20180784 Ver 1_MP_for IRT Review_20190220

ID#* 20180784 Version* 1
Select Reviewer:*
Mac Haupt
Initial Review 02/20/2019
Completed Date
Mitigation Project Submittal - 2/20/2019
Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site? *
Type of Mitigation Project:*
r Stream W Wetlands r Buffer r Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Contact Name:* Email Address:*
Raymond Holz [e-mail]
Project Information
Existing 20180784 Existing
(DWR) (nunbersonly ...nodash) Version: (nurrbersonly)
ID#:*
Project Type: f• DMS r Mitigation Bank
Project Name: Arabia Bay Wetland Mitigation Slte
County: Hoke
Document Information
........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Plans
File Upload: Arabia Bay Mitigation Plan—for IRT Review 02-20-
14.43M6
2019_.pdf
Rease upload only one RDF of the complete file that needs to be subnitted...
Signature
Print Name:* Raymond Holz
Signature:*

MITIGATION PLAN
ARABIA BAY WETLAND MITIGATION SITE
Hoke County, North Carolina
DMS Project ID No. 100061
Full Delivery Contract No. 7529
USACE Action ID No. SAW -2018-01151
DWR Project No. 2018-0784
RFP No. 16-007332
Cape Fear River Basin
Cataloging Unit 03030004
Prepared for:
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
1652 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27699-1652
February 2019

February 6, 2019
Lindsey Crocker
NC DEQ— Division of Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652
Subject: Arabia Bay, Project ID #100061, DMS Contract #0007529
Response to DMS Comments on the Draft Mitigation Plan Review (DMS review team:
Periann Russel, Melonie Allen, Lindsay Crocker), Submittal of Mitigation Plan for IRT
Review, & the Performance Bond
Restoration Systems received comments on the Arabia Bay Mitigation Plan from the Division of Mitigation
Services on December 12th, 2018. Below are the comments received in black, and Restoration Systems'
response in blue.
1. Add DWR project # to the cover page (DWR 2018-0784)
DWR project # has been added to cover page.
Page 3, Land Use - please provide approximate date that property was cleared for agriculture for
historic context. Also, there is no discussion about the "historic ditch" (Figure 7), only discuss
current ditches. Please provide a brief explanation of when that historic ditch was filled, and why,
to give a historic background of the site.
A sentence has been added to Section 1.3 providing an approximate date of when the property
was cleared based on the NC Geological Survey 1956 aerial photograph.
After reviewing several USGS aerial photographs from the 1950-60's it is apparent the property
was cleared sometime prior to 1950(https://earthexplorer.usgs.gov/). The size of the site
combined with the resolution of historic aerial photographs and limited availability of aerial
photographs for Hoke County, NC prevent a more accurate determination of when the site was
cleared for agriculture.
A brief discussion of the historic ditch has been added to Section 1.3.
The date of clearing is of importance notjust for historic context. Research on drained and cleared
bays has indicated that time in agriculture affects bulk density, which they should be affecting by
ripping, but also subsidence. The reason it may be important is that restoring the water table to
historic elevation has resulted in longer duration and deeper inundation than was likely present
prior to disturbance, which may lead to more ponded water than anticipated. Juniper Bay is the
site I'm referring to if you're familiar with that project (NCSU published at least 2 papers on that
one I think). These papers may be interesting to the designers to review.

Thank you for the recommended research regarding soils of Carolina Bays. During project
development research of the data and papers associated with Juniper Bay and nearby Hillcrest
Bay was conducted to identify potential concerns and ensure appropriate methodologies are used
in restoration of Arabia Bay. The soil series (McColl) and ecoregion (transition from Coastal Plain
to Piedmont) suggest historical organic material was lower relative to other Carolina bays with
higher organic content soils.
Additionally, a slightly larger Carolina Bay —2.0 -miles west of Arabia Bay where vegetation has
been undisturbed for 70+ years and no evidence of drainage was investigated to identify
reference site conditions. There was little to no evidence of surface ponding, the soils had a thin
organic soil horizon at the surface before transitioning into a mineral soil. Therefore, we feel there
was not a significant amount of subsidence since the land was put into agricultural production.
A fragipan was observed in this reference Carolina Bay which appeared to be at a higher bulk
density than Arabia Bay based on the ability to auger through the fragipan. It should also be noted
fragipans are known for high bulk densities which limit and restrict root growth. Given the
presence of a fragipan in the soils at Arabia Bay we do not think the agricultural practices at Arabia
Bay have increased the bulk density too significantly beyond what it was historically.
Page 6, CFRBRP goals and Page 9-11, Goals and Objectives: Objectives need to correlate directly
to a goal and be linked or funnel down from the RBRP goals. The content is there, but this is not
organized in a clear way. In the text, it shows one set of goals and objectives and the table has
others. Don't say 'remove' in goals, and then 'reduce' in objectives, items like that should match.
Goals from Page 6 along with Goals and Objectives from Pages 9-11 have been organized for
consistency and to correlate Goals and Objectives.
4. Page 7, nutrient model: it appears that you have developed a nutrient model based on multiple
data sources for multiple land uses. Please indicate in the text which of the data sources you used
to calculate the one specific for this project (which source of data shows 20 Ib/acre/year removal
of P&K for corn, and 15 Ib/acre/year P on soybeans)? This is the only data source relevant in this
case, although it is clear in your spreadsheet that each land use type may have come from one of
the other cited sources. As a note, Realistic Yield Expectations from NCSU may show nutrient
inputs much higher for this soil type and crop.
The narrative for the nutrient model has been revised to only identify the applicable data source
used for the calculation of this Site.
Page 7, Hydrological Characterization: the title of this section does not reflect what is in the
paragraph. Remove or update it to reflect more of a true hydrologic characterization.
Additional narrative has been added in section 3.3.1 to more accurately describe the Site's
hydrological characterization.
6. Page 8, depth to restrictive area is mentioned and the appendix is referenced, but not described.
Give a range of depths here in addition to referencing the Appendix. Your Soil Profile Map (Figure
4) does not indicate the same textural changes/restrictive layer depths as the points nearby in the
Depth to Restrictive Layer map (Figure 5). Did you make soil texture observations in the depth to

restrictive layer field work and can you provide that or can you explain the differences in these
two?
A range of depths to the restrictive soil horizon has been added to page 8.
The field investigation in assessing the depth to restrictive layer was a detailed assessment that
focused on the increase in clay content and/or fragic soil properties moving down into the soil
profile. Whereas the field investigation for the Soil Profile Map was conducted early in the project
development to identify drained hydric soils, and did not include detailed assessments of the
restrictive soil layer.
The field investigation for the Soil Profile Map (Figure 4) occurred in Feb 2018, and focused on
identifying drained hydric soils. During this effort holes were dug to an appropriate depth to make
this determination but did not include analysis at deeper depths regarding the formation of the
restrictive layer.
The field investigation for the Restrictive Layer Map (Figure 5) was performed in June 2018 and
focused on identifying restrictive properties associated with the McColl soil series. This
assessment included using a hand auger throughout the project area and a sharp shooter to
examine soil profiles along the ditch banks. The restrictive properties for the McColl soil series
relate to the prismatic structure of the fragipan, this restrictive layer for the official series
description starts at 13 — 20 -in in the soil (NCSS 1999). These restrictive properties can occur in
both clay and sandy clay loam soils. The field investigation found the restrictive layer to start at 2
— 32 -in in the soil with the greater range being associated with erosion and deposition during the
course of decades of agriculture land use practices.
The field investigation for Restrictive Layer Map occurred when the field had been plowed and
planted with cotton. Sampling for the Restrictive Layer Map sampled from the middle of the
planted rows which was trying to approximate the normal soil surface but obviously adds
variability to the depths compared to the field investigation for the Soil Profile Map when the soil
surface was flat and uniform.
7. Page 11 Objectives: deep ripping: Do you have any concerns that deep ripping will disturb your
fragipan? Please include depth planned for ripper. Soil moisture should be less than 30 percent of
field capacity at the maximum depth of tillage to avoid causing compaction when this is
conducted.
Upon further review, the term "deep ripping" has been replaced with "plowing" in the narrative.
The intent of this is to reduce compaction in the upper 6-8 inches of the soil and increase surface
roughness. Fragipans are the result of altered parent material, and in Carolina Bays they have
likely formed from the loading and wetting of water. These processes cause the soil to have a
columnar, prismatic, or blocky structure that makes the soil very restrictive to water movement
in the soil and plant root growth except along intermittent cracks. Therefore, it is not expected
the plowing will cause the subsoil to become compacted as it is already at a high bulk density due
to the presence of the fragipan. Proposed plowing will only include the upper 6 -8 -inches and will
be conducted to provide planted vegetation an appropriate substrate for establishment. The
official series description for the McColl soil series indicates the fragipan thickness is 15 — 32 -in
and the field investigation observed similar findings. Plowing will occur when the soil moisture is

less than 30 percent of field capacity at the maximum depth of tillage. Section 7.1 and Table 13
have been revised to include additional discussion regarding plowing.
8. Page 13, provide more detail and justification about the perched water table and how it will be
reestablished. Figure A does not relay the suggested information.
Additional narrative has been included in section 7.1 describing the reestablishment of the
perched water table.
9. Page 13 and design sheets, the text states "elevation not tied to grid." Tie to grid is required by
state survey board on any map of record and DMS electronic data submission requirements. RS
will have to use a surveyor and provide a sealed survey at as -built showing any deviations from
design. Please explain how surveying was conducted, and how RS intends on meeting contractual
requirements for this submission. Was design conducted entirely in the office based on LIDAR?
Additionally, the property must be closed before permits can be acquired, which will require using
an actual survey map which will be tied to grid. Update design to reflect surveyed site topo or
provide justification.
Due to the overall size of the owner's property a decision was made to survey a section of the
property boundary near the project conservation easement, rather than perform a complete
boundary survey. The property boundary survey located property corners near the project
conservation easement and tied them to grid to ensure the project outlet structure was not
located on adjacent properties. A surveyor did visit the site and conducted a boundary survey for
a portion of the subject property. A survey map tied to grid is included in the topographic survey
for design purposes. This was chosen over a traditional survey as the site is completely open and
advances in LiDAR availability have provided an alternate method to collecting topographic
surveys.
10. Page 13, design approach: what is the "impervious material?" Will this come from off-site?
Impervious material will be clay soil collected from onsite. There are clay berms along the ditches
that will provide the primary source for the clay fill material. Secondary sources of clay material
will come from habitat areas (small depressions, <6 inches deep) created during construction
throughout the project area, and excess clay from relocating the driveway. Section 7.2 has been
revised to provide additional details regarding the impervious material.
11. Page 13, Terracell Structure: It is unclear how the terracell will be 1.7' above the existing bay,
when also the plan states that it will be located at the current elevation of the existing ditch that
is 2-3' below the current existing bay ground level. Please revise the text to explain that more
clearly or provide a response to DMS.
Section 7.3, the narrative regarding the Terracell outlet structure has been revised to specify that
the "Terracell will be 2.5 feet above the existing bay floor." The Terracell outlet will be designed
to provide surface water drainage at a specified elevation to prevent hydrologic trespass on
surrounding properties. The Terracell will be the lowest elevation along the bay rim that provides
a drainage outlet.

12. There was no water budget or other rationale for wetland design. Provide a simplistic water
budget or other model that discusses rainfall, infiltration rates, evaporation, and surface /gw
runoff. This will provide a before and after for water retention and support hydroperiod. Contact
DMS for examples of this if RS has questions.
Appendix K has been added to the document to show the water balance calculation. Section 3.3.1
has been updated to discuss water budget calculation results for the project.
Instrumentation was not in place on site to provide direct measurement of site conditions,
therefore data was used from the closest state operated weather stations to provide inputs for
variables associated with the water balance calculation.
The water balance calculation determined the Site will retain enough of hydrological inputs to
restore wetland hydrology during normal weather conditions after the ditch outlet is removed
and the restrictive soil layer in the ditch is replaced.
13. Table 9 planting plan, DMS understands that Loblolly is part of the planting plan because it is a
documented part of this target community. However, in recollecting this site visit, there was a
significant Loblolly community adjacent to this site which will likely provide a seed source for this
site and be beneficial. Is it wise to plant 10% loblolly with this in mind? DMS would support
documenting in the Mitigation Plan that Loblolly will be desirable if volunteer.
The planting plan has been revised to replace Loblolly pine with Sweetbay magnolia (Magnolia
virginiana) as a planted species. Loblolly pine has been documented in the mitigation Plan as a
desirable volunteer that will count towards woody vegetation success in Table 12 under Section
8.1.
14. Page 14, per the RFP please update monitoring report deliverable date to December 1s'
The date on page 14 has been updated to December 15t
15. Table 11, vegetation plots: to document 2% of the planted areas, RS will only need to have 13
vegetation plots (at whatever combination of permanent and up to 50% random). It is fine to
leave this mitigation plan as is (14, and 4 vegetation plots), but DMS wanted to point out that this
is more than is required.
Thank you for the note. Given the IRT will likely require 14 ground water gauges, RS typically likes
to keep vegetation plots and gauges together. Thus we are going to keep the 14 vegetation plots
and use random transects as needed during monitoring years.
16. Table 12 (and in Hydrological Characterization) describe the system as precipitation -driven, but it
was earlier described as precipitation and groundwater? Please explain in the text clearly.
Precipitation (both direct precipitation on the site and upland/stormwater runoff) is the primary
hydrological input and groundwater is the secondary input. Narrative has been revised in Section
3.3.1 to explain the hydrological inputs for the Site. Table 12 specifies precipitation as the primary
hydrological input.
17. Table 13, Success criteria is a measured parameter. Update this column to include quantifiable
criteria.

Table 13 has been updated to include quantifiable criteria for the Success Criteria column.
18. Categorical Exclusion: the checklist submitted with this Mitigation Plan does not match the final
checklist approved by Donnie Brew. Please replace this one with the officially approved checklist
and corresponding data. Also need the USF&W response letter (dated January 2018) to include
with this submittal.
For the CE the checklist and corresponding data approved by Donnie Brew has been included with
the Mitigation Plan. The USFWS response letter has been included as well.
19. Appendix H, remove Schedule of Monitoring Table. This was discussed earlier and much of it does
not apply to this project. Remove discussion of Mitigation Banks. The only thing that should be in
this section is a table of credit release that applies to this project (remove coastal marsh wetlands,
streams table, and remove any columns or text that apply to mitigation banks.)
In Appendix H the following items have been removed, Table 3 — Schedule of Monitoring Events,
discussion of Mitigation Banks, text related to coastal marsh wetlands, and text referencing
streams.
Plan Sheets
1. Plan drawings should be NAD 83, and show major and minor contour lines, and proposed contours
from the design.
NAD 83 has been added to the Plan Sheets and a note detailing NC Spatial Data QL2 LiDAR data
has been added. Line weights and labeling of existing contour lines have been updated to make
existing contour data more legible. Raymond Holz and Grant Lewis discussed with Lindsay Crocker
(DMS) on 1-18-2019 plan sheets would not be showing proposed contours as the filling of Site
ditches is to be to existing grade. A note has been added to the Plan Sheets addressing this
comment.
Where is the staging area and construction entrance? Show on design sheets. If this is stabilized
construction entrance, provide a typical.
The construction entrance and staging area have been added to the Plan Sheets, a typical has
been added for the construction entrance.
Conservation Easement on design sheets is shown as a circle. Can these lines be straightened out
to ensure that they are at least 200' before a turn? This provides a hardship for Stewardship.
RS has reworked the proposed conservation easement to accommodate >200' easement lines to
the extent practical given the Site's position in the landscape in relation to parcel boundaries and
landowner requirements. The previous easement had 27 points with all 27 segments under 200'.
The new easements has 15 points and 6 of the 15 segments over 200' and 3 over 175', the
remaining segments are all over 100' in length.
4. Show on plans where ditch plugs are proposed and provide a ditch plug typical.
Plan Sheets have been revised to show ditch plug locations and a typical has been added.

5. These plans don't discuss the ripping or surface roughening in the construction sequence. Please
update by adding specification to design is applicable. Also, is an environmental inspection pre
and post construction required by Sediment & Erosion control? Update as required.
Upon further review, the term "deep ripping" has been replaced with "plowing" in the narrative
(see comment response #7 above).
Yes, a land quality permit will be required for construction activities. Revised Plan Sheets will be
used to apply for land quality permit.
6. Include a comprehensive planting plan. Although there is a list of permanent and temporary
seeding, there is no tree planting on the sheets and it is not clear where this will be applied (i.e.
staging and stockpile areas not indicated). Mulch and/or any soil amendments are also omitted.
This is fine if designer is not using these. Example plans can be provided by DMS if wanted.
A Planting Plan has been added to the Plan Sheets.

MITIGATION PLAN
ARABIA BAY WETLAND MITIGATION SITE
Hoke County, North Carolina
DMS Project ID No. 100061
Full Delivery Contract No. 7529
USACE Action ID No. SAW -2018-01151
DWR Project No. 2018-0784RFP No. 16-007332
Cape Fear River Basin
Cataloging Unit 03030004
Prepared for:
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
1652 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27699-1652
Restoration Systems, LLC
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 211
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Contact: Worth Creech
919-755-9490 (phone)
919-755-9492 (fax)
Prepared by:
And
February 2019
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
Contact: Grant Lewis
919-215-1693 (phone)
"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.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0
PROJECT INTRODUCTION....................................................................................... 3
1.1
Directions to Site...............................................................................................................
3
1.2
USGS Hydrologic Unit Code and NCDWR River Basin Designation ............................. 3
1.3
Physiography and Land Use..............................................................................................
3
1.4
Project Components and Structure....................................................................................
4
2.0
WATERSHED APPROACH AND SITE SELECTION ............................................. 7
3.0
BASELINE AND EXISTING CONDITIONS.............................................................. 8
3.1
Soils and Land Form.........................................................................................................
8
3.2
Nutrient Model..................................................................................................................
8
3.3
Project Site Wetlands........................................................................................................
8
3.3.1 Hydrological Characterization................................................................................
8
3.3.2 Soil Characterization...............................................................................................
9
3.3.3 Plant Community Characterization.........................................................................
9
4.0
REFERENCE FOREST ECOSYSTEM....................................................................... 9
5.0
FUNCTIONAL UPLIFT AND PROJECT GOALS/OBJECTIVES ........................
10
6.0
SITE DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION CONSTRAINTS .................................
12
6.1
Threatened & Endangered Species..................................................................................
12
6.2
Cultural Resources..........................................................................................................
13
6.3
North Carolina Natural Heritage Elements.....................................................................
13
6.4
Utilities............................................................................................................................
14
6.5
Air Transport Facilities...................................................................................................
14
7.0
DESIGN APPROACH AND MITIGATION WORK PLAN ....................................
14
7.1
Wetland Restoration........................................................................................................
14
7.2
Ditch Plugging.................................................................................................................
14
7.3
Driveway Relocation & Terracell Structure....................................................................
14
7.4
Natural Plant Community Restoration............................................................................
15
7.4.1 Nuisance Species Management............................................................................
15
8.0
MONITORING AND SUCCESS CRITERIA............................................................
15
8.1
Success Criteria...............................................................................................................
18
8.2
Contingency.....................................................................................................................18
8.2.1 Wetland Contingency...........................................................................................
18
8.2.2 Vegetation Contingency.......................................................................................
18
8.3
Compatibility with Project Goals....................................................................................
18
9.0
ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN.........................................................................
19
10.0
LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN.....................................................................
19
11.0
REFERENCES..............................................................................................................
20
Mitigation
Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) Table of Contents page i
Arabia
Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County,
North Carolina February 2019

TABLES
Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits..................................................................... 4
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History............................................................................ 5
Table 3. Project Contacts Table...................................................................................................... 5
Table 4. Project Attribute Table...................................................................................................... 6
Table 5. Web Soil Survey Soils Mapped within the Site................................................................ 8
Table 6. Reference Forest Ecosystem........................................................................................... 10
Table 7A. Arabia Bay NC WAM Summary................................................................................. 11
Table 7B. Wetland Targeted Functions, Goals, and Objectives ................................................... 12
Table 8. Threatened and Endangered Species.............................................................................. 13
Table9. Planting Plan................................................................................................................... 15
Table 10. Monitoring Schedule..................................................................................................... 16
Table 11. Monitoring Summary.................................................................................................... 17
Table12. Success Criteria............................................................................................................. 18
Table 13. Compatibility of Performance Criteria to Project Goals and Objectives ...................... 19
APPENDICES
Appendix A. Figures
Figure 1. Site Location
Figure 2. Hydrologic Unit Map
Figure 3. Topography
Figure 4. Historical Aerial Photograph (1956)
Figure 5. Existing Conditions and Soils
Figure 6. Impervious Layer Depth Analysis
Figure 7. Proposed Conditions
Figure 8. Outfall Structure
Figure 9. Planting Plan
Figure 10. Monitoring Plan
Appendix B. Existing Wetland Data
NC WAM Forms
Soil Boring Log
Nutrient Model Output
Appendix C. NHP Report
Appendix D. Approved Jurisdictional Determination
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. Construction Plans
Erosion Control Plan
Structure Details
Appendix K. Water Balance Calculation
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) Table of Contents page ii
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019

1.0 PROJECT INTRODUCTION
The Arabia Bay Wetland Mitigation Site (hereafter referred to as the "Site") encompasses 16.1
acres of agricultural fields used for row crop production. The Site is located approximately 4.5
miles southeast of Raeford, NC and northeast of the intersection of Arabia Road (SR 1003) and
LA Sandy Road in southeast Hoke County (Figures 1 and 2, Appendix A).
1.1 Directions to Site
Directions to the Site from Raleigh, North Carolina.
- Take I-40 East out of Raleigh; travel —30 miles
- Take exit 328A to merge onto I-95 S; travel —40 miles
- Take exit 41 for NC -59 towards Hope Mills and Parkton
- Turn right onto NC -59 N; after 0.7 miles, turn left onto Shipman Rd
- After 1 mile, turn right onto US -301 South; travel 2.4 miles
- Turn right onto NC -71 South; travel 2.7 miles
- Turn right onto 3rd Street and continue straight onto Barlow Road and Chason Road;
travel 5.5 miles
- Turn left on Arabia Rd; travel 3 miles
- The Site is located on the right, down a gravel driveway.
o Site Latitude, Longitude 34.9570, -79.1379 (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 03030004150011 of the South
Atlantic/Gulf Region (North Carolina Division of Water Resources [NCDWR] subbasin number
03-06-15) [Figures 1 and 2, Appendix A]). Site hydrology is comprised of precipitation and lateral
groundwater flow. A ditch network has been excavated to drain the Site, which ultimately drains
to Rockfish Creek located less than a mile to the north. Rockfish Creek (Stream Index Number 18-
31-(15)) has been assigned a Best Usage Classification of C (NCDWR 2013). Rockfish Creek is
not listed on the final 2016 NC 303(d) lists (NCDWR 2018).
1.3 Physiography and Land Use
The Site is located in the Atlantic Southern Loam Plains portion of the Southeastern Plains
ecoregion of North Carolina. Regional physiography is characterized by dissected irregular plains,
some smooth plains; broad interstream divides and mostly gentle side slopes dissected by
numerous small, low to moderate gradient sandy bottomed streams (Griffith et al. 2002). Onsite
elevations are nearly level averaging 220 feet National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) (USGS
Raeford, North Carolina 7.5 -minute topographic quadrangle) (Figures 1 and 3, Appendix A).
The Site is situated in a Carolina bay that has been cleared, drained, and farmed (Figure 3,
Appendix A). The NC Geological Survey 1956 aerial photograph for Hoke County shows the site
in agricultural production indicating the area was cleared prior to that date. The bay is an isolated
depression surrounded by sand rims along the northwest and southeast margins. Surrounding the
bay are rural residential properties, timber tracts, and additional row crops. Land use at the Site is
characterized entirely by agricultural row crops. Herbaceous vegetation and a few shrubby species
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) page 3
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019

grow within the ditches, which are regularly maintained by bush hogging and herbicide
application.
The 1956 NC Geological Survey aerial photograph and 1974 aerial photograph included in the
Hoke and Cumberland Counties Soil Survey show a historic ditch that is no longer present (USDA
1984). The ditch was placed in the middle of the field and ran from the southeast to the northwest
where it connected the primary present-day ditches. The historical ditch appeared to be a secondary
ditch that was not necessary for agricultural production and was therefore filled in during the
1980's. A field investigation was performed using hand tools to locate the historic ditch location
and determine if the subsurface clay layer was intact. Based on the field investigation it appears
the clay layer within the footprint of the historic ditch is intact. It is impossible for RS to determine
the depth of the historic ditch which may have never broken through the Site's restrictive layer.
The ditch could simply have been used to remove surface water. During Site construction,
additional field investigations may be conducted to assure the historic ditch does not undermine
the restoration goals.
1.4 Project Components and Structure
The Site encompasses 16.0 acres of drained hydric soil (Figure 4, Appendix A), which is proposed
for non -riparian wetland restoration. Completed project activities, reporting history, completion
dates, project contacts, and background information are summarized in Tables 1-4.
Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Arabia Bay Restoration Site
Length & Area Summations by Mitigation Category
Restoration Level Non -riparian Wetland (acreage)
Restoration 16.0
Overall Assets Summary
Asset Category Overall Credits
Non -riparian Wetland 16.0
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) page 4
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019
Restoration orMitigation
Wetland
Existing
Restoration
Restoration
Mitigation
Reach ID
Restoration
Type
Acreage
Acreage
Level
Ratio
Credits
Equivalent
Wetland
Non -riparian
--
16.0
Restoration
16.0
1:1
16.0
Restoration
Length & Area Summations by Mitigation Category
Restoration Level Non -riparian Wetland (acreage)
Restoration 16.0
Overall Assets Summary
Asset Category Overall Credits
Non -riparian Wetland 16.0
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) page 4
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019

Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Arabia Bay Restoration Site
Activity or Deliverable
Data Collection
Complete
Completion
or Deliver
Technical Proposal (RFP No. 16-007332)
February 8, 2018
February 8, 2018
Institution Date (NCDMS Contract No. 7529)
--
April 4, 2018
Mitigation Plan
October 2018
February 2019
Construction Plans
--
February 2019
Table 3. Project Contacts Table
Arabia Bay Restoration Site
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) page 5
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019
Restoration Systems
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 211
Full Delivery Provider
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Raymond Holz
919-755-9490
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
218 Snow Avenue
Designer / Monitoring
Raleigh, NC 27603
Grant Lewis
919-215-1693
Sungate Design Group, P.A.
905 Jones Franklin Road
Engineer
Raleigh, NC 27606
Josh Dalton
919-856-2243
Strother Land Surveying
120 East Elwood Avenue
Surveyor
Raeford, NC 28376
Leland D. Strother, PLS, CFS
910-875-8081
Carolina Silvics
114 E King Street
PO Box 1017
Planting Contractor
Edenton, NC 27932
Mary -Margaret McKinney
252-482-8491
Construction Contractor
TBD
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) page 5
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019

Table 4. Project Attribute Table
Arabia Bay Restoration Site
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) page 6
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019
Project Information dd
Project Name
Arabia Bay Restoration Site
Project County
Hoke County, North Carolina
Project Area (acres)
16.1
Project Coordinates (latitude & latitude)
34.95700N, 79.1379°W
Planted Area (acres)
16.1
gowProject
Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province
Piedmont
Project River Basin
Cape Fear
USGS HUC for Project (14 -digit)
03030004150011
NCDWR Sub -basin for Project
03-06-15
Project Drainage Area (acres)
NA
Percentage of Project Drainage Area that is
Impervious
<5%
CGIA Land Use Classification
Cultivated
Wetland Summary Information
Parameters
Wetlands
Wetland acreage
16.0 acres drained
Wetland Type
Non -riparian
Mapped Soil Series
McColl
Drainage Class
Poorly drained
Hydric Soil Status
Hydric
Source of Hydrology
Precipitation, groundwater
Hydrologic Impairment
Ditched and drained
Native Vegetation Community
Bay Forest/Small Depression Pocosin
% Composition of Exotic Invasive Vegetation
0%
Restoration Method
Hydrologic, vegetative
Enhancement Method
NA
Regulatory Considerations
Regulation
Applicable?
Resolved?
Supporting Documentation
Waters of the United States -Section 401
Yes
Yes
Approved JD (App D)
Waters of the United States -Section 404
Yes
Yes
Approved JD (App D)
Endangered Species Act
Yes
Yes
CE Document (App E)
Historic Preservation Act
Yes
Yes
CE Document (App E)
Coastal Zone Management Act
No
--
CE Document (App E)
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
No
--
CE Document (App E)
Essential Fisheries Habitat
No
--
CE Document (App E)
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) page 6
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019

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 row crops. A summary of existing Site
characteristics in favor of proposed wetland activities include the following.
• Wetlands have been cleared of forest vegetation
• Site receives nonpoint source inputs including agricultural chemicals
• Wetland soils have been compacted by agricultural equipment
• Wetland hydrology has been removed by ditching
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 wetland resources that will be ecologically self-
sustaining, requiring minimal long-term management (Long-term Management Plan [Section
10.0]).
The project is not located in a Regional or Local Watershed Planning Area; however, Cape Fear
River Basin Restoration Priorities (CFRBRP) report (NCEEP 2009) goals are addressed by project
objectives as follows:
1. CFRBRP Goal – Reduce and control sediment inputs
Site specific objective – Cessation of row crop production and conversion of a ditched
Carolina Bay to a depressional wetland will remove agricultural sediment inputs leaving
the Site and control sediment within the Site.
2. CFRBRP Goal – Reduce and manage nutrient inputs
Site specific objective – Cessation of row crop production may result in a direct reduction
of 160 pounds of nitrogen and 280 pounds of phosphorus per year (nutrient model [Section
3.2]) from the elimination of agricultural nutrient inputs/fertilizer application at the Site.
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) page 7
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019

Site specific mitigation goals and objectives have been developed through the use of North
Carolina Wetland Assessment Method (NC WAM) and are discussed further in Section 5.0
(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 2017) are described in
Table 5.
Table 5. Web Soil Survev Soils Mapped within the Site
Map Unit
Map Unit Name
Hydric
Description
M�
Symbol
(Classification)
Status
—
Candor sand
This series consists of somewhat excessively-
CaB
(Grossarenic Kandiudults)
Non -hydric
drained soils found along 1-8 percent slopes on
broad flats and rounded side slopes of uplands.
Mc
McColl loam
Hydric
y
This series consists of poorly drained soils found
(Typic Fragiaquults)
in shallow, oval depressions of uplands.
Norfolk loamy sand
This series consists of well -drained soils found
NoA
(Typic Kandiudults)
Non -hydric
along 0-2 percent slopes on broad smooth flats of
uplands.
3.2 Nutrient Model
A preliminary land use nutrient model was developed to estimate nitrogen and phosphorus inputs
from row crops at the Site. Model inputs include Site area, percent land use, and row -crop type.
Using published values of Nitrogen and Phosphorus the model predicts the nutrient input of
fertilizer associated with land uses (NC State 2016). A copy of the model input and output is
presented in Appendix B.
Based on the land use nutrient model, cessation of active row crops at the Site will result in a direct
reduction of 160 pounds of nitrogen and 280 pounds of phosphorus per year.
3.3 Project Site Wetlands
Following guidelines set forth in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual and
subsequent regional supplements, there are currently no jurisdictional areas present within the Site
(Environmental Laboratory 1987). This was verified by United States Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) representative Gary Beecher during a field meeting on October 30, 2018; the signed,
Approved Jurisdictional Determination, is provided in Appendix D.
3.3.1 Hydrological Characterization
Construction activities are expected to restore 16.0 acres of drained non -riparian hydric soils.
Areas of the Site targeted for non -riparian wetlands will receive hydrological inputs from direct
precipitation, upland/stormwater runoff, and to a lesser extent, groundwater migration into
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) page 8
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019

wetlands resulting in surface ponding due to the presence of an impervious soil layer. Hydrological
impairment in drained soils has resulted from lateral draw -down of the water table from an existing
network of agricultural ditches.
A water balance calculation was performed to determine if wetland hydrology will be restored by
removing the ditch outlet and restoring the broken restrictive soil layer in the existing ditches. The
water balance calculation was performed using nearby state operated weather station for
hydrological inputs and outputs as no direct hydrological measurements from the site are available.
The calculation determined a surplus of —32 acre-feet for the site on an annual basis which will
support wetland hydrology success criteria during years of normal precipitation.
3.3.2 Soil Characterization
The system is characterized as a clay -based Carolina bay of the McColl series; however, the term
clay -based is too specific when describing the mechanism whereby these bays develop a perched
water table. Inherent soil factors that contribute to ponding of water in the Carolina bays
characterized by sandy clay loam soil of the McColl series includes the presence of a fragipan, an
iron hardpan, a mixture of organic substances that binds soil particles into a relatively water -tight
layer, and possibly a spodic horizon (NatureServe 2018).
The entire Site was analyzed to verify the depth of the restrictive layer (Figure 5, Appendix A).
This analysis included soil borings, soil horizon identification along ditch margins, and mapping
of historic ditches from aerial photographs. The restrictive layer appears to be intact across the site
and occurs within a depth range of 2 — 32 -inches below the soil surface. The locations of soil
borings and ditch margin analysis are depicted on Figure 4 (Appendix A). Detailed soil boring logs
are included in Appendix B.
Hydrological impairment at the Site results from drainage ditch excavation. The drainage ditch
invert has been excavated below impervious layer and into coarse sand, thereby draining the entire
Site. During large rain events surface water may flow from the ditch; however, the majority of the
groundwater table alterations appear to result from subsurface, groundwater drawdown in coarse
sand below the ditch bottom.
Drained hydric soils were verified by a licensed soil scientist (NC LSS # 1233) in January 2018
and the entire 16.0 -acre Site (Figure 4, Appendix A) is comprised of drained hydric soil of the
McColl series.
3.3.3 Plant Community Characterization
Areas proposed for wetland restoration are currently used for agricultural row crops. Ditches
contain opportunistic herbaceous species with very little vegetative diversity. The entire Site
including ditches is subject to regular maintenance including bush hogging and herbicide
application.
4.0 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
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) page 9
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019

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.
An RFE for this project was difficult to locate as the majority of Carolina bays in the area have
been ditched and drained in support of agricultural and silvicultural practices. Therefore, data from
the NatureServe Explorer (Atlantic Coastal Plain Clay -based Carolina Bay Wetland, Unique ID #
CES203.245, NatureServe 2018), in addition to Schafale and Weakley (1990) and Schafale (2012)
community descriptions for a Cypress Savana were used for development of the planting plan.
These wetland systems are ovoid, shallow, nearly flat-bottomed depressions with dense, diverse
herbaceous layers and a fairly open canopy. Table 6 summarizes the dominant tree and shrub
species found in these systems.
Table 6. Reference Forest Ecosystem
Atlantic Coastal Plain Clay -based Carolina Bay Wetland/Cypress Savana
Swamp titi (Cyrilla racemiflora)
Fetterbush (Lyonia lucida)
Swamp holly (Ilex amelanchier)
Swamp tupelo (Nyssa biflora)
Swamp doghobble (Leucothoe racemosa)
Loblolly pine (Pinus taeda)
Southern spicebush (Lindera melissifolia)
Pond pine (Pinus serotina)
Sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua)
Pond cypress (Taxodium ascendens)
5.0 FUNCTIONAL UPLIFT AND PROJECT GOALS/OBJECTIVES
The project is not located in a Regional or Local Watershed Planning Area; however, Cape Fear
River Basin Restoration Priorities (CFRBRP) report (NCEEP 2009) goals are addressed by project
objectives as follows..
CFRBRP Goal — Reduce and control sediment inputs
Site specific objective — Cessation of row crop production and conversion of a ditched
Carolina Bay to a depressional wetland will remove agricultural sediment inputs leaving
the Site and control sediment within the Site.
2. CFRBRP Goal — Reduce and manage nutrient inputs
Site specific objective — Cessation of row crop production may result in a direct reduction
of 160 pounds of nitrogen and 280 pounds of phosphorus per year (nutrient model [Section
3.2]) from the elimination of agricultural nutrient inputs/fertilizer application at the Site.
Site specific mitigation goals have been developed through the use of North Carolina Wetland
Assessment Method (NC WAM) analyses (NC WFAT 2010). This methodology rates functional
metrics for wetlands as high, medium, or low based on field data collected on forms and transferred
into a rating calculator. 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.
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) page 10
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019

Table 7A summarizes 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.
Table 7A. Arabia Bav NC WAM Summary
NC WAM Sub -function Rating Summary
Arabia Bay
Wetland Type
Pocosin
(1) HYDROLOGY
LOW
(2) Surface Storage & Retention
LOW
(2) Sub -surface Storage and Retention
LOW
(1) WATER QUALITY
LOW
(2) Pollution Change
LOW
(1) HABITAT
LOW
(2) Physical Structure
LOW
(2) Landscape Patch Structure
LOW
(2) Vegetative Composition
LOW
OVERALL
LOW
Due to a lack of wetland hydrology in reestablishment areas, it is inappropriate to conduct an NC
WAM evaluation. However, the NC WAM description of a pocosin, as well as data collected at
the Site were utilized to determine wetland functions to target for uplift. Based on NC WAM data,
all three primary wetland functional metrics (Hydrology, Water Quality, and Habitat), as well as
all six sub -metrics are currently under -performing as exhibited by a LOW metric rating. LOW
performing metrics are to be targeted for functional uplift through mitigation activities, goals and
objectives, as well as, monitoring and success criteria.
Table 7B below presents wetland metrics targeted for functional uplift, in addition to Site specific
project goals and objectives.
Space Purposefully Left Blank
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) page 11
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019

Table 713. Wetland Targeted Functions, Goals, and Objectives
Targeted Functions
Goals
Objectives
(1) HYDROLOGY
(2) Surface Storage &
• Fill agriculture ditches to restore
jurisdictional hydrology
Retention
• Minimize downstream
. Plant native woody vegetation
• Cease row crop production within the
flooding to the
easement
(2) Sub -surface Storage &
maximum extent
• Plow soils (6-8 inches) to reduce surface
possible.
compaction and increase surface
Retention
roughness
• Protect the Site with a perpetual
conservation easement
(1) WATER QUALITY
• Remove agricultural land uses and
• Remove direct nutrient,
agricultural inputs from the Site
(2) Pollution Change
sediment, and pollutant
• Fill the ditch network to restore ground
and surface hydrology within the Site
inputs from the Site.
. Plant woody vegetation
• Restore jurisdictional wetlands
(1) HABITAT
(2) Physical Structure
• Plant woody vegetation to provide
organic matter and shade
(2) Landscape Patch Structure
• Improve wildlife habitat
. Fill ditches to provide groundwater
hydrology and plant woody native
within and adjacent to
vegetation
(2) Vegetation Composition
the Site.
• Protect the Site with a perpetual
conservation easement
• Restore jurisdictional wetlands
6.0 SITE DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION CONSTRAINTS
The presence of conditions or characteristics that have the potential to hinder restoration activities
on the Site was evaluated. The evaluation focused primarily on the presence of hazardous
materials, utilities and restrictive easements, rare/threatened/endangered species or critical
habitats, and the potential for hydrologic trespass. Existing information regarding Site constraints
was acquired and reviewed. In addition, any Site conditions that have the potential to restrict the
restoration design and implementation were documented during the field investigation.
No known Site constraints, that may hinder proposed mitigation activities, were identified during
field surveys. Potential constraints reviewed include the following.
6.1 Threatened & Endangered Species
Six federally protected species are listed as occurring in Hoke County (USFWS 2018); the
following table summarizes potential habitat and preliminary biological conclusions for each.
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) page 12
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019

Table 8. Threatened and Endangered Species
Species
Habitat
Potential
Biological
Federal Status
Habitat at Site
Conclusion
American alligator
(Alligator mississippiensis)
Found in rivers, streams, canals, lakes,
No
Not Required
Threatened due to Similarity
swamps, and coastal marshes.
of Appearance
Red -cockaded woodpecker
Open stands of pine containing trees 60 years
(Picoides borealis)
or older for nesting and roosting. Cavity
No
No Effect
Endangered
excavation occurs in living pine trees.
Saint Francis' Satyr
Occurs only in the sandhills of North
(Neonympha mitchellii)
Carolina in Hoke and Cumberland Counties.
No
No Effect
Endangered
Occurs in sandy (sandy peat, sandy loam),
acidic, seasonally moist to dry soils.
American chaffseed
Generally found in habitats described as
(Schwalbea americana)
open, moist pine flatwoods, fire -maintained
No
No Effect
Endangered
savannas, ecotonal areas between peaty
wetlands and xeric sandy soils, and other
open grass -sedge systems.
Michaux's sumac
Occurs in sandy or rocky open woods in
(Rhus michauxii)
association with basic soils
No
No Effect
Endangered
6.2 Cultural Resources
The term "cultural resources" refers to prehistoric or historic archaeological sites, structures, or
artifact deposits over 50 years old. "Significant" cultural resources are those that are eligible or
potentially eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. Evaluations of site
significance are made with reference to the eligibility criteria of the National Register (36 CFR
60) and in consultation with the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO).
Field visits were conducted at the Site in early 2018 to ascertain the presence of structures or other
features that may be eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places. No structures
were identified within proposed easement boundaries; however, coordination with SHPO will
occur prior to construction activities to determine if any significant cultural resources are present.
6.3 North Carolina Natural Heritage Elements
A query of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database indicates there are
no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, or conservation/managed
areas within the proposed project boundary. Within a one -mile radius of the project boundary
NCNHP lists seven element occurrences including three amphibians, a butterfly, two vascular
plants, and a natural community. NCNHP correspondence is included in Appendix C.
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) page 13
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019

The nearest North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS) project is Hillcrest Bay,
located approximately three miles northwest of the Site.
6.4 Utilities
No utilities are located on the Site.
6.5 Air Transport Facilities
No known air transport facilities are located within 5 miles of the Site.
7.0 DESIGN APPROACH AND MITIGATION WORK PLAN
7.1 Wetland Restoration
Portions of the Site underlain by hydric soils have been impacted by drainage ditch excavation,
vegetative clearing, agriculture plowing, herbicide application, and other land disturbances
associated with land use management. Precipitation driven wetlands are dependent on retaining all
direct precipitation and benefit from secondary inputs including overland flow and subsurface
groundwater from within the surrounding watershed. The site naturally retains hydrology due to
its convex shape, so by filling existing ditches and elevating the sole drainage outlet the site will
retain all hydrological inputs. Also, the restrictive soil layer in the existing ditches will be restored
in order to eliminate potential lateral drainage within the existing ditches which have penetrated
the restrictive soil layer. Additionally, the upper 6 — 8 inches of the soil surface will be plowed to
reduce compaction of the soil surface and increase soil surface roughness. Plowing will occur
when the soil moisture is less than 30 percent of field capacity at the maximum depth of tillage.
Wetland restoration will focus on the restoration of vegetative communities, filling drainage
ditches, and reestablishing a perched water table (Figure 6, Appendix A).
7.2 Ditch Plugging
In order to retain hydrological inputs the existing ditches will be plugged and backfilled with
impervious material. Impervious material will consist of clay borrow located from the Site within
the limits of disturbance. The clay borrow will be collected from areas adjacent to the existing
ditches where it was previously side cast during ditch excavation. Clay borrow will also be
collected from constructed habitat areas (small depressions, <6 inches deep) throughout the project
area, and excess clay borrow from relocating the driveway.
The ditch plugs will be placed in three locations including the ditch outlet and in the two 90 -degree
bends of the ditch alignment. Existing ditch sections between the plugs will be backfilled with
impervious material as well.
As discussed in Section 1.3 a historic ditch located in the center of the bay was determined, through
a field investigation, to still have the restrictive layer intact. No additional plugging or backfilling
of the historic ditch is anticipated.
7.3 Driveway Relocation & Terracell Structure
In support of wetland restoration activates the existing driveway will be relocated outside of the
easement/historic bay. To prevent flooding of the driveway during large rainfall events a Terracell
structure will be constructed in the current ditch outfall location. The Terracell will be situated
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) page 14
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019

approximately 2.5 feet above the elevation of the bay floor, where it will be keyed in below the
surface of the road. The Terracell will only be accessed by flow during a significant and prolonged
storm. The existing culvert will be removed and subsequently plugged with impervious material.
A road will be built to a base elevation of 221.5 feet (elevation not tied to grid). The Terracell
structure will extend approximately 50 feet down gradient (northwest) from the road crossing with
a final elevation grade matching the existing ditch at 215.01 feet (Figure 7, Appendix A).
7.4 Natural Plant Community Restoration
RFE data from the NatureServe Explorer (Atlantic Coastal Plain Clay -based Carolina Bay
Wetland, Unique ID # CES203.245, NatureServe 2018), in addition to Schafale and Weakley
(1990) and Schafale (2012) community descriptions for a Cypress Savana were used to develop
the primary plant community restoration.
Bare -root seedlings will be planted throughout the Site at a density of 680 stems per acre on 8 -foot
centers. Table 9 depicts the total number of stems and species distribution to be planted (Figure 8,
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.
Table 9. Planting Plan
Atlantic Coastal Plain Clay -based Carolina Bay Wetland/Cypress Savana
Area (acres)
16.0
Species
# Planned
% of total
Swamp titi (Cyrilla racemiflora)
1000
10
Swamp holly (Ilex amelanchier)
1000
10
Swamp doghobble (Leucothoe racemosa)
1000
10
Southern spicebush (Lindera melissifolia)
1000
10
Fetterbush (Lyonia lucida)
1000
10
Swamp tupelo (Nyssa Mora)
1600
15
Sweetbay magnolia (Magnolia virginiana)
1000
10
Pond pine (Pinus serotina)
1000
10
Pond cypress (Taxodium ascendens)
1600
15
TOTAL
10,000
100
7.4.1 Nuisance Species Management
No nuisance species controls are proposed at this time. Inspections for feral hogs 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 amend any negative
impacts regarding vegetation development and/or water management on an as -needed basis.
8.0 MONITORING AND SUCCESS CRITERIA
Monitoring will be conducted by Axiom Environmental, Inc based on the schedule in Table 10. A
summary of monitoring is outlined in Table 11 (Figure 9, Appendix A). Annual monitoring reports
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) page 15
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019

will be submitted to the NCDMS by Restoration Systems no later than December 1St of each
monitoring year data is collected.
Table 10. Monitoring Schedule
Resource Year 1
Year 2
Year 3 Year 4
Year 5 Year 6 Year 7
Wetlands
Vegetation
Visual Assessment
Report Submittal
Space Purposefully Left Blank
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) page 16
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019

s
U
b4U �•�
°
.U.i
2 Qi m
.U.i
n �;
U
�•�� o
U
onNC3 V
p.
A
�ofib-o
A
ID
O L y O
DO
uo
O
C/1
O
rA
rA
a
O
�
� b
N '� �
M
N
ami
ami
ani
C�
ami
cd o
ci
Q
� a
N
O U
N
cd
O
C
b4PC
N
N
d
O
d
7r
to 7y
on <r
°
>�ti°o
bo
a
b
on
7Oi
N
U

8.1 Success Criteria
Monitoring and success criteria for stream restoration should relate to project goals and objectives
identified from NC WAM 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 success
criteria. The following summarizes Site success criteria.
Table 12. Success Criteria
Wetland Hydrology
JA
• 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 condition based on the Wilmington District Stream and Wetland
Compensatory Mitigation Update (USACE 2016), Table 1, for a Typic Paleaquult (Rains). As the Site is
primarily a rainwater driven system, the first two monitoring years will require soil surface saturation for 8
percent of the growing season, while groundwater tables equilibrate.
Vegetation
• 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 5; 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 in each plot.
• 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. Volunteer
Loblolly pine which is not included on the planting list is a desirable species for the restoration of the vegetative
community and will count towards vegetative success.
• Any single species can only account for 50% of the required stems within any vegetation plot.
o Shallow freshwater marsh areas are a normal component of Carolina bays. Areas of freshwater marsh
are expected to be comprised of herbaceous emergent vegetation and not forested woody vegetation.
Shallow freshwater marsh is expected encompass approximately 20% of the bay area and should not
be held to the above vegetative success criteria.
8.2 Contingency
In the event that success criteria are not fulfilled, a mechanism for contingency will be
implemented.
8.2.1 Wetland Contingency
Hydrological contingency will require consultation with hydrologists and regulatory agencies if
wetland hydrology enhancement is not achieved. Recommendations for contingency to establish
wetland hydrology will be implemented and monitored until Hydrology Success Criteria are
achieved.
8.2.2 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.
8.3 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 (DMS Project No. 100061) page 18
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019

Table 13. Compatibility of Performance Criteria to Project Goals and Objectives
Goals
Objectives Success Criteria
(1) HYDROLOGY
• Fill agriculture ditches to restore
. Row crop production ceased within the
jurisdictional hydrology
easement
• Plant native woody vegetation
. Monitoring wells will be successful if the
• Minimize downstream
• Cease row crop production within
water table is within 12 inches of the soil
flooding to the
the easement
surface for 10% of the growing season
maximum extent
• Plow soils to reduce surface
. Vegetation plots will be successful if the
possible.
compaction and increase surface
plant density is 210 stems per acre with
roughness (6-8 inches)
an average plant height of 10 feet at 7
• Protect the Site with a perpetual
years following planting
conservation easement
• Conservation Easement recorded
(1) WATER QUALITY
• Row crop production ceased within the
• Remove agricultural land uses
easement
and agricultural inputs from the
. Monitoring wells will be successful if the
• Remove direct nutrient,
Site
water table is within 12 inches of the soil
sediment, and pollutant
• Fill the ditch network to restore
surface for 10% of the growing season
ground and surface hydrology
. Vegetation plots will be successful if the
inputs from the Site.
within the Site
• Plant woody vegetation
plant density is 210 stems per acre with
• Restore jurisdictional wetlands
an average plant height of 10 feet at 7
years following planting
(1) HABITAT
• Plant woody vegetation to
• Monitoring wells will be successful if the
provide organic matter and shade
water table is within 12 inches of the soil
• Improve wildlife habitat
• Fill ditches to provide
surface for 10% of the growing season
groundwater hydrology and plant
• Vegetation plots will be successful if the
within and adjacent to
native woody vegetation
plant density is 210 stems per acre with
the Site.
• Protect the Site with a perpetual
an average plant height of 10 feet at 7
conservation easement
years following planting
• Restore jurisdictional wetlands
• Conservation Easement recorded
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 -
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) page 19
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019

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.
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.
Griffith, G.E., J.M. Omemik, 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.
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.
NatureServe. 2018. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application].
Version 7.1. Ecological System Comprehensive Report, Atlantic Coastal Plain Clay -Based
Carolina Bay Wetland, Unique Identifier CES203.245. Available:
http://explorer.natureserve.org/servlet/NatureServe?sourceTeMplate=tabular_report.wmt
&loadTemplate=systems_ RptComprehensive.wmt&selectedReport=RptComprehensive.
wmt&summaryView=tabular_report.wmt&e1Key=723240&Easing=home&save=true&st
artlndex=l &nextStartlndex= l &reset=false&offPageSelectedElKey=723240&offPageSel
ectedElType=systems&offPageYesNo=true&post processes=&radiobutton=radiobutton
&selectedlndexes=723240&selectedlndexes=683613&selectedlndexes=685765 [August
3, 2018]. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://explorer.natureserve.org.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2005. Cape Fear River Basinwide Water
Quality Plan. Available: https:// https:Hdeq.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). 2013. River Basin Classification
Schedule -Cape Fear River Basin (online). Available:
https:Hfiles.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Planning/CSU/Surface%2OWater/River%20
Basin%20Water%2OQuality%20CIassifications%20as%20of%o2ODec%209%202013/Cap
eFear_Hydro_order.pdf [May 8, 2018]. North Carolina Department of Environmental
Quality, Raleigh.
North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). 2018. Final 2016 Category 5
Assessments -303(d) List. Available:
https:Hfiles.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Planning/TMDL/303d/2016/2016 NC_Cate
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) page 20
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019

gory 5_303d list.pdf [May 18, 2018]. North Carolina Department of Environmental
Quality, Raleigh, North Carolina.
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-
c72dfcb5 5012&group1d=60329
North Carolina State University (NC State 2016). NC State University and A&T State University
Cooperative Extension Resources. 2016 North Carolina Agricultural Chemicals Manual.
Available: http://content.ces.ncsu.edu/north-carolina-agricultural-chemicals-manual
North Carolina Wetland Functional Assessment Team. (NC WFAT 2010). N.C. Wetland
Assessment Method (NC WAM) User Manual. Version 4.1.
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, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources. Raleigh, North Carolina.
Schafale, M.P. 2012. Guide to the Natural Communities of North Carolina: Fourth Approximation.
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources. Raleigh, North Carolina.
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 Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2016. Wilmington District Stream and Wetland
Compensatory Mitigation Update.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1984. Soil Survey of Cumberland and Hoke
Counties, North Carolina. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation
Service.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2017. Web Soil Survey (online). Available:
https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.goy/A/App/HomePage.htm [May 8, 2018]. United States
Department of Agriculture.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2018. Endangered Species, Threatened
Species, Federal Species of Concern, and Candidate Species, Hoke County, North Carolina
(online). Available: https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/hoke.html [May 9,
2018].
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) page 21
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019

APPENDIX A
FIGURES
Figure 1. Site Location
Figure 2. Hydrologic Unit Map
Figure 3. Topography
Figure 4. Historical Aerial Photograph (1956)
Figure 5. Existing Conditions and Soils
Figure 6. Impervious Layer Depth Analysis
Figure 7. Proposed Conditions
Figure 8. Outfall Structure
Figure 9. Planting Plan
Figure 10. Monitoring Plan
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) Appendices
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019

rn o co
H U Z Y o 0 0
� Q Q rA
M Z Z Z C.14
QUO v Q
o m H F-
° O r
W U J o
?: T Y W z IL
a U F F- U
N N O � =
a_ ❑ ❑ U) d
Ilk -r
,I 1 •� Yc....Y. -, xA.
I
. r CY E
W.
E C x
t 11 0
�.r` �a w 0 X Off.
- f r fP t r, m a o
E2 0c
J Q' R
z�• . ��: .}] r �'• �-� _ I r r ' ' � ' i T` �i ld � � � tis U
y 41;1 j" ':' �_� � aI � �•_ . • . . •,y �'— � J � E 'a
Q- CL m
m a
+ = lJ t f r 0
p • I )
0
CL U, Ym R 4)
U • r
V, a�
• I b I J O E a LE ° ac00i�
' N � �J ��a � �1 •Ij A� O ��wN o d�
44 d 0 d> s `
'_`" [p4 ; . Ir 1 r r1 b,,_ If- c •� �� E= mwM R�
- — ■I� 1�� 'j h t 77D 0) 2 w M N - Qo p
- r I ', o c c t y
y Pp r r w R mLnLa�1-w 0 R =
}a> E V V 'a V 7E -0 c
I1 �• - i l!Ps �_�� , in p o Z z c z M u o
f 1 s p00 c.. = c Q 0
p W M , : .+ .+ C.N O
a+ :t t E t t v r
yco _j
mmmcyccc
L H H H H Q H H H H fn
r LA ❑
1
1#
� I
41 1
� I
w
4f

_ H U _) Y 0')0 r9
0 0 0
QpN Z Cha 04 Z � - W
m Z Z OQ a M
L QJ0 a o� N
o
F- F- U a~ C7
�WQ ° oZ Z
LL
T 0 } L
' Q H °
O C fD bi
U O
C F 0 cn d
- • fA
^ � � f" ^fiYx�F � •i
0 y i �byA� rc�F Co -0 p
rlrc (`7
�'i o M 7
— S� m O
o C$ II +C In
O O
Co O ca
.r, f LU O - O
SQ' � •" �, i, � i, J
pip = 70
a)
CD
Co L U) N
Z)
I ` ' AL�c�kl:iix' '�� J
. �, 0 %�I
DOEE
- r-~zgS
Of
Y� = r� x:
le
LO
u. t�4 �qu
I
I�
ti aY
+ rMja Ri 3 _
T.
r;
r#<
ZI
14
a
_ c
E �_
Cf-coCa)OZ CoL
Cco
co 0
U
° In
C CO O O
•ir 1d' N U L O
11 d�
71
v
r1.,
ll
s � Fz
s. -
ly

►�������������������������������ry►��044111111111111 R����-X04-04 - 00111���������������
►♦eee♦♦e♦♦♦e♦e♦♦eeei♦♦e♦♦eee♦♦ee♦♦ eeee♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦eeee•
EMISSIONS
►♦♦�e�.♦♦♦♦♦eoe♦♦♦♦♦♦e♦♦♦♦e♦♦♦♦♦♦♦eoe♦♦♦eoe�s♦♦♦♦♦e♦♦♦♦♦♦♦�♦♦e♦♦♦♦♦♦♦e♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ eeee♦♦e♦♦ h� n
.�..♦e♦e♦♦eoeoos♦e♦e♦e♦♦♦e♦e♦e♦♦oe♦♦e♦♦o♦o♦e�►♦♦e♦e♦o♦♦�ieeeeeeee♦oeeeeee♦♦eeeeee♦oeeeeooe ♦ooeoeeo ,�
►.♦♦♦♦o♦♦♦♦eee♦♦a♦oo♦♦ee'i♦e0i♦eee♦oeeeeeeeee♦o eeo
eeoeeeeeeeA♦Aeeoe♦e♦AeeeA♦e♦eeoeoeeeeeA♦eeee�e��♦Areoeoeeeoeeeeeeeoeeeeeeeoeeeeeeeoeeeeeee ♦♦♦o♦♦♦♦ �� �
.♦♦♦eee♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦a♦♦e♦e♦eee♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦e♦♦♦♦♦♦♦A��,,♦♦♦♦e♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦e♦ eeee♦♦e♦ ' �' �.
�♦ee♦eee♦eee♦e♦♦♦e♦♦ee♦o'li►ee♦♦♦e♦e♦♦eee♦e♦e♦e ♦♦♦o
♦o♦e♦e♦e♦♦♦eee♦e♦♦♦eeo♦o♦o♦e♦e♦e♦o♦e♦e♦o♦♦e♦�i♦oo. �e♦e♦a♦♦♦e♦e♦♦♦e♦e♦e♦♦♦e♦e♦♦♦eeeeee♦ ooee♦♦♦e♦ ''';
♦e♦♦♦e♦e♦♦♦♦♦o♦e♦♦♦eeee♦o♦♦o♦e♦o♦♦♦e♦e♦♦♦♦►♦♦♦o♦o�>.`y�♦♦o♦o♦e♦e♦e♦e♦e♦e♦e♦e♦♦♦e♦♦♦♦♦♦♦e ♦o♦♦♦ee♦
e♦e♦eeo♦♦♦o♦eee♦♦e♦♦e ♦e♦ee.a... e♦eee♦♦e♦♦e♦♦♦♦
�ee♦♦ee♦♦♦e♦♦e♦♦♦e♦♦♦�iOwn"WA . e♦eeeeeeeee♦eee eeeo
♦e♦e♦♦♦♦♦e♦e♦♦♦♦oo♦e♦e♦e♦eee♦♦♦e♦e♦o♦o♦♦e♦♦♦♦♦eee♦e♦♦♦a♦di♦♦e♦e♦e♦♦♦e♦e♦♦♦e♦e♦♦♦♦♦e♦♦♦ ♦eee♦♦♦♦ �►
♦♦♦e♦e♦e♦♦ooee♦e♦eeo♦e♦♦♦♦♦♦eee♦♦oeeo�♦♦e♦e♦e♦♦♦e♦e♦e♦a♦♦♦�i♦♦e♦♦♦e♦e♦e♦e♦e♦e♦♦♦e♦♦♦e eeo♦♦e♦e � ;?•'
♦e♦♦♦e♦e♦♦e♦e♦♦e♦♦e♦e♦e♦♦♦e♦eee,oeo♦e♦♦♦o♦e♦e♦♦♦♦♦o♦o♦o♦♦♦e♦.�`♦e♦e♦e♦e♦e♦e♦e♦♦♦e♦e♦e♦♦ ♦♦♦o♦eoe '� i`
♦eee♦♦♦e♦eeo♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦o♦e♦♦♦♦,eeee♦eeo♦e♦e♦o♦o♦eee♦o♦e♦o♦♦♦e♦e♦oeye♦e♦o♦e♦e♦e♦e♦e♦e♦♦♦e ♦eee♦♦♦� ,c .
♦e♦ooee♦♦♦♦e♦♦ ♦e♦♦♦e♦e♦ooee♦oe♦♦♦♦e♦e♦♦♦e♦♦♦e♦o♦♦♦o♦♦♦♦♦e♦e♦♦eye♦e♦e♦♦♦e♦e♦e♦♦♦e♦ ♦♦eeee♦
►�♦eeo♦eMI 'IV, lawl
♦oeo♦o♦o♦e♦e♦o♦o♦o♦e♦e�♦e♦e♦eeoeo♦e♦e♦e♦e♦o♦e♦o♦e♦o♦o♦e♦e♦e♦eee ♦o♦o♦e♦e♦e♦o♦e♦ o♦e♦oeo♦ „�w h
oieieioi♦eeieeoi♦ieiei♦ieeiei♦ioiei♦i♦ieioi♦i♦ieiei♦ieieieNO
eeieieieieieieioi�ieiei♦ie ♦♦♦♦ems' .. r
♦e♦eeeoeo♦♦ee♦♦♦e♦ee♦♦eee♦♦♦ee♦e♦♦ee♦♦♦e eeo ♦e♦-'
♦♦♦i♦i♦i♦i♦♦oioi♦i♦i♦i♦iei♦i♦eoi♦i♦i♦ioi♦i♦ioi♦i♦i♦ioi♦i♦i♦ioi♦i♦ioi♦i♦i♦ioi♦i`.�' ♦i♦i♦i
♦i♦ioi♦i♦i♦ion►s♦000000000000000e0000000e0000000e000000000000♦000000000000000e000000�d ,0000! -AM- -
►�Ow, �♦eeo♦ow,
�e�♦♦�e�e�♦♦�e�e�♦♦�e�e�♦�e�o�♦�e�♦�e�e�e�♦�e�e�e�e�e�♦�♦�e� %!oo : �= t.
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦oo♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦�;
eoe oe♦♦♦o♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦eeeoe♦o0♦♦♦e♦♦♦♦♦e ♦A �` ��.
♦ee�►♦♦♦♦♦e♦eee♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦e♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦oe
V♦eeo♦♦eee♦e♦♦eeee♦o♦♦ooeeeoeeee♦♦♦♦eeee♦♦eeee♦♦eeeoe♦eeeoe♦eeeeeoeeeeeeeoe♦eeeo ♦ e'I r �•f �`
►e1►♦♦♦♦♦eee♦♦♦♦eee♦♦♦♦eeeo♦♦♦♦e♦e♦♦♦♦♦eeeo♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦eee♦♦♦♦eeeo♦eeeoe♦e♦e♦♦eeee ♦e< 17�,�
"Al al
'IJ Mo♦o♦e♦eeo♦e♦eeo♦e♦e♦eeo♦e♦eeoeo♦e♦eeo♦e♦e♦eeo♦e♦oeeeoee♦o♦eeeoe♦oeoeee oeo. -. �► e
♦♦o•'♦oeeooeoeoeoe000eoeoeooeeee000eeeoe000eoeoe00000eoe000eee000eoeoeoo o!*e<i►' ' qty;'
ee�v►♦♦♦e♦♦ee♦♦♦eeee♦♦♦ee♦♦eeeee♦♦eee et r,
►e♦♦♦♦♦�� ��Neeeooee♦♦♦ooee♦♦♦♦ooee♦♦eeeoe♦♦♦ooee♦♦♦♦eeee♦♦♦ooee♦♦♦♦eee♦e ♦ear I' ; •� I�
►e♦♦ooee♦vd 'ee♦♦♦♦eee NINeee♦♦♦eeeo♦♦♦o♦e♦♦♦♦♦eee♦♦eeeeee♦♦e♦♦o♦eee ee♦4.
eee♦oto`♦♦eee♦e♦♦oo♦eee♦♦♦♦♦♦eeeo♦♦ oeo
►eo♦oed'oee♦eeeoe♦♦♦eee♦eee♦eee♦eee o<
►�NVOCIIMPOW-♦�O�♦Ooh♦♦♦`e�e�♦♦�e�e�♦♦�e�♦�♦�e�e�♦�♦�♦�e�♦�o♦oe!e�o!
►►eAAee♦eee♦eA14 eeAeee♦ee♦♦eAeeeeA♦e
►ooe♦♦♦ee♦
Qeee♦eee♦ee♦e♦♦eeee♦eeeAe�e♦e♦e♦AA��e♦te�♦♦eAd♦♦o♦♦e♦eeeo♦e♦oeoAeoee♦ee♦AA♦♦e
►♦e♦♦eeee♦♦eeeeieea,♦o♦♦♦♦♦♦e♦Ae♦ee♦♦'t♦eee♦eeeeeAdeo♦♦♦eoeeeeAe♦e�♦eee♦♦eeA1�♦i♦e♦�1'♦♦♦♦eeee'♦♦e�eee♦e♦ee♦eeAOe�♦♦ee♦
♦♦eeeAAee♦iee♦e�♦e♦A♦♦♦eeeee♦♦�♦eeee♦♦♦eeoAeeee♦ee�e♦ee1eoee i♦♦♦�eeee♦ee�♦♦ii♦ee►ON,O♦o♦eeee�e♦eeeAe♦e�e♦eejeeeiReee♦♦eo♦et-ee♦ei�y
e♦♦Aee♦♦eetiee♦seeeeeee�Ieeei♦e��eee' e'
e} �♦eee ♦C'�E �.
a .;�,• �
0414444e4e1eeeee
eee♦�♦1Ie♦0*♦dj
►e♦♦e♦♦o♦♦
ee
e*''•`,k•-�
.;�
�
►o♦eee♦♦o♦eoe♦♦o♦♦♦♦`'a �e eee
►♦♦e♦♦e♦♦♦♦♦e♦eee♦e♦♦♦eeee♦♦♦eee♦♦eeeo♦♦♦` � eeeoCel e � �' - `
►Ae♦jee♦♦♦j♦jee♦j♦jeeeje♦Aeeee♦♦jee♦j♦j♦jA '�dA<tj #, � _ ` ��.
►♦eeee♦A♦eee♦e♦♦♦eeeeA♦♦♦eee♦♦eeeeee♦eee ♦��!�v�` a -'�
♦e0♦eeeoe♦eeeeee♦♦ ♦ r _ _
►♦eeee♦eee♦♦♦♦eee♦ ee- • , _ •'
♦eeee♦eee♦♦eeeeee ee- - t• •'"`• - • . _ �'
►♦eeeeee♦♦e♦♦o♦♦o ♦♦��' .• i x
eeee♦oeo♦o♦♦♦♦♦e
♦eeeeee♦♦o♦eee oe.
►♦eeee♦eeeeeeeo♦e♦ee♦Aee♦A♦e-
►AeeeeeeeeeeeA♦Aee♦♦eee♦A ♦eeee♦eee♦ ��rq w r
PAI, 10
e�e�A�e�eeAeeA♦A♦A�A�e�e�A�� 7�i •� • i+� w
►e♦eeA♦Aee Ae♦e�A�A�e`��t�ee♦fit.. - �. k '�`?' - d•
►♦♦eee♦eee.,♦e i!
♦♦eee♦eee, ♦ 4 �=
►eeeeeeeee♦eeA♦Ae`' _- y +'� �';�'',.,�M -ate_ • �� ' '•
►eee♦eeee • r �.. '- :i ....
�e����•=•=ee ei ' I� r' 'FR S :F = 411
IK
JAL
�+ _ . {tai fir.. • , -1_*i� �:- J4 ,
-! cs
_ O
- '� • .ice � � I� p N
•+ 'iiw'- • - N
cu
_0
t a) U)O O C)
cu J,W `p Om
co 2 p w O
+�
.in = U
m m
NV w
_ -,
. J

O') O Cc)
U = Yo � o
Z Z F -N0 :3 CL Z ao
QQOLU CO
W ��� Q 0'
MF -0 U
W WLU Z RQ
o (�
CdC } Q Z LL
N Q G O C Q 3 N N
fSS biU
W 0 M d
� I
N
Tj
S ,
O'
T
O
O
"IL
tk
U
N
L
U
C
C
�
�
O
Cl)
J
U
(B
T
0
0
�
T
N
� O
m
E
O O
� U
U
O
O
WEU
o>
m a,
ca c
o
cts
W
QcmC
°O
(n N
_
0)
J0
•
t
O

0
z
Li
N
>1C6
w
co
LU
0 0
C/)
(3
ami
0
O
L
J
IL
Ci
o
-
W
U O
UU
C6
dj c)
.;
�U
w
w
CIO
E
L
O
Q
00
(_
Q
z
Z
O
r�/1
v,
z
N
o
°I
�
Z
Q
U
m
O
U)
o
a`
/
/
/
w
w
F-
EL0
I
¢z
xw
a_w
w
X F
I
j p
~
W Q
x
w
a O
D 2
I
I
x�
��
a F2
J
i
< w
I
z 3 V
m
Q
x
I
F
I
w wN
w
~
x
I
w �a
a ox
I
YY
x
I
o_ w<
x
N m3
Q
O
/
x F w
C� Jm
O ww
C
o
J
J J
3�
O
F-
z w J Z
LU
00
/
/
U UN
w w
('J W Q
Q U
m F
X
/
/
F y F
Z J
w0
x
JO
a
w - N
¢
U F dK
F F
/
J
J 0 x
�a
w w °
UQU
z U
W
�j
aD>-
/
/
w
U xa
xF
QO
� J Fx
/
wx
Fa
xw
HF
w (qLL F
a
/
O
x
0�
�O
zZ
v' K w Z
x LLN
o�
O w m0
z U
x Q�Q O
US
x
8Q Z¢
x
U 9 w
oil �F-
°z y o m
zo O
w o
w LL
O
z y z U Z
s
T /
/
x m x 00:
I
T
wg
U J x a
3 F
w
q0o0z
I
�xaiy°z
~ /
F
oz umo
I
I
"
L)0 tq O w J
w m Q F(Uq
U
LL
x O W Q O
I
W IL
U Z LL U 0
UUw00
LL
F �a)tV w
I
W
DZ I
Wo g I
F �(nN Q
F
w� I
Fw I
3w
I
�I
I
I
C
O
,
— (D
L
Ca
N
co
N
U��
(a
cow
O (n
�o�0
L
�,
X L O
O
O
3:0"O
O Ems:
O O L)
LP.� O >
O c
N X—
O N
U N
=_ N
�oU)U
�.Q"(D
LO
m
co
>` mC4
I— O
a�
Y .0
O
�_(H
(n
o �
_m
Y o o
sF
o
m
o
� ca.
o
—
o"�
Qm�
-
O L
•L
r
m O
O
M
O '0
Q L O
O
U —
>
u)Q fA
_
>
U L A
U
U 0 0
Q >�
c0
L
N O_
O
M N
(D
U U O
me
C
CL U)

rn O Qc)
C) o o
QQ Z z (7 Y N 00
mZ0 Z z — W
Z Q
L: o0HC97 U ZJ o V♦
a W H m J a Z
� 3: o d �; LL
Q Q 0 3
O _ (6 U O
CL a_ 0 U) d
'w-
w o 0 0 0 0Ln o o c
o
0
.t
r
Jo
y�
CL. -
V +�•' 00 00 00 00 D0 N 00 00 N 000 r
C 00 00 DD DD 00 M 00 00 M pp._{•
O O O O O
V.
s
NoAm
lk
• O
m

ti
MI
�-�4
.- rR r}
.-• - .
RL
' rL
a p Z ZZ
a')
Z
O
Qc)
m Z 2 >
Q
W
O
o
aJQLU L a
mHC9N U
of
Ur
M a)
0)
N
Q121C
O =
C
E
O
a-
r V
U
d
o �
ti
MI
�-�4
.- rR r}
.-• - .
RL
' rL
O
co
M a)
0)
r
r V
o �
LO
LU
U0
C�
m ami ami
O O
Q Q
(6 O O
r
Q EL 0-
0) a)
tm
m
❑ O
o

Appendix B
Existing Wetland Data
NC WAM Forms
Soil Boring Log
Nutrient Model Output
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) Appendices
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual
Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Arabia Bay
Date
1/31/18
Wetland Type Pocosin
Assessor Name/Organization
Jernigan/Axiom
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
YES
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
YES
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)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Rating Summary
Function Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrologi Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Particulate Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Physical Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Pollution Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
LOW
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Vegetation Composition
Condition
LOW
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrologi Condition
LOW
Water Quality Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Habitat Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
SOIL BORING LOG
Project/Site: Arabia Bay Wetland Mitigation Site
County, State: Hoke, NC
Sampling Point/
Coordinates: Hydric Soil/ 34.957125, -79.137307
Investigator: Lewis
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
Notes: Location of soil profile
is depicted on Figure 4.
Matrix
Depth (inches) Color %
Mottlin€
Color %
Texture
0-9 10YR 4/1 98
10YR 5/6 2
clay
9-14 10YR 6/2 60
10YR 5/6 40
clay
14+ 10YR 6/2 40
10YR 5/6 60
clay
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number: 1233
Signature: fit) Aaa
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis

AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
SOIL BORING LOG
Project/Site: Arabia Bay Wetland Mitigation Site
County, State: Hoke, NC
Sampling Point/
Coordinates: Hydric Soil/ 34.957807, -79.138144
Investigator: Lewis
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
Notes: Location of soil profile
is depicted on Figure 4.
Depth (inches)
Matrix
Mottlin€
Texture
Color % Color %
0-3
10YR 4/2
100
sandy clay loam
3-8
10YR 4/2
95
10YR 5/6
5
sandy clay loam
8-14
10YR 4/2
90
10YR 5/6
10
sandy clay loam
14+
10YR 4/2
75
10YR 5/6
7.5YR 6/2
15
10
sandy clay loam
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number: 1233
Signature: fit) Aaa
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis

5 O O O
x 0 0 0 0 0 0 H 1p O N 00 f%)
N N N
d
F0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 to
Z ti N
O O O to w O m
OV N In V V
C �
CL
flj M V m N
- m .-I D fn o O
� N ti ti ti ti�
Z
E
z
_ y u
fu fc a o
m p = w
u .n
CL
N \
U m O O m m
N N N
a �
0 0 0 0 0 0
N N fn n
Z �
CL
1
Q
a
�
a
m
z
z
o-
w
o
z
�
U
c
�o
O
4
CL
K
5 O O O
x 0 0 0 0 0 0 H 1p O N 00 f%)
N N N
d
F0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 to
Z ti N
O O O to w O m
OV N In V V
C �
CL
flj M V m N
- m .-I D fn o O
� N ti ti ti ti�
Z
E
z
_ y u
fu fc a o
m p = w
u .n
CL
N \
U m O O m m
N N N
a �
0 0 0 0 0 0
N N fn n
Z �
I
f26
r+ b\0 V M lfl
N
E O O O
u �
c
u
I
2to
N M O
N N N M
u Z
C
uo
0
C
K
fu
0
z
C
G/
E
OJ
th
10
C
I
3
v
E0
C
N
C
N
Y
3
Z
m
0
H
W
IR N
Z a
Q
CL
fn
fn
U
3
I
f26
r+ b\0 V M lfl
N
E O O O
u �
c
u
I
2to
N M O
N N N M
u Z
C
uo
0
C
K
fu
0
z
C
G/
E
OJ
th
10
C
I
3
v
E0
C
N
C
N
Y
3
Z
m
0
H
W
IR N
Z a

Appendix C
NHP Report
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) Appendices
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019

North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
Natural Heritage Program
Govemor Roy Cooper
February 2, 2018
Phillip Perkinson
Axiom Environmental Inc.
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27612
RE: Arabia Bay; 17-001.06
Dear Phillip Perkinson:
Secretary Susi H. Hamilton
NCNHDE-5261
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide information
about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
A query of the NCNHP database, based on the project area mapped with your request, indicates that there are
no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, or conservation/managed areas
within the proposed project boundary. Please note that although there may be no documentation of natural
heritage elements within the project boundary, it does not imply or confirm their absence; the area may not have
been surveyed. The results of this query should not be substituted for field surveys where suitable habitat exists.
In the event that rare species are found within the project area, please contact the NCNHP so that we may
update our records.
The attached `Potential Occurrences' table summarizes rare species and natural communities that have been
documented within a one -mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these records suggests that
these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area if suitable habitat exists and is
included for reference. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed area within a one -mile radius of the
project area, if any, are also included in this report.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation planning, project
review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria for regulatory decisions.
Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published without prior written notification to the
NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP
data may not be redistributed without permission.
The NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional correspondence if a Dedicated Nature
Preserve (DNP), Registered Heritage Area (RHA), Clean Water Management Trust Fund (CWMTF) easement,
or Federally -listed species are documented near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance, please
contact Rodney A. Butler at rod ney.butler o_ncdcr.gov or 919.707.8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
MAILING ADDRESS: Tele hone: [919', 7D7-8107 LOCA.TICN
16`1 MaiI Ser,rice Center �n�rr&ncnh2.org 121 VVest hones S-reat
Ralaigh, NC 27899-1881 Ralaigh, NC 27603

r
0
/
I
E
2
CD
e -49E
N
/
/
/
/
/
/
\
\
t
n
t
\
$
$
\
\
m
/
/
/
/
}
|
■
0
0
0
\
!
y
=
>
-
|
§
\
m
\
\
\
'
2
E
%
E
P
\ §
a
.
a
m 2
Co
\ ±
\
/
� _
' Of
� E
'\ ±
_ =
C
o o
f E
/
/
!
�
7
@
7
7
> /
§
§
G
i
|
2
66
§
2
\
3
2
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
a
co\
'
LL
E
\
\
U G
fE
_
±
_
_
%
\
§
\
>
7
>
7
±
0)0
,
S
2
&
-j
6
2
&
&
•2 -110)
k
«
A
A
A
2 /
( §
\§
.
k
3
{)
2
|
E/\
L
L
I
co
I
I
{}
kk
( ©
�k�
CD
'c
��\�k
\\
°�
/
/
/
q
q
E
2
w
g
E
z
\
k ƒ
ƒ
\
\
\
\
k
2 /
�\ (
U
2 z
0
}� \
�
3
3
6
c
-
%
%
A
■
§5
/\
$
L
§ 2
0
/
3
/
t
/
A
/
04
/
A
/
t
«
e§
, o
'cc2
!
«
®\
] '-
i
o
a)
2
} \
!
a.
°
G
m
« o
■
= E
!
/
2
�
2
�\
£
�}
{
0 b
_
E
m
k
=
»£�
o
w
\}
i
=
kƒ/
2
&
/
n
e=
§2
/
g
]
\
a2
§
2m
e§
2
\%
J
\
z
k
J
$
/
E 3/
\
\
4)(Y)
.0
}
f
2 0
m
m
§
)
\
\
2 3
7 0
2
L
m 0
0
,
<
z
\
&
o
§
\3
Ir
S ■
o
=
c
0
=
@
E
_
= 2
,
-0c
2
\
_
I
k
_
§ \
.
k
�
G
=
%
»
2
o
>
z
=
E
m
E
D
/
2
)
®
.
_ 0
■
2
2
\
E
®
n
\
c
a
=
E
/ >
c
m ■
E g
_
E
_
E
=
$
=
E\
x
/k
m
Ȥ$
|
u m
<
<
E
z
O
m±
m
t
\
o
`Co
0
2
0C3
-
■ g
/
/
ƒ
/
\
7
$
°
�
/ E
S
§
2
%/
o
c w
%
&
q
A
7
n
2
&
&
u
■
§ -
x
«
�/
)
2
2
m
_
\
\CL
§
%
%
'
J m
A
Coƒ
2
®
%
k
0
CL
\
3
5
_
/
§\
E § =
a
�
�
/
\
/
2
/
w
\ \
\
0
\
<
<
<
co
z
>
z <
0
r
0
/
I

m
m
M
Q
r
(D
N
LO
W
2
Z
U
z
C6 aa
a�
>>v
E
Y m T
N w 20
r aNO
O U�-
a =-
vo`�
`u Z
In m o
CV N m E'3 '`
NM p �Z"E
r O -^o
mU
EC7
N ) o v o N
n p wU'=CD
W Z m
=¢rte
z
�z
W'-
0 o yawl
vz
�O �7
w
.,�3
LL,
a m Z
�❑❑❑
LL
Cl)

Appendix D
Jurisdictional Determination
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) Appendices
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019

Jurisdictional Determination Request
A. PARCEL INFORMATION
Street Address: 3941 Arabia Rd
City, State:
County:
Raeford, NC 28376
Hoke
Parcel Index Number(s) (PIN): 794530001033
B. REQUESTOR INFORMATION
Name: Grant Lewis -Axiom Environmental, Inc.
Mailing Address: 218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27603
Telephone Number: 919-215-1693
Electronic Mail Address: [e-mail]
Select one:
❑ I am the current property owner.
✓❑ I am an Authorized Agent or Environmental Consultant'
❑ Interested Buyer or Under Contract to Purchase
❑ Other, please explain.
C. PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION
Name: Fred Harris
Mailing Address: 3941 Arabia Rd
Raeford, NC 28376
Telephone Number: 910-818-6449
Electronic Mail Address:
' Must provide completed Agent Authorization Form/Letter.
z Documentation of ownership also needs to be provided with request (copy of Deed, County GIS/Parcel/Tax Record).
Version: May 2017 Page 2

Jurisdictional Determination Request
D. PROPERTY ACCESS CERTIFICATION',4
By signing below, I authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on-
site investigations, if necessary, and issuing a jurisdictional determination pursuant to Section
404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. I, the
undersigned, am either a duly authorized owner of record of the property identified herein, or
acting as the duly authorized agent of the owner of record of the property.
W. Grant Lewis
Print Name
Capacity: ❑ Owner
Date
❑✓ Authorized Agent'
*Please see attached Agent Authorization Form
Signature
E. REASON FOR JD REQUEST: (Check as many as applicable)
I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be
designed to avoid all aquatic resources.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be
designed to avoid all jurisdictional aquatic resources under Corps authority.
I intend to construct/develop a projector perform activities on this parcel which may
require authorization from the Corps, and the JD would be used to avoid and minimize
impacts to jurisdictional aquatic resources and as an initial step in a future permitting
process.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a projector perform activities on this parcel which may
require authorization from the Corps; this request is accompanied by my permit application
and the JD is to be used in the permitting process.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a projector perform activities in a navigable water of the
U.S. which is included on the district Section 10 list and/or is subject to the ebb and flow of
the tide.
❑ A Corps JD is required in order obtain my local/state authorization.
❑ I intend to contest jurisdiction over a particular aquatic resource and request the Corps
confirm that jurisdiction does/does not exist over the aquatic resource on the parcel.
❑✓ I believe that the site may be comprised entirely of dry land.
❑ Other:
For NCDOT requests following the current NCDOT/USACE protocols, skip to Part E.
If there are multiple parcels owned by different parties, please provide the following for each additional parcel on a
continuation sheet.
s Must provide agent authorization form/letter signed by owner(s).
Version: May 2017 Page 3

Jurisdictional Determination Request
F. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD) TYPE (Select One)
❑ I am requesting that the Corps provide a preliminarX JD for the property identified herein.
A Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) provides an indication that there may
be "waters of the United States" or "navigable waters of the United States"on a property.
PJDs are sufficient as the basis for permit decisions. For the purposes of permitting, all
waters and wetlands on the property will be treated as if they are jurisdictional "waters of
the United States". PJDs cannot be appealed (33 C.F.R. 331.2); however, a PJD is
"preliminary" in the sense that an approved JD can be requested at any time. PJDs do
not expire.
❑ I am requesting that the Corps provide an approved JD for the property identified herein.
An Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD) is a determination that
jurisdictional "waters of the United States" or "navigable waters of the United
States" are either present or absent on a site. An approved JD identifies the limits of
waters on a site determined to be jurisdictional under the Clean Water Act and/or
Rivers and Harbors Act. Approved JDs are sufficient as the basis for permit
decisions. AJDs are appealable (33 C.F.R. 331.2). The results of the AJD will be
posted on the Corps website. A landowner, permit applicant, or other "affected
party" (33 C.F.R. 331.2) who receives an AJD may rely upon the AJD for five years
(subject to certain limited exceptions explained in Regulatory Guidance Letter 05-
02).
❑ I am unclear as to which JD I would like to request and require additional information
to inform my decision.
G. ALL REQUESTS
Map of Property or Project Area. This Map must clearly depict the boundaries of the
review area.
✓❑ Size of Property or Review Area 16 acres.
❑ The property boundary (or review area boundary) is clearly physically marked on the site.
Version: May 2017 Page 4

Jurisdictional Determination Request
H. REQUESTS FROM CONSULTANTS
Project Coordinates (Decimal Degrees): Latitude:
Longitude
34.9570
-79.1379
F1A legible delineation map depicting the aquatic resources and the property/review area.
Delineation maps must be no larger than 11x17 and should contain the following: (Corps
signature of submitted survey plats will occur after the submitted delineation map has been
reviewed and approved).6
■ North Arrow
■ Graphical Scale
■ Boundary of Review Area
■ Date
■ Location of data points for each Wetland Determination Data Form or tributary
assessment reach.
For Approved Jurisdictional Determinations:
■ Jurisdictional wetland features should be labeled as Wetland Waters of the US, 404
wetlands, etc. Please include the acreage of these features.
■ Jurisdictional non -wetland features (i.e. tidal/navigable waters, tributaries,
impoundments) should be labeled as Non -Wetland Waters of the US, stream, tributary,
open water, relatively permanent water, pond, etc. Please include the acreage or linear
length of each of these features as appropriate.
■ Isolated waters, waters that lack a significant nexus to navigable waters, or non -
jurisdictional upland features should be identified as Non -Jurisdictional. Please
include a justification in the label regarding why the feature is non jurisdictional (i.e.
"Isolated", "No Significant Nexus", or "Upland Feature"). Please include the acreage
or linear length of these features as appropriate.
For Preliminary Jurisdictional Determinations:
■ Wetland and non -wetland features should not be identified as Jurisdictional, 404,
Waters of the United States, or anything that implies jurisdiction. These features can be
identified as Potential Waters of the United States, Potential Non -wetland Waters of
the United States, wetland, stream, open water, etc. Please include the acreage and
linear length of these features as appropriate.
❑ Completed Wetland Determination Data Forms for appropriate region
(at least one wetland and one upland form needs to be completed for each wetland type)
6 Please refer to the guidance document titled "Survey Standards for Jurisdictional Determinations" to ensure that the
supplied map meets the necessary mapping standards. http://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/Re ugulatory-Pennit-
Pro gram/Jurisdiction/
Version: May 2017 Page 5

Jurisdictional Determination Request
aCompleted appropriate Jurisdictional Determination form
• PJDs, please complete a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form' and include the
Aquatic Resource Table
• AJDs, please complete an Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form'
Vicinity Map
Aerial Photograph
USGS Topographic Map
Soil Survey Map
OOther Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map, Proposed Site
Plan, previous delineation maps, LIDAR maps, FEMA floodplain maps)
❑ Landscape Photos (if taken)
❑ NCSAM and/or NCWAM Assessment Forms and Rating Sheets
NC Division of Water Resources Stream Identification Forms
FOther Assessment Forms
' www.saw.usace.army.mil/Portals/59/docs/re ug latoM/regdocs/JD/RGL 08-02_ App _ A_ Prelim_ JD_ Form_fillable.pdf
' Please see hlW://www.saw.usace.g.M.mil/Missions/Regulatory-Permit-Program/Jurisdiction/
Principal Purpose: The information that you provide will be used in evaluating your request to determine
whether there are any aquatic resources within the project area subject to federal jurisdiction under the regulatory
authorities referenced above.
Routine Uses: This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal, state, and local
government agencies, and the public, and may be made available as part of a public notice as required by federal
law. Your name and property location where federal jurisdiction is to be determined will be included in the
approved jurisdictional determination (AJD), which will be made available to the public on the District's website
and on the Headquarters USAGE website.
Disclosure: Submission of requested information is voluntary; however, if information is not provided, the
request for an AJD cannot be evaluated nor can an AJD be issued.
Version: May 2017 Page 6

w o co
W — 0 0
_ H U Z Y o 0
Q�rA
CO Z Z Q Q w
aJ0 v p r
a
F-
lo m W Q J 0 Q o
v Vr Y W Z LL
{ Ell CIOUQ F- O F- O 6 O
rN O
Q N O (n N v O
a F- o o C/) a-
Vl
CD
CD 0 Ln
4F&41, cn
W @ t
I.
■ �� > > O m y ., J j + ' of a >
--A @ o �
■ i L
IM
e C U
CL E
CL
U.
R
0
O — L m >
00
xni 1 �`3 ! t ! l a a a rA
+N a 1 1Y JI� • in 12 ON or -
2
2 N t R v >
M o U). y 3
CO SmR 0+ M f
0 3 m -• -• m mM
f 1 y T °z o,i R«« m
{1� [+ ' r APO ` • rt h ' w LmLO°i �toW o
p O Z Z Z MQ d 0
m
WWII
�_40MM
• `� t 0
J
p 00CaO
p W 0 o 0
cDtErww p 2
N. 4)R0 0L L U) JprO
d N
r p m m m 0 7 7 7 t}
l,l L7� HH H QH HH HrA
o
•. i / + l 4y 'J i J i
Q peon a;ed ►� �t �+ �t —4r 1
J l t
n • r r +
f, 1 f 1 J i i� ���f •
r• \
�
?
■`^
tIr
� .r 1�—f
1 4 1 rr
I 1 I
r
n
'
v
C R
!l
i`
4,$
dd
CL
Ln
Cl)
% sCL
0
!fit
;?� I
�'' L
`',•C
+ `'}�1�
�``` � ;f ~\
r
,ice
r�
Red springs

- eeeie♦,ii��0♦i�e♦�eiie�iiei♦e♦iie♦♦iii♦♦ei♦e♦♦eiie♦iie♦iieeiiie♦eeie♦ieSi,eei%eIS- ei
PON
We♦ieea�eeeeee♦e♦i �♦i♦��i��
e♦♦♦i♦e♦i♦i♦i♦i���^�e�
_`Q�eieieieieieieieieieeieeeeeeeieieeeieeeie•ems' " .
�eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.�,•
y � ���e�e"e�eAe�e�e�e�e�e�e�e�e�e�e�e�•e .
f
_ t
• t
Ya 1
►�♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦i♦ ♦♦i♦i♦ ee �
�e♦e♦e
;�.
♦e♦ �e.♦y
g f�. i
���♦����0♦�♦��r�
!Pell
w
w
CO •
•co
CU
••■
•
•
•
• 1
■■
••
•
■
•
' •• ■ •
Ya 1

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State: NC County/parish/borough: Hoke City: Raeford
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 34.9570° N, Long. 79.1379° �.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Rockfish Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) Into which the aquatic resource flows: Cape Fear River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03030004150011
® Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
❑ Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
❑ Field Determination. Date(s):
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Ar
,A "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
❑ Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
❑ Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are A "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): 1
❑ TNWs, including territorial seas
❑ Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
❑ Relatively permanent waters' (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
❑ Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non -wetland waters: linear feet: width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1987 Delineation Manual
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):3
Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:
Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
z For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
' Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section III.A.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent':
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non -navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody' is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.0 below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: Pick List
Drainage area: Pick List
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
❑ Tributary flows through Pick List tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from RPW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNW5:
'Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
s Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

Tributary stream order, if known:
(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: ❑ Natural
❑ Artificial (man-made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man -altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: Pick List.
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
❑ Silts ❑ Sands
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type/% cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
❑ Concrete
❑ Muck
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry: Pick List
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Pick List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: Pick List
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Pick List. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Pick List. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
❑ Bed and banks
❑ OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank
❑
the presence of litter and debris
❑ changes in the character of soil
❑
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
❑ shelving
❑
the presence of wrack line
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
❑
sediment sorting
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑
scour
❑ sediment deposition
❑
multiple observed or predicted flow events
❑ water staining
❑
abrupt change in plant community
❑ other (list):
❑ Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
High Tide Line indicated by: d Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects ❑ survey to available datum;
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ❑ physical markings;
❑ physical markings/characteristics ❑ vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
'A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally -sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain: .
Wetland quality. Explain: .
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: Pick List. Explain: Wetland surface water releases at higher rain events. Wetlands flow into the culvert and
then into the tributary.
Surface flow is: Pick List
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Pick List. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non-TNW:
❑ Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
❑ Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Pick List.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the Pick List floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain: Forested/ 100% cover.
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally -sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: Pick List
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section IIID:
2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section IIID:
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section IIID:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
❑ TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
❑ Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
❑ Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial:
❑ Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section IIIB. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
0 Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non-RPWss that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
❑ Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
❑ Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
❑ Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
❑ Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
❑ Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section IIL13 and rationale in Section IILD.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
❑ Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
❑ Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
❑ Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
❑ Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA -STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):'"
❑ which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
❑ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
❑ which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
Other factors. Explain:
'See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
❑ Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
F. NON -JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
❑ Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
❑ Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
❑ Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
❑ Non -wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
❑ Lakes/ponds: acres.
❑ Other non -wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
❑ Non -wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
❑ Lakes/ponds: acres.
❑ Other non -wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
❑ Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: 1:20,000 & 1:10,000 Raeford.
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Web Soil Survey 2017.
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
❑ Photographs: ❑ Aerial (Name & Date): .
or ❑ Other (Name & Date): Site photographs.
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Applicable/supporting case law:
❑ Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
❑ Other information (please specify): .
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

LANDOWNER AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRITION:
Deed Book:. Z 7
Page: Sf aj
Parcel ID Number: _� q 4 ._ D 10 3 3
Street Address: -; ,�y q..( 0 C
Property Owner (please print: ire J 14C*I-' i •S
County:
4o /4 L ---
The undersigned, registered property owner(s) of the above property, do hereby authorize
Vv o (i Cried , of Z e54Dr, �
(Contractor/Agent/Project Manager)' (Name of Contractor/Agent irm/Agency)2 1
4x i. j!51,J
of
(Contractor/Agent/Project Manager)' (Name of Contractor/Agent Firm/Agency)'
to take all actions necessary for the evaluation of the property as a potential stream, wetland and/or
riparian buffer mitigation project, including conducting stream and/or wetland determinations and
delineations, as well as issuance and acceptance of any required permit(s) or certification(s). I
agree to allow regulatory agencies, including the US Army Corps of Engineers, to visit the property
as part of these environmental reviews.
Property Owners(s) Address:
(if different from above)
Property Owner Telephone Number: 10 RI
I hereby certify the above information to be true and accurate to the best of our knowledge.
I s",
(Property Owner Authorized Signature) (Date)
Name of full delivery staff member (full -deliveries) or DMS project manager (design -bid -build).
=Name of company (full -deliveries) or DMS (design -bid -build).

Arabia Bay: GA1 Upland (see attached Figure 4 for data form location)
Lat/Long: 34.957, -79.139
This data point was taken in the bottom of an agricultural field ditch located within a ditched Carolina
bay. The bay is farmed for cotton and herbicide appears to be regularly applied.
Poi,- ii ,.. �•
y
�r.•rY"
.
*' - -•'#- 'moi �%1'w i'SC. r TP

X74 / OF
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coasts[ Plain Region
ProjecllSite: ■E rr,ttL r � �' a ! City/County: _do z- -_ Sampling Date: I -
Applicant/Owner: r e 5 �Ofol� 1 rl1� $ i! 6 ye- — S State: NC Sampling Point: C - A-, t Ufa
Investigator(s);Section, Township, Range: R a n r0f
Landform (halslope, terrace, etc.): T[ Local relief (concave, convex, none). c6-1 r A 1 L Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LK R P I -at: 3y • A Long: -:71-13 9 Darum: /V X7 9 3
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification: IV*
Are climatic 1 hydrol conditions the site typicat for this time of year? Yes No (if ne, explain In Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil =or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are'Normal Circumstances' present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed. explain any answers in Remarks-)
5UMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydraphytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the 5amp}ed Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetfbnd? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No _ Y
Remarks:
�G f` YO f p9 t-0 r" c.o }ry O ✓+ R ►rL9f ' M g i'1 J► ! C �' I H ct [ t:/�C
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of orae is reouire
d
Surface Water (Al) _
— High Water Table (A2) _
Saturation (A3) _
Water Marks (B1) _
Sediment Deposits (62) _
Drift Deposits (133) _
A6gsl Mat or Crust (B4) _
Iron Deposits (85) -
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
Wafer -Stained Leaves (89)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
check all that aonlr)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Mari Deposits (B15) (L RR U)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Sills (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
t�Depth (Inches), J T
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photo:
Remarks -
V Surface Soil Cracks (98)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
Drainage Pattems (B10)
_ Moss Trim Lines (6 16)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (Cg)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (03)
FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
_ Sphagnurn moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
inspections), if available:
No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point; (3 A 1 j F
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dorrdnance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: }Cover Soecigs? Status
Number of Dominant Spades
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
2.
3-
4,
5.
6.
7-
8.
50% oftotal cover;
So linQfShrub Stratum (Plot size; )
1.
2.
3,
4.
5.
6.
7.
S.
= Total Cover
20% of total cover;
0 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC; (AIB)
Prevalence Index worksheet -
orksheet:TataI
Tota I%Cover of;
ulti I by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = BIA =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is X50%
_ 3 - Prevalence index is 53.0'
= Total Cover Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
50% of totai cover:
20% of total cover;
Herb Stratum (Plot size; s C� t )
1. a h LA -1 Cgrl9 [ i rf t sof
—
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
2• a c t Cal f'a
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3_ 04,p1 Lt r L Ci
4.
Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (D BH), regardless of
5.
height.
6.
SaplinglShrub – Woody plants, exciuding vines, less
7.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 R (1 m) tall.
8'
Herb – All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
9•
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
10.
11
Woody wine – All woody vines greater than 328 R in
height.
12,
3 = Total Cover
50% of total cover; l _ 5 20% of total cover; d ,
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: }
1.
2.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
50% of trial cover; 20% of total cover:
(If observed, list morphological adapt atlons below).
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region –Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Pant
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
finches) Color (moist %
Cotor (mast) % Type Loc
Texture Remarks
0,i f
F
T
—
'T e: C=Con ce ntrati on, D= De pietion, RM=R educed Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Solt Indicators: {Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.]
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Histosd (Al)
_ Pdyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
_ fustic Epipedon [A2]
— Thin Dark Surfacc (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR Q)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ oamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, 5, T)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(M LRA 153B)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) {LRR P, T, U)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
_✓Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
_ Mark (F10) (LRR U)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Depleted Ochric (F11) (M LRA 151)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, TI 'Indicators of hydrophyiic vegetation and
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 15 DA)
_ Umbnc Surface (F13) (LRR P. T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR D, S)
_ Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
unless disturbed or problematic.
_ Sandy GI eyed Matrix (S4)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 15OB)
_ Sandy Redox (55)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149 A)
_ Stripped Matrix (56) -
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (IN LRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
_ Dark Surface (57) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ No
Remarks:
A4 -o.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region –Version 2.6

Appendix E
Categorical Exclusion Document
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) Appendices
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019

Arabia Bay Wetland Mitigation Site
Hoke County, North Carolina
DMS Project No. 100061
Categorical Exclusion/ERTR
Prepared for:
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
June 2018

TASK 1 b.) Categorical Exclusion Summary:
Part 1: General Project Information
(Attached) Part 2: All Projects
Regulation/Questions
Coastal Zone Management Act
Not applicable — project is not located within a CAMA county.
CERCLA
No issue within project boundaries— please see the attached Executive Summary from a Limited
Phase 1 Site Assessment performed by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) on June 12th,
2018.
National Historic Preservation Act (Section 106)
No Issue — please see attached letter from Ramona M. Bartos- State of the Historic Preservation
Office.
Uniform Act
Please see the attached letter, sent to the landowner June 12th, 2018.
Part 3: Ground -Disturbing Activates Regulation/Questions
American Indian Religious Freedom Act (AIRFA)
Not applicable — project is not located in a county claimed as "territory" by the Eastern Band of
Cherokee Indians.
Antiquities Act (AA)
Not applicable — project is not located on Federal land.
Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA)
Not applicable — project is not located on federal or Indian lands.
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
Project activities were determined to pose "No Effect" to Endangered or Threatened Species. The
proposed project will occur in existing agricultural fields which are intensively managed for row
crops. There is no Critical Habitat on-site, nor is there any suitable habitat for any of the T&E
species identified. Additionally, no T&E species were observed during field surveys. Record
searches from the Natural Heritage Program indicate that federally protected species are not
documented within a mile of the Site boundaries.
Executive Order 13007 (Indian Sacred Sites)
Not applicable — project is not located in a county claimed as "territory" by the Eastern Band of
Cherokee Indians.
Farmland Protection Policv Act (FPP
Please find the attached Form AD -1006 and letter from Milton Cortes of the NRCS.
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA)

Please find the attached response from the Fish and Wildlife Service
Land & Water Conservation Fund Act (Section 6(f))
Not applicable
Magnuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation and management Act (Essential Fish Habitat)
Not applicable — project is not located within an estuarine system
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA)
USFWS has no recommendation with the project relative to the MBTA
Wilderness Act
Not applicable—the project is not located within a Wilderness area.

Appendix A
Categorical Exclusion Form for Ecosystem Enhancement
Program Projects
Version 1.4
Note: only Appendix A should to be submitted {along with any supporting documentation} as the
environmental document.
6 Version 1.4, 8/18105
ProjectPart 1: General .
■
Project Name: Arabia Bay Welland Mitigatron Site
Count Name: Hoke
DMS Number: ID#:100061 Contract# 7529
Project 5 onsor: Restoration Systems, LLC
Project Contact Name: JD Hamby
Project Contact Address: 1101 Haynes street, suite 211, Raleigh, NC 27604
Project Contact E-mail: [e-mail]
DMS Project Manager: UndsayCrec: [e-mail]
Pro-Proiect Description
Ylie Site is located within 14 -digit Cataloging !Unit and Targeted Local Watershed
030300041500111. approximately 4.5 miles southeast of Raeford,
NC. The Site is situated in a
Carolina bay that has been cleared, drained, and farmed. Ditches will be plugged in order to
rehydrate the drained soils and woody vegetation planted.
For Official Use Only
Reviewed By: Lindsay Crocker
71131201$
Date
DMS Project Manager
Conditional Approved By:
Date
For Division Administrator
FHWA
❑ Check this box if there are outstanding issues
Final Approval By:
Date
For Division Administrator
FHWA
6 Version 1.4, 8/18105

Part 2: All Projects
Response
Coastal Zone Management Act CZMA
1. Is the project located in a CAMA county?
® Yes
E]No
2. Does the project involve ground -disturbing activities within a CAMA Area of
❑ Yes
Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ No
✓❑ N/A
3. Has a CAMA permit been secured?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Q N/A
4. Has NCDCM agreed that the project is consistent with the NC Coastal Management
❑ Yes
Program?
❑ No
✓❑ N/A
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liabilit Act CERCLA
1. Is this a "full -delivery" project?
0 Yes
❑ No
2. Has the zoning/land use of the subject property and adjacent properties ever been
❑ Yes
designated as commercial or industrial?
❑ No
❑ N/A
3. As a result of a limited Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or potential
❑ Yes
hazardous waste sites within or adjacent to the project area?
0 No
❑ N/A
4. As a result of a Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous
❑ Yes
waste sites within or adjacent to the project area?
❑ No
✓❑ N/A
5. As a result of a Phase 11 Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous
❑ Yes
waste sites within the project area?
❑ No
❑✓ N/A
6. Is there an approved hazardous mitigation plan?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑� N/A
National Historic Preservation Act Section 106
1. Are there properties listed on, or eligible for listing on, the National Register of
❑ Yes
Historic Places in the project area?
❑✓ No
2. Does the project affect such properties and does the SHPO/THPO concur?
❑ Yes
❑ No
✓❑ N/A
3. If the effects are adverse, have they been resolved?
❑ Yes
❑ No
✓❑ N/A
Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real PropertV Acquisition Policies Act Uniform
Act
1. Is this a "full -delivery" project?
0 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:❑
Yes
* prior to making an offer that the agency does not have condemnation authority; and
❑ No
* what the fair market value is believed to be?
❑ N/A
Version 1.4, 8/18/05

Part 3: Ground -Disturbing Activities
Regulation/Question ..
American Indian Religious Freedom Act AIRFA
1. Is the project located in a county claimed as "territory" by the Eastern Band of ❑ Yes
Cherokee Indians? 0 No
2. Is the site of religious importance to American Indians?
❑ Yes
❑ No
✓❑ N/A
3. Is the project listed on, or eligible for listing on, the National Register of Historic
❑ Yes
Places?
❑ No
❑✓ N/A
4. Have the effects of the project on this site been considered?
❑ Yes
❑ No
0 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
❑ Yes
of antiquity?
❑ No
❑✓ N/A
3. Will a permit from the appropriate Federal agency be required?
❑ Yes
❑ No
El N/A
4. Has a permit been obtained?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑✓ N/A
Archaeolo ical 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
0 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
0 N/A
Endangered Species Act ESA
1. Are federal Threatened and Endangered species and/or Designated Critical Habitat
0 Yes
listed for the county?
❑ No
2. Is Designated Critical Habitat or suitable habitat present for listed species?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ N/A
3. Are T&E species present or is the project being conducted in Designated Critical
❑ Yes
Habitat?
❑ No
❑� N/A
4. Is the project "likely to adversely affect' the species and/or "likely to adversely modify"
❑ Yes
Designated Critical Habitat?
[_1 No
0 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
E] N/A
Version 1.4, 8/18/05

Executive Order 13007 Indian Sacred Sites
1. Is the project located on Federal lands that are within a county claimed as "territory"
❑ Yes
by the EBCI?
❑✓ No
2. Has the EBCI indicated that Indian sacred sites may be impacted by the proposed
❑ Yes
project?
❑ No
❑✓ N/A
3. Have accommodations been made for access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred
❑ Yes
sites?
❑ No
❑✓ N/A
Farmland Protection Policy Act FPPA
1. Will real estate be acquired?
0 Yes
❑ No
2. Has NRCS determined that the project contains prime, unique, statewide or locally
❑✓ Yes
important farmland?
❑ No
❑ N/A
3. Has the completed Form AD-1006 been submitted to NRCS?
0 Yes
❑ No
❑ N/A
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act FWCA
1. Will the project impound, divert, channel deepen, or otherwise control/modify any
❑ Yes
water body?
❑✓ 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,
❑ Yes
outdoor recreation?
❑✓ 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
❑ Yes
project on EFH?
❑ 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 Treat 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
❑ Yes
federal agency?
❑ No
❑✓ N/A
Version 1.4, 8/18/05

ao o co
LU — 0 0
_ H U Z Y o 0
Q p fn
z 0
m o oCo LLJ
QQ0 � V LL
F-
lo m H F-
Uo
w ° LU L LU Z LL
{ co Ell N UQ F- O F- � 6 CJ
r� N (1)Q N O (n N v O
a F- o o C/) a-
CY
Lq
_ z LO
m o 0
E
UJ
r�. F��•; I it � � k �aS" � � � wyr m � � °
��,��L° v o
F r�
{ sP d d t
Im R V
f l _-. • • - • ■ r .,¢ �?; � i fir , CD O. c
4 •rte �� I kf
R
(� 4 I • �, —'EE
d
p' I . �r ti ► rl b�� c E Ew m'yL°M mLqT
it r `i '• Ln
•� f � 'f I 1 � � !� ~ t y Q1 = "' M N O O. _ O
a»= N ave m e 1°s�i
n • y E a�dwz ORww41
r
� o z z L U Q R y c
0 czM�., 0
m
WWI,
� -40MM
L R R
L
O O O J
• G aQo "- C "' C C Q y +
O:!:!
W i! t •E t t-, i!
N v xxof a) of w
C ya }
— Gi Gi •L r •L •L d � J
~� '• V Y Y Y L L L L
LII ;vH HH H QH HH Hrn
r a o
� rrrrrrrr
ar
I t ,
r i
-VA Iy r �Z4 , • •
op
�
i+ �}� ,fid
,�■
o 6
r
i`
— l:j
-
i ,
�l
Cl)%
0
CVo
tosCL
ra .�
LO
Z
r�
Red gprings R �. I
i

AM ��e♦e♦♦♦e♦ ♦♦♦♦e♦♦♦ a♦♦♦e♦♦♦e♦♦♦e♦♦♦e♦♦♦e♦e♦e♦♦we♦ ♦♦♦e ♦♦♦♦♦♦ws♦�
�♦♦♦e ♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦fie ♦ e♦♦♦♦♦w�
+♦♦♦♦♦♦♦e ♦e♦♦♦♦♦�..'
In I'M
;.
�♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦w♦♦♦w♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦+��♦♦♦♦www
y_.we♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦e♦♦ww♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦wwI
PF
\♦�♦*�
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦
ilk
w
. r.
co
CD
Co
CU =01
• u •
•
c
■
■
+
n,�

�
O N
U
�
C � U
C) � o
� O O�
cnc��
a
a
z � �C'1 � n� �
� �
Z
ago ��U aci
o N � ,.., Z sT
} �
E
m
C
� E w � � �
�
�W/
LL
.�
(B N
� � O �
v_
uj
E
�
m
U
Q w
p
70
c��6 � .� -IL)
LL
a
iii
(6
v
v
tri
N
N
T
O
N
N
T
O
M
O
�
N
N
Cn
T
N
N
00
119
O
�
Cn
�
N
M
�
�
M
N
N
O
M
00
r
N
N
�
N
N
r
N
T
N
M
O
O
N
O
N
CA
O
N
N
Q1
N
T
N
O
N
~
ti
ti
00
00
O
N
N
CA
N
00
00
tD
M
000
�
O �
N
to
0
O
�0
O
N
N
N
N
00
Cn
ti
00
�
N
N
r
IA
O
0�0
~
M
CA
N
N
O
O
r
N
CA
r
N
r
N
N
N
O
O
�
OD
O
-
M
ID
ID
O
OD
O
M
O
N
N
N
O
T
O
N
N
_
M
OD
N
1�
r
�
T
ti
M
�
O
N
N
O
N
�
N
N
r
N
O
�
N
�
N 01
r
N
r
O
N
O
N
Of •
tC
Of
O
N
N
N
O
O
O
O
N
N
N
tll
Q
(D
7
N
�,
�
N
•"� W
c0
Lo P� LD
c0
(D LD
c0
LD Lo
c0
u' co u' N v'
c') c'7
v'
c'7
O
Cl
u' O of
N
eD u'
N
P� u'
N
(D
N
u'
u'r u'
N
7 � M � N �
N N N
N
� O ii7 T u
N
O
u r u7
O u7
u'r u'
m
C
N N
v'
M N M
N ' N
N M
' N
N M
' N
N CO N M N
' N ' N ' N
N M
' N
N
'
N N N
N ' N
N N
' N
N N
' N
N
'
N
N
N N
' N
N N N N N N
' N ' N ' N
N
'
N N � N
N ' N ' N
N
'
N
N ' N
N
' N
N
' N
m
>
LD
C I�
LD
(D to
LD
u'1 u'1
Lo
V V
Lo w) , w)
(h m N N
w) ,
O O
u�
O
, u? ,
D) OD 00
u� ,
I� �
u? ,
(D (D
u�
u7
,
u)
u? �
V V
u? � u? � m
co m N N
�
O
� w) . u) .
O O D) OD co
w)
h
Ln
I� 6 O
Ln
L6 u7
L?
V -q-
Q
W
0 c'7
0
N
c'7 c'7 c'7
N N N
c'7 Cl)
N N
c'7 co
N N
c'7 Cl) Cl) Cl) Cl) Cl)
N N N N N N
Cl) c'7
N N
N
N
N N N
N N N
N N
N N
N N
N N
N
N
N
N
N N
N N
N N N N N N
N N N N N N
N
N
N
N N N N N
N
N N N
N N
N N
W
O N
a
a
z � �C'1 � n� �

June 12th, 2018
Mr. Fred Harris
3941 Arabia Rd.
Raeford, NC 28376
Dear Mr. Harris:
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that Restoration Systems, LLC, in offering to
purchase your property in Hoke County, North Carolina, does not have the power to acquire it by
eminent domain. Also, Restoration Systems' offer to purchase your property is based on what we
believe to be its fair market.
If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 919-755-9490.
Sincerely,
WA6-�
JD Hamby
Project Manager

May 18th, 2018
Shannon Deaton,
Habitat Conservation Program Manager
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
1701 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1701
Re: Arabia Bay Wetland Mitigation Project, Hoke County, NC
Dear Ms. Deaton:
The purpose of this letter is to request concurrence from the North Carolina Wildlife Recourse Commission
concerning a stream restoration project located in Hoke County for the N.C. Division of Mitigation Services.
The project will restore non -riparian wetlands in existing row crop fields and forested areas. Please review
and comment on any possible issues that might emerge with respect to the Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act from the potential stream restoration project. Attached is a USGS base map with the projects 16.01 acre
footprint identified.
The Arabia Bay non -riparian wetland mitigation project site has been identified for the purpose of providing
in-kind mitigation for unavoidable impacts to wetlands within watersheds of the Cape Fear River Basin, CU
03030004.
We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please feel free to contact the below
referenced Project Manager with any questions that you may have concerning the extent of site disturbance
associated with this project.
Yours truly,
Restoration Systems, LLC
JD Hamby
Project Manager
[e-mail]
919-755-9490
Attachments: Location and USGS Map

North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission n
Gordon Myers, Executive Director
July 12, 2018
JD Hamby
Restoration Services, LLC
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 211
Raleigh, NC 27604
Subject: Request for Environmental Information for the Arabia Bay Wetland Mitigation Project, Hoke
County, North Carolina.
Dear Mr. Hamby,
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.).
Restoration Systems, LLC has developed the Arabia Bay Wetland Mitigation Project for the NC Division
of Mitigation Services. Proposed work includes restoring non -riparian wetlands in existing row crops and
forested areas. This project will provide in-kind mitigation for unavoidable impacts to wetlands within
watersheds of the Cape Fear River Basin, CU 03030004. The project area is located east of the
intersection of Arabia and L.A. Sandy Roads, east of Raeford.
Wetland restoration projects often improve water quality and aquatic habitat. In addition, wetland areas
play an important role in flood and pollutant control. Lastly, they improve aquatic and terrestrial habitats
and provide refuge and travel corridors 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.
Mailing Address: Habitat Conservation • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]

Page 2
July 12, 2018
Scoping — Arabia Bay Wetland 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 gabriela.garrison(cr�,ncwildlife.org.
Sincerely,
Gabriela Garrison
Eastern Piedmont Habitat Conservation Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program

May 18th, 2018
Milton Cortes
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service
4407 Bland Road
Suite 117
Raleigh, NC 27609
Re: Arabia Bay Wetland Mitigation Site, Hoke County, NC
Restoration Systems, LLC (RS), of Raleigh, NC has been awarded a contract by DMS to provide 16 Wetland
Mitigation Units at the Arabia Bay Wetland Mitigation Site in Hoke County, North Carolina.
One of the earliest tasks to be performed by RS is completion of an environmental screening and
preparation/submittal of a Categorical Exclusion (CE) document. This document is specifically required by
the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to ensure compliance with various federal environmental laws
and regulations. DMS must demonstrate that its projects comply with federal mandates as a precondition to
FHWA reimbursement of compensatory mitigation costs borne by the North Carolina Department of
Transportation to offset its projects' unavoidable impacts to streams and wetlands.
In order for the project to proceed, RS is obligated to coordinate with the NRCS to complete Form AD -1006 in
compliance with the Farmland Protection Policy Act on behalf of the FHWA. The purpose of this letter is to
request your assistance in completion of the Form.
Project Location & Description
The Site is characterized by agricultural fields utilized for row crop production. All Site hydrology drains
through a ditch network to Rockfish Creek, located less than 1 mile north of the Site. The Site is entirely
encompassed within a Carolina bay that has been ditched/drained, cleared of vegetation, and is
maintained for row crop production. The proposed conservation easement area includes the entire
margins of the Carolina bay floor and is approximately 16.0 acres in size.
The Site is located in the Atlantic Southern Loam Plains portion of the Southeastern Plains ecoregion of
North Carolina. Regional physiography is characterized by dissected irregular plains, some smooth plains;
broad interstream divides and mostly gentle side slopes dissected by numerous small, low to moderate
gradient sandy bottomed streams (Griffith et al. 2002). Onsite elevations are nearly level averaging 220
feet National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) (USGS Raeford, North Carolina 7.5 -minute topographic
quadrangle) (Figure 3, Appendix A).
The Site is situated in a Carolina bay that has been cleared, drained, and farmed (Figure 3, Appendix A).
The bay is an isolated depression surrounded by sand rims along the northwest and southeast margins.
Surrounding the bay are rural residential properties, timber tracts, and additional row crops. Land use at
the Site is characterized entirely by agricultural row crops. Herbaceous vegetation and a few shrubby
species grow within the ditches, which are regularly maintained by bush hogging and herbicide
application.

Restoration Means & Methods
The Arabia Bay Wetland Mitigation Site has been identified for the purpose of providing in-kind
mitigation for unavoidable wetland impacts. Alternatives for wetland reestablishment 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 clearing of vegetation, ditch
network installation, agriculture plowing, row crop production, herbicide application, and other land
disturbances associated with land use management. Wetland reestablishment options should focus on
the restoration of vegetative communities, restoration of historic groundwater tables by filling ditches,
and the reestablishment of soil structure and microtopographic variations. These activities will result in
the reestablishment of 16.0 acres of jurisdictional, nonriparian wetlands.
Restoration of pocosin vegetation 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. In addition, viable pocosin communities will improve system
biogeochemical function by filtering pollutants from overland and shallow subsurface flows and
providing organic materials. Variations in vegetative planting will occur based on topography and
hydraulic condition of soils. Vegetative species composition will be based on RFEs, site specific features,
and community descriptions from Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina (Schafale
and Weakley 1990). Community associations to be utilized include: 1) Bay Forest and/or 2) Small
Depression Pocosin. However, a natural component of a Carolina bay includes shallow open water areas
that harbor vernal pools and freshwater marsh. Bare -root seedlings within the Bay Forest/Small
Depression Pocosin will be planted at a density of approximately 680 stems per acre on 8 -foot centers.
Planting will be performed between November 15 and March 15 to allow plants to stabilize during the
dormant period and set root during the spring season.
Should you have any questions or if any additional information is needed to complete the Form, please feel
free to contact meat the office 919.334.9111. Your valuable time and cooperation are much appreciated.
Yours truly,
RESTORATION SYSTEMS, LLC
rel
JD Hamby
Project Manager
[e-mail]
919-334-9111
Attachments- Location and Condition Maps
AD -1006 Form

John Hamby
From: Cortes, Milton - NRCS, Raleigh, NC <[e-mail]>
Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2018 3:09 PM
To: John Hamby
Subject: RE: Request Farmland Impact Evaluation -Stream and Wetland Mitigation Sites
Attachments: Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site_AD1006.pdf, Phantom Mill_AD1006.pdf, Shaws
Run_AD1006.pdf, Slingshot Restoration Site_AD1006.pdf
Importance: High
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed
John
Please find attached the Farmland Conversion Impact Rating forms, AD1026, for:
Arabia Bay Wetland Rest Hoke Co.
Phantom Mill Stream & Wet Rest Alamance Co.
Shaw's Run Stream & Wet Rest Columbus Co.
Slingshot Stream & Wet Rest Rockingham Co.
Please let us know if we can be of further assistance.
Cordially:
Milton Cortes
Acting State Soil Scientist
Natural Resources Conservation Service
4407 Bland Rd, Suite 117
Raleigh, NC 27609
Phone: [phone]
milton.cortes(@nc.usda.eov
USDA
2
This electronic message contains information generated by the USDA solely for the intended recipients. Any
unauthorized interception of this message or the use or disclosure of the information it contains may violate the
law and subject the violator to civil or criminal penalties. If you believe you have received this message in error,
please notify the sender and delete the email immediately.

U.S. Department of Agriculture
FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING
PART I (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Date Of Land Evaluation Request 5/18/18
Name Of Project Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site
Federal Agency Involved Federal Highway Administration
Proposed Land Use Stream and Wetland Restoration
County And State Hoke Co., NC
PART II (To be completed by NRCS)
Date Request Received By NRCS 5/18/18
Does the site contain prime, unique, statewide or local important farmland? Yes No
(If no, the FPPA does not apply -- do not complete additional parts of this form). 0 ❑
Acres Irrigated
none
Average Farm Size
212 acres
Major Crop(s)
CORN
Farmable Land In Govt. Jurisdiction
Acres: 252,166 acres % 60
Amount Of Farmland As Defined in FPPA
Acres: 219,627 acres %52
Name Of Land Evaluation System Used
Cumberland Co. NC LESA
Name Of Local Site Assessment System
N/A
Date Land Evaluation Returned By NRCS
6/24/18
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
16.0
B. Total Acres To Be Converted Indirectly
0.0
C. Total Acres In Site
16.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
PART IV (To be completed by NRCS) Land Evaluation Information
A. Total Acres Prime And Unique Farmland
1.5
B. Total Acres Statewide And Local Important Farmland
0.0
C. Percentage Of Farmland In County Or Local Govt. Unit To Be Converted
0.00070
D. Percentage Of Farmland In Govt. Jurisdiction With Same Or Higher Relative Value
59.8
PART V (To be completed by NRCS) Land Evaluation Criterion
Relative Value Of Farmland To Be Converted (Scale of 0 to 100 Points)
12
0
0
0
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
15
10
2. Perimeter In Nonurban Use
10
10
3. Percent Of Site Being Farmed
20
19
4. Protection Provided By State And Local Government
20
0
5. Distance From Urban Builtup Area
15
5
6. Distance To Urban Support Services
15
5
7. Size Of Present Farm Unit Compared To Average
10
4
8. Creation Of Nonfarmable Farmland
10
0
9. Availability Of Farm Support Services
5
5
10. On -Farm Investments
20
15
11. Effects Of Conversion On Farm Support Services
10
0
12. Compatibility With Existing Agricultural Use
10
1
TOTAL SITE ASSESSMENT POINTS
160
74
0
0
0
PART VII (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Relative Value Of Farmland (From Part V)
100
12
0
0
0
Total Site Assessment (From Part VI above or a local
site assessment)
160
74
0
0
0
TOTAL POINTS (Total of above 2lines)
260
86
0
0
0
Site Selected:
7DateOf 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 •

May 18th, 2018
Renee Gledhill -Earley,
Environmental Review Coordinator
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office
109 East Jones Street
Raleigh, NC 27699-4617
Sent electronically to Environmental. [e-mail]
Re: Arabia Bay Wetland Mitigation Project, Hoke County, NC
Dear Renee,
The purpose of this letter is to request written concurrence from the State Historic Preservation Office
(SHPO) for the Arabia Bay Wetland Mitigation Project in Hoke County, a Full -Delivery project for the N.C.
Davison of Mitigation Services. Please review and comment on any possible issues that might emerge with
respect to SHPO from a potential stream restoration project depicted on the attached mapping.
Project Name: Arabia Bay Wetland Mitigation Project
Project Location: 3941 Arabia Rd, Raeford, NC 28376
Project Contact: JD Hamby, Restoration Systems LLC, 1101 Haynes St. Suite 211,
Raleigh, NC 27604
Project Description: The project has been identified for the purpose of providing in-kind mitigation for
unavoidable stream channel and wetland impacts. Permits from the NC DWR and USACE will be obtained to
restore waters of the US. Soil and erosion control permits will also be obtained. The project encompasses
16.01 acres of drain hydric soils, currently used for row crops. Approximately 16 acres of non -riparian
wetland will be restored.
The term "cultural resources" refers to prehistoric or historic archaeological sites, structures, or artifact
deposits over 50 years old. "Significant" cultural resources are those that are eligible or potentially
eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. Evaluations of site significance are made
with reference to the eligibility criteria of the National Register (36 CFR 60) and in consultation with the
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO).
Field visits were conducted in March 2017 to conduct evaluations for presence of structures or features
that may be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. No structures were identified within the
Site boundaries that may be eligible for the National Register. In addition to field reviews for historically
relevant structures, a records search was conducted at the SHPO office to determine if documented
occurrences of historic structures or artifacts occur within, or adjacent to the Site. The SHPO records
identify no features within the Site boundaries and no features within a 1.0 mile radius of the Site.

Typical SHPO coordination will occur prior to construction activities to determine if any significant
cultural resources are present; however, no constraints are expected at this time. 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,
RESTORATION SYSTEMS, LLC
l
JD Hamby
Project Manager
[e-mail]
919-755-9490
Attachments — USGS Map, Existing Conditions

btu. STATE,,
North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Roy Cooper
Secretary Susi H. Hamilton
June 18, 2018
JD Hamby
Restoration Systems, LLC
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 211
Raleigh, NC 27604
Office of Archives and History
Deputy Secretary Kevin Cherry
Re: Arabia Bay Wetland Mitigation Project, 3941 Arabia Road, Raeford, Hoke County, ER 18-1207
Dear Mr. Hamby:
Thank you for your letter of May 18, 2018, concerning the above project.
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would be affected by
the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill -Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-807-6579 or
environmental.reviewgncdcr.gov. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the above
referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
�fKRamona M. Bartos
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6599

Regulatory review
Tre IPaC regu:atory review process helps evaluate the potentia~ impacts of your project on
r esources managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service_ It walks through r egulations
covering earn protected resource, and offers suggesdans and assistance in designing your
project_
Endangered species
Endangered species are protected under the Endange-ed Species Act y
6 en€langered species are known to -occur or maybe affected by activltles In
this location.
request an ofFcial species list
Arc official species list was Sener9ted about a month ago.
}valuatedeterminatio^ keys
There are no determfna6on Keys available in this pr-Dject area_
Make effect determinations
i=or each Iisred species in tyre project area, a deteirnination must be made
regarding the potentiar effects of this project.
Migratory b i''d s
Certain birds ace protected urrder rise M gratory Bird Treaty Act 2 and the Bald
and Golden Eagle P{vteftion Act 3 .
Z migratory. birds of conservation concern are expected to occur or may be
affected by activfties in this location.
Contact the local U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service field office
There is currently no regu:amry review process in iPaC for migratory birds_
Please contact the local U5. F`sh and Wildlife Service fiehd office to evaluate
effects and authorize take_
FaciRies
O.S. Fish and Wild:ife Service facilites are protected under toe National VVMIife
Refuge 5ysrem Administration Act 4 and the Natio-ml Fish Hatchery System 5 _
.F�k+ISE TEFL;G=S OR F!- - G. -E�cIES {� I
weTlands
Wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to reg-Uratioa under Sec -Zion
44 of the Clean Water Act 4 , or other StatelFederaI statutes.
0-4ERE ARE NID P CVYN IXETLAN :�= A71 —r!S LOCA .7 0 -NL

Regulatory review Endangered species Species determinations
Species determinations
For lisced species 1 net covered by determination keys, an impact analysis should be performed to reach
a conclusion about how this projeccmII impact the species. These conclusions will result in dererminations
for each species, which will be used in consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Bi rds
4AM DE ERIC';NAT:C'w
Red -cockaded Woodpecker None
Picoides borealis
Reptiles
-% = DETERIJINATIO%;
American Alligator None
=:o- mississippiensis
Insects
Y = DETERLMNATIO4
Saint Francis' Sayr Butterly Alone
N eorrym ph a fra r c isci
Flowering Plants
'l A.• __ OErERWNATO.';
American Chaffseed None
5ch"IlDea americana
Michaux's Sumac hone
Rhus michauxii
Rough -leaved Loosestrife hone
Lysimachia asperulaefolia
Critical habitats
c.s_

Table 3. Threatened and Endangered Species
Species
Potential
Biological
Federal Status
Habitat
Habitat at Site
Conclusion
American alligator
(Alligator mississippiensis)
Found in rivers, streams, canals, lakes,
No
Not Required
Threatened due to Similarity
swamps, and coastal marshes.
of Appearance
Red -cockaded woodpecker
Open stands of pine containing trees 60
(Picoides borealis)
years or older for nesting and roosting.
No
No Effect
Endangered
Cavity excavation occurs in living pine trees.
Saint Francis' Satyr
(Neonympha mitchellii)
Occurs only in the sandhills of North
No
No Effect
Carolina in Hoke and Cumberland Counties.
Endangered
Occurs in sandy (sandy peat, sandy loam),
acidic, seasonally moist to dry soils.
American chaffseed
Generally found in habitats described as
(Schwalbea americana)
open, moist pine flatwoods, fire -maintained
No
No Effect
Endangered
savannas, ecotonal areas between peaty
wetlands and xeric sandy soils, and other
open grass -sedge systems.
Michaux's sumac
Occurs in sandy or rocky open woods in
(Rhus michauxii)
No
No Effect
association with basic soils
Endangered
Six federally protected species are listed as occurring in Hoke County (USFWS 2018); the above
table summarizes potential habitat and preliminary biological conclusions for each.

4, United States Department of the Interior�"'�
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
` Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
In Reply Refer To:
Consultation Code: 04EN2000-2018-SLI-0761
Event Code: 04EN2000-2018-E-01663
Project Name: Arabia Bay
May 18, 2018
Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project
location, and/or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
The species list generated pursuant to the information you provided identifies threatened,
endangered, proposed and candidate species, as well as proposed and final designated critical
habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and/or may be affected by
your proposed project. The species list fulfills the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended
(16 U.S.C. 1531 etseq.).
New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of
species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Please feel free to
contact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to
federally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed critical
habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the
Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be
completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be
completed by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and
implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested
through the ECOS-IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list.
Section 7 of the Act requires that all federal agencies (or their designated non-federal
representative), in consultation with the Service, insure that any action federally authorized,
funded, or carried out by such agencies is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any
federally -listed endangered or threatened species. A biological assessment or evaluation may be
prepared to fulfill that requirement and in determining whether additional consultation with the
Service is necessary. In addition to the federally -protected species list, information on the
species' life histories and habitats and information on completing a biological assessment or

05/18/2018 Event Code: 04EN2000-2018-E-01663 2
evaluation and can be found on our web page at http://www.fws.gov/raleigh. Please check the
web site often for updated information or changes
If your project contains suitable habitat for any of the federally -listed species known to be
present within the county where your project occurs, the proposed action has the potential to
adversely affect those species. As such, we recommend that surveys be conducted to determine
the species' presence or absence within the project area. The use of North Carolina Natural
Heritage program data should not be substituted for actual field surveys.
If you determine that the proposed action may affect (i.e., likely to adversely affect or not likely
to adversely affect) a federally -protected species, you should notify this office with your
determination, the results of your surveys, survey methodologies, and an analysis of the effects
of the action on listed species, including consideration of direct, indirect, and cumulative effects,
before conducting any activities that might affect the species. If you determine that the proposed
action will have no effect (i.e., no beneficial or adverse, direct or indirect effect) on federally
listed species, then you are not required to contact our office for concurrence (unless an
Environmental Impact Statement is prepared). However, you should maintain a complete record
of the assessment, including steps leading to your determination of effect, the qualified personnel
conducting the assessment, habitat conditions, site photographs, and any other related articles.
Please be aware that bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668 et seq.), and projects affecting these species may require
development of an eagle conservation plan (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/
eagle_guidance.html). Additionally, wind energy projects should follow the wind energy
guidelines (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/) for minimizing impacts to migratory birds and
bats.
Guidance for minimizing impacts to migratory birds for projects including communications
towers (e.g., cellular, digital television, radio, and emergency broadcast) can be found at: http://
www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Hazards/towers/towers.htm; http://
www.towerkill.com; and http://www.fws. og v/mi rgratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Hazards/towers/
comtow.html.
Not all Threatened and Endangered Species that occur in North Carolina are subject to section 7
consultation with the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service. Atlantic and shortnose sturgeon, sea
turtles,when in the water, and certain marine mammals are under purview of the National Marine
Fisheries Service. If your project occurs in marine, estuarine, or coastal river systems you should
also contact the National Marine Fisheries Service, http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/
We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages
Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project
planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Tracking Number in
the header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project
that you submit to our office. If you have any questions or comments, please contact John Ellis
of this office at [e-mail].

05/18/2018 Event Code: 04EN2000-2018-E-01663
Attachment(s):
• Official Species List

05/18/2018 Event Code: 04EN2000-2018-E-01663
Official Species List
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the
requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether
any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed
action".
This species list is provided by:
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
[phone]

05/18/2018 Event Code: 04EN2000-2018-E-01663
Project Summary
Consultation Code: 04EN2000-2018-SLI-0761
Event Code: 04EN2000-2018-E-01663
Project Name: Arabia Bay
Project Type: LAND - RESTORATION / ENHANCEMENT
Project Description: This proposal describes the Arabia Bay Wetland Mitigation Site (Site) and
is designed specifically to assist in fulfilling
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
(NCDENR) Division of Mitigation Services
(NCDMS) mitigation goals. The Site is located within 14 -digit Cataloging
Unit and Targeted Local Watershed
03 03 000415 0011, approximately 4.5 miles southeast of Raeford, NC and
northeast of the intersection of Arabia Road
(SR 1003) and LA Sandy Road (Figures 1 and 2, Appendix A). The Site is
not located within a Local Watershed Planning
area.
The Site is proposed to include 16.0 acres of reestablished non -riparian
wetlands. Site alterations include the
cessation of row crop production, restoration of wetlands, and planting
native, woody vegetation within the entire
16.01 -acre Site easement. Mitigation outlined in this report will result in
net gains in hydrology, water quality, and
habitat functions, and are designed to provide 16.0 Non -riparian Wetland
Mitigation Units.
Construction and planting will occur outside of the growing season during
the winter months.
Project Location:
Approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:
www.aoogle.com/m!ips/Tlace/34.9566499476421 IN79.13785335625643W
2

05/18/2018 Event Code: 04EN2000-2018-E-01663
14IIJ4
Q
Counties: Hoke, NC
4
v

05/18/2018 Event Code: 04EN2000-2018-E-01663 4
Endangered Species Act Species
There is a total of 6 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.
Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include
species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species
list because a project could affect downstream species.
IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA
Fisheriesl, as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the
Department of Commerce.
See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially
within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office
if you have questions.
NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an
office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of
Commerce.
Birds
NAME STATUS
Red -cockaded Woodpecker Picoides borealis Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws. oe v/ecp/species/7614
Reptiles
NAME
STATUS
American Alligator Alligator mississippiensis
Similarity of
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Appearance
Species profile: htips:Hecos.fws. og v/ecp/species/776
(Threatened)
Insects
NAME
STATUS
Saint Francis' Satyr Butterfly Neonympha mitchellii francisci
Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: hiips:Hecos.fws. og v/ecp/species/5419

05/18/2018 Event Code: 04EN2000-2018-E-01663
Flowering Plants
NAME STATUS
American Chaffseed Schwalbea americana Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: htips:Hecos.fws. og v/ecp/species/1286
Michaux's Sumac Rhus michauxii Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: htips:Hecos.fws. og v/ecp/species/5217
Rough -leaved Loosestrife Lysimachia asperulaefolia Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: htips:Hecos.fws. og v/ecp/species/2747
Critical habitats
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECTAREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S
JURISDICTION.

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh ES Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
July 6, 2018
Kim Browning
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
Mitigation Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 2.7587
Re: Arabia Bay Wetland Mitigation Site / SAW -2018-01151/ Hoke County
Dear Mrs. Browning:
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed the project advertised in the above
referenced Public Notice. The project, as advertised in the Public Notice, is expected to have
minimal adverse impacts to fish and wildlife resources. Therefore, we have no objection to the
activity as described in the permit application.
In accordance with the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended; (ESA) and based on the
information provided, and other available information, it appears the action is not likely to adversely
affect federally listed species or their critical habitat as defined by the ESA. We believe that the
requirements of section 7 (a)(2) of the ESA have been satisfied for this project. Please remember
that obligations under the ESA must be reconsidered if: (1) new information identifies impacts of this
action that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner not previously considered; (2) this
action is modified in a manner that was not considered in this review; or, (3) a new species is listed
or critical habitat determined that may be affected by the identified action.
For your convenience a list of all federally protected endangered and.threatened species in North
Carolina is now available on our website at <http://wtivw.fws.gov/raleigh>. Our web page contains a
complete and updated list of federally protected species, and a list of federal species of concern
known to occur in each county in North Carolina.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to review and provide comments on the proposed action.
Should you have any questions regarding the project, please contact Kathy Matthews at [phone],
extension 27.
Xe
crly,
e Be min,
�I Field Supervisor
cc: NMFS, Beaufort, NC
EPA, Atlanta, GA
WRC, Raleigh

Arabia Bay
3941 Arabia Road
Raeford, NC 28376
Inquiry Number: 5328451.2s
June 11, 2018
6 Armstrong Road, 4th floor
Shelton, CT 06484
(rEDR` Toll Free: 800.352.0050
www.edrnet.com
FORM -PBA -CCA

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A search of available environmental records was conducted by Environmental Data Resources, Inc (EDR).
The report was designed to assist parties seeking to meet the search requirements of EPA's Standards
and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries (40 CFR Part 312), the ASTM Standard Practice for
Environmental Site Assessments (E 1527-13), the ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site
Assessments for Forestland or Rural Property (E 2247-16), the ASTM Standard Practice for Limited
Environmental Due Diligence: Transaction Screen Process (E 1528-14) or custom requirements developed
for the evaluation of environmental risk associated with a parcel of real estate.
TARGET PROPERTY INFORMATION
ADDRESS
3941 ARABIA ROAD
RAEFORD, NC 28376
COORDINATES
Latitude (North):
Longitude (West):
Universal Tranverse Mercator:
UTM X (Meters):
UTM Y (Meters):
Elevation:
34.9570000 - 34" 57'25.20"
79.1379000 - 79° 8' 16.44"
Zone 17
670022.8
3869660.5
217 ft. above sea level
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP ASSOCIATED WITH TARGET PROPERTY
Target Property Map: 5946403 RAEFORD, NC
Version Date: 2013
East Map: 5946401 PARKTON, NC
Version Date: 2013
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY IN THIS REPORT
Portions of Photo from: 20140517
Source: USDA
TC5328451.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1

MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
Target Property Address:
3941 ARABIA ROAD
RAEFORD, NC 28376
Click on Map ID to see full detail.
MAP
ID SITE NAME ADDRESS DATABASE ACRONYMS
RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.)
ELEVATION DIRECTION
JACKSON'S CASH MART 4100 ARABIA ROAD LUST Higher 1686, 0.319, SSE
5328451.2s Page 2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
LUST: The Leaking Underground Storage Tank Incidents Management Database contains an inventory
of reported leaking underground storage tank incidents. The data come from the Department of Environment, &
Natural Resources' Incidents by Address.
A review of the LUST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 02/02/2018 has revealed that there is 1 LUST
site within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property.
Equal/Higher Elevation
Address
JACKSON'S CASH MART 4100 ARABIA ROAD
Incident Phase: Closed Out
Incident Number: 13285
Current Status: File Located in Archives
Direction / Distance Map ID Page
SSE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.319 mi.) 1 8
TC5328451.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
There were no unmapped sites in this report.
TC5328451.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 8

OVERVIEW MAP - 5328451.2S
SITE NAME: Arabia Bay CLIENT: Restoration Systems, LLC
ADDRESS: 3941 Arabia Road CONTACT: JD Hamby
Raeford NC 28376 INQUIRY #: 5328451.2s
LAT/LONG: 34.957 / 79.1379 DATE: June 11, 2018 4:31 pm
Copyright cg 2018 EDR, Inc. 0 2015 TomTom Rai. 2015.
Target Property
o Iia
1/2 1 Miles
Sites at elevations higher than
or equal to the target property
Indian Reservations BIA
0 Hazardous Substance
�
Sites at elevations lower than
Power transmission lines
Disposal Sites
the target property
100 -year flood zone
A
Manufactured Gas Plants
500 flood zone
National Priority List Sites
year
Dept. Defense Sites
National Wetland Inventory
0
State Wetlands
This report includes Interactive Map Layers to
display and/or hide map information. The
legend includes only those icons for the
default map view.
SITE NAME: Arabia Bay CLIENT: Restoration Systems, LLC
ADDRESS: 3941 Arabia Road CONTACT: JD Hamby
Raeford NC 28376 INQUIRY #: 5328451.2s
LAT/LONG: 34.957 / 79.1379 DATE: June 11, 2018 4:31 pm
Copyright cg 2018 EDR, Inc. 0 2015 TomTom Rai. 2015.

Appendix F
Performance Bond
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) Appendices
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019

e
PERFORMANCE BOND Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America
One Tower Square, Hartford, CT 06183
Bond No. 106979588
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that we, Restoration Systems, LLC as Principal, and Travelers Casualty
and Surety Company of America, licensed to do business in the State of, North Carolina as Surety, are held and firmly
bound unto North Carolina -Department of Environmental Qualiy — Division of Mitigation Services (Obligee), in the
penal sum of t=our Hundred Thirteen Thousand Six Hundred Dollars ($413,600.00), lawful money of the United States
of America, for the payment of which sum, well and truly to be made, the Principal and Surety do bind themselves, their
heirs, executors, administrators, and successors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents.
THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that whereas the above bounden Principal has entered into certain
written Contract with the above named Obligee, effective the 9th day of April, 2018 for Arabia_ Bay Non-Riyerine
Wetland Mitigation Site in the Cape Fear River Basin, Cataloging Unit 03030004 (Contract _7529) -per R_FP-16-
007332 and more fully described in said Contract, a copy of which is attached, which Contract is made a part hereof and
incorporated herein by reference, except that nothing said therein shall alter, enlarge, expand or otherwise modify the
term of the bond as set out below.
NOW, THEREFORE, if Principal, its executors, administrators, successors and assigns shall promptly and faithfully
perform the Contract, according to the terms, stipulations or conditions thereof, then this obligation shall become null and
void, otherwise to remain in full force and effect. This bond is executed by the Surety and accepted by the Obligee
subject to the following express condition:
Notwithstanding the provisions of the Contract, this bond will commence on the date of approval of the Arabian Bay Non-
Riverine Wetland Mitigation Site Mitigation Plan and will remain in effect until the Principal has received written
notification from the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality - Division of Mitigation Services that the
requirements of Task 6 (Submittal of Baseline Monitoring Report) have been met, but may be extended by the Surety at
its sole option by Continuation Certificate. However, neither nonrenewal by the Surety, nor the failure or inability of the
Principal to file a replacement bond in the event of nonrenewal, shall itself constitute a loss to the Obligee recoverable
under this bond or any renewal or continuation thereof. The liability of the Surety under this bond and all Continuation
Certificates issued in connection therewith shall not be cumulative and shall in no event exceed the amount as set forth in
this bond or in any additions, riders, or endorsements properly issued by the Surety as supplements thereto.
Sealed with our seals and dated this 19th day of February . 2019.
;� 9. -.0 1,%.e '--, ::�
Witness
4
Witness
Agreed and acknowledged this _ day of , 2018
By:
S-5025 (08-99)
Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America
JW4 0. KA kltt
NgK-
Julia C. McElligott, Attorn -in-Fact
Obligee
McGriff Insurance Services
4309 Emperor Blvd Suite 300
Durham, NC 27709

WARNING: THIS POWER OF ATTORNEY IS INVALID WITHOUT THE RED BORDER
:ftk POWER OF ATTORNEY
TRAVELERSJ Farmington Casualty Company St. Paul Mercury Insurance Company
Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Company Travelers Casualty and Surety Company
Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Underwriters, Inc. Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America
St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company
St. Paul Guardian Insurance Company
Attorney -In Fact No. 230519
Certificate No. 007077194
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That Farmington Casualty Company, St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company, St. Paul Guardian Insurance
Company, St. Paul Mercury Insurance Company, Travelers Casualty and Surety Company, Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America, and United States
Fidelity and Guaranty Company are corporations duly organized under the laws of the State of Connecticut, that Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Company is a
corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of Iowa, and that Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Underwriters, Inc., is a corporation duly organized under the
laws of the State of Wisconsin (herein collectively called the "Companies"), and that the Companies do hereby make, constitute and appoint
Angela B. Britt, Richard V. Haar Jr., Phoebe C. Honeycutt, Kenneth J. Peeples, Heather Burroughs, Neil B. Biller, Bobbi D. Pendleton, Christopher A.
Lydick, Julia C. McElligott, Adam Pfanmiller, and Jason Lee Sayers
of the City of Durham , State Of. North Carolina , their true and lawful Attorney(s)-in-Fact,
each in their separate capacity if more than one is named above, to sign, execute, seal and acknowledge any and all bonds, recognizances, conditional undertakings and
other writings obligatory in the nature thereof on behalf of the Companies in their business of guaranteeing the fidelity of persons, guaranteeing the performance of
contracts and executing or guaranteeing bonds and undertakings required or permitted in any actions or proceedings allowed by law.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Companies have caused this instrument to be signed and their corporate seals to be hereto affixed, this
day of December 2QI.d
State of Connecticut
City of Hartford ss.
Farmington Casualty Company
Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Company
Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Underwriters, Inc.
St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company
St. Paul Guardian Insurance Company
21 st
St. Paul Mercury Insurance Company
Travelers Casualty and Surety Company
Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America
United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company
I ARTFORD,
n Di., 7 Hca�S jtl may... �.-•'r'i°n q� i apt' �F+ . yT` A!T AIH
By: Y
Robert L. Raney, Senior Vice President
On this the 21st day of December 2016 before me personally appeared Robert L. Raney, who acknowledged himself to
be the Senior Vice President of Farmington Casualty Company, Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Company, Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Underwriters, Inc., St. Paul
Fire and Marine Insurance Company, St. Paul Guardian Insurance Company, St. Paul Mercury Insurance Company, Travelers Casualty and Surety Company, Travelers
Casualty and Surety Company of America, and United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company, and that he, as such, being authorized so to do, executed the foregoing
instrument for the purposes therein contained by signing on behalf of the corporations by himself as a duly authorized officer.
07(9;,�Oplk
In Witness Whereof, I hereunto set my hand and official seal.My Commission expires the 30th day of June, 2021.
58440-5-16 Printed in U.S.A.
RED
Marie C. Tetreault, Notary Public

Appendix G
Site Protection Instrument
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) Appendices
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019

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 ag ., 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 1 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 2 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 3 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 4 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 5 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 6 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 7 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 8 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 9 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 10 of 11

Exhibit A
[INSERT LEGAL DESCRIPTION]
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 11 of 11

Appendix H
Credit Release Schedule
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) Appendices
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019

The standard release schedule for ILF credits generated through wetland mitigation projects has
been modified to meet the new standards for the monitoring timeframes provided in this guidance
document.
The schedules below list the updated credit release schedules for wetland mitigation projects
developed by ILF sites in North Carolina:
Arabia Bay Wetland Mitigation Site Credit Release Schedule and Milestones
Credit
ILF/NCDMS
Release
Milestone
Release Activity
Interim Release
Total Released
Site Establishment (includes all required criteria
1
stated above)
0%
0%
Completion of all initial physical and biological
improvements made pursuant to the Mitigation
30%
30%
2
Plan
Year 1 monitoring report demonstrates that
3
interim performance standards have been met
o
10%
0
40/o
Year 2 monitoring report demonstrates that
4
interim performance standards have been met
o
10/0
50%
Year 3 monitoring report demonstrates that
5
interim performance standards have been met
o
15%
0
65/o
Year 4 monitoring report demonstrates that
6
interim performance standards have been met
o
5 /0
0
70/o
Year 5 monitoring report demonstrates that
7
interim performance standards have been met
°
15%
85%
Year 6 monitoring report demonstrates that
8*
interim performance standards have been met
o
5 /0
0
90/o
Year 7 monitoring report demonstrates that
9
performance standards have been met
o
10%
100 0
/o
*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.
31

Appendix I
Maintenance Plan
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) Appendices
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019

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
Vegetation shall be maintained to ensure the health and vigor of the targeted
plant community. Routine vegetation maintenance and repair activities may
include supplemental planting, pruning, mulching, and fertilizing. Exotic invasive
Vegetation
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.
Site boundaries shall be identified in the field to ensure clear distinction between
the mitigation site and adjacent properties. Boundaries may be identified by
Site Boundary
fence, marker, 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.
Terracell Drop
Routine maintenance and repair activities may include removal of debris and
supplemental installation of live stakes and other target vegetation along the
Structure
channel. Undermining of the structure may require repair or replacement.

Appendix J
Construction Plans
Erosion Control Plan
Structure Details
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) Appendices
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019

H0 0
U
O
U
VICINITY MAP
Not to Scale
CONSTRUCTION PLANS
z
ARABIA BAY SITE
LOCATION: HOKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
IZ
�D TYPE OF WORK: WETLAND RESTORATION AND MITIGATION (CLEARING,
GRUBBING, GRADING, AND EROSION CONTROL)
THESE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLANS COMPLY
WITH THE REGULATIONS SET FORTH BY THE
NCG-010000 GENERAL CONSTRUCTION PERMIT EFFECTIVE AUGUST 1, 2016
ISSUED BY THE NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY - DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES.
7
BTA'IS
QI'ATB P-- RBPBRBNCB Na
SHEET
TO�
NeC,
ARABIA BAY SITE
]�
DWR PROJECT #2018-0784
INDEX OF SHEETS:
1
2 — 26
3
4
5
6
TITLE SHEET
DETAILS
NOTES
MITIGATION PLAN OVERALL
MITIGATION PLAN VIEW—IN
PLANTING PLAN
LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION:
17.4 ACRES
M
DO
C' DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
Q UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
Z
DeS19-d By. Prepared In the Office of:
Axiom Ernlronmenta/ SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
218 Snow Ave ., ''
Ro/e1g NC 27603 905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
h RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
TEL [phone]
GRANT LEWIS �1'�� ENG FZ LICENSE NO. C-890
Axiom Environmental, Inc. PROJECT DESIGNER
Restoration Systems
1101 Haynes St.
Suite 211 JOSHUA G. DALTON, P.E.
Ra/ei9t%NC 27604 PROJECT ENGINEER
WORTH CREECH
SITE CONSTRUCTION MANAGER

WATER SURFACE
ELEVATION
TR TERRACELL
8 IN TERRACELL
SYNTHETIC GEOGRID
DROP STRUCTURE -TERRACELL
BR TERRACELL
-------------
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
PROFILE ARMORED POOL
(SEE NOTES)
TERRACELL STRUCTURE NOTES:
1. CONTRACTOR WILL INSTALL 8 -INCH TERRACELL SYNTHETIC GEOGRID AS PER THE MANUFACTURER'S
SPECIFICATIONS.
2. THE POOL AT THE BOTTOM OF THE DROP STRUCTURE WILL BE ARMORED WITH GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
AND SUITABLE NATURAL BED MATERIAL.
3. NATURAL BED MATERIAL IS DEFINED AS MATERIAL OBTAINED FROM STOCKPILES AT THE SITE RANGING
IN SIZE FROM 5" - 17" AVERAGE DIAMETER WITH THE MAJORITY OF MATERIAL HAVING 10" AVERAGE
DIAMETER, OR EQUIVALENT MATERIAL.
DRIVEWAY TYPICAL
8" 10,
6:1 .02
6.1,
0 00 0000 0 000 000 0000 �o 00 Qo o �o �oo �o .o �o �
3" DECOMPOSED
GRANITE SCREENINGS
(CRUSF-VRUN)
5" CLASS 'A' RIP RAP
1
8 IN TERRACELL
SYNTHETIC GEOGRID
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
CROSS-SECTION
SHEET NAME I SHEET NUMBER
DETAILS 1 2
PROJECT NAME ARABIA BAY WETLAND RESTORATION AND MITIGATION SITE
COUNTY: HME I DATE: 2019
SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
.' 905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
\I I/ TEL (919) B59-2243
- - ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
TERRACELL STRUCTURE NOTES:
1. CONTRACTOR WILL INSTALL 8 -INCH TERRACELL SYNTHETIC GEOGRID AS PER THE MANUFACTURER'S
SPECIFICATIONS.
2. ONCE THE SYNTHETIC GEOGRID HAS BEEN INSTALLED, GEOCELLS WILL BE BACKFILLED WITH GRAVEL
AND TOPSOIL AND PLANTED WITH EROSION CONTROL GRASSES AND WILLOW STAKES (SAL/. -NIGRA.
TOP AND BOTTOM STRAND -
SHALL BE 10 GAUGE MIN.
WIRE
NOTES
USE GEOTEXTILE A MINIMUM OF
36" IN WIDTH AND FASTEN ADEQUATELY
TO THE POSTS AND WIRE AS DIRECTED.
USE WIRE A MINIMUM OF 32"
IN WIDTH AND WITH A MINIMUM
OF 5 LINE WIRES WITH 12" VERTICAL
SPACING.
PROVIDE 5'-0" STEEL POST OF
THE SELF -FASTENER ANGLE STEEL
TYPE.
FOR MECHANICAL SLICING METHOD
INSTALLATION, GEOTEXTILE SHALL
BE A MAXIMUM OF 18" ABOVE GROUND
SURFACE.
8' MAX. WITH WIRE
MAX. WITHOUT WIRE
MIDDLE AND VERTICAL WIRES
SHALL BE 121/2 GAUGE MIN.
GEOTEXTILE
GEOTEXTILE
COMPACTED FILL
C
DATE:
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
24" MAX.
(18" MIN.)
8I„ I I I I I I I I I I
L STEEL POST - 2'-0" DEPTH
EXTENSION OF GEOTEXTILE AND
WIRE INTO TRENCH
z
o�
�Q
a
H U
ool
l
w QZLLx
a c3 o cs
cox�zw
O =o - Q
oz
rH
�o
0
o W
LL V
c7 z
z W
3 LL
I. -
_j
H
Q N
o �
z
U)CC
a
r O
IL
o�
Q W
O

0 M
C I
NOTES
USE NO. 5 OR NO. 57 STONE FOR SEDIMENT
CONTROL STONE.
VARIABLE
DIMENSION ' *
4
�3ft ►
1/ WIRE MESH
SEDIMENT CONTROL STONE
z
O Cn
H Q
¢
Z 0�CJ
LL
O O c x z
w¢zLLx
Hx�zw
�
ooN¢
z x
H
d p
uJ
p
USE HARDWARE CLOTH 24 GAUGE WIRE MESH
2 fit
WITH 1/4 INCH MESH OPENINGS.
1 ft min
1
W
v
INSTALL 5 FT. SELF FASTENER ANGLE STEEL
POST 2 FT. DEEP MINIMUM.
LLI
�LL.
0
ATTACH HARDWARE CLOTH TO POSTS WITH WIRE
STAPLE OR OTHER ACCEPTABLE METHODS.
J
CD O
SPACE POSTS A MAXIMUM OF 3 FT.
H
FOR INSTALLATION BETWEEN SECTIONS OF
1/ WIRE MESH
¢ Z
O
SILT FENCE, EXTEND SEDIMENT CONTROL
p V
STONE A MINIMUM OF 12" ON EACH SIDE OF
SEDIMENT
CONTROL STONE
p
SPECIAL SEDIMENT CONTROL FENCE SECTION.
H
1 ft min
0 Z
W
WATER FLOW 2 , o
E-
u)
W
-1II III ;IILIII�II-III
J
STEEL POST - 2 ft DEPTH
0 Q
~
1/4 WIRE
MESH ,
_
c
V
2 ft
W
D_
V)
SHEET 1 OF 1
1606.01
SEDIMENT CONTROL STONE
STRUCTURAL ST(
FI nW
PLAN
NOTES
USE CLASS B EROSION CONTROL STONE
FOR STRUCTURAL STONE.
USE NO. 5 OR NO. 57 STONE FOR SEDIMENT
CONTROL STONE.
2/3 CHANNEL
WIDTH1'MIN -I--1
V MIN 20° o I ;bp°°
H 2' MIa° �" 12„
------ SECTION B -B
z
o�
�Q
ooU"z -
U O
H x ~ -w
0 H L, O J
00fn¢
z
H-
CL �
O
Q
iHEET 1 OF 1
1633.01
SHEET NAME I SHEET NUMBER
DETAILS I 2A
PROJECT NAME ARABIA BAY WETLAND RESTORATION AND MITIGATION SITE
COUNTY: HOKE I DATE: 2019
SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
.' WSJONESFRANKLINROAD
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
\I I/ TEL[phone]
- - ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
\\\\111111111///
\ Q)
OII II111\\\\
DATE.
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED

\„ Jc
X04,
NOTES
1. PROVIDE TURNING RADIUS SUFFICIENT TO ACCOMMODATE LARGE
TRUCKS.
2. LOCATE ENTRANCES TO PROVIDE FOR UTILIZATION
BY ALL CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES.
3. MUST BE MAINTAINED IN A CONDITION WHICH WILL PREVENT
TRACKING OR DIRECT FLOW OF MUD ONTO STREETS.
PERIODIC TOPDRESSING WITH STONE WILL BE NECESSARY.
4. ANY MATERIAL TRACKED ONTO THE ROADWAY MUST BE
CLEANED UP IMMEDIATELY.
5. LOCATE GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE AT ALL POINTS OF
INGRESS AND EGRESS UNTIL SITE IS STABILIZED. PROVIDE
FREQUENT CHECKS OF THE DEVICE AND TIMELY MAINTENANCE.
6. NUMBER AND LOCATION OF CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES TO
BE DETERMINED BY THE ENGINEER.
7. USE CLASS 'A' STONE OR OTHER COARSE AGGREGATE APPROVED
BY THE ENGINEER.
8. INSTALL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES IN A WAY TO PREVENT VEHICLES
FROM BYPASSING CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE LEAVING PROJECT SITE.
NOTE: PLACE GEOTEXTILE FOR DRAINAGE BENEATH STONE
NEW STREAMBANK SHALL
BE TREATED AS
SPECIFIED IN PLANS
EXTEND CHANNEL BLOCK
IN. OF BEYOND INVERT
F EXISTING CHANNEL
CHANNEL
INVERT
EXTEND CHANNEL BLOCK �✓ ��
MIN. OF BEYOND LIMITS
OF EXISTING CHANNEL
PLAN VIEW
MIN.
LENGTH UNCOMPACTED
BACKFILL
'OMPACTED
3ACKFILL
FLOW
�r
COMPACTED
BACKFILL
SECTION B -B
STREAM PLUG
NOT TO SCALE
Z
o�
�Q
a
LL LL0,—Z
W QZLL=
H=LLZw
C0o0N¢
z
rH
�o
0
W
0
Z
fn Q
O p�
LL
c7 Z
z UJ
3 Z
oO
Iy
o O
z CC
-- N
u) Z
O
V
3
o J
O UJ
cz: >
Q
0:
O
607.01
UNCOMPACTED
BACKFILL
5' Min. 10'
SECTION A -A
1.5'
FINISH GRADE
rr 0
Lu
2; r H
COMPACTED
BACKFILL
IMPERVIOUS SELECT
MATERIAL (SEE PROJECT
SPECIAL PROVISIONS)
NOTES:
1) CHANNEL BLOCK SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS.
2) BLOCK SHOULD BE INSTALLED AT THE INTERFACE BETWEEN EXISTING
CHANNEL AND PROPOSED CHANNEL.
3) BOTTOM OF BLOCK SHOULD BE A MINIMUM OF BELOW THE INVERT
OF THE EXISTING CHANNEL.
4) BLOCK SHOULD EXTEND A MINIMUM OF BEYOND THE LIMITS OF THE
EXISTING STREAM CHANNEL.
5) INSTALL EROSION CONTROL MATTING AND SEED IN ACCORDANCE WITH
THE PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS IMMEDIATELY AFTER GRADING.
6) COMPACT BACKFILL TO EXTENT POSSIBLE OR AT THE DIRECTION OF
THE ENGINEER.
SHEET NAME I SHEET NUMBER
PROJECT NAME:
/ A
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
COUNTY: HOKE I DATE: 2019
SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
101 905 JO NESFRANKLINROAD
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
\I I/ TEL (919) B59-2243
- _ - ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
DATE.
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL I
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED

EROSION CONTROL CONSTRUCTION
1) Obtain grading permit.
2) Install temporary construction entrance, silt fencing, access roads, and other measures shown on the
approved erosion and sedimentation control plan.
3) Install rain gage on site. Contractor shall provide a log book at the project site and shall read and record
rain amounts at the same time each day.
4) Contact local Soil Erosion Authority or State for on-site inspection by Environmental Inspector and
obtain certificate of compliance.
5) Begin clearing - maintain devices as necessary.
6) Begin channel fill in - stockpile waste material in designated spoil areas and surround with silt fencing.
7) Temporary or permanent ground cover stabilization shall occur within 7 calendar days from the last
land -disturbing activity, with the following exceptions in which temporary or permanent ground cover
shall be provided within 14 calendar days from the last land -disturbing activity:
• Slopes between 2:1 and 3:1, with a slope length of 10 feet or less
• Slopes 3:1 or flatter, with a slope length of 50 feet or less
• Slopes 4:1 or flatter
8) Roughen the soil using disc plow method, not deep ripping.
9) All graded areas must be seeded, mulched, and matted at the end of each day. For this reason, daily
disturbance is limited to the length of ditch that can be completed within daily work hours.
10) Once a existing channel fill in section is stabilized, water may be reintroduced to the channel.
11) When construction is complete and all areas are stabilized completely, call for inspection by
Environmental Inspector.
12) If site is approved, remove silt fencing, other measures, etc. and seed out any resulting bare areas.
13) When vegetation has been established, call for final site inspection by Environmental Inspector.
SEEDING SCHEDULE
TEMPORARY HERBACEOUS SEED
Common Name
Scientific Name
Application Rate
Application Dates
7 DAYS
NONE
130 lbs. per acre
7 DAYS
Grain Rye ^
Secale cereale
7 DAYS
Year-round
Indian grass
Sorghastrum nutans
(3 lbs. per 1,000 ft')
SLOPES 3:1 OR FLATTER
14 DAYS
7 DAYS FOR SLOPES GREATER THAN 50'IN
15 lbs per acre
Schizachyrium scoparium
Orchard Grass B
Dactylis glomerata
14 DAYS
September - March
Purple -top
Tridens flavus
(0.35 lbs. per 1,000 It)
Switch grass
Panicum virgatum
10%
40 lbs. per acreMay
Elymus virginicus
Brown Top Millet B
Panicum ramosum
(1.0 lbs. per 1,000 It)
— September
25 lbs. per acreMay
German Millet B
Setaria Italica
—September
(0.5 lbs. per 1,000 It)
Primarily utilized on disturbed or stockpiled areas.
s Primarily utilized near stream channels and streambanks.
SITE DESCRIPTION
STABILIZATION TIME
TIMEFRAME EXCEPTIONS
PERIMETER DIKES, SWALES, DITCHES AND SLOPES
7 DAYS
NONE
HIGH DUALITY WATER (HOW) ZONES
7 DAYS
NONE
SLOPES STEEPER THAN 3:1
7 DAYS
IF SLOPES ARE 10° OR LESS IN LENGTH AND ARE
Indian grass
Sorghastrum nutans
NOT STEEPER THAN 2:1,14 DAYS ARE ALLOWED.
SLOPES 3:1 OR FLATTER
14 DAYS
7 DAYS FOR SLOPES GREATER THAN 50'IN
Little Bluestem
Schizachyrium scoparium
LENGTH.
ALL OTHER AREAS WITH SLOPES FLATTER THAN 4:1
14 DAYS
NONE, EXCEPT FOR PERIMETERS AND HOW ZONES.
L
M
I
SEEDING SCHEDULE
PERMANENT HERBACEOUS SEED
SHEET NAME
SHEET NUMBER
PROJECT NAME: ARABIA BAY WETLAND RESTORATION AND MITIGATION SITE
COUNTY: HOKE I DATE: 2019
SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
. ' 905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
\I I/ TEL let 9)859-2243
- - ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
DATE:
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL I
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
Permanent herbaceous seeds containing a custom mix of the following forbs and grasses will be used from
within the bankfull channel to the limits of the riparian buffer. The application timeframe for the mix is March
through June and the minimum rate is 30 lbs/acre. This mix will also be used to plant the staging and stockpile
areas and any other areas as directed by the designer.
Common Name
Scientific Name
Mix Percentage
Big Bluestem
Andropogon gerardii
15%
Deer tongue
Dichanthelium clandstinum
10%
Gama grass
Tripsicum dactyloides
10%
Indian grass
Sorghastrum nutans
10%
Lance leaftickseed
Coreopsis lanceolata
5%
Little Bluestem
Schizachyrium scoparium
10%
Partridge pea
Chamaecrista fasciculate
5%
Purple -top
Tridens flavus
10%
Switch grass
Panicum virgatum
10%
Virginia wild rye
Elymus virginicus
15%
Total
100%

01
l f\\ / // " 2 50' 25' 0 50' 100'
`)I
SE .PSH 5 �� ITITIT�TTTl��/�I
SCALE: 1"=100'
�� ►� 1- •�✓ ► \ N �dti
�i /� / i • =___ ►' ►--- --=--. ___ NEW GRAVEL DRIVEWAY \
/ �J •-- l i -�.� SEE TYPICAL (PSH 02)
SHEET NAME
PROJECT NAME:
SHEET NUMBER
I I COUNTY: h'OKE I DATE: 209
SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
..' 905JONESFRANKI INROAD
' RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27808
\I I/ TEL[phone]
- - ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
SN
K 411,
DITCH PLUG
SEE DETAIL (PSH 0213) r/ ( •
GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION \�
ENTRANCE — SEE STAGI C� \�1 ►�
DETAIL (PSH 0213) AREA s ' ►I \
\ / ILU I I
C / �'Q
DATE:
DOCMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL I
UU
NLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
TOPOGRAHY BASED ON
NC SPATIAL DATA QL2 LIDAR
N I I \
1
N� FILL IN EXISTING 1 \ I
C 1 ' DRAINAGE DITCH �`ke- eLNell I I I THE PROPOSED EASEMENT HAS NOT
I W TO EXISTING FIELD °p6 ��t "� I I I BEEN SURVEYED OR TIED TO NC
ELEVATION ��S `( ire 1 \ I I GRID. DURING THE DEVELOPMENT OF
°� �� I I THE MAP OF RECORD FOR PURCHASE
EST 2300 CY \.\0' $ 1 1 I I 1 I OF THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT, THE
1 0
9 (• i I I I I EASEMENT WILL BE SURVEYED BY A
j F<e�e6eooP�ce Qo, h I I LICENSED SURVEYOR AND TIED TO
P015 0(0- m; I l i I NC GRID.
IW o 1 I I
co I I FILL IN EXISTING
N I DRAINAGE DITCH
LU TO EXISTING FIELD i I 1hh�1
CW� \ ELEVATION I'1
\
♦ �1 ►�
1
o � � of J �� � / � ►►�
DITCH PLUG ♦ ►
SEE DETAIL (PSHI�6213) ��� / /� ►►
1605.01 Temporary Silt Fence
l /♦ / ► ►
2zz
\ �� / �,� \ I �j�, / / / ►► ; Special Se�nxnnemt
\ ��, \ \ / ,�I / / / ► 1606.01 Control ]Fence
DITCH PLUG /Zz/ ♦� / / / / / / ► ►
SEE DETAIL (PSH 0213) / �♦ / J ► 1633.01 Temporary Rock Silt
Check Type -A
10
10 Limits of Disturbance
-- - -- -- ��'� / I ) / I --————————
Gravel Construction
]Entrance
FILL IN EXISTING _ �z2 - -� / / / // _ _
35,'/ / "' _\ �� _— — DRAINAGE DITCH —� �gB �� l / / moi' — — �/

rn
1 �
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
1 1
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
TEL [phone]
1 1
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C 890
1 1
1 /
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
1 1
1
----------
��111111111/j�
1
\
C
1160,
1 1
I
1
'
1 1
\
X11 II111\\\\
\ \I
o
DATE.
1 1
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
\
�
I / 1
TOPOGRAHY BASED ON
_
\
NC SPATIAL DATA QL2 LIDAR
\
/
30' 15' 0 30' 60'
SCALE: 1"= 60'
i = 3T 3B' 242 (RT)—
�225 D = 9'32'57S A
L = 394JTT 204.49'
�T
R = 600.49' — — —`
a ` �
aw
J � �
r- L MITS OF DISTURBANCE \
NEW 6RAVOUIRIVEWAY
TYPICAL (PSH 02)
SHEET NUMBER
COUNTY: HOKf I DATE: 2019
SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP P A
1606.01 Temporary Silt Fence
1606.01 Special Sediment
Control Fence
1633.01 Temporary Rock Silt
Check Type`A
M
Limns of Disturbance
-- - - - - - - --
� I
' I I
I I
I I
j I I
1 1
I
I I
I
I 1
I
• \
_\ al, • •
♦ I
_7N
1 I
� 1
B 1 I
ST GING AREA
\ \ IS PSH 04) \��s 11 \
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
1 1
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
TEL [phone]
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C 890
1 1
1 1
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
1 1
1 ►
----------
��111111111/j�
1
\
C
1160,
1 1
I
'
1 1
\
X11 II111\\\\
\ \I
o
DATE.
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
\
�
TOPOGRAHY BASED ON
_
\
NC SPATIAL DATA QL2 LIDAR
\
1606.01 Temporary Silt Fence
1606.01 Special Sediment
Control Fence
1633.01 Temporary Rock Silt
Check Type`A
M
Limns of Disturbance
-- - - - - - - --
� I
' I I
I I
I I
j I I
1 1
I
I I
I
I 1
I
• \
_\ al, • •
♦ I
_7N
1 I
� 1
B 1 I
ST GING AREA
\ \ IS PSH 04) \��s 11 \

Appendix K
Water Balance Calculations
Mitigation Plan (DMS Project No. 100061) Appendices
Arabia Bay Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Hoke County, North Carolina February 2019

Arabia Bay Water Balance Calculation
Water Budget Equation
The hydrologic cycle of a wetland can be expressed in a water budget that accounts for water
inflows and outflows to the system, as follows:
where:
AS = [P + Si + G;] — [ET + S, +Ga]
AS = change in volume of water storage in a defined area over time
P = precipitation
Si = surface -water inflow
G; = ground -water inflow
ET = evapotranspiration
So = surface water outflow
Go = groundwater outflow
Water Budget Calculation Assumptions
This drained Carolina Bay will be restored as a single wetland polygon. The following
assumptions apply to the water budget calculation:
1. Precipitation that falls within the 16 -acre footprint will be the primary hydrologic input.
2. Surface -water and ground -water inflow will be secondary hydrologic inputs and are not
expected to be critical factors in restoring wetland hydrology. This is assumed because
of the smaller size of the local watershed (24 -acres excluding the 16 -acre footprint of the
restoration area) and the Site is bounded on the upslope side by the Candor soil series
which consist of excessively drained sandy textured soils.
3. Currently surface water outflow for the site is being conveyed off the Site via a ditch
network system, and will be eliminated by removing the culvert outlet during restoration
of the Carolina Bay.
4. The existing ditches have broken through the Site's restrictive soil layer. The restrictive
soil layer supports wetland hydrology by creating a perched water table. During
construction the ditches will be filled with clay material which will restore the
fragmented restrictive soil layer and prevent potential for vertical groundwater outflow.
Based on these assumptions it is assumed that no significant groundwater or surface water
inflow/outflow will occur at the Site to the degree that it will affect the restoration of wetland

hydrology. Applying these assumptions to the water budget equation, modifies the water balance
equation for the Site to:
AS = [P] — [ET]
Precipitation
The USDA NRCS provides Wetlands Climate Tables through the Agricultural Applied Climate
System (AgACIS) which includes climate data and summary reports. There are seven AgACIS
weather stations listed for Hoke County, however when queried all of these weather stations
displayed a message that there was insufficient data to provide probability analysis of
precipitation data. Therefore, the nearest weather station (Red Springs 1 SE, NC) which is
located —10 -miles to the south in Robeson County was used as it provided the data needed. The
precipitation data is the average of precipitation data collected from 1971 — 2000.
Evapotranspiration
As discussed above in the water budget calculation assumptions surface water and groundwater
outflows will be eliminated during construction of the Site, leaving evapotranspiration as the
only water loss for the system after construction is complete. The State Office of North Carolina
at NCSU developed the NC Climate Retrieval and Observations Network Of the Southeast
Database (NC CRONOS) provides Daily Reference Crop Evapotranspiration (ETo) and Daily
Crop Evapotranspiration (ETc) for the previous 48 -months at their weather stations around the
state. A crop coefficient is multiplied by the ETo in order to calculate ETc. The closest weather
station to the Site is the Fayetteville Airport (Station ID: KFAY) in Cumberland County, NC.
The KFAY weather station is —14 -miles east northeast of the Site.
The data was accessed from the NC CRONOS KFAY weather station in January 2019, and
provided ETo and ETc data. Field corn at mid-season growth stage was selected for ETc as this
crop has the highest water loss through evapotranspiration of the crops previously grown at the
Site. The ETo and ETc data provided was from Jan 2015 — Dec 2018, and was averaged for each
month in order to perform the water budget calculation.

Summary of Water Budgetysis Results
Month
Total
Precipitation
(in)
Wetland
Area (ac)
Direct
Precipitation
on Wetland
(ac -ft)
Total
Water
Available
(ac -ft)
Avg Eto
Rate (in)
Avg Etc
Rate (in)
ET Water
Loss (ac -ft)
Water
Water Budget
Budget Net Remaining
Balance +/- Total +/-
(ac -ft) (ac -ft)
Jan
4.03
16
5.37
5.37
2.16
2.59
1.16
4.21
Feb
3.42
16
4.56
4.56
2.87
3.44
1.31
3.25
7.47
Mar
4.24
16
5.65
5.65
4.54
5.45
2.57
3.09
10.55
Apr
3.07
16
4.09
4.09
5.77
6.93
2.36
1.73
12.28
May
3.30
16
4.40
4.40
6.72
8.06
2.96
1.44
13.73
Jun
4.19
16
5.59
5.59
7.33
8.79
4.09
1.49
15.22
J u I
5.83
16
7.77
7.77
7.48
8.97
5.81
1.96
17.18
Aug
4.70
16
6.27
6.27
6.37
7.64
3.99
2.28
19.46
Sep
4.58
16
6.11
6.11
4.96
5.9S
3.03
3.08
22.53
Oct
3.15
16
4.20
4.20
3.68
4.42
1.55
2.65
25.19
Nov
3.04
16
4.05
4.05
2.38
2.86
0.97
3.09
28.27
Dec
3.20
16
4.27
4.27
1.85
2.22
0.79
3.48
31.75
Totals:
46.75
62.33
62.33
56.11
67.33
30.58
31.75
Results and Conclusions
The monthly and annual water budget results for the proposed wetlands are presented in the
"Water Budget Net Balance +/-" column of the table above. A monthly running total of the water
budget is presented in "Water Budget Remaining Total +/-" column of the table above. No water
deficits were observed in the calculation during any month of the year. A water surplus is
available on a monthly and annual basis. This analysis reflects monthly water budget conditions
based on monthly direct precipitation and subtracting monthly evapotranspiration to arrive at
monthly water budget summaries.
Based on this calculation -2-feet surplus of water will cover the entire 16 -acre on an annual
basis. Considering the approximate depth to the restrictive soil layer the proposed wetland
project will be able to meet the wetland hydrology requirement during years of normal
precipitation.
References
Kreiser, G.S. 2003. A Wetland Restoration Project: Water Budget and Nutrient Analysis of a
Drained Carolina Bay (Master's Thesis). Retrieved from NCSU Library Repository. (Acessed on
December 14, 2018 hgps://repository.lib.ncsu.edu/handle/1840.16/243)
Mitsch, W.J., and J.G. Gosselink. 2000. Wetlands. 3rd edition. John Wiley & Sons, New York,
NY, USA.