20230245 Ver 2_Georgianna Nutrient Offset Plan - Final_20240408

Nutrient Offset Plan

April 2024
GEORGIANNA NUTRIENT OFFSET BANK PARCEL
Wayne County, NC
DWR Project Number 20230245 v.2

Neuse River Basin
HUC 03020201

PREPARED BY:

Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
312 W Millbrook Road Suite 225
Raleigh, NC 27607
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

Wildlands Engineering, Inc.  phone [phone]  fax [phone]  312 W Millbrook Rd St 225  Raleigh, NC 27609
April 8, 2024
Katie Merritt
Nutrient Offset & Buffer Banking Coordinator
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, NC 27620
RE: DWR Georgianna Nutrient Offset Plan Comments
Georgianna Bank Parcel (DWR # 20230245 v.2)
Wayne County, NC
Dear Ms. Merritt:
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) has reviewed the Division of Water Resources (DWR) comments
dated May 11th, 2024, for the draft Nutrient Offset (NOP) for the Georgianna Bank Parcel.
The DWR comments are listed below in bold, while Wildlands responses are noted in italics lettering.
1. Cover Page – For nutrient offset only projects, we do not use “mitigation” in the name or plan.
Noted. The correction has been made.
2. Cover Page – Change project number to Version 2 instead of Version 1.
The correction has been made.
3. Section 1.0 – Once the naming conventions on maps have been updated to reflect the names
on the site viability letter, please update those names/labels here and throughout the Plan
where relevant.
The correction has been made within Section 1.0 and throughout the Plan.
4. Section 2.2 – I won’t make any more edits to the Plan to remove “mitigation” from the text.
But Wildlands needs to check the document and remove this word where it is used.
Where appropriate, Wildlands has removed the term “mitigation” from the text.
5. Table 2 – Modify this to be the 12-digit, the 14-digit HUC isn’t applicable for Neuse.
The correction has been made.
6. Section 2.10 – This culvert was determined to be clogged at Site Viability assessment and
preventing aquatic life passage. Identify this as a site constraint and explain how it will be
addressed in Section 4.0.
The culvert was identified as a site constraint and text has been added to Section 2.10 and
Section 4.0 stating that Wildlands will ensure the culvert remains clear at as-built and through
the duration of monitoring.
7. Section 4.0 – This should likely be section 4.0 but there is no section number.
The correction has been made.
8. Section 4.1
a. This section is lacking in details. Identify culvert removals, culvert maintenance,
ripping of any soils (or explain why you aren’t manipulating the soils).
Details on culvert removals and culvert maintenance have been added to the Nutrient
Offset Plan. An explanation of why Wildlands does not foresee soil manipulation to be
necessary has been added, as well.
b. If seeding is not planned, then tell me what Wildlands observed as "herbaceous".
Detail the observations: Annual? Perennial? grasses, sedges, crops, rye, etc... Not all
herbaceous is good, not all herbaceous will thrive or last.

Wildlands Engineering, Inc.  phone [phone]  fax [phone]  312 W Millbrook Rd St 225  Raleigh, NC 27609

Since Wildlands isn't proposing to seed with pollinator species or any seeding at all,
and ag fields can be barren with soils unstable at planting stage, then DWR needs to
know what exactly wildlands saw establishing in June. Otherwise, Wildlands needs to
include a seeding proposal to take place prior to year 1. Every provider proposes a
seeding plan, with the exception of Wildlands. Therefore wildlands is required to
provide additional details in this section to justify not needing to seed the ag fields.
Overland flow on barren soils will continue to add nutrients into streams and other
features even after planting hardwood species...therefore, nutrient loading isn't being
reduced as quickly or effectively when there are bare soils lacking in vegetation.
During June of 2023, the condition of herbaceous cover was visually assessed across the
Parcel. Species observed are displayed in Table 6: Existing Vegetation. Herbaceous
vegetation was noted to have established naturally throughout the Parcel with no bare
areas observed; therefore, Wildlands does not anticipate that seeding will be necessary.
If bare areas are observed in the Spring of 2024, Wildlands will seed with temporary and
native, pollinator species. Details on species used for seeding have been added to Section
4.1.
9. Section 4.2
a. Additional details are needed in this section. Explain the min and max widths that will
be restored, identify any areas that are not creditable and explain why (i.e. areas <50
or >200).
Explanations of min and max widths that will be restored have been added to section
4.2. Areas that are not creditable have been identified and explained.
b. Bank stabilization measures were identified as necessary during the site viability (see
letter) on UT2, but no measures are being described or proposed. Add this missing
information.
The missing information on UT2 bank stabilization has been added.
c. Add a statement about non-diffused flow here and request to use the clarification
memo (use correct reference in MBI template) to address the non-diffused flow from
the ditch/es.
A statement about non-diffused flow has been added.
d. Add a seeding plan here in case its ever needed and you don’t want to have to submit
for approval later.
A seeding plan has been added.
10. Table 8
a. Suggest changing this table with the 8 species to be planted to be Table 8a, with an 8b
table showing the 3 substitutions.
Table 8 still details the 11 species to be planted, and the text in section 4.2 has been
updated to reflect this.
b. Add a column for “Tree/Shrub” and add that information for each species proposed.
A Tree/Shrub column has been added to Table 8.
c. This all adds up to 100%, but only 8 of these 11 are suggested as being planted.
Address comment above and change the density associated with planting the 8
species.
The text in section 4.2 has been updated to reflect that Wildlands plans to plant 11
species at the densities described.

Wildlands Engineering, Inc.  phone [phone]  fax [phone]  312 W Millbrook Rd St 225  Raleigh, NC 27609
d. Identify the 8 that will be planted and include which 3 remaining species be used as
substitutions and at what density those 3 would be substituted if they were needed.
The text in section 4.2 has been updated to reflect that Wildlands plans to plant all 11
species at the densities described.
11. Section 4.3 – Add language to this section identifying what nutrient offset activities should be
completed at this stage: including adequately marking the easement boundaries, installing all
the plots, plantings completed, culvert maintenance complete, culvert removals, bank
stabilization measures...
Text has been added to Section 4.3 specifying what nutrient offset activities should be completed
by the NCDWR As-Built Evaluation.
12. Section 5.1
a. Clarify that the number of plots is in fact making up 2 percent of the planted area.
What is the total planted area in acres?? According to the project credit table, its
about 42 acres. Are these plots Fixed? Random? Rotating? Explain…
Clarification about the number of plots has been added, as well as details regarding the
amount of fixed and random plots.
b. The monitoring protocol for height and vigor is to record height for each stem in each
plot in years 1, 3, and 5. Average vigor per plot is to be recorded in years 1, 3, and 5.
Adjust language accordingly. Remember that all other monitoring expectations are the
same for years 1-5 consecutively.
Noted. The language has been adjusted accordingly.
13. Section 5.3 – Add language that if there are any encroachments within the conservation
easement that are identified during the year, that the Sponsor will notify DWR promptly, take
corrective measures, provide written notification to the landowner (or third party) and
include all information in the monitoring report.
Language has been added that details these points.
14. Section 7.0
a. Using the phrase “mitigation activity” is okay here since it’s a Column name on the
project credit table. But I’d all caps it as “Mitigation Activity”.
The phrase has been capitalized within the referenced sentence.
b. Attach this clarification memo to the appendix and reference it here.
The change has been made.
c. What is going on with Ditch F? The site viability letter didn’t address F, is F a ditch? A
swale? Did DWR miss this during the site viability? Should the ft2 of the feature’s
footprint (bank to bank) be deducted from riparian restoration? It is causing non-
diffused flow…please explain.
The referenced feature is a non-project ditch which must have been missed during the
site viability visit. Ditch F will be planted with a combination of live stakes and bald
cypress to ensure concentrated flows do not enter Ditch E. Due to planting, the footprint
of Ditch F is proposed to be included within the credit area.
d. Please add a statement to this section telling DWR how the Total Area you included in
the Project Credit Table was measured/quantified. Give us the technique used to get
the ft2. Tell me how your tree lines were measured out (did you use aerial, onsite,
etc.).
A statement explaining how the Total Area included in the Project Credit Table was
measured/quantified has been added.

Wildlands Engineering, Inc.  phone [phone]  fax [phone]  312 W Millbrook Rd St 225  Raleigh, NC 27609
15. Table 10
a. Please use the revised project credit table I provided you via email to test out the
nutrient offset credits.
Wildlands has used the revised project credit table for this Nutrient Offset Plan.
b. This table is called out as Table 9 in the T.O.C.
The table has been updated with the correct table number.
c. You should be able to combine all streams into just 2 categories (0-100 and 101-200)
All streams have combined into the 2 categories referenced.
d. You should be able to combine al ephemeral into just 2 categories (0-100 & 101-200)
The ephemeral channel has been combined into the 2 categories referenced.
e. You should be able to combine all ditches into 2 categories (0-100, & 101-200)
All ditches have been combined into the 2 categories referenced.
f. See comments on figures and change the names of the features to match what is in
the viability letter.
Parcel feature names have been changed throughout the report and figures to reflect
feature names chosen in the site viability letter.
g. Need to show a row for planted area that is not receiving credit based on being less
than 50’.
The change has been made.
16. Table 11 – This is Table 10 in the TOC.
The table has been updated to reflect the correct table number.
17. Figure 3
a. This is the culvert that was determined to be clogged. Add a note here.
The note has been added.
b. This ditch was labeled as Da in the site viability letter…add that label here.
Project feature labels have been updated to reflect feature names used in the site
viability letter.
c. Change all feature names to match exactly as they are in the site viability letter and
update the text to the Plan and all other figures to match. For example: Ditch C should
be Cb and Ditch G is Ca…
Project feature labels have been updated to reflect feature names used in the site
viability letter.
d. Ditch G is shown as Pink, Purple, then black. Explain.
Ditch G (now referred to as Ditch Ca and Ditch Cb) flows in two different directions.
Where the Conservation Easement intersects the ditch, the flow changes from travelling
west to then travelling east away from the Parcel. Where the ditch flows west toward
UT3b, it is indicated as a project ditch with pink symbology. Where it flows east (Ditch
Ca), its symbology is purple to indicate that it is a non-project ditch. The black line in
reference is the Project Location layer. Ditch Ca has been corrected on the figure to show
that it extends to the eastern tree line, thereby covering the Project Location line.
e. Add intermittent origins of this reach (see stream call letter).
The intermittent origin has been added to the figure.
f. Add ephemeral origin point.
The ephemeral origin point has been added to the figure.
g. Add a call out here to note that existing conditions include a sink hole and bank
erosion. See site viability letter.

Wildlands Engineering, Inc.  phone [phone]  fax [phone]  312 W Millbrook Rd St 225  Raleigh, NC 27609
A callout has been added to note that existing conditions include bank erosion.
h. Change to “Existing Conditions Map”. There should also be a figure in the Plan
representing existing conditions which are also described in the text of the Plan.
The change has been made. The Existing Conditions Map represents existing conditions
that are described in the Plan.
18. Figure 7
a. Please draw an arrow pointing to the specific spot <50’
An arrow has been added pointing to the specific locations which are less than 50’.
b. This should actually be called “non-diffused flow” deduction.
The change has been made.
c. Add (<50’ or >200’) if that is the reason the gray areas are not for credit.
Most of the non-credited area is due to the riparian widths being under 50’ or over 200’,
however, some are due to the presence of existing forest. The addition of (<50’ or >200’)
was therefore not made.
d. This area is shown with blue polka dots on the hard copy, but it isn’t showing up with
the blue polka dots here. It could be a problem with the electronic upload on our end,
but just make sure it is showing up with the polka dots when you upload the final.
Noted.
e. Is this a ditch? I don’t remember this feature during the site viability assessment.
Explain.
Yes, the feature in reference is a non-project ditch (Ditch F). It must have been missed
during the site viability visit. It will be planted with a combination of live stakes and bald
cypress to ensure concentrated flow does not enter Ditch E.
f. Make sure this area is also shown on a row in the project credit table. Prefer the
Feature Name on that table for that row be “UT1, UT3 (<50’)”.
A row has been added to Table 9 for the areas along UT1 and UT3b that are less than
50’.
19. Figure 9
a. The way you have the maps showing credit assets within 0-100 and 101-200 is fine, as
long as you use the new project credit table I gave you for nutrient offset only
projects. Otherwise, you'd have to have a different color representing the Nutrient
Offset credits measured off ditches vs streams and from Subject streams (UT1,UT2) vs
non-subject streams (UT3). If this site were being proposed for Buffer, you would have
to have these features represented differently. The nutrient offset project credit table
should also help keep the survey for asbuilt alot simpler. Let me know if you run into
any errors.
The new project credit table provided was used.
b. Confirm that this ditch is directly connected to Da. I don't remember, and the figure
you submitted for the Site Viability doesn't show Da connected to Ditch B. If it is found
to NOT be connected, remove the credit deduction for non-diffused flow...otherwise,
leave it in.
The ditch in reference (Ditch B), is not connected to Da, therefore, the non-diffused flow
deduction has been removed.

The final Nutrient Offset Plan has been uploaded to the Laserfiche system. Please contact me at 540-
907-9432 if you have any questions or concerns.

Wildlands Engineering, Inc.  phone [phone]  fax [phone]  312 W Millbrook Rd St 225  Raleigh, NC 27609
Sincerely,

Kaitlyn Hogarth
Environmental Scientist
[e-mail]

GeorgiannaGeorgiannaGeorgiannaGeorgianna Nutrient OffsetNutrient OffsetNutrient OffsetNutrient Offset Bank ParcelBank ParcelBank ParcelBank Parcel Nutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset Plan
HUC 03020201 Page i April 2024
Nutrient Offset Plan
Georgianna Nutrient Offset Bank Parcel
Neuse River Basin

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Project Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Parcel Description ......................................................................................................................... 1
2.0 Nutrient Offset Project Summary ..................................................................................................... 1
2.1 Project Goals ................................................................................................................................. 1
2.2 Existing Parcel Conditions ............................................................................................................. 2
2.3 Site Viability for Buffer Mitigation and Nutrient Offset ................................................................ 3
2.4 Watershed Characterization ......................................................................................................... 3
2.5 Soils ............................................................................................................................................... 4
2.6 Existing Vegetative Communities ................................................................................................. 4
2.7 Threatened and Endangered Species ........................................................................................... 5
2.8 Cultural Resources ........................................................................................................................ 6
2.9 FEMA Floodplain Compliance ....................................................................................................... 6
2.10 Parcel Location, Parcel Constraints, and Access ........................................................................... 6
2.11 Other Environmental Conditions .................................................................................................. 6
3.0 Site Protection Instrument................................................................................................................ 6
4.0 Nutrient Offset Work Plan ................................................................................................................ 6
4.1 Parcel Preparation ........................................................................................................................ 7
4.2 Riparian Area Restoration Activities ............................................................................................. 7
4.3 NCDWR As-Built Evaluation .......................................................................................................... 9
5.0 Monitoring and Maintenance Plan ................................................................................................... 9
5.1 Monitoring Protocol ...................................................................................................................... 9
5.2 Parcel Maintenance .................................................................................................................... 10
5.3 Easement Boundaries ................................................................................................................. 10
6.0 Financial Assurance and Long-Term Management ......................................................................... 10
6.1 Financial Assurances ................................................................................................................... 10
6.2 Long-term Management ............................................................................................................. 11
7.0 Project Credit Potential ................................................................................................................... 11
8.0 References ...................................................................................................................................... 13

GeorgiannaGeorgiannaGeorgiannaGeorgianna Nutrient OffsetNutrient OffsetNutrient OffsetNutrient Offset Bank ParcelBank ParcelBank ParcelBank Parcel Nutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset Plan
HUC 03020201 Page ii April 2024
TABLES
Table 1 Ecological and Water Quality Goals
Table 2 Project Attributes
Table 3 Project Features
Table 4 Drainage Areas and Associated Land Use
Table 5 Project Soil Types and Descriptions
Table 6 Existing Vegetation
Table 7 Site Protection Instrument
Table 8 Selected Planted Species
Table 9 Georgianna Project Credit Table
FIGURES
Figure 1 Vicinity Map
Figure 2 Credit Service Area Map
Figure 3 Existing Conditions Map
Figure 4 USGS Topographic Map
Figure 5 Watershed Map
Figure 6 NRCS 1974 Soil Survey Map
Figure 7 Project Credits Map
Figure 8 Riparian Buffer Zones Map
Figure 9 Monitoring Components Map
APPENDICES
Appendix A Current Land Use Photographs – June 28, 2023
Appendix B Historical Aerials
Appendix C On Site Determination of Applicability to Neuse Riparian Buffer Rules – June 21, 2023
Site Viability for Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Letter – September 11, 2023
Buffer Interpretation/Clarification Memo #2008-019
Appendix D USFWS Self-Certification Letter and Correspondence
SHPO Request for Review and Response
EDR Radius Map Report, Executive Summary

GeorgiannaGeorgiannaGeorgiannaGeorgianna Nutrient OffsetNutrient OffsetNutrient OffsetNutrient Offset Bank ParcelBank ParcelBank ParcelBank Parcel Nutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset Plan
HUC 03020201 Page 1 April 2024
Nutrient Offset Plan
Georgianna Nutrient Offset Bank Parcel
Neuse River Basin
1.0 Project Introduction
The Georgianna Nutrient Offset Bank Parcel (“Parcel”) is proposed under the terms and conditions of
the proposed Georgianna Nutrient Offset Banking Instrument (“NOBI”), made and entered into by
Wildlands Holdings X, LLC acting as Bank Sponsor (“Sponsor”) and the North Carolina Department of
Environmental Quality (“NCDEQ”) Division of Water Resources (“NCDWR”). The Parcel shall be planned
and designed according to the NOBI, 15A NCAC 02B .0703, and the Consolidated Buffer Mitigation Rule
15A NCAC 02B .0295 which became effective November 1, 2015.
The project is in Wayne County approximately 13 miles southwest of the City of Goldsboro (Figure 1).
Directions are included on Figure 1. The Parcel creates a protected riparian area from top of bank out to
200 feet along three unnamed tributaries (UT1, UT2, and UT3b), one ephemeral channel (UT3a), and
four project ditches (Ditch A, Ditch B, Ditch Cb, and Ditch Db). The primary purpose of the project is to
provide nutrient offset credits to compensate for unavoidable impacts in the Neuse River Basin
03020201 Hydrologic Unit Code (“HUC”) outside the Falls Lake Watershed (Figure 2). The Parcel is
located within the Neuse River Basin HUC 030202011700 and NCDWR Subbasin 03-04-12 in Wayne
County.
1.1 Parcel Description
The project features stormwater and agricultural flows drain to Horse Branch just outside the property
boundary. Horse Branch extends for approximately two miles until its confluence with Thoroughfare
Swamp, which then flows into Falling Creek. Falling Creek eventually flows into the Neuse River. Falling
Creek is classified as Water Supply Water source (“WS-IV”) and Nutrient Sensitive Waters (“NSW”) by
NCDWR. The proposed project supports specific goals identified in the 2018 Neuse River Basin
Restoration Priorities Plan (RBRP) by promoting “nutrient and sediment reduction in agricultural areas
by restoring and preserving wetlands, streams and riparian buffers”.
This nutrient offset riparian restoration project will reduce sediment and nutrient loading, provide and
improve terrestrial and instream habitats, and improve stream and bank stability. The area surrounding
the streams, ephemeral channel, and ditches proposed for nutrient offset is a mixture of forest and
active agricultural fields. See Appendix A for June 2023 photos. Restoring the riparian area up to 200
feet from project streams, ephemeral channel, and ditches will reduce nutrient and sediment inputs in
the tributaries to Falling Creek and subsequently the Neuse River. The restored floodplain areas will
filter sediment during high rainfall events and provide cover and food for wildlife throughout the Parcel.
2.0 Nutrient Offset Project Summary
2.1 Project Goals
The major goals of the proposed nutrient offset project are to provide ecological and water quality
enhancements to the Neuse River Basin by restoring the riparian area to create a functional riparian
corridor. Specific enhancements to water quality and ecological processes are outlined below in Table 1.

GeorgiannaGeorgiannaGeorgiannaGeorgianna Nutrient OffsetNutrient OffsetNutrient OffsetNutrient Offset Bank ParcelBank ParcelBank ParcelBank Parcel Nutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset Plan
HUC 03020201 Page 2 April 2024
Table 1: Ecological and Water Quality Goals
Goals Objectives
Decrease nutrient levels.
Nutrient input will be decreased by filtering runoff from the agricultural fields
through restored native vegetation. The off-site nutrient input will also be
absorbed on-site by filtering flood flows through restored floodplain areas,
where flood flows can disperse through native vegetation.
Decrease sediment input. Sediment from off-site sources will be captured by deposition on restored
floodplain areas where native vegetation will slow overland flow velocities.
Decrease water
temperature and increase
dissolved oxygen
concentrations.
Planted riparian trees will shade the project features as they mature, reducing
thermal pollution.
Create appropriate
terrestrial habitat.
Riparian areas will be restored by treating invasive vegetation and planting
native vegetation.
Permanently protect the
project Parcel from
harmful uses.
A conservation easement will be recorded on the Parcel.
2.2 Existing Parcel Conditions
The proposed nutrient offset project includes approximately 49.7 acres of agricultural fields and mature
forest along three unnamed tributaries (UT1, UT2, and UT3b), one ephemeral channel (UT3a), four
project ditches (Ditch A, Ditch B, Ditch Cb, and Ditch Db), and two non-project ditches (Ditch E and Ditch
F). The Parcel easement boundary will extend from the top of bank to 200 feet from the project features
(Figure 3).
Much of the project is currently used for row crop production. UT1 originates from a culvert at the
southern edge of the property and flows northeast. UT1 is surrounded by agricultural fields for its entire
project extent. UT2 also originates from a culvert at the southern edge of the property fields and flows
northeast until its confluence with UT3a, at which point UT2 begins flowing east. Nearly all of UT2 is
surrounded by row crops. Ditch A flows east through agricultural fields until its confluence with UT2.
Ditch Cb flows west towards its confluence with UT3b and is surrounded by agricultural fields on both
banks. Ditches B and Db flow east into UT3b and have agricultural land on both banks. UT3a begins as an
ephemeral channel flowing north near the elbow of UT2. UT3a is surrounded by agricultural fields. UT3b
begins where the channel becomes intermittent near its confluence with Ditch B. UT3b is surrounded by
agricultural fields until it reaches the northern edge of the property, where part of its riparian area
becomes forested.
The project area was forested until the early 1960’s. Since then, it has been used for agriculture (see
Appendix B). This consistency in land use within the project watershed indicates that watershed
processes affecting hydrology, sediment supply, and nutrient and pollutant delivery have not varied
widely over this period. With a lack of developmental pressure, watershed processes and stressors from
outside the project limits are likely to remain consistent throughout the implementation, monitoring,
and closeout of this project.

GeorgiannaGeorgiannaGeorgiannaGeorgianna Nutrient OffsetNutrient OffsetNutrient OffsetNutrient Offset Bank ParcelBank ParcelBank ParcelBank Parcel Nutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset Plan
HUC 03020201 Page 3 April 2024
Table 2: Project Attributes
Project Name Georgianna Nutrient Offset Bank Parcel
Hydrologic Unit Code 030202011700
River Basin Neuse, outside the Falls Lake watershed
Geographic Location (Lat, Long) -78.157332 W, 35.300949 N
Site Protection Instrument (DB, PG) To be recorded
Total Credits 96,153.035Ibs. N
Types of Credits Nutrient Offset Credits
Nutrient Offset Plan Date April 2024
Initial Planting Date December 2024
Baseline Report Date April 2025
MY1 Report Date December 2026
MY2 Report Date December 2027
MY3 Report Date December 2028
MY4 Report Date December 2029
MY5 Report Date December 2030
2.3 Site Viability for Buffer Mitigation and Nutrient Offset
NCDWR assessed the project features and issued the official Stream Origin Determination Letter on June
21, 2023. NCDWR performed an onsite visit of the project area to determine viability for buffer
mitigation and nutrient offset on May 31, 2023, and issued a site viability letter on September 11, 2023.
There have been no changes to land use in the project area since NCDWR’s 2023 site visit. A copy of
both the “On-Site Stream Origin Determination for Applicability to Neuse Riparian Buffer Rules” and the
“Site Viability for Buffer Mitigation & Nutrient Offset” letters from NCDWR are included in Appendix C
and summarized in Table 3.
Table 3: Project Features
Feature Name (NCDWR
Evaluation) Classification Buffer Credit Viable Nutrient Offset Viable
UT1 Stream Yes Yes
UT2 Stream Yes Yes
UT3a Ephemeral Yes Yes
UT3b Stream Yes Yes (non-forested fields only)
A Ditch No Yes
B Ditch No Yes
Cb Ditch No Yes
Db Ditch No Yes
Additional features are referenced in the Site Viability letter, but are not included in the project or Table 3.
2.4 Watershed Characterization
The Parcel is located within the HUC 030202011700. All onsite features drain to Horse Branch and then
Falling Creek. Falling Creek flows to the Neuse River. Falling Creek is classified as WS-IV and NSW by
NCDWR. WS-IV waters are sources of water supply for drinking water, culinary, or food processing

GeorgiannaGeorgiannaGeorgiannaGeorgianna Nutrient OffsetNutrient OffsetNutrient OffsetNutrient Offset Bank ParcelBank ParcelBank ParcelBank Parcel Nutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset Plan
HUC 03020201 Page 4 April 2024
purposes. The NSW designation applies to surface waters that are experiencing excessive growth of
microscopic or macroscopic vegetation.
The topography of the Parcel, as indicated on the Grantham USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
shows gently sloped areas throughout the Parcel (Figure 4). Drainage areas for the project features
(Figure 5) were delineated using 2-foot contour intervals derived from the North Carolina Floodplain
Mapping Program’s 2017 Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) data. Land uses draining to the project
features are primarily a mix of active crop fields, woodlands, and developed space. The watershed areas
and current land use are summarized in Table 4, below.
Table 4: Drainage Areas and Associated Land Use
Reach Name Watershed Area
(acres) Land Use
UT1 26 90% agriculture, 5% shrubland, 5% developed
UT2 62 96% agriculture, 4% developed
UT3a 5 100% agriculture
UT3b 56 99% agriculture, 1% forested
2.5 Soils
The proposed Parcel is mapped by the Wayne County Soil Survey. Project area soils are described below
in Table 5. UT1 and UT2 are depicted as streams on the 1974 NRCS Soil Survey provided in Figure 6.
Table 5: Project Soil Types and Descriptions
Soil Name Description
Ly – Lynchburg sandy
loam, 0-2% slopes
Lynchburg sandy loam consists of somewhat poorly drained soil on broad, smooth
flats. Permeability is moderate and surface runoff is slow. Seasonal high-water
table is around one and a half feet.
Ra – Rains sandy loam –
0-2% slopes
Rains loamy sand consists of poorly drained soil on smooth flats in broad areas
between streams. Permeability is moderate and surface runoff is slow.
NoA – Norfolk loamy
sandy – 0-2% slopes
Norfolk loamy sand (0-2% slopes) consists of well drained soils on smooth broad
divides. Permeability is moderate and surface runoff is slow.
NoB – Norfolk loamy sand
– 2-6% slopes
Norfolk loamy sand (2-6% slopes) consists of well-drained soil on smooth sides of
divides. Permeability is moderate and surface runoff is medium.
WaB – Wagram Loamy
Sand, 0-6% slopes
Wagram loamy sand consists of well-drained soils on slightly convex, smooth, and
broad divides. Permeability is rapid, while surface runoff is slow. Seasonal high-
water table remains below a depth of five feet.
Source: Wayne County Soil Survey, June 1974, USDA-NRCS,
https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_MANUSCRIPTS/north_carolina/wayneNC1974/map19.pdf
https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_MANUSCRIPTS/north_carolina/wayneNC1974/text.pdf
2.6 Existing Vegetative Communities
Existing vegetation within the Parcel is primarily comprised of agricultural fields used to grow row crops.
Various species of herbaceous vegetation exist along the banks of project features, including smartweed
(Polygonum pensylvanicum), goldenrod (Solidago spp.), seedbox (Ludwigia alternifolia), dog fennel
(Eupatorium capillifolium) and rush (Juncus spp.). Additionally, agricultural fields on the Parcel were left

GeorgiannaGeorgiannaGeorgiannaGeorgianna Nutrient OffsetNutrient OffsetNutrient OffsetNutrient Offset Bank ParcelBank ParcelBank ParcelBank Parcel Nutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset Plan
HUC 03020201 Page 5 April 2024
fallow in the spring of 2023 and several herbaceous species were observed in June 2023. Several woody
species, primarily saplings, are scattered along ditch and stream banks, including sweetgum
(Liquidambar styraciflua), red maple (Acer rubrum), black willow (Salix nigra), winged sumac (Rhus
copallinum), common elderberry (Sambucus canadensis), and blackberry (Rubus occidentalis). Existing
mature forest is located on the right floodplain of the northern extent of UT3b. Woody forest edges also
occur along portions of the southern and eastern Parcel boundaries. See Table 6 for existing woody and
herbaceous species noted within the Parcel.
Table 6: Existing Vegetation
Woody Herbaceous
Species Common Name Species Common Name
Acer rubra red maple Arundinaria sp. rivercane
Betula nigra river birch Bidens spp. tickseed
Cyrilla racemiflora swamp titi Boehmeria cylindrica smallspike false nettle
Ilex opaca American holly Campsis radicans trumpet vine
Ligustrum sinense Chinese privet Carex lurida lurid sedge
Liquidambar styraciflua sweetgum Eupatorium capillifolium Dog fennel
Liriodendron tulipifera tulip poplar Lespedeza cuneata sericea lespedeza
Nyssa biflora black gum Lonicera japonica Japanese honeysuckle
Pinus taeda loblolly pine Ludwigia alternifolia seedbox
Prunus serotina black cherry Juncus spp. rush
Quercus alba white oak Murdannia keisak marsh dewflower
Quercus falcata southern red oak Panicum spp. panicgrass
Quercus nigra water oak Parthenocissus quinquefolia Virginia creeper
Rhus copallinum winged sumac Paspalum urvillei Vasey’s grass
Rubus occidentalis blackberry Phytolacca americana American pokeweed
Salix nigra black willow Polygonum pensylvanicum smartweed
Sambucus canadensis common elderberry Solidago spp. goldenrod
2.7 Threatened and Endangered Species
The NC Natural Heritage Program (NHP) database and the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
Information for Planning and Consultation database (IPaC) were searched for federally listed threatened
and endangered plant and animal species in Wayne County, NC. Three listed endangered or threatened
species and one species proposed for listing as endangered or threatened were identified. Respectively,
these are the Red-cockaded Woodpecker (Picoides borealis), the Neuse River Waterdog (Necturus
lewisi), the Carolina Madtom (Notorus furiousus), and the Tricolored bat (Perimyotis subflavus).
Wildlands performed a pedestrian survey of the project parcel on April 18, 2023. It was determined that
there is no suitable habitat for any of the listed species; therefore, the project will have “no effect” on
the federally listed species. It was determined that suitable habitat is present for the proposed listed
species, but no roosts were observed and restoration activity is unlikely to adversely affect this species.
USFWS was contacted on July 7, 2023 with request for comment on the project. USFWS responded on
July 14, 2023 with their concurrence of Wildlands’ findings. The USFWS correspondence and Self-
Certification Letter packet is included in Appendix D.

GeorgiannaGeorgiannaGeorgiannaGeorgianna Nutrient OffsetNutrient OffsetNutrient OffsetNutrient Offset Bank ParcelBank ParcelBank ParcelBank Parcel Nutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset Plan
HUC 03020201 Page 6 April 2024
2.8 Cultural Resources
There are no existing structures in the project area. The Parcel is not located near any sites listed on the
National Register with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). SHPO was contacted with request
for review and comment on July 7, 2023. SHPO responded on August 1, 2023 stating they are aware of
no historic resources which would be affected by the project. The SHPO response and request are
included in Appendix D.
2.9 FEMA Floodplain Compliance
No grading activities are proposed in the FEMA floodplain, so a floodplain development permit will not
be required. No hydraulic modeling is proposed for this project.
2.10 Parcel Location, Parcel Constraints, and Access
The Parcel is accessible via a dirt farm road off US Highway 13 (See Figure 7). There is one external
culvert crossing along UT3b, which was determined to be clogged at the time of Site Viability
Assessment. On March 27, 2024, Wildlands found the culvert to be cleared (see Appendix A). Wildlands
will ensure the culvert crossing on UT3b remains cleared at the time of As-Built and through the
duration of monitoring.
Three additional culverts exist on the Parcel which will all be removed. One culvert is located at the top
of UT1, another is located at the top of UT2, and the third is along UT3a (See Figure 7).
2.11 Other Environmental Conditions
An EDR Radius Map Report with Geocheck was ordered for the Parcel through Environmental Data
Resources, Inc. on March 23, 2023. Neither the target property nor the adjacent properties were listed in
any of the Federal, State, or Tribal environmental databases searched by EDR. There were no known or
potentially hazardous waste sites identified within or immediately adjacent to the project area. The
Executive Summary of the EDR report is included in the Appendix.
3.0 Site Protection Instrument
The land required for planting, management, and stewardship of the nutrient offset project includes
portions of the parcels listed in Table 7. The Parcel will remain in private ownership, protected in its
entirety by an approved NCDWR long term stewardship, and will be managed under the terms detailed
in an approved NCDWR conservation easement.
Table 7: Site Protection Instrument
Landowner PIN County Site Protection
Instrument
Deed Book and
Page Number
Acreage to
be Protected
James O Burch
Trustee
2556-16-8963
2556-15-6813
2556-15-6095
Wayne Conservation
Easement
To Be
Recorded 49.7
4.0 Nutrient Offset Work Plan
The project will restore agriculturally impacted land along project features to a protected riparian
corridor, improving the ecological function of the area. The project design will ensure that no adverse
impacts to existing riparian areas occur. Figure 7 illustrates the conceptual design for the Parcel. Figure 8
further depicts the riparian zones and designated widths for the Parcel.

GeorgiannaGeorgiannaGeorgiannaGeorgianna Nutrient OffsetNutrient OffsetNutrient OffsetNutrient Offset Bank ParcelBank ParcelBank ParcelBank Parcel Nutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset Plan
HUC 03020201 Page 7 April 2024
4.1 Parcel Preparation
Most areas slated for restoration will require little parcel preparation because the land has been cleared
and maintained for agriculture; therefore, soil disturbance during planting of the project will be minimal.
Moreover, due to repeated agricultural use, Parcel soils are not compacted and will not require any soil
ripping. During June of 2023, the condition of herbaceous cover was visually assessed across the Parcel.
Herbaceous vegetation had established naturally, therefore seeding is not expected to be necessary.
Details on species observed are found in Table 6. If desirable herbaceous vegetation does not appear to
be establishing naturally during the spring of 2025, Wildlands will note the areas of deficiency and seed
them prior to monitoring year 1. An appropriate permanent seed mixture will be planted that may
include species beneficial to pollinators. Seeding will not be applied to areas with an existing native
herbaceous layer. Seeding used will be a mix of cover crop species, such as millet (Urochlea racemosa)
and clover (Trifolium repens), and permanent native species, such as black-eyed susan (Rudbeckia hirta),
partridge pea (Chamaecrista fasciculata), and Indiangrass (Sorghastrum nutans). Cover crop species are
to ensure quick establishment of herbaceous vegetation to provide ground coverage while permanent
native herbaceous species become established. Soil samples will also be collected and analyzed prior to
planting to determine if soil amendments are necessary to support herbaceous and planted stem
success.
Culverts at the top of UT1, the top of UT2, and along UT3a will be removed. Following their removals a
combination of coir matting, live stakes, and seeding with cover crop and native permanent species will
be applied to ensure the banks remain stable. Additionally, bank stabilization will occur where erosional
rills, sink holes, and gullies are observed on UT2. Bank stabilization may include a combination of coir
matting, live stake planting, seeding, and the installation of hay bales to slow and divert overland flow
near affected banks. Neither Division of Energy, Mineral, and Land Resources (DEMLR), nor local County
permits, are anticipated for stabilizing compromised areas. An external culvert crossing at the
downstream end of UT3b will remain; however, it was determined to be clogged at the time of Site
Viability Assessment. On March 27, 2024, Wildlands observed that the culvert was cleared (see
Appendix A). Wildlands will ensure the culvert crossing on UT3b remains cleared at the time of As-Built
and throughout the duration of monitoring.
4.2 Riparian Area Restoration Activities
Riparian area restoration will involve planting appropriate native tree species along the riparian corridor.
More specifically, riparian restoration for Nutrient Offset Credits will occur 0’ to 200’ from the top of
bank on project streams, ephemeral channels, and ditches (Figure 7). Areas not for credit include
locations where the riparian width is less than 50’ from the top of bank, which includes a small portion
on UT1 and UT3, as well as portions of the Parcel that are further than 200’ from the top of bank. Ditch
Db and Ditch E are subject to the Buffer Interpretation /Clarification Memo #2008-019 where
maintenance of diffuse flow into the conservation easement cannot be attained. The Buffer
Interpretation /Clarification Memo #2008-019 can be found in Appendix C. Ditch F flows to Ditch E
within the Parcel and will be planted with a combination of live staked species and bald cypress
(Taxodium distichum) to prevent concentrated stormflows from entering Ditch E. Saturation at the
surface, hydric soil indicators, fine sediment rather than coarse sorted sediment, hydrophytic
vegetation, and algae were all observed within Ditch F, indicating that it functions similarly to a wetland.
Bald cypress was therefore selected due to its ability to thrive within such areas. Table 8 below details
species selected for planting within Ditch F. Minor bank stabilization work will be completed along UT2
as described in Section 4.1. Herbaceous seeding will be done as needed across the Parcel and where
bank stabilization work is completed. Details on herbaceous seeding can be found in Table 8 below and
Section 4.1 above.

GeorgiannaGeorgiannaGeorgiannaGeorgianna Nutrient OffsetNutrient OffsetNutrient OffsetNutrient Offset Bank ParcelBank ParcelBank ParcelBank Parcel Nutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset Plan
HUC 03020201 Page 8 April 2024
Vegetation management and herbicide applications may be needed over the first few years of tree
establishment in the riparian restoration areas to prevent undesirable species from out-competing
planted native vegetation. Tree and herbaceous species to be planted across the riparian areas of the
Parcel will include a mixture of species listed in Table 8 below.
Table 8: Selected Planting Species
Tree Species
Species Common Name Density Forest Strata Tree/Shrub/Herb
Platanus occidentalis American Sycamore 10% Canopy Tree
Betula nigra River Birch 10% Canopy Tree
Diospyros virginiana Common Persimmon 5% Canopy Tree
Quercus nigra Water Oak 10% Canopy Tree
Quercus phellos Willow Oak 10% Canopy Tree
Quercus pagoda Cherrybark Oak 10% Canopy Tree
Ulmus americana American Elm 10% Canopy Tree
Populus deltoides Eastern Cottonwood 10% Canopy Tree
Magnolia virginiana Sweetbay Magnolia 10% Sub-canopy Tree
Acer negundo Boxelder 10% Canopy Tree
Prunus serotina Black Cherry 5% Canopy Tree
Herbaceous Species
Rudbeckia hirta Black-eyed Susan N/A Herbaceous –
Permanent Seed Mix Herb
Chamaecrista
fasciculata Partridge Pea N/A Herbaceous –
Permanent Seed Mix Herb
Sorghastrum nutans Indiangrass N/A Herbaceous –
Permanent Seed Mix Herb
Urochlea racemose Browntop Millet N/A Herbaceous –
Temporary Seed Mix Herb
Trifolium repens Ladino Clover N/A Herbaceous –
Temporary Seed Mix Herb
Ditch F Planting
Taxodium distichum Bald Cypress 50% Canopy Tree
Salix nigra Black Willow 50% Canopy Tree
Trees will be spaced at 7’X12’ upon planting, which is equivalent to a density of 519 stems per acre and
is sufficient to meet the performance standards outlined in Rule 15A NCAC 02B .0295 of 260 stems per
acre at the end of five years. There are approximately 5.7 acres of non-credited areas within the Parcel
which are a result of the riparian width exceeding 200 feet (see Figure 7). These areas will be planted,
but at a lower density of 303 stems per acre. This is equivalent to an approximate spacing of 12’X12’. No
one species will be planted at a composition higher than 15% throughout the Parcel. Stems will be well
mixed prior to planting to ensure diversity of bare root species across the Parcel. Due to the nature of

GeorgiannaGeorgiannaGeorgiannaGeorgianna Nutrient OffsetNutrient OffsetNutrient OffsetNutrient Offset Bank ParcelBank ParcelBank ParcelBank Parcel Nutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset Plan
HUC 03020201 Page 9 April 2024
random mixing, some stems of the same species might be planted together in some areas. Figure 7
illustrates areas proposed for planting. Planting is scheduled for December 2024.
4.3 NCDWR As-Built Evaluation
Within 30 calendar days after completing the establishment of the nutrient offset areas, the Sponsor will
submit written notification to NCDWR documenting that all nutrient offset activities have been
completed. Failure to submit written notification within 30 days may result in a modified credit release
schedule or a delay in the issuance of credit releases.
By the time of the NCDWR As-Built Evaluation, planting, vegetation plot installation, and easement
boundary demarcation will be completed. Culvert maintenance, three culvert removals, and bank
stabilization measures along UT2 will also be completed.
5.0 Monitoring and Maintenance Plan
5.1 Monitoring Protocol
Vegetation monitoring plots will be installed and evaluated within the riparian restoration areas to
measure the survival of the planted trees. Approximately 42.3 acres will be planted for Nutrient Offset
Nitrogen Credit. A total of 34 plots, making up 2 percent of the planted area, will be established within
the riparian restoration areas and will be randomly placed such that the plots are representative of the
nutrient offset credit areas (Figure 9). Of the 34 vegetation plots, 25 will be fixed in the same location
through the duration of the five-year monitoring period, and 9 will be placed randomly each year of
assessment. Each of the 34 plots will be 100 square meters; however, the 25 fixed plots will be 10 x 10
meter square plots while the 9 random plots will be circular with a radius of 5.64 meters. The equation
used to calculate the vegetation plot number is as follows:
42.3 acres x 0.02 = 0.846 acres
0.846 acres/0.0247 acres = 34.25 vegetation plots
Vegetation assessments will be conducted and follow the Carolina Vegetation Survey (CVS) Level 2
Protocol for Recording Vegetation (2008). A reference photo will be taken from the southwestern corner
of each of the 34 plots. Planting within Ditch F will be monitored annually to ensure stem survival, and
photographs will be included within each monitoring report. Overview photos will be taken each
monitoring year and provided in the annual reports. All planted stems will be marked with flagging tape
and recorded.
The first annual monitoring activities will commence at the end of the first growing season, at least five
months after planting has been completed and no earlier than the fall season. Species composition,
individual stem height, and survival rates will be evaluated in each plot during monitoring years 1, 3, and
5, and included in monitoring reports. Additionally, average vigor per plot will be evaluated in
monitoring years 1, 3, and 5 and included in monitoring reports. During monitoring years 2 and 4 stem
density will be recorded, and visual assessments will be completed, however individual stem height and
average vigor per plot will not be required. The total number of volunteer woody stems will be
documented and reported each monitoring year. The measure of vegetative success for the Parcel will
be the survival of at least four native hardwood tree or shrub species, where no one species is greater
than 50% of stems, and an established density of at least 260 stems per acre at the end of the fifth year
of monitoring. Appropriate and desirable native volunteer species may be included in the Parcel’s
density to meet the performance standards with written NCDWR approval.

GeorgiannaGeorgiannaGeorgiannaGeorgianna Nutrient OffsetNutrient OffsetNutrient OffsetNutrient Offset Bank ParcelBank ParcelBank ParcelBank Parcel Nutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset Plan
HUC 03020201 Page 10 April 2024
The Sponsor shall submit the annual monitoring report to NCDWR by December 31st of each year for five
consecutive years and will follow the terms and conditions of the NOBI.
5.2 Parcel Maintenance
If the Parcel or a specific component of the Parcel fails to achieve the success criteria outlined in Section
5.1, adaptive measures will be developed and/or appropriate remedial actions will be implemented.
Maintenance will be performed to correct any identified problems on the Parcel that have a high
likelihood of affecting project success. Such items include, but are not limited to, fire, flooding, drought,
or insects that cause excess tree mortality. Any actions implemented will be designed to achieve the
success criteria and will include a work schedule and updated monitoring criteria. A rigorous herbicide
schedule may need to be implemented in the first few years of tree establishment in the restoration
areas to prevent establishment of invasive species that may out-compete the planted native vegetation.
The only herbicides used on the Parcel will be aquatic approved herbicides that will be applied in
accordance with North Carolina Department of Agriculture rules and regulations.
The easement boundary will be checked annually as part of monitoring activities. Easement boundary
conditions as well as any maintenance performed will be reported in the annual monitoring reports to
NCDWR. If mowing is deemed necessary by the Sponsor during the monitoring period, the Sponsor must
receive approval from NCDWR prior to conducting any mowing activities within Zone 1 and Zone 2 of
the Neuse buffers to ensure that no buffer violations have occurred.
5.3 Easement Boundaries
Easement boundaries will be identified in the field to ensure clear distinction between the Parcel and
adjacent properties. Boundaries may be identified by marker, post, tree-blazing, or other means as
allowed by Parcel conditions and/or conservation easement prior to the NCDWR on-site As-Built
evaluation for Task 2 credit release. Contact information for the conservation easement holder will be
included on easement markers. The easement boundary will be checked annually at a minimum as part
of monitoring activities and the conditions as well as any maintenance performed will be reported in the
annual monitoring reports to NCDWR. Boundary markers that have been disturbed, damaged, or
destroyed will be repaired and/or replaced on an as needed basis. In the case of a conservation easement
encroachment, written notification will be provided to the landowner, or third party, and corrective
measures will be taken. The Sponsor will forward all communication via email to NCDWR promptly, and
all information will be included within the appropriate year’s monitoring report.
6.0 Financial Assurance and Long-Term Management
6.1 Financial Assurances
Following approval of the Georgianna Nutrient Offset Plan, the Sponsor shall provide a Performance
Bond from a surety that is rated no less than an “A-“ as rated by A.M. Best. The Performance Bond
amount shall be 100% of the estimated cost for implementation of the project as described in the
Nutrient Offset Plan, but not less than $150,000.00. In lieu of posting the performance bond, the
Sponsor may elect to construct the project prior to the first credit release. In that case no performance
bond will be necessary.
After completion of the restoration/construction, a separate Performance/Maintenance Bond will be
secured for 100% of the estimated cost to implement the monitoring and maintenance plan but not less
than $100,000.00 initially. The Performance/Maintenance Bond shall apply at the inception of the
monitoring period for a term of one year and be extended annually for a minimum of five years. Upon

GeorgiannaGeorgiannaGeorgiannaGeorgianna Nutrient OffsetNutrient OffsetNutrient OffsetNutrient Offset Bank ParcelBank ParcelBank ParcelBank Parcel Nutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset Plan
HUC 03020201 Page 11 April 2024
NCDWR approval, this may be lowered each year based on the adjusted cost to complete the
monitoring.
Performance bonds for monitoring shall be renewed at least annually to cover the next year’s
monitoring period, with confirmation of renewal provided to NCDWR with each annual monitoring
report when applicable. NCDWR reserves the right to alter the credit release schedule if monitoring
reports are submitted without proof of bond renewals when applicable.
6.2 Long-term Management
The Parcel will remain in private ownership, protected in its entirety by an approved NCDWR long term
steward and will be managed under the terms detailed in an approved NCDWR conservation easement.
The long-term manager will be chosen prior to the submittal of the Year 4 Monitoring report and will be
responsible for periodic inspection of the Parcel to ensure that the restrictions documented in the
recorded easement are upheld in perpetuity in accordance with the Parcel’s NOBI. In accordance with
the Parcel’s NOBI, no remaining credits will be released for Monitoring Year 4 until the conservation
easement has been assigned to an approved land trust or stewardship entity.
7.0 Project Credit Potential
Of the 49.7 acres protected under the conservation easement, the Mitigation Activity for 42.3 acres is
riparian restoration. All 42.3 acres of restoration are proposed for nutrient offset credit. Nutrient offset
credit totals were calculated using a combination of existing conditions data collected on-site and GIS
software. The existing top of bank of project features along with the existing tree line collected at the
base of trees were collected by a Professional Land Surveyor. GIS tools were then used to create
polygons which extend out a specified distance from the surveyed top of banks. These polygons were
then designated certain credit types based on factors including but not limited to distance from the top
of bank, whether the area was within the surveyed existing tree line, and project feature type. The
Buffer Interpretation /Clarification Memo #2008-019 applies to Ditch Db, and Ditch E where
maintenance of diffuse flow onsite is unattainable; therefore, a total of 5,769 square feet are removed
from the creditable area. The Buffer Interpretation /Clarification Memo #2008-019 can be found in
Appendix C. Ditch F flows to Ditch E, however, it is being planted to ensure that concentrated flow does
not enter Ditch E and the diffuse flow remains throughout the surrounding riparian areas. Due to
planting within Ditch F, its footprint is being included within the nutrient offset credit area. The
management objectives and proposed amount of nutrient offset credits are presented in Tables 9 and
10, below. Areas of riparian restoration where Wildlands is seeking Nutrient Offset Credit will not be
convertible to Riparian Buffer Credits per the Parcel's NOBI. There will be one credit ledger for the
project: A Nitrogen Nutrient Offset Credit Ledger.

GeorgiannaGeorgiannaGeorgiannaGeorgianna Nutrient OffsetNutrient OffsetNutrient OffsetNutrient Offset Bank ParcelBank ParcelBank ParcelBank Parcel Nutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset Plan
HUC 03020201 Page 12 April 2024

Upon submittal of the appropriate documentation by the Sponsor and subsequent approval by NCDWR, the nutrient offset credits associated
with the Georgianna Nutrient Offset Bank Parcel will be released as described in the NOBI.
Table 9. Georgianna Project Credit Table
Neuse 03020201 - Outside Falls Lake Project Area
19.16394 N Credit Conversion Ratio (ft2/pound)
N/A P Credit Conversion Ratio (ft2/pound)
Credit
Type
Feature
Type
Mitigation
Activity
Min-Max
Buffer Width
(ft)
Feature Name Total Area
(ft2)
Credit
Ratio
(x:1)
Convertible
to Nutrient
Offset?
Delivered
Nutrient
Offset: N
(lbs)
Delivered
Nutrient
Offset: P
(lbs)
Nutrient
Offset I / P Restoration 0-100 UT1, UT2. UT3b 687,257 1 Yes 35,861.989 —
Nutrient
Offset I / P Restoration 101-200 UT1, UT2, UT3b 536,988 1 Yes 28,020.751 —
Nutrient
Offset Ephemeral Restoration 0-100 UT3a 88,845 1 Yes 4,636.051 —
Nutrient
Offset Ephemeral Restoration 101-200 UT3a 72,525 1 Yes 3,784.451 —
Nutrient
Offset Ditch Restoration 0-100 Ditch A, Ditch B, Ditch
Cb, Ditch Db 269,151 1 Yes 14,044.659 —
Nutrient
Offset Ditch Restoration 101-200 Ditch A, Ditch B, Ditch
Cb, Ditch Db 187,905 1 Yes 9,805.134 —
Nutrient
Offset Ditch Restoration 101-200
Non-Diffused Flow
Deductions - Ditch Db,
Ditch E
5,769 1 No — —
Nutrient
Offset Ditch Restoration 0-50 UT1, UT3b < 50’ 2,230 1 No — —
Totals (ft2): 1,850,671 Total
Credits: 96,153.035 0.000

GeorgiannaGeorgiannaGeorgiannaGeorgianna Nutrient OffsetNutrient OffsetNutrient OffsetNutrient Offset Bank ParcelBank ParcelBank ParcelBank Parcel Nutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset PlanNutrient Offset Plan
HUC 03020201 Page 13 April 2024
8.0 References
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ), 2015. 15A NCAC 02B .0259 Mitigation
Program Requirements for Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Buffers.
http://reports.oah.state.nc.us/ncac/title%2015a%20-
%20environmental%20quality/chapter%2002%20-
%20environmental%20management/subchapter%20b/15a%20ncac%2002b%20.0295.pdf
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP), 2010. 2010 Neuse River Basin Restoration
Priorities Plan (RBRP).
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Mitigation%20Services/Watershed_Planning/Neuse_River_Basin/FINAL
%20RBRP%20Neuse%202010_%2020111207%20CORRECTED.pdf
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NHP), 2019. Natural Heritage Element Occurrence Database,
Wayne County, NC. https://www.ncnhde.natureserve.org
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), 2006. Natural Resources Conservation Service, Soil
Survey Geographic (SSURGO) database for Wayne County, North Carolina.
https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 2018. Endangered Species, Threatened Species, Federal
Species of Concern and Candidate Species, Wayne County, NC. https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/

^_
FallingCreekChurchRd
13
Aerial Photography 2021
0 0.5 1 Miles
Bank Parcel
Conservation Easement
^_Georgianna Bank Parcel
Location
Wayne County, NC
Figure 1. Vicinity Map
Georgianna Nutrient Offset Bank Parcel
Nutrient Offset Plan
Neuse River Basin (03020201)
¹
Directions: From the City of Raleigh, travel
east on I-40 for approximately 42 miles. Take
exit 341 for NC-50/NC-55 towards US13/
Newton Grove. Keep left at the fork, follow
signs for Newton Grove. Turn left onto NC-50
S/NC-55 E. At the traffic circle, take the 4th
exit onto US-13 N/Goldsboro Street.
Continue on Goldsboro Street for
approximately 12 miles. The Parcel will be
located on the left.
54
501
501
158
401
70
15
64
40
40
Occaneec hi-Saponi
S DTS A
N o r t h C a r o l i n a
Sanford
Durham
Cary
Burlington
87
24
401
1
Fort Liberty
Brookhaven
Gaineys Place
Fayetteville
Falls
Reser v oir
Lak e
Ga s ton
58
96
96
158
401
401
401
1
1
15
795
540
85
40
87
Haliwa-S ap on i
SDTSA
Wilson
Rocky Mount
Raleigh
24
117
117
421
40
Coharie S DTS A
Clinton
Goldsboro
^_
County Boundaries
HUC 03020201
Nutrient Offset Credit
Service Area
^_Georgianna Bank Parcel
Location
0 6 12 Miles ¹Figure 2. Credit Service Area Map
Georgianna Nutrient Offset Bank Parcel
Nutrient Offset Plan
Neuse River Basin (03020201)
Wayne County, NC
03020201
Existing Culvert
to be Removed
Existing Culvert
to be Removed
Existing Culvert
to be Removed
ÛÚ
ÛÚ
ÛÚ
ÛÚ
UT
2
UT
3
b
UT1
Ditch
D
b
Ditch Cb
Ditch A
U
T
3
a
Ditch B
UT2
Ditch Ca
Ditch F
Ditch E
Bank Erosion to
be Stabilized
Bank Erosion to
be Stabilized
Bank Erosion to
be Stabilized
Ditch F to be PlantedDi
t
c
h

D
a
Figure 3. Existing Conditions Map
Georgianna Nutrient Offset Bank Parcel
Nutrient Offset Plan
Neuse River Basin (03020201)
0 200 400 Feet ¹
Wayne County, NC
2021 Aerial Photography
Project Location
Bank Parcel Conservation
Easement
Ingress/Egress Easement
Project Stream
Project Ephemeral Channel
Project Ditch
Non-Project Ditch
Non-Project Stream
Intermittent Origin
Ephemeral Origin
ÛÚ Existing Culverts
0 200 400 Feet
Grantham USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Quadrangle
Bank Parcel Conservation
Easement
Figure 4. USGS Topographic Map
Georgianna Nutrient Offset Bank Parcel
Nutrient Offset Plan
Neuse River Basin (03020201)
Wayne County, NC
¹
13
L
o
o
p
R
d
US Highway 13 S
13
US Highway 13 S
UT2
UT
3
b
UT1
Ditch D
b
Ditch Cb
Ditch A
U
T
3
a
Ditch B
UT2
Ditch Ca
Ditch FDitch E
Di
t
c
h

D
a
Figure 5. Watershed Map
Georgianna Nutrient Offset Bank Parcel
Nutrient Offset Plan
Neuse River Basin (03020201)
Wayne County, NC
Bank Parcel Conservation
Easement
Project Stream
Project Ephemeral Channel
Project Ditch
Non-Project Ditch
UT1 Watershed (26 ac)
UT2 Watershed (62 ac)
UT3a Watershed (5 ac)
UT3b Watershed (56 ac)
Non-Project Stream
Topographic Contours (2')
0 250 500 Feet ¹
2021 Aerial Photography
1974 NRCS Soil Survey of Wayne County - Sheet 29
Bank Parcel
Conservation Easement
Figure 6. 1974 NRCS Soil Survey Map
Georgianna Nutrient Offset Bank Parcel
Nutrient Offset Plan
Neuse River Basin (03020201)
Wayne County, NC
0 200 400 Feet ¹
Figure 7. Project Credits Map
Georgianna Nutrient Offset Bank Parcel
Nutrient Offset Plan
Neuse River Basin (03020201)
Wayne County, NC
Existing Culvert
to be Removed
Existing Culvert
to be Removed
Existing Culvert
to be Removed
Di
t
c
h

D
a
ÛÚ
ÛÚ
ÛÚ
ÛÚ
UT
2
UT
3
b
UT1
Ditch
D
b
Ditch Cb
Ditch A
U
T
3
a
Ditch B
UT2
Ditch Ca
Ditch F
Ditch E
Bank Erosion to
be Stabilized
Bank Erosion to
be Stabilized
Bank Erosion to
be Stabilized
Ditch F to be Planted
UT
1
50'
UT
3
b
50'
Project Location
Bank Parcel Conservation
Easement
Ingress/Egress Easement
Project Stream
Project Ephemeral Channel
Project Ditch
Non-Project Ditch
Riparian Restoration for Nutrient
Offset Credits (0'-100')
Riparian Restoration for Nutrient
Offset Credits (101' - 200')
Riparian Restoration for Nutrient
Offset Credits (0'-100') - Ephemeral
Riparian Restoration for Nutrient
Offset Credits (101'-200') -
Ephemeral
Non-diffused Flow
Not For Credit
Proposed Planting Area
Non-Project Stream
Surveyed Treeline
Intermittent Origin
Ephemeral Origin
ÛÚ Existing Culverts
0 200 400 Feet ¹
2021 Aerial Photography
UT2
UT
3
b
UT1
Ditch
D
b
Ditch Cb
Ditch A
U
T
3
a
Ditch B
UT2
Ditch Ca
Ditch F
Ditch E
Dit
c
h

D
a
0 200 400 Feet ¹
Wayne County, NC
Figure 8. Riparian Buffer Zones Map
Georgianna Nutrient Offset Bank Parcel
Nutrient Offset Plan
Neuse River Basin (03020201)
Project Location
Bank Parcel Conservation
Easement
Ingress/Egress Easement
Project Stream
Project Ephemeral Channel
Project Ditch
Non-Project Ditch
Riparian Restoration for Nutrient
Offset Credits (0'-100')
Riparian Restoration for Nutrient
Offset Credits (101' - 200')
Riparian Restoration for Nutrient
Offset Credits (0'-100') - Ephemeral
Riparian Restoration for Nutrient
Offset Credits (101'-200') -
Ephemeral
Non-diffused Flow
Not For Credit
50' from Top of Bank
100' from Top of Bank
200' from Top of Bank
Non-Project Stream
2021 Aerial Photography
UT
2
UT
3
b
UT1
Ditch D
b
Ditch Cb
Ditch A
U
T
3
a
Ditch B
UT2
Ditch Ca
Ditch F
Ditch E
Di
t
c
h

D
a
Ditch F to be Planted
0 200 400 Feet ¹
Wayne County, NC
Figure 9. Monitoring Components Map
Georgianna Nutrient Offset Bank Parcel
Nutrient Offset Plan
Neuse River Basin (03020201)
Project Location
Bank Parcel Conservation
Easement
Project Stream
Project Ephemeral Channel
Project Ditch
Non-Project Ditch
Riparian Restoration for Nutrient
Offset Credits (0'-100')
Riparian Restoration for Nutrient
Offset Credits (101' - 200')
Riparian Restoration for Nutrient
Offset Credits (0'-100') -
Ephemeral
Riparian Restoration for Nutrient
Offset Credits (101'-200') -
Ephemeral
Non-diffused Flow
Not For Credit
Fixed Vegetation Plot
Rotating Vegetation Plot
Non-Project Stream
2021 Aerial Photography

APPENDIX A

CURRENT LAND USE PHOTOGRAPHS 
Georgianna Nutrient Offset Bank Parcel 

Georgianna Nutrient Offset Bank Parcel
HUC 03020201 

UT1 – Downstream (6/28/2023) UT2 ‐‐Downstream (6/28/2023) 

UT2 –Upstream (6/28/2023) UT2 – Upstream near confluence with UT3 (6/28/2023) 

Ditch A – Upstream near confluence with UT2 (6/28/2023) Ditch B – Upstream near confluence with UT3 (6/28/2023) 

Georgianna Nutrient Offset Bank Parcel
HUC 03020201 

Ditch B – Downstream at origin (6/28/2023) Ditch Cb – Downstream (6/28/2023) 

Ditch Cb – Upstream near confluence with UT3 (6/28/2023) Ditch Db – Upstream from confluence with UT3 (6/28/2023) 

Ditch Db – Downstream at origin (6/28/2023) Ephemeral UT3a – Upstream (6/28/2023)

Georgianna Nutrient Offset Bank Parcel
HUC 03020201 

UT3b – Upstream (6/28/2023) UT3b – Downstream (6/28/2023) 

UT3b – Upstream (6/28/2023) UT3b – Upstream (6/28/2023) 

UT3b – Culvert Inlet (3/27/2024) UT3b – Culvert Outlet (3/27/2024) 

APPENDIX B
The EDR Aerial Photo Decade Package
Georgianna Mitigation Bank Parcel
US Hwy 13 S
Goldsboro, NC 27530
Inquiry Number:
March 24, 2023
7288244.5
6 Armstrong Road, 4th floor
Shelton, CT 06484
Toll Free: 800.352.0050
www.edrnet.com
2020 1"=500'Flight Year: 2020 USDA/NAIP
2012 1"=500'Flight Year: 2012 USDA/NAIP
2009 1"=500'Flight Year: 2009 USDA/NAIP
2006 1"=500'Flight Year: 2006 USDA/NAIP
1999 1"=500'Acquisition Date: January 01, 1999 USGS/DOQQ
1993 1"=500'Acquisition Date: March 09, 1993 USGS/DOQQ
1983 1"=500'Flight Date: March 02, 1983 NHAP
1973 1"=500'Flight Date: March 20, 1973 USGS
1964 1"=500'Flight Date: April 01, 1964 USGS
1961 1"=500'Flight Date: October 05, 1961 USGS
1959 1"=500'Flight Date: March 04, 1959 USDA
1950 1"=500'Flight Date: November 21, 1950 USGS
EDR Aerial Photo Decade Package 03/24/23
Georgianna Mitigation Bank Parcel
Site Name:Client Name:
Wildlands Eng, Inc.
US Hwy 13 S 1430 South Mint Street
Goldsboro, NC 27530 Charlotte, NC 28203
EDR Inquiry #7288244.5 Contact:Tasha King
Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) Aerial Photo Decade Package is a screening tool designed to assist
environmental professionals in evaluating potential liability on a target property resulting from past activities. EDR’s
professional researchers provide digitally reproduced historical aerial photographs, and when available, provide one photo
per decade.
Search Results:
Year Scale Details Source
When delivered electronically by EDR, the aerial photo images included with this report are for ONE TIME USE
ONLY. Further reproduction of these aerial photo images is prohibited without permission from EDR. For more
information contact your EDR Account Executive.
Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice
Copyright 2023 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of
Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission.
EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, LLC or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein
are the property of their respective owners.
7288244 5-page 2
This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, LLC. It cannot
be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. This Report is provided on an
“AS IS”, “AS AVAILABLE” basis. NO WARRANTY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT.
ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, LLC AND ITS SUBSIDIARIES, AFFILIATES AND THIRD PARTY SUPPLIERS DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, OF ANY
KIND OR NATURE, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ARISING OUT OF OR RELATED TO THIS REPORT OR ANY OF THE DATA AND INFORMATION PROVIDED IN
THIS REPORT, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES REGARDING ACCURACY, QUALITY, CORRECTNESS, COMPLETENESS,
COMPREHENSIVENESS, SUITABILITY, MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, TITLE, NON-INFRINGEMENT,
MISAPPROPRIATION, OR OTHERWISE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, LLC OR ITS
SUBSIDIARIES, AFFILIATES OR THIRD PARTY SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE TO ANYONE FOR ANY DIRECT, INCIDENTAL, INDIRECT, SPECIAL,
CONSEQUENTIAL OR OTHER DAMAGES OF ANY TYPE OR KIND (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO LOSS OF PROFITS, LOSS OF USE, OR LOSS OF
DATA), ARISING OUT OF OR IN ANY WAY CONNECTED WITH THIS REPORT OR ANY OF THE DATA AND INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS REPORT.
Any analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk levels, or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to
provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only an assessment
performed by a qualified environmental professional can provide findings, opinions or conclusions regarding the environmental risk or conditions in, on or at any
property.
7288244.5
2020
= 500'
7288244.5
2012
= 500'
7288244.5
2009
= 500'
7288244.5
2006
= 500'
7288244.5
1999
= 500'
7288244.5
1993
= 500'
7288244.5
1983
= 500'
7288244.5
1973
= 500'
7288244.5
1964
= 500'
7288244.5
1961
= 500'
7288244.5
1959
= 500'
7288244.5
1950
= 500'
APPENDIX C

North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality Division of Water Resources
512 North Salisbury Street 1611 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1611
919.707.9000

June 21, 2023

Project # 20230245 v.1
Wayne County

James O. Burch & Jared H. Burch
639 Burch Rd.
Faison, NC 28341

Subject: On-Site Determination for Applicability Neuse Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 02B.0714)
Subject Property/Project Name: Georgianna Mitigation Bank

Address / Location: 35.300949, -78.157332
Responsible Party: James O. Burch & Jared H. Burch

Feature(s) Evaluated (7): Ditches A-D, UT 1-3

Determination Date: February 27, 2023 Staff: Allen Stewart

Determination Type: Applicability to Neuse Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 02B .0714)

Buffer:

Feature:
X - Neuse (15A NCAC 02B .0714)
- Tar-Pamlico (15A NCAC 02B .0734)
- Catawba (15A NCAC 02B .0614)
- Jordan (15A NCAC 02B .0267) (governmental
and/or interjurisdictional projects)
- Randleman (15A NCAC 02B .0724)
- Goose Creek (15A NCAC 02B .0605-.0608)

X – Ephemeral/ Intermittent/Perennial /Ditch/
Not Present - Determination

North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality Division of Water Resources
512 North Salisbury Street 1611 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1611
919.707.9000

*Ephemeral / Intermittent / Perennial / Ditch / Not Present / Unmapped

Mr. Burch,

The Division of Water Resources has determined that the streams listed as “subject” above and
included on the attached map have been located on the most recent published (1974) NRCS Soil Survey
of Wayne County, North Carolina and/or the web based Digital USGS National Topographic Map
https://apps.nationalmap.gov/viewer/ and evaluated for applicability to the Neuse River Basin Riparian
Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 02B .0714). For each stream that is checked “Not Subject” it has been
determined to not be at least intermittent, not present on the property, a wetland area, ditch or not
represented on the most recent published (1974) NRCS Soil Survey of Wayne County, North Carolina
and/or the Digital USGS National Topographic Map at a scale of 1:24,000 or less. There may be other
streams or features located on the property that were not assessed and/or that do not appear on the
maps referenced above but may be considered jurisdictional according to the US Army Corps of
Engineers and subject to the Clean Water Act.

This on-site determination shall expire five (5) years from the date of this letter. Landowners or
affected parties that dispute a determination made by the DWR may request a determination by the
Director. An appeal request must be made within sixty (60) calendar days of date of this letter to the
Director in writing.

If sending via US Postal Service:
c/o Stephanie Goss

If sending via delivery service (UPS, FedEx, etc.):
c/o Stephanie Goss
Feature E/I/P/D
/NP/U*
Not
Subject
Subject Start@ Stop@ Soil
Survey
USGS
Topo
Ditch A D/U X ~35.301140,
-78.158175
UT 2
Ditch B D/U X Near Western
Property Line
/ Road
UT 3
Ditch C D/U X Near Eastern
Property Line
UT 3
Ditch D D/U X Near Southern
Property Line
/ Corner of
Property
UT 3
UT 1 I X Culvert at
Southern
Property Line
UT 2 X X
UT 2 I X Culvert at
Southern
Property Line
Leaves
Property at
Eastern
Property Line
X X
UT 3 E/U X Elbow of UT 2 35.302213,
-78.156471

UT 3 I/U X 35.302213,
-78.156471
Northern
Property Line

North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality Division of Water Resources
512 North Salisbury Street 1611 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1611
919.707.9000

DWR – 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
DWR – 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
512 N. Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604

This determination is final and binding as detailed above unless an appeal is requested within sixty (60)
days.

This determination only addresses the applicability to the buffer rules and does not approve
any activity within the buffers or waters. The project may require a Section 404/401 Permit for
the proposed activity. Any inquiries regarding applicability to the Clean Water Act should be
directed to the US Army Corps of Engineers Washington Regulatory Field Office at 2407 W 5th
St, Washington, NC 27889, [phone].

If you have questions regarding this determination, please feel free to contact Allen Stewart at (252)
946-6481.
Sincerely,

David May, Regional Supervisor
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Division of Water Resources, NCDEQ

cc: WaRO DWR File Copy/LASERFICHE
Emily Thompson, USACE Washington Regulatory Field Office
[e-mail]
Randal Jones, NCDEQ Land Resources, [e-mail]
Carolyn Lanza, Wildlands Engineering Inc., [e-mail]
Jared Burch, Owner, [e-mail]

North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality Division of Water Resources
512 North Salisbury Street 1611 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1611
919.707.9000

North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality Division of Water Resources
512 North Salisbury Street 1611 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1611
919.707.9000

September 11, 2023

Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Attn: Kaitlyn Hogarth
(via electronic mail: [e-mail] )

Re: Site Viability for Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation – Georgianna Site
Near 35.299233, -78.159173 at 3334 US Hwy 13 S, Goldsboro, NC
Neuse 03020201
Wayne County

Dear Ms. Hogarth,

On March 31, 2023, Katie Merritt, with the Division of Water Resources (DWR), received a request
from you on behalf of Wildlands Engineering, Inc (Wildlands) for a site visit near the above-
referenced site in the Neuse River Basin within the 8-digit Hydrologic Unit Code 03020201. The site
visit was to determine the potential for nutrient offset and buffer mitigation within a proposed
conservation easement boundary, which is more accurately depicted in the attached maps labeled
“Post Site Viability Walk” (Figure 1) prepared by Wildlands and edited by DWR. The proposed
easement boundary on Figure 1 includes all riparian areas intended to be proposed as part of the
mitigation site. On May 31, 2023, Ms. Merritt performed a site assessment of the subject site. Staff
with Wildlands were also present.

Ms. Merritt’s evaluation of the features onsite and their associated mitigation determination for the
riparian areas are provided in the table below. This evaluation was made from Top of Bank (TOB)
and landward 200’ from each feature for buffer mitigation pursuant to 15A NCAC 02B .0295 and for
nutrient offset credits pursuant to 15A NCAC 02B .0703 using 15A NCAC 02B .0295 to define the
mitigation type determinations.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 02D5F731-C928-4B07-B007-8F6FD8B315DF
Georgianna Site
Wildlands
September 11, 2023

Page 2 of 4
Feature Classification
onsite Subject
to
Buffer
Rule1
Riparian Land uses
adjacent to Feature
(0-200’)
Buffer
Credit
Viable
Nutrient
Offset
Viable3

Mitigation Type Determination w/in
riparian areas 4,5,8
UT1 Stream Yes Non-forested agricultural
fields
Yes Yes Restoration Site per 15A NCAC 02B
.0295 (n)
UT2

Stream

Yes

Non-forested agricultural
fields
A sink hole and active
eroding banks were
observed.

Yes

Yes

Restoration Site per 15A NCAC 02B
.0295 (n)

Minor bank stabilization and grading
needed where bank stability is
compromised and where erosional rills,
sink holes and gullies are observed.
UT3a Ephemeral No Non-forested agricultural
fields

Yes6 Yes Restoration Site per 15A NCAC 02B
.0295 (o)(7)

Site constraints consist of one culvert;
must be removed to maintain hydrologic
connectivity to UT3b

UT3b Stream No Non-forested agricultural
fields with forested areas
downstream
Yes2 Yes (non-
forested fields
only)
Non-forested fields - Restoration Site
per 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(3)

Forested areas – Preservation Site per
15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(4)

Site constraints consist of one culvert that
is impeding in-stream flow and aquatic
life passage; must be repaired and
unclogged in order for the downstream
portion of UT3b to viable for credits

A Ditch >3’ No Non-forested agricultural
fields
No Yes Restoration Site per 15A NCAC 02B
.0295 (n)

B Ditch >3’ No Non-forested agricultural
fields
No Yes Restoration Site per 15A NCAC 02B
.0295 (n)

Ca
(see map)
Ditch >3’ No Non-forested agricultural
fields
No No Directional flow (overland and in the
ditch) flows opposite direction
Cb
(see map)
Ditch >3’ No Non-forested agricultural
fields
No Yes Restoration Site per 15A NCAC 02B
.0295 (n)

Da Ditch No Not located within project
boundary but drains to Db
N/A N/A N/A
Db Ditch >3’ No Non-forested agricultural
fields
No Yes Restoration Site per 15A NCAC 02B
.0295 (n)

DocuSign Envelope ID: 02D5F731-C928-4B07-B007-8F6FD8B315DF
Georgianna Site
Wildlands
September 11, 2023

Page 3 of 4
1Subjectivity calls and stream origins for the features were determined by DWR in correspondence dated June 21, 2023 (DWR# 2023-
0245) using the 1:24,000 scale quadrangle topographic map prepared by USGS and the most recent printed version of the soil survey
map prepared by the NRCS.
2The area of preservation credit within a buffer mitigation site shall comprise of no more than 25 percent (25%) of the total area of buffer
mitigation per 15A NCAC 0295 (o)(5) and 15A NCAC 0295 (o)(4). Site cannot be a Preservation Only site to comply with this rule.
3NC Division of Water Resources - Methodology and Calculations for determining Nutrient Reductions associated with Riparian Buffer
Establishment
4 Determinations made for this Site are determined based on the proposal provided in maps and figures submitted with the request.
5 All features proposed for buffer mitigation or nutrient offset, must have a planted conservation easement established that includes the
tops of channel banks when being measured perpendicular and landward from the banks, even if no credit is viable within that riparian
area.
6The area of the mitigation site on ephemeral channels shall comprise no more than 25 percent (25%) of the total area of buffer
mitigation per 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(7).
7The area described as an Enhancement Site was assessed and determined to comply with all of 15A NCAC 02B .0295(o)(6). Cattle
exclusion fencing is required to be installed around the mitigation area to get buffer credit under this part of the rule.
8The confluence of a ditch to a stream is required to be secured with a conservation easement to preserve the hydrologic connectivity of
ditches to streams to be viable to generate buffer and/or nutrient offset credits

Determinations provided in the table above were made using a proposed easement boundary showing
proposed mitigation areas and features shown on Figure 1. The map representing the proposal for the
site is attached to this letter and initialed by Ms. Merritt on September 11, 2023. Substantial changes
to the proposed easement boundary as well as any site constraints identified in this letter that are not
addressed in a riparian restoration plan, could affect the Site’s potential to generate buffer mitigation
and nutrient offset credits.

This letter does not constitute an approval of this Site to generate buffer and nutrient offset credits.
Pursuant to 15A NCAC 02B .0295, a mitigation proposal and a mitigation plan shall be submitted to
DWR for written approval prior to conducting any mitigation activities in riparian areas and/or
surface waters for buffer mitigation credit. Pursuant to 15A NCAC 02B .0703, a proposal regarding a
proposed nutrient load-reducing measure for nutrient offset credit shall be submitted to DWR for
approval prior to any mitigation activities in riparian areas and/or surface waters.

All vegetative plantings, performance criteria and other mitigation requirements for riparian
restoration, enhancement and preservation must follow the requirements in 15A NCAC 02B .0295 to
be eligible for buffer and/or nutrient offset mitigation credits. For any areas depicted as not being
viable for nutrient offset credit above, one could propose a different measure, along with supporting
calculations and sufficient detail to support estimates of load reduction, for review by the DWR to
determine viability for nutrient offset in accordance with 15A NCAC 02B .0703.

This viability assessment will expire on September 11, 2025 or upon the submittal of a complete
mitigation plan by the DWR, whichever comes first. This letter should be provided in any
nutrient offset, buffer, stream or wetland mitigation plan for this Site.

Feature Classification
onsite Subject
to
Buffer
Rule1
Riparian Land uses
adjacent to Feature
(0-200’)
Buffer
Credit
Viable
Nutrient
Offset
Viable3

Mitigation Type Determination w/in
riparian areas 4,5,8
E Ditch No Non-forested agricultural
fields
No No Not present during baseline or rule
effective date
DocuSign Envelope ID: 02D5F731-C928-4B07-B007-8F6FD8B315DF
Georgianna Site
Wildlands
September 11, 2023

Page 4 of 4
Please contact Katie Merritt at [e-mail] if you have any questions regarding this
correspondence.
Sincerely,

Stephanie Goss, Supervisor
401 and Buffer Permitting Branch

Attachments: Figure 1 – Post Site Viability Walk Map

cc: File Copy (Katie Merritt)

DocuSign Envelope ID: 02D5F731-C928-4B07-B007-8F6FD8B315DF
DocuSign Envelope ID: 02D5F731-C928-4B07-B007-8F6FD8B315DF

APPENDIX D

Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (P) 704.332.7754 • 1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104 • Charlotte, NC 28203
July 7, 2023

US Fish and Wildlife Service
Raleigh ES Field Office
551-F Pylon Drive
Raleigh, NC 27606
Submitted via email: [e-mail]

Subject: Georgianna Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel
Wayne County, North Carolina

To whom it may concern,

Wildlands Engineering, Inc. requests review and comment on any possible issues that might emerge with respect
to fish and wildlife issues associated with a potential riparian buffer restoration project on the Georgianna
Mitigation Bank Parcel located in Wayne County, NC. A Site Map is enclosed. The site is located at latitude
35.299233 longitude -78.159173.
The Georgianna Mitigation Bank Parcel is being developed to provide riparian buffer and nutrient offset mitigation
in the Neuse River basin. The project will include buffer restoration along UT1, UT2, UT3, and four ditches that flow
to Falling Creek. Restoration activities will include planting native tree species along the riparian corridor, along
with the application of a regionally appropriate seed mix of warm season grasses and wildflowers in areas without
existing herbaceous cover. This buffer mitigation project will reduce sediment and nutrient loading, provide and
improve terrestrial and in stream habitats, and improve stream and bank stability. The area surrounding the
channels proposed for buffer restoration is a combination of agricultural fields and forest. Restoring the vegetative
buffer on the areas up to 200 feet from streams and ditches will remove crops and fertilizer inputs within the
project area. The restored floodplain areas will filter sediment during high rainfall events. The establishment of
riparian buffers will create shading to minimize thermal heating. Finally, newly planted native vegetation will
provide cover and food for wildlife.
The major goals of the proposed buffer restoration project are to provide ecological and water quality
enhancements to the Neuse River Basin by creating a functional riparian corridor and restoring the riparian buffer.
Waters of the United States 404/401 permitting is not required for this buffer mitigation site as construction
activities will only involve planting riparian vegetation and will not impact project streams or downstream
resources.
The official United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) threatened and endangered species list generated
from the Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) database shows three federally Threatened or
Endangered species. Please refer to the IPaC Package attached below for the official species list, along with
Wildlands biological determinations and conclusions.
Additionally, there is one Proposed Endangered species listed, the tricolored bat (Perimyotis subflavus). Suitable
habitat was found in the project area in the form of two culverts. However, no culverts within or around the
conservation easement will be disturbed during buffer restoration. While the species is not yet listed, Wildlands
acknowledges its importance and has included the tricolored bat in the species conclusion table.
Per the NC Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) data explorer, there are no records for rare species, important
natural communities, natural areas, and/or conservation/managed areas within the proposed Project boundary.

Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (P) 704.332.7754 • 1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104 • Charlotte, NC 28203
We respectfully request review and comment concerning any possible issues that might emerge from the
proposed project with respect to endangered species, migratory birds, or other trust resources. We thank you in
advance for your response and cooperation. Please feel free to contact us with any questions that you may have
concerning the extent of site disturbance associated with this project.
Sincerely,
Savannah Seeber
Savannah Seeber, Environmental Scientist
[e-mail]
843.475.6086
Attachments:
Figure 1. Site Map
IPaC package (self-certification letter, species conclusion table, and USFWS official species list)

13
Gran t h a m
UT
2
U
T
3
UT
1
Ditch
D
Ditch C
Ditch A
U
T
3
Ditch B
UT2
Figure 1. Site Map
Georgianna Mitigation Bank Parcel
Neuse River Basin 030202010250500Feet¹
Wayne County, NC
Project Location
Proposed Conservation
Easement
Proposed Project
Stream
Proposed Ephemeral
Project Channel
Proposed Project Ditch
Non-Project Ditch
Non-Project Stream
Raleigh Field Office
P.O. Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726

Date:__________________________

Self-Certification Letter

Project Name______________________________

Dear Applicant:

Thank you for using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) Raleigh Ecological
Services online project review process. By printing this letter in conjunction with your
project review package, you are certifying that you have completed the online project
review process for the project named above in accordance with all instructions
provided, using the best available information to reach your conclusions. This letter,
and the enclosed project review package, completes the review of your project in
accordance with the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544, 87 Stat.
884), as amended (ESA), and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C.
668-668c, 54 Stat. 250), as amended (Eagle Act). This letter also provides
information for your project review under the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (P.L. 91-190, 42 U.S.C. 4321-4347, 83 Stat. 852), as amended. A copy of this
letter and the project review package must be submitted to this office for this
certification to be valid. This letter and the project review package will be maintained
in our records.

The species conclusions table in the enclosed project review package summarizes
your ESA and Eagle Act conclusions. Based on your analysis, mark all the
determinations that apply:

“no effect” determinations for proposed/listed species and/or
proposed/designated critical habitat; and/or

“may affect, not likely to adversely affect” determinations for proposed/listed
species and/or proposed/designated critical habitat; and/or

“may affect, likely to adversely affect” determination for the Northern long-
eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) and relying on the findings of the January 5,
2016, Programmatic Biological Opinion for the Final 4(d) Rule on the
Northern long-eared bat;

“no Eagle Act permit required” determinations for eagles.

Applicant Page 2

We certify that use of the online project review process in strict accordance with the
instructions provided as documented in the enclosed project review package results in
reaching the appropriate determinations. Therefore, we concur with the “no effect” or
“not likely to adversely affect” determinations for proposed and listed species and
proposed and designated critical habitat; the “may affect” determination for Northern
long-eared bat; and/or the “no Eagle Act permit required” determinations for eagles.
Additional coordination with this office is not needed. Candidate species are not
legally protected pursuant to the ESA. However, the Service encourages consideration
of these species by avoiding adverse impacts to them. Please contact this office for
additional coordination if your project action area contains candidate species.
Should project plans change or if additional information on the distribution of
proposed or listed species, proposed or designated critical habitat, or bald eagles
becomes available, this determination may be reconsidered. This certification letter is
valid for 1 year. Information about the online project review process including
instructions, species information, and other information regarding project reviews
within North Carolina is available at our website http://www.fws.gov/raleigh/pp.html.
If you have any questions, you can write to us at [e-mail] or please contact
Leigh Mann of this office at 919-856-4520, ext. 10.

Sincerely,

/s/Pete Benjamin

Pete Benjamin
Field Supervisor
Raleigh Ecological Services

Enclosures - project review package
Species Conclusions Table
Project Name: Georgianna Mitigation Bank Parcel
Date: 06/29/2023
Species / Resource Name Conclusion ESA Section 7 / Eagle Act
Determination
Notes / Documentation
Neuse River Waterdog
(Necturus lewisi)
No suitable habitat present No Effect A Field Survey was conducted on April 18, 2023.No suitable
habitat was found due to lack of appropriate channel
substrate, poor water quality, and small ditch/channel size.
The proposed project is not in the proposed critical habitat
area designated by USFWS for this species. Per NCNHP data
explorer, no known element occurrences exist within the
proposed project area.
Carolina Madtom
(Noturus furiosus)

No suitable habitat present No Effect A Field Survey was conducted on April 18, 2023.No suitable
habitat was found due to lack of appropriate channel
substrate, poor water quality, and small ditch/channel size.
The proposed project is not in the proposed critical habitat
area designated by USFWS for this species. Per NCNHP data
explorer, no known element occurrences exist within the
proposed project area.
Red-cockaded Woodpecker
(Picoides borealis)

No suitable habitat present No Effect, project located outside
of RCW Section 7 consultation
zone
A Field Survey was conducted on April 18, 2023. No suitable
habitat was found due to lack of mature forest with appropriate
tree species. No critical habitat has been designated by
USFWS for this species. The project area is not within a
Section 7 consultation zone defined by USFWS. Per NCNHP
data explorer, no known element occurrences exist within the
proposed project area.
Tricolored bat
(Perimyotis subflavus)

Suitable habitat present,
roosts not observed
May affect, but not likely to
adversely affect
A Field Survey was conducted on April 18, 2023. Suitable
habitat was found in the form of two culverts. No culverts will
be disturbed during buffer restoration for this project. Per
NCNHP data explorer, no known element occurrences exist
within the proposed project area.
Bald Eagle Unlikely to disturb nesting
bald eagles
No Eagle Act Permit Required Not within 660 feet of large bodies of water.
Critical Habitat No critical habitat present
Acknowledgement: I agree that the above information about my proposed project is true. I used all the provided resources to make an informed decision about
impacts in the immediate and surrounding areas.

Savannah Seeber
Environmental Scientist 06/29/2023
_______________________________________________________________ ___________________________
Signature /Title Date
June 27, 2023
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
In Reply Refer To:
Project Code: 2023-0098250
Project Name: Georgianna Mitigation Site

Subject:List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project
location or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
The enclosed species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as
well as proposed and final designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your
proposed project and/or may be affected by your proposed project. The species list fulfills the
requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the
Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). If your project area 
contains suitable habitat for any of the federally-listed species on this species list, the proposed
action has the potential to adversely affect those species.  If suitable habitat is present, surveys 
should be conducted to determine the species’ presence or absence within the project area.  The 
use of this species list and/or North Carolina Natural Heritage program data should not be
substituted for actual field surveys.  
New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of
species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Please feel free to
contact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to
federally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed critical
habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the
Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be
completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be
completed by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and
implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested
through the ECOS-IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list.
The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species and the
ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) of the
Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 et seq.), Federal agencies are required to
utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of threatened and endangered
06/27/2023   2

species and to determine whether projects may affect threatened and endangered species and/or
designated critical habitat.
A Biological Assessment is required for construction projects (or other undertakings having
similar physical impacts) that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the
human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)
(c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a biological
evaluation similar to a Biological Assessment be prepared to determine whether the project may
affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat. Recommended
contents of a Biological Assessment are described at 50 CFR 402.12.
If a Federal agency determines, based on the Biological Assessment or biological evaluation, that
listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be affected by the proposed project, the
agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to 50 CFR 402. In addition, the Service
recommends that candidate species, proposed species and proposed critical habitat be addressed
within the consultation. More information on the regulations and procedures for section 7
consultation, including the role of permit or license applicants, can be found in the "Endangered
Species Consultation Handbook" at:
http://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/pdf/TOC-GLOS.PDF
Migratory Birds: In addition to responsibilities to protect threatened and endangered species
under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), there are additional responsibilities under the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) to
protect native birds from project-related impacts. Any activity, intentional or unintentional,
resulting in take of migratory birds, including eagles, is prohibited unless otherwise permitted by
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)). For more
information regarding these Acts see https://www.fws.gov/birds/policies-and-regulations.php.
The MBTA has no provision for allowing take of migratory birds that may be unintentionally
killed or injured by otherwise lawful activities. It is the responsibility of the project proponent to
comply with these Acts by identifying potential impacts to migratory birds and eagles within
applicable NEPA documents (when there is a federal nexus) or a Bird/Eagle Conservation Plan
(when there is no federal nexus). Proponents should implement conservation measures to avoid
or minimize the production of project-related stressors or minimize the exposure of birds and
their resources to the project-related stressors. For more information on avian stressors and
recommended conservation measures see https://www.fws.gov/birds/bird-enthusiasts/threats-to-
birds.php.
In addition to MBTA and BGEPA, Executive Order 13186: Responsibilities of Federal Agencies
to Protect Migratory Birds, obligates all Federal agencies that engage in or authorize activities
that might affect migratory birds, to minimize those effects and encourage conservation measures
that will improve bird populations. Executive Order 13186 provides for the protection of both
migratory birds and migratory bird habitat. For information regarding the implementation of
Executive Order 13186, please visit https://www.fws.gov/birds/policies-and-regulations/
executive-orders/e0-13186.php.
06/27/2023   3

▪
▪
We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages
Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project
planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Code in the header of
this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project that you submit
to our office.
Attachment(s):
Official Species List
Migratory Birds
06/27/2023   1

OFFICIAL SPECIES LIST
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the
requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether
any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed
action".
This species list is provided by:
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
[phone]
06/27/2023   2

PROJECT SUMMARY
Project Code:2023-0098250
Project Name:Georgianna Mitigation Site
Project Type:Restoration / Enhancement - Upland
Project Description:Nutrient Offset & Buffer Mitigation Site
Project Location:
The approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https://
www.google.com/maps/@35.302460499999995,-78.15680531717558,14z
Counties:Wayne County, North Carolina
06/27/2023   3

1.
ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT SPECIES
There is a total of 5 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.
Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include
species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species
list because a project could affect downstream species.
IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA
Fisheries , as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the
Department of Commerce.
See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially
within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office
if you have questions.
NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an
office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of
Commerce.
MAMMALS
NAME STATUS
Tricolored Bat Perimyotis subflavus
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/10515
Proposed
Endangered
BIRDS
NAME STATUS
Red-cockaded Woodpecker Picoides borealis
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7614
Endangered
AMPHIBIANS
NAME STATUS
Neuse River Waterdog Necturus lewisi
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6772
Threatened
FISHES
NAME STATUS
Carolina Madtom Noturus furiosus
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/528
Endangered
1
06/27/2023   4

INSECTS
NAME STATUS
Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743
Candidate
CRITICAL HABITATS
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S
JURISDICTION.
YOU ARE STILL REQUIRED TO DETERMINE IF YOUR PROJECT(S) MAY HAVE EFFECTS ON ALL
ABOVE LISTED SPECIES.
06/27/2023   1

1.
2.
3.
MIGRATORY BIRDS
Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act .
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to
migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider
implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described below.
The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)
The birds listed below are birds of particular concern either because they occur on the
USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) list or warrant special attention in your
project location. To learn more about the levels of concern for birds on your list and how this
list is generated, see the FAQ below. This is not a list of every bird you may find in this location,
nor a guarantee that every bird on this list will be found in your project area. To see exact
locations of where birders and the general public have sighted birds in and around your project
area, visit the E-bird data mapping tool (Tip: enter your location, desired date range and a species
on your list). For projects that occur off the Atlantic Coast, additional maps and models detailing
the relative occurrence and abundance of bird species on your list are available. Links to
additional information about Atlantic Coast birds, and other important information about your
migratory bird list, including how to properly interpret and use your migratory bird report, can be
found below.
For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures
to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, click on the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE
SUMMARY at the top of your list to see when these birds are most likely to be present and
breeding in your project area.
NAME
BREEDING
SEASON
American Kestrel Falco sparverius paulus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions
(BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9587
Breeds Apr 1 to
Aug 31
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention
because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types
of development or activities.
Breeds Sep 1 to
Jul 31
1
2
06/27/2023   2

1.
NAME
BREEDING
SEASON
Lesser Yellowlegs Tringa flavipes
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9679
Breeds
elsewhere
Prairie Warbler Dendroica discolor
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
and Alaska.
Breeds May 1 to
Jul 31
Prothonotary Warbler Protonotaria citrea
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
and Alaska.
Breeds Apr 1 to
Jul 31
Red-headed Woodpecker Melanerpes erythrocephalus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
and Alaska.
Breeds May 10
to Sep 10
Rusty Blackbird Euphagus carolinus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions
(BCRs) in the continental USA
Breeds
elsewhere
Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
and Alaska.
Breeds May 10
to Aug 31
PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be
present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project
activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read and understand the
FAQ "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting
to interpret this report.
Probability of Presence ()
Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your
project overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4-week
months.) A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey effort (see
below) can be used to establish a level of confidence in the presence score. One can have higher
confidence in the presence score if the corresponding survey effort is also high.
How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:
The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in
the week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for
that week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee
was found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is
0.25.
06/27/2023   3

2.
3.
 no data survey effort breeding season probability of presence
To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of
presence is calculated. This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum
probability of presence across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of presence
in week 20 for the Spotted Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability of presence at week 12
(0.25) is the maximum of any week of the year. The relative probability of presence on
week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it is 0.05/0.25 = 0.2.
The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical
conversion so that all possible values fall between 0 and 10, inclusive. This is the
probability of presence score.
Breeding Season ()
Yellow bars denote a very liberal estimate of the time-frame inside which the bird breeds across
its entire range. If there are no yellow bars shown for a bird, it does not breed in your project
area.
Survey Effort ()
Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of surveys
performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. The number of
surveys is expressed as a range, for example, 33 to 64 surveys.
No Data ()
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.
Survey Timeframe
Surveys from only the last 10 years are used in order to ensure delivery of currently relevant
information. The exception to this is areas off the Atlantic coast, where bird returns are based on
all years of available data, since data in these areas is currently much more sparse.
SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
American Kestrel
BCC - BCR
Bald Eagle
Non-BCC
Vulnerable
Lesser Yellowlegs
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Prairie Warbler
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Prothonotary
Warbler
06/27/2023   4

▪
▪
▪
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Red-headed
Woodpecker
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Rusty Blackbird
BCC - BCR
Wood Thrush
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Additional information can be found using the following links:
Birds of Conservation Concern https://www.fws.gov/program/migratory-birds/species
Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds https://www.fws.gov/library/
collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take-migratory-birds
Nationwide conservation measures for birds https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/
documents/nationwide-standard-conservation-measures.pdf
MIGRATORY BIRDS FAQ
Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts
to migratory birds.
Nationwide Conservation Measures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize
impacts to all birds at any location year round. Implementation of these measures is particularly
important when birds are most likely to occur in the project area. When birds may be breeding in
the area, identifying the locations of any active nests and avoiding their destruction is a very
helpful impact minimization measure. To see when birds are most likely to occur and be breeding
in your project area, view the Probability of Presence Summary. Additional measures or permits
may be advisable depending on the type of activity you are conducting and the type of
infrastructure or bird species present on your project site.
What does IPaC use to generate the list of migratory birds that potentially occur in my
specified location?
The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern
(BCC) and other species that may warrant special attention in your project location.
The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the Avian
Knowledge Network (AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding,
and citizen science datasets and is queried and filtered to return a list of those birds reported as
occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project intersects, and that have been identified as
warranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that area, an eagle (Eagle Act
requirements may apply), or a species that has a particular vulnerability to offshore activities or
development.
06/27/2023   5

1.
2.
3.
Again, the Migratory Bird Resource list includes only a subset of birds that may occur in your
project area. It is not representative of all birds that may occur in your project area. To get a list
of all birds potentially present in your project area, please visit the Rapid Avian Information
Locator (RAIL) Tool.
What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs for the migratory birds
potentially occurring in my specified location?
The probability of presence graphs associated with your migratory bird list are based on data
provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). This data is derived from a growing
collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets.
Probability of presence data is continuously being updated as new and better information
becomes available. To learn more about how the probability of presence graphs are produced and
how to interpret them, go the Probability of Presence Summary and then click on the "Tell me
about these graphs" link.
How do I know if a bird is breeding, wintering or migrating in my area?
To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding,
wintering, migrating or year-round), you may query your location using the RAIL Tool and look
at the range maps provided for birds in your area at the bottom of the profiles provided for each
bird in your results. If a bird on your migratory bird species list has a breeding season associated
with it, if that bird does occur in your project area, there may be nests present at some point
within the timeframe specified. If "Breeds elsewhere" is indicated, then the bird likely does not
breed in your project area.
What are the levels of concern for migratory birds?
Migratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern:
"BCC Rangewide" birds are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) that are of concern
throughout their range anywhere within the USA (including Hawaii, the Pacific Islands,
Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands);
"BCC - BCR" birds are BCCs that are of concern only in particular Bird Conservation
Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA; and
"Non-BCC - Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on
your list either because of the Eagle Act requirements (for eagles) or (for non-eagles)
potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities
(e.g. offshore energy development or longline fishing).
Although it is important to try to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, efforts should be made,
in particular, to avoid and minimize impacts to the birds on this list, especially eagles and BCC
species of rangewide concern. For more information on conservation measures you can
implement to help avoid and minimize migratory bird impacts and requirements for eagles,
please see the FAQs for these topics.
Details about birds that are potentially affected by offshore projects
For additional details about the relative occurrence and abundance of both individual bird species
and groups of bird species within your project area off the Atlantic Coast, please visit the
Northeast Ocean Data Portal. The Portal also offers data and information about other taxa besides
06/27/2023   6

birds that may be helpful to you in your project review. Alternately, you may download the bird
model results files underlying the portal maps through the NOAA NCCOS Integrative Statistical
Modeling and Predictive Mapping of Marine Bird Distributions and Abundance on the Atlantic
Outer Continental Shelf project webpage.
Bird tracking data can also provide additional details about occurrence and habitat use
throughout the year, including migration. Models relying on survey data may not include this
information. For additional information on marine bird tracking data, see the Diving Bird Study
and the nanotag studies or contact Caleb Spiegel or Pam Loring.
What if I have eagles on my list?
If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to obtain a permit to avoid
violating the Eagle Act should such impacts occur.
Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report
The migratory bird list generated is not a list of all birds in your project area, only a subset of
birds of priority concern. To learn more about how your list is generated, and see options for
identifying what other birds may be in your project area, please see the FAQ "What does IPaC
use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location". Please be
aware this report provides the "probability of presence" of birds within the 10 km grid cell(s) that
overlap your project; not your exact project footprint. On the graphs provided, please also look
carefully at the survey effort (indicated by the black vertical bar) and for the existence of the "no
data" indicator (a red horizontal bar). A high survey effort is the key component. If the survey
effort is high, then the probability of presence score can be viewed as more dependable. In
contrast, a low survey effort bar or no data bar means a lack of data and, therefore, a lack of
certainty about presence of the species. This list is not perfect; it is simply a starting point for
identifying what birds of concern have the potential to be in your project area, when they might
be there, and if they might be breeding (which means nests might be present). The list helps you
know what to look for to confirm presence, and helps guide you in knowing when to implement
conservation measures to avoid or minimize potential impacts from your project activities,
should presence be confirmed. To learn more about conservation measures, visit the FAQ "Tell
me about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory
birds" at the bottom of your migratory bird trust resources page.
06/27/2023   7

IPAC USER CONTACT INFORMATION
Agency:Private Entity
Name:Savannah Seeber
Address:312 W Millbrook Road, Ste 225
City:Raleigh
State:NC
Zip:27609
Email [e-mail]
Phone:[phone]
1
Tasha King
From:Matthews, Kathryn H <[e-mail]>
Sent:Friday, July 14, 2023 9:18 AM
To:Tasha King; Savannah Seeber
Cc:Mann, Leigh
Subject:Re: Request for Review and Comment - Georgianna Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel (USFWS Project
Code: 2023-0098250)
Attachments:Georgianna Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel - Request for Review.pdf
Follow Up Flag:Flag for follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
Hi Tasha, 

The Service concurs with your species determinations for this project.   

By the way, we have an updated self‐certification template on our Project Planning website ‐ it includes 
additional information from IPaC and also removes the 4(d) language for NLEB.  Here is a link to the new 
form:  https://www.fws.gov/media/rfo‐self‐certification‐letter 

Thanks and have a good weekend, 

Please note that I am teleworking Wednesday through Friday, every week.   Email is the best way to reach 
me.  Thanks, 

Kathy Matthews 
NC Renewable Energy Coordinator & 
Fish and Wildlife Biologist 
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 
551‐F Pylon Drive 
Raleigh, NC  27606 
919‐856‐4520, x. 27 
From: Raleigh, FW4 <[e-mail]> 
Sent: Monday, July 10, 2023 7:40 AM 
To: Matthews, Kathryn H <[e-mail]> 
Subject: DUE DATE: AUGUST 3, 2023 Fw: [EXTERNAL] Request for Review and Comment ‐ Georgianna Buffer Mitigation 
Bank Parcel  

From: Tasha King <[e-mail]> 
Sent: Friday, July 7, 2023 7:31 PM 
To: Raleigh, FW4 <[e-mail]> 
Cc: Savannah Seeber <[e-mail]> 
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Request for Review and Comment ‐ Georgianna Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel  

2

 This email has been received from outside of DOI ‐ Use caution before clicking on links, opening attachments, or 
responding.   

Good afternoon, 

Wildlands Engineering, Inc. would like to request review and comment on any possible issues that might emerge with 
respect to respect to fish and wildlife associated with the Georgianna Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel. The project consists 
of a buffer restoration site in the Neuse River Basin, in Wayne County, NC. Restoration activities only involve planting 
riparian vegetation and will not impact project streams. Please refer to the attached PDF for the full scoping letter and 
figures. 

We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please feel free to contact us with any questions 
that you may have in regard to the attached information. 

Kind Regards, 
Tasha King 

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Tasha King  |  Environmental Scientist 
O: 919.851.9986  x116 

Wildlands Engineering, Inc. 
312 W. Millbrook Rd, Suite 225 
Raleigh, NC 27609 

Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (P) 919.851.9986 • 312 West Millbrook Road, Suite 225 • Raleigh, NC 27609

July 7, 2023

Renee Gledhill-Earley
State Historic Preservation Office
4617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-4617
Submitted via email: [e-mail]

Subject: Georgianna Mitigation Bank Parcel
Wayne County, North Carolina

Dear Ms. Gledhill-Earley,

Wildlands Engineering, Inc. requests review and comment on any possible issues that might emerge with respect
to archaeological or cultural resources associated with a potential riparian buffer restoration project on the
Georgianna Mitigation Bank Parcel located in Wayne County, NC. An Overview Site Map and a USGS Topographic
Map showing the approximate project area are enclosed. The topographic figure was prepared from the Grantham
7.5-Minute USGS Topographic Quadrangle, and the site is located at latitude 35.299233 longitude -78.159173.
The Georgianna Mitigation Bank Parcel is being developed to provide riparian buffer and nutrient offset mitigation
in the Neuse River Basin. The project will include restoration of riparian buffers along UT1, UT2, UT3, and four
ditches that flow to Falling Creek. UT1, UT2, UT3, and all four ditches are surrounded by agricultural fields that
reach top of bank on both sides.
The major goals of the riparian buffer and nutrient offset mitigation bank project are to provide ecological and
water quality enhancements to the Neuse River Basin while creating a functional riparian corridor at the site level.
This will be accomplished by restoring and or preserving the vegetative buffer on the areas up to 200 feet from
streams and ditches, along with permanently preserving and protecting the site through establishing a
conservation easement.
No surveyed sites listed on the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) are located within one mile
of the site. In addition, the site is not located near any sites listed on the National Register with the SHPO. No
architectural structures or archaeological artifacts have been observed or noted during preliminary surveys of the
site for restoration purposes. We ask that you review the site based on the attached information to determine the
presence of any historic properties within the conservation easement area proposed as shown on Figures 1 and 2.
We thank you in advance for your response and cooperation. Please feel free to contact us with any questions that
you may have concerning the extent of site disturbance associated with this project.
Sincerely,
Savannah Seeber
Savannah Seeber, Environmental Scientist
[e-mail]
843.475.6086
Attachments:
Figure 1. Site Map
Figure 2. USGS Topographic Map

13
Gran t h a m
UT
2
U
T
3
UT
1
Ditch
D
Ditch C
Ditch A
U
T
3
Ditch B
UT2
Figure 1. Site Map
Georgianna Mitigation Bank Parcel
Neuse River Basin 030202010250500Feet¹
Wayne County, NC
Project Location
Proposed Conservation
Easement
Proposed Project
Stream
Proposed Ephemeral
Project Channel
Proposed Project Ditch
Non-Project Ditch
Non-Project Stream
13
G r a n t h a m
0 250 500 Feet
Grantham USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Quadrangle
Proposed Conservation
Easement
Figure 2. USGS Topographic Map
Georgianna Mitigation Bank Parcel
Neuse River Basin 03020201
Wayne County, NC
¹

North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Roy Cooper Office of Archives and History
Secretary D. Reid Wilson Deputy Secretary, Darin J. Waters, Ph.D.

Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6898
August 1, 2023

Tasha King [e-mail]
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
312 West Millbrook Rd, Suite 225
Raleigh, NC 27609

Re: Georgianna Mitigation Bank, US 13 South, Wayne County, ER 23-1566

Dear Ms. King:

Thank you for your letter of July 7, 2023, concerning the above-referenced undertaking. We have reviewed
the submittal and offer the following comments.

We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would be affected
by the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.

The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation’s Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36
CFR Part 800.

Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-814-6579
or [e-mail]. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the
above referenced tracking number.

Sincerely,

Ramona Bartos, Deputy
State Historic Preservation Officer

FORM-LBD-MGA
®kcehCoeG htiw tropeR ™paM suidaR RDE ehT
6 Armstrong Road, 4th floor
Shelton, CT 06484
Toll Free: 800.352.0050
www.edrnet.com
Georgianna Mitigation Bank Parcel
US Hwy 13 S
Goldsboro, NC 27530
Inquiry Number: 7288244.2s
March 23, 2023
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
Executive Summary ES1
Overview Map 2
Detail Map 3
Map Findings Summary 4
Map Findings 8
Orphan Summary 10
Government Records Searched/Data Currency Tracking GR-1
GEOCHECK ADDENDUM
Physical Setting Source Addendum A-1
Physical Setting Source Summary A-2
Physical Setting Source Map A-7
Physical Setting Source Map Findings A-8
Physical Setting Source Records Searched PSGR-1
Thank you for your business.
Please contact EDR at 1-800-352-0050
with any questions or comments.
Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice
This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data
Resources, LLC. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist
from other sources. This Report is provided on an "AS IS", "AS AVAILABLE" basis. NO WARRANTY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED IS MADE
WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, LLC AND ITS SUBSIDIARIES,
AFFILIATES AND THIRD PARTY SUPPLIERS DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, OF ANY KIND OR NATURE, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
ARISING OUT OF OR RELATED TO THIS REPORT OR ANY OF THE DATA AND INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS REPORT,
INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES REGARDING ACCURACY, QUALITY, CORRECTNESS, COMPLETENESS,
COMPREHENSIVENESS, SUITABILITY, MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, TITLE, NON-INFRINGEMENT,
MISAPPROPRIATION, OR OTHERWISE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA
RESOURCES, LLC OR ITS SUBSIDIARIES, AFFILIATES OR THIRD PARTY SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE TO ANYONE FOR ANY DIRECT,
INCIDENTAL, INDIRECT, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR OTHER DAMAGES OF ANY TYPE OR KIND (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED
TO LOSS OF PROFITS, LOSS OF USE, OR LOSS OF DATA) INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS REPORT. Any analyses, estimates,
ratings, environmental risk levels, or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to
provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property.
Only an assessment performed by a qualified environmental professional can provide findings, opinions or conclusions regarding the
environmental risk or conditions in, on or at any property.
Copyright 2023 by Environmental Data Resources, LLC. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any
report or map of Environmental Data Resources, LLC, or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission.
EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, LLC or its affiliates. All other
trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners.
TC7288244.2s Page 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC7288244.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
A search of available environmental records was conducted by Environmental Data Resources, Inc (EDR).
The report was designed to assist parties seeking to meet the search requirements of EPA’s Standards
and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries (40 CFR Part 312), the ASTM Standard Practice for
Environmental Site Assessments (E1527-21), the ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site
Assessments for Forestland or Rural Property (E 2247-16), the ASTM Standard Practice for Limited
Environmental Due Diligence: Transaction Screen Process (E 1528-14) or custom requirements developed
for the evaluation of environmental risk associated with a parcel of real estate.
TARGET PROPERTY INFORMATION
ADDRESS
US HWY 13 S
GOLDSBORO, NC 27530
COORDINATES
35.3021640 - 35ˆ 18’ 7.79’’Latitude (North):
78.1566650 - 78ˆ 9’ 23.99’’Longitude (West):
Zone 17Universal Tranverse Mercator:
758543.2UTM X (Meters):
3910063.2UTM Y (Meters):
132 ft. above sea levelElevation:
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP ASSOCIATED WITH TARGET PROPERTY
13847225 GRANTHAM, NCTarget Property Map:
2019Version Date:
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY IN THIS REPORT
20141018Portions of Photo from:
USDASource:
7288244.2s Page 2
1 GRANTHAM ELEM SCHOOL 174 GRANTHAM SCHOOL LUST Higher 2545, 0.482, SW
MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
Target Property Address:
US HWY 13 S
GOLDSBORO, NC 27530
Click on Map ID to see full detail.
MAP RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.)
ID DATABASE ACRONYMS ELEVATION DIRECTIONSITE NAME ADDRESS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC7288244.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3
TARGET PROPERTY SEARCH RESULTS
The target property was not listed in any of the databases searched by EDR.
DATABASES WITH NO MAPPED SITES
No mapped sites were found in EDR’s search of available ("reasonably ascertainable ") government
records either on the target property or within the search radius around the target property for the
following databases:
STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Lists of Federal NPL (Superfund) sites
NPL National Priority List
Proposed NPL Proposed National Priority List Sites
NPL LIENS Federal Superfund Liens
Lists of Federal Delisted NPL sites
Delisted NPL National Priority List Deletions
Lists of Federal sites subject to CERCLA removals and CERCLA orders
FEDERAL FACILITY Federal Facility Site Information listing
SEMS Superfund Enterprise Management System
Lists of Federal CERCLA sites with NFRAP
SEMS-ARCHIVE Superfund Enterprise Management System Archive
Lists of Federal RCRA facilities undergoing Corrective Action
CORRACTS Corrective Action Report
Lists of Federal RCRA TSD facilities
RCRA-TSDF RCRA - Treatment, Storage and Disposal
Lists of Federal RCRA generators
RCRA-LQG RCRA - Large Quantity Generators
RCRA-SQG RCRA - Small Quantity Generators
RCRA-VSQG RCRA - Very Small Quantity Generators (Formerly Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity
Generators)
Federal institutional controls / engineering controls registries
LUCIS Land Use Control Information System
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC7288244.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4
US ENG CONTROLS Engineering Controls Sites List
US INST CONTROLS Institutional Controls Sites List
Federal ERNS list
ERNS Emergency Response Notification System
Lists of state- and tribal (Superfund) equivalent sites
NC HSDS Hazardous Substance Disposal Site
Lists of state- and tribal hazardous waste facilities
SHWS Inactive Hazardous Sites Inventory
Lists of state and tribal landfills and solid waste disposal facilities
SWF/LF List of Solid Waste Facilities
OLI Old Landfill Inventory
DEBRIS Solid Waste Active Disaster Debris Sites Listing
LCID Land-Clearing and Inert Debris (LCID) Landfill Notifications
Lists of state and tribal leaking storage tanks
LAST Leaking Aboveground Storage Tanks
INDIAN LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
LUST TRUST State Trust Fund Database
Lists of state and tribal registered storage tanks
FEMA UST Underground Storage Tank Listing
UST Petroleum Underground Storage Tank Database
AST AST Database
INDIAN UST Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
State and tribal institutional control / engineering control registries
INST CONTROL No Further Action Sites With Land Use Restrictions Monitoring
Lists of state and tribal voluntary cleanup sites
VCP Responsible Party Voluntary Action Sites
INDIAN VCP Voluntary Cleanup Priority Listing
Lists of state and tribal brownfield sites
BROWNFIELDS Brownfields Projects Inventory
ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Local Brownfield lists
US BROWNFIELDS A Listing of Brownfields Sites
Local Lists of Landfill / Solid Waste Disposal Sites
HIST LF Solid Waste Facility Listing
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC7288244.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5
SWRCY Recycling Center Listing
INDIAN ODI Report on the Status of Open Dumps on Indian Lands
ODI Open Dump Inventory
DEBRIS REGION 9 Torres Martinez Reservation Illegal Dump Site Locations
IHS OPEN DUMPS Open Dumps on Indian Land
Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites
US HIST CDL Delisted National Clandestine Laboratory Register
US CDL National Clandestine Laboratory Register
Local Land Records
LIENS 2 CERCLA Lien Information
Records of Emergency Release Reports
HMIRS Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System
SPILLS Spills Incident Listing
IMD Incident Management Database
SPILLS 90 SPILLS 90 data from FirstSearch
SPILLS 80 SPILLS 80 data from FirstSearch
Other Ascertainable Records
RCRA NonGen / NLR RCRA - Non Generators / No Longer Regulated
FUDS Formerly Used Defense Sites
DOD Department of Defense Sites
SCRD DRYCLEANERS State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners Listing
US FIN ASSUR Financial Assurance Information
EPA WATCH LIST EPA WATCH LIST
2020 COR ACTION 2020 Corrective Action Program List
TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act
TRIS Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System
SSTS Section 7 Tracking Systems
ROD Records Of Decision
RMP Risk Management Plans
RAATS RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System
PRP Potentially Responsible Parties
PADS PCB Activity Database System
ICIS Integrated Compliance Information System
FTTS FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide
Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
MLTS Material Licensing Tracking System
COAL ASH DOE Steam-Electric Plant Operation Data
COAL ASH EPA Coal Combustion Residues Surface Impoundments List
PCB TRANSFORMER PCB Transformer Registration Database
RADINFO Radiation Information Database
HIST FTTS FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Administrative Case Listing
DOT OPS Incident and Accident Data
CONSENT Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees
INDIAN RESERV Indian Reservations
FUSRAP Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program
UMTRA Uranium Mill Tailings Sites
LEAD SMELTERS Lead Smelter Sites
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC7288244.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6
US AIRS Aerometric Information Retrieval System Facility Subsystem
US MINES Mines Master Index File
ABANDONED MINES Abandoned Mines
FINDS Facility Index System/Facility Registry System
DOCKET HWC Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket Listing
UXO Unexploded Ordnance Sites
ECHO Enforcement & Compliance History Information
FUELS PROGRAM EPA Fuels Program Registered Listing
PFAS NPL Superfund Sites with PFAS Detections Information
PFAS FEDERAL SITES Federal Sites PFAS Information
PFAS TSCA PFAS Manufacture and Imports Information
PFAS RCRA MANIFEST PFAS Transfers Identified In the RCRA Database Listing
PFAS ATSDR PFAS Contamination Site Location Listing
PFAS WQP Ambient Environmental Sampling for PFAS
PFAS NPDES Clean Water Act Discharge Monitoring Information
PFAS ECHO Facilities in Industries that May Be Handling PFAS Listing
PFAS ECHO FIRE TRAINING Facilities in Industries that May Be Handling PFAS Listing
PFAS PART 139 AIRPORT All Certified Part 139 Airports PFAS Information Listing
AQUEOUS FOAM NRC Aqueous Foam Related Incidents Listing
PFAS PFAS Contamination Site Listing
AIRS Air Quality Permit Listing
ASBESTOS ASBESTOS
COAL ASH Coal Ash Disposal Sites
DRYCLEANERS Drycleaning Sites
Financial Assurance Financial Assurance Information Listing
NPDES NPDES Facility Location Listing
UIC Underground Injection Wells Listing
AOP Animal Operation Permits Listing
CCB Coal Ash Structural Fills (CCB) Listing
MINES MRDS Mineral Resources Data System
PCSRP Petroleum-Contaminated Soil Remediation Permits
SEPT HAULERS Permitted Septage Haulers Listing
EDR HIGH RISK HISTORICAL RECORDS
EDR Exclusive Records
EDR MGP EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plants
EDR Hist Auto EDR Exclusive Historical Auto Stations
EDR Hist Cleaner EDR Exclusive Historical Cleaners
EDR RECOVERED GOVERNMENT ARCHIVES
Exclusive Recovered Govt. Archives
RGA HWS Recovered Government Archive State Hazardous Waste Facilities List
RGA LF Recovered Government Archive Solid Waste Facilities List
RGA LUST Recovered Government Archive Leaking Underground Storage Tank
SURROUNDING SITES: SEARCH RESULTS
Surrounding sites were identified in the following databases.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC7288244.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7
Elevations have been determined from the USGS Digital Elevation Model and should be evaluated on
a relative (not an absolute) basis. Relative elevation information between sites of close proximity
should be field verified. Sites with an elevation equal to or higher than the target property have been
differentiated below from sites with an elevation lower than the target property.
Page numbers and map identification numbers refer to the EDR Radius Map report where detailed
data on individual sites can be reviewed.
Sites listed in bold italics are in multiple databases.
Unmappable (orphan) sites are not considered in the foregoing analysis.
STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Lists of state and tribal leaking storage tanks
LUST: The Leaking Underground Storage Tank Incidents Management Database contains an inventory
of reported leaking underground storage tank incidents. The data come from the Department of Environment, &
Natural Resources’ Incidents by Address.
A review of the LUST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 01/13/2023 has revealed that there is 1 LUST
site within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property.
PageMap IDDirection / Distance Address Equal/Higher Elevation ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____
GRANTHAM ELEM SCHOOL 174 GRANTHAM SCHOOL SW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.482 mi.) 1 8
Incident Phase: CO
Incident Number: 19791
Current Status: File Located in Archives
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC7288244.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 8
Due to poor or inadequate address information, the following sites were not mapped. Count: 6 records.
Site Name Database(s)____________ ____________
SOLA ELECTRIC (HEVI-DUTY) (DOWZER PRP
HEVI-DUTY ELECTRIC/GENERAL SIG SHWS
NC NATURAL GAS/GOLDSBORO CONSTRUCT LUST
N.C. NATURAL GAS CORP. LUST TRUST
STACKHOUSE, INC. LUST TRUST
HIGHWAY 70 PHILLIPS 66 LUST TRUST
EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.
1
2
0
1
2
1
6
0 1 2 0
1
60
16
0
160
160
1 6 0
160
1
6
0
1
6
0
160
16 0
1
6 0
1
60
1 2 0 120 1
2
0
1 2 0
1 2 0
1 2 0
1 2 0
120
120
120
12 0
12 0
12
1 2 0
1 2 0
EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.
1 2 0
120
120
12
0
MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
TargetDistance Total
Database Property(Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted
STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Lists of Federal NPL (Superfund) sites
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000NPL
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000Proposed NPL
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000NPL LIENS
Lists of Federal Delisted NPL sites
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000Delisted NPL
Lists of Federal sites subject to
CERCLA removals and CERCLA orders
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500FEDERAL FACILITY
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500SEMS
Lists of Federal CERCLA sites with NFRAP
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500SEMS-ARCHIVE
Lists of Federal RCRA facilities
undergoing Corrective Action
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000CORRACTS
Lists of Federal RCRA TSD facilities
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500RCRA-TSDF
Lists of Federal RCRA generators
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250RCRA-LQG
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250RCRA-SQG
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250RCRA-VSQG
Federal institutional controls /
engineering controls registries
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500LUCIS
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500US ENG CONTROLS
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500US INST CONTROLS
Federal ERNS list
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPERNS
Lists of state- and tribal
(Superfund) equivalent sites
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000NC HSDS
Lists of state- and tribal
hazardous waste facilities
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000SHWS
Lists of state and tribal landfills
and solid waste disposal facilities
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500SWF/LF
TC7288244.2s Page 4
MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
TargetDistance Total
Database Property(Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500OLI
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500DEBRIS
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500LCID
Lists of state and tribal leaking storage tanks
1 NR NR 1 0 0 0.500LUST
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500LAST
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500INDIAN LUST
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500LUST TRUST
Lists of state and tribal registered storage tanks
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250FEMA UST
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250UST
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250AST
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250INDIAN UST
State and tribal institutional
control / engineering control registries
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500INST CONTROL
Lists of state and tribal voluntary cleanup sites
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500VCP
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500INDIAN VCP
Lists of state and tribal brownfield sites
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500BROWNFIELDS
ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Local Brownfield lists
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500US BROWNFIELDS
Local Lists of Landfill / Solid
Waste Disposal Sites
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500HIST LF
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500SWRCY
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500INDIAN ODI
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500ODI
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500DEBRIS REGION 9
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500IHS OPEN DUMPS
Local Lists of Hazardous waste /
Contaminated Sites
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPUS HIST CDL
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPUS CDL
Local Land Records
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPLIENS 2
Records of Emergency Release Reports
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPHMIRS
TC7288244.2s Page 5
MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
TargetDistance Total
Database Property(Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPSPILLS
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500IMD
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPSPILLS 90
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPSPILLS 80
Other Ascertainable Records
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250RCRA NonGen / NLR
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000FUDS
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000DOD
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500SCRD DRYCLEANERS
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPUS FIN ASSUR
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPEPA WATCH LIST
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.2502020 COR ACTION
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPTSCA
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPTRIS
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPSSTS
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000ROD
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPRMP
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPRAATS
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPPRP
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPPADS
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPICIS
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPFTTS
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPMLTS
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPCOAL ASH DOE
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500COAL ASH EPA
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPPCB TRANSFORMER
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPRADINFO
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPHIST FTTS
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPDOT OPS
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000CONSENT
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000INDIAN RESERV
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000FUSRAP
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500UMTRA
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPLEAD SMELTERS
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPUS AIRS
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250US MINES
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250ABANDONED MINES
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPFINDS
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPDOCKET HWC
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000UXO
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPECHO
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250FUELS PROGRAM
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250PFAS NPL
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250PFAS FEDERAL SITES
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250PFAS TSCA
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250PFAS RCRA MANIFEST
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250PFAS ATSDR
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250PFAS WQP
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250PFAS NPDES
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250PFAS ECHO
TC7288244.2s Page 6
MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
TargetDistance Total
Database Property(Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250PFAS ECHO FIRE TRAINING
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250PFAS PART 139 AIRPORT
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250AQUEOUS FOAM NRC
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250PFAS
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPAIRS
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPASBESTOS
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500COAL ASH
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250DRYCLEANERS
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPFinancial Assurance
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPNPDES
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPUIC
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPAOP
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500CCB
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPMINES MRDS
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500PCSRP
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPSEPT HAULERS
EDR HIGH RISK HISTORICAL RECORDS
EDR Exclusive Records
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000EDR MGP
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.125EDR Hist Auto
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.125EDR Hist Cleaner
EDR RECOVERED GOVERNMENT ARCHIVES
Exclusive Recovered Govt. Archives
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPRGA HWS
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPRGA LF
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPRGA LUST
1 0 0 1 0 0 0- Totals --
NOTES:
TP = Target Property
NR = Not Requested at this Search Distance
Sites may be listed in more than one database
TC7288244.2s Page 7
MAP FINDINGSMap ID
Direction
EDR ID NumberDistance
EPA ID NumberDatabase(s)SiteElevation
0Operation Type:
6Ownership:
UNDETERMINED RESPONSIBLE PARTYOwner/Operator:
3/3/1999Date Reported:
11/21/1998Date Occurred:
19791Facility Id:
WA-1725UST Number:
Not reportedERR Type:
LUST:
Not reported5 Min Quad:
Not reportedTelephone:
WAYNE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLSCompany:
STFRegional Officer Project Mgr:
Not reportedTestlat:
FalseValid:
NError Code:
0Error Flag:
FalseRPOP:
FalseRPOW:
0Reel Num:
147CD Num:
TrueRPL:
3PETOPT:
G1RBCA GW:
ACurrent Status:
3GPS Confirmed:
Not reportedLUR Filed:
0Flag1:
1Flag:
NMTBE1:
0MTBE:
RESLand Use:
Not reportedSite Risk Reason:
1Phase Of LSA Req:
Not reportedSite Priority:
Not reportedNOV Issue Date:
Not reportedCorrective Action Plan Type:
LRisk Class Based On Review:
URisk Classification:
CCommercial/NonCommercial UST Site:
0# Of Supply Wells:
S1Level Of Soil Cleanup Achieved:
01/22/2002Close Out:
Not reportedClosure Request:
12/17/1998Date Reported:
3Source Type:
19791Incident Number:
WA-1725UST Number:
Not reportedFacility ID:
GRANTHAM, NC 28333City,State,Zip:
174 GRANTHAM SCHOOL ROADAddress:
GRANTHAM ELEM SCHOOLName:
LUST:
2545 ft.
0.482 mi.
Relative:
Higher
Actual:
167 ft.

1/4-1/2 GRANTHAM, NC 28333
SW 174 GRANTHAM SCHOOL ROAD N/A
1 LUSTGRANTHAM ELEM SCHOOL S110629901
TC7288244.2s Page 8
MAP FINDINGSMap ID
Direction
EDR ID NumberDistance
EPA ID NumberDatabase(s)SiteElevation
1/22/2002Close-out Report:
Not reportedClosure Request Date:
Not reportedRS Designation:
Not reportedReclassification Report:
Not reportedSOC Signed:
Not reportedPublic Meeting Held:
Not reported45 Day Report:
Not reportedNORR Issued:
Not reportedNOV Issued:
COIncident Phase:
2/25/2002Last Modified:
19791Incident Number:
LUST:
Not reportedUST Number:
Not reportedSource:
Not reportedCause:
Not reportedErr Type:
MIN_SOILSource Code:
Not reportedRelease Code:
Not reportedPirf/Min Soil:
Not reported5 Minute Quad:
Not reported7#5 Minute Quad:
Not reportedSamples Include:
Not reportedWells Affected Y/N:
3/29/1999Priority Update:
1Location:
Not reportedType:
GRANTHAM ELEM SCHOOL (Continued) S110629901
TC7288244.2s Page 9