoration Systems
Record: $26.00
eoorc 349 PAGE ]] (4)
315796 111111I�IPIflIIIIIIINp
Prepared By: Raymond Holz
NORTH CAROLINA MEMORANDUM OF
GATES COUNTY AGREEMENT FOR PURCHASE AND SALE
OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT
RESTORATION SYSTEMS, LLC, a North Carolina limited liability company
(hereinafter referred to as "Buyer"), and S & M FARMS, LLC, a North Carolina limited
liability company (whether one or more, hereinafter collectively referred to as `'Seller"), for and
in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars and 00/100 ($10.00) and other good and valuable
consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, have entered into
an Agreement for Purchase and Sale of Conservation Easement to purchase and sell conservation
easements pertaining to approximately-4** (71) acres, more or less, consisting of a portion of
Seller's real property located in Hunters Mill Township, Gates County, North Carolina, as shown
on Exhibit A-1 attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
(a) The provisions set forth in a written Agreement for Purchase and Sale of a
Conservation Easement dated the," — day of 3v I — 2019, between the
parties, are hereby incorporated in this Memorandum by reference. The
Referenced Agreement has an examination period of eighteen (18) months from
the execution of said Agreement.
WITNESS our hands and seals, this Memorandum of Purchase and Sale of a
Conservation Easement, this the 94-(�day of J tW 2019
BUYER:
RESTORATION SYSTEMS, LLC
By: o
�
me: John Preyer
Title: President

STATE OF NORTH C''A/ROLMA
COUNTY OF ��KX
I certify that the following person personally appeared before me this day, acknowledging
to me that he voluntarily signed the foregoing document:
J 6 n maw
(Name of Person(s) Appearing before Notary)
Witness my hand and official seal, this ^day of Ja 2019.
`````�`������t
ty ° 0
Notary's Official Signature
= Z Qf �1 0 '
G
1/?O t I N tNotary's Printed or Typed Name
ntltN���
My commission expires: 3
(Official Seal)
2 of 4

WITNESS our hands and seals, this Memorandum of Purchase and Sale of a
Conservation Easement, this the 3I st day of „ is 2019
SELLER:
S & M Farms, LLC
By: /4
Name: J M.
Title: 4h �esv S -r / ✓�'l`� v 1Y/
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF Gcl: A
I certify that the following person personally appeared before me this day, acknowledging
to me that he voluntarily signed the foregoing document:
lk, TTF.
(Name of Person(s) Appearing before Notary)
.( h
Witness my hand and official seal, this day of o ) , 2019.
Not I Official Signature
L4 00, % 6 � r i'M
Notary's Printed or Typed Name
My commission expires: Q 2 8-;!,0 23
3 of 4

EXHIBIT "A-1"
Map Depicting Conservation Easement(s)
Attached to and made a part of that certain Agreement for Purchase and Sale of
Conservation Easements dated , 2019, by and between RESTORATION
SYSTEMS, LLC ("Buyer") and S & M FARMS, LLC, a North Carolina limited liability
company (collectively "Seller").
S&hi Farms. LLC _. _..
Wiggins Tract 1 of 2
Tax PIN 6998127746DDD
(tt_ 9& 24 Ac.)
Legend
© Existing Conservation Easement Boundary (27.04 acres)
Q Conservation Easement Boundary (+1- 71 acres)
Gates Co Tax Parcels 2018
RESTORATION SYSTEMS. LLC 110 t HAINES 7, 3L[TE,•! I OK U+.`�7 X19 � Exhibit A-1
FAX 919AA94U ...___.
eeNww >pa tt aRN it t wM w w>pA NreMRp WtM�..at utwms
w >Tw tq ►>wtJr wr1A W aw atw NM w. •>Ir� p w .•e�w+sl wi ��t
M Y .M�H� • ewe Y�U�I M� �Y •writ M M� Y.h M' ht>i < 4
twt t>ttNgt►Yw1.M....s.. s.>+.ew t> fl wWl p,:x •Y n� .:
4 or4

LANDOWNER AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRITION:
Deed Book: 286 Page: 306 County: Gates
Parcel ID Number: Gates Countv: 0600422 NC PIN: 6998127746000
Street Address: 400 Silver Springs Rd. Sunbury, NC 27979
Property Owner (please print: S & M Farms, LLC
The undersigned, registered property owner(s) of the above property, do hereby authorize
Raymond Holz of Restoration Systems, LLC
(Contractor/Agent/Project Manager)' (Name of Contractor/Agent Firm/Agency)'
Grant Lewis of Axiom Environmental, Inc.
(Contractor/Agent/Project Manager)' (Name of Contractor/Agent Firm/Agency)'
to take all actions necessary 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). I
agree to allow regulatory agencies, including the US Army Corps of Engineers, to visit the property
as part of these environmental reviews.
Property Owners(s) Address: 539 NC 32 South
(if different from above)
Sunburv. NC 27979
Property Owner Telephone Number: [phone]
We hereby certify the above information to be true and accurate to the best of our knowledge.
Owner Authorized Signature)
I- RCI-17
(Date)
Name of full delivery staff member (full -deliveries) or DMS project manager (design -bid -build).
2Name of company (full -deliveries) or DMS (design -bid -build).

Filed: 08/08/2019 10:05:14 AM BOOK 349 PAGE 73 (4)
MARY C. HORTON, Register of Deeds
Gates County, NC 315795
Ifanded Back to Restoration Systems
Record: $26.00
Prepared By: Raymond Holz
NORTH CAROLINA MEMORANDUM OF
GATES COUNTY AGREEMENT FOR PURCHASE AND SALE
OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT
RESTORATION SYSTEMS, LLC, a North Carolina limited liability company
(hereinafter referred to as "Buyer"), and HELEN HOFLER PIERCE, a real person of North
Carolina (hereinafter referred to as "Seller"), for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars
and 00/100 ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of
which are hereby acknowledged, have entered into an Agreement for Purchase and Sale of
Conservation Easement to purchase and sell conservation easements pertaining to approximately
fifty-six (56) acres, more or less, consisting of a portion of Seller's real property located in Hunters
Mill Township, Gates County, North Carolina, as shown on Exhibit A-1 attached hereto and
incorporated herein by reference.
(a) The provisions set forth iti a written Agreement for Purchase and Sale of a Conservation
Easement dated the day of tk-c. , 2019, between the parties, are hereby
incorporated in this Memorandum by re. The Referenced Agreement has an
examination period of eighteen (18) months from the execution of said Agreement.
WITNESS our hands and seals, this Memorandum of Purchase and Sale of a Conservation
Easement, this the day of 2019
BUYER:
RESTORATION SYSTEMS, LLC
By: — �;
Name: George A. Howard
Title: Chief Executive Officer

STATE OF NO1RnTrH'`CAROLINA
COUNTY OF Y `�A Vt
I certify that the following person personally appeared before me this day, acknowledging
to me that he voluntarily signed the foregoing document:
cvumt A . mod
I/
(Name of Person(s) Appearing before Notary)
Witness my hand and official seal, this 9A- day of , 2019.
_ No 's Official Signature
PfotatYCo�n Y
'ems A. ,V\ ���•
N CP•(LQ�`.�` Notary's Printed or Typed Name
My commission expires:`,��* 6 j
(Official Seal)
2 of 4

WITNESS our hands and seals, this Memorandum of Purchase and Sale of a
Conservation Easement, this the day of—kllfi g•2019
SELLER:
HELEN HOFLER PIERCE ,
Name:zin NLj
Power of Attorney for Helen Hofler Pierce
Gates County Register of Deeds, Book 346 Page 788
Date: Y - Y ` l
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF (�h
I certify that the following person personally appeared before me this day, acknowledging
to me that he voluntarily signed the foregoing document:
—r—
(Name of Person(s) Appearing before Notary)
Witness my hand and official seal, this day of AjjVj641j6f 2019.
R• fiFj�'��i,,®�� Notary'sOf iignature
c7 ,�
^Qi \OTA49), ,pf s
Y - air`lliiYlP� �mcE�l`x
COMISS10M EXPIRES =
7 911 1;OZ Z Notary's Printed or Typed Name
V
6�B �. � '" My commission expires:
3 of 4

EXHIBIT "A-1"
Map Depicting Conservation Easement(s)
Attached to and made a part of that certain Agreement for Purchase and Sale of Conservation
Easements dated , 2019, by and between RESTORATION SYSTEMS, LLC
("Buyer") and Helen Hofler Pierce ("Seller").
RESTORATION SYSTEMS, LLC `d1ALE:11 -650t 4
1101 HAVNFv. j,GURE211 p^.TE: -2H1V Exhibit A-1
RAI EIG H, NO 27M4
P HO N E: 919356 V 410 GRE:CH-03-002
FAX: 9197b3192
f.�iw .�ww feel
...a IY....✓. ry v�[�l e rr•.�xwan ❑ BS 5Ep 1,1m 1 Z-
4 of 4

LANDOWNER AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRITION:
Deed Book: 139 Page: 610 County: Gates
Parcel ID Number: Gates County: 1002248 NC PIN: 6998161267000
Street Address: 149 Silver Springs Rd. Sunbury, NC 27979
Property Owner (please print: Helen Hofler Pierce
The undersigned, registered property owner(s) of the above property, do hereby authorize
Raymond Holz of Restoration Systems, LLC
(Contractor/Agent/Project Manager)' (Name of Contractor/Agent Firm/Agency)'
Grant Lewis
(Contractor/Agent/Project Manager)'
of Axiom Environmental, Inc.
(Name of Contractor/Agent Firm/Agency)'
to take all actions necessary 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). I
agree to allow regulatory agencies, including the US Army Corps of Engineers, to visit the property
as part of these environmental reviews.
Property Owners(s) Address: C/O Kirby Lynn Pierce Parker
(if different from above)
356 Silver Springs Rd. Sunbury, NC 27979
Property Owner Telephone Number: [phone]
We hereby certify the above information to be true and accurate to the best of our knowledge.
(Property Owner Autl0rized Signature) u (Date)
Kirby Lynn Pierce Parker - Power of Attorney (Gates County Register of Deeds, Book 346 Page 788)
'Name of full delivery staff member (full -deliveries) or DMS project manager (design -bid -build).
'Name of company (full -deliveries) or DMS (design -bid -build).

APPENDIX E
TECHNICAL PROPOSAL SCORE SHEET
Pierce Terrace Wetland Mitigation Site Appendices
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007907)

Technical Proposal Evaluation Criteria
Rating Form
Offeror:
Restoration Systems, LLC
Pierce Terrace Mitigation Site
Site Name:
River Basin
/ Catalog
Chowan 03010203 / 03010204
Unit:
RFP
16-007907
Number:
Date of Site
July 31, 2019
Evaluation:
Type/Amt of
Mitigation
105 Nonriparian WMU's
Offered:
Proposal
Review
Committee:
Alternate
Attendees:

Section 1. Minimum Requirements
Yes/No
or N/A
1- For stream mitigation projects, does theTechnical Proposal adequatelyclocument the historical presenceof
N/A
stream(s) on the project site, provide the dra inage a reas (acres) and provide accurate, process -based descriptions
ofaII project stream reaches a nd tributaries?
2- For proposals that i nclude wetl and mitigation, does the technical proposal a d equately document the presence of
Yes
hydric soil i ndicators (i ncluding soil boring logs prepared by a Licensed Soil Scientist a nd a map showing soil boring
locations and mapped soil series)?
3- For proposals that i ncludewetl and mitigation, does the proposed success hydroperiodfollow the I RTGuidance
for the proj ect s ite a nd soil series? I fthe proposed hydroperiod differs from the I RTgui dance,j ustification must be
Yes
provided i n the RFP.
4- Does the proposal adequately document the physical, chemical and/or biological i mpairments that currently
Yes
exi st on the proj ect s ite?
5- Does DMS agree wi th the overa II mitigation a pproach (proposed I evels of i ntervention) presented? [The
Techni cal Proposal must demonstrate that the proposed mitigation activities a re a ppropriate for exi sting s ite
Yes
conditions and watershed characteristics (e.g., adjacent I and use/land cover), andareoptimized toyield maximum
functional gains.]
6- Does DMS agree with the proposed credit structure(s) described in the proposal?
Yes
7- Does the proposed project avoid significant a dverse i mpacts to exi sting wetl ands a nd/or streams?
Yes
8- Does the proposal adequately describe howthe project will advance DMS watershed planninggoaIs?
Yes
9- For any proposed Priority 2 restoration, is P2justified and/or limited to "tie-ins"?
N/A
An a nswer of No i n this section mea ns the Technical Proposal i s rejected. Continue or Reject?
Continue

Section 2. Functional Uplift Evaluation
Functional
Functional
Planning Identified
Category
Functional Stressor
Uplift Potential
Stressor
Check box below if
Completethis section for identified
stressoris identified
Check boxes below toidentify
functional stressors ONLY. Selecttheoption
through watershed
stressors addressed by proposal.
that best describes the upl ift potential for
planning
RWP
LWP
the majorityof the proj ect area.
X Non-functioning riparian
Low
Moderate
High
eryHigh
buffer / wetl a nd vegetation
ca
X Sediment
Low
Moderate
High
eryHigh
Z3
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
X Nutrients
�1
X Fecal Coliform
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
>ro
X Other
Low
Moderate
High
eryHigh
X Peak Flows
Low
Moderate
High
eryHigh
4A
0
X Artificial Barriers
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
O
X Ditching/Draining
Low
Moderate(
High
_0
2
X Other
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
Habitat Fragmentation
Low
Moderate
Highro
eryHigh
U Limited Bedform Diversity
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
ca
2
X Absence of La rge Woody
Low
Moderate
High
eryHigh
Debris
X Other
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
o
Tota I Count
2
10
Total
C_ O
Count
Multiplier
Multiplier
ca a-J
— -0
ca Z3
x1
x3
x6
x10
x4
x6
C= V)
0 pp
Count x Function
12
100
Count x
Planning
U
C:
Multiplier
Multiplier
Z
'L ca
112 A
Sumof
B
0
a
Sumof Function
Planning

Adjusted Risk Factor
Total
Restoration
Restoration
Enhancement
Total Restoration and Enhancement Feet
Risk Adjusted Score
and
Feet
Feet
Enhancement Feet
(Enhancement
(Sum of Function AXFacto r9
Enhancement
Restoration Feet +
)
Feet
105
105
0
1 `
112
Risk Adjusted Score +PlanningB =
Section 3. General
112 E Total Function and Planning
1 point
3 points
6 points
10 points
What percent of the request does the proposed wetland
project provide? (if applicable)
<20 %
20-40%
41-60%
>60%
Physical constraints or barriers
>5%
2-5%
<2%
None
Easement Continuity
>12
8-12
0-8
Project Density
>10
8-10
4-8
1 <4
7
Total
6
1 30
Section 4. Final Score and Proposal Rating
Total Function and
112 E
Planning
Total General
36 F
Final Score
148
(E+F)
Proposal Rating
1.48
(Final Score x 0.01)
36 =