20171295 Ver 1_PCN Form Submission_20190612

DR
02*10n of Water R"Ourc"
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
September 29, 2018 Ver 3
Initial Review
Has this project met the requirements for acceptance into the review process?*
r Yes
r No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
r Yes r No
Change only if needed.
BIMS # Assigned *
Version#*
20171295
1
Is a payment required for this project?*
* No payment required
What amout is owed?*
* Fee received
r $240.00
r Fee needed - send electronic notification
r $570.00
Reviewing Office* Select Project Reviewer*
Central Office - [phone] Mac Haupt:eads\dmhaupt
Information for Initial Review
1a. Name of project:
Scout
1a. Who is the Primary Contact?*
Brad Breslow
1 b. Primary Contact Email:*
[e-mail]
Date Submitted
6/12/2019
Nearest Body of Water
Hauser Creek
Basin
Yadkin-PeeDee
Water Classification
WS -IV, Class C
Site Coordinates
Latitude:
36.030798
A. Processing Information
County (or Counties) where the project is located:
Davie
Is this project a public transportation project?*
r Yes r No
Longitude:
-80.516312
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
V Section 404 Permit (wetlands, streams and waters, Clean Water Act)
F Section 10 Permit (navigable ureters, tidal waters, Rivers and Harbors Act)
1 b. What type(s) of permit(s) do you wish to seek authorization?
P Nationwide Permit (NWP)
F- Regional General Permit (RGP)
r- Standard (IP)
1c. Primary Contact Phone:*
[phone]

1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
r Yes r No
Nationwide Permit (NWP) Number:
NWP Numbers (for multiple NWPS):
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
P 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular
F Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
F Individual Permit
27 - Restoration
F 401 Water Quality Certification - Express
F Riparian Buffer Authorization
1e. Is this notification solelyfor the record because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWR 401 Certification:
For the record only for Corps Permit:
1f. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?*
r Yes r No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
r Yes r No
19. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
r Yes r No
Acceptance Letter Attachment
1h. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties?
r Yes r No
1j. Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?
r Yes r No
B. Applicant Information
1d. Who is applying for the permit?
Owner W Applicant (other than owner)
le. Is there an Agent/Consultant for this project?
C Yes r No
2. Owner Information
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
Environmental Banc and Exchange, Nancy Sparks Miller
2b. Deed book and page no.:
00179/006 and 00186/0050
2c. Responsible party:
2d. Address
Street Address
903 Spillman Road
Address Line 2
City
Mocksville
Postal / Zip Code
27028-0000
2e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
2g. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
3. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
3a. Name:
Brad Breslow
State/ Rwince / Fbgicn
North Carolina
Country
Davie
2f. Fax Number
r Yes r No
rYes rNo

3b. Business Name:
RES
3c. Address
Street Address
302 Jefferson Street
Address Lim 2
Suite 110
Cfty
Raleigh
Postal / Zip Cade
27605
3d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
3f. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
C. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Project Information
1b. Subdivision name:
(d appropriate)
1c. Nearest municipality/town:
Bermuda Run
2. Project Identification
State / Rovince / Region
North Carolina
Country
Wake
3e. Fax Number:
2a. Property Identification Number:
2b. Property size:
585135817 & 5853144949
13.22
2c. Project Address
Street Address
Address Lim 2
City
State/ Rovince / Ilegion
Fbstal / Zip Cbde
Country
3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project:*
Hauser Creek
3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water:*
WS -IV. Class C
3c. What river basin(s) is your project located in?*
Yadkin-PeeDee
3d. Please provide the 12 -digit HUC in which the project is located.
03040101
4. Project Description and History
4a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this application:*
The Scout Mitigation Site (the "Project') is located within a rural watershed in Davie County, appropmately eight miles west of Clemrnons and five miles northwest of Bermuda Run.
The Project is located within the Yadkin River Basin, North Carolina Department of Water Resources (NCDWR) sub -basin 03-07-02 and United States Geological Survey (USGS) 14 -
digit hydrologic unit code (HUC) 03040101160010. The Project area is contained within two parcels, where the conservation easement totals 13.22 acres. Hauser Creek is the main
hydrologic feature in the Project. There are also two unnamed tributaries and one wetland area included within the Project. Land -use around the Project is characterized by active
pasture and woodland. The total drainage area for the Project is 810 acres (1.26 mi2). Primary land use within the rural watershed consists of approximately 49% agriculture, 39
forest, and 8% residential. Impervious area covers appropmately two percent of the total watershed. Due to its location and proposed improvements, the Project Will provide numerous
ecological and water quality benefits within the Yadkin River Basin.
There is currently a total of 2,801 eAsting linear feet of stream, and is made up of Hauser Creek, and two unnamed tributaries (CH1 and CH2) that drain to Hauser Creek, and ultimately
to the Yadkin River. There is one wetland located within the project (Wetland D), that is appropmately 0.75 acres in size. Furthermore, The US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
National Wetland Inventory Map (NWI) does not depict any potential wetland areas within the Project
In general, all or portions of Hauser Creek, CH1, and CH2 do not function to their full potential. Current conditions demonstrate significant habitat degradation as a result of impacts from
agricultural land use, and water diversion. Most portions of the streams do not access their floodplains as frequently as they naturally would have prior to agricultural operations. In most
cases, the riparian buffer is in poor condition where much of the riparian buffer is devoid of trees or shrubs. Habitat along the majority of the restoration reaches is poor in that there is
little woody debris or overhanging vegetation for fish cover or protection for other aquatic species.
4b. Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
r Yes 6 No r Unknown
4d. Attach an 8 1/2 X11 excerpt from the most recent version of the USGS topographic map indicating the location of the project site. (for DWR)

Figure 4 - USGS Map.pdf
1.81 MB
4e. Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the published County NRCS Soil Survey map depicting the project site. (for DWR)
Figure 3 - Soils Map.pdf 2.5MB
4f. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
4g. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
2801
4h. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:*
The objective for this stream project is to restore and enhance design natural waterways with the appropriate cross-sectional dimension and slope that will provide function and meet the
appropriate success criteria for the existing streams complexes. Accomplishing this objective entails the restoration of natural stream characteristics, such as stable cross sections,
planform, and in -stream habitat. The floodplain areas will be hydrologically reconnected to the channel to provide natural exchange and storage during flooding events.
The design will be based on reference conditions, USACE guidance, and criteria that are developed during this project to achieve success. Additional project objectives include
restoring the riparian buffer with native vegetation, ensuring hydraulic stability, and treating invasive species.
41. Describe the overall project in detail, including indirect impacts and the type of equipment to be used:*
Stream restoration efforts along the tributaries of the Project will be accomplished through analyses of geomorphic conditions and watershed characteristics. The design approach
applies a combination of analytical and reference reach based design methods that meet objectives commensurate with both ecological and geomorphic improvements. Proposed
treatment activities may range from minor bank grading and planting to re-establishing stable planform and hydraulic geometry. For reaches requiring full restoration, natural design
concepts have been applied and verified through rigorous engineering analyses and modeling. The objective of this approach is to design a geomorphically stable channel that
provides habitat improvements and ties into the existing landscape.
The Project will include Priority I Restoration and Enhancement Level 11. Stream restoration will incorporate the design of a single -thread meandering channel, with parameters based on
data taken from reference sites, published empirical relationships, regional curves developed from existing project streams, and NC Regional Curves. Analytical design techniques will
also be a crucial element of the project and will be used to determine the design discharge and to verify the design as a whole.
Current stream conditions along the proposed restoration reaches exhibit habitat degradation as a result of historic impacts from livestock and channelization performed to promote
agricultural and residential activities. Additionally, the riparian buffer is in poor condition throughout most of the Project area where much of the riparian buffer is devoid of trees or
shrubs and active pasture or maintained field is present up to the edge of the existing channel.
The Project design approach began with a thorough study of existing conditions, including the onsite streams, valleys, and watershed. Design parameters, including active channel,
habitat and floodplain features were developed from analyses performed on the reference site data. Analytical design techniques were used to determine the design discharge and to
verify the design as a whole.
Engineering analysis will be performed using various hydrologic and hydraulic models to verify the reference reach based design. A combination of methods will be used to estimate
bankfull flows, and flows corresponding to other significant storm events. A HEC -RAS model will then be used to simulate water surface elevations of flows generated by the hydrologic
analysis. The development of the HEC model is an important component to the design; therefore, model input parameters are field verified when possible. Through this hydrologic
analysis, the design discharge (typically referenced as bankfull or dominant discharge) will be determined. The subsequent design will be based on this calculated discharge. As partof
the design process, a qualitative analysis of sediment supply will be performed by characterizing watershed conditions. A combination of windshield surveys, existing land use data, and
historical aerial photography, followed up by ground truthing, will be analyzed to assess existing and past watershed conditions and to determine if any changes occurred that would
significantly impact sediment supply. Design parameters developed through the analyses of reference reach data, watershed characterizations, and hydrologic and hydraulic modeling
Wit be confirmed using the Stable Channel Design function and/or the Sediment Transport Analysis components within HEC -RAS in conjunction with shear stress and velocity analyses.
Geomorphic and habitat studies will be performed concurrently with the engineering analyses. While stream design will be verified by simulations of hydrology and fluvial processes,
analogs of desirable habitat features will be derived from reference sites and integrated into the project design. Both in -stream and riparian habitat features will be designed. In -stream
structures will be used throughout the project to act as grade control and for bank stabilization by dissipating and redirecting the stream's energy. Bank stability may further be
enhanced through the installation of brush mattresses, live stakes and cuttings bundles.
Sections of abandoned stream channel will be backfilled with material excavated from on-site to the elevation of the floodplain in areas adjacent to the new channel, installing channel
plugs where necessary. The floodplain will be planted with native species creating a vegetated buffer, which will provide numerous water quality and ecological benefits. Stream banks
Wit be stabilized using a combination of grading, erosion control matting, bare -root plantings, native material revetment techniques (i.e., bioengineering), structure placement, and sod
transplants where possible. The stream and adjacent riparian areas will be protected by a minimum 50 -foot conservation easement which will be fenced to exclude livestock as needed.
The Project has been broken into the following design reaches:
Reach HC3 — This reach begins on the south end of the project and flows north towards the Mockingbird Mitigation Site, transitioning off site through a proposed 24 LF of 48 -inch
double barrel RCP at a 40 -foot -wide conservation easement break. This is the main reach of the project and is proposed to restore 2,686 LF. Sparse woodland and actively managed
pasture is located adjacent to the reach. Restoration activities will include constructing a new channel within the natural valley with appropriate dimensions and pattern and backfilling
the abandoned channel. In -stream structures such as log sills, brush toes, rock cross vanes, and log vanes will be installed for stability and to improve habitat. Habitat will further be
improved through buffer plantings. Proposed buffer activities will improve riparian areas that will filter runoff from adjacent pastures, thereby reducing nutrient and sediment loads to the
channel. A hunting blind near the northern portion of the reach will be removed, as well as an existing crossing.
Reach CH1 — This reach is a tributary on the western side of HC3 and flows east. This reach totals 348 linear feet of Enhancement 11. Sparse woodland and actively managed pasture is
located adjacent to the reach. Enhancement activities will include improving habitat through supplemental buffer plantings. The widening and restoration of the riparian areas along the
left bank will filter runoff from adjacent pasture, reduce sediment loads, and provide wildlife corridors throughout the Project area.
Reach CH2 — This reach is a tributary on the western side of HC3 and flows east. This reach totals 110 linear feet of Enhancement 11. Sparse woodland and actively managed pasture is
located adjacent to the reach. Enhancement activities will include improving habitat through supplemental buffer plantings. The widening and restoration of the riparian areas along the
left bank will filter runoff from adjacent pasture, reduce sediment loads, and provide wildlife corridors throughout the Project area.
4j. Please upload project drawings for the proposed project.
Scout Mitigation Site.pdf 12.7MB
5. Jurisdictional Determinations
5a. Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the property or proposed impact areas?*
r Yes
Comments:
r No
5b. If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made?*
r Preliminary r Approved r Not Verified r Unknown r N/A
Corps AID Number:
SAW -2017-01469
Sc. If Sa is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
6 Unknown

Name (if known): Jeremy Schmid
Agency/Consultant Company: RES
Other:
5d. List the dates of the Corp jurisdiction determination or State determination if a determination was made by the Corps or DWR
Ajurisdictional determination request was sent to the United States Army Corps of Engineers on October 27, 2017, and the approved PJD was received on March 26, 2018.
5d1. Jurisdictional determination upload
Forest
SAW -2017-01469 & SAW -2017-01505 (signed PJD).pdf 1.12MB
Yes
6. Future Project Plans
0.030
6a. Is this a phased project?*
r Yes r No
Are any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permits(s) used, or intended to be used, to authorize any part of the proposed project or related
activity?
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
Ia. Where are the impacts associated with your project? (check all that apply):
® Wetlands W Streams -tributaries
❑ Open Waters r Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
F Buffers
Reason (?) 2b. Impact type * (?) 2c. Type of W.* 2d. W. name * 2e. Forested* 2f. Type of 29. Impact
-] Jurisdicition*(?) area*
W1 Stream Relocation ��T Bot--] (acres)
tomland Hardwood Forest W1 Yes Frp-
0.260
W2 Stream Relocation P ]t=rdvood
2g. Total Temporary Wetland Impact 2g. Total Permanent Wetland Impact
0.260 0.030
2g. Total Wetland Impact
0.290
2h. Comments:
Wetland impacts associated with restoration efforts occurring adjacent to the e>asting wetland will be minimized by the restoration plan. Creating a new
stream channel and enhancing e>asting channels will only impact wetlands slightly and will provide an overall increase in wetland function with the
addition of native trees and shrubs along the stream banks. There will be a total of 0.29 acres of wetland impacts, where 0.26 acres are permanent
impacts, and the remaining 0.03 acres are temporary
Forest
W2
Yes
Corps
0.030
impacts.
3. Stream Impacts
1-7 13a. Reason for impact (?) 3b.lmpact type * 3c. Type of impact* 3d. S. name* 3e. Stream Type * 3f. Type of 3g. S. width* 3h. Impact
(?) Jurisdiction* length*
Stream Relocation Permanent Relocation Hauser Creek HC3 Perennial rs 7 2,484
F
S7 ( ) P Average (feet) (linear feet)
g2 Culvert Temporary Culvert Hauser Creek (HC3) Perennial Corps 7 20
Average (feet) (Ir�rfeet)
Culvert Permanent Culvert Hauser Creek S3 HC3 Perennia-A
31
( )
l
Cors
P
7
48
Average (feet)
(Ir�ear feet)
. Total jurisdictional ditch impact in square feet:
0
3i. Total permanent stream impacts:
2,532
3i. Total stream and ditch impacts:
70
3j. Comments:
31. Total temporary
stream impacts:
20

Impacts due to the relocation of the stream to natural valley will provide a net gain in ecological function to the stream and wetland system. Restoration
is proposed along this reach to address channel degradation and bank erosion: Stream Impact 1, the existing length is 2,484 linear feet, and the new
length will be 2,686 linear feet. Furthermore, the extension of CH2 through the old foot print of HC3 is accounted for in Stream Impact 1.
Two stream impacts are associated with the installation of a culvert (Stream Impact 2, and Stream Impact 3). These impacts will occur between the
Scout Mitigation Project and the Mockingbird Mitigation Project. Stream Impact 2, is the temporary impact due to the installation of a 48 -inch double
barrel culvert; where Stream Impact 3 is the permanent impact due to the culvert installation.
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:
Due to the nature of this project, complete avoidance is not possible. Both stream and wetland impacts were considered when designing the Scout
Mitigation project. This project should uplift the ecological quality of streams and wetlands on site. The existing channel length is 2,801 LF. The
proposed project will result in 3,144 LF of stream.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:
Impacts are minimized using a staged construction approach. Where possible the channel will be constructed prior to turning stream flow into a
segment. This approach allows minimization of the impact of each stage during the project construction. Additionally, all work in wetlands and streams
Will be conducted during dry conditions and/or with mats to protect soil structure. Efforts will be made to preserve individual high value trees located
Within the stream restoration area.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
r Yes r No
2b. If this project DOES NOT require Compensatory Mitigation, explain why:
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
r Yes r No
If no, explain why:
There Will be no increase in impervious surface due to this project.
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250?*
r Yes r No
2b. Does this project meet the requirements for low density projects as defined in 15A NCAC 02H .1003(2)?
r Yes r No
Comments:
There will be no increase in impervious surface due to this project.
G. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of public (federal/state) land?*
r Yes r No
2. Violations (DWR Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), or DWR Surface Water or Wetland Standards or
Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B.0200)?*
r Yes r No
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWR Requirement)
3a. Will this project result in additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?*
r Yes r No
3b. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
This project will not result in an additional development that would impact water quality downstream. Ultimately, there will be an increase in water
quality within the project, due to the restoration and enhancement of project streams, planting of the riparian buffer, excluding livestock, and the
establishment of a conservation to be protected in perpetuity.

4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR forth is project?*
r Yes r Nor IIA
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
Sa. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or habitat?*
r Yes r No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?*
r Yes r No
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Asheville
Sd. Is another Federal agency involved?*
r Yes r No
5e. Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?
r Yes r No
Sf. Will you cut any trees in order to conduct the work in waters of the U.S.?
r Yes r No
5g. Does this project involve bridge maintenance or removal?
r Yes r No
5h. Does this project involve the construction/installation of a wind turbine(s)?*
r Yes r No
r Unknown
51. Does this project involve (1) blasting, and/or (2) other percussive activities that will be conducted by machines, such as jackhammers, mechanized pile drivers, etc.?
r Yes r No
5j. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?
USFWS IPAC and Natural Heritage Program Database
Consultation Documentation Upload
USFWS Scout.pdf 1.71 MB
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*
r Yes r No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat?*
NOAA Essential Fish Habitat Mapper
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation status?*
r Yes r No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?*
NC SHPO GIS Database and confirmation from coordination with SHPO.
7c. Historic or Prehistoric Information Upload
SHPO.pdf 288.75KB
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA -designated 100 -year floodplain?*
r Yes r No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
According to the North Carolina Floodplain Mapping Information System, the Project includes a mapped FEMA 100 -year floodplain (Zone AE, one
percent annual chance of flooding). The design and permitting of the mitigation work will include coordination with the Davie County Floodplain
Administrator and permitting a FEMA No -Rise Certification or CLOMR/LOMR. Construction access is not constrained throughout the Project area. No
hydrologic trespass will be permitted to adjacent properties upstream or downstream of the Project. The Project can be found on Flood Insurance
Rate Map (FIRM) Panel 5842 (map number 3710584200L), effective date 05/18/2009.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
FEMA National Flood Hazard Layer Firm Panel 3710584200L eff. 5/18/2009
Miscellaneous

Comments
Miscellaneous attachments not previously requested.
PCN_Form_Scout.pdf 471.96KB
Scout—PCN Cover Letter DWR.pdf 186.091<13
Signature '�
Q By checking the box and signing below, I certify that:
• I have given true, accurate, and complete information on this form;
• I agree that submission of this PCN form is a "transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a written signature; AND
• I intend to electronically sign and submit the PCN form.
Full Name:
Brad Breslow
Signature
r LIOW
Date
6/1212019

Landowner Authorization Form
Site:
Property Legal Description
Deed Book: 1036 Page: 258 County: Davie
Parcel ID Number: portion of PIN 5843932576
Street Address: 126 Chattie Lane. Mocksville NC 27028
Property Owner: H. Curt Heae. Sr.
The undersigned, registered property owner of the above property, do hereby authorize
Resource Environmental Solutions, the NC Division of Water Resources, and the US Army Corps of Engineers,
their employees, agents or assigns to have reasonable access to the above referenced property from property owned
by Nancy Sparks Miller for the evaluation of the property as a potential stream, wetland, and or riparian buffer
restoration project, including conducting stream and or wetland determinations and delineations, as well as issuance
and acceptance of any required permit(s) or certification(s).
Property Owner Address: 4249 Allistair Road Winston-Salem NC 27104
Me hereby certify the above information to be true and accurate to the best of my/our knowledge.
a. L rfi ] 'oCIt , 'I - Le —i -�-
(Property Owner Printed Name)
Date

0 1,000500
Feet
Figure 2 - USGS Farm ingtonQuadrangle (1967)
Scout Mitigation Project
Davie County, N orth Carolina
Legend
Prop osed Easement
©Date: 2/18/2019
Drawn by: GDS
Document Path: S:\@RES GIS\Projects\NC\Scout\MXD\PCN\Figure 4 - USGS Map.mxd1 inch = 2,000 feet
Checked by: MDE
0 1,000500
Feet
Figure 3 - NRCS Davie C ountySoil Survey (1995)
Scout Mitigation Project
Davie County, N orth Carolina
Legend
Propsed Easem ent
©Date: 2/18/2019
Drawn by: GDS
Checked by: MDE
Document Path: S:\@RES GIS\Projects\NC\Scout\MXD\PCN\Figure 3 - Soils Map.mxd1 inch = 1,000 feet
a
North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona N. Bartos, Administrator ,
Clot -error Roy Cooper
Secretary Suss If. [Ianodmn
November 7, 2017
Daniel Ingram
Resource Environmental Solutions
302 Jefferson Street, #110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Re: RES Yadkin 01 Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank, ER 17-1991
Dear Mr. Ingram:
Thank you for your letter of July 7, 2017, concerning the above project.
Office of Arcluves and History
Dcpnry Secretary Kecin Cherry
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,
please contact Renee Gledhill -Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-807-6579 or
[e-mail]. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the
above -referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
OR amona M. Bartos
Location: 109 hast (ones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Nail Sen -ice Center, Raleigh NC 27699-0@77 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6599

Page 1 of 10
PCN Form – Version 1.4 January 2009

Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no. _____________
DWQ project no. _______________
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps: Section 404 Permit Section 10 Permit
1b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: or General Permit (GP) number:
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps? Yes No
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
401 Water Quality Certification – Regular Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
401 Water Quality Certification – Express Riparian Buffer Authorization
1e. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?

For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification:
Yes No
For the record only for Corps Permit:

Yes No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program proposed for
mitigation of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank
or in-lieu fee program.
Yes No
1g. Is the project located in any of NC’s twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1h
below. Yes No
1h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)? Yes No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project:
2b. County:
2c. Nearest municipality / town:
2d. Subdivision name:
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
3d. Street address:
3e. City, state, zip:
3f. Telephone no.:
3g. Fax no.:
3h. Email address:

Page 2 of 10
4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is: Agent Other, specify:
4b. Name:
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address:
4e. City, state, zip:
4f. Telephone no.:
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
5c. Street address:
5d. City, state, zip:
5e. Telephone no.:
5f. Fax no.:
5g. Email address:

Page 3 of 10
PCN Form – Version 1.4 January 2009
B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
1b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): Latitude: Longitude:
1c. Property size: acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
2c. River basin:
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:

3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:

3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:

4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Yes No Unknown
Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made? Preliminary Final
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known):
Agency/Consultant Company:
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.

5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past? Yes No Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to “help file” instructions.

6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? Yes No
6b. If yes, explain.

Page 4 of 10
PCN Form – Version 1.4 January 2009
C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
Wetlands Streams – tributaries Buffers Open Waters Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
Wetland impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
2b.
Type of impact
2c.
Type of wetland
2d.
Forested
2e.
Type of jurisdiction
Corps (404,10) or
DWQ (401, other)
2f.
Area of
impact
(acres)
W1
W2
W3
W4
W5
W6
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
2h. Comments:

3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
Stream impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
3b.
Type of impact
3c.
Stream name
3d.
Perennial (PER) or
intermittent (INT)?
3e.
Type of
jurisdiction

3f.
Average
stream
width
(feet)
3g.
Impact
length
(linear
feet)
S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
S6
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
3i. Comments:

Page 5 of 10
4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
impact number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable
4c.

Type of impact
4d.

Waterbody
type
4e.

Area of impact (acres)
O1
O2
O3
O4
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:

5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
5d.
Stream Impacts (feet)
5e.
Upland
(acres)
5a.
Pond ID number
5b.
Proposed use or
purpose of pond
Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded Filled Excavated
P1
P2
5f. Total:
5g. Comments:

5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required? Yes No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a. Project is in which protected basin? Neuse Tar-Pamlico Catawba Randleman Other:
6b.
Buffer Impact
number –
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Stream name
6e.
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f.
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet)
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet)
B1
B2
B3
B4
B5
B6
6h. Total Buffer Impacts:
6i. Comments:

Page 6 of 10
PCN Form – Version 1.4 January 2009

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.

1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.

2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
Yes No

2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply): DWQ Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
Mitigation bank
Payment to in-lieu fee program
Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type:
Type:
Type:
Quantity:
Quantity:
Quantity:
3c. Comments:

4. Complete if Making a Payment to In-lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in-lieu fee program is attached. Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested: linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only): square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4f. Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested: acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.

Page 7 of 10
6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) – required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation? Yes No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
Zone
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Total impact
(square feet)

Multiplier
6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in-lieu fee fund).

6h. Comments:

Page 8 of 10
PCN Form – Version 1.4 January 2009
E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules? Yes No
1b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.

Yes No
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project? %
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan? Yes No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:

2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:

2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government’s jurisdiction is this project?
3b. Which of the following locally-implemented stormwater management programs
apply (check all that apply):
Phase II
NSW
USMP
Water Supply Watershed
Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached? Yes No
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
4a. Which of the following state-implemented stormwater management programs apply
(check all that apply):
Coastal counties
HQW
ORW
Session Law 2006-246
Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached? Yes No
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements? Yes No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met? Yes No

Page 9 of 10
PCN Form – Version 1.4 January 2009

F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
use of public (federal/state) land? Yes No
1b. If you answered “yes” to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Yes No
1c. If you answered “yes” to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.)
Comments:
Yes No
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
Yes No
2b. Is this an after-the-fact permit application? Yes No
2c. If you answered “yes” to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):

3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes No
3b. If you answered “yes” to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered “no,” provide a short narrative description.

4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.

Page 10 of 10
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
habitat? Yes No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
impacts? Yes No
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?

6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat? Yes No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?

7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
Yes No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?

8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain? Yes No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:

8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?

Applicant/Agent's Printed Name

_______________________________
Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant is provided.)

Date

res.us
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Corporate Headquarters
5020 Montrose Blvd. Suite 650
Houston, TX 77006
Main: 713.520.5400
January 4, 2018
Mrs. Janet Mizzi
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801
Subject: Project Scoping for Scout Mitigation Site in Davie County
Dear Mrs. Mizzi,
Resource Environmetal Solutions (RES) requests review and comment from the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) on any possible concerns they may have with regards to the implementation of the
Scout Mitigation Project (36°01'57.6"N 80°31'02.7"W). Please note that this request is in support of the
development of the Categorical Exclusion (CE) for the referenced project. The proposed project involves the
restoration and enhancement of approximately 2,752 linear feet of stream The Site is currently in agricultural
use, specifically as pasture and row crops.
The US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) database (accessed 26 June 2017) lists one endangered species for
Davie County, North Carolina: Michaux’s sumac (Rhus michauxii). The database also lists the northern long-
eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) as a threatened species. No protected species or potential habitat for protected
species was observed during preliminary site evaluations. A review of the NHP database indicates that there
are no known occurrences of state threatened or endangered species within a one-mile radius of the project
area. Based on initial site investigations, no impacts to federally protected species are anticipated as a result of
the proposed project.
Please provide comments on any possible issues that might emerge with respect to endangered species,
migratory birds, or other trust resources from the construction of a stream restoration project on the subject
property. Maps showing the location and approximate limits of the conservation easement are enclosed.
We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. You may return the comment to my
attention at the address below. Please feel free to contact me at [e-mail] with any questions that
you may have concerning the extent of site disturbance associated with this project.
Sincerely,
Eric Teitsworth
Ecologist
Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed
0 1,500750
Feet
USGS Map Scout Mitigation Site
Davie County, North Carolina
Legend
Proposed Easement
Drainage Area (Scout)
Contracted DMS Easements
©Date: 12/29/2017
Drawn by: EW T
Document Path: C:\Users\eteitsworth\Dropbox (RES)\@RES GIS\Projects\NC\Scout\MXD\RFP_Updated\USGS for scoping letters_Scout.mxd615ac.
43ac.
156ac.
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801

January 30, 2018

Mr. Eric Teitsworth
Resource Environmental Solutions
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, North Carolina 27605

Dear Mr. Teitsworth:

Subject: Scout Mitigation Site; Davie County, North Carolina
Log No. 4-2-18-119

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed the information provided in your
correspondence received via email dated January 4, 2018. We submit the following comments in
accordance with the provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended
(16 U.S.C. 661-667e); the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. §4321 et seq.); and
section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543) (Act).

Project Description
According to your correspondence, you are seeking our scoping comments to inform a NEPA
document for a proposed mitigation bank near Farmington, North Carolina. The proposed bank
would entail restoration and enhancement of approximately 2,752 linear feet of Hauser Creek.
Adjacent land use is dominated by pasture and row crops.

Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Species
According to Service records, suitable summer roosting habitat may be present in the project
area for the federally threatened northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis). However, the
final 4(d) rule (effective as of February 16, 2016), exempts incidental take of northern long-eared
bat associated with activities that occur greater than 0.25 miles from a known hibernation site,
and greater than 150 feet from a known, occupied maternity roost during the pup season (June 1
– July 31). Based on the information provided, the project (which may or may not require tree
clearing) would occur at a location where any incidental take that may result from associated
activities is exempt under the 4(d) rule. Although not required, we encourage you to avoid
any associated tree clearing activities during the maternity roosting season from May 15 –
August 15.

You indicated that no potential habitat for protected species was observed during a site
reconnaissance. Additionally, the Service has no record of federally protected species or
2

respective habitats in the project vicinity. Based on this information, we do not believe the
proposed project would impact federally protected species.

The Service supports responsible and sustainable stream restoration activities and we offer the
following comments in the interest of protecting fish and wildlife resources:

Stream Channel and Bank Restoration
A natural, stable stream system is one that is able to transport a wide range of flows and
associated bed load (sediment) while maintaining channel features and neither degrading
(accelerating the erosion of banks and scour of the channel bed) nor aggrading (accelerating the
deposition of sediment within the channel). Alterations to the dimension (cross-sectional view of
the channel), pattern (the sinuosity of the channel), or profile (longitudinal slope) of the stream
channel as well as changes to streambank vegetation, floodplains, hydrology, or sediment input
can significantly alter this equilibrium. Accordingly, we recommend the following:

1. Only the absolute minimum amount of work should be done within stream channels to
accomplish necessary reconstruction. The amount of disturbance to in-stream and
riparian areas should not exceed what can be stabilized by the end of the workday.
Restoration plans should account for the constraints of the site and the opportunities to
improve stream pattern, dimension, and profile with minimal disturbance.

2. All reconstruction work should follow natural channel design methodologies that are
based on the bank-full, or channel-forming, stage of the stream. Bank-full stage
maintains the natural channel dimensions and transports the bulk of sediment over time
(Doll et al. 2003). Natural channel conditions should be identified using a reference
reach (nearby stream reaches that exemplify restoration goals). Restoration design
should match the pattern, dimension, and profile of the reference reach to ensure the
project’s success. The Service is available to assist with the identification of reference
reaches.

3. All work in or adjacent to stream waters should be conducted in a dry work area to the
extent possible. Sandbags, cofferdams, bladder dams, or other diversion structures
should be used to prevent excavation in flowing water. These diversion structures should
be removed as soon as the work area is stable. When practical, a pump-around operation
shall be used to divert flow during construction.

4. Equipment should not be operated in the stream unless absolutely necessary. Machinery
should be operated from the banks in a fashion that minimizes disturbance to woody
vegetation. Equipment should be: (a) washed to remove any contaminant residue prior
to project construction, (b) in good working order, and (c) checked to ensure there are no
leaks of potential contaminants (such as oil or other lubricants) prior to and during
construction.

5. Streambanks with deep-rooted woody vegetation are the most stable, and stream
restoration efforts should incorporate the use of native vegetation adapted to the site
conditions. Biodegradable erosion-control materials may be incorporated into
3

bank-restoration design in order to stabilize soils as vegetation becomes established.
Live dormant stakes (such as black willow) may be used to reestablish root structure in
riparian areas. In areas where banks are severely undercut, high, and steep, whole-tree
revetment or rock may be used as a stabilization treatment (small rock, gravel, sand, and
dirt are not recommended due to their erosive nature), and it should not extend above the
bank-full elevation (the elevation of the channel where the natural floodplain begins).
Deep-rooting woody vegetation should be established along banks where any channel
work is accomplished. Tree and shrub plantings should be spaced at intervals no greater
than 10 feet along banks. Vegetated riparian zone widths should be as wide as practical
but should extend at least 30 feet from the stream channel.

6. Adequate measures to control sediment and erosion must be implemented prior to any
ground-disturbing activities in order to minimize effects on downstream aquatic
resources. In North Carolina, non-cohesive and erosion-prone soils are most common in
the felsic-crystalline terrains of the mountain and upper piedmont regions (Miller and
Kochel 2010). Therefore, reconstruction work should be staged such that disturbed areas
would be stabilized with seeding, mulch, and/or biodegradable (coir) erosion-control
matting prior to the end of each workday. No erosion-control matting or blankets should
contain synthetic (netting) materials. Matting should be secured in place with staples;
stakes; or, wherever possible, live stakes of native trees. If rain is expected prior to
temporary seed establishment, additional measures should be implemented to protect
water quality along slopes and overburden stockpiles (for example, stockpiles may be
covered with plastic or other geotextile material).

7. Woody debris, detritus, and other vegetative materials are the main sources of nutrients
and carbon necessary for primary productivity in stream ecosystems. Removal of this
material can impact the production of higher trophic levels, including fish. The Service
does not recommend the removal of woody debris within the stream channel or
floodplain unless it is causing a debris blockage (logjam) or will affect the ability to
achieve bank stability along a specific reach of stream. Woody debris that must be
removed should be chipped on the site.

8. At each restoration site, cross-sections (at intervals based on restoration reach size),
longitudinal profiles, and stream-pattern plans should be measured and mapped prior to
and immediately following any channel work. In addition, photographs should be taken
to document the condition of the project site prior to initiating the work and upon
completion of the work. However, since a project’s restoration success does not
necessarily equate to biological success, the ecological goals of the project should be
clearly defined and assessed for improvement after construction is completed (Palmer
et al. 2005).

The Service appreciates the opportunity to provide these comments. Please contact Mr. Byron
Hamstead of our staff at 828/258-3939, Ext. 225, if you have any questions. In any future
correspondence concerning this project, please reference our Log Number 4-2-18-119.

4

Sincerely,

- - original signed - -

Janet Mizzi
Field Supervisor

References

Doll, B.A., G.L. Grabow, K.R. Hall, J. Halley, W.A. Harman, G.D. Jennings, and
D.E. Wise. 2003. Stream Restoration: A Natural Channel Design Handbook.
North Carolina Stream Restoration Institute, North Carolina State University.
128 pp.

Hall, K. 2003. Recommended Native Plant Species for Stream Restoration in North
Carolina. Raleigh: North Carolina Stream Restoration Institute, North Carolina
State University.

Miller, J.R., and Kochel, R.C. 2010. Assessment of channel dynamics, in-stream
structures and post-project channel adjustments in North Carolina and its
implications to effective stream restoration. Environmental Earth Sciences, 59(8),
pp. 1681-1692.

Palmer, M.A., E.S. Bernhardt, J.D. Allan, P.S. Lake, G. Alexander, S. Brooks, J. Carr,
S. Clayton, C.N. Dahm, J. Follstad Shah, and D.L. Galat. 2005. Standards for
ecologically successful river restoration. Journal of Applied Ecology, 42(2),
pp. 208-217.

302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605

Corporate Headquarters
6575 West Loop South, Suite 300
Bellaire, TX 7740
Main: 713.520.5400

res.us

June 10, 2019

Mac Haupt
NC DWR, 401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
512 North Salisbury St.
Raleigh, NC 27604

RE: Nationwide 27 Permit Application for The Scout Mitigation Site

Dear Mr. Haupt,

The Scout Mitigation Site (the “Project”) is a stream, project located within a rural watershed dominated
by agricultural, forested and low-intensity residential land use in eastern Davie County, North Carolina,
approximately eight miles west of Clemmons and five miles northwest of Bermuda Run. The Project area
exhibits reduced hydrology and habitat value as a result of past and on-going agricultural activities. The
Project will involve the restoration and enhancement of three streams Yadkin River Basin. The Site has
been designed in concurrence with the NCDMS Mockingbird Mitigation Project. The Mockingbird site lies
just upstream and just downstream of the Project.
The objective for this mitigation project is to restore and design natural waterways through stream
complexes with appropriate cross-sectional dimension and slope that will provide function and meet the
appropriate success criteria agreed upon in the mitigation plan. Accomplishing this objective entails the
restoration of natural stream characteristics, such as stable cross sections, planform, and in-stream habitat.
The floodplain areas will be hydrologically reconnected to the channel to provide natural exchange and
storage during flooding events. Total wetland impacts resulting from the proposed project are 0.29 acres.
Total stream impacts resulting from the proposed project are 2,552 linear feet. There are no NCDWR
regulated buffers within the Project Site but the project will provide an overall benefit to the riparian
buffer.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this important project. Please contact me at 919-209-1062 or
[e-mail] if you have any questions or require any additional information.

Sincerely,

Brad Breslow
Regulatory Manager
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC