20190862 Ver 1_Technical Proposal_20190513

RFP # 16-007704
Copy Technical Proposal
Nesbit
Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site
Catawba River Basin
Cataloging Unit: 03050103
Attn: Marjorie Barber - Purchas
Proposal Number: 16-007571
NC Department of Environment;
Division of Mitigation Services
217 West Jones Street, Suite 340
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
Proposal Due Date:
January 09, 2019 at 2:00 PM ET
390
430
430

PART A — COVER LETTER
Technical Proposal (RFP #16-007704)
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE STREAM & RIPARIAN WETLAND MITIGATION CREDITS WITHIN
CATALOGING UNITS 03050101, 03050102, AND 03050103 OF THE CATAWBA RIVER BASIN
January 9, 2019
PROPOSAL NUMBER: 16-007704
NC DEQ -DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
ATTN: MARJORIE BARBER
217 WEST JONES STREET, SUITE 3409-J
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27603
Dear Ms. Barber:
Restoration Systems, L.L.C. is pleased to provide you with this Technical Proposal in response to the Request
for Proposals (RFP) #16-007704 dated September 6, 2018. This submittal includes one signed, original
technical proposal, four photo copies of the technical proposal, and one USB flash drive containing two
redacted copies of the technical proposal and ArcGIS shapefiles of the proposed project boundaries. The
cost proposal has been submitted in a separate sealed envelope.
This technical proposal describes the Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site and is designed specifically
to assist in fulfilling North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality's restoration goals.
Restoration Systems herein offers the following mitigation option:
- 5264 Stream Mitigation Units
- 4.7 Riparian Riverine Wetland Mitigation Units
If you, or your staff, have questions or comments regarding our proposal, please feel free to contact me at
your convenience at the number below. We look forward to working with the North Carolina Division of
Mitigation Services on this important project and are available for Site visits and technical review at your
discretion.
Sincerely,
RESTORATION SYSTEMS, L.L.C.
George A. Howard
Authorized Representative
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 211
Raleigh, N.C. 27604
919-755-9490
PROPOSAL PRINTED ON 30% POST CONSUMER RECYCLED PAPER

PART B: TITLE PAGE
TECHNICAL PROPOSAL AND RESTORATION PLAN
NESBIT STREAM & WETLAND MITIGATION SITE
UNION COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
(RFP #16-007704)
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS
TO PROVIDE STREAM & RIPARIAN WETLAND MITIGATION CREDITS WITHIN CATALOGING UNITS 03050101,
03050102, AND 03050103 OF THE CATAWBA RIVER BASIN
Prepared for:
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA
Restoration Systems, LLC
Authorized Representative: Georee Howard
Ph: 919-755-9490
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 211
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Prepared by:
JANUARY 2019
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
i�
Prepared for:
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA
Restoration Systems, LLC
Authorized Representative: Georee Howard
Ph: 919-755-9490
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 211
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Prepared by:
JANUARY 2019
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603

XA STATE oF�o
v
;
`
�..
�i•
\SSF QUUAMM�%
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Request for Proposal #: 16-007704
Full Delivery Projects to Provide
Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Credits
within the Cataloging Units 03050101, 03050102 and
03050103 of the Catawba River Basin as described in the
Scope of Work
Date of Issue: September 6, 2018
Proposal Opening Date: January 9, 2019
At 2:00 PM ET
Direct all inquiries concerning this RFP to:
Marjorie Barber
Purchasing Agent
Email: [e-mail]
Phone: [phone]

0
�,1, �STATF 0,,
�FSSE QUA/
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Request for Proposal #
16-007704
For internal State agency processing, including tabulation of proposals in the Interactive Purchasing
System (IPS), please provide your company's Federal Employer Identification Number or alternate
identification number (e.g. Social Security Number). Pursuant to G.S. 132-1.10(b) this identification number
shall not be released to the public. This page will be removed and shredded, or otherwise kept
confidential, before the procurement file is made available for public inspection.
This page is to be filled out and returned with your proposal.
Failure to do so may subject your proposal to rejection.
ID Number:
Federal ID Number or Social Security Number
Vendor Name
dh
�FSSE QUA/
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Request for Proposal #
16-007704
For internal State agency processing, including tabulation of proposals in the Interactive Purchasing
System (IPS), please provide your company's Federal Employer Identification Number or alternate
identification number (e.g. Social Security Number). Pursuant to G.S. 132-1.10(b) this identification number
shall not be released to the public. This page will be removed and shredded, or otherwise kept
confidential, before the procurement file is made available for public inspection.
This page is to be filled out and returned with your proposal.
Failure to do so may subject your proposal to rejection.
ID Number:
Federal ID Number or Social Security Number
Vendor Name

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
£_ %s Department of Environmental Quality
Refer ALL Inquiries regarding this RFP to:
Request for Proposal # 16-007704
Marjorie Barber
Proposals will be publicly opened: January 9, 2019
Contract Type: Open Market
Email: mariorie.barber(cDncdenr.gov
Phone: [phone]
Commodity No. and Description: 962-73 Restoration /
PRINT NAME & TITLE OF PERSON SIGNING ON BEHALF OF VENDOR:
Reclamation Services of Land and other Properties
Using Agency: Division of Mitigation Services
DATE:
EMAIL:
Requisition No.: N/A
EXECUTION
In compliance with this Request for Proposals, and subject to all the conditions herein, the undersigned Vendor offers and agrees to
furnish and deliver any or all items upon which prices are bid, at the prices set opposite each item within the time specified herein. By
executing this proposal, the undersigned Vendor certifies that this proposal is submitted competitively and without collusion (G.S.
143-54), that none of its officers, directors, or owners of an unincorporated business entity has been convicted of any violations of
Chapter 78A of the General Statutes, the Securities Act of 1933, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (G.S. 143-59.2), and that it
is not an ineligible Vendor as set forth in G.S. 143-59.1. False certification is a Class I felony. Furthermore, by executing this proposal,
the undersigned certifies to the best of Vendor's knowledge and belief, that it and its principals are not presently debarred, suspended,
proposed for debarment, declared ineligible or voluntarily excluded from covered transactions by any Federal or State department or
agency. As required by G.S. 143-48.5, the undersigned Vendor certifies that it, and each of its sub -Contractors for any Contract
awarded as a result of this RFP, complies with the requirements of Article 2 of Chapter 64 of the NC General Statutes, including the
requirement for each employer with more than 25 employees in North Carolina to verify the work authorization of its employees
through the federal E -Verify system. G.S. 133-32 and Executive Order 24 (2009) prohibit the offer to, or acceptance by, any State
Employee associated with the preparing plans, specifications, estimates for public Contract; or awarding or administering public
Contracts; or inspecting or supervising delivery of the public Contract of any gift from anyone with a Contract with the State, or from
any person seeking to do business with the State. By execution of this response to the RFP, the undersigned certifies, for your entire
organization and its employees or agents, that you are not aware that any such gift has been offered, accepted, or promised by any
employees of your organization.
Failure to execute/sign proposal prior to submittal shall render proposal invalid and it WILL BE REJECTED. Late
proposals cannot be accepted.
VENDOR:
STREET ADDRESS:
P.O. BOX:
ZIP:
CITY & STATE & ZIP:
TELEPHONE NUMBER:
TOLL FREE TEL. NO:
PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS ADDRESS IF DIFFERENT FROM ABOVE (SEE INSTRUCTIONS TO VENDORS ITEM #10):
PRINT NAME & TITLE OF PERSON SIGNING ON BEHALF OF VENDOR:
FAX NUMBER:
VENDOR'S AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE-
DATE:
EMAIL:
Offer valid for at least 180 days from date of proposal opening. After this time, any withdrawal of offer shall be made in writing,
effective upon receipt by the agency issuing this RFP.
ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL
If any or all parts of this proposal are accepted by the State of North Carolina, an authorized representative of the Departmentof
Environmental Quality shall affix his/her signature hereto and this document and all provisions of this Request For Proposal along
with the Vendor proposal response and the written results of any negotiations shall then constitute the written agreement between
the parties. A copy of this acceptance will be forwarded to the successful Vendor(s).
FOR STATE USE ONLY: Offer accept and Contract awarded this day of , 2019, as indicated on the
attached certification, by
(Authorized Representative of DEQ)
Ver:7/1/18 Page 1 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.
Table of Contents
1.0 PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND.............................................................................................4
2.0 GENERAL INFORMATION.......................................................................................................4
2.1
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL DOCUMENT.............................................................................4
2.2
E -PROCUREMENT SOLICITATION.......................................................................................4
PRICING................................................................................................................................17
2.3
NOTICE TO VENDORS REGARDING RFP TERMS AND CONDITIONS...............................4
DOWNWARD PAYMENT ADJUSTMENTS...........................................................................17
2.4
RFP SCHEDULE.....................................................................................................................5
INVOICES.............................................................................................................................18
2.5
MANDATORY PRE -PROPOSAL CONFERENCE...................................................................5
PAYMENT TERMS................................................................................................................18
2.6
PROPOSAL QUESTIONS.......................................................................................................6
FINANCIAL STABILITY........................................................................................................18
2.7
PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL.......................................................................................................6
FINANCIAL ASSURANCE....................................................................................................18
2.8
PROPOSAL CONTENTS........................................................................................................7
VENDOR EXPERIENCE.......................................................................................................19
2.9
IMPORTANT INFORMATION AND RESTRICTIONS............................................................10
REFERENCES......................................................................................................................19
2.10
TEMPLATES, TECHNICAL SCORESHEETS, TARGET WATERSHEDS, & MAPS.............10
BACKGROUND CHECKS.....................................................................................................19
2.11
DEFINITIONS, ACRONYMS, AND ABBREVIATIONS..........................................................10
PERSONNEL........................................................................................................................19
3.0 METHOD OF AWARD AND PROPOSAL EVALUATION PROCESS....................................14
3.1 METHOD OF AWARD...........................................................................................................14
3.2 CONFIDENTIALITY AND PROHIBITED COMMUNICATIONS DURING EVALUATION ....... 15
3.3 PROPOSAL EVALUATION PROCESS.................................................................................15
3.4 EVALUATION CRITERIA......................................................................................................16
3.5 PERFORMANCE OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES.............................................................17
3.6 INTERPRETATION OF TERMS AND PHRASES..................................................................17
4.0 REQUIREMENTS...................................................................................................................17
4.1
CONTRACT TERM................................................................................................................17
4.2
PRICING................................................................................................................................17
4.3
DOWNWARD PAYMENT ADJUSTMENTS...........................................................................17
4.4
INVOICES.............................................................................................................................18
4.5
PAYMENT TERMS................................................................................................................18
4.6
FINANCIAL STABILITY........................................................................................................18
4.7
FINANCIAL ASSURANCE....................................................................................................18
4.8
VENDOR EXPERIENCE.......................................................................................................19
4.9
REFERENCES......................................................................................................................19
4.10
BACKGROUND CHECKS.....................................................................................................19
4.11
PERSONNEL........................................................................................................................19
4.12
VENDOR'S REPRESENTATIONS........................................................................................19
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 2 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.,
5.0 SCOPE OF WORK.................................................................................................................21
5.1 GENERAL.............................................................................................................................21
5.2 OBJECTIVES........................................................................................................................21
5.3 TASKS...................................................................................................................................22
5.4 ACCEPTANCE OF WORK....................................................................................................25
6.0 CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION.............................................................................................25
6.1 PROJECT MANAGER AND CUSTOMER SERVICE............................................................25
6.2 DISPUTE RESOLUTION.......................................................................................................25
6.3 CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR............................................................................................25
ATTACHMENT A: PRICING.............................................................................................................26
ATTACHMENT B: INSTRUCTIONS TO VENDORS..........................................................................27
ATTACHMENT C: NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL CONTRACT TERMS & CONDITIONS .............30
ATTACHMENT D: LOCATION OF WORKERS UTILIZED BY VENDOR.........................................36
ATTACHMENT E: CERTIFICATION OF FINANCIAL CONDITION...................................................37
ATTACHMENT F: SUPPLEMENTAL VENDOR INFORMATION......................................................38
ATTACHMENT G: ADDITIONAL VENDOR INFORMATION
ATTACHMENT H: TASK AND DELIVERABLES
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 3 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.,
1.0 PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND
The mission of NCDMS is to provide cost-effective mitigation alternatives that improve the state's water resources.
This RFP is soliciting Proposals from qualified Vendors for needed mitigation as described herein for the NCDMS to
successfully meet permit conditions mandated by the regulatory agencies.
Proposals shall be submitted in accordance with the terms and conditions of this RFP and any addenda issued hereto.
This RFP is not an offer for a Contract, nor does the Department's acceptance of any Technical/Cost Proposal
guarantee a Contract with the Department. The Department reserves the right to reject any or all proposals deemed not
to be in the best interest of the State of North Carolina.
Proposals shall be submitted in accordance with the terms and conditions of this RFP and any addenda issued hereto.
2.0 GENERAL INFORMATION
2.1 REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL DOCUMENT
The RFP is comprised of the base RFP document, any attachments, and any addenda released before Contract award.
All attachments and addenda released for this RFP in advance of any Contract award are incorporated herein by
reference.
2.2 &PROCUREMENT SOLICITATION
ATTENTION: This is NOT an E -Procurement solicitation. Paragraph #16 of Attachment C: North Carolina General
Contract Terms and Conditions, paragraphs (b) and (c), do not apply to this solicitation.
2.3 NOTICE TO VENDORS REGARDING RFP TERMS AND CONDITIONS
It shall be the Vendor's responsibility to read the Instructions, the State's terms and conditions, all relevant exhibits and
attachments, and any other components made a part of this RFP, and comply with all requirements and specifications
herein. Vendors also are responsible for obtaining and complying with all Addenda and other changes that may be
issued in connection with this RFP.
If Vendors have questions, issues, or exceptions regarding any term, condition, or other component within this RFP,
those must be submitted as questions in accordance with in the instructions in Section 2.6 PROPOSAL QUESTIONS.
If the State determines that any changes will be made as a result of the questions asked, then such decisions will be
communicated in the form of an RFP addendum. The State may also elect to leave open the possibility for later
negotiation and amendment of specific provisions of the Contract that have been addressed during the question and
answer period. Other than through this process, the State rejects and will not be required to evaluate or consider any
additional or modified terms and conditions submitted with Vendor's proposal. This applies to any language appearing
in or attached to the document as part of the Vendor's proposal that purports to vary any terms and conditions or Vendors'
instructions herein or to render the proposal non-binding or subject to further negotiation. Vendor's proposal shall
constitute a firm offer. By execution and delivery of this RFP Response, the Vendor agrees that any additional or
modified terms and conditions, whether submitted purposely or inadvertently, shall have no force or effect, and
will be disregarded. Noncompliance with, or any attempt to alter or delete, this paragraph shall constitute
sufficient grounds to reject Vendor's proposal as nonresponsive.
If a Vendor desires modification of the terms and conditions of this solicitation, it is urged and cautioned to inquire during
the question period, in accordance with the instructions in this RFP, about whether specific language proposed as a
modification is acceptable to or will be considered by the State. Identification of objections or exceptions to the State's
terms and conditions in the proposal itself shall not be allowed and shall be disregarded or the proposal rejected.
Contact with anyone working for or with the State regarding this RFP other than the State Contract Specialist named on
the face page of this RFP in the manner specified by this RFP shall constitute grounds for rejection of said Vendor's
offer, at the State's election.
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 4 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.,
2.4 RFP SCHEDULE
The table below shows the intended schedule for this RFP. The State will make every effort to adhere to this schedule.
Event
Responsibility
Date and Time
Issue RFP
State
September 6, 2018
Hold Pre -Proposal Meeting
State
September 20, 2018
Submit Written Questions
Vendor
October 4, 2018
Provide Response to Questions
State
October 11, 2018
Submit Proposals
Vendor
January 9, 2019
Contract Award
State
TBD
Contract Effective Date
State
TBD
2.5 MANDATORY PRE -PROPOSAL CONFERENCE
Mandatory Pre -Proposal Conference
Date: September 20, 2018
Time: 10:30 AM Eastern Time
Contact #: [phone]
Instructions: It shall be MANDATORY that each Vendor representative be present for a pre -proposal site visit on
September 20, 2018. Attendees must meet promptly at 10:30 AM Eastern Time at North Carolina Department of
Environmental Quality, Division of Mitigation Services, 217 West Jones Street, Raleigh, NC 27603.
Attendance at this Pre -Proposal Conference is a prerequisite for consideration of a bidder's offer. Vendor and/or
his representative must:
(1) arrive prior to the scheduled start time of the Pre -Proposal Conference; Late arrivals will not be allowed to sign
in or participate in the meeting
(2) sign -in on the attendance sheet; and
(3) sign -out upon completion of the Pre -Proposal Conference.
Failure to comply with this requirement will cause offer to be rejected. The purpose of the pre -proposal
conference is for all prospective offerors to acquaint themselves with the conditions and requirements of the tasks to
be performed. Submission of an offer shall constitute sufficient evidence of this compliance and no allowance will be
made for unreported conditions that a prudent offeror would recognize as affecting the performance of the work called
for in this solicitation. Offeror is cautioned that any information released to offeror other than during the pre -proposal
conference which conflicts with, supersedes, or adds to requirements in this solicitation, must be confirmed by written
addendum before it can be considered part of this solicitation document. Vendor bidding otherwise does so at his own
risk.
Each offeror is permitted to send no more than (2) people to the conference. Only one (1) representative per
offeror is allowed to sign both the sign -in and sign -out sheet (the representative that signed in must also sign
out).
Only one (1) pre -determined, pre -proposal conference will be held; individual pre -proposal conferences are
not allowed.
The purpose of this visit is for all prospective Vendors to apprise themselves with the conditions and requirements which
will affect the performance of the work called for by this Request for Proposals. Vendors must stay for the duration of
the site visit. No allowances will be made for unreported conditions that a prudent Vendor would recognize as affecting
the work called for or implied by this proposal.
Vendors are cautioned that any information released to attendees during the site visit, other than that involving the
physical aspects of the facility referenced above, and which conflicts with, supersedes, or adds to requirements in this
Request for Proposal, must be confirmed by written addendum before it can be considered to be a part of this proposal.
Ver: 711118 Page 5 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.,
2.6 PROPOSAL QUESTIONS
Upon review of the RFP documents, Vendors may have questions to clarify or interpret the RFP in order to submit the
best proposal possible. To accommodate the Proposal Questions process, Vendors shall submit any such questions by
the above due date.
Written questions shall be emailed to mariorie.barber(@ncdenr.gov by the date and time specified above. Vendors should
enter "RFP #: 16-007704: Questions" as the subject for the email. Questions submittals should include a reference to
the applicable RFP section and be submitted in a format shown below:
Reference
Vendor Question
RFP Section, Page Number
Vendor question ...?
Questions received prior to the submission deadline date, the State's response, and any additional terms deemed
necessary by the State will be posted in the form of an addendum to the Interactive Purchasing System (IPS),
http://www.ips.state.nc.us, and shall become an Addendum to this RFP. No information, instruction or advice provided
orally or informally by any State personnel, whether made in response to a question or otherwise in
connection with this RFP, shall be considered authoritative or binding. Vendors shall rely only on written material
contained in an Addendum to this RFP.
2.7 PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL
Sealed proposals, subject to the conditions made a part hereof and the receipt requirements described below, shall be
received at the address indicated in the table below, for furnishing and delivering those items or Services as described
herein.
Mailing address for delivery of proposal
via US Postal Service
PROPOSAL NUMBER: 16-007704
NC DEQ - DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
ATTN: MARJORIE BARBER
1652 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NC 27699-1652
Office Address of delivery by any other method
(special delivery, overnight, or any other carrier)
PROPOSAL NUMBER: 16-007704
NC DEQ - DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
ATTN: MARJORIE BARBER
217 WEST JONES STREET, SUITE 3409-J
RALEIGH, NC 27603
IMPORTANT NOTE: All proposals shall be physically delivered to the office address listed above on or before the
proposal deadline in order to be considered timely, regardless of the method of delivery. This is an absolute
requirement. All risk of late arrival due to unanticipated delay—whether delivered by hand, U.S. Postal Service, courier
or other delivery service is entirely on the Vendor. It is the sole responsibility of the Vendor to have the proposal physically
in this Office by the specified time and date of opening. The time of delivery will be marked on each proposal when
received, and any proposal received after the proposal submission deadline will be rejected. Sealed proposals, subject
to the conditions made a part hereof, will be received at the address indicated in the table in this Section, for furnishing
and delivering the commodity as described herein.
Note that the U.S. Postal Service generally does not deliver mail to specified street address but to the State's Mail Service
Center. Vendors are cautioned that proposals sent via U.S. Mail, including Express Mail, may not be delivered by the
Mail Service Center to the agency's purchasing office on the due date in time to meet the proposal deadline. All Vendors
are urged to take the possibility of delay into account when submitting a proposal. Attempts to submit a proposal via
facsimile (FAX) machine, telephone or electronic means, including but not limited to email, in response to this
RFP shall NOT be accepted.
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 6 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.,
a) Submit one (1) signed, original executed Technical Proposal responses, and four (4) photocopies, (All 5 Must Be
Placed in Separate - 3 -Ring Binders or Notebooks and Include Section Tabs). Original responses must be
labeled.
b) Submit two (2) redacted electronic (Proprietary and Confidential Information Excluded) copies of the executed
Technical Proposal on one (1) USB flash drive simultaneously to the address identified in the table above. The
electronic files shall NOT be password protected, shall be in .PDF or .XLS format, and shall be capable of being
copied to other media including readable in Microsoft Word and/or Microsoft Excel.
Technical Proposal must list any proprietary information identified as confidential and proprietary in accordance with
Attachment A, Paragraph 11 of the Instructions to Vendors. The Division of Mitigation Services, in responding to
public records requests, will release the information provided. It is the sole responsibility of the Vendor to ensure that
this information complies with the requirements of Paragraph 11 of the Instructions to Vendors
c) Submit the ArcGIS format of the boundaries of the proposed project on the USB flash drive containing the technical
proposals described above. The boundary can be the proposed easement(s), or general project area. NCDMS
expects that the submitted file will match closely the project area(s) shown in the project proposal location map. JIM
file must be in ArcGIS format and must be projected in the State Plane Coordinate System (NAD 831 usina a
base unit of meters or feet. It is preferred that the *.prj file holding the coordinate system information be included
in the file. The table for the ArcGIS file must contain the following.
• Site _Name- (List as named in proposal report)
• Company- (Vendor)
•
Project—Type- (Stream, Wetland, Buffer or Combination)
• Coordinate_System- (SP Meters or SP Feet)
d) Submit your technical proposal in a sealed package. Clearly mark each package with: (1) Sealed Technical
Proposal (2) the RFP number, (3) the Due Date and Time, (4) Vendor Name and Address, (5) the River Basin
and Cataloging Unit for which the proposal response is being submitted, and (6) the Site Name and Type of
Mitigation being proposed. Address the package(s) for delivery as shown in the table above. If Vendor is submitting
more than one (1) proposal, each proposal shall be submitted in separate sealed envelopes and marked accordingly.
For delivery purposes, separate sealed envelopes from a single Vendor may be included in the same outer package.
Proposals are subject to rejection unless submitted with the information above included on the outside of the sealed
proposal package.
e) Submit two (2) signed, original executed cost proposal responses and two (2) photocopies (All 4 must be placed
in one separately sealed envelope). All cost proposal response packages must be clearly marked with (1) Sealed
Cost Proposal (2) the RFP number, (3) the Due Date and Time, (4) Vendor Name and Address, (5) the River
Basin and Cataloging Unit for which the proposal response is being submitted, and (6) the Site Name and Type
of Mitigation being proposed. If Vendor is submitting more than one (1) cost proposal option, each response
shall be submitted in a separately sealed envelope and marked accordingly. For delivery purposes, separately
sealed envelopes from a single Vendor may be included in the same outer package.
NOTE: All Technical and cost proposals must constitute a frim, irrevocable offer for a period of at least six (6)
months beyond the specified "Opening Date" for this RFP.
2.8 PROPOSAL CONTENTS
Vendors shall populate all attachments of this RFP that require the Vendor to provide information and include an
authorized signature where requested. Vendor RFP responses shall include the following items and those attachments
should be arranged in the following order:
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 7 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.
a) COVER LETTER
b) TITLE PAGE: Include the company name, address, phone number and authorized representative along with the
Proposal Number.
c) EXECUTION PAGES and any ADDENDA released in conjunction with this RFP that requires the Addenda to be
returned. These must be completed and signed. Failure to comply will result in your bid being disqualified.
d) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The executive summary shall consist of highlights of the general contents of the proposal,
and shall clearly state the anticipated mitigation type and amount of credits proposed. If the Vendor is proposing
multiple mitigation options, each option must be specifically described in this section. (Submitted Mitigation credits
as stated in the Executive Summary must match the credit tables shown in the Technical approach section of the
submittal. This credit total also must match the amount on the Sealed Bid Proposal (attachment C).
e) CORPORATE BACKGROUND AND EXPERIENCE: This section shall include background information on the firm
submitting the proposal, the firm's ability to carry out all phases of the proposal, information concerning similar
mitigation projects completed in North Carolina and other states, the firm's office location(s), the experience of the
project manager, the firm's multidisciplinary approach to the project, the resumes of key personnel for the primary
Vendor and sub -vendors, and DBE/HUB participation.
f) PROJECT ORGANIZATION: This section must include the proposed staffing, deployment, and organization of
personnel to be assigned to this project. The Vendor shall provide information as to the qualifications and experience
of all executive, managerial, legal, and professional personnel to be assigned to this project, including resumes citing
experience with similar projects and the responsibilities to be assigned to each person.
g) TECHNICAL APPROACH: This section shall include and be completed in the following sequence:
• Project Goals and Objectives- Specifically describe how the proposed project will address the watershed
goals identified in the River Basin Restoration Plan (RBRP) applicable to the project area, and the
objectives that will be used to accomplish those goals. RBRPs can be found at:
https://deg.nc.gov/about/divisions/mitigation-services/dms-planning/watershed-planning-documents
searchable by river basin. Unless otherwise specified in the RFP, the proposed ecological benefits and
functional uplift the project could provide may be determined at the discretion of the Vendor. If a proposed
site addresses more than one of the watershed goals, it will be taken into consideration in the site rating.
• Project Description- Provide a detailed description of the project including, but not limited to a description
of the site in its existing condition; watershed (including County and 14 -digit Hydrologic Unit) and its
condition; soils and geology; anticipated cultural resources, protected species issues and known site
constraints (i.e. other easements, crossings, site access, etc.). Note: due to concerns regarding waterfowl
attraction in the vicinity of air transport facilities, the project description must include a site location map
that identifies any air transport facility located within 5 miles of the project site. The presence of an air
transport facility will not exclude the proposal from consideration.
■ The proposal shall include a map(s) with topographic background that includes mapping of proposed
mitigation areas (Restoration, Enhancement, etc.)
Project Development — Describe in detail the means by which the proposed changes will be made.
Describe in detail reasons for the anticipated activities and why these activities are warranted to the level
proposed. Clearly state the anticipated ecological uplift for each activity on the project. The project
development description must include:
■ A general description for all stream crossings, fords, roads etc. The description must include the
location, width, and type of crossing (ford, culvert, bridge etc.). Crossings that utilize bridges and/or
culverts with fencing that permanently prevent livestock access both upstream and downstream of the
crossing (so that livestock exclusion is not dependent on the use of gates) provide better protection
of the riparian area, and possibly gaining more points on the Technical Proposal Scoresheet.
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 8 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.•
Proposed Mitigation - Provide a description of the mitigation credits proposed. Include an explanation of
how the proposed credits were derived and a table of anticipated mitigation credits. The table should include
a total for each type of mitigation (i.e. restoration, etc.) being offered. If multiple options are proposed, a
table for each option should be provided.
Current Ownership and Long Term Protection - Identify the ownership of all parcels which will be affected
by the project. Include the landowners name and parcel number and the proposed method for providing long
term protection of the mitigation site. The long term protection may be provided through real estate instruments
such as conservation easements held by entities such as federal, tribal, state or local resource agencies, non-
profit conservation organizations, or private land managers; the transfer of title to such entities; or by restrictive
covenants.
In this section of the technical proposal it should be clearly stated that conveyance of a conservation
easement to the State is the method that will be used to provide long term protection of the mitigation
site.
■ A signed option agreement valid for a period of at least one -hundred eighty (180) days from the closing
date of this RFP, prepared in accordance with NCGS Chapter 47G-2, and recorded in the applicable
County(ies), or other suitable documentation of real property interest must be provided for each parcel.
Project Phasing — Provide a complete schedule for completing the tasks for the project as identified in this
RFP. Describe methods for completing these tasks. The proposed schedule must be based on completion
of the project (seven (7) year monitoring period) within the ten (10) year contract period. The proposed
schedule should be based on the number of months (from contract issuance) needed to complete each of
the tasks listed in the scope of work.
Success Criteria — Identify specific performance standards that are anticipated to be utilized to measure
success of the project. The success criteria must be directly related to the anticipated ecological uplift
identified in paragraph Project Development above.
Quality Control — This section shall describe the Vendor's quality control program and other
procedures that will be used to ensure: 1) each deliverable (i.e. mitigation plan, baseline monitoring
document, monitoring report, etc.) is submitted in accordance with the schedule established in the
technical proposal, it follows the format(s) established by NCDMS, it contains all required information,
and is grammatically/typographically correct; and 2) sufficient oversight is provided during the
construction/planting phase so that the project is completed on schedule and is in compliance with
any required federal, state or local permit(s).
Maps diagrams, and/or photographs may be used to supplement the text and may be printed on one side.
However, the Technical Proposal should not exceed a total of 50 pages printed front to back (100 -
page limit) and each shall be submitted within a three ring binder with section tabs. Photographs,
maps and diagrams will count toward the 100 pages. If a technical proposal does not meet all the
Department's requirements, it will be rejected and the corresponding sealed cost proposal will not
be opened.
g) ATTACHMENT A: PRICING (COMPLETED, SIGNED AND SEPARATELY SEALED)
h) ATTACHMENT B: INSTRUCTIONS TO VENDORS
1) ATTACHMENT C: NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS
j) ATTACHMENT D: LOCATION OF WORKERS UTILIZED BY VENDOR (COMPLETED)
i) ATTACHMENT E: CERTIFICATION OF FINANCIAL CONDITION (COMPLETED AND SIGNED)
j) ATTACHMENT F: SUPPLEMENTAL VENDOR INFORMATION (COMPLETED)
k) ATTACHMENT G: ADDITIONAL VENDOR INFORMATION (COMPLETED)
1) TECHNICAL SCORESHEET — COMPLETED (OPTIONAL)
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 9 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.,
2.9 IMPORTANT INFORMATION AND RESTRICTIONS
a) The DMS recognizes that a Vendor(s) might not be able to find one site that provides the total amount of
mitigation requested for the cataloging unit listed above. Therefore, proposals may be submitted in any of the
following categories:
■ One or more sites providing all of the requested mitigation credits; or
■ One or more sites providing a portion of the requested mitigation credits.
b) Unless the Vendor states in both the cover letter and the Executive Summary of the technical proposal that
multiple mitigation options are being offered for a site, and specifically describes each option, the Department
shall only consider the full proposal amount and will not extend an offer to contract for less than the full amount
indicated in the proposal.
c) Proposals will NOT be accepted using the following types of sites:
1. Property purchased with Clean Water Management Trust Fund monies
2. Property that is enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program, Conservation Reserve
Program, Wetlands Reserve Program, or any other state or federal program that provides funds for any
of the tasks outlined in this RFP
3. Property that has been used for compensatory mitigation under Section 404 and/or 401 of the Clean
Water Act
4. Properties that are in the control of the State or currently in negotiation for compensatory mitigation
needs by any state agency
5. Properties that are controlled by any federal agency
6. Properties that have been timbered, filled, or manipulated (stream channel dredging or channel re-
alignment) in violation of federal or state rules or statutes.
d) Please note that the State of North Carolina will NOT accept fee simple title to any property as a result of this
RFP. As stated in the TASKS Section, long-term protection of the selected properties must be provided by a
conservation easement held by the State of North Carolina.
2.10 TEMPLATES, TECHNICAL SCORESHEETS, TARGET WATERSHEDS, & MAPS
The latest required report templates, technical scoresheets, target watersheds and mapping and applicable to
this RFP are found at:
https://deg.nc.gov/aboutldivisions/mitigation-services/dms-vendors/rfi)-forms-templates
2.11 DEFINITIONS, ACRONYMS, AND ABBREVIATIONS
Adjusted Credit Cost — The Credit Cost of a Site divided by the Proposal Rating; units are Dollars per Wetland
Mitigation Credit, Stream Mitigation credits, Buffer Mitigation credits, or Nutrient Offset Credits.
Agencies — The regulatory and advisory units of the state and federal government in North Carolina which are
involved in permitting and/or commenting on proposed activities in wetlands, streams, or riparian areas and in
approving and/or commenting on proposed compensatory wetland, stream, riparian buffer or nutrient offset
mitigation.
As -Built Drawings — Scale drawings depicting the final configuration, dimensions, and locations of all pertinent
features of a Site after all implementation activities have been completed.
Baseline Monitoring Document — A written document, supplemented with graphics (including as -built drawings),
that describes in detail the implemented mitigation site, the goals established for the project, how it was
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 10 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.,
implemented, how it will be monitored, the amount of mitigation credits the project will generate, and the criteria by
which its success will be determined.
Cataloging Unit ("CU") — A geographic area representing part or all of a River Basin and identified by an 8 -digit
number as depicted on the "Hydrologic Unit Map —1974, State of North Carolina, published by the U.S. Department
of Interior, Geological Survey".
Categorical Exclusion — Categories of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on
the human or natural environment and for which, therefore, neither an Environmental Assessment nor an
Environmental Impact Statement is required. The Categorical Exclusion will be satisfied by completing the
Categorical Exclusion Action Form and Document. The Categorical Exclusion must be approved by the
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA).
Coastal Wetland — As defined in North Carolina General Statute 113-229(n)(3) and described in the CAMA
Handbook for Development in Coastal North Carolina — Section 2(A)(4) found at:
http://Portal.ncdenr.org/web/cm/104
Closeout Report — A component of the final year of the Monitoring Report that provides an assessment of the
monitoring data collected from the entire monitoring period to demonstrate attainment of success criteria.
Conservation Easement — A restriction landowners voluntarily place on specified uses of their property to protect its
natural, productive, or cultural features. It is recorded as a written legal agreement between the landowner and the
"holder" of the easement. The State of North Carolina must receive from the landowner a conservation easement as
prepared and facilitated by the full delivery provider for all NC Division of Mitigation Services full delivery projects.
Credit — A unit of measure (e.g., a functional or a real measure or other suitable metric) representing the accrual or
attainment of aquatic functions at a compensatory mitigation site, as approved by the regulatory agencies. The
measure of aquatic functions is based on the resources restored (rehabilitated), established, enhanced or preserved.
Credit Cost — Total bid cost divided by the number of offered credits for each type of mitigation.
Credit Release Schedule - The timeline established for the periodic release of mitigation credits based upon the
successful implementation of the approved Mitigation Plan, including construction and post -construction monitoring.
Department — The North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ)
Division of Financial Services — Contracting arm of NCDEQ.
Division of Water Resources -Division in NCDEQ that is responsible for state water quality regulations.
DOA/P&C — The North Carolina Department of Administration, Division of Purchase and Contract.
Financial Assurance — Financial security assuring the ability of the provider to deliver the contracted for mitigation
credits. Financial Assurance must be provided through Performance Bonds, Letters of Credit or Casualty Insurance.
Hydrologic Unit ("HU") — A geographic area representing a portion of a Cataloging Unit as depicted on the
"Hydrologic Unit Map — 1974, State of North Carolina, published by the U.S. Department of Interior, Geological
Survey," and identified by a 14 -digit number.
Interagency Review Team (IRT) — A group of federal, tribal, state, and/or local regulatory and resource agency
representatives that review documentation for, and advises the USACE district engineer on the establishment and
management of a stream and/or wetland mitigation bank or an in -lieu fee program.
Intermittent Stream — A well-defined channel that contains water for only part of the year, typically during winter
and spring when the aquatic bed is below the water table. The flow may be heavily supplemented by storm water
runoff. An intermittent stream should score at least 19 points using the NC Division of Water Quality Classification
Manual, Version 4.11, 2010, effective September 1, 2010. This manual can be found at:
http://portal. ncdenr.org/web/wq/swp/ws/401 /waterresou rces/streamdeterm inations
Jurisdictional Wetland - A wetland as defined in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 11 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.,
Local Watershed Plan — an NCDMS watershed plan that is conducted in specific priority areas (typically one or
more TLWs) where NCDMS and the local community have identified a need to address critical watershed issues.
Through this planning process, NCDMS collaborates with local stakeholders and resource professionals to identify
projects and management strategies to restore, enhance and protect local watershed resources. LWPs can be
found by County or River Basin at:
https://deg.nc.gov/abouVdivisions/mitigation-services/dms-planning/watershed-planning-documents
Long Term Protection — as defined in the Federal Code of Regulations (Federal Register/Vol. 73, No.
70/Thursday, April 10, 2008/ Rules and Regulations — Section 332.7 Management, the Long Term Protection of a
mitigation site may be provided through real estate instruments such as conservation easements held by entities
such as federal, tribal, state or local resource agencies, non-profit conservation organizations, or private land
managers; the transfer of title to such entities; or by restrictive covenants. The use of conservation easements
and/or restrictive covenants must receive prior approval by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) —
District Engineer. As noted in the Federal Code of Regulations, the USACE District Engineer shall consider
relevant legal constraints on the use of conservation easements and/or restrictive covenants in determining
whether such mechanisms provide sufficient protection.
Mitigation Plan — A written document, supplemented with graphics, which describes: the existing site conditions,
the goals and objectives of the project and other pertinent information. The Mitigation Plan is developed and
submitted prior to the implementation of the project.
Monitoring Report — A written document, supplemented with graphics due on December 1 st of each year during
the seven (7) year monitoring period following the completion of construction. This report contains results of the
measured success criteria as defined in the Baseline Monitoring Document.
NCDMS — The North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services.
Non -Riparian Wetland — An area underlain with hydric soils that is NOT located in a geomorphic floodplain or
natural crenulation and NOT contiguous to natural lakes greater than 20 acres in size or artificial impoundments.
Non -Riparian Wetlands are typically found on flats in interstream divides (pocosins), side slopes (seeps), and in
depressions surrounded by uplands (mafic depressions, lime sinks and Carolina Bays). The hydrology of non -
riparian wetlands is driven by precipitation and is characterized by groundwater being at or near the surface for much
of the year. Must meet US Army Corps of Engineers wetlands definition (33 CFR 328.3(b)).
Opening Date — The location, date, and time that the Sealed Technical Proposal and Sealed Cost Proposal must
be delivered to NCDMS. Proposals will not be accepted by NCDMS after the opening date/time.
Perennial Stream — A well-defined channel that contains water year-round during a year of normal rainfall, with the
aquatic bed located below the water table for most of the year. A perennial stream should score at least 30 points
using the NC Division of Water Quality Stream Classification Manual, Version 4.11, 2010, effective September 1,
2010. This manual can be found at:
http://Portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/swp/ws/401/waterresources/streamdeterminations
Preliminary Findings Report — An NCDMS report that is developed during the Local Watershed Planning process
that contains an evaluation of available data sources and an initial determination of watershed conditions; identifies
data gaps; and includes a plan for a detailed evaluation of the watershed and its water quality, habitat and hydrologic
functions.
Project Area — For the purposes of this RFP, project area is defined as the area within the proposed conservation
easement for the project.
Project Milestones — A deliverable, such as a document or completed action that signifies that the endo of a task
in the Scope of Service.
Property— A Site may be comprised of one or more pieces of real Property owned by one or more individual.
Proposal — The response to the RFP from an interested Vendor consisting of a signed Sealed Cost Proposal and a
Sealed Technical Proposal.
Proposed Project - a site that is in a pre -construction state and that is not associated with, or a part of, an
approved (signed, fully executed) Mitigation Banking Instrument by the closing date of this RFP.
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 12 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.,
Proposal Rating ("PR") — A value (number) that is calculated for each Proposal based upon the evaluation of the
Proposal by the PRC. The PR is established by dividing the points scored by the total amount of potential points.
Proposal Review Committee ("PRC") - A committee established by the NCDMS to review and evaluate each
Proposal received and to make recommendations to the NCDMS Director and Procurement Manager.
Release of Credits — means a determination by the USACE district engineer in consultation with the IRT (or DWR
for riparian buffer and nutrient offset), that credits associated with an approved mitigation plan are available for sale
or transfer as defined under the Federal Guidance for the Establishment, Use and Operation of Mitigation Banks
(Federal Register April 10, 2008, Volume 70, Number 73, pp 19594-19705).
RFP — Request for Proposals; the document issued by the Department to solicit Proposals from interested Vendors.
Riparian Buffer Mitigation Credit- The unit of measurement of the extent of riparian buffer mitigation being offered
in a Proposal.
Riparian Wetlands — An area that is underlain with hydric soils and located within a geomorphic floodplain or natural
crenulation, or contiguous with NATURAL water bodies greater than 20 acres in size.
River Basin — The largest category of surface water drainage; there are seventeen (17) river basins in North
Carolina.
River Basin Restoration Priorities - A planning document prepared by the NCDMS that targets specific watersheds
(TLWs) with descriptions of existing degradation and protection needs for restoration project implementation. Unless
otherwise stipulated in the RFP, NCDMS requires mitigation sites to be located in these targeted local
watersheds (i.e. hydrologic units).
Scope of Services — All services, actions, and physical work required by the Department to achieve the purpose
and objectives defined in the RFP; such services may include the furnishing of all required labor, equipment, supplies
and materials except as specifically stated.
Sealed Cost Proposal — The completed Sealed Cost Proposal form included in the RFP signed by the Vendor
specifying the total compensation requested for the performance of the specified scope of services as defined by
the RFP. If more than one Site is proposed, a separate Sealed Cost Proposal must be submitted for each Site. If
the Vendor is willing to offer multiple options (i.e. different quantities of mitigation at different credit costs) for one
proposed site, a separate Cost Proposal must be submitted for each option offered.
Service Area — 1) A geographic area where mitigation credits from a mitigation site can generally be utilized to
satisfy permit requirements. 2) A geographic area where a mitigation requirement can be satisfied.
Site — Property or properties identified by a Vendor in a Proposal as having potential to provide either wetland, stream,
buffer or nutrient offset mitigation. A proposed project shall describe mitigation activities that occur on a single
property parcel, or which occur on multiple property parcels. Project proposals shall demonstrate hydrologic
connectivity and/or habitat continuity such that the functional relationships between the project components,
encompassed within each parcel is evident. DMS shall have the sole discretion to determine whether the project
components have sufficient hydrologic connectivity and/or habitat continuity to be considered in a single project
proposal.
Stream Mitigation Credit — The unit of measurement of the extent of stream mitigation being offered in a Proposal.
Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) — A 14 -digit Hydrologic Unit identified as a targeted area in the RFP. These are
preferred locations for mitigation projects because they may have environmental characteristics that can be
improved through restoration projects.
Targeted Resource Area (TRA) — a unique or substantial important asset, opportunity, or function located within a
defined area. TRAs can include targeted assets or targeted opportunities. These are identified by analyzing
spatial data representing assets, problems, and opportunities that manifest as patches of significance at a smaller
scale than the 12- or 14 -digit hydrologic units. These are analogous to TLWs; however, TRAs have defined
boundaries based on an area of influence or an area of habitat extent NOT necessarily defined by a watershed
boundary.
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 13 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.,
Technical Proposal — One of the two parts of the Proposal which contains a technical description of the proposed
mitigation.
USACE — United States Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory Branch, Wilmington District
USGS — United States Geological Survey.
Vendor — A private agency, corporation, firm, organization, business, or individual offering to provide qualified
professional or specialized services to the Department; if two or more private agencies, corporations, organizations,
businesses or individuals join together in a prime vendor/sub-vendor relationship to submit a Proposal, the
Department will consider the prime vendor to be the Vendor; only the Vendor may enter into a Contract with the
Department (The words 'Vendor' and `Contractor' are used interchangeably for this RFP).
Wetland Enhancement - means the manipulation of the physical, chemical and biological characteristics of a site
to heighten, intensify, or improve a specific aquatic resource function(s). Enhancement results in the gain of
selected aquatic resource function(s), but may also lead to a decline in other aquatic resource function(s).
Enhancement does not result in a gain in aquatic resource area.
Wetland Preservation - means the removal of a threat to, or preventing the decline of, aquatic resources by an
action in or near those aquatic resources. This term includes those activities normally associated with the protection
and maintenance of aquatic resources through the implementation of appropriate legal and physical mechanisms.
Preservation does not result in a gain in aquatic resource area or functions.
Wetland Restoration - means the manipulation of the physical, chemical and biological characteristics of a site with
the goal of returning natural/historic functions to a former or degraded aquatic resource. Wetland restoration is
divided into two categories: Re-establishment and Rehabilitation. See definition of Wetland Re-establishment and
Wetland Rehabilitation.
Wetland Re-establishment — means the manipulation of the physical, chemical and biological characteristics of a
site with the goal of returning natural/historic functions to a former aquatic resource. Re-establishment results in
rebuilding a former aquatic resource and results in a gain in aquatic resource area and function.
Wetland Rehabilitation — means the manipulation of the physical, chemical and biological characteristics of a site
with the goal of returning most, if not all of the natural/historic functions to a degraded aquatic resource.
Rehabilitation results in a gain in aquatic resource function, but does not result in a gain in aquatic resource area.
Wetland Mitigation Credit — The unit of measurement of the extent of wetland mitigation being offered in a Proposal.
3.0 METHOD OF AWARD AND PROPOSAL EVALUATION PROCESS
3.1 METHOD OF AWARD
Contracts will be awarded in accordance with G.S. 143-52 and the evaluation criteria set out in this solicitation.
Prospective Vendors shall not be discriminated against on the basis of any prohibited grounds as defined by
Federal and State law.
All qualified proposals will be evaluated and awards will be made to the Vendor(s) meeting the RFP requirements and
achieving the highest and best final evaluation, based on the criteria described below.
The NCDMS Procurement Manager and the Director, will analyze the ranked sites, determine the proposal selections and
submit recommendations to the Department of Administration, Purchase & Contract section, as required, for approval,
taking into account the following information:
■ adjusted credit cost
■ credit cost
■ available funds
■ mitigation needs at the time of selection
■ the best interest of the State of North Carolina
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 14 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.
While the intent of this RFP is to award a Contract(s) to single Vendor, the State reserves the right to make separate
awards to different Vendors for one or contracts, to not award one or more contracts or to cancel this RFP in its entirety
without awarding a Contract, if it is considered to be most advantageous to the State to do so.
The status of a Vendor's E -Procurement Services account(s) shall be considered a relevant factor in determining whether
to approve the award of a contract under this RFP. Any Vendor with an E -Procurement Services account that is in
arrears by 91 days or more at the time of proposal opening may, at the State's discretion, be disqualified from further
evaluation or consideration.
The State reserves the right to waive any minor informality or technicality in proposals received.
3.2 CONFIDENTIALITY AND PROHIBITED COMMUNICATIONS DURING EVALUATION
During the evaluation period—from the date proposals are opened through the date the contract is awarded—each
Vendor submitting a proposal (including its representatives, sub -contractors and/or suppliers) is prohibited from having
any communications with any person inside or outside the using agency, issuing agency, other government agency
office, or body (including the purchaser named above, department secretary, agency head, members of the general
assembly and/or governor's office), or private entity, if the communication refers to the content of Vendor's proposal or
qualifications, the contents of another Vendor's proposal, another Vendor's qualifications or ability to perform the
contract, and/or the transmittal of any other communication of information that could be reasonably considered to have
the effect of directly or indirectly influencing the evaluation of proposals and/or the award of the contract. A Vendor not
in compliance with this provision shall be disqualified from contract award, unless it is determined in the State's discretion
that the communication was harmless, that it was made without intent to influence and that the best interest of the State
would not be served by the disqualification. A Vendor's proposal may be disqualified if its sub -contractor and supplier
engage in any of the foregoing communications during the time that the procurement is active (i.e., the issuance date of
the procurement to the date of contract award). Only those discussions, communications or transmittals of information
authorized or initiated by the issuing agency for this RFP or general inquiries directed to the purchaser regarding
requirements of the RFP (prior to proposal submission) or the status of the contract award (after submission) are
excepted from this provision.
3.3 PROPOSAL EVALUATION PROCESS
The State shall review all Vendor responses to this RFP to confirm that they meet the specifications and requirements
of the RFP.
The State will conduct a Two -Step evaluation of Proposals:
Proposals will be received from each Vendor in two separate, sealed packages - the Technical Proposal and the
Cost Proposal. Each original of both proposals (Technical and Cost) shall be signed and dated by an official
authorized to bind the firm. Unsigned proposals will not be considered.
NOTE: No technical information shall be contained in the cost proposal. No cost information shall be
contained in the technical proposal. Inclusion of any cost information in the technical proposal and/or any
technical information in the cost proposal shall constitute sufficient grounds to reject Vendor's proposal.
All proposals must be received by the issuing agency not later than the date and time specified on the cover sheet
of this RFP.
At that date and time, the package containing the technical proposals from each responding firm will be publicly
opened and the name of each Vendor announced publicly. A notation will also be made whether a separate sealed
cost proposal has been received. Cost proposals will be placed in safekeeping until opened at a later date.
All technical proposals will be evaluated prior to opening any cost proposal.
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 15 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.
Upon completion of the technical evaluation, the cost proposals of those Vendors whose technical proposals have
been deemed acceptable will be publicly opened. The total cost offered by each firm will be tabulated and become
a matter of public record. Interested parties are cautioned that these costs and their components are subject to
further evaluation for completeness and correctness and therefore may not be an exact indicator of a Vendor's
pricing position.
At their sole option, the evaluators may request oral presentations or discussion with any or all Vendors for the
purpose of clarification or to amplify the materials presented in any part of the proposal. Vendors are cautioned,
however, that the evaluators are not required to request presentations or other clarification—and often do not;
therefore, all proposals must be complete and reflect the most favorable terms available from the Vendor.
Proposals will generally be evaluated according to completeness, content, experience with similar projects, ability of
the Vendor and its staff, and cost. Specific evaluation criteria are listed section 3.4 EVALUATION CRITERIA, below.
Vendors are cautioned that this is a request for proposals, not a request to contract, and the State reserves the
unqualified right to reject any and all offers at any time if such rejection is deemed to be in the best interest of the
State.
The State reserves the right to reject all original offers and request one or more of the Vendors submitting proposals
within a competitive range to submit a best and final offer (BAFO), based on discussions and negotiations with the
State, if the initial responses to the RFP have been evaluated and determined to be unsatisfactory.
Upon completion of the evaluation process, the State will make Award(s) based on the evaluation and post the
award(s) to IPS under the RFP number for this solicitation. Award of a Contract to one Vendor does not mean that
the other proposals lacked merit, but that, all factors considered, the selected proposal was deemed most
advantageous and represented the best value to the State.
3.4 EVALUATION CRITERIA
All qualified proposals will be evaluated and award made based on considering the following criteria, to result in an award
most advantageous to the State. A proposal may be rejected during any phase of review if the PRC determines that the
proposal has not provided the requested information in the specified format, has determined that the firm is not qualified
to perform the services, and/or if it has been determined that the proposal cannot provide the mitigation indicated in the
proposal. Each proposal will be reviewed and assigned a proposal rating prior to opening any cost proposal.
Proposals will generally be evaluated according to completeness, content, experience with similar projects,
ability of the offeror and its staff, and cost. Specific evaluation criteria are listed below.
Technical
a) Technical Proposals will be reviewed for length, format requirements and qualifications of firm and project
approach by the Contract Administrator and Purchasing Agent. Only vendors who meet these initial
qualifications will move forward.
b) Upon completion of the initial review, a field review and evaluation of the proposed site will be conducted
by the PRC.
c) Each Vendor will be scored based on the Technical Scoresheet.
Price
a) Sealed cost proposals for all proposals still under consideration will be opened and tabulated.
b) The adjusted credit cost is a combined technical and cost measure, and used for ranking sites. This is a
best value determination by NCDMS after evaluating all factors in the technical proposal and then
evaluating the cost proposal. The adjusted credit cost will be calculated and determined using the
following formula:
Credit Cost _ Proposal Rating (Technical Score)
Each site will be ranked by the lowest adjusted credit cost.
Ver: 711118 Page 16 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704
Vendor.-
3.5
endor.
3.5 PERFORMANCE OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES
Vendor shall complete ATTACHMENT D: LOCATION OF WORKERS UTILIZED BY VENDOR. In addition to any other
evaluation criteria identified in this RFP, the State may also consider, for purposes of evaluating proposed or actual
contract performance outside of the United States, how that performance may affect the following factors to ensure that
any award will be in the best interest of the State:
a) Total cost to the State
b) Level of quality provided by the Vendor
c) Process and performance capability across multiple jurisdictions
d) Protection of the State's information and intellectual property
e) Availability of pertinent skills
f) Ability to understand the State's business requirements and internal operational culture
g) Particular risk factors such as the security of the State's information technology
h) Relations with citizens and employees
i) Contract enforcement jurisdictional issues
3.6 INTERPRETATION OF TERMS AND PHRASES
This Request for Proposal serves two functions: (1) to advise potential Vendors of the parameters of the solution being
sought by the Department; and (2) to provide (together with other specified documents) the terms of the Contract
resulting from this procurement. As such, all terms in the Request for Proposal shall be enforceable as contract terms
in accordance with the General Contract Terms and Conditions. The use of phrases such as "shall," "must," and
"requirements" are intended to create enforceable contract conditions. In determining whether proposals should be
evaluated or rejected, the Department will take into consideration the degree to which Vendors have proposed or failed
to propose solutions that will satisfy the Department's needs as described in the Request for Proposal. Except as
specifically stated in the Request for Proposal, no one requirement shall automatically disqualify a Vendor from
consideration. However, failure to comply with any single requirement may result in the Department exercising its
discretion to reject a proposal in its entirety.
4.0 REQUIREMENTS
This Section lists the requirements related to this RFP. By submitting a proposal, the Vendor agrees to meet all stated
requirements in this Section as well as any other specifications, requirements and terms and conditions stated in this
RFP. If a Vendor is unclear about a requirement or specification or believes a change to a requirement would allow for
the State to receive a better proposal, the Vendor is urged and cautioned to submit these items in the form of a question
during the question and answer period in accordance with Section 2.6.
4.1 CONTRACT TERM
The Contract shall have maximum term of up to 10 years, beginning on the date of contract award (the "Effective Date").
The Vendor shall begin work under the Contract within seven (7) business days of the Effective Date.
4.2 PRICING
Proposal price shall constitute the total cost to Buyer for complete performance in accordance with the requirements and
specifications herein, including all applicable charges handling, administrative and other similar fees. Vendor shall not
invoice for any amounts not specifically allowed for in this RFP. Complete ATTACHMENT A: PRICING FORM and
include in Proposal.
4.3 DOWNWARD PAYMENT ADJUSTMENTS
Payment by the Department will be based on the number of credits the vendor is able to provide at the credit price first
established by the cost proposal pursuant to the proposal review process and credits identified in the technical proposal.
In order to ensure that the Department does not overpay at the end of the process, periodic adjustments may be made
so that the final total payment equals the final number of mitigation credits, as determined by the IRT, delivered by the
vendor multiplied by the original per credit price. Payment adjustments may be made after the initial contract is executed
based on the number of mitigation credits the project is anticipated to provide as documented after contract execution,
including but not limited to: completion of the mitigation plan; site restoration (earthwork/planting), completion of the
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 17 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.,
baseline monitoring document; the post construction monitoring period, and/or after final determination of mitigation
credits by the IRT.
4.4 INVOICES
a) Invoices are to be submitted to the NCDMS after its approval of each individual task/deliverable.
b) The Vendor must follow the NCDMS Invoice Guidelines dated March 1, 2014.
c) Final invoice must be received by the DEPARTMENT within 45 days after the end of the contract period.
d) Invoices must bear the correct contract number to ensure prompt payment. The Vendor's failure to include
the correct contract number may cause delay in payment.
e) Invoices must be submitted to the following address:
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
Attn: Debby Davis
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
4.5 PAYMENT TERMS
a) The Vendor will be compensated at the rates quoted in the Vendor's Cost Proposal (as per the Payment
Schedule provided in Section 5.3 TASKS).
b) The Vendor will be paid net thirty (30) calendar days after the Vendor's invoice is approved by the State
4.6 FINANCIAL STABILITY
Each Vendor shall certify it is financially stable by completing the ATTACHMENT E: CERTIFICATION OF FINANCIAL
CONDITION. The State is requiring this certification to minimize potential issues from Contracting with a Vendor that is
financially unstable. From the date of the Certification to the expiration of the Contract, the Vendor shall notify the State
within thirty (30) days of any occurrence or condition that materially alters the truth of any statement made in this
Certification.
4.7 FINANCIAL ASSURANCE
The vendor must provide financial assurance in one of the following forms:
1) Performance Bonding — The vendor must provide security in the form of an acceptable performance bond as
described in the following paragraph to guarantee delivery of the maximum number of originally contracted
credits. The performance bond must be obtained from a company licensed in North Carolina as shown in the
Federal Treasury Listing of Approved Sureties (Circular 570). The maximum allowable amount provided by a
surety may not exceed the "underwriting limitation" for the surety as identified in the Federal Treasury Listing.
Although this RFP is a request for mitigation and not construction, the performance bond shall follow the
prescribed wording provided in N.C.G.S. § 44A-33. The performance bond must be for 55% of the total value of
the contract and must be in effect and submitted with the Task 3 deliverable before DMS will authorize payment
for that deliverable. The bond must remain in effect until the vendor has received written notification from the
DMS that the requirements of Task 6 (submittal of baseline monitoring report) have been met (the financial
assurance document must indicate that it is in effect through approval of task 6 and must include the NCDEQ
contract number). After the successful completion of Task 6, the bond can be retired.
2) Letters of Credit- LDCs must be drawn from a reputable bank identified by the FDIC as "Well Capitalized" or
"Adequately Capitalized" and follow the submittal timing, contract amounts and schedules for reduction as
those described above for the performance bonds. Evergreen or irrevocable LOCs shall be required to
provide a 120 -day notice of cancellation, termination or non -renewal.
Ver: 711118 Page 18 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.,
3) Casualty Insurance on underlying performance of credits of mitigation, must follow the same submittal timing,
contract amounts and reduction schedules as those described above in performance bonds. The insurance
must contain the following information:
a. The "NCDEQ DMS," the contract number and the Insured Property must be named in the insurance
document. NCDEQ shall have the sole right to place a claim against the policy,
b. Casualty Insurance can be written effective for one year, but notice from the Vendor, stating that it is
currently in the process of replacing the current policy, must be submitted to NCDMS at least one
month before policy expiration date.
4.8 VENDOR EXPERIENCE
In its Proposal, Vendor shall demonstrate experience with public and/or private sector clients with similar or greater size
and complexity to the State of North Carolina. Vendor shall provide information as to the qualifications and experience
of all executive, managerial, legal, and professional personnel to be assigned to this project, including resumes citing
experience with similar projects and the responsibilities to be assigned to each person.
4.9 REFERENCES
The State reserves the right to request and verify references. Upon request, references must be submitted within 3
business days. Failure to provide references will cause your proposal to be rejected.
4.10 BACKGROUND CHECKS
Vendor and its personnel are required to provide or undergo background checks at Vendor's expense prior to beginning
work with the State. As part of Vendor background the details below must be provided to the State:
a) Any regulatory sanctions levied against Vendor or any of its officers, directors or its professional employees
expected to provide Services on this project by any state or federal regulatory agencies within the past three years
or a statement that there are none. As used herein, the term "regulatory sanctions" includes the revocation or
suspension of any license or certification, the levying of any monetary penalties or fines, and the issuance of any
written warnings;
b) Any regulatory investigations pending against Vendor or any of its officers, directors or its professional employees
expected to provide Services on this project by any state or federal regulatory agencies of which Vendor has
knowledge or a statement that there are none.
Vendor's responses to these requests shall be considered to be continuing representations, and Vendor's failure to notify
the State within thirty (30) days of any criminal litigation, investigation or proceeding involving Vendor or its then current
officers, directors or persons providing Services under this contract during its term shall constitute a material breach of
contract. The provisions of this paragraph shall also apply to any subcontractor utilized by Vendor to perform Services
under this contract.
4.11 PERSONNEL
Vendor shall not substitute key personnel assigned to the performance of this Contract without prior written approval by
the Contract Lead. Vendor shall notify the Contract Lead of any desired substitution, including the name(s) and
references of Vendor's recommended substitute personnel. The State will approve or disapprove the requested
substitution in a timely manner. The State may, in its sole discretion, terminate the services of any person providing
services under this Contract. Upon such termination, the State may request acceptable substitute personnel or terminate
the contract services provided by such personnel.
4.12 VENDOR'S REPRESENTATIONS
a) Vendor warrants that qualified personnel shall provide Services under this Contract in a professional manner.
"Professional manner" means that the personnel performing the Services will possess the skill and competence
consistent with the prevailing business standards in the industry. Vendor agrees that it will not enter any agreement
with a third party that may abridge any rights of the State under this Contract. Vendor will serve as the prime
contractor under this Contract and shall be responsible for the performance and payment of all subcontractor(s) that
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 19 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.,
may be approved by the State. Names of any third party Vendors or subcontractors of Vendor may appear for
purposes of convenience in Contract documents; and shall not limit Vendor's obligations hereunder. Vendor will
retain executive representation for functional and technical expertise as needed in order to incorporate any work by
third party subcontractor(s).
b) If any Services, deliverables, functions, or responsibilities not specifically described in this Contract are required for
Vendor's proper performance, provision and delivery of the service and deliverables under this Contract, or are an
inherent part of or necessary sub -task included within such service, they will be deemed to be implied by and
included within the scope of the contract to the same extent and in the same manner as if specifically described in
the contract. Unless otherwise expressly provided herein, Vendor will furnish all of its own necessary management,
supervision, labor, facilities, furniture, computer and telecommunications equipment, software, supplies and
materials necessary for the Vendor to provide and deliver the Services and Deliverables.
c) Vendor warrants that it has the financial capacity to perform and to continue perform its obligations under the
contract; that Vendor has no constructive or actual knowledge of an actual or potential legal proceeding being
brought against Vendor that could materially adversely affect performance of this Contract; and that entering into
this Contract is not prohibited by any contract, or order by any court of competent jurisdiction.
Ver: 711118 Page 20 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor. -
5.0 SCOPE OF WORK
5.1 GENERAL
The mission of NCDMS is to provide cost-effective mitigation alternatives that improve the state's water resources.
This RFP is soliciting Proposals from qualified Vendors for needed mitigation as described herein for the NCDMS to
successfully meet permit conditions mandated by the regulatory agencies.
5.2 OBJECTIVES
The Department desires to acquire Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Credits quantified in the table below and
occurring within the Catawba Expanded Service Area (ESA) including sections of Cataloging Units 03050101,
03050102, and 03050103 (which can be found on the DMS website at the following link:
https://deg.nc.gov/about/divisions/mitigation-services/dms-vendors/rfp-forms-templates).
RIVER BASIN
CATALOGING UNITS
Catawba
03050101*, 03050102*, 03050103*
*Catawba 03 Expanded Service Area (ESA)
Mitigation Type
Requested Credits
Thermal Regime
Credits Shall Not Exceed
Preservation Percentage
Credits Shall Meet a
Minimum Restoration
Percentage of Total
Credits Offered
Stream
5,000
Warm/Cool/Cold
10 % of total linear feet
n/a
Riparian Wetland
8.00
n/a
50%
Non -Riparian Wetland
n/a
n/a
n/a
Riparian Buffer
n/a
n/a
n/a
Credit Combinations
Acceptable for this Submission
Stream Only
NO
Riparian Wetland Only
YES
Stream & Wetland
YES
General Mitigation Information
Stream Mitigation:
The definitions of stream restoration, enhancement levels I and II, and preservation are defined in the Stream
Mitigation Guidelines (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District, April, 2003) available on their
website. For the purposes of this RFP (the technical proposal, and any contract(s) that may result from this
RFP), all mitigation must be consistent with 2003 USACE Stream Mitigation Guidelines and the Wilmington
District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update (NCIRT-October 24, 2016).
Wetland Mitigation:
Information, including soil boring logs prepared by a Licensed Soil Scientist (LSS), must be provided in the
technical proposal to demonstrate that areas proposed for restoration consist predominantly of hydric soils,
and:
1. Are not currently jurisdictional wetlands as defined in the 1987 US Army Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual and USACE regional supplements, and that are devoid of the proper community type of
vegetation (Wetland Re-establishment).
2. Are degraded (poorly functioning) jurisdictional wetlands that have been drained or otherwise manipulated
resulting in a significant loss of wetland function (Wetland Rehabilitation). Wetland Rehabilitation should
restore most, if not all natural and/or historic functions to a degraded wetland.
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 21 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.,
3. Are degraded (poorly to moderately functioning) jurisdictional wetlands that have been manipulated
resulting in a loss of wetland function (Wetland Enhancement) — Wetland Enhancement results in the gain of
selected wetland function(s), but may also lead to a decline in other aquatic resource function(s).
5.3 TASKS
Task deliverables must meet the latest required report templates described in Section 2.10. Deliverable quantity,
format, and method of delivery are provided in Attachment H.
The Vendor may elect to complete Task 3 (site specific Mitigation Plan), including the requirement for financial
assurance (See FINANCIAL ASSURANCE section) prior to completion of Task 2.
Task 1 Environmental and Project Screening:
a) Conduct an on-site meeting with the IRT and DMS to discuss basic concepts of the proposed mitigation
plan and identify concerns or issues related to that plan. Concerns or issues identified must be addressed
prior to conveyance of the conservation easement or development of the formal mitigation plan.
b) Conduct an environmental screening to identify/survey potential protected species, archaeological sites,
historical architecture structures, contamination, etc. of the site.
c) In addition, in accordance to USACE requirements, the Vendor will provide a signed and dated DMS Full
Delivery Landowner Authorization Form for each parcel AFTER contract has been awarded and prior to
the post contract on-site meeting with the IRT.
Task 2 Property:
Step One: Preliminary Process and Review
The Vendor shall provide the following task deliverables associated with the conservation
easement(s):
1. Draft Conservation Easement
• Use the latest conservation easement template found on the DMS website.
• The Vendor shall convey to the State of North Carolina the rights to all mitigation, including but not
limited to, stream, wetlands, riparian buffer, and nutrient offset mitigation credits derived from each
site and within the area of the conservation easement.
• The easement boundary must mimic the boundary provided within the technical proposal within
reason. Any variations must be communicated to the DMS Project Manager.
• The Vendor must provide a copy of the conservation easement to the landowner, and be aware of
tax implications such as NC General Statute 105-277.4 which addresses county agricultural deferred
taxes that may be incurred at closing.
2. Preliminary Survey Plat
• All surveys shall meet the Standards of Practice for Land Surveying in North Carolina as described
in Title 21, Chapter 56, of the North Carolina Administrative Code. As such, surveys and digital files
shall be tied to the North Carolina State Plane Coordinate System NAD83 (NSRS2007).
• The survey title block shall read, "Conservation Easement Survey for the State of North Carolina,
Division of Mitigation Services." The title block shall also contain the project name, SPO number,
DMS Project number, name of the owner, location, date surveyed, scale of the drawing, name,
address, registration number and seal of the surveyor.
• A table of coordinates (northing and easting) for all property corners, numbered consecutively, must
be included on the plat. If multiple parcels comprise a single project, assign a unique number for
each property corner within the project.
• A text metes and bounds must be provided for recordation with the conservation easement.
• The Vendor shall show the following that exist within 100 feet of the easement boundary: roads or
trails, property corners, nearby easements, dwellings, roadways, streams and creeks, manholes,
poles, and right-of-ways.
• The landowner(s) or his/her legal representative must sign the recorded plat.
• Access to the easement area must be shown, with location and width depicted by a dotted line and
note on the recorded plat.
Ver: 711118 Page 22 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.,
3. Draft attorney's report on title based on a 30 -year title search with all supporting deeds and documentation
• Each conservation easement conveyed must have good, marketable title free of liens and
encumbrances.
4.Title attorney's "Schedule A" with any documents describing possible exceptions to title and exhibits.
Step Two: Approval for Closing
1.SPO and DMS will review and issue written approval to record after documents meet requirements.
2.The Vendor shall record the final approved easement and plat and obtain all necessary approvals from
the County Review Officer.
Step Three: Task 2 Deliverables
The Vendor will complete the six (6) listed deliverables.
1. Recorded Conservation Easement
2. Recorded Survey Plat
3. Final attorneys report on title based on 30 -year search with deeds and
documentation.
4.Original title insurance policy shall be forwarded to SPO immediately upon availability
5. Provide the name, address, phone number, and e-mail address (if available) of each grantor (via
electronic communication) to SPO and DMS.
6. Install survey monumentation and conduct boundary marking with the following specifications in accordance
with NCBELS:
The Vendor shall set 5/8" rebar 30" in length with 3-1/4" aluminum caps on all easement corners.
Caps shall meet DMS specifications (Berntsen RBD5325, imprinted with NC State Logo # B9087
or equivalent). After installation, caps shall be stamped with the corresponding number from the
tableof coordinates on the survey.
• The Vendor shall place a 6 -foot tall durable witness post at each corner in the conservation easement
boundary. Posts shall be made of material that will last a minimum of 20 years.
• The Vendor shall attach a conservation easement sign to each witness post and place additional signs
at no more than 200 -foot intervals on long boundary lines. When applicable, the Vendor can mark
existing trees (>3dbh) with conservation easement signs and/or blaze property lines at approximate
eye level in lieu of line posts. Where applicable, established fence posts can be used for placement
of signage.
ALLOWANCES:
1. The vendor may elect to install boundary marking during Task 6 preparation. No payment for Task 6 will be
approved prior to installation.
2.The original title insurance policy(ies) must be received prior to payment for the Task 6 deliverable.
TASK 3
Develop a site-specific Draft mitigation plan, as appropriate for each site and submit it to the DMS for review,
comment, and approval. Submit a Final Draft mitigation plan for IRT review. Submit a Final mitigation plan with
PCNs for permitting. FINANCIAL ASSURANCE is also due as part of this deliverable.
Deliverables will not be approved without the strict adherence to the current version of the DMS digital
drawing guidance.
TASK 4
Secure any necessary permits and/or certifications (i.e. Erosion and Sedimentation Control permit, etc.).
Submit applicable permits, certifications, etc. to DMS prior to implementation of the earthwork portion of the
mitigation project. Upon completion of earthwork, notify DMS in writing of completion date.
Ver: 711118 Page 23 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.,
TASK 5
Complete planting of the mitigation site and install all monitoring devices/plots. Vegetation must be planted at
least six months before vegetation monitoring activities are conducted at the end of the growing season. Upon
completion of planting and installation of monitoring devices/plots, notify DMS in writing of completion date.
Deliverables will not be approved without the strict adherence to the current version of the
DMS digital drawing guidance.
TASK 6
Prepare the baseline monitoring document and as -built drawings. The as -built drawings (final record of project
construction) should be submitted with the following criteria:
a. Pre -Construction Plan design
b. As -built survey (on same sheets as Pre -Construction Plan design)
C. Must bear Professional Land Surveyor (PLS) seal and/or Professional Engineer (PE) seal where
applicable
d. Annotation and corrections of the Pre -Construction Plan design
Deliverables will not be approved without strict adherence to the current version of the DMS digital
drawing guidance.
TASKS 7-13
Monitor the mitigation site as stipulated in the mitigation plan and baseline monitoring report to assess the
success of the restored site for a period of at least seven (7) years. Each annual monitoring report must be
submitted to the DMS by December 1st of the year during which the monitoring was conducted. The 7th year
monitoring report (or final year in cases where monitoring has been extended beyond 7 years) must include a
closeout report that provides an assessment of the monitoring data collected from the entire monitoring period.
The Vendor must attend preparation closeout meetings, and present the final project to the IRT in closeout
office/onsite meetings.
Deliverables will not be approved without the strict adherence to the current version of the
DMS digital drawing guidance.
PAYMENT SCHEDULE AND DESCRIPTION OF MILESTONES
Project Milestones and Payment Schedule
Task
Project Milestone
Payment^
(% of Contract Value*)
1
Categorical Exclusion Document
5
2
Submit Recorded Conservation Easement on the Site
20
3
Mitigation Plan Final Draft and Financial Assurance
15
4
Mitigation Site Earthwork completed
15
5
Mitigation Site Planting and Installation of Monitoring Devices
10
6
Baseline Monitoring Report(including As -Built Drawin s 1
10
7
Submit Monitoring Report #1 to DMS meets success criteria*)l
5
8
Submit Monitoring Report #2 to DMS meets success criteria*)l
2
9
Submit Monitoring Report #3 to DMS meets success criteria*)l
2
10
Submit Monitoring Report #4 to DMS meets success criteria*)l
2
11
Submit Monitoring Report #5 to DMS meets success criteria*)l
2
12
Submit Monitoring Report #6 to DMS meets success criteria*)l
2
13
Submit Monitoring Report #7 to DMS and complete project Close- Out
rocess meets success criteria*
10
OTAL
100
^Vendor is only eligible for payment after DMS has approved the task/deliverable.
**If site fails to meet success criteria, as indicated in any monitoring report, payment of the monitoring task may
be made if a suitable contingency plan is submitted to and accepted by the DMS.
Ver: 711118 Page 24 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.,
1 For any year, beginning with delivery of Task 6; if credits are withheld by the regulatory agencies or credits are
lost for other reasons, and deliverable payments must be adjusted, then all future yearly payments will be made
following IRT yearly release of the credits.
5.4 ACCEPTANCE OF WORK
In the event acceptance criteria for any work or deliverables is not described in contract documents or work orders
hereunder, the State shall have the obligation to notify Vendor, in writing ten (10) calendar days following completion of
such work or deliverable described in the Contract that it is not acceptable. The notice shall specify in reasonable detail
the reason(s) it is unacceptable. Acceptance by the State shall not be unreasonably withheld; but may be conditioned
or delayed as required for reasonable review, evaluation, installation or testing, as applicable of the work or deliverable.
Final acceptance is expressly conditioned upon completion of all applicable assessment procedures. Should the work
or deliverables fail to meet any requirements, acceptance criteria or otherwise fail to conform to the contract, the State
may exercise any and all rights hereunder, including, for deliverables, such rights provided by the Uniform Commercial
Code as adopted in North Carolina.
6.0 CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION
6.1 PROJECT MANAGER AND CUSTOMER SERVICE
The Vendor shall designate and make available to the State a project manager. The project manager shall be the State's
point of contact for contract related issues and issues concerning performance, progress review, scheduling and service.
Vendor must complete a copy of ATTACHMENT G: Additional Vendor Information and return with bid.
6.2 DISPUTE RESOLUTION
The parties agree that it is in their mutual interest to resolve disputes informally. A claim by the Vendor shall be submitted
in writing to the State's Contract Lead for resolution. A claim by the State shall be submitted in writing to the Vendor's
Project Manager for resolution. The Parties shall negotiate in good faith and use all reasonable efforts to resolve such
dispute(s). During the time the Parties are attempting to resolve any dispute, each shall proceed diligently to perform
their respective duties and responsibilities under this Contract. If a dispute cannot be resolved between the Parties
within thirty (30) days after delivery of notice, either Party may elect to exercise any other remedies available under this
Contract, or at law. This term shall not constitute an agreement by either party to mediate or arbitrate any dispute.
6.3 CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR
Kristie Corson is designated as the contract administrator for the Department for the purposes of this RFP.
Ver: 711118 Page 25 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704
ATTACHMENT A: PRICING
Vendor:
RFP #: 16-007704
RFP TITLE: Full Delivery Projects to provide Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Credits within the
Cataloging Units 03050101, 03050102, and 03050103 of the Catawba River Basin as described in the
Scope of Work
A Separate Sealed Cost Proposal Is Required For Each Proposed Site And For Each Option Proposed For A
Site.
Vendor must list on the front of each sealed cost proposal envelope, the Site Name/Location and
Option Number (if Applicable) Must be Indicated
All costs related to the mitigation offered must be included in this SEALED COST PROPOSAL. No
additional charges for travel, per diem, or cost of any services will be allowed. Cost will be a major factor
in the selection of proposals. ALL Sealed Cost Proposals will be compared to mitigation cost data
maintained by the NCDMS.
SITE NAME
OPTION
PROPOSED COST
GRAND TOTAL:
Printed Name of Authorized Representative Signature of Authorized Representative
Company Name (Printed)
Date
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 26 of 39
STREAM
RIPARIAN WETLAND
TOTAL CREDITS
CREDIT COST ($/CREDIT)
TOTAL COSTS
GRAND TOTAL:
Printed Name of Authorized Representative Signature of Authorized Representative
Company Name (Printed)
Date
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 26 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.,
ATTACHMENT B: INSTRUCTIONS TO VENDORS
1. READ, REVIEW AND COMPLY: It shall be the Vendor's responsibility to read this entire document, review all
enclosures and attachments, and any addenda thereto, and comply with all requirements specified herein,
regardless of whether appearing in these Instructions to Vendors or elsewhere in this RFP document.
2. LATE PROPOSALS: Late proposals, regardless of cause, will not be opened or considered, and will automatically
be disqualified from further consideration. It shall be the Vendor's sole responsibility to ensure delivery at the
designated office by the designated time.
3. ACCEPTANCE AND REJECTION: The State reserves the right to reject any and all proposals, to waive any
informality in proposals and, unless otherwise specified by the Vendor, to accept any item in the proposal. If either
a unit price or an extended price is obviously in error and the other is obviously correct, the incorrect price will be
disregarded. Regardless of error or omission, a Vendor shall not be permitted to increase its pricing after the
deadline for submitting proposals.
4. BASIS FOR REJECTION: Pursuant to 01 NCAC 05B .0501, the State reserves the right to reject any and all offers,
in whole or in part, by deeming the offer unsatisfactory as to quality or quantity, delivery, price or service offered,
non-compliance with the requirements or intent of this solicitation, lack of competitiveness, error(s) in specifications
or indications that revision would be advantageous to the State, cancellation or other changes in the intended project
or any other determination that the proposed requirement is no longer needed, limitation or lack of available funds,
circumstances that prevent determination of the best offer, or any other determination that rejection would be in the
best interest of the State.
5. EXECUTION: Failure to sign the Execution Page (numbered page 1 of the RFP) in the indicated space will render
proposal non-responsive, and it shall be rejected.
6. ORDER OF PRECEDENCE: In cases of conflict between specific provisions in this solicitation or those in any
resulting contract documents, the order of precedence shall be (high to low) (1) any special terms and conditions
specific to this RFP, including any negotiated terms; (2) requirements and specifications and administration
provisions in Sections 4, 5 and 6 of this RFP; (3) North Carolina General Contract Terms and Conditions in
ATTACHMENT C: NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS; (4) Instructions in
ATTACHMENT B: INSTRUCTIONS TO VENDORS; (5) ATTACHMENT A: PRICING, and (6) Vendor's proposal.
7. INFORMATION AND DESCRIPTIVE LITERATURE: Vendor shall furnish all information requested and in the
spaces provided in this document. Further, if required elsewhere in this proposal, each Vendor shall submit with its
proposal any sketches, descriptive literature and/or complete specifications covering the products and Services
offered. Reference to literature submitted with a previous proposal or available elsewhere will not satisfy this
provision. Failure comply with these requirements shall constitute sufficient cause to reject a proposal without further
consideration.
8. RECYCLING AND SOURCE REDUCTION: It is the policy of the State to encourage and promote the purchase of
products with recycled content to the extent economically practicable, and to purchase items which are reusable,
refillable, repairable, more durable and less toxic to the extent that the purchase or use is practicable and cost-
effective. We also encourage and promote using minimal packaging and the use of recycled/recyclable products in
the packaging of commodities purchased. However, no sacrifice in quality of packaging will be acceptable. The
company remains responsible for providing packaging that will adequately protect the commodity and contain it for
its intended use. Companies are strongly urged to bring to the attention of purchasers those products or packaging
they offer which have recycled content and that are recyclable.
9. CERTIFICATE TO TRANSACT BUSINESS IN NORTH CAROLINA: As a condition of contract award, each out -of -
State Vendor that is a corporation, limited -liability company or limited -liability partnership shall have received, and
shall maintain throughout the term of The Contract, a Certificate of Authority to Transact Business in North Carolina
from the North Carolina Secretary of State, as required by North Carolina law. A State contract requiring only an
isolated transaction completed within a period of six months, and not in the course of a number of repeated
transactions of like nature, shall not be considered as transacting business in North Carolina and shall not require a
Certificate of Authority to Transact Business.
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 27 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.,
10. SUSTAINABILITY: To support the sustainability efforts of the State of North Carolina we solicit your cooperation
in this effort. Pursuant to Executive Order 156 (1999), it is desirable that all responses meet the following:
• All copies of the proposal are printed double sided.
• All submittals and copies are printed on recycled paper with a minimum post -consumer content of 30%.
• Unless absolutely necessary, all proposals and copies should minimize or eliminate use of non -recyclable or
non -reusable materials such as plastic report covers, plastic dividers, vinyl sleeves, and GBC binding. Three -
ringed binders, glued materials, paper clips, and staples are acceptable.
• Materials should be submitted in a format which allows for easy removal, filing and/or recycling of paper and
binder materials. Use of oversized paper is strongly discouraged unless necessary for clarity or legibility.
11. HISTORICALLY UNDERUTILIZED BUSINESSES: The State is committed to retaining Vendors from diverse
backgrounds, and it invites and encourages participation in the procurement process by businesses owned by
minorities, women, disabled, disabled business enterprises and non-profit work centers for the blind and severely
disabled. In particular, the State encourages participation by Vendors certified by the State Office of Historically
Underutilized Businesses, as well as the use of HUB -certified vendors as subcontractors on State contracts.
12. RECIPROCAL PREFERENCE: G.S. 143-59 establishes a reciprocal preference requirement to discourage other
states from favoring their own resident Vendors by applying a percentage increase to the price of any proposal from
a North Carolina resident Vendor. To the extent another state does so, North Carolina applies the same percentage
increase to the proposal of a vendor resident in that state. Residency is determined by a Vendor's "Principal Place
of Business," defined as that principal place from which the overall trade or business of the Vendor is directed or
managed.
13. INELIGIBLE VENDORS: As provided in G.S. 147-86.59 and G.S. 147-86.82, the following companies are
ineligible to contract with the State of North Carolina or any political subdivision of the State: a) any company
identified as engaging in investment activities in Iran, as determined by appearing on the Final Divestment List
created by the State Treasurer pursuant to G.S. 147-86.58, and b) any company identified as engaged in a boycott
of Israel as determined by appearing on the List of restricted companies created by the State Treasurer pursuant
to G.S. 147-86.81. A contract with the State or any of its political subdivisions by any company identified in a) or b)
above shall be void ab initio.
14. CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION: To the extent permitted by applicable statutes and rules, the State will maintain
as confidential trade secrets in its proposal that the Vendor does not wish disclosed. As a condition to confidential
treatment, each page containing trade secret information shall be identified in boldface at the top and bottom as
"CONFIDENTIAL" by the Vendor, with specific trade secret information enclosed in boxes, marked in a distinctive
color or by similar indication. Cost information shall not be deemed confidential under any circumstances.
Regardless of what a Vendor may label as a trade secret, the determination whether it is or is not entitled to protection
will be determined in accordance with G.S. 132-1.2. Any material labeled as confidential constitutes a representation
by the Vendor that it has made a reasonable effort in good faith to determine that such material is, in fact, a trade
secret under G.S. 132-1.2. Vendors are urged and cautioned to limit the marking of information as a trade secret or
as confidential so far as is possible. If a legal action is brought to require the disclosure of any material so marked
as confidential, the State will notify Vendor of such action and allow Vendor to defend the confidential status of its
information.
15. PROTEST PROCEDURES: When a Vendor wishes to protest the award of The Contract awarded by the Division
of Purchase and Contract, or awarded by an agency in an awarded amount of at least $25,000, a Vendor shall
submit a written request addressed to the State Purchasing Officer at: Division of Purchase and Contract, 1305 Mail
Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1305. A protest request related to an award amount of less than $25,000 shall
be sent to the purchasing officer of the agency that issued the award. The protest request must be received in the
proper office within thirty (30) consecutive calendar days from the date of the Contract award. Protest letters shall
contain specific grounds and reasons for the protest, how the protesting party was harmed by the award made and
any documentation providing support for the protesting party's claims. Note: Contract award notices are sent only
to the Vendor actually awarded the Contract, and not to every person or firm responding to a solicitation. Proposal
status and Award notices are posted on the Internet at https://www.ips.state.nc.us/ips/. All protests will be handled
pursuant to the North Carolina Administrative Code, 01 NCAC 05B .1519.
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 28 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.,
16. MISCELLANEOUS: Any gender -specific pronouns used herein, whether masculine or feminine, shall be read and
construed as gender neutral, and the singular of any word or phrase shall be read to include the plural and vice
versa.
17. COMMUNICATIONS BY VENDORS: In submitting its proposal, the Vendor agrees not to discuss or otherwise
reveal the contents of its proposal to any source, government or private, outside of the using or issuing agency until
after the award of the Contract or cancellation of this RFP. All Vendors are forbidden from having any
communications with the using or issuing agency, or any other representative of the State concerning the solicitation,
during the evaluation of the proposals (i.e., after the public opening of the proposals and before the award of the
Contract), unless the State directly contacts the Vendor(s) for purposes of seeking clarification or another reason
permitted by the solicitation. A Vendor shall not: (a) transmit to the issuing and/or using agency any information
commenting on the ability or qualifications of any other Vendor to provide the advertised good, equipment,
commodity; (b) identify defects, errors and/or omissions in any other Vendor's proposal and/or prices at any time
during the procurement process; and/or (c) engage in or attempt any other communication or conduct that could
influence the evaluation or award of a Contract related to this RFP. Failure to comply with this requirement shall
constitute sufficient justification to disqualify a Vendor from a Contract award. Only those communications with the
using agency or issuing agency authorized by this RFP are permitted.
18. TABULATIONS: Bid tabulations can be electronically retrieved at the Interactive Purchasing System (IPS),
https://www.ips.state.nc.us/ips/BidNumberSearch.aspx. Click on the IPS BIDS icon, click on Search for Bid, enter
the bid number, and then search. Tabulations will normally be available at this web site not later than one working
day after the bid opening. Lengthy or complex tabulations may be summarized, with other details not made available
on IPS, and requests for additional details or information concerning such tabulations cannot be honored.
19. VENDOR REGISTRATION AND SOLICITATION NOTIFICATION SYSTEM: The North Carolina electronic Vendor
Portal (eVP) allows Vendors to electronically register free with the State to receive electronic notification of current
procurement opportunities for goods and Services of potential interests to them available on the Interactive
Purchasing System, as well as notifications of status changes to those solicitations. Online registration and other
purchasing information is available at the following website: http://ncadmin.nc.gov/about-doa/divisions/purchase-
contract.
20. WITHDRAWAL OF PROPOSAL: a proposal may be withdrawn only in writing and actually received by the office
issuing the RFP prior to the time for the opening of proposals identified on the cover page of this RFP (or such later
date included in an Addendum to the RFP). A withdrawal request shall be submitted on Vendor's letterhead and
signed by an official of the Vendor authorized to make such request. Any withdrawal request made after the opening
of proposals shall be allowed only for good cause shown and in the sole discretion of the Division of Purchase and
Contract.
21. INFORMAL COMMENTS: The State shall not be bound by informal explanations, instructions or information
given at any time by anyone on behalf of the State during the competitive process or after award. The State is
bound only by information provided in writing in this RFP and in formal Addenda issued through IPS.
22. COST FOR PROPOSAL PREPARATION: Any costs incurred by Vendor in preparing or submitting offers are the
Vendor's sole responsibility; the State of North Carolina will not reimburse any Vendor for any costs incurred prior
to award.
23. VENDOR'S REPRESENTATIVE: Each Vendor shall submit with its proposal the name, address, and telephone
number of the person(s) with authority to bind the firm and answer questions or provide clarification concerning the
firm's proposal.
24. INSPECTION AT VENDOR'S SITE: The State reserves the right to inspect, at a reasonable time, the equipment,
item, plant or other facilities of a prospective Vendor prior to Contract award, and during the Contract term as
necessary for the State's determination that such equipment, item, plant or other facilities conform with the
specifications/requirements and are adequate and suitable for the proper and effective performance of the Contract.
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 29 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.,
ATTACHMENT C: NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL CONTRACT TERMS & CONDITIONS
PERFORMANCE AND DEFAULT: If, through any cause, Vendor shall fail to fulfill in timely and proper manner the
obligations under this contract, the State shall have the right to terminate this contract by giving written notice to the
Vendor and specifying the effective date thereof. In that event and subject to all other provisions of this contract, all
finished or unfinished deliverable items under this contract prepared by the Vendor shall, at the option of the State,
become its property, and the Vendor shall be entitled to receive compensation for units actually produced, if any, in
an amount determined by reducing the total amount due had the full number of Units been produced pro rata, such
that the ratio of the final compensation actually paid to the original total amount due in accordance with Attachment
A (as amended, if applicable) is equal to the ratio of the Units actually generated to the total Units identified in
Attachment A.
In the event of default by the Vendor, the State may procure the goods and Services necessary to complete
performance hereunder from other sources and hold the Vendor responsible for any excess cost occasioned
thereby. In addition, in the event of default by the Vendor under The Contract, or upon the Vendor filing a petition
for bankruptcy or the entering of a judgment of bankruptcy by or against the Vendor, the State may immediately
cease doing business with the Vendor, immediately terminate The Contract for cause, and may take action to debar
the Vendor from doing future business with the State.
a) Vendor grants the State a personal non -transferable and non-exclusive right to use and access, all Services and
other functionalities or Services provided, furnished or accessible under this Agreement. The State may utilize the
Services as agreed herein. The State is authorized to access State Data provided by the State and any Vendor -
provided data as specified herein and to transmit revisions, updates, deletions, enhancements, or modifications to
the State Data. This shall include the right of the State to, and access to, Support without the Vendor requiring a
separate maintenance or support agreement unless otherwise specifically agreed in writing. User access to the
Services shall be routinely provided by the Vendor and may be subject to a more specific Service Level Agreement
(SLA) agreed to in writing by the parties. In the absence of an SLA, the Vendor agrees to provide the Services at
least in the manner that it provides accessibility to the services to comparable users.
b) The State's right to access the Services and its associated services neither transfers, vests, nor infers any title or
other ownership right in any intellectual property rights of the Vendor or any third party, nor does this right of access
transfer, vest, or infer any title or other ownership right in any intellectual property associated with the Services
unless otherwise agreed to by the parties. The provisions of this paragraph will not be construed as a sale of any
ownership rights in the Services. Any Services or technical and business information owned by Vendor or its
suppliers or licensors made accessible or furnished to the State shall be and remain the property of the Vendor or
such other party, respectively. Vendor has a limited, non-exclusive license to access and use any State Data as
provided to Vendor, but solely for performing its obligations under this Agreement and in confidence as provided
herein. Vendor or its suppliers shall at minimum, and except as otherwise agreed, provide telephone assistance to
the State for all Services procured hereunder during the State's normal business hours (unless different hours are
specified herein). Vendor warrants that its Support and customer service and assistance will be performed in
accordance with generally accepted industry standards. The State has the right to receive the benefit of upgrades,
updates, maintenance releases or other enhancements or modifications made generally available to Vendor's users
for similar Services. Vendor may, at no additional charge, modify the Services to improve operation and reliability
or to meet legal requirements.
c) Vendor will provide to the State the same Services for updating, maintaining and continuing optimal performance for
the Services as provided to other similarly situated Users of the Services, but minimally as provided for and specified
herein. The technical and professional activities required for establishing, managing, and maintaining the Services
environment are the responsibilities of the Vendor. Any training specified herein will be provided by the Vendor to
specified State users for the fees or costs as set forth herein or in an SLA.
d) Some Services provided online pursuant to this Solicitation may, in some circumstances, be accompanied by a user
clickwrap agreement. The term clickwrap agreement refers to an agreement that requires the end user to manifest
his or her assent to terms and conditions by clicking an "ok" or "agree" button on a dialog box or pop-up window as
part of the process of access to the Services. All terms and conditions of any clickwrap agreement provided with
any Services solicited herein shall have no force and effect and shall be non-binding on the State, its employees,
agents, and other authorized users of the Services.
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 30 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.
e) If Vendor modifies or replaces the Services provided to the State and other comparable users, and if the State has
paid all applicable Fees, the State shall be entitled to receive, at no additional charge, access to a newer version of
the Services that supports substantially the same functionality as the then accessible version of the Services. Newer
versions of the Services containing substantially increased functionality may be made available to the State for an
additional subscription fee. In the event of either of such modifications, the then accessible version of the Services
shall remain fully available to the State until the newer version is provided to the State and accepted. If a modification
materially affects the functionality of the Services as used by the State, the State, at its sole option, may defer such
modification.
2. GOVERNMENTAL RESTRICTIONS: In the event any Governmental restrictions are imposed which necessitate
alteration of the material, quality, workmanship or performance of the goods or Services offered prior to their delivery,
it shall be the responsibility of the Vendor to notify the Contract Lead at once, in writing, indicating the specific
regulation which required such alterations. The State reserves the right to accept any such alterations, including any
price adjustments occasioned thereby, or to cancel the Contract.
AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS: Any and all payments to the Vendor shall be dependent upon and subject to the
availability of funds to the agency for the purpose set forth in The Contract.
4. TAXES: Any applicable taxes shall be invoiced as a separate item.
a) G.S. 143-59.1 bars the Secretary of Administration from entering into Contracts with Vendors if the Vendor
or its affiliates meet one of the conditions of G.S. 105-164.8(b) and refuses to collect use tax on sales of
tangible personal property to purchasers in North Carolina. Conditions under G.S. 105-164.8(b) include: (1)
Maintenance of a retail establishment or office, (2) Presence of representatives in the State that solicit sales
or transact business on behalf of the Vendor and (3) Systematic exploitation of the market by media -
assisted, media -facilitated, or media -solicited means. By execution of the proposal document the Vendor
certifies that it and all of its affiliates, (if it has affiliates), collect(s) the appropriate taxes.
b) The agency(ies) participating in The Contract are exempt from Federal Taxes, such as excise and
transportation. Exemption forms submitted by the Vendor will be executed and returned by the using agency.
c) Prices offered are not to include any personal property taxes, nor any sales or use tax (or fees) unless
required by the North Carolina Department of Revenue.
5. SITUS AND GOVERNING LAWS: This Contract is made under and shall be governed and construed in accordance
with the laws of the State of North Carolina, without regard to its conflict of laws rules, and within which State all
matters, whether sounding in Contract or tort or otherwise, relating to its validity, construction, interpretation and
enforcement shall be determined.
PAYMENT TERMS: Payment terms are Net not later than 30 days after receipt of correct invoice or acceptance of
goods, whichever is later. The using agency is responsible for all payments to the Vendor under the Contract.
Payment by some agencies may be made by procurement card, if the Vendor accepts that card (Visa, MasterCard,
etc.) from other customers, and it shall be accepted by the Vendor for payment under the same terms and conditions
as any other method of payment accepted by the Vendor. If payment is made by procurement card, then payment
may be processed immediately by the Vendor.
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION: The Vendor will take affirmative action in complying with all Federal and State
requirements concerning fair employment and employment of people with disabilities, and concerning the treatment
of all employees without regard to discrimination on the basis of any prohibited grounds as defined by Federal and
State law.
8. CONDITION AND PACKAGING: Unless otherwise provided by special terms and conditions or specifications, it is
understood and agreed that any item offered or shipped has not been sold or used for any purpose and shall be in
first class condition. All containers/packaging shall be suitable for handling, storage or shipment.
9. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY WARRANTY AND INDEMNITY: Vendor shall hold and save the State, its officers,
agents and employees, harmless from liability of any kind, including costs and expenses, resulting from infringement
of the rights of any third party in any copyrighted material, patented or patent -pending invention, article, device or
appliance delivered in connection with The Contract.
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 31 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.
a. Vendor warrants to the best of its knowledge that:
i. The Services do not infringe any intellectual property rights of any third party; and
ii. There are no actual or threatened actions arising from, or alleged under, any intellectual property
rights of any third party;
b. Should any Services supplied by Vendor become the subject of a claim of infringement of a patent, copyright,
Trademark or a trade secret in the United States, the Vendor, shall at its option and expense, either
procure for the State the right to continue using the Services, or replace or modify the same to become
noninfringing. If neither of these options can reasonably be taken in Vendor's judgment, or if further use
shall be prevented by injunction, the Vendor agrees to cease provision of any affected Services, and
refund any sums the State has paid Vendor and make every reasonable effort to assist the State in
procuring substitute Services. If, in the sole opinion of the State, the cessation of use by the State of any
such Services due to infringement issues makes the retention of other items acquired from the Vendor
under this Agreement impractical, the State shall then have the option of terminating the Agreement, or
applicable portions thereof, without penalty or termination charge; and Vendor agrees to refund any sums
the State paid for unused Services.
c. The Vendor, at its own expense, shall defend any action brought against the State to the extent that such action
is based upon a claim that the Services supplied by the Vendor, their use or operation, infringes on a
patent, copyright, trademark or violates a trade secret in the United States. The Vendor shall pay those
costs and damages finally awarded or agreed in a settlement against the State in any such action. Such
defense and payment shall be conditioned on the following:
i. That the Vendor shall be notified within a reasonable time in writing by the State of any such
claim; and,
ii. That the Vendor shall have the sole control of the defense of any action on such claim and all
negotiations for its settlement or compromise provided, however, that the State shall have the
option to participate in such action at its own expense.
d. Vendor will not be required to defend or indemnify the State if any claim by a third party against the State for
infringement or misappropriation results from the State's material alteration of any Vendor -branded
Services, or from the continued use of the good(s) or Services after receiving notice they infringe on a
trade secret of a third party.
Vendor shall hold and save the State, its officers, agents and employees, harmless from liability of any kind, including
costs and expenses, resulting from infringement of the rights of any third party in any copyrighted material, patented
or patent -pending invention, article, device or appliance delivered in connection with The Contract.
10. TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE: If this contract contemplates deliveries or performance over a period of time,
the State may terminate this contract at any time by providing 60 days' notice in writing from the State to the Vendor.
In that event, any or all finished or unfinished deliverable items prepared by the Vendor under this contract shall, at
the option of the State, become its property. If the contract is terminated by the State as provided in this section,
the State shall pay for those items for which such option is exercised, less any payment or compensation previously
made.
11. ADVERTISING: Vendor agrees not to use the existence of The Contract or the name of the State of North Carolina
as part of any commercial advertising or marketing of products or Services. A Vendor may inquire whether the State
is willing to act as a reference by providing factual information directly to other prospective customers.
12. ACCESS TO PERSONS AND RECORDS: During and after the term hereof, the State Auditor and any using
agency's internal auditors shall have access to persons and records related to The Contract to verify accounts and
data affecting fees or performance under the Contract, as provided in G.S. 143-49(9).
13. ASSIGNMENT: No assignment of the Vendor's obligations nor the Vendor's right to receive payment hereunder
shall be permitted.
However, upon written request approved by the issuing purchasing authority and solely as a convenience to the
Vendor, the State may:
a) Forward the Vendor's payment check directly to any person or entity designated by the Vendor, and
b) Include any person or entity designated by Vendor as a joint payee on the Vendor's payment check.
In no event shall such approval and action obligate the State to anyone other than the Vendor and the Vendor shall
remain responsible for fulfillment of all Contract obligations. Upon advance written request, the State may, in its
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 32 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.,
unfettered discretion, approve an assignment to the surviving entity of a merger, acquisition or corporate
reorganization, if made as part of the transfer of all or substantially all of the Vendor's assets. Any purported
assignment made in violation of this provision shall be void and a material breach of The Contract.
14. INSURANCE:
COVERAGE - During the term of the Contract, the Vendor at its sole cost and expense shall provide commercial
insurance of such type and with such terms and limits as may be reasonably associated with the Contract. As a
minimum, the Vendor shall provide and maintain the following coverage and limits:
a) Worker's Compensation - The Vendor shall provide and maintain Worker's Compensation Insurance, as
required by the laws of North Carolina, as well as employer's liability coverage with minimum limits of $500,000.00,
covering all of Vendor's employees who are engaged in any work under the Contract in North Carolina. If any work
is sub -contracted, the Vendor shall require the sub -Contractor to provide the same coverage for any of his employees
engaged in any work under the Contract within the State.
b) Commercial General Liability - General Liability Coverage on a Comprehensive Broad Form on an
occurrence basis in the minimum amount of $1,000,000.00 Combined Single Limit. Defense cost shall be in excess
of the limit of liability.
c) Automobile - Automobile Liability Insurance, to include liability coverage, covering all owned, hired and non -
owned vehicles, used within North Carolina in connection with the Contract. The minimum combined single limit
shall be $250,000.00 bodily injury and property damage; $250,000.00 uninsured/under insured motorist; and
$2,500.00 medical payment.
REQUIREMENTS - Providing and maintaining adequate insurance coverage is a material obligation of the Vendor
and is of the essence of The Contract. All such insurance shall meet all laws of the State of North Carolina. Such
insurance coverage shall be obtained from companies that are authorized to provide such coverage and that are
authorized by the Commissioner of Insurance to do business in North Carolina. The Vendor shall at all times comply
with the terms of such insurance policies, and all requirements of the insurer under any such insurance policies,
except as they may conflict with existing North Carolina laws or The Contract. The limits of coverage under each
insurance policy maintained by the Vendor shall not be interpreted as limiting the Vendor's liability and obligations
under the Contract.
15. GENERAL INDEMNITY: The Vendor shall hold and save the State, its officers, agents, and employees, harmless
from liability of any kind, including all claims and losses accruing or resulting to any other person, firm, or corporation
furnishing or supplying work, Services, materials, or supplies in connection with the performance of The Contract,
and from any and all claims and losses accruing or resulting to any person, firm, or corporation that may be injured
or damaged by the Vendor in the performance of The Contract and that are attributable to the negligence or
intentionally tortious acts of the Vendor provided that the Vendor is notified in writing within 30 days that the State
has knowledge of such claims. The Vendor represents and warrants that it shall make no claim of any kind or nature
against the State's agents who are involved in the delivery or processing of Vendor goods or Services to the State.
The representation and warranty in the preceding sentence shall survive the termination or expiration of The
Contract.
16. ELECTRONIC PROCUREMENT:
a) Purchasing shall be conducted through the Statewide E -Procurement Service. The State's third -party agent shall
serve as the Supplier Manager for this E -Procurement Service. The Vendor shall register for the Statewide E -
Procurement Service within two (2) business days of notification of award in order to receive an electronic purchase
order resulting from award of this contract.
b) The Supplier Manager will capture the order from the State approved user, including the shipping and payment
information, and submit the order in accordance with the E -Procurement Service. Subsequently, the Supplier
Manager will send those orders to the appropriate Vendor on State Contract. The State or State -approved user, not
the Supplier Manager, shall be responsible for the solicitation, proposals received, evaluation of proposals received,
award of contract, and the payment for goods delivered.
c) Vendor shall at all times maintain the confidentiality of its user name and password for the Statewide E -
Procurement Services. If Vendor is a corporation, partnership or other legal entity, then the Vendor may authorize
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 33 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.,
its employees to use its password. Vendor shall be responsible for all activity and all charges by such employees.
Vendor agrees not to permit a third party to use the Statewide E -Procurement Services through its account. If there
is a breach of security through the Vendor's account, Vendor shall immediately change its password and notify the
Supplier Manager of the security breach by email. Vendor shall cooperate with the State and the Supplier Manager
to mitigate and correct any security breach.
VENDOR IS AND SHALL REMAIN RESPONSIBLE FOR PAYING THE TRANSACTION FEE ON BEHALF OF
ANY SUB -CONTRACTOR OR DEALER INVOLVED IN PERFORMANCE UNDER THIS CONTRACT IN THE
EVENT THAT SUCH SUB -CONTRACTOR OR DEALER DEFAULTS ON PAYMENT.
17. SUBCONTRACTING: Performance under The Contract by the Vendor shall not be subcontracted without prior
written approval of the State's assigned Contract Lead. Unless otherwise indicated, acceptance of a Vendor's
proposal shall include approval to use the subcontractor(s) that have been specified therein in accordance with
paragraph 21 of Attachment B: Instructions to Vendor.
18. CONFIDENTIALITY: Any State information, data, instruments, documents, studies or reports given to or prepared
or assembled by or provided to the Vendor under The Contract shall be kept as confidential, used only for the
purpose(s) required to perform The Contract and not divulged or made available to any individual or organization
without the prior written approval of the State.
19. CARE OF STATE DATA AND PROPERTY: The Vendor agrees that it shall be responsible for the proper custody
and care of any data owned and furnished to the Vendor by the State (State Data), or other State property in the
hands of the Vendor, for use in connection with the performance of The Contract or purchased by or for the State
for The Contract. Vendor will reimburse the State for loss or damage of such property while in Vendor's custody.
The State Data in the hands of the Vendor shall be protected from unauthorized disclosure, loss, damage,
destruction by a natural event or other eventuality. Such State Data shall be returned to the State in a form acceptable
to the State upon the termination or expiration of this Agreement. The Vendor shall notify the State of any security
breaches within 24 hours as required by G.S. 143B.1379. See G.S. 75-60 et seq.
20. OUTSOURCING: Any Vendor or subcontractor providing call or contact center services to the State of North
Carolina or any of its agencies shall disclose to inbound callers the location from which the call or contact center
services are being provided.
If, after award of a contract, the contractor wishes to relocate or outsource any portion of performance to a location
outside the United States, or to contract with a subcontractor for any such the performance, which subcontractor
and nature of the work has not previously been disclosed to the State in writing, prior written approval must be
obtained from the State agency responsible for the contract.
Vendor shall give notice to the using agency of any relocation of the Vendor, employees of the Vendor,
subcontractors of the Vendor, or other persons providing performance under a State contract to a location outside
of the United States.
21. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS: Vendor shall comply with all laws, ordinances, codes, rules, regulations, and
licensing requirements that are applicable to the conduct of its business and its performance in accordance with
The Contract, including those of federal, state, and local agencies having jurisdiction and/or authority.
22. ENTIRE AGREEMENT: This RFP and any documents incorporated specifically by reference represent the entire
agreement between the parties and supersede all prior oral or written statements or agreements. This RFP, any
addenda hereto, and the Vendor's proposal are incorporated herein by reference as though set forth verbatim.
All promises, requirements, terms, conditions, provisions, representations, guarantees, and warranties contained
herein shall survive the contract expiration or termination date unless specifically provided otherwise herein, or
unless superseded by applicable Federal or State statutes of limitation.
23. ELECTRONIC RECORDS: The State will digitize all Vendor responses to this solicitation, if not received
electronically, as well as any awarded contract together with associated procurement -related documents. These
electronic copies shall constitute a preservation record, and shall serve as the official record of this procurement
with the same force and effect as the original written documents comprising such record. Any electronic copy,
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 34 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.,
printout or other output readable by sight shown to reflect such record accurately shall constitute an 'original."
24. AMENDMENTS: This Contract may be amended only by a written amendment duly executed by the State and the
Vendor.
25. NO WAIVER: Notwithstanding any other language or provision in The Contract, nothing herein is intended nor
shall be interpreted as a waiver of any right or remedy otherwise available to the State under applicable law. The
waiver by the State of any right or remedy on any one occasion or instance shall not constitute or be interpreted
as a waiver of that or any other right or remedy on any other occasion or instance.
26. FORCE MAJEURE: Neither party shall be deemed to be in default of its obligations hereunder if and so long as it
is prevented from performing such obligations as a result of events beyond its reasonable control, including without
limitation, fire, power failures, any act of war, hostile foreign action, nuclear explosion, riot, strikes or failures or
refusals to perform under subcontracts, civil insurrection, earthquake, hurricane, tornado, or other catastrophic
natural event or act of God.
27. SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY: Notwithstanding any other term or provision in The Contract, nothing herein is intended
nor shall be interpreted as waiving any claim or defense based on the principle of sovereign immunity or other State
or federal constitutional provision or principle that otherwise would be available to the State under applicable law.
Ver: 711118 Page 35 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.,
ATTACHMENT D: LOCATION OF WORKERS UTILIZED BY VENDOR
In accordance with NC General Statute 143-59.4, the Vendor shall detail the location(s) at which performance will occur,
as well as the manner in which it intends to utilize resources or workers outside of the United States in the performance
of this Contract. The State will evaluate the additional risks, costs, and other factors associated with such utilization prior
to making an award. Please complete items a, b, and c below.
a) Will any work under this Contract be performed outside the United States? ❑ YES V NO
If the Vendor answered "YES" above, Vendor must complete items 1 and 2 below:
List the location(s) outside the United States where work under this Contract will be performed by the Vendor,
any sub -Contractors, employees, or other persons performing work under the Contract:
2. Describe the corporate structure and location of corporate employees and activities of the Vendor, its affiliates
or any other sub -Contractors that will perform work outside the U.S.:
b) The Vendor agrees to provide notice, in writing to the State, of the relocation of the
Vendor, employees of the Vendor, sub -Contractors of the Vendor, or other persons ❑ YES ;Z NO
performing services under the Contract outside of the United States
NOTE: All Vendor or sub -Contractor personnel providing call or contact center services to
the State of North Carolina under the Contract shall disclose to inbound callers the
location from which the call or contact center services are being provided.
c) Identify all U.S. locations at which performance will occur:
Ver: 711118 Page 36 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.,
ATTACHMENT E: CERTIFICATION OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
Name of Vendor:
The undersigned hereby certifies that: [check all applicable boxes]
{a The Vendor is in sound financial condition and, if applicable, has received an unqualified audit opinion for the
latest audit of its financial statements.
Date of latest audit:
The Vendor has no outstanding liabilities, including tax and judgment liens, to the Internal Revenue Service or
any other government entity.
The Vendor is current in all amounts due for payments of federal and state taxes and required employment-
related contributions and withholdings.
The Vendor is not the subject of any current litigation or findings of noncompliance under federal or state law.
The Vendor has not been the subject of any past or current litigation, findings in any past litigation, or findings
of noncompliance under federal or state law that may impact in any way its ability to fulfill the requirements of
this Contract.
W He or she is authorized to make the foregoing statements on behalf of the Vendor.
Note: This is a continuing certification and Vendor shall notify the Contract Lead within 15 days of any material
change to any of the representations made herein.
If any one or more of the foregoing boxes is NOT checked, Vendor shall explain the reason in the space below:
Signature
Printed Name
Date
Title
[This Certification must be signed by an individual authorized to speak for the Vendor]
Ver: 711118 Page 37 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor.,
ATTACHMENT F: SUPPLEMENTAL VENDOR INFORMATION
HISTORICALLY UNDERUTILIZED BUSINESSES
Historically Underutilized Businesses (HUBs) consist of minority, women and disabled business firms that are at least
fifty-one percent owned and operated by an individual(s) of the categories. Also included in this category are disabled
business enterprises and non-profit work centers for the blind and severely disabled.
Pursuant to G.S. 14313-1361(a), 143-48 and 143-128.4, the State invites and encourages participation in this
procurement process by businesses owned by minorities, women, disabled, disabled business enterprises and non-
profit work centers for the blind and severely disabled. This includes utilizing subcontractors to perform the required
functions in this RFP. Any questions concerning NC HUB certification, contact the North Carolina Office of Historically
Underutilized Businesses at [phone]. The Vendor shall respond to question #1 and #2 below.
a) Is Vendor a Historically Underutilized Business? ❑ Yes W No
b) Is Vendor Certified with North Carolina as a Historically Underutilized Business? ❑ Yes JZ No
If so, state HUB classification:
Ver: 711118 Page 38 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007704 Vendor:
ATTACHMENT G: VENDOR'S INFORMATION
Vendors Primary Contact (or Project Manager)
Name:
Agency:
Title:
Address:
City:
State/ Zip:
Telephone:
Fax:
Email:
Vendors Execution Address (Where the contract should be mailed for signature)
Name:
Agency:
Title:
Address:
City:
State/ Zip:
Telephone:
Fax:
Email:
Vendors Payment (Remit To) Address (Where the checks should be mailed
(This address should agree with the "Remit -To" address associated with the Vendor's Tax ID. This information
must be verified with the Vendor's Corporate Accounting Office)
Name:
Agency:
Title:
Address:
City:
State/ Zip:
Telephone:
Fax:
Email:
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 39 of 39

RFP 16-007704
Tasks and Deliverables
Format
Delivery Method
ATTACHMENT H
Digital Survey in AutoCAD
Digital Survey in ArcMap
Task #
Task Description
Task Deliverable
Hardcopy (#)
Adobe PDF MS Word
(.dwg)**
(.shp)**
E -Mail
USB Flash Drive
Compact Disc
Notes:
Environmental & Project
Approved Categorical Exclusion
x
x
Screening
Regulatory Agency Post -contract site visit
Vendor. The Vendor will upload the returned, signed PCN with the Final Mitigation
PCN forms (completed with DMS as
2
Meetine Minutes
x
Plan to the NC Division of Water Resources online document library at the link
x
Permittee, Vendor as Agent)
DMS SPO
DMS SPO DMS SPO
DMS SPO
DMS
SPO
DMS
SPO
DMS
SPO
Draft Conservation Easement
x x
Planting & monitoring
x
x
Preliminary Conservation Easement Survey
5
x x
x x
x
x
x
x
.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
x
Draft Attorney's Report/30-year title search
Draft Baseline Monitoring report, As -Built
x
x
x
x
x
Drawings digital.delrverables
..........
Draft Title Attorneys "Schedule A"
x
......... ......... ......
......... .........
.................. .........
......... ......
x
Baseline Monitoring & As-
Final Baseline Monitoring report, As -Built
2
Property
...................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Vendor will upload to Final Baseline Monitoring Report and As
6
Built Drawings
Drawings, digital deliverables (including
Recorded Conservation Easement
1
x x
Built Drawings to the NC Division of Water Resources online
x
1
x
x
x
x
x
Final Conservation Easement Survey
1
x x x x
x x
x
x
x
x
x
.........................................................
Final Attorney's Report/30-year title search;
......
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
x
......... .........
deeds; documentation
1
x
Monitoring Years 1-6
Final Annual Monitoring Report &digital
Original Title Insurance Policy
1
_
_
Vendor will upload to Final Mitigation Plan to the NC Division of Water Resources
x
1
Survey monumentation installation
Draft Mitigation Plan 2
..............................................................
Final Draft Mitigation Plan
.......... ... 3
including revisions made during deliverable
review)
......... ..... .........
Financial Assurance 1
3 I Mitigation Plan & Financial
Assurance
Final Mitigation Plan
2
documented on As -Built Survey per Task 6
x x x
.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
DMS will upload the Final Draft Mitigation Report to the IRT Sharepoint for review by
x x x IRT members, and distribute a hardcopy each to USACE and DWR.
............. ____. ...................... ____. ____...... ____. ____. ..... ..... .........
x
DMS will distribute the Final Mitigation Plan to the USACE.
.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Vendor will upload to Final Mitigation Plan to the NC Division of Water Resources
online document library at the following link:
Instructions for uploading documents are found online at the following link:
https://edocs.deg.nc.zov/WaterResources/0/doc/620121/Pagelaspx
DMS will distribute 1 signed PCN to the USACE, and return 1 signed PCN to the
........................................................
.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Vendor. The Vendor will upload the returned, signed PCN with the Final Mitigation
PCN forms (completed with DMS as
2
Plan to the NC Division of Water Resources online document library at the link
Permittee, Vendor as Agent)
provided above.
4
Permitting
Permits and certifications
x
x
Planting & monitoring
5
installation
Written documentation
x
.............................................
.............................
.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
x
Draft Baseline Monitoring report, As -Built
1
x
x
x
x
Drawings digital.delrverables
..........
..........................
......... ......... ......
......... .........
.................. .........
......... ......
... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ..........
Baseline Monitoring & As-
Final Baseline Monitoring report, As -Built
Vendor will upload to Final Baseline Monitoring Report and As
6
Built Drawings
Drawings, digital deliverables (including
Built Drawings to the NC Division of Water Resources online
revisions made during deliverable review &
1
x
x
x
x
document library at the link provided above.
Quality Control)
Draft Annual Monitoring Report & digital
1
x
.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
x
x
deliverables
7-12
Monitoring Years 1-6
Final Annual Monitoring Report &digital
Vendor will upload to Final Mitigation Plan to the NC Division of Water Resources
deliverables
1
x
x
x
online document library at the link provided above.
Draft Annual Monitoring Report#7,
1
x
.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
x
x
Closeout Report & digital deliverables
Monitorin Year 7 and
g
13
project Closeout
Final Annual Monitoring Report #7, Closeout
Vendor will upload to Final Mitigation Plan to the NC Division of Water Resources
Report& digital deliverables
1
x
x
x
online document library at the link provided above.

Mitigation Services
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
Secretary
October 12, 2018
THIS ADDENDUM MUST BE RETURNED WITH YOUR TECHNICAL PROPOSAL
RFP NO.
16-007704
RFP TITLE:
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE STREAM
AND RIPARIAN WETLAND MITIGATION CREDITS
WITHIN THE CATALOGING UNIT 03050101, 03050102
AND 03050103 OF THE CATAWBA RIVER BASIN AS
DESCRIBED IN THE SCOPE OF WORK
ADDENDUM NO.
2
USING
AGENCY:
DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
PURCHASER
MARJORIE
OPENING
BARBER
DATE/TIME:
JANUARY 9, 2019 @ 2:00 P.M.
This correspondence serves as an addendum to the subject RFP. Your response to this RFP should be governed by the
content of the original RFP and the additional information provided in this addendum notice.
SECTION 1: Response to vendor questions:
Questions and Answers:
Question #1:
Section 2.11, page 13, River Basin Restoration Priorities definition states that "Unless otherwise stipulated in the
RFP, NCDMS requires mitigation sites to be located in these targeted local watersheds." Does DMS require that
proposed sites be located within TLWs?
Answer:
Section 5.2 Objectives identifies the service areas for each mitigation type requested. In addition, the
Targeted Watersheds pdf and the interactive map identify the specified service areas.
Question #2:
Proposal Section 2.7, page 7 of 39, line b: Can you tell us how many USB drives we should have for the
Technical proposal and how many USB drives we should have for the ArcGIS files?
Answer:
Submit one (1) USB drive containing one (1) electronic copy and one (1) redacted electronic copy of the
technical proposal, and the ArcGIS format of the proposed easement(s).
Question #3:
Proposal Section 2.8, page 8 of 39, line c: The ad says the addenda should be returned with the technical
proposal signed, but the addenda says to not include. Please provide clarification. Should addenda be included
with technical submission?
Addendum #2: RFP 16-007704 Page 1 of 3

Answer:
It is clearly stated on all addenda whether the vendor needs to sign and return.
Question #4:
Technical scoresheet referenced in proposal Section 2.10, page 10 of 39: Could DMS please provide a sample
easement boundary GIS shapefile and its confirmed continuity value with which to test the new GIS Toolbox
feature?
Answer:
The Easement Continuity Tool, including the sample easement boundary shapefile, is available on the
DMS website.
Question #5:
Section 5.2 Objectives, page 21 states that stream preservation credits shall not exceed 10% of total linear
feet. Wetland credits shall be a minimum of 50% wetland restoration credits as a percentage of total credit
offered. Should stream preservation credits be a maximum of 10% of stream credits or 10% of project linear
footage? Stream preservation at 10% of total length often forces us to leave out preservable headwater streams,
which when left unprotected could cause future degradation to downstream systems. 10% of total credit would
give us greater flexibility in establishing the highest -level projects possible.
Answer:
The maximum amount of stream preservation that will be accepted is 10% of the total length of the
submitted project.
Addendum #2: RFP 16-007704 Page 2 of 3

SECTION 2
Check ONLY ONE of the following categories and if required, return one properly executed copy of
this addendum prior to bid opening time and date.
❑ Bid has already been mailed. Changes resulting from this addendum are attached.
❑ Bid has already been mailed. NO CHANGES resulted from this addendum.
Bid has NOT been mailed and ANY CHANGES resulting from this addendum are included in
our offer.
PLEASE NOTE — THIS ADDENDUM MUST BE RETURNED WITH YOUR TECHNICAL PROPOSAL
SECTION 3
Execute Addendum:
BIDDER:
ADDRESS (CITY & STATE):
AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE: DATE:
Note: It is the offeror's responsibility to choose the appropriate delivery method to guarantee that the
offer is received by the Issuing Agency by the Opening Date/Time noted in the RFP.
[Mailing address for delivery of proposal
via US Postal Service
PROPOSAL NUMBER: 16-007704
NC DEQ - DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
ATTN: MARJORIE BARBER
1652 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NC 27699-1652
Office Address of delivery by any other method
(special delivery, overnight, or any other carrier)
PROPOSAL NUMBER: 16-007704
NC DEQ - DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
ATTN: MARJORIE BARBER
217 WEST JONES STREET, SUITE 3409-J
RALEIGH, NC 27603
IT IS THE OFFER'S RESPONSIBILITY TO CONTINUOUSLY CHECK FOR ADDENDA UP TO THE LAST
POSTED OPENING DATE/TIME AND TO ASSURE THAT ALL ADDENDA HAVE BEEN REVIEWED, SIGNED
AND RETURNED IF REQUIRED.
ALL OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS REMAIN THE SAME.
Addendum #2: RFP 16-007704 Page 3 of 3

Mitigation Services
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
Secretary
November 2, 2018
THIS ADDENDUM MUST BE RETURNED WITH YOUR TECHNICAL PROPOSAL
RFP NO.
16-007704
RFP TITLE:
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE STREAM
*Catawba 03 Expanded Service Area (ESA)
Mitigation Type
Requested Credits
AND RIPARIAN WETLAND MITIGATION CREDITS
Credits Shall Not Exceed
Preservation Percentage
Credits Shall Meet a
Minimum Restoration
Percentage of Total
Credits Offered
Stream
WITHIN THE CATALOGING UNIT 03050101, 03050102
Warm/Cool/Cold
10 % of total linear feet
n/a
AND 03050103 OF THE CATAWBA RIVER BASIN AS
10.00
n/a
DESCRIBED IN THE SCOPE OF WORK
ADDENDUM NO.
3
USING
n/a
n/a
Riparian Buffer
AGENCY:
DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
PURCHASER
MARJORIE
OPENING
BARBER
DATE/TIME:
JANUARY 9, 2019 @ 2:00 P.M.
This correspondence serves as an addendum to the subject RFP. Your response to this RFP should be governed by the
content of the original RFP and the additional information provided in this addendum notice.
SECTION 1:
Please make the following changes in the bid referenced above:
REVISIONS/ADDITIONS:
NCDMS requests an additional 2.00 Riparian Wetland Credits in the Catawba River Basin 03050101, 03050102
and 03050103. This increase makes the total Riparian Wetland Credits request 10.00.
The Department desires to acquire Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Credits quantified in the table
below and occurring within the Catawba Expanded Service Area (ESA) including sections of Cataloging
Units 03050101, 03050102, and 03050103 (which can be found on the DMS website at the following link:
https://deg.nc.gov/about/divisions/mitigation-services/dms-vendors/rfp-forms-templates).
RIVER BASIN
CATALOGING UNITS
Catawba
03050101*, 03050102*, 03050103*
*Catawba 03 Expanded Service Area (ESA)
Mitigation Type
Requested Credits
Thermal Regime
Credits Shall Not Exceed
Preservation Percentage
Credits Shall Meet a
Minimum Restoration
Percentage of Total
Credits Offered
Stream
5,000
Warm/Cool/Cold
10 % of total linear feet
n/a
Riparian Wetland
10.00
n/a
50%
Non -Riparian Wetland
n/a
n/a
n/a
Riparian Buffer
n/a
n/a
n/a
Addendum #3: RFP 16-007704 Page 1 of 2

SECTION 2
Check ONLY ONE of the following categories and if required, return one properly executed copy of
this addendum prior to bid opening time and date.
❑ Bid has already been mailed. Changes resulting from this addendum are attached.
❑ Bid has already been mailed. NO CHANGES resulted from this addendum.
Bid has NOT been mailed and ANY CHANGES resulting from this addendum are included in
our offer.
PLEASE NOTE — THIS ADDENDUM MUST BE RETURNED WITH YOUR TECHNICAL PROPOSAL
SECTION 3
Execute Addendum:
BIDDER:
ADDRESS (CITY & STATE):
AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE:DATE:
Note: It is the offeror's responsibility to choose the appropriate delivery method to guarantee that the
offer is received by the Issuing Agency by the Opening Date/Time noted in the RFP.
[Mailing address for delivery of proposal
via US Postal Service
PROPOSAL NUMBER: 16-007704
NC DEQ - DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
ATTN: MARJORIE BARBER
1652 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NC 27699-1652
Office Address of delivery by any other method
(special delivery, overnight, or any other carrier)
PROPOSAL NUMBER: 16-007704
NC DEQ - DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
ATTN: MARJORIE BARBER
217 WEST JONES STREET, SUITE 3409-J
RALEIGH, NC 27603
IT IS THE OFFER'S RESPONSIBILITY TO CONTINUOUSLY CHECK FOR ADDENDA UP TO THE LAST
POSTED OPENING DATE/TIME AND TO ASSURE THAT ALL ADDENDA HAVE BEEN REVIEWED, SIGNED
AND RETURNED IF REQUIRED.
ALL OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS REMAIN THE SAME.
Addendum #3: RFP 16-007704 Page 2 of 2

TECHNICAL PROPOSAL AND RESTORATION PLAN
NESBIT STREAM & WETLAND MITIGATION SITE
UNION COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
RFP #16-007704 - FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE STREAM & RIPARIAN WETLAND MITIGATION CREDITS
WITHIN CATALOGING UNITS 03050101, 03050102, AND 03050103 OF THE CATAWBA RIVER BASIN
PART D. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Restoration Systems, L.L.C. is pleased to provide you with this Proposal in response to the Request for Proposals
(RFP) #16-007704 dated September 6, 2018. This submittal includes one original and four copies of the technical
proposal, and one USB flash drive containing two redacted copies of the technical proposal and ArcGIS shapefiles of
the proposed project boundaries. The cost proposal has been submitted in a separate envelope containing two
originals and two copies. Preliminary restoration plans have been prepared by Axiom Environmental, Inc. with Site
identification, land acquisition, management, and construction established by Restoration Systems, L.L.C. This
proposal describes the technical merits of the project including the corporate team, fiscal resources,
restoration/monitoring procedures, and implementation schedules.
This proposal describes the Nesbit Stream & 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
03050103030030, approximately 7 miles southwest of Monroe and 5 miles southeast of Waxhaw in the southwest
corner of Union County near the North Carolina and South Carolina border (Figures 1 and 2, Appendix A). The Site
is not located within a Regional or Local Watershed Planning area. The Site is situated along warm water, Glen
Branch and unnamed tributaries to Glen Branch.
The Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site is proposed to include 4895 linear feet of stream restoration, 171 linear
feet of stream enhancement (level 1), 1275 linear feet of stream enhancement (level 11), 2.8 acres of riparian riverine
wetland restoration, and 3.8 acres of riparian riverine wetland enhancement. Site alterations include cessation of
agriculture, restoration of streams and wetlands, and planting native, woody vegetation. Mitigation outlined in this
report will result in net gains in hydrology, water quality, and habitat functions, and are designed to provide 5264
Stream Mitigation Units and 4.7 Riparian Riverine Wetland Mitigation Units, as calculated in accordance with the
requirements stipulated in RFP #16-007704, and are outlined as follows.
Proposed Mitigation Units
Stream Mitigation Type
Type
Linear Feet
Mitigation Ratio
SMUs
Restoration
Priority 1
4895
1:1
4895
Enhancement
Level 1
171
1.5:1
114
Enhancement
Level II
1275
2.5:1
510/2 - 255*
Preservation
-
--
10:1
--
Totals
6341 linear feet
5264 SMUs
Wetland Mitigation Type
Type
Acreage
Mitigation Ratio
Riparian Riverine WMU
Restoration
Riparian Riverine
2.8
1:1
2.8
Enhancement
Riparian Riverine
3.8
2:1
1.9
Totals
6.6 acres
4.7 WMUs
*Enhancement (level II) credit has been reduced by half to account for an approximate 5:1 ratio predicted to be allowed by the Interagency
Review Team.
Nesbit Stream & Mitigation Site Part D — Executive Summary
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

PART E. CORPORATE BACKGROUND AND EXPERIENCE
Restoration Systems (RS) is a leading environmental restoration and mitigation banking firm with more than seventy
(70) sponsored mitigation banks, permittee -responsible, and full -delivery mitigation sites. Based in Raleigh, North
Carolina, RS is one of the original 'Full -Delivery' providers in the nation and has participated in every Full Delivery in
NC since their origination in 2000. RS has profound experience locating and acquiring the best properties for our
customers in critical areas of targeted watersheds before using advanced ecological understanding to plan their
restoration, enhancement, and preservation. After conscientious construction, RS maintains and monitors all
projects to ensure physical stability and ecological success over the long-term based on permit and project -specific
parameters.
In 1996 RS principal George Howard managed and sold the state's first commercial mitigation bank to the North
Carolina Department of Transportation's (Barra Farms Mitigation Bank (623 acres). In 1998 Howard co-founded
Restoration Systems with the goal of developing Full -Delivery processes to better serve the North Carolina
Department of Transportation. Working with Dr. David Robinson and Mr. David Schiller of NCDOT, who later joined
the company, RS assisted the development of the first Full -Delivery RFP for compensatory mitigation in the United
States, issued in 2000 for wetlands mitigation in the Neuse River basin.
To date, RS has been awarded thirty-seven (37) full -delivery contracts from the North Carolina in -lieu fee program,
the Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) and its predecessors. When combined with full -delivery projects outside
of North Carolina, RS has entered into full -delivery contracts for stream mitigation totaling over 325,000 linear feet.
RS' ecological restoration projects total over 115,000 acres of wetlands, forests, and prairies and 75 miles of streams,
rivers, and bayous. The RS website and YouTube channel include a number of projects detailed with maps, images,
and aerial photography and drone videography.
- RS' website: www.restorationsystems.com
- RS' YouTube Page: https://goo.gl/g751Bm
RS' sole business activity is restoring and protecting water, land, and endangered species habitat by purchasing a
permanent conservation easement, or fee -simple interest, from property owners, and physically restoring the
waterways, vegetation, and habitat to exceed current function and duplicate historic ecological condition as closely
as possible. This work requires a multidisciplinary approach to project delivery, as project sponsor on over seventy
(70) compensatory mitigation projects across eight (8) States and US Army Corps Districts, RS intimately appreciates
the importance of local environmental experts who understand the biological, ecological, and geological forces at
work within their region.
As a firm, RS is rooted in a multidisciplinary approach. Staff backgrounds in policy, environmental science, landscape
architecture, real estate, construction management, and economics, allows for the flexibility to overcome ecological
and regulatory variables that are inherently part of providing full -delivery compensatory mitigation. That approach
is carried over to the selection of our sub -consultants. RS sub -contracts local biologist, geomorphologists, civil and
environmental engineers, and project -specific consultants to provide a diverse approach to achieving cost-effective
mitigation alternatives.
Sub -contractors are under the supervision of RS' Senior Project Managers who hold direct oversight over all aspects
of project development, implementation, monitoring, and closure. Work products are highly scrutinized for quality,
receiving both sub -contractor and RS quality assurance and control (QA/QC).
The RS Team for this project is detailed below, Project/Team Organization is detailed in Part F of this proposal.
Raymond Holz, who is a member of the American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA), will be the led RS Senior
Project Manager. During his seven years with RS, Raymond has performed dozens of Site Identification and
Mitigation Feasibility Studies and currently oversees Mitigation Implementation Services. He has worked on over a
dozen NC DMS full -delivery projects, his responsibilities have included site identification and acquisition, vegetation
management, project oversite (permitting, construction, yearly monitoring and, remedial action planning),
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site Part E. Corporate Background & Experience
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

coordination with DMS Project Managers, and management of project closeouts' with North Carolina Interagency
Review Team led by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Axiom Environmental (Axiom): http://axiomenvironmental.org/
Axiom is based in Raleigh, North Carolina and provides environmental services throughout the eastern US with
experience in the Carolinas, Georgia, Louisiana, Tennessee, Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, and the US Virgin
Islands. Axiom offers a full -spectrum of natural systems investigations and natural resources restoration services to
clients who need moderately priced and responsive solutions to complex ecological and regulatory issues.
The Axiom team of professionals consists of Licensed Soil Scientists, Professional Wetland Scientists, a Licensed
Wildlife Damage Control Agent, a geologist, botanists, biologists, and mitigation design specialists. Axiom offers
services in support of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Clean
Water Act, and Endangered Species Act. These services cover a wide range of activities including:
- Stream and Wetland Restoration Design
- Environmental Permitting
- Ecological Surveys
- Biological Assessments
- H2O Quality Sampling
- NEPA/SEPA Documentation
- Transportation Environmental Studies
- Protected Species Assessments
- Stream and Wetland Delineations
- Buffer Determinations
- Mitigation Banking
Axiom Staff in Publications
- Mitigation Site Searches
- Feasibility Studies
- Mitigation Monitoring
- Construction Plan Development and
Oversight
- Construction Implementation
- Benthic Macroinvertebrate Surveys
- Coastal Studies
- Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Surveys
- Forest Service Plant and Animal Surveys
- Comprehensive Plant and Animal Surveys
The North Carolina Wetland Assessment Method (NCWAM): Development of a Rapid Wetland
Assessment Method and Use for Compensatory Mitigation John R. Dorney, LeiLani Paugh, Alexander P.
(Sandy) Smith, Thomas (Brad) Allen, Matthew T. Cusack, Rick Savage, Emily B. Hughes, Breda Munoz
Key Team Member Resumes & Experience
Name and Proposed Role Key Mitigation Project Experience (Past 3 yrs.)
Raymond Holz, ASLA — Restoration Systems
Roles: Sr. Project Manager, DMS / Agency Coordination
Lead, Site Acquisition, Project QA/QC
No. of Relevant Projects: 12+
Professional Licenses, Certifications, and/or Training:
Stream Mechanics — Function -Based Framework for Stream
Assessment & Restoration Projects — 2015,
NC State Nutrient Management Training — 2017
Worth Creech — Restoration Systems
Roles: Construction Manger
No. of Relevant Projects: 20+
Professional Licenses, Certifications, and/or Training:
NC Unlimited Building General Contractor's License, NC,
#64807, Rosgen Level I Certification, NC Stormwater BMP
Inspection and Maintenance Certificate, NCEEP/NCSY
Stream Restoration Construction Training Certificate
- Environmental assessment and natural resource
investigations
- Land Acquisition
- Natural Systems Restoration Design
- Construction and Management
- Monitoring
- Project Closeout
- Environmental assessment and natural resource
investigations
- Land Acquisition
- Natural Systems Restoration Design
- Construction and Management
- Monitoring
- Project Closeout
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site Part E. Corporate Background & Experience
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

W. Grant Lewis—Axiom
Roles: Environmental assessment, natural resource
investigations, and technical approach
No. of Relevant Projects: 20+
Professional Licenses, Certifications, and/or Training:
NRCS Licensed Soil Scientist (#1233) for the State of North
Carolina, Society of Wetland Scientists, Professional
Wetland Scientist Certification - January 2002, Applied
Fluvial Geomorphology (Rosgen Level I, II, III, and IV)
- Environmental assessment and natural resource
investigations
- Natural Systems Restoration Design
- Construction and Management
- Monitoring
- Project Closeout
Kenan Jernigan —Axiom
Roles: Environmental assessment, natural resource
- Environmental assessment and natural resource
investigations, and technical approach
No. of Relevant Projects: 10+ investigations
- Natural Systems Restoration Design
Professional Licenses, Certifications, and/or Training:
INC Wetland Assessment Method Certification — 2012, Surface - Construction and Management
Water Identification Training and Certification — 2014, NC Stre Monitoring
Assessment Method Certification — 2017 - Project Closeout
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site Part E. Corporate Background & Experience
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

Restoration Systems' Existing Projects
Project
State
River Basin
8 -Digit
HUC
Client
Year
Initiated
Status (Q1 of
2017)
Mitigation Type
Credits
(Stream)
Credits
(Wetlands)
Credits
(Nutrients)
Credits
(Buffer)
Full Delivery Projects in North Carolina for the Division of Mitigation Services (DMS)
1
Alliance Headwaters
NC
Neuse
03020201
DMS
2016
Permitting
Stream
6,657
Riparian Wetland
14.32
2
Abbey Lamm
NC
Cape Fear
03030002
DMS
2014
Monitoring
Year 3
Stream
4,731
Riparian Wetland
1
3
Anderson Swamp
NC
Tar -Pamlico
03020102
1 DMS
2006
Closed Out
Non -Riparian Wetland
15.5
4
Aycock Springs
NC
Cape Fear
03030002
DMS
2014
Monitoring
Year 2
Stream
3,628
Riparian Wetland
0.5
5
Big Bull Creek
NC
Neuse
03020201
DMS
2005
Closed Out
Buffer
29.98
6
Brogden Road
NC
Neuse
03020201
DMS
2005
Closed Out
Buffer
15
7
Brown Marsh
NC
Lumber
03040204
DMS
2006
Closed Out
Stream
5,000
Non -Riparian Wetland
5
8
Cane Creek
NC
Broad
03050105
DMS
2006
Closed Out
Stream
6,748
Riparian Wetland
4.4
Non -Riparian Wetland
5
9
Carbonton Dam
NC
Cape Fear
03030003
DMS
2004
Closed Out
Stream
90,494
10
Casey Dairy
NC
Neuse
03020202
DMS
2002
Closed Out
Buffer
72
11
Columbus Swamp
NC
Lumber
03040203
DMS
2007
Closed Out
Wetland
32
12
Conetoe Creek
NC
Tar -Pamlico
03020103
DMS
2005
Closed Out
Buffer
10
13
Cutawhiskie
NC
Chowan
03010204
DMS
2006
Close Out in
Process
Stream
3,418
Wetland
12.17
14
Elk Shoals
NC
Catawba
03050101
DMS
2003
Closed Out
Stream
5,188
15
Fox Run
NC
Neuse
03020203
DMS
2009
Closed Out
Buffer
45
Nutrient
26.22
16
Gatlin Swamp
NC
Roanoke
03010107
DMS
2005
Closed Out
Non -Riparian Wetland
125
17
Gray Farm
NC
Catawba
03050101
DMS
2005
Closed Out
Stream
7,610
18
Haw River
NC
Cape Fear
03030002
DMS
2003
Closed Out
Riparian Wetland
31.55
19
Heath
NC
Neuse
03020202
DMS
2009
Closed Out
Buffer
59.95
20
Herman Dairy
NC
Catawba
03050101
DMS
2010
Monitoring
Year 6
Stream
4,785
Riparian Wetland
4
Non -Riparian Wetland
0.91
21
Heron
NC
Cape Fear
03030002
DMS
2017
Permitting
Stream
6,096
Riparian Wetland
0.63
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site Part E. Corporate Background & Experience
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

CONTINUED - Full Delivery Projects in North Carolina for the Division of Mitigation Services (DMS)
22
Holly Grove
NC
Cape Fear
03030002
DMS
2006
Closed Out
Stream 15,726
23
Jarman's Oak
NC
Cape Fear
03030001
DMS
2006
Closed Out
Stream 6,640
Wetland 12
24
Lick Creek
NC
Cape Fear
03030004
DMS
2004
Closed Out
Stream 9,500
25
Little Buffalo
NC
Neuse
03020201
DMS
2005
Closed Out
Buffer 18.5
26
Lloyd
NC
Cape Fear
03030001
DMS
2005
Closed Out
Stream 4,750
Riparian Wetland 3.3
Non -Riparian Wetland 3.1
27
Lowell Mill Dam
NC
Neuse
03020201
DMS
2004
Closed Out
Dam Removal 34,990
28
Major Hill
NC
Cape Fear
03030002
DMS
2017
Permitting
Stream 3,234
Riparian Wetland 0.76
29
Morgan Creek
NC
French Broad
06010106
DMS
2006
Closed Out
Stream 4,083
Wetland 1.14
30
Pepperwood Farm
NC
Neuse
03020201
DMS
2012
Monitoring
Year 4
Buffer 13.1
31
Sliver Moon
NC
Neuse
03020202
DMS
2011
Monitoring
Year 6
Non -Riparian Wetland 14
32
Summit Seep
NC
Yadkin
03040103
DMS
2010
Closed Out
Riparian Wetland 4
33
Three Mile Creek
NC
French Broad
06010108
DMS
2007
Close Out in
Process
Stream 8,021
Wetland 2.3
34
Vickis Thicket
NC
Neuse
03020202
DMS
2009
Closed Out
Buffer 28
35
Wall
NC
Cape Fear
03030003
DMS
2011
Close Out in
Process
Buffer 10.39
36
Walnut Creek
NC
Neuse
03020203
DMS
2004
Closed Out
Buffer 25
37
Warren Wilson
College
NC
French Broad
06010105
DMS
2017
Permitting
Stream 9,485
Approved Banks
38
Bass Mountain
NC
Cape Fear
03030002
Bank
2005
Monitoring Year 4
Stream
5,748
Buffer
10.55
Nutrient Offsets
0.35
39
Cranston Mill Pond
VA
James
2080206
Bank
2008
Active
Nutrient Offsets
752.00
40
Cripple Creek
NC
Cape Fear
03030002
Bank
2008
Monitoring
Year 7
Stream
4,518
Wetland
7.85
41
Jesuit Bend
LA
Deltaic Plain
8090301
Bank
2010
Monitoring
2
Marsh
(fresh/intermediate)Year
247 .7
Bottom Land Hardwoods
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site Part E. Corporate Background & Experience
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

CONTINUED—Approved Banks
Closed/Sold
Nutrients
96,648.00
42
Lane
NC
Neuse
03020201
Bank
2007
Buffer
10.56
Out
Stream 8,158
Wetland 33.50
Monitoring
43
Pancho
NC
Neuse
03020201
Bank
2009
Nutrient Offsets
25,503.00
Year 5
Buffer
3.50
Monitoring
Buffer
7.57
44
Half -Mile
NC
Neuse
03020201
Bank
2015
Nutrient Offsets
36,777.45
Year 3
45
Katy Prairie (Phase 1)
TX
Spring
12040102
Bank
2009
Monitoring
Stream 17,918
Year 5
Closed/Sold
46
Wellons
NC
Neuse
03020201
Bank
2007
Nutrient Offsets
73,804.00
Under
47
Weaver Farm
NC
Neuse
03020201
Bank
2017
Buffer & Nutrient Offset
33,360.65
6.08
Construction
Approved
Stream 5,993
48
Benton Branch
NC
Cape Fear
03030002
Bank
2015
Wetland 2.90
MBI
Approved
Stream 5,492
49
Motes Creek
NC
Cape Fear
0303002
Bank
2015
Wetland 0.92
MBI
Approved
Stream 2,470
50
Orphan Creek
NC
Cape Fear
0303002
Bank
2015
Wetland 0.05
MBI
Approved
Stream 1,007
51
Rocky Top
NC
Cape Fear
0303002
Bank
2015
Wetland
MBI
Approved
52
Milburnie Dam
NC
Neuse
03020201
Bank
2009
Stream 40,840
MBI
Banks In Development
53
Hebert II
TX
Spring
12040102
Bank
2014
Wetland
300.00
Development
54
Cane Island
NC
Cape Fear
0303002
Bank
2015
Stream
2,785
Development
55
Maple Hill
NC
Cape Fear
0303002
Bank
2015
Stream
2,685
Development
56
Slingshot Creek
NC
Cape Fear
0303002
Bank
2015
Stream
4,091
Development
57
Leaf Swamp
NC
Neuse
03020201
Bank
2017
Riparian Wetland
35.00
Development
58
Brooks Bank
NC
Yadkin
03040105
Bank
2016
Stream
5,990
Development
Stream
5,707
59
Brushy Mountain
NC
Yadkin
03040101
Bank
2017
In-
Development
Wetland
2.47
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)
Part E. Corporate Background & Experience

Permittee Responsible Mitigation Projects
60
Angola Bay
NC
Lumber
03040203
Private
2004
Design
Wetland
750.00
61
Bear Creek
NC
Neuse
03020202
NCDOT
2000
Closed Out
Riparian Wetland
165.60
62
Burrows Cove
TN
Middle Tenn.-
6030003
TNDOT
2009
Monitoring
Wetland
27.00
Elk
Year 8
City of
63
Butlers Branch
NC
Neuse
03020202
2009
Closed Out
Nutrient Offsets
122,742.00
Raleigh
Stream
7,000
64
Causey Farm
NC
Cape Fear
03030003
Fed -Ex
2003
Closed Out
Riparian Wetland
10.00
Global
65
Frog Hollow
NC
Neuse
03020202
2008
Closed Out
Wetland Preservation
1,114.00
Transpark
66
Katy Prairie (F1)
TX
Spring
12040102
TxDOT
2014
Monitoring
Stream
20,288
Year 3
67
Katy Prairie (F2)
TX
Spring
12040102
TxDOT
2014
Monitoring
Stream
6,636
Year 3
68
Katy Prairie (G)
TX
Spring
12040102
TxDOT
2015
Monitoring
Stream
28,161
Year 1
69
Salisbury Wicomico
MD
Wicomico
2060007
Private
2006
Closed Out
Wetland
40.00
70
Sleepy Creek
NC
Neuse
03020202
NCDOT
2002
Closed Out
Riparian Wetland
192.00
Stream
16,061
71
Spring Creek Ranch
TX
Spring
12040102
TxDOT
2015
Construction
Wetland
8.00
Credits
Credits
Credits
Credits
(Stream)
(Wetlands)
(Nutrients)
(Buffer)
Note: Credits are calculated differently for each Corps District. In general, the "Credits" column represents the
total length of stream restoration (feet), acreage of wetland restoration, acreage of buffer or pounds of nutrient
Totals
425,675
3,229.57
389,613.67
365.18
offset.
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site Part E. Corporate Background & Experience
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

PART F: PROJECT ORGANIZATION
RS will lead the team as Proposal Offeror/Sponsor, providing project management support and coordination
between the RS Team members, the DMS, and regulatory entities (County, State, and Federal) for the life of the
proposed project.
Work on this project will be performed primarily by staff from the following office locations:
Restoration Systems
1101 Haynes Street Suite 211
Raleigh, INC 27604
Jf r
Axiom Envlronmemal. Inc.
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
THE RESTORATION SYSTEMS TEAM
The Restoration Systems' project team for implementation of the Nesbit Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site is
comprised of the following personnel and subcontractors:
■ Raymond Holz, Restoration Systems, will serve as project manager, overseeing all aspects of
implementation, monitoring, and closeout with the North Carolina Interagency Review Team. Raymond will
be the primary contact for the DMS on this project.
■ Worth Creech, Restoration Systems, will be serving as construction manager and co -project manager. Worth
is a licensed general contractor and will provide implementation, landowner coordination, and oversight
for all activities undertaken by Restoration Systems throughout the life of the project.
■ Grant Lewis (Axiom), will contribute to project design as a subcontractor through RS. Axiom will also
provide monitoring services throughout the project life.
George Howard (RS)
RS' CEO, Project's
Authorized
Representative
NC DMS / NC IRT
Raymond Holz (RS)
Project Manager
Worth Creech (RS)
Construction
Coordinator and
Oversight
Grant Lewis (Axiom)
Project Design /
Monitoring
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site Part F. Project Organization
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

TECHNICAL APPROACH AND RESTORATION PLAN
NESBIT STREAM & WETLAND MITIGATION SITE
UNION COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
RFP #16-007704 - FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE STREAM & RIPARIAN WETLAND MITIGATION CREDITS
WITHIN CATALOGING UNITS 03050101, 03050102, AND 03050103 OF THE CATAWBA RIVER BASIN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART G: TECHNICAL APPROACH...................................................................................................................1
1.1
Project Goals and Objectives...........................................................................................................1
1.2
Project Description..........................................................................................................................8
Table 1C. Stream/Wetland Targeted Functions, Goals, and Objectives.......................................................................4
1.2.1 Existing Conditions..........................................................................................................8
Table 3. Stream Geometry and Classification...............................................................................................................9
1.2.2 Stream Characterization.................................................................................................9
1.2.3 Sediment Model..............................................................................................................9
1.2.4 Nutrient Model..............................................................................................................10
Table7. Monitoring Schedule.....................................................................................................................................16
1.2.5 Site Design and Implementation Constraints................................................................10
Table 8. Stream Monitoring Summary........................................................................................................................16
1.3
Project Development....................................................................................................................12
Table 10. Vegetation Monitoring Summary...............................................................................................................18
1.3.1 Stream Restoration.......................................................................................................12
Table 11. Compatibility of Performance Criteria to Project Goals and Objectives.....................................................19
1.3.2 Stream Enhancement (Level 1)......................................................................................12
1.3.3 Stream Enhancement (Level 11).....................................................................................12
1.3.4 Wetland Restoration (Reestablishment).......................................................................13
1.3.5 Wetland Enhancement..................................................................................................13
1.3.6 Riparian Restoration.....................................................................................................13
1.3.7 Fence / Easement Marking...........................................................................................14
1.3.8 Nuisance Species Management....................................................................................14
1.4
Proposed Mitigation......................................................................................................................14
1.5
Current Ownership and Long term Protection..............................................................................14
1.6
Project Phasing..............................................................................................................................15
1.7
Success Criteria.............................................................................................................................15
1.7.1 Stream Monitoring........................................................................................................16
1.7.2 Stream Success Criteria.................................................................................................17
1.7.3 Wetland Monitoring......................................................................................................17
1.7.4 Wetland Success Criteria...............................................................................................17
1.7.5 Vegetation.....................................................................................................................17
1.7.6 Vegetation Success Criteria...........................................................................................18
1.7.7 Visual Monitoring..........................................................................................................18
1.7.8 Compatibility with Project Goals...................................................................................18
1.8 Quality Control..............................................................................................................................20
1.9 Summary.......................................................................................................................................21
1.10 References.....................................................................................................................................22
LIST OF TABLES
Table1A. Nesbit NC SAM Summary..............................................................................................................................2
Table16. Nesbit NC WAM Summary............................................................................................................................3
Table 1C. Stream/Wetland Targeted Functions, Goals, and Objectives.......................................................................4
Table2. Site Soils..........................................................................................................................................................8
Table 3. Stream Geometry and Classification...............................................................................................................9
Table 4. BEHI and NBS Modeling Summary................................................................................................................10
Table 5. Threatened and Endangered Species............................................................................................................11
Table 6. Mitigation Activities and Credit Potential Summary.....................................................................................14
Table7. Monitoring Schedule.....................................................................................................................................16
Table 8. Stream Monitoring Summary........................................................................................................................16
Table 9. Wetland Monitoring Summary.....................................................................................................................17
Table 10. Vegetation Monitoring Summary...............................................................................................................18
Table 11. Compatibility of Performance Criteria to Project Goals and Objectives.....................................................19
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site Table of Contents
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

APPENDICES
Appendix A. Figures
Figure 1. Site Location
Figure 2. Hydrologic Unit Map
Figure 3. Topography and Drainage Area
Figure 4. Existing Conditions and Soils
Figure 5. Proposed Conditions
Appendix B. Stream & Wetland Data
Cross Sections
NCSAM Forms
NCDWQ Stream Identification Forms
NCWAM Form
BEHI & NBS
Nutrient Model
Soil Boring Log
Appendix C. NHP Report
Appendix D. Memorandum of Option Agreement
Appendix E. Landowner Authorization Form
Appendix F. Technical Proposal Score Sheet
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site Table of Contents
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

TECHNICAL APPROACH AND RESTORATION PLAN
NESBIT STREAM & WETLAND MITIGATION SITE
UNION COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
RFP #16-007704 - FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE STREAM & RIPARIAN WETLAND MITIGATION CREDITS
WITHIN CATALOGING UNITS 03050101, 03050102, AND 03050103 OF THE CATAWBA RIVER BASIN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART G: TECHNICAL APPROACH...................................................................................................................1
1.1
Project Goals and Objectives...........................................................................................................1
1.2
Project Description..........................................................................................................................5
Table 1C. Stream/Wetland Targeted Functions, Goals, and Objectives.......................................................................4
1.2.1 Existing Conditions..........................................................................................................5
Table 3. Stream Geometry and Classification...............................................................................................................6
1.2.2 Stream Characterization.................................................................................................6
Table 5. Threatened and Endangered Species..............................................................................................................8
1.2.3 Sediment Model..............................................................................................................6
1.2.4 Nutrient Model................................................................................................................7
1.2.5 Site Design and Implementation Constraints..................................................................7
1.3
Project Development......................................................................................................................9
1.3.1 Stream Restoration.........................................................................................................9
1.3.2 Stream Enhancement (Level 1)........................................................................................9
1.3.3 Stream Enhancement (Level 11).......................................................................................9
1.3.4 Wetland Restoration (Reestablishment).......................................................................10
1.3.5 Wetland Enhancement..................................................................................................10
1.3.6 Riparian Restoration.....................................................................................................10
1.3.7 Fence / Easement Marking...........................................................................................11
1.3.8 Nuisance Species Management....................................................................................11
1.4
Proposed Mitigation......................................................................................................................11
1.5
Current Ownership and Long term Protection..............................................................................11
1.6
Project Phasing..............................................................................................................................12
1.7
Success Criteria.............................................................................................................................12
1.7.1 Stream Monitoring........................................................................................................13
1.7.2 Stream Success Criteria.................................................................................................14
1.7.3 Wetland Monitoring......................................................................................................14
1.7.4 Wetland Success Criteria...............................................................................................14
1.7.5 Vegetation.....................................................................................................................14
1.7.6 Vegetation Success Criteria...........................................................................................15
1.7.7 Visual Monitoring..........................................................................................................15
1.7.8 Compatibility with Project Goals...................................................................................15
1.8 Quality Control..............................................................................................................................17
1.9 Summary.......................................................................................................................................18
1.10 References.....................................................................................................................................19
LIST OF TABLES
Table1A. Nesbit NC SAM Summary..............................................................................................................................2
Table16. Nesbit NC WAM Summary............................................................................................................................3
Table 1C. Stream/Wetland Targeted Functions, Goals, and Objectives.......................................................................4
Table2. Site Soils..........................................................................................................................................................5
Table 3. Stream Geometry and Classification...............................................................................................................6
Table 4. BEHI and NBS Modeling Summary..................................................................................................................7
Table 5. Threatened and Endangered Species..............................................................................................................8
Table 6. Mitigation Activities and Credit Potential Summary.....................................................................................11
Table7. Monitoring Schedule.....................................................................................................................................13
Table 8. Stream Monitoring Summary........................................................................................................................13
Table 9. Wetland Monitoring Summary.....................................................................................................................14
Table 10. Vegetation Monitoring Summary ...............................................................................................................15
Table 11. Compatibility of Performance Criteria to Project Goals and Objectives.....................................................16
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site Table of Contents
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

APPENDICES
Appendix A. Figures
Figure 1. Site Location
Figure 2. Hydrologic Unit Map
Figure 3. Topography and Drainage Area
Figure 4. Existing Conditions and Soils
Figure 5. Proposed Conditions
Appendix B. Stream & Wetland Data
Cross Sections
NCSAM Forms
NCDWQ Stream Identification Forms
NCWAM Form
BEHI & NBS
Nutrient Model
Soil Boring Log
Appendix C. NHP Report
Appendix D. Memorandum of Option Agreement
Appendix E. Landowner Authorization Form
Appendix F. Technical Proposal Score Sheet
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site Table of Contents
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

PART G: TECHNICAL APPROACH
This technical proposal describes the Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site (hereafter referred to as the "Site"),
located approximately 7 miles southwest of Monroe and 5 miles southeast of Waxhaw in the southwest corner of
Union County near the North Carolina and South Carolina border (Figures 1 and 2, Appendix A). Site land use consists
of agricultural row crops. All Site hydrology drains to warm, Glen Branch and unnamed tributaries to Glen Branch.
The proposed conservation easement area contains approximately 18.1 acres.
1.1 Project Goals and Objectives
The Site is located within Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) 03050103030030 and subbasin 03-08-38. The Site is not
located in a Local Watershed Plan (LWP), Regional Watershed Plan (RWP), or Targeted Resource Area (TRA). Project
goals are based on the Lower Catawba River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP) report (NCEEP 2007) and on-site
data collection of channel morphology and functions observed during field investigations. The RBRP report
documents that the main goal in the urbanized watersheds of this river basin is to better manage stormwater runoff.
The Waxhaw Creek watershed, which includes the Site, is a priority for land preservation because it faces
development pressures from the Charlotte Metro area, and the HU is the only one in the Catawba Basin that
supports a population of the federally endangered Carolina heel -splitter mussel (one of only six populations in the
world). Stream water quality is critical to its survival and requires the use of forested buffers and prevention of
siltation and other sources of pollution.
Site specific mitigation goals and objectives have been developed through the use of North Carolina Stream
Assessment Method (NC SAM) and North Carolina Wetland Assessment Method (NC WAM) analyses of existing and
reference systems at the Site (NC SFAT 2015 and NC WFAT 2010). These methodologies rate functional metrics for
streams and wetlands as high, medium, or low based on field data collected on forms and transferred into a rating
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.
Tables 1A and 16 summarize NC SAM and NC WAM metrics targeted for functional uplift; metrics targeted to meet
the Site's goals and objectives are depicted in bold. Table 1C outlines functions targeted for functional uplift, goals
tied to the specific functions, objectives to achieve the proposed goals, and outlines stressors that Site activities will
provide functional uplift for. The Site provides for restoration and protection of aquatic resources within a
conservation easement and will result in net gains in hydrology, water quality, and habitat functions.
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site page 1
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

Table 1A. Nesbit NC SAM Summary
SAM 2-
NC SAM Function Class Rating Summary SAM 1 -UT 1 Glen Branch
Upper
(1) HYDROLOGY HIGH LOW
SAM 3 -
Glen Branch
Lower
LOW
(2) Baseflow HIGH HIGH
(2) Flood Flow HIGH LOW
HIGH
LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation MEDIUM LOW LOW
(4) Floodplain Access HIGH MEDIUM MEDIUM
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
LOW
LOW
LOW
(4) Microtopography
LOW
LOW
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
LOW
LOW
(4) Channel Stability
HIGH
LOW
LOW
(4) Sediment Transport
HIGH
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Stream Geomorophology
HIGH
LOW
LOW
(1) WATER QUALITY
LOW
LOW
LOW
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Stream -side Area Vegetation
LOW
LOW
LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
LOW
LOW
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
NO
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
LOW
LOW
(1) HABITAT
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat
HIGH
LOW
LOW
(3) Baseflow
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Substrate
HIGH
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
LOW
LOW
(3) In -Stream Habitat
HIGH
LOW
LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
LOW
LOW
(3) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
LOW
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
LOW
LOW
LOW
OVERALL
MEDIUM LOW
LOW
Based on NC SAM output, all three primary stream functional metrics (Hydrology, Water Quality, and Habitat), as
well as 16 sub -metrics are 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.
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)
page 2

Table 1B. Nesbit NC WAM Summary
NC WAM Sub -function Rating Summary
WAM1
Wetland Type
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
(1) HYDROLOGY
MEDIUM
(2) Surface Storage & Retention
MEDIUM
(2) Sub -surface Storage and Retention
MEDIUM
(1) WATER QUALITY
MEDIUM
(2) Pathogen change
(2) Particulate Change
MEDIUM
LOW
(2) Soluble change
(2) Physical Change
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(1) HABITAT
LOW
LOW
(2) Physical Structure
(2) Landscape Patch Structure
LOW
LOW
(2) Vegetative Composition
OVERALL
MEDIUM
Based on NC WAM output, one of the primary wetland functional metrics (Habitat), as well as 4 sub -metrics are
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.
The proposed easement, existing conditions, and proposed mitigation activities are depicted in Figures 4 and 5
(Appendix A).
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site page 3
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

Table 1C. Stream/Wetland Targeted Functions, Goals, and Objectives
Targeted Functions Goals
Objectives
DMS Functional Uplift Evaluations
Functional Stressor (Uplift Potential)
(1) HYDROLOGY
(2) Flood Flow
0Construct new channel at historic floodplain elevation to restore overbank
flows and restore/enhance jurisdictional wetlands
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
• Minimize downstream flooding to the maximum extent
0 Plant woody riparian buffer
0 Install marsh treatment areas
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
possible.
0 Remove agricultural row crops
• Deep rip floodplain soils to reduce compaction and increase soil surface
• peak Flows
(4) Microtopography
roughness
• Protect riparian buffers with a perpetual conservation easement
• Artificial Barriers
• Ditching/Draining
(3) Stream Stability
• Construct channels with proper pattern, dimension, and longitudinal profile
• Remove agricultural row crops
(4) Channel Stability
• Increase stream stability within the Site so that channels
• Construct stable channels with appropriate substrate
are neither aggrading nor degrading.
• Upgrade forded crossings
(4) Stream Geomorphology
• Plant woody riparian buffer
• Stabilize stream banks
(1) WATER QUALITY
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
0Remove agricultural row crops and reduce agricultural land/inputs
• Install marsh treatment areas
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
Plant woody riparian buffer
• Non-functioning Riparian Buffer/Wetland Vegetation
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
• Remove direct nutrient and pollutant inputs from the
Site and reduce contributions to downstream waters.
• Restore/enhance jurisdictional wetlands adjacent to Site streams
0 Provide surface roughness and reduce compaction through deep
• Sediment
ripping/plowing.
• Nutrients
Wetland Particulate Change
Restore overbank flooding by constructing channels at historic floodplain
elevation.
(1) HABITAT
(2) In -stream Habitat
• Construct stable channels with appropriate substrate
• Plant woody riparian buffer to provide organic matter and shade
(3) Stream Stability
(3) In -Stream Habitat
• Construct new channel at historic floodplain elevation to restore overbank
(2) Stream side Habitat
flows
• Habitat Fragmentation
(3) Stream -side Habitat
• Improve instream and stream -side habitat.
• Upgrade forded crossings
•
Limited Bedform Diversity
• Plant woody riparian buffer
(3) Thermoregulation
Protect riparian buffers with a perpetual conservation easement
• Absence of Large Woody Debris
Wetland Physical Structure
• Restore/enhance jurisdictional wetlands adjacent to Site streams
Stabilize stream banks
PWetland Landscape Patch Structure
Install in -stream structures
Vegetation Composition
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)
page 4

1.2 Project Description
1.2.1 Existing Conditions
Physiography and Land Use
The Site is located in the Carolina Slate Belt portion of the Piedmont ecoregion of North Carolina. Regional
physiography is characterized by dissected, irregular plains with moderate to steep slopes and low to moderate
gradient streams over boulder and cobble -dominated substrate (Griffith et al. 2002). Onsite elevations range from
a high of 640 feet National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) at the upper reaches to a low of approximately 620 feet
NGVD at the Site outfall (USGS Waxhaw, North Carolina 7.5 -minute topographic quadrangle) (Figure 3, Appendix A).
The Site provides water quality functions to watersheds ranging from approximately 0.03 square mile (21 acres) on
UT3 to 1.25 square miles (799 acres) at the outfall (Figure 3, Appendix A). The watershed is dominated by pasture,
agricultural land, forest, and sparse residential development. Impervious surfaces account for less than 2 percent
of the upstream watershed land surface. Land use at the Site is characterized by agricultural row crops.
Water Quality
The Site is located within the Catawba River Basin in United States Geological Services (USGS) 14 -digit HUC
03050103030030 and North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) Subbasin 03-08-38. Site hydrology
drains to Glen Branch and unnamed tributaries to Glen Branch (Stream Index Number 11-139-1), which has been
assigned a Best Usage Classification of C (NCDWR 2013). Glen Branch is not listed on the NCDENR draft 2018 or final
2016 303(d) lists (NCDEQ 2018a, NCDEQ 2018b).
Soils and Land Form
Based on Web Soil Survey mapping (USDA 2017), the Site contains four soil series as follows (Figure 4, Appendix A).
Table 2. Site Soils
Map Unit
Map Unit Name
Hydric Status
Description
Symbol
(Classification)
This series consists of moderately eroded, well -drained soils
Badin channery silty clay
found on interfluves with 2-8 percent slopes. The parent
BdB2
loam
Non -hydric
material is residuum weathered from metavolcanics and/or
(Typic Hapludults)
argillite. Depth to the water table is more than 80 inches.
Depth to restrictive features is 20-40 inches to paralithic
bedrock and 40-80 inches to lithic bedrock.
This series consists of moderately well -drained soils found on
Cid channery silt loam
interfluves with 1-5 percent slopes. The parent material is
CmB
loam Non -hydric
residuum weathered from metavolcanics and/or argillite.
(Aquic Hapludults)
Depth to the water table 12-30 inches. Depth to restrictive
features is 20-40 inches to paralithic bedrock and 40-80 inches
to lithic bedrock.
This series consists of moderately well -drained soils found on
Non -hydric, but
Secrest-Cid complex
interfluves with 0-3 percent slopes. The parent material is
ScA
may contain
(Aeric Epiaquults/Aquic
residuum weathered from metavolcanics and/or argillite.
hydric
Hapludults)
Depth to the water table 12-30 inches. Depth to restrictive
inclusions
features is 40-60 inches to paralithic bedrock and 60-80 inches
to lithic bedrock.
This series consists of well -drained soils found on interfluves
Ta B, Ta C,
Tarrus gravelly silt loam
with 2-15 percent slopes. The parent material is residuum
Ta B2
(Typic Kanhapludults)
Non -hydric
weathered from metavolcanics and/or argillite. Depth to the
water table more than 80 inches. Depth to restrictive features
is 40-60 inches to paralithic bedrock.
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site page 5
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

Existing wetlands and drained hydric soils were mapped by a licensed soil scientist (NC LSS # 1233); results of the
soil mapping are depicted on Figure 4 (Appendix A) and the Site includes approximately 2.8 acres of disturbed
wetland and 3.8 acres of drained hydric soils. A soil boring log is included in Appendix B.
1.2.2 Stream Characterization
Stream geometry and substrate data have been evaluated to orient stream restoration based on a classification
utilizing fluvial geomorphic principles (Rosgen 1996). This classification stratifies streams into comparable groups
based on pattern, dimension, profile, and substrate characteristics. Primary components of the classification include
degree of entrenchment, width -depth ratio, sinuosity, and channel slope.
Cross-sectional measurements were utilized to characterize existing stream channel conditions. The location of each
cross-section is depicted in Figure 4 (Appendix A). Cross-sectional data indicate that Site streams are downcutting
and eroding vertically and laterally. The channels are characterized by incised Eg-type and unstable E -type channels.
Although E -type channels are not exhibiting incision, the width to depth ratio depicts a channel that is narrow and
deep (W/D ratio of 4.9) and are showing lateral scour on banks that would be expected to continue eroding until Eg-
type channels are present at the Site (data is presented in Figure 4, Appendix A and Table 3).
Table 3. Stream Geometry and Classification
Attribute
XS 1 Existing
Nesbit Site
XS 1 Proposed XS 2 Existing
XS 2 Proposed
DA
0.27
0.27
0.74
0.7.4
Abkf
8.7
8.7
17.5
17.5
Aexisting
16.5
8.7
18.7
17.5
Wbkf
8.5
8.1
9.3
12.1
Dbkf
1.0
1.1
1.9
1.1
Dmax
1.7
1.3
2.8
1.4
Wbkf/Dbkf
8.2
7.6
4.9
8.4
FPA
50
50
50
50
ENT
5.9
6.1
5.4
4.1
LBH
2.5
1.3
3.0
1.4
B H R
1.47
1.0
1.07
1.0
SIN
1 1.1
1 1.15 1
1.05
1 1.15
Stream Type
I Eg-type
I E -type I
E -type
I E -type
Proposed Stream Geometry
Site streams have been characterized based on fluvial geomorphic principles (Rosgen 1996). Table 3 provides a
summary of measured stream geometry attributes under existing conditions (considered to be unstable) and a
preliminary estimate of potentially stable stream attributes. Preliminary estimates of stable stream attributes are
based primarily upon data observations along the existing reaches, measurements of two cross-sections within the
Site, and regional curves for the Piedmont region of North Carolina.
Hydrology
This hydrophysiographic region is characterized by moderate rainfall with precipitation averaging approximately
46.7 inches per year (USDA 1996). The Site's discharge is dominated by a combination of upstream basin catchment,
groundwater flow, and precipitation. Based on regional curves (Harman et al. 1999), the bankfull discharge for a
0.03- to 1.25 -square mile watershed is expected to average 7.5 to 104.5 cubic feet per second and occur
approximately every 1.3 to 1.5 years (Rosgen 1996, Leopold 1994).
1.2.3 Sediment Model
Sediment load modeling was performed using methodologies outlined in A Practical Method of Computing
Streambank Erosion Rate (Rosgen 2009) along with Estimating Sediment Loads using the Bank Assessment of Non -
point Sources Consequences of Sediment (Rosgen 2011). These models provide a quantitative prediction of
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site page 6
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

streambank erosions by calculating Bank Erosion Hazard Index (BEHI) and Near -Bank Stress (NBS) along each Site
reach. The resulting BEHI and NBS values are then compared to streambank erodibility graphs prepared for North
Carolina by the NC Stream Restoration Institute and NC Sea Grant.
Streambank characteristics involve measurements of bank height, angles, materials, presence of layers, rooting
depth, rooting density, and percent of the bank protected by rocks, logs, roots, or vegetation. Site reaches have
been measured for each BEHI and NBS characteristic and predicted lateral erosion rate, height, and length to
calculate a cubic volume of sediment contributed by the reach each year. Data forms for the analysis are available
upon request and the data output is presented in Appendix B. Results of the model are presented in the following
table.
Table 4. BEHI and NBS Modeline Summary
Stream Reach
Proposed Mitigation Treatment
Predicted Sediment Contribution
(tons/year)
Glen Branch
Restoration and Enhancement (Level 1)
223.8
UT 1
Restoration and Enhancement (Level 11)
3.9
UT 2
Restoration and Enhancement (Level 11)
4.8
UT 3
Restoration and Enhancement (Level 11)
0
Total Sediment Contribution (tons/year)
232.5
1.2.4 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, rainfall, and row -crop type. Using published values of
nitrogen and phosphorus the model predicts the nutrient input of fertilizer associated with land uses (USDA 2015,
USDA 1992, NC State 2016, SMRC 2016). A copy of the model input and output is presented in Appendix B.
Based on the land use nutrient model, cessation of land use activities at the Site will result in a direct reduction of
360 pounds of phosphorus per year and 360 pounds of nitrogen per year.
1.2.5 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.
Threatened & Endangered Species
Three federally protected species are listed as occurring in Union County as of June 27, 2018 (USFWS 2018); the
following table summarizes potential habitat and a preliminary biological conclusion.
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site page 7
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

Table 5. Threatened and Endangered Species
Species
Habitat
Potential
Biological
Habitat at Site
Conclusion
In North Carolina, the species is now known only from a
handful of streams in the Pee Dee and Catawba River systems.
The species exists in very low abundances, usually within 6 feet
of shorelines, throughout its known range. The general habitat
Carolina heelsplitter
requirements for the Carolina heelsplitter are shaded areas in
(Losmigona decorata)
large rivers to small streams, often burrowed into clay banks
No
No effect
Endangered
between the root systems of trees, or in runs along steep
banks with moderate current. The more recent habitat where
the Carolina heelsplitter has been found is in sections of
streams containing bedrock with perpendicular crevices filled
with sand and gravel, and with wide riparian buffers.
Grows in sandy or rocky, open, upland woods on acidic or
circumneutral, well -drained sands or sandy loam soils with low
cation exchange capacities. The species is also found on sandy
or submesic loamy swales and depressions in the fall line
Sandhills region as well as in openings along the rim of Carolina
bays; maintained railroad, roadside, power line, and utility
Michaux's sumac
rights -of way; areas where forest canopies have been opened
(Rhus michauxii)
up by blowdowns and/or storm damage; small wildlife food
Yes
Unresolved
Endangered
plots; abandoned building sites; under sparse to moderately
dense pine or pine/hardwood canopies; and in and along edges
of other artificially maintained clearings undergoing natural
succession. In the central Piedmont, it occurs on clayey soils
derived from mafic rocks. The plant is shade intolerant and,
therefore, grows best where disturbance (e.g., mowing,
clearing, grazing, periodic fire) maintains its open habitat.
This species is found along roadside rights-of-way, maintained
power lines and other utility rights-of-way, edges of thickets
and old pastures, clearings and edges of upland oak -pine -
hickory woods and Piedmont longleaf pine forests, and other
Schweinitz's sunflower
sunny or semi -sunny habitats where disturbances (e.g.,
(Helianthus
mowing, clearing, grazing, blow downs, storms, frequent fire)
Yes
Unresolved
schweinitzii)
help create open or partially open areas for sunlight. It is
Endangered
intolerant of full shade and excessive competition from other
vegetation. Schweinitz's sunflower occurs in a variety of soil
series; it is generally found growing on shallow sandy soils with
high gravel content; shallow, poor, clayey hardpans; or shallow
rocky soils, especially those derived from mafic rocks.
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 December 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 State Historic Preservation Office will occur prior to
construction activities to determine if any significant cultural resources are present.
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
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site page 8
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

boundary. Within a one -mile radius of the Site, NCNHP lists the Eastern creekshell (Villosa delumbis) and the
Waxhaw Creek Aquatic Habitat (Appendix Q.
FEMA
Inspection of the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps 3710540000J, Panel 5400, effective October 16, 2008, indicates
that the lower reaches of the Site are located within a Zone AE flood area. Therefore, a HEC -RAS analysis will be
completed on the existing and proposed conditions of Glen Branch and its tributaries to assess hydraulic
performance. As per North Carolina Floodplain Mapping requirements, a Conditional Letter of Map Revision
(CLOMR) may need to be prepared for the Site.
Utilities
No utilities are located on the Site.
Air Transport Facilities
No air transport facility is located within 5 miles of the Site; however, a landing field is located approximately 2 miles
southeast of the Site.
1.3 Project Development
1.3.1 Stream Restoration
Stream restoration efforts are designed to restore a stable stream that approximates hydrodynamics, stream
geometry, and local microtopography relative to reference conditions. Restoration at the Site will be Priority I
restoration; therefore, bankfull elevations will be raised to meet the adjacent valley floodplain elevation.
Stream restoration is expected to entail 1) channel excavation, 2) channel stabilization, 3) channel diversion, and 4)
channel backfill.
In -stream Structures
The use of in -stream structures for grade control and habitat is essential for successful stream restoration. In -stream
structures may be placed in the channel to elevate local water surface profiles in the channel, potentially flattening
the water energy slope or gradient and directing stream energy into the center of the channel and away from banks.
The structures will consist of log cross -vanes or log j -hook vanes; however, at the discretion of the Engineer, rock
cross -vanes or rock j -hook vanes may be substituted if dictated by field conditions. In addition, the structures will
placed in relatively straight reaches to provide secondary (perpendicular) flow cells during bankfull events.
Forded Channel Crossings
Landowner constraints will necessitate the installation of forded channel crossings within breaks in the easement to
allow access to portions of the property isolated by stream restoration activities Figure 5 (Appendix A). The crossings
may be constructed of hydraulically stable rip -rap or suitable rock. Crossings will be large enough to handle the
weight of anticipated vehicular traffic. Approach grades to the crossing will be at an approximate 10:1 slope and
constructed of hard, scour -resistant crushed rock or other permeable material, which is free of fines.
1.3.2 Stream Enhancement (Level 1)
Stream enhancement (level 1) will entail restoration of stream dimension, installation of easement markers, and
planting riparian buffers with native forest vegetation to facilitate stream recovery and prevent further degradation
of the stream.
1.3.3 Stream Enhancement (Level II)
Stream enhancement (level II) will entail installation of easement markers and planting riparian buffers with native
forest vegetation to facilitate stream recovery and prevent further degradation of the stream.
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site page 9
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

1.3.4 Wetland Restoration (Reestablishment)
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 stream degradation, vegetative clearing,
agriculture plowing, and other land disturbances associated with land use management. Wetland reestablishment
options should focus on the restoration of vegetative communities, restoration of stream corridors and historic
groundwater tables, and the reestablishment of soil structure and microtopographic variations. In addition, the
construction of (or provisions for) surface water storage depressions (ephemeral pools) will also add an important
component to groundwater restoration activities. These activities will result in the reestablishment/restoration of
2.8 acres of jurisdictional riparian riverine wetlands.
1.3.5 Wetland Enhancement
Wetland enhancement will focus on the removal of row crops and restoration of vegetative communities resulting
in the enhancement of 3.8 acres of jurisdictional riparian riverine wetlands.
1.3.6 Riparian Restoration
Restoration of floodplain forest 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.
Revegetating floodplains will provide overall system stability, shade, and wildlife habitat. In addition, viable riparian
communities will improve system biogeochemical function by filtering pollutants from overland and shallow
subsurface flows and providing organic materials to adjacent stream channels.
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) Piedmont/Low Mountain Alluvial Forest, 2) Dry-Mesic Oak -Hickory Forest and 3) Streamside Assemblage.
Bare -root seedlings within the Piedmont/Low Mountain Alluvial Forest and Dry-Mesic Oak -Hickory Forest will be
planted at a density of approximately 680 stems per acre on 8 -foot centers, and in the stream -side assemblage at a
density of approximately 2720 stems per acre on 4 -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. Potential
species planted within the Site may include the following.
Piedmont/Low Mountain Alluvial Forest
1.
Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis)
2.
American elm (Ulmus americana)
3.
Hackberry (Celtis laevigata)
4.
Green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica)
5.
Shagbark hickory (Carya ovata)
6.
Willow oak (Quercus phellos)
7.
Shumard oak (Quercus shumardii)
8.
River birch (Betula nigra)
9.
Silky dogwood (Cornus amomum)
10.
Pawpaw (Asimina triloba)
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site page 10
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

Dry-Mesic Oak -Hickory Forest
1. White oak (Quercus alba)
2. Northern red oak (Quercus rubra)
3. Pignut hickory (Carya glabra)
4. Mockernut hickory (Carya alba/tomentosa)
5. Black gum (Nyssa sylvatica var. sylvatica)
6. Flowering dogwood (Cornus florida)
7. Eastern red cedar (Juniperus virginiana)
8. Persimmon (Diospyros virginiana)
9. Ironwood (Carpinus caroliniona)
Stream -Side Assemblage
1. Black willow (Salix nigra)
2. Tag alder (Alnus serrulate)
3. Buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis)
1.3.7 Fence / Easement Marking
The entire easement area will fenced and/or appropriately marked to identify the easement boundaries per United
States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and Interagency Review Team (IRT) requirements.
1.3.8 Nuisance Species Management
Beaver, privet, and other potential nuisance species will be monitored over the course of the 7 -year monitoring
period. Appropriate actions to ameliorate any negative impacts regarding vegetation development and/or water
management will occur on an as -needed basis.
1.4 Proposed Mitigation
Mitigation outlined in this report is designed to provide the following, as calculated in accordance with the
requirements stipulated in RFP #16-007704.
Table 6. Mitigation Activities and Credit Potential Summary
Stream Mitigation Type
Type
Linear Feet
Mitigation Ratio
SMUs
Restoration
Priority 1
4895
1:1
4895
Enhancement
Level 1
171
1.5:1
114
Enhancement
Level II
1275
2.5:1
510/2 - 255*
Preservation
-
-
10:1
-
Totals
6341 linear feet
5264 SMUs
Wetland Mitigation Type
Type
Acreage
Mitigation Ratio
Riparian Riverine WMU
Restoration
Riparian Riverine
2.8
1:1
2.8
Enhancement
Riparian Riverine
3.8
2:1
1.9
Totals
6.6 acres
4.7 WMUs
*Enhancement (level II) credit has been reduced by half to account for an approximate 5:1 ratio predicted to be allowed by the Interagency
Review Team.
1.5 Current Ownership and Long term Protection
Restoration Systems has an Agreement for the Purchase and Sale of a Conservation Easement with the property
owner. A Memorandum of this agreement was recorded at the Union County Register of Deeds January 7, 2019 is
included in Appendix E. Full copies are these agreements are available upon request. Upon approval of the contract,
Restoration Systems will execute the contract and subsequently place a conservation easement over the subject
parcel; such easement will be conveyed to the State of North Carolina. Restoration Systems will remain responsible
for project implementation and achievement of success criteria.
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site page 11
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

Current property ownership and parcel information is as follows:
Owner Name NC PIN#
Buford Township Farms, LLC (Alison & Franklin Howey Jr.) 04335004
During the operational period of the Site, Restoration Systems will be responsible for management actions. A long-
term management plan will be developed for the Site and incorporated into the mitigation plan. In general, long-
term management activities will include protecting the Site from encroachment, trespass, clearing, and other
violations that interfere with conservation purposes. Other activities may be incorporated based on site-specific
considerations.
1.6 Project Phasing
A tentative phasing schedule for the proposed project is presented below based on an executed contract at Week
0.
Task
Description
Weeks from Contract Execution
Task 1
Categorical Exclusion Document
5
Task 2
Submit Recorded Conservation Easement on the Site
20
Task 3
Mitigation Plan (Final Draft) and Financial Assurance
49
Task 4
Mitigation Site Earthwork Complete
76
Task 5
Mitigation Site Planting and Installation of Monitoring Devices
87*
Task 6
Baseline Monitoring report (including As -built Drawings)
87*
Task 7
Submit Monitoring Report #1 to NCDMS
Dec. after implementation
Task 8
Submit Monitoring Report #2 to NCDMS
Dec. - 2yrs after implementation
Task 9
Submit Monitoring Report #3 to NCDMS
Dec. - 3yrs after implementation
Task 10
Submit Monitoring Report #4 to NCDMS
Dec. - 4yrs after implementation
Task 11
Submit Monitoring Report #5 to NCDMS
Dec. - 5yrs after implementation
Task 12
Submit Monitoring Report #6 to NCDMS
Dec. - 6yrs after implementation
Task 13
Submit Monitoring Report #7 to NCDMS
Dec. - 7yrs after implementation
Closeout Process
Spring after submittal of Report #7
* Time frame is dependent upon seasonal conditions at completion of Site implementation.
1.7 Success Criteria
Monitoring requirements and success criteria outlined in this plan follow the October 24, 2016 NC Interagency
Review Team Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update. Monitoring data collected
at the Site should include reference photos, plant survival analysis, channel stability analysis, and biological data, if
specifically required by permit conditions.
Wetland hydrology is proposed to be monitored for a period of seven years (years 1-7). Riparian vegetation and
stream morphology is proposed to be monitored for a period of seven years with measurements completed in years
1-3, year 5, and year 7. If monitoring demonstrates the Site is successful by year 5 and no concerns have been
identified, Restoration Systems may propose to terminate monitoring at the Site and forego monitoring
requirements for years 6 and 7. Early closure will only be provided through written approval from the USACE in
consultation with the IRT. Monitoring will be conducted by Axiom Environmental, Inc. Annual monitoring reports
of the data collected will be submitted to the NCDMS by Restoration Systems no later than December 31 of each
monitoring year data is collected.
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site page 12
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

Table 7. Monitoring Schedule
Resource
Streams
Wetlands
Macroinvertebrates
Visual Assessment
Report Submittal
Year 1 1 Year 2 1 Year 3 1 Year 4 1 Year S I Year 6 1 Year 7
1.7.1 Stream Monitoring
Annual monitoring will include development of channel cross-sections and substrate on riffles and pools. Data to be
presented in graphic and tabular format will include 1) cross-sectional area, 2) bankfull width, 3) average depth, 4)
maximum depth, and 5) width -to -depth ratio. Longitudinal profiles will not be measured routinely unless monitoring
demonstrates channel bank or bed instability, in which case, longitudinal profiles may be required by the USACE
along reaches of concern to track changes and demonstrate stability.
Table 8. Stream Monitoring Summary
Parameter
Method
Schedule/Frequency
Number/Extent
Stream Profile
Full longitudinal survey
As -built (unless otherwise
All restored stream
required)
channels
Stream Dimension
Cross-sections
As -built, Years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7
Two per 1000 feet of
restored channels
Visual Assessments
Yearly
All restored stream
channels
Only if instability is
Channel Stability
Bank Pins
Yearly
documented during
monitoring
Additional Cross-
Only if instability is
Yearly
documented during
sections
monitoring
Continuous monitoring
Continuous recording through
As requested by the
Stream Hydrology
water level gauges
monitoring period
IRT
and/or trail camera
Visual Assessments
Visual assessment of in -stream structures will be conducted to determine if failure has occurred. Failure of a
structure may be indicated by collapse of the structure, undermining of the structure, abandonment of the channel
around the structure, and/or stream flow beneath the structure. In addition, visual assessments of the entire
channel will be conducted in each of the seven years of monitoring as outlined in the October 24, 2016 NC
Interagency Review Team Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update. Areas of
concern will be depicted on a plan view figure identifying the location of concern along with a written assessment
and photograph of the area.
Benthic Macroinvertebrates
Benthic macroinvertebrate sampling will be conducted once before construction (baseline conditions) and once
during monitoring years 3, 5, and 7. Macroinvertebrate sampling will be conducted in accordance with the "Qual 4"
method described in Standard Operating Procedures for Collection and Analysis of Benthic Macroin vertebrates,
Version 5.0 (NCDWR 2016). In addition, sampling will occur during the "index period" referenced in Small Streams
Biocriteria Development (NCDWQ 2009). Results will be presented on a site -by -site basis and will include a list of
taxa collected, an enumeration of Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Tricopetera taxa as well as Biotic Index values.
Benthic Macroinvertebrate sampling data will not be tied to success criteria; however, the data may be used as a
tool to observe positive gains to in -stream habitat.
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site page 13
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

1.7.2 Stream Success Criteria
Monitoring and success criteria for stream restoration should relate to project goals and objectives identified from
on-site NC SAM data collection. From a mitigation perspective, several of the goals and objectives are assumed to
be functionally elevated by restoration activities without direct measurement. Other goals and objectives will be
considered successful upon achieving vegetation success criteria. The following summarizes stream success criteria,
per the October 24, 2016 NC Interagency Review Team Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory
Mitigation Update.
• All streams must maintain an Ordinary High -Water Mark (OHWM), per RGL 05-05.
• Bank height ratio (BHR) cannot exceed 1.2 for a majority of measured cross sections on a given
reach.
• Entrenchment ratio (ER) must be 2.2 or above for a majority of measured riffle cross-sections on a
given reach.
• BHR and ER should not change by more than 10% in any given year for a majority of a given reach.
• Must document occurrence of at least 4 bankfull events in separate years during the monitoring
period.
1.7.3 Wetland Monitoring
Groundwater monitoring gauges will be installed to take measurements after hydrological modifications are
performed at the Site. Hydrological sampling will continue throughout the entire year at intervals necessary to
satisfy jurisdictional hydrology success criteria. In addition, an on-site rain gauge will be used to document rainfall
data for comparison of groundwater conditions with extended drought conditions and a floodplain crest gauge (or
other suitable recording devices) will be installed to confirm overbank flooding events.
Table 9. Wetland Monitoring Summary
Parameter Method Schedule/Frequency
Number/Extent
Data Collected
Gauges spread
Soil temperature at the
Wetland Groundwater As -built, Years 1, 2,
throughout
beginning of each monitoring
Restoration gauges 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7
restored
period, groundwater and rain
wetlands
data for each monitoring period
1.7.4 Wetland Success Criteria
The following summarizes wetland success criteria, per the October 24, 2016 NC Interagency Review Team
Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update.
• Saturation or inundation within the upper 12 inches of the soil surface for, at a minimum, 10 percent of the
growing season, during average climatic conditions (10% of the growing season as per USACE 2016).
According to the Soil Survey of Union County, the growing season is from March 28 — November 3 (USDA 1996).
However, the start date for the growing season is not typical for the Piedmont region; therefore, for purposes of this
project gauge hydrologic success will be determined using data from March 1 - November 3 to more accurately
represent the period of biological activity. Based on growing season information outlined in the Interim Regional
Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region (USACE
2012), this will be confirmed annually by soil temperatures exceeding 41 degrees Fahrenheit at 12 inches depth
and/or bud burst. Target hydrological characteristics include saturation or inundation for 10 percent (for a Worsham
soil) of the monitored period (March 1- November 3), during average climatic conditions (USACE 2016).
1.7.5 Vegetation
After planting has been completed in winter or early spring, an initial evaluation will be performed to verify planting
methods and to determine initial species composition and density. Supplemental planting and additional Site
modifications will be implemented, if necessary.
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site page 14
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

During quantitative vegetation sampling, plots (100 square meters in size) will be installed within the Site as per
guidelines established in CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation, Version 4.2 (Lee et al. 2008). In each sample
plot, vegetation parameters to be monitored include species composition and species density. Visual observations
of the percent cover of shrub and herbaceous species will also be documented by photograph.
Table 10. Vegetation Monitoring Summary
Parameter
Method
Schedule/Frequency
Number/Extent
Data Collected
Permanent
vegetation plots
As -built, Years 1, 2,
Plots spread across
Species, height,
0.0247 acre (100
3, 5, and 7
the Site (^2% of the
location, planted vs.
square meters) in
planted area)
volunteer, and age
Vegetation
size
establishment and
Annual random
vigor
vegetation plots,
0.0247 acre (100
As -built, Years 1, 2,
3 plots randomly
Species and height
square meters) in
3, 5, and 7
selected each year
size
1.7.6 Vegetation Success Criteria
The following summarizes vegetation success criteria, per the October 24, 2016 NC Interagency Review Team
Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update.
• Within planted portions of the site, a minimum of 320 stems per acre must be present at year 3; a minimum
of 260 stems per acre must be present at year 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.
• Planted and volunteer stems are counted, provided they are included in the approved planting list for the
site; natural recruits not on the planting list may be considered by the IRT on a case-by-case basis.
• Any single species can only account for 50% of the required stems within any vegetation plot.
1.7.7 Visual Monitoring
Visual monitoring of general Site conditions will be conducted at least twice during each monitoring year.
Monitoring will be conducted by traversing the entire Site to identify and document areas of low stem density, poor
plant vigor, prolonged inundation, native and exotic invasive species, beaver activity, excessive herbivory, easement
encroachment, and other areas of concern.
1.7.8 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.
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site page 15
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

i ame ii. c,ompatiamty or rerrormance criteria to Project t3oais ana ulojectives
Goals Objectives Success Criteria
W HYDROLOGY
• Minimize downstream flooding to •
the maximum extent possible. •
•
•
• Increase stream stability within the •
Site so that channels are neither •
aggrading nor degrading. •
•
WATER QUALITY
• Remove direct nutrient and
pollutant inputs from the Site and
reduce contributions to
downstream waters.
(1) HABITAT
• Improve instream and stream -side
habitat.
Construct new channel at historic floodplain elevation to restore
overbank flows and restore jurisdictional wetlands
Plant woody riparian buffer
Install marsh treatment areas
Remove agricultural row crops
Deep rip floodplain soils to reduce compaction and increase soil
surface roughness
Protect riparian buffers with a perpetual conservation easement
Construct channels with proper pattern, dimension, and
longitudinal profile
Remove agricultural row crops
Construct stable channels with appropriate substrate
Upgrade forded crossings
Plant woody riparian buffer
Stabilize stream banks
Remove agricultural row crops and reduce agricultural land/inputs
Install marsh treatment areas
Plant woody riparian buffer
Restore/enhance jurisdictional wetlands adjacent to Site streams
Provide surface roughness and reduce compaction through deep
ripping/plowing.
Restore overbank flooding by constructing channels at historic
floodplain elevation.
Construct stable channels with appropriate substrate
Plant woody riparian buffer to provide organic matter and shade
Construct new channel at historic floodplain elevation to restore
overbank flows
Plant woody riparian buffer
Protect riparian buffers with a perpetual conservation easement
Restore/enhance jurisdictional wetlands adjacent to Site streams
Stabilize stream banks
Install in -stream structures
• BHR not to exceed 1.2
• Document four overbank events in separate monitoring years
• Attain Wetland Hydrology Success Criteria
• Attain Vegetation Success Criteria
• Conservation Easement recorded
• Cross-section measurements indicate a stable channel with
appropriate substrate
• Visual documentation of stable channels and structures
• BHR not to exceed 1.2
• ER of 2.2 or greater
• < 10% change in BHR and ER in any given year
• Attain Vegetation Success Criteria
• Attain Wetland Hydrology Success Criteria
• Attain Vegetation Success Criteria
• Cross-section measurement indicate a stable channel with
appropriate substrate
• Visual documentation of stable channels and in -stream
structures.
• Attain Wetland Hydrology Success Criteria
• Attain Vegetation Success Criteria
• Conservation Easement recorded
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site page 16
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

1.8 Quality Control
Our core business at RS is full -delivery ecosystem restoration (usually within the context of compensatory
mitigation); as such, our projects are repeatedly scrutinized, and more importantly, our compensation is tied directly
to project quality. Thus, quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) are of the utmost importance to our
compensation and reputation.
The RS QA/QC program is made up of a broad range of measures, both general and specific, to ensure that all
deliverables submitted to the contracting organization meet projected schedules, follow appropriate formats, and
comply with applicable laws, regulations, and permits.
General Measures:
- Staff Qualifications — RS employs personnel who are trained and/or experienced in varied specific aspects
of environmental restoration. Examples include regulatory affairs, permitting, design, geomorphology,
chemistry, biology, soils, Geographic Informational Systems (GIS), invasive species management.
Field Training — Staff members attend periodic workshops for training in pertinent topics to improve and/or
maintain necessary skills related to stream/wetland design and construction. Restoration Systems
periodically holds internal workshops and field study days lead by experienced staff members to ensure
that the team of Project Managers is up-to-date on current practices and technology. Staff members have
also attended stream and wetland restoration workshops, including those held by North Carolina State
University's Stream Restoration Institute (SRI), focusing on proper procedures related to stream restoration
practices.
Internal Experience - Office staff members periodically attend workshops lead by professional organizations
in order to remain current on best practices. All projects are backed by a support team. Senior level
professionals are consulted at all times to successfully guide the process from start to finish.
Specific Measures:
- Project Implementation - The core of RS's project implementation QA/QC program utilizes points of task
changeover within the restoration process. Procedural verification steps at each of these changeover points
provide opportunities for control and correction, minimizing waste while ensuring a project meets its
objectives.
- Quality Control - Ecosystem restoration projects
o Site evaluation
■ identify and document site constraints that will affect restoration objectives, design, and
construction
o Design evaluation
■ verify design meets objectives and is practicable given construction constraints and site-
specific conditions
o Construction plan evaluation
■ ensure construction plan is consistent with permit conditions and efficiently implements
design (i.e., limits number of phases)
o Construction environmental and permit compliance
■ routine inspection of construction activities to ensure environmental compliance and that
all work is performed according to specifications and limitations of acquired permits
o Design and construction reconciliation
■ reconcile construction drawings with implementation routinely, especially before
transitioning between construction phases
o Construction drawing and as -built reconciliation
verify the accuracy of as -built drawings and reconcile with construction drawings, noting
deviations and their explanations
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site page 17
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

o Site close out
confirm planting was performed with appropriate species composition and density
check that all excess construction materials have been removed and all
features/structures are in a completed condition
Assignment of specific tasks and responsibilities — Specific tasks that occur throughout the life of a project
are assigned to specific individuals who are trained and/or experienced to perform that task. All
arrangements are overseen by senior management.
Project implementation QA/QC program is a collaborative effort between the Project Manager (PM) and
Construction Manager (CM). Either the project manager or the construction manager (or both) will be on-site during
construction hours to ensure environmental compliance and the appropriate implementation of the project's design.
- Deliverable Preparation — a series of measures are taken in the preparation of deliverables to ensure each
product meets the expectations of the customer in a timely manner.
Checklists and Templates — RS staff has developed internal guidelines, checklists and templates for
the preparation of all deliverables to ensure compliance with appropriate requirements and
schedules. Checklists are created to ensure that all required paperwork is included when
assembling submittal packages and for easy delegation of workflow.
Peer Review of Documents — All submitted deliverables are reviewed by several qualified
individuals. Once a document has been generated internally or received from an assigned
consultant, it is entered into a three -round process of internal review. It is first reviewed by staff
members with experience in editing, and then the document is passed on to staff members with
specific expertise in a given area to further ensure accuracy. Finally, where applicable, maps and
diagrams are reviewed by an experienced GIS Manager for accuracy. Once all comments have
been made, the document is edited and distributed for a final round of review by staff members
and the assigned Project Manager before packaging.
o Project Managers' Meetings — All managers meet weekly to update company management on the
status of each project, including the projected future timeline of tasks.
o Project Coordination and Tracking — Restoration Systems' Project Manager and Construction
Manager utilize appropriate computer software to produce a Gantt chart for each project. These
charts graphically display the schedule for each project and are used to identify potential delays,
overload points, and other issues related to schedules. Each chart is reviewed weekly at the
Project Managers' meeting.
1.9 Summary
Proposed Mitigation: 5264 SMUs & 4.7WMUs (calculated in accordance with RFP #16-007704)
Site: Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site
Location: Union County
River Basin: Catawba
USGS Cataloging Unit: 03050103
NCDWQ Subbasin: 03-08-38
USGS 14 -Digit Cataloging Number: 03050103030030
Targeted Local Watershed: Yes
303d Listed: No
Best Use Classification: C
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site page 18
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

1.10 References
Griffith, G.E., J.M. Omernik, J.A. Comstock, M.P. Schafale, W.H. McNab, D.R. Lenat, T.F. MacPherson, J.B. Glover, and
V.B. Shelbourne. 2002. Ecoregions of North Carolina and South Carolina. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia.
Harman, W.A., G.D. Jennings, J.M. Patterson, D.R. Clinton, L.A. O'Hara, A. Jessup, R. Everhart. 1999. Bankfull
Hydraulic Geometry Relationships for North Carolina Streams. N.C. State University, Raleigh, North Carolina.
Lee, M.T., R.K. Peet, S.D. Roberts, and T.R. Wentworth. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation. Version
4.2. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Ecosystem Enhancement Program. Raleigh,
North Carolina.
Leopold, L.B. 1994. A View of the River. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, MA. 298 pp.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2009. Small Streams Biocriteria Development. Available:
http://porta I. ncden r.org/c/document_l i brary/get_fi le?uuid=2d54ad23-0345-4d6e-82fd-
04005f48eaa7&grou pld=38364
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ). 2018a. Final 2016 Category 5 Assessments -303(d)
List (online). Available:
https:Hfiles.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Planning/TM DL/303d/2016/2016_NC_Category_5_303d_list.pdf
(December 14, 2018).
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ). 2018b. Draft 2018 North Carolina 303(d) List
(online). Available:
https:Hfiles.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Planning/TM DL/303d/2018/2018-DRAFT-NC-303-d--ListwCover.pdf
(December 14, 2018).
North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). 2013. River Basin Classification Schedule: Catawba (online).
Available:
https:Hfiles.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Planning/CSU/Surface%2OWater/River%2OBasin%2OWater%2OQualit
y%20Classifications%20as%20of%20Dec%209%202013/Catawba_Hydro_order.pdf (December 14, 2018).
North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). 2016. Standard Operating Procedures for Collection and
Analysis of Benthic Macroinvertebrates (Version 5.0). (online). Available:
https:Hfiles.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Environmental%2OSciences/BAU/NCDW RMacroinvertebrate-SOP-
Fe b ru a ry%202016_fi n a 1. p d f
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP 2007). Lower Catawba River Basin Restoration Priorities
2007 (online). Available:
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Mitigation % 20Services/Watershed_Planni ng/Catawba_River_Basin/RBRP_2007 % 20Low
er%20CAT_032013%20Final.pdf. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh
(December 18, 2018).
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 Stream Functional Assessment Team. (NC SFAT 2015). N.C. Stream Assessment Method (NC SAM)
User Manual. Version 2.1.
North Carolina Wetland Functional Assessment Team (NC WFAT) 2010. N.C. Wetland Assessment Method (NC
WAM) User Manual. Version 4.1.
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site page 19
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

Rosgen, D. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology (Publisher). Pagosa Springs, Colorado
Rosgen, D. 2009. A Practical Method of Computing Streambank Erosion Rate (online). Available: http://www.u-s-
c.org/htmI/documents/Erosionrates.pdf.
Rosgen, D. 2011. Estimating Sediment Loads using the Bank Assessment of Non -point source Consequences of
Sediment (BANCS). Watershed Assessment of River Stability and Sediment Supply (WARSSS). Hagerstown,
Maryland.
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina: Third
Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. Raleigh, North Carolina.
Stormwater Manager's Resource Center (SMRC). 2016. The Simple Method to Calculate Urban Stormwater Loads.
Available:
http://www.stormwatercenter.net/mon itoring%20a nd%20assessment/si m ple%20meth/si m ple. htm
Unites States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2012. 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). 1992. Natural Resources Conservation Service. Agricultural Waste
Management Handbook. Available at
http://www. n res. usda.gov/wps/portal/n res/detail/national/tech n ica I/nra/d ma/?cid=nres143_014211.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1996. Soil Survey of Union County, North Carolina. Soil
Conservation Service.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2015. Animal Manure Management (NRCS) available at
htt p://www. n res. u sd a .gov/wps/p o rta I/n res/d eta i I/n hj/tec h n i ca I/cp/cta/?
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2017. Web Soil Survey (online). Available:
http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx [December 14, 2018].
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2018. Endangered Species, Threatened Species, Federal Species of
Concern, and Candidate Species, Union County, North Carolina (online). Available:
https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/union.html [December 17, 2018].
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site page 20
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

APPENDIX A
FIGURES
Figure 1. Site Location
Figure 2. Hydrologic Unit Map
Figure 3. Topography and Drainage Area
Figure 4. Existing Conditions
Figure 5. Proposed Conditions
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site Appendices
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

Axiom ErtivTrQnmsefl187, inc.
Prepared for:
00
r+ora
IF
,f
,r ffj� Pa\rkJwood School Road;,.RESTORATION
Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic 7f' r
Society, -cubed
Project:
Sao
t � - �-�i. � .- NESBIT
O
a
Monroe �� r o • MITIGATION SITE
-
r'
I '
, ll
1
i
75 s c l� • Union County, NC
F:
t- L
--
.
y ,ea d + Title:
t
Y7� Nesbif d
_ a I
d�.
--
° - BANK SITE
rr-_"� �� ✓' r� LOCATION
2004
I 'eT r
�. zoo
rawn
t ,
D
4
Legend
KRJ
Nesbit Easement 18.1 ac
X.-
Date:
! NCDOT Roads DEC 2018
J " x Scale:
USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Map (Waxhaw and Unity, NC Quads) 1:20,000
522
UNl61a fr r''�,'r i '� ,•"I 'y�^(y -4, ,+
— Copyright © 2013 Nati` nal Geogr [) i -
JSoc ety a cubed
Project No.:
18-002.08
FIGURE
1

27
r�
cer
3u tairl M nt fly'-
F,Fs a
Alfai�dR�n i lle
29
Irno
: arta
KnobGaston
r 'kkwieipar
1
_—
r:. Reed G lJme
Historic S
LC
24 1_ _
—Midland
�1
�Bowling Green
c—lover _ _a s ` A A LL
>r
h For it ok Cr
74
ii-
� k h � . lnd'rVarr trail
ed Hill
ir
io
t 1�' Fort Mill
_ rk = Rot# Hili Y CCA
Axicm Erivrorimsenial, Pnc.
Prepared for:
Project:
NESBIT
f MITIGATION SITE
Union County, NC
Title:
HYDROLOGIC
UNIT MAP
Drawn by:
ll - -- KRJ
21 i7
w _ � -- 4 Mineral Sp gs % Date:
pf hock H1l l / DEC 2018
� Y�Waxlww
e 218 _ 7� p , ♦ �. Scale:
}� �► t 1:240,000
Legend ' Project No.:
9�}' _ 18-002.08
Nesbit Easement = 18.1 ac
�C. Van Vlyck
USGS Hydrologic Unit 03050103 � catawt}a - Location of Nesbit Mitigation FIGURE
Site within USGS Hydrologic
14 Digit Hydrologic Unit Boundaries• V,' �.! �_a1 Unit and Targeted Local
Targeted Local Watersheds Watershed 03050103030030 '
0 2.5 5 10 15
Miles 7+r`r r ...�� e_o
— Copyright:© 2014 DeLorme

Legend -�—
a
Nesbit Easement = 18.1 ac
Glen Branch Drainage Area = 1.25 sq mi (798.8 ac)
UT -1 Drainage Area = 0.28 sq mi (176.2 ac)
_ UT -2 Drainage Area = 0.07 sq mi (.6 ac)
UT -3 Drainage Area = 0.03 sq mi (2121.0 ac)
4�
N
0 ?
0 1,000 2,000 4,000 6,000
Feet
-- - r - _--
-a-
Prepared for
Project:
+� NESBIT
r �, • MITIGATION SITE
Union County, NC
i f I
Title:
TOPOGRAPHY
AND
DRAINAGE AREA
! r
12
Copyri=
1
Drawn by:
KRJ
Date:
DEC 2018
Scale:
1:13,000
Project No.:
18-002.08
FIGURE
3

APPENDIX B
STREAM & WETLAND DATA
Cross Sections
NCSAM Forms
NCDWQStream Identification Forms
NCWAM Form
BEHI & NBS
Nutrient Model
Soil Boring Log
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site Appendices
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

Nesbit Site - XS 1 Riffle --
98.5
98
97.5
F 97
9 96.5
w 96
95.5
95
94.5
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Width from River Left to Right (ft)
of instrument
notes
elevation I I bankfull I too of
dimensions
8.7
8.5
1.7
2.5
50.0
x -section area
1 1.0
9.3
0.9
8.2
5.9
Id mean
width
wet P
d max
h d radii
bank ht
w/dratio
W Flood rone area
lentratio
hydraulics
0.0
velocity ftlsec
0.0
discharge rate, C2 cfs
0.00
shear stress Ibs/fts
0.00
shear velocity ft/sec
0.000
unit stream power lbs/ft/sec
0.00
Froude number
0.0
friction factor u/u`
0,0
threshold grain size mm
check from channel material
0
measured D84 mm
0.0
relative rou hness 1 0.0 fric. factor
0.000
Mannin 's n from channel material
101
100
99
98
w 97
96
95
94
Nesbit Site - XS 2 Riffle --
0 5 10 15 20
Width from River Left to Right (ft)
height of instrument ftXIEZMI
omit distance FS FS FS W fpa channel Mannii
notes pt. (ft) (ft) elevation bankfull too of bank (ft) slope (% 1 "n"
25
dimensions
17.5
9.3
2.8
x -section area
1 1.9
11.7
1.5
4.9
5.4
Id mean
width
d max
ad,3.0
bank ht
tio50.0
LA
W Flood rone area
tio
hydraulics
0.0
velocity ft/sec
0.0
discharge rate, Q cfs
0.00
shear stress Ibs/fts
0.00
shear velocity ft/sec
0.000
unit stream power(lbs/ft/sec)
0.00
Froude number
0.0
friction factor u/u`
0.9
threshold grain size mm
check from channel material
0
measured D84 mm
0.0
relative rou hness 0.0 fric. factor
0.000
1 Mannin 's n from channel material

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Nesbit Site - UT1 Date of Assessment
8/18/18
Stream Category Pa2 Assessor Name/Organization AXE/WGL
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
YES
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
HIGH
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
HIGH
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
MEDIUM
(4) Floodplain Access
HIGH
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
LOW
(4) Microtopography
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
(4) Channel Stability
HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport
HIGH
(4) Stream Geomorphology
HIGH
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(1) Water Quality
LOW
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
MEDIUM
(2) In -stream Habitat
HIGH
(3) Baseflow
HIGH
(3) Substrate
HIGH
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
(3) In -stream Habitat
HIGH
(2) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
(3) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
LOW
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
Overall
MEDIUM

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Nesbit Site - Glen Br Upper Date of Assessment
8/18/18
Stream Category Pa3 Assessor Name/Organization AXE/WGL
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
YES
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
LOW
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
LOW
(4) Floodplain Access
MEDIUM
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
LOW
(4) Microtopography
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(4) Channel Stability
LOW
(4) Sediment Transport
MEDIUM
(4) Stream Geomorphology
LOW
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(1) Water Quality
LOW
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(3) Baseflow
HIGH
(3) Substrate
MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
(3) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
LOW
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
Overall
LOW

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Nesbit Site - Glen Br lower Date of Assessment
8/18/18
Stream Category Pa3 Assessor Name/Organization AXE/WGL
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
YES
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
LOW
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
LOW
(4) Floodplain Access
MEDIUM
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
LOW
(4) Microtopography
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(4) Channel Stability
LOW
(4) Sediment Transport
MEDIUM
(4) Stream Geomorphology
LOW
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(1) Water Quality
LOW
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(3) Baseflow
HIGH
(3) Substrate
MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
(3) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
LOW
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
Overall
LOW

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
�rl - I (-11 I)
Date: l♦ 1g1
it
Projec=te: j,.. v, r t o. n is l
latitude: 3 y, S 4 y 8
r
Evaluator. j<<f ,.. .ie�,
County: UM.�j
Longitude: _gp , C 2.3 2
Total Points:
Stream Determination (cigiwarreh
Other W a s
Stream Is at least Wemiltfent 7 3
if a 19 orperannial itt 2 30"
Ephemeral Intermittent ((¢¢even
e.g. Quad Name:
. 164 1
A. Geomorphology subtotal
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1' Continuity of channel bad and bank
0
1
2
0 0.5 1 1.5
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
3
3 In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step1ml,
ripple -pool uence
0
1
112
3
4 Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
24. Amphibians D
5 Activelrellct floodplain
0
1
2
3
6 Depositional bars or benches
0
t
7z
3
7 Recent alluvial deposits
0
2
3
B. Headcuts
,.
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
Sketch:
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.
11 Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes
3
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = -9--)
12. Presence of Baseflow
0 1 2
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
1 2 3
14. Leaf litter
1 1 0.5 0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0 1 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0 0.5 1 1.5
17. Soil4w sed evidence of high water table?
No = 0 Yes .
C. Biot Subtotal = 5
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 0
1
2
3
21 Aquatic Mollusks 4
2
3
22, Fish
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
U
1
1.5
24. Amphibians D
0.
1
1.5
25. Algae 0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Weiland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; DHL =1.5
Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identlfled using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: 1 Jr• �,. (i �, 1 - �� (-x• • I ..
,.
Sketch:
1

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
1,4 -&j.., 1)&J. -t
Date: iZ + I� lu
ProjectlSite- Or9v;l jM k
Latitude: 38 13 (►GO
Evaluator. j��n �., , Av;�,�.
County: �;,,,r,
Longitude: 60 ?01
Total Points:
Stream 1s at kart rntermment
Stream Deis (circle one)
Other tt)j y -Aa",;
If z 19 or rental If a 30•
Ephemeral,1nitenntgok Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = 14 -
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
18 Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
15. Sediment on plants or debris
2 Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
1 1.5
3 In -channel structure. ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ri of §Nuance
0
/
2
3
4 Particle size of stream substrate
0
N
2
3
5. Activelrelict floodplain
0
1.5
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
26. Wedand plants in stneatnbed
2
3
7 Recent alluvial deposits
0
7
2
3
8 Headcuts
0
ED
2
3
9 Grade control
0
0.5
1
1
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.
11 Second or greater order channel
No =1]
Yes = 3
"artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroloov (Subtotal = -7,S )
12. Presence of Baseftow
0 t
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0 '1
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5 1
0. 0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0 .5
1 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or plies
0 0.
1 1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes t3j
C. Bioloav (Subtotal =
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20. Macxobenthos (note diversity and abundance) %
1
2
3
21 Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22. Fish 9
0.5
1
15
23. Crayfish
0.5
1
1.5
24 Amphibians
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
05
1
1.5
26. Wedand plants in stneatnbed
FACW = 0 75; OBL = 1.5
Other = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

NC DWO Stream Identification Form Version 4.1 t
Data: I z I q`, q
Projectlsits: O is 6 4 UT 2
Latitude: 3,f - 8
Evaluator. ZZ ,, AtO.Y.1
County: onb,t
Longitude: -ao. (,S6-8
Total Points:
Stream tied (circle one)
Other u/ #� )rW
Shear, is at least intermittent ?jo
if? 19 or rennial if a 30'
Ephemeral ntermltte Perennial
P
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = 15 �
Arent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1° Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ri le Dol uence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Activelrelict floodplain
0
0.5
M
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
0.5
2
3
7 Recent alluvial deposits
0
2
3
S Headcuts
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0.5
1
1.5
10_ Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.
11, Second or greater order channel
No
0
Yes = 3
Sketch:
-artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions In manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = q 1
12. Presence of Baseflow
0 1
2 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
1
2 3
14. Leaf litter
1. 1
0.5 0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0 0.5
1 15
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0 0.5
1 1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes 3
C. Biolociv (Subtotal = 5 )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
130
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
i1L
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
1
1.5
26 Welland plants in strearnbed
FACW = 0.75;
OSL = 1.5 Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be Identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: c .l a W L I. -IT Irs[�•!j
',
rlo•. 5 ev4cs1. �jP
nK*-, 4to,rr
Sketch:

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name WAM #1 Date of Assessment
12/18/18
Wetland Type Bottomland Hardwood Forest Assessor Name/Organization
Jernigan/Axiom
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
Particulate Change
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Rating Summary
Condition
Function Sub -function Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition
MEDIUM
Sub -surface Storage and
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
Retention Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Hydrology
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Habitat
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Soluble Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Physical Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
LOW
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Vegetation Composition
Condition
LOW
Function Rating Summary
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Habitat
Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating MEDIUM

Site
Nesbit Steam Mitigation Site
Stream
Glen Br
Bank Length
8370
Observers
WGL
Date
18 -Dec -18
Station
Bank
BEHI
NBS
Erosion Rate Length
Bank Height
Erosion
1 80
left
Low
Low
0
80
2.5
0.0
2 675
left
VH
Low
0.6
595
3
1071.0
3 885
left
Low
Low
0
210
1.5
0.0
4 1555
left
VH
Low
0.6
670
3
1206.0
5 1815
left
Low
Low
0
260
3
0.0
6 2050
left
High
Low
0.1
235
2
47.0
7 4185
left
Low
Low
0
2135
2
0.0
8
9 80
right
Low
Low
0
80
2.5
0.0
10 675
right
VH
Low
0.6
595
3
1071.0
11 885
right
Low
Low
0
210
1.5
0.0
12 1555
right
VH
Low
0.6
670
3
1206.0
13 1815
right
Low
Low
0
260
3
0.0
14 2050
right
High
Low
0.1
235
2
47.0
15 4185
right
Low
Low
0
2135
2
0.0
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Sum erosion sub -totals for each BEHI/NBS
Total Erosion (ft3/yr)
4648.0
Divide total erosion (ft3) by 27
Total Erosion
(yd/yr)
172.1
Multiply Total
erosion (yard3) by 1.3
Total Erosion
(tons/yr)
223.8
Erosion per unit length
Total Erosion (Tons/yr/ft)
0.027

Site Nesbit Steam Mitigation Site
Stream LIT 1
Bank Length 1802
Observers WGL
Date 18 -Dec -18
Station Bank BEHI NBS
Erosion Rate
Length Bank Height
Erosion
1 741 right Low Low
0
741 2
0.0
2 901 right High Low
0.1
160 2.5
40.0
3
4 741 left Low Low
0
741 2
0.0
5 901 left High Low
0.1
160 2.5
40.0
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Sum erosion sub -totals for each BEHI/NBS
Total Erosion (ft3/yr)
80.0
Divide total erosion (ft3) by 27
Total Erosion (yd/yr)
3.0
Multiply Total erosion (yard3) by 1.3
Total Erosion (tons/yr)
3.9
Erosion per unit length
Total Erosion (Tons/yr/ft)
0.002

Site Nesbit Steam Mitigation Site
Stream LIT 2
Bank Length 400
Observers WGL
Date 18 -Dec -18
Station Bank BEHI
NBS
Erosion Rate
Length Bank Height
Erosion
1 40 left High
Mod
0.15
40 2
12.0
2 60 left High
High
0.2
20 3
12.0
3 80 left Low
Low
0
20 1
0.0
4 200 left Mod
Mod
0.05
120 3
18.0
5
6 40 right High
Mod
0.15
40 2
12.0
7 80 right Mod
Low
0.02
40 1.5
1.2
8 200 right High
Mod
0.15
120 2.5
45.0
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Sum erosion sub -totals for each BEHI/NBS
Total Erosion (ft3/yr)
100.2
Divide total erosion (ft3) by 27
Total Erosion (yd/yr)
3.7
Multiply Total erosion (yard3) by 1.3
Total Erosion (tons/yr)
4.8
Erosion per unit length
Total Erosion (Tons/yr/ft)
0.012

BEHIMBS Summary
Stream Reach
Erosion Rate
(tons/year)
Glen Br
223.8
UT 1
3.9
UT 2
4.8
Total
232.5

Nesbit
Land Use Nutrient Model
Woods Minimal Nutrients
Concentration
Land Use %
Total
Rainfall
Stream Length
Runnoff
N (mg/1)
Pasture
N (Ibs)
Annual
Site Buffer Width
0
2.2
Woods
0
0
Commercial/IndustrialOw
0
2.3
Row Crop 100
0
0
Site Area (ft sq) 784080
0
3.0
Urban
0
0
must total 100 100
0.0 1
0.0 Total Urban N and P
Number
N inputs
P inputs
Total
Total
Land Use Characteristics
of Animals
lbs/au/yr
lbs/au/yr
N (Ibs)
P (Ibs)
Pasture Beef
113
40
0
0
Dairy
164
26
0
0
Pig
153
58
0
0
Horse
102
40
0
0
fert/ac
60
45
0
0
0
1 0 ITotal Pasture Nand P
%
N inputs
P inputs
Total
Total
Row Crop Area
Ibs/ac/yr
Ibs/ac/yr
N
P
Row Crop Corn
20
20
360
360
Cotton
20
20
0
0
Soybeans
it
0
15
0
0
Hay Fescue
50
45
0
0
Hay Bermuda
70
45
0
0
must total 100
100
1
360
1 360 ITotal Row Crop N and P
Woods Minimal Nutrients
Notes: Residential Assumes 25 % Impervious Surfac
Commercial/Industrial Assumes 75% Impervous Surface
Roadway Assumes 100% Impervious Surface
Annual Load (Ibs) = 0.226*Annual Runoff (inches)*Concentration (mg/I)*Acres
Total Nutrients Removed within Easement
Total N Removed (Ibs/yr) 360
Total P Removed (Ibs/yr) 360
Concentration
Concentration
Total
Total
%Area
Runnoff
N (mg/1)
P (mg/1)
N (Ibs)
P (Ibs)
Urban Residential
0
2.2
0.4
0
0
Commercial/IndustrialOw
0
2.3
0.3
0
0
Roadway
0
3.0
0.5
0
0
0.0 1
0.0 Total Urban N and P
Notes: Residential Assumes 25 % Impervious Surfac
Commercial/Industrial Assumes 75% Impervous Surface
Roadway Assumes 100% Impervious Surface
Annual Load (Ibs) = 0.226*Annual Runoff (inches)*Concentration (mg/I)*Acres
Total Nutrients Removed within Easement
Total N Removed (Ibs/yr) 360
Total P Removed (Ibs/yr) 360

AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
SOIL BORING LOG
Date:
12/18/2018
Project/Site:
Nesbit Mitigation Site
County, State:
Union County, NC
Sampling Point/
fine sandy loam
Coordinates:
Soil Profile (35.892134,-80.655905)
Investigator:
W. Grant Lewis
Soil Series:
Worsham
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
Notes: Location is shown on
Figure 4.
Matrix
Depth (inches) Color %
Mottlin€
Color
%
Texture
0-9 10 YR 5/3 90
10 YR 4/6
5
fine sandy loam
10 YR 6/4
5
9-11 10 YR 6/1 100
fine sandy loam
11+ 2.5 YR 6/2 70
2.5 YR 6/3
20
sandy clay
10 YR 5/8
10
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number: 1233
Signature: (0 &'�o
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis

APPENDIX C
NHP REPORT
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site Appendices
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

P,
t t t t 1 1� 1`I t 11 11 I t \ I7 1 1 ♦ ♦ 1 t 1-► ♦ t ♦ t t t t ♦ ♦ ♦ 1..I'7 ♦ t ♦ t ♦ 1 1'I ♦ t ♦ ♦ 1.. '7 ♦ 1 \' I11111110
♦ t ♦ ♦ 11111
♦ \ 7 t ♦ ♦ t \ 7 1 11 1'I \' I \-► ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ 1 1 \'7 ♦ ♦ 1 1 ♦ \'I t l' / t ♦ \ / ♦ 1 1 1 ♦ ♦ 1' I ♦ t
I�llll 11151�11��11,!►1 IIN5�fQ�llllhlll,!I I111IIp11 I11151►1�15111111►11.11,!,Il IIIi115o11,�I"I 151 D111111!11011111 ►111111111111,11 11i1II,►1 P, "I'll 111III 1!.�111111►11,�1111►,111.1�1��1I,111F"�1►,!.111151a111N11
11 111111►i�I
II II 111'.1 1. /111 Il hill► ►.1. it 1.1�11�
I ►.111111 II ►5 ►1`,�1/1►;�',1111 I11
►� ►.111111►.1111� I I I
►:4►; 4►JII►J► 101H1►111111111114►1►; I►:1IJII►:IIDJ►:I►.1VI1611t►; II►;01L 11I1►1IEP11►11►; ►1►:1111:1►1q; il,:1►�1011Al'Pi ►:II ►:1
lI111111:111►;t; ►1I11i1111I II IIII III►: 0►\,11 ►;I}I►\,11►j111151111'.111 11,,11►\,►II(1,�111►1► Ii 11111, 1111111Ij"l11I111111111
11 El; ►;11 ►� ►:� 11 11 CO ►II 111 11►11M1 fI 11 ►:1►;�;1;� 111181 /�
11 1111 1111 1111111111 1�1 11111111.►1 II II II111•11;1;1 11111;11111 11 111111 111111 II 1'.11111.11'.11',!1
►1 I I P, 15 1111111111111►;1I 1 11111111►; 111r,111i i 111/1011 1111115 I I I E12 1 ►;�11► I I ►) i 5 1 ►;11/11111 ►;�11 I P,1111111s1111;11 1 Io1i2I I I I ►,i2►II ►;1101.12 111510
E rl "4l t1 ',II111 P, 15 11111 I P,1 5 11 IP, lIlIvvI I ll61r" 1111111" 1,1111 11 P, 15 111 II V,iI I ll Ill 11111111 11 111111111111111111111111111 111111111
♦♦1,r vrr vsll•1n •11♦ cnr1111rn .r ♦♦ ♦1cr 11n111111ra�r ♦1♦1n ♦♦1r111r1111r as♦♦♦♦1r
1111 1 PI I!„I�111,111111� 11”,1111111111 1! pl l 1111 Npl,!,11� 11 11 111 1!I 11 l�l�211111I 11 llllpl,l,I 11 11 N�11�1��11111111111111�1 N 111 111!I11111111111
III.I►:I@I I►; 121►1:15
11►1/1 1 @10 116111110 F11 10110 1111111
0 11 2TI I II l /1►;�"Ill 11 /115 11 EII II l
1151 ►51►ro ►:11;111; 011111t511;111t5I ►.�
1'511;11111 ►'.l 11 11 ►� ►� 1151
►1►1►1 I
I I II ►/ I ►;'I ►1 ►1.I
. ►11 I ►; IIiII ►1►1111''1 I ►1 I ►1
1:1 1:11;121:1 111QVI1:11;1111111@11
........ ............. , ., ...1, ....1, ........1, .1, 1111...,, . , �, ... r..... r 1111 , �, .1, ..
I II II I I I 1
11 11 11 1 1 I I I I I 11 I I ,I I I
1 1 1 1 1 11 1. 1 1 11 11 1 11 11 (11 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 11 11 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1
il� �Ui �I� �lill�al� �lil� I� I Ali .lily i� Ieli �I . 1 1 111111 1 11 11 1 11 1 1 11 1 11 11 1 11 1 1. 11 1 11. 11 111 1 1 1 1 1
1 1111111 .1 ;1r �1 1� Q'I1 11i�n11 1 1 �I�r t,,'I 111' t t 11 111 11,11 111 1 11 1 1 111 I11r ♦ ♦ ♦ � ♦
111...111,11111 1,„ � 1111 1 111 ,.;1111. ,;,11. ,1. 111 ,;,111111,;..;,1 1111111. , .11...11, . 11.11 111..1...11111111 11

w µaY
+'3
�tl
�a
WyhM eR
N
W+E
5
December 24, 2418
Project Boundary
Buffered Project Boundary
NMP Natural Area (NHNA)
NCNHDE-7778: Nesbit
-,—.4 !Kru•.. -
M
M
K
+'3
m
6�
Y
�g�Y 6 f� L peY
1:25,712
0 0.2 0.4 0.8 mi
0 0.35 0.7 1.4 km
Sources: Esri, HERE, Garrrin, Idar vp, inownere P Corp-. GE6CO3 USGS,
FAO, NPS, NRGAN, GeoBaSe, IG N, Kadasler NL, grdnano9 Surrey, Esri Japan,
MLTI, Esri Chula (Hong "). svdsstopo. G Qyen$OwWap wntribulors, and
the GIS User Car MN

APPENDIX D
MEMORANDUM OF OPTION AGREEMENT
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site Appendices
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

FILED
UNION COUNTY, NC
CRYSTAL D. GILLIARD
REGISTER OF DEEDS
FILED Jan 07, 2019
AT 09:12 am
BOOK 07294
START PAGE 0707
END PAGE 0712
INSTRUMENT # 00326
EXCISE TAX (None)
KSE
�u: Yl�o. +moo rfcll ►?•t5�o�aii�v, 9i�2w►S . Ilul I-i�ih45 `X, 4t ZIl wll� Zvi 2'ltev�
Prepared by
NORTH CAROLINA
UNION COUNTY
MEMORANDUM OF
CONTRACT TO PURCHASE
A CONSERVATION EASEMENT
RESTORATION SYSTEMS, LLC, as Buyer, and BUFORD TOWNSHIP FARMS, LLC,
a North Carolina limited liability company as Seller, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars
($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are
hereby acknowledged, have entered into an Agreement for Purchase and Sale of a Conservation
Easement, to purchase and sell that certain property of Seller containing 18 ± acres located in
Jackson and Buford Townships, Union County, North Carolina, as described in Exhibit A and
shown on Exhibit A-1 attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
(a) The provisions set forth in a written Agreement for Purchase and Sale of Real
Property dated the OLI. day of January 2019, between the parties, are hereby incorporated in
this Memorandum by reference. The referenced Agreement has an examination period of eighteen
(18) months from the execution of said Agreement.
WITNESS our hands an seals to this Memorandum of Agreement for Purchase and Sale
of Real Property, this the 31 day of January 2019.
BUYER:
RESTO lei SYSTE^ LLC
By: (SEAL)
N
Page 1 of 5

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF W.
I certify that the following person personally appeared before me this day,
acknowledging to me that he signed the foregoing document:
(Name of Person(s) Appearing before Notary)
WITNESS my hand and official seal, this 2 day of January, 2019.
(Official Seal)
.CAN *i'0
My commission expires;
Page 2 of 5

WITNESS our hands and seals to this Memorandum of Agreement for Purchase and Sale
of a Conservation Easement, this the _�(G* day of January, 2019.
SELLER:
BUFCJRD TOWNSHIP FARMS, LLC
By: loil° (SEAL)
Name: ` tl t
Title: Ma
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF � '.
I certify that the following persons personally appeared before me this day, each
acknowledging to me that he or she signed the foregoing document:
,kct�4
WITNESS my hand and official seal, this &4 day of January, 2019.
-1 -17
Notary's Official Signature
(Official Seal)
Notary's Printed or Typed Name
My commission expires: 7 ce -7o..L
,, Ef
fid J
ah
y
/67 Gor,Aea5.�
Page 3 of 5

EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Attached to and made a part of that certain Agreement for Purchase and Sale of a
Conservation Easement dated January Ste, 2019, by and between RESTORATION
SYSTEMS, LLC and BUFORD TOWNSHIP FARMS, LLC, a North Carolina limited liability
company.
Seller's Property is a fee simple interest in the entire Property being located in Jackson and Buford
Townships in Union County, North Carolina, described as follows:
Parcel 1: Approximately 151.54 acres as conveyed to Seller in Deed recorded in Deed Book
7279, Page 643 of the Union County Public Registry, which property is also described in that
certain deed recorded in Book 721, Page 225, Union County Public Registry, and also known as
Parcel Number 04335004.
The Easement Property is a portion of the total Property including approximately 18 acres. Boundaries are
indicated on Exhibit A-1 attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
The final legal description of the property will be determined by a survey prepared by a licensed
surveyor selected and paid by Buyer.
Page 4 of 5

EXHIBIT "A -I"
Map Depicting Conservation Easement(s)
Attached to and matte a part of that certain Agreement for Purchase and Sale of
Conservation Easements dated January &'�^ 2019, by and between RESTORATION
SYSTEMS, LLC ("Buyer") and BUFORD TOWNSHIP FARMS, LLC ("Seller").
[Map follows on next page.]
Page 5 of 5

BUFORD TOWNSHIP FARMS, LLC PARCEL
PARCEL #04335004
DEED BK 7279 PG 643
+0 *1vNPFPwqPR1v- ° —
"�„ .�►
nv` tura crossing
at prabaur:dary
M
�
10 ji
+�
60' ford crossing
excluded From
easement
's
21 j
a
-
r
THIS MAP MAY NOT BE A CERTIFIED SURVEY AND HAS j
NOT BEEN REVIEWED BY A LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL Y AND HAS NOT
AGENCY FOR COMPLIANCE WITH ANY APPLICABLE
VMENT AGENCY
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND HAS NOT BLE LAND
BEEN REVIEWED FOR COMPLIANCE WITH RECORDING
'
xs
REQUIREMENTS FOR PLATS (G.S. 47-30(n)) E [�i • it�l t lob �G` E r h bar gr i •5, E 1Ri b s d5..
r
r©,Rtp�I� .. nel a �1
tJs r rt�u ,+ty
FIConservation Easement Boundary = +/- 18 acres N
ExhibitA-1
Approximate Easement Property
Seller's Property
Feel
0 195 390 780
UNION COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA
1,170 1,560

APPENDIX E
LANDOWNER AUTHORIZATION FORM
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site Appendices
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

LANDOWNER AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRITION:
Deed Book: 7279 Page: 643 County: Union
Parcel ID Number: 04335004
Street Address: 4321 Nesbit Road
Monroe, NC 28112
Property Owner (please print): BUFORD TOWNSHIP FARMS, LLC
The undersigned, registered property owner(s) of the above property, do hereby authorize
Matthew Harrell of Restoration Systems, LLC
to take all actions necessary for the evaluation of the property as a potential stream and wetland
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: PO Box 429. Monroe. NC 28110
(if different from above)
Property Owner Telephone Number: (Frank Howey) 704-975-2200
Property Owner Telephone Number:
We hereby certify the above information to be true and accurate to the best of our knowledge.
11
101L.
�I
(Properrty Owner
Signature)
(Date)

APPENDIX F
TECHNICAL PROPOSAL SCORE SHEET
Nesbit Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site Appendices
Technical Proposal (RFP # 16-007704)

Technical Proposal Evaluation Criteria
8 -digit CU Rating Form
Offeror:
Site Name:
River Basin
/ Catalog
Unit:
RFP
Number:
Date of Site
Evaluation:
Type/Amt of
Mitigation
Offered:
Proposal
Review
Committee:
Alternate
Attendees:

Section 1. Minimum Requirements
Yes/No
or N/A
1- For stream mitigation projects, does the Technical Proposal adequately document the historical presence of
stream(s) on the project site, provide the drainage areas (acres) and provide accurate, process -based descriptions
of all project stream reaches and tributaries?
2- For proposals that include wetland mitigation, does the technical proposal adequately document the presence of
hydric soil indicators (including soil boring logs prepared by a Licensed Soil Scientist and a map showing soil boring
locations and mapped soil series)?
3- For proposals that include wetland mitigation, does the proposed success hydroperiod follow the IRT Guidance
for the project site and soil series? If the proposed hydroperiod differs from the IRT guidance, justification must be
provided in the RFP.
4- Does the proposal adequately document the physical, chemical and/or biological impairments that currently
exist on the project site?
5- Does DMS agree with the overall mitigation approach (proposed levels of intervention) presented? [The
Technical Proposal must demonstrate that the proposed mitigation activities are appropriate for existing site
conditions and watershed characteristics (e.g., adjacent land use/land cover), and are optimized to yield maximum
functional gains.]
6- Does DMS agree with the proposed credit structure(s) described in the proposal?
7- Does the proposed project avoid significant adverse impacts to existing wetlands and/or streams?
8- Does the proposal adequately describe how the project will advance DMS watershed planning goals?
9- For any proposed Priority 2 restoration, is P2 justified and/or limited to "tie-ins"?
An answer of No in this section means the Technical Proposal is rejected. Continue or Reject?

Section 2. Functional Uplift Evaluation
Functional
Functional
Planning Identified
Functional Stressor
Uplift Potential
Stressor
Category
Check box below if
Complete this section for identified
stressor is identified
Check boxes below to identify
functional stressors ONLY. Select the option
through watershed
stressors addressed by proposal.
that best describes the uplift potential for
planning
the majority of the project area.
TRA
RWP
LWP
❑ Non-functioning riparian
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
>.
buffer / wetland vegetation
ra
❑ Sediment
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
Z3
❑ Nutrients
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
L
Q�
❑ Fecal Coliform
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
>ra
❑ Other
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
❑ Peak Flows
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
t3A
_O
❑ Artificial Barriers
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
O
�
❑ Ditching/Draining
Low
Moderate
High
2
❑ Other
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
❑ Habitat Fragmentation
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
ro
❑ Limited Bedform Diversity
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
❑ Absence of Large Woody
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
ca
_
Debris
❑ Other
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
a
Total Count
Total
O
Count
ra 4-J
Multiplier
Multiplier
ca
x1
x3
x6
x10
x2
x4
x6
C: cn
O W
+-J C:Planning
Count x Function
Count x
'E
Multiplier
Multiplier
LLra
A
B
_
Sum of Function
Sum of
Planning

Adjusted Risk Factor
Total
Stream Feet
Restoration
Feet
Enhancement
Feet
Total Stream Feet
Risk Adjusted Score
(Sum of Function X Factorc)
Restoration Feet + (Enhancement Feet)
\ 2 J
< 25%
25-50%
50-75%
c
D
Risk Adjusted Score D+ PlanningB = I E I Total Function and Planning
Section 3. Genera
Section 4. Final Score and Proposal Rating
Total Function and
1 point
3 points
6 points
10 points
What percent of the request does the proposed wetland
project provide? (if applicable)
< 25%
25-50%
50-75%
>75%
What percent of the request does the proposed stream
project provide? (if applicable)
< 25%
25-50%
50-75%
>75%
Physical constraints or barriers
>10%
5-10%
<5%
None
Easement Continuity
>12
8-12
0 -
Project Density
>10
8-10
4-8
<4
Total
F
Section 4. Final Score and Proposal Rating
Total Function and
E
Planning
F
Total General
Final Score
(E + F)
Proposal Rating
(Final Score x 0.01)
Comments:
4