20150903 Ver 1_Technical Proposal_20150903

RFP 16-006310
ROUGH HORN SWAMP
RESTORATION SITE
Riparian and Non Riparian Wetland
Mitigation
Lumber River Basin 03040203
Prepared for
NC DENR Division of Mitigation Services (DMS)
Prepared by
KCI Technologies, Inc.
April 23, 2015
TECHNICAL PROPOSAL
FOR FULL DELIVERY PROJECT
TO PROVIDE WETLAND MITIGATION IN THE
LUMBER RIVER BASIN CATALOGING UNIT 03040203
ROUGH HORN SWAMP RESTORATION SITE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Execution Page and Addenda
Cover Letter
Part I Executive Summary
Part II Financial Statement
Part III Corporate Background and Experience
Part IV Project Organization
Part V Technical Approach
1. Project Goals and Objectives
2. Project Description
3. Project Development
4. Proposed Mitigation
5. Current Ownership
6. Project Phasing
7. Success Criteria
Part VI Quality Control
Appendix A Historical Aerial Photographs
Appendix B Site Photographs
Appendix C Soil Data
Appendix D Executed Option to Purchase Easement Restrictions
Appendix E Landowner Authorization Forms
Appendix F Nutrient Calculations
Appendix G Scoring Sheet
EXECUTION PAGE AND ADDENDA

EXECUTION OF PROPOSAL BY OFFEROR ( THIS MUST BE RETURNED WITH YOUR TECHINCAL PROPOSAL)
Therefore, in compliance with this Request for Proposals, and subject to all conditions herein, the undersigned offers and
agrees, if this proposal is accepted within one year from the date of the opening, to furnish the subject services per the
attached Sealed Cost Proposal.
Offeror: KCI Technologies, lni.,.
Check Appropriate Status—
Business Owned/Controlled
Street or PO Box:
4601 six Forks Road, suite 220
African American
Handicapped
Woman Owned
Other Minority Specify:
{ }
{ }
{ }
City: Raleigh
State: NC
Zip Code: 27609
Telephone Number:
919-783-9214
Fax Number:
919-783-9266
Principal Place of Business if different from above (See General
Information on Submitting Proposals, Item 18):
City: NA
State:
Zip Code:
Will any of the work under this contract be performed outside the United States? If yes, describe
in an attachment with your offer.
0 Yes
0 No
N.C.G.S. § 133-32 and Executive Order 24 prohibit the offer to, or acceptance by, any State Employee of any gift from
anyone with a contract with the State, or from any person seeking to do business with the State. By execution of any
response in this procurement, you attest, for your entire organization and its employees or agents, that you are not aware
that any such gift has been offered, accepted, or promised by any employees of your organization.
Signature (Autho d ffi
Title: vice President
Typed or rant a ph J. Pfeiffer, Jr.
date: 4-23-15
E -M ilad a [e-mail]
Key ersonnel/Individual Assigned To This RFP By The Offeror:
Joseph J. Pfeiffer
Title:
vice President
E -Mail address:
[e-mail]
"THIS PAGE MUST BE SIGNED AND INCLUDED IN YOUR TECHNICAL PROPOSAL"
FAILURE TO SIGN AND RETURN THIS PAGE WITH YOUR OFFER WILL CAUSE YOUR OFFER TO BE REJECTED.
RFP 16-006310 Page 29 of 32

North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM
Pat McCrory, Governor Michael Ellison, Director Donald R. van der Vaat, Secretary
February 20, 2015
THIS ADDENDUM MUST BE RETURNED WITH YOUR TECHNICAL PROPOSAL
RFP NO.
16-006310
RFP TITLE:
Full Delivery Projects To Provide Wetland Mitigation
Within Cataloging Unit 03040203 of the Lumber River
Basin
ADDENDUM NO.
01
USING
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
AGENCY:
PURCHASER
KATHY DALE
OPENING
April 23, 2015 @ 2:00 P.M.
DATE/TIME:
This correspondence serves as an addendum to the subject RFP. Your response to this RFP should be governed by the
content of the original RFP and the Revisions provided in this addendum notice.
SECTION 1- QUESTIONS & ANSWERS / QUANTITY ADDITIONS
QUESTIONS & ANSWERS:
1. Can a firm which received a contract from EEP to perform a watershed plan in a river basin be allowed
to also respond to a full delivery RFP in that same basin?
Yes, there are no laws or policies preventing that.
2. Is there any time limit which would preclude a firm under contract to EEP for watershed planning from
being eligible to respond to RFPs for a certain number of years in order to avoid any undue advantage
in the RFP?
No.
QUANTITY ADDITIONS
1. NCEEP is requesting 1 additional RWL credit for this RFP. The total RWL credits being requested now is 14.
The total of NRWL credits is still 11.
RFP 16-006310
Addendum No.1 Page 1 of 2

SECTION 2
PLEASE NOTE — THIS ADDENDUM MUST BE RETURNED WITH YOUR TECHNICAL PROPOSAL
Check ONLY ONE of the following categories and if required, return one properly executed copy of this
addendum prior to bid opening time and date.
❑ Bid has already been mailed. Changes resulting from this addendum are attached.
❑ Bid has already been mailed. NO CHANGES resulted from this addendum.
x❑ Bid has NOT been mailed and ANY CHANGES resulting from this addendum are included in our offer.
SECTION 3
Execute Addendum:
BIDDER: KCI Technologies, Inc.
ADDRESS (CITY & STATE): 4601
AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE:
NAME & TITLE (TYP
Road, Raleigh NC
iffer, Jr., Vice President
TE:
4-23-15
Note: It is the offeror's responsibility to choose the appropriate delivery method to guarantee that
the offer is received by the Issuing Agency by the Opening Date/Time noted in the RFP.
DELIVERED BY US POSTAL SERVICE
(Mail at least 7 business days prior to Bid
Closing Date
DELIVERED BY ANY OTHER MEANS (UPS /
FEDEX / ETC.)
Request Signature Receipt)
SEALED BID
-(Suggestion:
SEALED BID
RFP 16-006310
RFP 16-006310
NC DENR ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT
NC DENR ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT
PROGRAM
PROGRAM
ATTN: KATHY DALE
ATTN: KATHY DALE
1652 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
217 W. JONES STREET, SUITE 3000A
RALEIGH NC 27699-1652
RALEIGH NC 27603
IT IS THE OFFER'S RESPONSIBILITY TO CONTINUOUSLY CHECK FOR ADDENDA UP TO THE LAST
POSTED OPENING DATE/TIME AND TO ASSURE THAT ALL ADDENDA HAVE BEEN REVIEWED,
SIGNED AND RETURNED IF REQUIRED.
RFP 16-006310
Addendum No.1 Page 2 of 2

-PA.
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM
Pat McCrory, Governor Michael Ellison, Director Donald R. van der Vaat, Secretary
February 25, 2015
THIS ADDENDUM MUST BE RETURNED WITH YOUR TECHNICAL PROPOSAL
RFP NO.
16-006310
RFP TITLE:
Full Delivery Projects To Provide Wetland Mitigation
Within Cataloging Unit 03040203 of the Lumber River
Basin
ADDENDUM NO.
02
USING
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
AGENCY:
PURCHASER
KATHY DALE
OPENING
April 23, 2015 @ 2:00 P.M.
DATE/TIME:
This correspondence serves as an addendum to the subject RFP. Your response to this RFP should be governed by the
content of the original RFP and the Revisions provided in this addendum notice.
SECTION 1- QUESTIONS & ANSWERS
1. Due to requests from several vendors, a second time period has been set for receiving additional
questions regarding this RFP 16-006310.
ALL QUESTIONS MUST BE SUBMITTED BY 2:00 PM ON MARCH 2, 2015.
QUESTIONS MUST BE SENT TO KATHY DALE AT kathy.daleAmcdenr.gov
SECTION 2
PLEASE NOTE — THIS ADDENDUM MUST BE RETURNED WITH YOUR TECHNICAL PROPOSAL
Check ONLY ONE of the following categories and if required, return one properly executed copy of this
addendum prior to bid opening time and date.
❑ Bid has already been mailed. Changes resulting from this addendum are attached.
❑ Bid has already been mailed. NO CHANGES resulted from this addendum.
x❑ Bid has NOT been mailed and ANY CHANGES resulting from this addendum are included in our offer.
RFP 16-006310
Addendum No.2 Page 1 of 2

SECTION 3
Execute Addendum:
BIDDER: KCI Technologies, Inc.
ADDRESS (CITY & STATE):
AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE:
NAME & TITLE (TYPED):
4601 Six Forks Road, Raleigh NC 27609
eiffer, Jr., Vice President
,TE: 4-23-15
Note: It is the offeror's rk8`ponsibility to choose the appropriate delivery method to guarantee that
the offer is received by the Issuing Agency by the Opening Date/Time noted in the RFP.
DELIVERED BY US POSTAL SERVICE
(Mail at least 7 business days prior to Bid
Closing Date)
DELIVERED BY ANY OTHER MEANS (UPS /
FEDEX / ETC.)
ASu estion: Request Signature Receipt)
SEALED BID
SEALED BID
RFP 16-006310
RFP 16-006310
NC DENR ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT
NC DENR ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT
PROGRAM
PROGRAM
ATTN: KATHY DALE
ATTN: KATHY DALE
1652 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
217 W. JONES STREET, SUITE 3000A
RALEIGH NC 27699-1652
RALEIGH NC 27603
IT IS THE OFFER'S RESPONSIBILITY TO CONTINUOUSLY CHECK FOR ADDENDA UP TO THE LAST
POSTED OPENING DATEITIME AND TO ASSURE THAT ALL ADDENDA HAVE BEEN REVIEWED,
SIGNED AND RETURNED IF REQUIRED.
RFP 16-006310
Addendum No.2 Page 2 of 2

FMA
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM
Pat McCrory, Governor Michael Ellison, Director Donald R. van der Vaat, Secretary
March 9, 2015
THIS ADDENDUM MUST BE RETURNED WITH YOUR TECHNICAL PROPOSAL
RFP NO.
16-006310
RFP TITLE:
Full Delivery Projects To Provide Wetland Mitigation
Within Cataloging Unit 03040203 of the Lumber River
Basin
ADDENDUM NO.
03
USING
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
AGENCY:
PURCHASER
KATHY DALE
OPENING
April 23, 2015 @ 2:00 P.M.
DATE/TIME:
This correspondence serves as an addendum to the subject RFP. Your response to this RFP should be governed by the
content of the original RFP and the Revisions provided in this addendum notice.
SECTION 1
A zero on a bonus question will not necessary result in rejection of your technical proposal.
SECTION 2
PLEASE NOTE — THIS ADDENDUM MUST BE RETURNED WITH YOUR TECHNICAL PROPOSAL
Check ONLY ONE of the following categories and if required, return one properly executed copy of this
addendum prior to bid opening time and date.
❑ Bid has already been mailed. Changes resulting from this addendum are attached.
❑ Bid has already been mailed. NO CHANGES resulted from this addendum.
x❑ Bid has NOT been mailed and ANY CHANGES resulting from this addendum are included in our offer.
RFP 16-006310
Addendum No.3 Page 1 of 2

SECTION 3
Execute Addendum:
BIDDER: KCI Technologies Inc.
4601 Si.
ADDRESS (CITY & STATE):
AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE:
NAME & TITLE (TYPED):
Road, Raleigh NC
fer, Jr.
DATE: 4-23-1s
Note: It is the offeror's Wsponsibility to choose the appropriate delivery method to guarantee that
the offer is received by the Issuing Agency by the Opening Date/Time noted in the RFP.
DELIVERED BY US POSTAL SERVICE
(Mail at least 7 business days prior to Bid
Closing Date)
DELIVERED BY ANY OTHER MEANS (UPS /
FEDEX / ETC.)
(Suggest on: Request Signature Receipt)
SEALED BID
SEALED BID
RFP 16-006310
RFP 16-006310
NC DENR ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT
NC DENR ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT
PROGRAM
PROGRAM
ATTN: KATHY DALE
ATTN: KATHY DALE
1652 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
217 W. JONES STREET, SUITE 3000A
RALEIGH NC 27699-1652
RALEIGH NC 27603
IT IS THE OFFER'S RESPONSIBILITY TO CONTINUOUSLY CHECK FOR ADDENDA UP TO THE LAST
POSTED OPENING DATEITIME AND TO ASSURE THAT ALL ADDENDA HAVE BEEN REVIEWED,
SIGNED AND RETURNED IF REQUIRED.
RFP 16-006310
Addendum No.3 Page 2 of 2

COVER LETTER

KCI ENGINEERS • SCIENTISTS • SURVEYORS • CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS
Landmark Center II, Suite 220 4601 Six Forks Road Raleigh, NC 27609 [phone] [phone] Fax
April 23, 2015
RFP #16-006310 Sealed Bid
NC DENR
Division of Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652
Attention: Ms. Kathy Dale
Subject: Full Delivery Project
To Provide Wetland Mitigation in the
Lumber River Basin Cataloging Unit 03040203
Rough Horn Swamp Wetland Restoration Site
Dear Ms. Dale:
KCI Technologies, Inc. along with its co -venture partners, KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A. (KCI) and
Environmental Technologies and Construction, Inc. (ETC), is pleased to submit this proposal to provide the
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Mitigation Services (DMS)
with ecological, engineering, land acquisition, and turn -key design/build implementation of the above
referenced wetland mitigation project. KCI is a full service engineering, planning and environmental
consulting firm and is registered with the Office of the Secretary of State, as well as North Carolina Board of
Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors (C-0764). ETC is an environmental construction firm
specializing in the implementation of environmental restoration and management and is a registered with the
Office of the Secretary of State and is a North Carolina Licensed General Contractor (#41336). Both entities
are corporate subsidiaries of KCI Technologies, Inc. and as such are submitting as co -ventures on this
contract with KCI Technologies, Inc. The KCI team has the capacity to form the necessary legal and financial
entities for the proposed work and hereafter is referred to jointly as KCI. A consolidated financial statement
for KCI is found in Part II of the original proposal.
KCI offers a highly qualified staff of environmental, engineering and construction professionals with
extensive training and proven skills in all aspects of mitigation site location, plan development, design,
construction, monitoring and remedial action. We have successfully completed numerous projects involving
stream/wetland/riparian area restoration and management; included in Part III is an abbreviated statement of
our qualifications describing our ability to conduct this work. KCI has been involved in the location, design,
development and management of over 1,600 acres of wetland and 40 miles of stream mitigation throughout
the eastern seaboard and has extensive experience in North Carolina for both public and private clients.

North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
KCI Technologies, Inc./KCI Associates of North Carolina, PA/KCI Environmental Technologies and Constriction, Inc.
KCI has secured real estate option agreements for the purchase of easement rights on three properties located
in Columbus County, North Carolina, near the town of Evergreen. There are two options provided in this
proposal. Based on KCI's evaluation of the property, the site has the potential to generate up to 28.2 riparian
wetland mitigation units as well as approximately 29.1 non -riparian wetland mitigation units. Option A is a
stand-alone option that highlights a 25 acre wetland restoration option. This Option addresses all DMS needs
by providing 14 riparian wetland mitigation credits and 11 non -riparian wetland mitigation units. Option B
includes an additional alternative that would add approximately 14.2 riparian wetland mitigation credits and
18.1 non -riparian wetland mitigation credits to the project. Both options include the ancillary restoration of
approximately 3,000 linear feet of a coastal plain stream within the project limits that would be provided as a
non-credit bearing asset to the project. In accordance with the RFP, KCI is only submitting the wetland
components of this project as part of this proposal, but will construct the stream restoration at no additional
cost to DMS. Both options provide restoration of the historical location of Long Bay Creek and its relic
floodplain within the project area.
KCI stands ready to meet your wetland mitigation needs at this site. Upon review of our submittal, we trust
you will find our qualifications and proposed site commensurate with your requirements. We look forward to
addressing any questions or comments you may have and to the opportunity of working with you in the near
future.
KCI
►SVS
KCI Associates of NC, P.A.
www.kci.com
Employee -Owned Since 1988

PART I: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
KCI Technologies, Inc./KCI Associates of North Carolina, PA/KCI Environmental Technologies and Construction, Inc.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Rough Horn Swamp Restoration Site is a proposed riparian and non-riparian wetland mitigation site
located near the Town of Evergreen in the west central portion of Columbus County. Specifically, the
site is located just southwest of the intersection of Old Boardman Road and CCC Road. The wetland
restoration project will occur on portions of a three parcels of land owned by three separate property
owners. The site is situated within the 03040203 (Lumber 03) Watershed Cataloging Unit (8-digit HUC)
and the 03040203190010 Local Watershed Unit (14-digit HUC). The NCEEP has identified this 14-digit
HUC as a Targeted Local Watershed.

The Rough Horn Swamp Restoration Site (RHS) is an ideal candidate site for riparian and non-riparian
wetland as evidenced by historic aerial photos and site investigations. The site’s natural hydrologic
regime has been substantially modified to maximize agricultural uses on the property.

The site exists along a second-order tributary that originates in Long Bay, a drained Carolina Bay, located
approximately 1 mile to the southeast of the property. The site is also located within the 500-year
floodplain of the Lumber River, located approximately 1,400 linear feet from the western edge of the
property. The site topography is generally flat with only five feet of elevation change across the site.

Consistent with the goals of the Lumber River River Basin Restoration Priorities Plan developed by NC
EEP in 2003 and updated in 2008, restoring the RHS will achieve the following goals:

- Create a diverse bottomland hardwood habitat
- Restore a channelized stream
- Buffer nutrient and sediment impacts to the Lumber River and its tributaries from existing and
adjacent agricultural practices
- Provide habitat for a variety of aquatic species
- Expand an existing forested wildlife corridor from the Lumber River to Long Bay

The following objectives will be implemented to achieve these goals:
- Fill field ditches
- Relocate a coastal plain stream to its historic landscape position
- Redevelop wetland microtopography to slow the flow of surface and subsurface drainage
- Remove side-cast ditch spoil
- Plant the site with native trees and shrubs and a wetland seed mix
- Demarcate the project easement boundaries

KCI is offering two options for the restoration of this site.

Option A – 14 Riparian Wetland Mitigation Credits, 11 Non Riparian Wetland Mitigation Credits
Option A includes the development of a minimum of 14.0 riparian wetland mitigation credits (RWMC)
and 11.0 non-riparian wetland mitigation credits (NRWMC). Actual credits that should be achieved for
Option A are 15.8 RWMC and 12.0 NRWMC, however only 14.0 RWMC’s and 11.0 NRWMC’s will be
requested as part of this proposal. To achieve this, approximately 5,500 linear feet of ditches would be
filled and ditched streams emanating from Long Bay would be restored to their historic landscape
position. Additional restoration actions would include removing sidecast ditch spoils and surface
roughening the existing compacted soils. Consistent with the intent of the RFP, KCI is not requesting any
compensation for the stream restoration elements of this RFP. Although KCI feels that restoration of the
stream is not imperative to the success of the wetland components of the project, the restoration of the
stream would create a buffer between the resource and adjacent properties and would also provide a more
holistic approach to restoration by reestablishing the channel in its hist oric location. Approximately 1,500
linear feet of stream would be restored using a Priority 1 Approach as an ancillary (non-credit bearing)
benefit to this Option.

North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
KCI Technologies, Inc./KCI Associates of North Carolina, PA/KCI Environmental Technologies and Construction, Inc.

Option B – 28.2 Riparian Wetland Mitigation Credits, 29.1 Non Riparian Wetland Mitigation
Credits
Option B represents the full potential of wetland mitigation development on the property and includes
Option A plus an additional 14.2 RWMC (28.2 credits total) and 18.1 NRWMC credits (29.1 credits total)
on adjacent lands that are currently under option. The additional wetland restoration acreage includes all
the land underlain by drained hydric soils. This area is generally located below the 84.5’ contour. The
mitigation area would be restored by filling approximately 3,000 linear feet of additional ditches,
relocating sidecast spoil, and completing minor surface contouring to offset existing man -made drainage
enhancements (primarily field crowning). The coastal plain stream would continue upstream from Option
A within the stream’s historic landscape position located approximately 250 feet to the southwest of its
current ditched position within the wooded area of the proposed easement. The historic location of the
stream is evidenced in the field by shallow pools of standing water and a broad crenulation in the
landscape. The stream will be the main hydrologic source to the riparian components of the wetland
system but will be augmented by a shallow groundwater table, overland flow and seepage from the
adjacent uplands. Approximately 2,300 linear feet of priority 1 stream restoration will be provided as an
ancillary benefit to this option. This is in addition to the 1,500 linear feet stream restoration provided in
Option A.

KCI is willing to contract for less than the full amount of Wetland Mitigation Units presented in Option B.
Option A is a fixed quantity option.
PART II: FINANCIAL STATEMENT (IN ORIGINAL ONLY)

PART III: CORPORATE BACKGROUND AND EXPERIENCE

Project Team
The team assembled for this project is led by KCI Technologies Inc. and includes KCI Associates of North Carolina, PA (KCI) and
KCI Environmental Technologies and Construction, Inc. (ETC). KCI is a full-service engineering, planning and environmental
consulting firm registered with the Office of the Secretary of State, as well as the North Carolina Board of Professional Engineers
and Land Surveyors (C-0764). ETC is an environmental construction firm specializing in the implementation of environmental
restoration and management projects, and is registered with the Office of the Secretary of State and is a North Carolina Licensed
General Contractor (#41336). Both entities are corporate subsidiaries of KCI Technologies, Inc., and as such are submitting
as co-ventures on this contract in order to provide the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) with ecological,
engineering, land acquisition, and turn-key design-build implementation of wetland/stream mitigation projects. The team has
the capacity to form the necessary legal and financial entities for the proposed work and hereinafter is referred to jointly as KCI.
KCI is an employee-owned company headquartered in Sparks, Maryland, with division offices located throughout the Mid-
Alantic and Southeastern United States. The local staff in the Natural Resource Management and Ecosystem Dynamic practices
in the Raleigh, NC office will be responsible for work derived from this contract. With a staff of more than 1,100 professional
engineers, planners, architects, scientists, and construction support personnel, KCI is considered to have one of largest staffs
trained in wetland and stream restoration design and construction, watershed management, geomorphology, and hydrologic/
hydraulic engineering on the East Coast. KCI has made a concerted effort to foster the best technical expertise available in the
design, implementation and construction of stream and wetland restoration projects. The Raleigh office is the primary location
serving this work, with support provided from the Brentwood, Tennessee and Sparks, Maryland locations.
4601 Six Forks Rd, Suite 220 7003 Chadwick Dr., Suite 343 936 Ridgebrook Rd.
Raleigh, NC 27609 Brentwood, TN 37027 Sparks, MD 21152
[phone] [phone] [phone]
KCI’s team has been established to provide successful implementation of wetland and steam mitigation projects by providing
turnkey services including site identification, land acquisition, planning and assessment, design, permitting, construction, con-
struction management, performance monitoring, remedial action and financial planning in one entity. KCI has been involved in
the location, design, development and management of over 1,600 acres of wetland and 50 miles of stream mitigation throughout
the eastern seaboard and has extensive experience in North Carolina. Our approach to successfully meeting our client’s needs
utilizes the collaborative expertise of environmental, engineering, and construction professions, as well as quality support per-
sonnel. Table 1 summarizes KCI’s recent stream and wetland restoration experience. More detailed project descriptions are
also included in this section to demonstrate our experience in the execution of projects similar in nature to the one proposed.
Key Staff
The key staff assigned to the project offer the DMS a qualified and experienced group of professionals dedicated to providing
the highest quality services and technical expertise in the field of stream and wetland mitigation. KCI has been working on
full delivery mitigation since the inception of EEP/DMS and even before that with DENR’s Wetland Restoration Program.
Through this time period, KCI has experience very little staff turnover, resulting in the internal efficiencies, quality deliverables
and an invaluable working knowledge of the the State’s mitigation program. Our organizational chart is attached below. Our
staff is prepared to complete all tasks on the proposed project in an innovative, cost effective and timely manner. Our past re-
cord of successful work performance with state and federal clients, including DMS, is directly attributed to our ability to work
interactively on multi-disciplined projects in concert with clients, agencies and stakeholders, and demonstrates our commitment
and capabilities to undertake projects involving a variety of environmental, engineering and ecological challenges.
In addition to the key staff, KCI maintains a highly trained professional support staff to aid in the execution of project tasks.
This includes over 1,100 technical staff company-wide, with almost 85 in the Raleigh office alone. These groups of engineers
and scientists have, on average, 10 years of experience in their respective disciplines, and the majority of them have been
awarded advanced degrees and certifications in their field of expertise.
Project Manager Qualifications and Experience
KCI recognizes that the Project Manager will likely serve the most important role on a given full delivery project. An
individual with a broad range of skills linking together budgetary and personnel management with all the components of a
restoration project (assessment, design, construction, permitting, monitoring, agency negotiation and credit delivery) will be
needed to successfully oversee and implement this project. The individual will also need to be experienced in completing
large scale restoration projects with aggressive design and construction timelines.
KCI’s Project Manager on this project will be Tim Morris. Mr. Morris has been working in the environmental restora-
tion industry for 23 years since graduating from Duke University with a Master’s of Environmental Management degree
in 1991. Mr. Morris has worked on a broad range of environmental projects over the course of his career which has
helped to give him a well-rounded approach to problem solving and a unique ability to manage the complex needs of
large scale restoration projects. Equipped with first-hand knowledge of assessment techniques, design understanding
and construction management and implementation experience, Mr. Morris has been challenged to manage the design
and construction elements of many of the largest environmental mitigation projects completed on the east coast over
the last 15 years. To quantify on a cost basis, Mr. Morris has managed over $75 million in environmental restoration
projects in both urban and rural settings during this timeframe. Highlights have included managing the section design
review, procurement, and construction of all the environmental mitigation components of the $2.5 billion Woodrow
Wilson Bridge project in the Washington DC metropolitan area. He also managed the environmental construction and
mitigation elements of the US 113 dualizaton project on the Eastern Shore of Maryland, which at the time was the larg-
est and most complex environmental mitigation program completed in the State of Maryland. Mr. Morris currently
manages KCI’s full delivery mitigation projects for DMS. This work requires the concurrent management of 10 active
projects totally nearly $10 million in value. Mr. Morris’ philosophy on developing successful environmental design and
construction projects is to promote ownership of the project from the ground up. This involves informing and training
contractors, landowners, regulatory staff, project owners and other project stakeholders through diligent communication
and involvement. Table 2 below summarizes Mr. Morris’ project management and environmental restoration experi-
ence since 2000.
Mr. Morris has spent the last 8 years working primarily on DMS projects, both design-bid-build and full delivery. Mr.
Morris is very familiar with DMS contracting processes, deliverable timelines, review schedules, DMS guidance and
project closeout procedures and logistics. Mr. Morris is also actively involved and informed on developing policy is-
sues between DMS and the environmental regulatory agencies through his position as a President of the North Carolina
Environmental Restoration Association, a nonprofit restoration advocacy group in North Carolina. This knowledge
and understanding of ongoing issues has a direct impact on how he manages his projects as regulation and policy in the
restoration industry evolves to keep pace with the growing knowledge base. Mr. Morris will utilize his experience
working with DMS to ensure full credit delivery for this project.
As demonstrated in Table 2, Mr. Morris has worked on large scale, complex, time sensitive restoration projects through-
out his career. Often these projects were occurring simultaneously, requiring diligent communication with his project
team, careful time management and calculated planning to overcome the logistical challenges presented by multiple on-
going projects occurring in different site locations. Examples of Mr. Morris’ experience managing large scale projects
include completing multiple 10,000+ linear foot full delivery projects (Cane Creek – 18,000 linear feet, Collins Creek
– 10,000 linear feet) along with three design-bid build projects (McIntyre Creek, Little Troublesome Creek and McCain
Site) simultaneously. Additionally, while working on the Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project, Mr. Morris completed the
design and construction phases of 56 individual mitigation sites, utilizing 17 different contract vehicles over the course
of 4.5 years. These projects ranged in scope and scale from reforestation projects to large scale stream and fish passage
mitigation sites with a total construction value exceeding $40 million. Mr. Morris understands that the key to managing
large scale projects with aggressive time requirements is to stay in front of potential problems, foster active partnering
among team members and to surround yourself with hard working, skilled individuals who all have a stake in the suc-
cess of the project. The KCI Team has been formed with these factors in mind and will be dedicated to the success of
the project behind the leadership of the Project Manager.

KCI Team Organization Chart
DENR
Division of Mitigation Services
Project Manager
Timothy Morris
Site Assessment
Kristin Knight-Meng, PE
Adam Spiller
Alex French
Steve Stokes
Tommy Seelinger
Joe Sullivan
Project Design
Gary Mryncza, PE
Adam Spiller
Alex French
Kristin Knight-Meng, PE
Steve Stokes
Tim Morris
Jim Gellenthin, PLS
Rob Baumgartner, PLS
Site Restoration
Tim Morris
Kevin O’Briant
Zach Myrncza
KCI ETC
Monitoring/Management
Alex French
Adam Spiller
Tommy Seelinger
Joe Sullivan
KCI ETC

Support Staff
Role Local Corporate
Administrative 5 75
CADD Technicians 4 47
Construction Managers 2 36
Designers 4 80
Environmental Scientists 7 57
Geologists 0 4
Land Surveyors 6 42
(Identification and acquisition stages completed at time of proposal)
Principal-in-Charge
Joseph Pfeiffer, Jr., PWS
Table 1. Recent Stream/Wetland Restoration Project Experience
Region/Character Size Type of Project Work and Current Status
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

N
a
m
e
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n

Ye
a
r
St
a
t
e
Ph
y
s
i
o
g
r
a
p
h
i
c

Pr
o
v
i
n
c
e
Wa
t
e
r
s
h
e
d

Ch
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
We
t
l
a
n
d

A
c
r
e
s
St
r
e
a
m

L
F
As
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
De
s
i
g
n
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n

Ma
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
/

Ad
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
Mo
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
Na
t
u
r
a
l

Ch
a
n
n
e
l

De
s
i
g
n
Cl
i
e
n
t
Norman’s Pasture 2015 NC Coastal Rural 8.9 700 X X P P P Y NCEEP*
Stanley’s II 2013 NC Coastal Rural 6.5 0 X X P P P N NCEEP*
Norman’s Pasture 2013 NC Coastal Rural 15.6 0 X X X X P N NCEEP*
Bowl Basin 2014 NC Coastal Rural 11 0 X X X X P N NCEEP*
Bear Basin 2014 NC Coastal Rural 10 0 X X X X P N NCEEP*
Twin Bays 2013 NC Coastal Rural 11 0 X X X X P N NCEEP*
Stanley’s Slough 2013 NC Coastal Rural 2.8 4,250 X X X X P Y NCEEP*
Jacob’s Ladder 2013 NC Piedmont Rural 0 5,150 X X X X P Y NCEEP*
Jacob’s Landing 2013 NC Piedmont Rural 0 6,187 X X X X P Y NCEEP*
May Prairie 2013 TN Interior Plateau Rural 0 4,000 X X X X P TSMP**
Little Patuxent River 2013 MD Piedmont Urban 0 1,110 X X X N/A X N Howard County, MD
Meadowbrook Park 2012 MD Piedmont Urban 0 1,300 X X X N/A X Y Howard County, MD
Upper Roland Run at
Greenspring Drive
2012 MD Piedmont Urban 0 6,000 X U P N/A N/A Y Baltimore County, MD
West Piney River 2012 TN Int. Plateau Rural 0 18,623 X X U N/A P Y TSMP**
Johnson and Waddle 2012 VA Ridge and Valley Rural 20 0 X X X X U N TNCVA (VARTF)***
Elmmede Road 2012 MD Piedmont Urban 0 1,050 X X X X U Y Howard County, MD
Hi Tech Road 2012 MD Piedmont Urban 0 1,500 X X X X U Y Howard County, MD
Bramhope Lane 2012 MD Piedmont Urban 0 2,000 X X X X U Y Howard County, MD
Red Hill 2011 MD Piedmont Urban 0 350 X X X X*U Y Howard County, MD
Buffalo Flats 2011 NC Piedmont Rural 16 0 X X X X U N NCEEP*
X = completed, U = underway, P = pending, N/A = not part of project
Clients:*NCEEP-NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program; **TSMP-Tenn. Stream Mitigation Program; ***TNCVA (VARTF) The Nature Conservancy of VA, VA Aquatic Resources Trust Fund;
****MD SHA-Maryland State Highway Administration
Region/Character Size Type of Project Work and Current Status
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

N
a
m
e
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n

Ye
a
r
St
a
t
e
Ph
y
s
i
o
g
r
a
p
h
i
c

Pr
o
v
i
n
c
e
Wa
t
e
r
s
h
e
d

Ch
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
We
t
l
a
n
d

A
c
r
e
s
St
r
e
a
m

L
F
As
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
De
s
i
g
n
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n

Ma
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
/

Ad
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
Mo
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
Na
t
u
r
a
l

Ch
a
n
n
e
l

De
s
i
g
n
Cl
i
e
n
t
Mill Creek 2011 NC Piedmont Rural 0 21,644 N/A N/A N/A X N/A X NCEEP*
Redhouse Run 2011 MD Piedmont Urban 0 2,500 X X X N/A N/A Y Baltimore County, MD
Jahn Creek 2010 IN So. Hills/Lowlands Urban 0 2,500 X U P P P Y Bernardin, Lochmueller &
Assoc.
Cromwell Bridge
Gunpowder Falls
2010 MD Piedmont Urban 0 1,300 X X X N/A X Y Baltimore County, MD
Leipers Fork 2010 TN Int. Plateau Rural 0 12,000 X X U U U Y TSMP**
Woodbridge 2010 MD Piedmont Urban 0 1,200 X X P N/A P Y Harford County, MD
Grey Rock 2010 MD Piedmont Urban 0 700 X X X N/A X N Howard County, MD
Cherry Creek 2009 MD Piedmont Urban 0 550 X X X N/A X Y Howard County, MD
Roland Run 2009 MD Piedmont Urban 0 1,850 X X X N/A X Y Baltimore County, MD
Mill Creek - Antioch 2008 TN Int. Plateau Urban 0 10,000 X X X X N/A Y TSMP**
Sugar Creek 2008 TN Int. Plateau Rural 0 9,000 X U P P U Y TSMP**
Windy Cove 2008 VA Mountain Rural 5 0 X X X X N/A N TNCVA (VARTF)***
Newby Lane 2007 IN Central Lowlands Urban 0 1,825 X X X X U Y Town of Plainfield, IN
Gwynns Falls Tributary 2009 MD Piedmont Urban 0 2,000 X X N/A N/A X Y Baltimore County, MD
Laurel Valley 2009 MD Piedmont Urban 0 2,000 X X X N/A X Y Harford County, MD
Pavilion Branch 2007 TN Int. Plateau Urban 0 5,500 X X X X X Y TSMP**
Farrar Dairy 2008 NC Piedmont Rural 130 12,500 X X X X X Y NCEEP*
Dog Bite 2009 NC Mountain Rural 0 3,700 X X X X U Y NCEEP*
Crab Creek 2006 NC Piedmont Rural 32 6,000 X X X N/A N/A Y NCEEP*
Little Troublesome 2006 NC Piedmont Urban 6 2,200 X X X N/A U Y NCEEP*
Cane Creek 2006 NC Piedmont Rural 0 15,000 X X X X X Y NCEEP*
X = completed, U = underway, P = pending, N/A = not part of project
Clients:*NCEEP-NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program; **TSMP-Tenn. Stream Mitigation Program; ***TNCVA (VARTF) The Nature Conservancy of VA, VA Aquatic Resources Trust Fund;
****MD SHA-Maryland State Highway Administration
Region/Character Size Type of Project Work and Current Status
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

N
a
m
e
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n

Ye
a
r
St
a
t
e
Ph
y
s
i
o
g
r
a
p
h
i
c

Pr
o
v
i
n
c
e
Wa
t
e
r
s
h
e
d

Ch
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
We
t
l
a
n
d

A
c
r
e
s
St
r
e
a
m

L
F
As
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
De
s
i
g
n
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n

Ma
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
/

Ad
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
Mo
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
Na
t
u
r
a
l

Ch
a
n
n
e
l

De
s
i
g
n
Cl
i
e
n
t
Brown 2005 NC Piedmont Rural 25 0 X X X X X N NCEEP*
Daniels #2 2006 NC Piedmont Rural 15 0 X X X X X Y NCEEP*
Harrell 2008 NC Coastal Rural 15 8,238 X X X X X Y NCEEP*
Glen Raven 2007 NC Piedmont Rural 0 3,800 X X X X X Y NCEEP*
Collins Creek 2008 NC Piedmont Rural 0 12,000 X X X X X Y NCEEP*
George Creek 2005 IN Piedmont Urban 12 5,500 X X X X X Y Pannatoni Construction
Bold Run 2005 NC Piedmont Rural 0 1,600 X X X N/A N/A Y NCEEP*
Winters Run 2005 MD Piedmont Urban 0 1,700 X X X N/A X Y Harford County, MD
Malahorn Creek 2004 DE Coastal Rural 2 2,200 X N/A N/A N/A N/A N DEL DOT
Upper North Fork 2004 MD Piedmont Urban 0 2,000 X X X N/A U Y MD SHA****
McCain Site 2008 NC Piedmont Rural 0 3,000 X X X N/A N/A Y NCEEP*
Tank Creek 2003 NC Coastal Urban 0 1,200 X X X X X Y USACOE
Briles Site 2008 NC Piedmont Rural 0 2,500 X X X N/A N/A Y NCEEP*
High Point C.C.2003 NC Piedmont Urban 0 8,000 X N/A N/A N/A N/A Y NCDOT
Johnson Farm 2008 NC Piedmont Rural 0 2,200 X X X N/A N/A Y NCEEP*
Richland Creek 2008 NC Piedmont Urban 0 10,000 X X X X X Y Town of Wake Forest
Daniels Farm 2005 NC Piedmont Rural 30 0 X X X X X N NCEEP*
Nottoway Rvr. Bank 2003 VA Coastal Rural 24 0 X X X N/A X N VDOT
Pocoshock Creek 2003 VA Piedmont Urban 0 4,000 X N/A N/A N/A N/A Y VDOT
Henrico County 2003 VA Piedmont Urban 0 1,400 X N/A N/A N/A N/A Y Henrico County
James River Bank 2003 VA Mountain Rural 40 5,000 X N/A N/A N/A N/A Y VDOT
Route 33 2003 VA Coastal Rural 5 0 X X X N/A N/A N VDOT
X = completed, U = underway, P = pending, N/A = not part of project
Clients:*NCEEP-NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program; **TSMP-Tenn. Stream Mitigation Program; ***TNCVA (VARTF) The Nature Conservancy of VA, VA Aquatic Resources Trust Fund;
****MD SHA-Maryland State Highway Administration
Region/Character Size Type of Project Work and Current Status
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

N
a
m
e
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n

Ye
a
r
St
a
t
e
Ph
y
s
i
o
g
r
a
p
h
i
c

Pr
o
v
i
n
c
e
Wa
t
e
r
s
h
e
d

Ch
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
We
t
l
a
n
d

A
c
r
e
s
St
r
e
a
m

L
F
As
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
De
s
i
g
n
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n

Ma
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
/

Ad
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
Mo
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
Na
t
u
r
a
l

Ch
a
n
n
e
l

De
s
i
g
n
Cl
i
e
n
t
White Lick Creek 2002 IN CL Urban 0 15,840 X X X N/A U Y INDOT
Third Fork Creek 2005 NC Piedmont Urban 0 3,500 X X X N/A X Y NCDOT
McIntyre Creek 2009 NC Piedmont Urban 0 6,000 X X X N/A N/A Y NCEEP*
Metro Atlanta 2001 GA Piedmont Urban 0 56,000+X X N/A N/A N/A N GA DOT
Rock Creek Anacostia
River Fish Passage
Removal
2001 MD Coastal Urban 20 24 X X X N/A N/A Y MD SHA****
Bynum Run 2001 MD Coastal Urban 0 2,500 X X N/A N/A N/A Y MD SHA****
Wilmington LWPI 2001 NC Coastal Urban 1,500 65,000 X N/A N/A N/A N/A Y NCDOT
UT to Deep River 2001 NC Piedmont Rural 0 5,700 X X X N/A X Y NCDOT
Hominy Swamp Cr.2001 NC Coastal Urban 0 2,232 X X X X X Y NCWRP
Rich Fork 2001 NC Piedmont Rural 30 3,386+X X X X X Y NCWRP
Speight Branch 2001 NC Piedmont Rural 0 1,500 N/A N/A X X N/A Y NCWRP
Abbott Creek 2001 NC Piedmont Urban 0 1,200 N/A N/A X X N/A N NCWRP
US Route 220 2001 PA Mountain Rural 0 21,000 X X X N/A N/A Y PENN DOT
Frontier Museum 2001 VA Mountains Urban 4 500 X X X N/A U Y VDOT
Woodrow Wilson
Wetlands
2001 VA Coastal Urban 5 2,000 X X N/A N/A N/A Y VDOT
White Marsh Run 2000 MD Coastal Urban 0 13,200 X X X N/A X Y MD SHA****
White Marsh Run (3
Channels)
2000 MD Coastal Urban 6 13,200 X X X N/A X MD SHA****
Five Daughters Run 2000 MD Piedmont Rural 5 800 X X X X N/A Y MD SHA****
Kerr Reservoir 2000 NC Piedmont Rural 0 21,000+X X X N/A X Y MD SHA***
X = completed, U = underway, P = pending, N/A = not part of project
Clients:*NCEEP-NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program; **TSMP-Tenn. Stream Mitigation Program; ***TNCVA (VARTF) The Nature Conservancy of VA, VA Aquatic Resources Trust Fund;
****MD SHA-Maryland State Highway Administration
Region/Character Size Type of Project Work and Current Status
Pr
o
j
e
c
t

N
a
m
e
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n

Ye
a
r
St
a
t
e
Ph
y
s
i
o
g
r
a
p
h
i
c

Pr
o
v
i
n
c
e
Wa
t
e
r
s
h
e
d

Ch
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
We
t
l
a
n
d

A
c
r
e
s
St
r
e
a
m

L
F
As
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
De
s
i
g
n
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n

Ma
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
/

Ad
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
Mo
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
Na
t
u
r
a
l

Ch
a
n
n
e
l

De
s
i
g
n
Cl
i
e
n
t
Starmount Park 2000 NC Piedmont Urban 0 3,500 X X X N/A N/A Y DENR
Lindley Park 2000 NC Piedmont Urban 0 1,400 X X X N/A N/A Y NCDOT
Sussmans Park 2000 NC Piedmont Urban 0 1200 X X X N/A N/A Y NCDOT
High Point 2000 NC Piedmont Urban 0 22,000+X N/A N/A N/A N/A Y NCDOT
Edsel Place 2000 NC Piedmont Urban 0 2,400 X X N/A N/A N/A Y NCDOT
Woodrow Wilson 2000 VA Coastal Urban 25 5,000 X X X N/A X Y VDOT
Star. Forest C.C.1999 NC Piedmont Urban 0 8,030 X X X N/A N/A Y NCDOT
Slaughterhouse Br.1998 MD Piedmont Urban 1 2,500 X X X X N/A Y MD SHA****
MD Route 100 1998 MD Piedmont Urban 0 1,000 X X X X N/A Y MD SHA****
Shepherds Tree 1998 NC Piedmont Rural 120 10,000+X X X N/A N/A Y NCDOT
Wiggins Mill 1998 NC Coastal Rural 90 7,600 X X X N/A N/A Y NCDOT
Cemetery Branch 1998 NC Piedmont Urban 0 1,200 X X X N/A N/A Y NCDOT
X = completed, U = underway, P = pending, N/A = not part of project
Clients:*NCEEP-NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program; **TSMP-Tenn. Stream Mitigation Program; ***TNCVA (VARTF) The Nature Conservancy of VA, VA Aquatic Resources Trust Fund;
****MD SHA-Maryland State Highway Administration
TABLE 2. PROJECT MANAGEMENT / MITIGATION EXPERIENCE - TIM MORRIS, SINCE 2000
Project Name Year Purpose State Value (millions)Role Client
Bounds Wetland 2003 Mitigation - US 113 Maryland 0.8 Design Review/CM MSHA
Bradford Wetland 2003 Mitigation - US 113 Maryland 0.3 Design Review/CM MSHA
Bishop Wetland 2002 Mitigation - US 113 Maryland 0.1 Design Review/CM MSHA
Mitchell Wetland 2001 Mitigation - US 113 Maryland 0.1 Design Review/Construction PM MSHA
Lopez Site 2003 Mitigation - US 113 Maryland 0.2 Design Review/Construction PM MSHA
Mitchell Wetland 2002 Mitigation - US 113 Maryland 0.2 Design Review/Construction PM MSHA
Mariner Site 2003 Mitigation - US 113 Maryland 0.2 Design Review/Construction PM MSHA
Cropper Site 2002 Mitigation - US 113 Maryland 0.2 Design Review/Construction PM MSHA
US 50 and US 113 Site 2002 Mitigation - US 113 Maryland 0.1 Design Review/Construction PM MSHA
Bladensburg Marina Tidal Wetland 2005 Mitigation - WWB Maryland 0.8 Design Review/Contracting/CPM MSHA
Tuxedo Road Wetland 2004 Mitigation - WWB Maryland 0.5 Design Review/Contracting/CPM MSHA
Northwest Branch Fish Passage Sites 2005 Mitigation - WWB Maryland 1.4 Design Review/Contracting/CPM MSHA
Sligo Creek Fish Passage Sites 2005 Mitigation - WWB Maryland 0.5 Design Review/Contracting/CPM MSHA
Indian Creek Fish Passage Sites 2005 Mitigation - WWB Maryland 0.8 Design Review/Contracting/CPM MSHA
Rock Creek Fish Passage Sites 2006 Mitigation - WWB Washington, D.C.4.8 Design Review/Contracting/CPM MSHA
SAV Planting Potomac River 2004 Mitigation - WWB Maryland - Virginia 0.5 Design Review/Contracting/CPM MSHA
Four Mile Run Park Wetland & SM 2003 Mitigation - WWB Virginia 0.8 Design Review/Contracting/CPM VDOT
VA Tidal Wetlands - Interchanges 2003 - 2006 Mitigation - WWB Virginia 0.3 Design Review/Contracting/CPM VDOT
Mason Neck Segmented Breakwaters 2003 Mitigation - WWB Virginia 0.5 Design Review/Contracting/CPM VDOT
Silver Property Tidal Wetlands 2004 Mitigation - WWB Virginia 0.5 Design Review/Contracting/CPM VDOT
Aquia Harbour Property Tidal Wetlands 2004 Mitigation - WWB Virginia 0.4 Design Review/Contracting/CPM VDOT
Anacostia 11 Tidal Wetland Mitigation 2006 Mitigation - WWB Maryland 6.0 Design Review/Contracting/CPM MSHA
Reforestation Sites - WWB 2003 - 2006 Mitigation - WWB Maryland 0.3 Design Review/Contracting/CPM MSHA
McIntyre Site 2007 Mitigation - EEP North Carolina 1.3 Construction Administrator MSHA
McCain Site 2008 Mitigation - EEP North Carolina 0.5 Construction Administrator NCEEP
Briles Site 2008 Mitigation - EEP North Carolina 0.5 Construction Administrator NCEEP
Johnson Site 2008 Mitigation - EEP North Carolina 0.5 Construction Administrator NCEEP
Little Troublesome Creek Site 2009 Mitigation - EEP North Carolina 0.5 Construction Administrator NCEEP
UT to Crab Creek Site 2010 Mitigation - EEP North Carolina 0.8 Construction Administrator NCEEP
Cane Creek 2005 Mitigation - EEP North Carolina 3.1 Project Manager/Construction/Closeout NCEEP
Collins Creek 2005 Mitigation - EEP North Carolina 1.5 Project Manager/Construction/Closeout NCEEP
Daniels Farm 2005 Mitigation - EEP North Carolina 0.5 Project Manager/Construction/Closeout NCEEP
Glen Raven Site 2005 Mitigation - EEP North Carolina 1.0 Project Manager - Full Project NCEEP
Harrell Site 2005 Mitigation - EEP North Carolina 1.9 Project Manager - Full Project NCEEP
Farrar Dairy 2006 Mitigation - EEP North Carolina 5.9 Project Manager - Full Project NCEEP
Dog Bite Creek 2006 Mitigation - EEP North Carolina 0.9 Project Manager - Full Project NCEEP
Buffalo Flats 2010 Mitigation - EEP North Carolina 1.2 Project Manager - Full Project NCEEP
Jacobs Landing 2011 Mitigation - EEP North Carolina 1.3 Project Manager - Full Project NCEEP
Jacobs Ladder 2011 Mitigation - EEP North Carolina 1.4 Project Manager - Full Project NCEEP
Twin Bays 2012 Mitigation - EEP North Carolina 0.8 Project Manager - Full Project NCEEP
Bear Basin 2012 Mitigation - EEP North Carolina 0.6 Project Manager - Full Project NCEEP
Stanley Slough 2012 Mitigation - EEP North Carolina 1.6 Project Manager - Full Project NCEEP
Norman’s Pasture 2012 Mitigation - EEP North Carolina 1.3 Project Manager - Full Project NCEEP
Bowl Basin 2012 Mitigation - EEP North Carolina 0.5 Project Manager - Full Project NCEEP
Stanley’s II 2013 Mitigation - EEP North Carolina 0.4 Project Manager - Full Project NCEEP
Norman’s Pasture II 2014 Mitigation - EEP North Carolina 0.5 Project Manager - Full Project NCEEP
www.kci.com
Bowl Basin Restoration Site
Onslow County, North Carolina
• Redeveloped longer wetland flow patterns to increase surface
flow retention time
• Restored a native forested hardwood wetland community
using native trees and seed mixes
Construction was completed in the Fall of 2014. The site is
currently being monitored.
OWNER REFERENCE: NC DMS, Kristin Miguez, 919-796-7475
ENGINEER REFERENCE: Gary Mryncza 615-377-2499
TEAM MEMBERS:
Principal in Charge: Joe Pfeiffer
Project Manager: Tim Morris
Design: Alex French, Adam Spiller
Construction: Kevin O’Briant
Monitoring: Tommy Seelinger, Alex French
PROJECT VALUE: $529,000
DELIVERY METHOD: Full Delivery
The Bowl Basin Wetland Restoration Site (BBWRS) is a full-
delivery mitigation project being developed for the North
Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
Division of Mitigation Services (DMS). The BBWRS is a former
non-riparian wetland system in the White Oak River Basin
(03020106 8-digit HUC) in northeastern Onslow County, North
Carolina that had been substantially modified to maximize
agricultural production. The site offered the opportunity to
restore impacted agricultural lands to non-riparian wetland
habitat.
The project will provide the restoration of approximately
11.7 acres of non-riparian wetland. Project goals identified in
White Oak River Basin Restoration Priorities (WORBRP) were
incorporated into the goals of the BBWRS. These goals include:
• Slow and treat the runoff of up-slope agricultural drainage
• Restore a hardwood flats community
• Create additional valuable wetland habitat in the Upper
White Oak drainage basin
The project goals were addressed through the implementation
of the following project objectives:
• Filled field ditches to restore surface flow retention and
elevate local groundwater levels
• Alleviated surface compaction and furrow drainage by surface
roughening throughout the site
www.kci.com
Twin Bays Wetland Restoration Site
Duplin County, North Carolina
• Modified an existing pond to its natural seep condition to
feed the downslope wetland.
• Restored a forested hardwood wetland community using
native trees and seed mixes.
Construction was completed in the winter of 2014. The site
is currently being monitored.
OWNER REFERENCE: NC DMS, Kristin Miguez, 919-796-7475
ENGINEER REFERENCE: Gary Mryncza 615-377-2499
TEAM MEMBERS:
Principal in Charge: Joe Pfeiffer
Project Manager: Tim Morris
Design: Alex French, Adam Spiller
Construction: Kevin O’Briant
Monitoring: Tommy Seelinger, Alex French
PROJECT VALUE: $735,000
DELIVERY METHOD: Full Delivery
The Twin Bays Wetland Restoration Site (TBWRS) is located
northwest of Wallace, North Carolina. TBWRS is a full-delivery
mitigation site developed for the North Carolina Department
of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Mitigation
Services (DMS). The site is located within the Cape Fear River
Basin (03030007 8-digit HUC) and the Rock Fish Creek Local
Watershed (03030007090040 14-digit HUC) which has been
identified as a Target Local Watershed (TLW).
The project will provide the restoration of approximately 10.6
acres of non-riparian wetland and 0.4 acre of upland habitat.
The primary restoration actions were the filling of existing
ditches and roughening of the compacted ground surface, but
also included the modification of an existing pond and the
redevelopment of active seepage areas. Project goals addressed
stressors identified in the watershed. Goals included:
• Slow and treat the runoff of upslope agricultural drainage.
• Restore a Hardwood Flats Community.
• Develop valuable wetland habitat niches within a drained
agricultural landscape.
The project goals were addressed through the implementation
of the following project objectives:
• Filled field ditches to restore surface flow retention and
elevate local groundwater levels.
• Redeveloped longer wetland flow patterns to increase surface
flow retention time.
www.kci.com
Jacob’s Ladder and Jacob’s Landing Stream Restoration
Rowan County, North Carolina
The two sites encompass a series of tributaries that
make up a portion of the Irish Buffalo Creek headwaters in
southwestern Rowan County near China Grove. The sites are
located in a water supply watershed; Irish Buffalo Creek flows
into Kannapolis Lake, the primary water source for the City
of Kannapolis. Downstream of Kannapolis Lake, Irish Buffalo
Creek is listed as impaired on the 2010 North Carolina 303(d)
list for turbidity and copper.
Construction is completed and the site will be monitored for
five years.
OWNER REFERENCE:
NCEEP, Tim Baumgartner 919-707-8543
ENGINEER REFERENCE:
Gary Mryncza 615-377-2499
TEAM MEMBERS:
Principal in Charge: Joe Pfeiffer
Project Manager:Tim Morris
Design: Adam Spiller
Construction Inspector: Kevin O’Briant
Quality Control, Deliverables: Kristin Knight Meng
PROJECT VALUE: S2.8 Million
DELIVERY METHOD:
Full Delivery
The Jacob’s Ladder and Jacob’s Landing stream restoration sites
(JLS) are two full-delivery mitigation projects being developed
for the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP).
The sites offer the opportunity to restore two first-order stream
systems draining to Irish Buffalo Creek in the Lower Yadkin-
Pee Dee River Basin (HUC 03040105). The streams had been
impacted by decades of unrestricted cattle access and related
agricultural activity. Now completed, the two sites will restore,
enhance and preserve approximately 10,000 linear feet of stream
channel. The projects are located in the Irish Buffalo Creek Local
Watershed Unit (HUC 03040105020040), which the EEP has
identified as a Targeted Local Watershed (TLW). Project goals
address stressors identified in the watershed and include:
•Reduce sediment supply entering Irish Buffalo Creek.
•Restore a diverse riparian corridor that connects to forested
stream systems both upstream and downstream of each project.
The following activities will be implemented to achieve these
goals:
•Restore stable channel planform to streams that have been
straightened and modified.
•Reshape and stabilize eroding stream banks.
•Protect and stabilize incoming seepage flow into the site’s
tributaries.
•Plant site with native trees to help reestablish a diverse riparian
corridor.
•Install exclusion fencing to keep livestock out of the project
streams.
www.kci.com
Stanley’s Slough /II Stream and Wetland Restoration Projects
Northampton County, North Carolina
Stanley’s Slough and Stanley’s II stream and wetland restoration
project involved the restoration of coastal plain wetlands, streams
and riparian buffers. The project will restore approximately 4,274
LF of stream and 10 acres of riparian wetlands that have been
impacted by anthropogenic processes, including grazing, crop
production, land clearing and stream channel modification. The
project goals developed in the project’s mitigation plan addressed
stressors identified in local watershed planning documents
including the need to:
•Restore streams and riparian buffers to provide shade and
temperature control and increase in stream woody debris for
habitat.
•Restore and protect sensitive aquatic resources to improve
habitat and species diversity through the restoration of wetlands,
streams, and riparian buffers.
•Implement wetland and stream restoration projects that reduce
sources of nutrient pollution and surface runoff by restoring
hydrology and vegetation, stabilizing banks, and restoring natural
geomorphology where appropriate.
All of these goal were accomplished through careful planning,
design and project implementation. KCI restored a diverse
headwater stream and wetland community through the
design and implementation of stream and wetland grading
plans designed to restore the impacted channel and ancillary
drainage network to its historic condition. All of the drainage
modifications were implemented to increase the elevation of
the local groundwater table through the elimination of lateral
drainage ditches and modification of existing channelized streams
which allowed the designers to reconnect the site hydrology
to historic flow paths. Project construction and planting were
completed in March 2014. The site is currently in its first year of
monitoring and will be monitored for a total of seven years.
REFERENCE:
NCEEP, Lindsay Crocker 919-707-8944
ENGINEER REFERENCE:
Gary Mryncza 615-377-2499
TEAM MEMBERS:
Principal in Charge: Joe Pfeiffer
Project Manager: Tim Morris
Design: Alex French; Adam Spiller
Construction Inspection: Kevin O’Briant
VALUE:
$2 Million
DELIVERY METHOD:
Full Delivery
www.kci.com
The Nature Conservancy - Johnson and Waddle Sites
Smyth County, Virginia
With funding provided by the Virginia Aquatic Resources Trust
Fund (VARTF), KCI has contracted with The Nature Conservancy
of Virginia to provide 21 acres of forested wetland mitigation on
two sites in Smyth County, Virginia. These sites, known as the
Johnson and Waddle Sites (JWS), will provide wetland mitigation
credit along the North Fork Holston River in southwestern Virginia.
Following the implementation of the proposed mitigation design,
the JWS will provide 10.0 acres of wetland restoration, 8.3 acres of
wetland creation, 6.6 acres of wetland enhancement, and 11.3 acres
of upland buffer restoration. Together these areas will offer 21.0 units
of forested wetland mitigation.
The restoration of the Johnson and Waddle Sites offers an opportunity
to provide functional wetland uplift to the Tennessee River Basin.
The project goals include the following:
• Expand forested wetland habitat for migratory birds, amphibians,
and other wildlife.
• Increase nutrient uptake from surrounding pasture and
agricultural lands.
The project goals were addressed through implementation of the
following objectives:
• Filled field ditches and install ditch plugs to slow the outflow of
groundwater from the JWS.
• Redeveloped surface roughness to capture and retain precipitation
on the site.
• Planted the sites with species native to Mountain Alluvial Forest
and Mountain Swamp Seep communities.
• Restored an upland buffer to protect wetland resources.
The proposed mitigation actions at the JWS restored the hydrology
and vegetation that had been altered or entirely removed from the
project sites. At the Johnson Site, the mitigation approach focused
on increasing hydrologic retention through targeted grading in the
creation areas and restoring surface roughness in restoration areas.
Targeted locations in the creation areas had 1-2 feet of sub-soil removed
to reach soils with a slower hydraulic conductivity. In compacted
areas, surface roughness was restored by tilling the soil to form
microtopography +/- 0.5 foot. Mitigation actions at the Waddle Site
focused on filling the ditch that drains the entire length of the project.
A spring that is at the top of the main ditch was developed to allow
a natural seepage pattern through the wetland. Also, two smaller
ditches were filled to lengthen the hydroperiod throughout the site.
Construction was completed in the fall of 2012. The site is currently
being monitored.

CLIENT: The Nature Conservancy of Virginia
PROJECT VALUE: S800K
COMPLETED: Preliminary Assessment, Conceptual
Design
SERVICES:
Easement Acquisition
Site Identification
Categorical Exclusion
Site Assessment, Design
Construction
Monitoring
www.kci.com
Farrar Dairy Wetland and Stream Restoration FDP
Lillington, Harnett County, North Carolina
the NPAC were returned to natural channel forms.
Existing wetlands of marginal quality were enhanced
by removing berms, treating invasive species, and
partially filling in open water impoundments. The
project also included connecting the restored areas
to a stream and wetland preservation area along the
downstream end of the NPAC.
KCI completed monitoring the site in December
2013. Closeout of the site with the Interagency
Review Team occurred in May 2014. All
contracted credits are anticipated to be delivered to
NCEEP as a result of the closeout meeting.

OWNER REFERENCE:
NCEEP, Tim Baumgartner, 919-707-8543
DESIGNER REFERENCE:
Gary Mryncza, 615-377-2499
TEAM MEMBERS:
Principal in Charge: Joe Pfeiffer
Project Manager: Tim Morris
Design: Adam Spiller
Construction Manager: Tim Morris
VALUE:
$6 Million
DELIVERY METHOD:
Full Delivery

The Farrar Dairy Site is located southwest of Lillington, in Harnett
County. KCI found the site, assessed existing conditions, developed
the appropriate stream and wetland design, and completed the
construction. The project will provide mitigation credit for stream
and wetland impacts by restoring, enhancing, and preserving 13,044
linear feet of stream and 112 acres of wetland. The project aimed to
restore the streams, riparian buffers and forested wetlands along the
North Prong of Anderson Creek (NPAC), the main stream through
the site, in order to reestablish an interconnected floodplain corridor.
The project streams and wetlands at the site had become degraded
through poor grazing management and vegetation removal. The
NPAC was channelized to maximize use of agricultural fields, but
this modification also disconnected NPAC from its floodplain. Ditches
had been installed to drain wetlands, and incoming tributaries to the
NPAC were straightened to convey water straight through the property.
Impoundments and berms were built to attract migratory waterfowl,
but these features disrupted the natural hydrologic regime of the site.
The Farrar Dairy Site was an ideal opportunity to return a highly altered
system to a contiguous stream and wetland complex. KCI performed
an existing conditions site analysis and developed a design to raise
the bed elevation of the NPAC and restore a natural meander pattern
to reconnect the stream to its historic floodplain. The restoration
plan also called for filling and plugging ditches in the drained hydric
soils to restore saturated hydrologic conditions, planting a functional
Coastal Plain Small Swamp Stream community to create an effective
riparian buffer and wetland complex, and grading former agricultural
fields to redevelop wetland microtopography. Incoming tributaries to
www.kci.com
Collins Creek Stream Restoration
Chapel Hill, North Carolina
The Collins Creek Site (CCS) was full-delivery project developed
for the NCEEP. This site was successfully closed out in 2013. The
site restored a heavily impacted stream system in order to improve
water quality and aquatic and terrestrial habitat. The project restored
and enhanced 2,310 existing linear feet of an unnamed tributary to
Collins Creek (UTCC) and 6,879 existing linear feet along four of
its tributaries (T1, T1A, T1B, and T2).
The project streams had become degraded primarily through poor
grazing management and vegetation removal. The streams had all
experienced bank erosion. Bed degradation and aggradation were
also evident throughout the different project reaches. All of the
reaches exhibited areas of incision and vertical instability. There
were few stable riffle and pool sequences to provide bed diversity.
As a result, the ecological diversity and water quality values of the
site had been affected adversely.
The streams at the CCS were restored using a combination of C, Bc,
and B Rosgen stream types. In order to restore the different stream
systems on the CCS, a natural channel design approach was employed
using stable reference reaches. Six different reference reach sites were
identified for use in the project design.
Following the completion of the stream enhancement and restoration,
all floodplain areas surrounding the project streams were planted
with species consistent with Piedmont Alluvial Forest. The slopes
leading up from the floodplain areas and the valleys directly along
the channels were planted as Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest. The
planted areas were fenced to ensure that livestock no longer have
access to project streams or riparian buffers.
KCI Environmental Technologies and Construction (ETC) completed
the site restoration and planting in March 2008. Monitoring was
completed in December 2012 and a project closeout meeting was
completed in June 2013. The project generated 8,884 stream
mitigation units for the NCEEP.
OWNER REFERENCE:
NCEEP, Tim Baumgartner, 919-707-8543
ENGINEER REFERENCE:
Gary Mryncza, 615-377-2499
TEAM MEMBERS:
Principal in Charge: Joe Pfeiffer
Project Manager: Tim Morris
Construction Inspection: Kevin O’Briant
Design: Adam Spiller, Kristin Knight-Meng,
Alex French
VALUE:
$1.9 Million
DELIVERY METHOD:
Full Delivery
www.kci.com
Harrell Stream and Wetland Restoration
Edgecombe County, North Carolina
The Harrell Stream and Wetland Restoration Site is located in the
Coastal Plain in Edgecombe County. The project will mitigate stream
and wetland impacts within the Tar-Pamlico River Basin by restoring
6,808 linear feet on an unnamed tributary to Swift Creek and 15
acres of wetlands.
Project goals included protecting aquatic resources from excess
nutrients, sediment, and other pollutants coming from the agricultural
watershed; reestablishing terrestrial and aquatic habitat, and
connecting the site to the existing floodplain corridor along Swift
Creek. Project objectives included restoring a stable stream channel
with the appropriate pattern, profile, and dimension that can support
a sand transport system; connecting the stream to a functioning
floodplain; filling and plugging ditches in the drained hydric soils
to restore a wetland hydroperiod, and planting tree species typical
of a Coastal Plain Small Swamp Stream along the stream riparian
corridor and floodplain.
The stream restoration included four separate reaches that were
restored based on a combination of Priority Levels 2 and 3. Log
drop structures were used to control grade throughout the profile.
The stream was restored to a B5c and C5 stream types.
The wetland design was completed in August 2006, construction
began in October 2006 and the wetland was planted in February
2007. The stream design and restoration plan were completed in April
2007, construction began in July 2007 and the stream was planted in
January 2008. The site was monitored through 2012. The site was
closed out by the Interagency Review Team (IRT) in the spring 2013.
The site received the full credit requested at closeout by the NCEEP.
OWNER REFERENCE:
NCEEP, Tim Baumgartner, 919-707-8543
ENGINEER REFERENCE:
Gary Mryncza 615-377-2499
TEAM MEMBERS:
Principal in Charge: Joe Pfeiffer
Project Manager: Tim Morris
Design: Adam Spiller; Alex French
Quality Assurance/Quality Control: Kristin Knight Meng
VALUE:
$2 Million
DELIVERY METHOD:
Full Delivery
www.kci.com
Cane Creek Stream Restoration FDP
Person County, North Carolina
KCI is developing the Cane Creek Tributary Site as a full-delivery
stream mitigation project for the NCEEP. The site is located in
northwestern Person County, North Carolina within the upper
portion of the Roanoke Basin and drains into Hyco Lake.
The site is uniquely situated in the piedmont of North Carolina
with a large number of groundwater seeps feeding small headwater
tributaries that drain into Cane Creek. Across the site, there are ten
separate tributaries that make up over 18,000 linear feet of completed
stream mitigation.
KCI developed a restoration plan for the site that involved a
combination of stream restoration and enhancement of B and Bc
channel types. The project reaches were designed as restoration or
enhancement based on the level of departure from a stable stream
system. On the steeper tributaries with severe headcuts, log structures
were installed to stabilize bed elevations and to recreate pool habitat.
Other streams at the CCTS required less intensive work and bank
stabilization techniques were incorporated among existing mature
trees and bedrock. A riparian planting plan at the CCTS site was
developed using Piedmont Alluvial Forest species in flood prone
areas and Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest species in slopes leading
away from lower lying areas. Livestock exclusion fencing was also
installed along all of the streams in order to prevent any future
impacts from cattle.
Construction was initiated in May 2008 and completed in December
2008. The first year of post-construction monitoring was completed
during the summer of 2009. Monitoring was concluded in December
2013. Project closeout will occur in June 2014.
OWNER REFERENCE:
NCEEP, Tim Baumgartner, 919-707-8543
ENGINEER REFERENCE:
Gary Mryncza, 410-316-7862
TEAM MEMBERS:
Project Director: Joe Pfeiffer
Project Manager: Tim Morris
Superintendent: Kevin O’Briant
Cost Estimator: Tim Morris
VALUE:
$3.2 Million
DELIVERY METHOD:
Full Delivery

www.kci.com
Norman’s Pasture Wetland Restoration
Sampson County, North Carolina
Norman’s Pasture and Norman’s Pasture II Restoration Site is
a headwater stream and wetland system in Sampson County
that has been substantially modified to maximize grazing and
agriculture. The site, with approximately 25 acres of wetland
restoration and 750 linear feet of stream restoration potential
consists of a collection of tributaries that drain down moderately-
sloped valleys onto the floodplain of Stewarts Creek, a large
fourth-order blackwater stream. The streams have been moved
and straightened and the wetlands have been ditched in order to
clear and drain the land for anthropogenic uses. Despite these
modifications, there are areas with high-quality wetlands that
remain on the property. The site offers the potential to restore
and protect a range of unique aquatic resources in one setting
– existing riparian wetlands, a steep forested tributary, lower
gradient seep-fed headwaters, and artesian springs.
In the Cape Fear River Basin Restoration Priorities (NCEEP 2009),
the goals for the 8-digit hydrologic unit include focusing on water
quality improvements and protecting Outstanding Resource
Waters. Project goals will support these larger aims and include:
• Reconnect a continuous stream and wetland headwater system
to Stewarts Creek
• Improve and expand riparian habitat along Stewarts Creek
• Buffer nutrient inputs from adjacent agricultural and grazing
practices
The following objectives will be implemented to achieve the goals:
• Redevelop headwater stream-wetland complexes that have
previously been impacted by ditching
• Protect and integrate existing riparian wetlands into the project
design
• Plant any unvegetated riparian areas with native plant
communities
• Fence all easement areas to protect the site’s resources from
grazing
The site is currently in the construction stage and is anticipated to
be completed in summer of 2015.
REFERENCE:
NCEEP, Kristin Miguez, 910-796-7475
ENGINEER REFERENCE:
Gary Mryncza 615-377-2499
TEAM MEMBERS:
Project Director: Joe Pfeiffer
Project Manager: Tim Morris
Lead Designer: Adam Spiller
Quality Assurance/Quality Control:
Kristin Knight Meng
VALUE:
$1.8 Million
DELIVERY METHOD:
Full Delivery
www.kci.com
West Piney River Restoration Project
Dickson County, Tennessee
Under a design-build delivery with team member KCI Technologies, Inc.,
KCI Environmental Technologies and Construction (ETC) was responsible
for constructing the restoration and enhancement of approximately 3.5
miles of the main stem of West Piney River (WPR), Coon Creek, and Fielder
Branch (the latter two are tributaries that join WPR in the project reach)
in Dickson. This TSMP project delivered on goals of land loss reduction,
reversing the rapid degradation of the stream/riparian zone, aquatic and
terrestrial habitat enhancement, and improvement of water quality as a
product of sediment reduction and riparian re-vegetation.
The WPR exhibited varying levels of instability as evidenced by bank
erosion, unstable undercut banks, unstable sediment deposition (frequent
mid-channel and transverse bars), fallen and falling trees, and formation
of blockages. Limited bed form variability and the absence of deep pools
and structure to maintain them limited the quality of aquatic habitat
throughout the project reach.
The scope of the restoration construction included re-grading eroding
banks, establishing appropriate bank-height ratios by re-connecting the
streams with a functional floodplain, establishing grade controls using
constructed riffles, incorporating large woody debris and submerged log
and boulder scour structures, using combination biotechnical stabilization
techniques including structural stone foundations and encapsulated soil lifts
with brush layering and live staking, and planting of a minimum 50-foot
buffer protected within a permanent conservation easement. In addition
to earthwork, ETC was also responsible for establishing and maintaining
E&SC and maintenance of stream flow in accordance with the design
drawings and permit conditions.
Existing infrastructure running parallel to the project, specifically an
existing road and water line, required close coordination with the utility
owners and required modifications to site grading to accommodate
necessary clearances. In addition, KCI and ETC handled public outreach
and coordination with 12 separate landowners and exercised caution to
maintain livestock watering access throughout the construction period.
Further, ETC managed the project phasing to accommodate an in-stream
construction prohibition period intended to protect the Egg Mimic Darter
(Etheostoma pseudovulatum).
OWNER REFERENCE:
Joey Woodward, 615-831-9311
TEAM MEMBERS AND CURRENTLY WITH THE FIRM:
Project Director: Gary Mryncza
Project Manager: Adam Spiller
Design: Kristin Knight Meng; Adam Spiller
VALUE:
$1.8 Million
DELIVERY METHOD:
Design-Build
www.kci.com
Leiper’s Fork Stream and Wetland Restoration
Williamson County, Tennessee
KCI provided professional assessment, design, and construction
management and key points land surveying services to restore two
portions of Leipers Fork as well as two of its tributaries on two private
rural parcels in Williamson County, Tennessee.
The primary goals of the project was restoring a stable channel form,
enhancing instream habitat, and restoring riparian habitat. In order
to achieve these goals KCI proposed: re-establishing appropriate
pattern and dimension of the streams using a natural channel design
approach, restoring bedform diversity in the form of pools and riffles;
enhancing the ability of the site to mitigate municipal storm water
and accompanying pollutants, and establishing a protected riparian
corridor planted with native vegetation adjacent to the project streams.
Design and construction constraints included confining features
structures (houses, driveways and bridges), utilities (electrical and
water), rock outcrops/bluffs, large individual trees, stacked rock walls
(with historical significance) and sensitive areas. These constraints
required restoration work to be completed within the channel.
Construction on the Leipers Fork project began in October 2009 and
was completed in April 2010. In total, the project involved 12,274
linear feet of stream restoration and enhancement in addition to 24
adjacent acres put into a perpetual conservation easement. Several
sections of the tributaries were abandoned and a new channel and
floodplain was constructed incorporating wood/rock vanes and
bioengineering.
On large sections of Leipers Fork, boulders were stacked to mimic
the surrounding rock outcrops/bluffs to gain a natural look on
previously washed out stream banks.
OWNER REFERENCE:
Joey Woodward, 615-831-9311
ENGINEERING REFERENCE:
Gary Mryncza, 615-377-2499
TEAM MEMBERS:
Project Manager: Adam Spiller
Design: Kristin Knight Meng
Construction Inspection: Zach Mryncza
VALUE:
$125,000
DELIVERY METHOD:
Design-Build
PART IV: PROJECT ORGANIZATION

Key Personnel
NAME RESPONSIBILITIES CERTIFICATIONS YEARS
EXPERIENCE
PRINCIPAL-IN-CHARGE
Joseph J. Pfeiffer, Jr., PWS Principal in Charge Professional Wetland
Scientist #927
Rosgen Level I-IV
29
PROJECT MANAGER
Timothy Morris Project Manager Rosgen Level I-II 19
PROFESSIONAL PERSONNEL
Gary M. Mryncza, PE, PH Engineer of Record Professional Engineer: NC
#32733, CPESC
Rosgen Level I-IV
18
Steven F. Stokes, LSS Site Assessment, Project
Design
Rosgen Level I-III, NC WAM
NC Licensed Soil Scientist
- 1087
34
Zach Myrncza, CCM,
CPESC
Site Restoration Rosgen Level I, CCM,
CPESC
9
Adam Spiller, CPESC Site Assessment, Project
Design, Monitoring/Manage-
ment
Rosgen Level I-IV
CPESC
10
Joe Sullivan Site Assessment, Monitor-
ing/Management
4
Kristin Knight-Meng, PE Site Assessment, Project
Design
Rosgen Level I-II, NC WAM
Professional Engineer
NC#40899
9
Michael Underwood, EIT Site Assessment, Monitoring TDEC EPSC Level I
OSHA 10 Hour
NCSU Rivercourses
2
Alex French Project Design Rosgen Level I-IV 15
Tommy Seelinger Site Assessment, Monitoring 3
Jim Gellenthin, PLS Project Design Professional Land Surveyor:
NC #3860
28
Kevin O’Briant Site Restoration Water Pollution Control Sys-
tem Operator (#989400)
Rosgen Level I-II
15
All legal aspects related to recordation of the conservation easement will be handled by:
Poyner Spruill, 301 S. College Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
Poyner Spruill has performed in this capacity on 21 past full delivery projects for the KCI team.
(Key Personnel resumes on the following pages)
JOSEPH J. PFEIFFER, JR., PWS
Principal-in-Charge
Education
MA in Physical Geography and
Environmental Planning
BS in Natural Science
AA in Wildlife/Fisheries Management
Registration
Professional Wetland Scientist (#927)
Rosgen Levels I, II, III, IV
29 Years Experience
Mr. Pfeiffer is the Practice Leader for Ecosystem Dynamics
and is responsible for all mitigation acquisition and con-
struction. Since joining KCI in 1988, Mr. Pfeiffer has been
responsible for coordinating all aspects of environmental/en-
gineering projects for both public and private clients. Mr.
Pfeiffer utilizes his diverse background to integrate engineer-
ing and environmental planning to develop a comprehensive
project approach that facilitates effective working relation-
ships among his design teams. This management style aids
his abilities to coordinate design requirements with permit-
ting, minimizing unnecessary comments from the regula-
tory agencies and providing seamless participation between
all parties involved. During his tenure at KCI, Mr. Pfeiffer
has been responsible for wetland/stream restoration, bioen-
gineering design, shoreline stabilization, wildlife/fisheries
habitat assessment and design, recreation planning, GIS da-
tabase development and analysis, water quality analysis, wet-
land delineation, mitigation and permitting, NPDES permit
processing, image processing, and biological inventories.
• Farrar Dairy Full Delivery Project, Lillington, North
Carolina, NCEEP. Project Principal. Directed the loca-
tion, acquisition, design development, and permitting of
more than 110 acres of wetland and over 12,500 linear
feet of stream restoration, enhancement, and preserva-
tion.
• Collins Creek Full Delivery Project, Orange County,
North Carolina, NCEEP. Project Principal. Directed the
location, acquisition, design development, permitting
and construction of a 9,200 linear feet stream restoration
project.
• Harrell Full Delivery Project, Edgecombe County, North
Carolina, NCEEP. Project Principal. Directed the loca-
tion, acquistion, design development, permitting and
construction for the development of 15 acres of wetland
restoration and 6,800 linear feet of stream restoration.
Education
MEM in Water Resource Management
BS in Natural Resource Management
Registration
Rosgen Level I, II
19 Years Experience
Mr. Morris has worked as an environmental consultant for 19
years since graduating with a Master of Environmental Manage-
ment degree from Duke University. He has worked on a variety
of natural resource based planning and construction projects for
both private and public sector clients. His expertise is in the water
resource management field, and his specific experience includes
wetland delineation, wetland permitting, wetland mitigation de-
sign and construction management, pond and lake management,
environmental construction inspection and watershed planning.
Notable projects included the US 113 Dualization project on
the Eastern Shore of Maryland and the Woodrow Wilson Bridge
Project, a $2.5 billion transportation venture between Maryland,
Virginia and the District of Columbia. For this project, Mr. Morris
managed the design and construction of 17 successful environ-
mental mitigation contracts valued at approximately $20 million.
• Farrar Dairy Full Delivery Project, Lillington, North Caro-
lina, NCEEP. Lead Scientist/Wetland Designer. Supervised
the design of more than 110 acres of wetland mitigation and
over 12,500 linear feet of stream restoration, enhancement,
and preservation on a large integrated wetland-stream com-
plex in the Sand Hills. Coordinated preparation of construc-
tion drawings and facilitated the implementation of property
improvements coincident to the restoration project.
• Windy Cove Farm Wetland Mitigation Project, Millboro
Springs, Virginia, TNC. Project Manager. Responsible for
the design and construction of approximately four acres of
created and restored wetlands for the Virginia Aquatic Re-
sources Trust Fund, a mitigation fund managed by the Na-
ture Conservancy of Virginia. The project restored a wetland
located within an active cattle pasture by altering the cur-
rent hydrologic regime through targeted grading intended to
mitigate channelization on the site.
• US Route 113 Environmental Monitoring, Eastern Shore,
Maryland, MSHA. Environmental Inspector. Supervised the
construction of five wetland mitigation sites, four nutrient
sites, four stream restoration sites, two floodplain restoration
projects, two fish passage projects and more than 50 acres
of reforestation.
TIMOTHY MORRIS
Project Manager
STEVEN F. STOKES, LSS
Senior Environmental Scientist
Education
BS in Wildlife Biology
Registration
Licensed Soil Scientist #1087
USDA-SCS; Soil Correlation & Water
Quality
OSHA 40-Hour Safety Training/8-Hour Supervisor Course
Rosgen Levels I, II, III
34 Years Experience
Mr. Stokes is responsible for natural resource investigations
including soil classification and interpretation, soil and flood-
plain mapping, hydric soil classification and mapping based
on NRCS criteria, and water table analysis for wetland mitiga-
tion and delineation. Mr. Stokes is also responsible for pro-
viding technical quality control reviews and oversees project
progression, investigations, analyses, contract documents,
and field related activities for projects.
• Full Delivery Projects, NC Ecosystem Enhancement Pro-
gram. Lead Scientist. Responsible for site location/iden-
tification, acquisition, landowner contracts, assessment
and technical reports to provide stream, wetland and/or
buffer mitigation in the Tar-Pamlico, Cape Fear, French
Broad, and Roanoke River Basins.
• Brown Farm Full Delivery Project, Durham/Orange
Counties, North Carolina, NCEEP. Project Scientist. Re-
sponsible for site location/identification, acquisition and
contracts, wetlands and soils assessments, permitting,
and post-construction management of the 25-acre resto-
ration site in the Cape Fear River Basin.
• Daniels Farm Full Delivery Project, Louisburg, North
Carolina, NCWRP. Project Scientist. Responsible for site
location/identification, acquisition and contracts, assess-
ment, restoration plan development, permitting, con-
struction, reforestation and monitoring of the 30-acre res-
toration site in the Tar-Pam River Basin.
• Rich Fork Full Delivery Project, Thomasville, North Caro-
lina, NCDOT. Licensed Soil Scientist. Conducted a de-
tailed soils investigation to determine if the soils had been
buried by alluvial deposition or as a result of overburden
from spoil excavated from Rich Fork Creek during chan-
nelization. The results provided data to support the con-
cept of restoration rather than creation in spite of one-foot
of topsoil removal.
Education
MS in Water Resources
MS in Civil Engineering
BS in Natural Science
BSET in Civil Engineering Technology
Registration
Hey-River Mechanics and Restoration
Rosgen Levels I, II, III, IV
Professional Hydrologist (H-1605)
Professional Engineer (NC #32733)
Certified Professional in Erosion & Sediment Control
(#4314)
18 Years Experience
Mr. Mryncza is the company-wide Discipline Head for Resource
Management and specializes in hydrology and streams. His ex-
perience includes watershed and site-specific hydrologic analy-
sis, stream assessment, feasibility study and restoration design,
water quality assessment/stream monitoring, and water resources
management. Mr. Mryncza is versed in the use of hydrologic/
hydraulic models and has experience applying natural channel
design principles. He has been responsible for the development
of design plans for over 50,000 linear feet of channel in North
Carolina for NCWRP / NCEEP and NCDOT.
• Dog Bite Full Delivery Project, Bakersville, North Carolina,
NCEEP. Project Engineer. Supervised the design of over
3,000 feet of degraded stream (trout waters) and associated
riparian area. Led the design team in existing conditions as-
sessments and development of design criteria. Analyzed sed-
iment transport and hydrology and hydraulics. Performed
quality assurance/control for various design elements.
• Pavilion Branch Stream Restoration Project, Nashville, Ten-
nessee, TSMP. Project Manager/Design Engineer. Provided
assessment and design services for the restoration of over
5,000 feet of urban stream channel. The assessment includ-
ed surveying channel morphology, sediment transport and
H&H analyses, and evaluating urban constraints. Developed
the design criteria and final design drawings and specifica-
tions. Conducted a study of the federally-endangered Nash-
ville Crayfish and incorporated habitat features into the de-
sign.
• Glen Raven Full Delivery Project, Burlington, North Caro-
lina, NCEEP. Design Engineer. Supervised design of over
3,000 feet of impaired stream and associated riparian area.
Led the design team in existing condition assessments, ref-
erence reach surveys, and development of design criteria.
Performed sediment transport and hydraulic analyses. De-
veloped construction drawings and performed quality assur-
ance/control for various design elements.
GARY M. MRYNCZA, PE, PH
Project Engineer
ZACH MYRNCZA
Site Restoration
Education
Graduate / 2012 / MCM - Construction
Management / Western Carolina
University
BA / 2007 / Psychology /
St. Andrews Presbyterian College
Registration
TDOT Asphalt Roadway
TDEC EPSC Level I
CPESC
OSHA Construction Safety and Health Course 10-Hour
Rosgen Level I
TDOT Concrete Field Technician
TDOT Soils and Aggregate Technician
9 Years Experience
Zach Mryncza is an environmental scientist that has been in-
volved in stream restoration for more than ten years. His re-
sponsibilities include stream assessment and monitoring, con-
struction oversight and management, erosion prevention and
sediment control inspection, and CADD support during plan
preparation.
• Cane Creek Tributary Restoration Site, North Carolina De-
partment of Environment & Natural Resources, Person
County, NC. Environmental Scientist KCI developed a
restoration plan of approximately 17,000 LF of headwater
tributaries that involved a combination of stream restoration
and enhancement of B and Bc channel types. The project
reaches were designed as restoration or enhancement based
on the level of departure from a stable stream system.
• Harrell Stream and Wetland Restoration, North Carolina
Department of Environment & Natural Resources, Wake
County, NC. Environmental Scientist Project involved main
stream restoration for 8,238 LF of channelized and exten-
sively disturbed agricultural land. Work included Priority 2
restoration to modify plan form, profile and cross section in-
cluding any required in-stream structures to provide stabil-
ity and habitat. Channel was meandered within 150 feet of
approximate belt width. Grading was conducted to establish
a floodplain and appropriate cross sectional area. A total of
three stream crossings were provided to allow access across
easement to the agricultural land to north of the channel. A
75-foot riparian buffer was planted. The wetland preserva-
tion included 16 acres of riverine.
• 2008-9 NCEEP Monitoring, Statewide, NC. Environmental
Scientist. Stream monitoring services for multiple sites for
the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program.
ADAM SPILLER
Environmental Scientist
Education
MEM in Ecosystem Science and
Management
BS in Biology-Environmental Science
Registration
Rosgen Level I, II, III, IV
CPESC # 6515
10 Years Experience
Mr. Spiller is experienced in performing stream and wet-
land assessments and restoration design. His educational
background in biology and environmental management aid
him in understanding the functional implications of stream
restoration. He has applied these skills in numerous con-
texts, including assessment, design, and monitoring.
• Dog Bite Full Delivery Project, Bakersville, North Caro-
lina, NCEEP. Natural Channel Designer. Prepared the
design of over 3,000 feet of degraded stream (trout wa-
ters) and associated riparian area. Processed necessary
permits and participated in the existing conditions as-
sessments and client/landowner coordination. Devel-
oped watershed hydrology model to evaluate design
discharges for the three drainages contributing to the
site.
• Collins Creek Full Delivery Project, Orange County,
North Carolina, NCEEP. Natural Channel Designer.
Prepared the design for the primary tributary and con-
tributing drainages to the UT to Collins Creek. Con-
ducted existing conditions and reference reach as-
sessments, developed design criteria, and prepared
construction drawings. Participated in the oversight of
construction activities and will be responsible for prep-
aration of annual monitoring reports.
• 2006-2011 NCEEP Mitigation Monitoring, North Car-
olina NCEEP. Project Manager/Monitoring Specialist.
Led monitoring efforts on numerous EEP stream/wet-
land restoration projects. Monitoring included vegeta-
tion assessments and stream morphology assessments.
All aspects of monitoring process were conducted from
the field survey to final report preparation.
• Johnson Site Stream Restoration Project, Hamptonville,
North Carolina, NCEEP. Natural Channel Designer.
Prepared design drawings (30% through final) for over
2,000 feet of stream restoration. This included design-
ing typical channel cross-sections, horizontal and verti-
cal alignments, and the riparian planting plan. Tasks
also included preparing project reports for permitting.
KRISTIN KNIGHT-MENG, PE
Senior Project Engineer
Education
MEM in Ecosystem Science and
Management
BA in Biology-Environmental Studies
Registration
NC PE # 040899
Rosgen Level I, II
9 Years Experience
Ms. Knight-Meng is an Environmental Engineer who spe-
cializes in stream and wetland assessment and design. Ms.
Knight-Meng has worked on all aspects of stream and wet-
land restoration, including site assessment, design, GIS
analysis, permitting, hydrologic modeling, and monitoring.
Prior to joining KCI, Ms. Knight-Meng had previous experi-
ence in watershed management and conservation planning.
• Cane Creek Tributary Site Stream Restoration, Person
County, North Carolina, NCEEP. Stream Designer/ En-
vironmental Scientist. Prepared restoration design of
approximately 17,000 linear feet of streams and head-
water tributaries. Completed restoration plan and ac-
quired necessary permits.
• Antioch Fluvial and Riparian Assessment and Concep-
tual Plan, Nashville, Tennessee, USACOE. Technical
Manager. Completed inventory of stream and riparian
problem areas along an urban stream corridor. Devel-
oped a report describing prioritized enhancement ac-
tions aimed at improving water quality and riparian
habitat.
• Six Points Stream Monitoring, Indianapolis, Indiana,
INDOT. Environmental Scientist. Performed as-built
survey on the relocated reaches at the I-70 Six Points
Interchange. Completed macroinvertebrate and fish
sampling for annual monitoring.
• Collins Creek Full Delivery Project, Orange County,
North Carolina, NCEEP. Environmental Scientist. Per-
formed site assessment work. Developed project resto-
ration plan and acquired permits for construction.
• Harrell Full Delivery Project, Edgecombe County, North
Carolina, NCEEP. Environmental Scientist. Used geo-
spatial analysis to analyze land use and hydrologic fea-
tures of the project watershed. Incorporated watershed
and gauge data to create a HEC-HMS model to analyze
hydrologic inputs and outputs in the project watershed.
ALEX FRENCH
Environmental Scientist
Education
BS in Natural Resources
Registration
Rosgen Level I, II, III, IV
15 Years Experience
Mr. French is experienced in performing existing stream con-
dition data collection and reference reach assessments us-
ing the Rosgen Classification System. His educational back-
ground in biology and natural resource management provide
an excellent understanding of the functional implications of
stream restoration. He has applied these skills in numerous
contexts including assessment, design, and monitoring.
• Bold Run Stream Restoration Project, Wake Forest,
North Carolina, NCEEP. Stream Designer. Assisted with
design of over 1,600 linear feet of impaired stream and
associated riparian area. Performed existing conditions
assessment, reference reach surveys, and development of
design criteria. Prepared construction drawings.
• Little Troublesome Stream Restoration Project, Reids-
ville, North Carolina, NCEEP. Stream Designer. Assisted
in the design of over 2,100 feet of impaired stream and
associated riparian and wetland area. Performed exist-
ing conditions assessment, reference reach surveys, and
development of design criteria. Prepared construction
drawings.
• Glen Raven Stream Restoration Project (FDP), Burling-
ton, North Carolina, NCEEP. Stream Designer. Assisted
with the design of over 3,700 feet of impaired stream
and associated riparian area. Performed existing condi-
tions assessment, reference reach surveys, and develop-
ment of design criteria. Prepared construction drawings.
• Collins Stream Restoration Project (FDP), Orange Coun-
ty, North Carolina, NCEEP. Stream Designer. Aided in
design of over 9,200 feet of impaired stream and asso-
ciated riparian area. Performed existing conditions as-
sessment, reference reach surveys, and development of
design criteria. Developed construction drawings.
• Farrar Dairy Stream and Wetland Restoration Project
(FDP), Lillington, North Carolina, NCEEP. Stream De-
signer. Assisted in the design of over 12,000 feet of im-
paired stream and associated riparian and wetland area.
Performed existing conditions assessment, reference
reach surveys, and development of design criteria. Pre-
pared construction drawings.
KEVIN O’BRIANT
Site Restoration
Education
BS in Environmental Science
Registration
Water Pollution Control System
Operator (#989400), Rosgen Level I-II
15 Years Experience
Mr. O’Briant is an environmental scientist with 15 years of
experience on projects involving the assessment and remedia-
tion of sites impacted with petroleum, chlorinated solvents,
pesticides and metals. His experience includes Phase I and II
environmental site assessments applying all state, federal, and
EPA guidelines. Mr. O’Briant’s field experience includes soil,
groundwater, and stormwater sampling and installation of
groundwater monitoring wells. He has provided oversight for
removal of underground storage tanks and soil excavations.
• McCain Site Stream Restoration Project Sophia, North
Carolina. Construction Supervisor. Managed the resto-
ration of over 2,500 linear feet of stream channel. This
project restored a cattle impacted stream, utilizing a new
stream planform, in-stream structures, livestock exclu-
sion fencing, and a planted riparian buffer of native trees
and shrubs.
• Briles Site Stream Restoration Project Trinity, North Caro-
lina. Construction Supervisor. Managed the restoration
and enhancement of over 2,600 linear feet of stream chan-
nel. The project goals included restoring stable channel
morphology, improving water quality, and enhancing
aquatic and terrestrial habitat. The project objectives
included building an appropriate C4/B4c channel with
stable dimensions, excluding livestock from the project
area, installing in-stream, and planting a riparian buffer of
native trees and shrubs.
• Windy Cove Farm Wetland Restoration Project, The Na-
ture Conservancy, Millboro Springs, Virginia. Project Sci-
entist/Equipment Operator. Assisted with the creation,
restoration, enhancement and preservation of wetlands
and buffer in the Upper James River watershed in Bath
County, Virginia. Shallow berms were installed to di-
vert surface runoff to feed other portions of the created
wetland. In addition, shallow depressions were created
to retain surface and shallow subsurface flow to support
wetland plants and promote amphibian habitat. Major
tasks included the installation of an infiltration structure
to allow the surface runoff to exit the site at a slower rate
promoting wetland habitat creation.
JOE SULLIVAN
Environmental Scientist
Education
BS in Biology and BA Environmental
Studies
MS in Natural Resources
4 Years Experience
Mr. Sullivan is an environmental scientist with four years of
experience on projects involving the planning, assessment,
permitting, and compliance of infrastructure and develop-
ment projects. He has experience with stream and wetland
delineations, 404/401 permitting, buffer authorizations,
natural resource studies, endangered species surveys, and
invasive species management. His experience includes field
assessments & delineation, species surveys, GPS data collec-
tion, GIS analysis and mapping, and report preparation. He
has used these skills in a variety of private developments as
well as municipal and NCDOT projects.
• NCDOT I-4400: Widening of I-26, Buncombe and Hen-
derson Counties, NC. Environmental specialist for wet-
land/stream delineation, threatened/endangered species
surveys, and Natural Resources Technical Report. Project
involved the assessment and delineation of approximately
24 miles road.
• NCDOT R-2561: Riegelwood Bypass, Columbus County,
NC. Environmental specialist for wetland/stream delinea-
tion, threatened/endangered species surveys, and Natural
Resources Technical Report. Project involved the assess-
ment and delineation of approximately 300 acres of for-
ested lands. Complied with safety and security guidelines
were necessary working on International Paper property.
• NCDOT R-2593: Red Springs Bypass, Robeson and Hoke
Counties, NC. Environmental specialist for wetland/
stream delineation, threatened/endangered species sur-
veys, and Jurisdictional Determinations. Project involved
the re-verification, assessment and delineation of approxi-
mately 1500 acres of forested and agricultural lands.
• NCDOT U-2525C: Greensboro Eastern Loop, Guilford
County, NC. Environmental specialist for wetland/stream
delineation, threatened/endangered species surveys, and
Jurisdictional Determinations. Project involved the re-
verification, assessment and delineation of approximately
300 acres of forested and developed lands.
• NCDOT R-2250: Greenville Southwest Bypass, Pitt
County, NC. Environmental specialist for wetland/stream
delineation, threatened/endangered species surveys, Ju-
risdictional Determinations, and Buffer Authorizations.
involved the re-verification, assessment and delineation
of approximately 850 of forest and agricultural lands.
TOMMY SEELINGER
Environmental Scientist
Education
BS in Biology
3 Years Experience
Mr. Seelinger is an environmental scientist
with three years of experience on projects in KCI’s resource
management division.
• 2008-9 NCEEP Monitoring, Statewide, NC. Environmen-
tal Scientist. KCI has provided stream monitoring services
for the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program.
For this project, the firm performed assessment and doc-
umentation for multiple streams restoration sites.
• Pond Creek Monitoring, Pegram, TN. Environmental Sci-
entist. KCI provided professional stream monitoring and
adaptive management planning services in accordance
with the TSMP Monitoring Protocol for nine project sites
in Middle and West Tennessee as part of an on-call con-
tract. The Pond Creek task order included: QVA, two
cross-sections, Wolman counts at each riffle cross-section,
the Pfankuch Channel Stability Evaluation, survey of
twelve rectangular vegetation plots, and photograph ref-
erence documentation.
• Full Delivery Monitoring. Mr. Seelinger assists in the
monitoring of 12 active full delivery projects for KCI.
Conducts stream cross section and profile surveys, pebble
counts, vegetation surveys and groundwater monitoring.
• Design-Bid-Build assessments and monitoring. Mr.
Seelinger conducts stream and wetland assessments and
monitoring for EEP design-bid-build projects throughout
NC.
MICHAEL UNDERWOOD, EIT
Environmental Scientist
Education
BS / Biological and Agricultural
Engineering
Registration
TDEC EPSC Level I, OSHA 10-Hour,
NCSU Rivercourses
2 Years Experience
Mr. Underwood is an environmental scientist with two years
of experience on projects in KCI’s resource management divi-
sion.
• TDOT Mitigation Site Remediation, Statewide, Tennessee.
EIT. These task orders involve the assessment of 30 differ-
ent TDOT mitigation sites covering all 4 TDOT Regions
that were found to have deficiencies during monitoring.
These sites include stream and wetland restoration proj-
ects. After the assessment a repair strategy is devised and
upon approval by TDOT, KCI implements the repairs.
These services have been provided to TDOT for three
consecutive years and span two stream design contracts.
• May Prairie Stream Restoration Site, Manchester, TN. EIT.
Work included assessment, stream design, planting plan
design, construction drawings, report preparation, and
construction contracting. The final design includes over
4,500 linear feet of stream restoration through one of the
state’s most floristically diverse natural areas. Construc-
tion is underway and construction oversight is ongoing.
• SR 99 Stream Restoration Project, Murfreesboro, TN. EIT.
Due to widening of SR-99 it is necessary to relocate an
adjacent stream for the project’s onsite mitigation require-
ments. KCI conducted a stream assessment and concep-
tual design for UT Spence Creek. Currently final plans
are being prepared to support resubmittal of permit docu-
ments.
• Stream Mitigation Monitoring Contract, Middle and West
TN. Monitoring Specialist. Involved with data collection
and analysis for annual monitoring at multiple stream res-
toration sites throughout Tennessee for two years that in-
cludes collection of morphologic and vegetation data, and
photo-documentation and qualitative visual assessments.
• Richland Creek Dam Removal Feasibility Study, Nash-
ville, Davidson County, TN. EIT. Assisted with field sur-
vey and data collection to study feasibility of removing a
5’ high run-of-the-river concrete dam that is impound-
ing Richland Creek. Performed sediment collection under
standard sampling protocol and summarized laboratory
results from upstream, at dam, and downstream locations.
JIM GELLENTHIN, PLS
Chief Land Surveyor
Education
Certificate in Survey Technology
Registration
Professional Land Surveyor (NC #3860)
28 Years Experience
Mr. Gellenthin has 28 years of land surveying experience,
including supervision of survey personnel, survey proce-
dures and data management from courthouse research and
field procedures to the production of final mapping. He
has vast experience in preparation of topographic, bound-
ary, GPS control, environmental and construction surveys.
• Collins Creek Full Delivery Project, Orange County,
North Carolina, NCEEP. Project Surveyor. Responsible
for development of topographic base mapping, TIN
creation, easement plats, survey control and as-built
drawings for 9,200 linear feet of stream restoration.
• Harrell Full Delivery Project, Edgecombe County,
North Carolina, NCEEP. Project Surveyor. Responsible
for development of topographic base mapping, TIN
creation, easement plats, survey control and as-built
drawings on 15 acres of wetland restoration and 6,800
linear feet of stream restoration.
• Brown Farm Full Delivery Project, Durham/Orange
Counties, North Carolina, NCEEP. Project Surveyor.
Responsible for development of topographic base map-
ping, TIN creation, easement plats, survey control and
as-built drawings on over 25 acres of wetland restora-
tion.
• Glen Raven Full Delivery Project, Burlington, North
Carolina, NCEEP. Project Surveyor. Responsible for
development of topographic base mapping, TIN cre-
ation, easement plats, survey control and as-built draw-
ings for over 3,000 linear feet of stream restoration.
• Tar-Pam Full Delivery Project, North Carolina Wetlands
Restoration Program. Project Surveyor. Responsible for
development of topographic base mapping, TIN cre-
ation, easement plats, survey control and as-built draw-
ings on 30 acres of wetland restoration.
• Rich Fork Full Delivery Project, North Carolina Depart-
ment of Transportation. Project Surveyor. Responsible
for development of topographic base mapping, TIN
creation, easement plats, survey control and as-built
drawings on 25 acres of wetland restoration and 3,386
linear feet of stream restoration.
SECTION 10. LOCATION OF CONTRACT PERFORMANCE
INCLUDE IN TECHNICAL PROPOSAL WHERE SERVICE CONTRACTS WILL BE PERFORMED
In accordance with NC General Statue 143-59.4 (Session Law 2005-169), this form is to be completed and submitted with the offeror’s (technical) proposal / bid.
(THIS INFORMATION WILL NOT COUNT TOWARD THE 100 PAGE LIMIT REQUIRED FOR TECHNICAL PROPOSAL)
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
Issuing Agency: Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Ecosystem Enhancement Program
Solicitation #: RFP 16-006310
Agency Contract Person Kathy Dale Phone Number: 919-707-8451
Solicitation Title / Type of Service: Full Delivery Projects To Provide Wetland Mitigation Within Cataloging Unit 03040203 Of
The Lumber River Basin As Described In The Scope Of Work
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
TO BE COMPLETED BY THE OFFEROR

OFFEROR:

CITY & STATE:
Location(s) from which services will be performed by the Contractor:
SERVICE CITY / PROVIDENCE / STATE COUNTRY

Location(s) from which services are anticipated to be performed OUTSIDE THE U. S. by the Contractor:
SERVICE CITY / PROVIDENCE / STATE COUNTRY

Location(s) from which services will be performed by subcontractor(s):
SERVICE SUBCONTRACTOR CITY / PROVIDENCE / STATE COUNTRY

Location(s) from which services are anticipated to be performed OUTSIDE THE U. S. by the subcontractor(s):
SERVICE SUBCONTRACTOR CITY / PROVIDENCE / STATE COUNTRY

(Attach additional pages if necessary)
RFP 16-006310 Page 30 of 32

SECTION 11. ADDITIONAL OFFEROR INFORMATION

INCLUDE IN TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

(THIS INFORMATION WILL NOT COUNT TOWARD THE 100 PAGE LIMIT FOR THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL)

Offerors Primary Contact (or Project Manager)

Offerors Execution Address (Where the contract should be mailed for signature)

Offerors Payment (Remit-To) Address (Where the checks should be mailed)
(This address should agree with the “Remit-To” address associated with the Contractor’s Tax ID. This information must
be verified with the Contractor’s Corporate Accounting Office)

Name:
Agency:
Title:
Address:

City: State/ Zip:
Telephone: Fax:
Email:
Name:
Agency:
Title:
Address:

City: State/ Zip:
Telephone: Fax:
Email:
Name:
Agency:
Title:
Address:

City: State/ Zip:
Telephone: Fax:
Email:
OFFERORS INFORMATION
RFP 16-006310 Page 31 of 32

PART V: TECHNICAL APPROACH

North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
KCI Technologies Inc./KCI Associates of North Carolina PA/KCI Environmental Technologies and Construction, Inc.
PART 5 - TECHNICAL APPROACH

5.1 PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

The Rough Horn Swamp Restoration Site (RHS) is a candidate site for wetland restoration in Columbus
County, North Carolina. As evidenced by historic aerial photos and site investigations, the site’s natural
hydrologic regime has been substantially modified to maximize agricultural uses on the property.

The site exists along a second-order tributary that originates in Long Bay, a drained Carolina Bay, located
approximately 1 mile to the southeast of the property. For the purpose of this proposal, the unnamed
tributary will be referred to as Long Bay Creek. The site is also located within the 500-year floodplain of
the Lumber River, located approximately 1,400 linear feet from the western edge of the property. The site
topography is generally flat with only five feet of elevation change across the site. Consistent with the
goals of the Lumber River River Basin Restoration Priorities Plan developed by NC EEP in 2003 and
updated in 2008, restoring the RHS will achieve the following goals:

- Create a diverse bottomland hardwood habitat
- Restore channelized streams
- Buffer nutrient and sediment impacts to the Lumber River and its tributaries from existing and
adjacent agricultural practices
- Provide habitat for a variety of aquatic species
- Expand an existing forested wildlife corridor from the Lumber River to Long Bay

The following objectives will be implemented to achieve these goals:
- Fill field ditches
- Relocate a coastal plain stream to its historic landscape position
- Redevelop wetland microtopography to slow the flow of surface and subsurface drainage
- Remove side-cast ditch spoil
- Plant the site with native trees and shrubs and a wetland seed mix
- Demarcate the project easement boundaries

5.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

RHS is located near the Town of Evergreen in the west-central portion of Columbus County. Specifically,
the site is located just southwest of the intersection of Old Boardman Road and CCC Road (Figure 1). The
wetland restoration project will occur on portions of three adjacent properties. The primary restoration
parcel is a 51 acre parcel owned by Horace and Janet Fields. Two smaller tracts of land were also optioned
for the project to effectively control water levels and to minimize the potential of hydrologic trespass issues
on adjacent properties. These properties, owned by William Stephens (31.5 acres) and George Sanderson
(45 acres), also add significant wetland restoration potential to the project. RHS has undergone significant
modifications that have altered the site hydrology and vegetation since at least 1938. Historic aerial
photographs indicate that the site was already partially ditched by this time. The ditches, combined with
contour manipulation (crowning), have severely altered the site’s historic hydrologic regime. Even with
the addition of many drainage ditches, the site is still periodically flooded during storm events. Flooding
occurs both from overbank events from Long Bay and its surrounding drainages as well as from backwater
flooding from the Lumber River and Big Swamp during extreme events. Rack lines within forested portions
of the site and adjacent sites are evident and verbal communications with the landowner are additional
testimony to the site’s flood potential. The extent of historic modifications of the drainage features in this
watershed is not fully captured on the most recent USGS 7.5 minute quadrangle. Specifically, the routing
of stream flow through the subject site has been moved south of the location shown on the USGS
quadrangle. Soils investigations and interviews with local residents have confirmed that the historic
location of the channel was consistent with that shown on the USGS quadrangle and soil survey mapping.

ÊÚ
ROBESON COUNTY
COLUMBUS COUNTY
BOARDMAN
ORRUM
LumberRiver
BigSwamp
Gum SwampCanal
FIGURE 1. VICINITY MAPROUGH HOR N SWAMP RESTORATION SITECOLUMBUS COUNTY, NC ±0 1.50.75 Miles
ÊÚ
ROBESON
COLUMBUS
BLA DEN
ÊÚ Project Site Location
County Boundary
Major Roads
Minor Roads
Major Rivers
Cities and Towns
£¤74
¬«242
¬«242
¬«242
£¤74
£¤74
¬«130
¬«1506
¬«1508
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
KCI Technologies Inc./KCI Associates of North Carolina PA/KCI Environmental Technologies and Construction, Inc.
The site’s name, Rough Horn Swamp, was derived from historic mapping that showed Rough Horn Run, a
first-order tributary to the Lumber River, draining through the subject site. Current mapping shows Rough
Horn Run flowing to the south of the site and entering the Lumber River west of Route 74. According to
the landowner, locals still refer to the streams flowing through the subj ect site as Rough Horn Run, although
the tributary mapped through the site is currently mapped as Long Bay Creek.

Watershed Description
RHS is situated within the 03040203 (Lumber 03) Watershed Cataloging Unit (8-digit HUC) and the
03040203190010 Local Watershed Unit (14-digit HUC). The NC Division of Mitigation Services (DMS)
has identified this 14-digit HUC as a Targeted Local Watershed (Figure 2). The drainage area to the
downstream end of the site is approximately 1,800 acres (2.8 square miles). The hydrologic features within
the drainage area are comprised of a second-order tributary that drains two Carolina Bays. These Bays
(Long Bay and Big Bay) have been substantially modified to facilitate drainage. The drainage systems for
both sites enter the RHS site from the east and come together to form a second-order stream that is currently
routed through man-made ditches around the southern boundary of the site. Another smaller first -order
tributary (blue line on USGS topo) enters the site along the south side of CCC Road. As mentioned
previously, the alignment of the site’s current hydrology is not properly shown on the USGS 7.5 minute
quadrangle (Figure 3).

Several Significant Natural Heritage Areas (SNHA) exists in close proximity to the RHS. These include
Net Hole/Buck Landing Swamp approximately 2,000 feet to the west, Big Swamp/Old Whiteville Road
approximately 2 miles to the northeast, Flowers Swamp approximately 2 miles to the west, and Bluff
Swamp/Princess Ann Swamp, approximately 1.5 miles to the southwest. The project site stream drains
directly to Net Hole/Buck Landing Swamp and this project would connect a forested corridor fragmented
only by one two-lane roadway from Long Bay to Net Hole/Buck Landing Swamp (Figure 4).

Historic and Current Land Use/Land Cover
Historic aerial photographs were examined for any information pertaining to historic land use and site
hydrology. The reviewed aerials are included in Appendix A. Historic aerials were obtained from the
Columbus County Soil and Water Conservation District from 1938, 1951, 1955, 1966, 1972, 1979, 1993,
and 1998. From this photographic record, it is apparent that the area surrounding the project site has been
a mix of agricultural and forested land for many years. As early as 1938, drainage ditches are evident across
the project site. The 1938 aerial shows the main drainage feature on site in the same general location of the
current ditch that bisects the Fields property. Although the area east of CCC Road appears to be forested
in the 1938 photo, a drainage feature is evident in that photo as well as in the 1955 and 1966 views. The
site remained in the same general hydrologic condition from 1938 to 1979, although the site displays several
changes in vegetation composition during that period. The 1972 photo and the 1979 photo both show
evidence of the natural drainage feature that will be restored as part of this project. This feature is shown
on the Stephens property and runs along the edge of the newly cleared field. Evidence of smaller drainage
features are also evident in both the 1972 and 1979 photos, presumably installed to assist in draining the
present day Stephens’s field. These smaller drainage channels no longer exists and were removed when a
new drainage network was excavated to drain Long Bay and downstream properties in the 1980’s (Fields,
Personal Communication)

HU03040203190010
HU03040203191010
HU03040203180010
HU03040203180020
HU03040206010040
HU03040203180030
HU03040206010060
HU03040203160010
HU03040203090030
HU03040203170010
HU03040203090050
HU03040203150010
HU03040203090040
HU03040203200010
HU03040203070010
NC OneM ap, NC Center for Geographic Information andAnalysis, NC 911 Board
Source: Eastern Piedmont Orthoimagery, 2013.
FIGURE 2. WATERSHED PLANNING CONTEXTUA L MAPROUGH HOR N SWAMP RESTORATION SITECOLUMBUS COUNTY, NC ±0 15,0007,500 Feet
Option A Easement
Option B Additonal Easement Area
Project Watershed (2.81 sq mi)
14-digit HUC Boundaries
HUC03040203190010
HUC03040203170020
HUC03040203090020
HUC03040203090050
Source: USGS DRG, Rutherfordton North Quad (1993).
FIGURE 3. USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAPROUGH HOR N SWAMP RESTORATION SITECOLUMBUS COUNTY, NC ±0 3,0001,500 Feet
Existing Streams
Option A Easement
Option B Additional Easement Area
Project Watershed (2.81 sq mi)
14-digit HUC Boundaries
Bluff Swamp/Princess Ann Swamp SNHA
Net Hole/Buck Landing Swamp SNHA
Flowers Swamp SNHA
Big Swamp/O ld Whiteville Road SNHA
Parkers Landing Sand Ridge SNHA
Lumber River Swamp/Matthews Bluff SNHA
Lumber River B ottomlands IBA
HU03040203190010
HU03040203180010
HU03040203090020
HU03040203090050
HU03040203170020
HU03040203090030
NC OneM ap, NC Center for Geographic Information andAnalysis, NC 911 Board
Sources: NCNHP NHPNA, 1/1/2015;NC Statewide Orthoimagery, 2013.
FIGURE 4. MAP OF ADJACENT AND PROXIMAL PLANNING ELEMENTSROUGH HOR N SWAMP RESTORATION SITECOLUMBUS COUNTY, NC ±0 10.5 Miles
Project Watershed (2.81 sq mi)
Option A Easement
Option B Additional Easement Area
Significant Natural Heritage Areas
Important Bird Areas
14-digit HUC Boundaries
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
KCI Technologies Inc./KCI Associates of North Carolina PA/KCI Environmental Technologies and Construction, Inc.
Current land use in the project watershed (Figure 5) includes the following:
1. Bottomland Forest/Hardwood Swamps (19.8%)
2. Broadleaf Evergreen Forest (2.6%)
3. Cultivated (28.9%)
4. Deciduous Shrubland (1.4%)
5. Managed Herbaceous Cover (1.8%)
6. Mixed Hardwoods/Conifers (4.2%)
7. Mixed Shrubland (0.7%)
8. Oak/Gum/Cypress (0.6%)
9. Southern Yellow Pine (40.0%)

Geology and Soils
The site lies within the Mid-Atlantic Floodplains and Low Terraces (Level IV 63n) ecoregion of the Coastal
Plain physiographic province. These areas are characterized by large, sluggish rivers, deep-water swamps,
oxbow lakes, and alluvial deposits with abrupt textural changes characterize. Cypress-gum swamps are
common, along with bottomland hardwoods of wetland oaks, green ash, red maple, and hickories.

According to the Columbus County Soil Survey, the soils within the project site are mapped as Torhunta
fine sandy loam, Johnston loam, Wakulla course sand and Leon sand. The restoration efforts will be
conducted within the areas mapped as Torhunta and Johnston. Torhunta series soils are very poorly drained
soils located on upland bays and stream terraces. Torhunta series soils typically have a high water table
(0.5’ to 1.5’ from the surface) from December to May but are listed as having a flood frequency of “none”
in the Columbus County Soil Survey. Given these characteristics, this soil type was determined to be an
indicator for non-riparian wetland areas for the purpose of this proposal. Johnston soils are also very poorly
drained soils that are located along major drainageways and floodplains. Similar to Torhunta series soils,
Johnston soils have a seasonally high water table, but unlike Torhunta soils they are frequently flooded.
Given these characteristics this soil type was determined to be an indicator for riparian wetland areas for
the purpose of this proposal. The mapped soils were evaluated by a licensed soil scientist and small changes
to the boundaries of these two soil series were discovered. Both the mapped soils and the field -verified
soils are described in detail in Appendix B.

Cultural Resources
There are no registered historic places within a five-mile radius of the subject property. Should historic or
archeological resource issues arise during the permit process for the RHS site, KCI will address these issues
using staff historians and archaeologists.

Airports
There are no active airports within a 5-mile radius of the RHS.

Site Constraints
The only site constraints at RHS are the potential to cause hydrologic trespass on the upstream properties
and CCC Road which bisects the Fields property. KCI currently has real estate options on adjacent
properties to ensure that hydrologic trespass can be addressed through easement or fee simple land
purchase. CCC Road will likely require a larger main culvert and several additional floodplain relief
culverts to accommodate the changes in flow pattern across the site. Planning, design, coordination and
construction of these roadway improvements has been incorporated in this proposal. KCI is also looking
into the possibility of completely removing the road since it is owned by Horace and Janet Fields.
Additional title work will be required however to verify clear title.

FEMA Floodplain Issues
RHS is not located within the 100-year floodplain of the Lumber River and therefore a flood study is not
anticipated for this project. Modeling will occur on the property to ensure restoration activities do not
impact adjacent landowners (hydrologic trespass).

Old Boardman Rd
State R o a d 151 0
C
C
C R
d
Rough Horn Rd
P a ul W illo u g h b y R d
S
i
m
m
o
n
s

D
r
State Road 1574
E t h a n L n
K i s s a m L n
State Road 1574
Haynes LennonHwy
S
t
a
t
e

R
o
a
d

1
5
0
6

U
nite
d
S
tat
e
s
H
i
g
h
w
a
y 7
4
State R o a d 1 5 1 6
State R
oad 1508
State Road 1509
SimmonsDr
Old Hwy 74
State R
oad 1513
Ed
m
u
nd
R
d
St Rd 1513
S t a t e R o a d 1 5 0 6
NC OneM ap, NC Center for Geographic Information andAnalysis, NC 911 Board
Image Source: NC Statewide Orthoimagery, 2013. NCCGIA Land Cover, 1995
FIGURE 5. PROJECT WATERSH ED LA ND USEROUGH HOR N SWAMP RESTORATION SITECOLUMBUS COUNTY, NC ±0 3,0001,500 Feet
Project Watershed (2.81 sq mi)
Option A Easement
Option B Additional Easement Area
Roads
County Boundary
Land Use
Bottomland Forest/Hardwood Swamps (19.8%)
Broadleaf Evergreen Forest (2.6%)
Cultivated (28.9%)
Deciduous Shrubland (1.4%)
Managed Herbaceous Cover (1.8%)
Mixed Hardwoods/Conifers (4.2%)
Mixed Shrubland (0.7%)
Oak/Gum/Cypress (0.6%)
Southern Yellow Pine (40.0%)
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
KCI Technologies Inc./KCI Associates of North Carolina PA/KCI Environmental Technologies and Construction, Inc.
Protected Species Issues
Initial site evaluations for protected species listed for Columbus County have not resulted in any
occurrences on the site. A more detailed evaluation of listed species will be conducted during the planning
stages of this project and potential habitat components that could make the site more appealing to these
species will be considered at that time.

Existing Conditions
As mentioned previously, the project has experienced significant hydrologic and vegetative modifications
to allow for agricultural development since the time of aerial photographic record. The existing site
conditions are seen in site photographs (Appendix C). The historic aerials indicate that the existing streams
were channelized and the site has been ditched since at least 1938. The current or previous landowners
have installed a series of drainage ditches to optimize crop production. This activity has drained substantial
acreage of riparian and non-riparian wetlands resulting in water quality degradation to receiving waters.

Long Bay Creek is a modified (ditched) stream channel that originates in Long Bay and flows in a
northwesterly direction to the RHS. From the RHS, the channel continues to flow in a westerly direction
to its confluence with the Lumber River approximately 3000 feet to the west of the project site. As
evidenced by LIDAR information and field analysis, Long Bay was ditched through higher ground,
presumably to make ditch construction more manageable in wet conditions. Spoil piles remain in the
wooded area along the Long Bay Creek ditch attesting to the historic impact. Remnant portions of the
natural Long Bay channel are evident within the wooded area to the south and west of the existing ditched
channel. An unnamed tributary that drains Big Bay also enters the site along the eastern boundary of the
project. Both Long Bay Creek and the unnamed tributary from Big Bay had historically run through the
RHS site in the general location of the existing field ditch that runs through the center axis of the Fields
Property. This is evidenced by soil survey data, on-site soils evaluations and information gathered during
landowner and local resident interviews. LIDAR imagery of the site also shows this natural drainage pattern
(low point) entering the RHS site from the northeast (Figure 6). Another smaller tributary enters the
property along the south side of CCC Road and converges with the ditched Long Bay Creek. In addition
to the stream, the site contains approximately 6,500 linear feet of drainage ditches that are draining the
property. These features are shown on Figure 7.

The properties are currently being managed for commodity crop production. Generally soy beans and corn
are planted in rotation. There are no cattle grazing on the property or on adjacent properties.

5.3 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT

The mitigation approach for RHS will aim to restore an integrated stream/wetland ecosystem that will buffer
and support the Long Bay Creek/Lumber River corridor. Restoration (reestablishment) actions will focus
on relocating surface water inputs from the unnamed tributary from Big Bay and from Long Bay Creek to
their historic flowpaths through the center of the Fields Property. KCI is offering two options to provide
flexibility in meeting the NC Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) needs for mitigation in this basin.
Option A addresses DMS’s currently advertised need of 14.0 riparian wetland mitigation credits (RWMC)
and 11.0 non-riparian mitigation credits (NRWMC). Option B maximizes the restoration potential by
providing 28.2 RWMC and 29.1 NRWMC. KCI possesses appropriate real estate options for the
promulgation of both Options presented in this proposal. Figures 8A and 8B display the locations of the
proposed mitigation wetlands for Option A and Option B.

Option A – 14 Riparian Wetland Mitigation Credits, 11 Non Riparian Wetland Mitigation Credits
Option A includes the development of a minimum of 14.0 riparian wetland mitigation credits (RWMC) and
11.0 non-riparian wetland mitigation credits (NRWMC). Actual credits that should be achieved for Option
A are 15.8 RWMC and 12.0 NRWMC, however only 14.0 RWMC’s and 11.0 NRWMC’s will be requested
as part of this proposal. To achieve this, approximately 5,500 linear feet of ditches would be filled and

Source: NC 3DEP Lidar forColumbus County, 2014
FIGURE 6. LIDAR MAPPINGROUGH HOR N SWAMP RESTORATION SITECOLUMBUS COUNTY, NC ±0 500250Feet
Option A EasementOption B Additional Easement Area1-ft ContoursHigh : 102
Low : 78
81
82 80
82
94
81 83
82
NC OneM ap, NC Center for Geographic Information andAnalysis, NC 911 Board
Source: NC StatewideOrthoimagery, 2013.
FIGURE 7. SITE FLOODPLAIN ALTERATIONS AND WATER QUALITY STRESSORSROUGH HOR N SWAMP RESTORATION SITECOLUMBUS COUNTY, NC ±0 510255Feet
Option A Easement
Option B Additional Easement Easement
Ditched Stream
Ditches
Approximate Location of Spoil Piles
Attri bute Pe rcent Impacte dIncoming Ditch Fl ow 100%Spoi l 6%
NC OneM ap, NC Center for Geographic Information andAnalysis, NC 911 Board
Source: NC StatewideOrthoimagery, 2013.
FIGURE 8 A. PROPOSED MITIGATION TYPE A ND EXTENT- OPTION AROUGH HORN SWAMP RESTORATION SITECOLUMBUS COUNTY, NC ±0 300150
Feet
Option A Easement (29.3ac)
Coastal Plain Stream Restoration
Ditches to be Filled
Ditched Streams to be Filled
Non-Riparian Restoration (11.8ac)
Riparian Restoration (15.8ac)
Upland
Ditched Stream
NC OneM ap, NC Center for Geographic Information andAnalysis, NC 911 Board
Source: NC StatewideOrthoimagery, 2013.
FIGURE 8 B. PROPOSED MITIGATION TYPE AND EXTENT- OPTION BROUGH HORN SWAMP RESTORATION SITECOLUMBUS COUNTY, NC ±0 500250
Feet
Non-Riparian Restoration (28.9ac)
Riparian Restoration (28.2ac)
Upland
Ditches to be Filled
Ditched Stream to be Filled
Ditched Stream
Coastal Plain Stream Restoration
Option B Easement (64.6ac)
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
KCI Technologies Inc./KCI Associates of North Carolina PA/KCI Environmental Technologies and Construction, Inc.
a portion of the ditched stream emanating from Long Bay would be restored its historic landscape position
through the Fields property. Additional restoration actions would include removing sidecast ditch spoils
and surface roughening the existing compacted soils. Consistent with the intent of the RFP, KCI is not
requesting any compensation for the stream restoration elements of this RFP. Although KCI feels that
restoration of the stream is not imperative to the success of the wetland components of the project, the
restoration of the stream would create a buffer between the resource and adjacent properties and would also
provide a more holistic approach to restoration by reestablishing the channel in its historic location.
Approximately 1,500 linear feet of stream would be restored using a Priority 1 Approach as an ancillary
(non-credit bearing) benefit to this Option. All restoration proposed for both options is considered to be
reestablishment.

Option B – 28.2 Riparian Wetland Mitigation Credits, 29.1 Non Riparian Wetland Mitigation Credits
Option B represents the full potential of wetland mitigation development on the property and includes
Option A plus an additional 14.2 RWMC (28.2 credits total) and 18.1 NRWMC credits (29.1 credits total)
on adjacent lands that are currently under option. The additional wetland restoration acreage includes all
the land underlain by drained hydric soils. This area is generally located below the 84.5’ contour. The
mitigation area would be restored by filling approximately 3,000 linear feet of additional ditches, relocating
sidecast spoil, and completing minor surface contouring to offset existing man -made drainage
enhancements (primarily field crowning). The coastal plain stream would continue upstream from Option
A within the stream’s historic landscape position located approximately 250 feet to the southwest of its
current ditched position within the wooded area of the proposed easement. The historic location of the
stream is evidenced in the field by shallow pools of standing water and a broad crenulation in the landscape.
The stream will be the main hydrologic source to the riparian components of the wetland system but will
be augmented by a shallow groundwater table, overland flow and seepage from the adjacent uplands.
Approximately 2,300 linear feet of priority 1 stream restoration will be provided as an ancillary benefit to
this option. This is in addition to the 1,500 linear feet stream restoration provided in Option A. Option B
would yield 28.2 units of RWMU’s and 29.1 units of NRWMU’s.

KCI is willing to contract for less than the full amount of Wetland Mitigation Units presented in Option B.
Option A is a fixed quantity option.

Options A and B will be marked and surveyed per EEP’s requirements contained within the July 7, 2012
version of the NCEEP Full Delivery Requirements for the Completion of Survey as well as requirements
contained NCDENR’s Stewardship Program “Standard Operating Procedures” document.

With both Options, the following elements of functional uplift are expected from this project:

1. Increase in flood storage
2. Increase in groundwater recharge
3. Increase in sediment trapping and filtration
4. Increase in carbon storage
5. Increase in biochemical cycling of nutrients and other pollutants
6. Increase in habitat utilization by wildlife (migrants and residents)
7. Increase in landscape patch structure
8. Increase in shade and temperature control for the aquatic resources

The restoration of the functions listed above will serve to sequester and more effectively cycle nutrients
through the restored system. A simple spreadsheet model prepared by KCI for use in watershed planning
studies was used to predict the reduction of nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus) associated with the land
use change from agriculture to wetland. This spreadsheet model predicts a 40% reduction in nitrogen and
a 46% reduction in phosphorus from the pre-construction condition. These calculations are provided in
Appendix F.

North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
KCI Technologies Inc./KCI Associates of North Carolina PA/KCI Environmental Technologies and Construction, Inc.
Wetland Vegetation

The community type best represented by this site is a Headwater Forest Community (NCWAM, v. 4.1
2010). The planting plan proposed for the site considers the species identified in this community type as
well as other similar species that have been observed in the adjacent wetland areas. It is anticipated that
there will be two distinct planting areas within the site. The first planting area will be in the lower part of
the site (riparian area) where the restored coastal plain stream pattern will flow. It is anticipated that
significant numbers of bald cypress, swamp tupelo, overcup oak and river birch will be planted in the
riparian zone due to the anticipated periods of prolonged saturation and inundation. The second area (non-
riparian zone) would be at an elevation slightly above the stream area transitioning to the adjacent uplands.
The two planting areas will have many of the same species, differing only slightly based on the tolerance
to the wetness regime. Trees and shrubs will be planted at a density of 968 stems per acre (9 feet x 5 feet
spacing) to achieve a mature survivability of two hundred ten (210) stems per acre after seven years. Woody
vegetation planting will be conducted during dormancy. Species to be planted may consist of the following
and any substitutions from the planting plan will be taken from this list:

Headwater Forest Community - Wetland and Stream Planting Area

Common Name Scientific Name Wetland Indicator
Tag alder Alnus serrulata OBL
Silky dogwood Cornus amomum FACW
Persimmon Diospyros virginiana FAC
Green ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica FACW
River birch Betula nigra FACW
Tulip poplar Liriodendron tulipifera FACU
Sweet bay Magnolia virginiana FACW
Swamp tupelo Nyssa biflora FACW
Overcup oak Quercus lyrata OBL
Swamp chestnut oak Quercus michauxii FACW
Laurel oak Quercus laurifolia FACW
Water oak Quercus nigra FAC
Willow oak Quercus phellos FAC
Bald cypress Taxodium distichum OBL
Red maple Acer rubrum FAC
American elm Ulmus americana FACW

An herbaceous seed mix composed of appropriate native species will also be developed and used to further
stabilize and restore the wetland.

5.4 PROPOSED MITIGATION

The wetlands that make up the project offer substantial opportunity for restoring a riparian wetland and
protecting a large section of riparian buffer. The following descriptions of mitigation type and extent are
based on the Stream Mitigation Guidelines, April 2003 US Army Corps of Engineers Wilmington District,
United States Environmental Protection Agency, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission and North
Carolina Division of Water Quality.

North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
KCI Technologies Inc./KCI Associates of North Carolina PA/KCI Environmental Technologies and Construction, Inc.

KCI is offering two options for the restoration of this site.

Site Name: Rough Horn Swamp – Option A
Wetland Wetland
Riparian Non-Riparian Total Total
Acres Credits Acres Credits Acres Credits
Restoration -
Reestablishment 14.0 = 14.0 11.0 = 11.0 25.0 25.0
Enhancement 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 0
Preservation 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 0
Upland 0 = 0 2.1 = 0 2.1 0
Total 14.0 = 14.0 13.1 = 11.0 27.1 25.0

Site Name: Rough Horn Swamp – Option B
Wetland Wetland
Riparian Non-Riparian Total Total
Acres Credits Acres Credits Acres Credits
Restoration -
Reestablishment 28.2 = 28.2 29.1 = 29.1 57.3 57.3
Enhancement 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 0
Preservation 0 = 0 0 = 0 0 0
Upland 0 = 0 7.3 = 0 7.3 0
Total A & B 28.2 = 28.2 35.1 = 29.1 64.6 57.3

KCI is willing to contract for less than the full amount of Wetland Mitigation Units presented in Option B.
Option A is a fixed quantity option.

North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
KCI Technologies Inc./KCI Associates of North Carolina PA/KCI Environmental Technologies and Construction, Inc.
5.5 CURRENT OWNERSHIP

The proposed restoration project is located on properties owned by:

Horace and Janet Fields
2076 Old Boardman Road
Evergreen, North Carolina 28438
PIN# 0215-84-3286

George Allen Sanderson
3001 Old Boardman Road
Evergreen, NC 28438
PIN#0215-94-9519

William Stephens
Post Office Box 100
Orrum, NC 28369
PIN# 0215-93-1613

The Offeror holds executed options to purchase easement restrictions on the land necessary to undertake
the project and these options have been recorded with the Register of Deeds in Columbus County (Appendix
D). The mitigation will be protected by a conservation easement in perpetuity. A Landowner Authorization
Form is included in Appendix E.

5.6 PROJECT PHASING

The project schedule assumes a notice to proceed on or before 11-16-2015. Adjustments to the schedule
will be required if the construction/planting window (12-2015 – 3-2016) is missed due to a delayed Notice
to Proceed.

Task Completion Period (Following NTP)
Environmental Screening/Public Meeting 2 months (1-16-2016)
Record Easement 4 months (3-16-2016)
Mitigation Plan 12 months (11-16-2016)
Permits Acquisition and Earthwork 18 months (5-16-2017)
Planting and Monitoring Device Installation 25 months (12-16-2017)
As-Built Drawings and Baseline Monitoring Report 28 months (3-16-2018)
Monitoring Report #1 37.5 months (1-1-2019)
Monitoring Report #2 49.5 months (1-1-2020)
Monitoring Report #3 61.5 months (1-1-2021)
Monitoring Report #4 73.5 months (1-1-2022)
Monitoring Report #5 85.5 months (1-1-2023)
Monitoring Report #6 97.5 months (1-1-2024)
Monitoring Report #7 109.5 months (1-1-2025)

5.7 SUCCESS CRITERIA

Monitoring will consist of the collection and analysis of data to support the evaluation of the project in
meeting established restoration objectives. Specifically, project success will be assessed utilizing vegetation
survivability, stream and wetland hydrologic monitoring, stream stability, and visual inspection following
the monitoring guidelines and success criteria described in Stream and Wetland Mitigation Monitoring
Guidelines (NC EEP, February 2014).

North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
KCI Technologies Inc./KCI Associates of North Carolina PA/KCI Environmental Technologies and Construction, Inc.
Duration - Monitoring will be conducted for a period of seven years following project implementation. The
first scheduled monitoring event will be conducted during the first full growing seas on following project
completion and at least six months after the completion of the as-built survey.

Reporting - The monitoring report format will follow the EEP monitoring report template described in the
Annual Monitoring and Closeout Reporting Format, Data Requirements, and Content Guidance (NC EEP,
February 2014).

Photograph Reference Points - Photograph reference points (PRPs) will be established to assist in
characterizing the site and to allow qualitative evaluation of the site conditions. The location of each photo
point will be marked in the monitoring plan and the bearing/orientation of the photograph will be
documented.

Wetland Vegetation Monitoring
The survivability of the vegetation plantings will be evaluated using a sufficient number of vegetative
sampling plots randomly placed throughout the restored wetland. Plots must achieve a stem density of 260
stems/acre after five years and 210 stems/acre after seven years if monitoring continues until this point. A
photograph will be taken of each monitoring plot, allowing yearly qualitative comparison of vegetation
conditions.

Wetland Hydrology Monitoring
Wetland hydrology monitoring will be conducted to determine if the restored wetland areas meet the
proposed performance criteria for wetland hydrology. Verification of wetland hydrology will be determined
by automatic recording well data collected within the project area. Daily data will be collected from
automatic wells over the monitoring period following implementation. These data will determine if the
wetland meets the hydrology success criterion of the water table being within 12 inches of the ground
surface continuously for greater than 10.0% of the growing season in the riparian area and 7.5% of the
growing season in non-riparian areas.

*A scoring sheet taken from the RFP has been filled out based on KCI’s understanding of the site and
included in Appendix G.

North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
KCI Technologies Inc./KCI Associates of North Carolina PA/KCI Environmental Technologies and Construction, Inc.
REFERENCES

Fields, Horace, Personal Communication, March 2015

NCDENR, Ecosystem Enhancement Program. 2003. Lumber River River Basin Restoration Priorities
Plan. Last accessed at http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/eep/rbrps/lumber

NCDENR, Ecosystem Enhancement Program. 2008. Lumber River River Basin Restoration Priorities
Plan. Last accessed at http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/eep/rbrps/lumber

NCDENR, Ecosystem Enhancement Program. Feb. 2014. Annual Monitoring and Closeout Reporting
Format, Data Requirements, and Content Guidance. Last accessed at:
http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=7af33f02-0b5d-4e8c-b4e5-
8517b3b41815&groupId=60329

NCDENR, Ecosystem Enhancement Program. Feb. 2014. Stream and Wetland Mitigation Monitoring
Guidelines. Last accessed at: http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=908180a2-
dd26-4caf-9502-ff94fe325256&groupId=60329

PART VI: QUALITY CONTROL

APPENDIX A: HISTORICAL AERIAL PHOTOS

1955
1938 1951
1966
Source: Columbus County NRCS
APPENDIX A-1. HISTORICAL AERIALSROUGH HORN RESTORATION SITECOLUMBUS COUNTY, NC ±0 1,000500
Feet
Option A Easement
Option B Easement
NC OneMap1993
1972 1979
2000
Source:Columbus County NRCS, USGS Orthoimagery, and NC OneMap
APPENDIX A-2. HISTORICAL AERIALSROUGH HORN RESTORATION SITECOLUMBUS COUNTY, NC ±0 1,000500
Feet
Option A Easement
Option B E asement
APPENDIX B: SITE PHOTOGRAPHS

Rough Horn Swamp Mitigation Site
Drainage ditch bisecting the two eastern fields on Fields Property.
Northern boundary of Option A drainage ditch.

View looking east across Option A area.

View looking south across western portion of Option A and Option B.

Looking from CCC Road culvert northeast along relocated stream channel.

Looking from CCC Road southwest along relocated stream channel.
View of remnant channel within wooded View of Long Bay Creek within Option B.
Area of Option B.
Second view of remnant channel in Option Ditched stream on eastern parcel (Option B).
B.
APPENDIX C: SOIL DATA

To
Js
To
St
Fo
WkB
LnB
Ec
Js
Ec
WkB
St
St
Ud
Ec
Mu Fo
Mu
Ec
NC OneM ap, NC Center for Geographic Information andAnalysis, NC 911 Board
Option B Easement
Option A Easement
0 770385
Feet Source: NRCS SSURGO Data,Columbus CountyGoogle Earth ImageryOctober 2014.
APPENDIX B-1. NRCS SOIL SURVEY TWISTED TREE STREA M ANDWETLAND RESTORATION SITEBRUNSWICK COUNTY, NC ±0 500250Feet
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
21
54
3
6
7
8
9
18
17
121314
16
15
1110
NC OneM ap, NC Center for Geographic Information andAnalysis, NC 911 Board
Soils
Foreston
Johnston
Leon
Osier
Torhunta
Woodington
!(Soil Boring Locations
Option A Easement
Option B Easement
0 840420
Feet Source: NC StatewideOrthoimagery, 2013.
APPENDIX B-2. DETAILED SOILS MAPROUGH HORN SWAMP RESTORATION SITECOLUMBUS COUNTY, NC ±0 500250Feet
wwmmmmrdw�
Mwwmr4w�
MMMMIO�
MMM=Mfip�
MMMMMMMM,80�KCI
ASSOCIATES OF SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
NOM CAROLINA, PA
Client: KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A. Date: February 9, 2011
Project: Rough Horn Swamp Wetland Restoration Site Project #: 20101137P
County: Columbus State: NC
Location: 2076 Old Boardman Road, Evergreen, NC 28438 Site/Lot: SB 9 1
Soil Series: Johnston Variant
Soil Classification: Coarse -loamy, siliceous, active, acid, thermic Cumulic Humaquepts
AWT: 191, SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 0-1% Aspect:
Elevation: Drainage: Very Poorly Drained Permeability, Moderately rapid
Vegetation: Soybeans
Borings terminated at 60 Inches
COMMENTS:
DESCRIBED BY:
DAIT: 2/9/2011

WMWWWWENW-`
mmmmmv4h�
KCI
ASSOCIATES OF
NOM CAROLINA, PA
Client:
Project:
County:
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A. Date: February 9, 2011
Rough Horn Swamp Wetland Restoration Site Project #: 20101137P
Columbus State: NC
Location: 2076 Old Boardman Road, Evergreen, NC 28438
Soil Series: Johnston
Soil Classification
AWT: N/A
Elevation:
Vegetation: Soybean;
Borings terminated at
Site/Lot: SB # 2
Coarse -loamy, siliceous, active, acid, thermic Cumulic Humaquepts
SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 0-1% Aspect:
Drainage: Very Poorly Drained Permeability: Moderately rapid
60 Inches
COMMENTS:
Surface ponding from melted snow yesterday fills bore hole while augering.
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: 2/9/2011

MMMMMMEW4111�
mmmmmr4h�
mmmmw-dk�
KCI
ASSOCIATES OF
NOKM CAROQNA, PA
Client:
Project:
County:
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A. Date: February 9, 2011
Rough Horn Swamp Wetland Restoration Site Project #: 20101137P
Columbus State: NC
Location: 2076 Old Boardman Road, Evergreen, NC 28438
Soil Series: Johnston
Soil Classification
AWT: 18"
Elevation:
Site/Lot: SB # 3
Coarse -loamy, siliceous, active, acid, thermic Cumulic Humaquepts
SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 0-1% Aspect:
Drainage: Very Poorly Drained Permeability, Moderately rapid
Vegetation: Soybeans
Borings terminated at 60 Inches
COMMENTS:
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: 2/9/2011
stratified sand
COMMENTS:
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: 2/9/2011

KCI
ASSOCIATES UP
NORTH CAROLINA, PA
Client:
Project:
County:
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
KCl Associates of North Carolina, P.A. Date: February 9, 2011
Rough Hom Swamp Wetland Restoration Site Project #: 20101137P
Columbus State: NC
Location: 2076 Old Boardman Road, Evergreen, NC 28438
Soil Series: Torhunta
Site/Lot: SB # 4
Soil Classification: Coarse -loamy, siliceous, active, acid, thermic Typic Humaquepts
AWT: N/A SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 0-2% Aspect:
Elevation: Drainage: Very Poorly Drained, slow runoff Permeability: Moderately rapid
Vegetation: Soybeans
Borings terminated at 60 inches
COMMENTS:
Surface ponding from melted snow yesterday fills bore hole while augering.
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: E: 219/201 l
coarse sand
COMMENTS:
Surface ponding from melted snow yesterday fills bore hole while augering.
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: E: 219/201 l

===w==Vvww
mmmmmmr`�
MMMWi�
KCI
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH CAWLINA, PA
Client:
Project:
County:
Location:
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A.
Rough Horn Swamp Wetland Restoration Site
Columbus
2076 Old Boardman Road, Evergreen, NC 28438
Soil Series: Torhunta
Soil Classification:
AWT: 20"
Elevation:
Date: February 9. 2011
Project #: 20101137P
State: NC
Site/Lot: S13 # 5
Coarse -loamy, siliceous, active, acid, thermic Typic i lumaquepts
SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 0-2% Aspect:
Drainage: Very Poorly Drained, slow runoff Permeability: Moderately rapid
Vegetation: Soybeans
Borings terminated at 60 Inches
HORIZON
DEPTH (IN)
MATRIX
MOTTLES TEXTURE
STRUCTURE
CONSISTENCE
BOUNDARY NOTES
Ap
0-6
10YR 211
Mucky loam
1 fgr
mfr
as
Al
6-10
10YR3/1
is
ifgr
mfr
gw
A2
10-18
10YR 312
is
I fgr
mfr
gw
Bg
18-30
l OYR 3/2
IOYR 4/2fl f A
I fsbk
mfr
gw
I OYR 4/3fl f
Cgl
30-54
IOYR 4/2
Is
sg
mfr
dw
co 2
54-62
1 OYR 511
sl
massive
COMMENTS:
Water level in UT to Lumber River 30" from top of bank.
DESCRIBED BY: SFS
F.
DATE: 2/9/2011

KC I
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH CAROLINA, PA
Client:
Project:
County:
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
KCl Associates of North Carolina, P.A. Date: February 9, 2011
Rough Horn Swamp Wetland Restoration Site Project #: 20101137P
Columbus State: NC
Location: 2076 Old Boardman Road, Evergreen, NC 28438 Site/Lot: SB # 6
Soil Series: Johnston
Soil Classification
AWT: 18"
Elevation:
Coarse -loamy, siliceous, active, acid, thermic Curnulic Humaquepts
SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 0-1% Aspect:
Drainage: Very Poorly Drained Permeability: Moderately rapid
Vegetation: Soybeans
Borings terminated at 60 Inches
HORIZON
DEPTH (IN)
MATRIX
MOTTLES TEXTURE
STRUCTURE
CONSISTENCE
BOUNDARY NOTES
Ap
0-12
IOYR 211
Mucky loam
massive
mfr
as
A
12-30
10YR 311
Is
1 fgr-massive
mfr
as
C I
30-42
10YR 411
sl
massive
mfr
as
C 2
42-54
10YR 3l2
10YR 3/3c2d S
massive
mfr
gw I OYR 3/3 color of naturally buried woo
IQYR 413 fl f
mfr
C 3
54-60
10YR 612
s
massive
COMMENTS:
Water level in ditch 22" from top of bank.
Gravel layer (0.5"-1" gravel) between 50 to 56 inches.
DESCRIBED BY: SFS
SOI,
rmmft%
A F S1
1° 878`;
�
�c
D 1"t1i: 219/2011

�4w�
KCI
ASSOCIATES OF
NOM CAROUNA, PA
Client: KCI Associates of forth Carolina. P.A.
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Project:
Rough Horn Swamp Wetland Restoration Site
County:
Columbus
Location:
2076 Old Boardman Road, Evergreen, NC 28438
Soil Series:
Johnston
Date: February 9, 2011
Project #: 20101137P
State: IAC
Site/Lot: SB # 7
Soil Classification: Coarse -loamy, siliceous, active, acid, thermic Cumulic Humaquepts
AWT: 18" SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 04% Aspect:
Elevation: Drainage: Very poorly Drained Permeability: Moderately rapid
Vegetation: Soybeans
Borings terminated at 60 Inches
HORIZON
DEPTH (IN)
MATRIX
MOTTLES TEXTURE
STRUCTURE
CONSISTENCE
BOUNDARY NOTES
Ap
0-8
10YR 211
Muck loam
1 f r -massive
mfr
as High Organic Content
A[
8-20
1 OYR 211
Mucky loam
massive
mfr
as High Organic Content
A2
20-39
10YR 311
sl
massive
mfr
as
C 1
39-48
10YR4/2
s
Sg
wso
as
Cg2
48-60
10YR 5/2
s
massive
wso
COMMENTS:
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: 2/9/2011

�_
KCI
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH CAROLINA, PA
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Client: KCI Associates of North Carolina, P,A.
Project: Rough Nom Swamp Wctland Restoration Site
County: Columbus
Location: 2076 Old Boardman Road, Evergreen, NC 28438
Soil Series: Johnston
Date: February 9, 2011
Project #: 20101137P
State: NC
Site/Lot: SB # 8
Soil Classification: Coarse -loamy, siliceous, active, acid, thermic Cumulic Humaquepts
AWT: 18" SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 0-1% Aspect:
Elevation: Drainage: Very Poorly Drained Permeability, Moderately rapid
Vegetation: Soybeans
Borings terminated at 60 Inches
COMMENTS:
DESCRIBED BY: SFS
►� ham: _ ~"
Sk
1:
DATE: 2/912011
High Organic Content
High Organic Content
COMMENTS:
DESCRIBED BY: SFS
►� ham: _ ~"
Sk
1:
DATE: 2/912011

mmmmmmmmmr4h�
mmmmmww�
ASSOCIATES OF
NORM CAROUNA, PA
Client:
Project:
County:
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
KCI Associates or North Carolina, P.A. Date: February 9, 2011
Rough Hum Swamp Wetland Restoration Site Project #: 20101137P
Columbus State: NC
Location: 2076 Old Boardman Road, Evergreen, NC 28438 Site/Lot: SB # 9
Soil Series: Leon
Soil Classification: Sandy, siliceous, thermic Aeric Haplaquods
AWT: 48" SHWT: 0-12 Slope: 0-5% Aspect:
Elevation: Drainage: Poorly Drained Permeability; Moderate to moderately slowly
Vegetation: Soybeans
Borings terminated at 60 Inches
COMMENTS:
Water level in UT to Lumber River 48" from top of bank.
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: 2/912011

MMMMMMWi
MMMMMMr4h�
MMMW_&�
WMMMM&�
MMMMMM&�
MMMMMMO�
KCI
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH CAROLINA, 1A
Client: KCI Associates of North Carolina. P.A.
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Project: Rough Horn Swamp Wetland Restoration Site
County: Columbus
Location: 2076 Old Boardman Road, Evergreen, NC 284.38
Soil Series: Torhunta Variant
Date: February 9, 2011
Project #: 20101137P
State: NC
Site/Lot: SB # 10
Soil Classification: Coarse -loamy, siliceous, active, acid, thermic Typic Humaquepts _
AWT: 20" SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 0-2% Aspect:
Elevation: Drainage:. Very Poorly Drained; slow runoff Permeability: Moderately rapid
Vegetation: Soybeans
Borings terminated at 54 Inches
COMMENTS:
Didn't achieve 60" due to bore hole cave-in but reached the C horizon.
sok
DESCRIBED BY: SFS %/// , � Q � \\\\ DATE: 2/9/2011

-N --- mmdb�
KCI
ASSOCIA'T'ES OF
NORTH CAROUNA, PA
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Client:
KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A.
Project:
Rough Horn Swamp Wetland Restoration Site
County:
Columbus
Location:
2076 Old Boardman Road, Evergreen, NC 28438
Soil Series:
Johnston Variant
Date: February 9, 2011
Project #: 20101137P
State: NC
SitelLot: SB # 11
Soil Classification: Coarse -loamy, siliceous, active, acid thermic Cumulic Humaquepts
AWT: 20" SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 0-1% Aspect:
Elevation: Drainage: Very Poorly Drained Permeability: Moderately rapid
Vegetation: Soybeans
Borings terminated at 40 Inches
COMMENTS:
Didn't achieve 60" due to bore hole cave-in but reached the C horizon.
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: 2!9/2011
breaking to I fgr
COMMENTS:
Didn't achieve 60" due to bore hole cave-in but reached the C horizon.
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: 2!9/2011

_._
ASSOCIATES� OF SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
NORTH CAROHNf, PA
Client: KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A. Date: April 8, 2015
Project: Rough Hom Swamp Wetland Restoration Site Project #: 20153280P
County: Columbus State: NC
Location: 2076 Old Boardman Road Evergreen, NC 28438 Site/Lot: Boring#12
Soil Series: Torhunta
Soil Classification: Coarse -loamy, siliceous, active, acid, thermic Typic Humaquepts
AWT: 20" SHWT: 0-12•' Slope: 0-2% Aspect:
Elevation: Drainage: Very Poorly Drained; slow runoff Permeability: Moderately Rapid
Vegetation: Corn
Borings terminated at 60 Inches
COMMENTS:
Torhunta is a drained hydric soil
The Torhunta series is a very poorly drained soil found on nearly level stream terraces and upland bay areas of Coastal Plain.
This Torhunta soil has very slow runoff and moderately rapid permeability.
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: 4/8/2015
diffuse boundary, sandy loarn (SI) lenses
COMMENTS:
Torhunta is a drained hydric soil
The Torhunta series is a very poorly drained soil found on nearly level stream terraces and upland bay areas of Coastal Plain.
This Torhunta soil has very slow runoff and moderately rapid permeability.
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: 4/8/2015

KCI
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH G MA, PA
Client:
Project:
County:
Location:
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A. Date: April 8, 2015
Rough Horn Swamp Wetland Restoration Site Project N: 20153280P
Columbus State: NC
2076 Old Boardman Road Everereen. NC 28438
Site/Lot:
Soil Series: Johnston
Soil Classification: Coarse -loamy, siliceous, active, acid, thermic Cumulic Humaquepts
AWT: 24" SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 0-2% Aspect:
Elevation: Drainage: Very Poorly Drained; slow runoff Permeability: Moderately rapid
Vegetation: Com
Borings terminated at 60 Inches
COMMENTS:
Johnston is a drained hydric soil
The Johnston series is a very poorly drained soil found on nearly level floodplain and swamps of the Coastal Plain.
This Johnston soil has very slow nmoff and moderately rapid permeability.
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: 4/8/2015
®�
massive breaking to lmsbk
massive breaking to lf&msbk
COMMENTS:
Johnston is a drained hydric soil
The Johnston series is a very poorly drained soil found on nearly level floodplain and swamps of the Coastal Plain.
This Johnston soil has very slow nmoff and moderately rapid permeability.
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: 4/8/2015

_411..
K T
ASSOCIATES F SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
NORTH QkROtaNA, PA
Client: KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A.
Date: April 8, 2015
Project: Rough Horn Swamp Wetland Restoration Site
Project #: 20153280P
County: Columbus
State: NC
Location: 2076 Old Boardman Road Evergreen, NC 28438
Site/Lot: Boring # 14
Soil Series: Johnson
Soil Classification: Coarse -loamy, siliceous, active, acid, thermic Cumulic Humaguepts
AWT: 36" SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 0-2% Aspect:
Elevation: Drainage: Very Poorly Drained; slow runoff Permeability: Moderately Rapid
Vegetation: Com
Borings terminated at 56 Inches
ConmIENrS:
Johnston is a drained hydric soil
The Johnston series is a very poorly drained soil found on nearly level floodplains and swamps of the Coastal Plain.
This Johnston soil has very slow runoff and moderately rapid permeability.
Boring is 75' from ditch. Water table in ditch is 52" below top of bank.
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: 4/8/2015
Massive breaking to Ifbk
ConmIENrS:
Johnston is a drained hydric soil
The Johnston series is a very poorly drained soil found on nearly level floodplains and swamps of the Coastal Plain.
This Johnston soil has very slow runoff and moderately rapid permeability.
Boring is 75' from ditch. Water table in ditch is 52" below top of bank.
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: 4/8/2015

KCI
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH CARO A, PA
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Client: KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A.
Project: Rough Horn Swamp Wetland Restoration Site
County: Columbus
Date: April 8, 201
Project #: 20153280P
State: NC
Location:
2076 Old Boardman Road Evergreen, NC 28438
Site/Lot: Boring # 15
Soil Series:
Torhunta
STRUCTURE
CONSISTENCE
Soil Classification:
Coarse -loamy, siliceous, active, acid. thermic Typic Humaquepts
Ap
AWT:
42'
SHWT: 0-12' Slope: 0.2%
Aspect:
Elevation:
mfr
Drainage: Very Poorly Drained; slow runoff
Permeability: Moderately Rapid
Vegetation: Corn
Borings terminated at 60 Inches
HORIZON
DEFr11(IN)
MATRIX
MOTTLES
TEXTURE
STRUCTURE
CONSISTENCE
BOUNDARY
NOTES
Ap
0-12
IOYR 2/1
Is
I fgr
mfr
aw
B 1
12-15
IOYR 4/1
7.5YR 3/3c2d
sl
Ifsbk
mfr
aw
Mn masses
B 2
15-22
10YR 4/2
7.5YR 3/3c2d
sl
Imsbk
mfr
gw
8 3
22-30
10YR 4/2
sl
Imsbk
mfr
gw
Fc & Mn accumulations at 20"
BC
30-35
10YR 5/4
Is
Ifsbk
mfr
gw
BCg
35-51
10YR 5/2
IOYR 5/6c2d
sl
lmsbk
mfr
gw
C 1
51-55
IOYR 5/2
Is
massive
mfr
gw
C 2
55-60
IOYR 4/2
Is
massive
mfr
COMMENTS:
Torhunta is a drained hydric soil
The Torhunta series is a very poorly drained soil found on nearly level stream terraces and upland bay areas of Coastal Plain.
This Torhunta soil has very slow runoff and moderately rapid permeability.
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: 4/8/2015

KT
ASSOCIATES o SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
NORTH CAROL➢VA, PA
Client: KCI Associates of North Carolina. P.A. Date: Aoril 8.2015
Project: Rough Hom Swamp Wetland Restoration Site Project #: 20153290P
County: Columbus State: NC
Location: 2076 Old Boardman Road Evergreen, NC 28438 Site/Lot: Boring # 16
Soil Series: Torbunta
Soil Classification: Coarse -loamy, siliceous, active, acid, thermic Typic Humaquepts
AWT: 24" SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 0-2% Aspect:
Elevation: Drainage: Very Poorly Drained; slow runoff Permeability: Moderately Rapid
Vegetation: Com
Borings terminated at 52 Inches
COMMENTS:
Torhunta is a drained hydric soil
The Torhunta series is a very poorly drained soil found on nearly level stream terraces and upland bay areas of Coastal Plain.
This Torhunta soil has very slow runoff and moderately rapid permeability.
Boring is 36' from ditch. Water table in ditch is 29" below top of bank.
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: 4/8/2015

KC I
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH CAROLINA, RA
Client:
Project:
County:
Location:
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A. Date: April 8, 2015
Rough Horn Swamp Welland Restoration Site Project #: 20153280P
Columbus State: NC
2076 Old Boardman Road Everereen. NC 28438
Site/Lot•. Bonne # 17
Soil Series: Torhunta Variant
Soil Classification: Coarse -loam, siliceous, active, acid, thermic Typic Humaquepts
AWT: 20" SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 0-2% Aspect:
Elevation: Drainage: Very Poorly Drained; slow runoff Permeability: Moderately Rapid
Vegetation: Soybeans
Borings terminated at 56 Inches
COMMENTS:
Torhunta is a drained hydric soil
The Torhunta series is a very poorly drained soil found on nearly level stream terraces and upland bay areas of Coastal Plain.
This Torhunta soil has very slow runoff and moderately rapid permeability.
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: 4/8/2015

KC I
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH MCtNA, PA
Client: KCI Associates of North
Project: Rough Hom Swamp We
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
lina, P.A. Date: April 8, 2015
Restoration Site Project #: 20153280P
County:
Columbus .
State: NC
Location:
2076 Old Boardman Road Evergreen, NC 28438
Site/Lot: Boring # 18
Soil Series:
Torhunta
Soil Classification:
Coarse -loamy. siliceous, active, acid, thermic Typic Humaguepts
AWT:
22"
SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 0-2%
Aspect:
Elevation:
Drainage: Very Poorly Drained; slow runoff
Permeability: Moderately Rapid
Vegetation: Soybeans
Borings terminated at 54 Inches
COMMENTS:
Torhunta is a drained hydric soil
The Torhunta series is a very poorly drained soil found on nearly level stream terraces and upland bay areas of Coastal Plain.
This Torhunta soil has very slow runoff and moderately rapid permeability.
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: 4/8/2015

APPENDIX D: EXECUTED OPTION TO PURCHASE EASEMENT RESTRICTIONS

111111111111111111111111111
2015001303
COLUMBUS CO, NC FEE $26.00
PRESENTED &RECORDED:
03-26-2015 03:24:19 PM
KANDANCE H. BULLOCK
REGISTER OF DEEDS
BY REGINA MARCELLINO
DEPUTY
BK: RB 1105
PG: 691-691
Memorandum of Contract to Purchase Real Estate
Prepared by return to: Joseph P. Pfeiffer, Jr., KCI Environmental Technologies and Construction Inc., 4601 Six Forks
Road, Suite 220, Landmark Center II, Raleigh, NC 27609
Horace G. Fields, Jr. and wife Janet Gail Fields whose address is 2076 Old Boardman Road, Evergreen NC
28438, and KCI Environmental Technologies and Construction, Inc. a Delaware corporation ("Purchaser"), whose
address is 4601 Six Forks Road, Suite 220, Landmark Center II, Raleigh, NC 27609, have entered into a contract to sale
and purchase Easement Restrictions on the following property located in Columbus County, North Carolina: Parcel
Identification Number 0215-84-3286 Deed Book 354, Page 85.
The provisions set forth in a written contract to convey real estate between the parties dated the -1EL day of PRZ IV ,
2015 are hereby incorporated in this memorandum.
Witness our hands and seals this day of FSA N y' , 2015.
CC-
-70
Horace
Janet Gail Fieldi
€STH CAROLLTSA cea ,ervif'ss1- v, a�
.*�e f egoin3 �,....
'��•`�,Ve) �'n Y81'iYti
�-- blit Cj `L" � �
or atap wnd tY;
Notary) i nature, a Instrument
tG have a gdate TI'A ; gy red awn on th`
expiration 1'y re
oertifiaat� are ` n ,
and tipO
STATE OF North Carolina of Dem
COUNTY OF Columbus Iieglr Deeds.��9 �,
I, the undersigned, a Notary Public of the County and State aforesaid, do hereby certify that Horace G. Fields and ��
Janet Gail Fields personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged the due execution of the foregoing
ins ent. Witness my hand and official seal this the—day of fi=2Fj , 2015.
printed name �Wotary Public
My commission expires: 2-A i r • „i;+
�ifJ �� •fir {1a `t% ,i��

111111111111111111111111111
2015001302
COLUMBUS CO, NC FEE $26.00
PRESENTED & RECORDED:
03-26-2015 03:24:18 PM
KANDANCE H. BULLOCK
REGISTER OF DEEDS
BY: REGINA MARCELLINO
DEPUTY
BK: RB 1105
PG: 690-690
Memorandum of Contract to Purchase Real Estate
Prepared by/return to: Joseph P. Pfeiffer, Jr., KCI Environmental Technologies and Construction Inc., 4601 Six Forks
Road, Suite 220, Landmark Center II, Raleigh, NC 27609
Xffr.- George Allen Sanderson (collectively and severally, "Seller") whose address is 3001 Old Boardman Road,
Evergreen NC 28438, and KCI Environmental Technologies and Construction, Inc. a Delaware corporation
("Purchaser"), whose address is 4601 Six Forks Road, Suite 220, Landmark Center II, Raleigh, NC 27609, have entered
into an Offer to Purchase Easement Restrictions dated March 16, 2015 (the "Contract"), Pursuant to which Seller has
contracted to sell to Purchaser, upon the terms set forth in the Contract, certain easement rights on a portion of that real
property owned by Seller, located in Columbus County, North Carolina: Parcel Identification Number 0215-94-9519
Deed Book 373, Page 560. The provisions set forth in the Contract are hereby incorporated into this Memorandum.
OLIVA°:..(. Of
y yj,-,RTR CAR o annexed
Witness our hands and seals this 16th da of March, 2015. , fo go
e) verify
blic (ham) "d an
Q &LAI 0 � (jaiv /7 �g� or atamil, thio
atas'LY ature, ynsnt
r. eor a len Sanderson is hwve a �daw This n ta� at the Dam
g expiration are duly re$ ' on
oert�l�fi�e a� � the oou� a� P�
STATE OF North Carolina t
COUNTY OF Columbus ;er�
`MI, the undersigned, a Notary Public of the County and State afo aiddo certify that George Allen `�
Sanderson personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged the due execution of the foregoing instrument.
Witness my hand and official seal this the V�Sday of _Mk&015.
printed nam • otary Public
M
My commission expires: `� ? a • f `* +� '"'

mimo�imim
2015001301
COLUMBUS CO, NC FEE $26.00
PRESENTED 6 RECORDED
03-26-2015 03:24:17 PM
KANDANCE H. BULLOCK
REGISTER OF DEEDS
BY: REGINA MARCELLINO
DEPUTY
BK: RB 1105
PG: 689-689
Memorandum of Contract to Purchase Real Estate
Prepared by`retum to: Joseph P. Pfeiffer, Jr., KCI Environmental Technologies and Construction Inc., 4601 Six Forks
Road, Suite 220, Landmark Center II, Raleigh, NC 27609
AM William Stephens (collectively and severally, "Seller") whose address is Post Office Box 100, On um NC 28369,
and KCI Environmental Technologies and Construction, Inc. a Delaware corporation ("Purchaser"), whose address is
4601 Six Forks Road, Suite 220, Landmark Center II, Raleigh, NC 27609, have entered into an Offer to Purchase
Easement Restrictions dated March 16, 2015 (the "Contract"), Pursuant to which Seller has contracted to sell to
Purchaser, upon the terms set forth in the Contract, certain easement rights on a portion of that real property owned by
Seller, located in Columbus County, North Carolina: Parcel Identification Number 0215-93-1613 Deed Book436, Page
625.. The provisions set forth in the Contract are hereby incorporated into this Memorandum.
�
Witness our hands and seals this 16 day of March, 2015. 1 o . , 00 (8) °�
L
O.,Z�l1 wg
001 Of
/,� AX
Z30�t fo°i
°r 0
r. William Stephe e A ry wt �V,e 00 tlyp
STATE OF North Carolina
COUNTY OF Columbus
�.
to ;00x -
)3A.4 at'�°Q arfj t
�es'ptlq�o g i9
I, the undersigned, a Notary Public of the County and State a
personally appeared before me this da and acknowledged th
my h and official seal this the day of kkKK 2015.
printed name: , Notary Public
My commission expires:
Mliam Stephens
instrument. Witness

APPENDIX E: LANDOWNER AUTHORIZATION FORMS
�.
LANDOWNER AUTHORIZATION O
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRITION:
Deed Book: _354 Page:
Parcel ID Number: 4081-49-0166
County: i
Street Address: _2076 Old Boardman Road, Evergreen NC 28438
Property Owner (please print): _Horace and Janet
The undersigned, registered property owner(s) of the above property, do hereby authorize
KCI Technologies, Inc., the NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources, and the US
Army Corps of Engineers, their employees, agents or assigns to have reasonable access to the above
referenced property for the evaluation of the property as a potential stream, wetland and/or
riparian buffer mitigation project, including conducting stream and/or wetland determinations and
delineations, as well as issuance and acceptance of any required permit(s) or certiliication(s).
Property Owners(s) Address: _same as
(if different from above)
Property Owner Telephone Number: _910-738-8621 (home)
Property Owner Telephone Number:
I/We hereby certify the above information to be true and accurate to the best of my/our knowledge.
e)
(Date)

NORTH CAROLINA ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM
LANDOWNER AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRITION:
Deed Book: 373 page: 560 County:
Parcel ID Number: 0215-94-9519
Old Boardman Road, Evergreen NC
Street Address:
Property Owner (please print:
Property Owner (please print):
George Sanderson
Columbus
The undersigned, registered property owner(s) of the above property, do hereby authorize
Tim Morris of KCI Technologies, Inc.
(Contractor/Agent/Project Manager)' (Name of Contractor/Agent Firm/Agency)'
to take all actions necessary for the evaluation of the property as a potential stream, wetland and/or
riparian buffer mitigation project, including conducting stream and/or wetland determinations and
delineations, as well as issuance and acceptance of any required permit(s) or certification(s). I
agree to allow regulatory agencies, including the US Army Corps of Engineers, to visit the property
as part of these environmental reviews.
Property Owners(s) Address:
(if different from above)
3001 Old Boardman Road
Evergreen NC, 28438
910-739-6844
Property Owner Telephone Number:
Property Owner Telephone Number:
We hereby certify the above information to be true and accurate to the best of our knowledge.
QtC2rnd V ., r / S
Authorized Signature) (Date)
(Property Owner Authorized Signature) (Date)
'Name of full delivery staff member (full -deliveries) or EEP project manager (design -bid -build).
'Name of company (full -deliveries) or Ecosystem Enhancement Program (design -bid -build).

NORTH CAROLINA ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM
LANDOWNER AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRITION:
Deed Book: 436 Page: 625
Parcel ID Number: 0215-93-1613
CCC Road, Evergreen NC
Street Address:
Property Owner (please print:
Property Owner (please print):
William Stephens
County:
Columbus
The undersigned, registered property owner(s) of the above property, do hereby authorize
Tim Morris
(Contractor/Agent/Project Manager)'
of KCI Technologies, Inc.
(Name of Contractor/Agent Firm/Agency)'
to take all actions necessary for the evaluation of the property as a potential stream, wetland and/or
riparian buffer mitigation project, including conducting stream and/or wetland determinations and
delineations, as well as issuance and acceptance of any required permit(s) or certification(s). I
agree to allow regulatory agencies, including the US Army Corps of Engineers, to visit the property
as part of these environmental reviews.
Property Owners(s) Address:
(if different from above)
Post Office Box 100
Orrum, NC 28369
Property Owner Telephone Number:
Property Owner Telephone Number:
We hereby, certify the above
Owner
(Property Owner Authorized Signature)
910-618-2096
true and accurate to the best of our knowledge.
Af Is
(Date)
(Date)
'Name of full delivery staff member (full -deliveries) or EEP project manager (design -bid -build).
2Name of company (full -deliveries) or Ecosystem Enhancement Program (design -bid -build).

APPENDIX F: NUTRIENT CALCULATIONS

NITROGEN LOADING CALCULATOR
ID Total Area % Total Imp. Area RV TN Conc.TN Load
1 0.0 0.0%0.00 0.230 1.64 0.0
2 0.0 0.0%0.00 0.662 2.22 0.0
3 551.0 30.7%82.65 0.185 1.58 89.4
4 37.0 2.1%0.56 0.064 1.42 1.9
5 12.0 0.7%0.18 0.064 1.42 0.6
6 766.0 42.6%11.49 0.064 1.42 38.3
7 75.0 4.2%1.13 0.064 1.42 3.8
8 0.0 0.0%0.00 0.050 0.00 0.0
9 356.0 19.8%17.80 0.095 1.46 27.4
10 0.0 0.0%0.00 0.095 1.46 0.0
11 0.0 0.0%0.00 0.095 1.46 0.0
12 0.0 0.0%0.00 0.230 1.64 0.0
1797.00 100.0%113.80 161.4
6.3%
49
0.05

TOTAL POUNDS OF NITROGEN PER
ACRE-UNIT TIME
161.4
0.09
TOTAL
Forested Wetland
Shrub Wetland
Emergent Wetland
Barren
TOTAL POUNDS OF NITROGEN PER
UNIT TIME
TOTAL % IMPERVIOUS
Urban High
Land Uses
Mixed Forest
Water
Agriculture
Shrub
Deciduous Forest
Evergreen Forest
PRECIPITATION (inches/unit time)
% EVENTS w/ EFFECTIVE RAINFALL
Rough Horn
1SUBWATERSHED ID
USER ID
LOCAL WATERSHED NAME
JJP
Description
Urban Low
Land Uses
Urban Low Urban High
Agriculture Shrub
Deciduous Forest Evergreen Forest
Mixed Forest Water
Forested Wetland Shrub Wetland
Emergent Wetland Barren
TN Load by LU
Urban Low Urban High
Agriculture Shrub
Deciduous Forest Evergreen Forest
Mixed Forest Water
Forested Wetland Shrub Wetland
Emergent Wetland Barren
KCI Associates of NC
NITROGEN REMOVAL CALCULATOR
SUBCATCHMENT NAME

0.0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
0.0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
89.4 0.16 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 35.8
1.9 0.05 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.7
0.6 0.05 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2
38.3 0.05 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 15.3
3.8 0.05 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.5
0.0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
27.4 0.08 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 11.0
0.0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
0.0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
0.0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
Stormwater Detention
0
Forested Wetland
Shrub Wetland
Evergreen Forest
Rough Horn
1
Urban Low
Urban High
Wet Ponds
0
0
Wetlands Bioretention Total N
Removal
Level
Spreader
Emergent Wetland
Barren
Description N Load
Mixed Forest
Water
SUBCATCHMENT ID
Best Management Practices (percent of land use treated)
Land Use
Load per
acre
Open Channel
Dry
Swale
Wet
Swale
Grass
Channel
Filtering
Riparian
Buffers
0
0
Total N Removed in Subcatchment by
BMPs (lbs/unit time)
161.4
64.5
Total N Remaining in Subcatchment
(lbs/unit time)96.8
Total % Removal 40.0
Total N Load in Subcatchment Before
Treatment (lbs/unit time)
Agriculture
Shrub
Deciduous Forest
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
100
200
lbs/unit
time
N Removal
Total N Remaining Total N Before Treatment
KCI Associates of NC
4/20/2015
PHOSPHORUS LOADING CALCULATOR
ID Total Area % Total Imp. Area RV P Conc.P Load
1 0.0 0.0%0.00 0.230 0.26 0.0
2 0.0 0.0%0.00 0.662 1.08 0.0
3 551.0 30.7%82.65 0.185 0.26 14.7
4 37.0 2.1%0.56 0.064 0.15 0.2
5 12.0 0.7%0.18 0.064 0.15 0.1
6 766.0 42.6%11.49 0.064 0.15 4.1
7 75.0 4.2%1.13 0.064 0.15 0.4
8 0.0 0.0%0.00 0.050 0.00 0.0
9 356.0 19.8%17.80 0.095 0.10 1.9
10 0.0 0.0%0.00 0.095 0.10 0.0
11 0.0 0.0%0.00 0.095 0.10 0.0
12 0.0 0.0%0.00 0.230 0.26 0.0
1797.00 100.0%113.80 21.3
6.3%
49
0.05

Description
Land Uses
Mixed Forest
TOTAL % IMPERVIOUS
PRECIPITATION (inches/unit time)
Evergreen Forest
Urban Low
Urban High
Rough Horn
1SUBWATERSHED ID
USER ID
LOCAL WATERSHED NAME
Water
Agriculture
Shrub
Deciduous Forest
JJP
TOTAL POUNDS OF PHOSPHORUS PER
UNIT TIME
TOTAL POUNDS OF PHOSPHORUS PER
ACRE-UNIT TIME
21.3
0.01
TOTAL
Forested Wetland
Shrub Wetland
Emergent Wetland
Barren
% EVENTS w/ EFFECTIVE RAINFALL
Land Uses
Urban Low Urban High
Agriculture Shrub
Deciduous Forest Evergreen Forest
Mixed Forest Water
Forested Wetland Shrub Wetland
Emergent Wetland Barren
P Load by LU
Urban Low Urban High
Agriculture Shrub
Deciduous Forest Evergreen Forest
Mixed Forest Water
Forested Wetland Shrub Wetland
Emergent Wetland Barren
KCI Associates of NC
PHOSPHORUS REMOVAL CALCULATOR
1
Infiltration
0.0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
0.0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
14.7 0.03 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.8
0.2 0.01 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.1
0.1 0.01 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
4.1 0.01 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.9
0.4 0.01 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2
0.0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
1.9 0.01 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.9
0.0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
0.0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
0.0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
Urban Low
Urban High
Agriculture
Shrub
Forested Wetland
Shrub Wetland
Emergent Wetland
Barren
Deciduous Forest
Evergreen Forest
Mixed Forest
Water
Grass
Channel
Stormwater Detention
Description P Load Dry
Ponds
Wet
Ponds
Riparian
BuffersWetlandsBioretention Infiltration
Trench
Total P
Removal
Total P Load in Subcatchment Before
Treatment (lbs/unit time)
SUBCATCHMENT ID
Best Management Practices (percent of land use treated)
FilteringLand Use
Load per
acre
Water Quality Swales
Dry
Swale
Wet
Swale
Total P Removed in Subcatchment by
BMPs (lbs/unit time)
21.3
9.8
Total P Remaining in Subcatchment
(lbs/unit time)11.5
Total % Removal 46.0
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
lbs/unit
time
P Removal
Total P Remaining Total P Before Treatment
KCI Associates of NC
4/20/2015
APPENDIX G: SCORING SHEET

1
For proposals that include wetland mitigation, are all hydroperiod success criteria proposed in excess of 5%?
Do the proposal and site conditions leave EEP confident that the proposed levels of intervention are appropriate for a minimum of 85% of proposed footage and/or acreage ?
Does EEP agree with the proposed overall credit structure as described in the proposal?
Does the proposal adequately document the biological and/or physical impairment that currently exists on the project site? Examples: Physical manipulation of wetlands (ditching, draining, placement of fill materials); departure from reference vegetative community.
Does the proposed project avoid significant adverse impacts to existing wetlands and/or riparian buffer (indirect or construction related)?
Note: An answer of No in this section means the Technical Proposal is rejected.
Continue or Reject
For proposals that include wetland mitigation, does the technical proposal adequately document hydric soil profile characteristics through soil boring logs prepared by a Licensed Soil Scientist?
Alternate
Attendees:
Technical Proposal Evaluation Criteria
Lumber 03040203 - January 2015 Rating Form
Offeror:
Site Name:
Type/Amt of
Mitigation
Offered:
Proposal
Review
Committee:
River Basin /
Catalog Unit:
RFP Number:
Date of Site
Evaluation:
Yes/No or N/A
Does the option comply with RFP requirements?
Are the stated project goals and objectives directly linked to expected benefits to the aquatic resource and pertinent EEP watershed planning goals? (Proposals that contain project goals that simply define the type of work to be performed and not the functional uplift to be achieved will be rejected.)

Important Notes/Guidance
1.Projects MUST be located within EEP Targeted Watersheds within Lumber 03040203 (Attachment A Table and Map). Projects located within
Local Watershed Planning (LWP) HUCs may receive additional points, as noted in Section 1.0 of this Technical Proposal Rating Form.
2. Providers are strongly encouraged to conduct their own self-scoring evaluation of the project(s) they submit, using this Rating Form.
Please submit your self-scored form with your proposal.
ATTACHMENT B
RFP 16-006310
2
1.1
No, the proposed project is not located within the LWP area. 0 points
Yes, the proposed project is located within the LWP area. 10 points
1.2
Addresses 1 of 4 LWP priorities. 2 points
Addresses 2 of 4 LWP priorities. 5 points
Addresses 3 of 4 LWP priorities. 10 points
Addresses 4 of 4 LWP priorities. 15 points
1.3
No, it is not located within a Priority Subwatershed. 0 points
Yes, it is located within a Priority Subwatershed. 10 points
1.4
No, the proposed project does not implement an atlas-recommended project. 0 points
Yes, the proposed project implements an atlas-recommended project. 5 points
Project addresses 1 of 4 functional improvement objectives 1 point
Project addresses 2 of 4 functional improvement objectives 3 points
Project addresses 3 of 4 functional improvement objectives 10 points
Project addresses 4 of 4 functional improvement objectives 15 points
1.5
For proposed projects located outside of the LWP area but within a targeted area, to what extent does the project support the
CU-wide functional improvement objectives? (The following CU-wide objectives are explained in greater detail in the Lumber River
Basin Restoration Priorities report). 1--Improve water quality through increase riparian buffer area, 2--Reduce impacts from agricultural
practices, 3--Reduce impacts from impervious surfaces, 4--Protection of existing resources
Lumber River Basin Restoration Priorities 2008
Bear Swamp Findings and Recommendations
Is the proposed project recommended in the LWP Project Atlas? Atlas can be found at:
Is the proposed project located within a Focus Area of the Bear Swamp LWP? Focus Areas can be found in Section 6.3 of the
Initial Watershed Characterization.
Bear Swamp Initial Watershed Characterization
Is the proposed project located within the Bear Swamp LWP Area (consists of two 14-digit HUs)? See Attachment A for table and
map with LWP area.
Section 1.0 - Watershed Module
Does the proposed project address/manage key watershed stressors and meet priorities of the Bear Swamp LWP area? Offeror
must describe how a project contributes to priorities to receive points. (The following priorities relevant to this RFP are further
discussed in Table 1 of the Bear Swamp Findings and Recommendations (below). Does the proposed project address/manage: 1--
Sedimentation, 2--Nutrients, 3-- Land Use Impacts (imperviousness) and 4--Stormwater
Bear Swamp Watershad Management Plan/Project Atlas
Assessment Ranking
ATTACHMENT B
RFP 16-006310
3
2.1
The surrounding land use has a low impact on water quality within the project area. 0
points. (e.g. mature forest, or relatively undisturbed vegetation)
The surrounding land use has a medium impact on water quality within the project area.
10 points. (e.g. managed vegetation, row crop agriculture, limited ditching and/or tile
drains)
The surrounding land use has a high impact on water quality within the project area. 20
points. (e.g. livestock access, high impervious cover, spray field, extensive ditching
and/or tile drains)
2.2
Vegetation is present but predominant assemblage is not appropriate for the target
community (e.g. presence of high threat invasives, low diversity, emergent vegetation
where mature vegetation is appropriate). 2 points
Vegetation is not only predominantly absent but the site has been converted to a land
use such as row crop or pasture land. 5 points
Vegetation is not only predominantly absent but the site has been converted to a land
use such as row crop or pasture land and is being actively drained. 15 points
2.3
Gauge data are absent and no hydrologic modeling has been performed, and
hydrologic condition is not illustrated. minus 5 points (e.g. mapping ditch network)
Gauge data are absent and no hydrologic modeling has been performed, but hydrologic
condition is illustrated through GIS, CAD and/or aerials. 5 points (e.g. mapping ditch
network)
Gauge data are absent, but the site has been modeled providing confidence in the
hydrologic opportunity for >90% of the proposed acreage. 10 points
Gauge data are provided for the project providing confidence in the hydrologic
opportunity for >90% of the proposed acreage. 20 points
3.1
between 30 - 50% of the RFP request? (4 points total)
Section 2.0 - Existing Conditions Module
Confidence in Surrounding Existing Wetland Hydrologic Condition and Uplift Potential
Existing Condition of Predominant (greater than 50%) Wetland Vegetation Community
What level of impact on water quality does the land use immediately adjacent to the proposed easement have on the project (i.e.
impervious surface, nutrients, sediment)?
Section 3.0 - Design Module
Does the proposed project provide
ATTACHMENT B
RFP 16-006310
4
between 51 - 90% of the RFP request? (6 points total)
greater than 90% of the RFP request? (10 points total)
3.2
Proposal estimates anticipated reductions of 15-30% total nitrogen and/or 20-35% total
phosphorus (e.g. by modeling) within the proposed project area . 2 point
Proposal estimates anticipated reductions of at least 31% total nitrogen and/or 36%
total phosphorus (e.g. by modeling) within the proposed project area . 4 points
Proposal estimates anticipated reductions of at least 31% total nitrogen and/or 36%
total phosphorus (e.g. by modeling) within the proposed project area , and describes
specific pre- and post-construction monitoring protocols to document nutrient reductions
directly attributable to proposed project. 10 points
3.3
No. 0 points
Yes. 10 points
3.4
Proposed success hydroperiods are based on a modeling effort of the site and is
appropriate for the setting and landscape position. 4 points
Proposed success hydroperiods are based on data acquired from an appropriate local
reference. 12 points
4.1
Project as proposed does not connect a wildlife corridor from an adjacent natural area.
0 points
Project as proposed provides an uninterrupted wildlife corridor from an adjacent natural
area with mature vegetation. 2 points
Project as proposed provides an uninterrupted wildlife corridor from an adjacent natural
area with mature vegetation; and proposes to restore specific habitat elements required
for listed species. 8 points
4.2
There are no Threatened or Endangered Species within the project boundaries. 0
points.
Threatened and/or Endangered Species are identified within the project boundaries and
proposed activities do not have any adverse impact on those species. 5 points
Project contains identified Threatened and/or Endangered Species . (This includes any State or Federally listed species.)
Comparing nutrient concentrations of influent to effluent demonstrates the nutrient removal function of a project site. To what
level does the project propose to reduce on-site nutrient inputs? (Note: Simple spreadsheet tools are acceptable for proposal
review.)
Project Wetland Treatment Opportunity. Does greater than 50% of the proposed wetland acreage provide opportunity for pollutant
interception and treatment (of nutrients and/or sediment in lateral influent from land uses within or immediately adjacent to the proposed
project easement)?
Section 4.0 - General Module
Design Wetland Hydrology
Ability to connect adjacent (having a common boundary with) natural habitats and extend wildlife corridors.
ATTACHMENT B
RFP 16-006310
5
Threatened and/or Endangered Species are identified within the project boundaries and
proposed activities not only do not have any adverse impact on those species but also
have the potential to improve habitat availability or condition for the identified species.
15 points
4.3
No connection. 0 points
Conservation property connection. 8 points
Mitigation site (permanent easement) connection. 10 points
Proposed project boundaries connect directly to another protected conservation property.
ATTACHMENT B
RFP 16-006310
6
5.1
No potential suspect risks were indentified by the submittal but were found during the
EEP review. - MINUS 5 points
Some potential risks were identified and some documentation provided. 1 point
Implementation risks are identified and addressed; documentation is provided in the
submittal. 5 points
5.2
Proposal provides documentation concerning the status of FEMA regulated issues as
they pertain to the project (i.e. flood zone map, FEMA delegated authority or designated
Floodplain Manager). 2 points
Project does not occur in FEMA regulated zone. 5 points
5.3
All drainage features capable of influencing wetland yields are addressed in the
proposal to support proposed wetland hydrology. 5 points
All drainage features capable of influencing wetland yields are addressed in the
proposal to support proposed wetland hydrology, which is further supported with
hydrologic modeling of the site. 10 points
5.4
Overburden exists; origin is unknown, but is less than one foot deep on average. 5
points
Overburden exists, is generally no greater than 6 inches in depth, and its origin is
documented to be primarily from anthropogenic manipulation (e.g. dredge material,
ditching sidecast, deliberate row crop crowning). Hydric indicators appropriate to the
setting and series dominating the buried A or B horizons. 10 points
Proposed wetland features are generally devoid of overburden, with hydric indicators
appropriate to the setting and series dominating the A or B horizons. 15 points
6.1
Completed from 2 to 5 mitigation projects. 2 points
Completed more than 5 mitigation projects. 5 points
Section 5.0 - Implementation and Risk Module
Constraints - Has the proposal identified potential implementation risks related to constraints? As a baseline, offerors are
expected to provide in the proposal a description of potential constraints (including but not limited to, archeological sites,
waste materials, subsurface utilities/infrastructure, or other natural or manmade constraints).
Section 6.0 - Quality Control
Similar mitigation projects completed by the Offeror that have finished at least 3 years of monitoring.
Uncertainty of origin and extent of overburden
Does proposal address Federal Emergency Management Act (FEMA) regulated zones?
Risk of Hydrologic Shortfall
ATTACHMENT B
RFP 16-006310
7
6.2
Project team contains at least 2 individuals with specialties specific to project design,
construction, and monitoring. 1 point
All the above and at least 3 other individuals with relevant technical backgrounds and
experience in mitigation. 2 points
All of the above and at least 2 projects brought to successful regulatory closure (i.e.
credit yield is +/-5% of proposed). 5 points
6.3
Team for project design includes, at a minimum, engineering and biological
specializations. 2 points
Team for project design includes engineering, biological, hydrologic, soils, regulatory
review, and related specializations. 10 points
6.4
Offeror describes in the proposal checks and balances that cross examine engineering
and design methods, document preparation and delivery, and project implementation to
be used in the proposed project. 2 points
Offeror provides quality control/quality assurance plan that includes checks of
engineering and design methods results, document preparation and delivery, and
project implementation to be used in the proposed project. 5 points
6.5
EEP has been notified of 1 permit violation within the past year. - MINUS 15 points
EEP has been notified of 2 permit violations within the past year. - MINUS 20 points
EEP has been notified of more than 2 permit violations within the past 2 years. - MINUS
30 points
As a result of the technical evaluation, a Proposal Rating (PR) with a value between 0.0 and 2.45 (with 2.45 being the highest) will be determined for each proposal by the PRC.
Experience of Project Team (People actually completing work)
Multidisciplinary Team Approach to Project.
Comments:
Proposal Rating ( Score x 0.01) =
TOTAL
Total Points (Maximum Possible = 245 Points) =
History of Compliance with Required Federal, State and Local Permits within the past year.
Quality Control Program
ATTACHMENT B
RFP 16-006310