20081011 Ver 1_Restoration Plan_20080625

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
08 20 1 1
RESTORATION PLAN
COLUMBUS SWAMP WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
ROBESON/COLUMBUS COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA
(RFP #16-D07033)
FULL DELIVERY PROJECT
TO PROVIDE RIPARIAN WETLAND MITIGATION
IN THE LUMBER RIVER BASIN
CATALOGING UNIT 03040203
Prepared for:
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA

k

oil q. ??{ A
Y
M
Tr

?
'Al

Prepared by:
And
Ax om Environmental- iec
Restoration Systems, L.L.C. Axiom Environmental, Inc.
2126 Rowland Pond Drive
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 211
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 Willow Spring, North Carolina 27592
April 2008
??N 2 5 2008
DENR - WAS ERMW?TER BRANDN
?11p,NDS pND STOR
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Restoration Systems, L.L.C. (Restoration Systems) is developing plans for riparian wetland
restoration at the Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration Site (Site) located approximately 11
miles southeast of Lumberton, on the Robeson and Columbus County line. The Columbus
Swamp Restoration Site encompasses approximately 40 acres of land that is used for
agricultural row crop production and silviculture. The Site has been cleared of native forest
vegetation, ditched for agricultural/silvicultural purposes, and planted in agricultural row crops
and loblolly pine. Based on detailed soil mapping conducted by licensed soil scientists, the
entire 40 acre Site is underlain by Class A hydric soil, which was previously cleared and drained
in support of Site land uses.
The Site is located within the Lumber River Basin in 14-digit USGS Cataloging Unit
03040203170020 of the South Atlantic/Gulf Region (North Carolina Division of Water Quality
subbasin number 03-07-53). Brier Creek, the major drainage feature on Site, has been
assigned Stream Index Number 14-22-17 and has received a Best Usage Classification of C
Sw.
This document details existing Site conditions and proposed wetland restoration procedures at
the Site. A 40-acre conservation easement has been conveyed to the State that will incorporate
all planned restoration activities. The Site encompasses approximately 40 acres of drained,
hydric soil; of which approximately 33.5 acres are suitable for wetland restoration. An additional
2.5 acres of ditches and hydric soil within the Site are suitable for wetland enhancement.
Wetland restoration activities have been designed to restore wetland functions similar to those
exhibited by reference wetlands in the region. Site alterations designed to restore characteristic
wetland soil features and groundwater wetland hydrology includes the introduction of
microtopograhpic variability, impervious ditch plug construction, ditch backfilling, berm removal,
and scarification of wetland soil surfaces. Subsequently, trees and shrubs will be planted
throughout the Site to establish native forest species' characteristic of Coastal Plain Bottomland
Hardwoods (brownwater subtype). Planting of the Site will provide diversity and secondary
benefits such as enhanced foraging, nesting, and refuge opportunities for mammals, birds,
amphibians, and reptiles.
After implementation, the Site is expected to support 36 acres of restored/enhanced riparian
wetlands and 4.0 acres of upland forest. Monitoring of Site restoration efforts will be performed
until success criteria are fulfilled. Monitoring is proposed for wetland components of hydrology
and vegetation.
Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration Site Executive Summary
Detailed Restoration Plan
April 2008

Table of Contents
' 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ . 1
1.1 Project Goals ......................................................................................................... . 2
2.0
3.0 METHODS .....................................................................................................................
EXISTING CONDITIONS ............................................................................................... . 3
. 4
3.1 Physiography, Topography, and Land Use ............................................................ . 4
3.2
3.3 Water Quality .........................................................................................................
Soils ....................................................................................................................... . 5
.5
3.4 Plant Communities ................................................................................................. . 6
3.5 Hydrology .............................................................................................................. . 6
3.6 Jurisdictional Wetlands .......................................................................................... . 6
' 3.7 Categorical Exclusion Document ........................................................................... . 7
4.0 GROUNDWATER MODELING ....................................................................................... . 8
4.1 Groundwater Model Descriptions ...........................................................................
4.1.1 Model Application - Boussinesq Equation ......................................................... . 8
. 8
4.2 Groundwater Model Results .................................................................................. . 9
5.0
5.1 REFERENCE STUDIES .................................................................................................
Reference Forest Ecosystems ............................................................................... 10
10
5.2 Soil Surface Characterization ................................................................................. 10
6.0 RESTORATION PLAN ................................................................................................... 11
6.1 Ditch Cleaning Prior to Backfill ............................................................................... 11
6.2 Shallow Marsh Excavation ..................................................................................... 11
6.3 Depression Construction ........................................................................................ 11
' 6.4
6.5 Ditch Plugs ............................................................................................................
Ditch Backfilling ..................................................................................................... 12
12
6.6 Berm Removal ....................................................................................................... 12
6.7
6.8 Floodplain Soil Scarification ...................................................................................
Plant Community Restoration ................................................................................ 12
13
6 .8.1 Planting Plan ...................................................................................................... 13
6.8.2 Nuisance Species Management ......................................................................... 14
7.0 MONITORING PLAN ...................................................................................................... 14
7.1 Hydrology Monitoring ............................................................................................. 14
7.2 Hydrology Success Criteria .................................................................................... 15
7.3
7.4 Vegetation Monitoring ............................................................................................
Vegetation Success Criteria ................................................................................... 15
16
7.5 Report Submittal .................................................................................................... 16
7.6
8.0 Contingency ...........................................................................................................
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................... 16
18

Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration Site Table of Contents page i
Detailed Restoration Plan
April 2008
1

Appendices
1
1
1

APPENDIX A. FIGURES
APPENDIX B. CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION DOCUMENT
List of Figures
Figure 1. Site Location
Figure 2. Hydrologic Unit Map
Figure 3. Topography
Figure 4. Onsite Land Use
Figure 5. Area Land Use
Figure 6. NRCS Soils
Figure 7. Soil Profiles
Figure 8. Groundwater Model Existing Conditions
Figure 9. Wetland Restoration Plan
Figure 10. Depression Construction
Figure 11. Monitoring Plan
List of Tables
Table 1. Groundwater Model Results for the Zone of Wetland Loss (Johnston Soils) ................ 9
Table 2. Reference Forest Ecosystem .....................................................................................10
Table 3. Planting Plan ..............................................................................................................14
Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration Site
Detailed Restoration Plan
April 2008
Table of Contents page ii

1

1

DETAILED RESTORATION PLAN
COLUMBUS SWAMP WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
ROBESON/COLUMBUS COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Restoration Systems, L.L.C. (Restoration Systems) is developing plans for riparian wetland
restoration at the Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration Site (Site) located approximately 11
miles southeast of Lumberton (34.4597°N, 78.9002°W NAD 83/WGS84), on the Robeson and
Columbus County line. (Figures 1 and 2, Appendix A). The Columbus Swamp Restoration Site
encompasses approximately 40 acres of land that is used for agricultural row crop production
and silviculture. The Site has been cleared of native forest vegetation, ditched for
agricultural/silvicultural purposes, and planted in agricultural row crops and loblolly pine. Based
on detailed soil mapping conducted by licensed soil scientists, the entire 40 acre Site is
underlain by Class A hydric soil , which was previously cleared and drained in support of Site
land uses.
The Site is encompassed within two parcels owned by the Fields family. The Site is situated at
the outer floodplain edge of Big Swamp at the confluence of Big Swamp and a smaller tributary,
Brier Creek (Figure 3, Appendix A). Brier Creek changes from a single thread, bank-to-bank
system into a braided channel as it descends off the slopes south of Big Swamp. The braided
channel contributes overland, surface flow to the vast swamps adjacent to the Site. Big Swamp
serves as the primary hydrologic feature at the Site. The Big Swamp floodplain is approximately
three quarters of a mile in width, extending to timber tracts on the northern rim of the drainage
feature.
An extensive ditch system has been excavated to drain the Site for agricultural land uses
(Figure 4, Appendix A). Interfield ditches have been excavated to a depth of approximately 4 to
5 feet. Spoil from ditch excavation has been used to construct a berm/road that borders Site
agricultural fields. The berm hinders surface water from Big Swamp accessing agricultural
fields during wetter portions of the year. Site ditches drain to a central ditch at the northern
edge of the Site. The central ditch drains under the berm/peripheral road through a culvert.
The ditch then extends towards Big Swamp north of the Site.
Brier Creek extends along the southwestern margins of the Site in a roadside ditch. The road
serves as a driveway for a cabin situated next to the Site. The driveway also services farm
fields and silviculture stands in Big Swamp. Brier Creek has been ditched and channelized and
is routed around the Site.
Due to its position in the landscape, the Site provides important storage benefits to Big Swamp
and other downstream aquatic systems. The dominant presence of hydric soils, an extensive
ditch network, and a disturbed vegetation structure/composition highlight the potential for an
exceptional wetland restoration opportunity at the Site.
Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration Site Page 1
Detailed Restoration Plan
April 2008

1.1 Project Goals
The purpose of this study is to establish a cohesive restoration plan outlining methods for
riparian wetland restoration.. The primary goals of this riparian wetland restoration project focus
on improving water quality and biological diversity in the Lumber River watershed and will be
accomplished by:
1. Removal of nonpoint and point sources of pollution associated with agricultural practices
including cessation of broadcast fertilizers, pesticides, and other agricultural chemicals
onto the Site
2. Restoration of Site hydrology by filling approximately 8000 linear feet of existing
drainage ditches, thereby promoting flood storage, nutrient cycling, and aquatic wildlife
habitat.
3. Restoration of soil structure through appropriate soil modifications and physical
alteration (grading, discing, etc.).
4. Reforestation of a native wetland community with subsequent reestablishment of habitat
diversity and functional continuity.
5. Enhancing and protecting the Site's full potential of wetland functions and values in
perpetuity.
These goals will be achieved by:
• Providing a minimum of 32 Riparian Wetland Mitigation Units, as calculated in
accordance with the requirements stipulated in RFP #16-D07033.
o Restoring approximately 33.5 acres of wetland through filling agricultural ditches,
removal of a berm and spoil castings, eliminating row crop production activities, and
planting with native forest vegetation.
o Enhancing approximately 0.5 acre of wetland by eliminating row crop production
activities and planting with native forest vegetation.
o Enhancing 2.0 acres of wetlands associated with onsite ditches by filling the ditches
and planting with native forest vegetation.
• Protecting the Site in perpetuity with a conservation easement.
This document represents a detailed restoration plan summarizing activities proposed within the
Site. The plan includes 1) descriptions of existing conditions, 2) groundwater model
applications, 3) reference studies, 4) restoration plans, and 4) Site monitoring and success
criteria. Upon approval of this plan by regulatory agencies, activities will be implemented as
outlined. Minor modifications to the restoration game-plan may be necessitated by one of
several contingencies such as access issues, sediment-erosion control measures, drainage
needs, etc..
Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration Site Page 2
Detailed Restoration Plan
April 2008

2.0 METHODS
Natural resource information was obtained from available sources. United States Geological
Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle (Evergreen, North Carolina), United States
Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) mapping, Natural
Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) soils mapping for Columbus County (USDA 1990), and
recent Robeson/Columbus County aerial photography were utilized to evaluate existing
landscape, wetland, and soil information prior to onsite inspection.
Current (2006) aerial photography was utilized to determine primary hydrologic features and to
map relevant environmental features (Figure 4, Appendix A). Subsequently, fields, reference
wetland surfaces, agricultural field ditch cross-sections, and profiles were measured to quantify
elevational gradients affecting hydrologic parameters and to predict wetland restoration
potential.
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) databases were evaluated for the presence
' of protected species and designated natural areas, which may serve as reference wetland
communities for restoration design purposes. A listing of federally protected species whose
ranges extend into Robeson and Columbus County was also obtained from the USFWS
(http://nc-es.fws.gov/es/countyfr.html). State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) records were
evaluated for the presence of significant cultural resources in the Site vicinity. Results of these
database reviews have been presented to the State of North Carolina in a Categorical Exclusion
I (CE) document (Appendix B). The CE document did not identify any issues that may hinder
Site development for wetland restoration.
Areas located adjacent to the Site were evaluated for reference use (Figure 5, Appendix A);
identified sites were evaluated to provide information on target (post-restoration) wetland
conditions. Characteristic and target natural community patterns were classified according to
' Schafale and Weakley's Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina (1990).
Detailed field investigations were performed in January 2008, and consisted of hydrological
I measurements, soil surveys, and mapping of onsite resources. Project scientists evaluated
hydrology, vegetation, and soil parameters to map hydric soils and open waters, conduct
detailed soil measurements, and collected data for groundwater models. Existing plant
1 communities were also delineated, mapped, and described by structure and composition.
Detailed soil mapping was conducted by licensed soil scientists to verify NRCS soil mapping
units. Soil mapping was subsequently modified to determine the upland areas to eliminate from
' the easement and to quantify wetland restoration acreage. Detailed soil profiles were collected
during the mapping effort for use in groundwater modeling and taxonomic classification.
' Groundwater conditions were modeled using the Boussinesq Equation. The Boussinesq
Equation represents a two-dimensional general flow equation for unconfined aquifers. The
equation has been successfully used repeatedly in the past to predict the decline in elevation of
I Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration Site Page 3
Detailed Restoration Plan
' April 2008

the water table near a pumping well as time progresses. The equation is based primarily on
hydraulic conductivity, drainable porosity, and the saturated thickness of the aquifer. The model
was utilized to predict historic hydroperiods, the extent of wetland degradation due to ditching,
and the potential for wetland restoration through effective removal of the drainage network.
Field survey information was platted and compiled within Geographic Information System (GIS)
base mapping and analyzed to evaluate the Site under existing conditions. Based on field
investigations and data analyses, a wetland restoration plan has been developed for review and
approval prior to onsite implementation, based substantially on such field investigations and
data analysis.
3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
3.1 Physiography, Topography, and Land Use
The Site is located in the Southeastern Floodplains and Low Terraces portion of the
Southeastern Plains ecoregion of North Carolina within USGS Cataloging Unit 03040203,
Subbasin 03-07-53 of the Lumber River Basin. Regional physiography is characterized as
major river floodplains and associated low terraces, and low gradient streams with sandy/silty
substrate, oxbow lakes, ponds, and swamps (Griffith 2002). Elevations within the Site are
nearly level averaging approximately 85 feet National Geodetic Vertical Datum (USGS
Evergreen, North Carolina 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle).
The Site includes approximately 40 acres of land located on the outer margins of the Big
Swamp floodplain. The area is characterized by extensive expanses of swamps, braided
stream channels, and oxbow depressions (Figure 5, Appendix A). In addition, a significant
portion of the floodplain has been timbered in the past during dry climatic periods and is
revegetating with an early successional scrub-shrub hardwood assemblage.
The Site is utilized for agricultural row crop production, silviculture, and recreation (Figure 4,
Appendix A). During field visits remnants of corn, soybeans, and sorghum were evident
throughout the Site. The eastern portions of the fields were planted in loblolly pine (Pinus
taeda) approximately 3 years ago. Based on conversations with the landowner, additional
species were planted at the Site with excessive mortality due to drought.
An extensive ditch system has been excavated to drain the Site for intended land uses. Ditches
drain in a northwesterly direction towards Big Swamp. The ditches are approximately 5 feet in
depth and 20 feet in width through the majority of the Site. As the ditches reach the
northwestern periphery of the Site, ditches increase to approximately 40 feet in width.
Spoil from ditch excavation was used to construct an earth berm on the northern margins of the
Site to inhibit flow from Big Swamp from entering agricultural fields. The berm system also
serves as an elevated road embankment that circumnavigates the agricultural fields. A primitive
agricultural road system also traverses the interior of the Site, primarily for access of farm
machinery and hunting vehicles.
Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration Site Page 4
Detailed Restoration Plan
April 2008

1
1
1

1
Due to its position in the landscape, the Site provides important benefits to Big Swamp and
ultimately the Lumber River. The dominant presence of hydric soils, an extensive ditch network,
and lack of forested vegetation structure/composition highlight the potential for an exceptional
riparian wetland restoration opportunity at the Site.
3.2 Water Quality
The Site is located within the Lumber River Basin in 14-digit USGS Cataloging Unit
03040203170020 of the South Atlantic/Gulf Region (North Carolina Division of Water Quality
[NCDWQ] subbasin number 03-07-53) [Figure 2, Appendix A]). Brier Creek, the main drainage
feature within the Site has been assigned Stream Index Number 14-22-17 and has received a
Best Usage Classification of C Sw. Streams with a best usage designation of C are suitable for
aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation, and agriculture.
Secondary recreation includes wading, boating, and other uses not involving human body
contact with waters on an organized or frequent basis. Sw is a supplemental surface water
classification denoting swamp waters that have naturally occurring low pH, low dissolved
oxygen, and low velocities.
Brier Creek is not listed on the NCDWQ final 2006 or draft 2008 Section 303(d) lists (NCDWQ
2007a, 2007b) and the Site is not located within a Targeted Local Watershed (NCWRP 2003).
3.3 Soils
Soils that occur within the Site, according to the Soil Survey of Robeson County, North Carolina
(USDA 1978) and the Soil Survey of Columbus County, North Carolina (USDA 1990), are
depicted in Figure 6 (Appendix A) and consist entirely of Johnston soils. The Johnston soil
series (Cumulic Humaquepts) consists of nearly level, very poorly drained, Class A hydric soils
on floodplains of major drainageways. The seasonal high water table typically occurs at or
above the ground surface.
Detailed soil mapping for the Site, prepared based on landscape position and hydric verses
nonhydric soil characteristics, verify that the entire Site is underlain by hydric soils. Hydric soils
are defined as "soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing
season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper soil layer" (SCS 1987). As depicted in
Figure 6 (Appendix A), the only hydric soil mapped within the Site has been identified as the
Johnston soil series.
Johnston Soils
Hydric soils of the Johnston series underlie 100 percent of the 40 acre Site. Johnston soils are
characterized by a black, loamy surface over a very dark grayish brown sandy loam subsurface
(Figure 7, Appendix A). These soils are located in broad, expansive river floodplains that are
very poorly drained, with a seasonal high water table at or above the ground surface for much of
the growing season. In general, areas of Johnston soils are woodland, with wetness being the
main limitation affecting alternative land uses. Based on preliminary studies, onsite hydric soils
appear to be drained by agricultural ditching; however, the soils also exhibit signs of
groundwater saturation prior to ditching activities.
Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration Site Page 5
Detailed Restoration Plan
April 2008

Currently, onsite hydric soils do not support hydrophytic vegetation and/or wetland hydrology.
Areas targeted for wetland restoration historically supported jurisdictional wetlands. Restoration
of wetland hydrology and replanting with native hydrophytic vegetation will occur in these areas.
See Section 3.6 for more information on jurisdictional wetlands and Section 6.0 for detailed
wetland restoration information.
3.4 Plant Communities
The Site is composed of agricultural land utilized for row crop production consisting of corn,
soybeans, and sorghum with a few mature swamp chestnut oaks (Quercus michauxu) in the
center of the Site. Primary successional herbaceous vegetation includes dog fennel
(Eupatorium capillifolium), broomsedge (Andropogon sp.), blackberry (Rubus spp), baccharis
(Baccharis halimifolia), and annual bluegrass (Poa annua). Species found along the ditch
margins include giant cane (Arundinaria gigantea), bulrush (Scirpus sp.), and plumegrass
(Saccharum sp.). In addition, the eastern portions of the fields were planted in loblolly pine
(Pinus taeda) approximately 3 years ago. Based on conversations with the landowner,
additional species were planted at the Site with excessive mortality due to drought.
3.5 Hydrology
Under historic conditions, hydrology within the Site was most likely defined by the presence of
surface water flows, groundwater migration into open water conveyances, groundwater seepage
onto floodplain surfaces, and, to a lesser extent, precipitation. Surface water flows result
primarily from upstream drainage basin catchment, discharge into upstream feeder tributaries,
and surface water flows into and through the Site. Currently, groundwater migration has been
accelerated in crop lands by the leveled soil surface, increased permeability within the plow
layer, and potential removal of subsurface impediments to flow (rooting functions and B horizon
surface complexity). The induced groundwater migration is intercepted by a network of inter-
field ditches, which effectively drain farmed portions of the Site. Approximately 8000 linear feet
of ditches exist within the Site. The ditches are approximately 5 feet in depth and 20 feet in
width through the majority of the Site. As the ditches reach the northwestern periphery of the
Site, ditches increase to approximately 40 feet in width.
3.6 Jurisdictional Wetlands
Jurisdictional wetland limits are defined using criteria set forth in the Corps of Engineers
Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987). As stipulated in this manual,
the presence of three clearly defined parameters (hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and
evidence of wetland hydrology) are required for a wetland jurisdictional determination.
Hydric soil limits were confirmed within the Site by a licensed soil scientist. Based on filed
surveys and groundwater modeling discussed below, jurisdictional wetland hydrology has been
effectively removed from 37.6 acres of the 40-acre tract (Figure 8, Appendix A). Approximately
0.4 acre of hydric soils lies beyond the drainage effect of onsite ditches and is currently
characterized by jurisdictional wetland hydrology. An additional 2 acres of jurisdictional wetland
is confined to ditches excavated across the Site.
Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration Site Page 6
Detailed Restoration Plan
April 2008

Onsite ditches have been excavated through hydric soils, characterized by a prevalence of
hydric vegetation, and are saturated/ponded for greater than 12.5 percent of the growing
season. During field investigations, ditches were ponded to a depth of approximately 0.5 feet;
however, ponding to approximately 4 feet in depth may occur during wetter times of the year.
Ditches range in width from approximately 20 to 40 feet and account for 2 acres of jurisdictional
wetland within the Site (Figure 8, Appendix A).
' Historically, onsite wetlands may have supported a Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods
community (Schafale and Weakley 1990). The area was seasonally saturated or flooded by
high water tables, poor drainage, and overbank flow from the adjacent Brier Creek. The forest
was dominated by various hardwood species of oak (Quercus spp.), cypress (Taxodium
distichum), and gum (Nyssa biflora).
Disturbance to onsite jurisdictional wetlands may have collectively reduced the functionality of
these systems including reduced hydrologic functions, biogeochemical functions, and plant and
animal habitat interactions.
3.7 Categorical Exclusion Document
A Categorical Exclusion (CE) document has been prepared and submitted for this project. The
full document is provided in Appendix B. A summary of issues associate with the CE document
includes the following.
• CZMA - Not applicable; the project is not in a CAMA County
• CERCLA - A limited Phase I assessment has been conducted
• National Historic Preservation Act - Concurrence received
• Uniform Act - Letter sent to landowner
• American Indian Religious Freedom Act - Not applicable; the project is not in a county claimed by
the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians
• Antiquities Act - Not applicable; the project is not on Federal lands
• Archaeological Resources Protection Act - Not applicable; the project is not on Federal or Indian
lands
• Endangered Species Act - No habitat for federally protected species within or adjacent to the Site
• Executive Order 13007 - Not applicable; the project is not is a county claimed by the Eastern
Band of Cherokee Indians
• Farmland Protection Policy Act - Concurrence received
• Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act - Letters mailed with no reply from agencies
• Land and Water Conservation Fund Act - Not applicable, the project will not convert recreational
lands
• Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act - Concurrence not required
• Migratory Bird Treaty Act - Letters mailed with no reply from agencies
Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration Site Page 7
Detailed Restoration Plan
April 2008
4.0 GROUNDWATER MODELING
Groundwater modeling was performed to characterize water table elevations under historic
(reference), existing, and post-restoration conditions. Specifically, the study utilized output from
the Boussinesq Equation to estimate the linear distance from the edge of agricultural field
ditches where the potential exists for drainage impacts to occur within jurisdictional wetlands.
4.1 Groundwater Model Descriptions
The Boussinesq Equation represents a two-dimensional general flow equation for unconfined
aquifers. The equation has been applied in the past to predict the decline in elevation of the
water table near a pumping well as time progresses. The equation is based primarily on
hydraulic conductivity, drainable porosity, and the saturated thickness of the aquifer. One form
of the equation is as follows:
X = (K ho t/f)/"/ F(D,H)
Where:
K = hydraulic conductivity (in/hr)
ho= depth to aquiclude (in)
t = duration (hours)
f = drainable porosity (dimensionless ratio)
F(D,H) = profiles (graphs) relating ditch depth, water table depth, and depth to
the aquiclude (ho)
X = wetland impact distance (in)
4.1.1 Model Application - Boussinesq Equation
In this study, the Boussinesq Equation was applied to agricultural field ditches to predict where
the linear distance of drawdown in the groundwater exceeds 1 foot for 5 percent and 12.5
percent of the growing season. These percentages were selected based upon guidance from
the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987). The
equation is solved for the wetland impact distance with data for the following variables: 1)
equivalent hydraulic conductivity, 2) drainable porosity, 3) an estimated depth to the
impermeable layer or aquiclude, 4) the time duration of the drawdown, 5) target water table
depth (1 foot below the soil surface), and 6) minimum ditch depth.
Hydraulic conductivity (K) values were estimated using values published in the Soil Survey of
Columbus County, North Carolina (USDA 1990). The soil layer depths were obtained from
descriptions in the Columbus County soil survey and verified in the field. Drainable porosity was
determined using published data (Skaggs et al. 1986). The drainable porosities were cross-
referenced with water depth to drained-volume relationship provided by MUUF for depths
between 0 and 1 foot for the Johnston series. The depth to the aquiclude was obtained from
published values for the Johnston series (USDA 1990).
Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration Site Page 8
Detailed Restoration Plan
April 2008

1

1

The time variable, t, is based on 5 and 12.5 percent of the Robeson County growing season, 12
and 31 days, respectively. For the purpose of this study, the growing season is defined as the
period between March 14 and November 14 (USDA 1978). Values for the function F(D,H),
defined as a function of ditch depth, water table depth, and depth to the aquiclude, were taken
from plotted numerical solutions to the Boussinesq Equation (Figure 2j, Skaggs 1976), where
D=d/h0 and H=h/h0. The variable d is defined as the ditch elevation above the aquiclude. The
variable h0 is the distance from the soil surface to the aquiclude. The variable h is equal to the
height after drawdown for the water above the aquiclude at distance X from the ditch. For the
purposes of this analysis, h was defined as the distance between the aquiclude and a point 1
foot below the surface. Minimum ditch depths were determined during cross-sectional analysis
of agricultural field ditches.
4.2 Groundwater Model Results
The groundwater model was utilized to forecast the maximum zone of ditch influence on
jurisdictional wetland hydroperiods. The maximum zone of influence may be used to predict the
area of wetland hydrological restoration that may result due to effective ditch removal. Ditch
depths and spacing were varied in the model until wetland hydroperiods were reduced relative
to the jurisdictional wetland hydroperiods outlined by the Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987).
The Boussinesq Equation has the ability to support different ditch morphology and features,
suggesting that use of the model in evaluation of drainage impacts from agricultural field ditches
are applicable with proper data inputs. Groundwater model results are presented in Table 1.

1

The Boussinesq Equation predicts an influence on the jurisdictional wetland hydroperiod (12.5
percent of growing season) of 185 feet for a 3-foot ditch (Table 1). Figure 8 provides a depiction
of modeled wetland hydroperiods based on ditch depths and spacing under existing conditions.
As the Site succeeds towards steady state forest conditions, the zone of potential wetland is
expected to be reduced due to projected, lower infiltration and runoff rates.
Table 1. Groundwater Model Results for the 7nnp of Wptlanrl I n--c. Llnhnctnn Snilcl
Ditch Depth (feet) Ditch Impact (feet)
5 % of Growing Season Ditch Impact (feet)
12.5 % of Growing Season
2 79 125
3 117 185
4 131 206
5 137 217
- cone or intwence equal to iz of the moaeiea aitcn spacing
Groundwater model simulations for existing conditions indicate that portions of the Site are
forecast to meet hydrology criteria at distances of 125 to 217 feet from the existing drainage
ditches (Table 1). Under existing conditions Johnston soils are considered effectively drained
' throughout approximately 37.6 acres of the Site for hydrologic criteria of 12.5 percent of the
growing season due to the groundwater drawdown from the agricultural field drainage ditch
network (Figure 8, Appendix A).
I Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration Site Page 9
Detailed Restoration Plan
1 April 2008

5.0 REFERENCE STUDIES
Reference wetland systems were utilized as the primary method for development of this wetland
restoration plan. Reference areas are located approximately 1 mile northeast of the Site in less
disturbed portions of Big Swamp (Figure 5, Appendix A). Hydrologic reference areas will be
utilized to develop post-project hydrologic parameters for success criteria. Reference
vegetative community areas will be utilized to supplement Schafale and Weakley's Classification
of the Natural Communities of North Carolina (1990) vegetative community descriptions for
Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods (brownwater subtype).
5.1 Reference Forest Ecosystems
According to Mitigation Site Classification (MiST) guidelines (EPA 1990), Reference Forest
Ecosystems (RFEs) must be established for restoration sites. RFEs are forested areas on
which to model restoration efforts of the restoration site in relation to soils, hydrology, and
vegetation. RFEs should be ecologically stable climax communities and should represent
believed historical (predisturbance) conditions of the restoration site. Data describing plant
community composition and structure are collected at the RFEs and subsequently applied as
reference data for design of the restoration site.
Reference vegetative communities for this project are located in undisturbed portions of Big
Swamp northeast of the Site boundaries (Figure 5, Appendix A). Tree and shrub species
identified in this area are listed in Table 2 and will be utilized to supplement community
descriptions for Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods (brownwater subtype).
Table 2. Reference Forest FcosvstPm
Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods
Canopy Species Understory Species
Acer rubrum Persea borbonia
N ssa biflora Magnolia vir iniana
Quercus laurifolia flex o aca
Quercus michauxii
Quercus hellos
Taxodium distichum
5.2 Soil Surface Characterization
Wetland surface microtopography was evaluated in reference wetlands by estimating changes
in relief across local reaches of the landscape. In Johnston soils, depressional storage
associated with microtopography appears to play an important role in wetland hydrology and
function. Surface topography varies from approximately 0.5 to 1.0 foot across the soil surface.
Within the interior reference hydrology area, depressional areas are generally spaced at
Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration Site Page 10
Detailed Restoration Plan
April 2008

t distances ranging from 30 to 100 feet between hummocks and flats. The depressions ranged
' from 20 to 70 feet in width and averaged approximately 0.5 foot in maximum depth.
6.0 RESTORATION PLAN
' Site alterations designed to restore characteristic wetland soil features and groundwater wetland
hydrology include: 1) ditch cleaning prior to backfill, 2) depression construction, 3) impervious
ditch plug construction, 4) ditch backfilling, 5) berm removal, 6) floodplain soil scarification, and
' 7) plant community restoration. Restoration plans depicted in Figure 9 (Appendix A) are
expected to restore 33.5 acres and enhance 2.5 acre of forested riverine wetlands.
6.1 Ditch Cleaning Prior to Backfill
Ditches identified for backfilling in Figure 9 (Appendix A) will be cleaned, as needed, to remove
unconsolidated sediments within the lower portion of the cross-section. Accumulated sediment
within the ditches is relatively high permeability material that may act as a conduit for continued
drainage after restoration. The unconsolidated sediments will be lifted from the channel to
expose the underlying, relatively impermeable clay substrate along the ditch invert. The
sediment will be temporarily placed on adjacent surfaces during depression construction and
ditch backfilling. Subsequently, the unconsolidated sediment will be incorporated into top soils
graded during soil preparation for planting.
' 6.2 Shallow Marsh Excavation
Shallow freshwater marsh pools will be constructed in the primary floodplain along portions of
I ditches and used for additional fill material as needed. The pools will be constructed by
excavating shallow, irregularly shaped (oblong) depressions placed perpendicular to land slope.
The depressions will range to a maximum of 0.75-foot below the existing surface elevation in
the center of the depression. Depressional areas will extend over a radius of 50 to 75 feet (long
axis). The location and attributes of oval depressions will be constructed to mimic backwater
slough depressions and other depressional features found in the reference wetlands. Ditches
' located within depressional areas will be backfilled to the maximum 0.75-foot depth below the
ground elevation.
6.3 Depression Construction
Based on volume calculations for ditch-backfill material, approximately 30,500 cubic yards of
material must be borrowed from the Site. If borrow material derived from shallow depression
excavation results in insufficient quantities of ditch backfill material, depressions may be
excavated throughout the Site landscape. The primary purpose of these depressions is to
provide suitable, low permeability material for ditch plugs and backfilling, to increase water
' storage potential within the wetland restoration area, and to increase potential for biological
diversity within the complex. A conceptual model of the constructed depression, after
restoration is complete, is depicted in Figure 10 (Appendix A).
1 The depression will be constructed by excavating and stockpiling top soils overlying the B
horizon (clay layer) surface. Subsequently, clay from the B horizon will be excavated as

1
Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration Site Page 11
Detailed Restoration Plan
April 2008
1
individual pockets approximately 2 to 3 feet in width and 2 to 3 feet in depth, such that the
landscape is "pockmarked" with small, groundwater storage depressions. Clays excavated from
the depressions will be utilized as backfill material on adjacent ditch sections. Top soils and
sediment removed from ditch cleaning efforts will be utilized to backfill the depression to within
0.3 foot of the surface.
The location, depth, and configuration of each depression will be modified during construction to
maximize landscape 'diversity, provide varying depths throughout the Site, and to balance cut
and fill needs for ditch backfilling and plug construction.
6.4 Ditch Plugs
Ditch plugs will be installed along onsite ditches at locations conceptually depicted in Figure 9
(Appendix A). In addition, all Site outfall locations will be effectively plugged to prevent
migration of surface water to and from the Site. The plugs will represent low density material
designed to withstand erosive forces associated with concentrated surface water or
groundwater flows. If earthen material is used, each plug will consist of earthen material
backfilled in 2-foot lifts of vegetation free material and compacted into the bottom of the ditch.
Earthen plugs may be reinforced by incorporation of filter cloth into the plug to minimize
preferential flow of groundwater through fill material. Earthen material may be obtained from
upland borrow pits or through excavation of groundwater storage depressions within the Site.
6.5 Ditch Backfilling
Ditches will be backfilled using onsite, earthen material from excavated depressions as depicted
in Figure 9 (Appendix A). Based on cut-fill estimates for this project, approximately 30,500
cubic yards of ditch backfill material will be required to effectively fill all onsite ditches. Material
excavated from the groundwater storage depressions will be stockpiled adjacent to the ditches
to be backfilled. Ditch backfill locations will be filled, compacted, and graded to the approximate
elevation of the adjacent wetland surface. Certain, non-critical ditch sections may remain open
to provide habitat and hydrologic storage. Open ditch sections will be isolated between
effectively backfilled reaches to reduce potential for long-term, preferential groundwater
migration.
6.6 Berm Removal
Spoil from ditch excavation used to construct a berm/road that borders Site agricultural fields
will be removed to restore hydrology contributed to the Site by Big Swamp. Currently the berm
hinders surface water from Big Swamp from accessing the Site during overbank events.
6.7 Floodplain Soil Scarification
Microtopography and differential drainage rates within localized areas represent important
components of interstream flat functions. Reference hydrology areas north of the Site exhibit
complex surface microtopography. Small concavities, swales, exposed root systems, seasonal
pools, oxbows, and hummocks associated with vegetative growth and hydrological patterns are
scattered throughout these systems. Efforts to advance the development of characteristic
surface microtopography will be implemented.
Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration Site Page 12
Detailed Restoration Plan
April 2008

' In areas where soil surfaces have been compacted, ripping or scarification will be performed.
After construction, the soil surface is expected to exhibit complex microtopography ranging to 1
foot in vertical asymmetry. Subsequently, community restoration will be initiated.
' 6.8 Plant Community Restoration
Restoration of hardwood forest allows for development and expansion of characteristic species
across the landscape and will contribute to diversity and provide secondary benefits, such as
enhanced feeding and nesting opportunities for mammals, birds, amphibians, and other wildlife.
Reference Forest Ecosystem (RFE) data, onsite observations, and community descriptions from
' Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina (Schafale and Weakley 1990) were
used to develop the primary plant community associations that will be promoted during
community restoration activities. Based on Schafale and Weakley (1990) community
descriptions, the Site was historically characterized by Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods.
These areas occur on flat or rolling Coastal Plain sediments with a significant seasonal high
water table.
6.8.1 Planting Plan
Deep-rooted, riparian vegetation will be restored over the entire 40-acre Site. Planting
' vegetation is proposed to reestablish vegetation community patterns within the Site.
Revegetating is expected to provide soil stability, provide habitat for area wildlife, and filter
pollutants prior to entering the groundwater table. Scarification of floodplain surfaces may be
required prior to planting.
Variations in vegetative planting may occur based on topographic locations and hydraulic
' conditions of the soil. Vegetative species composition should mimic reference forest data and
onsite observations. Species expected for this project are characteristic of the Coastal Plain
Bottomland Hardwoods vegetative community as described in Classification of the Natural
' Communities of North Carolina (Schafale and Weakley 1990) and may include the following
elements.
swamp chestnut oak (Quercus michauxii) laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia)
water oak (Quercus nigra) bald cypress (Taxodium distichum)
willow oak (Quercus phellos) sweet bay (Magnolia virginiana)
1 ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana) American holly (Ilex opaca)
Bare-root seedlings of tree and shrub species may be planted within the Site at a density up to
' 1000 stems per acre (6.6-foot centers). Planting should be performed between December 1
and March 15 to allow plants to stabilize during the dormant period and set root during the
spring season. Bare-root seedlings should be hand planted to minimize Site soil disturbance,
thereby minimizing potential for sedimentation/siltation into Site receiving streams. A total of
40,000 diagnostic tree and shrub seedlings may be planted in support of Site wetland
restoration (Table 3). The entire 40-acre Site is expected to be revegetated during
implementation of this plan.
Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration Site Page 13
Detailed Restoration Plan
1 April 2008

6.8.2 Nuisance Species Management
No nuisance species were observed in the Site; therefore, no nuisance species controls are
proposed at this time. Potential for other nuisance species including nonnative floral species
will be monitored over the course of the 5-year monitoring period. Appropriate actions may be
taken to ameliorate negative impacts regarding vegetation development and/or water
management on an as-needed basis.
Table 3. Plantina Plan
Vegetation Association
(Planting Area) Coastal Plain Bottomland Harwoods
Area (acres) 40
SPECIES Total Number Planted' Percentage of Total2
Ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana) 5000 12.5
American Holly (Ilex opaca) 5000 12.5
Sweet Bay (Magnolia virginiana) 5000 12.5
Swamp Chestnut Oak (Quercus michauxil) 5000 12.5
Laurel Oak (Quercus laurifolia) 5000 12.5
Water Oak (Quercus nigra) 5000 12.5
Willow Oak (Quercus phellos) 5000 12.5
Bald Cypress (Taxodium distichum) 5000 12.5
TOTAL 40,000 100
1. Planting densities comprise 1000 trees per acre.
2. Some noncommercial elements may not be locally available at the time of planting. The stem count for
unavailable species should be distributed among other target species based on the percent (%) distribution. One
year of advance notice to forest nurseries will promote availability of some noncommercial elements. However,
reproductive failure in the nursery may occur.
7.0 MONITORING PLAN
Monitoring of Site restoration efforts will be performed until success criteria are fulfilled.
Monitoring is proposed for wetland components of hydrology and vegetation. A general Site
monitoring plan is depicted in Figure 11 (Appendix A).
7.1 Hydrology Monitoring
After hydrological modifications are performed, continuous reading, groundwater monitoring
gauges will be installed at the Site in accordance with specifications in Installing Monitoring
Wells/Piezometers in Wetlands (NCWRP 1993). Approximately nine groundwater monitoring
gauges (two gauges within reference and seven gauges onsite) will be installed at the Site as
conceptually depicted in Figure 11 (Appendix A). Monitoring gauges will be set to a minimum
Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration Site Page 14
Detailed Restoration Plan
April 2008
1

1

depth of 12 inches below the soil surface. Hydrological sampling will continue throughout the
growing season at intervals necessary to satisfy the hydrology success criteria (EPA 1990).
7.2 Hydrology Success Criteria
Target hydrological characteristics include a minimum regulatory wetland hydrology criteria
based upon reference groundwater modeling. Evaluation of success criteria will also be
supplemented by sampling and data comparison between restoration areas and the reference
wetland site. Hydrology success criteria for the five-year monitoring period will include a
minimum regulatory criterion, comprising saturation (free water) within one foot of the soil
surface for 5 percent of the growing season.
Reference Wetland Sites
Two monitoring gauges will be placed in reference wetlands located northwest of the Site.
Wetland hydroperiods measured by groundwater gauges located within the reference areas will
be compared to the hydroperiods exhibited by groundwater gauges in the restoration area to
further evaluate restoration success. Success criteria outlined by the groundwater model
indicates that the wetland restoration area should maintain saturation within one foot of the soil
surface for at least 74 percent of the hydroperiod exhibited by the reference wetland gauges in
any given year.
' 7.3 Vegetation Monitoring
Restoration monitoring procedures for vegetation are designed in accordance with guidelines
set forth in 2006 CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation (Levels 1 and 2 only) (Lee et. al.
I 2006). A general discussion of the restoration monitoring program is provided. A photographic
record of plant growth should be included in each annual monitoring report.
' After planting has been completed in winter or early spring, an initial evaluation will be
performed to verify planting methods and to determine initial species composition and density.
Supplemental planting and additional Site modifications will be implemented, if necessary.
During the first year, vegetation will receive visual evaluation on a periodic basis to ascertain the
degree of overtopping of planted elements by nuisance species. Subsequently, quantitative
sampling of vegetation will be performed between June 1 and October 30, until the vegetation
success criteria are achieved.
1 During quantitative vegetation sampling in early fall of the first year, up to ten sample plots will
be randomly placed within the Site. Sample-plot distributions are expected to resemble
locations depicted in Figure 11 (Appendix A); however, best professional judgment may be
' necessary to establish vegetative monitoring plots upon completion of construction activities. In
each sample plot, vegetation parameters to be monitored include species composition and
species density.

Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration Site Page 15
Detailed Restoration Plan
April 2008

7.4 Vegetation Success Criteria
Success criteria have been established to verify that the vegetation component supports
community elements necessary for floodplain forest development. Success criteria are
dependent upon the density and growth of characteristic forest species. Additional success
criteria are dependent upon density and growth of "Character Tree Species." Character Tree
Species include planted species, species identified through inventory of an approved reference
(relatively undisturbed) forest community used to orient the planting plan, and species outlined
in an appropriate plant community as described in Classification of Natural Communities of
North Carolina (Schafale and Weakley 1990).
An average density of 320 stems per acre of Character Tree Species must be surviving in the
first three monitoring years. Subsequently, 290 Character Tree Species per acre must be
surviving in year 4 and 260 Character Tree Species per acre in year 5.
If vegetation success criteria are not achieved based on average density calculations from
combined plots over the entire restoration area, supplemental planting may be performed with
tree species approved by regulatory agencies. Supplemental planting will be performed as
needed until achievement of vegetation success criteria.
No quantitative sampling requirements are proposed for herb assemblages as part of the
vegetation success criteria. Development of floodplain forests over several decades will dictate
the success in migration and establishment of desired understory and groundcover populations.
7.5 Report Submittal
An "as-built" mitigation plan of the area, including initial species compositions by community
type, and sample plot and well locations, will be provided after completion of planting. A
discussion of the planting design, including the types of species planted, species densities, and
number of stems planted will be included. The report will be provided within 90 days of
completion of all work.
Subsequently, reports will be submitted yearly no later than December 31 to appropriate
permitting agencies following each annual monitoring assessment. Reports will document the
sample plot locations, along with photographs which illustrate Site conditions. Groundwater
monitoring gauge data will be analyzed to determine the duration of wetland hydrology during
the growing season. In addition, the survival and density of planted and naturally recruited
stems will be reported and evaluated relative to the success criteria.
7.6 Contingency
In the event that vegetation or hydrology success criteria are not fulfilled, a mechanism for
contingency will be implemented. For vegetation contingency, replanting and extended
monitoring periods will be implemented if community restoration does not fulfill minimum
species density and distribution requirements.
Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration Site Page 16
Detailed Restoration Plan
April 2008

Hydrological contingency will require consultation with hydrologists and regulatory agencies if
' wetland hydrology restoration is not achieved during the monitoring period. Recommendations
for contingency to establish wetland hydrology will be implemented and monitored until
hydrology success criteria are achieved.

1
1

1

1
1
1
1
Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration Site
Detailed Restoration Plan
April 2008
Page 17

8.0 REFERENCES
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1990. Mitigation Site Type Classification (MIST).
EPA Workshop, August 13-15, 1989. EPA Region IV and Hardwood Research
Cooperative, NCSU, Raleigh, North Carolina.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical
Report Y-87-1. United States Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg,
MS. 92 pp.
Griffith, G.E. 2002. Ecoregions of North and South Carolina. Reston Virginia. U.S. Geological
Society (map scale 1:1,500,000).
Lee, M. T., R.LK. Peet, S.D. Roberts, T.R. Wentwoth. 2006. CVE-EEP Protocol for Recording
Vegetation, Level 1-2 Plot Sampling Only. North Carolina Division of Water Quality,
Ecosystem Enhancement Program. Available at http://www.nceep.net.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2007a. Final North Carolina Water Quality
Assessment and Impaired Waters List (2006 Integrated 305(b) and 303(d) Report)
(online). Available: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/tmdI/documents/20061R_FINAL_000.pdf
[November 26, 2007]. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, Raleigh, North Carolina.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2007b. North Carolina Stream
Classification Schedules (online). Available:
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/bims/reports/reportsWB.htmI [November 26, 20071. North
Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh, North Carolina.
North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP). 1993. Installing Monitoring
Wells/Piezometers in Wetlands (WRP Technical Note HY-IA-3.1). North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources, Raleigh.
North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP). 2003. Lumber River Basin
Watershed Restoration Plan (online). Available:
http://www.nceep.net/services/restplans/Lumber_2003.pdf [January 27, 2008]. North
Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh, North Carolina.
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North
Carolina: Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of
Parks and Recreation, N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources.
Raleigh, North Carolina.
Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration Site Page 18
Detailed Restoration Plan
April 2008
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Skaggs, R. W. 1976. Determination of the hydraulic conductivity-drainable porosity ratio from
water table measurements. Transactions of the ASAE 19(1): 73-80.
Skaggs, R. W., and A. Tabrizi. 1986. Design Drainage Rates for Estimating Drain Spacings in
North Carolina. ASAE Paper Number: 84-2055.
Soil Conservation Service (SCS). 1987. Hydric Soils of the United States. In cooperation with
the National Committee for Hydric soils. United States Department of Agriculture.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1978. Soil Survey of Robeson County, North
Carolina. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation
Service.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1990. Soil Survey of Columbus County,
North Carolina. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource
Conservation Service.
Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration Site Page 19
Detailed Restoration Plan
April 2008
1
1
1

1
1
APPENDIX A: FIGURES
Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration Site
Detailed Restoration Plan
April 2008
Appendices
Lumberton
o?
1G
l
Bladenboro
Site Location
34.4597°N, 78.9002°W
(NAD83/WGS84)
Macedonia Ch. Rd.
From Raleigh
Take 1-40 E to 1-95 S
Take Exit 14 From 1-95, go East on US-74
Take First Left on Old Boardman Road
After 2.5 Miles, Left on Paul Wiloughby Road
After 0.5 Mile, Site is on Left
0 1 mi. 4 mi.
-®?
1:158,400
Source: 1977 North Carolina Atlas and Gazetteer, pp.81 & 82.
0-
Dwn. by
CLF FIGURE
2126 Rowland Pond Drive
SITE LOCATION
Gkd by:
Willow Spring, NC 27592
COLUMBUS SWAMP WETLAND RESTORATION SITE WGL
[phone]
919
341
3839f Date:
-
az
(
) Robeson County, North Carolina January 2008
Project:
„::" :. 08-003
) K F

cS'o
C,
?o
5 mi. 0 5 mi. 15 mi.
1:625,000
Source: Hydrologic Unit Map - 1974 State of North Carolina
4
l
r

IN
?J
J

Dwn. by:
CLF
FIGURE
2126 Rowland Pond Drive
Willow Spring, NC 27592 HYDROLOGIC UNIT MAP Ckd by.
WGL
[phone]
[phone] fax COLUMBUS SWAMP WETLAND RESTORATION SITE

North Carolina
Robeson County Date:
January 2008
, Project.
08-003

N :.-- __
AE.

44-
-..L••• •.. ^'L .?. ?L -Ill-..
,

.
'
'
'
`
•: -
:iAfa_ '._.. .__. .-
,
°
T _. .Ail
•_ dam
Ali-
= _. ... ?V•` - ^' ?... 'AIL.' ..« T ..tides,., '
+Xe. -? rat,... _ .?,.. .. .iW` _?: ?:•`? -`k"`' a -_
... _i. .yju•_ .4,i ...a5t:.. ._.. ? ?, ?"r _•_.? s .yJ6.,, - .'fie' '
tj'.a° ?A ?L._'??? _JL. ?•?' .? - .-.•2,e• L
'N?
y _
P
Aw.
W
.
?f
m
t
t
--
, -
?
_
.
-?i .fi
...,wr ?? +
?-
? _..
•V
erg- -•--

-' Lumber River
_ 2 Miles Downstream

wt J'C

rj'" i % .. ? '+?'? • 1` ?`- ....tom .'.?'_"- •????rr• ? 1 ,.`t '

41

4
'`
9 t
Legend
Easement = 40 ac a

0 395 790 1,580 2,370 3,160
County Line
Feet

Dwn. By: FIGURE
2126 Rowland Pond Dr. WGL
TOPOGRAPHY Date-
(919) Spring, , NC 27592 ^
215-1693 COLUMBUS SWAMP WETLAND RESTORATION SITE January 2008 JJ
(91 9) 341-3839 (fax)

Project:
Robeson County, North Carolina
08-003

Dwn. By: FIGURE
2126 Rowland Pond Dr. ONSITE LAND USE WGL
Willow Spring, NC 27592 Date:
[phone] COLUMBUS SWAMP WETLAND RESTORATION SITE January 2008
(91 9) 341-3839 (fax) Robeson County, North Carolina ProAT VL ject:
08-003

Dwn. By: FIGURE
2126 Rowland Puna Dr. WGL
AREA LAND USE Date:
Willow Spring, NC 27592
[phone] COLUMBUS SWAMP WETLAND RESTORATION SITE January 2008 5
[phone] (fax) Robeson County, North Carolina
Project:
08-003

Dwn. By: FIGURE
2126 Rowland Pone Dr. NRCS SOILS WGL
Willow Spring, NC 27592 Date:
[phone] COLUMBUS SWAMP WETLAND RESTORATION SITE January 2008
[phone] (fax) Robeson County, North Carolina Project:
08-003
SOIL PROFILES
Johnston Soils
Typical Pedon as Depicted in NRCS 1990
Soil Survey of Columbus County, North Carolina
Johnston Soils
Hydric Soil as Observed in the Field
Texture
Texture
0

10
A 1
Loam
Permeability = 2.0-6.0 cm/hr 0

10

Ap l Sandy Loam

20 A2 Loam
Permeability = 2.0-6.0 cm/hr

20
131 Loam
30 30
10YR 3/2 AC Sandy Loam
Permeability = 2.0-6.0 cm/hr
40 40
10 " s- 4i2 C 1 Loamy Sand
Permeability = 6.0-20 cm/hr
$0 $0
10 Y - 412 C2 Sandy Loam
Permeability = 6.0-20 cm/hr
Depth in inches Depth in inches

rv uY WGL FIGURE
2126 Rowland Pond Dr SOIL PROFILES Ckd by:
Willow Springs, NC 27592 WGL
[phone] COLUMBUS SWAMP WETLAND RESTORATION SITE Date:
[phone] fax Robeson County, North Carolina January 2008
Project: 08-003

Dwn. By: FIGURE
2,zsRowland Pond Dr. WGL
willow Spring, NC 27592 GROUNDWATER MODEL EXISTING CONDITIONS Date: ^
(s,s)z,s-,ss3 COLUMBUS SWAMP WETLAND RESTORATION SITE January 2008 SV,j
AV Vk [phone] (fax) Robeson County, North Carolina
Project:
08-003
Legend
Easement = 40 ac
Wetland Restoration = 33.5 ac
Wetland Enhancement = 0.5 ac
Ditch Backfill/Wetland Enhancement 2 ac
Effectively Drained Onsite Hydric Soils = 4.0 ac
® Berm Removal
¦ Ditch Plugs
Shallow Marsh Pool
•
%
0 90 180 360 540 720
Feet

2126 Rowland Pond Dr.
Willow Spring, NC 27592
[phone]
AN IL (9 19) 341-3839 (fax)
WETLAND RESTORATION PLAN

COLUMBUS SWAMP WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
Robeson County, North Carolina Dwn. By:
Date: WGL

January 2008

Project: FIGURE

(V/]
08-003
m m m m r m m m m m m m m m m m s m m
Preconstruction Soil Surface
Post Construction Soil Surface
2-3'

2-3'
A Horizon

B Horizon

Dwn. by: WGL FIGURE
2126 Rowland Pond Dr
Willow Springs, NC 27592 DEPRESSION CONSTRUCTION Ckd by: ?/t/G?

^?.
(s1s>z1s-1ss3
[phone] fax
COLUMBUS SWAMP WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
Date:
Janua Zoos
ry ? O
- Robeson County, North Carolina Project: 08-003

Dwn. By: FIGURE
2126 Rowland Pond Dr. WGL
MONITORING PLAN
Willow Spring, , NC 2759 592 Date:
[phone] COLUMBUS SWAMP WETLAND RESTORATION SITE January 2008
[phone] (fax) Robeson County, North Carolina Project:
08-003

1
1

1

APPENDIX B: CE DOCUMENT
Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration Site Appendices
Detailed Restoration Plan
April 2008

1

Environmental Documentation
for
' Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration Site
EEP Contract Number 000619
' Categorical Exclusion Form Items
CZMA
' Not applicable. as the project is not in a CAMA County
CERCLA
See the attached Executive Summary of the limited Phase I Site Assessment.
National Historic Preservation Act (Section 106)
' See the attached letters to and from the State Historic Preservation Office.
Uniform Act
' See the attached letter that was sent to the landowner.
American Indian Religious Freedom Act
Not applicable, as the project is not located in a county claimed by the Eastern Band of Cherokee
' Indians.
Antiquities Act
Not applicable, as the project is not located on Federal lands.
Archaeological Resources Protection Act
Not applicable, as the project is not located on Federal or Indian lands.
Endangered Species Act
See attached internal memo related to protected species. Based upon the absence of suitable
nesting or foraging habitat within the conservation easement of the subject project, it is
reasonable to conclude the project x\ ill have No Effect on any of the listed species.
Executive Order 13007
Not applicable, as the project is not located in a county claimed by the Eastern Band of Cherokee
Indians.
Farmland Protection Policv Act
No unique or prime farmland will be converted. See the attached letter to USDA and Form AD-
1006.
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act
See the attached letters to the NCWRC and the USFNNIS. Neither agency commented on the
project.

Land and Water Conservation Fund Act t
Not applicable. The project will not convert recreation lands.
Nlaanuson-Stevens Fisherv Conservation and Management Act '
Not applicable. The project is not located in an estuarine system.
Migratory Bird Treatv Act '
See the attached letters to the NC'N 'RC and the USF\t'S. Neither a0ency commented on the
project.
Wilderness Act
Not applicable. The project is not located in a wilderness area.
Other Miscellaneous Items ,
Public Notice
See the attached Affidavit of Publication of a Public Notice in the Jacksonville Daily News.

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Appendix A
<e
Categorical Exclusion Form for Ecosystem Enhancement
Program Projects
Version 1.3
Note: Only Appendix A should to be submitted (along with any supporting documentation) as the
environmental document.
Part A: General Project Information
Project Name: Columbus Swam Wetland Restoration Site
EEP Number: Contract # 000619
Project Sponsor: Restoration Systems, L.L.C.
Project Contact Name: Preston Steele
Project Contact Address: 1101 Haynes Street Suite 211 - Ralei h, NC 27604
Project Contact E-mail: [e-mail]
EEP Project Mana er: Jeff Jurek
Project Description
The Columbus Swamp Site is located in southeastern Robeson County within
the floodplain of the Lumber River in Cataloging Unit 03030203. The Site, a
previously drained (ditched) wetland, encompasses approximately 37.5 acres of
mixed use agricultural land. Site restoration will include the removal of fill
materials, filling drainage ditches, reforestation of native wetland species, and
the reestablishment of soil structure and microtopographic variations over
approximately 32 acres of the Site. The Site is expected to support a Coastal
Plain, Bottomland Hardwood Forest, as well as a Cypress-Gum Swamp Forest in
depressions. 32 Wetland Miti ation Units will be im lemented at the Site.
For Official Use Only
Reviewed By:
--= UV- 'I Ge_.._-
Date EEP roject Manager
Conditional Approved By:
Date For Division Administrator
FHWA
? Check this box if there are outstanding issues
Final Approval By:
.Z =lye t
Date FoeDivision Administrator
FHWA

1
t
1

Part B: Non-Ground-Disturbing Activities
Response
Regulation/Question
Coastal Zone Man ement Act CZM
1. Is the project located in a CAMA county? ? Yes
® No
2. Does the project involve ground-disturbing activities within a CAMA Area of ? Yes
Environmental Concern (AEC)? ? No
® N/A
3. Has a CAMA permit been secured? ? Yes
? No
® N/A
4. Has NCDCM agreed that the project is consistent with the NC Coastal Management ? Yes
Program? ? No
® N/A
ion Mg LbM
1 Is this a "full delivery" project? ® Yes
? No
2. Has the zoning/land use of the subject property and adjacent properties ever been ? Yes
designated as commercial or industrial? ® No
3. As a result of a limited Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or potential ? Yes
hazardous waste sites within or adjacent to the project area? ® No
4 As a result of a Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous ? Yes
waste sites within or adjacent to the project area? ? No
® N/A
5. As a result of a Phase II Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous ? Yes
waste sites within the project area? ? No
® N/A
6. Is there an approved hazardous mitigation plan? ? Yes
? No
® N/A

1. Are there properties listed on, or eligible for listing on, the National Register of ? Yes
Historic Places in the project area? ® No
2. Does the project affect such properties and does the SHPO/THPO concur? ? Yes
? No
® N/A
3. If the effects are adverse, have they been resolved? ? Yes
? No
® N/A
Uniform Relo R P s
1. Is this a "full delivery" project? ® Yes
? No
2. Does the project require the acquisition of real estate? ® Yes
? No
3. Was the property acquisition completed prior to the intent to use federal funds? ? Yes
® No
? N/A
4. Has the owner of the property been informed ® Yes
prior to making an offer that the agency does not have condemnation authority; and ? No
* what the fair market value is believed to be? ? N/A

1

t
1

Part C: Ground-Disturbing Activities
Regulation/Question Response
1. Is the project located in a county claimed as "territory" by the Eastern Band of ? Yes
Cherokee Indians? ® No
2. Is the site of religious importance to American Indians? ? Yes
? No
® N/A
3. Is the project listed on, or eligible for listing on, the National Register of Historic ? Yes
Places? ? No
® NIA
4. Have the effects of the project on this site been considered? ? Yes
? No
® N/A
ArOMOM Act
1. Is the project located on Federal lands? ? Yes
® No
2. Will there be loss or destruction of historic or prehistoric ruins, monuments or objects ? Yes
of antiquity? ? No
® N/A
3. Will a permit from the appropriate Federal agency be required? ? Yes
? No
® N/A
4. Has a permit been obtained? ? Yes
? No
® N/A

1. Is the project located on federal or Indian lands (reservation)? ? Yes
® No
2 Will there be a loss or destruction of archaeological resources? Yes
? No
® N/A
3. Will a permit from the appropriate Federal agency be required? ? Yes
? No
H N/A
4. Has a permit been obtained? ? Yes
? No
® N/A
Endangered 2-
1. Are federal Threatened and Endangered species and/or Designated Critical Habitat ® Yes
listed for the county? ? No
2. Is Designated Critical Habitat or suitable habitat present for listed species? ? Yes
® No
? N/A
3. Are T&E species present or is the project being conducted in Designated Critical ? Yes
Habitat? ? No
® N/A
4. Is the project "likely to adversely affect" the specie and/or "likely to adversely modify" Yes
Designated Critical Habitat? ? No
® N/A
5. Does the USFWS/NOAA-Fisheries concur in the effects determination? ? Yes
? No
® N/A
6. Has the USFWS/NOAA-Fisheries rendered a "jeopardy" determination? ? Yes
? No
® N/A

1

1

1
1
1

1. Is the project located on Federal lands? ? Yes
® No
2 Has the EBCI indicated that Indian sacred sites may be impacted by the proposed ? Yes
project? ? No
® N/A
Have accommodations been made for access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred
3 ? Yes
.
sites? ? No
® N/A

1. Will farmland be converted? ® Yes
? No
2. Has NRCS determined that the project contains prime, unique, statewide or local ? Yes
important farmland? ® No
? N/A
3. Has the completed Form AD-1006 been submitted to NRCS? ® Yes
? No
? N/A

1. Will the project impound, divert, channel deepen, or otherwise control/modify any ® Yes
water body? ? No
Have the USFWS and the NCWRC been consulted?
2 ® Yes
. ? No
? N/A
L*nd MW MOT 22MEEME FAXId Act on
2. Will the project require the conversion of such property to a use other than public, ? Yes
outdoor recreation? ® No
4. Has the NPS approved of the conversion? ? Yes
? No
® N/A
1. Is the project located in an estuarine system? Y
® No
2. Is suitable habitat present for EFH-protected species? ? Yes
? No
® N/A
3. Is sufficient design information available to make a determination of the effect of the ? Yes
project on EFH? ? No
® N/A
4. Will the project adversely affect EFH? ? Yes
? No
® N/A
Has consultation with NOAA-Fisheries occurred?
5 ? Yes
. ? No
F1 N/A
T
1. Does the USFWS have any recommendations with the project relative to the MBTA? ? Yes
® No
Have the USFWS recommendations been incorporated?
2 ? Yes
. ? No
® N/A
der s Act
1. Is the project in a Wilderness area? ? Yes
® No
2. Has a special use permit and/or easement been obtained from the maintaining ? Yes
federal agency? ? No
® N/A

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
The EDR Radius Map
with GeoCheck R
Columbus Swamp
704 Paul Willoughby Road
Evergreen, NC 28358
Inquiry Number: 2097837.2s
December 11, 2007
W Environmental
Data Resources Inc
The Standard in
Environmental Risk
Information
440 Wheelers Farms Road
Milford, Connecticut 06461
Nationwide Customer Service
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Internet: www.edrnet.com
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
Executive Summary --------------------------------- ------- ------------ ES1
Overview Map-------- - ------------ 2
Detail Map----------- -------------------------------------- ------------ 3
Map Findings Summary -------------. ----- --- ------------ 4
Map Findings-------------------------- - _ --------- 6
Orphan Summary------------- - ---- ----------------------- ------------ 7
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----..------------- ----------------- A-12
Thank you for your business.
Please contact EDR at 1-800-352-0050
with any questions or cornments.
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, Inc. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from
other sources NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL
DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION,
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL
ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE,
ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL,
CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY
LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT, Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS". 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 a Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any
property Additionally, the information provided in [his Report is not to be construed as legal advice.
Copyright 2007 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. Inc. or its affiliates. All other
trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners.

1

TC20978372s Page 1

1
1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
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 (E 1527-05) or custom requirements developed for the evaluation of
environmental risk associated with a parcel of real estate.
TARGET PROPERTY INFORMATION
ADDRESS
704 PAUL WILLOUGHBY ROAD
EVERGREEN, NC 28358
COORDINATES
Latitude (North): 34.459220 - 34' 27' 33.2"
Longitude (West): 78.903400 - 7854' 12.2"
Universal Tranverse Mercator: Zone 17
UTM X (Meters): 692588.3
UTM Y (Meters): 3814873.8
Elevation: 84 ft. above sea level
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP ASSOCIATED WITH TARGET PROPERTY
Target Property Map: 34078-D8 EVERGREEN, NC
Most Recent Revision: 1986
' 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:
FEDERAL RECORDS
NPL__--------------------- National Priority List
Proposed NPL ............... Proposed National Priority List Sites
Delisted NPL ... . .. . . . . ... . . . National Priority List Deletions
NPL LIENS_ _ _ _ . _ _ _ .. _ .. _ . Federal Superfund Liens
CERCLIS-------------------- Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System
CERC-NFRAP----- ..__..---- CERCLIS No Further Remedial Action Planned
CORRACTS------- . . ... . .. . .. Corrective Action Report
' RCRA-TSDF----------------- Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Information
RCRA-LQG---------------- __ Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Information
RCRA-SQG _ .. _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Information

1

TC2097837.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ERNS__________________ ___ Emergency Response Notification System
HMIRS--------- _ . Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System
US ENG CONTROLS- _ . _ _ _ _ _ Engineering Controls Sites List
US INST CONTROL ------ __. Sites with Institutional Controls
DOD..... _ - - _ _ - _ .. _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . Department of Defense Sites
FUDS_____________________ ___ Formerly Used Defense Sites
US BROWNFIELDS------ ---- A Listing of Brownfields Sites
CONSENT- ..___ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees
ROD ---------------------- --- Records Of Decision
UMTRA------------------- --- Uranium Mill Tailings Sites
ODI----------------------- --- Open Dump Inventory
TRIS---------------------- --- Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System
TSCA _ - _ - _ Toxic Substances Control Act
FTTS----------------- _ . - - .. _ . FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide
Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
SSTS--------------------- --- Section 7 Tracking Systems
LUCIS .................... .... Land Use Control Information System
DOT OPS---- _ _ - - . Incident and Accident Data
ICIS----------------------- --- Integrated Compliance Information System
DEBRIS REGION 9------- --- Torres Martinez Reservation Illegal Dump Site Locations
HIST FTTS.. - _ _ .. _ . _ _ . _ - - . FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Administrative Case Listing
US CDL------------- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Clandestine Drug Labs
RADINFO--------------- . _ _ _ - Radiation Information Database
LIENS 2 . . .. . . . . . .... CERCLA Lien Information
PADS---.- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ PCB Activity Database System
MILTS_ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Material Licensing Tracking System
MINES -------------------- --- Mines Master Index File
FINDS . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . Facility Index System/Facility Registry System
RAATS------ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System
STATE AND LOCAL RECORDS
Fungicide, & Rodenticide
SH WS. _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - - . Inactive Hazardous Sites Inventory
NC HSDS--------------- ---- Hazardous Substance Disposal Site
IMD_ _ _ - _ _ . Incident Management Database
SWF/LF---- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ List of Solid Waste Facilities
OLI-------------- ........ .... Old Landfill Inventory
HIST LF--------------- . _ Solid Waste Facility Listing
LUST ------------------- ----- Regional UST Database
LUST TRUST . .. . . . . .. . . . . State Trust Fund Database
UST_ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ __ Petroleum Underground Storage Tank Database
AST ....... ..----- ------ ----- AST Database
INST CONTROL_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ No Further Action Sites With Land Use Restrictions Monitoring
VCP --------------------- -- Responsible Party Voluntary Action Sites
DRYCLEANERS-------- -- Drycleaning Sites
BROWNFIELDS_ Brownfields Projects Inventory
NPDES------------------ ---- . NPDES Facility Location Listing
TRIBAL RFrORDS
INDIAN RESERV_ . - . . Indian Reservations
INDIAN LUST_ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
INDIAN UST_________________ Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
EDR PROPRIETARY RECORDS
Manufactured Gas Plants-__ EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plants
TC2C97837.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2

1
' ? EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
' SURROUNDING SITES: SEARCH RESULTS
Surrounding sites were not identified.

1
1
1
1
1

1

1
1
1
Unmappable (orphan) sites are not considered in the foregoing analysis.
TC2097837.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3
1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Due to poor or inadequate address information, the following sites were not mapped:
Site Name
EVERGREEN SERVICE CENTER
ALLENTON GROCERY
BRITT'S GROCERY
TYNDALL'S GROCERY
EVERGREEN SERVICE CENTER
OLD 74 GROCERY
OSCAR BAXLEY GROCERY
SMITHSJALLENTON
SCOTT'S 76
211 QUICK MART
TRAVEL LODGE
REGINA HARDIN
ROBESON CO WATER DEPT
AMERICAN REFUSE SYSTEMS INC
R & J MINI MART
KNOX OLDS-PONTIAC
BILLY COX GROC.
ROBESON CORRECTIONAL CENTER
LONG BRANCH GROCERY
BOISE CASCADE
THE OSTERNECK COMPANY INC.
M. & J. STATION 1
RAFT SWAMP GROCERY
KWIK SHOP 14
BILLY'S AUTO TEXACO
MINUTEMAN 2
SUN DO-KWIK SHOP E.TOWN(BP)
MINUTE MAN 23 (FORM TWIN MART
#56-9131-101
FOX'S HOLSUM BAKERY INC
SOUTHERN STATES
CAROLINA DIV OF CONVERSE RUBBER
FLAIR FOLD CORPORATION
COOPERATIVE WAREHOUSE
NOBBS AUTO & TRUCK PARTS
NASH FINCH CO
Database(s)
LUST, IMD
LUST, UST, LUST TRUST, IMD
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
UST
AST
RCRA-SQG, FINDS
RCRA-SQG, FINDS
RCRA-SQG, FINDS
RCRA-SQG, FINDS
TC2097837 2s EXECUTJE SUM.'GARY 4

OVERVIEW MAP - 2097837.2s
f r rf 'f , J r; /, ?j % f g
%rt?r f'i`r
Target Property
' Sites at elevations higher than
or equal to the target property
+ Sites at elevations lover than
the target property
1 Manufactured Gas Plants
' National Priority List Sites
Depl. Defense Sites
1
SITE NAME: Columbus Swamp
' ADDRESS: 704 Paul Willoughby Road
Evergreen NC 28358
L.AT/LONG: 34.4592 / 78.903?

0 114 12 1 Wes
Indian Reservations BIA Hazardous Substance
County Boundary Disposal Sites
Oil & Gas pipelines
100-year flood zone
W 500-year flood zone
National Wetland Inventory
State Wetlands This report includes Interactive Map Layers to
display andlor hide map information. The
legend includes only those icons for the
default map view
CLIENT: Restoration Systems. LLC
CONTACT: Dave Schiller
INOUIRY /t: 2097837.2s
DATE: December 11, 2007 1:23 pm
?.. Cao,ncrl -?;?' ECR ?^.a 2C0? -_ -,:ups ==I n? cg*-=
1
DETAIL MAP - 2097837.2s
target Property 0 1116 its t/4Ulf-
Sites at elevations higher than
or equal to the target property
I -
ndian Reservations BIA Hazardous Substance
® Sites at elevations lower than
the target property ^' County Boundary Disposal Sites
L Manufactured Gas Plants Oil & Gas pipelines
' Sensitive Receptors 100-year flood zone
National Priority List Sites 500-year flood zone
Dept. DeLns=_ Sites National Wetland Inventory
Slate ?Netlands This report includes Interactive Map Layers to
display and/or hide map information. The
lenend includes only those icons for the
default map view.
' SI I L= NAi,AE: Columbus Swamp
ADDRESS: 704 Paul Willoughby Road CLIENT:
CONTACT Restoration Systems. LI-C
D
hill
S

Evergreen NC 28358 :
INQUIRY #: ave
c
er
2097837.2s
LATII-ONG: 3-.45921 78.9034 DATE: December 11, 2007 1:23 pm

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
Target Distance Total
Database Property (Miles) < 118 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 112 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted
FEDERAL RECORDS
NPL 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
Proposed NPL 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
Delisted NPL 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
NPL LIENS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
CERCLIS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
CERC-NFRAP 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
CORRACTS 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
RCRA TSD 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
RCRA Lg. Quan. Gen. 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
RCRA Sm. Quan. Gen. 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
ERNS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
HMIRS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
US ENG CONTROLS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
US INST CONTROL 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
DOD 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
FUDS 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
US BROWNFIELDS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
CONSENT 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
ROD 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
UMTRA 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
ODI 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
TRIS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
TSCA TIP NR NR NR NR NR 0
FTTS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
SSTS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
LUCIS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
DOT OPS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
ICIS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
DEBRIS REGION 9 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
HIST FTTS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
CDL TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
RADINFO TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
LIENS 2 TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
PADS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
MLTS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
MINES 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
FINDS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
RAATS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
STATE AND LOCAL RECORDS
State Haz. Waste 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
NC HSDS 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
IMD 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
State Landfill 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
OLI 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
HIST LF 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
LUST 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
TC2097837.2s Page 4
MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
Target Distance Total
Database Property (Miles) < 1/8 1/8- 1/4 1/4- 1/2 1/2- 1 > 1 Plotted
LUST TRUST 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
UST 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
AST 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
INST CONTROL 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
VCP 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
DRYCLEANERS 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
BROWNFIELDS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
NPDES TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
TRIBAL RECORDS
INDIAN RESERV 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
INDIAN LUST 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
INDIAN UST 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
EDR PROPRIETARY RECORDS
Manufactured Gas Plants 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
NOTES:
TP = Target Property
NR = Not Requested at this Search Distance
Sites may be listed in more than one database
TC2097837.2s Page 5

Map ID
' Direction
Distance
Distance (ft.)
Elevation Site

1

1

1
1
1
MAP FINDINGS
NO SITES FOUND
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
TC2097837.2s Page 6
1
IN
V
November 14, 2007
Renee Gledhill-Earley
State Historic Preservation Office
4617 IMail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-4617
Subject: EEP-Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration Site, Contract Number 000619
Dear Ms. Gledhill-Earlcti.
Restoration Systems, LLC (RS) has been awarded a contract by the Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (EEP) to implement the Columbus Swamp wetland restoration project in Robeson County.
As required by the contract, RS requests your reviev. of the project and any comments that you may
have with respect to archaeological or historical resources associated with it. The location ofthe
project is shown on the attached maps (Figures I and 2).
The Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration site has been identified for the purpose of providing in-
kind mitigation for unavoidable wetland impacts. The Site, a previously drained (ditched) wetland,
currently encompasses approximately 32 acres of mixed use agricultural land (Figure 3). No
architectural shuctures or areheolo-ical artifacts have been observed or noted during preliminary
surveys of the site for restoration purposes. In addition, the majority of this site has historically been
disturbed due to agricultural purposes such as hay and row crop production. The ground disturbance
activities required to complete this project will only impact those areas that have previously been
impacted due to these agricultural practices.
The site is located in southeastern Robeson County within the Iloodplain of the Lumber River (Figure 2).
%More speciticall?, the Site lies within a tributaFV of the Lutllber River known as 'Big. Swamp', all
expansive Coastal Plain, I3ottonland l lardwood Forest containing inclusions of Cypress-Gum swamp in
sloughs. The site is approximately 3.5 miles due north or F.ver2reen, NC. Nfore precisely, the Site is
located duc north of Paul Willoughby Road (SR t5 19) and can be accessed through dirt farm roads
(Figures 3). The project involves the restoration of the hydrology of the site by tilling in approximately
3,000 linear feet ofexistin, drainage ditches. The property is owned by Mr. all(] Mrs. Corbett Fields.
Pilot \tili • 1101 ii.nne, St.. Suite li)7 • iZai i; h- W 2,(x1 t • et . ,..t ,fur; tiolmAcmn ,:cmi • III wiw 90.715.' 490 • Fa\ )9.7;j.949?

We request that you review this site based on the inforriiation provided to determine if you know of
any existing resources that we need to know about. In addition, please provide us with your
conunents regarding the proposed project.
Thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please feel free to contact me at the
' office [phone] or on my cell phone [phone] if you have any questions.
Best Regards.
' Preston Steele, Project Manager
Attachments: 3 maps

1

1

a,a >TAIf °
N?
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Pear li. Sandbeck, Administrator
.%Ilchlll I-. IitJa, GovLmor ( Iftica of .\rchrccs InJ I h>lon
LIS12ctl( C. HvanS, ?ccrctan I)mc ton of I (utonc l Itc;ourc ..
Icffres I (.4M. I)CPtmSccrctanI):n t.l Bn K,k, ourcu,r
November 27, 2007
Preston Steele
Restoration Systems, IJ,C
1 101 Flaynes Street
Suite 107
Raleigh, NC 27604
Re: Columbus Swatnp Wetland Restoration, Contract NLimber 000619, Robeson County, lilt 07-2441
Dear Mr. Steele:
I-hank you for your letter of November 14, 2007, concerning the above project
We hire conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would be affected by
the project. 'Ilicrefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Fistoric Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on I listoric Presen-ation'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,
please contact Rence Gledhill-Farley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-807-6579. In all future
conununication concerning this project, please cite the above-referenced tracking number.
Sincerehv,
ter Sandbeck
'ICI
1 I1

Location: tug 1; 15c Ions Sena, It.flogh \1; 2-6111 Mailing Address' 461- Mad ?,nic, (:cnti r, Rtl.1¢h \(; 2-699- V.I - Telephone/FAX: 019. su 46-41 auW-,599

March 1, ?007
Mr. Corbet Fields
' 704 Paul Willoughby Rd.
Evergreen, NC
?8438
i Dear Mr. Fields:
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that Restoration Systems, LLC, in
' offering to purchase your property in Robeson County, North Carolina, does not have the
power to acquire it by eminent domain. Also, Restoration Systems' offer to purchase
your property is based on what we believe to be its fair market.
If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 919-755-9490
' l
Sincere
y,

Preston Steele
Project Manager

1

1
1
February 6, 2008
MEMO TO: Preston Steele, P ject Manager
FROM: Randy Turner ;
SUBJECT: Columbus Swamp Mitigation Site: Biological Conclusions for Federally
Listed Species documented For Columbus and Robeson Counties
Based on the most recently updated (01/31/08) county-by-county database of federally
listed species in North Carolina as posted by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) at http://nc-es.fws.gov/es/countyfr.html, Seven (7) federally protected species
are listed for Columbus County and three (3) for Robeson County. Table 1 lists the
federally protected species for both counties and indicates if potential habitat exists
within the Site for each species.
Table 1. Federally Protected Species for Columbus and Robeson Cnunfipc
Common Name County
C or R Scientific Name Status' Habitat Biological
_ Present Conclusion
American C and R Alligator N/A
alligator mississippiensis T S/A Yes

Bald eagle C Haliaeetus Bald and
Golden Eagle
No No Effect
leucocephalus
Protection Act
Wood stork C ia Endangered No No Effect
ammericaerica
ns
Red
woodpecker C and R Picoides borealis Endangered No No Effect
Short-nosed
stur eon C Acipenser
brevirostrum
Endangered
No
I No Effect
Waccamaw
silverside C
Menidia extensa
Threatened
No No Effect
Rough-leaved
loosest
if C Lysimachia
Endangered
No No Effect
r
e asperulaefolia
Michaux's
sumac R
Rhus michauxii
Endangered
No No Effect

-••??• y - a ,o uaiiyei u, extinction inrougnout au or a signitcant portion of its range"; Threatened = a taxon
'likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range"; Threatened
(S/A) = a species that is threatened due to similarity of appearance with other rare species and is listed for its protection;
these species (T S/A) are not biologically endangered or threatened and are not subject to Section 7 consultation
The analyses conducted on behalf of each species listed above includes:
• Review of each listed species' natural history including bloom window,
soil relationships, general habitat requirements; elevation restrictions, etc.
• Thorough evaluation of all habitats within the conservation easement of
the project, not just areas likely to be disturbed by construction;
• Formulation of conclusions about Site availability of suitable habitat for
each species;
• Development of biological conclusions.

' Page 2
February 6, 2008
' Preston Steele
Field evaluations were conducted in May 2007 and January 2008. Of the eight (8) listed
' species, only one (1), the American alligator has any reasonable chance of occurring
within or near the project conservation easement. The other seven listed species,
including the bald eagle, the wood stork, the red-cockaded woodpecker, the short-nosed
sturgeon, the Waccamaw silverside (a minnow endemic to to Lake Waccamaw and
related drainages), and two rare plants, rough-leaved loosestrife and Michaux's sumac,
will not occur within or adjacent to the Site conservation easement because of the
absence of suitable habitat.

1

Bald eagle: Although, adequate nesting and foraging habitat occurs
adjacent to the Lumber River, located 5-10 miles northwest and at Lake
Waccamaw, more than five miles to the southeast, Big Swamp, which is
located along the north side of the project conservation easement does
not provide enough open water to constitute foraging habitat for this
species. A review of the National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines
(USFWS, 2007) confirms that the project's activities will not constitute a
disturbance, or "take" of the bald eagle.
Wood Stork: Storks are birds of freshwater and brackish wetlands,
primarily nesting in cypress or mangrove swamps. They feed in
freshwater marshes, narrow tidal creeks, or flooded tidal pools.
Particularly attractive feeding sites are depressions in marshes or
swamps where fish become concentrated during periods of falling water
levels. Post breeding storks from Florida disperse as far north as North
Carolina. For more than 20 years. Yellow counties indicate an obscure
data reference to the species in the county.a colony of wood storks
ranging from 15-100 individuals frequent Sunset Beach during early June
through mid September. This colony represents the northernmost extent
of this Federally-endangered species' migration. No other such colony is
known to occur in North Carolina.
Red-cockaded woodpecker: This endangered bird occurs only in
forested areas dominated by coniferous trees, primarily long leaf pine.
Pines must be at least 30 years old to provide adequate forage, and at
least 60 years old, on the average, to provide suitable nesting habitat. No
pine, or cypress-dominated forest stands occur within the project's
conservation easement.
• Short-nosed sturgeon: This endangered fish is anadromous and moves
upstream along the Atlantic coast during seasonal spawning migrations.
Its migratory streams must have deep channels. No streams occur within
the project conservation easement.
Waccamaw silverside: This small fish is known only from Lake
Waccamaw and the upper Waccamaw River drainage in Columbus
County, North Carolina. The silverside is found in the upper Waccamaw
River only during periods of high water and is not a permanent resident.
The project watershed lies in Lumber 03, while the silverside is endemic
to Lumber 06.

Page 2
February 6, 2008
Preston Steele
Rough-leaved loosestrife: This species generally occurs in the
ecotones or edges between longleaf pine uplands and pond pine
pocosins (areas of dense shrub and vine growth usually on a wet, peaty,
poorly drained soil) on moist to seasonally saturated sands and on
shallow organic soils overlaying sand. The principle habitat matrix
associated with this species is pine, which is substantially absent from the
lands adjacent to the project conservation easement.
Michaux's sumac: grows in sandy or rocky open woods in association
with basic soils. Apparently, this plant survives best in areas where some
form of disturbance has provided an open area. At least twelve of the
plant's populations in North Carolina are on highway rights-of way,
roadsides, or on the edges of artificially maintained clearings. Two other
populations are in areas with periodic fires, and two populations exist on
sites undergoing natural succession. The project site and its surrounding
area is typically PC lands, or existing hardwood wetland without basic
soils.
American alligator
Although alligators may occasionally occur in the inflow canal from the Lumber River and
its bottomland drainages, this canal will be plugged during ditch filling activities within the
project's conservation easement. Their mobility and avoidance behavior will ensure that
any local specimens will stay outside the project area during ditch filling activities. Since
the species' status is "T S/A", consultation with the Fish and wildlife Service is not
required.
Biological Conclusions
Based upon the absence of suitable nesting or foraging habitat within the conservation
easement of the subject project, it is reasonable to conclude the project will have No
Effect on any of the listed species.

November 14, 2007
USDA/NRCS
Lumberton Field Oftce
County Office Hwy. 72
440 A Canton Rd.
Lumberton, NC
25360
ATTN: Doug Wassuin
SUBJECT: Completion of MRCS Form AD-1006 for Columbus Swamp Wetland
Restoration Full Delivery Project (Contract Number 000619) in compliance with the
Farmland Protection Policy Act.
Mr. WaSSnnl.
Restoration Systems, LLC (RS), of Raleigh, NC has been awarded a contract by the EEP
to provide 32 Wetland (Mitigation Units at the Columbus Swarnp Wetland Restoration
Site in Robeson County, North Carolina.
One of the earliest tasks to be performed by RS is completion of ail environmental
screening and preparatioiv'submittal of a Categorical Exclusion (CE) document. This
document is specifically required by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to
ensure compliance with various federal environmental laws and regulations. The EEP
must demonstrate that its vroiects comply with federal mandates as a precondition to
FHWA reimbursement of compensatory mitigation costs borne by the North Carolina
Department of Transportation to offset its projects' unavoidable impacts to streams and
wetlands.
In order for the project to proceed. RS is obligated to coordinate with the NRCS to
complete Form AD-1006 in compliance with the Farmland Protection Policy Act on
behalf of the FHWA. Tile purpose of this letter is to request your assistance in
completion of the Form.
The 32 acre Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration Site is located in soutllcastern
Robeson County within the f7oodplain of the Lumber River. More specifically, the Site
lies within a tributary of the Lumber River known as 'Big Swamp', an expansive Coastal
Plain, Bottomland Hardwood Forest containing: inclusions of Cypress-Guns swamp in
Pipit N I i I I • 1101 Flame, St.. St ltd 107 • t:;ilci_It. AC? _'7W-1 ? ?? %cc?.tc,I,imI ur?sic m; coo -H ior c 1)19.75i.1)490 • IaN 1)ISi.7?i.9-44?

sloughs. The site is approximately 3.5 miles due north of Evergreen, NC. More
precisely, the Site is located north of Paul Willoughby Road (SR 1519) and can be
accessed through dirt farm roads (Figures 1 and 2). The project involves the restoration
of the hydrology of the site by filling in approximately 8,000 linear feet of existing
drainage ditches. A map (Figure 3) depicting the type of soils within the area of
restoration as well as the total acreage is included.
The Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration site has been identified for the purpose of
providing in-kind mitigation for unavoidable wetland impacts. The Site, a previously
drained (ditched) wetland, currently encompasses approximately 32 acres of mixed use
agricultural land (Figure 3). The majority ol' this site has been used for agricultural
purposes such as hay and row crop production.
Should you have any questions or if any additional information is needed to complete the
Form, please feel free to contact me at the office [phone] or on my cell phone
[phone]. Your valuable time and cooperation are much appreciated.
Best Regards.
Preston Steele, Project Manager
Attachments: 3 maps
tic;
Oct, fi.U,? ?k .
?. z f
2 'k, 1-1

BY: .................a..
U.S. Department of Agriculture
FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING
PART I (To be completed by Federal Agency) Date Of Land Evaluation Request
Name Of Pro'ectC gl t Federal Agency Involved
ow buS Swaw w? Ha J R c ?tutac4;ov?
o
Proposed Land Use \ t A County And State Cl C_
PART II (To be completed by MRCS) V Date Request Received By NRCS
Does the site contain prime, unique, statewide or local important farmland? Yes No /Acres Irrigated Average Farm Size
(if no, the FPPA does not apply -- do not complete additional palls of this form).
hia;or Crop(s) Farmable Land In Govt Jurisdiction Amount Of Farmland As Defined in FPPA
C c\ r. Acres: % ?. Z Acres 469, 3-5_L % 1 7
Name Of Land Eyalua}ion Systcm Used Name Of Local Sit Assessment System Date Land Evaluation Returned By NRCS
=U klt j ? t'1 ?p ry ?:
PART III (To be completed by Federal Agency) Alternative Site Rating-_
Site A Site B Site C Site D
A. Tota! Acres To 3a Converted D:.ect!y 3 a
B. Total Acres To Be Converted Indirectly
C Total Acres In Site 0.0 3 ?L, 0.0 0.0 0.0
PART IV (To be completed by NRCS) Land Evaluation Information
A. Total Acres Prime And Unique Farmland t7
B. Total Acres Statewide And Local Important Farmland C)
C. Percentage Of Farmland In County Or Local Govt Unit To Be Converted (7
D. Percentage Of Farmland In Govt. Jurisdiction With Same Or Higher Relative Value
PART V (To be completed by NRCS) Land Evaluation Criterion
Relative Value Of Farmland To Be Converted (Scale of 0 to 100 Points) 0 0 0 0
PART VI (To be completed by Federal Agency) Max:murT,
Site Assessment Criteria (Tiese criteria are explained in 7 CFR 658 5(b) Points
1. Area In Nonurban Use
2 Perimeter In Nonurban Use
3 Percent Of Site Being Farmed
4 Protection Provided By State And Local Government
5 Distance From Urban Builtup Area
6. Distance To Urban Support SerVICeS
7_ Size Of Present Farm Unit Compared To Average
8. Creation Of Nonfarmable Farmland
9. Availability Of Farm Support Services - - --
10. On-Farm Investments
11. Effects Of Conversion On Farm Support Services
_12. Compatibility With Existing Agricultural Use
TOTAL SITE ASSESSMENT POINTS 160 0 0 0 0
PART VII (To be cornpieled by Federal Agency)
' Relative Value Of Farmland (From Part V)
Total Site Assessment (From Parl Vl above or a iocai
site assessment)
' TOTAL POINTS (Total of above 2 fines)
Site Selected Date Of Selection
Reason For Seled;on -

100 0 - 0_ 0 0
160 0 0 0 0
260 0 0 0 0
Was A Local Site Assessment Used?
Yes No ?
(See Instructions on reverse side) Form AD-1006 (10-83)

1
1

Directions from 1-95 (Heading South):
1. Take US-74 (Exit 14)- Turn left onto US-74 East. _
2. Travel 15.2 Miles and then take sharp left onto Old Boardman Rd.
(Note: Old Boardman Rd. becomes Old Boardman Hwy.) .,
3. Travel 2.8 Miles and turn left onto Paul Willoughby Rd.
4. Travel 0.6 Miles to site on left. u
jq.. ,. d `?' '• ar ?- .? inf.. ? ` ,
- •, - w cam,
,4 d ?? :;LY y may"' ? !!' ?'' s. ¢ ? -.?? ?Y1C-`i .ty j _
7 ?
- t
„
0
?. M
4 `r 't t l }
P }1 _ ?? j
v _
tip -9
f. Project Area : -
`1
.7 CP
71-
` * -1 Y ` • "'? ? ?^- ! mil'- t
w-? } ?, \ -` f• .tip a ` '
cam.,
Rin
? ?.
?Qt - t M lr. X41
Area of Detail
74
,0I _ {
01
71 '#icr! Esc a?.ti :.ft
?6
ra
1 A
Restoration Systems, LLC Figure 1:
1101 Haynes St. Suite 211 Columbus Swamp Restoration 1:24,000 A
Raleigh, NC 27604 Project Project N
1
tel: [phone] Location Robeson County, NC 0 455 310 1.820 2.730 3.640
Feet

t hc•???.r_?
U. S. Department of the Interior
Fish and Wildlife Service
Raleigh Field Office
P.O. Box 33726
Raleigh, NC
27636-3726
ATTN: Dale Suiter, Fish and Wildlife Biologist
November 14, 2007
SUBJECT: Coordination with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on Behalfof(l) Fish
and Wildlife Coordination Act and (2) Migratory Bird Treaty Act for the Brown ivlarsh
Swamp.
i41r. Suiter,
Restoration Systems, LLC (RS), of Raleigh, NC has been awarded a contract by the EEP
to provide 32 acres of wetland mitigation at the Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration
Site. One of the earliest tasks to be performed by RS is completion of an environmental
screening and preparation/submittal of a Categorical Exclusion (CE) document. This
document is specifically required by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to
ensure compliance with various federal environmental laws and regulations. The EEP
must demonstrate that its projects comply with federal mandates as a precondition to
FHWA reimbursement of compensatory mitigation costs borne by the North Carolina
Department of Transportation to offset its projects' unavoidable impacts to streams and
wetlands.
In order for the project to proceed, RS is obligated to coordinate with your office on
behalf of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWC'A) and the Migratory Bird Treaty
Act (NIBTA). This letter provides you with certain details of the Columbus Swamp
Wetland Restoration Site, including the project's location.. a general description of its
physiography, hydrography and existing land uses, as well as the intended modifications
to the site proposed by RS. You are encouraged to determine if the actions proposed by
RS may be inimical to any resources embraced by the F\VC'A, or the N!IBTA and provide
comments to RS based on your evaluation. It is reasonable to assume that the Service
will comment if the actions proposed by RS are, in the Service's opinion, likely to result
in harm to resources embraced by the FWCA or tile NMBTA,
I Pilot Mill • 1101 Hanes Si.. Suile 107 • kaloi-,h. NC _' 701-t • v,??u.restoralion,\stem>.com -H ionc `J19.l5i.9 90 • Fa\ 91 9 xi i ,
Project Location & Description
Tlie 32 acre Columbus SWalllp Wetland Restoration Site is located in southeastern
Robeson Count} within the floodplain of file Lumber River. \1 4ore specifically, the Site
lies within a tributary of the Lumber River known as `Big Swamp% an expansive Coastal
Plain, Bottomland Hardwood Forest contalnim, inclusions of Cypress-Gunl SWamp in
sloughs. The site is approximately 3.5 miles due north of Evergreen, NC. More
precisely, the Site is located north of Paul W111Ouuhby Road (SR 1519) and can be
accessed through dirt farm roads (Figures l and 2). The project involves the restoration
of the hydrology of' the site by filling in approximately 8,000 linear feet of existing
draina0e ditches. The Site is located on a single parcel consisting of agricultural fields
Utilized primarily for ro%v crop production (Figure 3. Appendix A). The site has been
historically dralned by a dutch system as depleted oil Figure 3. The ditch system consists
of a perimeter ditch that borders the Site to the north and west, and five ditches that
traverse the Site. The smaller ditches drain into the perimeter ditch, which empties into
Brier Creek. Brier Creek then travels northward into Big Swamp.
Restoration Nicans & Methods
The primary goals of this riparian wetland restoration project t??cus o11 improving wildlife
habitat and restorinu vital wetland functions to an area that has been functioning as an
agricultural area for decades. Restoration Oil the Site will focus on the restoration of
vC;etative Co111111u111tiCS, elevating groundwater tables to replicate jurisdictional
hydrological conditions, and the reestablishment of soil structure and topographic
variations within the existing floodplain.
Restoration of wetland hydrology and wetland soil attributes will involve I) ditch
cleaning prior to baektill1 2) ditch plug installation. 3) ditch backfill, and 4) scarification
of soils prior to planting. In addition, the construction of (or provisions for) surface water
storage depressions (ephemeral pools) also adds an important component to groundwater
restoration activities. These activities will restore 32 acres of wetland at the Site (Figure
3).
Sunlnim-y of Anticipated Effects
We anticipate that the immediate effects of this project (construction phase) will cause
,,round disturbance ",'thin the project area due to the use of' heavy machinery to complete
construction. Again, this site has historically received extensive ,'round disturbance due
to agricultural operations. The long, term effects of this project (pot construction) will
result in an overall cilhancelimit to the integrity of the immediate ecosystems anal result
in long terns herleficial effects to tish or wildlife. This site will also be protected in
perpetuity with a conservation easement.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Should you have any questions or if any additional information is needed to complete
your review, please feel free to contact me at the office [phone] or on my cell
phone [phone]. Your valuable time and cooperation are much appreciated.
Sincerely,
Preston Stecle, Project IManaber
Attachments: ? maps
Natural Resource Restoration & Conservation
November 14, 2007
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Division of Inland Fisheries
Falls Lake Office
1 142 1-85 Service Road
Creedmoor, NC 27522
ATTN: David Cox, Technical Guidance Supervisor
SUBJECT: Coordination \\ ith the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission on
Behalf of the Fish and 1Vildlife Coordination Act for the COILImbUS Swamp Wetland
Restoration Site (Contract Number : 000619)
Mr. Cox:
Restoration SNstems, LLC (RS), of Raleigh. NC has been awarded a contract by the EEf to
provide 32 acres of riparian wetland restoration at the Columbus Swamp Wetland
Restoration Site. One of the earliest tasks to be performed b} RS is completion of an
environmental screening and preparation submittal of a Categorical ExcIUSiO17 (CE)
document. This document is specifically required bN the Federal Highway Administration
(FI-IWA) to ensure compliance \%ith various federal environmental la\\s and regulations.
The EEP must demonstrate that its projects comply with federal mandates as a?
precondition to FHWA reimbursement of compensatory mitigation costs borne by the
North Carolina Department of Transportation to offset its projects' Unavoidable impacts to
streams and \%etlands.
In order for the project to proceed, RS is obligated to coordinate with your office on behalf
of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA). This letter provides you with certain
details of the Columbus Swamp 1Vctland Restoration Site, including the project's location,
a ?-,eneral description of' its physiography, hydrography and existing land uses, as well as
the intended modifications to the site proposed by RS. You are encouraged to determine if
the actions proposed by RS may be inimical to any resources embraced by the FWCA, and
provide comments to RS based on your evaluation. It is reasonable to assume that \-oil ??ill
comment if the actions proposed b} RS are, in vow- opinion. likely to result in harm to
resources embraced by the FWC'A.
Pilot Mill • 1 I01 flames Sr.. Juitr Iii- • R.tlei?{i, NC 2-604 • 1,XA?W CStor.uion?•,stcFn:u_>ut • t'h()uc 919.-55.9491) • f';1) 911.-».9-}9?
1

' Project Location & Description
Tile 32 acre Columbus Swamp Wetland Restoration Site is located in southeastern Robeson
' Count)' N%ithin the floodplain of the Lumber River. More specifically, the Site lies within a
tributary of the Lumber River knoNNn as Big SNyamp', an expansive Coastal Plain,
Bottonlland Hardwood Forest containing inclusions of Cypress Gunl sNvanlp in sloughs.
The site is approximately 3.5 miles due north of Evergreen, NC. Vlore precisely, the Site is
I located north of Paul Willoughby Road (SR 1519) and can be accessed through dirt farm
roads (Figures I and 2). The project involves the restoration of the hydrology of the site by
filling in approximately 8,000 linear feet of existing drainage ditches. The Site is located
' on a single parcel consisting of agricultural fields utilized primarily for row crop
production (Figure 3). The site has been historically drained by a ditch system as depicted
on Figure 3. The ditch system consists of a perimeter ditch that borders the Site to the
north and west, and five ditches that traverse the Site. The smaller ditches drain into the
perimeter ditch, which empties into Brier Creek. Brier Creek then travels northward into
Big Swamp.

Restoration Means & vlethods
The primary goals of this riparian Nyetland restoration project focus on improving wildlife
habitat and restorim, vital wetland functions to an area that has been functioning as an
agricultural area for decades. Restoration on the Site will focus on the restoration of
veaetative communities, elevating groundwater tables to replicate jurisdictional
y
' hydrological conditions, and the
reestablishment of soil structure and topographic
variations within file existing floodplain.
Restoration of wetland hvdrolo,,y and wetland soil attributes will involve I) ditch cleaning
prior to backfill, 2) ditch plug installation, 3) ditch backfill, and 4) scarification of soils
prior to planting. In addition, the construction of (or provisions for) surface water storage
' depressions (ephemeral pools) also adds an important component to groundwater
restoration activities. These activities will restore 32 acres of wetland at the Site (Figure
3).

Summarv of Anticipate(] Effects
We anticipate that the immediate effects of this project (construction phase) will cause
ground disturbance within the project area due to the use of heavy machinery to complete
construction. Again. this site has historically received extensive around disturbance due to
agricultural operations. The long term effects of this project (post construction) will result
in an overall enhancement to the integrity of the immediate ecosystems and result in loll-
term beneficial effects to fish or wildlife. This site will also be protected in perpetuit)' With
a conservation easement.
1
1
1
1

Should }'ou have any questions or if any additional information is needed to complete
}'our review, please feel free to contact me at the office (919) 755-9=490 or on min cell
phone [phone]. Your valuable time and cooperation are much appreciated.
Sincerely.
Preston Steele. Project klanager
Attachments: 3 maps
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
MOV-19-2007 MON 05:00 PM The Robesonian FAX NO, 910 739 6553 P. 03
Advertising
Receipt
The Robesonian
P.O. Box 1026
Lumberton, NO 28359
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Restoration Systems LLC
1101 Haynes St
Suite 211
RALEIGH, NO 27604
Ad taker; 12 Salesperson:
Caet$: 02104825.000
Ad#: 03540752
Phone: [phone]
Date: 11118107
Classification: 230
Description Start Stop Ins, Cost/Day Surcharges Total
01 Robesonian
Payment Reference:
11/20107 11/20/07 1 46.64
Public Notice of Opportunity for tin Informational Public Meeting on the Purchase and/or Use
of Property for the Restoration of Wetlands
Robeson County - Restoration Systems, L.L.C. proposes to purchase and/or use a 37+/-
acre tract of land in Robeson County, North Carolina, The purpose of acquiring and/or using
this property is to provide mitigation for impacts to wetlands that will result from existing or
future development in this area, Anyone desiring that an informational public meeting be
held for this proposed action may make such a request by registered letter clo Preston
Steele to Restoration Systems located at 1101 Haynes Street (Suite 211), Raleigh, NO
27604. Request must be made by December 20, 2007. If additional Information Is required,
please contact Preston Stoolo of [phone]. The NC Ecosystem Enhancement
Program reserves the right to determine if a public meeting will be held.
45.64
Total: 46.64
Tax: 0,00
Net: 46.64
Prepaid. 46.64
Total Due 0100
I
NOV-19-2007 KOM 05:00 PH The Robesonian
FAX NO, 910 739 6553
P. 02
PUBLIC NOTICE o1
Opportunity for an In-
tarmatlonal Public
Meeting an the Pur-
chuse andlar Use of
Property for the Re-
storutton of Watlunds
Robeson County - Re-
storation Systems,
L.L.C. proposes to pur-
chase and/or use a
37+1- acre tract of land
In Robeson County,
North Carolina, The
purpoee of acquiring
and/or using this prop-
erty is to provide mitiga-
tion for impacts to wet-
lands that will result
from existing or future
davolopment In this
area. Anyone deefring
that an Informational
public meeting be held
for this proposed action
may make such a re-
quest by registered let-
ter c/o Preston Steele
to Restoration Systems
locaierl nt 1101 Haynes
Street (Suite 211), Rn-
leigh, NO 27604. Re-
quest most be made byy
December 20, 2007, If
additional informatlon Is
required, please con-
tact Preston Stooie at
[phone]. The
NC Ecosystem En-
haticmnent Program re-
serves the right to de-
termine if a public
maetip0 will be hold.

1

1

1