20170921 Ver 1_Final Mitigation Plan_20180518

FINAL MITIGATION PLAN
MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND MITIGATION SITE
Alamance County, North Carolina

DMS Project ID No. 100015
Full Delivery Contract No. 7193
USACE Action ID No. SAW-2017-01472
RFP No. 16-006990

Cape Fear River Basin
Cataloging Unit 03030002

Prepared for:

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
1652 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27699-1652

May 2018
1101 Haynes St., Suite 211 • Raleigh, NC 27604 • www.restorationsystems.com • Ph 919.755.9490 • Fx 919.755.9492

January 25, 2018

Ms. Lindsay Crocker
NC DEQ – Division of Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina
27699-1652

Subject: Major Hill Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site: IRT Mitigation Plan Comment Responses
DMS Contract #: 7193; DMS Project ID: 100015; RFP # 16-006990

Mac Haupt, NCDWR, December 31, 2017:
1. Table 1-Project Components Table- in the Overall Assets Summary the stream credits are listed as
3006. However, in the same summary table there is a category of Stream (Low water channel)
“up to 228”. Where does this stream/credit come from? In reading the “note about SMUs” what I
am getting from the description is that current estimates are based on center line (GIS rendered)
and final footage amounts will be based on center line of low water channel, which means the
real measured footage will likely work out to the contracted stream amount… exactly. DWR
prefers that the Designer/RS make the best prediction possible for the amount of stream credit in
the Mitigation Plan and if the length/credit changes at the as-built stage then make the
justification to the IRT in the as-built document.

The “low water channel” measurement will be removed from the text and tables. Credit generation
tables will have credit from centerline of the design channel. We hope that this measurement
procedure is acceptable and the standard for all Mitigation Plans in the Wilmington District. The table
will include 3006 SMUs as the final amount of stream credit for the detailed restoration plan. If the
length/credit changes (due to unavoidable changes that may arise during construction) at the as-built
stage then we will make the justification to the IRT in the as-built document.

2. Section 3.3 Nutrient Model- DWR would recommend that while RS is monitoring water quality
and macrobenthos, nutrient and fecal samples taken before the project would likely be very
beneficial for showing functional uplift. Showing modeled results gives the reviewer an expected
ballpark of reductions, however, they are just predictions and at some point, need to be verified.
Various sections regarding the nutrient model state that the project “will result in a direct
reduction of 852.4 pounds of Nitrogen and 70.6 pounds of Phosporus per year”, unless the
nutrients are measured, pre-and post project, the statement should reach “may result in a
reduction…”.

The document will be changed to state “Nitrogen, Phosphorus, and Fecal coliform may be reduced”.
Additional measurements for macrobenthos and water chemistry will be conducted; however, these
1101 Haynes St., Suite 211 • Raleigh, NC 27604 • www.restorationsystems.com • Ph 919.755.9490 • Fx 919.755.9492
measurements are to be conducted in April of each year.

3. Section 5.3.1 mentions that the Worsham soil series is on site and refers to Figure 4 of
Appendix A, however, I did not see Worsham mapped. It appears the dominant mapped soil
series where the wetlands occur is the Local Alluvial Land series.

The proper mapped soil series is Local Alluvial Land. There is no NRCS detailed soil profile description
for Local Alluvial Land. Therefore, we determined the closest published soil profile as compared to
the Site includes the Worsham soil series. The text of the document will be clarified.

4. Section 7 Design Approach- particularly for the stream. DWR would like to see more information
on how the stream channel will be constructed in the old pond bed. In addition, some of the
structures mentioned were j-hook types. DWR does not believe that j-hooks are the best
structure types for small streams. DWR would recommend installing as much wood in the
channel as practicable.

J-hook vanes will be removed from the text of the document. There are no J-hook vanes in the
construction plans. As far as stream restoration in the pond bed, a more detailed description of work
will be inserted into the document. Text will include the following.

“Stream restoration within the abandoned pond will include 1) notching the dam to dewater
sediments, 2) removal of the dam to the elevation of the adjacent floodplain, 3) excavating sediment
that is unsuitable for channel bank construction, 4) backfilling areas of sediment removed with soil
suitable for channel construction (if necessary), 5) excavation of the design channel, 6) stabilization of
the channel with coir matting, seed, and mulch, and 7) installation of structures.

The dam will be notched in the early summer of 2018 and the pond bed will be seeded with temporary
grasses to stabilize sediments remaining in the pond. Care will be taken during notching of the dam to
drain the maximum amount of water; thereby allowing sediments to dewater.

Once the pond has dewatered and sediments have stabilized, the dam will be removed with finished
grades matching elevations of the valley and floodplain above and below the dam location. Material
removed from the dam, if suitable, may be used as channel backfill for reaches of stream to be
abandoned during priority 1 stream restoration efforts. If additional backfill remains, the material will
be stockpiled outside of the easement, or spread evenly across the adjacent property and seeded for
stabilization. Erosion control measures, such as silt fence, seeding, and mulching will be implemented
on all stockpiled or spread soil materials.

A determination on sediment quantity and quality within the abandoned pond will be made concerning
the ability to work within, or to stabilize the sediment for stream construction. If sediment is deemed
unsuitable for channel construction, the sediment will be removed from the vicinity of the design
channel and spread along the outer margins of the pond. Subsequently, suitable soil material will be
placed in the location of the design channel such that design channel banks will be stabilized without
liquefaction. The removal of unsuitable material, installation of suitable material, and excavation of the
design channel may occur simultaneously to reduce impacts of machinery on the pond bed.

Excavation of the design channel will occur in the pond bed similar to other reaches of restored stream,
with stabilization using approved erosion control materials and techniques.”

5. In the Outfall Structures portion of Section 7, the designer proposes the Terracell as an option
for achieving a drop in elevation. DWR does not recommend the use of these structures. In
1101 Haynes St., Suite 211 • Raleigh, NC 27604 • www.restorationsystems.com • Ph 919.755.9490 • Fx 919.755.9492
fact, after review of the Design Plans, DWR questions whether a drop structure is even needed
in the marked location. It appears from other design sheets that the same slope is being
maintained throughout the restoration reach with cross vanes. DWR recommends a constructed
riffle that incorporates wood as a portion of the substrate.

Axiom Environmental, Inc. representatives discussed the use of Terracell with NC DWR
representatives during a phone conversation upon the conclusion of the Site walkthrough. During
this telephone conversation, NC DWR representatives agreed to allow the use of Terracell as a drop
structure for the project. We believe the use of Terracell is a viable stabilization measure for outfalls
of restoration reaches. The final outfall structure is calculated at a slope of 0.0425 (2.8 foot drop
over 65 feet of run), which would be excessive for a typical riffle on the project.

If during channel construction adequate bed material is encountered to stabilize the outfall,
alternative measures for drop structure construction will be investigated. Alternative drop structures
may include constructed riffle (stone drop constructed of class B material, or similar), step-pool stone
structure, or tie-in to bed rock. Designer input is expected if alterations are made and the alterations
will be depicted on as-built plan sheets.

6. DWR likes that the designer is incorporating marsh treatment areas for drainage coming from
outside the easement area.

Agreed.

7. DWR notes that the flow standard mentioned in Section 8.1.1 Stream Success Criteria, is 30 days.
This standard was intended for wetland headwater projects. The IRT is considering an increased
flow standard for streams depending on their order or landscape position. For example, for
perennial streams this standard may 60-90 days of continuous flow.

We are aware of the potential for changes in flow duration success criteria. For this project, we intend
to use 30-continuouos days of flow for intermittent reaches of channel.

8. Section 8.2.1- Wetland Success Criteria-DWR will accept March 1st as the beginning of the
growing season if the measured soil temperature reached the required degrees at 12 inches of
depth. DWR expects the soil temperature probes will be installed and reported on in each
monitoring report.

Section 8.2.1 Wetland Success Criteria includes the following text - “this will be confirmed annually by
soil temperatures exceeding 41 degrees Fahrenheit at 12 inches depth and/or bud burst.”

9. Also, in this section, DWR accepts the 10% saturation period during the growing season,
however, DWR will not accept a comparison of % to reference as a possible alternative
performance criteria for wetland hydrology.

Text will be changed to include that reference gauge data will be used for comparative purposes
only and reference gauges will not be tied to success criteria.

10. DWR recommends for all permanent crossing typicals that floodplain pipes also be
included along with the low flow pipe.

The typical will be updated in the text and figure to include floodplain pipes.
1101 Haynes St., Suite 211 • Raleigh, NC 27604 • www.restorationsystems.com • Ph 919.755.9490 • Fx 919.755.9492

Andrea Hughes, USACE, December 31, 2017
1. Page 2, Section 1.4: The document states 228 linear feet of additional stream channel may be
measured in the final as-built. Please note that stream credits will be based on the amounts
shown in the mitigation plan which should be based on a centerline measurement. In order to
receive additional credits beyond the amounts proposed in the approved mitigation plan, you
must submit a modification request. Please be aware that modification requests for additional
credits based on thalwag measurement may not be granted.

The “low water channel” measurement will be removed from the text and tables. Credit generation
tables will have credit from centerline of the design channel. We hope that this measurement
procedure is acceptable and the standard for all Mitigation Plans in the Wilmington District. The table
will include 3006 SMUs as the final amount of stream credit for the detailed restoration plan. If the
length/credit changes (due to unavoidable changes that may arise during construction) at the as-built
stage then we will make the justification to the IRT in the as-built document.

2. The document indicates the existing site conditions include 0.52 acre of degraded wetland.
Please explain the proposed amount of 0.44 acre of enhancement. If the additional .08 acre will
be impacted by the project, the loss or conversion of those waters must be replaced on-site.

The reduction in wetland area from pre-project conditions (0.52 acre in approved PJD mapping) and
post project conditions (0.44 acre of wetland enhancement) results from the design channel crossing
wetland areas. However, the functional capacity of the remaining wetland enhancement areas are
expected to be elevated, possibly offsetting the loss. In addition, with wetland restoration occurring at
the Site, the overall wetland area will be increase to 0.98 acres. These items will be expanded upon in
the document.

3. Page 10, Section 3.3: The document references a nutrient modeling method (NCDMS 2016). The
citation was not included in the references. Please provide a copy of this document. Page 11,
Table 9: For the section of UT1 proposed for restoration, please explain the range of BHR
extending to 1.3. If the Causey Farm reference reach bankfull is 1.4 (functioning at risk), please
provide additional information on how data from this site will be used in the design of UT 1.

Citation
NC Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS). 2016. Quantifying Benefits to Water Quality from
Livestock Exclusion and Riparian Buffer Establishment for Stream Restoration.

A copy of NCDMS 2016 will be included in the appendix of the final restoration Plan

The Causey Farm Reference Reach data will be expanded upon. This was a reach measured in 2004 for
a restoration Site near the Major Hill Site. The channel was slightly incised; however, we were able to
find definable bankfull indicators to assist with assigning the appropriate cross sectional area. In
addition, the channel had suitable pattern (no shoot cutoffs, eroding outer bends, or excessively tight
radius) with appropriate pool-to-pool spacing and meander wavelengths. The pattern and cross
sectional area portions of the reference reach make it good for defining design criteria, particularly for a
channel so closely located to the Site. We will expand upon this further in the document for the final
restoration plan.

1101 Haynes St., Suite 211 • Raleigh, NC 27604 • www.restorationsystems.com • Ph 919.755.9490 • Fx 919.755.9492
4. Page 15, Section 5.1: Please provide a copy of the jurisdictional delineation approval letter.

A copy of the PJD approval letter has been received and will be included as an appendix item.

5. Page 21, Section 7.0: Please include details regarding restoration of the pond removal area.
When will structure removal occur? Will the restoration include removal of sediments or soil
amendments? Where will excavated sediments be relocated?

Text will be added to the document, including the following.

“Stream restoration within the abandoned pond will include 1) notching the dam to dewater
sediments, 2) removal of the dam to the elevation of the adjacent floodplain, 3) excavating sediment
that is unsuitable for channel bank construction, 4) backfilling areas of sediment removed with soil
suitable for channel construction (if necessary), 5) excavation of the design channel, 6) stabilization of
the channel with coir matting, seed, and mulch, and 7) installation of structures.

The dam will be notched in the early summer of 2018 and the pond bed will be seeded with temporary
grasses to stabilize sediments remaining in the pond. Care will be taken during notching of the dam to
drain the maximum amount of water; thereby allowing sediments to dewater.

Once the pond has dewatered and sediments have stabilized, the dam will be removed with finished
grades matching the elevations of the valley and floodplain above and below the dam location.
Material removed from the dam, if suitable, may be used as channel backfill for reaches of stream to be
abandoned during priority 1 stream restoration efforts. If additional backfill remains, the material will
be stockpiled outside of the easement, or spread evenly across the adjacent property and seeded for
stabilization. Erosion control measures, such as silt fence, seeding, and mulching will be implemented
on all stockpiled or spread soil materials.

A determination on sediment quantity and quality within the abandoned pond will be made concerning
the ability to work within, or to stabilize the sediment for stream construction. If sediment is deemed
unsuitable for channel construction, the sediment will be removed from the vicinity of the design
channel and spread along the outer margins of the pond. Subsequently, suitable soil material will be
placed in the location of the design channel such that design channel banks will be stabilized without
liquefaction. The removal of unsuitable material, installation of suitable material, and excavation of the
design channel may occur simultaneously to reduce impacts of machinery on the pond bed.

Excavation of the design channel will occur in the pond bed similar to other reaches of restored stream,
with stabilization using approved erosion control materials and techniques.”

6. Page 22, Section 7.1.1: For all marsh treatment areas located within the 50-foot buffer limits,
you must propose performance standards related to vegetative success and demonstrate that
these areas will not require long term maintenance.

As the marsh treatment areas are approximately 1/100th acre in size and are intended to naturalize into
the floodplain. The areas are slight depressions (0.5 to 1.5 feet in depth) that are to catch the first pulse
of storm drainage prior to vegetation establishment. They are intended to fill over time and naturalize
into the adjacent landscape. These are not stormwater BMPs which require maintenance to continue
functioning. At this time, due to the small size and expectation of naturalization, we do not propose
extensive monitoring beyond standard vegetative monitoring protocols outlined in IRT guidance.

1101 Haynes St., Suite 211 • Raleigh, NC 27604 • www.restorationsystems.com • Ph 919.755.9490 • Fx 919.755.9492
7. Page 23, under Hydrophytic Vegetation, the Natural Plant Community Restoration is listed
under Section 7.5.

Hydrophytic Vegetation on page 23 will be changed from Section 7.5 to Section 7.4.

8. Page 26, Section 8.0: This section is titled Performance Standards but includes monitoring
information. These should be separated into separate sections or the title changed to
reflect the content.

The title for Section 8.0 will be changed to “Performance Standards and Success Criteria” to reflect the
content.

9. Page 26, Section 8.0: Please remove the statement “if specifically required by permit conditions”.
Since the mitigation plan proposes biological monitoring, a permit condition is unnecessary.

The text “if specifically required by permit conditions” will be removed from the document.

10. Page 26, Section 8.0: Please remove the statement regarding early termination of
monitoring.

Verbiage concerning early termination of monitoring will be removed from the document.

11. Page 26, Table 16: Water quality and benthic monitoring should be added to Table 16.

Water quality and benthic monitoring will be added to Table 16.

12. Page 28, Section 8.1.1: Please revise the stream performance standards for consistency with
the 2016 guidance.

Stream performance standards will be changed to match those listed below.

a. BHR cannot exceed 1.2 at any measured riffle cross-section and ET must be no less
than 1.4 for at any measured riffle cross-section (2.2 for C/E streams).
b. BHR and ER at any measured riffle cross-section should not change by more than 10%
from baseline condition during any given monitoring interval.
c. Continuous surface water flow within the tributaries must be documented to occur
every year for at least 30 consecutive days during the prescribed monitoring period.
d. The stream project shall remain stable and all other performance standards shall be
met through four separate bankfull events, occurring in separate years, during the
monitoring years 1 through 7.

13. Page 29, Section 8.2: Please note that wetland monitoring requires a detailed soil
description for each boring where a gauge is installed.

A detailed soil description will be collected at each gauge location. Please note, we use a 4-inch bucket
1101 Haynes St., Suite 211 • Raleigh, NC 27604 • www.restorationsystems.com • Ph 919.755.9490 • Fx 919.755.9492
auger to install groundwater gauges. A bucket auger is not suitable for collecting, observing, and
describing a detailed soil profile. We proposed to install a second hole adjacent to the gauge using a 2-
inch dutch auger for soil description collection.

14. Page 30: Section 8.2.1: In order to use March 1- October 22 as growing season for
meeting wetland hydrology performance standards, you must document soil
temperatures exceeding 41 degrees Fahrenheit and this must be corroborated with
vegetative indicators including bud burst and leaf drop. Also, please remove the
statement that during atypical climatic conditions, groundwater gauges in reference
wetlands may dictate threshold hydrology success criteria.

The document currently includes “soil temperature exceeding 41 degrees Fahrenheit at 12 inches
depth”. We will ensure corroboration with vegetation indicators, as stated above. Text will be
changed to indicate that reference gauge data will be used for comparative purposes only, and
reference gauges will not be tied to success criteria.

15. Appendix H: Please remove this section and replace with Section XIV, pages 28-30
from the Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update
dated October 24, 2016. Under the new guidance, mitigation credits are based
upon the amounts listed in the approved mitigation plan. In addition, four bankfull
events in separate years must be documented in order to receive the 10% bankfull
credit release.

Appendix H will be changed to include Section XIV, pages 28-30 of the Mitigation Update, as stated
above.

16. Appendix I: If the Terracell structure is to remain, this section should address
potential maintenance/repair issues.

Terracell will remain and Appendix I will be updated to include maintenance and repair issues
associated with Terracell.

Please let me know if you have any further questions or comments.

Sincerely,

Worth Creech
Project Manager
Restoration Systems

February 15, 2018

Regulatory Division

Re: NCIRT Review and USACE Approval of the Major Hill Draft Mitigation Plan; SAW-2017-01472;
DMS Project #100015

Mr. Tim Baumgartner
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652

Dear Mr. Baumgartner:

The purpose of this letter is to provide the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
(NCDMS) with all comments generated by the North Carolina Interagency Review Team (NCIRT) during
the 30-day review for the Major Hill Draft Mitigation Plan, which closed on December 31, 2017. Several
issues were noted during the review that required an extension of the 60-day deadline. All comments
received in response to the Draft Mitigation Plan are attached for your review.

Based on our review of these comments and the provider’s response, we have determined that
concerns with the Draft Mitigation Plan have been adequately addressed, which is considered approved
with this correspondence. Issues that were identified during the review, as described in the attached
comment memo and response to comments, must be addressed in the Final Mitigation Plan.

The Final Mitigation Plan is to be submitted with the Preconstruction Notification (PCN)
application for nationwide permit (NWP) approval of the project along with a copy of this letter. Issues
identified in the attached memo and response must be appropriately addressed in the Final Mitigation
Plan. All changes made to the Final Mitigation Plan should be summarized in an errata sheet included at
the beginning of the document. If it is determined that the project does not require a Department of the
Army permit, you must still provide a copy of the Final Mitigation Plan, along with a copy of this letter,
to the appropriate USACE field office at least 30 days in advance of beginning construction of the project.
Please note that this approval does not preclude the inclusion of permit conditions in the permit
authorization for the project, particularly if issues mentioned above are not satisfactorily addressed.
Additional ly, this letter provides initial approval for the Mitigation Plan, but this does not guarantee that
the project will generate the requested amount of mitigation credit. As you are aware, unforeseen issues
may arise during construction or monitoring of the project that may require maintenance or reconstruction
that may lead to reduced credit.

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
69 DARLINGTON AVENUE
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403-1343
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter, and if you have questions regarding this letter,
the mitigation plan review process, or the requirements of the Mitigation Rule, please contact Andrea
Hughes at [phone] extension 59.

Sincerely,

for
Henry M. Wicker, Jr.
Deputy Chief, Regulatory

Enclosures

Electronic Copies Furnished:

NCIRT Distribution List
Lindsay Crocker, NCDMS

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) Executive Summary page i
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
FINAL MITIGATION PLAN
MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND MITIGATION SITE
Alamance County, North Carolina

DMS Project ID No. 100015
Full Delivery Contract No. 7193
USACE Action ID No. SAW-2017-01472
RFP No. 16-006990

Cape Fear River Basin
Cataloging Unit 03030002

Prepared for:

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
1652 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27699-1652

Prepared by:

And

Restoration Systems, LLC Axiom Environmental, Inc.
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 211 218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
Contact: Worth Creech Contact: Grant Lewis
919-755-9490 (phone) 919-215-1693 (phone)
919-755-9492 (fax)

May 2018

“This mitigation plan has been written in conformance with the requirements of the following:
 Federal rule for compensatory mitigation project sites as described in the Federal Register Title 33
Navigation and Navigable Waters Volume 3 Chapter 2 Section § 332.8 paragraphs (c)(2) through (c)(14).
 NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services In-Lieu Fee Instrument signed and dated July 28, 2010

These documents govern NCDMS operations and procedures for the delivery of compensatory mitigation.”

This document was assembled using the June 2017 DMS Stream and Wetland Mitigation Plan Template and Guidance
and the October 24, 2016 NC Interagency Review Team Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory
Mitigation Update.

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) Table of Contents page i
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 PROJECT INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 1
1.1 DIRECTIONS TO SITE .............................................................................................................. 1
1.2 USGS HYDROLOGIC UNIT CODE AND NCDWR RIVER BASIN DESIGNATION ....................... 1
1.3 PHYSIOGRAPHY AND LAND USE ............................................................................................ 1
1.4 PROJECT COMPONENTS AND STRUCTURE .............................................................................. 2
2.0 WATERSHED APPROACH AND SITE SELECTION .................................................... 6
3.0 BASELINE AND EXISTING CONDITIONS .................................................................... 8
3.1 SOILS AND LAND FORM ......................................................................................................... 8
3.2 SEDIMENT MODEL ................................................................................................................. 9
3.3 NUTRIENT MODEL ............................................................................................................... 10
3.4 PROJECT SITE STREAMS ...................................................................................................... 10
3.4.1 Existing Conditions Survey...................................................................................... 11
3.4.2 Channel Classification and Morphology .................................................................. 11
3.4.3 Channel Evolution .................................................................................................... 12
3.4.4 Valley Classification ................................................................................................ 12
3.4.5 Discharge.................................................................................................................. 12
3.5 CHANNEL STABILITY ASSESSMENT ..................................................................................... 12
3.6 BANKFULL VERIFICATION ................................................................................................... 13
4.0 REFERENCE STREAMS................................................................................................... 14
4.1 CHANNEL CLASSIFICATION ................................................................................................. 15
4.2 DISCHARGE ......................................................................................................................... 15
4.3 CHANNEL MORPHOLOGY .................................................................................................... 15
5.0 PROJECT SITE WETLANDS (EXISTING CONDITIONS) ......................................... 16
5.1 EXISTING JURISDICTIONAL WETLANDS ............................................................................... 16
5.2 HYDROLOGICAL CHARACTERIZATION ................................................................................. 16
5.3 SOIL CHARACTERIZATION ................................................................................................... 16
5.3.1 Taxonomic Classification......................................................................................... 16
5.3.2 Profile Description ................................................................................................... 17
5.4 PLANT COMMUNITY CHARACTERIZATION ........................................................................... 17
5.5 REFERENCE FOREST ECOSYSTEM ........................................................................................ 17
6.0 FUNCTIONAL UPLIFT AND PROJECT GOALS/OBJECTIVES .............................. 18
7.0 DESIGN APPROACH AND MITIGATION WORK PLAN .......................................... 22
7.1 STREAM DESIGN .................................................................................................................. 22
7.1.1 Stream Restoration ................................................................................................... 22
7.1.2 Stream Enhancement (Level II) ............................................................................... 24
7.2 HYDROLOGICAL MODIFICATIONS (WETLAND RESTORATION) ............................................ 24
7.3 WETLAND ENHANCEMENT .................................................................................................. 25
7.4 SOIL RESTORATION ............................................................................................................. 25
7.5 NATURAL PLANT COMMUNITY RESTORATION .................................................................... 25

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) Table of Contents page ii
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
7.5.1 Planting Plan ............................................................................................................ 25
7.5.2 Nuisance Species Management ................................................................................ 27
8.0 MONITORING AND SUCCESS CRITERIA .................................................................. 27
8.1 STREAM MONITORING ......................................................................................................... 27
8.1.1 Stream Success Criteria............................................................................................ 29
8.1.2 Stream Contingency ................................................................................................. 30
8.2 WETLAND MONITORING ...................................................................................................... 30
8.2.1 Wetland Success Criteria ......................................................................................... 31
8.2.2 Wetland Contingency ............................................................................................... 31
8.3 VEGETATION ....................................................................................................................... 31
8.3.1 Vegetation Success Criteria ..................................................................................... 32
8.3.2 Vegetation Contingency ........................................................................................... 32
8.4 COMPATIBILITY WITH PROJECT GOALS ............................................................................... 32
9.0 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN................................................................................ 34
10.0 LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN ......................................................................... 34
11.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................... 35

TABLES

Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits .................................................................... 3
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History ........................................................................... 4
Table 3. Project Contacts Table ..................................................................................................... 4
Table 4. Project Attribute Table..................................................................................................... 4
Table 5. Population Growth in Cape Fear 02 ................................................................................ 7
Table 6. Watershed Stressors and Usage Ratings .......................................................................... 8
Table 7. Web Soil Survey Soils Mapped within the Site ............................................................... 8
Table 8. BEHI and NBS Modeling Summary ............................................................................. 10
Table 9. Essential Morphology Parameters ................................................................................. 11
Table 10. Stream Power () and Shear Stress () Values ........................................................... 13
Table 11. Reference Reach Bankfull Discharge Analysis ........................................................... 14
Table 12. Reference Forest Ecosystem ........................................................................................ 17
Table 13A. Major Hill Site NC SAM Summary.......................................................................... 19
Table 13B. Major Hill Site NC WAM Summary ........................................................................ 20
Table 13C. Stream/Wetland Targeted Functions, Goals, and Objectives .................................... 21
Table 14. Planting Plan ................................................................................................................ 26
Table 15. Monitoring Schedule.................................................................................................... 27
Table 16. Stream Monitoring Summary ...................................................................................... 28
Table 17. Major Hill Water Quality Data .................................................................................... 29
Table 18. Wetland Monitoring Summary .................................................................................... 31
Table 19. Vegetation Monitoring Summary ................................................................................ 32
Table 20. Compatibility of Performance Criteria to Project Goals and Objectives ..................... 33

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) Table of Contents page iii
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
APPENDICES

Appendix A. Figures
Figure 1. Project Location
Figure 2. Hydrologic Unit Map
Figure 3. Topography and Drainage Area
Figure 4. Existing Conditions
Figure 5A. Cedarock Reference Drainage Area
Figure 5B. Cedarock Reference Existing Conditions
Figure 5C. Cedarock Reference Reach Dimension, Pattern, and Profile
Figures 6A-B. Restoration Plan
Figure 7. Proposed Dimension, Pattern, and Profile
Figures 8A-B. Typical Structure Details
Figure 9. Planting Plan
Figure 10. Monitoring Plan
Appendix B. Existing Stream Data
Table B1. Major Hill Morphological Stream Characteristics
Figure B1. Cross-section Locations
Existing Stream Cross-section Data
Baseline Water Quality Data
BEHI & NBS
NC SAM Forms
NC WAM Forms
NCDWQ Stream Forms
Appendix C. Flood Frequency Analysis Data
Appendix D. PJD Tearsheet & Correspondence
Appendix E. Categorical Exclusion Document
Appendix F. Financial Assurance
Appendix G. Site Protection Instrument
Appendix H. Credit Release Schedule
Appendix I. Maintenance Plan
Appendix J. Quantifying Benefits to Water Quality from Livestock Exclusion and Riparian
Buffer Establishment for Stream Restoration (NCDMS 2016)
Appendix K. Riparian Buffer Mitigation Plan

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 1
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
1.0 PROJECT INTRODUCTION
The Major Hill Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site (hereafter referred to as the “Site”)
encompasses 16.7 acres of pasture and disturbed forest along warm water, unnamed tributaries to
Pine Hill Branch. The Site is located approximately 3.5 miles southeast of Snow Camp and 6
miles north of Silk Hope in southern Alamance County near the Chatham County line (Figures 1
and 2, Appendix A).
1.1 Directions to Site
Directions to the Site from Raleigh, North Carolina.
 Take US-64 West out of Raleigh and travel 25 miles,
 Take exit 381 and turn right onto NC-87 N,
 After 5 miles, take a left onto Castle Rock Farm Road,
 After 5.8 miles, Castle Rock Farm Road becomes Old Switchboard Road,
 Continue for 2.1 miles, turn right onto Lindley Mill Road,
 After 0.5 mile, turn left onto Major Hill Road,
 Site can be accessed from Burnett Church Road, which is on the left after 1 mile.
o Site Latitude, Longitude
35.873206, -79.360906 (WGS84)
1.2 USGS Hydrologic Unit Code and NCDWR River Basin Designation
The Site is located within the Cape Fear River Basin in 14-digit United States Geological Survey
(USGS) Cataloging Unit and Targeted Local Watershed 03030002050050 of the South
Atlantic/Gulf Region (North Carolina Division of Water Resources [NCDWR], formerly the North
Carolina Division of Water Quality, subbasin number 03-06-04 [Figures 1 and 2, Appendix A]).
Topographic features of the Site drain to Pine Hill Branch, which has been assigned Stream Index
Number 16-28-5-1 and a Best Usage Classification of WS-V, NSW (NCDWR 2016a). Site
tributaries and their immediate receiving waters are not listed on the draft 2016 or final 2014 NC
303(d) lists of impaired waters (NCDWR 2016b, NCDWR 2014).
1.3 Physiography and Land Use
The Site is located in the Carolina Slate Belt Ecoregion of the Piedmont Physiographic Province
within Alamance County, North Carolina. Regional physiography is characterized by dissected
irregular plains, some hills, linear ridges, isolated monadnocks, and low to moderate gradient
streams with mostly boulder and cobble substrates (Griffith et al. 2002). Onsite elevations range
from a high of 560 feet National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) to a low of approximately 480
feet NGVD (USGS Silk Hope, North Carolina 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle) (Figures 1 and
3, Appendix A).

The primary hydrologic features of the Site consist of three unnamed tributaries (UTs) to Pine Hill
Branch. Site UT drainage areas range in size from 17.2 – 444.7 acres (0.001 – 0.70 square mile)
(Figure 3, Appendix A). The Site drainage area is primarily composed of pasture, forest,
agriculture land, and sparse residential property. Impervious surfaces account for less than two
percent of the upstream land surface.

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 2
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018

Site land use consists of pasture, hayfields, disturbed forest, and agricultural land used for livestock
grazing and hay production. Livestock have unrestricted access to Site streams and stream banks
are eroded vertically and laterally, and receive extensive sediment and nutrient inputs from stream
banks and adjacent agricultural land. Riparian zones in the upper reaches of UT 1 are primarily
composed of herbaceous vegetation that is sparse and disturbed due to livestock grazing, bush
hogging, and regular land-management activities. The downstream reaches of UT 1, and all of UT
3 are primarily wooded with livestock disturbance to stream channels.

A query of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program database indicates there are no records
for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, or conservation/managed areas
within the proposed project boundary, or within a one-mile radius of the project boundary.
However, a North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS) conservation easement
boundary occurs approximately 0.6 mile east of the Site boundaries.
1.4 Project Components and Structure
The Site encompasses 16.7 acres of pasture along warm water, unnamed tributaries to Pine Hill
Branch. Site streams have been relocated to the floodplain edge, ditched, impounded, trampled by
livestock, eroded vertically and laterally, and receive extensive sediment and nutrient inputs from
stream banks and adjacent agricultural land. In its current state, the Site includes 5293 linear feet
of degraded stream channel, 0.52 acre of degraded wetland, and 0.30 acre of drained hydric soil
(Figure 4, Appendix A). An estimate of approximately 0.24 acre of additional hydric soil underlies
an agriculture impoundment at the upper reaches of UT 1.

Proposed Site restoration activities include the construction of meandering, E/C-type stream
channel resulting in 1742 linear feet of Priority I stream restoration, 3161 linear feet of stream
enhancement (Level II), 0.54 acre of riparian wetland restoration, and 0.44 acre of riparian wetland
enhancement (Table 1) (Figures 6A-6B, Appendix A).

Completed project activities, reporting history, completion dates, project contacts, and background
information are summarized in Tables 1 - 4.

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 3
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Major Hill Restoration Site
Reach ID
Stream
Stationing/
Wetland Type
Existing
Footage/
Acreage
Restoration
Footage/
Acreage
Restoration
Level
Restoration or
Restoration
Equivalent
Mitigation
Ratio
Mitigation
Credits Comment
UT 1 00+00 to 16+99 1829 1699 Restoration 1699 1:1 1699
UT 1 16+99 to 27+59 1060 1060 EII 1060 2.5:1 424
UT 2 00+00 to 01+68 168 168 EII 168 2.5:1 67
UT 2 01+68 to 02+11 39 43 Restoration 43 1:1 43
UT 3 00+00 to 21+97 2197 2197 EII 2197-80-144-
40=1933 2.5:1 773
80 lf and 40 lf of UT3 are not
credit generating due to
crossings and drainage
easement. 144 lf are not
credit generating due to lack
of control of south bank and
drainage easement.
Wetlands Riparian
Riverine -- 0.54 Restoration 0.54 1:1 0.54 Wetland Restoration
Wetlands Riparian
Riverine 0.52 0.44 Enhancement 0.44 2:1 0.22 Wetland Enhancement

Length & Area Summations by Mitigation Category
Restoration Level Stream (linear footage) Riparian Wetland (acreage)
Restoration 1742 0.54
Enhancement (Level II) 3161* --
Enhancement -- 0.44**
* An additional 264 linear feet of stream enhancement (level II) is proposed outside of the easement (at road crossings), or the sponsor controls only one bank of the
stream, and is therefore not included in this total or in mitigation credit calculations.
**Approximately 0.08 acre of existing, degraded wetland will not be enhanced as the result of the design channel crossing the wetland area.

Overall Assets Summary
Asset Category Overall Credits
Stream 3006
Riparian Riverine Wetland 0.76

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 4
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Major Hill Restoration Site
Activity or Deliverable
Data Collection
Complete
Completion
or Delivery
Technical Proposal (RFP No. 16-006990) February 15, 2017 February 15, 2017
Institution Date (NCDMS Contract No. 7193) -- May 22, 2017
Mitigation Plan -- February 2018
Construction Plans -- --

Table 3. Project Contacts Table
Major Hill Restoration Site
Full Delivery Provider Restoration Systems
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 211
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Worth Creech
919-755-9490
Designer Axiom Environmental, Inc.
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27603
Grant Lewis
919-215-1693

Table 4. Project Attribute Table
Major Hill Restoration Site
Project Information
Project Name Major Hill Restoration Site
Project County Alamance County, North Carolina
Project Area (acres) 16.7
Project Coordinates (latitude & latitude) 35.873206, -79.360906
Planted Area (acres) 8.11
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province Piedmont
Project River Basin Cape Fear
USGS HUC for Project (14-digit) 03030002050050
NCDWR Sub-basin for Project 03-06-04
Project Drainage Area (acres) 17 to 445
Percentage of Project Drainage Area that is
Impervious <2%
CGIA Land Use Classification Managed Herbaceous Cover & Mixed Upland Hardwoods

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 5
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
Table 4. Project Attribute Table
Major Hill Restoration Site (continued)
Reach Summary Information
Parameters UT 1 UT 2 UT 3
Length of reach (linear feet) 2889 207 2197
Valley Classification & Confinement Alluvial, moderately confined to confined
Drainage Area (acres) 71.7 17.2 444.7
NCDWR Stream ID Score 20.25 – 33.5 -- --
Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral Intermittent/Perennial Intermittent Perennial
NCDWR Water Quality Classification WS-V, NSW
Existing Morphological Description (Rosgen 1996) Cg5 C4/5 C3
Proposed Stream Classification (Rosgen 1996) C/E 4 C4/5 C3
Existing Evolutionary Stage (Simon and Hupp 1986) III/IV III I
Underlying Mapped Soils Efland silt loam, Georgeville silt loam, Herndon silt loam,
Orange silt loam, Worsham sandy loam, Local Alluvial Land
Drainage Class Well-drained, well-drained, well-drained, poorly drained, well-
drained, poorly drained, respectively
Hydric Soil Status Nonhydric, nonhydric, nonhydric, nonhydric, hydric, hydric,
respectively
Slope 0.0241 0.0256 0.0130
FEMA Classification NA
Native Vegetation Community Piedmont Alluvial Forest/Dry-Mesic Oak-Hickory Forest
Watershed Land Use/Land Cover (Site) 45% forest, 35% agricultural land, 20% low density
residential/impervious surface
Watershed Land Use/Land Cover (Cedarock Reference
Channel)
65% forest, 30% agricultural land, <5% low density
residential/impervious surface
Percent Composition of Exotic Invasive Vegetation <5%
Wetland Summary Information
Parameters Wetlands
Wetland acreage 0.54 acre drained or impounded & 0.44 acre degraded
Wetland Type Riparian riverine
Mapped Soil Series Worsham and Local Alluvial Land
Drainage Class Poorly drained
Hydric Soil Status Hydric
Source of Hydrology Groundwater, stream overbank
Hydrologic Impairment Incised streams, compacted soils, livestock
Native Vegetation Community Piedmont/Low Mountain Alluvial Forest
% Composition of Exotic Invasive Vegetation <5%
Restoration Method Hydrologic, vegetative
Enhancement Method Vegetative

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 6
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
Table 4. Project Attribute Table
Major Hill Restoration Site (continued)
Regulatory Considerations
Regulation Applicable? Resolved? Supporting Documentation
Waters of the United States-Section 401 Yes Yes JD Package (App D)
Waters of the United States-Section 404 Yes Yes JD Package (App D)
Endangered Species Act No -- CE Document (App E)
Historic Preservation Act No -- CE Document (App E)
Coastal Zone Management Act No -- NA
FEMA Floodplain Compliance No -- CE Document (App E)
Essential Fisheries Habitat No -- NA
2.0 WATERSHED APPROACH AND SITE SELECTION
The Cape Fear River basin is one of four rivers in North Carolina completely contained within the
state’s boundaries. Comprised of five major drainages—Haw River, Deep River, Northeast Cape
Fear River, Black River, and the Cape Fear River—the basin drains portions of 26 counties and
115 municipalities with a total of 6386 stream miles. The most populated portions of the basin are
located in the Triad, the Triangle, Fayetteville, and Wilmington (NCDWQ 2005).

Primary considerations for Site selection included the potential for improvement of water quality
within a region of North Carolina under heavy development and livestock/agricultural pressure.
More specifically, considerations included: desired aquatic resource functions; hydrologic
conditions; soil characteristics; aquatic habitat diversity; habitat connectivity; compatibility with
adjacent land uses; reasonably foreseeable effects the mitigation project will have on ecologically
important aquatic and terrestrial resources; and potential development trends and land use changes.
Site specific characteristics are summarized below, in addition to development trends and land use
changes within the watershed.

Currently, the proposed Site is characterized by disturbed forest and agricultural land used for
livestock grazing and hay production. A summary of existing Site characteristics in favor of
proposed stream and wetland activities include the following.

 Streams and wetlands are accessible to livestock
 Stream banks are trampled by livestock
 Streams and wetlands have been cleared of forest vegetation
 Streams have been impounded
 Site receives nonpoint source inputs including agricultural chemicals and livestock waste
 Wetland soils have been compacted by livestock and agricultural equipment
 Wetland hydrology has been removed by stream channel entrenchment
 Additional wetland footprint has been flooded by agriculture impoundment
 Streams are classified as nutrient sensitive waters

In addition to the opportunity for ecological improvements at the Site, the use of the particular
mitigation activities and methods proposed in the Design Approach & Mitigation Work Plan
(Section 7.0) are expected to produce naturalized stream and wetland resources that will be

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 7
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
ecologically self-sustaining, requiring minimal long-term management (Long-term Management
Plan [Section 10.0]).

Development Trends and Land Use Changes in Cape Fear 03030002 (Cape Fear 02)
Between the 2000 and 2010 censuses, the Cape Fear 02 population increased approximately 17
percent (Table 5). The general trend of population growth appears to be continuing according to
recent population estimates, which indicate Guilford, Orange, Chatham, and Durham counties are
all growing at faster annual rates than North Carolina’s 1.02 percent (USCB 2013). These data
suggest land development activities will increase in frequency, as will aquatic ecosystem impacts
related to such development. Therefore, there is an immediate and prolonged need for
compensatory stream mitigation in the watershed. Of further benefit, aquatic ecosystem
restoration projects are capable of reducing nutrient loading in sensitive downstream receiving
waters such as Jordan Lake.

Table 5. Population Growth in Cape Fear 02
Municipality 2000 Population 2010 Population Percent Increase
Greensboro 223,891 269,666 20
Burlington 44,917 49,963 11
Chapel Hill 48,715 57,233 17
Durham* 187,035 228,330 22
Rest of Guilford County 421,048 488,406 11
Rest of Alamance County 130,800 151,131 18
Rest of Orange County 118,227 133,801 10
Chatham County 49,329 63,505 29
Rest of Durham County* 223,314 267,587 8
Totals 942,718 1,104,430 17
*Some portions of Durham (city) and Durham County are located in the Cape Fear 02; the majority of these areas
are located in the Neuse River basin.

According to the Cape Fear River Basinwide Water Quality Plan (NCDWQ 2005), all land uses
and discharges of wastewater and stormwater in the Cape Fear 02 subbasin 03-06-04 potentially
contribute nutrients to B. Everett Jordan Lake. B. Everett Jordan Lake provides low-flow
augmentation, flood control, recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and water supply. The lake is
impaired for aquatic life due to excessive levels of chlorophyll a in violation of current standards
in all segments of the reservoir. In addition, the Site has a supplemental water quality classification
of Nutrient Sensitive Waters, which designates areas with water quality problems associated with
excessive plant growth resulting from nutrient enrichment. The proposed mitigation activities will
reduce sediment and nutrient levels, and improve water quality within the Site and downstream
watersheds. Site UTs to Pine Hill Branch converge with Pine Hill Branch approximately 1600
linear feet downstream of the Site outfall and converge with South Fork an additional 400 linear
feet further downstream.

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 8
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018

Table 6. Watershed Stressors and Usage Ratings
Site Subbasin Index # Receiving Water NCDWR Rating 303(d) status*
Pine Hill Branch 03-06-04 16-28-5-1 Cane Creek WS-V, NSW NL
South Fork 03-06-04 16-28-5 Cane Creek WS-V, NSW NL
*Draft 2016 and Final 2014 303(d) status (NCDWR 2014, NCDWR 2016b); NL = Not Listed

Project goals are based on the Cape Fear River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP) report
(NCEEP 2009) and on-site data collection of channel morphology and function observed during
field investigations. The Site is located within Targeted Local Watershed (TLW)
03030002050050 (Figure 2, Appendix A). The RBRP report documents benthic ratings vary
between “Fair” and “Good-Fair” possibly due to cattle, dairy, and poultry operations. The project
is not located in a Regional or Local Watershed Planning Area; however, RBRP goals are
addressed by project activities as follows with Site specific information following the RBRP goals
in parenthesis.

1. Reduce and control sediment inputs (sediment model – reduction of 10.0 tons/year after
mitigation is complete);
2. Reduce and manage nutrient inputs (nutrient model - livestock removal from streams,
elimination of fertilizer application, and marsh treatment areas may result in a direct
reduction of 852.4 pounds of nitrogen and 70.6 pounds of phosphorus per year);
3. Protect and augment designated natural heritage areas.

Site specific mitigation goals and objectives have been developed through the use of North
Carolina Stream Assessment Method (NC SAM) and North Carolina Wetland Assessment Method
(NC WAM) and are discussed further in Section 6.0 (Functional Uplift and Project
Goals/Objectives).
3.0 BASELINE AND EXISTING CONDITIONS
3.1 Soils and Land Form
Soils that occur within the Site, according to the Web Soil Survey (USDA 2016) are described in
Table 7.

Table 7. Web Soil Survey Soils Mapped within the Site
Soil Series Hydric
Status Description
Efland silt
loam (EaC) Nonhydric
This series consists of eroded, well-drained soils found on interfluves. These soils
derived from residuum weathered from metavolcanics and/or argillite. Depth to
restrictive features is 20-40 inches to paralithic bedrock and 40-80 inches to lithic
bedrock. Depth to the water table is more than 80 inches. Slopes are typically 6 -10
percent.
Georgeville
silt loam
(GaC2)
Nonhydric
This series consists of eroded, well-drained soils found on hillslopes on ridges.
These soils derived from residuum weathered from metavolcanics and/or argillite.
Depth to restrictive features depth to the water table is more than 80 inches. Slopes
are typically 6-25 percent.

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 9
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
Table 7. Web Soil Survey Soils Mapped within the Site (Continued)
Soil Series Hydric
Status Description
Herndon silt
loam (HdC) Nonhydric
This series consists of eroded, well-drained soils that formed from residuum
weathered from metavolcanics and/or argillite. They are on hillslopes on ridges.
Depth to restrictive features and the water table is more than 80 inches. Slopes are
6-10 percent.
Local
alluvial
land, poorly
drained (Lc)
Hydric
This series consists of poorly drained soils found on floodplains and formed of
loamy alluvium derived from igneous and metamorphic rock. Depth to restrictive
features is more than 80 inches and the water table is about 0-12 inches. Slopes
range from 0-2 percent.
Orange silt
loam (ObC) Nonhydric
This series consists of moderately well-drained soils found on hillslopes on ridges.
These soils derived from residuum weathered from metavolcanics and/or argillite.
Depth to restrictive features is 20-40 inches to paralithic bedrock and 40-80 inches
to lithic bedrock. Depth to the water table is about 12 -36 inches. Slopes are 2-10
percent.
Worsham
sandy loam
(Wd)
Hydric
This series consists of poorly drained soils found in depressions and formed of
alluvium and/or colluvium over saprolite derived from granite and gneiss. Depth to
restrictive features is more than 80 inches and the water table is about 0 -12 inches.
Slopes range from 2-6 percent.

Hydric soils and jurisdictional wetlands were delineated and mapped by a licensed soil scientist in
November 2016. Based on soil delineations approximately 0.52 acre of disturbed jurisdictional
wetland occurs within the Site boundaries. Wetlands have been disturbed by livestock grazing and
clearing of vegetation within pastureland. In addition, approximately 0.30 acre of drained and
impacted hydric soil occurs within the Site boundaries. These hydric soils have been effectively
drained by stream channel incision or relocation of stream channels to the margins of the
floodplain. An estimate of approximately 0.24 acre of additional hydric soil underlies an
agriculture impoundment at the upper reaches of UT 1.
3.2 Sediment Model
Sediment load modeling was performed using methodologies outlined in A Practical Method of
Computing Streambank Erosion Rate (Rosgen 2009) along with Estimating Sediment Loads using
the Bank Assessment of Non-point Sources Consequences of Sediment (Rosgen 2011). These
models provide a quantitative prediction of streambank erosions by calculating Bank Erosion
Hazard Index (BEHI) and Near-Bank Stress (NBS) along each Site reach. The resulting BEHI
and NBS values are then compared to streambank erodibility graphs prepared for North Carolina
by the NC Stream Restoration Institute and NC Sea Grant.

Streambank characteristics involve measurements of bank height, angles, materials, presence of
layers, rooting depth, rooting density, and percent of the bank protected by rocks, logs, roots, or
vegetation. Site reaches have been measured for each BEHI and NBS characteristic and predicted
lateral erosion rate, height, and length to calculate a cubic volume of sediment contributed by the
reach each year. Data forms for the analysis are available upon request and the data output is
presented in Appendix B. Results of the model are presented in Table 8.

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 10
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
Table 8. BEHI and NBS Modeling Summary
Stream Reach Proposed Mitigation Treatment Predicted Sediment Contribution
(tons/year)
UT 1 Restoration and Enhancement (Level II) 10.0
Total Sediment Contribution (tons/year) 10.0

Results of the sediment model appear to match the prescribed mitigation treatment proposed for
the Site. UT 2 and UT 3 are proposed for enhancement (Level II) and are characterized by
relatively stable banks, extensive bedrock outcroppings, and mature forest vegetation. Livestock
have access to the stream channels; however, UT 2 and UT 3 appear very stable. Therefore, BEHI
and NBS modeling were not completed for UT 2 and UT 3. UT 1 is subject to a significant amount
of erosion, but is a small channel and not extensively long. Therefore, it is expected that UT 1 will
contribute sediment (approximately 10.0 tons/year) to the downstream receiving waters. Based on
this analysis, mitigation of Site streams will reduce streambank erosion and subsequent pollu tion
of receiving waters.
3.3 Nutrient Model
Nutrient modeling was conducted using a method developed by NCDMS (NCDMS 2016) to
determine nutrient and fecal coliform reductions from exclusion of livestock from the buffer.

The equation for nutrient reduction for this model includes the following:

TN reduction (lbs/yr) = 51.04 (lbs/ac/yr) x Area (ac)
TP reduction (lbs/yr) = 4.23 (lbs/ac/yr) x Area (ac)

Where:
TN – total nitrogen;
TP – total phosphorus; and
Area – total area of restored riparian buffers inside of livestock exclusion fences.

Equations for fecal coliform reduction for this model include the following.
Fecal coliform reduction (col) = 2.2 x 1011 (col/AU/day) x AU x 0.085

Where:
Col - quantities of Fecal Coliform bacteria
AU - animal unit (1000 lbs of livestock)

Results of the NCDMS analysis indicate approximately 852.4 lbs/yr of nitrogen, 70.6 lbs/yr of
phosphorus, and 9.35 x 1011 col of fecal coliform/day may be reduced due to exclusion of livestock
from the easement area.
3.4 Project Site Streams
Streams targeted for restoration and enhancement include UTs to Pine Hill Branch, which have
been cleared, straightened, impounded, trampled by livestock, eroded vertically and laterally, and
receive extensive sediment and nutrient inputs from livestock. Approximately 60 percent of the

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 11
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
existing stream channel has been degraded contributing to sediment export from the Site resulting
from mechanical processes such as livestock hoof shear. In addition, streamside wetlands have
been cleared and drained by channel downcutting and land uses. Current Site conditions have
resulted in degraded water quality, a loss of aquatic habitat, reduced nutrient and sediment
retention, and unstable channel characteristics (loss of horizontal flow vectors that maintain pools
and an increase in erosive forces to channel bed and banks). Site restoration activities will restore
riffle-pool morphology, aid in energy dissipation, increase aquatic habitat, stabilize channel banks,
and greatly reduce sediment loss from channel banks.
3.4.1 Existing Conditions Survey
Site stream dimension, pattern, and profile were measured to characterize existing channel
conditions. Locations of existing stream reaches are depicted in Figure 4 (Appendix A) and cross-
section locations are depicted in Figure B1 (Appendix B). Stream geometry measurements under
existing conditions are summarized in Table 9 (Essential Morphology Paramaters) and Table B1
(Appendix B).

Table 9. Essential Morphology Parameters
Parameter
Existing Condition
(UT1 Restoration
Reaches)
Reference Condition
Proposed Condition
(UT1 Restoration
Reaches)
Valley Width (ft) 60-160 50-200 60-160
Contributing Drainage Area (sq. mi.) 0.05-0.09 0.21-0.63 0.05-0.09
Channel/Reach Classification Cg5 Eb4, E5 E/C4
Design Discharge Width (ft) 3.8-8.7 8-12.1 5.6-7.8
Design Discharge Depth (ft) 0.7-1.3 1.1-2.0 0.5-0.8
Design Discharge Area (ft2) 2.6-25.7 8.0-14.7 2.6-3.8
Design Discharge Velocity (ft/s) 3.6-3.7 3.6-4.1 3.6-3.7
Design Discharge Discharge (cfs) 9.5-14.2 28.8-60.6 9.5-14.2
Water Surface Slope 0.0147-0.0225 0.0053-0.0258 0.0165-0.0223
Sinuosity 1.07-1.26 1.20-1.46 1.08-1.12
Width/Depth Ratio 5.4-27.0 8.0-15.1 12.0-16.0
Bank Height Ratio 1.0-2.8 1.0-1.4 1.0-1.3
Entrenchment Ratio 1.4-12.6 1.9-13 3.6-9.6
Substrate Sand Sand/gravel Gravel
3.4.2 Channel Classification and Morphology
Stream geometry and substrate data have been evaluated to classify existing stream conditions
based on a classification utilizing fluvial geomorphic principles (Rosgen 1996). Existing Site
reaches are classified as unstable Cg-type streams with variable sinuosity. Existing Site reaches
are currently impounded or characterized by sand substrate as the result of channel impacts
including livestock trampling, channel straightening, and riparian vegetation removal.

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 12
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
3.4.3 Channel Evolution
Site streams targeted for restoration have been channelized and are continually trampled by
livestock resulting primarily in channels classified as degraded (Class III) and degraded and
widened (Class IV) channels throughout the Site (Simon and Hupp 1986).
3.4.4 Valley Classification
The Site is located within a small stream, headwater, alluvial valley with an average 60- to 160-
foot floodplain valley width. Valley slopes of restoration reaches are typical for the Piedmont
region and range from 0.0185-0.0241. Typical streams in this region include C- and E-type
streams with slightly entrenched, meandering channels with a riffle-pool sequence.
3.4.5 Discharge
This hydrophysiographic region is characterized by moderate rainfall with precipitation averaging
approximately 40-50 inches per year (USDA 1960). Drainage basin sizes range from 0.001-square
mile for UT 2 to 0.7-square mile for the UT 3 outfall. Restoration reach (UT1) drainage basin
sizes range from approximatley 0.05- to 0.09-square mile.

The Site’s discharge is dominated by a combination of upstream basin catchment, groundwater
flow, and precipitation. Based on regional curves (Harman et al. 1999), the bankfull discharge for
the Site (0.001- to 0.7-square mile watershed) ranges from 0.6 to 68.8 cubic feet per second;
bankfull discharge for UT1 restoration reaches (0.05- to 0.09-square mile watershed) will range
from 9.5 to 14.2 cubic feet per second. Based on indicators of bankfull at reference reaches and
on-Site, the designed channel will equal approximately 93 percent of the channel size indicated by
Piedmont regional curves; this is discussed in Section 3.6 (Bankfull Verification).
3.5 Channel Stability Assessment
Channel degradation or aggradation occurs when hydraulic forces exceed or do not approach the
resisting forces in the channel. The amount of degradation or aggradation is a function of relative
magnitude of these forces over time. The interaction of flow within the boundary of open channels
is only imperfectly understood. Adequate analytical expressions describing this interaction have
yet to be developed for conditions in natural channels. Thus, means of characterizing these
processes rely heavily upon empirical formulas.

Traditional approaches for characterizing stability can be placed in one of two categories: 1)
maximum permissible velocity and 2) tractive force, or stream power and shear stress. The former
is advantageous in that velocity can be measured directly. Shear stress and stream power cannot
be measured directly and must be computed from various flow parameters. However, stream
power and shear stress are generally better measures of fluid force on the channel boundary than
velocity.

Stream power and shear stress were estimated for 1) existing dredged and straightened reaches, 2)
the reference reaches, and 3) proposed Site conditions. Important input values and output results
(including stream power, shear stress, and per unit shear power and shear stress) are presented in
Table 10. Average stream velocity and bankfull discharge values were calculated for the existing
Site stream reaches, the reference reach, and proposed conditions.

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 13
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018

In order to maintain sediment transport functions of a stable stream system, the proposed channel
should exhibit stream power and shear stress values so the channel is neither aggrading nor
degrading. Results of the analysis indicate the proposed channel reaches are expected to maintain
stream power as a function of width values of approximately 2.00-2.20 and shear stress values of
approximately 0.47-0.53 (Table 10).

Table 10. Stream Power () and Shear Stress () Values

Bankfull
Discharge
(ft3/s)
Water
surface
Slope
(ft/ft)
Total
Stream
Power
() /W
Hydraulic
Radius
Shear
Stress
()
Velocity
(v)  v max
Existing Conditions
UT1 (upstream) 9.5 0.0225 13.34 2.38 0.76 1.06 1.90 2.02 1.60
UT1 (downstream) 14.2 0.0147 13.03 1.94 2.12 1.94 0.85 1.65 2.92
Reference Conditions
Reference Reach-Cedarock 28.8 0.0258 46.37 5.72 0.82 1.33 3.60 4.78 6.67
Reference Causey Farm 60.6 0.0053 20.04 1.82 1.07 0.35 4.12 1.45 2.10
Proposed Conditions
UT1 (upstream) 9.5 0.0223 13.22 2.20 0.38 0.53 3.65 1.94 0.80
UT1 (downstream) 14.2 0.0165 14.62 2.00 0.46 0.47 3.74 1.76 0.71

Cedarock reference reach values for stream power and shear stress are higher due to steeper valley
and water surface slopes resulting in higher stream power and shear stress values. Causey Farm
reference reach values for stream power and shear stress are slightly lower due to flatter valley and
water surface slopes resulting in slightly lower stream power and shear stress values.

Existing, preconstruction Site streams are not characterized by excessive scour or erosion;
however, impacts are primarily caused by alteration of stream bed materials resulting in reduced
channel roughness due to impounding of stream reaches, livestock trampling of the stream bed and
banks, and embedding of stream bed materials. Stream power values of existing streams are not
elevated as evidenced by minimal channel erosion at the Site. Stream power values of existing
streams are comparable to reference reaches, residing between the Cedarock and Causey F arm.
Therefore, proposed stream power values are slightly lower from existing values and should
remain between reference reach values. Proposed stream power and shear stress values appear
adequate to mobilize and transport sediment through the Site, without aggradation or erosion on
proposed stream banks.
3.6 Bankfull Verification
Discharge estimates for the Site utilize an assumed definition of “bankfull” and the return interval
associated with that bankfull discharge. For this study, the bankfull channel is defined as the
channel dimensions designed to support the “channel forming” or “dominant” discharge (Gordon
et al. 1992).

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 14
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
Based on available Piedmont regional curves, the predicted bankfull discharge for the reference
reaches averages approximately 28.8 and 63.8 cubic feet per second (cfs) for Cedarock and Causey
Farm, respectively (Harmen et al. 1999). The USGS regional regression equation for the Piedmont
region indicates that bankfull discharge for the reference reaches at a 1.3 -1.5 year return interval
average approximately 27-32 and 53-65 cfs, respectively (USGS 2006).

Field indicators of bankfull, primarily topographic breaks identified on the banks, and riffle cross-
sections were utilized to obtain an average bankfull cross-sectional area for the reference reaches.
The Piedmont regional curves were then utilized to plot the watershed area and discharge for the
reference reach cross-sectional area. Field indicators of bankfull approximate an average
discharge of 31.3 and 59.8 cfs, respectively for the reference reaches, which is 108 and 94 percent
of that predicted by the regional curves; which is verified by the range approximated by the USGS
regional regression equation.

Based on the above analysis of methods to determine bankfull discharge, proposed conditions at
the Site will be based on reference reaches, onsite indicators of bankfull (cross-section 13,
Appendix B), and an undisturbed reach located upstream of the Abbey Lamm Mitigation Site
(located less than 2 miles northwest of the Site and currently in its third year of successful
monitoring). Based on field indicators of bankfull on-Site (93 percent of the curves), and the
Causey Farm Reference Reach (94 percent of the curves) and Abbey Lamm Mitigation Site (90
percent of the curves), which both closely resemble on-Site conditions, the designed onsite channel
restoration area will equal approximately 93 percent of the channel size indicated by Piedmont
regional curves. Table 11 summarizes all methods analyzed for estimating bankfull discharge.

Table 11. Reference Reach Bankfull Discharge Analysis
Method
Watershed Area
(square miles)
Return Interval
(years)
Discharge
(cfs)
Cedarock Reference Reach
Piedmont Regional Curves
(Harman et al. 1999) 0.2 1.3-1.5 28.8
Piedmont Regional Regression Model
(USGS 2004) 0.2 1.3-1.5 27-32
Field Indicators of Bankfull 0.2 1.3-1.5 31.3
Causey Farm Reference Reach
Piedmont Regional Curves
(Harman et al. 1999) 0.6 1.3-1.5 63.8
Piedmont Regional Regression Model
(USGS 2004) 0.6 1.3-1.5 53-65
Field Indicators of Bankfull 0.6 1.3-1.5 59.8

4.0 REFERENCE STREAMS
Two reference reaches were identified for the Site. The first reference stream (Cedarock) is located
approximately 9 miles northeast of the Site in Cedarock Park on an unnamed tributary to Rock
Creek (Figure 5A, Appendix A). The second reference stream (Causey Farm) is located less than

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 15
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
10 miles northeast of the Site, immediately north of Causey Airport on unnamed tributaries to
Stinking Quarter Creek. The Causey Farm reference was measured in 2004 as a reference reach
for the Causey Farm stream mitigation project, which was a successful project through f ive years
of monitoring with no issues. The streams were measured and classified by stream type (Rosgen
1996). Stream data is available for the Causey Farm reference; however, no figures were available
for inclusion with this document.
4.1 Channel Classification
The reference reaches are both characterized as E-type streams; Cedarock is a moderately sinuous
(1.2) channel dominated by gravel substrate and Causey Farm had slightly higher sinuousity
channel, due to a lower valley slope, with a sand-dominated substrate.
4.2 Discharge
Field indicators of bankfull approximate an average discharge of 31.3 and 59.8 cfs, respectively
for the Cedar Fork and Causey Farm reference reaches, which is 108 and 94 percent of that
predicted by the regional curves.
4.3 Channel Morphology
Dimension: Data collected at Cedarock and Causey Farm indicate bankfull cross-sectional areas
of 8.0 and 14.7 square feet, respectively. Cedarock was slightly larger than predicted by regional
curves (7.5 square feet) and Causey Farm was slightly smaller than predicted by regional curves
(15.7 square feet). Cedarock and Causey exhibit a bankfull width of 8.1 and 11.0, a bankfull depth
of 0.8 and 1.4 feet, and width-to-depth ratios of 10.1 and 9.0, respectively (see Table B1,
Morphological Stream Characteristics). Figure 5C (Appendix A) provides plan view and cross-
sectional data for the Cedarock reference reach. The reference reaches exhibit a bank-height ratio
of 1.0 and 1.4, respectively. The Causey Farm reference reach was slightly incised; however,
defined bankfull indicators were present, which assisted with determining the appropriate cross-
sectional area.

Pattern and Profile: In-field measurements of the reference reaches have yielded an average
sinuosity of 1.2 at Cedarock and 1.45 at Causey Farm (thalweg distance/straight-line distance).
Onsite valley slopes of Site restoration reaches range from 0.0185-0.0241. Valley slopes exhibited
by reference channels range from slightly higher (0.0310 at Cedarock) than the Site to slightly
lower (0.0077 at Causey Farm), providing a good range of slopes to compare existing and proposed
Site conditions. Although slightly incised, the Causey Farm reference reach had a suitable pattern
with no shoot cutoffs, eroding outer bends, or excessively tight radius of curvatures, in addition to
appropriate pool-to-pool spacing and meander wavelengths.

Substrate: Reference channels are characterized by substrate dominated by gravel and sand sized
particles, respectively.

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 16
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
5.0 PROJECT SITE WETLANDS (EXISTING CONDITIONS)
5.1 Existing Jurisdictional Wetlands
Jurisdictional wetlands/hydric soils within the Site were delineated in the field following
guidelines set forth in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual and subsequent
regional supplements, and located using GPS technology with reported submeter accuracy
(Environmental Laboratory 1987). A jurisdictional wetland delineation was completed and
verbally approved by United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) representative Dave
Bailey during a field meeting on October 13, 2017. Existing jurisdictional wetlands are depicted
in green and drained hydric soils are depicted in pink on Figure 4 (Appendix A).
5.2 Hydrological Characterization
Construction activities are expected to restore approximately 0.54 acre of drained or impounded
riparian hydric soils, and enhance 0.44 acre of cleared riparian wetlands. Areas of the Site targeted
for riparian wetlands will receive hydrological inputs from periodic overbank flooding of restored
tributaries, groundwater migration into wetlands, upland/stormwater runoff, and, to a lesser extent,
direct precipitation. Hydrological impairment in drained soils has resulted from lateral draw-down
of the water table adjacent to existing, incised stream channels. Additional hydric soils underlie
an agriculture impoundment at the upper reaches of UT 1.
5.3 Soil Characterization
5.3.1 Taxonomic Classification
Detailed soil mapping conducted by a North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist (NCLSS) in
November 2016 indicate that the Site is currently underlain by hydric soils of the Worsham Series
(Figure 4, Appendix A). According to the Web Soil Survey (USDA 2016), areas of the Site
proposed for wetland restoration and enhancement are mapped as Local Alluvial Land; however
an Official Soil Series Description does not exist for Local Alluvial Land. Hydric soils within the
Site most closely resemble published soil profiles for the Worsham Series. Wetlands have been
disturbed by livestock grazing and cleared of vegetation within pastureland. These hydric soils
have been effectively drained by stream channel incision or relocation of stream channels to the
floodplain margins.

Onsite hydric soils are grey to gley in color and are compacted and pockmarked by livestock
trampling. Livestock trampling, grazing, and clearing has resulted in an herbaceous vegetative
community. Groundwater springs and surface runoff contribute hydrology to these areas, although
the dominant hydrological influence is the lateral draw-down of the water table adjacent to incised
stream channels or streams relocated to the floodplain margins. A detailed soil profile conducted
by a NCLSS is as follows; the location is depicted on Figure 4 (Appendix A).

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 17
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
5.3.2 Profile Description
Depth (inches) Color Texture
0 - 3 10 YR 3/2 Fine Sand
3 - 9 10 YR 7/1 Fine Sand
9 + 10 YR 7/2
10 YR 7/2 Mottles 10%
10 YR 6/8 Mottles 30%
Fine Sand
5.4 Plant Community Characterization
Areas proposed for wetland restoration and enhancement are primarily vegetated by fescue and
opportunistic herbaceous species with very little vegetative diversity.
5.5 Reference Forest Ecosystem
A Reference Forest Ecosystem (RFE) is a forested area on which to model restoration efforts at
the Site in relation to soils and vegetation. RFEs should be ecologically stable climax communities
and should be a representative model of the Site as it likely existed prior to human disturbances.
Data describing plant community composition and structure should be collected at the RFEs and
subsequently applied as reference data in an attempt to emulate a natural climax community.

The RFE for this project is located 1.8 miles west of the Site at the Abbey Lamm Stream and
Wetland Mitigation Site. The RFE supports plant community and landform characteristics that
restoration efforts will attempt to emulate. Tree and shrub species identified within the reference
forest and outlined in Table 12 will be used, in addition to other relevant species in appropriate
Schafale and Weakley (1990) community descriptions.

Table 12. Reference Forest Ecosystem
Piedmont/Low Mountain Alluvial Forest
red maple (Acer rubrum)
tag alder (Alnus serrulata)
ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana)
pignut hickory (Carya glabra)
green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica)
eastern red cedar (Juniperus virginiana)
tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera)
sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua)
black gum (Nyssa sylvatica)
black cherry (Prunus serotina)
white oak (Quercus alba)
swamp chestnut oak (Quercus michauxii)
water oak (Quercus nigra)
cherrybark oak (Quercus pagoda)
willow oak (Quercus phellos)
slippery elm (Ulmus rubra)

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 18
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
6.0 FUNCTIONAL UPLIFT AND PROJECT GOALS/OBJECTIVES
Project goals are based on the Cape Fear River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP) report
(NCEEP 2009) and on-site data collection of channel morphology and function observed during
field investigations. The Site is located within Targeted Local Watershed (TLW)
03030002050050 (Figure 2, Appendix A). The RBRP report documents benthic ratings vary
between “Fair” and “Good-Fair” possibly due to cattle, dairy, and poultry operations. The project
is not located in a Regional or Local Watershed Planning Area; however, RBRP goals are
addressed by project activities as follows with Site specific information following the RBRP goals
in parenthesis.

1. Reduce and control sediment inputs (sediment model [Section 3.2] – reduction of 10.0
tons/year after mitigation is complete);
2. Reduce and manage nutrient inputs (nutrient model [Section 3.3]- livestock removal from
streams, elimination of fertilizer application, and marsh treatment areas may result in a
direct reduction of 852.4 pounds of nitrogen and 70.6 pounds of phosphorus per year);
3. Protect and augment designated natural heritage areas.

Site specific mitigation goals and objectives have been developed through the use of North
Carolina Stream Assessment Method (NC SAM) and North Carolina Wetland Assessment Method
(NC WAM) analyses of existing and reference stream systems at the Site (NC SFAT 2015 and NC
WFAT 2010). These methodologies rate functional metrics for streams and wetlands as high,
medium, or low based on field data collected on forms and transferred into a rating cal culator.
Using Boolean logic, the rating calculator assigns a high, medium, or low value for each metric
and overall function. Site functional assessment data forms are available upon request and model
output is included in Appendix B.

Tables 13A and 13B summarize NC SAM and NC WAM metrics targeted for functional uplift and
the corresponding mitigation activities proposed to provide functional uplift. Metrics targeted to
meet the Site’s goals and objectives are depicted in bold.

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 19
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
Table 13A. Major Hill Site NC SAM Summary
NC SAM Function Class Rating Summary UT 1
(Upstream)
UT1
(Downstream) Reference
(1) HYDROLOGY MEDIUM LOW HIGH
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM HIGH HIGH
(2) Flood Flow MEDIUM LOW HIGH
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation HIGH LOW HIGH
(4) Floodplain Access HIGH MEDIUM HIGH
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer LOW LOW HIGH
(4) Microtopography HIGH LOW HIGH
(3) Stream Stability LOW LOW HIGH
(4) Channel Stability LOW LOW HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport LOW LOW HIGH
(4) Stream Geomorophology MEDIUM HIGH HIGH
(1) WATER QUALITY LOW LOW HIGH
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM HIGH HIGH
(2) Stream-side Area Vegetation LOW LOW HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration LOW LOW HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation LOW MEDIUM HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors YES YES NO
(1) HABITAT LOW LOW HIGH
(2) In-stream Habitat LOW LOW HIGH
(3) Baseflow MEDIUM HIGH HIGH
(3) Substrate LOW LOW HIGH
(3) Stream Stability LOW LOW HIGH
(3) In-Stream Habitat LOW LOW HIGH
(2) Stream-side Habitat LOW LOW HIGH
(3) Stream-side Habitat LOW LOW HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation LOW LOW HIGH
OVERALL LOW LOW HIGH

Based on NC SAM output, all three primary stream functional metrics (Hydrology, Water Quality,
and Habitat), as well as 18 sub-metrics are under-performing as exhibited by a LOW metric rating.
These same metrics measured in a relatively undisturbed reference reach exhibit HIGH metric
ratings (see Figure 4, Appendix A for NC SAM data reaches). LOW performing metrics are to be
targeted for functional uplift through mitigation activities, goals and objectives, as well as,
monitoring and success criteria.

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 20
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
Table 13B. Major Hill Site NC WAM Summary
NC WAM Sub-function Rating Summary K1
Wetland Type HF
(1) HYDROLOGY MEDIUM
(2) Surface Storage & Retention MEDIUM
(2) Sub-surface Storage and Retention HIGH
(1) WATER QUALITY MEDIUM
(2) Pathogen change HIGH
(2) Particulate Change LOW
(2) Soluble change MEDIUM
(2) Physical Change HIGH
(1) HABITAT LOW
(2) Physical Structure LOW
(2) Landscape Patch Structure LOW
(2) Vegetative Composition MEDIUM
OVERALL MEDIUM
NC WAM forms are filled out for wetland enhancement areas. Wetland restoration areas are not
able to be rated by the NC SAM methodology.

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 21
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
Table 13C. Stream/Wetland Targeted Functions, Goals, and Objectives
Targeted Functions Goals Objectives
(1) HYDROLOGY
(2) Flood Flow (Floodplain Access)  Attenuate flood flow across the Site.
 Minimize downstream flooding to the
maximum extent possible.
 Connect streams to functioning wetland
systems.
 Construct new channel at historic floodplain elevation to restore overbank flows
and restore jurisdictional wetlands
 Plant woody riparian buffer
 Remove livestock
 Deep rip floodplain soils to reduce compaction and increase soil surface roughness
 Protect riparian buffers with a perpetual conservation easement
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
(4) Microtopography
(3) Stream Stability  Increase stream stability within the Site
so that channels are neither aggrading nor
degrading.
 Construct channels with proper pattern, dimension, and longitudinal profile
 Remove livestock
 Construct stable channels with cobble/gravel substrate
 Plant woody riparian buffer

(4) Channel Stability
(4) Sediment Transport
(1) WATER QUALITY
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
 Remove direct nutrient and pollutant
inputs from the Site and reduce
contributions to downstream waters.
 Remove livestock and reduce agricultural land/inputs
 Install marsh treatment areas
 Plant woody riparian buffer
 Restore/enhance jurisdictional wetlands adjacent to Site streams

(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Indicators of Stressors
(1) HABITAT
(2) In-stream Habitat
 Improve instream and stream-side
habitat.
 Construct stable channels with cobble/gravel substrate
 Plant woody riparian buffer to provide organic matter and shade
 Construct new channel at historic floodplain elevation to restore overbank flows
and plant woody riparian buffer
 Protect riparian buffers with a perpetual conservation easement
 Restore/enhance jurisdictional wetlands adjacent to Site streams

(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability
(3) In-Stream Habitat
(2) Stream-side Habitat
(3) Stream-side Habitat
(3) Thermoregulation
Wetland Landscape Patch Structure
Wetland Vegetation Composition

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 22
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
The proposed easement, existing conditions, and proposed mitigation activities are depicted in
Figures 4 and 6A-6B (Appendix A). The Site provides for restoration and protection of aquatic
resources within a conservation easement and will result in net gains in hydrology, water quality,
and habitat functions.
7.0 DESIGN APPROACH AND MITIGATION WORK PLAN
7.1 Stream Design
Onsite streams targeted for restoration have endured significant disturbance from land use
activities such as land clearing, livestock grazing, straightening and rerouting of channels, and
other anthropogenic maintenance. Site streams will be restored to emulate historic conditions at
the Site utilizing parameters from nearby, relatively undisturbed reference streams (see Section
4.0 Reference Streams).

Primary activities designed to restore Site streams include 1) stream restoration, 2) stream
enhancement (Level II), 3) wetland re-establishment and enhancement, 4) construction of marsh
treatment areas, and 5) vegetation planting (Figures 6A-6B, Appendix A).
7.1.1 Stream Restoration
Stream restoration efforts are designed to restore a stable stream that approximates hydrodynamics,
stream geometry, and local microtopography relative to reference conditions (Figure 7, Appendix
A). Restoration at the Site will be Priority I restoration; therefore, bankfull elevations will be
raised to meet the adjacent valley floodplain elevation.

Stream restoration is expected to entail 1) channel excavation, 2) removal of an agriculture pond,
3) spoil stockpiling, 4) channel stabilization, 5) channel diversion, and 6) channel backfill.

Stream restoration within the abandoned pond will include 1) notching the dam to dewater
sediments; 2) removal of the dam to the elevation of the adjacent floodplain; 3) excavating
sediment that is unsuitable for channel bank construction; 4) backfilling areas of sediment removed
with soil suitable for channel construction (if necessary); 5) excavation of the design channel, 6)
stabilization of the channel with coir matting, seed, and mulch; and 7) installation of structures.

The dam will be notched in early summer of 2018 and the pond bed will be seeded with temporary
grasses to stabilize sediments remaining in the pond. Care will be t aken during notching of the
dam to drain the maximum amount of water, thereby allowing sediments to dewater.

Once the pond has dewatered and sediments have stabilized, the dam will be removed with finished
grades matching elevations of the valley and floodplain above and below the dam location.
Material removed from the dam, if suitable, may be used as channel backfill for reaches of stream
to be abandoned during Priority I stream restoration efforts. If additional backfill remains, the
material will be stockpiled outside of the easement, or spread evenly across the adjacent property
and seeded for stabilization. Erosion control measures, such as silt fence, seeding, and mulching
will be implemented on all stockpiled or spread soil materials.

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 23
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
A determination on sediment quantity and quality within the abandoned pond will be made
concerning the ability to work within, or to stabilize the sediment for stream construction. If
sediment is deemed unsuitable for channel construction, the sediment will be removed from the
vicinity of the design channel and spread along the outer margins of the pond. Subsequently,
suitable soil material will be placed in the location of the design channel such that design channel
banks will be stabilized without liquefaction. The removal of unsuitable material, installation of
suitable material, and excavation of the design channel may occur simultaneously to reduce
impacts of machinery on the pond bed.

Excavation of the design channel will occur in the pond bed similar to other reaches of restored
stream, with stabilization using approved erosion control materials and techniques.

In-stream Structures
The use of in-stream structures for grade control and habitat is essential for successful stream
restoration (Figure 8A, Appendix A). In-stream structures may be placed in the channel to elevate
local water surface profiles in the channel, potentially flattening the water energy slope or gradient
and directing stream energy into the center of the channel and away from banks. The structures
will consist of log cross-vanes; however, at the discretion of the Engineer, rock cross-vanes may
be substituted if dictated by field conditions. In addition, the structures will placed in relatively
straight reaches to provide secondary (perpendicular) flow cells during bankfull events.

Piped Channel Crossings
Landowner constraints will necessitate the installation of a piped channel crossing within a break
in the easement to allow access to portions of the property isolated by stream restoration activities
Figures 6A-6B (Appendix A). The crossing may be constructed of properly sized pipes and
hydraulically stable rip-rap or suitable rock. Crossings will be large enough to handle the weight
of anticipated vehicular traffic. Approach grades to the crossing will be at an approximate 10:1
slope and constructed of hard, scour-resistant crushed rock or other permeable material, which is
free of fines. Floodplain pipes will be incorporated at each channel crossing to accommodate
overbank events.

Outfall Structures
One drop structure is proposed at the outfall of the UT1 restoration reach as depicted on Figure
6A (Appendix A). The drop structure may be constructed out of Terracell, or large cobble
depending upon anticipated scour from the restored stream channels (Figure 8B, Appendix A).
The structure should be constructed to resist erosive forces associated with hydraulic drops
proposed at the Site.

TerraCell is a light weight, flexible mat made of high density polyethylene strips. The strips are
bonded together to form a honeycomb configuration. The honeycomb mat is fixed in place and
filled with gravel or sand. Material in the TerraCell structure may be planted with grasses and
shrubs for additional erosion protection. The TerraCell structure will form a nickpoint that
approximates geologic controls in stream beds.

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 24
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
Marsh Treatment Areas
Two shallow wetland marsh treatment areas will be excavated in the floodplain to intercept surface
waters draining through agricultural areas prior to discharging into the Site. Marsh treatment areas
are intended to improve the mitigation project and are not generating mitigation credit. The
proposed marsh treatment area location is depicted on Figures 6A-6B (Appendix A) and will
consist of shallow depressions that will provide treatment and attenuation of initial stormwater
pulses (Figure 8B, Appendix A). The outfall will be constructed of hydraulically stable rip-rap or
other suitable material that will protect against headcut migration into the constructed depression.
It is expected that the treatment areas will fill with sediment and organic matter over time.
7.1.2 Stream Enhancement (Level II)
Stream enhancement (level II) will occur on the lower reaches of UT1, the upper reaches of UT2,
and the entire reach of UT3 (Figures 6A-6B, Appendix A). These reaches are characterized by
channels with mature riparian vegetation, good channel bed substrate, and little bank erosion. The
reaches are accessible by livestock and will have fence erected to exclude livestock. Planting
riparian buffers with native forest vegetation will occur where needed and will extend a minimum
of 50 feet from the top of stream banks to facilitate stream recovery and prevent further degradation
of the stream.
7.2 Hydrological Modifications (Wetland Restoration)
Alternatives for wetland restoration are designed to restore a fully functioning wetland system,
which will provide surface water storage, nutrient cycling, removal of imported elements and
compounds, and will create a variety and abundance of wildlife habitat. Portions of the Site
underlain by hydric soils have been impacted by channel incision, ground surface compaction,
vegetative clearing, and earth movement associated with agricultural practices. Wetland
restoration options will focus on the removal of fill materials, restoration of vegetative
communities, the reestablishment of soil structure and microtopographic variations, and
redirecting normal surface hydrology back to Site floodplains. These activities will result in the
restoration of 0.55 acre of riparian wetland (Figure 6A, Appendix A).

Reestablishment of Historic Groundwater Elevations
Hydric soils adjacent to the incised channels appear to have been drained due to lo wering of the
groundwater table and a lateral drainage effect from existing stream reaches. Reestablishment of
channel inverts is expected to rehydrate soils adjacent to Site streams, resulting in the restoration
of jurisdictional hydrology to riparian wetlands.

Reestablishment of Soil Structure
Soil structure throughout the Site, particularly within wetland areas, will be reestablished to allow
for penetration of rain water to the groundwater table. This will be accomplished by removing
livestock from the Site, ripping compacted soils, and revegetating the Site.

Hydrophytic Vegetation
Site wetland areas targeted for restoration have endured significant disturbance from land use
activities such as land clearing, livestock grazing, and other anthropogenic maintenance. Wetland
areas will be revegetated with native vegetation typical of wetland communities in the region.
Emphasis will focus on developing a diverse plant assemblage. Section 7.5 (Natural Plant

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 25
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
Community Restoration) provides detailed information concerning community species
associations.
7.3 Wetland Enhancement
Wetland enhancement will focus on the removal of livestock and restoration of vegetative
communities resulting in the enhancement of 0.44 acre of riparian wetland (Figure 6A, Appendix
A).
7.4 Soil Restoration
Soil grading will occur during stream restoration activities. Topsoils will be stockpiled during
construction activities and will be spread on the soil surface once critical subgrade has been
established. The replaced topsoil will serve as a viable growing medium for community restoration
to provide nutrients and aid in the survival of planted species.
7.5 Natural Plant Community Restoration
Restoration of floodplain forest and stream-side habitat allows for development and expansion of
characteristic species across the landscape. Ecotonal changes between community types
contribute to diversity and provide secondary benefits, such as enhanced feeding and nesting
opportunities for mammals, birds, amphibians, and other wildlife. 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.
7.5.1 Planting Plan
Stream-side trees and shrubs include species with high value for sediment stabilization, rapid
growth rate, and the ability to withstand hydraulic forces associated with bankfull flow and
overbank flood events. Stream-side trees and shrubs will be planted within 15 feet of the channel
top of bank throughout the meander belt-width. Shrub elements will be planted along the
reconstructed stream banks, concentrated along outer bends. Piedmont Alluvial Forest is the target
community for Site floodplains and Dry-Mesic Oak-Hickory Forest is the target community for
upland side-slopes.

Bare-root seedlings within the Piedmont Alluvial and Dry-Mesic Oak-Hickory Forests will be
planted at a density of approximately 680 stems per acre on 8-foot centers. Shrub species in the
stream-side assemblage and Marsh Wetland Treatment Areas will be planted at a density of 2720
stems per acre on 4-foot centers.

Table 14 depicts the total number of stems and species distribution within each vegetation
association (Figure 9, Appendix A). Planting will be performed between December 1 and March
15 to allow plants to stabilize during the dormant period and set root during the spring season.

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 26
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
Table 14. Planting Plan
Vegetation Association
Piedmont/Low
Mountain Alluvial
Forest*
Dry-Mesic Oak-
Hickory Forest*
Marsh Treatment
Wetland**
Stream-side
Assemblage** TOTAL
Area (acres) 1.1 5.5 0.01 1.5 8.11
Species
#
planted*
% of
total
#
planted*
% of
total
#
planted**
% of
total
#
planted**
% of
total # planted
River birch (Betula nigra) 75 10 -- -- -- -- 204 5 279
Ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana) -- -- 748 20 -- -- -- -- 748
Buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis) -- -- -- -- 5 20 -- -- 5
Red bud (Cercis canadensis) -- -- 561 15 -- -- -- -- 561
Sweet pepperbush (Clethra alnifolia) -- -- -- -- 4 15 -- -- 4
Silky dogwood (Cornus amomum) 75 10 -- -- 4 15 816 20 895
Persimmon (Diospyros virginiana) -- -- 374 10 -- -- -- -- 374
White ash (Fraxinus americana) -- -- 187 5 -- -- -- -- 187
Green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica) 150 20 -- -- -- -- 816 20 966
Blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum) -- -- -- -- 5 20 204 5 5
Tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera) 75 10 -- -- -- -- -- -- 75
Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis) 150 20 -- -- -- -- 816 20 966
Black gum (Nyssa sylvatica) -- -- 561 15 -- -- -- -- 561
Water oak (Quercus nigra) 112 15 748 20 -- -- 408 10 1268
Willow oak (Quercus phellos) 112 15 561 15 -- -- 408 10 1081
Black willow (Salix nigra) -- -- -- -- -- -- 408 10 408
Elderberry (Sambucus canadensis) -- -- -- -- 5 20 -- -- 5
Possumhaw (Viburnum nudum) -- -- -- -- 3 10 -- -- 3
TOTAL 748 100 3740 100 27 100 4080 100 8391
* Planted at a density of 680 stems/acre.
** Planted at a density of 2720 stems/acre.

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 27
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
In addition to planting seedlings, a seed mix will be spread within Marsh Treatment Wetland Areas
as follows.

1. Virginia wildrye (Elymus virginicus)
2. Switch grass (Panicum virgatum)
3. Big blue stem (Andropogon gerardii)
4. Indian grass (Sorghastrum nutans)
5. Deer tongue (Dichanthelium clandestinum)
7.5.2 Nuisance Species Management
Nuisance species controls are not proposed at this time. Inspections for beaver and other potential
nuisance species will occur throughout the course of the monitoring period. Appropriate actions
may be taken to ameliorate any negative impacts regarding vegetation development and/or water
management on an as-needed basis. The presences of nuisance species will be monitored over the
course of the monitoring period. Appropriate actions will be taken to ameliorate any negative
impacts regarding vegetation development and/or water management on an as-needed basis.
8.0 MONITORING AND SUCCESS CRITERIA
Monitoring requirements and success criteria outlined in this plan follow the October 24, 2016 NC
Interagency Review Team Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation
Update. Monitoring data collected at the Site should include reference photos, plant survival
analysis, channel stability analysis, and biological data.

Wetland hydrology is proposed to be monitored for a period of seven years (years 1 -7). Riparian
vegetation and stream morphology is proposed to be monitored for a period of seven years with
measurements completed in years 1-3, year 5, and year 7. Monitoring will be conducted by Axiom
Environmental, Inc. Annual monitoring reports of the data collected will be submitted to the
NCDMS by Restoration Systems no later than December 31 of each monitoring year data is
collected.

Table 15. Monitoring Schedule
Resource Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7
Streams
Wetlands
Vegetation
Macroinvertebrates
Water Quality
Visual Assessment
Report Submittal
8.1 Stream Monitoring
Annual monitoring will include development of channel cross-sections and substrate on riffles and
pools (Figure 10, Appendix A). Data to be presented in graphic and tabular format will include 1)
cross-sectional area, 2) bankfull width, 3) average depth, 4) maximum depth, and 5) width-to-
depth ratio. Longitudinal profiles will not be measured routinely unless monitoring demonstrates

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 28
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
channel bank or bed instability, in which case, longitudinal profiles may be required by the USACE
along reaches of concern to track changes and demonstrate stability.

Table 16. Stream Monitoring Summary
Parameter Method Schedule/Frequency Number/Extent
Stream Profile Full longitudinal survey As-built (unless otherwise
required)
All restored stream
channels
Stream Dimension Cross-sections Years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7 Two per 1000 feet of
restored channels
Channel Stability
Visual Assessments Yearly All restored stream
channels
Bank Pins Yearly
Only if instability is
documented during
monitoring
Additional Cross-sections Yearly
Only if instability is
documented during
monitoring
Stream Hydrology
Continuous monitoring
water level gauges and/or
trail camera
Continuous recording
through monitoring period
Two gauges on UT1
(upstream and
downstream)
Water Quality Water samples Yearly Two locations
Macroinvertebrates Qual 4 sampling Years 3, 5, and 7 Two locations

Visual Assessments
Visual assessment of in-stream structures will be conducted to determine if failure has occurred.
Failure of a structure may be indicated by collapse of the structure, undermining of the structure,
abandonment of the channel around the structure, and/or stream flow beneath the structure. In
addition, visual assessments of the entire channel will be conducted in each of the seven years of
monitoring as outlined in the October 24, 2016 NC Interagency Review Team Wilmington District
Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update. Areas of concern will be depicted on a
plan view figure identifying the location of concern along with a written assessment and
photograph of the area.

Water Quality
Water quality sampling has been conducted at two locations within the Site; one in areas visibly
impacted by livestock and one in downstream wooded areas that have livestock access, but are not
visibly impacted by livestock (Figure 4, Appendix A). Preconstruction sampling was conducted
by a NC Certified Wastewater/Groundwater Laboratory (NC State Lab Code #5642) in situ using
single event sampling devices (EkStik EC500 and EkStik DO600). Parameters sampled include
total dissolved solids, conductivity, temperature, dissolved oxygen, and pH. Annual water quality
sampling will be used to compare preconstruction baseline data with post -construction restored
conditions. At this time water quality is not proposed to be tied to success criteria, but may be
used as a tool to observe gains in water quality function by proposed mitigation activities.
Preconstruction water quality data is presented in the following table.

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 29
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
Table 17. Major Hill Water Quality Data
Upstream Downstream
Parameter 7/28/17 8/14/17 7/28/17 8/14/17
TDS (ppm) 110.1 147 62.6 86.8
TDS (mg/l) 109.1 149 64.6 83.5
Conductivity (m/s) 159.2 215 92.1 128.3
Temperature (°C) 25.4 22.6 24.6 22.1
DO (mg/l) - 1.93 - 3.06
DO (ppm) - 1.06 - 2.53
pH 6.61 6.37 6.65 6.22

Benthic Macroinvertebrates
Benthic macroinvertebrate sampling will be conducted once before construction (baseline
conditions) and once during monitoring years 3, 5, and 7. Macroinvertebrate sampling will be
conducted in accordance with the “Qual 4” method described in Standard Operating Procedures
for Collection and Analysis of Benthic Macroinvertebrates, Version 5.0 (NCDWR 2016). In
addition, sampling will occur during the “index period” referenced in Small Streams Biocriteria
Development (NCDWQ 2009). Results will be presented on a site-by-site basis and will include
a list of taxa collecter, an enumeration of Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Tricopetera taxa as well
as Biotic Index values. Benthic Macroinvertebrate sampling data will not be tied to success
criteria; however, the data may be used as a tool to observe positive gains to in-stream habitat.
8.1.1 Stream Success Criteria
Monitoring and success criteria for stream restoration should relate to project goals and objectives
identified from on-site NC SAM data collection. From a mitigation perspective, several of the
goals and objectives are assumed to be functionally elevated by restoration activities without direct
measurement. Other goals and objectives will be considered successful upon achieving vegetation
success criteria. The following summarizes stream success criteria, per the October 24, 2016 NC
Interagency Review Team Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation
Update.

 All streams must maintain an Ordinary High-Water Mark (OHWM), per RGL 05-
05.
 Continuous surface flow must be documented each year for at least 30 consecutive
days.
 Bank height ratio (BHR) cannot exceed 1.2 at any measured cross-section.
 Entrenchment ratio (ER) must be no less than 1.4 at any measured riffle cross-
section.
 BHR and ER at any measure riffle cross-section should not change by more than
10% from baseline condition during any given monitoring period.
 The stream project shall remain stable and all other performance standards shall be
met through four separate bankfull events, occurring in separate years, during the
monitoring years 1-7.

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 30
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
8.1.2 Stream Contingency
In the event that stream success criteria are not fulfilled, a mechanism for contingency will be
implemented. Stream contingency may include, but may not be limited to 1) structure repair and/or
installation; 2) repair of dimension, pattern, and/or profile variables; and 3) bank stabilization. The
method of contingency is expected to be dependent upon stream variables that are not in
compliance with success criteria. Primary concerns, which may jeopardize stream success, include
1) structure failure, 2) headcut migration through the Site, and/or 3) bank erosion.

Structure Failure
In the event that structures are compromised the affected structure will be repaired, maintained, or
replaced. Once the structure is repaired or replaced, it must function to stabilize adjacent stream
banks and/or maintain grade control within the channel. Structures which remain intact, but
exhibit flow around, beneath, or through the header/footer will be repaired by excavating a trench
on the upstream side of the structure and reinstalling filter fabric in front of the pilings. Structures
which have been compromised, resulting in shifting or collapse of a header/footer, will be removed
and replaced with a structure suitable for Site flows.

Headcut Migration Through the Site
In the event that a headcut occurs within the Site (identified visually or through measurements [i.e.
bank-height ratios exceeding 1.4]), provisions for impeding headcut migration and repairing
damage caused by the headcut will be implemented. Headcut migration may be impeded through
the installation of in-stream grade control structures (rip-rap sill and/or log cross-vane weir) and/or
restoring stream geometry variables until channel stability is achieved. Channel repairs to stream
geometry may include channel backfill with coarse material and stabilizing the material with
erosion control matting, vegetative transplants, and/or willow stakes.

Bank Erosion
In the event that severe bank erosion occurs within the Site, resulting in incision, lateral instability,
and/or elevated width-to-depth ratios locally or systemically, contingency measures to reduce bank
erosion and width-to-depth ratio will be implemented. Bank erosion contingency measures may
include the installation of log-vane weirs and/or other bank stabilization measures. If the resultant
bank erosion induces shoot cutoffs or channel abandonment, a channel may be excavated to reduce
shear stress to stable values.
8.2 Wetland Monitoring
Six groundwater monitoring gauges will be installed to take measurements after hydrological
modifications are performed at the Site. Groundwater gauges are proposed to be nested in the
drained pond area and spread evenl y throughout the remaining wetland restoration areas (Figure
10, Appendix A). A detailed soil profile will be described adjacent to each installed groundwater
gauge. Hydrological sampling will continue throughout the entire year at intervals necessary to
satisfy jurisdictional hydrology success criteria. In addition, an on-site rain gauge will document
rainfall data for comparison of groundwater conditions with extended drought conditions and
floodplain crest gauges (or other suitable recording devices) will be installed to confirm overbank
flooding events.

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 31
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
Table 18. Wetland Monitoring Summary
Parameter Method Schedule/Frequency Number/Extent Data Collected
Wetland
Restoration
Groundwater
gauges
As-built, Years 1, 2,
3, 4, 5, 6, and 7
6 gauges spread
throught restored
wetlands
Soil temperature at the
beginning of each monitoring
period, groundwater and rain
data for each monitoring period
8.2.1 Wetland Success Criteria
The following summarizes wetland success criteria, per the October 24, 2016 NC Interagency
Review Team Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update.

 Saturation or inundation within the upper 12 inches of the soil surface for, at a minimum,
10 percent of the growing season, during average climatic conditions

According to the Soil Survey of Alamance County, the growing season for Alamance County is
from April 17 – October 22 (USDA 1960). However, the start date for the growing season is not
typical for the Piedmont region; therefore, for purposes of this project gauge hydrologic success
will be determined using data from March 1 - October 22 to more accurately represent the period
of biological activity. Based on growing season information outlined in the Interim Regional
Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Eastern Mountains and
Piedmont Region (USACE 2010), this will be confirmed annually by soil temperatures exceeding
41 degrees Fahrenheit at 12 inches depth and/or bud burst.

Target hydrological characteristics include saturation or inundation for 10 percent of the monitored
period (March 1-October 22), during average climatic conditions. During years with atypical
climatic conditions, groundwater gauges in reference wetlands may be used for comparison to the
Site; however, reference gauge data will not be tied to success criteria. These areas are expected
to support hydrophytic vegetation. If wetland parameters are marginal as indicated by vegetation
and/or hydrology monitoring, a jurisdictional determination will be performed. The jurisdictional
determination will not supersede monitoring data, or overturn a failure in meeting success criteria;
however, this information may be used by the IRT, at the discretion of the IRT, to make a final
determination on Site wetland re-establishment success.
8.2.2 Wetland Contingency
Hydrological contingency will require consultation with hydrologists and regulatory agencies if
wetland hydrology enhancement is not achieved. Floodplain surface modifications, including
construction of ephemeral pools, represent a likely mechanism to increase the floodplain area in
support of jurisdictional wetlands. Recommendations for contingency to establish wetland
hydrology will be implemented and monitored until Hydrology Success Criteria are achieved.
8.3 Vegetation
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.

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 32
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
During quantitative vegetation sampling, 7 sample plots (10-meter by 10-meter) will be installed
within the Site as per guidelines established in CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation,
Version 4.2 (Lee et al. 2008). In each sample plot, vegetation parameters to be monitored include
species composition and species density. Visual observations of the percent cover of shrub and
herbaceous species will also be documented by photograph.

Table 19. Vegetation Monitoring Summary
Parameter Method Schedule/Frequency Number/Extent Data Collected
Vegetation
establishment and
vigor
Permanent
vegetation plots
0.0247 acre (100
square meters) in
size
As-built, Years 1, 2,
3, 5, and 7
7 plots spread
across the Site
Species, height,
location, planted vs.
volunteer, and age
Annual random
vegetation plots,
0.0247 acre (100
square meters) in
size
As-built, Years 1, 2,
3, 5, and 7
2 plots randomly
selected each year Species and height
8.3.1 Vegetation Success Criteria
The following summarizes wetland success criteria, per the October 24, 2016 NC Interagency
Review Team Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update.

 Within planted portions of the site, a minimum of 320 stems per acre must be present at
year 3; a minimum of 260 stems per acre must be present at year 4; and a minimum of 210
stems per acre must be present at year 7.
 Trees must average 7 feet in height at year 5, and 10 feet in height at year 7.
 Planted and volunteer stems are counted, provided they are included in the approved
planting list for the site; natural recruits not on the planting list may be considered by the
IRT on a case-by-case basis.
 Any single species can only account for 50% of the required stems within any vegetation
plot.
8.3.2 Vegetation Contingency
If vegetation success criteria are not achieved, 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.
8.4 Compatibility with Project Goals
The following table outlines the compatibility of Site performance criteria described above to Site
goals and objectives that will be utilized to evaluate if Site goals and objectives are achieved.

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 33
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
Table 20. Compatibility of Performance Criteria to Project Goals and Objectives
Goals Objectives Success Criteria
(1) HYDROLOGY
 Attenuate flood flow across the
Site.
 Minimize downstream flooding
to the maximum extent
possible.
 Connect streams to functioning
wetland systems.
 Construct new channel at historic floodplain elevation to
restore overbank flows and restore jurisdictional wetlands
 Plant woody riparian buffer
 Remove livestock
 Deep rip floodplain soils to reduce compaction and increase
soil surface roughness
 Protect Site with a perpetual conservation easement
 BHR not to exceed 1.2
 Document four overbank events in separate monitoring
years
 Livestock excluded from the easement
 Attain Wetland Hydrology Success Criteria
 Attain Vegetation Success Criteria
 Conservation Easement recorded
 Increase stream stability within
the Site so that channels are
neither aggrading nor
degrading.
 Construct channels with proper pattern, dimension, and
longitudinal profile
 Remove livestock from the Site
 Construct stable channels with cobble/gravel substrate
 Plant woody riparian buffer
 Cross-section measurements indicate a stable channel with
cobble/gravel substrate
 Visual documentation of stable channels and structures
 BHR not to exceed 1.2
 ER of 1.4 or greater
 < 10% change in BHR and ER in any given year
 Livestock excluded from the easement
 Attain Vegetation Success Criteria
(1) WATER QUALITY
 Remove direct nutrient and
pollutant inputs from the Site
and reduce contributions to
downstream waters.
 Remove livestock and reduce agricultural land/inputs
 Install marsh treatment areas
 Plant woody riparian buffer
 Restore/enhance wetlands adjacent to Site streams
 Livestock excluded from the easement
 Attain Wetland Hydrology Success Criteria
 Attain Vegetation Success Criteria
(1) HABITAT
 Improve instream and stream-
side habitat.
 Construct stable channels with cobble/gravel substrate
 Plant riparian buffer to provide organic matter and shade
 Construct new channel at historic floodplain elevation to
restore overbank flows and plant woody riparian buffer
 Protect Site with a perpetual conservation easement
 Restore/enhance wetlands adjacent to Site streams
 Cross-section measurement indicate a stable channel with
cobble/gravel substrate
 Visual documentation of stable channels and in-stream
structures.
 Attain Wetland Hydrology Success Criteria
 Attain Vegetation Success Criteria
 Conservation Easement recorded

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 34
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018

9.0 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN
In the event the mitigation Site or a specific component of the mitigation Site fails to achieve the
necessary performance standards as specified in the mitigation plan, the sponsor shall notify the
members of the IRT and work with the IRT to develop contingency plans and remedial actions.
10.0 LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN
The Site will be transferred to the NCDEQ Stewardship Program. This party shall serve as
conservation easement holder and long-term steward for the property and will conduct periodic
inspection of the Site to ensure that restrictions required in the conservation easement are upheld.
Funding will be supplied by the responsible party on a yearly basis until such time an endowment
is established. The NCDEQ Stewardship Program is developing an endowment system within the
non-reverting, interest-bearing Conservation Lands Conservation Fund Account. The use of funds
from the Endowment Account will be governed by North Carolina General Statute GS 113A -
232(d)(3). Interest gained by the endowment fund may be used for the purpose of stewardship,
monitoring, stewardship administration, and land transaction costs, if applicable.

The Stewardship Program will periodically install signage to identify boundary markings, as
needed. Any livestock or associated fencing, or permanent crossings will be the responsibility of
the owner of the underlying property to maintain.

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 35
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
11.0 REFERENCES

Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical
Report Y-87-1. United States Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg,
Mississippi.

Gordon, N.D., T.A. McMahon, and B.L. Finlayson. 1992. Stream Hydrology: an Introduction
for Ecologists. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. West Sussex, England.

Griffith, G.E., J.M. Omernik, J.A. Comstock, M.P. Schafale, W.H. McNab, D.R. Lenat, T.F.
MacPherson, J.B. Glover, and V.B. Shelbourne. 2002. Ecoregions of North Carolina and
South Carolina. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia.

Harman, W.A., G.D. Jennings, J.M. Patterson, D.R. Clinton, L.A. O’Hara, A. Jessup, R. Everhart.
1999. Bankfull Hydraulic Geometry Relationships for North Carolina Streams. N.C. State
University, Raleigh, North Carolina.

Lee, M.T., R.K. Peet, S.D. Roberts, and T.R. Wentworth. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording
Vegetation. Version 4.2. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, Ecosystem Enhancement Program. Raleigh, North Carolina.

North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS). 2014. Stream and Wetland Mitigation
Monitoring Guidelines. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Raleigh,
North Carolina.

North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS). 2016. Quantifying Benefits to Water
Quality from Livestock Exclusion and Riparian Buffer Establishment for Stream
Restoration.

North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2005. Cape Fear River Basinwide Water
Quality Plan. Available: https:// https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-
resources/planning/basin-planning/water-resource-plans/cape-fear-2005 [December 8,
2016]. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh, North
Carolina.

North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). 2014. Final 2014 Category 5 Water
Quality Assessments-303(d) List. Available: https://ncdenr.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-
public/Water%20Quality/Planning/TMDL/303d/2014/2014_303dlist.pdf [December 8,
2016]. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Raleigh, North Carolina.

North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). 2016a. River Basin Classification
Schedule (online). Available: https://deq.nc.gov/river-basin-classification-schedule
[December 8, 2016]. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Raleigh.

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 36
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). 2016b. Draft 2016 Category 5
Assessments EPA Submittal -303(d) List. Available:
https://ncdenr.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-
public/Water%20Quality/Planning/TMDL/303d/2016/NC_2016_Category_5_20160606.
pdf [December 8, 2016]. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Raleigh,
North Carolina.

North Carolina Division of Environmental and Natural Resources. 2005. Updated Draft Manual
of Stormwater Best Management Practices.

North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). 2016. Standard Operating Procedures
for Collection and Analysis of Benthic Macroinvertebrates (Version 5.0). (online).
Available:
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Environmental%20Sciences/BAU/NCDWRM
acroinvertebrate-SOP-February%202016_final.pdf

North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2009. Small Streams Biocriteria
Development. Available:
http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=2d54ad23-0345-4d6e-82fd-
04005f48eaa7&groupId=38364

North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP). 2009. Cape Fear River Basin
Restoration Priorities 2009 (online). Available :
http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=864e82e8-725c-415e-8ed9-
c72dfcb55012&groupId=60329

North Carolina Stream Functional Assessment Team. (NC SFAT 2015). N.C. Stream Assessment
Method (NC SAM) User Manual. Version 2.1.

North Carolina Wetland Functional Assessment Team. (NC WFAT 2010). N.C. Wetland
Assessment Method (NC WAM) User Manual. Version 4.1.

Rosgen, D. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology (Publisher). Pagosa Springs,
Colorado

Rosgen, D. 2009. A Practical Method of Computing Streambank Erosion Rate (online). Available:
http://www.u-s-c.org/html/documents/Erosionrates.pdf.

Rosgen, D. 2011. Estimating Sediment Loads using the Bank Assessment of Non-point source
Consequences of Sediment (BANCS). Watershed Assessment of River Stability and
Sediment Supply (WARSSS). Hagerstown , Maryland.

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

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 37
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
Parks and Recreation, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources. Raleigh, North Carolina.

Simon A, Hupp CR. 1986. Geomorphic and Vegetative Recovery Processes Along Modified
Tennessee Streams: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Disturbed Fluvial Systems. Forest
Hydrology and Watershed Management. IAHS-AISH Publ.167.

Stormwater Manager’s Resource Center (SMRC). 2016. The Simple Method to Calculate Urban
Stormwater Loads. Available:
http://www.stormwatercenter.net/monitoring%20and%20assessment/simple%20meth/sim
ple.htm

United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2010. Interim Regional Supplement to the
Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual, Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Region.

United States Census Bureau (USCB). 2013. Population estimates V.2013.
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/37000.html

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2016. Web Soil Survey (online). Available:
http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx [August 2016].

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1960. Soil Survey of Alamance County, North
Carolina. Soil Conservation Service.

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2015. Animal Manure Management (NRCS)
available at http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/nhj/technical/cp/cta/?

United States Geological Survey (USGS). 2006. Estimating the Magnitude and Frequency of
Floods in Rural Basins of North Carolina – Recompiled. USGS Water-Resources
Investigations Report 01-4207. Raleigh, North Carolina.

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) Appendices
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018

APPENDIX A
FIGURES

Figure 1. Project Location
Figure 2. Hydrologic Unit Map
Figure 3. Topography and Drainage Area
Figure 4. Existing Conditions
Figure 5A. Cedarock Reference Drainage Area
Figure 5B. Cedarock Reference Existing Conditions
Figure 5C. Cedarock Reference Reach Dimension, Pattern, and Profile
Figures 6A-B. Restoration Plan
Figure 7. Proposed Dimension, Pattern, and Profile
Figures 8A-B. Typical Structure Details
Figure 9. Planting Plan
Figure 10. Monitoring Plan
Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed, U. S. Geological Survey - National Geospatial Program. Data Refreshed October,
2017.
FIGURE
Drawn by:
Date:
Scale:
Project No.:
KRJ
NOV 2017
1:20,000
17-009
Title:
Project:
Prepared for:
Alamance County, NC
MAJOR HILLSTREAM ANDWETLANDMITIGATION SITE
PROJECTLOCATION
1
³
Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic
Society, i-cubed
Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic
Society, i-cubed, U. S. Geological Survey -
National Geospatial Program. Data
Refreshed October, 2017.
Directions to the Site from Raleigh:- Take US-64 West out of Raleigh and travel 25 miles,- Take exit 381 and turn right onto NC-87 N,- After 5 miles, take a left onto Castle Rock Farm Road,- After 5.8 miles, Castle Rock Farm Road becomes Old Switchboard Road,- Continue for 2.1 miles, turn right onto Lindley Mill Road,- After 0.5 mile, turn left onto Major Hill Road,- Site can be accessed from Burnett Church Road which is on the left after 1 mile.- Site Latitude, Longitude 35.873206, -79.360906 (NAD83/WGS84)
USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Map (Saxapahaw, Silk Hope, Snow Camp, and Crutchfield Crossroads, NC Quads)
Snow Camp
¬«87
LindleyMillRoadBet
hel
Sout
hForkRoadE G reensboroChap elHi l l R o a d
SnowCampRoadB
eth
el
S
o
uthForkRoad
Ma jo r H ill R o a d
Ol
d
S
wit
c
h
b
oar
d
R
o
a
d
Copyright:© 2014 DeLorme
FIGURE
Drawn by:
Date:
Scale:
Project No.:
KRJ
NOV 2017
1:375,000
17-009
Title:
Project:
Prepared for:
Alamance County, NC
HYDROLOGICUNIT MAP
2
³
Location of Major Hill Stream and
Wetland Mitigation Site within
USGS Hydrologic Unit andTargeted Local Watershed03030002050050
0 10 20 305Miles
Legend
Easement
USGS Hydrologic Unit 03030002
14 Digit Hydrologic Unit Boundaries
Targeted Local Watersheds
MAJOR HILLSTREAM AND WETLANDMITIGATION SITE
FIGURE
Drawn by:
Date:
Scale:
Project No.:
KRJ
NOV 2017
1:12,000
17-009
Title:
Project:
Prepared for:
Alamance County, NC
TOPOGRAPHY AND DRAINAGEAREA
3
MAJOR HILLSTREAM ANDWETLANDMITIGATION SITE
Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed NCCGIA
Legend
Easement = 16.7 ac
UT 1 Drainage Area = 71.7 ac (0.11 sq mi)
UT 3 Drainage Area = 444.7 ac (0.70 sq mi)
UT 2 Drainage Area = 17.2 ac (0.001 sq mi)
!.
!.
#*
Lc
Wd
HdC
HdB
GaC2
ObB
GaB2
ObC
AaB
OaB
GaB2
EaC
GaB2
EaB2
HdB2
GaB
AaB
GaC2
GbC3
HdC
HdC
ObB2
GaC
HdB
OaB2
Mc
W
GaE
Lc
GbC3
HdC
Sb
ObC
HdB
AaB
GaC2
TaC2
GaB
GaB2
Ld
GaB2
HdB2
GaC2
Ld
GaB2
GaC2
GbD3
GaC2
GbD3
GbD3
W
ObB
GaB
GbC3
HdB2
GaB2
GaC2
HdC
GbD3
GbC3
W
GaB2
GbD3
HeC3
EbC3
GaB2
HdB2
TbC3
TaB2
HdB2GaB2 NCCGIA
FIGURE
Drawn by:
Date:
Scale:
Project No.:
KRJ
NOV 2017
1:4000
17-009
Title:
Project:
Prepared for:
Alamance County, NC
EXISTINGCONDITIONS
4
³
0 1,000 2,000500Feet
Legend
Easement = 16.7 acres
Perennial Stream = 4,700 linear feet
Intermittent Stream = 630 linear feet
Jurisdictional Wetlands = 0.52 acres
Drained Hydric Soil = 0.30 acres
Wetland Under Impoundment = 0.24 acres
!.NCDWQ Form
#*Soil Profile
NRCS Soil Boundary
MAJOR HILLSTREAM ANDWETLANDMITIGATION SITE
NCSAM Form
Reach 1
Soil Map Unit Soil Series
EaC Efland silt loam, 6 to 10 % slopes
GaC2 Georgeville silt loam, 6 to 10 % slopes, eroded
HdC Herndon silt loam, 6 to 10 % slopes
Lc Local alluvial land, poorly drained
ObC Orange silt loam moderately well drained, 6 to 10 % slopes
NCSAM Form
Reach 2
U
T-3
U T -3 UT-2UT-1Water Quality
Monitoring Point 1
Water Quality
Monitoring Point 2
!(
Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed
Axiom Environmental218 Snow AvenueRaleigh, NC 27603(919) 215-1693
CEDAROCK REFERENCE DRAINAGE AREA
MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND
MITIGATION SITE
Alamance County, North Carolina
Dwn. by.
Date:
Project:
FIGURE
5AWGL
Mar 2014
17-009
³0 640 1,280 1,920320Feet
!(
NC OneMap, NC Center for Geographic Information and Analysis, NC
911 Board
0 640 1,280 1,920320Feet³1:8600
1:8600
Legend - Drainage Area Topography
!(Cedarock Reference Site
Cedarock Reference Drainage Area = 0.21 sq mi
Legend - Land Use
!(Cedarock Reference Site
Cedarock Reference Drainage Area = 0.21 sq mi
6
0
0
560
5
4
0 580520620
560
540560540NC OneMap, NC Center for Geographic Information and Analysis, NC
911 Board
Axiom Environmental218 Snow AvenueRaleigh, NC 27603(919) 215-1693
EXISTING CONDITIONS
CEDAROCK REFERENCE REACH
MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND
MITIGATION SITE
Alamance County, North Carolina
Dwn. by.
Date:
Project:
FIGURE
5BWGL
Mar 2014
17-009
³0 250 500 750125Feet
Legend
Cedarock Reference Site
Contour at 20 feet
Contour at 4 feet
Contour at 100 feet
Contour at 500 feet
Streams
929496981001021041060 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 4502722732742752760 1020304027427527627727801020302742752762772782790 10203027627727827928001020302772782792802812822830 102030
Vegetation AssociationTOTALArea (acres)8.11Species # planted* % of total # planted* % of total # planted** % of total # planted** % of total # plantedRiver birch (Betula nigra) 75 10 -- -- -- -- 204 5 279Ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana) -- -- 748 20 -- -- -- -- 748Buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis)---- ----520 -- --5Red bud (Cercis canadensis) -- -- 561 15 -- -- -- -- 561Sweet pepperbush (Clethra alnifolia) ---- ----415 -- --4Silky dogwood (Cornus amomum) 75 10 -- -- 4 15 816 20 895Persimmon (Diospyros virginiana) -- -- 374 10 -- -- -- -- 374White ash (Fraxinus americana) -- -- 187 5 -- -- -- -- 187Green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica) 150 20 -- -- -- -- 816 20 966Blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum) ---- ----52020455Tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera) 7510-------- -- --75Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis) 150 20 -- -- -- -- 816 20 966Black gum (Nyssa sylvatica)-- -- 561 15 -- ------ 561Water oak (Quercus nigra)112 15 748 20 -- -- 408 10 1268Willow oak (Quercus phellos)112 15 561 15 -- -- 408 10 1081Black willow (Salix nigra)-- -- -- -- -- -- 408 10 408Elderberry (Sambucus canadensis) ---- ----520 -- --5Possumhaw (Viburnum nudum) ---- ----310 -- --3TOTAL 748 100 3740 100 27 100 4080 100 8391* Planted at a density of 680 stems/acre.** Planted at a density of 2720 stems/acre.Piedmont/Low Mountain Alluvial Forest*Dry-Mesic Oak-Hickory Forest*Marsh Treatment Wetland**Stream-side Assemblage**1.1 5.5 0.01 1.5

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) Appendices
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018

Appendix B
Existing Stream Data
Table B1. Major Hill Morphological Stream Characteristics
Figure B1. Cross-section Locations
Existing Stream Cross-section Data
Baseline Water Quality Data
BEHI & NBS
NC SAM Forms
NC WAM Forms
NCDWQ Stream Forms

Table B1. Major Hill Morphological Stream Characteristics
Stream Type
Drainage Area (mi2)
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (Abkf)8.0 14.7
Existing Cross-Sectional Area at TOB (Aexisting)8.0 14.7
Mean: 8.1 Mean: 11.0 Mean:Mean:Mean:Mean:
Range: 8.0 - 12.1 Range: 10.7 - 11.3 Range:3.8 to 8.1 Range:5.6 to 6.4 Range:4.9 to 8.7 Range: 6.8 to 7.8
Mean: 0.8 Mean: 1.4 Mean:Mean:Mean:Mean:
Range: 0.8 - 1.0 Range: 1.3 - 1.4 Range:0.3 to 0.7 Range:0.4 to 0.5 Range:0.4 to 0.8 Range: 0.5 to 0.6
Mean: 1.4 Mean: 2.0 Mean:Mean:Mean:Mean:
Range: 1.1 - 1.4 Range: 1.9 - 2.0 Range:0.7 to 1.3 Range:0.5 to 0.7 Range:0.7 to 1.2 Range: 0.6 to 0.8
Mean: 9.3 Mean: 10.5 Mean: Mean:
Range: 8.9 - 9.7 Range: Range: 6.0 to 8.4 Range: 7.3 to 10.2
Mean: 1.8 Mean: 2.7 Mean: Mean:
Range: 1.5 - 2.1 Range: Range: 0.6 to 0.9 Range: 0.7 to 1.1
Mean: 18 Mean: 131 Mean:Mean:Mean:Mean:
Range: 15 - 25 Range: 122 - 140 Range:11 to 48 Range:20 to 60 Range:9 to 21 Range: 25 to 75
Mean: 2.1 Mean: 12 Mean:Mean:Mean:Mean:
Range: 1.9 - 2.2 Range: 11 - 13 Range:1.4 to 12.6 Range:3.6 to 9.3 Range:1.4 to 4.3 Range: 3.7 to 9.6
Mean: 10.1 Mean: 9 Mean:Mean:Mean:Mean:
Range: 8.0 - 15.1 Range: 8 - 9 Range:5.4 to 27.0 Range:12.0 to 16.0 Range:6.1 to 21.8 Range: 12.0 to 16.0
Mean: 1.4 Mean: 1.4 Mean:Mean:Mean:Mean:
Range: 1.4 - 1.8 Range: 1.4 - 1.5 Range:1.4 to 2.3 Range:1.2 to 1.5 Range:1.4 to 2.0 Range: 1.2 to 1.5
Mean: 1.0 Mean: 1.4 Mean:Mean:Mean:Mean:
Range: 1.0 - 1.8 Range: Range:1.0 to 1.7 Range:1.0 to 1.3 Range:1.6 to 2.8 Range: 1.0 to 1.3
Maximum Pool Depth / Bankfull Mean: 1.9 Mean: 2 Mean: Mean:
Mean Depth (Dpool/Dbkf)Range: 0 - 2.1 Range: Range: 1.3 to 2.1 Range: 1.3 to 2.1
Pool Width / Bankfull Mean: 1.1 Mean: 1 Mean: Mean:
Width (Wpool/Wbkf)Range: 0 - 1.2 Range: Range: 1.0 to 1.4 Range: 1.0 to 1.4
Pool Area / Bankfull Mean: 1.4 Mean: 1.4 Mean: Mean:
Cross Sectional Area Range: 0 - 1.6 Range: Range: 1.1 to 1.6 Range: 1.1 to 1.6
Med: 37.2 Med: 44.3 Med: Med:
Range: 25 - 69 Range: 22 - 81 Range: 18.1 to 48.3 Range: 21.9 to 58.4
Med: 68.4 Med: 62.9 Med: Med:
Range: 44 - 116 Range: 10 - 91 Range: 36.2 to 72.4 Range: 43.8 to 87.5
Med: 22.8 Med: 29.8 Med: Med:
Range: 20 - 38 Range: 17 - 36 Range: 18.1 to 36.2 Range: 21.9 to 43.8
Med: 16.5 Med: 30.6 Med: Med:
Range: 11 - 27 Range: 9 - 113 Range: 12.1 to 60.3 Range: 14.6 to 72.9
Sinuosity (Sin)
Pool to Pool Spacing/Med: 4.6 Med: 4 Med: Med:
Bankfull Width (Lp-p/Wbkf)Range: 3.1 - 8.4 Range: 2.0 - 7.4 Range: 3.0 to 8.0 Range: 3.0 to 8.0
Meander Length/Med: 8.4 Med: 5.7 Med: Med:
Bankfull Width (Lm/Wbkf)Range: 5.5 - 14.3 Range: 0.9 - 8.3 Range: 6.0 to 12.0 Range: 6.0 to 12.0
Meander Width Ratio Med: 2.8 Med: 2.7 Med: Med:
(Wbelt/Wbkf)Range: 2.4 - 4.7 Range: 1.5 - 3.5 Range: 3.0 to 6.0 Range: 3.0 to 6.0
Radius of Curvature/Med: 2.0 Med: 2.8 Med: Med:
Bankfull Width (Rc/Wbkf)Range: 1.4 - 3.3 Range: 0.8 - 10.3 Range: 2.0 to 10.0 Range: 2.0 to 10.0
Mean: 0.0316 Mean: 0.0098 Mean: Mean:
Range:0.01 - 0.0576 Range:0.002 - 0.01198 Range:0.0268 to 0.0401 Range:0.0198 to 0.0297
Mean: 0.0007 Mean: 0.0006 Mean: Mean:
Range: 0 - 0.018 Range: 0 - 0.004 Range: 0.0000 to 0.0156 Range: 0.0000 to 0.0116
Mean: 0.0353 Mean: Mean: Mean:
Range: 0 - 0.3565 Range: Range: 0.0000 to 0.0178 Range: 0.0000 to 0.0132
Mean: 0.0029 Mean: Mean: Mean:
Range: 0 - 0.0431 Range: Range: 0.0000 to 0.0178 Range: 0.0000 to 0.0132
Riffle Slope/ Water Surface Mean: 1.2 Mean: 1.6 Mean: Mean:
Slope (Sriffle/Save)Range:0.39 - 2.23 Range:0 - 3.7 Range:1.2 to 1.8 Range:1.2 to 1.8
Pool Slope/Water Surface Mean: 0.0 Mean: 0.1 Mean: Mean:
Slope (Spool/Save)Range: 0 - 0.70 Range: 0 - 0.8 Range: 0.0 to 0.7 Range: 0.0 to 0.7
Run Slope/Water Surface Mean: 1.37 Mean: Mean: Mean:
Slope (Srun/Save)Range: 0 - 13.82 Range: Range: 0.0 to 0.8 Range: 0.0 to 0.8
Glide Slope/Water Surface Mean: 0.11 Mean: Mean: Mean:
Slope (Sglide/Save)Range: 0 - 1.67 Range: Range: 0.0 to 0.8 Range: 0.0 to 0.8
* Causey Farm Reference includes measurments from a Reference Site measured in 2004.
0.40
51.3
24.1
18.1
4.0
0.11
0.0022
0.0089
0.0025
1.60
0.10
No distinct repetitive pattern of
riffles and pools due to
staightening activities
No distinct repetitive pattern of
riffles and pools due to
staightening activities
No distinct repetitive pattern of
riffles and pools due to
staightening activities
No distinct repetitive pattern of
riffles and pools due to
staightening activities
No distinct repetitive pattern of
riffles and pools due to
staightening activities
No distinct repetitive pattern of
riffles and pools due to
staightening activities
8.5
4.0
3.0
0.0357
No distinct repetitive pattern of
riffles and pools due to
staightening activities
No distinct repetitive pattern of
riffles and pools due to
staightening activities
No distinct repetitive pattern of
riffles and pools due to
staightening activities
No distinct repetitive pattern of
riffles and pools due to
staightening activities
No distinct repetitive pattern of
riffles and pools due to
staightening activities
No distinct repetitive pattern of
riffles and pools due to
staightening activities
6.6
0.8
1.9
1.1
PROPOSED
0.6 0.7
8.0
14.0
1.4
1.4
0.6
0.9
2.2
14.0
1.4
1.0
13.1
1.6
2.2
2.6
5.6 6.0 6.7
E/C 4
0.05
2.6
2.6 - 7.3
9.5
1.26
0.0147
0.0185
Existing UT 1 (Downstream)
40
6.6
14
29.2
Pattern Variables
Existing UT 1 (Downstream)
Cg 5
0.09
14.2
3.8
7.8 - 25.7
Variables REFERENCE -
CEDAROCK PARK ProposedExisting UT 1 (Upstream)
1.20
Radius of Curvature (Rc)
2.6
REFERENCE - CAUSEY*
FARM
0.4
Eb 4
Belt Width (Wbelt)
1.46
9.5
Dimension Variables
Width / Depth Ratio (Wbkf/Dbkf)
Entrenchment Ratio (Wfpa/Wbkf)
Bankfull Maximum Depth (Dmax)
28.8
Meander Length (Lm)
E 5
0.630.21
Profile Variables
60.6
Bankfull Width (Wbkf)
Bankfull Mean Depth (Dbkf)
Pattern Ratios
Dimension Ratios
Pool Width (Wpool)
Maximum Pool Depth (Dpool)
Width of Floodprone Area (Wfpa)
Max. Dbkf / Dbkf Ratio
Low Bank Height / Max. Dbkf Ratio
REFERENCE -
CEDAROCK PARK
REFERENCE - CAUSEY*
FARM Existing UT 1 (Upstream)Proposed
Pattern Variables
Pool to Pool Spacing (Lp-p)
Variables
24.1
0.0077
Riffle Slope (Sriffle)
Valley Slope (Svalley)
1.07
Average Water Surface Slope (Save)0.0225
0.0241
Pattern Ratios
8.5
Profile Ratios
0.0053
Run Slope (Srun)
Pool Slope (Spool)
0.0258
4.0
3.0
Glide Slope (Sglide)
0.0310
E/C 4
0.05
5.8
PROPOSED
7.3
3.8
3.8
Dimension Variables
14.2
0.09
Cg 5
1.0
50
6.9
Dimension Ratios
27
0.5
0.9
0.5
0.0264
0.0017
0.0066
0.0018
1.9
1.4
0.0185
21.9
1.12
4.0
0.0241
1.1
0.0165
1.0
0.0223
1.08
62.0
29.2
0.40
0.10
0.11
1.60
13.4
1.9
1.4
Profile Ratios
Profile Variables
B
Cross SectionCross Sectionsection:Major Hill - XS 10section:Major Hill - XS 11RiffleRiffle------------description:Major Hill - XS 10description:Major Hill - XS 11height of instrument (ft):100.00height of instrument (ft):100.00omit distance FSFS FS W fpa channel Manning'somit distance FSFS FS W fpa channel Manning'snotes pt. (ft) (ft) elevation bankfull top of bank (ft) slope (%) "n"notes pt. (ft) (ft) elevation bankfull top of bank (ft) slope (%) "n"###0 21.2246678.7753425.08 24.64 12.0###0 22.3024777.6975326.28 25.76 11.0###11.32494 21.9102678.08974 74.92 75.36###13.38725 22.8823977.11762 73.72 74.24###32.716 23.0377176.96229###28.67774 23.8144476.18556###40.51483 23.7568476.24316 dimensions###38.96493 24.9028475.09717 dimensions###46.75931 24.294575.70552.6 x-section area0.5 d mean###46.66575 25.759774.24032.6 x-section area0.3 d mean###50.87182 24.6385575.361455.5 width5.8 wet P###49.10806 26.749473.25068.1 width8.6 wet P###54.64443 25.8137574.186260.7 d max0.4 hyd radi###52.4095 26.2779173.722090.7 d max0.3 hyd radi###56.87534 25.6656574.334351.2 bank ht11.7 w/d ratio###54.08237 26.9398973.060111.2 bank ht25.2 w/d ratio###59.15972 24.2512775.7487312.0 W flood prone area 2.2 ent ratio###55.43899 26.8478573.1521511.0 W flood prone area 1.4 ent ratio###63.51316 23.1205576.87945###56.78182 25.6249774.37504###72.44177 21.0870778.91293 hydraulics###66.14574 24.1920875.80792 hydraulics###80.25382 19.8581780.141830.0 velocity (ft/sec)###76.71326 22.5825377.417470.0 velocity (ft/sec)###92.96824 18.356581.64350.0 discharge rate, Q (cfs)###84.04721.2440778.755930.0 discharge rate, Q (cfs)###103.14116.8809883.119020.00shear stress ((lbs/ft sq)####N/A0.00 shear stress ((lbs/ft sq)###112.3654 15.6845584.315450.00 shear velocity (ft/sec)####N/A0.00 shear velocity (ft/sec)####N/A0.000 unit stream power (lbs/ft/sec)####N/A0.000 unit stream power (lbs/ft/sec)####N/A0.00 Froude number####N/A0.00 Froude number####N/A0.0 friction factor u/u*####N/A0.0 friction factor u/u*####N/A0.0threshold grain size (mm)####N/A0.0threshold grain size (mm)####N/A####N/A####N/Acheck from channel material####N/Acheck from channel material####N/A0 measured D84 (mm)####N/A0 measured D84 (mm)####N/A0.0 relative roughness 0.0 fric. factor####N/A0.0 relative roughness 0.0 fric. factor####N/A0.000 Manning's n from channel material####N/A0.000 Manning's n from channel material####N/A####N/A73.57474.57575.57676.57777.57840 45 50 55 60 65 70Elevation (ft)Width from River Left to Right (ft)Major Hill - XS 10 Riffle ---72.57373.57474.57575.57640 45 50 55 60 65 70Elevation (ft)Width from River Left to Right (ft)Major Hill - XS 11 Riffle ---
Cross SectionCross Sectionsection:Major Hill - XS 12section:Major Hill - XS 13RiffleRiffle------------description:Major Hill - XS 12description:Major Hill - XS 13height of instrument (ft):100.00height of instrument (ft):100.00omit distance FSFS FS W fpa channel Manning'somit distance FSFS FS W fpa channel Manning'snotes pt. (ft) (ft) elevation bankfull top of bank (ft) slope (%) "n"notes pt. (ft) (ft) elevation bankfull top of bank (ft) slope (%) "n"###0 25.5473774.4526328.5 28.28 35.0###0 29.7158770.2841331.2 31.2 48.0###14.86919 26.3909473.6090671.5 71.72###15.67876 30.1329569.8670568.8 68.8###22.17293 26.764673.2354###15.90313 30.1445869.85542###32.81466 27.4814572.51855 dimensions###28.56359 30.2292369.77077 dimensions###42.97031 27.7181672.281852.6 x-section area0.5 d mean###34.08261 30.3565269.643482.6 x-section area0.7 d mean###55.63639 28.2769771.723035.0 width5.6 wet P###38.69984 31.3070668.692943.8 width5.0 wet P###57.4224 28.7563471.243661.0 d max0.5 hyd radi###40.47686 32.3313767.668631.3 d max0.5 hyd radi###59.01435 29.5151870.484821.2 bank ht9.7 w/d ratio###41.42271 32.5424167.457591.3 bank ht5.3 w/d ratio###60.03552 29.4117670.5882435.0 W flood prone area 6.9 ent ratio###41.93971 31.1859168.8140948.0 W flood prone area 12.8 ent ratio###60.79263 28.7109271.28908###45.98856 30.826469.1736###63.01452 28.0558571.94415 hydraulics###51.54829 30.7478769.25213 hydraulics###66.99702 28.122771.877310.0 velocity (ft/sec)###56.63955 30.1040269.895980.0 velocity (ft/sec)###70.58041 28.1712371.828770.0 discharge rate, Q (cfs)###61.4436329.1863370.813670.0 discharge rate, Q (cfs)###74.77227 27.3223372.677670.00shear stress ((lbs/ft sq)###66.5558928.2122371.787780.00 shear stress ((lbs/ft sq)###81.30691 25.9230974.076910.00 shear velocity (ft/sec)####N/A0.00 shear velocity (ft/sec)####N/A0.000 unit stream power (lbs/ft/sec)####N/A0.000 unit stream power (lbs/ft/sec)####N/A0.00 Froude number####N/A0.00 Froude number####N/A0.0 friction factor u/u*####N/A0.0 friction factor u/u*####N/A0.0threshold grain size (mm)####N/A0.0threshold grain size (mm)####N/A####N/A####N/Acheck from channel material####N/Acheck from channel material####N/A0 measured D84 (mm)####N/A0 measured D84 (mm)####N/A0.0 relative roughness 0.0 fric. factor####N/A0.0 relative roughness 0.0 fric. factor####N/A0.000 Manning's n from channel material####N/A0.000 Manning's n from channel material####N/A####N/A7070.57171.57272.57340 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80Elevation (ft)Width from River Left to Right (ft)Major Hill - XS 12 Riffle ---6767.56868.56969.57070.57120 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60Elevation (ft)Width from River Left to Right (ft)Major Hill - XS 13 Riffle ---
Cross SectionCross Sectionsection:Major Hill - XS 16section:Major Hill - XS 18RiffleRiffle------------description:Major Hill - XS 16description:Major Hill - XS 18height of instrument (ft):100.00height of instrument (ft):100.00 omit distance FS FS FS W fpa channel Manning's omit distance FS FS FS W fpa channel Manning'snotes pt. (ft) (ft) elevation bankfull top of bank (ft) slope (%) "n" notes pt. (ft) (ft) elevation bankfull top of bank (ft) slope (%) "n"###0 29.7498570.2501534.04 32.58 15.0###0 32.899167.100936.5 35.64 8.5###12.87996 30.7089369.29107 65.96 67.42###7.487308 33.5742166.42579 63.5 64.36###27.48769 31.7532568.24675###14.19865 34.4018865.59812###40.52665 32.2124767.78753 dimensions###19.6971 35.3645464.63546 dimensions###53.12952 32.3823167.61769 3.8 x-section area 0.4 d mean###22.26744 36.1218763.87813 3.8 x-section area 0.6 d mean###56.99437 33.6935666.30644 8.7 width 8.9 wet P###23.77514 36.7221463.27786 6.1 width 6.7 wet P###59.55431 34.824465.1756 0.8 d max 0.4 hyd radi###25.85423 37.2835462.71646 0.9 d max 0.6 hyd radi###61.23245 34.7873965.21261 2.2 bank ht 20.0 w/d ratio###27.09172 37.4126262.58738 1.8 bank ht 9.9 w/d ratio###64.5982 34.2523765.74763 15.0 W flood prone area 1.7 ent ratio###28.94069 37.2159162.78409 8.5 W flood prone area 1.4 ent ratio###68.71221 33.793266.2068###29.82648 35.636864.36321###74.24095 32.5816167.41839 hydraulics###35.19068 35.1216464.87836 hydraulics###82.50737 31.743668.2564 0.0 velocity (ft/sec)###43.2753 34.8492365.15077 0.0 velocity (ft/sec)###88.53412 31.1378668.86214 0.0 discharge rate, Q (cfs)###49.9616533.7308466.269160.0 discharge rate, Q (cfs)####N/A0.00shear stress ((lbs/ft sq)###55.340132.8507967.149210.00 shear stress ((lbs/ft sq)####N/A0.00 shear velocity (ft/sec)####N/A0.00 shear velocity (ft/sec)####N/A0.000 unit stream power (lbs/ft/sec)####N/A0.000 unit stream power (lbs/ft/sec)####N/A0.00 Froude number####N/A0.00 Froude number####N/A0.0 friction factor u/u*####N/A0.0 friction factor u/u*####N/A0.0threshold grain size (mm)####N/A0.0threshold grain size (mm)####N/A####N/A####N/Acheck from channel material####N/Acheck from channel material####N/A0 measured D84 (mm)####N/A0 measured D84 (mm)####N/A0.0 relative roughness 0.0 fric. factor####N/A0.0 relative roughness 0.0 fric. factor####N/A0.000 Manning's n from channel material####N/A0.000 Manning's n from channel material####N/A####N/A646566676869707130 40 50 60 70 80 90Elevation (ft)Width from River Left to Right (ft)Major Hill - XS 16 Riffle ---626364656667680 102030405060Elevation (ft)Width from River Left to Right (ft)Major Hill - XS 18 Riffle ---
Cross SectionCross Sectionsection:Major Hill - XS 19section:Major Hill - XS 21RiffleRiffle------------description:Major Hill - XS 19description:Major Hill - XS 21height of instrument (ft):100.00height of instrument (ft):100.00 omit distance FS FS FS W fpa channel Manning's omit distance FS FS FS W fpa channel Manning'snotes pt. (ft) (ft) elevation bankfull top of bank (ft) slope (%) "n" notes pt. (ft) (ft) elevation bankfull top of bank (ft) slope (%) "n"###0 34.3953965.6046137.66 36.51 10.0###0 35.6769564.3230538.45 37.77 21.0###4.000122 35.3859264.61409 62.34 63.49###11.35197 36.8698363.13017 61.55 62.23###6.863603 36.1921263.80788###21.68422 37.0534862.94652###11.74897 38.0285461.97146 dimensions###31.43169 37.2986862.70132 dimensions###13.24583 38.3111861.68882 3.8 x-section area 0.5 d mean###35.97616 37.6425662.35744 3.8 x-section area 0.8 d mean###17.09316 38.3397561.66025 7.2 width 7.5 wet P###37.68979 39.3568860.64312 4.9 width 5.7 wet P###19.39201 36.506963.49311 0.7 d max 0.5 hyd radi###38.82678 39.693560.3065 1.2 d max 0.7 hyd radi###29.34762 36.3905263.60948 1.8 bank ht 13.6 w/d ratio###40.5001 39.2294560.77055 1.9 bank ht 6.4 w/d ratio###45.17769 36.3551763.64483 10.0 W flood prone area 1.4 ent ratio###42.79461 37.7655762.23443 21.0 W flood prone area 4.3 ent ratio###57.35287 36.5969763.40303###49.53491 37.2880562.71195###64.08076 36.2152663.78475 hydraulics###61.27242 36.9219863.07802 hydraulics####N/A0.0 velocity (ft/sec)###74.35441 36.6098263.39018 0.0 velocity (ft/sec)####N/A0.0 discharge rate, Q (cfs)####N/A0.0discharge rate, Q (cfs)####N/A0.00 shear stress ((lbs/ft sq)####N/A0.00shear stress ((lbs/ft sq)####N/A0.00shear velocity (ft/sec)####N/A0.00 shear velocity (ft/sec)####N/A0.000 unit stream power (lbs/ft/sec)####N/A0.000 unit stream power (lbs/ft/sec)####N/A0.00 Froude number####N/A0.00 Froude number####N/A0.0 friction factor u/u*####N/A0.0 friction factor u/u*####N/A0.0threshold grain size (mm)####N/A0.0threshold grain size (mm)####N/A####N/A####N/Acheck from channel material####N/Acheck from channel material####N/A0 measured D84 (mm)####N/A0 measured D84 (mm)####N/A0.0 relative roughness 0.0 fric. factor####N/A0.0 relative roughness 0.0 fric. factor####N/A0.000 Manning's n from channel material####N/A0.000 Manning's n from channel material####N/A####N/A6161.56262.56363.56464.56565.5660 10203040506070Elevation (ft)Width from River Left to Right (ft)Major Hill - XS 19 Riffle ---6060.56161.56262.56363.56464.5650 1020304050607080Elevation (ft)Width from River Left to Right (ft)Major Hill - XS 21 Riffle ---
Major Hill Stream Restoration Site
Baseline Water Quality Data
7/28/2017 14‐Aug‐17
UPSTREAM
TDS (ppm)110.1 147
TDS (mg/l)109.1 149
Cond (ms)159.2 215
Temp 25.4 22.6
DO (mg/l)‐1.93
DO (ppm)‐1.06
PH 6.61 6.37
DOWNSTREAM
TDS  (ppm)62.6 86.8
TDS  (mg/l)64.6 83.5
Cond (ms)92.1 128.3
Temp 24.6 22.1
DO (mg/l)‐3.06
DO (ppm)‐2.53
PH 6.65 6.22
Station Bank BEHI NBS Erosion Rate Length Bank Height Erosion
1 120 left low low 0 120 1 0.0
2 510 left low low 0 390 1 0.0
3 600 left moderate low 0.02 90 1.8 3.2
4 760 left high low 0.1 160 2.2 35.2
5 925 left high low 0.1 165 3 49.5
6 1035 left moderate low 0.02 110 2 4.4
7 1090 left high low 0.1 55 2 11.0
8 4250 left low low 0 3160 1 0.0
9 0.0
10 120 right low low 0 120 1 0.0
11 510 right low low 0 390 1 0.0
12 600 right moderate low 0.02 90 1.8 3.2
13 760 right high low 0.1 160 2.2 35.2
14 925 right high low 0.1 165 3 49.5
15 1035 right moderate low 0.02 110 2 4.4
16 1090 right high low 0.1 55 2 11.0
17 4250 right low low 0 3160 1 0.0
18 0.0
19 0.0
20 0.0
21 0.0
22
23
24
206.7
7.7
10.0
0.00
Stream UT 1
Site Major Hill  Steam and Wetland Mitigation Site
Observers Grant and Alison
Bank Length 8500
Date 13‐Dec‐16
Sum erosion sub‐totals for each BEHI/NBS Total Erosion (ft3/yr)
Divide total erosion (ft3) by 27
Multiply Total erosion (yard3) by 1.3
Erosion per unit length
Total Erosion (yd/yr)
Total Erosion (tons/yr)
Total Erosion (Tons/yr/ft)
Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1

Stream Site Name Major Hill UT1 (Upstream) Date of Assessment 12/13/16
Stream Category Pa1 Assessor Name/Organization Axiom Environmental

Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) YES
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N) YES
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Intermittent

Function Class Rating Summary
USACE/
All Streams
NCDWR
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology MEDIUM MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation HIGH HIGH
(4) Floodplain Access HIGH HIGH
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer LOW LOW
(4) Microtopography HIGH HIGH
(3) Stream Stability LOW LOW
(4) Channel Stability LOW LOW
(4) Sediment Transport LOW LOW
(4) Stream Geomorphology MEDIUM MEDIUM
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA NA
(1) Water Quality
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation LOW LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration LOW LOW
(3) Thermoregulation LOW LOW
(2) Indicators of Stressors YES YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA NA
(1) Habitat LOW LOW
(2) In-stream Habitat LOW MEDIUM
(3) Baseflow MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3) Substrate LOW LOW
(3) Stream Stability LOW LOW
(3) In-stream Habitat LOW HIGH
(2) Stream-side Habitat LOW LOW
(3) Stream-side Habitat LOW LOW
(3) Thermoregulation LOW LOW
(2) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat
NA NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat
NA NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA NA
Overall

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1

Stream Site Name Major Hill UT1
(Downstream) Date of Assessment 12/13/16
Stream Category Pa1 Assessor Name/Organization Axiom Environmental

Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) YES
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N) YES
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Perennial

Function Class Rating Summary
USACE/
All Streams
NCDWR
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology LOW
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Flood Flow LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW
(4) Floodplain Access MEDIUM
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer LOW
(4) Microtopography LOW
(3) Stream Stability LOW
(4) Channel Stability LOW
(4) Sediment Transport LOW
(4) Stream Geomorphology HIGH
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(1) Water Quality
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration LOW
(3) Thermoregulation MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA
(1) Habitat LOW
(2) In-stream Habitat LOW
(3) Baseflow HIGH
(3) Substrate LOW
(3) Stream Stability LOW
(3) In-stream Habitat LOW
(2) Stream-side Habitat LOW
(3) Stream-side Habitat LOW
(3) Thermoregulation LOW
(2) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
Overall

Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N)
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
Sub-function Rating Summary
Function Sub-function Metrics
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition
Sub-Surface Storage and Retention Condition
Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Particulate Change Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Soluble Change Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Physical Change Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Pollution Change Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Habitat Physical Structure Condition
Landscape Patch Structure Condition
Vegetation Composition Condition
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics/Notes
Hydrology Condition
Water Quality Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Habitat Condition
Overall Wetland Rating
NA
HIGH
HIGH
YES
NA
YES
NA
NA
MEDIUM
HIGH
YES
HIGH
YES
LOW
NA
HIGH
LOW
LOW
Rating
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
YES
LOW
NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Wetland Type
Wetland Site Name All Existing Wetlands
Jernigan/AxiomHeadwater Forest
Date
Assessor Name/Organization
1/3/2017
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Rating
MEDIUM
HIGH
NO
NO
YES
YES
NO
YES

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) Appendices
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018

Appendix C
Flood Frequency Analysis Data
Cedarock Reference ReachReturn Interval (years)Discharge (cfs)1.3271.532243.6581.4101152516950217100272200337500438Note: Bold values are interpolated.Causey Farm Reference ReachReturn Interval (years)Discharge (cfs)1.3531.565294.35171102382534250435100541200663500852Reference ReachesFlood Frequency Analaysis-Regional Regression Equation (USGS 2004)0501001502002503003504004505000 100 200 300 400 500Return Interval (years)Discharge (cfs)Cedarock Reference Reach01002003004005006007008009000 100 200 300 400 500Return Interval (years)Discharge (cfs)Causey Farm Reference Reach

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) Appendices
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018

Appendix D
PJD Tearsheet & Correspondence
SAW-2017-01472
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT

Action Id. SAW-2017-01472 County: Alamance U.S.G.S. Quad: NC-Saxapahaw/Silk Hope

NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION

Property Owner: NCDEQ DMS
Attn: Tim Baumgartner
Address: 1619 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1619

Size (acres) ~15 Nearest Town Snow Camp
Nearest Waterway UT to Pine Hill Branch River Basin Cape Fear
USGS HUC 03030002 Coordinates 36.877647 N, -79.362255 W
Location description: The project area is located south of Major Hill Road, and east of the eastern terminus of Shelby Drive,
near Snow Camp, Alamance County, North Carolina. The Project Area is shown as the “Easement = ~15 acres” on the
attached Figures 3 and 4, titled “Jurisdictional Areas.” And “Wetland Detail”, respectively.
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A.PreliminaryDetermination
There appear to be waters including wetlands, on the above described project area, that may be subject to Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). The
waters including wetlands, have been delineated, and the delineation has been verified by the Corps to be sufficiently
accurate and reliable. The approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated
October 2017. Therefore this preliminary jurisdiction determination may be used in the permit evaluation process,
including determining compensatory mitigation. For purposes of computation of impacts, compensatory mitigation
requirements, and other resource protection measures, a permit decision made on the basis of a preliminary JD will treat
all waters and wetlands that would be affected in any way by the permitted activity on the site as if they are jurisdictional
waters of the U.S. This preliminary determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory Program
Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331). However, you may request an approved JD, which is an
appealable action, by contacting the Corps district for further instruction.
There appear to be waters including wetlands, on the above described project area/property, that may be subject to Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). However,
since the waters including wetlands, have not been properly delineated, this preliminary jurisdiction determination may not be
used in the permit evaluation process. Without a verified wetland delineation, this preliminary determination is merely an
effective presumption of CWA/RHA jurisdiction over all of the waters including wetlands, at the project area, which is not
sufficiently accurate and reliable to support an enforceable permit decision. We recommend that you have the waters including
wetlands, on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a
timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can be verified by the Corps.
B. Approved Determination
There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described project area/property subject to the permit
requirements of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for
a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
There are waters including wetlands, on the above described project area/property subject to the permit requirements of Section
404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
We recommend you have the waters including wetlands, on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be
able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that
can be verified by the Corps.
The waters including wetlands, on your project area/property have been delineated and the delineation has been verified by the
Corps. The approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated MAP DATE. If you wish to
have the delineation surveyed, the Corps can review and verify the survey upon completion. Once verified, this survey will
SAW-2017-01472
provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA and/or RHA jurisdiction on your property which, provided there is no
change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years.
The waters including wetlands, have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the Corps
Regulatory Official identified below on SURVEY SIGNED DATE. Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described project area/property which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA).
You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Morehead City, NC, at [phone] to determine their
requirements.
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US, including wetlands, without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). Placement of dredged or fill material, construction or
placement of structures, or work within navigable waters of the United States without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Sections 9 and/or 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC § 401 and/or 403). If you have any questions
regarding this determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact David Bailey at [phone] X 30 or
[e-mail].
C.Basis For Determination: See the Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination form dated 12/21/2017.
D. Remarks: None.
E. Attention USDA Program Participants

This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps’ Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the particular site
identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security
Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in USDA programs, you should request
a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in B.
above)

This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. If you object to this
determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. Enclosed you will find a
Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this determination you
must submit a completed RFA form to the following address:

US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn: Jason Steele, Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Room 10M15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801

In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for appeal
under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP. Should you
decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by Not applicable.
**It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this correspondence.**

Corps Regulatory Official: ______________________________________________________

Date of JD: 12/21/2017 Expiration Date of JD: Not applicable

The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we continue to do so,
please complete our Customer Satisfaction Survey, located online at http://corpsmapu.usace.army.mil/cm_apex/f?p=136:4:0.

Copy furnished:
Sue Homewood, NCDEQ-DWR, 450 W. Hanes Mill Rd, Suite 300, Winston-Salem, NC 27105
Digitally signed by BAILEY.DAVID.E.1379283736
DN: c=US, o=U.S. Government, ou=DoD, ou=PKI,
ou=USA, cn=BAILEY.DAVID.E.1379283736
Date: 2017.12.21 15:25:18 -05'00'
SAW-2017-01472
NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: NCDEQ DMS (Attn: Tim Baumgartner)File Number: SAW-2017-01472 Date: 12/21/2017
Attached is: See Section below
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission) A
PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission) B
PERMIT DENIAL C
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION D
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION E
SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision.
Additional information may be found at or http://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/RegulatoryProgramandPermits.aspx
or the Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
• OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request
that the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district
engineer. Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will
forfeit your right to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your
objections and may: (a) modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your
objections, or (c) not modify the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After
evaluating your objections, the district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in
Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
• APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein,
you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of
this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days
of the date of this notice. C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by
completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division
engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice. D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or provide new
information.
• ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the
date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
• APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers
Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the district engineer. This form
must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps regarding the
preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be appealed),
by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new information for further consideration by the
Corps to reevaluate the JD.
SAW-2017-01472

SECTION II - REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an initial
proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons or
objections are addressed in the administrative record.)

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the
record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to
clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record.
However, you may provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative
record.
POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION:
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the
appeal process you may contact:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division
attn: David E. Bailey
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
also contact:
Mr. Jason Steele, Administrative Appeal Review Officer
CESAD-PDO
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
60 Forsyth Street, Room 10M15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government
consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15 day
notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in all site investigations.

________________________________________
Signature of appellant or agent.
Date: Telephone number:

For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to:

District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, David Bailey, 69 Darlington Avenue, Wilmington, North Carolina
28403

For Permit denials, Proffered Permits and Approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this form to:

Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Jason Steele, Administrative Appeal
Officer, CESAD-PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 10M15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]

12/21/2017
NCDMS (Attn: Tim Baumgartner)
SAW-2017-01472 (NCDMS ILF - Major Hill Stream and Wetland MitigationSite)
X 1013/2017
aerial,soils,and topomaps (Axiom)
X
x x 2014 NC OneMap
LiDAR (NC Floodmaps)
Site Number/ Feature
Name Latitude Longitude
Cowardin
Class
Estimated amount of
aquatic resource in review
area
Class of aquatic
resources
UT 1 35.875848 -79.36001 R3UB1/2 2174 feet
Non-section 10 -
Non-wetland
UT 2 35.87554 -79.359185 R3UB1/2 160 feet
Non-section 10 -
Non-wetland
UT 3 35.871358 -79.360794 R3UB1/2 2131 feet
Non-section 10 -
Non-wetland
GA 35.87629 -79.360328 PSS1 0.230 acres
Non-section 10 -
Wetland
GB 35.875821 -79.359938 PSS1 0.122 acres
Non-section 10 -
Wetland
GC 35.875323 -79.359201 PSS1 0.008 acres
Non-section 10 -
Wetland
W 35.874462 -79.359294 PSS1 0.048 acres
Non-section 10 -
Wetland
WB 35.87439 -79.359201 PSS1 0.003 acres
Non-section 10 -
Wetland
DB 35.877628 -79.360824 PSS1 0.108 acres
Non-section 10 -
Wetland
Digitally signed by
BAILEY.DAVID.E.1379283736
DN: c=US, o=U.S. Government,
ou=DoD, ou=PKI, ou=USA,
cn=BAILEY.DAVID.E.1379283736
Date: 2017.12.21 15:24:59 -05'00'
^_^_500540520560480540560560540560 560560NCCGIAFIGUREDrawn by:Date:Scale:Project No.:KRJOCT 20171:400017-009Title:Project:Prepared for:Alamance County, NCJURISDICTIONALAREAS3³Notes:1. Background Imagery Source:2014 aerial photographyprovided by the NC OneMapprogram (online, provided by the NCGeographic Information Coordination Council)01,0002,000500FeetLegendEasement = ~15 acresPotential Streams - approximately 4,465 feetPotential Wetlands (Headwater Forest) - approximately 0.52 acres^_NCDWQ FormsNCDOT Roads4-foot elevation contours (LiDAR 2007)UT-1W WetlandGB WetlandGA WetlandMAJOR HILL STREAM ANDWETLANDMITIGATION SITEUT-2UT-3GC WetlandWB WetlandNC SAM FormReach 1NC SAM FormReach 2DB Wetland
1
Grant Lewis
From:Bailey, David E CIV USARMY CESAW (US) <[e-mail]>
Sent:Monday, January 08, 2018 3:40 PM
To:Grant Lewis
Cc:Baumgartner, Tim; Worth Creech; Crocker, Lindsay; Homewood, Sue; Browning,
Kimberly D CIV USARMY CESAW (US)
Subject:RE: Major Hill PJD Form
Thanks Grant. I re‐read the documentation from our 12/21/2017 PJD document and agree with your assessment. As 
such, the PJD table you sent earlier this afternoon will replace the one in our 12/21/2017 PJD document; I have made 
the change in our file and database. This email will act as documentation of our concurrence that the acreage of 
Wetland GA is 0.230 acre. Please let me know if you have any questions. 
‐Dave Bailey 

‐‐‐ 
David E. Bailey, PWS 
Regulatory Project Manager 
US Army Corps of Engineers  
CE‐SAW‐RG‐R 
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105  
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587 
Phone: (919) 554‐4884, Ext. 30. 
Fax: (919) 562‐0421 
Email:  [e-mail] 

We would appreciate your feedback on how we are performing our duties. Our automated Customer Service Survey is 
located at: http://corpsmapu.usace.army.mil/cm_apex/f?p=136:4:0  
Thank you for taking the time to visit this site and complete the survey. 

‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ 
From: Grant Lewis [mailto:[e-mail]]  
Sent: Monday, January 8, 2018 1:32 PM 
To: Bailey, David E CIV USARMY CESAW (US) <[e-mail]> 
Cc: Worth Creech <[e-mail]>; Crocker, Lindsay <[e-mail]> 
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Major Hill PJD Form 

Hello David; 

Based on our telephone conversation, I am sending you an updated PJD table that represents the correct acreage of 
wetlands at the Major Hill Site.  The update is for wetland GA, which was changed from 0.023 acre to 0.23 acre.  The 
table should match wetlands depicted on Figure 4 sent to you on 11/2/2017 via email from Kenan Jernigan. The correct 
acreage for the approved PJD should be 0.52 acre. 

2
The initial discrepancy concerning the table was discovered by Lindsay Crocker at DMS.  She noticed the PJD Form, 
Table, and Restoration Plan all had different acreages for wetlands at the Site.   

1.       PJD form ‐ 0.204 ac 

2.       Revised Map ‐ 0.52 ac 

3.       Revised Table ‐ totaling 0.312 ac 

The discrepancy in the PJD form and Map revolve around wetlands being added during field verification of the 
delineation.  After the field verification, an updated map/table were sent to you in correspondence listed above 
(11/2/2017 email from Kenan Jernigan).  When table was updated a decimal was out of place (GA wetland 0.023 ac 
instead of 0.23 ac).  The table attached to this email should correct the error and the map/table should match at 0.52 
acre. 

Lindsay has a concern that the approved PJD (tear sheet) has the incorrect wetland acreage listed (0.204 ac) and the 
revised map/table have the different wetland acreage listed (0.52 ac).  Based on our conversation today, it's not a 
problem that the approved PJD tear sheet and map/table have differing acreages.  Is that correct? 

Also, I am to understand I can update the approved PJD tear sheet by swapping out the tables.  Is that also correct? 

Thank you for your attention to this matter. 

Grant 

Grant Lewis 

Senior Project Manager 

Axiom Environmental, Inc. 

218 Snow Avenue 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27603 

[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>  

(919) 215‐1693 (cell) 

3

 <file:///S:\Business\Administrative\logos\Axiom.jpg>  

^_^_^_^_w05w04w02wb04wb03wb01gd06gd07GB13GB12GB11GB10GB09GB07GB06GB05GB02GB01ga99ga98ga97ga96ga95ga93ga92ga91ga90ga87ga86ga12ga11ga10ga09ga08ga06ga05ga04ga03ga02ga01wb02\gc-07gb-99gb-97gb-96gb-95gb-93gb-92gb-90gb-89gb-86gb-85DB-08DB-08DB-07DB-06DB-05DB-04DB-04DB-03DB-02W-96=rbW-97=rbW-98=rbga85=13W-100=rbDB-09=fenceDB-01=fenc3GB15-drained02gd-01=08 draind540
560520 540560NCCGIAFIGUREDrawn by:Date:Scale:Project No.:KRJOCT 20171:160017-009Title:Project:Prepared for:Alamance County, NCWETLANDDETAIL4³Notes:1. Background Imagery Source:2014 aerial photographyprovided by the NC OneMapprogram (online, provided by the NCGeographic Information Coordination Council)0300600150FeetLegendEasement = ~15 acresPotential Streams - approximately 4,465 feetPotential Wetlands (Headwater Forest) - approximately 0.52 acresWetland GPS Points^_Wetland Data Forms^_NCDWQ Forms4-foot elevation contours (LiDAR 2007)W WetlandGB WetlandGA WetlandMAJOR HILL STREAM ANDWETLANDMITIGATION SITEGC WetlandWB WetlandNC SAM FormReach 1NC SAM FormReach 2DB Wetland

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) Appendices
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018

Appendix E
Categorical Exclusion Document

Part 2: All Projects
Regulation/Question Response
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA)
1. Is the project located in a CAMA county? Yes
No
2. Does the project involve ground-disturbing activities within a CAMA Area of
Environmental Concern (AEC)?
Yes
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
Program?
Yes
No
N/A
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA)
1. Is this a “full-delivery” project? Yes
No
2. Has the zoning/land use of the subject property and adjacent properties ever been
designated as commercial or industrial?
Yes
No
N/A
3. As a result of a limited Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or potential
hazardous waste sites within or adjacent to the project area?
Yes
No
N/A
4. As a result of a Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous
waste sites within or adjacent to the project area?
Yes
No
N/A
5. As a result of a Phase II Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous
waste sites within the project area?
Yes
No
N/A
6. Is there an approved hazardous mitigation plan? Yes
No
N/A
National Historic Preservation Act (Section 106)
1. Are there properties listed on, or eligible for listing on, the National Register of
Historic Places in the project area?
Yes
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 Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act (Uniform Act)
1.Is this a “full-delivery” project? Yes
No
2. Does the project require the acquisition of real estate? Yes
No
N/A
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:
* prior to making an offer that the agency does not have condemnation authority; and
* what the fair market value is believed to be?
Yes
No
N/A
Version 1.4, 8/18/05 7

Part 3: Ground-Disturbing Activities

Regulation/Question Response
American Indian Religious Freedom Act (AIRFA)
1. Is the project located in a county claimed as “territory” by the Eastern Band of
Cherokee Indians?
Yes
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
Places?
Yes
No
N/A
4. Have the effects of the project on this site been considered? Yes
No
N/A
Antiquities Act (AA)
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
of antiquity?
Yes
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
Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA)
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
N/A
4. Has a permit been obtained? Yes
No
N/A
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
1. Are federal Threatened and Endangered species and/or Designated Critical Habitat
listed for the county?
Yes
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
Habitat?
Yes
No
N/A
4. Is the project “likely to adversely affect” the species and/or “likely to adversely modify”
Designated Critical Habitat?
Yes
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
Version 1.4, 8/18/05 8
Executive Order 13007 (Indian Sacred Sites)
1. Is the project located on Federal lands that are within a county claimed as “territory”
by the EBCI?
Yes
No
2. Has the EBCI indicated that Indian sacred sites may be impacted by the proposed
project?
Yes
No
N/A
3. Have accommodations been made for access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred
sites?
Yes
No
N/A
Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA)
1. Will real estate be acquired? Yes
No
2. Has NRCS determined that the project contains prime, unique, statewide or locally
important farmland?
Yes
No
N/A
3. Has the completed Form AD-1006 been submitted to NRCS? Yes
No
N/A
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA)
1. Will the project impound, divert, channel deepen, or otherwise control/modify any
water body?
Yes
No
2. Have the USFWS and the NCWRC been consulted? Yes
No
N/A
Land and Water Conservation Fund Act (Section 6(f))
1. Will the project require the conversion of such property to a use other than public,
outdoor recreation?
Yes
No
2. Has the NPS approved of the conversion? Yes
No
N/A
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Essential Fish Habitat)
1. Is the project located in an estuarine system? Yes
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
project on EFH?
Yes
No
N/A
4. Will the project adversely affect EFH? Yes
No
N/A
5. Has consultation with NOAA-Fisheries occurred? Yes
No
N/A
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA)
1. Does the USFWS have any recommendations with the project relative to the MBTA? Yes
No
2. Have the USFWS recommendations been incorporated? Yes
No
N/A
Wilderness 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
federal agency?
Yes
No
N/A
Version 1.4, 8/18/05 9

Axiom Environmental, Inc.
218 Snow Avenue, Raleigh, North Carolina 27603 919-270-9306

July 27, 2017

John Gerber, PE, CFM
State NFIP Coordinator
NC Floodplain Management Branch
4218 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-4218

Re: Major Hill Stream and Wetland mitigation project in Alamance County 17-009
FEMA Floodplain Requirements Checklist

Dear Mr. Gerber:

The purpose of this letter is to request concurrence from the National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP) concerning a stream and wetland restoration site located in Alamance County. The Site
encompasses approximately 15.4 acres of agricultural land used for livestock grazing and hay
production. Existing Site streams have been impounded, cleared, trampled by livestock, eroded
vertically and laterally, and receive extensive sediment and nutrient inputs from livestock. Proposed
activities at the Site include the restoration of perennial and intermittent stream channels,
enhancement of perennial stream channel, and restoration of riparian wetlands.

The project easement is depicted on the attached figures and lengths/priority of restoration are as
follows.

Reach Length Priority
UT 1 2227 Priority 1 Restoration and
Enhancement Level II
UT 2 160 Enhancement Level II
UT 3 2015 Enhancement Level II

FEMA mapping was reviewed to determine if the project is located in a FEMA study area (DFIRM
panel number 8797). Based on existing floodplain mapping, Site tributaries are not included in the
latest flood mapping study. Therefore, a “Conditional Letter of Map Revision” (CLOMR) is not
expected for this project. Please see the attached Project Location Map and Topographic Map for
your review. Also please find attached three copies of the NCDMS Floodplain Requirements
Checklist for your records.

We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please feel free to contact me
with any questions that you may have concerning the extent of site disturbance associated with this
project.

Yours truly,

AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL

, INC.

W. Grant Lewis
Senior Project Manager

Attachments
Figure 1 Project Location and Topography
Figure 2 Project Reaches
NCDMS Floodplain Requirements Checklist
Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed
FIGURE
Drawn by:
Date:
Scale:
Project No.:
KRJ
MAY 2017
1:20000
17-009
Title:
Project:
Prepared for:
Alamance County, NC
MAJOR HILL STREAM ANDWETLANDMITIGATION SITE
SITE LOCATION
1
³
Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic
Society, i-cubed
Copyright:© 2014 DeLorme LindleyMillRoadNotes:
Background Imagery Sources
(Provided by ESRI Data and
Maps):
1. Physical Map of the United
States (2009) Created by the
U.S. Park Service (Upper Inset)
2. DeLorme World Basemap
digital mapping (2010, Lower
Inset)
3. Saxapahaw (1977), Silk Hope
(1974), Snow Camp (1978), and
Crutchfield Crossroads (1974)
7.5-minute topographic
quadrangles provided by the
U.S. Geological Survey
Major Hilll R o a d
Directions to the Site from Raleigh:- Take US-64 West out of Raleigh and travel 25 miles,- Take exit 381 and turn right onto NC-87 N,- After 5 miles, take a left onto Castle Rock Farm Road,- After 5.8 miles, Castle Rock Farm Road becomes Old Switchboard Road,- Continue for 2.1 miles, turn right onto Lindley Mill Road,- After 0.5 mile, turn left onto Major Hill Road,- Site can be accessed from Burnett Church Road which is on the left after 1 mile.- Site Latitude, Longitude 35.873206, -79.360906 (NAD83/WGS84)BethelSouthForkRoadOl
d
S
wit
c
h
b
oard
R
o
a
d
NCCGIA
Project Reaches
Major Hill Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site
Alamance County, North Carolina
Axiom Environmental
218 Snow Ave
Raleigh, NC 27607
[phone]
FIGUREDwn. By:
Date:
Project:
WGL
May 2017
17-009
2
›
0 500250Feet
Legend
Easement
Stream Restoration
Stream Enhancement Level I
UT 1
UT 1
UT 2
UT 3

Axiom Environmental, Inc.
218 Snow Avenue, Raleigh, North Carolina 27603 919-270-9306

July 27, 2017

Shannon Deaton,
Habitat Conservation Program Manager
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission

Re: Major Hill Stream and Wetland mitigation project 17-009
Alamance County, NC

Dear Ms. Deaton:

The purpose of this letter is to request concurrence from the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission concerning a stream and wetland restoration site located in Alamance County. The
project will restore stream channels through active pastureland. Please review and comment on any
possible issues that might emerge with respect to the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act from the
potential wetland and stream restoration project (USGS Saxapahaw and Silk Hope, North Carolina
7.5-minute topographic quadrangle).

The Major Hill site has been identified for the purpose of providing in-kind mitigation for unavoidable
stream channel and wetland impacts. Several sections of channel have been identified as significantly
degraded.

We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please feel free to contact me
with any questions that you may have concerning the extent of site disturbance associated with this
project.

Yours truly,

AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.

W. Grant Lewis
Senior Project Manager

Attachments
Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed
FIGURE
Drawn by:
Date:
Scale:
Project No.:
KRJ
MAY 2017
1:20000
17-009
Title:
Project:
Prepared for:
Alamance County, NC
MAJOR HILL STREAM ANDWETLANDMITIGATION SITE
SITE LOCATION
1
³
Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic
Society, i-cubed
Copyright:© 2014 DeLorme LindleyMillRoadNotes:
Background Imagery Sources
(Provided by ESRI Data and
Maps):
1. Physical Map of the United
States (2009) Created by the
U.S. Park Service (Upper Inset)
2. DeLorme World Basemap
digital mapping (2010, Lower
Inset)
3. Saxapahaw (1977), Silk Hope
(1974), Snow Camp (1978), and
Crutchfield Crossroads (1974)
7.5-minute topographic
quadrangles provided by the
U.S. Geological Survey
Major Hilll R o a d
Directions to the Site from Raleigh:- Take US-64 West out of Raleigh and travel 25 miles,- Take exit 381 and turn right onto NC-87 N,- After 5 miles, take a left onto Castle Rock Farm Road,- After 5.8 miles, Castle Rock Farm Road becomes Old Switchboard Road,- Continue for 2.1 miles, turn right onto Lindley Mill Road,- After 0.5 mile, turn left onto Major Hill Road,- Site can be accessed from Burnett Church Road which is on the left after 1 mile.- Site Latitude, Longitude 35.873206, -79.360906 (NAD83/WGS84)BethelSouthForkRoadOl
d
S
wit
c
h
b
oard
R
o
a
d
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Gordon Myers, Executive Director

Mailing Address: Habitat Conservation • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]

August 31, 2017

Mr. Grant Lewis
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27603

Subject: Request for Environmental Information for the Major Hill Stream and Wetland Mitigation
Project, Alamance County, North Carolina.

Dear Mr. Lewis,

Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) have reviewed the
proposed project description. Comments are provided in accordance with certain provisions of the Clean
Water Act of 1977 (as amended), Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16
U.S.C. 661-667e) and North Carolina General Statutes (G.S. 113-131 et seq.).

Axiom Environmental, Inc. has developed the Major Hill Stream and Wetland Mitigation Project in order
to provide in-kind mitigation for unavoidable stream channel and wetland impacts. The project site is
located on active pastureland. This project will include stream and wetland restoration and enhancement.
The site is located south of Major Hill Road, east of its intersection with Bethel South Fork Road, east of
Snow Camp.

Stream restoration projects often improve water quality and aquatic habitat. Establishing native, forested
buffers in riparian areas will help protect water quality, improve aquatic and terrestrial habitats and
provide a travel corridor for wildlife species. The NCWRC recommends the use of biodegradable and
wildlife-friendly sediment and erosion control devices. Silt fencing, fiber rolls and/or other products
should have loose-weave netting that is made of natural fiber materials with movable joints between the
vertical and horizontal twines. Silt fencing and similar products that have been reinforced with plastic or
metal mesh should be avoided as they impede the movement of terrestrial wildlife species. Excessive silt
and sediment loads can have detrimental effects on aquatic resources including destruction of spawning
habitat, suffocation of eggs and clogging of gills. Any invasive plant species that are found onsite should
be removed.

Page 2

August 31, 2017
Scoping – Major Hill Mitigation Project

Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project. If I can be of further assistance,
please contact me at [phone] or [e-mail].

Sincerely,

Gabriela Garrison
Eastern Piedmont Habitat Conservation Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program

Axiom Environmental, Inc. 218 Snow Avenue, Raleigh, North Carolina 27603 919-270-9306
July 27, 2017

Dale Suiter,
Endangered Species Biologist
USFWS Raleigh Field Office
PO Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636

Re: Major Hill Stream and Wetland mitigation project in Alamance County 17-009
Alamance County, NC

Dear Mr. Suiter:

The purpose of this letter is to request a list of federally protected species in Alamance County as
well as any known information for each species in the county. Please review and comment on any
possible issues that might emerge with respect to endangered species, and migratory birds from a
potential wetland and stream restoration project on the attached site (USGS Saxapahaw and Silk
Hope, North Carolina 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle).

The Major Hill Site has been identified for the purpose of providing in-kind mitigation for
unavoidable stream channel and wetland impacts. Several sections of channel have been identified
as significantly degraded.

We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please feel free to contact me
with any questions that you may have concerning the extent of site disturbance associated with this
project.

Yours truly,

AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.

W. Grant Lewis
Senior Project Manager

Attachments
Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed
FIGURE
Drawn by:
Date:
Scale:
Project No.:
KRJ
MAY 2017
1:20000
17-009
Title:
Project:
Prepared for:
Alamance County, NC
MAJOR HILL STREAM ANDWETLANDMITIGATION SITE
SITE LOCATION
1
³
Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic
Society, i-cubed
Copyright:© 2014 DeLorme LindleyMillRoadNotes:
Background Imagery Sources
(Provided by ESRI Data and
Maps):
1. Physical Map of the United
States (2009) Created by the
U.S. Park Service (Upper Inset)
2. DeLorme World Basemap
digital mapping (2010, Lower
Inset)
3. Saxapahaw (1977), Silk Hope
(1974), Snow Camp (1978), and
Crutchfield Crossroads (1974)
7.5-minute topographic
quadrangles provided by the
U.S. Geological Survey
Major Hilll R o a d
Directions to the Site from Raleigh:- Take US-64 West out of Raleigh and travel 25 miles,- Take exit 381 and turn right onto NC-87 N,- After 5 miles, take a left onto Castle Rock Farm Road,- After 5.8 miles, Castle Rock Farm Road becomes Old Switchboard Road,- Continue for 2.1 miles, turn right onto Lindley Mill Road,- After 0.5 mile, turn left onto Major Hill Road,- Site can be accessed from Burnett Church Road which is on the left after 1 mile.- Site Latitude, Longitude 35.873206, -79.360906 (NAD83/WGS84)BethelSouthForkRoadOl
d
S
wit
c
h
b
oard
R
o
a
d
IPaC: Regulatory review - Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/project/IG3ZSA7ZBBC4BHU75SM6TBZF3M...
1 of 2 7/27/17, 12:25 PM
IPaC: Regulatory review - Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/project/IG3ZSA7ZBBC4BHU75SM6TBZF3M...
2 of 2 7/27/17, 12:25 PM

Axiom Environmental, Inc. 218 Snow Avenue, Raleigh, North Carolina 27603 919-270-9306
July 27, 2017

Brian Loadholt
Natural Resources Conservation Services
209 N. Graham-Hopedale Rd.
Burlington, NC 27217

Re: Major Hill Stream and Wetland mitigation project 17-009
Alamance County, NC

Dear Mr. Loadholt:

The purpose of this letter is to request concurrence from the Natural Resources Conservation Service
concerning a stream and wetland restoration site located in Alamance County. The Site encompasses
approximately 15.4 acres of agricultural land used for livestock grazing and hay production.
Existing Site streams have been cleared, dredged of cobble substrate, trampled by livestock, eroded
vertically and laterally, and receive extensive sediment and nutrient inputs from livestock. Proposed
activities at the Site include the restoration of perennial and intermittent stream channels,
enhancement of perennial stream channel, and restoration of riparian wetlands. In support of this
effort, the entire easement will be planted with native forest vegetation; thereby, removing the area
within the easement from active pasture.

Please review and comment on any possible issues that might emerge with respect to the Farmland
Conversion. You will find attached to this letter information including a location map, a map
depicting soil types and acreages to be converted, and Form AD-1006.

We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please feel free to contact me
with any questions that you may have concerning the extent of site disturbance associated with this
project.

Yours truly,

AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
W. Grant Lewis
Senior Project Manager

Attachments
Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed
FIGURE
Drawn by:
Date:
Scale:
Project No.:
KRJ
MAY 2017
1:20000
17-009
Title:
Project:
Prepared for:
Alamance County, NC
MAJOR HILL STREAM ANDWETLANDMITIGATION SITE
SITE LOCATION
1
³
Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic
Society, i-cubed
Copyright:© 2014 DeLorme LindleyMillRoadNotes:
Background Imagery Sources
(Provided by ESRI Data and
Maps):
1. Physical Map of the United
States (2009) Created by the
U.S. Park Service (Upper Inset)
2. DeLorme World Basemap
digital mapping (2010, Lower
Inset)
3. Saxapahaw (1977), Silk Hope
(1974), Snow Camp (1978), and
Crutchfield Crossroads (1974)
7.5-minute topographic
quadrangles provided by the
U.S. Geological Survey
Major Hilll R o a d
Directions to the Site from Raleigh:- Take US-64 West out of Raleigh and travel 25 miles,- Take exit 381 and turn right onto NC-87 N,- After 5 miles, take a left onto Castle Rock Farm Road,- After 5.8 miles, Castle Rock Farm Road becomes Old Switchboard Road,- Continue for 2.1 miles, turn right onto Lindley Mill Road,- After 0.5 mile, turn left onto Major Hill Road,- Site can be accessed from Burnett Church Road which is on the left after 1 mile.- Site Latitude, Longitude 35.873206, -79.360906 (NAD83/WGS84)BethelSouthForkRoadOl
d
S
wit
c
h
b
oard
R
o
a
d
Lc
GaC2
ObC
Wd
GaB2
EaC
GaB2 AaB
HdC
HdC
GaC2
GaB
EaB2
GaC2
HdB2ObB HdB2
GbD3
HdB
GaC2
GbC3GaB2
HdC
HdB2
W AaB
AaB
HdB2GaB2
GaB2
GbD3
NCCGIA
Existing Conditions
Major Hill Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site
Alamance County, North Carolina
Axiom Environmental
218 Snow Ave
Raleigh, NC 27607
[phone]
FIGUREDwn. By:
Date:
Project:
WGL
May 2017
17-009
2
›
0 500250Feet
Legend
Easement
NRCS Soil Mapping Units
Map Unit Acreage AcreageSymbolMap Unit Name In Easement ConvertedEaCEfland silt loam, 6 to 10 % slopes 2.62 2.62GaC2Georgeville silt loam, 6 to 10 % slopes, eroded 2.65 2.65HdCHerndon silt loam, 6 to 10 % slopes 0.37 0.37LcLocal alluvial land, poorly drained 7.33 7.33ObC Orange silt loam moderately well drained, 6 to 10 % slopes 1.00 ac 1.00 acWdWorsham sandy loam, 2 to 6% Slopes 2.43 2.43

The Natural Resources Conservation Service
is an agency of the Department of Agriculture’s
Natural Resources mission.

An Equal Opportunity Provider, Employer and Lender

August 10, 2017

Grant Lewi
Senior Project Manager
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603

Dear Grant Lewis:

Thank you for your letter dated August 1, 2017, Subject: Major Hill Stream and
Wetland Restoration Site in Alamance Co., North Carolina. The following
guidance is provided for your information.

Projects are subject to the Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA) requirements
if they may irreversibly convert farmland (directly or indirectly) to non-
agricultural use and are completed by a federal agency or with assistance from a
federal agency. Farmland means prime or unique farmlands as defined in section
1540(c)(1) of the FPPA or farmland that is determined by the appropriate state or
unit of local government agency or agencies with concurrence of the Secretary of
Agriculture to be farmland of statewide local importance.

For the purpose of FPPA, farmland includes prime farmland, unique farmland,
and land of statewide or local importance. Farmland subject to FPPA
requirements does not have to be currently used for cropland. It can be
forestland, pastureland, cropland, or other land, but not water or urban built-up
land.

Farmland does not include land already in or committed to urban development
or water storage. Farmland already in urban development or water storage
includes all such land with a density of 30 structures per 40-acre area. Farmland
already in urban development also includes lands identified as urbanized area
(UA) on the Census Bureau Map, or as urban area mapped with a tint overprint
on the United States Geological Survey (USGS) topographical maps, or as
urban-built-up on the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)
Important Farmland Maps.

The area in question meets one or more of the above criteria for Farmland.
Farmland area will be affected or converted. Enclosed is the Farmland
Conversion Impact Rating form AD1006 with PARTS II, IV and V completed by
NRCS. The corresponding agency will need to complete the evaluation,
according to the Code of Federal Regulation 7CFR 658, Farmland Protection
Policy Act.

Natural Resources
Conservation Service

North Carolina
State Office

4407 Bland Road
Suite 117
Raleigh, NC 27609
Voice 919-873-2171
Fax [phone]
Grant Lewi
Page 2

If you have any questions, please contact Milton Cortes, Assistant State Soil Scientist at
919-873-2171 or by email: [e-mail].

Again, thank you for inquiry. If we can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to
contact us.

Sincerely,

Milton Cortes
Assistant State Soil Scientist

cc:
Kent Clary, State Soil Scientist, NRCS, Raleigh, NC

U.S. Department of Agriculture
FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING
PART I (To be completed by Federal Agency)Date Of Land Evaluation Request
Name Of Project Federal Agency Involved
Proposed Land Use County And State
PART II (To be completed by NRCS)Date Request Received By NRCS
Does the site contain prime, unique, statewide or local important farmland?
(If no, the FPPA does not apply -- do not complete additional parts of this form).
Acres Irrigated Average Farm Size
Major Crop(s)Farmable Land In Govt. Jurisdiction Amount Of Farmland As Defined in FPPA
Name Of Land Evaluation System Used Name Of Local Site Assessment System Date Land Evaluation Returned By NRCS
Yes No

Acres: % %Acres:
PART III (To be completed by Federal Agency)Alternative Site Rating
Site A Site B Site C Site D
A.Total Acres To Be Converted Directly
B.Total Acres To Be Converted Indirectly
C.Total Acres In Site
PART IV (To be completed by NRCS) Land Evaluation Information
A.Total Acres Prime And Unique Farmland
B.Total Acres Statewide And Local Important Farmland
C.Percentage Of Farmland In County Or Local Govt. Unit To Be Converted
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)
PART VI (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Site Assessment Criteria (These criteria are explained in 7 CFR 658.5(b)
Maximum
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
PART VII (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Relative Value Of Farmland (From Part V)100
Total Site Assessment (From Part VI above or a localsite assessment)160
TOTAL POINTS (Total of above 2 lines)260
Site Selected:Date Of Selection
Was A Local Site Assessment Used?
Yes No
Reason For Selection:
(See Instructions on reverse side) Form AD-1006 (10-83)
This form was electronically produced by National Production Services Staff

Step 1 Federal agencies involved in proposed projects that may convert farmland, as defined in the Farmland Protection
Policy Act (FPPA) to nonagricultural uses, will initially complete Parts I and III of the form.
Step 2 -
-
Originator will send copies A, B and C together with maps indicating locations of site(s), to the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) local field office and retain copy D for their files. (Note: NRCS has a field office in most counties
in the U.S. The field office is usually located in the county seat. A list of field office locations are available from the NRCS
State Conservationist in each state).
Step 3 - NRCS will, within 45 calendar days after receipt of form, make a determination as to whether the site(s) of the pro-
posed project contains prime, unique, statewide or local important farmland.
. Step ‘4 -In cases where farmland covered by the FPPA will be converted by the proposed project, NRCS field offices will com-
plete Parts II, IV and V of the form.
Step 5 -NRCS will return copy A and B of the form to the Federal agency involved in the project. (Copy C will be retained for
NRCS records).
Step 6 -The Federal agency involved in the proposed project will complete Parts VI and VII of the form.
Step 7 -The Federal agency involved in the proposed project will make a determination as to whether the proposed conver- sion is consistent with the FPPA and the agency’s internal policies.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THE FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING FORM

Part I: In completing the "County And State" questions list all the local governments that are responsible
for local land controls where site(s) are to be evaluated.
Part III: In completing item B (Total Acres To Be Converted Indirectly), include the following:
1 . Acres not being directly converted but that would no longer be capable of being farmed after the conver-
sion, because the conversion would restrict access to them.
2.Acres planned to receive services from an infrastructure project as indicated in the project justification
(e.g. highways, utilities) that will cause a direct conversion.
Assign the maximum points for each site assessment criterion as shown in § 658. 5 (b) of CFR. In cases of
. . : :
and will, be weighed zero, however, criterion #8 will be weighed a maximum of 25 points, and criterion
#11 a maximum of 25 points.
Individual Federal agencies at the national level, may assign relative weights among the 12 site assessment criteria other than those shown in the FPPA rule. In all cases where other weights are assigned relative adjust- ments must be made to maintain the maximum total weight points at l60.
Federal agencies shall consider each of the criteria and assign points within the limits established in the FPPA rule. Sites most suitable for protection under these criteria will receive the
highest total scores, and sites least suitable, the lowest scores.

Part VII: In computing the "Total Site Assessment Points" where a State or local site assessment is used points is other than 160, adjust the site assessment points to a base of 160.
, Example: if the Site Assessment maximum is 200 points, and alternative Site "A" is rated 180 points:
Total points x 160 = 144 points for Site “A.”

STEPS IN THE PROCESSING THE FARMLAND AND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING FORM
Part VI: Do not complete Part VI if a local site assessment is used.
projects such as transportation, powerline and flood control, criteria #5 and #6 will not applycorridor-type
In rating alternative sites,
and the total maximum number of
200
assigned Site A = 180
Maximum points possible
Site Assessment Scoring for the Twelve Factors Used in FPPA
The Site Assessment criteria used in the Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA) rule are designed to
assess important factors other than the agricultural value of the land when determining which alternative
sites should receive the highest level of protection from conversion to non agricultural uses.
Twelve factors are used for Site Assessment and ten factors for corridor-type sites. Each factor is listed
in an outline form, without detailed definitions or guidelines to follow in the rating process. The purpose
of this document is to expand the definitions of use of each of the twelve Site Assessment factors so
that all persons can have a clear understanding as to what each factor is intended to evaluate and how
points are assigned for given conditions.
In each of the 12 factors a number rating system is used to determine which sites deserve the most
protection from conversion to non-farm uses. The higher the number value given to a proposed site, the
more protection it will receive. The maximum scores are 10, 15 and 20 points, depending upon the
relative importance of each particular question. If a question significantly relates to why a parcel of land
should not be converted, the question has a maximum possible protection value of 20, whereas a
question which does not have such a significant impact upon whether a site would be converted, would
have fewer maximum points possible, for example 10.
The following guidelines should be used in rating the twelve Site Assessment criteria:
1. How much land is in non-urban use within a radius of 1.0 mile from where the project is
intended?
More than 90 percent:15 points
90-20 percent:14 to 1 points
Less than 20 percent:0 points
This factor is designed to evaluate the extent to which the area within one mile of the proposed
site is non-urban area. For purposes of this rule, "non-urban" should include:
· Agricultural land (crop-fruit trees, nuts, oilseed)
· Range land
· Forest land
· Golf Courses
· Non paved parks and recreational areas
· Mining sites
· Farm Storage
· Lakes, ponds and other water bodies
· Rural roads, and through roads without houses or buildings
· Open space
· Wetlands
· Fish production
· Pasture or hayland
Urban uses include:
· Houses (other than farm houses)
· Apartment buildings
· Commercial buildings
· Industrial buildings
· Paved recreational areas (i.e. tennis courts)
· Streets in areas with 30 structures per 40 acres
· Gas stations
· Equipment, supply stores
· Off-farm storage
· Processing plants
· Shopping malls
· Utilities/Services
· Medical buildings
In rating this factor, an area one-mile from the outer edge of the proposed site should be outlined on a
current photo; the areas that are urban should be outlined. For rural houses and other buildings with
unknown sizes, use 1 and 1/3 acres per structure. For roads with houses on only one side, use one half
of road for urban and one half for non-urban.
The purpose of this rating process is to insure that the most valuable and viable farmlands are protected
from development projects sponsored by the Federal Government. With this goal in mind, factor S1
suggests that the more agricultural lands surrounding the parcel boundary in question, the more
protection from development this site should receive. Accordingly, a site with a large quantity of non-
urban land surrounding it will receive a greater
number of points for protection from development. Thus, where more than 90 percent of the area
around the proposed site (do not include the proposed site in this assessment) is non-urban, assign 15
points. Where 20 percent or less is
non-urban, assign 0 points. Where the area lies between 20 and 90 percent non-urban, assign
appropriate points from 14 to 1, as noted below.
Percent Non-Urban Land
within 1 mile
Points
90 percent or greater 15
85 to 89 percent 14
80 to 84 percent 13
75 to 79 percent 12
70 to 74 percent 11
65 to 69 percent 10
60 to 64 percent 9
55 to 59 percent 8
50 to 54 percent 7
45 to 49 percent 6
40 to 44 percent 5
35 to 39 percent 4
30 to 24 percent 3
25 to 29 percent 2
21 to 24 percent 1
20 percent or less 0
2. How much of the perimeter of the site borders on land in non-urban use?
More than 90 percent:l0 points
90 to 20 percent:9 to 1 point(s)
Less than 20 percent:0 points
This factor is designed to evaluate the extent to which the land adjacent to the proposed site is non-
urban use. Where factor #1 evaluates the general location of the proposed site, this factor evaluates
the immediate perimeter of the site. The definition of urban and non-urban uses in factor #1 should be
used for this factor.
In rating the second factor, measure the perimeter of the site that is in non-urban and urban use.
Where more than 90 percent of the perimeter is in non-urban use, score this factor 10 points. Where
less than 20 percent, assign 0 points. If a road is next to the perimeter, class the area according to the
use on the other side of the road for that area. Use 1 and 1/3 acre per structure if not otherwise known.
Where 20 to 90 percent of the perimeter is non-urban, assign points as noted below:
Percentage of Perimeter
Bordering Land
Points
90 percent or greater 10
82 to 89 percent 9
74 to 81 percent 8
65 to 73 percent 7
58 to 65 percent 6
50 to 57 percent 5
42 to 49 percent 4
34 to 41 percent 3
27 to 33 percent 2
21 to 26 percent 1
20 percent or Less 0
3. How much of the site has been farmed (managed for a scheduled harvest or timber activity)
more than five of the last ten years?
More than 90 percent:20 points
90 to 20 percent:19 to 1 point(s)
Less than 20 percent:0 points
This factor is designed to evaluate the extent to which the proposed conversion site has been used or
managed for agricultural purposes in the past 10 years.
Land is being farmed when it is used or managed for food or fiber, to include timber products, fruit, nuts,
grapes, grain, forage, oil seed, fish and meat, poultry and dairy products.
Land that has been left to grow up to native vegetation without management or harvest will be
considered as abandoned and therefore not farmed. The proposed conversion site should be evaluated
and rated according to the percent, of the site farmed.
If more than 90 percent of the site has been farmed 5 of the last 10 years score the site as follows:
Percentage of Site Farmed Points
90 percent or greater 20
86 to 89 percent 19
82 to 85 percent 18
78 to 81 percent 17
74 to 77 percent 16
70 to 73 percent 15
66 to 69 percent 14
62 to 65 percent 13
58 to 61 percent 12
54 to 57 percent 11
50 to 53 percent 10
46 to 49 percent 9
42 to 45 percent 8
38 to 41 percent 7
35 to 37 percent 6
32 to 34 percent 5
29 to 31 percent 4
26 to 28 percent 3
23 to 25 percent 2
20 to 22 percent percent or Less 1
Less than 20 percent 0
4. Is the site subject to state or unit of local government policies or programs to protect
farmland or covered by private programs to protect farmland?
Site is protected:20 points
Site is not protected:0 points
This factor is designed to evaluate the extent to which state and local government and private programs
have made efforts to protect this site from conversion.
State and local policies and programs to protect farmland include:
State Policies and Programs to Protect Farmland
1. Tax Relief:
A. Differential Assessment: Agricultural lands are taxed on their agricultural use value, rather
than at market value. As a result, farmers pay fewer taxes on their land, which helps keep them
in business, and therefore helps to insure that the farmland will not be converted to
nonagricultural uses.
1. Preferential Assessment for Property Tax: Landowners with parcels of land used for
agriculture are given the privilege of differential assessment.
2. Deferred Taxation for Property Tax: Landowners are deterred from converting their land
to nonfarm uses, because if they do so, they must pay back taxes at market value.
3. Restrictive Agreement for Property Tax: Landowners who want to receive Differential
Assessment must agree to keep their land in - eligible use.
B. Income Tax Credits
Circuit Breaker Tax Credits: Authorize an eligible owner of farmland to apply some or all of the
property taxes on his or her farmland and farm structures as a tax credit against the owner's
state income tax.
C. Estate and Inheritance Tax Benefits
Farm Use Valuation for Death Tax: Exemption of state tax liability to eligible farm estates.
2. "Right to farm" laws:
Prohibits local governments from enacting laws which will place restrictions upon normally
accepted farming practices, for example, the generation of noise, odor or dust.
3. Agricultural Districting:
Wherein farmers voluntarily organize districts of agricultural land to be legally recognized
geographic areas. These farmers receive benefits, such as protection from annexation, in
exchange for keeping land within the district for a given number of years.
4. Land Use Controls: Agricultural Zoning.
Types of Agricultural Zoning Ordinances include:
A. Exclusive: In which the agricultural zone is restricted to only farm-related dwellings, with, for
example, a minimum of 40 acres per dwelling unit.
B. Non-Exclusive: In which non-farm dwellings are allowed, but the density remains low, such
as 20 acres per dwelling unit.
Additional Zoning techniques include:
A. Slidinq Scale: This method looks at zoning according to the total size of the parcel owned.
For example, the number of dwelling units per a given number of acres may change from
county to county according to the existing land acreage to dwelling unit ratio of surrounding
parcels of land within the specific area.
B. Point System or Numerical Approach: Approaches land use permits on a case by case
basis.
LESA: The LESA system (Land Evaluation-Site Assessment) is used as a tool to help
assess options for land use on an evaluation of productivity weighed against commitment to
urban development.
C. Conditional Use: Based upon the evaluation on a case by case basis by the Board of
Zoning Adjustment. Also may include the method of using special land use permits.
5. Development Rights:
A. Purchase of Development Rights (PDR): Where development rights are purchased by
Government action.
Buffer Zoning Districts: Buffer Zoning Districts are an example of land purchased by
Government action. This land is included in zoning ordinances in order to preserve and
protect agricultural lands from non-farm land uses encroaching upon them.
B. Transfer of Development Rights (TDR): Development rights are transferable for use in other
locations designated as receiving areas. TDR is considered a locally based action (not
state), because it requires a voluntary decision on the part of the individual landowners.
6. Governor’s Executive Order: Policy made by the Governor, stating the importance of agriculture,
and the preservation of agricultural lands. The Governor orders the state agencies to avoid the
unnecessary conversion of important farmland to nonagricultural uses.
7. Voluntary State Programs:
A. California's Program of Restrictive Agreements and Differential Assessments: The
California Land Conservation Act of 1965, commonly known as the Williamson Act, allows
cities, counties and individual landowners to form agricultural preserves and enter into
contracts for 10 or more years to insure that these parcels of land remain strictly for
agricultural use. Since 1972 the Act has extended eligibility to recreational and open space
lands such as scenic highway corridors, salt ponds and wildlife preserves. These
contractually restricted lands may be taxed differentially for their real value. One hundred-
acre districts constitute the minimum land size eligible.
Suggestion: An improved version of the Act would state that if the land is converted
after the contract expires, the landowner must pay the difference in the taxes between
market value for the land and the agricultural tax value which he or she had been
paying under the Act. This measure would help to insure that farmland would not be
converted after the 10 year period ends.
B. Maryland Agricultural Land Preservation Program: Agricultural landowners within
agricultural districts have the opportunity to sell their development rights to the Maryland
Land Preservation Foundation under the agreement that these landowners will not
subdivide or develop their land for an initial period of five years. After five years the
landowner may terminate the agreement with one year notice.
As is stated above under the California Williamson Act, the landowner should pay the back
taxes on the property if he or she decides to convert the land after the contract expires, in
order to discourage such conversions.
C. Wisconsin Income Tax Incentive Program: The Wisconsin Farmland Preservation Program
of December 1977 encourages local jurisdictions in Wisconsin to adopt agricultural
preservation plans or exclusive agricultural district zoning ordinances in exchange for credit
against state income tax and exemption from special utility assessment. Eligible candidates
include local governments and landowners with at least 35 acres of land per dwelling unit in
agricultural use and gross farm profits of at least $6.000 per year, or $18,000 over three
years.
8. Mandatory State Programs:
A. The Environmental Control Act in the state of Vermont was adopted in 1970 by the Vermont
State Legislature. The Act established an environmental board with 9 members (appointed
by the Governor) to implement a planning process and a permit system to screen most
subdivisions and development proposals according to specific criteria stated in the law.
The planning process consists of an interim and a final Land Capability and Development
Plan, the latter of which acts as a policy plan to control development. The policies are
written in order to:
· prevent air and water pollution;
· protect scenic or natural beauty, historic sites and rare and irreplaceable
natural areas; and
· consider the impacts of growth and reduction of development on areas of
primary agricultural soils.
B. The California State Coastal Commission: In 1976 the Coastal Act was passed to establish
a permanent Coastal Commission with permit and planning authority The purpose of the
Coastal Commission was and is to protect the sensitive coastal zone environment and its
resources, while accommodating the social and economic needs of the state. The
Commission has the power to regulate development in the coastal zones by issuing permits
on a case by case basis until local agencies can develop their own coastal plans, which
must be certified by the Coastal Commission.
C. Hawaii's Program of State Zoning: In 1961, the Hawaii State Legislature established Act
187, the Land Use Law, to protect the farmland and the welfare of the local people of
Hawaii by planning to avoid “unnecessary urbanization”. The Law made all state lands into
four districts: agricultural, conservation, rural and urban. The Governor appointed members
to a State Land Use Commission, whose duties were to uphold the Law and form the
boundaries of the four districts. In addition to state zoning, the Land Use Law introduced a
program of Differential Assessment, wherein agricultural landowners paid taxes on their
land for its agricultural use value, rather than its market value.
D. The Oregon Land Use Act of 1973: This act established the Land Conservation and
Development Commission (LCDC) to provide statewide planning goals and guidelines.
Under this Act, Oregon cities and counties are each required to draw up a comprehensive
plan, consistent with statewide planning goals. Agricultural land preservation is high on the
list of state goals to be followed locally.
If the proposed site is subject to or has used one or more of the above farmland protection programs or
policies, score the site 20 points. If none of the above policies or programs apply to this site, score 0
points.
5. How close is the site to an urban built-up area?
The site is 2 miles or more from an
urban built-up area
15 points
The site is more than 1 mile but less
than 2 miles from an urban built-up area
10 points
The site is less than 1 mile from, but is
not adjacent to an urban built-up area
5 points
The site is adjacent to an urban built-up
area
0 points
This factor is designed to evaluate the extent to which the proposed site is located next to an existing
urban area. The urban built-up area must be 2500 population. The measurement from the built-up area
should be made from the point at which the density is 30 structures per 40 acres and with no open or
non-urban land existing between the major built-up areas and this point. Suburbs adjacent to cities or
urban built-up areas should be considered as part of that urban area.
For greater accuracy, use the following chart to determine how much protection the site should receive
according to its distance from an urban area. See chart below:
Distance From Perimeter
of Site to Urban Area
Points
More than 10,560 feet 15
9,860 to 10,559 feet 14
9,160 to 9,859 feet 13
8,460 to 9,159 feet 12
7,760 to 8,459 feet 11
7,060 to 7,759 feet 10
6,360 to 7,059 feet 9
5,660 to 6,359 feet 8
4,960 to 5,659 feet 7
4,260 to 4,959 feet 6
3,560 to 4,259 feet 5
2,860 to 3,559 feet 4
2,160 to 2,859 feet 3
1,460 to 2,159 feet 2
760 to 1,459 feet 1
Less than 760 feet (adjacent)0
6. How close is the site to water lines, sewer lines and/or other local facilities and services
whose capacities and design would promote nonagricultural use?
None of the services exist nearer than
3 miles from the site
15 points
Some of the services exist more than
one but less than 3 miles from the site
10 points
All of the services exist within 1/2 mile
of the site
0 points
This question determines how much infrastructure (water, sewer, etc.) is in place which could facilitate
nonagricultural development. The fewer facilities in place, the more difficult it is to develop an area.
Thus, if a proposed site is further away from these services (more than 3 miles distance away), the site
should be awarded the highest number of points (15). As the distance of the parcel of land to services
decreases, the number of points awarded declines as well. So, when the site is equal to or further than
1 mile but less than 3 miles away from services, it should be given 10 points. Accordingly, if this
distance is 1/2 mile to less than 1 mile, award 5 points; and if the distance from land to services is less
than 1/2 mile, award 0 points.
Distance to public facilities should be measured from the perimeter of the parcel in question to the
nearest site(s) where necessary facilities are located. If there is more than one distance (i.e. from site to
water and from site to sewer), use the average distance (add all distances and then divide by the
number of different distances to get the average).
Facilities which could promote nonagricultural use include:
· Water lines
· Sewer lines
· Power lines
· Gas lines
· Circulation (roads)
· Fire and police protection
· Schools
7. Is the farm unit(s) containing the site (before the project) as large as the average-size
farming unit in the county? (Average farm sizes in each county are available from the NRCS
field offices in each state. Data are from the latest available Census of Agriculture, Acreage
of Farm Units in Operation with $1,000 or more in sales.)
As large or larger:10 points
Below average: Deduct 1 point for
each 5 percent below the average,
down to 0 points if 50 percent or more
is below average
9 to 0 points
This factor is designed to determine how much protection the site should receive, according to its size in
relation to the average size of farming units within the county. The larger the parcel of land, the more
agricultural use value the land possesses, and vice versa. Thus, if the farm unit is as large or larger
than the county average, it receives the maximum number of points (10). The smaller the parcel of land
compared to the county average, the fewer number of points given. Please see below:
Parcel Size in Relation to Average County
Size
Points
Same size or larger than average (l00 percent)10
95 percent of average 9
90 percent of average 8
85 percent of average 7
80 percent of average 6
75 percent of average 5
70 percent of average 4
65 percent of average 3
60 percent of average 2
55 percent of average 1
50 percent or below county average 0
State and local Natural Resources Conservation Service offices will have the average farm size
information, provided by the latest available Census of Agriculture data
8. If this site is chosen for the project, how much of the remaining land on the farm will become
non-farmable because of interference with land patterns?
Acreage equal to more than 25 percent of acres directly
converted by the project
10 points
Acreage equal to between 25 and 5 percent of the acres
directly converted by the project
9 to 1 point(s)
Acreage equal to less than 5 percent of the acres
directly converted by the project
0 points
This factor tackles the question of how the proposed development will affect the rest of the land on the
farm The site which deserves the most protection from conversion will receive the greatest number of
points, and vice versa. For example, if the project is small, such as an extension on a house, the rest of
the agricultural land would remain farmable, and thus a lower number of points is given to the site.
Whereas if a large-scale highway is planned, a greater portion of the land (not including the site) will
become non-farmable, since access to the farmland will be blocked; and thus, the site should receive
the highest number of points (10) as protection from conversion
Conversion uses of the Site Which Would Make the Rest of the Land Non-Farmable by Interfering with
Land Patterns
Conversions which make the rest of the property nonfarmable include any development which blocks
accessibility to the rest of the site Examples are highways, railroads, dams or development along the
front of a site restricting access to the rest of the property.
The point scoring is as follows:
Amount of Land Not Including the
Site Which Will Become Non-
Farmable
Points
25 percent or greater 10
23 - 24 percent 9
21 - 22 percent 8
19 - 20 percent 7
17 - 18 percent 6
15 - 16 percent 5
13 - 14 percent 4
11 - 12 percent 3
9 - 11 percent 2
6 - 8 percent 1
5 percent or less 0
9. Does the site have available adequate supply of farm support services and markets, i.e., farm
suppliers, equipment dealers, processing and storage facilities and farmer's markets?
All required services are available 5 points
Some required services are available 4 to 1 point(s)
No required services are available 0 points
This factor is used to assess whether there are adequate support facilities, activities and industry to
keep the farming business in business. The more support facilities available to the agricultural
landowner, the more feasible it is for him or her to stay in production. In addition, agricultural support
facilities are compatible with farmland. This fact is important, because some land uses are not
compatible; for example, development next to farmland cam be dangerous to the welfare of the
agricultural land, as a result of pressure from the neighbors who often do not appreciate the noise,
smells and dust intrinsic to farmland. Thus, when all required agricultural support services are available,
the maximum number of points (5) are awarded. When some services are available, 4 to 1 point(s) are
awarded; and consequently, when no services are available, no points are given. See below:
Percent of
Services Available
Points
100 percent 5
75 to 99 percent 4
50 to 74 percent 3
25 to 49 percent 2
1 to 24 percent 1
No services 0
10. Does the site have substantial and well-maintained on farm investments such as barns,
other storage buildings, fruit trees and vines, field terraces, drainage, irrigation, waterways,
or other soil and water conservation measures?
High amount of on-farm investment 20 points
Moderate amount of non-farm
investment
19 to 1 point(s)
No on-farm investments 0 points
This factor assesses the quantity of agricultural facilities in place on the proposed site. If a significant
agricultural infrastructure exists, the site should continue to be used for farming, and thus the parcel will
receive the highest amount of points towards protection from conversion or development. If there is little
on farm investment, the site will receive comparatively less protection. See-below:
Amount of On-farm Investment Points
As much or more than necessary to
maintain production (100 percent)
20
95 to 99 percent 19
90 to 94 percent 18
85 to 89 percent 17
80 to 84 percent 16
75 to 79 percent 15
70 to 74 percent 14
65 to 69 percent 13
60 to 64 percent 12
55 to 59 percent 11
50 to 54 percent 10
45 to 49 percent 9
40 to 44 percent 8
35 to 39 percent 7
30 to 34 percent 6
25 to 29 percent 5
20 to 24 percent 4
15 to 19 percent 3
10 to 14 percent 2
5 to 9 percent 1
0 to 4 percent 0
11. Would the project at this site, by converting farmland to nonagricultural use, reduce the
support for farm support services so as to jeopardize the continued existence of these
support services and thus, the viability of the farms remaining in the area?
Substantial reduction in demand for support
services if the site is converted
10 points
Some reduction in demand for support
services if the site is converted
9 to 1 point(s)
No significant reduction in demand for
support services if the site is converted
0 points
This factor determines whether there are other agriculturally related activities, businesses or jobs
dependent upon the working of the pre-converted site in order for the others to remain in production.
The more people and farming activities relying upon this land, the more protection it should receive from
conversion. Thus, if a substantial reduction in demand for support services were to occur as a result of
conversions, the proposed site would receive a high score of 10; some reduction in demand would
receive 9 to 1 point(s), and no significant reduction in demand would receive no points.
Specific points are outlined as follows:
Amount of Reduction in Support
Services if Site is Converted to
Nonagricultural Use
Points
Substantial reduction (100 percent)10
90 to 99 percent 9
80 to 89 percent 8
70 to 79 percent 7
60 to 69 percent 6
50 to 59 percent 5
40 to 49 percent 4
30 to 39 percent 3
20 to 29 percent 2
10 to 19 percent 1
No significant reduction (0 to 9 percent)0
12. Is the kind and intensity of the proposed use of the site sufficiently incompatible with
agriculture that it is likely to contribute to the eventual conversion of the surrounding
farmland to nonagricultural use?
Proposed project is incompatible with existing
agricultural use of surrounding farmland
10 points
Proposed project is tolerable of existing
agricultural use of surrounding farmland
9 to 1 point(s)
Proposed project is fully compatible with existing
agricultural use of surrounding farmland
0 points
Factor 12 determines whether conversion of the proposed agricultural site will eventually cause the
conversion of neighboring farmland as a result of incompatibility of use of the first with the latter. The
more incompatible the proposed conversion is with agriculture, the more protection this site receives
from conversion. Therefor-, if the proposed conversion is incompatible with agriculture, the site receives
10 points. If the project is tolerable with agriculture, it receives 9 to 1 points; and if the proposed
conversion is compatible with agriculture, it receives 0 points.
CORRIDOR - TYPE SITE ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
The following criteria are to be used for projects that have a linear or corridor - type site configuration
connecting two distant points, and crossing several different tracts of land. These include utility lines,
highways, railroads, stream improvements, and flood control systems. Federal agencies are to assess
the suitability of each corridor-type site or design alternative for protection as farmland along with the
land evaluation information.
For Water and Waste Programs, corridor analyses are not applicable for distribution or collection
networks. Analyses are applicable for transmission or trunk lines where placement of the lines are
flexible.
(1) How much land is in nonurban use within a radius of 1.0 mile form where the project is intended?
(2) More than 90 percent (3) 15 points
(4) 90 to 20 percent (5) 14 to 1 point(s).
(6) Less than 20 percent (7) 0 points
(2) How much of the perimeter of the site borders on land in nonurban use?
(3) More than 90 percent (4) 10 point(s)
(5) 90 to 20 percent (6) 9 to 1 points
(7) less than 20 percent (8) 0 points
(3) How much of the site has been farmed (managed for a scheduled harvest or timber activity) more
than five of the last 10 years?
(4) More than 90 percent (5) 20 points
(6) 90 to 20 percent (7) 19 to 1 point(s)
(8) Less than 20 percent (9) 0 points
(4) Is the site subject to state or unit of local government policies or programs to protect farmland or
covered by private programs to protect farmland?
Site is protected 20 points
Site is not protected 0 points
(5) Is the farm unit(s) containing the site (before the project) as large as the average - size farming unit
in the County? (Average farm sizes in each county are available from the NRCS field offices in
each state. Data are from the latest available Census of Agriculture, Acreage of Farm Units in
Operation with $1,000 or more in sales.)
As large or larger 10 points
Below average deduct 1 point for each 5
percent below the average, down to 0 points if
50 percent or more below average
9 to 0 points
(6) If the site is chosen for the project, how much of the remaining land on the farm will become non-
farmable because of interference with land patterns?
Acreage equal to more than 25 percent of
acres directly converted by the project
25 points
Acreage equal to between 25 and 5 percent of
the acres directly convened by the project
1 to 24 point(s)
Acreage equal to less than 5 percent of the
acres directly converted by the project
0 points
(7) Does the site have available adequate supply of farm support services and markets, i.e., farm
suppliers, equipment dealers, processing and storage facilities and farmer's markets?
All required services are available 5 points
Some required services are available 4 to 1 point(s)
No required services are available 0 points
(8) Does the site have substantial and well-maintained on-farm investments such as barns, other
storage building, fruit trees and vines, field terraces, drainage, irrigation, waterways, or other soil
and water conservation measures?
High amount of on-farm investment 20 points
Moderate amount of on-farm investment 19 to 1 point(s)
No on-farm investment 0 points
(9) Would the project at this site, by converting farmland to nonagricultural use, reduce the demand for
farm support services so as to jeopardize the continued existence of these support services and
thus, the viability of the farms remaining in the area?
Substantial reduction in demand for support
services if the site is convened
25 points
Some reduction in demand for support
services if the site is convened
1 to 24 point(s)
No significant reduction in demand for support
services if the site is converted
0 points
(10) Is the kind and intensity of the proposed use of the site sufficiently incompatible with agriculture
that it is likely to contribute to the eventual conversion of surrounding farmland to nonagricultural
use?
Proposed project is incompatible to existing
agricultural use of surrounding farmland
10 points
Proposed project is tolerable to existing
agricultural use of surrounding farmland
9 to 1 point(s)
Proposed project is fully compatible with
existing agricultural use of surrounding
farmland
0 points

Axiom Environmental, Inc. 218 Snow Avenue, Raleigh, North Carolina 27603 919-270-9306

July 27, 2017

Renee Gledhill-Earley,
Environmental Review Coordinator
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office
109 East Jones Street
Raleigh, NC 27601

Re: Major Hill Stream and Wetland mitigation project in Alamance County 17-009
Alamance County, NC

Dear Renee:

The purpose of this letter is to request written concurrence from the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)
for the Major Hill Stream and Wetland Mitigation Project in Alamance County. Please review and comment
on any possible issues that might emerge with respect to SHPO from a potential wetland and stream restoration
project depicted on the attached mapping (USGS Saxapahaw and Silk Hope, North Carolina 7.5-minute
topographic quadrangle).

Field visits were conducted in November and December 2016 to ascertain the presence of structures or features
that may be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. No structures were identified within the
proposed Site boundary. In addition, the SHPO website was evaluated for known occurrences of sites eligible
for the historic register. Based on the website review, one surveyed structure is located on Bethel South Fork
Road near the Site (AM0582 Simon Hadley House); however, the structure does not appear eligible for the
National Register and will not be disturbed during mitigation activities.

We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please feel free to contact me with any
questions that you may have concerning the extent of site disturbance associated with this project.

Yours truly,

AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.

W. Grant Lewis
Senior Project Manager

Attachments
Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed
FIGURE
Drawn by:
Date:
Scale:
Project No.:
KRJ
MAY 2017
1:20000
17-009
Title:
Project:
Prepared for:
Alamance County, NC
MAJOR HILL STREAM ANDWETLANDMITIGATION SITE
SITE LOCATION
1
³
Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic
Society, i-cubed
Copyright:© 2014 DeLorme LindleyMillRoadNotes:
Background Imagery Sources
(Provided by ESRI Data and
Maps):
1. Physical Map of the United
States (2009) Created by the
U.S. Park Service (Upper Inset)
2. DeLorme World Basemap
digital mapping (2010, Lower
Inset)
3. Saxapahaw (1977), Silk Hope
(1974), Snow Camp (1978), and
Crutchfield Crossroads (1974)
7.5-minute topographic
quadrangles provided by the
U.S. Geological Survey
Major Hilll R o a d
Directions to the Site from Raleigh:- Take US-64 West out of Raleigh and travel 25 miles,- Take exit 381 and turn right onto NC-87 N,- After 5 miles, take a left onto Castle Rock Farm Road,- After 5.8 miles, Castle Rock Farm Road becomes Old Switchboard Road,- Continue for 2.1 miles, turn right onto Lindley Mill Road,- After 0.5 mile, turn left onto Major Hill Road,- Site can be accessed from Burnett Church Road which is on the left after 1 mile.- Site Latitude, Longitude 35.873206, -79.360906 (NAD83/WGS84)BethelSouthForkRoadOl
d
S
wit
c
h
b
oard
R
o
a
d
FORM-LBE-CCA
®kcehCoeG htiw tropeR ™paM suidaR RDE ehT
6 Armstrong Road, 4th floor
Shelton, CT 06484
Toll Free: 800.352.0050
www.edrnet.com
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
2040 Burnett Church Road
Snow Camp, NC 27349
Inquiry Number: 5005690.6s
July 27, 2017
SECTION PAGE
Executive Summary ES1
Overview Map 2
Detail Map 3
Map Findings Summary 4
Map Findings 8
Orphan Summary 9
Government Records Searched/Data Currency Tracking GR-1
GEOCHECK ADDENDUM
Physical Setting Source Addendum A-1
Physical Setting Source Summary A-2
Physical Setting Source Map A-7
Physical Setting Source Map Findings A-8
Physical Setting Source Records Searched PSGR-1
TC5005690.6s
Thank you for your business.
Please contact EDR at 1-800-352-0050
with any questions or comments.
Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice
This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data
Resources, 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 this Report is not to be construed as legal advice.
Copyright 2017 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.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5005690.6s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
A search of available environmental records was conducted by Environmental Data Resources, Inc (EDR).
The report was designed to assist parties seeking to meet the search requirements of EPA’s Standards
and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries (40 CFR Part 312), the ASTM Standard Practice for
Environmental Site Assessments (E 1527-13) or custom requirements developed for the evaluation of
environmental risk associated with a parcel of real estate.
TARGET PROPERTY INFORMATION
ADDRESS
2040 BURNETT CHURCH ROAD
SNOW CAMP, NC 27349
COORDINATES
35.8727560 - 35˚ 52’ 21.92’’Latitude (North):
79.3613490 - 79˚ 21’ 40.85’’Longitude (West):
Zone 17Universal Tranverse Mercator:
647934.5UTM X (Meters):
3970875.0UTM Y (Meters):
546 ft. above sea levelElevation:
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP ASSOCIATED WITH TARGET PROPERTY
5945591 SILK HOPE, NCTarget Property Map:
2013Version Date:
5945583 SAXAPAHAW, NCNortheast Map:
2013Version Date:
5945515 CRUTCHFIELD CROSSROADS, NCSouthwest Map:
2013Version Date:
5945593 SNOW CAMP, NCNorthwest Map:
2013Version Date:
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY IN THIS REPORT
20140827, 20140619Portions of Photo from:
USDASource:
5005690.6s Page 2
NO MAPPED SITES FOUND
MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
Target Property Address:
2040 BURNETT CHURCH ROAD
SNOW CAMP, NC 27349
Click on Map ID to see full detail.
MAP RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.)
ID DATABASE ACRONYMS ELEVATION DIRECTIONSITE NAME ADDRESS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5005690.6s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3
TARGET PROPERTY SEARCH RESULTS
The target property was not listed in any of the databases searched by EDR.
DATABASES WITH NO MAPPED SITES
No mapped sites were found in EDR’s search of available ("reasonably ascertainable ") government
records either on the target property or within the search radius around the target property for the
following databases:
STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Federal NPL site list
NPL National Priority List
Proposed NPL Proposed National Priority List Sites
NPL LIENS Federal Superfund Liens
Federal Delisted NPL site list
Delisted NPL National Priority List Deletions
Federal CERCLIS list
FEDERAL FACILITY Federal Facility Site Information listing
SEMS Superfund Enterprise Management System
Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site list
SEMS-ARCHIVE Superfund Enterprise Management System Archive
Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list
CORRACTS Corrective Action Report
Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD facilities list
RCRA-TSDF RCRA - Treatment, Storage and Disposal
Federal RCRA generators list
RCRA-LQG RCRA - Large Quantity Generators
RCRA-SQG RCRA - Small Quantity Generators
RCRA-CESQG RCRA - Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator
Federal institutional controls / engineering controls registries
LUCIS Land Use Control Information System
US ENG CONTROLS Engineering Controls Sites List
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5005690.6s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4
US INST CONTROL Sites with Institutional Controls
Federal ERNS list
ERNS Emergency Response Notification System
State- and tribal - equivalent NPL
NC HSDS Hazardous Substance Disposal Site
State- and tribal - equivalent CERCLIS
SHWS Inactive Hazardous Sites Inventory
State and tribal landfill and/or solid waste disposal site lists
SWF/LF List of Solid Waste Facilities
OLI Old Landfill Inventory
State and tribal leaking storage tank lists
LAST Leaking Aboveground Storage Tanks
LUST Regional UST Database
INDIAN LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
LUST TRUST State Trust Fund Database
State and tribal registered storage tank lists
FEMA UST Underground Storage Tank Listing
UST Petroleum Underground Storage Tank Database
AST AST Database
INDIAN UST Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
State and tribal institutional control / engineering control registries
INST CONTROL No Further Action Sites With Land Use Restrictions Monitoring
State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites
INDIAN VCP Voluntary Cleanup Priority Listing
VCP Responsible Party Voluntary Action Sites
State and tribal Brownfields sites
BROWNFIELDS Brownfields Projects Inventory
ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Local Brownfield lists
US BROWNFIELDS A Listing of Brownfields Sites
Local Lists of Landfill / Solid Waste Disposal Sites
SWRCY Recycling Center Listing
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5005690.6s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5
HIST LF Solid Waste Facility Listing
INDIAN ODI Report on the Status of Open Dumps on Indian Lands
DEBRIS REGION 9 Torres Martinez Reservation Illegal Dump Site Locations
ODI Open Dump Inventory
IHS OPEN DUMPS Open Dumps on Indian Land
Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites
US HIST CDL Delisted National Clandestine Laboratory Register
US CDL National Clandestine Laboratory Register
Local Land Records
LIENS 2 CERCLA Lien Information
Records of Emergency Release Reports
HMIRS Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System
SPILLS Spills Incident Listing
IMD Incident Management Database
SPILLS 90 SPILLS 90 data from FirstSearch
SPILLS 80 SPILLS 80 data from FirstSearch
Other Ascertainable Records
RCRA NonGen / NLR RCRA - Non Generators / No Longer Regulated
FUDS Formerly Used Defense Sites
DOD Department of Defense Sites
SCRD DRYCLEANERS State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners Listing
US FIN ASSUR Financial Assurance Information
EPA WATCH LIST EPA WATCH LIST
2020 COR ACTION 2020 Corrective Action Program List
TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act
TRIS Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System
SSTS Section 7 Tracking Systems
ROD Records Of Decision
RMP Risk Management Plans
RAATS RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System
PRP Potentially Responsible Parties
PADS PCB Activity Database System
ICIS Integrated Compliance Information System
FTTS FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide
Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
MLTS Material Licensing Tracking System
COAL ASH DOE Steam-Electric Plant Operation Data
COAL ASH EPA Coal Combustion Residues Surface Impoundments List
PCB TRANSFORMER PCB Transformer Registration Database
RADINFO Radiation Information Database
HIST FTTS FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Administrative Case Listing
DOT OPS Incident and Accident Data
CONSENT Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees
INDIAN RESERV Indian Reservations
FUSRAP Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program
UMTRA Uranium Mill Tailings Sites
LEAD SMELTERS Lead Smelter Sites
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5005690.6s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6
US AIRS Aerometric Information Retrieval System Facility Subsystem
US MINES Mines Master Index File
ABANDONED MINES Abandoned Mines
FINDS Facility Index System/Facility Registry System
DOCKET HWC Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket Listing
ECHO Enforcement & Compliance History Information
UXO Unexploded Ordnance Sites
FUELS PROGRAM EPA Fuels Program Registered Listing
COAL ASH Coal Ash Disposal Sites
DRYCLEANERS Drycleaning Sites
Financial Assurance Financial Assurance Information Listing
NPDES NPDES Facility Location Listing
UIC Underground Injection Wells Listing
EDR HIGH RISK HISTORICAL RECORDS
EDR Exclusive Records
EDR MGP EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plants
EDR Hist Auto EDR Exclusive Historic Gas Stations
EDR Hist Cleaner EDR Exclusive Historic Dry Cleaners
EDR RECOVERED GOVERNMENT ARCHIVES
Exclusive Recovered Govt. Archives
RGA HWS Recovered Government Archive State Hazardous Waste Facilities List
RGA LF Recovered Government Archive Solid Waste Facilities List
RGA LUST Recovered Government Archive Leaking Underground Storage Tank
SURROUNDING SITES: SEARCH RESULTS
Surrounding sites were not identified.
Unmappable (orphan) sites are not considered in the foregoing analysis.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5005690.6s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7
There were no unmapped sites in this report.
EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.
00 680
640720
6 80
680
6 4 0640640
600
6 00
520560 5204
480520520520520
5 6 0
5 205 2 0520
520
56056 0640
5606 00
6 005605605 6 0
6005 60 560
560
6
00560560
5 6 0560
560
5 20
48 0
600
60
0
6 00
56 0
56 0
5 60
560560
5 6 0
5 205
6
0
52 056060
5 6 0
5 6056 0
6000560560 4805 20
600
5205 204 80600 48
0
480520
5 2060 0
520560
5 20560 480560
520
6 00 48 0
5 6 0
560480600
5605
2
0 5560560560
5 6 0
5205 2 0
52056052052060056
0
520 5205 205205 2 0
5 2 05 2 0 520520520520600
520520
52052052060052052056
052 0
56
0
6 00520 600
520600
520560 6 0 0
600
60 056
0 5 206 0520600
5 6 05 6 0
5 60
56056
EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.
560
560560
56
0
5 20
5
6
0
520
60
0
5
20
520560520
MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
TargetDistance Total
Database Property(Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted
STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Federal NPL site list
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000NPL
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000Proposed NPL
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPNPL LIENS
Federal Delisted NPL site list
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000Delisted NPL
Federal CERCLIS list
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500FEDERAL FACILITY
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500SEMS
Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site list
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500SEMS-ARCHIVE
Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000CORRACTS
Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD facilities list
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500RCRA-TSDF
Federal RCRA generators list
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250RCRA-LQG
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250RCRA-SQG
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250RCRA-CESQG
Federal institutional controls /
engineering controls registries
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500LUCIS
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500US ENG CONTROLS
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500US INST CONTROL
Federal ERNS list
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPERNS
State- and tribal - equivalent NPL
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000NC HSDS
State- and tribal - equivalent CERCLIS
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000SHWS
State and tribal landfill and/or
solid waste disposal site lists
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500SWF/LF
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500OLI
State and tribal leaking storage tank lists
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500LAST
TC5005690.6s Page 4
MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
TargetDistance Total
Database Property(Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500LUST
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500INDIAN LUST
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500LUST TRUST
State and tribal registered storage tank lists
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250FEMA UST
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250UST
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250AST
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250INDIAN UST
State and tribal institutional
control / engineering control registries
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500INST CONTROL
State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500INDIAN VCP
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500VCP
State and tribal Brownfields sites
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500BROWNFIELDS
ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Local Brownfield lists
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500US BROWNFIELDS
Local Lists of Landfill / Solid
Waste Disposal Sites
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500SWRCY
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500HIST LF
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500INDIAN ODI
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500DEBRIS REGION 9
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500ODI
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500IHS OPEN DUMPS
Local Lists of Hazardous waste /
Contaminated Sites
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPUS HIST CDL
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPUS CDL
Local Land Records
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPLIENS 2
Records of Emergency Release Reports
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPHMIRS
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPSPILLS
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500IMD
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPSPILLS 90
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPSPILLS 80
Other Ascertainable Records
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250RCRA NonGen / NLR
TC5005690.6s Page 5
MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
TargetDistance Total
Database Property(Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000FUDS
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000DOD
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500SCRD DRYCLEANERS
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPUS FIN ASSUR
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPEPA WATCH LIST
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.2502020 COR ACTION
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPTSCA
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPTRIS
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPSSTS
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000ROD
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPRMP
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPRAATS
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPPRP
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPPADS
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPICIS
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPFTTS
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPMLTS
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPCOAL ASH DOE
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500COAL ASH EPA
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPPCB TRANSFORMER
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPRADINFO
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPHIST FTTS
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPDOT OPS
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000CONSENT
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000INDIAN RESERV
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000FUSRAP
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500UMTRA
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPLEAD SMELTERS
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPUS AIRS
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250US MINES
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500ABANDONED MINES
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPFINDS
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPDOCKET HWC
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPECHO
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000UXO
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250FUELS PROGRAM
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500COAL ASH
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250DRYCLEANERS
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPFinancial Assurance
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPNPDES
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPUIC
EDR HIGH RISK HISTORICAL RECORDS
EDR Exclusive Records
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000EDR MGP
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.125EDR Hist Auto
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.125EDR Hist Cleaner
EDR RECOVERED GOVERNMENT ARCHIVES
Exclusive Recovered Govt. Archives
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPRGA HWS
TC5005690.6s Page 6
MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
TargetDistance Total
Database Property(Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPRGA LF
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPRGA LUST
0 0 0 0 0 0 0- Totals --
NOTES:
TP = Target Property
NR = Not Requested at this Search Distance
Sites may be listed in more than one database
TC5005690.6s Page 7
MAP FINDINGSMap ID
Direction
EDR ID NumberDistance
EPA ID NumberDatabase(s)SiteElevation
NO SITES FOUND
TC5005690.6s Page 8
ORPHAN SUMMARYCityEDR IDSite NameSite AddressZipDatabase(s)Count: 0 records.NO SITES FOUNDTC5005690.6s Page 9
To maintain currency of the following federal and state databases, EDR contacts the appropriate governmental agency
on a monthly or quarterly basis, as required.
Number of Days to Update:Provides confirmation that EDR is reporting records that have been updated within 90 days
from the date the government agency made the information available to the public.
STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Federal NPL site list
NPL: National Priority List
National Priorities List (Superfund). The NPL is a subset of CERCLIS and identifies over 1,200 sites for priority
cleanup under the Superfund Program. NPL sites may encompass relatively large areas. As such, EDR provides polygon
coverage for over 1,000 NPL site boundaries produced by EPA’s Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center
(EPIC) and regional EPA offices.
Date of Government Version: 04/05/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/21/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/12/2017
Number of Days to Update: 21
Source: EPA
Telephone: N/A
Last EDR Contact: 07/07/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/16/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
NPL Site Boundaries
Sources:
EPA’s Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC)
Telephone: [phone]
EPA Region 1 EPA Region 6
Telephone [phone] Telephone: [phone]
EPA Region 3 EPA Region 7
Telephone [phone] Telephone: [phone]
EPA Region 4 EPA Region 8
Telephone [phone] Telephone: [phone]
EPA Region 5 EPA Region 9
Telephone [phone] Telephone: [phone]
EPA Region 10
Telephone [phone]
Proposed NPL: Proposed National Priority List Sites
A site that has been proposed for listing on the National Priorities List through the issuance of a proposed rule
in the Federal Register. EPA then accepts public comments on the site, responds to the comments, and places on
the NPL those sites that continue to meet the requirements for listing.
Date of Government Version: 04/05/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/21/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/12/2017
Number of Days to Update: 21
Source: EPA
Telephone: N/A
Last EDR Contact: 07/07/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/16/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
NPL LIENS: Federal Superfund Liens
Federal Superfund Liens. Under the authority granted the USEPA by CERCLA of 1980, the USEPA has the authority
to file liens against real property in order to recover remedial action expenditures or when the property owner
received notification of potential liability. USEPA compiles a listing of filed notices of Superfund Liens.
Date of Government Version: 10/15/1991
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/02/1994
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/30/1994
Number of Days to Update: 56
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08/15/2011
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/28/2011
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
TC5005690.6s Page GR-1
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Federal Delisted NPL site list
Delisted NPL: National Priority List Deletions
The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) establishes the criteria that the
EPA uses to delete sites from the NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425.(e), sites may be deleted from the
NPL where no further response is appropriate.
Date of Government Version: 04/05/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/21/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/12/2017
Number of Days to Update: 21
Source: EPA
Telephone: N/A
Last EDR Contact: 07/07/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/16/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
Federal CERCLIS list
FEDERAL FACILITY: Federal Facility Site Information listing
A listing of National Priority List (NPL) and Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) sites found in the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System (CERCLIS) Database where EPA Federal Facilities
Restoration and Reuse Office is involved in cleanup activities.
Date of Government Version: 11/07/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/05/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/07/2017
Number of Days to Update: 92
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/07/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/16/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
SEMS: Superfund Enterprise Management System
SEMS (Superfund Enterprise Management System) tracks hazardous waste sites, potentially hazardous waste sites,
and remedial activities performed in support of EPA’s Superfund Program across the United States. The list was
formerly know as CERCLIS, renamed to SEMS by the EPA in 2015. The list contains data on potentially hazardous
waste sites that have been reported to the USEPA by states, municipalities, private companies and private persons,
pursuant to Section 103 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA).
This dataset also contains sites which are either proposed to or on the National Priorities List (NPL) and the
sites which are in the screening and assessment phase for possible inclusion on the NPL.
Date of Government Version: 02/07/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/19/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 16
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/21/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/30/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site list
SEMS-ARCHIVE: Superfund Enterprise Management System Archive
TC5005690.6s Page GR-2
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
SEMS-ARCHIVE (Superfund Enterprise Management System Archive) tracks sites that have no further interest under
the Federal Superfund Program based on available information. The list was formerly known as the CERCLIS-NFRAP,
renamed to SEMS ARCHIVE by the EPA in 2015. EPA may perform a minimal level of assessment work at a site while
it is archived if site conditions change and/or new information becomes available. Archived sites have been removed
and archived from the inventory of SEMS sites. Archived status indicates that, to the best of EPA’s knowledge,
assessment at a site has been completed and that EPA has determined no further steps will be taken to list the
site on the National Priorities List (NPL), unless information indicates this decision was not appropriate or
other considerations require a recommendation for listing at a later time. The decision does not necessarily mean
that there is no hazard associated with a given site; it only means that. based upon available information, the
location is not judged to be potential NPL site.
Date of Government Version: 02/07/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/19/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 16
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/08/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/31/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list
CORRACTS: Corrective Action Report
CORRACTS identifies hazardous waste handlers with RCRA corrective action activity.
Date of Government Version: 12/12/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/28/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2017
Number of Days to Update: 44
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/29/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/09/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD facilities list
RCRA-TSDF: RCRA - Treatment, Storage and Disposal
RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database
includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste
as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Transporters are individuals or entities that
move hazardous waste from the generator offsite to a facility that can recycle, treat, store, or dispose of the
waste. TSDFs treat, store, or dispose of the waste.
Date of Government Version: 12/12/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/28/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2017
Number of Days to Update: 44
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/29/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/09/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
Federal RCRA generators list
RCRA-LQG: RCRA - Large Quantity Generators
RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database
includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste
as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Large quantity generators (LQGs) generate
over 1,000 kilograms (kg) of hazardous waste, or over 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month.
Date of Government Version: 12/12/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/28/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2017
Number of Days to Update: 44
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/29/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/09/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
TC5005690.6s Page GR-3
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
RCRA-SQG: RCRA - Small Quantity Generators
RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database
includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste
as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Small quantity generators (SQGs) generate
between 100 kg and 1,000 kg of hazardous waste per month.
Date of Government Version: 12/12/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/28/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2017
Number of Days to Update: 44
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/29/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/09/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
RCRA-CESQG: RCRA - Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators
RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database
includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste
as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Conditionally exempt small quantity generators
(CESQGs) generate less than 100 kg of hazardous waste, or less than 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month.
Date of Government Version: 12/12/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/28/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2017
Number of Days to Update: 44
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/29/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/09/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
Federal institutional controls / engineering controls registries
LUCIS: Land Use Control Information System
LUCIS contains records of land use control information pertaining to the former Navy Base Realignment and Closure
properties.
Date of Government Version: 12/28/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/04/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/07/2017
Number of Days to Update: 93
Source: Department of the Navy
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 05/15/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/28/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
US ENG CONTROLS: Engineering Controls Sites List
A listing of sites with engineering controls in place. Engineering controls include various forms of caps, building
foundations, liners, and treatment methods to create pathway elimination for regulated substances to enter environmental
media or effect human health.
Date of Government Version: 02/13/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/28/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 06/09/2017
Number of Days to Update: 101
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 05/31/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/11/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
US INST CONTROL: Sites with Institutional Controls
A listing of sites with institutional controls in place. Institutional controls include administrative measures,
such as groundwater use restrictions, construction restrictions, property use restrictions, and post remediation
care requirements intended to prevent exposure to contaminants remaining on site. Deed restrictions are generally
required as part of the institutional controls.
Date of Government Version: 02/13/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/28/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 06/09/2017
Number of Days to Update: 101
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 05/31/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/11/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
TC5005690.6s Page GR-4
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Federal ERNS list
ERNS: Emergency Response Notification System
Emergency Response Notification System. ERNS records and stores information on reported releases of oil and hazardous
substances.
Date of Government Version: 09/26/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/29/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 11/11/2016
Number of Days to Update: 43
Source: National Response Center, United States Coast Guard
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/28/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/09/2017
Data Release Frequency: Annually
State- and tribal - equivalent NPL
HSDS: Hazardous Substance Disposal Site
Locations of uncontrolled and unregulated hazardous waste sites. The file includes sites on the National Priority
List as well as those on the state priority list.
Date of Government Version: 08/09/2011
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/08/2011
Date Made Active in Reports: 12/05/2011
Number of Days to Update: 27
Source: North Carolina Center for Geographic Information and Analysis
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/26/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2017
Data Release Frequency: Biennially
State- and tribal - equivalent CERCLIS
SHWS: Inactive Hazardous Sites Inventory
State Hazardous Waste Sites. State hazardous waste site records are the states’ equivalent to CERCLIS. These sites
may or may not already be listed on the federal CERCLIS list. Priority sites planned for cleanup using state funds
(state equivalent of Superfund) are identified along with sites where cleanup will be paid for by potentially
responsible parties. Available information varies by state.
Date of Government Version: 10/07/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/15/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/06/2017
Number of Days to Update: 81
Source: Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/15/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/25/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
State and tribal landfill and/or solid waste disposal site lists
SWF/LF: List of Solid Waste Facilities
Solid Waste Facilities/Landfill Sites. SWF/LF type records typically contain an inventory of solid waste disposal
facilities or landfills in a particular state. Depending on the state, these may be active or inactive facilities
or open dumps that failed to meet RCRA Subtitle D Section 4004 criteria for solid waste landfills or disposal
sites.
Date of Government Version: 11/17/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/28/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/08/2017
Number of Days to Update: 70
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/29/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/09/2017
Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
OLI: Old Landfill Inventory
Old landfill inventory location information. (Does not include no further action sites and other agency lead
sites).
Date of Government Version: 08/08/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/17/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/08/2017
Number of Days to Update: 50
Source: Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 04/14/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/24/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
TC5005690.6s Page GR-5
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
State and tribal leaking storage tank lists
LAST: Leaking Aboveground Storage Tanks
A listing of leaking aboveground storage tank site locations.
Date of Government Version: 10/07/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/09/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/06/2017
Number of Days to Update: 117
Source: Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 05/10/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/21/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
LUST: Regional UST Database
This database contains information obtained from the Regional Offices. It provides a more detailed explanation
of current and historic activity for individual sites, as well as what was previously found in the Incident Management
Database. Sites in this database with Incident Numbers are considered LUSTs.
Date of Government Version: 11/07/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/09/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/06/2017
Number of Days to Update: 117
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 05/10/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/21/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
INDIAN LUST R5: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
Leaking underground storage tanks located on Indian Land in Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin.
Date of Government Version: 11/14/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/26/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 99
Source: EPA, Region 5
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 04/28/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/07/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
INDIAN LUST R1: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
A listing of leaking underground storage tank locations on Indian Land.
Date of Government Version: 11/14/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/26/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 99
Source: EPA Region 1
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 04/28/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/07/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
INDIAN LUST R4: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
LUSTs on Indian land in Florida, Mississippi and North Carolina.
Date of Government Version: 10/14/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/27/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 98
Source: EPA Region 4
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 04/28/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/07/2017
Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
INDIAN LUST R10: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
LUSTs on Indian land in Alaska, Idaho, Oregon and Washington.
Date of Government Version: 10/07/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/26/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 99
Source: EPA Region 10
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 04/28/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/07/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
INDIAN LUST R9: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
LUSTs on Indian land in Arizona, California, New Mexico and Nevada
TC5005690.6s Page GR-6
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 10/06/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/26/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 99
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 04/28/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/07/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
INDIAN LUST R6: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
LUSTs on Indian land in New Mexico and Oklahoma.
Date of Government Version: 10/01/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/26/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 99
Source: EPA Region 6
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 04/28/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/07/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
INDIAN LUST R7: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
LUSTs on Indian land in Iowa, Kansas, and Nebraska
Date of Government Version: 09/01/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/26/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 99
Source: EPA Region 7
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 04/28/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/07/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
INDIAN LUST R8: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
LUSTs on Indian land in Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming.
Date of Government Version: 10/17/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/26/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 99
Source: EPA Region 8
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 04/28/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/07/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
LUST TRUST: State Trust Fund Database
This database contains information about claims against the State Trust Funds for reimbursements for expenses
incurred while remediating Leaking USTs.
Date of Government Version: 01/06/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/12/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/06/2017
Number of Days to Update: 53
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/13/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/23/2017
Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
State and tribal registered storage tank lists
FEMA UST: Underground Storage Tank Listing
A listing of all FEMA owned underground storage tanks.
Date of Government Version: 01/01/2010
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/16/2010
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010
Number of Days to Update: 55
Source: FEMA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/14/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/23/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
UST: Petroleum Underground Storage Tank Database
Registered Underground Storage Tanks. UST’s are regulated under Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) and must be registered with the state department responsible for administering the UST program. Available
information varies by state program.
TC5005690.6s Page GR-7
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 09/30/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/09/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/06/2017
Number of Days to Update: 117
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 05/10/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/21/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
AST: AST Database
Facilities with aboveground storage tanks that have a capacity greater than 21,000 gallons.
Date of Government Version: 09/26/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/30/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/06/2017
Number of Days to Update: 66
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/19/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/02/2017
Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
INDIAN UST R10: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian
land in EPA Region 10 (Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Washington, and Tribal Nations).
Date of Government Version: 10/07/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/26/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 99
Source: EPA Region 10
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 04/28/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/07/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
INDIAN UST R8: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian
land in EPA Region 8 (Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming and 27 Tribal Nations).
Date of Government Version: 10/17/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/26/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 99
Source: EPA Region 8
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 04/28/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/07/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
INDIAN UST R7: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian
land in EPA Region 7 (Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, and 9 Tribal Nations).
Date of Government Version: 09/01/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/26/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 99
Source: EPA Region 7
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 04/28/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/07/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
INDIAN UST R6: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian
land in EPA Region 6 (Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Texas and 65 Tribes).
Date of Government Version: 10/01/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/26/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 99
Source: EPA Region 6
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 04/28/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/07/2017
Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
INDIAN UST R5: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian
land in EPA Region 5 (Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin and Tribal Nations).
TC5005690.6s Page GR-8
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 01/14/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/26/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 99
Source: EPA Region 5
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 04/28/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/07/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
INDIAN UST R4: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian
land in EPA Region 4 (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee
and Tribal Nations)
Date of Government Version: 10/14/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/27/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 98
Source: EPA Region 4
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 04/28/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/07/2017
Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
INDIAN UST R1: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian
land in EPA Region 1 (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont and ten Tribal
Nations).
Date of Government Version: 11/14/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/26/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 99
Source: EPA, Region 1
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 04/28/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/07/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
INDIAN UST R9: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian
land in EPA Region 9 (Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, the Pacific Islands, and Tribal Nations).
Date of Government Version: 10/06/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/26/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 99
Source: EPA Region 9
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 04/28/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/07/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
State and tribal institutional control / engineering control registries
INST CONTROL: No Further Action Sites With Land Use Restrictions Monitoring
A land use restricted site is a property where there are limits or requirements on future use of the property
due to varying levels of cleanup possible, practical, or necessary at the site.
Date of Government Version: 10/07/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/15/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/06/2017
Number of Days to Update: 81
Source: Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/15/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/25/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites
INDIAN VCP R7: Voluntary Cleanup Priority Lisitng
A listing of voluntary cleanup priority sites located on Indian Land located in Region 7.
Date of Government Version: 03/20/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/22/2008
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/19/2008
Number of Days to Update: 27
Source: EPA, Region 7
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 04/20/2009
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/20/2009
Data Release Frequency: Varies
TC5005690.6s Page GR-9
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
INDIAN VCP R1: Voluntary Cleanup Priority Listing
A listing of voluntary cleanup priority sites located on Indian Land located in Region 1.
Date of Government Version: 07/27/2015
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/29/2015
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2016
Number of Days to Update: 142
Source: EPA, Region 1
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/27/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/09/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
VCP: Responsible Party Voluntary Action Sites
Responsible Party Voluntary Action site locations.
Date of Government Version: 10/07/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/15/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/08/2017
Number of Days to Update: 83
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/15/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/25/2017
Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
State and tribal Brownfields sites
BROWNFIELDS: Brownfields Projects Inventory
A brownfield site is an abandoned, idled, or underused property where the threat of environmental contamination
has hindered its redevelopment. All of the sites in the inventory are working toward a brownfield agreement for
cleanup and liabitliy control.
Date of Government Version: 01/03/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/06/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/06/2017
Number of Days to Update: 59
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/07/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/16/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Local Brownfield lists
US BROWNFIELDS: A Listing of Brownfields Sites
Brownfields are real property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence
or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant. Cleaning up and reinvesting in these
properties takes development pressures off of undeveloped, open land, and both improves and protects the environment.
Assessment, Cleanup and Redevelopment Exchange System (ACRES) stores information reported by EPA Brownfields
grant recipients on brownfields properties assessed or cleaned up with grant funding as well as information on
Targeted Brownfields Assessments performed by EPA Regions. A listing of ACRES Brownfield sites is obtained from
Cleanups in My Community. Cleanups in My Community provides information on Brownfields properties for which information
is reported back to EPA, as well as areas served by Brownfields grant programs.
Date of Government Version: 03/02/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/02/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/07/2017
Number of Days to Update: 36
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/20/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/02/2017
Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
Local Lists of Landfill / Solid Waste Disposal Sites
SWRCY: Recycling Center Listing
A listing of recycling center locations.
Date of Government Version: 11/30/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/05/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/08/2017
Number of Days to Update: 93
Source: Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 05/01/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/14/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
TC5005690.6s Page GR-10
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
HIST LF: Solid Waste Facility Listing
A listing of solid waste facilities.
Date of Government Version: 11/06/2006
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/13/2007
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/02/2007
Number of Days to Update: 17
Source: Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 01/19/2009
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
INDIAN ODI: Report on the Status of Open Dumps on Indian Lands
Location of open dumps on Indian land.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/1998
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/03/2007
Date Made Active in Reports: 01/24/2008
Number of Days to Update: 52
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 05/01/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/14/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
DEBRIS REGION 9: Torres Martinez Reservation Illegal Dump Site Locations
A listing of illegal dump sites location on the Torres Martinez Indian Reservation located in eastern Riverside
County and northern Imperial County, California.
Date of Government Version: 01/12/2009
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/07/2009
Date Made Active in Reports: 09/21/2009
Number of Days to Update: 137
Source: EPA, Region 9
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/24/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2017
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
ODI: Open Dump Inventory
An open dump is defined as a disposal facility that does not comply with one or more of the Part 257 or Part 258
Subtitle D Criteria.
Date of Government Version: 06/30/1985
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/09/2004
Date Made Active in Reports: 09/17/2004
Number of Days to Update: 39
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/09/2004
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
IHS OPEN DUMPS: Open Dumps on Indian Land
A listing of all open dumps located on Indian Land in the United States.
Date of Government Version: 04/01/2014
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/06/2014
Date Made Active in Reports: 01/29/2015
Number of Days to Update: 176
Source: Department of Health & Human Serivces, Indian Health Service
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 05/05/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/14/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites
US HIST CDL: National Clandestine Laboratory Register
A listing of clandestine drug lab locations that have been removed from the DEAs National Clandestine Laboratory
Register.
Date of Government Version: 02/09/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/08/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 06/09/2017
Number of Days to Update: 93
Source: Drug Enforcement Administration
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 02/28/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/12/2017
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
TC5005690.6s Page GR-11
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
US CDL: Clandestine Drug Labs
A listing of clandestine drug lab locations. The U.S. Department of Justice ("the Department") provides this
web site as a public service. It contains addresses of some locations where law enforcement agencies reported
they found chemicals or other items that indicated the presence of either clandestine drug laboratories or dumpsites.
In most cases, the source of the entries is not the Department, and the Department has not verified the entry
and does not guarantee its accuracy. Members of the public must verify the accuracy of all entries by, for example,
contacting local law enforcement and local health departments.
Date of Government Version: 02/09/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/08/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 06/09/2017
Number of Days to Update: 93
Source: Drug Enforcement Administration
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 05/31/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/11/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
Local Land Records
LIENS 2: CERCLA Lien Information
A Federal CERCLA (’Superfund’) lien can exist by operation of law at any site or property at which EPA has spent
Superfund monies. These monies are spent to investigate and address releases and threatened releases of contamination.
CERCLIS provides information as to the identity of these sites and properties.
Date of Government Version: 02/18/2014
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/18/2014
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/24/2014
Number of Days to Update: 37
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/26/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
Records of Emergency Release Reports
HMIRS: Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System
Hazardous Materials Incident Report System. HMIRS contains hazardous material spill incidents reported to DOT.
Date of Government Version: 12/28/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/28/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/03/2017
Number of Days to Update: 37
Source: U.S. Department of Transportation
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/28/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/09/2017
Data Release Frequency: Annually
SPILLS: Spills Incident Listing
A listing spills, hazardous material releases, sanitary sewer overflows, wastewater treatment plant bypasses and
upsets, citizen complaints, and any other environmental emergency calls reported to the agency.
Date of Government Version: 12/14/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/16/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/08/2017
Number of Days to Update: 82
Source: Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/12/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/25/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
IMD: Incident Management Database
Groundwater and/or soil contamination incidents
Date of Government Version: 07/21/2006
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/01/2006
Date Made Active in Reports: 08/23/2006
Number of Days to Update: 22
Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/01/2011
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/17/2011
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
SPILLS 90: SPILLS90 data from FirstSearch
Spills 90 includes those spill and release records available exclusively from FirstSearch databases. Typically,
they may include chemical, oil and/or hazardous substance spills recorded after 1990. Duplicate records that are
already included in EDR incident and release records are not included in Spills 90.
TC5005690.6s Page GR-12
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 09/27/2012
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/03/2013
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/06/2013
Number of Days to Update: 62
Source: FirstSearch
Telephone: N/A
Last EDR Contact: 01/03/2013
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
SPILLS 80: SPILLS80 data from FirstSearch
Spills 80 includes those spill and release records available from FirstSearch databases prior to 1990. Typically,
they may include chemical, oil and/or hazardous substance spills recorded before 1990. Duplicate records that
are already included in EDR incident and release records are not included in Spills 80.
Date of Government Version: 06/14/2001
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/03/2013
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/06/2013
Number of Days to Update: 62
Source: FirstSearch
Telephone: N/A
Last EDR Contact: 01/03/2013
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
Other Ascertainable Records
RCRA NonGen / NLR: RCRA - Non Generators / No Longer Regulated
RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database
includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste
as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Non-Generators do not presently generate hazardous
waste.
Date of Government Version: 12/12/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/28/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2017
Number of Days to Update: 44
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/29/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/09/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
FUDS: Formerly Used Defense Sites
The listing includes locations of Formerly Used Defense Sites properties where the US Army Corps of Engineers
is actively working or will take necessary cleanup actions.
Date of Government Version: 01/31/2015
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/08/2015
Date Made Active in Reports: 10/13/2015
Number of Days to Update: 97
Source: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 02/24/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/05/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
DOD: Department of Defense Sites
This data set consists of federally owned or administered lands, administered by the Department of Defense, that
have any area equal to or greater than 640 acres of the United States, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2005
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/10/2006
Date Made Active in Reports: 01/11/2007
Number of Days to Update: 62
Source: USGS
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/12/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/23/2017
Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
FEDLAND: Federal and Indian Lands
Federally and Indian administrated lands of the United States. Lands included are administrated by: Army Corps
of Engineers, Bureau of Reclamation, National Wild and Scenic River, National Wildlife Refuge, Public Domain Land,
Wilderness, Wilderness Study Area, Wildlife Management Area, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau of Land Management,
Department of Justice, Forest Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2005
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/06/2006
Date Made Active in Reports: 01/11/2007
Number of Days to Update: 339
Source: U.S. Geological Survey
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/14/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/23/2017
Data Release Frequency: N/A
TC5005690.6s Page GR-13
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
SCRD DRYCLEANERS: State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners Listing
The State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners was established in 1998, with support from the U.S. EPA Office
of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation. It is comprised of representatives of states with established
drycleaner remediation programs. Currently the member states are Alabama, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Kansas,
Minnesota, Missouri, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin.
Date of Government Version: 01/01/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/03/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/07/2017
Number of Days to Update: 63
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 05/19/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/28/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
US FIN ASSUR: Financial Assurance Information
All owners and operators of facilities that treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste are required to provide
proof that they will have sufficient funds to pay for the clean up, closure, and post-closure care of their facilities.
Date of Government Version: 02/13/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/15/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/12/2017
Number of Days to Update: 86
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 05/17/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/28/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
EPA WATCH LIST: EPA WATCH LIST
EPA maintains a "Watch List" to facilitate dialogue between EPA, state and local environmental agencies on enforcement
matters relating to facilities with alleged violations identified as either significant or high priority. Being
on the Watch List does not mean that the facility has actually violated the law only that an investigation by
EPA or a state or local environmental agency has led those organizations to allege that an unproven violation
has in fact occurred. Being on the Watch List does not represent a higher level of concern regarding the alleged
violations that were detected, but instead indicates cases requiring additional dialogue between EPA, state and
local agencies - primarily because of the length of time the alleged violation has gone unaddressed or unresolved.
Date of Government Version: 08/30/2013
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/21/2014
Date Made Active in Reports: 06/17/2014
Number of Days to Update: 88
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 05/08/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/21/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
2020 COR ACTION: 2020 Corrective Action Program List
The EPA has set ambitious goals for the RCRA Corrective Action program by creating the 2020 Corrective Action
Universe. This RCRA cleanup baseline includes facilities expected to need corrective action. The 2020 universe
contains a wide variety of sites. Some properties are heavily contaminated while others were contaminated but
have since been cleaned up. Still others have not been fully investigated yet, and may require little or no remediation.
Inclusion in the 2020 Universe does not necessarily imply failure on the part of a facility to meet its RCRA obligations.
Date of Government Version: 04/22/2013
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/03/2015
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/09/2015
Number of Days to Update: 6
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 05/05/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/21/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
TSCA: Toxic Substances Control Act
Toxic Substances Control Act. TSCA identifies manufacturers and importers of chemical substances included on the
TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory list. It includes data on the production volume of these substances by plant
site.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2012
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/15/2015
Date Made Active in Reports: 01/29/2015
Number of Days to Update: 14
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/21/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/02/2017
Data Release Frequency: Every 4 Years
TC5005690.6s Page GR-14
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
TRIS: Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System
Toxic Release Inventory System. TRIS identifies facilities which release toxic chemicals to the air, water and
land in reportable quantities under SARA Title III Section 313.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2014
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/24/2015
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/05/2016
Number of Days to Update: 133
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 05/26/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/04/2017
Data Release Frequency: Annually
SSTS: Section 7 Tracking Systems
Section 7 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, as amended (92 Stat. 829) requires all
registered pesticide-producing establishments to submit a report to the Environmental Protection Agency by March
1st each year. Each establishment must report the types and amounts of pesticides, active ingredients and devices
being produced, and those having been produced and sold or distributed in the past year.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2009
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/10/2010
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/25/2011
Number of Days to Update: 77
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 04/26/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/07/2017
Data Release Frequency: Annually
ROD: Records Of Decision
Record of Decision. ROD documents mandate a permanent remedy at an NPL (Superfund) site containing technical
and health information to aid in the cleanup.
Date of Government Version: 11/25/2013
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/12/2013
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/24/2014
Number of Days to Update: 74
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/09/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/18/2017
Data Release Frequency: Annually
RMP: Risk Management Plans
When Congress passed the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, it required EPA to publish regulations and guidance
for chemical accident prevention at facilities using extremely hazardous substances. The Risk Management Program
Rule (RMP Rule) was written to implement Section 112(r) of these amendments. The rule, which built upon existing
industry codes and standards, requires companies of all sizes that use certain flammable and toxic substances
to develop a Risk Management Program, which includes a(n): Hazard assessment that details the potential effects
of an accidental release, an accident history of the last five years, and an evaluation of worst-case and alternative
accidental releases; Prevention program that includes safety precautions and maintenance, monitoring, and employee
training measures; and Emergency response program that spells out emergency health care, employee training measures
and procedures for informing the public and response agencies (e.g the fire department) should an accident occur.
Date of Government Version: 02/01/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/09/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/07/2017
Number of Days to Update: 57
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/24/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
RAATS: RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System
RCRA Administration Action Tracking System. RAATS contains records based on enforcement actions issued under RCRA
pertaining to major violators and includes administrative and civil actions brought by the EPA. For administration
actions after September 30, 1995, data entry in the RAATS database was discontinued. EPA will retain a copy of
the database for historical records. It was necessary to terminate RAATS because a decrease in agency resources
made it impossible to continue to update the information contained in the database.
Date of Government Version: 04/17/1995
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/03/1995
Date Made Active in Reports: 08/07/1995
Number of Days to Update: 35
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/02/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/01/2008
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
TC5005690.6s Page GR-15
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
PRP: Potentially Responsible Parties
A listing of verified Potentially Responsible Parties
Date of Government Version: 10/25/2013
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/17/2014
Date Made Active in Reports: 10/20/2014
Number of Days to Update: 3
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/06/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/21/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
PADS: PCB Activity Database System
PCB Activity Database. PADS Identifies generators, transporters, commercial storers and/or brokers and disposers
of PCB’s who are required to notify the EPA of such activities.
Date of Government Version: 01/20/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/28/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 09/02/2016
Number of Days to Update: 127
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 04/10/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/24/2017
Data Release Frequency: Annually
ICIS: Integrated Compliance Information System
The Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS) supports the information needs of the national enforcement
and compliance program as well as the unique needs of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
program.
Date of Government Version: 11/18/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/23/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2017
Number of Days to Update: 79
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/24/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/23/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
FTTS: FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
FTTS tracks administrative cases and pesticide enforcement actions and compliance activities related to FIFRA,
TSCA and EPCRA (Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act). To maintain currency, EDR contacts the
Agency on a quarterly basis.
Date of Government Version: 04/09/2009
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/16/2009
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/11/2009
Number of Days to Update: 25
Source: EPA/Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 05/19/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/04/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
FTTS INSP: FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
A listing of FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System (FTTS) inspections and enforcements.
Date of Government Version: 04/09/2009
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/16/2009
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/11/2009
Number of Days to Update: 25
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 05/19/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/04/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
MLTS: Material Licensing Tracking System
MLTS is maintained by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and contains a list of approximately 8,100 sites which
possess or use radioactive materials and which are subject to NRC licensing requirements. To maintain currency,
EDR contacts the Agency on a quarterly basis.
Date of Government Version: 08/30/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/08/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 10/21/2016
Number of Days to Update: 43
Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 05/08/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/21/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
TC5005690.6s Page GR-16
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
COAL ASH DOE: Steam-Electric Plant Operation Data
A listing of power plants that store ash in surface ponds.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2005
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/07/2009
Date Made Active in Reports: 10/22/2009
Number of Days to Update: 76
Source: Department of Energy
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/05/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/18/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
COAL ASH EPA: Coal Combustion Residues Surface Impoundments List
A listing of coal combustion residues surface impoundments with high hazard potential ratings.
Date of Government Version: 07/01/2014
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/10/2014
Date Made Active in Reports: 10/20/2014
Number of Days to Update: 40
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: N/A
Last EDR Contact: 06/05/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/18/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
PCB TRANSFORMER: PCB Transformer Registration Database
The database of PCB transformer registrations that includes all PCB registration submittals.
Date of Government Version: 02/01/2011
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/19/2011
Date Made Active in Reports: 01/10/2012
Number of Days to Update: 83
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 04/28/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/07/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
RADINFO: Radiation Information Database
The Radiation Information Database (RADINFO) contains information about facilities that are regulated by U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations for radiation and radioactivity.
Date of Government Version: 01/04/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/06/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2017
Number of Days to Update: 35
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/12/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/16/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
HIST FTTS: FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Administrative Case Listing
A complete administrative case listing from the FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System (FTTS) for all ten EPA regions. The
information was obtained from the National Compliance Database (NCDB). NCDB supports the implementation of FIFRA
(Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act) and TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act). Some EPA regions
are now closing out records. Because of that, and the fact that some EPA regions are not providing EPA Headquarters
with updated records, it was decided to create a HIST FTTS database. It included records that may not be included
in the newer FTTS database updates. This database is no longer updated.
Date of Government Version: 10/19/2006
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/01/2007
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/10/2007
Number of Days to Update: 40
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 12/17/2007
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/17/2008
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
HIST FTTS INSP: FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Inspection & Enforcement Case Listing
A complete inspection and enforcement case listing from the FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System (FTTS) for all ten EPA
regions. The information was obtained from the National Compliance Database (NCDB). NCDB supports the implementation
of FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act) and TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act). Some
EPA regions are now closing out records. Because of that, and the fact that some EPA regions are not providing
EPA Headquarters with updated records, it was decided to create a HIST FTTS database. It included records that
may not be included in the newer FTTS database updates. This database is no longer updated.
TC5005690.6s Page GR-17
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 10/19/2006
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/01/2007
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/10/2007
Number of Days to Update: 40
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 12/17/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/17/2008
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
DOT OPS: Incident and Accident Data
Department of Transporation, Office of Pipeline Safety Incident and Accident data.
Date of Government Version: 07/31/2012
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/07/2012
Date Made Active in Reports: 09/18/2012
Number of Days to Update: 42
Source: Department of Transporation, Office of Pipeline Safety
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 05/02/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/14/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
CONSENT: Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees
Major legal settlements that establish responsibility and standards for cleanup at NPL (Superfund) sites. Released
periodically by United States District Courts after settlement by parties to litigation matters.
Date of Government Version: 09/30/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/18/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/03/2017
Number of Days to Update: 77
Source: Department of Justice, Consent Decree Library
Telephone: Varies
Last EDR Contact: 06/21/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/09/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
BRS: Biennial Reporting System
The Biennial Reporting System is a national system administered by the EPA that collects data on the generation
and management of hazardous waste. BRS captures detailed data from two groups: Large Quantity Generators (LQG)
and Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2013
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/24/2015
Date Made Active in Reports: 09/30/2015
Number of Days to Update: 218
Source: EPA/NTIS
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 05/26/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/04/2017
Data Release Frequency: Biennially
INDIAN RESERV: Indian Reservations
This map layer portrays Indian administered lands of the United States that have any area equal to or greater
than 640 acres.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2014
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/14/2015
Date Made Active in Reports: 01/10/2017
Number of Days to Update: 546
Source: USGS
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/11/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/23/2017
Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
FUSRAP: Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program
DOE established the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) in 1974 to remediate sites where
radioactive contamination remained from Manhattan Project and early U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) operations.
Date of Government Version: 12/23/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/27/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/17/2017
Number of Days to Update: 52
Source: Department of Energy
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 05/05/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/21/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
UMTRA: Uranium Mill Tailings Sites
Uranium ore was mined by private companies for federal government use in national defense programs. When the mills
shut down, large piles of the sand-like material (mill tailings) remain after uranium has been extracted from
the ore. Levels of human exposure to radioactive materials from the piles are low; however, in some cases tailings
were used as construction materials before the potential health hazards of the tailings were recognized.
TC5005690.6s Page GR-18
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 09/14/2010
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/07/2011
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/01/2012
Number of Days to Update: 146
Source: Department of Energy
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 05/22/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/04/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
LEAD SMELTER 1: Lead Smelter Sites
A listing of former lead smelter site locations.
Date of Government Version: 12/05/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/05/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2017
Number of Days to Update: 36
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/07/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/16/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
LEAD SMELTER 2: Lead Smelter Sites
A list of several hundred sites in the U.S. where secondary lead smelting was done from 1931and 1964. These sites
may pose a threat to public health through ingestion or inhalation of contaminated soil or dust
Date of Government Version: 04/05/2001
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/27/2010
Date Made Active in Reports: 12/02/2010
Number of Days to Update: 36
Source: American Journal of Public Health
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 12/02/2009
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
US AIRS (AFS): Aerometric Information Retrieval System Facility Subsystem (AFS)
The database is a sub-system of Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS). AFS contains compliance data
on air pollution point sources regulated by the U.S. EPA and/or state and local air regulatory agencies. This
information comes from source reports by various stationary sources of air pollution, such as electric power plants,
steel mills, factories, and universities, and provides information about the air pollutants they produce. Action,
air program, air program pollutant, and general level plant data. It is used to track emissions and compliance
data from industrial plants.
Date of Government Version: 10/12/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/26/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/03/2017
Number of Days to Update: 100
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/21/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/09/2017
Data Release Frequency: Annually
US AIRS MINOR: Air Facility System Data
A listing of minor source facilities.
Date of Government Version: 10/12/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/26/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/03/2017
Number of Days to Update: 100
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/21/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/09/2017
Data Release Frequency: Annually
US MINES: Mines Master Index File
Contains all mine identification numbers issued for mines active or opened since 1971. The data also includes
violation information.
Date of Government Version: 02/08/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/28/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/07/2017
Number of Days to Update: 38
Source: Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 05/31/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/11/2017
Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
US MINES 2: Ferrous and Nonferrous Metal Mines Database Listing
This map layer includes ferrous (ferrous metal mines are facilities that extract ferrous metals, such as iron
ore or molybdenum) and nonferrous (Nonferrous metal mines are facilities that extract nonferrous metals, such
as gold, silver, copper, zinc, and lead) metal mines in the United States.
TC5005690.6s Page GR-19
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 12/05/2005
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/29/2008
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/18/2008
Number of Days to Update: 49
Source: USGS
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 05/31/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/11/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
US MINES 3: Active Mines & Mineral Plants Database Listing
Active Mines and Mineral Processing Plant operations for commodities monitored by the Minerals Information Team
of the USGS.
Date of Government Version: 04/14/2011
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/08/2011
Date Made Active in Reports: 09/13/2011
Number of Days to Update: 97
Source: USGS
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/02/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/11/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
ABANDONED MINES: Abandoned Mines
An inventory of land and water impacted by past mining (primarily coal mining) is maintained by OSMRE to provide
information needed to implement the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA). The inventory
contains information on the location, type, and extent of AML impacts, as well as, information on the cost associated
with the reclamation of those problems. The inventory is based upon field surveys by State, Tribal, and OSMRE
program officials. It is dynamic to the extent that it is modified as new problems are identified and existing
problems are reclaimed.
Date of Government Version: 03/14/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/17/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/07/2017
Number of Days to Update: 21
Source: Department of Interior
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/09/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/25/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
FINDS: Facility Index System/Facility Registry System
Facility Index System. FINDS contains both facility information and ’pointers’ to other sources that contain more
detail. EDR includes the following FINDS databases in this report: PCS (Permit Compliance System), AIRS (Aerometric
Information Retrieval System), DOCKET (Enforcement Docket used to manage and track information on civil judicial
enforcement cases for all environmental statutes), FURS (Federal Underground Injection Control), C-DOCKET (Criminal
Docket System used to track criminal enforcement actions for all environmental statutes), FFIS (Federal Facilities
Information System), STATE (State Environmental Laws and Statutes), and PADS (PCB Activity Data System).
Date of Government Version: 04/04/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/07/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/12/2017
Number of Days to Update: 35
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/07/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/18/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
DOCKET HWC: Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket Listing
A complete list of the Federal Agency Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket Facilities.
Date of Government Version: 06/02/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/03/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 09/02/2016
Number of Days to Update: 91
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 05/24/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/11/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
UXO: Unexploded Ordnance Sites
A listing of unexploded ordnance site locations
Date of Government Version: 10/25/2015
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/29/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/05/2016
Number of Days to Update: 67
Source: Department of Defense
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/17/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/30/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
TC5005690.6s Page GR-20
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
ECHO: Enforcement & Compliance History Information
ECHO provides integrated compliance and enforcement information for about 800,000 regulated facilities nationwide.
Date of Government Version: 03/19/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/21/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/12/2017
Number of Days to Update: 52
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/07/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/18/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
FUELS PROGRAM: EPA Fuels Program Registered Listing
This listing includes facilities that are registered under the Part 80 (Code of Federal Regulations) EPA Fuels
Programs. All companies now are required to submit new and updated registrations.
Date of Government Version: 02/22/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/22/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/12/2017
Number of Days to Update: 79
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 05/24/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/04/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
COAL ASH: Coal Ash Disposal Sites
A listing of coal combustion products distribution permits issued by the Division for the treatment, storage,
transportation, use and disposal of coal combustion products.
Date of Government Version: 12/14/2015
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/23/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/18/2016
Number of Days to Update: 85
Source: Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 05/15/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/14/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
DRYCLEANERS: Drycleaning Sites
Potential and known drycleaning sites, active and abandoned, that the Drycleaning Solvent Cleanup Program has
knowledge of and entered into this database.
Date of Government Version: 12/13/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/20/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 06/02/2017
Number of Days to Update: 164
Source: Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/20/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/02/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
Financial Assurance 1: Financial Assurance Information Listing
A listing of financial assurance information for underground storage tank facilities. Financial assurance is intended
to ensure that resources are available to pay for the cost of closure, post-closure care, and corrective measures
if the owner or operator of a regulated facility is unable or unwilling to pay.
Date of Government Version: 09/30/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/09/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/06/2017
Number of Days to Update: 117
Source: Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 05/10/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/21/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
Financial Assurance 2: Financial Assurance Information Listing
Information for solid waste facilities. Financial assurance is intended to ensure that resources are available
to pay for the cost of closure, post-closure care, and corrective measures if the owner or operator of a regulated
facility is unable or unwilling to pay.
Date of Government Version: 10/02/2012
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/03/2012
Date Made Active in Reports: 10/26/2012
Number of Days to Update: 23
Source: Department of Environmental & Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/23/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/09/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
TC5005690.6s Page GR-21
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Financial Assurance 3: Financial Assurance Information
Hazardous waste financial assurance information.
Date of Government Version: 09/14/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/16/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 10/05/2016
Number of Days to Update: 19
Source: Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/12/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/25/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
NPDES: NPDES Facility Location Listing
General information regarding NPDES(National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) permits.
Date of Government Version: 02/17/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/19/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/03/2016
Number of Days to Update: 74
Source: Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/15/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/14/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
UIC: Underground Injection Wells Listing
A listing of uncerground injection wells locations.
Date of Government Version: 12/07/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/09/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/08/2017
Number of Days to Update: 89
Source: Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/05/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/18/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
EDR HIGH RISK HISTORICAL RECORDS
EDR Exclusive Records
EDR MGP: EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plants
The EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plant Database includes records of coal gas plants (manufactured gas plants)
compiled by EDR’s researchers. Manufactured gas sites were used in the United States from the 1800’s to 1950’s
to produce a gas that could be distributed and used as fuel. These plants used whale oil, rosin, coal, or a mixture
of coal, oil, and water that also produced a significant amount of waste. Many of the byproducts of the gas production,
such as coal tar (oily waste containing volatile and non-volatile chemicals), sludges, oils and other compounds
are potentially hazardous to human health and the environment. The byproduct from this process was frequently
disposed of directly at the plant site and can remain or spread slowly, serving as a continuous source of soil
and groundwater contamination.
Date of Government Version: N/A
Date Data Arrived at EDR: N/A
Date Made Active in Reports: N/A
Number of Days to Update: N/A
Source: EDR, Inc.
Telephone: N/A
Last EDR Contact: N/A
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
EDR Hist Auto: EDR Exclusive Historic Gas Stations
EDR has searched selected national collections of business directories and has collected listings of potential
gas station/filling station/service station sites that were available to EDR researchers. EDR’s review was limited
to those categories of sources that might, in EDR’s opinion, include gas station/filling station/service station
establishments. The categories reviewed included, but were not limited to gas, gas station, gasoline station,
filling station, auto, automobile repair, auto service station, service station, etc. This database falls within
a category of information EDR classifies as "High Risk Historical Records", or HRHR. EDR’s HRHR effort presents
unique and sometimes proprietary data about past sites and operations that typically create environmental concerns,
but may not show up in current government records searches.
Date of Government Version: N/A
Date Data Arrived at EDR: N/A
Date Made Active in Reports: N/A
Number of Days to Update: N/A
Source: EDR, Inc.
Telephone: N/A
Last EDR Contact: N/A
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
Data Release Frequency: Varies
TC5005690.6s Page GR-22
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
EDR Hist Cleaner: EDR Exclusive Historic Dry Cleaners
EDR has searched selected national collections of business directories and has collected listings of potential
dry cleaner sites that were available to EDR researchers. EDR’s review was limited to those categories of sources
that might, in EDR’s opinion, include dry cleaning establishments. The categories reviewed included, but were
not limited to dry cleaners, cleaners, laundry, laundromat, cleaning/laundry, wash & dry etc. This database falls
within a category of information EDR classifies as "High Risk Historical Records", or HRHR. EDR’s HRHR effort
presents unique and sometimes proprietary data about past sites and operations that typically create environmental
concerns, but may not show up in current government records searches.
Date of Government Version: N/A
Date Data Arrived at EDR: N/A
Date Made Active in Reports: N/A
Number of Days to Update: N/A
Source: EDR, Inc.
Telephone: N/A
Last EDR Contact: N/A
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
Data Release Frequency: Varies
EDR RECOVERED GOVERNMENT ARCHIVES
Exclusive Recovered Govt. Archives
RGA HWS: Recovered Government Archive State Hazardous Waste Facilities List
The EDR Recovered Government Archive State Hazardous Waste database provides a list of SHWS incidents derived
from historical databases and includes many records that no longer appear in current government lists. Compiled
from Records formerly available from the Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources in North Carolina.
Date of Government Version: N/A
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/01/2013
Date Made Active in Reports: 12/24/2013
Number of Days to Update: 176
Source: Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Telephone: N/A
Last EDR Contact: 06/01/2012
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
Data Release Frequency: Varies
RGA LF: Recovered Government Archive Solid Waste Facilities List
The EDR Recovered Government Archive Landfill database provides a list of landfills derived from historical databases
and includes many records that no longer appear in current government lists. Compiled from Records formerly available
from the Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources in North Carolina.
Date of Government Version: N/A
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/01/2013
Date Made Active in Reports: 01/13/2014
Number of Days to Update: 196
Source: Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Telephone: N/A
Last EDR Contact: 06/01/2012
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
Data Release Frequency: Varies
RGA LUST: Recovered Government Archive Leaking Underground Storage Tank
The EDR Recovered Government Archive Leaking Underground Storage Tank database provides a list of LUST incidents
derived from historical databases and includes many records that no longer appear in current government lists.
Compiled from Records formerly available from the Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources in North
Carolina.
Date of Government Version: N/A
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/01/2013
Date Made Active in Reports: 12/20/2013
Number of Days to Update: 172
Source: Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Telephone: N/A
Last EDR Contact: 06/01/2012
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
Data Release Frequency: Varies
OTHER DATABASE(S)
Depending on the geographic area covered by this report, the data provided in these specialty databases may or may not be
complete. For example, the existence of wetlands information data in a specific report does not mean that all wetlands in the
area covered by the report are included. Moreover, the absence of any reported wetlands information does not necessarily
mean that wetlands do not exist in the area covered by the report.
TC5005690.6s Page GR-23
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
CT MANIFEST: Hazardous Waste Manifest Data
Facility and manifest data. Manifest is a document that lists and tracks hazardous waste from the generator through
transporters to a tsd facility.
Date of Government Version: 07/30/2013
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/19/2013
Date Made Active in Reports: 10/03/2013
Number of Days to Update: 45
Source: Department of Energy & Environmental Protection
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 05/15/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/28/2017
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
NJ MANIFEST: Manifest Information
Hazardous waste manifest information.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2015
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/29/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 01/03/2017
Number of Days to Update: 96
Source: Department of Environmental Protection
Telephone: N/A
Last EDR Contact: 07/10/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/23/2017
Data Release Frequency: Annually
NY MANIFEST: Facility and Manifest Data
Manifest is a document that lists and tracks hazardous waste from the generator through transporters to a TSD
facility.
Date of Government Version: 01/30/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/01/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/13/2017
Number of Days to Update: 12
Source: Department of Environmental Conservation
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 05/03/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/14/2017
Data Release Frequency: Annually
PA MANIFEST: Manifest Information
Hazardous waste manifest information.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2015
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/22/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 11/22/2016
Number of Days to Update: 123
Source: Department of Environmental Protection
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/17/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/30/2017
Data Release Frequency: Annually
RI MANIFEST: Manifest information
Hazardous waste manifest information
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2013
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/19/2015
Date Made Active in Reports: 07/15/2015
Number of Days to Update: 26
Source: Department of Environmental Management
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 05/22/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/04/2017
Data Release Frequency: Annually
WI MANIFEST: Manifest Information
Hazardous waste manifest information.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/13/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 07/14/2017
Number of Days to Update: 92
Source: Department of Natural Resources
Telephone: N/A
Last EDR Contact: 06/12/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/25/2017
Data Release Frequency: Annually
Oil/Gas Pipelines
Source: PennWell Corporation
Petroleum Bundle (Crude Oil, Refined Products, Petrochemicals, Gas Liquids (LPG/NGL), and Specialty
Gases (Miscellaneous)) N = Natural Gas Bundle (Natural Gas, Gas Liquids (LPG/NGL), and Specialty Gases
(Miscellaneous)). This map includes information copyrighted by PennWell Corporation. This information
is provided on a best effort basis and PennWell Corporation does not guarantee its accuracy nor warrant
its fitness for any particular purpose. Such information has been reprinted with the permission of PennWell.
Electric Power Transmission Line Data
Source: PennWell Corporation
This map includes information copyrighted by PennWell Corporation. This information is provided on a best
effort basis and PennWell Corporation does not guarantee its accuracy nor warrant its fitness for any
particular purpose. Such information has been reprinted with the permission of PennWell.
TC5005690.6s Page GR-24
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Sensitive Receptors: There are individuals deemed sensitive receptors due to their fragile immune systems and special sensitivity
to environmental discharges. These sensitive receptors typically include the elderly, the sick, and children. While the location of all
sensitive receptors cannot be determined, EDR indicates those buildings and facilities - schools, daycares, hospitals, medical centers,
and nursing homes - where individuals who are sensitive receptors are likely to be located.
AHA Hospitals:
Source: American Hospital Association, Inc.
Telephone: [phone]
The database includes a listing of hospitals based on the American Hospital Association’s annual survey of hospitals.
Medical Centers: Provider of Services Listing
Source: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
Telephone: [phone]
A listing of hospitals with Medicare provider number, produced by Centers of Medicare & Medicaid Services,
a federal agency within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Nursing Homes
Source: National Institutes of Health
Telephone: [phone]
Information on Medicare and Medicaid certified nursing homes in the United States.
Public Schools
Source: National Center for Education Statistics
Telephone: [phone]
The National Center for Education Statistics’ primary database on elementary
and secondary public education in the United States. It is a comprehensive, annual, national statistical
database of all public elementary and secondary schools and school districts, which contains data that are
comparable across all states.
Private Schools
Source: National Center for Education Statistics
Telephone: [phone]
The National Center for Education Statistics’ primary database on private school locations in the United States.
Daycare Centers: Child Care Facility List
Source: Department of Health & Human Services
Telephone: [phone]
Flood Zone Data: This data was obtained from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). It depicts 100-year and
500-year flood zones as defined by FEMA. It includes the National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL) which incorporates Flood
Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) data and Q3 data from FEMA in areas not covered by NFHL.
Source: FEMA
Telephone: [phone]
Date of Government Version: 2003, 2015
NWI: National Wetlands Inventory. This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR
in 2002, 2005 and 2010 from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
State Wetlands Data: Wetland Inventory
Source: US Fish & Wildlife Service
Telephone: [phone]
Current USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Map
Source: U.S. Geological Survey
TC5005690.6s Page GR-25
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
STREET AND ADDRESS INFORMATION
© 2015 TomTom North America, Inc. All rights reserved. This material is proprietary and the subject of copyright protection
and other intellectual property rights owned by or licensed to Tele Atlas North America, Inc. The use of this material is subject
to the terms of a license agreement. You will be held liable for any unauthorized copying or disclosure of this material.
TC5005690.6s Page GR-26
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
TC5005690.6s Page A-1
geologic strata.
of the soil, and nearby wells. Groundwater flow velocity is generally impacted by the nature of the
Groundwater flow direction may be impacted by surface topography, hydrology, hydrogeology, characteristics
2. Groundwater flow velocity.
1. Groundwater flow direction, and
Assessment of the impact of contaminant migration generally has two principal investigative components:
forming an opinion about the impact of potential contaminant migration.
EDR’s GeoCheck Physical Setting Source Addendum is provided to assist the environmental professional in
2013Version Date:
5945593 SNOW CAMP, NCNorthwest Map:
2013Version Date:
5945515 CRUTCHFIELD CROSSROADS, NCSouthwest Map:
2013Version Date:
5945583 SAXAPAHAW, NCNortheast Map:
2013Version Date:
5945591 SILK HOPE, NCTarget Property Map:
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP
546 ft. above sea levelElevation:
3970875.0UTM Y (Meters):
647934.5UTM X (Meters):
Zone 17Universal Tranverse Mercator:
79.361349 - 79˚ 21’ 40.86’’Longitude (West):
35.872756 - 35˚ 52’ 21.92’’Latitude (North):
TARGET PROPERTY COORDINATES
SNOW CAMP, NC 27349
2040 BURNETT CHURCH ROAD
MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND MITIGATION SITE
TARGET PROPERTY ADDRESS
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE ADDENDUM®
TC5005690.6s Page A-2
should be field verified.
on a relative (not an absolute) basis. Relative elevation information between sites of close proximity
Source: Topography has been determined from the USGS 7.5’ Digital Elevation Model and should be evaluated
SURROUNDING TOPOGRAPHY: ELEVATION PROFILES
Elevation (ft)Elevation (ft)TP
TP
0 1/2 1 Miles✩Target Property Elevation: 546 ft.
North South
West East582566544540515493521532522546576563572571585560545537541588596603576575552569548555546547535521540491475500477528General SSEGeneral Topographic Gradient:
TARGET PROPERTY TOPOGRAPHY
should contamination exist on the target property, what downgradient sites might be impacted.
assist the environmental professional in forming an opinion about the impact of nearby contaminated properties or,
Surface topography may be indicative of the direction of surficial groundwater flow. This information can be used to
TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
collected on nearby properties, and regional groundwater flow information (from deep aquifers).
sources of information, such as surface topographic information, hydrologic information, hydrogeologic data
using site-specific well data. If such data is not reasonably ascertainable, it may be necessary to rely on other
Groundwater flow direction for a particular site is best determined by a qualified environmental professional
GROUNDWATER FLOW DIRECTION INFORMATION
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY®
TC5005690.6s Page A-3
Not Reported
GENERAL DIRECTIONLOCATION
GROUNDWATER FLOWFROM TPMAP ID
hydrogeologically, and the depth to water table.
authorities at select sites and has extracted the date of the report, groundwater flow direction as determined
flow at specific points. EDR has reviewed reports submitted by environmental professionals to regulatory
EDR has developed the AQUIFLOW Information System to provide data on the general direction of groundwater
AQUIFLOW®
Search Radius: 1.000 Mile.
contamination exist on the target property, what downgradient sites might be impacted.
environmental professional in forming an opinion about the impact of nearby contaminated properties or, should
of groundwater flow direction in the immediate area. Such hydrogeologic information can be used to assist the
Hydrogeologic information obtained by installation of wells on a specific site can often be an indicator
HYDROGEOLOGIC INFORMATION
YES - refer to the Overview Map and Detail MapSILK HOPE
NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY
NWI Electronic
Data CoverageNWI Quad at Target Property
FEMA FIRM Flood data3710878600J
FEMA FIRM Flood data3710879600K
FEMA FIRM Flood data3710878700J
Additional Panels in search area:FEMA Source Type
FEMA FIRM Flood data3710879700J
Flood Plain Panel at Target Property FEMA Source Type
FEMA FLOOD ZONE
and bodies of water).
Refer to the Physical Setting Source Map following this summary for hydrologic information (major waterways
contamination exist on the target property, what downgradient sites might be impacted.
the environmental professional in forming an opinion about the impact of nearby contaminated properties or, should
Surface water can act as a hydrologic barrier to groundwater flow. Such hydrologic information can be used to assist
HYDROLOGIC INFORMATION
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY®
TC5005690.6s Page A-4

> 60 inchesDepth to Bedrock Max:
> 60 inchesDepth to Bedrock Min:
HIGH Corrosion Potential - Uncoated Steel:
Hydric Status: Soil does not meet the requirements for a hydric soil.
water table is more than 6 feet.
Well drained. Soils have intermediate water holding capacity. Depth toSoil Drainage Class:
textures.
moderately well and well drained soils with moderately coarse
Class B - Moderate infiltration rates. Deep and moderately deep,Hydrologic Group:
silt loamSoil Surface Texture:
HERNDON Soil Component Name:
The following information is based on Soil Conservation Service STATSGO data.
in a landscape. Soil maps for STATSGO are compiled by generalizing more detailed (SSURGO) soil survey maps.
for privately owned lands in the United States. A soil map in a soil survey is a representation of soil patterns
Survey (NCSS) and is responsible for collecting, storing, maintaining and distributing soil survey information
The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Soil Conservation Service (SCS) leads the National Cooperative Soil
DOMINANT SOIL COMPOSITION IN GENERAL AREA OF TARGET PROPERTY
Map, USGS Digital Data Series DDS - 11 (1994).
of the Conterminous U.S. at 1:2,500,000 Scale - a digital representation of the 1974 P.B. King and H.M. Beikman
Geologic Age and Rock Stratigraphic Unit Source: P.G. Schruben, R.E. Arndt and W.J. Bawiec, Geology
ROCK STRATIGRAPHIC UNIT GEOLOGIC AGE IDENTIFICATION
Volcanic RocksCategory:PaleozoicEra:
CambrianSystem:
Cambrian volcanic rocksSeries:
CvCode: (decoded above as Era, System & Series)
at which contaminant migration may be occurring.
Geologic information can be used by the environmental professional in forming an opinion about the relative speed
GEOLOGIC INFORMATION IN GENERAL AREA OF TARGET PROPERTY
move more quickly through sandy-gravelly types of soils than silty-clayey types of soils.
characteristics data collected on nearby properties and regional soil information. In general, contaminant plumes
to rely on other sources of information, including geologic age identification, rock stratigraphic unit and soil
using site specific geologic and soil strata data. If such data are not reasonably ascertainable, it may be necessary
Groundwater flow velocity information for a particular site is best determined by a qualified environmental professional
GROUNDWATER FLOW VELOCITY INFORMATION
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY®
TC5005690.6s Page A-5
clay
sandy clay loam
unweathered bedrock
weathered bedrock
silty clay loamDeeper Soil Types:
very channery - silt loam
clay loam
loam
silt loam
sandy clay
silty clay loamShallow Soil Types:
loam
channery - silt loam
clay loam
stony - silt loam
gravelly - silt loam
sandy loamSurficial Soil Types:
loam
channery - silt loam
clay loam
stony - silt loam
gravelly - silt loam
sandy loamSoil Surface Textures:
appear within the general area of target property.
Based on Soil Conservation Service STATSGO data, the following additional subordinant soil types may
OTHER SOIL TYPES IN AREA
Min: 3.60
Max: 5.50
Min: 0.60
Max: 2.00
silt.
more), Elastic
limit 50% or
Clays (liquid
SOILS, Silts and
FINE-GRAINED
Soils.
200), Clayey
passing No.
than 35 pct.
Materials (more
Silt-Claysilt loam68 inches48 inches 3
Min: 3.60
Max: 5.50
Min: 0.60
Max: 2.00
silt.
more), Elastic
limit 50% or
Clays (liquid
SOILS, Silts and
FINE-GRAINED
Soils.
200), Clayey
passing No.
than 35 pct.
Materials (more
Silt-Claysilty clay loam48 inches 9 inches 2
Min: 4.50
Max: 6.50
Min: 0.60
Max: 2.00
50%), silt.
limit less than
Clays (liquid
SOILS, Silts and
FINE-GRAINED
Soils.
200), Silty
passing No.
than 35 pct.
Materials (more
Silt-Claysilt loam 9 inches 0 inches 1
Soil Layer Information
Boundary Classification
Permeability
Rate (in/hr)
Layer Upper Lower Soil Texture Class AASHTO Group Unified Soil Soil Reaction
(pH)
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY®
TC5005690.6s Page A-6
MAJOR HILL MONADNOCK NC10002696
_________ ___
Name ID
NORTH CAROLINA SIGNIFICANT NATURAL HERITAGE AREAS DATABASE:
OTHER STATE DATABASE INFORMATION
1/4 - 1/2 Mile NNWNC2000000006624 1
STATE DATABASE WELL INFORMATION
LOCATION
FROM TPWELL IDMAP ID
Note: PWS System location is not always the same as well location.
1/2 - 1 Mile NNWNC0201423 2
FEDERAL FRDS PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM INFORMATION
LOCATION
FROM TPWELL IDMAP ID
No Wells Found
FEDERAL USGS WELL INFORMATION
LOCATION
FROM TPWELL IDMAP ID
1.000State Database
Nearest PWS within 1 mileFederal FRDS PWS
1.000Federal USGS
WELL SEARCH DISTANCE INFORMATION
SEARCH DISTANCE (miles)DATABASE
opinion about the impact of contaminant migration on nearby drinking water wells.
professional in assessing sources that may impact ground water flow direction, and in forming an
EDR Local/Regional Water Agency records provide water well information to assist the environmental
LOCAL / REGIONAL WATER AGENCY RECORDS
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY®
EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.76 08 00 680760
760 640720
720
2 0
680
680
680680
64 06406640640
6 00
600
5606000 600600
60 0
600
60
0
600
6005606006005 6 0
5
60
5605606 0
0
5 606 06
005 6 0
5 20560
520
560
5 6 0560
560
5 6 0
60056060 0
560600560
6 0 0
NC
TC5005690.6s Page A-8
Not ReportedZipserv:NCStateserv:
AlamanceCntyserv:GRAHAMCityserv:
336-376-3014Phone:27253Zip:
NCState:GRAHAMCity:
Not ReportedAdd2:
1957 BURNETT CH RDAdd1:
25Popserved:
GWPrimsrccd:TNCWSPwstypcd:
BURNETTS UNITED CHURCH OF CHRISTName:
Location Information:
hypochlorination, postTreatment process:disinfectionTreatment obj:
IActivity code:Treatment_plantFacility type:
TREATMENT_PLT_WELL #1Facname:
3979Facid:
AActivity code:
27253Contact zip:NCContact state:
GRAHAMContact city:Not ReportedContact address2:
1957 BURNETT CH RDContact address1:336-376-3014Contact phone:
WHITE, JIMMYContactor gname:
WHITE, JIMMYContact:
PrivateOwner:TNCWSPws type:
GroundwaterSource:1Pwssvcconn:
25Pop srvd:ActiveStatus:
37001Fips county:Not ReportedZip served:
NCState served:Not ReportedCity served:
BURNETTS UNITED CHURCH OF CHRISTPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:
NCState:04Epa region:
2
NNW
1/2 - 1 Mile
Higher
NC0201423FRDS PWS
NC2000000006624Site id:
BURNETTS UMC_201423Owner name:
FTWell dep 1:
337Well depth:
AAvailavili:
-79.365136Longitude :
35.877823Latitude m:
001Facility a:
WELL #1Facility n:
GWWater type:
GWPrimary so:
GRAHAMCity:
ALAMANCECounty:
NCPws type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem nam:
NC0201423Pwsidentif:
1
NNW
1/4 - 1/2 Mile
Higher
NC2000000006624NC WELLS
Map ID
Direction
Distance
Elevation EDR ID NumberDatabase
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS®
TC5005690.6s Page A-9
ResolvingEnf act cat:St Intentional no-actionEnf act detail:
04/17/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:4836303Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Public Notif requestedEnf act detail:
10/22/2009Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:4836305Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Formal NOV issuedEnf act detail:
10/22/2009Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:4836305Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
ResolvingEnf act cat:St Compliance achievedEnf act detail:
12/31/2010Enf act date:2011Enf fy:
SOrig cd:4836305Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Public Notif receivedEnf act detail:
03/04/2011Enf act date:2011Enf fy:
SOrig cd:4836305Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
FormalEnf act cat:St AO (w/penalty) issuedEnf act detail:
01/22/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:4836305Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
ResolvingEnf act cat:St Compliance achievedEnf act detail:
03/04/2011Enf act date:2011Enf fy:
SOrig cd:4836306Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Public Notif requestedEnf act detail:
02/04/2000Enf act date:2000Enf fy:
SOrig cd:800Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Formal NOV issuedEnf act detail:
02/04/2000Enf act date:2000Enf fy:
SOrig cd:800Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Public Notif requestedEnf act detail:
03/20/2000Enf act date:2000Enf fy:
SOrig cd:900Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Formal NOV issuedEnf act detail:
03/20/2000Enf act date:2000Enf fy:
SOrig cd:900Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS®
TC5005690.6s Page A-10
ResolvingEnf act cat:St Intentional no-actionEnf act detail:
04/17/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:3908605Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
ResolvingEnf act cat:St Compliance achievedEnf act detail:
04/17/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:3908605Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
ResolvingEnf act cat:St Compliance achievedEnf act detail:
04/17/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:4316503Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
ResolvingEnf act cat:St Intentional no-actionEnf act detail:
04/17/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:4316503Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
ResolvingEnf act cat:St Compliance achievedEnf act detail:
04/17/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:4481903Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
ResolvingEnf act cat:St Intentional no-actionEnf act detail:
04/17/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:4481903Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
ResolvingEnf act cat:St Compliance achievedEnf act detail:
04/17/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:4614204Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
ResolvingEnf act cat:St Intentional no-actionEnf act detail:
04/17/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:4614204Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
ResolvingEnf act cat:St Compliance achievedEnf act detail:
04/17/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:4730804Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
ResolvingEnf act cat:St Intentional no-actionEnf act detail:
04/17/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:4730804Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
ResolvingEnf act cat:St Compliance achievedEnf act detail:
04/17/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:4836303Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS®
TC5005690.6s Page A-11
ResolvingEnf act cat:St Compliance achievedEnf act detail:
06/11/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:2105Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Intentional no-actionEnf act detail:
06/11/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:2105Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
FormalEnf act cat:St AO (w/penalty) issuedEnf act detail:
01/22/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:2205Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
ResolvingEnf act cat:St Compliance achievedEnf act detail:
06/11/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:2205Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Formal NOV issuedEnf act detail:
05/05/2005Enf act date:2005Enf fy:
SOrig cd:2205Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Public Notif requestedEnf act detail:
05/05/2005Enf act date:2005Enf fy:
SOrig cd:2205Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Intentional no-actionEnf act detail:
06/11/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:2205Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
ResolvingEnf act cat:St Intentional no-actionEnf act detail:
04/17/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:2249506Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
ResolvingEnf act cat:St Compliance achievedEnf act detail:
04/17/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:2249506Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
ResolvingEnf act cat:St Compliance achievedEnf act detail:
04/17/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:3623205Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
ResolvingEnf act cat:St Intentional no-actionEnf act detail:
04/17/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:3623205Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS®
TC5005690.6s Page A-12
ResolvingEnf act cat:St Compliance achievedEnf act detail:
06/11/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1905Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Intentional no-actionEnf act detail:
06/11/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1905Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Formal NOV issuedEnf act detail:
11/09/2004Enf act date:2005Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1905Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Public Notif requestedEnf act detail:
11/09/2004Enf act date:2005Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1905Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Formal NOV issuedEnf act detail:
03/07/2005Enf act date:2005Enf fy:
SOrig cd:2005Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
ResolvingEnf act cat:St Compliance achievedEnf act detail:
02/07/2005Enf act date:2005Enf fy:
SOrig cd:2005Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Public Notif requestedEnf act detail:
03/07/2005Enf act date:2005Enf fy:
SOrig cd:2005Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
FormalEnf act cat:St AO (w/penalty) issuedEnf act detail:
01/22/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:2105Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Formal NOV issuedEnf act detail:
03/31/2005Enf act date:2005Enf fy:
SOrig cd:2105Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Public Notif requestedEnf act detail:
03/31/2005Enf act date:2005Enf fy:
SOrig cd:2105Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Public Notif receivedEnf act detail:
04/25/2005Enf act date:2005Enf fy:
SOrig cd:2105Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS®
TC5005690.6s Page A-13
FormalEnf act cat:St AO (w/penalty) issuedEnf act detail:
01/22/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1704Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Formal NOV issuedEnf act detail:
02/06/2004Enf act date:2004Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1704Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Public Notif requestedEnf act detail:
02/06/2004Enf act date:2004Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1704Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
ResolvingEnf act cat:St Compliance achievedEnf act detail:
06/11/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1704Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Intentional no-actionEnf act detail:
06/11/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1704Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
ResolvingEnf act cat:St Compliance achievedEnf act detail:
06/11/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1804Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Intentional no-actionEnf act detail:
06/11/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1804Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
FormalEnf act cat:St AO (w/penalty) issuedEnf act detail:
01/22/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1804Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Formal NOV issuedEnf act detail:
08/10/2004Enf act date:2004Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1804Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Public Notif requestedEnf act detail:
08/10/2004Enf act date:2004Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1804Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
FormalEnf act cat:St AO (w/penalty) issuedEnf act detail:
01/22/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1905Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS®
TC5005690.6s Page A-14
FormalEnf act cat:St AO (w/penalty) issuedEnf act detail:
01/22/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1402Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Intentional no-actionEnf act detail:
06/11/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1503Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
FormalEnf act cat:St AO (w/penalty) issuedEnf act detail:
01/22/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1503Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Formal NOV issuedEnf act detail:
01/30/2003Enf act date:2003Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1503Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Public Notif requestedEnf act detail:
01/30/2003Enf act date:2003Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1503Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
ResolvingEnf act cat:St Compliance achievedEnf act detail:
06/11/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1503Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Public Notif requestedEnf act detail:
07/31/2003Enf act date:2003Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1603Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
FormalEnf act cat:St AO (w/penalty) issuedEnf act detail:
01/22/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1603Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
ResolvingEnf act cat:St Compliance achievedEnf act detail:
06/11/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1603Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Intentional no-actionEnf act detail:
06/11/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1603Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Formal NOV issuedEnf act detail:
07/31/2003Enf act date:2003Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1603Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS®
TC5005690.6s Page A-15
InformalEnf act cat:St Intentional no-actionEnf act detail:
06/11/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1202Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
ResolvingEnf act cat:St Compliance achievedEnf act detail:
06/11/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1202Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Public Notif requestedEnf act detail:
04/26/2002Enf act date:2002Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1302Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
ResolvingEnf act cat:St Compliance achievedEnf act detail:
06/11/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1302Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Intentional no-actionEnf act detail:
06/11/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1302Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
FormalEnf act cat:St AO (w/penalty) issuedEnf act detail:
01/22/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1302Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Formal NOV issuedEnf act detail:
04/26/2002Enf act date:2002Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1302Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Formal NOV issuedEnf act detail:
08/02/2002Enf act date:2002Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1402Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Public Notif requestedEnf act detail:
08/02/2002Enf act date:2002Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1402Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
ResolvingEnf act cat:St Compliance achievedEnf act detail:
06/11/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1402Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Intentional no-actionEnf act detail:
06/11/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1402Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS®
TC5005690.6s Page A-16
Not ReportedUnitmeasur:Not ReportedViolmeasur:
TCRRule name:
110Rule code:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol name:
23Viol code:
Coliform (TCR)Contamnm:
3100Contamcd:
2000Viol fy:NCState:
SOrig cd:900Violation id:
Violations Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Public Notif requestedEnf act detail:
11/08/2000Enf act date:2001Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1001Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Formal NOV issuedEnf act detail:
11/08/2000Enf act date:2001Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1001Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
ResolvingEnf act cat:St Compliance achievedEnf act detail:
06/11/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1101Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Public Notif requestedEnf act detail:
05/01/2001Enf act date:2001Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1101Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Formal NOV issuedEnf act detail:
05/01/2001Enf act date:2001Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1101Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
FormalEnf act cat:St AO (w/penalty) issuedEnf act detail:
01/22/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1101Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Intentional no-actionEnf act detail:
06/11/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1101Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Formal NOV issuedEnf act detail:
11/07/2001Enf act date:2002Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1202Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
InformalEnf act cat:St Public Notif requestedEnf act detail:
11/07/2001Enf act date:2002Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1202Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
FormalEnf act cat:St AO (w/penalty) issuedEnf act detail:
01/22/2010Enf act date:2010Enf fy:
SOrig cd:1202Violation id:
Enforcement Information:
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS®
TC5005690.6s Page A-17
Not ReportedCmpedt:
02/10/2004Cmpbdt:Not ReportedState mcl:
Not ReportedUnitmeasur:Not ReportedViolmeasur:
PN ruleRule name:
410Rule code:
PN Violation without NPDWR ViolationViol name:
76Viol code:
Public NoticeContamnm:
7500Contamcd:
2004Viol fy:NCState:
SOrig cd:4730804Violation id:
Violations Information:
Not ReportedCmpedt:
11/18/2002Cmpbdt:Not ReportedState mcl:
Not ReportedUnitmeasur:Not ReportedViolmeasur:
PN ruleRule name:
410Rule code:
PN Violation without NPDWR ViolationViol name:
76Viol code:
Public NoticeContamnm:
7500Contamcd:
2002Viol fy:NCState:
SOrig cd:4836303Violation id:
Violations Information:
06/30/2009Cmpedt:
04/01/2009Cmpbdt:Not ReportedState mcl:
Not ReportedUnitmeasur:Not ReportedViolmeasur:
TCRRule name:
110Rule code:
Monitoring, Repeat Major (TCR)Viol name:
25Viol code:
Coliform (TCR)Contamnm:
3100Contamcd:
2009Viol fy:NCState:
SOrig cd:4836305Violation id:
Violations Information:
Not ReportedCmpedt:
10/23/2010Cmpbdt:Not ReportedState mcl:
Not ReportedUnitmeasur:Not ReportedViolmeasur:
PN ruleRule name:
410Rule code:
PN Violation for NPDWR ViolationViol name:
75Viol code:
Public NoticeContamnm:
7500Contamcd:
2010Viol fy:NCState:
SOrig cd:4836306Violation id:
Violations Information:
01/31/2000Cmpedt:
01/01/2000Cmpbdt:Not ReportedState mcl:
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS®
TC5005690.6s Page A-18
Not ReportedUnitmeasur:Not ReportedViolmeasur:
PN ruleRule name:
410Rule code:
PN Violation without NPDWR ViolationViol name:
76Viol code:
Public NoticeContamnm:
7500Contamcd:
2005Viol fy:NCState:
SOrig cd:3623205Violation id:
Violations Information:
Not ReportedCmpedt:
08/21/2005Cmpbdt:Not ReportedState mcl:
Not ReportedUnitmeasur:Not ReportedViolmeasur:
PN ruleRule name:
410Rule code:
PN Violation without NPDWR ViolationViol name:
76Viol code:
Public NoticeContamnm:
7500Contamcd:
2005Viol fy:NCState:
SOrig cd:3908605Violation id:
Violations Information:
Not ReportedCmpedt:
05/07/2003Cmpbdt:Not ReportedState mcl:
Not ReportedUnitmeasur:Not ReportedViolmeasur:
PN ruleRule name:
410Rule code:
PN Violation without NPDWR ViolationViol name:
76Viol code:
Public NoticeContamnm:
7500Contamcd:
2003Viol fy:NCState:
SOrig cd:4316503Violation id:
Violations Information:
Not ReportedCmpedt:
08/13/2003Cmpbdt:Not ReportedState mcl:
Not ReportedUnitmeasur:Not ReportedViolmeasur:
PN ruleRule name:
410Rule code:
PN Violation without NPDWR ViolationViol name:
76Viol code:
Public NoticeContamnm:
7500Contamcd:
2003Viol fy:NCState:
SOrig cd:4481903Violation id:
Violations Information:
Not ReportedCmpedt:
08/10/2004Cmpbdt:Not ReportedState mcl:
Not ReportedUnitmeasur:Not ReportedViolmeasur:
PN ruleRule name:
410Rule code:
PN Violation without NPDWR ViolationViol name:
76Viol code:
Public NoticeContamnm:
7500Contamcd:
2004Viol fy:NCState:
SOrig cd:4614204Violation id:
Violations Information:
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS®
TC5005690.6s Page A-19
12/31/2004Cmpedt:
01/01/2004Cmpbdt:Not ReportedState mcl:
Not ReportedUnitmeasur:Not ReportedViolmeasur:
NitratesRule name:
331Rule code:
Monitoring, RegularViol name:
03Viol code:
NitrateContamnm:
1040Contamcd:
2004Viol fy:NCState:
SOrig cd:2005Violation id:
Violations Information:
02/28/2005Cmpedt:
02/01/2005Cmpbdt:Not ReportedState mcl:
Not ReportedUnitmeasur:Not ReportedViolmeasur:
TCRRule name:
110Rule code:
Monitoring, Repeat Minor (TCR)Viol name:
26Viol code:
Coliform (TCR)Contamnm:
3100Contamcd:
2005Viol fy:NCState:
SOrig cd:2105Violation id:
Violations Information:
03/31/2005Cmpedt:
03/01/2005Cmpbdt:Not ReportedState mcl:
Not ReportedUnitmeasur:Not ReportedViolmeasur:
TCRRule name:
110Rule code:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol name:
23Viol code:
Coliform (TCR)Contamnm:
3100Contamcd:
2005Viol fy:NCState:
SOrig cd:2205Violation id:
Violations Information:
Not ReportedCmpedt:
11/20/2005Cmpbdt:Not ReportedState mcl:
Not ReportedUnitmeasur:Not ReportedViolmeasur:
PN ruleRule name:
410Rule code:
PN Violation without NPDWR ViolationViol name:
76Viol code:
Public NoticeContamnm:
7500Contamcd:
2005Viol fy:NCState:
SOrig cd:2249506Violation id:
Violations Information:
Not ReportedCmpedt:
02/16/2005Cmpbdt:Not ReportedState mcl:
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS®
TC5005690.6s Page A-20
Not ReportedUnitmeasur:Not ReportedViolmeasur:
TCRRule name:
110Rule code:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol name:
23Viol code:
Coliform (TCR)Contamnm:
3100Contamcd:
2002Viol fy:NCState:
SOrig cd:1503Violation id:
Violations Information:
06/30/2003Cmpedt:
04/01/2003Cmpbdt:Not ReportedState mcl:
Not ReportedUnitmeasur:Not ReportedViolmeasur:
TCRRule name:
110Rule code:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol name:
23Viol code:
Coliform (TCR)Contamnm:
3100Contamcd:
2003Viol fy:NCState:
SOrig cd:1603Violation id:
Violations Information:
12/31/2003Cmpedt:
10/01/2003Cmpbdt:Not ReportedState mcl:
Not ReportedUnitmeasur:Not ReportedViolmeasur:
TCRRule name:
110Rule code:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol name:
23Viol code:
Coliform (TCR)Contamnm:
3100Contamcd:
2003Viol fy:NCState:
SOrig cd:1704Violation id:
Violations Information:
06/30/2004Cmpedt:
04/01/2004Cmpbdt:Not ReportedState mcl:
Not ReportedUnitmeasur:Not ReportedViolmeasur:
TCRRule name:
110Rule code:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol name:
23Viol code:
Coliform (TCR)Contamnm:
3100Contamcd:
2004Viol fy:NCState:
SOrig cd:1804Violation id:
Violations Information:
09/30/2004Cmpedt:
07/01/2004Cmpbdt:Not ReportedState mcl:
Not ReportedUnitmeasur:Not ReportedViolmeasur:
TCRRule name:
110Rule code:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol name:
23Viol code:
Coliform (TCR)Contamnm:
3100Contamcd:
2004Viol fy:NCState:
SOrig cd:1905Violation id:
Violations Information:
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS®
TC5005690.6s Page A-21
03/31/2001Cmpedt:
01/01/2001Cmpbdt:Not ReportedState mcl:
Not ReportedUnitmeasur:Not ReportedViolmeasur:
TCRRule name:
110Rule code:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol name:
23Viol code:
Coliform (TCR)Contamnm:
3100Contamcd:
2001Viol fy:NCState:
SOrig cd:1101Violation id:
Violations Information:
09/30/2001Cmpedt:
07/01/2001Cmpbdt:Not ReportedState mcl:
Not ReportedUnitmeasur:Not ReportedViolmeasur:
TCRRule name:
110Rule code:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol name:
23Viol code:
Coliform (TCR)Contamnm:
3100Contamcd:
2001Viol fy:NCState:
SOrig cd:1202Violation id:
Violations Information:
03/31/2002Cmpedt:
01/01/2002Cmpbdt:Not ReportedState mcl:
Not ReportedUnitmeasur:Not ReportedViolmeasur:
TCRRule name:
110Rule code:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol name:
23Viol code:
Coliform (TCR)Contamnm:
3100Contamcd:
2002Viol fy:NCState:
SOrig cd:1302Violation id:
Violations Information:
06/30/2002Cmpedt:
04/01/2002Cmpbdt:Not ReportedState mcl:
Not ReportedUnitmeasur:Not ReportedViolmeasur:
TCRRule name:
110Rule code:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol name:
23Viol code:
Coliform (TCR)Contamnm:
3100Contamcd:
2002Viol fy:NCState:
SOrig cd:1402Violation id:
Violations Information:
12/31/2002Cmpedt:
10/01/2002Cmpbdt:Not ReportedState mcl:
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS®
TC5005690.6s Page A-22
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf action:
11/8/2000 0:00:00Enfdate:9/30/2000 0:00:00Complperen:
7/1/2000 0:00:00Complperbe:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol. Type:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:1001Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf action:
11/8/2000 0:00:00Enfdate:9/30/2000 0:00:00Complperen:
7/1/2000 0:00:00Complperbe:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol. Type:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:1001Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
ENFORCEMENT INFORMATION:
Violations information not reported.
00000200Population:UntreatedTreatment Class:
SNOW CAMPCity Served:
079 22 00Facility Longitude:35 52 45Facility Latitude:
079 24 02Facility Longitude:36 04 08Facility Latitude:
GRAHAM, NC 27253
747 BROOKWOOD AT SILER CITY
STEVE OLDHAM
System Owner/Responsible PartyAddressee / Facility:
GRAHAM, NC 27253
ROUTE 2
STEVE OLDHAM OR PASTOR
System Owner/Responsible PartyAddressee / Facility:
SNOW CAMP, NC 27253
BURNETT’S CHAPEL CHURCHPWS Name:
Not ReportedDate Deactivated:8304Date Initiated:
NC0201423PWS ID:
09/30/2000Cmpedt:
07/01/2000Cmpbdt:Not ReportedState mcl:
Not ReportedUnitmeasur:Not ReportedViolmeasur:
TCRRule name:
110Rule code:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol name:
23Viol code:
Coliform (TCR)Contamnm:
3100Contamcd:
2000Viol fy:NCState:
SOrig cd:1001Violation id:
Violations Information:
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS®
TC5005690.6s Page A-23
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf action:
4/26/2002 0:00:00Enfdate:3/31/2002 0:00:00Complperen:
1/1/2002 0:00:00Complperbe:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol. Type:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:1302Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf action:
4/26/2002 0:00:00Enfdate:3/31/2002 0:00:00Complperen:
1/1/2002 0:00:00Complperbe:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol. Type:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:1302Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf action:
11/7/2001 0:00:00Enfdate:9/30/2001 0:00:00Complperen:
7/1/2001 0:00:00Complperbe:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol. Type:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:1202Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf action:
11/7/2001 0:00:00Enfdate:9/30/2001 0:00:00Complperen:
7/1/2001 0:00:00Complperbe:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol. Type:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:1202Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf action:
5/1/2001 0:00:00Enfdate:3/31/2001 0:00:00Complperen:
1/1/2001 0:00:00Complperbe:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol. Type:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:1101Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf action:
5/1/2001 0:00:00Enfdate:3/31/2001 0:00:00Complperen:
1/1/2001 0:00:00Complperbe:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol. Type:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:1101Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS®
TC5005690.6s Page A-24
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf action:
7/31/2003 0:00:00Enfdate:6/30/2003 0:00:00Complperen:
4/1/2003 0:00:00Complperbe:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol. Type:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:1603Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf action:
7/31/2003 0:00:00Enfdate:6/30/2003 0:00:00Complperen:
4/1/2003 0:00:00Complperbe:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol. Type:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:1603Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf action:
1/30/2003 0:00:00Enfdate:12/31/2002 0:00:00Complperen:
10/1/2002 0:00:00Complperbe:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol. Type:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:1503Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf action:
1/30/2003 0:00:00Enfdate:12/31/2002 0:00:00Complperen:
10/1/2002 0:00:00Complperbe:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol. Type:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:1503Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf action:
8/2/2002 0:00:00Enfdate:6/30/2002 0:00:00Complperen:
4/1/2002 0:00:00Complperbe:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol. Type:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:1402Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf action:
8/2/2002 0:00:00Enfdate:6/30/2002 0:00:00Complperen:
4/1/2002 0:00:00Complperbe:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol. Type:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:1402Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS®
TC5005690.6s Page A-25
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf action:
11/9/2004 0:00:00Enfdate:9/30/2004 0:00:00Complperen:
7/1/2004 0:00:00Complperbe:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol. Type:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:1905Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf action:
11/9/2004 0:00:00Enfdate:9/30/2004 0:00:00Complperen:
7/1/2004 0:00:00Complperbe:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol. Type:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:1905Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf action:
8/10/2004 0:00:00Enfdate:6/30/2004 0:00:00Complperen:
4/1/2004 0:00:00Complperbe:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol. Type:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:1804Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf action:
8/10/2004 0:00:00Enfdate:6/30/2004 0:00:00Complperen:
4/1/2004 0:00:00Complperbe:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol. Type:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:1804Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf action:
2/6/2004 0:00:00Enfdate:12/31/2003 0:00:00Complperen:
10/1/2003 0:00:00Complperbe:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol. Type:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:1704Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf action:
2/6/2004 0:00:00Enfdate:12/31/2003 0:00:00Complperen:
10/1/2003 0:00:00Complperbe:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol. Type:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:1704Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS®
TC5005690.6s Page A-26
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
State Public Notif ReceivedEnf action:
4/25/2005 0:00:00Enfdate:2/28/2005 0:00:00Complperen:
2/1/2005 0:00:00Complperbe:
Monitoring, Repeat Minor (TCR)Viol. Type:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:2105Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf action:
3/31/2005 0:00:00Enfdate:2/28/2005 0:00:00Complperen:
2/1/2005 0:00:00Complperbe:
Monitoring, Repeat Minor (TCR)Viol. Type:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:2105Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf action:
3/31/2005 0:00:00Enfdate:2/28/2005 0:00:00Complperen:
2/1/2005 0:00:00Complperbe:
Monitoring, Repeat Minor (TCR)Viol. Type:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:2105Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf action:
3/7/2005 0:00:00Enfdate:12/31/2004 0:00:00Complperen:
1/1/2004 0:00:00Complperbe:
3Viol. Type:
NITRATEContaminant:2005Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf action:
3/7/2005 0:00:00Enfdate:12/31/2004 0:00:00Complperen:
1/1/2004 0:00:00Complperbe:
3Viol. Type:
NITRATEContaminant:2005Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
State Compliance AchievedEnf action:
2/7/2005 0:00:00Enfdate:12/31/2004 0:00:00Complperen:
1/1/2004 0:00:00Complperbe:
3Viol. Type:
NITRATEContaminant:2005Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS®
TC5005690.6s Page A-27
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
7/8/2009 0:00:00Enf action:
No Enf Action as ofEnfdate:12/31/2025 0:00:00Complperen:
5/7/2003 0:00:00Complperbe:
Other Non-NPDWR Potential Health RisksViol. Type:
7500Contaminant:4316503Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
7/8/2009 0:00:00Enf action:
No Enf Action as ofEnfdate:12/31/2025 0:00:00Complperen:
8/21/2005 0:00:00Complperbe:
Other Non-NPDWR Potential Health RisksViol. Type:
7500Contaminant:3908605Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
7/8/2009 0:00:00Enf action:
No Enf Action as ofEnfdate:12/31/2025 0:00:00Complperen:
2/16/2005 0:00:00Complperbe:
Other Non-NPDWR Potential Health RisksViol. Type:
7500Contaminant:3623205Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
7/8/2009 0:00:00Enf action:
No Enf Action as ofEnfdate:12/31/2025 0:00:00Complperen:
11/20/2005 0:00:00Complperbe:
Other Non-NPDWR Potential Health RisksViol. Type:
7500Contaminant:2249506Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf action:
5/5/2005 0:00:00Enfdate:3/31/2005 0:00:00Complperen:
3/1/2005 0:00:00Complperbe:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol. Type:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:2205Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf action:
5/5/2005 0:00:00Enfdate:3/31/2005 0:00:00Complperen:
3/1/2005 0:00:00Complperbe:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol. Type:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:2205Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS®
TC5005690.6s Page A-28
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf action:
3/20/2000 0:00:00Enfdate:1/31/2000 0:00:00Complperen:
1/1/2000 0:00:00Complperbe:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol. Type:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:900Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf action:
3/20/2000 0:00:00Enfdate:1/31/2000 0:00:00Complperen:
1/1/2000 0:00:00Complperbe:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Viol. Type:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:900Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
7/8/2009 0:00:00Enf action:
No Enf Action as ofEnfdate:12/31/2025 0:00:00Complperen:
11/18/2002 0:00:00Complperbe:
Other Non-NPDWR Potential Health RisksViol. Type:
7500Contaminant:4836303Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
7/8/2009 0:00:00Enf action:
No Enf Action as ofEnfdate:12/31/2025 0:00:00Complperen:
2/10/2004 0:00:00Complperbe:
Other Non-NPDWR Potential Health RisksViol. Type:
7500Contaminant:4730804Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
7/8/2009 0:00:00Enf action:
No Enf Action as ofEnfdate:12/31/2025 0:00:00Complperen:
8/10/2004 0:00:00Complperbe:
Other Non-NPDWR Potential Health RisksViol. Type:
7500Contaminant:4614204Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
Not ReportedViolmeasur:
7/8/2009 0:00:00Enf action:
No Enf Action as ofEnfdate:12/31/2025 0:00:00Complperen:
8/13/2003 0:00:00Complperbe:
Other Non-NPDWR Potential Health RisksViol. Type:
7500Contaminant:4481903Vioid:
NCPwstypecod:25Retpopsrvd:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHPwsname:
NC0201423Pwsid:03/31/2009Truedate:
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS®
TC5005690.6s Page A-29
State Public Notif RequestedEnf. Action:5/1/2001 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1101Violation ID:
1/1/2001 0:00:00 - 3/31/2001 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf. Action:5/1/2001 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1101Violation ID:
1/1/2001 0:00:00 - 3/31/2001 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf. Action:11/8/2000 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1001Violation ID:
7/1/2000 0:00:00 - 9/30/2000 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf. Action:11/8/2000 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1001Violation ID:
7/1/2000 0:00:00 - 9/30/2000 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf. Action:11/8/2000 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1001Violation ID:
7/1/2000 0:00:00 - 9/30/2000 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf. Action:11/8/2000 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1001Violation ID:
7/1/2000 0:00:00 - 9/30/2000 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf. Action:2000-02-04Enforcement Date:
0003870Violation ID:
1999-12-01 - 1999-12-31Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Repeat Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UMCSystem Name:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf. Action:1999-08-12Enforcement Date:
0000819Violation ID:
1999-04-01 - 1999-06-30Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UMCSystem Name:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf. Action:2000-02-04Enforcement Date:
0000819Violation ID:
1999-12-01 - 1999-12-31Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Repeat Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UMCSystem Name:
ENFORCEMENT INFORMATION:
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS®
TC5005690.6s Page A-30
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf. Action:4/26/2002 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1302Violation ID:
1/1/2002 0:00:00 - 3/31/2002 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf. Action:4/26/2002 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1302Violation ID:
1/1/2002 0:00:00 - 3/31/2002 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf. Action:4/26/2002 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1302Violation ID:
1/1/2002 0:00:00 - 3/31/2002 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf. Action:11/7/2001 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1202Violation ID:
7/1/2001 0:00:00 - 9/30/2001 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf. Action:11/7/2001 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1202Violation ID:
7/1/2001 0:00:00 - 9/30/2001 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf. Action:11/7/2001 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1202Violation ID:
7/1/2001 0:00:00 - 9/30/2001 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf. Action:11/7/2001 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1202Violation ID:
7/1/2001 0:00:00 - 9/30/2001 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf. Action:5/1/2001 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1101Violation ID:
1/1/2001 0:00:00 - 3/31/2001 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf. Action:5/1/2001 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1101Violation ID:
1/1/2001 0:00:00 - 3/31/2001 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
ENFORCEMENT INFORMATION:
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS®
TC5005690.6s Page A-31
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf. Action:1/30/2003 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1503Violation ID:
10/1/2002 0:00:00 - 12/31/2002 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf. Action:1/30/2003 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1503Violation ID:
10/1/2002 0:00:00 - 12/31/2002 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf. Action:1/30/2003 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1503Violation ID:
10/1/2002 0:00:00 - 12/31/2002 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf. Action:1/30/2003 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1503Violation ID:
10/1/2002 0:00:00 - 12/31/2002 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf. Action:8/2/2002 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1402Violation ID:
4/1/2002 0:00:00 - 6/30/2002 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf. Action:8/2/2002 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1402Violation ID:
4/1/2002 0:00:00 - 6/30/2002 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf. Action:8/2/2002 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1402Violation ID:
4/1/2002 0:00:00 - 6/30/2002 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf. Action:8/2/2002 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1402Violation ID:
4/1/2002 0:00:00 - 6/30/2002 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf. Action:4/26/2002 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1302Violation ID:
1/1/2002 0:00:00 - 3/31/2002 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
ENFORCEMENT INFORMATION:
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS®
TC5005690.6s Page A-32
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf. Action:8/10/2004 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1804Violation ID:
4/1/2004 0:00:00 - 6/30/2004 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf. Action:2/6/2004 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1704Violation ID:
10/1/2003 0:00:00 - 12/31/2003 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf. Action:2/6/2004 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1704Violation ID:
10/1/2003 0:00:00 - 12/31/2003 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf. Action:2/6/2004 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1704Violation ID:
10/1/2003 0:00:00 - 12/31/2003 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf. Action:2/6/2004 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1704Violation ID:
10/1/2003 0:00:00 - 12/31/2003 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf. Action:7/31/2003 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1603Violation ID:
4/1/2003 0:00:00 - 6/30/2003 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf. Action:7/31/2003 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1603Violation ID:
4/1/2003 0:00:00 - 6/30/2003 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf. Action:7/31/2003 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1603Violation ID:
4/1/2003 0:00:00 - 6/30/2003 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf. Action:7/31/2003 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1603Violation ID:
4/1/2003 0:00:00 - 6/30/2003 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
ENFORCEMENT INFORMATION:
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS®
TC5005690.6s Page A-33
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf. Action:3/7/2005 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
2005Violation ID:
1/1/2004 0:00:00 - 12/31/2004 0:00:00Compliance Period:
NITRATEContaminant:
3Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Compliance AchievedEnf. Action:2/7/2005 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
2005Violation ID:
1/1/2004 0:00:00 - 12/31/2004 0:00:00Compliance Period:
NITRATEContaminant:
3Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf. Action:11/9/2004 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1905Violation ID:
7/1/2004 0:00:00 - 9/30/2004 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf. Action:11/9/2004 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1905Violation ID:
7/1/2004 0:00:00 - 9/30/2004 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf. Action:11/9/2004 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1905Violation ID:
7/1/2004 0:00:00 - 9/30/2004 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf. Action:11/9/2004 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1905Violation ID:
7/1/2004 0:00:00 - 9/30/2004 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf. Action:8/10/2004 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1804Violation ID:
4/1/2004 0:00:00 - 6/30/2004 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf. Action:8/10/2004 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1804Violation ID:
4/1/2004 0:00:00 - 6/30/2004 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf. Action:8/10/2004 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
1804Violation ID:
4/1/2004 0:00:00 - 6/30/2004 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
ENFORCEMENT INFORMATION:
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS®
TC5005690.6s Page A-34
State Public Notif RequestedEnf. Action:3/31/2005 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
2105Violation ID:
2/1/2005 0:00:00 - 2/28/2005 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Repeat Minor (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf. Action:3/31/2005 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
2105Violation ID:
2/1/2005 0:00:00 - 2/28/2005 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Repeat Minor (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Public Notif ReceivedEnf. Action:4/25/2005 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
2105Violation ID:
2/1/2005 0:00:00 - 2/28/2005 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Repeat Minor (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Public Notif ReceivedEnf. Action:4/25/2005 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
2105Violation ID:
2/1/2005 0:00:00 - 2/28/2005 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Repeat Minor (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf. Action:3/31/2005 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
2105Violation ID:
2/1/2005 0:00:00 - 2/28/2005 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Repeat Minor (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Compliance AchievedEnf. Action:2/7/2005 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
2005Violation ID:
1/1/2004 0:00:00 - 12/31/2004 0:00:00Compliance Period:
NITRATEContaminant:
3Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf. Action:3/7/2005 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
2005Violation ID:
1/1/2004 0:00:00 - 12/31/2004 0:00:00Compliance Period:
NITRATEContaminant:
3Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf. Action:3/7/2005 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
2005Violation ID:
1/1/2004 0:00:00 - 12/31/2004 0:00:00Compliance Period:
NITRATEContaminant:
3Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf. Action:3/7/2005 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
2005Violation ID:
1/1/2004 0:00:00 - 12/31/2004 0:00:00Compliance Period:
NITRATEContaminant:
3Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
ENFORCEMENT INFORMATION:
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS®
TC5005690.6s Page A-35
NC, 27 336-3
GRAHAMAddress 2:
1957 BURNETT CH RDAddress:
Not ReportedPhone:WHITE, JIMMYContact:
25Population:BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHName:
CONTACT INFORMATION:
Not ReportedEnf. Action:4/12/2007 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
3623205Violation ID:
2/16/2005 0:00:00 - 12/31/2025 0:00:00Compliance Period:
7500Contaminant:
Other Non-NPDWR Potential Health RisksViolation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
10/17/2006 0:00:00Enf. Action:No Enf Action as ofEnforcement Date:
2249506Violation ID:
11/20/2005 0:00:00 - 12/31/2025 0:00:00Compliance Period:
7500Contaminant:
Other Non-NPDWR Potential Health RisksViolation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
Not ReportedEnf. Action:4/12/2007 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
2249506Violation ID:
11/20/2005 0:00:00 - 12/31/2025 0:00:00Compliance Period:
7500Contaminant:
Other Non-NPDWR Potential Health RisksViolation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf. Action:5/5/2005 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
2205Violation ID:
3/1/2005 0:00:00 - 3/31/2005 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf. Action:5/5/2005 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
2205Violation ID:
3/1/2005 0:00:00 - 3/31/2005 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf. Action:5/5/2005 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
2205Violation ID:
3/1/2005 0:00:00 - 3/31/2005 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Public Notif RequestedEnf. Action:5/5/2005 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
2205Violation ID:
3/1/2005 0:00:00 - 3/31/2005 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Routine Major (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
State Formal NOV IssuedEnf. Action:3/31/2005 0:00:00Enforcement Date:
2105Violation ID:
2/1/2005 0:00:00 - 2/28/2005 0:00:00Compliance Period:
COLIFORM (TCR)Contaminant:
Monitoring, Repeat Minor (TCR)Violation Type:
BURNETTS UNITED METH CHURCHSystem Name:
ENFORCEMENT INFORMATION:
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS®
TC5005690.6s Page A-36
327.21Acres per Polygon:
Not ReportedQuality:
MAJOR HILL MONADNOCKSite Name:
NC10002696NC_SNHA
Map ID
Direction
Distance EDR ID NumberDatabase
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS®
TC5005690.6s Page A-37
Not ReportedNot ReportedNot ReportedNot ReportedBasement
Not ReportedNot ReportedNot ReportedNot ReportedLiving Area - 2nd Floor
0%0%100%0.527 pCi/LLiving Area - 1st Floor
% >20 pCi/L% 4-20 pCi/L% <4 pCi/LAverage ActivityArea
Number of sites tested: 11
Federal Area Radon Information for ALAMANCE COUNTY, NC
: Zone 3 indoor average level < 2 pCi/L.
: Zone 2 indoor average level >= 2 pCi/L and <= 4 pCi/L.
Note: Zone 1 indoor average level > 4 pCi/L.
Federal EPA Radon Zone for ALAMANCE County: 3
AREA RADON INFORMATION
®GEOCHECK - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS
RADON
®
TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
USGS 7.5’ Digital Elevation Model (DEM)
Source: United States Geologic Survey
EDR acquired the USGS 7.5’ Digital Elevation Model in 2002 and updated it in 2006. The 7.5 minute DEM corresponds
to the USGS 1:24,000- and 1:25,000-scale topographic quadrangle maps. The DEM provides elevation data
with consistent elevation units and projection.
Current USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Map
Source: U.S. Geological Survey
HYDROLOGIC INFORMATION
Flood Zone Data: This data was obtained from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). It depicts 100-year and
500-year flood zones as defined by FEMA. It includes the National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL) which incorporates Flood
Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) data and Q3 data from FEMA in areas not covered by NFHL.
Source: FEMA
Telephone: [phone]
Date of Government Version: 2003, 2015
NWI: National Wetlands Inventory. This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR
in 2002, 2005 and 2010 from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
State Wetlands Data: Wetland Inventory
Source: US Fish & Wildlife Service
Telephone: [phone]
HYDROGEOLOGIC INFORMATION
AQUIFLOW Information SystemR
Source: EDR proprietary database of groundwater flow information
EDR has developed the AQUIFLOW Information System (AIS) to provide data on the general direction of groundwater
flow at specific points. EDR has reviewed reports submitted to regulatory authorities at select sites and has
extracted the date of the report, hydrogeologically determined groundwater flow direction and depth to water table
information.
GEOLOGIC INFORMATION
Geologic Age and Rock Stratigraphic Unit
Source: P.G. Schruben, R.E. Arndt and W.J. Bawiec, Geology of the Conterminous U.S. at 1:2,500,000 Scale - A digital
representation of the 1974 P.B. King and H.M. Beikman Map, USGS Digital Data Series DDS - 11 (1994).
STATSGO: State Soil Geographic Database
Source: Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)
The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) leads the national
Conservation Soil Survey (NCSS) and is responsible for collecting, storing, maintaining and distributing soil
survey information for privately owned lands in the United States. A soil map in a soil survey is a representation
of soil patterns in a landscape. Soil maps for STATSGO are compiled by generalizing more detailed (SSURGO)
soil survey maps.
SSURGO: Soil Survey Geographic Database
Source: Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)
Telephone: [phone]
SSURGO is the most detailed level of mapping done by the Natural Resources Conservation Service, mapping
scales generally range from 1:12,000 to 1:63,360. Field mapping methods using national standards are used to
construct the soil maps in the Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) database. SSURGO digitizing duplicates the
original soil survey maps. This level of mapping is designed for use by landowners, townships and county
natural resource planning and management.
TC5005690.6s Page PSGR-1
PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE RECORDS SEARCHED
LOCAL / REGIONAL WATER AGENCY RECORDS
FEDERAL WATER WELLS
PWS: Public Water Systems
Source: EPA/Office of Drinking Water
Telephone: [phone]
Public Water System data from the Federal Reporting Data System. A PWS is any water system which provides water to at
least 25 people for at least 60 days annually. PWSs provide water from wells, rivers and other sources.
PWS ENF: Public Water Systems Violation and Enforcement Data
Source: EPA/Office of Drinking Water
Telephone: [phone]
Violation and Enforcement data for Public Water Systems from the Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) after
August 1995. Prior to August 1995, the data came from the Federal Reporting Data System (FRDS).
USGS Water Wells: USGS National Water Inventory System (NWIS)
This database contains descriptive information on sites where the USGS collects or has collected data on surface
water and/or groundwater. The groundwater data includes information on wells, springs, and other sources of groundwater.
STATE RECORDS
North Carolina Public Water Supply Wells
Source: Department of Environmental Health
Telephone: [phone]
OTHER STATE DATABASE INFORMATION
NC Natural Areas: Significant Natural Heritage Areas
Source: Center for Geographic Information and Analysis
Telephone: [phone]
A polygon converage identifying sites (terrestrial or aquatic that have particular biodiversity significance.
A site’s significance may be due to the presenceof rare species, rare or hight quality natural communities, or
other important ecological features.
NC Game Lands: Wildlife Resources Commission Game Lands
Source: Center for Geographic Information and Analysis
Telephone: [phone]
All publicly owned game lands managed by the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission and as listed in Hunting
and Fishing Maps.
NC Natural Heritage Sites: Natural Heritage Element Occurrence Sites
Source: Center for Geographic Information and Analysis
Telephone: [phone]
A point coverage identifying locations of rare and endangered species, occurrences of exemplary or unique natural
ecosystems (terrestrial or aquatic), and special animal habitats (e.g., colonial waterbird nesting sites).
RADON
State Database: NC Radon
Source: Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Telephone: [phone]
Radon Statistical and Non Statiscal Data
Area Radon Information
Source: USGS
Telephone: [phone]
The National Radon Database has been developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA) and is a compilation of the EPA/State Residential Radon Survey and the National Residential Radon Survey.
The study covers the years 1986 - 1992. Where necessary data has been supplemented by information collected at
private sources such as universities and research institutions.
TC5005690.6s Page PSGR-2
PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE RECORDS SEARCHED
EPA Radon Zones
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Sections 307 & 309 of IRAA directed EPA to list and identify areas of U.S. with the potential for elevated indoor
radon levels.
OTHER
Airport Landing Facilities: Private and public use landing facilities
Source: Federal Aviation Administration, 800-457-6656
Epicenters: World earthquake epicenters, Richter 5 or greater
Source: Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Earthquake Fault Lines: The fault lines displayed on EDR’s Topographic map are digitized quaternary faultlines, prepared
in 1975 by the United State Geological Survey
STREET AND ADDRESS INFORMATION
© 2015 TomTom North America, Inc. All rights reserved. This material is proprietary and the subject of copyright protection
and other intellectual property rights owned by or licensed to Tele Atlas North America, Inc. The use of this material is subject
to the terms of a license agreement. You will be held liable for any unauthorized copying or disclosure of this material.
TC5005690.6s Page PSGR-3
PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE RECORDS SEARCHED

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) Appendices
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018

Appendix F
Financial Assurances

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) Appendices
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
Per the NC EEP RFP #: 16-006990, Restoration Systems will provide financial assurance in one
of the following forms:

1) Performance Bonding – The Offeror must provide security in the form of acceptable
performance bonds as described in the following paragraph to guarantee delivery of the
maximum number of originally contracted Mitigation Units. The performance bonds must
be obtained from a company licensed in North Carolina as shown in the Federal Treasury
Listing of Approved Sureties (Circular 570). The maximum allowable amount provided by
a surety may not exceed the “underwriting limitation” for the surety as identified in the
Federal Treasury Listing. Although this RFP is a request for mitigation and not
construction, the performance bonds shall follow the prescribed wording provided in
N.C.G.S. § 44A-33. The Offeror must provide two performance bonds. The first bond must
be for 100% of the total value of the contract and must be in effect and submitted with the
Task 3 deliverable (see Section 8. SCOPE OF WORK – Task 3) before EEP will authorize
payment for that deliverable. The bond must remain in effect until the Offeror has received
written notification from the EEP that the requirements of Task 6 (submittal of baseline
monitoring report) have been met. After the successful completion of Task 6, the bond can
be retired and a second bond must be substituted for the first. The second bond must be for
40% of the value of the contract, which covers the monitoring period. The Monitoring
Phase Performance Bond can be reduced yearly concurrent with the payment schedule once
the yearly deliverable is approved by EEP and credits are released by the IRT.

2) Letters of Credit- LOCs must be drawn from a reputable Bank identified by the FDIC as
“Well Capitalized” or “Adequately Capitalized” and follow the submittal t iming, contract
amounts and schedules for reduction as those described above for the performance bonds.
Evergreen or irrevocable Letters of Credit shall be required to provide a 120 day notice of
cancellation, termination or non-renewal.

3) Casualty Insurance on underlying performance of Credits or Units of Restoration – Must
follow the same submittal timing, contract amounts and reduction schedules as those
described above in performance bonds. The insurance must contain the following
information.
a) The “NC DENR” must be named as the “Regulatory Body”. NC DENR shall have
the sole right to place a claim against the policy. NC DENR shall have the sole right
and obligation as the responsible “regulatory body” to approve any claim settlement.
b) Initial insurance must be for a 10 year period.

The process of evaluating these options is underway. Once obtained, RS will provide digital and
hard copies of the assurance of distribution to IRT members.

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) Appendices
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018

Appendix G
Site Protection Instrument

NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 1 of 11

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT
AND RIGHT OF ACCESS PROVIDED
PURSUANT TO
FULL DELIVERY
MITIGATION CONTRACT
_______________ COUNTY

SPO File Number:
DMS Project Number:

Prepared by: Office of the Attorney General
Property Control Section
Return to: NC Department of Administration
State Property Office
1321 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1321

THIS DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND RIGHT OF ACCESS, made
this ________day of ________________, 20__, by Landowner name goes here
, (“Grantor”), whose mailing address is Landowner address goes here , to the State of
North Carolina, (“Grantee”), whose mailing address is State of North Carolina, Department of
Administration, State Property Office, 1321 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1321. The
designations of Grantor and Grantee as used herein shall include said parties, their heirs,
successors, and assigns, and shall include singular, plural, masculine, feminine, or neuter as
required by context.

WITNESSETH:

WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-214.8 et seq., the State
of North Carolina has established the Division of Mitigation Services (formerly known as the
Ecosystem Enhancement Program and Wetlands Restoration Program) within the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources for the purposes of acquiring, maintaining, restoring,
enhancing, creating and preserving wetland and riparian resources that contribute to the
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 2 of 11

protection and improvement of water quality, flood prevention, fisheries, aquatic habitat, wildlife
habitat, and recreational opportunities; and

WHEREAS, this Conservation Easement from Grantor to Grantee has been negotiated,
arranged and provided for as a condition of a full delivery contract between ( insert name and
address of full delivery contract provider ) and the North Carolina Department of Environmental
Quality, to provide stream, wetland and/or buffer mitigation pursuant to the North Carolina
Department of Environmental Quality Purchase and Services Contract Number __________.

WHEREAS, The State of North Carolina is qualified to be the Grantee of a Conservation
Easement pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 121-35; and

WHEREAS, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources and the United
States Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District entered into a Memorandum of
Understanding, (MOU) duly executed by all parties on November 4, 1998. This MOU
recognized that the Wetlands Restoration Program was to provide effective compensatory
mitigation for authorized impacts to wetlands, streams and other aquatic resources by restoring,
enhancing and preserving the wetland and riparian areas of the State; and

WHEREAS, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the North Carolina
Department of Transportation and the United States Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington
District entered into a Memorandum of Agreement, (MOA) duly executed by all parties in
Greensboro, NC on July 22, 2003, which recognizes that the Division of Mitigation Services
(formerly Ecosystem Enhancement Program) is to provide for compensatory mitigation by
effective protection of the land, water and natural resources of the State by restoring, enhancing
and preserving ecosystem functions; and

WHEREAS, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, the North Carolina Division of
Water Quality, the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management, and the National Marine
Fisheries Service entered into an agreement to continue the In-Lieu Fee operations of the North
Carolina Department of Natural Resources’ Division of Mitigation Services (formerly Ecosystem
Enhancement Program) with an effective date of 28 July, 2010, which supersedes and replaces
the previously effective MOA and MOU referenced above; and

WHEREAS, the acceptance of this instrument for and on behalf of the State of North
Carolina was granted to the Department of Administration by resolution as approved by the
Governor and Council of State adopted at a meeting held in the City of Raleigh, North Carolina,
on the 8th day of February 2000; and

WHEREAS, the Division of Mitigation Services in the Department of Environmental
Quality, which has been delegated the authority authorized by the Governor and Council of State
to the Department of Administration, has approved acceptance of this instrument; and

NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 3 of 11

WHEREAS, Grantor owns in fee simple certain real property situated, lying, and being
in __________ Township, ___________ County, North Carolina (the "Property"), and being
more particularly described as that certain parcel of land containing approximately ________
acres and being conveyed to the Grantor by deed as recorded in Deed Book _____ at Page ____
of the _________ County Registry, North Carolina; and

WHEREAS, Grantor is willing to grant a Conservation Easement and Right of Access
over the herein described areas of the Property, thereby restricting and limiting the use of the
areas of the Property subject to the Conservation Easement to the terms and conditions and
purposes hereinafter set forth, and Grantee is willing to accept said Easement and Access Rights.
The Conservation Easement shall be for the protection and benefit of the waters of if known,
insert name of stream, branch, river or waterway here.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, terms, conditions, and
restrictions hereinafter set forth, Grantor unconditionally and irrevocably hereby grants and
conveys unto Grantee, its successors and assigns, forever and in perpetuity, a Conservation
Easement along with a general Right of Access.

The Conservation Easement Area consists of the following:

Tracts Number ________________ containing a total of _________ acres as shown on the plats
of survey entitled “Final Plat, Conservation Easement for North Carolina Division of Mitigation
Services, Project Name: ___________, SPO File No.__________, EEP Site No. ___________,
Property of _________________________,” dated ___________, 20__ by name of surveyor,
PLS Number __________ and recorded in the ______________ County, North Carolina Register
of Deeds at Plat Book _______ Pages __________.

See attached “Exhibit A”, Legal Description of area of the Property hereinafter referred to as the
“Conservation Easement Area”

The purposes of this Conservation Easement are to maintain, restore, enhance, construct,
create and preserve wetland and/or riparian resources in the Conservation Easement Area that
contribute to the protection and improvement of water quality, flood prevention, fisheries,
aquatic habitat, wildlife habitat, and recreational opportunities; to maintain permanently the
Conservation Easement Area in its natural condition, consistent with these purposes; and to
prevent any use of the Easement Area that will significantly impair or interfere with these
purposes. To achieve these purposes, the following conditions and restrictions are set forth:

I. DURATION OF EASEMENT

Pursuant to law, including the above referenced statutes, this Conservation Easement and
Right of Access shall be perpetual and it shall run with, and be a continuing restriction upon the
use of, the Property, and it shall be enforceable by the Grantee against the Grantor and against
Grantor’s heirs, successors and assigns, personal representatives, agents, lessees, and licensees.

NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 4 of 11

II. GRANTOR RESERVED USES AND RESTRICTED ACTIVITIES

The Conservation Easement Area shall be restricted from any development or usage that
would impair or interfere with the purposes of this Conservation Easement. Unless expressly
reserved as a compatible use herein, any activity in, or use of, the Conservation Easement Area
by the Grantor is prohibited as inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation Easement.
Any rights not expressly reserved hereunder by the Grantor have been acquired by the Grantee.
Any rights not expressly reserved hereunder by the Grantor, including the rights to all mitigation
credits, including, but not limited to, stream, wetland, and riparian buffer mitigation units,
derived from each site within the area of the Conservation Easement, are conveyed to and belong
to the Grantee. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the following specific uses are
prohibited, restricted, or reserved as indicated:

A. Recreational Uses. Grantor expressly reserves the right to undeveloped recreational
uses, including hiking, bird watching, hunting and fishing, and access to the Conservation
Easement Area for the purposes thereof.

B. Motorized Vehicle Use. Motorized vehicle use in the Conservation Easement Area is
prohibited except within a Crossing Area(s) or Road or Trail as shown on the recorded survey
plat.

C. Educational Uses. The Grantor reserves the right to engage in and permit others to
engage in educational uses in the Conservation Easement Area not inconsistent with this
Conservation Easement, and the right of access to the Conservation Easement Area for such
purposes including organized educational activities such as site visits and observations.
Educational uses of the property shall not alter vegetation, hydrology or topography of the site.

D. Damage to Vegetation. Except within Crossing Area(s) as shown on the recorded
survey plat and as related to the removal of non-native plants, diseased or damaged trees, or
vegetation that destabilizes or renders unsafe the Conservation Easement Area to persons or
natural habitat, all cutting, removal, mowing, harming, or destruction of any trees and vegetation
in the Conservation Easement Area is prohibited.

E. Industrial, Residential and Commercial Uses. All industrial, residential and
commercial uses are prohibited in the Conservation Easement Area.

F. Agricultural Use. All agricultural uses are prohibited within the Conservation Easement
Area including any use for cropland, waste lagoons, or pastureland.

G. New Construction. There shall be no building, facility, mobile home, antenna, utility
pole, tower, or other structure constructed or placed in the Conservation Easement Area.

H. Roads and Trails. There shall be no construction or maintenance of new roads, trails,
walkways, or paving in the Conservation Easement.

NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 5 of 11

All existing roads, trails and crossings within the Conservation Easement Area shall be shown on
the recorded survey plat.

I. Signs. No signs shall be permitted in the Conservation Easement Area except
interpretive signs describing restoration activities and the conservation values of the
Conservation Easement Area, signs identifying the owner of the Property and the holder of the
Conservation Easement, signs giving directions, or signs prescribing rules and regulations for the
use of the Conservation Easement Area.

J. Dumping or Storing. Dumping or storage of soil, trash, ashes, garbage, waste,
abandoned vehicles, appliances, machinery, or any other material in the Conservation Easement
Area is prohibited.

K. Grading, Mineral Use, Excavation, Dredging. There shall be no grading, filling,
excavation, dredging, mining, drilling, hydraulic fracturing; removal of topsoil, sand, gravel,
rock, peat, minerals, or other materials.

L. Water Quality and Drainage Patterns. There shall be no diking, draining, dredging,
channeling, filling, leveling, pumping, impounding or diverting, causing, allowing or permitting
the diversion of surface or underground water in the Conservation Easement Area. No altering
or tampering with water control structures or devices, or disruption or alteration of the restored,
enhanced, or created drainage patterns is allowed. All removal of wetlands, polluting or
discharging into waters, springs, seeps, or wetlands, or use of pesticide or biocides in the
Conservation Easement Area is prohibited. In the event of an emergency interruption or
shortage of all other water sources, water from within the Conservation Easement Area may
temporarily be withdrawn for good cause shown as needed for the survival of livestock on the
Property.

M. Subdivision and Conveyance. Grantor voluntarily agrees that no further subdivision,
partitioning, or dividing of the Conservation Easement Area portion of the Property owned by the
Grantor in fee simple (“fee”) that is subject to this Conservation Easement is allowed. Any future
transfer of the Property shall be subject to this Conservation Easement and Right of Access and to the
Grantee’s right of unlimited and repeated ingress and egress over and across the Property to the
Conservation Easement Area for the purposes set forth herein.

N. Development Rights. All development rights are permanently removed from the
Conservation Easement Area and are non-transferrable.

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

The Grantor may request permission to vary from the above restrictions for good cause
shown, provided that any such request is not inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation
Easement, and the Grantor obtains advance written approval from the Division of Mitigation
Services, 1652 Mail Services Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652.

NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 6 of 11

III. GRANTEE RESERVED USES

A. Right of Access, Construction, and Inspection. The Grantee, its employees and agents,
successors and assigns, receive a perpetual Right of Access to the Conservation Easement Area
over the Property at reasonable times to undertake any activities on the property to restore,
construct, manage, maintain, enhance, protect, and monitor the stream, wetland and any other
riparian resources in the Conservation Easement Area, in accordance with restoration activities
or a long-term management plan. Unless otherwise specifically set forth in this Conservation
Easement, the rights granted herein do not include or establish for the public any access rights.

B. Restoration Activities. These activities include planting of trees, shrubs and herbaceous
vegetation, installation of monitoring wells, utilization of heavy equipment to grade, fill, and
prepare the soil, modification of the hydrology of the site, and installation of natural and
manmade materials as needed to direct in-stream, above ground, and subterraneous water flow.

C. Signs. The Grantee, its employees and agents, successors or assigns, shall be permitted
to place signs and witness posts on the Property to include any or all of the following: describe
the project, prohibited activities within the Conservation Easement, or identify the project
boundaries and the holder of the Conservation Easement.

D. Fences. Conservation Easements are purchased to protect the investments by the State
(Grantee) in natural resources. Livestock within conservations easements damages the
investment and can result in reductions in natural resource value and mitigation credits which
would cause financial harm to the State. Therefore, Landowners (Grantor) with livestock are
required to restrict livestock access to the Conservation Easement area. Repeated failure to do so
may result in the State (Grantee) repairing or installing livestock exclusion devices (fences)
within the conservation area for the purpose of restricting livestock access. In such cases, the
landowner (Grantor) must provide access to the State (Grantee) to make repairs.

E. Crossing Area(s). The Grantee is not responsible for maintenance of crossing area(s),
however, the Grantee, its employees and agents, successors or assigns, reserve the right to repair
crossing area(s), at its sole discretion and to recover the cost of such repairs from the Grantor if
such repairs are needed as a result of activities of the Grantor, his successors or assigns.

IV. ENFORCEMENT AND REMEDIES

A. Enforcement. To accomplish the purposes of this Conservation Easement, Grantee is
allowed to prevent any activity within the Conservation Easement Area that is inconsistent with
the purposes of this Conservation Easement and to require the restoration of such areas or
features in the Conservation Easement Area that may have been damaged by such unauthorized
activity or use. Upon any breach of the terms of this Conservation Easement by Grantor, the
Grantee shall, except as provided below, notify the Grantor in writing of such breach and the
Grantor shall have ninety (90) days after receipt of such notice to correct the damage caused by
such breach. If the breach and damage remains uncured after ninety (90) days, the Grantee may
enforce this Conservation Easement by bringing appropriate legal proceedings including an
action to recover damages, as well as injunctive and other relief. The Grantee shall also have the
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 7 of 11

power and authority, consistent with its statutory authority: (a) to prevent any impairment of the
Conservation Easement Area by acts which may be unlawful or in violation of this Conservation
Easement; (b) to otherwise preserve or protect its interest in the Property; or (c) to seek damages
from any appropriate person or entity. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Grantee reserves the
immediate right, without notice, to obtain a temporary restraining order, injunctive or other
appropriate relief, if the breach is or would irreversibly or otherwise materially impair the
benefits to be derived from this Conservation Easement, and the Grantor and Grantee
acknowledge that the damage would be irreparable and remedies at law inadequate. The rights
and remedies of the Grantee provided hereunder shall be in addition to, and not in lieu of, all
other rights and remedies available to Grantee in connection with this Conservation Easement.

B. Inspection. The Grantee, its employees and agents, successors and assigns, have the
right, with reasonable notice, to enter the Conservation Easement Area over the Property at
reasonable times for the purpose of inspection to determine whether the Grantor is complying
with the terms, conditions and restrictions of this Conservation Easement.

C. Acts Beyond Grantor’s Control. Nothing contained in this Conservation Easement
shall be construed to entitle Grantee to bring any action against Grantor for any injury or change
in the Conservation Easement Area caused by third parties, resulting from causes beyond the
Grantor’s control, including, without limitation, fire, flood, storm, and earth movement, or from
any prudent action taken in good faith by the Grantor under emergency conditions to prevent,
abate, or mitigate significant injury to life or damage to the Property resulting from such causes.

D. Costs of Enforcement. Beyond regular and typical monitoring expenses, any costs
incurred by Grantee in enforcing the terms of this Conservation Easement against Grantor,
including, without limitation, any costs of restoration necessitated by Grantor’s acts or omissions
in violation of the terms of this Conservation Easement, shall be borne by Grantor.

E. No Waiver. Enforcement of this Easement shall be at the discretion of the Grantee and
any forbearance, delay or omission by Grantee to exercise its rights hereunder in the event of any
breach of any term set forth herein shall not be construed to be a waiver by Grantee.

V. MISCELLANEOUS

A. This instrument sets forth the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the
Conservation Easement and supersedes all prior discussions, negotiations, understandings or
agreements relating to the Conservation Easement. If any provision is found to be invalid, the
remainder of the provisions of the Conservation Easement, and the application of such provision
to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is found to be invalid, shall not be
affected thereby.

B. Grantor is responsible for any real estate taxes, assessments, fees, or charges levied upon
the Property. Grantee shall not be responsible for any costs or liability of any kind related to the
ownership, operation, insurance, upkeep, or maintenance of the Property, except as expressly
provided herein. Upkeep of any constructed bridges, fences, or other amenities on the Property
are the sole responsibility of the Grantor. Nothing herein shall relieve the Grantor of the
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 8 of 11

obligation to comply with federal, state or local laws, regulations and permits that may apply to
the exercise of the Reserved Rights.

C. Any notices shall be sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested to the
parties at their addresses shown herein or to other addresses as either party establishes in writing
upon notification to the other.

D. Grantor shall notify Grantee in writing of the name and address and any party to whom
the Property or any part thereof is to be transferred at or prior to the time said transfer is made.
Grantor further agrees that any subsequent lease, deed, or other legal instrument by which any
interest in the Property is conveyed is subject to the Conservation Easement herein created.

E. The Grantor and Grantee agree that the terms of this Conservation Easement shall survive
any merger of the fee and easement interests in the Property or any portion thereof.

F. This Conservation Easement and Right of Access may be amended, but only in writing
signed by all parties hereto, or their successors or assigns, if such amendment does not affect the
qualification of this Conservation Easement or the status of the Grantee under any applicable
laws, and is consistent with the purposes of the Conservation Easement. The owner of the
Property shall notify the State Property Office and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in writing
sixty (60) days prior to the initiation of any transfer of all or any part of the Property or of any
request to void or modify this Conservation Easement. Such notifications and modification
requests shall be addressed to:

Division of Mitigation Services Program Manager
NC State Property Office
1321 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1321

and

General Counsel
US Army Corps of Engineers
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, NC 28403

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

NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 9 of 11

VI. QUIET ENJOYMENT

Grantor reserves all remaining rights accruing from ownership of the Property, including
the right to engage in or permit or invite others to engage in only those uses of the Conservation
Easement Area that are expressly reserved herein, not prohibited or restricted herein, and are not
inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation Easement. Without limiting the generality of
the foregoing, the Grantor expressly reserves to the Grantor, and the Grantor's invitees and
licensees, the right of access to the Conservation Easement Area, and the right of quiet
enjoyment of the Conservation Easement Area,

TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said rights and easements perpetually unto the State of
North Carolina for the aforesaid purposes,

AND Grantor covenants that Grantor is seized of said premises in fee and has the right to
convey the permanent Conservation Easement herein granted; that the same is free from
encumbrances and that Grantor will warrant and defend title to the same against the claims of all
persons whomsoever.

NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 10 of 11

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

___________________________________ (SEAL)

NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF _________________

I, _____________________________, a Notary Public in and for the County and State
aforesaid, do hereby certify that _________________________, Grantor, personally appeared
before me this day and acknowledged the execution of the foregoing instrument.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and Notary Seal this the __________
day of ___________________, 20__.

________________________________________
Notary Public

My commission expires:

______________________________

NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 11 of 11

Exhibit A

[INSERT LEGAL DESCRIPTION]

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) Appendices
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018

Appendix H
Credit Release Schedule

28

Table 3 – Schedule of Monitoring Events
Monitoring
Event
Monitoring Activities Required
Streams Wetlands
Pre-Construction • Water Quality (Section VII(A))
• Macroinvertebrate & Fish (Section VII(B-C))*
• Per Mitigation Plan
Year 0
(As-Built)
• As-built Survey (includes longitudinal profile and
sampling point locations)
• As-built Survey
Year 1
• Vegetation (Section V)
• Stream Channel Stability/Hydrology (Section VI)
• Water Quality (Section VII(A))*
• Visual, two times (Section X)
• Vegetation (Section V)
• Wetland Hydrology (Section IX)
• Visual, two times (Section X)
Year 2
• Vegetation (Section V)
• Stream Channel Stability/Hydrology (Section VI)
• Water Quality (Section VII(A))*
• Visual, two times (Section X)
• Vegetation (Section V)
• Wetland Hydrology (Section IX)
• Visual, two times (Section X)

Year 3
• Vegetation (Section V)
• Stream Channel Stability/Hydrology (Section VI)
• Water Quality (Section VII(A))*
• Macroinvertebrate & Fish (Section VII(B-C))*
• Visual, two times (Section X)
• Vegetation (Section V)
• Wetland Hydrology (Section IX)
• Visual, two times (Section X)
Year 4 • Water Quality (Section VII(A)) *
• Visual, two times (Section X)
• Visual (Section X)
• Wetland Hydrology (Section IX)
Year 5
• Vegetation (Section V)
• Stream Channel Stability/Hydrology (Section VI)
• Water Quality (Section VII(A)) *
• Macroinvertebrate & Fish (Section VII(B-C)) *
• Visual, two times (Section X)
• Vegetation (Section V)
• Wetland Hydrology (Section IX)
• Visual, two times (Section X)
Year 6 • Water Quality (Section VII(A)) *
• Visual, two times (Section X)
• Wetland Hydrology (Section IX)
• Visual, two times (Section X)
Year 7
• Vegetation (Section V)
• Stream Channel Stability/Hydrology (Section VI)
• Water Quality (Section VII(A)) *
• Macroinvertebrate & Fish (Section VII(B-C)) *
• Visual, two times (Section X)
• Vegetation (Section V)
• Wetland Hydrology (Section IX)
• Visual, two times (Section X)
*Indicates optional monitoring activities
XIV. Credit Release Schedules

The standard release schedule for mitigation bank and ILF credits generated through stream and wetland
mitigation projects has been modified to meet the new standards for the monitoring timeframes provided
in this guidance document. For mitigation banks, the first credit release (15% of the bank’s total stream
restoration and/or enhancement credits) will occur upon establishment of the mitigation bank, and upon
completion following criteria:
1) Execution of the MBI or UMBI by the Sponsor and the USACE
2) Approval of the final Mitigation Plan
29

3) The mitigation bank site must be secured
4) Delivery of the financial assurances described in the Mitigation Plan
5) Recordation of the long-term protection mechanism and title opinion acceptable to the USACE
6) Issuance of the 404 permit verification for construction of the site, if required.

For mitigation sites that include preservation-only credits, 100% of the preservation credits will be
released with the completion of the six criteria stated above.

For ILF sites (including all NCDMS projects), no initial release of credits (Milestone 1) is provided because
ILF programs utilized advance credits, so no initial release is necessary to help fund site construction. To
account for this, the 15% credit release associated with the first milestone (bank establishment) is held
until the second milestone, so that the total credits release at the second milestone is 30%. In order for
NCDMS to receive the 30% release (shown in the schedules as Milestone 2), they must comply with the
credit release requirements stated in Section IV(I)(3) of the approved NCDMS Instrument.

The following conditions apply to the credit release schedules:

A. A reserve of 10% of a site’s total stream credits will be released after four bankfull events
have occurred, in separate years, provided the channel is stable and all other performance
standards are met. In the event that less than four bankfull events occur during the
monitoring period, release of these reserve credits is at the discretion of the NCIRT.

B. For mitigation banks, implementation of the approved Mitigation Plan must be initiated no
later than the first full growing season after the date of the first credit transaction (credit sale).

C. After the second milestone, the credit releases are scheduled to occur on an annual basis,
assuming that the annual monitoring report has been provided to the USACE in accordance
with Section IV (General Monitoring Requirements) of this document, and that the monitoring
report demonstrates that interim performance standards are being met and that no other
concerns have been identified on-site during the visual monitoring. All credit releases require
written approval from the USACE.

D. The credits associated with the final credit release milestone will be released only upon a
determination by the USACE, in consultation with the NCIRT, of functional success as defined
in the Mitigation Plan.

30

The schedules below list the updated credit release schedules for stream and wetland mitigation projects
developed by bank and ILF sites in North Carolina:
Credit Release Schedule and Milestones for Wetlands
Credit
Release
Milestone
Release Activity
Banks ILF/NCDMS
Interim
Release
Total
Released
Interim
Release
Total
Released
1 Site Establishment (includes all required criteria
stated above) 15% 15% 0% 0%
2
Completion of all initial physical and biological
improvements made pursuant to the Mitigation
Plan
15% 30% 30% 30%
3 Year 1 monitoring report demonstrates that
interim performance standards have been met 10% 40% 10% 40%
4 Year 2 monitoring report demonstrates that
interim performance standards have been met 10% 50% 10% 50%
5 Year 3 monitoring report demonstrates that
interim performance standards have been met 15% 65% 15% 65%
6* Year 4 monitoring report demonstrates that
interim performance standards have been met 5% 70% 5% 70%
7 Year 5 monitoring report demonstrates that
interim performance standards have been met 15% 85% 15% 85%
8* Year 6 monitoring report demonstrates that
interim performance standards have been met 5% 90% 5% 90%
9 Year 7 monitoring report demonstrates that
performance standards have been met 10% 100% 10% 100%
*Please note that vegetation plot data may not be required with monitoring reports submitted during
these monitoring years unless otherwise required by the Mitigation Plan or directed by the NCIRT.

Credit Release Schedule and Milestones for Coastal Marsh Wetlands
Credit
Release
Milestone
Release Activity
Banks ILF/NCDMS
Interim
Release
Total
Released
Interim
Release
Total
Released
1 Site Establishment (includes all required criteria
stated above) 15% 15% 0% 0%
2
Completion of all initial physical and biological
improvements made pursuant to the Mitigation
Plan
15% 30% 30% 30%
3 Year 1 monitoring report demonstrates that
interim performance standards have been met 10% 40% 10% 40%
4 Year 2 monitoring report demonstrates that
interim performance standards have been met 15% 55% 15% 55%
5 Year 3 monitoring report demonstrates that
interim performance standards have been met 20% 75% 20% 75%
6 Year 4 monitoring report demonstrates that
interim performance standards have been met 10% 85% 10% 85%
7 Year 5 monitoring report demonstrates that
performance standards have been met 15% 100% 15% 100%
31

Credit Release Schedule and Milestones for Streams
Credit
Release
Milestone
Release Activity
Banks ILF/NCDMS
Interim
Release
Total
Released
Interim
Release
Total
Released
1 Site Establishment (includes all required criteria
stated above) 15% 15% 0% 0%
2
Completion of all initial physical and biological
improvements made pursuant to the Mitigation
Plan
15% 30% 30% 30%
3
Year 1 monitoring report demonstrates that
channels are stable and interim performance
standards have been met
10% 40% 10% 40%
4
Year 2 monitoring report demonstrates that
channels are stable and interim performance
standards have been met
10% 50% 10% 50%
5
Year 3 monitoring report demonstrates that
channels are stable and interim performance
standards have been met
10% 60% 10% 60%
6*
Year 4 monitoring report demonstrates that
channels are stable and interim performance
standards have been met
5% 65%
(75%**) 5% 65%
(75%**)
7
Year 5 monitoring report demonstrates that
channels are stable and interim performance
standards have been met
10% 75%
(85%**) 10% 75%
(85%**)
8*
Year 6 monitoring report demonstrates that
channels are stable and interim performance
standards have been met
5% 80%
(90%**) 5% 80%
(90%**)
9
Year 7 monitoring report demonstrates that
channels are stable, performance standards
have been met
10% 90%
(100%**) 10% 90%
(100%**)
*Please note that vegetation data may not be required with monitoring reports submitted during these monitoring
years unless otherwise required by the Mitigation Plan or directed by the NCIRT.
**10% reserve of credits to be held back until the bankfull event performance standard has been met.

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) Appendices
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018

Appendix I
Maintenance Plan

Maintenance Plan

The Site shall be monitored on a regular basis and a physical inspection of the site shall be conducted a
minimum of once per year throughout the post-construction monitoring period until performance
standards are met. These site inspections may identify site components and features that require routine
maintenance. Routine maintenance should be expected most often in the first two years following site
construction and may include the following:

Component/Feature Maintenance through project close-out
Stream
Routine channel maintenance and repair activities may include securing of loose
coir matting and supplem ental installations of live stakes and other target
vegetation along the channel. Areas where stormwater and floodplain flows
intercept the channel may also require maintenance to prevent bank failures and
head-cutting.
Vegetation
Vegetation shall be m aintained to ensure the health and vigor of the targeted
plant comm unity. Routine vegetation maintenance and repair activities may
include supplemental planting, pruning, mulching, and fertilizing. Exotic invasive
plant species shall be controlled by mechanical and/or chemical methods. Any
vegetation control requiring herbicide application will be performed in
accordance with NC Department of Agriculture (NCDA) rules and regulations.
Beaver Beaver and associated dams are to be removed as they colonize and until the
project is closed.
Site Boundary
Site boundaries shall be identified in the field to ensure clear distinction between
the mitigation site and adjacent properties. Boundaries may be identified by
fence, m arker, bollard, post, tree- blazing, or other means as allowed by site
conditions and/or conservation easement. Boundary markers disturbed,
damaged, or destroyed will be repaired and/or replaced on an as needed basis.
Road Crossing
Road crossings within the site may be maintained only as allowed by
Conservation Easement or existing easement, deed restrictions, rights of way, or
corridor agreements.
Terracell Drop
Structure
Routine maintenance and repair activities may include removal of debris and
supplem ental installation of live stakes and other target vegetation along the
channel. Undermining of the structure may require repair or replacement.

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) Appendices
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018

Appendix J
Quantifying Benefits to Water Quality from Livestock Exclusion and Riparian
Buffer Establishment for Stream Restoration (NCDMS 2016)
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) Appendix K: Riparian Buffer Mitigation Plan
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018

Appendix K

Riparian Buffer Mitigation Plan
(Haw River Arm of the Jordan Lake Watershed – Cape Fear 02)

RIPARIAN BUFFER MITIGATION PLAN
MAJOR HILL MITIGATION SITE
Alamance County, North Carolina

DMS Project ID No. 100015
Full Delivery Contract No. 7193
USACE Action ID No. SAW-2017-01472
RFP No. 16-006990

Cape Fear River Basin – Haw River Arm
Cataloging Unit 03030002

Prepared for:

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
1652 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27699-1652

May 2018

This mitigation plan was written in conformance with the following:
North Carolina consolidated buffer mitigation rule 15A NCAC 02B .0295, effective November 1, 2015
and the Jordan Lake Buffer Protection Rule (15A NCAC 02B .0267 & 15A NCAC 02B .0268)
Buffer Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) Table of Contents page i
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
Table of Contents

1.0 MITIGATION PROJECT SUMMARY .............................................................................. 1
1.1 Project Location ................................................................................................................... 2
1.2 Directions to Site.................................................................................................................. 2
2.0 REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................................... 2
2.1 Determination of Credits...................................................................................................... 2
2.3 Permits ................................................................................................................................. 3
3.0 RIPARIAN RESTORATION, ENHANCEMENT, & PRESERVATION PLAN ........... 3
3.1 Riparian Area Restoration Activities .................................................................................. 3
3.1.1 Natural Plant Community Restoration ......................................................................... 3
3.1.2 Site Preparation ............................................................................................................ 3
3.2.3 Planting Plan ................................................................................................................ 4
3.2 Riparian Buffer Enhancement via Cattle Exclusion Activities........................................... 5
3.3 Riparian Buffer Preservation Activities .............................................................................. 5
3.4 Marsh Treatment Area ........................................................................................................ 5
3.5 Nuisance Species Management............................................................................................ 7
4.0 MONITORING PLAN .......................................................................................................... 7
4.1 Monitoring ........................................................................................................................... 7
4.2 Reporting.............................................................................................................................. 7
5.0 PROJECT PERFORMANCE STANDARDS ..................................................................... 8
5.1 Vegetation Contingency ....................................................................................................... 8
6.0 LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT ......................................................................................... 8
7.0 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................... 9

Attachments
Attachment 1 - Figures
Figure 1. Site Location & Service Area
Figure 2. USGS 1:24000 Topographic Map & NRCS Overview
Figure 3. Existing Conditions Plan View
Figure 4. Restoration Plan
Figure 5. Fencing Plan
Figure 6. Credit Determination

Attachment 2 – NCDWR Site Viability Letter & Buffer Determination

Attachment 3 – Existing Condition Photos

Attachment 4 – Document Review Correspondence
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 1
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
1.0 MITIGATION PROJECT SUMMARY
The Site is located in the Carolina Slate Belt Ecoregion of the Piedmont Ph ysiographic Province
within Alamance County, North Carolina. Regional physiography is characterized by dissected
irregular plains, some hills, linear ridges, isolated monadnocks, and low to moderate gradient
streams with mostly boulder and cobble substrates (Griffith et al. 2002). Onsite elevations range
from a high of 560 feet National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) to a low of approximately 480
feet NGVD (USGS Silk Hope, North Carolina 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle) (Figures 1 and
3, Appendix A).

The primary hydrologic features of the Site consist of three unnamed tributaries (UTs) to Pine Hill
Branch. Site UT drainage areas range in size from 17.2 – 444.7 acres (0.001 – 0.70 square mile)
(Figure 3, Appendix A).The Site drainage area is primarily composed of pasture, forest, agriculture
land, and sparse residential property. Impervious surfaces account for less than five percent of the
upstream land surface.

Site land use consists of pasture, hayfields, disturbed forest, and agricultural land used for livestock
grazing and hay production. Livestock has unrestricted access to Site streams, and stream banks
are eroded vertically and laterally and receive extensive sediment and nutrient inputs. Riparian
zones in the upper reaches of UT 1 are primarily composed of herbaceous vegetation that is sparse
and disturbed due to livestock grazing, bush hogging, and regular land-management activities.
The downstream reaches of UT 1 and all of UT 3 is primarily wooded with livestock disturbance
to stream channels. UT 2 is the lone tributary not subject to continuous, unrestricted livestock
access. Immediate riparian areas adjacent to UT 2 are forested. An existing fence protects this area
from livestock access.

The riparian areas will be restored in concurrence with the Major Hill Stream and Wetland
Mitigation Site (NC DMS Project ID 10015, SAW-2017-01472) and will involve restoring riparian
buffers adjacent to restored streams to help reduce non-point source contaminant discharges to
downstream waters in the Haw River sub-watershed of Jordan Lake. All riparian areas were
assessed by DWR (Katie Merritt and Sue Homewood) during an onsite visit February 20th, 2018
to determine viability for buffer mitigation (DWR Site Viability Letter, Attachment B). RS
completed a DMS Categorical Exclusions Form was approved by the Donnie Brew
(Preconstruction & Environment Engineer – Federal Highway Administration) on September 6th,
2017. The entire document is attached to the Major Hill Stream and Wetland Mitigation Plan as
Appendix E.

The Site will be protected with a permanent conservation easement. Riparian restoration,
enhancement, and preservation area widths adjacent to restored streams will extend out to a
maximum of 200 feet from the top of stream banks with a minimum width of 50 from the top of
banks. Riparian buffer enhancement and preservation credits generated on this Site are allowed
pursuant to 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o). No riparian restoration areas that are less than 20 feet wide
from Top of Banks can be used to generate riparian buffer credit. Figure 6, Credit Determination
Map and Section 2.1, provide details of the riparian buffer mitigation determination on the Site.

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 2
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
Riparian buffer mitigation credit will not be generated in areas that are generating wetland
mitigation credit.
1.1 Project Location
The Major Hill Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site (hereafter referred to as the “Site”)
encompasses 16.7 acres of pasture and disturbed forest along warm water, unnamed tributaries to
Pine Hill Branch. The Site is located approximately 3.5 miles southeast of Snow Camp and 6
miles north of Silk Hope in southern Alamance County near the Chatham County line (Figure 1,
Attachment A).
1.2 Directions to Site
Directions to the Site from Raleigh, North Carolina.
 Take US-64 West out of Raleigh and travel 25 miles,
 Take exit 381 and turn right onto NC-87 N,
 After 5 miles, take a left onto Castle Rock Farm Road,
 After 5.8 miles, Castle Rock Farm Road becomes Old Switchboard Road,
 Continue for 2.1 miles, turn right onto Lindley Mill Road,
 After 0.5 mile, turn left onto Major Hill Road,
 The site can be accessed from Burnett Church Road, which is on the left after 1 mile.
o Site Latitude, Longitude
35.873206, -79.360906 (WGS84)

2.0 REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS
Credit determination for a riparian restoration site follows North Carolina consolidated buffer
mitigation rule 15A NCAC 02B .0295, effective November 1, 2015.
2.1 Determination of Credits
Table 1. Major Hill: Jordan Lake, Haw River Sub-Watershed, Credit Determination Table
Buffer
Width/Zone Credit Type Total Area
(Sq. Ft.)
Mitigation
Ratio
% of Full
Credit
RBM Units (in
sq. ft.)
TOB - 100 ft. Restoration 228,254 1:1 100% 228,254
101 - 200 ft. Restoration (15A NCAC 02B .0295 (n)(1) 31,363 1:1 33% 10,349
TOB - 100 ft. Enhancement via Cattle Exclusion (15A
NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(6) 340,639 2:1 100% 170,319
TOB - 100 ft. Preservation (Non-Subject Stream)(15A
NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(4) 25,264 5:1 100% 5,052
101 - 200 ft. Preservation (Non-Subject Stream)(15A
NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(4) 2,613 5:1 33% 172
Total Riparian Buffer Mitigation Units: 414,146

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 3
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
2.3 Permits
Implementation of the riparian buffer mitigation plan will be completed in conjuncture with the
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Mitigation Plan. Permits required will be a 404 Nation Wide 27
permit and appropriate NC Division of Water Resources 401 certifications, as well as a NC
Division of Land Quality Sediment and Erosion Control permit. Application for permits will
begin upon approval of the said mitigation plans.

3.0 RIPARIAN RESTORATION, ENHANCEMENT, & PRESERVATION PLAN
This site is also being proposed as a stream and wetland mitigation project; therefore, restoration
of riparian areas will be accomplished through the goals and methods outlined by the Major Hill
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Plan. All applicable federal, state, and local documentation,
permits, and/or authorizations will be acquired as part of implementing the above-mentioned
mitigation plan. Primary goals focus on 1) improving water quality, 2) enhancing flood attenuation
and hydrology, 3) improving aquatic resources, and 4) restoring riparian habitat. Proposed
mitigation activities will provide floodplain connectivity, floodplain resistance, stream stability,
sediment transport, surface and subsurface storage and retention, in-stream habitat, riparian habitat
and structure, thermal regulation, floodplain biogeochemical processing, and pollutant filtration as
well as remove sources of pollutants. The riparian area will be restored through the revegetation
of native plant communities.

All riparian restoration activities will commence in concurrence with the stream mitigation
activities and not before. Therefore, the mitigation area where riparian restoration is being
performed may be altered slightly depending on the approval of the Stream Mitigation Plan. The
riparian restoration areas will be surveyed and information provided in the As-Built report. Areas
where existing mature vegetation will potentially be negatively impacted by stream restoration
activities are not eligible for riparian buffer restoration credit; however, these areas are eligible for
riparian buffer enhancement via cattle exclusion credit (Figure 6, Attachment A).
3.1 Riparian Area Restoration Activities
3.1.1 Natural Plant Community Restoration
Restoration of floodplain forest and stream-side habitat allows for development and expansion of
characteristic species across the landscape. Ecotonal changes between community types contribute
to diversity and provide secondary benefits, such as enhanced feeding and nesting opportunities
for mammals, birds, amphibians, and other wildlife. Reference Forest Ecosystem 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.
3.1.2 Site Preparation
Soil grading will occur during stream restoration activities. Topsoils will be stockpiled during
construction activities and will be spread on the soil surface once critical subgrade has been
established. The replaced topsoil will serve as a viable growing medium for community restoration
to provide nutrients and aid in the survival of planted species. Restoration Systems (RS) may elect
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 4
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
to control weed competition and kill fescue with glyphosate before planting. If so, RS will follow
all NC Pesticide regulations. RS may also choose to prepare riparian restoration areas by aerating
the soil to a depth of 6”, this will improve infiltration and break up surface compaction.

Farm Pond Removal
To complete the stream and wetland restoration activities and subsequent riparian buffer
restoration, the removal of a small farm pond, ~0.58 acres will occur. Stream, wetland and riparian
area restoration within the abandoned pond will include 1) notching the dam to dewater; 2) removal
of the dam to the elevation of the adjacent floodplain; 3) excavating sediment that is unsuitable for
channel bank construction; 4) backfilling areas of sediment removed with soil suitable for channel
construction (if necessary); 5) excavation of the design channel, 6) stabilization of the channel
with coir matting, seed, and mulch; and 7) installation of structures. If necessary, RS may amend
impounded soils with soil from the earthen dam or other additives to prevent cracking and prepare
the riparian areas for planting. No additional permits will be required to carry out this work beyond
those mentioned in Section 2.3 above.
3.2.3 Planting Plan
Stream-side trees and shrubs include species with high value for sediment stabilization, rapid
growth rate, and the ability to withstand hydraulic forces associated with bankfull flow and
overbank flood events. Stream-side trees and shrubs will be planted within 15 feet of the channel
throughout the meander belt-width. Shrub elements will be planted along the reconstructed stream
banks, concentrated along outer bends. Piedmont Alluvial Forest is the target community for Site
floodplains and Dry-Mesic Oak-Hickory Forest is the target community for upland side-slopes.

Bare-root seedlings within the Piedmont Alluvial and Dry-Mesic Oak-Hickory Forests will be
planted at a density of approximately 680 stems per acre on 8-foot centers. Shrub species in the
stream-side assemblage and Marsh Wetland Treatment Areas will be planted at a density of 2720
stems per acre on 4-foot centers.

Table 2 (following page) depicts the total number of stems and species distribution within each
vegetation association (Figure 4, Attachment A). Planting will be performed between December
1 and March 15 to allow plants to stabilize during the dormant period and set root during the spring
season.

In addition to planting seedlings, a seed mix will be spread within Marsh Treatment Wetland Areas
as follows.
1. Virginia wildrye (Elymus virginicus)
2. Switch grass (Panicum virgatum)
3. Big blue stem (Andropogon gerardii)
4. Indian grass (Sorghastrum nutans)
5. Deer tongue (Dichanthelium clandestinum)

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 5
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018
3.2 Riparian Buffer Enhancement via Cattle Exclusion Activities
Riparian buffer enhancement will include permanently protecting existing riparian buffer from
livestock via exclusionary fencing, cutting, clearing, filling, grading, and any similar activities that
would affect the functionality of the riparian buffer (Figure 6, Attachment A). These areas are
defined primarily as disturbed mixed hardwoods. Buffer credits sought in the enhancement area
are allowed under 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (o)(6). The enhancement area will extend a maximum
of 200 feet from the top of the bank with a minimum width of 20 from top of banks.

A small portion of UT-3 is generating riparian buffer enhancement credit from only one side of
the stream. Cattle currently have access to the entire area but only have access from the pasture on
the northern side of the stream, the Parcel owned by Mr. Lamm. Once fencing has been installed
to prevent cattle access from Mr. Lamm’s parcel to the stream, cattle will no longer be able to
access the south side of the stream. This action will result in compliance with 15A NCAC 02B
.0295 (o)(6) which states that the permanent exclusion of grazing livestock must be done such that
the livestock are fenced out of the stream and its adjacent buffer. The southern parcel, which is not
apart of the conservation easement, is owned by the Caviness family and is a single family home.
Cattle will not be grazing within their parcel post construction. Figure 5 dipicts where fencing will
be constructed to exclude cattle.
3.3 Riparian Buffer Preservation Activities
Riparian buffer preservation will include permanently protecting existing riparian buffer from
cutting, clearing, filling, grading, and any similar activities that would affect the functionality of
the riparian buffer. Areas specified for Preservation, as defined in 15A NCAC 02B .0295, are
shown in Figure 6 (Attachment A). These areas are defined primarily as disturbed mixed
hardwoods, with the number of high-value species above 200 per acre. They are areas where
livestock are currently fenced out, and there has been little or no historical livestock access.
3.4 Marsh Treatment Area
Two marsh treatment areas will be constructed to intercept surface waters draining through
agricultural areas before discharging into subject streams (UT1 and UT3). The marsh treatment
areas are excluded from credit calculations (Figure 6, Attachment A).
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 6
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina April 2018
Table 2. Planting Plan
Vegetation Association
Piedmont/Low
Mountain Alluvial
Forest*
Dry-Mesic Oak-
Hickory Forest*
Marsh Treatment
Wetland**
Stream-side
Assemblage** TOTAL
Area (acres) 1.1 5.5 0.01 1.5 8.11
Species #
planted*
% of
total
#
planted*
% of
total
#
planted**
% of
total
#
planted**
% of
total # planted
River birch (Betula nigra) 75 10 -- -- -- -- 204 5 279
Ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana) -- -- 748 20 -- -- -- -- 748
Buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis) -- -- -- -- 5 20 -- -- 5
Red bud (Cercis canadensis) -- -- 561 15 -- -- -- -- 561
Sweet pepperbush (Clethra alnifolia) -- -- -- -- 4 15 -- -- 4
Silky dogwood (Cornus amomum) 75 10 -- -- 4 15 816 20 895
Persimmon (Diospyros virginiana) -- -- 374 10 -- -- -- -- 374
White ash (Fraxinus americana) -- -- 187 5 -- -- -- -- 187
Green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica) 150 20 -- -- -- -- 816 20 966
Blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum) -- -- -- -- 5 20 204 5 5
Tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera) 75 10 -- -- -- -- -- -- 75
Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis) 150 20 -- -- -- -- 816 20 966
Black gum (Nyssa sylvatica) -- -- 561 15 -- -- -- -- 561
Water oak (Quercus nigra) 112 15 748 20 -- -- 408 10 1268
Willow oak (Quercus phellos) 112 15 561 15 -- -- 408 10 1081
Black willow (Salix nigra) -- -- -- -- -- -- 408 10 408
Elderberry (Sambucus canadensis) -- -- -- -- 5 20 -- -- 5
Possumhaw (Viburnum nudum) -- -- -- -- 3 10 -- -- 3
TOTAL 748 100 3740 100 27 100 4080 100 8391
* Planted at a density of 680 stems/acre.
** Planted at a density of 2720 stems/acre.
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 7
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina April 2018
3.5 Nuisance Species Management
Nuisance species controls are not proposed at this time. Inspections for beaver and other potential
nuisance species will occur throughout the course of the monitoring period. Appropriate actions
may be taken to ameliorate any negative impacts regarding vegetation development and/or water
management on an as-needed basis. The presences of nuisance species will be monitored over the
course of the monitoring period. Appropriate actions will be taken to ameliorate any negative
impacts regarding vegetation development and/or water management on an as-needed basis.

4.0 MONITORING PLAN
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.
4.1 Monitoring
Vegetation monitoring plots will be installed and monitored across the Site in accordance with the
NC Division of Mitigation Services’ Riparian Buffer and Nutrient Offset Buffer Annual
Monitoring Report Template (ver. 1.0) dated Feb. 2, 2014, to include a level 2 CVS monitoring
protocol. At least 2% of the area generating riparian buffer restoration credit will be monitored.
Six (6) sample plots (10-meter by 10-meter) will be installed within the Site as per guidelines
established in CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation, Version 4.2 (Lee et al. 2008).
Vegetation monitoring will occur annually in the fall (between September and November), prior
to the loss of leaves for a period of five monitoring years following planting. Parameters to be
monitored include species composition and species density. Visual observations of the percent
cover of shrub and herbaceous species will also be documented by photograph.
4.2 Reporting
Annual monitoring data will be reported using the NC Division of Mitigation Services’ Riparian
Buffer and Nutrient Offset Buffer Annual Monitoring Report Template (ver. 1.0) dated Feb. 2,
2014. The monitoring report shall provide a project data chronology that will facilitate an
understanding of project status and trends, population of NC Division of Mitigation Services’
databases for analysis, research purposes, and assist in decision making regarding project close-
out. The following table outlines monitoring requirements for this project; monitoring parameter
descriptions follow.

Required Parameter Quantity Frequency Notes
Yes Vegetation
Six (6) plots located
across all restored
buffer zones.
Annual
Vegetation will be monitored for five years or until
performance standards are met. Visual monitoring of the
site will be done all five years. Analysis of vegetation
will be recorded using level 2 CVS Monitoring protocol.
Yes Project
Boundary NA Annual Locations of fence damage, vegetation damage, boundary
encroachments, etc. will be mapped.

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 8
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina April 2018
5.0 PROJECT PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
Performance standards were established to verify that the vegetation component supports
community elements necessary for forest development and the maintenance of diffuse flow
through the riparian buffer in accordance with North Carolina Division of Water Resources
Administrative Code 15A NCAC 02B.0295 (Mitigation Program Requirements for Protection and
Maintenance of Riparian Buffers). Performance standards are dependent upon the density and
growth of at least four native hardwood tree species where no one species is greater than 50% of
the stems. After five years of monitoring, an average density of 260 woody stems per acre,
including planted shrubs (Silky dogwood and Blueberry), must be surviving, and diffuse flow
maintained. 15A NCAC 02b .0295 (2)(E) dictates that monitoring for planted stems would also
include the health of planted stems. Level 2 CVS monitoring protocol requires the vigor, a
determinant of health, of a monitored stem be recorded. If requested, RS will make available during
the monitoring years, planted stem health, e.g. vigor.
5.1 Vegetation Contingency
If vegetation performance standards 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 performance standards.

6.0 LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT
The Site will be transferred to the NCDEQ Stewardship Program. This party shall serve as
conservation easement holder and long-term steward for the property and will conduct periodic
inspection of the Site to ensure that restrictions required in the conservation easement are upheld.
Funding will be supplied by the responsible party on a yearly basis until such time an endowment
is established. The NCDEQ Stewardship Program is developing an endowment system within the
non-reverting, interest-bearing Conservation Lands Conservation Fund Account. The use of funds
from the Endowment Account will be governed by North Carolina General Statute GS 113A-
232(d)(3). Interest gained by the endowment fund may be used for the purpose of stewardship,
monitoring, stewardship administration, and land transaction costs, if applicable.

The Stewardship Program will periodically install signage to identify boundary markings, as
needed. Any livestock or associated fencing, or permanent crossings will be the responsibility of
the owner of the underlying property to maintain.

Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) page 9
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina April 2018
7.0 REFERENCES

Griffith, G.E., J.M. Omernik, J.A. Comstock, M.P. Schafale, W.H. McNab, D.R. Lenat, T.F.
MacPherson, J.B. Glover, and V.B. Shelbourne. 2002. Ecoregions of North Carolina
and South Carolina. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia.

Jordan Lake Water Supply Watershed Buffer Rules 15A NCAC 02B .0267, 15A NCAC 02B
.0268, and 15A NCAC 02B .0295

Lee, M.T., R.K. Peet, S.D. Roberts, and T.R. Wentworth. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for
Recording Vegetation, Level 1-2 Plot Version 4.2. Ecosystem Enhancement Program,
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources.

Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2014. Web Soil Survey (online). Available:
http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/ [January 9, 2014]. United States Department of
Agriculture.

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.
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) Attachments
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018

ATTACHMENT A

Figures

Figure 1. Site Location & Service Area
Figure 2. USGS 1:24000 Topographic Map & NRCS Overview
Figure 3. Existing Conditions Plan View
Figure 4. Restoration Plan
Figure 5. Fencing Plan
Figure 6. Credit Determination
Sourc e s: Esri, HERE, De Lorm e , Inte rm ap, inc re m e nt P Corp., GEBCO, USGS,FAO, N PS, N RCAN , Ge oBase , IGN , Kad aste r N L, Ord nanc e Surve y, EsriJapan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), swisstopo, Mapm yInd ia, ©Ope nStre e tMap c ontributors, and the GIS Use r Com m unity
RESTORATION SYSTEMS, LLC1101 HAY N ES ST, SUITE 211RALEIGH, N C 27604PHON E : 919.755.9490FAX : [phone]
This m ap and all d ata c ontaine d within are supplie d as is with no warranty. Re storation Syste m s, LLC e xpre ssly d isc laim s re sponsibility for d am age s or liability from any c laim s that m ay arise out of the use or m isuse of this m ap. It is the sole re sponsibility of the use r to d e te rm ine if the d ata on this m ap is c om patible with the use r’s ne e d s. This m ap was not c re ate d as surve y d ata, nor should it be use d as suc h. It is the use r’s re sponsibility to obtain prope r surve y d ata, pre pare d by a lic e nse d surve yor, whe re re q uire d by law.

SCALE:
DATE: 04-2018
PROJECT: Major HIll
Riparian Buffer AppendixMajor Hill Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site
COORDIN ATE SY STEM: N AD 1983 SPLAS FEET
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY (c ) 2014 N C One Map
1 in = 54,167 ft
Loc ation of Major Hill Stre am andWe tland Mitigation Site withinUSGS Hyd rologic Unit andTarge te d Loc al Wate rshe d03030002050050
Site Latitud e , Longitud e 35.873206, -79.360906 (WGS84)
Figure 1: Site Location &Service Area
Legend
Se rvic e Are a - Haw Rive r Subwate rshe d
Jord an Lake 14-Digit USGS HUCs
Jordan Lake Subwatershed Boundaries
Haw
Lowe r N e w Hope
Uppe r N e w Hope
Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed
FIGURE
Drawn by:
Date:
Scale:
Project No.:
KRJ
MAY 2017
1:8000
17-009
Title:
Project:
Prepared for:
Alamance County, NC
PROJECTMAPPING
2
³
Notes:
1. Background Imagery Sources
a. Saxapahaw (1977) and Silk
Hope (1974) 7.5-minute
topographic quadrangles provided
by the U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS, left window).
b. Soil Survey of Alamance
County (1960) provided by the
Natural Resources Conservation
Service, sheet 35 (right window)
NCCGIA01,000 2,000 3,000500
Feet
Legend
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
MAJOR HILL STREAM ANDWETLANDMITIGATION SITE
!.
!.
#*
Lc
Wd
HdC
HdB
GaC2
ObB
GaB2
ObC
AaB
OaB
GaB2
EaC
GaB2
EaB2
HdB2
GaB
AaB
GaC2
GbC3
HdC
HdC
ObB2
GaC
HdB
OaB2
Mc
W
GaE
Lc
GbC3
HdC
Sb
ObC
HdB
AaB
GaC2
TaC2
GaB
GaB2
Ld
GaB2
HdB2
GaC2
Ld
GaB2
GaC2
GbD3
GaC2
GbD3
GbD3
W
ObB
GaB
GbC3
HdB2
GaB2
GaC2
HdC
GbD3
GbC3
W
GaB2
GbD3
HeC3
EbC3
GaB2
HdB2
TbC3
TaB2
HdB2GaB2 NCCGIA
FIGURE
Drawn by:
Date:
Scale:
Project No.:
KRJ
AUG 2017
1:4000
17-009
Title:
Project:
Prepared for:
Alamance County, NC
EXISTINGCONDITIONS
4
³
0 1,000 2,000500Feet
Legend
Easement = 15.5 acres
Perennial Stream = 4,663 linear feet
Intermittent Stream = 630 linear feet
Jurisdictional Wetlands = 0.41 acres
Drained Hydric Soil = 0.25 acres
Wetland Under Impoundment = 0.3 acres
!.NCDWQ Form
#*Soil Profile
NRCS Soil Boundary
MAJOR HILLSTREAM ANDWETLANDMITIGATION SITE
NCSAM Form
Reach 1
Soil Map Unit Soil Series
EaC Efland silt loam, 6 to 10 % slopes
GaC2 Georgeville silt loam, 6 to 10 % slopes, eroded
HdC Herndon silt loam, 6 to 10 % slopes
Lc Local alluvial land, poorly drained
ObC Orange silt loam moderately well drained, 6 to 10 % slopes
NCSAM Form
Reach 2
U
T-3
U T -3 UT-2UT-1
Vegetation AssociationTOTALArea (acres)8.11Species # planted* % of total # planted* % of total # planted** % of total # planted** % of total # plantedRiver birch (Betula nigra) 75 10 -- -- -- -- 204 5 279Ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana) -- -- 748 20 -- -- -- -- 748Buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis)---- ----520 -- --5Red bud (Cercis canadensis) -- -- 561 15 -- -- -- -- 561Sweet pepperbush (Clethra alnifolia) ---- ----415 -- --4Silky dogwood (Cornus amomum) 75 10 -- -- 4 15 816 20 895Persimmon (Diospyros virginiana) -- -- 374 10 -- -- -- -- 374White ash (Fraxinus americana) -- -- 187 5 -- -- -- -- 187Green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica) 150 20 -- -- -- -- 816 20 966Blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum) ---- ----52020455Tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera) 7510-------- -- --75Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis) 150 20 -- -- -- -- 816 20 966Black gum (Nyssa sylvatica)-- -- 561 15 -- ------ 561Water oak (Quercus nigra)112 15 748 20 -- -- 408 10 1268Willow oak (Quercus phellos)112 15 561 15 -- -- 408 10 1081Black willow (Salix nigra)-- -- -- -- -- -- 408 10 408Elderberry (Sambucus canadensis) ---- ----520 -- --5Possumhaw (Viburnum nudum) ---- ----310 -- --3TOTAL 748 100 3740 100 27 100 4080 100 8391* Planted at a density of 680 stems/acre.** Planted at a density of 2720 stems/acre.Piedmont/Low Mountain Alluvial Forest*Dry-Mesic Oak-Hickory Forest*Marsh Treatment Wetland**Stream-side Assemblage**1.1 5.5 0.01 1.5
UT1
UT2
UT1
UT3
UT3
Marsh Treatment Area(No Buffer Credit)
Marsh Treatment Area(No Buffer Credit)
Legend
Ne w Fe ncing for Cattle Exclusion
Existing Fe ncing - To Re m ain for Cattle Exclusion
Existing Fe ncing - To-Be Re m ove d /Re worke d for Cattle Exclusion
Ease m e nt
M ajor Hill W e tland M itigation - Re m ove d From Buffe r Cals
Prop ose d Stre am TOB-TOB
TOB to 50 fe e t
100 foot line
150 foot line
200 foor line
Riparian Buffer Mitigation Type
TOB - 100 ft. Re storation (1:1) - 5.24 Acre s
101 ft. - 200 ft. Re storation (1:1 b ut 33% cre d it p e r Rule ) - 0.72 Acre s
TOB - 100 ft. Enhance m e nt (2:1 Cattle Ex. p e r Rule ) - 7.82 Acre s
TOB - 100 ft. Pre se rvation (Non-Sub je ct Stre am 5:1) - 0.58 Acre s
101 ft. - 200 ft. Pre se rvation (Non-Sub je ct Stre am 5:1 33% Cre d it p e r Rule ) - 0.06 Acre s
None Cre d it Ge ne rating (Le ss than 20 ft.)
RESTORATION SYSTEMS, LLC1101 HAYNES ST, SUITE 211RALEIGH, NC 27604PHONE : [phone] FAX : [phone]
This m ap and all d ata containe d within are sup p lie d as is with no warranty. Re storation Syste m s, LLC e xp re ssly d isclaim s re sp onsib ility for d am age s or liab ility from any claim s that m ay arise out of the use or m isuse of this m ap . It is the sole re sp onsib il ity of the use r to d e te rm ine if the d ata on this m ap is com p atib le with the use r’s ne e d s. This m ap was not cre ate d as surve y d ata, nor should it b e use d as such. It is the use r’s re sp onsib ility to ob tain p rop e r surve y d ata, p re p are d b y a lice nse d surve yor, whe re re quire d b y law.
SCALE:
DATE: 5-15-2018
PROJECT: M ajor HIll
Riparian Buffer AppendixMajor Hill Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site
COORDINATE SYSTEM : NAD 1983 SPLAS FEET
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY (c ) 2014 NC One M ap
1 in = 208 ft
Figure 5:Fencing Plan
UT1
UT2
UT1
UT3
UT3
Marsh Treatment Area(No Buffer Credit)
Marsh Treatment Area(No Buffer Credit)
Legend
Easem ent
Proposed Stream TOB-TOB
TOB to 50 feet
100 foot line
150 foot line
200 foor line
Major Hill W etland Mitigation - Rem oved From Buffer Cals
Riparian Buffer Mitigation Type
TOB - 100 ft. Restoration (1:1) - 5.24 Acres
101 ft. - 200 ft. Restoration (1:1 b ut 33% cred it per Rule) - 0.72 Acres
TOB - 100 ft. Enhancem ent (2:1 Cattle Ex. per Rule) - 7.82 Acres
TOB - 100 ft. Preservation (N on-Sub ject Stream 5:1) - 0.58 Acres
101 ft. - 200 ft. Preservation (N on-Sub ject Stream 5:1 33% Cred it per Rule) - 0.06 Acres
N one Cred it Generating (Less than 20 ft.)
Proposed Vegitation Monitoring Locations
Buffer Width/Zone Credit Type Total Area (Sq. Ft.)Mitigation Ratio % of Full Credit RBM Units (in sq. ft.)
TOB - 100 ft. Restoration 228,254 1:1 100% 228,254
101 - 200 ft. Restoration (15A NCAC 02B .0295 (n)(1) 31,363 1:1 33% 10,349
TOB - 100 ft.Enhancement via Cattle Exclusion (15A NCAC
02B .0295 (o)(6)340,639 2:1 100% 170,319
TOB - 100 ft.Preservation (Non-Subject Stream)(15A NCAC
02B .0295 (o)(4)25,264 5:1 100% 5,052
101 - 200 ft.Preservation (Non-Subject Stream)(15A NCAC
02B .0295 (o)(4)2,613 5:1 33% 172
414,146
Table 1. Major Hill: Jordan Lake, Haw River Sub-Watershed, Credit Determination Table
Total Riparian Buffer Mitigation Units:
RESTORATION SYSTEMS, LLC1101 HAYN ES ST, SUITE 211RALEIGH, N C 27604PHON E : 919.755.9490FAX : [phone]
This m ap and all d ata c ontained within are supplied as is with no warranty. Restoration System s, LLC expressly d isclaim s responsib ility for d am ages or liab ility from any c laim s that m ay arise out of the use or m isuse of this m ap. It is the sole responsib ility of the user to d eterm ine if the d ata on this m ap is com patib le with the user’s need s. This m ap was not created as survey d ata, nor should it b e used as such. It is the user’s responsib ility to ob tain proper survey d ata, prepared b y a licensed surveyor, where req uired b y law.
SCALE:
DATE: 2-23-2018
PROJECT: Major HIll
Riparian Buffer AppendixMajor Hill Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site
COORDIN ATE SYSTEM: N AD 1983 SPLAS FEET
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY (c ) 2014 N C One Map
1 in = 188 ft
Figure 6: Riparian Buffer Credit Determination
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) Attachments
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018

ATTACHMENT B

NCDWR Site Viability Letter & Buffer Determination

State of North Carolina | Environmental Quality
450 West Hanes Mill Road, Suite 300 | Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27105
336-776-9800

ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
Secretary
LINDA CULPEPPER
Interim Director Water Resources
Environmental Quality

March 8, 2018

Worth Creech
Restoration Systems LLC
1101 Haynes St, Suite 211
Raleigh NC 27604

Subject: On-Site Determination for Applicability to the Buffer Mitigation Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0295)
Subject Property: Major Hill Restoration Site, Graham NC, Alamance County

Dear Mr. Creech:

On February 12, 2018, at your request, Sue Homewood conducted an on-site determination to review
features located on the subject project for stream determinations with regards to the above noted state
regulations.

Based on the on-site determination as well as a review of the Alamance County Soil Survey and the
USGS 1:24,000 topographic map, it was determined that UT1 as shown on the attached map is an
intermittent stream which begins at the outlet of the existing pond. UT2 as shown on the attached map
was determined to be an intermittent stream throughout the proposed project boundary.

Please note that the Jordan Lake Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 02B .0267) apply to UT1 and UT3 as shown on
the attached map.

The owner (or future owners) should notify the Division (and other relevant agencies) of this decision in
any future correspondences concerning this property. This on-site determination shall expire five (5) years
from the date of this letter.

Landowners or affected parties that dispute a determination made by the Division or Delegated Local
Authority that a surface water exists and that it is subject to the buffer rule may request a determination by
the Director. A request for a determination by the Director shall be referred to the Director in writing c/o
401 & Buffer Permitting Branch, 1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650. Individuals that
dispute a determination by the Division or Delegated Local Authority that “exempts” surface water from
the buffer rule may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that you
receive this letter. Applicants are hereby notified that the 60-day statutory appeal time does not start until
the affected party (including downstream and adjacent landowners) is notified of this decision. The
Division recommends that the applicant conduct this notification in order to be cer tain that third party
appeals are made in a timely manner. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition, which conforms to
Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail
Service Center, Raleigh, N.C. 27699-6714. This determination is final and binding unless you ask for a
hearing within 60 days.

This letter only addresses the applicability to the mitigation rules and the buffer rules and does not approve
any activity within Waters of the United States or Waters of the State or their associated buffers. If you
have any additional questions or require additional information, please contact me at 336-776-9693 or
[e-mail].

Sincerely,

Sue Homewood
Winston-Salem Regional Office

Enclosures: USGS Topo Map
Restoration Systems Pre Monitoring Feature Locations Map

Cc: James D Lamm, 7354 Lindley Mill Rd, Graham NC 27253
Katie Merrit, 401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
DWR, Winston-Salem Regional Office

Legend
XS-2
XS-1
DA = 0.09
Abkf = 3.3 sq ft
Aexisting = 8.6 sq ft
Wbkf = 5.1 ft
Dbkf = 0.6 ft
Dmax = 1.0 ft
Wbkf/Dbkf = 7.9
FPA = 11.5 ft
ENT = 2.2
LBH = 1.8 ft
BHR = 1.8
Ge-type
DA = 0.09
Abkf = 3.4 sqft
Aexisting = 8.1 sq ft
Wbkf = 7.9 ft
Dbkf = 0.4 ft
Dmax = 0.7 ft
Wbkf/Dbkf = 18.6
FPA = 26 ft
ENT = 3.3
LBH = 1.1 ft
BHR = 1.6
Eg-type UT-1UT-2U T -3
&RS\ULJKW‹1DWLRQDO*HRJUDSKLF6RFLHW\LFXEHG
),*85(
'UDZQE\
'DWH
6FDOH
3URMHFW1R
.5-
0$<


7LWOH
3URMHFW
3UHSDUHGIRU
$ODPDQFH&RXQW\1&
1RWHV
%DFNJURXQG,PDJHU\6RXUFHV
D6D[DSDKDZDQG6LON
+RSHPLQXWH
WRSRJUDSKLFTXDGUDQJOHVSURYLGHG
E\WKH86*HRORJLFDO6XUYH\
86*6OHIWZLQGRZ
E6RLO6XUYH\RI$ODPDQFH
&RXQW\SURYLGHGE\WKH
1DWXUDO5HVRXUFHV&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6HUYLFHVKHHWULJKWZLQGRZ
1&&*,$
)HHW
0DMRU+LOO6WUHDPDQG:HWODQG0LWLJDWLRQ6LWH
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) Attachments
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018

ATTACHMENT C

Existing Condition Photos

EXISTING CONDITIONS : 05-08-2018
EXISTING CONDITIONS : 05-08-2018
Top of UT-1 looking downstream
Top of UT-1 looking across valley
EXISTING CONDITIONS : 05-08-2018
EXISTING CONDITIONS : 05-08-2018
Earthen dam along UT-1 looking upstream
Adjacent to earthen dam along UT-1 looking downstream
EXISTING CONDITIONS : 05-08-2018
EXISTING CONDITIONS : 05-08-2018
Pasture area adjacent to UT-1 looking upstream
UT-2 preservation area and existing fence line
EXISTING CONDITIONS : 05-08-2018
EXISTING CONDITIONS : 05-08-2018
Below UT-1 & UT-2 confluence looking downstream within pasture area
Below UT-1 & UT-2 confluence looking downstream within pasture area (opposite side of valley from photo above
EXISTING CONDITIONS : 05-08-2018
EXISTING CONDITIONS : 05-08-2018
Below UT-1 & UT-2 confluence looking downstream within pasture area
Looking down toward UT-1 where marsh treatment area will be constructed
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100015) Attachments
Major Hill Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Alamance County, North Carolina May 2018

ATTACHMENT D

Document Review Correspondence

1
Ray Holz
From:Crocker, Lindsay <[e-mail]>
Sent:Friday, May 11, 2018 1:51 PM
To:Merritt, Katie
Cc:Ray Holz
Subject:RE: Major Hill DWR Comments
Thanks! 

Lindsay Crocker 
NC DEQ Division of Mitigation Services 
217 West Jones St., Raleigh, NC 27603 
Office 919.707.8944  
Cell 919.594.3910 
[e-mail] 

Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed 
to third parties unless the content is exempt by statute or other regulation. 

From: Merritt, Katie  
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 11:54 AM 
To: Crocker, Lindsay <[e-mail]> 
Cc: Raymond Holz ([e-mail]) <[e-mail]> 
Subject: Re: Major Hill DWR Comments 

Hey Lindsay,
That's fine regarding the template. I didn't know if I had that one in our files, now I do. Regarding the
categorical exclusion part - RS needs to acknowledge with written text in the buffer mitigation plan, that the
categorical exclusion form was done, was submitted with the Stream Mitigation Plan, and was approved by
DMS. Otherwise, I didn't have a clue it had been done.

Let me know if there is anything else.

Thank you,

Katie
From: Crocker, Lindsay 
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 11:38:12 AM 
To: Merritt, Katie 
Cc: Raymond Holz ([e-mail]) 
Subject: RE: Major Hill DWR Comments  

Thanks for your review Katie, 

2
Quick question on your comment to add the monitoring template comment…the monitoring template RS is referring to 
is the one that is required for all DMS full delivery contracts.  It’s the same one you see on all of our projects, and is 
specified in their contract.  These templates are updated frequently and we typically ask providers to use the most 
updated version, which is available on our spreadsheet like this one (attached).  Is it ok with you to omit the actual 
template as it doesn’t provide anything useful to the mitigation plan?   

Also, all mitigation plans include the full Categorical exclusion signed form (by US FHA) and supporting 
documentation.  It wasn’t included on the buffer appendix to make it easier and smaller file size, the current mitigation 
plan is already 310 pages (not including the buffer appendix). 

Let me know if this is ok with you, and RS will get started adding this to the final mitigation plan and going out for 
permits. 

Thanks again and hope you have a great Mother’s Day, 
Lindsay 

Lindsay Crocker 
NC DEQ Division of Mitigation Services 
217 West Jones St., Raleigh, NC 27603 
Office 919.707.8944  
Cell 919.594.3910 
[e-mail] 

Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed 
to third parties unless the content is exempt by statute or other regulation. 

From: Merritt, Katie  
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2018 4:46 PM 
To: Crocker, Lindsay <[e-mail]> 
Cc: Higgins, Karen <[e-mail]> 
Subject: Major Hill DWR Comments 

Hey Lindsay, 
DWR has finalized their review of Appendix K (Riparian Buffer Mitigation Plan) for the Major Hill Mitigation Site.  Please 
see the attached document for your files.  Don’t hesitate to give us a call when you get a chance if you need to discuss 
anything.   

Thank You, 
Katie 

Katie Merritt 
Nutrient Offset & Buffer Banking Coordinator 
401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality  
Work: 919-807-6371 
Website:  http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/401bufferpermitting 

512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, NC 27620 
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 

Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the 
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. 

0
0
0
PROFILE (HORIZONTAL)
STATE STATE PROJECT REFERENCE NO.NO.
TOTAL
SHEETS
N.C.
SHEET
1
PROJECT ENGINEER
GRAPHIC SCALES
PLANS
PROFILE (VERTICAL)
LOCATION:
TYPE OF WORK:09/08/990
00
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_01.dgnbsmithCONTRACT:Axiom Environmental, Inc.
Prepared in the Office of:
GRUBBING, GRADING, EROSION CONTROL AND PLANTING)
STREAM RESTORATION AND ENHANCEMENT (CLEARING,
Not to Scale
VICINITY MAP
50
50
10
50
50
10
100
100
25
25
5 5
Raleigh, NC 27603
218 Snow Ave
Axiom Environmental
GRANT LEWIS
PROJECT DESIGNER
WORTH CREECH
Raleigh, NC 27604
Suite 211
1101 Haynes St.
Restoration Systems
SITE CONSTRUCTION MANAGER
Designed By:
SITE
NONRIPARIAN WETLAND (acreage)RIPARIAN WETLAND (acreage)STREAM (linear footage)RESTORATION LEVEL
RESTORATION
ENHANCEMENT
TOTALS
MITIGATION UNITS
ALAMANCE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
UT3
UT1
JOSHUA G. DALTON, P.E.
UT2
PSH 04
PSH 05
PSH 06
PSH 07 PSH 08
PSH 09 PSH 11DATE:AIN
HT
OR LR
O
CA
ROFESSION
26971
GE
NREINE
SEALPNAL
NOTLAD .G
AUHS
OJTOTAL STREAM LENGTH= 5301 LF
12PSHSTA 0+00
START -UT1-
STA 27+96
END -UT1-
STA 0+00
START -UT3-
STA 0+00
START -UT2-MAJOR HILL SITEMAJOR HILL SITE
CONSTRUCTION PLANS
MAJOR HILL SITE
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
3.1 ACRES
LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION: Whitehead Dr.SR 2453Burnett Church RdSR 2349UT1
STA 2+07
END -UT2-
STA 22+98
END -UT3-PSH 10

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
PROPOSED LENGTH OF UT1= 2796 LF
PROPOSED LENGTH OF UT3= 2298 LF
PROPOSED LENGTH OF UT2= 207 LF Justice TrlSelby DrPointer Dr60% PLANSNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARY DESIGN---
---
---
- RIPARIAN WMUs - NONRIPARIAN WMUs- SMUsTaltonTr
Rd
Alson
White RdBurnettChurch Rd
Whitehead Dr.
1003
2350
2348
2349
1003
2453
Chapel
Burnetts
2351
2351
2351
ALAMANCE
SHEET NUMBERSHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:
COUNTY:DATE:2018
Axiom Environmental, Inc.

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_02.dgnbsmith
*
*

É
TYPICAL POOL CROSS-SECTION
TYPICAL RIFFLE CROSS-SECTIONTYPICAL CHANNEL PROFILE
TYPICAL CHANNEL PLAN VIEW
CROSS-SECTION DIMENSIONS
VARIES
1
1 BANK SLOPE
STAKES
LIVE WILLOW
MAX. 1:1 SLOPE
W thal DpoolW pool
SIDE SLOPE
VALLEY
15' MIN.W
3
1
thalDbkf
STAKES
LIVE WILLOW
FLOODPLAIN
PROPOSED
rifD0.5'botW
thalW
POOL
GLIDE RIFFLE
POOL
RUN GLIDE RIFFLERUN
ELEVATION
WATER SURFACE
CHANNEL
BOTTOM OF
(VARIES - SEE NOTE 1)
POOL-TO-POOL SPACING (ft.)
POOL LENGTH
RIFFLE
TAIL OF
CHANNEL
DESIGN
FLOWRIFFLERUN
RADIUSR1 GLI
DEHR1
RI
F
F
LERIFFLE
TAIL OF R2
FLOW
POOL LENGTH
RIFFLE
HEAD OF
HR2 RIFFLEREACH Wbkf (ft.)Wbot (ft.)Driff (ft.)Dthal (ft.)Dpool (ft.)Wpool (ft.)Wthal (ft.)
1.00.5 0.1 0.8 6.6
0.1 1.0 8.0
MANAGER BEFORE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CHANNEL.
OR AVOID OBSTACLES. THE STAKE-OUT SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE CONSTRUCTION
2. FIELD ADJUSTMENTS OF THE ALIGNMENT MAY BE REQUIRED TO SAVE TREES
CONNECTING TANGENT SECTIONS SHALL COMPLETE THE LAYOUT OF THE CHANNEL.
THE RADII AND SCRIBING THE CENTER LINE FOR EACH POOL BEND. THE
1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL LAYOUT THE CHANNEL ALIGNMENT BY LOCATING
CHANNEL PLAN VIEW NOTES:
CENTER OF POOL BEND TO CENTER OF POOL BEND.
1. POOL-TO-POOL SPACING IS MEASURED FROM
NOTES:
3.6
4.5
FLOODPLAIN
PROPOSED
FLOODPLAIN
PROPOSED
6.0
1.0
riffTO 1/3 D
CHANNEL BANK
BED MATERIAL UP
EXTEND STONE
Cobble Stone
Class A and
7.3
BANK SLOPE
2:1
2
UT 1 (Upstream)
UT 1 (Downstream)0.6
TYPICALS 2
AIN
HT
OR LR
O
CA
ROFESSION
26971
GE
NREINE
SEALPNAL
NOTLAD .G
AUHS
OJ
DATE:
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETEDNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARY DESIGNSEE NOTE 2
CONTROL MATTING
EROSION
COIR FIBER
SEE NOTE 2
CONTROL MATTING
EROSION
COIR FIBER
A MIX OF CLASS A AND SMALLER STONE.
LENGTH OF EACH RIFFLE SECTION. THE BED MATERIAL SHALL CONSIST OF
3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUPPLY BED MATERIAL FOR THE ENTIRE BED
PLACED TO THE TOP OF BANK. (SEE DETAIL COIR FIBER MATTING, SHEET E-3D)
2. BANK PROTECTION SHALL CONSIST OF NATURAL COIR FIBER MATTING AND

USED TO BACKFILL EXISTING CHANNEL.
1. MATERIAL EXCAVATED FROM CHANNEL AND FLOODPLAIN SHALL BE
CHANNEL CONSTRUCTION NOTES:
ALAMANCE
SHEET NUMBERSHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:
COUNTY:DATE:2018
Axiom Environmental, Inc.

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_02A.dgnbsmithTYPICALS 2A
REACH ARM LENGTH (FT.)CHANNEL DEPTH (FT.)FLOW5'5'
HEADER STONE
ELEVATION A-A
5'5'
FLOW
FILTER FABRIC
PROFILE B-B
FOOTER STONE
HEADER STONE
TYPICAL CROSS-VANEBABA
3 2
1
1
2
3
3
2
1
PLAN VIEW
ARM LENGTH
O- 30O20O- 30O20
0.5'
0.5 - 0.7
0.6 - 0.8
BANK
CHANNEL
21 21
FABRIC
FILTER
STONE
FOOTER
BANK
CHANNEL
STONE
HEADER
CHANNEL
EXIST.
STONE
FOOTER
TO GRADE
BACK FILL
GROUND
EXIST.
WHERE NEEDED
(#57 STONE)
ROCK FILL
DEPTH
CHANNEL
MEASURING A MINIMUM OF 24" ALONG THE SHORTEST DIMENSION.
HEADER AND FOOTER STONES ARE LARGE, ANGULAR BOULDERS
NOTE:
7
6UT 1 (Upstream)
UT 1 (Downstream)
LOG CROSS VANE
SECTION A-A
SECTION B-B
VANE ARM DOES NOT HAVE A ROOTBALL TO TIE INTO THE BANK.
5. PERPENDICULAR ROOTWAD LOGS ARE REQUIRED IF THE LOG
STRUCTURE.
ELEVATION AND SHALL BE PLACED THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE
FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE FOOTER TO THE FINISHED GRADE
THROUGH LOG GAPS. FILTER FABRIC SHALL EXTEND
OF THE STRUCTURE TO PREVENT WASHOUT OF SEDIMENT
4. FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE PLACED ON THE UPSTREAM SIDE
3. ALL STONES ARE TO BE STRUCTURE STONES.
STREAMS.
2. A DOUBLE FOOTER LOG MAY BE REQUIRED IN SAND BED
(FOOTER LOG MAY BE SUBSTITUTED WITH PINE)
DIAMETER AND SHALL BE A HARDWOOD SPECIES.
1. HEADER AND FOOTER LOGS SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 18"
NOTES:
MATERIAL
NATIVE CHANNEL
CLASS 'A' RIP RAP/
#57 STONE AND BANKFULLFLOW
BANKFULLFILTER FABRIC
LOG SILL
FILTER FABRIC
HEADER LOG
BLOG
FOOTER
B
POOL
DEEP
A
A
(BANKFULL)
TOP OF BANK
ELEVATION
STREAMBED
POOL
SCOUR
FLOW
FOOTER LOG
FABRIC
FILTER
CHANNEL MATERIAL
#57 STONE / NATIVE
MATERIAL
NATIVE CHANNEL
CLASS 'A' RIP RAP /
COIR LOG
HEADER LOG
SCALE:NTS
CHANNEL MATERIAL
CLASS 'A' RIP RAP / NATIVE
WITH #57 STONE AND
BACKFILLED AND COMPACTED
GROUND
EXISTING
HEADER LOG (BANKFULL)
TOP OF BANK
GROUND
EXISTING
FILTER FABRIC
FOOTER LOG
ELEVATION
STREAMBED
POOL
COIR LOG
PLAN VIEW
{AIN
HT
OR LR
O
CA
ROFESSION
26971
GE
NREINE
SEALPNAL
NOTLAD .G
AUHS
OJ
DATE:
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETEDNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARY DESIGN{FLOW
A
A
30°
20° TO
BANKFULLBANKFULLWIDTH
BANKFULL
1/3
WIDTH
BANKFULL
1/3
WIDTH
BANKFULL
1/3
BBDIRECTION OF ENGINEER
POOL EXCAVATED PER
POOL
FLOW
STONE
LARGE
WITH REBAR.
BY CABLING OR PINNIN
LOGS TOGETHER EITHER
CHANNEL BED. SECURE
AND HEADER LOG INTO
BURY END OF LOG VANES
VANE
LOG
NOTCH

LOG
HEADER
LOWER
BANKFULL OR SLIGTHLY
ELEVATION EQUAL TO
MINIMUM OF AT AN
KEY IN VANE TO BANK
PLAN VIEW
PROVISIONS
SEE PROJECT SPECIAL
TO BACK OF LOG VANE,
NAIL GEOTEXTILE
GEOTEXTILE
FLOW
{
2' MIN.
STONE
LARGE
STONE
LARGE
BACKFILL, TYP.
LOG VANE, TYP.
CONSTRUCTION
FOR LOG VANE
EXCAVATED TRENCH
HEADER LOG, TYP.
EXCAVATED POOL
BED2' MIN.
SECTION A-A
GEOTEXTILE, TYP.
FLOW {4% TO 10% SLOPE
STONE
LARGE
BANKFULL
1/2 BANKFULL ELEVATION
TIE VANE ARM INTO
BED
BACKFILL, TYP.
SECTION B-B
GEOTEXTILE, TYP.
5) POOL DEPTH SHOULD BE 2 TO 3 TIMES BANKFULL DEPTH.
DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER.
4) COMPACT BACKFILL TO EXTENT POSSIBLE OR AT THE
BETWEEN HEADERS AND FOOTERS.
3) CLASS "A" STONE CAN BE USED TO REDUCE VOIDS
2) DO NOT EXCAVATE POOL TOO CLOSE TO FOOTER BOULDERS.
VANE ARM TIES INTO BANKFULL.
1) DEEPEST PART OF POOL TO BE IN LINE WITH WHERE
NOTES:
TYPICAL LOG VANE
ALAMANCE
SHEET NUMBERSHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:
COUNTY:DATE:2018
Axiom Environmental, Inc.

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_02B.dgnbsmithTYPICALS 2B
Wetland
Stormwater
Wetland
Stormwater
Tie to Existing Grade
PROFILE
SECTION A-A
A
MARSH TREATMENT AREA
Side Slope at 8 to 1
Wetland at 15 to 1
Grade Base of
PIPE INLET
DITCH OR
BASIN
RIP RAP
DEEP POOL
RIP RAP OUTLET AIN
HT
OR LR
O
CA
ROFESSION
26971
GE
NREINE
SEALPNAL
NOTLAD .G
AUHS
OJ
DATE:
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETEDNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARY DESIGNWbot 6.0 ft
3
1
3
1
CROSS-SECTION
).SALIX NIGRAAND TOPSOIL AND PLANTED WITH EROSION CONTROL GRASSES AND WILLOW STAKES (
2. ONCE THE SYNTHETIC GEOGRID HAS BEEN INSTALLED, GEOCELLS WILL BE BACKFILLED WITH GRAVEL
SPECIFICATIONS.
1. CONTRACTOR WILL INSTALL 8-INCH TERRACELL SYNTHETIC GEOGRID AS PER THE MANUFACTURER'S
TERRACELL STRUCTURE NOTES:
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
SYNTHETIC GEOGRID
8 IN TERRACELL
Wbkf = 16 ft
(SEE NOTES)
ARMORED POOL
DIAMETER, OR EQUIVALENT MATERIAL.
IN SIZE FROM 5" - 17" AVERAGE DIAMETER WITH THE MAJORITY OF MATERIAL HAVING 10" AVERAGE
3. NATURAL BED MATERIAL IS DEFINED AS MATERIAL OBTAINED FROM STOCKPILES AT THE SITE RANGING
AND SUITABLE NATURAL BED MATERIAL.
2. THE POOL AT THE BOTTOM OF THE DROP STRUCTURE WILL BE ARMORED WITH GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
SPECIFICATIONS.
1. CONTRACTOR WILL INSTALL 8-INCH TERRACELL SYNTHETIC GEOGRID AS PER THE MANUFACTURER'S
TERRACELL STRUCTURE NOTES:
ELEVATION
WATER SURFACE
PROFILE
TR TERRACELL
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
BR TERRACELL
SYNTHETIC GEOGRID
8 IN TERRACELL
LOG SILL
DROP STRUCTURE - TERRACELL
A
ALAMANCE
SHEET NUMBERSHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:
COUNTY:DATE:2018
Axiom Environmental, Inc.

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_02C.dgnbsmithTYPICALS 2C
SCALE: N.T.S.
PERMANMENT CROSSING
1' MIN18" THICK MIN
CL 'I' RIP RAP
1' DEPTH MIN
CL 'A' RIP RAP
SELECT MATERIAL
COMPACTED
SELECT MATERIAL
COMPACTED
(SIZE AS PER PLAN)
RCP PIPE
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC BURY PIPE 20%
1' DEPTH MIN
CL 'A' RIP RAP
(SIZE AS PER PLAN)
RCP PIPE
MATTING ON EXPOSED SOILS.
2) IF UNABLE TO INSTALL WHILE LOCATION IS DRY, PLACE
LOCATION WITHIN STREAM HAS BEEN DEWATERED.
1) INSTALL PERMANENT CROSSING WHILE CONSTRUCTION
NOTES:
CROSSING (TYP)
PERMANENT STREAM
(SIZE AS PER PLAN)
RCP PIPE
SECTION A-A'
SECTION B-B'
A
A'
SCALE: N.T.S.
ENGINEERED RIFFLE
CL A RIP RAP
G
round
N
a
tu
ra
lGround
Natural
BANK SLOPE
CHANNEL
BANK SLOPE
AS DIRECTED BY ENGINEER OR DESIGNER.
2) RIP RAP SIZE MAY BE ADJUSTED BASED ON FIELD CONDITIONS
1) PLACE CLASS A RIP RAP IN CHANNEL AND ON BANK SLOPES.
NOTES:AIN
HT
OR LR
O
CA
ROFESSION
26971
GE
NREINE
SEALPNAL
NOTLAD .G
AUHS
OJ
DATE:
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETEDNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARY DESIGNINV. OUT=488.0
INV. IN=489.7
BURY 1.0'
2@54" RCP 487487
488488
4884
8
9
489489489
489
489
490
490490490
490
490
490
490
490
490
491
491491491
492
492492492
493
493
493493494
494495495
495495496
496497497498
498
498499
4
9
9
499499
500
500
500500500501
501501
502
502503
503503
503 504504
504505505505505
506506
507
507508
508 509509510510
510
511
511512
512
512
513
513
513513
UT3
UT1
UT2
Whitehead Dr.SR 2453Burnett Church RdSR 2349UT1
2D
ALAMANCE
SHEET NUMBERSHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:
COUNTY:DATE:2018
Axiom Environmental, Inc.

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_02E_ctrl.dgnbsmithCONTROL POINTS
0 300'150'300'
SCALE: 1"=600'
600'
ISS 4
ISS 3
ISS 2
ISS 1
ISS 5
GOLDSBORO, NC 27534
5688 U.S. HIGHWAY 70 EAST
K2 DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
EASEMENT PROVIDED BY:
SURVEY INFORMATION PROPERTY/
Pointer Dr
Selby DrJustice TrlUT1
00 +50 AIN
HT
OR LR
O
CA
ROFESSION
26971
GE
NREINE
SEALPNAL
NOTLAD .G
AUHS
OJ
STRUCTURES 4
ALAMANCE
SHEET NUMBERSHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:
COUNTY:DATE:2018
DATE:
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
550
545
540
535
530
[phone]+50 +50 +50 +50
540
545
535
530
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_04.dgnbsmithAT PROP THALWEG
EXST GROUND
THALWEG
PROP
06+50
550

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
SEE SHEET 5MATCHLINE STA 6+50 -UT1-
UT 1
SEE SHEET 5MATCHLINE STA 6+50 -UT1-R R
WETLANDS
DENOTES RESTORED
E E IN WETLAND
DENOTES ENHANCEMENT
REMOVE STRUCTURE
REMOVE PIPE
ELEV= 546.29
STA 0+00
BEGIN RESTORATION
-UT 1-
NC SPATIAL DATA QL2 LIDAR
OF SURVEY LIMITS BASED ON
ON 4-2017. TOPOGRAHY OUTSIDE
PERMFORMED BY K2 SURVEYING
TOPOGRAPHY BASED ON SURVEYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARY DESIGN532533534534535535536537538539539539540540540
540
540540540541541541
541541542542542
542
542542
543543543543
543543543544544544544
544
544544
544544544
545545545545545545 545
545
545
545
545
545545
546546546546
546
546547547547547
547
547
548548548
548 548549549549
549 549549549549550550550550550
550 550
550 550
550
550
550551551551
551
551
5
5
2
552
552 552552552553553553
553
553 553554554554554
554
554
554555555555555
555
555
555
555
556556556
556
5
5
6
557557557
558558
558
559559
560560560560
561
562
562563
563564564
5645645
6
4
564564565 565
565
565565566
566566567
567567567567567568
568568S
AND CAROL L
LAMM, JAMES D
DEED PG 0896
DEED BK 2789
TINNIN, ANDREW M
DEED PG 0756
DEED BK 2514
TINNIN, ANDREW M
DEED PG 0756
DEED BK 2514
12" PVC OUTLET
12" HDPE
SURV
EY
BOUNDARY
SURV
EY BO
UND
ARYSURVEY BOUNDARYEIP 0+00 -UT1-1+00 -UT1-2+00 -UT1-3+00 -UT1-4+00 -UT1-5+00 -UT1-6+00 -UT1-ELEV=546.29
STA 0+00 -UT1-
RESTORATION
-UT1- BEGIN
CROSS VANE
CROSS VANE
BANKFULL
PROPOSED
PRIOR TO DAM REMOVAL
BY PUMP-AROUND METHOD
POND SHALL BE DRAINED
REMOVE EXISTING DAM
STRUCTURE
REMOVE DRAINAGE
REMOVE PIPE
AIN
HT
OR LR
O
CA
ROFESSION
26971
GE
NREINE
SEALPNAL
NOTLAD .G
AUHS
OJ
SEE SHEET
4MATCHLINE STA
6
+5
0
-UT1-
STRUCTURES 5
ALAMANCE
SHEET NUMBERSHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:
COUNTY:DATE:2018
DATE:
Axiom Environmental, Inc.

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_05.dgnbsmithSEE SHEET 613+00 -UT1-MATCHLINE STA
13+50
540
535
530
525
520SEE SHEET 6MATCHLINE STA 13+00 -UT 1-[phone]+50 +50 +50 +50
530
535
525
520
AT PROP THALWEG
EXST GROUND
THALWEG
PROP
12+50
540
UT 1
SEE SHEET 4MATCHLINE STA 6+50 -UT 1-525
520
UT 2
00 +50 01 02+50 +25
AT PROP THALWEG
EXST GROUND
THALWEG
PROP
R R
WETLANDS
DENOTES RESTORED
E E IN WETLAND
DENOTES ENHANCEMENT
ELEV= 520.42
STA 2+07 -UT2-
-UT2- END RESTORATION
ELEV= 522.86
STA 0+00 -UT2-
ENHANCEMENT II
-UT2- BEGIN
ELEV= 520.42
STA 12+08 -UT1-
STA 2+07 -UT2-
-UT2- END RESTORATION
ELEV= 520.44
STA 1+68 -UT2-
BEGIN RESTORATION
-UT2- END ENHANCEMENT II
NC SPATIAL DATA QL2 LIDAR
OF SURVEY LIMITS BASED ON
ON 4-2017. TOPOGRAHY OUTSIDE
PERMFORMED BY K2 SURVEYING
TOPOGRAPHY BASED ON SURVEYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARY DESIGN517
517
518519520
520521
521521
522522
522522
523 523523
524 524524524
524
524524
525525
525
5255255255255
2
5
525525525
525
526
526526526
5
2
6
526
526526526
526
527527527
527527527527
527
528
528528
5285285
2
8
528
528528
528
528
528
528
529
529529529529 5295
3
0
530
530
530
530530530530530530531
531
531531531 532532532
532532532
532
532
533
533
533
533533534534
534534534
535535535535
535 535536536
536537537537
538538
539
539540540
540
541543544
546
TINNIN, ANDREW M
DEED PG 0756
DEED BK 2514
ISS CAP 3
SURVEY BOUNDARYSURVEY BOUNDARYSURVEY BOUNDARYEIP
ISS CAP 26+00 -UT1-7+00 -UT1-8+00 -UT1-9+00 -UT1-10+00 -UT1-11+00 -UT1-12+00 -UT1-0+00 -UT2-1+00 -UT2-2+00 -UT2-
ELEV= 520.44
STA 1+68 -UT2-
BEGIN RESTORATION
-UT2- END ENHANCEMENT II
ELEV= 520.42
STA 12+08 -UT1-
STA 2+07 -UT2-
-UT2- END RESTORATION
ELEV= 522.86
STA 0+00 -UT2-
ENHANCEMENT II
-UT2- BEGIN
CROSS VANE
CROSS VANE
CROSS VANE
LOG VANE
CROSS VANE
VANE
LOG
BANKFULL
PROPOSED
BANKFULL
PROPOSEDREMOVE PI
PE
AIN
HT
OR LR
O
CA
ROFESSION
26971
GE
NREINE
SEALPNAL
NOTLAD .G
AUHS
OJ
STRUCTURES 6
ALAMANCE
SHEET NUMBERSHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:
COUNTY:DATE:2018
DATE:
Axiom Environmental, Inc.

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_06.dgnbsmith19 +50
520
515
510
505
500SEE SHEET 7MATCHLINE STA 19+50 -UT 1-[phone]+50 +50 +50 +50
510
515
505
500
AT PROP THALWEG
EXST GROUND
THALWEG
PROP
18+50
520
UT 1
SEE SHEET 5MATCHLINE STA 13+00 -UT 1-SEE SHEET 513+00 -UT1-
MATCHLINE STA
SEE SHEET 7MATCHLI
NE STA 19+50
-UT1-
R R
WETLANDS
DENOTES RESTORED
E E IN WETLAND
DENOTES ENHANCEMENT
TREATMENT
DENOTES MARSH*
*
*
*
**
*
**
*
*
ELEV= 511.16
STA 16+99 -UT1-
BEGIN ENHANCEMENT II
-UT1- END RESTORATION
NC SPATIAL DATA QL2 LIDAR
OF SURVEY LIMITS BASED ON
ON 4-2017. TOPOGRAHY OUTSIDE
PERMFORMED BY K2 SURVEYING
TOPOGRAPHY BASED ON SURVEYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARY DESIGN505
506 507507508509
5 10
510510510511
511512
512513
513513513514
514514514
514514515515
515
515515
515515515515515515516
516
516
516516516516516516517
517517517517
517517517517518518518518
518518518519
519
519
519519519520
520
52052
0520520520
520520520520520521
521521
521521521522
522
522
522522522522523523523523
523
523 5235235245245245
2
4
524
524
525525525525525
525525
525 525525526526526526526
527527
5
2
7
527528528528528 5295
2
9529
529530530530530530530
530
531531
531
531531532
533
AND CAROL L
LAMM, JAMES D
DEED PG 0896
DEED BK 2789
ENTERPRISES, LLC
WILLIARD
DEED PG 0270
DEED BK 3143
SURVEY BOUNDARY14+00 -UT1-15+00 -UT1-16+00 -UT1-17+00 -UT1-18+00 -UT1-19+00 -UT1-20+00 -UT1-ELEV= 511.16
STA 16+99 -UT1-
BEGIN ENCHANCEMENT II
-UT1- END RESTORATION
CROSS VANE
DROP STRUCTURE
BANKFULL
PROPOSED
BANKFULL
PROPOSED
TREATMENT
MARSH
VANE
CROSS
AIN
HT
OR LR
O
CA
ROFESSION
26971
GE
NREINE
SEALPNAL
NOTLAD .G
AUHS
OJ
STRUCTURES 7
ALAMANCE
SHEET NUMBERSHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:
COUNTY:DATE:2018
DATE:
Axiom Environmental, Inc.

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_07.dgnbsmith25 +50
505
500
495
490
485SEE SHEET 8MATCHLINE STA 26+00 -UT 1-[phone]+50 +50 +50 +50
495
500
490
485
AT PROP THALWEG
EXST GROUND
THALWEG
PROP
24+50
505
UT 1
SEE SHEET 6MATCHLINE STA 19+50 -UT 1-SEE SHEET 6MATCHLINE STA 19+50 -UT1-S E E S HE E T 8
26+00 -UT 1-MAT C HL INE S T ANC SPATIAL DATA QL2 LIDAR
OF SURVEY LIMITS BASED ON
ON 4-2017. TOPOGRAHY OUTSIDE
PERMFORMED BY K2 SURVEYING
TOPOGRAPHY BASED ON SURVEY
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARY DESIGN484484
484484485
486486
486486487487487487488
488488488488488489
489489490490
490490490490490491
491491491491491491492492
492492492
492
493
493
493493 494494
494494495
495495
495
495495495495495496
496
496
4964964
9
7497
497
497497497497497498
498
498498498498498499
499
499499499499500500
500
500500
500
500500500500500500501
501
501501501501501501502502502
502
502
5
0
2
503
503503
503503504504
504
504504504504504505
505505
505
505
505
505505505505505506
506
506506506506507
507
507
507
507507507507508508508508 5085085085085085
0
9
509
509509509509510510510
510
510
510510510510510511
511511511511511511512
512
512512512513
513
513513514
514
514514515515
515515515515515515516516
516516516517
517517517518
518518518519
5195195195195 2 0
520520
5205205205205
21
5215215215225
2
2
5225225225235235
2
3
523
524524524524524525525525525525
525
525525526526527528529ENTERPRISES, LLC
WILLIARD
DEED PG 0270
DEED BK 3143
AND CAROL L
LAMM, JAMES D
DEED PG 0896
DEED BK 2789
D
EED PG 0896D
EED BK 2789AN
D CA
RO
L LLAM
M, JA
M
ES DSURVEY BOUNDARY20+00 -UT1-21+00 -UT1-22+00 -UT1-23+00 -UT1-24+00 -UT1-25+00 -UT1-
AIN
HT
OR LR
O
CA
ROFESSION
26971
GE
NREINE
SEALPNAL
NOTLAD .G
AUHS
OJ
STRUCTURES 8
ALAMANCE
SHEET NUMBERSHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:
COUNTY:DATE:2018
DATE:
Axiom Environmental, Inc.

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_08.dgnbsmith22 +50
495
490
485
480
475
[phone]+50 +50
485
490
480
475
AT PROP THALWEG
EXST GROUND
495
UT 1
SEE SHEET 7MATCHLINE STA 26+00 -UT 1-SEE SHEET 726+00 -UT1-MATCHLINE STA495
490
485
480
475
UT 3
NC SPATIAL DATA QL2 LIDAR
OF SURVEY LIMITS BASED ON
TOPOGRAHY OUTSIDE
AT PROP THALWEG
EXST GROUND
ELEV= 478.78
STA 27+35 -UT1-
STA 22+98 -UT3-
-UT3- END ENHANCEMENT II
ELEV= 478.20
STA 27+96 -UT1-
END ENHANCEMENT II
-UT1-
SEE SHEET 12
MATCHLINE STA 21+50 -UT3-SEE SHEET 12MATCHLINE STA 21+50 -UT 3-NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARY DESIGNELEV= 478.78
STA 27+35 -UT1-
STA 22+98 -UT3-
-UT3- END ENHANCEMENT II
477
477478
4
7
8
478478479 479479480480
480480480480480480480480480 480480481481481481
4
8
1 481481481482482482482
482482482482482482483483483483
483
4834834 8 4
484
484484484484484484484485485485485485485 485485
485485485485486
486486486486487
487
4874874874874884884884884 8 9
489489490490
490490490490491
49149149149 2492492492493
493494
494494495495
495495496
496497
4974
9
84
9
8 4984984 9 9
499500500
5005005
0
1
501501502502502503505505 507507508508508ENTERPRISES, LLC
WILLIARD
DEED PG 0270
DEED BK 3143
DEED PG 749
DEED BK 690
AND MARY A
NOBLIT, GEORGE W
DEED PG 0896
DEED BK 2789
AND CAROL L
LAMM, JAMES D
DEED PG 0920
DEED BK 3150
AND MARY E
RICE, JOSEPH M
EIP
EIP
EIP
EX ROCK EX ROCK
27+00 -UT1--UT3-22+00STA 27+35 -UT1-
STA 22+98 -UT3-
END ENHANCEMENT II
-UT3-
STA 27+96 -UT1-
-UT1- END ENHANCEMENT II
AIN
HT
OR LR
O
CA
ROFESSION
26971
GE
NREINE
SEALPNAL
NOTLAD .G
AUHS
OJ
STRUCTURES 9
ALAMANCE
SHEET NUMBERSHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:
COUNTY:DATE:2018
DATE:
Axiom Environmental, Inc.

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_09.dgnbsmith03 +50
515
510
505
500
495
[phone]+50 +50
505
510
500
495
AT PROP THALWEG
EXST GROUND
515
UT 3
06 +50+5005+50 SEE SHEET
1
0MATCHLINE STA
6
+5
0
-UT3
-SEE SHEET 10MATCHLINE STA 6+50 -UT3-TREATMENT
DENOTES MARSH*
*
*
*
**
*
**
*
*
STA 0+00
BEGIN ENHANCEMENT II
-UT3-
NC SPATIAL DATA QL2 LIDAR
OF SURVEY LIMITS BASED ON
TOPOGRAHY OUTSIDENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARY DESIGNSTREAM CROSSING PIPE
2@48" RCP 499500
500501
501501501501
501501501501501502502502
502502502502502502 502502503503
503503503503503503503503504504504504
504 504504504504504504504504504505505505505505505
505505505505505505505505505505505505505505505505505505506506
506506506506506506506
506506506 506506506506506506506 506506506506506507
507
507507507507507 5075075075075075075075075075 0 8 508508508508508
508508
508508508508508508508508509
509
509
509509 509509509509509509509509509509509509509509509510510510510510510510510
510
5
10 510
510
510510
510510510510510 510510510510511511511511511511511511511511511511511511511511511511511511512
512
512
512512
512512512512512512512512512512513513513513513
513513513513513513513513513514
514
514
514514514514514514 515
515
515
515
515
515515515515515515515515515515516516
516516516517517517517517517517517518
5185185185185185195195195205205205215215
2
1
521522522522523523523524525526526528DEED PG 0105
DEED BK 3158
AND CAROL L
LAMM, JAMES D
DEED PG 0896
DEED BK 2789
EASEMENT
EX 20' ACCESS
EASEMENT
EX 20' DRAINAGE
CAVINESS, ROBERT W
DEED PG 0716
DEED BK 3572
AND WELDON L
JENKINS, BETHANY L 0+00 -UT3-1+00 -UT3-2+00 -UT3-3+00 -UT3-4+00 -UT3-
5+00 -UT3-6+00 -UT3-STA 0+00 -UT3-
ENHANCEMENT II
-UT3- BEGIN
TREATMENT
MARSH
PERMANENT CROSSING
INV. OUT=505.5
INV. IN=505.7
BURY 1.0'
2@48" RCP
AIN
HT
OR LR
O
CA
ROFESSION
26971
GE
NREINE
SEALPNAL
NOTLAD .G
AUHS
OJ
STRUCTURES 10
ALAMANCE
SHEET NUMBERSHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:
COUNTY:DATE:2018
DATE:
Axiom Environmental, Inc.

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_10.dgnbsmith09 +50
510
505
500
495
490
[phone]+50 +50
500
505
495
490
AT PROP THALWEG
EXST GROUND
510
UT 3
12 +50+5011+50 SEE SHEET 11MATCHLINE STA 13+00 -UT3-SEE SHEET 1113+00 -UT3-MATCHLINE STASEE SHEET 9MATCHLINE STA 6+50 -UT3-SEE SHEET 9MATCHLINE STA 13+00 -UT 3-NC SPATIAL DATA QL2 LIDAR
OF SURVEY LIMITS BASED ON
TOPOGRAHY OUTSIDENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARY DESIGN495495495
495
495
495 496496496496
496
496
497
497497497497 497
497
497
497497
497497
497
497
497
498
498
498 498498498
498
498
498
498498498
498
498
498
498498498498
499
499
4
9
9
499499499499499
499499499499
499
499
499
499499
499
499 499
499
499
499499
499
499
499
499
499499
499
499
499
499
499
499 499
499
499499
499
499
499
499
499
499
499
499
499
499
499
499
499499
499
499
499
499
499499
500
500
500
500500500
500500
5
0
0
5
0
0
500500500500500500500500
500
500
500
500
500500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
501
501
501501
501501501501501
501
501
501
5
0
1
501
501
501
501501
501
501
501
501501
501
501
501
501
501
501501
501
501
501
501
501
501
501
502
5025025025025
0
2
502502
502
503
503503503503503503503
504
504
504
504504504504
504
504
504
504
504
504 504
505
505505505505
505
505505505505505505505
505 505
505
506
506
5
0
6
506506506506507
507
507
507507507507
507
507
508508508508508
508 508
508508508
508
508
508
509
509
509
509509509509509
509
510510510510510510510
510
510
510
510510
511
511
5
11
511511511511512512
512512512512
513
513513513513513513
513
514
514514514514514515
515515515515515515515515
515
515
515515
515516
516516516516
516
516
516
517517517517517
517
517517
518518518519519519
519
519520520521521
522523524525525526CAVINESS, ROBERT W
DEED PG 0716
DEED BK 3572
AND CAROL L
LAMM, JAMES D
DEED PG 0896
DEED BK 2789
EASEMENT
EX 20' DRAINAGE
EIP
7+00 -UT3-8+00 -UT3-9+00 -U T3-10+00 -UT3-11+00 -UT3-12+00 -UT3-
AIN
HT
OR LR
O
CA
ROFESSION
26971
GE
NREINE
SEALPNAL
NOTLAD .G
AUHS
OJ
STRUCTURES 11
ALAMANCE
SHEET NUMBERSHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:
COUNTY:DATE:2018
DATE:
Axiom Environmental, Inc.

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_11.dgnbsmith16 +50
500
495
490
485
480
[phone]+50 +50
490
495
485
480
AT PROP THALWEG
EXST GROUND
500
UT 3
19 +50+5018+50 SEE SHEET 12MATCHLINE STA 19+50 -UT3-SEE SHEET 9MATCHLINE STA 13+00 -UT 3-S
E
E
S
HE
E
T
12MATCHLINE
S
T
A
19
+
5
0 -UT
3-
S EE S HEET 10
13 +0 0 -UT3 -MATCHLIN E S TANC SPATIAL DATA QL2 LIDAR
OF SURVEY LIMITS BASED ON
TOPOGRAHY OUTSIDENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARY DESIGNSTREAM CROSSING PIPE
2@54" RCP 485485485485
485 486486486486486
486 487487
487487
487
487
487
488488
488488488
488
488
488488488
489489
489
489489489489 489
489
489
489
489
490
490
490
490490490490490
490
490
490
490
490
490
490
491491
491491491491
491
491491491491491
491
492
492
492492492492
492
492
492
493
493
493
493493493493
493
493493493
493
493
494494
494
494494494494494
494
494
495
495495
495
4 9 5
4
9
5495
495495495495495495495
495
495
495
495
496496
496496
496496496497497
497
497497497497
497
497
497
497
498
4
9
8498
498498498498498
498498
499
499
499
499499499499499
499
499
500
500500500
500
500
500500500500500500500500 501501
501
501501501501
502
502
502
502502502502503503
503
503503503503
503
503
503
504504
504
504
504504504504505
505
505
505505505
505505505505505505505505505
505
506506
506
506506506506
507
507
507
507
507507507507
508508 508
508
508
508
508
508
508508508
508 508508
508
508
508
508 5095095
0
9
509509509509509509509
510510510510
510510510 510510510
510510
510
510
510
511
511511512
512512512
512
512
513
513513513 513513513513
514
514514514
515
515515515516
516
516
517
AND CAROL L
LAMM, JAMES D
DEED PG 0896
DEED BK 2789
AND MARY E
RICE, JOSEPH M
DEED PG 0920
DEED BK 3150
14+00 -UT3-15+00 -UT3-16+00 -UT3-17+00 -UT3-18+00 -UT3-19+00 -UT3-INV. OUT=488.0
INV. IN=489.7
BURY 1.0'
2@54" RCP
PERMANENT CROSSING
AIN
HT
OR LR
O
CA
ROFESSION
26971
GE
NREINE
SEALPNAL
NOTLAD .G
AUHS
OJ
STRUCTURES 12
ALAMANCE
SHEET NUMBERSHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:
COUNTY:DATE:2018
DATE:
Axiom Environmental, Inc.

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_12.dgnbsmith20 +50
495
490
485
480
475
+50 21
485
490
480
475
AT PROP THALWEG
EXST GROUND
495
UT 3
+50 SEE SHEET 8MATCHLINE STA 21+50 -UT3-SEE SHEET 11MATCHLINE STA 19+50 -UT 3-SEE SHEET 11MATCHLINE STA 19+50 -UT3-SEE SHEET 8MATCHLINE STA 21+50 -UT3-NC SPATIAL DATA QL2 LIDAR
OF SURVEY LIMITS BASED ON
TOPOGRAHY OUTSIDENOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARY DESIGN481481482482483
483484
484485485485
485 485486
486486486486487
487487487488
488489
489490
490
490490491
491492
492
492492493493493494
495
495
495495496
496497497498
498498499
499499499500
500
500500500501
501502
502503
503504504504505
505505505506507
507507508509511DEED PG 0920DEED BK 3150AND MARY E
RICE, JOSEPH M
DEED PG 0920
DEED BK 3150
AND CAROL L
LAMM, JAMES D
DEED PG 0896
DEED BK 2789
20+00 -UT3-21+00 -UT3--
U
T
3-
22
+
00
AIN
HT
OR LR
O
CA
ROFESSION
26971
GE
NREINE
SEALPNAL
NOTLAD .G
AUHS
OJ
DATE:
EROSION CONTROL NOTES
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
EROSION CONTROL

SHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
E-2A
ALAMANCE
SHEET NUMBER
COUNTY:DATE:2018
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_E02a (notes).dgnbsmith

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARY DESIGN
AIN
HT
OR LR
O
CA
ROFESSION
26971
GE
NREINE
SEALPNAL
NOTLAD .G
AUHS
OJ
DATE:
NOTES:
C
O
NST
R
U
CTIO
N
A
RE
A
OF
A
CTIVE
EXISTING CHANNEL
FLEXIBLE HOSE
TEMPORARY
PUMP-AROUND PUMP FLOWTYPICAL PUMP-AROUND OPERATION
DISSIPATION PAD
RIP RAP
P-1
PDA-1
(SEE DETAIL)
IMPERVIOUS DIKE
(SEE DETAIL)
SEDIMENT BAG
IMPERVIOUS DIKE
6. RIP RAP DISSIPATION PAD TO BE INSTALLED DOWNSTREAM OF LOWER
TO DEWATER THE WORK AREA.
5. PUMPS AND HOSES SHALL BE OF A SUFFICIENT SIZE AND NUMBER
DIVERSION PIPES, PUMPS, AND HOSES.
TO THE WORK, THIS INCLUDES POLYETHYLENE SHEETING,
4. MAINTENANCE OF STREAM FLOW OPERATIONS SHALL BE INCIDENTAL
DOCUMENTS.
AREAS SHALL BE SEEDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONSTRUCTION
MATTED AT THE END OF EACH WORKING DAY. ALL OTHER GRADED
3. ALL GRADED STREAM BANKS SHALL BE SEEDED, MULCHED, AND
STREAM FLOW WHEN NECESSARY
2. IMPERVIOUS DIKES ARE TO BE USED TO ISOLATE WORK FROM
SECTIONS OF CHANNEL
1. ALL EXCAVATION SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ONLY DRY OR ISOLATED
NOTES:
PUMP
DEWATERING
A A
BLANKET
FILTER
PLAN VIEW
LENGTH WIDTH
(Y/N)(IN)
PERMANENT
La (FT)Wo (FT)
STONE SIZE
d50 (IN)
STONE CLASS THICKNESS
(IN)
N 3 A 12
RIP RAP DISIPATION PAD SPECIFICATIONS
T=12"
HOSE SIZE
4"4.0 1.0
ASSUMED
4.0 FT
PIPE
EXISTING
RIPRAP DISSIPATION PAD
INSTALLED BETWEEN THE RIPRAP AND SOIL FOUNDATION.
4. A FILTER BLANKET OR FILTER FABRIC SHOULD BE
UP THE CHANNEL BANKS TO THE TOP OF THE BANK.
3. IN A WELL-DEFINED CHANNEL EXTEND THE APRON
2. T = THICKNESS
1. La IS THE LENGTH OF THE RIPRAP APRON.
SECTION A-A
(SEE DETAIL)
IMPERVIOUS DIKE
AND MULCH.
8. REMOVE SEDIMENT BAG(S) AND BACKFILL. STABILIZE DISTURBED AREA WITH SEED
DETERMINING THE LOCATION OF THE IMPERVIOUS DIKES.
WORK FOR EACH STREAM SEGMENT. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR
SHOWN ON THIS SHEET ONLY REPRESENT THE UPPER AND LOWER EXTENT OF
AROUND AREAS BETWEEN THE IMPERVIOUS DIKES. THE IMPERVIOUS LOCATIONS AS
7. ALL GRADING AND STABILIZATION MUST BE COMPLETED WITHIN THE PUMP
AND DISSIPATION PAD (BEGIN WITH DOWNSTREAM IMPERVIOUS DIKE FIRST).
IMPERVIOUS DIKES. REMOVE IMPERVIOUS DIKES, PUMPS, TEMPORARY FLEXIBLE HOSE,
6. EXCAVATE ANY ACCUMULATED SILT AND DEWATER BEFORE REMOVAL OF
5. PERFORM STREAM RESTORATION WORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANS.
AREA.
4. INSTALL SEDIMENT BAG AND ASSOCIATED PUMP. DEWATER THE ENTRAPPED
3. PLACE DOWNSTREAM IMPERVIOUS DIKE.
BEGIN PUMPING OPERATIONS FOR STREAM DIVERSION.
2. PLACE UPSTREAM IMPERVIOUS DIKE, DOWNSTREAM RIP RAP DISSIPATION PAD, AND
1. INSTALL UPSTREAM PUMP AND TEMPORARY FLEXIBLE HOSE.
CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE FOR TYPICAL PUMP-AROUND:
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
EROSION CONTROL TYPICAL

SHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
E-3
ALAMANCE
SHEET NUMBER
COUNTY:DATE:2018
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_E03 (typ).dgnbsmith

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARY DESIGN
AIN
HT
OR LR
O
CA
ROFESSION
26971
GE
NREINE
SEALPNAL
NOTLAD .G
AUHS
OJ
DATE:

STREAM BED
2
1
2
1
BASE OF STREAM
TOP OF BANK
1'
1'-6" MIN.
3'MAX.
CROSS SECTION VIEW
TOP VIEW
FRONT VIEW
BANK
TOP OF
IMPERVIOUS DIKE
CONTROL STONE
SEDIMENT
STONE
STRUCTURAL FABRIC
GEOTEXTILE
IMPERVIOUS
2' MIN.
DOWNSTREAM OF IMP. DIKE.
STONE 5' UPSTREAM AND 10'
5. LINE BANKS WITH CLASS B
MATERIAL
4. TOE IN IMPERVIOUS
DEPTH.
OF 1 FT. ABOVE NORMAL FLOW
3. CONSTRUCT DAM A MAXIMUM
STONE FOR SEDIMENT CONTROL.
2. USE NO. 5 OR NO. 57
STRUCTURAL STONE.
1. USE CLASS B STONE FOR
NOTES:
15' MINIMUM
STREAMPUMP HOSE
EXISTING GROUND
SEDIMENT BAG
INSTALLATION:
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
SEDIMENT BAG
(12" THICK)
CLASS B STONE
ATTRIBUTES.
4. REFER TO DETAIL REGARDING GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
FABRIC.
THE CONTENTS SEEDED AFTER REMOVING VISIBLE
DESIGNER. IF ALLOWED, BAG MAY BE CUT OPEN AND
3. DISPOSE OF SEDIMENT BAG AS DIRECTED BY THE SITE
STRAPS.
TO RUPTURE OR FAILURE OF THE HOSE ATTACHMENT
OVERFILLING WITH SEDIMENT WILL CAUSE THE BAG
MINUTE. USE OF EXCESSIVE FLOW RATES OR
ACCOMMODATE FLOW RATES OF 1100 GALLONS PER
CIRCUMSTANCES THE SEDIMENT BAG WILL
SLOPE ON WHICH THE BAG LIES. UNDER MOST
SUBSTANCE UNDER THE BAG AND THE DEGREE OF THE
BAG, THE TYPE OF GROUND, ROCK OR OTHER
AND AMOUNT OF SEDIMENT DISCHARGED INTO THE
DEPENDING ON THE SIZE OF SEDIMENT BAG, THE TYPE
REASONABLE RATE. FLOW RATES WILL VARY
FILTER SEDIMENT OR ALLOW WATER TO PASS AT A
2. BAG IS FULL WHEN IT NO LONGER CAN EFFICIENTLY
THROUGH THE SURFACE AREA OF THE BAG.
GRAVEL BED IN ORDER TO MAXIMIZE WATER FLOW
EFFICIENCY OF FILTRATION, PLACE THE BAG ON A
WITHOUT CREATING MORE EROSION. TO INCREASE THE
INCOMING WATER FLOWS DOWNHILL THROUGH BAG
1. INSTALL SEDIMENT BAG ON A SLOPE SO
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
EROSION CONTROL TYPICAL

SHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
E-3A
ALAMANCE
SHEET NUMBER
COUNTY:DATE:2018
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_E03a (typ).dgnbsmith

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARY DESIGN
AIN
HT
OR LR
O
CA
ROFESSION
26971
GE
NREINE
SEALPNAL
NOTLAD .G
AUHS
OJ
DATE:
ADJOINING ROADWAY
TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE/EXIT
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
FILTER FABRIC
8"
4"
SILT FENCE
FLOW
STEEL POST - 2'-0" DEPTH
GRADE
ABOVE EX
6" MIN100' MI
N4' MAX.4' MAX.
FILTER FABRIC
COMPACTED FILL
BE CLEANED UP IMMEDIATELY.
5. ANY MATERIAL WHICH FINDS ITS WAY ONTO THE ADJACENT ROADWAY MUST
TOP DRESSING WITH STONE MAY BE NECESSARY.
TRACKING OR DIRECT FLOW OF MUD ONTO ADJACENT ROADWAYS. PERIODIC
4. ENTRANCE(S) MUST BE MAINTAINED IN A CONDITION WHICH WILL PREVENT
CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES.
3. ENTRANCE(S) SHOULD BE LOCATED AS TO PROVIDE MAXIMUM UTILITY BY ALL
2. TURNING RADIUS SHOULD BE SUFFICIENT TO ACCOMODATE LARGE TRUCKS.
1. USE CLASS 'A' STONE ON PAD. PAD TO BE MINIMUM 100' LONG x 12' WIDE x 6" DEEP.
NOTES:
INTO TRENCH
EXTENSION OF FABRIC
INHIBITORS AND STABILIZERS.
FABRIC SHOULD CONTAIN ULTRAVIOLET RAY
WITH A MINIMUM FLOW RATE OF 0.3 GAL/FT/MIN.
STRENGTH (50 LB/LIN. INCH MINIMUM) AND
PROPYLENE, OR ETHYLENE YARN WITH EXTRA
4. FILTER FABRIC TO BE NYLON, POLYESTER,
WITH OVERLAP TO THE NEXT POST.
FASTEN THE FABRIC AT A SUPPORT POST
3. WHEN JOINTS ARE NECESSARY, SECURELY
STEEL TYPE.
AND BE OF THE SELF-FASTENER ANGLE
2. STEEL POST SHALL BE 5'-0" IN HEIGHT
FASTENED SECURELY TO THE POSTS.
OF 36" IN WIDTH AND SHALL BE
1. FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE A MINIMUM
NOTES: 10' MIN
CLASS 'A' STONE
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
EROSION CONTROL TYPICAL

SHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
E-3B
ALAMANCE
SHEET NUMBER
COUNTY:DATE:2018
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_E03b (typ).dgnbsmith

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARY DESIGN
AIN
HT
OR LR
O
CA
ROFESSION
26971
GE
NREINE
SEALPNAL
NOTLAD .G
AUHS
OJ
DATE:
+/-108
TOP OF BANK
TOP OF BANK
LENGTH VARIES
ROUGH CUT TIMBER
12"x12" +/-
LENGTH VARIES
ROUGH CUT TIMBER
12"x12" +/-
LENGTH VARIES
ROUGH CUT TIMBER
12"x12" +/-
5' MIN
12' MAX
5' MIN
AS APPROPRIATE
BOLTED TOGETHER
LOG MAT BRIDGE
LOG MAT BRIDGE
SECTION THROUGH
PLAN VIEW
CROSS SECTION VIEW
IS AT CONTRACTORS DISCRETION.
PURPOSES. USE OF LOG MAT BRIDGE
DETAIL PROVIDED FOR INFORMATIONAL
NOTE:
FLOW
CHANNEL
STREAM
25 FT. MIN.
TOP OF BANK
25 FT. MIN.
TOP OF BANK
IS GREATER
OR 18 IN. WHICHEVER
• DIAMETER OF PIPE
3" STONE
3" STONE
PLAN VIEW
PROFILE VIEW
STREAM CROSSING
TEMPORARY CULVERTED
NOT FOR USE IN RESTORED STREAMS.
NOTE: FOR USE IN EXISTING CHANNELS ONLY.
METAL PIPE
CORRUGATED
FABRIC
GEOTEXTILE
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
EROSION CONTROL TYPICAL

SHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
E-3C
ALAMANCE
SHEET NUMBER
COUNTY:DATE:2018
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_E03c (typ).dgnbsmith

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARY DESIGN
AIN
HT
OR LR
O
CA
ROFESSION
26971
GE
NREINE
SEALPNAL
NOTLAD .G
AUHS
OJ
DATE:FLOW
NOTES:
TYPICAL MATTING LOCATION
ELEVATION
PROPOSED BANKFULL
ELEVATION
WATER SURFACE
PROPOSED
BEYOND BANKFULL
TO MINIMUM 1 FT.
FROM TOE OF CHANNEL
COIR FIBER MATTING
AS NECESSARY.
BE MADE AT THE DESIGNERS OR CONTRACTORS DISCRETION
-FIELD ADJUSTMENTS TO MATTING LOCATION MAY
AND ALONG BOTH SIDES OFTHE CHANNEL IN TANGENT AREAS.
PLACED ALONG THE OUTSIDE BANK OF ALL BENDS
-MEDIUM WEIGHT WOVEN COIR FIBER MATTING SHALL BE
ELEVATION
BANKFULL
6" MIN
COIR MATTING CROSS SECTION
STRAW MULCH
1 FT. MIN.
COIR FIBER MATTING
NORMAL WATER
BED MATERIAL
BACKFILL
OVERLAP
6" MIN
NOTES:
1.
2.
3.
BACKFILLED WITH EXCAVATED MATERIAL.
WITH MATTING LAID FLAT AND STAKED. TRENCH TO BE
MINIMUM 1' WIDE, 6" DEEP TRENCH OVER TOP OF BANK
DIRECTED BY MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS.
USE 12" WOODEN STAKES ON 5' CENTERS OR AS
FROM WORKING OFF OF STAKE.
WITH GALVANIZED NAIL BENT TO PROHIBIT MATTING
SECURE TOE OF MATTING WITH 24" WOODEN STAKES
GROUND
EXISTING
STRAW WATTLE
STRAW WATTLE
GROUND
EXISTING
CHANNEL
TRENCH3"1' MIN
STRAW WATTLE
4. STRAW SHALL BE CERTIFIED WEED FREE.
STAKES, SPACE AT 5' MAXIMUM.
3. SECURE STRAW WATTLE WITH 1"x2"x18" WOODEN
OF BANKFULL CHANNEL.
2. INSTALL STRAW WATTLE ALONG TOP
MAY NEED ADDITIONAL RUNOFF PROTECTION.
OF THE CONTRACTOR OR DESIGNER IN AREAS THAT
1. STRAW WATTLE TO BE INSTALLED AT THE DISCRETION
NOTES:
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
EROSION CONTROL TYPICAL

SHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
E-3D
ALAMANCE
SHEET NUMBER
COUNTY:DATE:2018
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_E03d (typ).dgnbsmith

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARY DESIGN
AIN
HT
OR LR
O
CA
ROFESSION
26971
GE
NREINE
SEALPNAL
NOTLAD .G
AUHS
OJ
DATE:
DD
DDDDIMENSION
VARIABLE
‚ WIRE MESH
SEDIMENT CONTROL STONE
‚ WIRE MESH
WATER FLOW
1 ft min
2:1
2 ft
2 ft
3 ft
‚ WIRE MESH
SEDIMENT CONTROL STONE
1 ft min
*
SPECIAL SEDIMENT CONTROL FENCE BREAK
D2 ft DEPTH
STEEL POST -
4. SPACE POST A MAXIMUM OF 3 FT.
STEEL POST 2 FT. DEEP MINIMUM.
3. INSTALL 5 FT. SELF FASTENER ANGLE
MESH WITH 1/4 INCH MESH OPENINGS.
2. USE HARDWARE CLOTH 24 GAUGE WIRE
FOR SEDIMENT CONTROL STONE.
1. USE NO. 5 OR NO. 57 STONE
CONSTRUCTION NOTES:
BY CONTRACTOR OR DESIGNER.
DIRECTED ON PLANS AND AS DEEMED NECESSARY
TO RELIEVE ACCUMULATION OF RUNOFF AS
FENCE AS A BREAK IN TEMPORARY SILT FENCE
-INSTALL 9 FT SECTION OF SEDIMENT CONTROL
NOTE:
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
EROSION CONTROL TYPICAL

SHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
E-3E
ALAMANCE
SHEET NUMBER
COUNTY:DATE:2018
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_E03e (typ).dgnbsmith

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARY DESIGN
GOLDSBORO, NC 27534
5688 U.S. HIGHWAY 70 EAST
K2 DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
EASEMENT PROVIDED BY:
SURVEY INFORMATION PROPERTY/SR 2349AIN
HT
OR LR
O
CA
ROFESSION
26971
GE
NREINE
SEALPNAL
NOTLAD .G
AUHS
OJ
DATE:
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
UT 3
UT 1
HAUL ROAD
HAUL ROAD
UT 1
UT 3
STAGING AREA
Burnett Church RdSR 2453Whitehead DrSEE DETAIL
CONSTRUCTION ENTRACE
0 300'150'300'
SCALE: 1"=600'
600'
UT 2
EROSION CONTROL HAUL ROADS

SHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
E-3F
ALAMANCE
SHEET NUMBER
COUNTY:DATE:2018
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_E03f (haul).dgnbsmith

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARY DESIGNSTAGING AREAHAUL ROAD
HAUL ROAD
HAUL ROAD
HAUL ROADHAUL ROADHAUL ROADHAUL ROADHAUL ROADDISTURBANCELIMITS OF
DISTURBANCELIMITS OF
DISTURBANCELIMITS OF
DISTURBANCELIMITS OF DISTURBANCELIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
LIMITS OF
DISTURBANCE
LIMITS OF
DISTURBANCELIMITS OF
AIN
HT
OR LR
O
CA
ROFESSION
26971
GE
NREINE
SEALPNAL
NOTLAD .G
AUHS
OJ
ALAMANCE
SHEET NUMBERSHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:
COUNTY:DATE:2018
DATE:
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_E04.dgnbsmith

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
NC SPATIAL DATA QL2 LIDAR
OF SURVEY LIMITS BASED ON
ON . TOPOGRAHY OUTSIDE
PERMFORMED BY K2 SURVEYING
TOPOGRAPHY BASED ON SURVEY
EROSION CONTROL E-4
SEE SHEET E-5MATCHLINE STA 6+50 -UT1-NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARY DESIGN532533534534535535536537538539539539540540540
540
540540540541541541
541541542542542
542
542542
543543543543
543543543544544544544
544
544544
544544544
545545545545545545545 545
545
545
545
545
545545
546546546546
546
546547547547547
547
547
548548548548
548 548549549549549
549 549549549549550550550550550550
550 550
550 550
550
550
550551551551
551
551
5
5
2
552
552 552552552552553553553
553
553 553554554554554
554
554
554555555555555555555
555
555
555
555
556556556 556
556
5
5
6
557557557557
558558
558
559559
560560560560560
561
562
562563
563564564
5645645
6
4
564564565 565
565
565565566
566566567
567567567567567568
568568568S
AND CAROL L
LAMM, JAMES D
DEED PG 0896
DEED BK 2789
TINNIN, ANDREW M
DEED PG 0756
DEED BK 2514
TINNIN, ANDREW M
DEED PG 0756
DEED BK 2514
12" PVC OUTLET
12" HDPE
SURV
EY
BOUNDARY
SURV
EY BO
U
NDARYSURVEY BOUNDARYEIP
ISS CAP 40+00 -UT1-1+00 -UT1-2+00 -UT1-3+00 -UT1-4+00 -UT1-5+00 -UT1-6+00 -UT1-ELEV=546.29
STA 0+00 -UT1-
RESTORATION
-UT1- BEGIN
CROSS VANE
CROSS VANE
BANKFULL
PROPOSED
PRIOR TO DAM REMOVAL
BY PUMP-AROUND METHOD
POND SHALL BE DRAINED
REMOVE EXISTING DAM
STRUCTURE
REMOVE DRAINAGE
REMOVE PIPE
HAUL ROAD
DISTURBANCE
LIMITS OF
DISTURBANCE
LIMITS OF
AIN
HT
OR LR
O
CA
ROFESSION
26971
GE
NREINE
SEALPNAL
NOTLAD .G
AUHS
OJ
NC SPATIAL DATA QL2 LIDAR
OF SURVEY LIMITS BASED ON
ON . TOPOGRAHY OUTSIDE
PERMFORMED BY K2 SURVEYING
TOPOGRAPHY BASED ON SURVEY
EROSION CONTROL E-5
ALAMANCE
SHEET NUMBERSHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:
COUNTY:DATE:2018
DATE:
Axiom Environmental, Inc.

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_E05.dgnbsmithSEE SHEET E-613+00 -UT1-MATCHLINE STASEE SHEET E-
4MATCHLINE STA
6
+5
0
-UT1-NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARY DESIGN517
517
518519520
520521
521521
522522
522522
523 523523
524 524524524
524
524524
525525
525
5255255255255
2
5
525525525
525
526
526526526
5
2
6
526
526526526
526
527527527
527527527527
527
528
528528
5285285
2
8
528
528528
528
528
528
528
529
529529529529 5295
3
0
530
530
530
530530530530530530531
531
531531531 532532532
532532532
532
532
533
533
533
533533534534
534534534
535535535535
535 535536536
536537537537
538538
539
539540540
540
541543544
546
TINNIN, ANDREW M
DEED PG 0756
DEED BK 2514
ISS CAP 3
SURVEY BOUNDARYSURVEY BOUNDARYSURVEY BOUNDARYEIP
ISS CAP 26+00 -UT1-7+00 -UT1-8+00 -UT1-9+00 -UT1-10+00 -UT1-11+00 -UT1-12+00 -UT1-0+00 -UT2-1+00 -UT2-2+00 -UT2-
ELEV= 520.44
STA 1+68 -UT2-
BEGIN RESTORATION
-UT2- END ENHANCEMENT II
ELEV= 520.42
STA 12+08 -UT1-
STA 2+07 -UT2-
-UT2- END RESTORATION
ELEV= 522.86
STA 0+00 -UT2-
ENHANCEMENT II
-UT2- BEGIN
CROSS VANE
CROSS VANE
CROSS VANE
LOG VANE
CROSS VANE
VANE
LOG
BANKFULL
PROPOSED
BANKFULL
PROPOSEDREMOVE PI
PEHAUL ROAD
DISTURBANCE
LIMITS OF
DISTURBANCE
LIMITS OF
AIN
HT
OR LR
O
CA
ROFESSION
26971
GE
NREINE
SEALPNAL
NOTLAD .G
AUHS
OJ
NC SPATIAL DATA QL2 LIDAR
OF SURVEY LIMITS BASED ON
ON . TOPOGRAHY OUTSIDE
PERMFORMED BY K2 SURVEYING
TOPOGRAPHY BASED ON SURVEY
EROSION CONTROL E-6
ALAMANCE
SHEET NUMBERSHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:
COUNTY:DATE:2018
DATE:
Axiom Environmental, Inc.

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_E06.dgnbsmithSEE SHEET E-513+00 -UT1-
MATCHLINE STA
SEE SHEET E-7MATCHLI
NE STA 19+50
-UT1-NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARY DESIGN505
506 507507508509
5 10
510510510511
511512
512513
513513513514
514514514
514514515515
515
515515
515515515515515515516
516
516
516516516516516516517
517517517517
517517517517518518518518
518518518519
519
519
519519519520
520
5205
2
0520520
520520520520520520521
521521
521521521522
522
522
522522522522523523523523
523
523 52352352452452452
4
524
524
525525525525525
525525
525 525525526526526526526
527527
5
2
7
527528528528528 5295
2
9529
529530530530530530530
530
531531
531
531531532
533
AND CAROL L
LAMM, JAMES D
DEED PG 0896
DEED BK 2789
ENTERPRISES, LLC
WILLIARD
DEED PG 0270
DEED BK 3143
SURVEY BOUNDARY14+00 -UT1-15+00 -UT1-16+00 -UT1-17+00 -UT1-18+00 -UT1-19+00 -UT1-20+00 -UT1-ELEV= 511.16
STA 16+99 -UT1-
BEGIN ENCHANCEMENT II
-UT1- END RESTORATION
HAUL ROAD
DISTURBANCE
LIMITS OF
DISTURBANCE
LIMITS OF
DISTURBANCE
LIMITS OF
CROSS VANE
DROP STRUCTURE
BANKFULL
PROPOSED
BANKFULL
PROPOSED
TREATMENT
MARSH
VANE
CROSS
AIN
HT
OR LR
O
CA
ROFESSION
26971
GE
NREINE
SEALPNAL
NOTLAD .G
AUHS
OJ
NC SPATIAL DATA QL2 LIDAR
OF SURVEY LIMITS BASED ON
ON . TOPOGRAHY OUTSIDE
PERMFORMED BY K2 SURVEYING
TOPOGRAPHY BASED ON SURVEY
EROSION CONTROL E-7
ALAMANCE
SHEET NUMBERSHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:
COUNTY:DATE:2018
DATE:
Axiom Environmental, Inc.

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_E07.dgnbsmithSEE SHEET E-6MATCHLINE STA 19+50 -UT1-S E E S HE E T E -8
26+00 -UT 1-MAT C HL INE S T ANOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARY DESIGN484484
484484485
486486
486486487487487487488
488488488488488489
489489490490
490490490490490491
491491491491491491492492
492492492
492
493
493
493493 494494
494494495
495495
495
495495495495495496
496
496
496496497497
497
497497497497497498
498
498498498498498499
499
499499499499500500
500
500500
500
500500500500500500501
501
501501501501501501502502502
502
502
5
0
2
503
503503
503503504504
504
504504504504504505
505505
505
505
505
505505505505505506
506
506506506506507
507
507
507
507507507507508508508508 5085085085085085
0
9
509
509509509509510510510
510
510
510510510510510511
511511511511511511512
5
12
512512512513
513
513513514
514
514514515515
515515515515515515516516
516516516517
517517517518
518518518519
5195195195195 2 0
520520
5205205205205
2
15215215215225
2
2
5225225225235235
2
3
523
524524524524524525525525525525
525
525525526526527528529ENTERPRISES, LLC
WILLIARD
DEED PG 0270
DEED BK 3143
AND CAROL L
LAMM, JAMES D
DEED PG 0896
DEED BK 2789
DEED PG 0896DEED BK 2789A
N
D CA
RO
L LLA
M
M, JA
M
ES
DSURVEY BOUNDARY20+00 -UT1-21+00 -UT1-22+00 -UT1-23+00 -UT1-24+00 -UT1-25+00 -UT1-
AIN
HT
OR LR
O
CA
ROFESSION
26971
GE
NREINE
SEALPNAL
NOTLAD .G
AUHS
OJ
NC SPATIAL DATA QL2 LIDAR
OF SURVEY LIMITS BASED ON
TOPOGRAHY OUTSIDE
EROSION CONTROL E-8
ALAMANCE
SHEET NUMBERSHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:
COUNTY:DATE:2018
DATE:
Axiom Environmental, Inc.

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_E08.dgnbsmithSEE SHEET E-12
MATCHLINE STA 21+50 -UT3-SEE SHEET E-726+00 -UT1-MATCHLINE STANOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARY DESIGN477
477478
4
7
8
478478479 479479480480
480480480480480480480480480 480480481481481481
4
8
1 481481481482482482482
482482482482482482483483483483
483
4834834 8 4
484
484484484484484484484485485485485485485 485485
485485485485486
486486486486487
487
4874874874874884884884884 8 9
489489490490
490490490490491
49149149149 2492492492493
493494
494494495495
495495496
496497
4974
9
84
9
8 4984984 9 9
499500500
5005005
0
1
501501502502502503505505 507507508508508ENTERPRISES, LLC
WILLIARD
DEED PG 0270
DEED BK 3143
DEED PG 749
DEED BK 690
AND MARY A
NOBLIT, GEORGE W
DEED PG 0896
DEED BK 2789
AND CAROL L
LAMM, JAMES D
DEED PG 0920
DEED BK 3150
AND MARY E
RICE, JOSEPH M
EIP
EIP
EIP
EX ROCK EX ROCK
27+00 -UT1--UT3-22+00STA 27+35 -UT1-
STA 22+98 -UT3-
END ENHANCEMENT II
-UT3-
STA 27+96 -UT1-
-UT1- END ENHANCEMENT II
AIN
HT
OR LR
O
CA
ROFESSION
26971
GE
NREINE
SEALPNAL
NOTLAD .G
AUHS
OJ
EROSION CONTROL E-9
ALAMANCE
SHEET NUMBERSHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:
COUNTY:DATE:2018
DATE:
Axiom Environmental, Inc.

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_E09.dgnbsmithSEE SHEET E-
1
0MATCHLINE STA
6
+5
0
-UT3
-NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARY DESIGN499500
500501
501501501501
501501501501501502502502
502502502502502502 502502503503
503503503503503503503503504504504504
504 504504504504504504504504504505505505505505505
505505505505505505505505505505505505505505505505505505506506
506506506506506506506
506506506 506506506506506506506 506506506506506507
507
507507507507507 5075075075075075075075075075 0 8 508508508508508
508508
508508508508508508508508509
509
509
509509 509509509509509509509509509509509509509509509510510510510510510510510
510
5
10 510
510
510510
510510510510510 510510510510511511511511511511511511511511511511511511511511511511511511512
512
512
512512
512512512512512512512512512512513513513513
513513513513513513513513513513514
514
514
514514514514514514 515
515
515
515
515
515515515515515515515515515515516
516
516516516517517517517517517517517518
5185185185185185195195195205205205215215
2
1
521522522522523523523524525526526528DEED PG 0105
DEED BK 3158
AND CAROL L
LAMM, JAMES D
DEED PG 0896
DEED BK 2789
EASEMENT
EX 20' ACCESS
EASEMENT
EX 20' DRAINAGE
CAVINESS, ROBERT W
DEED PG 0716
DEED BK 3572
AND WELDON L
JENKINS, BETHANY L 0+00 -UT3-1+00 -UT3-2+00 -UT3-3+00 -UT3-4+00 -UT3-
5+00 -UT3-6+00 -UT3-STA 0+00 -UT3-
ENHANCEMENT II
-UT3- BEGIN
TREATMENT
MARSH
PERMANENT CROSSING
INV. OUT=505.5
INV. IN=505.7
BURY 1.0'
2@48" RCP
HAUL ROAD
DISTURBANCE
LIMITS OF
AIN
HT
OR LR
O
CA
ROFESSION
26971
GE
NREINE
SEALPNAL
NOTLAD .G
AUHS
OJ
EROSION CONTROL E-10
ALAMANCE
SHEET NUMBERSHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:
COUNTY:DATE:2018
DATE:
Axiom Environmental, Inc.

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_E10.dgnbsmithSEE SHEET E-1113+00 -UT3-MATCHLINE STASEE SHEET E-9MATCHLINE STA 6+50 -UT3-NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARY DESIGN495495495
495
495
495 496496496496
496
496
497
497497497497 497
497
497
497497
497497
497
497
497
498
498
498 498498498
498
498
498
498498498
498
498
498
498498498498
499
499
4
9
9
499499499499499
499499499499
499
499
499
499499
499
499 499
499
499
499499
499
499
499
499
499499
499
499
499
499
499
499 499
499
499499
499
499
499
499
499
499
499
499
499
499
499
499
499499
499
499
499
499
499499
500
500
500
500500500
500500
5
0
0
5
0
0
500500500500500500500500
500
500
500
500
500500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
501
501
501501
501501501501501
501
501
501
5
0
1
501
501
501
501501
501
501
501
501501
501
501
501
501
501
501501
501
501
501
501
501
501
501
502
5025025025025
0
2
502502
502
503
503503503503503503503
504
504
504
504504504504
504
504
504
504
504
504 504
505
505505505505
505
505505505505505505505
505 505
505
506
506
5
0
6
506506506506507
507
507
507507507507
507
507
508508508508508
508
508
508508508
508
508
508
509
509
509
509509509509509
509
510510510510510510510
510
510
510
510510
511
511
5
11
511511511511512512
512512512512
513
513513513513513513
513
514
514514514514514515
515515515515515515515515
515
515
515515
515516
516516516516
516
516
516
517517517517517
517
517517
518518518519519519
519
519520520521521
522523524525525526CAVINESS, ROBERT W
DEED PG 0716
DEED BK 3572
AND CAROL L
LAMM, JAMES D
DEED PG 0896
DEED BK 2789
EASEMENT
EX 20' DRAINAGE
EIP
7+00 -UT3-8+00 -UT3-9+00 -U T3-10+00 -UT3-11+00 -UT3-12+00 -UT3-HAUL ROAD
AIN
HT
OR LR
O
CA
ROFESSION
26971
GE
NREINE
SEALPNAL
NOTLAD .G
AUHS
OJ
S EE S HEET E-10
13 +0 0 -UT3 -MATCHLIN E S TAS
E
E
S
HE
E
T
E-
12MATCHLINE
S
T
A
19
+
5
0 -UT
3-
EROSION CONTROL E-11
ALAMANCE
SHEET NUMBERSHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:
COUNTY:DATE:2018
DATE:
Axiom Environmental, Inc.

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_E11.dgnbsmithNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARY DESIGN485485485485
485 486486486486486
486 487487
487487
487
487
487
488488
488488488
488
488
488488488
489489
489
489489489489 489
489
489
489
489
490
490
490
490490490490490
490
490
490
490
490
490
490
491491
491491491491
491
491491491491491
491
492
492
492492492492
492
492
492
493
493
493
493493493493
493
493493493
493
493
494494
494
494494494494494
494
494
495
495495
495
4 9 5
4
9
5495
495495495495495495495
495
495
495
495
496496
496496
496496496497497
497
497497497497
497
497
497
497
498
498498
498498498498498
498498
499
499
499
499499499499499
499
499
500
500500500
500
500
500500500500500500500500 501501
501
501501501501
502
502
502
502502502502503503
503
503503503503
503
503
503
504504
504
504
504504504504505
505
505
505505505
505505505505505505505505505
505
506506
506
506506506506
507
507
507
507
507507507507
508508 508
508
508
508
508
508
508508508
508 508508
508
508
508
508 5095095
0
9
509509509509509509509
510510510510
510510510 510510510
510510
510
510
510
511
511511512
512512512
512
512
513
513513513 513513513513
514
514514514
515
515515515516
516
516
517
AND CAROL L
LAMM, JAMES D
DEED PG 0896
DEED BK 2789
AND MARY E
RICE, JOSEPH M
DEED PG 0920
DEED BK 3150
14+00 -UT3-15+00 -UT3-16+00 -UT3-17+00 -UT3-18+00 -UT3-19+00 -UT3-INV. OUT=488.0
INV. IN=489.7
BURY 1.0'
2@54" RCP
PERMANENT CROSSING
HAUL ROAD
HAUL ROAD
DISTURBANCE
LIMITS OF
AIN
HT
OR LR
O
CA
ROFESSION
26971
GE
NREINE
SEALPNAL
NOTLAD .G
AUHS
OJ
SEE SHEET 11MATCHLINE STA 19+50 -UT3-SEE SHEET 8MATCHLINE STA 21+50 -UT3-EROSION CONTROL E-12
ALAMANCE
SHEET NUMBERSHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:
COUNTY:DATE:2018
DATE:
Axiom Environmental, Inc.

SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
TEL [phone]
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
MAJOR HILL STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
11/7/2017Major Hill_Hyd_PSH_E12.dgnbsmithNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONPRELIMINARY DESIGN481481482482483
483484
484485485485
485 485486
486486486486487
487487487488
488489
489490
490
490490491
491492
492
492492493493493494
495
495
495495496
496497497498
498498499
499499499500
500
500500500501
501502
502503
503504504504505
505505505506507
507507508509511DEED PG 0920DEED BK 3150AND MARY E
RICE, JOSEPH M
DEED PG 0920
DEED BK 3150
AND CAROL L
LAMM, JAMES D
DEED PG 0896
DEED BK 2789
20+00 -UT3-21+00 -UT3--
U
T
3-
22
+
00HAUL ROAD