20190864 Ver 1_Technical Proposal_20190513

Ll_
PROPOSAL -COPY
DALES CREEK RESTORATION SITE
STREAM MITIGATION CREDITS WITHIN THE CATALOGING UNIT 06010105 OF
THE FRENCH BROAD RIVER BASIN
RFP 116-007724
Prepared for
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
Prepared by
KCI Technologies, Inc.
March 6, 2019
KCI

■1
SECTION A .............. Cover Letter
SECTION B ............... Title Page
SECTION C .............. Execution Page, Addenda, and RFP
Attachment D: Location of Workers Utilized by Vendor
Attachment E: Certification of Financial Condition
Attachment F: Additional Vendor Information
SECTION D .............. Executive Summary
SECTION E ............... Corporate Background and Experience
SECTION F ............... Project Organization
SECTION G .............. Technical Approach
1. Project Goals and Objectives
2. Project Description
3. Project Development
4. Proposed Mitigation
5. Current Ownership and Long Term Protection
6. Project Phasing
7. Success Criteria
8. Quality Control
APPENDIX A. Historic Aerial Photos
APPENDIX B. Site Photographs
APPENDIX C. Executed Options to Purchase Easement Restrictions
APPENDIX D. Stream and Wetland Forms
APPENDIX E. Mock Score Sheet
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
KCI North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

KO 9001X013 CERTIFIED
ENGINEERS PLANNERS SCIENTISTS CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS
KCI4505 Falls of Netue Rd., Suite 400 • Raleigh, NC 27609 • Phone [phone] • Fax [phone]
TECHNOLOGIES
March 6, 2019
RFP #16-007724 Sealed Bid
NC DEQ - Division of Mitigation Services
217 West Jones Street, Suite 3409-J
Raleigh, North Carolina. 27603
Attention: Ms. Marjorie Barber
Subject. Full Delivery Project to Provide Stream Mitigation in the French Broad River Basin
within Cataloging Unit 06010105 for the Dales Creek Restoration Site
Dear Ms. Barbel
KCI Technologies, Inc., along with its co -venture partners, KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A. and KCI
Environmental Technologies and Construction, Inc. (ETC), is pleased to submit this proposal to provide the North
Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) with ecological,
engineering, land acquisition, and turnkey design/build implementation for the above refmwced stream mitigation
project. KCI Associates is a full service engineering, planning, and environmental consulting firm. They are
registered with the Office of the Secretary of State, as well as North Carolina Board of Professional Engineers and
Land. Surveyors (C-0764). ETC is an environmental construction firm specializing in the implementation of
enviromnerltal restoration and management. They are registered with the Office of the Secretary of State and is a
North Carolina Licensed General Contractor (#41336). Both entities are corporate subsidiaries of KCI
Technologies, Inc. and are submitting as co -ventures on this contract with KCI Technologies, Inc. The KCI team
has the capacity to form the necessary legal and financial entities for the proposed work and hereafter is referred to
jointly as KCL
KCI offers a highly qualified staff of environmental, engineering, and construction professionals with extensive
training and proven skills in all aspects of mitigation site location, plan development, design, construction,
monitoring, and remedial action. We have successfully completed numerous projects involving
stream/wetland/riparian area restoration and management; included in Section E is an abbreviated statement of our
qualifications describing our ability to conduct this work. KCI has been involved in the location, design,
development, and management of over 1,600 acres of wetland and 40 miles of stream mitigation throughout the
eastern seaboard and has extensive experience in North Carolina for both public and private clients.
KCI has secured a real estate option agreement for the purchase of easement rights on one property located in
Buncombe County, North Carolina near the Town of Leicester. There is a single option proposed for this project.
Based on KCI's evaluation of the property, we believe that we can generate 1,842 stream mitigation credits.
These credits will be generated by restoring and enhancing unnamed tributaries to Newfound Creek that have been
impacted by historical agricultural practices.
INE W f NIa1E W if IIN6 K1W � 1S 0U! TM H,%%,%V. . c OM

Norm Carolina Division of MiUSatlon savices
KCI Technologies, Inc.
KCI stands ready to meet your dream. mitigation needs at this site. Upon review of our submittal, we trust you will
find our qualifications and proposed site commensurate with your requirements. We look forward to addressing any
questions or comments you may have and to the opportunity of working with you in the near future.
Sincerely,
Laurie Arensdorf
KCI Technologies, Inc.
Vice President
T4F X95{ s=lEtllpl6 MlM �5 OUI TDA www. Ki I. r 11M

■1
DALES CREEK RESTORATION SITE
Company Name: KCI Technologies, Inc.
Company Address: 4505 Falls of Neuse Road
Suite 400
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609
Company Representative: Gary M. Mryncza, PE
Phone Number: 919-783-9214
Proposal Number: 16-007724
Proposal Title: Full Delivery Projects to Provide Stream Mitigation Credits within
the Cataloging Unit 06010105 of the French Broad River Basin
Date of Issue: November 13, 2018
Proposal Opening Date: March 6, 2019, 2:00 PM
DMS Purchasing Agent: Marjorie Barber
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
KCI North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

I
L
Q
Q
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Request for Proposal #: 16-007724
Full Delivery Projects to Provide
Stream Mitigation Credits within the Cataloging Unit
06010105 of the French Broad River Basin as described
In the Scope of Work
Date of Issue: November 13, 2018
Proposal Opening Date: March 6, 2019
At 2:00 PIM ET
Direct all inquiries concerning this RFP to:
Marjorie Barber
Purchasing Agent
Email: [e-mail]
Phone: [phone]

.c STAII r
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Request for Proposal N
16-007724
For intemal 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:
52-160-4386
Federal ID Number or Social Security Number
KCI Technologies, Inc.
Vendor Name

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental
Refer Inquiries regarding this RFP to:
Marjorie Barber
Email: mar orie.barber(Mncdenr.nov
Phone: [phone]
16-007724
Proposals will be publicly opened: March 6, 2019
Contract Twoe: Oren Market
. and
Reclamation Services of Land and other Properties
Using Agency: Division of Mitigation Services
Requisition No.: NIA
�1►ECUTiON
Incompliance 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 pries 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 enft 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. 143-559.1. False certification Is a Class I felony. Furthermore, by executing this proposal,
the undersigned cartifies to the best of Vendor's knowledge and belief, that it and Its principals are not presently debarred, suspended,
proposed for debarment, declared insilgible 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 then 25 employees in North Carolina to verify the work authodwtion 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 executelsign proposal prior to submittal shall render proposal Invalid and It WILL BE REJECTED. Late
proposals cannot be accepted.
KCI Taftologles, Inc.
4506 Falls of Neuse Road. Sub 400
NUMBER:
Raleigh, NC27609 919-783-9214
PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS ADDRESS IF DIFFERENT FROM ABOVE (SEE INSTRUCTIO
PRINT NAME & TITLE OF PERSON SIGNING ON BEHALF OF VENDOR: FAX NUMBEF
Laurie Arenedorf, Vice President 919-78942M
VENDOR'$ AUTHORIZED SIOJATURE: , DATE: EMAIL:
3M12019 1lauds-orensdorr; kci.com
Offer valid for at least 180 day �m 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 j
attached certification, by — —
(Authorized Representative of DEQ)
Ver.711118 Pagel of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007724 Vendor.. KCI Technologies, Inc.
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
2.3
NOTICE TO VENDORS REGARDING RFP TERMS AND CONDITIONS...............................4
2.4
RFP SCHEDULE.....................................................................................................................5
2.5
MANDATORY PRE -PROPOSAL CONFERENCE...................................................................5
2.6
PROPOSAL QUESTIONS.......................................................................................................6
2.7
PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL.......................................................................................................6
2.8
PROPOSAL CONTENTS........................................................................................................7
2.9
IMPORTANT INFORMATION AND RESTRICTIONS............................................................10
2.10
TEMPLATES, TECHNICAL SCORESHEETS, TARGET WATERSHEDS, & MAPS.............10
2.11
DEFINITIONS, ACRONYMS, AND ABBREVIATIONS..........................................................10
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. 711118 Paye 2 of 39

Proposal Number: 46-007724 Vendor.. KCI Technologles, Inc.
5.0 SCOPE OF WORK.................................................................................................................21
5.1 GENERAL.............................................................................................................................21
5.2 OBJECTIVES........................................................................................................................21
5.3 TASKS...................................................................................................................................22
5.4 PAYMENT SCHEDULE AND DESCRIPTION OF MILESTONES.........................................24
5.5 ACCEPTANCE OF WORK.................................:..................................................................25
6.0 CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION.............................................................................................26
6.1 PROJECT MANAGER AND CUSTOMER SERVICE............................................................25
6.2 DISPUTE RESOLUTION.......................................................................................................25
6.3 CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR............................................................................................25
ATTACHMENTA. 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............................................................39
ATTACHMENT H: TASKS AND DELIVERABLES
Ver: 711118 Page 3 of 39

Proposal Number. 16-007724 vendor.• KCI Technologies, Inc.
1.0 PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND
The mission of NCDMS Is to provide cost -affective mitigation altematives 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 excaptions 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 fond 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: 711118 Page 4 of 39

Proposal Number 16-007724 Vendor.
2.4 RFP SCHEDULE
KCI Technologies, Inc.
The table below shows the Intended schedule for this RFP. The State will make every effort to adhere to this schedule.
Event
Issue RFP
—5in— p'o ibliity
State
Data and Time
November 13, 2018
Hold Pre -Proposal Meeting
Submit Written Questions
State
Vendor
December 5, 2018
December 19, 2018
Provide Response to Questions
Submit Proposals
j State _ _
I Vendor
January 4, 2019
March 6, 2019
Contract Award
Contract Effective Date
State
State
TBD
TBD
2.5 MANDATORY PRE -PROPOSAL CONFERENCE
Mandatory Pro -Proposal Conference
Date: December 5, 2018
Time: 2:00 PM Eastern Time
Contact #: [phone]
Instructions: It shall be MANDATORY that each Vendor representative be present for a pre-proposel conference on
December 5, 2018. Attendees must most promptly at 2:00 PM 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 andlor
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 pre -proposal conference 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 pre -proposal conference. 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 pre -proposal conference, 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 Pape 5 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007724
2.6 PROPOSAL QUESTIONS
vendor. KCI Technologies, Inc.
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 emalled to mariorle.barberancdenr.gov by the date and time specified above. Vendors should
enter °RFP 0: 16-007724: 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
RFP Section, Page Number
Vendor Question
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),
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 Postai Service
PROPOSAL NUMBER: 16-007724
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: 16-007724
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
reauirement. 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 solen i ill the Vendor h
In this 9f km 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 n9t 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 most 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 (FA)Q machine, telephone or electronic means, Including but not limited to small, In response to this
RFP shall NOT be accepted.
Ver: 711118 Page 6 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007724 Vendor. KCI Technolo:ies, Inc.
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
Igh2le$•
b) Submit one (1) 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 flies 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. lba
IS fiormat and In the fflnto
hAM of maftM or It is preferred that the '.pd 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 Rhrer 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 one (1) signed, original executed cost proposal responses and one (1) photocopy (AIImust 6a old 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. K 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 some outer package.
NOTE: All Technical and cost proposals must constitute a firm, 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: 711118 Page 7 of 3g

Proposal Number. 16-007724 Vendor: KCI Technologies, Inc.
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
retumed. 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 A).
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 locatlon(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 DBEIHUB 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:
hftps://deo. nc.00v/about/divisions/mitioation-services/dm s-planning/watershed-olanni ng -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: 711118 Page 8 of 39

Proposal Number 16-007724 Venda~ KCI Technologies, Inc.
• 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 entitles such as federal, tribal, state or local resource agencies, non-
profit conservation organizations, or private land managers; the transfer of titre 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(les), 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 grammadcallyttypographically 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 Dean DLIOtodfront to back (1100-
i=is limit) and each shall be submitted within a three rine 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)
1) 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: 711118 Page 9 of 39

Proposal Number: 10-007724 Vendor. KCI Technok,gles, Inc. _
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
S. 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 sooresheets, target watersheds and mapping and applicable to
this RFP are found at:
h s:lids .nc. ov/abouttdivisionstmiti ation- ervicesldms-vendors) forms -tem lates
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 711118 Page 10 of 30

Proposal Number: 16-007724 Vendor.- KCI Technologies, Inc.
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 Wetiand — As defined in North Carolina General Statute 113-229(nx3) and described in the CAMA
Handbook for Development in Coastal North Carolina — Section 2(Ax4) found at:
httD:NDortal.nodenr.oro/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 equate 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:
htto://Dortol. ncdenr.oraMebMWswn/wW401 twaterresoumal&t nglndWerm inations
Jurisdictional Wetland - A wetland as defined In the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.
Ver: 7!1118 Page 11 of 39

Proposal Number. 16-007724
Vendor. KCI Technologies, Inc.
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://dee. nc.nov/a bouttdivisionstm itiaaflon-servicestd m s-plann lna/watershed-ola n ning-docum ents
Long Term Protection — as defined in the Federal Code of Regulations (Federal RegisterNol. 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 tide 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 (USAGE) —
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 lot 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 artlfldal Impoundments.
Non -Riparian Wetlands are typically found on flats in interstream divides (pocosins), side slopes (seeps), and in
depressions surrounded by uplands (maflc 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:
httpmfloortol.ncdonr.orgMobhrialswphW40ihNsterresourcesistmamdeterrningdons
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 veal 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 dosing date of this RFP.
Ver. 711118 Page 12 of 39

Proposal Number. 16-007724 Vendor.• KCI Tschnok_gtas, Inc.
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 1959419705).
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: 711118 Pape 13 of 39

Proposal Number. IM07724 Vendor. • KCI Technologies, Inc.
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 tern 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 Welland Re-establishment and
Welland 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, N 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 edtarle set out in this solicitation.
Prospective Vendors shall not be diwAminated 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: 711118 Page 14 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007724 Vendor: KCI Technologies, Inc. `
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 accourd(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 disauslifiied from contract awardunless 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 -Stop waluatlon 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: 711118 Page 15 of 39

Proposal Number 16-007724 Vendor. KCI Technologies, Inc.
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 most 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 Sooresheet.
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: 711!18 Pape 18 of 39

Proposal Number. 1"07724 Vendor. KCI Technologies, Inc.
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 outsidlpf 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
1) 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 maybe 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 (earthworklplenting), completion of the
Ver: 711118 Page 17 of 39

Proposal Number. 16-007724 Vendor.- KCI Technologies, Inc.
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 aftr 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 and 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 5.4).
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) — The vendor must provide security In the form of an scoeptable 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°1 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) Letfers of Credit- LOCs 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: 16-007724
Vendor. KCI Technologies, Inc.
3) Casualty Insurance on underlying performance of credits of mitigation, must follow the some 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.
4.6 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 Stats. 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.
Vendors 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.
4.12VENDOR'S REPRESENTATIONS
a) Vendor warrents 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. 7/1118 Page 19 of 39

Proposal Number 16-007724 Venda. KCI Technologies, Inc.
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 warrents that it has the financial capacity to perform and to continue perforin 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: 16-007724
5.0 SCOPE OF WORK
Vendor. • KCI Technologies, Inc.
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 Mitigation Credits quantified in the table below and occurring within the service
areas for Cataloging Unit 06010105 of the French Broad River Basin (which can be found on the DMS website at the
following link: h: s://deLi.nc.L4ov/abouttdivisions/mitt ation-services/dms-vendors/rfL-forms-tem. lates).
RIVER BASIN
CATALOGING UNITS
French Broad
06010105
Mitigation Type
Requested Credits
Thermal
Regime
Credits Shall Not
Exceed Preservation
Percentage
10 % of total CREDITS
Credits Shall Most a
Minimum Restaretion
Percentage of Total
Credits Offered
Stream
15,500
COOL
COLD
n/a
800
Riparian Wetland
OPTION
nla
n/a
Non-Rlparlan
Wetland
n/a
nla
n/a
Riparian Buffer n/a
i
n/a n/a
DMS Is not seekino Rinarian Wetland credits at this time. On the Cost Proposal form (Attachment C), there is a line
for an optional riparian wetland credit cost. If DMS has a riparian wetland credit need during the contracted project
lifetime, an amendment can be made to the contract payable to the contracted vendor for the amount per credit
delhrered (and accepted by the IRT) as indicated by the optional cost. Vendors must provide an optional cost for
Riparian Wetland credits If they wish DMS to purchase these credits from the vendor.
General Ml igglion 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 oontract(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 Modopli2n:,
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: 7/1118 Pape 21 of 39

Proposal Number. 1"07724 Vendor. KCl Technologies, Inc.
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:
1. Conduct an on-site meeting with the IRT and DMS to discuss proposed mitigation plan and obtain concurrence
on planned work and crediting. Document and distribute site visit through notes and receive approval via
communication from IRT (email or letter).
2. Follow procedure from most recent DMS and FHWA'Environmental Screening and Documentation Guidelines
for DMS Projects' for compliance with environmental laws and regulations. This screening tool and associated
documentation must be reviewed and approved by DMS and FHWA to meet categorical exclusion
requirements and demonstrate project will not have a significant environmental impact.
3. if applicable, provide a signed and dated DMS Full Delivery Landowner Authorization form prior to post-
contract
ostcontract site visit In accordance with USACE requirements.
4. If applicable, satisfy the public notification process in accordance with USACE requirements.
Task 2 Property:
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 Sunray for the State of North Caro//na,
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 comers, numbered consecutively, must
be included on the plat. If multiple parcels oompdse a single project, assign a unique number for each
property comer 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 comers, nearby easements, dwellings, roadways, streams and creeks, manholes,
poles, and right-of-ways.
• The landowners) or his/her legal representative must sign the recorded plat.
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 22 of 39

Proposal Number. 16-007724
vendor.. KCI Technolo i ft, Inc.
• Access to the easement area must be shown, with location and width depicted by a dotted line and
note on the recorded plat.
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.Tkle attorney's "Schedule K with any documents describing possible exceptions to title and exhibits.
Sten TWo• Approval for Closlna
I. 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.
The Vendor will complete the six (6) listed deliverables.
I. 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 email 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 518° rebar 30' In length with 3-114" aluminum caps on all easement comers.
Caps shall most DMS specifications (Bemtsen RBD5326, 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 tell durable witness post at each comer 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(les) 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.
Delivembles 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 16-007724
Vendor.- KCI Technologies, lnc.
Complete planting of the mitigation site and Install all monitoring devloes/plots. Vegetation must be planted at least six
months before vegetation monitoring activities are conducted at the and of the growing season. Upon completion of
planting and installation of monitoring devioes/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 peflod of at least seven (7) years. Each annual monitoring report must be submitted to the DMS
by December 1°c of the year during which the monitoring was conducted. The 7a' 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 offiice/onsits meetings.
Delhrersbles will not be approved without the strict adherence to the current version of the
DMS dlgltal drawing guidance.
5.4 PAYMENT SCHEDULE AND DESCRIPTION OF MILESTONES
Project Milestones and Payment Schedule
Task Project Milestone
Visit
IPayment" -
!(% of Contract Value")
I 5
1 2 1 Submit Recorded Conservation Easement on the Site j 20
3
Mitig ation Plan Final Drafty and Financial Assurance
15
4
Miticiation Site Earthwork completed
15
5
Mkalation Site Planting and Installation of Monitoring Devices
10
6
Baseline Monitoring Report(including
As -Built Drawings)'
10
7
8 I
1 Submit Monitorine Report #1 to DMS
Submit Monitorinq Re ort #2 to DMS
meets success criteria*11
meets success criteria"'
5
2
9
f Submit Monitoring Report #3 to DMS
meets success criteria"'
2
10 I
Submit Monitoring Report #4 to DMS
imeets success criteria"'
2
11 Submit Monitoring Report #5 to DMS meets success criteria"' 2
12 Submit Monitoring Report #6 to DMS i meets success criteria'' 2
13 Submit Monitoring Report #7 to DMS and complete project Close- 10
Out grocess emeets success criteria' -- —
TOTA!`T _ 100
"Vendor is only eligible for payment after DMS has approved the task/delivemble.
"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.
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 credlts.
Ver. 711118 Page 24 of 39

Proposal Number. 1 M07724 Vendor. KCI Technologies, Inc.
5.5 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 detall
the reason(s) ft 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 submltted in writing to the Vendors
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 responsibiiities under this Contract. If a dispute cannot be resolved between the Parties
within thirty (30) days after delivery of notlos, 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
Krlstle Corson is designated as the contract administrator for the Department for the purposes of this RFP.
Ver. 711118 Page 25 of 39

Proposal Number 16-007724
ATTACHMENT A: PRICING
Vendor. KCI Technologies, Inc.
RFP 0: 16-007724
RFP TITLE: Full Delivery Projects to provide Stream Mitigation Credits within the Cataloging Unit
06010105 of the French Broad 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 enIgIM, 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
1�Wr�•�
Optional Riparian Wetland Credit Cost ($/Credit)
Printed Name of Authorized Representative Signature of Authorized Representative
Company Name (Printed)
Date
Ver: 711118 Page 25 of 39
STREAM
TOTAL CREDITS
CREDIT COST (1WCREDI7)
TOTAL COSTS
1�Wr�•�
Optional Riparian Wetland Credit Cost ($/Credit)
Printed Name of Authorized Representative Signature of Authorized Representative
Company Name (Printed)
Date
Ver: 711118 Page 25 of 39

Proposal Number. 16-007724 Vendor.• KCI Technologies, Inc.
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-complianoe 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. FAF&JJJI!QN Failure to sign the Execution Page (numbered page 1 of the RFP) in the indicated space will render
proposal non-responsive, and it sha)l 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 terns; (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) Vendors 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.
S. 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: 711118 Pape 27 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007724 Vendor.
KCI Technologies, Inc.
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 d9uble 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. 143-05 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 some 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. 147-06.81. A contract with the State or any of its political subdivisions by any company Identified in a) or b)
above shall be void ab 1rildo.
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 fine responding to a solicitation. Proposal
status and Award notices are posted on the Internet at hgos://wuwv.ips.state.nc.usi All protests will be handled
pursuant to the North Carolina Administrative Code, 01 NCAC 05B .1519.
Ver: 711118 Page 28 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007724 Venda:- _ KCI Technologies, Inc.
18. 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 -13Y 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),
httDs:/Iwww.IDs.state. nc.us1IpWBidNumberSsarch.asox. Click on the IPS BIDS icon, dick on Search for Bid, order
the bid number, and then search. Tabulations will normally be available at this web site not later then 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 (sVP) 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://neadmin.nc.soov/about-doo/dMslonslDurchase-
contracl
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
data 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. 711118 Page 29 of 39

Proposal Number. 16-007724 Vendor. KCI Technologies, Inc.
ATTACHMENT C: NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL CONTRACT TERMS & CONDITIONS
1. 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 natio 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 errant 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 titre 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 warrents 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
cllckwrap agreement. The term clickwrep 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: 711!48 Pape 30 of 39

Proposal Number. 16407724 Vendor. • KCI Technoiogies, Inc.
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.
3. AVAILABILITY _OF FUNDS: Any and all payments to the Vendor shall be dependent upon and subject to the
availabllity 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
oertifies that it and all of Its affiliates, (If it has affiliates), collect(s) the appropriate taxes.
b) The agency(les) 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 ANQ GMBNINQ 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.
6. 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 cans, If the Vendor accepts that card (Visa, MasterCard,
etc.) from other customers, and it shall be accepted by the Vendor for payment under the some terns 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.
7. 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. 711118 Page 31 of 39

Proposal Number:16-007724 Vendor.. KCI Technologies, Inc.
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
If. 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,
if. 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 anytime by providing 00 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 PERSON$ AND 1112QRD$: 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(g).
13. ASSIGNMENT: No assignment of the Vendor's obligations nor the Vendors 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: 711118 Page 32 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007724 Vendor; KCI Technologies, Inc.
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. INSURAN-!F:
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 Liablllty - 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 uninsUredlunder 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 Vendors 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 tordous 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
111
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. ff Vendor Is a corporation, partnership or other legal entity, then the Vendor may authorize
Ver: 711/18 Pape 33 of 39

Proposal Number. 16-007724 Vendor. KCI Technologies, Inc.
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 notlfy 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 SUBCONTRACTOR OR DEALER INVOLVED IN PERFORMANCE UNDER THIS CONTRACT IN THE
EVENT THAT SUCH SUBCONTRACTOR OR DEALER DEFAULTS ON PAYMENT.
17. SUBCONTRACTING: Performanoe 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 properly 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. 7560 st 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'oontect 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. COMPLIISNCE 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 andlor 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 some force and effect as the original written documents comprising such record. Any electronic copy,
Ver. 711118 Page 34 of 39

Proposal Number. 16-D07724 Vendor.- KCI Technologies, Inc.
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 hereln 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 MAJ§LIRE: 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. 16-007724 Vendor.KCI Technologies Inc,
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 ® NO
If the Vendor answered "YES' above, Vendor must complete Items 1 and 2 bsiow:
1. Ust the locatlon(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 ❑ 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:
Raleigh, NC
Ver: 711118 Page 36 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007724 Vender.; KCI Technologies, Inc.
ATTACHMENT E: CERTIFICATION OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
Name of Vendor: KCI Technologies, Inc. _
The undersigned hereby certifies that: [check all applicable boxes]
® 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: May 18, 2018
® 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.
® • 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:
2/25/2019
Slgnatu Date
Nathan Bell, PE Chief Exective Officer
Printed Name
Title
[This Certification must be signed by an Individual authorized to speak for the Vendor]
Ver. 711118 Page 37 of 39

Proposal Number. 16-007724 Vendor: KCI Technologies, Inc.
ATTACHMENT F: SUPPLEMENTAL VENDOR INFORMATION
HISTORICALLY UNDERUTILIZED BUSINESSES
Historically Underutilized Businesses (HUB$) consist of minority, women and disabled business firms that are at least
fifty-one percent owned and operated by an individual(s) of the categories. Also included In this category are disabled
business enterprises and non-profit work centers for the blind and severely disabled.
Pursuant to G.S. 14313-1361(x), 143.48 and 143-128.4, the State invites and encourages participation In this
procurement process by businesses owned by minorities, women, disabled, disabled business enterprises and non-
profit work centers for the blind and severely disabled. This includes utilizing subcontractors to perform the required
functions in this RFP. Any questions concerning NC HUB certification, contact the North Carolina Office of Historically
Undemidl[zed Buslne$wo at [phone]. The Vendor shall respond to question #1 and #2 below.
a) Is Vendor a Historically Underutilized Business? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Is Vendor Certified with North Carolina as a Historically Underutilized Business? ❑ Yes ® No
If so, state HUB classification:
Ver. 7/1118 Page 38 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007724 Vendor KCI Technologies, Inc.
ATTACHMENT G: VENDOR'S INFORMATION
Vendors Primary Contact (or Project Manager)
Vendors Execution Address (Where Elie conVacf should be malled forsomftre)
Name:
Agency:
Gary M. Mryncza. PE
KCI Techno!-;t:les, Inc.
Tide: Senior Vice President
Address: ienr r_n_ -2 u_..__ e
400
CRY: : Rale h — State! Zlp: NO 27609
Telephone: Fax: 1783<9fi6
Enroll:
Vendors Payment (Remit To) Address (Whom the checks should be malled
(This address should agree with the "Remit -To" address associated with the Vendor's Tax IQ. This Information
must be verified with the Vandoes Corporate Accounting Office)
Name:
F
Laurie Arensdorl
KCI 7echnal ies Inc.
Vice President
4505 Falls of Neuse Road Suite 400
Agency'
Tide:
Address'
CRY:
Rale State! Zip:
919-783-9214 Fax:
NQ 2760
Telephone:
919-783-9266
Email:
Ver. 711!18 Page 39 of 39

!
|
all
| !
a
�@
|
,I
�,
- |
'�■ �! '�
a
■■
§
4$
\
.
! |
� !;
.
.
.
�
■
-
,
.
,
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
|
.
.
. .
.
. .
.
&
|
|
.
■
�
, '
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
■
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
!
■
§ | |
� �
!
■ #
!
!�
� �
|
�:
!
�;
�
|
�.|
!
|
!!1
|!|�
|;|!
|! |�
■
:
�
|�

oil
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Dale's Creek Restoration Site (DCRS) is a candidate site for stream restoration in the French Broad River Basin in
Buncombe County, North Carolina. As evidenced by historic aerial photos and site investigations, the streams at this
site have been substantially modified by relocation and straightening, impacted from cattle, and other anthropogenic
impacts. Restoring these streams will not only return this to a stable stream ecosystem with a functional riparian buffer,
floodplain access, and riparian wetlands, but will also lower the supply of sediment entering Newfound Creek, a tributary
to the French Broad River, and reduce incoming nutrients from livestock.
KCI is offering a single option for the restoration of this site. This option is consistent with the 2009 French Broad
River Basin Restoration Priorities in unit 06010105 that focus on restoring stream functions such as maintaining and
enhancing water quality and improving fish and wildlife habitat. The project goals for DCRS are in line with the following
basin goals:
• Reduce sediment inputs
• Reduce nutrient inputs
• Restore riparian buffers
• Stabilize stream banks
• Restore and/or protect aquatic habitat
• Reduce fecal coliform inputs
• Implement agricultural BMPs (eg., livestock exclusion) in rural areas
Project -specific goals for the site will include:
• Restore channelized and livestock -impacted streams to a natural pattern within the landscape.
• Buffer nutrient and sediment impacts to the French Broad River and its tributaries from adjacent grazing and farming
practices.
• Improve and expand habitat for a variety of aquatic species.
Multiple objectives will be implemented to achieve these goals. Restoring and enhancing the channelized and cattle
impacted streams to B and C-type channels will improve stream stability, restore aquatic habitat, and reduce sediment
loading by limiting channel erosion and restoring riffle and pool features to the channel bed. Fencing cattle out of the
headwater channels in this system will help protect the sources of these streams, an important component to maintaining
good water quality. By establishing an easement that will be planted with native vegetation, a buffer will be restored,
which will reduce nutrient loading from cattle access and other adjacent agricultural practices. By excluding livestock,
this buffer will also reduce a direct source of fecal coliform inputs.
Dales Creek
Mitigation •
Stream Restoration
391 1:1
391
Stream Enhancement 1
1,342 1:1.5
895
Stream Enhancement 2
1,024 1:2.5
410
Stream Enhancement 2
729 1:5
146
TOTAL SMCs
3,486 =
1,842
Monitoring will consist of the collection and analysis of data to support the evaluation of the project in meeting established
restoration objectives. Specifically, project success will be assessed utilizing vegetation survivability, stream and wetland
hydrologic monitoring, stream stability, and visual inspection following the monitoring guidelines and success criteria
described in the DMS monitoring guidelines and template current at the time of this RFP.
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
K C I North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

■1
PROJECT TEAM
The team assembled for this project is led by KCI Technologies Inc. and includes KCI Associates of North Carolina, PA
(KCI) and KCI Environmental Technologies and Construction, Inc. (ETC). KCI is a full-service engineering, planning
and environmental consulting firm registered with the Office of the Secretary of State, as well as the North Carolina
Board of Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors (C-0764). ETC is an environmental construction firm specializing
in the implementation of environmental restoration and management projects, and is registered with the Office of the
Secretary of State and is a North Carolina Licensed General Contractor (#41336). Both entities are corporate subsidiaries
of KCI Technologies, Inc., and as such are submitting as co -ventures on this contract in order to provide the North
Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) with ecological, engineering, land acquisition, and turn -key design -
build implementation of wetland/stream mitigation projects. The team has the capacity to form the necessary legal and
financial entities for the proposed work and hereinafter is referred to jointly as KCI.
KCI is an employee -owned company headquartered in Sparks, Maryland, with division offices located throughout the
Mid -Atlantic and Southeastern United States. The local staff in the Natural Resource Management and Ecosystem Dynamic
practices in the Raleigh, NC office will be responsible for work derived from this contract. With a staff of more than
1,400 professional engineers, planners, architects, scientists, and construction support personnel, KCI is considered to
have one of the largest staffs trained in wetland and stream restoration design and construction, watershed management,
geomorphology, and hydrologic/hydraulic engineering on the East Coast. KCI has made a concerted effort to foster the
best technical expertise available in the design, implementation, and construction of stream and wetland restoration
projects. The Raleigh office is the primary location serving this work, with support provided from the Brentwood,
Tennessee and Sparks, Maryland locations.
4505 Falls of Neuse Road, Suite 400 7003 Chadwick Drive, Suite 343 936 Ridgebrook Road
Raleigh, NC 27609 Brentwood, TN 37027 Sparks, MD 21152
[phone] [phone] [phone]
KCI's team has been established to provide successful implementation of wetland and steam mitigation projects by
providing turnkey services including site identification, land acquisition, planning and assessment, design, permitting,
construction, construction management, performance monitoring, remedial action, and financial planning in one
entity. KCI has been involved in the location, design, development, and management of over 1,700 acres of wetland
and 55 miles of stream mitigation throughout the eastern seaboard with extensive experience in North Carolina. Our
approach to successfully meeting our client's needs utilizes the collaborative expertise of environmental, engineering, and
construction professionals, as well as quality support personnel. Table 1 (found at the end of this section) summarizes
KCI's recent stream and wetland restoration experience. More detailed project descriptions are also included in this
section to demonstrate our experience in the execution of projects similar in nature to the one proposed.
Key Staff
The key staff assigned to the project offer the DMS a qualified and experienced group of professionals dedicated to
providing the highest quality services and technical expertise in the field of stream and wetland mitigation. KCI has been
working on full delivery mitigation since the inception of EEP/DMS and even before that with DENR's Wetland Restoration
Program. Through this time period, KCI has experienced little staff turnover, resulting in the internal efficiencies, quality
deliverables, and an invaluable working knowledge of the State's mitigation program. Our organizational chart is attached
at the end of this section. Our staff is prepared to complete all tasks on the proposed project in an innovative, cost
effective, and timely manner. Our past record of successful work performance with state and federal clients, including
DMS, is directly attributed to our ability to work interactively on multi -disciplined projects in concert with clients,
agencies and stakeholders, and demonstrates our commitment and capabilities to undertake projects involving a variety
of environmental, engineering and ecological challenges.
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
K C I North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

oil
In addition to the key staff, KCI maintains highly trained professional support staff to aid in the execution of project
tasks. This includes over 1,400 technical staff company -wide, with over 100 in the Raleigh office alone. These groups of
engineers and scientists have, on average, 10 years of experience in their respective disciplines, and the majority of them
have been awarded advanced degrees and certifications in their field of expertise.
Project Manager Qualifications and Experience
KCI recognizes that the Project Manager will likely serve the most important role on a given full delivery project. An
individual with a broad range of skills linking together budgetary and personnel management with all the components of
a restoration project (assessment, design, construction, permitting, monitoring, agency negotiation, and credit delivery)
will be needed to successfully oversee and implement this project. The individual will also need to be experienced in
completing large scale restoration projects with aggressive design and construction timeliness.
KCI's choice for Project Manager on this project will be Tim Morris. Mr. Morris has been working in the environmental
restoration industry for 27 years since graduating from Duke University with a Master's of Environmental Management
degree. Mr. Morris has worked on a broad range of environmental projects over the course of his career which has
helped to give him a well-rounded approach to problem solving and a unique ability to manage the complex needs
of large-scale restoration projects. Equipped with first-hand knowledge of real estate acquisition, assessment, design,
construction, monitoring and regulatory hurdles, Mr. Morris has been challenged to manage the design and construction
elements of many of the largest environmental mitigation projects completed on the east coast over the last 15 years. To
quantify on a cost basis, Mr. Morris has managed over $60 million in environmental restoration projects in both urban
and rural settings during this time frame. Highlights have included managing the section design review, bidding, and
construction of all the environmental mitigation components of the $2.5 billion Woodrow Wilson Bridge project in
the Washington, DC metropolitan area. He also managed the environmental construction and mitigation elements of
the US 113 dualizaton project on the Eastern Shore of Maryland, which at the time was the largest and most complex
environmental mitigation project completed in the State of Maryland. Mr. Morris currently manages KCI's full delivery
mitigation program for DMS. This work requires the concurrent management of multiple projects typically ranging
in value from $1 million to $6 million. Mr. Morris' philosophy on developing successful environmental design and
construction projects is to promote ownership of project from the ground up. This involves informing and training
contractors, landowners, regulatory staff, project owners and other project stakeholders through diligent communication
and involvement. Table 2 at the end of this section summarizes Mr. Morris' project management and environmental
restoration experience since 2000.
Mr. Morris has spent the last eight years working primarily on DMS projects, both design -bid -build and full delivery.
Mr. Morris is very familiar with the DMS contracting processes, deliverable time lines, review schedules, DMS guidance
and project closeout procedures and logistics. Mr. Morris is also actively involved and informed on developing policy
issues between DMS and the environmental regulatory agencies through his position as a President of the North Carolina
Environmental Restoration Association, a nonprofit restoration advocacy group in North Carolina. This knowledge
and understanding of ongoing issues has a direct impact on how he manages his projects as regulation and policy in
the restoration industry evolves to keep pace with the growing knowledge base. Mr. Morris will utilize his experience
working with DMS to ensure full credit delivery for this project.
As demonstrated in Table 2, Mr. Morris has worked on large scale, complex, time sensitive restoration projects throughout
his career. Often these projects were occurring simultaneously, requiring diligent communication with his project team,
careful time management, and calculated planning to overcome the logistical challenges presented by multiple on-
going projects occurring in different site locations. Examples of Mr. Morris' experience managing large scale projects
include completing multiple 10,000+ LF full delivery projects (Cane Creek — 18,000 LF, Collins Creek — 10,000 LF)
along with three design -bid build projects (McIntyre Creek, Little Troublesome Creek, and McCain Site) simultaneously.
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
KCI North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

oil
Additionally, while working on the Woodrow Wilson Bridge project, Mr. Morris completed the design and construction
phases of 56 individual mitigation sites, utilizing 17 different contract vehicles over the course of 4.5 years. These
projects ranged in scope and scale from reforestation projects to large scale stream and fish passage mitigation sites
with a total construction value exceeding $40 million. Mr. Morris understands that the key to managing large scale
projects with aggressive time requirements is to stay in front of potential problems, foster active partnership among team
members and to surround yourself with hard working, skilled individuals who all have a stake in the success of the
project. The KCI team has been formed with these factors in mind and will be dedicated to the success of the project
behind the leadership of your Project Manager.
Resumes of Vendor and Sub -Vendor
Resumes of the project team and sub -vendors can be found in Section F - Project Organization.
DBE/HUB Participation
Neither KCI nor our subconsulant Axiom Environmental are DBE or HUB particpants.
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
KCI North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

oil
Gary Mryncza, PE, PH
Timothy Morris
Kristin Knight -Meng, PE
Adam Spiller, CPESC
Local
Gary Mryncza, PE, PH
Adam Spiller, CPESC
Administrative
1
Alex French
CADD Technician
Alex French
11
Timothy Morris
Tommy Seelinger
Joe Sullivan
19
Kristin Knight -Meng, PE
15
Kevin O'Bria
Zachary Mryn
Charlie Morgan, RF
8
Michael Underwood, PE
Timothy Morris
Geologists
KCI Etc.
Jim Gellenthin, PLS
Land Surveyors
6
14
Grant Lewis, LSS, PWS (Axiom)
K C: I
Adam Spiller, CPESC
Alex French
Tommy Seelinger
nt Joe Sullivan
cza Kevin O'Briant
Charlie Morgan, RF
KCI Etc.
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
Role
Local
Corporate
Administrative
1
51
CADD Technician
4
11
Construction Managers
3
19
Designers
15
32
Environmental Scientists
8
45
Geologists
0
1
Land Surveyors
6
14

ON
Table 1 - KCI Full Delivery Project Summary
Region/CharacterProject
Work
and
Current
Status
•
. ,
U
t E .
•
..C3
..
.•,
•
C-
,.
.,
U•
Round Hill Branch
2018
NC
Mountain
Rural
N/A
N/A
2,130
P
U
P
P
P
P
Y
NCDMS
Hip Bone Creek
2018
NC
Piedmont
Rural
4.2
P
3,000
P
U
P
P
P
P
Y
NCDMS
Rough Horn II
2018
NC
Coastal
Rural
20.7
P
4,394
P
U
P
P
P
P
Y
NCDMS
Black Bull
2017
NC
Piedmont
Rural
3.1
P
6,101
P
U
P
P
P
P
Y
NC DOT
Hair Sheep
2017
NC
Mountain
Rural
1.0
P
3,100
P
U
P
P
P
P
Y
NC DOT
Stony Fork
2016
NC
Piedmont
Rural
N/A
N/A
7,187
P
X
X
P
P
P
Y
NCDMS
Mill Dam Creek
2016
NC
Piedmont
Rural
N/A
N/A
11,000
P
X
X
P
P
P
Y
NCDMS
Sandy Bridge Farm
2015
NC
Piedmont
Rural
4.1
P
1,600
P
X
X
P
P
P
Y
NCDMS
Cedar Branch
2015
NC
Piedmont
Piedmont
N/A
N/A
7,000
P
X
X
X
X
U
Y
NCDMS
Rough Horn Swamp
2015
NC
Coastal
Coastal
31
P
N/A
N/A
X
X
P
P
P
N
NCDMS
Norman's Pasture 11
2014
NC
Coastal
Rural
9.4
P
332
P
X
X
X
X
U
Y
NCEEP
Stanley's II
2013
NC
Coastal
Rural
6.5
P
N/A
N/A
X
X
X
X
U
N
NCEEP
Norman's Pasture
2012
NC
Coastal
Rural
15.6
P
N/A
N/A
X
X
X
X
U
N
NCEEP
Bowl Basin
2012
NC
Coastal
Rural
10.8
P
N/A
N/A
X
X
X
X
U
N
NCEEP
Bear Basin
2012
NC
Coastal
Rural
10.0
P
N/A
N/A
X
X
X
X
U
N
NCEEP
Twin Bays
2012
NC
Coastal
Rural
11.0
P
N/A
N/A
X
X
X
X
U
N
NCEEP
Stanley's Slough
2012
NC
Coastal
Rural
2.8
P
4,248
P
X
X
X
X
U
Y
NCEEP
Jacob's Ladder
2011
NC
Piedmont
Rural
N/A
N/A
4,935
P
X
X
X
X
U
Y
NCEEP
Jacob's Landing
2011
NC
Piedmont
Rural
N/A
N/A
4,655
P
X
X
X
X
U
Y
NCEEP
X
= completed, U =
underway, P = pending, N/A = not part of project
Clients: NCEEP-NC Ecosystem
Enhancement
Program; TNCVA (UARTF)
The Nature
Conservancy
of VA, VA Aquatic
Resources
Trust Fund;
NCDMS - NC
Division of Mitigation
Services, NC DOT - NC Department of Transportation, NCWRP - North Carolina Wetland Restoration Program
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

■
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
Region/Characternow-
Credit
•
4
�
,
,2
C3
C-
U.
.
Johnson and Waddle
2011
VA
Mountain
Rural
21.1
P
N/A
N/A
X
X
X
X
U
N
TNCVA
(VARTF)
Buffalo Flats
2011
NC
Piedmont
Rural
15.0
15.0
N/A
N/A
X
X
X
X
X
N
NCEEP
Farrar Dairy
2006
NC
Piedmont
Rural
61.9
64.0
11,881
11,561
X
X
X
X
X
Y
NCEEP
Dog Bite
2006
NC
Mountain
Rural
N/A
N/A
3,265
3,317
X
X
X
X
X
Y
NCEEP
Cane Creek
2006
NC
Piedmont
Rural
N/A
N/A
14,622
14,622
X
X
X
X
X
Y
NCEEP
Brown
2005
NC
Piedmont
Rural
26.3
26.3
N/A
N/A
X
X
X
X
X
N
NCEEP
Daniels #2
2005
NC
Piedmont
Rural
19.2
19.2
N/A
N/A
X
X
X
X
X
Y
NCEEP
Harrell
2005
NC
Coastal
Rural
15.0
15.0
8,238
6,808
X
X
X
X
X
Y
NCEEP
Glen Raven
2005
NC
Piedmont
Rural
N/A
N/A
3,405
3,355
X
X
X
X
X
Y
NCEEP
Collins Creek
2005
NC
Piedmont
Rural
N/A
N/A
8,933
8,933
X
X
X
X
X
Y
NCEEP
Daniels Farm
2003
NC
Piedmont
Rural
31.7
31.7
N/A
N/A
X
X
X
X
X
N
NCEEP
Rich Fork
2001
NC
Piedmont
Rural
21.5
21.5
3,400
2,913
X
X
X
X
X
Y
NCWRP
X =
completed, U
= underway, P
= pending, N/A = not part of project
Clients: NCEEP-NC Ecosystem
Enhancement
Program; TNCVA (VARTF) The Nature Conservancy
of VA,
VA Aquatic
Resources
Trust Fund;
NCDMS
- NC
Division of Mitigation
Services, NC DOT - NC Department of Transportation, NCWRP - North Carolina Wetland Restoration Program
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

■t
Table 2 - Tim Morris Project Management/ Mitigation Experience - Since 2001
Round Hill Branch
2018
Mitigation - DMS
North Carolina
1.0
Project Manager -
NCDMS
Full Project
Hipbone Creek
2018
Mitigation - DMS
North Carolina
1.0
Project Manager -
NCDMS
Full Project
Rough Horn Swamp I1
2018
Mitigation - DMS
North Carolina
2.0
Project Manager -
NCDMS
Full Project
Hair Sheep Site
2017
Mitigation - NC DOT
North Carolina
1.0
Project Manager -
NC DOT and Private
and Private Bank
Full Project
Users
Black Bull Mitigation
2017
Mitigation - NC DOT
North Carolina
2.4
Project Manager -
NC DOT and PrivaLc
Site
and Private Bank
Full Project
Users
Mill Dam Creek Site
2016
Mitigation - DMS
North Carolina
3.4
Project Manager -
NCDMS
Full Project
Stony Fork Site
2016
Mitigation - DMS
North Carolina
2.6
Project Manager -
NCDMS
Full Project
Cedar Branch
2015
Mitigation - DMS
North Carolina
1.8
Project Manager -
XCDNIS
Full Project
Rough Horn Swamp
2015
Mitigation - DMS
North Carolina
1.2
Project Manager -
NCDMS
Full Project
Sandy Bridge Farm
2015
Mitigation - DMS
North Carolina
0.8
Project Manager -
NCDMS
Full Project
Norman's Pasture 11
2014
Mitigation - EEP
North Carolina
05
Project Manager -
NCEEP
Full Project
Stanley's Il
2013
Mitigation - EEP
North Carolina
0.4
Project Manager -
NCEEP
Full Project
Twin Bays
2012
Mitigation - EEP
North Carolina
0.8
Project Manager -
NCEEP
Full Project
Bear Basin
2012
Mitigation - EEP
North Carolina
0.6
Project Manager -
NCEEP
Full Project
Stanley's Slough
2012
Mitigation - EEP
North Carolina
1.6
Project Manager -
NCEEP
Full Project
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

ON
Norman's Pasture
2012
Mitigation - EEP
North Carolina
1.3
Project Manager -
NCEEP
Full Project
Bowl Basin
2012
Mitigation - EEP
North Carolina
0.5
Project Manager -
NCEEP
Full Project
Jacobs Landing
2011
Mitigation - EEP
North Carolina
1.3
Project Manager -
NCEEP
Full Project
Jacobs Ladder
2011
Mitigation - EEP
North Carolina
1.4
Project Manager -
NCEEP
Full Project
UT to Crab Creek Site
2010
Mitigation - EEP
North Carolina
0.8
Construction
NCEEP
Administrator
Buffalo Flats
2010
Mitigation - EEP
North Carolina
1.2
Project Manager -
NCEEP
Full Project
Little Troublesome
2009
Mitigation - EEP
North Carolina
0.5
Construction
NCEEP
Creek Site
Administrator
McCain Site
2008
Mitigation - EEP
North Carolina
0.5
Construction
NCEEP
Administrator
Briles Site
2008
Mitigation - EEP
North Carolina
0.5
Construction
NCEEP
Administrator
McCain Site
2008
Mitigation - EEP
North Carolina
0.5
Construction Admin-
NCEEP
istrator
Briles Site
2008
Mitigation - EEP
North Carolina
0.5
Construction Admin-
NCEEP
istrator
Johnson Site
2008
Mitigation - EEP
North Carolina
0.5
Construction Admin-
NCEEP
istrator
Johnson Site
2008
Mitigation - EEP
North Carolina
0.5
Construction
NCEEP
Administrator
McIntyre Site
2007
Mitigation - EEP
North Carolina
1.3
Construction Admin-
MSHA
istrator
McIntyre Site
2007
Mitigation - EEP
North Carolina
1.3
Construction
MSHA
Administrator
Rock Creek Fish
2006
Mitigation - WWB
Washington DC
4.8
Design Review/
MSHA
Passage Sites
Contracting / CPM
Anacostia 11 Tidal
2006
Mitigation - WWB
1\-Iaryland
6.0
Design Review/
MSHA
Wetland Mitigation
Contracting / CPM
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
K North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

oil
Rock Creek Fish Pas-
2006
Mitigation - WWB
Washington DC
4.8
Design Review/Con-
MSHA
sage Sites
tracting/CPM
Anacostia 11 Tidal
2006
Mitigation - WWB
Maryland
6.0
Design Review/Con-
MSHA
Wetland Mitigation
tracting/CPM
Farrar Dairy
2006
Mitigation - EEP
North Carolina
5.9
Project Manager - Full
NCEEP
Proj ect
Dog Bite Creek
2006
Mitigation - EEP
North Carolina
0.9
Project Manager -
NCEEP
Full Project
Bladensburg Marina
2005
Mitigation - WWB
Maryland
0.8
Design Review /
MSHA
Tidal Wetland
Contracting / CPM
Northwest Branch
2005
Mitigation - WWB
Maryland
1.4
Design Review /
MSHA
Fish Passage Sites
Contracting / CPM
Sligo Creek Fish
2005
Mitigation - WWB
Maryland
0.5
Design Review/
MSHA
Passage Sites
Contracting / CPM
Indian Creek Fish
2005
Mitigation - WWB
Maryland
0.8
Design Review /
MSHA
Passage Sites
Contracting / CPM
Cane Creek
2005
Mitigation - EEP
North Carolina
3.1
Project Manager/Con-
NCEEP
struction/Closeout
Collins Ck
2005
Mitigation - EEP
North Carolina
1.5
Project Manager/Con-
NCEEP
struction/Closeout
Daniels Farm
2005
Mitigation - EEP
North Carolina
0.5
Project Manager/Con-
NCEEP
struction/Closeout
Glen Raven Site
2005
Mitigation - EEP
North Carolina
1.0
Project Manager/Con-
NCEEP
struction/Closeout
Harrell Site
2005
Mitigation - EEP
North Carolina
1.9
Project Manager -
NCEEP
Full Project
Silver Property Tidal
2004
Mitigation - WWB
Virginia
0.5
Design Review/
VDOT
Wetlands
Contracting/ CPM
Tuxedo Road Wetland
2004
Mitigation - WWB
Maryland
0.5
Design Review/
MSHA
Contracting / CPM
SAV Planting
2004
Mitigation - WWB
Maryland -Virginia
0.5
Design Review/
MSHA
Potomac River
Contracting/ CPM
Aquia Harbour Prop-
2004
Mitigation - WWB
Virginia
0.4
Design Review/
VDOT
erty Tidal Wetlands
Contracting/CPM
M FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

oil
Tuxedo Road Wetland
2004
Mitigation - WWB
Maryland
0.5
Design Review/
MSHA
Contracting / CPM
SAV Planting
2004
Mitigation - WWB
Maryland -Virginia
0.5
Design Review/
MSHA
Potomac River
Contracting/ CPM
Aquia Harbour Prop-
2004
Mitigation - WWB
Virginia
0.4
Design Review/
VDOT
erty Tidal Wetlands
Contracting/CPM
VA Tidal Wetlands -
2003-2006
Mitigation - WWB
Virginia
0.3
Design Review/
VDOT
Interchanges
Contracting/CPM
Reforestation Sites -
2003-2006
Mitigation - WWB
Maryland
0.3
Design Review/
MSHA
WWB
Contracting/CPM
Bounds Wetland
2003
Mitigation - US 113
Maryland
0.8
Design Review/CM
MSHA
Bradford Wetland
2003
Mitigation -US 113
Maryland
0.3
Design Review/CM
MSHA
Lopez Site
2003
Mitigation - US 113
Maryland
0.2
Design Review/
MSHA
Construction PM
Mariner Site
2003
Mitigation - US 113
Maryland
0.2
Design Review/
MSHA
Construction PM
Four Mile Run Park
2003
Mitigation - WWB
Virginia
0.8
Design Review/
VDOT
Wetland and Stream
Contracting/CPM
Mitigation
Mason Neck Segment-
2003
Mitigation - WWB
Virginia
0.5
Design Review/
VDOT
ed Breakwaters
Contracting/CPM
Bishop Wetland
2002
Mitigation - US 113
Maryland
0.1
Design Review/CM
MSHA
Mitchell Wetland
2002
Mitigation - US 113
Maryland
0.2
Design Review/
MSHA
Construction PM
Cropper Site
2002
Mitigation - US 113
Maryland
0.2
Design Review/
MSHA
Construction PM
US 50 and US 113
2002
Mitigation - US 113
Maryland
0.1
Design Review/
MSHA
Site
Construction PM
Mitchell Wetland
2001
Mitigation - US 113
Maryland
0.1
Design Review/
MSHA
Construction PM
WWB - Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project, NCEEP - NCDENR Ecosystem Enhancement Program, NCDMS - NC DEQ, Division of Mitigation Services,
NC DOT - North Carolina Department of Transportation, MSHA - Maryland State Highway Administration, VDOT - Virginia Department of Transportation
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

■1 �
KEY PERSONNEL
All legal aspects related to recordation of the conservation easement and other legal documentation
will be handled by: Moore & VanAllen (MVA), 100 North Tryon Street, Suite 4700, Charlotte NC 28202-4003
Paul Arena, Counsel from MVA has performed in this capacity on 29 past full delivery projects for the KCI team.
(Key Personnel resumes on the following pages)
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
K C I North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
RESPONSIBILITIES
CERTIFICATIONS YEARS OF
EXPERIENCE
PROJECTNAME
MANAGER
Timothy Morris
Project Manager/Practice
Rosgen Level I-II 27
Leader
PRINCIPAL -IN -CHARGE
Gary M. Mryncza, PE, PH
Principal -in -Charge
Professional Engineer: 20
NC#32733, CPESC, Rosgen
Level 1-4
PROFESSIONAL
Kristin Knight -Meng, PE
Site Assessment, Project Design
Rosgen Level I-II, NC WAM
13
Professional Engineer
NC#40899
Adam Spiller, CPESC
Site Assessment, Project
Rosgen Level I-IV
10
Design, Monitoring/
CPESC
Management
Alex French
Site Assessment/Survey, Project
Rosgen Level I-IV
19
Design, Monitoring
Tommy Seelinger
Site Assessment, Monitoring
Rosgen I-II
7
Joe Sullivan
Site Assessment, Monitoring
NC WAM/NC SAM
6
Certifications
Charlie Morgan
Site Assessment, Real Estate,
NC Registered Forester #1822
16
Construction
NC Real Estate Broker
#303068
Jim Gellenthin, PLS
Site Assessment/Survey
Professional Land Surveyor:
30
NC #3860
Grant Lewis, LSS, PWS
Site Assessment/Survey
Rosgen I-IV
(Axiom)
NC Licensed Soil Scientist -
1233
Michael Underwood, PE
Project Design, Monitoring
Professional Engineer
TN#118847
TDEC EPSC Level I-II
Rosgen Level I-II
NCSU Rivercourses
Kevin O'Briant
Site Restoration, Monitoring
Water Pollution Control System
16
Operator (#989400)
Rosgen Level I-IV
Zach Myrncza, CCM, CPESC
Site Restoration
Rosgen Level I, CCM, CPESC
9
All legal aspects related to recordation of the conservation easement and other legal documentation
will be handled by: Moore & VanAllen (MVA), 100 North Tryon Street, Suite 4700, Charlotte NC 28202-4003
Paul Arena, Counsel from MVA has performed in this capacity on 29 past full delivery projects for the KCI team.
(Key Personnel resumes on the following pages)
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
K C I North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

1
TIMOTHY MORRIS
Mitigation Project Manager
Education
MEM in Water Resource Management
BS in Natural Resource Management
Registration
Rosgen Level I, II
WTI Certified Wetland Delineator
NASHP/AHERA Certified Environmental Auditor (#1000196193)
27 Years of Experience
Mr. Morris is a Practice Leader for KCI's Natural Resource Programs practice. He worked as an environmental consultant for 27
years since graduating with a Master of Environmental Management degree from Duke University. Mr. Morris has worked on a
variety of natural resource based planning, restoration and construction projects for both private and public sector clients. His area
of expertise is in the water resource management field, and his specific experience includes natural resource restoration (primarily
riparian area restoration), wetland delineation, wetland permitting, wetland mitigation design, construction management, pond and
lake management, environmental construction inspection and watershed planning. For the last 15 years, Mr. Morris has focused on
the restoration of natural systems, primarily to mitigate for impacts associated with large-scale public and municipal infrastructure
projects.
Notable projects included in Mr. Morris' resume are the US 113 Dualization project on the Eastern Shore of Maryland and the
Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project, a $2.5 billion transportation venture between Maryland, Virginia, and the District of Columbia. For
these two projects, Mr. Morris managed a portfolio of restoration projects valued at over $60 million. These projects included stream
restoration, tidal and non -tidal wetland restoration, dam removal, migratory fish habitat expansion, submerged aquatic vegetation re-
establishment, water quality enhancement projects and fish passage and shoreline stabilization projects.
Currently, Mr. Morris manages KCI's mitigation banking and full delivery mitigation program. The main clients for this program
include the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services, the NC Department of Transportation as well as private developers.
As part of these programs, Mr. Morris has successfully managed over $40 million of mitigation assets over the last 11 years. These
projects include stream, wetland, and riparian area restoration components. As the name implies, these full delivery projects require
involvement in the project from site reconnaissance, real estate acquisition (fee simple and easement acquisition), assessment, design,
permitting, implementation (construction), monitoring, maintenance, and credit delivery. Mr. Morris has a defendable track record of
producing 99% of the credits that have been proposed in the mitigation plans and mitigation banking instruments.
• Farrar Dairy Project in Lillington, North Carolina for NCEEP. Lead Scientist/Wetland Designer. Supervised the design of more
than 110 acres of wetland mitigation and over 12,500 linear feet (LF) of stream restoration, enhancement, and preservation on a
large integrated wetland -stream complex in the Sand Hills of North Carolina. Coordinated preparation of construction drawings
and facilitated the implementation of property improvements coincident to the restoration project. Managed the regulatory
components of the project including permitting, document review, adaptive management and credit release for the site. The
project was closed out with no credit reductions from the proposed design.
• Johnson and Waddle Sites in Saltville, Virginia for TNC of Virginia and the Virginia Aquatic Resources Trust Fund. Project Manager.
Supervised the reconnaissance, real estate acquisition, regulatory negotiation, design, permitting, construction, and monitoring
of two adjacent 16 acres sites located along the North Fork of the Holston River in the mountains of Virginia. The credits derived
from the project were used to mitigate private impacts occurring in the Tennessee River basin. The wetland mitigation approach
involved preservation, restoration, enhancement and creation components that were integrated into a constructible design that
was constructed by KCI Environmental Technologies and Construction, Inc., the specialty environmental construction contracting
arm of KCI Technologies, Inc.
• Rough Horn Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank in Evergreen NC for NC Division of Mitigation Services. Project Manager.
Managing the ongoing development of a stream and wetland mitigation bank located in the Coastal Plain of North Carolina. This
site, when completed, will restore, enhance or preserve over 70 acres of riparian and non -riparian wetlands, restore approximately
5,500 LF of coastal plain stream, and integrate a continuous riparian buffer that originates from a drained Carolina Bay. Mr. Morris
was responsible for the initial identification of the restoration opportunity; the acquisition of easements and fee simple land for
seven different parcels owned by 4 separate entities; and the assessment, design, and permitting of the site.
E� FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
K C r North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

1
GARY M. MRYNCZA, PE, PH
Principal -in -Charge
Education
MS in Water Resources
MS in Civil Engineering
BS in Natural Science
BSET in Civil Engineering Technology
Registration
Hey -River Mechanics and Restoration
Rosgen Levels I, II, II1, IV
Professional Hydrologist (H-1605)
Professional Engineer (NC #32733)
Certified Professional in Erosion & Sediment Control
(#4314)
20 Years of Experience
Mr. Mryncza is the company -wide Discipline Head for
Resource Management and specializes in hydrology and
streams. His experience includes watershed and site-
specific hydrologic analysis, stream assessment, feasibility
study and restoration design, water quality assessment/
stream monitoring, and water resources management.
Mr. Mryncza is versed in the use of hydrologic/hydraulic
models and has experience applying natural channel design
principles. He has been responsible for the development
of design plans for over 50,000 LF of channel in North
Carolina for NCWRP / NCEEP and NCDOT.
• Glen Raven Full Delivery Project (FDP) in Burlington,
North Carolina for NCEEP. Design Engineer. Supervised
design of over 3,000 LF of impaired stream and associated
riparian area. Led the design team in existing condition
assessments, reference reach surveys, and development
of design criteria. Performed sediment transport and
hydraulic analyses. Developed construction drawings
and performed quality assurance/control for various
design elements.
• Rich Fork FDP in High Point, North Carolina for
NCWRP. Design Engineer. Supervised design of over
3,300 linear feet of impaired stream and 30 acres of
riparian wetlands along Rich Fork Creek in the High
Point area of Davidson County, North Carolina. Mr.
Mryncza led the design team in existing condition
assessments, reference reach surveys, and development
of design criteria. Led the development of construction
drawings and performed quality assurance/control for
various design and planning related project elements
and coordinated the regulatory approvals for the
project.
KCI
KRISTIN KNIGHT-MENG, PE
Restoration Design Engineer, Mitigation
Planner
Education
MEM in Ecosystem Science and
Management
BA in Biology -Environmental Studies
BS in Civil Engineering
Registration
NC PE # 040899
Rosgen Level I, II
NCWAM Training
13 Years of Experience
Ms. Knight -Meng is an engineer and project manager who
specializes in the restoration of natural stream and wetland
systems. During her 13 years at KCI, she has utilized
her background in engineering and ecosystem science to
complete stream and wetland assessments, design, report
preparation, and monitoring, hydrologic and hydraulic
studies and modeling, sediment studies, watershed
planning, 401/404 permitting, sediment and erosion
control plan development and FEMA coordination across
North Carolina.
• Twin Bays Wetland Restoration Site in Duplin County,
North Carolina for NCDMS. Project Scientist. Ms.
Knight -Meng developed the proposal and mitigation
plan and design for the restoration of approximately
10.6 acres of non -riparian wetland and 0.4 acre of
upland habitat in a former agricultural field in the
coastal plain. The primary restoration actions included
filling existing ditches and roughening the compacted
ground surface, but also included the modification
of an existing pond and the redevelopment of active
seepage areas. She developed a water budget to model
the proposed wetland hydrology.
• Sandy Bridge Stream and Wetland Restoration Project
in Rutherford County, North Carolina for NCDMS.
Project Engineer. Ms. Knight -Meng worked on the
initial site search and development, assessment, design,
and mitigation plan development for the restoration of
1,626 LF of a tributary to Cathys Creek and 6.94 acres
of adjacent wetlands at a livestock farm. This involved
developing the design, mitigation plan, hydrologic
analysis, and construction plans for the project.
• Mill Dam Creek Stream Restoration Site in Yadhin
County, North Carolina for NCDMS. Project Engineer.
Ms. Knight -Meng worked on the initial site development
and later the mitigation design and plan for this
approximately 13,000 LF stream restoration project.
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

1
ADAM WILLER
Restoration Designer/Monitoring Supervisor
Education
MEM in Ecosystem Science and
Management
BS in Biology -Environmental Science
Rosgen Level I, II, III, IV
CPESC # 6515
10 Years of Experience
Mr. Spiller is experienced in performing stream and
wetland assessments and restoration design. His
educational background in biology and environmental
management aid him in understanding the functional
implications of stream restoration. He has applied these
skills in numerous contexts, including assessment, design,
and monitoring.
• Dog Bite FDP in Bakersville, North Carolina for
NCEEP. Natural Channel Designer/Construction
Oversight. Prepared the design of over 3,000 LF
of degraded stream (trout waters) and associated
riparian area. Spent extensive time on-site during
construction working with the contractor to ensure
that the project was built as designed and address
design related questions from the construction staff.
This construction oversight also included adapting
the design in enhancement portions of the stream to
incorporate beneficial existing habitat features into the
project such as mature trees, stable undercut banks,
and natural grade control boulder features. This
oversight allowed construction to proceed efficiently
and successfully.
• Cane Creek FDP in Person County, North Carolina
for NCEEP Natural Channel Designer. Helped lead
the design team for this project that included almost
19,000 LF of stream restoration and enhancement to
generate 14,622 stream credits. The design included
the assessment of cattle impaired and channelized
streams and continued to the preparation of a
mitigation plan. The mitigation plan documented
these conditions and provided the justification for
the design approach to restore this large site. The
design incorporated multiple constraints including:
existing perennial springs, bedrock outcrops, and
steep valley slopes. Following the mitigation plan
Mr. Spiller assembled the design and construction
plans and worked through the permitting phase to
get to construction. The construction phase included
oversight and baseline monitoring.
W_ PROPOSAL
ALEX FRENCH
Restoration Designer
Education
BS in Natural Resources with minors in
Environmental Science and Forestry
Registration
Rosgen Level I, II, II1, IV
19 Years of Experience
Mr. French is experienced in performing existing stream
condition data collection and reference reach assessments
using the Rosgen Classification System. His educational
background in biology and natural resource management
provide an excellent understanding of the functional
implications of stream restoration. He has applied these
skills in numerous contexts including assessment, design,
and monitoring.
• Stanley's Slough/II Restoration FDP in Margarettsville,
North Carolina for NCDMS. Designer. Prepared the
design of over 4,274 LF of headwater stream and 11.2
acres of riparian wetland. Coordinated with team to gather
data for existing conditions assessment, reference reach
surveys, and development of design criteria. Developed
concept for a braided channel detail and assisted the
construction contractor with the implementation of the
design. Prepared construction drawings and assisted in
the monitoring of the project.
• Norman's Pasture and Norman's Pasture II Restoration
FDP in Turkey, North Carolina for NCDMS. Designer.
Prepared the design of over 843 LF of headwater stream
and 27.2 acres of riparian wetland. Coordinated with
team to gather data for existing conditions assessment,
reference reach surveys, and development of design
criteria. Stream design required fill and structure
installation in the incised channel bed to wet the relic
floodplain. Design also required the stable conveyance
of stream flow from a single thread channel into broad
coastal plain wetland complex to enhance and restore the
floodplain of Stewart's Creek. Prepared the construction
drawings for the entire project.
• Cedar Branch Restoration FDP in Randolph County,
North Carolina for NCDMS. Designer. The site's natural
hydrologic regime had been impacted by cattle access and
cleared of any riparian buffer. KCI restored the site from
impacted agricultural lands to a stable stream ecosystem
with a functional riparian buffer and floodplain access.
Designed over 7,047 LF of stream and coordinated with
team to gather data for existing conditions assessment,
reference reach surveys, and development of design
criteria.
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

oil
TOMMY SEELINGER
Monitoring Manager
Education
BA in Biology
Registration
Rosgen Level I, II
7 Years of Experience
Mr. Seelinger is an environmental scientist with experience
on projects in KCI's Resource Management Division. Mr.
Seelinger manages the monitoring elements for all of KCI's
North Carolina mitigation projects and often assists with
the monitoring for KCI mitigation projects in other states.
Duties include managing the monitoring schedules to ensure
fieldwork is completed efficiently for as many as 20 separate
mitigation sites during the course of the year, as well as
generating the annual monitoring reports for each site.
• Cane Creek Monitoring FDP in Person County, North
Carolina. The Cane Creek Site was a full delivery project
that included over 19,000 LF of stream. Mr. Seelinger
assisted with the monitoring of this site from Year 03
through project closeout. This included surveying more
than 4,700 LF of longitudinal profile and 20 cross sections
with Wolman pebble counts, sampling 20 permanent
vegetation monitoring plots, and visual assessment and
identification of potential problem areas. Mr. Seelinger
was also was in charge of annual monitoring reports.
• Buffalo Flats Monitoring FDP in Cabarrus County,
North Carolina. This project for the North Carolina
Division of Mitigation Services included over 20 acres of
wetlands. Mr. Seelinger assisted with the creation of the
baseline report using data collected by others on the team
and oversaw the monitoring of this site from Monitoring
Year 01 through project closeout. This included sampling
13 permanent vegetation monitoring plots, upkeep and
bi-monthly downloads of 12 pressure transducer wetland
gauges, annual soil profile monitoring at two locations,
and visual assessment and identification of potential
problem areas. Mr. Seelinger was also in charge of annual
monitoring reports.
• Jacob's ladder and Landing Monitoring FDP in Rowan
County, North Carolina. Together the sites include over
10,000 LF of stream for the North Carolina Division
of Mitigation Services. The monitoring for the two
sites consists of over 6,200 LF of longitudinal profile
survey, 21 cross sections with Wolman pebble counts,
28 permanent vegetation monitoring plots, upkeep of 4
pressure transducer stream gauges, and visual assessment
and identification of potential problem areas.
M
KCT
JOE SULLIVAN
Mitigation Planner/Assessment and
Monitoring
Education
MS in Natural Resources
BS in Biology and BA Environmental
Studies
Registration
NC Wetland Assessment Method (NC
WAM)
NC Stream Assessment Method (NC SAM)
6 Years of Experience
Mr. Sullivan is an environmental scientist with experience
in assessment, permitting, monitoring, and compliance
of stream and wetland restoration project, infrastructure
projects, and private development projects. He has
experience with stream and wetland delineations, 404/401
permitting, buffer authorizations, natural resource studies,
stream and wetland monitoring, endangered species
surveys, and invasive species management. His experience
includes field assessments and delineation, species surveys,
GPS data collection, GIS analysis and mapping, and report
preparation. He has used these skills in a variety of stream
and wetland restoration projects, private developments as
well as municipal and NCDOT projects.
• Stony Fork FDP in Benson, North Carolina for
NCDMS. Performed a wetland/stream delineation and
buffer determination on the site and acquired relevant
agency approvals. Assisted in the collection of stream
assessment data to inform the restoration design and
mitigation plan. The project involved the restoration of
over 7,500 LF of stream channel, including Stony Fork
and four unnamed tributaries.
• Rough Horn Swamp I and II FDP in Evergreen
North Carolina for NCDMS. Environmental scientist
responsible for the wetland and stream delineation
of sites totaling over 100 acres. Contributed to the
preparation of the mitigation and design plans. Project
involved the restoration, enhancement, and preservation
of over 5,000 LF of coastal plain streams and 60 acres
of wetlands.
• Bear Basin FDP in Richlands, North Carolina for
NCDMS. Assisted in the monitoring o f wetland hydrology
and vegetation on the 10 -acre site. Responsible for data
reduction, report writing, and assisting with adaptive
management activities required to ensure the site was
achieving its performance standards.
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

01 � �
CHARLIE MORGAN, RF
Real Estate Acquistion Specialist/Landowner
Education
MS in Agriculture and Natural Resource
Systems Management
BS in Forestry
Registration
Registered Forester, NC #1822; AL
#2271
Real Estate Broker, NC #303068
16 Years of Experience
Mr. Morgan has a broad record of accomplishment in
planning, coordinating, and executing conservation plans
and restoration projects in riparian, wetland, and forested
habitats in the southwestern and southeastern United States.
The projects and programs he has led required coordination
with federal, state, and local agencies as well as international
and cross-cultural organizations. In addition to his comfort
engaging all levels of legislative, regulatory, and executive
entities, he has valuable experience engaging land owners
and conducting community outreach and education.
• Yuma East Wetlands Restoration Project for the Bureau
of Reclamationl2uechan Indian Tribe/City of Yuma.
Restoration Program Director. Assisted with the design,
implementation, and management of a nearly 400 acre
restoration project at the historic confluence of the
Colorado and Gila Rivers.
• Hunters Hole Wetland Restoration Project for the
Bureau of Reclamation. Restoration Program Manager.
Responsible for implementation and management of
approximately 40 acre wetland restoration project on
the U.S.-Mexico border. This project also included a
sister project on the Mexican side of the border that Mr.
Morgan assisted with designing and acted as the local
national liaison.
• Rio Grande Restoration Consultation for the National
Park Service. Project Manager. Conducted field work
and provided recommendations for methods to restore
a 50 -mile stretch of the Rio Grande through Big Bend
National Park
• Laguna Division Wetland Restoration Project for the
Lower Colorado River Multispecies Conservation
Program, BOR. Restoration Program Director. Managed
the largest (1300 acres) wetland restoration project to
date on the lower Colorado River.
KCI
JIM GELLENTHIN, PLS
Chief Land Surveyor
Education
Certificate in Survey Technology
Registration
Professional Land Surveyor (NC #3860)
30 Years of Experience
Mr. Gellenthin has land surveying experience, including
supervision of survey personnel, survey procedures and
data management from courthouse research and field
procedures to the production of final mapping. He has
vast experience in preparation of topographic, boundary,
GPS control, environmental and construction surveys.
• Stony Fork FDP, Johnston County, North Carolina,
NCDMS. Project Surveyor. Responsible for
development of topographic base mapping, TIN
creation, easement plats, survey control and as -
built drawings for approximately 7,000 LF of stream
restoration.
• Mill Dam Creek FDP, Yadkin County, North
Carolina, NCDMS. Project Surveyor. Responsible
for development of topographic base mapping, TIN
creation, easement plats, survey control and as -built
drawings on approximately 11,000 LF of stream
restoration.
• Cedar Branch FDP, Randolph County, North
Carolina, NCDMS. Project Surveyor. Responsible
for development of topographic base mapping, TIN
creation, easement plats, survey control and as -built
drawings on over 7,000 LF of stream restoration and
enhancement.
• Sandy Bridge Farm FDP, Rutherford County, North
Carolina, NCDMS. Project Surveyor. Responsible
for development of topographic base mapping, TIN
creation, easement plats, survey control and as -built
drawings for over 1,500 LF of stream restoration and
4.5 acres of wetland restoration.
• Rough Horn Swamp FDP, Onslow County, North
Carolina NCDMS. Project Surveyor. Responsible
for development of topographic base mapping, TIN
creation, easement plats, deed research and survey
control and as -built drawings on approximately 31
acres of wetland restoration.
• Norman's Pasture and Norman's Pasture II FDP,
Sampson County, North Carolina, NCDMS. Project
Surveyor. Responsible for development of topographic
base mapping, TIN creation, easement plats, survey
control and as -built drawings on approximately 25
acres of wetland restoration and 830 LF of stream
enhancement.
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

1
GRANT LEWIS, LSS, PWS
Licensed Soil Scientist (Axiom)
Education
BS in Range Ecosystem Management
Registration
Licensed Soil Scientist (NC #1233)
Professional Wetland Scientist
Rosgen Level I, II, II1, IV
25 Years of Experience
Mr. Lewis has a 25 -year professional background in the
environmental consulting field including experience in
natural systems documentation, permitting, and stream/
wetland restoration. He has managed over 75 mitigation
feasibility studies, 20 detailed mitigation plans, and
implemented more than 30,000 LF of stream restoration
and 500 acres of wetland restoration. Additionally,
Mr. Lewis has managed the production of numerous
ecological assessments and/or natural system reports
including field delineations, protected species surveys,
document preparation, and permitting. Mr. Lewis will
serve the role of soil scientist on FDPs, primarily to map
hydric soil areas in wetlands and drained wetland features
to properly and accurately document wetland and stream
credit potential at each site.
• Abbey Lamm Stream and Wetland Restoration Site
in Alamance County, North Carolina for NC EEP.
Developed stream and wetland restoration plans to
restore 5,637 LF of stream channel and 1 acre of
riverine wetlands.
• Poncho Mitigation Bank Stream and Wetland
Restoration Site in Wayne County, North Carolina
for Restoration Systems, LLC. Developed stream
and wetland restoration plans to restore 5322 LF
of stream channel and 29 acres of riverine wetlands
as well as riparian buffer credits. Once the site was
constructed, stream and wetland monitoring included
longitudinal profile surveys, measurements of
permanently monumented cross-sections, substrate
pebble counts, benthic macroinvertebrate surveys,
vegetative sampling, and groundwater monitoring.
KCI
MICHAEL UNDERWOOD, PE
Design Engineer
Education
BS / Biological and Agricultural
Engineering
Registration
TN PE #118847
Rosgen Level I, Il
NCSU Rivercourses
TDEC EPSC Level I, lI
6 Years of Experience
Mr. Underwood is a design engineer with experience
on projects in KCI's resource management division. Mr.
Underwood has contributed to both the design and
monitoring elements of many KCI's full delivery projects
for NCDMS. Mr. Underwood's in-depth understanding of
stormwater BMP's and hydrologic processes has allowed him
to provide design input on stream and wetland restoration
elements that serve to enhance function and minimize risk
associated with incoming drainage features.
• Lockeland Springs Stream Restoration in Nashville,
Tennessee for the Tennessee Stream Mitigation
Program (TSMP). Project Engineer. Project is located
on a golf course within a city park. Streams are currently
channelized within impervious (concrete) drainage
features that feed into the Cumberland River. The 5,300
LF project will focus on removing the concrete/asphalt,
restoring bank and bed features, and adding structures
for bank stability and habitat. Mr. Underwood was
involved with the assessment, H&H modeling,
mitigation plan, design, site meetings, construction
drawings, and planting plan.
• Weimer Dam Removal in Bloomington, Indiana. Project
Engineer. Weimer Dam, a century old earthen dam
owned by the City of Bloomington, has been classified
as a significant hazard because of multiple safety
deficiencies including seeps through the dam. The dam
is approximately 400 feet long, 20 feet high, and holds
80 acre -ft of water. KCI was tasked with designing and
overseeing the removal of the dam through incorporating
a proposed natural stream design channel through the
dam remnant and planting the old lakebed with native
wetland plants. Mr. Underwood's work includes the
H&H model, design plans, site meetings, bid package,
and construction estimate. The project is underway and
construction oversight is ongoing.
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

1
KEVIN O'BRIANT
Construction Manager/Maintenance
Supervisor
Education
BS in Environmental Science
Registration
Rosgen Level I, II, III, IV
Water Pollution Control System
Operator (#989400)
16 Years of Experience
Mr. O'Briant is an environmental scientist with experience
restoring sites impacted by contamination as well as other
anthropogenic factors. Most recently, Mr. O'Briant has been
managing the construction end of stream and wetland
mitigation projects throughout North Carolina. His duties
include construction scheduling and estimating as well as
leading field crews and subcontractors during all phases
of the construction process. Mr. O'Briant is also in charge
of managing the maintenance elements of all of KCI's full
delivery projects. This important task requires careful
coordination with monitoring and project management staff
to ensure that performance standards and success criteria
are being met in compliance with each site's mitigation plan
• Bowl Basin FDP in Jacksonville, North Carolina for
NCDMS. Managed the construction phase of this 12 acre
wetland restoration project. Work included the filling/
partial filling of the existing drainage network, surface
roughening of existing compacted soils, installation of
shallow surface water deflectors and stabilization and
planting of all disturbed areas.
• Cedar Branch Full Delivery Project in Sophia, North
Carolina for NCDMS. Managed the construction phase
of this 7,500 LF stream restoration project in the Yadkin
River Basin. Duties included channel and floodplain
grading, structure installation, vegetative stabilization
and sediment and erosion control compliance. Managed
all material and equipment deliveries and provided
oversight and management of all subcontractors and
vendors. Coordinated all land improvements including
the development water wells and cattle waterers, the
installation of fence and easement signage and the
construction of stream crossings and farm roads.
• Norman's Pasture/II Full Delivery Project, in Turkey,
North Carolina for NCDMS. Managed the construction
phase of this 850 LF stream project and 27 acre wetland
project. Duties included channel and floodplain grading,
structure installation, vegetative stabilization and
sediment and erosion control compliance. Managed all
equipment and material deliveries.
KCT
ZACH MYRNCZA
Site Restoration
Education
MCM in Construction Management
BA in Psychology
Registration
Rosgen Level I
TDOT Asphalt Roadway
TDEC EPSC Level I
CPESC
OSHA Construction Safety and Health Course 10 -Hour
TDOT Concrete Field Technician
TDOT Soils and Aggregate Technician
9 Years of Experience
Mr. Mryncza is an environmental scientist that has been
involved in implementing stream restoration projects for more
than ten years. His responsibilities include stream assessment
and monitoring, construction oversight and management,
erosion prevention and sediment control inspection, and CADD
support during plan preparation.
• Twin Bays Restoration Site in Wallace, North Carolina for
NC Division of Mitigation Services. Served as superintendent
for the construction phase services associated with this 10.6
acre wetland restoration site. Mr. Mryncza was responsible
for the daily planning, materials management, labor
allocation, and cost monitoring as well as other on-site
activities. The project was completed on-time and within
budget even though significant weather delays and set backs
were encountered.
• Leiper's Fork Stream and Wetland Restoration Project in
Williamson County, Tennessee. Managed the construction
of over 12,000 LF of stream and ancillary wetland restoration
for the rural stream restoration project. Several sections
of the tributaries were abandoned and a new channel and
floodplain was constructed incorporating wood/rock vanes
and bioengineering. On large sections, boulders were
stacked to mimic the surrounding rock outcrops/bluffs to
gain a natural look on previously washed out stream banks.
• Sandy Bridge Farm Restoration Site in Rutherfordton,
North Carolina for NC Division of Mitigation Services.
Served as the assistant construction foreman for the
construction phase services associated with this stream and
wetland restoration project. The project was completed
on-time and within budget parameters. The project assets,
including 1,500 stream credits and 4.2 wetland credits
which are currently in the monitoring phase.
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

■1
SECTION G - TECHNICAL APPROACH
1.0 PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The Dales Creek Restoration Site (DCRS) is a candidate site for stream restoration in the French Broad River Basin in
Buncombe County, North Carolina. As evidenced by historic aerial photos and site investigations, the streams at this site
have been substantially modified by relocation and straightening, impacted from cattle, and other anthropogenic impacts.
Restoring these streams will not only return this to a stable stream ecosystem with a functional riparian buffer, floodplain
access, and riparian wetlands, but will also lower the supply of sediment entering Newfound Creek, a tributary to the
French Broad River, and reduce incoming nutrients from livestock.
KCI is offering a single option for the restoration of this site. This option is consistent with the 2009 French Broad River
Basin Restoration Priorities in unit 06010105 that focus on restoring stream functions such as maintaining and enhancing
water quality and improving fish and wildlife habitat. The project goals for DCRS are in line with the following basin
goals:
• Reduce sediment inputs,
• Reduce nutrient inputs,
• Restore riparian buffers,
• Stabilize stream banks,
• Restore and/or protect aquatic habitat,
• Reduce fecal coliform inputs, and
• Implement agricultural BMPs (eg., livestock exclusion) in rural areas.
Project -specific goals for the site will include:
• Restore channelized and livestock -impacted streams to a natural pattern within the landscape.
• Buffer nutrient and sediment impacts to the French Broad River and its tributaries from adjacent grazing and
farming practices.
• Improve and expand habitat for a variety of aquatic species.
Multiple objectives will be implemented to achieve these goals. Restoring and enhancing the channelized and cattle
impacted streams to B and C-type channels will improve stream stability, restore aquatic habitat, and reduce sediment
loading by limiting channel erosion and restoring riffle and pool features to the channel bed. Fencing cattle out of the
headwater channels in this system will help protect the sources of these streams, an important component to maintaining
good water quality. By establishing an easement that will be planted with native vegetation, a buffer will be restored,
which will reduce nutrient loading from cattle access and other adjacent agricultural practices. By excluding livestock,
this buffer will also reduce a direct source of fecal coliform inputs.
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The DCRS is situated in northwest of Buncombe County. The site is located approximately 3.5 miles southwest of the
town of Leicester, North Carolina. Specifically, the site is on Newfound Road, south west of the intersection of Morgan
Branch Road and Newfound Road. The center of the site is at approximately 35.5991 N and —82.7466 W in the Enka
USGS Quadrangle. The site is comprised of five streams: UT's 1-5 to Newfound Creek. All of the streams are tributaries
to UT1, which flows directly to Newfound Creek. The location of the project is shown in Figure 1 and the USGS
quadrangle is shown in Figure 2.
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
KCI North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

Project Location:
Buncombe County, NC
A Gree*
�e
hyo
Project Easement (5.4 ac)
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
�31tieY Rd
4'
C
�ey
�d
%o
i+
n� �CIO
r
G,.
%*$
�190ai
11111gir 9'anch Morgan&
',
N,
�d
C?a
4,
t�
i
O
9
R
y
�A R
�J
f
C"01
di
-
Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan,
Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand),
NGCC, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community
FIGURE 1. PROJECT SITE VICINITY MAP N
DALE'S CREEK RESTORATION SITE n
BUNCOMBE COUNTY, NC A

Proposed Easement (5.4 ac)
Project Watershed (139 ac / 0.22 sqmi)
0 500 1,000 FIGURE 2. USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP N Source: USGS National Map,
Feet DALE'S CREEK RESTORATION SITE Canton and Enka Quadrangles
BUNCOMBE COUNTY, NC

oil
Watershed Description
The site is within the 06010105 Watershed Cataloging Unit (8 -digit HUC) of the French Broad River Basin and the 14 -
digit HUC 06010105090020. The 14 -digit watershed includes a mix of agricultural (27 percent of land cover), forested
(72 percent of land cover), and rural development (1 percent of land cover) with an overall imperviousness estimated at
1.1 percent.
In DMS's most recent publication of excluded and Targeted Local Watersheds/Hydrologic Units, this 14 -digit HUC has
been identified as a Targeted Local Watershed (TLW). The unit has been identified as having water quality stressors that
include a large percent of agricultural lands, disturbed buffer, and impervious surfaces.
UTI to Newfound Creek, drains directly to Newfound Creek (NCDWR Index# 6-84), which is classified for surface water
as Class C. Newfound Creek is listed on the 2016 303(d) list of impaired waters. The watershed boundary is shown in
Figure 3.
Current Land Use/Land Cover
The project watershed for the DCRS is comprised of 0.22 square mile (139 acres). Current land use in the project watershed
(Figure 4) was derived from the 2015 orthoimagery and consists of pasture/farmland (27% / 38 ac), forest (72% / 99 ac),
and low-density development (1% / 1.3 ac). The current adjacent land use has a negative impact on the water quality of
the project streams. This is evidenced by direct runoff from agricultural fields along parts of the stream where there is no
riparian buffer and by livestock having direct access to many of the project reaches. KCI's measurement of the total
impervious area for the project watershed is approximately 1%, which is based on the land use delineated from the 2015
orthoimagery.
There are no conservation or protected areas located adjacent to the project site, but the project will connect with existing
forested buffer immediately adjacent to the project along some reaches, and improve and restore the existing forested
buffer on the site itself (see forested buffer metrics for the project streams in the table below). There are no Natural Heritage
Areas located near the site (Figure 5).
Forested Buffer Width Percent Impacted
Left Bank
Less than 30' 75%
Right Bank
Less than 30' 73%
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
KCI North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

U
Proposed Easement (5.4 ac)
Project Watershed (139 ac / 0.22 sqmi)
06010105090020 TLW
{
14 -digit HUC Boundaries
0 0.5 1 FIGURE 3. WATERSHED PLANNING CONTEXTUAL MAP N
DALE'S CREEK RESTORATION SITE Source: ge Statewide
Miles BUNCOMBE COUNTY, NC orthoimary, 2015

r �
i
OProject Easement (5.4 ac)`ar
.l .,.
O Project Watershed (139 ac / 0.22 sgmi)
Land Use
x
Forestland (72%)
.+...
,
Agriculture/Pasture (27%)
Rural Development %)
P
NCC�iGA
(1
,
0 350 700
FIGURE 4. PROJECT WATERSHED LAND USE
,AN\ Image Source: NC Statewide
Feet
CREEK RESTORATION SITE
2015
OrthoDALE'S
,\ Land Cover from
Land Cover from Imagery
BUNCOMBE COUNTY, NC
,/\\1

oil
Assessment of Historic Aerials
The DCRS has undergone significant modifications that have altered the site hydrology and vegetation. Historic aerials
were examined for any information about how the site has changed over recent history. The reviewed aerials are included
in Appendix A. Historic aerials were obtained from the USGS EarthExplorer, NCDOT, and NCOneMap for 1974, 1993,
2002, and 2010.
This evidence shows that the site has been systematically impacted by agriculture over the past 44 years with most of the
impacts involved with clearing and channelization occurring prior to the earliest aerial photo available. The primary
impacts to the system were associated with channelization and clearing throughout the site to utilize the resources in
support of agricultural production. In the earliest aerial photo from 1974, all of the project streams have already been
cleared. There is little change within the project area between 1974 and the most recent aerial photo.
FEMA Floodplain Issues
UT 1 to Newfound Creek is located approximately 1001f upstream of a mapped FEMA flood zone. Coordination with the
local floodplain administrator will take place to fulfill any requirements. Hydrologic modeling will be performed as
necessary to ensure that no hydrologic trespass occurs on neighboring properties.
Site Constraints
There are minimal constraints at this site. Most of the project is enhancement level work and will not conflict with any
adjacent properties. The areas that are restoration have natural constraints that include working within a confined mountain
valley. Other than these natural constraints, which KCI is used to working around, there is nothing that prevents the final
design from resulting in a high functioning stream, with significant uplift compared to the existing degraded system.
Airports
There are no airports within five miles of the project site.
Protected Species Issues
Initial site evaluations for protected species listed for Buncombe County have found occurrences of Golden Banded -
Skipper (Autochton cellus) and Superb Jewelwing (Calopteryx amata) within one mile of the project site. It is not
anticipated that there will be negative impacts to these species; however, a more detailed evaluation will be conducted
during the planning stages of this project.
Cultural Resources
There is one potential cultural resource located within a mile of the project. The BN0331 — David Cole House is located
approximately 0.2 mile northeast of the UT 1 to Newfound Creek. The project is not expected to have any effect on this
property.
Geology and Soils
The site lies within the Broad Basins (Level IV 66j) ecoregion of the Blue Ridge. The Broad Basins is drier, has lower
elevations and less relief than the more mountainous Blue Ridge Regions. It also has less boulder colluvium than the
surrounding regions and more saprolite. Although some areas are mostly forested, overall it has more pasture, cropland,
industrial land uses, and human settlement than other Blue Ridge ecoregions. The natural vegetation generally contains a
mix of oaks and pines more similar to the Piedmont, with more shortleaf and Virginia pine, and white, southern red, black,
and scarlet oaks.
According to the NRCS Web Soil Survey, most of the project consists of Toecane-Tusquitee complex soils (TpD), which
are mountain soils with a high content of rock fragments, characterized by random areas of seeps and springs, consisting
of Toecame (approximately 45-50%) and Tusquitee (approximately 35-40%); and Tate loam (TaC), which is an
intermountain hill soil found on footslopes and toeslopes, characterized by random areas of seeps and springs.
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
KCI North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

Proposed Easement (5.4 ac)
- 5 -ft Contours
0 150 300
Feet
FIGURE 6. EXISTING SITE TOPOGRAPHY N
A
Source: Contours derived from
DALE'S CREEK RESTORATION SITE NCLidarBare
BUNCOMBE COUNTY, NC Earth Data.

oil
Existing Conditions
The project has experienced significant landscape and vegetative modifications to allow for agriculture and livestock
management. The existing site conditions are shown in Figures 6 through 10 and seen in site photographs in Appendix B.
NC DWR stream forms for the project streams are included in Appendix D.
There are five streams located throughout the site, ultimately draining to Newfound Creek. Although many of these
features have small drainage areas, a combination of springs/seeps coming from hillslopes and surface water provide
steady hydrologic sources for these streams. Bedrock is not a contributor to channel form and is not found along the site
streams (Figure 10). The restoration and heavier handed enhancement work will focus on the areas of stream that are
incised, with bank height ratios above 1.5 (17%) and bank erosion (23%). As mentioned above, livestock have had a
significant impact on many of the project streams. Currently, cattle have full access to the majority of the project streams.
The primary drainage associated with this project includes an unnamed tributary (UT1 to Newfound Creek) and its
tributaries (UT2, UT3, UT4, and UT5). UT1 begins in a forested area, downstream of multiple seeps. This area is open to
cattle, but due to the forest and the valley confinement, the stream has not been significantly degraded by the cattle and
appears to be functioning. UT 1 continues to flow down this forested valley. There are a couple of large drops, but these
are not active headcuts. Where the UTI valley becomes broader and the forest transitions to pasture there are still some
sparse trees, but the cattle regain access to the channel. This portion of channel is not as degraded as most other project
reaches, but the condition begins to get worse as it flows downstream. The channel alternates between being incised and
confined to areas where the banks are less steep and cattle have destroyed the channel form. These varying conditions
continue downstream where cattle access remains until the bottom 150' of the project reach, where cattle do not have
channel access.
UT5 begins at a spring/seep at a series of boulders, where perennial flow exists and begins flowing down valley. This first
section of UT5 has a riparian buffer that is composed of invasive shrubs and vines before transitioning to an open pasture
and then to a forested valley. Before the forested portion, the stream has evidence of cattle impacts throughout the channel.
The channel does not appear to be unstable, but the banks and bed have been negatively affected by the cattle. Where the
forested valley starts, the stream condition improves and has fewer cattle impacts. UT5 continues in this condition until it
joins UT1. UT4 is in a similar condition as UT5, starting at a spring/seep in an open area, surrounded by invasives, with
frequent cattle access, and then transitioning to a forested valley with steeper side slopes that prevent extensive cattle
access until the confluence with UT 1.
UT3 has the least amount of buffer and is the most open to cattle impacts. This stream has an inconsistent bed and channel
form. Some portions of the channel are wide with minimal banks and other parts are narrow with steep drops at headcuts.
The entire reach shows multiple signs of instability and these deficiencies are compromising the stream functions. This
channel flows down the valley to the confluence with UT 1.
The last tributary to UT1 is UT2. UT2 starts at a spring/seep at the base of a slope with a rhododendron canopy on the
right side of the stream. This stream has a stable low flow channel, but there are impacts from cattle and the riparian buffer
is weak or non-existent as the stream flows away from the slope towards UTI. There are fringe wetlands along the edge
of UT2, which enhance the function of this headwater channel.
The descriptions above detail how the modifications to this landscape from livestock, vegetation removal, and
channelization have resulted in the present day condition of the project streams and the adjacent degraded fringe wetlands
that exist along some of these reaches. These streams all have small drainages, but the hydrology source for most of the
streams are a series of persistent groundwater seeps and springs. Even though the drainages are small, these streams and
the adjacent wet areas have the potential to be a high functioning system if their current functional impairments can be
overcome. Below is a table that lists the watershed sizes of the project streams. For more information on the stream
conditions, see the stream forms in Appendix D. While most of these streams score out as intermittent, there is ample
evidence, that these streams run most of the year if not year-round. A suite of stream functions has been compromised
across this system. This starts with the hydrologic modifications to the site including channelization to drain hillside
seepage and several small degraded wetlands and seeps. The degradation of these features affect how runoff and
groundwater interact with the project streams. Hydraulic functions have been affected by the direct modifications to the
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
KC I North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

oil
channel such as ditching and by processes that have happened naturally due to anthropogenic disturbance in the watershed
such as incision, disconnection from the floodplain, and cattle impacts. The most visually apparent impact to the project
streams, which also has had the most functional impact to the streams is cattle access to the channels. This includes impacts
to hydraulic and geomorphological functions evident by degraded bed and banks, which in some instances means the
channel and bed form is gone from the stream, and also the physicochemical functional impairments caused by the steady
stream of cattle waste to the project reaches. These functions have also been compromised by the removal of riparian
vegetation and channelization of these streams. This is especially apparent on the steeper reaches where there are severe
headcuts that are migrating up these valleys. Streams in this setting should have some coarse riffles present, but these are
minimal at this site. Investigation of the stream bed has found gravel deposits beneath the layers of silt, but they are
infrequently at the surface of the stream. The majority of the project channels have low functional values and all have
compromised functions. This project covers the most degraded channels within this system and offers a chance to restore
and enhance these streams, which would bring significant functional uplift to this system.
KCI
Project Stream and Watershed Sizes
Project Stream
UTI Newfound Creek
Watershed Size (ac)
76
UT2 Newfound Creek
14
UT3 Newfound Creek
25
UT4 Newfound Creek
9
UT5 Newfound Creek
16
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

a
Project Easement
10 -ft Contours
0 150 300
Feet
FIGURE 7. LIDAR MAP
DALE'S CREEK RESTORATION SITE
BUNCOMBE COUNTY, NC
N
A Source: Contours derived from
NC Lidar Bare
Earth Data.

Attribute
Livestock Access
Percent Impacted
allows 80%
N
R I
heti. `
Q Proposed Easement (5.4 ac)
Existing Streams
Cattle Wallow
Culverts
FIGURE 9. SITE FLOODPLAIN ALTERATIONS
0 150 300 AND WATER QUALITY STRESSORS
Feet DALE'S CREEK RESTORATION SITE
BUNCOMBE COUNTY, NC
N
A Image Source: NC Statewide
Orthoimagery, 2015

Attribute Percent Impacted
Erosion -Active Scour
r, Low 4%
Moderate 16%
-------———--___ — _-___ Severe 3%
None 77%
Bank Height Ratio
Less than 1.5 83%
" Greater than 1.5 17%
1 Proposed Easement (5.4 ac)
Project Parcels
x"
1
— Bedrock/Boulders
1
— Headcuts
1
Bank Height Ratio
1
Less than 1.5
1
— Higher than 1.5
Erosion -Active Scour
Severe
-
Moderate
\
Low
— None
0
1
1
~: _
4.
- ✓
NGC�UIH
FIGURE 10. CHANNEL STABILITY MAPPING A
N
0 150 300 DALE'S CREEK RESTORATION SITE Image Source: NC Statewide
Feet BUNCOMBE COUNTY, NC Orthoimagery, 2015
t'
0
1
1
~: _
4.
- ✓
NGC�UIH
FIGURE 10. CHANNEL STABILITY MAPPING A
N
0 150 300 DALE'S CREEK RESTORATION SITE Image Source: NC Statewide
Feet BUNCOMBE COUNTY, NC Orthoimagery, 2015

ME
3.0 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
The Dales Creek Restoration Project will generate 1,842 Stream Mitigation Credits (SMCs). Depending on the reach,
restoration and enhancement work will include: restoring the profile, dimension, and planform of project streams within
the valley, reconnecting their relic floodplains, stabilization of headcuts in the project streams, reduction and management
of widespread invasive vegetation, excluding cattle from the project streams, and the establishment of a native riparian
buffer. Four culverted crossings are planned for the site. These crossings are discussed below and are replacements for
existing failing crossings, while other failing crossings will be removed and not replaced. All of these crossings will be in
easement exceptions and not included in the project easement. This project offers the opportunity to restore many degraded
tributaries within this watershed and their associated riparian wetlands along with natural springs and seeps that feed this
system throughout the agricultural parcel. The project is providing significant functional uplift for this small agricultural
watershed. Figure I 1 illustrates the proposed mitigation at the site. In Section 4.0, the proposed mitigation is depicted in
tabular form. All of the project streams will have buffers of at least 30'.
Unnamed Tributaries to Newfound Creek (UTI, UT2, UT3, UT4, and UT5)
The mitigation work associated with these tributaries will include Enhancement I and 11 and Restoration. The upper limits
of UT 1 along with the lower portions of UT4 and UT5 will be Enhancement 11, but at a ratio of 5:1. Cattle have access to
all of these channels, but they are surrounded by steep valley walls and forest, which make these channels harder for cattle
to access so they are generally functioning. This Enhancement II work includes invasive control and cattle exclusion with
fencing. The upper portions of UT5, UT4, and UT2 are all similar, in that they are small spring/seep headwater channels,
with poor quality or non-existent buffers that have been impacted by cattle, but are still generally functioning.
Enhancement 11(2.5:1 ratio) work along these reaches will consist of buffer planting, invasive control, and cattle exclusion.
The portion of UT 1 after the initial Enhancement II (5:1 ratio) work is a slightly larger channel than the other Enhancement
II portions in this drainage, but the same general approach (at 2.5:1 credit ratio) will guide the work to improve that reach
as the other Enhancement II sections with the same ratio. The rest of UTI, downstream of the confluence with UT3, with
be Enhancement I mitigation. This work will focus on the same improvement methods as the Enhancement 11 reaches, but
there will be more of an emphasis on bank grading and the installation of grade control and habitat structures in the
channel. These structures will create habitat diversity and arrest the active headcuts within this reach. UT3 is the only
channel that is in need of restoration work within this stream system. This is a steep channel that has had significant cattle
impacts and active headcuts are present. The restoration work will focus on restoring this headwater channel to a more
natural step and cascade pool system. This will include adjustments to dimension, pattern, and profile and the installation
of woody debris structures to provide habitat niches throughout the stream. Special attention will be given to channel form
where the cattle have destroyed the existing bed and banks and in the steeper portions of the channel as described here.
The restoration will make use of boulder structures to mimic the natural grade control that is found in the stable systems
throughout the Newfound Creek watershed. Reference reaches for these types of steep headwater channels will be used to
identify a stable form that is common within this valley setting. Some culverted crossings on these streams will be replaced
and others will replace ford crossing. One existing failing culvert crossing will be removed.
The functional lift associated with this enhancement and restoration work is significant. The stressors to this system are
primarily caused by direct cattle impacts to the project streams and poor riparian buffers. For water quality functions, there
are multiple stressors that will be addressed to improve function. Currently, almost 75% of the project has minimally
functioning riparian buffers. The project will include planting a full buffer with a minimum of 30' in width along all
project reaches. By excluding cattle from the entire easement and all of the project streams, there will be significant uplift
through reductions in sediment, nutrients, and fecal coliform. Since these are all headwater channels and the project
includes the full length of these streams, to their source in most cases, there will be minimal off-site contributors of these
water quality stressors once the project is implemented. The only source of these stressors currently is the cattle access,
which this project directly addresses.
For hydrology functions, this agricultural watershed has minimal impervious area and is only flashy due to the steep slopes
of the watershed. This will be addressed primarily through wider buffers that will slow sheet flow to the project streams,
and by replacement of culverts that are partially failed and represent a barrier to flow at times with new culverts designed
to convey bankfull flows in a stable manner.
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
KCI North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

oil
The restoration and enhancement work will also improve habitat functions. Habitat fragmentation exists on site in the
form of degraded culverts and portions of channel that are suffering extreme erosion and sedimentation from cattle
crossings/wallows. These features act like blockages within the stream since they have no cover and conditions in them
are so poor. All of these crossing areas will be repaired and have new habitat features restored to create better connectivity
throughout the stream channels. These areas are also where there is limited bedform diversity. Bedform diversity is also
limited by the steep nature of these channels and the sedimentation caused by the cattle impacts that has covered most of
the coarse material in the stream and filled in natural pools. The enhancement and restoration work will create habitat
diversity in the form of riffles, cascades, and step pools. This will make sure that there is habitat structure throughout these
streams. Large woody debris will also be added to the channel. Currently, there is sufficient woody debris in some of the
enhancement reaches. The restoration will ensure that this supply of woody debris is consistent throughout all project
streams. Overall, the work within this small watershed leading to Newfound Creek is a significant step in helping the
overall health of Newfound Creek.
As discussed before, all stream crossings will be culverts and there will be a total reduction in the number of existing
crossings on these streams. The newly designed crossings will be designed to not impact the flow of the channel and have
natural bed material through the crossings to allow for aquatic organism passage. Each of these crossings will be
approximately 15'-20' wide and be in easement exceptions 30'-60' wide. These crossings will be in easement exceptions
that will include a total of 170' of channel.
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
KCI North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

oil
In order to analyze the existing sediment conditions within the project streams, bar sampling and pebble counts will be
conducted, which will describe the sediment regime and the types of sediment found throughout the streams. After
analyzing the existing sediment conditions, the site will be studied with respect to proposed sediment transport. In active
bed systems, there is a threshold level of bedload movement. At low flow levels, only the smallest particles will move,
with the larger particles resisting the flow of the stream; this is the condition of partial sediment transport. As the stream
flow increases, eventually every particle on the streambed will show threshold movement. This is the condition of full
sediment transport. If the largest particle that moves during a bankfull event can be identified, then the flow conditions
that produced this movement can be determined and this flow condition (channel competency) can be used in the design
of the restored stream. Determinations of the design shear stresses will be made based on the sediment distribution from
the surface and subsurface sampling.
These shear stresses will be validated for the proposed riffle cross-sections and channel gradient using established shear
stress equations for competency. The shear stress values for the designed reaches will be calculated and related to the
movement of a particular grain size using Shield's threshold of motion curve. An approximate bedload transport rate may
be modeled using the Wilcock and Crowe model for mixed gravel -sand systems using the existing surface data if
determined necessary.
The project streams all have small watershed areas and are predominantly seep driven. Any existing bed material is all
imbedded from the fine sediment deposition caused by erosion due to cattle impacts. Most of the project streams are likely
threshold channels, which is defined as a stream where the bed material inflow is negligible and the channel boundary is
immobile even at high flows. As opposed to an active bed system, a threshold channel never achieves full sediment
transport; the system only achieves partial sediment transport. Therefore, the bedload rates provided for some streams may
not be relevant for all of the project streams. Based on this analysis, the channels will be designed to provide sufficient
competency for the type of streams proposed and capable of transporting sediment during bankfull events.
As a result of the restoration and enhancement actions, these streams will be protected in perpetuity and will expand
valuable stream habitat near other important ecosystem features nearby.
Riparian Vegetation
Evaluation of community types in the area indicates that the proposed stream buffers will be generally consistent in species
types throughout the buffer, but there will likely be some transition of species dependent on the proximity to the active
floodplain of the channel and the position in the valley. Plantings of 968 stems per acre (9 feet x 5 feet spacing) will be
installed to achieve a mature survivability of two hundred ten (2 10) stems per acre after seven years. Woody vegetation
planting will be conducted during dormancy.
The portions to be planted closer to the active channel, floodplain, and in the riparian wetlands may consist of the following
species:
American Sycamore
Platanus occidentalis
River Birch
Betula nigra
Swamp Chestnut Oak
Quercus michauxii
Willow Oak
Quercus phellos
Green Ash
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Tulip Poplar
Liriodendron tulipifera
Tag Alder
Alnus serrulata
Blackgum
Nyssa sylvatica
Buttonbush
Cephalanthus occidentalis
Silky Dogwood
Cornus amomum
The portions to be planted slightly higher in the valley, in potentially drier areas, may consist of the following species:
Tulip Poplar Liriodendron tulipifera White Oak Quercus alba
Southern Red Oak Quercus falcata Chestnut Oak Quercus montana
As discussed above there are small spring and seep driven wetlands throughout the project area, and likely more will be
restored. Those areas will be planted with a mix of trees and shrubs to potentially include:
Tag Alder Alnus serrulata Blackgum Nyssa sylvatica
Buttonbush Cephalanthus occidentalis Silky Dogwood Cornus amomum
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
KCI North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

oil
PROPOSAL
On the restored stream banks, live stakes will be used to provide natural stabilization. Appropriate species identified for
live staking include:
Silky Dogwood Cornus amomum Silky Willow Salix sericea
Black Willow Salix nigra Common Elderberry Sambucus canadensis
A custom herbaceous seed mix composed of appropriate native species found in reference communities will also be
developed and used to further stabilize and restore the site.
Easement Boundary Marking
The site will be marked and surveyed as per DMS's requirements contained within http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/eep/fd-
forms-templates.
4.0 PROPOSED MITIGATION
The streams and wetlands that make up the project offer substantial opportunity for restoring a stable, buffered stream and
wetland system. The following descriptions of mitigation type and extent are based on the Stream Mitigation Guidelines,
April 2003 US Army Corps of Engineers Wilmington District, United States Environmental Protection Agency, North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission and North Carolina Division of Water Quality.
Stream Restoration
Dales Creek
Restoration Site
391
a
1:1
redits
391
Stream Enhancement 1
1,342
1:1.5
895
Stream Enhancement 2
1,024
1:2.5
410
Stream Enhancement 2
729
1:5
146
TOTAL SMCs
3,486
=
1,842
5.0 CURRENT OWNERSHIP AND LONG TERM PROTECTION
The proposed restoration project is located on properties owned by:
Franklin Dale Morgan and Joyce C. Morgan
1281 Newfound Road
Leicester, NC 28748
PIN — 8689-63-4964
Neal A. Morgan and Ava M. Morgan
321 Morgan Branch Road
Leicester, NC 28748
PIN — 8689-63-4964
Martin C. Morgan
75 Morgan Branch Road
Leicester, NC 28748
PIN — 8689-63-4964
The Offeror holds an executed option to purchase easement restrictions on the land necessary to undertake the project and
this option has been recorded with the Register of Deeds in Buncombe County (Appendix C).
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
KCI North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

oil
Conveyance of a perpetual conservation easement to the State of North Carolina is the method that will be used to provide
long term protection to the mitigation site.
6.0 PROJECT PHASING
The project schedule assumes a notice to proceed on or before June 1, 2019. Adjustments to the schedule will be required
if the construction/planting window (11/2020 — 3/2021) is missed due to a delayed Notice to Proceed.
Completion Period (Following NTP)
Environmental Screening/Public Meeting 2 months
Record Easement 4 months
Mitigation Plan 12 months
Permits Acquisition and Earthwork
Planting and Monitoring Device Installation
As -Built Drawings and Baseline Monitoring Report
Monitoring Report #1
Monitoring Report #2
Monitoring Report #3
Monitoring Report #4
Monitoring Report 45
Monitoring Report 46
Monitoring Report #7
7.0 SUCCESS CRITERIA
18 months
21 months
24 months
30 months
42 months
54 months
66 months
78 months
90 months
102 months (8.5 years)
Monitoring will consist of the collection and analysis of data to support the evaluation of the project in meeting established
restoration objectives. Specifically, project success will be assessed utilizing vegetation survivability, stream hydrologic
monitoring, stream stability, and visual inspection following the monitoring guidelines and success criteria described in
the DMS monitoring guidelines current at the time of this proposal submittal.
Duration
Monitoring will be conducted for a period of seven years following project implementation. The first scheduled monitoring
event will be conducted during the first full growing season following project completion and at least six months after the
completion of the as -built survey.
Reporting
The monitoring report format will follow the DMS monitoring report template available at the time of this proposal
submittal.
Photograph Reference Points
Photograph reference points (PRPs) will be established to assist in characterizing the site and to allow qualitative
evaluation of the site conditions. The location of each photo point will be marked in the monitoring plan and the
bearing/orientation of the photograph will be documented.
KCI
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

oil
Stream Vegetation Monitoring
The survivability of the vegetation plantings will be evaluated using a sufficient number of vegetative sampling plots
randomly placed throughout the restored wetland and stream buffer. Plots must achieve a stem density of 260 stems/acre
after five years and 210 stems/acre after seven years. A photograph will be taken of each monitoring plot, allowing yearly
qualitative comparison of vegetation conditions.
Stream Monitoring
The purpose of monitoring is to evaluate the stability of the restored stream. The monitoring for the restored streams will
comply with guidance included in the DMS monitoring guidelines current at the time of this proposal submittal.
*A scoring sheet taken from the RFP has been filled out based on KCI's understanding of the site. This sheet is included
in Appendix E.
KCI
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

■1
8.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL
KCI, as part of its strategic plan, has achieved ISO 9001: 2015 certifications companywide.
Our primary quality objectives are to:
• Satisfy client expectations through designs and professional services that conform to client specifications;
Continually review company performance by analyzing objective data regarding both our processes and
deliverables; and
Use this objective data to identify and drive opportunities to continuously improve the Quality Management
System (QMS).
ISO is a QMS standard requiring that company activities be modeled as a system of inter -related processes, which will be
continually audited to objectively measure performance and improve outcomes. A key component of the ISO standard
that differentiates it from other systems is the mandatory continual auditing and improvement requirement.
As part of our quality management system, KCI has developed its own internal audit program to measure the performance
of the processes, which define our quality management system. Select employees within the firm have been trained as ISO
Internal Auditors to audit our internal systems throughout the organization. Results of the audits are evaluated for the root
cause of non -conformities to quality objectives and presented to senior management to develop and implement
improvements to our processes to ensure desired results.
In order to obtain and maintain ISO certification, third party auditors from an independent registrar firm audit KCI's QMS
on a regular basis. The audit consists of three basic questions: 1) is our quality management system in conformance with
the ISO standard, 2) are we following the requirements of our QMS and 3) are we continually improving our QMS to
achieve higher quality objectives. To better understand the ISO auditing and certification process, KCI has trained
employees as third party/lead auditors who have a thorough understanding of the ISO. 9001:2015 QMS standard, QMS
evaluation, and process auditing. The International Register of Certificated Audi- tors (IBCA) recognizes this training.
Quality control procedures for the work performed in each of KCI's technical disciplines are defined in each discipline's
quality control manual. These procedures, developed by the technical staff, contain specific instructions on the preparation,
checking, review, and coordination of each work product produced by the discipline. Developing separate quality control
procedures for each technical discipline allows the procedures to be customized and rigorous for the work products
produced in that discipline. The purpose of these procedures is to eliminate potential errors, omissions, ambiguities, and
inconsistencies in the design and development of project documents. The manuals and their implementation constitute the
principal mechanism for technical quality control at KCI. Conformance to these procedures is ensured through KCI's
internal auditing process.
KCI's Corporate Quality Management Manual, in addition to stating corporate administrative requirements involving
issues such as file maintenance, professional licensing and document retention, describe the principles that form the
foundation of the firm's technical quality control procedures. Five simple principles are incorporated into the procedures
developed by the technical staff to track the accuracy and completeness of the work products they produce. The five basic
principles are:
1. Dissemination of Project Information: A Project Memorandum is prepared and posted on the network prof ect files
so that the project team is aware of relevant project information.
2. Performance of Work by Qualified Personnel: Work is performed by qualified personnel based on education and
experience in the technical discipline required. It is a violation of company policy for personnel to participate in
design or checking of work outside their area of expertise.
3. Detailed Checkfor Technical Accuracy: Work is thoroughly checked for technical accuracy by a person qualified
to perform the work as described in Number 2 above.
4. Independent Quality Review: Senior personnel review work clarity, understandability, and constructability
prior to submittal.
5. Documentation: Personal signatures accompany documents and checklists attesting that quality control
procedures were appropriately incorporated into the work product.
KCI
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

■1
Job Specific Quality Control Procedures
For complex assignments, KCI will prepare a project -specific Quality Assurance (QA) Plan to demonstrate that major
project deliverables conform to accepted design practices and comply with the client's design standards. The QA Plan will
contain procedures that will be used to take care that a quality planning and/or design and construction product is provided
and will list documentation to be submitted to verify the procedures have been followed. Sample checklists, or similar
documentation, will be used to indicate that a quality review has been performed will be prepared. If KCI's client requires
preparation of a project specific QA Plan for a specific task, it will be submitted for approval.
QA/QC Responsibility
Primary responsibility for planning, executing, coordinating, and reviewing the planning and design work per- formed
under this contract will be KCI's QA/QC Administrator, and Project Manager. It will be their responsibility to check that
technical disciplines comply with their respective quality control procedures. Documentation of compliance with quality
control procedures is included in this responsibility.
Quality Assurance Reviews
KCI's senior management takes an active role in the Quality Management Program. In addition to routinely completing
independent Quality Assurance Reviews, senior managers also perform annual Quality Assurance Reviews (QAR) for
each technical division and branch office to assess the implementation of the provisions contained in the Quality
Management Program Manual and specific procedures developed by each discipline. The effectiveness of these quality
control procedures is continually evaluated through these reviews and by soliciting feedback from staff and clients. The
policies and procedures are modified and augmented, as necessary, to provide the quality services to which KCI is
committed.
KCI's specific construction administration and management capabilities for DMS full delivery projects include the
following:
Construction Administration and Management Capabilities
KCI maintains a well-trained and experienced construction administration, inspection and management staff with direct
experience on DMS projects. KCI has developed an internal Project Procedures Manual that is specific to DMS projects,
both design -bid -build (DBB) and full delivery projects. This manual identifies project management procedures for phases
of procurement, construction and the closeout. The manual also identifies document control requirements, quality control
methods, safety procedures, construction inspection techniques, claims avoidance, scheduling and reporting requirements.
The manual has recently been updated to include changes reflected in the most recent version of the DMS Project
Implementation Manual. KCI's experience is exemplified in the successful completion of design -bid -build and full
delivery projects in various physiographic regions throughout North Carolina. We believe that our successful record of
accomplishment on construction projects is due to the cross training of staff on construction projects of our own. The
employees working in the field on DBB projects are trained in construction techniques refined through full delivery and
similar projects where KCI utilizes our own equipment and staff to complete stormwater, stream, and wetland projects.
The direct experience is beneficial for communicating with contractors and understanding the capabilities of equipment
during construction.
KCI is diligent in documenting all phases of the construction process. Daily logs, meeting minutes, weekly and monthly
progress reports, payment request markups, plan revisions, email and phone correspondence, RFI's, field and change
orders, schedules, quality assurance forms, contract documents and submittals are all examples of the documentation
requirements for KCI during construction. KCI maintains an office file, a digital file, and field files for all of these items.
KCI has developed our own quality assurance and quality control procedures that incorporate DMS requirements/guidance
and expand on those procedures to ensure the site is properly inspected and documented during construction. We
understand the roles of all the parties involved (contractor, designer, DMS and landowners) and communicate these roles
to all parties involved so that proper chain of command is followed. When necessary, we are experienced in the resolution
of corrective actions, disputes and the interpretation of liquidated damages and other general contract conditions.
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
K % 1 North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

oil I
Inspection of the work includes the inspection of sediment and erosion control devices, project materials, channel and
structure grading, vegetation, staging and stockpile areas, and permitted conditions. KCI maintains project logs
supplemented by KCI -developed inspection forms to document all inspection items.
KCI prides itself on completing all site work to a level of quality such that punchlist items will be non-existent or minimal
during the final inspection of the project. This will ensure rapid project closeout and a quick transition of the site to its
monitoring phase.
KCI
FULL DELIVERY PROJECTS TO PROVIDE MITIGATION CREDITS
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

1974
4
a
01
T!.- !-I-- w7fflAn
.� -... -
Project Easementi"
` NCCGIA t NCCGIA
FIGURE A. HISTORIC AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS N Image source:
0 300 600NCDOT Historic Aerials;
DALE'S CREEK RESTORATION SITE NC OneMap
FCei BUNCOMBE COUNTY, NC
1993
kxY �
1�
Oak r
j
.mss'
-
• 1�Y:_.,it�. 1LL
T!.- !-I-- w7fflAn
.� -... -
Project Easementi"
` NCCGIA t NCCGIA
FIGURE A. HISTORIC AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS N Image source:
0 300 600NCDOT Historic Aerials;
DALE'S CREEK RESTORATION SITE NC OneMap
FCei BUNCOMBE COUNTY, NC
1993
kxY �
1�
T!.- !-I-- w7fflAn
.� -... -
Project Easementi"
` NCCGIA t NCCGIA
FIGURE A. HISTORIC AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS N Image source:
0 300 600NCDOT Historic Aerials;
DALE'S CREEK RESTORATION SITE NC OneMap
FCei BUNCOMBE COUNTY, NC

Dale's Creek Restoration Site Photo Log
Photo 1: Looking at UT1 below UT2 confluence.
Photo 2: Looking at upstream portion of UT2.
Photo 3: Looking at UT1 upstream of UT2.
Photo 4: Looking at UT1 in reach of Enhancement
2 at 2.5:1.
Photo 5: Looking at UTI in reach of Enhancement
2 at 5:1.
Photo 6: Looking at a seep above UT4.

Photo 7: Cattle access to UT1 Newfound Creek.
Photo 8: Cattle crossing along UT3 Newfound
Creek.

Page t of 1
Doo 1D: 0V5o7"/Sp00o1 7vPr: t7P
Reoorded: 02/07!2018 at 01:27:11 PH
Fre Aat: #10.00 Peps 1 of t
Vorkflowa O000Ab3o1l-0002
Buncombe county. NC
Drew Relainper Register or Deeds
w5634 m1891
Memorandum of Contract to Porehase Real Estate
Prepared by / m-wm to: TimotbyJ. Morris, KCI Environmental Technologies and Construction Im, 4505 Fells of Neuse
Road, Suite 400 Raleigh, NC 27609.
Franklin Dale Morgan and Joyce C. Morgan {collectively and severally, "Seller"), whose address is 1281
Newfound Road, Uioester, NC 28748, and KCI Emirsnmeutal Technologies and Construction, like. a Delaware
corpwatlon rPurthaser"), whose address is 4505 Falls of'Neuse Road, Suite 400 Raleigh NC 27609, have entered into a
contract to sale and purchase easement restrictions on the following properties located in Bumcombe County, North
Carolina: PIN's,8689-69-5419,8689-66-3036,8689-87-7949 and 8689-634964. This MemorandumofContreawril
terminate 18 months from the date of this Memorandum and is recorded at the Register ofDeeds in Asheville, Buncombe
Canty, North Carolina
Witness our hands and seals this rday oMLirONk, Affy.
Franklin Dale Morgan
ApLt� �JrY�=
C. Morgan
STATE OF /VC
COUNTYOF_Wek b
1, the undersigned, a Notary Public of the County and State aforesaid, do hereby cert* that Franklin Dale Morgan and
Joyce C. Morgan personally appeared before me this day and acknawledgod the due execution of the foregoing
instrument. Witness my band and official seal this the day of FAMAh y _ 2018.
ported name: - Notary Public
MygpmrnissionCq*es: i a -30---a07-0
419kfaf Seat) /,per
Z, �OYARy
PUBO
i �C
NO
Book:5634 Page: 1891 Seq: 1
Book: 5634 Page: 1891 Page 1 of 1

Page i of 7
1n-, F4c+- �'4i1-Ct—,Lti
i M1,01111re1
1
Doc ]0: 03159390000i 7 pe: CRP
Fee Amid$26.00 P690 it f7127:13 PH
Workflow# 00004530%1-0009
Bunoombe County, @1C
Drew Reisinger Register of Deeds
5634 mi892
Memorandum of Contrast to Purchase Reil Estate
Prepared by I return to: Timothy J. Morris, KCI Envifonmental Technologies and ConstrncdM lnc., 4505 Falls ofNense
Road. Suite 400 Raleigh, NC 27609.
Neal A. Morgan and Ara M. Morgan (collectively and severally, "Seller"), whose address is 321 Morgan
Branch Road, Leicester, NC 28748, and KCI Environmental Technologles and Construction, lot. a Delaware
corporation ("Pwrtmee), whose addr en is 4505 Falls of Neusc Road, Suite 400 Raleigh, NC 27609, have entered into a
contract to sale and purchase easement restrictions on the following properties located in Buncombe Courcy, North
Carolina: PIN'S 8689-48-8018, 8689-36-4053, 8689-W3036, 8684-87-7949 and 868M3-1964. ThisMemorandum of
Contract will terminate 18 months from the date of this Memorandum and is recorded at the Register of Deeds in
Asheville, Buncombe County, North Carolina.
Wines hands seals this 7 day of / � a►t
A Morgan
A - mt,
Ava M. Morgan
STATE OF /" C
COUNTY OF l.✓.d Ip
1, the undersigned, a Notary Public of the County ad State aforesaid, do hereby certify that Neal A. Morgan and Ave
M. Morgan personally appeared before tri this day and acknowledged the due execution of the foregoing instran+ar+t.
Witrnss my hand and official sea] this the _'today of FtkAbp1u y 2018.
pruned name: nn+sl�i`/T JnaleriJt , Notary Public
My commission expires:_ 12- 3 v— 2 Cza
Book: 5034 Page: 1892 Page 1 of 1
do'���'�
4oTA
PUSLIG
1
Lit,
Book: 5634 Page: 1892 Seq:1

Page IofI .Vo ri'i:-D, 1AC'. taluii4r�_o,i' _,. `e C)IS
Doo ID: 03169J810D01 Typs: CRP
ReCordrd: 02/07/2018 at 01:28:15 Ph
Fee Mt: $26.00 Pape 1 of 1
workflow# 0000453012-0004
Buncombe County, NC
Dread Relsinner Register of Deeds
5634 P4893
Memorandum of Contract to Purehose Real Estate
Pfepered by / return to; Timothy J. Morris, KCI Environmental Technologies and Construction Inc., 4505 Falls ofNeuse
Road, Spite 440 Raleigh, NC 27609.
Martie C. Morgan (collectively and severally, "Seller'}, whose address is75 Morganl3ranch Road, Lokcster,
NC 28748, and KCI Environmental Technologies and Construction, Inc. a Delaware corporation ("Purebaser"),
whose address is 4505 Falls of Neuse Road, Suite 400 Raleigh, NC 27609, have emoted into contracts to sell and
purchase easement restrictions on the following properties located in Bumcombe County, North Carohoa: PIN's 8689-
36-4053, 8689-66-3036,8689-87-7949 and 8689-634964. This Memorandum of Contract will terminate 18 months
from the date of this Memorandum and is recorded at the Register of Deeds in Asheville, Buncombe County, North
Carolina.
Witttem our hao and seals this7� day of ffojohy, mak.
Martin C. Morgan
STATE OF A/ L
COUNTY OF W,- k f
J, the undersigned, a Notary Public of the County and State aforesaid, do hereby certify that Martin C. Morgan
personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged the due execution of the foregoing instrument. Witness my
hand and official seal this the �hday of Mjt V/ Is V , 2018.
prtntcd nacre: Notary Public
My commission expires: I-J�—zBzn
a'[ AR Y i
- a
PURL
rfi•9K�f�I�tt���.
Book. 5634 Page: 1893 Seq:1
Book: 5634 Page: 1893 Page 1 of 1

HT1 A)eu(04
NC DWO Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: �/ S / L U
Project/Site: /" r_4 n f� `
Latitude: 3 S S ! q
I
Evaluator: J_ Sc1l �1V r1
County:
Longitude: 63
0
s nCli
2
Total Points:
�j
Stream Determination (cir
Other
Stream is at least intermittent
if >_ 19 or perennial if 2:30* �"`
Ephemeral Intermittent erennia
P
e. Quad Name:
9
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
0.5
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
1
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2.2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
)
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1_t>
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Ves=3
Sketch:
artmciai aitcnes are not rates; see cliscussions in manual
B. Hvdroloqv (Subtotal = '5 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
3
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
51::::]
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0a�`
1
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
+ 0.5
1
e 1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
Q0
No = 0
1
kyes = 3
C. Bioloav (Subtotal = A
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
(
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
i 0?
1
2
3
22. Fish
(>
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
Q0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1 ---- .
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5
F%Other =
"perennial streams may also be identified using other meth! s. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: ,.*,1 r,z�!s �� n( i �P� , „k
p
e
Sketch:

NC DWO Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date:`
Project/Site:
Latitude: j
Evaluator:Count*
y'If C_cf'r
Longitude: �/
g G+
Total Points: g
Stream is at least intermittent
Stream Deter ' tion circle one)
Other
if 2: 19 or perennial if 2: 30*
E hemer Intermittent erennial
p
e. Quad Name:
g
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =_n,_)
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
2 3
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
p
U>
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
a
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
No = 0
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
11
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0?
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
0.5
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
FACW = 0.75;
2
3
9. Grade control
0
a
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0 ,-%m5,
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0.
Yes = 3
Sketch:
artmaai acnes are not ratea; see aiscussions in manual �---
B. Hvdrolociv (Subtotal= 7 1
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
.> 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
c
1
2 3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1„
0.5 0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
4 0.'
1 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
s; 0.5'
1 1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
u. tuipiogv (subtotal = L., )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
`3`;
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
t Q.""
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22. Fish
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish,.Q
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
f "
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0'
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75;
OBI = 1.5 ;'Other = 0 N
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
1......
Notes:
Sketch:

UT3 Nov&"
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date:
Project/Site:
hof
Latitude: 6 C
Evaluator: \ r � � w SVA r"
County: �r }
Longitude: r � �7
Total Points:"
Stream is at least intermittent
Stream Deter ' ircle one)
Other
_
if >_ 19 or perennial if >_ 30"
E hemeral Intermittent erennial
p
e. Quad Name:
9
CA
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = -�2 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1 a. 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,
ripple -pool sequence
0
�!
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1;
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
,�
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
'0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
('1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
t. 0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
00.5
GNo�='
i 1 „
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
r' 0
Yes = 3
Sketch:
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual �.
B. Hydrology Subtotal = )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0`T?
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
(1 s
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
00.5.
1
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
(0.5'a
1 r-
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high-water table?
No = 0
f Yes = 3
1.5
C. biology (Subtotal = t? ) --
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
i;
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed''
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
,17f
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
(0
1
2
3
22. Fish
( 0)
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
Q
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75;
OBL = 1.5 (Other: 0'\
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
"
Notes:
Sketch:

uT q 0?jun
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date
Project/Site: p
Latitude::
Evaluator:i,
County: }
Longitude: - .J') ?
Total Points: d .,
Stream!19rs at intermittent C
Stream Determinatiopcircle one)
Ephemeral f termittent,`,Perennial
Other
Name:
perenleast
if if3
if _ 19 or perennial if >_ 30"
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
e.g. Quad
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = ! )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
,a, Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1 e
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
4;,0.5 }
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1 5
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
`0''
4.
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0 x
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1 J
2
3
9. Grade control
0
15
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5 '
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0' �,
Yes = 3
Sketch:
aniticiai ancnes are not rated; see discussions in manual fir"
B. Hydrology Subtotal = C%'
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
l 2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
= 0 A
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0',
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
4;,0.5 }
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5 1
1 , ..
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
! Yes =.-3,,)
1.5
C. Biology (Subtotal = <) )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
~ -'`
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
Q
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22. Fish
0`s
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
t 0„
0.5
1 .___..
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBI =
1.5` Other
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
�---- '
Notes:
Sketch:

UIGlvej
)Nq
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date:/ [�%
Project/Site:mo
Latitude:U
Evaluator:
Count 4�,y
Longitude: �-if
Total Points:
Stream Deter . at' circle one)
Other
Stream is at least intermittent
if >_ 19 or erennial if >_30*
Ephemeral ntermittent erennial
p
e. Quad Name:
g'
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 1 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
,a, Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
2
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
0.
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
t 0.5
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1 }
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0)0
0.5
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
t 0"?
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1`
2
3
9. Grade control
0Q
5:
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
(No =
Yes = 3
Sketch:
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal= 10,
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
4 0,1
2
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.9s
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
t 0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
Q r
No = 0
i Yes = 3
1.5
C. Biology (Subtotal = b
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
?
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3'
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
(,_O.j
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
,
_0,.
1
2
3
22. Fish
( p
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
Q r
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
10''
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
t 0
0.5
1,,•-�,
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75;
OBL = 1.5r Other = 0'`1
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual...•
-
Notes:
Sketch:

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

MF4�
KCI
www.kci.com