20190866 Ver 1_Technical Proposal_20190513

wztftv�
W ILDLANDS
E N 01 N C E P I N CG
March 6, 2019
Ms. Marjorie Barber
NC DEQ -Division of Mitigation Services
217 West Jones Street, Suite 3409-J
Raleigh, NC 27603
RE: Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Proposal— Huntsman Mitigation Site
Yadkin River Basin Cataloging Unit 03040102; Wilkes County, NC
In response to RFP 16-007728 - Full Delivery Project
Dear Ms. Barber,
As an authorized representative of Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands), I am pleased to present to
the NC Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) the following proposal to provide stream credits in the
Yadkin River Basin (Cataloging Unit 03040102) in response to RFP 16-007728. This proposal is a firm
offer from Wildlands and remains open for acceptance by the NC Department of Environmental Quality
(DEQ) until September 2, 2019, which is 180 days from the closing date of the above -referenced RFP.
As a fully licensed engineering firm, Wildlands will serve as the contracting entity and lead designer with
Kee Mapping & Surveying providing professional surveying services. The key individuals on the
Wildlands Team have worked together on numerous projects over multiple years and will operate
smoothly as a cohesive unit.
Wildlands is committed to creating an excellent ecological restoration project at the Huntsman
Mitigation Site and is proposing to develop up to 6,000 warm stream credits using a combination of
stream restoration and enhancement Il.
The Site is an active farm and includes North Little Hunting Creek and its tributaries. The Site is divided
by Ingle Hollow Road, and cattle currently have access to all Site streams south of the road. Site streams
here are severely eroded throughout and have poor bedform diversity due to emheddedness. On the
north side of the road, there are 3 inline embankments at risk of failure and the stream is buried in a
pipe for several hundred feet. This project will improve water quality and ecology in this water supply
watershed through cattle exclusion, buffer reforestation, reconnecting streams to the historic
floodplain, daylighting streams and removing impoundments, restoring stream dimension and function,
and installation of three stormwater best management practices (BMP) to treat overland flow.
Wildlands' Huntsman Mitigation Site submittal includes one signed, original Technical proposal; four
photocopies of the Technical Proposal; one USB flash drive containing one electronic copy of the
Technical Proposal and the Project Site boundaries in ArcGIS format; one signed, original Cost Proposal;
and one photocopy of the Cost Proposal. All paper contained within this proposal is 100% recycled, 30%
past -consumer content.
With our diverse, yet unified team we offer the expertise, understanding, and commitment to ensure
this project's success.
5 cerely,
Shawn Wilkerson, President
Q& Wildlands Engineering, Inc, (P) 794.332.7754 • (F) 704.332.3306 • 1430 South Mint St, Suite 104 • Charlotte, NC 28203

0
�,1, �STATF 0,,
�FSSE QUA/
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Request for Proposal #
16-007728
For internal State agency processing, including tabulation of proposals in the Interactive Purchasing
System (IPS), please provide your company's Federal Employer Identification Number or alternate
identification number (e.g. Social Security Number). Pursuant to G.S. 132-1.10(b) this identification number
shall not be released to the public. This page will be removed and shredded, or otherwise kept
confidential, before the procurement file is made available for public inspection.
This page is to be filled out and returned with your proposal.
Failure to do so may subject your proposal to rejection.
ID Number:
56-0651376
Federal ID Number or Social Security Number
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Vendor Name
dh
�FSSE QUA/
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Request for Proposal #
16-007728
For internal State agency processing, including tabulation of proposals in the Interactive Purchasing
System (IPS), please provide your company's Federal Employer Identification Number or alternate
identification number (e.g. Social Security Number). Pursuant to G.S. 132-1.10(b) this identification number
shall not be released to the public. This page will be removed and shredded, or otherwise kept
confidential, before the procurement file is made available for public inspection.
This page is to be filled out and returned with your proposal.
Failure to do so may subject your proposal to rejection.
ID Number:
56-0651376
Federal ID Number or Social Security Number
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Vendor Name

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Quality
Refer ALL Inquiries regarding this REP to:
Marjorie Barber
Email: mariorie.barber ncdenr. ov
Phone: [phone]
Request for Proposal # 16-007728
Proposals will be publicly opened: March 6, 2019
Contract Type: Open Market
Commodity No. and Description: 952-73 Restoration I
Reclamation Services of Land and other Properties
Using Agency: Division of Mitigation Services
Requisition No.: N/A
EXECUTIUN
In compliance with this Request for Proposals, and subject to all the conditions herein, the undersigned Vendor offers and agrees to
furnish and deliver any or all items upon which prices are bid, at the prices set opposite each item within the time specified herein. By
executing this proposal, the undersigned Vendor certifies that this proposal is submitted competitively and without collusion (G.S.
143-54), that none of its officers, directors, or owners of an unincorporated business entity has been convicted of any violations of
Chapter 78A of the General Statutes, the Securities Act of 1933, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (G.S. 143-59,2), and that it
is not an ineligible Vendor as set forth in G.S. 143-59,1. False certification is a Class I felony. Furthermore, by executing this proposal,
the undersigned certifies to the best of Vendor's knowledge and belief, that it and its principals are not presently debarred, suspended,
proposed for debarment, declared ineligible or voluntarily excluded from covered transactions by any Federal or State department or
agency. As required by G.S. 143-48.5, the undersigned Vendor certifies that it, and each of its sub -Contractors for any Contract
awarded as a result of this RFP, complies with the requirements of Article 2 of Chapter 64 of the NC General Statutes, including the
requirement for each employer with more than 25 employees in North Carolina to verify the work authorization of its employees
through the federal E -Verify system. G.S. 133-32 and Executive Order 24 (2069) 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 executefsign proposal prior to submittal shall render proposal invalid and it WILL BE REJECTED. Late
proposals cannot be accepted.
VENDOR:
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
STREET ADDRESS;
P.O. BOX
ZIP.-
IP:1430
1430S. Mint Street, Suite 104
nla
28203
CITY & STATE & ZIP:
TELEPHONE NUMBER:
TOLL FREE TEL. NO:
Charlotte, NC 28203
[phone]
nla
PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS ADDRESS IF DIFFERENT FROM ABOVE {SEE INSTRUCTIONS TO VENDORS ITEM #10}:
nla
PRINT NAME & TITLE OF PERSON SIGNING ON BEHALF OF VENDOR:
FAX NUMBER
Shawn D. Wilkerson, President
[phone]
VEN OR'S AU DE ESIGNATURE:
DATE:
EMAIL:
kA�03/06/2099
swilkerson wildIandsen ,com
OffeKvalid for at least 180 days from date of proposal opening. After this time, any withdrawal of offer shall be made in writing,
effective upon receipt by the agency issuing this RFP.
ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL
If any or all parts of this proposal are accepted by the State of North Carolina, an authorized representative of the Departmentof
Environmental Quality shall affix hislher 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 Vendors).
FOR STATE USE ONLY: Offer accept and Contract awarded this day of , 2019, as Indicated on the
attached certification, by
(Authorized Representative of DEQ)
Ver:711118 Page 'I of 30

PART D - Executive Summary
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) is proposing to provide 6,000 warm stream credits within the
Yadkin River Basin Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03040102020030 at the Huntsman Mitigation Site (Site)
in Wilkes County, NC. The project will include restoration and enhancement of North Little Hunting
Creek and six of its unnamed tributaries (UT1, UT2, Trapper Tributary, Rifle Tributary, Barn Branch, and
Old Bus Branch). Wildlands has recorded options to acquire approximately 18 acres of conservation
easement on the Site.
The Site is an active cattle farm with managed
agricultural fields, and the streams are in various
stages of impact due to cattle grazing,
impoundments, and piping. Cattle currently have
access to North Little Hunting Creek and five of the
six unnamed tributaries. UT1 is not currently
accessed by cattle but is piped and has three online
ponds that are at risk of dam failure. Site streams are
in various stages of evolution, with a predominant
condition of extensive erosion and incision. While
instream habitats such as riffles and pools are
present, they are impacted by embeddedness from
bank erosion. Large woody debris (LWD) is minimal
within the Site. The riparian buffer is generally
impaired on both sides of the stream and upland erosion from grazing areas reaches Site streams
unfiltered.
This project will improve water quality and ecology through riparian buffer establishment, dam removal,
daylighting a piped stream, stream and habitat restoration, exclusion of livestock and farm equipment,
and installation of three stormwater BMPs, resulting in a decrease in nutrient and sediment loads from
the Site and improved aquatic and terrestrial habitat. The specific evaluation criteria outlined in the
Division of Mitigation's (DMS's) Request for Proposals will be met as summarized in Part G of this
proposal.
In summary, the mitigation plan for the Site will include the following:
• Cattle exclusion from the Site's streams and riparian buffers;
• Reconnection of incised streams to their historic floodplain;
• Enhancement of habitat functions through in -stream structures and native riparian buffers;
• Protection for stream channels from further channel manipulation and vegetation impact for
agricultural purposes;
• Reduction of sediment and nutrient loadings by filtering overland runoff from agricultural fields
and providing treatment through protected buffers and three stormwater BMPs;
• Generation of 6,000 warm stream credits through restoration and enhancement; and
• Conservation of approximately 18 acres of restored land in perpetuity.
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART D
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page D.1

PART E - Corporate Background and Experience
1.0 Corporate Background
The Wildlands Team is a multidisciplinary group of professionals that brings together the expertise
necessary to create outstanding ecological restoration projects in a timely and cost-effective manner.
Wildlands, the primary offeror, is headquartered in Charlotte, NC. Wildlands has offices in Charlotte, NC;
Raleigh, NC; Asheville, NC; Charleston, SC; and Fairfax, VA. Our 52 employees dedicated to
environmental restoration have positioned Wildlands as a leader in ecosystem restoration in the
southeastern United States.
Wildlands has teamed with Kee Mapping & Surveying (Kee) for survey and easement services for the
Site. Kee is a well-established professional land surveying firm based out of Asheville, NC. Kee has
worked on a variety of projects with Wildlands staff and their experience includes geomorphic
assessment surveys, Global Positioning System (GPS) control for NC State Plane survey work, boundary
surveys for property net verification, easement platting, legal descriptions, and easement
monumentation. Early coordination and frequent communication ensures that everyone understands
their role in the project and can complete tasks in a timely and efficient manner.
Wildlands will use one of the following five contractors specializing in stream work:
• Baker Grading, based in Old Fort, NC
• Carolina Environmental Contracting, Inc., based in Mount Airy, NC
• KBS Earthworks, based in Julian, NC
• Land Mechanic Designs, Inc., based in Willow Spring, NC
• North State Environmental, Inc., based in Winston Salem, NC
2.0 Ability to Complete all Phases of the Proposal
Wildlands' success is owed to the skills and abilities of its diverse and
talented staff. Wildlands' staff expertise includes planning, ecology,
biology, economics, civil engineering, real estate, AutoCAD, Geographic Information System (GIS), land
management, environmental consulting, and habitat construction. Our collection of professionals allows
for a seamless approach to planning, permitting, design, construction, and management of restoration
projects. We fully understand the permitting process at the federal, state, and local level. Wildlands has
five NC Certified Floodplain Managers (CFMs) on staff to address local, state, and FEMA floodplain
permitting requirements. We have extensive experience with categorical exclusions, 401/404
permitting, and sediment and erosion control plans.
3.0 Similar Projects
Wildlands has completed numerous projects involving stream restoration, wetland restoration, and
mitigation banking. Several of these projects are summarized below.
Lone Hickory Mitigation Site, Yadkin County, NC - This project is
expected to provide 12,900 SMUs and 8.0 WMUs in the Yadkin River
basin. The site includes a steep, confined valley stream channel on the
eastern portion of the site and a flatter stream -wetland complex near
the South Deep Creek floodplain on the western portion of the site. The
project includes stream and wetland restoration design, hydrologic
modeling for wetland design, permitting, construction, and post -
construction monitoring. Assessment, permitting, design, and easement
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART E
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Page E.1

acquisition phases are complete. Construction is underway and is
expected to be completed in spring 2019.
Alexander Farm Mitigation Site, Alexander County, NC - This project will
provide 4,058 SMUs on two unnamed tributaries of Elk Shoals Creek in
the Catawba River Basin. The project will decrease nutrient and
sediment loads from the watershed by eliminating widespread bank
erosion, connecting the onsite streams to their floodplains, and
restoring native riparian buffers. The project will create significant
ecological improvement through exclusion of cattle from the stream
and through restoration of aquatic and terrestrial habitats on
headwater systems. Construction is expected to begin in fall 2019. The
project is currently in the design phase.
Lyle Creek Mitigation Site, Catawba County, NC- Wildlands is currently
performing ecological restoration work at a site northwest of Lake
Norman in Catawba County, NC. The project is expected to provide
5,571 SMUs and 7.0 WMUs on unnamed tributaries to Lyle Creek in the
Catawba river basin. The project includes categorical exclusion
documentation, existing conditions assessment, landowner
coordination, conservation easement acquisition, stream and wetland
restoration design, permitting, construction, and post -construction
monitoring. Construction was completed in 2012. This project was
successfully closed out in 2019.
Henry Fork Mitigation Site, Catawba County, NC - This project, which
involves the reclamation of a former golf course, will deliver 4,500
SMUS and 4.0 WMUs through restoration and enhancement of streams
and rehabilitation, re-establishment, and enhancement of wetlands. In
addition, outside of the credited activities, Wildlands purchased the
expansive floodplain of the Henry Fork river, which was placed in
permanent conservation easement at no credit as a value-added benefit
of the project. The project is currently in the fourth year of post -
construction monitoring.
Scaly Bark Creek Mitigation Site, Stanly County, NC— Wildlands
performed ecological restoration work at a site near Albemarle, NC. The
full -delivery project delivered 6,415 SMUs on Scaly Bark Creek and six
unnamed tributaries in the Yadkin River basin for DMS. The project
included categorical exclusion documentation, existing conditions
assessment, landowner coordination, conservation easement
acquisition, restoration design, permitting, construction, and five years
of post -construction monitoring. Wildlands successfully completed
CLOMR and LOMR packages for this project. This project was
successfully closed out in 2016.
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART E
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Page E.2

Owl's Den Mitigation Site, Lincoln County, NC- Wildlands is developing
a full -delivery project in Lincoln County on two unnamed tributaries to
Howards Creek. The project is expected to provide 2,400 SMUs in the
Catawba river basin and 8.0 WMUs via wetland re-establishment,
rehabilitation, and enhancement. The project includes categorical
exclusion documentation, existing conditions assessment, landowner
coordination, conservation easement acquisition, stream and wetland
restoration design, permitting, construction, and seven years of post -
construction monitoring. Detailed hydrologic modeling was completed
to study wetland -groundwater connections. This project is in the fourth
year of post -construction monitoring.
Big Harris Mitigation Site, Cleveland County, NC - This project will
provide approximately 25,836 SMUs in the Broad River basin. The
project includes stream enhancement and restoration design, water
quality Best Management Practices (BMPs) design, permitting,
construction, and five years of post -construction monitoring. Nine
storm water BMPs have been implemented to treat agricultural runoff.
This agricultural watershed is impacted by bank erosion and loss of
riparian buffer. Wildlands negotiated credit development with the IRT
to recognize a lighter touch approach directed at distinct functional
stressors within the system. Construction was completed in spring 2018
and the project is now in post -construction monitoring.
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site, Union County, NC- Wildlands is
developing a full -delivery project in rural Union County on Norkett
Branch and four tributaries. The project is expected to provide 10,098
SMUs for DMS in the Yadkin river basin. The project includes existing
site assessment, conservation easement acquisition, permitting, stream
restoration design, construction, and seven years of post -construction
monitoring of geomorphic stability and vegetation. Detailed hydraulic
modeling was completed for CLOMR and LOMR approvals. Two
stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) were constructed to
treat headwater agricultural runoff and will provide SMU credits. This
project is currently in the sixth year of post -construction monitoring.
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site, Rockingham County, NC -
Wildlands performed ecological restoration work at a site in Reidsville,
NC. The full -delivery project provided 4,900 SMUs and 12.7 WMUs on
Little Troublesome Creek, Irvin Creek, and one of its unnamed
tributaries in the Cape Fear river basin for DMS. The project included
categorical exclusion documentation, existing conditions assessment,
landowner coordination, conservation easement acquisition, stream
and wetland restoration design, permitting, construction, and five years
of post -construction monitoring. Wildlands also performed detailed
hydraulic modeling of the proposed restoration design for CLOMR and
LOMR submittals to satisfy FEMA requirements. This project was
successfully closed out in 2017.
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART E
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Page E.3

4.0 Lead Consultant and Team Members
Wildlands is a licensed engineering firm in NC and will act as prime consultant for this contract. Staff
from our Charlotte, NC and Asheville, NC offices will complete this project. Wildlands has teamed with
Kee to offer the best possible team to DMS. As indicated above in Section 1.0, Wildlands will select a
specialty stream contractor from our provided list of qualified firms.
LEAD CONSULTANT
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. - Headquarters
Charlotte, NC Office Location
O 1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28203
WILDLANDS (P) 704.332.7754 (F) 704.332.3306
ENGINEERING
Firm Contact:
TEAM MEMBERS
Shawn Wilkerson, President; [e-mail]
North Carolina S -Corporation
Federal Identification Number: 56-0651376
Asheville, NC Office Location
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
167-B Haywood Road
Asheville, NC 28806
Kee Mapping and Surveying, PA
P.O. Box 2566
Asheville, NC 28802
(P) 828-575-9021
J-jLee
Firm Contact
Phillip Brad Kee, PLS
[e-mail]
Services to be Provided: Professional surveying services
5.0 Project Manager Experience
Ms. Blackwelder currently serves as a Senior Environmental Scientist for Wildlands. She is a technical
leader in stream restoration and her duties include assessment and design of ecological restoration
projects, as well as conducting internal technical trainings. Ms. Blackwelder has 16 years of professional
experience in environmental restoration and is skilled in watershed assessment methodology,
geomorphic assessments, natural channel design, bid document development, construction
management, and monitoring techniques. Additional information on Ms. Blackwelder's experience is
provided below in Section 7.0.
6.0 Project Approach
The Wildlands Team takes a holistic, integrated approach to site restoration. The following text outlines
some key aspects of our multi -disciplinary project approach. Site-specific project plans are further
described in Part G of this proposal.
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART E
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page EA

6.1 Site Selection
The Wildlands Team carefully selects project sites where ecological
restoration can be maximized. Our sites are reviewed by our
environmental scientists and engineers during the selection
process to ensure that ecological uplift can be achieved within
regulatory parameters related to floodplain management,
protected species, and existing wetland resources. We consult with
the existing landowners to explain the restoration process and the
conservation easement conditions. We review the site with our
contractor to identify potential construction challenges and
opportunities.
6.2 Property Owner Coordination
Property owner coordination begins during the site selection stage and continues throughout the
project. We meet with families to understand the existing and future land use plans for the site. We
work to fully explain the restoration process and review site plans at the conceptual design stage and
final design stage with the property owners to make sure that their concerns are addressed. Our project
manager is the point of contact throughout the project so that the property owners always know who
can answer any questions that may arise.
6.3 Contractor Coordination
Wildlands draws on our contractor's construction expertise early in the project planning phase. We
consult with our contractor so that the project can be designed and constructed in an efficient and cost-
effective manner. We work to identify on-site materials that are native to the existing ecosystem and
that should be incorporated into the restoration project to best mimic natural systems for the site
locale. For example, cobble material embedded in excavated material on mountain stream sites can be
sorted and used for riffle construction. We also know that coordination and flexibility during
construction is the key to a successful restoration site.
6.4 Site Assessment
Numerous methods of assessment are used to quantify and qualify
the site and upstream watershed's stability, nutrient loads, sediment
transport, hydrologic and hydraulic properties, plant and animal
habitat, ecology, soil conditions, and functional uplift potential. Our
assessment is carried out by surveyors trained in natural channel
assessment and by field scientists and engineers trained in stream
and wetland assessment and design who know what characteristics
to look for that will aid in design. Wildlands looks for predictors of
future stability problems, such as upstream development and
concentrated overland flow paths.
6.5 Permitting
A project's schedule can be completely disrupted if the permitting for the project is not performed
correctly. The Wildlands Team understands the critical steps necessary for acquiring these permits in a
timely and efficient manner. Methods used to ensure a rapid permitting process include on-site
meetings with the various permitting agency representatives prior to design, as well as staying up-to-
date on the regulations associated with ecosystem restoration. These steps allow for the submittal of a
thorough and accurate permitting application for our projects.
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART E
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page E.5

6.6 Site Design
Once the existing conditions are documented and evaluated, the preferred alternative selected, and
base -mapping developed, a design discharge range is selected based on the project goals. Natural
channel design parameters will be developed based on reference reach data, hydraulic modeling, and
sediment transport assessment. Wildlands has five CFMs on staff who can evaluate design options to
optimize floodplain function and minimize off-site adverse flood elevation impacts. During the
preliminary design the plan view channel location is set, cross-sections for riffles and pools are designed,
and in -stream habitat and grade control structures are located. General grading limits, details, and
easement locations are included at this stage. Property owner input and contractor coordination help to
assure that the proposed design meets the multi -faceted design goals.
6.7 Construction
The Wildlands Team is familiar with the policies, procedures, and
practices necessary to construct natural channel design and wetland
restoration projects. Wildlands has provided construction
administration and observation services for over 72 miles of stream
work and 174 acres of wetland work.
6.8 Monitoring
Monitoring is an important component to any stream restoration or
enhancement work. The Wildlands Team has experience in both developing monitoring plans for
mitigation projects and in implementing those plans. Our monitoring plan experience includes as -built
surveys and determining whether the project has met its success criteria after the required time period.
7.0 Key Personnel Resumes (Prime and Subconsultant)
This section provides resumes for the Wildlands project manager and the managing staff for our survey
subcontractor on this project. An additional description of the Wildlands project manager's abilities is
provided in Section 5.0. Resumes for remaining personnel on the team are provided in Part F.
Christine Blackwelder - Wildlands Project Manager
Ms. Blackwelder has 16 years of professional experience in ecological restoration projects.
JOB CLASSIFICATION: Senior Environmental Scientist
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THIS PROJECT: Project Manager
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS: none
TOTAL YEARS EXPERIENCE: 16 years
EDUCATION: BA, Environmental Science, University of Virginia, 2002
ADDITIONAL TRAINING: Sediment Transport in Stream Assessment and Design, 2014
Rosgen Level I - IV, 2006-2008
Project Manager Boot Camp, 2008, 2014
Aquatic Insect Collection Protocols for Stream Mitigation
Projects, 2006
Stream Restoration Construction Training, 2005
Erosion and Sediment Control Inspector, 2003
Erosion and Sediment Control Plan Reviewer, 2003
OSHA 10 Hour Safety Training, 2009
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART E
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page E.6

PROJECT EXPERIENCE AT WILDLANDS I PROJECT DETAILS I PROJECT ROLE
Reedy Creek Design -Build Stream
Restoration Project Charlotte, NC
Little Pine Creek III Stream and Wetland
Restoration Project
Alleghany County, NC
Little Pine Creek II Stream and Wetland
Restoration Project: Redesign
Alleghany County, NC
Lone Hickory Mitigation Site
Yadkin County, NC _
Big Harris Mitigation Site
Cleveland County, NC
25,974 SMUs
7,017 SMUs;
1.4 WMUs
4,156 LF of streams;
5.4 acres of wetlands
12,900 SMUs;
8.0 WMUs
25,836 SMUs;
9 BMPs
Assistant Project Manager;
Designer
Project Manager;
Lead Designer
Project Manager;
Lead Designer
Lead Environmental
Scientist
Project Scientist
Lyle Creek Mitigation Site 5,571 SMUs;
Assistant Project Manager;
Catawba County, NC 7.0 WMUs Design; Construction
Administration
Brad Kee, PLS —Surveyor Subconsultant
With over 20 years of experience in land surveying, Mr. Kee has been a leader in providing high quality
site surveys for clients ranging from land developers to conservation agencies. Mr. Kee is experienced in
geomorphic assessment surveys, conservation easement surveys, boundary surveys for property net
verification, GPS control for NC State Plane survey work, easement platting, legal descriptions, and
easement monumentation. For projects large and small, Kee Mapping & Surveying uses the same care
and integrity to achieve accurate documentation.
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATION: Professional Land Surveyor NC L-4647
PROJECT EXPERIENCE (WILDLANDS PROJECTS)
PROJECT DETAILS
PROJECT ROLE
Reedy Creek Design -Build Stream Restoration Project
Project Surveyor;
Charlotte, NC
25,974 SMUs
Easement Plats
Candy Creek Mitigation Site
Project Surveyor;
Guilford County, NC
15,456 SMUs
Easement Plats
2,400 SMUs;
Owl's Den Mitigation Site
Project Surveyor;
Lincoln County, NC
8.0 WMUs
Easement Plats
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Project Surveyor;
Union County, NC
10,098 SMUs
Easement Plats
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
6,488 SMUs;
Project Surveyor;
Guilford County, NC
130,680 BMUs
Easement Plats
Project Surveyor;
Little Pine Creek III Stream & Wetland Restoration
7,017 SMUs;
Project Alleghany County, NC
1.4 WMUs
Easement Plats
0 ^ DBE/HUB Participation
Three of our potential contractors are woman -owned businesses: Carolina Environmental Contracting,
Inc., Land Mechanic Designs, Inc., and North State Environmental, Inc.
k6V Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART E
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page E.7

PART F - Project Organization
1.0 Organizational Chart
The following illustrates the organization of personnel that will be assigned to this project.
Shawn Wilkerson
Christine Blackwelder
QA/QC Manager
Emily Reinicker, PE, CFM
Jake McLean, PE, CFM
Jacob Wiseman, EI, CFM
■ WILDLANDS Charlotte, NC Office Engineering services will be
performed by employees of
licensed rorporate entities
■ WILOLANos Asheville, NC Office
■ KEE MAPPING & SURVEYING Asheville, NC Office
2.0 Qualifications and Experience
Brief resumes presenting the qualifications, experience, and assigned project responsibilities of each
project team member are presented on the following pages. Resumes for the Wildlands project
manager, Ms. Christine Blackwelder, and for the project manager for Kee were presented in Part E,
Section 7.0.
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page F.1

Shawn Wilkerson
Mr. Wilkerson has 20 years of professional experience in water resources, focusing on surface water
hydrology and restoration. He has managed and designed a diverse range of projects, including wetland/
Best Management Practice (BMP) construction and monitoring, stream restoration and enhancement,
and watershed planning for flood control and water quality improvements. Mr. Wilkerson plays a key
role in initial site evaluation for mitigation and conservation easement acquisition. In the roles of
principal -in -charge or project manager, Mr. Wilkerson has overseen and managed design and
construction for more than 34 miles of stream restoration projects. Several of his key projects have
involved mitigation banking and turn -key mitigation solutions. In his role at Wildlands, he also serves as
the leader of a 52 -person team of scientists and engineers that focuses on ecological restoration and
assessments. Mr. Wilkerson focuses on integrating ecologically responsible projects within the
constraints of impacted landscapes while using his experience and education to manage and create
innovative and successful projects.
JOB CLASSIFICATION:
President
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THIS PROJECT:
Principal -in -Charge
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS:
NC Real Estate Broker, 2000
TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE:
20 years
EDUCATION:
MS, Civil Engineering, University of North Carolina at Charlotte,
1998
BA, English Literature, Appalachian State University, 1993
ADDITIONAL TRAINING:
Rosgen Levels I through IV, 1998-2003
PSMJ Project Manager Boot Camp, 2004, 2014
Mecklenburg Habitat Assessment Protocol Training, 2000
PROJECT EXPERIENCE AT WILDLANDS
PROJECT DETAILS
PROJECT ROLE
Big Harris Mitigation Site
25,836 SMUs;
Project Manager
Cleveland County, NC
9 BMPs
Henry Fork Mitigation Site
4,500 SMUs;
principal -in -Charge
Catawba County, NC
4.0 WMUs
Candy Creek Mitigation Site
15,456 SMUs
Principal -in -Charge
Guilford County, NC
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
10,098 SMUs
Principal -in -Charge
Union County, NC
Scaly Bark Creek Mitigation Site
Principal -in -Charge; Project
Stanly County, NC
6,415 SMUs
Manager; Conservation
Easement Acquisition
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation
Site 4,900 SMUs;
Principal -in -Charge; Project
Rockingham County, NC
12.7 WMUs
Manager
Lyle Creek Mitigation Site
5,571 SMUs;
Principal -in -Charge;
Catawba County, NC
7.0 WMUs
Conservation Easement
Acquisition
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page F.2

Emily Reinicker, PE, CFM
Ms. Rein icker currently serves as a senior water resources engineer for Wildlands' Charlotte, NC, office.
Her duties include technical review and project management for ecological restoration projects. She has
19 years of professional experience in water resources and civil engineering, including hydrologic and
hydraulic modeling, natural channel design, regulatory research, watershed analysis, and stormwater
management. She has been involved in the design of more than 23 miles of stream restoration and
enhancement work in NC.
JOB CLASSIFICATION:
Senior Water Resources Engineer
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THIS PROJECT:
QA/QC Manager
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS:
Professional Engineer; Certified Floodplain Manger
TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE:
19 years
EDUCATION:
BS, Biosystems Engineering with a Minor in Environmental
Engineering, Clemson University, 1999
ADDITIONAL TRAINING:
Hydraulic Modeling for Stream Restoration and Sediment
Transport, 2011
Applied Fluvial Geomorphology for Engineers, 2006
Project Manager Boot Camp, 2004, 2014
Stormwater BMP Academy, 2004
Advanced HEC -RAS Training, 2002
Floodplain Map Revision Workshop (FEMA), 2001
Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Construction Practices
Workshop (US Army Corps of Engineers), 2000
Using Best Management Practices to Improve Water Quality
and Reduce Flood Damages in Urban Watersheds, 2000
PROJECT EXPERIENCE AT WILDLANDS
Lone Hickory Mitigation Site
Yadkin County, NC
Big Harris Mitigation Site
Cleveland County, NC
Owl's Den Mitigation Site
Lincoln County, NC
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Union County, NC
Lyle Creek Mitigation Site
Catawba County, NC
Scaly Bark Restoration Site
Stanly County, NC
Reedy Creek Design -Build Stream Restoration
Project Charlotte, NC
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
PROJECT DETAILS PROJECT ROLE
12,900 SMUs; Project Manager
8.0 WMUs
25,836 SMUs; Assistant Project
9 BMPs Manager
2,400 SMUs; Project Manager
8.0 WMUs
10,098 SMUs Project Manager
5,779 SMUS; Assistant Project
7.0 WMUs Manager
6,415 SMUs Lead Designer
25,974 SMUs Project Manager
Page F.3

Andrea Eckardt
Ms. Eckardt has 20 years of experience in watershed management, environmental planning, permitting,
and geographic information systems (GIS). She currently serves as a senior environmental planner for
Wildlands. She specializes in environmental permitting, watershed management, project development
and implementation, citizen/agency facilitation, grant writing, conservation easement coordination, and
GIS mapping. Ms. Eckardt has experience with municipal and state improvement projects, school and
university improvement projects, non-profit improvement projects, and private development projects.
Ms. Eckardt has facilitated State Property Office coordination of easements for 484 acres of
conservation easements in NC.
JOB CLASSIFICATION: Senior Environmental Planner
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THIS PROJECT: Categorical Exclusions; Conservation Easement Acquisition Lead
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS: none
TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE: 20 years
EDUCATION: MS, Environmental Science, Applied Ecology, Indiana
University, 1996
BS, Biology, Wake Forest University, 1994
ADDITIONAL TRAINING: Consultant Regulatory Workshop, 2007
Financial Benefits of Conservation Easements: Conservation
Programs and Tax Incentives for NC Landowners, 2006
Project Manager Boot Camp, 2005, 2014
Natural Resource Leadership Institute, 2001
PROJECT EXPERIENCE AT WILDLANDS
Various Full -Delivery Projects
Multiple Counties in NC
Big Harris Mitigation Site
Cleveland County, NC
Box Creek Wilderness Area Stream Mitigation Bank
Rutherford County, NC
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
Rockingham County, NC
Crooked Creek #2 Restoration Project
Union County, NC
Burnetts Chapel Mitigation Site
Guilford County, NC
Lone Oak Mitigation Bank
Albemarle County, VA
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
PROJECT DETAILS
19 full -delivery
projects
25,836 SM Us;
9 BMPs
PROJECT ROLE
Categorical Exclusion;
Conservation
Easement Acquisition
Mitigation Plan Lead
158,400 LF (30 miles) Project Manager
4,900 SMUs;
Project Manager
(existing condition
12.7 WMUs
and design phase)
5,672 SMUs;
Project Manager
11.5 WMUs
(conceptual phase)
9.2 BMUs
Project Manager
38,000 LF
Permitting; Banking
Instrument
Page FA

Mimi Caddell
Ms. Caddell has three years of experience related to watershed resources. She has assisted with water
quality grant projects such as stormwater best management practices and conservation land monitoring
in Western North Carolina. Additionally, she is experienced with community outreach by working with
volunteer groups on invasive plant species projects and carrying out watershed education programs. At
Wildlands, Ms. Caddell primarily works on vegetation and geomorphic assessments and data processing,
GIS mapping, and site maintenance.
JOB CLASSIFICATION:
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THIS PROJECT:
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS:
TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE:
EDUCATION:
ADDITIONAL TRAINING:
PROJECT EXPERIENCE AT WILDLANDS
Deep Meadow Mitigation Site
Union County, NC
Candy Creek Mitigation Site
Guilford County, NC
Henry Fork Mitigation Site
Catawba County, NC
Hopewell Mitigation Site
Randolph County, NC
Crooked Creek #2 Restoration Project
Union County, NC
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Environmental Scientist
Categorical Exclusions; Existing Conditions Survey; Monitoring
none
3 years
BS, Environmental Science, University of North Carolina at
Chapel Hill, 2014
River Course 101: Stream Morphology Assessment, 2017
Stormwater BMP Maintenance & Inspection, 2015
PROJECT DETAILS PROJECT ROLE
2,746 SM Us; Existing Conditions
8.1 WMUs Assessment
15,456 SM Us Existing Conditions
Assessment; Monitoring
4,500 SM Us; Monitoring
4.0 WMUs
7,463 SM Us Monitoring
5,672 SM Us; Monitoring
11.5 WMUs
Page F.5

Kristi Suggs
Ms. Suggs currently serves as a Senior Environmental Scientist and the Monitoring Lead Coordinator for
Wildlands. She has over 15 years of experience in watershed management, environmental planning and
permitting, and geographic information systems (GIS). Her expertise includes geomorphic assessments,
stream classification, wetland delineation, biological and habitat assessment, protected species surveys,
sediment sampling and analysis, water quality monitoring, groundwater monitoring, benthic
macroinvertebrate sampling, vegetation assessment, GIS mapping, and post -construction monitoring.
JOB CLASSIFICATION:
Environmental Scientist
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THIS PROJECT:
Existing Conditions Survey; Monitoring Lead
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS:
none
TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE:
15 years
EDUCATION:
BS, Animal Veterinary Science, West Virginia University, 1995
MS, Earth and Environmental Resource Management, University
of South Carolina, 2005
ADDITIONAL TRAINING:
NC Wetland Assessment Method Training Certification, 2016
NC Stream Assessment Method Training Certification, 2016
NC Natural Heritage Data Explorer Training, 2015
Mussel Identification Workshop -Atlantic Slope Species of NC
and SC, 2015
Piedmont Rare Species and Mafic Rock Communities Workshop,
2014
2011 Rare Plant & Community Identification Workshop, 2011
Surface Water Identification and Training Class, V. 4.0, 2010
Wetland Delineation and Jurisdictional Determination: Post
Rapanos-Carabel, 2008
Stream Restoration Design Introduction, Existing Conditions
Analysis, and Preliminary Design, 2007
Intermittent and Perennial Stream Identification for Regulatory
Applications, 2007
PROJECT EXPERIENCE PRIOR TO WILDLANDS PROJECT DETAILS
Lochill Farm Stream Mitigation Site 5,962 LF of stream; 15.8
Haywood County, NC acres of riparian buffer
UT to Rush Fork Stream Mitigation Site
Haywood County, NC
Russell Gap Mitigation Site
Alexander County, NC
UT to Town Creek Restoration Project
Stanly County, NC
Town Creek Restoration Project
Stanly County, NC
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
4,032 LF of stream
13,066 LF of stream;
7.3 acres of riparian
wetland
6,345 LF of stream;
4.12 acres of riparian
wetland
3,696 LF of stream
PROJECT ROLE
Categorical Exclusion; Existing
Conditions Assessment;
Environmental Permitting
Categorical Exclusion; Existing
Conditions Assessment
Categorical Exclusion; Existing
Conditions Assessment;
Permitting
Project Manager; Categorical
Exclusion; Existing Conditions
Assessment; Permitting;
Construction Admin; Monitoring
Project Manager; Categorical
Exclusion; Existing Conditions
Assessment; Permitting;
Construction Admin; Monitoring
Page F.6

Jordan Hessler
Mr. Hessler currently serves the Asheville office as an Environmental Scientist/Designer. He has four
years of experience in civil engineering, Auto CAD applications, GIS, stormwater management, and soil
and sediment control measures. additional skills include wetland land delineation and permitting,
construction quality assurance, landscape design, vegetation surveys, threatened and endangered
species surveys.
JOB CLASSIFICATION: Environmental Scientist/Designer
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THIS PROJECT: Existing Conditions Survey; Construction Administration;
Monitoring
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS: none
TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE: 4 years
EDUCATION: BS, Biology (concentration in ecology & evolution), Western
Carolina University, 2015
AAS, Horticulture Technology, Haywood Community College,
2011
ADDITIONAL TRAINING: Wetland Delineation & Permitting Training
NC State: Rive Course 201 Natural Channel Design
NCDOT Level 1 Erosion & Sediment control/stormwater
certification
Southern Appalachian Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and
Tricoptera Identification Training
PROJECT EXPERIENCE AT WILDLANDS PROJECT DETAILS PROJECT ROLE
Double H Mitigation Site
Alleghany County, NC 6,500 SMUs Existing Conditions Assessment
Shake Rag Branch Mitigation Site
6,472 SMUs
Existing Conditions Assessment
Madison County, NC
Banner Farm Mitigation Site
6,194 SMUs;
Existing Conditions Assessment;
Henderson County, NC
16.0 WMUs
Design Assistance
Wyant Lands Mitigation Site
6,800 SMUs;
Existing Conditions Assessment;
Lincoln County, NC
12.0 WMUs
Design Assistance
Henry Fork Mitigation Site
4,500 SMUs;
Monitoring
Catawba County, NC
4.0 WMUs
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page F.7

Robert Bugg, ALC
Mr. Bugg is a seasoned real estate broker and land acquisition professional with a 15 -year history as a
Realtor® focusing primarily on land acquisition and entitlement for development and mitigation. In his
career he has purchased, sold, or brokered over $50M in real estate. He is one of only 36 brokers in the
state of North Carolina to hold the esteemed Accredited Land Consultant (ALC) designation which
required over 90 hours of class time and over $10M in land sales.
Mr. Bugg has been responsible for identification, land owner negotiation, and closure of conservation
easements and land use agreements on over 840 acres representing 112,000 feet of stream mitigation,
50 acres of buffer mitigation, and 100 acres of wetlands mitigation. In addition to helping identify and
close easements for Wildlands, Mr. Bugg is also responsible for our mitigation credit sales to local
developers from our existing mitigation banks.
JOB CLASSIFICATION: Director of Land Acquisition
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THIS PROJECT: Conservation Easement Acquisitions
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS: NC & SC Realtor° Broker, Accredited Land Consultant, Unlimited
NC General Contractor's License
TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE: 15 years
EDUCATION: BA, Psychology, The University of the South, 1990
PROJECT EXPERIENCE AT WILDLANDS PROJECT DETAILS PROJECT ROLE
Agony Acres Mitigation Site 6,488 SM Us; Conservation Easement
Guilford County, NC 130,680 BMUs Acquisition; Realtor
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site 10,098 SMUs Conservation Easement
Union County, NC Acquisition; Realtor
Owl's Den Mitigation Site 2,400 SM Us; Conservation Easement
Lincoln County, NC 8.0 WMUs Acquisition; Realtor
Devil's Racetrack Mitigation Site 18,527 SMUs; Conservation Easement
Johnston County, NC 67.0 WMUs Acquisition; Realtor
Burnetts Chapel Mitigation Site (Phase 1) 407,649 BMUs Conservation Easement
Guilford County, NC Acquisition
Reedy Creek Design -Build Stream Restoration 25974 SMUs Conservation Easement
Project Charlotte, NC , Acquisition
Cannon Creek Mitigation Site Conservation Easement
Berkeley County, SC 16,000 SMUs Acquisition
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page F.8

Jake McLean, PE, CFM
Mr. McLean has 15 years of experience in ecological restoration, stormwater management design,
planning and modeling, floodplain management, and hydrologic/hydraulic analysis. At Wildlands, he is
responsible for managing stream restoration and stormwater quality BMP projects, performing
hydrologic and hydraulic modeling to support natural channel design, performing floodplain
management consulting and modeling, and preparation of construction documents. Mr. McLean has
experience with municipal, non-profit, state and federal restoration, and stormwater projects. He has
extensive experience developing and overseeing compensatory mitigation projects from initial site
identification through construction and monitoring. He has completed FEMA flood studies for dozens of
stream and floodplain restoration projects. His experience includes minor project studies, no -rise and
map amendment (Conditional Letter of Map Revision and Letter of Map Revision) studies.
JOB CLASSIFICATION:
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THIS PROJECT:
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS:
TOTAL YEARS EXPERIENCE:
EDUCATION:
ADDITIONAL TRAINING:
PROJECT EXPERIENCE AT WILDLANDS
Henry Fork Mitigation Site
Catawba County, NC
Big Harris Mitigation Site
Cleveland County, NC
Candy Creek Mitigation Site
Guilford County, NC
Western Stream Initiative
Multiple Counties in Western NC
Water Resources Engineer
Design; Permitting
Professional Engineer; Certified Floodplain Manager
15 years
MS, Civil Engineering, Auburn University, 2002
BS, Civil Engineering, Auburn University, 2000
NCSU Department of Biological & Agricultural Engineering:
Rivercourse 1-3, 2005-2006
Stream Restoration Construction Training, 2006
Stormwater BMP Academy, 2005
Bioretention / Stormwater Wetlands, 2005
Stormwater BMP Inspection and Maintenance, 2012
HEC -RAS Sediment Transport Training, 2010
Geomorphic Assessment Workshop, 2006
Natural Channel Design Workshop, 2006
Rosgen Level 1, 2016
Aquatic Organism Passage Stream Simulation Training, 2018
PROJECT DETAILS
4,500 SMUs;
4.0 WMUs
25,836 SM Us;
9 BMPs
15,456 SM Us
Multiple projects
totaling 16,000 LF
PROJECT ROLE
Project Manager
Design
Design
Design
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page F.9

Jacob Wiseman, EI, CFM
Mr. Wiseman currently serves as an environmental designer in Wildlands' Asheville, NC office. He has
experience in hydrologic and hydraulic modeling, bioengineering, and has an extensive background in
erosion control and stormwater management. As an environmental designer, Mr. Wiseman assists with
planning, hydrologic and hydraulic modeling, design, construction observation and monitoring of
ecological restoration and stormwater projects.
JOB CLASSIFICATION:
Environmental Designer
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THIS PROJECT:
Design
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS:
Engineering Intern; Certified Floodplain Manager
TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE:
8 years
EDUCATION:
MS, Biological and Agricultural Engineering, NCSU, 2011
BS, Biological and Agricultural Engineering, Environmental
Western Stream Initiative
Engineering Concentration, NCSU, 2008
ADDITIONAL TRAINING:
Level III Design of Erosion and Sediment Control Plans
totaling 15,000 LF
Certification, NCDOT
NCSU Stormwater BMP Inspection and Maintenance
Certification
PROJECT EXPERIENCE AT WILDLANDS
PROJECT DETAILS PROJECT ROLE
Shake Rag Mitigation Site 6,472 SMUs Existing Conditions
Madison County, NC Assessment; Design
Plantation Branch Mitigation Site
5,045 SMUs
Existing Conditions
Surry County, NC
Assessment; Design
White Buffalo Mitigation Site
5,045 SMUs
Existing Conditions
Surry County, NC
Assessment; Design
Western Stream Initiative
Multiple projects
Existing Conditions
Multiple Counties in Western NC
totaling 15,000 LF
Assessment
Britton Creek Stabilization Project
1,500 LF Construction Oversight
City of Hendersonville, NC
Stream Restoration for Asheville Regional
Airport Authority Buncombe County, NC 1,430 LF Design
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page F.10

Sam Davis, EI
Mr. Davis has four years of site design, stormwater management design and modeling, and
hydrologic/hydraulic analysis. At Wildlands, he is responsible for design assistance for stream
restoration and storm water quality BMP projects, performing hydrologic and hydraulic modeling, and
final preparation of construction documents.
JOB CLASSIFICATION: Environmental Designer
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THIS PROJECT: Design
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS: Engineering in Training
TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE: 4 years
EDUCATION:
PROJECT EXPERIENCE AT WILDLANDS
Deep Meadow Mitigation Site
Union County, NC
Lone Hickory Mitigation Site
Yadkin County, NC
Big Harris Mitigation Site
Cleveland County, NC
Candy Creek Mitigation Site
Guilford County, NC
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
BS, Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of North
Carolina at Charlotte, 2014
PROJECT DETAILS
PROJECT ROLE
Existing Conditions
2,746
Assessment, Design
VIu
8.1 WMUs
Assistance
Existing Conditions
12,900 SMUs;
Assessment, Design
8.0 WMUs
Assistance
25,836 SM Us;
Plan Production
9 BMPs
15,456 SMUs Plan Production
Page F.11

Ian Eckardt, Pws
Mr. Eckardt has 13 years of experience in stream geomorphic assessments, stream classification,
wetland delineation, protected species surveys, sediment sampling and analysis, water quality
monitoring, groundwater monitoring, surveying, and vegetation assessment. He currently serves as an
environmental scientist for Wildlands Engineering and is responsible for regulatory permitting, agency
correspondence, wetland delineations, geomorphic surveys and assessments, protected species surveys,
and post -construction monitoring.
JOB CLASSIFICATION: Environmental Scientist
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THIS PROJECT: Permitting
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS: Professional Wetland Scientist
TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE: 13 years
EDUCATION: MS, Earth Science, University of North Carolina at Charlotte,
2007
BA, Geology, NC State University, 2001
ADDITIONAL TRAINING: NC SAM Certificate Training, 2017
Basic Processes in Hydric Soils, 2013
Advanced Problems in Hydric Soil Evaluation, 2013
Rosgen Level I, 2013
Surface Water Identification Training and Certification, 2013
NC WAM Certificate Training, 2010
Management of Invasive and Exotic Vegetation in Riparian
Areas, 2009
North Carolina Rare Plant Identification Workshops, 2007 &
2011
Delineation of Piedmont and Coastal Plain Jurisdictional
Wetlands, 2007
PROJECT EXPERIENCE AT WILDLANDS PROJECT DETAILS PROJECT ROLE
Deep Meadow Mitigation Site 2,746 SMUs;
Union County, NC
8.1 WMUs
Existing Conditions Assessment
Big Harris Mitigation Site
10,098 SMUs
25,836 SMUs;
Existing Conditions Assessment
Cleveland County, NC
2,400 SMUs;
9 BMPs
8.0 WMUs
Henry Fork Mitigation Site
6,415 SMUs
4,500 SMUs;
5,571 SMUs;
Existing Conditions Assessment; Permitting
Catawba County, NC
4.0 WMUs
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
Guilford County, NC
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Union County, NC
Owl's Den Mitigation Site
Lincoln County, NC
Scaly Bark Creek Mitigation Site
Stanly County, NC
Lyle Creek Mitigation Site
Catawba County, NC
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
6,488 SM Us;
Existing Conditions Assessment; Categorical
130,680 BMUs
Exclusion; Permitting; Monitoring
10,098 SMUs
Existing Conditions Assessment; Categorical
Exclusion; Permitting; Monitoring
2,400 SMUs;
Existing Conditions Assessment; Categorical
8.0 WMUs
Exclusion; Permitting; Monitoring
6,415 SMUs
Monitoring
5,571 SMUs;
Monitoring
7.0 WMUs
Page F.12

Ben McGuire
Mr. McGuire has five years of experience in stream construction, erosion and sediment control, and
BMP projects. He has assisted with several grant funded projects for water quality in Western North
Carolina. Mr. McGuire has experience with construction administration, surveying, monitoring, project
acquisition, landowner relations, and permitting. He also has real estate experience in North and South
Carolina.
JOB CLASSIFICATION: Land Management
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THIS PROJECT: Construction Administration
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS: none
TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE: 5 years
EDUCATION: BS, Environmental Studies, University of North Carolina at
Wilmington, 2011
ADDITIONAL TRAINING: Rosgen Level I—Applied Fluvial Geomorphology, 2015
NCDOT Erosion and Sedimentation Control/Stormwater
Certification
BMP Inspection and Maintenance Certification
PROJECT EXPERIENCE AT WILDLANDS
Reedy Creek Design -Build Stream Restoration
Project Charlotte, NC
Little Pine Creek II Stream & Wetland
PROJECT DETAILS
25,974 SMUs
Restoration Project: Redesign 41156 LF of streams;
Alleghany County, NC 5.4 acres of wetlands
Lone Hickory Mitigation Site 12,900 SM Us;
Yadkin County, NC 8.0 WMUs
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
Union County, NC
10,098 SMUs
Agony Acres Mitigation Site
6,488 SM Us;
Guilford County, NC
3.0 BMUs
Devil's Racetrack Mitigation Site
18,527 SMUs;
Johnston County, NC
67.0 WMUs
Maney Farm Mitigation Site
4,922 SMUs
Chatham County, NC
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART F
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
PROJECT ROLE
Construction
Administration
Construction
Administration
Construction
Administration
Monitoring;
Maintenance
Monitoring
Monitoring
Monitoring
Page F.13

Part G -Technical Approach
The Huntsman Mitigation Site (Site) is
located in Wilkes County approximately
5 miles south of Ronda and 8 miles
southwest of Jonesville (Figure 1). North
Little Hunting Creek and six of its
unnamed tributaries, which have been
named for this proposal, will be restored
and enhanced as part of this project.
North Little Hunting Creek drains to
Hunting Creek, which then flows to the
South Yadkin River. The Site is located
within the North Little Hunting Creek
targeted local watershed (TLW)
Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC)
03040102020030 and is being submitted
for mitigation credit in the Yadkin
03040102 (Yadkin 02) Cataloging Unit
(CU). North Little Hunting Creek is defined in the 2016 North Carolina Integrated Report as Water Supply
III waters.
The 2009 Upper Yadkin Pee -Dee River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP) lists broad restoration goals of:
• restoring water quality and aquatic habitat in impaired streams;
• protecting high resource value waters;
• continuing existing watershed restoration and protection efforts in the basin;
• implementing new stream, buffer, and wetland restoration, enhancement, and preservation
projects within TLWs;
• improving stormwater management in urban areas; and
• implementing agricultural BMPs to limit sediment, nutrients, and fecal coliform to streams.
The RBRP noted a pattern of habitat degradation across the Yadkin 02, and that the North Little Hunting
Creek TLW suffers from habitat degradation related to agricultural/pasture operations such as those on
the Site. Watershed and stream stressors identified by the RBRP and the 2008 NCDWR Yadkin -Pee Dee
River Basinwide Water Quality Plan include:
• naturally erodible soils;
• sediment and erosion from agriculture/pasture/logging;
• excessive stormwater flow off impervious surfaces in urban and suburban areas;
• moderate to severe bank erosion;
• shifting sandy substrates;
• channelization and sedimentation;
• turbidity and fecal coliform violations; and
• poor riparian buffer vegetation.
The Yadkin River Basin is also discussed in the 2015 North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission's
(NCWRC) Wildlife Action Plan (WAP). This report notes that sedimentation and changes in hydrology and
geomorphology due to urban development, agriculture, and instream mining impact streams in the
basin. They also note that water quality is degraded by excessive nutrient and chemical inputs from
wastewater discharges and agricultural runoff.
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.1

Restoration of the Site streams will directly and indirectly address stressors identified in the RBRP and
the NCWRC WAP by excluding livestock, creating stable stream banks, restoring a forest in agriculturally
maintained buffer areas, and implementing agricultural BMPs. These actions will reduce fecal, nutrient,
and sediment inputs to North Little Hunting Creek, and ultimately to Hunting Creek and South Yadkin
River, as well as reconnect instream and terrestrial habitats on the Site. Restoration of the Site is directly
in line with recommended management strategies outlined in the RBRP. Approximately 18 acres of land
will be placed under permanent conservation easement to protect the Site in perpetuity.
Sources:
NC Division of Mitigation Services. 2009. Upper Yadkin Pee -Dee River Basin Restoration Priorities.
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Mitigation%20Services/Watershed Planning/Yadkin River Basin/2009%20Upper%20Yadkin%20RBR
P Final%20Final%2C%2026feb%2709.pdf
NC Division of Water Resources. 2008. Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basinwide Water Quality Plan.
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Planning/BPU/BPU/Yadkin/Yadkin%20PIans/2010%20PIan/Yadkin%x202008%20PIa
n%20with%201 R%20and%20Bio%20Append ice. pdf
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission. 2015. North Carolina Wildlife Action Plan. Raleigh, NC.
http://ncwildlife.org/Portals/0/Conserving/documents/2015WildlifeActionPlan/NC-WAP-2015-All-Documents.pdf
1.0 Project Goals and Objectives
The major goals of the proposed stream mitigation project are to provide ecological and water quality
enhancements to the Yadkin River Basin while creating a functional riparian corridor at the site level.
Specific enhancements to water quality and ecological processes are outlined in Table G.1.
Table GA Ecological and Water Quality Goals of the Mitigation Project
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.2
CU -Wide RBRP Stressors/Sources
Goal
Objective
Addressed
Exclude livestock
Install livestock fencing as needed to exclude livestock
Sediment from agriculture/bank
from stream
from stream channels and riparian areas or remove
erosion. Turbidity/fecal coliform
channels.
livestock from adjacent fields.
violations.
Restore and
Convert active cattle pasture to forested riparian buffers
along all Site streams, which will slow and treat sediment
Sediment from agriculture/bank
enhance native
laden runoff from adjacent pastures and fields before
erosion. Poor riparian buffer
floodplain
entering streams. Protect and enhance existing forested
vegetation.
vegetation.
riparian buffers. Treat invasive species.
Improve the
Reconstruct stream channels slated for restoration with
Sediment from agriculture.
stability of stream
stable dimensions and appropriate depth relative to the
Moderate to severe bank erosion.
channels.
existing floodplain. Add bank revetments and instream
Channelization and
structures to protect restored/ enhanced streams.
sedimentation.
Install habitat features such as constructed steps, cover
Moderate to severe bank erosion.
Improve instream
logs, and brush toes on restored reaches. Add woody
Channelization and
habitat.
materials/ LWD to channel beds. Construct pools of varying
depth.
sedimentation.
Treat concentrated
Install stormwater BMPs in areas of concentrated
Sediment from agriculture.
agricultural runoff.
agricultural runoff to treat runoff before it enters the
Turbidity/fecal coliform violations.
stream channel.
Permanently
Establish a conservation easement on the Site. Exclude
Sediment from agriculture.
protect the project
livestock from Site streams, remove impoundments and
Channelization and
sedimentation. Turbidity/fecal
site from harmful
daylight streams, and remove fields from the riparian
coliform violations.
uses.
buffer.
Poor riparian buffer vegetation.
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.2

2.0 Project Description
The following section describes the existing conditions at the Site in terms of geomorphic condition,
watershed, soils, geology, cultural resources, species of concern, regulated floodplain zones, and site
constraints. Figure 2 provides a Site map.
2.1 Existing Site Conditions
The Site is an active farm composed of cattle pastures,
hayfields, and chicken houses. North Little Hunting
Creek and six of its unnamed tributaries (UTs) flow
through the Site. The UTs have been given names for
the organizational purposes of this proposal. North
Little Hunting Creek generally flows east through the
Site, paralleling Ingle Hollow Road as depicted on
Figure 2. UTI originates within the Site limits north of
Ingle Hollow Road and flows south through several
impoundments and then through a culvert under Ingle
Hollow Road to join North Little Hunting Creek. UT2
originates offsite and flows generally north to join
North Little Hunting Creek. Barn Branch, Old Bus
Branch, Trapper Tributary, and Rifle Tributary are all
headwater tributaries to UT2 which originate within
the Site limits and flow generally north to join UT2.
Much of the Site, including North Little Hunting Creek, UT2, Barn Branch, Old Bus Tributary, Rifle
Tributary, and Trapper Tributary, are dominated by pasture grasses such as fescue (Festuca spp.) with
scattered trees along the top of bank and adjacent floodplain. Canopy species within these areas are
primarily black cherry (Prunus serotina), black walnut (Juglans nigra), box elder (Acer negundo), red
maple (Acer rubrum), river birch (Betula nigra), sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), tree -of -heaven
(Ailanthus altissima), tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), and white oak (Quercus alba). Shrub species
are primarily Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), pasture rose (Rosa carolina), and pockets of blackberry
(Rubus sp.). In addition to pasture grasses, other herbaceous species include beefsteak plant (Perilla
frutescens), chickweed (Stellaria media), dogfennel (Eupatorium capillifolium), Japanese honeysuckle
(Lonicera japonica), Japanese stiltgrass (Microstegium vimineum), and wild garlic (Allium vineale). Asters
(Aster spp.), sedges (Carex spp.), and soft rush (Juncus effusus) are present in wetter areas around
hillside seeps.
UTI and the upstream end of UT2 have a buffer that is primarily wooded. Canopy species in these areas
include American beech (Fagus grandifolia), black cherry, black willow, box elder, red maple, river birch,
sycamore, and tree -of -heaven. The shrub layer is primarily Chinese privet with clusters of blackberry and
pasture rose. Herbaceous species within these wooded areas include chickweed, greenbriar (Smilax
rotundifolia), Japanese honeysuckle, and Japanese stiltgrass. Fescue and goldenrod (Solidago sp.) are
present on the edge of these wooded area.
A review of historic aerials from 1950 to 2016 shows that onsite streams have existed in their same
approximate location over 65 years, with some changes to the agricultural management of the land.
Aerials show that the riparian buffer of UT1 was wooded with pasture or hay beyond in 1950. Pond 3
and a chicken house were constructed along UT1 between 1950 and 1963. In the 1963 aerial, the
upstream watershed to UT1 also appears to be actively logged with visible logging roads and a less
dense tree stand. The embankments for Ponds 1 and 2 were built between the 1976 and 1993 aerials.
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.3

In the 1950 aerial, North Little Hunting Creek appears to have some gentle sinuosity. North Little
Hunting Creek is not visible in the 1963 aerial, but by the 1976 aerial, North Little Hunting Creek is
straighter, and a driveway bridge was installed downstream of the UTI confluence. The UT2 buffer was
also converted to pasture between the 1963 and 1976 aerials, and UT2's straight alignment out to North
Little Hunting Creek is evident. The upstream reach of UT2 exhibits some pattern in the 1976 and 1993
aerials, but appears much straighter in the 2006 and thereafter aerials. Historic aerial photos are
provided for review in the appendix.
Details about the existing streams and associated reaches are provided in Section 2.2 below. Figure 2
maps stream stressors, including erosion and incision.
2.2 Existing Conditions — Streams
North Little Hunting Creek
North Little Hunting Creek flows east onto the Site from an agricultural parcel. Within the Site limits,
cattle have access to the stream and its buffer, although a fence approximately 20 feet off the left top of
bank prevents cattle from accessing the left floodplain and valley. The pasture is heavily grazed and the
stream banks are devoid of stabilizing vegetation. As a result, stream banks are severely eroded and
undergoing rotational failure. The stream bed substrate is cobbles and gravels embedded with fines
from the bank erosion. Instream habitat is limited to riffles, runs, and shallow pools with very little
woody debris, leaf packs, or root mats. Although badly eroded, the stream is not deeply incised due to
intermittent bedrock outcrops.
North Little Hunting Creek flows under a driveway bridge downstream of the UTI confluence.
Downstream of the bridge, North Little Hunting Creek widens and some instream deposition is present.
Table G.2a Summary of Potential for Functional Uplift — North Little Hunting Creek
Functional
Potential for Functional Uplift
Category
North Little Hunting Creek has a high volume of fine sediment load from the severe, systemic bank
erosion and is slightly incised, preventing deposition of fines on a bench or floodplain and resulting in
embedded stream substrate. Priority 1 restoration will correct the onsite erosion and incision and
Water
provide an area for fine sediments delivered from upstream to deposit. The riparian buffer is non -
Quality
functioning on both sides of North Little Hunting Creek for its entire length. Cattle have direct access
to the stream channel and graze up to the top of the stream bank, resulting in nutrient and fecal
coliform loading to the stream channel. The proposed conservation easement will allow for buffers
greater than the 30 -feet required for Mountain streams, excluding cattle and restoring a wide
vegetative riparian zone.
Hydrology
North Little Hunting Creek is slightly incised and raising the channel will restore a floodplain to
attenuate peak flows and support stream and wetland functions both on and offsite.
North Little Hunting Creek does not have a riparian buffer, and restoration of the riparian zone will
Habitat
create an uninterrupted forested corridor from the upstream wooded parcel on UT2 to the wooded
riparian zone downstream of the Site. Restoration will also provide additional bedform habitat and
introduce large woody debris to a stream with limited available habitats due to embeddedness.
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page GA

UT1
UT1 originates onsite within Pond 1 as depicted on Figure 2. During a field visit on February 14, 2019,
the Pond 1's principal spillway pipe was clogged and the water level in the 150 LF long pool was up to
the top of the dam and spilling over a low point in the embankment. Pond 1's emergency spillway,
which is in poor condition and is actively eroding, was also engaged and flowing. The split flow from
Pond 1 runs down the embankment and immediately enters the 250 LF long backwater for Pond 2.
While Pond 2's principal spillway pipe was flowing, the emergency spillway
was also engaged, and the dam showed evidence of recent overtopping
with debris lines at the top of the dam and the normal pool at the top of
the embankment. Pond 2's dam is badly eroding, with sheer, exposed clay
slopes. There is a 2- to 3 -foot drop from the end of the principal spillway
pipe to the downstream UT1 channel. Downstream of Pond 2, UTI has low
banks and varied habitat including snags, roots mats, pools, and leaf packs.
The stream continues in this condition for approximately 150 LF before it
enters a 300 LF length of buried pipe which runs along the chicken coops.
The pipe outlets to the backwater of Pond 3. Pond 3 is approximately 300
LF long and has evidence of beaver activity around its edges. UT1 exits
Pond 3 through the emergency spillway and over a series of 3 active
headcuts totaling 10 feet in drop. UT1 has high, eroded banks through the
headcuts and is at risk of eroding into the dam. Landowners have placed
construction debris in UT1 here in an attempt to stabilize the stream.
UT1 flows into a culvert under Ingle Hollow Road. Downstream of the road, UT1 is incised and
disconnected from the floodplain. The riparian zone is vegetated with grasses until UTI enters the
narrow, wooded buffer along North Little Hunting Creek. The channel is dominated by algal growth and
lacks woody debris. Instream habitat consists of riffles and pools with some coarse substrate. UT1 gains
a narrow floodplain just before its confluence with North Little Hunting Creek.
Table G.2b Summary of Potential for Functional Uplift — UTI
Functional
Potential for Functional Uplift
Category
The riparian buffer on UT1 is largely non-functioning because the stream is mostly impounded or piped upstream
of the road, and the riparian buffer is largely absent downstream of the road. Restoration will restore a flowing
Water
stream channel and a wooded, riparian floodplain. The current impoundments are at high risk of failure given the
Quality
condition of the dams, and the current embankment erosion is already contributing sediments to downstream
waters. Removal of the impoundments, their accumulated sediments, and pipes and correction of erosion will
prevent the potential sedimentation and the release of mass nutrients likely stored behind the dams.
Hydrology
Removal of the inline impoundments and piped section of stream will eliminate artificial barriers and fully restore
in -stream flow and function.
UT1's habitat is near non-existent due to impoundments, active headcuts, and incision. Restoration will improve
Habitat
aquatic organism passage by removing barriers and providing aquatic bedform habitats, including introduction of
large woody debris (LWD).
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.5

UT2
UT2 enters the Site from a wooded upstream parcel. The
stream channel slope is steep with steep, wooded valley walls.
Although cattle have full access to the stream, fallen trees
across the channel appear to discourage access up into the
valley. The stream bedform is relatively stable, with spot
erosion along the valley walls as UT2 approaches the open
pasture. In -stream habitat consists of stable cobble/gravel
riffles, micropools, leaf packs, and woody debris. UT2's valley
begins to widen where UT2 enters the open pasture.
Approximately 300 LF downstream of the project limits, UT2
begins to drop over headcuts and becomes incised and
disconnected from the floodplain. UT2 regains connection to the valley downstream but loses bedform
due to extreme cattle trampling. The stream becomes anastomosed due to trampling before dropping
over a 3 -foot headcut at its confluence with Rifle Tributary. The stream continues to be incised with
areas of active erosion and drops over several more headcuts before appearing to stabilize vertically
within the incised gully. Here there is some stream bank erosion present, but the main impairment is the
channel incision and confinement. As UT2's valley begins to widen and decrease in slope, erosion
becomes more predominant. Downstream of UT2's confluence with Barn Branch, the stream is ditched
straight out to North Little Hunting Creek. UT2 here has no bedform diversity and is a long, silted -in run.
There is no wood in the stream channel and no riparian buffer. Cattle graze directly up to the stream,
and the only areas where UT2 regains floodplain connectivity here is where the cattle have trampled the
banks for access.
Rifle Tributary and Trapper Tributary
Rifle Tributary and Trapper Tributary are two perennial streams
that flow north to join UT2. Rifle Tributary originates at a
headcut. The stream is incised for a distance, then trampled by
cattle. Trapper Tributary originates at a seep and is severely
trampled by cattle until its confluence with Rifle Tributary. Both
streams drop over a large headcut at their confluence. Rifle
Tributary is incised downstream of the headcut and continues
to be incised to its confluence with UT2.
Old Bus Branch
Old Bus Branch originates onsite as an intermittent tributary at
a three-foot deep headcut. The stream is severely eroded
below the headcut, then loses bed and bank definition for a
distance before dropping over another 10 to 15 foot headcut.
The stream is characterized as perennial below this second
headcut. Trees have fallen into the headcut, including a large
tree with a massive root system which buried the stream,
resulting in subsurface flow. Downstream of the large tree, Old
Bus Branch continues to be incised and eroded to its
confluence with UT2. Instream habitat appears limited to small
gravel riffles and root mats from the large tree.
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.6

Barn Branch
Barn Branch begins at a cattle wallow in a seep. The
watershed draining to the stream includes a broad, erodible,
sloped pasture area. Barn Branch is incised throughout its
length but only has one area of active bank erosion. The
stream substrate is deeply embedded with fines, likely from
the upstream pasture erosion. Available habitats include some
root mats and riffles with shallow pools. The stream continues
in this condition until its confluence with UT2.
Table G.2b Summary of Potential for Functional Uplift — UT2,
Rifle Tributary, Trapper Tributary, Old Bus Branch, and Barn Branch
Functional
Potential for Functional Uplift
Category
The riparian buffer is non-functioning for one or both sides of UT2 and its tributaries, and the proposed
conservation easement will allow for riparian buffers. UT2, Barn Branch, and Old Bus Branch have high volume of
fine sediment loads from bank erosion and cattle activity and incision prevents deposition of fines on a bench or
Water
Quality
floodplain, resulting in embedded stream substrate. Priority 1 restoration will correct the onsite erosion and
incision and provide a depositional storage area for fine sediments. The cattle pastures upstream of Rifle
Tributary, Trapper Tributary, and Barn Branch are large sources of fecal coliform, sediment, and nutrient loading
to the streams, but creation of BMPs at these locations will reduce these loads.
UT2 and its tributaries are incised. Restoration of a floodplain will attenuate peak flows from the watershed and
Hydrology
support stream functions onsite. Additionally, UT2 will be routed through the broad floodplain of North Little
Hunting Creek, which will further restore natural floodplain and hydrology, reducing local time of concentration
and attenuating peak flows.
UT2 and its tributaries have fragmented riparian buffers, and restoration of the riparian zone will create an
uninterrupted forested corridor from the upstream wooded parcels to the wooded riparian zone of North Little
Habitat
Hunting Creek. Restoration will improve aquatic organism passage by correcting the series of large headcuts
throughout the UT2 watershed. Restoration will also provide additional bedform habitat and introduce large
woody debris (LWD) to UT2 and its tributaries, which have limited available habitats due to embeddedness.
2.3 Existing Conditions - Watershed
The Site is located in Wilkes County within the North Little Hunting Creek targeted local watershed HUC
03040102020030 and DWR Subbasin 03-07-06. All onsite streams drain to North Little Hunting Creek
which is classified as Water Supply III waters. Water Supply III waters are a water supply source for
drinking, culinary, or food processing purposes. Water Supply III waters are also protected for Class C
uses. Class C waters are protected for secondary recreation, fishing and fish consumption, wildlife,
aquatic life, and agriculture. Secondary recreation includes wading, boating, and other uses involving
human body contact with water where such activities take place in an infrequent, unorganized, or
incidental manner.
The Site topography, as indicated on the Ronda USGS 7.5 minute topographic quadrangle, shows a
gently sloped valley of North Little Hunting Creek running east through the center of the Site (Figure 3)
with moderately sloped valley of UTI running south and the more steeply sloped valley of UT2 running
north to join North Little Hunting Creek. Drainage areas for the project reaches were delineated using
USGS North Carolina StreamStats Verison 4 (Figure 4). Land uses draining to the project reaches are a
mix of forested, agricultural (pasture/hay fields), shrubland, and some development. The land use was
calculated using the National Land Cover Database (NLCD) for 2011. The impervious area within the
project catchment at the downstream end was calculated to be 2.93 acres, or approximately 0.23% of
the project catchment using USGS North Carolina StreamStats Version 4. The watershed areas and
current land uses are summarized in Table G.3, below.
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.7

Table G.3 Drainage Areas and Associated Land Use
Notes: Land Use Source — National Land Cover Database 2011 (NLCD 2011), Multi -Resolution Land Characteristics (MRLC)
consortium, https://www.mric.gov/nlcd20ll.php and visual assessment of the 2015 aerial.
2.4 Soils
The proposed project is mapped by the Web Soil Survey for Wilkes County. Project area soils are
described below in Table G.4. Figure 5 provides a soil map of the Site.
Table G.4 Project Soil Types and Descriptions
Soil Name
NC DWR
CoA — Codorus loam, 0 to 2%
This series consists of somewhat poorly drained, nearly level soils on
slopes, frequently flooded
floodplains on the Piedmont. This soil has low runoff, high permeability, and
Reach
Stream
Intermittent/
Watershed
Watershed
ridges on the Piedmont. The permeability is moderate. This soil is moderately
to 25% slopes
suited for woodland and poorly suited for field crops due to the slope and
hazard of erosion.
FcC2 — Fairview sandy clay
Land Use
Name
Identification
Perennial Status
Area (acres)
Area (sq. mi.)
This series consists of gently to strongly sloping areas of Udorthents and
UdC— Udorthents-Urban land
Form Scores
complex, 1 to 15% slopes
has been cut or filled during grading, and Urban land consists of areas where
soils are covered by impervious surfaces such as concrete, asphalt, etc.
74% Forested, 22%
North Little
Agricultural, 2%Shrubland,
Hunting
43.5
Perennial
1274
2.0
1% Developed, 1% Open
Creek
Water
91% Agricultural, 5%
UT1
33
Perennial
67
0.10
Developed, 2% Forested, 2%
Open Water
UT2
35
Perennial
43
0.07
Rifle
32.75
Perennial
12
0.02
Tributary
57% Forested, 3°7%
Agricultural, 6%
Trapper
32.5
Perennial
1.9
0.003
Tributary
Shrubland/Grassland
Old Bus
30.5/20.5
Perennial/Intermittent
5.2
0.008
Branch
Barn Branch
31.5
Perennial
10
0.016
Notes: Land Use Source — National Land Cover Database 2011 (NLCD 2011), Multi -Resolution Land Characteristics (MRLC)
consortium, https://www.mric.gov/nlcd20ll.php and visual assessment of the 2015 aerial.
2.4 Soils
The proposed project is mapped by the Web Soil Survey for Wilkes County. Project area soils are
described below in Table G.4. Figure 5 provides a soil map of the Site.
Table G.4 Project Soil Types and Descriptions
Soil Name
Description
CoA — Codorus loam, 0 to 2%
This series consists of somewhat poorly drained, nearly level soils on
slopes, frequently flooded
floodplains on the Piedmont. This soil has low runoff, high permeability, and
floods frequently.
This series consists of moderately steep, well drained soils on side slopes and
FaD — Fairview sandy loam, 15
ridges on the Piedmont. The permeability is moderate. This soil is moderately
to 25% slopes
suited for woodland and poorly suited for field crops due to the slope and
hazard of erosion.
FcC2 — Fairview sandy clay
This series consists of well drained soils on side slopes and ridgetops on the
loam, 8 to 15% slopes,
Piedmont. This soil has moderate permeability and low surface runoff.
moderately eroded
This series consists of gently to strongly sloping areas of Udorthents and
UdC— Udorthents-Urban land
Urban land combined to one mapping unit. Udorthents consists of soil that
complex, 1 to 15% slopes
has been cut or filled during grading, and Urban land consists of areas where
soils are covered by impervious surfaces such as concrete, asphalt, etc.
Source: Soil Survey of Wilkes County, North Carolina, USDA-NRCS,
https://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.8

2.5 Geology
The Site is located in the Cat Square terrane of the Piedmont physiographic province. The Piedmont
province is characterized by rolling, well rounded hills and long low ridges, with elevations ranging from
300 to 1500 feet above sea level. The Cat Square terrane is composed of deformed metamorphic rocks
that have been intruded by younger granitic rocks. The underlying geology of the Site is mapped as
biotite gneiss and schist (CZbg) and metamorphosed granitic rock (OCg). The biotite gneiss and schist
from the late Proterozoic to Cambrian Period (500 to 900 million years in age) is described as
inequigranular with locally abundant potassic feldspar and garnet; interlayered and gradational with
calc-silicate rock, sillimanite-mica schist, and amphibolite. The unit also contains small masses of granitic
rock. The metamorphosed granitic rock is Cambrian to Ordovician Periods (455 to 540 million years in
age) is described as equigranular to megacrystic with foliated to massive structure. The unit includes
Toluca Granite.
Source: Geologic Map of North Carolina 1:500,000 scale.
Compiled by Philip M. Brown at el. Raleigh, NC, North Carolina Geological Survey
https://ncdenr. mons.arcgis. com/appsIManSeries/index. html?oppid=a8281 cbd24b84239b29cd2ca798d4al0
2.6 Cultural Resources and Significant Natural Heritage Areas
Two surveyed sites listed on the North Carolina State Historic Preservation office are located within five
miles of the Site, including the Johnson House and Store (SHPO Site ID: WK0392) and Claymont Hill
(SHPO Site ID: WK0186). The archaeological site files at the North Carolina Office of State Archaeology
(OSA) have not yet been reviewed. All appropriate cultural resource agencies will be contacted for their
review and comment prior to any land disturbing activity. The NC Natural Heritage Program (NHP)
Managed Areas reference two areas for Wilkes County Open Space and three NC DOT mitigation sites
within five miles of the site (Figure 1).
2.7 Threatened and Endangered Species
Wildlands searched the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and NHP databases for federally listed
threatened and endangered plant and animal species in Wilkes County, NC. Currently, there are three
species federally listed for this specific county which include the bog turtle (Glyptemys muhlenbergii),
the northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis), and the rusty -patched bumble bee (Bombus
affinis) (Table G.5). A pedestrian survey conducted on February 14, 2019, indicated that the Site could
provide potential habitat for the bog turtle and summer roosting for the northern long-eared bat, but no
individuals were located at the time. No suitable habitat was identified for the rusty -patched bumble
bee. Wildlands will conduct a review of the Site for protected species upon award of contract and will
coordinate with USFWS and NCWRC as necessary based on that review.
Table G.5 Federally Protected Threatened and Endangered Species in Wilkes County, NC
Species Federal Status Habitat
Vertebrate
Threatened
Inhabit open -canopy, herbaceous sedge meadows and fens, wet cow
Bog turtle (Glyptemys
(Similarity of
pastures, and shrub swamps bordered by wooded areas. Depend on
muhlenbergii)
Appearance)
wetland microhabitats for foraging, nesting, basking, hibernation, and
shelter.
Northern long-eared bat
Threatened
Roost in 3" dbh dead and alive trees with exfoliating bark, crevices or
(Myotis septentrionalis)
hollows during summer months. Caves or mines during winter months.
Invertebrate
Rusty -patched bumble
Endangered
Nest in abandoned rodent burrows and need proximity to flowering
bee (Bombus affinis)
plants found in or near woodlands.
Species and habitat information from the following websites:
https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/wilkes.htmi; and https://www.ncnhp.org/data/species-community-search
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.9

2.8 Floodplain Compliance
The Site is represented on the Wilkes County Flood Map 3710482600J. North Little Hunting Creek is
mapped in a Zone AE Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) downstream of the confluence with UT1.
Hydraulic modeling for North Little Hunting Creek will be obtained from the NC Floodplain Mapping
Program. A no -rise permit will be pursued if compatible with Priority 1 restoration and enhancement
grading. If a no -rise condition is not attainable, then a CLOMR will be prepared. Wildlands' engineers
have successfully navigated the CLOMR process for several similar full -delivery project sites. A LOMR will
be completed if required after construction using as -built survey data.
2.9 Site Constraints and Access
Four internal easement breaks are proposed to maintain utilities, landowner access, and use of
adjoining tracts. Each crossing is proposed to be fenced and gated if needed for livestock exclusion. The
crossings are summarized and numbered below in Table G.6 and depicted on Figure 6.
Table G.6 Easement Crossings
No.
Width (ft)
Location
Internal or External
Crossing Type
1
30
North Little Hunting Creek
Internal
None — break for utility only
2
60
North Little Hunting Creek
Internal
Existing bridge to remain
3
SO
UT1
Internal
Culvert crossing
4
SO
UT2
Internal
Culvert crossing
Utilities within the project area include an overhead utility line which crosses UT1 at crossing 3 and
North Little Hunting Creek upstream of the UT1 confluence. The conservation easement boundary will
be set after existing conditions survey to exclude any other overhead utilities which may run along Ingle
Hollow Road. No other known utilities are present within the conservation easement area.
The easement boundaries around all streams proposed for mitigation credit provide the required 30 -
foot minimum riparian buffer for Mountain streams and exceeds 30 -feet along the entire left bank of
North Little Hunting Creek. The entire easement area can be accessed for construction, monitoring, and
long-term stewardship from Ingle Hollow Road.
There no known airports within the five -mile radius from the Site as illustrated on Figure 1.
3.0 Project Development
The Wildlands Team proposes to restore a high quality of ecological function to the streams and riparian
corridors on the Site. The project design will be developed to avoid adverse impacts to existing streams,
wetland resources, or mature wooded vegetation. Different management objectives are proposed for
different portions of the project area. These activities are discussed below and summarized in Table G.6.
Figure 6 illustrates the conceptual design for the Site.
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.10

3.1 Stream Mitigation Approach
Currently, the streams throughout the Site are extensively
impacted by agricultural management, including cattle
grazing and crop production. The primary stressors to Site
streams are livestock trampling, lack of stabilizing stream
bank and riparian vegetation, active erosion, upland
erosion and sedimentation, incision, and impoundments.
Wildlands' approach to restoring streams on the Site
includes a multi -tiered approach including enhancement II
and Priority 1 restoration with Priority 2 restoration
limited to confluences and transition zones.
UT2, from the upstream project boundary to crossing 4, is
relatively stable geomorphically with spot bank erosion
and a sparse buffer near its downstream extents. Cattle access this reach and likely use it for shade
during summer. This reach is slated for enhancement level II, which will include cattle exclusion,
correcting isolated areas of bank erosion and planting woody vegetation. Localized invasive species
treatment will also take place where needed.
Restoration level practices are proposed on the remainder of the Site where persistent, systemic incision
and erosion cannot be addressed through spot treatment. North Little Hunting Creek will be raised using
a transitional length of Priority 2 restoration to correct moderate incision. A Priority 1 design will be
achieved as quickly as possible, and the stream will be meandered through the center of the broad
floodplain. Priority 1 restoration will continue to the downstream project extents, where a transitional
length of Priority 2 restoration will be required to tie the stream into the existing channel. The Priority 1
restoration will be designed to allow for the existing bridge to remain in place.
The primary stressors to UT1 are sediment -laden impoundments and active stream incision and
headcutting. Wildlands' approach to restoring UT1 will focus on removing the breaching embankments
and sediments behind them, daylighting piped sections of stream, reconnecting the stream to its
floodplain, stabilizing active headcuts, and replacing sinuosity that was removed during the agricultural
management of the system. The remnant embankments and impounded sediments of Ponds 1, 2, and 3
will be removed, eliminating the aquatic species barriers. The vertical grade change through the
embankments will be spread out and stabilized to prevent further incision. During design, Wildlands will
most likely (based on consultation with DMS and the IRT) remove the sediments stored behind these
embankments and will restore the natural valley bottom. UT1 will likely be designed as a Rosgen B -type
stream, with energy dissipated vertically over steps, at the upstream extents. Moving downstream
through the old pond bottoms as the valley widens, the stream will gain sinuosity and transition to a
Rosgen C-type stream, with energy dissipated laterally through meander geometry. As UTI approaches
the road, the design will likely transition back to a Rosgen B -type stream as the valley narrows to align
with the Ingle Hollow Road culvert. Downstream of the road, UT1 will be designed to meander gently to
join North Little Hunting Creek.
Restoration of UT2 will begin at crossing 4 at an existing headcut. UT2 will be raised to tie into the
natural valley floor, eliminating the aquatic species barrier presented by the headcut, and Priority 1
restoration will continue downstream to North Little Hunting Creek. Cattle will be excluded from the
easement. Restoration of Trapper Tributary and Rifle Tributary will begin at their headwater seeps and
continue down to join UT2. Restoration of Old Bus Branch will involve construction of a series of steps to
drop the stream down valley in a stable manner to join UT2. Barn Branch's restoration will begin at its
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.11

inception, raising the incised stream up onto the historic floodplain using Priority 1 restoration. The
stream will be meandered through the broad floodplain to join UT2.
Buffers will be planted as described in Section 3.3. In areas where invasive species are present, these
plants will be removed either as part of grading activities or treated with herbicide prior to buffer
planting. Restoration of riparian buffers will create an uninterrupted wooded corridor for wildlife,
connecting Site streams to upstream wooded tracts.
This proposed work will not only improve Site streams but will directly address several of the stressors
identified in the RBRP, including addressing channelization, sedimentation from agriculture, eroding
stream banks, and restoring degraded riparian buffers. The project will benefit downstream waters in
this water supply watershed by directly reducing sediment, nutrients, and fecal coliform sources.
Overall, approximately 18 acres will be preserved in perpetuity on the Site.
4 -
-
f;:I%Y e4l - ........ r
Jl.! I:':;-- JUNE 2014
All project reaches will be designed to create stable, functional stream channels. Design will be based on
reference reach and sediment transport analyses. Dimension, pattern, and profile will be designed to
allow for frequent overbank flooding, provide stable bank
slopes, and enable biological lift. This approach will provide
•'
hydrologic connectivity between creeks and floodplains, and
will also create vertical and lateral stability. Treating invasive
vegetation and establishing stable bank slopes will allow fora
��" �•
native and diverse riparian zone to grow which will improve
nutrient removal. A diverse bedform and addition of LWD will
provide habitat for an increased number of species of insects,.
fish, and amphibians. This diverse bedform will be established
,,:
using instream structures appropriate for the geomorphic
y.
setting such as log steps, rock steps, log vanes, and constructed
riffles and rock cascades.
Wildlands will begin the project by identifying the best design
approach to meet the stated project objectives and implement the appropriate degree of intervention.
A combination of analog, empirical, and analytical design
approaches will potentially be used. Reference streams will be
identified and will serve as one of the primary sources of
information on which restoration designs are based. Modeling
and other detailed analyses will be used as appropriate to
develop or verify designs. Wildlands has developed a general
approach to be used as the basis for stream restoration design.
The design approach, which is tailored to each site, continues
to develop as additional projects are implemented. Some of the
key elements of the methods are described below.
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.12

Generally, stream designs will be based on a design discharge range that, in most cases, will
approximate the bankfull discharge but will be selected to meet the objectives of the design. The
discharge will be determined through detailed hydrologic analyses using the best available information
such as local or regional stream gage records, empirical regional stream flow estimates, hydrologic
modeling results, and reference stream flows. Other discharges (such as baseflow or flows to support
instream habitat features) will also be considered during the design process based on the specific
project objectives.
Conservation easement areas will be marked per DMS guidelines, and crossings will be constructed to
exclude livestock access as discussed in Section 2.9. Native riparian buffers measuring a minimum of 30
feet from the proposed top of bank will be planted along all restored and enhanced streams on the Site.
Restored buffer widths will exceed 30 -feet along the left bank of North Little Hunting Creek.
3.2 Stormwater BMPs
Three stormwater BMPs are proposed for the Site, as
depicted on Figure 6. Runoff from the adjacent pastures will
be slowed and filtered through BMPs such as bioretention
cells or step pool stormwater conveyances (SPSCs) at the
upstream extents of Barn Branch, Trapper Tributary, and
Rifle Tributary. The BMPs will be designed to slow and treat
drainage before entering the riparian zone. The BMP buffers
will be planted with appropriate native species to encourage
filtration, settling, and treatment.
3.3 Vegetation Plan
The Site will be planted following construction of the project.
The planting plan will be based on an appropriate nearby
reference community and will be developed to restore
appropriate strata (canopy, understory, shrub, and
herbaceous layers).
The canopy will be restored through planting of bare root
trees. The understory and shrub layers will be restored
through a combination of planting bare root, low growth
species and installing live stake shrub species. The
herbaceous layer will be restored by seeding the disturbed
area with a native seed mix with an emphasis placed on
creating good soil contact to encourage germination.
4.0 Proposed Mitigation
The Site will be a combination of stream restoration and
enhancement II and is expected to deliver 6,000 warm
stream credits as detailed in Table G.7, below.
The mitigation credit calculation was derived using the US
Army Corps of Engineers' Stream Mitigation Guidance, and
was based on Wildlands' conceptual design for maximum
ecological uplift. The credit calculations include additional
credit for the wide left buffer proposed for North Little
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.13

Hunting Creek, which will range from approximately 125 LF to over 150 feet for its entire length,
generating up to 250 additional stream credits.
Given the existing conditions of the stream channels, the disturbance factors, and the constraints,
management objectives for each reach have been established. The management objective, the
mitigation type, and proposed amount of stream mitigation is presented in the below.
Table G.7 Stream and Wetland Credits proposed for the Huntsman Mitigation Site
Stream Credits
Parcel ID
Number
Memorandum of Option
Type of
Length
Stream
Reach
Management Objectives
Mitigation
(feet)1
Ratio
Credits'
RESTORATION
North Little
01280
0225
Lynn Johnson
4827-84-8574
Hunting Creek
Restore appropriate dimension, pattern, and
profile with Priority 1 restoration. Install habitat
structures, allow bankfull floodplain access.
4827-95-0384
1,730
1:1
1,980
UT2 Reach 2
1,388
1:1
1,388
Rifle Tributary
158
1:1
158
Trapper Tributary
Establish native riparian buffer and exclude cattle.
Restoration
77
1:1
77
Old Bus Branch
158
1:1
158
Barn Branch
252
1:1
252
All the above, plus remove 3 pond embankments
UT1
and uncap approximately 400 LF of buried stream
1,882
1:1
1,882
channel.
Restoration Subtotal
5,645
5,895
ENHANCEMENT II
Spot bank erosion repair. Establish native riparian
UT2 Reach 1
Enhancement II
315
3:1 105
buffer where needed and exclude cattle.
Enhancement II Subtotal
315
105
TOTAL:
5,960
6,000
Note 1: Lengths are approximate based on professional judgement and exclude crossing locations.
Note 2: North Little Hunting Creek's left buffer will range from 125 to over 150 feet wide, generating an additional 250 credits.
5.0 Current Ownership
The Site is located on four parcels, and an option agreement for the purchase of a conservation
easement as shown on Figure 6 has been signed by the Johnson family. The Memorandum of Option is
on record at the Wilkes County Register of Deeds. The option agreement allows Wildlands to purchase a
conservation easement on the properties. The Memorandum of Option is valid for a minimum of 180
days from the closing date of RFP 16-007728. Wildlands will convey the conservation easement to the
State to provide long term protection of the Site. The conservation easement agreement will ensure the
right of entry abilities of Wildlands, its contractors, and the future easement holder in any future land
transactions. A copy of the Memorandum of Option is included in the appendix. The landowners, parcel
identification number, and deed book and page numbers for the Memorandum of Option are
summarized in Table G.8.
Table G.8 Property Owners for the Huntsman Mitigation Site
Property Owner
Parcel ID
Number
Memorandum of Option
Deed Book
Page Number
4827-97-1278
Jerry A. and Debra
4827-96-5044
01280
0225
Lynn Johnson
4827-84-8574
4827-95-0384
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.14

Wildlands' option agreement with the Johnsons also allows Wildlands to place a Restrictive Covenant on
a toe of slope drainage which joins North Little Hunting Creek in the southwest corner of the project.
The Restrictive Covenant will prevent cattle access to the drainage feature.
6.0 Scope of Work and Project Phasing
Table G.9 describes the tasks and deliverables required by the Scope of Work outlined in RFP 16-007728.
Note that all deliverables will be provided following the requirements of Attachment H to the RFP. Table
G.10 provides the proposed schedule for accomplishing each Scope of Work task. The Wildlands Team
has experience handling tightly scheduled projects with many stakeholders. We understand the
importance of clear communication and adherence to deadlines. We will establish additional internal
deadlines to keep the project milestones on track. Each task will be staffed with the appropriate
technical and management staff to ensure quality and timely completion.
Table G.9 Summary Scope of Work for the Huntsman Mitigation Site
Task #
Task Name
Task Summary
DMS Deliverable
• Onsite meeting with the IRT and DMS
to discuss concepts of the mitigation
plan and obtain concurrence on
planned work and crediting.
• Approved Categorical Exclusion
• Conduct DMS/FHWA guidelines for
document - emailed Adobe PDF.
Categorical
environmental screening to identify
• IRT meeting minutes — emailed Adobe
1
Exclusion
threatened/endangered species,
PDF.
Documentation
environmental, or cultural issues on
• DMS Full Delivery Landowner
the Site.
Authorization Form (if applicable).
• Secure DMS Full Delivery Landowner
• USACE Public Notice (if applicable).
Authorization Form (if applicable).
• Satisfy USACE public notification
process (if applicable).
• 4 preliminary review items outlined in
the RFP, submitted electronically as
defined in Attachment H.
Conservation
• Create conservation easement
• 5 final deliverables outlined in the
documents and plats.
2
Easement
• Close and record the conservation
RFP, submitted electronically and in
Recordation
hard copy as defined in Attachment H.
easement.
• Installation of boundary marking
documented on As -Built survey during
Task 6.
• 2 hard copies and 1 electronic "Draft"
Mitigation Plan and survey.
Mitigation Plan
•Develop asite-specific mitigation plan,
• 3 hard copies and 1 electronic "Final
(Final Draft) and
appropriate for the Site.
Draft" Mitigation Plan and survey.
3
Financial
• Revise per DMS and IRT review
• Performance Bond (may be retired
Assurance
comments.
after completion of Task 6)
• 2 Completed PCN forms and 2 hard
copies of the "Final" Mitigation Plan. 1
copy of both submitted electronically.
• Secure all necessary permits and/or
• 1 electronic copy of approved permits
4
Permitting and
certifications for Site construction.
prior to beginning earthwork.
Earthwork
• Written notification of earthwork
•Construct the Site.
completion.
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page GAS

Task #
Task Name
Task Summary
DMS Deliverable
Mitigation Site
Planting and
• Complete planting of Site.
• Written notification of planting and
S
Installation of
monitoring device installation
Monitoring
. Install monitoring devices.
completion.
Devices
• 1 hard copy and 1 electronic copy of
Baseline
• Conduct baseline monitoring.
"Draft" Baseline Monitoring Document
• Perform as -built survey.
and As -Built drawings. Electronic copy
Monitoring Report
• prepare baseline monitoring
of surveys.
6
(Including As -Built
Drawings)
document.
• 1 hard copy and 1 electronic copy of
Approved by DMS
• Prepare as -built survey drawings.
"Final" Baseline Monitoring Document
• Install easement markers and signage.
and As -Built drawings. Electronic copy
of surveys.
• Monitor the Site.
7
Monitoring Year 1
• prepare the monitoring report.
8
Monitoring Year 2
• Monitor the Site.
• Prepare the monitoring report. p g p
1 hard copy and 1 electronic copy of
each "Draft" annual monitoring report.
9
Monitoring Year 3
• Monitor the Site.
• prepare the monitoring report.
Electronic copy of survey.
1 hard copy and 1 electronic copy of
• Monitor the Site.
10
Monitoring Year 4
• prepare the monitoring report.
each "Final" annual monitoring report.
Electronic copy of survey.
• Monitor the Site.
11
Monitoring Year 5
• prepare the monitoring report.
12
Monitoring Year 6
• Monitor the Site.
• prepare the monitoring report.
• 1 hard copy and 1 electronic copy of
• Monitor the Site.
the "Draft" annual monitoring report
Monitoring Year 7
• Prepare the monitoring report.
and closeout report. Electronic copy of
13
and Close -Out
• Prepare closeout report.
survey.
Process
•Attend closeout meetings and present
. 1 hard copy and 1 electronic copy of
"Final"
the annual monitoring report
final project to IRT.
and closeout report. Electronic copy of
survey.
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.16

Table G.10 Project Schedule for the Huntsman Mitigation Site
*Meets success criteria (schedule progression has been developed assuming that the site meets success criteria each
monitoring year)
7.0 Performance Standards and Monitoring Plan
The performance criteria for the Site will follow approved performance criteria presented in the DMS
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Plan Template and Guidance (June 2017) and the October 2016 IRT
Mitigation Monitoring Guidance. Annual monitoring and semi-annual site visits will be conducted to
assess the condition of the completed project. The stream restoration reaches of the project will be
assigned specific performance criteria components for hydrology, vegetation, and geomorphology. The
enhancement II reaches will be assigned specific performance criteria components for vegetation only.
Performance criteria will be evaluated throughout the (up to) seven years of post -construction
monitoring. If all performance criteria have been successfully met and at least four bankfull events have
occurred during separate years, Wildlands may propose to terminate stream and/or vegetation
monitoring after five years with written approval from the USACE and North Carolina Interagency
Review Team (IRT). An outline of the performance criteria components follows.
7.1 Stream Morphological Parameters and Channel Stability
Dimension
Riffle cross sections on the restoration reaches should be stable and should show little change in
bankfull area, bank height ratio, and width -to -depth ratio. Riffle cross sections should fall within the
parameters defined for channels of the appropriate stream type. If any changes do occur, these changes
will be evaluated to assess whether the stream channel is showing signs of instability. Changes in the
channel that indicate a movement toward stability or enhanced habitat include a decrease in the width -
to -depth ratio in meandering channels or an increase in pool depth. Remedial action would not be taken
if channel changes indicate a movement toward stability.
In order to assess channel dimension performance, permanent cross sections will be installed on
restoration reaches per the IRT Mitigation Monitoring Guidelines (October 2016). Each cross section will
be permanently marked with pins to establish its location. Cross section surveys will include points
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.17
Proposed Time to
Proposed Completion
Project Milestone
Completion
Date (assuming NTP on
(from date of NTP)
August 1, 2019)
Task 1. CE Document
3 months
November 1, 2019
Task 2. Submit Recorded Conservation Easement on the Site
1 year, 8 months
April 1, 2021
Task 3. Mitigation Plan Approved by DMS and Financial
1 year, 8 months
April 1, 2021
Assurance
Task 4. Mitigation Site Earthwork Completed
2 years, 6 months
February 1, 2022
Task 5. Mitigation Site Planting & Installation of Monitoring
2 years, 8 months
April 1, 2022
Devices
Task 6. Baseline Monitoring Report (Including As -Built
2 years, 10 months
June 1, 2022
Drawings) Approved by DMS
Task 7. Submit Monitoring Report #1 to DMS*
3 years, 4 months
December 1, 2022
Task 8. Submit Monitoring Report #2 to DMS*
4 years, 4 months
December 1, 2023
Task 9. Submit Monitoring Report #3 to DMS*
5 years, 4 months
December 1, 2024
Task 10. Submit Monitoring Report #4 to DMS*
6 years, 4 months
December 1, 2025
Task 11. Submit Monitoring Report #5 to DMS*
7 years, 4 months
December 1, 2026
Task 12. Submit Monitoring Report #6 to DMS*
8 years, 4 months
December 1, 2027
Task 13. Submit Monitoring Report #7 to DMS* and
9 Years, 4 months
December 1, 2028
complete Close -Out Process
*Meets success criteria (schedule progression has been developed assuming that the site meets success criteria each
monitoring year)
7.0 Performance Standards and Monitoring Plan
The performance criteria for the Site will follow approved performance criteria presented in the DMS
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Plan Template and Guidance (June 2017) and the October 2016 IRT
Mitigation Monitoring Guidance. Annual monitoring and semi-annual site visits will be conducted to
assess the condition of the completed project. The stream restoration reaches of the project will be
assigned specific performance criteria components for hydrology, vegetation, and geomorphology. The
enhancement II reaches will be assigned specific performance criteria components for vegetation only.
Performance criteria will be evaluated throughout the (up to) seven years of post -construction
monitoring. If all performance criteria have been successfully met and at least four bankfull events have
occurred during separate years, Wildlands may propose to terminate stream and/or vegetation
monitoring after five years with written approval from the USACE and North Carolina Interagency
Review Team (IRT). An outline of the performance criteria components follows.
7.1 Stream Morphological Parameters and Channel Stability
Dimension
Riffle cross sections on the restoration reaches should be stable and should show little change in
bankfull area, bank height ratio, and width -to -depth ratio. Riffle cross sections should fall within the
parameters defined for channels of the appropriate stream type. If any changes do occur, these changes
will be evaluated to assess whether the stream channel is showing signs of instability. Changes in the
channel that indicate a movement toward stability or enhanced habitat include a decrease in the width -
to -depth ratio in meandering channels or an increase in pool depth. Remedial action would not be taken
if channel changes indicate a movement toward stability.
In order to assess channel dimension performance, permanent cross sections will be installed on
restoration reaches per the IRT Mitigation Monitoring Guidelines (October 2016). Each cross section will
be permanently marked with pins to establish its location. Cross section surveys will include points
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.17

measured at all breaks in slope, including top of bank, bankfull, edge of water, and thalweg. Cross
section and bank pin surveys (if applicable) will be conducted in monitoring years one, two, three, five,
and seven.
Profile and Pattern
Longitudinal profile surveys will be conducted during the as -built
survey, but will not be conducted during the seven-year
monitoring period unless other indicators during the annual
monitoring indicate a trend toward vertical and lateral instability.
If a longitudinal profile is deemed necessary, monitoring will
follow standards as described in the Stream Channel Reference
Sites An Illustrated Guide to Field Technique (Harrelson et. al.,
1994) for the necessary reaches.
Substrate
Substrate materials in the restoration reaches should indicate a
progression towards or the maintenance of coarser materials in the riffle features and smaller particles
in the pool features. However, natural variations in pool and riffle substrate is expected as a result of
sediment transport processes in steeper sloped channels. A reach -wide pebble count will be performed
in each restoration reach each year for classification purposes. A wetted pebble count will be performed
during the baseline survey at surveyed riffles to characterize the pavement.
7.2 Hydrology
Stream
Four bankfull flow events, occurring in separate years, must be documented on the restoration reaches
within the seven-year monitoring period. Stream monitoring will continue until success criteria in the
form of four bankfull events in separate years have been documented. Bankfull events will be
documented using photographs and either a crest gage or a pressure transducer, as appropriate for Site
conditions. The selected measurement device will be installed in the stream within a surveyed riffle
cross section. Photographs will also be used to document the occurrence of debris lines and sediment
deposition.
7.3 Vegetation
The final vegetative success criteria will be the survival of 210 planted stems per acre in the riparian
corridors at the end of the required monitoring period (year seven). The interim measure of vegetative
success for the site will be the survival of at least 320 native species stems per acre at the end of the
third monitoring year and at least 260 stems per acre at the end of the fifth year of monitoring. Also,
trees must average six feet in height at the end of the fifth monitoring year, and eight feet in height at
the end of the seventh monitoring year. If this performance standard is met by year five and stem
density is trending towards success (i.e., vigor), and invasive species are not threatening ecological
success, monitoring of vegetation on the Site may be terminated with written approval by the USACE in
consultation with the IRT. The extent of invasive species coverage will also be monitored and controlled
as necessary throughout the required monitoring period.
Vegetation monitoring quadrants will be installed across the Site to measure the survival of the planted
trees. The number of monitoring quadrants required and frequency of monitoring will be based on the
October 2016 IRT Mitigation Monitoring Guidance. Vegetation monitoring will occur in the summer and
will follow the CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation (2008) or another DMS approved protocol.
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.18

7.4 Other Parameters
Photo Reference Stations
Photographs should illustrate the Site's vegetation and morphological stability on an annual basis. Cross
section photos should demonstrate no excessive erosion or degradation of the banks. Longitudinal
photos should indicate the absence of persistent mid -channel bars within the channel or vertical
incision. Grade control structures should remain stable. Deposition of sediment on the bank side of vane
arms is preferable. Maintenance of scour pools on the channel side of vane arms is expected.
Photographs will be taken once a year to visually document stability for seven years following
construction. Permanent markers will be established and located with GPS equipment so that the same
locations and view directions on the Site are photographed each year. Photos will be used to monitor
restoration and enhancement areas as well as vegetation plots.
Longitudinal reference photos will be established at regular intervals along the channel by taking a
photo looking upstream and downstream. Cross sectional photos will be taken of each permanent cross
section looking upstream and downstream. Reference photos will also be taken for each of the
vegetation plots. Representative digital photos of each permanent photo point, cross section, and
vegetation plot will be taken on the same day the stream and vegetation assessments are conducted.
The photographer will make every effort to consistently maintain the same area in each photo over
time.
Visual Assessments
Visual assessments should support the specific performance standards for each metric as described
above. Visual assessments will be performed along stream reaches on a semi-annual basis during the
seven-year monitoring period. Problem areas such as channel instability (e.g. lateral and/or vertical
instability, instream structure failure/instability and/or piping, headcuts), vegetation health (e.g. low
stem density, vegetation mortality, invasive species, or encroachment), beaver activity, or livestock
access will be noted. Areas of concern will be mapped and photographed and will be accompanied by a
written description in the annual report. Problem areas with be re-evaluated during each subsequent
visual assessment. Should remedial actions be required, a plan of action will be provided in the annual
monitoring report.
Benthic Macroinvertebrates
If required by DWR as part of the project's permitting process, benthic macroinvertebrate sampling will
be performed on the restored site. Any required sampling will be performed using DWR Standard
Operating Procedures for Benthic Macroinvertebrates (October 2012).
7.5 Reporting Performance Criteria
Using the DMS Baseline Monitoring Report Template (June 2017), a baseline monitoring document and
as -built record drawings of the project will be developed for the constructed Site. Complete monitoring
reports will be prepared in the fall of monitoring year one, two, three, five, and seven and submitted to
DMS. In monitoring years four and six, a brief summary of the site conditions along with photos, current
condition plan view (CCPV) map, and applicable hydrology data will be prepared and submitted to DMS.
Annual monitoring reports will be based on the DMS Annual Monitoring Report Template (June 2017).
The monitoring period will extend seven years beyond completion of construction or until performance
criteria have been met.
7.6 Maintenance and Contingency Plans
The Wildlands Team will develop necessary adaptive measures or implement appropriate remedial
actions if the site or a specific component of the site fails to achieve the success criteria outlined above.
The project -specific monitoring plan developed during the design phase will identify an appropriate
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.19

threshold for maintenance intervention based on the monitored items. Any actions implemented will be
designed to achieve the success criteria specified previously, and will include a work schedule and
updated monitoring criteria (if applicable).
8.0 Quality Control
The Wildlands Team takes pride in the quality of services that
we deliver to our clients. We strive to exceed our clients'
expectations. To maintain the highest level of quality, Wildlands
has an established Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC)
protocol that every member of our staff follows.
At the beginning of a project, the necessary level of QA/QC is
determined based on the size and complexity of the project. At
a minimum, the project manager and an assigned QA/QC
manager will function to control the quality of the project. The
project manager provides day-to-day QA/QC and may assign
task leaders to provide task -specific quality control (QC)
functions. The QA/QC manager is a knowledgeable senior staff
member who is not assigned to function in a lead capacity on
other areas of the project. This provides the QA/QC manager
objective views of the quality of work.
Our QC program includes established procedures for processes
performed from project inception through implementation and
monitoring of the project. For example, Wildlands has
developed standardized checklists and pre -defined procedures
for activities such as field surveys of stream cross-sections and
profiles, pebble counts, benthic surveys, bank stability
assessments, natural channel design, permitting, contract
document preparation, post -construction baseline survey, and
kz­rr."
QA 1—
ERleting Condltloln Data
Pieparetl �
Perinrvac 0y
rd eem
Prepared bye Jag
Re�irv�eC RJ -
P[p[n �MX1ga[1[n Plart "M1 [omplatol
etl By
Revievree Py JaL
Plans -sow arena mrmmyanon gran Peaon esurmirni no.e.% ­Pim I
Preparetl br
Re�te..reo ev Jare
SM1— & Eroalon C-1 Permll Appllallcn PaeM'.�e
Rer�tl6
eWem BY JaR
ea^p P1... suxniuii nce w wnalerer
atl Ey
Pa��are�E,
d�
Pa�rsaa am,l arar� �, �omnlewi
Preparetl By >aR .c
Reviwreo 9y
spe[nlcsnons vv mn P-)
Preparetl By 3R
post construction monitoring. The checklists are largely based on the most current DMS guidelines to
ensure that all required information is included in the correct format. Task leaders assigned for each
activity train project team members in the application of these procedures. The task leaders assist the
project manager by providing day-to-day QC functions, such as establishing clear decisions and
directions to team members in the field, checking the completeness and accuracy of checklists, constant
supervision, and documentation of all decisions, assumptions, and recommendations. The role of the
project manager in QC is to monitor and maintain project schedule and budget, address any concerns
the client may have, constantly assess company resources, and review all of the checklists.
During the conceptual and preliminary design stages, the project manager and the task leader will
perform a review of the design data, plans, technical specifications, and construction estimate for
accuracy, correct approach, and general overall quality of the product and compliance with DMS
formats before submission to the client. Sediment sampling, groundwater gage monitoring, and
pressure transducer surface flow monitoring are frequently used during the design phase to validate the
design criteria and analytical models. The project manager will perform a similar review at final design as
will the QA/QC manager. During the construction phase, the project manager and the construction task
manager will regularly meet to provide updates and discuss any issues. The goal of the QC process is to
provide the highest quality product to our client by completing tasks correctly the first time. By
completing procedural processes once, Wildlands helps ensure that we deliver the best products at a
minimum cost to our clients.
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.20

QA is performed to confirm that the QC program is effectively practiced, and to provide feedback on
further developments needed in the QC program. The QA/QC manager leads the QA program; however,
the project manager, task leaders, and project team staff also play large roles. It is each person's
responsibility to notify the QA/QC manager whenever discrepancies and inefficiencies are found in the
set of procedural activities that make up the QC process. The objective of QA is the continual
improvement of the total delivery process to enhance quality, productivity, and customer satisfaction.
We are continually improving the QC process so that our latest products and services are better than the
previous ones.
8.1 Deliverables
The project schedule is established during the scoping phases of a project and it is the project manager's
responsibility to maintain the schedule. A work plan is developed at the outset of a project and shared
internally with team members so that milestone deadlines and work requirements are clearly outlined.
Review time is built into this internal schedule to ensure that adequate review takes place.
The QA form, which is maintained by the QA/QC manager, is established at the beginning of the project
and is maintained throughout the life of the project. Reviews of technical data, design parameters,
reports, plan sheets, hydraulic models, and supporting calculations are tracked on the form. Included on
this form are requirements that a professional staff member, who is not involved in the project on a
day-to-day basis, review the design calculations, hydraulic models, reports, plans, and all other types of
project deliverables. Conformance with DMS report templates and a final grammar/spelling/formatting
review are also integrated into the QA review process.
8.2 Construction
Wildlands team members are familiar with the policies, procedures, and practices necessary to
construct natural channel design and stream mitigation projects. Wildlands has provided construction
administration and observation services of over 72 miles of stream work and 174 acres of wetland work.
We believe that project implementation is the ultimate key to a successful project and, to achieve this, it
is extremely important to have our most experienced staff members involved on all construction
projects. Our team knows how to oversee construction so that the project is completed on time and in
compliance with all federal, state, and local permits. Several members of the proposed project team
have assisted with construction services for the DMS restoration sites, many of which have performed
successfully for three years or more.
Table G.11 Wildlands Team Member Construction Oversight Experience
c
a`,
v
(6
c
Z
C
Project
Details
W
ui
m
Big Harris Creek Mitigation Site
25,836 SMUs; 9 BMPs
x
x
x
Henry Fork Mitigation Site
4,807 SMUs; 4.2 WMUs
x
x
Lone Hickory Mitigation Site
12,900 SM Us; 8.0 WMUs
x
x
Western Stream Initiative
Multiple projects totaling 15,000 LF
x
Reedy Creek Design -Build Stream
25,974 SMUs
x
x
Restoration Project
Little Pine II Stream Restoration Project
4,156 LF of streams;x
x
5.4 acres of wetlands
Lyle Creek Mitigation Site
5,571 SMUs; 7.0 WMUs
x
x
Owl's Den Mitigation Site
2,400 SMUs; 8.0 WMUs
x
Huntsman Mitigation Site - PART G
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. Page G.21

Proposal Number: 16-007728 Vendor., Wildlands Engineering, 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-compliance with the requirements or intent of this solicitation, lack of competitiveness, error(s) in specifications
or indications that revision would be advantageous to the State, cancellation or other changes in the intended project
or any other determination that the proposed requirement is no longer needed, limitation or lack of available funds,
circumstances that prevent determination of the best offer, or any other determination that rejection would be in the
best interest of the State.
5. EXECUTION: Failure to sign the Execution Page (numbered page 1 of the RFP) in the indicated space will render
proposal non-responsive, and it shall be rejected.
6. ORDER OF PRECEDENCE: In cases of conflict between specific provisions in this solicitation or those in any
resulting contract documents, the order of precedence shall be (high to low) (1) any special terms and conditions
specific to this RFP, including any negotiated terms; (2) requirements and specifications and administration
provisions in Sections 4, 5 and 6 of this RFP; (3) North Carolina General Contract Terms and Conditions in
ATTACHMENT C: NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS; (4) Instructions in
ATTACHMENT B: INSTRUCTIONS TO VENDORS; (5) ATTACHMENT A: PRICING, and (6) Vendor's proposal.
7. INFORMATION AND DESCRIPTIVE LITERATURE: Vendor shall furnish all information requested and in the
spaces provided in this document. Further, if required elsewhere in this proposal, each Vendor shall submit with its
proposal any sketches, descriptive literature and/or complete specifications covering the products and Services
offered. Reference to literature submitted with a previous proposal or available elsewhere will not satisfy this
provision. Failure comply with these requirements shall constitute sufficient cause to reject a proposal without further
consideration.
8. RECYCLING AND SOURCE REDUCTION: It is the policy of the State to encourage and promote the purchase of
products with recycled content to the extent economically practicable, and to purchase items which are reusable,
refillable, repairable, more durable and less toxic to the extent that the purchase or use is practicable and cost-
effective. We also encourage and promote using minimal packaging and the use of recycled/recyclable products in
the packaging of commodities purchased. However, no sacrifice in quality of packaging will be acceptable. The
company remains responsible for providing packaging that will adequately protect the commodity and contain it for
its intended use. Companies are strongly urged to bring to the attention of purchasers those products or packaging
they offer which have recycled content and that are recyclable.
9. CERTIFICATE TO TRANSACT BUSINESS IN NORTH CAROLINA: As a condition of contract award, each out -of -
State Vendor that is a corporation, limited -liability company or limited -liability partnership shall have received, and
shall maintain throughout the term of The Contract, a Certificate of Authority to Transact Business in North Carolina
from the North Carolina Secretary of State, as required by North Carolina law. A State contract requiring only an
isolated transaction completed within a period of six months, and not in the course of a number of repeated
transactions of like nature, shall not be considered as transacting business in North Carolina and shall not require a
Certificate of Authority to Transact Business.
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 27 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007728 Vendor: Wildlands Engineering, 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 double sided.
• All submittals and copies are printed on recycled paper with a minimum post -consumer content of 30%.
• Unless absolutely necessary, all proposals and copies should minimize or eliminate use of non -recyclable or
non -reusable materials such as plastic report covers, plastic dividers, vinyl sleeves, and GBC binding. Three -
ringed binders, glued materials, paper clips, and staples are acceptable.
• Materials should be submitted in a format which allows for easy removal, filing and/or recycling of paper and
binder materials. Use of oversized paper is strongly discouraged unless necessary for clarity or legibility.
11. HISTORICALLY UNDERUTILIZED BUSINESSES: The State is committed to retaining Vendors from diverse
backgrounds, and it invites and encourages participation in the procurement process by businesses owned by
minorities, women, disabled, disabled business enterprises and non-profit work centers for the blind and severely
disabled. In particular, the State encourages participation by Vendors certified by the State Office of Historically
Underutilized Businesses, as well as the use of HUB -certified vendors as subcontractors on State contracts.
12. RECIPROCAL PREFERENCE: G.S. 143-59 establishes a reciprocal preference requirement to discourage other
states from favoring their own resident Vendors by applying a percentage increase to the price of any proposal from
a North Carolina resident Vendor. To the extent another state does so, North Carolina applies the same percentage
increase to the proposal of a vendor resident in that state. Residency is determined by a Vendor's "Principal Place
of Business," defined as that principal place from which the overall trade or business of the Vendor is directed or
managed.
13. INELIGIBLE VENDORS: As provided in G.S. 147-86.59 and G.S. 147-86.82, the following companies are
ineligible to contract with the State of North Carolina or any political subdivision of the State: a) any company
identified as engaging in investment activities in Iran, as determined by appearing on the Final Divestment List
created by the State Treasurer pursuant to G.S. 147-86.58, and b) any company identified as engaged in a boycott
of Israel as determined by appearing on the List of restricted companies created by the State Treasurer pursuant
to G.S. 147-86.81. A contract with the State or any of its political subdivisions by any company identified in a) or b)
above shall be void ab initio.
14. CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION: To the extent permitted by applicable statutes and rules, the State will maintain
as confidential trade secrets in its proposal that the Vendor does not wish disclosed. As a condition to confidential
treatment, each page containing trade secret information shall be identified in boldface at the top and bottom as
"CONFIDENTIAL" by the Vendor, with specific trade secret information enclosed in boxes, marked in a distinctive
color or by similar indication. Cost information shall not be deemed confidential under any circumstances.
Regardless of what a Vendor may label as a trade secret, the determination whether it is or is not entitled to protection
will be determined in accordance with G.S. 132-1.2. Any material labeled as confidential constitutes a representation
by the Vendor that it has made a reasonable effort in good faith to determine that such material is, in fact, a trade
secret under G.S. 132-1.2. Vendors are urged and cautioned to limit the marking of information as a trade secret or
as confidential so far as is possible. If a legal action is brought to require the disclosure of any material so marked
as confidential, the State will notify Vendor of such action and allow Vendor to defend the confidential status of its
information.
15. PROTEST PROCEDURES: When a Vendor wishes to protest the award of The Contract awarded by the Division
of Purchase and Contract, or awarded by an agency in an awarded amount of at least $25,000, a Vendor shall
submit a written request addressed to the State Purchasing Officer at: Division of Purchase and Contract, 1305 Mail
Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1305. A protest request related to an award amount of less than $25,000 shall
be sent to the purchasing officer of the agency that issued the award. The protest request must be received in the
proper office within thirty (30) consecutive calendar days from the date of the Contract award. Protest letters shall
contain specific grounds and reasons for the protest, how the protesting party was harmed by the award made and
any documentation providing support for the protesting party's claims. Note: Contract award notices are sent only
to the Vendor actually awarded the Contract, and not to every person or firm responding to a solicitation. Proposal
status and Award notices are posted on the Internet at https://www.ips.state.nc.us/ips/. All protests will be handled
pursuant to the North Carolina Administrative Code, 01 NCAC 05B .1519.
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 28 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007728 Vendor: Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
16. MISCELLANEOUS: Any gender -specific pronouns used herein, whether masculine or feminine, shall be read and
construed as gender neutral, and the singular of any word or phrase shall be read to include the plural and vice
versa.
17. COMMUNICATIONS BY VENDORS: In submitting its proposal, the Vendor agrees not to discuss or otherwise
reveal the contents of its proposal to any source, government or private, outside of the using or issuing agency until
after the award of the Contract or cancellation of this RFP. All Vendors are forbidden from having any
communications with the using or issuing agency, or any other representative of the State concerning the solicitation,
during the evaluation of the proposals (i.e., after the public opening of the proposals and before the award of the
Contract), unless the State directly contacts the Vendor(s) for purposes of seeking clarification or another reason
permitted by the solicitation. A Vendor shall not: (a) transmit to the issuing and/or using agency any information
commenting on the ability or qualifications of any other Vendor to provide the advertised good, equipment,
commodity; (b) identify defects, errors and/or omissions in any other Vendor's proposal and/or prices at any time
during the procurement process; and/or (c) engage in or attempt any other communication or conduct that could
influence the evaluation or award of a Contract related to this RFP. Failure to comply with this requirement shall
constitute sufficient justification to disqualify a Vendor from a Contract award. Only those communications with the
using agency or issuing agency authorized by this RFP are permitted.
18. TABULATIONS: Bid tabulations can be electronically retrieved at the Interactive Purchasing System (IPS),
https://www.ips.state.nc.us/ips/BidNumberSearch.aspx. Click on the IPS BIDS icon, click on Search for Bid, enter
the bid number, and then search. Tabulations will normally be available at this web site not later than one working
day after the bid opening. Lengthy or complex tabulations may be summarized, with other details not made available
on IPS, and requests for additional details or information concerning such tabulations cannot be honored.
19. VENDOR REGISTRATION AND SOLICITATION NOTIFICATION SYSTEM: The North Carolina electronic Vendor
Portal (eVP) allows Vendors to electronically register free with the State to receive electronic notification of current
procurement opportunities for goods and Services of potential interests to them available on the Interactive
Purchasing System, as well as notifications of status changes to those solicitations. Online registration and other
purchasing information is available at the following website: http://ncadmin.nc.gov/about-doa/divisions/purchase-
contract.
20. WITHDRAWAL OF PROPOSAL: a proposal may be withdrawn only in writing and actually received by the office
issuing the RFP prior to the time for the opening of proposals identified on the cover page of this RFP (or such later
date included in an Addendum to the RFP). A withdrawal request shall be submitted on Vendor's letterhead and
signed by an official of the Vendor authorized to make such request. Any withdrawal request made after the opening
of proposals shall be allowed only for good cause shown and in the sole discretion of the Division of Purchase and
Contract.
21. INFORMAL COMMENTS: The State shall not be bound by informal explanations, instructions or information
given at any time by anyone on behalf of the State during the competitive process or after award. The State is
bound only by information provided in writing in this RFP and in formal Addenda issued through IPS.
22. COST FOR PROPOSAL PREPARATION: Any costs incurred by Vendor in preparing or submitting offers are the
Vendor's sole responsibility; the State of North Carolina will not reimburse any Vendor for any costs incurred prior
to award.
23. VENDOR'S REPRESENTATIVE: Each Vendor shall submit with its proposal the name, address, and telephone
number of the person(s) with authority to bind the firm and answer questions or provide clarification concerning the
firm's proposal.
24. INSPECTION AT VENDOR'S SITE: The State reserves the right to inspect, at a reasonable time, the equipment,
item, plant or other facilities of a prospective Vendor prior to Contract award, and during the Contract term as
necessary for the State's determination that such equipment, item, plant or other facilities conform with the
specifications/requirements and are adequate and suitable for the proper and effective performance of the Contract.
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 29 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007728 Vendor: Wildlands Engineering, 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 ratio of the final compensation actually paid to the original total amount due in accordance with Attachment
A (as amended, if applicable) is equal to the ratio of the Units actually generated to the total Units identified in
Attachment A.
In the event of default by the Vendor, the State may procure the goods and Services necessary to complete
performance hereunder from other sources and hold the Vendor responsible for any excess cost occasioned
thereby. In addition, in the event of default by the Vendor under The Contract, or upon the Vendor filing a petition
for bankruptcy or the entering of a judgment of bankruptcy by or against the Vendor, the State may immediately
cease doing business with the Vendor, immediately terminate The Contract for cause, and may take action to debar
the Vendor from doing future business with the State.
a) Vendor grants the State a personal non -transferable and non-exclusive right to use and access, all Services and
other functionalities or Services provided, furnished or accessible under this Agreement. The State may utilize the
Services as agreed herein. The State is authorized to access State Data provided by the State and any Vendor -
provided data as specified herein and to transmit revisions, updates, deletions, enhancements, or modifications to
the State Data. This shall include the right of the State to, and access to, Support without the Vendor requiring a
separate maintenance or support agreement unless otherwise specifically agreed in writing. User access to the
Services shall be routinely provided by the Vendor and may be subject to a more specific Service Level Agreement
(SLA) agreed to in writing by the parties. In the absence of an SLA, the Vendor agrees to provide the Services at
least in the manner that it provides accessibility to the services to comparable users.
b) The State's right to access the Services and its associated services neither transfers, vests, nor infers any title or
other ownership right in any intellectual property rights of the Vendor or any third party, nor does this right of access
transfer, vest, or infer any title or other ownership right in any intellectual property associated with the Services
unless otherwise agreed to by the parties. The provisions of this paragraph will not be construed as a sale of any
ownership rights in the Services. Any Services or technical and business information owned by Vendor or its
suppliers or licensors made accessible or furnished to the State shall be and remain the property of the Vendor or
such other party, respectively. Vendor has a limited, non-exclusive license to access and use any State Data as
provided to Vendor, but solely for performing its obligations under this Agreement and in confidence as provided
herein. Vendor or its suppliers shall at minimum, and except as otherwise agreed, provide telephone assistance to
the State for all Services procured hereunder during the State's normal business hours (unless different hours are
specified herein). Vendor warrants that its Support and customer service and assistance will be performed in
accordance with generally accepted industry standards. The State has the right to receive the benefit of upgrades,
updates, maintenance releases or other enhancements or modifications made generally available to Vendor's users
for similar Services. Vendor may, at no additional charge, modify the Services to improve operation and reliability
or to meet legal requirements.
c) Vendor will provide to the State the same Services for updating, maintaining and continuing optimal performance for
the Services as provided to other similarly situated Users of the Services, but minimally as provided for and specified
herein. The technical and professional activities required for establishing, managing, and maintaining the Services
environment are the responsibilities of the Vendor. Any training specified herein will be provided by the Vendor to
specified State users for the fees or costs as set forth herein or in an SLA.
d) Some Services provided online pursuant to this Solicitation may, in some circumstances, be accompanied by a user
clickwrap agreement. The term clickwrap agreement refers to an agreement that requires the end user to manifest
his or her assent to terms and conditions by clicking an "ok" or "agree" button on a dialog box or pop-up window as
part of the process of access to the Services. All terms and conditions of any clickwrap agreement provided with
any Services solicited herein shall have no force and effect and shall be non-binding on the State, its employees,
agents, and other authorized users of the Services.
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 30 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007728 Vendor: Wildlands Engineering, 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.
GOVERNMENTAL RESTRICTIONS: In the event any Governmental restrictions are imposed which necessitate
alteration of the material, quality, workmanship or performance of the goods or Services offered prior to their delivery,
it shall be the responsibility of the Vendor to notify the Contract Lead at once, in writing, indicating the specific
regulation which required such alterations. The State reserves the right to accept any such alterations, including any
price adjustments occasioned thereby, or to cancel the Contract.
AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS: Any and all payments to the Vendor shall be dependent upon and subject to the
availability of funds to the agency for the purpose set forth in The Contract.
4. TAXES: Any applicable taxes shall be invoiced as a separate item.
a) G.S. 143-59.1 bars the Secretary of Administration from entering into Contracts with Vendors if the Vendor
or its affiliates meet one of the conditions of G.S. 105-164.8(b) and refuses to collect use tax on sales of
tangible personal property to purchasers in North Carolina. Conditions under G.S. 105-164.8(b) include: (1)
Maintenance of a retail establishment or office, (2) Presence of representatives in the State that solicit sales
or transact business on behalf of the Vendor and (3) Systematic exploitation of the market by media -
assisted, media -facilitated, or media -solicited means. By execution of the proposal document the Vendor
certifies that it and all of its affiliates, (if it has affiliates), collect(s) the appropriate taxes.
b) The agency(ies) participating in The Contract are exempt from Federal Taxes, such as excise and
transportation. Exemption forms submitted by the Vendor will be executed and returned by the using agency.
c) Prices offered are not to include any personal property taxes, nor any sales or use tax (or fees) unless
required by the North Carolina Department of Revenue.
SITUS AND GOVERNING LAWS: This Contract is made under and shall be governed and construed in accordance
with the laws of the State of North Carolina, without regard to its conflict of laws rules, and within which State all
matters, whether sounding in Contract or tort or otherwise, relating to its validity, construction, interpretation and
enforcement shall be determined.
PAYMENT TERMS: Payment terms are Net not later than 30 days after receipt of correct invoice or acceptance of
goods, whichever is later. The using agency is responsible for all payments to the Vendor under the Contract.
Payment by some agencies may be made by procurement card, if the Vendor accepts that card (Visa, MasterCard,
etc.) from other customers, and it shall be accepted by the Vendor for payment under the same terms and conditions
as any other method of payment accepted by the Vendor. If payment is made by procurement card, then payment
may be processed immediately by the Vendor.
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION: The Vendor will take affirmative action in complying with all Federal and State
requirements concerning fair employment and employment of people with disabilities, and concerning the treatment
of all employees without regard to discrimination on the basis of any prohibited grounds as defined by Federal and
State law.
8. CONDITION AND PACKAGING: Unless otherwise provided by special terms and conditions or specifications, it is
understood and agreed that any item offered or shipped has not been sold or used for any purpose and shall be in
first class condition. All containers/packaging shall be suitable for handling, storage or shipment.
9. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY WARRANTY AND INDEMNITY: Vendor shall hold and save the State, its officers,
agents and employees, harmless from liability of any kind, including costs and expenses, resulting from infringement
of the rights of any third party in any copyrighted material, patented or patent -pending invention, article, device or
appliance delivered in connection with The Contract.
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 31 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007728 Vendor: Wildlands Engineering, 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
ii. There are no actual or threatened actions arising from, or alleged under, any intellectual property
rights of any third party;
b. Should any Services supplied by Vendor become the subject of a claim of infringement of a patent, copyright,
Trademark or a trade secret in the United States, the Vendor, shall at its option and expense, either
procure for the State the right to continue using the Services, or replace or modify the same to become
noninfringing. If neither of these options can reasonably be taken in Vendor's judgment, or if further use
shall be prevented by injunction, the Vendor agrees to cease provision of any affected Services, and
refund any sums the State has paid Vendor and make every reasonable effort to assist the State in
procuring substitute Services. If, in the sole opinion of the State, the cessation of use by the State of any
such Services due to infringement issues makes the retention of other items acquired from the Vendor
under this Agreement impractical, the State shall then have the option of terminating the Agreement, or
applicable portions thereof, without penalty or termination charge; and Vendor agrees to refund any sums
the State paid for unused Services.
c. The Vendor, at its own expense, shall defend any action brought against the State to the extent that such action
is based upon a claim that the Services supplied by the Vendor, their use or operation, infringes on a
patent, copyright, trademark or violates a trade secret in the United States. The Vendor shall pay those
costs and damages finally awarded or agreed in a settlement against the State in any such action. Such
defense and payment shall be conditioned on the following:
i. That the Vendor shall be notified within a reasonable time in writing by the State of any such
claim; and,
ii. That the Vendor shall have the sole control of the defense of any action on such claim and all
negotiations for its settlement or compromise provided, however, that the State shall have the
option to participate in such action at its own expense.
d. Vendor will not be required to defend or indemnify the State if any claim by a third party against the State for
infringement or misappropriation results from the State's material alteration of any Vendor -branded
Services, or from the continued use of the good(s) or Services after receiving notice they infringe on a
trade secret of a third party.
Vendor shall hold and save the State, its officers, agents and employees, harmless from liability of any kind, including
costs and expenses, resulting from infringement of the rights of any third party in any copyrighted material, patented
or patent -pending invention, article, device or appliance delivered in connection with The Contract.
10. TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE: If this contract contemplates deliveries or performance over a period of time,
the State may terminate this contract at any time by providing 60 days' notice in writing from the State to the Vendor.
In that event, any or all finished or unfinished deliverable items prepared by the Vendor under this contract shall, at
the option of the State, become its property. If the contract is terminated by the State as provided in this section,
the State shall pay for those items for which such option is exercised, less any payment or compensation previously
made.
11. ADVERTISING: Vendor agrees not to use the existence of The Contract or the name of the State of North Carolina
as part of any commercial advertising or marketing of products or Services. A Vendor may inquire whether the State
is willing to act as a reference by providing factual information directly to other prospective customers.
12. ACCESS TO PERSONS AND RECORDS: During and after the term hereof, the State Auditor and any using
agency's internal auditors shall have access to persons and records related to The Contract to verify accounts and
data affecting fees or performance under the Contract, as provided in G.S. 143-49(9).
13. ASSIGNMENT: No assignment of the Vendor's obligations nor the Vendor's right to receive payment hereunder
shall be permitted.
However, upon written request approved by the issuing purchasing authority and solely as a convenience to the
Vendor, the State may:
a) Forward the Vendor's payment check directly to any person or entity designated by the Vendor, and
b) Include any person or entity designated by Vendor as a joint payee on the Vendor's payment check.
In no event shall such approval and action obligate the State to anyone other than the Vendor and the Vendor shall
remain responsible for fulfillment of all Contract obligations. Upon advance written request, the State may, in its
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 32 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007728 Vendor.• Wildlands Engineering, 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. INSURANCE:
COVERAGE - During the term of the Contract, the Vendor at its sole cost and expense shall provide commercial
insurance of such type and with such terms and limits as may be reasonably associated with the Contract. As a
minimum, the Vendor shall provide and maintain the following coverage and limits:
a) Worker's Compensation - The Vendor shall provide and maintain Worker's Compensation Insurance, as
required by the laws of North Carolina, as well as employer's liability coverage with minimum limits of $500,000.00,
covering all of Vendor's employees who are engaged in any work under the Contract in North Carolina. If any work
is sub -contracted, the Vendor shall require the sub -Contractor to provide the same coverage for any of his employees
engaged in any work under the Contract within the State.
b) Commercial General Liability - General Liability Coverage on a Comprehensive Broad Form on an
occurrence basis in the minimum amount of $1,000,000.00 Combined Single Limit. Defense cost shall be in excess
of the limit of liability.
c) Automobile - Automobile Liability Insurance, to include liability coverage, covering all owned, hired and non -
owned vehicles, used within North Carolina in connection with the Contract. The minimum combined single limit
shall be $250,000.00 bodily injury and property damage; $250,000.00 uninsured/under insured motorist; and
$2,500.00 medical payment.
REQUIREMENTS - Providing and maintaining adequate insurance coverage is a material obligation of the Vendor
and is of the essence of The Contract. All such insurance shall meet all laws of the State of North Carolina. Such
insurance coverage shall be obtained from companies that are authorized to provide such coverage and that are
authorized by the Commissioner of Insurance to do business in North Carolina. The Vendor shall at all times comply
with the terms of such insurance policies, and all requirements of the insurer under any such insurance policies,
except as they may conflict with existing North Carolina laws or The Contract. The limits of coverage under each
insurance policy maintained by the Vendor shall not be interpreted as limiting the Vendor's liability and obligations
under the Contract.
15. GENERAL INDEMNITY: The Vendor shall hold and save the State, its officers, agents, and employees, harmless
from liability of any kind, including all claims and losses accruing or resulting to any other person, firm, or corporation
furnishing or supplying work, Services, materials, or supplies in connection with the performance of The Contract,
and from any and all claims and losses accruing or resulting to any person, firm, or corporation that may be injured
or damaged by the Vendor in the performance of The Contract and that are attributable to the negligence or
intentionally tortious acts of the Vendor provided that the Vendor is notified in writing within 30 days that the State
has knowledge of such claims. The Vendor represents and warrants that it shall make no claim of any kind or nature
against the State's agents who are involved in the delivery or processing of Vendor goods or Services to the State.
The representation and warranty in the preceding sentence shall survive the termination or expiration of The
Contract.
16. ELECTRONIC PROCUREMENT:
a) Purchasing shall be conducted through the Statewide E -Procurement Service. The State's third -party agent shall
serve as the Supplier Manager for this E -Procurement Service. The Vendor shall register for the Statewide E -
Procurement Service within two (2) business days of notification of award in order to receive an electronic purchase
order resulting from award of this contract.
b) The Supplier Manager will capture the order from the State approved user, including the shipping and payment
information, and submit the order in accordance with the E -Procurement Service. Subsequently, the Supplier
Manager will send those orders to the appropriate Vendor on State Contract. The State or State -approved user, not
the Supplier Manager, shall be responsible for the solicitation, proposals received, evaluation of proposals received,
award of contract, and the payment for goods delivered.
c) Vendor shall at all times maintain the confidentiality of its user name and password for the Statewide E -
Procurement Services. If Vendor is a corporation, partnership or other legal entity, then the Vendor may authorize
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 33 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007728 Vendor: Wildlands Engineering, 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 notify the
Supplier Manager of the security breach by email. Vendor shall cooperate with the State and the Supplier Manager
to mitigate and correct any security breach.
VENDOR IS AND SHALL REMAIN RESPONSIBLE FOR PAYING THE TRANSACTION FEE ON BEHALF OF
ANY SUB -CONTRACTOR OR DEALER INVOLVED IN PERFORMANCE UNDER THIS CONTRACT IN THE
EVENT THAT SUCH SUB -CONTRACTOR OR DEALER DEFAULTS ON PAYMENT.
17. SUBCONTRACTING: Performance under The Contract by the Vendor shall not be subcontracted without prior
written approval of the State's assigned Contract Lead. Unless otherwise indicated, acceptance of a Vendor's
proposal shall include approval to use the subcontractor(s) that have been specified therein in accordance with
paragraph 21 of Attachment B: Instructions to Vendor.
18. CONFIDENTIALITY: Any State information, data, instruments, documents, studies or reports given to or prepared
or assembled by or provided to the Vendor under The Contract shall be kept as confidential, used only for the
purpose(s) required to perform The Contract and not divulged or made available to any individual or organization
without the prior written approval of the State.
19. CARE OF STATE DATA AND PROPERTY: The Vendor agrees that it shall be responsible for the proper custody
and care of any data owned and furnished to the Vendor by the State (State Data), or other State property in the
hands of the Vendor, for use in connection with the performance of The Contract or purchased by or for the State
for The Contract. Vendor will reimburse the State for loss or damage of such property while in Vendor's custody.
The State Data in the hands of the Vendor shall be protected from unauthorized disclosure, loss, damage,
destruction by a natural event or other eventuality. Such State Data shall be returned to the State in a form acceptable
to the State upon the termination or expiration of this Agreement. The Vendor shall notify the State of any security
breaches within 24 hours as required by G.S. 1438.1379. See G.S. 75-60 et seq.
20. OUTSOURCING: Any Vendor or subcontractor providing call or contact center services to the State of North
Carolina or any of its agencies shall disclose to inbound callers the location from which the call or contact center
services are being provided.
If, after award of a contract, the contractor wishes to relocate or outsource any portion of performance to a location
outside the United States, or to contract with a subcontractor for any such the performance, which subcontractor
and nature of the work has not previously been disclosed to the State in writing, prior written approval must be
obtained from the State agency responsible for the contract.
Vendor shall give notice to the using agency of any relocation of the Vendor, employees of the Vendor,
subcontractors of the Vendor, or other persons providing performance under a State contract to a location outside
of the United States.
21. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS: Vendor shall comply with all laws, ordinances, codes, rules, regulations, and
licensing requirements that are applicable to the conduct of its business and its performance in accordance with
The Contract, including those of federal, state, and local agencies having jurisdiction and/or authority.
22. ENTIRE AGREEMENT: This RFP and any documents incorporated specifically by reference represent the entire
agreement between the parties and supersede all prior oral or written statements or agreements. This RFP, any
addenda hereto, and the Vendor's proposal are incorporated herein by reference as though set forth verbatim.
All promises, requirements, terms, conditions, provisions, representations, guarantees, and warranties contained
herein shall survive the contract expiration or termination date unless specifically provided otherwise herein, or
unless superseded by applicable Federal or State statutes of limitation.
23. ELECTRONIC RECORDS: The State will digitize all Vendor responses to this solicitation, if not received
electronically, as well as any awarded contract together with associated procurement -related documents. These
electronic copies shall constitute a preservation record, and shall serve as the official record of this procurement
with the same force and effect as the original written documents comprising such record. Any electronic copy,
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 34 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007728 Vendor: Wildlands Engineering, 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 herein is intended nor
shall be interpreted as a waiver of any right or remedy otherwise available to the State under applicable law. The
waiver by the State of any right or remedy on any one occasion or instance shall not constitute or be interpreted
as a waiver of that or any other right or remedy on any other occasion or instance.
26. FORCE MAJEURE: Neither party shall be deemed to be in default of its obligations hereunder if and so long as it
is prevented from performing such obligations as a result of events beyond its reasonable control, including without
limitation, fire, power failures, any act of war, hostile foreign action, nuclear explosion, riot, strikes or failures or
refusals to perform under subcontracts, civil insurrection, earthquake, hurricane, tornado, or other catastrophic
natural event or act of God.
27. SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY: Notwithstanding any other term or provision in The Contract, nothing herein is intended
nor shall be interpreted as waiving any claim or defense based on the principle of sovereign immunity or other State
or federal constitutional provision or principle that otherwise would be available to the State under applicable law.
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 35 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007728 Vendor.• Wildlands Engineering, 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 below:
List the location(s) outside the United States where work under this Contract will be performed by the Vendor,
any sub -Contractors, employees, or other persons performing work under the Contract:
n/a
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.:
n/a
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:
Design: Charlotte, NC and Asheville, NC; / Survey: Asheville, NC
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 36 of 39

Proposal Number. 15-007728 Vendor: Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
ATTACHMENT E: CERTIFICATION OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
Name of Vendor; Wildlands Engineering, 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:
® 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 small 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:
Box 1 is not checked, because, although Wildlands is in sound financial condition, our CPA has recommended that a
full audit is not necessary for a firm of our size. Our CPA performs an annual CPA review of our financials for our
bonding company, produces quarterly statements for our bonding company, and is actively involved in reconciliations
and our other regular accounting duties on a monthly basis-
.A��
b' - 0310512019 ^-
Signature Date
Shawn D. Wilkerson President
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: 16-007728 Vendor.- Wild#ands Engineering, Inc.
ATTACHMENT F: SUPPLEMENTAL VENDOR INFORMATION
HISTORICALLY UNDERUTILIZED BUSINESSES
Historically Underutilized Businesses (HUBS) consist of minority, women and disabled business firms that are at least
fifty-one percent owned and operated by an individual(s) of the categories. Also included in this category are disabled
business enterprises and non-profit work centers for the blind and severely disabled.
Pursuant to G.S. 143$-1361(x), 143-48 and 143-128.4, the State invites and encourages participation in this
procurement process by businesses awned 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 HUS certification, contact the North Carolina Office of Historically
Underutilized Businesses at (9 19) 807-2330. The Vendor shall respond to question #1 and #2 below.
a) Is Vendor a Historically Underutilized Business? ❑ Yes EK No
b) Is Vendor Certified with North Carolina as a Historically Underutilized Business? ❑ Yes ® No
If so, state HUB classification:
Ver V119 8 Page 08 of 39

Proposal Number: 16-007728 Vendor: Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
ATTACHMENT G: VENDOR'S INFORMATION
Vendors Primary Contact (or Project Manager)
Name:
Christine Blackwelder
Agency:
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Title:
Senior Environmental Scientist
Address:
1430 S. Mint Street, Suite 104
City:
Charlotte
State/ Zip:
NC/ 28203
Telephone:
[phone]
Fax:
[phone]
Email:
[e-mail]
Vendors Execution Address (Where the contract should be mailed for signature)
Name:
Shawn D. Wilkerson
Agency:
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Title:
President
Address:
1430 S. Mint Street, Suite 104
City:
Charlotte
State/ Zip:
NC/ 28203
Telephone:
[phone]
Fax:
[phone]
Email:
[e-mail]
Vendors Payment (Remit To) Address (Where the checks should be mailed
(This address should agree with the "Remit -To" address associated with the Vendor's Tax ID. This information
must be verified with the Vendor's Corporate Accounting Office)
Name:
Shawn D. Wilkerson
Agency:
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Title:
President
Address:
1430 S. Mint Street, Suite 104
City:
Charlotte
State/ Zip:
NC/ 28203
Telephone:
[phone]
Fax:
[phone]
Email:
[e-mail]
Ver: 7/1/18 Page 39 of 39

RFP 16-007728
Tasks and Deliverables
Format
Delivery Method
ATTACHMENT H
Digital Survey in AutoCAD
Digital Survey in ArcMap
Task #
Task Description
Task Deliverable
Hardcopy (#)
Adobe PDF MS Word
(.dwg)**
(.shp)**
E -Mail
USB Flash Drive
Compact Disc
Notes:
Environmental & Project
Approved Categorical Exclusion
x
x
Screening
Regulatory Agency Post -contract site visit
Vendor. The Vendor will upload the returned, signed PCN with the Final Mitigation
PCN forms (completed with DMS as
2
Meetine Minutes
x
Plan to the NC Division of Water Resources online document library at the link
x
Permittee, Vendor as Agent)
DMS SPO
DMS SPO DMS SPO
DMS SPO
DMS
SPO
DMS
SPO
DMS
SPO
Draft Conservation Easement
x x
Planting & monitoring
x
x
Preliminary Conservation Easement Survey
5
x x
x x
x
x
x
x
.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
x
Draft Attorney's Report/30-year title search
Draft Baseline Monitoring report, As -Built
x
x
x
x
x
Drawings digital.delrverables
..........
Draft Title Attorneys "Schedule A"
x
......... ......... ......
......... .........
.................. .........
......... ......
x
Baseline Monitoring & As-
Final Baseline Monitoring report, As -Built
2
Property
...................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Vendor will upload to Final Baseline Monitoring Report and As
6
Built Drawings
Drawings, digital deliverables (including
Recorded Conservation Easement
1
x x
Built Drawings to the NC Division of Water Resources online
x
1
x
x
x
x
x
Final Conservation Easement Survey
1
x x x x
x x
x
x
x
x
x
.........................................................
Final Attorney's Report/30-year title search;
......
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
x
......... .........
deeds; documentation
1
x
Monitoring Years 1-6
Final Annual Monitoring Report &digital
Original Title Insurance Policy
1
_
_
Vendor will upload to Final Mitigation Plan to the NC Division of Water Resources
x
1
Survey monumentation installation
Draft Mitigation Plan 2
..............................................................
Final Draft Mitigation Plan
.......... ... 3
including revisions made during deliverable
review)
......... ..... .........
Financial Assurance 1
3 I Mitigation Plan & Financial
Assurance
Final Mitigation Plan
2
documented on As -Built Survey per Task 6
x x x
.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
DMS will upload the Final Draft Mitigation Report to the IRT Sharepoint for review by
x x x IRT members, and distribute a hardcopy each to USACE and DWR.
............. ____. ...................... ____. ____...... ____. ____. ..... ..... .........
x
DMS will distribute the Final Mitigation Plan to the USACE.
.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Vendor will upload to Final Mitigation Plan to the NC Division of Water Resources
online document library at the following link:
Instructions for uploading documents are found online at the following link:
https://edocs.deg.nc.zov/WaterResources/0/doc/620121/Pagelaspx
DMS will distribute 1 signed PCN to the USACE, and return 1 signed PCN to the
........................................................
.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Vendor. The Vendor will upload the returned, signed PCN with the Final Mitigation
PCN forms (completed with DMS as
2
Plan to the NC Division of Water Resources online document library at the link
Permittee, Vendor as Agent)
provided above.
4
Permitting
Permits and certifications
x
x
Planting & monitoring
5
installation
Written documentation
x
.............................................
.............................
.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
x
Draft Baseline Monitoring report, As -Built
1
x
x
x
x
Drawings digital.delrverables
..........
..........................
......... ......... ......
......... .........
.................. .........
......... ......
... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ..........
Baseline Monitoring & As-
Final Baseline Monitoring report, As -Built
Vendor will upload to Final Baseline Monitoring Report and As
6
Built Drawings
Drawings, digital deliverables (including
Built Drawings to the NC Division of Water Resources online
revisions made during deliverable review &
1
x
x
x
x
document library at the link provided above.
Quality Control)
Draft Annual Monitoring Report & digital
1
x
.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
x
x
deliverables
7-12
Monitoring Years 1-6
Final Annual Monitoring Report &digital
Vendor will upload to Final Mitigation Plan to the NC Division of Water Resources
deliverables
1
x
x
x
online document library at the link provided above.
Draft Annual Monitoring Report#7,
1
x
.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
x
x
Closeout Report & digital deliverables
Monitorin Year 7 and
g
13
project Closeout
Final Annual Monitoring Report #7, Closeout
Vendor will upload to Final Mitigation Plan to the NC Division of Water Resources
Report& digital deliverables
1
x
x
x
online document library at the link provided above.

Technical Proposal Evaluation Criteria
Rating Form
Offeror:
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Site Name:
Huntsman Mitigation Site
River Basin
/ Catalog
Yadkin 03040102
Unit:
RFP
Number:
16-007728
Date of Site
Evaluation:
TBD
Type/Amt of
Mitigation
6,000 warm stream credits
Offered:
Proposal
Review
TBD
Committee:
Alternate
TBD
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
Yes
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
N/A
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
N/A
provided in the RFP.
4- Does the proposal adequately document the physical, chemical and/or biological impairments that currently
exist on the project site?
Yes
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
Yes
functional gains.]
6- Does DMS agree with the proposed credit structure(s) described in the proposal?
Yes
7- Does the proposed project avoid significant adverse impacts to existing wetlands and/or streams?
Yes
8- Does the proposal adequately describe how the project will advance DMS watershed planning goals?
Yes
9- For any proposed Priority 2 restoration, is P2 justified and/or limited to "tie-ins"?
Yes
An answer of No in this section means the Technical Proposal is rejected. Continue or Reject?
Continue

Section 2. Functional Uplift Evaluation
Functional
Functional
Planning Identified
Category
Functional Stressor
Uplift Potential
Stressor
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.
RWP LWP
X
❑x Non-functioning riparian
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
>.
buffer / wetland vegetation
ra
D Sediment
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
X
Z3
❑x Nutrients
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
X
L
Q�
Fecal Coliform
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
X
>rax❑
❑ Other
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
® Peak Flows
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
bz
_O
❑x Artificial Barriers
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
O
❑x Ditching/Draining
Low
Moderate
High
2
❑ Other
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
❑x Habitat Fragmentation
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
ro
X
❑x Limited Bedform Diversity
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
x❑ Absence of Large Woody
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
ca
=
Debris
❑ Other
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
a
Total Count
1
5
4
Total 5
Count
O
ra 4-J
Multiplier
Multiplier
ca
x1
x3
x6
x10
x4
x6
C: cn
O W
Count x Function
C
Count x
'E
Multiplier
3
30
40
Planning Zp
Multiplier
LLra
_
A
B
of
Sum of FunctionSum
73
Planning 20

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)
8-12
0-8
Project Density
\ 2 J
8-10
4-8 <4
Total
1
c
D
5,960
5,645
315
1.027
74.97
Risk Adjusted Score D+ PlanningB =
Section 3. Genera
94.97 E I Total Function and Planning
1 point 13 points 16 points 110 points
Physical constraints or barriers
>10%
5-10%
<5% None
Easement Continuity
>12
8-12
0-8
Project Density
>10
8-10
4-8 <4
Total
1
3
6 10 F
Section 4. Final Score and Proposal Rating
Total Function and
94.97 E
4 97E
Planning
F
Total General
10
Final Score
(E + F)
104.97
Proposal Rating
(Final Score x 0.01)
1.05
Comments:
4

. �_ . , �, , . . . . .�. Jonesville
f Wilkes County Open Space Ronda . ye. . . . . . . . . . . �. . . r
•'�-.� �' /'� f �' •�• ,Wilkes'County.OpenSpace: 'c • ' ' i
.. , . .. .. . . . .SWAN CREEK AIRPORT
; : ' '
r � YNIlkes County'Op®n Space'' ; i: ....... .. 4
del
0304010113
030401070050 .. .. _ " '�;'
01
03040101070040 ' , :
03040101060070
L ` . .. . . .
1 r •,�
..:. . IyC;D'OT Mitigation Site
I01060060� , 421
i 030
' `. *� • .' •..' +..: e . ' • NC DOT Mitigation Site
I
...... ... w z
•Project Location - • • • • - ' • - 1 0
. . . . . 1 . : .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . 03040102020030 }
:: .:::::.:::: :::::: NCo DOT Mitigation Site
..:030,44102020010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * ' . . . . ..
.....::::::::::::::::::::....�
' Bru_shyVo1ir6'ins2Vannoy Rioge µ � := . . . . s : ; : : : :: : ::: ::: : ::: : ; �/; _ � 03040102020020•
� R �•
Nr
:::::: ' ' : ....WICKES • ...... .`y,
Five Mile Radius Hydrologic Unit Code (14 -Digit) NC Natural Heritage Program Managed Areas
Project Location Targeted Local Watershed 303d Listed Streams
County Line Water Supply Watershed © Airports
Municipalities NC Historic Preservation Areas
QYadkin 02 River Basin Significant Natural Heritage Areas
Oft'WILDLANDS
ENGINEERINCG
0 0.75 1.5 Miles
I I I I I
Figure 1 Vicinity Map
Huntsman Mitigation Site
Yadkin River Basin (03040102)
Wilkes County, NC

Pond 1 . Parcels
1
i ® Project Location
Proposed Conservation Easement
s Impoundment
• Embankment
Pond 2 Cattle Access
Perennial Project Stream
Intermittent Project Stream
Non Project Streams
u Piped Channel
' Erosion
' Incision
Topographic Contours (4')
1 i
�� -- Utility Lines
O Utility Poles
O Bedrock
1 O Headcut
■
U
■
t 4.
r
Pond 3 ► ■ME PJZM
t
t .. n •1
• ,•.",+.� Existing Bridge - - .� .. - - - , ..
i
4827-95-0
384
North• Creeki
1
I
1
4827-75 801,
ILr •
17,90 7
JOHNSON, JERRY A
I
& DEBRA LYNN
4827-84-8574
r • ...
R
f
1 �
1260 1220
R
:I f
R
- v f #
• R
WILDLANDS
EN GI NEE 121 NG
Figure 2 Site Map
0 100 200 400 Feet Huntsman Mitigation Site
I Yadkin River Basin (03040102)
Wilkes County, NC

Project Location
_ _ ! Proposed Conservation Easement Boundary
" % 0
F � ,
♦
i IP • _•
a
oo
---
.
♦
' ,
Ronda USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Quadrangle
�,.Figure 3 USGS Topographic Map
WILDL.ANDS 0 250 500 Feet Huntsman Mitigation Site
ENO IN EER INO- i I i I i I Yadkin River Basin (03040102)
Wilkes County, NC

c>W�`
North Little Hunting
Creek - 1274 AC
QWatershed
Subwatershed
Project Location
Project Streams
Non Project Streams
Topographic Contours (20')
41 f1
1.
0 0.5 1 Miles' '
,0
y UT1 - 67 AC t' [0
AA
F J
North Little Hunting a -_
Creek - 1274 AC
y
a
►,- Old Bus Branch - 5.2 AC
I LQ
-mss
Barn Branch - 10 AC
UT2 -
43 AC
WILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
Rifle Trib - 12 AC
Trapper Trib - 1.9 AC
Figure 4 Watershed Map
0 250 500 1,000 Feet Huntsman Mitigation Site
I i I i I Yadkin River Basin (03040102)
Wilkes County, NC

,
Parcels
Project Location
Proposed Conservation Easement
k , - CoA - Codorus loam, 0 to 2% slopes, frequently flooded
I
y k - FaD -Fairview sandy loam, 15 to 25% slopes
k FcC2 - Fairview sandy clay loam, 8 to 15% slopes, moderately eroded
}
1 - UdC - Udorthents -Urban land complex, 1 to 15% slopes
t
k W - Water
r k
,a Project Streams
+� Non Project Streams
k k -
r
9 k
I FaD 9 I
t k "
, k
I M
4 r
r �
t •-:.
ibis
k
ly
w,
FcC2
North Little Hunting Crf
Jr
P
U d C
VWILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
0 125 250 500 Feet
IIIA
Figure 5 Soils Map
Huntsman Mitigation Site
Yadkin River Basin (03040102)
Wilkes County, NC

f
Parcels
Project Location
1 1
Proposed Conservation Easement
'---
Proposed Internal Crossings
- Proposed Restrictive Covenant Area
Proposed Stream Restoration
Proposed Stream Enhancement II
Non Project Streams
Existing Channel to be Filled
Proposed Stormwater BMP
Utility Lines
O Utility Poles
r 0 �' w
r 1 ■
rr ♦ . Existing Stream 1 r
+ Channel To Be ;. r
Filled
r + 1 •
r ♦ • � r 1 •
r . �
it __ i 1 i• � ■ ■
Y'A'�.���Y. e�, '��� .; �' 1 � gal � ` • • y • `, ♦
1I ..
1 '• �
r ♦
� 0
� ♦ r
. r
1
Restrictive Covenant Area 1
To Be Established to Parcel ; Y
Boundary 1
Jh-
Oft
triiu.�4 a+R e's!. _ _ �._, { — -" w.111C^'�� �.:.R•k���:- �f�C, �. �`:.� r 1M^a"
13
Figure 6 Concept Map
ON WILD LANDSHuntsman Mitigation Site
0 100 200 400 Feet
ENGINEERING Yadkin River Basin (03040102)
I 1 I 1 I
Wilkes County, NC

INQUIRY #: 5562675.5
YEAR: 2016
= 500'
iN
(rEDR
ZE
b
A:
VfWrA
O,lb f

i r
ENQUIRY #: 5562675.5 f� N
YEAR: 2012 �IJr
= 500' EQR

•,+ 37 ^" r+,, i* ",4..'f "y` '4` (tied
�e f i
,.
It +yeti ,, .[+s4,Fa':k.�,,
AL
Ai
4t44�
ti S� 4 n.
- �. ��.i�'r Mit RC��ir• .
t ' x• t
r 1.r 1$i"iyyl. � •�• i xV-9—!� I�.Y�..r .. l�.iu S w s • f� At
Jr
yp
YA
-04
?#iliL
4NQUIRY #: 5562675.5
YEAR: 2009
= 500'
i N

wwVC
�"+r +r R-1 Vii•ry;.,I'iy"
i�� 7- �'%'��� , � ��,�%i �Sf, yf#� ��j�,�. ��`�'� � ����tJt•`�+a1 � 5� �� ` y ��� `f, �.
77
r.
�;! �'' • r- - .sem a tti � ~ � -
i �.�♦.
4r t
'♦ �rF �'1' _ � 171,
�r
14
�. N.
Sip f ♦ r
� _ .�. "�. "� ��� �. r� •yam :�r�.x- r. i �.`- .+�f..i„•i
wI rr, '•v•�faf lflfPy�r '
_
4A�
y ,,w� y� ,• a I... Y.
'.� �. a
x,����j. `, .�.- � - ; 4 ; �.} i �V'di'_ � lei y, % fi«r �l ?. a Ir ,`'}'� r�. ,�� i • ��
X11.' T' r ►`, � i �, 'Ri ,� 1 ' ' � , �, r 1 �” � i]� , � i ^�,1� .t"�� y ° 'air',
INQUIRY #: 5562675.5
, � i � Ar r �". �i �i • {� � r� a • a�}tR • � l� , !iI M a y '.'�' '� � _ � / '' � r '�
YEAR: 2006
(rEDR
= 500' ?'i rr ��" : f �i'I�i'� ��" � ?N.► �'�1 ' �.:•a'` i'd'�JQ. � ii'"' a7 � - �:6r f."YryI ,A, ':T a��Y. tF t _" � '�'

r
INQUIRY M 5562675.5 i� N
YEAR: 1976 '14Jr
= 500' EQR

� r
4
i
i 6
M
M dI
'I
y

. #.4W" rA4 INVYL-40
o
T
Alf f,
. r
1
r
500,•

NC DWO Streani Identification Form Version d_1 I
Date:
Project/Site:
I Latitude: 36 39 443°N
Evaluator: �C�4�� rt"'
County: w�R�t f
Longitude: _ 8o, IS Wil
Total Points: u I
Stream is at least intermitent 3
Stream Determination (cif
Other `�` '-"4�
Cr��
I
1 11
if >_ 19 or perennial if >_ 30'
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennia
B.q. Quad Name: j
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal
Absent Weak
Moderate
Strong
13' 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,0
ripple -pool sequence
( 1
I
2
3
O
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0 1
2
3
5. Active/relict fioodolain
0 1
(
'3
6. Depositional bar or benches
0 1
AE
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0' 1
I
3
8. Headcuts
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0 0.5
1
1
10. Natural valley
0 1 0.5
I 1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = J
vuuu�ai ununc� a� � nui ia���, �cc u�owaawiia ni ��aiivai -
8. Hvdroloov (Subtotal
12. Presence of Baseflow
I 0 1
2
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
I 1
2 I 3
14. Leaf litter
15. Sediment on plants or debris
I' C1.5 1 1
0 1 919
I 0.5 ( 0
1 1 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
1 1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
U. L510100V (buolofal = 1A.S )
118. Fibrous roots in streambed
I
2 1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2 ( 1
0
20. Miacrobenthos (note diversibj and abundance)
0
1 2 I
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1 2
3
22. Fish
23. Crayfish
0
0
0.5 1
0.5 I 1 I
1.5
1.5
24, Amphibians
0
0.5 1
1.5
25. Algae I
0
5 1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL
I' 'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Ngtes: ObsuoaI I0'4 $
Sketch:
W

NC DWO Stream Idenrifcntion_Forrh Vercinn 1 1
Date: a /� 11 /, C)
Project/site:, Ny,r,+sm0.v�
I Latitude: 3 6 I �^I3 20 3°h�
Evaluator: EGICd�r�'I"
County:A i I��QS
longitude: $�.q 33600°
Points:
is least intermitleritEpherrferal
Stream Determination (ci e
Other UTI (Op-, C",AJTotal
if y 19 or perennial if ? 30'
Intermittent Pe rennia
e.g.. c?uad Pl3me: bklo%,. P�
H. ueomor n010 y (subtotal = I l )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
13. Continuity of channel bed.and bank-'
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel -along thalweg
0
1
No = 0
es = 3
3. In -channel structure: ex, riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple=pool_ sequence
0
0.5
©
3
4, Particle size"of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodolain
0
1
2
.3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
1 .5
1
T5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
f5)
11.. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes ="3
artificial ditches ara not rated, see discussions in manual
R_ Hvdrnlnnv (Suhtntal = Ir1S 1
12. Presence of Baseflo.w
I 0 1
2 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria -
= 0 1.
2 3
14. Leaf litter
5 1
0.5 0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0 0.5
1 1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
es = 3
U. DIUIUUY I C lUULU a!
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1 I
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 3
2
1
0
20. Nlaerobenthos (note diversib/ and abundance) 0
2
i3
21. Aquatic Mollusks 0
1
2
3
22. Fish ' CO
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish 0
0.5
1
1.5
.24. Amphibians 0
0.5
1.5
25. Algae • i 0
075
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be idenUned using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
NQtes: Cts 'Ma S Ir S1
GC.,i-��o 4.kf w�. �ar..--
' U ��
,�, �.rp
-1-A b!<EW&#A
e
� w.Ci%rC��^i
�bIJ M,
1
.:1..,eW,L.r
e'� a�sicss��,n+ f ea.�I^ i S Ia�.d:,�t�,.w&'arc� �ra�. I��,s«� P`��= �.4� h ) •c� �t'�-w �.*aAc.�G�
Sketch:
�A1N/41.AL% A Mw pr'l �. O� F
Wi b`�rr'�S ` %v r�d�+w'6 �i SOsiI 'P 1'0 C
vets �aG �:batfe.Il Sv°�^,$'�"r^�.(..
wAJ�w

NC MV0 Stream fdentil'ication- Forrii X�Prcinn 1 1 I -
Date:
Project/Site:.
I Latitude:
Evaluator: S, �C�<u.r�`�
County: W i Ike -s;
Longitude: ,
Sc�,930�62
Total Points:
Stream is atle3st intermittent 5
Stream Determination (ci e
�
Other UTa v s-tr:.n•.M
if a 19 or perennial if a 30 `
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennia
��
g. Quad N3rr1e:
A. veomor nota y (5ubtotai = ff ')
Absent
Weak,
Moderate I
Strong
1" Continuity of channel bed.and bank,
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0 0,5
1.5
3. In -channel structure: ex, riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -spool sequence
0
1
2
Q
4. Particle sizz"of stream substrata
0
1
2
g
5, Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
6. Depositional bars or'benches
0
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0'
1
2
3 .
8. Headcuts
0
1
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1 1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5 I
1
g
1.1., Second or greater order channelNo
= 0
Yes ='3
artinaal ditches are not rated, see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = 9 .1
12. Presence of Baseflo.,,4
I 0 1
2
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
= 0 1.
2 I 3
14. Leaf litter
I` 1.5 I 1 I
0,5 ( 0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0 0. 1
1 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0 0,5
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
U. 010100v 1 JUD[otal = K
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 3 I
21
0
19. Rooted uplandplants in streambed CY
2 1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversib/ and abundance)
1 2 I
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
1 I 2
3
22. Fish
0.51 1
1.5
23, Crayfish I
0.5 1
1.5
24. Amphibians 0
0.5 1
1.5
25. Algae • I 0
.5 I 1
1.5
26. Watland plants in streambed
FACP/ = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
rotes: ,ltrua d 0.1 t � iCs<<wPa1 -9'.
r
A j
Sketch:

NC n" n StrPAnl 1rlPntil`irtinn_Fnrri-m Vprcinn -i 1 I -
Date: a _) 1.1 _ ! AI
Pro ��u�.�
I Latitude: 3,6.138050N
Evaluator: _, Ecleard�-
County: ����
Longitude:-
8c�.q 3 QoS
Total Points:
Stream is at leastintarnit':ent 3(�, S
Stream Determination ci
I
Other 3 v
Q�� S
ifs t9orperennialif2. 30'
E herrferal Intermittent Perennial
p
e g' Quad Name: �be�bw l0'
A. ueomor Holo y (subtotal = I J )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1' Continuity of channel bed.and bank
0
1
2
15. Sediment on plants or debris
2. Sinuosit j of channel along thalweg
0
1
-Z __ _._.._...--.....`
3 ..
3. In-channelstructure. ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool.. sequence
! 0
Yes =
2
3
4. Particle siz"of stream substrate
0
1
- 2
3
5. Active/relict floodolain
1
2
3
6. Depositional -bars or'benches
'
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits0
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
' 'perannial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
9. Grade control
0
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
4'_J 1 A6..
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes ='3
ardncral ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
R Hvrirninnv Miihtntal = Q, C, 1
12. Presence of Baseflo.,,v
0 1
2
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0 1"
2 " I 3
14. Leaf litter
- 5 1
0.5 0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0 5
1 1.5
10. Organic debris lines or piles
0 1 0.5
1 1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes =
r . rainnnv r I-)unrnrai = ar r
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in strearrmbed
3
2
1
0
20, Ma' crobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
I 0
2
3
21, Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish0.5
1
1.5
.24. Amphibians
0C07D
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.,5
1
1.5
26. Weiland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
' 'perannial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
notes: 0b.tt,rvt i cid ►S�/Ft 1
swl wr~d ��
, t,, f �•Lw-
�1" � E
q'
k41t.�%.4^�� r-0. 14, "
4'_J 1 A6..
•t M' .�,i +fit .Ran"f"
s "R" ""i .✓ � '�
Sketch:

r
i',;C DWO .Strpnni frlPnriI`it-qtinn_Fnrrn l'Prcinn 1 i
Date: 19
Project/Site:,rtl,n' JM��
I Latitude:
Evaluator: > aICG�ruL
County: 1,J $
FLongitude:80.qJc
Total Points:
Stream is at /east intermittent
if 19 ii2 30'
Stream Det n (circle one)
Ephenfera Intermitten Perennial I
Other Old du1 (3rwnch ,
e.g. Quad Name: (t
a: orperennial
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
ov` lo'ka
H. ueomor holo y (subtotal = FV d5 )
Absent
Weak,
Moderate I
Strong
1'' Continuity of channel bed.and bank-'
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
0 0,5 1
3.....
3. In -channel •structure:. ex, riffle -pool, step -pool,
.ripple -pool -.sequence R,is rw a�e��
I 0
l,;J
2
3
4. Particle sizz"of stream substra.e M;»' r`" 1=�w
�,.i 0
0 0..5 1
2
3
�.5, Activelrelict floodolain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0' 1
1
3 ,
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control.
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.
i i. Second or greater order channel
No =
Yes ='3
artincial ditches are not rated, sea discussions in manual
R Hvrirnlnnv (Riihtntal = cr 1
12. Presence of Baseflo.av
0 1 2
0
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
- 1. 2"
3
14. Leaf litter
T 0.5 (
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0 1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0 0,5 1
1,5
17. Soil -based evidence of high avatar table?
No = 0 Yes= 3
1.5
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3 1
0
19. Rooted upland.plants in streambed
2 1
0
20. blacrobenthos (note diversib/ and abundance)
1 2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
1 2
3
22. Fish
0.5 1
1.5
23, Crayfish
( 0.5 1
1.5
24. An.
0.5 1
1.5
25, Algae
0 0..5 1
1.5
26. %/Vetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
'parannial streams may also be identified using other methods.
See p. 35 of manual.
dotes:Thi �cac1. Dtv w444�- s �;
. ���•� . 1 E dao �t
(�vr•;n Si�� vsi`I o� eZ _1�1ai.
WtatG }r c�Ct4/bagfu.�iaw vv -j
Sketch:
44,r-A,,v4 PR.wGk
J '

NC Dwn .StrPAn'1 frlPntif t-ntinn_Fnrm Varcinn 1
Date: oZ . j to _ o�
Project/Site:. 4}dA ! J rna�
I Latitude:
Evaluator: ,_.
County; �n/�11tcs
Longitude: a
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent 31.5
Stream Determination circ
(
I
Other
4"'r'�
if_ 19 orpenrtnialif> 30'
Ephenferal Intermittent erenntal
e.g. Quad P�sme:
H. ueomof nolo y (tiubtotai = I.0 )
Absent
Weak •
Moderate
Strong
1 �. Continuity of channel bed.and bank ••
p
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
p I
16. Organic debris lines or piles
__......__2....._._...._._.._ ............._::
3
3. In -channel structure: ex, riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -poo( sequence
0
Yes = 3
0.5
3
4. Particle sizz'of stream substrate
p
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodolain
0
1
25. Algae •0
3
6. Depositional bar or benches
0)
26. Welland plants in streambed
2
3
7. P.ecent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
B. Headcuts
p
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1075
11,. Second or greater order channel
No "= 0
Yes ='3
arUncial ditches are not rated, see discussions in manual
R Hvrirninnv f Suhtntal = G . XV 1 --- - -
12. Presence of baseflo."v
I 0 1
2
(.
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria -
= 0 1
2 I 3
14. Leaf litter •
-(E5_)
0.5 0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0 0:5
1 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
( 0
1 1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
t. nininnv 1 .11uMnrai = i u i
18. Fibrous roots' in streambed
3
2
1. 0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1 I 0
20. tAacrobenthos (note diversiby and abundance)
0
1
2 4 3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1 1
2 3
22. Fish
CD
0.5
1 1.5
23. Crayfish
0
1 1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1 1.5
25. Algae •0
05
1 1.5
26. Welland plants in streambed
FACb = 0.75;
�Othe
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: ® Sprv&, a vk.V4`• Wort-.
Sketch:

Nr DWO SrrP;im frlenrific tinn.Fnrm Vprcinn 1 11
Date: .- q _ 9
Pro'lect/Site: 4VV\+SM a.A
Latitude:
Evaluator:
County: W ., 1 (<;s 5
Longitude: Q3ooa� •
- aa.
Total Points:
Stream is at least intarm&ent 5
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other `hr -w a,, Ti - b
PP
d_ 19 oroarennialif> 30'
Epherrferal Intermittent Perennial
e.g. Quad /!mile:
H. veomor holo y (subtotal
A.bsent
Weak,
Moderate
Strong
1" Continuity of channel bed.and bank,
0
i
2
3
2.S inuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1)
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool _ sequence
( 0
1
Q
3
4. Particle size"of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bar orbenches
0
1
2 I
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
CO
1 (
2
3
8, He.adcuts
i 0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0I
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes=
annual ditches are not rated, sea discussions in manual
R Hvrirnlonv (Siihtntal = )n.0 1
12. Presence of Baseflo,,v
0 1 2
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0 1 2 3
14. Leaf litter
1.5 1 0.5 ( 0
15, Sediment on plants or debris
0 p, 1 1,5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0 1 1.5
17. Soil -basad evidence of high water table?
N0=0 ICYes = 3
C_ Rinlnnv (Subtntal = 1
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
(
2
- 1
0
19. Rooted uplandplants in streambed
03
2
1
0
20. Miacrobenthos (note diversib/ and abundance) 1 ."„
F 0
1)
2
13
21. Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22. Fish
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
Co
0.5
1
1.5
.24.Amp hibians sal��,w„dtt
0
1
1.5
25. Algae •
0
0,
1
1.5
26. Wedand 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: Zejt,r .,�� �, ' r k -Stfkft
fkf,A S vrr*uv% s
a •W L41� 4, -see
,
Sketch:

NC D«'O Stream Identification - Form Version 4.11
Date: _ y -t
ProjecdSite; .Iv n� SMav�
! Latitude:
I
Evaluator: _, �cNGar��
County: �� ��
Longitude:
Total Points:
Stream is atle3st interrnittent �,'� 5
Stream Determination (circle one)
I
Other P,14),L. 'rrt6
ifs 19 or perennial i(>_ 30 3
Ephenferal Intermittent Perennial
e.g. Quad Nwb-a:
A. ueomof nolo y (subtotal =--j b )
Absent
Weak
Moderate �
Strong
13' Continuity of channel bed.and bank,
0
1
2
IT
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
_ .. - .__.._......_.:.....__.._...------_--
3 ..
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool_ sequence
0
©
3
4. Particle sizz'of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
�.5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or'benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0'
1
2
3 .
8. He.adcuts
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
Yes ='3
% arjficlal ditches are nonrated, see discussions In manual
R Hvrirnlnnv (Suhtntal = Q 1
12. Presence of Baseflomi
0 1 2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria -
0 1 2- I
3
14. Leaf litter
( 1 0,5 I
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0 1
16. Organic debris lines or piles
CO) 1
17. Soil -basad evidence of high water table?
No = 0
&4��
t' MI111UUV I JUL)101HI = "41-t`1 1
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2 1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
20. Macrobenthos (note diversibj and abundance)I
3
0
2 1
1 2
0
3
21, Aquatic FiIollUsks
0
1 2
3.
22. Fish
0
0.5 1
1.5
23. Crayfish0
0.5 1
1.5
.24. Amphibians S a� rar~� cr
0
1
1.5
25. Algaa •
0
0,5 j 1
1.5
26. Welland plants in streambed _S7,g'
as
FACiV = 0.75) -OBI = 1.5 Other = 0
' 'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p.
of manual.
Notes: Ghk nntl�' ori -Ael' 014-4 I.w4`v-+
'.F(,�
p
Cfn.s��' t`,.w asa.� ta.� Cr
i `
w✓� 1 f4CFn`i o his.
I'e
Sketch:

1280
0225
001 FILED
WILKES COUNTY
MISTY M. SMITHEY
REGISTER OF DEEDS
FILED Feb 27, 2019
AT 10:14:27 am
BOOK 01280
PAGE 0225
INSTRUMENT # 01176
'EXCISE TAX (None)
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
Wildlands Engineering, Inc{Ges
1430 South Mint Street, Suite 1 4
Charlotte, NC 28203
Attention: Lee Knight Caffery
SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE
M OF OPTION
This Memorandum of Option (this "Memorandum") is between Jerry A. and Debra Lynn
Johnson("Seller"), and Wildlands Engineering, Inc., a North Carolina corporation ("Buyer").
This memorandum will become effective when all parties have signed it. The date of this
Memorandum will be the dates Memorandum is signed by the last party to sign it.
Seller does hereby give and grant to Buyer the right and option to purchase a conservation
easement on a portion of four parcels of real property comprised, in total, of approximately 113 acres
located off Ingle Hollow Road in Ronda, Wilkes County, North Carolina, recorded in that county's Register
of Deeds at Book 653, Page 160, Deed Book 621, Page 14 and Deed Book 668, Page 110 (the "Property").
The Property is also identified as Parcel Identification Numbers 4827-97-1278, 4827-96-5044, 4827-84-
8574 and 4827-95-0384.
This option expires on March 15, 2021.
The provisions set forth in an Option Agreement between the parties with an effective date of
2019 are hereby incorporated in this memorandum.
Each party is signing this memorandum on the date stated below that party's signature.

1280
0225
002
BUYER:
SELLER:
WILDLANDS ENGINEERING, INC., a North Carolina JERRY A. and DEBRA LYNN JOHNSON
cor)hahwn�EWilkerson,
ion h
By: " ' By:
President 4TerryK. Johnson
Date: I 0.0 f Date: oZ — %
By: w�
Debra Lynn Johnson
Date: a 1 I

1280
0225
003
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
I certify that Shawn D. Wilkerson personally appeared before me this day, acknowledging to me that he
is President of Wildlands Engineering, Inc., a North Carolina corporation and that he, as President, being
authorized to. do so, executed the foregoing on behalf of Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Date: 2- -7 1 101q,
(Official Seal)
Official Signature of Notary
P. KINNEY
CHARLOTTE
NOTARY PUBLIC �—
Me"nburg County, North Carolina. Notary's printed or typed name
My co mission expires: Z' 00
3

1280
0225
004
C-�Ui `-trs4 County, North Carolina
I certify that the following person personally appeared before me this day, acknowledging to me that he
or she signed the foregoing document:
Name of principal
Date: 2 ( a I ( q
(Official Seal)
BENJAMIN N NEECE
Notary Public, North Carolina
Guilford County
My Commission Expires
May 10, 2022
Official Signature of Notary
�� +�ic� + /�• wee. C'
Notary's printed or typed name
My commission.expires: OS — CO- Z o7* -"7
4

1280
0225
005
62 Q, County, North Carolina
I certify that the following person personally appeared before me this day, acknowledging to me that he
or she signed the foregoing document:
�tt
Name of principal
Date: �z— } — (4�
(Official Seal)
fficial Signature of Notary
�0.�a� 1�• �2�c-c
BENJAMIN N NEECENotary's printed or typed name
Not Public, North Carolina
Guilford County
My Commission Expires My commission expires: 8S - CCS -
May 10, 2022
MR -I