20181461 Ver 1_Mitigation Plans_20230914 (3)

THE MIDDLE NEUSE STREAM AND
WETLAND UMBRELLA MITIGATION BANK
Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT (Rev. 5 )
Middle Neuse River Basin – HUC 03020202
Beaufort County, North Carolina
USACE ACTION ID NUMBER:
SAW-2017-02019

SPONSOR: PREPARED BY:
Weyerhaeuser NR Company
Attn: Doug Hughes
406 Cole Road
Hattiesburg, MS 39402
601 341 6054
Kimley-Horn
Attn: Tara Allden and Jason Claudio-Diaz
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200
Charlotte, NC 28202
704 319 7699
Coggin Asset Management, LLC
Attn: Daniel S. Coggin
P.O. Box 476
Amory, MS 38821
662 825 0058
This mitigation plan has been written in conformance with the requirements of the following:
Federal rule for compensatory mitigation project sites as described in the Feder al Register Title 33 Navigation and Navigable
Waters Volume 3, Chapter 2, Section § 332.8 paragraphs (c)(2) through (c)(14).
The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
September 2023│
2

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Project Introduction.......................................................................................................... 5
1.1 Project Description ......................................................................................................... 5
1.2 Site Selection ................................................................................................................. 6
1.3 Mitigation Site Location, Size, and Service Area ............................................................. 6
1.4 Ownership ...................................................................................................................... 7
2.0 Watershed Approach ....................................................................................................... 8
2.1 Watershed environmental concerns and mitigation needs ............................................... 8
2.2 Goals and Objectives...................................................................................................... 8
2.3 Assurance of Sufficient Water Rights, Control of Minerals, and Access ........................... 9
2.4 Site Protection ................................................................................................................ 9
3.0 Site Baseline ................................................................................................................. 10
3.1 Existing Watershed Conditions ..................................................................................... 10
3.2 Existing Site Conditions ................................................................................................ 10
3.3 Endangered/Threatened species .................................................................................. 12
3.4 Cultural Resources ....................................................................................................... 13
3.5 Regulated floodplains ................................................................................................... 13
3.6 Existing Site Constraints ............................................................................................... 14
4.0 Functional Uplift Potential .............................................................................................. 14
5.0 Mitigation Plan ............................................................................................................... 16
5.1 Reference Site and Design Parameters ........................................................................ 16
5.2 Mitigation Work Plan ..................................................................................................... 19
6.0 Determination Of Credits ............................................................................................... 26
6.1 Stream Mitigation Credit Calculations ........................................................................... 26
6.2 Wetland Mitigation Credit Calculations .......................................................................... 27
7.0 Credit Release Schedule ............................................................................................... 28
8.0 Monitoring Plan ............................................................................................................. 28
8.1 Stream Monitoring Requirements .................................................................................. 29
8.2 Wetland Monitoring Requirements ................................................................................ 30
3 The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
│September 2023

8.3 Performance Standards ................................................................................................ 30
8.4 Adaptive Management Plan .......................................................................................... 32
8.5 Post-Construction Documentation ................................................................................. 33
8.6 Long-Term Management Plan ...................................................................................... 33
8.7 Financial Assurances.................................................................................................... 34
9.0 References .................................................................................................................... 36
TABLES
Table 1 – Proposed Stream Mitigation Summary ..................................................................................... 5
Table 2 – Proposed Wetland Mitigation Summary.................................................................................... 5
Table 3 – Watershed Overview ............................................................................................................. 10
Table 4 – Beaufort County Protected Species ....................................................................................... 12
Table 5 – Stream Mitigation Work Plan .................................................................................................. 14
Table 6 – Distribution of Intermittent and Perennial Origin Contributing Watershed (acre) ...................... 18
Table 7 – Stream Mitigation Approach Summary ................................................................................... 19
Table 8 – Wetland Mitigation Approach Summary.................................................................................. 22
Table 9 – Proposed Buffer Widths ......................................................................................................... 24
Table 10 – Zone 1 Planting Summary .................................................................................................... 25
Table 11 – Zone 2 Planting Summary .................................................................................................... 25
Table 12 – Zone 3 Planting Summary .................................................................................................... 26
Table 13 – Zone 4 Planting Summary .................................................................................................... 26
Table 14 – Proposed Stream Mitigation Credits ..................................................................................... 27
Table 15 – Proposed Wetland Mitigation Credits ................................................................................... 27
Table 16 – Credit Release Schedule—Streams ..................................................................................... 28
Table 17 – Credit Release Schedule—Wetlands ................................................................................... 28
Table 18 – Vegetative Monitoring Plots.................................................................................................. 29
Table 19 – Wetland Hydrology Performance Standards ......................................................................... 31
Table 20 – Estimated Amount Required for Performance Bond ............................................................. 35
Table 21 – Performance Bond Reduction Schedule ............................................................................... 35
The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
September 2023│
4

APPENDICES
Appendix A – Figures
Appendix B – Photo Pages
Appendix C – Geomorphic Cross-Sections
Appendix D – Geomorphology
Appendix E – Buffer Credit Calculations
Appendix F – Mitigation Plan Sheets
Appendix G – NCSAM Forms
Appendix H – Wetland and Stream Data Forms
Appendix I – Conservation Easement Documents
Appendix J – Performance Bond

FIGURES
Figure 1 – Service Area Map
Figure 2 – Vicinity Map
Figure 3 – USGS Topographic Map
Figure 4 – Historic Aerials
Figure 5 – NRCS Soils
Figure 6 – Hydric Soils
Figure 7 – Watershed
Figure 8 – Existing Conditions
Figure 9 – LiDAR
Figure 10a – Proposed Mitigation
Figure 10b – Credit Type
Figure 11 – Monitoring Plan
Figure 12a – Additional Stream Buffer Credit – Ideal
Figure 12b – Additional Stream Buffer Credit – Actual

5 The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
│September 2023

1.0 PROJECT INTRODUCTION
1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Beaufort 56 Mitigation Site (“B56 Site” or “Site”) is an initial site in the Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland
Umbrella Mitigation Bank (the “Middle Neuse UMB” or “Bank”). The Site is identified as having potential to help meet
the compensatory mitigation requirement for permitted stream and freshwater wetland impacts in Hydrologic Unit
Code (“HUC”) 03020202 of the Neuse River Basin (Figure 1 – Service Area Map). The Site was selected based on its
ability to provide improvements to aquatic resources within the Middle Neuse 8-digit HUC through restoration as
described further within this Mitigation Plan.
The Site is in Beaufort County, NC (Figure 1 – Service Area Map) and consists of one (1) stream system within the
Creeping Swamp watershed (HUC 030202020403) that includes headwater restoration and stream and wetland
restoration. This Mitigation Plan is a holistic approach that encompasses the valley and riparian wetlands adjacent to
the stream channels. The stream system described here as Pollard Swamp (“PS”) is a tributary to Creeping Swamp,
which joins Clayroot Swamp upstream of the confluence with Swift Creek.
On-site streams that are proposed for restoration were historically impacted by extensive ditching and currently have
diminished functionality within the functional categories identified in the stream functional pyramid (Harman, Starr,
Tweedy, Clemmon, Suggs, Miller. 2012). Based on these areas of impacted functionality and potential for functional
uplift, this Mitigation Plan has been produced identifying the proposed mitigation activities and associated credit
generation shown in Table 1 and Table 2.
All mitigation areas within the Site will be protected in perpetuity by a conservation easement totaling 111.0 acres.
The Conservation Easement document will be in the form described in Section X of the Middle Neuse Umbrella
Mitigation Baking Instrument (“UMBI”).
Table 1 – Proposed Stream Mitigation Summary
Reach Mitigation Approach Existing Length (ft.) Proposed Length (ft.) Credit Ratio Credits
PS – R1 Headwater Restoration 968 968 1:1 968
PS – R2 Restoration 2,217 2,486 1:1 2,486
PS – R3 Restoration 1,205 1,366 1:1 1,366
Total stream lengths and sub-total Credits 4,390 4,820 4,820
BUFFER ADJUSTMENT TO STREAM CREDITS (SEE “WILMINGTON DISTRICT STREAM BUFFER CREDIT
CALCULATOR” WORKSHEETS IN Appendix E – Buffer Credit Calculations) 730.70
TOTAL STREAM CREDITS 5,551
Table 2 – Proposed Wetland Mitigation Summary

Mitigation Approach Mitigation Area (ac.) Wetland Mitigation Ratio Credits
Restoration 60.9 1:1 60.9
Enhancement 0.1 3:1 0.0
TOTAL WETLAND CREDITS 60.9
The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
September 2023│
6

1.2 SITE SELECTION
As part of the Middle Neuse UMB, the B56 Site is proposed to provide compensatory mitigation for
permitted impacts within the Middle Neuse Watershed (HUC 03020202). The larger Neuse River Basin
has been a focal point for water quality concerns for almost three decades due to sediment disturbances
in upstream rural development and nutrient loading from upstream agricultural land use. Development
within this basin is predicted to increase—especially with the proposed Kinston Bypass construction,
which will likely increase development around the proposed interchanges. As such, the B56 Site aims to
provide protection and the potential for significant water quality and aquatic habitat improvements in this
sensitive region. The B56 Site was identified as a strong candidate for mitigation based on its potential for
uplift as well as the following criteria (as originally documented in the prospectus phase):
• Access—Potential sites must have permanent, deeded access.
• Proximity to Impacts—Potential sites must be within the 8-digit HUC in which impacts are
anticipated to occur.
• Watershed Impact—Restoring, enhancing, and protecting a potential site must contribute to the
overall improvement of the watershed in which it is found.
• Restoration Potential—Potential sites must have a combination of wetland and stream
restoration. Sites with historical alterations, such as silviculture, will generally be given priority
for development.
• Habitat Connectivity—Potential sites must contribute to creating larger, contiguous conservation
properties to help support habitat diversity, quality, and stability.
• Sufficient Water Rights/Resources—Potential sites must have sufficient water rights/resources to
sustain restored and/or protected wetlands and streams.
• Mineral Rights—The Bank Sponsor must own/control the surface mineral rights, including gravel,
sand, salt, and coal.
1.3 MITIGATION SITE LOCATION, SIZE, AND SERVICE AREA
The B56 Site is in southwest Beaufort County, North Carolina, about 23 miles north of New Bern. It can
be accessed from Pollard Road off State Road 102, approximately 3 miles east of U.S. Highway 17. The
Site is located at 35.4126° North and -77.1526° East (Figure 1 – Service Area Map). Overall, the Site includes
the restoration of multiple tributaries and riparian wetlands, some of which currently are within narrow
bands of hardwood forest near active timber production.
The Site is in the Creeping Swamp sub-basin of the Middle Neuse River Basin (HUC 030202020403) and
the Middle Atlantic Coastal Plain Level III Ecoregion. The Site sits in the Department of Water Resources
(“DWR”) Sub-basin 03-04-09. HUC 03020202 is situated downstream of HUC 03020201 (which contains
Raleigh and Durham) and HUC 03020203 (which includes Smithfield, Goldsboro, Farmville, and other
heavily agricultural areas). The local Creeping Swamp sub-basin is predominantly used for timber
production, with some agriculture and very little existing commercial, industrial, or residential
development.
The B56 Site, as a mitigation site under the framework of the Middle Neuse UMB, is proposed to produce
stream and wetland credits that will be used to offset permitted impacts to aquatic resources within the
Bank’s service area. The service area associated with the B56 Site is defined as the United States
Geological Survey (USGS) 8-digit HUC within which the Site is located – the Middle Neuse 02 HUC (HUC
03020202) (Figure 1 – Service Area Map).
7 The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
│September 2023

1.4 OWNERSHIP
BANK OWNER, SPONSOR, AND LONG -TERM STEWARD
Weyerhaeuser NR Company
Contact: Doug Hughes
Address: 406 Cole Road
Hattiesburg, MS 39402
Phone: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
As the landowner, Weyerhaeuser NR Company will provide access to the property for establishment
(including granting the conservation easement), operation, management of the Site, and long-term
management of the property within the framework of the Middle Neuse UMBI. The owner will retain all
rights and responsibilities of ownership subject to the terms of the Conservation Easement (included as
Appendix I – Conservation Easement Documents), which shall be placed on the property prior to the first release
of mitigation credits.
As the Bank Sponsor, Weyerhaeuser NR Company maintains the rights to permit, develop, maintain, and
operate the Middle Neuse UMB and its associated sites, including The B56 Site, in accordance with the
terms of the Middle Neuse UMBI and this Mitigation Plan and subject to the terms and conditions of the
conservation easement that will be established over the property.
Weyerhaeuser NR Company will be responsible for maintenance of the Site’s aquatic resources as
described in the Long-Term Management Plan, in Section 8.6 of this document. Long-term management
responsibilities will begin at the end of the bank’s monitoring phase (and continue in perpetuity.
CONSERVATION EASEMENT HOLDER
The Conservation Easement will be held by Unique Places To Save
(https://www.uniqueplacestosave.org), a 501 (c)(3) nonprofit conservation organization located in Chapel
Hill, North Carolina. Founded in 2014, Unique Places To Save was founded to “move beyond barriers to
address unmet needs in the fields of natural and cultural heritage, farming, community, and technology.”
Unique Places To Save is an entrepreneurial nonprofit organization that invests in, and enhances the
places that make communities unique. To date, the organization holds fifteen (15) conservation
easements.
A copy of the Conservation Easement document is included as Appendix I – Conservation Easement Documents.

The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
September 2023│
8

2.0 WATERSHED APPROACH
2.1 WATERSHED ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS AND MITIGA TION NEEDS
The Middle Neuse River Basin (HUC 03020202) has been significantly impacted by agricultural land
uses, extensive ditching, and lack of riparian buffer. Development within this basin is predicted to
increase, especially with construction of the Kinston Bypass. This bypass will increase mobility in the area
and spur development around proposed interchanges, likely creating additional impacts to the area. The
Middle Neuse River Basin (HUC 03020202) consists of 1,008 square miles with more than 340 miles of
stream and is primed for significant local growth. Among the five (5) counties that make up the watershed
(Beaufort, Craven, Lenoir, Pitt, and Wayne Counties), Pitt County is forecasted to grow the most rapidly,
with 5.8% by 2030**. The B56 Site represents a valuable opportunity to restore natural streams and
headwater systems to offer long-term protection to essential habitat and aquatic resources as growth and
development comes to the area.
This Site’s goals and objectives described below are consistent in addressing the major stressors
identified in the 2010 Neuse River Basin Restoration Priorities (“RBRP”) document produced by the North
Carolina Department of Mitigation Services (“NCDMS”).
** https://www.osbm.nc.gov/media/2247/download?attachment (accessed April 7, 2022).
2.2 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
WATERSHED SCALE GOALS
The Neuse RBRP 2010 document produced by the NCDMS spells out the Middle Neuse Basin
restoration and protection goals. Applicable goals stated are as follows:
• Promote nutrient and sediment reduction in agricultural areas by restoring and preserving
wetlands, streams, and riparian buffers.
• Continue targeted implementation of projects under the Nutrient Offset and Buffer programs, as
well as focusing Department of Transportation (“DOT”) sponsored restoration in areas where they
will provide the ecosystem’s most functional improvement.
Mitigation proposed as part of the B56 Site addresses these specific RBRP goals. A significant length of
stream mitigation, wetland mitigation, and riparian corridor enhancement and preservation will improve
water quality within the Middle Neuse Basin. Additionally, these projects are being implemented now to
offset future impacts that could occur as part of the Kinston Bypass construction and future development
that may occur because of the roadway improvements.
SITE -SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES
• Fill ditches that currently are draining headwater valley systems and reestablish the historic
headwater valley system to accomplish the following:
o Restore hydrology to the headwater valley system to restore wetland systems within
the headwaters.
o Restore original headwater stream system to provide more frequent flooding of the adjacent
headwater wetlands and valley.
9 The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
│September 2023

o Supplement existing trees and roots in headwater systems with appropriate vegetation to
encourage stabilized flow paths through restored headwater systems.
o Restore native riparian buffers.
o Restore native wetland vegetation.
• Restore intermittent and perennial streams with a Priority 1 restoration approach to:
o Reestablish the restored channel to the center of its valley and restore appropriate pattern,
dimension, and profile.
o Because of elevating the stream through a Priority 1 approach, restore adjacent riparian
wetland hydrology. This also will address the cross-sectional dimensions of the channel to
return it to a stream hydraulically connected to its floodplain versus its current ditched and
disconnected/incised state.
o Restore profile and habitat diversity by reestablishing riffle/ripple and pool sequences (i.e.,
habitat transitions) throughout the restored stream systems to provide depth variability.
o Establish a 150-foot-wide vegetated buffer to each site of the Priority 1 restoration and
transition reaches.
o Establish and/or protect a minimum 50-foot-wide vegetated buffer to each side of the
headwater reaches.
o Provide additional buffer, outside the required 50 feet along restored headwater systems, to
protect restored wetlands.
• Where possible, preserve channel reaches to provide a contiguous riparian corridor throughout
the site.
• Reestablish natural overland flow patterns within the adjacent buffers and riparian wetlands by
removing planting rows and disrupting the drainage effect of ditches within the buffer.
• Restore natural topography in the floodplains, including minor depression and mounds that
promote diversity of hydrologic conditions and habitats.
• Restore site wetland hydrology by promoting storage of surface water, increasing surface
ponding and infiltration, decreasing drainage capacity, and imposing a higher water table across
the floodplain and wetlands.
2.3 ASSURANCE OF SUFFICIENT WATER RIGHTS, CONTROL OF
MINERALS, AND ACCESS
Sufficient water rights exist to support the long-term sustainability of the Site. There are no severed rights
on the property.
2.4 SITE PROTECTION
In accordance with Section X (Site Protection) found in the Middle Neuse UMBI, the Bank Sponsor,
Weyerhaeuser NR Company, plans to protect the site by applying a conservation easement. A copy of
the Conservation Easement document is included as Appendix I – Conservation Easement Documents.

The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
September 2023│
10

3.0 SITE BASELINE
3.1 EXISTING WATERSHED CONDITIONS
The stream system proposed for mitigation consists of the Pollard Swamp stream channel and two (2)
unnamed tributaries. The headwaters for this system occur onsite and are included in the mitigation area.
Silviculture is the primary land use within the headwater system. In some reaches, a hardwood buffer has
been left intact where the adjacent floodplain typically is too inundated for pine harvesting. In these
reaches, the center of the valley typically has been ditched, draining the headwater system. Watershed
summary information for the system is provided in the table below.
Table 3 – Watershed Overview
Level IV Ecoregion 63e Mid-Atlantic Flatwoods
River Basin Neuse
USGS 8-digit Hydrologic Unit 03020202
USGS 12-digit Hydrologic Unit 030202020403
DWR Sub-Basin 03-04-09
Project Watershed / Percent Impervious
Beaufort 56 807 Ac 0.11%
The watershed sits within the Carolina Flatwoods ecoregion (Level IV), which occur in the nearly level
coastal plain with frequently high-water tables and large areas of poorly drained soil. While the watershed
currently is occupied by significant commercial loblolly pine plantations, the large areas of loamy, organic
soils historically were home to significant biological diversity compared to the Mid-Atlantic Flatwood region
to the north. Restoring and preserving headwater systems is especially valuable to the health and water
quality of the watershed because of its shallow topography.
3.2 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS
SURFACE WATER CLASSIFICATION
All reaches identified on-site, including each unnamed tributary and named swamp system (Pollard
Swamp), are identified as Class C waters with additional designations of nutrient sensitive waters
(“NSW”) and swamp waters (“SW ”). The system joins Clayroot Swamp, which is listed as impaired and
drains to an impaired segment of Swift Creek.
SITE SOILS
The on-site soils are derived from deposits on marine terraces within the coastal plain. These soils were
deposited between the Pliocene and Pleistocene epochs, where ocean levels were high enough to form
flat terraces across the coast of North America and deposit marine sands, silts, and clays. The on-site
soils are described by site section and soil type below. The soils that occur on-site are presented in Figure
5 – NRCS Soils and Figure 6 – Hydric Soils. The soils further described below occur in areas planned for wetland
restoration. These areas currently do not meet wetland hydrology parameters due to past ditching and
stream incision.
11 The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
│September 2023

Leon Sand
Leon Sand (“Lo”) is a sandy soil that forms on flats in marine terraces created from sandy fluvio-marine
deposits during prehistoric periods of high sea levels. The profile consists of medium sand from 0 to 15
inches and fine sand from 15 to at least 80 inches (end of profile). The soil is highly conductive, with
hydraulic conductivity values in the most confining layers (fine sand) of as high as 1.98 inches per hour.
The Leon soil occurs on-site adjacent to the stream corridors of Pantego loam. The water table is
consistently at 0 to 12 inches in depth and the soil has a hydric rating of 80.
Pantego Loam
Pantego Loam (“Pa”) forms in broad interstream divides on marine terraces and consists of mostly loam
and sandy loam. The soil profile consists of loam from 0 to 18 inches and a sandy clay loam from 18 to 80
inches (end of profile). The soil is poorly drained with high available water storage and a hydric rating of
90. Fitting with its description, the Pantego soils occur within the tributary corridors.
Tomotley Fine Sandy Loam
Tomotley Fine Sandy Loam (“To”) forms in depressions on terraces along the coastal plain and consists
of medium-to-fine sandy loam. The soil profile is made up of fine sandy loam from 0 to 12 inches, sandy
clay loam from 12 to 42 inches, sandy loam from 42 to 50 inches, and loamy sand from 50 to 80 inches
(end of profile). The soil profile is poorly drained but has a high hydraulic conductivity rating and a hydric
rating of 91. Tomotley soils occur in the western edge of the Site.
BASELINE STREAM CONDITIONS
Descriptions of each existing reach condition are outlined below. Figure 7 – Watershed provides watershed
acreages for each reach and Table 1 provides existing lengths. Additionally, representative photos are
included in Appendix B – Photo Pages. Figure 8 shows existing Site conditions.
Pollard Swamp (“PS”) Reach 1
Historically, Pollard Swamp Reach 1 is a headwater systems that have been ditched and disconnected
from the adjacent floodplain to drain adjacent areas. North Carolina Stream Assessment Method (“NC
SAM”) scores for each reach are low, due to the incised and disconnected nature of the existing
conditions, and bank ratios for each reach range from 2.5 to 4.0. NCSAM forms for the stream in Appendix
G – NCSAM Forms.
Pollard Swamp (“PS”) – Reaches 2 and 3
The lower portion of Pollard Swamp is an incised channel that has been ditched and currently acts as a
roadside ditch. Historically, reaches 2 and 3 were shallow E-type stream channel that formed at the
downstream extent of the PS headwater system. Currently, due to the incised and ditched nature of the
channel, it is disconnected from the floodplain and lacks natural pattern and bedform diversity. The NC
SAM rating of the lower reach of PS is low, primarily due to its entrenched condition and inability to
frequently access its historic floodplain.
The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
September 2023│
12

BASELINE WETLAND CONDITIONS
All areas within the Beaufort 56 site boundary have been field reviewed (Figure 8 – Existing Conditions). While
large portions of riparian areas along each system have hydric soils and, historically, have been
headwater and riparian wetlands, with the exception of a 0.1-acre disturbed, herbaceous area near a
culvert, there are currently no existing wetlands on-site due to a lack of hydrology. A request for a
preliminary jurisdictional determination or delineation concurrence is being submitted concurrently with
this mitigation plan.
3.3 ENDANGERED/THREATENED SPECIES
Table 4 includes a full list of state and federally protected species known to occur in Beaufort County.
Current Site conditions do not provide suitable habitat for the listed species. Also, none of the listed
species have been observed during on-site reconnaissance. The restoration of the Site’s streams and
wetlands, however, may result in potentially suitable aquatic and forest habitat for the species noted.
Table 4 – Beaufort County Protected Species
(NC Natural Heritage Program, https://www.ncnhp.org/data/species-community-search, updated February 9, 2019.)
Taxonomic
Group Scientific Name Common Name State
Status
Federal
Status Habitat
Suitable
Habitat On-
site
Amphibian Necturus lewisi Neuse River
Waterdog SC PT
rivers and large streams in Neuse
and Tar drainages (endemic to North
Carolina)
No
Amphibian Pseudacris ornata Ornate Chorus Frog E swamps, savannas, wooded ponds
and pools No
Amphibian Rana capito (syn.
Rana capito capito)
Carolina Gopher
Frog E
breeds in temporary fish-free pools;
forages in sandy woods, especially
pine-oak sandhills
No
Bird Ammodramus
henslowii Henslow's Sparrow E clearcut pocosins and other damp
weedy fields [breeding season only] No
Bird Haliaeetus
leucocephalus Bald Eagle T BGPA
mature forests near large bodies of
water (nesting); rivers, lakes, and
sounds (foraging) [breeding evidence
only]
No
Bird Ixobrychus exilis Least Bittern SC fresh or brackish marshes [breeding
evidence only] No
Bird Picoides borealis Red-cockaded
Woodpecker E E
mature open pine forests, mainly in
longleaf pine [breeding evidence
only]
No
Bird Setophaga virens
waynei
Wayne's Black-
throated Green
Warbler
E
nonriverine wetland forests,
especially where white cedar or
cypress are mixed with hardwoods
[breeding evidence only]
No
Freshwater
Bivalve Fusconaia masoni Atlantic Pigtoe E PT
Roanoke, Tar, Neuse, Cape Fear,
Yadkin-Pee Dee drainages. Prefers
medium to large streams with large
substrate.
No
Freshwater
Fish
Acipenser
brevirostrum Shortnose Sturgeon E E
brackish water of large rivers and
estuaries; spawns in freshwater
areas
No
Freshwater
Fish
Acipenser
oxyrinchus
oxyrinchus
Atlantic Sturgeon E E coastal waters, estuaries, large rivers No
Mammal Canis rufus Red Wolf T EXP swamps, pocosins, extensive forests Potential
13 The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
│September 2023

Mammal Corynorhinus
rafinesquii macrotis
Eastern Big-eared
Bat SC
roosts in hollow trees, old buildings,
and beneath bridges, usually near
water
No
Mammal Trichechus manatus West Indian
Manatee T T warm waters of estuaries and river
mouths No
Reptile Alligator
mississippiensis American Alligator T T(S/A) fresh to slightly brackish lakes,
ponds, rivers, and marshes No
Reptile Crotalus horridus Timber Rattlesnake SC wetland forests in the Coastal Plain;
rocky, upland forests elsewhere Potential
Reptile Malaclemys
terrapin
Diamondback
Terrapin SC salt or brackish marshes, estuaries No
Reptile Nerodia sipedon
williamengelsi
Carolina
Watersnake SC salt or brackish marshes (endemic to
North Carolina) No
Reptile Sistrurus miliarius
miliarius
Carolina Pigmy
Rattlesnake SC pine flatwoods, pine/oak sandhills,
other pine/oak forests Potential
Vascular
Plant
Aeschynomene
virginica Sensitive Jointvetch T T freshwater to slightly brackish tidal
marshes and wet ditches No
Vascular
Plant Eleocharis cellulosa Gulfcoast Spikerush E interdune ponds, brackish marshes
& tidal freshwater marshes No
Vascular
Plant
Lysimachia
asperulifolia
Rough-leaf
Loosestrife E E pocosin/savanna ecotones, pocosins No
Vascular
Plant Platanthera nivea Snowy Orchid T wet savannas No
Vascular
Plant
Polygonum
glaucum Seabeach Knotweed E ocean and sound beaches No
Vascular
Plant
Ponthieva
racemosa Shadow-witch T blackwater forests and swamps,
especially over marl No
Vascular
Plant
Sagittaria
weatherbiana
Grassleaf
Arrowhead E fresh to slightly brackish marshes,
streams, swamps, and pond margins No
Vascular
Plant Spiranthes eatonii Eaton's Ladies'-
tresses E pine savannas and pine-oak sandhills No
3.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
A search of the North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources – State Historic Preservation Office
(SHPO) GIS Web Service (http://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/, accessed January 3, 2019) showed no known
significant historic or archeological resources on site or immediately adjacent to the site. No impacts to
such resources if they do occur are anticipated.
3.5 REGULATED FLOODPLAINS
The site is located in an Area of Minimal Flood Hazard (Zone X – FIRM panel 3720564000L). No FEMA
coordination is required to work in this area.
The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
September 2023│
14

3.6 EXIS TING SITE CONSTRAINTS
There are no known constraints that are not being addressed through design. The only known design
constraints are:
• An existing dirt road that crosses the site along the PS Reach 2 section of channel.
o The existing culvert under this road is to be upsized with a wider/larger culvert to
improve the hydraulic connection from the upstream side of the road to the downstream
side.
o The new culvert will be elevated to match the higher stream invert that was designed to
provide a Priority 1 restoration and thus promote floodplain connectivity.
o The new culvert invert will also be installed 1.0 foot below the stream invert in order to
better allow for fish passage.
o The conservation easement will have a break to accommodate the road; no mitigation
credits will be generated from the break in the road.
• Reach 3 will tie into the existing channel as it leaves the site.
o The lower 550 feet of PS – Reach 3 will transition from the Priority 1 restoration down to
tie into the lower existing invert of the channel as the stream channel leaves the site.
4.0 FUNCTIONAL UPLIFT POTENTIAL
Based on data and observations collected from the watershed analysis, site visits, and reference material,
Table 5 outlines areas of potential uplift and a work plan associated with the uplift of each design
consideration. These parameters, and their associated design considerations, have been developed to fit
under the framework of the Harman Stream Functions Pyramid. Maximum practical uplift potential for
each functional level, including stream hydrology, hydraulics, geomorphology, physical chemistry, and
biology, were scrutinized based on the existing conditions and limitations associated with adjacent land
use, watershed condition, and landscape variables. The content of this Mitigation Plan was guided by
these observed functional uplift areas to best serve the project and improve overall site conditions.
Table 5 – Stream Mitigation Work Plan
Parameter Design Consideration Work Plan (if not functioning or functioning at-risk)
Hydrologic Function
Surface Flow and
Watershed Contribution
Overland Flow
Restore multi-zone hardwood and vegetative buffer to slow overland
flow and reduce sedimentation. Identify areas of concentrated flow
such as lateral ditches that enter the proposed conservation
easement and fill these ditches and locations of concentrated flow.
Also, implement floodplain depressions to dissipate energy and slow
water entering the conservation easement.
Vegetative Buffer
Hydraulic Function
Floodplain Connectivity
Bank Height Ratios
(BHR)
Restore natural bankfull dimensions and reestablish hydrologic
access to the floodplain by raising existing channel bottoms or
designing new channel with appropriate base width and bankfull
dimensions based on regional curves and reference reach data. The
primary approach throughout all reaches is to reconnect the channel
to its historic floodplain by filling in ditches through headwater
systems and implementing Priority 1 restoration where feasible.
Floodplains and adjacent wetlands will be restored to promote the
Entrenchment Ratio
(ER)
Dimensionless Rating
Curve
15 The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
│September 2023

storage and infiltration of surface water.
Flow Dynamics
Bankfull Velocity Reduce channel erosion and stabilize sediment transport within the
channel by selecting bankfull dimensions and channel
geomorphology to optimize stream power and velocity and minimize
negative impacts from excess shear stress. Changes to the
dimensions of the channels will include construction of a channel
with appropriate bank height ratios (1.0) and appropriate bedform
diversity to dissipate energy across the floodplain and channel.
Bankfull Shear Stress
Bankfull Stream Power
Groundwater/Surface
Water Exchange
Meander Width Ratios
Reestablish channel pattern and profile, removing existing ditches
that drain surrounding groundwater areas. Raised groundwater
conditions along the stream banks restore hyporheic zones and allow
for groundwater and surface water exchange. Floodplains and
adjacent wetlands will be restored to promote surface water storage
and infiltration. Priority 1 combined with decreasing floodplain
drainage capacity will impose a higher water table across the site.
Bedform diversity
Geomorphic Function
Large Woody Debris
Transport and Storage
Large Woody Debris
Index (LWDI) compared
to reference
Reestablish hardwood buffer along riparian zone to provide shade,
detritus, and large and small woody debris to supplement habitat
provided by in-stream structures in the channel and buffer area.
Channel Evolution
Rosgen Stream Channel
Succession Scenarios
(2010) Design new channel with intentional P-P spacing, radius of curvature,
riffle slopes, and bankfull dimensions to regulate channel type and
development. Simon Channel
Evolution Model Stages
(1989)
Bank Migration/
Lateral Stability
Meander Width Ratios Design channels with appropriate width-to-depth ratios and
meander widths, as well as radius of curvature, to prevent unnatural
bank erosion and excess sedimentation. Plant stabilizing vegetation
and live stakes on the banks to reduce bank recession and
sedimentation.
Bank Erosion Hazard
Index (BEHI)
Width-to-Depth Ratios
Riparian Vegetation Vegetative Buffer
Varying widths of vegetative buffers will provide valuable hydrologic
and hydraulic benefits to the overbank and transitional areas of the
stream reaches and headwater systems, including stabilization,
energy dissipation, and natural habitat.
Bed-form Diversity
Percent Riffle Provide mechanism for channel bedform revitalization through
appropriate channel profile and dimensions that will subsequently
alter sediment deposition, transport, and channel stability.
Introducing proper pool-to-pool spacing and riffle/ripple grades will
support deposition of sediment and establishment of stable natural
channel bed material. Additionally, wood structures such as log
vanes, log cross vanes, brush and roll riffles, and toe wood will be
used to provide immediate bedform diversity creating habitat
transitions like references
Pool-to-Pool Spacing
Depth Variability
Bed Material
Characterization
Bed Material
Composition Relative to
Reference
Physicochemical Function
Water Quality Vegetative Buffer and
Bank Stability
Establish vegetative buffer to decrease sediment erosion from
riparian areas and from incoming surface flow from outside of the
conservation easement. The buffer also will reduce runoff velocities
which will decrease the potential for channel bank erosion.
Regrading and planting channel banks (where applicable) will reduce
The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
September 2023│
16

the potential for bank erosion and further reduce sediment loading.
Water Temperature Establish Riparian
Buffer
Establish riparian buffer along headwater systems, as well as
ephemeral, intermittent, and perennial streams within the
conservation easement. Narrowing low flow when channel is
overwide will further reduce temperature.
Nutrients
In-Stream Riffle
Structures
Reestablish appropriate channel dimensions and pool-to-pool
spacing to restore groundwater to surface water exchange in the
channel banks and revitalize hyporheic zones where micro bacteria
breakdown and consume complex nutrients from fertilizers, like
nitrates into atmospheric Nitrogen.
Profile and Bankfull
Dimensions
Biological Function
Aquatic organism
communities
Aquatic Habitat Revitalize riparian buffer conditions, install instream structures for
stability and habitat (brush and roll rifles, brush toe, log vanes, and
log cross vanes), and raise channel bed to reconnect flow to the
floodplain and enhance hyporheic activity. The installation of riffle
structures provides areas for aquatic habitat, as well as areas for
turbulence that oxygenates water.
Wetland Habitat
Groundwater and
Surface Water
Connectivity
5.0 MITIGATION PLAN
5.1 REFERENCE SITE AND DESIGN PARAMETERS
Design of the proposed restoration reaches within the B56 Site were based on multiple considerations
and sources of design parameters. The following were used for the stream and wetland design:
• Four (4) reference stream sites located within the Carolina Flatwoods level-IV ecoregion.
• On-site relic channels and relic wetland systems.
• Multiple coastal plain regional curves and accompanying data.
• Current U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (“USACE”) and NCDMS guidelines/design parameters.
Searches were conducted upstream/downstream of the Site and into surrounding watersheds to find
suitable references that contained similarities to the Site streams including level IV physiographic
ecoregion, watershed, valley slope, and morphology. No reference reaches were identified immediately
upstream or downstream of the site or in the surrounding watershed. Four (4) reference reaches from
multiple reference databases (NCDOT and Sweet/Geratz) were selected outside of the watershed but
within the Carolina Flatwoods level-IV physiographic eco-region. The reference reaches were selected to
represent the probable configurations for the proposed streams. The data shown in Table 6 helped to
provide a basis for evaluating the project site and determining the stream systems that may have been
present historically and/or how they may have been influenced by changes within the watershed. A
description of each reference reach is included below. Geomorphic parameters for these reference
reaches are summarized in Appendix D – Geomorphology.
Reference streams provide geomorphic parameters of a stable system, which can be used to inform
design of stable channels of similar stream types in similar landscapes and watersheds. While reference
reach data can be a useful aid in designing channel dimension, pattern, and profile, there are limitations
in smaller stream systems. The flow patterns and channel formation for most reference reach quality
streams is often controlled by slope, watersheds, groundwater inputs and larger trees and/or other deep-
rooted vegetation. Some meander geometry parameters, such as radius of curvature, are particularly
17 The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
│September 2023

affected by vegetation control. Pattern ratios observed in reference reaches may not be applicable or are
often adjusted in the design criteria to create designs that are less likely to erode after construction before
the permanent vegetation is established.
REFERENCE STREAM REACHES
Beaverdam Branch
The Beaverdam Branch reference reach is located approximately 1,000 feet downstream of SR 1119
outside Trenton, North Carolina in Jones County. Beaverdam Branch is classified as a Rosgen E5 stream
type. The stream flows through a wide wooded swamp floodplain with a valley slope of 0.1%-0.4% and
sinuosity of 1.9. Most of floodplain would be considered wetland with numerous seeps and side
tributaries. The 3.0 square mile watershed is mostly agricultural (70.4% cultivated) with the remainder
being bottomland forest/hardwood swamps, shrublands, mixed upland hardwoods, and some single-
family residences.
Black Branch
Black Branch is in Craven County just north-west of New Bern off SR 1101, within Croatan National
Forest. This site was classified as a blackwater E stream type and has a watershed of 1.2 square miles.
The reach has a valley slope of 0.6% and channel slope of 0.4% giving it a sinuosity of 1.7. The stream
maintains an entrenchment ratio of 15-25. The watershed of the reference reach lies almost entirely
within the National Forest boundaries made up of predominantly silviculture southern yellow pine with
some bottomland forest, mixed upland hardwoods, and mixed shrubland.
Tributary to Town Creek
The unnamed tributary (“UT”) to Town Creek is located north of SR 1413 (Town Creek Rd NE) near
Belville, NC in Brunswick County. The stream was classified as a blackwater E stream type with a
watershed of 0.6 square miles. This reach flows through a semi mature bottomland forest and has an
average valley slope of 0.72% and an average channel slope of 0.35%. The channel has a width-to-depth
ratio of 8.9, an entrenchment ratio of over 20, and a sinuosity of 2.0. The watershed for this reference
reach is mostly used for cultivated silviculture with some forested land and shrubland.
Tributary to Hunters Creek
The UT to Hunters Creek is in Jones County, south of Great Lake Road, Croatan National Forest. The
watershed is 0.7 square miles and the land use within the watershed is comprised of cultivated
silviculture, semi mature-mature bottomland forest/hardwood swamps, shrublands, and mixed upland
hardwoods. The UT to Hunters Creek reference site was classified as a C6 stream type with a sinuosity of
1.5. The channel has a width to depth ratio of 19 and an entrenchment ratio of 16. The reach has a valley
slope of 0.4% while the channel slope is 0.2%.
HYBRID ECOREGION -SPECIFIC REGIONAL CURVE
The published Rural NC Coastal Plain regional curve (Doll, et al., 2003) along with an additional NC
Coastal Plain regional curve (Sweet and Geratz, 2003) was used to check hydraulic geometry based on
watershed using regional relationships. A hybrid level IV ecoregion-specific curve was developed for the
Carolina Flatwoods ecoregion using data from the two published regional curves and supplementary data
from Kimley-Horn’s internal reference reach database. Analytical review of applicable streams from
The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
September 2023│
18

multiple stream reference databases and developing a hybrid regional curve, provided the most pertinent
background information to determine the appropriate design parameters given the existing conditions and
overall site functional uplift potential. Additionally, reference parameters from Kimley-Horn’s internal
database based on successful past projects were consulted and analyzed. Appendix D – Geomorphology
illustrates the NC Coastal Plain curves along with other data used for these analyses.
HEADWATER REFERENCE
In addition to design criteria reference data (mentioned above), design and placement of the headwater
restoration reach systems required consideration of the valley slope, contributing watershed, ground
water inputs, curvature, soils, precipitation and ecoregion. Research provided in “Mapping Headwater
Streams: Intermittent and Perennial Headwater Stream Model Development and Spatial Application” by
Russell (2008) shows that contributing watershed is the usually the dominating factor in predicting
intermittent and perennial stream points of origin. For the Coastal Plain it was found that the mean
contributing watershed at the point of origin of intermittent streams is about 40 acres. For perennial
streams that value is about 100 acres.
Table 6 – Distribution of Intermittent and Perennial Origin Contributing Watershed (acre)
Carolina Slate
Belt-A
Carolina Slate
Belt-B
Eastern Blue
Ridge Foothills
Northern Outer
Piedmont
Rolling Coastal
Plain Triassic Basin
int per int per int per int per int per int per
Min 0.20 0.72 0.05 2.04 0.23 0.24 1.55 2.54 0.16 7.16 0.10 0.13
10% 1.47 7.53 0.77 2.39 2.17 1.02 1.80 4.07 7.52 10.76 1.24 1.89
25% 2.85 11.58 4.89 9.52 3.72 2.91 4.48 10.05 11.15 28.82 1.95 3.27
50% 7.36 15.99 23.80 37.50 4.60 4.98 8.82 16.18 25.67 84.00 3.70 6.85
Mean 11.20 23.74 50.86 60.85 5.16 5.27 12.72 20.52 40.66 95.59 5.11 10.40
75% 14.47 35.40 69.96 68.16 6.34 7.04 15.06 27.11 55.15 122.00 7.16 15.79
90% 27.39 43.33 142.41 187.26 8.16 9.81 22.99 41.31 101.33 217.34 11.87 27.80
Max 74.63 107.00 322.27 328.28 14.60 15.85 115.95 64.81 173.65 343.66 16.51 32.49
(Russell, 2008)
REFERENCE SITE WETLANDS
Wetland restoration adjacent to the headwater systems will be based on hydrology restored through the
process of restoring headwater stream systems and implementing Priority 1 stream restoration. Relic
wetlands within the headwater systems are primarily impacted by extensive ditching through the middle of
the valley, which has drained the systems. The relic hydric soils and valley features are already in place.
The system uplift will be based on the headwater channel and Priority 1 channel design which will raise
the groundwater table. Any wetland restoration that results from the stream restoration work will be
monitored and tracked. On-site reference wetland systems (upper 56B) in similar landscape positions
(i.e., headwater or riparian) and mapped soils will provide design and monitoring success criteria for
hydrology and vegetative community reference (see Figure 6 – Hydric Soils for hydric soils and Figure 11 –
Monitoring Plan for monitoring locations).
19 The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
│September 2023

DESIGN PARAMETER DEVELOPMENT
Design parameters were first based on the existing valley shape and slope, on-site relic stream systems,
the reference stream dimensionless parameters, and finally checked and confirmed using multiple
regional curves for North Carolina’s Coastal Plain region. Appendix D – Geomorphology outlines these
developed parameters.
5.2 MITIGATION WORK PLAN
STREAM MITIGATION WORK PLAN
A summary of the mitigation approach and lengths for each reach is provided in the table below.
Table 7 – Stream Mitigation Approach Summary
Reach Mitigation Approach Existing Length (ft.) Proposed Length (ft.)
PS – R1 Headwater 968 968
PS – R2 Restoration 2,217 2,486
PS – R3 Restoration 1,205 1,366
*Lengths reported are valley lengths
Overall Stream Channel Mitigation Approach Description
The B56 site has historically been extensively ditched, which has altered the wetland and stream systems
that used to be located within the headwater valleys of the systems. The overall approach to the system
is to reverse the damage created through ditching. More detailed and reach-specific approaches are
outlined below for restoration reaches, but the overall goal of these approaches is to reconnect the
channel flow with its adjacent riparian floodplain and wetlands and restore native vegetation communities
to restore lost functions of the system.
The design process began with a thorough analysis of existing and historic conditions and functions
within the catchment area for each reach and analysis of hydrologic, hydraulic, and geomorphic functional
impairments within each reach, wetland, and floodplain. From this data, reference systems (e.g., streams,
headwaters, wetlands, and riparian buffers) were selected that represented a stable, healthy system that
manages the same or similar baseline conditions. Through a comparison of existing conditions and relic
performance, as well as historic conditions, major areas of concern and potential uplift were identified.
The concerns include, but are not limited to, bank instability, disconnection from the natural floodplain due
to significant ditching, incision, over-widening of existing channels, and wetland and floodplain drainage.
Site analysis also identified a significant loss of in-stream and riparian wetland habitat (including sources
of shade, woody detritus, and large woody debris for future habitat development).
These issues will be addressed with a watershed-based approach. Starting at the top of the watershed,
the ditches within the valley reaches that show potential for headwater system restoration will be filled.
Downstream of these headwater systems, a Priority 1 approach will be used to continue a reconnection of
the stream hydrology to the adjacent floodplain through the valley; thus, raising the water table. This is a
valley restoration approach that will benefit adjacent wetland areas and the channel instead of only
providing uplift to the channel itself. In addition to raising the invert of the channel back to its historic
elevation, the channel will be returned to its original location along the lower portion of its valley and
appropriate pattern and bedform diversity (profile) will be restored.
The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
September 2023│
20

Headwater Restoration Approach Description
The on-site headwater systems have been ditched to accelerate drainage, damaging the hydrologic and
ecological functions of these systems. When functioning properly, with gradual progression from linear
wetland systems to channelized stream-wetland system, headwaters offer a vital ecological resource and
mitigate against nonpoint source pollution from the contributing watershed, as well as critical habitat for
aquatic and terrestrial species. Species diversity and frequency benefit from enhanced habitat in the
headwater and buffer areas within the entire B56 Site. As such, special focus has been given to addressing
major deficiencies in on-site headwater resources and the transitions from upland to headwater and
headwater to stream-wetland-floodplain.
Pollard Swamp—Reach 1, UT2, and UT3 within the B56 area each represent headwater mitigation and
aim to remove ditching and enhance riparian/wetland vegetation for a buffering mechanism. They also
aim to provide stabilized flow pathways for overland flow that will reduce sediment contributions from off-
site runoff and dissipate energy from potential sources of concentrated flow. Where relevant, new planted
vegetation will be selected based on its uplift potential for stability and erosion reduction, as well as its
functional value as wetland wildlife habitat. Headwater restoration is proposed to begin on each reach
where the cumulative watershed becomes 40 acres. Research has documented that 40 acres is the
average watershed size in the Coastal Plain Region that can support the formation of an intermittent
channel. (Russell, 2008) The headwater restoration will continue until the watershed size reaches 100
acres, at which point the work will transition to traditional Priority 1 stream restoration.
In general, the headwater restoration approach applied to the reaches listed above will include
the following:
• Fill the existing ditch (use adjacent spoil piles from original ditching activity).
• Fill lateral ditches that tie-in to the existing centerline ditch (using adjacent spoil pile material).
• Ensure appropriate organic topsoil exists (site investigations confirmed plenty of organic topsoil
material on-site).
• Rip and disk (if needed) the freshly placed soil and areas of construction to help ensure soil is
not compacted.
• Reestablish natural overland flow patterns within the adjacent buffers by removing berms and
planted rows and disrupting the drainage effect of ditches within the buffer.
• Restore natural topography in the wetland-floodplain, including minor depression and small
mounds that promote diversity of hydrologic conditions and habitats.
• Restore or enhance site hydrology by promoting surface water storage, increasing surface
ponding and infiltration, decreasing drainage capacity, and imposing a higher water table ac ross
the valley.
• Plant appropriate headwater system vegetation.
• Install woody debris structures to provide immediate stabilization to the freshly filled portions of
the ditch footprint (e.g., log sills or brush mattresses).
• Install coir fiber matting (as necessary) in some locations where concentrated flow is anticipated.
• Plant native vegetation within all restored areas as the contractor works their way out of the
headwater restoration area and down to the lower stream restoration reaches
21 The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
│September 2023

Stream Restoration Approach Description
Priority 1 restoration is proposed for Pollard Swamp – Reaches 2 and 3. Restoration activities aim to
reconnect flow to the floodplain and provide stable, natural bankfull dimensions, pattern, and profile.
These goals are accomplished by filling the existing ditched, incised, and eroding channel and redirecting
flow into a newly constructed natural channel that has been sized and aligned based on the following:
• Relic stream location.
• Valley topography/centerline location.
• Consideration of dimensionless ratios from reference reach conditions.
• Regional curve data.
The following specific improvements are incorporated into the restoration reaches on the Site:
• Dimension—The channel will be reconnected to its historic valley and floodplain by raising the
stream back up from its incised/ditched condition and the channel will have an appropriate
bankfull depth. This will restore the groundwater depths in areas directly adjacent to the channel
and will allow for more frequent floodplain access for storm flows.
• Pattern—The channel will be returned to its historic location within its valley as opposed to its
current straight/ditched location. Within the confines and boundary of its historic valley center, the
channel’s pattern will be returned based on on-site relic channel patterns, reference reach
dimensionless ratios, and regional curve data.
• Profile—With a restored dimension and pattern, the profile also will be designed to incorporate
bedform diversity with well-defined pools and shallow riffle reaches. In-stream structures will be
installed to provide scour for pools and initial grade control until the new riparian vegetation has
time to establish the root system necessary to hold the restored system in place. In addition,
woody structures—such as the proposed brush and roll riffles and toe-wood—will provide
immediate habitat and stabilization for the newly constructed channel.
• Riparian Buffer—Beyond restoring the natural channel, the stream restoration approach also
reestablishes a native riparian buffer protected with a permanent conservation easement that
provides uplift to site hydrology, channel stability, and availability of natural habitat.
• Flow Patterns—Within the adjacent buffers, natural overland flow patterns will be reestablished
by removing berms, planted rows, etc. and disrupting the drainage effect of ditches within
the buffer.
• Natural Topography—Natural topography in the floodplains, including minor depression and
mounds that promote diversity of hydrologic conditions and habitats, will be restored.
• Site Hydrology—Site hydrology will be restored or enhanced by promoting surface water storage,
increasing surface ponding and infiltration, decreasing drainage capacity, and imposing a higher
water table across the floodplain and wetlands.
Mitigation Approach for Individual Reaches
Mitigation approaches for each reach in the B56 Site have been outlined below. Table 7 provides an
overview of the suggested mitigation activities that will be employed to achieve the targeted objectives
within each reach.
The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
September 2023│
22

Pollard Swamp—Reach 1
Headwater Restoration – Mitigation activities will aim to restore headwater stream-wetland-floodplain
system functionality by filling in the existing ditched channel and restoring appropriate grade, hydrology,
and vegetative communities. Existing buffer hardwoods will be preserved as much as possible and will
continue to provide a stabilized flow path for restored stream and riparian wetlands, and a 100-foot buffer
will be added to each side of the valley centerline to protect the restored system and regulate incoming
surface flow from outside the conservation easement.
Pollard Swamp—Reach 2 and 3
Priority 1 Restoration—Mitigation activities include raising and re-meandering the channel with
appropriate dimensions to reconnect hydrology with the floodplain and restore/enhance riparian wetlands
adjacent to the stream. Within the channel, in-stream structures will be installed, including log cross
vanes, toe wood, and other woody debris to protect restored banks, maintain channel grade in riffles, and
enhance natural habitat within the restored profile. A 150-foot buffer will be added on either side of the
stream valley along Reach 2 and along the East side of Reach 3. A 50-foot buffer will be added along the
West bank of Reach 3.
As Reach 3 reaches its tie in location at the southern end of the Site, the stream will need to be
transitioned from a Priority 1 restoration back down to tie into the existing channel using Priority 2 before
flowing off-site. This transition is gradual over the last 550 feet of the reach and is shown on Sheet 13 of
the attached Draft Mitigation Plan Drawings.
WETLAND MITIGATION WORK PLAN
Through restoration of the headwater stream systems and Priority 1 restoration of the downstream
systems, riparian and headwater wetlands will be restored throughout the system. Based on
topography/LIDAR and presence of hydric soils, there are wetlands that are anticipated to be restored
through filling of the ditches and restoration of the headwater systems (hydrology and vegetation). These
areas will be monitored after restoration to determine the extent of restoration achieved. A summary of
the mitigation approach and areas for each system is provided in the table below.
Table 8 – Wetland Mitigation Approach Summary
Wetland Unit Acreage Mitigation Approach Mitigation Credits
WA-1 11.8 Restoration 11.8
WA-2 36.4 Restoration 36.4
WA-3 7.1 Restoration 7.1
WA-4 5.6 Restoration 5.6
WA-5 0.1 Enhancement 0.0
Total 61.0 60.9
Wetland Restoration Approach Description
Site conditions and historical mapping indicate that the full site area within the lower topographic setting
was historically wetlands. Wetland restoration activities aim to establish site hydrology, improve surface
and subsurface hydrologic connectivity, vegetation diversity/density/composition/vigor, and to provide
improvements that benefit downstream waters. On site wetland hydrology will be restored as part of the
23 The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
│September 2023

headwater stream restoration activities, plugging lateral ditches, and by converting vegetation from
commercial pine plantation to bottomland hardwood forest species. These new plantings will provide flow
velocity control, soil stability, habitat, and additional essential ecosystem functions that will provide
essential, permanent habitat for local fauna in areas where loblolly pine plantations make habitat variable
and less diverse. Proposed wetland mitigation areas are shown in Figure 10.
Included below is a bulleted list of the proposed activities to be completed to accomplish wetland
restoration on the site. Activities to restore these wetland systems include:
• Fill existing ditch as part of the headwater stream restoration approach.
• Fill any lateral ditches that currently drain the wetland restoration areas to the primary ditch.
• Remove berms and spoil piles that exist along ditches.
• Remove pine planting beds within the wetland restoration areas (as applicable) because they
adversely affect drainage.
• Disk (if needed) the disturbed areas prior to planting.
• Re-establish native wetland vegetation within areas currently in pine production and within
disturbed areas.
• Monitor the restored wetland areas for invasive species and treat as necessary to comply with the
success criteria outlined in this document.
The rationale for each wetland restoration unit is provided below:
• WA-1 (11.8 AC) Wetland restoration area is comprised of hydric soils (Lo and Pa), adjacent to
headwater restoration and at an elevation lower than 55.5 feet. Restoration of the headwater area
will limit lateral drainage, restoring wetland hydrology. Areas of planted pine will be cleared and
planted with appropriate hardwood species. Hardwood areas will remain with replanting in any
areas disturbed by stream restoration.

• WA-2 (36.4 AC) Wetland restoration area is comprised of hydric soils (Lo, To, and Pa), adjacent
to headwater and priority 1 restoration and at an elevation lower than 54 feet. Stream restoration
and plugging of lateral ditches will restore wetland hydrology. Areas of planted pine will be
cleared and planted with appropriate hardwood species. Hardwood areas will remain with
replanting in any areas disturbed by stream restoration. The mitigation area has been offset by
75-feet to enable the roadside ditch in the southern area to continue to function.

• WA-3 (7.1 AC) Wetland restoration area is comprised of hydric soils (Lo and Pa), adjacent to
priority 1 restoration, and at an elevation lower than 52 feet. Priority 1 restoration of Reach 2 will
limit lateral drainage and provide overbank flow to restore wetland hydrology. The planted pine
will be cleared and planted with appropriate hardwood species. Cleared fields will be prepped and
planted. Hardwood areas will remain with replanting in any areas disturbed by stream restoration.
The mitigation area has been offset by 75-feet to enable the roadside ditch in the southeastern
area and within the timber area to continue to function.

• WA-4 (5.6 AC) Wetland restoration area is contained within the 50-foot stream buffer area along
Pollard Swamp Reach 2. This area is wholly within Pa soils. Hydrology will be restored through
the Priority 1 restoration of the stream reach. Appropriate riparian wetland planting will be done.

The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
September 2023│
24

• WA-5 (0.1 AC) Wetland enhancement area is an existing emergent wetland in a disturbed area
that is located within WA-4 and will be enhanced by planting.
VEGETATI ON AND PLANTING PLAN
Planting within the Conservation Easement has been separated into four (4) zones to reflect differences
in purpose and location, as well as differences in vegetation. Zone 1 is located along the stream bank and
serves to provide bank stability and in-stream habitat along the channel. Zone 2 makes up the riparian
buffer of each reach and the wetlands within the buffer, providing a wide range of benefits including
physicochemical and hydrological uplift to the channel as well as overbank habitat and erosion
prevention. Zone 3 includes planting for upland areas that are currently planted in pine. Zone 4 is
supplemental planting for existing hardwood areas. Buffer widths for either side of each reach are
provided in Table 9. The plant species proposed for the zones were selected based on reference
vegetative conditions and various resources providing guidance on healthy North Carolina Coastal Plain
small stream swamp communities. Planting ratios were identified based on relevant guidance to restore
natural small stream swamp conditions that were impacted historically by land use and site
manipulations. Tree seedlings will be planted at a density of 450 stems per acre.
Post-constructed vegetation communities will resemble those found in unaltered Coastal Plain Small
Stream Swamp and Bottomland Hardwood communities. Riparian and Wetland zone vegetation will
consist of planted hardwoods, specifically native members of the Quercus and Nyssa genera, as well as
water tolerant species such as American Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis) and Swamp Cyrilla (Cyrilla
racemiflora) that thrive in the semi-acidic conditions found within the mitigation site.
Due to the differences in hydrologic purpose and ecological benefit, different planting profiles are
proposed for Headwater and stream mitigation areas. Typical planting sections are provided in the project
plan set, Appendix F – Mitigation Plan Sheets.
Table 9 – Proposed Buffer Widths
Reach Proposed Length Left Buffer width (ft) Right Buffer width (ft)
PS – R1 968 50 50
PS – R2 2,448 150 150
PS – R3 1,318 150 50
Zone 1 – Stream Bank
Channel stability and geomorphology are dependent in large part on the health and strength of stream bank
vegetation. As such, live stakes selected for Zone 1 have been identified for their rapid growth rate and
high success rates in channel bank conditions. Long term, stream bank vegetative conditions will evolve
through natural secondary succession, eventually transitioning to shade tolerant hardwoods like the riparian
buffer conditions. Understory areas will be inhabited by silky dogwood (Cornus amomum), silky willow (Salix
sericea), elderberry (Sambucus), buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis), black willow (Salix nigra), tag
alder (Alnus serrulata), which are rapidly growing, highly successful species that enhance bank stability.
The table below provides Zone 1 species for live stake planting within these buffer areas.
25 The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
│September 2023

Table 10 – Zone 1 Planting Summary
Stream Bank Live Stake Planting
Common Name Scientific Name Wetland Indicator
Status
Silky Dogwood (Cornus amomum) FACW
Silky Willow (Salix sericea) OBL
Elderberry (Sambucus) FACW
Buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis) OBL
Black Willow (Salix nigra) OBL
Tag Alder (Alnus serrulata) OBL

Zone 2 – Riparian Buffer and Wetland
Riparian wetland conditions suffer in absence of a stable vegetative stream buffer. Table 9 outlines
proposed buffer widths along either side of each reach. Table 11 below provides Zone 2 species for
planting within these buffer and wetland areas. The wetland delineation for each site is shown in Figure 8 –
Existing Conditions.
Table 11 – Zone 2 Planting Summary
Riparian Buffer and Wetland Zone Planting
Common Name Scientific Name Wetland Indicator
Status Percent Planted
Cherrybark Oak (Quercus pagoda) FACW 10%
American Sycamore (Platanus
occidentalis) FACW 20%
Willow Oak (Quercus phellos) FACW 10%
Swamp Chestnut Oak (Quercus michauxii) FACW 10%
Blackgum (Nyssa sylvatica) FAC 15%
Swamp Tupelo (Nyssa biflora) OBL 10%
Water Oak (Quercus nigra) FAC 15%
Swamp Cyrilla (Cyrilla racemiflora) FACW 10%

Zone 3 – Upland
Intact upland habitats protect water quality and provide critical habitat for wildlife as well, providing a
location of refuge for species seeking shelter. Upland planting areas will host FAC and FACU hardwoods
native to existing Coastal Plain small stream swamp communities. Table 12 below provides Zone 3
species for planting within upland areas.
The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
September 2023│
26

Table 12 – Zone 3 Planting Summary
Upland Zone Planting
Common Name Scientific Name Wetland Indicator
Status Percent Planted
Loblolly Pine (Pinus taeda) FAC 10%
Sweet Gum (Liquidambar
styraciflua) FAC 20%
Water Oak (Quercus nigra) FAC 20%
Tulip Poplar (Liriodendron
tulipifera) FACU 20%
Blackgum (Nyssa sylvatica) FAC 20%
American Hornbeam (Carpinus caroliniana) FAC 10%
Zone 4 – Supplemental
The supplemental zone will aid the existing hardwood communities within the project area. The plant
community in this zone will be dominated by common upland hardwoods within Coastal Plain small
stream swamps with wetland indicator statuses of FAC or FACU. Table 13 provides Zone 4 species for
planting within the supplemental area.
Table 13 – Zone 4 Planting Summary
Supplemental Zone Planting
Common Name Scientific Name Wetland Indicator
Status Percent Planted
Loblolly Pine (Pinus taeda) FAC 20%
Sweet Gum (Liquidambar
styraciflua) FAC 25%
Tulip Poplar (Liriodendron
tulipifera) FACU 30%
American Hornbeam (Carpinus caroliniana) FAC 25%

6.0 DETERMINATION OF CREDITS
6.1 STREAM MITIGATION CREDIT CALCULATIONS
Proposed stream mitigation ratios and credits are included in the table below. These credits are based on
the lengths and approaches as included in the draft Mitigation Plan Sheets. These numbers are subject to
change based on the final design plan drawings that will be produced for construction and based on the
actual constructed project and as-built survey.
27 The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
│September 2023

Table 124 – Proposed Stream Mitigation Credits
Reach Mitigation Approach Existing Length (ft.) Proposed Length (ft.) Credit Ratio Credits
PS – R1 Headwater Restoration 968 968 1:1 968
PS – R2 Restoration 2,217 2,486 1:1 2,486
PS – R3 Restoration 1,205 1,366 1:1 1,366
Total stream lengths and sub-total Credits 4,390 4,820 4,820
BUFFER ADJUSTMENT TO STREAM CREDITS (SEE “WILMINGTON DISTRICT STREAM BUFFER CREDIT
CALCULATOR” WORKSHEETS IN Appendix E – Buffer Credit Calculations) 730.70
TOTAL STREAM CREDITS 5,551

6.2 WETLAND MITIGATION CREDIT CALCULATIONS
Proposed wetland mitigation ratios and credits are included in the table below. These credits are based
on the delineated areas and restoration approaches as included in the draft Mitigation Plan Sheets.
These values are subject to change based on the final design plan drawings that will be produced for
construction and based on the actual constructed project and as-built survey.
Table 135 – Proposed Wetland Mitigation Credits
Mitigation Approach (Acres)
Site Restoration Enhancement Preservation Total Wetland
Credits Total Acres
B56
WA-1 11.8 0.0 0.0 11.8
WA-2 36.4 0.0 0.0 36.4
WA-3 7.1 0.0 0.0 7.1
WA-4 5.6 0.0 0.0 5.6
WA-5 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.3
Total 60.9 0.1 0.0 60.9 61.0

The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
September 2023│
28

7.0 CREDIT RELEASE SCHEDULE
Mitigation credits shall be released and added to the mitigation site ledger in accordance with the
milestones and percentages shown in Table 14 and Table 15.
Table 146 – Credit Release Schedule—Streams
Credit Release Schedule and Milestones for Streams
Credit Release
Milestone Release Activity Interim
Release
Total
Released
1 Site Establishment 15% 15%
2 Completion of all initial physical and biological improvements made pursuant to the
Mitigation Plan 15% 30%
3 Year 1 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are stable and interim
performance standards have been met 10% 40%
4 Year 2 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are stable and interim
performance standards have been met 10% 50%
5 Year 3 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are stable and interim
performance standards have been met 10% 60%
6 Year 4 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are stable and interim
performance standards have been met 5% 65%
7 Year 5 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are stable and interim
performance standards have been met 10% 75%
8 Year 6 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are stable and interim
performance standards have been met 5% 80%
9 Year 7 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are stable and performance
standards have been met 10% 90%*
*NOTE: 10% reserve credits will be held back until the bankfull event performance standard has been met.

Table 157 – Credit Release Schedule—Wetlands
Credit Release Schedule and Milestones for Forested Wetland
Credit Release
Milestone Release Activity Interim
Release
Total
Released
1 Site Establishment 15% 15%
2 Completion of all initial physical and biological improvements made pursuant to the Mitigation
Plan 15% 30%
3 Year 1 monitoring report demonstrates that interim performance standards have been met 10% 40%
4 Year 2 monitoring report demonstrates that interim performance standards have been met 10% 50%
5 Year 3 monitoring report demonstrates that interim performance standards have been met 15% 65%
6 Year 4 monitoring report demonstrates that interim performance standards have been met 5% 70%
7 Year 5 monitoring report demonstrates that interim performance standards have been met 15% 65%
8 Year 6 monitoring report demonstrates that interim performance standards have been met 5% 90%
9 Year 7 monitoring report demonstrates that performance standards have been met 10% 100%
8.0 MONITORING PLAN
The Site will be monitored based on the performance standards and monitoring requirements provided
below. Annual monitoring reports will be provided using the IRT monitoring template for the duration of
the 7-year monitoring window. The monitoring plan is outlined in Figure 11 – Monitoring Plan.
29 The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
│September 2023

8.1 STREAM MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Vegetative Monitoring (Streams and Wetlands)
Vegetative monitoring will be conducted per the October 24, 2016 “Wilmington District Stream and
Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update” (“NCIRT guidance”) with the exception that the sites are
relatively small, and the Sponsor will increase the percent monitored to obtain an accurate measurement
of survival, species variability, and trees per acre. Five (5) percent of the total planted portion of the site
will be monitored with vegetation plots. The NCIRT guidance states that this area requirement can be
adjusted on a case-by-case basis for these types of sites. A combination of fixed (50%) and random
(50%) 0.05-acre plots will cover five (5) percent of the planted area on site. Planted area acreage was
determined based on anticipated supplemental planting to expand existing hardwood areas and replace
absent buffers. Tree seedlings will be planted at a density of 450 stems per acre. Planted acreages and
monitoring plot counts are provided in the table below. Locations are shown in Figure 11 – Monitoring Plan.
Invasive species will be monitored visually during field visits to ensure that no species threatens the
growth of the planted and native community vegetation. The native community vegetation may include the
presence of some pine species so long as the vegetative performance standards are met as described in
Section 8.3. The areas within the conservation easement that are not generating mitigation credit will also
be planted with native tree species where pine has been cleared. These areas will be monitored but will
not be included in the success criteria.
Table 168 – Vegetative Monitoring Plots
Planted Area Number of Tree
Seedlings to be Planted
Vegetative Monitoring Plots
Permanent Random
74.9 Ac
(required) 33,705 37 37
36.1 Ac
(upland) 16,245 5 0
Headwater Stream Monitoring
Headwater monitoring will be conducted every year for seven (7) years. Surface flow will be documented
using gauges or photo(s) (i.e., time lapse/game cameras) and will be monitored in accordance with the
2016 guidance.
Stream Channel Stability and Stream Hydrology Monitoring
Channel stability and hydrology monitoring will be conducted, per the 2016 guidance. Due to the narrow
width of the channels in the B56 Site, the Bank Sponsor will place two (2) cross sections per 1,000 feet of
stream. Crest gauges will be installed to monitor channel hydrology and will be capable of monitoring
frequency and duration of overbank events.
Visual Monitoring
Monitoring will be conducted with a walkthrough of the entire project area, looking to identify areas of low
stem density, poor plant vigor, prolonged inundation, native and exotic invasive species, beaver activity,
herbivory, encroachments, indicators of livestock access, or other areas of concern. Results of both
monitoring walkthroughs each year will be reported in the annual monitoring report, where-in
The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
September 2023│
30

recommended courses of action shall be identified where necessary. Any areas of concern will be
reevaluated on all subsequent visual assessments.
8.2 WETLAND MONITOR ING REQUIREMENTS
MONITORING HYDROLOGY AND REPORTING HYDROLOGIC DATA
Monitoring of areas of wetland restoration will be conducted per the 2016 guidance. Installation of
groundwater equipment will be in accordance with techniques and standards described in the USACE
Technical Standard for Water Table Monitoring of Potential Wetland Sites. Wells will be installed in
wetland restoration mitigation areas, and the location of these wells is shown in Figure 11 – Monitoring Plan.
Hydrologic success of wetlands will be determined based on published guidance (IRT 2016) or through
comparison to measured reference condition. Well data will be collected continuously for hydrology
measurement within the wetland restoration areas as shown in Figure 11.
8.3 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
VEGETATION PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
Success will be identified based on interim stem density criteria provided in the 2016 NCIRT guidance:
• Survival of at least 320 stems per acre at the end of year 3, 260 stems per acre by the end of
year 5, and 210 stems per acre at the end of year 7.
• Per IRT guidance, coastal plain projects must maintain vegetation that averages seven (7) feet in
height at year 5 and ten (10) feet in height at year 7.
• No one species may comprise more than fifty (50) percent of the total composition within any plot.
• No more than five (5) percent invasive species may occur be present.
STREAM CHANNEL STABILITY AND STREAM HYDROLOGY
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
Stream Channel Flow (Perennial and Intermittent Channels)
All perennial channels shall receive sufficient flow throughout the monitoring period to maintain an
ordinary high-water mark. Surface flow within intermittent tributaries must be documented to occur every
year for at least thirty (30) consecutive days during the prescribed monitoring period, per the 2016 NCIRT
guidance. Perennial streams must have continuous surface flow. See the “Headwater Stream Flow
Performance Standards” section that follows for headwater systems.
Channel Stability
Bank Height Ratios and Entrenchment Ratios shall meet minimum/maximum requirements as provided in
the 2016 NCIRT guidance, and not differ by more than ten (10) percent from baseline conditions. Bank
Height Ratios shall not exceed 1.2. Entrenchment Ratios shall not be less than 2.2.
Bankfull Events
The project shall remain stable during four (4) separate bankfull events occurring in separate years during
monitoring years 1 through 7.
31 The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
│September 2023

Headwater Stream Flow Performance Standards
Success will be based on the standards outlined in the 2016 NCIRT guidance for Headwater Stream
Performance Standards. Continuous surface water flow must be documented to occur every year for at
least thirty (30) consecutive days for monitoring years 1 through 7. The extensive ditch drainage system
that will be filled during restoration activities will require a large amount of material to be moved and
placed in the existing ditches. To reduce disturbance within the headwater system existing spoil material
from on-site will be used to fill the ditches and some small portions of the ditches will be graded to act as
vernal pools. It will take a few seasons for an appropriate number of fines to wash into the system
naturally to fill the voids of the newly placed material therefore sealing it up. During years 1 through 3
these fines will work their way into the system and return baseflow to the flow path of the headwater
valley system. Visual identification of natural channel formation indicators will be performed in accordance
with the schedule provided in the 2016 NCIRT monitoring guidance.
WETLAND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
Wetland Hydrologic Performance Criteria
All areas of wetland restoration must be monitored to determine whether the restored areas meet the
established percent saturation/hydroperiod thresholds as described in the “Wilmington District Stream
and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update, North Carolina Interagency Review Team” dated October
24, 2016. The areas of proposed wetland restoration adjacent to the project reach contain Pantego (Pa),
Tomotley (To), and Leon (Lo), which require 12-16%, 10-12%, and 7-9% wetland saturation ranges
respectively per “Table 1 – Wetland Saturation Threshold Table” of the above referenced document.
Wetland hydrology will be measured each year with the percentage of saturation based on continuous
days within the growing season. WETS data for New Bern was used to determine the growing season of
March 23 through November 16 (238 days).1 Because the Site has been significantly disturbed through
decades of timber production, it is appropriate to have a lower expected saturation period during the first
two years following Site implementation.
Site wetland hydrology performance standards are shown in the table below.
Table 19 – Wetland Hydrology Performance Standards
Target Saturation % # of Consecutive Days
Soil Series Years 1-2 Years 3-7 Years 1-2 Years 3-7
Pantego (Pa) 10% 12% 24 29
Tomotley (To) 10% 10% 24 24
Leon (Lo) 10% 10% 24 24

1 http://agacis.rcc-acis.org/?fips=37049, April 11, 2022.
The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
September 2023│
32

8.4 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN
An integral part of a successful compensatory mitigation project is early detection of problems during
implementation, determining the cause(s) of those problems, and attempting to correct those problems
so that the compensatory mitigation project achieves its objectives and ecological performance
standards. Interim performance standards are crucial to ensuring compensatory mitigation performance
follows a trajectory to attain final compensatory mitigation success.

In the event the Site or a specific component of the Site fails to achieve the necessary performance
standards as specified in Section 8.3, the Sponsor shall notify the members of the IRT and work with the
IRT to develop contingency plans and remedial actions. Large scale corrective measures may require
an Adaptive Management Plan. Large scale corrective measures may include, but are not limited to, re-
grading part of the mitigation site, replanting more than twenty (20) percent of the Site to improve
composition or species diversity, or the addition of stabilization structures.

The Adaptive Management Plan review will follow Section 332.8(o)(9) of the 2008 Mitigation Rule, part
of the streamlined review process, which requires an IRT review period of 15 calendar days.
Once the Adaptive Management plan is prepared, the Sponsor will:

• Notify the USACE as required by the Nationwide Permit 27 general conditions.
• Notify NCDWR if necessary for 401 conditions.
• Revise performance standards, maintenance requirements, and monitoring requirements
as necessary.
• Obtain other permits as necessary.
• Submit the Adaptive Management Plan for IRT review and approval.
• Implement the Adaptive Management Plan.
• Provide the IRT a Record Drawing/As-Built of corrective actions. The Final
Listed below are identified project risks and uncertainties that have been evaluated in the development
of design plans for the Site, along with methods that have been/will be used to address these concerns.
Methods to address may be presented as adaptive management.

1. Land use development: There is potential for increased land development around the site in
the future that could lead to additional runoff and changes to watershed hydrology.
• Methods to Address: The project area has seen little development in recent years and it is
unlikely that development will threaten the site in the foreseeable future. Restoration of the
site to reconnect streams to their floodplains will reduce the likelihood of future degradation
from watershed changes, as increased flows will spread over a wider floodplain. Grade
control (in the form of constructed in-stream structures and natural bedrock outcrops) will
decrease the chances of future channel incision.

2. Easement Encroachment: Any encroachment to the conservation easement. (Including road
widening, culvert maintenance, utility easements, etc.)
• Methods to Address: To ensure that there are no encroachment issues within the
easement boundary, the Sponsor will clearly mark the easement boundary with appropriate
signage. The Sponsor will also work in conjunction with the conservation easement holder
to routinely monitor the Site for encroachment issues. Any encroachments that do occur will
be remedied by the sponsor to address any damage and provide any other corrections
required by the IRT.

33 The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
│September 2023

3. Drought and Floods: There is potential for extreme climatic conditions during the monitoring
period of the project.
• Methods to Address: The Sponsor will apply adaptive management techniques as
necessary to meet the site performance criteria. Such adaptive management may include
replanting, channel damage repair, irrigation, or other methods. If adaptive management
activities are significant, additional monitoring may be required by the IRT.

4. Beavers: While there was no evidence of recent beaver activity during recent assessments,
there is potential for beavers to colonize the site during the monitoring period of the project.
• Methods to Address: If beaver colonization does occur, the sponsor will take steps to trap
and remove beaver if they colonize the Site during the monitoring period.
5. Hydrologic Trespass: Since the Sponsor owns the lands surrounding the Site, there is little
or no potential for hydrologic trespass onto any other adjacent landowners.
• Methods to Address: The project has been designed and will be constructed utilizing
methodologies which will greatly reduce the potential of hydrologic trespass outside of the
conservation easement boundary. Based off this information, the possibility of hydrologic
trespass is extremely unlikely and is not expected to be an issue.

6. Invasive/Nuisance Species: No significant number of invasive/nuisance vegetation currently exist
in the conservation easement area. However, there is the potential for such species to have a
negative impact of the restored vegetation within the easement area.
• Methods to Address: The sponsor will be diligent is monitoring for any invasive
vegetation and if any is found, will visually assess, photograph, and map the areas
affected. These areas will be treated by mechanical or chemical methods, so that the
invasive species are no more than five (5) percent of the easement acreage, and zero
tolerance for kudzu. Any vegetation requiring herbicide application will be performed in
accordance with the NC Department of Agriculture rules and regulations.
8.5 POST -CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTATION
An as-built survey will be conducted following construction to document channel condition and provide
baseline data for comparison to future monitoring reports. Information included in the as-built will be in
accordance with USACE guidance and has been identified in the monitoring requirements and
performance standards sections. A redline comparison of as-built to approved mitigation plan design
sheets will also be included and will indicate field deviations and changes to plant species or quantities.
Soil boring information will also be provided near the wetland gauge locations per the 2016 NCIRT
Guidance.
Monitoring reports will be provided to the Wilmington District USACE for review no later than April 1st of
the year following the monitoring activity.
8.6 LONG -TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN
Land use and property boundaries along with the proposed mitigation plan were designed to minimize
long-term management conflicts. As a result, the potential for hydrologic and boundary conflicts have
been minimized. The Sponsor has identified Unique Places to Save (a 501 (c)(3) entity) as the grantee of
the conservation easement deed. The recorded Conservation Easement deed will ensure the protection
The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
September 2023│
34

of the project in perpetuity. The site-protection instrument is provided in Appendix I – Conservation Easement
Documents.
The overall purpose of the Site is to establish a self-sustaining, natural ecological resource. Proposed
restoration and enhancement activities should not require maintenance beyond the proposed monitoring
period to provide aquatic resource functions in perpetuity. The Bank Sponsor will serve as long-term
manager of the Site. Because Weyerhaeuser has been the landowner and established a practice of
managing the land over many decades, it is appropriate that Weyerhaeuser NR continues in this role,
subject to the restrictions of the Conservation Easement. Weyerhaeuser maintains the human and capital
resources to accomplish this role.
Ownership of the Mitigation Site
It is anticipated that Weyerhaeuser NR will remain the owner of the Site. The Site will be protected by a
conservation easement held by Unique Places to Save.
Identification of Long-Term Management Activities
No long-term management activities are proposed except those that are related to the general
maintenance of the Site. These general activities will include removal of significant woody impediments
(such as downed trees) to road passage, maintenance of access roads and gates, and periodic visual
inspections to identify the same.
Long-Term Maintenance and Protection Account
Since no long-term management activities are proposed for this Site, a long-term maintenance and
protection account is not being established for the Site.
8.7 FINANCIAL ASSURANCES
In accordance to Section IX (Financial Assurances) found in the Middle Neuse UMBI, the Bank Sponsor
shall provide financial assurances in the form of a Performance Bond to the IRT sufficient to assure
completion of all mitigation work, required reporting and monitoring, and any remedial work required.
Financial assurances shall be payable at the direction of the USACE to its designee or to a standby trust.
Financial assurances structured to provide funds to the USACE in the event of default by the Bank
Sponsor are not acceptable. A financial assurance must be in the form that ensures that the USACE
receives notification at least 120 days in advance of any termination or revocation.
The amount of the Performance Bond shall be based on costs to implement the Site through monitoring
and any remedial work that may be required. The Performance Bond shall be in place prior to the first
credit release. The costs that are detailed in the table below include the construction and monitoring costs
for the Site.
35 The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
│September 2023

Table 20 – Estimated Amount Required for Performance Bond
Activity Cost
Site Prep Mechanical Shear (within wetland and riparian buffers) $16,916.87
Site Prep Mechanical Rake (within wetland and riparian buffers) $11,277.54
Site Prep Chemical Application (If needed within wetland and riparian buffers) $9,586.41
Site Prep Prescribed Burn (if needed within wetland and riparian buffers) $8,457.88
Planting Labor and Seedlings (wetland and riparian buffers) $28,879.23
Stream Construction Work (in-stream and riparian buffer work) $530,200.00
As-built Report $50,000.00
Annual Monitoring $349,999.99
Total Estimated Amount of Performance Bond $1,005,317.92
The USACE will review the as-built and annual monitoring reports to evaluate the success of the
ecological restoration. Success will be evaluated based on the Site’s adherence to performance
standards specified in Section 8.3. As performance standards are met, the Bank Sponsor will request a
reduction in the amount of the performance bond based on the reduction schedule provided below. The
reduction schedule assumes that the Site will meet all performance standards on an annual basis.
Table 21 – Performance Bond Reduction Schedule
Year Activity Reduction Amount (%) Reduction Amount ($) Bond Amount
1 Establishment of Performance Bond N/A N/A $ 1,005,317.92
2 USACE approval of As-Built Report 65.19% $ 655,317.93 $ 349,999.99
3 USACE approval of Year 1 Monitoring 4.97% $ 50,000.00 $ 300,000.00
4 USACE approval of Year 2 Monitoring 4.97% $ 50,000.00 $ 250,000.00
5 USACE approval of Year 3 Monitoring 4.97% $ 50,000.00 $ 200,000.00
6 USACE approval of Year 4 Monitoring 4.97% $ 50,000.00 $ 150,000.00
7 USACE approval of Year 5 Monitoring 4.97% $ 50,000.00 $ 100,000.00
8 USACE approval of Year 6 Monitoring 4.97% $ 50,000.00 $ 50,000.00
9 USACE approval of Year 7 Monitoring 4.97% $ 50,000.00 $ -
Total 100% $1,005,317.92
The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
September 2023│
36

References
Sweet, W. V. & Geratz, J. W. Bankfull Hydraulic Geometry Relationships and Recurrence Intervals for
North Carolinas Coastal Plain. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 39, 861–
871 (2003).
Doll, Barbara A., A.D. Dobbins, J. Spooner, D.R. Clinton and D.A. Bidelspach, Hydraulic Geometry
Relationships for Rural North Carolina Coastal Plain Streams, NC Stream Restoration Institute,
Report to N.C. Division of Water Quality for 319 Grant Project No. EW20011, www.ncsu.edu/sri.
11 pp. (2003).
Russell, Periann 2008. Mapping Headwater Streams: Intermittent and Perennial Headwater Stream
Model Development and Spatial Application. Final Report for Federal Highway Administration
Contract Feasibility Study WBS: 36486.4.2. January 28, 2008.
US Army Corps of Engineers Wilmington District (2003), Stream Mitigation Guidelines, April 2003.
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS). 2014. Stream and Wetland Mitigation Monitoring
Guidelines. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Raleigh, North Carolina.
Harman, W.A., G.D. Jennings, J.M. Patterson, D.R. Clinton, L.A. O’Hara, A. Jessup, R. Everhart. 1999.
Bankfull Hydraulic Geometry Relationships for North Carolina Streams. N.C. State University,
Raleigh, North Carolina.
Harmon, W., R. Starr, M. Carter, K. Tweedy, M. Clemmons, K. Suggs, C. Miller. (2012) A Function-Based
Framework for Stream Assessments and Restoration Projects. US Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, DC EPA 843-K-12-006. .
North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). 2016a. River Basin Classification Schedule
(online). Available: https://deq.nc.gov/river-basin-classification-schedule [August 01, 2018]. North
Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Raleigh.
North Carolina Division of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ). Surface Water Classifications.
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ps/csu/classifications Raleigh, NC.
North Carolina Stream Functional Assessment Team. (NC SFAT 2015). N.C. Stream Assessment Method
(NC SAM) User Manual. Version 2.1.
North Carolina Wetland Functional Assessment Team. (NC WFAT 2010). N.C. Wetland Assessment
Method (NC WAM) User Manual. Version 4.1.
Rosgen, D. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology (Publisher). Pagosa Springs, Colorado
Rosgen, D.L. 1994. A classification of natural rivers. Catena 22:169-199.
North Carolina Floodplain Mapping Program. Floodplain Mapping Information System.
http://floodmaps.nc.gov/FMIS/Default.aspx Raleigh, NC.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2018. Web Soil Survey (online). Available:
http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx.
37 The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
│September 2023

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1960. Soil Survey of Beaufort County, North Carolina.
Soil Conservation Service.
The Stream Stats web program for North Carolina. Available online at:
https://water.usgs.gov/osw/streamstats/north_carolina.html
National Land Cover Database 2011. [Online WWW]. Available URL: https://www.mrlc.gov/nlcd2011.php
United States Geological Survey (USGS) National Land Cover Dataset 1992. [Online WWW]. Available
URL: https://www.mrlc.gov/nlcd1992.php
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 6-8-2015. Endangered Species, Threatened Species,
Federal Species of Concern and Candidate Species, Beaufort County, NC. Available online at:
http://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/beaufort.html
Harman, W.A., G.D. Jennings, J.M. Patterson, D.R. Clinton, L.O. Slate, A.G. Jessup, J.R. Everhart, and
R.E. Smith. 1999. Bankfull hydraulic geometry relationships for North Carolina streams. Wildland
Hydrology. AWRA Symposium Proceedings. D.S. Olsen and J.P. Potyondy, eds. American Water
Resources Association. June 30-July 2, 1999. Bozeman, MT.
Gridded Soil Survey Geographic (gSSURGO) Database for North Carolina. United States Department of
Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. Available online at
https://gdg.sc.egov.usda.gov/. (FY2016 release date).
North Carolina Department of Transportation. 2003. Reference Reach Database. In publication.
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services. 2010. Neuse River Basin Restoration Priorities. NC
Department of Environmental Quality. Raleigh, NC.
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services. 2010. Neuse River Basin Restoration Priorities. NC
Department of Environmental Quality. Raleigh, NC.
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NHP), 2009. Natural Heritage Element Occurrence Database,
Beaufort County, NC.
The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
September 2023│
38

Appendix A –
Figures

Beaufort 56 Site35.4126, -77.1526
03020201
03030007
03010205
03020103
03020202
03020101
03020104
03030006
03030006
03020102
03020302 03020301
03020203
03010107
03020204
±
0 10 20 Miles
Beaufort 56Figure 1Service Area MapMiddle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Prepared For:Prepared By:
Legend
Conservation Easement
8-Digit HUC
County Boundary
Craven County
Beaufort County
Pitt County
Revised By: SMW Date: 6/28/2023
±
0 1 2 Miles
Beaufort 56Figure 2Vicinity MapMiddle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Prepared For:Prepared By:
Legend
County Boundary
Conservation Easement
Craven County
Beaufort CountyPitt County
Revised By: SMW Date: 6/28/2023
Legend
Conservation Easement
Delineated Feature (Jurisdictional)
Perennial Stream
Jurisdictional Ditch
±
0 1,0 00 2,0 00 Feet
Beaufort 56Figure 3USGS Topographic MapMiddle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Prepared For:Prepared By:
user: sarah.walker date: 6/29/2023time: 3:34:02 PM
Revised By: SMW Date: 6/29/2023
Pollard Swamp - Reach 2
Pollard Swamp - Reach 1
Pollard Swamp - Reach 3
Beaufort 56Figure 4Historic Aerials Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Prepared For:Prepared By:
Legend
Conservation Easement
Delineated Feature (Jurisdictional)
Perennial Stream
Jurisdictional Ditch 0 3,0001,500 Feet
1993 Aerial1958 Aerial
1977 Aerial 2010 Aerial
Revised By: SMW Date: 6/29/2023
Pollard Swamp - Reach 2
Pollard Swamp - Reach 1
Pollard Swamp - Reach 3
Pollard Swamp - Reach 2
Pollard Swamp - Reach 1
Pollard Swamp - Reach 3
Pollard Swamp - Reach 2
Pollard Swamp - Reach 1
Pollard Swamp - Reach 3
Pollard Swamp - Reach 2
Pollard Swamp - Reach 1
Pollard Swamp - Reach 3
Legend
Conservation Easement
Delineated Feature (Jurisdictional)
Perennial Stream
Jurisdictional Ditch
±
0 1,0 00 2,0 00 Feet
Beaufort 56Figure 5NRCS Soil Survey - Beaufort CountyMiddle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Prepared For:Prepared By:
Pollard Swamp - Reach 2
Pollard Swamp - Reach 1
Pollard Swamp - Reach 3
Revised By: SMW Date: 6/29/2023
Lo
Lo
Lo
Lo
GoA
GoA
To
La
BoB
Pa
Pa
Legend
Conservation Easement
Delineated Feature (Jurisdictional)
Perennial Stream
Jurisdictional Ditch
Hydric Soils
Not H ydric (0-7%)
Hydric (80-91%)
±
0 1,0 00 2,0 00 Feet
Beaufort 56Figure 6Hydric Soils MapMiddle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Prepared For:Prepared By:
user: sarah.walkerdate: 6/29/2023time: 3:41:28 PM
Map unit symbol Map unit name Hydric Rating
BoB Bonneau loamy sand, 0 to 4 perc ent slopes 5
GoA Goldsboro fine sandy loam, 0 t o 2 perc ent slopes 5
La Leaf silt loam 90LoLeon sand 80
Ly Lync hburg fine sandy loam 7
Pa Pant ego loam 90RaRains fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 perc ent slopes, At lant ic Coast Flatwoods 92
To T omot ley fine sandy loam 91
Revised By: SMW Date: 6/29/2023
Pollard Swamp - Reach 2
Pollard Swamp - Reach 1
Pollard Swamp - Reach 3
!.
!.
!.
1
2
3
Legend
Conservation Easement
Current Contributing Drainage Area
!.Drainage Area Points
Stream M itigation Approach
Headwater Restoration
Restoration
±
0 1,5 00 3,0 00 Feet
Beaufort 56Figure 7Watershed MapMiddle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Prepared For:Prepared By:
Revised By: SMW Date: 6/29/2023
Pollard Swamp - Reach 2
Pollard Swamp - Reach 1
Pollard Swamp - Reach 3
Number Name Historic Drainage Area (Ac)Current Drainage Area (Ac)Proposed Drainage Area (Ac)1 Pollard Swamp-R1-US 136 88 882Pollard Swamp-R2-DS 455 307 3073Pollard Swamp-R3-DS 914 807 807
Legend
Conservation Easement
Wetlands (Potential Wetland WoUS)
Stream s (Potential Non-Wetland WoUS )
Perennial Stream
Open Water Ditch
±
0 1,0 00 2,0 00 Feet
Beaufort 56Figure 8Existing ConditionsMiddle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Prepared For:Prepared By:
Revised By: SMW Date: 7/5/2023
Pollard Swamp - Reach 2
Pollard Swamp - Reach 1
Pollard Swamp - Reach 3
WA-1
Legend
Conservation Easement
±
0 1,0 00 2,0 00 Feet
Prepared For:Prepared By:Beaufort 56Figure 9 LiDAR ElevationsMiddle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Eleva tion (ft)High : 65
Low : 40
Revised By: SMW Date: 6/29/2023
Pollard Swamp - Reach 2
Pollard Swamp - Reach 1
Pollard Swamp - Reach 3
Legend
Conservation EasementExisting DitchesStream M itigation ApproachHeadwater RestorationRestorationStream Buffers
Proposed Buffer AreaMinimum Buffer AreaWetland M itigation Approach
WA-1 Wetland RestorationWA-2 Wetland RestorationWA-3 Wetland RestorationWA-4 Wetland RestorationWA-5 Wetland Enhancement
±
0 750 1,5 00 Feet
Beaufort 56Figure 10aProposed Mitigation PlanMiddle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Prepared For:Prepared By:
Conservation Easement: 111.0 Acres
Pollard Swamp - Reach 1 (968 LF)Headwater restoration with 50' buffer toeach side of valley centerline. Fill exsitingchannel and supplement existing vegetation.Credit ratio = 1:1
Pollard Swamp - Reach 2 (2,486 LF) Priority 1 stream restoration with150' buffer from both sides of channel.Credit ratio = 1:1
Pollard Swamp - Reach 3 (816 LF of Priority 1 restoration and 550 LF of Priority 2 restoration)Channel will transition from priority 1 to priority 2 as it ties into the existing stream. Proposed buffers exceed 50' on both sides of the channel and extend out to 150' along the entire left bank.Credit ratio = 1:1
WA-1 (11.8 AC) Wetland restoration area is atan elevation lower than 55.5' and is adjacent to headwater restoration, which will restorewetland hydrology. Planted pine will be clearedand replaced with hardwood species.Credit ratio = 1:1
WA-3 (7.1 AC) Wetland restoration areais at an elevation lower than 52' and is adjacent to priority 1 stream restoration, which will provide overbank flow to restore wetland hydrology. Planted pine will be cleared and replaced with hardwood species.Credit ratio = 1:1
WA-2 (36.4 AC) Wetland restoration area is at an elevation less than 54' and isadjacent to priority 1 restoration, whichwill provide overbank flow to restore wetlandhydrology. Ditch plugs will also improvehydrology. Planted pine will be cleared andreplaced with hardwood species.Credit ratio = 1:1
WA-4 (5.6 AC) Wetland restoration area is adjacent to stream restoration and containedwithin the 50' stream buffer. Priority 1 restorationwill provide overbank flow to restore wetland hydrology. Planted pine (where present) will be cleared and replaced with hardwood species.Credit ratio = 1:1
Construct ditch plug.
Construct ditch plug.
Construct ditch plug.
Construct ditch plug.
Construct ditch plug.
Construct ditch plug.
Construct ditch plug.
Construct ditch plug.
Construct ditch plug.
Revised By: SMW Date: 6/28/2023
NOTE: Full conservation easement area to be planted.
Construct proposed culverts.
WA-5 (0.1 AC) Wetland enhancement area is a small emergent wetland that will be plantedwith hardwood species.Credit ratio = 3:1
Legend
Conservation Easement
Stream M itigation ApproachHeadwater Restoration
Resto ra tion
Wetland M itigation Approach
WA-1 Wetland RestorationWA-2 Wetland Restoration
WA-3 Wetland RestorationWA-4 Wetland Restoration
WA-5 Wetland Enhan ce me nt
±
0 750 1,5 00 Feet
Beaufort 56Figure 10bCredit Type FigureMiddle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Prepared For:Prepared By:
Revised By: SMW Date: 6/28/2023
Pollard Swamp - Reach 2
Pollard Swamp - Reach 1
Pollard Swamp - Reach 3
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")")")")
")
")
")
")
")
")
Legend
Conservation Easement
")Pe rman ent Vegetation Plo t
!Crest Ga uge
!Groun dwater Mon ito ring Well
!Rain Ga uge
Cross Section
Ide al Bu ffer
Stream M itigation Approach
Headwa ter RestorationRestoration
Wetland M itigation ApproachWA-1 Wetland Restoration
WA-2 Wetland Restoration
WA-3 Wetland Restoration
WA-4 Wetland Restoration
WA-5 Wetland Enhan ce me nt
±
0 750 1,5 00 Feet
Beaufort 56Figure 11Monitoring PlanMiddle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Prepared For:Prepared By:
user: tim.aldinger date: 9/6/2023time: 3:37:51 PM
PS - Reach 2
NOTE: Vegetative Monitoring will cover5% o f pla nte d a re as o n site. Pe rma nent mon itoring plo ts will make up 50%.The remaining 50% will be made up of random plots, per the 2016 guidance.
Revised By: SMW Date: 7/5/2023
Pollard Swamp - Reach 2
Pollard Swamp - Reach 1
Pollard Swamp - Reach 3
Legend
Conservation EasementIdeal 50ft Stream BufferIdeal 150ft Stream BufferStream Mitigation Approach
Headw ater R estoration
Restoration
±
0 600 1,2 00 Feet
Beaufort 56Figure 12aAdditional Stream Buffer Credit - IdealMiddle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Prepared For:Prepared By:
Proposed Credi tabl e Stream Length Elli gible for Addi tional Credit (Total Base line Credit )
Credit Loss in Required Buffe r Credi t Gain for Additional Buffer Net Change in Credit from Buffers Total Credit
3852 -27 757 738 4583
Pollard Swamp - Reach 2
Pollard Swamp - Reach 1
Pollard Swamp - Reach 3
Revised By: SMW Date: 6/29/2023
Ideal buffer removed at road crossingssince stream is not creditable in these areas
Legend
Conservation EasementActual Stream Buffer <50ftActual Stream Buffer >50ft (Additional Credit)Stream Mitigation Approach
Headw ater R estoration
Restoration
±
0 600 1,2 00 Feet
Beaufort 56Figure 12bAdditional Stream Buffer Credit - ActualMiddle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Prepared For:Prepared By:
Pollard Swamp - Reach 2
Pollard Swamp - Reach 1
Pollard Swamp - Reach 3
Revised By: SMW Date: 6/29/2023
Proposed Credi tabl e Stream Length Ell igibl e for Addi tional Credit (Total Baseline Credit )
Cre di t Loss in Require d Buffer Credi t Gain for Additional Buffer Ne t Change i n Cre di t from Buffers Total Cre di t
3852 -27 757 738 4583
39 The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
│September 2023

Appendix B –
Photo Pages

Photo 2 – Beaufort 56 – UT1 Reach 1
Photo 3 – Beaufort 56 – UT1 Reach 2 Photo 4 – Beaufort 56 – UT1 Reach 2
Photo 1 – Beaufort 56 – UT1 Reach 1

Photo 5 – Beaufort 56 – UT1 Reach 3 Photo 6 – Beaufort 56 – UT1 Reach 3
Photo 7 – Beaufort 56 – UT2 Photo 8 – Beaufort 56 – UT2

Photo 9 – Beaufort 56 – UT3 Photo 10 – Beaufort 56 – UT3

The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
September 2023│
40

Appendix C –
Geomorphic Cross -Sections

BEAUFORT 56A
BEAUFORT 56A
BEAUFORT 56A
41 The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
│September 2023

Appendix D –
Geomorphology

Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Avg Max
1 Stream Type (Rosgen)
2 Drainage Area (square miles)
3 Bankfull Width (Wbkf)11.6 19.8 8.1 14.9 7.0 13.2
4 Bankfull Mean Depth (dbkf)1.2 1.7 1.0 1.5 0.9 1.3
5 Width/Depth Ratio (Wbkf/dbkf)9.7 11.6 8.1 9.9 7.8 10.2 8.5 10.9 10.6
6 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (Abkf)17.1 28.8 10.1 21.7 7.4 11.9
7 Bankfull Mean Velocity, ft/s (Vbkf)0.6 1.0 0.8 1.3
8 Bankfull Discharge, cfs (Qbkf)16.9 18.4
9 Bankfull Maximum Depth (dmax)2.1 2.8 1.4 2.6 1.7 2.1
10 Max dmax/dbkf ratio 1.6 1.8 1.4 1.7 1.6 1.9 1.6 1.7 1.8
11 Low Bank Height to Max Bankfull dbkf ratio 1.2 1.5 1.2 1.4 1.5
12 Width of Flood Prone Area (Wfpa)164.6 216.3 200.0 225.0 175.0 180.0
13 Entrenchment Ratio (Wfpa/Wbkf)10.4 34.5 13.4 27.8 13.3 25.7 12.4 20.2 29.3
14 Meander Length (Lm)92.0 125.0
15 Ratio of Meander Length to Bankfull Width (Lm/Wbkf)4.9 6.7 4.9 6.2 6.7
16 Radius of Curvature (Rc)30.0 40.0
17 Ratio of Radius of Curvature to Bankfull Width (Rc/Wbkf)1.6 2.1 1.6 1.8 2.1
18 Belt Width (Wblt)49.0 105.0
19 Belt Width Ratio (Wblt/Wbkf)2.6 5.6 2.6 3.5 5.6
20 Sinuosity (k) (Stream Length / Valley Length) 1.70 2.10 1.60 1.70 1.7 1.8 1.9
21 Valley Slope (Svalley) (ft/ft)0.0007 0.0044 0.0017 0.0048
22 Average Stream Slope (Savg) = (Svalley/k)0.0004 0.0021 0.0011 0.0028
23 Riffle Slope (Sriff)
24 Ratio of Riffle Slope to Avg. Slope (Sriffle/Savg)
25 Pool Slope (Spool)
26 Ratio of Pool Slope to Avg. Slope (Spool/Savg)
27 Maximum Pool Depth (Dpool)2.9 4.1 1.3 3.1 2.2 3.0
28 Ratio of Pool Depth to Bkf Depth (Dpool/dbkf)0.9 1.5 1.0 2.2 2.0 2.7 1.3 2.0 2.1
29 Pool Width (Wpool)13.4 18.1 9.2 17.0 9.7 12.5
30 Ratio of Pool Width to Bankfull Width (Wpool/Wbkf)0.8 1.3 1.0 1.3 1.1 1.4 1.0 1.1 1.3
31 Pool Area (Apool)20.3 34.8 8.8 30.5 10.4 15.8
32 Ratio of Pool Area to Bankfull Area (Apool/Abkf)0.8 1.3 0.8 1.5 1.1 1.7 0.9 1.2 1.5
33 Pool to Pool Spacing (p - p)
34 Ratio of Pool to Pool Spacing to Bankfull Width (p-p/Wbkf)4.2
REFERENCE REACH MORPHOLOGICAL DATA
The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Beaufort County, North Carolina
Beaverdam
Branch Black Branch Tributary to
Town CreekVARIABLES
(All units are in Feet)
Tributary to
Hunters Averaged Ratios
E5 E E C6 --
3.20 1.20 0.60 0.70 --
17.0 --
0.9 --
18.9
15.0 --
-- 2.8 --
13.1 -- 42.0 --
1.8 --
2.0
-- -- --
278.5 --
16.4
-- -- 120.0 --
-- -- 7.1
-- -- 31.0 --
-- -- 1.8
-- -- 40.0 --
-- -- 2.4
2.00 1.50
0.0072 0.0040 --
0.0036 0.0027 --
-- -- -- ----
-- -- -- ----
-- -- -- ----
-- -- -- ----
51.0 --
3.0 --
3.4
11.5 --
0.7
5.4 -- -- 3.0
----
--
100.0 -- --
Hybrid Carolina Flatwoods Regional Curve
y = 12.004x0.7118
R² = 0.94
NC Coastal Plain Regional Curve - Sweet/Geratz
y = 9.43x0.74
R² = 0.96
NC Coastal Plain Regional Curve - Doll
y = 14.25x0.66
R² = 0.88
1
10
100
1000
0.1 1 10 100
Ba
n
k
f
u
l
l

A
r
e
a

(
f
t
2)
Drainage Area (square miles)
Beaufort 56 Site Design Bankfull Area Plot
NC Coastal Plain Regional Curve - Doll NC Coastal Plain Regional Curve - Sweet/Geratz Hybrid Carolina Flatwoods Regional Curve
Hybrid Carolina Flatwoods Data Existing Conditions Reference Reaches
Design Values
Min Max Min Avg Max Min Max Min Max Min Avg Max Min Max
1 Stream Type (Rosgen)
2 Drainage Area (square miles)
3 Bankfull Width (Wbkf)
4 Bankfull Mean Depth (dbkf)
5 Width/Depth Ratio (Wbkf/dbkf)8.5 10.9 10.6 8.5 10.9 10.6
6 Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (Abkf)
7 Bankfull Mean Velocity, ft/s (Vbkf)
8 Bankfull Discharge, cfs (Qbkf)
9 Bankfull Maximum Depth (dmax)1.2 1.4 1.4 1.7 1.9 2.0
10 Max dmax/dbkf ratio 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.6 1.7 1.8
11 Low Bank Height to Max Bankfull dbkf ratio 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.0 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.0 1.0
12 Width of Flood Prone Area (Wfpa)113.9 186.2 270.2 102.0 306.0 159.5 260.8 378.4 154.0 462.0
13 Entrenchment Ratio (Wfpa/Wbkf)12.4 20.2 29.3 10.0 30.0 12.4 20.2 29.3 10.0 30.0
14 Meander Length (Lm)45.1 57.4 61.7 51.0 71.4 63.2 80.4 86.4 77.0 107.8
15 Ratio of Meander Length to Bankfull Width (Lm/Wbkf)4.9 6.2 6.7 5.0 7.0 4.9 6.2 6.7 5.0 7.0
16 Radius of Curvature (Rc)14.7 16.9 19.3 16.3 25.5 20.6 23.7 27.1 24.6 38.5
17 Ratio of Radius of Curvature to Bankfull Width (Rc/Wbkf)1.6 1.8 2.1 1.6 2.5 1.6 1.8 2.1 1.6 2.5
18 Belt Width (Wblt)24.0 32.6 51.6 25.5 56.1 33.5 45.6 72.2 38.5 84.7
19 Belt Width Ratio (Wblt/Wbkf)2.6 3.5 5.6 2.5 5.5 2.6 3.5 5.6 2.5 5.5
20 Sinuosity (k) (Stream Length / Valley Length)1.65 1.77 1.90 1.65 1.77 1.90
21 Valley Slope (Svalley) (ft/ft)
22 Average Stream Slope (Savg) = (Svalley/k)
23 Riffle Slope (Sriff)0.0042 0.0113 0.0042 0.0113
24 Ratio of Riffle Slope to Avg. Slope (Sriffle/Savg)1.5 4.0 1.5 4.0
25 Pool Slope (Spool)0.0000 0.0003 0.0000 0.0003
26 Ratio of Pool Slope to Avg. Slope (Spool/Savg)0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1
27 Maximum Pool Depth (Dpool)1.0 1.5 1.7 1.4 2.2 2.4
28 Ratio of Pool Depth to Bkf Depth (Dpool/dbkf)1.3 2.0 2.1 1.3 2.0 2.1
29 Pool Width (Wpool)8.9 10.0 12.3 12.5 14.0 17.2
30 Ratio of Pool Width to Bankfull Width (Wpool/Wbkf)1.0 1.1 1.3 1.0 1.1 1.3
31 Pool Area (Apool)6.4 8.5 10.7 12.7 17.0 21.2
32 Ratio of Pool Area to Bankfull Area (Apool/Abkf)0.9 1.2 1.5 0.9 1.2 1.5
33 Pool to Pool Spacing (p - p)30.6 71.4 46.2 107.8
34 Ratio of Pool to Pool Spacing to Bankfull Width (p-p/Wbkf)3.0 7.0 3.0 7.0
BEAUFORT 56 SITE MORPHOLOGICAL DATA
Pollard Swamp - Reach 3
DesignRegional Curve &
Reference ReachesExisting DesignRegional Curve &
Reference ReachesExisting
The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Beaufort County, North Carolina
--54.2
--4.2
--
--
0.0031 --
17.6
--1.2
--16.9
1.1
----
--1.9
--2.0
0.0031
0.0030 --0.0028
----
----
----
6.2 16.2
6.2
2.1
1.7
1.6
14.2
3.0
--
--
--
--
--
--
1.04 1.11
12.9 15.4
1.1 1.1
0.48
9.2
14.7
0.0031
0.0028
1.11
--
1.4
1.5
1.0
13.6
--1.1 1.0
--15.0 15.0
B E C
1.26 1.26
--1.6
--
--
--
--
0.0031
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
1.26
6.6
--
--
--
--
--
--1.2
--9.5
--2.0
--11.2
38.7
4.2
--1.1
8.3
2.1
13.6
3.0
1.6 1.5
0.0030
--
1.04
1.7 1.2
--8.3
6.2 7.9
6.2 13.1
1.1 0.80.8
7.1
--1.01.2
B CE
Pollard Swamp - Reach 2
6.6 10.2
0.48 0.48
VARIABLES
(All units are in Feet)
The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
September 2023│
42

Appendix E –
Buffer Credit Calculations

Site Name:
USACE Action ID:
NCDWR Project Number:
Sponsor:
County:Beaufort
Minimum Required Buffer Width1:50
Mitigation Type Mitigation Ratio
Multiplier2
Creditable Stream
Length3 Baseline Stream Credit
Restoration (1:1)1 3852 3852.00
Enhancement I (1.5:1)1.5
Enhancement II (2.5:1)2.5
Preservation (5:1)5
Other (7.5:1)7.5
Other (10:1)10
Custom Ratio 1
Custom Ratio 2
Custom Ratio 3
Custom Ratio 4
Custom Ratio 5
Totals 3852.00 3852.00
Buffer Zones less than 15 feet >15 to 20 feet >20 to 25 feet >25 to 30 feet >30 to 35 feet >35 to 40 feet >40 to 45 feet >45 to 50 feet >50 to 75 feet >75 to 100 feet >100 to 125 feet >125 to 150 feet
Max Possible Buffer (square feet)4 115560 38520 38520 38520 38520 38520 38520 38520 192600 192600 192600 192600
Ideal Buffer (square feet)5 113006.5616 37576.56179 37406.92673 37109.97097 36801.40491 36464.81823 36168.57671 35882.62564 171938.2963 152256.1812 148915.935 149551.8424
Actual Buffer (square feet)6 112610.7243 37332.08845 37106.07024 36751.74341 36386.05766 35993.68683 35638.38178 35297.16179 169138.6294 149633.7758 146340.9717 146997.4581
Zone Multiplier 50%10%10%10%5%5%5%5%7%5%4%4%
Buffer Credit Equivalent 1926.00 385.20 385.20 385.20 192.60 192.60 192.60 192.60 269.64 192.60 154.08 154.08
Percent of Ideal Buffer 100%99%99%99%99%99%99%98%98%98%98%98%
Credit Adjustment -6.75 -2.51 -3.10 -3.72 -2.17 -2.49 -2.82 -3.14 265.25 189.28 151.42 151.45
Total Baseline Credit Credit Loss in Required
Buffer
Credit Gain for
Additional Buffer
Net Change in
Credit from Buffers Total Credit
3852.00 -26.70 757.40 730.70 4582.70
Weyerhauser NR Company
4This amount is the maximum buffer area possible based on the linear footage of stream length if channel were perfectly straight with full buffer width. This number is not used in calculations, but is provided as a reference.
Buffer Width Zone (feet from Ordinary High Water Mark)
6Square feet in each buffer zone, as measured by GIS, excluding non-forested areas, all other credit type (e.g., wetland, nutrient offset, buffer), easement exceptions, open water, areas failing to meet the vegetation performance standard, etc. Additional credit is given to 150 feet in buffer width, so areas within the easement that
are more than 150 feet from creditable streams should not be included in this measurement. Non-creditable stream reaches within the easement should be removed prior to calculating this area wtih GIS.
5Maximum potential size (in square feet) of each buffer zone measured around all creditable stream reaches, calculated using GIS, including areas outside of the easement. The inner zone (0-15') should be measured from the top of the OHWM or the edge of the average stream width if OHWM is not known. Non-creditable stream
reaches within the easement should be removed prior to calculating this area wtih GIS.
2Use the Custom Ratio fields to enter non-standard ratios, which are equal to the number of feet in the feet-to-credit mitigation ratio (e.g., for a perservation ratio of 8 feet to 1 credit, the multiplier would be 8).
1Minimum standard buffer width measured from the top of bank (50 feet in piedmont and coastal plain counties or 30 feet in mountain counties)
3Equal to the number of feet of stream in each Mitigation Type. If stream reaches are not creditable, they should be excluded from this measurement, even if they fall within the easement.
Wilmington District Stream Buffer Credit Calculator
Beaufort 56
SAW-2017-02019
43 The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
│September 2023

Appendix F –
Mitigation Plan Sheets

BE
A
U
F
O
R
T

5
6
ST
R
E
A
M

A
N
D

W
E
T
L
A
N
D
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N

B
A
N
K
PR
E
P
A
R
E
D

F
O
R
©
CO
V
E
R

S
H
E
E
T
01
WEYERHAEUSER NR COMPANY
BEAUFORT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
VICINITY MAP
NORTH
OWNER:
HATTIESBURG, MS 39402
406 COLE ROAD
WEYERHAEUSER NR COMPANY
[phone]
DOUG HUGHES
PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
DRAFT MITIGATION PLANS
for
SURVEY:
BASE MAPPING PROVIDED BY:
2014 QL2 LIDAR
METADATA CONTACT:
NC FLOODPLAIN MAPPING PROGRAM
4105 REEDY CREEK DRIVE
RALEIGH, NC 27607
[phone]
Sheet List Table
SheetNumber Sheet Title
ENGINEER:
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA 28202
200 SOUTH TRYON STREET, SUITE 200
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
[phone]
JASON CLAUDIO-DIAZ, P.E.
BEAUFORT 56 SITE
GE
N
E
R
A
L

N
O
T
E
S
02
BE
A
U
F
O
R
T

5
6
ST
R
E
A
M

A
N
D

W
E
T
L
A
N
D
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N

B
A
N
K
PR
E
P
A
R
E
D

F
O
R
©
PROPOSED PLAN LEGEND PROPOSED PROFILE LEGENDEXISTING PLAN LEGEND
1035+00
PROPOSED STREAM BANKFULL BENCH (BACK)
PROPOSED WETLAND PLAN LEGEND
LE
G
E
N
D
S

A
N
D
SY
M
B
O
L
S
03
BE
A
U
F
O
R
T

5
6
ST
R
E
A
M

A
N
D

W
E
T
L
A
N
D
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N

B
A
N
K
PR
E
P
A
R
E
D

F
O
R
©
RIFFLE
RIFFLE
RIFFLE
MEANDERING
POOL
MEANDERING
POOL
STRAIGHT
POOL
TY
P
I
C
A
L

P
L
A
N

A
N
D
PR
O
F
I
L
E
04
BE
A
U
F
O
R
T

5
6
ST
R
E
A
M

A
N
D

W
E
T
L
A
N
D
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N

B
A
N
K
PR
E
P
A
R
E
D

F
O
R
©
TY
P
I
C
A
L

S
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
05
BE
A
U
F
O
R
T

5
6
ST
R
E
A
M

A
N
D

W
E
T
L
A
N
D
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N

B
A
N
K
PR
E
P
A
R
E
D

F
O
R
©
SHE
E
T

07
SHE
E
T

08
SHE
E
T

09
SHE
E
T

10
SH
E
E
T

11
SH
E
E
T

1
2
SH
E
E
T

13
POL
L
A
R
D

S
W
A
M
P

-
REA
C
H

1
PO
L
L
A
R
D

S
W
A
M
P

-
RE
A
C
H

3
POL
L
A
R
D

S
W
A
M
P

-
REA
C
H

2
OV
E
R
A
L
L

P
L
A
N

A
N
D
KE
Y

S
H
E
E
T
06
NORTH
BE
A
U
F
O
R
T

5
6
ST
R
E
A
M

A
N
D

W
E
T
L
A
N
D
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N

B
A
N
K
PR
E
P
A
R
E
D

F
O
R
©
1
1
RE
V
I
S
E
D

P
E
R

C
O
M
M
E
N
T
S
07
-
0
5
-
2
0
2
3
JC
D
1
0+0
0
1+0
0
2+0
0
3+0
0
4+
0
0
5+
0
0
6+00
7+
0
0
8+00
9+00
10+00 11+00
12+00
MA
T
C
H

L
I
N
E

S
T
A

1
0
+
0
0
SE
E

S
H
E
E
T

0
8
Hor. Scale:1"=40' | Vert. Scale:1"=4'
PROFILE - REACH 1
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
0+00
55
.
8
55
.
8
1
1+00
56
.
8
56
.
8
3
2+00
56
.
2
56
.
2
5
3+00
56
.
2
56
.
2
5
4+00
57
.
0
57
.
0
2
5+00
55
.
2
55
.
1
7
6+00
55
.
9
55
.
8
7
7+00
56
.
5
56
.
5
1
8+00
56
.
3
56
.
3
1
9+00
55
.
8
55
.
8
1
10+00
55
.
7
55
.
7
1
PL
A
N

A
N
D

P
R
O
F
I
L
E

-
PO
L
L
A
R
D

S
W
A
M
P
RE
A
C
H

1
07
N
O
R
T
H
BE
A
U
F
O
R
T

5
6
ST
R
E
A
M

A
N
D

W
E
T
L
A
N
D
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N

B
A
N
K
PR
E
P
A
R
E
D

F
O
R
©
9+00
10+00 11+00
12+00 13+00 14+00
15+00 16+00 17+00 18+00 19+00 20+00 21+00
POLLARD SWAMP - REACH 1
MA
T
C
H

L
I
N
E

S
T
A

1
0
+
0
0
SE
E

S
H
E
E
T

0
7
MA
T
C
H

L
I
N
E

S
T
A

1
9
+
9
3
.
4
SE
E

S
H
E
E
T

0
9
Hor. Scale:1"=40' | Vert. Scale:1"=4'
PROFILE - REACH 1
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
10+00
55
.
7
11+00
54
.
4
54
.
0
5
12+00
54
.
2
53
.
6
1
13+00
54
.
4
53
.
4
8
14+00
53
.
9
53
.
3
1
15+00
53
.
3
53
.
1
1
16+00
52
.
7
52
.
8
3
17+00
51
.
7
52
.
4
7
18+00
51
.
8
52
.
1
8
19+00
51
.
7
51
.
8
9
20+00
51
.
4
51
.
5
9
PL
A
N

A
N
D

P
R
O
F
I
L
E

-
PO
L
L
A
R
D

S
W
A
M
P
RE
A
C
H

1
08
N
O
R
T
H
BE
A
U
F
O
R
T

5
6
ST
R
E
A
M

A
N
D

W
E
T
L
A
N
D
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N

B
A
N
K
PR
E
P
A
R
E
D

F
O
R
©
1
1
RE
V
I
S
E
D

P
E
R

C
O
M
M
E
N
T
S
07
-
0
5
-
2
0
2
3
JC
D
19+00 20+00 21+00 22+00 23+00 24+00 25+00 26+00
27+
0
0
28+
0
0
29+
0
0
30+
0
0
31+00
32+00
POLLARD SWAMP - REACH 1
POLLARD SWAMP - REACH 2
MA
T
C
H

L
I
N
E

S
T
A

1
9
+
9
3
.
4
SE
E

S
H
E
E
T

0
8
MA
T
C
H

L
I
N
E

S
T
A

2
9
+
8
7
.
7
SE
E

S
H
E
E
T

1
0
Hor. Scale:1"=40' | Vert. Scale:1"=4'
PROFILE - REACH 1 AND REACH 2
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
20+00
51
.
4
51
.
5
9
21+00
51
.
8
51
.
4
4
22+00
50
.
9
51
.
3
0
23+00
51
.
6
51
.
0
6
24+00
52
.
0
50
.
7
9
25+00
50
.
0
50
.
4
5
26+00
52
.
3
50
.
1
1
27+00
51
.
2
49
.
5
8
28+00
51
.
6
49
.
3
5
29+00
50
.
7
49
.
2
7
30+00
50
.
3
49
.
1
2
PL
A
N

A
N
D

P
R
O
F
I
L
E

-
PO
L
L
A
R
D

S
W
A
M
P
RE
A
C
H

1
&
2
09
N
O
R
T
H
BE
A
U
F
O
R
T

5
6
ST
R
E
A
M

A
N
D

W
E
T
L
A
N
D
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N

B
A
N
K
PR
E
P
A
R
E
D

F
O
R
©
1
1
RE
V
I
S
E
D

P
E
R

C
O
M
M
E
N
T
S
07
-
0
5
-
2
0
2
3
JC
D
1
28+
0
0
29+
0
0
30+
0
0
31+00
32+00
33+00
34+00
35+
0
0
36+00
37+0
0
38+0
0
39+
0
0
4
0
+
0
0
41
+
0
0
POLLARD SWAMP - REACH 2
MA
T
C
H

L
I
N
E

S
T
A

2
9
+
8
7
.
7
SE
E

S
H
E
E
T

0
9
MA
T
C
H

L
I
N
E

S
T
A

3
9
+
8
5
.
3
SE
E

S
H
E
E
T

1
1
Hor. Scale:1"=40' | Vert. Scale:1"=4'
PROFILE - REACH 2
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
30+00
50
.
3
49
.
1
2
31+00
50
.
3
48
.
9
5
32+00
52
.
4
48
.
7
7
33+00
51
.
4
48
.
6
0
34+00
50
.
7
48
.
4
2
35+00
50
.
3
48
.
2
5
36+00
50
.
0
48
.
0
7
37+00
49
.
8
47
.
9
0
38+00
51
.
1
47
.
7
2
39+00
49
.
8
47
.
5
5
40+00
49
.
7
47
.
3
8
PL
A
N

A
N
D

P
R
O
F
I
L
E

-
PO
L
L
A
R
D

S
W
A
M
P
RE
A
C
H

2
10
N
O
R
T
H
BE
A
U
F
O
R
T

5
6
ST
R
E
A
M

A
N
D

W
E
T
L
A
N
D
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N

B
A
N
K
PR
E
P
A
R
E
D

F
O
R
©
1
1
RE
V
I
S
E
D

P
E
R

C
O
M
M
E
N
T
S
07
-
0
5
-
2
0
2
3
JC
D
1
RE
V
I
S
E
D

P
E
R

C
O
M
M
E
N
T
S
07
-
0
5
-
2
0
2
3
JC
D
1
1 1
1 1 1
3
8
+
0
0
3
9
+
0
0
4
0
+
0
0
4
1
+
0
0
4
2
+
0
0
43+00
44+0
0 45+
0
0
46+
0
0
47
+
0
0
48
+
0
0
49+
0
0
50+00
51+0
0
52+
0
0
POL
L
A
R
D

S
W
A
M
P

-

R
E
A
C
H

2
MA
T
C
H

L
I
N
E

S
T
A

3
9
+
8
5
.
3
SE
E

S
H
E
E
T

1
0
MA
T
C
H

L
I
N
E

S
T
A

5
0
+
2
6
.
8
SE
E

S
H
E
E
T

1
2
Hor. Scale:1"=40' | Vert. Scale:1"=4'
PROFILE - REACH 2
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
40+00
49
.
7
49
.
6
8
41+00
49
.
3
49
.
2
8
42+00
49
.
3
49
.
3
1
43+00
49
.
0
49
.
0
1
44+00
48
.
6
48
.
5
6
45+00
48
.
5
48
.
4
8
46+00
47
.
7
47
.
6
9
47+00
47
.
8
47
.
8
0
48+00
47
.
2
47
.
1
9
49+00
47
.
5
47
.
5
2
50+00
47
.
3
47
.
3
2
PL
A
N

A
N
D

P
R
O
F
I
L
E

-
PO
L
L
A
R
D

S
W
A
M
P
RE
A
C
H

2
11
N
O
R
T
H
BE
A
U
F
O
R
T

5
6
ST
R
E
A
M

A
N
D

W
E
T
L
A
N
D
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N

B
A
N
K
PR
E
P
A
R
E
D

F
O
R
©
1
1
RE
V
I
S
E
D

P
E
R

C
O
M
M
E
N
T
S
07
-
0
5
-
2
0
2
3
JC
D
1
1
Hor. Scale:1"=40' | Vert. Scale:1"=4'
PROFILE - REACH 2 and REACH 3
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
50+00
47
.
3
47
.
3
2
51+00
45
.
4
45
.
3
9
52+00
47
.
8
47
.
7
5
53+00
47
.
0
46
.
9
7
54+00
47
.
2
47
.
2
1
55+00
46
.
2
46
.
2
0
56+00
46
.
0
45
.
9
9
57+00
46
.
1
46
.
0
8
58+00
45
.
3
45
.
3
5
59+00
45
.
6
45
.
5
8
60+00
45
.
4
45
.
3
7
49+00
50+
0
0
51+00 52+00
53+00
5
4
+
0
0
55+
0
0
56+00
57+
0
0
58+00
59+00
60+0
0
61
+
0
0
6
2
+
0
0
POLLARD SWAMP - REACH 3
MA
T
C
H

L
I
N
E

S
T
A

5
0
+
2
6
.
8
SE
E

S
H
E
E
T

1
1
MA
T
C
H

L
I
N
E

S
T
A

6
0
+
2
6
.
3
SE
E

S
H
E
E
T

1
3
PL
A
N

A
N
D

P
R
O
F
I
L
E

-
PO
L
L
A
R
D

S
W
A
M
P
RE
A
C
H

2
&
3
12
NO
R
T
H
BE
A
U
F
O
R
T

5
6
ST
R
E
A
M

A
N
D

W
E
T
L
A
N
D
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N

B
A
N
K
PR
E
P
A
R
E
D

F
O
R
©
1
1
RE
V
I
S
E
D

P
E
R

C
O
M
M
E
N
T
S
07
-
0
5
-
2
0
2
3
JC
D
56+
0
0
57
+
0
0
58+0
0
59+0
0
60
+
0
0
61+00
62
+
0
0
63+0
0
64+00
65+00
66+0066+10
POL
L
A
R
D

S
W
A
M
P

-

R
E
A
C
H

3
POLLARD S
W
A
M
P

-

R
E
A
C
H

3
M
A
T
C
H

L
I
N
E

S
T
A

6
0
+
2
6
.
3
S
E
E

S
H
E
E
T

1
2
Hor. Scale:1"=40' | Vert. Scale:1"=4'
PROFILE - REACH 3
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
60+00
45
.
4
45
.
3
7
61+00
45
.
1
45
.
1
3
62+00
45
.
7
45
.
7
1
63+00
45
.
1
45
.
1
1
64+00
43
.
9
43
.
9
2
65+00
42
.
6
42
.
5
7
66+00
PL
A
N

A
N
D

P
R
O
F
I
L
E

-
PO
L
L
A
R
D

S
W
A
M
P
RE
A
C
H

3
13
N
O
R
T
H
BE
A
U
F
O
R
T

5
6
ST
R
E
A
M

A
N
D

W
E
T
L
A
N
D
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N

B
A
N
K
PR
E
P
A
R
E
D

F
O
R
©
POL
L
A
R
D

S
W
A
M
P

-
REA
C
H

1
PO
L
L
A
R
D

S
W
A
M
P

-
RE
A
C
H

3
PO
L
L
A
R
D

S
W
A
M
P

-
REA
C
H

2
WE
T
L
A
N
D

P
L
A
N
14
NORTH
BE
A
U
F
O
R
T

5
6
ST
R
E
A
M

A
N
D

W
E
T
L
A
N
D
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N

B
A
N
K
PR
E
P
A
R
E
D

F
O
R
©
1
1
RE
V
I
S
E
D

P
E
R

C
O
M
M
E
N
T
S
07
-
0
5
-
2
0
2
3
JC
D
1
DI
T
C
H

P
L
U
G

P
L
A
N
15
BE
A
U
F
O
R
T

5
6
ST
R
E
A
M

A
N
D

W
E
T
L
A
N
D
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N

B
A
N
K
PR
E
P
A
R
E
D

F
O
R
©
NORTH
1
1
RE
V
I
S
E
D

P
E
R

C
O
M
M
E
N
T
S
07
-
0
5
-
2
0
2
3
JC
D
Not to Scale
BRUSH AND ROLL RIFFLE1
ST
R
E
A
M

D
E
T
A
I
L
S
16
BE
A
U
F
O
R
T

5
6
ST
R
E
A
M

A
N
D

W
E
T
L
A
N
D
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N

B
A
N
K
PR
E
P
A
R
E
D

F
O
R
©
Not to Scale
LOG VANE2 Not to Scale
LOG SILL3
ST
R
E
A
M

D
E
T
A
I
L
S
17
BE
A
U
F
O
R
T

5
6
ST
R
E
A
M

A
N
D

W
E
T
L
A
N
D
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N

B
A
N
K
PR
E
P
A
R
E
D

F
O
R
©
Not to Scale
BRUSH TOE PROTECTION5Not to Scale
LOG CROSS VANE4
ST
R
E
A
M

D
E
T
A
I
L
S
18
BE
A
U
F
O
R
T

5
6
ST
R
E
A
M

A
N
D

W
E
T
L
A
N
D
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N

B
A
N
K
PR
E
P
A
R
E
D

F
O
R
©
Not to Scale
CHANNEL BLOCK6 Not to Scale
CROSSING (SINGLE PIPE)7
CROSSING INFORMATION (SINGLE PIPE)
ST
R
E
A
M

D
E
T
A
I
L
S
19
BE
A
U
F
O
R
T

5
6
ST
R
E
A
M

A
N
D

W
E
T
L
A
N
D
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N

B
A
N
K
PR
E
P
A
R
E
D

F
O
R
©
1
1
RE
V
I
S
E
D

P
E
R

C
O
M
M
E
N
T
S
07
-
0
5
-
2
0
2
3
JC
D
Not to Scale
INSTALLATION GUIDE FOR EROSION CONTROL MATTING8
Not to Scale
TEMPORARY SILT FENCE9
ER
O
S
I
O
N

C
O
N
T
R
O
L
DE
T
A
I
L
S
20
BE
A
U
F
O
R
T

5
6
ST
R
E
A
M

A
N
D

W
E
T
L
A
N
D
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N

B
A
N
K
PR
E
P
A
R
E
D

F
O
R
©
Not to Scale
EXAMPLE OF PUMP-AROUND OPERATION10
ER
O
S
I
O
N

C
O
N
T
R
O
L
DE
T
A
I
L
S
21
BE
A
U
F
O
R
T

5
6
ST
R
E
A
M

A
N
D

W
E
T
L
A
N
D
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N

B
A
N
K
PR
E
P
A
R
E
D

F
O
R
©
VE
G
E
T
A
T
I
O
N

N
O
T
E
S
AN
D

D
E
T
A
I
L
S
22
BE
A
U
F
O
R
T

5
6
ST
R
E
A
M

A
N
D

W
E
T
L
A
N
D
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N

B
A
N
K
PR
E
P
A
R
E
D

F
O
R
©
1
1
RE
V
I
S
E
D

P
E
R

C
O
M
M
E
N
T
S
07
-
0
5
-
2
0
2
3
JC
D
1
PL
A
N
T
I
N
G

P
L
A
N
23
BE
A
U
F
O
R
T

5
6
ST
R
E
A
M

A
N
D

W
E
T
L
A
N
D
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N

B
A
N
K
PR
E
P
A
R
E
D

F
O
R
©
NORTH1
1
RE
V
I
S
E
D

P
E
R

C
O
M
M
E
N
T
S
07
-
0
5
-
2
0
2
3
JC
D
The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
September 2023│
44

Appendix G –
NCSAM Forms

Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
(4) Floodplain Access
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
(4) Microtopography
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
(1) Water Quality
(2) Baseflow
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Indicators of Stressors
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
(1) Habitat
(2) In-stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability
(3) In-stream Habitat
(2) Stream-side Habitat
(3) Stream-side Habitat
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat
(3) Flow Restriction
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
(3) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
Overall
NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
LOW
LOW
USACE/
All Streams
NCDWR
Intermittent
NA
NA
(2) Flood Flow
J. Hartshorn/Kimley-Horn
June 13, 2017
YES
YES
YES
Perennial
(2) Baseflow
Stream Category Assessor Name/Organization
LOW
Ia2
Stream Site Name Weyerhaeuser - Site B-56-A - UT1-Reach 1 Date of Evaluation
LOW
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
MEDIUM
NA
HIGH
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
Function Class Rating Summary
(1) Hydrology
NA
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
NA
NO
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
HIGH
HIGH
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
HIGH
NA
NA
HIGH
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
(4) Floodplain Access
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
(4) Microtopography
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
(1) Water Quality
(2) Baseflow
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Indicators of Stressors
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
(1) Habitat
(2) In-stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability
(3) In-stream Habitat
(2) Stream-side Habitat
(3) Stream-side Habitat
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat
(3) Flow Restriction
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
(3) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
Overall LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
HIGH
NA
NA
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
NA
NA
NA
NA
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
Function Class Rating Summary
(1) Hydrology
NA
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
NA
NO
LOW
Stream Site Name Weyerhaeuser - Site B56-A - UT1-Reach 2 Date of Evaluation
LOW
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
MEDIUM
NA
HIGH
NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
LOW
LOW
USACE/
All Streams
NCDWR
Intermittent
NA
NA
(2) Flood Flow
J. Hartshorn/Kimley-Horn
June 13, 2017
YES
YES
YES
Perennial
(2) Baseflow
Stream Category Assessor Name/Organization
LOW
Ia2
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
(4) Floodplain Access
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
(4) Microtopography
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
(1) Water Quality
(2) Baseflow
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Indicators of Stressors
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
(1) Habitat
(2) In-stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability
(3) In-stream Habitat
(2) Stream-side Habitat
(3) Stream-side Habitat
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat
(3) Flow Restriction
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
(3) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
Overall LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
NA
NA
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
NA
NA
NA
NA
MEDIUM
HIGH
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
Function Class Rating Summary
(1) Hydrology
NA
MEDIUM
HIGH
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
NA
NO
LOW
Stream Site Name Weyerhaeuser - Site B56-A - UT1 - Reach3 Date of Evaluation
LOW
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
LOW
LOW
NA
NA
MEDIUM
NA
HIGH
NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
LOW
LOW
USACE/
All Streams
NCDWR
Intermittent
NA
NA
(2) Flood Flow
J. Hartshorn/Kimley-Horn
June 13, 2017
YES
YES
YES
Perennial
(2) Baseflow
Stream Category Assessor Name/Organization
LOW
Ia3
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
(4) Floodplain Access
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
(4) Microtopography
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
(1) Water Quality
(2) Baseflow
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Indicators of Stressors
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
(1) Habitat
(2) In-stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability
(3) In-stream Habitat
(2) Stream-side Habitat
(3) Stream-side Habitat
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat
(3) Flow Restriction
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
(3) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
Overall LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
HIGH
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
NA
NA
HIGH
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
NA
NA
NA
NA
HIGH
NO
NA
NA
HIGH
MEDIUM
NA
NA
NA
LOW
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
Function Class Rating Summary
(1) Hydrology
MEDIUM
HIGH
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
HIGH
HIGH
NA
NO
NA
NA
LOW
Stream Site Name
LOW
NA
Weyerhaeuser - Site B56-A - UT2 Date of Evaluation
LOW
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
NA
NA
LOW
NA
MEDIUM
NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
LOW
LOW
USACE/
All Streams
NCDWR
Intermittent
NA
NA
(2) Flood Flow
J. Hartshorn/Kimley-Horn
June 13, 2017
YES
YES
YES
Intermittent
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
(2) Baseflow
Stream Category Assessor Name/Organization
LOW
Ia1
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
(4) Floodplain Access
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
(4) Microtopography
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
(1) Water Quality
(2) Baseflow
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Indicators of Stressors
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
(1) Habitat
(2) In-stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability
(3) In-stream Habitat
(2) Stream-side Habitat
(3) Stream-side Habitat
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat
(3) Flow Restriction
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
(3) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
Overall
NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
LOW
LOW
USACE/
All Streams
NCDWR
Intermittent
NA
NA
(2) Flood Flow
J. Hartshorn/Kimley-Horn
June 13, 2017
YES
YES
YES
Intermittent
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
(2) Baseflow
Stream Category Assessor Name/Organization
LOW
Ia1
Stream Site Name
LOW
NA
Weyerhaeuser - Site B56-A - UT3 Date of Evaluation
LOW
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
HIGH
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
NA
NA
LOW
NA
MEDIUM
LOW
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
Function Class Rating Summary
(1) Hydrology
MEDIUM
HIGH
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
LOW
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
HIGH
HIGH
NA
NO
NA
NA
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
HIGH
NO
NA
NA
HIGH
MEDIUM
NA
NA
NA
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
HIGH
HIGH
MEDIUM
NA
NA
HIGH
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
45 The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
│September 2023

Appendix H –
Wetland and Stream Data Forms

Date:Project/Site:Latitude:
Evaluator:County:Longitude:
Total Points:32.5
Stream is at least intermittent
if ≥ 19 or perennial if ≥ 30
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = Absent Weak Strong Score
0 1 3 3
0 1 3 1
0 1 3 2
0 1 3 2
0 1 3 1
0 1 3 1
0 1 3 1
0 1 3 1
0 0.5 1.5 0.5
0 0.5 1.5 1
3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology Subtotal = 6.5
0 1 3 1
0 1 3 0
1.5 1 0 0.5
0 0.5 1.5 1
0 0.5 1.5 1
3
C. Biology Subtotal = 9.5
3 2 0 3
3 2 0 3
0 1 3 0
0 1 3 0
0 0.5 1.5 0
0 0.5 1.5 0.5
0 0.5 1.5 1
0 0.5 1.5 0.5
1.5
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: BKFW 12'
BKFD 6'
intercepts groundwater. Multiple ditches and two intermittent tributaries WW 3'
contribute to S1.WD 1'
Substrate silt/sand
Clarity clear
Flow low/slow
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank 2
North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form, Version 4.11
7/16/2018 Pollard Swamp S1-
Beaufort 56A 34.41565
Jason Hartshorn Beaufort -77.149363
Stream Determination (circle one)
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
Other
e.g. Quad Name:Wilmar
16.5 Moderate
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 2
3. In-channel structure: ex. riffle-pool, step-pool, ripple-pool sequence 2
4. Particle size of stream substrate 2
5. Active/relic floodplain 2
6. Depositional bars or benches 2
7. Recent alluvial deposits 2
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 2
8. Headcuts 2
9. Grade control 1
10. Natural valley 1
11. Second or greater order channel No = 0 Yes = 3
12. Presence of Baseflow 2
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 1
14. Leaf litter 0.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris 1
16. Organic debris lines or piles 1
17. Soil-based evidence of high water table?No = 0 Yes = 3
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 1
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)2
21. Aquatic Mollusks 2
22. Fish 1
26. Wetland plants in streambed FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5; Other = 0
S1 is Pollard Swamp in the study area and is a deep, channelized stream that
23. Crayfish 1
24. Amphibians 1
25. Algae 1
Date:Project/Site:Latitude:
Evaluator:County:Longitude:
Total Points:18
Stream is at least intermittent
if ≥ 19 or perennial if ≥ 30
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = Absent Weak Strong Score
0 1 3 3
0 1 3 1
0 1 3 1
0 1 3 1
0 1 3 0
0 1 3 0
0 1 3 1
0 1 3 1
0 0.5 1.5 0.5
0 0.5 1.5 0.5
0
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology Subtotal = 5
0 1 3 0
0 1 3 0
1.5 1 0 0
0 0.5 1.5 1
0 0.5 1.5 1
3
C. Biology Subtotal = 4
3 2 0 1
3 2 0 3
0 1 3 0
0 1 3 0
0 0.5 1.5 0
0 0.5 1.5 0
0 0.5 1.5 0
0 0.5 1.5 0
0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: BKFW 5'
BKFD 0.5'
UT-1 is a weak intermittent channel within study area. Historically ditched.WW n/a
No waters in channel.WD n/a
Saturation at 6"Substrate sand/silt
Clarity n/a
Flow n/a
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank 2
North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form, Version 4.11
7/16/2018 UT-1 Neuse 02 56A 35.414808
Willie Sullivan Beaufort -77.152939
Stream Determination (circle one)
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
Other
e.g. Quad Name:Wilmar
9 Moderate
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 2
3. In-channel structure: ex. riffle-pool, step-pool, ripple-pool sequence 2
4. Particle size of stream substrate 2
5. Active/relic floodplain 2
6. Depositional bars or benches 2
7. Recent alluvial deposits 2
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 2
8. Headcuts 2
9. Grade control 1
10. Natural valley 1
11. Second or greater order channel No = 0 Yes = 3
12. Presence of Baseflow 2
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 1
14. Leaf litter 0.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris 1
16. Organic debris lines or piles 1
17. Soil-based evidence of high water table?No = 0 Yes = 3
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 1
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)2
21. Aquatic Mollusks 2
22. Fish 1
26. Wetland plants in streambed FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5; Other = 0
23. Crayfish 1
24. Amphibians 1
25. Algae 1
Date:Project/Site:Latitude:
Evaluator:County:Longitude:
Total Points:37.25
Stream is at least intermittent
if ≥ 19 or perennial if ≥ 30
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = Absent Weak Strong Score
0 1 3 3
0 1 3 1
0 1 3 1
0 1 3 1
0 1 3 0
0 1 3 1
0 1 3 1
0 1 3 0
0 0.5 1.5 0.5
0 0.5 1.5 0.5
0
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology Subtotal = 5.5
0 1 3 0
0 1 3 0
1.5 1 0 1
0 0.5 1.5 1
0 0.5 1.5 0.5
3
C. Biology Subtotal = 22.75
3 2 0 1
3 2 0 3
0 1 3 3
0 1 3 3
0 0.5 1.5 3
0 0.5 1.5 3
0 0.5 1.5 3
0 0.5 1.5 3
0.75
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: BKFW 6'
BKFD 0.5'
Saturation at 4" under surface.WW n/a
WD n/a
Substrate sand/silt
Clarity n/a
Flow n/a
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank 2
North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form, Version 4.11
7/16/2018 UT-2 Neuse 02 Beaufort
56-A 35.413913
Willie Sullivan Beaufort -77.153894
Stream Determination (circle one)
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
Other
e.g. Quad Name:Wilmar
9 Moderate
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 2
3. In-channel structure: ex. riffle-pool, step-pool, ripple-pool sequence 2
4. Particle size of stream substrate 2
5. Active/relic floodplain 2
6. Depositional bars or benches 2
7. Recent alluvial deposits 2
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 2
8. Headcuts 2
9. Grade control 1
10. Natural valley 1
11. Second or greater order channel No = 0 Yes = 3
12. Presence of Baseflow 2
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 1
14. Leaf litter 0.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris 1
16. Organic debris lines or piles 1
17. Soil-based evidence of high water table?No = 0 Yes = 3
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 1
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)2
21. Aquatic Mollusks 2
22. Fish 1
26. Wetland plants in streambed FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5; Other = 0
UT-2 is a weak intermittent channel that has been ditched.
23. Crayfish 1
24. Amphibians 1
25. Algae 1
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Lat:Long:
Soil Map Unit Name:
X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
X No
No X X
No X
X
Yes X
Yes X
Yes X No X
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Saturation (A3)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Are “Normal Circumstances” present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Yes
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Yes
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
No
Surface Water Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Sphagnum Moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Saturation Present?
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)Iron Deposits (B5)
Datum:
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
Yes
Remarks:
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Field Observations:
Water Table Present?No
No
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
No
(includes capillary fringe)
18
Pa - Pantego loam
35.415218
No hydrology indicators observed.
7/16/2018
-77.150345
No
N/A
DP-1 was taken in the middle of Pollard Swamp and lateral ditches within a hardwood forest. The Antecedent Precipitation tool produced an output of
normal conditions for 7/16/2018.
HYDROLOGY
NAD83
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?Yes
(If no, explain in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed?
naturally problematic?
Flat
Yes
LRR T, MLRA 153A
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R
OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
(Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
NWI classification:
Water Marks (B1)
Sampling Date:Beaufort
NCWeyerhauser NR Company
Beaufort 56 City/County:
Slope (%):
PFO1C
DP-1
none
Section, Township, Range:Willie S., Emma A.
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
<1%Local relief (concave, convex, none):Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):
Yes
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-2-SG, JUL 2018 Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
(Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.(A/B)
7.
8.
x 1 =
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:x 2 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 3 =
1.x 4 =
2.x 5 =
3.Column Totals:(B)
4.
5.
6.
7.X
8.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
50% of total cover:20% of total cover:X
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Woody Vine – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
5
=Total Cover
5
30
Ilex glabra
1
2
3
5
=Total Cover
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below.)
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?Yes No
35
FACW
30
30
60
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
12
Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Yes
Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
=Total Cover
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Absolute
% Cover
15
No
)30
10
15
5Woodwardia areolata
DP-1
7
7
FACU species
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Yes
(B)
Indicator
Status
40
VEGETATION (Four Strata)– Use scientific names of plants.
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
100.0%
(A)
40
FACW
Yes
Yes
FAC
FAC
0
No
Yes
14
FAC
FACW
355
0
145
5
70
(A)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
70
10
Multiply by:
140
2.45
UPL species
)
=Total Cover
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
OBL
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Total % Cover of:
Prevalence Index worksheet:
70
0
210
Dominant
Species?
Smilax rotundifolia FAC
0
)
Magnolia virginiana
Ilex opaca
Tree Stratum
Acer rubrum
Liquidambar styraciflua
Persea borbonia
30 )
5
10
Smilax laurifolia
5
FACW
Yes
Yes
ENG FORM 6116-2-SG, JUL 2018 Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain – Version 2.0
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
Depth (inches):X
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
Barrier Islands 1 cm Muck (S12)
(MLRA 153B, 153D)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
(outside MLRA 150A, 150B)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, T)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Anomalous Bright Floodplain Soils (F20)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Hydric Soil Present?
(MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
Marl (F10) (LRR U)
Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
(MLRA 153B)
Red Parent Material (F21)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Histosol (A1)
Barrier Islands Low Chroma Matrix (TS7)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
%
Matrix
Color (moist)Type1
Redox FeaturesDepth
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Loc2 Texture Remarks%(inches)Color (moist)
10YR 2/1 1002-18
18-24 10YR 4/2
0-2 10010YR 3/6
SOIL Sampling Point:
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Reduced Vertic (F18)
NoYes
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
DP-1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
100
Uncoated sand grains at surface.
(LRR S, T, U)
(MLRA 138, 152A in FL, 154)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
(outside MLRA 138, 152A in FL, 154)
(MLRA 153B, 153D)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Anomalous Bright Floodplain Soils (F20)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(outside MLRA 150A)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)Black Histic (A3)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Remarks:
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
ENG FORM 6116-2-SG, JUL 2018 Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain – Version 2.0
loam
sandy loam
sandy loam
The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
September 2023│
46

Appendix I –
Conservation Easement Documents

1

RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER’S
USE
PERMANENT CONSERVATION
EASEMENT

THIS CONSERVATION EASEMENT (“Conservation Easement”) made this day
_____ of _______________, 2020 by Weyerhaeuser NR Company and between
(“Grantor”) and Unique Places To Save (“Grantee”).

The designation Grantor and Grantee as used herein shall include said parties, their
heirs, successors and assigns, and shall include singular, plural, masculine, feminine or
neuter as required by context.

RECITALS

WHEREAS, Grantor owns in fee simple certain real property situated, lying and
being in Beaufort County, North Carolina, more particularly described in Exhibit A attached
hereto and incorporated herein (the “Property”);

WHEREAS, Grantee is a charitable, not-for-profit or educational corporation,
association, or trust qualified under § 501 (c)(3) and § 170 (h) of the Internal Revenue
Code, and N.C. Gen. Stat. § 121-34 et seq., the purposes or powers of which include one
2

or more of the purposes (a) – (d) listed below;

(a) retaining or protecting natural, scenic, or open-space aspects of real
property;
(b) ensuring the availability of real property for recreational, educational, or
open-space use;
(c) protecting natural resources;
(d) maintaining or enhancing air or water quality.

WHEREAS, Grantor and Grantee recognize the conservation, scenic, natural, or
aesthetic value of the property in its natural state, which includes the following natural
communities: non-riparian wetlands, riparian wetlands, perennial and intermittent streams
and riparian buffers. The purpose of this Conservation Easement is to maintain streams,
wetlands and riparian resources and other natural values of approximately 99.2 acres,
more or less, and being more particularly described in Exhibit B attached hereto and
incorporated fully herein by reference (the “Conservation Easement Area”), and prevent
the use or development of the Conservation Easement Area for any purpose or in any
manner that would conflict with the maintenance of its natural condition.

WHEREAS, the restoration, enhancement and preservation of the Conservation
Easement Area is a condition of the approval of the Mitigation Banking Instrument (MBI)
and Mitigation Plan for the Middle Neuse Umbrella Mitigation Bank, Department of the
Army (DA) Action ID Number SAW-2017-02019, entitled “Agreement to Establish the
Middle Neuse Umbrella Mitigation Bank in the Neuse River Basin within the State of North
Carolina”, entered into by and between Weyerhaeuser NR Company acting as the Bank
Sponsor and the Wilmington District Corps of Engineers (Corps), in consultation with the
North Carolina Interagency Review Team (IRT). The Beaufort 56 Mitigation Site has
been approved by the Corps for use as a mitigation bank to compensate for unavoidable
stream and wetland impacts authorized by DA permits.

WHEREAS, Grantor and Grantee agree that third -party rights of enforcement shall
be held by the North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) and the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District (“Third -Parties,” to include any successor
agencies), and may be exercised through the appropriate enforcement agencies of the
United States and the State of North Carolina, and that these rights are in addition to, and
do not limit, the rights of enforcement under the NCDWR Project ID # _______________
and Department of the Army instrument number SAW-2017-02019 (“Mitigation Banking
Instrument”), or any permit or certification issued by the Third-Parties.

NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the covenants and representations
contained herein and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and legal
sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, Grantor hereby unconditionally and
irrevocably grants and conveys unto Grantee, its heirs, successors and assigns, forever
and in perpetuity a Conservation Easement of the nature and character and to the extent
hereinafter set forth, over the Conservation Easement Area described on Exhibit B,
together with the right to preserve and protect the conservation values thereof, as follows:

3

ARTICLE I.
DURATION OF EASEMENT

This Conservation Easement shall be perpetual. This Conservatio n Easement is an
easement in gross, runs with the land and is enforceable by Grantee against Grantor,
Grantor’s personal representatives, heirs, successors and assigns, lessees, agents and
licensees.

ARTICLE II.
PROHIBITED AND RESTRICTED ACTIVITIES

Any activity on, or use of, the Conservation Easement Area inconsistent with the
purpose of this Conservation Easement is prohibited. The Conservation Easement Area
shall be preserved in its natural condition and restricted from any development that would
impair or interfere with the conservation values of the Conservation Easement Area.

Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the following activities and uses are
expressly prohibited, restricted or reserved as indicated hereunder:

A. Disturbance of Natural Features. Any change disturbance, alteration or
impairment of the natural features of the Conservation Easement Area or any introduction
of non-native plants and/or animal species is prohibited.

B. Construction. There shall be no constructing or placing of any building, mobile
home, asphalt or concrete pavement, billboard or other advertising display, antenna, utility
pole, tower, conduit, line, pier, landing, dock or any other temporary or permanent structure
or facility on or above the Conservation Easement Area.

C. Industrial, Commercial and Residential Use. Industrial, residential and/or
commercial activities, including any rights of passage for such purposes are prohibited.

D. Agricultural, Grazing and Horticultural Use. Agricultural, grazing, animal
husbandry, and horticultural use of the Conservation Easement Area are prohibited.

E. Vegetation. There shall be no removal, burning, destruction, harming, cutting or
mowing of trees, shrubs, or other vegetation in the Conservation Easement Ar ea except as
provided in the Mitigation Plan. Mowing of invasive and herbaceous vegetation for
purposes of enhancing planted or volunteer trees and shrubs approved in the Mitigation
Plan is allowable once a year for no more than five consecutive years from the date on
page 1 of this Conservation Easement, except where mowing will negatively impact
vegetation or disturb soils. Mowing activities shall only be performed by Weyerhaeuser NR
Company and shall not violate any part of Item L of Article II.

F. Roads and Trails. There shall be no construction of roads, trails or walkways on
the Conservation Easement Area; nor enlargement or modification to existing roads, trails
or walkways.

4

G. Signage. No signs shall be permitted on or over the Conservation Easement
Area, except the posting of no trespassing signs, signs identifying the conservation values
of the Conservation Easement Area, signs giving directions or proscribing rules and
regulations for the use of the Conservation Easement Area and/or signs identi fying the
Grantor as owner of the Conservation Easement Area.

H. Dumping or Storage. Dumping or storage of soil, trash, ashes, garbage, waste,
abandoned vehicles, appliances, machinery or hazardous substances, or toxic or
hazardous waste, or any placement of underground or aboveground storage tanks or other
materials on the Conservation Easement Area is prohibited.

I. Excavation, Dredging or Mineral Use. There shall be no grading, filling,
excavation, dredging, mining or drilling; no removal of topsoil, sand, gravel, rock, peat,
minerals or other materials, and no change in the topography of the land in any manner on
the Conservation Easement Area, except to restore natural topography or drainage
patterns. For purposes of restoring and enhancing streams and wetlands within the
Conservation Easement Area, Weyerhaeuser NR Company is allowed to perform grading,
filling, and excavation associated with stream and wetland restoration and enhancement
activities as described in the Mitigation Plan and authorized by Department of the Army
Nationwide Permit 27.

J. Water Quality and Drainage Pattern. There shall be no diking, draining,
dredging, channeling, filling, leveling, pumping, impounding or related activities, or altering
or tampering with water control structures or devices, or disruption or alteration of the
restored, enhanced, or created drainage patterns. In addition, diverting or causing or
permitting the diversion of surface or underground water into, within or out of the easement
area by any means, removal of wetlands, polluting or discharging into waters, springs,
seeps, or wetlands, or use of pesticide or biocides is prohibited.

K. Development Rights. No development rights that have been encumbered or
extinguished by this Conservation Easement shall be transferred pursuant to a transferable
development rights scheme or cluster develo pment arrangement or otherwise.

[Not required, but may be added if Grantor and Grantee agree:]
L. Subdivision. The Grantor and Grantee agree that the Conservation Ease ment
Area currently consists of _______________ within _______________ separate parcels.
The Grantor may not further subdivide the Conservation Easement Area, except with the
prior written consent of the Grantee. If Grantor elects to further subdivide any portion of the
Conservation Easement Area, Grantor must provide the Grantee the name, address, and
telephone number of new owner(s) of all property within the Conservation Easement Area,
if different from Grantor. No subdivision of the Conservation Easem ent Area shall limit the
right of ingress and egress over and across the Property for the purposes set forth
herein. Further, in the event of any subdivision of the Property (whether inside or outside of
the Conservation Easement Area) provision shall be m ade to preserve not only Grantee’s
perpetual rights of access to the Conservation Easement Area, as defined herein, but also
Grantee’s right of perpetual access to any conservation easements on properties adjacent
to the Property which form a part of or ar e included in the Mitigation Plan. Creation of a
5

condominium or any de facto division of the Conservation Easement Area is prohibited. Lot
line adjustments or lot consolidation without the prior written consent of the Grantee is
prohibited. The Grantor may convey undivided interests in the real property underlying the
Conservation Easement Area. The Grantor shall notify the Grantee immediately of the
name, address, and telephone number of any grantee of an undivided interest in any
property within the Conservation Easement Area.

M. Vehicles. The operation of mechanized vehicles, including, but not limited to,
motorcycles, dirt bikes, all-terrain vehicles, cars and trucks is prohibited other than for
temporary or occasional access by the Weyerhaeuser NR Company, the Grantee, its
employees and agents, successors, assigns, NCDWR, and the Corps for purposes of
constructing, maintaining and monitoring the restoration, enhancement and
preservation of streams, wetlands and riparian areas within the Conservation
Easement Area. The use of mechanized vehicles for monitoring purposes is limited to
only existing roads and trails as shown in the approved in the mitigation plan .

N. Other Prohibitions. Any other use of, or activity on, the Conservation Easement
Area which is or may become inconsistent with the purposes of this grant, the preser vation
of the Conservation Easement Area substantially in its natural condition, or the protection of
its environmental systems, is prohibited.

ARTICLE III.
GRANTOR’S RESEVERED RIGHTS

The Grantor expressly reserves for himself, his personal representatives, heirs,
successors or assigns, the right to continue the use of the Conservation Easement Area for
all purposes not inconsistent with this Conservation Easement, including, but not limited to,
the right to quiet enjoyment of the Conservation Easement Area, the rights of ingress and
egress, the right to hunt, fish, and hike on the Conservation Easement Area, the right to
sell, transfer, gift or otherwise convey the Conservation Easement Area, in whole or in part,
provided such sale, transfer or gift conveyance is subject to the terms of, and shall
specifically reference, this Conservation Easement.

Notwithstanding the foregoing Restrictions, Grantor reserves for Grantor, its
successors and assigns, including Weyerhaeuser NR Company acting as the Bank
Sponsor, the right to construct and perform activities related to the restoration,
enhancement, and preservation of streams, wetlands and riparian areas within the
Conservation Easement Area in accordance with the approved Beaufort 56 Mitigation Plan,
and the Mitigation Banking Instrument described in the Recitals of this Conservation
Easement.

Notwithstanding the foregoing Restrictions, Grantor reserves for Grantor, its
successors and assigns, the following rights in the areas labeled as “Interna l Crossing” on
the plat [insert plat name and recorded plat book page number] in the Conservation
Easement Area: vehicular access, livestock access, irrigation piping and piping of livestock
waste. All Internal Crossings that allow livestock access will be bounded by fencing and will
be over a culvert.
6

ARTICLE IV.
GRANTEE’S RIGHTS

The Grantee or its authorized representatives, successors and assigns, and the
Corps, shall have the right to enter the Property and Conservation Easement Area at all
reasonable times for the purpose of inspecting the Conservation Easement Area to
determine if the Grantor, or his personal representatives, heirs, successors, or assigns, is
complying with the terms, conditions, restrictions, and purposes of this Conservation
Easement. The Grantee, Weyerhaeuser NR Company, and its authorized representatives,
successors and assigns, and the Corps shall also have the right to enter and go upon the
Conservation Easement Area for purposes of making scientific or educational observations
and studies, and taking samples. The easement rights granted herein do not incl ude public
access rights.

ARTICLE V.
ENFORCEMENT AND REMEDIES

A. To accomplish the purposes of this Easement, Grantee, the Corps, and
NCDWR are allowed to prevent any activity on or use of the Conservation Easement Area
that is inconsistent with the purposes of this Easement and to require the restoration of
such areas or features of the Conservation Easement Area that may be damaged by such
activity or use. Upon any breach of the terms of this Conservation Easement by Grantor
that comes to the attention of the Grantee, the Grantee shall notify the Grantor in writing of
such breach. The Grantor shall have 30 days after receipt of such notice to correct the
conditions constituting such breach. If the breach remains uncured after 30 days, the
Grantee may enforce this Conservation Easement by appropriate legal proceedings
including damages, injunctive and other relief. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Grantee
reserves the immediate right, without notice, to obtain a temporary restraining order,
injunctive or other appropriate relief if the breach of the terms of this Conservation
Easement is or would irreversibly or otherwise materially impair the benefits to be derived
from this Conservation Easement. The Grantor and Grantee acknowledge that under such
circumstances damage to the Grantee would be irreparable and remedies at law will be
inadequate. The rights and remedies of the Grantee provided hereunder shall be in addition
to, and not in lieu of, all other rights and remedies available to Grantee in connectio n with
this Conservation Easement. The costs of a breach, correction or restoration, including the
Grantee’s expenses, court costs, and attorneys’ fees, shall be paid by Grantor, provided
Grantor is determined to be responsible for the breach. The Corps an d the NCDWR shall
have the same rights and privileges as the said Grantee to enforce the terms and
conditions of this Conservation easement.

B. No failure on the part of the Grantee to enforce any covenant or provision
hereof shall discharge or invalidate su ch covenant or any other covenant, condition, or
provision hereof or affect the right to Grantee to enforce the same in the event of a
subsequent breach or default.

C. Nothing contained in this Conservation Easement shall be construed to entitle
Grantee to bring any action against Grantor for any injury or change in the Conservation
7

Easement Area resulting from causes beyond the Grantor’s control, including, without
limitation, fire, flood, storm, war, acts of God or third parties, except Grantor’s lessees or
invitees; or from any prudent action taken in good faith by Grantor under emergency
conditions to prevent, abate, or mitigate significant injury to life, damage to p roperty or
harm to the Conservation Easement Area resulting from such causes.

ARTICLE VI.
MISCELLANEOUS

A. Warranty. Grantor warrants, covenants and represents that it owns the Property
in fee simple, and that Grantor either owns all interests in the Property which may be
impaired by the granting of this Conservation Easement or that there are no outstanding
mortgages, tax liens, encumbrances, or other interests in the Property which have not been
expressly subordinated to this Conservation Easement. Grantor further warrants that
Grantee shall have the use of and enjoy all the benefits derived from and arising out of thi s
Conservation Easement, and that Grantor will warrant and defend title to the Property
against the claims of all persons.

B. Subsequent Transfers. The Grantor agrees to incorporate the terms of this
Conservation Easement in any deed or other legal instrument that transfers any interest in
all or a portion of the Conservation Easement Area. The Grantor agrees to provide written
notice of such transfer at least sixty (60) days prior to the date of the transfer. The Grantor
and Grantee agree that the terms of this Conservation Easement shall survive any merger
of the fee and easement interests in the Conservation Easement Area or any portion
thereof and shall not be amended, modified or terminated without the prior written consent
and approval of the Corps.

C. Assignment. The parties recognize and agree that the benefits of this
Conservation Easement are in gross and assignable provided, however that the G rantee
hereby covenants and agrees, that in the event it transfers or assigns this Conservation
Easement, the organization receiving the interest will be a qualified holder pursuant to 33
CFR 332.7 (a)(1), N.C. Gen. Stat. § 121-34 et seq. and § 501 (c)(3) and § 170 (h) of the
Internal Revenue Code, and the Grantee further covenants and agrees that the terms of
the transfer or assignment will be such that the transferee or assignee will be required to
continue in perpetuity the conservation purposes described in this document.

D. Entire Agreement and Severability. The Mitigation Banking Instrument: MBI
with corresponding Mitigation Plan, and this Conservation Easement sets forth the entire
agreement of the parties with respect to the Conservation Easement and supersedes all
prior discussions, negotiations, understandings or agreements relating to the Conservation
Easement. If any provision is found to be void or unenforceable by a court of competent
jurisdiction, the remainder shall continue in full force and effect.

E. Obligations of Ownership. Grantor is responsible for any real estate taxes,
assessments, fees, or charges levied upon the Property. Grantor shall keep the Property
free of any liens or other encumbrances for obligations incurred by Grantor, except those
incurred after the date hereof, which are expressly subject and subordinate to the
8

Conservation Easement. Grantee shall not be responsible for any costs or liability of any
kind related to the ownership, operation, insurance, upkeep, or maintenance of the
Property, except as expressly provided herein. Nothing herein shall relieve the Grantor of
the obligation to comply with federal, state or local laws, regulations and permits that may
apply to the exercise of the Reserved Rights.

F. Long-Term Management. Grantor is responsible for all long-term management
activities associated with fencing. These activities include the maintenance and/or
replacement of fence structures to ensure the aquatic resource functions within the
boundaries of the Protected Property are sustained.

G. Extinguishment. In the event that changed conditions render impossible the
continued use of the Conservation Easement Area for the conservation purposes, this
Conservation Easement may only be extinguished, in whole or in p art, by judicial
proceeding.

H. Eminent Domain. Whenever all or part of the Conservation Easement Area is
taken in the exercise of eminent domain so as to substantially abrogate the Restrictions
imposed by this Conservation Easement, Grantor and Grantee shal l join in appropriate
actions at the time of such taking to recover the full value of the taking, and all incidental
and direct damages due to the taking.

I. Proceeds. This Conservation Easement constitutes a real property interest
immediately vested in Grantee. In the event that all or a portion of the Conservation
Easement Area is sold, exchanged, or involuntarily converted following an extinguishment
or the exercise of eminent domain, Grantee shall be entitled to the fair market value of this
Conservation Easement as determined at the time of the extinguishment or condemnation.

J. Notification. Any notice, request for approval, or other communication required
under this Conservation Easement shall be sent by registered or certified mail, postage
prepaid, to the following addresses (or such address as may be hereafter specified by
notice pursuant to this paragraph):

To Grantor:
Weyerhaeuser NR Company
Attn: Doug Hughes
406 Cole Road
Hattiesburg, MS 39402

To Grantee:
Unique Places To Save
Attn: Michael Scisco
P.O. Box 1183
Chapel Hill, NC 27514-1183

9

To Sponsor:
Weyerhaeuser NR Company
Attn: Doug Hughes
406 Cole Road
Hattiesburg, MS 39402

To the Corps:
US Army Corps of Engineers Wilmington District, Regulatory Division
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, NC 28403

K. Failure of Grantee. If at any time Grantee is unable or fails to enforce this
Conservation Easement, or if Grantee ceases to be a qualified grantee, and if within a
reasonable period of time after the occurrence of one of these events Grantee fails to make
an assignment pursuant to this Conservation Easement, then the Grantee’s interest shall
become vested in another qualified grantee in accordance with an appropriate proceeding
in a court of competent jurisdiction.

L. Amendment. This Conservation Easement may be amended, but o nly in a
writing signed by all parties hereto, and provided such amendment does not affect the
qualification of this Conservation Easement or the status of the Grantee under any
applicable laws, and is consistent with the conservation purposes of this grant.

M. Present Condition of the Conservation Easement Area. The wetlands, scenic,
resource, environmental, and other natural characteristics of the Conservation Easement
Area, and its current use and state of improvement, are described in Section _____ of the
Mitigation Plan, prepared by Grantor and acknowledged by the Grantor and Grantee to be
complete and accurate as of the date hereof. Both Grantor and Grantee have copies of this
report. It will be used by the parties to assure that any future changes in the use of the
Conservation Easement Area will be consistent with the terms of this Conservation
Easement. However, this report is not intended to preclude the use of other evidence to
establish the present condition of the Conservation Easement Area if there is a controversy
over its use.

TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said rights and easements perpetually unto Grantee
for the aforesaid purposes.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Grantor has hereunto set his hand and seal, the
day and year first above written.

[Signatures of the Grantor and Grantee in appropriate form]
47 The Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank │ Beaufort 56 Site Mitigation Plan – DRAFT
│September 2023

Appendix J –
P erformance Bond

Maintenance and Monitoring
Performance Bond

Bond No. Penal Sum: $1,005,317.92
Know All Men By These Presents,

That we, Weyerhaeuser Company of 220 Occidental Avenue S Seattle, WA 98104-3120
(hereinafter called the Principal), as Principal, and Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of
America with an office at One Tower Square Hartford, CT 06183, a corporation duly
organized under the laws of the State of CT (hereinafter called the “Surety”), as Surety, are held
and firmly bound unto the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District, (hereinafter
called the “USACE”) and the Unique Places to Save with a mailing address of P.O. Box 1183
Chapel Hill, NC 27514-1183 , (hereinafter called the “Obligee”), up to the maximum penal sum
of ONE MILLION AND FIVE THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED AND SEVENTEEN
DOLLARS AND NINETY TWO CENTS ($1,005,317.92.00) (hereinafter called the
“Maximum Penal Sum”), for the payment of which we, the Principal and the Surety, bind
ourselves, our heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, jointly and severally,
firmly by these presents.

WHEREAS, the Principal has entered into the Middle Neuse Stream and Wetland Umbrella
Mitigation Banking Instrument (hereinafter called the “MBI”) with the USACE, dated the
__________day of_____________, _____________which includes the Final Mitigation Plan for
the Beaufort 56 Mitigation Site (the “FMP”) to ensure that aquatic resources within the
boundaries of the mitigation site will be restored, enhanced and protected.

WHEREAS, the principal promised to deliver to the USACE and the Obligee a Bond substantially
in the form hereto upon completion and compliance with construction and other criteria of the
UMBI, FMP, and permits.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH that this Bond will
not be released in whole or in part until the Principal receives written verification from the
USACE that the conditions for release in the FMP have been fully met. If the above bounden
Principal shall meet the final performance standards as defined in the FMP, then this obligation
shall be null and void; otherwise it shall remain in full force and effect. This bond is subject to
the following conditions:
1) This bond shall remain in full force and effect for a period of nine (9) years. The
Maximum Penal Sum of this bond may be reduced by the USACE, by these scheduled amounts:

Year Reduction Revised Penal Sum
1 N/A $1,005,317.92
2 $655,317.93 $349,999.99
3 $50,000.00 $300,000.00
4 $50,000.00 $250,000.00
5 $50,000.00 $200,000.00
6 $50,000.00 $150,000.00
7 $50,000.00 $100,000.00
8 $50,000.00 $50,000.00
9 $50,000.00 $0.00
Total $1,005,317.92

2) USACE shall issue a full and final release of this Bond when the construction activities are
complete and/or seven year monitoring period is complete; all monitoring reports have been
submitted and have been approved by the USACE; and the success criteria identified in the
FMP have been achieved and approved by the USACE. This Bond shall not be released in
whole until the Principal receives written verification from the USACE that all the conditions for
release have been satisfied.

3) If any payment under this Bond, as set forth in subsection 4 (b) below, is made, then the
outstanding penal sum of the Bond shall be reduced by the corresponding amount of such
payment. Notwithstanding anything contained herein to the contrary, the aggregate liability of
the Surety is limited to the Maximum Penal Sum stated above, regardless of the number or
amount of claims brought against this bond and regardless of the number of years this bond
remains in effect. The USACE shall issue a full and final release of this Bond and any and all of
Surety’s obligations hereunder when Surety has tendered payment in whole, or in parts equal to
the aggregate sum, of the Maximum Penal Sum of this Bond.

4) The Surety’s obligation under this Bond shall arise after the USACE has notified the
Principal of their failure to abide by, or cure default conditions related to, the terms and
conditions of the FMP. Upon notice of the Principal’s default under the FMP, the Surety, in its
sole discretion and notwithstanding any of the provisions of the above, shall remedy the
Principal’s default by taking action under 4) a) or 4) b) below. In the event that the Surety either
fails to respond to USACE’s notice of default within thirty (30) business days of receipt of said
notice, or fails to honor Surety’s commitments under this bond to the full satisfaction of the
USACE, then Surety shall remedy such default in accordance with subsection 4) c) below:

a) Remedy the default of the Principal to the full satisfaction of the USACE by a reasonable date
determined by the USACE; or
b) Immediately tender to the Obligee, that portion of the Maximum Penal Sum that the
Obligee determines, in their discretion, is due and owing and necessary to remedy the
default. If payment is tendered to the Obligee under this subsection, the Obligee shall
immediately become a Surety or Sureties to this Bond, or

c) In the event that the Surety fails to respond within thirty (30) business days to the
USACE’s notice of default, or to honor commitments to the full satisfaction of the

USACE under paragraph a) or b) of this section within a reasonable time to be
determined by the USACE, the remaining portion of the Maximum Penal Sum may, at
the election of the Obligee, immediately become due and owing and paid to the Obligee.
The Obligee under this paragraph shall immediately become a Surety or Sureties under
this bond for the remaining term of the bond.

5) Surety shall have no obligation to the Principal, USACE, the Obligee, or any other person
or entity for any loss suffered by the Principal, USACE, the Obligee, or any other person or
entity by reason of acts or omissions which are or could be covered by the Principal’s
general liability insurance, products liability insurance, completed operations insurance or any
other insurance. Under no circumstance shall the USACE be responsible to arbitrate any
insurance claims made, declined or disputed under this Bond.

6) The Surety hereby waives notification of amendments to the UMBI, permits, applicable
laws, statutes, rules, and regulations, and agrees that no such amendment shall in any way
alleviate its obligation on this Bond.

NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING CONTAINED IN THE AGREEMENT TO THE
CONTRARY, THE LIABILITY OF THE PRINCIPAL AND SURETY UNDER THIS BOND IS
LIMITED TO THE TERM BEGINNING THE DAY OF , 20___, AND
ENDING THE DAY OF , 20___. AND
ANY EXTENSIONS OR RENEWALS OF THE REFERENCED AGREEMENT SHALL BE
COVERED UNDER THIS BOND ONLY WHEN CONSENTED TO IN WRITING BY THE
SURETY. IT IS FURTHER AGREED THAT THE REFUSAL BY THE SURETY TO EXTEND
THE TERM OF THIS BOND SHALL NOT CONSTITUTE A DEFAULT BY THE
PRINCIPAL, AND SHALL NOT GIVE RISE TO A CLAIM OR DEMAND AGAINST THE
SURETY UNDER THIS BOND.

In accordance with 33 C.F.R. § 332.3(n)(5), the Surety shall provide the USACE and the Obligee
written notification at least 120 days in advance of termination, revocation, or modification of
this Bond.

No right of action shall accrue on this bond to or for the use of any person or corporation other
than the USACE or the Obligee named herein, or their successors or assigns.
The above-bounden parties have executed this instrument under their several seals, dated this
day of , 2024, the name and corporate seal of each corporate party being
affixed and these presents duly signed by its undersigned representative, pursuant to authority of
its governing body.

Principal: Weyerhaeuser NR Company

By:
Doug Hughes, Mitigation Banking
Manager

Surety: Travelers Causality and Surety
Company of America

By:
Attorney-in-Fact

Obligee: Unique Places to Save

By:
Director or Acting Director